"... Can we officially congratulate Nuland for a crappy job and also for providing Putin with
all the tools he needed to bring back Ukraine under his wing.
False flag operations for American private interests must stop now. They are immoral, unethical and
only bring death and destruction to otherwise stable societies. The UN should have a say." . "...this is what happens when you play with fire: you get burned. Using Neo-Nazi's to implement
Nato expansionist policies was always a very bad idea. It's just a shame it is not people like Victoria
'fuck the EU' Nuland who will have to suffer the blowback consequences- it is the poor Ukrainian people.
This is not that different to what has happened in Libya- where Islamic extremists were used as a proxy
force to oust Gaddafi."
The Georgian authorities have asked Interpol to put a Red notice on Mikheil Saakashvili as the
request to Ukraine to return him for trial in Georgia was refused.
ww3orbust PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 20:22
That does not detract from the fact that the Ukranian cabinet has been chosen by the US state
department. Natives of the US, Georgia and Lithuania were hastily granted Ukrainian citizenship
in order to maintain an iron grip on Ukraine, while accusing Putin of appointing majors or governors
- in his capacity as head of state?
ww3orbust 13 Jul 2015 20:16
Amazing, nothing at all mentioned by the BBC. It does not fit in to their narrative to see the
country descend into a new stage of anarchy, between the people who murdered police and protesters
on Maidan square, and the US state department installed cabinet. Presumably if Right Sector refuse
to disarm and continue torturing civilians and murdering police, the BBC will continue to ignore
it and focus instead on its Russo-phobic narrative, while accusing Russia of propaganda with the
self-righteous piety that only the BBC are capable of. Or god forbid, more stories about what
colour stool our future king has produced this week.
The thing is, Ukraine is unique in allowing their Nazi thugs to be armed and have some semi-official
status. Everywhere else (including Russia), governments are looking to constrain the activities
of Nazis and prosecute them where possible.
jgbg Pwedropackman 13 Jul 2015 18:26
If it was not for the right sector, Ukraine would still be one united nation.
Them and Svoboda. If it had just been Orange Revolution II, with a simple change of Jewish
oligarchs in charge, there might have been some complaints but little more. It is the Russian-hating
far right that has brought about the violence and everything that has happened since.
PrinceEdward GreatMountainEagle 13 Jul 2015 18:22
Last I heard, Ukraine owes China billions for undelivered Grain.
HollyOldDog gimmeshoes 13 Jul 2015 18:11
But the Euro maidan press is just an Ukrainian rag that invents stories to support its corrupt
government in Kiev.
jgbg PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 17:54
I forget the article, but in the comments I mentioned that multiple Georgians were being
appointed to high level positions by Kiev, and some Russophobe called me a liar.
Not a few days later, Shakashvilli was appointed governor of Odessa. An ex-president of another
country, as governor of a province in another one! Apparently, none of the millions upon millions
of Ukrainians were qualified for the job.
Sakashvilli's former Minister of Internal Affairs in Georgia, Eka Zguladze, is First Deputy
Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. Of course, the Georgian people removed these chumps from
power the first chance they got but the Ukrainian electorate haven't had any say in the appointments
of foreigners in their country.
Well ... when it comes to Ukraine, the need to stock up on popcorn. This bloody and unpredictable
plot is not even in the "Game of Thrones." And this is only the middle of the second season.
Today Speaker of the "RS" Andrew Sharaskin, said: Sports Complex in Mukachevo where the shooting
occurred, was used as the base of the separatists DNR.
- A place 1,000 kilometers from Donetsk! But it's a great excuse to murder the guard in the café
and wounded police officers.
I think tomorrow will say that there have seen Russian Army tanks and Putin - 100%
"Ukraine is part of Europe" - the slogans of the Maidan in action...
Pravyi Sektor were not wrong. However, you cannot have armed groups cleaning up corruption
outside the law...that only works in Gotham City.
Right Sector weren't trying to clean up corruption, they were simply trying to muscle in on
the cigarette smuggling business. If Right Sector cared about crime and public order, they wouldn't
be driving around, armed to the teeth, in vehicles stolen in the EU. (In the video linked in the
article, all of their vehicles have foreign number plates. At least one of those vehicles is on
the Czech police stolen vehicle database:
http://zpravy.idnes.cz/pravy-sektor-mel-v-mukacevu-auta-s-ceskymi-spz-fqj-/zahranicni.aspx?c=A150713_102110_zahranicni_jj)
The EU and the US have stated on many occasions that there are "No Right Wing Nationalists" operating
in Ukraine and its simply propaganda by Putin.
So there shouldn't be anything to worry about should there ?
Stas Ustymenko hfakos 13 Jul 2015 15:15
Yes, yes. You seem to tolerate Medvedchuk and Baloga mafias way better, for years.
Transcarpathian REgion is the most corrupt in all of Ukraine (which is quite a fit). What we see
here is a gang war in fatigues.
tanyushka Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 15:14
sorry i posted the same above... i was just to hasty.. sorry again...
in the main picture of the same article it's interesting to notice the age of most of the conscripted
soldiers... they are in their 30's, theirs 40's and even in their 50's... it's forced conscription,
they are not volunteers... while all the DPR & LPR soldiers are real volunteers...
an uncle, the father of a cousin, was conscripted in Kherson... my cousin had to run away to South
American to say with an aunt to avoid conscription... many men are doing it in Ukraine nowadays...
not because they are cowards but because they don't want to kill their brothers & sisters for
the benefit of the oligarchs and their NATO masters (and mistresses...)
did you know that all the conscripts have to pay for their own uniforms and other stuff, while
in the National Guard and the oligarchs batallions everything is top quality and for free... including
bulletproof vests and other implements courtesy of NATO
Demi Boone 13 Jul 2015 15:13
Well finally they reveal themselves. These Ukraine Nationalists are the people who instigated
the anarchy and shootings at Maidan and used it as an excuse to wrongfully drive out an elected
President and in the chaos that followed bring in a coup Government which represents only West-Ukraine
and suppress' East-Ukraine. You are looking at the face of the real Maidan and not the dream that
a lot of people have tried to paint it to be.
Stas Ustymenko MartinArvay 13 Jul 2015 15:11
Many Right Sector members are indeed patriots. But it looks like the organisation itself is,
sadly, much more useful for providing thugs for hire than "justice".
BMWAlbert PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 14:20
But seriously, the naval base is probably the reason, it is too important for some interests
to have a less-reliable (Ukrainian) in charge, this is a job only for the most trusted poodles.
If things had gone differently, the tie-eatimng chap would have been appointed Mayor of Sebastopol.
BMWAlbert PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 14:15
There appears to be a Quisling-shortage in Ukraine at present.
Stas Ustymenko obscurant 13 Jul 2015 13:32
More accurately, Kolomoyskiy is Ukrainian oligarch. Who happens to be ethnically, culturally
and, by all accounts, religiously, a Jew.
Stas Ustymenko Kaiama 13 Jul 2015 13:24
Ukrainian Volunteer Corps of the Right Sector fighting in Donbass is two battalions. How is
this a "key organization"? They are a well-known brand and fought bravely on some occasions, but
the wider org is way too eager to brandish arms outside of combat or training. They will be reigned
in, one way or another, and soon.
GameOverManGameOver Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 12:02
Shh shh shh. This news does not exist yet in the western media, therefore it's nothing but
Russian propaganda.
Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 11:54
It gets worse - soldiers from the UA are now refusing to follow orders in protest against the
total anarchy sweeping the chain of command, and their lack of rest and equipment.
Tensions have been rising between the government and the Right Sector militia that has
helped it fight pro-Russian separatists in the east of the country.
Finally, the Guardian decided to report the actual new after satisfying itself with ample discussion
of the quality of Russian cheeses. Right sector "helped" to fight "separatists"? Really? Does
Alec Luhn know that there are currently two (!) RS battalions at the front and 19 (!) inside Ukraine?
They are some warriors. Now they are occupying themselves fighting as criminals they are for the
control of contraband.
At the ATO zone, they help consists of plundering, murdering and raping the local population.
They enter a village, take everything of value from houses and then blow them up. They rape women
and girls as young as 10 years old. They've been doing this for more than a year, and we've been
telling you that for more than a year. But apparently in the fight against "pro-Russian separatists"
everything is good. These crimes are so widespread, even the Ukrainian "government" is worried
this will eventually becomes impossible to deny. Some battalions such as Shakhtersk and Aidar
have been officially accused of crimes and ompletely or partially reformed.
Examples: http://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR50/040/2014/en/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bfb_1413804655
Ukraine, what a mess. As though it was ever about the people. It was a grab for resources,
19-century style. But with 21st-century stakes. You can see what the West is after when you look
at the US-Ukraine Business Council. It bring NATO, Monsanto and the Heritage Foundation under
one roof:
You'd be surprised, but I like Bandera (controversial as he was) way more than I trust some
people who wrap themselves in his red-and-black Rebel banner. Yarosh included. Banderite rebellion
ended 60 years ago. Its major goal was establishing a "united, free Ukrainian state"; by contrast,
stated ultimate goals of the Right Sector are way murkier; I'm not sure even most of the movement's
members are clear on what these are.
With present actions, Right Sector has a huge image problem in the West. If it will come to all-out
conflict, no doubt the West will back Poroshenko government over a loose confederation of armed
dudes linked by the thin thread of 30ies ideology (suspect even then). And the West will be right.
Stas Ustymenko Nik2 13 Jul 2015 11:03
Methinks you're way overselling a thug turf war as "major political event. Truth is, the region
has been long in the hands of organized crime. The previous regime incorporated and controlled
almost all organized crime in the country, hence no visible conflict. Now, individual players
try to use temporary uncertainty to their advantage. Right Sector claims they were trying to fight
the smuggling, but this doesn't sound plausible. The word is, what's behind the events is struggle
for control over lucrative smuggling between two individuals (who are both "businessmen" and "politicians",
members of Parliament). Both are old-school players, formerly affiliated with Yanukovitch party.
One just was savvy enough to buy himself some muscle under Right Sector banner. Right Sector will
either have to straighten out its fighters (which it may not be able to do) or disappear as a
political player. I fail to see how people see anything "neo-Nazi" in this gang shootout.
PaddyCannuck Cavirac 13 Jul 2015 10:21
Nobody here is an apologist for Stalin, who was a brutal and cruel despot, and the deportations
of the Crimean Tatars were quite indefensible. However, a few observations might lend some perspective.
1. Crimea has been invaded and settled by an almost endless succession of peoples over the
millennia. The Crimean Tatars (who are of Turkic origin) were by no means the first, nor indeed
the last, and cannot in any meaningful sense be regarded as the indigenous people of Crimea.
2. The Crimean Tatars scarcely endeared themselves to the Russians, launching numerous raids,
devastating many towns, including the burning of Moscow in 1571, and sending hundreds of thousands,
if not millions of Russians into slavery in the Ottoman Empire.
3. The deportations took place in 1942 - 1943 against the backdrop of World War II, when a lot
of bad stuff happened, including -
4. The American (and also Canadian) citizens of Japanese ethnicity who had their property confiscated
and were likewise shipped off to camps. Their treatment, if anything, was worse.
Sevastopol, Pearl Harbor. What's the difference? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
meanwhile last night & this morning, just to distract the people of what is going on in the West,
Kiev launched a massive shelling over Donetsk and other places in Donbass using weapons forbbiden
by the Minsk agreements, including Tor missiles, one of which fell at a railway station but didn't
explode... it was defused by emergency workers but the proof is there if you care to see... it
was thesecond biggest attack since the cease fire...
Nik2 6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:53
Not exactly. By now, BBC has made good coverage of these events in Ukrainian and Russian languages,
but not in English. It looks like BBC considers that Western public does not deserve the politically
sad truth about armed clashes between "champions of Maidan Revolution" and "new democratic authorities,
fighting corruption". Western public should not be in doubt about present-day "pro-European" Ukraine.
And "The Guardian" still has only one article on the issue that could be a turning point in Ukrainian
politics. This is propaganda, not informing about or analyzing really serious political events.
VictorWhisky 13 Jul 2015 09:51
This is the IMF hired guns now going after the very people who helped the Wall Street IMF shysters
in the illegitimate coup and the set up of the illegitimate Kiev junta, a mix of half Ukrainian
and non-Ukrainian mongrels. Furthermore, instead of bringing in the people who helped overthrow
Janukovich into the government fold, the IMF is placing it's foreign collaborators in ministerial
positions by making them instant Ukrainian citizens, while keeping the right wing, without whose
help the coup would not have succeeded, out of government and slowly trying to eliminate them
with their private foreign mercenary force. Madame "F*ck the EU Nuland from the US state department
bordello, a devout Zionist, enticed these supposed Ukrainian NAZIs to help her in her dirty deeds,
no doubt with promises of power sharing. So madame Nuland was perfectly willing to get in bed
with the Ukrainian NAZI devils (her Jewish friend should be proud) and when the dirty deed was
done, she is now turning against Ukrainian nationalists in the attempt to have outside forces
in control of Ukraine. Madame Nuland is not as intelligent or capable as portrayed, because if
she was, she would have known Ukraine has a very delicate and very complicated political structure
and history with nearly half the country speaking Russian and more loyal to the Russians than
to the US. An intelligent person familiar with Ukrainian history would know any attempt of placing
a US stooge in Kiev would certainly result in a civil war. She no doubt got her position not by
intelligence but by connections. More than 6000 Ukrainians, human beings, innocent men women and
children, have died in madame Nuland's engineered coup, putting her in league with her mentor,
Henry Kissinger, aka the butcher of Vietnam. That intelligent idiot's policies resulted in the
death of 3 million Vietnamese and 50,000 young Americans. Does madame Nuland intend to sacrifice
that many Ukrainians to prove her ultimate stupidity?
Jeremn Luminaire 13 Jul 2015 09:51
The conscripts didn't want to shoot their fellow Ukrainians. The nationalists don't believe
the people in the east are their fellow Ukrainians.
Because they were lovely guys, evidently, and their "popularity" has nothing to do with armed
thugs beating you up if you say anything against them (or the state prosecuting you for denying
or questioning their heroism).
Jeremn jezzam 13 Jul 2015 09:35
Ukrainian media, reporting Ukrainian government official:
12 police dead in two days, 180 wounded with gunshot wounds.
Still Kremlin lies?
Jeff1000 13 Jul 2015 09:30
Thank God Ukraine is finally free and democratic. The old autocratic regime actually had the
gall to make running street battles illegal - but those dark days are in the past. In the liberated
Ukraine you are free spend the dollar a day you get paid on a bullet proof vest so the rampant
Nazi street gangs don't kill you.
Jeremn SHappens 13 Jul 2015 09:26
You'd be surprised, there are Bandera-lovers in the UK too. There's a Bandera museum. And there
is this lot, teaching Christian values to children. And telling them that Bandera was a hero.
Future Right Sector supporters being crafted as we type.
6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:24
The Ukrainian sub-saharan African minimum wage is now being accompanied by Somali-style politics.
Luckily, the Russians have liberated Crimea so piracy on the high seas isn't an option for
the Ukrainians.
6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:18
Apparently, UAVs generously supplied to Ukrainians by the Canadian taxpayers are being put
to good use smuggling cigarettes into Slovakia.
6i9vern 13 Jul 2015 09:12
The BBC are bravely sticking to their decision not to report this story. Congratulations are
in order for such dedication.
The graun protected its readership from this confusing information for 24 hours and then caved
to the temptation to report news. Too bad.
aucontraire2 13 Jul 2015 08:36
Can we officially congratulate Nuland for a crappy job and also for providing Putin with
all the tools he needed to bring back Ukraine under his wing.
False flag operations for American private interests must stop now. They are immoral, unethical
and only bring death and destruction to otherwise stable societies. The UN should have a
say.
SomersetApples 13 Jul 2015 08:25
The country is bankrupt; the Kiev putschists are selling off the country's assets to their
New York allies, the oligarchs and Nazis are at war against each other and the illegal putschist
government and now toilet mouth Nuland is back on the scene. Looks like a scene form Dante's Inferno.
todaywefight Polvilho 13 Jul 2015 07:54
Which Russian invasion will this be the of he approximately 987 mentioned by Poroshenko and
our man Yatz...or are you referring to the people of the AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA's (yes
that was what was called after the 1994 referendum) massive wishes to (like Donbass) go against
a government who illegally dismissed an elected president a wish that was reflected on a referendum
which was allowed by their constitution 18(7)
Bosula Scepticbladderballs 13 Jul 2015 07:38
Yes. Most of the protesters are good people who just want a better deal in life.
monteverdi1610 13 Jul 2015 06:54
Remember all those CIF threads when those of us who pointed to the neo-Nazis in Ukraine were
immediately called ' Putinbots ' ?
PS/ Apologies would be the order of the day , perhaps ?
Sturney 13 Jul 2015 06:49
Apparently this conflict is over. Temporarily over. Anyway in ever-contracting economy, in
a Mariana trench between Russia and EU, in the most totalitarian country in history, such conflicts
will continue. Since Nuland tossed yeast in the outhouse nobody can stop fermentation of sh*t.
Help yourself with some beer and shrimps. I am looking forward when these masses splash out to
EU, preferably to Poland. Must be fun to watch. (Lipspalm)
Justin Obisesan 13 Jul 2015 06:33
In the run-up to the Euro 2012 football tournament, jointly hosted by Poland and Ukraine, I
remember how the media in this country worked themselves into a frenzy harping on about the presence
of violent neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine. After the removal of Mr Yanukovych from office, the same
media organisations changed their tune by describing any talk of neo- Nazis in Ukraine as "Russian
propaganda". The Western media coverage of the Ukrainian crises has been so blatantly pro-Kiev
and anti-Donbass that their claims of impartiality and objectivity cannot be taken seriously anymore.
Jeremn jgbg 13 Jul 2015 06:16
It is fine when they are shooting at Donetsk, but not so good when they use the same tactics
in western Ukraine.
Azov are the same, violent neo-Nazi thugs given authority, and this article notes that PrivatBank
is the bank that services requests for donations to the Azov funds, using J P Morgan as intermidiary.
Neither Azov nor Right Sector want peace. On 3 July 4,000 men from these units protested in
Kiev, calling for resumption of the war against the eastern provinces.
They favour ethnic cleansing.
Jeremn William Fraser 13 Jul 2015 06:10
The people who support Bandera are in western Ukraine. They are the ones who say Stalin starved
the Ukrainian people.
Trouble is, in the 1930s, western Ukraine belonged to Poland.
It was the Russians, eastern Ukrainians and other Soviet people who starved, not the western
Ukrainians.
Kefirfan 13 Jul 2015 06:02
Good, good. Let the democracy flow through you...
Pwedropackman SHappens 13 Jul 2015 05:53
It will be interesting to see which side the US and Canada will support. Probably Poroshenko
and the Oligarchs because the Right Sector is not so happy about the ongoing sales of Ukraine
infrastructure to US corporates.
SHappens 13 Jul 2015 05:14
Harpers' babies are out manifesting, supporting the good guys:
"Supporters of Ukraine's Right Sector extremist group rallied in Ottawa Sunday amid the
radicals' ongoing standoff with police in western Ukraine."
The rally outside the Ukrainian embassy was organized by the Right Sector's representative
office in the Canadian capital, 112 Ukraine TV channel reported, citing the Facebook account of
the so-called Ukrainian Volunteer Corps.
careforukraine 13 Jul 2015 05:09
I wonder how long it will be before the us denounces nazi's in ukraine?
Kind of seems like we have seen this all before.
Almost like how ISIS were just freedom fighters that needed our support until ?.....
Well we all know what happened there.
Pwedropackman 13 Jul 2015 05:04
If it was not for the right sector, Ukraine would still be one united nation.
GameOverManGameOver Chris Gilmore 13 Jul 2015 04:41
Yes, I agree, they do wreck the economy. That was my point. Russia want's strong economies
to do business with, not broken economies that only ask for financial aid.
Like I said, no evidence of Russian troops in Donbass and South Ossetia asked for the presence
of Russian troops to deter the Georgian government from trying another invasion.
And organisations like CIS are meant to expand economic ties. Just like the EU I suppose. They
function in pretty much the same way with everyone getting a chance to lead. So I don't know why
that should be a bad thing. Since the EU is not interested in admitting Russia why can't Russia
go to other organisations?
VladimirM Dmitriy Grebenyuk 13 Jul 2015 04:26
It's a poisonous sarcasm, I think. But I've heard that RS accuse the Ukrainian government of
being pro-Putin as the govermment accuse them of being Russian agents. Surreal a bit.
stewfen FOHP46 13 Jul 2015 04:24
The west would not have dialogue with Russia because it was not what Washington wanted. Washington
wanted to push a wedge between Russia and EU at any cost even 6500 lives and unfortunately they
succeeded
GameOverManGameOver Chris Gilmore 13 Jul 2015 03:54
I'll admit that frozen conflicts could be useful to Russia. But only from a security point
of view. And why not, exactly? NATO is Russia's biggest threat, so it would make sense for the
government to want to avoid it expanding any further. I understand your misgivings since you're
speaking from the position that NATO should expand to deter Russi…I mean 'Iran', but surely you
understand that Russia wanting to prevent that makes logical sense? Sure, it's at someone else's
expense but let's not pretend that big countries doing something at someone else's expense is
a new and revolutionary concept reserved only to Russia. And the Georgian conflict dates back
to the very early 90's.
From an economic point of view though, no sense at all. Frozen conflicts usually bring economic
barriers. Believe it or not Russia's priority isn't expansion, but the economy. And trade with
it's neighbours is an important element of the Russian economy. It's very hard to trade with areas
that are in the middle of a frozen conflict. So in that sense the last thing Russia would want
are profitable areas in a frozen conflict around it's borders hampering it's economic growth.
And none of this has anything to do with Marioupol.
Debreceni 13 Jul 2015 03:38
The Right Sector does not exist, or if it does, it has been created by Moscow. The crisis in
Greece is also the work of Russian agents. The ISIS is financed and trained by Putin. Ebola was
cooked up in a laboratory in Saint Petersburg. Look for the Russian!
Kaiama PrinceEdward 13 Jul 2015 02:50
We don't know if PS were also doing it as well or just poking their noses into someone else's
business. Who started it? I doubt the correct answer will ever be known. Two unsavoury groups
arguing about an illegal business. The problem is that the MP is an MP whereas PS is a national
organisation.
"neo-Chekists" That's new to me.... Are you sure they are not "Just doing their jobs" ?
Did you read the Nafeez Ahmed piece someone linked ? Here (if you didn't)
It's never the US....it's never the West.....
(you know, to balance things) : )
todaywefight 13 Jul 2015 01:53
If any one on the other side, the dark side, ever thought that these lot will hold hands with
any one, lay down their arms and sing Kumbaya, uou are either utterly naive or willfully ignorant.
Apparently, these lot have 23 battalions, armed to their teeth, the added bonus for the Privy
Sektor is that , due to expedience and cowardice , they have just made legal and incorporated
into the Ukrainian army, Kyiv is in a highway to nowhere.
Incidentally, unlike the maidan demonstrations which essentially were only in Kyiv there are
demonstrations in more than a dozen cities, and have established dozen of check points already
and Yarosh a member of the VT. have clearly instructed them to fight if necessary.
GameOverManGameOver Omniscience 13 Jul 2015 01:35
So? Yes there are nationalists in Russia, just like everywhere else. You get a gold star for
googling. Shall I get some articles with European and American nationalists to parade around to
make a vague point? If you want I can get you an article of Lithuanians dressed up as the Waffen
SS parading around Vilnius. That's Lithuania the EU and Nato member. Funny how EU principles disappear
when it's one of their own violating them.
You seem to be missing the point entirely. While all countries have their nationalists, those
nationalists are a very small minority, have no power, have no popular support, have no seats
in government, usually derided by the majority of the population and they certainly aren't armed
to the teeth roaming around the country killing, torturing and kidnapping people with the blessing
of their government
HollyOldDog Joe way 13 Jul 2015 00:09
The Right Sector were / are Ukrains Storm Troopers who have had more advanced training by the
Americans. If the Right Sector turn on the Kiev Government they will be difficult to defeat, and
who knows if the civilian population of Ukraine may join in the 'fun' by ousting the current unpopular
Ukrainian government.
sorrentina 12 Jul 2015 23:35
this is what happens when you play with fire: you get burned. Using Neo-Nazi's to implement
Nato expansionist policies was always a very bad idea. It's just a shame it is not people like
Victoria 'fuck the EU' Nuland who will have to suffer the blowback consequences- it is the poor
Ukrainian people. This is not that different to what has happened in Libya- where Islamic extremists
were used as a proxy force to oust Gaddafi.
annamarinja jgbg 12 Jul 2015 23:31
The threshold has been guessed impatiently by the US neocons (while the provocateur Higgins/
Bellingcat fed the gullible the fairy tales about Russian army in Ukraine). The US needs desperately
a real civil war in Ukraine, the Ukrainians be damned. Just look what the US-sponsored "democracy
on the march" has produced in the Middle East. Expect the same bloody results in eastern Europe.
annamarinja obscurant 12 Jul 2015 23:25
perhaps you do not realize that your insults are more appropriate towards the poor Ukrainians
that have been left destitute by the cooky-carrying foreigners and their puppets in Kiev. The
Ukrainian gold reserve has disappeared... meanwhile, the US Congress has shamed the US State Dept
for collaborating with Ukrainian neo-nazis. Stay tuned. But do not expect to hear real news from
your beloved Faux News.
annamarinja quorkquork 12 Jul 2015 23:14
the jihadists in Ukraine are the integral part of Iraqization of Ukraine. The lovers of Nuland's
cookies are still in denial that Ukraine was destined by the US plutocrats to become a sacrificial
lamb in a fight to preserve the US dollar hegemony.
Bud Peart 12 Jul 2015 22:59
Well we always knew it would end this way. With a stalemate in the war with the East the Right
wing paramilitaries and private oligarch militias (whom the west funded and trained) have gone
completely feral and are now in fighting directly with whats left of the Ukrainian National Army.
This is pretty much the rode to another breakaway in Galacia which would effectively end the Ukraine
as a functional state.
The government should move as fast as possible to get a decent federal structure (copy switzerland)
in place before the whole of the West goes into revolt as well.
DelOrtoyVerga LostJohnny 12 Jul 2015 22:38
That is what you get when you put fascists in your government.
I rather reword it to
That is what you get when you enable and rely on thugish pseudo-fascist radical para-military
groups to impose order by force and violence against dissident segments of your own population
(which is armed to the teeth probably by Russia)
Bosula Scepticbladderballs 12 Jul 2015 22:37
What do you think it is?
There were several people identified directly or indirectly in this BBC story whose stories should
have been formally pursued by legal authorities in Kiev.
If you lived in the West you would understand that we call these references as possible 'leads'
- you follow these 'leads' and see where they take you. That is what Western police do.
The story says that Kiev didn't want to follow up any of these points. Why? What harm could this
do?
You state that you do not understand the point that this BBC journalist was making. But I have
in a fair way tried to to explain the point that the BBC was making.
This story caused quite a stir went it came out - and the BBC chose to stick with it and support
their British reporter. In an edited and shorter form the story is still on the BBC - the editing
is also acknowledged by the BBC.
Do you think the BBC should have blocked or not published this investigative piece?
If so - why?
And why hasn't Kiev followed up these issues?
Have I addressed your point yet?
HollyOldDog Scepticbladderballs 12 Jul 2015 21:34
I am just watching a program recorded earlier. Hiroshima: The Aftermath. I have got past the
part when the Japanese 'survivors' had to drink from the pools of Black Rain ( highly radioactive)
and watched the part when American Army Tourists visited the city to take a few photos ( no medical
help though) while gawking at the gooks. In fact the Japanese civilians recieved no medical assistance
at all from the Americans. The commentator just said that they were just there to study the effects
of nuclear radiation on a civilian population. These nuclear bombs were just dropped on Japan
to save One Day of the surrender of the Japanese forces.
The next documtary I will watch another day is the sinking of the Tirpitz by the RAF using
Tallboy bombs. At least this had a useful pupose in helping to stop the destruction of the North
Atlantic convoys, sending aid to Russia. That aid along with the rebuilding of the Soviet Armies
helped the Soviet Union to destroy the invading Nazi forces and provided a Second Front to the
Western Allies to invade Normandy. A lot of good can be achieved when the East and West work together
- maybe avoiding the worst effects of Global Warming but the Americans only seem to want to spend
Trillions $ building more powerful nuclear weapons. Is this all that America has now, an Arms
Industry - I can see it now, cooling the planet with a Nuclear Winter.
HollyOldDog Scepticbladderballs 12 Jul 2015 20:33
The USA caused the chaos in Ukraine so they must pay the billions of $ to fix it then leave
Ukraine alone.
6i9vern 12 Jul 2015 20:29
One of the amusing features of the Soviet media was the long silences it maintained on possibly
embarrassing breaking news until it became clear what the Party Line was.
Eventually, a memo would go out from Mikhail Suslov's office to various media outlets and the
silence would be broken.
At least everyone knew exactly how that system worked. What is happening with the British media
is much more murky.
The beeb/graun seem to be the Pravda/Izvestia, whilst the torygraph is a sort of Trybuna Ludu
- ie real news very occasionally appears in it.
6i9vern 12 Jul 2015 20:08
So, after a mere 24 hours the Graun ran a story on Mukachevo. The Torygraph actually had the
nerve to run the AFP wire report more or less straight away.
The BBC are still keeping shtum.
The Beeb/Graun complex have well and truly had the frighteners put on them.
PrinceEdward Kaiama 12 Jul 2015 20:07
There's no doubt. I agree that the MP was probably running cigarettes, but also Right Sektor
was going to muscle in.
If you asked somebody 3 years ago if Ukraine would be rocked by armed bands with RPGs and Light
Machine Guns fighting in towns, they would have thought you were crazy.
This isn't Russia, this is the Ultranats/Neo-Nazis.
PrinceEdward obscurant 12 Jul 2015 20:05
Right, it's the people in Donbass who bury 14th SS Division veterans with full honors, push
for full pensions to surviving Hiwi and SS Collaborators... not those in Lvov. Uh huh.
BMWAlbert 12 Jul 2015 20:04
11 months of investigations by the newKiev regime, attempting to implicate the the prior one
for the murder of about 100 people in Kiev early last year was unsuccessful. There may be better
candidates here.
fragglerokk ploughmanlunch 12 Jul 2015 19:55
It always amazes me that the far right never learn from history. The politicians and oligarchs
always use them as muscle to ensure coup success then murder/assasinate the leaders to make sure
they dont get any ideas about power themselves. Surprised its taken so long in ukraine but then
the govt is barely hanging onto power and the IMF loans have turned to a trickle so trouble will
always be brewing, perhaps theyve left it too long this time. Nobody will be shedding any tears
for the Nazis and Banderistas.
Why, don't you know? They infiltrated Ukraine, the CIA (and NATO and the EU somehow) created
Maidan, their agents killed the protesters, then they overthrew a legitimate government and installed
a neo-nazi one, proceeded to instigate a brutal oppression against Russian speakers, then started
a war against the peaceful Eastern Ukrainians and their innocent friends in the Kremlin, etc etc.
Ignorant question that, by now you should know the narrative!
Kaiama gimmeshoes 12 Jul 2015 19:53
If you think Pryvi Sektor want to "clean up" then yes, but not in the way you imagine - they
just want the business for themselves.
Geordiemartin 12 Jul 2015 19:51
I am reminded of AJP Taylor premise that Eastern Europe has historically had either German
domination or Russian protection.
The way that the Ukrainian government had treated their own Eastern compatriots leaves little
reason to believe they would be welcome back into the fold and gives people of Donbass no reason
to want to rejoin the rest of the country.
If government is making an effort to reign in the likes of Right sector it is a move in the
right direction but much much more will be needed to establish any trust.
Some Guy yataki 12 Jul 2015 19:45
just because they are nazis doesnt mean they are happy about doing any of this... now. look
at greece and the debacle that has unfolded over the past week has been . the west ukraine wanted
to be part of the euro zone and wanted some of that ecb bail out money. now they are not even
sure if they could skip out on the bill and know they are fighting for nothing . russia gave them
14 bil dollars . the west after the coup only gave the 1 bil
Andor2001 Kaiama 12 Jul 2015 19:44
According to the eyewitnesses the RS shot a guard when he refused to summon the commanding
officer. It was the beginning of the fight.
Andor2001 yataki 12 Jul 2015 19:41
Remember Shakespeare "Othello"? Moor has done his job, Moor has to go..
The neo-Nazis have outlived their usefulness.
Bosula caaps02 12 Jul 2015 19:39
The BBC investigative reported earlier this year that a section of Maidan protesters deliberately
started shooting the police. This story was also reported in the Guardian. Google and you will
easily find it.
The BBC also reported that the Prosecutors Office in Kiev was forbidden by Rada officials from
investigating Maiden shooters.
Maybe the BBC is telling us a lie? The BBC investigation is worth a read - then you can make up
your own mind.
Bosula William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 19:29
Kazakhstan had the highest percentage of deaths from Stalin's policies in this period when
he prevented the nomad herders moving from the mountains to the planes to take advantage of the
benefits of seasons and weather.
Stalin forced the nomads to stay in one area and they perished in the cold of the mountains or
the heat of the summer plains (whichever zone they were foced to stay in).
Some of my family is Ukrainian and some recognise that Stalin's policies weren't specifically
aimed at Ukrainians - the people of Kazakhstan suffered the most (as a percentage of population).
Either way, there is no genetic difference between Slavs or Russian or Ukrainian origin in Ukraine
or Russia - they are all genetically the same people.
This information should be better taught in Ukraine.
The problem is that it would undermine the holy grail story of right wing nationalism in Ukraine.
quorkquork annamarinja 12 Jul 2015 19:27
There are already jihadist groups fighting in Ukraine!
It's been one of the biggest mistakes ( although Ukraine's military started in a desperately
poor condition ) , to allow militia groups to get so powerful. Right sector should not have arms
and guns... The national Ukraine military should, If members of Right sector want to fight , they
should leave Right sector and join the army.
This was and will happen if they don't disband such armed groups.
annamarinja silvaback 12 Jul 2015 18:18
have you ever studied geography? If yes, you should remember the proximity of Ukraine to Russia
(next door) and the proximity of Ukraine to the US (thousands miles away). Also, have you heard
about the CIA Director Brennan and his covert visit to Kiev on the eve of the beginning of the
civil war in Ukraine? This could give you an informed hint about the causes of the war. Plus you
may be interested to learn about Mrs. Nuland-Kagan (Ms. Nudelman), her cookies, and her foul language.
She is, by the way, a student of Dick Cheney. If you were born before 2000, you might know his
name and his role in the Iraq catastrophe. Mrs. Nuland-Kagan (and the family of Kagans she belongs
to) finds particular pleasure in creating military conflicts around the globe. It is not for nothing
that the current situation in Ukraine is called Iraqization of Eastern Europe.
Bev Linington JJRichardson 12 Jul 2015 18:10
Ukrainians shot down the plane. East, West does not matter as they were all Ukrainians before
the government overthrow. Leaders of the new government could not look past some Ukrainian citizens
ethnicity, instead of standing together united, they decided to oppress which lead to the referendum
in Crimea and the rise of separatists in the East.
jgbg Chirographer 12 Jul 2015 17:53
And for the Pro-Russian posters the newsflash is that could also describe the situation
inside the Donbass.
It certainly describes the situation in Donbass where Right Sector or the volunteer battalions
are in charge. In Dnepropetrovsk, Right Sector would simply turn up at some factory or other business
and order the owner to sign document transferring the enterprise to them. In other cases, they
have kidnapped businessmen for ransom. Some people have simply disappeared under such circumstances.
The Ukrainian National Guard simply break into homes left empty by people fleeing the war and
steal the contents. Such was the scale of looting, the Ukrainian postal service have now refused
to ship electrical goods out of the ATO area unless the senders have the original boxes and receipts.
jgbg AlfredHerring 12 Jul 2015 17:45
Maybe Kiev just needs to bomb them some more.
Putin promised to protect the Russian speaking people in Ukraine - but he hasn't really done
that. His government has indicated that they would not allow Kiev to simply overrun or obliterate
the people of Donbass. Quite where their threshold of actual intervention lies is anyone's guess.
The "pro-Russian" government that you refer to was only elected because it promised to sign
the EU trade agreement. It then reneged on that promise...
Yanukovych's government was elected the previous one was useless and corrupt.
Yanukovych wanted to postpone the decision to sign for six months, while he attempted to extract
more from both the EU and Russia. Under Poroshenko, the implementation of the EU Association Agreement
has been delayed for 15 months, as the governments of Ukraine, the EU and Russia all recognised
that Russian trade (with the favourable terms which Ukraine enjoys) are vitail to Ukraine's economic
recovery. Expect that postponement to be extended.
.... severely and brutally curtailing freedom of speech and concentrating all power in the
hands of Yanukovich's little clan...
As opposed to sending the military to shell the crap out of those who objected to an elected
government being removed by a few thousand nationalists in Kiev.
There was no "coup".
An agreement had been signed at the end of February 2014, which would see elections in September
2014. The far right immediately moved to remove the government (as Right Sector had promised on
camera in December 2013). None of the few mechanisms for replacing the president listed in the
Ukrainian constitution have been followed - that makes it a coup.
The maidan protesters were not armed
This newspaper and other western media documented the armed members of far right groups on
Maidan. One BBC journalist was actually shot at by a Svoboda sniper, operating from Hotel Ukraina
- the video is still on the BBC website.
....the interim government that was put in place by the parliament in late February and
the government that was elected in May and Oct. of 2014 were and are not fascist.
The interim government included several ministers from Svoboda, formerly the Socialist Nationalist
Party of Ukraine. These were the first Nazi ministers in a European government since Franco's
Spanish government that ended in the 1970's. In a 2013 resolution, the EU parliament had indicated
that no Ukrainian government should include members of Svoboda or other far right parties.
pushkinsideburn vr13vr 12 Jul 2015 16:45
There has been a marked change in rhetoric over the last few weeks. Even CiF on Ukraine articles
seems to attract less trolls (with a few notable exceptions on this article - though they feel
more like squad trolls than the first team). Hopefully a sign of deescalation or perhaps just
a temporary lull before the MH17 anniversary this week?
pushkinsideburn calum1 12 Jul 2015 16:38
His other comments should have been the clue that arithmetic, like independent critical thinking,
is beyond him.
normankirk 12 Jul 2015 16:19
Right sector were the first to declare they wouldn't abide by the Minsk 2 peace agreement.Nevertheless,
Dmitry Yarosh, their leader is adviser to Ukraine's Chief of staff. Given that he only received
about 130,000 votes in the last election, he has a disproportionate amount of power.
As predicted the real civil war in ukraine is still to happen. The split between the east and
the ordinary ukrainian was largely manufactored . In the long term no body would be able to live
with the right sector or more preciselly the right sector cant share a bed with anyone else.
sashasmirnoff RicardoJ 12 Jul 2015 15:44
"When the Guardian claims to be a fearless champion of investigative journalism - as
it is, in some areas - why did it obey the dictats of the US neocon media machine which rules
all Western mainstream media over the Ukrainian land grab, instead of telling the truth, at
that time?"
This may be why:
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media." - former CIA Director William
Colby
Alexander_the_Great 12 Jul 2015 15:43
This was so, so predictable. The Right Sector were the main violent group during the coup in
2014 - in fact they were the ones to bring the first guns to the square following their storming
of a military warehouse in west Ukraine a few days before the coup. It was this factor that forced
the Police to arm themselves in preparation.
Being the vanguard of the illegal coup, they then provided a useful tool of manipulation for
the illegal Kiev government to oppress any opposition, intimidate journalists who spoke the truth
and lead the war against the legally-elected ELECTED governments of Donetsk and Lugansk.
Having failed in the war against the east, western leaders have signalled the right sector
has now outlived its usefulness and has become an embarrassment to Kiev and their western backers.
The Right Sector meanwhile, feel betrayed by the establishment in Kiev. They have 19 battalions
of fighters and they wont go away thats for sure. I think one can expect this getting more violent
in the coming months.
SHappens jezzam 12 Jul 2015 15:40
Putin is a Fascist dictator.
Putin is not a dictator. He is a statist, authoritarian-inclined hybrid regime ruler that possesses
some democratic elements and space for opposition groups.
He has moderate nationalist tendencies in foreign affairs; his goal is a secure a strong Russia.
He is a patriot and has a charismatic authority. Russians stay behind him.
ploughmanlunch samuel glover 12 Jul 2015 15:31
'this notion that absolutely everything Kiev does follows some master script drawn up
in DC and Brussels is simplistic and tiresome'
Agreed.
As is everything is Russia's fault.
ConradLodziak 12 Jul 2015 15:26
This is just the latest in a string of conflicts involving the right sector, as reported by
RT, Russian media and until recently many Ukrainian outlets. The problem, of course, is that Porostinko
has given 'official' status to the right sector. Blow back time for him.
CIAbot007 William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 15:06
Yes, Russia (USSR) from the USSR foundation had been forcing people of the then territory of
Ukraine to identify themselves as ukrainians under the process of rootisation - ukrainisation,
then gave to Ukraine Donbass and left side Dniepr and Odessa, Herson and Nikolaev, and then decided
to ethnically cleane them..It doesn't make sense, does it? Oh, wait, sense is not your domain.
annamarinja William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 15:05
let me help you with arithmetics: 72 years ago Europe was inflamed with the WWII.
There was a considerable number of Ukrainians that collaborated with Hitler' nazis:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)
Now moving to the present. The US-installed oligarchs in Kiev have been cooperating closely with
Ruropean neo-nazis (the followers of the WWII scum): http://rt.com/news/155364-ukraine-nazi-division-march/
In short, your government finds it is OK to glorify the perpetrators of genocide in Europe during
the WWII.
Nik2 12 Jul 2015 15:04
These tragic events, when YESTERDAY, on Saturday afternoon, several civilians were unintentionally
wounded in gun battles in previously peaceful town near the Hungary and Slovakia borders, vividly
exposes Western propaganda. Though mass media in Ukraine and Russia are full of reports about
this from the start, The Guardian managed to give first information exactly 1 day later, and BBC
was still keeping silence a few minutes ago. Since both sides are allies of the West (the Right
Sector fighters were the core of the Maidan protesters at the later stages, and Poroshenko regime
is presumably "democratic"), the Western media preferred to ignore the events that are so politically
uncomfortable. Who are "good guys" to be praised? In fact, this may be the start of nationalists'
revolt against Ukrainian authorities, and politically it is very important moment that can fundamentally
change Ukrainian politics. But the West decides to be silent ...
annamarinja William Fraser 12 Jul 2015 14:59
Do your history book tell you that the Holodomor was a multiethnic endeavor? That the Ukrainians
were among the victims and perpetrators and that the whole huge country had suffered the insanely
cruel policies of multiethnic bolsheviks? The Holodomor was almost a century ago, whereas the
Odessa massacre and the bombardments of civilian population in east Ukraine by the neo-nazi thugs
(sent by Kiev), has been going during last year and half. Perhaps you have followed Mr. Brennan
and Mrs. Nuland-Kagan too obediently.
foolisholdman zonzonel 12 Jul 2015 14:58
zonzonel
Oops, the presumably fascist govt. is fighting a fascist group.
What is a poor troll to do these days??
Antiukrainian copywriting just got more difficult, perhaps a raise is needed? Just sayin.
What's your problem? Never heard of Fascist groups fighting each other? Never heard of the
"Night of the Long Knives"? Fascists have no principles to unite them. They believe in Uebermenschen
and of course they all think that either they themselves or their leader is The Ueberuebermensch.
Anyone who disagrees is an enemy no matter how Fascist he may be.
samuel glover ploughmanlunch 12 Jul 2015 14:55
Y'know, I'm no fan of the Russophobic hysteria that dominates English-language media. I've
been to Ukraine several times over the last 15 years or so, and I'm sorry to say that I think
that in time Ukrainians will regard Maidan's aftermath as most of them view the Orange Revolution
-- with regret and cynicism.
That said, this notion that everything, absolutely everything Kiev does follows some master
script drawn up in DC and Brussels is simplistic and tiresome. Most post-revolution regimes purge
one end or the other of the current ideological wings. Kiev has already tangled with the oligarch
and militia patron Igor Kolomoisky. So perhaps this is another predictable factional struggle.
Or maybe, as another comment speculates, this is a feud over cigarette tax revenue.
In any case, Ukraine is a complex place going through an **extremely** complex time. it's too
soon to tell what the Lviv skirmish means, and **far** too soon to lay it all on nefarious puppetmasters.
TheTruthAnytime ADTaylor 12 Jul 2015 14:49
The only thing that makes me reconsider is their service to their country,...
Is the CIA their country? So far they've only seemed to serve the interests of American businesspeople,
not Ukrainian interests. Also, murdering eastern Ukrainians cannot really be considered such a
great service to Ukraine, can it?
annamarinja ID075732 12 Jul 2015 14:44
Maidan was indeed a popular apprising, but it was utilized by the US strategists for their
geopolitical games. The Ukrainians are going to learn hard way that the US have never had any
interest in well-being of the "locals" and that the ongoing civil war was designed in order to
create a festering wound on a border with the Russia. The Iraqization of Ukraine was envisioned
by the neocons as a tool to break both Russia and Ukraine. The sooner Ukrainians come to a peaceful
solution uniting the whole Ukraine (for example, to federalization), the better for the general
population (but not for the thieving oligarchs).
vr13vr 12 Jul 2015 14:38
"Couple of hundred Right Sector supporters demonstrated in Kiev?" Come on! Over the last week,
there have been enough of videos of thousands of people in fatigues trying to block access to
government buildings and shouting rather aggressive demands. The entire battalions of "National
Guard." This is much bigger than just 100 people on a peaceful rally. Ukraine might be heading
towards Maidan 3.0.
ID075732 12 Jul 2015 14:26
The situation in Ukraine has been unravelling for months and this news broke on Friday evening.
The Minsk II cease fire has not been honoured by Poroshenko, who has not managed to effect
any of the pledges he signed up to. The right sector who rejected the cease-fire from the start
are now refusing the rule of their post coup president in Kiev.
Time for Victoria Nuland to break out the cookies? Or maybe it's too late for that now. The
country formerly know as Ukraine is turning out to be another outstanding success of American
post -imperial foreign policy.
Meanwhile in UFA the BRIC's economic forum is drawing to a close, with representatives from
the developing world and no reporting of the aspirations being discussed there of over 60% of
the world's population. It's been a major success, but if you want to learn about it, you will
have to turn to other media sources - those usually reported as Russian propaganda channels or
Putin's apologists.
The same people who have been reporting on the deteriorating situation in Kiev since the February
coup. Or as Washington likes to call it a popular up rising.
'The only thing that makes me reconsider is their service to their country'
Don't get me wrong. I detest the fascist militias and their evil deeds.
However, despite their callousness, brutality and stupidity, they have been the most effective
fighting force for Kiev ( more sensible Ukrainians have been rather more reluctant to kill their
fellow countrymen ).
Deluded ? Yes. Cowardly ? No.
Even more reprehensible, in my opinion are the calculating and unprincipled Kiev Government
that have attempted to bully a region of the Ukraine that had expressed legitimate reservations,
using those far right battalions, but accepting no responsibility for the carnage that they carried
out.
mario n 12 Jul 2015 12:52
I think it's time Europe spoke up about dangers of Ukrainian nationalism. 72 years ago Ukrainian
fascists committed one of the most hideous and brutal acts of genocide in the human history. Details
are so horrifying it is beyond imagination. Sadly not many people remembers that, because it is
not politically correct to say bad things about Ukraine. Today mass murderers are hailed as national
heroes and private battalions and ultranationalist groups armed to the teeth terrorise not only
Donbas but now different parts of the country like Zakarpattia where there is strong Hungarian,
Russian and Romanian minority.
How many massacres and acts of genocide Europe needs before it learns to act firmly?
SHappens 12 Jul 2015 12:49
Kiev has allowed nationalist groups including Right Sector to operate despite allegations
by groups like Amnesty International, that Right Sector has tortured civilian prisoners.
You know what, you dont play with fire or you will get burnt. It was written on the wall that
these Bandera apologists would eventually turn to the hand that fed them. I wonder how Kiev will
manage to blame the russians now.
RicardoJ 12 Jul 2015 12:33
Of course the Guardian doesn't like to explain that 'Right Sector' are genuine fascists - by
their own admission!
These fascists, who wear Nazi insignia, were the people who overthrew the elected government
of Ukraine in the US / EU-supported coup - which the Guardianistas and other PC-brainwashed duly
cheered on as a supposed triumph of democracy.
Since that glorious US-financed and EU-backed coup, wholly illegal under international law,
Ukraine's economy has collapsed, as has Ukrainians' living standards.
The US neocons are losing interest in their attempted land grab of Ukraine - and the EU cretins
who backed the coup, thinking it would be a nice juicy further territorial acquisition for the
EU, are desperately looking the other way, now that both the US and EU realize that Ukraine is
a financial black hole.
When the Guardian claims to be a fearless champion of investigative journalism - as it is,
in some areas - why did it obey the dictats of the US neocon media machine which rules all Western
mainstream media over the Ukrainian land grab, instead of telling the truth, at that time?
jgbg 12 Jul 2015 12:15
The move came after a gunfight broke out on Saturday, when about 20 Right Sector gunmen
arrived at a sports complex controlled by MP Mikhail Lano. They had been trying to stop the
traffic of cigarettes and other contraband, a spokesman for the group said.
Put another way, one group of gangsters tried to muscle in on the cigarette smuggling operation
of another group of gangsters. Smuggling cigarettes into nearby EU countries is extremely lucrative.
Note the registration plates driven by both Right Sector and the other gangsters i.e. not Ukrainian.
In all likelihood, these cars are all stolen.
Right Sector and fighters from "volunteer battalions" have become accustomed to muscling in
on other people's activities (legal or not) in Donbass. This sort of thuggery is routine when
these folk come to town. It is only when since they have continued such activities on their home
turf in west and central Ukraine that the authorities have taken any notice.
"...He said he supported their efforts to obtain "so elementary and undeniably necessary a right
as that of the three "Ls": land, lodging and labour"."
"...he called the unfettered pursuit of money "the dung of the devil", and said poor countries
should not be reduced to being providers of raw material and cheap labour for developed countries.
"
"..."Let us not be afraid to say it: we want change, real change, structural change," the pope
said, decrying a system that "has imposed the mentality of profit at any price, with no concern for
social exclusion or the destruction of nature"."
"...The new colonialism takes on different faces. At times it appears as the anonymous influence
of mammon: corporations, loan agencies, certain 'free trade' treaties, and the imposition of measures
of 'austerity' which always tighten the belt of workers and the poor"
"...A lot of us are awaiting the 3rd WW, between Russia and the US, between China and the US, between
the West and the East, while the war is on. ... Is it work of Capitalism? I think that capitalism
in it's modern form lies near this war, and both are made by the same people."
"...Still, the subject of my comment was not the predominance of Christians, but how much poverty
exists in this predominantly Christian nation. They ignore the most fundamental teachings they
profess to believe--the admonitions of Jesus to feed, clothe, and generally help the poor."
"...There is a reason the US has over 900 bases across the world, and that is to insure its business
interests."
"...An economic system is not a matter of either-or. Those who profit from "Laissez Faire" capitalism
like to push the idea that the only alternative is communism. Pope Francis is obviously a proponent
of a "mixed economy" as most people in the US on the left are. He is attacking "unbridled capitalism"
not an adequately regulated free-market economy."
"...Animal farm is not about the failure of either Communism or Fascism....it is a commentary on
the corruption of power; not a uniquely Communist problem. The machinations of politics also feature
quite heavily...divide and rule, propaganda, double standards and the use of language to achieve
ones aims...these are abuses of power that both the left and the right have been guilty of. Hitler's
Germany was Fascist (right wing extremism), Stalin's Russia was Communist (left wing extremism)..."
Pope Francis has urged the downtrodden to change the world economic order, denouncing a
"new colonialism" by agencies that impose austerity programs and calling for the poor to have the
"sacred rights" of labor, lodging and land.
In one of the longest, most passionate and sweeping speeches of his pontificate, the Argentine-born
pope used his visit to Bolivia
to ask forgiveness for the sins committed by the Roman Catholic church in its treatment of native
Americans during what he called the "so-called conquest of America".
The pontiff also demanded an immediate end to what he called the "genocide" of Christians taking
place in the Middle East and beyond, describing it as a third world war.
"Today we are dismayed to see how in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world many of our
brothers and sisters are persecuted, tortured and killed for their faith in Jesus," Pope Francis
said.
"In this third world war, waged piecemeal, which we are now experiencing, a form of genocide
is taking place, and it must end."
Quoting a fourth century bishop, he called the unfettered pursuit of money "the dung of the
devil", and said poor countries should not be reduced to being providers of raw material and cheap
labour for developed countries.
Repeating some of the themes of his
landmark encyclical Laudato Si on the environment last month, Francis said time was running out
to save the planet from perhaps irreversible harm to the ecosystem.
Pope Francis shakes hands with a mining worker's leader watched by Bolivia's president
Evo Morales, right, in Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Photograph: Rodrigo Abd/AP
Francis made the address in the city of Santa Cruz to participants of the second
world meeting of popular movements, an international body that brings together organisations
of people on the margins of society, including the poor, the unemployed and peasants
who have lost their land. The Vatican hosted the first meeting last year.
He said he supported their efforts to obtain "so elementary and undeniably necessary a right
as that of the three "Ls": land, lodging and labour".
His speech was preceded by lengthy remarks from the left-wing Bolivian president
Evo Morales, who wore
a jacket adorned with the face of Argentine revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Guevara. He was executed
in Bolivia in 1967 by CIA-backed Bolivian troops.
"Let us not be afraid to say it: we want change, real change, structural change," the pope
said, decrying a system that "has imposed the mentality of profit at any price, with no concern
for social exclusion or the destruction of nature".
"This system is by now intolerable: farm workers find it intolerable, labourers find it intolerable,
communities find it intolerable, peoples find it intolerable. The earth itself – our sister, Mother
Earth, as Saint Francis would say – also finds it intolerable," he said in an hour-long speech
that was interrupted by applause and cheering dozens of times.
Since his election in 2013, the first pope from Latin America has often spoken out in defence
of the poor and against unbridled capitalism but the speech in Santa Cruz was the most comprehensive
to date on the issues he has championed.
Francis' previous attacks on capitalism have prompted stiff criticism from politicians and commentators
in the United States, where he is due to visit in September.
The pontiff appeared to take a swipe at international monetary organisations such as the IMF and
the development aid policies by some developed countries.
"No actual or established power has the right to deprive peoples of the full exercise of their
sovereignty. Whenever they do so, we see the rise of new forms of colonialism which seriously
prejudice the possibility of peace and justice," he said.
"The new colonialism takes on different faces. At times it appears as the anonymous influence
of mammon: corporations, loan agencies, certain 'free trade' treaties, and the imposition of measures
of 'austerity' which always tighten the belt of workers and the poor," he said.
Last week, Francis called on European authorities to keep human dignity at the centre of debate
for a solution to the economic crisis in Greece.
He defended labor unions and praised poor people who had formed cooperatives to create jobs where
previously "there were only crumbs of an idolatrous economy".
In one of the sections on colonialism, he said:
"I say this to you with regret: many grave sins were committed against the native peoples of
America in the name of God."
He added: "I humbly ask forgiveness, not only for the offences of the church herself, but
also for crimes committed against the native peoples during the so-called conquest of America.
"There was sin and an abundant amount of it."
The audience gave Francis a standing ovation when he put on a yellow miner's hat that was given
to him at the end of his speech.
The pope made his speech at the end of his first full day in Bolivia, where he arrived on Wednesday.
On Thursday morning he said a mass for hundreds of thousands of people and said that everyone had
a moral duty to help the poor, and that those with means could not wish they would just "go away".
Francis praised Bolivia's social reforms to spread wealth under Morales. On Friday, he will visit
Bolivia's notoriously violent Palmasola prison.
The pope
looked bemused on Wednesday night when Morales handed him one of the more unusual gifts he has
received: a sculpted wooden hammer and sickle – the symbol of communism – with a figure of a crucified
Christ resting on the hammer.
Francis leaves on Friday for Paraguay, the last stop on his "homecoming" trip.
The Pope didn't actually say "unbridled capitalism is the dung of the devil" did he?
So why is that the headline of this piece?
valeronfreza 10 Jul 2015 08:46
Actually, I find one of his thoughts really interesting. A lot of us are awaiting the 3rd WW,
between Russia and the US, between China and the US, between the West and the East, while the
war is on. The whole civilized world takes part in this mess, the thing is that this war looks
different from what we're used to see. I mean, we get information, made by those, who wants us
to see it different, like something, that happening far away, though it's dangerous as hell.
Is it work of Capitalism? I think that capitalism in it's modern form lies near this war,
and both are made by the same people.
cblyth79 10 Jul 2015 08:41
he called the unfettered pursuit of money "the dung of the devil"
He has hit the nail on the head. This is everything that is wrong with society. Every decision
is taken with regards to making as much money as possible. However, the great irony is that even
if people do make money, their constant desire for more means they are never happy or fulfilled.
Meanwhile, socially and environmentally we suffer greatly due to this ultimately fruitless pursuit
of as much money as possible.
PM782_ -> Greenshoots 10 Jul 2015 08:40
Generally speaking, you are right of course.
I have very little time for virgin men in silly hats & dresses, carrying crucifixes and expecting
everyone to take them seriously when history shows us they cannot be trusted to act in an ethical
way, and will (as always) be more concerned about amassing money and influence than doing any
good in the world.
The whole thing is ludicrous and you should be ashamed that you believe in it. It is really
astonishing.
Greenshoots -> Drew Layton 10 Jul 2015 08:39
Atheist trope. One could as easily say "Religion compels unreasonable people to do reasonable
things".
Westonboy -> pol098 10 Jul 2015 08:37
I'm happy to salute the personal contributions you make but, of course, the computer that you
will have used to write or test your software is a product of capitalism.
Also, most of the the goods you recycle or give away are no doubt the products of capitalism.
Anti-capitalists don't seem to have any alternative method of wealth creation.
EnglishChapin 10 Jul 2015 08:26
In the article:
Quoting a fourth century bishop, he called the unfettered pursuit of money "the dung of the
devil"
In the headline:
"Unbridled capitalism is the 'dung of the devil', says Pope Francis"
kycol1 -> natsirtguy 10 Jul 2015 08:24
As a Unitarian/Universalist I am equally, if not more, wary of that practice. Francis, however,
is a public figure who has the right to express his opinion. While he was definitely speaking
to a Catholic audience, he was not giving his words the weight of a Papal Encyclical. Also, it
is the accepted and expected belief of Catholics that the Pope directs their thinking as far as
faith goes. I do not see his words being a act of forcing his will on me, personally. All public
figures have the right to express their opinion on that subject. I also believe that regulation
should go further than dealing with "negative externalities" unless you view the financial crisis
of 2008 as a negative externality . While the causes of the crisis were complex and varied, lax
regulatory oversight during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations played a role in creating the
conditions for it.
Why do you want poor people to rise up? On what sense? Revolution to topple world governments,
what's next? What kind of governmental system will we apply to ensure law and order? Will it be
one world government by the Vatican?
I'm glad you set everyone straight on this. We were all thinking capitalism is an economic
and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners
for profit, rather than by the state. But clearly capitalism involves greed for money, exploitation
and environmental destruction. The very fact you've attempted to pick at this shows you're missing
the overarching point. The Pope is criticizing how our unregulated "socioeconomic system" - which
was capitalism the last time I looked - for being responsible for ruining society, enslaving men
and women and destroying human fraternity. All of which is pretty spot on. Excuse me for having
to clarify this for you.
citizen_1111 10 Jul 2015 07:48
Wouldn't it be great if newspapers like the Guardian printed the truth, rather than spin. The
pope did not say that "unbridled capitalism is the dung of devil". Here's the actual paragraph.
It's nothing like the Guardian's deceptive headline.
Today, the scientific community realizes what the poor have long told us: harm, perhaps irreversible
harm, is being done to the ecosystem. The earth, entire peoples and individual persons are being
brutally punished.
And behind all this pain, death and destruction there is the stench of what Basil of Caesarea
called "the dung of the devil". An unfettered pursuit of money rules.
The service of the common good is left behind. Once capital becomes an idol and guides people's
decisions, once greed for money presides over the entire socioeconomic system, it ruins society,
it condemns and enslaves men and women, it destroys human fraternity, it sets people against one
another and, as we clearly see, it even puts at risk our common home.
So he's actually referring to greed for money - a moral sin .... not capitalism, which is basically
meritocratic mechanism of funding businesses.
HobbesianWorld -> Drew Layton 10 Jul 2015 07:41
Wrong, it's a predominantly Christian nation. Christians don't own it. Under the Constitution,
all beliefs in matters of religion are equal.
Still, the subject of my comment was not the predominance of Christians, but how much poverty
exists in this predominantly Christian nation. They ignore the most fundamental teachings they
profess to believe--the admonitions of Jesus to feed, clothe, and generally help the poor.
Capitalism isn't a sacred arm of Christianity, yet many (most?) Christians tend to favor Wall
Street's gluttony and greed while millions of children live in poverty. Is that what we should
see in a "Christian" nation? It's the epitome of hypocrisy.
PM782_ 10 Jul 2015 07:33
The guy in charge of 1 billion plus devout catholics, with all the riches of the Vatican, preaches
to us about how excessive capitalism is a bad thing.
This pope seems more reasonable than his predecessors however until he actually DOES something
that makes the world a better place and in some way makes up for the history of atrocious behavior
that the Catholic church has engaged in, I'm simply not interested.
It is strange though, seeing how many people are hoodwinked by a few choice words, when the
organization he represents has been an utter blight on humanity since it began.
heretoeternity -> natsirtguy 10 Jul 2015 07:32
There is a reason the US has over 900 bases across the world, and that is to insure its business
interests.
Laurence W 10 Jul 2015 07:18
Devout capitalists/corporatists may not see the symmetry between John Paul II's defiance of
the bankruptcy of unbridled Communism and Francis's defiance of the bankruptcy of unfettered Capitalism.
They cling to their irrational faith (and that is what it is) in Adam Smith's "invisible hand."
The collapse of Communism does not somehow validate Capitalism. It seems Capitalism's true believers
must be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st. Century.
ideation2020 -> PeterAB12 10 Jul 2015 07:11
In the West there is a marked reduction in family size since about 1965. There are also far
more women at work, the workforce has adapted to almost full attendance of female workers. We
generally have accommodated an increase of 70% by reducing family size and equally as important
is the accommodation and full attendance of single a and" won't marry" adults.
SmileyFace2 -> natsirtguy 10 Jul 2015 07:10
But Capitalism has resulted in a Plutocracy which leads to rule by the top 1%. So it is not
quite a simple as you seem to think hence the need for a mixed economy.
HobbesianWorld 10 Jul 2015 07:08
While I wouldn't put it that way, the Pope is correct that unfettered capitalism is the major
source of injustice, especially the injustice of poverty.
It's a source of dark humor for me to hear Christians call the U.S. a "Christian nation" even
as they fight to maintain and enhance the cause of poverty--unbridled corporatism; profit over
humanity, wealth over justice and selfishness over honor.
Brian Milne -> Kevin Lim 10 Jul 2015 06:59
How much time have you spent in South America? I spent 18 years going back and forth as part
of my job, must admit I have not spoken to a Liberation Theology priest (he was actually a Jesuit
originally) since October. So perhaps I am just a little bit out of synch.
Life paths include being allowed to express one's sexuality openly and not risk excommunication
and denunciation by the church, to be allowed to have abortions and use contraception without
being told that you will go to Hell, to be allowed to 'formally' leave the church (some countries
still require religion on official document) and to follow political streams that the church condemns
as unchristian to name but just a few. By using the pressure of condemnation in the afterlife
people are to this day controlled by fear.
Sure nobody is obliged to put money in the dish but too many still fear the stigma of not doing
so. If this man can end that then it would be a job well done, but he will not, will he?
cblyth79 -> Manjush 10 Jul 2015 06:51
I agree that overpopulation is a problem, but to me the real problem is the capitalist consumerism
of first-world countries and the damage this is causing to the planet. Even if the populations
of third-world countries doubled they would not get anywhere near the CO2 that we produce. And
that's not even to mention the fact that we have caused climate change and they haven't. To blame
overpopulation is to out the blame on third-world countries, when it should be squarely on us.
VivF -> dysro1 10 Jul 2015 06:50
Animal farm is not about the failure of either Communism or Fascism....it is a commentary on
the corruption of power; not a uniquely Communist problem. The machinations of politics also feature
quite heavily...divide and rule, propaganda, double standards and the use of language to achieve
ones aims...these are abuses of power that both the left and the right have been guilty of. Hitler's
Germany was Fascist (right wing extremism), Stalin's Russia was Communist (left wing extremism)...
"Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
- Lord Acton
Drew -> Layton 10 Jul 2015 06:48
Yay! Religion has done something that isn't rape, muder, burning at the stake, ripping people's
breasts off, implement, beheading, shooting people on beaches, blowing things up, being homophobic,
sexist, racist or generally being a complete twat! Let's all jump up and down and burn a pilot!
YAY!
Kathy -> Foulds 10 Jul 2015 06:42
We are in very new times....Pope Francis is not afraid to challenge the status quo...Alleluia.
Tony Menezes 10 Jul 2015 06:24
The national interest of the unbridled capitalists has sidelined morality and justice. The
third world war has started albeit piecemeal.
This is a strong wake up call from someone that must be listened to.
Greenshoots -> rgrabman 10 Jul 2015 06:23
I can only speak for the UK where I have yet to find a Catholic friend who is not immensely
supportive of what the Pope has to say, whatever prominent Tory Catholics may have to say. Catholics
on the whole tend to vote Labour.
If you want to see a precursor to what the Pope is now saying, read the Catholic bishops document
"The common good" from 1996:
"As at the end of the 19th century, Catholic Social Teaching is concerned to protect the poor
and vulnerable from the chill winds of economic forces. The defeat of Communism should not mean
the triumph of unbridled capitalism."
"The Catholic doctrine of the common good is incompatible with unlimited freemarket, or laissez-faire,
capitalism ...".
Unconstituted -> natsirtguy 10 Jul 2015 06:22
Massively disagree with that bit about him being a non-scientist etc.
If skeptics are still unsure after all the science that has been thrown at them, then perhaps
they aren't influenced that way. They follow figures that they personally respect.
And the Pope has a huge following. I am certain that he will have given a lot of people pause
for thought recently.
Like many here, as an atheist, I'm no fan of the guy. But causes like social justice, climate
change etc need more than just reams of studies. It needs PR.
Greenshoots -> clogexpat 10 Jul 2015 06:17
Which is incorrect because the left is not, and never has been, an identifiable tribe in British
politics.
I agree that many people are not tribal about being left wing. They are willing to partner with
people whom they disagree with on some issues but where there is a common cause.
However, you just have to read many of the posts in this thread to see that, for many other people,
it is a form of tribal allegiance because they, in response to the Pope saying something they
probably do agree with, they cannot refrain from attacking him on unrelated issues. They are not
interested in supporting the common cause.
Longasyourarm -> MaximTS 10 Jul 2015 06:15
Well spotted but many here are in it for the opportunity to exercise their demons of hatred,
bigotry and racism. Most don't even read the article and jump right to the comments in their haste
to slag off Catholics, the Pope, Religion in general. I suppose it is still better than invasion
of other countries and stealing their stuff, isn't it Tony?
domrice 10 Jul 2015 06:13
Finally, a pontiff brave enough to enunciate the core values of Jesus Christ. Oh that the world
had political leaders who weren't shameless slaves to the moneylenders.
discreto -> SmileyFace2 10 Jul 2015 06:11
That is because the Free Trade is not Fair Trade, this is what Pope Francis is talking about.
Capitalism is Free Trade it is not Fair Trade with the People who work to ensure the Goods are
there to trade are not getting what is a Fair and Just Living wage, they are being used by the
Corporations who make Millions out of their hard work. I support Pope Francis and his Courage
in speaking up for the People in developing Countries who are made to depend on Capitalism against
their will. At last he is the Pope who is acknowledging the sins of the Church both past and present,
with a strong voice of Apology. It would be good if he could sit down with The First Nations of
America to take part in their native Ritual of Smudging from Smoke of burnt Herbs and grasses
for forgiveness and Peace. I pray for Pope Francis's Protection.
kycol1 -> natsirtguy 10 Jul 2015 06:02
An economic system is not a matter of either-or. Those who profit from "Laissez Faire" capitalism
like to push the idea that the only alternative is communism. Pope Francis is obviously a proponent
of a "mixed economy" as most people in the US on the left are. He is attacking "unbridled capitalism"
not an adequately regulated free-market economy.
ID1780902 10 Jul 2015 05:55
Why so many negative comments? Here we have an extremely high profile figure publicly rallying
people all over the world to help with climate change, and to oppose some of the excesses of capitalism.
Regardless of what you think of the Catholic church, many people will listen to what he says,
and take it very seriously. If he only changes the mind of a single climate-change denier that
would be enough, but I think he will do a lot more than that, particularly in the US.
"...And what were the boards, and risk and compliance committees of the lending banks, and the
regulators of Germany, France and the EU doing while the banks were lending hand over fist to a country
which plainly was over extended?
Hardly surprising that the number one priority of the ECB, EU, France, and Germany was to bail out their
banks, regardless of what happened to the feckless Greeks."
. "...Your point is valid if you believe the drug-pusher has no responsibility for the state of
the addict. A sensible economy is one where you keep the banksters on a leash - the free market agenda
beloved of the IMF put paid to that." . "... Monbiot is saying that 21st century neoliberalism is the same as 19th century laissez-faire." . "...To me, what the Europeans are doing to Greece is so transparent, if one knows a little about
the history of other parts of the world. But other parts of the world are periphery, in Europe's view,
and they are the center. Now they are treating even parts of the Eurozone as periphery. At some point
the center gets smaller and smaller and everything is periphery, the other, out there, those people,
and the European identity becomes a black hole rather than a beacon of light." . "...A very succinct article that hits some of the historical notes that explains how the elites
have controlled the masses to their advantage. All the financial laws, regulations that have been put
in place such as compound interest, the corporation as a 'person', and the takeover of the IMF and World
Bank by US and European elites are geared to keep the wealth in those few hands." . "...Great article. Particularly nails the canard that right wing IMF policies are "natural",
"objective" and "correct." All economics is politics in disguise, especially neo-liberal economics."" . "...The Greek people did not know that Goldman Sachs had cooked the books to allow them entry
into the Euro. They didn't know that Goldman Sachs was betting against them providing the final nail
in the coffin of their economy. They didn't know that sub prime mortgages were being re-packaged as
mortgage backed securities causing a GLOBAL financial crisis. Only the most informed would have been
able to see through their previous governments lies about spending levels. " . "...Agreed: the IMF is politicised and has operated as a means of enforcing market capitalism on
countries which were not in a position to make it work. Agreed: the EU project and the single currency
in particular were extremely ambitious projects which in some respects were based on a degree of utopia
and some pretty fundamental fallacies. None of which excuses successive Greek governments for being
complacently corrupt, economically incompetent and, in Syriza's case, deliberately inflammatory, of
course. Not that Greece is entirely alone in this, even within the EU, though as shambles go it takes
some beating. "
"
From laissez-faire economics in 18th-century India to neoliberalism in today's Europe the subordination
of human welfare to power is a brutal tradition
Greece may be financially bankrupt, but the
troika is politically bankrupt.
Those who persecute this nation wield
illegitimate, undemocratic powers, powers of the kind now afflicting us all. Consider the International
Monetary Fund. The distribution of power here was perfectly stitched up: IMF decisions require an
85% majority, and the US holds
17% of the votes.
The IMF is controlled by the rich, and governs the poor on their behalf. It's now doing to Greece
what it has done to one poor nation after another, from Argentina to Zambia. Its
structural adjustment programmes have forced scores of elected governments to dismantle public
spending, destroying health, education and all the means by which the wretched of the earth might
improve their lives.
The same programme is
imposed
regardless of circumstance: every country the IMF colonises must place the
control of inflation ahead of other economic objectives; immediately remove barriers
to trade and the flow of capital; liberalise its banking system; reduce government
spending on everything bar debt repayments; and privatise assets that can be sold
to foreign investors.
Using the threat of its self-fulfilling prophecy (it warns the financial markets that countries
that don't submit to its demands are doomed), it has forced governments to abandon progressive policies.
Almost single-handedly, it engineered the
1997 Asian financial crisis: by forcing governments to remove capital controls, it opened currencies
to attack by financial speculators. Only countries such as Malaysia and China, which refused to cave
in, escaped.
Consider the European Central Bank. Like most other central banks, it enjoys "political independence".
This does not mean that it is free from politics, only that it is free from democracy. It is ruled
instead by the financial sector, whose interests it is constitutionally obliged to champion through
its
inflation
target of around 2%. Ever mindful of where power lies, it has exceeded this mandate, inflicting
deflation and epic unemployment on poorer members of the eurozone.
The Maastricht treaty,
establishing the European Union and the euro, was built on a lethal delusion: a belief that the
ECB could provide the
only
common economic governance that monetary union required. It arose from an extreme version of
market fundamentalism: if inflation were kept low, its authors imagined, the magic of the markets
would resolve all other social and economic problems, making politics redundant. Those sober, suited,
serious people, who now pronounce themselves the
only adults in the room, turn out to be demented utopian fantasists, votaries of a fanatical
economic cult.
All this is but a recent chapter in the long tradition of subordinating human
welfare to financial power. The brutal austerity imposed on Greece is mild compared
with earlier versions. Take the 19th century Irish and Indian famines, both exacerbated
(in the second case caused) by the doctrine of
laissez-faire, which we now know as market fundamentalism or neoliberalism.
In Ireland's case, one eighth of the population was killed – one could almost say murdered– in
the late 1840s, partly by
the British
refusal to distribute food, to prohibit the export of grain or provide effective poor relief.
Such policies offended the holy doctrine of laissez-faire economics that nothing should stay the
market's invisible hand.
When drought struck India in 1877 and 1878, the British imperial government insisted on exporting
record amounts of grain,
precipitating a famine that killed millions. The
Anti-Charitable
Contributions Act of 1877 prohibited "at the pain of imprisonment private relief donations that
potentially interfered with the market fixing of grain prices". The only relief permitted was forced
work in labour camps, in which less food was provided than to the inmates of Buchenwald. Monthly
mortality in these camps in 1877 was equivalent to an annual rate of 94%.
As
Karl Polanyi argued in The Great Transformation, the gold standard – the self-regulating system
at the heart of laissez-faire economics – prevented governments in the 19th and early 20th centuries
from raising public spending or stimulating employment. It obliged them to keep the majority poor
while the rich enjoyed a gilded age. Few means of containing public discontent were available, other
than sucking wealth from the colonies and promoting aggressive nationalism. This was one of the factors
that contributed to the first world war. The resumption of the gold standard by many nations after
the war exacerbated the Great Depression, preventing central banks from increasing the money supply
and funding deficits. You might have hoped that European governments would remember the results.
Today equivalents to the gold standard – inflexible commitments to austerity – abound. In December
2011 the European Council
agreed a
new fiscal compact, imposing on all members of the eurozone a rule that "government budgets shall
be balanced or in surplus". This rule, which had to be transcribed into national law, would "contain
an automatic correction mechanism that shall be triggered in the event of deviation." This helps
to explain the seigneurial horror with which the troika's unelected technocrats have greeted the
resurgence of democracy in Greece. Hadn't they ensured that choice was illegal? Such diktats mean
the only possible democratic outcome in Europe is now the collapse of the euro: like it or not, all
else is slow-burning tyranny.
It is hard for those of us on the left to admit, but Margaret Thatcher saved the UK from this
despotism. European monetary union, she predicted, would
ensure that the poorer countries must not be bailed out, "which would devastate their inefficient
economies."
But only, it seems, for her party to supplant it with a homegrown tyranny. George Osborne's proposed
legal commitment to a budgetary surplus exceeds that of the eurozone rule.
Labour's promised budget responsibility lock, though milder, had a similar intent. In all cases
governments deny themselves the possibility of change. In other words, they pledge to thwart democracy.
So it has been for the past two centuries, with the exception of the 30-year
Keynesian respite.
The crushing of political choice is not a side-effect of this utopian belief system but a necessary
component. Neoliberalism is inherently incompatible with democracy, as people will always rebel against
the austerity and fiscal tyranny it prescribes. Something has to give, and it must be the people.
This is the true road to serfdom: disinventing democracy on behalf of the elite.
It really is a religion. It's fun sometimes to imagine certain twinings-- compare and contrast.
So one day I was sitting around thinking: US...and IS... what do they have in common?
Well,
1) they both pursue really totalitarian ideologies with every conviction of the religious fanatic.
2) Meaning they will subordinate their very humanity to the propagation, nay: perfection! of this
brand of 'Utopianism'.
3)They each of them want to completely wipe something out and feel they must do so in order for
their Creed to survive. The IS wants to destroy the Past ...as is evidenced by their historical
monuments destructions. But the US, they want to destroy the Future... Or, specifically: any future
where they are not practicing their own very self-interested brand of money-power religion and
are not on top of the world lording it over everyone else.
Both of these visions are so deranged as to be impossible to achieve, but like any ardent Totalitarians--
they will damn sure try and over the dead bodies Of Others, regardless of how many or how much
suffering need be inflicted to serve their 'God'...
Remco van Santen 9 Jul 2015 21:36
Conspiracist twaddle to argue the problem is external. Greece was corruptly managed for decades
with the less wealthy bearing the burden disguised by an on-going devaluation of the drachma that
devalued seven-fold in the two decades to joining the euro (http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/fedstl/exgrus).
The Europeans were naïve to expect the internal corruption to cease and the fixed exchange rate,
presented by the adopted euro, simply brought it out to the surface. Greece is the home of democracy,
but it is also became the home of those saying we might all be equal, but some are more entitled
than others. Adopting the euro exposed the rot and so this is an opportunity for Greece to get
its own house in order.
The Eurozone might like to think of helping the more vulnerable like the pensioners are protected
and not used by the Greek government for grandstanding. Greece, the sheep, is parasite-infested
and to be held just long enough under the sheep-dip pesticide to kill the parasites but not too
long to kill the sheep.
Go Tsipras, show you are a leader of a true democracy.
motram 9 Jul 2015 20:50
Looks like the Tsyriza government has surrendered to Eurozone and IMF austerity demand. The
game is over. The Rothsyz and the bilderbergys have carried the day in the end.
zolotoy -> peeptalk 9 Jul 2015 20:38
Only the little people pay taxes, as Mrs. Helmsley so trenchantly observed. That holds for
all countries, not just Greece.
Allykate mikebain 9 Jul 2015 17:38
Interesting comment Mike Bain, thank you. Only a couple of points the "hoi polloi" are the
lower classes not the elite (a common error!) and I dispute the notion that all humans are exploiters
and takers. History proves otherwise. The early banks and building societies in England were created
by non-conformists, Unitarians and Quakers etc, who did not spend their wealth on themselves but
lived sparingly, ploughed their money back into their businesses, and ultimately achieved amazing
reforms for the ordinary people here. If the rich, modern Greeks had the same selfless Christian
philosophy, the corrupt tax system and greedy loans may not have destroyed their economy.
Allykate 9 Jul 2015 17:20
The "true road to serfdom" or revolution. Don't blame me..... I made speeches in support of
the Referendum Party to oppose the signing of The Maastricht Treaty. John Major just would not
listen to the people.
Boghaunter mikebain 9 Jul 2015 17:00
Governments are not the people. Germans were not Hitler. He was elected but then assumed dictatorial
power. Look at the US - our government is made up of politicians bought by the 0.1%. The 0.1%
do a great job controlling what the average American is told.
As for Germany reaping the benefit of no military, we'd be A LOT better off if we made the choice
to invest in our country instead of in our ridiculously large military budget. We could choose
that benefit. General Butler famously said, "War is a racket," and he was right.
The Marshall Plan was enlightened self interest as the US feared the spread of communism in devastated
Europe. The UK received the most $. It also was disbursed with tight control over German politics/administration/economy
and required dismantling of much of Germany's remaining industry. It was not a simple handout.
NYbill13 9 Jul 2015 15:45
Why Did They Lend Mega-Billions to Greece?
I still can't figure out what 'Greece' needed so badly that a handful of men who ran its government
a decade ago took on these loans.
Was the money invested in public infrastructure? Does Greece now have a fabulous highway, airport
and rail systems?
Did the previous Greek government ('conservative,' perhaps?) build a dozen new public hospitals,
renovate the nation's schools or build networks of water and sewer treatment plants or desalination
stations?
If so, then the Greek people may indeed owe a great debt to European financiers.
If not, who spent all this money and on what? Did those who signed the loan agreements receive
any sort of commission for doing so?
Do those signatories now work for the IMF or perhaps Deutsche Bank?
All the press says is 'the Greeks' owe the Germans a ton of money. After 11,789 headlines and
articles, I definitely understand that much.
After that, it's just pompous quotes and dire speculation about the future of the damn euro.
How about some background information, fellas? I'll bet you could even find out who signed the
loan papers on both sides and talk to them.
Oh, but that would take, you know, research.
syenka CaptainGrey 9 Jul 2015 14:22
The point cap'n, is that the money isn't actually going to the Greeks. It's going to Greece's
creditors (the ECB et al) who made incredibly irresponsible loans to a tiny slice of the Greek
population. That irresponsibility should NOT be rewarded. The way out, of course -- oh horrors!
-- is to just let the creditors take a bath, i.e. wipe the debt off the books. Then, put some
money into the pockets of regular Greeks who will, of course, proceed to spend it and thereby
relaunch the economy. Would you or I or any European be hurt by such a move? If your answer is
yes, tell us how. And, the suffering of millions of Greeks would come to an end.
alpine1994 CaptainGrey 9 Jul 2015 13:22
It's true, the Greek government took the money. We all know about the Legarde List and the
rampant corruption of the previous government administrations. They've all got off scot free and
instead it's the Greek people who suffer through aggressive austerity. One might be so callous
to blame them too, but if the government decreed citizens could retire young with a fat pension,
most people would excitedly take up the offer. If the EU had any balls, it would authorize INTERPOL
or what ever agency to crack down on corrupt current and former Greek politicians and other financial
criminals to help recover money to satiate the debt. These fat cats get away with sinking whole
countries!
CollisColumbulus Patrick Moore 9 Jul 2015 09:43
The greatest landholders in Ireland were almost to a man absentees, living in comfortable houses
in Britain with wealth extracted from Irish peasants by their middlemen. Furthermore, they were
alien in religion, often language, and nationality (the landholders may have considered themselves
Irish - in some cases - by they were certainly 'British' in identity also, which cannot be said
of the mass of the population) from the peasantry who provided their wealth. The ethno-religious
land settlement in Ireland and the stranglehold on the Irish peasantry that resulted were the
direct result of British policy in Ireland from the sixteenth and especially the seventeenth century
onward and were maintained by the power of the British military. While the situation is too often
reduced to 'Irish good, English bad' - note the heroic relief efforts of many private British
individuals, especially the Quakers - it is impossible to excuse the British state from a large
dose of culpability for the Famine without resorting to historical dishonesty of the highest level.
and remember: "the ones who have no knowledge, should not express opinion" Plato 460bc
CollisColumbulus -> Patrick Moore 9 Jul 2015 09:37
"The potato famine was a tragedy, but it is a little reported fact that the only crop that
was blighted. During the time of the famine Ireland was an exporter of meat and grain. There was
no shortage of food in Ireland - but there was a shortage of potatoes, which was the staple of
the poor".
I am astonished that you use this to argue against British culpability in the Irish famine. The
actions of the British state and Anglo-Irish colonial landholding society both created the conditions
of dreadful rural poverty (and potato dependency) that were a sine qua non of the Famine and directly
exacerbated the situation through their adherence to laissez-faire economics. It might be noted
that many starving Irish farm labourer families emigrated to Britain to enter the workhouses there,
rather than the workhouses in Ireland, because they knew the poor would not be allowed to starve
to death in Britain.
Its called the GFC. To refresh your memory financial institutions had manufactured schemes
that made them lots of money from money that did not exist. When they eventually got caught out
the tower of cards collapsed and the world was left short of cash and economies everywhere shrank.
The financial institutions that caused the problem were bailed out by taxpayers because they were
too big to fail. This meant that a few thousand very wealthy kept there wealth and the institutions
could continue to play their game and make more money. The next collapse is not far away. The
Greek loans (and other bad and risky loans) were bought by the taxpayer as part of their bail
out package. It is shameful that governments refuse a similar bailout deal to the Greeks which
involves the misery of millions of people. It is even sicker that the condition they imposed have
been known and shown repeated not to work since the 1930 depression.
mikebain 9 Jul 2015 08:30
A great essay with a sad but true take-away point-humans are exploiters, takers. Humans can
see no other way forward than to take from the weak - it's the easiest thing to do. Wealth must
be protected at all costs. History is replete and is an unyielding witness to human exploitation
of anything exploitable, especially the defenseless.
There is one exception to this-the aftermath of WWII. It is interesting that Germany never
repaid its WWII debits (or those from WWI) and was the beneficiary of the Marshall Plan and U.S.
military protection during the Cold War. So as Germany had no real debt-after murdering millions-and
did not have the expense of maintaining a military, it was able to focus on growing it's economy
at the cost of the U.S. taxpayer, some who had family members killed by Germans in WWII.
Of course this does not enter into the reporting of the credit crisis in Greece, where Germany
is demanding austerity.
And so it goes: money talks, hoi polloi walks. True democracy will always be threatened by
the human exploiters, the takers of this world, many who we call "Leaders"-and unfortunately they
are legion and reborn on our planet every second; entering life with a mind fully open to and
waiting to be filled with Free Market, Libertarian hubris, avarice, and the right to self-righteous
exploitation of any and everything.
Michael Bain
Glorieta, New Mexico
Celtiberico 9 Jul 2015 08:27
the gold standard – the self-regulating system at the heart of laissez-faire economics –
prevented governments in the 19th and early 20th centuries from raising public spending or
stimulating employment. It obliged them to keep the majority poor while the rich enjoyed a
gilded age. Few means of containing public discontent were available, other than sucking wealth
from the colonies and promoting aggressive nationalism. This was one of the factors that contributed
to the first world war. The resumption of the gold standard by many nations after the war exacerbated
the Great Depression, preventing central banks from increasing the money supply and funding
deficits. You might have hoped that European governments would remember the results.
The worrying part is that a repeat performance today would quite possibly result in the destruction
of human civilisation, or even life on earth.
Cecelia O'brien 9 Jul 2015 05:22
there may be a few errors here but fundamentally this article is spot on! Good for you!
I'd add though we let this happen - we too were greedy and the managerial middle class stood by
as the unions were destroyed - we all took this 15% returns on dicey investments and did not question
how such high rates could be possible - we celebrated globalism while and we supported elected
officials who promised us deregulation was going to bring more prosperity.
Take your government back while you can.
JimGC athenajoseph 9 Jul 2015 04:58
And what were the boards, and risk and compliance committees of the lending banks, and
the regulators of Germany, France and the EU doing while the banks were lending hand over fist
to a country which plainly was over extended?
Hardly surprising that the number one priority of the ECB, EU, France, and Germany was to bail
out their banks, regardless of what happened to the feckless Greeks.
Cafael Skeffo 9 Jul 2015 04:34
Appeal to authority.
Capitalism destroyed feudalism? No, historical cataclysms and technological advances destroyed
feudalism, but after a period of flux which you call capitalism, power and wealth is again concentrated
at the top and new aristocracies emerge who move to guard their position and make it permanent;
we are seeing this now with the increase in inequality and the end of post-industrial revolution/post-war
social mobility in Western nations.
And you appear to subscribe to survival of the fittest approach of the extreme right wing: 'destroying
the inefficient'. Heard that before.
Skeffo Cafael 9 Jul 2015 03:51
Your thinking so extraordinarily confused that it almost impossible to confront all the contradictions
and inanities. You really need to do some philosophy courses, and focus on logic please.
Then start to learn some economic history: capitalism does not lead to feudalism, it destroyed
feudalism. (I mean, even a simple time line could help you there.)
Capitalism, through its creative destruction, is continuous revolution. Try to get your head
around it. It may take a few decades, or even the rest of your life, but you will understand if
you work at it seriously.
ThanksNeolibZombies athenajoseph 9 Jul 2015 03:48
"Has Monbiot lost it?" No, his article looks spot on to me. Forcing a country to adopt austerity
/ structural adjustement policies that have a long, proven track record of causing economic devastation
everywhere they have been tried is a form of persecution...and of course these policies have caused
economic devastation in Greece.
"Why should [Greece] be allowed to walk away from a debt of its own making?"
(Sigh.) I got tired of hearing this in the 1980s and 90s and the 2000s, the same argument was
used to justify beating African economies to a pulp.
Interesting that the rich people who made trillions out of throwing us all into unsustainable
debt in the decades leading up to the financial crash have been bailed out and have been "allowed
to walk away" with trillions of pounds, leaving us with the bill. It's one rule for the rich and
another rule for everyone else, so Greeks have to suffer big cuts in living standards.
Debt is a big stick with which the rich continually beat the poor, and it's always the fault of
the poor for some reason.
Benjamin Raivid Giannis Kalogeropoulos 9 Jul 2015 03:45
You don't need to be 'bailed out' - the money you own is fake - made from thin air by banks
who never had the money, but were allowed to metamorphosis it (i.e. just type the numbers they
wanted, but didn't have) onto a screen. This fake money is then charged at interest. The audacity!
It's 'legalised' counterfeiting and totally corrupt. Why should anyone have to pay back fake money,
let alone at interest?
The EU waged war against the Greeks - calling them lazy and saying they are in debt because they
don't pay their taxes (lol! Forget about being insulted, it reveals a total ignorance of the nature
of taxes: even buying clothes at a store, or fuel from a petrol station is taxed! We are always
paying taxes!). Brits seriously believe that Greeks are in debt because they don't pay taxes....(while,
of course, Britain itself is great at paying taxes, just ask Vodafone and Amazon and Boots and
Specsavers...)
Forget the bailout; do an Iceland. Or use the resources you have, land, fields, food - the basic
necessities of life, and live.
merlin2 pdre 9 Jul 2015 03:05
Agree with others here. The vast majority of the money (240B or so) went to servicing the debt
owed to German banks, laundered through the ECB agent). Another 40B went to Greek banks to stave
off bankruptcy and most of the rest was spent (by necessity and EU dictats) on various private/public
equities and entities. Much less than 10% of the original actually went towards internal social
programs, infrastructure and/or any stimulus activities that could help the country actually regrow
its economy.
With no funds for growth and a substantial reduction in tax receipts and economic activities
due to mandated austerity, a catch 22 was created as sure as night follows day. This result is
so obvious that one is left wondering - could the EU financial elitocrats be that clueless or
did they know and caused the Greek collapse deliberately? I see no other possibility. Not when
every economist worth their salt, from Krugman to de Long to Piketty and just about everyone (even
a few Austrians!) saw ihe crisi coming from miles away and issued warnings by the bushel for some
time now.
That leaves a major question unanswered - if the economic wizards of Europe are not entirely
incompetent/clueless - what does the alternative mean? if they knew what's going to happen, and
let it roll, what purpose did/does it serve?
athenajoseph 9 Jul 2015 02:46
Has Monbiot lost it? Those who persecute Greece he says....
Greece has been incompetent, corrupt and profligate and now owes more than it can pay. Why should
it be allowed to walk away from a debt of its own making?
An individual cannot. Did the Greek economists not read the fine print? Why did they not act when
the debt got to $100billion? Why wait until you have added another $270billion?
Sure the EU has played a part but the biggest part was played by Greece. The sooner it is out
of the EU the better.
athenajoseph 9 Jul 2015 02:44
One may well argue that there were flaws in the EU from the beginning, however, as an exercise
and experiment, sourced in a deep desire to unite Europe and perhaps avoid a third disastrous
war, it is to be commended and has offered much of value.
Given the Greek propensity for corruption and default it was perhaps singularly unwise for the
EU to ever admit Greece into their ranks. However, what was done is done. The Greeks may well
be better off outside of the EU or at least back to the drachma, but anyone who thinks that there
will be anything 'better' without Greece dealing with its endemic corruption and incompetence
is deluded.
You can lay perhaps 30% of the blame for this situation at the door of the EU and banks but the
rest is surely on the shoulders of Greece.
The Greek Government should have acted when the debt got to $100billion. It did not. It did not
when it got to $200billion or $300billion and it now sits at $370billion. And that is supposed
to be someone else's fault??
Tsipras has been playing childish games. Calling a referendum and then encouraging a no vote,
which he got, and then sacrificing his finance minister in the name of it, as was correct given
his appalling use of the term 'terrorism' applied to the EU, and then returning supposedly to
negotiate with the EU with nothing concrete in his hands.
The manipulative, cavalier, incompetent, childish and corrupt behaviour of the Greeks should have
them thrown out and the sooner, the better. Let them create their utopia themselves and put their
money where their very large mouth is.
A great description of their actions and the pain they cause. The reason they cut the army
is to ensure there could not be a popular uprising that it would support . Also a large number
of Greeks have done their military service. A popular uprising led by such a knowledgeable group
would preserve democracy and they don't want that.
AnonForNowThanks corstopitum 8 Jul 2015 23:25
But WHO really got the "haircut?"
Who got the commissions? Who set up the insurance products? Who is actually holding the note,
and what stream of income did they expect to get and what are they getting instead?
I don't think you understand modern "risk shifting," or how much money is made on such deals,
and I don't think that anyone does, frankly.
But like Socrates, at least I realize that I don't know -- because these are not regulated markets,
their actions are hidden from scrutiny yet have massive, global ramifications, and all we have
been fed are ridiculous, home-spun metaphors designed to stoke mindless rage. I'm sorry, but you've
fallen for it.
As John Lanchester pointed out in IOU: Why Everyone Owes Everyone and No One Can Pay, there
were a lot of things that "could" be done when the US and its sphere of influence had to "compete"
with the Soviets in a "beauty contest."
Thanks to Sputnik, little American children learned physical science and calculus in public schools,
thanks to the Cuban system of medicine the elderly got Medicare, thanks to the Red Army Germany
got debts forgiven, and thanks to the whole lot of them major appliances ran trouble-free for
20 years.
So you believe investment bankers have to be FORCED to set up bond auctions that will result
in commissions so large that they and their children and their children's children will be set
up for life?
They were screaming, "no, NO!" and trying to push the money back out of their pockets, but they
were forced.
In the case of Greece, the bonds were engineered by a right-wing government acting in collusion
with Goldman Sachs. And there will be complete idiots who will believe your tale, that the "leftists"
forced loans to be made to Greece.
The sad part is that although you do have to count on mass idiocy, a two-minute memory and an
even shorter attention span, you can.
Giannis Kalogeropoulos 8 Jul 2015 22:44
if they only could give us some time to breath ... Greece from 1994 till 2008 have pay for
loans 540 billions and everything was fine to the country and the loaners. we can pay 320 billion
we owe now (that was 190bn before EU run to "save" us) but they don't want to get the money! they
have made a trap! they turn the Goldman Sachs loans to EU loans, so ordinary EU people will have
to pay it! why? ask your governments ... who did it! (so it seems we are not the only ones with
corrupted governments) ... then, they come to tell us how to run the country (and sell all the
valuable to German France etc. private companies for a penny ) ... HOW WOLD YOU FEEL, if you get
a loan to buy a house and someone from the bank comes every day to your house, to tell you what
to eat, how to dress, how to use water and electricity ... to don't pay to educate your kids,
to sell your favorite leather chair, so he can make sure he will get his money back???? and all
that, while you were paying the debt on time!!!!!!!! how would you feel??? ... that's how we feel
... they did it to us, they will try it on you all too, sooner or later ... its harvest time and
banks don't know what is civil rights or democracy. they need assets, houses cars gold land for
to turn their worthless paper in to real value!!!! keep in mind that in Greece at 1998 it was
discovered one of the biggest oil reserves in Europe .... coincidence that after that Goldman
sachs "bomb" us with loans???? think again. ordinary people are in danger of loosing our freedom
today in Europe from banks who we owe some paper they type and tell us it has value ... but it
cost to them, some ink and paper ... Greek referendum scared them. they are afraid of little people
come together and form groups of common interests. cause that gives us power. we have power to
change our faith, as we Greeks are trying to do. we stopped them from stealing the valuable of
our country and to drink our blood just by choosing the right government and say no to fear! they
try to scare us by saying we become Zimbabwe (no offence to that country) that we die from hunger
with out money, they close our banks, they said we ll become fail state etc. still we vote no!
one and only reason. ENOUGHT IS ENOUGHT and when someone feed a desperate man to the wolfs, he
will return leading the wolfs!!! I think banks will not stop so we must all be suspicious and
supportive to each other. together we won the Huns, we won the Turks, we won the Nazis, we won
dark ages, we can win banks ... we want and we will pay back every penny of what we owe (even
if its with tricky interests) as we always did. but they have to let us to do so. how on earth,
they make us to close our factories and productive companies and they expect us to pay back??
they ask to double costs on touristic businesses. but if so Greece will become expensive for tourists
and they will go elsewhere! tourist industry produces 7% of Greek economy!!!! hmmm wait! German
companies last 10 years have bought great deal of hotels in turkey!!!! ... and they say they want
to save us... 5 years they did the worst they could to save us and the best they could for to
buy all the valuable assets here. so that is what its all about ... fortunately we have a strong
army (one of the best trained in world, and that because we have near war events with turkey all
time around), cause else they will threaten us even with army force. how accidental that 5 years
now, they cut 60% of money for the army, and they want to cut even more ... Germany France and
others last 20 years sold us weapons worth over 90bn euro. now they say we have very big army.
but we don't have neighbors Luxemburg or Belgium! we have aggressors like turkey (2 biggest army
in NATO), Syria's crisis Libya Albania's uck etc. why now they discover that we have to cut 50%
of our army??? they used it to all crisis but now is a danger ... also because we are the last
neighboring battle grounds like Syria etc we receive refugees and emigrants from all poor countries.
estimates say they are now over 30% of Greek population!!!! over 3million!!! EU offers advise
their respect but nothing else!!!
WE HAVE CRISIS! we have 1,5 million unemployed! how can we feed the poor emigrants who want
to go to England Germany France etc and we are forced by EU rools to keep them here??? why EU
acts like nothing is wrong? ... I hope you are wiser now about what is happening to a small but
proud country called Greece, last borders of EU with the "dangerous" out world ...
Tsipras should tell the latter day East India Companies to take a hike. Sadly, I think he'll back
down because socialists are just as bound by economic orthodoxy as Adam Smith, Thomas Malthus
and their descendants.
As Alfred Marshall argued, "man should be equally important as money, services are as important
as goods, and that there must be an emphasis on human welfare, instead of just wealth".
LostintheUS 8 Jul 2015 19:49
Excellent essay. Hear, hear!
I was just reading exactly this last night, that the famine was caused "partly by the British
refusal to distribute food, to prohibit the export of grain" in the "Chronicles of the Macedonian".
A ship that was the second ship captured by the American navy during the War of 1812. In the 1840s,
the "Macedonian" was borrowed by a private citizen/sea captain to take food to Ireland. He made
the observation that none of the other crops had failed and that people were starving by the hundreds
of thousands because the British government would not distribute these other crops that had been
extremely successful.
seaspan 8 Jul 2015 19:47
Predatory international finance is killing capitalism. Where austerity simply means shrinking
the private economy and making more and more working age people to be dependent on government,
but receiving less and less money driving them to poverty and penury, which kills capitalism even
more. This will surely lead to socialism (massive govt intervention and investment) or fascism
(economic slavery under authoritarian rule).
Rozina DavidRees 8 Jul 2015 19:45
Unfortunately, people didn't like the results of communism and it depended in the assumption
that humans like sharing and aren't greedy. We don't and we are.
That last sentence itself could also be an assumption. How much of the self-interest and greed,
that we are taught is innate, is actually inculcated into us by culture and becomes ingrained
habit hard to overcome and easy to indulge in an environment where we are constantly pushed to
acquire more possessions and pile up more debt?
There are other alternatives to capitalism and communism: you could try investigating
social credit as one alternative.
According to Douglas, the true purpose of production is consumption, and production must
serve the genuine, freely expressed interests of consumers. In order to accomplish this objective,
he believed that each citizen should have a beneficial, not direct, inheritance in the communal
capital conferred by complete access to consumer goods assured by the National Dividend and
Compensated Price.[6] Douglas thought that consumers, fully provided with adequate purchasing
power, will establish the policy of production through exercise of their monetary vote.[6]
In this view, the term economic democracy does not mean worker control of industry, but democratic
control of credit.[6] Removing the policy of production from banking institutions, government,
and industry, Social Credit envisages an "aristocracy of producers, serving and accredited
by a democracy of consumers."[6]
CodePink 8 Jul 2015 19:38
And yet, when the private banks (financial elite) needed bailing out to the tune of TRILLIONS
of dollars due to their own greedy practices, the taxpayer was forced into it.
Given most of Greece's debt was originally owed to private banks like Goldman Sachs who continued
to loan them money despite the fact they knew they couldn't pay it back, and they then somehow
managed to convince the ECB to take on the debt - the old socialise the losses, privatise the
profits scheme - perhaps the IMF should be looking to GS and the likes to contribute significantly
to paying down Greece's debt.
lifeloveroverall 8 Jul 2015 19:26
The order from and to the Brussels Donkeycrats : Attack and no mercy to Greece. Regardless:
we are the chosen, on a holy mission to keep safe our beloved money power. But here is my wish
to all Donkeycrats, may you all burn in Hell.
PS: my apologies to the poor donkeys
estragon11 8 Jul 2015 19:09
as far as that goes, who cares about the planet as long as there is money to be made?
Austerity, Merkel style, is just a modern version of Le droit du Seigneur, but writ large.
it's time for another version of 1932 when the Republicans were thrown out and men and women who
cared about the middle and lower classes took the reigns of government. Time for the Greeks to
start printing Drachmas and go forward. it has been said "better a horrible end than horrors with
no end"
goldstars 8 Jul 2015 18:25
More people need to know about the IMF's actions in the world, and how that affects all of
us. It won't get better unless people realise they can stand up to it. The Guardian is still vaguely
leftwing enough (or has that history) that it attracts those who already have sympathy or understanding.
We need to see Monbiot's articles, and similar information, spread far and wide in all mainstream
media.
RealWavelengths 8 Jul 2015 18:15
"The IMF is controlled by the rich, and governs the poor on their behalf. It's now doing to
Greece what it has done to one poor nation after another, from Argentina to Zambia. Its structural
adjustment programmes have forced scores of elected governments to dismantle public spending,
destroying health, education and all the means by which the wretched of the earth might improve
their lives."
Best synopsis of the IMF. However, I disagree that returning to the gold standard during the interwar
period was a factor in the Great Depression. Creative credit policy was the main culprit.
seaspan 8 Jul 2015 17:30
The Greek pension system has four aspects that should be considered. 1) demographics,,, 20%
of the population is aged 65 and over, 2) Govt layoffs by attrition (early retirement options),
3) no clear distinction between social security and welfare, 4) disability pensions. Officially,
the retirement age is 66 years old climbing from 57 in 2009. Where people get manipulated is the
malicious citing of individual cases as being the rule rather than the exception. Demand context
when reading these false statistics...
The notion that public spending didn't make a dent in the poverty rate is simply absurd, but
it's one of those invented facts repeated endlessly by right-wingers because it sounds like it
might be true.
In fact, there was a sharp decline in various indicators of poverty from the late 1960s until
the early 1980s, when the launch of Reaganomics took the American economy into a long, slow, steady
decline; and even in the three subsequent decades, by measurements like housing, medical care
and nutrition poor Americans are unquestionably better off than they were before the war on poverty.
Moreover, look at social spending over a greater span of time: the long-term success of Social
Security and Medicare at lifting America's elderly out of the direst ranks of poverty is just
unquestionable--except, of course, by reactionary propagandists who insist it can't possibly be
true because it's such an inconvenient truth.
Before Social Security, nearly half of America's elderly lived in poverty, many of them in dire
poverty. It was not unheard of for old people to starve to death in this country, and many were
forced out of their homes and into wretched existences in county homes and poor farms.
Today, thanks to social spending, the poverty rate among the elderly is down to about 10%--still
far too many, with income inequality worsened by Reaganism in this age cohort as in all others,
but an incredible improvement over the rate just a few generations ago nevertheless.
Public spending works.
Unfortunately, so do incessant right-wing mantras and lies.
Arjen Bootsma 8 Jul 2015 16:55
The world we live in values property rights over human rights.
AuntieMame Ykuos1 8 Jul 2015 16:53
73% of Greece's exports are mineral fuels, followed by salt, sulphur, stone and cement. And
don't forget Virgin Olive oil, the best in the world, since it is not mixed with inferior oils
the way Italian produce theirs mixed with normal imported oils.
Tourism is a large sector of the service industry in that absolutely stunningly beautiful country,
but by far not the largest.
Do a little research before spewing platitudes her about Greece, a country that you obviously
know nothing about.
seaspan shout_at_me 8 Jul 2015 16:35
Greece has the highest self employed sector in all of Europe. In any country that sector is
the most difficult for tax collection. It is a libertarian paradise...
AuntieMame shout_at_me 8 Jul 2015 16:06
Actually the Greek crisis was caused by prior conservative government, not the lefty coalition
of Tsipras which only became the majority five short month ago.
But I guess that you are one of those calling all of Europe as socialist haven, including the
conservative government with universal healthcare, free higher education, and strong safety nets
for the less fortunate among their citizens.
easterman FenlandBuddha 8 Jul 2015 15:15
Don't borrow from the IMF and none of this applies. Run a sensible economy and you never
need the IMF
Sounds logical - until you factor in the fact that the market's-know -best IMF was a cheerleader
for the de-regulation of the banks which led to the credit boom which led to the credit crunch
which led to taxpayer bailouts of the banks (and counter-cyclical fiscal policy by the G7 in order
to head of a global depression) which led to quadrupling of budget deficits in many countries
which led the weaker ones into the clutches of ...the IMF who then set about deflating them using
a dodgy estimate of the fiscal multiplier which grossly underestimated the damage this would do
to output and tax revenue which left them needing more bailouts to pay the interest on the loans
( created at the push of a button) and subject to even more deflation ...
Your point is valid if you believe the drug-pusher has no responsibility for the state of
the addict. A sensible economy is one where you keep the banksters on a leash - the free market
agenda beloved of the IMF put paid to that.
Henforthe SteB1 8 Jul 2015 14:48
The whole modern system is a gigantic Ponzi Scheme, I mean it literally.
I certainly get what you mean- I've always suspected it's more to do with our banking system though.
Interest rates are routinely manipulated specifically in order to encourage growth, and fractional
reserve systems can mean that this growth isn't based in anything of real value. Sure, growth
creates jobs and can lift communities out of poverty, but can it be sustained indefinitely? And
once a society becomes developed, does it really need further growth, at least enough to continue
to manipulate currencies to encourage it?
It's presumably possible for economic growth to decouple from physical resource use, although
it's not really happened yet. But I suspect there are still 'Limits to Growth' within the pure
economic realm. Growth seems to inevitably slow to a crawl as a society becomes developed and
its population stabilises: see Japan and much of Europe, and perhaps also look at China where
this week the government is desperately trying to keep markets rising in the face of a gradual
realisation that the actual demand just isn't there. Perhaps if we learnt to accept this, things
might be more stable in the long term.
I agree that we should look back at the Enclosures as a heinous crime perpetrated by the landed
elites. The Enclosures are doubly relevant here: in the event of market uncertainty, one can fall
back on savings or assets. But government economic policy makes that more difficult: interest
manipulation and capital controls mean savings become diminished or inaccessible. But also, in
some parts of the world people can still weather hard economic times by going 'back to the land'.
But in the West this is no longer possible, because the common land was stolen.
SocratesTheGooner -> Colin Chaplain 8 Jul 2015 14:17
Take the 19th century Irish and Indian famines, both exacerbated (in the second case
caused) by the doctrine of laissez-faire, which we now know as market fundamentalism or
neoliberalism.
Not a straw man. Monbiot is saying that 21st century neoliberalism is the same as 19th
century laissez-faire. How much more explicitly could he put it?
shaheeniqbal 8 Jul 2015 13:33
This Greek Tragedy highlights the interferences of IMF and World Bank into the democratic processes
of a country. From the collapse of Greek economy it is quite clear that "Confessions of a Hitman"
was not a conspiracy theory. Every day the third world is constantly suffering the IMF excesses...
Greece is lucky that it is in Europe otherwise it would have suffered the same fate as the African
and other third world countries indebted to IMF and World Bank and had their arms and legs twisted.
It is not only that IMF dictates the prices of Electricity and Gas and imposition of taxes ie
general sales taxes but they also interfere in the Democratic processes by backing their favorite
chosen corrupt and criminal political leaders who loot these countries with both hands and shift
the assets of the impoverished countries to foreign shores.
One hopes that with the establishment of Brics Bank the poor and deprived third world will
be able to shop around for cheaper loans and suffer less interference in the internal politics.
The events in Greece highlight the misery and suffering of the impoverished third world countries
at the hands of the unscrupulous lenders who once allowed into the country will keep thrusting
the indebted economies into further debt and ultimate ruination.
Piotr Szafrański -> hankwilliams 8 Jul 2015 12:51
Hank, you think that "40% [of enterprises] wouldn't have been lost and many Poles would not
have left if the austerity programme wasn't inflicted on the Poles.". You might be right, you
might be not right. The only way to decide was to check the other way.
Well, at least 51% of Poles did not want to check the other way. Our choice.
Of some interest here is that there WERE countries which tried "the other way" (no austerity).
Did not work so well for them. So this alternative might not had worked. But you are free to have
your opinion.
"get their rich to pay their share"??? Always those mystical "rich"... Used to be "rich Jews",
but after WWII this is somehow awkward, isn't it? But well, the Bolshevik revolution definitely
made the rich pay, didn't it? How well did it work for Russia? Wanna recommend this to the Greeks?
But sorry, this time we have "rich Germans". It is politically correct to call to take their money,
of course. Social justice and international justice in one package. They are all Nazi, I forgot.
Piotr Szafrański -> hankwilliams 8 Jul 2015 11:59
Hank, our "austerity programme" had started in 1989. And continues. Back then the country was
in such dire straights that even the ruling elite ("communists") had problems with buying basic
appliances. People's wages were below 100$/month.
Since then, supported by the international community (massive debt relief, massive investments)
we GRADUALLY progressed. But the said debt relief was ONLY at the very beginning of the reforms
(1989/90). We pay our dues on time since then.
Meanwhile, the price of reform was high. Whole cities had found over 50% of jobs disappearing.
Factories employing tens of thousands were being closed. Some of those jobs/enterprises maybe
could be saved (we estimate say 40% of the closed ones), but there were no lenders willing to
experiment. Axes were in full swing. Many people remember this today with revulsion, and in many
cases they are right. About 10% of population (i.e. over 3mln people) emigrated or are shuttling
between jobs elsewhere and families in Poland. Unemployment remains high (about 10%). Poles work,
on average, supposedly the longest hours worldwide, except for the Koreans.
But since 1991/92, Poland had an uninterrupted growth. Most Poles today earn money they would
not believe back in 1989. We slowly grow enterprises and industries competitive or even dominant
in their markets worldwide. And obviously, the more you eat, the bigger the appetite grows. Ask
average Pole - we are grumbling. Which is not bad - we still have way to go.
But maybe were we were "lucky" it was that 1989 was a clear break - we got suddenly full freedom
and responsibility, after 50 years. So it was obvious to most that we start low and we have to
keep belts tight for a long time. That precious 51% of people feeling less of entitlement and
more of duty was there.
sassafrasdog Gerbetticus 8 Jul 2015 11:57
Yes, I have the Shock Doctrine, and my professor of Latin American history required that we
view the documentary version of Shock Doctrine on a day when he was out of town at a conference
or something.
I sat there with my jaw dropped. Other students in the room, all much younger, were muttering
curses. As an older adult student, I remembered the day when Salvador Allende fell, and could
still picture the TV in my mother's kitchen where we had watched the coverage.
Shock Doctrine explained all, like the other shoe dropping.
To me, what the Europeans are doing to Greece is so transparent, if one knows a little about
the history of other parts of the world. But other parts of the world are periphery, in Europe's
view, and they are the center. Now they are treating even parts of the Eurozone as periphery.
At some point the center gets smaller and smaller and everything is periphery, the other, out
there, those people, and the European identity becomes a black hole rather than a beacon of light.
It is hard to look at oneself sometimes, but a wise teacher once told me that the characteristics
that we dislike in others, are the same characteristics that we ourselves contain. That is the
fear. The answer is that by facing the truth of that, we are able to attend to our own faults,
and become, humbly, more tolerant of the things that make us all human.
I hope that Europe can acquire some wisdom before it is too late.
BritCol 8 Jul 2015 11:27
A very succinct article that hits some of the historical notes that explains how the elites
have controlled the masses to their advantage. All the financial laws, regulations that have been
put in place such as compound interest, the corporation as a 'person', and the takeover of the
IMF and World Bank by US and European elites are geared to keep the wealth in those few hands.
What has been so worrying is how few people seem to realize that, and cheer on the status quo.
Have they such little self-respect that they believe these elites are better, smarter than them?
All they have is all the advantages of being born rich. Although certainly some entrepreneurs,
like artists, have natural advantages.
Gerbetticus 8 Jul 2015 11:06
Dr Karen Adler states in a letter to The Guardian today:
"The debt that the Greek government is attempting to negotiate on is around £237billion. Compare
that with the British government bailout which, at its peak, guaranteed £1,162 billion to the
banks. One bank alone (Deutsche Bank) got £226 billion......
So Dr Adler, , if you're on here, can you explain how, in the face of EU prohibition of State
Aid to private companies , a , no , The German bank, was bailed out by the British taxpayer to
a total sum only £11 billion less than the total owed by the entire Greek state? Forgive me, Im
not a practitioner of the dismal science!
bridgefergal -> BeTrueForAll 8 Jul 2015 11:05
Agreed. The general ignorance extant about how money is created - it's created from thin air,
for free and is essentially an unlimited resource - is truly breathtaking. The Bank of England
had a circular on money creation a short while back, which should have been required reading for
the usual "there's no money left" Tory trolls who infest CiF. But who needs the truth when comforting
untruths are far more reassuring viz. Labour spent all the money; benefits and welfare caused
the crash and the deficit; tax cuts for business and the wealthy trickle down to everyone; only
Labour raises taxes (it can't be said often enough that Tories hiked VAT by a third in 2010).
Etc. Etc.
Maria Pospotiki -> Extremophile 8 Jul 2015 11:01
Tsipras right after his election, was the first to open Lagarde's list, he asked Swiss bank's
collaboration to impose taxes on those who had sent their money abroad, he even dealt with media
corruption even though this could do harm to his party. And all these in five months. Us Greeks
are not proud about the corruption of our system, but this corruption was reinforced by foreign
forces all these years. Even recently, the ex minister of health has signed under much suspicion
a contract with a German company offering technical support which hasn't yet been delivered. All
these years this was exactly what was happening in Greece with the consistent opinion of the european
countries. Solidarity and democracy seem to be a utopia in our days.
Chenoa mickstephenson 8 Jul 2015 10:50
Yes, exactly.
I said before and I'll say it one more time:
Syriza aren't playing ball so they must be dealt with and used as an example in case Spain, Portugal,
Italy et al get any similar ideas.
A good question that many people ask is this: why does the current illegal and fascist government
in Ukraine get loans from the IMF straight away & 'no questions asked' yet the democratically-elected
government in Greece will only be allowed to receive loans if they meet with the harsh, inhumane
conditions attached? Double standards due to ineptitude etc etc or planned tactics by neoliberal
& neoconservative ideologues? I think I'll go with the latter. This is all about economic warfare
and the asset-stripping of countries (read books like 'The Shock Doctrine' by Naomi Klein and
'Confessions of an Economic Hitman' by John Perkins for more info) it's all been done before in
so-called 'developing countries' and they are currently doing it to the 'developed countries'.
Also, research shows that the US/Israel/Europe/NATO and allies (the actual planners are linked
to the BIS, CFR, Committee of 300, Trilateral Commission aka the corporatocracy) want global hegemony
and won't stand for any competition. The neocons/neolibs/zionists have even written books and
documents about these things themselves:
- 'The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives' by Zbigniew Brzezinski
- Project for a New American Century
- 'Crisis of Democracy' by the Trilateral Commission
- The Wolfowitz Doctrine:
"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory
of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly
by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy
and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources
would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."
Brollachain 8 Jul 2015 10:31
The Maastricht treaty, establishing the European Union and the euro, was built on a lethal
delusion: a belief that the ECB could provide the only common economic governance that monetary
union required. Those sober, suited, serious people...turn out to be demented utopian fantasists,
votaries of a fanatical economic cult.
Well, quite, because in Guardianland the basic delusion is to believe in a market system in
the ifrst place.
If, on the other hand, you do subscribe to the market - as just about everybody on the planet
outside the Guardian does - then one of the things you could do would be to link up with other
people of the same mind, and set some rules for the market. But then , as part of the price for
joining the club, you also have to keep to the rules.
Monbiot is quite right; ECB is not democratic in this sense. It's a game manager - in its way,
not unlike a moderator on CiF, for example. Democracy doesn't really come into it. As a participant,
you may like the rules, or not, but nobody forced you to join the club in the first place - the
joining part is where democracy comes in, and everyone gets to decide whether to join or not.
Now, Monbiot doesn't like this; but then, he doesn't believe in the system to start with. Like
many Guardian writers, he believes in a system where there is an inexhaustible pot of Scott Trust
money to support everyone's way of life, and no accountability whatsoever to produce a product
that anyone is actually prepared to pay for. Not unlike the Greeks, in fact, until about two days
ago.
So what exactly happened recently? In the first place, the Greeks were so keen to get into the
game that they lied their way in. Since then, Greek governments have lied repeatedly to stay in.
The last Greek Finance Minister was so contemptuous of the system that he openly declared his
determination to 'game the system' - to take it for all it was worth, and give nothing in return.
From his point of view, there was literally nothing to lose. If the system gave in, he could claim
victory. If the system failed, this would simply be an interesting academic demonstration of the
correctness of his own convictions. If Greece left, or was ejected from the system for ignoring
its rules, then there would always be the Monbiots of this world, with their Scott Trust mentalities,
to put the blame on everyone else.
Let's once and for all do away with the myth that all this is somehow to do with 'austerity'.
Were Monbiot's ecological pretensions ever to be realised, life in the West would be infinitely
more austere than anything the ECB has proposed. Monbiot is not against austerity, in fact he
is all for it, provided it is on his own terms; he is against 'the system'.
The system is the market system, which in its current incarnation defers to the not-so-invisible
hand of organisations such as the ECB. That is the way the game works , as played nowadays. Monboit
needs to be honest with himself. Democracy and markets are two sides of the same coin. If you
have a planned economy, democracy makes no sense, since the State invariably knows what is best
for the people anyway.
So, as a non-believer in democracy, why is he concerned about 'undemocratic powers' in the first
place? In his ideal, market-free State, democracy would not exist. Let the Greeks starve, should
be his war-cry - just as it seems to have been Varoufakis's. Let the whole of Europe starve, as
long as it brings 'the system' down! Who cares, as long as the game ends with the withering away
of democracy and the market he so heartily detests.
BeTrueForAll Rusty Richards 8 Jul 2015 10:29
The EU were as much a part of the lie to help Greece gain membership of the EU as the
Greeks were and must be held equally liable. An all round con job by the EU and the IMF.
Correct! The motive was the wealthy wanted the Greeks to join because they could "rent" out
their wealth to the Greek government in the form of Greek government bonds and at a higher interest
rate to boot than other Eurozone countries particularly Germany. Where there's greed there's always
miscalculation of risk!
JustsayNO1954 MightyDrunken 8 Jul 2015 10:28
"The UK doesn't need the IMF. We have Gideon Osborne."
That's just as well, because we have nothing left to sell!
Unlike the Greeks, we gave ours away without a fight, the only thing left are Public Services
and they go in the TTIP!
TTIP is the NWO next move, which will give Corporations control of each nations Sovereignty,
it's also a Slave Charter, which is why EU insist on Free Movement!
BeTrueForAll cambridgefergal 8 Jul 2015 10:20
Great article. Particularly nails the canard that right wing IMF policies are "natural",
"objective" and "correct." All economics is politics in disguise, especially neo-liberal economics."
Your comment really hits the nail on the head in regard to the Greek debt fiasco and indeed all
the Austerity War-Mongering politicians around the planet. The "politics" is really about a few
trying to get away with "dominating" the many!
Geoffrey Ingham, the Cambridge University Professor of Sociology, in the concluding remarks of
his truly excellent book "The Nature of Money" states the following:-
"...... the two sides of the economy - entrepreneurial (and consumer) debtors - struggle with
creditor capitalists over the real rate of interest."
I would add to this that in reality creditor capitalists prowl the planet like savage beasts always
looking to force societies to be as utterly dependent upon privately created money for sale as
possible and ignorant of sovereign governments ability to create public money debt and interest
free.
The Eurozone is a classic example of the war going on between public interest and private greed.
Likewise the war in the UK with the austerity promoting Conservative and Labour Parties trying
to pull the wool over individual's eyes that there is no such thing as a sovereign society being
able to create public money.
roninwarrior 8 Jul 2015 10:17
Nothing here many haven`t worked out long ago, but still good to see the truth being written.
This should lead people to the current trade agreements being negotiated secretly. TPP and TTIP
are completely nefarious items of legislation that will further destroy democracy, and people
need to enlighten themselves and start leaning on their local representatives to be the will of
the people.
I watched this recently, and although it`s not directly on topic of these trade agreements, what`s
said within it has extremely pertinent echoes to how these processes are being carried out, and
generally the entitlement attitude of these corrupted plutocrats.
Greece has once again taught the world a lesson in democracy, and the world needs to take careful
heed. It`s also worth
revisiting the words of Joseph Stiglitz, , recently published in these very pages.
Stiglitz said,
It is hard to advise Greeks how to vote on 5 July. Neither alternative – approval or rejection
of the troika's terms – will be easy, and both carry huge risks. A yes vote would mean depression
almost without end. Perhaps a depleted country – one that has sold off all of its assets, and
whose bright young people have emigrated – might finally get debt forgiveness; perhaps, having
shrivelled into a middle-income economy, Greece might finally be able to get assistance from
the World Bank. All of this might happen in the next decade, or perhaps in the decade after
that.
By contrast, a no vote would at least open the possibility that Greece, with its strong democratic
tradition, might grasp its destiny in its own hands. Greeks might gain the opportunity to shape
a future that, though perhaps not as prosperous as the past, is far more hopeful than the unconscionable
torture of the present.
I know how I would vote.
Youmadbrah 8 Jul 2015 10:14
Corruption at all levels and dysfunctional financial and legal systems are at the heart of
any developing economy crisis. Spending less on more vulnerable people in the society will do
nothing fix it. Governments usually go this route because the old and the children are less likely
to revolt, well they did in Greece so at the democracy works there. The way to fix the country
is by radical reform and debt relief. Austerity is just a patch on a dysfunctional system.
skinnywheels feliciafarrel 8 Jul 2015 10:09
This idea that the Greeks went and blew all the money on women, cars and drink is a convenient
argument for insisting that a nation of people are made to pay for reckless actions of others
that were largely out of their control.
The Greek people did not know that Goldman Sachs had cooked the books to allow them entry
into the Euro. They didn't know that Goldman Sachs was betting against them providing the final
nail in the coffin of their economy. They didn't know that sub prime mortgages were being re-packaged
as mortgage backed securities causing a GLOBAL financial crisis. Only the most informed would
have been able to see through their previous governments lies about spending levels.
There was asymmetric information, so when the huge amount of spin and marketing was used to get
people to take on these loans people were not aware of all the facts. These loans should not have
been made and there are far more factors involved then just Greeks partying all their money away.
So why should it just be the Greek people who pay? Why not the banks who were offering out loans
at a time when they must have known there was a high likelihood of default?
TruthseekerD 8 Jul 2015 09:54
Indeed, Sir!!
It beggars belief that anyone with a conscience and an open mind can defend the Troika/IMF. They
did this to African countries throughout the latter half of the 20th century, hence the problems
and instabilities that have continued to unfold there. People in the west didn't give a damn then
and stayed asleep, believing the victim-blaming propaganda that gets put about to create a perception
that 'the poor did this to themselves'.
Now, having run out of developing countries to pillage and plunder, they have turned their parasitic
gaze towards Southern Europe. Again, disingenuous bullshit is sold through their complicit media
wing of the vampire banking elites that buys into the right-wing nationalism and isolationist
mood that has been carefully cultivated, sowing seeds in the minds of the unquestioning that 'they
were profligate, it's their own fault and they should take their medicine'.
It's only when the shit hits the fan (and it will) in a major western economy that enough people
will suddenly wake up and smell the coffee, and realise that the banking elites are the ones controlling
bought and paid for puppet governments, leading the majority to hell in a handcart.
The much-vaunted sham of western democracy has been exposed - if a people elect a government that
doesn't fit in with the agenda of the parasitic banking elites, it is discredited and destabilised
so as to punish them for their temerity in not bending over for more virtual slavery. That's what
this is really about..........
PixieFrouFrou SocalAlex 8 Jul 2015 09:51
'And to think a decade and a half ago, Monbiot was one of the reasons why I paid for the (paper)
Graun every day. I am DONE with this paper!'
George has done sterling work in his reportage on environmental matters. I salute and support
him for this. Just don't read any of his articles on finance or economics.
Albert_Jacka_VC 8 Jul 2015 09:37
It should never be forgotten that economics of the Austrian School, as re-baptised by Friedman
& Co as economic rationalism, or neo-liberalism, was born of religious impulses -- by fat Calvinists
for whom Hell was for others, not for their own class.
And class warfare is what neo-liberalism is. Guilt and shame over sinful debt are the propaganda
weapons. But they grow blunt, when the fraud becomes exposed.
The Euro phase is war by the banker class, on everyone else. Only the One Percent are supposed
to benefit.
The Irish fell for the trap, Spain's Indignados appear to have been infiltrated by Soros shills,
but in Greece, they have run into a problem. SYRIZA is in touch with a desperatre people, whose
backs are against the wall, and who have nothing to lose.
The Eurogarchs had better beware. SYRIZA owns printing presses, and is perfectly able to begin
running off tewenty-euro notes. The next phase, now that the Troika has bared its bloody fangs,
is open and guerilla war against these vicious parasites. Harrying the Germans is not novel to
Greeks. They did it before, during the war. And Greece is not alone.
BeTrueForAll Bob adda 8 Jul 2015 09:44
It is hard for those of us on the left to admit, but Margaret Thatcher saved the UK from
this despotism.
I was never a fan of Margaret Thatcher's but on this issue she was spot on. I am so glad that
Britain is not part of the eurozone. It is an extremely destructive force that I think will
end up destroying the EU.
Unfortunately this is myth making due to a shallow understanding of money mechanics. Here is
Margaret Thatcher declaring there is no such thing as "public money":-
"One of the great debates of our time is about how much of your money should be spent by the State
and how much you should keep to spend on your family. Let us never forget this fundamental truth:
the State has no source of money other than money which people earn themselves. If the State wishes
to spend more it can do so only by borrowing your savings or by taxing you more. It is no good
thinking that someone else will pay-that "someone else" is you. There is no such thing as public
money; there is only taxpayers' money."
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/105454
Now see my above comment why free "public money" has to be created before "private money" for
sale can exist and why public money is essential to deal with crises and in particular crises
caused by the misuse of private money creation.
dedalus77uk 8 Jul 2015 09:16
Agreed: the IMF is politicised and has operated as a means of enforcing market capitalism
on countries which were not in a position to make it work. Agreed: the EU project and the single
currency in particular were extremely ambitious projects which in some respects were based on
a degree of utopia and some pretty fundamental fallacies. None of which excuses successive Greek
governments for being complacently corrupt, economically incompetent and, in Syriza's case, deliberately
inflammatory, of course. Not that Greece is entirely alone in this, even within the EU, though
as shambles go it takes some beating.
Two things strike me, though.
One is that, if the IMF's policies and strings are so obviously bad, severeign governments
can choose to not avail themselves of its funding and not enter into a Faustian pact. It's
not as easy as getting a big load of money upfront, of course, but if the implication is destroying
your economy and putting your country at the mercy of faceless international institutions and
its capitalist purse-strong holders, then that would seem to be the right choice, no? No-one
is being forced at gun-point to drink from the poisoned well, though I appreciate that much
pressure can be brought to bear, and it takes a strong government to resist that. But everyone's
still responsible for their own choices, at the end of the day: it's not IMF or bust.
Secondly, the concept of allowing countries access to money in return for certain reforms
is not in itself a bad thing, if those reforms are in fact the "right" ones. That doesn't mean
only economic reforms - in fact perhaps it shouldn't mean economic reforms at all. Perhaps
what these reforms should be more focused on is human rights: ie, ensure that there is a proper
and independent judiciary and a transparent legal process; ensure that national assets are
distributed equitably; ensure that there is proper participation in the democratic process,
etc - all things which are in the UDHR and which actually serve to make a country more stable,
more prosperous and - importantly - more attractive for investment. Is this perhaps the future
of international money-lending?
If so we need someone to either reform the IMF, or set up the "ethical" alternative to
the IMF - any takers?
MightyDrunken Stilts 8 Jul 2015 09:16
It is the obvious problem with the IMF, some countries contribute and other borrow. The ones
who contribute gets the votes which means the power is in the hands of the creditors.
Therefore if a country is unlucky enough to need an IMF loan they have to sign a deal which
is in the creditors interest and not their own. However the purported purpose of the IMF is not
to further the interest of the developed nations but to;
foster global growth and economic stability by providing policy, advice and financing to
members, by working with developing nations to help them achieve macroeconomic stability, and
by reducing poverty.
Terence Skill rathbaner 8 Jul 2015 08:57
As a German, I want to tell you two things. 1st: I totally agree with your point. 2nd: But
Wolfgang Schauble is everything but blind. He is one eager globalist using his power to the fullest
to reach his goals. To me, it all depends on the assault on his life in 1989 - he should never
had become the interior minister of Germany after that (set up several surveillance laws "to protect
the public from terrorism", but only achieved one thing: surveillance) nor the financial minister
of this country.
His view on the world and how things should be is just another one than ours might be - his
vision has always been a European super-state. unfortunately he is a psych, oder "damaged goods"
as I believe to call him. A politically motived criminal who shouldn´t be in disposal of more
than his own, barrier-free house.
onoway 8 Jul 2015 08:52
The thing is that the politicians who get in do not practice what they promise.
Nobody gets into power promising to make things worse for people, they spin things so that what
they say will do has the shiny promise of a better future. Politicians and businesses have learned
very well how to push the emotional buttons hard wired into humanity. Witness the way women were
brought to the idea that smoking was a symbol of independence and the implication that women who
did not smoke were dependent and servile. Nothing is said at the time about cancers and other
issues directly related.
Also, people have a very limited choice as to who they vote for, the only option to protest the
choices is to abstain, which accomplishes nothing but make it easier for the government to push
through things they would never otherwise be able to do.
Nobody rational would vote for total control of the world's food supply by 4 or 5 chemical companies,
possibly the most powerful being one for which the basis of their business is the development
and manufacturing of poisons, but that's now what we have, mandated and promoted by governments.
Perhaps a suggestion made on QI is the answer, instead of career politicians, all of whom are
in it for the power it gives them, governments should be run like jury duty, your turn comes up
you are part of the government for however long. Or as the Inuit and others did; nothing can become
law unless ALL the politicians agree, if they don't, then it simply doesn't happen. Then we might
get back to some form of democracy.
At the very least, it would take longer to get to the totalitarian state we are rapidly approaching
if not indeed already in. All we have now is the (very expensive) veneer, not democracy at all.
MrBlueberry DrChris 8 Jul 2015 08:41
The wealth of this world is owned by the Corporate companies not governments and the gap keeps
growing each year. For example Corporates take 900$ billion annually in tax avoidance from poor
countries while the poorest countries pay 600$ billion in debt each year to the rich corporations.
In all 2$ trillion goes from the poorest countries to bolster the wealth of the riches corporations.
The total wealth of the world is 223$ trillion.
8 out 6 people are poor. The richest 300 people (not governments) have the same wealth as the
poorest 3 billion. It's worth pondering over.
rathbaner 8 Jul 2015 08:40
I'v been struck many times by the similarity in attitude - and the blindness - shown by Wolfgang
Schauble and by Lord John Russell.
Russell to Parliament at the height of the famine: "Sir, I am obliged to say, therefore, that
while we attempt all that we think practicable, we must, in the first place, refuse to make promises
of that which is out of our power; and in the next place, we must call upon and expect those who
have local duties to perform in Ireland, to perform those duties, and to assist the Government
and Parliament in their arduous duty: and when I say that I expect this, I am quite sure that
many will perform it, because I know that in many, very many instances, the resident proprietors
in Ireland have been most ready with their money, with their time, and with their attendance,
in endeavouring to provide for the relief of their destitute countrymen."
Just like Schauble saying we've done everything we can and it is now up to the Greek govt to
rescue themselves and their country.
Both seem utterly blinded to the - utterly obvious - reality by their ideological beliefs.
And all this while Ireland was a net exporter of food (to the Empire) and German banks and the
ECB are making profits on the €bn from interest on the Greek loans.
halfdan Rahere2015 8 Jul 2015 08:39
Indeed. When one looks at the money lent to bail out a number of banks, e.g. $868 billion to
Barclays, why can it not be done to bailout a national economy. There could be conditions attached,
such as a caretaker financial advisory team to make sure it was spent correctly, the aim being
to get the Greek economy back into a position from which it could grow rather than fail. This
may have been done, but Greeks being Greeks, they won't look a gift horse in the mouth for fear
that it is a wooden one.
"...This particular one is not a scientist, he was an administrator. And a CEO of a
venture-capital company, so that he probably doesn't need a job, to survive." . "...I wonder if calling what Washington has been doing for the last year can be called
"waging war". They certainly attack Russia in every way they think possible: economy, diplomacy,
military buildup, media demonization campaigns, and just a total overall hostility.
Maybe the word "war" is too strong a metaphor, but given that it is simply not possible to have a
shooting war with Russia (those damn nukes!), this might be as war-like that it will ever get. It is
pretty dismally ugly and reflects rather poorly on West's residual rationality."
Also, I don't think you're right assuming that this is all government pressure. I'd argue that
this is mostly public pressure. Private enterprises aren't immune. People who are perceived as
enemies are going to be ostracized no matter what. All you can do is to insist that they are not
illegally discriminated. And in this case I assume everything was done by the book.
MaoChengJi -> Калинин Юрий 4 Jul 2015 10:40
"I am sure that this particular scientist will find a job. But the whole situation is sad."
This particular one is not a scientist, he was an administrator. And a CEO of a
venture-capital company, so that he probably doesn't need a job, to survive.
However, for the scientists Americans have a mechanism to ensure at least some degree of
independence: tenure. There are pluses and minuses, of course, like in everything else.
Does it exist in Russia?
Beckow Gunnar -> René Øie 4 Jul 2015 02:22
There are obscenity laws in US and many EU countries (Poland!!) that are identical to the
Russian law. Same for the "foreign agent" laws. Instead of addressing it, you repeat as an
assertion that "in Russia it is different...inconsistent and arbitrary".
Really? Why? Because you say so? You realize that is not an argument? Back up what you say, we
could all assert things we want. I can say that "blacks are not treated equally by law in US".
Is that true?
Regarding slavery or British colonial mass murder: why Rhodes, that would be too easy. Why not
Churchill, or Queen Victoria, or Jefferson/Washington? Are US-UK ready to denounce them? If
not, why do they expect others to demonize their own past personalities? Learn how to use the
same metric, be objective, or you will simply stay irrelevant...hypocrisy is fatal for people
who want to preach to others. We might be beyond point of no return for the current Western
preachers...
nnedjo 4 Jul 2015 02:00
White told the Guardian by email that he was on vacation in Florida but would be
returning to Russia this weekend. "What I am going to find there is absolutely not clear to
me now that I am proposed to be on some sort of stop list," White said. "But I plan to meet
with the university to try to better understand the situation with my good friends and
colleagues there."
From all this it is only clear that even for the professor White himself is not clear what
exactly is going on with his position on the Lobachevsky University. But, as usual, Moscow
Times is the only one who is best informed about everything.
This Moscow Times is a really interesting newspaper. It is published in Russia, but nobody
seems to read it there. Unlike the Western media, which immediately reprinted their news as
they occur.:-)
Калинин Юрий Gunnar René Øie 3 Jul 2015 22:23
For sure the american soldiers are there.
The situation of your poor country exactly the same that has been described by Bernard Shaw in
his book Arms and the man. A war between Bulgaria and Serbia. All the officers in Bulgaria
were Russians and all the officers in Serbia were Austrians and even a soldier from
Switzerland. Because locals are too stupid and ignorant.
Even BBC already call it a civil war but you continue to cry an ocean about the Russian troops
there. Poroshenko tells about 200 000 - more then the army of Germany. Ask him - what does he
smoke and where you can buy it.
Mo Rochdale sasha19 3 Jul 2015 20:03
Who's closing of who? The yanks started this by banning russian businessmen and
politicians. It sticks in your crow when somebody does it back to the yanks.
Russianelf caliento 3 Jul 2015 16:21
As the saying goes "a friend in need is a friend indeed" :-).
Why have not you mentioned Xi Jinping?
20 years ago the first president of Russia, Boris Eltssin, always drunk and funny,
destroyed Russian industry and economy. I was a minor at that time but I remember clearly that
I had nothing to eat then. He was so much welcome by US and its satellites. He had many
friends!
If you think that UK and US are friends you are deeply mistaken!
AndreyR2008 Gunnar René Øie 3 Jul 2015 16:10
So in nutshell it's bad not because it's bad but because it's Russian.
Thank you! Finally somebody of our western teachers had an honesty to say that outloud.
Beckow Gunnar René Øie 3 Jul 2015 13:29
Your distinctions do not establish a real difference. Those are adjustments that account
for different situation in Russia vs. US, e.g. lots and lots of Russian oligarchs have foreign
citizenships and keep their money abroad - e.g. Zimin, etc...
Russian law against "indecent sexual propaganda to minors (under 18)" is actually also almost
identical to laws in many US states, and also laws in Poland, Romania, Lithuania, and lots of
other countries in EU. There is no mention of gay-this or that, it simply says that minors
cannot be "exposed" to non-traditional stuff that could be considered obscene.
So the laws are the same, and somehow none of this attracts much attention in the West, only
when it is in Russia, they are "shocked". That is a definition of total hypocrisy. Your
argument that it is the "application" of the law that is different is not supported by any
evidence: the number if cases in Russia where these questionable laws have been used is very
small, the outcomes were ambiguous (small fines, endless appeals, etc...), in other words none
of the Western hysteria is reflected in reality.
You seem to - like "Ijust want to say" - live in a virtual reality that you have created based
on ideology, endless dated allusions (Dzerzhinsky?), and a bit of dislike or even hatred for
the "eastern beast". In other words your thinking is not reality-based it is politicized. That
is not a good place to be, reality will come back to bite you. I can also pontificate on US
genocides (natives, slavery) or British murderous march around the word - it is past, not that
relevant today. Let go of this obsession with Stalin, he has been dead for 60 years. Look at
Russia as it is today, don't exaggerate, calm down and maybe peace can prevail....
LoneSurvivor AbsolutelyFapulous 3 Jul 2015 13:17
LOL. What virtual reality are you in?
AbsolutelyFapulous 3 Jul 2015 13:09
He can now teach in russian language in Ukraine, if he wants. And go back later to Russia,
together with the Ukraine army, conquering the European part of it.
AbsolutelyFapulous - 12 messages
dropthemchammer - 240 both with the replies
truk10 - only 8 with the answers
Luminaire - 29 with the answers
raffine - 59 with the answers
srmttmrs - 106 messages including the answers
You guys are talking to each other. Get yourself a good job!
johnbonn 3 Jul 2015 08:19
It is not paranoia at all. It is sanctions for sanctions. But there is no question that the
US is aggressively organizing protests and orchestrating regime change in the RF.
The Pentagon will work tirelessly and relentlessly to unsettle the RF until it can extricate
Crimea from Russia.
Crimea is the crossroads of the Middle East, Europe, and Asia and is the single most
strategically situated piece of land on the planet.
centerline Luminaire 3 Jul 2015 04:12
that the Kiev regime are US backed is in every MSM article. It is in the Ukraine Freedom
act passed by congress into law in the US and signed by Obomber.
Popeyes raffine 3 Jul 2015 04:01
You really need to do more research currently there are 21 universities in Russia featured
within the QS World University Rankings® 2014/15, five of which are placed among the top 400
universities worldwide. Russia also boasts a substantial presence in the QS University
Rankings: BRICS 2014, a ranking of the leading universities in the BRICS countries (Brazil,
Russia, India, China and South Africa), with 53 Russian universities making the BRICS top
200.Lomonosov Moscow State University, or Lomonosov MSU for short, is Russia's highest ranked
institution, placed 114th in the world in the QS World University Rankings® 2014/15.
vr13vr raffine 3 Jul 2015 02:01
We might not have the "fifth column" argument but we simply fire academics for them
expressing opinion that doesn't match the one of the administration. Which, come to think of
it is even worse. At least Russians believe in some potential threat while we don't even need
threat, we just fire whoever disagree with us:
Kendrick was not a rector but vice-rector on innnovations. I assume the University needed
him badly to get some grants and launch joint projects with businesses.
He was not fired . He is no longer vice-president, but is dotzen and, as far as I know,
heads a laboratory or center that deals with innivations, start ups etc. But he is really a
great guy.
vr13vr 2 Jul 2015 21:40
I hold and MBA and it doesn't make me an academic. His bio by the way does not mention
neither MBA nor PhD.
Beckow Gunnar René Øie 2 Jul 2015 20:49
It is the same. Same law, same interpretation - being a "foreign agent" is not the same as
a "spy". There has been controversy about "foreign funded" initiatives in US too - but the law
is purely about labeling, it doesn't forbid being a "foreign agent". Same is US, same in
Russia, the law was copied word-for-word from US.
Anglican Church in Boston (Episcopalian I would presume) is based in US and funded in US. It
is also not a political organization (at least not primarily). So there is no comparison...
centerline 2 Jul 2015 20:44
After the colour revolutions and springs of the last decade, and the death and destruction
they have brought, any independent sovereign nation needs to sweep the US garbage out the
door.
Terry Ross Nashi_kb 2 Jul 2015 20:05
Drop the travel bans and asset freezes and I am sure they will reconsider. ha ha
At least they did not freeze the academics assets within Russia and prevent him from returning
by refusing a visa.
Firstly, the leadership in Kiev did not simply 'come' to power: a sitting president and his
cabinet first had to be deposed.
Secondly, the 2012 law has been since justified by the attempts of US-AID to depose the Cuban
government via a mobile phone and social networking scheme
'USAID programme used young Latin Americans to incite Cuba rebellion'
Thirdly, the issue of travel bans and freezing assets via a hit list was first employed by
the US and EU.
Beckow sasha19 2 Jul 2015 17:46
I wonder if calling what Washington has been doing for the last year can be called
"waging war". They certainly attack Russia in every way they think possible: economy,
diplomacy, military buildup, media demonization campaigns, and just a total overall hostility.
Maybe the word "war" is too strong a metaphor, but given that it is simply not possible to
have a shooting war with Russia (those damn nukes!), this might be as war-like that it will
ever get. It is pretty dismally ugly and reflects rather poorly on West's residual
rationality.
PaddyCannuck caliento 2 Jul 2015 17:32
"Nazi" is a word with very serious implications, and not a word that should be casually
thrown around the place by children chanting childish insults. Naziism is an extreme and
violent form of nationalism based on morally repugnant concepts of ethnic purity and racial
superiority.
Has Putin ever said that Russia should be exlcusively a country for "ethnically pure
Russians", or advocated ridding Russia of "ethnic impurities"? If so, please provide
references, links etc. Otherwise, crawl back into your hole and shut the hell up, because you
don't have a clue what you're talking about. Remember, there's always somebody else out there
who sees YOU as a racially inferior ethnic impurity, and you should be very grateful that Mr
Putin is not one of them.
sasha19 AndreyR2008 2 Jul 2015 17:10
There are some excellent universities with great technology same as the West and there
are others that are behind, same as the West
sasha19 Beckow 2 Jul 2015 17:08
"waging war" that was a quantum leap. It is true what has happened to Russian
academics, one of my friends lost her post in March due to budgetary issues. The article was
not about western academics but it is true that many universities are eliminating programs
that are not producing graduates and thus faculty are released. At the same time there are
some universities hiring as they have growing programs. It is 6 of one and a half dozen of
another.
Beckow sasha19 2 Jul 2015 16:59
You seem to get pleasure out of "my neighbors' cow died" new stories. I don't even
think it is news, more like a propaganda distraction.
How about looking at "pay cuts, job losses" at home? Wouldn't that be real news? Or would you
claim that no academician ever lost a position for "political" reason in the West? A foreigner
from a country (US) that basically is waging a war on all allowable fronts on Russia is
unlikely to keep a cushy academic sinecure. That's the way it is all over the world.
Beckow 2 Jul 2015 16:13
High administrative posts in all universities, in all countries, since time immemorial have
been political. To be a dean in Oxford, Sorbonne, or Warsaw or Munich, it always has a major
political components. These are cushy jobs given as rewards, not earned in any meaningful
sense of the world.
Why should it be different in Nizny Novgorod? Maybe a local well-connected guy wants the job.
Why is this "news", there are tens of thousand frustrated academicians all over West who
didn't get a job or were let go. It is political, it is always political, declaring that it is
"news" because it is in Russia is, by the way, also political.
MaoChengJi 2 Jul 2015 16:02
Really, how does a venture-capitalist become rector of a university in the first place? One
can hardly imagine any other way but bribery. Good catch, Mr. Kiselyov, but firing is not
enough, they need to investigate.
Canigou sasha19 2 Jul 2015 15:59
Not every Fulbright Program person, and member of other similar U.S.-funded academic
organization, is a spy. Some have been, however, and it was a big scandal when the CIA was
exposed (to its disgrace) as subsidizing supposed student organizations and using them as
fronts to promote U.S. propaganda.
Laurence Johnson 2 Jul 2015 15:49
We all know how NGO's have been used in an attempt to undermine the government in Russia.
Yet again Putin is streets ahead and clearing them all out. There isn't a way to topple the
Russian government and the more we try the more foolish we look.
Its time to leave Russia to sort out its internal affairs and concentrate on getting our
economies back on track before we find the world has passed us all by.
Canigou -> sasha19 2 Jul 2015 15:01
The U.S. has decided to exclude many Russians from its territory because it does not like
their political views. Russia's expulsion of an American professor looks to be a blowback from
that U.S. policy.
If you want your academic friends in Russia to feel secure in their ability to have their
Russian visas renewed, perhaps you could ask The State Department to reconsider its
politicized travel sanctions against Russian individuals.
vr13vr sasha19 2 Jul 2015 14:53
Good try. He is "the chief executive of the Russia-focused investment consultancy Marchmont
Capital Partners," according to the article. "In 2005, Mr. White founded Marchmont Capital
Partners, LLC an investment advisory firm... ," and he worked in the same city, according to
the link. How many Marchmont Capital Partners exist in Nizhniy Novgorod and how many of them
were created by someone with the name Kendrik White?
In either case, the article doesn't mention any academic credentials. The website does mention
a lot of finance credentials instead.
SHappens 2 Jul 2015 14:13
The Putin government has also stopped many US/Russia collaborative studies, blaming the US
for "stealing" Russian intellectuals.
When we know the NSA spies on technology everywhere in the world this is hardly surprising
that'd be true. Tit for tat. US got what it sowed.
Like any neoliberal country Greece is a divided country with 20% of population representing "fifth
column of globalization" and benefiting from it and 80% suffering from it. . "...Well that is the rub. Western banks effectively control the cost of credit globally. You either
fall into line or you're perpetually behind the curve until you sell all your goods of any value." . "...Are you even aware that this is not actually loans that the Greek people got? If I loan
money to your corrupt banker and than ask YOU to return it, will you be less offensive?
" . "...The 2010 bailout was the one that allowed private French, Dutch and German banks to transfer
their liabilities to the Greek public sector, and indirectly to the entire eurozone's public sector.
There was no debt restructuring in that deal." . "...The loans were made by a cabal of high-financiers in Europe to a cabal of corrupt finianciers
in Greece. The game of lending rules are: you bet that the party you lend money to will pay back the
loan with interest. Which is what the German banks did, making a profit on the interest for quite some
time. But now the high-financiers in Europe have lost the game, i.e. Greece/the-old-displaced-guard-in-Greece
can no longer pay them back. That's the financiers problem: not the problem of Greece's normal citizens
nor other EU taxpayers! Is that so difficult to understand? Class war for beginners... privatize the
profit, socialize the loss." . "...The banksters, multi-national corporations and their political lackeys, have engaged in
an extend and pretend fantasy which is passing their private debt onto taxpayers across Europe. Once
the shoulders of the Greek taxpayer have been broken, it will pass onto the shoulders of the taxpayers
from the rest of Europe. God, I want to shake the anti Greek/pro EU lobby to wake them up. Greece, please,
please, please vote NO, so we can begin the long process of getting control of Europe out of the hands
of these maniacs." . "...Without risking depositors' cash, governments had the ability to sit back ready to nationalise
any banks whose lending to Greece was so irresponsible that they were unsustainable. This would have
wiped out the shareholders and sent a clear message that lending as well as borrowing has to be responsible
and that shareholders need to earn their fat returns by exerting oversight.
" . "...Yanis Varoufakis has a point. The proposals put by the EU would cause the Greek economy to contract
further, this effectively would increase the debt ratio to GDP. Nowhere have I heard any talk on how
to build up the Greek economy, it has all been about collecting taxes.
I have also read commentators on here talk about how Greece lied to get into MU, this has a great deal
of truth in it, but one must remember the EU knew what a basket case Greece was financially, therefore
they are equally complicit in this debacle.
The question has to be why the EU is doing this to Greece, they know their actions will do nothing other
than cause more misery in the country. The reason this is happening is to protect German banks. Greece
is the domino that could bring the whole system down." . "...No, the original package lent to Greece was to bailout Greek and EU banks. The subsequent
bailout (to pay for the bailout) is 60% owned/facilitated by EFSF. It raised it through selling bonds,
no doubt to financial institutions. So now we're in the bizarre situation of banks befitting from the
bailout of banks with the Greek people carrying the can and Europeans (who are liable to honour EFSF
bonds+intererst) blaming Greece and defending the banks! "
Yes it should have been, by letting the banks go under as per Iceland. Or were too many people
(living in vacuums ?) unprepared to deal with the short term pain ? Now it seems the world of
people must suffer to service the Banks' bad debt.....what good slaves we are! The Emperor has
no clothes!
Duncan Frame -> Brasil13 4 Jul 2015 11:10
Well that is the rub. Western banks effectively control the cost of credit globally. You either
fall into line or you're perpetually behind the curve until you sell all your goods of any value.
W61212 -> Brasil13 4 Jul 2015 11:08
Careful what you wish for. From the EC
'In 2013 the EU recorded a trade surplus in goods (more than double the surplus registered in
2012). The EU also has a surplus in commercial services trade.
The EU is the biggest foreign investor in Brazil with investments in many sectors of the Brazilian
economy. Around 50% of the FDI flows received by Brazil during the last 5 years originated in
the EU.'
This debacle with Greece demonstrates the EU can't run itself and yet it has huge holdings with
Brazil and has recently reversed to a trade surplus in to Brazil, a nation with huge natural,
industrial and human resources of its own. Brazil exports mainly agricultural and mining products
to the EU and imports manufactured products. See the imbalance? Brazil exports primary products
and imports finished products made elsewhere and those jobs are elsewhere. See the problem?
There's only one letter difference but choice for the Greeks is to become either the new Ireland
(and suffer self-inflicted austerity for decades to come) or the new Iceland (by tearing up the
rule book and starting again).
Germans (for the most part) are not Nazis or terrorists, and should not have to take the blame
for this crisis. They are, however, dupes, like people living under capitalism everywhere. They
are willing to let the international banksters and their political cronies in the European parliament
run their lives and create whatever mischief they believe is in their interest.
ToddPalant -> Scaff1 4 Jul 2015 11:06
Tell us suckers then, about how Ukraine, a run down country that was just made worse by
regime change. From bad Yanukovich to much worse American puppet and idiot Poroshenko plus a catastrophic
war. Tell us about Lybia and bad Qaddafi, who in his life time killed 3-4000 people and the much
worse UK-France that caused at least a 100000 dead with their pet invasion at the behest of our
friends from across the Atlantic.
May be you need to dust your mirror.
Duncan Frame -> Laurelei 4 Jul 2015 11:05
Terrorists primary aim is to promote fear rather than harm. That's far more effective in getting
their way. You close the banks you show the public what you're capable of.
Saaywar Montana -> thisisafix 4 Jul 2015 11:04
Their economies are naff. Spain and Italy are the two countries most likely to join Greece
in a new union. Portugal and Ireland are too far gone but Ireland has been rebelling. Once people
see a progressive union to compete with the rubbish EU then these countries will gain support
for joining a new southern European union.
These countries are not out of the water and won't get out of it either. Austerity will do what
it does and the people will rise up. It's inevitable. The EU doesn't have a monopoly on unions
lol.
Greece, as did every other country, got left with the bill of the private banking sector.
Yes, it was their fault for running a deficit but a significant proportion of the debt owed by
the Greek gov is bank bailouts.
It's the same here. The UK paid £700bn to private banks to make sure they didn't fail. The
deficit has nothing to do with that. so around 50% of the debt is a mixture or deficit spending
and capital investments made by the government.
Robape Laurelei 4 Jul 2015 10:57
Financial terrorists, just interested in the bottom line, not countries.
elcomm W61212 4 Jul 2015 10:56
When fascist governments get in trouble at home they start wars to distract people. It's not
that far out.
Duncan Frame Laurelei 4 Jul 2015 10:56
Yes everything's exceptional. 2008 was the biggest economic collapse since the great depression.
And Greece was the most exposed country. No difference.
Alfie Silva karlmiltonkeynes 4 Jul 2015 10:55
My mistake, I thought you were intelligent.
It is common knowledge that only around 10% of bailout monies went to the real economy.
You are correct indeed in that creditors got a haircut, mainly hedgefunds and most foreign banks
by 2015 had reduced their exposure to Greece. The issue today is sovereign debt. Do you realise
that sovereign debt is the senior collatoral for Eurozone banks?
So we are back to banks again Mr Banker.
Duncan Frame ID13579 4 Jul 2015 10:53
I don't have to excuse giving voice to the victims of those in power to you or anyone else.
And it seems to me Tsipras is taking the same line. You confuse the Greek people with the people
who actually profited from that debt. Why should they be forced to starve on the back of decisions
over which they had influence?
usufruct -> HoorayHenrietta 4 Jul 2015 10:44
Like Americans and most other people around the globe, the German people have allowed the international
banks to pull the wool over their eyes. There is no reason for taxpayers to bail out the banks
as we are still doing here in the U.S. For the past six years my wife and I have been paying down
mortgages on real estate hoping to reestablish equity in properties whose value was gutted by
cavalier banksters on Wall Steet. A few clicks to gamble away the hard work of millions! These
people should be arrested and tried for their crimes. In a fair court they would be sent away
for life.
Chris Hindle 4 Jul 2015 10:42
'Yanis Varoufakis accuses creditors of terrorism.'
So what is wrong with that? Financial terrorism is a much more protracted and painful process
to the victims than sudden violence, but the end result is the same.
The Vermin Who Would Be Kings have discovered they no longer need the fuss and expense of maintaining
a standing army of occupation, far simpler to get countries/continents/ the world in deep debt
(via bent politicians making private bankster debt into sovereign debt - just like they did in
Greece ) and exert control through that.
BTW the UK has some £9 trillion in foreign debt (much of which is the bad debts of the
City - and the highest of any stand-alone country on earth) So now you know what next months austerity
drive is all about
InjunJoe -> degardiyen 4 Jul 2015 10:24
The "slovakian tax payer" will not be paying to maintain the Greek standard of living,
but to shore up the ECB, the IMF and the private lenders to Greek banks, as 90% of the "bail-out"
goes to serving interest. Haven't you been reading the news?
Duncan Frame -> karlmiltonkeynes 4 Jul 2015 10:20
That's weird because at the same time the banks collapsed in 2008 the deficit went up from
57% to 82%, lots of people lost their jobs or had to take pay cuts. I'm sure it was just a coincidence.
LeftToWrite -> ID6487190 4 Jul 2015 10:17
Yeah the EU has shown itself to want a compromise. All those nice compromised offers it made.
Yep we all remember those.
Compromise means both sides giving ground, not one side accepting everything the other demands.
Use a dictionary next time.
For once a nation is standing up to EU bullying and we have ignorant fools like you turning it
the other way in an attempt to change the narrative.
LeftToWrite 4 Jul 2015 10:11
How can the Troika have fucked up this badly? It seems they forgot that Greece is actually
a construct that represents the people who live there, and you can't just impose misery after
misery on a people without expecting them to finally have enough. Even if they vote yes, all it
does is postpone that that time when they will have had enough.
Honestly, this has shown the true greed at the hearts of Merkel et al, and by extension the people
they represent. Save the French and German banks, fuck over the Greek people. If people think
anti German rhetoric in Greece is extreme now, decades of resentment is about to follow.
שוקי גלילי Steve Collins 4 Jul 2015 10:09
You probably meant to say "when you ask for it back from someone ELSE, who didn't actually
get your money". Are you even aware that this is not actually loans that the Greek people
got? If I loan money to your corrupt banker and than ask YOU to return it, will you be less offensive?
email from Green Party Brussels office. TTIP and ISDS - Call to action by Keith Taylor MEP!
Breaking news! We've just been informed that the postponed vote on the European Parliament
resolution on TTIP has been put on the agenda for Wednesday 8th July.
MEPs will be voting on the resolution as a whole, but also on a whole array of amendments
to the text. Among these is a compromise amendment on the investor-state dispute mechanism, or ISDS.
The compromise amendment suggests replacing ISDS courts with some kind of 'new' system,
but there is no further explanation or details. As long as there is any system in place
for investors to sue governments, as the compromise calls for, it is still ISDS. The
fact that the Parliament's President is trying to spin this as something different by
giving it a new name does not change anything.
The compromise amendment has been agreed by the largest
groups in the European Parliament: the centre-left Socialists & Democrats (which includes
the UK's Labour MEPs), the centre-right European People's Party, and the European Conservatives
and Reformists group (which includes the UK's Conservative MEPs) and the Alliance of
Liberals and Democrats (which includes the UK's Liberal Democrat MEP).
On Wednesday, all MEPs will get a chance to vote on this amendment and the resolution
as a whole.
The Greens are calling on citizens, trade unions, NGOs,
towns and regions and businesses to speak out and contact their elected representatives
and hold them to account on this attempt to privatise justice and infringe democratic
rights.
How you can help This is our last chance to make sure that damaging ISDS provisions are not given the
green light by the European Parliament. MEPs need to know the full force of public opinion
on this threat to our national laws and our democratic rights. Contact your other MEPs before Wednesday asking them to oppose TTIP and the Investor
State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). - use Write To Them to email your MEPs directly with your own concerns - use the 38 Degrees campaign to send a quick template email - call your MEPs in Brussels to let them the reasons you're opposed - spread the word! Share your concerns on social media, tweet your MEPs, encourage your
friends and family to contact their MEPs, use Greens/EFA resources to campaign. Message from Keith
"I've been extremely heartened to receive so many emails from constituents voicing
their opposition to ISDS and the TTIP proposals in the last few weeks. It's clear that
there's a powerful and growing democratic movement to protect our laws, our public services
and our regulatory standards from potential devastation.
The decision to postpone the vote on TTIP earlier in
the month stinks of political parties running scared of the huge public opposition to
TTIP.
TTIP represents a monumental power grab by corporations and it must be stopped in its
tracks.
The sudden re-scheduling of this vote means we are now short on time to make our voices
heard. The Greens need all the help we can get to spread the word and put pressure on
other MEPs to do the right thing and represent the views and interests of their constituents." You can keep up-to-date with the Greens/EFA campaign and what the Greens are doing in
the European Parliament via their TTIP campaign website and their twitter feed.
Thank you for your support. Best wishes,
LeftToWrite ID105467 4 Jul 2015 10:14
To bail out German banks, get your facts straight before posting nonsense.
Kalandar 4 Jul 2015 10:14
Propoganda galore from the mainstream media but its fooling no one, except perhaps themselves.
ID345543 4 Jul 2015 10:04
This Is Why The Euro Is Finished
The 2010 bailout was the one that allowed private French, Dutch and German banks to
transfer their liabilities to the Greek public sector, and indirectly to the entire eurozone's
public sector. There was no debt restructuring in that deal.
The loans were made by a cabal of high-financiers in Europe to a cabal of corrupt finianciers
in Greece. The game of lending rules are: you bet that the party you lend money to will pay back
the loan with interest. Which is what the German banks did, making a profit on the interest for
quite some time. But now the high-financiers in Europe have lost the game, i.e. Greece/the-old-displaced-guard-in-Greece
can no longer pay them back. That's the financiers problem: not the problem of Greece's normal
citizens nor other EU taxpayers! Is that so difficult to understand? Class war for beginners...
privatize the profit, socialize the loss.
NeverNotHereTV gsxsure 4 Jul 2015 09:59
Syriza does not want "free money". They want a fraction put toward economic growth, and then
payments as a meaningful fraction of that growth. It is simple enough.
Alfie Silva 4 Jul 2015 09:50
Please can anyone explain to me why we are letting the bankster cabal turn European against
European?
The banksters, multi-national corporations and their political lackeys, have engaged in an
extend and pretend fantasy which is passing their private debt onto taxpayers across Europe. Once
the shoulders of the Greek taxpayer have been broken, it will pass onto the shoulders of the taxpayers
from the rest of Europe. God, I want to shake the anti Greek/pro EU lobby to wake them up. Greece,
please, please, please vote NO, so we can begin the long process of getting control of Europe
out of the hands of these maniacs.
Finnbolt 4 Jul 2015 09:49
"Debt relief was "politically highly toxic for many eurozone member states"."
Here you have the problem. The creditor state governments are responsible to their voters and
many have said that their taxpayers will not finance the Greeks and money lent will be paid back
in full.
Syriza says they have a mandate from the Greek people to force other euro countries to continue
financing them and take a haircut. In other words, lose most of the money lent to Greece.
EU is a collection of nation states with pretensions of a federation. One of the pretensions about
to be busted is a transfer union, meaning taxpayers in richer countries tranferring part of their
wealth to poorer countries.
APSAPS 4 Jul 2015 09:49
A $22.6 billion International Monetary Fund and World Bank financial package was approved on
13 July 1998 to support reforms and stabilize the Russian market. Despite the bailout, July 1998
monthly interest payments on Russia's debt rose to a figure 40 percent higher than its monthly
tax collections. Additionally, on 15 July 1998, the State Duma dominated by left-wing parties
refused to adopt most of the government anti-crisis plan so that the government was forced to
rely on presidential decrees. On 17 August 1998, the Russian government devalued the ruble, defaulted
on domestic debt, and declared a moratorium on payment to foreign creditors. It was later revealed
that about $5 billion of the international loans provided by the World Bank and International
Monetary Fund were stolen upon the funds' arrival in Russia on the eve of the meltdown.
Sounds very similar.
Oh, wait, maybe some referendum could have helped?
Insomnijazz hertsman 4 Jul 2015 09:48
Nah - these are just lies for the gullible to swallow.
Without risking depositors' cash, governments had the ability to sit back ready to nationalise
any banks whose lending to Greece was so irresponsible that they were unsustainable. This would
have wiped out the shareholders and sent a clear message that lending as well as borrowing has
to be responsible and that shareholders need to earn their fat returns by exerting oversight.
Instead they chose the worst option: bailing out the bank shareholders by assuming responsibility
for their risky lending, but refusing to then pay the price for their political cowardice and
shifting the blame onto a largely guiltless Greek population which has already suffered hugely
from the economic devastation.
Brent1023 4 Jul 2015 09:46
Debt relief not on the table.
It comes down to the Greek people or the banksters. Who needs a bailout more?
The EU has sided with the banksters.
Not just in Greece but in Ireland, Spain, Portugal.
Only Iceland was able to force banksters to swallow their losses.
Everywhere else bankster fraud was rewarded with a 100% bailout.
Should be renamed the European Bankster Union.
Surprising that the UK does not want it - it also bailed out its banksters.
NWObserver sunnytimes 4 Jul 2015 09:39
The creditors are not looking to get their money back. Debt is the leverage being used to destroy
the social and public infrastructure in the country.
So their worst nightmare is Greeks voting 'No', staying in default and surviving or prospering
while remaining in the Eurozone. Then they will not be able to use the same fear tactics against
another EZ country. They are psychopaths out to destroy, not creditors looking to get their money.
So if Greeks vote 'No' , they will spare no effort to destroy Greece, beginning with the continuation
of the liquidity freeze. However, there are some simple steps that Greece can take to end the
liquidity freeze and I think they have already taken them.
Albrecht Ritschl: During the past century alone, though, at least three times. After the first
default during the 1930s, the US gave Germany a "haircut" in 1953, reducing its debt problem to
practically nothing. Germany has been in a very good position ever since, even as other Europeans
were forced to endure the burdens of World War II and the consequences of the German occupation.
Germany even had a period of non-payment in 1990....but we were also extremely reckless -- and
our export industry has thrived on orders. The anti-Greek sentiment that is widespread in many
German media outlets is highly dangerous. And we are sitting in a glass house: Germany's resurgence
has only been possible through waiving extensive debt payments and stopping reparations to its
World War II victims.'
Don't worry. The nappy business is doing well in Brussels...
EU sources: possible extra Eurogroup on Monday and EU leaders Summit on Wednesday #Greferendum
via GR media http://www.dimokratiki.gr/04-07-2015/pithano-ektakto-eurogroup-ti-deftera-ke-sinodos-korifis-tin-tetarti/
…
They are pissing in their pants the lot of them...
rafela Bogoas81 4 Jul 2015 09:00
Austerity didnt work. In the last five years the economy shrinked by 19%. Unemployment rose
to 27%. Tsipras wanted more debt relief. The IMF report sustain that an improvement is impossible
without debt relief.
sunnytimes 4 Jul 2015 08:58
German people are industrious and inventive. They play by the rules. Unfortunately they are
also rather naive and believe generally what the state tells them. In history the role of such
people has always been to pay the bills.
GuillotinesRUs 4 Jul 2015 08:45
Yanis Varoufakis has a point. The proposals put by the EU would cause the Greek economy to
contract further, this effectively would increase the debt ratio to GDP. Nowhere have I heard
any talk on how to build up the Greek economy, it has all been about collecting taxes.
I have also read commentators on here talk about how Greece lied to get into MU, this has a great
deal of truth in it, but one must remember the EU knew what a basket case Greece was financially,
therefore they are equally complicit in this debacle.
The question has to be why the EU is doing this to Greece, they know their actions will do nothing
other than cause more misery in the country. The reason this is happening is to protect German
banks. Greece is the domino that could bring the whole system down.
U77777 -> CassiusClay 4 Jul 2015 08:40
Austerity isn't the answer - but when you have put yourself into the situation that the Greeks
have, it is part of the solution. A small part and nothing like the media like to portray, but
something has got to give.
As for electing Tsipras and varoufakis......Seriously, stop drinking. They're a bunch of cowboys
with some well intended principles and a load of rather deluded ideas. Worse still, neither of
them have actually come up with anything like a constructive plan how to stimulate the economy
and help Greece stand on its own 2 feet again
Dimitris Chloupis -> sylvester 4 Jul 2015 08:39
Any sensible Greek realizes without deep reforms no economy is going forward. This is not even
debatable in my country. We already reduced public sector by 500.000 employes thats a juicy 50%.
High pensions of the past are long gone. The result is that now it costs 6 billion to pay for
wages in public sector and another 5 billion to pay for pension, total 10 billion. But we need
another 10 billion for paying back loans each year. This year alone we paid back 25 billion !!!
Tax evasion should be our next focus, its not reasonable for an economy that makes 200 billions
per year to need loans . There is a will to fix all that, because the alternative is far worse.
Of course the same can be said about Germany , why a country that make 3.1 trillion euros per
year has a 80% debt ? Tax evasion of course ;) Time to open those swish bank accounts , but does
Germany want that ? How many vested Greek interest are connected with German vested interest ?
Denying corruption is to deny the foundation of modern economies.
W61212 -> RussBrown 4 Jul 2015 08:39
I made a point earlier about the birth of a new Brussels based dictatorship which controls
all EZ 'national governments', which are national governments by name only, ergo Syriza has to
go for straying from the script. Brussels has already proven it would rather deal with corrupt
Greek politicians by doing so in the past
Continent Renato -> Timotheus 4 Jul 2015 08:37
Inequality of opportunity in the Eurozone is now so great -- young people in Greece have
an unemployment level of 60% and the rate is 33% in the austerity "success story" of Portugal
The systems are different. Northern countries have the dual education system, i.e. only about
10 p.c. of the youth go to college/university, and 90 p.c. go through a 3 or 4 year education
"learning by doing".
In addition, the "dirty work" in Greece (farming/harvest/construction) is done by temporary migrants
from Macedonia, Albania, Romania, Bulgaria because the Greek parents wanted their children to
have a better life and sent them to universities without an employment market for so many acdemics.
Many of them land in a job with in the bloated govt.
sunnytimes 4 Jul 2015 08:36
The true parasites are the bond markets of London and New York. The create nothing. All they
do is swap pieces of paper with ech other all day long, skimming every transaction. The UK and
US have run trade deficits or decades, that is by definition they produce less than they consume.
Time to tear down this edifice of debt and get back to a capital-based economy.
LeftOrRightSameShite FOARP 4 Jul 2015 08:35
Greece already has been bailed out
No, the original package lent to Greece was to bailout Greek and EU banks. The subsequent
bailout (to pay for the bailout) is 60% owned/facilitated by EFSF. It raised it through selling
bonds, no doubt to financial institutions. So now we're in the bizarre situation of banks befitting
from the bailout of banks with the Greek people carrying the can and Europeans (who are liable
to honour EFSF bonds+intererst) blaming Greece and defending the banks!
Bit thick really innit!
RussBrown 4 Jul 2015 08:35
Myth 1 - Greece do nothing to solve the problem (they have had years of austerity)
Myth 2 - Germany is bailing out the Greeks. The money that goes to Greece goes straight back into
the German Banks. But by making it impossible for business to run in Greece the businesses move
their resources to Germany and pay taxes their in a massive transfer of wealth from a poor EU
country to the richest. This is a capitalist scam and all of lot on here shouting their propaganda
should be ashamed of yourselves. The rich bankers are using you to justify the destruction of
the poor!
"...Neoliberal politicians are well-paid traitors to their own countries and peoples - how much
empathy can be expected of them for anyone else?"
"...When I see expressions like "hard-working" and "sustainable", I stop reading. It is as Orwell
said: ready made plastic expressions rushing in to smother all possibility of an original individual
thought. All this dolt needed to include were "inclusive", "sensitive", "globalised", "aspirational",
"stakeholders", and he would be done."
"...You are quite right about Golden Dawn but I don't think the Troika actually care about
that so much. Its beyond obvious that the Troika care nothing for the Greek population and I think they
would be content with a fascist dictatorship as long as it signs up to austerity."
"...That would not be a bad thing, but I don't think the Euro is seen as an error or a mistake
at all. As Germany has discovered, it is an extremely useful tool in assuring the triumph of greed:
keeping populations poor, unemployed and fearful, so they are more willing to accept the lash of the
markets and agree to bank bailouts, low wages, a diminished social safety-net, trade treaties, etc.,
etc."
The possibility of a Greek exit from the eurozone has never been more likely. We shouldn't be
under any illusions – this would be a catastrophe for Greece's eurozone creditors, the Greek state
and the European Union.
Like it or not, we are all in this together. If we continue on our current trajectory, everyone
stands to lose from what now resembles a reckless, self-destructive standoff. The Greek economy is
on the verge of complete collapse. This would not only be devastating for the people of Greece, it
will guarantee that creditors never see their money again. We must remember that Germany has lent
approximately €80bn. This is an astonishing figure, close to a quarter of Greece's budget for 2016.
Yet the sad irony is, the longer the current impasse continues, the greater pressure Angela Merkel
will face within her own party to reject any solution that is accepted by the Greek government.
But much more is at stake than euros. The world will consider a "Grexit" as a devastating blow
for EU monetary cooperation and the European project. A destabilising Grexit will only be welcomed
by the likes of China, Russia and those who are most threatened by a strong, united European Union.
If Greece is to stay within the eurozone, we need to secure a massive de-escalation of the tensions,
rhetoric and threats from both sides – and fast. It is time for Greece's finance minister Yanis Varoufakis
and the political leaders of the eurozone to come to their senses and bring this crisis back from
the brink.
Prodisestab -> HolyInsurgent 3 Jul 2015 18:26
Neoliberal politicians are well-paid traitors to their own countries and peoples - how
much empathy can be expected of them for anyone else?
Agreed to a good extent. However, when the discussions broke off Friday night, the two sides
were very close regarding the measures that were needed. I believe that they were off by 60 million
euros only. Their differences were mostly about the types of measures to be taken with the Greek
government wanting more taxes on businesses and the creditors wanting more to be paid by ordinary
people. The problem that I have and that a lot of observers have with that is the fact that the
Greek government did compromize quite a lot while the creditors refused to budge from their inflexible
position despite the fact that implementation of their policies during the last five years has
put the country into a depression. A basic premise of "negotiation" is that both sides make compromises
in order to arrive at a mutually beneficial solution. In this case the creditors demonstrated
total lack of flexibility, which clearly indicates alterior motives at least on the part of some
of the creditors. In Germany they have fed their people with all the hate against "lazy Greeks"
etc that clearly shows up in these messages and in that sense they have themselves created a very
negative environment. I believe that about 90% or so of all the loans that have been given to
Greece went back to the creditors. Greece is not looking for handouts here. This must be understood.
This is a debt crisis that has been mishandled and that has span out of control as a result.
Economic terrorism is not justified under any conditions and particularly within the EZ.
LiveitOut 3 Jul 2015 21:45
When I see expressions like "hard-working" and "sustainable", I stop reading.
It is as Orwell said: ready made plastic expressions rushing in to smother all possibility of
an original individual thought.
All this dolt needed to include were "inclusive", "sensitive", "globalised", "aspirational", "stakeholders",
and he would be done.
How odd all this stuff about hardworking families when we are all being screwed to kingdom come
by hard whoring banking gangsters who have never done a second of useful work in their effing
lives --
The Greek economy is on the verge of complete collapse. This would not only be devastating
for the people of Greece, it will guarantee that creditors never see their money again.
The debt has been known to be unpayable for a long time. It has nothing to do with current events
in Greece. It should have been written off.
No one believes anything Alexis Tsipras says anymore, and this is why a yes vote on Sunday
is crucial. But it's also clear eurozone leaders have made mistakes with Greece.
But despite their nonsenses the latter group somehow, mysteriously, retain credibility. It was
not the antics of Tsiparis that brought about this mess but the behaviour of his 'credible' opponents.
Greece and its creditors agree a three-month window to develop a long-term reform programme
combined with an investment package to turn Greece's ailing economy around.
Now you are getting close to the Syriza position.
Let us use this crisis to deliver real, sustainable change by drawing up a settlement in
the next three months in which the Greek state, its government and its administration are paying
back the debts, instead of forcing hard-working citizens to pay the bill.
Is that before or after the twenty-year moratorium on debt implied by the IMF?
From the burning embers of two world wars, we have created a single market with free movement
of people, goods, services and capital.
And the freedom to avoid taxes.
PaleMan -> jonbryce 3 Jul 2015 12:59
You are quite right about Golden Dawn but I don't think the Troika actually care about
that so much.
Its beyond obvious that the Troika care nothing for the Greek population and I think they would
be content with a fascist dictatorship as long as it signs up to austerity.
Danny Sheahan 3 Jul 2015 12:59
No one believes the ECB or the EU leadership anymore.
If they were serious about the Euro as a strong functional currency this mess would not be
so big.
They would not have had to flush out private German and French bad debt in the 2nd bailout
by putting it on the tax payer, or those countries would have had to step in to hep their banks
and political careers would have been over.
The ECB has become a political football and it cannot maintain stability in its currency region.
It is a failed central bank.
Vilos_Cohaagen 3 Jul 2015 12:58
"The Greek economy is on the verge of complete collapse. This would not only be devastating
for the people of Greece, it will guarantee that creditors never see their money again."
The problem is that there's no scenario where the creditors do get paid back. So, why (for
a start) "lend" them 60 billion more Euros? Wiping the debt completely out just means that the
Greeks can start accumulating new "debt" they'll have no intention to re-pay and will be defaulting
on a few years down the line.
BusinessWriter 3 Jul 2015 12:52
it will guarantee that creditors never see their money again.
Crazy - this Guy actually thinks the creditors have any chance of seeing their money again
- what planet is he on.
As for his idea that the Greek state (or any state for that matter that doesn't control its own
currency) can pay of its debt independent of the taxpaying public - it's deluded nonsense.
Where is the Greek state supposed to get the billions of euro from? The only source of revenue
it has is taxes or selling assets that it holds on behalf of the citizens of Greece.
Equally, the idea that the clientelist state is somehow a separate thing to the majority of
the Greek people is nonsense. So many of them are either employed by the state or in professions
protected from competition by the state or in companies that only serve the state. Identifying
anyone who doesn't benefit in some way from the current clientelist state would be like looking
for an ATM in Athens with cash in it on Monday morning.
This Guy is just another symptom of the problem - he offers no sustainable solution - and what
he does offer is incoherent and too late.
fullgrill -> elliot2511 3 Jul 2015 12:51
That would not be a bad thing, but I don't think the Euro is seen as an error or a mistake
at all. As Germany has discovered, it is an extremely useful tool in assuring the triumph of greed:
keeping populations poor, unemployed and fearful, so they are more willing to accept the lash
of the markets and agree to bank bailouts, low wages, a diminished social safety-net, trade treaties,
etc., etc.
whichone 3 Jul 2015 12:50
"Syriza's game is up. No one believes anything Alexis Tsipras says anymore"
well 1) it looks like 50% of the Greeks believe him
2) The IMF (and Merkel in leaked notes) have acknowledged that the debt is unsustainable even
if Greece accept all conditions imposed by the Troika.
Varoufakis has been saying this since the start. So lets no longer pretend that this is all
about getting the money back or that Greece wants to avoid its responsibility to its creditors
: again will say Varoufakis has said the Greek government does not want to do this. The point
is he and many other knowledgeable people (not politicians) know that it can not be paid back
, but with the conditions in place to allow the economy to start to grow then Greece has a chance
to pay some of it back. This is about bringing a Government to heel. I wish the Guardian , having
continually reported on this crisis and knows what has been said allows a contributor to use the
paper as propaganda.
And I hope that all those people who purposely said that a 'NO' vote means a no to Greece in
the Euro and EU after a 'NO' result and surprise surprise Greece is still in the Euro, get thrown
to the Wolves.
The same is goes with the comments about Varoufakis playing Game theory. He denied this basically
saying that those who say this obviously don't know the first thing about Game Theory.
badluc TheSighingDutchman 3 Jul 2015 12:48
Genuine question: correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the electorates of Germany, Netherlands,
Finland etc been consistently fed by most of their politicians (and newspapers) a completely mistaken
"morality tale" about what the root causes of the problems are, blaming inefficient and corrupt
governments who borrowed too much, without mentioning either the reckless lenders (mainly German,
French, Dutch etc banks), were silent about the shifting of the burden of bad lending from the
banks to the EU taxpayers (did they ever acknowledge that clearly?!?), describing the solution
as a punitive austerity which would somehow bring moribund economies back from the abyss, etc?
Politicians have a duty to be frank and sincere with their electorate, sharing with them all the
relevant data they have on a given problem. If they have been feeding them misguided rhetoric,
they have only themselves to blame if the chickens now come home to roost. In other words, if
the electorate would now revolt against the inevitable, don't the politicians of those countries
who have most strongly supported and advocated austerity have only themselves to blame?
SouthSeas 3 Jul 2015 12:48
Germany has lent 80bn to Greece to pay back loans from German banks
RudolphS 3 Jul 2015 12:47
While Verhofstadt calls for a cooling-off period he at the same time claims 'Syriza's game
is up' and is urging the Greek people to vote 'yes' next sunday. With the latter he shows his
true colours as just another Brussels eurocrat, and is only fuelling debate instead of cooling-off.
Dear Mr. Verhofstadt, why the hell do you think the Greek voted en masse for a party like Syriza?
Because they are sick and tired of people like you.
And yes, there much more at stake than a debt. Putin must be watching this whole spectacle
with total bewilderment how the EU is crippling itself from the inside.
Rainborough 3 Jul 2015 12:47
Anyone who is in danger of being impressed by conservative politician Guy Verhofstadt's perspective
on Greek problems might like to bear in mknd that among his numerous other highly lucrative financial
interests is his position on the board of the multi-billion Belgian investment company Sofina,
whose interests include a stake in the highly controversial planned privatization of the Thessaloniki
water utility.
hatewarmongers OscarD 3 Jul 2015 12:46
The neoliberal elite don't
SHappens 3 Jul 2015 12:17
In a democracy people can chose their fate by voting or through referendum. That's the way
it goes but not in Europe where referendum are seen as a danger to the establishment. Tsipras,
as soon as he came to power through a democratic vote was seen as a danger. He was ostracized
and considered a pariah, Greece became a pariah state and they can as well die from hunger.
The EU, and institutions have behaved like the little bullies they are, just like they did
with Switzerland after the vote on immigration, they threat, blackmail everyone who dare think
different.
For the sake of democracy, the Greeks have to vote no, there is no other decent alternatives
especially after all the bashing and disrespect they have been under. Nobody in EU and US (since
they have their say in european affairs) want to see Greece walking away, nor Russia or China
for that matter. But Tsipras had the opportunity to see where his real allies stand, and it is
not within Europe. He might not forget this in the future.
mfederighi 3 Jul 2015 12:09
You are entirely right in suggesting that the only sustainable solution is a far-reaching reform
programme for the Greek state and the reek economy. However, when you say that:
Greece's people must be at the centre of such a settlement. They did not cause this crisis
and remain the victims of successive Greek governments, who have protected vested interests
and the Greek clientelist system at their expense.
You seem to think that vested interest and the reek clientelist system are distinct from the
Greek people. There is, I am afraid, a substantial overlap - that is, quite a few people benefit
from clientelism and are part of vested interests. Not recognising this is disingenuous.
After all, corrupt and inefficient governments have been elected again and again - by whom?
jimmywalter 3 Jul 2015 12:06
The Banks solution is no solution - it means poverty and no taxes to pay to repay. The Banks
want a Treaty of Versailles. We all know of a certain Austrian that rose up to end the German
economic collapse. We all know how that ended. I don't want that again. People revolt over economics.
Spain, Italy, and Greece have huge numbers of unemployeed who did nothing to create this crisis.
The Banks did. Who should pay? Anyway, leave the Euro, stay in the EU!
"...So, to recap: corrupt German companies bribed corrupt Greek politicians to buy German weapons.
And then a German chancellor presses for austerity on the Greek people to pay back the loans they took
out (with Germans banks) at massive interest, for the weapons they bought off them in the first place.
"
"...Debt and war are constant partners."
"...And the reason the USA dominated the world after WW2 was they had stayed out of both wars
for the first 2 years and made fortunes lending and selling arms to Britain (and some to the Axis).
It was the Jewish moneylenders of the Middle Ages who financed the various internal European wars, created
the first banks, and along with a Scot formed the Bank of England."
omewhere in a Greek jail, the former defence minister, Akis Tsochatzopoulos, watches the financial
crisis unfold. I wonder how partly responsible he feels? In 2013, Akis (as he is popularly known)
went down for 20 years, finally succumbing to the waves of financial scandal to which his name had
long been associated. For alongside the lavish spending, the houses and the dodgy tax returns, there
was bribery, and it was the €8m appreciation he received from the German arms dealer, Ferrostaal,
for the Greek government's purchase of Type 214 submarines, that sent him to prison.
There is this idea that the Greeks got themselves into this current mess because they paid themselves
too much for doing too little. Well, maybe. But it's not the complete picture. For the Greeks also
got themselves into debt for the oldest reason in the book – one might even argue, for the very reason
that public debt itself was first invented – to raise and support an army. The state's need for quick
money to raise an army is how industrial-scale money lending comes into business (in the face of
the church's historic opposition to usury). Indeed, in the west, one might even stretch to say that
large-scale public debt began as a way to finance military intervention in the Middle East – ie the
crusades. And just as rescuing Jerusalem from the Turks was the justification for massive military
spending in the middle ages, so the fear of Turkey has been the reason given for recent Greek spending.
Along with German subs, the Greeks have bought French frigates, US F16s and German Leopard 2 tanks.
In the 1980s, for example, the Greeks spent an average of 6.2% of their GDP on defence compared with
a European average of 2.9%. In the years following their EU entry, the Greeks were the world's fourth-highest
spenders on conventional weaponry.
So, to recap: corrupt German companies bribed corrupt Greek politicians to buy German weapons.
And then a German chancellor presses for austerity on the Greek people to pay back the loans
they took out (with Germans banks) at massive interest, for the weapons they bought off them in the
first place. Is this an unfair characterisation? A bit. It wasn't just Germany. And there were
many other factors at play in the escalation of Greek debt. But the postwar difference between the
Germans and the Greeks is not the tired stereotype that the former are hardworking and the latter
are lazy, but rather that, among other things, the Germans have, for obvious reasons, been restricted
in their military spending. And they have benefited massively from that.
Debt and war are constant partners. "The global financial crisis was due, at least in part,
to the war," wrote Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, calculating the cost of the US
intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq, pre-financial crash, to have been $3tn. Indeed, it was only
this year, back in March, that the UK taxpayer finally paid off the money we borrowed to fight the
first world war. "This is a moment for Britain to be proud of," said George Osborne, as he paid the
final instalment of £1.9bn. Really?
The phrase "military-industrial complex" is one of those cliches of 70s leftwing radicalism, but
it was Dwight D Eisenhower, a five-star general no less, who warned against its creeping power in
his final speech as president. "This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large
arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even
spiritual – is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the federal government … we
must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved;
so is the very structure of our society." Ike was right.
Speaking to reporters in Washington on Tuesday, Yiannis Bournous, the head of international
affairs for Greece's ruling Syriza party, heartily endorsed defense cuts as a way to meet
the fiscal targets of Greece's international creditors.
"We already proposed a 200 million euro cut in the defense budget," Bournous said at
an event hosted by the Center for Economic Policy and Research and the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation,
referring to cuts in Syriza's most recent proposal to its creditors. "We are willing to
make it even bigger -- it is a pleasure for us."
If the report is correct, ideology is playing just as much of a role as arithmetic in
preventing a resolution. The IMF's refusal to consider a plan that would lessen pension
cuts is consistent with itshistorically neoliberal political philosophy.
Giftedbutlazee 3 Jul 2015 11:52
we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought,
by the military–industrial complex.
Still as relevant now, 54 years after Eisenhower said it.
BritCol 3 Jul 2015 11:39
And the reason the USA dominated the world after WW2 was they had stayed out of both wars
for the first 2 years and made fortunes lending and selling arms to Britain (and some to the Axis).
It was the Jewish moneylenders of the Middle Ages who financed the various internal European wars,
created the first banks, and along with a Scot formed the Bank of England.
The moral? War makes money for profiteers, and puts those of us not killed or displaced in
debt for generations. Yet we morons keep waving flags every time a prime minister wants to send
us into another conflict.
barry1947brewster 3 Jul 2015 11:39
28 May 2014 The Royal United Services Institute estimated that since the Berlin Wall fell the
UK has spent £35 billion on wars. Now it is suggested that we bomb IS in Syria. Instead of printing
"Paid for by the Taxpayer" on medicines provided by the NHS we should have a daily costing of
our expenditure on bombs etc used in anger.
real tic 3 Jul 2015 11:23
Finally someone at Graun looks at this obvious contradiction present in the Greek governments
opposition to cut in defense spending (when they apparently accept cuts to pensions, healthcare
and other social services)! Well done Giles, but what's wrong with your colleagues in CIF, or
even in the glass bubbled editorial offices? Why has it taken so long to examine this aspect of
Greek debt?
Defense expenditure is also one reason some actors in creditor nations are content to keep
Greece in debt, even as far as to see its debts deepen, as long as it keeps on buying. while within
Greece, nationalism within the military has long been a way of containing far right tendencies.
It is notable but unsurprising that the current Minister of Defense in Greece is a far right
politician, allied to Tsipiras in the Syriza coalition.
Pollik 3 Jul 2015 11:03
"Throughout history, debt and war have been constant partners"
"...But it has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with a dysfunctional currency
union, a destructive neoliberal economic model enforced by treaty and an austerity regime maintained
to ensure a return to profitability on corporate terms."
.
"...No, I think Berlin and Brussels are behaving abominably, not so much in terms of what is decided,
but, as Pope Francis implied (there you are) without any consideration for the dignity of the Greek
people. Shaming, blaming, demonizing, threatening, giving the cold shoulder, to a small marginal country
who is supposedly part of your union."
.
"...I am against Syriza mate, but many commentors ignore the socioeconomic impact on the Greek population
and simplify or generalize things. Syriza is in power the past 3 or 5 months. The previous gov were
in power since 1974. Two parties, two families. Nepotism in politics is strong. "
.
"...Seamus is correct in his analysis. What is happening in Greece is akin to Democratic asphyxiation
by financial means. And those of us that believe in basic Democracy should be standing with Syriza and
the Greek people at this time. Neo-liberal dogma was always ugly. It's practical application is even
uglier. This will have serious implications for the Left in Europe as a whole but more imminently for
the British referendum vote due pretty soon."
.
"...After all, based on a leak of series of emails , Greek government was strictly following the instructions
of Troika during the past 5 years. "
.
"...we wouldn't be having this conversation if the private companies that lent money to Greece had
been made to eat their own losses.
But then neoliberalism isn't capitalism, not in the traditional sense. As has been proven beyond
reasonable doubt, neoliberals magically turn into socialists at the drop of a hat. Gains privatised,
losses socialised. In other words, they use the power of the state to collect economic rents. To call
this sure thing investing or risk-taking is pure propaganda.
"
.
"...I agree the EU élites are out to topple Syriza. The invective against Tsipras and ruthless shut
down of bank support to strike fear in the population show that clearly enough. Syriza is a mortal threat
to the noe-liberal order. I don't agree that Syriza is innocent in this drama, though. Its crisis management
has been abysmal. They know, or should, what is coming. when they threaten the EU élites."
.
"...This is a clash of ideologies. It's obvious if you listen to the spokepersons of Syriza and
the Left compared with the clapped out so-called politicians of ND and the Right. The Greeks and the
Spanish are the only countries where there's a popular moblisation against the robber barons who created
the crisis and are continuing to profit from the consequences. The left have been emasculated throughout
Europe "
.
"...My fear is that Syriza has lost the momentum, they have been unable to make the subject what
it should be, Neoliberal ideological economics. The fear mongering and the bank run neatly engineered
by Draghi and now the threat of shutting down the entire banking system - I'd be scared too. That's
hardball politics - but the main thing is people obey authority and the EU has authority as far as the
Greek people are concerned and they will back them into their very own graves."
.
"...Don't forget they are beyond the Great Depression now in terms of the economic catastrophe.
Population has been sliding since 2010."
.
"...Greeks elected Syriza out of desperation. The rest is just the usual anti-left cliches, not that
there's anything wrong with anti-left, however your understanding of the situation would be greatly
enhanced if you spent a minute Googling origins of this crisis. Perhaps EU/EZ is a bit complex for you."
.
"...The reason why the Troika objected to increases in certain taxes as part of Greece's economic
plans is twofold: (i) due to this historical lack of tax collection, increased revenue projections based
on increased taxes would be almost entirely illusory, and (ii) they targeted weak industries that Greece
needs to prosper and grow, and risked making Greece's economic situation worse. Many of the larger and
stronger of these multinational industries also had the capability of simply leaving Greece. Tsipras
refused to discuss sources of real and easy tax revenue, like tourism on the Greek islands. "
.
"...This is another round of banking bailouts using public money, cynically misnamed as bailing
out Greece. The troika need to launder the money through Greece to give to the banks. Greece get to
keep a very small percent for their troubles and taking more blame than they should."
.
"..."Europe is not under obligation to Greece" is nonsense. If Greece is a member state then EU
is indeed under obligation to support it, and it should do this effectively. It should not carry out
a policy that undermines its economy. Even if EU officials do not do this out of principles, they should
to do it to avoid loosing the support of the EU project."
.
"...The preliminary report of the Greek debt investigation (yes, there is one) will be out shortly.
From what I've read, much of the debt went to Greek banks and their foreign partners that indulged in
an aggressive loaning orgy and created a debt bubble inside the Greek economy. The banks were recapitalised
during the bailout with €80bn of state money that ended up as sovereign debt."
.
"...I had thought that Angie, Wolfie and Christine were perhaps just inept, but now I'm afraid they
may be executing a well laid plan. Perhaps they want to form a new entity: The People's Neo-liberal
Puppy Republic Of Greece. The steps: Blame all others; extort impossible amounts of invented "debts";people
who oppose you are labeled as traitors; prioritize German and French banks so they can be saved from
their own shitstorm and nationalize (i.e. charge the ordinary punter) all the fantasy cash that no-one's
ever seen; call a national emergency and impose martial law. Next is destroy all opposition and hand
everything over to private industry. A week ago, this would be very far-fetched, but now??"
It's now clear that Germany and Europe's powers that be don't just want the Greek government to
bend the knee. They want regime change. Not by military force, of course – this operation is being
directed from Berlin and Brussels, rather than Washington.
But that the German chancellor Angela Merkel and the troika of Greece's European and International
Monetary Fund creditors are out to remove the elected government in Athens
now seems beyond serious doubt. . Everything they have done in recent weeks in relation to the
leftist Syriza administraton, elected to turn the tide of austerity, appears designed to divide or
discredit Alexis Tsipras's government.
They were at it again today, when Tsipras offered what looked like almost complete acceptance
of the austerity package he had called a referendum on this Sunday. There could be no talks, Merkel
responded, until the ballot had taken place.
There's no suggestion of genuine compromise. The aim is apparently to humiliate Tsipras and his
government in preparation for its early replacement with a more pliable administration. We know from
the IMF documents prepared for last week's "final proposals" and
reported in the Guardian that the creditors were fully aware they meant unsustainable levels
of debt and self-defeating austerity for Greece until at least 2030, even on the most fancifully
optimistic scenario.
That's because, just as the
bailouts went to the banks not the country, and troika-imposed austerity has brought penury and
a debt explosion, these demands are really about power, not money. If they are successful in forcing
Tsipras out of office, a slightly less destructive package could then be offered to a more house-trained
Greek leader who replaced him.
Hence the European Central Bank's decision to switch off emergency funding of Greece's banks after
Tsipras called the referendum on an austerity scheme he had described as blackmail. That was what
triggered the bank closures and capital controls, which have taken Greece's crisis to a new level
this week as it became the first developed country to default on an IMF loan.
The EU authorities have a deep aversion to referendums, and countries are routinely persuaded
to hold them again if they give the wrong answer. The vote planned in Greece is no exception. A barrage
of threats and scaremongering was unleashed as soon as it was called.
One European leader after another warned Greeks to ignore their government and vote yes – or be
forced out of the eurozone, with dire consequences. Already the class nature of the divide between
the the
wealthier yes and more working-class no camps is stark. The troika's hope seems to be that if
Tsipras is defeated by fear of chaos, Syriza will split or be forced from office in short order.
The euro elite insists it is representing the interests of Portuguese or Irish taxpayers who have
to pick up the bill for bailing out the feckless Greeks – or will be enraged by any debt forgiveness
when they have been forced to swallow similar medicine. The reality is the other way round.
But Syriza insiders say there is little preparation for what anyway may be forced on them. The
relentless pressure of the EU bureaucracy demands a strong and clear-headed response. Right now,
for example, that means the Athens government immediately taking control of its banks, currently
shutting down all transactions.
The worst outcome of this crisis would be for Syriza to implement the austerity it was elected
to end. A yes vote in
next weekend's referendum, , if it goes ahead, would probably lead to the government's fall,
and almost certainly new elections.
Papistpal rredge 1 Jul 2015 21:21
"Implicit in your argument"
Always a ploy of course, when you find implicit, tacit, implied arguments in someone else's
thought, and then argue with it. No, I am not saying anything about the money. No, I think Berlin and Brussels are behaving abominably, not so much in terms of what is decided,
but, as Pope Francis implied (there you are) without any consideration for the dignity of the
Greek people. Shaming, blaming, demonizing, threatening, giving the cold shoulder, to a small
marginal country who is supposedly part of your union. There is NO excuse for your behavior
Ritoras Tijger 1 Jul 2015 20:57
I am against Syriza mate, but many commentors ignore the socioeconomic impact on the Greek
population and simplify or generalize things. Syriza is in power the past 3 or 5 months. The previous
gov were in power since 1974. Two parties, two families. Nepotism in politics is strong.
As said, because none answers your question that doesn't mean no is the answer.
Be open minded and less emotional. Few of the questions you ask you can google them and share
the findings with us. That will be more convincing!
peekaboo -> summicron 1 Jul 2015 20:54
The public in the 18 countries have not been consulted. Critical decisions affecting all other
members need direct approval. In fact referendums have almost never been held for EU membership
in candidate countries.
ineluctable2u -> tsimshatsui 1 Jul 2015 20:50
That's naive. Merkel is only making the Greek people suffer now in the hope that they will
lose their will and vote yes. This is ruthless politics by the troika and Merkel in particular.
martyc73 -> Gearóid Ó Loingsigh 1 Jul 2015 20:49
The North is a diversion - it cant raise taxes and relies on subvention from the British State
etc and you know this so don't be using that as an argument. The bank guarantee was also sold
in a totally different way to what was rolled out subsequently. And you know this too. Hums and
Haws???
Seamus is correct in his analysis. What is happening in Greece is akin to Democratic asphyxiation
by financial means. And those of us that believe in basic Democracy should be standing with Syriza
and the Greek people at this time. Neo-liberal dogma was always ugly. It's practical application
is even uglier. This will have serious implications for the Left in Europe as a whole but more
imminently for the British referendum vote due pretty soon.
Ritoras Tijger 1 Jul 2015 20:46
Bud, first of all you repeat you you you, it is very instructional, chill. Bravo to you as
well for making so focussed comments. I mean it even though you put all the fault on the Greek
gov.. Don't see you challenging yourself enough? Are the rest of stakeholders here perfect?
But, how do you know what Greece has done and what not?
Why the Troika have not reacted the same and with the same persistence as it does now during
the last 5 years to correct the direction of travel? You're 100% right about the Lagarde list.
The ministers who did not do nothing are in trials now.. However, I was in fact hoping that the
Troika could play a more active role in this and exercise influence to clear corruption. After
all, based on a leak of series of emails , Greek government was strictly following the instructions
of Troika during the past 5 years.
About the military expenses. I like defense and the military in fact. But! In a recession,
the Troika should have first said, save money there to invest in sectors like healthcare, education
etc. After all, Greece is very well equipped and supposedly is backed up by NATO allies.
calsation miceonparade 1 Jul 2015 20:43
I must say I enjoyed your takedown of oldships immensely. It seems he doesn't realise we
wouldn't be having this conversation if the private companies that lent money to Greece had been
made to eat their own losses.
But then neoliberalism isn't capitalism, not in the traditional sense. As has been proven beyond
reasonable doubt, neoliberals magically turn into socialists at the drop of a hat. Gains privatised,
losses socialised. In other words, they use the power of the state to collect economic rents.
To call this sure thing investing or risk-taking is pure propaganda.
Papistpal 1 Jul 2015 20:40
Never thought I'd agree with you, but I have to say, from this American capitalist perspective,
Berlin and Brussels have no sense of fair play and no respect for democracy. How can the EU call
itself a democracy if Germany has a veto because it has the big bucks. The US, I admit, would
like to do something similar, but we are constrained by maintaining at least some vestige of democratic
practice and sensibility. What is with the moralism, anyway. "Greece is wrong, so we get to do
whatever we want to them." Moralistic platitudes are not policy statements. Damn Merkel to hell
I agree the EU élites are out to topple Syriza. The invective against Tsipras and ruthless
shut down of bank support to strike fear in the population show that clearly enough. Syriza is
a mortal threat to the noe-liberal order.
I don't agree that Syriza is innocent in this drama, though. Its crisis management has been
abysmal. They know, or should, what is coming. when they threaten the EU élites. Why for
instance did they not impose capital controls the very first weekend after coming to power?? The
the country could have put up its defenses at a time of its own choosing, husbanded its resources
while negotiating - paid the IMF, keep banks open during this crucial referendum week. You don't
negotiate with 17 adversaries who all want to crush you, with one hand tied behind your back and
€ billions flowing out weekly. In three months you are on the floor.
castalla 1 Jul 2015 20:17
This is a clash of ideologies. It's obvious if you listen to the spokepersons of Syriza
and the Left compared with the clapped out so-called politicians of ND and the Right. The Greeks
and the Spanish are the only countries where there's a popular moblisation against the robber
barons who created the crisis and are continuing to profit from the consequences. The left have
been emasculated throughout Europe ... let's hope the OXI vote wins the day and Syriza gets
a mandate to argue for a restructure of the debt programme.
someoneionceknew -> FactPatrol 1 Jul 2015 20:10
The – European Social Model – is built on the fundamental principles built into Treaty establishing
the European Community (TEC):
… promotion of employment, improved living and working conditions … proper social protection,
dialogue between management and labour, the development of human resources with a view to lasting
high employment and the combating of exclusion.
It combines with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights to define an "underlying principle is
one of solidarity and cohesion: that economic growth must serve to boost overall social wellbeing,
and not take place at the expense of any section of society".
The ILO book says that while "there is no official definition of the European Social Model"
there is a long history of practice and dialogue that allows one to map out the main characteristics.
The ILO define "six main pillars":
1. "Increased Minimum Rights on Working Conditions".
2. "Universal and Sustainable Social Protection Systems".
3. "Inclusive Labour Markets".
4. "Strong and Well-Functioning Social Dialogue".
5. "Public Services and Services of General Interest".
6. "Social Inclusion and Social Cohesion".
miceonparade -> Exodus20 1 Jul 2015 20:08
Remember what Greece were like before joining the euro, in the 1990's?
Greece in the 1990s did not have 30% unemployment or 60% youth unemployment or a depression.
Things can only begin to get better after exiting the euro and reclaiming fiscal sovereignty which
can be used to put Greek people back to work.
while the European Social Model may have been called into question here and there before
the crisis, the list of changes in most elements and pillars of the European Social Model since
the crisis is formidable. While there are a few exceptions … all other trends show a general
withdrawal of the state from social policy, first through massive cuts in social expenditure
and reduced funding of education, health care and other public services, and second through
radical reforms in a number of areas, such as social dialogue, social protection, pensions,
labour market and social cohesion in general …
the changes are particularly severe in those countries that implemented an austerity package
under the direct influence of the Troika …
Hill0fBeans sjorsnotmine 1 Jul 2015 20:05
There are no poor Greeks in Greece any more...
You're a disgrace. Instead of trolling, read some facts every now and then.
- like the 4 out of 10 Greek children living beneath the poverty line
- or 44.8% of pensioners living on less than 665 euros/month
- or the 27% unemployed
Go crawl back underneath your bridge. This is not a place for trolls.
camerashy 1 Jul 2015 19:56
The closet fascists are all out in force to get rid of a democratically elected government!
Rule by corporations and banks is what you deserve and is what you are going to get in next 5
years ... so enjoy it.
deskandchair -> Danny Sheahan 1 Jul 2015 19:56
It can't go any other way, fiscal control means political control. The tragedy is that the
EZ was formed in the first place.
Lafcadio1944 1 Jul 2015 19:52
My fear is that Syriza has lost the momentum, they have been unable to make the subject
what it should be, Neoliberal ideological economics. The fear mongering and the bank run neatly
engineered by Draghi and now the threat of shutting down the entire banking system - I'd be scared
too. That's hardball politics - but the main thing is people obey authority and the EU has authority
as far as the Greek people are concerned and they will back them into their very own graves.
xsyfer John Smith 1 Jul 2015 19:51
It has that already. Don't forget they are beyond the Great Depression now in terms of
the economic catastrophe. Population has been sliding since 2010. There will be friends.
I reckon UK, us and Sweden might do something bilateral after the mess to keep Greece away from
Russia.
Might be too late then though
deskandchair Markdoug1 1 Jul 2015 19:51
You don't live in EZ or EU (although superficial thinking isn't exclusive to those outside
EZ) however you're correct, Greeks elected Syriza out of desperation. The rest is just the
usual anti-left cliches, not that there's anything wrong with anti-left, however your understanding
of the situation would be greatly enhanced if you spent a minute Googling origins of this crisis.
Perhaps EU/EZ is a bit complex for you.
Eleutheros 1 Jul 2015 19:46
But it has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with a dysfunctional currency
union, a destructive neoliberal economic model enforced by treaty and an austerity regime maintained
to ensure a return to profitability on corporate terms.
And that's the essence of the current situation, not just in the EU, but most "western" societies,
including Australia, where I live; our present government follows the policies of Thatcher and
Reagan and is trying to bring austerity to a rich and prosperous country.
Excellent article Seumas Milne, thank you.
Oscarinho 1 Jul 2015 19:43
Yes, there is a potential danger of a right-wing, if not neo-nazi, turn in Greece (and maybe,
only maybe in other places, too). But just tell me why does the author doesn't mention that without
the support of the right-wingers and neo-nazis called Anel and Golden Dawn Syriza would not have
a majority in their own country??? Syriza does not represent a European leftist alternative (ask
Renzi) but mere 2 million Greek voters supported by the far right that are taking their own society
hostage playing the nationalistic card.
Yes, we need another haircut and, yes, this radical austerity policies needs to be changed.
It's just not sustainable as we learned the hard way- But Syriza is looking for a system change
by any means with any partners (Golden Dawn, Putin's Russia, and even Erdogan). No thanks.
Forthestate ID5590609 1 Jul 2015 19:40
you and others believe that Greeks are now somehow inherently entitled to this new and vastly
improved standard of living...
Just more bollocks! How do you square "this new and vastly improved standard of living" with
the reality since the crisis hit? Most analysts agree that the decline has seen Greece lose everything
that it acquired during the years you refer to, and more, and I repeat, it is a decline probably
unparalleled in peacetime. Where is the recognition of the catastrophe that has hit the Greek
people in your ridiculous assertion that they are enjoying a new and vastly improved standard
of living?
John Smith 1 Jul 2015 19:32
Looking at the headline photo of Merkel, the caption: Who will rid me of this troublesome Greek
popped into my head.
Then I read the article above.
Nothing would please the Euromeddlers more than a military coup, or a revolt by the coalition
partners.
Because what this crisis is exposing is how after five fruitless years, the geniuses at the
heart of the EU, couldn't grasp that among their many errors of judgement, it's no good loaning
a bankrupt money to pay off debt, the Euro has actually worked against the economic expansion
of the Eurozone both before and after the crash, and by failing to spot the dishonesty of previous
Greek administrations or act, it has shown the world that their system is weak, cannot tackle
a crisis, and despite years of rhetoric will have to do the one thing it said would never ever
happen, expel a member state and write off tens of billions of wasted euros.
In my earlier analysis I have already explained why the Euro was a currency launched half cocked,
and that without taking into account the needs of individual nations, it is doomed in the long
term, to fall to pieces.
I fear that whatever happens now, Greece is going to find itself with few friends, and at least
five years of pain and emigration of its youth.
ID5590609 Forthestate 1 Jul 2015 19:26
The level of Greek tax collection from all sectors and classes in Greek society is abysmal.
Tspiras and Varoufakis do not deny this is a problem, and other than pride or foolishness, I question
why you do. Some economists suggests that as much as 39% of the Greek economy is effectively underground.
The other purported statistics are simply red herrings to confuse this simple fact (and also avoid
dealing with the rampant other corruption and incompetence inherent in the Greek economy).
The reason why the Troika objected to increases in certain taxes as part of Greece's economic
plans is twofold: (i) due to this historical lack of tax collection, increased revenue projections
based on increased taxes would be almost entirely illusory, and (ii) they targeted weak industries
that Greece needs to prosper and grow, and risked making Greece's economic situation worse. Many
of the larger and stronger of these multinational industries also had the capability of simply
leaving Greece. Tsipras refused to discuss sources of real and easy tax revenue, like tourism
on the Greek islands.
The fact that Greece's economy has contracted over 25% is also not particularly relevant. The
larger GDP since joining the Euro represented a tremendously bloated bubble based on irresponsible
public and private debt. The current GPD still has ample room to decrease before it accurately
reflects the true size, scope and productivity of the Greek economy (and even reflects Greece's
pre-Euro GDP). Also noteworthy is the fact that Greek incomes nearly tripled since it joined the
Euro Apparently, you and others believe that Greeks are now somehow inherently entitled to this
new and vastly improved standard of living (more impressive than some other Eurozone members who
are poorer and helped fund Greece's bailout) despite the fact that it was entirely unearned and
based on fraud and the largesse of the taxpayers of other nations.
Exodus20 Tijger 1 Jul 2015 19:26
This is another round of banking bailouts using public money, cynically misnamed as bailing
out Greece. The troika need to launder the money through Greece to give to the banks. Greece get
to keep a very small percent for their troubles and taking more blame than they should.
JordiLlull neilmack 1 Jul 2015 19:24
Who are "Most people"? I dont think there are polls, but few people in Europe believe that
the fault lies exclusively on a government who has been there for 6 months, and is trying to prevent
the policies that have led to a 25% loss of GDP. Particularly since the troika has made it damn
clear that it does not plan to accept ANY plan. Sure, some have bought Daily Mirror arguments
that the Greeks spent the bailouts on Ouzo, but informed people know that the vast majority was
used to pay back interests, and that Greek retirement pensions are around 300 euro/month. I would
rather argue that "most people" in Europe who have traditionally supported EU are starting to
raise questions about what EU's role in this crisis.
"Europe is not under obligation to Greece" is nonsense. If Greece is a member state then
EU is indeed under obligation to support it, and it should do this effectively. It should not
carry out a policy that undermines its economy. Even if EU officials do not do this out of principles,
they should to do it to avoid loosing the support of the EU project.
deskandchair truecomrade 1 Jul 2015 19:22
Fiscal control = political control, it can be no other way.
FourtyTwo sjorsnotmine 1 Jul 2015 19:21
More than 30% of the population are officially below the poverty line.
The preliminary report of the Greek debt investigation (yes, there is one) will be out
shortly. From what I've read, much of the debt went to Greek banks and their foreign partners
that indulged in an aggressive loaning orgy and created a debt bubble inside the Greek economy.
The banks were recapitalised during the bailout with €80bn of state money that ended up as sovereign
debt.
MTSK87 privateindustry44 1 Jul 2015 19:13
You are an ignorant piece of work aren't you Sir? Look at the facts before spreading lies.
The Greeks work (the ones still in employment that is) work more hours than any other EU citizen
( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17155304
), the rich and powerful did not pay taxes no, but your average 20-30 something year old with
a wage of 400 euros a month that has to go back to living with his/her parents can barely afford
coffee never mind pay taxes. And free money? Please the "creditors" have NEVER given anyone "free"
money. Germany never gave away anything for free (see treaties imposed on Greece to buy old German
weapons). Greece was manipulated and suffered for that "free money".
emordnilap Mark Riggle 1 Jul 2015 19:10
I had thought that Angie, Wolfie and Christine were perhaps just inept, but now I'm afraid
they may be executing a well laid plan. Perhaps they want to form a new entity: The People's Neo-liberal
Puppy Republic Of Greece. The steps: Blame all others; extort impossible amounts of invented "debts";people
who oppose you are labeled as traitors; prioritize German and French banks so they can be saved
from their own shitstorm and nationalize (i.e. charge the ordinary punter) all the fantasy cash
that no-one's ever seen; call a national emergency and impose martial law. Next is destroy all
opposition and hand everything over to private industry. A week ago, this would be very far-fetched,
but now??
They (Hollywood staple) should be taxed the same way as tobacco or controlled substances. Full
of violence, harmful to mental well-being of children an adults alike.
HollyOldDog wereallfuckedboy 29 Jun 2015 18:54
The UK government should have given the Hollywood WWW2 films the the J rating for JUNK.
Doors2distant 29 Jun 2015 18:29
What an excellent idea, the quality can only improve. No car chases, cop porn, war porn or
saccharin sentimentality.
Ieuan 29 Jun 2015 17:15
" he wants to introduce a sales tax that will be used to increase funds for local productions."
In just about every market Hollywood films gross the most. But in many markets (fewer and fewer
as US companies take over their own local distribution) they are distributed by local distributors,
who then invest some of their profits into local productions - hence some of the Hollywood blockbusters'
moneymaking gets routed into supporting the local industry.
If (as I suspect) the Russian distributors of Hollywood product are owned by Hollywood studios,
and do not produce anything locally, then I think it's fair enough that the government steps in
and routes some of the money made into local industry.
olliemaple 29 Jun 2015 16:52
Exceptionally right decision indeed. It's only fair that whoever watches that Hollywood crap
should be extra taxed in favor of positive domestic productions. Not unlike cigarette sales.
Alderbaran 29 Jun 2015 10:36
Many Russian films could be considered to be great and to me trump much of what comes out of
Hollywood. However, it was a shame that Medinsky saw no merit in Leviathan and I'm probably one
of many who see Medinsky's actions as political in nature, especially given the criterea for state
funding of films in Russia.
It is a shame to see the state increasingly policing the film industry in Russia but I'm certain
that creative directors will still be able to work within the constraints.
Tilipon -> dropthemchammer 29 Jun 2015 08:24
countries who passed through state coup. Look in root but not in a peak...
I can only imagine the intensity of "consultations" between Washington and Berlin now... . "...The present circumstances in Greece were inherited by the current government from the previous
right-wing government, which managed to bring them out by faithfully following the austerity prescriptions
of the Troika. However both left and right-wing governments of the past, who created and hid the enormous
debt, are also to blame." . "...The documents show that the IMF's baseline estimate – the most likely outcome – is that
Greece's debt would still be 118% of GDP in 2030, even if it signs up to the package of tax and spending
reforms demanded. " . "...This is nothing more than a large-scale payday loan scam. Greece will never get past the
loan sharks and will constantly have to borrow just to pay off the interest. I'd rather default and
eat beans for a year while starting fresh than eat beans for 20 years paying off old debt. You can call
them lazy, you can call them thieves but - if they play their cards right - you can also call them "debt
free"." . "...The public debt of Greece existed BEFORE the recent election. The cruel conditions inflicted
upon Greece by its "partners" existed BEFORE the recent election. The crisis existed BEFORE the recent
election." . "...Lending more billions to Greece so they can repay the interest on previous billions loand and
those new loans repayed by cuts to pensions and more privatisation of public assets...blatant transference
of cash from those who can't afford it to those who don't need it. Hopefully the Greek people
give a resounding middle finger to the EU/IMF. And if I hear another muppet crack on about 'the Greeks
ought to pay their taxes' I'll bloody lose my temper. D some reading for gawds sake. It really isn't
that hard." . "...I would have thought that a "senior german conservative politician" telling the Times that
whatever happens Tsipras must be forced from office is an historic blow to the EU. Now, at least, people
know what it is and who it is for." . "...If they actually wanted payment, they'd be reasonable. But payment isn't their priority, these
organisations want power over Greece."
The Greek banks and former conservative governments, you mean.
You and plenty of other brainwashed idiots around here seem to think that individual, working
class Greeks had something to do with this. Of course, as always, the banks and politicians who
actually caused this got off scott free, with taxpayer money, to cause the next big financial
crisis.
HaroldP -> Nottodaymate 30 Jun 2015 21:29
Banksters, what did you expect, honesty, morality, humanity, financial expertise? Bailouts
from citizens, that's what you expected? The poor darlings can't even run a bank when they can
print money. Incompetant scum. Regards, Harry.
Jazzfunk23 -> workingclass2 30 Jun 2015 21:28
In recent years most of this mess was presided over by liberal conservatives...
Germania offers a regime of permanent debt servitude to pay for its failed banks:
The documents, drawn up by the so-called troika of lenders, support Greece's argument that
it needs substantial debt relief for a lasting economic recovery.
The documents show that the IMF's baseline estimate – the most likely outcome – is that
Greece's debt would still be 118% of GDP in 2030, even if it signs up to the package of tax
and spending reforms demanded.
clematlee Danny Sheahan 30 Jun 2015 21:25
What you have in the USA is TENS of millions of people who don't have any US dollars while
in Manhattan flats sell for millions.
AlamoSexual 30 Jun 2015 21:20
This is nothing more than a large-scale payday loan scam. Greece will never get past the
loan sharks and will constantly have to borrow just to pay off the interest. I'd rather default
and eat beans for a year while starting fresh than eat beans for 20 years paying off old debt.
You can call them lazy, you can call them thieves but - if they play their cards right - you can
also call them "debt free".
UnevenSurface Danny Sheahan 30 Jun 2015 21:12
Greece will still be here. There will of course be enormous poverty (in various forms) in the
short term - but even the FT says that the GDP will bounce up 6% quite quickly. After that, they'll
be the cheapest holiday destination in Europe, exporting the cheapest wine and olive oil. The
GDP could expand by 25%, up to pre-austerity levels. Excluding macro economic factors out of our
control, I would be truly surprised if they aren't better off - overall - within five years.
HaroldP -> owl905 30 Jun 2015 21:12
The public debt of Greece existed BEFORE the recent election. The cruel conditions inflicted
upon Greece by its "partners" existed BEFORE the recent election. The crisis existed BEFORE the
recent election. Obviously Tsipras did not "wreck his country." His fellow citizens elected
his party to fix an existing crisis. He won the election with a proposal of how to do that. He
has deviated only slightly from his promises. I find him to be a "hero" in that he could teach
the political class of Europe the importance of keeping the agreement between the state and the
citizens. It is heroic indeed to be the honest politician of Europe. He has my respect. Regards,
Harry.
Paul Collins 30 Jun 2015 21:12
Lending more billions to Greece so they can repay the interest on previous billions loand
and those new loans repayed by cuts to pensions and more privatisation of public assets...blatant
transference of cash from those who can't afford it to those who don't need it. Hopefully
the Greek people give a resounding middle finger to the EU/IMF.
And if I hear another muppet crack on about 'the Greeks ought to pay their taxes' I'll bloody
lose my temper. D some reading for gawds sake. It really isn't that hard.
malenkylitso -> owl905 30 Jun 2015 21:08
Greece was forced into a corner, then took a bailout which less than 10% went to the Greeks. The
rest went to the banks.
Sounds like a protection racket.
SystemD 30 Jun 2015 21:07
This is not just about Greece; the impact of a Greek default go much wider. The IMF (and the
Troika) has to be seen to be taking a hard line. If they don't, then their credibility with the
rest of the world diminishes, particularly in Africa. The Germans are worried about the Euro as
a currency; the Deutchmark was given up on the promise of stability, and the 1920's are still
- just - within living memory. There is a lot of fear behind their stance. Stock markets generally
are worried about the instability the situation is causing. They don't want Greece crushed - they
just want a stable situation with predictable outcomes. Volatility is not in their interest. And
Greece needs money and help to try to cure the cancer of corruption in its economy.
Greece cannot pay back its debt. Unless the creditors agree to a very long term of repayment (at
least 50 years) at reasonable rates, the only real options are for Greece to leave the Euro zone
and go back to the drachma, or the debt must be written off, with the proviso that there will
be no new loans, and Greece will have to rebuild and finance its economy from its own resources.
Stanley Wallings 30 Jun 2015 21:06
I feel sorry for the Greek people - they've had 5 hard years and for nothing. Grexit will be
horrible for those who have to stay in Greece. The 'haves' have already moved their money and
can just hop on a flight out. I hope Tsipras isn't driving the bus over a cliff for no reason
other than to piss off the Troika. I hope he has a plan C
medicynic RobWilson73 30 Jun 2015 21:06
What a great idea! Let's get rid of pensions worldwide, then no one has any cause for complaint.
I'm pleased to see that you are one of those who, when pensions in the UK increase say: "No thanks.
I don't need it and don't deserve it. It only makes me fat anyway".
In my experience in British industry, workforces are rife with 'tax-dodging, CSA dodging, mendacious,
lazy wankers', a lot of who deserve a cut in wages never mind a pension.
Monkeybus 30 Jun 2015 21:06
SQUEEZE THE GREEKS, WRING THEM OUT, RINSE THEM. Other xenophobic pronouncements are available.
SHIFTLESS, LAZY, FECKLESS. Can't they print their own money like more advanced nations?
We are all in this together, err, hang on.
Imagine if Gordon Brown had taken us into the Euro after all?
clematlee FakeyWilson 30 Jun 2015 21:06
and the west arms heart eating loonies in North Africa and invades and kills millions of people
in the process, Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, Grenada, Korea, Panama, Syria and the list goes on. Watch
the EX USA secetary of state on youtube saying the starvation of 500,000 children was a price
worth paying, by the west imposed on Iraq. It was starvation to death. Her name was Madalin Allbrite.
Don't worry about losing some so called freedoms to stop Allbite and her ilk.
Tappert Heintz 30 Jun 2015 21:03
"Greek failure to make IMF payment deals historic blow to eurozone"
Sounds like the Daily Mail. Nonsense.
owl905 Iheartbill 30 Jun 2015 21:02
They're not barred from international trade, but it's really scewed to cash and barter. There
simply isn't the mechanism to manage the exchange rates. No one outside the country will want
rapidly devaluating and 'only-good-in-Greece' drachmas. Greeks don't realize what's coming after
15 years of Euro stability.
One big surprise from them is that pipeline deal with Russia. That needs a lot of capital -
Russia is walking into even more problems if it starts forwarding debt financing to Greece to
get the pipeline built.
The tourist industry won't be hit by it (except for foreign import items that are part of the
industry) - it will be hit by the drachma, that has the profit from the industry shrink to nothing.
Danny Sheahan Justitiadroit 30 Jun 2015 21:01
Look at the Eurozone growth rates for the last 5 years, its a basket case.
The Greeks have messed up over the years but the Euroland is no case study in growth.
rberger ArundelXVI 30 Jun 2015 21:00
Actually there is very little debt servicing involved. The 29 billion actually includes debt
repayments (principal, not interest). Greece is not paying any interest for most of its bailout
money until after 2020, but of course needs to pay interest on the bonds that it has issued itself.
ScanDiscNow Danny Sheahan 30 Jun 2015 21:00
Pre Euro Greek total production increased by some 600% between 1960 and 2001 while German total
production increased by a mere 255%. However, throw in the Euro and the subsequent 15 years has
German total production up 20% while Greece total production is down 26%
ZeroHedge.
Anthony Apergis owl905 30 Jun 2015 20:57
And herein lies the issue my friend! The strictly monetary considerations that underpin your
rationale betray the disintegration of what started in Rome as a visionary peace project for the
peoples of Europe to an economic, neoliberal construct whose only concern is %s and profits. Surely,
you must be able to see this. I would strongly advise you to read the preamble to the Treaty of
Rome (1957).
MonsieurBoombastic FilthyRichBanker 30 Jun 2015 20:54
The capital controls in Greece apply to cash withdrawals and overseas transfers so this won't
affect things like internet banking where cash is transferred within the system. The things you
mention are probably still going on in most cases.
moderatextremist 30 Jun 2015 20:51
When Greece joined the EU, the corrupt government went on a spending spree of EU money, and
used Goldman Sachs to cover it up. It is those politicians and Goldman Sachs, the vampire squid
on the face of the world, that should be put on trial. I fear this development will be hurtful
to an awful lot of good people, while the arseholes that created the mess will get away with it......
yet again.
sefertzi7 30 Jun 2015 20:48
The worst possible outcome. Now the crooks who caused the debt mountain in the first place
(Papandreou x2, Simitis, Karamanlis, Samaras et al) will come back to power, reluctantly do what
they are told with the quid pro quo of a blind eye turned while they carry on in their corrupt
old ways.
Call that a revolution? More like crash and burn to me.
raymundlully -> Kaiama 30 Jun 2015 20:45
If the debt is forgiven and goes away.
Greece has in arrears to private pharma companies ,I doubt they'll extend credit orwant paying
in toy Drachmas.
Cash-strapped Greece has racked up mounting debts with international drugmakers and now owes the
industry more than 1.1 billion euros ($1.2 billion), a leading industry official said on Wednesday.
The rising unpaid bill reflects the growing struggle by the nearly bankrupt country to muster
cash, and creates a dilemma for companies under moral pressure not to cut off supplies of life-saving
medicines.
Richard Bergstrom, director general of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and
Associations, told Reuters his members had not been paid by Greece since December 2014. They are
owed money by both hospitals and state-run health insurer EOPYY.
MalleusSacerdotum 30 Jun 2015 20:45
If Greece were a private or public company and continued to 're-finance' in the manner proposed
by the IMF, its directors would be charged with insolvent trading.
They are getting a lot of stick for admitting that they are effectively bankrupt.
It is at least an honest admission of the state of play.
Omniscience Jazzfunk23 30 Jun 2015 20:42
They turned a primary deficit into a surplus within the last 5 years
Right wing conservative neo-libs corrupt elitists. The Troika is refusing to allow Greece to
tax the wealthy corrupt tax avoider thieves, while forcing more of the workers into poverty.
Vee1984 30 Jun 2015 20:40
It is a well known fact that many Greeks like to avoid paying taxes just as there are many
other European countries who avoid paying tax whether on an individual or on a company basis.
The European Union has created this problem over a long period of time by allowing countries
to borrow more than required and funds being used to build eg airports in Spain which are unused
and unnecessary due ro their geographical location and many speculative projects undertaken throughout
the EU. The reason for lending such sums, with a total disregard as to how interest payments can
be repaid, never mind repaying the loans, has been done to enrich the lenders who, as we all know,
love to gamble on how much money can be made. A risk game, played out every day, and, I suspect,
some bets even being placed on the odds of Greece defaulting in some hedge fund offices somewhere
in Europe. It should be noted that Spain and Italy have loaned money to Greece. How can this be
when both countries have loans via the EU etc? Again, investors after interest on the loans with
a total disregard as to their own countries finances. Greece is a democracy and should not give
in to the rhetoric coming from the IMF or ECB. Why not? Neither can afford to and neither can
Germany. Interesting days ahead. I truly hope that in the name of Democracy, the Greek people
will vote NO in the referendum no matter the increasing hardship this will bring. The EU really
need to be extremely mindful of the fact that abject poverty and the continuation of austerity
gives rise to discontent and a surge in popularity to right-wing extremist views.
Anthony Apergis Justitiadroit 30 Jun 2015 20:39
Indeed, the EU has mutated from a union of the peoples of Europe, into a market-driven transnational
institution governed by bankers and solely concerned with GDP growth rates (and I mean this in
a strictly non-communist/leftist way).
Dannybald DavidRees 30 Jun 2015 20:36
As a German voter I would never vote for the right wing neo-lib corporatist Fascist scum in
government. The hypocrisy of this regime is turning millions of Europeans against Germany and
rightly so. The London conference of 1953 halved German debt owed for destroying Europe. Greek
debt was 100% of GDP in 2008 and that had nothing to do with Tspiras.
Euro zone countries have already extended the maturities of their loans to Greece from 15 to 30
years and reduced the interest rates on some to just 0.5 basis points above their borrowing cost.
They also granted Greece a 10-year moratorium on interest payments on the second bailout loan
from the euro zone rescue fund.
FlashRat 30 Jun 2015 20:35
I would have thought that a "senior german conservative politician" telling the Times that
whatever happens Tsipras must be forced from office is an historic blow to the EU. Now, at least,
people know what it is and who it is for.
PennyForYourComment DavidRees 30 Jun 2015 20:35
Which is why the Eurozone concept is fundamentally broken.
Imagine if every time one US went into a bad recession, all the other states had to vote on whether
to send them money, with all the governors having to agree... and then trying to post their own
conditions on how that States economy be run before the money were delivered. It would be an unworkable
mess, especially given acrimony and resentment between states and regions (North vs. Deep south
vs. midwest, vs. west coast, etc)... The country would sooner or later fall apart as States started
rebelling and quitting. It would be absurd.
But somehow Europe is supposed to run on exactly this system. If you are going to have a single
currency, then you need common fiscal mechanism binding the areas together, because these act
as automatic financial stabilizers when there's a regional crash. If Florida's economy crashes,
money automatically pours in from everywhere else to cover unemployment insurance, etc, via the
Federal government. No similar thing happens with Greece in Europe.
BunyipBluegum theoldgreyfox 30 Jun 2015 20:34
The default you are referring to is a recent one (2014) - I was referring to the previous default
in 2001, which was followed by a significant period of economic growth and recovery. I am not
suggesting that a default is always the best solution in such circumstances, nor that the immediate
fallout won't be problematic. However in any case the example of Iceland clearly demonstrates
that a default can be the best option economically in some circumstances.
It's the same principle as bankruptcy: if your debts reach a level that can never be paid back,
it's better to wipe the slate clean and start again, even though the cost of doing this may be
to slide back down the snake to the bottom of the board.
Anthony Apergis 30 Jun 2015 20:33
To sum up:
Roughly €170b initial Greek debt +
Roughly €150b financial aid to Greece aimed at repaying initial creditors (NOT the restructuring
of the Greek economy) + austerity measures while doubling an already unsustainable debt = EU solidarity
to a member- state.
And the above does not even take into account whose economy did the initial debt prop up. I cannot
believe that the people of Europe cannot see what the REAL problem is.
The EU - and by extension Europe - is truly in trouble.
raymundlully Franco87 30 Jun 2015 20:32
UK had third world inflation in the 1970s it took the IMF medicine broke the unions in the
80s and created a home fit for bankers.
What about economic slums like Portugal and Italy.
They are much worse off now than Greece was at the start of its crisis. It will not take much
to have Italy in crisis.
Portugal is heading for an abandoned state after its crisis so its not much of a threat now, how
it will pay its debt in the future is anyone's guess. Though it is safe to presume that a country
in such decline will have less people paying tax.
They'll want more than billion.
RGBargie 30 Jun 2015 20:31
It looks like Greece might soon be sailing into uncharted waters.
I can just imagine what the consequences will be for the EZ if Greece goes alone, and then
makes a success of their new found freedom. I imagine there might well be others ready to abandon
ship if that happens.
Westmorlandia BunyipBluegum 30 Jun 2015 20:31
Point taken, but whatever the Greeks don't pay back to the EFSF will have to be paid by other
Eurozone countries, as that's how the EFSF guarantees work. So it isn't just about whether it's
fair for Greeks to pay for what their government borrowed, but whether it's more fair for Greeks
to pay or for everyone else in the Eurozone to pay for what elected Greek governments borrowed.
Reality has said for some time that Greece can't pay, and therefore some of it should have
been written off. But that's more about pragmatism than fairness.
FilthyRichBanker Wily Ways 30 Jun 2015 20:30
He could do what the rest of Europe does and make paying taxes compulsory rather than voluntary
for a start.
Cut the bloated Public sector and halve the defence budget in line with the rest of Europe - and
sell off the $50bn of assets they previously agreed to.
Bardamux Michael Richard Allen 30 Jun 2015 20:29
Ignorant it is then. So i'll explain it to you step by step.
1) If you deposit money in a bank, you are loaning the bank your money. And in many countries
you will get a small interest rate for it.
2) it is considered a short term loan, because you can withdraw it at (almost) any time.
3) Remember Icesave in the UK ? That bank did not pay its depositors
4) Other banks received hundreds of billions of euro's / pounds / dollars
5) Banks could loan money at almost 0% even with terrible collateral to help them survive
6) Greece will pay its debt if they receive half or even less help than the Dutch and UK banks
did.
Get it now or do you need more steps to help you out ?
Euro zone countries have already extended the maturities of their loans to Greece from 15 to 30
years and reduced the interest rates on some to just 0.5 basis points above their borrowing cost.
They also granted Greece a 10-year moratorium on interest payments on the second bailout loan
from the euro zone rescue fund.
Omniscience 30 Jun 2015 20:27
To be fair, they have only been lying about reform since joining the Euro.
2005 : Greece faces up to taxing times
Greece plans to offset a projected shortfall this year in tax revenues with a €2bn securitisation
deal, in spite of European Commission strictures against the use of one-off measures to reduce
the budget deficit. George Alogoskoufis, finance minister, said in an interview with the Financial
Times that the transaction would enable Greece to achieve this year's budget deficit target. He
also stressed securitisation was "a temporary measure that will give us time to bring about permanent
structural corrections".
Joaquin Almunia, the European Union's budget commissioner, signalled acceptance of this year's
planned transaction during a visit to Athens last week but urged Greece to accelerate structural
reforms next year.
The problems of Greece haven't happened since "a radical populist party" was elected. On the
contrary, the present government was elected because of the problems.
Danny Sheahan outsiderwithinsight 30 Jun 2015 20:23
Not at all, it means that Italy and Portugal are next.
If Greece leaves and its hard to see how they will not at this stage then the Euro has become
a non-permanent currency arrangement that the EU or ECB will not defend its integrity.
That marks it out as different from every other currency in the world. Only currencies that have
allowed that in the past went on to be all failed entities.
CambridgeAfterDark 30 Jun 2015 20:25
Splendid, send a message to all banker gangsters everywhere.
Best way to deal with a bully, is hit them back.
Guess the right-wing trolls on here look pretty silly now, all saying last week the FTSE would
rally upwards upon a Grexit!
BunyipBluegum robbyevans 30 Jun 2015 20:20
The present circumstances in Greece were inherited by the current government from the previous
right-wing government, which managed to bring them out by faithfully following the austerity prescriptions
of the Troika.
However both left and right-wing governments of the past, who created and hid the enormous debt,
are also to blame.
coxinutant 30 Jun 2015 20:16
A continued austerity programme makes it unlikely that Greece will be able to grow economically.
Continued economic pain-> lower ability to repay debt. So all those people who get on their hig
horse and demand that Greece repay its debts should keep in mind that debt cannot be repaid when
you have 25% unemployment, when wages plummet and people cannot spend to make the economy grow.
If austerity had been the miracle cure, it would have worked years ago. So stop bandying about
terms like 'communist' and 'marxist' and all that BS. The current government in Greece did not
create the crisis, the austerity, the 25% unemployment. The crisis was created by an irresponsible
banking sector, which was then bailed out by your money (yeah ordinary Joe, looking at you). Austerity
was hatched by The IMF, against the advice of sensible economists...
And it hasn't worked. And I am sure the 'marxist' policies of Syriza did not create the enormous
unemployment that Greece faces. Last time that occured in Europe, fascist governments came to
power, aided by pro-fascist symptahies in France and the UK...
BunyipBluegum -> peter nelson 30 Jun 2015 20:14
It was the Greek governments of the mid 2000s, who were corrupt and nepotistic. If it was them
and their wealthy friends who were going to carry the can for this, then I'd say well deserved.
But the whole reason why Syriza is against the austerity program is that it doesn't greatly affect
these people, but it DOES greatly affect ordinary Greeks, especially the working class, elderly
and vulnerable.
Also it hasn't worked. If you were prescribed a foul medicine by your doctor that made you feel
sick and weak, and then failed to cure your problem, would you be inclined to go back for another
dose?
AtomsNest -> echoniner 30 Jun 2015 20:14
If they actually wanted payment, they'd be reasonable. But payment isn't their priority, these
organisations want power over Greece.
"...Actually 90% of the money went off to pay the private creditors (French and German banks
who had invested in Greece). Only 10% amount of the loan ever went into the Greek economy but that
was more than balanced by the the damage that austerity politics did to the country." . "...So the IMF and the Eurozone have in effect been playing debt collectors for French and
German banks, and have attempted to bestow the costs on Greece. Is there any way that could possibly
ever have worked?" . "... Lagarde, is getting smacked and rightly so; she, Merkel et al, all thought they could
dictate to and bully Greece, and Greece would roll over, well it hasn't." . "...Only because the banks were too big to fail and therefore letting them crash would have
crashed the entire economy. If you ignore that, in theory holding the banks responsible for the
crisis they created and making them insolvent instead of using QE to bail them out could
theoretically have been something that held the right people to blame, and didn't punish ordinary
people with austerity.
It's pretty smart of the banks as they got themselves into a position where, when they screw up,
other people have to pay the price." . "...Tsipras called them "criminals". I guess it is more close to the truth." . "...Greece cannot pay, but no one can say that as it undermines the whole financial system,
which is based on confidence. We can't 'write off Greek debt' (as Jeremy Corbyn helpfully suggests)
as no indebted countries would feel the need to pay off debts again - they'd just wait for the
'Greece' solution."
The big problem right now in Greece is lack of liquidity to operate the economy. There
simply is not enough money in circulation.
If newly issued Greek euros are not traded on international markets and they are legal
tender in Greece and the Greek government accepts them as tax payments, there is no market
value. You have an assigned value, like in other controlled systems. So you can have a high
velocity of circulation as people spend them quickly, but no problem of devaluation - unless
the Greek government would issue Greek euros to total excess.
Suppose you are a shopkeeper in Greece and your pensioner customers pay you in Greek euros.
And suppose, the Greek law says you can pay your suppliers in Greek euros and the supplier can
pay his taxes in Greek euros. In that case, the Greek government will need capital controls to
ration the supplier's euros to buy imports. But that's likely to stimulate local production
and be a plus for the Greek economy.
Local fiat currencies do work.
It is a rather different and probably not very acceptable example, but the Cuban 'CUC', is
not backed at 1:1 against the US dollar in an open market. Its value is the fiat of the Cuban
government. No open market trading means no devaluation by market forces.
Trumbledon 30 Jun 2015 10:03
We never had an advanced economy actually asking for that kind of thing, delayed
payment
They still haven't - Greece is no more an advanced economy than a person who buys a
houseful of luxury items using credit cards is a wealthy person.
Greece has virtually no industry worth mentioning and virtually no agriculture; the Greek
economy is almost entirely reliant on tourism.
Greece has a smaller GDP than Thailand or Argentina, Greece's economy is roughly half the size
of Vietnam's. How on earth can Greece be considered an 'Advanced economy'? That's claptrap.
mikeyk1 Omniscience 30 Jun 2015 10:03
Actually 90% of the money went off to pay the private creditors (French and German
banks who had invested in Greece). Only 10% amount of the loan ever went into the Greek
economy but that was more than balanced by the the damage that austerity politics did to the
country.
Adam Fo 30 Jun 2015 09:57
It's probably worth adding here that Argentina did pay off it's IMF loans in full as well
as the modest amount of interest charged. One of the reasons they could do that is they are a
more resource based economy than Greece. Increasing commodity prices during that period helped
them.
Like Greece holders of Governments bonds saw massive haircuts. 50% (100 billion euro) in the
case of Greece in 2012.
Thalia01 ThinBanker 30 Jun 2015 09:55
Only because the banks were too big to fail and therefore letting them crash would have
crashed the entire economy.
If you ignore that, in theory holding the banks responsible for the crisis they created and
making them insolvent instead of using QE to bail them out could theoretically have been
something that held the right people to blame, and didn't punish ordinary people with
austerity.
It's pretty smart of the banks as they got themselves into a position where, when they screw
up, other people have to pay the price.
Hottentot 30 Jun 2015 09:40
Sorry, but the Guardian can't compare Argentina, Zimbabwe, Somalia and Sudan, to Greece, as
none of them were / are in the Euro. Lagarde, is getting smacked and rightly so; she,
Merkel et al, all thought they could dictate to and bully Greece, and Greece would roll over,
well it hasn't. It's about time others started telling the IMF (interesting that it's
referred to as the Washington-based organisation) and the EU who are all about 'protecting'
their interests, to sod off.
So the IMF and the Eurozone have in effect been playing debt collectors for French and
German banks, and have attempted to bestow the costs on Greece. Is there any way that could
possibly ever have worked?
bonkthebonk -> Adam Fo 30 Jun 2015 09:50
True, but how many of them are in a flawed currency union that actively contributed to
their demise, saw their mainly foreign reckless, speculative lenders' liabilities socialised
and how many of these poorer countries have been lent ever more money just to service the
their debts and nothing more?
CaptainGrey -> colin2d 30 Jun 2015 09:26
Calling it a Greek Euro as opposed to a new Drachma won't make any difference. It will
crash overnight. Greece has no reserves to prop it up.
optimist99 30 Jun 2015 09:24
The Greeks need to look hard at Argentina - once one of the richest countries in the
world....
"By 1908 it had surpassed Denmark, Canada and The Netherlands to reach 7th place-behind
Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom and Belgium.
Argentina's per capita income was 70% higher than Italy's, 90% higher than Spain's, 180%
higher than Japan's and 400% higher than Brazil's". (Bolt & Van Zanden 2013)
Now it is number 55....
(At the moment Greece is at 44 - similar to Portugal).
CaptainGrey -> EricthePenguin 30 Jun 2015 09:24
Mexico didn't default, it devalued. Completely different. As I note above/below (depending
on your settings)
Argentina was shut out for a decade, but was able to get through it thanks to it's
vast natural reserves of mining, farming and forestry, plus strict financial discipline.
Greece has none of those things.
Default could be a disaster for a generation of more.
Actually, nobody knows for certain how bad a default will be. But it will not be a walk in
the park
ThinBanker -> Gelion 30 Jun 2015 09:24
"But of course that's not debt, that's just a way of lowering currency values to keep your
exports competitive and put your citizens into Austerity"
Huh? Without QE, 'austerity' would have been all the greater ...
PeterHG 30 Jun 2015 08:50
It seems inconceivable to me that Greece will leave the Euro. The loss of face to the
Brussels European Union bureaucracy would be too great for them to bear . Such a happening is
beyond their imagination so they will find some means to keep Greece in. The Greek politicians
sense this and that knowledge dictates their actions.
ApfelD -> Johanes 30 Jun 2015 09:13
Tsipras called them "criminals". I guess it is more close to the truth.
optimist99 -> sandywinder 30 Jun 2015 09:15
"is that borrowing and spending too much will always get you in the end. In case
people have forgotten, the UK has a £1.5 trillion national debt."
But the folk who lend money to the UK are perfectly happy to continue to do this... So it's
not "borrowing and spending too much" in the UK... (HMG can borrow money over 30 years at less
than 3% interest...).
kentspur 30 Jun 2015 08:36
It's a default.
This semantic dancing on a pinhead just shows the absurdity of the situation. Greece
cannot pay, but no one can say that as it undermines the whole financial system, which is
based on confidence. We can't 'write off Greek debt' (as Jeremy Corbyn helpfully suggests) as
no indebted countries would feel the need to pay off debts again - they'd just wait for the
'Greece' solution.
"... What infuriates me is the assumption that everything Russia puts out as fact is actually
disinformation, while everything the west puts out as fact is fact, despite being caught lying again
and again and again. Believe us – baby, we've changed."
"...I also do not really get what the EU is doing. There already exist pro-western propaganda
outlets, for example RFE/RL, etc. In Hungary, more than 50% of the media is western owned. So why is
more propaganda needed?"
"...Typical duplication of effort so as to charge the public purse twice over for the same work.
The EU produced a marvelous
graphic extravaganza intended to lure Ukraine, extolling the virtues of European integration and
the salutatory effect it would have on important things like life expectancy, health care, availability
of clean water, life expectancy (so important they put it in twice), friendly police instead of extortion-junkies,
bla, bla. I encourage everyone to have a look through it from the lens of today, and see how many came
true. I especially loved the one about tolerance – mercy, yes; tolerance in Ukraine has certainly taken
a leap upward thanks to Europe's beneficial influence. "
And the latest news from Inside the Bubble or, the EU as it's sometimes known, is this breathless
piece from the Guardian announcing the actions the Bubble leaders are planning to take to counter
Russian 'propaganda'.
"The document, drafted by the EU's diplomatic corps, also calls for efforts
to persuade people in countries such as Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova of the benefits of European-style
reforms.
The plan was prepared ahead of the EU summit in Brussels and offers a strategy to provide alternatives
sources of information to outlets such as Russia's state-funded RT television, amid an increasingly
polarised media environment sparked by the war in Ukraine.
A communications unit called the East StratCom Team, launched in April, will support EU delegations
in the six eastern neighbourhood countries, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and
Ukraine – as well as in Russia itself.
The main objectives include communicating and promoting "EU policies and values", supporting
independent media and increasing awareness of "disinformation activities by external actors".
The document states that communication towards the east should "first and foremost focus on the
development of positive and effective messages regarding EU policies towards the region".
Brussels needs to spread the message that reforms promoted by the European Union "can, over time,
have a positive impact on their daily lives," the action plan says. It stresses that the strategy
should highlight the benefits, not the bureaucracy, focusing on clearly explaining the positive
effects of EU programmes and policies rather than going into details about the policies."
The author of the paper or report called "The Kremlin's Hall of Mirrors" to which this Guardian
article refers is Peter Pomerantsev and everything makes an appearance therein including Putin's
troll factory. It goes without saying that everything coming out of Russia is propaganda while
everything coming out of the West is the God's Honest Truth. Pure unvarnished facts. Take this
snippet where he tells the tale of one Margo Gontar who's involved with StopFake:
"At times like this, she had always reached out to western media for a sense of something
solid, but this was starting to slip too. Whenever somewhere like the BBC or Tagesspiegel published
a story, they felt obliged to present the Kremlin's version of events – fascists, western conspiracy,
etc – as the other side, for balance. Gontar began to wonder whether her search for certainty
was futile: if the truth was constantly shifting before her eyes, and there was always another
side to every story, was there anything solid left to hold on to?"
Yeah, I always reach out to western media for the self-same reasons. And if the BBC's coverage
of Ukraine has ever been impartial, well, I must have blinked and missed it.
In similar vein, Pomerantsev spends a lot of the article ridiculing RT as here:-
"Presenters rarely challenge the views of "experts" during discussions of subjects such
as the Syria conflict – where Moscow has backed President Bashar al-Assad. One regular guest
has suggested that the Syrian civil war was "planned in 1997 by Paul Wolfowitz", while another
has described the death toll as "a joint production of CIA, MI6, Mossad".
I take it that Mr Pomerantsev has heard neither of the Yinon plan dating from the 1970's which
started that a key part of Israel's foreign policy objectives should be the break-up of the surrounding
nation states into mutually hostile ethnic statelets nor the Project for a New American Century,
a neo-con outfit in which Wolfowitz played a leading role, that targeted around seven countries,
including Iraq and Syria for destruction.
This is the issue Mr P the EU and NATO are really complaining about – in the past their statements
would pass without challenge, but not any longer.
'Gontar began to wonder whether her search for certainty was futile: if the truth was constantly
shifting before her eyes, and there was always another side to every story, was there anything
solid left to hold on to?"'
That's the shreds of your conscience screaming at you to pull your
head out of your arse. You know you're full of it – why not quit before you completely damn yourself?
What infuriates me is the assumption – as Fern alluded – that everything Russia puts out as fact
is actually disinformation, while everything the west puts out as fact is fact, despite being
caught lying again and again and again. Believe us – baby, we've changed.
I remember some smart arse on the Guardian CiF commenting after I had posted a lengthy contribution
in which I had used Levada sourced statistics: "You do realize that all your sources are Russian?"
US government media Radio Liberty reports
on "strategic communications action plan" they probably had a pivotal role in writing, about how
they plan to pump more money into Ukrainian and other post-soviet media in order to promote Europeanization,
which would technically be what RFE would call "propaganda". Both Russian media and Western media
especially RFE is complicit in "disinformation propaganda campaigns" and I struggle to understand
what quite "EU policies and values" are exactly, other than promoting LGTB rights. Nonetheless,
why do we need to promote "EU policies and values" in three Caucasus countries and two European
countries one traditionally Russian and the other which will never be integrated into the EU.
Is it just me or does this look less about promoting are values and more about turning post-soviet
states against Russia? Something which was previously carried out in Ukraine before the coup as
highlighted in some Wikileaks documents on Crimea.
-
"Lesm" had this to say:
This article itself is a good example of the kind of propaganda that the EU is thinking of
expanding to the East. Rt was itself started by the Russians as an antidote to the relentless
Western propaganda contained in the "news" that comes from the Western Controlled wire services
and media empires. The thing I find quite funny about the West is their habit of suggesting always
that they are simply responding to things being done to them rather than initiating actions that
others are responding to. So the West never does "terrorism", it only does "counter-terrorism".
Equally it never does propaganda, it only counters propaganda from the "other" side.
The reality is of course quite different. The West, and in particular the US, the UK and NATO,
are the largest and most successful terrorist organisations on the planet. In addition the old
USSR acknowledged that it simply could not compete with the propaganda mechanisms of the West
as they were so pervasive and so well disguised as to be unbeatable!!!!
-
Reader "DomesticExtremist" is unconvinced that the EU is democratic:
European values = declaring Conchita Wurst the winner of Eurovision 2014 even though the telephone
(popular) vote was won by Donatan and Cleo.
A metaphor for Western democracy if ever there was.
[ThatJ: I hate it when people speak only of the EU, EU, EU… it's like we're helping to cement
the view in the public's mind that the EU is kinda like an "United States of Europe". Distinction
between the member countries must be made. I'll try to speak of "Brussels" instead of the European
Union, because Brussels belongs to a country only (Belgium), and the message is clear enough:
the dictates of Brussels are alien to the European countries.]
-
A bigoted homophobe named "Lordoflight23″ thinks US-exported, Brussels-welcomed values are
uninspiring:
The values of supporting moderate opposition and creating extremist, backing all "good regimes"
around the world, the two most powerful EU leaders being wiretapped and still do nothing about
it, gay parades and bearded women. Some values that is.
-
Kremlin troll "Alphysicist" resorts to whataboutism, links to a RT article:
So in Germany Salve.TV took a broadcast from RT.com, and is now under fire from media watchdogs.
That is EU pluralism! Real values.
I also do not really get what the EU is doing. There already exist pro-western propaganda
outlets, for example RFE/RL, etc. In Hungary, more than 50% of the media is western owned. So
why is more propaganda needed?
I like RT, because one gets to hear many who are persona non grata in the Western media. John
Mearsheimer, Stephen Walt, Gilad Atzmon, Norman Finkelstein, George Galloway, Udo Ulfkotte, and
the list goes on and on. And they have many interesting things to say! Also, even if RT is connected
to the Kremlin, the persons above are saying their own opinions, regardless of the Kremlin. This
is why RT is a really useful supplement to western propaganda.
ThatJ, thanks for posting those comments from Guardian correspondents, baffling as always that
they seem more informed than the journalists paid to write for the paper. Glad to hear it's not
only me struggling to understand what 'western values' actually are.
Typical duplication of effort so as to charge the public purse twice over for the same work.
The EU produced
a marvelous graphic
extravaganza intended to lure Ukraine, extolling the virtues of European integration and the
salutatory effect it would have on important things like life expectancy, health care, availability
of clean water, life expectancy (so important they put it in twice), friendly police instead of
extortion-junkies, bla, bla. I encourage everyone to have a look through it from the lens of today,
and see how many came true. I especially loved the one about tolerance – mercy, yes; tolerance
in Ukraine has certainly taken a leap upward thanks to Europe's beneficial influence.
The commission reiterated on Monday that the door remained open to a deal.
Jean-Claude Juncker, the European commission president, was expected on Monday to appeal to Greece
to return to the negotiating table, but would not make any fresh proposals.
On Sunday, the commission took the unusual step of releasing the draft bailout agreement that
creditors had been negotiating with Greece before talks broke down.
"We are some centimetres away from an agreement," tweeted Pierre Moscovici, France's European
commissioner, adding that there was an open door to further talks. "We must find a compromise. I
want a reformed Greece to stay in the eurozone without austerity."
A bank manager explains the situation to pensioners waiting outside a branch of the National Bank
of Greece hoping to get their pensions.
A bank manager explains the situation to pensioners waiting outside a branch of the National Bank
of Greece hoping to get their pensions. Photograph: Yannis Behrakis/Reuters
Meanwhile, Angela Merkel will hold emergency talks with senior German politicians on Monday afternoon.
The German chancellor spoke to the US president, Barack Obama, on Sunday, with the two leaders
agreeing it was "critically important to make every effort to return to a path that will allow Greece
to resume reforms and growth within the eurozone", according to a White House statement.
The US Treasury secretary, Jack Lew, spoke to his counterparts in Germany and France, as well
as Tsipras and the head of the IMF, Christine Lagarde. The US is urging all sides to resolve the
crisis: it has called for Greece's creditors to discuss debt relief ahead of Sunday's referendum,
but is also counselling Athens to adopt "difficult measures to reach a pragmatic compromise".
In a brief, televised address to the nation on Sunday night, Tsipras blamed the eurozone leaders.
He did not say how long the banks would remain shut, nor did he give details of how much individuals
and companies would be allowed to withdraw once they reopened.
In the early hours of Monday morning, Tsipras published a decree in the official government gazette
setting out the capital controls to be imposed. The decree – entitled "Bank Holiday break" – was
signed by Tsipras and the Greek president, Prokopis Pavlopoulos.
It said all banks would be kept shut until after the referendum on 5 July and that withdrawals
from cash machines would be limited to €60 – about £40. Cash machines were not expected to reopen
until later on Monday.
Foreign transfers out of Greece are prohibited, although online transactions between Greek bank
accounts are to continue as normal. Tsipras insisted that pensions and wages would be unaffected
by the controls.
Greece's finance ministry later announced that the strict ATM withdrawal limits would not apply
to holders of credit or debit cards issued in foreign countries. This was viewed as a necessary move
as tourists were spotted joining locals in front of ATMs on Sunday. Any similar restriction would
hurt tourism, Greece's sole thriving industry, which accounts for at least a fifth of economic activity.
Tsipras said Saturday's move by the eurozone's finance chiefs to halt Greece's bailout programme
was unprecedented. He called it "a denial of the Greek public's right to reach a democratic decision".
The commission said on Monday that Greece's capital controls were "necessary and proportionate",
but free movement of capital would need to be be reinstated "as soon as possible in the interests
of the Greek economy, the eurozone and the European Union's single market as a whole".
Tsipras added that the finance ministers' initiative had prompted the ECB to curb its assistance,
forcing the government's hand. The Greek prime minister, who has always insisted the crisis can only
be solved at the highest political levels, said he had once again appealed for an extension of the
bailout until after the referendum, sending his proposal to the president of the European council,
Donald Tusk, the leaders of the other 18 member states of the single currency, the commission and
the ECB.
Markets suffered across Asia on Monday as Greece shut down its banks for a week ahead of an increasingly
likely debt default.
Oil prices declined and the euro edged down against the dollar, while Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index
fell 2% to 20,283.98 points. The Shanghai Composite Index was off 0.4% at 4,178.56 despite China's
surprise weekend interest rate cut.
Hong Kong's Hang Seng lost 1.7% to 29,192.67. Seoul's Kospi shed 1.6% to 2,057.52 and Sydney's
S&P/ASX 200 was off 1.8% to 5,447.80. Market benchmarks in Taiwan, Singapore and New Zealand also
fell sharply.
Turmoil in Asia had been widely expected after the failure of 11th-hour talks in Europe over the
weekend raised the possibility of a Greek exit from the eurozone.
More than $35bn was wiped off the Australian stock market in the first hour of trading on Monday
as investors braced for what could become a torrid week.
Earlier the euro dropped more than 3% to 133.80 yen, its lowest level for five weeks. The common
currency fell as much as 1.9% to $1.0955, its lowest level in almost a month.
More on this topicGreek debt crisis: the key points of Athens bank controls
The US Treasury secretary, Jack Lew, stressed the need for Greece "to take necessary steps to
maintain financial stability" ahead of the referendum.
He told the Greek prime minister, Alexis Tsipras, on Sunday that Athens and its creditors needed
to continue working toward a resolution ahead of a Greek referendum on 5 July on the creditors' demands
for austerity.
US stock futures dived 1.8%, hitting a three-month low, while US Treasuries futures price gained
almost two points.
A cash-strapped Greece looks certain to miss its debt repayment on Tuesday as Greece's European
partners shut the door on extending a credit lifeline after Greece's surprise move to hold a referendum
on bailout terms.
robtal 29 Jun 2015 08:43
We can print all the money we want all over the world to save every banker, financial wizard,
and insurance company . But one little country like Greece is the scape goat these financial criminals
use to bring fear and control to the rest of the world. These are evil less than human monsters
that run these world banks.
Paul Hawkins 29 Jun 2015 08:31
The World is being run by a group of financial gangsters such as the Rothschilds and 30 to
40 of the richest people in the world: Karen Hudes is a graduate of Yale Law School and she worked
in the legal department of the World Bank for more than 20 years. In fact, when she was fired
for blowing the whistle on corruption inside the World Bank, she held the position of Senior Counsel.
She was in a unique position to see exactly how the global elite rules the world, and the information
that she is now revealing to the public is absolutely stunning. According to Hudes, the elite
uses a very tight core of financial institutions and mega-corporations to dominate the planet.
Austerity is a lie as Countries use the Fiat monetary system and can produce money when they
want, such as quantitative easing. It is the greed of the banks, that had to be bailed out across
the world, that is causing the problem.
The sooner these greedy selfish power hungry bankers are brought to book the sooner the financial
markets would recover.
Mark Foster Kenneth Stephen Besig 29 Jun 2015 08:17
A large part of Syriza wanted out of the Euro because they were sure the Troika would not compromise
on it's insane 'reforms' which had already destroyed most of the economy. Debtors prison's were
abolished years ago in the UK, primarily because creditors realized it meant they would never
get any compensation for losses while debtors were in gaol. Yet by insisting on repayments on
an odious debt, we effectively put the whole of Greece into a debtors prison, and insisted on
all the wrong IMF/ECB reforms that have always failed to resurrect economies in the past. We are
still caught up in the idiotic Washington consensus/Jeffrey Sachs/ Hernando de Sotos models of
development.
In truth Greece should have left the failed euro project years ago. Iceland had the sense to
get out of the Banks clutches, file bankruptcy and impose capital controls and start again. For
the most part that as worked very well for them. Some will say Greece isn't Iceland, or nonsense
like the Greeks are lazy (they work longer hours than the Germans), Greece has deep problems for
sure and i'm not saying I'm confident Syriza have the program to fix them. But I'm 100% confident
the demands of the Troika would only cripple them further.
Myrtle7 29 Jun 2015 08:14
Save Greece! A Kind Request to the EU Leaders and Creditors (Myrtle 7)
I am writing this because today we are hours before a bitter end, perhaps, for Greece and the
beginning of problems for the EU.
A lot has been said about the Greeks living above their income for a long time or partying for
a long time and these may have been true in many cases but the Greeks should not be punished now
as they followed the example and attitude of some of their leaders. And, moreover, now, it is
the poorer people, those with lower income, that are suffering, those that did not have the right
"connections."
The referendum arranged by the government seems like a democratic move but in fact it will
be a desperate choice as the Greek people are asked to choose between suicide by drowning and
suicide by hanging.
If Greece goes into default it will be a catastrophe for the country; there is no currency
to devalue. They have to re-create the drachma (it will take perhaps a year or more) which will
be immediately devalued. How would these people, who are suffering already, cope? And if Greece
defaults, I am not sure whether the Creditors will get their money within the next 50 years, anyway.
Most seriously, the tense situation in the defaulted country, the low morale and possible disorder,
would invite & unleash unforeseen dangers for Greece first, for other European countries later
and the EU eventually; as we all know such situations can spread to the detriment of the people.
Historic recurrence is here: the specifics and the actors change, but the result is similar. Moreover,
it is common knowledge that there are forces, (they have their own agenda) which, wish, discuss
in conferences, and even envision, the break up of the European Union, even as 'we speak'. If
I am aware of this, I am sure the European leaders are aware too, for, as wise leaders, are conscious
(or should be) of emerging situations long before they get out of hand. With around 6 million
Muslims outside its northern borders, (excluding Turkish territories), Greece, will be an open,
unprotected theatre for anyone who wants an easy passage to the west.
The Creditors are part of the leadership or the Hegemony of European Union as they form the
powerful financial aspect of it; usually, leaders who push think they facilitate progress; in
fact they are blocking it. Yet, there are certain characteristics that wise leaders have and magnanimity
is the most important one. They do not expect a poor, proud nation to fall on their knees. They
would always offer opportunities for relief and growth. Lawrence Summers, US Treasury Secretary,
suggested something which sounds as a good solution: the Creditors can write off a small amount
of the debt now and perhaps ask for something that Greece, could, comfortably, add to their plan
that would help growth; e. g. taxing certain accounts many Greeks keep in Swiss banks. Such a
move by the Creditors would be wise, intelligent and humane.
With this magnanimous act the Greeks would feel uplifted and stronger to face the odds. In
my view, the most important attitude of the Leader is to make people feel they mean something
within the group, but I may be wrong.
John Kakkos DazzlingKarina 29 Jun 2015 07:04
Lazy Greeks is a very racisti thing to say, espesially since Greeks work-hours exceed that
of oher EU countries (including Germany). War reparations agreement was not accepted. Since in
1942, the Greek Central Bank was forced by the occupying Nazi regime to loan 476 million Reichsmarks
at 0% interest to Nazi Germany. In 1960, Greece accepted 115 million Marks as compensation for
Nazi crimes. Nevertheless, past Greek governments have insisted that this was only a down-payment,
not complete reparations. The 300 bn were not given to Greeks but to banks. 30% of Greeks are
iving below the povery line. Unemployment is 26% (60% to young) and 16% cant even provide daily
food needs. EU is not to blame, nor it is Greece. This financial system is just not working.
Aboutface 29 Jun 2015 06:47
There are "invisible hands" weaving the thread of EU-Euro through the IMF needle in this Greek
tradegy. One of the comment here by Steven Tracy on the Rothschilds and Rockerfeller seems about
right...a force majeure / fire sale of prime assets and not to dismiss, there are very wealthy
Greeks with offshore accounts, like vultures over a soon to be cadaver. Next move, the "Alexis
Tsipras surprise" call option.
pauline7883 29 Jun 2015 06:40
the greek people have the right to this referendum they have to decide if the deal is acceptable
whether they can cope with the continuing austerity. the financial institutions of europe have
acted disgracefully
the greek government should begin an audit of the books looking at the loans/debts owed by greece
to see if there was any illegality and prosecutions should follow
SEADADDY 29 Jun 2015 06:35
So, as Greece slips into the financial abyss, it's the common man/woman that gets the pain, the
punishment and the price tag of bankers ineptitude, greed and Houdini escapism. The bankers, corporate
investors and politicians get away with grand gambling and larceny of incredible scale, without
so much as a slap on the wrist. It wasn't the small man in Greece that caused the crisis. It was
the Niarchos's and the Onassis's & etc that caused the downfall, with getting away with not paying
their fair taxes, flags of convenience, double dealing and tax havens world wide. It's high time
that some government agency woke up and
NorthernFella,29 Jun 2015 06:00
They weren't ready to join the EU...
I would say, weren't ready to join the euro. Interesting that you don't mention anything about
the role of Goldman Sachs in this big scam.
"Humiliation" - what idiocy.
If accusing all the Greek of the ongoing (bank)crisis, using austerity (cuts directed to the
disadvantaged groups mostly) as a medicine and calling them lazy is not humiliating I don't know
what is.
And the idea that they were being 'starved by austerity' is ridiculous. They were starved
by their corrupt practices.
Let's take measures of that how much the neoliberalist austerity policy has affected those
in the most vulnerable position and let's compare it to the times before austerity. Sure the situation
has been bad for a long time before the crisis but austerity brought real hell.
Luckyspin marcus_rm 29 Jun 2015 05:34
The Greeks accuse the IMF of colluding in an EMU-imposed austerity regime that breaches the
Fund's own rules and is in open contradiction with five years of analysis by its own excellent
research department and chief economist, Olivier Blanchard.
Objectively, it is acting as an imperialist lackey. The IMF enforced brute liquidation without
compensating stimulus or relief. It claimed that its policies would lead to a 2.6 % contraction
of GDP in 2010 followed by brisk recovery.
What in fact happened was six years of depression, a deflationary spiral, a 26 % fall in GDP,
60 % youth unemployment, mass exodus of the young and the brightest, chronic hysteretic that will
blight Greece's prospects for decades to come, and to cap it all the debt ratio exploded because
of the mathematical – and predictable – denominator effect of shrinking nominal GDP.
George Vasilakakos deskandchair 29 Jun 2015 05:27
very poorly served Greece is by its media
That's the key point. You see the Greek media groups are run by the same oligarchs who've been
buying our politicians. They owe hundreds of millions to the Greek banks, along with the political
parties, between them it must be around a billion. The banks were unwilling to collect on those
debts, got bailed out and we are footing the bill...
Well, that's why I'm writing about "near-racism". Greece is schizophrenically seemed as the cradle
of democracy and the Western culture but as Gerold reveals the opinion of many by the comment:
Nonsense. The Greek nation and people have failed to grow into a modern responsible state.
They are still living like an Ottoman Province, trying to short-change the Sultan.
Many are still romanticizing the ancient times and are disappointed as they see the times have
changed. Many are wondering (bitterly) how the modern day Greek are so different from the ancient
times. In one book (a Finnish version of Traveler's history of Greece, I think) it was written
(in introduction) something like this: "are those hot-tempered noisy people really descended from
the ancient Greek?".
When adding to it Gerold's views on Greece as a nation that is still living like "an Ottoman
Province" it's easy to extend near-racist stereotypes even further. Now we're talking about "lazy
Greek who just lie down under the palm trees, waiting for the next bailout". Of course there are
stereotypes related to each nation but they get always stronger when we are going to the south
and they are told by "harder-working northerners" ...
I'm looking forward to the Greek people correcting their previous election error
Should the Greek vote only for "rationalist", pro-euro, business-oriented right-wing parties
who are ready to starve their own people to death? It sounds travesty of democracy and would prove
that economy has replaced democracy.
Theo Krom 29 Jun 2015 05:14
The markets. already have lost much more money than if they were agree to restructure, not
necessarily write-off, the Greek debt. If we count the profits the markets would gain after such
deal would have been announced then it seems that whatever is happening is a clear and utter irrational
thinking orchestrated by the allegedly proponents of rational economic thinking...
Policy for the contemporary markets, seems to be much more important than free markets. Free
market is an illusion, an excuse for the banks to suffocate democracy, using pseudo-politicians
as their most valuable gatekeepers....Well, the actual neo-liberalism has been implemented in
a very distorted manner, exactly as happened with socialism... Actually, both lead to utter misery!!!
This is what the private FMI corporation owned by the private federal reserve corporation of USA
has planned for ALL our countries. I's the Rothschields, the Rockfellers etc... The 1% that are
behind all this.
Can't you see USA is deep in debt and nearly bankrupt, just like most of the western countries
and Africa. They lend us money, put us deeper in debt, and we pay them back only the interest
of the debt ???
This has all been carefully planned since the creation of the private federal reserve corporation
in 1913 to rob our assets and control us.
This is why the BRIC countries have come together to ditch the US dollar.
Better than Eduard Snowden on the NSA.
GRJones Mark Foster 29 Jun 2015 04:51
Iceland is often held up on these pages as a shining example of the wealth and riches that
flow to you if you reject austerity. It shouldn't be. Iceland suffered enormous economic contraction
after its rejection of bailout conditions, and while the economy is growing, GDP is at about the
level it was in 2004, unemployment is still well above pre-crash levels, and prices are 50% higher
than they were before the crash. The steep devaluation of the currency by 50% meant that everyone
in Iceland took an enormous hit in terms of real wages, and because most Icelandic mortgages are
linked to the Euro theses have effectively doubled, while their homes have halved in value, leaving
much of the population in negative equity. They have enacted massive austerity, more than any
country in Europe bar Greece, slashing their deficit from 15% to less than 1%. The fall in living
standards has been severe enough that the Icelandic people voted the parties that came into power
after the rejection of bailout terms out of office, and reelected the party that was in power
before the crash. The lesson to be learned from Iceland is that economic collapse means pain,
no matter what you do.
someoneionceknew ID5590609 29 Jun 2015 04:50
Do you realize that the European rules prevent the ECB from funding member countries, as
well as prohibiting national bailouts
Sure. But why aren't you Germans subject to the rules too?
The rules don't work. They can be changed fairly easily. Why not if it stops people starving
and otherwise being persecuted through no fault of their own?
ID5590609 mjmizera 29 Jun 2015 04:38
Creditors already took a 50% haircut on Greece debt, and the conditions of Greece's bailout
loans were extremely generous, with very low interest rates and exceptionally long payment terms.
The terms and conditions were better than what was offered to Spain, Portugal and Ireland, and
those countries actually implemented the demanded austerity reforms and are now experiencing growth.
Greeks don't need their debt forgiven. Greeks need to start paying taxes and reforming and
managing their economy like a respectable first world nation, not some banana republic. Why should
Europeans and others show solidarity with Greeks when Greeks fail to show solidarity with their
own people and their democratically elected government?
Overdog81 29 Jun 2015 04:36
The past Greek politicians are responsible for bringing this debt to current levels. There's
no doubt about this.
However, the current government found itself at the edge of a cliff. 6 months of negotiations
and the issue of restructuring or writing off a non viable debt never came on the table by Greece's
creditors. Basically Greece is begging for money that only go towards paying this huge debt and
never into the real economy. Austerity measures are applied just to pay the debt's interest which
has become huge (twice the size of Ireland's and Portugal's combined) .
What Syriza is doing now is the only option it has in order to make the debt viable and end
austerity for its people. The timing of the referendum on friday night and capital controls on
Sunday night (banks closed for a week and stock market closed on Monday) point towards this way.
Its a huge gamble in order to reach an agreement but possibly the only hand Greece could play
in order to shake off the markets and thus its creditors.
I truly hope an agreement is reached before the referendum so that everyone walks out happy
especially Varoufakis and the Greek people who would get the best deal they could ever dream of.
On the other side, a debt relief decision seems the only road for the imf and eu partners. Its
a debt that could never be paid anyway so why risk?
Arthur Buse 29 Jun 2015 04:36
I had thought it was only Samuri that chose harakiri. But Alexis has done the EU a great kindness
by throwing the Greek people to the dogs of famine. He has helped the cause of breaking up the
Euro and even, dare we hope, the EU. Ever closer union was always a grave danger. It never went
well for the USSR and it ended in tragedy. The EU will eventually go the same way. The USA is
quite different. They adopted a common language before trying for a common currency and common
Federal taxes. The EU will not manage the former and has not got the will to manage the latter.
The Euro was therefore always doomed and now the EU needs to return to individual currencies and
the EEC.
Germany is the largest net contributor to the EU. They will bear the brunt of any aid extended
to Greece.
If Germans bear any loss then it is their own foolishness for trusting their politicians. Why
are Germans on the hook for bailing out their own banks?
Greece has been an economic failure for their entire modern history, including well before
they joined the Euro. They want to be live and be treated like a rich first world economy,
yet run their country like banana republic. It's readily apparent that other Europeans will
no longer fund or subsidize a lifestyle that Greeks cannot independently afford. Greece essentially
partied on northern European largesse, but the bill is now due.
That's just cut and paste racist cant. Germans should know better given their history.
Your feelings about capitalism
Oh, you still don't understand what mercantilism means? Good lord.
but what do you think is going to happen when Greece is "independent" and has to reintroduce
the Drachma.
Depends on many factors I'd say. But what are you offering?
ID5590609 someoneionceknew 29 Jun 2015 04:23
Germany is the largest net contributor to the EU. They will bear the brunt of any aid extended
to Greece. That is why the opinion of the Germans is so important when considering any action
on Greece.
Greece has been an economic failure for their entire modern history, including well before
they joined the Euro. They want to be live and be treated like a rich first world economy, yet
run their country like banana republic. It's readily apparent that other Europeans will no longer
fund or subsidize a lifestyle that Greeks cannot independently afford. Greece essentially partied
on northern European largesse, but the bill is now due.
Your feelings about capitalism notwithstanding, things must drastically change in Greece. You
claim to oppose the Eurogroup's and IMF's purportedly cruel demand for austerity and reform. That's
fine, but what do you think is going to happen when Greece is "independent" and has to reintroduce
the Drachma. Socialist solidarity is not going to fund imports of food, fuel, medicine and other
essentials. There will be austerity in Greece, either organized with their European partners,
or resulting from the chaos of financial incompetence. Greece is going to have to continue to
painfully adjust to a lifestyle commiserate with their true GDP, earnings and economic value.
The good old days are gone.
They are not asking for Herr Schauble's (or his ilks')
money or aid.
major economic reforms
More counterproductive austerity. More poverty, more privation, more labour bashing, more
suicides.
"mercantilism" (which I assume is meant as a juvenile reference to capitalism)
So I'm dealing with an idiot.
Germany has generally learned the political and economic lessons from their own unfortunate
history, everyone from WW1 reparations and the risks of inflation, the horrors of WWII,
Clearly it has not. Quite the opposite.
Carlo47 29 Jun 2015 04:03
Only the American Treasure understood the gravity of the situation, but it's odd that they
don't give appropriate instructions to the IMF and namely to the chauvinist Ms Lagrande, who continues
in its absurd hard line more on measures that on the debt.
On the other end Mr Schäuble and Mr Dijsselbloem must be happy that investors flee.
They have only have a bit of patience, until the contagion will arrive in Germany and Holland.
Anyhow, if they are honest, both should resign for clear inability to do their job and to understand
the heavy drawbacks of their dummy hard line, as supposed and false financial experts.
The German Government and the EU heads should slap the door in their face and send them away.
CanadaChuck ID9492736 29 Jun 2015 03:53
I had thought that Greece was unimportant overall in the EU. What will happen when Italy and
Spain collapse? I guess the UK won't have to bother leaving the EU.
Ian Crowther slingsby1000 29 Jun 2015 03:49
Agreed Slingsby, so a lot depends on the post management of crisis as we see in Argentina and
Turkey, its not plain sailing, far from it. But being enslaved is worse, and paying on the never
never, feeding German and French income is not the way to go Fault lies on both sides, nobody
comes out of this smelling of roses.
The EU construct was a nonsense form the very start, a union of unequals, instabilities and
too many externalities to manage that technocrats have little idea on how to manage in complex
situations.
Lanceowenmorgan Kompe75 29 Jun 2015 03:42
Ya the Forth Reich is coming and it seems Putin is the only one smart enough to see it
ID9492736 29 Jun 2015 03:40
Barely half an hour after opening, the German Stock Exchange index (DAX) is down almost 5%,
which is dangerously close to a system meltdown. The German moneymasters are trying to intervene
by pumping money into the exchange, but it's like putting a band-aid on the collapsing levee.
The German nuclear reactor is overheating uncontrollably.
Xenkar Stivell 29 Jun 2015 03:34
True, ordinary people in Europe need to stand up and support the people of Greece, but sadly
as spiceof so eloquently put it
"These little conformists, the lowly prison guards of the elites, are the lowest form
of humanity. Spiteful and small minded, they always want to "punish" those who dare raise their
heads and complain."
MrEurope Lupick 29 Jun 2015 03:31
You do realize that what you wrote is beyond ignorance...? While I agree that the way market-news
is brought is excessively dramatic, markets ARE for a large part a reflection of human productive
activity, and productive activity tends to be... you know... the stuff that makes people money.
Jobs. Earnings... roof over your head, and so forth... these things quite obviously matter.
The problem is that humans absolutely suck at understanding the long term consequences and
impact of small, tiny little (negative, but also positive) changes that accumulate over time.
You know the famous example that if Jesus would have put one dollar in his bank account, he
would (assuming 3% per annum interest) by the year 1000 he would have 7,080,467,438,104.71 dollars.
(and more money than ever has or will exist in the history of Earth by 2015...) 3% does not sound
like much... but all these small little additions do add up. And so if you're living in a world
where every week or two there is a minor crisis here or there.... eventually it starts to matter.
A lot. People put off investing. They spend less. There are less jobs... (which in turn compounds
the problems...) and on it goes.
Bottom line is - you and I know fuck all about advanced economics, just like the vast majority
of posters here.
Stivell 29 Jun 2015 03:28
Lagarde and the European leaders have forced Greece into this corner and really should expect
nothing more than the Greeks turning and baring their teeth. Ordinary people in Europe need to
stand up and support the people of Greece against these relentless scaremongering money-obsessed
bastards. Go Greece, bite that hand!
Kompe75 29 Jun 2015 03:25
If the Schaueble , Merkel and Jean Claude don't resign after the upcoming fiasco , then the
investors will fire them.Remember my prediction.They will have a bitter end than DSK.
D9492736 royaldocks 29 Jun 2015 03:16
If you really, seriously believe that EU economy is so competitive that it can turn on the
dime and adjust to the coming global economic meldown to its advantage and do so in the current
political and economic timespace , I have a BIG surprise for you: you are dangerously delusional.
First of all, the prices of ALL commodities, raw and unprocessed material EU economy needs
to keep going are going to get sky-high because EUR will be hemorrhaging value until cows come
home. And even if Mario Draghi and the idiots from Eurogroup come back to their senses tomorrow,
it will have been too late: they already committed an act of economic suicide, and it is really
too late to stop the head exit wound from bleeding to death now. Secondly, with the investors
quitting the stock bubble like crazy, the amount of discretionary spending and funded demand is
going to go down like a rock: Europe will be hit with AT LEAST a quadruple -whammy: (a) rigid
and dogmatic austerity and money-supply strangulation (b) supply chain disruption (c) extremely
weak demand and massively negative growth and (d) catastrophic consumer confidence index. Add
to this list of nightmares a never-ending flow of migrants and refugees, ever-increasing pressure
on social services, cost of funding of wars and military operations in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Aghanistan
and elsewhere, the massive losses caused by the American-imposed sanctions against Russia (by
most accounts, somewhere between $100 and $150 billion), the cost of containing the situation
in Ukraine and bankrolling the bankrupt Ukrainian government and - on top of it all - servicing
the sovereign debt, and you get a much clearer picture. There is absolutely no way - not even
a hypothetical chance - that European economy can weather out this tsunami unaffected and unharmed.
EU should consider itself lucky if they do not lose 20-30% of its entire economy in the next month
or so.
If I were a German retiree, I would be queuing up at the local ATMs as we speak. Because, yes,
it's the end of the Eurozone as we know it.
spiceof 29 Jun 2015 03:12
Amazing how the Greek subject matter brings forth the establishment sadists out en masse, demanding
that punishment, penury and the bubonic plague be visited upon that rebellious country.
These little conformists, the lowly prison guards of the elites, are the lowest form of humanity.
Spiteful and small minded, they always want to "punish" those who dare raise their heads and complain.
iruka Lupick 29 Jun 2015 02:56
Important point.
Of course it's worth bearing in mind that people like StrategicVoice213 aren't really concerned
with contrasting good people and bad people, lazy people and hard-working people, etc..
Take a closer look, and 99 times out of 100 it's amply clear that their only real interest
is in defending the authority and legitimacy of the institutions that they see being threatened
or insulted by those they're calumnying.
The actual behaviour or character of this person or that nation is of no real consequence to
213's . Any old lie, projection or blinkered misconstruction will do.
It's the need to preserve sanctified hierarchies of power that engages them.
Or more accurately (since they're clearly all sad little creatures of no importance whatsoever,
and no capacity to preserve anything, for whom an identification with power provides them with
something clearly lacking in their actual lives) it's the need to glorify power, and all its ways
and entitlements.
Lanceowenmorgan slingsby1000 29 Jun 2015 02:55
Who the fuck was the dumb ass(es) who would lend Greece all that money?
€386,000,000,000 to a country with a population of what 6-10 million? That's mathematics son you
can argue with me but you can't argue with figures. Apologies to Foghorn Leghorn. But I think
all comes down to greed.
truthbetold13 borninthe80s 29 Jun 2015 02:50
Such a pathetic cliche, a real twatcherite/conmoron lie. By bloated public sector you just
mean that more things are run by the government instead of by big business. Nobody here being
ripped off by utilities/ rail/private landlords etc thinks this is a better arrangement. What
you have is higher prices, worse service, less equal pay within those sectors, systemic tax evasion
by business and its bosses. Give me a state controlled service any day.
JohnnyMorales 29 Jun 2015 02:45
This should be the quote of the day:
Mitsuo Shimizu, deputy general manager at Japan Asia Securities Group in Tokyo, told Bloomberg
News: "In the face of pressure from the eurozone to accept austerity measures, the Greeks answered
that it's hard to live just on water."
The Japanese have never been considered softies. If they are describing the EU demands as too
much, then they are definitely too much.
FactualEvidence 29 Jun 2015 02:45
The EU needs Britain to stay in the EU for one reason only and its financial.
The EU have ploughed in billions and billions of tax payers money into several different countries
bailouts not just Greece, including Portugal, Spain, Cyprus, Ireland, Hungary, Latvia and Romania.
A total amount of 487.75 BILLION Euros has been given to these countries and that's since just
2008.
So rather than the EU getting stronger as united nation's it is getting worse.
The EU Commission, MEP's, LIBLABCON parties and BBC don't tell you that information. You have
to research it yourselves on Wikipedia.
So my three questions to all those Europhiles are.
If being in the EU is so great how come so many countries have to rely on hand out?
If so many countries need billions to even provide essential services to survive. Where is
this great trading economy?
Why is it not working for so many millions of people?
Go to Wikipedia and see how the monetary crisis is getting worse for all the countries not
better.
Google : European Debt Crisis, and check out the chart around the middle of a very long page.
Were would the EU be without the billions we put in to it and on top of that all the VAT tax
they get from us, YES VAT. Did you know that it was through EU ruling you pay VAT on your utility
bills?
Good thing Europe is ring-fenced to the risk of contagion....
The ECB will have to buy more Spanish and Italian bonds this week than the entire Greek debt,
and then bailout these countries so they can buy back the bonds (Greek style). Oh well, if they
say they've got it covered, it's fine I suppose... (shakes head in haughty derision).
The only markets still in the black are the markets that haven't opened yet. When DAX and FTSE
open, the shit tsunami is REALLY going to hit the austerity fans.
JohnnyMorales 29 Jun 2015 02:29
The loss of value across the world even if most of it is just temporary is many many times
more than Greece's entire debt.
Yet because the EU troika wanted to win a moral battle and teach a wayward Greece a moral lesson
and make impossible demands and accept the humiliation entailed in caving they opted to create
those losses.
Greece only asked for some extra help. They did not make outrageous demands like the troika.
If anything good comes out of this may it be the end of the careers of those who think the
financial world is the proper place to stage morality plays devoid of any financial purpose which
cost far more than the alternative.
Ian Crowther 29 Jun 2015 02:28
This is the end game, and has been Greece's plan from the new Government taking power. The
left want Grexit, and they will get what they wish for now, independence from a failing political
and financial EU construct.
This may work well for Greece in the mid term, sure, its going to be tough on the people, but
at least the Government will not be debt slaves now, reset the currency, devalue the economy so
it can compete again, lower taxation to bring in big business, and begin to build a new economy
based on what the Greek people want, rather than 85% of the money Greece leant eventually being
paid back to the rentiers from which the cash came. Now zero will be repaid, and EU banks will
have to suffer the losses, a drop in recapitalisation, and a hit to the recovery.
Lanceowenmorgan ID9492736 29 Jun 2015 02:24
I agree. FUCK ALL YOU NEOLIBERAL & NEOCON mother fuckers
LeonardPynchon borninthe80s 29 Jun 2015 02:24
Some perspective in the below piece - might help you:
The Financial Times' leading commentator Martin Wolf recently argued that "the vast bulk of
the official loans to Greece were not made for its benefit at all, but for that of its feckless
private creditors", that is, primarily, European banks and financial institutions. After exposing
the futility of austerity, ex-IMF economic advisor Jeffrey Sachs recently declared: "Europe's
leaders are hiding behind a mountain of pious, nonsensical rhetoric" risking an economic and social
disaster "in order to insist on collecting some crumbs from the country's pensioners".
Describing the treatment of Greece as "the Iraq War of finance", Daily Telegraph's Ambrose
Evans-Pritchard wrote: "rarely in modern times have we witnessed such a display of petulance and
bad judgement by those supposed to be in charge of global financial stability."
dzogchen 29 Jun 2015 02:23
Five lost years for the Greeks it seems. From the market's perspective those years have been
all about maneuvering the banks from out of risk. Now that work is done as the losses are laid
squarely in the public lap. The markets of course don't give half a toss about Greek people, empathy
isn't part of their nature, so might as well do what should have been done five years ago. All
the best to the people who will pay the price for all this shenanigans. Kali tihi!
BeamEcho Tim Roberts 29 Jun 2015 02:21
This is not new for the IMF, their mandate includes providing policy advice to their members.
They review the economic policies of their members. When they lend money they require economic
policy changes...
Ian Crowther IndependentScott 29 Jun 2015 02:18
Greece will not have to repay the debt, they will walk away, default and never repay. It is
the banking system and rehypothecated debt that will suffer, and the banks that have leant the
money to France and Germany. European banks have only just been recapitalised, and losing another
€300-400bn will hit the Euro recovery hard at a time when QE is being rolled out. The answer will
be print more money.
Normin 29 Jun 2015 02:17
The banksters are just waiting for a scapegoat to pin their non sustainable economic system
failure on. Meanwhile the elite will profit as the masses bleed. It can't go on like this forever
it's just a matter of when.
Kompe75 29 Jun 2015 02:14
Juncker announces a campaign to support "YES" at the greek referendum..
Another sign these people consist the out-of-touch neoliberal elite..
Does he really believe Greeks , who have suffered enormously , will sign a appalling deal that's
going to define the misery of generations for the next decades ? Just because he wants to remain
President in the dictatorship of Brussels ? I live for the moment Juncker comes in Athens...the
whole place will go up in flames.
john4108 29 Jun 2015 02:09
yes all going acording to plan the sacred " markets" are indulging in the usual lemmng like
behaviour while the banksrs try to convince everyone that,the have the medicine that we all need
. Casino capitalism writ large. Eventually, unless we want endlessly repeated crises and utter
destruction on this plant, mankind will have to come up,with a more resilient economic system.
Islam is waiting in the wings and usory is a crime in the Koran. Of course Jesus threw the
money lenders out of the temple....but Judeo-christianity has conveniently forgotten that.
"...The troika clearly did a reverse Corleone - they made Tsipras an offer he can't accept,
and presumably did this knowingly. So the ultimatum was, in effect, a move to replace the Greek government.
And even if you don't like Syriza, that has to be disturbing for anyone who believes in European ideals...." . "...This is nothing more than a neo-liberal play. They just don't want to strip their pensions,
but infrastructure as well. They should be making the requirements of the loan for deep pension cuts
and money for investments which would help build up Greece's economy and the end for these bailouts.
The fact they aren't doing that, but trying to confiscate it instead, which is the real issue. " . "..."IMF and Germany Are Hell-Bent on Finishing Off Even a Moderate Left in Greece" "Indeed,
the leftist Greek government failed to see that what Europe's neoliberal elite was after, especially
after being fully aware of the fact that Athens had no alternative plan, was not merely a humiliating
Greek deal for the Syriza-led government but finishing them off completely to send a message to all
potential "troublemakers" in the euro area of the fate awaiting them if they dared challenge the neoliberal,
austerity-based orthodoxy of the new Rome." " . "...Panicky depositors spent the weekend pulling an estimated one billion euros from the banking
system, stashing the cash in their houses or exchanging them for bulging bags of gold coins." . "...There are not as many hedge funds in Greece as there were a year ago, when it is estimated
that around 100 foreign funds were sitting on big investment stakes. Their bet was that the previous
Greek government would be able to complete the arduous process of economic reform in Greece that started
five years ago." . "...Most of the hedge fund money in Greece is invested in about 30 billion euros of freshly
minted Greek government debt securities that emerged from the 2012 restructuring of private sector bonds." . "...Among the most dubious of these, was a 10 percent equity stake, then worth about $137 million,
that Mr. Paulson's hedge fund took last year in the Athens water monopoly. The company had little debt
and was slated to be privatized, making it an attractive prospect at the time."
ATHENS - For investors around the world looking at Greece, there was but one question Sunday:
What is going to happen when the markets open on Monday?
That question is particularly acute for the hedge fund investors - including luminaries like
David Einhorn and John Paulson - who have collectively poured more than 10 billion euros into
Greek government bonds, bank stocks and a slew of other investments.
This weekend, Nicholas L. Papapolitis, a corporate lawyer here, was working around the clock
comforting and cajoling his frantic hedge fund clients.
"People are freaking out," said the 32-year-old Mr. Papapolitis, his eyes red and his voice
hoarse. "They have made some really big bets on Greece.
But there is no getting around the truth of the matter, he said. Without a deal with its European
creditors, the country will default and Greek stocks and bonds will tank when the markets open.
On the ground here, the surprise decision of the Greek prime minister, Alexis Tsipras, to hold
a referendum has turned what was a bank jog into more of a sprint with most Greeks now fearing
that the country's depleted banks will be closed on Monday.
Panicky depositors spent the weekend pulling an estimated one billion euros from the banking
system, stashing the cash in their houses or exchanging them for bulging bags of gold coins.
The yields on Greek government bonds, now around 12 percent are expected to soar as investors
rush to unload their positions in a market that of late has become extremely hard to trade.
Bank stocks, if the stock market, in fact, opens, will also be hit with a selling wave, as
they cannot survive if the European Central Bank withdraws its emergency lending program.
There are not as many hedge funds in Greece as there were a year ago, when it is estimated
that around 100 foreign funds were sitting on big investment stakes. Their bet was that the previous
Greek government would be able to complete the arduous process of economic reform in Greece that
started five years ago.
When it became clear that a radical Syriza government under Mr. Tsipras would come to power,
many investors quickly turned heel, dumping their Greek government bonds and bank stocks in large
numbers before and after the election.
But a brave, hardy few stayed put - around 40 to 50, local brokers estimate - taking the view
that while the new left-wing government could hardly be described as investor friendly, it would
ultimately agree to a deal with Europe. It would be a bumpy ride for sure, but for those taking
the long view that Greece would remain in the eurozone, holding onto their investments as opposed
to selling them in a panic seemed the better course of action.
For now, at least, that seems to be a terrible misjudgment, especially if Greece defaults and
leaves the euro.
Most of the hedge fund money in Greece is invested in about 30 billion euros of freshly
minted Greek government debt securities that emerged from the 2012 restructuring of private sector
bonds.
The largest investors include Japonica Partners in Rhode Island, the French investment funds
H20 and Carmignac and an assortment of other hedge funds like, Farallon, Fortress, York Capital,
Baupost, Knighthead and Greylock Capital.
A number of hedge funds have also made big bets on Greek banks, despite their thin levels of
capital and nonperforming loans of around 50 percent of assets.
They include Mr. Einhorn at Greenlight Capital and Mr. Paulson, both of whom have invested
and lost considerable sums in Piraeus Bank. Fairfax Financial Holdings and the distressed investor
Wilbur Ross own a large stake in Eurobank, one Greece's four main banks.
Big positions have also been taken in some of Greece's largest companies. Fortress Capital
bought $100 million in discounted debt belonging to Attica Holdings, Greece's largest ferry boat
holder. York Capital has taken a 10 percent stake in GEK Terna, a prominent Greek construction
and energy firm.
In 2014, Blackstone's credit arm bought a 10 percent chunk of the Greek real estate developer
Lamda Development. And Third Point, one of the earliest, most successful investors in Greek government
bonds, has set up a $750 million Greek equity fund.
Many of these forays were made during the heady days of 2013 and early 2014 when the view was
that, in a rock bottom global interest rate environment, risky Greek assets looked attractive,
especially if the reform process continued.
Among the most dubious of these, was a 10 percent equity stake, then worth about $137 million,
that Mr. Paulson's hedge fund took last year in the Athens water monopoly. The company had little
debt and was slated to be privatized, making it an attractive prospect at the time.
But the privatization process is now frozen and the monopoly is struggling to collect payment
on its bills from near broke government entities, making it unlikely that Mr. Paulson will get
much of his money back.
To be sure, many of these hedge funds are enormous and their Greek investments represent a
fairly small slice of their overall portfolio.
Mr. Papapolitis, who used to work at Skadden Arps law firm in New York structuring exotic real
estate deals, moved back to Greece in 2008 and has led some of the biggest hedge fund deals in
the market.
Of the same age and generation as many of his clients, he feels their pain.
"These guys are my friends," he said. "They invested in Greece when the economy was improving.
And now this happens - I feel obliged to be there for them."
He is not the only point man for hedge funds coming to Greece.
Last week, a group of about 12 of the largest remaining hedge funds arrived in Athens to attend
a seminar organized by George Linatsas, a founding partner of Axia Ventures, an investment bank
that specializes in Greece, Cyprus, Portugal and Italy, as well as shipping.
With all the large investment banks and law firms having largely given up on Greece, Mr. Linatsas
and his team of analysts became the main port of call for hedge funds that started buying Greek
government bonds in 2012.
Then, the bonds were trading at 12 cents on the euro and they soon shot up to 60 cents, making
billions of dollars for those early investors.
"People made their careers on that trade," Mr. Linatsas said. "The problem now is politics
and whether there is a government that can take this country to the next stage."
The outlook seems grim.
Indeed, in recent months these investors have spent little time breaking down balance sheets
or discounting cash flows. Instead, they have spent every effort trying to figure out what the
Syriza government is up to.
Some have tried to get an edge by listening to Greek radio. Others have hired outside firms
to study video clips of Mr. Tsipras and his finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, to try and discern
from body movement and voice tone whether they are telling the truth. And an increasing number
have resorted to begging journalists for inside scuttlebutt.
Because few Syriza officials will meet with the investors, a large number of them have banded
together, an unusual occurrence in an industry that puts the highest of premiums on secrecy. They
exchange tips and theories via emails when they are apart and over wine-soaked dinners in Athens
during their frequent trips here.
At times the swankiest hotel in town, the Hotel Grande Bretagne (or G.B. as it is commonly
known) is so chock full of hedge fund executives (mostly in their 30s) that some have called it
the G.G.B. - the acronym for Greek government bonds.
In recent days, as it has become clear that the Syriza government was not going to accept the
latest proposal from its creditors, stress and anxiety has, in some cases, turned to outright
anger.
"I just can't believe these guys are willing to torch their own country," one investor with
a large holding of Greek bonds lamented in an email. "They thought this was a game. Now, when
the supermarkets run out of food, gas stations run out of gas, hospitals have no medicine, tourists
flee, salaries don't get paid because banks shut - what are they going to do?"
Peter K. -> Peter K....
""I just can't believe these guys are willing to torch their own country," one investor with
a large holding of Greek bonds lamented in an email."
How ideological do you have to be to not understand that the Troika already torched the
country and that the Greeks voted in Syriza becasue 5 years on there was no light at the end of
the tunnel.
I hope there's a Grexit even if the Troika forces it because the referendum took place after
Monday's deadline. Syriza should really study all of the past defaults of other countries.
Paine -> Peter K....
This Sarris gent suggest the Syriza team should have proposed " bold reforms " early on
List em mr S... List em
He however seems to understands the original sin was
The elites decision to bail the private northern banks out
Of course the people of Greece must pay for that sin.
RGC:
"IMF and Germany Are Hell-Bent on Finishing Off Even a Moderate Left in Greece"
"Indeed, the leftist Greek government failed to see that what Europe's neoliberal elite
was after, especially after being fully aware of the fact that Athens had no alternative plan,
was not merely a humiliating Greek deal for the Syriza-led government but finishing them off completely
to send a message to all potential "troublemakers" in the euro area of the fate awaiting them
if they dared challenge the neoliberal, austerity-based orthodoxy of the new Rome."
The crash has brought this done to where it was in 2000. Why did they join the Euro system
in the first place? Why would anyone listen to the finance minister of this nation?
Paine -> pgl...
Precisely put
Only a corporate lackey corrupted stooge or stool pigeon
Peter K. -> Peter K....
Greece's own central banker, Yannis Stournaras said in a statement after the European Central
Bank decision on Sunday that the Greek central bank would "take all measures necessary to ensure
financial stability for Greek citizens in these difficult circumstances."
Before negotiations broke off on Saturday between Athens and its creditors, the Tsipras government
had been hoping to reach terms that would free up a €7.2 billion allotment of bailout money that
the country needs to meet its short-term debt obligations.
Because European officials said on Saturday that Greece's €240 billion bailout program would
not be extended, the big question had been whether the central bank's president, Mario Draghi,
would continue financing the country's depleted banks.
Guidelines of the European Central Bank dictate that it can keep supporting troubled banks
as long as there is a possibility that the country in question will come to terms with its creditors
on a bailout - as was the case with Cyprus.
If Athens and its creditors do not resume talks before Tuesday, the promise of European support
for Greece may no longer be on the table. But the European Commission, the executive arm of the
European Union and a key broker in the debt talks, seemed on Sunday to reach out to the Greek
people, unexpectedly publishing the offer made to Greece before Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras
ended the negotiations and announced a national referendum.
The publication was designed to show the lengths to which the creditors, including the I.M.F.
and the European Central Bank, had gone to satisfy Athens's demands for a deal that avoided hurting
ordinary Greeks, said one European Union official with direct knowledge of the decision to publish
the offer. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the institutions had not ruled
out a resumption of talks with Mr. Tsipras on the sensitive issue of extending the bailout.
"This is a last bridge we are building for them," said the official. The goal of publishing
the document was also to pressure "Mr. Tsipras to change course and choose to mount a 'yes' campaign"
in the upcoming referendum, the official said.
The official acknowledged there was a slim chance that Mr. Tsipras would accede to the terms
so soon after abandoning the negotiations. But if Mr. Tsipras did change course, that could lead
to a meeting of leaders of the eurozone member states on Monday night to try one more time to
reach a deal before the expiration of the bailout.
On Saturday, amid intense discussions between Greece and its creditors, officials representing
the I.M.F., to which Greece owes €1.6 billion on Tuesday, were trying to persuade European leaders
and Mr. Draghi to keep the bank emergency assistance flowing. And on Sunday, the head of the I.M.F.,
Christine Lagarde, waved an olive branch toward Greece.
In a statement, Ms. Lagarde expressed her "disappointment'' in the "inconclusive outcome of
recent discussions on Greece in Brussels.''
"I shared my disappointment and underscored our commitment to continue to engage with the Greek
authorities," she said, adding that the I.M.F. would ''continue to carefully monitor developments
in Greece and other countries in the vicinity and stands ready to provide assistance as needed.''
Early Sunday, the Greek Parliament approved Mr. Tsipras's request for a public referendum on
the proposal offer by Greece's creditors, with the vote to be held next Sunday. Mr. Tsipras and
other Greek officials had asked European officials and Mr. Draghi to keep the central bank assistance
in place until the vote.
The European Central Bank's decision on Sunday to cap the emergency loan program, as opposed
to canceling it, "allows the Greek banks to remain in a sort of coma – not functioning but not
dead," said Karl Whelan, an economics professor at University College in Dublin. That way, he
said, the Greek financial system might be revived if at some later point if Greece secures a deal
with its creditors.
Raoul Ruparel, an economist and co-director of Open Europe, a London-based research group,
said the rupture between Greece and its creditors on Saturday was unlikely to mean a definitive
end to negotiations, instead becoming "merely a prelude" to yet more talks in a week or so after
Greece holds its referendum.
"I think we are just getting started on this merry-go-round," Mr. Ruparel said, predicting
that Greek voters would probably vote to endorse proposals put forward by creditors and rejected
by the Tsipras government. "We would then be back where we started, only in a worse situation,"
he added. Because the current program will have expired by then, Greece and its creditors would
need to negotiate a new bailout - most likely a short-term deal - in an atmosphere poisoned by
even deeper distrust than before.
"The whole thing is absolute nightmare,'' Mr. Ruparel said. ''I have been following this saga
for five years, and it is depressingly tedious."
leoFromChicago:
Guy is totally business-as-usual.
I'm hardly an expert on Greece but if you were about to make a difficult decision -- say, exit
the Euro -- you might want a dramatic display of public backing say, in the form of a referendum.
The Warnings from the Bank of International Settlements Have Been Ignored Because They Have Been
Wrong
by Dean Baker
Published: 28 June 2015
The Wall Street Journal passed along warnings from the Bank of International Settlements (BIS)
that central banks should start to curtail monetary expansion and that governments need to reduce
their debt levels. The piece tells readers:
"The BIS has issued similar warnings in recent years concerning an overreliance on monetary policy,
but its advice has gone largely unheeded."
It is worth noting that the BIS has been consistently wrong in prior years, warning as early as
2011 about the prospects of higher inflation due to expansionary monetary policy:
"But despite the obvious near-term price pressures, break-even inflation expectations at distant
horizons remained relatively stable, suggesting that central banks' long-term credibility was
intact, at least for the time being.
"But controlling inflation in the long term will require policy tightening. And with short-term
inflation up, that means a quicker normalisation of policy
rates."
Since that date, the major central banks of the world have been struggling with lower than
desired inflation and doing whatever they could to raise the rate of inflation. It would have
been helpful to readers to point out that the BIS has been hugely wrong in its past warnings,
so people in policy positions appear to have been right to ignore them. This is likely still the
case.
OK, this is real: Greek banks closed, capital controls imposed. Grexit isn't a hard stretch from
here - the much feared mother of all bank runs has already happened, which means that the cost-benefit
analysis starting from here is much more favorable to euro exit than it ever was before.
Clearly, though, some decisions now have to wait on the referendum.
I would vote no, for two reasons. First, much as the prospect of euro exit frightens everyone
- me included - the troika is now effectively demanding that the policy regime of the past five
years be continued indefinitely. Where is the hope in that? Maybe, just maybe, the willingness
to leave will inspire a rethink, although probably not. But even so, devaluation couldn't create
that much more chaos than already exists, and would pave the way for eventual recovery, just as
it has in many other times and places. Greece is not that different.
Second, the political implications of a yes vote would be deeply troubling. The troika clearly
did a reverse Corleone - they made Tsipras an offer he can't accept, and presumably did this knowingly.
So the ultimatum was, in effect, a move to replace the Greek government. And even if you don't
like Syriza, that has to be disturbing for anyone who believes in European ideals.
A strange logistical note: I'm on semi-vacation this week, doing a bicycle trip in an undisclosed
location. It's only a semi-vacation because I didn't negotiate any days off the column; I'll be
in tomorrow's paper (hmm, I wonder what the subject is) and have worked the logistics so as to
make Friday's column doable too. I was planning to do little if any blogging, and will in any
case do less than I might have otherwise given the events.
Clearly, though, some decisions now have to wait on the referendum.
I would vote no, for two reasons. First, much as the prospect of euro exit frightens everyone
- me included - the troika * is now effectively demanding that the policy regime of the past five
years be continued indefinitely. Where is the hope in that? Maybe, just maybe, the willingness
to leave will inspire a rethink, although probably not. But even so, devaluation couldn't create
that much more chaos than already exists, and would pave the way for eventual recovery, just as
it has in many other times and places. Greece is not that different.
Second, the political implications of a yes vote would be deeply troubling. The troika
clearly did a reverse Corleone - they made Tsipras an offer he can't accept, and presumably did
this knowingly. So the ultimatum was, in effect, a move to replace the Greek government. And even
if you don't like Syriza, that has to be disturbing for anyone who believes in European ideals....
* European Union Commission, EuropeanCentral Bank, and International Monetary Fund
Paine -> anne...
Pk has really shown a leadership side here
Not contrarian
Progressive leadership
Vote no !
Praise be to PK
Ben Groves:
This is nothing more than a neo-liberal play. They just don't want to strip their pensions,
but infrastructure as well. They should be making the requirements of the loan for deep pension
cuts and money for investments which would hel build up Greece's economy and the end for these
bailouts. The fact they aren't doing that, but trying to confiscate it instead, which is the real
issue. If Greece wants their fat pension system, that is their choice.
I don't see anything different than post WWI Germany. This is what Libertarianism will bring to
the West if implemented. They would dismantle the current power structure and replace it with
a privately controlled syndicate dictating wealth much like today. This is not new, it has been
going on since the rise of Abrahamic religions in the west.
... to understand the deeper causes of what's been going on since Tsipras' government swept
to power in January, you really need to set the finance and economics aside and focus on the politics.
Greece has been drawing dead this whole time, and the future outlook appears bleak for one simple
reason - nobody else in Europe who holds power has any interest in making things anything other
than painful for Greece.
1) Giving Greece a better deal would be a political disaster
Tsipras' fundamental miscalculation has been that he thought that by cloaking his specific
requests for more lenient terms in the larger cause of anti-austerity politics, he could build
a coalition of political support throughout Europe for his position. The reality was just the
opposite. While politicians in Europe's creditor nations were naturally reluctant to grant Greece
a better deal, politicians in Europe's debtor nations were even more opposed.
After all, if electing a bunch of far-left types to parliament so they can demand a better
deal actually worked, then voters in Portugal and Spain and Italy and Ireland would take note
of that fact. And the last thing the current crop of elected officials in Lisbon and Madrid and
Rome and Dublin want is to all be turned out in favor of a bunch of far-left types.
2) Letting Greece default gracefully would be a disaster
Even if Greece's European partners weren't inclined to give Greece a better financial deal,
they could have at least smoothed the path to default. A Greece that doesn't pay what it owes
would be instantly cut off from credit markets and forced to run a very austere fiscal policy.
It's in Europe's interest to make things as hard as possible for Greece
Things could have been left at that. Instead, throughout the year, the European Central Bank
has been saying that it will cut the Greek banking system off from emergency funding if Greece
doesn't keep paying its debts. That means default will lead to the collapse of Greek banks, and
the end of Greek membership in the euro.
That's a political decision the ECB isn't legally required to make. But politically it's the
only possible decision. After all, if a default works out non-disastrously for Greece then other
countries could be tempted to default. And international investors might worry that other countries
could be tempted to default, raising interest rates and slowing the European economy. Only making
default as painful as possible can safeguard the interests of other countries.
3) Letting Greece leave the Eurozone gracefully would be a disaster
Here's where the news gets really bad for Greece. Leaving the Eurozone could, in theory, go
better or worse. But Europe needs it to go as badly as possible. After all, if Greece leaving
goes pretty well, then other countries might be tempted to leave. And that raises the prospect
of debt defaults, higher interest rates, and slowing European growth.
Once again, it's in Europe's interest to make things as hard as possible for Greece.
4) This is the time to fold 'em
The tragic irony, if you are Tsipras, is that his plan very well might have worked back in
2010 when his predecessors originally agreed to the terms of a bailout. Back then, the whole situation
was considerably more fluid. Greece could have threatened to default and essentially commit a
murder/suicide on the entire European economy unless it got better terms. That would have been
a very risky strategy and you can see why the Greek government didn't pursue it. But it might
have worked.
Yet as the song says, you need to know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em. ...
(Alternatively, persuade various major German
corps to re-locate to Greece, for tax-breaks,
warm weather, great beaches, warm weather,
'right-to-work' labor policies, tax breaks,
warm weather & great beaches, and - voilà - problem solved!)
Fred C. Dobbs:
The Next Few Days Have the Potential to Transform
Greece and Europe http://nyti.ms/1Nr7fbd
via @UpshotNYT
NYT - Neil Irwin - June 28
As it turns out, the Greek crisis ends not with a bang, but with a referendum.
It has been easy to ignore the doings in Greece for the last few years, with the perpetual
series of summits in Brussels that never seem to resolve anything. But it's time to pay attention.
These next few days are shaping up to become a transformational moment in the 60-year project
of building a unified Europe. We just don't yet know what sort of transformation it will be.
The immediate headlines that got us to this point are these: After an intractable series of
negotiations over a bailout extension with Greece's creditors, the nation's left-wing government
left the table Friday and said it would hold a referendum on July 5. Greek leaders think the offer
on the table from European governments and the International Monetary Fund is lousy, requiring
still more pension cuts and tax increases in a depressed economy, and intend to throw to voters
the question of whether to accept it.
Whatever the exact phrasing of the question (and assuming the referendum goes forward as planned),
it really boils down to this simple choice:
A "Yes" vote means that Greece will continue the grinding era of austerity that has caused
so much pain to its citizens over the last five years, in exchange for keeping the euro currency
and the monetary stability it provides.
A "No" vote almost certainly means that the country will walk away from the euro and create
its own currency (which will surely devalue sharply), bringing financial chaos in the near
term, but creating the possibility of a rebound in the medium term as the country becomes more
competitive with its devalued currency.
The Greek government, led by Alexis Tsipras, disputes this framing, and argues that Greece
could in fact reject the creditors' offer to extend the bailout program while sticking with the
euro. Events over the weekend show how untenable that is. Thousands of Greeks lined up to withdraw
euros from money machines, and the European Central Bank said it would not increase the size of
the emergency lending program that Greek banks have been using to secure euros.
Ergo, the Greek banks are, or will soon be, out of money, and the E.C.B. will be disinclined
to open the floodgates again in the absence of a bailout deal. That's why the Greek government
has effectively frozen its financial system, closing banks and the stock market on Monday. ...
ATHENS - Greece will keep its banks closed on Monday and place restrictions on the withdrawal
and transfer of money, Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said in a televised address on Sunday
night, as Athens tries to avert a financial collapse.
The government's decision to close banks temporarily and impose other so-called capital
controls - and to keep the stock market closed on Monday - came hours after the European Central
Bank said it would not expand an emergency loan program that has been propping up Greek banks
in recent weeks while the government was trying to reach a new debt deal with international
creditors. ...
"Aluminum tubes UN testimony trick again: looks like attempt by the US and other interested parties
to keep some evidence secret as in criminal trial all evidence should be made available to defense.
Guardian presstitutes: "Suspicions immediately fell on the separatists, who may have used a surface-to-air
missile supplied by Russia to
shoot down the plane." And other facts versions are simply ignored... That's how blackmail operates.
"...Russia HAS published its satellite data and data on portable radar activity which implicated
Ukraine forces in the downing of the plane. It did so shortly after the incident. Russia has also stated
that the US had a surveillance satellite over this area at the time of the plane coming down. Why is
the US reluctant to publish any surveillance data? This includes both satellite and communications intercepts."
"...I've searched across the web for anyone else reporting this and it's in a few places but always
citing the AFP. Each version is different but they all contain this line: "Suspicions immediately fell
on the separatists, who may have used a surface-to-air missile supplied by Russia to shoot down the
plane."
"...The initial investigation has dragged it's feet but can't they just put their efforts into
completing it, or is Ukraine using it's veto to stop anything coming out? I'm not sure what is going
on in the Netherlands, but it seems they have their mind made up on Russia. "
"...Exactly ultimately we must hold we must hold Obama, Victoria "f**** Europe" Nuland and ambassador
Geoffrey Pyatt responsible. It was they that initiated and organized the violent coup that overthrew
the legally elected President and government of the Ukraine. Their preferred nominees we installed in
a parliament patrolled by armed fascist and neo-Nazi thugs that ensured that it voted the "right way".
Remember Nuland's intercepted phone call anointing "Yats" (Yatsenuk) as prime minister. Not to mention
her photo-ops in the Maidan with the fascist leaders Oleh Tyahnybok and Andriy Parubiy."
"...In fact in 20 years Russia, directly or indirectly, destroyed about 40 thousand people.
USA - about 650 thousand. So what?
Calling Putin - the bloody tyrant, a little funny. Is not it?"
Now the missiles have been fired from Russian territory, because you cannot remind people that
Ukie's actually themselves claimed reasons to activate their own BUK's in the area
Notice all modified reports came out after MH17 shooting, but we know that no aircraft was
shot down after that.
Small details like that will eventually blow a big hole in the narrative that is pushed
down our throats
Jeff Pawiro 26 Jun 2015 21:14
How will the west react when the investigation proves Poroshenko's thugs shot down MH17. Giving
a killer billions in aide ..... i have a feeling this investigation will last for tens of years
till most people forgot about it.
DrKropotkin Jackblob 26 Jun 2015 21:00
Haven't seen the evidence and it's not for lack of looking. A photo provided by Ukraine of
a BUK system with a missing missile driving through government controlled territory is all I've
seen.
As for evidence to which we are not privy, I stopped listening to that talk after the WMD saga.
Terry Ross Jackblob 26 Jun 2015 21:10
June 3, Russia challenges USA to publish its information on MH17, USA refuses.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Russia's Foreign Ministry called on the United States on Wednesday to make
public any evidence it has on last year's crash of Malaysia Airlines' flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine.
"If the United States has objective control data from satellites or the airborne warning
and control system AWACS, it should be made public. The same applies to recordings of talks
between controllers and Ukraine's military sector," the ministry said.
<<<>>>
US State Dept Daily Press Briefing (Wednesday):
QUESTION:
Okay, and next question about MH-17. Today, Russian foreign minister –
ministry urged United States to unveil satellite images taken on the date the plane crashed. So
are you going to do that, or maybe you are going to transfer to investigators?
MS HARF: Well, we've worked with – we've given information to the investigators if we thought
it was relevant. At the time, I remember us actually putting out maps. And those maps included
where we believed, where we had evidence, that this
missile was fired from. So we put out, actually, quite a bit of information at the time.
QUESTION: So nothing new?
MS HARF: Nothing new and our assessment of what happened has not changed.
QUESTION: Now I'm talking about new images maybe.
MS HARF: Correct. No.
Russia HAS published its satellite data and data on portable radar activity which implicated
Ukraine forces in the downing of the plane. It did so shortly after the incident. Russia has also
stated that the US had a surveillance satellite over this area at the time of the plane coming
down. Why is the US reluctant to publish any surveillance data? This includes both satellite and
communications intercepts.
DrKropotkin 26 Jun 2015 20:45
I've searched across the web for anyone else reporting this and it's in a few places but
always citing the AFP. Each version is different but they all contain this line:
"Suspicions immediately fell on the separatists, who may have used a surface-to-air missile supplied
by Russia to shoot down the plane."
Not great journalism, let's fix it: "Suspicions (from 5 eyes nations and their media mocking birds)
immediately fell on the separatists, who may have used a surface-to-air missile (that we have
no evidence was) supplied by Russia (or even exists) to shoot down the plane."
chemicalscum -> JJRichardson 26 Jun 2015 20:44
The question is why would they fire one given only Kiev planes were in the air, apart from,
tragically and stupidly, civilian aircraft.
They had form, the incompetent Ukrainian military accidentally shot down a civilian airliner in
2001. However I wouldn't rule out a deliberate fascist Junta/CIA provocation the CIA has form
on that too.
normankirk -> SomersetApples 26 Jun 2015 20:42
And that is going to require transparency of the highest order. Too many horses in this race,
with powerful interests. Its questionable that it is even possible to have a fair trial when the
media and govts have leapt in early on with accusations and a huge effort to assign guilt. Most
people think the russians are guilty. I don't myself, thats the weakest scenario. I think its
an accident by either separatists or Ukrainians. Both had the means and the motive. Ukrainians
to defend against what they perceived to be an imminent Russian invasion, Rebels defending their
towns and cities from air attack
chemicalscum -> airman23 26 Jun 2015 20:39
Ukraine isn't a suspect. Russia is the most likely suspect.
As we say in England "Pull the other one its got bells on it" . The Ukraine along with the
US are the only countries known to have shot down civilian airliners. The Ukrainians shot down
a Russian airliner bringing passengers back form Israel. Siberia Airlines Flight 1812 in 2001.
The Ukrainian army possessed lots of Buk batteries that were deployed and had their radar on in
the right place at the right time.
DrKropotkin 26 Jun 2015 20:37
Why skip to this stage now? The initial investigation has dragged it's feet but can't they
just put their efforts into completing it, or is Ukraine using it's veto to stop anything coming
out? I'm not sure what is going on in the Netherlands, but it seems they have their mind made
up on Russia.
Nothing to do with the Dutch investigation are you aware that the US will not allow any of
their citizens to face ICC trials for war crimes, despite the innumerable war crimes they have
committed in. Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Central America, Serbia, Iraq, Libya etc?
SomersetApples -> ByThePeople 26 Jun 2015 20:22
Yes, Poroshenko has already asked for a delay of the investigation disclosure.
Vatslav Rente 26 Jun 2015 20:21
Well, it sounds like - we Have no evidence against Russia, no results of the investigation.
There is no evidence the Ukrainian air traffic controller. No suspects separatists. OK, let's
create a UN Tribunal:)
Someone really believes that after 1.5 years, the guilty will be punished? You guys are optimists?
Paul Moore -> SomersetApples 26 Jun 2015 20:13
I was looking at other airline incidents to see what a typical time frame in posting information
and reports. I picked one recent one and it seems as if the MH17 investigation is going no slower
than normal. Other than delays in getting information from the site, it may actually be faster
than normal. Implying that there is some kind of sinister motive in the amount of time it takes
to issue the final report is disingenuous at best.
This report discusses the July 6, 2013, accident involving a Boeing 777-200ER, Korean registration
HL7742, operating as Asiana Airlines flight 214, which was on approach to runway 28L when it struck
a seawall at San Francisco International Airport (SFO), San Francisco, California.
The Report was not released until June 24, 2014, after a year. Other investigations have taken
two or more years.
ultimately the people who started the war must be held accountable
Exactly ultimately we must hold we must hold Obama, Victoria "f**** Europe" Nuland and
ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt responsible. It was they that initiated and organized the violent coup
that overthrew the legally elected President and government of the Ukraine. Their preferred nominees
we installed in a parliament patrolled by armed fascist and neo-Nazi thugs that ensured that it
voted the "right way". Remember Nuland's intercepted phone call anointing "Yats" (Yatsenuk) as
prime minister. Not to mention her photo-ops in the Maidan with the fascist leaders Oleh Tyahnybok
and Andriy Parubiy.
This government then started a genocidal civil war against its own citizens murdering en mass
civilians by shelling cities.
Yes we know who the war criminals are.
Vatslav Rente -> talenttruth 26 Jun 2015 19:54
In fact in 20 years Russia, directly or indirectly, destroyed about 40 thousand people.
USA - about 650 thousand. So what?
Calling Putin - the bloody tyrant, a little funny. Is not it?
normankirk -> Doom Sternz 26 Jun 2015 19:52
Legally I don't see how that agreement can stand up in a criminal trial. If all evidence can
be vetoed by the parties in the investigation, there can not be the possibility of a fair trial.
All evidence must be available to the defense.
Vatslav Rente -> Metronome151 26 Jun 2015 19:47
One would think that for 1 year - will determine how any idiot was shot down a civilian Boeing.
But a surprising number of "professionals" and interested parties leaves no hope for it ... When
at stake is the Geopolitics ... well, I think you understand.
SomersetApples -> Metronome151 26 Jun 2015 19:47
Many posters on this page are already assuming that Russia is at fault before they know the
facts. For the UN to make a decision before they know the facts would be just as ignorant. Let
us see the facts first before we make a decision.
SomersetApples 26 Jun 2015 19:25
It is incredible that it has taken so long to release the information recorded on the black
box. A US surveillance satellite was immediately overhead at the time and we know how the US are
always bragging about how accurate their satellites are. Witnesses on the ground saw a fighter
shoot down the plane and photos of the wreckage show bullet holes the size of the onboard cannons
carried on the Ukraine fighters and shrapnel consistent with air-to-air missiles. Usually investigators
make preliminary statements about their investigation in a matter of weeks. In this case, nothing
has ever been disclosed. The Russians named the Ukrainian pilot flying the fighter that day. He
made one brief statement to the press, something about making a terrible mistake and disappeared
never to be heard of again.
I think the Russians are trying to wait until the results of the investigation are disclosed,
examined and cross examined before taking it to the UN. As we have waited all this time for the
disclosure that would seem like a reasonable request.
The West seems to be trying to take it to the UN before the facts are known. They could then argue
that results of the investigation must be kept sealed as they are the subject of a UN hearing
and involve national secrets and insist that it be decided behind closed doors. Any decision by
the UN could then be based on politics rather than facts. Poroshenko is already trying to delay
disclosure of the investigation.
In the UK we are still waiting for the results of the investigation into the invasion of Iraq.
After 12 years they are still stalling and refusing to tell us what they found. Maybe they feel
that if they wait long enough the current generation will die out and future generations will
not remember what happened.
Results of the MH17 air crash investigation are due out and the world is entitled to know what
happened. What are they waiting for?
HollyOldDog -> truk10 26 Jun 2015 18:50
Or to show the DATA and minor design mods that a SU25 would be capable of performing this task
and that Ukraine when it was in the USSR had the data and knowledge to perform this task. But
let's wait for the investigations to finish while ensuring all the evidence has been examined
and all the possible avenues followed. No point jumping to concluesions where the West could end
up with EGGs on their faces. Why is Poroshenko trying to rush this investigation? He is interested
in the TRUTH isn't he?
Doom Sternz -> truk10 26 Jun 2015 18:46
The Russians have presented the evidence. When the US accused Russia of the demise of MH17
they lied. We can now see that 48 hours after that German crackpot murdered 149 people we knew
everything and a year after the MH17, we know nothing. How long does it take to doctor a black
box?
MrHMSH -> Robzview2 26 Jun 2015 18:37
There's a huge difference: we know that Iran Air 655 was shot down by the USS Vincennes. Whereas
we don't know who shot down MH17. You can argue morals and that all day long, but at least it
is known.
normankirk -> psygone 26 Jun 2015 18:36
I do understand thats the way its been from the start. I'm talking about a very recent extension
to the agreement., and was asking if anyone knows what thats about. I'd understood the investigation
will be complete in October, from there, comes a prosecution. So I'm none the wiser from your
post
Doom Sternz -> psygone 26 Jun 2015 18:36
On August 8, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Australia and Belgium signed a non-disclosure agreement
pertaining to data obtained during the investigation into the causes of the crash of Malaysian
Airlines MH17. In the framework of the 4-country agreement, information on the progress and results
of the investigation of the disaster will remain classified.
annamarinja -> BigNowitzki 26 Jun 2015 18:27
Aluminum tubes? Again? Is not Nuland-Kagan the most trusted student of Cheney?
If you are so particular about evidence, then ask the US government to divulge, for gods sake,
the pictures that have been taken by the US' satellite that happened to be just above the shooting
of MH17. What intelligent person could believe that the the best evidences that the US can provide
are some suspicious pics and half-wit ramblings from a website of a deranged blogger.
normankirk -> truk10 26 Jun 2015 18:24
Its the UK and US who have been so vocal about accusing the Russians , right from the start.
The official Russian position has not been to assign blame, but to ask questions. You confuse
media reports, the Engineers union, and the Buk manufacturers with the official position, when
they are not.
Have you seen Putin in a public forum declaring that Kiev is to blame for MH17?
I have not
Whereas I have seen all the plonkers of the 5 eyes countries dutifully doing their bit.
Harper, Abbott, Cameron, Obama, all thundering from the pulpit...Putin did it!
normankirk 26 Jun 2015 18:13
I noticed that Poroshenko, in the Rada has called for an extension of the mh17 investigation
agreement between Ukraine and the Netherlands A really short piece in the Kyiv Post. No further
explanations.
Does any one know what that's about?Does he want a longer time frame, or is it just a standard
agreement that needs to be re affirmed regularly?
"...As the Times has degenerated from a relatively decent newspaper into a fount of neocon propaganda,
its editors also have descended into the practice of simply inventing a narrative of events that serves
an ideological purpose, its own version of "Two Minutes Hate." "
Exclusive: In the up-is-down Orwellian world that is now The New York Times'
editorial page, there was no coup in Ukraine in 2014, no U.S.-driven "regime change," no provocation
on Russia's border, just Moscow's aggression - a sign of how propaganda has taken over mainstream
U.S. media, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
In George Orwell's 1984, the leaders of Oceania presented "Two Minutes Hate" in which
the image of an enemy was put on display and loyal Oceanianians expressed their rage, all the better
to prepare them for the country's endless wars and their own surrender of freedom. And, now, in America,
you have The New York Times.
Surely the Times is a bit more subtle than the powers-that-be in Orwell's Oceania, but the point
is the same. The "paper of record" decides who our rotating foreign enemy is and depicts its leader
as a demon corrupting whatever he touches. The rest of us aren't supposed to think for ourselves.
We're just supposed to hate.
As the Times has degenerated from a relatively decent newspaper into a fount of neocon propaganda,
its editors also have descended into the practice of simply inventing a narrative of events that
serves an ideological purpose, its own version of "Two Minutes Hate." Like the leaders of Orwell's
Oceania, the Times has become increasingly heavy-handed in its propaganda.
Excluding alternative explanations of events, even if supported by solid evidence, the Times arrogantly
creates its own reality and tells us who to hate.
In assessing the Times's downward spiral into this unethical journalism, one could look back on
its false reporting regarding Iraq, Iran, Syria or other Middle East hotspots. But now the Times
is putting the lives of ourselves, our children and our grandchildren at risk with its reckless reporting
on the Ukraine crisis – by setting up an unnecessary confrontation between nuclear-armed powers,
the United States and Russia.
At the center of the Times' propaganda on Ukraine has been its uncritical – indeed its anti-journalistic
– embrace of the Ukrainians coup-makers in late 2013 and early 2014 as they collaborated with neo-Nazi
militias to violently overthrow elected President Viktor Yanukovych and hurl Ukraine into a bloody
civil war.
Rather than display journalistic professionalism, the Times' propagandists ignored the evidence
of a coup – including
an intercepted
phone call in which U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland
and U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt discussed how to "mid-wife" the regime change and handpick the
new leaders. "Yats is the guy," declared Nuland, referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk who emerged as prime
minister.
The Times even ignored a national security expert, Statfor founder George Friedman, when he termed
the ouster of Ukraine's elected president "the most blatant coup in history." The Times just waved
a magic wand and pronounced that there was no coup – and anyone who thought so must reside inside
"the Russian propaganda bubble." [See Consortiumnews.com's "NYT
Still Pretends No Coup in Ukraine."]
Perhaps even more egregiously, the Times has pretended that there were no neo-Nazi militias spearheading
the Feb. 22, 2014 coup and then leading the bloody "anti-terrorist operation" against ethnic Russians
in the south and east who resisted the coup. The Times explained all this bloodshed as simply "Russian
aggression."
It didn't even matter when the U.S. House of Representatives – of all groups – unanimously acknowledged
the neo-Nazi problem when it prohibited U.S. collaboration in military training of Ukrainian Nazis.
The Times simply expunged the vote from its "official history" of the crisis. [See Consortiumnews.com's
"US
House Admits Nazi Role in Ukraine."]
Orwell's Putin
Yet, for an Orwellian "Two Minute Hate" to work properly, you need to have a villain whose face
you can put on display. And, in the case of Ukraine – at least after Yanukovych was driven from the
scene – that villain has been Russian President Vladimir Putin, who embodies all evil in the intense
hatred sold to the American public.
So, when Putin presents a narrative of the Ukraine crisis, which notes the history of the U.S.-driven
expansion of NATO up to Russia's borders and the evidence of the U.S.-directed Ukrainian coup, the
Times editors must dismiss it all as "mythology," as they did in Monday's editorial regarding
Putin's
remarks to an international economic conference in St. Petersburg.
"President Vladimir Putin of Russia is not veering from the mythology he created to explain away
the crisis over Ukraine," the Times' editors
wrote. "It is one that wholly blames the West for provoking a new Cold War and insists
that international sanctions have not grievously wounded his country's flagging economy."
Without acknowledging any Western guilt in the coup that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government
in 2014, the Times' editors simply reveled in the harm that the Obama administration and the European
Union have inflicted on Russia's economy for its support of the Yanukovych government and its continued
backers in eastern and southern Ukraine.
For nearly a year and a half, the New York Times and other major U.S. news organizations have
simply refused to acknowledge the reality of what happened in Ukraine. In the Western fantasy, the
elected Yanukovych government simply disappeared and was replaced by a U.S.-backed regime that then
treated any resistance to its rule as "terrorism." The new regime even dispatched neo-Nazi militias
to kill ethnic Russians and other Ukrainians who resisted and thus were deemed "terrorists."
The upside-down narrative of what happened in Ukraine has become the conventional wisdom in Official
Washington and has been imposed on America's European allies as well. According to The New York Times'
Orwellian storyline, anyone who notes the reality of a U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine is engaging in
"fantasy" and must be some kind of Putin pawn.
To the Times' editors, all the justice is on their side, even as Ukraine's new regime has deployed
neo-Nazi militias to kill eastern Ukrainians who resisted the anti-Yanukovych coup. To the Times'
editors, the only possible reason to object to Ukraine's new order is that the Russians must be bribing
European dissidents to resist the U.S. version of events. The Times wrote:
"The Europeans are indeed divided over the extent to which Russia, with its huge oil and gas resources,
should be isolated, but Mr. Putin's aggression so far has ensured their unity when it counts. In
addition to extending existing sanctions, the allies have prepared a new round of sanctions that
could be imposed if Russian-backed separatists seized more territory in Ukraine. …
"Although Mr. Putin insisted on Friday that Russia had found the 'inner strength' to weather sanctions
and a drop in oil prices, investment has slowed, capital has fled the country and the economy has
been sliding into recession. Even the business forum was not all that it seemed: The heads of many
Western companies stayed away for a second year."
An Orwellian World
In the up-is-down world that has become the New York Times' editorial page, the Western coup-making
on Russia's border with the implicit threat of U.S. and NATO nuclear weapons within easy range of
Moscow is transformed into a case of "Russian aggression." The Times' editors wrote: "One of the
most alarming aspects of the crisis has been Mr. Putin's willingness to brandish nuclear weapons."
Though it would appear objectively that the United States was engaged in serious mischief-making
on Russia's border, the Times editors flip it around to make Russian military maneuvers – inside
Russia – a sign of aggression against the West.
"Given Mr. Putin's aggressive behavior, including pouring troops and weapons into Kaliningrad,
a Russian city located between NATO members Lithuania and Poland, the allies have begun taking their
own military steps. In recent months, NATO approved a rapid-reaction force in case an ally needs
to be defended. It also pre-positioned some weapons in front-line countries, is rotating troops there
and is conducting many more exercises. There are also plans to store battle tanks and other heavy
weapons in several Baltic and Eastern European countries.
"If he is not careful, Mr. Putin may end up facing exactly what he has railed against - a NATO
more firmly parked on Russia's borders - not because the alliance wanted to go in that direction,
but because Russian behavior left it little choice. That is neither in Russia's interest, nor the
West's."
There is something truly 1984-ish about reading that kind of propagandistic writing in
The New York Times and other Western publications. But it has become the pattern, not the exception.
The Words of the 'Demon'
Though the Times and the rest of the Western media insist on demonizing Putin, we still should
hear the Russian president's version of events, as simply a matter of journalistic fairness. Here
is how Putin explained the situation to American TV talk show host Charlie Rose on June 19:
"Why did we arrive at the crisis in Ukraine? I am convinced that after the so-called bipolar system
ceased to exist, after the Soviet Union was gone from the political map of the world, some of our
partners in the West, including and primarily the United States, of course, were in a state of euphoria
of sorts. Instead of developing good neighborly relations and partnerships, they began to develop
the new geopolitical space that they thought was unoccupied. This, for instance, is what caused the
North Atlantic bloc, NATO, to go east, along with many other developments.
"I have been thinking a lot about why this is happening and eventually came to the conclusion
that some of our partners [Putin's way of describing Americans] seem to have gotten the illusion
that the world order that was created after World War II, with such a global center as the Soviet
Union, does not exist anymore, that a vacuum of sorts has developed that needs to be filled quickly.
"I think such an approach is a mistake. This is how we got Iraq, and we know that even today there
are people in the United States who think that mistakes were made in Iraq. Many admit that there
were mistakes in Iraq, and nevertheless they repeat it all in Libya. Now they got to Ukraine. We
did not bring about the crisis in Ukraine. There was no need to support, as I have said many times,
the anti-state, anti-constitutional takeover that eventually led to a sharp resistance on the territory
of Ukraine, to a civil war in fact.
"Where do we go from here?" Putin asked. "Today we primarily need to comply with all the agreements
reached in Minsk, the capital of Belarus. … At the same time, I would like to draw your attention
and the attention of all our partners to the fact that we cannot do it unilaterally. We keep hearing
the same thing, repeated like a mantra – that Russia should influence the southeast of Ukraine. We
are. However, it is impossible to resolve the problem through our influence on the southeast alone.
"There has to be influence on the current official authorities in Kiev, which is something we
cannot do. This is a road our Western partners have to take – those in Europe and America. Let us
work together. … We believe that to resolve the situation we need to implement the Minsk agreements,
as I said. The elements of a political settlement are key here. There are several."
Putin continued: "The first one is constitutional reform, and the Minsk agreements say clearly:
to provide autonomy or, as they say decentralization of power, let it be decentralization. This is
quite clear, our European partners, France and Germany have spelled it out and we are quite satisfied
with it, just as the representatives of Donbass [eastern Ukraine where ethnic Russians who had supported
Yanukovych have declared independence] are. This is one component.
"The second thing that has to be done – the law passed earlier on the special status of these
territories – Luhansk and Donetsk, the unrecognized republics, should be enacted. It was passed,
but still not acted upon. This requires a resolution of the Supreme Rada – the Ukrainian Parliament
– which is also covered in the Minsk agreements. Our friends in Kiev have formally complied with
this decision, but simultaneously with the passing by the Rada of the resolution to enact the law
they amended the law itself … which practically renders the action null and void. This is a mere
manipulation, and they have to move from manipulations to real action.
"The third thing is a law on amnesty. It is impossible to have a political dialogue with people
who are threatened with criminal persecution. And finally, they need to pass a law on municipal elections
on these territories and to have the elections themselves. All this is spelled out in the Minsk agreements,
this is something I would like to draw your attention to, and all this should be done with the agreement
of Donetsk and Luhansk.
"Unfortunately, we still see no direct dialogue, only some signs of it, but too much time has
passed after the Minsk agreements were signed. I repeat, it is important now to have a direct dialogue
between Luhansk, Donetsk and Kiev – this is missing."
Also missing is any objective and professional explanation of this crisis in the mainstream American
press. Instead, The New York Times and other major U.S. news organizations have continued with their
pattern of 1984-ish propaganda.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated
Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative,
either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry's trilogy
on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy
includes America's Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.
Abe
June 22, 2015 at 11:04 pm
we hear ever-shriller charges that Moscow has mounted a dangerous, security-threatening propaganda
campaign to destroy the truth-our truth, we can say. It is nothing short of "the weaponization of
information," we are provocatively warned. Let us be on notice: Our truth and our air are now as
polluted with propaganda as during the Cold War decades, and the only apparent plan is to make it
worse.
O.K., let us do what sorting can be done.
[…]
Details. The Times described "Hiding in Plain Sight: Putin's War in Ukraine" as "an independent
report." I imagine [New York Times' State Department correspondent Michael] Gordon-he seems to do
all the blurry stuff these days-had a straight face when he wrote three paragraphs later that John
Herbst, one of the Atlantic Council's authors, is a former ambassador to Ukraine.
I do not know what kind of a face Gordon wore when he reported later on that the Atlantic Council
paper rests on research done by Bellingcat.com, "an investigative website." Or when he let Herbst
get away with calling Bellingcat, which appears to operate from a third-floor office in Leicester,
a city in the English Midlands, "independent researchers."
I wonder, honestly, if correspondents look sad when they write such things-sad their work has
come to this.
One, Bellingcat did its work using Google, YouTube and other readily available social media technologies,
and this we are supposed to think is the cleverest thing under the sun. Are you kidding?
Manipulating social media "evidence" has been a parlor game in Kiev; Washington; Langley, Virginia,
and at NATO since the Ukraine crisis broke open. Look at the graphics included in the presentation.
I do not think technical expertise is required to see that these images prove what all others offered
as evidence since last year prove: nothing. It looks like the usual hocus-pocus.
Two, examine the Bellingcat web site and try to figure out who runs it. I tried the about page
and it was blank. The site consists of badly supported anti-Russian "reports"-no "investigation"
aimed in any other direction.
With no substantive points to add to your article I can only mourn
that I wish I had written it myself.
In addition to NYT, NPR has taken the same line with proofs of Russian evil and in the same
spirit as the NYT totally fails to address any other points such as the coup, the increasing US
bases and so forth. And all in the name of their so called "ballanced", "objective" journalism.
(This was on NPR's national radio broadcast for "All Things Considered" which might be renamed
"Not Very Much Considered". I felt like screaming except that on topics I
care about deeply I have come to expect this kind of reporting from NPR).
--Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA
Abe, June 22, 2015 at 11:22 pm
now, finally, Ukraine's Constitutional Court is faced with the shocking predicament of Ukraine's
own President, who won his post as a result of this coup, requesting them to "acknowledge" that
it was a coup, much as the founder of the "private CIA" firm Stratfor had even called it, "the
most blatant coup in history."
Let's see, we also got an American citizen to be the new "Foreign Minister" in Ukraine.
The New York Times has lost ALL credibility.
JA, June 23, 2015 at 2:57 am
It is not just English language media. In Sweden, both the main national dailies, Dagens Nyheter
and Svenska Dagbladet run with the same propaganda about Russian aggression and Putin's expansionist
plans. Both are also stridently calling for Sweden to join NATO, damning 200 years of Swedish
neutrality and in a belligerant tone of faux outrage at anyone who suggests this is not a good
idea as it would further antagonise relationships across the Baltic, 'how dare Putin (aks Hitler
II) interfere in Swedish politics'.
As Russia is strengthening its naval port defences in Kaliningrad,
probably also a NATO target like Crimea, the US/NATO must be licking its lips at taking over the
Swedish naval base at Karlskrona, pretty much opposite Kaliningrad on the Baltic.
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 2:19 pm
On June 13, NATO conducted a preliminary amphibious landing exercise at Ravlunda, Sweden as part
of BALTOPS 2015.
On June 17, Swedish troops participated in the major landing exercise at Ustka, Poland, 300
kilometers east of Kaliningrad oblast.
On June 18, in an interview with the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, Viktor Tatarintsev,
Russian ambassador to Sweden, criticized the "aggressive propaganda campaign" by Swedish media.
"Russia is often described as an attacker who only thinks of conducting wars and threatening
others. But I can guarantee that Sweden, which is an alliance-free nation, is not part of any
military plans by Russian authorities. Sweden is not a target for our armed troops," he said.
However, he underlined that "consequences" if Sweden were to abandon its alliance neutrality
and join NATO.
"I don't think it will become relevant in the near future, even though there has been a certain
swing in public opinion. But if it happens there will be counter measures. Putin pointed out that
there will be consequences, that Russia will have to resort to a response of the military kind
and re-orientate our troops and missiles. The country that joins NATO needs to be aware of the
risks it is exposing itself to" he said.
A ballyhooed October 2014 weekend survey conducted by pollsters Novus for TV4, Sweden's largest
commercial television channel, showed 37% of Swedes were in favor of joining NATO with 36% of
Swedes against. This was the first time that more Swedes have favored joining the alliance than
not.
Stef, June 23, 2015 at 4:36 am
I was in Ukraine for 18 months before and after the overthrow of Yanukovych. The reason why
he was overthrown is simple . . . people were upset at the corruption and string of broken promises.
Many people believe a shift toward Europe will force the government to make structural economic
reforms that will reduce corruption and improve efficiency and competitiveness. One main reason
SOME people in the east are pro-Russian is because of the strong economic ties with Russia; Russia
is the only country that will buy Ukrainian goods because they are of better quality in many cases
(and less expensive) than Russian produced products.
Varenik
June 23, 2015 at 4:38 pm
You might be glossing over the fact that most of them are ethnically
Russian, born on land of their ancestors that did not belong to Ukraine until Lenin gave it. AND
that they know what western Ukrainians are capable of. And that those western Ukrainians were
the the stormtroopers that, with the help of US, violently overthrew the elected government. And
that the austerity that will come, imposed by IMF and European Bank along with de-industrialization
of Ukraine will make any and all imaginable "abuse" by Russia pale in comparison.
Just a few of reality bites you chose to skip over. Unless those 18 months in Ukraine were
in employ of some "freedom and democracy" promoting NGO's.
Helge
June 23, 2015 at 5:23 pm
If Yanukovich was corrupt then it would appear likely that all those
working as ministers for his government were corrupt as well, wouldn't you agree? No have a look
who was Ukraine's minister of economy from December 2012 until February 2014? So what has changed
then since Feb. 2014? Obviously, absolutely nothing, and if then, only for the worse because the
current regime appears more repressive than Yanukovich ever was.
Joe Wallace
June 23, 2015 at 10:04 pm
If Ukrainian goods "are of better quality in many cases (and less
expensive) than Russian produced products," why would Russia be "the only country that will buy
them?"
Drew
June 24, 2015 at 2:46 am
Steph- so the 5 Billion the US spent on Maiden had nothing to do with
it? How about the propaganda? Prior attempts at color revolution? The paramilitaries? A deal was
brokered to let the president stand a little longer with a new election around the corner. After
this, the protesters (a minority in Ukraine, by the way) appeared content & started home. It was
at this point that paramilitaries kicked in & the US officials did nothing to stop it, nor invalidate
the coup. It does not seem that you understand what is going on, here,
Dahoit
June 24, 2015 at 10:46 am
Yeah, my toaster has made in Ukraine. Sheesh. The only products Ukraine
sells are weapons, from factories probably left over from the SU. The Russians seem to have rockets
and many other weapons that are modern and formidable, and effective, so they must make some good
stuff, eh?
Bianca
June 24, 2015 at 5:42 pm
You are mixing up the reasons for protest and the reasons for overthrow
of elected president. There is no doubt that the economy was bad, and people had reasons to be
unhappy. But the protests - no matter how large, are still representing a tiny portion of the
country's population. Kiev had already had a pro-Western revolution, "Orange" as it was called.
Yet, the country fell apart during the rule of pro-western politicians, and Yanukovich inherited
the mess. The reason for coup was external intelligence meddling, busing in thousands of openly
and proudly Nazi groups from the Western Ukraine, primarily from Lvov. And the key reason for
coup was the false agreement that the foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland struck between
the President and the "opposition". The President agreed to elections, and to withdraw police
from the streets. The Europeans barely left the airport, when the armed coup perpetrators started
shooting into police and protesters. They pushed in with iron bars and Molotov coctails into Rada,
and blocked those parliamentarians that tried to flee - forcing them to stay inside and "vote".
They went immediately to the homes of politicians, president and other leaders of the regime,
and killed many in the process. The President fled. In Rada, the vote was forced that appointed
the new government, and the old one was disbanded. All of this evidence is recorded - including
violence against delegates of Yanukovic party that were forced to vote for the coup. Thousands
upon thousands of recorded evidence exists of the violence against Russians, Jews, Bulgarians,
Poles, Hungarians, Romanians and Tatars. Yet, all it was cleaned up for the Western audience,
and even Jewish leadership in US declared that Jews are not threatened in Ukraine. Thousands have
however, fled the country. OPEN and RECORDED debate was held on what to do with the Russian population
in Ukraine. "Yatz's" boss, Yulia Tymoshenko recommended "nuking them", while more practical Right
Sector Leadership, and the leadership of Svoboda (nowdays in deep hiding, getting ready to be
transformed into legitimate party of the right) recommended giving authority to local military
commanders to round up all prominent Russians - businessmen, lawyers, doctors, teachers, engineers
- and killing them WITHOUT requiring a prior approval from the authorities. Tymoshenko, being
the head of a large political party with presence throughout Ukraine, offered her offices for
such initiative. Now, which one of the options is West subscribing to? Looks like it could be
both: first they declare Russian population "terrorists", then launch indiscriminate bombing campaign
against their cities and villages. The "nuking" option may be needed in the end, as the "response"
to "Russian aggression". Even though US Congress prevented arms to go to neo-Nazis - it is merely
a shell game. Training centers and arming is happening in Lvov region. That is where the core
Nazi elements are. US is thus training Nazis in order to create "National Guard". Why is this
"Guard" needed when Ukraine has military? Because US and West do not trust military - they are
unfortunately still guided by professional military training and code of conduct. What is needed
is army of head-choppers and people-burners, those that will have no emotional barriers to committing
heinous crimes. This is why Georgian Saakashvili has been put in charge of Odessa - as this is
a region full of Russians and other "non loyal" minorities. Besides Odessa, such "punitive" squads
will be dispatched to: Zaporozye, Kharkov, Kherson, Dnepropetrovsk, and Mikolayev.
Just because people are unhappy with their lives, it does not entitle them to change government
by force, and to trash institutions upon which ordinary people rely in their daily lives. Such
"revolutions' usually bring scum to power, and the suffering of people is invariably greater.
We have to stop believing in revolutions, supporting them, and recognizing their ill gains. Political
process may be slow, but it is up to people to organize and build political parties that will
do better job. I hope that if ever any revolutionary comes to my streets that my country will
do everything in its power to destroy them. As much as I do not approve of many things in politics,
I am - like most people, and I am sure majority of Ukrainians, grateful for the order that allows
us to lead normal life and our children to grow up in peace. No revolution is worth one child's
tear.
Brad Owen, June 23, 2015 at 5:38 am
This is all completely Wall Street/City-of-London vs. BRICS. The City and the Street are on
the verge of bankruptcy. Greece has until the end of June to make an impossible payment for a
fraudulent debt, and The Western Empire's own financial shenanigans have "checkmated" them. BRICS
is the obvious alternative for World development & progress, which has driven The Western Empire
MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction…"if we can't reign, nobody will"). I've read where powerful,
institutional forces are pushing back against this madness…it's going to be a long, dreadfully
hot, summer.
Tom, June 23, 2015 at 5:47 am
Here are the facts on the last 100 years of ukrainian and russians relations. Ukraine was conquered
and incorporated into the russian empire in the late 1700's. After the Russian revolution, soviet
troops made sure a puppet government was established and exterminated any opposition creating
the soviet republic of Ukraine. In the 30's accused Ukraine farmers of stealing food supplies
and not distributing through Moscow. Took all their food for a few years and created a man made
famine that killed 6 million Ukrainians. Skipping the war atrocities stuff in ww2, which russians
do not call ww2 bevause the were allies with hitler for the first part. They then expanded ukraines
border into poland, deported all the polish creating a ukrainian west and encouraged russian migration
to the east and made russian compulsory everywhere. Fast forward to now. The russians invade ukraine
openly and anex crimea. They deny invading the other parts for now but are doing it anyway. They
blame all the other soviet block coutries which they forcibly occupied for 50 years as being under
some duress from the west to join them. Geopolitical theories might be true, and newspapers can
be biased, but the ukraines arent russias brothers. And if they are they need to flee the domestic
violence and get a step family.
Anonymous
June 23, 2015 at 7:47 am
You may want to submit this to the NY Times for publishing as it conspicuously
lacks any mention of the US engineering the 2014 coup as well as the fact that NATO has repeatedly
violated the agreements that ended the Cold War.
Seems that Russia learned its lessons from the Cold War while the US never stopped trying to
"win" the original Cold War by overthrowing anyone that puts their own interests and sovereignty
in front of the Wests neocon/banking cabal just as the Ukraine did before the 2014 US engineered
coup.
Joe, June 23, 2015 at 9:09 am
Why this nonsense about "russians invade ukraine openly and anex crimea"? We all know that
this is propaganda for which zero evidence has emerged. If you have an historical point it is
lost in this plain attempt to deceive. There often are historical trends which may continue, but
causes in the present must be argued: it is careless to assert that there is such a thing as "the
russians" over such a long period.
Factional grievances are solved only by recognizing the legitimate interests and rights of
all factions, not by looking for devils and refusing to see faults on other sides. This balance
is clear in the Putin remarks. Opposition requires good reasoning and evidence.
Zerge
June 23, 2015 at 9:45 am
You really should try to learn history more ant stop tear facts from
a context. For example, Ukraine didn't actually exist like a state before 1918. By centuries modern
Ukraine's territories were included into Lithuania, Poland, Moldavia, Hungary. Russian Empire
not the only one here, you know.
About famine just wiki's quote: "The Soviet famine of 1932–33 affected the major grain-producing
areas of the Soviet Union, leading to the deaths of millions in those areas and severe food insecurity
throughout the USSR. These areas included Ukraine, Northern Caucasus, Volga Region and Kazakhstan,
the South Urals, and West Siberia". I don't really understand why famine in Ukraine more tragic
and more terrible than famine in Mordovia or Ural.
By the way, new family doesn't rush to hug and love new step kid. More likely it enjoys watching
kid's suicide.
Ptaha, June 23, 2015 at 11:03 am
Your post is sadly funny – such a crazy interpretation on Russian- Ukrainian history. Are you
really "Tom" or you "Tom from west Ukraine"? Who occupied Ukraine in 1700????!!!!!! Ukraine was
straggling to survive from Polish and Turkish aggression and asked Russia to take Ukraine as a
part of Russia in order to be protected. Under Polish-Turkish occupation they were not allowed
to speak Ukrainian language and get married without permission. When it comes to that " cry" about
Ukrainian farmers who died without food that was taken forcefully or were sent away from home,
why you do not mention that the same situation was over all Soviet Union? How about Povolzh'e
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1921
? Who "forcefully" occupied other Soviet Union Republics?.All of them were in Russian borders
before 1917. What about England who occupied Ireland and Scotland or US occupied Texas and so
on? One more thing – we are brothers and sisters and it is not your business to decide identification
of our ethnicity. We all have mixed blood and we do not deny any part of it.
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 12:00 pm
"Skipping the war atrocities stuff" is a popular pastime in Ukraine.
Unless, of course, one is enthusiastically commemorating the 1941 liberation of Lviv by the "heroic"
Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), the 1943 liberation of Volhynia and Eastern Galicia
by the "heroic" Ukrainian insurgent Army (UPA), the 1944 exploits of the "heroic" Waffen-SS Galicia
Division, or the 1945 exploits of the "heroic" Ukrainian National Army (UNA).
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 12:38 pm
Not to mention the 2014 exploits of the "heroic" Ukrainian territorial defense battalions and
special police battalions. In November 2014, all 37 volunteer battalions to be integrated into
Ukraine's regular forces, thus they were officially inducted into the Armed Forces of Ukraine,
Minister of Internal Affairs and National Guard of Ukraine as National Guard battalions.
We'll just skip the "heroic" exploits of Azov, Aidar, and Tornado battalions.
A nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat, eh? Know what I mean? Say no more.
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 1:03 pm
"Geopolitical theories might be true, and newspapers can be biased,
but the ukraines arent russias [sic] brothers. And if they are they need to flee the domestic
violence and get a step family."
Sure, just like in 1941, Ukraine can get a Nazi step family (NATO) and reenact the "Battle
of the European SS".
Dear Tom, you probably meant to leave your comment at a different site
(like Euromaidan, Mirotvorec, etc). Here you're facing a different kind of audience. It does not
take a rocket scientist to go to the wiki and find that you wrote blatant lies. E.g. that Bohdan
Khmelniskiy asked for Russian protection and Tsar's favours in 1654 after he had been annihilated
by the Poles. And it went on from there. For instance, Stalin gave parts of Poland, Romania and
Czechoslovakia to Ukraine, Khruschev donated Crimea, etc. such that Ukraine actually has grown
a lot under the Soviet rule.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Ukraine#/media/File:Ukraine-growth.png
Not to mention that many USSR leaders were Ukranian.
Drew
June 24, 2015 at 3:06 am
Tom- your knowledge of history is lacking, somewhat. Might I point
out that the eastern portion of what you call Ukraine historically belongs to Russia? That Ukraine
has been more of a middle ground and borderland between for East & West Europe for centuries,
continually being carved up & never really becoming a nation until recently. While I do not approve
of Stalin's modernization programs in Ukraine and purges & other acts of violence, you leave out
the growth of the OUN-B, the nazi-like nazi collaborators who were trained by both British & Germany
to attack Russia/Soviets. Then there is the genocide the Ukranian nationalists participated in
and with such a ferocity, the Nazis were ashamed….post-WWII: Bandera OUN to the US, largely working
in CIA and Washington….1991& on: back to Ukraine to help foment a break from Rusdia & color revolution….,
Odessa- Putin was in his legal rights to bring a force that size, where the port is controlled
by Russia. Moreover, repeated poling by independent sources reveal 90+% of Crimeans residents
want to be part of Ukraine…. Condortium and other award winning independent outlets have already
turned the "Russia invasion" mythology of its head.
"Ukrainian's aren't Russia's brothers" …sorry, but at least half of Ukraine would disagree, especially
those fighting for agency in Donbass. You really can't peddle that stuff here.
Bianca
June 24, 2015 at 6:14 pm
This creative "history" will do well for New York Times - it is so
biased and untrue, that it will take pages to get the lies covered. As for your concluding thought
- that Ukrainians need another family, you may have a point. It is very important that a country
grows up. Ukraine has been on a crossroads of many battles, and was source of slaves for hundreds
of years before Russia put an end to this lucrative "business". Those that hunted slaves and those
that then sold them making hefty profits - until today feel some sort of superiority over those
Slavs. Ukraine must grow up, and what it does not kill it, will make it stronger. Its people will
go through horrendous pains as the new relations will take all they can carry out of the country,
and what cannot be carried, will be destroyed. But it must be so. Some will discover that they
are Russians after all, while others will gravitate to the world that they were most familiar
with - such as Galicia gravitating to Poland. What this country called for a long time is an amicable
divorce. Now, it will happen anyway, but after much suffering.
As you chose to start your twisted history full of lies and innuendos in 1700 - you may have
mentioned that Kiev was capital of Russia before Mongol invasion, and it is because of the invasion
of Mongols and Tatars that the capital was moved to Moscow.
Also, West has not shown itself to be CAPABLE of offering any path, any successful economic
model for all the countries they happen to bestow their "love" upon. There is no country in Eastern
Europe that is successful, contrary to propaganda. Most are in fact in horrible shape, and its
population fled to other countries in search of jobs or just to save themselves from bank imposed
slavery. Check out Baltic countries, as an example. Countries like Poland are tired as well -
the theme of the latest elections was "we look good on paper". That is what Europe is - good on
paper. Most countries of the former Eastern block are now economically depressed, their education
and health care decimated. Life in countries like Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia,
Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia, Moldavia, etc. is well below their former socialist existence. Yet, they
MUST implement "reforms" that harm them, they must fulfill all the orders from their European
masters, yet year after year they are poorer. Masses od emigrants are flooding Europe - from the
regions were Western wars destroyed entire countries, Middle East, Central and North Africa, and
now from poor European countries. Greece has not caused its own misery - no matter what White
West has to say about it. Loans have been forced down their throats for "reforms", that nobody
ever knew how exactly will those "reforms" work. The banks just wanted politicians to take loans,
White West companies were in line to get the money for various "needs", and in the end, instead
of punishing the greedy bankers that had no business giving loans to feather western companies
pockets - all the loans have been magically transferred to Greek taxpayer, and if they do not
pay, to European taxpayer - as the utterly incompetent EU Bank and politically motivated IMF managed
to fool the European public. Ukraine is quite welcome to this mess - for as long as they remember
not to blame Russia. People must be allowed to make their mistakes. And if some regions of Ukraine
are not eager to go there, why force them? After all - what is wrong with some competition. Let
pro-Russian regions stay to trade with Russia, and pro-Western go to EU, and build their fortune
there.
As far as those so called "Neo -Nazi" battalions are concerned, they appear to be criminal
gangs who have adopted Waffen S.S. insignia as their symbols.
And, judging by whose side they are fighting on, they appear to be quite kosher "Nazis" indeed.
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 3:57 pm
One of Cass Sunstein's cognitive infiltration trolls assigned to Consortium
News takes a break from porn surfing to chime in. Gotta keep earning that guv'mint paycheck.
Mulegino1
June 24, 2015 at 4:14 pm
It is quite perceptive of you to say so – that is indeed what is really
at play here.
The BRICS are a direct threat to Atlanticist Zionist financial hegemony in the same way that National
Socialist Germany was.
Long before Germany invaded Poland, the war parties in Britain and the F.D.R. administration
had decided that the German nation had to be destroyed; the issue of currency backed only by the
productive power of physical labor – much like Lincoln's "Greenbacks" – was a huge blow against
the central banks, and the barter trade – the exchange of German industrial goods in exchange
for raw materials – was a potential fatal blow to the hegemony of Wall St. and the City of London.
A "Barter Bloc" of nations including the Soviet Union, Iran, Turkey and much of Latin America
would have obviated the need for an international reserve currency.
We're seeing much the same situation here. The difference, of course, is that Putin has time
and space on his side, not to mention the world's largest nuclear arsenal.
Abbybwood
June 23, 2015 at 1:49 pm
U.S. is ratcheting up the rhetoric now with talk of Putin being Hitler
and the times now feeling like the 1930's:
Small mistake – not her father – her brother. There is his personal
"page" on some sort of Russian "Facebook":
https://vk.com/slava_banderi
Caf
June 23, 2015 at 3:19 pm
It is singularly amazing me, the degree to which the Times has descended
into sheer propaganda. Even during the run-up to the Iraq War, which was an absolute low point
in Times' history, the editorial board was not as over-the-top propagandistic as it is today.
As it stands now, the Times really has no credibility on Russia or Ukraine, nothing published
on these matters by the Times can really be taken seriously.
dahoit
June 24, 2015 at 10:52 am
They and our puppeticians have gotten everything wrong about everything,and
still spew their swill with no pushback.Revolting!
F. G. Sanford
June 23, 2015 at 4:04 pm
Propaganda can hide the means and the motives. It can obfuscate the
ideology that informs the strategy. It can parade a figurehead and disguise the prime movers.
It can deflect attention from incompetent blunders and lionize the perpetrators. But in the end,
it cannot hide utter failure. Every thinking General Officer – and despite the best efforts of
military indoctrination there are always a few – is by now having grave doubts. We have seen purges
of late based on dubious charges. Experts have been replaced by political hacks, and resignations
have been tendered out of a clear blue sky. Months ago, there was talk of a 5,000 strong "rapid
reaction force" in the Baltics. Then, it was upped to 10,000. Now, we are hearing of prepositioned
war materiel, and a force of 40,000. In terms of a conventional force deterrent, this is laughable.
A real conventional threat from Russia would require a counterforce of 10,000 tanks and 250,000
troops. Nobody is tossing around those numbers, but there must be a few realistic analysts who
realize they are accurate. So…what's the game afoot? In the absence of defections from the current
lunatic cabal, it's hard to know for sure. But it certainly seems likely that there must be some
dissenters. Hollywood versions of reality aside, there were on the order of 27 plots against Hitler,
and Admiral Canaris's was among the least ambitious. (I believe some are still classified.) It
is not difficult to imagine that there is currently a crisis of loyalty in the halls of power.
In order to generate propaganda effectively, one must also have a grasp of the truth. Even among
sycophants, complete reversal of the truth is sometimes abhorrent. In this 'Alice in Wonderland'
reality, it is tempting to speculate that the plan is to "lose" with as small a force as possible
in order to create a new strategic reality. If it goes wrong, there's always the 'nuclear option'.
Propaganda will not be able to hide that.
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 5:22 pm
The reality today is that the NSA operates a global surveillance apparatus
undreamed of even by Abwehr chief Admiral Canaris' rival, SS-Obergruppenführer Heydrich of the
Reichssicherheitshauptamt.
Even without a Führer oath, the Empire of Chaos is no less prepared to battle all "enemies
of the Reich", both foreign and domestic.
After the 193 Dutch airline passengers, surely no one will mind if the Empire sacrifices a
few hundred Lithuanians and Estonians on the altar of "collective security". Heck, why not throw
in a few Swedes. Europe will remain snug as a bug beneath its "Iron Dome" without the need for
American troops, sure as hot summer and hotter autumn is followed by nuclear winter.
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 6:55 pm
Reinhard Heydrich also was the coordinator of the Endlösung der Judenfrage (the Final Solution
of the Jewish Question) which meant the systematic extermination of the Jews living in the European
countries occupied by the Third Reich during the Second World War.
The plans for the Final Solution were outlined by Heydrich at the Wannsee Conference in January
1942. Later in 1942, Heydrich was assassinated by British-trained Czechoslovak agents in Prague
in Operation Anthropoid.
Heydrich's death led to a wave of merciless reprisals by German SS troops, including the destruction
of the villages of Lidice and Ležáky, and the killing of civilians.
In January 1943, Himmler delegated the office to SS-Obergruppenführer and General of Police
Dr. Ernst Kaltenbrunner, who headed the RSHA for the rest of World War II.
During the The International Military Tribunal at Nuremburg, Kaltenbrunner argued in his defense
that his position as RSHA chief existed only in title. He claimed that all decrees and legal documents
which bore his signature were "rubber-stamped" and filed by his adjutants.
Kaltenbrunner maintained that SS-Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler, as his superior, was the person
actually culpable for the atrocities committed during his tenure as chief of the RSHA.
The IMT noted that Kaltenbrunner was a keen functionary in matters involving the sphere of
the RSHA's intelligence network, but the evidence also showed that Kaltenbrunner was an active
authority and participant in many instances of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The IMT found Kaltenbrunner not guilty of crimes against peace. However, Kaltenbrunner was
found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and sentenced him to death by hanging.
Abe
June 23, 2015 at 7:29 pm
Interpol, the International Criminal Police Organization, was originally
founded in 1923 as the International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC). Its headquarters were
in Vienna.
Following Anschluss, the invasion and forced incorporation of Austria in 1938, the organization
fell under the control of Nazi Germany. Its headquarters were eventually moved to Berlin in 1942.
Between 1938 and 1945, the organization's presidents included Reinhard Heydrich and Ernst Kaltenbrunner.
All were generals in the SS, and Kaltenbrunner was the highest ranking SS officer executed after
the Nuremberg Trials.
After the end of World War II in 1945, the organization was revived as Interpol by officials
from Belgium, France, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom. The new Interpol headquarters were established
in France.
Until the 1980s, Interpol did not intervene in the prosecution of Nazi war criminals in accordance
with Article 3 of its Charter, which prohibited intervention in "political" matters.
Helge
June 23, 2015 at 5:16 pm
The NYT writes: "If he is not careful, Mr. Putin may end up facing
exactly what he has railed against - a NATO more firmly parked on Russia's borders - not because
the alliance wanted to go in that direction, but because Russian behavior left it little choice."
Not because the Alliance wanted to go in that direction???? Well, how did Russia "provoke" NATO
expansion then in the last 15 years? How then? Usually the NYT and others make the claim that
any free country is free to join whatever alliance it wants to, on a sudden Poland, Latvia etc.
have been driven in NATO by Russian threats? Which threats? How has the Russian sphere of influence
then expanded in the last 20 years? And the US had to place the missiles officially aimed at Iran
in such a way that they also aim at Russia? And now after the Iranian agreement there is not even
remotely any suggestion that perhaps they are redundant and could be removed? How is the Kremlin
to understand that? There is obviously something the NYT knows which we don't know….
The unprecedented militarisation of international relations and the standoff with Russia has
proven to be an absolute boon for Washington's military-industrial complex. To be sure, the Americans
are not defending Europe and the other NATO members out of chivalry.
Each new expenditure by NATO states – under the impetus of an alleged "threat of Russian expansion"
– is a boost for sales of US-made fighter jets, missiles, tanks, warships and much else.
george mcglynn
June 23, 2015 at 7:14 pm
Excellent analysis of the blatant ideological nonsense and misinformation
that is coming from the editorial page of the Times. Their foreign desk has been pedaling the
same lies from the beginning of the orchestrated coup, by the U.S., in the Ukraine.
George McGlynn
Abe
June 24, 2015 at 1:25 am
Kiev is still a coup that has not really consolidated its power. The
people trust this government less than the former. They know they were sold a bill of goods. Most
are powerless but not all, like Kiev's Deputy Minister of Defense, Major-General Alexander Kolomiets
who defected to Donbass this week. He has this to say:
"The potential of the Ukrainian army is at a very low level. From a moral point of view, all
the generals and officers who understand that the government's actions are criminal, don't want
to fight. Only volunteers from nationalist troops are fighting. In the near future the Armed forces
of Ukraine will be rocked by uprisings. Officers do not understand the commands to kill civilians.
We will see it sometime in the fall. Everything will change very soon."
While Kiev plays its waiting game, it is somewhat tied to that of the US and NATO, where the
6,000-man ready reaction force could be increase to 40,000 at the NATO conference next week. Four
divisions is a major offensive move. Much of this force is headed to the Baltic States who have
made a huge strategic blunder by offering themselves up for Western cannon fodder. The citizens
there need some new and better leadership, and quickly, like most of the rest of us do.
Moscow is also buying time to complete its military modernization and to complete building
with China and India the Eurasian integrated economic and military defensive Great Wall of Asia
that will be able to defend itself via mutually assured destruction. Yes, the Western leaders
are taking us backwards to that situation.
Apparently New York Times staffers are too busy pulling pranks regarding
mass shootings and mass death events to bother doing serious, hard-hitting and objective journalism:
"there was no coup in Ukraine in 2014, no U.S.-driven "regime change,"
no provocation"
And anyone who reminds readers of reality is called wild names, "Putinbot" or "comrade"
and the like. It is no different from the treatment of any critics of Israeli right wing policy
being called anti-semites or self-hating. This has grown so obnoxious in the NYT comments
that it has become a large proportion of comments.
"..."It makes me think of ... people, managers, businessmen who call themselves Christian and
they manufacture weapons. That leads to a bit of distrust, doesn't it?" he said to applause."
At rally of young people in Turin, Francis issues his toughest condemnation to date of the
weapons industry, criticizing investors as well as workers
People who manufacture weapons or invest in weapons industries are hypocrites if they call themselves
Christian, Pope Francis said on Sunday.
Duplicity is the currency of today ... they say one thing and do another --
-- Pope Francis
Francis issued his toughest condemnation to date of the weapons industry at a rally of thousands
of young people at the end of the first day of his trip to the Italian city of Turin. "If you trust only men you have lost," he told the young people in a long commentary about war,
trust and politics, after putting aside his prepared address.
"It makes me think of ... people, managers, businessmen who call themselves Christian and
they manufacture weapons. That leads to a bit of distrust, doesn't it?" he said to applause.
He also criticized those who invest in weapons industries, saying "duplicity is the currency of
today ... they say one thing and do another."
Francis also built on comments he has made in the past about events during the first and second
world wars. He spoke of the "tragedy of the Shoah", using the Hebrew term for the Holocaust.
"The great powers had the pictures of the railway lines that brought the trains to the concentration
camps like Auschwitz to kill Jews, Christians, homosexuals, everybody. Why didn't they bomb (the
railway lines)?"
Discussing the first world war, he spoke of "the great tragedy of Armenia", but did not use the
word "genocide". Francis sparked a diplomatic row in April, calling the massacre of up to 1.5 million
Armenians 100 years ago "the first genocide of the 20th century", prompting Turkey to recall its
ambassador to the Vatican.
"...In short, the propaganda we should be worried about is not Russia's, it's our
own. And it comes from just about every news article we're fed. We're much less than six degrees removed
from Orwell." . "...Western journalists claim that the big lesson they learned from their key role in selling
the Iraq War to the public is that it's hideous, corrupt and often dangerous journalism to give anonymity
to government officials to let them propagandize the public, then uncritically accept those anonymously
voiced claims as Truth. But they've learned no such lesson. That tactic continues to be the staple of
how major US and British media outlets "report," especially in the national security area. And journalists
who read such reports continue to treat self-serving decrees by unnamed, unseen officials – laundered
through their media – as gospel, no matter how dubious are the claims or factually false is the reporting."
Through the last decades, as we have been getting ever more occupied trying to be what
society tells us is defined as successful, we all missed out on a lot of changes in our world.
Or perhaps we should be gentle to ourselves and say we're simply slow to catch up.
Which is somewhat curious since we've also been getting bombarded with fast increasing amounts
of what we're told is information, so you'd think it might have become easier to keep up. It was
not.
While we were busy being busy we for instance were largely oblivious to the fact the US
is no longer a beneficial force in the world, and that it doesn't spread democracy or freedom.
Now you may argue to what extent that has ever been true, and you should, but the perception was
arguably much closer to the truth 70 years ago, at the end of WWII, then it is today.
Another change we really can't get our heads around is how the media have turned from a source
of information to a source of – pre-fabricated – narratives. We'll all say to some extent or another
that we know our press feeds us propaganda, but, again arguably, few of us are capable of pinpointing
to what extent that is true. Perhaps no big surprise given the overdose of what passes for information,
but duly noted.
So far so good, you're not as smart as you think. Bummer. But still an easy one
to deny in the private space of your own head. If you get undressed and stand in front of the mirror,
though, maybe not as easy.
What ails us is, I was going to say perfectly human, but let's stick with just human, and leave
perfection alone. What makes us human is that it feels good to be protected, safe, and prosperous.
Protected from evil and from hard times, by a military force, by a monetary fund, by a monetary union.
It feels so good in fact that we don't notice when what's supposed to keep us safe turns against
us.
But it is what happens, time and again, and, once again arguably, ever more so. What we think
the world looks like is increasingly shaped by fiction. Perhaps that means we live in dreamtime.
Or nightmare time. Whatever you call it, it's not real. Pinching yourself is not going to help. Reading
Orwell might.
The Sunday Times ran a story today -which the entire world press parroted quasi verbatim- that
claimed MI6 had felt compelled to call back some of its operatives from the 'field' because Russia
and China had allegedly hacked into the encrypted files Edward Snowden allegedly carried with him
to Russia (something Snowden denied on multiple occasions).
Glenn Greenwald's take down of the whole thing is – for good reasons- far better than I could
provide, and it's blistering, it leaves not a single shred of the article. Problem is, the die's
been cast, and many more people read the Times and all the media who've reprinted its fiction, than
do read Greenwald:
Western journalists claim that the big lesson they learned from their key role in selling
the Iraq War to the public is that it's hideous, corrupt and often dangerous journalism to give
anonymity to government officials to let them propagandize the public, then uncritically accept
those anonymously voiced claims as Truth. But they've learned no such lesson. That tactic continues
to be the staple of how major US and British media outlets "report," especially in the national
security area. And journalists who read such reports continue to treat self-serving decrees by
unnamed, unseen officials – laundered through their media – as gospel, no matter how dubious are
the claims or factually false is the reporting.
We now have one of the purest examples of this dynamic. Last night, the Murdoch-owned Sunday
Times published their lead front-page Sunday article, headlined "British Spies Betrayed to Russians
and Chinese." Just as the conventional media narrative was shifting to pro-Snowden sentiment in
the wake of a key court ruling and a new surveillance law, the article claims in the first paragraph
that these two adversaries "have cracked the top-secret cache of files stolen by the fugitive
US whistleblower Edward Snowden, forcing MI6 to pull agents out of live operations in hostile
countries, according to senior officials in Downing Street, the Home Office and the security services."
Please read Greenwald's piece. It's excellent. Turns out the Times made it all up.
At the same time, it's just one example of something much more expansive: the entire world view of
the vast majority of Americans and Europeans, and that means you too, is weaved together from a smorgasbord
of made-up stories, narratives concocted to make you see what someone else wants you to see.
Last week, the Pew Research Center did a survey that was centered around the question what 'we'
should do if a NATO ally were attacked by Russia. How Pew dare hold such a survey is for most people
not even a valid question anymore, since the Putin as bogeyman tale, after a year and change, has
taken root in 99% of western brains.
And so the Pew question, devoid of reality as it may be, appears more legit than the question
about why the question is asked in the first place. NATO didn't really like the results of the survey,
but enough to thump some more chests. Here's from an otherwise wholly forgettable NY Times piece:
Poles were most alarmed by Moscow's muscle flexing, with 70% saying that Russia was a major
military threat. Germany, a critical American ally in the effort to forge a Ukraine peace settlement,
was at the other end of the spectrum. Only 38% of Germans said that Russia was a danger to neighboring
countries aside from Ukraine, and only 29% blamed Russia for the violence in Ukraine. Consequently,
58% of Germans do not believe that their country should use force to defend another NATO ally.
Just 19% of Germans say NATO weapons should be sent to the Ukrainian government to help it better
contend with Russian and separatist attacks.
Do we need to repeat that Russia didn't attack Ukraine? That if after all this time there
is still zero proof for that, perhaps it's time to let go of that idea?
Over the past week, there have been numerous reports of NATO 'strengthening' its presence in Eastern
Europe and the Baltics. Supposedly to deter Russian aggression in the region. For which there is
no evidence. But if you ask people if NATO should act if one of its allies were attacked, you put
the idea in people's heads that such an attack is a real risk. And that's the whole idea.
This crazy piece from the Guardian provides a very good example of how the mood is manipulated:
The US and Poland are discussing the deployment of American heavy weapons in eastern Europe
in response to Russian expansionism and sabre-rattling in the region in what
represents a radical break with post-cold war military planning. The Polish defence ministry said
on Sunday that Washington and Warsaw were in negotiations about the permanent stationing of US
battle tanks and other heavy weaponry in Poland and other countries in the region as part of NATO's
plans to develop rapid deployment "Spearhead" forces aimed at deterring Kremlin attempts to destabilise
former Soviet bloc countries now entrenched inside NATO and the EU.
Warsaw said that a decision whether to station heavy US equipment at warehouses in Poland
would be taken soon. NATO's former supreme commander in Europe, American admiral James Stavridis,
said the decision marked "a very meaningful policy shift", amid eastern European complaints that
western Europe and the US were lukewarm about security guarantees for countries on the
frontline with Russia following Vladimir Putin's seizure of parts of Ukraine. "It provides
a reasonable level of reassurance to jittery allies, although nothing is as good as troops stationed
full time on the ground, of course," the retired admiral told the New York Times.
NATO has been accused of complacency in recent years. The Russian president's surprise
attacks on Ukraine have shocked western military planners into action. An alliance summit
in Wales last year agreed quick deployments of NATO forces in Poland and the Baltic states. German
mechanised infantry crossed into Poland at the weekend after thousands of NATO forces inaugurated
exercises as part of the new buildup in the east. Wary of antagonising Moscow's fears of western
"encirclement" and feeding its well-oiled propaganda effort, which regularly asserts that NATO
agreed at the end of the cold war not to station forces in the former Warsaw Pact countries, NATO
has declined to establish permanent bases in the east.
It's downright borderline criminally tragic that NATO claims it's building up its presence
in the region as a response to Russian actions. What actions? Nothing was going on until
'we' supported a coup in Kiev, installed a puppet government and let them wage war on their own citizens.
That war killed a lot of people. And if Kiev has any say in the matter, it ain't over by a long shot.
Poroshenko and Yats still want it all back. So does NATO.
When signing a post-cold war strategic cooperation pact with Russia in 1997, Nato pledged
not to station ground forces permanently in eastern Europe "in the current and foreseeable security
environment". But that environment has been transformed by Putin's decision to invade and annex
parts of Ukraine and the 1997 agreement is now seen as obsolete.
Meanwhile, Russia re-took Crimea without a single shot being fired. But that is still what the
western press calls aggression. Russia doesn't even deem to respond to 'our' innuendo, they feel
there's nothing to be gained from that because 'our' stories have been pre-cooked and pre-chewed
anyway. Something that we are going to greatly regret.
There are all these alphabet soup organizations that were once set up with, one last time,
arguably, good intentions, and that now invent narratives because A) they can and B) they need a
reason to continue to exist. That is true for NATO, which should have been dismantled 25
years ago.
It's true for the IMF, which was always only a tool for US domination. It's true for the CIA and
FBI, which might keep you safe if that was their intent, but which really only function to keep themselves
and their narrow group of paymasters safe.
It's also true for political unions, like the US and EU. Let's leave the former alone for now,
though much could be said and written about the gaping distance between what the Founding Fathers
once envisioned for the nation and what it has since descended into.
Still, that is a story for another day. When we can find our way through the web of narratives
that holds it upright. Like the threat from Russia, the threat from China, the threat from all the
factions in the Middle East the US itself (helped) set up.
The EU is much younger, though its bureaucrats seem eager to catch up with America in
fictitious web weaving. We humans stink at anything supra-national. We can have our societies
cooperate, but as soon as we invent 'greater' units to incorporate that cooperation, things run off
the rails, the wrong people grab power, and the weaker among us get sacrificed. And that is what's
happening once again, entirely predictably, in Greece.
That Spain's two largest cities, Barcelona and Madrid, have now sworn in far-left female mayors
this week will only serve to make things harder for Athens. Brussels is under siege, and it will
defend its territory as 'best' it can.
What might influence matters, and not a little bit, is that Syriza's Audit Commission
is poised to make public its findings on June 18, and that they yesterday revealed they have in their
possession a 2010 IMF document that allegedly proves that the Fund knew back then, before the first
bail-out, that the Memorandum would result in an increase in Greek debt.
That's potentially incendiary information, because the Memorandum -and the bailout-
were aimed specifically at decreasing the debt. That -again, allegedly- none of the EU nations have
seen the document at the time -let's see how the spin machine makes that look- doesn't exactly make
it any more acceptable.
Nor of course does the fact that Greece's debt could and should have been restructured, according
to the IMF's own people and 'standards', but wasn't until 2012, when the main European banks had
been bailed out with what was subsequently shoved onto the shoulders of the Greek population, and
had withdrawn their 'assets' from the country, a move that made Greece's position that much harder.
The narrative being sold through the media in other eurozone nations is that Greece is
to blame, that for instance German taxpayers are on the hook for Greek debts, while they're really
on the hook for German banks' losing wagers (here's looking at you, Deutsche!). And that
is, no matter how you twist it, not the same story. It's again just a narrative.
Once more, and we've said it many times before, Brussels is toxic -and so is the IMF- and Greece
should leave as soon as possible, as should Italy, Spain, Portugal. And we should all resist the
spin-induced attempts to demonize Putin, Athens and China any further, and instead focus on the rotten
apples in our own basket(s).
In short, the propaganda we should be worried about is not Russia's, it's our own.
And it comes from just about every news article we're fed. We're much less than six degrees removed
from Orwell.
US intelligence agencies have been angered by the amount of sensitive information being made public
as a result of German investigations into US surveillance after the
Edward Snowden revelations
two years ago.
German federal prosecutors announced on Friday that their investigation was being wound down because
they had been unable to find evidence that would stand up in court.
The investigation came after
Der Spiegel reported in October 2013 that the NSA had a database containing Merkel's personal
phone number. Merkel publicly expressed outrage and dispatched a team of senior German intelligence
officers to Washington, supposedly to extract a "no spy" agreement. When the row was its height,
the chancellor said: "The charges are grave and have to be cleared up."
A German federal investigation began last June but the office of the German chief prosecutor,
Harald Range, announced on Friday that it did not have an original NSA document proving the
NSA spied on Merkel.
"The documents published in the media so far that come from Edward Snowden also contain no
evidence of surveillance of the mobile phone used by the chancellor solid enough for a court,"
Range's office said. German prosecutors said they saw no prospect of success in continuing to
investigate.
The White House, responding to the Der Spiegel story in 2013, said it was not spying on Merkel
at present and nor would it in the future, but refused to say whether it had in the past, which was
interpreted by some as an admission of guilt.
But German prosecutors said:
"The vague comments by US officials about possible surveillance of the chancellor's mobile
telecommunication by a US intelligence service 'not any more' are not enough to describe what
happened. The comments, which were viewed in public as a general admission of guilt, do not discharge
us from (fulfilling) the burden of proof according to the requirements of criminal procedure."
The federal prosecutor's office received virtually no cooperation in its investigation from either
the NSA or Germany's equivalent, the BND.
Christoph Scheuermann, UK correspondent for Der Spiegel, said closure of the investigation was
about reassuring the US and showing that
Germany was going to be more
cooperative. "Merkel wants to be a good ally again after all the embarrassing things that have
happened," he said.
While German intelligence has a reputation for being solid on the Middle East, it remains heavily
reliant on the US for other parts of the world and may have feared the flow of information from the
US could be cut off, Scheuermann said.
Germany may also be reliant on US cooperation in helping keep tabs on foreign fighters in Syria
and Iraq with groups such as Islamic State, which is active on social media. The NSA has better access
to US-based internet providers than Germany.
"...A fantastic bit of writing irrelevance based on hearsay and speculation as non important
filler to shape opinion. God against Putin is the message, well done Guardian, following orders again,
brown nosing in case those nasty GCHQ people will come and threaten you again. " . "...The headline does not read 'Pontiff Meeting with Putin', which would confirm that Russia
is not as isolated as the Guardian would want, but 'Pope Urged to Take Stance against Putin' which confirms
the Guardians prejudice on all issues Russian." . "...Some one clearly earning their Agent of influence bonus." . "...Since the US has the EU firmly under its heel it's now moving on to bullying the Pope to further
the geopolitical goals of American hegemony? No doubt they threatened to sanction the Pope if he doesn't
fall into line." . "...Just another US stupidity. Hasn`t anyone the peace-nobel-prize-drone`s administration how
much Yanks are hated in South and Central America? Especially Argentina has suffered a lot because of
the US initiated coups and military goverments. ALL juntas, the one here in La Paz as well, were run
by the American Embassies. A lot of priests were tortured and killed as well. Hugo Chavez once said,
that the only goverment in the Western Hemisphere which doesn`t have to worry about a coup is the one
in the USA, because there is no American Embassy in Washington." . "...Many bureaucrats and politicians in the U.S. want to restart the Cold War with Russia as
a means of keeping the bloated U.S. military-industrial budget intact. Pope Francis appears to be an
impediment in this effort, as he is talking to everyone with some weird Christian notion about making
peace with one's enemies - he must be a communist, right?" . "...Hopefully, the Pope is intelligent enough to understand that the Ukraine crisis was provoked
by the US-backed removal of a democratically elected government. What has happened subsequently in the
country is the result of the coup. Moreover, behind the US backing for the coup, is its desire to continue
NATO's expansion on Russia's western border. Too many people today are confusing the original action,
i.e. the coup, with the reaction!" . "...The fact that the Pope elected to meet Putin means that he is completely disregarding the
ugly and meaningless blather coming from the neocon/neoliberal/neoevangelical/neofascist quarters and
is guided by the divine wisdom alone. Clearly, the neoconservatism has lost its global mojo and is now
reduced to vile global intrigue and worse." . "...When is Vatican going to start the process of excommunication of the pious catholic Tony
Blair, a self-serving politician that made the UK join the US in the illegal wars in the Middle East?
Hundreds of thousands of civilians are dead, including children and pregnant women. Hundreds of thousands
became handicapped. Millions are displaced. The western atrocities and politicking in ME have created
a monster of ISIS. Where is the voice of Church? Vatican is amazingly lenient towards the war criminal." . "...Well, whataya want: the Pope gets his daily news and instructions directly from God, while
the others get it from the US embassy."
The title of the article is very misleading. "Pope Francis WAS urged (by Hackett -surprise,
surprise!) to take tougher stance against Vladimir Putin". I am worried about the fact that the
relationship between the US and Russia are back to the hostility level of the pre-Gorbachev era
of Cold War, but without the red lines that had been understood between the United States and
the USSR. The communication lines are not in place any more either, and any accident could easily
escalate into Hot War, and then we are all toast...Nice of Obama to take the Global Warming seriously,
but what about the threat of Global Nuclear Annihilation???
RayJosephCormier Roger Tidy 10 Jun 2015 14:50
One of the 1st acts of the new Coup Leaders was to pass legislation removing Russian as an
Official Language in Ukraine, as it always had been up to that point in the majority Russian speaking
Eastern parts of Ukraine closest to Russia.
I expect other Western Leaders got to the new "appointed President" to have him VETO the legislation.
But it was too late to put the genie back in the bottle!
That singular action by the new Coup Leaders caused the rebellion more than anything else. That
happened before Russia re-claimed Crimea before the Americans got control in Ukraine.
Nolens 10 Jun 2015 14:49
It's Pope Francis task to be a mediator. He will not be stopped by instructions from whatever
corner. It's also important that Orthodox Christians and Catholics (like myself)keep on speaking
terms.
That doesn't mean the Pontiff should not address the situation in the Ukraine and appeal to Russia
to seek peace, truth and justice. In my opinion Russia is threatening the sovereignty of the Ukraine
and is waging war by proxy but the EU and the US have also share the responsibility for this awful
bloody conflict as it acted in a dangerous and irresponsible way by meddling in the internal affairs
of the Ukraine by supporting the removal of the elected president.
Maybe i'm naive but I really would like to see the EU, the Ukraine and Russia sit together and
try to make a peace deal. I would prefer a deal where the Crimea is officially handed over to
Russia and the Eastern oblasts remains an integral part of the Ukraine with safeguards for the
Russian speaking population. The severe issue of the MH17 should also be on the agenda. It must
be absolutely clear who was responsible. So, all the crimes committed in the Ukraine by whatever
side should be addressed including the downing of flight MH17. Like South-Africa and Northern
Ireland a truth and reconciliation commission could clear what was done and by whom. This will
also mean that those responsible will be brought to justice but will not serve any jail time as
it only would lead to another conflict. A UN force assembled from Asian and South-American nations
like Thailand and Brazil could keep the peace.
TiredOfBS_2015 chulumani 10 Jun 2015 14:41
Especially Argentina has suffered a lot because of the US initiated coups and military governments.
--
Ah, they've moved far beyond that... introduced themselves in Ukraine now.
Different continent, you know..
EightEyedSpy nishville 10 Jun 2015 14:37
My respect for Pope Francis would grow if he ordered the RCC in the US not to claim tax-exempt
status on the hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in revenue the RCC generates in
the US, including by ownership of residential and commercial rental properties.
Did you know the RCC is one of, if not the, biggest, property owners in NYC?
Roger Tidy Cedrins 10 Jun 2015 14:36
Let's not forget that the Ukraine is in crisis now because of AMERICAN interference, i.e. Washington's
support for the Kiev coup against a democratically elected government. Without that coup, there
would have been no rebellion by the people in the east of the country and no threat to Russia's
lawful military presence in Crimea. Russia, with the overwhelming backing of Crimea's predominantly
Russian population, had to act to ensure the continuation of Crimea as a base for its fleet and
to prevent the further provocative expansion of NATO on its borders. It could all have been so
different if, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO had been abolished at the same
time as the Warsaw Pact.
RayJosephCormier Cedrins 10 Jun 2015 14:33
And the US has overturned Democracies and installed, armed and supported many proxy Dictators.
The US has no problems with Dictatorships as long as they are friendly to US Business interests.
He who is without sin cast the 1st stone applies to Nations and Individuals.
Since WWII, the US has invaded and bombed only poor, backward, undeveloped, 3rd world Nations.
In a display of Divine Justice, most often the US ran away with their tails between their legs,
not able to get out fast enough. That's why they use remote controlled drones to attack people
without indoor plumbing or electricity for the most part. There are still those Americans who
maintain the US could "win" if they were more brutal in terrorizing the people, dropping more
bombs, Death and Destruction on them. The US is the only Nation to burn people alive in the other,
never discussed, nuclear holocaust of WWII.
ID9492736 Cedrins 10 Jun 2015 14:24
Who says that Serbia "lost its rights" on its territory and sovereignty? . United Nations Security
Council certainly did not (au contraire, UNSC resolution 1244 specifically says otherwise). United
Nations General Assembly did not. The International Court of Justice did not. Nobody but Bill
and Hillary Clinton said so.
And how is Serbia's "barbaric" (sic) behavior, which killer some 1,200 islamic terrorists on its
own soil any worse than the wholesale slaughter of nearly a million of Iraqi and more than quarter
million Aghan civilians?
There are no brutal tyrants in Serbia. The country is an open, transparent and democratic society
and a recognized regional ally of both US and Russia. If you don't believe me, ask the State Department.
sensitivepirate 10 Jun 2015 14:13
With regard to Putin, the US wants to destabilize Russia and hopefully move in and grab the
vast resources of the RF. The first and major goal is to remove Crimea from Russian control.
Going back a year and a half, in preparing the program for the overthrow of Yanukovich, the US
Dept. of Defense had fully developed plans, timetables, and logistics, and blueprints were drawn
up for new US military bases, air fields, and ports in Crimea. These plans were in 'ready mode'
and included the immediate cancellation of lease agreements between the RF and Ukraine, and of
course it included the immediate removal of the Russian fleet from Crimea.
The US Dept. of Defense is frustrated that their massive preparations for Crimea could not be
immediately implemented. It has lost its strategic plan to build a ready-military force for clandestine
incursions into Turkey, Syria, Russia, Iraq, Iran, Belarus, Lebanon, Gaza, etc.. This was the
biggest prize in the plan to overthrow the government of Ukraine.
Everything is on hold until Crimea is extricated from Russia, and the US now is begging Pope Francis
to help it in destabilizing Russia.
Botswana61 Solongmariane 10 Jun 2015 14:11
Indeed, USA supporting Maggie Thatcher's operation in the Falklands and supplying British troops
with the actionable info through its recon sats.
With Argentina being today a veritable economic basket case.
[2nd only to Greece]
MahsaKaerra kowalli 10 Jun 2015 13:59
Oh that one. Translated as "Kiev holds Russia responsible for the violation of any articles
of the European Convention on Human Rights in the area of the ATO".
Meaning Ukraine isn't going to enforce ECHR decisions on territory over which it has no control.
If you ask Slovenia to make such decisions on Italian territory you will get the same answer.
OMG, Slovenia is quitting the ECHR!!!1!
foolisholdman 10 Jun 2015 13:43
Kenneth Hackett, the US ambassador to the Holy See, said the Vatican "could say more about
concerns on territorial integrity".
Another US "statesman" who does not see the irony of what he is saying! Is he blissfully unaware
of how many countries the USA has violated the "territorial integrity" of ? Does he want the Pope
to criticise all countries that violate other countries' territorial integrity Or does it only
apply to Russia?
Oh! Silly me!! Of course it is all right for The USA to violate other countries' territorial integrity,
because they are exceptional !!! How could I forget?
geedeesee EightEyedSpy
Well, I've read extensively about the period in question to understand the circumstances as
Nazism developed, and though while reading different books I wasn't looking exclusively for the
views of the pope of the day, I did have an appreciation of the decline in the relationship between
Nazi Germany and the Vatican. Though your comments didn't ring true , I have checked with my books
and they've confirmed my understanding.
Not only did the Pope write several protests against the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1936,
he also delivered three papal encyclicals challenging the new creeds: against Italian Fascism
Non abbiamo bisogno (1931; 'We do not need (to acquaint you)'); against Nazism
"Mit brennender Sorge" (1937; 'With deep concern') and against atheist Communist Divini redemptoris
(1937; 'Divine Redeemer'). He also challenged the extremist nationalism of the Action Française
movement and anti-Semitism in the United States.
'Mit brennender SorgeIt' concerned Nazi Germany. It condemned "pantheistic confusion", "neopaganism",and
"the so-called myth of race and blood", and the idolising of the State.
To ensure it had the maximum effect, he had it translated into German and copies smuggled into
Nazi Germany so that they be secretly printed and distributed to all the Catholic churches of
Germany for reading from the pulpits Catholic parishes on Palm Sunday throughout the country in
1937.
The Nazis saw it as "a call to battle against the Reich", and Hitler was furious after it happened
and "vowed revenge against the Church". Churches were raided across the country and hundreds of
priests arrested. The Catholic church were seen as the major resistance and opposition to the
nazi regime at the time.
Over the years until the outbreak of war Catholic resistance stiffened until finally its
most eminent spokesman was the Pope himself with his encyclical 'Mit Brennender Sorge' ...
of 14 March 1937, read from all German Catholic pulpits... In general terms, therefore, the
churches were the only major organisations to offer comparatively early and open resistance:
they remained so in later years.
Extract from 'The History of the German Resistance 1933–1945' by Peter Hoffmann.
Once again you reveal your tendency to chip-in with your own version of history, disregarding
what actually happened, due either to your ignorance or malevolence. In other words, you've been
caught out again.
Michael West Joe King 10 Jun 2015 13:21
Again, this is another biased comment from you. Are you even from America?
The U.S. is one of the least religious countries on this planet. In fact, atheism is the fastest
growing demographic in the U.S. today.
More than 20% of Americans have "no faith".
Here is a Guardian article about the rise of atheism in America.
Here is another Guardian article about the rapid rise of atheist churches in America.
As for Fox News, it is not a religious channel. Fox has a weekly libertarian show hosted by
John Stossel where he talks about legalizing drugs, prostitution, euthanasia, and polygamy.
Here is a video of him talking about legalizing brothels -- which is already in sone states.
Fox's sister channel, FX, airs some of the moat violent & erotic shows on television.
Fox News is not a religious channel -- not even close.
kowalli 10 Jun 2015 13:17
Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjorn Jagland confirmed that he had received
notification from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine in Kiev on the retreat from the European
Convention on Human Rights.
robertthebruce2014 10 Jun 2015 13:16
The Guardian suffering from confirmation bias?
The headline does not read 'Pontiff Meeting with Putin', which would confirm that Russia is
not as isolated as the Guardian would want, but 'Pope Urged to Take Stance against Putin' which
confirms the Guardians prejudice on all issues Russian.
If ever there was a vassal state or satrapy more obedient to its master than Britain is to America
someone inform us please. India's Victorian relationship to the British Crown was less submissive
than Britain's obedience to American rule today.
EugeneGur MahsaKaerra 10 Jun 2015 13:10
You have trouble with memory? I can appropriate recommend medication.
Borders in Europe changed a lot before Putin had a chance to do anything or even came to the scene.
The reunification of Germany did not require border change in your view? The breakup of the Soviet
Union is not border change enough for you? The breakup of Yugoslavia? Kosovo rings a bell?
Crimea is sacred for the Russians, not just Orthodox but for every Russian because of its cultural
and historical significance. Ukrainians declared themselves to be not Russians but something quite
the opposite. If you must refer to someones statement, please, reproduce it accurately.
Babeouf 10 Jun 2015 13:10
How was the US suppose to know the Guardian would make such a big splash over this non event.
US ambassador, who knows diddly, gives advice to the Pope.
Yes its a funny story but that is not how the Guardian is playing it. Some one clearly
earning their Agent of influence bonus.
OneTop 10 Jun 2015 13:07
Since the US has the EU firmly under its heel it's now moving on to bullying the Pope to
further the geopolitical goals of American hegemony?
No doubt they threatened to sanction the Pope if he doesn't fall into line.
nnedjo 10 Jun 2015 13:03
Now what? If Pope Francis would now really started to criticize Putin "for the violation of
the sovereignty of Ukraine," then everyone would say, "You see, Pope Francis receives orders from
the US ambassador to the Vatican!" So, it would seem as if the US ambassador to the Vatican is
pontiff, and not that it is Pope Francis himself.
All in all, it was a very stupid public statement by the US ambassador in Vatican.
charrette 10 Jun 2015 13:01
"It shows the ignorance of the pope about the situation in Ukraine."
Perhaps, on the contrary, it shows that the Pope has done his homework and read, for example,
the recent excellent account by Richard Sakwa, Frontline Ukraine : crisis in the borderlands.
I recommend it to anyone who thinks the Russian stance is to be merely demonised. Sakwa deals
particularly well with decay of diplomatic protocols.
RayJosephCormier AbsolutelyFapulous 10 Jun 2015 12:55
No one was killed when the Russian troops, already in Crimea, came out of their barracks, compare
to millions killed in US invasions of other Nations so far from the continental US.
chulumani 10 Jun 2015 12:53
Just another US stupidity. Hasn`t anyone the peace-nobel-prize-drone`s administration how
much Yanks are hated in South and Central America? Especially Argentina has suffered a lot because
of the US initiated coups and military goverments. ALL juntas, the one here in La Paz as well,
were run by the American Embassies. A lot of priests were tortured and killed as well. Hugo Chavez
once said, that the only goverment in the Western Hemisphere which doesn`t have to worry about
a coup is the one in the USA, because there is no American Embassy in Washington.
So this freaky US troll tries to tell the Pope about the right thing to do? The Pope should
have told him tell that joker in the White House to stop invading other countries, torturing innocent
people, instigating terrible civil wars and financing as well as arming islamic terrorists.
nnedjo 10 Jun 2015 12:51
If the US ambassador to the Vatican dares to command the Pope what he has to say to Putin,
then imagine what the US ambassador to Ukraine was ordered to their President Yanukovych, before
he was deposed by violent coup.
And then they have the nerve to talk about "respect for the integrity and sovereignty of other
countries."
photosymbiont 10 Jun 2015 12:48
Many bureaucrats and politicians in the U.S. want to restart the Cold War with Russia as
a means of keeping the bloated U.S. military-industrial budget intact.
Pope Francis appears to be an impediment in this effort, as he is talking to everyone with some
weird Christian notion about making peace with one's enemies - he must be a communist, right?
Roger Tidy 10 Jun 2015 12:47
Hopefully, the Pope is intelligent enough to understand that the Ukraine crisis was provoked
by the US-backed removal of a democratically elected government. What has happened subsequently
in the country is the result of the coup. Moreover, behind the US backing for the coup, is its
desire to continue NATO's expansion on Russia's western border. Too many people today are confusing
the original action, i.e. the coup, with the reaction!
Albatros18 caliento 10 Jun 2015 12:46
It is called state visit, and when he does he achieves things. You remember what Abbott said
he would do to Putin when he met him? Abbott was shitting his pants. G7? They met, and what did
they achieve other than confirming that the EU is being hurt by the anti-Russian sanctions.
Jeffrey_Harrison jezzam 10 Jun 2015 12:46
Well, there's Libya; no boots on the ground but we bombed the shit out of them and there's
Yemen and Pakistan where we have ongoing drone wars. I'll grant you that Obama has mostly continued
the wars of his predecessor but now they're his. I would also point out that the Russian troops
that acted in Georgia were not invaders but were there as a peacekeeping force and the Russians
in Crimea were there in the Russian base in Sevastopol which was by arrangement with Ukraine.
While the US tries to make everybody look the other way, we send troops into Ukraine under the
guise of trainers. If we can send troops halfway around the world, why can't Russia send troops
across their border?
AngrySkeptic 10 Jun 2015 12:42
Kenneth Hackett, the US ambassador to the Holy See, said the Vatican "could say more
about concerns on territorial integrity".
I am always amused by anyone from the New World being serious about "territorial integrity".
All of those countries exist because they ignored the territorial integrity of the people who
were already living there. It was an American president who decided after WW1 to give a part of
Austria to Italy. It was an American president who took Kosovo away from the Serbs. "Territorial
integrity" mattered not a jot in the adjustments made after WW2, in Europe as much as in the Middle
East. What has this got to do with the Pope, whose main concern is with the spiritual welfare
of Catholics?
TiredOfBS_2015 10 Jun 2015 12:41
Pope Francis has been encouraged by a top American diplomat to take a tougher stance
against Vladimir Putin when he meets the Russian president
---
Wow...
So US "apparatchik" is patronizing Pope himself now...?
This is just marvellous..
So is it really works like this? US fella coming to all EU government officials and Telling
them what to do?
For a moment (long time ago), I've thought we have a representative democracy.
Apparently, by the actions taken by Brussels recently I can tell – Commission represents USA,
not me.
My opinion is surely ignored.
Actually nobody even bothers about my opinion. US is dictating how we are living now here,
in Europe. Just great.
secondiceberg Alessandro De Sando 10 Jun 2015 12:27
When a group of people, geographically, culturally, and political united, decide that they
want to pursue self-determination (a stated Western value once upon a time), that does not exactly
fit the definition of terrorism. We might call them freedom fighters. By your reckoning, Mandela
was a "terrorist".
ID9492736 jezzam 10 Jun 2015 11:43
This is not even hypothetically possible. Russian GDP is a fraction if American, roughly one
eighth of it (Russian $ 2.1 trillion, American about $17 trillion). For American corruption to
be lesser than Russian in absolute terms, American corruption would have to be lesser than 1/8th
of what is currently going on in Russia.
Anyone who has ever done business with an American corporation (be it private or government-owned),
or - heavens forbid - the City of New York - knows that such statements belong in science-fiction.
geedeesee annamarinja 10 Jun 2015 11:42
"war criminals among the flock. Blair is the prime example."
And Blair was re-elected in 2005. Popes have to have some contact with leaders of different
countries.
annamarinja Skallior 10 Jun 2015 11:39
No, he is not. Obama is a clever and loyal servant to the Plutocracy. He is own by the global
financial system and he has been doing everything in his power to please the system.
ID9492736 10 Jun 2015 11:34
The fact that the Pope elected to meet Putin means that he is completely disregarding the
ugly and meaningless blather coming from the neocon/neoliberal/neoevangelical/neofascist quarters
and is guided by the divine wisdom alone. Clearly, the neoconservatism has lost its global mojo
and is now reduced to vile global intrigue and worse.
With Pope as brilliant and as likable as this, I could easily become a Catholic myself (well,
perhaps for an hour or two). I am concerned, however, that the Vatican bankers and their City
of London bosses may not quite like the idea of Pope meeting Putin.
Habeas Papam, indeed. Bless ya, Frankie!
annamarinja cherryredguitar 10 Jun 2015 11:31
When is Vatican going to start the process of excommunication of the pious catholic Tony
Blair, a self-serving politician that made the UK join the US in the illegal wars in the Middle
East? Hundreds of thousands of civilians are dead, including children and pregnant women. Hundreds
of thousands became handicapped. Millions are displaced. The western atrocities and politicking
in ME have created a monster of ISIS. Where is the voice of Church? Vatican is amazingly lenient
towards the war criminal.
nobledonkey -> Alderbaran 10 Jun 2015 11:30
Who cares about Western Liberal Democracy in Russia? That's a purely western conceit.
The Pope's main concern here is peace and the long efforts to reunite the Catholic and the Orthodox,
something much, much more important than silly notions that the Americans are pushing.
secondiceberg -> jezzam 10 Jun 2015 11:25
If Putin had the slightest interest in re-establishing control over the former USSR countries,
he had a long time to do it, but he turned his attention to rebuilding the country he is president
of, with a lot of success until the U.S. recognized it might have to deal with another significant
economic entity.
We are left with the fact that it is the U.S. that now has de facto control over those countries,
through its apparent dictatorial power over the E.U. and its military arm, NATO. Maybe it is too
simplistic, but if you want to establish who desired control over those countries, it might be
well to look had who has control.
secondiceberg -> jezzam 10 Jun 2015 11:19
For someone who has no influence, Putin seems to be the constant focus of anguish and attention
by politicians and media in the West. Another day, another column, another wild-eyed speech about
Putin. Even Forbes once again names him as the most powerful person in the world (albeit after
a short introduction denouncing his "sins", with a list of transgressions that must surprise Putin.)
As for more positive influence that Putin possesses, you left off Brazil, India, China, South
Africa, a number of countries in Latin America, even Greece, Turkey, etc. This positive influence
is not gained by Western style bullying, but old-fashioned goodwill negotiation that seeks compromises
that recognize the interests of all countries involved.
Bogdanich 10 Jun 2015 11:18
The Pope will do no such thing and all this represents is a suggestion by an enormously corrupt
US administration about talking points they would like to see included when he speaks before the
US Congress in September 2015. Yes that idiot Bonyer invited the pope to speak as cover for inviting
Netenyahu against the wishes of the administration and so now they have a problem as they already
know what he is likely to say.
As an aside if you substitute the word "Fuhrer" for "Administration" it makes the point clearer
but then you get in trouble with the thought police.
Profhambone FallenKezef 10 Jun 2015 11:13
Absolutely! And the Pope should be wary of taking US advice. While our moderate republican
President Obama rails at Russia for interfering in the Ukraine (whose democratically elected President
was ousted in a US supported coup) we support countries with "great" human rights' records such
as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel, Communist China and Egypt while using drones in Pakistan, Yemen
and Iraq.
Hell, we even lost one to Iran when it flew "accidentally" over the Iraq-Iran border. Intact....
At one time the USSR was described as "the Evil Empire". The people who pointed and quoted
that forgot that there were 3 fingers pointing back at them.....The Pope should remember that.....
StatusFoe -> Expats10 10 Jun 2015 11:11
1) Oil and gas reserves off the coast
2) To kick the Russian Navy out of the most strategic port on the northern side of the Black Sea.
3) To block planned Russian pipelines under the Black Sea.
All very plausible for US energy and, by extension, military interests.
ConradLodziak 10 Jun 2015 10:58
Being Argentinian the Pope will be very familiar with US ignorance. Furthermore Francis does
not need 'advice' from an unqualified lightweight. He is perfectly capable of detecting western
propaganda in relation to Ukraine, Russia and Putin.
The latter has consistently demonstrated a strong stance against US hegemony and EU and eastern
European states willingness to tolerate neo-nazism. This stance has won Putin the respect of most
of the world. The US should be advised to mind their own business and focus their energies on
trying to become a civilised society.
Joe King 10 Jun 2015 10:40
As much as that tool Putin deserves an endless waterfall of cold criticism poured over his
head -
In this case, the Pope might also blast America for its newfound Christian fundamentalism that's
attacking its poor and marginalised, the wholescale militarisation of the US police into a violent
above-the-law force attacking its own people, how America's self-serving overseas wars and tinkering
has stirred up all kinds of trouble for Catholics/Christians in those countries, and so on.
Putin is a puffed-up little thug, so I'd wholeheartedly support the pope in criticising him -
just as, to be fair, I'd also want to see him criticising America for the many, many awful things
that It has done, and that are happening there.
Someone might tell the ambassador that the Pope's searing criticism of America would be true fairness
and equality before God. (Even if an atheist like me says so.)
VengefulRevenant -> jezzam 10 Jun 2015 10:32
Could this change of mind to 97% in favour of joining Russia be due to the fact that
the Crimea referendum was organised by the Russian army at gunpoint?
Or could it have had more to do with the right-wing/neo-fascist coup in Kiev that took place
between those polls you cite and the poll, the one where Crimeans officially expressed their desire
to leave Ukraine and join Russia? The latter obviously, because their change of mind has subsequently
been reflected in every poll taken since, even those conducted by US regime agencies. Crimean
support for Russia is genuine.
Jezzam, you're just making a dick of yourself here. "Forgetting" the US-backed coup is just ridiculous,
and nobody honest and informed believes that the people of Crimea want to be part of Ukraine.
Nobody.
Dani Jenkins jezzam 10 Jun 2015 10:31
Perhaps you could point me towards ANY democracy....
I see a light over my Greek border, but not equal representation of women in the London and Zuerich
elite echelons of the corporate class.
In case you had not noticed the exodus from the corrupt practice of empires, the wave of feudalism
and diseased minds , is heading your way. It looks to me like you have sucked the Hack(ett) job,
hook line and sinker.... look too at the article for the Congo and Soco's corruption of said "military"
and get back to me with any queeries:-)
You should be worried about your state, as it seems to me , Vlad has his well under control....you
on the other hand NOT....stop closing your eyes to corrupt practices that have corrupted the world
today, far more than Putin.... yermelai's comment holds credibility, yours a complete joke.
I see no sign of democracy whatsoever yet (Iceland excepted)....you are surely a man, well out
of Africa!
chulumani 10 Jun 2015 10:30
It just beggars belief. The rogue state USA which has been since decades going over this planet
with a flame thrower, initiating coups, installed bloody, military regimes, financed and created
terrorism and terrorist groups at will and financed civil wars whenever it helped their own agenda,
tries now to tell the Pope what to do and what not. After getting ready for a hostile takeover
of the FIFA, they seem to aim now for the Vatican as well.
Not even the Nazis dared that.
johnbonn 10 Jun 2015 10:27
This Pope has shown that he can think, speak and act for himself.
The CIA now wants the Pope to go against the largest Christian country. Isn't geo politics entertaining.
On the other hand the CIA always goes around the world telling people what to think and what to
do. The CIA would even tell God to sanction the RF, so Hunter Biden doesn't lose his job.
If Pope Francis doesn't listen to the CIA /ambassador, he could be in trouble. Reports of his
Vatican enemies are already circulating. Cardinal John Law is the chief of suppressing criminal
behavior in all church affairs. He never saw a pedophile he didn't like.
Now the CIA is streaming anti Russia messages through the Internet into Crimea, to turn Crimeans.
Russians will never allow Crimea to be occupied by the west.
RayJosephCormier Alessandro De Sando 10 Jun 2015 10:26
Does Obama think about the terrorism he is supporting in Syria, half way across the world from
the US, but Russia cannot do anything when the US engineers a Coup d'Etat on Russia's border?
Such hypocritical, double standard BS will not cultivate a more peaceful world, but the opposite!
Is it right for Obama to change the regimes in other Nations so far from the US? Iraq was an illegal
invasion since the only world body that could have given permission for the invasion, denied the
permission. The US setting the example, broke International Law, but demands other Nations follow
it or be punished, Israel being the exception.
geedeesee -> jezzam 10 Jun 2015 10:22
Not when you look at the survey. 68% had warm attitude towards Russia; only 14% to EU.
And only 14% consider themselves Ukrainian; the vast majority Russian/Crimean. No doubt their
position shifted further after they witnessed the coup in Kiev.
Pope Francesco and Putin-probably the two most wise, intelligent and carismatic leaders on
earth!
They are the defensors of christians, unlike the west, which send weapons to anti-christian terrorist
groups, for example in Syria.
Up the Pope!
Up Putin!
Up the Catolics and the Ortodoxs!
VengefulRevenant 10 Jun 2015 09:11
The pontiff has chided world leaders for seeking to diminish anti-Christian violence
and the topic is likely to be raised on Wednesday.
Actually the pope would be pleased and grateful if world leaders would take action to "diminish
anti-Christian violence."
The literal meaning of "diminish" - to reduce - overpowers the writer's apparent intended meaning
- to discount - creating another absurdity in this rubbish article.
SHappens 10 Jun 2015 09:02
What a delirious article. Putin pariah on the world's stage is risible. The World does not
resume the US and its poodles. The symptom of a European order, [or] European architecture, which
has not found its stability at the end of the cold war has all to do with NATO's aggressive expansion
towards Russia's borders.
Putin and the Pope already shared the same views about Syria thus it is not excluded that they
might also have the same view about the fratricide war in Ukraine, brought to you by the US. Unless
the next US coup will be to oust the Pope since he doesnt comply with their hegemony's plans and
resist to their pressures.
MaoChengJi -> HollyOldDog 10 Jun 2015 08:57
Well, whataya want: the Pope gets his daily news and instructions directly from God, while
the others get it from the US embassy.
AnimalFarm2 10 Jun 2015 08:53
Why? because you don't like Putin? Well I can list a whole load of Americans the Pope should
ex-communicate, starting with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice. To name a few!
philbo 10 Jun 2015 08:52
"The presidential visit underscores Russia's cosy relationship with Italy at a time when
Putin is otherwise being treated as a pariah on the world stage."
the world stage -- you mean by world the US and its poodles in Europe but that doesn't include
China, India, Brasil and all the rest of the countries that don't have a voice on the global stage.
As Usual Imperial US has to bully other countries who dare to think differently and it can't bear
dissent from some of its allies.
Justin Thyme 10 Jun 2015 08:47
A fantastic bit of writing irrelevance based on hearsay and speculation as non important
filler to shape opinion. God against Putin is the message, well done Guardian, following orders
again, brown nosing in case those nasty GCHQ people will come and threaten you again.
Andrew Morten was the death knell for investigative journalism in the UK as the unreported is
hidden with crap like this. Infotainment sols as information and knowledge.
VengefulRevenant 10 Jun 2015 08:28
The presidential visit underscores Russia's cosy relationship with Italy at a time when
Putin is otherwise being treated as a pariah on the world stage.
What an extremely stupid, ignorant thing to write. It's deranged.
Putin is not a pariah by any objective standard. The only countries treating him as such are the
NATO imperialist regimes and a smattering of other US satellites, i.e. a tiny minority of the
world's states including an even tinier minority of the world population.
This is the absurdity of atavistic Eurocentrism in a world that has definitively stopped revolving
around the white empires. It smacks of "Heavy Fog in Channel, Continent Cut Off."
MaoChengJi 10 Jun 2015 08:19
In February, the pontiff referred to the bloodshed in the Ukrainian conflict as "fratricidal",
a comment seen as controversial in Ukraine, where the violence is viewed as a direct consequence
of Russian aggression.
Obviously, the Pope is a separatist and FSB agent. 7 years. Next!
"..."Derp" is a term borrowed from the cartoon "South Park"...:
people who keep saying the same thing no matter how much evidence accumulates that it's completely
wrong. ..."
What am I talking about here? "Derp" is a term borrowed from the cartoon "South Park"...:
people who keep saying the same thing no matter how much evidence accumulates that it's completely
wrong. ...
And there's a lot of derp out there. Inflation derp, in particular, has become more or less
a required position among Republicans. ... And that tells you why derp abides: it's basically
political. ...
Still, doesn't everyone do this? No... There's also plenty of genuine, honest analysis out
there - and you don't have to be a technical expert to tell the difference.
I've already mentioned one telltale sign of derp: predictions that just keep being repeated
no matter how wrong they've been in the past. Another sign is the never-changing policy prescription,
like the assertion that slashing tax rates on the wealthy, which you advocate all the time, just
so happens to also be the perfect response to a financial crisis nobody expected.
Yet another is a call for long-term responses to short-term events – for example, a permanent
downsizing of government in response to a recession. ...
So ... how can you ... protect yourself against derpitude? The first line of defense, I'd argue,
is to always be suspicious of people telling you what you want to hear.
Thus, if you're a conservative opposed to a stronger safety net, you should be extra skeptical
about claims that health reform is about to crash and burn, especially coming from people who
made the same prediction last year and the year before (Obamacare
derp runs almost as deep as inflation derp).
But if you're a liberal who believes that we should reduce inequality, you should similarly
be cautious about studies purporting to show that inequality is responsible for many of our economic
ills, from slow growth to financial instability. Those studies might be correct - the fact is
that there's less derp on America's left than there is on the right - but you nonetheless need
to fight the temptation to let political convenience dictate your beliefs.
Fighting the derp can be hard, not least because it can upset friends who want to be reassured
in their beliefs. But you should do it anyway: it's your civic duty.
I Do Not Think That Derp Means What You Think It Means By Paul Krugman
Continuing on the theme of derp in policy discourse: * Vox coincidentally has a post ** about
Hillary Clinton's proposal for automatic voter registration noting that signing up less informed
voters isn't necessarily a bad thing, because "informed" voters mainly seem to be informed about
the party line. In effect, they know which derp they're supposed to repeat.
Indeed, regular viewers of Fox are worse at answering simple questions about reality than people
who watch no news at all.
Meanwhile, however, I'm getting a lot of people saying "Oh yeah? You do derp more than anyone!"
No, I don't. You may believe that I am evil or stupid, or evil andstupid. But derp means something
specific: it means always saying the same thing, regardless of circumstances, and regardless of
past errors. Declaring that the Federal Reserve's policies are going to cause hyperinflation,
year after year, when it keeps not happening is derp. Declaring that we need aggressive fiscal
and monetary expansion when the economy is depressed isn't. It's not an invariant claim - in fact,
I get accused (stupidly) of some kind of inconsistency because I thought deficits were bad under
Bush but good under Obama. And it's not a prediction that has repeatedly proved false.
What the accusers really mean here is that I keep saying things they dislike and dispute. But
that's not derp, that's just disagreement. There's a difference, and only the derpy fail to grasp
that difference.
It's a lefty version of Republican derp. They know Obummer is a centrist sellout, ergo Obamacare
is bad.
I just think the stats speak for themselves and will so increasingly as times go by.
With inflation and monetary policy, the derp is strong even on the left. It's harder to argue
conclusively about macro which is why it's so vulnerable to derp.
The president who protected the culprits who made the 2008 banking crash is center-left? The
president who then protected the felonies of robo-signing is center-left? The president whose
policy caused the destruction of half of black American net worth is center-left? The president
who prosecuted more whistleblowers more aggressively than any in history is center-left?
The president who continues to maintain classified state secret status of a trade treaty that
he is pushing through Congress is center-left?
It starts with our something our gold bug cultist (JohnH) should read:
It is amazing how economic reporters continue to repeat nonsense about deflation. As fans of
arithmetic and logic everywhere know, deflation is bad for the same reason a lower rate of inflation
is bad. It raises the real interest rate at a time when we want a lower real interest rate and
it increases the real value of debt when we want to see the real value of debt reduced. (The real
interest rate is the nominal interest minus the inflation rate.)
Well, I finally caught pgl in a lie. He has not read Piketty! If he had read Piketty he would
understand what he said about inflation. It's all over the book.
Piketty said, "inflation in
France and Germany averaged 13 and 17 percent a year, respectively, from 1913 to 1950. It was
inflation that allowed both countries to embark on reconstruction efforts of the 1950s with a
very small burden of public debt," (because they had effectively eliminated the public debt via
inflation.)
Regarding Britain, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the British monarchy chose to
borrow without limit to finance wars. "it would take a century of budget surpluses to gradually
reduce Britain's debt to under 30 percent of national income in the 1910s."
During the 20th century "in Britain, things were done differently [from France and Germany:]
more slowly and with less passion. Between 1913 and 1950, the average rate of inflation was a
little more than 3 percent a year...Britain was fully mobilized to pay for the war effort without
undue dependence on the printing press, with the result that by 1950 the country found itself
saddled with a colossal debt, more than 200 percent of GDP, even higher than in 1815. Only with
the inflation of the 1950s (more than 4 percent a year) and above all of the 1970s (nearly 15
percent a year) did Britain's debt fall to around 50 percent of GDP." This experience helps explain
why British politicians are more sensitive to a high structural deficit (5.7% of GDP) than liberal
economists, who could care less about such things.
pgl (and many liberal economists) think that massive debt levels are a free lunch, and that
there are no consequences! However, as interest rates, as eventually they must, and governments
must roll over debts, debt service impinges on the government budget, necessitating increases
in taxes or decreases in investments and services. Alternatively, governments can choose to just
inflate away their debts, as France and Germany did, something that liberal economists do not
seem to particularly concerned about, despite the adverse impact on significant portions of society.
And just what did pgl see in Piketty? Surely not that France and Germany used it to wipe out the
public debt. And surely not that Britain soldiered 25 years under the burden of its public debt
after WWII rather than resorting to inflation.
I guess pgl conveniently skimmed over a lot of
things that he disagreed with, even though this was repeated several times in the book.
"Only with the inflation of the 1950s (more than 4 percent a year) and above all of the 1970s
(nearly 15 percent a year) did Britain's debt fall to around 50 percent of GDP."
This is funny because you earlier said the UK did not use inflation to lower its public debt.
I and Anne noted that its inflation rate since 1955 has been higher than that of France, Germany,
and the UK. And Piketty notes it was high too.
Do make up your mind someday - please. Every one has noticed how much your fact free rants
contradict each other. It is getting really embarrassing.
JohnH has figured out that there was a lot of inflation in Germany between World War I and World
War II. Wow! The economic issues for the Weimer Republic have been long discussed. The Treaty
of Versailles and its war reparations was the subject of Keynes first important thesis, which
has been widely discussed but I guess JohnH missed that discussion and its importance for the
Greek situation. It was this issue that the government used as its excuse for excessive monetary
growth and the resulting hyperinflation. But that ended and the 1924-1929 Golden Era followed.
I guess JohnH missed that too.
But the real crisis – which is what led to Hitler displacing
this regime – was when they listened to gold bug idiots like JohnH, PeterK has reminded us of
Brüning's policy of deflation which led to a massive recession. I guess JohnH has chosen to ignore
this. But Piketty noted in his book. Funny that JohnH never mentions the disaster that listening
to his gold bug stupidity led to.
pgl still thinks that high public debt is a free lunch...I mean, what could go wrong? The
experiences of Germany, France and Britain mean nothing to him.
Now, pgl, can you tell
me exactly why Piketty doesn't like inflation? And can you tell me the only thing that Piketty
thinks is worse than inflation?
Now we'll see if pgl has read Piketty, as he claims.
"But if you're a liberal who believes that we should reduce inequality, you should similarly
be cautious about studies purporting to show that inequality is responsible for many of our economic
ills, from slow growth to financial instability."
Following up on that point, Sandwichman
has a comment on Dean Baker's response to Krugman's blog post, "Musings on Inequality and Growth"
In response to musings by Paul Krugman on inequality and growth, Dean Baker asks whether taking
more of the benefits in leisure time might skew the appearance of the data. That is to say if
the value of leisure wasn't excluded from GDP, those countries that took more leisure -- and,
incidentally, are relatively more equal -- would have higher growth rates.
Ironically, Dean doesn't have the time just now to check that one out. Sandwichman has time
but not Dean's virtuosity with data.
As Krugman argues, "there just isn't a striking, simple relationship between inequality and
growth; all the results depend on doing fairly elaborate data massaging..." There isn't a striking
result to be had from the data for a good reason. There isn't a single relationship in the underlying
reality. The results are also constrained by what questions are being asked.
The presumptive question seems to be whether inequality is good or bad for growth. Is that
the only question worth asking? Is it the best question? Dean framed his question about leisure
as a supplement. He remarks, mock apologetically, "there is nothing wrong with taking the benefits
of higher productivity in the form of leisure rather than income."
Wanna bet?
There must indeed be "something wrong" with taking the benefits of higher productivity as leisure.
Otherwise, why would economists echo, decade after decade, the lump-of-labor refrain against the
"fallacy" of reducing working time? If there really was nothing wrong with taking the benefits
of productivity as leisure, then, hey presto, that boilerplate injunction would be superfluous
-- inappropriate, even.
Are economists ignoring the obvious?
Sixty years ago, Simon Kuznets -- who won the Sveriges Bank ("Nobel") Prize for his pioneering
work in national income accounting -- was puzzled by his finding that for a limited sample of
industrially-advanced countries, inequality didn't increase with growth. He was puzzled, in part,
because ceteris paribus, "the cumulative effect of such inequality in savings would be the concentration
of an increasing proportion of income-yielding assets in the hands of the upper groups." This
was the famous inverted "U"-shaped Kuznets curve. Subsequent research by Thomas Piketty has shown
the curve to be an anomalous statistical artifact of the periodization and country selection.
There are a multitude of factors that could explain the Kuznets curve anomaly and it is doubtful
that knot could ever be untangled. But let me suggest a factor candidate. The period in which
the Kuznets curve prevailed was the period in which the eight-hour day became standardized in
the industrially-advanced countries. Instead of looking exclusively at the relationship between
growth and inequality, might there not be greater insight gained from investigating the triad
of growth, inequality and leisure?
Paul Krugman questions * whether there is an existence of positive relationship between equality
and growth. He rightly cautions those on the left against being too quick to accept the existence
of such a relationship.
He uses a simple graph showing the relationship between inequality and growth per working age
person in the years 1985 to 2007. His takeaway is that there is not much a positive relationship,
but there clearly is no negative relationship between equality in growth. In other words, the
people who are that we need to have more inequality to support stronger growth have a hard case
to make using this simple comparison.
I would suggest taking the analysis one step further. One big difference between countries
over this period is the extent to which they opted to take the benefits from growth in more leisure
time. There are large differences in the decline in the length of the average work year across
countries.
Using the OECD data ** (which is not perfect for international comparisons) we find that relatively
equal France saw a decline in average work hours of 10.2 percent over this period. Denmark had
a decline of 5.3 percent, and West Germany had a drop of 15.9 percent. These would translate into
annual increases in GDP per potential work hour of 0.5, 0.2, and 0.8 percentage points, respectively.
By contrast, in the relatively unequal U.K. the drop in average hours was 4.7 percent, in Canada
3.1 percent, and in the U.S. 2.2 percent. These translates in gains in annual GDP per potential
hour worked of 0.2, 0.1, and 0.1 percentage points, respectively.
Would looking at GDP per potential hour worked strengthen the positive correlation between
equality and growth? I don't have time to check that one just now, but a quick eyeballing of the
data suggests that it is possible. This still would not be conclusive evidence that equality is
good for growth, but it would be interesting. And, it is an important reminder that there is nothing
wrong with taking the benefits of higher productivity in the form of leisure rather than income.
The planet will thank you for it.
I've been using the case of research on inequality and growth as an example of an issue where
liberals need to be careful not to let wishful thinking drive their conclusions; it would fit
perfectly with our world view if inequality were not just a bad thing but also bad for the economy,
which is a reason to bend over backwards to avoid accepting that conclusion too easily. But what
do we really know?
Well, there have been a number of studies that seem to find a negative relationship, all based
on some kind of international cross-section approach (some with time-series aspects too). So what
is my problem? In general, I have doubts about the whole growth regression methodology, which
has lots of problems in identifying causation (remember, that's the methodology behind the Reinhart-Rogoff
debt-threshold paper). Beyond that, there just isn't a striking, simple relationship between inequality
and growth; all the results depend on doing fairly elaborate data massaging, which might be right
but might also be teasing out a relationship that isn't really there.
Let me give you a picture showing what I think we know. It compares inequality with growth;
I've made some data choices that others may wish to do differently, so let me explain those details.
First, instead of raw Ginis I use the new Gornick-Milanovic numbers * for households without members
over 60. Second, I measure growth in real GDP per working-age adult (15-64), because raw GDP per
capita is significantly affected by demographic divergence. Third, I look at the period 1985-2007
- essentially, the Great Moderation - because I'm not talking about macroeconomic policy. Oh,
and finally I exclude both transition economies (which went from Communist to very poor capitalist
circa 1990, and have very different stories) and Ireland, which grew so fast that it's hard to
see anything else.
Here's what I get:
[Growth in GDP per working-age adult, 1985-2007]
If you squint, maybe you see a very slight negative relationship here (R-squared of 0.02, if
you care), but it's not much. Basically, there isn't much difference in growth rates overall;
the low-inequality northern Europeans have a range of outcomes not noticeably different from the
high-inequality Anglo-Saxons.
I might also note that low inequality is no protection against financial crisis - the Nordics
had some major ones in the early 1990s. Also Denmark and the Netherlands have very high levels
of household debt.
It's important to realize that the absence of any clear relationship is a big win for progressives:
right-wingers always claim that any attempt to reduce inequality will hurt the feelings of job
creators and kill growth, but there's not a hint of that problem in the data. But not much evidence
that failure to reduce inequality kills growth, either. And I personally am making an effort not
to be greedy - not to claim that a drive against inequality, which I view as crucially important
for social and political reasons, is also the cure for lots of other things.
There have been a number of studies done on this, including the fact that arguing with "Derps"
makes them go to ridiculous logical extremes to justify their beliefs. It's counterproductive
to argue with them. I cover this in this article:
Yes, there is no chance of persuading with facts someone whose mind is made up. One would
have a better chance with a fence post. The only point to such an argument is for the sake of
the spectators -- if there is an undecided audience.
I much prefer liberal applications of prozac and/or a baseball bat to those people. Far
more effective than a fence post. And in the case of the drug they may actually become human.
Actually Guardian does mention "far-right groups" attacks. Still this short article does contain
cowardly phase "unknown assailants" -- "Dozens of unknown assailants have attacked a gay rights
march in Kiev, injuring several marchers and police officers." As in all such cases Guardian does
not allow comments to the article because commenters would reveal double standard it practice in
covering such events, depending of the GB establishment position toward particular country. Nothing
surprising. Standard practice of "free press".
The gay pride pride march in Kiev lasted all of 30 minutes. After the organizers rejected
mayor Vitaly Klitschko's request that they cancel the march, just 300 people turned up. As they
threatened, Right Sector duty attacked the march and dispersed it.
Meanwhile the western media persists in its cover up. The most outrageous is the Guardian. It
reports that the gay pride march in Kiev was dispersed. However, it says it was attacked by
"unknown assailants".
That is a straight lie. There is nothing "unknown" about the assailants.
"...I find it personally offensive if people in other EU states who don't even know me make the
assumptions you allude to purely on what they know about handful of people who represent their own
xenophobic interests and not the decent majority of the UK population. "
"...Since 1997 (legitimate) immigration to this country has been at a rate of 500,000 a year -
roughly 9,000,000 over the past 18 years. How can you suggest that the need to build on green land,
to accommodate an extra 9,000,000 people, is the result of governmental failings. It is simple fact
that people need to have somewhere to live, and there simply isn't enough housing stock nor
available brownfield land to build on to accommodate such a number without building on greenbelt
land."
"...I am from Germany and have been following the discussion on England and EU for some 20
years. The debate has not lost any of its momentum, though the pro and cons have not changed much. I
have come to believe that the mind set in England is completely different from Europe. The focus
there is on the economic advantages and on the loss of sovereignty."
This article is just a load of straw man arguments!
1. Just because we leave the EU does not then mean that Britain is then treated like a third
world country run by a mad despot. Travelling in and out of the EU would still be very easy
for British passport holders.
2. Retiring to pretty much ANY country in the world with a British passport is easy. I have
met retirees in Goa, India; Koh Chang, Thailand and California, America. Most countries in the
world would welcome us because we are British (goddamit).
3. Nonsense! You think Spain is going to start making it difficult for Brits to buy a second
home there? With their economy as it is? Yeah, I didn't think so.
4. Rubbish. How do you know this would happen? Pro-tip: You don't. I have bought stuff from
China and found I have consumer rights there. Yeah, I know right!
5. OH NOEZZ!! Trade with some EU countries lost. But wait... Trade with whoever we want in the
rest of the world? Yay! Triples all round. I'm buying.
6. This makes no sense.
7. Ok this one could be true. So that's one benefit of the EU I can see. -_-
8. HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS??
9. Oh yeah, we leave the EU and start throwing rubbish everywhere. That'll happen.
10. Nonsense. You just made this up. And besides, if you're implying that these thieves are
all from the EU, they won't be allowed entry in the future, right?
This article is another reason why I am finding The Guardian becoming more of a joke.
Do better.
Brucey7 happyki11 7 Jun 2015 19:35
Rather than jumping in with unjustified assumptions about those who hold views on
immigration it would be sensible to look at the matter from an objective point of view.
You suggest that both Tory and Labour governments are responsible for the 'problems'. The
problem I raised is one of the requirement to build on the countryside to accommodate a
growing population. Since 1997 (legitimate) immigration to this country has been at a rate of
500,000 a year - roughly 9,000,000 over the past 18 years. How can you suggest that the need
to build on green land, to accommodate an extra 9,000,000 people, is the result of
governmental failings. It is simple fact that people need to have somewhere to live, and there
simply isn't enough housing stock nor available brownfield land to build on to accommodate
such a number without building on greenbelt land.
Steve Belsey -> Abiesalba 7 Jun 2015 18:29
I am from UK, I have not blackmailed anyone, I have not demanded special treatment, I am
against a referendum, and a member of a political party that was not calling for a referendum
at the last election, I am against discrimination in all forms, I am 100% commi8tted to
freedom of movement across the EU, and even more so I am in favour of use o cohesion and
structural funding to promote equality of opportunity across Europe. I believe in mutuality
and reciprocity, so much that I work for a cooperative = a structure embodied with an EU
Directorate Generals- sorry if I spelt it wrong, I cant remember which one. I have worked on
Intergra, Adapt, Leonardo and Horizon transnational programmes So which of the above
statements do you consider unconstructive, unreliable or disloyal? Oh yeas, I forgot to
mention, I have been in a long term long relationship with my partner from the Czech public. I
find it personally offensive if people in other EU states who don't even know me make the
assumptions you allude to purely on what they know about handful of people who represent their
own xenophobic interests and not the decent majority of the UK population. I have said
repeatedly I am pro closer integration, especially in social policy. If you find this attitude
unacceptable, then by definition you have isolationist views and sure that is what decent
people should be objecting to.
praha7 -> countofmontecristo 7 Jun 2015 18:24
My very first comment answered your question i.e. Britain declared war on Germany in
response to the invasion of Poland. The fact that this was not of immediate help to Poland was
because it was impossible to help straight away.
Perhaps you will answer this question which is how could Britain have provided arms,
finance, supplies etc etc. Think about it and I think you will see that it was impossible.
The reason that I brought up the present day situation is that some of the countries in the
east appear to have what I think is a similar misplaced confidence in their new and not so new
allies.
countofmontecristo -> praha7 7 Jun 2015 18:03
There's quite a big difference though from launching a ground offensive to doing absolutely
nothing. Britain could have provided arms, finance, supplies etc, etc but effectively left
Poland to it's own devices. You seem to be trying to answer points that I'm not trying to make
- nothing to do with the current situation with Russia or NATO. I'm not Polish, nor do I have
an axe to grind with or against the Poles or Russia. The point that I've made repeatedly
(which you haven't answered) is that Britain didn't follow through on it's responsibilities -
it turned its back on an ally in its time of need.
Hellmut1956 7 Jun 2015 17:50
I guess there is one mayor difference on the view and attitude towards the EU which at the
end I do believe is the problem with the UK people! For continental members of the EU, mainly
those being a part of it since the effort was initiated, the EU is a project to prevent that
to repeat that happened 2 times in the 20th century: War!
As a consequence it is the attitude of many of the citizens in those founding members, that we
all have to contribute to make this project EU a success!
This is at the same time what is wrong with you my dear friends in the UK. You see the EU
merely as a source to national benefits and if those are at any risk you want special deals!
Well, we "old member states citizens" see that the press, the politicians and the political
environment within the UK keeps its citizen not well informed and is not doing what should be
done, to inform you so you can educatedly contribute.
We in Germany see many of the objectives and positions expressed by the UK politicians and
reflected in the activities where UK politicians do contribute to the EU inner work as being
pretty close to our own positions. As a consequence we would regret if the UK leaves the EU!
The article behind this comments is just focusing on trying to present some of the
consequences of the UK leaving the EU.
But to my personal believe, the most critical consequence for a UK after leaving the EU is,
that the UK would still have to comply with EU laws when dealing with the EU while not having
voting power anymore! Take it or leave it is the consequence!
TheTrueHarryPotter 7 Jun 2015 17:15
I am from Germany and have been following the discussion on England and EU for some 20
years. The debate has not lost any of its momentum, though the pro and cons have not changed
much.
I have come to believe that the mind set in England is completely different from Europe. The
focus there is on the economic advantages and on the loss of sovereignty.
In Germany we just have got used to the EU that coexists with the concept of a
nation state. Whether it is better for the economy is difficult to say, how should I know, but
it just seems to be logical to me that a supranational organization is better suited to
address European wide issues. Maybe the EU is not perfect, but it is a platform that one
should attempt to change and not to throw away.
I do not know any country that abuses the EU for domestic politics to the same extent as
England does. I do not know of any politician of rank who defends the EU.
"...- that it's
enacting violence as a yearning to return to Islam's most primitive and literal beliefs,
an attempt to time travel, per se, to a medieval past, and in so doing, an attempt to excise modernity
itself from the world (hence its ferocious attacks on other Muslims who have overwhelmingly abandoned
those archaic beliefs and teachings) -- equal parts enlightening and chilling. "
"...The Soviets were fighting on the side of those Afghans
echo wanted to rid their country of such scum. The seppos with their British and Saudi running dogs
were the ones who helped these scum win on Afghanistan. They got a thank you on 11/9/01."
"...ISIL remind me of USA from history books. A lot of people unite under an idea, take over
land, wipe history and population to a maximum possible extent in order to create a new nation.
Ironically it was US idea to give ISIL (or ISIS) a kick start."
"...This piece of non-news from Washington's official propaganda machine RFERL comes across as a
thinly vieled attempt to humanize and romanticize the brainwashed ISIS terrorists, who according to
the piece are now militants - essentially a neutral term). Will RFERL again relabel them "freedom fighters"
if they return to wage Jihad in Chechnya? Most definitely I say. The recently leaked DIA documents revealing
that the US financed jihadi-crazed extremist groups in Syria, knowing full well the likelihood they
would attempt to declare a caliphate, clearly exposes the cynicism of the US in the Middle East and
their plan to create chaos in order to maintain hegemony in the region, prevent Iran and the Shia's
from gaining strength, and no matter how many lives and destruction it costs - remove Assad so the Qutari
gas pipeline can finally be built through Syria to Europe. Sickening"
"...Yeah, but they need the single evil mastermind responsible for all the evil in the world. They
need him in order to scare their rubes, to distract them from real problems, to re-focus their anger.
They need Emmanuel Goldstein. Obama bin Laden is dead, so now it's Putin. Obviously he's responsible
for ISIS, who else."
"...Attempting to forge a public perception link between Russia and IS ? The White House press Dept
have been doing that for quite a while now. Strange then that IS is basically a gang of US originated,
trained, armed, and funded attack dogs?"
"ISIS terrorists, who according to the piece are now militants"
The term "ISIS militant" has been in use for years in British press. Russia Today uses it
as well. So your theories are not confirmed by facts. Unless RT is really a part of
"Washington's official propaganda machine".
dyst1111 -> Luminaire 4 Jun 2015 08:33
USA created ISIS, NATO, Bolsheviks, Hitler etc...but it were the British who created the USA.
So it is the Brits' fault really.
AhBrightWings 4 Jun 2015 07:35
I've rarely seen a greater need for air quotes. There is no "poetry" to be had here, none;
not a line or image quoted here rises to poetry's exacting metrics (oddly, the most moving line
was about the stove).
I do think the author is right to note the similarities to romanticized chivalry. The Atlantic
has a superb, recent article about what "Isis wants." I found its main premise -- that it's
enacting violence as a yearning to return to Islam's most primitive and literal beliefs,
an attempt to time travel, per se, to a medieval past, and in so doing, an attempt to excise modernity
itself from the world (hence its ferocious attacks on other Muslims who have overwhelmingly abandoned
those archaic beliefs and teachings) -- equal parts enlightening and chilling.
These written records -- whether propaganda or legitimate letters -- offer glimpses into the
mentality that gives rise to these terrible acts, and so have value, but none of the lines quoted
rise to poetry in the way the famous Sullivan Ballou Civil War letter does (though, maybe something
is lost in translating Arabic to English).
6i9vern psygone 4 Jun 2015 07:29
The Soviets were fighting on the side of those Afghans echo wanted to rid their country
of such scum.
The seppos with their British and Saudi running dogs were the ones who helped these scum win on
Afghanistan. They got a thank you on 11/9/01.
6i9vern -> Aritra Gupta 4 Jun 2015 07:23
The Graun/RFE/Soros have a soft spot for these types. They did a similar piece on the women
of one of the Ukrainian Nazi militias.
HollyOldDog -> Luminaire 4 Jun 2015 07:13
There is no relationship between Putins Russia and ISIS as its a contradiction in terms as
Russia favors its relationship with the Syrian Government. Jordan ( who's representatives now
want to lead FIFA - payment for services rendered) trained (with the assistance of the USA) the
Syrian militants who became ISIS. There are several fractions within Chechnya, some who oppose
the countries leader Kadyrov while the majority support him. A few Chechens were 'bused' from
ISIS earlier this year to assassinate Kadyrov but they failed and were mostly wiped out.
dyst1111 -> InShockAndAwe 4 Jun 2015 05:42
I know. Just a few examples of this change of tone:
ISIL remind me of USA from history books. A lot of people unite under an idea, take over land,
wipe history and population to a maximum possible extent in order to create a new nation. Ironically
it was US idea to give ISIL (or ISIS) a kick start.
StatusFoe 4 Jun 2015 04:47
This piece of non-news from Washington's official propaganda machine RFERL comes across
as a thinly vieled attempt to humanise and romanticise the brainwashed ISIS terrorists, who according
to the piece are now militants - essentially a neutral term). Will RFERL again relabel them "freedom
fighters" if they return to wage Jihad in Chechnya? Most definitetly I say. The recently leaked
DIA documents revealing that the US financed jihadi-crazed extremist groups in Syria, knowing
full well the likelyhood they would attempt to declare a caliphate, clearly exposes the cynicism
of the US in the Middle East and their plan to create chaos in order to maintain hegemony in the
region, prevent Iran and the Shia's from gaining strength, and no matter how many lives and destruction
it costs - remove Assad so the Qutari gas pipeline can finally be built through Syria to Europe.
Sickening...
normankirk 4 Jun 2015 03:53
Seems there are chechens and chechens, those who are loyal to Russia and those who would still
be doing Beslan type massacres if they could. Incidentally those were always referred to as militants,
not terrorists by the US. Chechens who fight in Syria also fight in Ukraine against the eastern
Ukrainians. There are two excellent articles in The Intercept about the Chechen Extremists fighting
alongside the Ukrainian army.
Maxstoic -> Corsair1972 4 Jun 2015 03:31
There once was a Chechen named Sam
Who listened to his fanatic Imam
So full of hysteria
He pissed off to Syria
And blew himself all over the sands.
Sam's wife left her home and her kids
And headed south to pick up the bits
Of her dead husband's remains
(Though he had little brains
His head filled up with myths and shit)
MaoChengJi -> Chris Hindle 4 Jun 2015 02:54
Yeah, but they need the single evil mastermind responsible for all the evil in the world.
They need him in order to scare their rubes, to distract them from real problems, to re-focus
their anger. They need Emmanuel Goldstein. Obama bin Laden is dead, so now it's Putin. Obviously
he's responsible for ISIS, who else.
Chris Hindle 4 Jun 2015 02:17
Attempting to forge a public perception link between Russia and IS ?
The White House press Dept have been doing that for quite a while now
Strange then that IS is basically a gang of US originated, trained, armed, and funded attack
dogs?
"...Money money money, grab grab grab. The opening up of Iran is all about western companies making
money and peace may be a fortunate side effect."
"...But maybe it's just reputation. The USA has been partying in the Middle East for decades, so
people there already know who Americans are and what to expect from them. Russians and Chinese are involved
too, but ways they use to achieve an agreement are not so... insolent, I'd say."
"...Against crippling sanctions they've achieved what the vast majority of countries in the region
could only have dreamt of"
"...Resistance against what? Oh, you must mean the Western steam roller that crushes all life in
countries that wish to follow their own destiny. Why would Iran want to join the 'Also Rans' who are
only allowed the scraps thrown from the Western Oligarch Table?"
"...I'm not sure why state ownership of certain assets and industries is presented as a bad thing,
in Guardian of all places. This is how governments pay for high standard of education, healthcare and
strong defence. This is how governments avoid the debt trap and compounded interest charges creeping
into the tax bill"
"...Wow, you must think that the rest of the world is truly as gullible as those in Canada and Australia
when the USA once again stirs the shit at the bottom of the West Ukrainian pond."
"...They also have 81% home ownership as against The US and UK on about 65%. Education is valued
and they have a high rate of women accessing tertiary education."
"...It's this kind: we, the westerners, are the most advanced civilization! The proof: our economies
are all privatized, not government-run! The Iranians Russian, and Chinese are still savages! They have
a long way to go to achieve our advanced level of civilization! "
"...US expert don't really understand that state capitalism is not a communist theory. Majority
of Asian nations had practiced state capitalism.
Even British regime do practiced state capitalism till private liberalization been pushed by Margaret
Thatcher."
Money money money, grab grab grab. The opening up of Iran is all about western companies
making money and peace may be a fortunate side effect.
BabyLyon 4 Jun 2015 08:14
Russia and China are more eastern, than western. It's easier for Iran to communicate with them,
I think this may be a reason too.
But maybe it's just reputation. The USA has been partying in the Middle East for decades,
so people there already know who Americans are and what to expect from them. Russians and Chinese
are involved too, but ways they use to achieve an agreement are not so... insolent, I'd say.
abdur razzak 4 Jun 2015 07:38
Good, more power to them. This is a much more efficient way to use resources for the benefit
of the whole population than anything the west ever tried. http://www.latestdatabase.com/
1DrSigmundFraud -> JoePope 4 Jun 2015 07:22
The US probably won't be doing business there for obvious reasons. Iran wants to protect it's
industries if sanctions are lifted for obvious reasons. You only need to look at the UK for reasons
as to what happens if you don't while the US for instance now has only 3 levels of classes
Poor
Extremely poor
Extremely wealthy
Iran does have a healthy middle class one the downtrodden US labor force would die for. Their
Oil wealth has been put to good use check out the Tehran Metro for instance
Against crippling sanctions they've achieved what the vast majority of countries in the
region could only have dreampt of
normankirk -> LoungeSuite 4 Jun 2015 06:47
And neo liberalism delivers such a great standard of living for ALL Americans and Brits does
it?
HollyOldDog -> LoungeSuite 4 Jun 2015 06:27
Resistance against what? Oh, you must mean the Western steam roller that crushes all life in
countries that wish to follow their own destiny. Why would Iran want to join the 'Also Rans' who
are only allowed the scraps thrown from the Western Oligarch Table?
MaoChengJi -> LoungeSuite 4 Jun 2015 06:21
Sort of like in Putin's Russia.
Yeah, exactly. Like Putin's Russia compared to Yeltsin's Russia. Like China.
LoungeSuite -> MaoChengJi 4 Jun 2015 06:08
Neoliberalism will fail soon, but state-controlled economies will survive,
Sort of like in Putin's Russia. And now in Venezuela. Oh. And the Cuban is a supreme example
of socialism. (Gone wrong of course. Somehow, it always goes wrong. Oh! And America is to blame.
Standard Guardian discourse).
HollyOldDog -> Luminaire 4 Jun 2015 06:01
Swimming against the tide again is your speciality. Plus you just love throwing nonsense around.
I have noticed that the Far Right Ukrainian punishers are up to their nasty tricks again just
before a G7 meeting.
Wow, you must think that the rest of the world is truly as gullible as those in Canada
and Australia when the USA once again stirs the shit at the bottom of the West Ukrainian pond.
HollyOldDog -> normankirk 4 Jun 2015 05:48
It's a pity that successive British Governments were not better disposed to hanging on to British
State assets rather than selling off the family jewels.
JoePope 4 Jun 2015 05:15
I'm not sure why state ownership of certain assets and industries is presented as a bad
thing, in Guardian of all places. This is how governments pay for high standard of education,
healthcare and strong defence. This is how governments avoid the debt trap and compounded interest
charges creeping into the tax bill -- it is difficult to support the welfare system in any
populous country purely through tax collection. One would have to have perfect conditions of natural
resources/reserves, high technology, innovation and diversification, favourable geopolitical environment
& export ability, stable and predictable population levels AND the lack of short term electioneering
and corruption to achieve that. Even then, it is debatable whether private ownership and capital
especially foreign capital in the case of strategic assets (energy, defence) is justified or needed.
Of course a fully centrally planned economy has been proven to be inefficient and uncompetitive
when met with open/free markets -- the "greed is good" mantra, profit seeking motive and consumerism
trumps the desire to empower and care for the wider population and more worryingly the need to
maintain social cohesion, independence and security. Therefore, a balance should be sought through
bilateral or regional deals with economies which are at a similar developmental level, to ensure
healthy competition exists and drives improvements in labour productivity, product quality and
technology.
This analysis gives some interesting information on Iran but reads as sour grapes and profiteering
attempt by western investment funds and corporations. I hope Iranians keep the family jewels in
their hands and allow external trade and investment only on terms favorable to their people and
their economy.
normankirk -> MaoChengJi 4 Jun 2015 04:13
Good shit, I agree. Must be how come they can afford a good public health system, their primary
health care network is acclaimed. They also have 81% home ownership as against The US and
UK on about 65%. Education is valued and they have a high rate of women accessing tertiary education.
All of the above is how they have been so resilient in the face of pretty brutal sanctions.
But of course these days, having national assets is akin to being a dictatorship in the
eyes of corporatocracies.
MaoChengJi Dmitry Berezhnov 4 Jun 2015 03:26
It's this kind: we, the westerners, are the most advanced civilization! The proof: our
economies are all privatized, not government-run! The Iranians Russian, and Chinese are still
savages! They have a long way to go to achieve our advanced level of civilization!
Yes, you can make money trading and making deals with savages, but you need to understand their
savagery ways and be careful.
allowmetosayuarefool 4 Jun 2015 02:50
US expert don't really understand that state capitalism is not a communist theory. Majority
of Asian nations had practiced state capitalism.
Even British regime do practiced state capitalism till private liberalization been pushed by Margaret
Thatcher.
Private liberation had its own disadvantages.
look at HK economic - largely been controlled by few family of tycoon. Today, UK election result
had been determined by UK BANKER.
MaoChengJi 4 Jun 2015 02:42
The economy in the Islamic republic is still largely state-owned, with much of its 'privatised'
capital in the hands of regime-affiliated organizations
Good, more power to them. This is a much more efficient way to use resources for the benefit
of the whole population than anything the west ever tried.
Neoliberalism will fail soon, but state-controlled economies will survive, if they are
isolated enough from the failing neoliberal environment. Sounds like the Iranian economy is, and
good for them.
Dmitry Berezhnov 4 Jun 2015 00:14
Could not figure what kind of article that is, either:
- In case we are not going to sign a nuclear deal, please note that there's no democracy
and we will have to invade them.
or:
- Iran is kind of not bad for investments, look how China and Russia make money on cooperation
while we cannot due to sanctions implied by ourself.
Poor deluded child. You still believe that the POTUS runs the show? He's merely the MC of a
long running cabaret act called "US Politics". He reads the script, you applaud - or else!
SamIamgreeneggsanham 2 Jun 2015 21:27
So this is great, but what about the man who sacrificed his life so that we could have this
information? Surely if this passage is a vindication of his actions, then the conversation needs
to move towards allowing him to return to the US (if he wishes to) or at least not make him a
wanted criminal...?
EdChamp -> russmi 2 Jun 2015 21:22
I guess to most of his supporters this is one instance where "the results justify the means."
Actually, we don't have to argue that the end justify the means. The end was that we were all
aware of what had been kept secret from us, culminating in the failure to renew metadata collection.
The means to that was the illegal distribution of classified information. I applaud both the ends
and the means, it might have been better if he had not been required to break the law, but in
this case, I applaud his doing so.
He should return home and accept the legal consequences of his actions. Someone who truly
felt he or she was in the right would do so.
Nonsense, but how nice of you to easily volunteer that he give up his freedom. Where is it
written that we must be prepared to spend the rest of our lives in prison to make known a secret
program, effecting every American, violating the constitution, and subsequently ruled illegal
by the courts?
Joe Stanil -> osprey1957 2 Jun 2015 21:21
Remind me. Who said "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"? Ah, yes, Dr Johnson.
Joe Stanil 2 Jun 2015 21:17
Does anyone honestly believe that passing a little law will stop the NSA from continuing its
collection of data? Like, it's against the law to steal, that's why there aren't any thieves.
Wake up children. This whole game, starting with Snowden, was a calculated "limited hangout" operation,
ie show a bit of naughtiness, get the public used to it, then go back under cover. Now the real
spying begins.
James Saint-Amour 2 Jun 2015 21:06
Pardon Edward Snowden! He's a patriot just like the Founding Fathers, who were also considered
criminals when they stood up for freedom. It's interesting that our government doesn't see that
side of the story (but then again, who am I kidding to think they would?)
Nyarlat -> russmi 2 Jun 2015 21:04
Snowden is so baaaad!
The CIA and NSA is soooo trustworthy!
(Of course they helped Pinochet dispose of Allende and also killed thousands of Vietcong with
black ops death squads etc.)
osprey1957 2 Jun 2015 21:04
Whatever happens, know that Snowden is, was, and always will be a great patriot. he may be
a deluded libertarian...but his patriotism can never be questioned.
shininhstars122 2 Jun 2015 21:01
>>>>New Mexico senator Martin Heinrich, another Democrat on the intelligence committee, praised
the bill's passage on Tuesday, saying: "Ben Franklin would have been proud of this outcome."
HAH! What altered universe is the Ben Franklin from that the Senator from the Land of Enchantment
is referring to?
Ben Franklin would have said this sir.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither
liberty nor safety."
Waterdown liberty is what the USA Freedom Act is plain and simple.
awoolf14 -> TeamAmerica2015 2 Jun 2015 20:58
Come out of the 1950's for 10 seconds and you might notice that there is no longer any difference
whatsoever between the vested interests of either Party other than the window dressing... Wake
up.
russmi 2 Jun 2015 20:54
Personally I'm tired of Snowdon. He still stole and illegally distributed classified info.
I guess to most of his supporters this is one instance where "the results justify the means."
But how often do they let others get away with that excuse? He should return home and accept the
legal consequences of his actions. Someone who truly felt he or she was in the right would do
so.
awoolf14 2 Jun 2015 20:53
Its great to know that we're all being 'protected' and are 'safe' in the hands of Obamas
exorbitantly expensive "national security professionals."
.
...Professionals like The TSA, who recently failed 95% of a 'Red Team' national airport security
infiltration test, including but not limited to failing to notice a team member walking by them,
with a fake bomb taped to his back (face-palms).
Or The NSA, who have just been forced by their own Govornment to shut down a 4 year multi million
dollar bulk surveillance program that- er- didn't actually catch any 'terrorists,' because they
don't make a point of sending open emails or telephone calls to each other to discuss their evil
plans (something an 8 year old could figure out).
Please, please lets get somebody sane into the White House this time- because the only job these
people are doing, is making all of us look like complete fools.
et_tu_brute -> Oneiricist 2 Jun 2015 20:44
Yeh... the surveilance worked so well, that they didn't see the 'Boston Bombers' coming. People
have every right to question the NSA's self-given right to delve into peoples lives, all without
any independent oversight, no checks and balances, no transparency. No wonder people don't trust
them.
et_tu_brute -> BradBenson 2 Jun 2015 20:38
You are absolutely correct, however the o/p is a member of a tribe that choses to believe Snowden
was a traitor, no matter what facts were presented or are revealed by his actions.
et_tu_brute -> delphinia 2 Jun 2015 20:35
Yeh, I remember that. Bush & Cheney promoting the looney neo-con cause by creating the fiction
of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. Now look at the mess left behind by these stupid idiots
who were intent on creating a new mess by trading up on the goodwill they received internationally
that backed the US in their quest to go into Afghanstan after 9/11.
et_tu_brute -> MtnClimber 2 Jun 2015 20:29
There has been no evidence that that ever happened. What did happen though was Snowden leaking
embarrassing information which gave cause to his fellow citizens to wake up and smell the flowers,
that they were being illegally 'spied upon', collectively, through the bulk collection of telecommunications
data, without legal authority to do so.
Now go back to looking for commies or jihardists lurking around the corner. I guess
you are just a simple victim of politicians' rhetoric that promotes 'fear, uncertainty & doubt'
within the community, a.k.a. 'The F.U.D. principle'.
Gary M. Wilson -> Nicholas_Stone 2 Jun 2015 20:28
THE MAN IN THE ARENA:
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where
the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in
the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs,
who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but
who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who
spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall
never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
Theodore Roosevelt
Posh_Guardianista -> JohnDavidFletcher 2 Jun 2015 20:28
Do you know who controls them, who governs the use of the data, what happens to it? That's
a bigger danger to your freedom than the NSA.
Key difference being that you can block them. You can't block the NSA surveillance.
et_tu_brute -> shortcircuit299 2 Jun 2015 20:19
Unfortunately, I suspect this won't curtail the NSA's nefarious activities, just change the
goal posts. No doubt 'Plan B' had already been devised a long while ago and would come into play
in such a contingency. The lack of independent oversight and transparency of the activities of
the NSA will mean that another 'whistle-blower', if they are game enough, would be needed to come
forward to further expose wrong-doing. Most, if not all members of Congress and the Senate still
haven't got a clue about any of this, and most never will.
Leondeinos 2 Jun 2015 20:18
This so-called reform is very limited: as he "praised" the passage of this bill, Obama said
he will "work expeditiously to ensure our national security professionals again have the full
set of vital tools they need to continue protecting the country." You bet! That means he'll set
the NSA and the other "competent organs" to work on new ways to gobble up even more useless data.
He will also continue telling lies, repressing revelation of truth throughout the government,
and driving war all over the planet.
Senators Sanders and Paul are right about the USA Freedumb Act.
TiredOfTheLies 2 Jun 2015 20:11
McConnell should be ashamed of himself. The bulk collection of cell phone data was a stalker's
candy store, and there are just as many predators on the inside of government as on the outside.
The Republicans were well aware of problem agents, some even suspected of abduction, rape, and
murder. As if the founding fathers didn't know about rape, and the problem with abusers of all
kind having too much information on innocent peoples' lives.
Search warrants are there for a reason. They leave a paper trail. If the only thing that missing
women have in common are search warrants by the same agent or group of agents, then police have
the suspect list that they need. When they don't have search warrants, you're likely to find bodies
all over the country with no idea of how they got there, which is what the US has now.
And by the way, that beloved program of theirs was of no use for solving those crimes because
criminals are smart enough not to leave phone record evidence. The only people who leave a trail
that can be found this way are the innocent (read: victims), and the stupidest criminals on earth.
redbanana33 2 Jun 2015 20:05
"US Congress passes surveillance reform in vindication for Edward Snowden"
Those are the headlines on this Guardian story.
To vindicate, my dictionary says, means to clear of blame or suspicion.
Well, then, COME ON HOME, ED!!
No? You won't? Well,..... why? Then why would the Guardian say you are vindicated by the passage
of this stupid half-bill in the U.S. Congress?
Someday soon, though.
Sydneyfl -> Nicholas_Stone 2 Jun 2015 19:57
Traitor to WHAT? Oppression? Spying? Conjured up enemies? The military industrial complex,
financed by the bankers, cabal? Hooray for Snowdon!
MKB1234 2 Jun 2015 19:54
Mitch "The Party of Smaller Government" McConnell destroying America from the inside.
Lesm -> Happy Fella 2 Jun 2015 19:51
No his refusal to do so shows he recognises the complete and utter failure of the US legal
system, as is evidenced almost daily by the revelations emerging about the mass torture, incarceration
without trial and sometimes death of innocent people whose only sin was to be in the wrong place
at the wrong time.
Lesm -> Happy Fella 2 Jun 2015 19:51
No his refusal to do so shows he recognises the complete and utter failure of the US legal
system, as is evidenced almost daily by the revelations emerging about the mass torture, incarceration
without trial and sometimes death of innocent people whose only sin was to be in the wrong place
at the wrong time.
Posh_Guardianista -> FoolsDream 2 Jun 2015 19:51
You should read the entire article.
NSA "reform" is essentially a reset - existing legislation has passed, reorganisation will
now take place and the mass surveillance will still continue as before.
Make no mistake, PRISM, mass surveillance of the world, XKEYSCORE, widespread backdoors in
routers and computer equipment; compulsory sharing of data (whether for security or corporate
gain, as with Petronas) with the US Government - will still continue. If you think otherwise,
then it is you who is deluded.
FoolsDream -> JohnDavidFletcher 2 Jun 2015 19:49
Only if you assume we visit this page unprotected my friend. Besides, the argument
of they do it so it's not a problem if the others do it, is a poor argument.
Lesm 2 Jun 2015 19:48
It would be nice if all the troglodytes who bagged Snowden for his act of conscience would
recognise the courage that he showed in doing so, but that is about as likely to happen as Hell
freezing over. These loons, who spend hours every day blogging about the State trying to take
away their freedoms have the capacity that Orwell talked about as "doublespeak" and doublethink"
where you can hold two completely conflicting ideas in your head at the same time and believe
both, as they see Snowden as a traitor for revealing the traducing of the American people by their
own government.
Washington_Irving SteB1 2 Jun 2015 19:44
Unfortunately, the NPP committee consists of discarded politicians. And when it comes to
standing up to Uncle Sam, Norwegian politicians are – as a general rule – a bunch of despicable
cowards.
Snowden was awarded a £12500 freedom of expression prize earlier today (well, yesterday), and
the chances of him being allowed to accept it in person in September are virtually non-existent.
FoolsDream Happy Fella 2 Jun 2015 19:44
You'd have been great back in the witch-hunting days. "If you drown, you're a witch and we'll
burn you. If you live, you're a witch.. and guess what?.. yep, burned."
Audience Science
Facebook Social Graph
Google Dynamic Remarketing
Krux Digital
NetRatings SiteCensus
Outbrain
PointRoll
ScoreCard Research Beacon
Twitter Badge
That's the 9 companies/organisations tracking you on this very page. They will then record where
you go next, what you do on this page, the frequency of these visits, what links you click on
your emails etc.
Do you know who controls them, who governs the use of the data, what happens to it? That's a bigger
danger to your freedom than the NSA.
Happy Fella 2 Jun 2015 19:38
If Mr. Snowden has been, as The Guardian says, "vindicated", will he now be returning to the
U.S. to receive whatever apologies, honors and rewards are bestowed on those who have been "vindicated"?
Or, alternatively, will he continue to reside in Russia, remaining a fugitive from justice in
the U.S.? And, if he chooses to do the latter (which I predict he will do--anybody want to make
a bet?), in what sense has he been "vindicated".
The passage of this legislation doesn't change the fact that Snowden has been charged with multiple
violations of U.S. law regarding confidential, secret information, and his refusal to stand trial
is powerful evidence that those charges are well-founded.
awoolf14 2 Jun 2015 19:36
Re Obama: "work expeditiously to ensure our national security professionals again have the
full set of vital tools they need to continue protecting the country".
- Ah yes, the famous 'National Security Professionals." That would be Star Trek fan Kieth Alexander,
who had the command center of the NSA converted into a full scale replica of the bridge of the
'USS Enterprise,' complete with whooshing doors and a Captain Kirk chair for him to sit in, and
his 'Mr Spock' James Clapper (oddly unretired) who lied to Congress during the NSA hearings, then
absolved himself by saying he'd given the "least untruthful answer."
- "Professional?' What on earth is Obsms talking about, these people are obviously stark raving
bonkers!
bodicca 2 Jun 2015 19:23
Orwell lives on! What is this "Freedom" that government intrusion into our lives and activities
is protecting? Is it the freedom to work harder and longer than people in other developed countries
for less access to advanced education, healthcare and free time than those people?
Or is it the freedom to pay excessive salaries and benefits beyond our imagination to CEOs
of corporations? Or the freedom to exist with a crumbling infrastructure while funds for repairs
are diverted? Or the freedom to pay for bribes (er lobbying) for legislators elected by us, so
that they will pass laws that oppose the wishes of the people. How long will we tolerate being
lied to? Freedom, indeed!
Jim Mansberger 2 Jun 2015 19:20
It is the military and intelligence agencies that do not want to drop all criminal charges
against Snowden, and rather do the right and just thing, which is to recognize him as a US Government
whistleblower and protect him.
Wharfat9 2 Jun 2015 19:12
On cutting out the bulk surveillance ...
This makes one a little uneasy - this, so they say - stopping of bulk data collection. Look here:
you got that big ´ol facility out at Bluffdale, Utah. A huge mongramamous caw that can take in
all the e-mails, phone this and that and every other thing - including, probably, the kitchen
sink - and don´t tell me that they gonna just put all those huge gears and terabytes and fans
and flywheels and nobs and buttons and doodlygooks on idle?
Idle? A ´sweet machine´ like that?
No way, José.
Sydneyfl 2 Jun 2015 19:10
America no longer has a press. Foreigners and Neocons have used the international banksters
to finance their buying up of 99% of our newspapers, book publishers, TV content, magazines, radio,
etc.,.. and who they didn't buy out ...they try to bribe or muzzle with the threat of job loss.
Snowdon had no choice. Remember we are the "huddled masses yearning to BREATHE FREE". We will
keep chipping away until we get our God Given country back. Snowdon risked himself to help us
do just that. He had no choice!! Some people can't be bought!!
Dugan222 Edward Frederick Ezell 2 Jun 2015 19:08
The advantage is that this third party is a NSA front operation. :) Do you know what it means???
Every night, all the data being stored by this company are being transferred and backed up by
the NSA. Hehehehehhee......
The NSA still keeps all the data but the public won't assume the NSA has the data since we
are supposed to think that the NSA is no longer storing out phone data..... No one talks about
who is running this third party company...
Edward Frederick Ezell 2 Jun 2015 19:07
Since users of communications services will be required by the private providers to agree to
the recording of their communications, this procedure nicely sidesteps the limitations placed
on the government by the Constitution.
Although it seems quite clever it is in effect a conspiracy between the government and providers
to facilitate government violation of the constitution.
WadeLovell 2 Jun 2015 18:49
ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer says, "This is the most important surveillance reform
bill since 1978, and its passage is an indication that Americans are no longer willing to give
the intelligence agencies a blank check." I don't see this as vindication. OTOH, I don't believe
it would have passed without the lingering bitter taste of overzealous government and the people
like Snowden who helped expose it.
Dugan222 2 Jun 2015 18:41
Sigh...I am not convinced. The NSA would go after where the data is. If they are in the hands
of the phone company, they would have operatives working there. Worst, the phone company would
outsource the data management retention to a third party, NSA front company. Here, on the surface,
the NSA may appear to have no connections and responsibilities for storing the phone data. Again,
who is policing the phone company. And who is policing this "third party."
vr13vr 2 Jun 2015 18:08
Why does the Congress have to name laws with such fanfare? Freedom Act, Patriot Act, and so
on? Just to sound self righteous? Or to make sure that whoever does not agree with it could be
viewed as a unpatriotic and against freedom?
Would that be much better, and practical as well, not to over-hype laws but give them reasonable
and descriptive names?
sbabcock 2 Jun 2015 18:07
Seems to me the difference is the NSA has to actually go to the phone companies and plug in
to their server to vacuum up the data instead of having it delivered on a silver platter. Let's
face it, there are loop-holes galore in the "Freedom" Act. This is the Senate pretending to do
their jobs. "Hey, you pretend to be against this to save face. We'll pretend to pass something
that is 'different' and then we'll go on vacation again. People will think we 'do' stuff. Problems
solved." But it's simply re-shuffling the paperwork, something the House, headed by the Orange
Man, are experts at.
There's another story here today about FBI planes, registered under fake business identities,
using Sting-Ray to scoop up all kinds of phone data from above... so... look over here! so you
don't see what's going on over there! smfh
mcstowy DerekHaines 2 Jun 2015 18:07
During the McCarthy hearings, the easiest way to come under suspicion was to be "prematurely
anti-fascist." You see "good Americans" (meaning the right-wing corporate elite) supported Hitler
and Mussolini.
ID9492736 2 Jun 2015 17:50
The Most Transparent Administration In American History.
Even the sponges and mollusks are fainting from too much laughter.
Barry D. Lauterwasser wardropper 2 Jun 2015 17:29
It's amazing how a few people, and the internet can make such a difference. Throughout
the annals of history, many have sacrificed much, even their lives, for the good of the nation.
Like you, I'd like to see him come home and pardoned, but I'm sure his safety would be in jeopardy
due to the fanaticals here. Someday, history will hopefully judge these brave souls that came
forward to shed light on the things government does under the guise of "security." Time will tell...
madamefifi 2 Jun 2015 17:11
Not a week goes by without my thoughts (and I am just an ordinary joe with no political connections
whatsoever) turning to Edward Snowden and the gross injustice he has and still is suffering. Please
watch Citizenfour if you have not already done so, to understand the full magnitude of this injustice.
I hope I will live to see this injustice corrected and hope this is a step forward in an inhumanely
long process. Edward Snowden is one of the world's true heroes. I believe he deserves the Nobel
peace prize or some other worldwide recognition for his sacrifice but sadly no prizes or freedoms
are within my remit and never will be. Mr Snowden, this is all I can do and it might not count
for much, but I thank you from the bottom of my heart.
TrueCopy 2 Jun 2015 16:59
USA Freedom act is not what it is made to be. It has so many loopholes that makes it essentially
irrelevant. For example to get records a subpoena need to be issued, but the subpoena doesn't
need to be for one number or one individual, or even a roaming individual, they can issue a subpoena
for Verizon and another for AT&T and another for Sprint and T-mobile, and pretty cover everyone.
This is pretty much the same as what they were doing, but a little more cumbersome, which can
be overcome by a few software applications. Rand Paul wanted to limit the subpoena to an individual
living and breathing person or persons, rather than a telecom company which failed. So you know
where this is going, the lawyers at NSA can argue because that amendment failed, the intent of
congress was to allow them to subpoena phone company records.
Jbons990 2 Jun 2015 16:36
Fantastic. The fact that the mass collection of telecommunication data was hidden from the
public (and would have remained hidden were it not for a certain whistle blower) just demonstrates
that the NSA and GCHQ will never tell us the truth. This shiny new surveillance reform is one
giant metaphorical rug, for the NSA to sweep all attention underneath, before proceeding to collect
everybody information again. Because that's America. And that's democracy. *cough* Bureaucracy.
freeandfair tbv954 2 Jun 2015 16:34
Yep, the CIA were caught hacking into White House computers (about 6 months ago ? ) in order
to see the information on torture. Anything happened after they were caught red-handed and lies
about being caught under oath?
Nope. Just business as usual in the self-proclaimed shining city on the hill, the most democratic
country on Earth.
It's all water under the bridge now whether assurances were made or not. Nato expanded,
Russia saw the threat in it and we have arrived to where we are now.
If this bitter experience is anything to go by, Nato would better stop where it is at the moment
and not 'invite' new members, such as Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine.
From the military point of view, and what well known events have proven, both Georgian and
Ukrainian armies (do not know about Moldova) do not meet and unlikely will soon meet requirements
needed, from the financial point of view neither Europe nor those countries can afford full-scale
refurbishment of their military capabilities. Is it worth pushing any further?
Cooperation implies communication and dialogue and listening to each other, it's about time,
I believe.
Alexander S -> Botswana61 27 May 2015 08:49
Can you explain it?
How come Russia is the second destination country in the World after the US? How about you
get the facts straight before commenting?
Alexander S -> Botswana61 27 May 2015 08:39
wasn't it pres. Putin who has recently changed Moscow's military doctrine…
You're wrong. It was Medvedev in 2010. "Prevention of a nuclear conflict, as well as any other
military conflict is the most important task of the Russian Federation".
"Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and
other types of weapons of mass destruction against it or its allies, and also in case of aggression
against Russia with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened".
Alexander S -> Botswana61 27 May 2015 08:11
cannot be held responsible for its deeds
I perfectly understand Russians. You see I've inherited all the property and debts of my grandad.
I've paid all his liabilities existed. I continue to execute his contracts. But don't you dare
to make me responsible for what that old hag says he did to her in college! I AM his successor
but I'm not responsible for his deeds. Period.
assets a little east of the Urals … not being formally in Europe anymore
That's exactly what the Treaty says. Anyway it doesn't matter anymore as Russia completely
halted its participation in the Treaty.
Iran has also signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. And?
And the US of A do anything it can to encumber Iran's peaceful nuclear program.
Alexander S -> Botswana61 27 May 2015 05:28
Ukraine never had any nuclear arsenal at the first place, USSR did. The Russian Federation
is one and only USSR's successor state. Ukraine was pushed by Russia and US to give back or destroy
any nuclear weapon happened to be on its soil after the fall of the Soviet Union.
And yeah, Ukraine has given up any rights to have a nuclear arsenal by signing the Non-Proliferation
Treaty not the "Budapest Memorandum" as some imply.
Czechlander 26 May 2015 23:47
None of this chatter matters; let those that clamor for NATO enjoy their imagined security.
Of course, by joining NATO, a country like Estonia is at a risk from all NATO potential enemies.
Not a wise choice. But never mind. The greatest danger to us all are the risks associated with
the undeniable fact that huge swathes of Russia are under foreign occupation because of Bolshevik
treason of the Russian people. Let's face it, only Russia was made smaller and weaker within the
framework of the Soviet Union by the egregious Bolsheviks; it's easy to figure out how much Bolsheviks
"loved" the Russian nation.
The Russian people resident in the territories fraudulently taken away from Russia have full
rights to do anything to change the illegal status quo and return to Russia's bosom. One doesn't
have to be an oracle to see that Ukraine is going down the drain, what with all the fascists in
its government, the failed economy, the exodus of its young to Russia and the EU, and so on. When
the people in the Russian regions under illegal occupation become fed up with their bleak lot
within the chauvinist Ukraine, and a standard of living akin to that of the Indian unclean caste,
they will be in position to simply and easily say Good Bye to it. There won't be anybody around
to take on the unenviable task of stopping them. Nothing I or anyone else says about it here is
going to alter one iota of this geopolitically inevitable future.
AnimalFarm2 26 May 2015 23:08
What utter rubbish! Guardian was once respected. The author has done very little homework!
U.S. Secretary of State James Baker told Gorbachev on February 8, 1990 that "NATO's jurisdiction
will not shift one inch eastward."
The next day, German Chancellor, Helmut Kohl told Gorbachev that "naturally NATO could not
expand its territory" into East Germany.
On the same day Germany's Minister for Foreign Affairs Hans-Dietrich Genscher said the following
to Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze: "For us, it stands firm: NATO will not expand
to the East."
On this basis the whole article is codswallop!
The author should retract and apologise!
MysticMegsy -> Ivan Daraktchiev 26 May 2015 21:46
"With the collapse of Soviet Union NATO's raison d'être disappeared and it should have
disbanded itself exactly the way the Warsaw Pact did"
Fair point, can't argue with that. Your user name had me worried at first, but you seem to
be a rational thinker.
"Instead, it continues to serve as a vehicle for conducting USA's proxy wars, each part of
its 70 years long bellicose campaign for the immense Russian resources."
Hmmm, are you sure? and which proxy wars (relating specifically to Russian resources) might
those be? I could list dozens, but none to do with Russian sovereign territory. In fact most proxy
wars I can think of were backed by the US and USSR on opposing sides.
"There's nothing to discuss here, especialy after US Congress' vote for Resolution 758
on Dec. 4th 2014 thus legalizing the war against Russia - including approval of a preemptive
(nuclear) strike."
OK, it's clear now - you are a paranoid lunatic. You almost had me hoodwinked there for a moment.
desconocido 26 May 2015 19:51
The claim that the west gave no guarantees against Nato expanding eastwards may be literally
true but is nevertheless misleading. As Clark and Spohr write, "these developments belonged to
a future that was not yet in sight".
Having freed eastern Europe and dissolved the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet leadership trusted that
the west would reciprocate by respecting Russian interests, and was repeatedly reassured by western
leaders in this respect.
As a member of the European parliament delegation to the Supreme Soviet in 1989, I witnessed
this trust and later the increasing bewilderment of the Soviet/Russian participants in various
conferences at the arrogant triumphalism of Nato and even EU speakers. "But I thought communism
had lost and we had all won?" complained one.
Many Soviet leaders responsible for the "miracle of 1990" – like the former Soviet ambassador
to Bonn, Valentin Falin – have complained bitterly that Mikhail Gorbachev naively trusted the
west and gave away so much for so little.
So the attitude of the revived Russia of today should not come as a surprise.
Jakob von Uexkull
Former MEP, German Greens
desconocido -> Metronome151 26 May 2015 19:41
So yes it is just Russian hysteria, wishful thinking and false memory syndrome.
More to the point is EugeneGur's comment:
But the memory of Nato's broken promises also matters because it touches on the legitimacy,
in Russian eyes, of the international settlement established during the German unification
process and the European order that emerged in its wake.
The west always considers Russia's action in isolation from everything else. The narrative
is rather simple, not to say primitive: Russia is inherently bad, aggressive, totalitarian
(feel free to add whatever additional derogatory adjectives you can come up with). So, whatever
the West does against Russia must be good. The West never considers the impact its own actions
have on the Russian perception of the situation and Russian actions. The expansion of NATO
were bound to elicit Russia's reaction at some point, regardless whether any promise was made
and whether it was binding or not. It doesn't really take a genius to predict what that reaction
would be, which is a good thing, because NATO is rather short on geniuses.
People, you were given a gift, a gift the West did not in the least deserve. The Soviet
Union peacefully withdraw from Eastern Europe. Germany, in particular, was given a gift , which
was no less than magnificent considering what Germany did in Russia. And how did the West use
that gift? It grabbed and grabbed, and grabbed. Finally, it bit off more than it could chew
with Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, particularly, Ukraine.
desconocido -> Chirographer 26 May 2015 19:28
nobody in NATO, Ukraine, Georgia or Moldova has been planning an attack on Russia.
Really? What do you call that Georgian attack on the Russian peacekeeping force (don't sneer,
official OSCE title) in South Ossetia? And if I was in Russia, looking at NATO's track record,
I wouldn't believe for a minute that NATO wasn't planning an attack on me.
Alexander S -> SonnyTuckson 26 May 2015 19:27
"The Budapest Memorandum" is a perfect case of false memory syndrome as stated in this article.
At no time did anybody, including US and Russia, offer a binding commitment to respect and/or
protect Ukrainian borders.
Nevertheless as Russia stated on many occasions it upholds the international law and supports
both the integrity of Ukrainian territory and the right of people of the Autonomous Republic of
Crimea to self-determination.
Ivan Daraktchiev 26 May 2015 17:32
With the collapse of Soviet Union NATO's raison d'être disappeared and it should have disbanded
itself exactly the way the Warsaw Pact did. Instead, it continues to serve as a vehicle for conducting
USA's proxy wars, each part of its 70 years long bellicose campaign for the immense Russian resources.
There's nothing to discuss here, especially after US Congress' vote for Resolution 758 on Dec.
4th 2014 thus legalizing the war against Russia - including approval of a preemptive (nuclear)
strike.
Volkovolk -> silvaback 26 May 2015 17:08
Bla-bla-bla, russian occupants, agression, occupation... Tell me better how you have an
UNA-UNSO ultaright party led by son of UPA leader Shushevich.
The guy who led the Volin Slaughter and served in SS punitive batallion Nachtigall. How you
have this abomination of a party and dare accuse us in anything, Bizarro?)
MaoChengJi 26 May 2015 15:36
I must say: the authors of
letters you published are too nice to this truly disgusting lying and racist piece.
Duncan Frame -> psygone 26 May 2015 13:14
I agree but, you can see US doing almost exactly the same thing with any country that embraces
socialism in the Americas. Had Russia extended its hegemony, insofar as it exists these days,
there is no doubt the US would use the most effective tools at it's disposal (powerful economic
sanctions) to destabilize or otherwise nullify the political power of that country.
The difference between Russia and the US is that Russia cannot control the economic climate
anywhere as near as effectively as the US so it uses more direct methods.
The Atlantic Alliance and European Security
in the 1990s
Extract:
This will also be true of a united Germany in NATO.
The very fact that we are ready not to deploy NATO troops
beyond the territory of the Federal Republic gives
the Soviet Union firm security guarantees.
Moreover we could conceive of a transitional period
during which a reduced number of Soviet forces could
remain stationed in the present-day GDR.
This will meet Soviet concerns about not changing
the overall East-West strategic balance.
Soviet politicians are wrong to claim that German
membership of NATO will lead to instability.
The opposite is true.
Europe including the Soviet Union would gain stability.
It would also gain a genuine partner in the West ready to cooperate.
Do you realy think all of these is a case of false memory syndrome ?
vlad day -> Botswana61 26 May 2015 11:47
How smart. Really being curious or just used to be noisy? Relax. A year has passed, and so
far Russia has not recognized the two Republics. Today, nobody speaks in Chechnya or Dagestan
about independence; hope the botswana man's being outdated has an excuse. The problem of these
territories was not separatism but terrorism. When Russians and other non-Chechens started leaving
Chechnya, big banners appeared in the streets reading "Russians, do not leave, we need slaves
and prostitutes". As for independence, poorly educated mountain folk whose best skill was using
a gun and explosives, had a special idea of it.
When told about the need to buy a visa for every crossing the border once independence is established,
they would jump: "Why should I?.. I don't want any visa!!!" – "But you have to…" – "No! No visa!"
I guess the botswana man was already born to the world when Kosovo tragedy started unfolding.
Was he asking NATO American guys who were shelling Kosovo and Belgrade (with the words "Still
willing to be a Serb?" and "Easter Greetings!" on the shells and rockets) if they were ready,
for instance, to grant independence to Texas populated mainly with Mexicans? To all appearance,
no.
BradBenson -> alpamysh 26 May 2015 07:41
That is insane. Hitler was always hell-bent on expansion to the East for Lebensraum. The Molotov-Ribbentrop
Pact bought time for both countries to prepare for the conflict that both knew was coming. Stalin
was always paranoid and, having killed off his officer corps in the 30's, he was well aware that
Russia was not prepared for war.
Unfortunately for Stalin, he began to believe that the treaty would hold, especially since
he did not think that the Germans would risk a two-front war again. As a result, he was initially
caught off guard and didn't want to believe that the Germans were actually attacking Russia on
June 22, 1941. As history has proven, he quickly came to his senses.
BenAris 26 May 2015 07:40
there was a promise of no nato expansion:
On January 31, 1990 West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher publicly declared that
there would be "no expansion of NATO territory eastward" after reunification. Two days later,
U.S. Secretary of State James Baker met with Genscher to discuss the plan. Although Baker did
not publicly [8] endorse Genscher's plan, it served as the basis for subsequent meetings between
Baker, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, and Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze. During
these discussions, Baker repeatedly underlined the informal deal on the table, first telling Shevardnadze
that NATO's jurisdiction "would not move eastward" and later offering Gorbachev "assurances that
there would be no extension of NATO's current jurisdiction eastward." When Gorbachev argued that
"a broadening of the NATO zone" was "not acceptable," Baker replied, "We agree with that." Most
explicit was a meeting with Shevardnadze on February 9, in which Baker, according to the declassified
State Department transcript, promised "iron-clad guarantees that NATO's jurisdiction or forces
would not move eastward." Hammering home the point, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl advanced
an identical pledge during meetings in Moscow the next day.
the prob was because Soviets didnt explicit accept the terms of this informal offer the US
felt justified changing it later and eventually included E Germany in NATO.
its not clear cut like Putin suggests but there was an offer even if Soviets fluffed the diplomatic
close of the deal.
brianfp -> Polvilho 26 May 2015 07:34
The double standard I refer to is the attitude, prominent in mainstream media, of tremendous
hand-wringing over Russia's actions in Ukraine by the same people who either or laud or ignore
much worse acts of aggression or terrorism carried out by the US with far less plausible pretext.
I disagree with you on the matter of US actions in the region also but that wasn't what I was
walking about.
BradBenson -> SanDiegoGuy 26 May 2015 07:30
I didn't mention the Czars. What I said above is exactly what happened in Georgia.
I was living as an expatriate in Germany at the time and the German Newspapers carried daily
maps showing the locations of the pipelines and the location of the fighting. They didn't cover
any of that in the US.
Nor did any US Newspaper mention the involvement of the US Military by airlifting the Georgian
Afghanistan War Contingent from Afghanistan back home to Georgia virtually over night. Nor
did the American News Reports cover the Russian Claims of US Special Forces Involvement and that
they found dead black soldiers in Georgian Uniforms. Maybe they were from Atlanta or Resaca.
In any case, I have provided my sources in my other response to your posts. Therefore, I will
not repost them here. Suffice to say, if you feel my sources are flawed, you are always welcome
to present your own, which you haven't by the way.
BradBenson SanDiegoGuy 26 May 2015 07:13
Well that's all fine and dandy that you have reviewed all of these links and found the arguments,
the supporting links in the articles, and the knowledge base of so many different analysts to
be flawed. Yet you present an equally flawed history without so much as a supporting source. Whom
do you think has made the more cogent argument here?
As for my comments to AstarSoldier, if he's such a "star soldier" let him speak for himself.
To me, there are no "star soldiers" and I don't care about his physical stature. The term "little
man" referred to his intellect and was a direct reference to yet another sophomoric comment by
someone who doesn't know what he is talking about...sort or like your comment above.
Here is the history on Georgia. Educate yourself.
Georgia accused of targeting civilians.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7692751.stm
I survived the Georgian war. Here's what I saw.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2008/1008/p09s02-coop.html
Revisiting the "Battle of Tskhinvali"
http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/08/16/revisiting-the-quot-battle-of-tskhinvali-quot/
Plucky Little Georgia? No, the Cold War Reading Won't Wash
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/09/georgia.russia1
Tbilisi Admits Misjudging Russia
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0d8beefe-6fad-11dd-986f-0000779fd18c,Authorised=false.html?nclick_check=1&_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F0d8beefe-6fad-11dd-986f-0000779fd18c.html%3Fnclick_check%3D1%26siteedition%3Duk&siteedition=uk&_i_referer=#axzz3a7HUGsQv
'Poor Little Georgia'–Not!
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2008/08/13/poor-little-georgia-not/
Saakashvili "planned S. Ossetia invasion": ex-minister
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/09/14/us-georgia-russia-opposition-idUSLD12378020080914
Did Saakashvili Lie? The West Begins to Doubt Georgian Leader
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/did-saakashvili-lie-the-west-begins-to-doubt-georgian-leader-a-578273.html
Aleksander Trebunskikh Matthew Reynolds 26 May 2015 05:10
According to your logic, USA is the biggest empire nowadays and ever been in history, because:
"exercise authoritarian control over it's satellite nations" - but, in case you love USA and hate
USSR - which doesn't exist for more then 25 years, you wont see this.
Dmitry Fedotov alpamysh 26 May 2015 05:04
For the first time in 20 years in the Chernobyl forest appeared bear, and it was captured at
the camera. In Chernobyl, for the first time in 20 years. And then there is a war for a year!
tanks, jets! bombs! and no photographs of Russian troops in Ukraine. Hows that? Maybe they are
not there? Maybe your media epidemic of idiocy? Remember, your media did not show you all the
people killed in Iraq. And them there were more than 200,000. Maybe they're lying to you again?
Botswana61 Kiselev 26 May 2015 04:12
Sea tranport of bulk is the cheapest one by far. With air transport being the best for perishable
goods and merchandize (e.g. machine tools, plane parts, etc.) which have to make it to their final
destination literally over night.
Sorry ,but Trans-Siberian express types of trains belong to XIX century; while gas-guzzling
and heavily polluting Diesel-powered, road-clogging 18-wheelers will largely disappear before
the end of the next decade.
Botswana61 Laurence Johnson 26 May 2015 03:52
'The US is isolated geographically from the core global markets of trade.'
What a patent nonsence! If you followed the trends you would have noticed that while Europe
(currently in recession) is stagnating - the obvious area of a dynamic economic development is
PACIFIC RIM!
The biggest trade association in the world by far is APEC, which includes such countries like
Chile, Peru, Costa Rica, Mexico, United States, Canada, Russia, China, Japan, Indonesia, Philippines,
Australia and New Zealand, to mention just a few.
More&more Americans think of themselves as Pacific nation rather than Atlantic one.
US's business with Pacific Rim countries is brisque and growing fast. So is American export
to other APEC member states.
So nice try, but no cigar.
Volkovolk AlfredHerring 26 May 2015 03:45
Yes, that was 70-90% of [all] ordinary people including ukrainians, belarus, kazachs and all
other nations with some Batlic and georgian exceptions) What's interesting is that geogians had
another exception - Osetian autonomous soviet republic. They - osetians - decided that they wanna
stay in USSR and had their autonomous referendum.
The situation in Ukraine (where 70% of people voted for preserving and 28% againsts) changed
for now because, you see, ukrainian leaders decided that's the best way to validate independence
of Ukraine is to create artifical hatred towards past in USSR and by extension because of galicial
lobby towars Russia and russians-moscals.
Now this 25 years of propaganda brought fruits and Ukraine is tearing itself apart in civil
war.
SidSpart EugeneGur 26 May 2015 03:21
don't act surprised by the Russia's reaction and the measures Russia takes to counter
what it sees as a threat.
I am not surprised by Russia's reaction to N.AT.O expansion .
Even if there was no formal agreement for N.A.T.O not to expand ,it must have been obvious
after the collapse of the U.S.S.R that Russians would not want N.A.T.O on their doorstep .
At the time when the old Warsaw pact countries were joining N.A.T.O I felt it was sending the
wrong message to the Russians - basically saying - "We Do Not Trust You " especially the talk
about setting up the missiles shield .
The question is would the people living in those East European which are now members of N.A.T.O
feel safer if they had remained non-members in the light of what has happened in the Ukraine ?
(Even though I think the Ukraine situation is a different case.)
It is not only Russians who worry about their Security and Safety, after all Latvia and Poland
have never occupied Moscow or St Petersburg - but Russians have occupied Warsaw and Riga .
Laurence Johnson 26 May 2015 02:31
The problem is simple. The US is isolated geographically from the core global markets of
trade. Europe united with Russia and Asia in trade would be a disaster for the US and as such
must never happen.
The bridge between Asia and Europe is Russia and its clear that all options are on the table
to prevent that link from becoming a reality. Its simple good business sense on the part of the
US to protect its markets, which is Europe.
Laurence Johnson 26 May 2015 02:31
The problem is simple. The US is isolated geographically from the core global markets of trade.
Europe united with Russia and Asia in trade would be a disaster for the US and as such must never
happen.
The bridge between Asia and Europe is Russia and its clear that all options are on the table
to prevent that link from becoming a reality. Its simple good business sense on the part of the
US to protect its markets, which is Europe.
TecchnoExpertThanx 26 May 2015 00:08
What concerns me is that both the authors Christopher Clark (a Regius Professor of History
at Cambridge and the author of The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 ) and Kristina
Spohr (a senior lecturer at the London School of Economics and Political Science), carry with
them significant title, and responsibility to educate and ultimately influence the next generation
of political analysts, historians and policy makers.
This research and amateurish conclusions, resembles more like an essay written by a first year
'Poly Science' student with a score of 'F'.
The problem with many of our educators (amongst other things) is laziness.
Hey, I personally subscribe and listen to LSE (and similar) lectures, debates and PR book releases/reviews...
but whether a student or professor, being overexposed to liberal dissidence that are well funded
for their 'expert' analysis, will not make you in return an 'Expert', historian, or have you any
nearer to understanding fact from fiction.
Its time to break away from the the bubble that includes free lunches and coffee, supplied
by government and non government think tanks, and go out and do some real research and analysis
that people can learn and benefit from.
AssameseGuy87 -> Bangorstu
I think, after forty years of independence, many of those nations need to start taking
some responsibility for themselves.
Yes, there has to be some progress. For example, in India, there has been a furore over colonial-era
laws that remain in practice. There really shouldn't be any excuses as to why these laws remain
in place and haven't yet been repealed. But the fact remains the Empire did engage in widespread
economic exploitation of the colonies that the successor nations were still reeling under after
decades after independence. It's easy for some Britons to ask that question ('What have they been
doing these past 50-70 years') but I don't think they can ever imagine the mess the Empire had
left some of their erstwhile colonies in (in many cases, after more than a century of rule).
Most of the British Empire was conquered for somewhat less than a century....
The bulk of its colonies were acquired in the period from 1815 to 1896 (almost all of them
achieved independence after the end of the WW2). One more things needs to be said. In many of
these colonies, the formal incorporation of the territory into the British Empire came later;
for decades (and in one particular case, up to a century) prior to that, the British were by and
large the de facto rulers. Also, some of these colonies were initially British protectorates where
the rulers of these states were mere figureheads.
But we never did - the indigenous languages weren't suppressed and they still survive.
The British didn't overtly have to; just one interesting policy was that they just preferred
those with English education over those with vernacular language education for posts. It was largely
due to the efforts of the indigenous people in many places that their languages survive today.
In some places, the British favoured one ethno-religious group over the other for consideration
for posts. But then, that comes under divide and rule policies implemented by most colonial powers.
I would like to say that in many of these places it wasn't all peace and harmony before the colonial-era;
there were indeed bloody conflicts. But then rarely were they along ethnic/religious lines. Divide
and rule undoubtedly deepened the divisions between ethnic/religious groups in many former colonies.
And note many of the issues are due to arbitrarily drawn borders which can of course
be changed if the countries concerned wish them to be.
And how exactly do you think we should do that??. I actually do know of a war fought over an
arbitrarily drawn border. In that case, the British signed an unequal treaty which incorporated
that territory into the British Raj (that was in the early 20th century). After independence,
it's successor state inherited the territory. The state from which the British had gained the
territory (when it's rule was weak and the might of the British was at their highest) considered
that border drawn under an unequal treaty to be illegal. The successor state should just hand
over the territory and the people living there, right (after 100 years of rule)??.
The Empire did good in many cases (very few dispute these). But what irritates people from places
which were formerly part of the British Empire is the tendency of some Britons to simply wish
away the problems faced by some of it's former colonies ('Oh, they have been independent for 50-70
years, what's stopping them') without understanding the complexity of the problem and dismissing
anyone critical of some policies of the Empire as someone having a 'chip on their shoulder'.
Even worse are of course the shameless, despicable Empire apologists ('Oh, but, but the Spanish
were much worse', 'Oh, but, but massacres were the norm back then', 'Oh, but, look at the ones
firing the guns'; if only the Nazi war criminals used that last one as an excuse at Nuremberg).
Thankfully, you do say this though:
I didn't say that did I? I said being colonized was a mixed blessing which is somewhat
different.
Btw, It's a very much more complex situation and set of relationships
Yes, indeed (I agree). The Empire did much good (very few dispute that) and the Empire did much
wrong too, many of which have consequences today (and out come all the apologists; I'm not saying
you are one though). Many Britons take pride in the Commonwealth (the Army traditions, the language
etc) but I sadly doubt many Britons can truly (or more unfortunately, even wish to) understand
the negative effects some of the Empire's policies have had on its former colonies.
hermanmitt -> Matthew Reynolds 25 May 2015 20:20
If you really want to sustain this notion that the US is this covert empire, then you
have to eventually get around to some sort of Phantom Menace conspiracy theory...
Once there was gold backing the U.S. Dollar. Then there was oil which turned the dollar into
the world reserve currency. That and WW11. Now there is nothing backing the dollar, which is now
a totally fiat currency backed solely by the U.S. military industrial complex.
The U.S. has established its Empire through the financial system by creating debt, backed at
present by absolutely nothing, except the U.S. Military which needs to be pervasive around the
globe in order to maintain that status quo.
When a country, Iraq, chooses to start selling its oil in Euros, it gets invaded. When a country
starts to sell its oil in 'gold backed Dinars', Libya, it gets toppled. When there is a country
the U.S. does not wish a direct military confrontation with, Russia, the war footing moves to
a proxy, Ukraine, and the war is escalated on a financial front. Russia kicked out the Rothschilds,
paid off their interest owed from oil revenues and banned them from returning to Russia. Now,
Russia and China trade for oil and gas in local currencies, cutting out the dollar middle-man,
and are creating a new global reserve currency based on the Chinese Yuan coupled to a new gold
standard. That makes Russia a legitimate target for both a proxy war, via Ukraine, and a financial
war, through sanctions. China cannot be directly confronted because China owns too much US debt,
which they can call in at any time, and bankrupt the FED. The same pattern of financial aggression
applied, until recently, to Iran. However the mood has changed since the U.S. need Iran to help
deal with ISIS in the region in order to keep the dollar-based oil flowing.
The pattern of military and financial aggression is now so blatant it's impossible to hide,
and with the rise of the Chinese who have a financial and military pact with Russia, the writing
is on the wall for the fall of the dollar, possibly this year. Even the City of London has recognized
this and is trading the Yuan in London, with the UK effectively joining the BRICS alliance.
It's time to start recognising the very obvious pattern that has been clearly revealed over
the past decade and a half. The U.S. has buried the world in debt through the Federal Reserve
System and is desperately trying to keep itself afloat. It has no real friends left, apart from
perhaps Britain, but that is also a bit questionable. Everyone has just done as they are instructed,
until recently, but of late, and due to the huge shift in trade and energy supply eastwards, U.S.
influence is fast on the wane, and the only thing they have left is the MIC.
We are witnessing the last desperate gasps for breath of the U.S. Empire, and it could get
a lot more dangerous for everyone on this planet as the inevitable day approaches where the, mathematically
certain, collapse of the dollar finally occurs.
Does that go some way to filling in a few of the gaps for you?
Volkovolk -> Will Hay 25 May 2015 20:17
You are really ignorant.
Firstly "soviet invasion" started two weeks after the german. Secondly the goal of this invasion
was to put border away to west before inevitable war with Germany. Read about Brest Fortress then
understand that before that invasion Brest was on Poland territory. And thirdly to blame Stalin
"as much as Hitler" is kinda the same as to blame jews for Holocoust.
Volkovolk 25 May 2015 19:49
Oh, and by the way i feel that i shall ask you western people one question. Have you ever wondered
what Russians are thinking about Gorbachev, Yeltsin and about nearly all of their decisions? Have
you ever wondered what Russians are feeling towards them? Not pro-western sectant Russians and
not some successful businessmen who used the opportunity to became oligarchs, but ordinary people?
Hint: this emotion has much, much common with despise and hatred.
vlad day 25 May 2015 18:09
False logic enveloped into quasi-academic wording.
"There was no commitment to abstain in future from eastern NATO enlargement". Yes, there was;
a western politician who used to communicate with Gorbachev's team over German matters etc., speaking
to reporters: "We didn't put it on paper." A girl journalist happily smiled and nodded her little
head on those wise words. So, there was a pledge, though not "put on paper". A nice way of cheating.
"…a mythical sequence of unmediated aggressions whose ultimate purpose was to justify current
Russian policy in the Ukraine". And where is a formulation of "Russian policy in Ukraine"?
Here, I guess, the author's knowledge approximates zero. No Western (and no Ukrainian) reporters
in the area of conflict, except for a couple of freelancers, one of which is Graham Phillips,
a classical black sheep (white crow, as we put it in Russian) of the highly hypocritical journalist
community in Britain.
Radical Ukrainian nationalists commit violence all over Ukraine (not only in the two "pro-Russian"
regions trying to get out of Kiev's deadly grip), killing politicians, bloggers, writers in broad
daylight. Every time no investigation follows. "People being tortured and murdered, oh, really?"
Who cares.
The Ukrainian topics have disappeared in the western media except for some half-abstract "academic"
contexts like the one above.
EugeneGur 25 May 2015 16:15
But the memory of Nato's broken promises also matters because it touches on the legitimacy,
in Russian eyes, of the international settlement established during the German unification process
and the European order that emerged in its wake.
The west always considers Russia's action in isolation from everything else. The narrative
is rather simple, not to say primitive: Russia is inherently bad, aggressive, totalitarian (feel
free to add whatever additional derogatory adjectives you can come up with). So, whatever the
West does against Russia must be good. The West never considers the impact its own actions have
on the Russian perception of the situation and Russian actions. The expansion of NATO were bound
to elicit Russia's reaction at some point, regardless whether any promise was made and whether
it was binding or not. It doesn't really take a genius to predict what that reaction would be,
which is a good thing, because NATO is rather short on geniuses.
People, you were given a gift, a gift the West did not in the least deserve. The Soviet Union
peacefully withdraw from Eastern Europe. Germany, in particular, was given a gift , which was
no less than magnificent considering what Germany did in Russia. And how did the West use that
gift? It grabbed and grabbed, and grabbed. Finally, it bit off more than it could chew with Georgia,
Moldova, Ukraine, particularly, Ukraine. Because, you see, Russia is in a way.
Here everything goes: Nazis - no problem; civilian deaths - regrettable but for the good cause;
political repressions, torture, murders - can happen to the best of us. With Ukraine even that
stand by excuse that the country wanted to join NATO doesn't cut it, because a good half of the
country wanted nothing to do with NATO, and NATO knows. But who cares? If necessary, we'll organize
a coup, buy off the elites, instigate a civil war, destroy the country - do what it takes but
we'll drag whatever is left of it into NATO.
hermanmitt Matthew Reynolds 25 May 2015 15:00
Thank-you for proving my point.
Russia currently has a total of 13 military bases, most of which are in fairly close proximity.
According to a statement Ron Paul, the U.S. currently has 900 military bases stationed in 130
countries around the globe.
That is a difference of 878
AGLiakhov 25 May 2015 14:47
I was a member of various Soviet delegations in these and other talks in the late 80s. I am
prepared to sign an affidavit setting out at least 3 occassions when non expansion assurances
were given by US and NATO officials of different seniority. I was present when President Bush
Sr. Personally promised President Gorbachev that there would be no Eastern expansion. Unfortunately
Gorby believed that the world is run by gentlemen and "my word is my bond". He refused to allow
us to commit this undertaking to paper. Dear researchers - please research well and maintain your
integrity. However I doubt that my comment will be allowed in.
Bardamux -> Chirographer 25 May 2015 14:08
As long as Ukraine does not control all of its territory it can not become a member of NATO.
Same with Georgia. The Russian action, while illegal and wrong, is quite understandable. They
do not want Ukrain/Georgia to become part of a possibly hostile military alliance. Thus they take
a small piece of land and prevent these countries from becoming members.
This would of course be completely unnecessary if the Russians could trust the promises that
Ukraine and Georgia will never, ever become members of NATO. But surprise they do not believe
this pledge.
' pledge not to violate the territorial integrity of Ukraine' - After there was a deal by with
the Western-powers to keep Yanukovich in power until new elections. Which was ripped up barely
after the ink dried.
Please try to understand this, right or wrong, Russia might risk nuclear war over Ukraine and
Georgia. Much like America risked and threatened this over the Cuban missiles.
Dmitry Fedotov 25 May 2015 14:00
Europe and America turned flourishing Libya to hell. The endless civil war, half the population
are refugees in their own country. The number of victims is unknown. Democracy level has not increased.
You poured into the Iraq more than 300 tons of depleted uranium which is horrendous toxin. children
will die from it for generations. You turned Fallujah into radioactive hell. And you call Assad's
chemical? All your weapons containing depleted uranium - the chemical.
Chemical Britain, chemical United States and chemical Europe.
When you will realize that you are guilty, when you will repent, remember what else do is your
fault, understand how much blood on your hands, then you will have the right to judge someone.
Now it's just the arguments of a maniac who sagely condemns others and chews human heart same
time.
Bardamux -> Grishnakh 25 May 2015 13:37
Please learn how to read. I stated many times it was not a binding agreement. It was a promise,
not a binding agreement. Still upset the Russians though. Well now Russia knows that it can not
trust any promise by the US/NATO. And since it is nearly impossible to make a binding agreement
that can not be changed it means they will remain distrustful. And might use force if they feel
it is necessary. I.e. Georgia and Ukraine. Perhaps even in the Baltics. Which would be a disaster.
Congratulations on making a dunce out of Russia. But do not blame them for their lack of trust
now.
US can block access of countries if they want. Has there ever joined nation without American
approval ?
EugeneGur 25 May 2015 12:36
Amid recriminations over US and western European interventions in Kosovo, Libya and Syria,
the Russian leadership has begun to question the legitimacy of the international agreements
on which the current European order is founded.
Isn't that rather natural? Nobody certainly signed up for that, for the US or, more broadly,
the West, single-handedly deciding what is "the European order" or any other "order", for that
matter. It may sound naive, and definitely was extremely naive, but at the time of the Germany
reunification agreement the Russian leadership and Russian people could not have imagined in their
worst nightmares that the West, including Germany, of all countries (!), would instigate a coup
in Ukraine, support neo-Nazis, a civil war, killing and starving of civilians. The West, it
seems, like Bourbons, have learned nothing and forgot nothing".
I do hope that the Russian have learned something useful from this development: that the
West is never ever to be trusted. If you have to deal with the West at all, get everything
in righting three times over, and support that by a good number of judiciously placed military
bases.
sambeckett2 -> Renato Timotheus 25 May 2015 11:56
Let's imagine, for a moment, that the you and I go out for dinner and we talk about a lot
of things, but we don't discuss me having sex with your wife.
Does that mean that you have acquiesced to me doing it?
The countries in question are not the 'wife' of Russia - they do not belong to Russia. The
break up of the Eastern Bloc was more akin to a divorce. If your wife chooses to sleep with me
after that divorce it is none of your business - you do not 'acquiesce' to me doing it because
you have no say.
Not discussing something does not amount to acquiescence to it.
And it doesn't amount to you having a right to prevent it either.
When G. says that NATO expansion was not discussed, I think he clearly means it was not
even countenanced.
They did not have a right to 'countenance' it. If Russia did not consider the possibility at
the time, that was their misfortune. To quote Gorbachev:
So don't portray Gorbachev and the then-Soviet authorities as naïve people who were wrapped
around the West's finger. If there was naïveté, it was later, when the issue arose. Russia
at first did not object.
the Germans - e.g. Kohl and Genscher -- knew full well that they would never get their precious
reunification if there was any hint of a NATO eastward expansion.
So the implicit and explicit assurances they gave -- the latter in the form of a gentlemanly
agreement -- were very real ones.
in 1990-1, there was no assurances of any kind, except with regards to the GDR. Again, Gorbachev
clearly states this, and he also states that the assurances with regards to the GDR were kept.
You have not pointed out a single instance in which such assurances were made in 1990-91. Gorbachev
clearly states that the matter was not discussed and that the examples you have given relate to
to GDR alone.
how can Russia's current leadership have any trust in Merkel's pronouncements --
And, as the article suggests, how can anyone trust Russia when they falsely claim they were
given assurances about NATO expansion when they weren't? Their own leader at the time affirms
this - I cannot see how the sentence "The topic of "NATO expansion" was not discussed at all,
and it wasn't brought up in those years" could be any clearer.
Without some level of trust between Germany and Russia, we will see increasing tensions
between them and in the part of Europe that lies between the two countries.
That does not give Russia a free pass to claim that something happened when it simply didn't.
GuardianFearless 25 May 2015 11:23
Another NATO fairy tale. Don't you think it's doesn't matter now what exactly West thinks about
it, all European decisions already were made and nothing can be done now to change the outcome.
The more important part what Russia thinks of that events, and what will be the consequences now,
just because Russia thinks that there was a betrayal.
You can try to justify actions that was taken in the past in this case only for your own people,
but if you can't convince Russia (and, by the way, the rest of non USA-oriented world), that will
not delay or spare consequences. West will have a problem with Russia in future, it's inevitable,
and a big one (looks like even nuclear one), because Russia makes reality in the world on her
own, that West has to check, so if Russians thinks there was something wrong with NATO actions
in 90-th it's totally 100 percent real for the rest of the world. So, author, please check your
reality detector, looks like a battery fails in it, and write again!
EugeneGur 25 May 2015 11:06
The miracle of 1990 is that one of the greatest transformations of the international system
in human history was achieved without war, in a spirit of dialogue and cooperation.
And then this miracle was used up ill by the West to expand east without any spirit of
dialog or cooperation. Even assuming no promises were made, the actions themselves were hardly
friendly, and that's precisely how they are perceived in Russia. The usual argument that the Eastern
European countries fell over themselves to join NATO is faulty. First, correct me if I am wrong,
but I don't recall a single referendum about joining NATO in any of them, so how the people of
these countries felt remains unknown.
Second, even assuming they were anxious to join NATO, NATO could've predicted the Russian reaction,
could it not, if the NATO commanders had any brains at all? You want to please Estonia and annoy
Russia - that's what you have achieved.
So, don't act surprised by the Russia's reaction and the measures Russia takes to counter what
it sees as a threat. Regardless of what the Eastern Europe wants, Russia remains within its right
to protect itself, and it will. Trying to present it as something totally unreasonable, Russian
"paranoia", is the usual deceit tactics the West is so good at. This always amuses me to no end:
Russia feeling apprehensive at being encircled by something that represents itself as the strongest
military alliance in the wold is paranoia, but the US representing North Korea as existential
threat is reality. Fantastic.
Алексей Кузнецов -> AbsolutelyFapulous 25 May 2015 10:48
What did NATO do to Russia that is not a product of Russia paranoia?
Who's next? What about missile defense system in Europe?
TecchnoExpertThanx 25 May 2015 10:41
8
9
If the Russians are constantly guilty of 'whataboutism', then unfortunately for us in the west,
we are guilty of 'Double Speak' (having this pointed out to us, is commonly referred to as 'whataboutism').
Whether it is deliberate or not, it is about time we stop using this technique to hide behind our
false justifications and need for 'action'.
Courtesy of our propagators, their media poodles and sock puppets, people actually believe that
the 'Ends justify the means' and that the ends is 'Freedom' and the means is 'Democracy Building',
and everything in between is 'Good'.
And sure, we may 'torture some folks', but how dare anyone question intent!!!
Bin Laden? Why am i not surprised to have read only last week that Bin Laden must be conspiracy theorist
because seals found amongst other novels, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man?
Here are some quotes from a Guardian article in 2004. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jun/11/iraq.usa
....the hallmark of Reagan's presidency was anti-communist cynicism, masked by phoney rhetoric
about freedom. In his first press conference as president he used quasi-biblical language to claim
that Soviet leaders "reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat". It
was one of the most extraordinary cases of the pot calling the kettle black...
...In the name of anti-communism everything was possible. Reagan invaded Grenada on the false
premise that US students who had been there safely for months were suddenly in danger. Reagan armed
thugs to overthrow the government of Nicaragua, even after it won internationally certified free
elections in 1984....
Reagan armed and trained Osama bin Laden and his followers in their Afghan jihad, and authorised
the CIA to help to pay for the construction of the very tunnels in Tora Bora in which his one-time
ally later successfully hid from US planes. On the grounds that Nelson Mandela's African National
Congress was pro-communist, Reagan vetoed US congress bills putting sanctions on the apartheid regime
the ANC was fighting.
His policies towards the Soviet Union were hysterical and counter-productive. He put detente into
deep freeze for several years with his insulting label "the evil empire". It led to overblown outrage
over the downing by Soviet aircraft of a South Korean airliner that intruded into Russian air space.
Moscow's action was inept, but if Reagan had not put the superpowers in collision, the Kremlin might
have treated the wayward plane more calmly.
It further goes onto conclude;
Reagan's Star Wars project did not bankrupt the Soviet Union into reform, as his admirers claim.
In repeated statements as well as his budget allocations Gorbachev made it clear Moscow would not
bother to match a dubious weapons system which could not give Washington "first-strike capability"
for at least another 15 years, if ever.
But hey, all this is a distraction. Rather than bickering around 'he said, she said', Ambassador
to the .S.S.R. from 1987 to 1991, Jack F. Matlock does an excellent job in readdressing one of Russia's
biggest concerns. Now irregardless of a promise or lost in translation, who in their right mind would
think that expanding NATO (even if countries BEG to join), would be in the in the best interest for
global security??????
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/who-is-the-bully-the-united-states-has-treated-russia-like-a-loser-since-the-cold-war/2014/03/14/b0868882-aa06-11e3-8599-ce7295b6851c_story.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwj8T34v6hM
Report
StephenKMack 26may1989 25 May 2015 10:40
Thank you for your comment. For those of us who came of age during the last Cold War we don't
need a 'report' to inform us of the fact that a 'New Cold War' is in full swing! The attacks on
those who dissent as 'dupes' and/or as 'paid agents of Putin' hinting at the notion of 'Quislings'
are all familiar territory.
It smacks of the Nixon/McCarren/Mundt/McCarthy political axis of the late forties in America:'
a generation of treason' to describe The New Deal! Always the same screeching hysteria, although
Mr. Clark in his search for 'reasons', while he carefully diagnosis Russian paranoia, and the
self-identification as victim of Western mendacity, tries to mute the tone of that hysteria, by
providing plausible historical antecedents, in a carefully massaged exercise in empiricism, and
he acquits himself with a kind of confident ease.
To provide one salient example of the same old faces, the same old rhetoric, from the last
'Cold War', we see Strobe Talbott of Brookings, or RussiaHand as he dubbed himself, one of the
architects of the transition of the Soviet Union from command to a 'free market' economy, that
required the 'strong medicine' of the 'shock doctrine' to make that transition. That transition
led to the rise of The Oligarchs equaling former KGB thugs like your arch-enemy Putin.
After that ignominious policy failure, hailed by the Western Media as a necessity for the transition
to Democracy, that caused untold suffering on the Russian people: the triumph of the misery producing
Neo-Liberal Dogma in it's squalid infancy , or nearly that.
Regards,
StephenKMackSD
Кирилл Олейник 25 May 2015 10:26
After all these events since the bombing of Yugoslavia it is obviously that Gorbachev had made
mistake.
The West is not able to appreciate the concessions, West doesn`t know what means gratitude.
And such demagogic articles are just another proof.
When Soviets had stopped meaningless Cold War the West had dared to call itself the winner.
So there is no reason to have a dialogue with the West, because it can understand only the language
of strength. Well, this is a good remark, Russians will remember this. If you prefer the language
of strength then you`ll have it.
Don`t cry then.
Z'ing Sui AbsolutelyFapulous 25 May 2015 10:16
From what I read, Russians are angry for a number of reasons, here's approximate list
1. Expansion - "our anti-Western alliance is over, your anti-Russian alliance is growing", the
broken promise to Gorby, etc.
2. Bombing Russia's allies. - Russia had very few of them as it was, and the Serbia thing being
done without engaging Russians is something they can't forgive. Destroying Libya and threats to
bomb Syria pale in comparison (Russians don't see the distinction between NATO countries and NATO)
3. "We helped you, you didn't help us" - Russia's provided logistics to NATO in Afghanistan,
but they say NATO has never done anything meaningful in return
4. Training troops that fight Russia - that's something spanning from Soviets fighting in Afghanistan
to Georgia, they aren't specific. But training Georgia troops and then having them shell Russian
positions in South Ossetia is something that actually seems to have happened
Alexander Bach Artusov 25 May 2015 10:06
There was NO written agreement as I understand it.
True. Russians have never claimed there was a written agreement. They claim that was alluded
in spoken words and they believed it as at that time they trusted the West much more than today.
Anyway, today they don't use this issue as a justification of everything. They only give it as
one example of the West's behaviour. There were many other things later on. So there's no point
in focusing on this particular one. The fact is that today Russia has no trust towards the West
whatsoever, not only because of the cheats, but mostly because the West continuously refuses to
admit any Russia's interests.
Putin is KGB trained and probably shares some ideas of Russian expansion [ or perhaps
not - who knows ? ]
I don't think so. Putin has given a hint a few times that he treats the ex-USSR splinters as
a burden for Russia, so he prefers them to pay for themselves. Crimea is an easily explainable
exclusion: 1) it's very Russian (full of Russians) 2) it's very pro-Russian (people there want
to be in Russia) 3) it has very high strategic value (having it gives control over the whole Black
Sea).
As per other regions (South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Novorossia), as you see Putin doesn't take them
into Russia although he could apparently do so with ease.
Ieuan Tintenfische 25 May 2015 10:00
Tintenfische said: "As for Iran, well yes we did invade together with you, but the SHah had
declared war on the UK"
If you're talking about 1941, no the Shah had not declared war on anybody. Iran had declared
itself neutral.
The Brits used as their excuse for invasion that Iran was under Nazi domination and 'full of
German advisers'. In turns out that the only Germans in the country were a couple of hundred employees
of the German embassy, who had every right to be there.
The UK occupied the country until 1946.
Interestingly enough the Shah of 1941 had been supported by the UK in the 1920's when he was
no more than a junior army officer and marched on Tehran to overthrow the new Iranian Parliament
(There had been an Iranian constitutional revolution which had overthrown the current Shah and
set up a democratic parliament).
Z'ing Sui AbsolutelyFapulous 25 May 2015 09:57
Would have been a great move 20-25 years ago, when Russians removed their boots from Europe,
their people hailed western values and their politicians weren't former KGB. Now, with NATO disregarding
Russia for 20 years basically just because Russia was too concerned with not falling apart to
do anything about it, and Russians going on a rampage in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, with Putin
having almost 90% ratings for opposing NATO, it's just too late.
Why would they trust NATO after all these years? I sure wouldn't, not until NATO undoes whatever
Russians consider NATO's wrongdoings, which is not really possible too.
Z'ing Sui 25 May 2015 09:46
Almost every politician who was privy to the process of negotiations with the Russians or had
anything to do with foreign policy towards USSR at the time has at least expressed sentiment that
Russians would of course not expect NATO expansion and would consider it a hostile move after
they've remove their troops from Europe.
A number of people confirm that the assurances were in fact given to the Russians, and here's
a great article that actually relies on the documents of the time, and not on some ww1 history
lessons
"What would Mr. Gorbachev demand in return? To learn the answer, Mr. Baker and Mr. Kohl
journeyed to Moscow within a day of each other. On Feb. 9, 1990, Mr. Baker asked Mr. Gorbachev,
"Would you prefer to see a unified Germany outside of NATO, independent and with no U.S. forces
or would you prefer a unified Germany to be tied to NATO, with assurances that NATO's jurisdiction
would not shift one inch eastward from its present position?"
Mr. Gorbachev, according to Mr. Baker, answered that "any extension of the zone of NATO would
be unacceptable." Their meeting ended without any final deals made. Mr. Baker left behind a secret
letter, detailing what he had said, for Mr. Kohl in Moscow."
It seems clear that although Kohl obviously negotiated mostly concerning East Germany's future,
Russians were talking about any sort of NATO expansion, into East Germany and otherwise, and Kohl
and Baker at the very least, knew it when they made their assurances to the soviets.
Yes, there was no binding agreement, but Gorby's trust was obviously betrayed. "False memory
syndrome" is what authors suffer from. You can't fight Putin's lies with lies of your own.
PixieFrouFrou Alexander Bach 25 May 2015 09:43
'In a recent atricle (8 of March 2015) the Guardian writes (see http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/08/nato-is-misquoting-mikhail-gorbachev)'
The item you quote is a letter to the Guardian from a reader, not an article in the Guardian.
BradBenson Steely1 25 May 2015 08:43
Yes indeed. That was an excellent article which, although written six years ago, is more accurate
and true to the facts than the above opinion piece.
These two authors want to blame something that happened at the beginning of the 20th Century
for Russian mistrust of the West in the 21st. I would suggest that, if they want to go back that
far in history to find a reason for Russian mistrust of the West, they should not overlook the
Western MILITARY INTERVENTION in Russia during the civil war, which followed the revolution--to
which US Military Units were also dispatched. Perhaps the Russian Memory is better than ours here
in the West.
Ian56789 DHMeyer 25 May 2015 08:24
The Ukraine economy is in the midst of collapse - GDP fell by 17.6% in Q1.
This was the highly predictable outcome (as was the civil war) of the US engineered Coup in
Kiev.
The IMF loans will do absolutely nothing to help Ukraine. They will go on bailing out Templeton,
Soros and other US hedge funds that hold Ukraine debt (about $23bn in total).
The IMF loans will go on increasing military spending up from $1.5bn in 2013 to $3.8bn in 2015.
A fair amount of it will be used on buying US made weapons (quelle surprise!).
A billion or so will go in the pockets of Poroshenko, Yatsenuk & other Ukrainian Oligarchs.
Yatsenuk is already accused of embezzling $325m.
The IMF imposed "austerity" will further depress Ukraine's economy. Private fuel bills have
increased by 300% and overall inflation is running at something like 60%.
The EU co-operation agreement was discussed at a meeting in Yalta in September 2013 attended
by Bill and Hillary Clinton, Tony Blair, Poroshenko and representatives of the IMF, German and
Russian foreign ministries.
It was later reported that Hillary Clinton had taken an $8m bribe from the host - Ukrainian
Oligarch Viktor Pinchuk.
Susan O'neill alpamysh 25 May 2015 08:22
What an utterly ridiculous claim. The nazi Kiev regime has outlawed Russian speech, legal representation
of Russian speaking peoples and the Lugansk and Donetsk peoples wanted to survive. They are fighting
for their lives under an oppressive regime who has promised them suffering beyond belief. They
asked to be recognized as a federation, which Putin has acknowledged but the US wants a deal on
that "bread basket" land and will support the Kiev war in order to get it. This war is about power
to those who have it and can wield it. The only "ideals" are those of the nazi ideology. There
is real conviction on the part of the Donbass civilian population. It's called survival.
It was also later reported (in the Telegraph) that the EU trade agreement up for consideration
would cost the Ukraine economy something like $160bn over 10 years, which was the reason that
Yanukovich eventually rejected it.
You should also look into Kolomoyski, Burisma Holdings (Ukraine's largest private fracking
company), Hunter Biden (son of VP Joe) and John Kerry's investments in Burisma through the Heinz
Family Trusts.
hermanmitt 25 May 2015 08:06
Try asking yourself one question:
How many Russian 'military bases' are there around the globe?
It perhaps needs to be pointed out that, in reality, there is no such thing as NATO. NATO,
as it exists, is merely the European military arm that enforces the current 'western occupation'
by the U.S. Empire, which relies exclusively on its Military Industrial Complex to hold the empire
together.
When you look at it in this way, to get the full picture, one needs to add into the mix all
the other U.S. military bases around the globe, which tells you that the entire planet is held
under a threat of U.S. aggression. It's the reason that U.S. military spending is more than the
next 26 countries combined. A strategy first widely employed in the building and maintenance of
the British Empire, this is really nothing more than an extension of 'gunboat diplomacy' - a global
example of a military backed empire, but done in a more cover way.
The Russians may, diplomatically, be pointing out some very salient facts, for those of us
who prefer the macro, as opposed to micro, view of the geo-political map.
Anyone who supports the current corrupt and disastrous, heavily Fascist orientated, regime
in Kiev is no friend of Ukrainians, nor friends of Europe (or ordinary Americans).
Putin has repeatedly tried to have civilized discussions with the West and sought to de-escalate
the situation at every opportunity. It just hasn't been reported in Western mainstream media -
it has been reported in numerous Western alternative media outlets. Just about all of the Western
alternative media directly contradicts the false Neocon propaganda pushed in Western Corporate
media.
DHMeyer SHappens 25 May 2015 07:59
1. Expansion of NATO was the choice of the independent countries which applied to join the
organisation. They wouldn't have done so if Russia was indeed a peaceful and helpful neighbour,
but sorry, history of the region proves they are not interested in that sort of role.
2. Do you really believe that Russia wouldn't demand written guarantees "because it would
have seemed indecent"? Since when Russian diplomats are sentimental fools and since when Russia
is overly concerned with decency?
The changing political mood could signal a return to power of Duda's conservative Law and Justice
party in parliamentary elections this autumn. That would cement Poland's turn to the right, create
a new dynamic with other European countries and possibly usher in a less welcoming climate for foreign
investors.
Law and Justice presents itself as a protector of those who have not benefited from the capitalist
transformation and as a defender of national interests abroad. It is staunchly pro-US, but has a
sometimes defiant stance towards other European partners, which has created tensions in the past
with the EU and neighbouring Germany.
Duda says he wants new taxes on the foreign-owned banks and supermarkets to protect Polish interests,
suggesting an approach similar to that of Hungary's prime minister, Viktor Orbán. He also wants banks
returned to Polish control.
Quote: "The Eurovision Contest certainly is as dreadful and cheesy as ever". Still take
note about Guardian presstitute title ;-). I think Polina Gagarina is stronger in singing
Russian romances, then Europop. See also
Polina
Gagarina
and Russian Music Oldies
The Eurovision Contest certainly is as dreadful and cheesy as ever. The
faux-American accents in almost all English-language songs are getting a bit better, though:
The Swedish winner was almost perfect, but the Scandinavians and Dutch always manage to sing
better in English than others (for ex., the Germans -- and far better than the French or
Italians). The winning song "Heroes" is rather pedestrian: shoddy lyrics and a melody most
anyone could have written in five minutes. The grandiose technical effects in the background,
along with the exuberant crowd, were needed to give a dull song some pizazz. In general,
Eurovision is Euro-pop at its worst (and continental European pop music since the 1960s is
pretty much the world's worst). Ghastly.
SallyWa -> Ipswichone 24 May 2015 10:41
If Russians there are that powerful so they could change voting results so much and give
high points to Russia, then they are not minorities. It means there are lots of them. Or that
many Estonians, Latvians and etc. also vote for Russia together with them. Good for nations
and people, but bad for anti-Russian agenda.
Ipswichone -> SallyWa 24 May 2015 10:36
The Baltic states have large Russian minorities, a proportion of them placed there in
Soviet times (that's one of the grievances Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians have against
Russia). These are the ones who mainly vote for Russia in the contest. The same applies to
some other former Soviet territories. A determined minority can sway the vote if they vote en
masse for a particular country, while the votes of the majority of Estonians, Latvians and
Lithuanians will be dispersed among the other countries. That's how it works in Russia's
favour.
Richard Hunter -> Linguistician 24 May 2015 10:35
No, what you've said about the Russian musicians is that they deserved to be abused by the
crowd because of what their political leaders are like. I haven't said much about the quality
of the Russian song either but clearly it was a strong song and deserved to finish highly. I'm
only disappointed that the German song got nothing because it was my favourite closely
followed by the Georgian one, not because I care much about the result but because it would be
nice for the performers. At the very least they should be able to perform their music
unmolested by people trying to drag politics into it.
SallyWa 24 May 2015 10:20
What is more interesting, that we are told on daily basis that Baltic States live in a
routine fear of Russia and etc., etc. But according to the voting results on eurovision.tv
Latvia gave Russia 10 points, Estonia - 12 points. Poland managed to give 6.
I mean, there is obviously political agenda and there are people who obviously didn't buy it.
Linguistician -> JanefromLondon 24 May 2015 10:11
ilankling's got you there Jane.
"Cultural" is wheeled out every year as an excuse for the political voting.
Let's just be honest. The ESC is political. It oozes politics. It was born out of
politics and the entire format is national state pitted against other nation states.
The vast majority of the songs are (attempts at) Anglo-American music. Occasionally there's
a few fusion pieces (Israel's last night for example), and very occasionally there are folksy
songs (don't tend to do well though).
Yes, the Balkan states share culture, but if they are all singing songs in English (they
did, with the exception of Montenegro) in similar styles, then the argument that its cultural
affinity just doesn't hold water (and arguably "cultural affinity" is still just politics in
different clothing).
Tallulah Hennessey -> NickBandura 24 May 2015 09:51
"It's getting too gay and political"
That is just a star quote.
NickBandura 24 May 2015 09:48
The contest unofficially pro-gay while Russia is officially anti-gay as opposed to Sweden
that's officially and unofficially pro-gay. Hence no prizes for guessing which way the vote
would sway for.
The problem with the contest it's getting too gay and political - what's needed is
diversity. Things need to straighten up a bit. Hating on Russia must go too.
Mundialbatross 24 May 2015 09:41
Yep songs from Eurovision song contest aren't master pieces,but generally not worst or
better than a lots of "pop" canned rubbish that is passed here in UK and all over the world.
Because of that I can not understand why some here in UK are so critical about Eurovision
contest... If also here "we "listen" so much trash...
CaptTroyTempest -> fireadmin2cats 24 May 2015 09:02
This result should hardly come as a surprise to anyone in Sweden. There is no other nation
that invests more time and money in this competition at the regional and national levels than
Sweden (a nation of 10 million) with numerous pre-qualification and qualification rounds, all
of which are aired on national TV. Not only has the Melodifestival (now known as 'Melo')
become a gravy train for countless Swedish 'has been' song writers, artists, producers and
their sidekicks. It has also become a drain on the monies made available for drama,
children's, documentary, arts and other programmes, of course, at the taxpayers' expense. A
reporter who allegedly researched this enormous scam a few years back was gagged by SVT (the
Swedish equivalent of BBC) for attempts to tarnish the name and reputation of the competition
… and its 'entourage'.
It has to be said that Sweden understands the 'Science' of Eurovision better than any other
European nation. Namely by finding something that goes down with average televoter throughout
Europe, even if it means plagiarizing other people's work, and testing the water by putting
these tunes to European juries during the qualification rounds. In other words, holding a
'mini-Eurovision' prior to the 'big event'. (I'm not kidding, Sweden really does this).
The result is invariably a ditty that is unoriginal, predictable and 'safe'. Because so
many people's livelihoods and reputations depend on this being the winning entry, heads roll
if it doesn't come out on top. Needless to say, there will be many sighs of relief today
amongst all those on the Swedish Melodifestival gravy train/drain. They have yet another year
to sponge their backs off the Swedish taxpayers.
PhillFiorini -> Antwerpenaar 24 May 2015 08:50
I think you are right. However, nowadays nearly every country in the West uses the words
"democracy" and "freedom of expression" to counteract regimes that are not aligned with
Western interests. I heard about "democracy" and "freedom" when the US intervened in Iraq and
Libya. But after the war there is no freedom nor democracy there. Even worse, they are all
pariah states today. I don't hear "democracy" and "freedom" when John Kerry visits Saudi
Arabia; a country that shares the same religious views with ISIS, and a country that beheads
as many people as ISIS. They are "friends" of the West.
Once I observe the electoral options the US electorate have I don't see much of a difference
from Russia. Both Democratic and Republican parties obey to the same corporation conglomerates
that have enough lobbying power and funds to pressure the White House to make decisions that
go against the interests of the 99% of the US citizens.
The same can be said in the UK once you see the disproportionate power that the City of London
and its elites exert on Westminster.
Obviously, the difference between the West and Russia is enormous when it comes to freedom of
expression, but I have the feeling that the gap is getting narrower and not in a good way.
2thep01nt 24 May 2015 08:13
I have always been baffled by the Eurovision Song Contest, right from the start as a
youngster becoming musically aware, around the times of primarily Elvis, then the Beatles,
Beach Boys and Stones started shaking up the airwaves. Later, during the 70s, I couldn't
understand why music lovers would enthuse over mediocrity, kitsch and just downright poor
taste. Maybe that was it, a celebration of just that, poor taste as that levelled the playing
field to allow the 'also rans' to have a chance.
I suffered though last nights 2015 Eurovision Song Contest and got bored very quickly and
found myself channel hopping after 20 minutes. I kept going back to Eurovision however, but I
still managed to pick up one of the iconic movie lines, "I love the smell of napalm in the
morning!" which got me thinking why do artists put themselves up for this. To bastardise
Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore's words, "Either you sing, or watch". I can't sing so I'd just
have to watch. I watched the last hour uninterrupted and put the remote out of reach. The more
I watched the more cringeworthy it became. Even Graham Norton seemed like he was struggling to
become enthused. Maybe that's it, he said mockingly.
The voting system seems to be tweaked every year to make it fairer, but every year fails
and is just as predictable. Out of all those meaningful, passion filled songs I heard and saw
last night the highlight would still be the snatches of 'Apocalypse Now' that made more of an
impression on me. I mean if the Beatles were still together and they entered "All You Need is
Love" as the UK's entry last night, I doubt if it would've made any impact. Probably wouldn't
do better than Electro Velvet's 4th last either. None of the songs or tracks I endured last
night would ever make it into my iTunes library. I wouldn't even consider just one of them for
even sentimental reasons. The multi-million selling or downloaded artists of the UK, who
incidentally sell and are downloaded in the European market, are still seem to be more popular
than all the artist who appeared on last nights Eurovision song Contest. Why does this contest
not inspire our artist to take part, like "Florence + the Machines" for example or "Bring Me
the Horizon" and even the Irish band U2 for Ireland?
Every year I just think, "Oh Dear". Last night it was so poor I only echoed Colonel Kurtz's
words, "The horror... the horror... "
I still don't get it. Please explain what the huge expense, all the pageantry, the attempt
to make it witty and insightful is all about. Seriously, I really would like to know? Maybe
I'm just one of the few that just don't get it and never will?
In the aftermath of Russia's annexation of Crimea and the invasion of eastern Ukraine,
Finland is uniquely vulnerable to any further aggression.
… In recent months, Russian warplanes have frequently probed Finnish air defences.
In April, the Finnish navy resorted to depth-charging a suspected submarine that was detected
near the capital, Helsinki.
Notable Quotes: " I have argued all along that Ukraine's best hope is to smartly play EU and Russia
against each other. By passionately siding with EU (that doesn't really want them) they are making a
strategic blunder. That's what we are observing." ... "Russia didn't start this crisis, it
was started by geo-political morons from EU (Sikorski, Bildt) with assistance from Washington neo-cons.
Ukrainians will pay a huge price for allowing themselves to act as extras in other people's geo-political
games. And they deserve it." ... 'Russia doesn't want Ukraine. They want the US and EU to pay
for that bastardly thing they broke. "...
.
Usual crowd of Jezzam, havingalarov, botswans61,
Metronome151,
Robert Looren de Jongare, Alderbaran,
alphmysh, BMWAlbert and several
other bots including a couple of newcomers ( AbsolutelyFapulou)
are on duty today.
The Guardian kindly needs to first explain why inflation and utility prices have risen
in Ukraine, when:
a) deflation has taken over most of Ukraine's European partners, and indeed much of the world
economy; and
b) utility prices tend to move with oil and gas prices, which are one-half of what they were
last year.
Both inflation and utility prices should therefore be considerably lower, unless someone
in the Ukraine Government (or their pals elsewhere) gets to pocket the benefits that should be
coming to the Ukrainian people, and moreover load on another bunch of inflation and utility prices.
Who is pocketing all the money? Once we know that, we may have an inkling of why people in
Odessa or Kharkiv are pissed off at the Ukraine Government. Hopefully, The Guardian would do some
of its homework. Naughty child.
Beckow -> Jonathan Stromberg 22 May 2015 14:52
"EU are for a large variety of reasons a better place to live"
Sure, I agree. But Ukraine is not in EU. I can equally say that Beverly Hills is a "better
place to live", wishes are not reality.
The GDP loss due to Donbass and Crimea cannot exceed 30% since they were less than 15% of GDP
before the crisis. So most of the collapse is due to Kiev's policies, loss of trade with Russia
and continued corruption.
Since 1991 Ukraine has had 5 governments, most leaning west. Yanukovitch rules for 4 years and
was the most pro-Russian, yet even he was pissing of Russia, negotiating with EU and IMF, he saw
himself as neutral. What made Yanuk different that he represented Donbass industry. But most of
the time Ukraine has been ruled by pro-Western governments, some radically so: Yushenko, Tymoshenko.
You seem to be upset at Russia's policy to protect its own interests and willing to go quite
far in getting its way. Well, that's what countries do: US does it all the time. Russia didn't
start this crisis, it was started by geo-political morons from EU (Sikorski, Bildt) with assistance
from Washington neo-cons.
Ukrainians will pay a huge price for allowing themselves to act as extras in other people's geo-political
games. And they deserve it.
John Smith -> atozed 22 May 2015 14:25
The Ukrainian parliament has backed a decree allowing the country to rescind its commitments
outlined in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Social Charter.
Thursday's second reading of the decree was passed by 249 votes in the Verkhovna Rada, 23 more
than the minimum required.
John Smith -> Craig Axon 22 May 2015 13:57
No, I am a Humanist and a Paifist so I dont believe in any form of violence or discrimination
towards anyone or anything.
This started a war together with the Odessa massacre. That happened in Mariupol a year ago, nazi
battalions shooting at unarmed civilians on a Victory Day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HZlaXOJhHY
John Smith -> Havingalavrov 22 May 2015 13:05
Yanukovich took a better deal, presented by Russia.
A better deal for who ? For Ukrainians ? ha ha ha ha ha ha......
How things are in Ukraine? Do you know?
I heard that average wage is 120$, it was 300-400$ under Yanukovich.
All bills skyrocketed.
This is from Reuters report:
But German Chancellor Angela Merkel, herself brought up in Communist East Germany, was clear,
telling parliament in Berlin before leaving: "We must not create false expectations."
EU chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker said "they are not ready, we are not ready", but
added "the process is on its way".
Bummer.
annamarinja -> jezzam 22 May 2015 12:53
Has not Ukraine got notoriety recently for the number of political prisoners? There was also
a wave of violence and murder against Ukrainian journalists and opposition leaders. Could you
enlighten us what was wrong with the murdered journalist Buzina? And how touching of you to mention
the "freedom of discrimination" in Ukraine. Perhaps you have some explanation for the parades
of neo-Nazis in Ukraine during the celebration of the Day of Victory in WWII and the harassment
of the old soldiers that fought that war against the Nazi collaborators...
EugeneGur -> jezzam 22 May 2015 12:51
No doubt there are equally heartrending stories on the Kiev side.
Why don't you tell us one? I seem to have missed the moment when Kiev was fired upon by the
Donbass militia.
Beckow -> Jonathan Stromberg 22 May 2015 12:28
Ukraine has been independent since 1991, so much for your "clutches". They have had pro-West
leaders (Yushenko, Tymoshenko, now Poroshenko) for most of the last 15 years. At what point are
they going to be responsible for themselves?
The economic trouble is only partially caused by Donbass, the rest of Ukraine is not exactly booming.
Maybe 30% Donbass?
Russia is not "Uzbekistan". Actually Ukraine is much, much closer. And so is Bulgaria and Romania.
Compare GNP and living standards before sharing your views.
You seem to be an ideologue disconnected from reality. Get over your biases and do some
number crunching....
sutjeska -> jezzam 22 May 2015 12:27
You mock Russians for wounded pride, and then move straight into rationalising the Germans
murdering their way across Europe for the same? I thought I'd have to scroll further down to find
a blatant Nazi apologist. Seems like there's a lot of that going around now.
The thing is, Russians remember what happened when they tried to join Europe - they got NATO breathing
down their neck and their country went into an economic and demographic nosedive that they're
only just now recovering from.
Beckow -> Alderbaran 22 May 2015 12:23
Yes, it is going Putin's way.
But it was also predictable and thus easily avoidable. I have argued all along that Ukraine's
best hope is to smartly play EU and Russia against each other. By passionately siding with EU
(that doesn't really want them) they are making a strategic blunder. That's what we are observing.
Beckow -> NoOneYouKnowNow 22 May 2015 12:18
The people in EU are externally represented by their politicians and media - one can only assume
that "people" either agree or don't care enough to object.
I have always said that it takes two to lie: the liars and the ones who agree to be lied to. Lying
has consequences, this could get really ugly for all of us.
Dannycraig007 jezzam 22 May 2015 11:38
Russia doesn't want Ukraine. They want the US and EU to pay for that bastardly thing they
broke. If Russia wanted it they could have easily taken it last year in less than two weeks.
The have the best part, Crimea. Those people voted wisely to secede from the new fascist Kiev
regime.
Had they not voted in such a manner it is very likely that they too would have been killed
like the 7,000 innocent civilians the Kiev regime bombed in Donbass.
Beckow -> Alderbaran 22 May 2015 11:37
"There was no anti-Russian genocide and in general there were few tensions"
Hmm, they are fighting a bloody civil war. I don't think anybody has called it a "genocide". Yet.
But "few tensions"?...how about the massacre of Russians in Odessa? How about bombing Donetsk?
What exactly is "tension" in your book? You must live in a rough neighborhood.
"I feel that my rights are more likely to be respected under European law than under Russian law"
How is that relevant? My point is that EU needs to respect Russian minorities as much as they
respect Catalans, Albanians, etc... If they don't - as they clearly don't - they have no standards,
just favorites and enemies. Pretty much any system in history had that, that's tribalism, not
human rights.
midnightschild10 22 May 2015 11:03
I wonder if the writer forgot about the separatists being burned to death in Odessa, or the
bombings of homes, hospitals, and infrastructure in Southeastern Ukraine cities. Perhaps some
of the people realized that when Crimea held its referendum to join Russia, and Russia annexed
Crimea no one died. Since Nuland spent 5 billion tax paper dollars on Kiev and the West put in
Yatsy and Poroshenko over 5,000 have died and counting. Just a few things to mention to balance
the article.
BorninUkraine -> Dannycraig007 22 May 2015 10:44
Welcome to the club! I voted for Obama twice, and I am ashamed of it. As the saying goes, "fool
me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".
Compared to the blatant lies spewed by Western propaganda, even Soviet newspapers look truthful,
and that's saying something. Unfortunately, there is a clear pattern.
About 90% of official US statements regarding Ukraine in 2014-15 are blatant lies, and the remaining
10% have the facts twisted beyond recognition. Several thousands died, and counting.
The claims that Iraq had WMDs were blatant lies, and the tube Colin Powell shook at the UN
was a fake, containing laundry detergent or something. More than 150 thousand died, and counting.
Alleged by the US government genocide of Albanians by Serbs in Kosovo, used as a pretext for
its occupation by NATO and separation from Serbia, was also a blatant lie, as further investigation
established. Several thousands were killed by NATO bombing of Serbia.
Tonkin incident used by the US government as a pretext for Vietnam war was a lie. More than
2 million Vietnamese were killed by the US troops.
The statements by US government and media reports about Russian-Georgian war in 2008 were lies.
Funnily, on day one the media did not have proper instructions, and reported the reality: Georgia
shelled peacekeepers and civilians in Tskhinval, killing quite a few. Then the instructions came
and the story was turned around 180 degrees. A couple of years later EU reluctantly "found" that
the original story was true, but did not advertise its "findings".
I can continue this list, but what's the point? Any sensible person knows that you can't believe
anything US government says. On the other hand, every person paid by said government will try
to prove otherwise to justify his/her/its salary.
Oh, dear;
violent clashes in Odessa and Kharkov, as The Grauniad admits that those two cities "are deeply
divided along political lines, with large numbers opposed to the government in Kiev and in favour
of closer ties with Moscow."
Hostility grows toward Kiev; you don't say. They're coming for your fat ass, Porky. Maybe not
tonight – just as well, since you're not there – but soon.
Of course The Grauniad loyally announces that all the destabilization efforts originate in
Russia, and that bombers and partisans who were captured confess that they were paid. The only
true patriots, who don't do it for the money, are honest pro-Kiev Ukrainians. I guess you better
crank on some more sanctions against Russia, because they obviously still have too much money.
Meanwhile, in central Kiev, the air is once again perfumed with burning rubber – one of Ukraine's
few growth industries – as activists of the "Financial Maidan" protest the plummeting currency
and skyrocketing utility costs and
lay siege to the
Parliament again. The crowd demands Parliament "approves the law on restructuring private
loans in foreign currency, which would convert people's debts into national currency at pre-crisis
levels." Good luck with that, it sounds like you have a great chance.
The country is coming apart; it's just a matter of time. And not very much time, by the look
of things.
Commenters also pointed out that Grauniad knowingly lied just by posting that starting
photo (showing allegedly a nasty and violent looking masked "pro-Russian activist" swinging his
pistol in front of Odessa Trade Union building). Commenters quickly pointed out the Odessan
Chief of Police, whose face can just be discerned peering over the shoulder of the "pro-Russian
activist". In other words, the photo shows the opposite of what it purports, and the Grauniad
editor knows this perfectly well, but decided to lie, hoping there are some newbies on their forum,
who don't know the story.
Except that there is some reasonable evidence that the then Chief of Police was in cahoots with
the anti-government forces, and the people in the photo are wearing St George ribbons, so one
cannot say that the Guardian 'knowingly lied' by posting the photo and caption.
Please don't make me laugh too much.
The Grauniad author, Howard Amos knows the whole story better than anyone else.
If he thinks those guys standing around Fuchedzi are "pro-Russians", then let him make that claim.
He also has to explain his theory of why Fuchedzi was there, and what he was up to.
You have to wonder why The Giardia keeps printing propaganda long after commenters have either
exposed the lies or migrated to other websites and blogs. The Giardia would be better off turning
itself into a British version of the Australian Women's Weekly or UFO Chronicles than continuing
to be a front for neofascists while pretending to be something else. New readers probably won't
notice much difference.
Quote: "Soros & Oligarchy Graun now so desperate as to conflate ISIS with Moscow! You could not
but marvel at the timing of it - while ISIS is now de facto Saudi military outlet in Yemen, conflating
them with Russia is like claiming SNP is a British unity party."
It's funny, when Russians were fighting islam ppl in chechenia we all have been told that russians
are evil and those poor chechenian terrorists are freedom fighters. I remember they were bombing
subway cars and houses in Moscow and we all have been told that it is a great thing they are doing.
So why it's suddenly not so great? Wouldn't it be better if all countries would unite to fight
ISIS and Boko Haram instead of quarrelling with each other. And after those two horrid groups
will have been dealt with everyone can go back to hating each other like normal again.
Luschnig -> jezzam 6 May 2015 02:39
You seem to know a lot about the private thoughts of the Kremlin . . . truth is all American
presidents are war mongers, it's part of the American DNA that developed from a two century plus
genocidal war against the independent countries (nations) that stood between White America and
its Empire. Very few Americans, especially politicians, are sane enough to live at peace in a
non-American world.
ID5868758 6 May 2015 01:44
What's the point of this article? Is it to tell us that the monsters of ISIS have a fertile
recruiting ground among the radical Islamic terrorists who hide out in Chechnya? After the massacre
in Beslan, I hardly need reminding of the evil residing among the Chechen people, the evil that
the US refused to acknowledge as Islamic terrorism because it was the Russian government fighting
it, and Saudi Arabia supporting it.
HauptmannGurski -> caliento 6 May 2015 01:16
The gas deals go way back to before the EU. We had Russian gas connected in Germany in about
1970. German policies have always had that component that Russia/Soviet Union must not be brought
to her knees for fear of millions of refugees/asylum seekers. As we can see in Ukraine, you can
change the regime but you can still end up in s#*t.
hydroxl -> BigBadAmerican 5 May 2015 20:58
Why are these Chechens waging Jihad in Syria rather than Chechnya?
I was wondering that too, Syria is a client state of Russia, so for Russia to allow jihadis
to join forces trying to overthrow the Syrian government seems odd. My best guess is that Russia
has no more ability to stop people from its territory joining the jihadis than the British, Americans,
or French.
The main thing that all four countries should be doing is to never under any circumstances allow
them to return.
Rozina 5 May 2015 20:50
This whole article by Daniil Turovsky (who works for an anti-Russia media outlet) lacks analysis
and in most parts looks as if it was made up of various anecdotes and interviews all woven into
something with a very different purpose from what most interviewees might have desired. Plus it
is so long that most people would hardly bother reading further than the first few paragraphs
of fluff – which I suspect is part of its purpose.
normankirk -> BigBadAmerican 5 May 2015 20:49
Russia has suffered plenty from those Chechen extremists.. the Moscow theatre siege, the Beslan
school massacre. The Americans described these same Islamic chechen terrorists as "rebels" in
Time magazine., the "rebels " later bit them in the bum at Boston.
Vaska Tumir -> WishesandHorses 5 May 2015 14:07
Good question, that: who's bankrolling ISIS?
This very newspaper gave us a very clear hint about that in May 2013 when it informed us that
the EU had just rescinded its ban on buying oil from Syria.
By May 2013, all of the Syrian oil wells and its few refineries were in the hands of Al Nusra
(Al Qaeda in Syria) and ISIS/Daesh. This was common knowledge, a matter of public record.
Thus, at the time the EU allowed its member states to start buying oil from Syria, it did so pressured
by those EU countries whose aim was to contribute to the bankrolling of both Al Nusra and ISIS.
Since the EU could not have done this without Washington's explicit approval -- most of EU being
in NATO -- part of the answer to the question you posed is quite clear, I think.
We still don't know precisely which EU member states have been financing ISIS and Al Nusra by
buying Syrian oil from them only because our press has not gone after the EU to find out and inform
us of those specific details.
Vaska Tumir -> jezzam 5 May 2015 13:57
A lot of the Nazis were "good Protestants". Hitler has never been excommunicated by the Catholic
Church, and only one tiny Protestant church in Germany ever opposed Nazism as an inherently anti-Christian
ideology (which it was and is).
A lot of Nazi collaborationists (Croatia, Slovakia, Latvia, Estonia, Belguim, Denmark, the so-called
neutral Sweden, etc.) were either Catholics or Protestants.
The only branch of Christianity which staunchly resisted and opposed Nazism were the Christian
Orthodox Churches. The case of the Orthodox church in Bulgaria is particularly instructive in
this respect. Although the state had allied itself with Nazi Germany -- Bulgaria was officially
a Nazi ally -- the Orthodox Church protected the country's Jews and forbade the handing over of
even one of them to the Nazis.
vr13vr -> clashcr 5 May 2015 13:17
Why did you assume that guy meant Turkey? Maybe he meant Italy? Or maybe he didn't know geography
and didn't mean anything that just a somewhat cool sounding phrase without much of the meaning.
vr13vr -> geedeesee 5 May 2015 13:12
Russia would prefer that the US doesn't create another hot spot, it's just a little too close
to Russia. The US has already created enough mess.
vr13vr 5 May 2015 13:04
Reading this article, it looks like the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, which we all
cheer so happily, wasn't such a great thing after all. It's hard to imagine any of those former
Soviet members would have become ISIS recruiting targets and potentially attack targets under
the Soviet Union.
Besides, I need to point out that before the dissolution, there wasn't such a huge economic
crisis in those cities, nor there were cruel yet appealing market for migrant workers in Russia.
vr13vr -> Ilja NB 5 May 2015 13:00
And back then, in 2000s and earlier, it was the US and the West that started public campaign
and tried to hamstring Russia.
RonBuckley 5 May 2015 12:55
The reverberations of the collapsed empires of the 20 century will be globally felt long into
the 21st 22nd and so on. Now to present, first abroad, exactly what prevents US ally Turkey from
cutting off everything that sustains ISIS? Surely a few strings could be pulled by the west to
force Turkey to blockade ISIS hellhole to finish it off. But no sir. Now domestically, why not
shut mosques, ban Islam and deport Muslims to their beloved Caliphate? Nope again. Why? Any guesses
anyone?
The clue would be understanding the inner workings of the neocon brain on foreign and domestic
policies.
SHappens -> normankirk 5 May 2015 08:59
Glad you could read the article, anyway it will be aired on tv as below.
BROTHERS, a documentary film being developed for Germany's broadcaster WDR – Die Story and Autentic,
produced by Propellerfilm, broadcast date May 18th, 10pm (MET).
Jeff1000 -> Ikinmoore 5 May 2015 08:57
The Iraq war had nothing to do with religion. Neither did the Vietnam war. Both World wars,
the Crimean war. The American revolutionary war. The Spanish civil war. The Mexican-American war.
The war of 1812. The Greek civil war. The Boer war. The Korean war. The American civil war. Religion
hasn't been the main cause of a large-scale conflict in centuries. And even in the small ways
"religion" was the given reason - like in Northern Ireland or Israel - the real reasons were poverty,
cultural oppression and imperialism.
The idea that we'd all live in peace if not for religion is a preposterous fiction touted by aggressive
atheists like Richard Dawkins. The only cause of war is power, money and Imperial ambitions -
the fact the sometimes the people in power use religion as an excuse means nothing.
nishville -> vorpalblade99 5 May 2015 06:54
Soros & Oligarchy Graun now so desperate as to conflate ISIS with Moscow!
You could not but marvel at the timing of it - while ISIS is now de facto Saudi military
outlet in Yemen, conflating them with Russia is like claiming SNP is a British unity party.
Goodthanx -> Jeff1000 5 May 2015 06:44
I was wondering when ISIS was going to become Russia's fault.
Ive heard Obama use ISIS and Russia used in the same sentence that many times, i just assumed
the leader of ISIS is Putin and Al-Baghdadi is the Russian revanchist, revisionist homophobe,
that has invaded the Euro patriots of Ukraine, with ambitions of forming an 'Anti-U2 Caliphate'
in Vilnius.
I should stop listening to the BBC..
WishesandHorses 5 May 2015 06:28
The comments to thus article are so ridiculous that I have given up reading them.
What we should be asking is who is bankrolling isis? If it is the Saudis then we should stop playing
silly buggers. How can we be such good friends with the most extremist and dangerous country in
the middle east? A good enough reason to drastically decrease our dependence on fossil fuels!
The young men who join isis are mostly very poor and desperate to prove themselves. They make
great cannon fodder. Isis can't be stopped by attacking them. They are just patsies. Follow the
money!
geedeesee 5 May 2015 05:49
Russia should just let US and UK deal with the problem. Let them foot the bill. Let ISIS get
bigger. The more that leave, the better. Russia can sit it out and benefit from the ongoing arms
sales to Syria - and soon arms sales to Iran. The West only has a few unresolved conflicts on
its hands - Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan. Let them squander more money
on intelligence-gathering and drones and interventions. Poland and Lithuania are demanding European
countries spend more on defence to protect them anyway. There's lots of lobbying going on in UK
as well to increase defence spending.
Let UK divert funds from the NHS. Let USA divert funds from cities such as Baltimore.
Corkboard Smith Mike_UK 5 May 2015 05:44
Thankfully ISIS are not in Africa
Yes they are, but the name ISIS is specific to Iraq & Syria/al-Sham, so they wouldn't call
themselves that.
where it appears the whole population is getting on boats to come to Europe for work.
A few thousand out of hundreds of millions. Most of them from a handful of failed states.
Luckily EU MEPs and left wingers are on top of the ISIS threat and not just jumping on the babies
are drowning line!
At this point you're just rambling incoherently away to yourself so I'll leave you to it
DIPSET 5 May 2015 05:44
Hmmmmm.........
ISIS are also recruiting in America. Using American citizens at that.
Seattle to be exact is where some of their recruiters are based.
Channel 4 just did a huge expose on this. And have the wholse sordid, inconveniant truth, on their
UK website.
Goodthanx clashcr 5 May 2015 05:42
Interesting that the article is copied directly from a publication based in Riga, who's editor
does will not disclose who her financial backers are for her venture.
Since when does a western/anglo saxon newspaper, publish blogs as news from eastern european
publications without applying so called western journalistic checks and balances to validate the
story?
Forget it. who was i kidding.
MaoChengJi QueenElizabeth 5 May 2015 05:31
Western involvement - idiotic though it is - merely hastened the process.
No, I disagree. It's not idiotic at all. The American formula was (and still is) based
on igniting and aggravating sectarian hatred, steering sectarian troubles. Then siding with one
side or the other, offering support, maneuvering.
Divide and rule, the oldest trick in the book. There is an alternative: national unity of
all sects or religions, but it doesn't have a chance when a superpower is working hard deliberately
inflaming sectarian tensions.
Olcan85 -> Kaiama 5 May 2015 05:30
1 million Tajik immigrants in Russian. 2000-4000 of whom have travelled to Syria. The problem
of Islamist radicalisation is clearly been blown out of proportion
stewfen -> Mike_UK 5 May 2015 05:22
Actually Russia has done a great deal to counter ISIS. They trained Iraq fighter pilots and
supplied them with 80 Sukhoi fighter jet aircraft to fight ISIS. Here is a BBC news link where
Nouri Maliki Iraq president thanks Russia for their support and says they were delude by American
contracts to sell them F35 fighter jets.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28042302
Kaiama 5 May 2015 05:10
I would bet that if Russia cracked down on this migration it would be accused of discriminating
against the Tajiks. Central Asia has provided construction labour to Moscow for the last 25 odd
years. A great deal of the migration is not legally done and it is easy to see where the attraction
of money figures. The real question is where the money comes from. And I doubt that Russia really
cares if the Tajiks (or any other Central Asian immigrants disappear off somewhere else).
normankirk -> jezzam 5 May 2015 04:52
oh Jezzam, you're such a bore. Hit me with some facts you're all hot air and insult and no
substance.
Yes, I think the US is irrational. how many fronts are they fighting on now?How many unarmed
black men are they killing every week?How many people do they incarcerate and execute every year?Drone
killing , half the time not even knowing who the victims are. Exceptional?Yeah, exceptionally
irrational.
You harp on about Crimea, how much bloodshed?How many deaths?And despite the privations brought
about by sanctions, the Crimeans are still happy to be back in Russia. Puyin this, Putin that
as if he's some god, give it a break
istanbul11 5 May 2015 04:35
Poverty is the main issue here. People who have no hope for the future being told come and
live in Syria promised regular income. Probably they feel being valued and they think that someone
realise they exist.
Economic sanctions on Russia, because of the way they handled Ukraine crisis, does not help.
It will make Russia weak to deal with IS. Europe should revise this sanction. If IS gets stronger
it will not make big difference in America but it will in Europe as IS is able recruit in Turkey.
SoiledNappy16 -> 6i9vern 5 May 2015 04:14
An interesting comment. I also think that The West has little to fear from a resurgent China
until China stops sending its brightest to the best universities in the world. Almost entirely
the USA and Europe. (But, (gasp!), Israel too.) China cannot develop good universities until it
frees its population in the same way that western liberal democracy has freed the peoples of Europe,
America and some previous British colonies. (Gasp!). In those WLD, nothing is holy, nothing is
above criticism, (Well, maybe Kate's new baby), no limits on offending people either.
Arab and Muslim countries must reform Islam. There is no other way. Arabs/Muslims must realize
that when mankind leaves the Earth for the stars, they will remain on backward Earth. Mankind
will pass them by. They will remain planet bound to mould on Earth with their allies on the self-hating
morally inverted radical extreme left.
PlatonKuzin -> Mike_UK 5 May 2015 04:11
The US, UK, EU do all their best to crash Russia in all respects - sanctions, arms race, info
wars etc - not to let it breathe freely and now you ask what Russia is doing to counter ISIS.
You are a VERY VERY interesting guy, Mike_UK. Your logic is beyond any competition!
MaoChengJi 5 May 2015 04:09
...as for Islamic State, let's be clear: this is a direct result - pure and simple, and easily
predictable - of the American and NATO meddling in the Middle East in the last dozen years.
Iraq, Libya, Syria - all the same simple schema: crushing the secular government, igniting
and aggravating sectarian hatred. So, now we have Islamic State, and yes, it's a problem
for Russia, and other countries in the region. Less so for the US and Western Europe. Mission
accomplished?
6i9vern -> dropthemchammer 5 May 2015 04:07
There is a link in my post above, but since I'm always accommodating of those with special
needs, here it is again:
Don't get me wrong, having a great dislike is too much of an understatement of what I feel
for those IS idiots.
But indiscriminate attacks on the local population will not improve things. Apart from the fact
that those actions are considered war crimes by civilised people.
Someone civilised, should not stoop to barbaric measures to stop barbarians. That's what created
the barbarians in the first place.
Luschnig 5 May 2015 03:29
ISIS is recruiting not only in Russia but everywhere where there are Muslims. Thankfully the
majority of Muslims in Russia like in other countries turn a deaf ear to the recruiters. But enough,
poor and rich, educated and ignorant, are tempted by the promises of the Caliphate that ISIS has
become a real danger to most countries.
Unfortunately the thug president in Washington, instead of wholeheartedly fighting ISIS,
is waging a stupid neocon vendetta against Moscow and Damascus therefore weakening the struggle
against the Caliphate.
plasticsurgery -> Mr_Mouse 5 May 2015 03:24
Who opened up the physical space that IS operate in by fatally undermining the security and
infrastructure of Iraq - a major and important regional state?
Where is the money and logistics coming from to prosecute such high intensity warfare and for
what strategic end?
And this is just the basic obvious stuff - it gets much more complicated than this if you spend
some time on the subject - so please - be off with your simplistic nonsense.
oleteo -> Mr_Mouse 5 May 2015 03:23
Lybia was a prosperous islamic state. Now there are gangs of terrorists fighting for power.Citizens
are trying to rescue themselves in Europe. The state was destructed under the flag of democracy
and freedom
MaoChengJi 5 May 2015 03:19
Should Russia take a cue from Europe and start drowning immigrants in the sea somewhere?
6i9vern 5 May 2015 03:08
Since the fall of the USSR literacy levels in Tajikistan have fallen from around 90% to below
50% - from near European to Indian levels, and heading for Pakistani and, perhaps, Afghan levels.
It is a rare thing in human history for literate parents to raise illiterate children. It happened
when the Western Roman Empire fell, during the Islamic and Mongol conquests of Persia and India.
That tells us something of the scale of the catastrophe.
ID1387159 5 May 2015 02:47
Why did the Guardian mistranslate the headline of the Paik newspaper in the illustration? It
does NOT say 'Nursat Nazarov calls on Tajik religious figure Hoji Mirzo to come to Syria'. The
headline says 'Terrorists ask Hoji Mirzo to come to Syria.' The story might have explained more,
and the translation might be from the story (too small to read) but it is not the headline.
normankirk 5 May 2015 01:35
Maybe now its time for Washington to realise that Russia should be an ally instead of attempting
to weaken it and go for regime change. A weakened or worse, destabilised Russia would not be able
to deal with extreme elements and control vulnerable borders
There are also Chechens fighting for the Ukrainian army, 2 recent articles by the Intercept
report, veterans of the war against Russia, armed by Kiev and funded by the likes of Kolomoisky.
These same Chechens have also fought in Syria, according to Marcin Mamon, a reporter for the
Intercept who spent time with this group in Ukraine.
Ukraine war is becoming the new Syria ...
What is it with that part of the world..!? ALL that region is in chaos, from northern
Russia-Baltic States, passing from Ukraine, Turkish PKK, to southern Syria - Irak - Palestine
- Yemen, even Somalia and Eritrea.... and why ?!
Why ALL that part of the world is always in conflict ?!?!
Is it because is the border of East-West sides of the world ?! That's lame...
Is it because there is SO much money in resources in those parts ?!? That's greed
Is it because a cultural clash ?! That's lame...
Is it because goverments bloody and corrupt regimes ?!
Most important of all, WHEN will it be peace in that part of the world.? What does it take ?!
What it needs to be done, we MUST do it ?!
The world is tired of conflicts in that zone, imagine how the people living there feel, its
deperate ..
childofmine 20 May 2015 11:47
Is any informed person really surprised by this?
Sund Fornuft -> Chiselbeard 20 May 2015 11:44
How about reasoning like this: In the city we have two types of foreigners. Ones that kill
us and the other type that kills our killers. Who should go home? Use that math for every city
and you will get the right answer. This is how your holly partiotic war looks like in the eyes
of the ordinary europeans. This is why you will never become part of Europe in your current
mental tune.
aLLaguz -> TOR2000 20 May 2015 11:34
What the E.U. is saying is: Where is the decentralization? Where is the commitment? Where
are the reforms?"
So, what i have learned from this is that, in international politics, there is no such thing
as a inconditional help ....
I'll will help you mantain your territory if you help me opening the business from my
companies...
If there were good will, EU, US, etc. will be helping Ukraine with no conditions.
Violations of POW's are in both sides, and will not finish, as sad as that sounds ...
anarxist -> careforukraine 20 May 2015 11:33
This is not a line. Russians can be freely discriminated against. All rules have
exceptions, well Human Rights and laws against discriminations do not apply to: 1) Russian
citizens, 2) Russian sympathisers, 3) Russian backers, 4) Russian anything.
careforukraine 20 May 2015 11:28
Its great that western media are starting to show the true kiev but seriously how many
"lines" can kiev cross before the west takes action?
Poroshenko has proven to be untrustworthy at all times,both to the west and to the people of
ukraine.
Was killing civilians not a line?
Censoring political beliefs
Banning languages
Banning freedom of speech
Etc etc........
How many lines can one man cross before he is condemned?
BunglyPete -> Chiselbeard 20 May 2015 11:20
As Foreign Policy reports the CIA is in the "killing business" and "effectively answers to
no one except the president".
If these are 'spies' working for the CIA, then they could well be involved in such activities.
BunglyPete -> Chiselbeard 20 May 2015 11:09
So there is no possibility that the US could use a person masquerading as an aid worker as
a spy? This is completely impossible?
Why should we trust the US after Iraq and Afghanistan? I'm not saying trust Russia mind
you, I don't doubt there are Russian soldiers in the Donbass. This doesn't mean the US are
suddenly wholesome and trustworthy though.
"Poroshenko, whether you like him or not, he's not delivering," said Bruce P. Jackson, the
president of the Project on Transitional Democracies, an American nonprofit group. "The
Ukrainian government is so weak and fragile that it is too weak to do the necessary things to
build a unified and independent state."
The continuing disarray is becoming a source of friction between the Ukrainian government
and its European allies, especially Germany and France, whose leaders helped broker the
cease-fire and are increasingly frustrated with the slow pace of change.
"We don't have simply Russian aggression against the victim Ukraine," Mr. Jackson said. "We
have a predictably aggressive Russia against an unpredictable and unreliable Ukraine. Ukraine
is now seen as not to be trusted. What the E.U. is saying is: Where is the decentralization?
Where is the commitment? Where are the reforms?"
Chiselbeard -> Andrey Andreevich K 20 May 2015 10:57
Until the separatists or their Russian masters capture US combat forces from battles in
eastern Ukraine your argument is baseless. Nobody disputes Russian logistical and intelligence
support of the rebels. Allowing "soldiers of fortune" to freely come and go from Russia to
combat roles in eastern Ukraine is a different matter entirely. We're the west to match this
in earnest we would see this conflict change from a proxy Cold War to a proxy War. If this is
a civil war than it should be fought by Ukrainians. If Russian citizens should be allowed to
support a side of their choosing then so too should citizens of NATO member states be allowed
to participate. And the EU.
Chiselbeard -> BunglyPete 20 May 2015 10:45
You seem to be confused Pete. Allow me to endevour to enlighten you. "Spies" are associated
with espionage, or the covert acquisition of data. They are typically directed by intelligence
agency's like the CIA or Mosad.
Special forces are elite soldiers, usually hand picked by their superiors from different
branches of the armed forces. They are directed by their ministries of defense.
While, often times, so called "spec' ops" forces are used to achieve goals set out by
intelligence services, they are not employed in the collection of data as that is within the
purview of the intelligence agency.
They are different tools for different jobs. The Russians caught inside Ukranian territory
were soldiers. They are unrelated to perceived "spies" imbedded within aid organizations. You
are connecting dots that aren't on the same page.
BorninUkraine 20 May 2015 10:44
Amazing!
After Ukrainian Nazis burned people alive in Odessa last year, shot civilians en mass in
Mariupol last May, murdered thousands of civilians in Donbass by indiscriminate shelling for a
year now, tortured thousands of political prisoners (Ukraine has more political prisoners than
Soviet Union ever had in Brezhnev period), murdered numerous political opponents and
opposition journalists all over the country, the Western media found an instance when Ukraine
violated Geneva conventions? It's like blaming A-bomb for damaging a flower in Hiroshima.
Is there any limit to hypocrisy? Or does anything go, as long as it's paid for?
anarxist -> Chiselbeard 20 May 2015 10:43
Wasn't Angela Merkel just in Russia on a visit? Why don't you feel Germany will be
first to lift the sanctions?
Some EU countries have expressed desire to lift sanctions, such as Greece, Italy, Austria,
etc... But they are not allowed to. Kerry stated that if EU lift sanctions it would jeopardise
the entire concept of sanctions, basically not allowing EU to do this. On the other hand,
rules that America imposes on the rest of the world are not necessarily rules they follow
themselves. Time will tell, but this is my prediction.
Simultaneously their government protects a violent dictator in Syria
Don't believe everything you are being told by the western media. He was branded evil
during the colour revolution season in the middle east. He was fighting against islam
extremists. This conflict is more related to Saudi Arabia, gas, energy, money, greed - as
usual.
Middle East in general - most countries in the Middle East have better relations with
Russia than they do with US. Russia has a lot of influence in this region. As BBC mentions:
Ukraine is important, but Iran is more important. US needs Russia to resolve these conflicts.
Solongmariane -> Chiselbeard 20 May 2015 10:38
This is an attack of Washington (and NATO), and Moscow counter-attacked. Both, sent their
people. What makes Russia more sympathic, it's the fact that most of the East Ukrainians are
"Russ" and neighbours. Even some cupid politicians decided to seccede in 1991, a lot of people
of these regios still get Russian-feelings.
anarxist -> BunglyPete 20 May 2015 10:34
I wonder why this article is not available in BBC English
Дипломатия США-Россия: Украина важна, но Иран важнее
title roughly translated: Diplomacy USA-Russia: Ukraine is important, but Iran is more
important
Andrey Andreevich K -> Chiselbeard 20 May 2015 10:33
If Russia is providing troops to the seperatists in eastern Ukraine by simply
allowing them an honorable discharge as they cross the border, are they not just as guilty
of interference in this "civil war"
US sends their instructors and arms to Ukraine. Does it mean that US has conflict with DPR
and LPR?
I believe that Russian soldiers should be there in order to control and keep balance. So that
neither Ukr forces nor rebels could win. Poroshenko should understand that it's impossible to
win by bombing own citizens. He should follow agreements signed in Minsk. And mainly the term
concerning federalization of the country and autonomy to East regions
Chiselbeard 20 May 2015 10:14
What do want to bet their service "ended" in the last six months. If Russia is providing
troops to the seperatists in eastern Ukraine by simply allowing them an honorable discharge as
they cross the border, are they not just as guilty of interference in this "civil war". They
are trained in combat tactics by Moscow and then turned loose on a neighboring country's
military.
If they had no affiliation to the Russian government whatsoever their sheer numbers alone
would be enough to consider them "foreign hostiles". How many Frenchmen do you think could
attack members of the German armed forces before serious diplomatic chaos insued? How long
could France hide behind the lazy excuse of "we didn't send them"? If Russia wishes the world
to believe they aren't a major instigator in this conflict, they need to publicly condemn
participation in the fighting by Russian citizens, especially those with recent military
experience. Until such time as the Kremlin sees fit to take this minimal step the rift between
them and the developed world will widen and the sanctions will only increase.
anarxist 20 May 2015 10:14
My prediction: The US press is changing its tactics toward Russia, as they need Russia to
solve their problems in the middle east. Europe is now confused, not sure how to interpret
these signs. The US will be first to lift its sanctions on Russia, which will follow by Russia
lifting sanctions on US. Europe will be slow to react. US will start benefiting economically,
while Europe gets stuffed...
BunglyPete 20 May 2015 10:07
Nice to see both sides being reported on.
What has been missed by even Russian media for some reason is this from Bloomberg,
The US and the leader of the IRC claim they aren't spies. The problem for me is the leader of
IRC is David Miliband, who I don't trust at all.
The timing is very interesting, as it came just as 2 alleged Russian agents were arrested by
Ukrainian services, and just before Kerry made the visit to Sochi. My best guess is some deal
was made whereby Putin agreed to not make a scene about the alleged US spies. You would
certainly expect this to be a big scoop bannered all over RT and Sputnik, but it isn't.
I am noticing a change in the way things are being presented. Here is another Bloomberg
article from yesterday,
Whatever you think of the article/statement, it's a clear shift in direction from 'Its all
Russia guv'. Good to see.
MaoChengJi 20 May 2015 10:03
Ha, RFE/RL goes concern-trolling. Who cares about a stupid video, when neonazi thugs of the
pro-Washington regime in Keiv are indiscriminately shelling cities and towns on a daily basis.
Andrey Andreevich K SHappens 20 May 2015 10:02
2 prisoners for more than a year of war. That's a prove of Russian army massive invasion
Babeouf 20 May 2015 10:01
You see this is the trouble with Ukrainian fictions their plots are predictable. Why not
try 'Ukraine captures Russian Colonel' or even Russian General or Putin's brother. All you
need is someone lying in a bed claiming to be Colonel Youri Popov from Omsk and it will sell
to the West's MSM. Who cares if he is tortured can he twirl his mustache.
Oh finally. Ukraine needs a closer look at what they are up to. After all the atrocities
they already committed which are carefully hidden to the public, it was time for a concern.
Impunity has its limits.
OldStickie 20 May 2015 09:56
RT has shown their identity documents as policemen from Lugansk. The Kiev militias' use of
torture, indiscriminate murder of prisoners and even crucifixion is well documented.
Виталий Седин 20 May 2015 09:46
"Video raises concerns over Ukraine's treatment of Russian prisoners"(c)
lmost from the start of the international oil boom of the late 19th century, Russia was a
major player. The city of Baku, now in Azerbaijan but then a southern outpost of the empire, was
producing half the world's oil in 1900, and though it lost market share during the years of
revolution and civil war, Russia remained an oil power through the Soviet era. Soviet geologists
discovered oil in the Volga-Urals basin and then, most rewardingly, in western Siberia. The
Samotlor field, discovered in 1965, was one of the largest in the world, and its oil would
subsidise Soviet military and social programmes throughout the period of late socialism, right up
until the collapse of world oil prices in 1985. In a lesson about oil dependence that was quickly
forgotten, the price collapse was followed by the collapse of the entire country.
Since 1991, two things have happened to Russian oil. First, as the Russian economy was opened up
to global competition, hydrocarbons became not less but more important: no one wanted Russian
cars or electronics or Russian shoes, but Russian oil was pretty much as good as any other. And
so the great post-Soviet fortunes were largely oil fortunes. It was oil that paid for Roman
Abramovich's purchase of Chelsea football club, and it was oil that paid for Mikhail
Khodorkovsky's attempt to mount a challenge against Vladimir Putin. Most important of all, it was
oil that paid for the Russian economic "miracle" of the Putin era, when oil prices rose steadily
for years on end, and Russian living standards with them, and Putin got all the credit.
The second thing that happened was that the western Siberian oil fields started to run dry. In
fact many of them were past their prime by the late 80s, and it was only aggressive western
specialists in "tight oil" (light crude oil found in shale and rock formations), hired by people
such as Khodorkovsky, who managed to get everything out of them that they could. Nonetheless, the
resource was finite.
One thing that failed to happen was any major new discoveries. In the uncertain legal climate, if
you happened to gain control of an oil company, you'd have to be crazy not to pump all the oil
you could from existing wells before someone came and took your company away from you. What's
more, the Soviets had done a good job of covering the country. There may not be another western
Siberia or Baku.
Chinmay -> Bluecloud 5 May 2015 10:32
Greenpeace India has been funded by various European organizations who in turn received
money from European and North American Governments. The agenda Greenpeace is working on in the
developing countries is to stop development so that West can keep on enjoying their dominance
over world's resources.
vr13vr -> thesistersofmercy 29 Apr 2015 14:07
Did they got the permission for their "peaceful protest" on the foreign rig? If not, it's
an attempt of illegal boarding. Russians were right to react.
vr13vr -> alpamysh 29 Apr 2015 14:03
Where is that 80 years old nun that tried to protest around the nuclear station in the US?
A hint: she is still in a Brooklyn prison.
vr13vr 29 Apr 2015 14:01
"The prisoners themselves were pretty nice, but the food was bad... . The fact that most of
the Greenpeace activists spoke no Russian didn't help."
No kidding! He didn't have choice to order how he wants his eggs for breakfast? And yes,
learning the language could be helpful if they were preparing to go to a foreign prison.
vr13vr 29 Apr 2015 13:56
This is the second article about this book in so many weeks. This starts feeling as a book
promotion.
samanthajsutton 29 Apr 2015 11:03
For some perspective please remember the action against Rainbow Warrior -- Which resulted in
a death.
Do Greenpeace care about the lives of the workers on the rig?
As to be expected, the actions of Greenpeace in attempting to board the rig caused a response
from those on the rig.
What if one of the workers on the rig had fallen into the sea due to the actions of
Greenpeace? More or less instant death in those conditions.
Greenpeace needs to think through these stunts and remember that they carry a risk.
In this particular case it seems to me that the risk of injury was high - to the workers on
the rig and to the memberso of Greenpeace.
whobailedoutwho -> alpamysh 29 Apr 2015 10:46
The definition of the crime of piracy is contained in article 101 of UNCLOS, which reads as
follows:
''Piracy consists of any of the following acts:
(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for
private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and
directed:
(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on
board such ship or aircraft;
(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction
of any State;
(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with
knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in
subparagraph (a) or (b).''
Their actions could be considered "attacking" the rig - ie depredation.
Mordantdude -> Bluecloud 29 Apr 2015 06:09
It sounds absolutely the same as words "independent Western massmedia".
Mordantdude -> james187 29 Apr 2015 05:54
Are Guantanamo basic human rights suit you well?
Albatros18 29 Apr 2015 05:07
Greenpeace should be thankful to the Russian government. If they tried this illegal act on
any other country's waters such as the US, France or Israel, they would have been thrown into
the sea or got shot. Perhaps this is what they wanted in the Arctic to show how 'evil' Russia
is.
Albatros18 -> Bluecloud 29 Apr 2015 05:04
It is not working. The Russian activity in the Arctic doubled, more nuclear energy is being
used and more plants opening in Turkey, Britain, Hungary, Iran and soon south America.
Greenpeace has no power or credibility to change anything. Greenpeace is itself a rich kids
club whose members will end up in boards of global corporations.
davies12 29 Apr 2015 04:30
"Their plan was to climb on to the massive Prirazlomnoye oil platform in the Pechora sea,
set up shop, and communicate their message to the world: "Save the Arctic.""
Followed a little later by.... "arrest of 30 peaceful protesters"
Boarding a drilling rig in a country's territorial waters without permission to "set up shop"
or takeover in other words used to have a name and that was piracy. Ah but apparently not when
liberal climate changers are doing it. The Russians were quite within their rights to come
down hard on them. A lesson that could be learned by us when for example ships are boarded by
pirates off Somalia...ah but they are poor souls who are struggling to earn a living.
PlatonKuzin 29 Apr 2015 04:09
Greenpeace is no longer an honest environment protector. It is a well organized and well
paid organization working for those who pay them. And the justice Greenpeace stands for is
strictly fixed by their sponsors.
note was supported by hundreds of thousands - that is not a coup, but a revolution
Aside from the fact that in a 40 million people nation 'hundreds of thousands' is very far
from a majority, it's the protests that were supported by hundreds of thousands.
Feb 21 Yanuk signs the agreement with the opposition, negotiated and guaranteed by European
politicians. Stipulating early elections, amnesties, rollback of some laws, investigations of the
police abuses, etc. It was accepted and signed by the opposition, i.e. those representing these
hundreds of thousands you're taking about.
Had this agreement been implemented, everything would've probably worked out somehow.
Instead, a few ultra-nationalist militants, a fringe, refuse to accept the agreement. They take
over the government. And the opposition politicians play along and become figureheads, puppets.
And that's what's been going on there since: militant ultra-nationalist fringe is controlling the
regime from the inside, and the US and EU from the outside, supplying them with money, weapons,
propaganda, and diplomatic support. What a shame.
Babeouf 13 May 2015 08:57
Look Kerry went to see Putin to sell off an unwanted collection of Ukrainian Fascists.
Apparently the Fascists had disappointed their US owners. And afterwards the invariable
accompaniment of the brush off Kerry phoned Kyiv but didn't stop off on his way home. Today Yats
is in Paris and the Choc Soldier is in Germany.
Their survival now depends on Germany and France. So this sad collection of non entities now
have to cut a deal with Putin, on Russia's terms. I 'm not surprised that the US public
repudiation of the previous US policy of isolating 'Russia' is not noticed by the Guardian.
As for the Russian opposition their identification with the 'invader at the Gates' has
finished them off for a generation at least.
entirely pro-government now, apart from one radio station Ekho
Moskvy, and one TV station Dozhd
MaoChengJi -> kolf, 13 May 2015 07:01
That's precisely NOT entirely. Besides, kommersant is a
newspaper, not broadcast media. There are plenty of opposition
newspapers. Also, when the government is popular, the media, naturally,
reflects that - there's nothing sinister about it. And murdering people
is a crime, where they are journalists or not.
it is rather like the soldiers that have to "resign" before they
patriotically "volunteer" in Donbass, when instructed to do so - a
mere technicality
Perhaps. But we don't know that. I understand the suspicion, but not
the certainty. Strelkov, in particular, gives the impression of very
much anti-government character. A right-wing government opponent.
Personally, I see absolutely no reason to believe that he was sent or
controlled by the RF government. I'd be surprised.
The violent takeovers in Donbass were carried out initially by
small Russian-sponsored groups, with the support of special forces
from Russia, who carried out a range of criminal and paramilitary
activity including abduction, intimidation, murders, attacks on
Ukrainian military bases, and destroying military Ukrainian aircraft
on the ground
This is a bunch of lies. The protests in Donetsk started the next day
after the coup, I saw videos. Gubarev became the 'people's governor'. He
was arrested - protests became more violent. I watched videos with old
ladies blocking roads to stop the regime's troops carriers.
was installed by the Rada after the previous president fled
Oh, god. President fleeing and the majority party decimated (their
offices burned) is the definition of a coup d'etat. He didn't resign, he
didn't die, and he wasn't even impeached - they tried but they didn't
have the votes.
Can anyone in the right mind and not being disingenuous still insist
that it wasn't a coup? I don't think so. So, go ahead, have your last
word.
Dmitry Berezhnov -> Botswana61 13 May 2015 04:06
RFE is US propaganda bullhorn, of course I believe them in anything they say about Russia.
MaoChengJi -> kolf 13 May 2015 04:05
even Russian media acknowledges it
you appear to be under the impression that Russian media are all pro-government. This
completely disproves your statement that you "know the difference between propaganda and
journalism". A large portion of the Russian media is rabidly anti-government. If you knew the
difference between propaganda and journalism, you would've known it.
All that "clearly" is just your impression, based on anti-Russian propaganda, on the stories you
read and believe. What's clear to you isn't clear to others, if they read different stories. In
fact, exactly the opposite can be clear to them. It's important for you to understand that your
stories are not at all better than their stories.
Also, "war started by Russian intelligence officers like Strelkov and Borodai" is all wrong,
objectively. Strelkov and Borodai are not Russian intelligence officers. The Kiev regime attacked
Donbas, Donbas did not attack Kiev. If Kiev acknowledged the referendum, there would've been no
war. The important thing to understand here is that the Kiev regime was NOT at that time -
without any doubt - a legitimate government, even if you believe that the current government is
legitimate (I don't).
Kiev had a revolution, and then Donetsk had a revolution. Then Kiev attacked Donetsk. It didn't
have to, but it did. Blaming this on Russia is disinformation and a manifestation of russophobia.
lionarslan Botswana61 13 May 2015 03:45
Mr. Lavrov never denied that there's Russian citizens in Ukraine. Do you know the difference
between soldiers (people who signed obligatory military contract and take a vow to serve their
country) and volunteers (people who consciously decided to do something or to go somewhere)?
People from Russia, Germany, Spain, Netherlands comes to Donbass to fight for freedom of people
of Donbass. They volunteered, no one forced them. And that is what Sergey Lavrov "admitted".
I read that report, that's really science-ficton. All so-called proofs are quotes without
context which someone can understand in more than one way. The text itself is clear anti-Putin
propaganda. It was really boring to read that text. It's like watching "Glee" only Glee has
wonderful songs and some of actors are really good in their play.
Russian self-named opposition's report is much more boring and have so much realism as tv-series
"Glee".
lionarslan -> freedomcry 13 May 2015 03:21
Nationalists in Russia was never decent and sober-minded people. In time of Russian empire
they were terrorists, in modern Russia they are still the same. Moreover, if you are sentient
being you wouldn't support ideas of nationalists in any possible way. Do you forgot what
nationalists did in Germany and then in half of the world in last century?
Agatha_appears -> freedomcry 13 May 2015 01:53
it is not opposition. This is a group of people who, like Yashin, have never worked, never
done anything useful. They found a job paid by the US State Dep-t. Their responsibility is to
play against official Russia according to US scenario. They buy luxurious cars, apartments, go to
expensive resorts. Their main audience is the western media. There is a small group of Russia
haters inside the country who notice them.
There are nationalists who oppose the Kremlin. They are radicals. Some of them are in prison.
They represent larger part of Russian society than so to say "liberals". Their views are similar
to Ukranian nazi who are in power in Kiev. Putin tries to maintain balance and does not let them
come to power, speak publicly, because nationalism is infection desease ( see what is going
on in Ukraine). And Russian nationalism can be as awful as Ukrainian. It is close to fascism.
Dmitry Berezhnov -> Tepluken 13 May 2015 01:05
Funny enough to see fairytales about Savushkina st. Once I have decided to waste some time and
watched a video about a "troll lair", well, small office with like 10-12 people there. Do you
really call that a HQ of Evil Russain Propaganda Machine?
Let's just mention that:
1. UK officially annouced creation of cybersquad with unmentioned budget for delivering a
propaganda.
2. US spending over 1 bln in 2014 for Russian opposition NGO sponssorship and declaring a war
on "Russian propaganda" with it's own propaganda via BBG and state controlled media throughour
Europe with gazillion bucks budget.
3. Ukraine creating a Truth Ministry and Ukranian Information Army with up to this very moment
over 40 000! volunteers, not mentioning a full-time staff.
And we do not know about other countries trolls. In my humble opinion, Savushkina with it's 20
people tops looks very very faintly.
Colin Robinson 13 May 2015 00:31
Claims about Russian forces covertly entering the Donbas region, even if true, cannot explain
the conflict there.
It would hardly be possible for Russian tanks to move across the border, without being shot at
or even photographed, unless the local population had previously rejected the Kiev régime and
removed its border guards.
This is conflict between two constituencies within Ukraine itself, not between a supposedly united
Ukraine and a supposedly ambitious president of Russia.
normankirk -> Botswana61 12 May 2015 23:36
What do you mean he's just admitted it, he's never denied it. I would be disgusted if no help
had been given to eastern Ukrainian civilians, HRW and Amnesty intern. have both recorded use
of illegal weapons against civilians by the Ukrainian army.
If ever there was a reason for humanitarian intervention you need go no further than protecting
unarmed civilians from cluster bombs
MichaPalkin -> bcnteacher 12 May 2015 23:08
If they had found the slightest evidence it was indeed rebels' BUK, froth-at the mouth anti-Russian
hysteria would have been filling the free press for months now. THE FACT IS THEY CAN'T. And since
the Dutch keep remarkably quiet about it, what they v. probably have is the evidence to the contrary.
When someone from the investigation tried to make the findings public a few weeks ago - he was
immediately silenced and fired. This is called cover-up. It shouldn't be that difficult to tell
BUK from air-to-air missile really. So this investigation will either go on into the plus infinity
or they'll say some evasive bs, no media outlet would ever mention it and that would be the end
of it. Ok?
BorninUkraine -> Chirographer 12 May 2015 22:46
There is real opposition in Russia. If I lived there, I'd be one of them. But those are the
people who do not sell their country to foreign interests, never touch Western money, and therefore
are not promoted by Western media owned by the same interests that purchase third-rate opposition
figures in Russia.
To give you a few examples, Eduard Limonov, Boris Kagarlitsky (who even spent some time in
jail in Soviet period), and others like them are opposition, but they are not bought and paid
for traitors. That's why they are not rich.
Unlike Nemtsiov, they cannot afford to pay for the abortion of a whore in Switzerland. You
are welcome to ask your supervisor to find out who they are.
BorninUkraine -> nnedjo 12 May 2015 21:45
The "government" in Kyiv absolutely needs this alleged Russia aggression.
How else can they explain that they ran into the ground a reasonably decent country so quickly:
from solid third world to total shit in a bit over a year.
If Poroshenko, Yatsenyuk, and Co acknowledge how much they steal and how incompetent they are,
their puppeteers might start looking for better puppets, and that would never do.
BorninUkraine -> Paul Moore 12 May 2015 21:36
Oh, yes. Military officials in Sweden have already been looking very hard for a Russian submarine.
As soon as they achieved what they wanted, an increase in the military budget, they acknowledged
that no submarine ever existed.
Apparently someone in Finland also wants a bigger military budget. How creative, wouldn't you
say?
Sergey A Gimranov 12 May 2015 21:33
Good science-fiction report. The highlight of the presentation was "We don't have any actual
evidence but we know troops were there". I could not believe they said that. Lame and fake! Shocking
discovery from the "book" Russian troops were in Crimea on Russian military bases. Oh my God!
Standards are lower and lower with each and every article. Where are the reporters? Why they cannot
go there and report it? I guess narrative would change drastically.
Roodan 12 May 2015 20:57
But I do agree the government in Kiev does not represent the political will of all of its people
and hence the civil war. That there is external support for each side in this war form special
forces or otherwise be they NATO or Russian that this is not the cause of the war . I do not my
self understand the relevance of the article, it states the obvious. Only a regional settlement
between the waring parties will end the war. A ettlement in which all of the aspiration of the
people in the Ukrainian, have representation perhaps a federation or Union like the EU .
I don't think there is any value in supporting one side against the other to impose a system of
government with out the support of the people . That is a dictatorship and I don't support dictatorships
by any military alliance NATO or Russian federation, they result in perpetual war in which only
the powerless suffer.
Chirographer -> Walter Potocki 12 May 2015 20:55
You seem to very concerned about who paid for the report. Why? That doesn't address the content
of the report at all.
And wouldn't there be more money and a lot safer life for this Yashin character if he'd published
a book supporting the government's narrative?
Walter Potocki 12 May 2015 20:18
there were never CIA operatives in Ukraine, it is not true that Maiden was a western agencies.
Just few masked people gathered on the square with clubs and firearms to have a fun
Walter Potocki 12 May 2015 20:13
Hi Tom, did you ask Russian opposition how much this report cost? You did not have to ask who
paid, the same sponsored paid for your piece. Nice propaganda.
nnedjo -> nnedjo 12 May 2015 19:21
And to add one more thing. If I'd lived in the southeast of Ukraine and if my government would
abolish my salary, and, on the other hand, if I would have known that soldiers receive 90,000
rubles per month, that would be an extra motivation for me to join the rebel army. So, in that
case there would be no need at all for the arrival of troops from Russia, because the Ukrainian
government itself supports the recruitment in the Donbas, in a way that stopped the economic support
to the region.
nnedjo -> Solongmariane 12 May 2015 19:11
It is ridiculous to speculate about it at all, because it is clear that Russia pays not only
all the fighters in the southeast of Ukraine, but also all other citizens. Because how else they
would survive, considering that the Ukrainian government has abolished them all salaries and pensions,
and closed all the banks, and prevent the use of payment cards.
Thus, considering that the Ukrainian government itself agreed that someone else should pay these
people, or more precisely, that Russia should pay them, then why do they complain about it now?
ID5868758 12 May 2015 18:26
You know, we're supposed to buy this narrative that Nemtsov was a credible political threat
to Putin. But I remember seeing a video of a Russian TV station catching Nemtsov sneaking out
of the side door of the American embassy in Moscow, and he was not a happy camper when he was
caught.
Now, reverse that, and imagine an American politician being caught sneaking out of the side
door of the Russian embassy in DC. How much credibility do you suppose that politician would have
left with the American public?
Russians aren't really that different from Americans after all, and Nemtsov was no threat to
Putin at all.
Puttepoju -> Kaiama 12 May 2015 18:06
Dear Kaiama.
Russian journalists are clever and wise. They are better than the entire US satellite system. They
have "common sense".I like Russia and Russians --- but what I like most -- is to be honest. My best
greetings. Puttepoju
Falloe7 12 May 2015 18:00
more PROPAGANDA and the media of the West naturally believes it -because they want to believe
it if you are in opposition in anything you will make up stories about your opponent just like
this past Election there was enough Lies by the parties about each other hoping the voters will
believe it (and they did) and the same about Russia. the papers are well known for printing Lies
or make up stories
Kaiama 12 May 2015 17:44
So how come 10 Russian journalist claim to find something that the entire US satellite system
can't find? It comes as no surprise that Russian volunteers have been killed in Ukraine fighting
alongside their relatives.
What is more telling is the 100,000+ Kiev draft evaders and 800,000+ displaced citizens - all
in Russia (defected to the enemy? or simply more astute than their government in Kiev?
Solongmariane 12 May 2015 17:38
Some bizarre figures, I find ;
a) 53 bln Rubles is just around 1 Bln $. Isn't ? Not so much money, for a war with 40.000-50.000
fighters.
b) If the average of wages of 60.000 - 90.000 rubles is correct, It is around an army of 1.500
soldiers during 10 months.
Are my calculations correct ? Please, check it !
BorninUkraine -> bcnteacher 12 May 2015 17:32
I don't have anything except my brains, but that's enough to have a pretty prestigious job
in the US.
Russia apparently has a lot to make self-appointed masters of the Universe in the US hysterical,
and their European poodles even more so. Not to mention small-change commenters here paid very
little (to match pathetic quality of their comments).
The three things that immediately come to mind regarding Russia are nukes, natural resources,
and fighting spirit. Each of these would be enough to scare the opponents. For example, the opposition
in Iraq and Afghanistan only has fighting spirit, and this was sufficient to make NATO retreat
with its tail between its legs. Or, in 1940 France had an army at least as strong as Hitler's,
but due to lack of fighting spirit it disgracefully surrendered in no time.
So, I can only express my sincerest condolences to the servants of humiliatingly hysterical
masters.
nnedjo -> Metronome151 12 May 2015 17:22
Perhaps you are confused with suspicious arrest and detention of a female Ukranian pilot
and Estonian security officer by the FSB. Must be he effect of those drugs you refer to.
Actually, in the event that you mentions use of the drug is excluded because the pilot Savchenko
was very defiant during the examination before the cameras, which is why she has acquired the
status of a national hero in Ukraine, and in the absence she is elected to parliament.
It is also interesting that the example of the pilot Savchenko is the first proven case of "a
soldier on leave," who fought on the Ukrainian front. Because it is known that she left the regular
Ukrainian army to join the volunteer battalion Aidar. So I do not see what is the problem that
Russian troops also take leave and go to help the brothers in Ukraine.
However, Ms. Savchenko has one big problem. If she had been released from the Russian prison now,
she would not have anywhere to return because her Aidar battalion was disbanded by the Ukrainian
authorities.
Kiev Claims Is Disbanding Notorious Aidar Volunteer Battalion
KIEV, March 2, (TASS) - Ukraine's Defense Ministry is disbanding an armed militia group blamed
for abuse during recent months of regional conflict, said to be out of control and with a splinter
faction planning unrest in the capital...
The move follows the arrest of former Aidar battalion fighters said by Luhansk regional administration
head Gennady Moskal to be preparing transfer of weapons from the Ukraine's restive Donbas region
in a bid to promote social upheaval in Kiev.
"Part of this unit long ago defected from Aidar and was engaged in looting, robbery, racketeering,
auto theft and other crimes in regions controlled by the Ukrainian side," Moskal's website
said.
Moskal added that an attempt had been prevented to take an arsenal of weapons from the area
of combat operations in Donbas to Kiev. The arms were meant for "destabilizing the situation"
in the capital.
Babeouf 12 May 2015 17:11
So the opposition united to produce a monster /blockbuster report ,you say , well when there
is a report I shall force myself to read it to see what evidence it actually contains. I seen
no evidence open source or otherwise just assertions based on claims made by person or persons
unknown. This battle over Russian troops is itself a proxy war between the supporters of the US
and the rest of the world.
MichaPalkin -> alpamysh 12 May 2015 17:09
What's truly outstanding is how lame you are and inept Kiev regime is. And quit blubbering
gibberish. It simply kills me how low RFE standards sunk. You're trained very badly, klopets.
nnedjo -> alpamysh 12 May 2015 16:28
Gosh, you seem to have a lot of them--and you said all we had to do was just watch ONE
I am talking here about a group of 10 soldiers who were captured by the Ukrainian Security
Service last year.
Yes, there are several of these videos, and from each of them, it is clear that the soldiers
recite a prepared text directly into the camera.
VladimirM -> SoloLoMejor 12 May 2015 16:28
He is not, I think. But I did, actually, it is in Russian on the Dozhd website. I had an impression
of reading some of the articles here in the Guardian but in Russian. Or even some posters, which
is weird. The report is incoherent, includes many topics, just one chapter is about the Russian
troops in Donbas. You may read anything here in the Guardian to get some idea of what the report
is like. The article "Invisible army…" will do, I think. In my view, the report is utter rubbish
and does not live up to expectations.
nnedjo 12 May 2015 15:56
As I saw in another article this report mentions the examination of Russian soldiers caught
in Ukraine. We all remember this event in the summer of last year. Internet was flooded with videos
with "examination" of Russian "prisoners of war" who were actually recited a prepared text that
was placed somewhere in front of them and behind the camera. I think it was clear to everyone
at the first viewing of the video.
As an example, look at examination of the imprisoned soldier Alexei Generalov. This guy almost
three minutes talking without interruption and without pauses, with a view strictly focused at
one point, probably in some text that he reads somewhere on the left side of the camera. In one
moment the examiner asks him something, and he looked at him, then to the right side of the camera.
A particular problem is the fact that these soldiers were arrested somewhere near the border
under very suspicious circumstances. According to the official Ukrainian version, that the soldiers
also recited in the camera, they were caught about twenty kilometers inside the Ukrainian territory.
However, it is very possible that they were in fact kidnapped by Ukrainian special forces on the
Russian side of the border.
You can say that this is my very bold assumption. But, one can easily notice that during examination
these soldiers were very disoriented. I would not be surprised if this is the result of a drug
that has been deliberately given to captives in order to weaken their will, but I still stand
by my first assumption that they were kidnapped.
For example, another captured soldier to the question of where he is, he replies: "I am now located
in Ukraine, the city of Ukraine."
Thus, it is clear that this soldier has no idea what his exact location, and that he is completely
disoriented, although they examined him in a tent (ie in a tent in the "city of Ukraine"), which
should be somewhere near the scene of his capture. Here you can watch, from 0:59 onwards of this
video:
`And he will NEVER risk an open confrontation with the West`.
Oh, this is the main mistake. The Western politician think that Putin doesn`t attack Ukraine
because he`s afraid of the NATO, West, etc. No, he doesn`t. He just grants the West with a good
chanceopportunity to go home without shame. Why to fight Ukraine if it sooner or later crawls
back? It will, it will due to many objective reasons. No, Putin won`t send troops there until
Ukrainians ask him. Russia does not need any war.
normankirk -> alpamysh 12 May 2015 15:45
Poroshenko still wants the Donetsk airport. Why are they breaking the ceasefire to try and
get it back off the anti-govt fighters?
Madness to throw so many lives away
Noes Vencia -> alpamysh 12 May 2015 15:41
So 140 were given compensation to keep silence and 70 were not?!
1) Given compensation to keep silence will work in a couple of instance, never in dozens!
2) For sure it will never work, if then you don't give compensation to others.
3) Lets do some math; if Ukraine have 200,000 troops of which some 2500 died, at that rate if
there are 210 dead Russian soldiers send by Moscow, that means Russia has send 16,800 troops!
Trust me, you cannot send 1000 soldiers anywhere without being highly noticeable, the logistics
are immense! Let alone 17000!.
4) What percentage does Kiev says of Russian troops are combating against? Because looking at
the media seems that all are Russians. if so, that is a slap on the face to their own army that
they cannot win an "army" of 12 times less soldiers with the same weaponry capabilities. If, however
Russians are a small portion of the Revels, why 100% of focus on Russians so?
Again, I do believe Russia has personnel in there, but limited to advising and intelligence gathering.
I highly doubt there are troops fighting because 1st, they don't need it (enough supply with the
residents) and 2nd it would not have got better outcomes for their own safety or economy.
I feel sad that Ukrainians felt for antagonizing their biggest trading partner for the dream of
UE. EU will not accept Ukraine in decades, enough we have with bankrupt tiny Greece, let alone
10 times bigger corrupted Ukraine. Nor will the French farmers will be happy with Ukrainian ones.
Ukraine should had approached EU while maintained trade with Russia and assuring Russia that no
NATO membership. That is what Finland choose even though of past severe confrontations with Russia;
that pragmatism made of it a prosperous country.
Quote: Thanks for the hour of duelling histories. Made me realise what a great agitprop resource
history is for those who would like to "shape" current narratives.
You have the white-hat / bad-hat lust for an – ideally, ego-stroking – answer multiplied by the
my-eyes-glaze-over factor. Result: maximum impact.
Best, this can all be deployed while seeming judicious and balanced to those not checking "facts-not-mentioned."
I have arrived in Moscow today during a difficult situation for German-Russian relations.
It was important for me, together with President Putin, on the occasion of the 70th anniversary
of the end of world war II to honour those who died. I have laid a wreath at the Tomb of the
Unknown Soldier and thus I want to say to the Russian people, that I, as German Chancellor,
kneel in front of the millions of victims of a war that was unleashed by Nazi Germany. We shall
be constantly aware of the fact that the share of the peoples of the former Soviet Union and
Red Army soldiers accounted for the majority of casualties in that war. I remind you that the
war in the East was carried out as a brutal race war and a war of extermination, and that it
brought untold suffering to millions of people.
The occasion of the 70th anniversary of the end WWII is on August 15, 2015.
The occasion of the 70th anniversary of the end of the German-Soviet War was on the day before
her arrival in Moscow.
She could not be in Moscow on 9 May because she had been told not to attend the celebrations.
Putin should have said to his "partner": Fick dich, Arschloch!
:-(
Tim Owen says:
May 11, 2015 at 3:49 am
Stalin offered in 1939 to send 1 mln troops to stop Hitler if Britain, France agreed to anti-Nazi
pact; they refused http://t.co/46cwbt0x7y
- exiledonline.com (@exiledonline) May 10, 2015
"Papers which were kept secret for almost 70 years show that the Soviet Union proposed sending
a powerful military force in an effort to entice Britain and France into an anti-Nazi alliance.
Such an agreement could have changed the course of 20th century history, preventing Hitler's
pact with Stalin which gave him free rein to go to war with Germany's other neighbours."
Pavlo Svolochenko, May 11, 2015 at 4:01 am
A forlorn hope, since the Ango-French idea of an alliance was that the USSR would do the
fighting while the western allies made sympathetic noises and gathered up the spoils afterward.
That's a pretty good rundown. A handy list to keep for reference.
Tim Owen, May 11, 2015 at 9:55 pm
"Sympathetic noises" is a great phrase. An emotional gesture without any underlying meaning
or commitment. It therefore also has a charge of implied violence to it.
I admire your cynicism.
Warren, May 11, 2015 at 5:20 am
Listen to Michael Parenti's lecture on the real causes of WW2:
I see the UK is on the list above, making a "Devils' Alliance"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_potato_(game)
Moscow Exile, May 11, 2015 at 9:49 am
The UK made that Naval Treaty with Nazi Germany behind of France's back. The Frogs were
none too pleased at the time.
Max, May 11, 2015 at 3:41 pm
prima facia nonsense because Stalingrad.
Tim Owen, May 11, 2015 at 9:46 pm
Thanks for the hour of duelling histories. Made me realise what a great agitprop resource
history is for those who would like to "shape" current narratives.
You have the white-hat / bad-hat lust for an – ideally, ego-stroking – answer multiplied by
the my-eyes-glaze-over factor. Result: maximum impact.
Best, this can all be deployed while seeming judicious and balanced to those not checking "facts-not-mentioned."
Has an American or British political dissident, opposed to the policies of his own government,
ever won a Nobel Prize?
I don't know whether you can consider Pintor a political dissident. However he certainly
did not approve the policies of his own government, as clearly stated in his beautiful
Nobel Prize lecture.
The trick there was the usual one, namely not to silence dissent but to drown it in noise.
Great find; I had never heard of Harold Pinter – shows what an uncultured Philistine I am.
The lecture is indeed a thing of beauty, and one paragraph of it may be perfect for my next
post, which is in the works. Thanks!!
A year after the fall of President Yanukovych, and the triumph of the coup in Kiev,
Ukraine continues immersed in a civil war that Poroshenko promised that he would win in
a month.
It is difficult to find a scenario where Western irresponsibility is so great as in
Ukraine.
In a year, the heads of the European and US diplomats have gone to stimulate protests
and finance groups of thugs and provocateurs, while distributing biscuits in the Maidan,
as did Victoria Nuland, assistant secretary of the US State Department, to contemplate
unmoved
a civil war that has already caused thousands of deaths in the east, and that can lead to a larger
European war if diplomacy established in Minsk agreements not consolidated.
However, the absence of US negotiations and persistent temptation to stoke clashes over
the procedure of arming the government of Kiev and advise its troops to the spread of a
war that could involve NATO have opened a dangerous
wound in Europe.
Obama, the Pentagon and the State Department, discuss the extent of their involvement in
the war, because, in practice, already engaged by interposed actors, and sent advisors,
spies and mercenaries.
Victoria Nuland, moreover, has had no qualms in meeting with Andriy Parubiy, the
neo-Nazi leader who organized the Maidan in Kiev with the complicity of the American CIA
and the Polish AW, and later became head of the Security Council
National government
emerged from the coup.
Accustomed to manipulation and propaganda, Washington and the headquarters of NATO in
Brussels, assisted by an army of unscrupulous journalists, have raised a giant edifice
of lies reminiscent of other wars, such as Yugoslavia and Iraq, knowing that
Memory of public opinion is weak and a plug lies to others.
Because the fire of Ukraine has a logic that makes sense when it is repaired in wars initiated by
the United States in recent years in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen.
Under Yanukovych, rampant corruption was rife, and strangled the country, but all the
steps taken so far, obliging hand with Washington, government Poroshenko and Yatseniuk,
have gone in the direction of the disaster.
Poroshenko Ukraine is now run by a grotesque capitalist country where they send the new
oligarchy created from theft, as yesterday, but the thugs and murderers, commanders of
armed right-wing groups, who do not hesitate to get rid of any
, thieves of the country's resources and people that seems to be unsane.
It is not an exaggeration: just look at the characters who stroll through the parliament
and ministries, armed, accompanied by fascist thugs who do not hesitate to bring hand
grenades in thier pockets.
Although divided into factions, they share solidarity to be the beneficiaries of the
coup who are protected by United States.
Yatsenyuk (accomplice and partner in one of the major capitalist Ukrainian, Igor
Kolomoisky, organizer and financer of fascist battalions) is one of Washington's men in
Kiev;
Poroshenko doubt rapprochement between Berlin and submission to the United States, and
as Turchinov and other rulers, both wallow in corruption and incompetence, which has
plunged the economy, while casting cries for help to Washington
Berlin
and they try to convince the world that Russia is a danger.
Tellingly, all they are benefiting from a patriotic rhetoric going back to Stepan
Bandera, and have hidden the horrors of Babi Yar and Volin. They also ignore symbols and
the struggle against Nazism during World War II.
They do not hesitate to use the crudest lies, providing, for example, Washington pictures taken on
the war in Georgia in 2008 ... as evidence of the Russian invasion in Ukraine, leaving a
paper snubbed US Senator Jim Inhofe.
During the past year since the coup, corruption has not only not blocked, but it has
increased, helped by the disarray of war, and it involves all the leaders of Kiev:
Ukrainian press even talk that Poroshenko has achieved
huge profits with their companies, and he has not hesitated to lie and take advantage of
the state structures to enrich themselves even more.
Thus, the Ukrainian economy, already going through a severe crisis, has been virtually
destroyed: many factories have stopped working, it is common that no wages are paid in
many companies, pensions are miserable and living conditions are getting tougher
but the coup government knows that it may not have another opportunity like the present
and its members steal handfuls.
And war and fear many mouths silent.
Poroshenko acknowledged that his forces had broken the first truce of Minsk, certainly
advised by the American secret services, making a bet on a quick defeat of the rebels in
the Donbass, but Russian help with arms and supplies to militias foiled the offensive
and forced to
Poroshenko to sign agreements Minsk II.
If during the cold war the boundaries between right and left, between supporters and
opponents of the United States were clear, today the situation is more confused.
The Donbass have come volunteers from many countries, although in small numbers, to help
the militias, from Communists and leftists to nationalists and members of the extreme
right, to traditionalists Cossacks and supporters of the Pan-Slavic solidarity they see
in Russia's older sister
although it is clear that the anti-fascist and anti-imperialist reference is dominant
between rebel forces and the fascist and Nazi symbols it is very present in the
Ukrainian National Guard and the troops who fight with Kiev, also plagued by mercenaries
and adventurers fascists.
Thus, the Russian neo-Nazi group Restrukt (Restructura) supports the Ukrainian fascist
party Pravii Serktor, a circumstance that has led members of the Ukrainian security
services accused the FSB (Federal Security Service) to infiltrate Russian members of the
organization (not
arouse suspicions, and those who have purchased) in the Azov battalion (created by the
coup government of Kiev and funded by the oligarch Igor Kolomoisky) in order to get
information.
It is one among many examples, similar to what they are doing Western intelligence services.
A part of Russian nationalism supports, panrrusas considerations, the rebels of the
Donbass, and in that constellation, neo-Nazi groups are, like far-right groups also
sympathize with fascist groups of Maidan Kiev, and some groups
Chechens, with opposing motivations, fight with both sides.
Similarly, groups of Serbs have come to support the rebels in Eastern Ukraine protected
by the Slav identity, which they consider threatened by the West, as they themselves
noted in the Yugoslav wars, and have even gone Hungarian right-wing groups who dream
to "recover" Romanian and Ukrainian territories to create a Greater Hungary ... you need
the prerequisite for the partition of modern Ukraine.
Nevertheless, these groups are very conservative minority among militants Donbass.
Also some Russian groups speak of "imperialist confrontation" between Washington and
Moscow, to apply a strict neutrality.
To finish making the situation more confusing, the long arm of the secret service, the
CIA, the Mossad, the German BND, the AW (Agencja Wywiadu) Polish, and others, have made
possible the transit of mercenaries from the Middle East
Ukraine, and Islamist groups in the Russian periphery, while the Russian FSB tries to jihadists
CIA drone fighters do not come to Ukraine and Russia itself.
If you have ceased fighting in Ukraine thanks to Minsk II, the propaganda war continues.
Fantasy for devotees of NATO states: Putin's imperial dream, as shown annexation of
Crimea, claims exclusive spheres of influence in Europe and provoked the most serious
crisis since the collapse of the USSR.
In devotional package also will Putin's role as an aggressor in the war, the demolition
of the Malaysian aircraft, the violation of the borders of Ukraine, the deployment of
Russian troops in the Donbass, and the violation of international law.
No matter it has not shown any of these allegations, although no doubt that militias
This would not have been able to withstand without Russian help in weapons, supplies and
provisions.
In the giant Western propaganda campaign efforts not lacking anyone remember the
American and European encouragement and to overthrow a government, that of Yanukovich,
elected by the Ukrainian people in elections that neither the United States nor the
European Union considered illegitimate;
and it has been hidden Western support for the violence unleashed by the fascist bands
(tens of policemen were killed by gunshot wounds to the Maidan, for example) while the
goodness of a supposed "peace movement" that wanted to "join Europe" was spreading
, as remains in the shadow in the months before the fall of Yanukovych military training
groups of mercenaries and fascists in Poland was organized to send them after the Maidan
in Kiev;
nor, of course, hardly any references to the gradual expansion of NATO into Eastern
Europe, war provocation of Georgia, missile defense, to attempt to incorporate Ukraine
and Georgia into NATO do, to beat been to Kiev.
Are patents the flimsy arguments Washington and its hypocritical subsequent outrage at
Russian help to the militias, as if Putin had initiated the conflict, even the Ukrainian
crisis be understood, because why would Moscow to create if the government
Yanukovych maintained
good relations with Russia?
And, after the coup of pro-Western state, Moscow could leave their fate to the people
revolted against Kiev and had been crushed by the coup government?
But for those Americans in launching massive advertising campaigns to experts, the coup
in Kiev has been turned into the "revolution of dignity" and their Ukrainian clients
remember him every day in the press.
A year after the fall of the government of Yanukovych, remain unclear killings by the
mysterious snipers who caused carnage on the Maidan, and it was the fuse for the
overthrow of the government.
Neither the coup cabinet Kiev nor the United States have shown the slightest interest in
that investigation, while the oligarchs loot and territory are spread: Igor Kolomoisky,
one of the most corrupt millionaires Ukrainian financier Nazi groups, a character
It has come to use groups of thugs to impose their wishes, buying judges and get
judgments or, if necessary, the fakes, is now governor of Dnepropetrovsk.
The Attorney General Viktor Shokin, neglecting the fight against corruption and crime,
which disdains research snipers Maidan in the days of the coup against Yanukovych, and
has no intention to clarify the horrific slaughter of building
Odessa unions, working instead to outlaw the Communist Party, the only political force
that attempts to limit the power of corrupt businessmen-thieves;
because the Communist Party is the only party which denounces fascism in Ukraine, claiming the
dissolution of the Nazi paramilitary groups and asked, in vain, protection of monuments
and symbols of the struggle against the Nazis during World War II.
United States is torn between greater involvement in the war and the arms shipment.
Influential private foundations and sectors of the Pentagon and government are inclined
to send weapons, although they are aware that this does not become the Ukrainian army
into a force capable of winning the civil war, and could create a difficult situation
with Moscow.
However, other sectors of the US administration, while accepting the risks of
challenging Russia, a country with a huge nuclear arsenal, arming committed to Kiev
confident that a war of attrition will eventually damage the Russian economy and,
eventually,
Putin could plunge, or at least make unviable restructuring effort in the Eurasian Union
that Moscow plans.
This, in Washington, amid absurd discussions about whether to send weapons to Ukraine
"offensive" or "defensive" when the truth is that an escalation in the war would have a
difficult start, and the temptation to annul Russia and
moor closer to the European Union through a continental war is very much on Pentagon
strategists and the White House.
The state of opinion generated in Washington can give an idea comments one analyst at
CSIS, Center for Strategic and International Studies, the most important "think tank" in
American capital as for foreign policy issues.
Andrew C. Kuchins, director of the Russia and Eurasia Program of CSIS, had the murdered
Boris Nemtsov as a patriot and demonized Putin, saying the Russian President's speech in
parliament in April 2014 might indicate the "tipping point
Russia in a fascist state. "
Obviously, for those who think, it would be more than justified open military
intervention in Ukraine, even for intervening actors, mercenaries or soldiers of the
most aggressive countries, such as Poland or the Baltic.
After all, they can always argue the dangers of an "imminent Russian attack" or similar pretexts
which led to the US aggression in Iraq.
The strange murder of Boris Nemtsov (who, today, was a completely irrelevant politician
in Russia) may have implications related to the Ukrainian crisis, and can not rule out
the long hand of Nuland and the US government Russophobe circles, especially at the
evidence that the disappearance of Nemtsov precisely not benefit Putin.
Russian President made a tough bogey, Washington does not want to acknowledge their own
responsibility in increasing international tension, we must remember that Putin began
his presidency trying to accommodate a unipolar world led by the United States,
demanding respect and recognition of interest Russians.
The blatant disregard to the Russian president, the evidence that the United States is
encouraging speculation and hypothetical partition of Russia, as it did with the Soviet
Union, raised all alarms in Moscow and led to Putin, still under President George W
. Bush, in his speech of February 2007 in Munich, where he denounced American
expansionism and breach of all agreements signed or tacit, between Moscow and Washington
after the demise of the Soviet Union.
Since then, and despite the theatrics as the button "reset" offered by Hillary Clinton (which did
not result in any change in US foreign policy), the United States has continued its
military closer to the Russian borders.
France and Germany have been involved in the search for a political solution to Ukraine,
but thier room for maneuver is limited, because their governments have obligations as
members of NATO, and Washington and the Allied headquarters in Brussels have made a
speech
that, in essence, has been imposed on all members and has also been adopted by Paris and
Berlin, which, while still reluctantly bellicose speech, are forced to impose economic
sanctions on Moscow and discuss most dangerous scenario where
do not rule out sending arms and even military forces, but for the moment, that
possibility is discussed in secret.
Trapped in its own propaganda, the NATO countries are unable to assume that the
Ukrainian crisis erupted not a "citizen protests" (otherwise, instigated and financed
largely by Western countries), but by supporting a coup
State and regime change which aims to incorporate Ukraine into an openly hostile
military alliance with Moscow.
If you show aggressive with others, you can not expect to be greeted with open arms.
Neither the European Union nor, much less the United States, want to recognize that the
commitment to integrate Ukraine into NATO is a real provocation against Russia (anyone
imagine the hypothesis that Mexico or Canada to be integrated into an aggressive
military alliance against
Washington?), which has also unnecessary, brought a civil war has destroyed the
Ukrainian economy, has opened a dangerous front in Europe and has dynamited the
medium-term possibility of a friendly and peaceful coexistence in the continent.
Ukrainian war that has been the result of calculation or an unintended consequence of
the coup, the US does not mitigate responsibility.
Adventurous war that US foreign policy has ignited is now presented as the sole
responsibility of Moscow and dangerous test as Russian "expansionism," but forget that
after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, the manifest destiny of NATO was unable to
start their
dismantling but an accelerated expansion towards Russia's borders has led him to settle
in eight countries (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Czech Republic, Slovakia,
Romania, Bulgaria) and try to do with Georgia and Ukraine, including its facilities in
some the old
Soviet republics of Central Asia.
That was the real military expansionism of the last two decades.
Because Washington does not want to understand that security must be a shared principle, and to
bring the military presence of NATO to Russia's own borders is not only a challenge but
also the rupture of unstable international balances.
Accusations and alarms, always without proof, launched by the US against Russia Philip
M. Breedlove, commander of NATO forces in Europe, or the secret visit to Kiev in January
2015, General James R. Clapper, director
of US National Intelligence, among others, they reflect the vision of the hawks in
Washington.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and the head of the Joint Chiefs, General Martin Dempsey,
also support sending weapons to Kiev, and alarms launched by the hard Zbigniew
Brzezinski on a hypothetical attack from Russia to the Baltic countries, will
in the same direction: they want to send weapons to Ukraine, poison the situation and
irreversible a European war, perhaps global, and this can be done through different
ways, because the hawks in Washington have too many scruples: not long ago,
General Wesley Clark declared to CNN about new Islamists slaughtered before the cameras: "We
created the Islamic State funding of our allies."
The recent declaration of the Ukrainian Communist Party, the main opposition force, now
persecuted and reduced, closed with a worrying proclamation to Ukrainian and European:
say no to war and fascism.
Because
that is the risk, the tumor that threatens to Ukraine and Europe.
There are other problems for Europe, of course, added to the severe economic crisis and
cracks in the euro area: from the unexpected Greek rebellion, that Brussels intends to
subdue;
until the response of the real powers in the hypothetical emergence of an opposition
movement that although confusingly, in different countries challenging the neoliberal
construction of the European Union;
through the strengthening of the extreme right, who cares so much about its social model
and because it can push back the ruling conservatives today formations;
or even the wiles of unreliable British partner, head of American bridge in Europe,
along with Polish and Baltic revanchist governments;
and, finally, the challenges of terrorism that Europe and the US itself helped to
create, but none of these problems is as serious as the war in Ukraine and the
possibility of extending the rest of the continent if not consolidates
diplomatic channels.
Angela Merkel's pragmatism, promoting agreements Minsk, has a double interpretation: on
the one hand, knows he can not overcome Russia in a global war and, therefore, walks
wire diplomacy;
secondly, even if I wanted to kneel to Moscow knows that victory would not be German,
but American, and that pushes to Berlin at the balance between the required submission
to Washington (NATO ata), self-interest in European stability
and the ever-present German misgivings about the large Slavic country that refuses to
accept Western supremacy.
For its part, the US wants a weak Russia, and does not renounce its fragmentation, which
would enable the US control of hydrocarbon deposits, and in that scenario, it is no
coincidence that the United States is not involved in the peaceful solution to the
Ukrainian crisis: open warfare submit to Moscow to the test, would prevent the
rebuilding of ties between the former Soviet republics and block its economic
modernization.
At the same time, for the European Union, the extension of the Ukrainian war would be a
nail in the coffin new strategic helplessness and submission with which Washington wants
to lock Brussels: a confrontation between Russia and the European Union in Ukraine, one
open and bleeding on the continent, injury is the best American hypothesis to strengthen their own
power through NATO, to corner Russia, and to prepare themselves for the great battle of
the coming decades: China.
A little about Higinio Polo: Degree in Geography and History and a PhD in Contemporary History from the University of
Barcelona.
He has published numerous papers and essays on political and cultural issues, and
regularly works in media such as the magazine El Viejo Topo, the newspaper Workers World
and other conventional and digital publications.
His books include The last days of Republican Barcelona, novels At the end of the afternoon, in
Singapore are counted; Pearl belly, and the case Blondstein and Iran tests: Memories of
Paradise; USA: the rogue state; Terrorism (in collaboration); Portraits (indoor);
Dashiell Hammett. Crime fiction and Hollywood witch hunt; The night of Calcutta;
Barcelona (confidential report). His last work published in 2014, is White roses on
Stalingrad.
Rebellion has posted this article with the author's permission through a license from
Creative Commons, respecting their freedom to publish elsewhere.
The problem that West and first of all the USA and Germany face now is that Ukraine is another Greece.
To keep it afloat financially requires tremendous and continues investment. 40 billions from IMF is
only a start. Economic ties with Russia are destroyed. And without tens of billions of annual aid that
means death sentence. Allowing it to fail with shake Western financial system and we do
not know how many derivatives were written on Ukrainian debt and who holds them. . Looks like MentalToo was on duty for this article with support of usual gang. There was even
some backlash against "Hillary bots", specifically against alphamysh.
By paying a price I clearly meant the very expensive support for Ukraine that EU has to provide,
about 40 billion so far. The Ukraine's economy is down about 14% from just three years ago - this
is going to get very, very expensive.
If you want to compare Russia's and EU's losses due to sanctions, they have been very substantial
for both. EU has so far lost about 10 billion in exports and in the long run it is not clear who
will end up losing more. Russia's GNP will drop by 3% after years of high growth (more than double
in 10 years). EU has been largely stagnant and many countries there are still below where they
were in '09 (Italy, Spain, ...).
Finally, militarily all that matters is who has local superiority. Russia has it in eastern Ukraine.
You can squirm, hallucinate, cry all you want, there is no f...ing way that Nato can defeat Russia
there.
They know it, thus the coming deal.
Dannycraig007 -> MentalToo 11 May 2015 21:34
You would prefer I use the corrupt and obviously biased mainstream Western media as sources
I assume, rather than first person video accounts from the victims themselves? Award winning war
correspondent and Guardian journalist John Pilger has a few words for you.
http://www.discussionist.com/101459708
This is a must watch video about how the Western media operate from a man who was once a part
of the establishment here at the Guardian.
Standupwoman -> Captain_Underpants 11 May 2015 17:08
Yep. I think my own Pollyanna moment is already beginning to seep away.
But the stakes are so high! NATO's revival of the 'hotline' has unilaterally put us back on a
Cold War footing, and at a time when the Doomsday clock is already set at 3 minutes to midnight.
Putin has shown incredible restraint so far, but if the provocations don't stop then I'm genuinely
worried about what might happen.
Bosula -> samanthajsutton 11 May 2015 20:43
Neither side is very open about what support it provides.
Russia says openly it doesn't stop volunteers from Russia, often family, cross the border to fight
with the East Ukrainians. They are also probably supplying weapons, but we don't really know.
And no Russian troops have been captured despite the huge battles. To capture a Russian soldier
in a fighting zone would be worth gold in terms of PR value.
The Eastern Ukrainian are having difficulties training all their volunteers (just too many) with
a million refugees, many based in camps in Russia, providing a fertile source of volunteers. The
West provides no humanitarian help - a short sighted strategic decision, maybe?
The US and their allies are also pretty secret about what support they provide - best estimates
are around 1,500 advisers, trainers - and 'volunteers' fighting alongside privately funded far
right militias and the Ukrainian army.
The US are not really in a position to take the self- righteous moral high ground in a civil
war tens of thousands of kilometres from their home.
nnedjo -> MentalToo 11 May 2015 20:17
What little influence US has on events in Ukraine is irrelevant.
Because of this "little influence" the whole Ukrainian government has become irrelevant. You
know, the fact that you do not see the strings that move their limbs does not mean that they are
not puppets on the strings. And that guys from Washington hold the ends of the strings, that's
probably clear to everyone after the cookies of Victoria Nuland. Or Toria, as poster Dipset called
her.:-)))
Funny guy that Dipset, wonder why he is not here yet.
Standupwoman 11 May 2015 20:09
'Although the 300 US trainers are operating in the west of the country'
Are we really sure of this? Yes, Kiev has predictably denied Russian claims that American troops
have been spotted in the Donbass, but the odd thing is that several pro-Kiev supporters have uploaded
this footage of American training under the following description:
In Severodonetsk, Luhansk region instructors from Georgia, Israel and the US carried out
military exercises with the soldiers of the special units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs
of Ukraine
Luhansk is in the ATO region - and Severodonetsk is very, very near to the front line.
geedeesee -> MentalToo 11 May 2015 20:05
Irrelevant ...?
Just the CIA advisers, military trainers, $billions of dollars, political cover, a propaganda
machine.
geedeesee -> mlubiank 11 May 2015 19:59
Not proper interviews, are they? Just clips of sentences without knowing the question that
is being answered. They wrap narrative around the comment. Not one of those nine soldiers admits
to fighting in Ukraine, and the claim of written evidence from NGOs is negated towards the end
of the article with the caveat that 'Ukraine' wasn't actually mentioned in the NGO's documentary
evidence.
You're easily duped by propaganda.
Standupwoman -> ID5868758 11 May 2015 19:50
Understood. If governments had to actually fight the wars they started, the world would be
a very different place...
Dannycraig007 -> mlubiank 11 May 2015 19:35
If your still doubtful about what the Kiev regime do to people who post unflattering information
online, I present to you them demonstrating firsthand what happens when people step out of line.
Graphic warning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXnNDbJ7r0k&feature=youtu.be
geedeesee -> mlubiank 11 May 2015 19:31
"What about the guys in military uniforms with weapons, mortars, mines, grenades, anti-tank
weapons..."
What about them? They're defending themselves - the self-defence activists - after the Kiev regime
sent tanks and aircraft to attack the protesters in what they called an Anti-Terror Operation
as this example shows (see all four videos)..
Your question answers itself, in that the Kiev Regime have been tracking down people who post
videos on the internet and in social media that criticize the regime, hence the lack of video
out of Slavyansk now.
The Residents of Slavyansk have disappeared; the town is being re-populated with migrants from
Western Ukraine.
POSTED BY S. NAYLOR ⋅ AUGUST 14, 2014 ⋅ 27 COMMENTS
In Slavyansk, occupied by Ukrainian troops, the local residents have practically disappeared.
The town is being inundated with migrants speaking in a foreign dialect, who take over the housing
of those who left to escape the Ukrainian bombing campaign.
This is reported by one of very few residents of Slavyansk who, trusting Ukrainian official propaganda,
made the decision to return to his native city. The picture that he saw is terrifying. He realized
that the information about residents of Slavyansk returning home is nothing but a vile lie.
"Please, heed our plea! The people have disappeared from Slavyansk!
"I am a native of Slavyansk, residing here already for twenty-seven years. Or better to say 'I
was residing', having left the town three months ago, when it was becoming dangerous to stay.
During this time I found refuge with relatives in Odessa. I made a decision to return when all
the Ukrainian media started saying that everything in Slavyansk was back to normal, that over
sixty percent of residents have come back.
"In the three months of my absence my apartment remained untouched by shells from the junta's
bombardment or by its marauding thugs. I had already started to unpack when I heard the sound
of my neighbour's doors opening across the hallway. I thought it must have been my neighbour,
Sergey Ivanovich, but then I saw a young man unknown to me. To my question about his identity
he replied that he was Sergey Ivanovich's son.
geedeesee -> mlubiank 11 May 2015 19:27
Here's an example:
Slaviansk: 10 self-defense activists and some 30 unarmed civilians killed
Can you tell us how many people have been killed in Slayvansk?
Dannycraig007 -> mlubiank 11 May 2015 19:06
Here's another video for you that proves the Kiev regime are Nazis as it shows them marching
through Kiev in uniform holding the Waffen SS Wolfsangel flag and was filmed by Poroshenkos very
own Chanel 5 TV outlet.
The rest of the hour and a half long video is a bloodbath showing them killing hundreds of
innocent civilians. Get back to me after you've cleaned your conscience.
Investors, such as Franklin Templeton and George Soros' Foundation, who planned to make blood
money and placed their bets off of the inside information right before the coup back in November
2013, have a combined $7 billion at stake in Ukraine.
The IMF is trying to convince them to take a haircut on the massive amount and get put on the
back burner for the time being, but Russia put it's $3 billion loan in strict terms back in 2012
and has payback priority.
Those human flesh eating Western sharks want their money. This makes those 1%ers and their
IMF vassals very upset as they didn't actually expect to lose money......they thought they were
gonna double their billions with the rape of Ukraine. Now it's hard earned.
Standupwoman ID5868758 11 May 2015 18:41
I completely understand that. It's a very sensitive subject, and must be far more so for those
with personal experience.
Part of the problem is the difference between what we knew then and what we know now. At the time,
as you say, we all thought My-Lai was a 'one-off' by a few bad apples, but now so much material
has been declassified a very different picture has emerged.
BUT there's still a world of difference between 'a lot' and 'all', and we must never allow
those war crimes to taint the reputation of the good soldiers, or to belittle what they endured.
It is indeed wrong to apply excessively broad brush-strokes, and I want to apologize to you personally,
because I think in my post I was guilty of doing just that.
SoloLoMejor -> geedeesee 11 May 2015 18:40
Yep all good points and there's definitely some push back from Merkel and Hollande. I just
don't think the US can relinquish control of our military or monetary systems as would happen
if Europe developed independently and naturally became close to European Russia. This is a superpower
making sure that it stays a superpower. That said, this is Europe & Russia, not the under developed
middle East so they may not get it all their own way but 6000 lives so far is tolerable collateral
damage for them
Beckow -> Alderbaran 11 May 2015 18:37
There are 1,000 American, British, Polish and Canadian troops in Ukraine. Officially. Plus
endless civilian advisors, agents, private security companies, etc...
Maybe Russians have more people there, but it is after all on their border.
"given control of Ukraine's border back to Ukraine, in contravention of the Minsk II agreement"
No. The Minsk II specifically says that the border will be returned to Kiev control AFTER the
Donbass area gets autonomy. Where is the "autonomy"? You can't cherry-pick from an agreement.
If Nato steps over the line in Ukraine, as they are about to do, the nuclear option will be on
the table. It is absolutely horrible, but that's where we are heading. Try to get your head out
of your behind to understand what is going on there - it is playing with a huge fire on the border
of a nuclear power that said they will not allow Nato missiles 400 km from Moscow. You want to
test them?
nnedjo -> Tattyana 11 May 2015 18:32
I believe there is no need in any meetings for any further escalation as well.
That's right, Tattyana, that's exactly what I said. My only criticism was related to Miss Marie
Harf, who apparently recited a prepared statement, which aims only to reduce the importance of
the visit of John Kerry to Russia.
By the way, a true pleasure for me is to watch the exchange of opinions between US spokeswoman
Marie Harf and her favorite "reporter", Matt Lee, at the State Department press conferences.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Marie+Harf+Matt+Lee
Standupwoman -> geedeesee 11 May 2015 18:23
Yes, that all makes good sense - but I still think personal integrity can have an (admittedly
tiny) role to play. Carter is a case in point.
I'm even (don't laugh!) inclined to extend that to Obama. Yes, he's technically responsible for
this mess, and he must have supported Nuland and Pyatt in the original coup, but I still think
things would be very much worse if either Biden or HRC had been at the helm.
Obama (like Putin) has hawks screaming at him for being weak, but the fact he's holding out
suggests there's a little shred of integrity still there.
It's not much, but it's all we've got. Sometimes it feels as if the whole world is screaming
for war, and in the centre is this little patch of stillness where two men are holding firm against
the madness. If anything happens to either Barack Obama or Vladimir Putin then I think we really
are sunk.
geedeesee -> SoloLoMejor 11 May 2015 18:22
Yes, there clearly is a strategic plan being played out, though I don't think it has gone to
plan for the Americans. The release of the Nuland/Hyatt phone call obviously came from Russian
intelligence, which was an embarrassment for US. I suspect this is all a prelude to the coming
clash for stakes in Arctic oil. There are a number of competing nations but US probably wants
to minimise Russian access.
However, there is a lot of strain within the EU at the moment, and we know the views of EU
leaders were disregarded by Nuland last year ("Fvck the EU").
It's possible the whole thing has gone far enough for EU leaders (see link below to comments
identifying reasons) and they're pushing back on US behind the scenes to cool it down now.
See the original post by Beckow and replies. Link direct to individual comment number:
Although the 300 US trainers are operating in the west of the country, well away from the conflict
zone, Russia has questioned their purpose.
So I do not see how it could be otherwise. Had the US sent their "trainers" in the conflict
zone in the east of Ukraine, it is possible that in that case Russia would not complain at all.
In that case, Russia would also send their "trainers" who would soon be found "in the west
of the country [Ukraine], well away from the conflict zone".:-)))
normankirk -> MaoChengJi 11 May 2015 18:04
and the German gold still locked up in US vaults
Popeyes 11 May 2015 17:53
Once again on Saturday Putin completely outclassed the West, and the decision by Western leaders
to stay away in the end showed their total irrelevance.
Closer ties between China and Russia is Washington's worst nightmare, and a very different
new World Order is emerging from the rubble of the post-Cold War period. Today Russia proposed
that Greece become the 6th member of a new Development Bank set up by the BRINCS, and with some
European leaders desperate to end sanctions things are not going as planned for the empire.
Dannycraig007 -> Bradtweeters 11 May 2015 17:52
Oh, I'm an 'authentic' Guardian reader alright. i'm on my 20th account after being constantly
banned this past year for posting the truth about Ukraine. And when they bane me again I'll be
right back. True Brits don't give up so easily.
ID5868758 -> Dannycraig007 11 May 2015 17:51
Well, it's printed in English only, given away free in places like the Metro and coffee houses,
so it's not like it's the Russian equivalent of the New York Times, to begin with. My son says
it's read mostly by ex-pats in Russia, tourists, that kind of audience, it's certainly not anything
that Russians read on a regular basis.
ID5868758 -> salthouse 11 May 2015 17:45
Good grief, what fiction. Vladimir Putin's only problem is that he is not Boris Yeltsin,
opening the door to the international banks and the multinational corporations to continue their
rape of the assets and resources of the Russian people. He is slowly but surely returning
Russia to Russians. Contrast that to Ukraine, going in the opposite direction, with the privatization
of the assets and resources of the people just beginning, and the predators like Monsanto, Cargill,
Chevron, banging at the gate.
normankirk -> salthouse 11 May 2015 17:44
Oh I know! its his nature! He can't help it! And vindictively, at home, he's raised the standard
of living and life expectancy! the bastard, only a lunatic would do so.And when he walks among
the people he's forcing them ... at gunpoint!.... to put on forced smiles you can tell by looking.
he.s a maniac! getting Assad to give up his chemical stores! crazy!
Kaiama -> BMWAlbert 11 May 2015 17:43
There was some indication that the ships could not be sold without the explicit permission
of the Russians - probably because they provided the middle part of the hull and if they were
feeling bad have the right to ask for it to be cut out and given back to them.
nnedjo 11 May 2015 17:42
"This trip is part of our ongoing effort to maintain direct lines of communication with
senior Russian officials and to ensure US views are clearly conveyed," state department spokeswoman
Marie Harf said in a written statement.
I do not see what it was unclear so far in the views of the State Department at the Ukrainian
crisis. I mean, if John Kerry is going to Sochi to repeat the usual accusations against Russia,
which US officials have said so far, then there's really no need for him to go to Russia only
because of this, nor Putin is interested to hear it one more time.
Thus, rather it will be some other reason behind this visit, about which we can now only guess.
And none of us is so naive to believe that the Ukrainian crisis can be resolved without direct
negotiations between the United States and Russia. So, either to make a deal, or to enter a further
escalation of the military conflict.
I am inclined to believe that the latter, less predictable solution, is not in anyone's interest.
Kaiama -> Metronome151 11 May 2015 17:41
Maybe, but if the US did cut Russia off of SWIFT for instance, the Russians have already said
that they would regard it as a declaration of "war". The US might start it but the Russians will
definitely finish it.
MichaPalkin -> salthouse 11 May 2015 17:40
It finally happened: A REAL nutjob.
Now why don't you put your money where you mouth is, you pos and go join the fight against Putin
yourself um?.. See? Told ya.
geedeesee -> Standupwoman 11 May 2015 17:31
On the glimmer of hope, I think you maybe right, though its early days. History books on 20th
century show that when there's been a stand-off for sometime an intermediary, or unofficial envoy,
is often sent to explore the basis for talks. And the history books also show confidence-building
measures are used, such as making an announcement via the media acknowledging part of the grievance
of the other side which can use for domestic purposes.
This happened with the IRA talks, for example, both in 1970s and 1990s. Last week Jimmy Carter
visited Putin in Moscow, not on its own remarkable, but what suggested this wasn't an initiative
of his own volition was the interview he gave to Voice of America (official US Gov. channel) immediately
after the meeting in Moscow - indicating they'd travelled with him.
The narrative is for the press and the accompanying 45 second video of Carter saying all the
right things for the Russians can be used by Russian TV/media in news reports.
You'll be disappointed if you look for integrity with the players at this level, because it doesn't
exist. They have their plans and self-interests; integrity doesn't come into it.
Dannycraig007 -> dmitryfrommoscow 11 May 2015 17:30
The Moscow Times is actually operated out of Scandinavia and their readership has been dropping
due to the obvious anti-Russian propaganda.
ID5868758 -> Standupwoman 11 May 2015 17:27
Well, My-Lai was, of course, just a horrific example of evil behavior on the part of a few
of our troops, but Kerry came home and, without personal knowledge, painted the entire military
with the same broad brush, made up stories, and just so disgraced himself with this nation that
he would never have won a Senate seat if he had not run in Massachusetts.
I still to this day cannot listen to him speak for more than a few minutes at a time, his betrayal
of the men who were fighting and dying in the hellhole that was Vietnam will stay with me forever.
dmitryfrommoscow -> Havingalavrov 11 May 2015 17:26
The Moscow Times is one of those pro-Washington mouthpieces which, according to the claims
by Putin's critics, have been ruthlessly wiped out of the scene.
SoloLoMejor 11 May 2015 17:15
I saw the Merkel Putin press conference in full. Merkel fully acknowledged and apologised for
the horrors inflicted on the Soviet Union by Nazi Germany, and quite rightly.
When asked specifically about what she still blamed Russia for with respect to Minsk she became
a lot less clear and rambling and very non specific. I couldn't make out what her beef was although
I really wanted to know.
She's going to need some very clear reasons to reinstate EU sanctions on Russia and the phrase
Shaun Walker regurgitates in virtually every piece he writes, "mounting evidence" of Russian involvement
(but without producing any) won't be enough this time round.
MichaPalkin -> alpamysh 11 May 2015 17:15
l though I find your comments stupid, and what is absolutely amazing is that guests such as
you have had zero effect on anything.
Some fascist parties did once praise you and still do, ahem, "purely for the funding you was willing
to give". Some grammar problems here eh.
But this has had no effect on nothing, or the policy of the EU in general.
One does not even see you loonies demonstrating in the street, shouting "hail" to Poro & Co."
Poro's only real "western" base of support comes from RFE and probably Guardian. Even Americans
begin having their reservations now.
Period
Indeed, we may well have all your clownish incompetence to thank for your highly unsuccessful
trolling.
OK, klopets?
John Smith -> Alderbaran 11 May 2015 17:06
You can forget about Crimea.
Nothing will come out from this talks because the US will not let off their 'great prize'
as the NED head called it. Unfortunately for Ukrainians.
ID5868758 -> Standupwoman 11 May 2015 16:31
Standupwoman, I rarely disagree with you, but as an American who lived through Vietnam as the
wife of a Marine Corps officer, and the sister of a brother in country as a cryptologist, may
I just tell you that John Kerry's actions in front of Congress were not seen by most as heroic
at all, not borne of courage and integrity, especially since he had spent only a very short time
in country, and had awarded himself 2 or 3 purple hearts, but strangely enough, has no scars of
those wounds remaining today. He lied, it was a performance that caused much of America to shun
him even today, and that's the truth.
Igor1980 -> GoodOldBoy1967 11 May 2015 16:29
I am in Sochi now, a navy ship is patrolling the area of the Residence and many police cars
can be seen. It is not surprising . I was surprised by the number of cars with Ukrainian license
plates. The hosts say that many Ukrainian citizens moved to the area on the coast with their money.
Standupwoman -> cabaret1993 11 May 2015 16:22
I agree. If this were HRC rather than Kerry I'd think we were doomed. Do you remember her hilariously
rabble-rousing claim that Putin had no soul - 'He's KGB, it's a given!' - and Putin's dry response?
That woman ought never to have been allowed within a hundred miles of foreign affairs, and if
she ever becomes President then it'll be time to start stocking up on the potassium iodide...
Igor1980 -> Beckow 11 May 2015 16:12
Great and sober analysis. The reality is harsh for both parties and very painful for the
USA: the people in the West are not ready to die for the cause of the American dominance.
It is easy to hate Putin, it is difficult to sacrifice your lives in a war to punish Russia
for a little border change in the most unpleasant part of Eastern Europe.
MaoChengJi -> DogsLivesMatter 11 May 2015 16:11
state department spokeswoman Marie Harf said in a written statement
That's just standard bs. What do you expect them to say.
Standupwoman 11 May 2015 16:06
Maybe I'm having a Pollyanna moment, but I wonder if there isn't just the littlest, tiniest
glimmer of hope in this. The fact the US is prepared to talk to Russia on its own ground is definitely
a step in the right direction, and the fact it's John Kerry is even better.
Because Kerry was once an honest man. Back in 1971 he testified to Congress about American war
crimes in Vietnam, and showed the kind of courage and integrity it's almost impossible to mention
in the same sentence as 'politician'. He talked openly about the everyday reality of rapes, torture,
desecration of the dead, and killing civilians for fun – the American toolbox we're all familiar
with in Afghanistan and Iraq, but which in 1971 was genuinely shocking news. Nationalists hated
him, but I think he showed genuine American patriotism when he explained: 'We feel that because
of what threatens this country, the fact that the crimes threaten it - not the Reds, not redcoats,
but the crimes which we're committing are what threaten it – and we have to speak out.'
OK, he's a politician now, and his words have frequently been used against him to show the hypocrisy
of his support for America's current wars, but deep down he's still in some way the same man he
was then. He and Lavrov certainly used to have a good relationship until he made that unbelievably
stupid remark about Russians 'lying to his face'.
That kind of populist rudeness plays well with the 'Murica, F*ck yeah!' mob, but grown-up countries
tend to choose a calmer, more courteous approach when it comes to negotiations which could lead
to the threat of nuclear war. Kerry will need to apologize for that (even if only in private)
if he hopes to get in the same room as President Putin.
But maybe he will. Maybe he'll even confound the words of that Psaki-Manqué Harf and actually
listen as well as talk. If he does, and if there's any integrity left in him, then maybe, just
maybe, there'll really be a chance of peace.
PlatonKuzin -> oleteo 11 May 2015 16:03
The Ukies think that the US and EU do them gifts for granted. And they were very suprised
as they knew that, for example, in Poland, an organization named "Restitution of Kresy" was established
that in the nearest future will expropriate, from Ukraine, the property belonging to the Poles.
And more than 100,000 such Poles are now ready to start proceedings to return their property
from there.
Dannycraig007 -> PlatonKuzin 11 May 2015 15:57
Agreed on the 50,000. I am just citing the US/MSM 'official' number. I have been keeping up
with the real numbers also. Petri Krohn has done a great job establishing a proper count of the
dead form various events and battles. The majority of those 50,000 dead are Ukrainian conscripts
and Kievs Baghdad Bob intentionally played the numbers way down in order to not have to pay dead
soldiers families and hide the truth of the war, which the US and EU media simply parroted with
no investigation whatsoever. Here's a link to the numbers:
The US could have prevented all this by keeping there nose out of Ukraine . In the words of
Obama we brokered the change of government in Ukraine.
Now their are 6000 plus people dead . east of Ukraine destroyed, Crimea gone never
to return.
Only the US could imagine you could get away with this.\
Beckow -> Alderbaran 11 May 2015 15:54
Hmmm...don't fool yourself, he meant the Maidan crowd in Kiev. The problem Kiev government
has is that as economy gets worse, the large cities like Kharkov, Odessa, etc... will become ungovernable.
Except through brute force.
How do you "join EU" if you have to be suppressing large portion of your population? I am
sure EU would love to look the other way, but the cognitive dissonance might get too much, with
YouTube, refugees, etc...
Captain_Underpants 11 May 2015 15:52
Kerry will offer to swap Ukraine for Assad's head + no S300 missiles to Iran + sanction relief.
Putin and Lavrov will tell Kerry to stick the offer where the sun don't shine and then it's back
to square one.
Obumbler won't be involved, he's too busy on the golf course, watching the NBA playoffs, and making
hollow speeches filled with platitudes about race issues and police violence.
Meanwhile back in the increasingly irrelevant Euroweenie land, the NSA-compromised Frau Merckel
has a desk and a phone and will do as told by her masters
Dannycraig007 -> DIPSET 11 May 2015 15:47
I'd still like to see what those US spy satellites saw the day MH-17 was shot down. They first
said they had proof Russia did it, then they went quiet, then they relied on social media BS,
then they said they had a drunk Ukrainian that made a confession that the rebel put on Ukrainain
uniforms, then they stayed quiet. All the while they had ships in the Black Sea monitoring that
airspace and they had AWACS flying over Europe.
They obviously know what really happened but they have chosen no to show that 'evidence'....there
can only be one reason.......because it implicates the Kiev regime...and thereby....themselves.
geedeesee -> MentalToo 11 May 2015 15:42
"...the army of Ukraine is not at war with "protesters"."
Yes they are, they called it an Anti-Terror Operation and not war against an army. The facts are
against you. Hard luck. ;-)
Dannycraig007 -> MaoChengJi 11 May 2015 15:40
Many people have no idea that Merkels father was in the Hitler youth. Sad but true fact. Hence,
maybe that partly explains her allegiance to Ukraine.
Horst Kasner
Biography http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horst_Kasner
Kasner was born as Horst Kaźmierczak in 1926, the son of a policeman in the Pankow suburb of Berlin,
where he was brought up. His father Ludwig Kaźmierczak (born 1896 in Posen, German Empire) - died
1959 in Berlin) was born out of wedlock to Anna Kazmierczak and Ludwik Wojciechowski.[1] Ludwig
was mobilised into the German army in 1915 and sent to France, where he was taken prisoner of
war and joined the Polish Haller's Army fighting on the side of Entente.[2] Together with the
army he returned to Poland to fight in Polish-Ukrainian war and Polish-Soviet war.[3] After Posen
had become part of Poland, Ludwig moved with his wife in 1923 to Berlin, where he served as a
policeman, and changed his family name to Kasner in 1930.
Little is known about Horst Kasner's wartime service, and he was held as a prisoner of war at
the age of 19. During his high school years he was a member of the Hitler Youth, with the last
service position of a troop leader.[citation needed] From 1948 he studied theology, first in Heidelberg
then in Hamburg. He married Herlind Jentzsch, an English and Latin teacher, born on 8 July 1928
in Danzig (now Gdańsk, Poland) as the daughter of Danzig politician Willi Jentzsch, and their
daughter Angela was born in 1954.
PlatonKuzin -> Kaiama 11 May 2015 15:38
There is another side of this medal: Novorussia said that, if Ukraine violates the ceasefire
one more time, the Army of Novorussia will make no stops any longer and will free Kiev.
Beckow -> MichaPalkin 11 May 2015 15:35
Threats are simply a part of making deals. When one threatens, there is an implicit understanding
of what the alternatives are. It is how countries negotiate.
Look at it from Russia's point of view: they prefer to deal with useless twats. Putin has been
smart to keep all his threats, options and deals to himself. He speaks very diplomatically and
applies pressure on the ground. There is a Russian saying: "let the punishment tell" - that's
what Russia is doing and it drives the likes of Kerry crazy.
Unless US escalates into a nuclear confrontation, Russia has the upper hand in the long run.
That was obvious from the beginning. So the question is why did Peace Price Winner do this? Why
did he start? Is he and people around him that stupid or that desperate? I hope, it is just stupidity.
"Poro & Co would be applying for the political asylum in the US" - that's going to happen anyway,
but I think Canada will take the bulk of them...
Beckow -> Alderbaran 11 May 2015 15:24
Let's be clear: Kerry is flying in with a proposal to review with Lavrov. If Russia accepts,
Kerry will meet Putin. If not, we will know that sh..t is about to escalate - on both sides.
Regarding "military involvement": both sides are heavily militarily involved with arms, training,
"advisors" of all kinds, intelligence, logistics. And both sides downplay it ("lie", if you prefer).
Why is that even an issue? Or "news"?
It is infantile to discuss it. In a war there is always "military involvement". And this is
a war, has been for about a year, this is the way wars are fought now (see Syria, Libya, etc...).
And yes, of course Putin can change weather. Anyone with enough nukes can.
BMWAlbert 11 May 2015 15:15
Looks like India's participation in the Moscow parade is also paralleled by the cutting of
80% of the French fighter order (remembering that the govt. in New Delhi stated several months
ago that its confidence in France as a supplier would be related to its vulnerability to political
pressuring vis a vis the RU ships that will end-up being scrapped or bought by by a third party,
and it might be that said party, if also participating in said parade, might sell in turn to RU
for a 'cut'). IDK if this is related, big new orders from India for SU's:
These cannot be made in Russia, in any event, as Russia is entirely isolated.
Dannycraig007 11 May 2015 15:09
The US has really hurt itself with the WW2 remembrance ceremony snub. Russia won't be soon
forgetting what the US has been doing in Ukraine and Europe either. After all the 7,000 people
killed by the Kiev regime that came to power through the US backed coup were all ethnic Russian
Ukrainian civilians. So many lives could have been saved if only the US would have allowed federalization
of the obviously ethnically diverse regions of the country.
For those that missed it, here's link to the amazing WW2 Red Square commemoration concert. It
truly was a sight to behold.
Turn Ukraine into a federation. Of a rich pro western part that is member of the EU and a poor
pro Russian part that is member of the Eurasian Union.
In ten years time the East Ukrainians will have had enough of their Russian propaganda-ridden
life without a decent standard of living. We will then have another Euromaidan, but this time
in Donbass.
History always discloses propaganda lies. In the end the people of Donbass will understand they
have been used by Russia for its geopolitical games. And chose for a prosperous future in Europe
as well.
Beckow -> geedeesee 11 May 2015 14:14
Yes, there are huge problems.
But if US accepts a de facto defeat in Ukraine, they are done in many other places too.
My guess is that they will try to weasel out of it by offering a deal to Russia:
- US backs down, Kiev goes back in the box (over time), things quiet down, BUT no victory
speeches or remarks by Russia. US has to be able to maintain that they "won".
It is a disease for insecure people. They fear being seen as losers more than anything else.
Thus we might still see the fire-works if Russia refuses to oblige.
vr13vr 11 May 2015 14:09
"Unfairly blaming Russia for the crisis in Ukraine, which was actually in the main provoked
by the US itself, Obama's administration in 2014 went down the road of ruining bilateral links,
announced a policy of 'isolating' our country on the international stage, and demanded support
for its confrontational steps from the countries that traditionally follow Washington."
Why does the press want us feel so amazed about this quote? What part of it isn't true?
1. US did and does blame Russia for crisis in Ukraine.
2. US did provoke the crisis.
3. US did go down the road of ruining bilateral links.
4. It did announced a policy of "isolation."
5. And it did demand support for its steps from other countries in Europe.
Putin actually appears to be a straight talker.
vr13vr -> caliento 11 May 2015 14:05
"The first question asked should be... "
Kerry doesn't get to ask questions as if he were running a deposition. He can talk politely
and be nice. Outside of the US police TV show and court drama, nobody in the world allows anyone
to speak like this, especially in the diplomatic talks with Russia.
vr13vr 11 May 2015 14:03
"Russia believes that the US is meddling in Ukraine..."
No, it's not just Russia believes. It is a fact. And everyone knows it, not just Russia.
geedeesee -> Beckow 11 May 2015 13:46
Add to your list:
EU unity under considerable strain. Divisive issues on it's plate include Greece and Grexit, UK
referendum and possible Brexit, UK Human rights exit, unresolved Eurozone crisis, migrant quotas,
all made worse by further US spying revelations and German betrayal of EU businesses to the benefit
of US companies.
Putin now supporting/funding anti-EU parties in Europe.
MH17 report and voice recorder info, clearly delayed for political reasons, is due this summer.
Obama administration needs cooperation at UNSC on Iran nuclear deal.
Putin supplying arms to Iran is giving Obama more problems from Netanyahu.
If Obama has plans for a last attempt at cracking Israel/palestine then he'll need as much international
support as he can muster.
Russia opening spying and military bases in Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua.
BunglyPete 11 May 2015 13:46
Russia has engaged in a rather remarkable period of the most overt and extensive propaganda
exercise that I've seen since the very height of the cold war,
That suggests that it is equivalent to the RFE/RL campaigns of the Cold War.
The reports they produced in 1984 relating to showing the Ukrainian nationalists in a good light
were described by Richard Pipes as "blatant anti-semitic propaganda". Not my words, the words
of Richard Pipes.
These same reports are reprinted today in the Guardian and if you disagree you are a "Putin propagandist".
Even though Richard Pipes agrees that it is distasteful propaganda.
Other activities involved sending millions of balloons across eastern Europe, campaigns in the
US to ask for "Truth Dollars" to fund said balloon campaigns, leaflets pretending to come from
a fictional resistance organisation intended to militarise citizens against their governments,
and much much more. There are many books and articles on the subject.
Senator Royce said in May 2014, in an instruction to Victoria Nuland at a senate subcommitee hearing,
he wants them "producing the stuff they did years ago". Indeed they granted more money than they
did during the cold war to BBG campaigns.
In comparison to the rather pathetic RT, the US campaigns are far more serious in scope and effects.
madeiranlotuseater 11 May 2015 13:27
and to ensure US views are clearly conveyed," state department spokeswoman Marie Harf said
in a written statement
In other words, do as the USA says or we shall continue to hound you.
"Russia has engaged in a rather remarkable period of the most overt and extensive propaganda
exercise that I've seen since the very height of the cold war," Kerry said in February. "And
they have been persisting in their misrepresentations, lies, whatever you want to call them,
about their activities to my face, to the face of others, on many different occasions."
There speaks the nation that admits to being involved in forcing regime changes all over the
world since 1947. To arm twisting and invading Iraq on the basis of a known lie. If Mr Kerry believes
he has been lied to he should present his evidence. We can all relax then. But he doesn't. He
says to trust him to tell the truth. Why should we. The USA is a massive war machine intent on
ruling the world. China and Russia are not interested in being bullied.
Beckow -> deathbydemocracy 11 May 2015 12:53
I see that even indirect criticism of the media coverage is not allowed. Interesting, but somehow
understandable.
DIPSET 11 May 2015 12:31
First when they thought they thought they were "winning" they did not want to talk and
instead, instructed their media to do the talking for them.
Okay.
Then reality happened hahaha
As a consequence, we now have all sorts of chatter coming out of Washington and the urgent need
to talk to Russia. So now it's......
Let's "talk" about East Ukraine
Let's "talk about Iraq
Let's "talk" about Syria
Let's "talk" about Yemen
Let's "talk about Iran
Lets "talk" about Latin America
Funny how seeing China and Russia stand next to each other has sharpened some minds across
the Atlantic.
Pity they could not "talk" before Crimea was 'liberated' right in front of the American satellites
circling in space lol
;-)
Fascinating times
Ilja NB 11 May 2015 12:28
Which mounting evidence ??? I haven't seen a single one provided ?
**The Russian foreign ministry said: "We continue to underline that we are ready for cooperation
with the US on the basis of equality, non-interference in internal affairs, and that Russian interests
are taken into account without attempting to exert pressure on us."**
Of-course USA will never agree with it, since USA wants to put it's nose in everyone's affairs.
BMWAlbert -> BunglyPete 11 May 2015 11:55
Mr. Semenchenko is clearly referring to Greater Ukraine here that extends east into the Kuban,
including some buffer areas around the mount Elbrus region (intruded upon on this 2008 occasion)
to the south, and north to the Middle Don and Upper Donets basins, to include Beograd and steppe
lands east of Voronezh.
Beckow -> miceonparade 11 May 2015 11:40
Kerry is going to make a deal. Probably surrender after one more chest-beating threat. If Putin
doesn't meet him (also possible), we will have a very hot summer in Ukraine. And maybe elsewhere.
Beckow 11 May 2015 11:34
Kerry is going for a reason, and it is not to restate US views. The reality is:
- Ukraine cannot win the war in its east
- Ukraine is going bankrupt
- EU has just basically said no to Ukraine in EU for foreseeable future (decades?)
- EU denied visa-free access for Ukrainians
- the whole f...ing adventure in Kiev is getting really, really expensive
- time is on Russia's side, they can sit and watch Kiev collapse or West spending billions
to prop it up
- EU cannot currently survive without Russia's gas. Russia has deals with China and Turkey,
in 3 years EU will be screwed or pay a lot, lot more
These realities on the ground drive US crazy. They don't like to deal with reality, it
is too hard. They prefer the fantasy play world where US is god-like, others are scared and geography,
resources and other realities are wished away. Infantile. Stupid. Self-defeating. Russia is actually
doing US a favor by bringing them back to the real word.
I feel sorry for the Ukrainians; they will suffer for years enormously. They rebelled against
a miserable life, were used by a few hustlers from Washington, Berlin and a few Polish ultra-nationalists,
now they will pay for it all. Those are the wages of naivete...
emb27516 miceonparade 11 May 2015 11:32
Yes, especially if they wrestle.
BunglyPete 11 May 2015 11:32
"Mr Putin, look at these images provided to our Senator Inhofe, from Mr Semenchenko of Ukraine's
official government designation to Washington.
As you can see, these images from Georgia in 2008 clearly show you invaded Ukraine last year.
We feel these images prove the invasion so strongly, Senator Inhofe wrote a bill authorising arms
to Ukraine, and we passed this quite easily.
What, Mr Putin, will you do about this? If you continue to send tanks to Georgia in 2008 then
we will assume you have no interest in fulfilling the terms of Minsk accord and will enact necessary
measures to ensure the stability of Ukraine."
alsojusticeseeker Jeremn 11 May 2015 11:27
"He may be a son of a b..., but he is our son of a b...". Just another typical example
of US hypocrisy.
BMWAlbert 11 May 2015 11:25
If only his brain were as big as his hair (obviously, not the bald one).
warehouse_guy 11 May 2015 11:25
"Western leaders mainly boycotted the parade in protest at Russia's actions in Ukraine."
Aka people's will in Crimea, and Russian people's will to help Donbass, they are not exactly hiding
it there are donation kiosks all over the country almost in every major city. Not on government
level though. There are no on duty Russian troops in Ukraine.
RudolphS 11 May 2015 11:24
So, Barry is too chickenshit to go to Russia himself?
Jeremn 11 May 2015 11:19
Americans should be asking why their government is supporting a Ukrainian governmnet which
honours veterans of an insurgency which massacred Poles, Jews and Russians across Ukraine in 1943
and 1944.
Here they are, members of the UPA-OUN. Rehabilitated by Poroshenko's governmnet. It was an organisation
which formed the Nachtigall Battalion, in German service, and tasked with clearing the Lvov ghetto,
and which took men from SS auxiliaries (Schutzmannschaft Battalion 201), which cleared Belarus
of partisans and Jews.
Most notoriously, the UPA ran a campaign of ethnic cleansing against Poles in Ukraine, killing
some 100,000 of them (mostly women and children).
So there are the veterans, in Ukraine's parliament.
Here's a history of one of their
massacres.
America, you should know.
Steve Ennever 11 May 2015 11:15
"The US has placed several rounds of sanctions on Russia over its actions in Ukraine"
It has indeed. And badgered Europe into sanctioning Russia further. All of which
has affected the US little but has been an immense pain economically for it's "allies."
Strangely though, in 2014, business between the US & Russia actually increased by 7%.
Honestly, you get taken for a ride as recently as Iraq & Libya & you still don't learn a thing.
StatusFoe11 May 2015 11:08
"This trip is part of our ongoing effort to maintain direct lines of communication with
senior Russian officials and to ensure US views are clearly conveyed,"
i.e. "If you don't do what we say and submit to our will there'll be more costs."
warehouse_guy 11 May 2015 11:00
"While Washington has pointed to mounting evidence of Russian military involvement in
the east of the country."
Yet unable to provide any concrete evidence for over a year...
To mark the 70th anniversary of the Victory against Nazism, we publish a study of Valentin
Katasonov on financing of the NSDAP and the rearmament of the Third Reich. The author deals with
new documents that confirm the organization of the Second World War by US and UK Bankers, covered
by President Franklin Roosevelt and Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, in the hope of destroying
the USSR. This study raises new questions that will be addressed in a future article.
The war was not unleashed by frenzied Fuhrer who happened to be ruling Germany at the
time. WWII is a project created by world oligarchy or Anglo-American "money owners". Using
such instruments as the US Federal Reserve System and the Bank of England they started to
prepare for the next world conflict of global scale right after WWI. The USSR was the target.
The Dawes and Young Plans, the creation of Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the
Germany's suspension of reparations payments it had to pay according to Paris Peace Treaty and
the acquiescence of Russia's former allies in this decision, large-scale foreign investments
into the economy of Third Reich, the militarization of German economy and the breaches of
Paris Treaty provisions – they all were important milestones on the way of preparing the war.
There were key figures behind the plot: the Rockefellers, the Morgans, Lord Montagu Norman
(the Governor of the Bank of England), Hjalmar Schacht (President of the Reichsbank and
Minister of Economics in the Hitler's government). The strategic plan of Rockefellers and
Morgans was to subjugate Europe economically, saturate Germany with foreign investments and
credits and make it deliver a crushing blow against the Soviet Russia so that it would be
returned into the world capitalist system as a colony.
Montagu Norman (1871 - 1950) played an important role of go-between to keep up a dialogue
between American financial circles and Germany's business leaders. Hjalmar Schacht organized
the revival of Germany's defense sector of economy. The operation conducted by "money owners"
was covered up by such politicians as Franklin Roosevelt, Neville Chamberlain and Winston
Churchill. In Germany the plans were carried out by Hitler and Hjalmar Schacht. Some
historians say Hjalmar Schacht played a more important role than Hitler. Simply Schacht kept
away from spotlight.
The Dawes Plan was an attempt following World War I for the Triple Entente to compromise
and collect war reparations debt from Germany. The Dawes Plan (as proposed by the Dawes
Committee, chaired by Charles G. Dawes) was an attempt in 1924 to solve the reparations
problem, which had bedeviled international politics following World War I and the Treaty of
Versailles (France was reluctant to accept it got over 50% of reparations). In 1924-1929
Germany got $2, 5 billion from the United States and $ 1, 5 billion from Great Britain,
according to Dawes Plan. In today's prices the sum is huge, it is equal to $1 trillion of US
dollars. Hjalmar Schacht played an active role in the implementation of Dawes Plan. In 1929 he
summed up the results, saying that in 5 years Germany got more foreign loans that the United
States in the 40 years preceding WWI. As a result, in 1929 Germany became the world's second
largest industrial nation leaving Great Britain behind.
In the 1930s the process of feeding Germany with investments and credits continued. The
Young Plan was a program for settling German reparations debts after World War I written in
1929 and formally adopted in 1930. It was presented by the committee headed (1929–30) by
American industrialist Owen D. Young, creator and ex-first chairman of Radio Corporation of
America (RCA), who, at the time, concurrently served at board of trustees of Rockefeller
Foundation, and also had been one of representatives involved in previous war reparations
restructuring arrangement – Dawes Plan of 1924. According to the plan, the Bank of
International Settlements (BIS) was created in 1930 to make Germany pay reparations to
victors. In reality the money flows went in quite a different direction - from the United
States and Great Britain to Germany. The majority of strategically important German companies
belonged to American capital or were partly under its control. Some of them belonged to
British investors. German oil refinery and coal liquefaction sectors of economy belonged to
Standard Oil (the Rockefellers). Farbenindustrie AG, chemical industry major was moved under the
control of the Morgan Group. 40% of telephone network and 30% of Focke Wulf shares belonged to
American ITT. Radio and AEG, Siemens, Osram electrical industry majors moved under the control
of American General Electric. ITT and General Electric were part of the Morgan's empire. At
least 100% of the Volkswagen shares belonged to American Ford. By the time Hitler came to
power the US financial capital practically controlled all strategically important sectors of
German industry: oil refining, synthetic fuel production, chemistry, car building, aviation,
electrical engineering, radio industry, and a large part of machine-building (totally 278
companies). The leading German banks - Deutsche Bank, Dresdner Bank, Donat Bank and some
others - were under US control.
***
On January 30, 1933 Hitler was named the Chancellor of Germany. Before that his candidacy
had been thoroughly studied by American bankers. Hjalmar Schacht went to the United States in
the autumn of 1930 to discuss the nomination with American colleagues. The Hitler's
appointment was finally approved at a secret meeting of financiers in the United States. He
spent the whole 1932 trying to convince the German bankers that Hitler was the right person
for the position. He achieved the goal. In mid-November 1932 17 German largest bankers and
industrialists sent a letter to President Hindenburg expressing their demand to make Hitler
the Chancellor of Germany. The last working meeting of German financiers before the election
was held on January 4, 1933 in Kölnat the home of banker Kurt von Schröder. After that the
National Socialist Party came to power. As a result, the financial and economic ties of
Germany with Anglo-Saxons elevated to a higher level.
Hitler immediately made an announcement that he refused to pay postwar reparations. It put
into doubt the ability of England and France to pay off WWI debts to the United States.
Washington did not object to the Hitler's announcement. In May 1933 Hjalmar Schacht paid
another visit to the United States. There he met with President Franklin Roosevelt and big
bankers to reach a $1 billion credit deal.In June the same year Hjalmar Schacht visited London
to hold talks with Montagu Norman. It all went down smoothly. The British agreed to grant a $2
billion loan. The British offered no objections related to the Germany's decision to suspend
debt payments.
Some historians say the American and British bankers were pliant because by 1932 the Soviet
Union had fulfilled the 5-year economic development plan to make it achieve new heights as an
industrial power. A few thousand enterprises were built, especially in the sector of heavy
industry. The dependence of USSR on import of engineering production has greatly dwindled. The
chances to strangle the Soviet Union economically were practically reduced to zero. They
decided to rely on war and launched the runaway militarization of Germany.
It was easy for Germany to get American credits. By and large, Hitler came to power in his
country at the same time as Franklin Roosevelt took office in the United States. The very same
bankers who supported Hitler in 1931 supported Roosevelt at the presidential election. The
newly elect President could not but endorse large credits to Germany. By the way, many noticed
that there was a big similarity between the Roosevelt's "New Deal Policy" and the economic
policy of the German Third Reich. No wonder. The very same people worked out and consulted the
both governments at the time. They mainly represented US financial circles.
The Roosevelt's New Deal soon started to stumble on the way. In 1937 America plunged into
the quagmire of economic crisis. In 1939 the US economy operated at 33% of its industrial
capacity (it was 19% in the heat of the 1929-1933 crisis).
Rexford G. Tugwell, an economist who became part of Franklin Roosevelt's first "Brain, a
group of Columbia University academics who helped develop policy recommendations leading up to
Roosevelt's New Deal,wrote that in 1939 the government failed to reach any success.There was
an open seatill the day Hitler invaded Poland.Only the mighty wind of war could dissipate the
fog. Any other measures Roosevelt could take were doomed to failure. [1]
Only the world war could save the US capitalism. In 1939 the money owners used all leverage at
their disposal to put pressure of Hitler and make him unleash a big war in the east.
***
The Bank of International Settlements (BIS) played an important role during the Second
World War. It was created as an outpost of American interests in Europe and a link between
Anglo-American and German businesses, a kind of offshore zone for cosmopolitan capital
providing a shelter from political processes, wars, sanctions and other things. The Bank was
created as a public commercial entity, it's immunity from government interference and such
things as taxes collection was guaranteed by international agreement signed in the Hague in
1930.
The bankers of Federal Reserve Bank of New York, who were close to the Morgans, Montagu
Norman, the Governor of the Bank of England, German financiers: Hjalmar Schacht (President of
the Reichsbank and Minister of Economics in the Hitler's government), Walther Funk (who later
replaced Hjalmar Schacht as President of the Reichsbank) and EmilPuhl – all of them played an
important role in the efforts to establish the Bank. The central banks of Great Britain,
France, Italy, Germany, Belgium and some private banks were among the founders. The Federal
Bank of New York did its best to establish the BIS, but it was not listed as a founder. The US
was represented by the private First National Bank of New York, J.P. Morgan and Company, the
First National Bank of Chicago – all parts of the Morgan's empire. Japan was also represented
by private banks. In 1931-1932 19 European central banks joined the Bank of International
Settlements. Gates W. McGarrah, a banker of Rockefeller's clan, was the first BIS chairman of
the board. He was replaced by Leon Fraser, who represented the clan of Morgans. US citizen
Thomas H. McKittrick was President of the Bankduring the war years.
A lot has already been written about the BIS activities serving the interests of Third
Reich. The Bank was involved in deals with different countries, including those Germany was at
war with. Ever since Pearl Harbor the Bank of International Settlements has been a
correspondent bank for the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. It was under Nazi control during
the war years, no matter American Thomas Huntington McKittrick was the Bank's President.
Soldiers were dying on the battlefields while the leadership of BIS held meetings in Basel
with the bankers of Germany, Japan, Italy, Belgium, Great Britain and the United States.
There, in the Swiss offshore zone, it was all peaceful, the representatives of belligerents
quietly worked in the atmosphere of mutual understanding.
Switzerland became the place where gold seized by Germany in different corners of Europe
was transported to for storage. In the March of 1938, when Hitler captured Vienna, part of
Austrian gold was transferred to BIS vaults. The same thing happened with the gold of Czech
National Bank (48 million USD). As the war started, the flows of gold poured into the Bank of
International Settlements. Germany got it from concentration camps and as a result of
plundering the wealth of occupied countries (including whatever belonged to civilians: jewels,
gold crowns, cigarette cases, utensils…). It was called the Nazi Gold. The metal was processed
into ingots to be stored in the Bank of International Settlements, Switzerland, or outside
Europe. Charles Higham in his Trading With The Enemy: An Expose of The Nazi-American Money
Plot 1933-1949 wrote that during the war Nazi transferred $378 million into the accounts
of Bank of International Settlements.
A few words about the Czech gold. The details surfaced when after the Bank of England's
archives were declassified in 2012. [2]
In the March of 1939 Germany captured Prague. Nazi demanded $48 million of national gold
reserves. They were told that the sum had already been transferred to the Bank of
International Settlements. Later it became known that the gold was transferred from Basel to
the vaults of Bank of England. Upon the command from Berlin the gold was transferred to the
ReichsbankBIS account. Then the Bank of England was involved in transactions done upon the
orders of Reichsbank given to the Bank of International settlements. The commands were
retransmitted to London. There was collusion between German Reichsbank, the Bank of
International Settlements and the Bank of England. In 1939 a scandal broke out in Great
Britain because the Bank of England executed the transactions with Czech gold upon the
commands coming from Berlin and Basel, not the Czech government. For instance, in the June of
1939, three months before the war between Great Britain and Germany started, the Bank of
England helped Germans to get into their accounts the amount of gold equal to 440 thousand
pounds sterling and transfer some gold to New York (Germany was sure that in case of German
intervention into Poland the United States would not declare war).
The illegal transactions with Czech gold were implemented with tacit approval of the
government of Great Britain which was aware of what was going on. Prime Minister Neville
Chamberlain, Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir John Simon and other top officials did their best
to hide the truth, including outright lies (the gold was returned to the lawful owner or had
never been transferred to Reichsbank). The recently declassified materials of Bank of England
reveal the truth and show that the government officials lied to cover up themselves and the
activities of the Bank of England and the Bank of International Settlements. It was easy to
coordinate the joint criminal activities because Montagu Norman, the head of Bank of England,
served as the chairman of the board of Bank of International Settlements. He never made secret
of his sympathy for fascists.
The Bretton Woods Conference, formally known as the United Nations Monetary and Financial
Conference, was the gathering of 730 delegates from all 44 allied nations at the Mount
Washington Hotel situated in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, the United States, to regulate the
international monetary and financial order after the conclusion of World War II. The
conference was held from 1 to 22 July 1944. All of a sudden the issue of the Bank of
International Settlements hit the agenda. It was reported that the bank collaborated with
fascist Germany. Leaving many details aside, I'd only mention that with great difficulty (some
US delegates opposed the motion) the delegates reached an agreement to close the BIS. The
decision of international conference has never been enacted. All the discreditable information
related to the BIS wartime activities was classified. Today it helps to falsify the history of
the Second World War.
Finally, a few words about Hjalmar Schacht (1877-1970) who served as President of the
Reichsbank and Minister of Economics in the fascist Germany's government. He was a key figure
controlling the economic machine of Third Reich, an extraordinary and
plenipotentiaryambassador representing Anglo-American capital in Germany. In 1945 Schacht was
tried at Nuremberg to be acquitted on October 1, 1946. He got away with murder. The same way
it happened to Hitler. For some unexplained reasons he was not in the 1945 leading wartime
criminals list. More to it, Schacht returned to his profession like if nothing happened and
founded Schacht GmbH in Düsseldorf. This detail may go unnoticed, though it serves as another
testimony to the fact that Anglo-American "money owners" and their plenipotentiary
representatives in Germany prepared and, to some extent, influenced the outcome of the Second
World War. The "money owners" want to rewrite the history of the war and change its results.
Source : "Anglo-American Money Owners Organized World War II", by Valentin
Katasonov, Strategic Culture Foundation (Russia), Voltaire Network, 7 May 2015,
www.voltairenet.org/article187508.html
Valentin
Katasonov
Professor, Department of Moscow State Institute of International Finance, doctor of economic
sciences, corresponding member of the Academy of Economics and Commerce. He was consultant of the
United Nations (1991-1993), member of the Advisory Council to the President of the European Bank
for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) (1993-1996), head of the Department of international
monetary relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Russia (2001-11).
Now we have new forces that push the world to the war much like in 30th of XX century. One of the key problem of modern world is
the USA elite attempt to maintain world hegemony. The post WWII security architecture was dismantled by the USA and its allies and after
the collapse of the USSR. Instead the regime of unconditional domination of the USA was put in place by Clinton's government. This switch
was signified by the attack on Serbia and treatment of Russia (as well as other xUSSR countries) after the dissolution of the USSR.
Russia as all other xUSSR countries were mercilessly economically raped, which provided to the USA (and EU) another 10 years of economic
expansion and only in 2001 crisis hit again. And it never ended with the second wave of the same crisis coming in 2008 and the third
wave being in the wings right now (whether it'll materialize in 2016 or 20120 is an open question). With the current level of world
debt and, especially, the USA debt the situation changed, Also the USA economy is smaller in comparison with other world economies then
ever before (Germany and Japan economies fully recovered from WWII, and China became a new world economic power). This create a drive
against the US hegemony and "dollar regime" (with EU and euro as one such development). Recent US adventures in Iraq, Libya and Syria
were met with understandable resistance which due to decline of the US manufacturing base threatens the current US domination in world
affairs. Only in Ukraine they managed to secure a victory by using nationalists as a Trojan horse for establishing full hegemony over
the country (but at the expense of partitioning the country). Due to those threats and instability of world financial system "audacious
oligarchy" that rules the USA is becoming more and more reckless. Neocons continue dominate the State Department and we have a chance
of neocon becoming the next US president (not the Clinton., Bush II or Obama were substantially different in this respect). Which provoked
rearmament of Russia and armament of China making the world again more dangerous. Putin took a "independence" stand (may be prematurely,
failing to wait for the time when Russia would be ready, forced by the events in Ukraine) which now greatly complicates US geopolitical
position and expantion of its neoliberal empire (which come to the screeching end in any case because the Earth is a finite size) .
Troubles with cheap oil availability ("plato oil" or "end of cheap oil") were just the straw that broke the camel back. And without
continues expansion of markets neoliberalism enters deep crisis. Understandably no love left between the US elite and Russia and Ukraine
was only a pretext to put Russia "in place". The USA and EU desperately need to acquire the control over Russian energy sector, but
with Putin in power this is not possible.
.
All is fine in Guardian Russian-Ukrainian forums. Alpamysh, GreatMountainEagle, jezzam, Botswana61, Metronome151 and company
perform their usual roles. We have some newcomers such as some1here
An apologist is not necessarily a supporter. The bottom line is, you're repeating the exact things Hitler's propaganda used
to justify the invasion of the USSR which were contradicted both later, in the way the Nazis behaved on occupied territories,
and earlier in Mein Kampf where Hitler had laid out quite bluntly the Lebensraum argument for colonising Russia and Ukraine.
Aneesia 10 May 2015 10:36
The behavior of the West was childish in this matter. They are looking for a fight to keep their economies growing...and will
do all they can to provoke one.....like the spoiled brat in a sandbox. Russia was by far the most mature.
Abiesalba -> Carly435 10 May 2015 10:33
And what percentage of Western Europeans are neo-fascists, in your opinion?
If you define Nazi-fascist ideology for what it really is, namely 'us against them' and 'superior' vs 'inferior' nations,
then I think at least 10% of the population, if not more.
It is now acceptable for parties with such ideologies to even run in elections, e.g. Wilders, Le Pen, Farage etc., and they
get rather high support.
This dangerous 'us and them' ideology has different forms and undertones with respect to the local context. For example, here
is Slovenia I would count among such divisive and potentially very dangerous parties the party which won 20% in our 2014 elections
(their main target for discrimination are the 'Southerners' = immigrants from other Yugoslav nations).
I think it is very dangerous that Europe is largely turning a blind eye. They also did not confront neither Hitler, nor Mussolini,
and more recently nor Milošević until it was too late.
Freedom of speech is not unlimited; it is limited by the rights of others. The right of individuals and groups to human dignity
and to not be discriminated against on any grounds has a priority over the right to freedom of expression. In other words, hate
speech should be unacceptable, yet parties with hate ideologies are making it to European national parliaments and to the EU parliament.
Very worrying.
I suppose that Slovenes are very sensitive to such developments. We have been oppressed by the Austrians/Germans for more than
a thousand years. After WWI, Slovenes in Italy were the first nation in Europe to experience the Nazi-fascist terror, so Slovene
writers and poets had very early premonitions of a new, even more sinister war coming (which indeed happened - WWII). See for
example Srečko Kosovel's poem Ecstasy of Death about the death of western Europe in a sea of scorching blood. Kosovel published
this poem in 1925, when he was 21 (and this was 15 years before WWII, and before Hitler rose to power).
Kosovel died at the age of 21, but he was a true European visionary. He stood for Europe of peace and brotherhood of nations.
I suspect he would be horrified by the recent developments in Europe if he were alive today. Maybe he would write the Ecstasy
of Death all over again.
Vladimir Makarenko -> alpamysh 10 May 2015 10:28
this is what is called "black agitprop" or in a lay man talk - lies.
Vladimir Makarenko -> Metronome151 10 May 2015 10:27
Since when you started to be heartbroken about Russian interests?
CoastalBrake1 -> Abiesalba 10 May 2015 10:24
"With all due respect to the US, the US role is not even remotely comparable to the sacrifice in the Soviet Union. The Red
Army was by far the decisive power in defeating Nazi Germany" No shlt, because the Red Army had no other choice under the thumb
of one of the most vicious and ignorant military leaders in history.
Yes, Russia clearly paid the biggest price for victory, but many of The Red Army casualties were simply a result of their own
military strategies and the fact they had way more troops in the first place compared to other allied powers.
freedomcry -> Carly435 10 May 2015 10:23
Russians are loath to reflect too deeply on the meanings of that war.
That is one big filthy lie. I can see how a certain amount of intelligence went into its making: the fact that the Russian
predicament during the war was more about survival than almost anyone else's, creates the possibility that the war impressed itself
as something that's more about defeating the invader than understanding what had made them into what they were. And once you have
that possibility, you go ahead and just blurt out the claim - it being the nature of ubiquitous Russophobia that any judgement
of the Russians automatically rings true.
But seriously, it's so completely false, so diametrically the opposite of how we actually see the war that I'm reeling a little.
And I thought I'd heard every insult of Russians out there, from the crudest to the most intricate.
Vladimir Makarenko -> GreatMountainEagle 10 May 2015 10:22
Hm all complaints please to greedy sharks which draw the Versaille treaty. As those with brains can see the WWII started the
moment it was signed.
Metronome151 -> Popeyes 10 May 2015 10:22
Indeed it is a win win situation for China at Russia's expense.
Botswana61 -> BeatonTheDonis 10 May 2015 10:21
[stalin]"took the Soviet Union from a devastated agrarian economy to an industrial power that defeated Nazi Germany and
was able to compete with the USA and Western Europe."
Soviet Union has never been able to compete economically, industrially with the Western Europe, let alone the U$A.
It collapsed not only because it had an insane political system, but also because it had a lunatic economic system which could
not produce any quality products (especially consumer goods) for its populace.
Btw. Putinesque Russia still cannot.
[have you seen any Russian 4G cell phones, laptops, tablets, supercomputers, video cameras, HDTV large screens, modern-wide-body
passenger planes or even attractive passenger cars sold anywhere in the world?]
alpamysh -> FraidyMan 10 May 2015 10:18
I think that Merkel's actions, as usual, have been the best.
Boycotting the military parade sends a clear message.
And a German chancellor honouring fallen Russians the next day sends one just as powerful...
Popeyes 10 May 2015 10:17
I hope the Russia/China agreements and the pacts they have made between themselves work out and just maybe the U.S. will climb
back into its box. The alliance between Russia/China is Washington's worst nightmare. Russia with the world's largest land mass,
richest natural resources and it would seem the most advanced technology together with China who has the world's largest population,
and the largest producer and exporter of manufactured goods.
bailliegillies ID5868758 10 May 2015 10:15
We haven't and are fully aware of its consequences. Chamberlain's problem was that Britain was not yet ready to face the might
of an emerging Germany. Home Chain was nowhere near ready, nor was Fighter Command, it had plenty of Hurricanes but the Spitfire
squadrons were still being formed as was the integrated defence system that the RAF relied on in 1940. Chamberlain and others
in government knew that when the war came the main threat that Britain was going to face was from the air. Chamberlain bought
the country the time needed to prepare. All the same Munich is not something the country is proud off.
MyFriendWillPay -> sztubacki 10 May 2015 10:14
Murdering their own people when they should be killing other people?
Here is a more human ideal, currently practiced by "you know who"!
* Get agents provocateur to let off a few bombs to create civilian casualties.
* Pin the blame on people you want to get rid of.
* Apply to UN for no-fly zone to protect the civilians.
* Bomb the shit out of anything that moves anywhere in the country.
* Fly in local exiles from US with geologists and lawyers to secure mineral rights
* Conclude regime change
* Escape ensuing chaos to plan next regime change.
* Have your President nominated for Nobel Peace Prize!
Botswana61 -> ijustwant2say 10 May 2015 10:14
One huge difference between UK and RF.
UK has reconciled itself to the loss of the (huge) British Empire after WWII;
never looked back, but moved forward, today being more successul economically than many other EU member states.
[Modern Turkey has also reconciled itself to the loss of its huge Ottoman Empire]
But Russia has not. It still dwells in the past, relieves its past 'glories' and yearns for return of times when everybody
feared it.
While still unable to transform itself into a modern, democratic, prosperous country which could have a meaningful, successful
future.
Vladimir Makarenko -> dyst1111 10 May 2015 10:12
Hm, what is then the point of NATO expansion in the time when Russia was making drastic reduction in its weapons and army size?
Ukraine coup d'etat? Or should it be called what it is - a highway robbery of Russia's most important trade market?
Well, Russians successfully made it a EU disaster.
As to new generations of weapons - Russians do feel better, they know that for sure Western Europe or whoever will not repeat
the 1941 mistake.
kraljevic -> MiltonWiltmellow 10 May 2015 10:10
The Russian power elites are no more pernicious than the American ones. The supposed anti-red, anti-commie Republicans are
now the most vocal defenders of Big Commie himself Lenin's perverse internal borders. Lenin arrived at those borders not through
democratic legitimacy but through the "blood" of millions of Russian patriots who wanted to preserve the unity of their nation
and fought against his monstrous tyranny.
Although supposedly ideological enemies the likes of Breedlove and McCain on one side and Lenin and Trotsky on the other are
in perfect harmony when it comes to rigging borders so that the Russian people come away with as little as possible and become
the big losers!
The sudden devotion of the American right wing establishment to Lenin's "unitary" Ukraine is motivated purely by the anti-Russian
nature of the new Government in Kiev and the damage and shelling and killing it can inflict on the pro-Russian population in the
east!
MyFriendWillPay -> MahsaKaerra 10 May 2015 10:07
"A series of UN mandates that Russia deemed so threatening that they either voted in favor of the military interventions or
didn't bother to express an opinion one way or the other. For all the US's military actions there have been zero Russian vetoes."
That's because the Yanks are so disingenuous;
* Get agents provocateur to let off a few bombs to create civilian casualties.
* Pin the blame on people you want to get rid of.
* Apply to UN for no-fly zone to protect the civilians.
* Bomb the shit out of anything that moves anywhere in the country.
* Fly in local exiles from US with geologists and lawyers to secure mineral rights
* Conclude regime change
* Escape ensuing chaos to plan next regime change.
* Have your President nominated for Nobel Peace Prize!
Abiesalba -> sztubacki 10 May 2015 10:04
It was estimated about half a million of American soldiers casualties to conquer Japan.
The Soviet Union lost about 10 million soldiers and 15 million civilians.
About 1.6 million German soldiers were killed in WWII, of which 1.1 million in the Eastern (Soviet) front. So out of 10 dead
German soldiers, 7 died fighting the Red Army.
In Europe, 9 in 10 Jews were killed.
In Poland, 1 in 5 people were killed, many civilians.
In my country Slovenia, 1 in 10 were killed, many civilians. And about 10% is among the highest national death rates in WWII.
With all due respect to the US, the US role is not even remotely comparable to the sacrifice in the Soviet Union. The Red Army
was by far the decisive power in defeating Nazi Germany.
And it is highly hypocritical and disrespectful that the 'west' ignored the celebration of the end of WWII in Europe in Moscow.
Was perhaps the role of the US and the UK in WWII ignored by everybody due to the recent illegal and catastrophic US/UK Iraq
invasion? I thought not. There were also no sanctions etc.
Carly435 -> Nat1978 10 May 2015 10:03
Though I'm not a fan of what-aboutism, the horrific scale of German war crimes against Russian POWs has never gained the attention
it deserves in the West.
BeatonTheDonis -> alpamysh 10 May 2015 10:00
Luckily for them he is back "on brand" with his latest book, about two-thirds of which is devoted to the Eastern Front, which
Beevor believes redresses the balance of previous histories of the Second World War. "Ninety per cent of all Wehrmacht losses
were on the Eastern Front. As far as the Germans were concerned, we were a sideshow. But each country sees the war from its own
perspective and memories."
Unfortunately the West (i.e., the America and its key European allies) refuse to recognise the realities as far as the Russians
are concerned. it was understood - blatantly - that Russia did not want countries on its doorstep, including Ukraine, made members
of NATO. Yet the West and Ukraine itself persist.
As for WWII. It is callous for the everyman Russian to hear that the country's then leaders - by initially siding with the
Nazis and also annihilating their own people - were accountable for so many of the losses they suffered. But regardless of any
and all of this, the West should have attended this commemoration in full force. Sanctions, snubbings and petty political manoeuvring
is not the way to move forward. The West screwed up royally with Ukraine (and Crimea) and should accept and amend the fact that
it is an insensitive behemoth guilty of the utmost arrogance and pushing for the 'unipolar world' suggested by Mr. Putin.
The only thing that will change this is Russia (and other nations) pushing back. Indeed, with the likes of Russia and China
establishing relations with South America, it will only be a matter of time that America might find itself the the 'enemy' at
its doorsteps.
sodtheproles -> Vijay Raghavan 10 May 2015 09:47
How dare you!? How dare you dishonour and disfigure the memory of British and American exploitation of colonised peoples, and,
above all, on a day like this!? Don't you realise how lucky they were to be given the chance of dying for democracy, a chance
which was simply not open to them in their home countries!? How the very dare you, Mr Raghavan!?
Eugene Weixel -> Roguing 10 May 2015 09:51
Had Neville Chamberlain and company not given Czechoslovakia to Hitler and nudged him eastward there would have been no pact
between the USSR and Hitler. This pact was a response to the Dr facto Hitler Chamberlain accord.
kraljevic -> dyst1111 10 May 2015 09:50
Since the majority of the Balkan peoples are eagerly allowing their territories to be used as forward bases for NATO and American
attempts to contain and encircle Russia I wouldn't have wasted a single Russian bullet freeing them from Nazi rule! Many of them
schemed with Hitler and took part in the invasion of the Soviet Union with great enthusiasm!They are definitely no angels and
since most of them were hostile to the Russian presence and the Americans wouldn't have been in any great hurry to free them if
it meant costing them lives there was little reason for the Russians to come to their rescue!
MyFriendWillPay -> Rudeboy1 10 May 2015 09:43
If you unscrambled your comment, it would be more readable but just as wrong.
When the Nazis launched Operation Barbarossa against the Soviet Union (SU) on 22 June 1941, three million German soldiers and
almost 700,000 allies of Nazi Germany crossed the border, and their equipment consisted of 600,000 motor vehicles, 3,648 tanks,
more than 2.700 planes, and just over 7,000 pieces of artillery.[
The Nazis expected their blitzkrieg to bring total collapse of the SU within two months, and British Intelligence assessed
the timescale as 8 - 10 weeks.
However, events unfoulded rather differently as, within the first 3 4 weeks of the campaign, Admiral Canaris, head of German
Military Intelligence, confided to a German general on the easter front, that everything about the campaign now looked "black".
Even Goebells at that time wrote entries in his diary about how bad German progress was in the first month.
By mid October 1941 - six weeks after the scheduled Nazi victory over the SU - various agencies, from the Swiss Secret Service
to the Vatican, predicted that the Nazis would lose the war.
By the start of December 1941, when the Germans ground to a halt just 20 miles from the Kremlin - exhausted, frozen and with
over-extended supply lines - the Soviets prepared to strike. Their offensive began on 5 December and it pushed the Nazis back
60 - 170 miles, whereupon Hitler postponed the assault on Moscow until Spring 1942. Significantly, the success of this Soviet
offensive prompted the German Armaments Minister to suggest to Hitler that a negotiated peace might be sought. Hitler was not
prepared to negotiate, although his inner circle and Hitler himself, evidently realized that the war was lost.
The Nazis fought on, hoping to seize the oilfields in the southeast, but this dream ended with the surrender of their army
at Stalingrad in early 1942 and the long retreat to Berlin. During the retreat, a new dream emerged as the Nazis hoped to make
peace with the western allies, and then turn their combined forceas against the Soviets. However, that was not to be, and the
war ended in berlin on 9 May 1945.
In summary, the Soviets were always going to win this war after Operation Barbarossa failed to crush them during the Summer
of 1941. The Nazis had failed to seize Soviet materiel - from food to oil - and, unlike the Soviets, they were not able to go
on replacing casualties with high quality manpower. Also, importantly, the Soviets were not merely fighting for freedom as their
western allies were doing, they were fighting for their very survival as a people, hence their monumental sacrifices.
The die for the outcome of this war was cast before the first shipments of material support to the Soviets, welcome as they
were, and almost three years before the Normandy landings. But the cost to the SU was enormous: vast destruction of infrastructure,
and the loss of fighters and civilians killed at 30 times higher than the combined losses of the British Empire and the United
States!
That is why the western WW2 allies' boycott of the Memorial Parade was churlish.
Eugene Weixel -> Abiesalba 10 May 2015 09:43
UZ troops had their way with destitute women in Germany and Italy the price of a candy bar for years.
Abiesalba -> Carly435 10 May 2015 09:40
Russians and Russian history textbooks gloss over what was at stake in WWII. For them, it's all about defeating an enemy
Americans and Britons completely fail to understand the difference between having the territory of your own nation occupied
and sending soldiers and/or planes to fight in another country.
Having the enemy on your doorstep in terrible. And having Nazi-fascists on your doorstep was much worse in Slavic countries
than in the occupied western European nations, becuase Hitler, Mussolini and allies waged ethnic cleansing of 'inferior' Slavs.
On the other hand, the Aryan people of the occupied western Europe were spared this horror.
I am from Slovenia, which was brutally occupied in WWII by Germany, Italy and Hungary. For two decades before WWII, Italian
fascists pursued ethnic cleansing in western Slovene territory. This ethnic cleansing only intensified in WWII.
For Slovenes, WWII meant having to choose between fear and courage every day.
We had a very strong resistance movement, including the guarilla partisan fighters.
But members of the resistance knew how brutal the revenge of the occupiers against their families and Slovenes can be. When
the father joined the partisans, the mother and the children had to go underground. The occupiers frequently shout 10 civilian
hostages for every of their soldiers killed by the resistance. They burnt down whole villages on suspicion that they support the
partisans. Oh, and the use of the Slovene language was prohibited. And Slovenes were tortured, sent to concentration camps etc.
In fact, our strong resistance drove the occupiers crazy. Italians encircled the capital of Slovenia, Ljublana, with 35 km
of barbed wire and bunkers, hoping that they will defeat the resistance. In essence, they converted Ljubljana to the largest concentration
camp in Europe. But people still strongly fought back, including the increasingly strong partisan units.
The people of the Soviet Union faced a similar dilemma. They fought incredibly heroically for every inch of their homeland.
In fact, they largely defeated Nazi Germany themselves. The Eastern Front was the largest military combat in history.
And while the people of the Soviet Union, Slovenia and other occupied nations fought for their very existence, it seems to
me, with all due respect, that the resistance in the occupied western countries was very weak, and often their regimes in effect
sided with Germany.
Now, what would you do if you had the enemy on your doorstep? Would you chose fear or courage?
It is a tough personal choice and a tough decision for a nation. But under such circumstances, the true spirit of the nation
shines through.
freedomcry -> lizgiag 10 May 2015 09:39
The anti-Russian feelings you encounter are really the product of decades of anti-Soviet propaganda.
It's much older than that, I'm afraid. Anti-Soviet propaganda was a continuation of an already well-established prejudice
against Russians. And the sad thing is, notwithstanding the West's present obsession with fighting stereotypes and hate speech,
many a Westerner nowadays would read Rudyard Kipling's ridiculous The Man Who Was and find it entirely convincing because those
are the exact same cardboard Russians with horns and tails that their media and Hollywood keep showing them.
Laudig 10 May 2015 09:38
Compare the situation in the Crimea and the situation in Hawaii. The vote was held promptly in Crimea. 3 or 4 generations later
in Hawaii. The USG has no moral standing to complain. It is an empire that needs to collapse so the country can exist.
Vijay Raghavan 10 May 2015 09:38
I think the President of Russia & President of China being very powerful should ask the exceptional president of America to
pay pension dues for war veterans of second world war.They should take this matter up in security council & discuss this promptly.If
the British & Americans claim that their values are exceptional then how come they have not paid the pensions for millions of
war veterans for 70 years.
I think the exceptional president should ask his federal printing press to print a little more dollars & send it to all countries
who have been paying pensions on their behalf.
BBC can do like this instead of wasting their time on silly documentaries they should produce documentaries on their war veterans
& ask the moral question are they responsible for paying war veterans pensions or not.
lizgiag -> MiltonWiltmellow 10 May 2015 09:37
Great rant! But if you take a look at any country's history you will find the same - Britain, Spain, France, Germany - bloody
wars instigated everywhere all for the glory of empire & resources.
Now its the turn of the EU & USA - these empires are re-branded, they no longer call themselves empires, but the outcome is
the same - a geo-political land & resource grab!
Be in NO DOUBT the populace comes way down on the list of concerns - look at what is happening the world over, the middle east
is in a mess because of the involvement of the West recently but also for decades past.
Do not be fooled, the New American Century is upon us...google it!
freedomcry -> Botswana61 10 May 2015 09:25
And it probably originates with Nazi propaganda about the advancing barbarous subhuman Russian hordes.
This is not to be taken as a denial that the Red Army committed any rapes at all. Rather, I'm pointing to the fact that mass
rapes are just the sort of thing that specifically Russian soldiers were likely to be accused of, whether they did it or not.
And the core of that prejudice still survives more or less intact.
Vijay Raghavan -> GreatMountainEagle 10 May 2015 09:16
Those who fought for the British only got a middle finger.BBC has been so callous it does not even put in a word to British
government to reimburse pension for those who fought for them.....that has been their attitude.
The total number of people for whom the British government has not paid pension is 1.5MM people for their 2nd world war.Indian
governemnt had to pay their pensions & they have been paying with all courts saying it is India's responsibility.The cost per
year would be 1.Billion for 60 years we had paid 60Billion dollars that is just your world war 2....add another 30 Billion for
your world war 1.I think the Guardian and BBC should write a article about that and ensure British Government promptly repays
back 100Billion dollars to India.If we add up Nepal that will also be huge claim on British government.
We can do a deal like this you can pay 50% for our schools & another 50% for the roads & hospitals.or May be you can give a
interest free loan to Nepal for 100 billion against pension amount payable to India as they need that money badly for fixing their
country after earth quake.
Standupwoman -> MentalToo 10 May 2015 09:15
'Rapes committed by western allies ground troops against German civilians are not, for the very good reason nothing like
that happened.'
That is not true. There is considerable evidence to suggest the majority of rapes were committed by the Red Army (whose own
civilian population had suffered in a way ours never had) but the other Allies were guilty of a lot of it too - one estimate quoting
a figure of 11,040 for the Americans alone. Don't forget the Australian journalist who accompanied the American army and claimed:
I know for a fact that many women were raped by white Americans. No action was taken against the culprits. In one sector
a report went round that a certain very distinguished army commander made the wisecrack, 'Copulation without conversation does
not constitute fraternisation'.
Rape is always wrong, and even if the Red Army had considerably more provocation than we did, that still doesn't excuse them.
But neither does it give us the right to lie about them, or about our own share in the atrocities. Can't we at least show some
integrity about that?
BeatonTheDonis -> ijustwant2say 10 May 2015 09:14
The history on Churchill's role in the Bengal Famine and Allied torture and murder of German and Japanese POWs is quite
recent, so you must be pretty young if you covered it at school.
You haven't provided any evidence for Putin's revisionism affecting Russian schools. From what Putin has said, it seems he
acknowledges Stalin's crimes but places them in the context of the challenges Stalin faced and he compares Stalin to other historical
figures whose crimes against humanity haven't seen them completely written off as monsters - Oliver Cromwell, for example.
Stalin was a murderer who terrified his populace into submission. But he was also in power for 30 years and took the Soviet
Union from a devastated agrarian economy to an industrial power that defeated Nazi Germany and was able to compete with the USA
and Western Europe. Life expectancy in the USSR when he died had increased to 63 for men and 69 for women.
After the fall of the USSR, life expectancy for men fell to under 60 - that is the context which sees Putin lauded by many
Russians.
Tattyana -> Carly435 10 May 2015 09:13
It is easy. We can not find any single point your ideology is ever better.
You insist our media keep to lie? You think so because YOUR media told you so? I can read both - yours and ours. I can
read Ukrainian as well. And I can compare. Can you?
I can continue, but unlike you I do aware, there are some bad pages in history of every country or people. And I never
start to talk with any of Germany people from the point "Do you remember that Hitler killed millions of Russians?"
Though here is much more truth than in your points which should blow hatred to Russians.
Abiesalba -> Barkywoof 10 May 2015 09:10
Was nothing learned from that awful war ?
Unfortunatelly, not much. Except that it is now not politically correct in western Europe to specifically target the Jews.
However, it is very popular to specifically target the horrible 'Eastern and Central European' immigrants. The term 'Eastern
and Central European' immigrants predominantly means the Slavs.
According to the Nazi ideology, Slavs were at the very bottom of the race hierarchy, below the Jews. And oppression of 'inferior'
Slavs by the 'Aryan' race has more than a thousand years of history. Hitler planned a genocide of Slaves, and the Nazis killed
many millions of Slavs due to their 'inferior' ethnicity.
I find it very disturbing that in the 21st century in nations which Hilter declared to be the Aryan superior race, targeting
the Slavs is acceptable. Take Wilders in the Netherlands or Farage in the UK, or neo-Nazis in Austria and neo-fascists in Italy,
etc.
moongibbon Carly435 10 May 2015 09:09
This is the spectacle presented in the Western media and it's not representative of Russians at all, for whom today is about
remembering those who died in WWII to save their country from destruction.
Lafcadio1944 10 May 2015 09:08
The Guardian's "coverage" of Russia is pathetic. Anyone could have written this article far from Moscow by just watching
TV. It is really disgraceful propagandist "reporting" just throw up some insult and scary warning about evil Putin/Russia and
go home - well done.
There are huge - some even positive - things going on in Russia, China and India which count for a huge % of the global population
and China is the 2nd largest economy and has launched one of the biggest global trade initiatives of modern times yet not a word
about it.
The Guardian just regurgitates propaganda about these nations written by the CIA or US State Department it has no reporters
in these places and just ignores any positive developments. Thu leaving its readers fearful of the "mysterious" East - purposely.
Dimmus -> Isanybodyouthere 10 May 2015 09:06
"like claims to Russian speaking populations being endangered " - everything depends on the point of view of course. Even when
pro-Russian people in Ukraine were burned alive they were not endangered from the point of view of anti-Russian nationalists.
When many russian journalists were killed in Ukraine - it is not much mentioned, it is not interesting.
When one US journalist killed somewhere - country is bombed and all the media for long time are full of discussions and moaning.
When pro-Russian people (Ossetians) in Georgia were bombed by heavy artillery by order of Georgian president it was not endangering
of those people because the president was a US-friendly president.
And there are many more examples of western nationalizm. Just believe, that there are many people around the world who are
really feel endangered by nationalists, including western nationalism.
Eugene Weixel -> raffine 10 May 2015 09:06
Had the West not awarded Czechoslovakia to Hitler and nudged him eastward three never would have been that pact, and many fewer
on all sides would have suffered and died.
teurin_hgada -> GreatMountainEagle 10 May 2015 09:05
Rotenberg is jew. TimchenKO is ukrainian. Those evil nazi russians!!
teurin_hgada -> Metronome151 10 May 2015 09:03
Poland invaded Russia somedays before that. That was revenge. 'Who will come with us with a sword will dye from a sword' very
old russian proverb. Chingiskhan, Napoleon, and Hitler knew that. Obobo still dont know
kraljevic -> sztubacki 10 May 2015 09:02
Facts speak for themselves Russia emerged the victor in WW2 but its an irony that if anyone sticks up for the Russians they
are accused of being a fascist!Many eastern European nations especially western leaning ones look down on Russians as oriental
savages and there's no doubt many of them hated their Russian liberators more than they did the Germans even though the latter
treated them like scum! That's why the Russians should have stopped when they liberated their own territories and let the Eastern
Europeans stew in their in their own juices and liberate themselves.Why should a Russian mother lose her precious son to free
a Pole or Czech or Hungarian who hates him with a passion and would stab him in the back first chance he got!
freedomcry nobblehobble 10 May 2015 08:58
Like I said: Russian neo-Nazis exist. Your links tell a lot about the level of attention they get from Western media (who happily
follow the old trope of "take an issue that's hot in the West and make it look like it's much worse in Russia" - never fails to
sell well) than about the actual scale of the problem. Did you even know Tesak is in jail now? Or that Belov (if you even know
who that is) is under house arrest?
Do you know what phrase famously, and ridiculously, landed Konstantin Krylov a conviction for hate speech in 2013? Did you
know last year's Russian March was pro-Ukrainian? No? Then leave me alone.
No; apologise for the paid troll libel, then leave me alone.
Eugene Weixel -> bumcyk 10 May 2015 08:51
Russia is being demonized and confronted by the West as though it was the USSR. It is in Russia and some former Soviet republics
that the victory over Nazism is unambiguously seen as something positive.
Barkywoof 10 May 2015 08:58
There are a bunch of psychos always at the ready on all sides if allowed to take the reins. The Russians did terrible things.
The Nazis did terrible things. Then the USA killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese women and children with a new and
horrifying weapon.
I don't think it's a case of 'We Are Good... They are Bad.'
Was nothing learned from that awful war ?
teurin_hgada -> Roguing 10 May 2015 08:58
Half of Europr and Japan were Hitler allies. Ask them. And USSR just signed pact of no attack with Hitler. It is not the same
that to be allies
sodtheproles -> Isanybodyouthere 10 May 2015 08:57
So what should be done when Russian speaking populations who see themselves as Russian are 'endangered', and that's 'endangered'
in the sense of raped, bludgeoned, shot, beaten and burnt to death 'endangered'
Eugene Weixel -> nonanon1 10 May 2015 08:56
Good enough reason as Putin underlines the fact that his name is not Manuel Noriega.
sodtheproles -> ID5868758 10 May 2015 08:53
It's Shaun of all credibility journalism
Eugene Weixel -> Koppen616 10 May 2015 08:53
A necessary show of force, determination and support by the world's largest nation's, and many others as well.
Vladimir Makarenko -> ChristineH 10 May 2015 08:51
Hm, "dinosaur era" is marked by destroying countries by choice and then walking away cursing "f*ck, it is again didn't work..."
Military parade commemorating staggering sacrifice is internal matter of Russia and for Russia, outsiders are welcome to
watch and think twice.
oAEONo -> Nolens 10 May 2015 08:50
What "well documented fact" are you talking about, can you please give me a link?
Books by Noam Chomsky would provide you with a huge amount of carefully documented facts. Some are even mentioned on this thread
alone. That you missed them up until now simply beggars belief. Makes me wonder if you are interested in facts at all.
SHappens 10 May 2015 08:50
"We have seen attempts to create a unipolar world, and we see how forced bloc thinking is becoming more common."
Because of the attitude of the United States, but also because of the cowardice of European leaders, this May 9, 2015 has
confirmed the division of the world in two. It symbolizes the opposition of an "old world", the Atlantic Basin and this new world
emerging around Asia, which constantly attracts to itself new countries.
During his speech in Munich in 2007, Putin talked about a multipolar world. Because even the most powerful and richest country
cannot alone ensure the stability of the world. The US project exceeds the US forces. But instead of listening, since this speech
there was an acceleration of the US demonization of Putin.
It is important to break this dynamic of the political blocs to return towards a dynamic of a multipolar world. Beyond the
shame and anger we feel for the attitude of the western leaders, beyond the disgust we feel for the insult not only to the Russian
people but also to Chinese and Indian people, as well as to all others who came to Moscow on 9 May, we must realize that by calculation
or cowardice, Western leaders, by abdicating their natural role, are helping to plunge the world towards a future of wars and
conflicts.
It is a mistake- as we know from Talleyrand - the policy mistakes are worse than crimes.
No country should be denied honour for genuinely heroic deeds, no matter what else it's done. As long as that country also
admits and is sorry for its crimes, then it is also worthy our respect. Unlike Ukraine under its current regime, Russia merits
Michael A -> sztubacki 10 May 2015 08:46
Thank you for sharing MIKHAIL SHISHKIN's honest, candid and insightful words. I share his morality. He is correct in his assumptions
and conclusions and he mirrors my felling about the hypocrisy that has shaped too much of my American lifetime.
The shame of the disintegration of relations between our two spheres is not the goals sought but the myopic way both sides
have gone about achieving them.
Unfortunately the old American saw that our children grow up with, "it matters not whether you win or lose, but how you play
the game", is almost inevitably and totally reversed in adulthood to, "it matters whether you win or lose, not how you played
the game". The idealism and honesty of youth is replaced with greed and shortsightedness as age creeps in.
I thank the Russian people for the horrible sacrifices they made on behalf of victory over fascism. I also thank my American,
British, French, etc, etc brothers and sisters for the their sacrifice. Sacrifice is to be commended not by degree but by intent.
Thank you all.
Goodthanx -> Metronome151 10 May 2015 08:42
The number of Poles who died due to Soviet repressions in the period 1939-1941 is estimated as at least 150,000
Ukrainian nationalists[edit]
Main article: Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia
Ukrainian nationalists organized massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia during which (according to Grzegorz Motyka)
approximately 80,000-100,000 Poles were killed.[5]
An OUN order from early 1944 stated: "Liquidate all Polish traces. Destroy all walls in the Catholic Church and other Polish
prayer houses. Destroy orchards and trees in the courtyards so that there will be no trace that someone lived there... Pay
attention to the fact that when something remains that is Polish, then the Poles will have pretensions to our land"
Its a sad reflection of today's selfish blinkered and short sighted world that the usual Russophobes and closet Nazis
are given so much space and airtime to spread their pernicious ideology which consists of almost exclusively denigrating everything
Russian.
Where are the thundering armies of the Tsar trampling the upstart Napoleon at Borodino?
Where are the Tsar's great Cossacks rousting quiet villages to pay the Tsar's new taxes during the Balybostock Pogram (1906)
while terrified Russians fled into the night, onto the steppes, into the ocean...
And, as I'm a bit of an ettymologitst, where did the term "pogram" actually originate.
Where are the murderers of the Tsar's family whose blood spattered the cellar of a small estate? Who was Pavel Medevedev?
There's one Russian truth. Not this glorious past upon which Putin attempts to rebuild a lost and imperious empire, but a series
of killings in the night of the Russian people by those waving saber and lance against defenseless people.
Exhortations like this this belong in the history books of Germany, Imperial Russia, and many of the religiously motivated
wars that has turned Europe's soil a deep, rich crimson from which has arisen -- like a virginal saint roused from slumber-- as
kingmakers and various petty tyrants lick their bloody wolf lips.
Nobility in war is about as common women and children left unmoslested by maurading troops.
Go badk to your Tolstoy ... or is it your pastiche writer Sholokov? ... to find your vanished glory, because there's little
glory in Russian History. It's mostly a history of endurance and suffering.
Says Kasparov:
Arguably the world's best chess player ever, Garry Kasparov is on a new mission. He hopes to convince the world that the
biggest threat to global unrest is not the Islamic State, al-Qaida or North Korea. Instead it is Vladimir Putin, Russia's president
from 2000 to 2008 and then again from 2012 to today. [http://news.yahoo.com/bianna-golodryga-interviews-garry-kasparov-093317385.html]
mrkhawaja1944 -> Roguing 10 May 2015 08:41
Ask the Russians they will give you better answer but I am not talking about invaders Russians or no Russians but do you know
any country invaded America I know of one and they are very good friends now but give you list of countries invaded and occupied
by America and Europe I do not think you can name any country in present days world not invaded by so called western powers.
But I was taking about Russian who died in millions defending the country not invading other countries.
Vladimir Makarenko -> Debreceni 10 May 2015 08:36
Let's make some sorting of apples from oranges: not "Ukrainians" but Western Ukrainians or how they called themselves "Galicians".
Galicia never was a part of Russia but divided between Hungary and Poland. Its pro independence movement made alliance with German
Nazis in the beginning of 30-ties.
When Nazis made a call for SS division "Galicia" more than 100,000 volunteered, 27,000 were admitted. Their training was in
first turn anti guerilla actions. Their fate was sealed during three days battle of Brody with regular experienced Soviet troops
which without particular difficulty eliminated this bunch wannabe warriors. The remnants (about 7,000) escaped and ended up in
Italy and after war across the pond, mostly to Canada. (Hence Canada attitude to Russia today).
This explains why there will be no peace between Donbass and Eastern Ukraine (which was a center of resistance then as it is
today) and pro Galician (today) Kiev.
itsanevolvething 10 May 2015 08:36
A serious lack of respect and error of judgment by scameron and other western nations to not recognise the sacrifice of the
Red Army in WW2 and send representation to this event. There is zero wisdom out there right now..just battle lines being drawn
up.
nnedjo -> Omniscience 10 May 2015 08:33
Not sure, hope that wouldn't clash with the Victory over Czechoslovakia celebrations.
You know, politics are like the weather: it cools off and then it gets warmer. A person is happy when it warms up after
a cool-down. This is one thing.
The other is that I have stated several times in public that I am here primarily to pay tribute not only to those soldiers
who died on the territory of the Czech Republic, but to all the 20, or some say 27 million Soviet citizens, both soldiers and
civilians, who died during the Great Patriotic War. This was the first purpose of my visit.
Abiesalba -> J00l3z 10 May 2015 08:32
He would do as well to remember that Stalin consigned a great number of the returning servicemen who had seen the west
to death in Gulags. And that Russia exterminated more of her own people than Hitler did in concentration camps. Shmoozing despots
says a lot about the nasty party !
The UK and all other imperial powers would do well to remember how many countries they forcefully occupied and then ruthlessly
exploited their hunam and natural resources for centuries, including slavery. The UK and others had colonies well after WWII.
How many dead people from the activities of these most glorious empires based on Nazi-like ideologies of the 'superior'
nation vs the 'inferior' nation?
And did these most democratic western powers ever pay reparations to their former colonies for the huge damage they have caused?
johhnybgood 10 May 2015 08:29
In the US the population knows nothing about the Russian involvement in the war.
Even in Europe only 13% of the population know the real story. This of course is because the history has been rewritten. If
you watched the ceremony in Moscow, you realised just how deep feelings still run throughout the whole population. Few families
escaped without loss.
This is why the West is playing with fire through its NATO encroachment provocation. The West's foreign policy regarding Russia
is totally self defeating. Only the politicians are responsible -- the general populations have no desire for war with Russia
- quite the reverse, Russia and China represent the future of global trade.
mrkhawaja1944 10 May 2015 08:18
Shameful act of revenge by western leaders not people by not attending ceremony in Russia as if their dead were better then
Russians who lost millions.
They did not attend just because they do not like one man happened to be president making excuse of Ukrainian problem but who
started it paid demonstrators by CIA known fact like the Arab spring where no flowers bur rubbles pile up in middle east spread
to Europe thanks to American freedom loving policies.
Russians who died in millions deserver to be remembered with respect like the one in western countries who's leaders absence
is disgraceful act.
Abiesalba -> HHeLiBe 10 May 2015 08:12
Sad that the hallmarks of expansionism and extreme nationalism are now most evident in Russia.
How about the illegal US/UK Iraq invasion?
How about the US relationships with its neighbours? A Berlin Wall along its border with Mexico. Decades of embarge against
their neighbour Cuba. Cuba is, however, good enough for the US to have its Guantanamo concentration camp there. Oh, and how about
racism in the US, and the status of the native Indians.
The UK financially supported the rise to power of Mussolini and his fascists in Italy who pursued brutal policies of ethnic
cleansing of 'inferior' races long before Hitler rose to power in Germany. After WWII, the UK prevented extradition of 1,200 Italian
fascists accused of war crimes to Yugoslavia, Greece and Ethiopia. These war criminals were never put to trial, and the UK kept
supporting Italian pro-fascist politicians after WWII. The general acceptance of Italian fascism in the UK was also reflected
in the English football team Sunderland appointing the Italian extreme Mussolini fan and self-declared fascist Paolo Di Canio
as the manager in 2013.
Meanwhile, Italy keeps denying its WWII atrocities and neo-fascism is very alive. Every year, in Italy people march to celebrate
the anniversary of Mussolini's march on Rome, which led to Mussolini's fascist regime taking the power in Italy (video of the
march in 2014 here.) The most democratic 'western' states do not protest about it and the western media just avoid this scandal.
And there is much more. For example, in February 2015 (three months ago), the Italian GOVERNMENT (!) gave medals of honour
to 300 Mussolini's fascists, including 6 accused of war crimes.
And neo-Nazism is alive and well also in Austria. Surely the EU members demanded in 2002 that neo-Nazi Jörg Haider is expelled
from the Austrian government. But after that happened, nobody cared about the fact that Haider went on to be the elected (!) governor
of the Carinthia region of Austria until 2008 (he was not voted out; he died in a reckless car crash) where he pursued apartheid-like
policies against the Slovene minority in Carinthia. Slovenes are Slavs, and according to Nazi and fascist ideology they are an
'inferior' race and should be eradicated. The Slovene minorities in Austria and Italy keep being oppressed and attacked by neo-fascists
and neo-Nazis, often also via the attitudes of the Italian and the Austrian governments.
Germany is the only Nazi-fascist country which fully admitted its war atrocities and apologized for them. Germany is now at
least very watchful about neo-Nazis, and is trying to crack down on groups with neo-Nazi and similar ideologies. Even so, neo-Nazism
is rising its ugly head also in Germany.
Many other European states keep denying their involvement in Nazism and fascism. In these states (e.g. Austria, Italy, Hungary,
Slovakia, the Netherlands etc. etc.), the state of denial enables Nazi and fascist ideologies to thrive. In Hungary, the neo-fascist
Jobbik party won 17% of the votes in the 2010 elections and 20% in 2014. In Slovakia, a neo-Nazi won regional elections in 2013.
In the Netherlands, Geert Wilders' party is the third largest in the parliament. In the UK, UKIP just got 13% of the votes and
is the third largest party by the number of votes.
Besides, all western European states (including the UK) are collectively in denial about their centuries-long support of Nazi-like
ideologies. The imperialistic Nazi-like ideology of 'superior' vs 'inferior' nations/races fuelled centuries of forceful occupation,
oppression and exploitation of human and natural resources (including slavery) of many 'inferior' nations around the world.
Across western Europe, there is rising discrimination against 'Eastern and Central European' immigrants. These unwanted immigrants
are largely Slavs. The specific targeting of 'inferior' Slavs has a long history in Europe (over a thousand years) and was also
reflected in Hitler's hierarchy of races, where the Slavs were at the very bottom of under-humans (below the Jews). Hitler had
plans for extensive genocide of Slavs, and Nazis killed many millions of them (e.g. Poles, Ukarinians).
In this historical context, I find the specific targeting of 'inferior' Slavs by various xenophobic groups in western Europe
rather disturbing. This is nothing but re-painted Nazi-fascist ideology. Notably, such ideology thrives in particular in nations
which Hitler declared to be the superior race = Herrenvolk = Aryan race: Germans, British, Irish, Dutch, Northern French, Swedes,
Norwegians, Danes etc.
It seems to me that it would not be acceptable in modern Europe to specifically target the Jews. On the other hand, it
is very acceptable to specifically target the Slavs.
Rudeboy1 -> Batleymuslim 10 May 2015 08:11
The first rule of war is logistics, logistics , logistics...in that order.
I don't underestmate the Russians, far from it. It's a realistic view on their real capabilities and re-equipment in recent
years. They're running to stay still at present. They have block obsolescence on the horizon for most of their kit and can't afford
to replace it at the required levels. The Russian Navy is a case in point, their latest SSN was actually laid down 15 years ago
and has yet to enter service. For surface ships they're done for as they either don't have the skills or they no longer have powerplants
for them (their marine GT's were all built in the Ukraine).
The recent excitement over their new armour was a tad over the top. Have a look at them. The Kurganets? Is it as good as a
German Puma? Bumerang? Is it really as good as a German Boxer? The Armata is an attempt to try and close the gap to western designs,
but it's 25+ years too late. They'll never manage to build 2000 of them, they don't have the funds or the production capabilities.
The point about the F22 and F35 is still valid. I'm not counting the F35's as they're yet to hit IOC. The West has done all
this in an era of declining military spending, with next to no effort.
In contract the Russians are spending increasing proportions on defence although they have announced some cuts recently). The
Russian's simply aren't a military threat, and they know it. The last thing we need is an over-reaction. If the Armata is anything
like previous Russian tanks once we get our hands on one we'll find that it was never all that anyway, still it keeps defence
spending a little higher I suppose...
nnedjo -> Bradtweeters 10 May 2015 08:05
This is not a commemoration of the war dead. The commemoration of the war dead are being made at monuments to war victims.
So, this is a celebration of the victory over fascism, and not any commemoration.
But, anyway, Putin is not a priest, he is a politician, and from politicians are expected on such occasions to give a political
message too. Especially, if he complains that there is not enough cooperation in the world. It should be the political agenda
of all politicians in the world, and not only of Putin.
lizgiag -> Natalia Volkova 10 May 2015 08:01
Privet Natalia! The anti-Russian feelings you encounter are really the product of decades of anti-Soviet propaganda. For decades
there was really nothing positive said about the Soviet Union, years and years of negativity (not just about the system but also
the people) meant that it is a deeply rooted feeling which was very easy to resurrect in the past few years.
Whilst this is not new, the more sinister side of this is the re-writing of history, so that the events of World War 2 are
re-interpreted to the extent that the Soviet Union is now slowly being seen as the aggressor to fit in with the current narrative
for the West's geo-political strategy.
Frustrating as this is, it makes it even more important that Russia's point of view is put forward even if it seems futile.
kraljevic 10 May 2015 07:59
Its a sad reflection of today's selfish blinkered and short sighted world that the usual Russophobes and closet Nazis are
given so much space and airtime to spread their pernicious ideology which consists of almost exclusively denigrating everything
Russian.
You could almost see some of them them practicing their Heil Hitler salutes in front of the mirror!
But however many of them delude themselves into believing that victory was snatched from their grasp by a set of unlucky circumstances
rather than relentless Russian resistance then they will continue to try to kid the world that Russia's victory was a fluke!
The next step is to revive the myth that the SS and their allies stood for humane values and the defence of freedom and European
civilization! But none of this relentless drivel will affect the attitude of the majority of people who continue to be inspired
by the incredible, unimaginable and superhuman bravery and defiance of the Russian people in a life and death struggle unmatched
in the annals of history!
geedeesee -> airman23 10 May 2015 07:46
"Crimea belongs to Ukraine"
Things change, nothing is fixed forever. Scotland may leave the UK. The Declaration of Independence by the Republic of Crimea
was in accord with the provisions in the UN Charter.
Standupwoman -> sztubacki 10 May 2015 07:46
I don't actually disagree with you about the leadership. Stalin (a Georgian, as you know) was a murderous tyrant in his own
right, and the Russian people suffered as much as any other Soviet country under his rule.
But Victory Day isn't about Stalin, except as a figurehead. It's about the ordinary men and women who fought and died and
achieved the most incredible victory the world has ever seen. How could anyone want to take away from that?
dyst1111 -> Manolo Torres 10 May 2015 07:42
"Then we have the Royals that attended Nazi parties and married Nazis and even conspired against Britain with the Nazis."
And what of this? Nothing. They had no power.
Halifax was sidelined because of his attitude and Churchill made PM.
Soviet Union worked with the Nazis AFTER the war had broken out. Worked closely on many levels.
And there is one more aspect - what Britain and France did is regarded today with disdain as cowardly acts. What USSR did is
desperately being whitewashed by Russia. So even if they acted more less the same, only Russia thinks it was OK.
John Smith -> Omniscience 10 May 2015 07:33
The US companies had some 500 mln$ investments in German war industries.
Standard Oil, General Motors, General Electric, ITT, Ford...
IG Farben ( Standard Oil) financed Hitler's rise to power.
CaptTroyTempest -> Kaikoura 10 May 2015 07:31
According to Wikileaks, Petro Walzmann (aka Poroschenko) has been in the pockets Washington's pocket since 2006. Probably just
a coincidence.
Soviets may have won the war but they got pasted in the subsequent PR department.
I've seen interesting public opinion polls in France that immediately after the war showed 80+% people said mostly SU won the
war and 60 year on 80+% people said the US played that role.
Because SU was branded the empire of evil and the US the force of good and people bought it ignoring the fact there is precious
little difference. And still to this day Obama speaks of say the Vietnam war with praising the american troops for their righteous
and good fight for freedom in the jungles. Clearly, he's never seen the Winter Soldier. The one from 1972 with testimonies of
veterans that was and is de facto censored in the US for 40 years now, not the Cpt. America one.
In a new international ranking, the United Kingdom ranks first, while the U.S. performs poorly across almost all health metrics.
According to the world health organization you are second to 36 countries in 2000. Morocco, Singapore and Costa Rica have better
healthsystem than you.
teurin_hgada -> AlfredHerring 10 May 2015 07:21
Your democrazy is nukong civilians in Japan after theirs capitulation. To kill Vietnam with WMD. Serbia, Syria, Lybia, Iraq.
Do you know that democracy eas invited in Greece and means slavery. There are citizens in democracy, and there are slaves,
which brings prosperity to citizens. We dont want to be slaves of successors of criminals from whole word which made genocide
to indeans civilization 300 years ago
Kaiama 10 May 2015 07:21
Read and Enjoy (2/2)
Dear friends,
We welcome today all our foreign guests while expressing a particular gratitude to the representatives of the countries that fought
against Nazism and Japanese militarism.
Besides the Russian servicemen, parade units of ten other states will march through the Red Square as well. These include soldiers
from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Their forefathers fought shoulder to shoulder both at
the front and in the rear.
These also include servicemen from China, which, just like the Soviet Union, lost many millions of people in this war. China was
also the main front in the fight against militarism in Asia.
Indian soldiers fought courageously against the Nazis as well.
Serbian troops also offered strong and relentless resistance to the fascists.
Throughout the war our country received strong support from Mongolia.
These parade ranks include grandsons and great-grandsons of the war generation. The Victory Day is our common holiday. The Great
Patriotic War was in fact the battle for the future of the entire humanity.
Our fathers and grandfathers lived through unbearable sufferings, hardships and losses. They worked till exhaustion, at the limit
of human capacity. They fought even unto death. They proved the example of honour and true patriotism.
We pay tribute to all those who fought to the bitter for every street, every house and every frontier of our Motherland. We bow
to those who perished in severe battles near Moscow and Stalingrad, at the Kursk Bulge and on the Dnieper.
We bow to those who died from famine and cold in the unconquered Leningrad, to those who were tortured to death in concentration
camps, in captivity and under occupation.
We bow in loving memory of sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, grandfathers, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, comrades-in-arms,
relatives and friends – all those who never came back from war, all those who are no longer with us.
A minute of silence is announced.
Minute of silence.
Dear veterans,
You are the main heroes of the Great Victory Day. Your feat predestined peace and decent life for many generations. It made it
possible for them to create and move forward fearlessly.
And today your children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren live up to the highest standards that you set. They work for the
sake of their country's present and future. They serve their Fatherland with devotion. They respond to complex challenges of the
time with honour. They guarantee the successful development, might and prosperity of our Motherland, our Russia!
Long live the victorious people!
Happy holiday!
Congratulations on the Victory Day!
Hooray!
Kaiama 10 May 2015 07:20
Read and Enjoy... (1/2)
Fellow citizens of Russia,
Dear veterans,
Distinguished guests,
Comrade soldiers and seamen, sergeants and sergeant majors, midshipmen and warrant officers, Comrade officers, generals and admirals,
I congratulate you all on the 70th Anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War!
Today, when we mark this sacred anniversary, we once again appreciate the enormous scale of Victory over Nazism. We are proud
that it was our fathers and grandfathers who succeeded in prevailing over, smashing and destroying that dark force.
Hitler's reckless adventure became a tough lesson for the entire world community. At that time, in the 1930s, the enlightened
Europe failed to see the deadly threat in the Nazi ideology.
Today, seventy years later, the history calls again to our wisdom and vigilance. We must not forget that the ideas of racial supremacy
and exclusiveness had provoked the bloodiest war ever. The war affected almost 80 percent of the world population. Many European
nations were enslaved and occupied.
The Soviet Union bore the brunt of the enemy's attacks. The elite Nazi forces were brought to bear on it. All their military power
was concentrated against it. And all major decisive battles of World War II, in terms of military power and equipment involved,
had been waged there.
And it is no surprise that it was the Red Army that, by taking Berlin in a crushing attack, hit the final blow to Hitler's Germany
finishing the war.
Our entire multi-ethnic nation rose to fight for our Motherland's freedom. Everyone bore the severe burden of the war. Together,
our people made an immortal exploit to save the country. They predetermined the outcome of World War II. They liberated European
nations from the Nazis.
Veterans of the Great Patriotic War, wherever they live today, should know that here, in Russia, we highly value their fortitude,
courage and dedication to frontline brotherhood.
Dear friends,
The Great Victory will always remain a heroic pinnacle in the history of our country. But we also pay tribute to our allies in
the anti-Hitler coalition.
We are grateful to the peoples of Great Britain, France and the United States of America for their contribution to the Victory.
We are thankful to the anti-fascists of various countries who selflessly fought the enemy as guerrillas and members of the underground
resistance, including in Germany itself.
We remember the historical meeting on the Elbe, and the trust and unity that became our common legacy and an example of unification
of peoples – for the sake of peace and stability.
It is precisely these values that became the foundation of the post-war world order. The United Nations came into existence. And
the system of the modern international law has emerged.
These institutions have proved in practice their effectiveness in resolving disputes and conflicts.
However, in the last decades, the basic principles of international cooperation have come to be increasingly ignored. These are
the principles that have been hard won by mankind as a result of the ordeal of the war.
We saw attempts to establish a unipolar world. We see the strong-arm block thinking gaining momentum. All that undermines sustainable
global development.
The creation of a system of equal security for all states should become our common task. Such system should be an adequate match
to modern threats, and it should rest on a regional and global non-block basis. Only then will we be able to ensure peace and
tranquility on the planet.
Manolo Torres -> dyst1111 10 May 2015 07:19
Lets see the other side as well then:
Huge trade, far bigger, just the investment of GM in Nazi Germany was 25% of the total amount their trade with the Soviet Union,
if we add Standard Oil and Ford it will probably be already much more, and we are not throwing in the bankers that are the ones
that made the most profit.
Then we have the Royals that attended Nazi parties and married Nazis and even conspired against Britain with the Nazis.
Then we have France and Britain giving Hitler (and the Polish) parts of Czechoslovakia. Talking about congratulatory letters
we know about one from British deputy prime minister:
"Herr Chancellor, on behalf of the British Government I congratulate you on crushing communism in Germany and standing as
a bulwark against Russia" (1a)
- Lord Halifax then British Deputy Prime Minister (later Foreign Secretary) addressing Adolf Hitler, November 1937.
Standupwoman 10 May 2015 07:17
I'm having a hard time believing both the tone of this article and the venom in some of the comments. On Russia's own Victory
Day? Really? Are we sunk as low as that?
The only excuse I can find is that maybe some people simply don't know what this day really represents. This piece in The Hill,
for example, actually states:
The Soviet victory in World War II - also known as the "Great Patriotic War" in Russia - can in terms of mythological importance
be compared to D-Day for Americans
OK, this might be an unusually crass and insensitive writer, but could anybody with even a smattering of education make such
a comparison? How could the events of one day in which 2,500 Americans died conceivably equate to the events of four years in
which 27 million Soviet citizens were killed - nearly 14 million of them Russian? We know how Americans feel about 9/11, but even
if they'd suffered a new 9/11 every day for four years, it would still be less than half what was done to Russia.
Even the British struggle to comprehend that degree of loss. We too suffered from Nazi attack, we too saw women and children
killed in their own homes, we too saw our great cities pulverized and our history smashed - like Coventry Cathedral, for a start.
But the German army never set foot here, because we were saved by the English Channel, the best airforce in the world - and the
fact that the Russians held out long enough to turn the tide.
No-one in the West can really imagine what Russia went through, and there isn't space to say it here. Do some reading - or
better still, watch the BBC's 'The World at War' and 'Nazis: A Warning from History'. The latter programme even interviews a former
German soldier who describes how they treated the 'sub-human Slavs' of their occupied territories - 'We'd kill the children first
in front of their mothers, and then the mothers.' Imagine it. Try. Imagine the desperate courage of that defence, at Moscow, Leningrad
and Stalingrad. Look again at the Victory Day footage, and note how young some of the veterans are - because even children took
part in the sieges of their homes. At Sevastopol in 2011 I met one woman who'd been throwing Molotov cocktails against German
tanks when she was seven years old.
And they won. The tide was turned before the Americans even joined, and the momentous Battle of Kursk for the first time put
the Germans on the run. Yes, we retook France and Italy, but it was the Red Army who drove the Germans back from the East all
the way to Berlin. Britain has many victories of which she can be rightfully proud, but none on the scale of that one. No-one
has.
Of course they celebrate it - and so should we. Politics should never be allowed to rewrite history, and I'm utterly ashamed
that my country chose this day to insult 27 million dead. God bless Russia, and I hope and pray they can forgive us some day.
I'm not sure I ever can.
Debreceni -> jezzam 10 May 2015 07:11
What is the connection? There was apartheid in the American South in the 1930s and 1940s. Sill, you do not question or try
to trivialize American contribution to the victory over Japan or Nazi Germany.
The debate about dictatorhip, politial oppresion belong to a different page. You do not go to a funeral to bring up the widow's
past.
AlfredHerring veloboldie 10 May 2015 07:11
If only Truman listened to Patton,
Yep, we could have liberated Moscow within 6 months. Easy, just cut off all the lend lease crap and drop the big one on Moscow
during that stupid parade of German prisoners that Stalin was watching and the whole thing would have been ripe for free elections.
Thanks to the war a 'well regulated militia' was already in place, just would have had to hunt down those NKVD motherfuckers.
Hants13 sztubacki 10 May 2015 07:10
How many dictators do you know that are happily united in many multi-polar relationships with like minded nations?
Over 85% of the people of Russia support their leader and Government and these are a few reasons why:
Russia was bankrupt in 2000, when Putin first came to power. Since then:
He sorted out the oligarchs.
The average Russian lives an additional ten years since 2000.
There is a rise in the middle class sector.
Russia is now a creditor nation.
Christian Orthodox Russia paid off the $45 billion debt of the Communist Soviet Union (including when the Bolsheviks and Lenin
overthrew the Russian Empire).
Russia paid off the $16.5 billion RF debt.
Russia has the 12th largest currency reserves (around $420,000,000,000)
Russia has the 5th largest gold reserves and can almost back the ruble with gold, rather than printers and paper.
Russia has minimal debt (11% GDP Debt)
Russia has control of her vast wealth of natural resources.
How is the West, up until 2019 going to pay for Russian gas? Rubles or gold. After that, there are no contract with EU countries
and much of the Russian gas will be going to China and no doubt India.
No wonder Russia loves their President and his cabinet. Can any other Western Nation and the USA say the same?
Mungobel samanthajsutton 10 May 2015 07:01
I fully agree that the UK's failure to join in honouring the memory of the millions of Russians and other Soviet citizens who
lost their lives in the struggle to resist the Nazi onslaught in WWII was a shaming thing. Worse still, while the Russians and
others were preparing to celebrate the hard won end to that war, the UK joined with it's NATO friends in playing US-led war games
on Russia's doorstep - as if intent on provoking yet another blood-letting across the globe.
Reco1234 Hants13 10 May 2015 07:00
The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and
strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight. Thus it denies the value of personality in man, contests the significance
of nationality and race, and thereby withdraws from humanity the premise of its existence and its culture. As a foundation of
the universe, this doctrine would bring about the end of any order intellectually conceivable to man. And as, in this greatest
of all recognizable organisms, the result of an application of such a law could only be chaos, on earth it could only be destruction
for the inhabitants of this planet.
-Adolf Hitler: Mein Kampf
Hmmm, Hitler was a fan of the ideology of Karl Marx........nice one, moron.
Hants13 MentalToo 10 May 2015 07:00
You are aware that the Ukrainian Krushchev took Crimea from Russia in 1954?
Using international law and self determination, the people of Crimea voted to return home to Russia in 2014. Aided by the words
of the Ukrainian Presidential Candidates and what they wished to do to the 8,000,000 Russian speaking citizens of Ukraine. Eastern
Ukraine did the same, but not to be ruled by Ukraine.
The argument is explained in the 1970 United Nations Report, Self Determination and Territorial Integrity. In fact NATO used
the same argument in their final report, Kosovo in an International Perspective: Self Determination, Territorial Integrity and
the NATO Interpretation. Then if you study the foundations of the United Nations Charter, it was based around self determination.
By the way, Russia leased Sevestopol (which NATO wanted) at a substantial cost and owing to the agreement, they were allowed
25,000 serving members of the military (no specifics on ranks, grades or trades). At the time that the people of Crimea voted
to return home to Russia, there were only 20,000 out of the 25,000 little green men in Crimea.
plumrose799999 10 May 2015 06:59
The Observer(one of limited vision) is so obsessed with its Putin prodding that it fails to acknowledge Russia's part in winning
the war which might not have been won by our side had it not been for the Russian people.
I don't know whether Putin is as bad as the western media make out but thankfully their is one leader left in the world
who is still capable of standing up to the USA and dictorial colonist aspirations.
Liberator37 10 May 2015 06:57
Without for a moment endorsing its bloodthirsty liquidation of more helpless civilians than Hitler killed, Eric Margolis has
a crackerjack and fact-filled
article out today in praise of the Soviet contribution to the WW-II victory. The Western boycott of Putin's celebrations is
downright churlish.
His concerns, which were echoed by other US officials, were based upon an RFE/RL report that painted the Ukrainian nationalists
that fought alongside Hitler in a good light.
Fast forward to 1984, sorry I mean 2015, and those messages are now reproduced in the Guardian and are enshrined in Ukrainian
law and celebrations.
If Richard Pipes thought it was an issue, can't you see Russia's concern when it leads to the downfall of Ukraine?
MyFriendWillPay -> Amanda Katie Bromley 10 May 2015 06:48
It's clear that those who have criticised your comment have done so from a position of ignorance.
Operation Barbarossa, the German-led Blitzkrieg of 4 million men against the Soviet Union (SU), on 22 June 1941, was expected
to bring SU defeat within weeks, which is why the Germans only stockpiled 2 months of supplies for the campaign, and even British
Intelligence expected the SU to collapse within 8 - 10 weeks. However, within less than a month, the head of German Military Intelligence,
Admiral Canaris, confided to a general on the eastern front that he could only see a "black outlook" for the war in the east.
Even Goebells himself noted in diary entries in July 1941 of the allarming lack of progress towards victory.
By mid October 1941, the previously euphoric Vatican had decided that Germany would lose the war in the east, as had the Swiss
Secret Service and other neutral intelligence agencies.
By the start of December 1941, with German forces less than 20 miles from the Kremlin, their campaign had ground to a halt
due to troop exhaustion, the Russian winter and over-extended supply lines. Then, on 5 December 1941, the Soviets launched a massive
attack that drove the Germans back 60 - 170 miles. Hitler then ordered the campaign to take Moscow delayed until the following
Spring, although he then realised, apparently, that he would lose the war, and that was more than a year before the iconic Soviet
victory at Stalingrad.
Two imprtant points can be drawn from the initial weeks of Operation Barbarossa. Firstly, the US material support in war was
going to the German side until it became apparent that they would not win. Most supplies of vital material, such as oil and rubber,
came from the US via Spain and Vichy France. For example, 44% of Germany's vital engine oil came from the US in July 1941, and
this rose to 94% in September 1941. This means that, important as subsequent western supplies were to the SU's war effort, they
started arriving after it was recognised that the SU would defeat Germany and her allies. It was a fundamental issue of resources
- manpower as well as materiel - that the SU had, and Germany didn't.
Secondly, even accepting the destruction of Germany's heavy water facility, if Operation Barbarossa had succeded, Germany would
have had four whole years to catch-up the US's possession of a few low-yield atomic bombs in August 1945. Taking Germany's rapid
programme for the V1 & V2 rockets in the last months of the war as an example of her capability for technological development,
few could seriously doubt her potential to produce the atomic bomb.
As someone who lost a father in the west and a grandfather in the east - both during WW2 - I try to view history objectively.
And, in this case, I regard the boycot by western wartime allies of Russia's celebration of WW2 victory over fascism as very disappointing
indeed.
Vladimir Putin has used an address commemorating the 70th anniversary of victory over Nazi Germany
to accuse the US of attempting to dominate the world.
Speaking at Moscow's annual Victory Day parade in Red Square, which this year has been boycotted
by western leaders over the continuing crisis in Ukraine, the Russian president berated Washington
for "attempts to create a unipolar world".
Putin said despite the importance of international cooperation, "in the past decades we have seen
attempts to create a unipolar world". That phrase is often used by Russia to criticise the US for
purportedly attempting to dominate world affairs.
The US president, Barack Obama, has snubbed the festivities, as have the leaders of Russia's other
key second world war allies, Britain and France, leaving Putin to mark the day in the company of
the leaders of China, Cuba and Venezuela.
The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, has likewise ducked out of attending the parade but will
fly to Moscow on Sunday to lay a wreath at the grave of the Unknown Soldier and meet the Russian
president.
As western sanctions on Russia over its actions in Ukraine continue to bite, Moscow has increasingly
appeared to pivot away from Europe and focus more on developing relations with China. The Chinese
leader, Xi Jinping, will be the most high-profile guests on the podium next to Putin. Other presidents
in attendance include India's Pranab Mukherjee, president Abdel Fatah al-Sisi of Egypt, Raúl Castro
of Cuba, Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and Jacob Zuma of South Africa.
Russia used the parade to show off its latest military technology, including the Armata tank,
in the parade, which included 16,000 troops and a long convoy of weapons dating from the second world
war to the present day. Also on show for the first time was a RS-24 Yars ICBM launcher, which Moscow
has said described as a response to US and Nato anti-missile systems.
The celebrations stand in contrast to the festivities a decade ago, when Putin hosted the leaders
of the United States, France, Germany, Italy and Japan.
The Soviet Union lost about 27 million soldiers and civilians in what it calls the "great patriotic
war" – more than any other country – and the Red Army's triumph remains an enormous source of national
pride.
On Saturday morning, many Muscovites sported garrison caps and black and orange striped ribbons
that have become a symbol of patriotism in recent years. More than 70% of Russians say a close family
member was killed or went missing during the war, making Victory Day an emotional symbol of unity
for the nation.
In recent years, victory in what Russians see as a 1941-1945 conflict has been raised to cult
status and critics accuse Putin of seeking to co-opt the country's history to boost his personal
power.
The Kremlin has also used second world war narratives to rally support for its current political
agenda, for example painting the Ukrainian government as Nazi sympathisers.
Later in the day around 200,000 people were expected to march through Red Square with portraits
of relatives who fought in the war, in a Kremlin-backed campaign dubbed the "immortal regiment".
The parade will also see more than 100 military planes – including long-range nuclear bombers
swoop over Moscow in a spectacular flyby.
Smaller parades in 25 other cities will involve 25,000 soldiers and even nuclear submarines, according
to the defence ministry.
With the NSA's bulk surveillance ruled illegal, the debate on the Patriot Act should be
reinvigorated – with Edward Snowden free to join in
... ... ...
The final debate is one that is unlikely to happen, but should: the US needs to start
considering the privacy and freedom of foreigners as well as its own citizens. The US public is
rightly concerned about its government spying on them. But citizens of countries around the
world, many of them US allies, are also rightly concerned about the US government spying on them.
Considering Americans and foreigners alike in these conversations would be a great moral stance –
but pragmatically, it should also help Americans. If the US doesn't care about the privacy of
other countries, it shouldn't expect foreign governments to care about US citizens. There's
something in this for everyone.
These are the debates we could be having, and should be having. The judiciary has spoken. The
legislature is deliberating. The public is debating. And all of it is enabled thanks to
information provided by Edward Snowden.
He should be free to join the conversation, in person.
ekkaman -> Kitty Grimnirs 8 May 2015 19:07
Maybe I spoke too soon, funny how two show up to make comments and it is almost word for
word the same thing. One takes the Russians are bad okay stance the other that it is real life
and he should not mess with the big boys. You guys are so easy to see right through it would
make for a good comedy, you can call it "the government troll squad".
GKJamesq -> Isadore Stumrumple 8 May 2015 16:34
If Snowden "did good this time" (albeit "accidentally"), what makes him a "traitor"? Who
decides whether he's in fact a traitor? What "whole lot of damage" has he done? What's the
evidence for the assertion that he begged China for asylum? And what, exactly, makes him an
"apparatchik" as opposed to, say, an IT professional who did work for the US government as a
contractor?
Thomas Drake tried the official channels, please read his story. Also, Hong Kong is not an
enemy of the US.
He only ended up in Russia as his passport was revoked while he was in transit.
Daniel Bird -> Isadore Stumrumple 8 May 2015 16:13
NO COUNTRY can have low level apparatchiki determining what is right or wrong in a
countries security."
That's the job of other organs of the democracy e.g. Congress, right? Except that NSA
director James Clapper lied under oath to congress that NSA weren't collecting data on
millions of US citizens.
DrKropotkin -> Isadore Stumrumple 8 May 2015 16:08
The NSA and the politicians who support them have made a mockery of your constitution, they
are the traitors. Mr. Snowden has given you the evidence and you turn on him. Please re-read
your countries founding document and ask yourself again who needs to go to jail.
NYbill13 8 May 2015 15:36
Catch 22 Again And Again
"Catch 22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing." That's how
Joseph Heller puts it in his superb comic novel about World War II bomber crews.
And yes, it's a staggering coincidence that Snowden, a gunner on the main character's B-17, is
the novel's premiere human sacrifice.
More pertinent to the real Snowden is the warning shouted to the main character, Yossarian,
when he goes AWOL. To escape murderous lunatic commanders, Yossarian is prepared to row a
rubber dinghy from Italy through the Strait of Gibraltar to Sweden.
As he runs for his raft, his pal cries out, "They'll bend heaven and earth to catch you."
Tragically, Mr. Edward Snowden, they will. Just as tragically, the rest of us probably won't
be able to stop them.
Thank you again, Mr. Snowden. No kidding.
George Cantrell 8 May 2015 14:40
As a U$A citizen, I am proud of Edward Snowden and consider him to be a true patriot. I
wish more whistle-blowers would come forward with details/proof of illegal/unconstitutional
acts being committed by supposedly 'public servants' against private citizens.
Unfortunately, so many of my fellow countrymen have been reduced to fear-mongered
bed-wetters who engage in the religion/idolatry of flag worship/ultra-nationalism to the point
of where they are blind to the principles/rights our country was founded on.
Isadore Stumrumple -> libbyliberal 8 May 2015 12:57
Are you actually equating the present atmosphere and reality of living in the US as the
equivalent of Nazi Germany? If so then you understand neither.
Isadore Stumrumple -> ekkaman 8 May 2015 12:56
Americans feel proud? Last time I checked not everyone approves of his brand of Lone Ranger
moralism. He not only outed the NSA, but also stole and shared much more sensitive information
with this countries enemies in order to get asylum. That is no hero to any thinking person
that really cares about their countries security. Any "good" that he did is far overshadowed
by the damage he caused up to and including the lives of agents and operatives throughout the
world. This is no game of Risk or cheesy adventure movie, this is deadly serious business.
Isadore Stumrumple -> GKJamesq 8 May 2015 12:52
and what evidence do you have for your assertions?
Isadore Stumrumple 8 May 2015 12:49
I'm relieved to hear that what snowden did was okay. Now every other low level twerp that
disagrees with the way that the US keeps itself safe can also defect to another country. That
is if they bring loads of other sensitive data to sweeten the pot and ensure that they have a
place to lay their heads. Snowden was a traitor, is a traitor and needs to pay for his act of
espionage. NO COUNTRY can have low level apparatchiki determining what is right or wrong in a
countries security. He accidentally did good this time but also a whole lot of damage. Putin
would have had him shot if he was a Russian attempting the same thing and the Chinese, whom he
first went begging to for asylum, would have done the same.
NYbill13 8 May 2015 12:03
Let The Experiment Continue, Please
Rule by brute force has been the norm for a long, long time. No quibble there, right?
But during the stifling summer of 1789, a few ex-British colonists met in Philadelphia to
codify a new type of government, one run by the people it governed.
Grabbing ideas from Europeans and some long-dead Greeks, those studious, entirely serious
young men made impressive progress.
When slavery and obdurate financial power threatened to derail discussion, they were set
aside. The colonies had to unite; Great Britain wouldn't be fighting France forever.
I can't think of anything more antithetical to the principles of self-government extolled in
that first constitutional convention than today's all-powerful spook agencies.
With limitless finances, impenetrable secrecy and de facto immunity from all laws, they
are now high-tech baronies, autonomous, self-isolated and profoundly opposed to popular
sovereignty.
If the NSA, CIA or any of America's other spy dynasties had been around in 1787, those
brilliant men in buckled shoes and stockings would never have made it home alive.
kalbus -> Kitty Grimnirs 8 May 2015 10:47
Everyone with any kind of heart and soul cares deeply for a good outcome for Mr. Snowden
who has risked his life to reveal our fascist-becoming government.
GKJamesq -> Kitty Grimnirs 8 May 2015 10:37
Snowden tried to get the issue raised through the standard channels, with predictable
results. As for your allegation that he "headed straight for America's enemies and tried to
bargain with them," what evidence do you have?
Lafcadio1944 -> mike miller 8 May 2015 10:08
Snowden will never be allowed back in the USA the Empire will hound him to his grave.
Strong verifiable end to end encryption individually installed and open source. Some methods
of protection are already starting to appear and more will come.
libbyliberal -> libbyliberal 8 May 2015 05:33
When I was a little girl and I heard how horrible Hilter was, I asked why people didn't
overtake him when he went to sleep.
I was so naive and thought Hitler alone was evil and doing evil things and did not
appreciate the massive collusion with his evil of so very many.
All the CRONYISM OF EVIL OF HIS PATRIARCHAL MILITARY AND ENABLING FROM STOCKHOLM SYNDROMED
CITIZENRY. Many of the German people were enthralled with him, and convinced themselves his
regime of massive evil was serving "exceptional" them as his beloved children
libbyliberal 8 May 2015 05:28
Authoritarian followers insist unethical laws be followed, and conscientious objectors to
unethical laws be punished. Too bad these lemmings can't seem to grow a conscience no matter
what evidence is presented to them of institutionalized mass murder and criminality. Stockholm
syndrome mass pathology.
Aryu Gaetu 8 May 2015 05:20
Based on the premise that everything in the US, especially with politicians, is based on
personal greed, if the NSA has the phone records of people, it must have the records of
corporations. If the business or any of its officers makes an international call, then they
can legally monitor the content of the call. I wonder how many billion$ that is worth to a
competitor and if there is just 1 person in the NSA that can't resist that potential windfall
from that information.
Will the last person to drop the Constitution into the shredder, please, water the plants and
turn out the lights before you leave. Thank you.
Littlemissv 8 May 2015 05:00
The court of appeals judges very deliberately chose not to consider the constitutionality
of NSA bulk surveillance programs, as such questions are currently before Congress...
The court simply wimped out. It should ruled them to be unconstitutional and demanded their
immediate cessation.
Since the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoints the judges on the secret (FISA) court,
he is already an accessory before the fact in various constitutional felonies. The Supremes
will rubber-stamp NSA, displaying all the wisdom and integrity that they did in Bush v. Gore
(2000).
libbyliberal 8 May 2015 02:41
Excellent and inspiring article. Thank you!!
Jeffrey_Harrison -> David Edwards 8 May 2015 02:03
And your inane comment is exactly why governments must not be allowed to just make any old
thing secret. They should not be able to make most of what they do make secret, secret.
Martin_C 8 May 2015 01:40
Laws that require the highest scrutiny of all are laws that benefit all politicians and
government at the expense of the people they supposedly serve, because the intrinsic
protections of the adversarial nature of politics breaks down. Normally, if a right-wing party
tries to pass something overly right-wing, the left-wing party kicks up a stink and vice
versa. The party opposing the legislation becomes the de facto advocate for the people being
cheated, and the debate must then be carried on under the scrutiny of the people.
But when politicians pass legislation that enables all politicians to spy on all citizens, the
citizens have no advocate. The pollies are all in on it. We can't even exercise our only
faintly effective prerogative of changing our vote, because in this type of law change, all
snouts are in the trough.
The Patriot Act was and is terrible legislation. Australia's recently passed East-German-style
data retention bill: terrible legislation. Britain's pathetic attempts at forcing encryption
keys to be yielded to the government: terrible legislation. No government should have tabula
rasa permission to spy on its own citizens. These are our lives they are trying to spy on! We
cannot throw that away for the 'safety' of living in a permanent mass surveillance state.
To prevent these dreadful laws being passed requires 1) principled lawmakers who can step away
from the feeding trough; 2) vigorous, ethical and independent media; and 3) citizens willing
to stand up and demand better from their elected representatives.
As i've written before, it's actually very astute of Sanders to elide around Clinton rather
than attack her head-on (best to leave that to the loony Right). All he has to do is present a
full-policy spectrum alternative to Clinton's corporatism, neo-con affiliations, elite (glass-ceiling)
feminism, support for fracking/KXL, TPP-like trade agreements, etc., and let support his his policies
drive his campaign in the positive sense, than to run against Clinton in the negative sense.
There are serious limits to both how far "left" Clinton can go and how sincere her 'campaign
conversion' to progressive policies really is; which will be exposed the moment she starts assembling
her campaign managers/speech-writers, economic and foreign policy adviser teams, which will be
soon enough. [As Napoleon Bonaparte said, "Never interrupt an opponent when they're making a mistake"]
One of the best things Sanders could do here is to start that process himself with a 'shadow cabinet'
as surrogate speakers on specific policy areas (eg, getting Robert Reich back in as Labor Sec.).
And i'm serene in the confidence that once "democratic socialism" is honestly explained to U.S.,
there will be far more support for it than you can imagine.
ExcaliburDefender Dean Hovey 3 May 2015 12:58
I'll vote for whichever democratic candidate is selected in the general. Don't know who I'll
vote for in the primary yet, or if will make a difference when my state has a primary.
Don't want the bombs dropping in Iran, roll back of the ACA, or NRA rule.
#allvotesmatter2016
David Linsell 3 May 2015 12:50
I think it's terribly sad that one of the few who actually care about social justice & the
American working class is almost considered a joke by mainstream America. Come to Europe Bernie,
we love you!
bcarey 3 May 2015 12:10
Bernie Sanders is exactly correct. He is not afraid to point at the elephant in the room.
Dean Hovey 3 May 2015 12:07
I can hear the question now: "Why would you back a loser?"
Yes, I'm backing Bernie, with my vote and a tiny bit of discretionary income.
The question begs the question by assuming Bernie Sanders cannot win. It fails to account for
the disillusionment over two years of Barack Obama's appeasement of right-wing pols and the strong
possibility that Hilary will be the "other Republican" in the presidential race. Hilary, like
Obama, can "strap on" progressive talking points, but her Velcro Values will be discarded as soon
as she grasps victory.
So, really, what is there to lose by backing Bernie? A Corporate Democrat is much like a Corporate
Republican. Vote for either one, and you've lost--unless you're among the 1%.
The "Russian aggression" meme really follows in the footsteps of the "WMD" meme.
You can easily see how it works, from the invention
of a few buzzwords and/or phrases that are then repeated in nauseam, to the obedient media quickly following suit.
It strikes me as the highest level of irony that all the silly propaganda tactics they continuously and loudly accuse Russia
of (and Russia is surely guilty of some of them), they employ themselves – ten fold.
It's like that ongoing BS about RT, its funding and penetration. All the data's there, and RT is simply dwarfed by its Western
analogues, both in terms of finances and scale. Yet they keep raving about it, using bald-faced lies to support their tirades.
Likewise, whatever bad journalism RT is guilty of (e.g. distorting events by omission to fit the agenda etc) they're again ten
times worse.
And the big elephant in the room is Ukraine, a country highly relevant in this context as most of these things pertain to that
particular crisis. Ukraine where things are so aggressive, oppressive and generally rotten that had it been any other country
there'd be talk about some sorely needed B-52's raining democracy bombs over Kiev by now.
This kind of mindblowing hypocrisy, selective (deceptive) reporting and cynical agitation against whatever the "preferred target"
happens to be today is nothing new, of course, but it never ceases to amaze me.
Such an elaborate dance around facts by despicable bottom feeders. From comments: "It is so
depressing when there is far more information in the comments section than in the article itself. It
seems the new editor is keen to continue the traditions of her predecessor." This is one event about
which there is quite a lot of information to see how Guardian presstitutes try to bent the truth.
See
Odessa Massacre of
May 2, 2014
The emergency calls became increasingly desperate. "When are you coming? It's already burning
and there are people inside," a woman told the fire brigade dispatcher. Minutes later, callers
started describing how people were jumping from the upper floors. "Have you lost your minds?" one
man asked, his voice breaking. "There are women and children in the building!" another man
yelled. In one of the most deadly episodes in Ukraine's turbulent 2014 power transition, 48
people were killed and hundreds injured on 2 May last year in the Black Sea port of Odessa.
Street battles culminated in a fatal fire at Soviet-era building where hundreds of pro-Russia
activists were barricaded in.
VengefulRevenant -> AlfredHerring 1 May 2015 17:24
The victims are the ones who were raped, shot or burned to death in the massacre.
The perpetrators are those protected by the NATO-backed regime which has failed to investigate
the massacre.
The apologists are the NATO-aligned media who blame the victims or assign blame equally to the
killers and the dead along the lines of, 'There was heroism and cruelty on both sides.'
normankirk -> Metronome151 1 May 2015 16:52
Well isn't it wonderful to hear a diversity of views expressed on Russian TV. When all we
hear is how all media is controlled by the Kremlin
Kaiama Danram 1 May 2015 16:48
So the dead Ukrainian children and women are Kremlin goons too?
How simple your life must be to allow you to make such simplistic conclusions.
vr13vr 1 May 2015 16:46
Some nice whitewashing. Now it's fault of the victims and the heroism of the perpetrators,
there hasn't been and there will be no investigation and the word massacre is no longer used.
For those of you who still argue it was not a massacre but some mysterious suicide by 48
people who set themselves afire, here is footage again.
Take a look at some of the pretty revealing moments:
23 min mark - Ukrainians are entering the building, there was no resistance.
24:20. A group of Ukrainians go upstairs, there is no fire yet.
26:20 Some are coming returning. The stairs are being set on fire.
27:50 A Ukrainian is firing gun at those trying to jump from the building.
While in the building, Ukrainians were slaughtering people. And it wasn't a fight. Half of the
victims were middle-aged. At least 10 of them - women.
31min - 33min - the victims who got out have their faces and hands disfigured while the rest
of their bodies don't have the same injuries. That's what happens if someone splashes fuel
over someone's face and light it up. There are pictures of victims with only their heads and
hands burned.
33min - 35min - there were women among those trying to find safety in the building. Some of
them are middle-aged. They were not fighters, as the article would imply.
36min- 37min - Ukrainians were inside the building, setting it on fire and killing those whom
they could find, a young woman in this specific frame.
46min - a person was bludgeoned to death. The room doesn't have marks of fire but the blood is
splattered all over the room.
48min-50min - the same story, Ukrainians were slaughtering their victims.
1h:00min - Ukrainians are entering the building again, this time from the make shift
scaffolding.
Any attempt to pretend there was a fight rather than a massacre is crazy. Any suggestion that
somehow people inside were setting themselves on fire is ludicrous in light of evidence that
the Ukis were inside the building. And the fact that Kiev doesn't even see it as murder makes
me just angry.
AbsolutelyFapulous -> PlatonKuzin 1 May 2015 16:43
Odessa as well as the most Ukraine is a Russian soil.
Donno why you are commenting here. You even don't seem to be able to read a map.
BorninUkraine -> RonBuckley 1 May 2015 16:25
In a way, you are right, it was the US (via Vicky "f… the EU" Nuland and mad John
McCain) that pushed Ukraine over the cliff. As usual, the EU "leaders" (Merkel, etc) acted as
US lackeys.
However, equal blame goes to stupid and thieving Ukrainian elites, under whose "leadership"
the country was on the edge of that cliff to begin with.
Current Ukrainian "leaders" keep stealing everything they can, including financial and
material aid from the West. What else is new?
MaoChengJi -> Goodthanx 1 May 2015 16:03
Yeah. I'm convinced that they should've sent paratroopers and take Kiev right the next day
after the coup d'etat; stop this whole unholy mess right then and there. That really would've
saved tens of thousands of lives - if not millions, seeing how this thing seems to escalate,
leading us to a nuclear war.
Putin is a pussy, Medvedev got it right in Georgia in 2008. Well, frankly Medvedev is a pussy
too. He should've taken Tbilisi, and put Saakashvili on trial.
To teach the bastards a lesson.
Instead, now we hear every day 'Russia will not fight Ukraine', 'Russia will not fight
Ukraine', and the murdering Nazi bastards get bolder and bolder. What's the point of having
all that military hardware if you're afraid to use it. They Yanks would've taken control of
the place months ago, look at Grenada.
RonBuckley -> BorninUkraine 1 May 2015 15:52
Well said, man. Yes, Ukrainian politics have always been divisive, stupid, thievery and
corrupt. That said they had neither brains nor money for a coup. So Ukraine should thank
certain external powers for the deep shit it is in now.
PlatonKuzin -> puttypants 1 May 2015 15:31
Odessa as well as the most Ukraine is a Russian soil. That's the point. And the state of
Ukraine is a temporary occupier of the Russian soil. So people living in Odessa don't have to
go to Russian. They are right at their home. This is the state of Ukraine that has stayed on
our Russian land for 23 years now. It's time for the quasi-state of Ukraine to leave.
BorninUkraine -> puttypants 1 May 2015 15:16
I was born in Lvov in Western Ukraine, I grew up in Lugansk in the East, I have friends and
relatives all over, and I know exactly what is going on in Ukraine.
Ukraine in 1991 was extremely heterogenous. In the area West of Carpatian mountains people
speak Hungarian, Romanian, and Rusine (a form of old Russian, spoken in Kievan Rus).
Galichina and Volynia in the West speak several dialects of Ukrainian. Many in Central
Ukraine speak what is considered literary Ukrainian. In the South and East (historic
Novorossia) and in Kharkov region (historic Slobozhanschina) the majority speaks "surgik", a
mix of pidgin-Ukrainian and pidgin-Russian. Finally, in Crimea people speak Russian, Tatar,
and very few speak Ukrainian. Crimea voted AGAINST Ukraine in 1991 referendum and got a chance
to run away in 2014, when Ukraine committed suicide.
If the leaders of Ukraine had any brains and loved their country, they would have followed
the example of Switzerland and Singapore, having many official languages. However, all
Ukrainian rulers from day one were thieves and idiots. They made Ukrainian the only official
language and pushed it everywhere, so that while you could get school education in several
languages, all colleges operated only in Ukrainian, putting people who spoke other languages
at a disadvantage.
That idiotic policy started this whole mess, which with a bit of US money, prodding, and
now arms became a civil war. Not to mention that Galichina is the place that fought against
Russia in WWI (as part of Austro-Hungarian empire, siding with Kaiser) and WWII (siding with
Hitler). They supplied the troops that under Hitler's command murdered thousands of civilians
in Ukraine, Poland, Belarus, and Slovakia. Bandera, Shuhevich, and veterans of Waffen SS
division Galichina, who are considered heroes by current puppets in Kiev, voluntarily served
Hitler.
80% of Ukrainian population hates these Bandera worshippers, so when external forces push
them to power, it creates trouble. Personally I hate them for giving a bad name to everything
Ukrainian.
BorninUkraine -> AbsolutelyFapulous 1 May 2015 15:10
Russia failed to send its troops to Donbass, and Ukrainian army killed thousands of
civilians there, including women, children, elderly, and disabled veterans.
Or is saying things explicitly beyond your pay grade?
RonBuckley -> AbsolutelyFapulous 1 May 2015 15:06
To Odessa Kiev sent a few hundred pro-Nazi thugs - 42 died.
To Donetsk and Luhansk Kiev sent a few thousand pro-Nazi thugs plus the entire Ukrainian army
- 6000 died.
Get it now?
Goodthanx -> Anette Mor 1 May 2015 15:04
For me it was the silence... You are right! Seeing what i was seeing, with no commentry to
convince me either way.. How could the worlds media be so silent?
Then with MH, it was the complete opposite!! Immediately and with no investigation, MSM
could not shut up about who they thought was responsible!!
Both fail the logic test miserably. But try explaining common sense to those that haven't
any.
Goodthanx -> Chirographer 1 May 2015 14:48
Those protesters were Ukrainian Pro Federalists! Not one Russian amongst them!
Anette Mor -> Goodthanx 1 May 2015 14:46
Good for you. It is impossible to hide truth with current state of technology. Only not
showning. Any life reporting give the footage adding facts one by one and crwating a true
picture eventually. Even this rather bias article contributes to true story because the lie in
it sticks out of logic for anybody we is able to think for themselves.
PlatonKuzin -> ID5868758 1 May 2015 14:42
Western media are not simply mirror images of the fascist governments they support.
Acting the way they do, these media prepare the public for a future war.
Anette Mor -> vr13vr 1 May 2015 14:41
It is poinless to try to install fear in these people. Need to look at the history of
people's wars in Russia. Since 17 century they were able to resist occupation and unwanted
rulers by people war. There wpuld not be a win against Napoleon and Hitler without people
rising and forming resistance. Same in Odessa now. Just a matter of time.
BunglyPete -> Chirographer 1 May 2015 14:35
The explanation is very simple. Right Sector had free reign to terrorise pro Russians, so
he took action. Kiev choose not to punish Right Sector both then and now. He said this in the
same interview you constantly reference.
Now can you explain why you think it is acceptable for Right Sector to terrorise the Donbass?
If Strelkov wasnt allowed to defend them, who was?
Anette Mor -> Jeff1000 1 May 2015 14:34
Not sure why you call them pro-Russians. Odessa is multi-national city. These who were
massacred are simply local people who disagreed with the violent coup which put to power by
the west. Does it make them "pro-russian" and justify thier killing? Surely these who want own
country to be coverned by own elected officials could not be pro- another country. If they
trust Russian government care for them more then thier own coup, that only says how bad the
coup rule is.
Goodthanx -> Chirographer 1 May 2015 14:24
Forget about the Russian government. The idea is justice for the victims and punishment for
the perpetrators. Is it the ambition of the UN to be percieved as bias as so called Russuan
investigators would be?
Kaiama -> truk10 1 May 2015 14:22
FFS there are enough links and analysis to demonstrate that pro-Kiev forces inflicted a
massacre of civilians here. I don't see any pro-Ukraine links to additional information but an
overwhelming deluge of links supporting the unvoiced version of events.
ID5868758 1 May 2015 14:18
Our western media have really become mirror images of the fascist governments they support.
By publishing such whitewashing attempts as this, they only enable more such behavior in the
future, behavior that leads to the deaths of more innocents, more civilians whose only desire
is to live in freedom and peace.
Kaiama 1 May 2015 14:13
It is so depressing when there is far more information in the comments section than in the
article itself. It seems the new editor is keen to continue the traditions of her predecessor.
Goodthanx -> Chirographer 1 May 2015 14:09
What kind of a teenage girl carries in their backpack petrol, empty bottles, rags and
whatever else is required to make Molotov cocktails? What a coincidence... there is a group of
them!!
As for Right Sector? Chartered buses transported Right Sector militia which arrived early in
the day. These were the people communicating with police from the start.
MaoChengJi -> MaoChengJi 1 May 2015 13:51
Speaking of the media... I've been reading this Odessa news website:
http://timer-odessa.net/ , and it has been relatively informative (as much as Ukro-sites can
be, these days). And today suddenly it's gone dark: "there is no Web site at this address".
Does anyone know if it's gone for good? I really hope those who were running it are safe...
Jean-François Guilbo -> truk10 1 May 2015 13:51
So you didn't watch the video link in my comment did you?
If you just take this article for granted to know on which side the Odessa police was, you
won't learn much on what happened...
Seems like the officier on the picture would have been recognised as a colonel from Odessa
police, watch this link:
And from these two links, these armed guys not afraid to shoot from the crowd, could have been
agents provocateur...
BorninUkraine -> IrishFred 1 May 2015 13:47
Are you saying that Bandera, Shuhevich, and veterans of Waffen SS division Galichina never
existed? If so, please state it explicitly.
Are you saying all of the above did not serve Hitler voluntarily? If so, please state it
explicitly.
Are you saying all of the above are not guilty of mass murder and other crimes against
humanity? If so, please state it explicitly.
Are you saying that people who are murdering their opponents, politicians and journalists,
are not Nazis? If so, please state it explicitly.
As to Crimea, if you knew any history, you'd know that it was illegally annexed by Ukraine
in 1991. Here is history 101, not necessarily for you, but for those who actually want to know
the truth.
Russia deployed its troops in Crimea, and nobody was killed there. Russia failed to send
its troops to Donbass, and Ukrainian army killed thousands of civilians there, including
women, children, elderly, and disabled veterans.
As many Ukrainians joke now, "Crimeans are traitors: they ran away without us".
Your next argument?
Jeff1000 -> Chirographer 1 May 2015 13:45
Don't display callous and willful ignorance and call it even-handedness. The Guardian's
"credible" account offers no sources, agrees with none of the available pictorial or video
evidence and is rampant apologism.
I posted videos - including raw CCTV footage of the starting of the fire, further up the page.
BunglyPete -> coffeegirl 1 May 2015 13:40
I saw that guy's post it was fantastic, very well sourced and thorough. The comments on
here were a different kettle of fish entirely back then.
Jeff1000 1 May 2015 13:39
The attempt to re-package this event as some awful conglomeration of circumstances spurred
on by the cruelty of fate is sickening. We reduce the death of at least 50 people down so that
calling it a "massacre" becomes needlessly emotive. We casually refer to the pro-Ukrainians as
"football fans" to make it seem innocent - when Ukrainian football fans known as "Ultras" are
famours for 2 things: Being neo-Nazis, and being violent thugs.
Look at this video especially: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAEcceedzCU
It's really very simple - candid videos at the time made it clear.
1. Pro-Russian groups were attacked by Ukrainian "ultras". They sought shelter in the Trade
Union building.
2. The building was set on fire when the Ultras threw molotovs through the windows. The doors
were barred.
3. People attempting to climb out of the windows were shot at, if they jumped they were beaten
as they lay on the ground.
4. Ukrainian nationalists deliberately blockaded the streets to inhibit the progress of
ambulances and fire engines.
Only a week after The Odessa Massacre an american CiFer, ex-marine, has gathered links,
sieved through hours and hours of video - he, practically, has done what the journos were
supposed to do, - to prove the Guardian, BBC and the rest were trying hard to whitewash the
atrocity. Check his posts: Additional proof that the BBC and the mainstream Western press lied
when they said both sides threw the molotov's.
I looked for 5 hours searching for one video that showed anyone in the building throwing a
molotov cocktail as the BBC first reported and the rest of the MSM went along with. I could
not find a single one. They claimed a person named Sergei (what are the odds of that) told
them a person threw the molotov inside the building and didn't realize the window was closed.
This is absolutely ludicrous and an example of the pathetic reporting that passes for "news"
these days.
I did find the video of the third floor fire starting. It is at the following link and runs
consecutively. You'll notice at exactly the 2 minute mark the camera zooms in on the window
where the fire begins. You'll also notice that at the 2:02 mark you see an additional molotov
cocktail just miss the window. This is strong evidence that the window was being targeted by
individuals on the ground. Prior to this fire starting there is no other fire on the third
floor, therefore this is most likely the cause of the third floor fire and lends credence to
the fact that the violent youth below burned those people alive.
And not just "Russian state-owned media" - also most of the Russian privately owned media,
and most of the world media (and even some of the western media).
I believe I saw a chinadaily calling it Kristallnacht.
Jeff1000 1 May 2015 13:16
Russian state-owned media characterised the day's events as a "massacre" planned by
"fascists" in Kiev, a narrative that has gained widespread traction.
Mostly because it's a pretty fitting description of what happened.
Its not hard truk. Those red armbands that the so called pro Russian provocatores wore? Are
actually the same red armbands Right sector militia was wearing during the most violent Maidan
clashes. You can identify some of the same protagonists wearing the same armband in both
Odesaa and Maidan!
vr13vr -> truk10 1 May 2015 13:07
Idiot. Nobody is laughing. Especially when 50 people died. Look at this video and see how
Ukrainians entered the supposedly "heavily defended" building. You will see them operating
inside, you will see them existing the building after it started burning from inside.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxcB0PI4ZLg
Look at 23 min mark - they are entering the building with no resistance.
24:20. A group of Ukrainians go upstairs, there is no fire yet.
26:20 Some are coming returning. The stairs are being set on fire.
27:50 A Ukrainian is firing gun at those trying to jump from the building.
Yes, Ukrainians overrun the building, including the roof. The photographs suggest that people
in the building where set afire while still alive.
You must be an idiot to say someone is laughing at this.
castorsia -> truk10 1 May 2015 13:02
No. They burned them. Check the photographic evidence.
PlatonKuzin -> vr13vr 1 May 2015 12:58
Armored vehicles and special riot forces were brought today in Odessa to prevent possible
unrest there.
WHYNOPASSWORD12 -> Havingalavrov 1 May 2015 12:56
Plenty of witnesses point out that these were pro-ukraine provacateurs sent up to stir up
trouble. They are wearing the same red armbands worn by a group who started the skirmishes
earlier in the town centre. They were part of the group bussed-in under the guise of football
supporters.
MaoChengJi -> truk10 1 May 2015 12:55
Hi turk10,
I understand your confusion. Luckily, Mr. Christof Lehmann investigated it all for you. Seek
and ye shall find. Use google.
vr13vr 1 May 2015 12:50
Sure, Kiev views burning alive almost 50 people as a "victory." They even allowed to
install fear in the city. Since then the city is totally subdued, people would be afraid to
even discuss the events or think of any peaceful opposition as they are aware of the potential
response from Kiev's supporters.
Nice job Guardian trying to whitewash the events and justify the cold blooded murder by some
street fights elsewhere in the city, events that were taking place all over the country those
days.
Jeremn -> oleteo 1 May 2015 12:40
No greater cynics than western politicians, who certainly don't mourn this heavenly
half-hundred, or come to lay flowers at the scene of their death.
No greater cynic than the Czech envoy, Bartuska, who said:
"Groups of civilians - including men, women and children - seize government buildings. Within
two days they get arms and after that women and children disappear, leaving only the armed
men. If they [independence supporters] are quickly resisted, as it was done in Odessa where
they were simply burned to death, or Dnepropetrovsk, where they were simply killed and buried
by the side of the road, everything will be calm. If this is not done, then there will be war.
That's all."
ID5868758 1 May 2015 12:18
Another despicable attempt to paint a false equivalency, to assign blame for this massacre,
for their own deaths, on those who perished. Take the Molotov cocktail throwing, for instance.
I watched the videos of those Molotov cocktails being made, pretty little pro-Ukrainian girls
sitting on the ground with their assembly line all set up, smiling as they made those
instruments of death and handed them out, now just where did those supplies come from, who
thought to bring bottles and rags and fuel to an event if it was innocent in nature?
And where would those innocent victims chased inside the building get Molotov cocktails to
throw from inside the building, when they were interested only in escaping the smoke and
flames, saving their own lives? The narrative doesn't match the evidence, but neither does it
pass the smell test, pretty SOP for western media reporting on Ukraine.
StillHaveLinkYouHate -> MaoChengJi 1 May 2015 11:56
The difference is that Nazis want to murder people for the accident of how they were born.
Extreme natinalists will want to murder anybody who does not behave in the perverted way they
feel a patriot should.
That is the difference. Praviy sektor are nazis, incidentally.
It makes the point already made below in this comment thread:
I invite people to imagine how the British media would have reported this massacre if
roles had been reversed and if it had been Maidan supporters who were burnt alive in the
Trade Union building with an anti Maidan crowd filmed throwing Molotov cocktails into the
building whilst baying for blood outside.
Indeed.
GreatCthulhu -> Metronome151 1 May 2015 11:45
Many of them not locals.
I thought the article was pretty clear that everyone on both sides were local. I speak, of
course s an Irish man who doesn't regard hating Russians/ people who identify with Russia who
aren't Russians but live nearby as a default position before beginning any debate.
There are a small minority of Irish people, living in the Republic (I am not referring to the
northern Unionist Community here), who identify with Britain often to the point that they
express regret that Ireland ever left the UK. I don't agree with them, but I would not set
them on fire in a building. For that matter, it is ARGUABLE (I am not saying whether that
argument is right or wrong- just that you could put forward the thesis) that the N.I state-let
is something of an Irish Donbass. No justification for Ireland shelling the crap out of it
though... at all... that sort of stuff is kind of regarded as savagery here these days.
MaoChengJi -> truk10 1 May 2015 11:43
Hi turk10,
what's wrong with calling them 'nazis'? The guardian piece identifies them as "extreme
nationalists", and isn't it the same thing as 'neo-nazis' or 'nazis'?
Is there some nuance I'm missing here? What would you call them?
BorninUkraine -> truk10 1 May 2015 11:38
So you object to calling a spade a spade? Typical pro-US position in Ukrainian crisis. What
do you call the insignia of, for example, Azov battalion (see here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion
). If that's not Nazi insignia, I don't know what is.
I am simply saying that those who organized Odessa massacre, then Mariupol massacre, then
fueled the war in Donbass, including Poroshenko, Turchinov, Yats, etc, are Nazis.
The simple reason for that conclusion is, as the saying goes, "if it looks like a duck, if
it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, it is a duck". If you prefer Christian version
of the same thing, see Mathew 7:16 "you will know them by their fruits".
To sum it up, if someone behaves like a Nazi, s/he is a Nazi. Is this clear enough?
EugeneGur 1 May 2015 11:28
A pro-Russia activist aims a pistol at supporters of the Kiev government during clashes
in the streets of Odessa, 2 May 2014.
How do we know that the guy is pro-Russian? Does the picture show what he is aiming at?
Does he have a sign on his forehead burned in saying "I am pro-Russian and I am going to shoot
that pro-Ukrainian bastard"? No, he does not. We are expected to assume that because the
caption says so - but captions to pictures aren't evidence. Anybody can put any caption to any
picture, and it's been done many a time.
The head of the local pro-Ukraine Maidan self-defence group, Dmitry Gumenyuk, recalled
the effect of the homemade grenades. . . they threw a grenade and it exploded under his
bullet-proof vest and four nails entered his lungs," he said.
Such peaceful people - going for a nice in the park walk in bullet-proof vests. They were
going to destroy that camp and not on the agreement with the activists in that camp, as
Guardian states (complete BS) but violently, which they did. Even if they were attacked, what
did women in the camp have to do with it?
Come on, people, even in the face of such a tragedy, is it so absolutely necessary to hush up
the truth all the time?
BorninUkraine -> caliento 1 May 2015 11:24
There is a Ukrainian joke. Russians ask:
- If you believe that Russia annexed Crimea, why don't you fight for it?
- We aren't that stupid, there are Russian troops there.
- But you say there are Russian troops in Donbass?
- That's what we say, but in Crimea there really are Russian troops.
castorsia 1 May 2015 11:21
The Guardian continues to misrepresent the Odesa massacre by reporting claims by the
official Ukrainian investigation and the Odesa governor created May 2 group that the deadly
fire started when both sided were throwing Molotov cocktails. The videos and other evidence
showing that the fire started after the Molotov cocktails and tires were thrown by the
attackers are deliberately omitted.
Open question to you all: What would be in the headlines if scores of "Pro-Ukrainian activists
" were being burned, hacked, mauled, shot and raperd to death by Donetsk rebels or their
supporters?
BorninUkraine 1 May 2015 11:20
There are lies, there are blatant lies, and then there are reports of Western media.
Sad, but true.
In this article Howard Amos pretends that he believes that both sides were to blame for the
mass murder of anti-fascists by pro-Maidan thugs in Odessa on May 2, 2014. That's like saying
that both the Nazis and the inmates of concentration camps were equally guilty.
This lie is so outrageous, and so far from reality, that it does not even deserve an argument.
The readers who want to know the truth can do Google search using "Odessa massacre 2014" and
read for themselves.
The lie that the Guardian repeats after Kyiv "government" looks even less plausible now, as
Odessa massacre was followed by the massacre of civilians by Nazi thugs in Mariupol a few days
later (change Odessa to Mariupol in your Google search), and the murder of thousands of
civilians in Donbass, including women, children, elderly, and disabled veterans, by the
Ukrainian army and Nazi battalions.
I grew up in the USSR, but I have never read a lie so obvious and outrageous in the Soviet
media. Congratulations on a new low!
coffeegirl -> aussiereader4 1 May 2015 11:11
Sounds like you know little about what happened in Odessa.
The best compilation of any available material was done on May 8, 2014 by our fellow CiFer US
ex-marine griffin alabama:
You like to cite Strelkov, don't you, when it suits your purpose? If he is such an
authority for you, why don't you cite everything he says? Among other things, he said that
Maidan was not a popular uprising but a pure decoration for the coup organized by the right
wing groups and funded by oligarchs together with the foreign agents? You can watch this here
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2015/02/must-watch-strelkov-vs-starikov-debate.html
greatwhitehunter caliento 1 May 2015 11:08
you would no if you followed events the idea of peace keepers was supported by Russia, the
separatists and a good many other countries right from the start of the conflict . It was not
however supported by the kiev government or the US. Peace keepers were offered to Ukraine
right up until 4 days before the Minsk agreement.
Kiev's solution has always been a military one and still is. There belated cries for
peace keepers only came after getting an a*& kicking.
kiev signed the minsk agreement which requires them to deal with the issues peace keepers
would be a way out for them. Usa by their actions does not support the Minsk agreement.
Poroshenko,s idea of peace keepers was a few kiev friendly states to send weapons and troups
to bolster their ranks.
An offer was made via the UN security council for a peace keeping force that included china
and new zealand and poroshenko stated that ukraine didn't needed china and new Zealand's help,
as it turned out they did.
EugeneGur 1 May 2015 10:54
Oh Guardian, Guardian. Both are to blame, heroism on both sides - in short, they burned
themselves. We've heard that before. But then the article goes on and tells you that the
movement they for some reason call "pro-Russian", although its not pro-Russia as much as it's
anti-fascist, is essentially eliminated, with all leaders in jail or in exile. In contrast,
None of the pro-Ukraine activists have been put on trial
Kind of tells you what actually happened, doesn't it?
Activists from both sides admit that the port city remains divided into two
approximately matched camps
No, they aren't matched. The Odessa residents are mostly anti-Maidan. The city is flooded
with newcomers from the western Ukraine, and they the main supporters of Kiev. Otherwise, why
would Kiev deploy half of the army to Odessa before the May holidays?
Recently Poroshenko who had the temerity to visit Odessa on the anniversary of the
city' liberation from occupation was met with shouts "Fascism will not pass".
So much for "matched camps". Of course, if you put everybody of the opposing view in jail
of kill them, you can sort of achieve a "match".
Elena Hodgson 1 May 2015 10:50
This was a massacre. Period.
Hanwell123 1 May 2015 10:48
Ukraine is a gangster state where if activists aren't arrested then they are shot; 6
prominent figures shot this year alone. No arrests. It's supported to the hilt by the EU who
shell out enormous sums to keep it from bankruptcy.
nnedjo 1 May 2015 08:42
This is the news from the Ukraine crisis Media Center:
Odesa, April 27, 2015 – Vitaly Kozhukhar, coordinator of the Self-Defense of Odesa,
Varvara Chernoivanenko, a spokesman for the Right Sector of Odesa held a briefing on the
topic: "May 2 this year in Odesa. How a single headquarters of the patriotic forces
preparing to hold a day of mourning for those killed in the city"...
Varvara Chernoivanenko said that for all patriots of Ukraine is important that May 2 was
peaceful day. Patriotic forces create patrols that will keep order in the area of
Cathedral Square, which will host a memorial meeting for all those, who died on 2 May.
They will make every effort to ensure peace and order. Already, the city has operational
headquarters of the patriotic forces. Their representatives will stop all provocations. At
the same time, according to Varvara Chernoivanenko, on their part will not be any
aggression.
Thus, the "patriotic forces", which I suppose are responsible for burning people alive in
the building of Trade Unions in Odessa, will now protect those who survived and who should
hold the memorial service for their relatives and friends, victims of Odessa massacre. The
only question is, from whom they should protect them?
I mean, this lady from the Right Sector boasts that they organized patrols of its members all
over the city. Well, you can bet that in these patrols will be at least some, if not all of
those who threw Molotov cocktails at the building of trade unions, and beaten with clubs or
even shot at those who tried to escape from the fire. Because, as this article shows, none of
them has even been charged, let alone be convicted of that crime.
So, can we then conclude that the executioners of the victims of the Odessa massacre will now
provide protection to those who mourn the victims, which is a paradox of its kind.
And how these patrols of "patriotic forces" operating in reality, you can watch in this video,
which was filmed during the visit of Poroshenko in Odessa, on the day of the celebration of
liberation of the city in WWII, 10 April. At the beginning of the film, the guys from
"Patriotic patrol" argue with a group of anti-fascists, demanding that they reject one of
their flag. And then at one point (0:31 of the video), one of these guys from patrol says:
"Didn't burn enough of you, eh?"
MaoChengJi 1 May 2015 07:45
Ah, of course: both sides are to blame, because before the massacre an extreme nationalist
militant died, under circumstanced unknown (shot in self-defense, perhaps? who knows).
Nice.
a pro-Ukraine member of the extreme nationalist organisation
Even nicer: 'pro-Ukraine extreme nationalist'. Pro-Ukraine? Which kind of Ukraine?
I find that one of the most misleading elements in these west-interpreted stories is
"pro-Russian" and "pro-Ukrainian" labels.
Truth? One doesn't look for truth in the Graun - the house journal of European
Post-Democracy.
The truth will occasionally slip out of one of the Post-Democrats - the Czech diplomat Vaclav
Bartuska, for example:
"Groups of civilians - including men, women and children - seize government buildings. Within
two days they get arms and after that women and children disappear, leaving only the armed
men. If they are quickly resisted, as it was done in Odessa where they were simply burned to
death, or Dnepropetrovsk, where they were simply killed and buried by the side of the road,
everything will be calm. If this is not done, then there will be war. That's all."
The journos of the Graun who want to carry on attending their dinner parties and pretend to be
liberal and decent folk have better sense than to state matters truthfully.
6i9vern 1 May 2015 07:43
Truth? One doesn't look for truth in the Graun - the house journal of European
Post-Democracy.
The truth will occasionally slip out of one of the Post-Democrats - the Czech diplomat Vaclav
Bartuska, for example:
"Groups of civilians - including men, women and children - seize government buildings.
Within two days they get arms and after that women and children disappear, leaving only the
armed men. If they are quickly resisted, as it was done in Odessa where they were simply
burned to death, or Dnepropetrovsk, where they were simply killed and buried by the side of
the road, everything will be calm. If this is not done, then there will be war. That's
all."
The journos of the Graun who want to carry on attending their dinner parties and pretend to
be liberal and decent folk have better sense than to state matters truthfully.
Vladimir Makarenko -> Celtiberico 1 May 2015 06:20
They took it from Odessa being a symbol of Black Sea and a while ago a Russian poet said:
Chernoe More - Vor na Vore.
Black Sea - a thief by thief.
normankirk 1 May 2015 06:14
This is a shameless attempt to whitewash a massacre.There is plenty of evidence on you tube
Every one has cell phones which can record events as they unfold. This is why the American
police can no longer get away with murder. The European parliament held a hearing in Brussels
to hear the Odessa survivors. there was a concerted effort from Maidan activists from Kiev to
shut down the survivors testimony. A Europarliament deputy from the Czech republic Miroslav
said "This is simply shocking. this is an evidence of fascism not being disappeared from
European countries.He blamed Parubiy, co founder of far right Svoboda party and Kolomoisky,
paymaster of neo nazi militia for the massacre at Odessa. All this is recorded. Ignorance can
no longer be a defence
ID075732 1 May 2015 05:53
The US Holocaust Memorial Museum quotes the following, famous text by Pastor Martin
Niemoller about the cowardice of intellectuals following the Nazis':
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me.
It's time for the MSM to realise that the same is happening Ukraine - for which the Odessa
massacre is a warning. It's time they stopped playing intellectual games to prop up what is a
fascist regime in Kiev.
BunglyPete 1 May 2015 05:48
Just in case those involved in the production of this article do read or hear of these
comments.. Do you not realise we have Google and Youtube now? You can verify anything within a
few keystrokes.
You do not need to rely on the evil Russian media, you can watch the eyewitness videos
yourself.
I mean this seriously, if you are going to attempt to prove something then at least realise
that you will need to go to more lengths to do so. In the context of the greater 'propaganda
war', articles like this are nonsensical, as you merely serve to discredit yourself, and
encourage people to move to alternative media sources.
If you want to discredit the Russian narrative then discredit it, don't write things that
discredit your own narrative.
You don't need to bill me for this advice it comes for free.
SHappens 1 May 2015 04:30
Many allege that investigators are dragging their feet for political reasons, possibly
to cover up high-level complicity.
At the beginning of the unrest, the most virulent reaction came from supporters of
Ukrainian football clubs. But they were soon joined by a well-organized gang of self-defense
that came in a column of about 100 people dressed in military fatigues and relatively well
equipped.
Members of the Ukrainian security forces withdrew from the scene allowing the rightwing
radicals to block the exits and firebomb the building forcing many to jump from open windows
to the pavement below where they died on impact. The few who survived the fall were savagely
beaten with clubs and chains by the nearly 300 extremist thugs who had gathered on the street.
Street fighting thugs don't typically waste their time barricading exits unless it is part of
a plan, a plan to create a big-enough incident to change the narrative of what is going on in
the country. None of the victims of the tragedy were armed.
This isn't the first time the US has tried to pull something like this off. In 2006, the Bush
administration used a similar tactic in Iraq. That's when Samarra's Golden Dome Mosque was
blown up in an effort to change the public's perception of the conflict from an armed struggle
against foreign occupation into a civil war.
So who authorized the attack on Odessa's Trade Unions House? Could it be that the Ukrainian
Security Services were supervised by some external mercenaries just like the Oluja blitzkrieg
in Croatia back in 1995 when the Croatian National Guard was then supervised and managed by
MPRI, an US SMP based in Virginia? Because in Kiev, dozens of specialists from the US CIA and
FBI were advising the Ukrainian government helping Kiev end the rebellion in the east of
Ukraine and set up a functioning security structure. (report, AFP).
Whatever and if ever an inquiry succeeds, fact is that the government in Kiev bears direct
responsibility, and is complicit in these criminal activities for they allowed extremists and
radicals to burn unarmed people alive.
warehouse_guy 1 May 2015 04:30
Tatyana Gerasimova also says the case is getting killed off in court, put that on your
headline.
alpykog 1 May 2015 04:30
Nothing unusual about police, army and terrorists working together. I remember the
British army in Belfast actually running joint patrols in broad daylight with Loyalist
terrorists through Catholic areas and that was the tip of the iceberg. Try not to feel
"holier than thou" when you read this stuff.
ID075732 1 May 2015 04:23
Rumours swirl of a higher death toll, the use of poisonous gas and the body of a
pregnant woman garrotted by pro-Ukraine fanatics.
Clearly the author has not watched the footage filmed inside the building after the
massacre - this was no "swirling rumour". Clearly the footage wasn't faked either. It showed
may murdered victims with burns to their heads and arms with bodies and clothes unscorched,
not caused by the actual fire.
Also those that have studied the many videos available of the unfolding events saw a much more
an orchestrated attack on the Trade Union building with fires breaking out in rooms further
away from the seat of the original fire. Also two masked figures on the roof before the fire
started in the building.
Reports that the exits were blocked and a number of masked pro-Ukrainians were inside the
building not just on the roof, don't figure in this report.
ploughmanlunch 1 May 2015 03:41
'While many pro-Ukraine activists helped the rescue effort, others punched, kicked and
beat those who fled the burning building. "There was blood and water all over the
courtyard," said Elena, who escaped via a fireman's ladder. "They were shouting 'on your
knees, on your knees'."
This sums up, in my opinion, the whole sordid mess that is present Ukraine.
The majority of ordinary Ukrainians living under the authority of Kiev will broadly agree
with their Government, but are civilised and are probably horrified by the violence
perpetrated by both sides in the war.
Unfortunately, however, there is a significant minority of extremist Ukrainian Nationalists
that readily resort to violence and intimidation and revile Russian speaking 'separatists' in
the Donbas ( and elsewhere ).
Even more unfortunately, the fanatical far right have a disproportionate influence in the
Kiev Parliament and even the Government; a fact conveniently overlooked by the incredibly
indulgent Western powers. The present Kiev regime is blatantly anti-democratic and lacks any
humanitarian concern for the desperate plight of citizens still living in Donbas, ( unpaid
pensions, economic and humanitarian blockade ).
This crisis still has a long way to go, and I believe has not yet reached it's nadir. A
brighter future for all the people of Ukraine will require unbiased and honest involvement of
the great powers, East and West.
Geo kosmopolitenko 1 May 2015 03:22
Some spin doctors in Washington would sarcastically smile if they ever read this sadly
tragic article.
Kiselev 1 May 2015 03:20
Symbol of separated Ukrainian society...
Whatever western Ukrainians told us.
Difficult time for Hillary bots. Botswana61 even complained: "How come that posters who clearly hate The Guardian and its editorial
policy keep coming back to its portal day after day".
What will be funny is when your "military advisers" start coming home in pieces because the Kiev hill billies they are training
can't cut it in the field….
This video should tell you all you need to know about the lies of the Kiev regime- Video Shows the Beautiful Terrorists the
US Financed the Ukrainian Nazi National Guard Battalions To Kill. When you see them you will realize that you have been lied to
all along.
...incidentally, is it normal for the guardian now to cooperate openly with RFE/RL, cold-war propaganda tool of the US government?
..... How long has this been going on?
Good question. The really big change occurred after MI5 smashed the Guardian's computer hard drives with sledge hammers.
Nobody from the Guardian was ever charged under Official Secrets legislation, and the Guardian never sought any redress or
compensation for the damage.
Anyone arguing against stereotyping of Russia, its leader and its policies, who substantiates his or her argument with solid
reasoning and historical or contemporary fact, must be paid by the Russian government:
A few days ago, I was thinking that I might do a post on the bellyaching and caterwauling from the Russophobes about Moscow's
supposed army of "paid trolls," who are reimbursed by the Russian government for clogging western comment threads with fallacious
arguments and childish insults which detract from – or derail entirely – thoughtful and informative commentary, often ridiculing
the post itself in the bargain.
Read on and follow the links to the related pieces quoted therein for a fuller discussion.
Kremlin trolls? Actually, there is much less there than meets the eye -- that is, for those still capable of seeing with some
degree of clarity.
How come that posters who cleary hate The Guardian and its editorial policy keep coming back to its portal day
after day
Listen, Botswana, who authorized you to be attorney for The Guardian editorial policy. You have enough of your Swahili media in
Botswana, so go there to play the role of an attorney.:-)
Odessa = Was that after Russian's invaded Crimea and Luhansk?
Was that more Russian's chancing their arm at starting civil war in Odessa?
Who left theie Molotov cocktails on the stairwells of the buiding they were in?
German and Poland brown coal open cast sites. The Brussels is going to take them to the cleaners over the huge pollution this
will cause. Polish farmers are already Upset as the will lose 1000 hectares of their farm land - this is probably why they are
going to Brussels to protest. EU countries are no longer free to make their own decisions that have the potential to harm the
environment and increase the threat of Global Warming - on this point ' are we not all in it together'.
It's not going to happen- Lithuania has no money for that, just about have enough wherewithal to ran charitable APC from 60
and 70.... but from what I hear munitions production ramped up to resupply koshermafia entrenched in Ukraine. Bizarre as French
keep saying.:)
I noticed that 2 bits of your info was incorrect Cuba has been released from the debt it owes to Russia and that Russia is
welcome to invest in Cyprus (South), Cyprus (North ) is awaiting confirmation from Turkey.
Hillary Clinton: war mongering is her strong suit – according to media hacks.
BradBenson Ashok Choudhury 2 Apr 2015 19:04
Nonsense. Who are the wise? Hillary is a war criminal. She should not be elected for any
reason. She should be shipped off to the Hague with Obama, Bush and Cheney.
BradBenson yesfuture 2 Apr 2015 18:57
Libya, for one. It's always been about light crude that is used for airplane fuel.
Regaining control of Libya's Oil is BP Petroleum's prime project and Hillary supported it.
BradBenson Elton Johnson 2 Apr 2015 18:52
Congratulations, you are both wrong. We were occupiers in Iraq and were always going to
incite bigger and more violent opposition groups. We should not have gone in. We should have
gotten out sooner. We should not be there now.
BradBenson Michael Seymour 2 Apr 2015 18:49
This kid is a living, typing example of the way that Americans have been dumbed down over
the years. He has no fucking clue as to what we are doing in the world and believes everything
he hears on CNN and MSNBC (our so-called 'liberal' media outlets). He can no longer be
reeducated.
He will live in fear that ISIS or some other phony terrorist group will plant a bomb in his
toilet and thus suffer from constipation for the rest of his life.
Paul Moore Alchemist 2 Apr 2015 18:45
Bush vs. Clinton
Been there. Done that.
BradBenson Whitt 2 Apr 2015 18:42
Well, actually that is no longer possible. Still, should we continue to accept that status
quo? We can't overthrow the government, but we could all vote third party. I'll not vote for a
Bush or a Clinton in the coming election. If my vote is wasted, so be it. My conscience will
be clear and I will no longer vote for a known War Criminal as I did when I voted for Obama
the second time around.
BradBenson Batters56 2 Apr 2015 18:40
Boy have you got it bass ackwards. We wanted Obama to do the things he promised. Instead,
he became a neo-con War Criminal on his first day in office and rejected everything for which
he once claimed to have stood.
Here's the links. Read 'em and weep.
More information on Obama's Embrace of war, murder, torture and mayhem can be found at the
following link.
Well, actually that is no longer possible. Still, should we continue to accept that status
quo? We can't overthrow the government, but we could all vote third party. I'll not vote for a
Bush or a Clinton in the coming election. If my vote is wasted, so be it. My conscience will
be clear and I will no longer vote for a known War Criminal as I did when I voted for Obama
the second time around.
BradBenson Batters56 2 Apr 2015 18:40
Boy have you got it bass ackwards. We wanted Obama to do the things he promised. Instead,
he became a neo-con War Criminal on his first day in office and rejected everything for which
he once claimed to have stood.
Here's the links. Read 'em and weep.
More information on Obama's Embrace of war, murder, torture and mayhem can be found at the
following link.
Nobody, including Obama. Where have you been for the past six years. Obama makes Bush look
like a beginner. Bush started two wars. We now have seven that we know about and are
militarily engaged in more than 100 countries.
The blind eye that you faux lefties turn toward Obama and Hillary is absolutely disgusting and
hypocritical. Obama and Hillary are fucking WAR CRIMINALS--just like Bush and Cheney--in fact
worse!
BradBenson diddoit 2 Apr 2015 18:34
Yes...in the wrong direction. He's beginning to reverse some of his earlier
anti-interventionist statements and was one of 47 idiots that signed that letter to Ayatollah
Khamenei. I like Rand for a while, strictly because of his 'opposition' to our wars and
the domestic spying. Lately, he's back to trying to appeal to Evangelical Nutcases.
BradBenson Natasha2009 2 Apr 2015 18:30
Well Natasha, you are correct that US Foreign Policy should be about protecting US
Interests--to a point. Where we may disagree is in how that policy has truly not served our
best interests and certainly could not be said to have served in the best interests of the US
or the Globe in any single respect--not one. When your only foreign policy is war and murder
by drone, you are not serving anyone's interests but the arms dealers.
BradBenson Samuel Burns 2 Apr 2015 18:22
Our leaders have brought war, torture, murder and mayhem to the planet since the early 90's
and have doubled down since 9/11. They are war criminals and the blame is correctly place upon
the US. Wake up.
BradBenson fredimeyer 2 Apr 2015 18:19
Well I wish you were right, but it's not shaping up that way right now. That being said,
she cannot win and we will all be stuck with another fucking Bush.
I'll be voting third party this year as will every other anti-war progressive.
BradBenson sour_mash 2 Apr 2015 18:17
Those ills are now the ills of the Obama Administration and I have pointed this out to you
way too often in the past for you not to have gotten it. Obama embraced Bush's War Crimes and
made them his own. Quit apologizing and making excuses for this murderous SOB. Here again are
the links. Educate yourself.
More information on Obama's Embrace of war, murder, torture and mayhem can be found at the
following link.
She like Obama are militarists. Obama astounded his progressive supporters with his praise
for militarism at Nobel. Hillary lost the primaries by hanging onto the 'Iraq was a just and
good intervention'. Even if it was imposed by Bill it was idiotic when even some in the GOP
were jumping ship.
BradBenson Mikhail Lykhin 2 Apr 2015 18:14
That's just sexist bullshit. She's a well-qualified war criminal and will wage our wars
with the same audacity, ferocity and veracity of any man. In fact, she will be more brutal
just to prove that women should be allowed to be the War-Criminal-in-Chief more often.
BradBenson Expatdownunder1 2 Apr 2015 18:11
Yep, I remember that too. That should have been a wake up call for any faux Democrats that
hated Bush's Policies, but loved those same policies under Obama. Now these neo-con converts
can't wait for Hillary to break the glass ceiling and become the greatest US War Criminal of
all-time. She will never be President. Real lefties will stay home.
BradBenson toadwarrior 2 Apr 2015 18:07
It's not a matter of age. It's a matter of faulty policies and a total lack of any
morality. I'm 64 and I'd match my intellectual acuity against anyone, young or old. I might
not always win, but it wouldn't be because of my age if I lost.
Hillary is not qualified because she is a war criminal. Period.
Kikinaskald voxusa 2 Apr 2015 18:03
It was easier for Clinton to coordinate his politics with Europeans at that time. The US
was the measure of everything.
But yes, I think you are right, Hillary may be moved by an excessive ambition rather than
pure ideology. What I fear is that this ambition makes her prone to hard ideological positions
and to alliaces with the worst currents of American politics. On the other hand, you are
right, as a whole the Democrats may seem to be more reasonable and I, in Europe, probably
underestimate the political climate in the country.
BradBenson Kikinaskald 2 Apr 2015 17:59
People with money back them and most of the American People have been dumbed down to
believe that we are a beacon of freedom and democracy around the world.
Despite the fact that realistic Americans recognize the truth, we can no longer unseat the
shadow government and will just have to wait for the inevitable collapse of the evil empire
under its own weight. It will be tough, but the education will be good for the
survivors--however difficult.
voxusa Kikinaskald 2 Apr 2015 17:48
Point taken.
But interestingly, there was much less "go-it-alone" foreign policy by Bill Clinton. He
coordinated with European allies, for one--for which he was castigated by the Republicans.
That sort of foreign policy really took off under Bush--the right-wing is contemptuous of
Europe, the UN, and pretty much any other nation.
I agree with you that she's too hawkish--and that she has made a number of serious
mistakes. But I think she's less ideologically driven that driven by her (maybe "pragmatic")
ambition.
But the climate in the US is such that the Republican alternatives are *much* more extreme
and aggressive -- they talk about waging war on a daily basis. It's truly terrifying.
But anyone more "moderate" that Clinton really doesn't stand a chance for the Democrats.
The political climate is too extreme and money has totally corrupted our political
process--big money is generally (*but not exclusively) interested in "advancing their
interests" and "the rest of the world be damned." There really are no good alternatives--it's
Clinton or someone like Bush, or even worse someone like Cruz, Christie, or Paul.
NomChompsky Natasha2009 2 Apr 2015 17:45
The world is in much worse shape and the U.S. held in much lower esteem since she was
Secretary of State.
Hey.
BradBenson 2 Apr 2015 17:32
The people are not dissatisfied with Obama's Foreign Policy because it has somehow been too
tepid. They are sick of his embrace of the worst war crimes of the neo-con right as his own
and his failure to implement hope and change from the abuses of the Bush/Cheney
Administration. To say that Hillary's experience as Secretary of State has given her anything
more than experience in WAR CRIMES is an exaggeration if not outright mendacity.
Obama started with two wars and we now have at least seven. During Obama's Tenure, both he and
Hillary were involved in: illegal drone murders; CIA Black Sites (Benghazi was actually about
the freeing of illegally held Libyan Nationals from a CIA Black Site Prison); an illegal Coup
d'état in the Ukraine, which nearly brought Europe to the brink of war; the overthrow of the
Libyan Government, which resulted in a civil war and the rise of ISIS there; the failure of
our policies in Syria and Yemen, resulting in major wars throughout the Middle East; the
failure of the Arab Spring and the reestablishment of US-backed dictatorial strongmen in
numerous Arab Countries. Hillary has promised to be "more aggressive" than her predecessor.
There is no basis for this woman to be elected and her candidacy will result in the US being
saddled with Bush III. Anti-war Progressives WILL NOT vote for another war criminal and will
either vote for a third party candidate or stay home.
More information on Hillary's War Crimes can be found at the following sites.
We don't call her Killary over here for nothing. There is no need to speculate about the
future. We can already see her foreign policy in action in Yemen, where the USA is once again
directing another lawless war of aggression.
Ask the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate how his targeted bombing of what little civilian
infrastructure Yemen has? You know, dairy processing, electrical power installations, the
usual list of war criminality we have all come to know so well and hate.
Ana ask how long will it take for mass starvation to kick in with a total naval blockade on a
country that must import 100% of its grain?
normankirk 2 Apr 2015 17:02
Please, not Hillary. I'm not eligible to vote in American elections, but I do have a stake
in staying alive. Hillary has to be a nutcase with her warmongering rhetoric.
And I'm not encouraged by Ukrainian oligarchs bloating the Clinton foundation with looted
money
Kikinaskald voxusa 2 Apr 2015 16:56
I meant internationally. At that time nobody dared to oppose the US. Nowadys it's
different. China challenges the US, in South America there are left governments and others
that claim some independence. In Europe there is skepticism and critic of the American
government. Iran made now an agreement on better terms than they had offered in 2003. Russia
showed that they would act according to what they think it's their interest against American
opposition. The US lost wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq. We have to consider all those
failures and mistakes. Hillary Clinton is not the right person for that.
voxusa Kikinaskald 2 Apr 2015 16:38
"Bill Clinton could do whatever he wanted without much opposition."?
You must have missed the government shut-down by the right-wing and the mendacious
obstructionism of Newtie Gingrich and his pals
Kikinaskald 2 Apr 2015 16:21
I wonder why the electorate keeps people in politics who are clearly unsuitable to be
politicians. Many are crazy, are ignorant, are politically corrupt, have no common sense, have
no scruples of any kind, are greedy. Why can't people have better choices? Why don't they send
such people in retirement and vote for better politicians? Why do such politicians remain
eternally in the political arena? Why do people take them seriously?
CroatianRoger 2 Apr 2015 16:14
If Clinton or Bush win we are in for more war, only Rand Paul will pull the troops back.
Apparently this election will cost about $5 billion, disgusting.
Kikinaskald 2 Apr 2015 16:12
but who may be guided by a preference for alliance-based negotiations of the kind that
informed her husband's presidency
This doesn't mean very much. Times were completely different. The Soviet Union had just
fallen when Bill Clinton was the president and the leadership of the US was not disputed.
Today opposition to intervention is much stronger and an agressive politics which didn't
function before when conditions were more favourable will not function now.
Bill Clinton could do whatever he wanted without much opposition. But he didn't seem to be
very ideologically guided. He used military and diplomatic power because he had the power to
do that, he was moved by custom, and for personal reasons (because of the scandals involving
him).
Obama doesn't seem to be a very determined person, to have very strong convictions. He noticed
that his power was limited and decided to take the easiest way. That means that he made
mistakes, that he simply followed what Bush had begun without much questioning. But he tried
to correct the course in some moments, to repair some mistakes, he took some positive
initiatives.
Hilary Clinton on the other hand lacks some of the few qualities of past presidents while
combining their bad qualities. She doesn't seem to be careful like Obama, she isn't so
pragmatic as Bill Clinton, she's as ideological as some of the worse politicians in the US,
she's as naive as Bush, she's as ignorant as McCain, she doesn't show any kind of moral and
intellectual independence and autonomy: she sides with the worst tendencies of politics. The
results cannot be good.
Speculation and discussions about all those cases (Ukraine, Syria and so on) show how insane
political talk has become. It's funny, because they are exactly the result of long term
faillures, political mistakes and so on. Obama often spoke wrong, but did the right thing in
the end. H. Clinton would do the wrong thing in the end. I think that politis is too serious
to be in the hand of people like her.
Expatdownunder1 2 Apr 2015 14:59
On the 22nd April 2008 Hillary Clinton made the following astonishing comment:"I want the
Iranians to know that if I'm the President, we will attack Iran," she replied adding, "In the
next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we
would be able to totally obliterate them". From that time on, I began to see her as a
liability and was confirmed by innumerable speeches made as Secretary of State: speeches which
displayed arrogance towards and ignorance of other cultures, together with a contempt for the
political process.
Natasha2009 2 Apr 2015 14:41
How exactly is foreign policy her strong suit? The world is in much worse shape and the
U.S. held in much lower esteem since she was Secretary of State. There is not one area of the
world better off now due to her efforts.
Phil429 lightstroke 2 Apr 2015 13:55
Obama's strategy of forcing the regional players to sort things out themselves
This would be the same Obama who started the war on Libya and showered his Al-Qaeda buddies
with weapons to terrorise the whole region, would it? The same Obama who tried to support
Hosni Mubarak only until his defeat became undeniable, then worked to make sure his
replacement would be as close to identical as possible? Whose State Department funded and
enabled the Nazis who overthrew the government of Ukraine? Who's been devoted to indefinitely
continuing the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq from his first day in office? Whose
murder-by-drone campaign has caused vastly more devastation in Yemen and Pakistan than under
Gov Bush? Who's turned Honduras into a living hell, tried to sanction the life out of Iran on
fraudulent grounds with no authority and faithfully continued enabling every war crime Israel
commits on its way to national suicide?
Anyone who considers that 'leaving others to sort things out' has lost all touch with reality.
Whitt brighterday 2 Apr 2015 12:48
"If some nutter like Jeb Bush wins, a major war is just a matter of time." - brighterday
*
Actually, in the current crop of Republicans making noises about running, Jeb Bush is the
moderate one. Moderate being in a completely relative sense here.
TONY C 2 Apr 2015 12:08
A vote for Hillary is a vote for her undying support of the Iraq war. I hope this woman
becomes undone at the seams for whatever can be made to stick. She is the same old pedigree of
war mongers that both democrats and republicans push to the forefront of amerikkkan politics.
LowlyPeruser 2 Apr 2015 12:06
Hillary Clinton supported just about every military aggression in the Middle East (invading
Iraq, bombing Syria and Lybia) that was on offer, and when the crap hit the fan (as in
Benghazi) she was stupid enough to try to cover it up. Some strong diplomatic skills and
wisdom she has, indeed....
sparafucile2 2 Apr 2015 11:24
Rand Paul is the only candidate on the horizon who could conceivably end America's
disastrous love-affair with the neo-cons and neo-liberals. The thought of Hillary Clinton
returning to the White House would be a bit like Cherie Blair returning to No 10.
DynamicDitherer 2 Apr 2015 11:24
Americans are being fed the idea that it is time a woman was in charge, like the first
black president it is a con.
Anyone want to know what Hillary Clinton is about simply google "Hilary Clinton on Gadaffi"
and it just about sums up US foreign policy REGARDLESS who is in the big chair.
If people in the UK really want to end the murders and mayhem our? foreign policies wreak
around the globe then the only way to stop it is to vote green and be brave enough to usher in
a brand new dawn in British politics as this shit has to stop, its only a matter of when, vote
for the main parties and we are sending more of our own sons and daughters to go fight the
banksters wars which in turn will unleash hell on the civillian populations of whatever
country it is.. last time it was Libya, almost Syria... lets not let it happen again and
perhaps bring foreign policy to the front of elections... no more war.
nonfiction 2 Apr 2015 11:02
She is an old fraud. She's told the world she was the one who brought peace to Northern
Ireland, though it was certainly not anything she did that helped there. She told the world
how brave she was, when she landed in a supposed danger zone, when in fact she and her
daughter had landed to a peaceful welcome by a children's band. She showed no understanding of
Palestine or of Israel. Internationally, she hasn't a clue. She's nothing but a grabby
property developer. t can't believe even Americans are so easily hood-winked that they'd vote
for her.
wimberlin 2 Apr 2015 10:42
She is obviously a bellicose bag - there is no doubt about that. However the irony is that
this bellicose bag may be better than any wing-nut the Republicans decide to come up with in
the next year.
American politics is all about money anyways - if she can get the really rich behind her, then
she will get in.
Continent 2 Apr 2015 10:39
Foreign donations to foundation raise major ethical questions for Hillary Clinton ......
... Hillary, give the money back. Or don't run. You can't keep the money and run.
In politics you do not need to be good, you just need to be better than the other choices
and win a plurality of the electorate. Discussing someones merits or failings as a leader
without contrasting that with the competition is a tiresome waste of time. Clinton is not
impressive except in comparison with the lunatics from which her opponent will be choosen. It
is this contrast that is the relevant one that should be discussed. Despote her many failings,
she is the least bad choice among thoae on offer, by a country mile.
Continent 2 Apr 2015 10:28
Hillary Clinton: foreign policy is her strong suit
25 Mar 2008 ........ Hillary Clinton has conceded that she "did misspeak" about landing in
Bosnia under sniper fire, blaming tiredness for a dramatic description that was shown to have
been significantly exaggerated. .....
..... News footage of the event however showed her claims to have been wide of the mark, and
reporters who accompanied her stated that there was no sniper fire. Her account was ridiculed
by ABC News as "like a scene from Saving Private Ryan".
Madame is a war hawk's war hawk; and few major political figures belong more completely to
Wall Street.
No thanks.
moncur 2 Apr 2015 09:48
Family dynasties are a disturbing, newish trend in Western democracies, particularly in
USA. The Bushes, the Clintons...
There is no need to copy North Korea.
"I guess at some point last year they made the strategic decision that any credibility amongst
those who are well informed could be sacrificed. Very few Westerners (especially in the Anglosohere)
will make the effort to find alternative sources, and the rest can easily be gulled." ... "How
embarassing for the Guardian; history will not be kind to the complicit, useful idiots who have prostituted
their credibility on the altar of propaganda." This neocons who run the show has thrown Ukrainian
people into abysmal poverty and horrors of civil war and now want to sell all the assets for pennies
on the dollar. Note activity of Psakibots (psigone, jessam,
nickpossum,
Mike_UK, etc) in comments. Quote: "I notice the Graun finally reported on the Kolomoisky situation.
Only a week after he sent his armed gangs to occupy corporate HQs in Kiev. Not bad, not bad at all.
I guess it takes time to be sure what the party line is in such delicate situations. Safer to say nothing
than the wrong thing."
Finance minister Natalie Jaresko wants to see debt cut and interest on remainder reduced so
Ukraine can move towards stability
Jeremn -> MartinArvay 26 Mar 2015 09:04
It is Shock Therapy II. Deregulation. Privatisation ("privatization of everything that can
be privatized and we plan to start it this year," she said on 13 March). Selling off assets. Firing
staff.
See the number of staff being sacked from state institutions. 50% from the economic ministry
alone. The minister helpfully remarked
"One can't do anything with old staff."
OldStickie -> Goodthanx 26 Mar 2015 06:53
East European oligarchs usually buy themselves Israeli citizenship. There is no extradition
from Israel so that is where you go when justice begins to catch up with you.
sodtheproles Goodthanx 26 Mar 2015 05:47
Common sense dictates federalisation for the whole of Ukraine. The existing situation benefits
only the US, and their arms manufacturers, no one else
61gvern 25 Mar 2015 21:12
I notice the Graun finally reported on the Kolomoisky situation.
Only a week after he sent his armed gangs to occupy corporate HQs in Kiev. Not bad, not bad
at all. I guess it takes time to be sure what the party line is in such delicate situations. Safer
to say nothing than the wrong thing.
nnedjo 25 Mar 2015 17:37
As far as I understand, with Ukraine is happening now something similar with the patient
over which performs open-heart surgery. So, while the surgeons do not complete the operation,
they must attach a patient to the artificial heart and artificial lungs, otherwise he would have
died.
Similarly, the Ukraine until recently was inextricably linked with Russia's economic and industrial
complex. Severing those ties were equally to the separation of man from his heart during surgery.
And, IMF now plays the role of an artificial heart, which should maintain the patient's bloodstream
until they implanted a new heart to him. How long the operation will last, and whether it will
ever be successful, it is obvious that neither the IMF knows himself. Because, as Natali Jaresko
said, Ukraine is a very big country, and throughout the EU is currently a major crisis.
Also, it is not known how the patient (Ukraine) will pay "the cost of the operation" to the
IMF, if one day he really healed, and will he ever be able to do so.
sodtheproles -> Gonzogal 25 Mar 2015 17:12
I meant for ability to use government to line her own pockets, certainly not for her investment
'skills'
Jeff1000 25 Mar 2015 17:02
Prof. Steven Cohen, of Princeton and NYU, calls the Ukraine situation "the worst international
crisis since the Cuban Missile Crisis":
That $150 million WNISEF fund handed by Jaresko has lost more than a third of its value since
the Ukrainian economy tanked. As she steps into office, Kiev's foreign reserves are down to $10
billion and shrinking, while inflation roars at 22 percent.
my sources mostly Russian and Ukrainian news agencies or blogs. There has been occupations
and clashes between the regime forces and battalions in Kiev, Dniepr and also in Odessa.
However my best independent source is Colonel Cassad.
Gonzogal 25 Mar 2015 15:43
Some background on Natalie Jaresko:
Ukraine's new Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko, a former U.S. State Department officer who
was granted Ukrainian citizenship only this week, headed a U.S. government-funded investment project
for Ukraine that involved substantial insider dealings, including $1 million-plus fees to a management
company that she also controlled.
Jaresko served as president and chief executive officer of Western NIS Enterprise Fund (WNISEF),
which was created by the U.S. Agency for International Development (U.S. AID) with $150 million
to spur business activity in Ukraine. She also was cofounder and managing partner of Horizon Capital
which managed WNISEF's investments at a rate of 2 to 2.5 percent of committed capital, fees exceeding
$1 million in recent years, according to WNISEF's 2012 annual report.
The growth of that insider dealing at the U.S.-taxpayer-funded WNISEF is further underscored
by the number of paragraphs committed to listing the "related party transactions," i.e., potential
conflicts of interest, between an early annual report from 2003 and the one a decade later.
In the 2003 report, the "related party transactions" were summed up in two paragraphs, with
the major item a $189,700 payment to a struggling computer management company where WNISEF had
an investment.
In the 2012 report, the section on "related party transactions" covered some two pages and
included not only the management fees to Jaresko's Horizon Capital ($1,037,603 in 2011 and $1,023,689
in 2012) but also WNISEF's co-investments in projects with the Emerging Europe Growth Fund [EEGF],
where Jaresko was founding partner and chief executive officer. Jaresko's Horizon Capital also
managed EEGF.
From 2007 to 2011, WNISEF co-invested $4.25 million with EEGF in Kerameya LLC, a Ukrainian
brick manufacturer, and WNISEF sold EEGF 15.63 percent of Moldova's Fincombank for $5 million,
the report said. It also listed extensive exchanges of personnel and equipment between WNISEF
and Horizon Capital.
Though it's difficult for an outsider to ascertain the relative merits of these insider deals,
they could reflect negatively on Jaresko's role as Ukraine's new finance minister given the country's
reputation for corruption and cronyism, a principal argument for the U.S.-backed "regime change"
that ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych last February.
"Russian President Putin's game plan now in Ukraine is to turn it into a failed state as
an example to the others in his EurAsian (customs) Union."
As if Putin and Lavrov need to do anything - it's already a failed state. All thanks to Washington,
its NATO stooges and a woefully naive Ukrainian population.
Jeff1000 -> psygone 25 Mar 2015 13:07
Ukraine is a disaster - anybody can see that. Your decidedly odd efforts to convince...somebody...that
Ukraine is about to turn around and become a healthy economy is, frankly, mad.
If there isn't another coup, or at least huge unrest in Kiev, by the end of the year it will
be a near miracle.
HollyOldDog -> SHappens 25 Mar 2015 10:38
The foundations of the bridge between Russia and Crimea are due to go in this spring though
the bridge completion could take 2years. Has anyone heard of how the pipelines from Russia to
Crimea are progressing - one for gas and the other for water. I think it's best for Crimea to
be totally physically seperated from Ukraine for the safety of the Crimean citizens.
Griffon79 -> nnedjo 25 Mar 2015 10:09
pretty sure the shadow government in the US has decided to destroy the US - the social compact
has been broken - no longer do they act in national interests, but private, commercial ones.
I give them about a half century before collapse followed by civil war.
Griffon79 -> UncleSam404 25 Mar 2015 10:05
Incorrect, but either your juvenile patriotism, or ignorance, or possibly payola prevents you
from seeing the absurdness of your position.
Luckily, the rest of the world as they say is not so dim.
Griffon79 -> Jonathan Stromberg 25 Mar 2015 10:01
No, there isnt. This little coup has made that clear to the intellectuals in the West -
you know, the ones not in government in journalism, the ones who make the society tick, that our
media is at least as, if not more corrupt than any media, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD, with the possible
exception of North Korea.
So, I guess the elite thought we would either swallow this, after Syria, Iraq, Libya and countless
other misadventures, or that they could retain some credibility after this propaganda assault.
Check out the insignia on the vehicle behind 'anaconda'. Really great people our 'leaders'
have elected to ally with eh?
Just to defend against your next deflection, it is in fact the neonazo simple 1488, as the
Guardian, under pressure BTL, was forced to admit.
I bet some poor staffer got in trouble for that.
Griffon79 -> Mike_UK 25 Mar 2015 09:55
Ukraine was not attacking anyone until they had a coup, didnt like resistance in the East,
and so sent a bunch of neonazi hooligans and their poorly equipped army to attack civilian populations.
Facts. Unsubjective ones. You feel me, Guardian?
Griffon79 -> psygone Mar 2015 09:52
Yes, and America will be nowhere to be seen. America likes to talk big but when it comes down
to the wire, they will sacrifice their 'allies' in a heartbeat.
Griffon79 -> Mike_UK 25 Mar 2015 09:42
They weren't Ukrainian nuclear weapons ; they were Russian. The Russians were taking back what
they owned. Also, given recent history, its probably a good thing the nutcases in the Ukrainian
coup government do not have nukes, n'est pas?
What do you think happens to the US economy when oil is no longer being traded almost exclusively
in US dollars?
Just curious what the Langley view is.
Griffon79 -> rogermell1e 25 Mar 2015 09:38
This point, from the HEAVENS:
"This is really a victory for Russia, because at one time a substantial part of the intelligentsia
had some trust in the western MSM. This has now almost completely evaporated."
Griffon79 -> Systematic 25 Mar 2015 09:35
They don't conform to their dishonest narrative, so they wont report on it.
Right now meetings are being held to determine the best possible way to spin the news for the
few dullards who remain supportive in Western nations of the Ukrainian coup government.
Griffon79 -> TOR2000 25 Mar 2015 09:34
ah yes but don't expect the vaunted Guardian to report that; they think we are rubes who
will swallow their outrageous lies hook line and sinker
newsflash, kids in short pants, you are the ones killing your creditibility, not us
johnbonn -> Goodthanx 25 Mar 2015 09:31
You are on fire today, 'how are you'. Keep it going.
Griffon79 -> GreatMountainEagle 25 Mar 2015 09:31
Erm. Ukraine can. Ukraine is like a child that does not understand why her parents wont give
her more money after she spends her allowance on candy.
Only instead of candy, she is spending her money on weapons with which to attack her own (former)
citizens.
Griffon79 -> Demi Boone 25 Mar 2015 09:26
Its getting bad then since this has been true from the start.
How embarassing for the Guardian; history will not be kind to the complicit, useful idiots
who have prostituted their credibility on the altar of propaganda.
johnbonn -> retsdon 25 Mar 2015 09:25
How else was the US going to conduct a regime change. And speaking of thugs and carpet baggers
Joe Biden fits in nicely.
And why would you put the words western and credibility together - - a contradiction in terms.
Griffon79 -> jezzam 25 Mar 2015 09:19
"Ukraine will not be allowed to founder by the West whatever "
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Are you really that naive? Explains a lot, if you are Ukrainian. Idealists, not realists.
Griffon79 -> Vladimire_Poutine 25 Mar 2015 09:16
Well, as a Canadian, I certainly don't support your blatant lies and distortions.
The misinformation campaign headquartered in Langley has failed, miserably. People are only
too aware of how our corrupt governments have connived in order to support a coup. People are
only too aware that the coup government is a mashup of neonazi nationalists, corrupt oligarchs
and poorly trained and equipped (and led - look at Debaltseve) conscripts who are deserting in
droves.
We are aware the vast majority of the roughly 1 MILLION refugees fled East, to Russia. Not
West, to the people trying to kill them. We are aware the vast majority of the killed civilians
were killed by the Ukrainian coup government using artillery and that those same forces are being
trained and equipped by our subservient governments.
We are aware Ukraine is a financial black hole that our governments will throw taxpayer dollars
into, despite a crumbling domestic economy.
Oh - on the neonazis, dont even try to deny it. The Guardiane even posted an article about
'women of the revolution' unintentionally exposing their neonazi leanings when they were photogrpahed
next to a van showing the brigade insignia of the SS (yes, that SS, WAFFEN SS)
Long and short, the battle for 'hearts and minds' is long lost. If the US agitates for WWIII
to save their bankrupt state, I think the leaders best check their heads are still attached to
their shoulders. People are the power, not the banksters and their puppets.
This conflict has done more to awaken Western citizens to the utter abrogation of our soverignity
to US aggression than any of their previous illegal adventures. We dont like what we see.
sodtheproles -> MaiKey Dee 25 Mar 2015 08:34
That's why they called shelling their own citizens an anti-terrorist operation. The Americans
have a lot to answer for, not least their abuse of the English language. Anyone remember 'collateral
damage'?
MaiKey Dee 25 Mar 2015 08:26
I thought the IMF was not permitted to lend to countries in a state of civil war
todaywefight 25 Mar 2015 08:08
Poroshenko: Ukrainian army among five strongest in Europe
Yet they have to "orderly" retreat in the middle of the night from Debaltsevo leaving dead
and injured behind as well as equipment. Furthermore they keep on begging for more money to arm
these army while the population cannot afford to feed itself...
retsdon 25 Mar 2015 07:56
As this well-researched article at the Saker makes evident, the Ukrainian leadership is
a rat's nest of criminals, thugs, and carpet-baggers. It debases western credibility entirely
that we even deal with such people at all, leave alone support and court them. And it dirties
the rest of us by association.
Victoria Nuland's background is even more telling. Quite frightening in fact.
todaywefight -> Standupwoman 25 Mar 2015 07:28
I have taken the liberty to copy your post to a series of documents that I keep since the beginning
of this sad episodes...as your comment is one of the very few posts that is solid and deeply relevant,
as such it affects ones feelings just as deeply, thank you.
Crimea has been experiencing an upsurge in development following its reunification with Russia
thanks to the country's investment in the republic. "Crimea has not developed at such a pace as
it has in the past year over the past twenty years.
Unfortunately, the 23-year-long tenure in Ukraine has been the time of regression for Crimea.
The Ukrainian government did not invest a single penny into Crimea, at the same time it sucked
out all possible resources from here," Polonsky told Sputnik, stressing that Russia "is taking
an entirely different route" which is making a "drastic" difference on the peninsula. But even
if Crimea residents were told not to expect any investment from the Russian government a year
ago, they would have "still made the choice of becoming part of Russia," the minister stressed.
The social standards, salaries and the level of medical services in Crimea grew sharply in the
past year.
Standupwoman 25 Mar 2015 06:49
"Everybody in the free world should be doing more to help Ukraine. This is a country that
has given its life for democracy and is protecting Europe from an aggressive neighbour".
Listen, Ms 'Insider Trading' Jaresco, and I'll tell you what you and your country have actually
done to Britain.
You've damaged our economy by unjust sanctions, and used our taxpayers' money to fund your
murderous war on your own people. British citizens are reduced to living off food banks, but you're
demanding we divert our spending into NATO defence – to fight an enemy that would never have been
a threat if you hadn't interfered in the first place.
You've released a poison into Europe that will take generations to cure. You've split us in
two, revived old racial hatreds, and brought back the spectre of Nazism to the countries that
suffered from it most. You've forced us into provocations that have brought us to the very brink
of war – and one that threatens to destroy us all.
You've insulted our war dead by your revision of history. You've hailed Hitler as a liberator,
deified those who committed mass murder under the Nazi flag, and defiled monuments to those who
resisted him. You've made our war sacrifices worthless, and forced us to stand by while Nazi sympathizers
glorify their heroes at the site of our own Cenotaph. You've forced us to insult our war allies
by snubbing the May 9th acknowledgement of the millions of Russian dead whose sacrifice enabled
our own country to survive. You've dishonoured us all.
You've taken away our self-respect, and put us for ever on the wrong side of history. You've
forced us to condone the destruction of democracy, and made us complicit in war crimes. You've
put us in breach of the Hague Conventions, the Geneva Conventions, the Vienna Conventions for
the protection of Embassies, and even made us abandon the presumption of innocence. God knows
we didn't have much moral credibility after our colonial past, but you've taken from us every
last little shred of decency we had left.
And now you want us to pay for the privilege?
No, Ms Jaresco. You can take your begging bowl back to Washington and tell them, 'You broke
it – you own it.' Get them to stop the war, bring justice to the innocent, and give freedom to
the people of the East. Get them to help those ordinary decent Ukrainians who only wanted the
chance of a better life, and were misled by you to their ruin. Get them to rebuild Donbass, give
back homes to the 1.5 million displaced people, help and compensate the bereaved families of those
60,000 dead. And when they've done all that, then it'll be time to start thinking about what reparations
you can make to us…
Its fantastic isnt it? You couldnt script better characters than a self styled President in
rent a Prop Poroshenko, Pre Menstraul Yatsintook, 'Its a miracle i can walk' Tymoshenko.. The
list goes on..
TrueBrit1066 -> Jeff1000 25 Mar 2015 06:42
Thanks for this. Why does this not surprise me? :)
oleteo -> Jeff1000 25 Mar 2015 06:37
I'd wish a success to Ukies but ultranationalism can't be a success
HollyOldDog -> justTR 25 Mar 2015 06:37
Except for those countries who refuse to keep filling the pot.
Sargv_ -> jezzam 25 Mar 2015 06:35
> The only countries in recent history that have resorted to mass killings of their own people
are Russia, China and Cambodia
USSR was not Russia, not even by a long shot. For starters, Russians were a minority on all
levels of early-days soviet state machine, and were, by far, the most oppressed nation during
communist rule. Consider the gains and losses for all the nations occupied by bosheviks prior
to communist revolution, and after the Soviet collapse.
It's Russians, Chechens Russian Germans who lost the most, while Georgia - a homeland of Stalin,
and Ukraine - a homeland of Kruschev and Brezhnev, gained enormous territories and industries.
They lost most of this in just 25 years, but that's anothe story.
todaywefight -> Albatros18 25 Mar 2015 06:32
Sorry I don't see any mention of demonstrations and the army getting ready mate..just give
me a link please
Albatros18 -> todaywefight 25 Mar 2015 06:32
she is the only candidate who does not scream for war. People, especially his allies, are fed
up with Yatsenyuk's foul, nonsense, warmongering language. Let's see who will be the winner of
this fight for power.
todaywefight -> Albatros18 25 Mar 2015 06:28
Thank you very much
oleteo 25 Mar 2015 06:27
Good girl, good start.
At the beginning there was the begging for money, now and then there would be an incessant
begging to write off.
Albatros18 -> todaywefight 25 Mar 2015 06:27
Porkoshenko's website.
Verbum -> jezzam 25 Mar 2015 06:25
The US spent 5 billion between 1991 and 2014 on the development of standard democratic institutions
in Ukraine
Is Kolomoisky and his private army one of the 'standard democratic institutions' funded by
the US in Ukraine?
Verbum -> Albatros18 25 Mar 2015 06:23
Kolomoisky, Poroshenko, Yats... Is it the 'democracy' the Yanks spent 5 billion dollars on?
The dollar doesn't seem to buy much nowadays. And Nuland's cookies to top it all up... All wasted.
Sargv_ 25 Mar 2015 06:21
With all that constant 'donate for the good cause' narrative here and there, Ukraine should
finally drop the idea of being a sovereign state (as they are clearly suck at this) and register
as a World-first 45mln-strong charity organisation instead.
Goodthanx -> Albatros18 25 Mar 2015 06:19
I say let them! The fighters of DPR are looking forward to the resupply!
Jeff1000 25 Mar 2015 06:18
Finance minister Natalie Jaresko...
Interesting notes on the career/life of Ms Jaresko:
- Born in America, still a US citizen.
- Not a Ukrainian citizen until 2014, Poroshenko pushed a special law through parliament in order
to make her FM.
- Her dual citizenships are illegal under Ukrainian law (they seem to be OK with it).
- Held jobs at: The US State Dept, the US Treasury and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
Just another sign that the USA has absolutely NOTHING to do with the mess in Kiev, and
it certainly isn't about grabbing money, influence and/or natural resources.
Goodthanx -> todaywefight 25 Mar 2015 06:17
I have never lived there, but a close examination and reading of history plus an attitude that
remembers we are talking about human life.. Is enough to convince me to the virtues of this cause.
ID075732 -> Parangaricurimicuaro 25 Mar 2015 06:16
But it's no secret where she came from!
todaywefight -> Albatros18 25 Mar 2015 06:16
Apparently he resigned... and Poroshenko accepted his resignation and installed one of his
followers to the position.
Do you have any links to the rest of your post? if that lady becomes the PM Ukraine is gone
for all money.
Sargv_ -> nickpossum 25 Mar 2015 06:15
> Two simple truths. The West does not want a war with Russia. If Russia attacks the West,
it will be destroyed.
If Russia attacks the West, it'll attack the part it can reach, which is, obviously, the EU.
So the outcome will be slightly more complicated: Russia attacks The West, EU and Russia are
both destroyed, while The Rest of The West grab all the gains (nobody will ever mention that $17tln
debt; there'd be no high-end market competition wit US goods - and so on, and so forth).
There's only one winner in this conflict, no matter how hot it will get: the USoA. Europeans
are predefined to the role of economical donor for pro-US Ukraine at best, WW3 cannon fodder at
worst.
todaywefight -> Goodthanx 25 Mar 2015 06:12
What is sad is that, having lived in the country for many years I feel so sorry for the people,
the normal people, not the Gucci, Ferragamo and Zegna brigade the guys wearing $4000 suits wth
a black tee shirt, the ones that their idea of being part of parliament is to sit the whole day
in Passage, or go to Da vinci fo lunch or go to Mafia for dinner and look important when their
chauffeurs open the door of the black mercs a disgusting low life.
It will never be the same, forces were unleashed last year by Nuland that helped create
a generational hatred and the loss of life not to mention the lose of 1/5 of the country and if
Poroshenko or anyone else think that the eggs can be unscrambled I can advise them that they do
not need the IMF but a bunch of Clinical Psychiatrists
HollyOldDog vr13vr 25 Mar 2015 06:09
But it won't last. The Anericans always screwup.
Sargv_ -> geedeesee 25 Mar 2015 06:06
> "Jaresko said that, in five years, she wanted to see a Ukraine at peace"
"In five years I want to be a five years sober." We definitely need an international AA for
country-wide hangovers caused by 'we are the people' riots.
HollyOldDog -> someoneionceknew 25 Mar 2015 06:05
But the USA fallout is to destroy whatever is left of the Ukraine economy leaving it citizens
with far higher food and fuel costs.
While Russia is finding new friends and markets the World over. Strange how many countries
are now learning that if you don't protect your back then expect an USA knife trying to rip your
guts out .
DerFremde -> HollyOldDog 25 Mar 2015 06:05
wag the dog, Holly, wag the dog
first law of democratisation, you will open your markets to us in full. nationalised assets
will be privatised and you will take out IMF loans to do the 'restructuring' not the so-called
investors. this debt will be paid for by the population in due course.
Albatros18 25 Mar 2015 06:03
Kolomoisky sacked by Poroshenko, the former's private army is on alert to attack government
buildings, hundreds protest in Kiev asking Yatsenyuk's head, the reports suggest that the finance
minister, the Chicago born lady to become PM, the junta still shells Donetsk towns, and what the
Americans want: send more weapons. Only continuing conflict would save the Americans' crooks in
Kiev in short term.
todaywefight -> Goodthanx 25 Mar 2015 05:57
Yes actually I saw one of the interviews, she wants the Russians not to call the debt, she
also wants peace and then she turns the switch on and talks like Nuland and proceeds to shit all
over Russia, It think the girl will be done like a dinner in no time...
todaywefight -> jezzam 25 Mar 2015 05:47
Probably the most important part about your posts is that they are totally disconnected
from reality, and, as such we do not really have to even give you the courtesy of an answer.
todaywefight -> jezzam 25 Mar 2015 05:42
...the 2,000,000 to 3,600,000 killed in Vietnam and the millions left without limbs and the
destruction of their cities. How about the hundreds of thousands dead in latin america due to
the intervention of the US...the exceptional country...the thing is that all these deaths were
based on lies invented by your country
What exactly do you call the targeted wooden buildings and the firebombing of these buildings
by 300 b29s killing an US official "100000" and two days later the bombing of Hyrishima and Nagasaky,
the 1,000,000 killed in Ira
Goodthanx -> Vladimire_Poutine 25 Mar 2015 02:36
As a Jew myself, i can tell you that Kolomovsky and the likes of him, does not represent me
or the greater Ukrainian Jewish community. Referencing a 'dial-a-jew', does not provide validity
to your argument, just provides further fuel to the propoganda fire.
Lastly i believe the question was, 'who do you work for?'
MSM is full of articles and comments that demonise Putin and Russia. The problem is, there
is no where near enough attention and scrutiny brought towards the country that staged a violent
coup helped by neo nazis who now control critical ministerial positions in the Rada, declared
an ATO on their own civilian population in the east, murdered opposition and intimidate the rest,
burn thru international funds and pocket the rest, war crimes..etc
These are the issues.
PlatonKuzin 25 Mar 2015 02:04
Kolomoisky id no longer a governor but the questions remain and the conflict between the oligarchs
in Ukraine gains strong momentum. What next?
todaywefight 25 Mar 2015 01:58
In 1887, the struggle for control of Hawaii was at its height as David Kalakaua was elected
to the Hawaiian throne. King Kalakaua signed a reciprocity treaty with the United States making
it possible for sugar to be sold to the U.S. market tax-free, but the haole - or "white" -
businessmen were still distrustful of him. They criticized his ties to men they believed to
be corrupt, his revival of Hawaiian traditions such as the historic Hula, and construction
of the royal Iolani Palace. A scandal involving Kalakaua erupted in the very year he was crowned,
and it united his opponents, a party of businessmen under the leadership of Lorrin Thurston.
The opposition used the threat of violence to force the Kalakua to accept a new constitution
that stripped the monarchy of executive powers and replaced the cabinet with members of the
businessmen's party. The new constitution, which effectively disenfranchised most native Hawaiian
voters, came to be known as the "Bayonet Constitution" because Kalakaua signed it under duress.
Replace Nuland for Thurston and there you have a good example of there is no reason for reinventing
the wheel.
irishinrussia -> UncleSam404 25 Mar 2015 01:16
Russia is not broke by any stretch of the imagination. It has a very low debt to GDP ratio.
It still has $360 billion in reserves (even if that figure continues to decline at its current
rate - unlikely as the rouble has stabilised - that would still give them almost three years before
that money ran out). The budget deficit for last year was very small. This year it is projected
to be around 3% (incidentally, about what the US deficit was last year and is projected to be
for the next ten years). It continues to run a balance of payments surplus even with lower oil
prices. The situation in Russia is certainly not peachy, but it is a far cry from "broke".
Demi Boone -> Vladimire_Poutine 25 Mar 2015 01:09
Oh Vlad, take a look at the marches honoring the Ukranian SS that just took place across Ukraine
where thousands showed up, or the SS armbands worn by extreme right participants in the Maiden
or the Azov Battalion who brags of their SS devotion (but they are quick to denounce the atrocities
of WW2) I challenge you to show any article promoting NeoNazi's in Russia. You have obviously
not read any Russian History to know the hatred these people have for the idea of the Nazi. Your
accusations of Nemstov's murder are pure speculation based on your biased opinion. There were
no Nuclear threats made by Russia rather they were saying that all systems were on alert. When
a Russian plane flies close to the UK you had better believe they are on the same high alert.
With regards to your statement about News credibility most media sources in the US whitewash the
news. Did you read anything in any major papers about the people who were run over by Ukranian
forces and given permission to "shoot to kill" if the crowd got too out of hand and began to fight
back?
someoneionceknew -> Goodthanx 25 Mar 2015 00:57
What is it by the way, with her numerous investments in Ukraine and Moldova?
CIA, buddy. She's a company gal.
someoneionceknew 25 Mar 2015 00:51
"The good news is that we have made great progress on stability."
Words fail me.
These CIA types certainly can gild a lily when required.
Jerome Fryer normankirk 25 Mar 2015 00:44
The Russian economy in GDP terms is expected to have a 5% contraction year on year, then pick
up growing. That assumes no favourable changes in oil price, and doesn't factor in Putin's attempts
to steer the Russian economy into greater self-sufficiency. Oil is likely to recover, and the
attempt to shift / diversify the economy could go either way.
(At a minimum, they will be replacing as much of Ukraine's former supply of critical components
as quickly as possible. Russia have been handing out citizenship papers and jobs like candy to
any Ukrainians that were working in the defense related industries. Putin isn't trying to rebuild
the USSR, but he is trying to maintain the capabilities of the USSR by drawing critical personnel
-- and allegedly machinery -- into Russia.)
Jerome Fryer -> BorninUkraine 25 Mar 2015 00:33
It is very sad.
Western propaganda used to be a lot smarter, presumably because of the 'clash of ideologies'
background. Now we are back to the old, pre-Communist threat, standard of "The Kaiser eats babies".
Most people tend to only 'believe' this nonsense at a superficial level, though. Ask them about
the 'reporting' and you'll find that they consider the assertions dubious. Effective propaganda
is intended to operate at more of a subliminal / emotional level, and bypass our thinking abilities.
Jerome Fryer -> pantaraxia 25 Mar 2015 00:25
He is also president of European Council of Jewish Communities, which probably translates
into backing from powerful Jewish interests in the US and Israel.
That is debatable, and incorrect. See here for why he resigned from the ECJC and started his
own "European Jewish Union".
Kolomoisky is no less divisive than Poroshenko. He is, however, very much an 'old school'
Jewish mafia type -- and prone to blatant aggressive behaviour such as the recent takeover of
the UkrTransNafta building by his 'private security'.
Oh, and it appears that Poroshenko has gone with the option to try to arrest Kolomoisky's
'private security', as a start. (Source seems to be RT, though, so about as reliable / unreliable
as the BBC.)
todaywefight -> Vladimire_Poutine 25 Mar 2015 00:17
Are you from the newly created Ministry of Truth in Kyiv? or "ukraine tomorrow"?
The former is an oxymoron Truth and Ukraine should never be on the same sentence unless it says
Ukraine failed to tell the truth...that is acceptable...
I dont know Vladimire...in view of the current events and the little fight amongst the Oligarchs...and
accusations against Kolomoisky, his partners and his rather strong response, I am not sure who
the crazy ones are here.
HollyOldDog ID075732 25 Mar 2015 00:15
I could be wrong but I half remember a political cartoon depicting the USA as a Wreaking Ball
against some other economy. I will have to check later.
BorninUkraine rogermell1e 25 Mar 2015 00:04
Wow! The circus keeps going.
Poroshenko relieved Kolomoisky of duties of Dniepropetrovsk governor (directive 173/2015).
In response, Kolomoisky promised to take his battalions from the war zone with LNR/DNR and
direct them to take over Kremenchug power plant and the office of Ukrtransgas (Ukrainian "state"
company involved in transport of natural gas). Mega-thieves started all-out struggle, revealing
the criminal nature of current Ukrainian state for all to see in the process.
How can Western media report such a piece of evidence directly incriminating the US and EU?
Old_Donkey 24 Mar 2015 23:53
Let's hope that Natalie Jaresko's skills as a financier are better than her skills as a diplomat.
She's asking Russia to accept a haircut on $3 billion of debt, and Ukraine's situation is so desperate
that you can't blame her for trying. But if she wants the Kremlin to "buy into this vision", she
will need to learn some manners and show Russia some more respect first. Jaresko presents Ukraine
as a country that is "protecting Europe from an aggressive neighbour". No one who wanted to persuade
Vladimir Putin to restructure the debt would say that unless they were either very stupid or dutifully
repeating State Department propaganda (or both).
The fundamental problem with the Ukrainian government is that it is incapable of restoring
stability to Ukraine and instead seems hell-bent on a continuation of the civil war. The Kiev
government remains absolutely opposed to finding a political solution to the problems in Eastern
Ukraine and refuses to recognize the authority of the rebel leaders, who, in Donetsk and Lugansk,
are clearly "the only game in town". Jaresko's own government is busily wrecking the Minsk 2 agreement
and has thereby enormously increased the political risks attached to any new loans. Already, Ukrainian
forces have violated the ceasefire by firing on Russian journalists and OSCE observers near Shirokino.
The purpose of an IMF loan is not to enable a country to rearm or to continue fighting a civil
war but to help it to rebuild its financial system. Until we can be confident that Kiev is committed
to implementing Minsk 2, all IMF loans to the Kiev government would therefore be irresponsible
and offered on a dishonest basis. The IMF is specifically prohibited from offering war loans by
its own charter. At the moment, it looks as though Kiev needed Minsk 2 merely for form's sake,
so that it could screw some more cash out of Christine Lagarde to pay for a reconquest of the
Donbass once spring arrives.
Madame Lagarde's career has always benefitted from American support, and her eagerness to return
the favour is understandable. She knows how the game is played but she also knows that loyalty
to a patron has its limits. So if Jaresko and her State Department controllers expect Madame Lagarde
to violate the IMF's own rules by continuing to fund Ukraine's neo-Nazi war machine, they may
find themselves disappointed. Madame Lagarde still has a reputation to protect but Jaresko lost
hers as soon as she joined the criminal regime in Kiev.
Goodthanx 24 Mar 2015 23:46
"we are lucky to have the support of the IMF."
Yes well according to Jaresko's biography which includes very cosey relationship with the IMF,
i dont think luck played any hand in it.
What is it by the way, with her numerous investments in Ukraine and Moldova? Conflict of interest?
Or just business as usual?
Jaresko said she could not complain that Ukraine had been ignored while the European Union
tried to sort out the problems of Greece.
It's a joke isn't it?
Jaresko parachuted in by the US to help shore-up the coup they created financially and think
it should have the same status as Greece. Now claiming a similar restructuring package that the
EU refused for Tsipras?
The difference being that Ukraine is not part of the EU, nor part of NATO.
Jaresko is claiming that Russia is a threat to Europe? We all know Putin's big idea was for
more trade integration with Europe that was the actual threat the US didn't want. So they turned
Ukraine into a buffer against this happening, although its become more of a punch bag.
Another wreaking US intervention, we're all wise to this now. And when it's wreaked buy it
cheap - great for Amerika's business. A win win for US backed business, a lose lose for the Ukrainian
people!
EugeneGur 24 Mar 2015 23:31
Well, the oligarch war in Ukraine is intensifying. Kolomoiskyi threatened the head of Naftogas
to take his battalions out of the war zone and to occupy the office of Ukrtransgas and Kremenchug
power station. Poroshenko just fired Kolomoiskyi from his position of the Governor of Dnepropetrovsk
region, which Kolomoiskyi is not about to give up, of course. The Ukrainian parliament, Rada,
in the meantime is considering privatization of Privatbank owned by Kolomoiskyi, the move that
could crush whatever is left of the Ukrainian financial system. Curiouser and curiouser.
I do hope that even those people in the West who had no clue before now realize that kind of
personages their governments brought to power in Ukraine. Ukraine is in chaos, there is no government
to speak of, and all these colorful individuals keep their personal airplanes ready for immediate
departure.
Goodthanx 24 Mar 2015 23:09
"There is always a risk of a default," she added, noting that several factions in Ukraine's
parliament were demanding that the government go down that route.
In Ukraine, we call it the classic 'Ha Ha..screw you maneuver.'
twiglette 24 Mar 2015 23:04
This absurd narrativeve that Ukraine is a beacon of Western democracy! It is a corrupt racist
state whose current elite came to power in a U.S. inspired coupe that threw out the elected government
that wished to join Russia. It has fought a viscous war against its Russian east. It deserves
nothing.
rogermell1e 24 Mar 2015 23:03
Looks like Kolomoiskyi has had it. The "Kyiv Post" just ran an article in which they mention
that Kolo has (gasp) "connections to organised crime".
:-D
Last week they were *very* careful about what they said about Kolomoiskyi to the point of barely
reporting the events. But now the rats are fleeing the sinking ship.
Kolo had better skedaddle before we see yet another mysterious defenestration.
OneTop 24 Mar 2015 22:58
Natalie Jaresko wants to see debt cut and interest on remainder reduced so Ukraine can
move towards stability
Jaresko is a US citizen who was appointed by Nuland [Assistant Secretary of State for European
and Eurasian Affairs] to run the finance ministry of the Ukraine. (the Ukraine granted her citizenship
-- to give the appearance of legitimacy).
The Ukraine is run by very powerful oligarchs who have to date, much more political and real
power than the western installed and supported Poroshenko.
There is no doubt the US / West will continue to support Poroshenko as he desperately needs
US support to maintain his position, the more powerful "other" oligarchs with their private armies
do not.
Jaresko is simply parroting US diktat (her paymasters) which is building the narrative that
Ukraines' debt to Russia (primarily for energy) be legally declared as odious debt.
Which means that the Ukraine could stiff Russia for the billions it owes for goods and services
already rendered.
In plain words, Jaresko is a mindless mandarin installed by America in an effort to wrest Ukraine
from their evil Russian masters.
Vaska Tumir Kata L 24 Mar 2015 22:11
America's Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, has now informed him, in no uncertain
terms, that "the law of the jungle" must end in Ukraine.
Ambassador Pyatt's statements are taken very seriously by Ukrainian Government officials.
Really?
They ARE the "law of the jungle" enforcers in Ukraine, as Pyatt knows perfectly well. In this
instance, what we have is a situation in which a set of criminals of exactly the same sort as
those in power but currently not in the government itself (Kolomoysky and his lot) is stronger
than the set of criminals the USA put in power in Kiev. That's what comes from having a foreign
policy based on pure banditry.
ChristopherMyers 24 Mar 2015 22:09
I realize this may be a very bizarre thought, but the situation here in the Ukraine bears a
striking resemblance to the annexation of Hawaii in 1898 by the United States.
BorninUkraine -> rogermell1e 24 Mar 2015 21:57
It's not only the media, it is much broader than that. When I left USSR in 1991, most educated
people believed BBC, Voice of America, and Western media in general, and had fairly good feelings
about the US and Europe.
When I started reading Russian news sites last year (simply because the Western narrative about
Ukrainian crisis made no sense to someone who has friends and relatives all over Ukraine), I was
appalled by the level of anti-American and anti-EU feelings. Americans are called almost invariably
"pindós" [Cyrillic spelling пиндос], which is a pretty derogative term, the US is called "pindostan",
and most people think that Western media lie almost as much as Ukrainian media, which are notorious
for ludicrous lies (like the story that Russia used nukes in the fight for Lugansk airport).
In the USSR I always knew that Soviet media are spewing propaganda, using half-truths and
blatant lies. However, compared to current reporting on Ukraine in the Western media, even Soviet
papers look truthful. It is very sad.
pantaraxia 24 Mar 2015 21:45
It will be fascinating to see which way the US goes with Kolomoisky vs. Poroshenko.
On the one hand a lot of time and energy has been expended propping up the Poroshenko gov't.
In spite of this he is rapidly losing popularity with the populace and may be seen as expendable.
A convenient scapegoat for the failed military operation in eastern Ukraine. However another regime
change at this point would threaten the country with absolute chaos and would make external financing
arrangements problematic to say the least.
Kolomoisky is hooked into the US state department, via Bursima, the murky gas company where
both VP Biden's son and Kerry's stepson(?) are members of its Board. He is also president of European
Council of Jewish Communities, which probably translates into backing from powerful Jewish interests
in the US and Israel. Kolomoisky and Nuland seem to be kindred spirits both in their advocacy
for a military solution as well as their general ziocon tendencies.
Interesting times indeed.
whitemangotnodreamin -> normankirk 24 Mar 2015 21:41
Because they are probably under instructions to support Poroshenko and his side kick no matter
what..lest they want their hard drives smashed to smithereens in the carpark as it happened before.
They did it with Iraq, Libya, Syria, Torture and Kidnapping, Diego Garcia...all of these glossed
over...lately even the "suicide" of 7 party of regions members they reported as 4 and did not
open for comments...such is life
frankverismo -> Chirographer 24 Mar 2015 21:39
"I don't think anybody really wants to lend or give the Ukraine any money because of the
rampant corruption and "mismanagement" referred to in the article."
I don't think you get how this works. Or you simply don't wish to see the sheer depth of the
venality at work. Jaresko has been put there by Washington. The plan is exactly the opposite of
granting Ukraine its sovereign independence but rather to put it even further into debt thus putting
it completely at the mercy of outside forces. It's already a black hole - and she's asking for
the death blow.
"And the Ukraine's problems didn't start with the war or Yanukovich. While he might have
been the biggest crook who ruled the country, he has competition for that title from previous
leaders too."
Correct.
"Russia's aggression and policy of destabilisation is a huge aggravating factor at present"
Kindly tell us all about this 'aggression'. Be specific. You are, I assume, aware that Russia
has had its Black Sea Fleet stationed in Crimea since the 18th century? What was Russia going
to do when a US-backed coup happened on her doorstep? Hand her naval base over to NATO and let
Kiev do to Crimea what they've been doing in Donbass? Really? Be honest. What would you have done?
"Ukraine's failing economy is another anchor, with low oil prices and western sanctions,
tied to the feet of a sinking Russia."
Were the Russian economy remotely similar to the US' this might be so. But it isn't. It has
a low debt-to-GDP ratio, an expanding manufacturing base and countries other than Europe and the
US perfectly willing to trade with it (and not in US$). The sanctions are certainly an annoyance
as is the low oil price but long-term this will only serve to further divorce Russia from the
West's sick fiat system - a very healthy thing.
rogermell1e Systematic 24 Mar 2015 21:34
"I wonder how long can The Guardian & Co."
I guess at some point last year they made the strategic decision that any credibility amongst
those who are well informed could be sacrificed. Very few Westerners (especially in the Anglosohere)
will make the effort to find alternative sources, and the rest can easily be gulled.
This is really a victory for Russia, because at one time a substantial part of the intelligentsia
had some trust in the western MSM. This has now almost completely evaporated.
TOR2000 24 Mar 2015 21:33
Kiev continues to violate the ceasefire (OSCE):
Between 09:40 and 10:40hrs, whilst at an observation point in the eastern outskirts of Sopyne
(government-controlled, 15km east of Mariupol, 2.5km west of Shyrokyne) the SMM heard heavy
engagement of small arms, machine guns, automatic grenade launchers and mortars, including
70 outgoing 82mm and 120mm mortar shells. The SMM assessed that the fire originated from one
kilometre to the east and was directed further east of the SMM's position. An additional ten
82mm mortar shells hit 400m east of the SMM's position, some of which detonated in the air
indicating that they were fitted with distance or time delay fuses. Due to the security situation,
the SMM relocated to another observation point 4km north-west of Shyrokyne ("DPR"-controlled,
20km east of Mariupol, 102km south of Donetsk). Between 11:33 and 12:06hrs the SMM observed
three incoming 82mm mortar shells exploding above Ukrainian Armed Forces positions north of
Berdyanske (government-controlled, 18km east of Mariupol). It also heard small arms and light
weapons fire as well as ten mortar detonations but was not able to ascertain the direction
and calibre.
The SMM unarmed/unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) monitored both sides of the contact line east
of Mariupol. At 17:38hrs, in Shyrokyne the SMM UAV observed outgoing mortar fire from a Ukrainian
Armed Forces position.
The SMM revisited four Ukrainian Armed Forces heavy weapons holding areas, all of which
comply with the respective withdrawal lines and remain in situ. All serial numbers are consistent
with previous visits. Additionally, the SMM intended to monitor two additional holding areas,
but these sites no longer contained any heavy weapons.
BorninUkraine -> rogermell1e 24 Mar 2015 21:33
Yes, the competition between two mega-thieves, Kolomoisky and Poroshenko, intensified in the
last few days. Considering that the head of SBU (Ukrainian KGB) Nalivaichenko, who is CIA agent
and US citizen, took the side of Poroshenko, the US plans to play against Kolomoisky. This does
not guarantee Poroshenko win, though: this is about a lot of money to be made on oil, gas, etc,
and then on grain that will be paid by farmers in return for credits for gas, diesel, and lubricants
they need for planting.
It is well known (not in the West, I am sure, where people are fed ridiculous lies) that for
this amount of money Kolomoisky would kill his own mother, let alone Poroshenko or even US ambassador.
So buying some popcorn is a good idea.
whitemangotnodreamin -> Jerome Fryer 24 Mar 2015 21:21
No prospect to repay 'loans' makes those loans unlikely.
Precisely, what Jaresko is essentially saying is give us the money but don't ask for it back...
Nick is a confused soul...or a purposely confused one.
whitemangotnodreamin 24 Mar 2015 20:41
I actually watched one of her interviews on Bloomberg, full of softballs, she seldom if ever
answered a question, in particular what would happen if Russia demands payment at the end of the
year, and the fact that they are asking creditors to take a rather large haircut. The softest
thing about this woman are her teeth, but as we will see being hard does not translate to being
tough, hit a brick in the right place and it breaks.
So let's see who is Natalie Jaresko:
" A Chicago-born investment banker who received her Ukrainian citizenship in December 2014,
she. is Ukraine's finance minister and in total control of Ukrainian financial policy. In the
late '80s and early '90s, she just so happened to hold several positions at the US State Department
before taking the position of Chief of the Economic Section of the US Embassy in Ukraine. She
also managed the USAID-financed Western NIS Enterprise Fund, which kindly provided funds for
'pro-democracy' movements in Belarus, Moldova and, predictably, Ukraine. "
Ms.Jaresko, is involved in court proceedings, again. This time for breaching US passport laws.
She was previously a US State Dept. employee and was granted Ukrainian citizenship so she could
take the job.
She has previously been in court over the misappropriation of US funding through her previous
company Horizon Capital. This company just happened to be a partner of Yatsenyuk's pre maidan
campaign. The other party in the case is her husband who she has been attempting to silence by
court order. She has also so far managed to silence her former husband spilling the beans of some
significant loan improprieties.
But, hey what would one expect of a President who, was secretly palling up to the US's embassy
in Kyiv when he was a minister for 3 different administrations in Ukraine, a man whose latest
Human resource success was the employment of "Help me or I'll eat my red tie" Saakashvili a man
wanted in Georgia who was being kept quietly in the US until now.
bobby_fisher 24 Mar 2015 20:33
US citizen, financial shaister and former State Department employee Natalie Jaresko is well
positioned as Finance minister of Ukraine to oversee implementation of the H.R. 5859, the Ukraine
Freedom Support Act, that among other things gives control to Washington over Ukrainian Energy
policies, provides protections to American oil, gas, biotech, financial corporate interests over
legitimate interests of Ukrainian people.
This seals the fate of Ukraine as US colony, instead of an independent state.
Chirographer 24 Mar 2015 20:32
I don't think anybody really wants to lend or give the Ukraine any money because of the rampant
corruption and "mismanagement" referred to in the article.
And the Ukraine's problems didn't start with the war or Yanukovich. While he might have been
the biggest crook who ruled the country, he has competition for that title from previous leaders
too.
Russia's aggression and policy of destabilisation is a huge aggravating factor at present,
but there will have to be real and substantial changes in the way Ukrainians conduct their businesses
and government before they're going to get the kind money the finance minister is asking for.
It does seem fitting though, that given the economic ties between the two countries, Ukraine's
failing economy is another anchor, with low oil prices and western sanctions, tied to the feet
of a sinking Russia.
HollyOldDog DerFremde 24 Mar 2015 20:23
The Russian Steppes? The Ukrainian fracking has not shown commercial quantities of gas/oil.
To try the same techniques in East Ukraine would mean closing down the existing coal mines first
and even then there is a serious risk of contaminating the fresh water both underground and surface
waters. All this with only minor prospects of finding commercial quantities of Fracked oil/gas.
If the existing cialthey mines in East Ukraine were closed down then where would West Ukraine
get its coal of a suitable quality to be used in its coal fired power stations?
HollyOldDog Manolo Torres 24 Mar 2015 20:11
And not forgetting the looting of the Iraq museums by any sneak theif who walked through the
unguarded doors . Only the Oil Ministry was important to the Americans.
pantaraxia HollyOldDog 24 Mar 2015 20:09
The Japanese had been attempting to surrender months before Hiroshima. The back channels went
through the USSR with no constructive response from the American side.
According to a number of analysts there was another reason for dropping the nuclear bombs
- to showcase to the USSR and the world the raw power available to the US military. A scare tactic.
Manolo Torres -> DIPSET 24 Mar 2015 19:30
That seems indeed a very good book, but one may end up extremely disgusted after reading it.
From the review, to give our friends an idea of what Mrs Jaresko might be up to now and why her
urgent plead:
An unprecedented account of life in Baghdad's Green Zone, a walled-off enclave of towering
plants, posh villas, and sparkling swimming pools that was the headquarters for the American
occupation of Iraq. The Washington Post's former Baghdad bureau chief Rajiv Chandrasekaran
takes us with him into the Zone; into a bubble, cut off from wartime realities, where the task
of reconstructing a devastated nation competed with the distractions of a Little America-a
half-dozen bars stocked with cold beer, a disco where women showed up in hot pants, a movie
theater that screened shoot-'em-up films, an all-you-could-eat buffet piled high with pork,
a shopping mall that sold pornographic movies, a parking lot filled with shiny new SUVs, and
a snappy dry-cleaning service- much of it run by Halliburton
In the vacuum of postwar planning, Bremer ignores what Iraqis tell him they want or need
and instead pursues irrelevant neoconservative solutions-a flat tax, a sell-off of Iraqi government
assets, and an end to food rationing. His underlings spend their days drawing up pie-in-the-sky
policies, among them a new traffic code and a law protecting microchip designs, instead
of rebuilding looted buildings and restoring electricity production.
Mordantdude 24 Mar 2015 19:14
Everybody in the free world should be doing more to help Ukraine. This is a country that has
given its life for democracy and is protecting Europe from an aggressive neighbour," she said.
Meanwhile with the little help from "the free world" Ukraine downgraded further into junk by
Moody's. Do you need more?
pantaraxia 24 Mar 2015 19:14
The whole IMF program is a con job, transferring debt onto the Ukrainian government and its
taxpayers (with the inevitable austerity and privatization programs to follow), while leaving
the back door wide open to systemic abuse by well-connected oligarchs.
As for where the IMF money which has been paid into the Ukrainian banks has gone, the report
discloses … the banking system faced large foreign currency outflows (US$3.1 billion). Capital
controls likely prevented larger outflows, but were not fully effective in stemming them."
In short, of the $3.2 billion disbursed to the Ukrainian treasury by the IMF at the start
of May, $3.1 billion had disappeared offshore by the middle of August.
The looting continues.
HollyOldDog -> nickpossum 24 Mar 2015 19:08
There is a history of the other side of the coin with the actions of the USA. When Japan was
on the point of defeat and negociations for Japan's surrender to the USA and its allies were occuring
, the USA decided to drop nuclear bombs on Japan. A senior military spokesman from that period
gave the reasons why.
1. To force Japan to surrender more quickley and solely under the terms Givern solely by the
USA.
2. If it saved only ONE DAY of negociations then dropping nuclear bombs on Jalan would be worth
it.
Millions of Japanese citizens died either through the the blasts themselves or by radiation
sickness just for the Americans to save ONE DAY of negociations.
pantaraxia 24 Mar 2015 18:36
For the sordid backstory on the IMF loan to Ukraine:
The new loan terms announced by the IMF last week, postpone reform by the commercial banks
until well into 2016. In the meantime, the IMF says it will allow about $4 billion of its loan
cash to be diverted to the treasuries of the oligarch-owned banks. That is almost one dollar
in four of the IMF loan to Ukraine.
The biggest beneficiary of last year's IMF financing is likely to repeat its good fortune,
according to sources close to the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU). This is PrivatBank, controlled
by Igor Kolomoisky , governor of Dniepropetrovsk region and financier of several units fighting
on Kiev's side in the civil war.
snip
…Kolomoisky has been assured by the IMF that he is one of the few Ukrainian taxpayers to
be safe from an increase in income tax.
snip
The justification for the PrivatBank payout, …
For collateral, Gontareva (NBU Governor) has accepted a shareholding in the bank, plus an undisclosed
number of airplanes owned by Kolomoisky, or by airlines associated with the Privat group. ….
They are all bankrupt, and so the asset value is uncertain and the subject of creditor claims
pending in several countries
and the punch line:
…." A Geneva banker with an office close to Kolomoisky's residence in the city comments:
"Not even the Swiss have thought of war financing like this – funding civil war, then taking
international loans for compensation, then banking the profit margin in Geneva."
DIPSET Manolo Torres 24 Mar 2015 18:17
Be fair, most of that money to rebuild Iraq was stolen by the same homicidal maniacs that destroyed
the country in the first place.
True that.
You won't find a better tome than this book on the whole debacle and financial corruption the
Yanks got into in Iraq.....
Because of bureaucratic delays, only 2 percent of the $18.4 billion Supplemental had been
spent. Nothing had been expended on construction, health care, sanitation, or the provision
of clean water, and more money had been devoted to administration than all projects related
to education, human rights, democracy, and governance combined. At the same time, the CPA had
managed to dole out almost all of a $20 billion development fund fed by Iraq's oil sales, more
than $1.6 billion of which had been used to pay Halliburton, primarily for trucking fuel into
Iraq.
Or this......
The first guy who was assigned to help rebuild Iraq's health sector was named Skip Burkle.
And Skip is physician. He has a Master's degree in public health. He has four postgraduate
degrees. He teaches at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. He had worked in Kosovo,
in Somalia and in Northern Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War. He also was employed by the U.S. Agency
for International Development, and a USAID colleague called him the single most talented post-conflict
public health specialist in the U.S. government. But a few weeks after the fall of Saddam's
government, Mr. Burkle was informed by an email from a superior at USAID that he was being
replaced. He was told that the White House wanted, quote/unquote, "a loyalist" in the job.
And I write in the book that Burkle had a wall of degrees, but he didn't have a picture with
the President.
In his place was sent Jim Haveman. Jim Haveman does not have a medical degree. He was a
social worker, and he was the former Director of Community Health in the State of Michigan.
Prior to his stint in government, he had a little bit of international experience, but it was
largely in the context of being a director for International Aid, a faith-based relief organization
that promotes Christianity in the developing world in conjunction with development assistance.
And prior to that, he headed up a large adoption agency in the State of Michigan that urges
pregnant women not to have abortions.
Well, Haveman showed up, and his view was that, look, Iraq didn't need a huge infusion of
money to rebuild its hospitals, even though I and other people who have been to Iraqi hospitals
have seen them to be thoroughly decrepit and really, you know, in need of an overhaul, and
particularly with the violence that's wracking that country today and the number of injured
from insurgent attacks. You would think that really putting resources toward rebuilding emergency
rooms would be a top priority.
Instead, Haveman devoted resources to other projects.
And now they have moved onto Ukraine.
Good luck is all i can say......
Bosula -> Mike_UK 24 Mar 2015 17:56
Ukraine is a country not a business. The interests of countries are very different from fund
mangers, hedge funds, etc.
Very unusual to bring in a foreigner to a country to run a finance ministry when there are
serious legal allegationS about propriety hanging over her head.
Could you imagine bringing in a Sate Department official to run the finances of the UK?
Ukraine has a lot of smart people...
Another Nuland buddy meddling in Ukrainian affairs.
DIPSET BunglyPete 24 Mar 2015 17:53
now emblazined with Bransons face in giant ads as testament to the corporate takeover
Ah yes, the faustian pact and it's tentacles are eating Ukraine up (and soon to spit out an
empty husk) right in front of our eyes.
Remember that American company that brought up all that pure and rich soil and agricultural
land in Ukraine ?
Look what's been happening back at the ranch in Yankee Land......
After paying an original sum of $2.4 million to reimburse farmers for contaminating their
fields with genetically modified wheat that had not even yet been approved for farming, Monsanto
has been forced to pay another $350,000 in order to settle a class action lawsuit brought upon
by numerous farmers from over seven different states.
The news comes amid economic struggles for the biotech juggernaut that have resulted in
the loss of share value and poor projections for the long term future. In last year's fourth
quarter, Monsanto reported a loss of $156 million. And for the multi-billion dollar company,
it's not about the monetary figure, but the future of its genetically modified creations that
the public just simply isn't buying.
In the latest legal settlement, we find that Monsanto's new method of simply paying off
farmers just isn't going to cut it when it comes to international trade. Following the news
that GMO wheat had contaminated nearby wheat supplies, Japan and South Korea suspended a number
of wheat orders from the United States - a blow towards the national economy in full thanks
to Monsanto.
And these are the "friends" Ukraine have placed their trust in since this whole think kicked
off last year.
Who needs enemies, eh ?
Fascinating times...
frankverismo -> nnedjo 24 Mar 2015 17:36
"Why has the United States spent so much money and time so disastrously trying to rebuild
occupied nations abroad, while allowing its own infrastructure to crumble untended? Why do
we even think of that as "policy"?
The Wolfowitz Doctrine is a giant boot sworn to crush national self-determination wheresoever
on the globe it may be found. If ordinary Americans have to pay the bill, so be it.
It's not much of a policy - but it's what happens when Washington is taken over by those the
White House used to rightly refer to as 'The Crazies'.
BunglyPete DIPSET 24 Mar 2015 17:30
9
10
It gets better! Pinchuk made donations to the Clinton fund before Maidan, and not only this he
was the top contributor.
Back in September 2013 they all met with Blair, Branson, IMF and more to hash it all out in Yalta
at a Pinchuk bash.
Check vesti-ukr.com a Ukraine news site now emblazined with Bransons face in giant ads as testament
to the coporate takeover. Fantastic stuff.
Some images remain like scars on my memory. One of the last things I saw in Iraq, where
I spent a year with the Department of State helping squander some of the $44 billion American
taxpayers put up to "reconstruct" that country, were horses living semi-wild among the muck
and garbage of Baghdad. ...
I flew home that same day, a too-rapid change of worlds, to a country in which the schools
of my hometown in Ohio could not afford to pay teachers a decent wage. Once great cities were
rotting away as certainly as if they were in Iraq, where those horses were scrabbling to get
by.
To this day I'm left pondering these questions: Why has the United States spent so much
money and time so disastrously trying to rebuild occupied nations abroad, while allowing its
own infrastructure to crumble untended? Why do we even think of that as "policy"?
Canigou 24 Mar 2015 17:24
I like the picture at the top of the article-----it shows burning tires, tired and hungry-looking
men sitting on makeshift seats and shivering, trash strewn about, some motley men in the background
standing about doing nothing, some sinister-looking smoke rising as a backdrop. A bleak, hellish,
desperate, post-apocalyptic landscape.
It seems to be from the Maidan riots of last year, but makes a fitting image for an article
about the Ukraine economy of 2015.
EugeneGur 24 Mar 2015 17:23
Well, people of Europe, it's time to open up your wallets to pay for the handiwork of your
leaders. Ukraine is indeed a large country on the verge of economical collapse marred in a civil
war. The present "government" did everything in its power to ruin the economy succeeding quite
well. They alienated and then destroyed Donbass responsible for a good part of the country's economic
output. They disrupted economic ties with Russia, the main trading partner, so most enterprises
have closed or are closing throwing workers out on the streets.
Give these people more money - and they'll spend some on the war they'll lose, and steal the
rest. It is hard to tell whether they are more inept or corrupt - I guess they are just well-rounded
individuals combining the highest degree of greed and corruption with utter stupidity/ineptitude
and total disregard for their country's interests. One example: Ukraine is short on coal, but
the miners in Volyne region, the only coal deposit outside of Donbass, haven't been paid for months
and are now on strike. Is that what they mean by "structural reforms", not paying salaries any
more?
HollyOldDog -> UncleSam404 24 Mar 2015 17:23
Interesting, so you agree with the Ukrainian Oligarts having a right to plunder the assets
of Ukraine - Let the People eat cake. Perhaps this attitude that the West has to Ukraine will
bolster the undercurrent of discontent within West Ukraine citizens to boot out its current government
and Western Freeloaders.
A French style revolution baring the gillotine is in the cards.
nnedjo 24 Mar 2015 17:19
Jaresko said the IMF loan was enough to stabilise the economy but not sufficient to "reorganise
and renew" it.
The intention to "reorganise and renew" Ukraine's economy is very generous indeed. However,
before accepting this job, Ms. Jaresko should draw some lessons from previous unsuccessful attempts
of the kind:
The U.S. has spent more reconstructing Iraq and Afghanistan than it did rebuilding Germany
after World War II. And it's not done yet.
Released: January 18, 2013
The United States has invested more reconstructing Iraq and Afghanistan than
it did rebuilding Germany after World War II. $60.45 billion has been spent in Iraq, more than
$100 billion in Afghanistan. For comparison, the U.S. spent less than $35 billion in today's
dollars in Germany from 1946 through 1952...
These are reconstruction costs only; the total cost to the U.S. of the Iraq and Afghan conflicts
exceeds $1.4 trillion.
babalua Mike_UK 24 Mar 2015 17:18
Ukraine is not to be compared to anything, let alone to a company. Parasite living off Russia,
EU and everyone else. Should not really be a state. With crooks in power? Not only crooks, but
literally scum?! You call it a country and compare it to whatever? Oh, god, wake up. You know
, the funnu thing is that this black hole of Europe even wants to compete with Russia. Who are
these people from U? Are they taking LSD?
DIPSET BunglyPete 24 Mar 2015 17:17
She also recently spoke at the Brookings insitute of which Nulands husband is a key member. Theyre
all in it together in one big circle of dodgy deals and kickbacks.
:-)
As always, you are spot on Sir.
I'm sure you have read this but sharing is caring as they say lol..........
Victoria Nuland and Robert Kagan have a great mom-and-pop business going. From the State Department,
she generates wars and – from op-ed pages – he demands Congress buy more weapons.
......a new Cold War took shape. Prominent neocons, including Nuland's husband Robert Kagan, a
co-founder of the Project for the New American Century which masterminded the Iraq War, hammered
home the domestic theme that Obama had shown himself to be "weak," thus inviting Putin's "aggression."
In May 2014, Kagan published a lengthy essay in The New Republic entitled "Superpowers Don't Get
to Retire," in which Kagan castigated Obama for failing to sustain American dominance in the world
and demanding a more muscular U.S. posture toward adversaries.
According to a New York Times article about how the essay took shape and its aftermath, writer
Jason Horowitz reported that Kagan and Nuland shared a common world view as well as professional
ambitions, with Nuland editing Kagan's articles, including the one tearing down her ostensible boss.
Though Nuland wouldn't comment specifically on her husband's attack on Obama, she indicated that
she held similar views. "But suffice to say," Nuland said, "that nothing goes out of the house that
I don't think is worthy of his talents. Let's put it that way."
Horowitz reported that Obama was so concerned about Kagan's assault that the President revised
his commencement speech at West Point to deflect some of the criticism and invited Kagan to lunch
at the White House, where one source told me that it was like "a meeting of equals."
I found this bit even more fascinating......
And, whenever peace threatens to break out in Ukraine, Nuland jumps in to make sure that the interests
of war are protected. Last month, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande
hammered out a plan for a cease-fire and a political settlement, known as Minsk-2, prompting Nuland
to engage in more behind-the-scenes maneuvering to sabotage the deal.
In another overheard conversation - in Munich, Germany - Nuland mocked the peace agreement as
"Merkel's Moscow thing," according to the German newspaper Bild, citing unnamed sources, likely from
the German government which may have bugged the conference room in the luxurious Bayerischer Hof
hotel and then leaked the details.
Picking up on Nuland's contempt for Merkel, another U.S. official called the Minsk-2 deal the
Europeans' "Moscow bullshit."
Nuland suggested that Merkel and Hollande cared only about the practical impact of the Ukraine
war on Europe: "They're afraid of damage to their economy, counter-sanctions from Russia." According
to the Bild story, Nuland also laid out a strategy for countering Merkel's diplomacy by using strident
language to frame the Ukraine crisis.
"We can fight against the Europeans, we can fight with rhetoric against them," Nuland reportedly
said
Europe has got itself entangled in some bullshit it is going to regret for a looooong time.
Hope them cookies tasted good and were worth it.
BunglyPete 24 Mar 2015 16:57
Jaresko is quite possibly the most poorly judged person to be in her position, nevermind
make these claims.
She is not only a US citizen ex State Dept employee who was granted Ukrainian citizenship just
to take the job, she is involved in other affairs that seriously question her credibility.
Firstly she is involved in a lawsuit filed by her ex husband who claims she missappropriated
USAID funds through her Ukrainian company Horizon Capital. She had a court injuction taken out
to prevent her husband discussing the case.
Furthermore, Horizon Capital funded Yatsenyuk's Open Ukraine campaign in the years before
he came to power.
The whole idea of the new government was to get rid of corruption and outside influence and
move to a new honest and accountable system.
Now we have a foreigner trying their hardest to push more IMF debt which benefits very few
people other than those friendly to Jaresko; which would be, western financial and corporate
interests, the main IMF stakeholders and the Yatsenyuk government.
Ukrainian citizens lose pensions and fight over food in supermarkets as Jaresko is chaffeuered
around in the most expensive car her ministry has ever bought.
She also recently spoke at the Brookings insitute of which Nulands husband is a key member.
Theyre all in it together in one big circle of dodgy deals and kickbacks.
nnedjo -> Mike_UK 24 Mar 2015 16:56
What the hell was the problem before the Russians invaded that justified armed take over of
police stations and tanks being sent into Ukraine.
The government which the Ukrainian people voted in the previous election was violently
overthrown in Kiev, by the people for which the people from the Donbas not only never voted,
but in many cases not even know them.
So, it's very simple. People from Donbas took care to protect their police stations and
other government buildings that foreign visitors would not have entered into them.
frankverismo 24 Mar 2015 16:56
"Everybody in the free world should be doing more to help Ukraine. This is a country
that has given its life for democracy and is protecting Europe from an aggressive neighbour,"
she said.
Was a more incorrect statement ever made? The 'democracy' of which she speaks was, sadly,
Victoria Nuland's idea of democracy: "the democracy Ukraine deserves".
Does Ukraine really 'deserve' to be torn apart by warring oligarchs while being used by
Washington as a proxy war theatre to bait Russia into a wider conflict? Should the Ukranian
people have seen this coming? Probably. Did they ever have much choice in the matter? Little,
if any. A bloody tragedy.
brianboru1014 psygone 24 Mar 2015 16:44
Russian economy going down the tubes?
I very much doubt it. They have what the West needs, and lots of it
The article is about this Ukrainian Foreign Minister, a woman with a begging bowl and really
zero to offer the West except a monstrous headache. Too bad Bush's neocon Victoria Nuland (who
should have been dismissed by Obama, but wasn't) but was able to poison everything in this
particular part of the world with her now famous obscene comment referring to the European
Union.[11] After discussing Ukrainian opposition figures Nuland stated that she preferred the
United Nations as mediator, instead of the European Union, adding "Fuck the EU,".
So as a result, the EU will give her zero.
nnedjo 24 Mar 2015 16:34
"Everybody in the free world should be doing more to help Ukraine. This is a country that
has given its life for democracy and is protecting Europe from an aggressive neighbour," she [Mrs
Jaresko] said.
So, practically until yesterday, in its economic existence Ukraine relied on its
"aggressive neighbor." This is what Russian PM Medvedev wrote about it in his article, at the
end of last year:
How Russia supported the Ukrainian economy
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, all of this (including the gas transport system)
went to Ukraine. In addition, Russia took on the entire Soviet debt. Ukraine entered a new
era in its history, free of any burden. That is why in 1991 its initial conditions for
economic growth were among the best in the post-Soviet space. And that's precisely why the
economy of independent Ukraine managed to remain afloat. Until recently, Ukraine was using
its past achievements to survive. It continued to rely on cooperation with Russia. And it
used our resources.
Does Mrs. Jaresko thought to this when she said that "Ukraine protects Europe from its
aggressive eastern neighbor." Okay, no problem. Aggressive eastern neighbor no longer needs to
pumped gas and money to Ukraine with its invasive methods. As of this moment its "less
aggressive" Western friends can take on this responsibility. In particular, the country of
origin of Mrs. Jaresko, United States, could take care of it. It is also a very big country,
and besides, they constantly boast to their economic superiority over Russia.
Well then, if you wanted, here you go, be our guest!
SHappens -> Mike_UK 24 Mar 2015 16:26
It's the same with ISIS supporters and ISIS terrorists, they need each other for
their terrorist activities to spread
Indeed, what we do not hear about is that while we fight the Islamic State, alias ISIS, in
Iraq and Syria, Washington and the Caliphate are fighting on the same side in Ukraine.
Nobody is paying attention to the role played by the Dudayev Battalion, a fighting force of
Islamic radicals consisting of Chechens, but also including fighters from the Caucasus and
some Ukrainians.
geedeesee -> Mike_UK 24 Mar 2015 16:24
"What the hell was the problem before the Russians invaded..."
If the Russians had invaded it would be a war, whether declarations had been made or not.
The Ukraine-Russian War. But there is no war between the two states. Kiev instead calls it an
"anti-terror operation". Objective observers like me would call it a civil war.
Steve Ennever 24 Mar 2015 15:48
That's American, Natalie - I'm Ukrainian now - Jaresko, right? Strange, even David
Cameron had some thoughts on this subject...
It appears supporting the overthrow of one democratically elected president because you
didn't like him & he was corrupt, apparently doesn't remove the corruption.
But other things should be raising the eyebrows of lenders right now, & Jaresko.
This is a country that has given its life to democracy......
The major loss of life has been in the Donbass, where its civilians have been killed in the
tens of thousands.They are the ones who can be said to have given their lives to democracy.
Once again "democracy" has been the trojan horse for corporate interests and the Wolfowitz
doctrine.
I hope that one day Ukraine does achieve a true democracy,but it wont be through the
efforts of the criminal Nuland-Pyatt crowd.
DIPSET 24 Mar 2015 15:24
C'mon Larry, it ain't a plea for "help".
It's pure, unprincipled, without a sliver of self pride and shame begging.
Beg for gas
Beg for coal
Beg for weapons
Beg for money
Beg for EU membership
Beg for money again
Beg for cookies
Beg for a football tournament to be cancelled
Beg for men to be sent to die in the East
After they stupidly get the real war and invasion they have been moaning for, watch them *beg
for mercy.
*Shout out to G-Unit for those that know ;-)
Watch them in the next couple of weeks beg Russia to not call in that 5 Billion loan repayment
that is due.
2015 is going to be one helluva year.....
brianboru1014 24 Mar 2015 14:58
Ukraine is protecting Europe from an aggressive neighbor she said with a straight face.
She says the country had 70 years of Communism, which it had, and 23 years of incomplete
reforms.
She should have said 23 years of thievery because the people of Ukraine didn't see too much
benefit. Twenty three years of neo liberalism. That's a very hard sell.
Mobile voting booth or no, I want you to just picture the type of coverage that would result –
in the Grauniad and others – if that had been a Russian soldier voting in Duma elections in
Kavaliereva. That twitching little stoat Shaun Walker would have achieved geosynchronous orbit on
the strength of his outrage, freaking out that there was no OSCE observer there to check his
passport and make sure he was even a resident, never mind verifying he had not already voted 5
times. No problems for Israel, though – they can be trusted. Except for those dirty Arabs, of
course.
Is Israel a democracy? Most would agree it is. Let me ask you this – is this how the voting
process is done in a democracy?
An Israeli soldier is pictured here – in a photo sufficiently iconic that The Grauniad ran it
as one of its "The 20 Photos of the Week" for last week – voting in the Israeli elections to the
Knesset, casting his ballot in a box on top of a picnic table, no security, not another soul
around. Well, it is billed as a "mobile voting booth" which is transported on a truck, so
presumably there are other people there who shuttle it from place to place. Amazingly – yes, I
was being sarcastic – Bibi and the Likud Roadshow won a smashing victory, guaranteeing that
Israeli foreign and domestic policy will continue to be about as flexible as the door to a bank
vault and that we will see much more "It's all about ME" histrionics in the international press.
Mobile voting booth or no, I want you to just picture the type of coverage that would
result – in the Grauniad and others – if that had been a Russian soldier voting in Duma elections
in Kavaliereva. That twitching little stoat Shaun Walker would have achieved geosynchronous orbit
on the strength of his outrage, freaking out that there was no OSCE observer there to check his
passport and make sure he was even a resident, never mind verifying he had not already voted 5
times. No problems for Israel, though – they can be trusted. Except for those dirty Arabs, of
course.
Spinner-in-chief: Every tinpot PR now thinks he is Alastair Campbell
As with Nye Bevan and Conservatives so with me and PR departments: "No amount of cajolery, and
no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for
press officers. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." Or as the BBC's economics editor
Robert Peston put it in his recent Charles Wheeler lecture, "I have never been in any doubt that
PRs are the enemy."
Let me explain how they are the nearest thing to prostitutes you can find in public life. You
might say that biased reporters look more like sex workers, as they try to satisfy their readers'
every whim. But there is a small difference. The biased journalist occasionally tells the truth.
He might produce propaganda, but his bias or that of his editor will cause him to investigate stories
conventional wisdom does not notice. Right-wing journalists uncover truths about corruption
in the European Union. Left-wing journalists discover truths about the crimes of Nato armies. They
look at scandals others ignore precisely because they do not think like level-headed and respectable
members of the mainstream.
Press officers have no concern with truth. It is not that all of them lie - although many do
- rather that truth and falsity are irrelevant to their work. Their sole concern is to defend
their employers' interests. That they can manipulate on behalf of central government, local authority
and other public bodies is an under-acknowledged scandal. The party in power that wishes to stop
public scrutiny, or the NHS trust whose executives wish to maintain their positions, use taxpayer
funds to advance their personal or political interests. If anyone else did the same, we would
call them thieves.
It makes no difference who is in office. Conservatives complained about the spin and manipulation
of New Labour but they are no different now. Indeed they are playing tricks those of us who lived
through the Blair years haven't seen before.
They withhold information from journalists in the hope of killing a story. If reporters publish
nevertheless - as they should - the government tells their editors and anyone else who will listen
that they are shoddy hacks who failed to put the other side of the story. An alternative tactic
is for press officers to phone up at night, just after an article has appeared online, and try to
bamboozle late-duty editors into making changes. I have had the Crown Prosecution Service and the
BBC try to pull that one on me. That neither institution is in the political thick of it only goes
to show that every dandruff-ridden PR in every backwater office now thinks he is Alastair Campbell.
Politicians and senior civil servants do not rate state-sponsored propagandists by their ability
to tell the public what is done in their name with their money. Like corporate chief executives and
celebrities, they judge them by their ability to keep uncomfortable stories out of the press.
Compare PRs with other despised trades. Journalists have blown the whistle on journalistic malpractice.
Bankers have blown the whistle on financial malpractice. But I have never heard of a press officer
going straight and coming clean by explaining how his government department or corporation manipulated
public opinion.
Once you could have said that my comparison between press officers and prostitutes was unfair - to
prostitutes. Poverty and drug addiction drives women on to the street. Press officers are not heroin
addicts or the victims of child abuse. Nor do the equivalent of sex traffickers kidnap media studies
graduates and force them to work in "comms". PRs do not do what they do because a cruel world has
left them with no alternative to selling their souls, but because they want to.
But that is no longer quite right. As the web destroys the media's business model, PR is where the
jobs are. Students leave university and go straight into PR or hang around newsrooms for a few years
on internships and petty payments before giving up and joining the former reporters in PR departments.
A profound shift in the balance of power is under way, and the advantage lies with those who can
buy coverage. You can see it on the screen and in the press. Television royal coverage is run by
Buckingham Palace - I always tell foreigners that if they want to know what Britain would look like
if it were a dictatorship, they should watch how the BBC reports the monarchy. Travel journalism
is advertising in all but name. Press offices give travel "journalists" free holidays and they repay
the favour in kind copy. Political coverage is still of a high quality, but the state-funded BBC
is always open to attack from the state's spin doctors. Meanwhile most serious news, business and
arts journalism remains clean, but Private Eye has reported anger among Daily Telegraph
journalists about the advertising department's attempts to influence what they write.
Such conflicts will grow. The web has made most newspapers imitate most television stations. They
give away their content and rely on advertising for an income. At the same time, the web has lowered
the price of advertising by making a vast number of new outlets available to advertisers. In his
speech, which is worth reading in full online, Peston said: "News that is a disguised advert, or
has been tainted by commercial interests, is not worth the name." But the need for money is pushing
newspapers into creating more cloaked commercials.
Without sales revenue or conventional advertising revenue, media marketing departments are offering
what they call "native" advertisements: commercials disguised as news features. Peston says BBC executives
are thinking of doing the same - though how they could hope to retain public funding if they do is
beyond me. Readers may not be aware that the videos they are watching or the stories they are reading
are "sponsored content", and that is the point. Manipulation works best when no one realises it is
happening. PR departments aren't just influencing or stifling news, but creating it, and passing
off advertisements as independent journalism.
We are heading towards a media future that is not worth having. To avoid it we will need strict controls,
backed by criminal sanctions, against the use of public money for propaganda, and a popular revolt
against a pestilential trade. A start could be made by journalists. We should refuse to speak to
press officers unless we intend to give them the ridicule and contempt they deserve.
Anonymous
September 8th, 2014
8:09 PM
I don't know whether to laugh or cry and the irony and stupidity of the comparison between
PR's and 'sex workers'. This is written by someone who is clearly unable to cast a critical eye
on the propaganda campaign which upholds the nasty power structures between men and the women
that they demonise in order to exploit. Maybe he can have a decent opinion on propaganda without
being aware of how it is saturated into his own understanding of the world but dear God what a
way to undermine oneself only a few lines into to a rant against propaganda. Laugh or give up
all hope? The predictable defences, outrage and mocking of the other commenters in response to
this will probably means hopelessness is the appropriate response.
Captain Nemo Vero
July 30th, 2014
7:07 PM
Cohen ignores (among so much else) the blithe and cosy relationship between the BBC and
Guardian on the one hand and "campaigning organizations" on the other. When Greenpeace claimed
what they called "bottom-trawlering" (must be something done on Hampstead Heath; I think they
mean "bottom trawling", or dredging) "destroyed 10,000 species", they did so without one shred
of scientific evidence. Nonetheless, the story was given a DPS in the Times and The Guardian before
the PR department at a fishing industry body forced a retraction.
The same PR department won an apology from The Times over inaccurate posters in the London
underground falsely repeating Daniel Pauly's now-recanted saw that there would be no fish left
in the sea by 2048; and so on and so on.
The liars and whores among journalists (since when is it a "profession" by the way? That implies
a barrier to entry, and there is no such thing in journalism)also need exposition, and to ignore
this fact is to ignore reality.
Anon
July 28th, 2014
4:07 PM
Nick makes the good point that the balance of power is changing. There used to be lots of journalists
with enough time on their hands to properly research a story. That isn't the case now. It means
that an increasing amount of copy is PR-generated. Given the financial travails of most media
outlets I can't see that changing. A journalist under pressure to fill his/her publication must
be tempted to believe any old guff. There is an answer - the internet. I see very many well-informed
blogs. I learn more from them than I do from the BBC or newspapers. It's a shame that so few people
read them.
Countdown2
July 10th, 2014
2:07 PM
Surely Robert Peston doesn't think the output of a future BBC which would have to pay its way
by giving advertisers what they want can be any worse than the current outfit which acts like
the propaganda wing of the Green Party?
Richard Whipple
July 9th, 2014
6:07 PM
So, now I have read and digested the article and I see a bunch on my colleagues in this discussion
here and I have to ask: WHERE ARE YOUR VOICES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF OUR TRADE (I refuse to demean
the term profession)? True press agentry is not the sum total of PR's potential to be a voice
in business but how many clients call up a PR agency for a Corporate Conscience. And just where
and by whom is this work taught? After three decades work on multiple continents with Fortune
100 companies I am willing to intuit that a good 99% of calls into the name brand PR agencies,
which are all controlled by three corporations, are for perception management rather than Corporate
Conscience/Governance work.
*** Press officers have no concern with truth. truth and falsity are irrelevant to their
work. ***
This is spot on. PRSA pays lip service to ethics but without a revocable professional license,
the service to the public is meaningless spin. And they do not want to pursue a licensing agenda.
Rather they shame whistleblowers (contrary to policy).
*** They withhold information from journalists in the hope of killing a story. ***
How we have fallen from the management of information to withholding it altogether. Technically,
still information management. Amazing what multitude of sins good phrasing can cover up, no? But
let's not stop there. Let's consider what PR did for the tobacco industry or in the case of American
Express vs. Edward Safra.
*** I have never heard of a press officer going straight and coming clean by explaining
how his government department or corporation manipulated public opinion. ***
You would have if you were in PR: Scott McClellan, Edward Bernays, Ivy Lee and others who are/were
vilified. My mentor called for licensing and freely admitted his role in black public relations
work for everyone: a real gun for hire. He wrote clearly worded books entitled Propaganda and
Crystallizing Public Opinion. And that's where I get to the point that this trade will not be
a profession – an independent symmetric voice for the public inside institutions to do the kind
of work Glenn M. Broom and David M. Dozier detailed in Using Research in Public Relations.
But there is no money in that kind of Corporate Conscience work when you get crowded out of
a market managed by an oligarchy of corporations, DSM IV qualified sociopathic. Better financially
to play ball and those university students have debt to pay.
http://earthisnotround.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/the-10-companies.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5hEiANG4Uk WHERE ARE OUR FEARLESS VOICES? They are not working
for the three corporations that own 90% of the industry.
andygreencreativity
July 6th, 2014
1:07 PM
Lively stirring up of debate here - and highlights the need for coherent, robust and relevant
theory and definitions of what constitutes 'PR' and 'propaganda'. Can I alert you to an independent,
not-for-profit global initiative which would help all sides in this debate, called #PRredefined.
It currently covers issues such as 'truthiness', 'integrity' and 'values' and 'propaganda' and
welcomes your input at wwww.prredefined.org
wtloild
July 3rd, 2014
2:07 PM
Fantastic piece on an point that doesn't get raised enough. I worked in local govt for 20yrs
& the cancerous impact of this spin culture annoyed me throughout. However...I'll make one point
in their defence - there are numerous instances where council clients go to the press attacking
the authority with their very one-sided story, often a pack of lies, yet because of confidentiality
rules, the council is unable to denounce those blatant untruths. I'd suggest that where an individual
chooses to share their story, they then waive some right to confidentiality, and the public body
can respond with the facts of the case.
Mary WillowAnonymous
July 3rd, 2014
1:07 PM
The problem is the definition of 'lie' is as difficult to pin down as a definition of 'truth'
A witness under oath promises to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth- not
simply to tell the 'truth'. PR is just PR speak for propaganda whenever its purpose is to deceive
or mislead. If PR people had ever attended a Catholic primary school they would know from their
catechism that it is perfectly possible to lie by omission and that St Peter at the pearly gates
has no tick box for letting you off on a technicality.
Anon
June 27th, 2014
10:06 AM
If PRs were named by whoever quotes them the lies would reduce drastically. The anonymity they
enjoy is the fuel that allows them to lie.
Oldster
June 27th, 2014
9:06 AM
'Twas ever thus, as you will recall from John Betjeman's poem "Executive" and Malcolm Muggeridge's
description of PR as "organised lying".
James Matthews
June 27th, 2014
8:06 AM
Prostitutes should sue.
reluctant_pseudonym
June 26th, 2014
5:06 PM
"I have never heard of a press officer going straight and coming clean by explaining how his
government department or corporation manipulated public opinion." => Damian McBride?
Tim Almond
June 26th, 2014
4:06 PM
"Compare PRs with other despised trades. Journalists have blown the whistle on journalistic
malpractice. Bankers have blown the whistle on financial malpractice. But I have never heard of
a press officer going straight and coming clean by explaining how his government department or
corporation manipulated public opinion." Know what else PRs do? They protect business people from
giving a reasonable and honest interview that is twisted into a sensational story that paints
them as a villain by pushing certain elements to the fore and omitting certain aspects completely.
Julian Kavanagh
June 26th, 2014
4:06 PM
I think Nick needs to have more faith in journalists and the democratic nature of information
in the internet age. I work for a FTSE100 company as a corporate PR (Julian Kavanagh is a pseudonym,
by the way). When I speak to journalists (and I do so most days) I push the company line - of
course - but my main job is to help journalists navigate the vast swathes of information and opinion
already out there and provide background detail and context (often political) to the news that
we're announcing. The point about the Telegraph is interesting. In my experience, the woeful journalism
at the Telegraph is a result of Telegraph journalists being chained to their desks providing web
content rather than going our and getting stories. I should also add that while my loyalty to
the company is clear, the first rule of a good PR is that there are no circumstances under which
it is acceptable to lie. If you don't like a question or don't want to compromise yourself, then
reach for 'no comment.' If my CEO asked me to lie to a journalist, I would resign. Finally, both
Robert Peston and Nick Cohen have given the impression with their diatribes against PR that they
are on the side of the angels. They and their fellow journalists are clearly not - journalists
have their agendas too. If they were on the side of the angels, would CEOs and other feel there
is a need for press officers?
Harold
June 26th, 2014
3:06 PM
But even worse are the 'journalists' who get a by-line for regurgiating a slightly altered
press release.
If you compare this with Nuland's recent testimony, it's clear
Condoleezza Rice was higher quality diplomat then Victoria
Nuland. Both are neocons although Ms. Rise was less supportive of Israel. But true to neocon doctrine when she said "especially
because in 2000 we hoped that it was moving closer to us in terms of values." she means neoliberal values (aka "Washington consensus")
under which Russia should play the role of vassal of the USA (like all other countries). A colony.
You should replace "democratization" with "neoliberalization"
globally in the text to understand the real interests she defends.
What is the national interest? This is a question that I took up in 2000 in these pages. That was a time that we as a nation revealingly
called "the post-Cold War era." We knew better where we had been than where we were going. Yet monumental changes were unfolding
-- changes that were recognized at the time but whose implications were largely unclear.
And then came the attacks of September 11, 2001. As in the aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, the United States
was swept into a fundamentally different world. We were called to lead with a new urgency and with a new perspective on what constituted
threats and what might emerge as opportunities. And as with previous strategic shocks, one can cite elements of both continuity and
change in our foreign policy since the attacks of September 11.
What has not changed is that our relations with traditional and emerging great powers still matter to the successful conduct of
policy. Thus, my admonition in 2000 that we should seek to get right the "relationships with the big powers" -- Russia, China, and
emerging powers such as India and Brazil -- has consistently guided us. As before, our alliances in the Americas, Europe, and Asia
remain the pillars of the international order, and we are now transforming them to meet the challenges of a new era.
What has changed is, most broadly, how we view the relationship between the dynamics within states and the distribution of power
among them. As globalization strengthens some states, it exposes and exacerbates the failings of many others -- those too weak
or poorly governed to address challenges within their borders and prevent them from spilling out and destabilizing the international
order. In this strategic environment, it is vital to our national security that states be willing and able to meet the full
range of their sovereign responsibilities, both beyond their borders and within them. This new reality has led us to some significant
changes in our policy. We recognize that democratic state building is now an urgent component of our national interest. And in the
broader Middle East, we recognize that freedom and democracy are the only ideas that can, over time, lead to just and lasting stability,
especially in Afghanistan and Iraq.
As in the past, our policy has been sustained not just by our strength but also by our values. The United States has long tried
to marry power and principle -- realism and idealism. At times, there have been short-term tensions between them. But we have always
known where our long-term interests lie. Thus, the United States has not been neutral about the importance of human rights or the
superiority of democracy as a form of government, both in principle and in practice. This uniquely American realism has guided us
over the past eight years, and it must guide us over the years to come.
GREAT POWER, OLD AND NEW
By necessity, our relationships with Russia and China have been rooted more in common interests than common values. With Russia,
we have found common ground, as evidenced by the "strategic framework" agreement that President George W. Bush and Russian President
Vladimir Putin signed in Sochi in March of this year. Our relationship with Russia has been sorely tested by Moscow's rhetoric, by
its tendency to treat its neighbors as lost "spheres of influence," and by its energy policies that have a distinct political tinge.
And Russia's internal course has been a source of considerable disappointment, especially because in 2000 we hoped that it was
moving closer to us in terms of values.
Yet it is useful to remember that Russia is not the Soviet Union. It is neither a permanent
enemy nor a strategic threat. Russians now enjoy greater opportunity and, yes, personal freedom than at almost any other time in
their country's history. But that alone is not the standard to which Russians themselves want to be held. Russia is not just a great
power; it is also the land and culture of a great people. And in the twenty-first century, greatness is increasingly defined by the
technological and economic development that flows naturally in open and free societies. That is why the full development both of
Russia and of our relationship with it still hangs in the balance as the country's internal transformation unfolds.
The last eight years have also challenged us to deal with rising Chinese influence, something we have no reason to fear if that
power is used responsibly. We have stressed to Beijing that with China's full membership in the international community comes responsibilities,
whether in the conduct of its economic and trade policy, its approach to energy and the environment, or its policies in the developing
world. China's leaders increasingly realize this, and they are moving, albeit slowly, to a more cooperative approach on a range of
problems. For instance, on Darfur, after years of unequivocally supporting Khartoum, China endorsed the UN Security Council resolution
authorizing the deployment of a hybrid United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force and dispatched an engineering battalion to
pave the way for those peacekeepers. China needs to do much more on issues such as Darfur, Burma, and Tibet, but we sustain an active
and candid dialogue with China's leaders on these challenges.
The United States, along with many other countries, remains concerned about China's rapid development of high-tech weapons systems.
We understand that as countries develop, they will modernize their armed forces. But China's lack of transparency about its military
spending and doctrine and its strategic goals increases mistrust and suspicion. Although Beijing has agreed to take incremental steps
to deepen U.S.-Chinese military-to-military exchanges, it needs to move beyond the rhetoric of peaceful intentions toward true engagement
in order to reassure the international community.
Our relationships with Russia and China are complex and characterized simultaneously by competition and cooperation. But in the
absence of workable relations with both of these states, diplomatic solutions to many international problems would be elusive. Transnational
terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, climate change and instability stemming from poverty and disease
-- these are dangers to all successful states, including those that might in another time have been violent rivals. It is incumbent
on the United States to find areas of cooperation and strategic agreement with Russia and China, even when there are significant
differences.
Obviously, Russia and China carry special responsibility and weight as fellow permanent members of the UN Security Council, but
this has not been the only forum in which we have worked together. Another example has emerged in Northeast Asia with the six-party
framework. The North Korean nuclear issue could have led to conflict among the states of Northeast Asia, or to the isolation of the
United States, given the varied and vital interests of China, Japan, Russia, South Korea, and the United States. Instead, it has
become an opportunity for cooperation and coordination as the efforts toward verifiable denuclearization proceed. And when North
Korea tested a nuclear device last year, the five other parties already were an established coalition and went quickly to the Security
Council for a Chapter 7 resolution. That, in turn, put considerable pressure on North Korea to return to the six-party talks and
to shut down and begin disabling its Yongbyon reactor. The parties intend to institutionalize these habits of cooperation through
the establishment of a Northeast Asian Peace and Security Mechanism -- a first step toward a security forum in the region.
The importance of strong relations with global players extends to those that are emerging. With those, particularly India and
Brazil, the United States has built deeper and broader ties. India stands on the front lines of globalization. This democratic nation
promises to become a global power and an ally in shaping an international order rooted in freedom and the rule of law. Brazil's success
at using democracy and markets to address centuries of pernicious social inequality has global resonance. Today, India and Brazil
look outward as never before, secure in their ability to compete and succeed in the global economy. In both countries, national interests
are being redefined as Indians and Brazilians realize their direct stake in a democratic, secure, and open international order --
and their commensurate responsibilities for strengthening it and defending it against the major transnational challenges of our era.
We have a vital interest in the success and prosperity of these and other large multiethnic democracies with global reach, such as
Indonesia and South Africa. And as these emerging powers change the geopolitical landscape, it will be important that international
institutions also change to reflect this reality. This is why President Bush has made clear his support for a reasonable expansion
of the UN Security Council.
SHARED VALUES AND SHARED RESPONSIBILITY
As important as relations are with Russia and China, it is our work with our allies, those with whom we share values, that is
transforming international politics -- for this work presents an opportunity to expand the ranks of well-governed, law-abiding democratic
states in our world and to defeat challenges to this vision of international order. Cooperation with our democratic allies, therefore,
should not be judged simply by how we relate to one another. It should be judged by the work we do together to defeat terrorism and
extremism, meet global challenges, defend human rights and dignity, and support new democracies.
In the Americas, this has meant strengthening our ties with strategic democracies such as Canada, Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, and
Chile in order to further the democratic development of our hemisphere. Together, we have supported struggling states, such as Haiti,
in locking in their transitions to democracy and security. Together, we are defending ourselves against drug traffickers, criminal
gangs, and the few autocratic outliers in our democratic hemisphere. The region still faces challenges, including Cuba's coming
transition and the need to support, unequivocally, the Cuban people's right to a democratic future. There is no doubt that centuries-old
suspicions of the United States persist in the region. But we have begun to write a new narrative that speaks not only to macroeconomic
development and trade but also to the need for democratic leaders to address problems of social justice and inequality.
I believe that one of the most compelling stories of our time is our relationship with our oldest allies. The goal of a Europe
whole, free, and at peace is very close to completion. The United States welcomes a strong, united, and coherent Europe. There is
no doubt that the European Union has been a superb anchor for the democratic evolution of eastern Europe after the Cold War. Hopefully,
the day will come when Turkey takes its place in the EU.
Membership in the EU and NATO has been attractive enough to lead countries to make needed reforms and to seek the peaceful resolution
of long-standing conflicts with their neighbors. The reverse has been true as well: the new members have transformed these two pillars
of the transatlantic relationship. Twelve of the 28 members of NATO are former "captive nations," countries once in the Soviet
sphere. The effect of their joining the alliance is felt in a renewed dedication to promoting and protecting democracy.
Whether sending troops to Afghanistan or Iraq or fiercely defending the continued expansion of NATO, these states have brought new
energy and fervor to the alliance.
In recent years, the mission and the purpose of the alliance have also been transformed. Indeed, many can remember when NATO viewed
the world in two parts: Europe and "out of area," which was basically everywhere else. If someone had said in 2000 that NATO today
would be rooting out terrorists in Kandahar, training the security forces of a free Iraq, providing critical support to peacekeepers
in Darfur, and moving forward on missile defenses, hopefully in partnership with Russia, who would have believed him? The endurance
and resilience of the transatlantic alliance is one reason that I believe Lord Palmerston got it wrong when he said that nations
have no permanent allies. The United States does have permanent allies: the nations with whom we share common values.
Democratization is also deepening across the Asia-Pacific region. This is expanding our circle of allies and advancing
the goals we share. Indeed, although many assume that the rise of China will determine the future of Asia, so, too -- and perhaps
to an even greater degree -- will the broader rise of an increasingly democratic community of Asian states. This is the defining
geopolitical event of the twenty-first century, and the United States is right in the middle of it. We enjoy a strong, democratic
alliance with Australia, with key states in Southeast Asia, and with Japan -- an economic giant that is emerging as a "normal" state,
capable of working to secure and spread our values both in Asia and beyond. South Korea, too, has become a global partner whose history
can boast an inspiring journey from poverty and dictatorship to democracy and prosperity. Finally, the United States has a vital
stake in India's rise to global power and prosperity, and relations between the two countries have never been stronger or broader.
It will take continued work, but this is a dramatic breakthrough for both our strategic interests and our values.
It is now possible to speak of emerging democratic allies in Africa as well. Too often, Africa is thought of only as a humanitarian
concern or a zone of conflict. But the continent has seen successful transitions to democracy in several states, among them Ghana,
Liberia, Mali, and Mozambique. Our administration has worked to help the democratic leaders of these and other states provide for
their people -- most of all by attacking the continental scourge of HIV/AIDS in an unprecedented effort of power, imagination, and
mercy. We have also been an active partner in resolving conflicts -- from the conclusion of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which
ended the civil war between the North and the South in Sudan, to active engagement in the Great Lakes region, to the intervention
of a small contingent of U.S. military forces in coordination with the African Union to end the conflict in Liberia. Although conflicts
in Darfur, Somalia, and other places tragically remain violent and unresolved, it is worth noting the considerable progress that
African states are making on many fronts and the role that the United States has played in supporting African efforts to solve the
continent's greatest problems.
A DEMOCRATIC MODEL OF DEVELOPMENT
Although the United States' ability to influence strong states is limited, our ability to enhance the peaceful political and economic
development of weak and poorly governed states can be considerable. We must be willing to use our power for this purpose -- not only
because it is necessary but also because it is right. Too often, promoting democracy and promoting development are thought of as
separate goals. In fact, it is increasingly clear that the practices and institutions of democracy are essential to the creation
of sustained, broad-based economic development -- and that market-driven development is essential to the consolidation of democracy.
Democratic development is a unified political-economic model, and it offers the mix of flexibility and stability that best enables
states to seize globalization's opportunities and manage its challenges. And for those who think otherwise: What real alternative
worthy of America is there?
Democratic development is not only an effective path to wealth and power; it is also the best way to ensure that these benefits
are shared justly across entire societies, without exclusion, repression, or violence. We saw this recently in Kenya, where democracy
enabled civil society, the press, and business leaders to join together to insist on an inclusive political bargain that could stem
the country's slide into ethnic cleansing and lay a broader foundation for national reconciliation. In our own hemisphere, democratic
development has opened up old, elite-dominated systems to millions on the margins of society. These people are demanding the benefits
of citizenship long denied them, and because they are doing so democratically, the real story in our hemisphere since 2001 is not
that our neighbors have given up on democracy and open markets; it is that they are broadening our region's consensus in support
of democratic development by ensuring that it leads to social justice for the most marginalized citizens.
The untidiness of democracy has led some to wonder if weak states might not be better off passing through a period of authoritarian
capitalism. A few countries have indeed succeeded with this model, and its allure is only heightened when democracy is too slow in
delivering or incapable of meeting high expectations for a better life. Yet for every state that embraces authoritarianism and manages
to create wealth, there are many, many more that simply make poverty, inequality, and corruption worse. For those that are doing
pretty well economically, it is worth asking whether they might be doing even better with a freer system. Ultimately, it is at least
an open question whether authoritarian capitalism is itself an indefinitely sustainable model. Is it really possible in the long
run for governments to respect their citizen's talents but not their rights? I, for one, doubt it.
For the United States, promoting democratic development must remain a top priority. Indeed, there is no realistic alternative
that we can -- or should -- offer to influence the peaceful evolution of weak and poorly governed states. The real question is not
whether to pursue this course but how.
We first need to recognize that democratic development is always possible but never fast or easy. This is because democracy is
really the complex interplay of democratic practices and culture. In the experience of countless nations, ours especially, we see
that culture is not destiny. Nations of every culture, race, religion, and level of development have embraced democracy and adapted
it to their own circumstances and traditions. No cultural factor has yet been a stumbling block -- not German or Japanese "militarism,"
not "Asian values," not African "tribalism," not Latin America's alleged fondness for caudillos, not the once-purported preference
of eastern Europeans for despotism.
The fact is, few nations begin the democratic journey with a democratic culture. The vast majority create one over time -- through
the hard, daily struggle to make good laws, build democratic institutions, tolerate differences, resolve them peacefully, and share
power justly. Unfortunately, it is difficult to grow the habits of democracy in the controlled environment of authoritarianism, to
have them ready and in place when tyranny is lifted. The process of democratization is likely to be messy and unsatisfactory, but
it is absolutely necessary. Democracy, it is said, cannot be imposed, particularly by a foreign power. This is true but beside the
point. It is more likely that tyranny has to be imposed.
The story today is rarely one of peoples resisting the basics of democracy -- the right to choose those who will govern them and
other basic freedoms. It is, instead, about people choosing democratic leaders and then becoming impatient with them and holding
them accountable on their duty to deliver a better life. It is strongly in our national interest to help sustain these leaders, support
their countries' democratic institutions, and ensure that their new governments are capable of providing for their own security,
especially when their nations have experienced crippling conflicts. To do so will require long-term partnerships rooted in mutual
responsibility and the integration of all elements of our national power -- political, diplomatic, economic, and, at times, military.
We have recently built such partnerships to great effect with countries as different as Colombia, Lebanon, and Liberia. Indeed, a
decade ago, Colombia was on the verge of failure. Today, in part because of our long-term partnership with courageous leaders and
citizens, Colombia is emerging as a normal nation, with democratic institutions that are defending the country, governing justly,
reducing poverty, and contributing to international security.
We must now build long-term partnerships with other new and fragile democracies, especially Afghanistan. The basics of democracy
are taking root in this country after nearly three decades of tyranny, violence, and war. For the first time in their history, Afghans
have a government of the people, elected in presidential and parliamentary elections, and guided by a constitution that codifies
the rights of all citizens. The challenges in Afghanistan do not stem from a strong enemy. The Taliban offers a political vision
that very few Afghans embrace. Rather, they exploit the current limitations of the Afghan government, using violence against civilians
and revenues from illegal narcotics to impose their rule. Where the Afghan government, with support from the international community,
has been able to provide good governance and economic opportunity, the Taliban is in retreat. The United States and NATO have a vital
interest in supporting the emergence of an effective, democratic Afghan state that can defeat the Taliban and deliver "population
security" -- addressing basic needs for safety, services, the rule of law, and increased economic opportunity. We share this goal
with the Afghan people, who do not want us to leave until we have accomplished our common mission. We can succeed in Afghanistan,
but we must be prepared to sustain a partnership with that new democracy for many years to come.
One of our best tools for supporting states in building democratic institutions and strengthening civil society is our foreign
assistance, but we must use it correctly. One of the great advances of the past eight years has been the creation of a bipartisan
consensus for the more strategic use of foreign assistance. We have begun to transform our assistance into an incentive for developing
states to govern justly, advance economic freedom, and invest in their people. This is the great innovation of the Millennium Challenge
Account initiative. More broadly, we are now better aligning our foreign aid with our foreign policy goals -- so as to help developing
countries move from war to peace, poverty to prosperity, poor governance to democracy and the rule of law. At the same time, we have
launched historic efforts to help remove obstacles to democratic development -- by forgiving old debts, feeding the hungry, expanding
access to education, and fighting pandemics such as malaria and HIV/AIDS. Behind all of these efforts is the overwhelming generosity
of the American people, who since 2001 have supported the near tripling of the United States' official development assistance worldwide
-- doubling it for Latin America and quadrupling it for Africa.
Ultimately, one of the best ways to support the growth of democratic institutions and civil society is to expand free and fair
trade and investment. The very process of implementing a trade agreement or a bilateral investment treaty helps to hasten and consolidate
democratic development. Legal and political institutions that can enforce property rights are better able to protect human rights
and the rule of law. Independent courts that can resolve commercial disputes can better resolve civil and political disputes. The
transparency needed to fight corporate corruption makes it harder for political corruption to go unnoticed and unpunished. A rising
middle class also creates new centers of social power for political movements and parties. Trade is a divisive issue in our country
right now, but we must not forget that it is essential not only for the health of our domestic economy but also for the success our
foreign policy.
There will always be humanitarian needs, but our goal must be to use the tools of foreign assistance, security cooperation, and
trade together to help countries graduate to self-sufficiency. We must insist that these tools be used to promote democratic development.
It is in our national interest to do so.
THE CHANGING MIDDLE EAST
What about the broader Middle East, the arc of states that stretches from Morocco to Pakistan? The Bush administration's approach
to this region has been its most vivid departure from prior policy. But our approach is, in reality, an extension of traditional
tenets -- incorporating human rights and the promotion of democratic development into a policy meant to further our national interest.
What is exceptional is that the Middle East was treated as an exception for so many decades. U.S. policy there focused almost exclusively
on stability. There was little dialogue, certainly not publicly, about the need for democratic change.
For six decades, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, a basic bargain defined the United States' engagement in
the broader Middle East: we supported authoritarian regimes, and they supported our shared interest in regional stability. After
September 11, it became increasingly clear that this old bargain had produced false stability. There were virtually no legitimate
channels for political expression in the region. But this did not mean that there was no political activity. There was -- in madrasahs
and radical mosques. It is no wonder that the best-organized political forces were extremist groups. And it was there, in the shadows,
that al Qaeda found the troubled souls to prey on and exploit as its foot soldiers in its millenarian war against the "far enemy."
One response would have been to fight the terrorists without addressing this underlying cause. Perhaps it would have been possible
to manage these suppressed tensions for a while. Indeed, the quest for justice and a new equilibrium on which the nations of the
broader Middle East are now embarked is very turbulent. But is it really worse than the situation before? Worse than when Lebanon
suffered under the boot of Syrian military occupation? Worse than when the self-appointed rulers of the Palestinians personally pocketed
the world's generosity and squandered their best chance for a two-state peace? Worse than when the international community imposed
sanctions on innocent Iraqis in order to punish the man who tyrannized them, threatened Iraq's neighbors, and bulldozed 300,000 human
beings into unmarked mass graves? Or worse than the decades of oppression and denied opportunity that spawned hopelessness, fed hatreds,
and led to the sort of radicalization that brought about the ideology behind the September 11 attacks? Far from being the model of
stability that some seem to remember, the Middle East from 1945 on was wracked repeatedly by civil conflicts and cross-border wars.
Our current course is certainly difficult, but let us not romanticize the old bargains of the Middle East -- for they yielded neither
justice nor stability.
The president's second inaugural address and my speech at the American University in Cairo in June 2005 have been held up as rhetorical
declarations that have faded in the face of hard realities. No one will argue that the goal of democratization and modernization
in the broader Middle East lacks ambition, and we who support it fully acknowledge that it will be a difficult, generational task.
No one event, and certainly not a speech, will bring it into being. But if America does not set the goal, no one will.
This goal is made more complicated by the fact that the future of the Middle East is bound up in many of our other vital interests:
energy security, nonproliferation, the defense of friends and allies, the resolution of old conflicts, and, most of all, the need
for near-term partners in the global struggle against violent Islamist extremism. To state, however, that we must promote either
our security interests or our democratic ideals is to present a false choice. Admittedly, our interests and our ideals do come into
tension at times in the short term. America is not an NGO and must balance myriad factors in our relations with all countries. But
in the long term, our security is best ensured by the success of our ideals: freedom, human rights, open markets, democracy, and
the rule of law.
The leaders and citizens of the broader Middle East are now searching for answers to the fundamental questions of modern state
building: What are to be the limits on the state's use of power, both within and beyond its borders? What will be the role of the
state in the lives of its citizens and the relationship between religion and politics? How will traditional values and mores be reconciled
with the democratic promise of individual rights and liberty, particularly for women and girls? How is religious and ethnic diversity
to be accommodated in fragile political institutions when people tend to hold on to traditional associations? The answers to these
and other questions can come only from within the Middle East itself. The task for us is to support and shape these difficult processes
of change and to help the nations of the region overcome several major challenges to their emergence as modern, democratic states.
The first challenge is the global ideology of violent Islamist extremism, as embodied by groups, such as al Qaeda, that thoroughly
reject the basic tenets of modern politics, seeking instead to topple sovereign states, erase national borders, and restore the imperial
structure of the ancient caliphate. To resist this threat, the United States will need friends and allies in the region who are willing
and able to take action against the terrorists among them. Ultimately, however, this is more than just a struggle of arms; it is
a contest of ideas. Al Qaeda's theory of victory is to hijack the legitimate local and national grievances of Muslim societies and
twist them into an ideological narrative of endless struggle against Western, especially U.S., oppression. The good news is that
al Qaeda's intolerant ideology can be enforced only through brutality and violence. When people are free to choose, as we have seen
in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq's Anbar Province, they reject al Qaeda's ideology and rebel against its control. Our theory of
victory, therefore, must be to offer people a democratic path to advance their interests peacefully -- to develop their talents,
to redress injustices, and to live in freedom and dignity. In this sense, the fight against terrorism is a kind of global counterinsurgency:
the center of gravity is not the enemies we fight but the societies they are trying to radicalize.
Admittedly, our interests in both promoting democratic development and fighting terrorism and extremism lead to some hard choices,
because we do need capable friends in the broader Middle East who can root out terrorists now. These states are often not democratic,
so we must balance the tensions between our short-term and our long-term goals. We cannot deny nondemocratic states the security
assistance to fight terrorism or defend themselves. At the same time, we must use other points of leverage to promote democracy and
hold our friends to account. That means supporting civil society, as we have done through the Forum for the Future and the Middle
East Partnership Initiative, and using public and private diplomacy to push our nondemocratic partners to reform. Changes are slowly
coming in terms of universal suffrage, more influential parliaments, and education for girls and women. We must continue to advocate
for reform and support indigenous agents of change in nondemocratic countries, even as we cooperate with their governments on security.
An example of how our administration has balanced these concerns is our relationship with Pakistan. Following years of U.S. neglect
of that relationship, our administration had to establish a partnership with Pakistan's military government to achieve a common goal
after September 11. We did so knowing that our security and that of Pakistan ultimately required a return to civilian and democratic
rule. So even as we worked with President Pervez Musharraf to fight terrorists and extremists, we invested more than $3 billion to
strengthen Pakistani society -- building schools and health clinics, providing emergency relief after the 2005 earthquake, and supporting
political parties and the rule of law. We urged Pakistan's military leaders to put their country on a modern and moderate trajectory,
which in some important respects they did. And when this progress was threatened last year by the declaration of emergency rule,
we pushed President Musharraf hard to take off his uniform and hold free elections. Although terrorists tried to thwart the return
of democracy and tragically killed many innocent people, including former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, the Pakistani people dealt
extremism a crushing defeat at the polls. This restoration of democracy in Pakistan creates an opportunity for us to build the lasting
and broad-based partnership that we have never achieved with this nation, thereby enhancing our security and anchoring the success
of our values in a troubled region.
A second challenge to the emergence of a better Middle East is posed by aggressive states that seek not to peacefully reform the
present regional order but to alter it using any form of violence -- assassination, intimidation, terrorism. The question is not
whether any particular state should have influence in the region. They all do, and will. The real question is, What kind of influence
will these states wield -- and to what ends, constructive or destructive? It is this fundamental and still unresolved question that
is at the center of many of the geopolitical challenges in the Middle East today -- whether it is Syria's undermining of Lebanon's
sovereignty, Iran's pursuit of a nuclear capability, or both states' support for terrorism.
Iran poses a particular challenge. The Iranian regime pursues its disruptive policies both through state instruments, such as
the Revolutionary Guards and the al Quds force, and through nonstate proxies that extend Iranian power, such as elements of the Mahdi
Army in Iraq, Hamas in Gaza, and Hezbollah in Lebanon and around the world. The Iranian regime seeks to subvert states and extend
its influence throughout the Persian Gulf region and the broader Middle East. It threatens the state of Israel with extinction and
holds implacable hostility toward the United States. And it is destabilizing Iraq, endangering U.S. forces, and killing innocent
Iraqis. The United States is responding to these provocations. Clearly, an Iran with a nuclear weapon or even the technology to build
one on demand would be a grave threat to international peace and security.
But there is also another Iran. It is the land of a great culture and a great people, who suffer under repression. The Iranian
people deserve to be integrated into the international system, to travel freely and be educated in the best universities. Indeed,
the United States has reached out to them with exchanges of sports teams, disaster-relief workers, and artists. By many accounts,
the Iranian people are favorably disposed to Americans and to the United States. Our relationship could be different. Should the
Iranian government honor the UN Security Council's demands and suspend its uranium enrichment and related activities, the community
of nations, including the United States, is prepared to discuss the full range of issues before us. The United States has no permanent
enemies.
Ultimately, the many threats that Iran poses must be seen in a broader context: that of a state fundamentally out of step with
the norms and values of the international community. Iran must make a strategic choice -- a choice that we have sought to clarify
with our approach -- about how and to what ends it will wield its power and influence: Does it want to continue thwarting the legitimate
demands of the world, advancing its interests through violence, and deepening the isolation of its people? Or is it open to a better
relationship, one of growing trade and exchange, deepening integration, and peaceful cooperation with its neighbors and the broader
international community? Tehran should know that changes in its behavior would meet with changes in ours. But Iran should also know
that the United States will defend its friends and its interests vigorously until the day that change comes.
A third challenge is finding a way to resolve long-standing conflicts, particularly that between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
Our administration has put the idea of democratic development at the center of our approach to this conflict, because we came to
believe that the Israelis will not achieve the security they deserve in their Jewish state and the Palestinians will not achieve
the better life they deserve in a state of their own until there is a Palestinian government capable of exercising its sovereign
responsibilities, both to its citizens and to its neighbors. Ultimately, a Palestinian state must be created that can live side by
side with Israel in peace and security. This state will be born not just through negotiations to resolve hard issues related to borders,
refugees, and the status of Jerusalem but also through the difficult effort to build effective democratic institutions that can fight
terrorism and extremism, enforce the rule of law, combat corruption, and create opportunities for the Palestinians to improve their
lives. This confers responsibilities on both parties.
As the experience of the past several years has shown, there is a fundamental disagreement at the heart of Palestinian society
-- between those who reject violence and recognize Israel's right to exist and those who do not. The Palestinian people must ultimately
make a choice about which future they desire, and it is only democracy that gives them that choice and holds open the possibility
of a peaceful way forward to resolve the existential question at the heart of their national life. The United States, Israel, other
states in the region, and the international community must do everything in their power to support those Palestinians who would choose
a future of peace and compromise. When the two-state solution is finally realized, it will be because of democracy, not despite it.
This is, indeed, a controversial view, and it speaks to one more challenge that must be resolved if democratic and modern states
are to emerge in the broader Middle East: how to deal with nonstate groups whose commitment to democracy, nonviolence, and the rule
of law is suspect. Because of the long history of authoritarianism in the region, many of the best-organized political parties are
Islamist, and some of them have not renounced violence used in the service of political goals. What should be their role in the democratic
process? Will they take power democratically only to subvert the very process that brought them victory? Are elections in the broader
Middle East therefore dangerous?
These questions are not easy. When Hamas won elections in the Palestinian territories, it was widely seen as a failure of policy.
But although this victory most certainly complicated affairs in the broader Middle East, in another way it helped to clarify matters.
Hamas had significant power before those elections -- largely the power to destroy. After the elections, Hamas also had to face real
accountability for its use of power for the first time. This has enabled the Palestinian people, and the international community,
to hold Hamas to the same basic standards of responsibility to which all governments should be held. Through its continued unwillingness
to behave like a responsible regime rather than a violent movement, Hamas has demonstrated that it is wholly incapable of governing.
Much attention has been focused on Gaza, which Hamas holds hostage to its incompetent and brutal policies. But in other places,
the Palestinians have held Hamas accountable. In the West Bank city of Qalqilya, for instance, where Hamas was elected in 2004, frustrated
and fed-up Palestinians voted it out of office in the next election. If there can be a legitimate, effective, and democratic alternative
to Hamas (something that Fatah has not yet been), people will likely choose it. This would especially be true if the Palestinians
could live a normal life within their own state.
The participation of armed groups in elections is problematic. But the lesson is not that there should not be elections. Rather,
there should be standards, like the ones to which the international community has held Hamas after the fact: you can be a terrorist
group or you can be a political party, but you cannot be both. As difficult as this problem is, it cannot be the case that people
are denied the right to vote just because the outcome might be unpleasant to us. Although we cannot know whether politics will ultimately
deradicalize violent groups, we do know that excluding them from the political process grants them power without responsibility.
This is yet another challenge that the leaders and the peoples of the broader Middle East must resolve as the region turns to democratic
processes and institutions to resolve differences peacefully and without repression.
THE TRANSFORMATION OF IRAQ
Then, of course, there is Iraq, which is perhaps the toughest test of the proposition that democracy can overcome deep divisions
and differences. Because Iraq is a microcosm of the region, with its layers of ethnic and sectarian diversity, the Iraqi people's
struggle to build a democracy after the fall of Saddam Hussein is shifting the landscape not just of Iraq but of the broader Middle
East as well.
The cost of this war, in lives and treasure, for Americans and Iraqis, has been greater than we ever imagined. This story is still
being written, and will be for many years to come. Sanctions and weapons inspections, prewar intelligence and diplomacy, troop levels
and postwar planning -- these are all important issues that historians will analyze for decades. But the fundamental question that
we can ask and debate now is, Was removing Saddam from power the right decision? I continue to believe that it was.
After we fought one war against Saddam and then remained in a formal state of hostilities with him for over a decade, our containment
policy began to erode. The community of nations was losing its will to enforce containment, and Iraq's ruler was getting increasingly
good at exploiting it through programs such as oil-for-food -- indeed, more than we knew at the time. The failure of containment
was increasingly evident in the UN Security Council resolutions that were passed and then violated, in our regular clashes in the
no-fly zones, and in President Bill Clinton's decision to launch air strikes in 1998 and then join with Congress to make "regime
change" our government's official policy in Iraq. If Saddam was not a threat, why did the community of nations keep the Iraqi people
under the most brutal sanctions in modern history? In fact, as the Iraq Survey Group showed, Saddam was ready and willing to reconstitute
his weapons of mass destruction programs as soon as international pressure had dissipated.
The United States did not overthrow Saddam to democratize the Middle East. It did so to remove a long-standing threat to international
security. But the administration was conscious of the goal of democratization in the aftermath of liberation. We discussed the question
of whether we should be satisfied with the end of Saddam's rule and the rise of another strongman to replace him. The answer was
no, and it was thus avowedly U.S. policy from the outset to try to support the Iraqis in building a democratic Iraq. It is important
to remember that we did not overthrow Adolf Hitler to bring democracy to Germany either. But the United States believed that only
a democratic Germany could ultimately anchor a lasting peace in Europe.
The democratization of Iraq and the democratization of the Middle East were thus linked. So, too, was the war on terror linked
to Iraq, because our goal after September 11 was to address the deeper malignancies of the Middle East, not just the symptoms of
them. It is very hard to imagine how a more just and democratic Middle East could ever have emerged with Saddam still at the center
of the region.
Our effort in Iraq has been extremely arduous. Iraq was a broken state and a broken society under Saddam. We have made mistakes.
That is undeniable. The explosion to the surface of long-suppressed grievances has challenged fragile, young democratic institutions.
But there is no other decent and peaceful way for the Iraqis to reconcile.
As Iraq emerges from its difficulties, the impact of its transformation is being felt in the rest of the region. Ultimately, the
states of the Middle East need to reform. But they need to reform their relations, too. A strategic realignment is unfolding in the
broader Middle East, separating those states that are responsible and accept that the time for violence under the rubric of "resistance"
has passed and those that continue to fuel extremism, terrorism, and chaos. Support for moderate Palestinians and a two-state solution
to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and for democratic leaders and citizens in Lebanon have focused the energies of Saudi Arabia,
Egypt, Jordan, and the states of the Persian Gulf. They must come to see that a democratic Iraq can be an ally in resisting extremism
in the region. When they invited Iraq to join the ranks of the Gulf Cooperation Council-Plus-Two (Egypt and Jordan), they took an
important step in that direction.
At the same time, these countries look to the United States to stay deeply involved in their troubled region and to counter and
deter threats from Iran. The United States now has the weight of its effort very much in the center of the broader Middle East. Our
long-term partnerships with Afghanistan and Iraq, to which we must remain deeply committed, our new relationships in Central Asia,
and our long-standing partnerships in the Persian Gulf provide a solid geostrategic foundation for the generational work ahead of
helping to bring about a better, more democratic, and more prosperous Middle East.
A UNIQUELY AMERICAN REALISM
Investing in strong and rising powers as stakeholders in the international order and supporting the democratic development of
weak and poorly governed states -- these broad goals for U.S. foreign policy are certainly ambitious, and they raise an obvious question:
Is the United States up to the challenge, or, as some fear and assert these days, is the United States a nation in decline?
We should be confident that the foundation of American power is and will remain strong -- for its source is the dynamism, vigor,
and resilience of American society. The United States still possesses the unique ability to assimilate new citizens of every race,
religion, and culture into the fabric of our national and economic life. The same values that lead to success in the United States
also lead to success in the world: industriousness, innovation, entrepreneurialism. All of these positive habits, and more, are reinforced
by our system of education, which leads the world in teaching children not what to think but how to think -- how to address problems
critically and solve them creatively.
Indeed, one challenge to the national interest is to make certain that we can provide quality education to all, especially disadvantaged
children. The American ideal is one of equal opportunity, not equal outcome. This is the glue that holds together our multiethnic
democracy. If we ever stop believing that what matters is not where you came from but where you are going, we will most certainly
lose confidence. And an unconfident America cannot lead. We will turn inward. We will see economic competition, foreign trade and
investment, and the complicated world beyond our shores not as challenges to which our nation can rise but as threats that we should
avoid. That is why access to education is a critical national security issue.
We should also be confident that the foundations of the United States' economic power are strong, and will remain so. Even amid
financial turbulence and international crises, the U.S. economy has grown more and faster since 2001 than the economy of any other
leading industrial nation. The United States remains unquestionably the engine of global economic growth. To remain so, we must find
new, more reliable, and more environmentally friendly sources of energy. The industries of the future are in the high-tech fields
(including in clean energy), which our nation has led for years and in which we remain on the global cutting edge. Other nations
are indeed experiencing amazing and welcome economic growth, but the United States will likely account for the largest share of global
GDP for decades to come.
Even in our government institutions of national security, the foundations of U.S. power are stronger than many assume. Despite
our waging two wars and rising to defend ourselves in a new global confrontation, U.S. defense spending today as a percentage of
GDP is still well below the average during the Cold War. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have indeed put an enormous strain on our
military, and President Bush has proposed to Congress an expansion of our force by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 marines. The experience
of recent years has tested our armed forces, but it has also prepared a new generation of military leaders for stabilization and
counterinsurgency missions, of which we will likely face more. This experience has also reinforced the urgent need for a new kind
of partnership between our military and civilian institutions. Necessity is the mother of invention, and the provincial reconstruction
teams that we deploy in Afghanistan and Iraq are a model of civil-military cooperation for the future.
In these pages in 2000, I decried the role of the United States, in particular the U.S. military, in nation building. In 2008,
it is absolutely clear that we will be involved in nation building for years to come. But it should not be the U.S. military that
has to do it. Nor should it be a mission that we take up only after states fail. Rather, civilian institutions such as the new Civilian
Response Corps must lead diplomats and development workers in a whole-of-government approach to our national security challenges.
We must help weak and poorly functioning states strengthen and reform themselves and thereby prevent their failure in the first place.
This will require the transformation and better integration of the United States' institutions of hard power and soft power -- a
difficult task and one that our administration has begun. Since 2001, the president has requested and Congress has approved a nearly
54 percent increase in funding for our institutions of diplomacy and development. And this year, the president and I asked Congress
to create 1,100 new positions for the State Department and 300 new positions for the U.S. Agency for International Development. Those
who follow us must build on this foundation.
Perhaps of greater concern is not that the United States lacks the capacity for global leadership but that it lacks the will.
We Americans engage in foreign policy because we have to, not because we want to, and this is a healthy disposition -- it is that
of a republic, not an empire. There have been times in the past eight years when we have had to do new and difficult things -- things
that, at times, have tested the resolve and the patience of the American people. Our actions have not always been popular, or even
well understood. The exigencies of September 12 and beyond may now seem very far away. But the actions of the United States will
for many, many years be driven by the knowledge that we are in an unfair fight: we need to be right one hundred percent of the time;
the terrorists, only once. Yet I find that whatever differences we and our allies have had over the last eight years, they still
want a confident and engaged United States, because there are few problems in the world that can be resolved without us. We need
to recognize that, too.
Ultimately, however, what will most determine whether the United States can succeed in the twenty-first century is our imagination.
It is this feature of the American character that most accounts for our unique role in the world, and it stems from the way that
we think about our power and our values. The old dichotomy between realism and idealism has never really applied to the United States,
because we do not really accept that our national interest and our universal ideals are at odds. For our nation, it has always been
a matter of perspective. Even when our interests and ideals come into tension in the short run, we believe that in the long run they
are indivisible.
This has freed America to imagine that the world can always be better -- not perfect, but better -- than others have consistently
thought possible. America imagined that a democratic Germany might one day be the anchor of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. America
believed that a democratic Japan might one day be a source of peace in an increasingly free and prosperous Asia. America kept faith
with the people of the Baltics that they would be independent and thus brought the day when NATO held a summit in Riga, Latvia. To
realize these and other ambitious goals that we have imagined, America has often preferred preponderances of power that favor our
values over balances of power that do not. We have dealt with the world as it is, but we have never accepted that we are powerless
to change the world. Indeed, we have shown that by marrying American power and American values, we could help friends and allies
expand the boundaries of what most thought realistic at the time.
How to describe this disposition of ours? It is realism, of a sort. But it is more than that -- what I have called our uniquely
American realism. This makes us an incredibly impatient nation. We live in the future, not the past. We do not linger over
our own history. This has led our nation to make mistakes in the past, and we will surely make more in the future. Still, it
is our impatience to improve less-than-ideal situations and to accelerate the pace of change that leads to our most enduring achievements,
at home and abroad.
At the same time, ironically, our uniquely American realism also makes us deeply patient. We understand how long and trying the
course of democracy is. We acknowledge our birth defect, a constitution founded on a compromise that reduced my ancestors each to
three-fifths of a man. Yet we are healing old wounds and living as one American people, and this shapes our engagement with the world.
We support democracy not because we think ourselves perfect but because we know ourselves to be deeply imperfect. This gives us reason
to be humble in our own endeavors and patient with the endeavors of others. We know that today's headlines are rarely the same as
history's judgments.
An international order that reflects our values is the best guarantee of our enduring national interest, and America continues
to have a unique opportunity to shape this outcome. Indeed, we already see glimpses of this better world. We see it in Kuwaiti
women gaining the right to vote, in a provincial council meeting in Kirkuk, and in the improbable sight of the American president
standing with democratically elected leaders in front of the flags of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the future state of Palestine. Shaping
that world will be the work of a generation, but we have done such work before. And if we remain confident in the power of our values,
we can succeed in such work again.
I found more lies and disinformation in the Western news than in the Russian news
in fact the info found on Itar-Tass, Interfax, Sputnik, RT, russia-insider, etc - can be
easily verifiable and is reliable...
and another positive aspect - they do NOT use vitriolic aggressive hysterical language when
writing about Western politicians - their approach is very PROFESSIONAL, polite, and
down-to-earth
the Western media would re-gain their audience if they will start to report HONESTLY from both
sides, unbiased...
after the lies we were fed when the press manipulated people to believe in the justice of US
invading Afghanistan and Iraq - nobody in his/her right mind believe anything Western
politicians said about Libya, Syria and Ukra
enough is enough - we are sick of so many lies
in Ukra the power was taken by the oligarchs after a violent armed coup staged by amer (the
vulgar nullity said it clearly in the ''f**k EU'' conversation)
the democratically elected president was threatened that he will be killed like Qaddafi and
run away with his family (Obama recognized that US brokered the gov change in Kiev)
President Putin - knowing that Crimeans are majority in the favour of being united with Russia
and wanting to protect their military naval base in Crimea - helped Crimea to do a referendum
to reunite with Russia - then US mafia was outfoxed - they imagined the NATO will easily take
over Russia's base
Biden recognized that US pushed EU to apply anti-Russia sanctions (Obama admitted that US has
the habit to twist the arms to make the other countries do want they want)
Donbass asked for the same rights as Crimea had with Ukraine's border
criminal illegitimate Kiev gov launched ATO - sending the far-right punitive private
battalions to kill Eastern Ukrainians
Poroshenko promised PEACE and RECONCILIATION during his electoral campaign - after he was
elected - he continued killing civilians in the Eastern Ukraine...
Poroshenko, Yats and their criminal gang in Kiev LOST the moral right to govern the Eastern
Ukrainians!
Виталий Седин -> JohnNewcomb 20 Mar 2015 11:47
"Estonia - a country that ranks a very high #10 on RSF's World Press Freedom Index
2015."(c)
...and where 15% residents do not have basic civil rights.
Perfect example of Real Democracy (TM) for Russian Bloody Dictatorship (TM).
ijustwant2say -> Виталий Седин 20 Mar 2015 11:14
You still name nothing similar in UK/US, I note.
Are you being serious? Almost every paper or news channel you care to mention in this country
has at some stage attacked the government of the day (because governments here change). Just
watch Fox News in the US and see what it says about the US President. Watch the Daily Show in
the US. Read this newspaper, on which you spend an inordinate amount of time commenting. The
Snowden revelations weren't revealed by a Russian newspaper - but by this one and the New York
Times. Stop pretending that Russia's, Kremlin controlled media, which has some of the worst
press freedoms in the world, is on the same planet as media in the West. In the global press
freedoms index, the UK is ranked 34, the US 49 (neither perfect), but Russia comes in at an
appalling 152 out of 180 countries . Must make you proud.
You can only name one, I note. Most papers in this country will happily criticise the
actions of the government if they feel it is justifiable. Most regard it as part of their
raison d'etre. Don't try and pretend that Russia, which has some of the worst press freedoms
in the world, is on the same level as the press over here. I know the press in Russia and I
know the press in Europe and the US. The West has some appalling stations (e.g. Fox News) but
there is a vast mainstream choice of factually based reporting. Not so much in Russia where
most get their news from TV and each of the three major National TV stations are controlled by
the Kremlin. How do you think Putin has managed to stay so popular in Russia, while being
reviled and distrusted most other places?
Renfrow -> kolarg 20 Mar 2015 10:07
I know in Ukraine all the papers are bankrolled by various oligarchs and each one prints
information in accordance with their owners' views and/or interests. Sort of like FOX and
MSNBC t.v. stations in the U.S.A. piping their own particular outlook in the world events
Виталий Седин 20 Mar 2015 07:52
Is there smth. comparable with Novaya Gazeta in UK?
ID075732 20 Mar 2015 07:45
Lebedev is basically a thug. A black not a white swan.
Washington is betraying the best interests of the American people through its current
foreign policy... European democracy is threatened by US, not Russian, foreign policy
The avalanche of commentary since the Ukrainian crisis erupted a year ago has overshadowed any reflections
on the immense forgone benefits (technically speaking, the "opportunity cost") of what might have been
if Washington had been working for peace and stability instead of war and chaos.
Imagine the following: After the unraveling of the Communist bloc, Europe, in partnership with the
US, had forged a new security system in which Russia was treated as a valued and equal partner – one
whose interests were respected. Russia, decimated by a century of wars and Communist imperialism, would
doubtless have eagerly reciprocated in kind. Most countries of the former Soviet Union would have then
proceeded to build a new Eurasian structure of which Russia would have served as the natural umbrella,
given its long-standing interaction with the region's diverse nations and cultures.
Indeed, as Putin himself had proposed in his visionary October 2011 article, the Eurasian Union
could have become one of the pillars of a huge harmonized economic area stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok
and based on the EU's single-market rules (acquis communautaire). The rising Far Eastern economic powerhouse,
with the world's most populous country, China, at its centre, would have linked up with the world's
largest economy (the EU). An enormous Eurasian production and financial bloc would have been created
– one that drew primarily on secure supplies of Russian energy and other natural resources. Untold
investment opportunities would have opened up in Siberia and Russia's Far East as well as in Central
Asia. Hundreds of millions of people in Eurasia and elsewhere would have been lifted out of poverty.
And, not least, the EU would have been refashioned as an integral part of the dynamic trans-Eurasian
economy (rather than as a German-centred empire, as appears to be the case today), thereby making a
major contribution to overcoming the ongoing global economic depression.
All of this was not to be, however. Why not? First and foremost, because the self-proclaimed "exceptional"
power (actually, a mere "outlying island" in the Atlantic, according to the founder of geopolitics,
Halford Mackinder) and its dysfunctional "deep-state" officialdom did not want it to be. How could
they have permitted such a thing? How could they have allowed other countries to get on with improving
the lives of their citizens without being obliged to seek Washington's approval every step of the way?
European democracy is threatened by US, not Russian, foreign policy
In order to make sure that they were not side-lined, the US elites had to intervene. The Western
propaganda machine started churning out all sorts of nonsense that Putin is a new Hitler who is bent
on restoring the Soviet empire and who is bullying Europe, while continuing to bang on about his "increasingly
autocratic rule". Deadly attacks by chauvinistic proxies were launched on the Russophone people in
South Ossetia, Georgia in 2008 and more recently in Ukraine. And in what is eerily reminiscent of Stalinist
"bloc discipline", the EU/NATO nomenclature was ordered to implement the absurd strategy of severing
the Russian economy from the EU. For their part, the cowering Eurocrats willingly obliged by imposing
sanctions on Russia that, perversely, have had a negative impact on their own economies (but, let it
be stressed, not that of the US). No questions raised and no public debate on the wisdom of such a
strategy permitted.
Stuck in an Orwellian nightmare, Europe has to demonstrate its unfailing loyalty
to Big Brother and go along with the view that Russia, an intrinsic and valuable part of the European
mainstream both historically and culturally, represents universal evil and that the Earth will not
be safe until the Federation has been dismembered and Putinism wiped out once and for all.
This abuse and humiliation of Europe is unparalleled. The continent that gave the world the wonders
of the Antiquity, modern democracy, the industrial revolution and what is arguably the greatest tradition
of philosophy, fine arts and classical music is being bullied by its oversized offspring. Having
self-destructed in two world wars, it has become an easy and even willing prey to an arrogant, ignorant
and power-drunk predator that has never experienced the hardships and horrors that Europe has.
War and extermination camps are etched into the European DNA. America "knows" about them only from
afar – and, not least, from the Hollywood entertainment industry.
Even more terrifying, intellectually third-rate Washington viceroys such as Victoria Nuland
and the freelancing armchair warrior Senator McCain are allowed to play God with our continent.
The so-called European "leaders" are colluding with them in plunging Europe into the abyss and thereby
risking nuclear confrontation.
America, too, is a loser
But this is not just a tragedy for Europe and Eurasia. We are also witnessing the wilful misrule
of America and, by default, of the entire West. Indeed, Washington is betraying the best interests
of the American people through its current foreign policy. The "democracy-promoters" running Washington's
foreign-policy apparatus apparently do not understand that America has nothing to lose and a lot to
gain from the Eurasian economic project: the rising tide of global economic welfare would lift everyone's
boats, including its own. Why should it matter to Washington if the rising tide comes from other quarters
beyond its control?
Indeed, the damage extends beyond the economy. By aligning with the forces of chaos – such as chauvinistic
extremists in Ukraine – Washington and its Euro-vassals are corrupting the moral (and intellectual)
core of the West. If it continues to support such forces against Russia, united Europe will lose not
only its backbone but its very soul. The moral consequences of this loss will be enormous and could
lead to the precipitous erosion of Western democracy.
The 'autocrats' want to work with the West, not against it
US and EU leaders believe that the Russian and Chinese "autocrats" are out to destroy the West because
the latter hate freedom (as George W. Bush might have put it). And hence, they argue, the autocrats
must be stopped in their tracks. The simple truth is that Western leaders are too blinkered to understand
that far from desiring to destroy the West, Russia and China want it to prosper so that they can work
with it to everyone's benefit. Having enjoyed a privileged position over several centuries and having
attained unprecedented prosperity in recent decades, the West simply cannot understand that the rest
of humanity has no interest in fomenting the "clash of civilizations" but rather craves peace and stability
so that it can finally improve its economic lot.
Perhaps, however, all is not yet lost. It is still possible that reason – and economic forces –
will prevail and force the West to correct the errors of its ways. What we need, perhaps, more than
ever is the ability to step out of the box, question our fundamental assumptions (not least about Russia
and China) and find the courage to change policies that have proved disastrous. After all, critical
thought, dispassionate analysis and the ability to be open to new ideas is what made the West so successful
in the past. If we are to thrive once again in the future, we must resurrect these most valuable and
unsurpassed assets.
What I cannot understand is the naive belief that elected politicians would act in the interests
of those whom they represent. Under what other circumstances do we see human beings act with disinterested
altruism? So why would a bunch of people who have been ruthlessly selected for selfishness, arrogance,
and callousness - a bunch of carefully chosen psychopaths, if you will - behave in that way?
'My Ph.D. dissertation chairman, who became a high Pentagon official assigned to wind down the
Vietnam war, in answer to my question about how Washington gets Europeans to always do what Washington
wants replied: "Money, we give them money." "Foreign aid?" I asked. "No, we give the European political
leaders bagfuls of money. They are for sale. We bought them. They report to us." Perhaps this explains
Tony Blair's $50 million fortune one year out of office'.
- Paul Craig Roberts
jabirujoe
"Washington is betraying the best interests of the American people through its current foreign
policy".
Not only it's foreign policy but it's domestic policy as well. Let's call it for what it really
is. The Wall Street/Corporate policy which is the driving force behind behind everything the US does
Toddrich
"We, the [CENSORED] people, control America and the Americans know it."
-- Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of [CENSORED]
"When we're done with the U.S. it will shrivel up and blow away."
-- Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of [CENSORED]
The welfare or future of the American people are not part of the equation.
Well young man, I only talk down to clowns. If you had something reasonable to say in your original
comment, you might have avoided being patronized. You reap what you sow.
The US is no better or worse than the Russia. You get zero news on our TV Media except that which
'unnamed government sources' claim. How is that any different than what the Russian People see? Moreover,
YOU don't know what the Russians see or know and can't know it unless you are living in Russia, which
you aren't.
Right now, even as I type, the so-called 'liberal' station, MSNBC, is reporting that Putin hasn't
been seen for a week, when, in fact, he was seen live and in person twice this past week and it was
reported elsewhere in the European Media. But we have to keep him in the news because he's the current
"evil enemy du jour" and until we can come up with some new 'outrage' committed by Putin, this is
the best they can do.
People on the 'All-Israel-all-the-Time' Station, CNN Amerika, have even gone so far as to suggest
that Putin's been overthrown by hardliners bent on restoring the borders of the old USSR. Quick! Throw
open the siloes. We have to take them out now before these hardliners attack poor innocent Amerika!
At the commercial break, there will be yet another advertisement for Boeing or Northrup Grumman
just to keep us in that Cold War mood until the talking heads come back on. Meanwhile, even though
none of us could ever possibly buy a Boeing or Grumman product, 'liberal' MSNBC is bought off with
advertising money so that they won't ever criticize the new Cold War. Nor will you ever see a negative
story about Boeing or Grumman contract cost overruns, especially not during the coming war with Iran
(which has no bomb vs. poor Israel, which has at least 250 bombs).
Meantime, we are also being told that there is no mass surveillance. Of course not, it's just "bulk
collection". I'm sure that you find that reassuring, but I've been around long enough to remember
when this would never have been permitted--that is, of course, without a "new pearl harbor" (google
it and learn something about PNAC, while you're at it).
In a country in which:
1. all of your communications are collected and analyzed;
2. the regular police forces are now full-scale armed para-military units;
3. the National Defense Authorization Act permits the President to impose martial law anywhere in
the country and to actually house US Military Personnel in our homes as required;
4. the new Patriot Act permits indefinite incarceration without habeas corpus for American Citizens;
and,
5. people are shot in the streets on a regular basis by uniformed thugs;
you have no basis whatsoever to claim that life in Amerika is any better than it is in Putin's
Russia.
Finally, young man, I'm 64 and you can call me a "young man" any time you want. At my age, it's
a compliment. In the future, should you want to discuss things, dispute something I've said or make
a counter-argument to something I've said, as some do, you will be treated with respect. If all you
bring is ignorance and snark, rest assured you will be patronized. After all, we have standards here
in the threads and I'm not allowed to tell little punks like you to just F-off.
sheikhoftheprairies Adabsiz1 13 Mar 2015 14:36
The Gazprom is a sponsor of the `Echo of Moscow`, many newspapers (like `The New Izvestiya`) of
the so called liberal opposition. The state-owned corp. supports the opposition! How can it be explained?
The Kremlin masochism? Curioser and curioser! Wonderland! Who gonna be Alice?
Adabsiz1 13 Mar 2015 14:29
Amazingly, and despite Western sanctions on Russia, not to mention attacks on the person of President
Putin .... GAZPROM, the largest Russian oil company, is the SOLE sponsors of not only the UEFA Champions League
...... but also FC Schalke 04 (a premiere German club) !!!
The Central Intelligence Agency was created to gather intelligence.
Collecting intelligence through human sources and by other appropriate means, except that he shall
have no police, subpoena, or law enforcement powers or internal security functions; Correlating and evaluating intelligence related to the national security and providing appropriate
dissemination of such intelligence; Providing overall direction for and coordination of the collection of national intelligence outside
the United States through human sources by elements of the Intelligence Community authorized to undertake
such collection and, in coordination with other departments, agencies, or elements of the United States
Government which are authorized to undertake such collection, ensuring that the most effective use
is made of resources and that appropriate account is taken of the risks to the United States and those
involved in such collection; and Performing such other functions and duties related to intelligence affecting the national security
as the President or the Director of National
sheikhoftheprairies -> psygone 13 Mar 2015 13:06
CNN is a source for the masses. To be more or less informed persons need other sources of information.
My choice is the Lloyd List. It writes nothing about policy, only marine industry, yet you can judge
the real state of affairs in the international economy, cos maritime transportation is blood of the
world`s economy. Even the FT is not very reliable for me. I prefer figures and graphs to the words.
worried 13 Mar 2015 12:43
"competent leaders who embraced the western world because they cared more about maximizing the prosperity
of their people than stealing their national wealth"
....HO HO HO !!
I just love the twisted Guardianista thinking that we get on here from time to time....NOT.
Read all about it : ' they cared more about maximizing the prosperity of their people than stealing
their national wealth" ....
Does this win the 2015 Orwellianspeak prize of the year?
BradBenson -> brendonn 13 Mar 2015 10:52
Fact are facts. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution? Sounds to me as if you don't
have the education or acquired knowledge to dispute what I said. Perhaps you should check out our standing
against the rest of the world.
Since I've traveled all of my life and lived as an expatriate in Germany for ten years, I've had the
opportunity to see the differences myself. Since you've never been outside of your trailer park, let
alone your state, you will have to go to the net to find out the truth.
Make that your assignment for today young man and run along.
HollyOldDog -> romans 13 Mar 2015 10:42
By manning the Concentration Camps where their extreme brutality was noted by the Gestapo but the
Ukrainians cowardice was evident when the Soviet forces discovered the Auschwitz Concentration camp
where the Ukrainian guards discarded their uniforms and tried to hide within the prisoners. But they
stood out like a sore thumb as they were overweight whereas the true prisoners were 'stick thin' and
obviously starving and awaiting their place in the que for the gas chambers.
jgbg -> huzar30 13 Mar 2015 10:29
Strongmen always eliminate potential rivals, and surround themselves with competent sycophants.
(Strangely, despite giving the impression of being a complete madman, Zhirinovsky made a fairly accurate
prediction on a Ukrainian TV programme in 2006, about what would happen in Ukraine if the nationalists
and their far right chums in Svoboda seized power)
Conniston -> romans 13 Mar 2015 10:27
Romans, they sure got their revenge at the Treblinka death camp. They were Catholic Christians with
a deep hatred of Jews, communists and Orthodox Christians. Just to rub it in the new prime minister
was seen with the Pope only a few days after the coup in Kiev. It may be 70 years ago but they still
believe in priestcraft. It's a good job they have a saviour-god who is going to forgive all the rotten
things they do while on Earth.
valeronfreza -> Daniel Simkins 13 Mar 2015 10:15
It creates resonance. But it really stupid. He's a president, a busy guy, he has lots of things
to do, which are way more important than making new photos. There are plenty of them, already, he's
not a TV serial so people would wait a new portion of him every two days or so. In spite of intensions
of medias to turn his life and actions into series.
HollyOldDog -> Havingalavrov 13 Mar 2015 09:57
It's probably due to Poroshenko asking for an emergency Asylum due to all the murders of Russian
Speaking politicians in West Ukraine but the armed road blocks around Kiev are posing problems for
his safe escape plan.
samlebon23 13 Mar 2015 09:55
The Cancer Inducing Agency is hard at work.
StatusFoe -> RealityCheck2014 13 Mar 2015 09:42
He has not busy working hard with Western nations to secure a mutually beneficial reconciliation
What was he doing in Minsk a couple of weeks ago then?
fully integrate Russia into the global economy, promote positive and respectful relationships with
foreign markets for Russia's products,
Under Putin Russia has become a member of the WTO, the Russian Middle Class has grown enormously.
Sure, the bureaucracy is still stiffling and huge reforms are still needed to promote SMEs. On the
other hand, Putin has stopped the western energy corps from taking over Russia's resources in the way
they do in the third world, Nigeria for example. That resistance has irked the US led western corporate
cabal and thus the campaign in western MSM to demonize Putin and vilify Russia as a whole.
Ida Barnes -> Metronome151 13 Mar 2015 09:40
Huge dollop of whataboutery
Whataboutery. Newspeak noun: used as a desperate attempt by people with poor reasoning skills to deflect
attention from their double standards
VladimirM -> VladimirM 13 Mar 2015 08:10
There were two other presidents in Russia. Everybody knew and could see themselves how healthy Yeltsin
was. But I can't remember a single story about Medvedev's health during his tenure.
The youth don't remember Politburo and even Yeltsin's presidency seems to be far away. So it's a
bit rich to call it 'scares' and compare it to the early 80s.
Dr_Delaney 13 Mar 2015 08:01
One has to understand that Mr Putin has had to defend his nation from the war of economic aggression
that a minority of US-connected countries have waged on his country. I say minority because their actions
are not supported by the world community - far from it indeed.
Mr Putin is also working hard on the 2018 World Cup - which is expected to be the bes so far in the
competitions history.
Socraticus -> SHappens 13 Mar 2015 07:46
Matt Lee is one of the few journalists that consistently challenges the official government narrative
and points out their hypocrisy during press briefings. The MSM need many more individuals like him.
SHappens -> linzter 13 Mar 2015 07:31
The US would never lie, never do such things, check Psaki's statement:
As a matter of long-standing policy, the United States does not support political transitions by non-constitutional
means."
It's Nato that's empire-building, not Putin....Peter Hitchens in The Spectator magazine
"Two great land powers face each other. One of these powers, Russia, has given up control over 700,000
square miles of valuable territory. The other, the European Union, has gained control over 400,000
of those square miles. Which of these powers is expanding"?
Crimea would have been flattened if the nationalists had invaded. Luckily the people of Crimea acted
swiftly and succeeded from Ukraine. Yes, it was all illegal but lives were saved. Western liberal interventionists
should have supported Russia.
Dr_Delaney -> SHappens 13 Mar 2015 07:13
This is quite true. The western game of denegration of a whole nation has backfired on them.
They appear NOT to have learnt from past mistakes from history: 1812 (France invaded Russia), 1914
(Germany invaded Russia) and 1942 (Germany again invaded Russia). On each occasion Russia came out
stronger.
SHappens 13 Mar 2015 07:08
"Something remarkable is taking place in Russia, and it's quite different from what we might expect.
Rather than feel humiliated and depressed Russia is undergoing what I would call a kind of renaissance,
a rebirth as a nation. This despite or in fact because the West, led by the so-called neo-conservatives
in Washington, is trying everything including war on her doorstep in Ukraine, to collapse the Russian
economy, humiliate Putin and paint Russians generally as bad. In the process, Russia is discovering
positive attributes about her culture, her people, her land that had long been forgotten or suppressed."
Putin probably needed a break to look with satisfaction at what the West has achieved so far, and that
is nothing constructive for the EU.
sheikhoftheprairies -> gewillia21 13 Mar 2015 07:03
Chechnya`s part of the Russian Federation. It was and is. South Ossetia was saved by Russia. Georgians
planned their genocide. Ukraine became a victim of the coup d'état like in LA in the 70s. Crimea? Now
we see what ordeal this peninsula would undergo if not Russia`s help. Ukraine is a part of the Russian
world, Russian populated universe, and therefore the EU and US are wrong when they try to trespass
this thin, invisible but real red line. It is not our business. Let the Russian (Ukrainians are the
Russian too) do like they can, we should not interfere with their Civil war. `Mad Vlad` is a vocabulary
of hongweibings and dazibaos, as to the white overalls they won`t move their fingers until paid for
their service. Who will pay them, you? Vlad won`t do it.
Putin is a great national leader and the best friend of Chechnya, that Muslim republic. Visit Grozny
(capital of the republic), it`s a fairy tale in the mountains. Putin built it anew.
StatusFoe -> SirHenryRawlins 13 Mar 2015 06:37
Indeed, it's very scarry. Thankfully it's been relatively very quiet in East Ukraine these last
few days.... the hawks are surely not happy. And now the US establishment's official mouthpiece, tyhe
Washington Post is berating the UK for not spendiing more on defence and not being sifficiently aggressive:
In the two conflicts that most directly imperil Europe today, Britain has been largely invisible.
Obama, Kerry, Rasmusseen, Nuland, McCain, Hague & Ashton.
The '' hug a, Kiev, fascist'' - lets have
a coup d' etat' in a sovereign and democratic country - gang.
And, Putin, sat back whilst the above mentioned incompetence actions dropped into Putin's and the Russian's
lap - Crimea and 20% of Ukraine.
And now the fucking political imbeciles are planning a war with Russia.
Socraticus 13 Mar 2015 06:25
Good lord! Do any of you anti-Putin fanatics ever once bother to investigate the claims presented
in the MSM rather than take them as fact at face value?
A simple cursory check of the Russian Presidential website would have easily dispelled the disinformation
being disseminated, as it provides a listing of Putin's various meetings held over the past week and
beyond (including photos taken at those meetings and links to the press releases of same).
Further, those meetings can also be validated via the video coverage of them found on YouTube (including
the Women's Day on March 8th), as well as postings made on other governmental websites that pertain
to the individuals he met with. Here are just a few of those links so you can see for yourself...
Things have become clearer following the 'Yesterday' TV programme that told the harrowing story
of the death camp at Treblinka in Poland - March 10th. The guards killing the Jews were Ukrainian.
Many Ukrainians joined the German army when they attacked the USSR in June 1941.
With this in mind we can now begin to understand why the Russians are, rightly or wrongly, calling
those in Kiev Nazis.
Pateric -> GreatMountainEagle 13 Mar 2015 06:24
Why not, if even after Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya....the Westerners believe in their "exclusive" democracy as they, obviously, believe in the above 108-124%.
Vladimire_Poutine 13 Mar 2015 06:23
Where's Wally? *
*Wally = common Anglicization of Vladimir.
sheikhoftheprairies 13 Mar 2015 06:04
Churchill: `Stalin took over Russia when it had just a plough and left it with nuclear weapons`.
Putin took over Russia when it had just plights, and now Russia is a liberal, democratic, capitalist
country. Its only guilt is it does not want to be anybody`s fool, victim. Putin is a real leader, not
just a formal President. I wish him every success. I`d recommend politicians of other countries to
follow his example for the sake of their nations.
