The Reason Behind the US Government’s Secret Hatred of Europeans

The Reason Behind the US Government’s Secret Hatred of Europeans

The Reason Behind the US Government’s Secret Hatred of Europeans

The reason for the US government’s hostility — at least since 4 February 2014 —toward Europeans, has been a mystery, until now.

This hostility wasn’t even publicly recognized at all, until it leaked out, on that date, from a tapped phone-line of arguably the most powerful person at the US State Department, the person whom American President Barack Obama had personally entrusted with running his Administration’s most geostrategically sensitive secret foreign operations (and she did it actually throughout almost the entirety of Obama’s eight years in office, regardless of whom the official US Secretary of State happened to be at the time): Victoria Nuland.

Her official title was «Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs» and she was appointed to that post by the President himself, but nominally she reported to him through the Deputy Secretary of State William Joseph Burns, who reported to the Secretary of State, who, in turn, reported to the President.

She ran policies specifically on Ukraine (and, more broadly, against Russia). In the famous leaked phone call that she made on 4 February 2014 to the US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, she instructed him to place in charge of Ukraine’s government, once America’s coup in Ukraine would be completed (which then occurred 18 days later and overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, entirely in violation of Ukraine’s own Constitution), «Yats» or Arseniy Yatsenyuk. He did, immediately after the coup was completed, receive this crucial appointment — basically, the power to control all other top appointments in the new Ukrainian government. With this appointment, the coup, which had started by no later than 2011 to be planned inside the US State Department, was effectively completed.

In this phone call, Nuland said «F—k the EU!» and no one, at the time, paid much attention to what this outburst was all about, but only that it sounded shockingly undiplomatic. Finally, however, clear evidence has now emerged, concerning what it was actually about. 

This crucial evidence consists of a refusal (at long last) by both Germany and Austria, to ratchet-up further, as the US regime now demands, economic sanctions against Russia, sanctions that are a key part of America’s plan ultimately to conquer Russia — a plan that’s been carried out consistently by all US federal governments since the moment, on the night of 24 February 1990, when US President George Herbert Walker Bush himself secretly announced it to West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and afterward to other US vassal-heads-of-state — that, though the Soviet Union was already irrevocably in the process of ending the Cold War against the US and its allies, the US and its allies would secretly continue that war, henceforth, against Russia, until Russia itself would be conquered. He was implicitly informing them, there, that the Cold War, on the US side, wasn’t really about ideology (capitalist versus communist), but instead, was actually a long war for conquest, of the entire world (now it would be to strip Russia of its allies, and then to go in for the kill), by the US aristocracy and its vassal aristocracies (whom those European leaders represented).

On 15 June 2017, the Associated Press headlined «Germany, Austria slam US sanctions against Russia», and reported that both of those US vassal-nations, while paying obeisance to the imperial master, were not going to proceed further all the way to destruction of their own major oil and gas companies, in order to please that master:

In a joint statement, Austria’s Chancellor Christian Kern and Germany’s Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said it was important for Europe and the United States to form a united front on the issue of Ukraine, where Russian-based separatists have been fighting government forces since 2014.

«However, we can’t accept the threat of illegal and extraterritorial sanctions against European companies», the two officials said, citing a section of the bill that calls for the United States to continue to oppose the Nord Stream 2 pipeline that would pump Russian gas to Germany beneath the Baltic Sea. Half of the cost of the new pipeline is being paid for by Russian gas giant Gazprom, while the other half is being shouldered by a group including Anglo-Dutch group Royal Dutch Shell, French provider Engie, OMV of Austria and Germany’s Uniper and Wintershall. Some Eastern European countries, including Poland and Ukraine, fear the loss of transit revenue if Russian gas supplies don’t pass through their territory anymore once the new pipeline is built.

Gabriel and Kern accuse the US of trying to help American natural gas suppliers at the expense of their Russian rivals. They said the possibility of fining European companies participating in the Nord Stream 2 project «introduces a completely new, very negative dimension into European-American relations».

Currently, and for a very long time, the leading energy-supplier to the EU has been Russia, in the forms of oil and, especially, natural gas, both of which are transported into the EU via an extensive network of pipelines, most of which travel through Ukraine, which is a major reason why the US rulers wanted to take over Ukraine — in order to stop that, or at least to cause a necessity for Russia to build alternative pipelines (which the US regime would likewise do everything to block from happening) — but now both Germany and Austria are saying no to this US effort.

The US regime wants fracked US natural gas to fill an increasing portion of Europe’s needs, and for natural gas from US-allied fundamentalist Sunni royal regimes to fill as much of the rest as possible, so as to squeeze-out the existing top supplier, Russia. (Until recently, the plan was for US ally Qatar, owned by the Thani royal family, to become Europe’s main supplier, via pipelines which would traverse through Syria, for which reason Syria needs to be conquered (so that those pipelines through Syria can be built, perhaps even by American firms). However, the Sauds, who usually run US foreign relations — often with assistance from the Israeli regime, which is far more popular in the United States and also in Europe (and thus serves as the Sauds’ agents in the US and Europe) — have now blockaded Qatar because of Qatar’s insufficient compliance with the Sauds’ demand for total international isolation of Iran and of any other nation where Shia are or might become dominant. (For example, the Sauds bomb Yemen to impose fundamentalist Sunni leadership there and kill the Shia population.) And, so, now, after the break between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, even more than before, the main beneficiaries of cutting off Russian gas-supplies to the EU would be US fracking companies.

However, the big European oil and gas corporations would then play a smaller role in the European market, because those firms have mutual commitments with Gazprom and other Russian giants. The only big winners, now, of increased sanctions against Russia, would thus be US firms.

«Europe’s energy supply is a matter for Europe, and not for the United States of America», Kern and Gabriel said.

Europe already has suffered considerable economic harm from complying with the US on taking over Ukraine, and from absorbing millions of destitute and alien refugees from Syria, Libya, and other countries where the US CIA, and other agencies, fomented the «Arab Spring» to unlock, in those countries, the oil and gas pipeline potential, which, if controlled by the US, would go to US oilfield-services firms such as Halliburton, and not to European ones such as Schlumberger.

Kern and Gabriel — and the local national aristocracies (respectively Austrian, and German) whom they represent — are now speaking publicly about the limits beyond which they will not go in order to obey their US masters.

Consequently, back in February 2014, when the European aristocracies complied with the US aristocracy’s coup in Ukraine even though knowing full well that it was a barbaric and very bloody coup and nothing ‘democratic’ such as the US-manufactured story-line alleged it to have been, those aristocracies accepted the heist because they thought and expected to be cut in on enough of the looting of Ukraine so as to come out ahead on it. But that’s no longer the case. Because of the Sauds’ campaign against the Thanis (the owners of Qatar), the gang are starting to break up. The US gangsters are no longer clearly in control, but are being forced to choose between the Sauds and the Thanis, and have apparently chosen the Sauds. The Sauds financed the 9/11 attacks in the United States, but are the largest foreign purchasers of US-made weapons.

The US aristocracy hate Europeans because the US aristocracy are determined to conquer Russia, and because Europeans aren’t fully cooperating with that overriding US government goal — many EU billionaires want deals with Russia, but America’s billionaires are determined instead to take over Russia, and so the US (and the Sauds) might be losing its traditional support from the EU.

International affairs — US, Russia, Sauds, Thanis, Iran, Germany, UK, etc. — are in unpredictable flux. But Europe seems gradually to be drifting away from the US

And resistant European aristocrats seem to be digging in their heels on this. Here is a translation of a report dated June 17th from the most reliable source of news regarding international relations, Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten, or «German Economic News»:

Eastern Committee: US sanctions against Russia are a threat to Europe

German Economic News | Released:17.06.17 00:36 Clock

The Eastern Committee of the German economy is indignant at the new US sanctions against Russia.

The German companies have sharply criticized the US sanctions against Russia. «The sanctions plans of the US Senate are deeply alarming and, in principle, a threat to the European and German economy», said Klaus Schäfer, Deputy Chairman of the Eastern Committee of the German Economy, on Friday evening in Berlin. «America first is a new dimension to open up international markets to US providers at the expense of European jobs. Furthermore, we consider an extraterritorial application of economic initiatives generally wrong, «he said. In the Eastern Committee, the German companies active in Eastern Europe are organized. The federal government had also clearly criticized the sanction decision.

«Every further turn at the sanctioning screw increases the danger of new trade wars and the uncertainty of the world economy», warned Schäfer. The solution of the Ukraine conflict is not a step closer. A de-escalation on all sides was necessary. He pointed out that the US-Russia trade represented only one-tenth of the EU-Russia trade. «We pay the price of sanctions to Europeans», he criticized. «Implementation of the planned sanctions would make Europe more difficult to provide with favorable energy and inevitably lead to higher prices».

The most remarkable thing about this intensification of economic aggression by the US aristocracy against some of the European aristocracies, is that instead of the aggression being spearheaded this time by the US President, it’s being spearheaded by an almost unanimous US Senate: 97 out of the 100 US Senators voted for this bill. One cannot, this time around, reasonably blame «Donald Trump» for this ‘nationalism’ — it is instead clearly a Cold War, this time, by the US aristocracy (who are represented by the US government), against some European aristocracies, which are paying insufficient obeisance to the demands by the imperial aristocracy: the US gang.

Whereas, at the time of the US coup in Ukraine, the EU swallowed in silence their shock at how brutal and bloody it had been, and stayed with the Americans because the Americans claimed that the takeover would benefit European aristocracies too (‘expand the EU’), the lie about that is now clear to all (and Ukraine has been too wrecked by America, to be of much use to anyone but the Americans as a staging base for their missiles against Moscow), and therefore «the Western Alliance» might finally be breaking up.

The vassal-governments have put up with a lot from the US aristocracy, such as when German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s phone was revealed to be tapped by America’s NSA, and the case was quietly dropped because, «Prosecutors say they can find no actionable evidence to support claims German chancellor’s mobile phone was tapped by US National Security Agency» even though everyone knew that the refusal by Germany’s prosecutors was based upon a lie, and that Germany «remains heavily reliant on the US», and that the US government’s knowing everything that German politicians do, provides against those politicians a blackmail-potential against themselves, that cannot be taken lightly. On the other hand, perhaps there now exists a countervailing force that can outweigh even considerations such as that. Maybe Germany’s billionaires have, somehow, finally become able to turn the tide on this.

Putin, Ukraine and What Americans (are allowed to) Know

Putin, Ukraine and What Americans Know

Exclusive: In an interview with Oliver Stone, Russian President Putin explained his take on the Ukraine crisis, one that contrasts with what the U.S. mainstream media has allowed the American people to hear, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

A prime example of how today’s mainstream media paradigm works in the U.S. is the case of Ukraine, where Americans have been shielded from evidence that the 2014 ouster of democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych was a U.S.-supported coup d’etat spearheaded by violent neo-Nazi extremists.

Russian President Vladimir Putin in Showtime’s “The Putin Interviews”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As The New York Times has instructed us, there was no coup in Ukraine; there was no U.S. interference; and there weren’t even that many neo-Nazis. And, the ensuing civil conflict wasn’t a resistance among Yanukovych’s supporters to his illegal ouster; no, it was “Russian aggression” or a “Russian invasion.”

If you deviate from this groupthink – if you point out how U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland talked about the U.S. spending $5 billion on Ukraine; if you mention her pre-coup intercepted phone call with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt discussing who the new leaders would be and how “to glue” or how “to “midwife this thing”; if you note how Nuland and Sen. John McCain urged on the violent anti-Yanukovych protesters; if you recognize that snipers firing from far-right-controlled buildings killed both police and protesters to provoke the climactic ouster of Yanukovych; and if you think all that indeed looks like a coup – you obviously are the victim of “Russian propaganda and disinformation.”

But most Americans probably haven’t heard any of that evidence revealing a coup, thanks to the mainstream U.S. media, which has essentially banned those deviant facts from the public discourse. If they are mentioned at all, they are lumped together with “fake news” amid the reassuring hope that soon there will be algorithms to purge such troublesome information from the Internet.

So, if Americans tune in to Part Three of Oliver Stone’s “The Putin Interviews” on “Showtime” and hear Russian President Vladimir Putin explain his perspective on the Ukraine crisis, they may become alarmed that Putin, leader of a nuclear-armed country, is delusional.

A Nuanced Perspective

In reality, Putin’s account of the Ukraine crisis is fairly nuanced. He notes that there was genuine popular anger over the corruption that came to dominate Ukraine after the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 and the selling off of the nation’s assets to well-connected “oligarchs.”

Screen shot of the fatal fire in Odessa, Ukraine, on May 2, 2014, set by right-wing Ukrainian nationalists killing scores of ethnic Russians. (From RT video)

Putin recognizes that many Ukrainians felt that an association with the European Union could help solve their problems. But that created a problem for Russia because of the absence of tariffs between Russia and Ukraine and concerns about the future of bilateral trade that is especially important to Ukraine, which stood to lose some $160 billion.

When Yanukovych decided to postpone the E.U. agreement so he could iron out that problem, protests erupted, Putin said. But — from that point on — Putin’s narrative deviates from what the U.S. government and mainstream media tell the American people.

“Our European and American partners managed to mount this horse of discontent of the people and instead of trying to find out what was really happening, they decided to support the coup d’etat,” Putin said.

Contrary to the U.S. claims blaming Yanukovych for the violence in the Maidan protests, Putin said, “Yanukovych didn’t give an order to use weapons against civilians. And incidentally, our Western partners, including the United States, asked us to influence him so that he did not give any orders to use weapons. They told us, ‘We ask you to prevent President Yanukovych from using the armed forces.’ And they promised … they were going to do everything for the opposition to clear the squares and the administrative buildings.

“We said, ‘Very well, that is a good proposal. We are going to work on it.’ And, as you know, President Yanukovych didn’t resort to using the Armed Forces. And President Yanukovych said that he couldn’t imagine any other way of dealing with this situation. He couldn’t sign an order on the use of weapons.”

Though Putin did not specifically finger blame for the sniper fire on Feb. 20, 2014, which killed more than a dozen police and scores of protesters, he said, “Well, who could have placed these snipers? Interested parties, parties who wanted to escalate the situation. … We have information available to us that armed groups were trained in the western parts of Ukraine itself, in Poland, and in a number of other places.”

After the bloodshed of Feb. 20, Yanukovych and opposition leaders on Feb. 21 signed an accord, brokered and guaranteed by three European governments, for early elections and, in the meantime, a reduction of Yanukovych’s powers.

Ignoring a Political Deal

But the opposition, led by neo-Nazi and other extreme nationalist street fighters, brushed aside the agreement and escalated their seizing of government buildings, although The New York Times and other U.S. accounts would have the American people believe that Yanukovych simply abandoned his office.

Nazi symbols on helmets worn by members of Ukraine’s Azov battalion. (As filmed by a Norwegian film crew and shown on German TV)

“That’s the version used to justify the support granted to the coup,” Putin said. “Once the President left for Kharkov, the second largest city in the country to attend an internal political event, armed men seized the Presidential Residence. Imagine something like that in the U.S., if the White House was seized, what would you call that? A coup d’etat? Or say that they just came to sweep the floors?

“The Prosecutor General was shot at, one of the security officers was wounded. And the motorcade of President Yanukovych himself was shot at. So it’s nothing short of an armed seizure of power. Moreover, one day afterwards he used our support and relocated to Crimea (where he stayed for more than a week) thinking that there was still a chance that those who put their signatures on the (Feb. 21) agreement with the opposition would make an attempt to settle this conflict by civilized democratic legal means. But that never happened and it became clear that if he were taken he would be killed.

“Everything can be perverted and distorted, millions of people can be deceived, if you use the monopoly of the media. But in the end, I believe that for an impartial spectator it is clear what has happened – a coup d’etat had taken place.”

Putin noted how the new regime in Kiev immediately sought to limit use of the Russian language and allowed extreme nationalist elements to move against eastern provinces known as the Donbass where ethnic Russians were the vast majority of the population.

Putin continued, “First, there were attempts at arresting them [ethnic Russians] using the police, but the police defected to their side quite quickly. Then the central authorities started to use Special Forces and in the night, people were snatched and taken to prison. Certainly, people in Donbass, after that, they took up arms.

“But once this happened, hostilities started so instead of engaging in dialogue with people in the southeast part of Ukraine, they [Ukraine government officials] used Special Forces, and started to use weapons directly – tanks and even military aircraft. There were strikes from multiple rocket launchers against residential neighborhoods. … We repeatedly appealed to this new leadership asking them to abstain from extreme actions.”

However, the civil conflict only grew worse with thousands of people killed in some of the worst violence that Europe has seen since World War II. In the U.S. mainstream media, however, the crisis was blamed entirely on Putin and Russia.

The Crimea Case

As for the so-called “annexation” of Crimea, a peninsula in the Black Sea that was historically part of Russia and that even after the Soviet break-up hosted a major Russian naval base at Sevastopol, Putin’s account also deviated sharply from what Americans have been told.

When Stone asked about the “annexation,” Putin responded: “We were not the ones to annex Crimea. The citizens of Crimea decided to join Russia. The legitimate parliament of Crimea, which was elected based on the Ukrainian legislation, announced a referendum. The Parliament, by an overwhelming majority, voted to join Russia.

“The coup d’etat in Ukraine was accompanied by a surge in violence. And there was even the threat that violence would be perpetrated by nationalists against Crimea, against those who consider themselves to be Russian and who think Russian is their mother language. And people got concerned — they were preoccupied by their own safety.

“According to the corresponding international agreement [with Ukraine], we had a right to have 20,000 people at our military base in the Crimea. We had to facilitate the work of the Parliament of Crimea, the representative government body, in order for this Parliament to be able to assemble and affect actions in accordance with the law.

“The people had to feel they were safe. Yes, we created conditions for people to go to polling stations, but we did not engage in any hostilities. More than 90 percent of the Crimean population turned out, they voted, and once the ballot was cast, the [Crimean] Parliament, based on the outcome of the referendum, addressed the Russian parliament, asking to incorporate it into the Russian Federation.

“Moreover, Ukraine lost the territory, not due to Russia’s position, but due to the position assumed by those who are living in Crimea. These people didn’t want to live under the banner of nationalists.”

Stone challenged some of Putin’s concerns that Ukraine might have turned the Russian naval base over to NATO. “Even if NATO made an agreement with Ukraine, I still don’t see a threat to Russia with the new weaponry,” Stone said.

Putin responded: “I see a threat. The threat consists in the fact that once NATO comes to this or that country, the political leadership of that country as a whole, along with its population, cannot influence the decisions NATO takes, including the decisions related to stationing the military infrastructure. Even very sensitive weapons systems can be deployed. I’m also talking about the anti-ballistic missile systems.”

Putin also argued that the U.S. government exploited the situation in Ukraine to spread hostile propaganda against Russia, saying:

”Through initiating the crisis in Ukraine, they’ve [American officials] managed to stimulate such an attitude towards Russia, viewing Russia as an enemy, a possible potential aggressor. But very soon everyone is going to understand, that there is no threat whatsoever emanating from Russia, either to the Baltic countries, or to Eastern Europe, or to Western Europe.”

A Dangerous Standoff

Putin shed light, too, on a little-noticed confrontation involving a U.S. destroyer, the USS Donald Cook, that steamed through the Black Sea toward Crimea in the middle of the crisis but turned back when Russian aircraft buzzed the ship and Russia activated its shoreline defense systems.

Ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.

Stone compared the situation to the Cuban Missile Crisis when a Soviet ship turned back rather than challenge the blockade that President John Kennedy had established around the island. But Putin didn’t see the confrontation with the U.S. destroyers as grave as that.

Putin said, “Once Crimea became a full-fledged part of the Russian Federation, our attitude toward this territory changed dramatically. If we see a threat to our territory, and Crimea is now part of Russia, just as any other country, we will have to protect our territory by all means at our disposal. …

“I wouldn’t draw an analogy with the Cuban Missile Crisis, because back then the world was on the brink of a nuclear apocalypse. Luckily, the situation didn’t go so far this time. Even though we did indeed deploy our most sophisticated, our cutting-edge systems for the coastal defense,” known as the Bastion.

“Certainly – against such missiles as the ones we’ve deployed in Crimea – such a ship as the Destroyer Donald Cook is simply defenseless. … Our Commanders always have the authorization to use any means for the defense of the Russian Federation. … Yes , certainly it would have been very bad. What was the Donald Cook doing so close to our land? Who was trying to provoke whom? And we are determined to protect our territory. …

“Once the destroyer was located and detected, they [the U.S. crew] saw that there was a threat, and the ship itself saw that it was the target of the missile systems. I don’t know who the Captain was, but he showed much restraint, I think he is a responsible man, and a courageous officer to boot. I think it was the right decision that he took. He decided not to escalate the situation. He decided not to proceed. It doesn’t at all mean that it would have been attacked by our missiles, but we had to show them that our coast was protected by the missile systems.

“The Captain sees right away that his ship has become the target of missile systems – he has special equipment to detect such kinds of situations. … But indeed we were brought to the brink, so to speak. … Yes, certainly. We had to respond somehow. Yes, we were open to positive dialogue. We did everything to achieve a political settlement. But they [U.S. officials] had to give their support to this unconstitutional seizure of power. I still wonder why they had to do that?”

It also remains a question why the U.S. mainstream media feels that it must protect the American people from alternative views even as the risks of nuclear confrontation escalate.

Regarding other issues discussed by Putin, click here. For more on Stone’s style in interviewing Putin, click here

Trump and the bubbles from a sunken (old) world

June 02, 2017

This article was written for the Unz Review 

First, a confession: I really don’t know how the corporate media has covered the Trump trip to NATO and the G7 summit. Frankly, I don’t really care – it’s been a long while already since I stopped listening to these imperial shills. There is a risk in completely ignoring them, and that risk is the risk to say “white” when everybody else says “black”. This is a small risk – and, after all, who cares? – but today I will take it again and give you my own take on Trump’s trip to Europe: I think that it was an immense success. But not necessarily for Trump as much as it was an immense success for the enemies of the Empire, like myself. Here is my own rendition on what I think has taken place.

First, Trump was consistently rude. I cannot judge if this lack of manners is the real Trump or whether Trump was tying to send an unspoken message. For whatever this is worth, I know of only one person who had personal and private dealing with the Trump family, including The Donald Himself, and according to him, Trump is an impeccably courteous person. Whatever may be the case, whether this was nature or no so subtle “messaging”, Trump truly outdid himself. He unceremoniously pushed aside the Prime Minister of Montenegro, who richly deserves being treated with utter contempt. Then he blocked out Angela Merkel during the official photo taking. He made the G7 wait for over an hour, he refused to walk to another photo op by foot. He didn’t even bother putting on his translation headset when others were speaking and, crime of crimes, he told the NATO members states to pay more money while not saying a single word about Article 5. It is hard to gauge what the rest of the assembled politicians really thought (prostitutes are good at hiding and repressing their own feelings), but Merkel clearly was angry and frustrated. Apparently, everybody hated Trump, with the sole possible exception of Marcon (but he is a high-end prostitute). As much as Obama was a charmer, Trump seems to relish the role of ruffian. But most importantly, Trump treated the EU/NATO gang with the contempt they deserve and that, frankly, I find most refreshing. Why?

The ugly truth about NATO: Eurosissies and Eurodummies

What is NATO? Originally, NATO was supposed to be a military alliance to oppose the Soviet armed forces and, later, the Warsaw Treaty Organization. Now that these two have disappeared, NATO has no real mission. What NATO still has is a huge bureaucracy. There is a lot of money to be made through NATO: salaries, contracts, investments, etc. Heck – these guys just built themselves gigantic and brand new headquarters, probably to “deter the Russian aggression”, right? NATO is also a huge bureaucratic lift which can pull people up to the real centers of power, including financial power. Furthermore, NATO is also a gang of people who use NATO to advance their petty career or political agenda. At best, NATO is a gigantic fig leaf covering the obscenity of western imperialism.

What NATO is not is a militarily useful alliance. Oh yes, sure, the Americans can use NATO to force the Europeans to use US military hardware, that is true, but should a war break out, especially a *real* war against Russia, the Americans would push all these Eurosissies out of the way and do 90%+ of the fighting. Most NATO armies are a joke anyway, but even those who are marginally better fully depend on the USA for all the force multipliers (intelligence, logistics, transportation, communications, navigation, etc.).

And then there is the “New Europe”: the crazies in Poland or the Baltics who are making an immense effort in trying to get the Old Europeans (who made the huge mistake to accept them into NATO) on a collision course with Russia. From a pragmatic point of view, NATO member states should have never EVER incorporated the “New Europeans” into their alliance. The same goes for the EU, of course. But in their illusions of grandeur and their petty revanchism they decided that *real* Europe needed to be joined at the hip with “New Europe” and now they are paying the price for this strategic mistake of colossal proportions. Of course, the Americans are bastards for encouraging the Eurodummies in their delusional dreams, but now that the deed is done, the Americans are doing the rational and pragmatic thing: they are letting the Eurodummies deal with their own mistakes. This is best shown by Trump’s new policy about the Ukraine: he simply does not care.

Oh sure, he will say something about the Minsk Agreement, maybe mention Crimea, he might even say something about a Russian threat. But then he turns away and walks. And the Eurodummies are not discovering something which they should have suspected all along: the Ukraine is *their* problem now, the Americans don’t care because they have nothing to lose and nothing to win either, and so besides empty words they will offer nothing. Much worse is the fact that it appears that it will be the Europeans who will end up paying most of the costs of rebuilding the Ukraine when the current Nazi regime is finally removed (but that is a topic for a future article).

There is karmic justice at work here: all the Eurodummies will now have to deal with the fallout from the total collapse of the Ukraine, but the first ones to pay will be the Poles who tried so hard to draw NATO and the real Europe into their revanchist agenda. Besides, is it not simply justice for the Poles who for years have been ranting about a Russian threat and who for years have been supporting nationalist and even neo-Nazi movements in the Ukraine to now be faced with a deluge of problems (social, political, economic, etc.) coming from “their” Ukrainians will the Russians will be looking at this mess from the east, protected by the two Novorussian republics and formidable National and Border guards. As most Russians will, I wish the Europeans “bien du plaisir” with the upcoming waves of Ukrainian refugees and the “European values” they will bring with them.

[Sidebar: will Russia fare any better with her refugees? Absolutely! Why? Because the Eurodummies are not just Eurodummies, but also Eurosissies. When faced with a refugee-generated crimewave all they can do is roll over and go into deep denial. In Russia any such crimewave will be met with all the force and even violence of the state. Take a look at these guys:

Russian National Guardsmen

and imagine how they would react to the kind of events which have taken place in “Old Europe” recently. Try raping their women!]

The sad truth is that NATO and the EU are do not deserve to be treated with any respect at all. Trump’s condescension is fully deserved. Worse, the Americans don’t even have to pretend to take the Europeans seriously because, for the past decade, the latter have sheepishly obeyed the most ridiculous and even self-defeating orders from the Americans.

Truly, Victoria Nuland’s famous words about the EU were expressing something of an American consensus about the Old Continent.

The G7: “bubbles from a sunken world”

Bubbles from a sunken world” is not an expression I coined. It was the Russian author Ivan Solonevich who wrote that about the kind of exiled Russian aristocrats who still thought that they would one day recover all their properties seized by the Soviets in Russia. Still, this expression also applies to the G7 leaders who meet with a great deal of gravitas and pretend like they really matter. In truth, they don’t. There used to be a time when the G7 really was huge, but now with China and India missing at the table and with Russia expelled, the G7 has become just a kaffeeklatsch for ugly rich people, an occasion to reminisce about the good old days when Europe still mattered.

In reality, of course, and just like with the EU or NATO, the G7 is an anachronistic leftover of a long gone past. G7 countries are simply not the place where the real action is nowadays. But even worse than that is the fact that the leaders of the G7 suffer from the same form of senile dementia as the EU or NATO leaders which is unsurprising since they are more or less the same people: they have nothing original or new to say, nothing important for sure. They have no vision at all, very little legitimacy and even less credibility. Yes, sure, in France Macron did win, but only because the French establishment engaged in a massive propaganda campaign combined aimed at beating Marine LePen. But if you consider that only about 20% of the French voted for Macron in the first round and that he achieved that rather pitiful score even though he had the full support of the French establishment then you realize how unpopular that establishment really is with the French. While the Rothschild propaganda machine tried to present Macron like some kind of de Gaulle, most French people did see him for what he was: a hollow puppet in the hands of the transnational plutocracy. And yet, of all the leaders of the G7, Macron is undeniably the most dynamic one, not only due to his young age, but simply because he does not come across as some kind of fossil from a distant past.

We are told that the G7 is composed of the seven major advanced economies on the planet (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States), but the only real power in that list is the USA. Next, it would be Germany, but Merkel’s immigration policies have resulted in a EU-wide disaster and she is very much an embattled leader. She is also a prime culprit of the Ukrainian fiasco. Next in line would be the UK, but the UK has just left the EU and May is presiding over a process which she herself opposes, as do the British elites. Which leaves us with Japan, Italy and Canada. Japan’s past economic power is being overshadowed by China’s immense economy while in political terms the Japanese are voiceless US subcontractors. Italy should not even be part of the G7, at least not in political and economic terms, because Italy is much closer to her Mediterranean neighbors such as Spain and Greece and therefore looked down with contempt by the “northerners”, especially Germany. Which leaves Canada, arguably the most irrelevant and subservient country of them all (when is the last time Canada had anything of relevance to say about anything? Exactly). The bottom line is this: in economic terms the G7 has pretty much been replaced by the G20 while in political terms the G7 is an empty shell. Trump fully realizes that and that is why he does not even try to be polite with them.

Trump and the Eurodwarves

Obama was a born used car salesman: he could be charming and polite with anybody and everybody. Trump has never had any need to act in such a way and, in the case of the Europeans, he does not even feel like trying.

Trump’s contempt for European leaders is definitely undiplomatic and shows a basic lack of education, but it still is a contempt the European leaders richly deserve. Furthermore, while it is true that the AngloZionist Empire is sinking, the European part is sinking much faster than the American one. Which is unsurprising since the USA is truly a very unique country.

The American Sonderfall

As I was writing this article have been listening to the press conference of Donald Trump in the Rose Garden explaining to the world that the USA would now withdraw from the Paris Agreement. I don’t want to discuss the merits of this agreements or the reasons behind Trump’s decision, but I will stress that this places the USA in direct opposition to 195 other countries who signed this treaty expecting the USA to abide by its terms. 195 countries really means just about the entire planet. And yet Trump feels confident that he can afford taking a separate path and the rest of the world will have to shut up.

Trump is right. The USA is a “special case”.

There is absolutely nothing the rest of the planet can do to prevent the United States from withdrawing from this or any other agreement. The best proof of that fact can be found in the more or less official US position that it does not need a UN Security Council to impose sanctions on another nation, threaten it with military aggression or even go to war against it. Right now, the USA have attacked Syria several times already and there are US forces deployed inside Syria and nobody seems to care, which is kind of ironic considering how many lawyers there are in the USA and, even more so, in Congress. Yet everybody sheepishly accepts that the US is, for some reason, above the law, that laws are for “others”, not for the “indispensable nation” with a “duty” and a “special responsibility” to “lead the world” (sorry, I indulge, but I just love this kind of imperialistic language!).

In politics, power is not absolute, but relative. Sure, the US military is basically dysfunctional and doesn’t seem to be capable of frightening anybody on the US list of “enemies”, but compared to Europe the USA is a powerhouse. As for the Europeans, they are depending on the Americans for pretty much everything that matters. Trump understands all that and he seem to have more respect for Kim Jong-un than for Angela Merkel. I can’t blame him as this is also how I feel.

The many sweet ironies of it all

The traditional British foreign policy has always been to fosters wars in Europe to prevent any kind of continental unity. As for the US, its main objective has always been to keep “keep the Americans in, the Russians out, and the Germans down”. And now we see the Brits leaving the EU and the Americans pulling out well, maybe not out of Europe per se, but out of most of Europe’s problems. So why are the Anglos pulling out? Is that not a clear sign that Europe is sinking?

One of the favorite slogans of the Ukronazis is “Україна – це Європа” (The Ukraine is Europe). Alas, as I wrote in a past article, it is Europe which “became” (like) the Ukraine: poor, corrupt, lead by hypocritical ideologues totally detached from reality and, most importantly, totally fixated on imaginary threats. The only difference between the EU leaders and their Ukronazi counterparts is that while the latter have declared that they are already fighting a Russian invasion, the former are only preparing to counter it. That’s it. Other than that, I see no difference, at least none that matters. Oh, I almost forgot the Americans: they don’t fight the Russians (yet?), but they are “defending” their country from the onslaught of Russian hackers and pro-Russian moles in the entourage of Donald Trump. Brilliant.

In this world got mad, only the Russians are patiently trying to convince their western partners to return to some semblance of sanity. But, frankly, I don’t think that they are very hopeful. They see how the so-called “West” is falling apart, how the ruling elites of the West appear to be hell-bent on self-destruction and they wonder: why are our “western partners” so determined to bring about their own demise and why are they blaming us for what they are doing to themselves? They also often laugh at the quasi magic powers the paranoid crazies in the West seem to ascribe to Russia. One senior US official, James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence, even thinks that Russians are “almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique” to subvert democracy (I can’t decide if he sounds more like a Nazi racist or a clown… probably a mix of both). As I said, the Russians are mostly laughing at it all, but just to make darn sure things don’t turn ugly, they are also re-creating their famous “Shock Armies” (including at least one Tank Army) and doubling the size of the Russian Airborne Forces bringing them to 72’000 soldiers and generally preparing for World War 3.

But for the time being, war is far less likely than it would have been the case with Hillary. What we see is Trump making “America great again” by stepping on its allies in Europe and by contemptuously disregarding the rest of humanity. That kind of arrogant megalomania is not a pretty sight for sure – but way better than WWIII. And “better than WWIII” is all we can hope for in the foreseeable future.

The Saker

Anti-Christian pogrom underway in Ukraine…while is ongoing the genocide of Donbass/Novorossiya population, Donetsk, Lugansk … by neo-Nazi gangs of Kiew regime […U.S.-NATO supported…]

Source


Anti-Christian pogrom underway in Ukraine…

…while is ongoing the genocide of Donbass/Novorossiya population, Donetsk, Lugansk … by neo-Nazi gangs of Kiew regime





ALL  VIDEOS  ARE  WITH  ENG-SUBT

Russia to supply electricity to liberated parts of Eastern Ukraine

Source

Ukraine Says Regions Weren’t Paying Their Bills

The Russian government has announced that they have begun supplying electricity to the Eastern Ukrainian oblasts of Donetsk and Luhansk today, after all electricity supplies were cut by the Ukrainian government. over what they said were unpaid bills.

Donetsk and Luhansk are rebel-held parts of Ukraine, and have been since 2014. The regions have ethnic Russian majorities and rebelled over attempts to ban Russian as an official language, and curtail trade across the Russian border. Many of the rebels advocate secession.

Ukraine’s state power company claimed the regions were some $431 million in debt over non-payment of bills. Russia says that they will be providing power through pre-existing lines effective immediately to avoid loss of electricity to some 3 million people in the effected areas.

The decision by the Ukrainian government to cut power to the region appears to be an attempt to put pressure on the secessionist movement, though ironically by forcing them to turn to Russia for electricity they may further enhanced the region’s link to the Russian Federation.

 

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

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.

%d bloggers like this: