Fake News: The Unravelling of US Empire From Within

Global Research, March 27, 2017

Setting the Stage of the Press-President War

US ruling ideology and Washington power have become unstuck as never before. A war of opposing certitudes and denunciations is waged day to day between the long-ruling US corporate media and the White House. Both continuously proclaim ringing recriminations of the other’s ‘fake news’. Over months they both portray each other as malevolent liars.

US bully pulpits are now beyond show disagreements and successful media inquisitions of the past. Slanderous accusations long confined to vilifying the designated Enemy have crept into accusations of the President himself. ‘The Russians are coming’ is returning as the final recourse of smear to stop deviations from the global program of hugely profitable enemy hate and perpetual preparations for foreign war.

The ruling big lies of the US money party and corporate globalization have divided into opposing camps. The Press and the President denounce each other non-stop on the public stage, while US dark state agents take sides behind the scenes.

Fake news is the medium of battle.

Tracking the Real Fake News Built into Corporate Globalization

Beneath the civil war of official narratives, cognitive space opens for truth long suffocated by ‘the Washington Consensus’. Even the US-led G-20 has recently agreed not to automatically condemn ‘protectionism’ as an economic evil. The battle slogan of transnational corporate rule over 30 years has been quietly withdrawn on the global stage.

Is the big lie of ‘free trade’ finally coming to ground? It has long led the hollowing out of societies and life support systems across the world in a false mass promotion as “freedom and prosperity for all”.  In fact beneath the pervasive fake news, a closed-door transnational corporate command system forces all enterprises across borders into a carbon-multiplying trade regime with thousands of rules to protect the transnational corporate looting and ruin of home economies and environments as the only rights enforced.

Propagandist names and fake freedoms are proclaimed everywhere to conceal the reality. The corporate-investor regime has stripped out almost all evolved protections of workers, ecologies and social infrastructures. Non-stop liquidations and roboticizations of local jobs and enterprises are reversed in meaning to ‘jobs, jobs, jobs’ and ‘higher living standards’, the very opposite of the facts. Destabilization and bombing wars attack resource-rich and air-defenceless societies outside the circle of treaty subjugation.

False news allows every step. Even the happy-face Trudeau regime is taken aback by the tidal shift to national priorities. Its ministers scuttle around the US in near panic to find common cause for restoring the unaccountable regime. Multiplying carbon, disemployment and ecological plunder are ignored throughout in the longest standing fake news of all –‘economic growth”.

In fact, there is no real economic growth in universal life necessities or reduction of waste. The only growth is of volumes and velocities of transnational money exchanges, foreign commodities, and private profits to the top.

‘More prosperity for nations and the world’ means, decoded, more transnational corporate-state treaties to deprive nations of their rights to organization and production for citizens’ real needs as well as organically regulated protection of environments and ecosystems.

The consequences covered over by pervasively false cover stories are speeded-up ecocidal extractions, permanent disemployments, and wastes hemorrhaging into cumulatively more polluted oceans, air, atmosphere and life habitats. Corporate-state solutions of carbon markets for pollution rights have nowhere reduced any of these life-and-death crises, but only further and selectively enriched transnational corporations.

As for the Obama solution, “we need more Canadas”, fake news again conceals the reality. Beneath the global celebrity hype covering empty and broken promises, Canada’s Trudeau  regime is essentially a brand change of PM rhetoric to advance transnational corporate dictates as ‘free trade’ and to ensure oil pipelines out of the most polluting oil basin in the world, Alberta’s tar-sands, are built through water basins and indigenous lands across Canada and the US. One cannot help but observe this is Trump’s plan too, and overrides Trudeau’s promises to protect Canada’s first peoples.

I recently sent a letter to my local MP requesting evidence for what PM Trudeau promises over months of repetition that “more free trade” means “a better life for those in the middle class and those wanting to join the middle class”. As always, there is no evidence to support the non-stop false news from the PMO. Revealingly, the “middle class” turns out to be people making $180,000 a year slated to get significant tax cuts.

Trump’s rogue elephant charge on Washington-led lies, war, and dispossession of the working class is no solution to life-blind corporate globalization. Trump in office is a US nationalist oligarch commanding policies even more blindly rapacious in despoliation of the environment and transferring far more public wealth to the rich.

The common ground of all our lives, collective life capital, does not exist for any government in ‘the free world’ or any policy of ‘globalization’.  The lies that must be promulgated to advance the private corporate agenda are built into its transnational command system from the beginning.

Out of the Ruling Memory Hole with the Internet Commons

Joining the dots shows that every step of US money-party ‘globalization’ has, in fact, been driven by fake news.

No corporate media tolerance has been given in a quarter of a century to any voice demanding accountability to the common life-ground of citizens. A new game of numbers has proceeded instead. At most, a euphemistic ‘climate change’ has been endlessly debated while the totalizing destabilization of human and planetary life cycles remains without a name or collective response. Only more profitable market panaceas which do not reduce any pollution continue to divert from the deepest degenerate trends destroying the planetary life host.

On the upside, the big lies of ‘free trade’ and ‘humanitarian wars’ have been called into official question for the first time by the Trump presidential campaign, and he has been elected against the official line. Yet opposing camps are still at each other’s throats. So the perpetual fallback on accusing the long-designated foreign enemy is triggered by the fallen establishment. The fake news chorus of Russia’s aggressions now includes collusion of the Trump administration with its officials to win the US election. This mainspring diversion from reality is called back from the dead witch-hunts of the past. As then tool, facts do not count, only accusations do. The official media line is almost predictable: Russia is behind Trump’s election victory. As always, reverse projection is the mass-psyche operation to blame an official Enemy to divert attention from the life-and-death facts. The Enemy is once again accused of doing what the US has always done worse as the reason for attacking It. Russia is the usual placeholder in this reverse-blame operation. The 2016 US election of Trump is the latest variation.

Meanwhile throughout the election and its aftermath, the new transnational internet commons including Wiki-leaks over a decade has increasingly laid bare the greatest propaganda machine in history now in many-leveled crisis. The long normalized half-truths, one-sided slanting of the facts, and non-stop fallacies of inference are coming out into the open as never before.  The pretexts and lies for US imperial bullying and war are exposed beyond any corporate-media gate.

This time the accusation is “interference and attack on the US presidential election” with no evidence of wrongdoing or vote manipulation whatsoever. Yet as in the long past, the method is smear with no evidence for the accusations. Ever more media repetition and shadowy insinuation does the job. It has always worked before, why not again since all the other media buttons pushed on taking down the Trump peace initiatives with Russia and opposition to globalization of US jobs have failed.

Having wondered during the election campaign whether we could be “friends with Russia” and promoted diplomatic relations into his administration, Trump can be named as the enemy in hiding to be rooted out. The real problem the fake news never mentions is that he threatens the cornerstone of the US war state over 70 years.

So when Trump won the election with his heresy still intact, the ever-ready accusation of evil-Russia connection moves into high gear although the target is the opposite of communist and an epitome of capitalist riches and connections. We see here the historical mind-lock compulsion to blame the Enemy Russia and smear whoever dissents from it, even if it is a bully-capitalist president. There are very big stakes in keeping the game going.

Yet the no-profit and unpaid analyses from the internet commons have no such ulterior motive and interest in false accusations. With more objectively informed analysts than the commercial press and unimpeachable facts like WikiLeaks going to tens of millions of readers across the world, the genie is out of the bottle. The official grand narrative and its normalized big lies are coming apart at the seams.

So blame as usual is diverted onto the accepted Enemy, now conniving with Trump to attack the 2016 US presidential election. Beneath the fake news, the fact is that positive diplomatic relations with Russia not only threaten to stop the highly profitable permanent war against it, but spike the longest pretext for US war and military domination now moving through Ukraine.

The free internet commons cannot be gagged for telling the truth. Freedom of speech in the US cannot be openly stopped without fatal loss of legitimacy of rule.

So the rest follows. All the non-corporate and non-profit messages from the critical sites on the internet commons which are speaking against the US war state inside are now vilified as ‘fake news’. A third, unofficial protagonist has entered the battle with no private profit or career motive or corporate boss to serve and a wealth of proven professional knowledge and talent at work. It has to be denounced to sustain the big lies of the ruling money-war game which is in deepening crises and conflicts all the way to the unprecedented US President-Press civil war.

The Harvard Proclamation of a New Memory Hole

The innermost fount of US ideology and war, Harvard University, has now stepped in. It is officially naming and denouncing US-critical internet sites for ‘fake news’.

Not even the medieval Church went so far in its Index Librorum Prohibitorum of prohibited writings. It was at least innocent of scientific method and openly declared its dogmas. Not Harvard.

Underneath notice, all the sites it attacks are internet commons, and none are financed by private corporate donors and captive institutions while Harvard and the corporate media are. This is the real battle agenda underneath, the long war  to privatize the news for profit as everything else with anti-establishment internet criticism now the target.

In the background, Harvard University has long propagated an unexamined academic method. It normally cuts off any faculty or learned source of opposition to the private corporate rule of America and the wars of aggression to impose it on the world.  Accordingly, the underling grand narrative equations of the US is Good and the designated Enemy is Evil is not questioned. It is presupposed. Malevolent motives are always assumed of the designated Enemy, down to Harvard-produced geostrategic economic and war models. So when a host of internet commons sites challenge the grand narrative framework, Harvard and satellites denounce them to stop people reading them. A long list of critical sites is accused without criteria, proof or evidence as all spreaders of ‘fake news’.

What is not recognised here is that only on the internet commons can the process of truth be free from ruling pressures to control message for external sponsors.

Here there is no commercial-profit condition to speak and write, and no livelihood dependence on private profit. There is no inducement to avoid life-and-death issues in academic obfuscation or ad-vehicle style. Internet authors not on the payroll can be free of the game of all games behind the scenes – enriching the rich further with no life-coherent criterion of truth.

These underlying conditions of the internet commons and free speech itself cannot be recognised by the academy or the corporate press without undercutting their proclaimed status as the only legitimate founts of truth. The internet commons is a new world of competitive capacities to research, understand and disseminate not bound by private money patronage (as over centuries in Harvard University).

When challenged in this way, Harvard (and the official press) are set back on their heels. They cannot think the facts through because their instituted presumptions have long been what they must presuppose and not question to acquire their credentials and pay for public speech. They must attack what calls all this into question if it effectively speaks truth to power to expose or de-legitimate the ruling system narrative as false. Harvard and the US press thus follow the reigning method of reverse projection. They accuse the effective opposition of ‘fake news’.

The most revealing fact here is that Harvard authority as other academic administrations proceed in name-calling without any valid argument or demonstration – the very basis of reasonable conclusion. Yet this is such a long tradition of presumptive accusation allowed against anyone designated as the Enemy, and anyone else exposing the falsehood of the ruling US story of moral superiority over all others and God’s blessing to lead the world by force or money.

This is why only dissenting sites from the official storyline of US freedom and rightness in all things are accused as ‘fake news’. Accusation of opposing positions is so well-worn into conditioned brains that endless repetition locks it in as self-evident. This is why attributions of vile motive are automatic from Harvard or the New York Times for any outside leader opposing US interference in their countries including elections. US hypocrisy here is staggering, but unreported. In fact, Harvard’s life-blind elite of war criminal geo-strategists, economic modellers and so on are fawned upon within the wider corporate rule they serve.

None can engage critical facts and thought challenging the US moral superiority assumptions because they have never been required to consider them. So they denounce them as once the Church denounced apostasy. In the end, US system worship is a war-state religion. It eliminates all enemies to its right to rule. Its globalizing system institutes the market laws of God. War crimes are God-blessed justice.

Freedom of Speech, the Process of Truth, and the US Constitution

Led by senior academics, journalists and technical expertise, the internet commons provide for the first time impartial witness and free speech open to public examination and circulation across borders. They are free from corporate-rank dictate and private copy-right control.

In consequence, the internet commons are liberated from private corporate profit as controlling goal. Those who know what they are talking about can speak truth to dogma and power without words to appease editors, business boards and ad revenues. Truth itself is not defined, but its principle of process is a more inclusively consistent taking into account towards life-coherent conclusion

Despite Google black-holing of radical legal facts, CIA penetration of Wikipedia, and so on, the internet commons’ freedom of speech is far beyond anything guaranteed in the US constitution. In fact, the ‘sacred US Constitution’ that all presidents give oath to “preserve, protect and defend” guarantees in the end only freedom of public speech to private money demand.

Long before the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision reverse-titled as “Citizens United”, the US constitution was structured to one overriding end –  to remove prior limits to private-money right over all else, including to begin, the rule of British law and  the lands of the first nations West of the Appalachians.

This is why no common life interest exists in the US Constitution from the start. People’s universal human life necessities of water, food, protection and liveable environment are ruled out a-priori.  This is why civil rights themselves were first federally enforced by the ‘commerce clause’ protecting freedom of commercial bus passengers including blacks to cross borders.

It is also why the Fourteenth Amendment to protect the equal rights of freed slaves ended up being the legal basis for private-profit corporations and wealthy funds to acquire the constitutional rights of living persons (e.g., to freedom of speech for big money to buy elections and to avoid government access to financial records).

Even the iconic rights of “life, liberty and happiness” turn out to be in fact only private market rights which allow corporate ‘fictive persons’ to unlimited money wealth, protection against public redistribution, and the freedom of private wealth alone to  speak to America by buying corporate self promotions and election attack ads.

The US Constitution fix goes all the way back to 1787. As professor of constitutional law at Chicago’s iconic Kent College of Law, Matthew Stanton, explains in personal correspondence:

“[The fix] goes all the way back to the 1787 coup where the 39 signatories to the Constitution sequestered themselves in a Philadelphia meeting house, with locked doors and shuttered windows, to ostensibly make adjustments to the Articles of Confederation, but instead delivered an entirely new document that enabled creating a federal system centralizing control of the economy by  propertied wealth”.

Russia the Enemy: the Deus ex Machina of Fake News

We may recall that the corporate-press and Wall-Street-enriched candidate for the presidency, Hillary Clinton, started the accusation of ‘fake news’ to explain her defeat. As establishment mask of the politically correct masses with the money-war party as her paymaster, Clinton blamed her fall in the 2016 US election on the new enemy she saw arising against the official story and herself. When the ‘glass mirror’ story line did not take, she joined forces with the corporate media on another plane. ‘Fake news’ misled Americans. The New York Times, the Washington Post, the TV Networks, and other establishment tale tellers saw pay-dirt far beyond Clinton’s failed bid for president.

In fact, the corporate mass media were losing marketability by the escalating appeal of free social media. The once all-powerful press propaganda system has been increasingly deserted. The ‘fake news’ story provided a media base to condemn free internet news and commentary as immoral. The 2016 election became the leverage for a big market grab back.

Very soon it was not just ‘fake news’ to spike news cycles and subscriptions. War as peace and corporate globalization as freedom found its long place of rule – the enemy of Russia to blame. Now the news can be that Russia hacked and attacked the lost 2016 election. Russia may be a hollowed-out shell by global corporate and oligarch dispossession. But it can still continue as pretext for US-NATO war crimes and aggression reverse-blamed on it. As the European breadbasket and newly discovered fossil-fuel rich nation, Ukraine is a very big prize. Now in Ukraine’s US-led coup aftermath and ethnic civil war, evil Russia can be an ace card again to accuse for attacking the US election.

Since Russia led by Putin is drawing the line as in Crimea to support the Russia-speaking region against US-led war crimes under international law (documented in previous articles), all roads connect. “Russia’s uncontrolled aggression” is  reverse-projected onto the victim again in  a glorious new use. Reverse blame it  for interference in the US election of Trump and kill Russia-US peace initiatives at the same time. No fact is required to verify the accusation, and no law broken is needed to insinuate treason of whoever relates with Russia’s officials in peace initiative. It can work even against an elected US president.

At the same time, the US’s own record attacking other nations’ elections and societies is thereby erased as well – continually orchestrating mass-murder and dictatorship to sabotage the electoral process from Vietnam and Chile to Ukraine in 2010 and Latin America social democracies since.

If it were a story of reverse projection by a mass-murderous psychopath, it would be too much to believe. Yet it now runs the US news cycle as the big story unfolding with no evidence of US illegality, force, or non-compliance with international law. The accusations run by themselves in US media culture and across the empire. So as 2017 Spring breaks, endless media insinuations of treason seep into the populace from corporate media sites across borders with backrooms and Congress setting up for another presidential inquisition.

It is interesting to observe two precedents. Past inquisitions were unfolded soon after Bill Clinton said in India, “it’s time to level up rather than down in global trade” and Richard Nixon founded the Environmental Protections Agency, stopped corporations from outsourcing US jobs, and made peace with China as Trump sought with Russia.

The ludicrous hypocrisy, factual vacuum, and war-drums of blame-the-enemy go into high-volume operation again, led by an attack-dog media against the elected US president whose only action has been to have business-like relations with Russia. Few observe the immense stakes of the US media and war establishments in this process. Cui bono? – who benefits? – is the question never asked.

What’s new?  The perpetual red herring of ‘Russia aggression’ takes everyone’s eyes off the ball – including the continuing US-drone mass murder and ecological wars built into the Trump agenda. Canada’s oil and mining corps and big banks sneak behind the pervasive fake news with a smiling Trudeau front. NATO demands more money behind Trump now fulsomely praising what he earlier campaigned on as “obsolete”, as he has done with the CIA he also condemned. Those hoping for a new departure under Trump from the big lies and war crimes as normalized operations watch in a combination of horror and hilarity.

Who connects the dots? Beneath official notice, the ruling goal of US empire is blind to its consequences of human and planetary life ruin. It has to cover itself in false news to carry on. This is why fake news is not a temporary phenomenon of the Trump era. It is the necessary veil of illusion of an eco-genocidal system. The symptoms and trends are everywhere. But a US-led prism of false inversions of reality regulates consciousness, perception and reaction to ‘steer the course’.

This is true of both sides of the Trump divide, and also in corporate Canada as the US’s largest trading partner, branch-plant and resource cornucopia. What is new is that the ruling illusions are divided against themselves at the top of the US political and ideological system. The Trump phenomenon reflects the rupture. The US empire is in deep crisis from its cumulative destruction of social and natural life support systems. Its carcinomic multiplication of private money demand with no tie to the production of means of life is the reality beneath all the false news.

Nothing is life secure. The ‘global security system’ protects only money values and sequences through life hosts. Peoples everywhere compete to make it go faster to survive. The ruling concept of ‘economy ‘inverts the systematic depletion, degradation and despoliation of the life capital of organic, social and ecological life. Universal necessities of human and fellow life are stripped, polluted and wasted as ‘efficiencies’.

President Trump has gone into the political ring to fight it out with the political establishment on a nationalist capitalist level. He is losing money in the short term. But his program in office is completely eco-blind, and the opposing mass media follow suit. All they can focus on is demonizing normal relations with the official Enemy Russia. Meanwhile Trump has all but abolished the EPA and cut off all federal funding for restoration of the Great Lakes, the most important source of fresh water heritage on the planet.

These supreme crimes under international law are recognised by none on stage. In Canada, a Nazi progeny and neo-Nazi supporter of the violent coup and civil war in Ukraine is made Foreign Affairs Minister and hustles her connections throughout the US to keep the attack-Russia juggernaut going as in the past under  a continuous barrage of ethnic prejudices and fake news.

The pattern is clear but unspoken. The Enemy Russia is the auto-pilot of fake news to divert from US and client leadership failure on almost every level. Relations of mutual respect with Russia’s ambassador are ‘collusion’ and taboo.

The Reality Beneath the Questions not Asked

How does disclosure of Hillary’s Clinton’s apparatus theft of the Democratic nomination from Bernie Sanders get blamed on Russia? The question is not asked. The Washington mass media and visible Congress focus instead on accused “collusion with Russia” with very big stakes in the new inquisition show. Suspicions without substance run free in the mass media once the designated Enemy is smeared onto the target, even if elected president.

Who knows that the US joined the armed forces of Britain, colonial Canada and Japan to crush the 1917 Russian Revolution on behalf of the Czarist autocracy and Western capitalism? More deeply, who names the governing objective behind all the shows of force and accusation over a century since? To be managed successfully, attention must be diverted from the facts of US-led war crimes and public looting within and without US empire proclaimed as ‘world freedom’.

The new President and his Exxon Secretary of State seek business-like relations with Russia. Very big powers are coming into conflict over business and war within the US empire. Big oil in both leviathan countries are pitted against the US Enemy-and-smear establishment which has long run the show with big oil formerly leading it. Now transnational big oil in the US and Russia are leading out of the blind alley of war against each other which has so totally failed to bring benefits to either side in the long term, and has almost reversed civilization.

The dots again are not joined. The completely counter-productive war against Russia to keep the US money-war state going is deepened by Wall Street. The falling price of oil is driven beneath notice by Wall Street which has successfully short-future-traded oil down to establish its money-printing powers by debt as supreme over its rival substitute, while diverting everybody’s attention from the greatest fraud in history still going. Observe that Wall Street remains untouched even from its multi-trillion dollar heist from public and pension coffers from 2007 on.

Blame Russia is the normal chorus which Wall Street benefits from as the ultimate leader of the ruinously anti-productive money-war system. It pays off so well to the money party in more public dollars appropriated by its control and issue of money debt for everything that exists; the pervasive military-industrial complex which never gets reversed even in the peace after the planned destruction of the ‘Evil Empire’; and the corporate mass media in front turning the fake news system over continuously to promote, idealize and divert from the global empire’s war and occupation powers. The neo-con and neo-liberal war strategists alike are built into the dark state as managers uniquely dependent on Russia as the Enemy.

So it is in all their self-maximizing interests to sustain perpetual accusations of some enemy’s evil as the great cover-up story of US empire and it inherited war-crime system. Joined to despotic local oligarchies, this axis dismantles ever more societies for corporate, bank and military plunder and jackal payoffs everywhere (including the academy). There is no limit or borders to the established system invasion, and all is at the expense of public treasuries and of life support systems across domains.

President Trump does not break the fatal ruling cycle. He demands that vassal states should pay for their US military protection, a new global extortion supporting new NATO oligarchies against change which accompanies his stripping of environmental protections to pay for more war powers. Trump behind his populist bluster is a paradigm example of instituted US capitalist greed and aggression. Yet the fact that hate of the Enemy is smeared even onto him for not hating Russia too reveals the ultimate pretext of the US-NATO war machine. Behind the US-led perpetual arms build-up, border threats and bombings of mostly innocents across the globe while blaming the terrorists for the horrors now built into the global ‘growth’ system is fake news as continuous cover story. The war-criminal drone mass murders continue on unnoticed. The bank looting of public wealth is instituted more broadly. The universities, health systems and public infrastructures are privatized for profit with no life criteria of outcomes.

Trump is dispossessing the American common wealth for big US money in line with the Reagan public-looting machine before him. It drained  public revenues into a black hole of US debt, blamed acid rain on trees, and portrayed orchestrated mass murderers of socialists in Afghanistan and Nicaragua as ‘freedom fighters’. What has changed in the corporate media’s fake-news today?

Trump in office is the opposite of the anti-establishment candidate he promised to be. He wars on the US Environmental Protection Agency (its only collective life protective organization). He fractions corporate taxes in a giveway to the rich beyond Reagan’s $500-billion tax cut. He privatizes the public’s falling infrastructure for speculators and developers’ long-term private tolls, profits and control for private profit at taxpayers’ expense.

Who in the corporate media or Congress questions any of it?

The Trudeau  regime to the north imitates the new massive scheme of privatizing public infrastructure. But it disguises it in terms of public investment in public goods. The big banks and speculators on both sides of the border are the winners whatever the corporate media and state cover story. The common wealth is sold off under pervasive fake news masquerading as responsible and for the public good. But the drive-wheel policy mechanisms for ever more dismantling of the living earth and redistribution of more public wealth upwards to the rich march on beneath conscious comprehension.

Trump does not hide the privatization for profit of America’s public infrastructure and stripping of public health and environmental protection policies once he has rising stockholder support in office. The Trudeau Liberal party masqueraded as the social democrat NDP in promising whopping public investment to win the election, but when in office lets the giant privatization boondoggle trickle out in sunny  avoidance of the facts.

The monumental schemes of robbing the commonwealth at every level are led by slanted and selective reports through every step across ever more domains. But a constant across US empire is Russia the Enemy to justify it all. In the deepening life support crises of this ruling axis, Russia’s projected ‘attacks’ still lead the show.

The Life-Blind Moral DNA of US Rule

With no common ground but belief in God’s blessing over all nations and the greatest killing machine in history to enforce it, US ideology may seem to be a psychopathic rationalization writ large.

Yet the US national morality tale governs perception so that the a-priori life-blindness is not recognised even by philosophers. The US continues to be ruled at home and abroad without life-value ground or compass. So as the US-led global market system multiplies its demands on organic, social and ecological life systems, it moves inexorably towards a few multibillionaires with more wealth than 99% of the population, steering planetary depredation to ruin as freedom and growth.

How else would a global cancer system behave? Yet almost none recognise that this system overrides life requirements at every level. The reformer Trump selects for even more wealth and power to the home rich. He attacks evolved environmental research and regulations with no better alternative. He seeks to repeal Obamacare with no public option considered. His nationalist and cost-cutting program is essentially life-blind.

The baseline of crisis goes all down to the moral DNA of the US project and its evolved economic, political and ideological system. The innermost value driver is long presupposed without question by even US moral philosophers and social scientists as the first principle of their models. Atomic self-maximization towards more private money-value without limit is the meta-program.

In consequence, the ‘global free market’ the US leads and imposes has no feedback loops to protect human or planetary life against hollowing them out for transient commodities, private profit and wastes on every level. The ruling system is structured only to ensure more money demand and commodities to those who have money to pay. Any accountability to universal life necessities is ruled out a-priori from the US Constitution, ruling market doctrine, and received theories.

As I have commented in articles prior to his presidency, “Trump is America come to meet itself”. But the US cover story has not yet been decoded in its master functions of legitimation and idealization. What makes the eco-genocidal system acceptable to human consciousness is an ultimate story line and moral syntax that transforms it into heroic liberty, individualism and moral supremacy.

This moral syntax has been imprinted into US empire since its original revolution against Britain to invade the America West to the Pacific Ocean to appropriate and  destroy all the life and life support systems of the developed first peoples there as ‘freedom’, ‘development’ and ‘self-defense’. What is required for the grand narrative’s success is to hide the reality of continuous eco-genocide by continuous false representations as the virtue and truth others fail to understand.

This first principle the justifying morality tale entails the second – that an alien Enemy must always be blamed for the system’s destructive attacks on barriers and resistance to it. Conversion of all life and life support systems to limitless self-maximization of the US system and its richest citizens then proceeds under cover of fake news with wars of acquisition and control represented as courageous and beneficent for all.

For-profit private corporations are the ever more empowered legal vehicles of this transnational system which is set to select for systematic self-maximization of the rich by all market, state and war means that can be constructed to enable it, starting with the US Constitution (as explained above). This set-point is built into the legislative, judicial and executive branches so that today the system outcome is a constitutionally ordered money-party control of all three branches of government as well as the funding systems of social sciences and philosophy.

Fake news in the widest sense provides a continuous cover story to mask and justify the underlying program which is not seen – the money-war party’s limitless take from life within and without the US that depends on a designated Enemy as perennial pretext to strip the US and global commonwealth against effective opposition or change.

Prof. John McMurtry FRSC is the author of The Cancer Stage of Capitalism: From Crisis to Solution  and the three-volume study, Philosophy and World Problems,  UNESCO Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), Paris-Oxford. 

World SITREP Heads and Tails

March 27, 2017
World SITREP Heads and Tails

Pentagon has finally discovered a “link between Russia and Libyan commander Haftar”

Marine General Thomas Waldhauser, the head of U.S. forces in Africa told reporters on Friday March 24 that there was an “undeniable” link between Russia and powerful Libyan commander Khalifa Haftar, underscoring U.S. concerns about Moscow’s deepening role in Libya.” as Reuters reported.

General Khalifa Haftar, commander in the Libyan National Army (LNA), visit to Moscow was announced last summer and he visited Moscow in November 2016,. His meeting with Sergey Lavrov took place on November 29, 2016

The information about the meeting between Lavrov and General Khalifa Haftar was posted the same day on the Ministry of the Foreign Affairs website.

The Pentagon’s presentation of this fact four months later as some kind of deeply classified Intel just discovered by their Intelligence services just to show you what kind of complete and utter morons work for the US military and intelligence.

That’s however, doesn’t mitigate an interference of the US into the relations of Russia with other countries.

It’s none of your business, Pentagon!

——-

A district court in Moscow threw out a civil complaint filed by Yuri Kanner, the head of the Jewish congress in Russia, and the vice president of the World Jewish congress (WJC). The complaint was filed against  Maksim Shevchenko, an opposition journalist and a member of the Council for Human Rights for the President of the Russian Federation.  A year ago Shevchenko published an article that criticized the policies of the state of Israel against occupied Palestine.

What makes this court decision truly remarkable is that the Jewish World Congress alleged his article to be an example of “anti-Zionist speech,” instead of traditionally used by them term “anti-Semitic speech.”

The court’s decision has underscore the fact that freedom of speech protects people as individuals, not political organizations and their geo-political concepts.

===========================

An aftermath of Balaklaya arsenal explosion

The Balakleya lost one civilian killed, two wounded. And according to Vice Premier Zubko:

“We identified five destroyed private houses. Damages of different degrees were identified for 243 building, including 117 apartment buildings, 87 private houses, 12 social facilities, 22 facilities and industry. Assessment of volume of damage and destruction of these buildings is still underway”

90 servicemen were on duty at this military facility at any given time. Not a word a word about them from the government of Ukraine.

An unofficial  search was conducted across the local hospitals. No one reported any injured people arriving from this area. It looks like those 90 troops just vanished into thin air, literally or figuratively.

According to the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Center:

NATO troops are moving into the area around Kharkov.

NATO envoys arrive in Balaklia to assist in humanitarian demining NATO representatives are arriving in the town of Balaklia, Ukraine, to conduct demining operations in the area where a large-scale fire engulfed a military munitions depot on March 23, head of the Kharkiv regional state administration Yulia Svetlichna said on air of 112 Ukraine TV channel.

 “I can say that NATO envoys are already arriving to carry out demining the military munitions depot, at the request of the president,” Svetlichna said.

She also noted that the city’s electricity supply would be resumed on Sunday, while gas services would be renewed before next Thursday. Svetlichna emphasized that the residents had already been provided with humanitarian aid. She also reported on the preparation of applications for financial assistance from the Cabinet of Ministers to carrying out restoration work. Read also Almost 20,000 residents evacuated due to blasts at Kharkiv region military depot As UNIAN reported earlier, overnight Thursday, March 23, a fire broke out at Ukraine’s largest munitions depot in Balaklia, Kharkiv region. Mass detonations led to an evacuation of nearly 20,000 residents of nearby settlements. There were no casualties among the military, but one civilian woman was killed and several others were injured. Poroshenko said on March 23 that he instructed the Foreign Ministry, the Defense Ministry and the State Emergency Service “to attract NATO assistance for humanitarian demining in Balaklia.” On March 24, Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of Ukraine Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze said that the United States and Slovakia had already expressed their readiness to assist Ukraine in demining the military arsenal in Balaklia in the framework of cooperation with the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Center.”

 

Also, there are reports of NATO troops moving to take over Ukrainian nuclear stations.

This is a full-fledged overt NATO invasion of Ukrainian territory.

Now, we can safely suggest that it was NATO behind the organization and execution of this explosion at Balakleya in the middle of Donbass. Most likely, they will proceed with consolidating their army against the Donetsk and Lugansk republics.

By taking over the nuclear power stations with 15 nuclear reactors, NATO gets a tool to start blackmailing Russian government with the threats of nuclear explosions.

============================

Who makes claims for Daesh?

This question was asked by a blogger I closely follow, Cat (Matvey) Motja, after the attack on the military base in Chechnya left six servicemen dead and three wounded.  So, I decided to look into who or what was the initial source for this information.

After a bit of research, I came to a conclusion that an initial source of this claim was the SITE Intelligence Group.

It was their website  that has announced that it was ISIS, and not some kind of CIA special ops or Mossad, that organized and executed this attack on the territory of Russia and by the hands of the Russian citizens.

IS Claims 6-Man Suicide Raid on Russian National Guard Base in Chechnya http://tinyurl.com/m3mqh8d 

.@siteintelgroup Where did you get this image? Can you give us the url for this source? @katMotja pic.twitter.com/QqQGrS3UhR

View image on Twitter
 =========================================

Last night, the Kulak had dropped me this link to an FP article about a new TV show recently broadcasted in Russia titled “Adaptation.” The FP recommends us to watch this show, which means that this shows is yet another Russophobic anti-cultural project financed by Gazprom.

The Kulak: “Reminds me of that old Russian joke from the 1980s Cold War: the CIA dispatched an elite operative whose Russian was perfect to infiltrate the country. When he parachutes in with his secret radio into eastern Siberia, a babushka captures him with the help of some local militsiya. As the CIA agent is led away to be flown to KGB headquarters the dejected agent asks ‘How did you spot me as an American spy?’ and the babushka ‘ Oh, dear, we don’t get many blacks in our region.’” It’s worth noting that the gas behemoth’s media arm, Gazprom Media, owns the TNT network.”

Gazprom Media also owns Echo of Moscow, one of the most liberal and anti-Putin and pro-Washington and pro Israel news opinions dump.

The question is, who owns Gazprom Media?

The Foreign Policy article quotes Alexey Kovalev, “a Russian journalist and founder of Noodleremover, a Russian site that monitors the media”

Just a reminder that he dedicates himself attacking RT, TASS and Sputnik News for  what he calls “Russian propaganda for the West.”

Another FP sentiments, which is exactly why they posted this article: “is that sanctions have put several oil and gas exploration and drilling projects on hold, such as a huge Arctic gas plan with ExxonMobil.”

This should explain to you why a Russophobic show that depicts “drunk Russians working for Gazprom” is made and why it’s being promoted by the FP.tru to get a Pro-Russian TV show to be promote by the FP.

To create a fake reality and to demonstrate that Russia cannot function under sanctions and without the US technologies.

In reality

In 2017 Russia LNG export from Yamal will increase by 12% to 11.2 million tons.

Photo gallery of  Russian Arctic gas exploration capital  Sabeta, Yamal

They went on without ExxonMobil, with mostly Russian made equipment

People living in Norilsk said that the show hurts their patriotic sentiments and that Yamal was much better than it was depicted in this show.
They even started a twitter hashtag #Yamalisbetterthaninthemovie #ЯмалЛучшеЧемВКино

In the US the entertainment industry depicts the US as ‘shining city upon a hill” above everyone else, disregarding the reality of how dilapidated and crumbling it really is.

In Russia, it’s a complete opposite. People employed by an entertainment industry try to instill gloom and doom upon the country that is growing, building, inventing, investing in its economy and has the best prospects for the future than anyone else in the world now.

Infrastructure of Yamal, a hometown for the liquefied natural gas project located deep in the Russian Arctic

View image on Twitter

infrastructure of Yamal, a hometown for the liquefied natural gas project located deep in the Russian Arctic http://sdelano-u-nas.livejournal.com/10833047.html 

The most colorful town in Russia – Anadyr, a capital of Chukotka

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

The most colorful town in Russia – Anadyr, a capital of Chukotka
https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/84892/ 

====================

Kadyrov awards the servicemen of the Russian military police who have recently returned from Syria

Kadyrov awards the Chechen military police who have recently returned from Syria

==========================================

March 26th demonstrations in Russia

Red Jackets provocateurs

A professional provocateur “glued” himself to the road

 

Videos with the similar type of actions were also taken during the March 25th demonstration in Minsk.

In Belarus, these people were coming for the demonstration with arsenals of weapon and bottles of Molotov cocktail.

What kind of future do you think this arsenal owners would bring to Belarus?

On March 23rd, the Police searched a car that belonged to Sergey Kuntsevich, 32yo Minsk resident, and discovered bottles filled with flammable fluids.

==========================================================

MOD video: Performance by Russian Knights at the Lima’17 International Expo

 

Cadets of the Ryazan Higher Airborne twice Red Banner Order of Suvorov Command School named after V.F. Margelov take horse-riding lessons

Known also as the Ryazan Airborne Senior Command School of the General of the Army Vasily Margelov

The Ryazan Higher Airborne Command School is one of Russia’s oldest military academies, having been established in 1918. The academy serves since 1941 as the premier staff college and advanced training center of the Russian Airborne Troops, named first in honor of the Komsomol and at present after one of the greatest commanders of the Airborne Troops, Vasily Margelov, who was instrumental in the modernization and capability upgrades done to the service in the 1950s, as well as for its full independence as a separate arm directly responsible to the Defense Ministry.

===================

Paris – the situation is very tense between the forces if law enforcement and 200 protesters

Paris – Tensions devant le commissariat du 19eme suite au décès d’un homme lors d’une intervention policière hier soir. pic.twitter.com/u6y9rlldr5

Paris – Situation tres tendue entre les forces de l’ordre devant le commissariat et 200 manifestants. pic.twitter.com/jchyTjuA8Z

Kuwait News Agency: France strongly concerned over Russian repression of demonstrations

“PARIS, March 27 (KUNA)– The French Foreign Ministry on Monday said that France was “deeply concerned” by the Russian break-up of an anti-corruption rally in Moscow.”

 

===============

Scott Humor

Director of Research and Development

author of The enemy of the State

Follow me on twitter

Belarus March 2017 SITREP

March 26, 2017

Belarus March 2017 SITREP

I haven’t written much about Belarus, and many reliable analysts also have been careful not to say anything, because everyone understood that Belarus would be next to be hit by the deep state operatives in their attempt to initiate a reality game of a “War in Belorussia,” that could be blamed on Russia.

The globalists succeeded beyond their wildest dreams in Ukraine, but they failed in Armenia, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. As I covered prior in my article “Give the falling CIA APUSH,” the CIA, being an operational arm of the deep state, in order to destroy Russia has planned to instill the chaos and wars into all the former Soviet Republics.

In 2014 we were told by one of the CIA “color revolution” specialists, Steve Pieczenik, that Belorussia will be next after Ukraine.

Following the CIA plan, over the past three years, Belarus, a member of the Union State with Russia, and one of Russia’s closest political, economic and military partner, has been rocked by a series of protests. You can find a boiled down backdrop of the current political situations given by the foreign affairs commentator Mikhail Demurin.

March of 2017 has been chosen by the globalists as the “Hour Zero” point for the beginning of an anti-government operation. Keep in mind that last couple of years everyone watching the situation has been aghast at the “liberal” behavior and unreasonable exuberant tolerance of Lukashenka and the countries law enforcement structures. Anti-government, Russophobic, pro-Hitler extremist blogs and online publications flourished. Young people were posting their selfies in front of a banned white, red, white flag with a Germanic looking horseman, or a Chaise as it’s known in heraldry.

This flag reflects the tragic historical fact that a part of the White Russia was under the occupation and kept in slavery by the papists known as The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, formally the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy Lithuania. At the time the Russian people living in White Russia (Belorussiya) and Small Russia (Malorossiya) were transferred under an authority of the  Uniate Church, a true monstrosity only papists could come up for the colonized Orthodox Christian people.

The horror of the Russian people’s existence under the combined Polish – Lithuanian rule caused nonstop protests and liberation movements by the Cossacks. The most devastating for this chimera state as was the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth became Bogdan Khmelnytsky Uprising, a Cossack rebellion within the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth in 1648–1657 and it ended the Polish Catholic Szlachta′s domination over the Orthodox Christian population of Eastern Europe.

Despite this being removed from us through time, it’s still important to have awareness of those events because the idea of re-creation of this chimera state is being awoken and brought back by those who are working now to engineer new nations.  Back then, the government of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth used foreign mercenaries, armed thugs from other parts of Europe and from Turkey, as the punitive armed formations to keep the population under submission. To position themselves as the “good cops,” the papist authorities used Jews as estate managers and local authorities, tax collectors, and judges.

Jews were unrestricted in their capacity to inflict pain on the population, including the use of the punitive formations against the Orthodox Christians in villages; they were known to close schools and churches, kill the Orthodox priests and monks, to burn icons and Orthodox prayers books, and to impose unbearable tax burdens on the Russian populations living under their control.

It is understandable that when the wrath of people reached its boiling point, the Jews tuned to be those who bore the brunt of the people’s anger the most. It’s not that hard to see that the same patterns were re-activated and now being used on the territory of Ukraine, and attempted to be used on the territory of Belarus.

I want to brag a little that my ancestral coat of arms includes the image of a chaise, which was granted to them by Peter I for their role in returning these historical Russian lands back to Russia.

The European nations’ mode in dealing with Russia has always been a state of war, hot or cold, as an enterprise between the Zionists, papists and Lutherans. The war against Russia and Orthodox Christianity is the only thing that unites all of them for centuries.

Their conjoined efforts to destroy and take apart Russia demonstrated itself during the Bolshevik revolt against the Russian government, church and state, with simultaneous invasion of the Antanta forces known as the Allied Antanta armies invasion of Russia in 1918 when over 3,000,000 invaders attacked Russia from the West, South, North and East, including the British and French forces, the Canadian, Australian and the British Indian Colonial forces, German Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Ottoman Empire, Czechoslovakia, along with the troops from Greece, Italy, Poland, Romania, Estonia, Finland, Serbia, the Japanese occupational forces and the American Expeditionary corpus  in Siberia and the Far East. For more details read here. in Russian

or using the Yandex transition.

It’s has been a common practice of deception to call this multinational invasion of Russian in 1918 to 1921, a “Russian Civil war, when in fact it was a typical “color revolution” staged by the same scenario that was used in the USSR in 1991, in Ukraine in 2014, and in Syria and in Libya, and in many other countries. It’s truly tragic for us that it took us hundred years to start recognizing this scenario of invasion by the Western powers .

—-

For Belarus, March of 2017 has been chosen as a start of a color revolution.

Predictably, it’s designed to be anti-government, anti-Russia, pro-free market, pro-European Union, and the US. The moving force of this has been a Polish, Lithuanian and Ukrainian nationalists who call themselves “Belarusian nationalists,” fascists and anarchy-extremists, Zionists, and jihadists.

March Madness in Belorussian politics has come to a boiling point during the March 19 visit of the IMF representatives with the plan to loan Belarus’ government some money in exchange for “social and economic reforms.”

The European Union and the globalists have become very enthusiastic about this newly found nation to be “liberated” from trade ties with Russian markets, from the cultural and political ties to the Russian people, and also from its national wealth, lands, and its sanity.

The following article published by the European Council on Foreign relations listed all the talking point of the subject of Russia and Belarus relations: “Belarus’s game of truancy by the European Council on Foreign Relations.”

It would take me a hundred pages just to disprove each of the ECFR points. For now, just take this as a CIA-developed propaganda manifesto, that completely inverts the reality.

We know that the altered and simulated reality is the basic principle for the game of the liberalization and democratization with the goal of taken out the national sovereign governments and replacing them with the rule of supra-national corporations and entities while suppressing the country’s population by punitive forces of the international mercenary armies.

If this anti-government revolt succeeds, and if NATO invades Belarus, the US nuclear missiles launchers will be right in the middle of the European part of Russia, and China will have to say goodbye to the new Silk Road to Europe currently going through the territory of Belarus.

There is no doubt that Belarus will lose its status and income as a gas transit country from Russia to Europe, just like Ukraine did. Poland will stand to lose its status as a transit country, inevitably. Poland, on the Russian sanctions list, will also lose its routes to sell its apples and other products that they currently push via Belarus to Russia by re-labeling  products.

Russia is overlooking this situation for now, since it gives to Belarus some kind of cash flow. There are little doubts that if Lukashenka is toppled by the pro American and pro EU revolt, Russia will close its market to Belarus completely, and  the country will collapse into chaos and the war of NATO on its population, not unlike Ukraine.

—–

How the Western plan of a “color revolution” in Belarus is being dismantled:

Will the US and EU and the deep state be able to cut Belarus from the Union State with Russia? Will NATO be able to invade Belarus, like they have done with Ukraine?

Unlike Ukraine, the law enforcement and intelligence officers of Belarus are getting educated in Russia and share objectives, methods, and inspirations when it comes to the global challenges.

We have to understand one simple fact about “color revolutions”: they only succeed when some people inside the national governments commit willful treason. They do it for money, more personal power, and US citizenship. They don’t care of their nations’ inevitably decent into chaos, poverty, misery and war.

Unless this condition is met, any anti-government actions would fail.

The plan to destroy the sovereign countries is simple: peaceful protests of students mixed with disenfranchised and marginalized youths, like LGBT community members, and the professional provocateurs from the Western paid NGOs These protests are almost immediately being radicalized by armed provocateurs, snipers, and militants who are there to kill the protestants and the police to create so called  “sacrificial victims,” and more chaos.

First, everything was going according to this plan.  An unprecedented anti-Russia and anti-government media campaign, accompanied by multiple micro-provocations by the journalists and bloggers.

The demonstrations in protests of laws and regulations. The more prominent role given to the nationalists, Nazis and other extremists. Everything was repeating the pre-Maidan Ukraine.

 

March 4th became a day of the reckoning for this plan.

Minsk held a parade for the 100th year anniversary of the Belarus Police.

 As a part of this parade, the Minsk authorities showed its crowd control units.

A monument to a Russian Empire police officer with a Scottish terrier was unveiled in the center Minsk.

Minister of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus Igor Shunevich has always demonstrated his affinity for the Soviet Union and Russia. On the featured image he is dressed in a blue uniform of NKVD for the Victory Day parade in 2016.

After the March 4 parade, the Police suddenly from a passive observer turned into a very active law enforcer arresting opposition leaders and people who demonstrated their extremism online and in real life.

On March 6, the central TV channel broadcasted a real shocker of a special report called “A phone call to a friend.”

The report showed the fight between two opposition leaders for their influence over their herd of demonstrators and  with their Western handlers. The biggest shock was that every move that opposition was making was known to the government.

 At 1:32 the documentary shows the symbol of the “fist” used by the opposition and called it “the sign of doom,” because this symbol has been so wildly used in countries destroyed by the color revolutions.  It first appeared in Yugoslavia , and the young people who walk with this symbol in Minsk won’t be able to find this country on a map. It doesn’t exist. It was destroyed

An initiator of the current opposition activities in Minks is the Belarus National Congress, a fake structure that calls to place Nikolai Stankevish as a ruler, and another fake anti-government structure called the European Belarus.

In the following days, the Belarusian KGB has detained 26 people, who had been preparing mass riots. They belong to the White Legion and the Young Front groups.

Among them there are professional fighters, they had weapons and the Azov battalion symbols. According to special services, they planned to use weapons during street protests on March 25th. The Militants arriving from Ukraine were also involved.

One of the detainees revealed that they had to oppose pro-Russian forces which could allegedly attack a column of protesters. It means that some others were supposed to act as “pro-Russian” fighters to attack the demonstrators. The plan was for these two groups to pretend fighting with each other, in the process killing the demonstrators and the police.

The arrests of the militants that are currently going on in Belarus and the weapons that were seized indicates that they were getting ready to participate in the shooting  of the demonstration and the Police.

—-

Those of you who are familiar with the Ukrainian extremist armed punitive formation called “The Right Sector” would understand the nature of  “The White Legion,” an extremist terrorist organization located in Belarus.

They became known in the 90s for attacks on law enforcement. For over a decade they were laying low, most likely by the order of their Western handlers, now their sleeper cells have been activated.

The law enforcement in Belarus reported arrests of several members of the White Legion. The Police found three M4 carbines, a shorter and lighter variant of the M16A2 assault rifle, ammunition, bulletproofed vests,  and also printed in Ukraine materials for militants of the “volunteer armed formations.”

In mid March, the news came that Belarus detained gunmen plotting to stage an armed provocation and that Lukashenko has broken up a Maidan putsch cell backed by Poles, Ukrainians and Lithuanians with dozens arrested.

The following is a video of the arrest of Danilov, a prominent member  of the extremist fascist organization “the White Legion.” In his apartment the law enforcement officers discovered drawings of the militant in face masks in front of the government building in Minsk with blood splatters, and the Bandera followers black and red flag. In addition, at [4:06] the video shows an arsenal of weapons that Danilov claimed to be his personal collection including hand grenades, amunition, automatic weapons including one AK.

 At the same time, the Police raided a paramilitary camp near Bobruisk called “Patriot.” More on this matter see an article Belarus arrests “armed provocateurs,” Lukashenko points finger at Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland

 “We’ve already arrested several dozen…who were trained in camps with weapons. In fact, one of the camps was in the Bobruisk and Ospivoichi areas. The rest of the camps are in Ukraine. In my opinion, also in Lithuania and Poland. I won’t claim anything, but somewhere there,” President Lukashenko is quoted as saying by Sputnik Belarus.

“Thank you that there are true Belorussian men and women who, living abroad – in the EU – warned us. A woman came to an embassy and warned, officially wrote a letter about a provocation being prepared. And we started looking into it. And, indeed, we discovered some interesting things,” Lukashenko said.

The camp near Bobruisk that was used as a militants training base had been legally registered as the children’s art center “Patriot.”  Those arrested were “teachers,” all are retired military and former Police officers. Several of them are known members of the “White Legion.” Arrested Miroslav Lozovsky was prior arrested in 2008 for his connection to the terror act in Minsk that injured many people.

Arrests started on March 15th when a demonstration against economic problems turned into a violent rally of extremists nationalists who call themselves anarchists. 

Somehow every demonstration in Belarus inevitably turns pro-nationalist and against an “Eastern enemy.

Opposition, also, demands for the president and the government to step down, and to stand against the “Russian occupants.”

Victoria Nuland’ heritage is alive and well.

 This video of the beginning of the March of Anarchists, a.k.a. “angry Belarusians” in Minsk. They carry a black banner with white slogan “Parasites of all nations unites!”  

 An incredibly reasonable and knowledgeable  young blogger from Belarus CT-1 urges us to pay some attention to the British ambassador to Belarus Fiona Gibbs.

She was visited by the leaders of the extremists movement “White legion” right before their arrests.  Her SV includes many interesting “coincidences.”

She worked as a Vice Consul in Berlin from 1992 to 1995. This period was important because of withdrawal of the Soviet troops from Germany, and the eastern Germany getting a Western puppet government ruled by the US and UK. After Germany she moved to Ukraine and worked for three years 1995 – 1998 doing a mysterious job titled a “Team Leader.” 1995 was the last year Ukraine held a Victory Day parade. In 1996 Ukraine cuts broadcasting of the Russia’s TV stations. In 1997 Ukraine conducted privatization of the government assets when most of the current Ukrainian fortunes were made.  Oligarchs were buying up everything and transferring everything under the ownership of the West. In 1998 Ukraine had a near default.

In 2003 – 2005, Ms. Gibbs served as a team leader for the Counter Proliferation Department at the Foreign and Commonwealth office. You would be very wrong to assume that the western produced weapons were included into the British “Counter Proliferation”  schemes.

From 2005 to 2008, Ms. Gibbs served as a head of section for the Counter Terrorism Department.

From 2008  to  2009 she worked in Basra as a UK’s Deputy Consul-General. In 2009 the Britain has formally handed to the US control of Basra, where thousands of its troops have been based since the invasion of Iraq six years prior. It was the end of so called six year British rule in Iraq.

Next, Ms, Gibbs was transferred to Yemen. And this periods between 2010 to 2012  was very interesting, because in 2011 the “Arab spring” color revolution took place there with the same exact scenario as everywhere else. Current humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen is also of Ms. Gibbs’ doing.

It’s started with a small demonstration, when the demonstrators started walking towards the center square in Sana they got under snipers’ fire. More than 40 people were killed, and more than 200 injured. After that the leader of the opposition  declared the cooperation with the government “impossible.” He also said that Yemen’s president Ali Abdullah Saleh needs to step down.

Snipers sitting on the roofs of buildings around the central square shooting at the group of protesters. The scenario had been very similar to what took place in other countries, including Tunis and Maidan in Kiev. Everyone understands that it’s the most ineffective way for any government to stop the demonstration, since the mob becomes unruly.

In 2012 she had been transferred to Somali, right after so called “Kenyn invasion”  in 2011. Ms. Gibbs participated in the creation of the temporally constitution that “legalized” the division of Somali into two parts, and the current humanitarian catastrophe in Somali is of Ms. Gibbs doing.

In  2012, she heads a newly formed Task Force, one of its biggest project was the plan of taking over Ukraine, the misery of the population there notwithstanding.

And, finally in 2016  Ms. Gibbs has been appointed as an Ambassador to the republic of Belarus.

It’s expected that the demonstration of the Independence day of March 25th would follow the same scenario as in Yemen, that worked so well for the UK and for Ms. Gibbs.

Another woman of war from the UK that we should pay attention is Fiona Hill

This month, a few days before her NSC staff appointment was announced, Hill gave an interview to a New York periodical  in which she declared war on Russia. “I think we are in a hot war with Russia, not a cold war.  But we have to be careful about the analogy. It’s a more complex world. There is no set-piece confrontation. This is no holds barred. The Cold War was a more disciplined competition, aside from the near blowups in Berlin and Cuba, where we walked back from the brink. The Kremlin now is willing to jump over the abyss. They want to play for the asymmetry. They see themselves in a period of hot kinetic war. Also, this is not just two-way superpower. There is China, the rising powers. I almost see it as like the great power competition from the time before the Second World War.

Hill’s work in stoking Kremlin regime change schemes during the Obama Administration and at Brookings with Strobe Talbott, Clifford Gaddy, and Robert Kagan (husband of Victoria Nuland), was  reported here –  click to open.

 

In essence, it is the same snake nest of neocons, known and recognizable. To destroy this nest, the national security services have to take them out one by one. But they have to start with their network of local affiliates to bring down with them both bearers of human disaster and misery, those including Fiona Gibbs and Fiona Hill.

 

March 25th or The Freedom Day demonstration

The EU and US  paid anti-government opposition declared “widespread protests” on March 25th, or the Freedom day. They claimed that the protests would be held against the social “parasites” law, also formally known as the Presidential Decree “On prevention of social dependency.” Initially the law was intended against people who didn’t have jobs, but had income, people who are paid  by the West via multiple NGOs.

One important nuance of this story that has been ignored by the Western propaganda is that this decree has been canceled, and that there wasn’t any actual reasons to demonstrate against the law that wasn’t even in place.

Another detail ignored by the Western media is that the meeting wasn’t authorized by the authorities. The opposition leaders were explicitly told that they couldn’t have a demonstration in the center city because that would create a disruption of the life of the capital and costs too much for the city.

Now, imagine unauthorized demonstrations in the city of London, Paris or New York, and the police brutality that has been used against those demonstrators.

Against the same scenario is used against Lukashenka, that was applied to Yanukovich, the Western powers insisting that that the sovereign government is not allowed to use force to preserve stability in its country while it’s being threatened by extremists.  

Everyone was waiting for the March 25 demonstration that wasn’t authorized by the Minsk authorities. It was heralded by the western media as the start of Maidan. At the end of the day there were more journalists than demonstrators, and everything was done after the Police arrested two dozens of activists.

 A video made by the European Union financed anti-government channel taking the view of the demonstration from a drone

  News in brief

 

  • 20 minutes long video made by an opposition channel tut.by showing a handful of “demonstrators” on March 25th gatherings against the law that has already been canceled

 More videos and images of the Freedom Day demonstration here

the EU immediately condemned Belarus for “violation of democracy”

 

 Bibliography

If you are new here and you feel like you don’t understand what’s going on, I refer you to our articles that explain methods of Russia’s security services called an “aquarium” and a “mousetrap.”

A beautiful situation in Syria or how to build a mousetrap, by Cat Motya

 

Scott Humor

Director of Research and Development

author of The enemy of the State

Follow me on twitter

Could the fire at the Europe’s largest munitions depot be Ben Hodges’s fault?

March 25, 2017

Could the fire at the Europe’s largest munitions depot be Ben Hodges’s fault?

After hitting rock bottom will Ukraine begin to rise again? Hitting a rock bottom can be very educational, as I found out this week. After I dropped a piece of chocolate into a tin can with sweetened condensed milk, I decided that one cannot exist on sugar alone and bought a bottle of wine, to add an item of nutritional value to my diet. What else should I consume to keep up with the superhuman energy of our Ukrainian none-brothers?

For starters, a devastating fire at the 65th rocket and artillery arsenal died out on March 24th. Kiev authorities and the state controlled Ukrainian news agencies proclaimed the fire to be “extinguished,” which is their way to tell the world that the depot has burned out of its own.

A Ukrainian Daily News channel posted a video of what’s left of the 65th Arsenal  in Balakleya

 

The same news channel has also posted a video of some Ukraine military activities titled “How the military extinguished the fire with fire fighting tanks”

The video doesn’t show much with an exception of a serviceman transporting an artillery shell on his shoulder and two others assisting him.

 

The following is data posted by the Ukrainian news channel “Ukraine 112

“Military unit A 1352 (65th rocket and artillery arsenal) is deployed in the city of Balakliya. Until recently, it has been considered to be the largest place in Europe where different types of ammunition are stored.

It was established in 1918. Its technical area is 368 hectares. According to the passport, this base is designed for 150 thousand tons of ammunition, currently 125 thousand tons are kept there.

As of 2009, approximately 30% of all artillery shells in Ukraine were stored there. The media reported (with reference to some inner sources) that they store ammunition from small-caliber artillery shells to S-300 anti-aircraft missiles, but many of them were to be subjected to utilization. In 2010, Kharkiv regional state administration reported that the military unit A 1352 in Balakliya was by 20% loaded with ammunition; it was quite risky, so the object has been gradually unloaded.”

 

The last sentence gently guides us to a conclusion that for the past seven years, the load of ammunition was “gradually” “utilized” due to the “risks” of its “storage.”

I am sorry… I am laughing so hard, that I can barely type. God bless the Ukrainian journalists, they have got some ways with words that we have not even started to explore.

The Ukraine 112 channel confirms our common suspicion that the 65th Arsenal has been practically emptied out at the time of the fire. The most obvious reason is that the depot is located just 150 kilometers from Donetsk and was the source of munitions for the war on Donbass.

There are, however, a few other reasons why Ukraine is running out of its weapons, and few other places these weapons are going.

After the separation from the USSR in 1991, Ukraine had the largest military force in the world, after the US and Russia. The largest supply of the Soviet Union weaponry, like tanks, artillery, fighter jets, bombers, fire weapons and ammunition of all kinds, got concentrated on the territory of Ukraine. I personally believe that this was done by the people who divided the USSR with a war between Ukraine and Russia in mind.

Over the past twenty five years Ukraine has been the largest vendor of the Soviet made weapon in the world.

 “In the wake of the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine inherited from the USSR one of the biggest military-industrial complexes, employing over 3 million people at more than 3,000 enterprises across the republic.

Twenty-four years later a mere 140 such enterprises are still at work.” says the news-front’s report, “How Ukraine sells its weapons” due to an ongoing scandal over Ukrainian-made explosives and armor plates seized by Syrian armed forces from Daesh terrorists.

Just recently there were some sightings of the Cyprus-flagged cargo reefer with alleged load of illicit Ukrainian weapons destined for the North Africa.

 

What precipitated this fire, however, was the visit to Ukraine of Lt. Gen.  Ben Hodges, a commander of the U.S. Army in Europe. His visit was announced by the Ukrainian extremist nationalist online outlet maintained by SBU called censor.net. An announcement came just a few hours before the Arsenal went up in flames.

“Hodges visits Ukraine: NATO’s efforts to deter Russian aggression …en.censor.net.ua/…/us_army_europe_commander_hodges_visits_ukraine_asks_ukrain…3 days ago – Frederick Ben Hodges, commander, U.S. Army Europe visited Ukraine’s National Defense”

Another announcement from the same source about a mysterious “international inspection group” from the US that started working on the Ukrainian’s military sites

 

I can’t find any second source confirmation for this visit, with one exception being this video taken on March 23rd by someone in Balaklaya. At 1:30 a person on the video says that the arsenal was expecting some kind of foreign military commission that was supposed to do an inspection of the supplies, and that’s why he believes the depot was blown up.

It could be that this commission was visiting Ukraine in preparation for a full-fledged deployment of the American ground troops to Ukraine.

Over the past three years, the US conducts an ongoing deployment of its military servicemen to Ukraine, with no prove that any of the troops have ever left the country. Some 10,000 US Marines are guarding Poroshenko’s residence and Kiev authorities.

This is just one November 2016 announcement of deployment:

“1 / 4 Show Caption + Hide Caption – Oklahoma Army National Guardsmen with 1st Battalion, 179th Infantry Regiment, 45th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT), conduct squad-level lane training Nov. 22, 2016, during their pre-mobilization at Camp Gruber Training Center (CGTC), near Braggs, Oklahoma, in preparation for their deployment to Ukraine. The 179th is the first of two six-month rotations to the Ukraine as part of the Joint Multinational Training Group-Ukraine, a training mission focused on providing defensive and security training to Ukrainian forces within the U.S. Security Cooperation agreement. (Photo Credit: 1st Lt. Leanna Litsch) VIEW ORIGINAL

 

There are many indications that the US troops are the driving force behind the war on Donbass.

On March 22nd,  addressing the US Congress Curtis Michael “Mike” Scaparrotti, a four-star general in the United States Army, and is the current Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO Allied Command Operations, said

“In terms of lethal support, the Ukrainians are in a very tough fight which you saw. They are very disciplined soldiers, but they are facing what we say are separatists, they are actually Russian proxies in my mind. They are being provided very lethal equipment; the Russians are providing the separatists that.”

 

Following his speech, on the night between March 22nd and 23rd, the munitions depot near Kharkov went up in flames.

On March 23rd, President Poroshenko announced on his twitter that he ordered his power ministers to bring the NATO troops to Ukraine.

Kharkov region has started its descent into hell, with thousands of people evacuating, and the national guards taking over the region and immediately, claiming a need to “fight with marauders” have started the arrests of the locals who  refused to leave their houses.

 

Prime Minister of Ukraine Vladimir Groisman promised seven days of this hell.

A few hours later everything suddenly stopped.

Don’t’ tell me that it’s because of the Friday night and  Sabbath.

There are two things I want you to think about while I am researching further.

First, a radiation level in the region went many times up.  Chief military Prosecutor Anatoly Matios has denied on Friday that Ukraine has any nuclear weapons.

Second, a few hours ago witnesses reported powerful explosions around the Mariupol region, which is south from Kharkov. According to the statement issued by the  “command of an anti-terrorist operation,” explosions were controlled and conducted due to the “scheduled utilization of munitions.”

to be continued

The Secretary General of Macron’s French political party “en Marche” takes aims at The Saker, RT & Sputnik News!!

The Secretary General of Macron’s French political party “en Marche” takes aims at The Saker, RT & Sputnik News!!https://en-marche.fr/contre-tentatives-de-destabilisation-de-campagne-presidentielle/ 

 Scott Humor

Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff

March 24, 2017

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to questions during a lecture for senior officers of the Military Academy of the General Staff, Moscow, March 23, 2017

23 March 201714:21

http://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/2702537

For English subtitles click the ‘cc’ button on the bottom right.

 

Mr Kuralenko,

Comrade officers, colleagues, friends,

I am grateful for the invitation to speak at the Military Academy as part of the Army and Society series of lectures. The organisers are doing a great job supporting the tradition of unity of the people and the army, as it should be and has always been in the best years of Russia’s history. Today, we will focus on Russia’s role in international politics. This theme has always been of interest to our citizens, patriots, and all the more so to servicemen protecting our state.

How is the role of state determined in international politics? Just like in other social disciplines, there are specific fundamental values ​​and criteria in international relations for making judgments on that.

Geopolitical weight is among the most important ones. It is clear that a vast country like Russia, with its wealth of resources and unique geographical location spanning Europe and Asia, is unlikely to remain on the side, let alone be isolated from international processes, especially in the modern era when trade, economic, financial, information, cultural and human relations simply demand that our planet be united into one truly unified space.

I’m aware that some entertain the notion, which is eagerly picked up by Russophobes, that Russia’s vast geography took shape due to expansion resulting from an internal sense of insecurity. As if the Russians, who for several centuries expanded their territory, were trying to “push back” a potential aggressor. To this, I can say that the greatest misfortunes in the past centuries came to Russia almost always from the West, while Russia, according to Mikhail Lomonosov’s famous dictum, “expanded through Siberia,” bringing different peoples and lands in the East under its wing. Many centuries of experience of harmonious coexistence of different ethnicities and religions within one state now allow Russia to promote a dialogue and form partnerships between cultures, religions and civilisations, which is also what happens within the UN, the OSCE and other international and regional organisations.

Another hallmark associated with our vast Russian territory concerns respect for the state, which is the guarantor of the country’s unity and the security of its citizens. A strong state also underpins an independent foreign policy. In international relations, all of that is embodied in the notion of sovereignty.

The sovereignty of states, their equality as the main subjects of international relations, was substantiated and approved within the Westphalian system that took shape in Europe in the 17thcentury. Currently, these traditional notions are being questioned in a number of Western countries. They are trying to secure for themselves, for example, the ability to interfere in other people’s affairs under the pretext of non-compliance with all sorts of unilaterally engineered human rights concepts like the so-called “responsibility to protect.” We are against such a distorted interpretation of the most important universal international legal norms and principles. Healthy conservatism with regard to the inviolability of the stabilising foundations of international law unites Russia with most countries of the world.

Of course, it takes more than just the size of a country’s territory for it to be considered “big and strong” in today’s world. There is also the economy, culture, traditions, public ethics and, of course, the ability to ensure one’s own security and the security of the citizens under any circumstances. Recently, the term “soft power” has gained currency. However, this is power as well. In other words, the power factor in its broad sense is still important in international relations. Its role has even increased amid aggravated political, social, and economic contradictions and greater instability in the international political and economic system. We take full account of this fact in our foreign policy planning.

Thanks to its advanced nuclear deterrent capabilities, Russia plays an important stabilising role in global politics. At the same time, strategic stability for us is not confined to maintaining the nuclear balance between us and the United States. Given globalisation processes, the increasing mutual dependence of countries and the development of technologies, including military technology, we’re taking a broader view of this concept. In politics, strategic stability is a state of international relations that ensures strict compliance with international law by all countries and their associations, respect for the legitimate interests of all countries and peoples and non-interference in their political affairs. In the military context, it means consistently bridging the gap between military capabilities, ensuring a high level of confidence, transparency and predictability and abstaining from steps which may be perceived as a threat to the national security of other countries, forcing them to resort to retaliatory measures. We stand for the strengthening of all aspects of strategic stability which is the foundation for a lasting peace and reliable, equal and indivisible security for all.

Recently, there has been a push towards forcing the nuclear states to abandon their nuclear arsenals and banning nuclear weapons altogether. It is crystal clear that this is premature. Let me remind you that it wasn’t for nothing that the parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty wrote into it that the nuclear arsenals had to be fully scrapped but only in the context of general and complete disarmament. We are prepared to discuss the possibility of further gradual reductions in nuclear capabilities but only if we take all the factors influencing strategic stability into account and not just the quantity of strategic offensive weapons. Another reason why we’re prepared to discuss this issue is the growing sense of urgency about making this process multilateral. The restrictions on nuclear capabilities which Russia and the United States have repeatedly accepted for many years have led them to a situation where, essentially, they cannot proceed doing this on the bilateral basis.

We take pride in the fact that there has been a qualitative change in the Russian Armed Forces’ capabilities in recent years. It’s particularly important to note that the position of Russia today is that force can only be used in strict compliance with international law and its own laws and commitments – not to conquer, and not to export political ideas as repeatedly happened in world history and in our past history, for that matter, but to defend our most vital interests, when all other means have been exhausted, or to help our allies and friends at their request, as is happening today in Syria at the invitation of the country’s legitimate government.

Regretfully, not all countries in the world are so scrupulous in providing legal grounds for the use of military force. We have noted cases of loose interpretations of the UN Charter and of removing any boundaries for designating something a threat to one’s own security.

The negative trend of using economic tools of coercion is accelerating in international relations. These are diverse kinds of unilateral sanctions and restrictions that clash with the UN Security Council’s positions and prerogatives. As we know, there are attempts to use these tools on Russia, on the assumption that we are especially sensitive to this kind of influence.

However, it is impossible, and will remain impossible to ignore the fact that Russia is among the largest and most stable economies in the world. It is hard to overestimate its role in some fields of the global economy, particularly in energy, including nuclear energy.

Whether some people like it or not, Russia remains the economic centre of gravity for the post-Soviet countries. This objective factor, not Moscow’s mythical urge to “revive the empire”, underlies the movement toward Eurasian integration. We and our partners in the Eurasian Economic Union are linked in today’s globalised world by centuries-long economic and cultural contacts and the intertwined destinies of our nations. We also advance the EAEU’s foreign contacts to implement President Vladimir Putin’s initiative to form a multilevel integration model in Eurasia. Interest in this initiative is growing steadily.

Historical traditions should also be mentioned among the factors that determine a nation’s role in world politics. “History is the memory of States,” said Henry Kissinger, the theoretician and practitioner of international relations. By the way, the United States, whose interests Mr Kissinger has always defended, did not aspire to be the centre of the liberal world order for a greater part of its own fairly short history, and did not see that role as its preeminent mission. Its Founding Fathers wanted its leadership and exceptional nature to derive from its own positive example. Ironically, the American elite, which emerged as freedom fighters and separatists anxious to cast off the yoke of the British crown, had transformed itself and its state by the 20th century into a power thirsting for global imperialist domination. The world is changing, however, and – who knows – America might yet purify itself and return to its own forgotten sources.

Russia has its own experience with messianic fervour. Its current foreign policy is pragmatic, not ideological. Our country has its traditions and wholesome values, and we do not try to impose them on anyone. We warn our partners at the same time that when they are in Rome they should do as the Romans do.

After many centuries of trials, our country made it to the forefront of international and European politics under Peter the Great – his name graces one of the academies whose students, as I understand it, are here today – and then fully participated in European affairs during the Vienna Congress of 1814-1815. At that time, with the direct participation of Alexander I, a system for a balance of power that existed for many years and mutual recognition of national interests, precluding domination of any one state, was created in Europe.

The ensuing developments show us the futility of any efforts to drive our country out of the European or international arena. Resolving any pressing international issues without Russia became impossible. We can also see the major damage caused by such efforts to all the participants in this process. The collapse of the Vienna system (during which events such as the Crimean War of 1853-1856, the unification and the rise of Germany, and the final collapse of monarchy in France took place) resulted in the bloodletting of World War I. After it ended, Soviet Russia was left outside of the Treaty of Versailles, which largely predetermined its brief existence. The distrust of Western democracies and the reluctance to interact with us on an equal footing doomed the attempts to create collective security in Europe in the 1930s, which resulted in the even greater destruction of World War II. Only after it was over were the foundations of the international order laid with our active participation, which remain relevant to this day.

The UN is called on to play the central coordinating role in the international order. It has proved that there are no alternatives to it and that it enjoys unique international legitimacy despite all the shortcomings of this huge “organism” which unites almost 200 states. Russia supports ensuring the inviolability of the UN Charter’s key provisions, including those related to consolidating the outcomes of World War II. We support comprehensive efforts to expand the capacity of this international organisation to efficiently adapt to new international realities.

In modern Europe, the roots of many problems can be seen in the irrational and doomed desire to sideline Russia, the Eurasian power. NATO and EU expansion has reached the point where Ukraine and other CIS countries were all but presented a false choice: either you are with Russia, or with Europe. Such an ultimatum was beyond the capacity of yet inherently unstable Ukrainian statehood. As a result, a major crisis in the heart of Europe broke out directly on the borders of Russia and the West. Frankly, the prospects for its settlement and the implementation of the Minsk agreements have so far been bleak. First, this is due to the lack of political will and a realistic vision for the future of this country from the Ukrainian government, and due to its attempts to look for ways to resolve Ukrainian problems not on the basis of pragmatic interests in the name of national harmony and prosperity, but at the behest of external sponsors who have no regard for the aspirations of Russians, Ukrainians and Eastern Slavs, in general.

We do not see that our European partners are willing to work honestly in favour of creating a common security and cooperation space. A fair settlement of the Ukrainian crisis in line with the Minsk agreements, which we have consistently advocated, could become part of it. In general, the European Union has been tangibly “losing itself” recently. In fact, they are serving other people’s interests, failing to find their own unified voice in foreign affairs. We are patient people, and we will wait for our colleagues to realise that due to a number of reasons – including historical, geopolitical, economic, and cultural – we, Russia and Europe, need each other.

The historical, geopolitical, moral foundations that shape the foreign policy of Russia are solid and constant. They set the tone of our day-to-day diplomatic efforts which, in keeping with the Constitution, are guided directly by the President of the Russian Federation.

The world is really changing fast. Another “industrial revolution” is unfolding, and a new, more technologically advanced way of life is taking shape.  Uneven development, a wider gap in the wealth of states and nations, and the battle for resources, access to markets, and control over transport arteries are exacerbating differences. Competition is acquiring civilisational dimensions and becoming a rivalry of values and development models.

In the region of the Middle East and North Africa, the situation has reached a point beyond which lies the annihilation of states and of the regional political map. This widespread chaos has been conducive to an unprecedented increase in the threat of terrorism embodied by the aggression of the so called Islamic State and other similar groups. Global terror is a challenge to international security, and it can only be addressed by establishing a joint international coalition, acting on a solid legal basis — as Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested in his speech at the 70th United Nations General Assembly.

The redistribution of the global balance of power continues. We are witnessing new centres of economic power and associated political influence come into being in the world. The Asia-Pacific Region has established itself as the driver of the world economy. Latin American and African nations, which have considerable human and resource potential, are taking a more active role. These developments bring into stark relief the cultural and civilisational diversity of the modern world. The need to democratise relations between states is becoming a more pressing issue.

The formation of a polycentric international order is an objective process. It is in our common interest to make it more stable and predictable. In these conditions, the role of diplomacy as a tool to coordinate balanced solutions in politics, economics, finance, the environment, and the innovation and technology sectors has increased significantly. Simultaneously, the role of the armed forces as the guarantor of peace has increased too.

It is clear that there simply isn’t any other way except painstaking daily work to achieve the compromises necessary to peacefully overcome the numerous problems in the world. History shows that betting on hegemony and one’s own exceptionalism leads to greater instability and chaos.

There is an objective, growing need for Russia-advanced approaches to key modern issues that are free of ideology and rooted in the principles of multilateralism and respect for international law. More and more countries are coming to share these approaches, which strengthens Russia’s authority and its role as a balancing factor in world politics.

We do not favour confrontation or isolationism. Guided by the Foreign Policy Concept approved by President Vladimir Putin, we will continue to advance a positive agenda in our relations with our partners and neighbours, including the United States and the European Union.

Under the current circumstances, there is no alternative to an independent, pragmatic and multi-vector foreign policy based on the consistent defence of national interests along with the simultaneous development of equal cooperation with all who are interested in reciprocating. All our actions are aimed at protecting our sovereignty and creating conditions for the peaceful and sustainable development of Russia and the Russians.

Thank you for your attention. I will now take questions.

Question: Recent experience shows that, in terms of the damage they cause, aggressive actions in the media at times have consequences similar to the use of weapons of mass destruction. In your opinion, isn’t it time, at the UN, in the format of bilateral ties with other states, to move forward with drafting and signing a comprehensive treaty in this field, similar to strategic arms limitation treaties?

Sergey Lavrov: We’ve been working on this for several years now. Russia put forward an initiative that became known at the UN as International Information Security [Initiative]. It has been a subject of independent resolutions at a number of UN General Assembly sessions. While initially these resolutions were rejected by some of our Western partners, in recent years resolutions related to the UN contribution to international information security have been adopted unanimously.

Several years ago, a group of government experts was set up. It drafted a report that was approved by consensus at the UN General Assembly. The General Assembly expressed support for continuing this effort in the context of identifying specific cyberspace risks at present. Another government expert group was also formed, which is beginning to work. It is meant to prepare specific proposals in one and a half years.

I’d like to say right away that despite the apparently constructive participation of all states in this discussion, we are aware of the desire [of certain states] to limit themselves to discussions and not reach practical international legal agreements. So, alongside the work that I just mentioned, Russia and its partners, in particular in the SCO, have drafted a document entitled Code of Conduct for Cyberspace. It was also distributed at the UN and is designed to promote targeted dialogue on the legal aspects of this problem. Overall, we believe (and we have already submitted this proposal) that it is time to draft an international convention on cyber security, including the elimination of threats and risks related to hacking. We were the first to propose penalising and banning hacking within the framework of international law. We will see how those who are accusing Russian hackers of seeking to blow up the world in the style of James Bond will respond to this.

There is another important topic related to these issues. It concerns internet governance. For several years now a discussion on the democratisation of the internet and internet governance has been ongoing at the International Telecommunication Union. A very serious ideological struggle, if you will, is under way. Some people are upholding free market principles but there are also those who believe that farming out the internet to the free market is tantamount to giving it away to just one country. In this context, serious debate lies ahead.

We see all these problems. The majority of countries agree on the need to enforce some generally acceptable order. Focused work is under way but it is too early to expect any results yet.

Question: I am a participant in the Aerospace Forces’ operation in Syria, so my question is related to that country. The results achieved by the Russian centre for reconciliation in Syria show how effective it has been. At the same time such things as the search for missing persons and the return of POWs often encounter difficulties related to inter-agency coordination. Do you believe direct cooperation between the centre for reconciliation of opposing sides and the Russian Embassy in Syria in dealing with certain problems would be possible?

Sergey Lavrov: Actually, this comes as a surprise to me. I was under the impression (and I receive daily confirmation of it) that this cooperation exists. If you have facts pointing to insufficient cooperation in this respect, please let us know. The Russian Embassy in Damascus and the centre in Hmeymim are in daily contact on issues of both the centre’s practical operation and Syria’s international contacts with its foreign partners with our assistance. A delegation of MPs from Europe and the Russian Federal Assembly recently visited it. The Hmeymin centre and our Embassy were actively involved in organising that visit.

If you were somewhat concerned by the topic you mentioned – the exchange of POWs – perhaps the Embassy is not supposed to play a leading role in this process. As far as my colleague and friend Sergey Shoigu and I see our roles, the main objective here is to establish contact with those who are holding POWs who fought terrorists and extremists. The most important thing here is contact between military departments, intelligence services, the Hmeymim centre, our Turkish partners and other countries that have their special forces (or their representatives in other forms) on the ground and have influence with the militants. Politically, we actively cooperate with the Russian Defence Ministry through the Astana process. At the most recent meeting in Astana, a week ago, in addition to preparing constitutional reform, consolidating the ceasefire and developing a mechanism to respond to ceasefire violations, the topic of establishing dialogue between the parties to the conflict with the aim of exchanging POWs as a humanitarian confidence building measure was also addressed. I’m highlighting in particular the aspect you have mentioned. To be sure, things can always be better and communication can always be taken to a higher level. I assure you that the efforts of the Embassy and the Hmeymim centre are well coordinated.

Question: US President Donald Trump, in a recent statement, unexpectedly proposed revisiting the issue of reducing strategic arms as a platform for bargaining. Should strategic nuclear forces today be a subject of negotiations with the Americans or would it be advisable at this point to put them outside the bounds of Russian-US relations?

Sergey Lavrov: To a very large extent, President Trump’s position on the majority of key issues on the foreign policy agenda, including further steps to limit strategic nuclear weapons as you’ve mentioned, has yet to be finalised. By the way, if I remember right, Donald Trump mentioned the issue of cooperation with us in this field as an example. He was asked whether he would be prepared to lift sanctions on Russia. I believe that was the way the question was formulated. He responded by saying they should see if there were issues on which they could cooperate with Russia on a mutually beneficial basis in US interests, in particular, mentioning nuclear arms control. At the same time, as you know, the US president said the Americans should modernise and build up their nuclear triad. We need to wait until the military budget is finally approved under the new administration and see what its priorities and objectives are and how these funds will be spent.

As for our further conversation, I briefly mentioned in my address that we are ready for such a conversation but it should be conducted with acknowledgment of all strategic stability factors without exception. Today, those who propose implementing the so-called nuclear zero initiative as soon as possible, banning and destroying nuclear weapons and generally outlawing them absolutely, ignore the fact that since the nuclear bomb was made and this new kind of weapon began to be produced on a large scale in the USSR, the US, China, France and the UK, colossal changes have taken place in military science and technology. What is being developed in the US under the codename Prompt Global Strike are non-nuclear strategic weapons. If they are developed (and this work is moving forward very actively, with the objective of reaching any point in the world within an hour), of course, they will be more humane than nuclear weapons, because there will be no radiation, no Hiroshima or Nagasaki effect. However, in terms of military superiority, my friends at the Defence Ministry tell me the effect will be more devastating than from a modern nuclear bomb.

What’s more, our American partners are not abandoning the programme of deploying weapons in outer space, and they are essentially alone in voting against the initiatives co-sponsored by us, China and many other colleagues to commit not to do so. The Americans refuse to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, which is also an important strategic stability factor. And of course the global missile defence system has an absolutely direct impact on strategic stability.

Another point: imbalances in conventional weapons, which are also being modernised very quickly. We always begin our dialogue with NATO by stressing the need to restore normal relations. We propose normalisation and agreements on mutual verification measures but before that, it is necessary to sit down and look at what each of us has deployed in proximity to each other, as well as in the entire Euro-Atlantic region. There are a lot of factors that need to be considered if we want not simply to ban nuclear weapons as idealists, but to ensure peace and security in the world and ensure strategic stability that will be sustainable and based on global parity. Everything that I’ve mentioned needs to be discussed. I may have missed some other factors.

I should also add that restrictions imposed by Russia and the US on each other have reached a point where it is hard to say that we will be able to do a great deal together anymore. All states that have nuclear weapons should be brought in – importantly, not only those that have them officially but also de facto.

Question: The United States started using the so-called managed chaos technology long ago. What can be used to counter such technology on the international scale? Is there a response to the concept of global stability and security management? Which countries could potentially initiate this project?

Sergey Lavrov: The concept of managed chaos appeared long ago as a method of strengthening US influence. Its basic premise is that managed chaos projects should be launched away from the United States in regions that are crucial for global economic and financial development. The Middle East has always been in the focus of politicians and foreign policy engineers in Washington. Practice has shown that this concept is dangerous and destructive, in particular for the countries where the experiment was launched, namely Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan.

In the case of Afghanistan, the United States launched its operation there with international support following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The UN Security Council unanimously confirmed the US right to self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. The US operation against the Taliban and al-Qaeda was supported by all countries. It’s another matter that after receiving the international approval, the United States and its NATO allies, which took over in Afghanistan, started acting rather inconsistently, to put it mildly. During their operation in Afghanistan, the terrorist threat has not been rooted out, while the drug threat has increased many times over. The drug industry prospered. There is factual evidence that some of the NATO contingents in Afghanistan turned a blind eye to the illegal drug trafficking, even if they were not directly involved in these criminal schemes. Afghanistan is a separate case, although the current developments there, which are a result of the NATO operation’s failure, despite the carte blanche the bloc received from the international community, can be considered an unintended cause of managed chaos. In Iraq, Syria and Libya, this chaos was created intentionally.

I have also mentioned Yemen. The situation there can be described as a huge humanitarian catastrophe. It is not at the top of the international agenda, for some reason, although representatives of the UN Secretariat who are responsible for humanitarian affairs have described the situation in Yemen as the “largest humanitarian crisis in the world”, larger than in Syria or Iraq. Responsible politicians have come to see that the managed chaos theory is destroying life in many regions. Some parties can benefit in the short term from fluctuations on the raw materials markets provoked by the revolutions orchestrated by external forces, but this theory ultimately backfires at its engineers and executors in the form of massive migration inflows, which terrorists use to enter these countries. We can see this in Europe. Terrorist attacks have been staged even in the United States. The Atlantic Ocean has not protected it from the terrorist threat. This is the boomerang effect. Serious people are coming to see this. Reliance on international law is the only weapon against this threat. The UN Charter offers the necessary tools for this. Military force can only be used by decision of the UN Security Council, or a country can resort to anticipatory self-defence in keeping with the spirit of the UN Charter when an armed attack is imminent and inevitable. Russia acts in keeping with these premises in its relations with other countries. China, India, Brazil and the majority of other countries share this view.

There is one more thing connected with the issue of managed chaos and its consequences.

The policy of countries in Africa and Latin America, as well as their regional organisations – the African Union and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) – is based on a formal principle on the unacceptability of the unconstitutional change of power via a coup d’état. Since this danger is not purely African or Latin American (we have seen it surface in other parts of the world), we have proposed that the UN General Assembly formalise the universal unacceptability of coups as a means of changing government. Last autumn, a resolution was adopted at the initiative of a large group of co-authors – our Cuban colleagues were among the most active advocates of this idea, alongside other countries. This resolution recognised the importance of creating a more democratic and equitable world order and openly rejected the change of governments through unconstitutional coups and attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of states and to impose alien ideas and values on them as unacceptable. It is also unacceptable when national jurisdictions are applied extraterritorially, when a country hunts down other countries’ legal entities and nationals around the world even though they have not violated international law but are believed to have violated the national legislation of the said country. Three countries voted against this resolution and a few dozen countries – mostly Western ones – abstained. The resolution was adopted by a far larger vote than some other resolutions that our Western partners like to quote, for example the resolution on the violation of human rights in Crimea.

Question: Because of the sharp decline in authority of international institutions, including the UN, the OSCE, and the Council of Europe which are potentially under the influence of their American partners and curators, the Russian Federation needs other alternatives to solve vital issues, sometimes directly with the heads of states including the US, Germany, India, China and other powers. Don’t you think we should resume direct state-to-state relations?

Sergey Lavrov: Direct state-to-state relations have never been suspended. In spite of the very tight agenda of international organisations, bilateral dialogue with the overwhelming majority of states has today become even more intensive. For now there is an objective pause in our relations with the US because our American colleagues, the new administration has not yet made all its post appointments for the leading positions at the State Department, the Pentagon and other agencies. In addition to departmental heads, their deputies have yet to be appointed, which calls for Senate approval. And it is unclear when these appointments will be made, so there is a natural waiting period. But I have met with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. As for the General Staff, several meetings have been held between the Chief of the Russian General Staff Valery Gerasismov and US General Joseph Dunford who heads the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. There has been contact on another level on how to avoid unforeseen and unintended incidents in Syria between the Russian Aerospace Forces and the US-led coalition. So, bilateral dialogue is important with any country. Regarding multilateral, universal and regional institutions, we are well aware of their shortcomings, but these are, if you like, inevitable.

The UN has 193 member countries. The West, Russia, China, India, Africa and Latin America – they are all interested in promoting their viewpoints on decisions that are taken and then implemented, or set the political agenda for further discussions. Of course, we would like to have a say on all these matters. From time to time our Western partners find a way to obstruct us, or put forward absolutely unacceptable ideas which we have to block. In such situations some “well-wishers” like to say that the UN has outlived its usefulness because the right of veto is abused and so on. This is disingenuous. The veto was included in the UN Charter at the insistence of the US after the League of Nations came to a sad end precisely because its activities and mechanisms did not provide for a special role of the big powers. Because of this the US decided that it had no time to just listen to moralising without being able to exert decisive influence. That’s why today the right of veto is not some kind of privilege, but an instrument for maintaining stability in international affairs which guarantees that no decision by the international community can be taken unless it is backed by the five permanent UN Security Council members. This needs to be understood.

Our French colleagues are pushing the idea that the UN Security Council members should voluntarily refrain from exercising their veto when mass human rights violations are involved. We asked them how they see it from the purely practical point of view. If there are 99 victims, this is not yet a violation, and if there are a hundred, we should refrain from using the veto? This is an old concept. Previously it was served “under the guise” of responsibility to protect, of humanitarian intervention, arguing that the international community had the right to intervene in certain conflicts regardless of UN Security Council resolutions if genocide or some other mass human rights violations are taking place in a country.  This is a mathematical approach. Who will determine whether or not mass violations are taking place? This is a very cynical approach, where they say that the death of one person is a tragedy, but a list of military casualties are statistics. You can discuss this at length, but the right of veto must remain part of any concept for reforming the UN Security Council. It needs to be reformed and made more representative. Without the right of veto by current permanent Security Council members it will be unable to function and will morph into an organ that rubberstamps shortsighted and ideologically charged documents. The OSCE does not have the veto right, but it has the principle of consensus which also sometimes leads to exhausting debates. Nevertheless consensus safeguards the interests of those who take part in that organisation. This can be useful in spite of all the criticism it incurs in connection with  OSCE activities in Ukraine. In any case the presence in that country of a special monitoring mission, which we support, helps to bring down the level of violence and keep the situation under control. We witnessed a flare-up of violence, for example, the day before yesterday the radicals from the Azov battalion were acting provocatively around Mariupol. The mission records these facts which we then use in our work with the Normandy four, at the Contact Group to motivate the Ukrainian authorities to stop sabotaging the Minsk Agreements.

I can cite some positive examples for any international organisation, but we have to keep in mind that none of them – neither the UN, nor the OSCE, nor the G20, not even BRICS or the SCO — will follow the wishes of any one country a hundred per cent. It’s always a compromise, a consensus or a balance of interests. As our President Vladimir Putin constantly stresses, we are not imposing anything on anyone, we are always ready to look for a balance of interests through mutual concessions with any country that is ready to talk with us as an equal. This is how diplomacy works. The same is true for bilateral relations. Sometimes it is even more difficult to reach an agreement bilaterally than multilaterally because in a multilateral format, say at the UN, you have allies you can call on and they will exert additional pressure. In bilateral talks your partner is sitting opposite you and it’s either you or him who gains the upper hand. It’s better that no one should gain the upper hand and that there should be a consensus. We are ready for this kind work, including, as I said, with the US because we are well aware what great influence the relations between the two biggest nuclear powers have on the overall situation in the world. We are prepared to exercise our responsibility for such influence through dialogue with the US.

Question: Today we see a growing split of the world political elites. There are globalists who express the interests of transnational corporations and world financial organisations and there is a new political concept, the so-called populists who express the interests of the people in their countries. A vivid example is the election of US President Donald Trump, and there are a number of other political leaders who are seen as fringe politicians in the West, for example Marine Le Pen. Given this, it is not by chance that Russia is seen as a leader in half of the world. Is this view justified? Can we talk about a future victory for one of these ideologies? How would this influence today’s world order?

Sergey Lavrov: I wouldn’t call Donald Trump or Marine Le Pen “fringe politicians” if only because they absolutely fit into the principles that underlie the functioning of the American and French states. Marine Le Pen is a European member of parliament and her party is active in the national parliament.  Donald Trump has been elected in full accordance with the American constitution, with its two-level indirect system of electing the president. I would not even call them populists. The word “populist” has a negative connotation. You said interestingly that populists are those who represent the people. There are nuances in the interpretation of the word “populist.” In modern Russian it tends to be applied to people who go into politics, but do not bear the responsibility for their words and just seek to lure voters. A populist is someone who might promise to triple wages while the budget absolutely cannot support it, etc. So I would rather call them realists or anti-globalists, if you like. Having said that, anti-globalists are also associated with hooligans who try to disrupt the G20 and G7 summits, and so on. Come to think of it, even now that the new president of the world’s largest power has declared that it is necessary to think not of global expansion, but of how America lives, the role of globalists will be changing. American corporations have already demanded a reduction in manufacturing in developing countries to move it to the US in order to create jobs there. Granted, this may not be very good news for the consumer because labour is more expensive in the US, so the prices for goods, cars and so on will increase. But this is the trend. In general, President Trump’s conceptual slogans during his election campaign to the effect that America should interfere less in the affairs of other countries and address its own issues send a very serious signal to the globalists themselves. Again, up until now the US has been perceived as a symbol of globalism and the expansion of transnational corporations. Those who represent their interests are the huge team that has taken up arms against President Trump and his administration and in general against everything he does, and which tries, in any way possible, to throw a spanner in the works. Something similar things are happening in France where mountains of compromising materials of ten or fifteen years ago have been unearthed which invariably are presented through an “anti-Russia prism.” It’s been a long time since I’ve seen such a dirty campaign when at stake are the concepts and ideas of how to develop the state and their country, and a smear war is being waged. We had this not so long ago, and I don’t see anything good about it.

In parallel the global market and the global trade system are being reappraised through the actions and statements of the new US administration. As you know, they have walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and said they would work through regional and bilateral agreements. We believe, though, that the World Trade Organisation which it took us such a long time to join did provide a common umbrella for world trade. Some regional structures could be built into these universal systems so as not to break the ties with the non-members of these regional organisations to maintain some common contact and exchanges through the WTO. That too is now under threat. So, we are in a period of rethinking our approaches, and I don’t think it has everything to do with Trump. These changes have been brewing; otherwise the American position on so many issues could not have changed so abruptly. They were long in coming, and the WTO was in a major crisis when the Western countries categorically refused to listen to the leading developing countries on a range of issues connected with investment, financial services, etc.

I wouldn’t say that there are globalists and populists. There are simply people who want to get elected and follow a well-trodden path and preserve the neoliberal structures that are all over the place in the West, and then there are people who see the neoliberalism and permissiveness which are part of the neoliberal approach as a threat to their societies, traditions and cultures. This is accompanied by philosophical reflections and practical discussions of what to do about the problem of illegal migrants, their own roots and religions, whether it is politically correct to remind people that you are an Orthodox or Catholic or whether you should forget about religion altogether. I have said more than once that the European Union wanted to adopt a constitution many years ago and was drafting it. The commission was headed by Giscard d’Estaing and he proposed a very simple sentence about Europe having Christian roots. He was prevented from doing so on the grounds that it would not be politically correct and would insult the Muslims. In reality it turns out that if you are cautious about making your religious roots known you end up not caring about the religious roots of others and the consequences are not usually good. Therefore, at the UN and UNESCO, we actively support all the initiatives that are particularly relevant today: the Dialogue of Civilisations, the Dialogue of Cultures and the Dialogue of Religions. It is not by chance that they have become topical issues on the agenda because they reflect the fermentation within societies and the need to somehow search for a national consensus.

Question: The traditional definition of war is “war is nothing more than an extension of state policy by alternate means.” We usually understand “alternate means” as military violence and therefore claim that war always involves military action. Do you think it would be correct to say that the nature of war has changed in contemporary circumstances, that is, now the term includes measures for information, economic, political and psychological impact?

Sergey Lavrov: You know, in the West they coined the term ‘hybrid war.’ As a matter of fact, this is the concept they seem to be forming based on their experience. Unilateral economic sanctions are definitely a declaration of war, no doubt about it. An information war is underway when slander becomes a mandatory condition for the media. This is an objective fact. These days we talk a lot about Syria. Allegedly, there is a non-governmental organisation called the White Helmets funded by several Western countries and countries in the Persian Gulf. A film about this organisation won the Oscar for best documentary this year. They present themselves as a humanitarian agency helping people attacked by bombs – particularly, in Syria. On several occasions, they were caught lying and showing staged video clips. For one such clip, they painted a girl with red paint and on camera she was sitting down and allegedly suffering from Russian and Syrian bombs. Several days ago in Geneva, an American journalist presented research in which he proved that the White Helmets are fake and that they only deal with developing falsified and provocative news, while dragging Russia, Iran, the Syrian government and armed forces through the mud. He also proved that they are providing direct assistance to terrorists and extremists, including medical supplies and equipment, and treating injured members of extremist groups. This is just one example. But anywhere you go, when I just try talking to my Western colleagues, the White Helmets are exempt from any criticism and seem to have a monopoly on the truth. There are many other tricks like that. Certainly, in a wider perspective, cyberspace is an area where there is a material possibility to inflict potentially very serious harm. Cyber forces were created and, apparently, they have some significance. This is exactly why we need forums where these things can be discussed as a single package. The military discusses purely military issues, which now extends to cyberwars. Those dealing with information and sharing experience are trying to convince each other that the media must be used not for provocation but to reconcile people. When it comes to the economy, it should be understood – and many have come to realise this – that unilateral sanctions will come back like a boomerang and hit the countries that joined them, especially small countries. It is very short-sighted to impose unilateral sanctions on a country like Russia, with its huge potential, human and natural resources. By encouraging dialogue in each of these areas to build a general understanding, mutually beneficial and generally acceptable approaches, we need a forum where all these issues can be considered in their relation to each other because they all affect the general status of international relations. Except for the UN, there is no other framework like this. This is a very topical issue and we have no doubt that it will be in the centre of very heated and engaging debates for the foreseeable future.

To be continued…

Many thanks to our research assistant Baaz for discovering the video.

What America’s Coup in Ukraine Did

What America’s Coup in Ukraine Did

By Eric Zuesse,

Armée Ukraine USA

On March 23rd, Gallup headlined “South Sudan, Haiti and Ukraine Lead World in Suffering”, and the Ukrainian part of that can unquestionably be laid at the feet of U.S. President Barack Obama, who in February 2014 imposed upon Ukraine a very bloody coup (see it here), which he and his press misrepresented (and still misrepresent) as being (and still represent as having been) a ‘democratic revolution’, but was nothing of the sort, and actually was instead the start of the Ukrainian dictatorship and the hell that has since destroyed that country, and brought the people there into such misery, it’s now by far the worst in Europe, and nearly tied with the worst in the entire world.

America’s criminal ‘news’ media never even reported the coup, nor that in 2011 the Obama regime began planning for a coup in Ukraine, and that by 1 March 2013 they started organizing it inside the U.S. Embassy there, and that they hired members of Ukraine’s two racist-fascist, or nazi, political parties, Right Sector and Svoboda (which latter had been called the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine until the CIA advised them to change it to Freedom Party, or “Svoboda” instead), and that in February 2014 they did it (and here’s the 4 February 2014 phone call instructing the U.S. Ambassador whom to place in charge of the new regime when the coup will be completed), under the cover of authentic anti-corruption demonstrations that the Embassy organized on the Maidan Square in Kiev, demonstrations that the criminal U.S. ‘news’ media misrepresented as ‘democracy demonstrations,’ though Ukraine already had democracy (but still lots of corruption, even more than today’s U.S. does, and the pontificating Obama said he was trying to end Ukraine’s corruption — which instead actually soared after his coup there).

The head of the ‘private CIA’ firm Stratfor said it was “the most blatant coup in history” but he couldn’t say that to Americans, because he knows that our press is just a mouthpiece for the regime (just like it was during the lead-up to George W. Bush’s equally unprovoked invasion of Iraq — for which America’s ‘news’ media suffered likewise no penalties).

When subsequently accused by neocons for his having said this, his response was “I told the business journal Kommersant that if the US were behind a coup in Kiev, it would have been the most blatant coup in history,” As I pointed out when writing about that rejoinder of his, he had, in fact, made quite clear in his Kommersant interview, that it was, in his view “the most blatant coup in history,” no conditionals on that.

Everybody knows what Obama, and Clinton, and Sarkozy, did to Libya — in their zeal to eliminate yet another nation’s leader who was friendly toward Russia (Muammar Gaddafi), they turned one of the highest-living-standard nations in Africa into a failed state and huge source of refugees (as well as of weapons that the Clinton State Department transferred to the jihadists in Syria to bring down Bashar al-Assad, another ally of Russia) — but the ‘news’ media have continued to hide what Obama (assisted by America’s European allies, especially Poland and Netherlands, and also by America’s apartheid Middle Eastern ally, Israel) did to Ukraine.

I voted for Obama, partly because the insane McCain (“bomb, bomb, bomb Iran”) and the creepy Romney (“Russia, this is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe”) were denounced by the (duplicitous) Obama for saying such evil things, their aggressive international positions, which continued old Cold-War-era hostilities into the present, even after the Cold War had ended long ago (in 1991) (but only on the Russian side). I since have learned that in today’s American political system, the same aristocracy controls both of our rotten political Parties, and American democracy no longer exists. (And the only scientific study of whether America between the years 1981 and 2002 was democratic found that it was not, and it already confirmed what Jimmy Carter later said on 28 July 2015: “Now it’s just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or being elected president. And the same thing applies to governors, and U.S. Senators and congress members.” But yet our Presidents continue the line, now demonstrably become a myth, of ‘American democracy’, and use it as a sledgehammer against other governments, to ‘justify’ invading (or, in Ukraine’s case, overthrowing via a ‘democratic revolution’) their lands (allies of Russia) such as in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and maybe even soon, Iran.

Here are some of the events and important historical details along the way to Ukraine’s plunge into a worse condition than most African nations:

“Yanukovych’s Removal Was Unconstitutional”

“Obama Definitely Caused The Malaysian Airliner To Be Downed”

“War on Donbass was planned to ignite a major war in Europe.”

“Our ‘Enemies’ In Ukraine Speak”

“Meet Ukraine’s Master Mass-Murderer: Dmitriy Yarosh”

“Ukrainian Soldier Explains Why He Enjoys Killing Russians”

“Russia’s Leader Putin Rejects Ukrainian Separatists’ Aim To Become Part Of Russia”

“Gallup: Ukrainians Loathe the Kiev Government Imposed by Obama”

Please send this article to every friend who is part of the majority that, as a Quinnipiac University poll published on March 22nd reported, “A total of 51 percent of voters say they can trust U.S. intelligence agencies to do what is right ‘almost all of the time’ or ‘most of the time’” (and that level of trust was far higher than for the rotten press and for the rotten politicians), even after the CIA’s rubber-stamping Bush’s lies to invade Iraq, and after the FBI’s shameless performance on Hillary Clinton’s privatized State Department emails even after her smashing their cell-phones with hammers, etc., and all the other official cover-ups, with no American officials even so much as being charged for their rampant crimes against the American public.

Besides: ever since the CIA’s founding, it has had an “Operation Gladio” that specializes in organizing terrorist acts so as for them to be blamed on, first, communist countries when they existed; and, then, after the end of communism, on allies of Russia. Did the American dictatorship begin right after FDR died in 1945? How much longer will these lies succeed?

For the people of Iraq, and of Syria, and of Ukraine, and many such countries, this dictatorship has destroyed their lives. Trusting the ‘intelligence’ services of a dictatorship doesn’t make any sense at all. They’re all working for the aristocracy, the billionaires — not for any public, anywhere; not here, not there, just nowhere. Should the cattle trust the feedlot-operator? Only ignorance can produce trust, under the conditions that actually exist.

So, unless the idea is that ignorance is bliss, pass along the truth, when you find it, because it is very rare — and the system operates to keep it that way.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Comments of the Russian MID on the EU authority on human rights

March 22, 2017

The EU has long lost its moral right to act as an authority on human rights issues

The following statement is an important step taken by the MID. Until recently, they refrained from directly pointing out that the European nations that are orchestrating the anti-Russian campaign are the same nations that participated in the  war on the USSR in 1941-1945. Some of them sent their armies to invade Russia and to burn Russian towns and villages and to hang Russians women and children, some of them were busy producing tanks, ammunition and ropes, while others were treating the injured invaders and financing the war.

Let’s list the crimes of the Western nations against the Russians every time we write about their political representatives, governments and military alliances.

Today marks the 74th Anniversary of the horrific massacre, Ukrainian nationalists & Nazis burned 150 people alive

 Comment by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Information and Press Department on a declaration by the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on behalf of the European Union on Crimea and the European Parliament resolution on Ukrainian political prisoners in Russia and situation in Crimea

March 20th, 2017

We were perplexed by the March 18 declaration by the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on behalf of the European Union on Crimea, timed to coincide with the anniversary of the reunification of Crimea and Sevastopol with Russia. Apparently, Brussels remains detached from reality and refuses to acknowledge the obvious, positive changes in the lives of the people in the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol, which are now part of the Russian Federation.

Instead of repeating unsubstantiated assertions by Kiev regarding alleged “human rights violations” and the “annexation of Crimea,” European officials wishing to receive objective information regarding the situation in Russia’s Crimea would do better to visit the peninsula and see with their own eyes what is happening there, as many unbiased public and political figures from EU member countries have already done.

The EU invokes international law but seems to forget about its gross violations in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, and, for that matter, Ukraine, with the goal of toppling unwanted regimes in which its member countries took an active part. The EU has yet to respond adequately to the regular marches and rallies of Waffen-SS veterans in Latvia, which not only insult the memory of millions of victims, but also ignore the rulings of the Nuremberg Tribunal, as well as the UN General Assembly resolutions on inadmissibility of the glorification of Nazism.

Fabrications about “threats to international security” and the “ongoing militarisation” of Crimea also come as a surprise. The EU prefers not to notice the deployment of US missile defence elements in Romania and Poland, the ever more frequent NATO exercises in the Black Sea, and the increased NATO military presence in Eastern Europe, which have a negative impact on the security situation in Europe, including the Black Sea region.

The attempt to portray the EU’s blanket discriminatory restrictive measures against Crimeans as part of the “policy of non-recognition” of the reunification of Crimea with Russia appears cynical. In the context of EU visa policies, they are reminiscent of “visa reprisals” and run counter to a range of norms of international law. The same applies to the EU’s appeals to UN member states to impose sanctions on Russia.

The adoption by the European Parliament on March 16 of the resolution on Ukrainian Political Prisoners in Russia and Situation in Crimea once again demonstrates a prejudiced approach to human rights. Clearly, the EU has long lost its moral right to act as an authority on human rights issues. For the sake of dubious political expediency, Brussels prefers to turn a blind eye to the actions of the Kiev regime and the Ukrainian nationalists blocking water and energy supplies to Crimea, non-payment of pensions and benefits, as well as the blocking of railway links with southeastern Ukraine, not to mention the numerous migrant issues in the EU itself, including the disappearance of migrant children and violations of their rights, the status of “non-citizens” in Latvia and Estonia, growing racism and xenophobia throughout the European Union, and the blatant human rights violations in the course of involvement of a number of EU countries in the infamous secret CIA prisons. Those are the cold hard facts. However, MEPs in their resolutions on Crimea prefer to see only the mythical deterioration of the situation of the Crimean Tatar population, despite the fact that real progress in restoring its rights was made only after reunification of the peninsula with Russia.

To reiterate, Crimea and Sevastopol are an integral part of the Russian Federation, and methods of political or economic pressure, to which the European Union persistently resorts, are futile efforts and will not change this fact.

%d bloggers like this: