Why Did RT Hire Liberals That Are Bringing Harm to Russia? (Ruslan Ostashko)

Source

Translated and captioned by Leo.

Guess who started the cycle of documentaries about the “main people of the country” on the state channel RT Russia? From the editor-in-chief of the disgusting Russophobic radio station Echo of Moscow, Alexei Venediktov. It is this person who, in violation of the law, does not liquidate the media despised by the people, according to RT, is worthy of the title of “the main person of Russia.” The question arises: maybe it was for this that Margarita Simonyan recruited liberals like Anton Krasovsky on RT?

No matter how politically active a Russian is, they will not say a few sweet words after hearing the name of the most odious liberal media of the country. The same editor-in-chief whose editorial office apparently gets saved from closing due to pressure on shareholders. Against this background, personally for me it was disgusting to see the TV channel RT bends to Venediktov along with Anton Krasovsky. “And here is the first non-related directly with me product by RT Russia. This is a series of documentaries about the most important people of Russia. Starting off with Venediktov. Watch it.”

It turns out by the opinion of editors at RT Russia, the liberal leader of Echo of Moscow stands first on the list of important people in the country. And in order to film a movie about it, a whole week was wasted of workers time which was paid by the state budget.

RT Russia’s description on the video: “For a whole work week, we followed Alexei Venediktov with cameras. We filmed how he conducts meetings on Echo of Moscow, comes up with new radio shows, follows the live broadcast, threatens to fire employees, jokes with Tina Kandelaki, criticizes Stanislav Belkovsky, meets with Moscow prefects, meets in the Moscow public chamber, generates ideas and new projects. And from this video you will learn why Venediktov lives in a hotel, how he raises his son and why, as he himself says, ‘arranges the fate of the world.’”

Like a Pathos. Look at that, Venediktov not only arranges the fate of the world, but he also raises his adult yet dodging-the-army-conscription son. As if the society is not aware of the product of this raising. Tell me, respectable subscribers, if it was up to you regarding what work time should be spent on for the RT journalists, would you have approved the filming of movie about a liberal as one of the most important people in the country? I would say that not only would it not be approved, but they would get a loaf stuffed in them for those trying to approve it. However, you political Russian media managers like Margarita Simonyan do not depend on us. Which is why they do what they want.

For example, they bring to work specific people like Krasovsky himself. In the past I was calmly reacting to him, sometimes even citing his attacks on other quacks. But just like with the other ones, I think he has a lower side to himself. While journalist Krasovsky was doing documentaries about the Coronavirus epidemic and the problems with medicine, he was in his own spot. But as soon as he was assigned to do an interview with the press secretary of the president of Russia [Dmitry Peskov], then that was it, he went down a pediment. And for me, it’s hard to not agree with what the publicist Alexander Rogers wrote about it:

Zhurnalistskaya Pravda (Journalist Truth), Alexander Rogers: “Now explain to me, I sincerely do not understand. In Russia there are thousands of journalists, tens of thousands, but for some reason they sent the only openly gay one to interview the president’s press secretary. Why?! Is he an outstanding journalist, a shining interviewer? Never once! This interview is impossible to listen to the end. It is impossibly boring, and not because of Peskov, but namely because of Krasovsky. He came to the interview with fishnet socks, laid his leg on his other leg, rolled his shoe around, and for more than an hour licked the earpiece of his glasses. Generally, he behaved like ‘not even a man with reduced social responsibility.’ Thank you Putin for the precision of wording.”

Sitting and having your mouth on the earpiece of glasses in front of an interviewee is what? An increase in journalistic professionalism? Or is it a method to show your orientation? What is this new form of interviewing state officials? The content however is even worse:

Alexander Rogers: “This interview is absolutely liberal in essence, and completely not interesting to the Russian people. For almost 15 minutes discussing the ‘poisoning’ of Navalny. Despite half of the Russian population in general does not know who that is! And the rest will say ‘Oh, this is some kind of schmuck that they want to use for imposing new sanctions against Russia.’ Then the tying attempts by Krasovsky to make Russia look extreme. From betraying the Armenians, to betraying Ukrainians and Belarussians. Everything was made into a stupid template according to a boring manual. Peskov also burned in certain points. On his words about the political wisdom of Pashinian, I almost hit myself with a facepalm. And about what kind of talks that Vladimir Vladimirovich [Putin] is carrying out there.But at the end, a little talk on an actual topic – how the fight against the pandemic is going. Although this topic actually needs to be discussed not with Peskov, but with relevant ministries and specialists.”

So like in the case of the film about Venediktov, the work time by journalists which was paid by Russian state money was wasted on the promotion of the anti-Russian liberal narrative. Do you need that content? I definitely don’t. If it went in that direction, then Rogers wrote it correctly. Peskov like a PR spokesman should have been asked not about the ‘wisdom of the crapped-pants Pashinian’, but instead about the information war of the West against Russia. There is a whole section of hot topics there:

Alexander Rogers: “For example, how does Mr. Peskov feel about the censorship in Western social networks and platforms? Or to the fact that ‘The New York Times’ journalists calls to ban even truthful information if it can be used against the US Democratic Party? Or even how Twitter censors the acting US president? And how TV channels cutoff the broadcast to his statements, because ‘we don’t like what he’s saying.’ Or how for example, YouTube deleted the channel ‘News-Front’, which had 460,000 subscribers and almost half a billion views on their videos, without any explanation for it? And also, why Google and other Western search engines cut from their search results many Russian medias. (Including Zhurnalistskaya Pravda in that regard)?

But Krasovsky did not ask about any of the named subjects. He only continuously licked the earpiece of his glasses, rolled his shoe around and broadcasted an anti-Russian agenda. Does RT need such employees like him, Maria Baronova, or other liberals picked by Margarita Simonyan? In my opinion, no. What do you think, respectable subscribers?

Putin Expels the Families

November 19, 2020

Putin Expels the Families

by The Ister for The Saker Blog

The 1990s was a time of immense suffering for the Russian people. As the impending collapse of the USSR became discernable, insiders such as Nikolai Kruchina, Viktor Geraschenko, and Leonid Veselovsky created a planning group to ensure the continued influence of Soviet-era officials by transferring Russian state assets to offshore shell companies and thus stripping the country’s wealth. One such offshore company, FIMACO, was used to pilfer an estimated $50 billion from the nation. Viktor Gerashchenko, the head of the central bank of Russia, sent a memorandum demanding transfers from FIMACO be covered up. It was through this looting that liquid capital was generated and used by future oligarchs to build their fortunes. An early beneficiary of this arrangement was Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who had started his career as a minor Soviet official and whose Yukos oil conglomerate was tied to FIMACO. In return for his help Viktor Gerashchenko was later given a position as the chairman of Yukos by Khodorkovsky.

In 1991 the Soviet Union finally collapsed. That August, state treasurer Nikolai Kruchina, responsible for Russia’s gold reserves, died by falling from his window. He had been a member of the planning group which originated the plot to steal state assets. His successor Georgy Pavlov fell to his death from a window two months later: the oligarchs were cleaning house.

In September, the Russian central bank announced the Kremlin’s gold reserves had inexplicably dropped from the estimated 1000-1500 tons to a mere 240 tons. Two months later, Victor Gerashchenko announced Russia’s gold reserves had actually entirely vanished. While the Russian public was horrified at the revelation, European bankers were less surprised. It was whispered frequently among those circles that Soviet transport planes had been flying to and from Switzerland for months and selling off large amounts of gold. Boris Yeltsin announced his plans to privatize the nation’s assets and the real looting began.

During the privatization period, international capital wasted no time in opportunistically swooping in to take over Russian industries. The Clinton administration sought to redesign the economic policies of the nascent Russian Federation according to the Washington Consensus: privatization, deregulation, austerity, and the opening up of Russia’s companies to purchase by ultra-wealthy Americans. They gave the role of economic planning in Russia to the Harvard Institute for International Development, which sent Harvard economists to meet with Anatoly Chubais, Boris Yeltsin’s head of privatization. The close relationship with Anatoly Chubais allowed a select group of American investors to be on an inside track of financial dealings in the new Russia. One Harvard grad involved in this scheme was Jonathan Hay, convicted inside trader. He became senior advisor to the GKI, Russia’s new state privatization committee.

Certain members of this network, which included Harvard graduates Hay, Jeffrey Sachs, Andrei Shleifer, Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, David Lipton, and others, misused funds from USAID that were intended for Russian economic development and rigged deals for privatization to gain control of key Russian industries in backroom negotiations. In one 1995 off market deal, Anatoly Chubais created a closed bidding process for prime national properties in which the only approved bidders were Harvard Management Company and George Soros. This resulted in the acquisition of major stakes in Sidanko Oil, Novolipetsk Steel, and Sviazinvest.

Foreign investors flocked in and the level of greed among this fifth column of new Muscovites was truly astonishing. The 1999 RICO suit Avisma Titano Magnes v. Dart Management is particularly enlightening. RICO allows victims of a racketeering conspiracy to sue conspirators for damages caused by their illegal conduct, and the following defendants were named in the action:

Kenneth Dart; Dart Management Inc, address unknown
Jonathan Hay; Dart Management Inc, address unknown
Michael Haywood; Dart Management Inc, address unknown
Michael Hunter; Dart Management Inc
Francis E. Baker; Andersen Group Inc
William Browder, Hermitage Fund
Barclays Bank, PLC

The complaint document alleges the following: the defendants and a cooperating bank called Bank Menatep, owned by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, had a controlling interest in titanium producer Avisma. They forced Avisma to sell its titanium below market price to offshore companies which they secretly controlled. Next, these offshore companies sold the titanium at a correct price on international markets for profit, which was then funneled back from the offshore companies to the defendants and Bank Menatep. Money that should have been booked as profits for Avisma was siphoned away, and the majority shareholders who were in on the scam benefitted at the expense of minority shareholders, the company, and Russian tax authorities.

Defendant Francis E. Baker described the actions in a private letter as, “An immense Russian bank money laundering scheme, clearly a criminal matter.” According to the complaint, the actions were discovered when defendants attempted to swap Avisma shares for shares of mining company VSMPO and replicate the same scam at VSMPO. Baker and other defendants later excused their actions by claiming the suit was Russian targeting. Sound familiar?

The criminality was not limited to foreign speculators. During the early period of privatization in the 90s a secret society of seven Russian oligarchs entirely controlled Boris Yeltsin’s administration. This group called itself Semibankirschina, named after the Seven Boyars who controlled Russia during the 17th centuryThe secret society included the following oligarchs: Boris Berezovsky, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven, Vladimir Gusinsky, Vladimir Potanin, and Alexander Smolensky.

A Russian journalist named Andrey Fadin described their overwhelming power in an article, “they control the access to budget money and basically all investment opportunities inside the country. They own the gigantic information resource of the major TV channels. They form the President’s opinion. Those who didn’t want to walk along them were either strangled or left the circle.” Less than one year after publishing the article Andrey Fadin was killed. Through their front man Anatoly Chubais, Semibankirschina used control of television networks to prop up Boris Yeltsin’s low approval ratings. From the mid-90s to 1999 this clique had total authority over Russian policies and industries, judiciously using violence to enforce its monopoly. In one case Mikhail Khodorkovsky and his underling Leonid Nevzlin carried out the murder of the mayor Vladimir Petukhov, who was pursuing Yukos Oil Company’s evasion of taxes.

In late 1999, Vladimir Putin became president of Russia and the fortunes of these self-appointed rulers rapidly turned for the worse. A new group of Putin insiders such as Gennady Timchenko, Vladimir Yakunin, and Sergey Chemezov formed and began supplanting the previous access that the Semibankirschina had to the president. In 2001, a state takeover of media seized the television networks previously owned by oligarchs Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Gusinsky, and Badri Patarkatsishvili, prompting Patarkatsishvili to denounce Russia to the New York Times and flee the country. While exiled in the UK, Patarkatsishvili died suspiciously at the age of 48. The Georgian government has called his death an assassination. Boris Berezovsky also died suspiciously in the UK after having sold his Russian assets and denounced Putin. After his television networks were seized, Vladimir Gusinsky was criminally charged with money laundering and forced to flee the country as well.

The sweep continued as three other allies of the Semibankirschina were killed: Nikolai Glushkov, Alexander Litvinenko, and Boris Nemtsov. Bill Browder was deported in 2005, and later convicted in absentia for fraud. Fraudster Konstantin Ponomarev was also convicted, sentenced to 8 years in prison for crimes relating to his extortion of $1 billion from IKEA. Jamison Firestone, an associate of Ponomarev and Browder, was forced to flee Russia due to his involvement in the Magnitsky case, and his associate Alexander Peripilichny mysteriously died while jogging near London. George Soros was banned from Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan.

Once the richest man in the country, Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s fortunes turned for the worse as well. In the early 2000s, Putin pushed through a number of populist reforms for criminal, tax, and land law, which the oligarchs of the 90s had strongly opposed. As the most blatantly criminal member of the original Semibankirschina, Khodorkovsky’s Bank Menatep had been founded with funds stolen as part of the looting of state assets. The bank operated as a hub of money laundering and engaged in countless financial scams, even delaying government funds to Chernobyl victims while using their money to financially speculate. It was Bank Menatep through which American fraudsters had allegedly ripped off Avisma shareholders with the titanium dumping scam.

In 2003, Khodorkovsky was criminally prosecuted by Putin for tax evasion and fraud for which he ended up serving 10 years in prison. His protege Leonid Nevzlin was convicted of ordering multiple contract murders on Khodorkovsky’s behalf, and sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia. Associate Platon Lebedev was also convicted and imprisoned. This wave of prosecution sent a message and gave Putin a strong position, which was used to negotiate a “grand bargain” with the remaining oligarchs: they retained most of their existing assets in return for alignment with Putin’s vertical rule of Russia. The era of financial gangsterism from the 1990s was over.

Stolen Russian gold reserves have now been restored and are at the highest levels in history. Because of the lack of collaboration with other central banks it is certain that Russian gold is present in Moscow’s vaults: there are none of the surreptitious leasing or swap agreements which call into question the claimed size of Western bank holdings. So instead of buying US treasuries or dollars for its reserves, the Bank of Russia can demand physical gold delivery into Moscow vaults. This will continually strain the fraudulent COMEX and London Bullion Market systems with the pressure of physical shipments and threaten the dollar. Unlike China, Russia is in the position to attack the dollar as a net commodity exporter, meaning when its gold purchases bid up the price of metals it is simply increasing the receipts of its own domestic commodity producing companies like Norilsk Nickel and VSMPO-AVISMA.

The economic crisis of 1998 has heavily influenced the Kremlin’s financial policy, and the last twenty years have been spent creating a resilient system. One of Putin’s first agenda items was to pay off all debt to the IMF and holdover loans from the Soviet era. Russia is now positioned to attack the dollar, as the only powerful state not operating on a debt-based system. A decade of economic warfare in the form of sanctions has cut off access to international capital: the result is one of the lowest levels of external debt of any country in the world, with cash reserves large enough to pay off all debt at once. These low debt levels have tangible benefits, primarily that Russia is now able to withstand large economic fluctuations without crumbling as a result of internal defaults. By comparison, the financial system of America would disintegrate if it attempted to sustain the decline in GDP Russia incurred from 2013-2016.

The Bank of Russia actively enforces stringent lending standards in order to prevent the emergence of consumer credit bubbles, and forces banks to hold extra cash on their balance sheets (as a result, most applications for personal credit are declined). So sanctions have actually made the country stronger, as hubris of the McCain class of American politicians has created a competitor state with no stake in the survival of the existing debt-based financial order. Russia’s mission to create resiliency and restore sovereignty foreshadows a tumultuous future, while America bets everything that the world will remain the same. The concerted plot to loot Russia has been foiled.

In December of 1999, Edmond Safra was murdered at his fabulous mansion, the Villa Leopolda in Monaco. The Safras are one of the oldest and most secretive of the banking families, with a fortune dating back to the gold trading caravans of the Ottoman Empire. Coincidentally, Safra means yellow, or gold, in Arabic. It was Edmond Safra who served as Bill Browder’s mentor in Russia, providing him with an initial seed funding of $25 million to start his Hermitage Fund. When Browder needed protection during a business dispute with an oligarch, Safra sent his emissary four armored vehicles and fifteen bodyguards led by a former Mossad agent. While Edmond Safra spent much of his later life defending himself from drug trafficking and money laundering allegations, he was accomplished, nonetheless. He founded his first bank at 23 years old and had dreamed of creating a banking dynasty that would last 10,000 years.

Just after Putin’s takeover as president, Villa Leopolda was broken into. Safra’s nurse, a former Green Beret named Ted Maher, was stabbed by two masked intruders who entered the premises, after which Safra was killed. Under pressure from Monacan authorities, Ted Maher was forced to sign a nonsensical confession in which he claimed that he stabbed himself and admitted to setting the fire in order to attempt to gain his employer’s adoration. He has since recanted this confession, saying that his defense attorneys coerced him into signing and threatened he would never see his family again otherwise. Jean-Christophe Hullin, the chief judge in the case, revealed in 2007 that the guilty conviction was a predetermined outcome which had been planned in a secret meeting with himself, Maher’s attorneys, and the chief prosecutor of Monaco: in short, Ted Maher was a fall guy for the real murderers of Edmond Safra. Now free, he believes Safra was ordered killed by Putin, “in retaliation for a plot orchestrated by Safra and Russian oligarchs to take control of all of Russia’s assets.”

It was during the purge of oligarchs and vulture capitalists that the true power behind Mikhail Khodorkovsky emerged. When it became likely he would be arrested, he arranged to have all his shares from the Yukos Oil Company transferred to the ownership of Jacob Rothschild. The transfer took place in November of 2003, giving Lord Rothschild control of shares estimated by the Sunday Times to be worth $13.5 billion. Putin subsequently liquidated and nationalized Yukos by seizing and selling off its shares to state oil companies at much below market value.

So Putin has declared war on the most powerful people on the planet.

The Ister is a researcher of financial markets and geopolitics. Author of The Ister: Escape America

Is the Russian Ministry of Finance Sabotaging Putin’s Decision? (Ruslan Ostashko)

Is the Russian Ministry of Finance Sabotaging Putin’s Decision? (Ruslan Ostashko)

August 12, 2020

Translated and captioned by Leo.

The attempt to sabotage the [Russian] President’s decision to pull the tail of offshore optimizers seems to be the work of the Ministry of Finance. The profile of the ministry, with the head of Anton Siluanov, has set back the actions of preventing withdrawal of dividends without taxation until the beginning of 2024. Which once again brings up the question about, “who do the Russian liberals in power work for?”

A very controversial decision was made at the end of July by the Ministry of Finance. I’ll remind you. Earlier, Vladimir Putin proposed to introduce a 15% tax on the output of dividends into offshore zones. And the government quickly went into a decisive action. For example, with the laws of the Republic of Cyprus, there was a letter about the change in their agreement for taxation. A few months went by with negotiations. Cypriots didn’t agree with terms, so as a result of this, Russia recently tore up the agreement in a one-sided manner. It would seem that everything is going according to the plan proposed by the President. But in light of the actions by the Ministry of Finance, it puts the question on the refusal of actually attaining the proposed goals for upcoming years.

Article title: “The Ministry of Finance Will Extend the Possibility of Withdrawing Dividends Abroad Without Taxes”. Businesses have lobbied for the transition period until 2024 to pay for the dividends offshore with a 0% tax under certain conditions. The Ministry of Finance wanted to completely close this loophole by the beginning of next year.

As RBK Group media reported in the Ministry of Finance: “The proposed bill was discussed with the involvement of the business community to develop an optimal mechanism for applying the benefits as for the state, and the same way for business, in order to prevent a sharp increase in the tax burden, following the discussion, a compromise decision was made on a transition period (before December 31, 2023) for the application of this long process and the need to comply with certain conditions for its retrieval. The amendments were submitted for consideration to the government.”

Am I the only one who sees that with the phrasing of these words, businesses lobbied for actions of criminal offense? I’ll remind you that it’s in the USA where lobbyism is legalized. But here [in Russia] it’s in fact called ‘corruption’. Maybe the Ministry of Finance’s press service will sound out the name of the company which influenced the official on the question about delaying the term in introducing the 15% tax on outsourced dividends? Which would allow our comrades from the FSB to visit these companies.

It looks like Russia’s liberal Minister of Finance completely confused which side of the ocean he’s supposed to be on. We know very well what happens with the output of money from Russia into offshore accounts with no taxes. For those who don’t know, it won’t be that hard to find out after reading on the aftermath of the accident in the Arctic. (Article featured in video: https://www.forbes.ru/obshchestvo-photogallery/402193-krupneyshaya-katastrofa-v-arktike-chto-izvestno-o-razlive-topliva) Which was caused by the ‘I don’t care’ attitude by the company leadership of Nornickel. This corporation exploits Russian natural resources and shareholders move them into the offshore accounts without paying any taxes. But if they had paid it, then the government could have used this money to make decisions themselves, without expecting responsibility from light clothes-wearing talk-managers to answer those same questions related to ecology. But for the Minister of Finance, the opinions of entrepreneurial networks are more important.

When it comes to buying out recent proposals by turning up the heat on privatization, it is characterized by this very Minister of Finance like the lackeys of major businesses:

Source: Lenta.ru – “From the period until 2025, the number of companies with state participation should be reduced 1.5 times to 961 enterprises, such figures are contained in the plan of activities of the Ministry of Finance of Russia for 2020 until 2025. The department is gathered to consistently fight against state participation in the economy. In 2020, the number of state companies should fall to 1465, in 2021 – down to 1319, in 2022 – down to 1187, in 2023 – down to 1068.”

Has there been not enough privatization frauds in Russia with their consequences? There were only a little amount of ‘effective owners’ that harmed our fellow citizens, like that same owner of the shopping center ‘Winter Cherry’ in Kemerovo. While sitting abroad and regularly receiving his rent money, he hired ‘effective managers’ which didn’t care about fire safety. Do we really need more effective bloodsuckers to cause accidents and death? Or maybe we need to get rid of the rotten liberals in the Ministry of Finance who are clearly serving not the government of the Russian society, but instead those same ‘effective owners’. Otherwise it’s looking like the Prime Minister changed, but the liberal path of independent ministries has remained unchanged:

Source: Lenta.ru – “In January, even before the resignation of Dmitry Medvedev’s government, the Ministry of Finance published forecasts for a privatization plan for 2020-2022. It mentioned within three years the sale of 86 federal unitary enterprises, 186 joint-stock companies, 1168 facilities and 13 shares of state participation in limited liability companies.”

I am personally against a written path, and I express my lack of trust in the Minister who pushes these kind of politics. If you agree with me, then I suggest you to spread this information on social media, demanding that we remove Anton Siluanov from the post of Minister of Finance. Enough already, he’s ruled long enough. Let the post become available to someone who will carry out the orders of the President of Russia, instead of sabotaging them.

Russia and the next Presidential election in the USA

Source

Intro: not a pretty picture

Let’s begin with a disclaimer: in this article, I will assume that there will be a US Presidential election in the Fall. Right now, it appears to be likely that this election will take place (there appear to be no legal way to cancel or delay it), but this is by no means certain (see here for a machine translated and very interesting article by one Russian analyst, who predicts a diarchy after the election). Right now, the state of the US society is both extremely worried (and for good reason) and potentially explosive. It is impossible to predict what a well-executed false flag attack could do to the US. There is also the possibility of either a natural disaster (hurricane, earthquake, etc.) or even an unnatural one (considering the condition of the US infrastructure, this is almost inevitable) which could precipitate some kind of state of emergency or martial law to “protect” the people. Finally, though at this point in time I don’t see this as very likely, there is always the possibility of a coup of some kind, maybe a “government of national unity” with the participation of both parties which, as Noam Chomsky correctly points out, are basically only two factions of what could be called the Business Party. There might come a point when they decide to drop this pretense too (just look at how many other pretenses the US ruling elites have dropped in the last decade or so).

Alexander Solzhenitsyn used to explain that all governments can be placed on a continuum ranging from, on one end, “states whose power is based on their authority” to, on the other end, “states whose authority is based on their power“. In the real world, most states are somewhere between these two extremes. But it is quite obvious that the US polity currently has gone very far down the “states whose authority is based on their power” path and to speak of any kind of “moral authority” of US politicians is really a joke. The (probable) upcoming “choice” between Donald “grab them by the pussy” Trump and Joe “creepy uncle” Biden will make this joke even more laughable.

Right now, the most powerful force in the US political system must be the financial sector. And, of course, there are many other powerful interest groups (MIC, Israel Lobby, the CIA and the ridiculously bloated Intel community, Big Pharma, the US Gulag, the corporate media, Oil, etc.) who all combine their efforts (just like a vector does in mathematics) to produce a “resulting vector” which we call “US policies”. That is in theory. In practice, you have several competing “policies” vying for power and influence, both on the domestic and on international front. Often these policies are mutually exclusive.

Last, but certainly not least, the level of corruption in the US is at least as bad as, say, in the Ukraine or in Liberia, but rather than being on the street and petty cash level, the corruption in the US is counted in billions of dollars.

All in all, not a pretty sight (see here for a good analysis of the decline of US power).

Yet the US remains a nuclear power and still has a lot of political influence worldwide and thus this is not a country anyone can ignore. Including Russia.

A quick look at Russia

Before looking into Russian options in relation to the US, we need to take a quick look at how Russia has been faring this year. The short of it would be: not too well. The Russian economy has shrunk by about 10% and the small businesses have been devastated by the combined effects of 1) the economic policies of the Russian government and Central Bank, and 2) the devastating economic impact of the COVID19 pandemic, and 3) the full-spectrum efforts of the West, mostly by the Anglosphere, to strangle Russia economically. Politically, the “Putin regime” is still popular, but there is a sense that it is getting stale and that most Russians would prefer to see more dynamic and proactive policies aimed, not only to help the Russian mega-corporations, but also to help the regular people. Many Russians definitely have a sense that the “little guy” is being completely ignored by fat cats in power and this resentment will probably grow until and unless Putin decides to finally get rid of all the Atlantic Integrationists aka the “Washington consensus” types which are still well represented in the Russian ruling circles, including the government. So far, Putin has remained faithful to his policy of compromises and small steps, but this might change in the future as the level of frustration in the general population is likely to only grow with time.

That is not to say that the Kremlin is not trying. Several of the recent constitutional amendments adopted in a national vote had a strongly expressed “social” and “patriotic” character and they absolutely horrified the “liberal” 5th columnists who tried their best two 1) call for a boycott, and 2) denounce thousands of (almost entirely) imaginary violations of the proper voting procedures, and to 3) de-legitimize the outcome by declaring the election a “fraud”. None of that worked: the participation was high, very few actual violations were established (and those that were, had no impact on the outcome anyway) and most Russians accepted that this outcome was the result of the will of the people. Furthermore, Putin has made public the Russian strategic goals for 2030,which are heavily focused on improving the living and life conditions of average Russians (for details, see here). It is impossible to predict what will happen next, but the most likely scenario is that Russia has several, shall we say, “bumpy” years ahead, both on the domestic and on the international front.

What can Russia reasonably hope for?

This is really the key question: in the best of situations, what can Russia really hope for in the next elections? I would argue that there is really very little which Russia can hope for, if only because the russophobic hysteria started by the Democrats to defeat Trump has now apparently been completely endorsed by the Trump administration and the all the members of Congress. As for the imperial propaganda machine, it now manages to simultaneously declare that Russia tried to “steal” COVID vaccine secrets from the West AND that Russian elites were given a secret COVID vaccine this Spring. As for the US Dems, they are already announcing that the Russians are spreading “disinformation” about Biden. Talk about PRE-traumatic stress disorder (to use the phrase coined by my friend Gilad Atzmon)…

Although I have no way of knowing what is really taking place in the delusional minds of US politicians, I am strongly suspecting that the latest hysteria about “Russia stealing COV19 vaccine secrets” is probably triggered by the conclusion of the US intel community that Russia will have a vaccine ready before the US does. This is, of course, something absolutely unthinkable for US politicians who, (sort of) logically conclude that “if these Russkies got a vaccine first, they *must* have stolen it from us” or something similar (see here for a good analysis of this). And if the Chinese get there first, same response. After all, who in the US legacy media would ever even mention that Russian or Chinese researchers might be ahead of their US colleagues? Nobody, of course.

I would argue that this mantric Russia-bashing is something which will not change in the foreseeable future. For one thing, since the imperial ruling elites have clearly lost control of the situation, they really have no other option left than to blame it all on some external agent. The “terrorist threat” has lost a lot of traction over the past years, the “Muslim threat” is too politically incorrect to openly blame it all on Islam, as for the other boogeymen which US Americans like to scare themselves at night with (immigrants, drug dealers, sex offenders, “domestic terrorists”, etc.) they simply cannot be blamed for stuff like a crashing economy. But Russia, and China, can.

In fact, ever since the (self-evidently ridiculous) “Skripal case” the collective West has proven that it simply does not have the spine to say “no”, or even “maybe”, to any thesis energetically pushed forward by the AngloZionist propaganda machine. Thus no matter how self-evidently silly the imperial propaganda is, the people in the West have been conditioned (literally) to accept any nonsense as “highly likely” as long as it is proclaimed with enough gravitas by politicians and their legacy ziomedia. As for the leaders of the EU, we already know that they will endorse any idiocy coming out of Washington or London in the name of “solidarity”.

Truth be told, most Russian politicians (with the notable exception of the official Kremlin court jester, Zhirinovskii) and analysts never saw Trump as a potential ally or friend. The Kremlin was especially cautious, which leads me to believe that the Russian intelligence analysts did a very good job evaluating Trump’s psyche and they quickly figured out that he was no better than any other US politician. Right now, I know of no Russian analyst who would predict that relations between the US and Russia will improve in the foreseeable future. If anything, most are clearly saying that “guys, we better get used to this” (accusations, sanctions, accusations, sanctions, etc. etc. etc.). Furthermore, it is pretty obvious to the Russians that while Crimea and MH17 were the pretexts for western sanctions against Russia, they were not the real cause. The real cause of the West’s hatred for Russia is as simple as it is old: Russia cannot be conquered, subdued, subverted or destroyed. They’ve been at it for close to 1,000 years and they still are at it. In fact, each time they fail to crush Russia, their russophobia increases to even higher levels (phobia both in the sense of “fear” and in the sense of “hatred”).

Simply put – there is nothing which Russia can expect from the upcoming election. Nothing at all. Still, that does not mean that things are not better than 4 or 8 years ago. Let’s look at what changed.

The big difference between now and then

What did Trump’s election give to the world?

I would say four years for Russia to fully prepare for what might be coming next.

I would argue that since at least Russia and the AngloZionist Empire have been at war since at least 2013, when Russia foiled the US plan to attack Syria under the pretext that it was “highly likely” that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons against civilians (in reality, a textbook case of a false flag organized by the Brits), This means that Russia and the Empire have been at war since at least 2013, for no less than seven years (something which Russian 6th columnists and Neo-Marxists try very hard to ignore).

True, at least until now, this was has been 80% informational, 15% economic and only 5% kinetic, but this is a real existential war of survival for both sides: only one side will walk away from this struggle. The other one will simply disappear (not as a nation or a people, but as a polity; a regime). The Kremlin fully understood that and it embarked on a huge reform and modernization of the Russian armed forces in three distinct ways:

  1. A “general” reform of the Russian armed forces which had to be modernized by about 80%. This part of the reform is now practically complete.
  2. A specific reform to prepare the western and southern military districts for a major conventional war against the united West (as always in Russian history) which would involve the First Guards Tank Army and the Russian Airborne Forces.
  3. The development of bleeding-edge weapons systems with no equivalent in the West and which cannot be countered or defeated; these weapons have had an especially dramatic impact upon First Strike Stability and upon naval operations.

While some US politicians understood what was going on (I think of Ron Paul, see here), most did not. They were so brainwashed by the US propaganda that they were sure that no matter what, “USA! USA! USA!”. Alas for them, the reality was quite different.

Russian officials, by the way, have confirmed that Russia was preparing for war. Heck, the reforms were so profound and far reaching, that it would have been impossible for the Russians to hide what they were doing (see here for details; also please see Andrei Martyanov’s excellent primer on the new Russian Navy here).

While no country is ever truly prepared for war, I would argue that by 2020 the Russians had reached their goals and that now Russia is fully prepared to handle any conflict the West might throw at her, ranging from a small border incident somewhere in Central Asia to a full-scaled war against the US/NATO in Europe.

Folks in the West are now slowly waking up to this new reality (I mentioned some of that here), but it is too late. In purely military terms, Russia has now created such a qualitative gap with the West that the still existing quantitative gap is not sufficient to guarantee a US/NATO victory. Now some western politicians are starting to seriously freak out (see this lady, for example), but most Europeans are coming to terms with two truly horrible realities:

  1. Russia is much stronger than Europe and, even much worse,
  2. Russia will never attack first (which is a major cause of frustration for western russophobes)

As for the obvious solution to this problem, having friendly relations with Russia is simply unthinkable for those who made their entire careers peddling the Soviet (and now Russian) threat to the world.

But Russia is changing, albeit maybe too slowly (at least for my taste). As I mentioned last week, a number of Polish, Ukrainian and Baltic politicians have declared that the Zapad2020 military maneuvers which are supposed to take place in southern Russia and the Caucasus could be used to prepare an attack on the West (see here for a rather typical example of this nonsense). In the past, the Kremlin would only have made a public statement ridiculing this nonsense, but this time around Putin did something different. Right after he saw the reaction of these politicians, Putin ordered a major and UNSCHEDULED military readiness exercise which involved no less than 150,000 troops, 400 aircraft & 100 ships! The message here was clear:

  1. Yes, we are much more powerful than you are and
  2. No, we are not apologizing for our strength anymore

And, just to make sure that the message is clear, the Russians also tested the readiness of the Russian Airborne Forces units near the city of Riazan, see for yourself:

This response is, I think, the correct one. Frankly, nobody in the West is listening to what the Kremlin has to say, so what is the point of making more statements which in the future will be ignored equally as they have been in the past.

If anything, the slow realization that Russia is more powerful than NATO would be most helpful in gently prodding EU politicians to change their tune and return back to reality. Check out this recent video of Sarah Wagenknecht, a leading politician of the German Left and see for yourself:

The example of Sahra Wagenknecht is interesting, because she is from Germany, one of the countries of northern Europe; traditionally, northern European powers have been much more anti-Russian than southern Europeans, so it is encouraging to see that the anti-Putin and anti-Russia hysteria is not always being endorsed by everybody.

But if things are very slowly getting better in the EU, in the bad old US of A things are only getting worse. Even the Republicans are now fully on board the Russia-hating float (right behind a “gay pride” one I suppose) and they are now contributing their own insanity to the cause, as this article entitled “Congressional Republicans: Russia should be designated state sponsor of terror” shows (designating Russia as a terrorist state is an old idea of the Dems, by the way).

Russian options for the Fall

In truth, Russia does not have any particularly good options towards the US. Both parties are now fully united in their rabid hatred of Russia (and China too, of course). Furthermore, while there are many well-funded and virulently anti-Russian organizations in the US (Neo-cons, Papists, Poles, Masons, Ukrainians, Balts, Ashkenazi Jews, etc.), Russian organizations in the US like this one, have very little influence or even relevance.

Banderites marching in the US

Banderites marching in the US

However, as the chaos continues to worsen inside the US and as US politicians continue to alienate pretty much the entire planet, Russia does have a perfect opportunity to weaken the US grip on Europe. The beauty in the current dynamic is that Russia does not have to do anything at all (nevermind anything covert or illegal) to help the anti-EU and anti-US forces in Europe: All she needs to do is to continuously hammer in the following simple message: “the US is sinking – do you really want to go down with it?”.

There are many opportunities to deliver that message. The current US/Polish efforts to prevent the EU from enjoying cheap Russian gas might well be the best example of what we could call “European suicide politics”, but there are many, many more.

Truth be told, neither the US nor the EU are a top priority for Russia, at least not in economic terms. The moral credibility of the West in general can certainly be described as dead and long gone. As for the West military might, it is only a concern to the degree that western politicians might be tempted to believe their own propaganda about their military forces being the best in the history of the galaxy. This is why Russia regularly engages in large surprise exercises: to prove to the West that the Russian military is fully ready for anything the West might try. As for the constant move of more and more US/NATO forces closer to the borders of Russia, they are offensive in political terms, but in military terms, getting closer to Russia only means that Russia will have more options to destroy you. “Forward deployment” is really a thing of the past, at least against Russia.

With time, however, and as the US federal center loses even more of its control of the country, the Kremlin might be well-advised to try to open some venues for “popular diplomacy”, especially with less hostile US states. The weakening of the Executive Branch has already resulted in US governors playing an increasingly important international role and while this is not, strictly speaking, legal (only the federal government has the right to engage in foreign policy), the fact is that this has been going on for years already.

The example of Sahra Wagenknecht is interesting, because she is from Germany, one of the countries of northern Europe; traditionally, northern European powers have been much more anti-Russian than southern Europeans, so it is encouraging to see that the anti-Putin and anti-Russia hysteria is not always being endorsed by everybody.

But if things are very slowly getting better in the EU, in the bad old US of A things are only getting worse. Even the Republicans are now fully on board the Russia-hating float (right behind a “gay pride” one I suppose) and they are now contributing their own insanity to the cause, as this article entitled “Congressional Republicans: Russia should be designated state sponsor of terror” shows (designating Russia as a terrorist state is an old idea of the Dems, by the way).

Russian options for the Fall

In truth, Russia does not have any particularly good options towards the US. Both parties are now fully united in their rabid hatred of Russia (and China too, of course). Furthermore, while there are many well-funded and virulently anti-Russian organizations in the US (Neo-cons, Papists, Poles, Masons, Ukrainians, Balts, Ashkenazi Jews, etc.), Russian organizations in the US like this one, have very little influence or even relevance.

Banderites marching in the US

Banderites marching in the US

However, as the chaos continues to worsen inside the US and as US politicians continue to alienate pretty much the entire planet, Russia does have a perfect opportunity to weaken the US grip on Europe. The beauty in the current dynamic is that Russia does not have to do anything at all (nevermind anything covert or illegal) to help the anti-EU and anti-US forces in Europe: All she needs to do is to continuously hammer in the following simple message: “the US is sinking – do you really want to go down with it?”.

There are many opportunities to deliver that message. The current US/Polish efforts to prevent the EU from enjoying cheap Russian gas might well be the best example of what we could call “European suicide politics”, but there are many, many more.

Truth be told, neither the US nor the EU are a top priority for Russia, at least not in economic terms. The moral credibility of the West in general can certainly be described as dead and long gone. As for the West military might, it is only a concern to the degree that western politicians might be tempted to believe their own propaganda about their military forces being the best in the history of the galaxy. This is why Russia regularly engages in large surprise exercises: to prove to the West that the Russian military is fully ready for anything the West might try. As for the constant move of more and more US/NATO forces closer to the borders of Russia, they are offensive in political terms, but in military terms, getting closer to Russia only means that Russia will have more options to destroy you. “Forward deployment” is really a thing of the past, at least against Russia.

With time, however, and as the US federal center loses even more of its control of the country, the Kremlin might be well-advised to try to open some venues for “popular diplomacy”, especially with less hostile US states. The weakening of the Executive Branch has already resulted in US governors playing an increasingly important international role and while this is not, strictly speaking, legal (only the federal government has the right to engage in foreign policy), the fact is that this has been going on for years already. Another possible partner inside the US for Russian firms would be US corporations (especially now that they are hurting badly). Finally, I think that the Kremlin ought to try to open channels of communication with the various small political forces in the US which are clearly not buying into the official propaganda: libertarians, (true) liberals and progressives, paleo-conservatives.

What we are witnessing before our eyes is the collapse of the US federal center. This is a dangerous and highly unstable moment in our history. But from this crisis opportunities will arise. The best thing Russia can do now is to simply remain very careful and vigilant and wait for new forces to appear on the US political scene.

Another possible partner inside the US for Russian firms would be US corporations (especially now that they are hurting badly). Finally, I think that the Kremlin ought to try to open channels of communication with the various small political forces in the US which are clearly not buying into the official propaganda: libertarians, (true) liberals and progressives, paleo-conservatives.

What we are witnessing before our eyes is the collapse of the US federal center. This is a dangerous and highly unstable moment in our history. But from this crisis opportunities will arise. The best thing Russia can do now is to simply remain very careful and vigilant and wait for new forces to appear on the US political scene.

رسالة موجهة من قنديل إلى زاسيبكين: نأمل أن يتسع صدر القيادة الروسية للتعامل مع هذه العريضة المرفقة كتعبير صادق عن الصداقة

الصديق العزيز المحب لشعوبنا والمناصر لقضايانا

سعادة السفير الكسندر زاسيبكين المحترم

تحية الصداقة وبعد

Photo of في ذكرى اغتصاب فلسطين اقتراح للتفكير… ومبادرة سلام القدس عليكم وصباح القدس لكم

في ضوء تكرار بعض وسائل الإعلام في روسيا لتعامل خارج عن المهنية والموضوعية ومخالف لمدوّنات سلوك الإعلام الحر بالمعايير العالمية، وهو ما نؤمن به ونتمسك بحمايته، ونشرها معلومات مفبركة تسيء للدولة الروسية وللعلاقات الروسية العربية، أو فتح المجال لضيوف مبتذلين لا يمثلون شيئاً ليقوموا بالإساءة للقضايا العربية، ورموزها، وفي مقدمتهم صديق روسيا وحليفها الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد، فيما يجري الالتزام باحترام سائر قادة الدول بمن فيهم خصوم روسيا، وفقاً لموجبات القانون والمدونات المهنية، ما يشكل عملاً مبرمجاً لاستثارة الغضب والإيحاء بأن روسيا لا تقيم اعتباراً لمفهوم سيادة الدول وشرعيتها الدستورية، وهو العنوان الذي تحرص الدولة الروسية على تحصينه وتثبيته، وقد جعلته عنواناً لمشاركتها وتضحياتها في الحرب على الإرهاب في سورية، وقدّمت علاقتها بسورية كدولة وشرعية وسيادة نموذجاً لعلاقات التحالف وللعلاقات الدولية في آن واحد، في مقابل نوعية العلاقات القائمة على الاستعلاء والوصاية التي تسود التعامل الأميركي مع من تسميهم بالحلفاء، ما استدعى قيام عدد من السياسيين والمثقفين والإعلاميين والنخب في سورية والبلاد العربية من خيرة أصدقاء روسيا ومحبيها، التحرك لإسناد موقف القيادة الروسية في السعي لوضع القانون والسلوك المهني أساساً في مواصلة حماية الإعلام الحر في ظل ديمقراطية تعتز بها روسيا ونساندها.

سعادة السفير الصديق

الموقعون على هذه العريضة هم خيرة أصدقاء روسيا في العالم العربي ويعتقدون أن ما يفعلونه يعزز رؤية القيادة الروسية وعلى رأسها الرئيس الاستثنائي فلاديمير بوتين الذي نعتز به رمزاً للعالم الجديد، ووزير خارجيته المحترف السيد سيرجي لافروف، الذي نعتبره بحق وزير خارجية كل الدول المظلومة وفي مقدمتها سورية.

سعادة السفير المحترم

نأمل أن يتسع صدر القيادة الروسية للتعامل مع هذه العريضة المرفقة كتعبير صادق عن الصداقة، من مناضلين يؤمنون بأن صديقك مَن صدقك لا من صدَقَك، وأملنا أن تقوموا بإيصالها إلى المعنيين في الدولة الروسية، وأن تلقى الآذان الصاغية.

لقد شرّفني زملائي برفع هذه العريضة عبركم، كما سيقوم زملاء في عواصم عربية أخرى، بتقديمها لسفارات روسيا الاتحادية.

مع الشكر والتقدير سلفاً

ناصر قنديل – نائب لبناني سابق – مقرّر لجنة الإعلام والاتصالات النيابية سابقاً

رئيس سابق للمجلس الوطني للإعلام المرئي والمسموع

رئيس تحرير صحيفة البناء اليومية السياسية القومية

بيروت في 14-5-2020.

Is there a 6th column trying to subvert Russia?

THE SAKER • APRIL 30, 2020 

For those of us who followed the Russian Internet there is a highly visible phenomenon taking place which is quite startling: there are a lot of anti-Putin videos posted on YouTube or its Russian equivalents. Not only that, but a flurry of channels has recently appeared which seem to have made bashing Putin or Mishustin their full-time job. Of course, there have always been anti-Putin and anti-Medvedev videos in the past, but what makes this new wave so different from the old one is that they attack Putin and Mishustin not from pro-Western positions, but from putatively Russian patriotic positions. Even the supposed (not true) “personal advisor” to Putin and national-Bolshevik (true), Alexander Dugin has joined that movement (see here if you understand Russian).

This is a new, interesting and complex phenomenon, and I will try to unpack it here.

First, we have to remember that Putin was extremely successful at destroying the pro-Western opposition which, while shown on a daily basis on Russian TV, represents something in the 3-5% of the people at most. You might ask why they are so frequent on TV, and the reason is simple: the more they talk, the more they are hated.

So far from silencing the opposition, the Kremlin not only gives it air time, it even pays opposition figures top dollars to participate in the most popular talk shows. See here and here for more details

Truly, the reputation of the pro-Western “liberal” (in the Russian sense) opposition is now roadkill in Russia. Yes, there is a core of russophobic Russians who hate Russia with a passion (they refer to it as “Rashka”) and their hatred for everything Russian is so obvious that they are universally despised all over the country (the one big exception being Moscow where there is a much stronger “liberal” opposition which gets the support of all those who had a great time pillaging Russia in the 1990s and who now hate Putin for putting an end to their malfeasance).

As for the Duma opposition, it is an opposition only in name. They make noises, they bitch here and there, they condemn this or that, but at the end of the day, they will not represent a credible opposition at all.

Why?

Well, look at this screenshot I took from a Russian polling site:

The chart is in Russian, but it is also extremely simple to understand. On the Y axis, you see the percentage of people who “totally trust” and “mostly trust” the six politicians, in order: Putin, Mishustin, Zhirinovskii, Ziuganov, Mironov and Medvedev. The the X axis you see the time frame going from July 2019 to April 2020.

The only thing which really matters is this: 

in spite all the objective and subjective problems of Russia, in spite of a widely unpopular pension reform, in spite of all the western sanctions and in spite of the pandemic, Putin still sits alone in a rock-solid position: he has the overwhelming support of the Russian people. This single cause pretty much explains everything else I will be talking about today.

As most of you probably remember, there were already several waves of anti-Putin PSYOPS in the past, but they all failed for very simple reasons:

  1. Most Russians remember the horrors of the 1990s when the pro-Western “liberals” were in power.
  2. Second, the Russian people could observe how the West put bona fide rabidly russophobic Nazis in power in Kiev. The liberals expressed a great deal of sympathy for the Ukronazi regime. Few Russians doubt that if the pro-western “liberals” got to power, they would turn Russia into something very similar to today’s Ukraine.
  3. Next, the Russians could follow, day after day, how the Ukraine imploded, went through a bloody civil war, underwent a almost total de-industrialization and ended up with a real buffoon as President (Zelenskii just appointed, I kid you not, Saakashvili as Vice Prime Minister of the Ukraine, that is all you need to know to get the full measure of what kind of clueless imbecile Zelenskii is!). Not only do the liberals blame Russia for what happened to this poor country, they openly support Zelenskii.
  4. Most (all?) of the pro-western “NGO” (I put that in quotation marks, because these putatively non-governmental organization were entirely financed by western governments, mostly US and UK) were legally forced to reveal their sources of financing and most of them got listed as “foreign agents”. Others were simply kicked out of Russia. Thus, it became impossible for the AngloZionists to trigger what appeared to be “mass protests” under these condition.
  5. There is a solid “anti-Maidan” movement in Russia (including in Moscow!) which is ready to “pounce” (politically) in case of any Maidan-like movement in Russia. I strongly suspect that the FSB has a warm if unofficial collaboration with them.
  6. The Russian internal security services (FSB, FSO, National Guard, etc.) saw a major revival under Putin and they are now not only more powerful than in the past, but also much better organized to deal with subversion. As for the armed forces are solidly behind Putin and Shoigu. While in the 1990s Russia was basically defenseless, Russia today is a very tough nut to crack for western subversion/PSYOP operations.
  7. Last, but not least, the Russian liberals are so obviously from the class Alexander Solzhenitsyn referred to as “obrazovanshchina“, a word hard to translate but which roughly means “pretend educated”: these folks have always considered themselves very superior to the vast majority of the Russian people and they simply cannot hide their contempt for the “common man” (very similar to Hillary’s “deporables”). The common man fully realizes that and, quite logically, profoundly distrusts and even hates “liberals”.

There came a moment when the western curators of the Russian 5th column realized that calling Putin names in the western press, or publicly accusing him of being a “bloody despot” and a “KGB killer” might work with the gullible and brainwashed western audience, but it got absolutely no traction whatsoever in Russia.

And then, somebody, somewhere (I don’t know who, or where) came up with an truly brilliant idea: accusing Putin of not being a patriot and declare that he is a puppet in the hands of the AngloZionist Empire. This was nothing short of brilliant, I have to admit that.

First, they tried to sell the idea that Putin was about to “sell out” (or “trade”) Novorussia. One theory was that Russia would stand by and let the Ukronazis invade Novorussia. Another one was that the US and Russia would make a secret deal and “give” Syria to Putin, if he “gave” Novorussia to the Empire. Alternatively, there was the version that Russia would “give” Syria to Trump and he would “give” Novorussia to Putin. The actual narrative does not matter. What matters, A LOT, is that Putin was not presented as the “new Hitler” who would invade Poland and the Baltics, who would poison the Skripals, who would hack DNC servers and “put Trump into power”. These plain stupid fairy tales had not credibility in Russia. But Putin “selling out” Novorussia was much more credible, especially after it was clear that Russia did not allow the DNR/LNR forces to seize Mariupol.

I remain convinced that this was the correct decision. Why? Because had the DNR/LNR forces entered Mariupol their critical supply lines would have been cut off by an envelopment maneuver by the Ukrainian forces. Yes, the DNR/LNR forces did have the power needed to take Mariupol, but then they would end up surrounded by Ukronazi forces in a “cauldron/siege” kind of situation which would then have forced Russia to openly intervene to either support these forces. That was a no brainer in military terms, but in political terms this would have been a disaster for Russia and a dream come true to the AngloZionists who could (finally!) “prove” that Russia was involved all along. The folks in the Russian General Staff are clearly much smarter than the couch-generals which were accusing Russia of treason for now letting Mariupol be liberated.

Eventually, both the “sellout Syria” and the “sellout Novorussia” narratives lost their traction and the PSYOPS specialists in the West tried another good one: Putin became the obedient servant of Israel and, personally, Netanyahu. The arguments were very similar: Putin did not allow Syrians (or Russians) to shoot down Israeli aircraft over the Mediterranean or Lebanon, Putin did not use the famous S-400 to protect Syrian targets from Israeli strikes, and Putin did not land an airborne division in Syria to deal with the Takfiris. And nevermind here the fact that the officially declared Russian objectives in Syria were only to “stabilize the legitimate authority and create conditions for a political compromise” (see herefor details). The simple truth is that Putin never said that he would liberate each square meter of Syrian land from the Takfiris nor did he promise to defend Syria against Israel!

Still, for a while the Internet was inundated with articles claiming that Putin and Netanyahu were closely coordinating their every step and that Putin was Israel’s chum.

Eventually, this canard also lost a lot of credibility. After all, most folks are smart enough to realize that if Putin wanted to help Israel, all he had to do is… … well… … exactly *nothing*: the Takfiris would take Damascus and it would be “game over” for a civilized Syria and the Israelis would have a perfect pretext to intervene.

As I have already mentioned in a past article, these were the original Israeli goals for Syria:

  1. Bring down a strong secular Arab state along with its political structure, armed forces and security services.
  2. Create total chaos and horror in Syria justifying the creation of a “security zone” by Israel not only in the Golan, but further north.
  3. Trigger a civil war in Lebanon by unleashing the Takfiri crazies against Hezbollah.
  4. Let the Takfiris and Hezbollah bleed each other to death, then create a “security zone”, but this time in Lebanon.
  5. Prevent the creation of a Shia axis Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon.
  6. Breakup Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
  7. Create a Kurdistan which could then be used against Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran.
  8. Make it possible for Israel to become the uncontested power broker in the Middle-East and forces the KSA, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait and all others to have to go to Israel for any gas or oil pipeline project.
  9. Gradually isolate, threaten, subvert and eventually attack Iran with a wide regional coalition of forces.
  10. Eliminate all center of Shia power in the Middle-East.

It is quite easy nowadays to prove the two following theses:

1) Israel dismally failed to achieve ANY of the above set goals and

2) the Russian intervention is the one single most important factor which prevented Israel from achieving these goals (the 2nd most important one was the heroic support given by Iran and Hezbollah who, quite literally, “saved the day”, especially during the early phases of the Russian intervention. Only an ignorant or dishonest person could seriously claim that Russia and Israel are working together when Russia, in reality, completely defeated Israel in Syria.

Still, while the first PSYOP (Putin the new Hitler) failed, and while the second PSYOP (Putin the sellout) also failed, the PSYOP specialists in the West came up with a much more potentially dangerous and effective PSYOP operation.

But first, they did something truly brilliant: they realized that their best allies in Russia would not be the (frankly, clueless) “liberals” but that they would find a much more powerful “ally” in those nostalgic of the Soviet Union. This I have to explain in some detail.

First, there is one thing human psychology which I have observed all my life: we tend to remember the good and forget the bad. Today, most of what I remember from boot-camp (and even “survival week”) sounds like fun times. The truth is that while in boot camp I hated almost every day. In a similar way, a lot of Russian have developed a kind of nostalgia for the Soviet era. I can understand that. After all, during the 50s the USSR achieved a truly miraculous rebirth, then in the 60s and 70s there were a lot of true triumphs. Finally, even in the hated 80s the USSR did achieve absolutely spectacular things (in science, technology, etc.). This is all true. What is often forgotten is that at the same time, the Soviet society was oppressive, the corrupt and geriatric CPSU ran everything and was mostly hated, the Russian people were afraid of the KGB and could not enjoy the freedoms folks in the US or Europe had. In truth, it was a mixed bag, but it is easy to remember only the good stuff.

Furthermore, a lot of folks who had high positions during the Soviet era did lose it all. And now that Russia is objectively undergoing various difficult trials, these folks have “smelled blood” and they clearly hope that by some miracle Putin will be overthrown. He won’t, if only for the following very basic reasons:

  1. The kind of state apparatus which protects Putin today can easily deal with this new, pseudo (I will explain below why I say “pseudo”) patriotic opposition.
  2. In the ranks of this opposition there is absolutely no credible leader (remember the chart above!)
  3. This opposition mostly complains, but offers no real solutions.

The core of this opposition is formed of Communists and Communist sympathizers who absolutely hate Putin for his (quite outspoken) anti-Communism. Let’s call them “new Communists” or “Neo-Communists”. And here is what makes them much more dangerous than the “liberal” opposition: the Neo-Communists are often absolutely right.

The (in my opinion) sad reality is that, for all his immense qualities, Putin is indeed a liberal, at least an economic sense. This manifests itself in two very different ways:

  1. Putin has still not removed all of the 5th columnists (aka “Atlantic Integrationists” aka “Washington consensus” types) from power. Yes, he did ditch Medvedev, but others (Nabiulina, Siluanov, etc.) are still there.
  2. Putin inherited a very bad system where almost all they key actors were 5th columnists. Not just a few (in)famous individuals, but an entire CLASS (in a Marxist sense of the term) of people who hate anything “social” and who support “liberal” ideas just so they can fill their pockets.

Here is the paradox: the USSR died in 1991-1993, Putin is an anti-Communist, but there STILL is a (Soviet-style) Nomenklatura in Russia, except for now they are often referred to as “oligarchs” (which is incorrect because, say, the Ukrainian oligarch truly decide the fate of the nation whereas this new Russian Nomenklatura does not decide the fate of Russia as a whole, but they have a major influence in the financial sector, which is what they care mostly about).

So we have something of a, maybe not quite “perfect”, but still very dangerous storm looming over Russia. How? Consider this:

Under Putin the Russian foreign policy has been such a success that even the Russian liberals, very reluctantly, admit that he did a pretty good job. However, the internal, many financial, policies of Russia have been a disaster. Just one example, the fact that the major Russian banks are bloated with their immense revenues, did not prevent millions of Russians from living in poverty and many hundreds of thousands of Russian small/family businesses of going under due to the very high interest rates.

One key problem in Russia is that both the Central Bank and the major commercial banks only care about their profits. What Russia truly needs is a state-owed DEVELOPMENT bank whose goal would not be millions and billions for the few, but making it possible for the creativity of the Russian people to truly blossom. Today, we see the exact opposite in Russia.

So what is my beef with this social ( if not quite “Socialist”) opposition?

They are so focused on their narrow complaints that they completely miss the big picture. Let me explain.

First, Russia has been in a state of war against the US+EU+NATO since at least 2015. Yes, this war is 80% informational, 15% economic and only 5% kinetic. But it is a very real war nonetheless. The key characteristic of a real war is that victory is only achieved by one side, the other is fully defeated. Which means that the war between the AngloZionist Empire is an existential one: one party will win and survive, the other one will disappear and will be replaced with a qualitatively new polity/society. The Neo-Communist Russian opposition steadfastly pretends like there is no war, like all the losses (economic and human) are only the result of corruption and incompetence. They forget that during the last war between Russia and the “United West” German tanks were at the outskirts of Moscow.

Well, of course they know that. But they pretend not to. And this is why I think of them as the 6th column (as opposed to the 5th, openly “liberal” and pro-Western one).

Second, while this opposition is, in my opinion, absolutely correct in deploring Putin’s apparent belief that following the advice of what I would call “IMF types” is safer than following recommendations of what could be loosely called “opposition economists” (here I think of Glaziev, whose views I personally fully support), they fail to realize the risks involved in crushing the “IMF types”. The sad truth is that Russian banks are very powerful and that in many ways, the state cannot afford totally alienating them. Right now the banks support Putin only because he supports them. But if Putin decided to follow the advice of, say, Glaziev and his supporters, the Russian bankers would react with a “total war” against Putin.

If you study Russian history, you will soon realize that Russia did superbly with military enemies, did very averagely with diplomatic efforts (which often negated military victories) and did terribly with what we could call the “internal opposition”.

So let me repeat it here: I do not consider NATO or the US as credible military threats to Russia, unless they decide to use nuclear weapons, at which point both Russia and the West would suffer terribly. But even in this scenario, Russia would prevail (Russia has a 10-15 year advantage against the US in both civilian and military nuclear technologies and the Russian society is far more survivable one – if this topic is of interest to you, just read Dmitry Orlov’s books who explains it all better than I ever could). I have always, and still do, consider that the real danger for Putin and those who share his views is the internal, often “insider”, opposition in Russia. They were always the ones to present the biggest threat to any Russian ruler, from the Czars to Stalin.

This new Neo-Communist 6th column is, however, a much more dangerous threat to the future of Russia than the pro-western 5th columnists. Some of their tactics are extremely devious. For example, one of the things you hear most often from these folks is this: “unless Putin does X, Y or Z, there is a risk of a bloody revolution”. Having listened to many tens of their videos, I can tell you with total security that far from fearing a bloody revolution, these folks in reality dream of such a revolution.

”Too often in our history we have seen that instead of an opposition to the government we are confronted with an opposition to Russia herself. And we know how this ends: with the destruction of the state as such”.

”Too often in our history we have seen that instead of an opposition to the government we are confronted with an opposition to Russia herself. And we know how this ends: with the destruction of the state as such”.

Now, if you think as a true patriot of Russia, you have to realize that Russia suffered from not one, but two, truly horrible revolutions: in 1917 and 1991. In each case the consequences of these revolutions (irrespective of how justified they might have appeared at the time) were absolutely horrible: both in 1917 and in 1991 Russia almost completely vanished as a country, and millions suffered terribly. I now hold is as axiomatic that nothing would be worse for Russia than *any* revolution, no matter what ideology feeds it or how bad the “regime in power” might appear to be.

Putin is acutely aware of that (see image).

These Neo-Communists would very much disagree with me.

They “warn” about a revolution, while in reality trying to create the conditions for one.

Now let me be clear: I am absolutely convinced that NO revolution (Neo-Communist or other) is possible in Russia. More accurately, while I do believe that an attempt for a revolution could happen, I believe that any coup/revolution against Putin is bound to fail. Why? The graphic above.

Even if by some (horrible) miracle, it was possible to defeat/neutralize the combined power of the FSB+FSO+National Guard+Armed forces (which I find impossible), this “success” would be limited to Moscow or, at most, the Moscow Oblast. Beyond that it is all “Putin territory”. In terms of firepower, the Moscow Oblast has a lot of first-rate units, but it does not even come close to what the “rest of Russia” could engage (just the 58th Army in the south would be unstoppable). But even that is not truly crucial. The truly crucial thing following any coup/revolution would be the 70%+ of Russian people who, for the first time in centuries, truly believe that Putin stands for their interest and that he is “their man”. These people will never accept any illegal attempt to remove Putin from power. That is the key reason why no successful revolution is currently possible in Russia.

But while any revolution/coup would be bound to fail, it could very much result in a bloodbath way bigger than what happened in 1993 (where the military was mostly not engaged in the events).

Now lets add it all up.

There is a very vocal internal opposition to Putin in Russia which is most unlikely to ever get real popular support, but which could possibly unite enough of the nostalgics of the Soviet era to create a real crisis.

This internal opposition clearly and objectively weakens the authority/reputation of Putin, which has been main goal of the western “alphabet soup” ever since Putin came to power.

This internal opposition, being mostly nostalgics of the Soviet era, will get no official support from the West, but it will enjoy a maximal covert support from the western “alphabet soup”.

Finally, this Neo-Communist opposition will never seize power, but it might create a very real internal political crisis which will very much weaken Putin and the Eurasian Sovereignists.

So what is the solution?

Putin needs to preempt any civil unrest. Removing Medvedev and replacing him by Mishustin was the correct move, but it was also too little too late. Frankly, I believe that it is high time for Putin to finally openly break with the “Washington consensus types” and listen to Glaziev who, at least, is no Communist.

Russia has always been a collectivistic society, and she needs to stop apologizing (even just mentally) for this. Instead, she should openly and fully embrace her collectivistic culture and traditions and show the “Washington consensus” types to the door.

Yes, the Moscow elites will be furious, but it is also high time to tell these folks that they don’t own Russia, and that while they could make a killing prostituting themselves to the Empire, most Russian don’t want to do that.

The bottom line is this: Putin represents something very unique and very precious: he is a true Russian patriot, but he is not one nostalgic for the days of the Soviet Union. Right now, he is the only (or one of very few) Russian politician which can claim this quality. He needs to preempt the crisis which the Neo-Communists could trigger not by silencing them, but by realizing that on some issues the Russian people do, in fact, agree with them (even if they are not willing to call for a revolution).

Does that sound complicated or even convoluted? If it does, it is because it is. But for all the nuances we can discern a bottom line: it is not worth prevailing (or even failing) if that weakens/threatens Russia. Right now, the Neo-Communist opposition is, objectively, a threat to the stability and prosperity of Russia. That does NOT, however, mean that these folks are always wrong. They often are spot on, 100% correct.

Putin needs to prove them wrong by listening to them and do the right thing.

Difficult? Yes. Doable? Yes. Therefore he has to do it.

“سيسبب كارثة إنسانية”… كتائب حزب الله العراق تحذّر من مخطط أميركي جديد

المخطط يرتكز على إنزال جوي على مواقع للجيش والأمن والحشد بدعم أرضي وإسناد جوي

الميادين نت

كتائب حزب الله العراق تكشف أن القوات الأميركية تجهّز لمخطط “سيسبب كارثة إنسانية ومجتمعية”، وذلك بمساندة جهاز أمني عراقي.

المخطط يرتكز على إنزال جوي على مواقع للجيش والأمن والحشد بدعم أرضي وإسناد جوي

كشفت كتائب حزب الله العراق أن بحوزتها “معطيات ترقى إلى مستوى المعلومة” عن رصد تحركات أميركية مريبة لتحقيق أهداف مشبوهة، بمشاركة جهاز أمني عراقي. 

ونبّهت الكتائب إلى “موجة الحملات النفسية الأميركية الممهدة لمخطط أميركي جديد في العراق”، موضحةً أن المخطط “يرتكز على إنزال جوي على مواقع للجيش والأمن والحشد بدعم أرضي وإسناد جوي”.

وقالت: “هذا الإجراء وما ينتج منه من تداعيات خطرة، سيسبب كارثة إنسانية ومجتمعية تصعب السيطرة عليها”، مضيفةً أنها “أمام خيار تجاوز مراحل كثيرة في معادلة المواجهة” مع القوات الأميركية.

وأعلنت كتائب حزب الله أنها سترد “بكل قوة على جميع منشآته العسكرية والأمنية واﻻقتصادية من دون استثناء”، متوعدةً بجعل “المواقع التي يخططون لاستهدافها مقبرة لهم وعاراً يلاحقهم، هم ومن يتعاون معهم”.

وحذّرت الكتائب “أي طرف عراقي تسوّل له نفسه المشاركة في هذا المخطط التآمري”، داعيةً إياه إلى أن “يضع في حسبانه أنه سيُعامل كعدو لن تغفر خيانته، ولا يعفى عن جريمته، وسيلقى حساباً عسيراً”

.المصدر : الميادين نت

The Cave, Lying Sadists, and Rabid Dogs of War

February 10, 2020 Miri Wood

“The Cave” is what the people of East Ghouta call the underground prison cells and headquarters of the Syrian opposition of ‘Moderate Terrorists’ Faylaq Rahman.

The Cave was a massive underground headquarters

The Cave ( الكهف )was an underground prison discovered by the Syrian Arab Army after the liberation of East Ghouta from NATO supported al Qaeda — specifically the ‘Faylaq Rahman‘ sect of the malignant sociopaths. As previously with Aleppo, prior to the liberation of East Ghouta the rabid western dogs of war howled to protect the criminally insane occupiers, barked about humanitarian catastrophe, and then promptly became irrevocable amnesiacs (the same madness is currently yelped about the last terrorists of Idlib, who will also soon be permanently forgotten).

“The discovery [of The Cave] was in the town of Zamalka in East Ghouta, the town was cleaned from terrorists by the SAA end of last month March after the main defense trenches and fortifications of the terrorist group collapsed by the swift, surprise and forceful SAA attack from the east.

“Following video clip by SANA shows the former building used by the terrorist group as their main command center and under it was a vast network of tunnels and underground prisons where they detained the kidnapped residents of East Ghouta and tortured them.”

The filthy scum sadists behind the scenes — that apocryphal, nebulous, gang known as deep stateMilitary Industrial Complex, financier global oligarchy – has turned The Cave into another in a long series of never-ending fraudementaries against the Syrian Arab Republic. Such an Orwellian inversion of reality is possible due to the pandemic success of Operation Mockingbird and NATO war whores hijacking virtually all major media.

Hollywood has been primarily a 5th column operation since not long after the talkies began; NATO stenographers have taken to utilizing its techniques of enchantment to brainwash huge segments of the population into alignment with demons and criminal liars.

The sanctimonious inner Hollywood elite nominated two fetid anti-Syrian dramatization of the news high gloss propaganda videos for tonight’s Oscars, and NATO orchestrated MSM and faux liberal media have been breathlessly reporting on the two nominees. For Sama is one of the most manipulative operations; some descriptions of it have attempted to feminize war crimes and war prop as to border on salacious pornification.

If Rep. Waltz wanted to ‘capture the female experience of war’ [creepy, to say the least], why did he show no interest in the Syrian women who were kidnapped by FSA & al Jazeera?
The UK ad was even pervier, in addition to breaching the UN Charter which prohibits a member state from pimping propaganda against another member state.

NATO media, NATO diplomats, and NATO politicians continue to pretend they do not know of the friendship of Sama’s father with the savages who kidnapped 12 year old Abdullah Issa from a hospital, and tormented him before cutting off his head with a kitchen knife, which they videoed and proudly uploaded to the internet.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is hamza-c-child-beheader2.jpg
Abdullah Issa, 12 year old Syrian-Palestinian, kidnapped from hospital, moments before his heinous beheading with a kitchen knife.
omran
afp

The criminal hijacking of The Cave, though, remains one of the most sadistically cynical propaganda operations, to date, and so we shall expose the lies of the criminal liars, quickly.

The fraudumentary was shamelessly produced by National Geographic. The attempted final solution against Syria has been a financial boon to all things in need of economic transfusion. NGO’s receive tax exemption status in return for puking up lies created by the State Department, lies which are then disseminated through the warmongering media. No vetting of facts is required when there is money to be made. One only need to say she is a doctor who hates Syria, to be taken at her word; one only need to say he was tortured, and hates Syria, to be taken at his word.

the cave
All things corrupt consider themselves entitled to a taste of Syrian blood.

The front men for the Hollywood movie propaganda are an alleged torture victim cum propaganda director, and an alleged physician cum stay-at-home wife. Neither lives in Syria. Both had massive complaints to the Los Angeles Times on the travesty involving their difficulties in being granted temporary visas to attend tonight’s awards.

The two propagandist story-tellers whined about the ‘Trump travel ban.’

Feras Fayyad is the ‘director’ of the stolen, lying version of The Cave. He lives in Copenhagen and wailed about jet lag, and not enough time to pimp the fraudumentary among the voters. ‘Doctor’ Amani Ballour — who lives in Turkey where she does not practice medicine, since the liberation of East Ghouta was made to feel bad that Geographic and SAMS had to intervene to help her get her visa.

Fayyad is so barely literate in English, that most media have to do re-writes when they interview him.

Like all the others claiming massive, 37,000 hours daily, for 67 years torture status, Pretty Boy Fayyad shows no signs of it. He is fully mobile, maintains full symmetry, has a fabulous head of hair, and his pretty face is unscathed — though the Times reported some scars on his lips (hot coffee? Putting in the wrong end of a lit cigarette?).

Someone surely flunked Torture 101.
How he ‘directed’ ‘The Cave’ fabrication remains a mystery, as he wasn’t there.

The Times interview/report is almost incomprehensible. Ballour — who ‘fled’ — is quoting saying, “A lot of doctors fled, and I don’t understand that.”

The Times incoherently writes that “Ballour began working at the Cave in 2013, shortly after completing general medical studies at the University of Damascus. She was in the midst of her pediatric residency when the war began but abandoned her studies to focus on the hidden hospital,” despite the fact that graduating medical school does not include licensure, and no one out of med school is equipped to run a hospital.

Given that this journal went through the standard litany of lies about hospitals that do not exist, being consistently bombed, in Syria — while never mentioning the actual hospitals that have been bombed, one into dust — the inference is disquieting.

Despite being barely verbal in English, the tired, fake tortured has been provided with a list of appropriate mood-enhancing trigger words for the Mockingbird public: [fake] feminism, [fake] sexism, [fake] chemical attacks.

Fayyad lied that Ballour was the first female manager of a hospital in Syria — unless he meant the first fake female manager of a fake hospital.

The Oscar nominee fabricator probably does not know that Syria’s Vice President is a woman and that President al Assad’s Chief Advisor is a woman, and that both Vice President Najah al Attar and Advisor Bouthaina Shaaban hold doctorate degrees.

This is Dr. Rana Omran. She is the Director of Ophthalmology Hospital in the Ibn al Nafis Medical Complex in Damascus.

Dr. Omran led her hospital’s surgical team in its first artificial corneal transplant in 2018. The surgery was successful and full sight was returned to her patient.

The trailer for the sadistically stolen The Cave should not be ‘inspirational’ to those who are not lunatics. What sane persons want unlicensed, fake hospitals being illegally run by unlicensed ‘surgeons’ in their own cities, states, countries?

Who is this man? Could anyone imagine this as being humorous?

Is this a sadistic joke, or is this an unlicensed Mengele?

The sadistic theft is extended to hijacking something from Syria News:

What fantastic coincidence that the trailer for The Cave just happens to include Beethoven in the illicit operating room, conducted by Japan’s Maestro Yutaka Sado!

Upon Syria’s announcement of the liberation of eastern Aleppo, 14 December 2016, Syria News posted a short congratulation titled Ode to Joy: Syrians Celebrate the Liberation of Aleppo. It included a video clip of the street celebrations, several photographs, the simple words, Aleppo, Syria’s second capital, has been liberated. Syria, Mother of Civilization, Beethoven applauds you. Schiller applauds you. Humanity applauds you. It also contained the full video of Maestro Sado conducting 10,000 singing the 4th Movement of the 9th Symphony.

We have some very good news: Hollywood may have taken a hiatus from acting as NATO’s Public Relations firm. American Factory took the Oscar.

The interlopers inspired by The Cave of al Qaeda terrorists to fabricate another demonization of Syria, based on the real suffering of those forced to endure it, have not been rewarded, this time.

Syrian Artists Bring Sublime Light to Terrorist Tunnels

syrian-artists-tunnel

President & First Lady Visit Newly Illuminated Death Tunnel

Victor Rothschild was a “Soviet” Agent

January 29, 2020

(Victor Rothschild, 1910-1980,  the famous “Fifth Man” of the Cambridge Five Spy Ring)

Reprise of key article:

Here is proof that the Rothschild-controlled
world central banking cartel is behind
Communism, war and world government tyranny.

As the New World Order (“globalism”) reveals its ugly face–censorship, gender dysphoria, migration– this article reveals who is behind it. Most politicians and media are owned by the people who create money out of nothing. 

slightly revised from July 19, 2013 

By Henry Makow Ph.D.

In 1942, Sir Mark Oliphant, a leading British physicist was shocked when a messenger delivered a part from his new radar technology with a warning from MI-5 Security Inspector Victor Rothschild to “tighten up your security.”

A few days earlier Rothschild had visited Oliphant’s Birmingham University lab, quizzed him on his research, and pocketed the three-inch diameter magnetron.

But talk about chutzpah!

Baron Rothschild was himself a Soviet agent! Before returning the magnetron, he had transmitted detailed drawings to Moscow, a fact later confirmed by his KGB handlers.

Oliphant related this story in 1994 to Roland Perry, the Australian author of The Fifth Man (1994, Sedgwick and Jackson, 475 pp).

Between 1935 and 1963, the Soviet Union knew all of Britain’s military and scientific secrets thanks  to “The Cambridge Five” a spy ring that operated in M1-5, MI-6 and the Foreign Office. Western intelligence agencies were rendered ineffective and Allied secrets, including the design of the atomic bomb, were stolen.

The traitors were Kim Philby, Donald Maclean, Guy Burgess and Anthony Blunt. But there is a natural reluctance to admit that “the Fifth Man” was Nathaniel Meyer Victor Rothschild (1910-1990), the Third Baron Rothschild, the British head of the world’s richest banking dynasty, which controls the Bank of England.

In 1993, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, six retired KGB Colonels in Moscow confirmed Rothschild’s identity to Roland Perry. Col. Yuri Modin, the spy ring’s handler, went on the record.

Perry writes: “According to …Modin, Rothschild was the key to most of the Cambridge ring’s penetration of British intelligence. ‘He had the contacts,’ Modin noted. ‘He was able to introduce Burgess, Blunt and others to important figures in Intelligence such as Stewart Menzies, Dick White and Robert Vansittart in the Foreign Office…who controlled Mi-6.”  (p.89)

You can understand the reluctance. The Rothschilds are undoubtedly the largest shareholders in the world’s central banking system. Victor Rothschild’s career as Soviet agent confirms that these London-based bankers plan to translate their monopoly on credit into a monopoly on everything using government as their instrument, ultimately a “world government” dictatorship akin to Communism.

It adds credence to the claim theRothschilds were behind the Bolshevik Revolution, and used the Cold War and more recently the 9-11 hoax and bogus “War on Terror” to advance their world hegemony. 

Which is more plausible? One of the richest men in the world, Victor Rothschild espoused Communist ideals so that his own fabulous wealth and position could be taken away? 

Or that Communism in fact was a deception designed to take away our wealth and freedom in the name of “equality” and “brotherhood”? 

Evil and Rich)

MAN OF ACTION

According to “The Fifth Man”, Victor Rothschild had an IQ of 184. He was a gifted jazz pianist with an intuitive understanding of many scientific disciplines. He saw banking as a dreary affair and preferred the exciting example of his great grandfather Lionel Rothschild (1808-1879) who Benjamin Disraeli immortalized as “Sidonia” in the novel Coningsby (1844).

“No minister of state had such communication with secret agents and political spies as Sidonia. He held relations with all the clever outcasts of the world. The catalog of his acquaintances in the shape of Greeks, Armenians, Moors, secret Jews, Tartars, Gypsies, wandering Poles and Carbonari, would throw a curious light on those subterranean agencies of which the world in general knows so little, but which exercise so great an influence on public events. The secret history of the world was his pastime. His great pleasure was to contrast the hidden motive, with the public pretext, of transactions.” (Coningsby pp. 218-219)

Rothschild studied Zoology at Cambridge where Anthony Blunt recruited him for the KGB about 1936. (Blunt later said it was Rothschild who recruited him, which makes more sense.) Rothschild later joined MI-5 and was in charge of counter sabotage. He instructed the military on how to recognize and defuse bombs. Rothschild was a personal friend of Winston Churchill. Perry writes:

“The two socialized often during the war years. Rothschild used his wealth and position to invite the prime minister to private parties. His entree to the wartime leader, plus access to all the key intelligence information, every major weapons development and his command of counter-sabotage operations in Britain, made Rothschild a secretly powerful figure during the war years…The result was that Stalin knew as much as Churchill about vital information, often before the British High Command was informed.” (xxviii-xxix) 

(left, only a society with a death wish would idealize traitors and dupes.) 

Rothschild helped neutralize enemies of the Soviet Union who came to the British for support. For example, he was involved in the cover-up of the assassination of Polish war leader and British ally Wladyslaw Sikorski, whose plane was blown up in July 1944. Sikorski had become burdensome to Stalin after he discovered the KGB had massacred 16,000 Polish officers in the Katyn Woods and elsewhere in 1940.  

In 1944, Blunt, Burgess and Philby all stayed with Victor at the Rothschild mansion in Paris.  Rothschild was briefly in charge of Allied intelligence in Paris and interrogated many prisoners. 

After the war Rothschild spent time in the US overseeing attempts to learn the atom bomb secrets. Due in part to the Cambridge Five, Perry says “the Russians knew about every major intelligence operation run against them in the years 1945 to 1963.”  (xxxi)

CONCLUSION

Victor Rothschild held many jobs that served to disguise his true role which I suspect was that of a member of the Illuminati Grand Council. (The Illuminati represent the highest rank of Freemasonry.)  He was not a lowly agent. He probably gave orders to people like Winston Churchill, FDR and Stalin.

For example, he ensured that the USSR supported the establishment of the State of Israel.  “He knew the proper back-channels to reach decision-makers in Moscow,” a KGB Colonel told Perry. “Let us just say, he got things done. You only did that if you reached the top. He was very persuasive.” (176)

T Stokes wrote: ” In the Russian Intel archives Lord and Lady Rothschild are codenamed; “David and Rosa.” Rothschild and Churchill were inseparable during W.W.II. The bankers bought Churchill’s services in W.W.II for a recorded £50,000 to lobby for total war with Germany, and in W.W.1 Churchill had a bank account in the name of ‘Colonel Arden,’ to accept these secret donations.”

(Rothschild making Satanist hand sign)
The fact that Rothschild was protected until his death suggests this is a ruling class conspiracy.According to Greg Hallett, Anthony Blunt, a fellow spy, was an illegitimate son of George V, half-brother and look-alike to Edward VIII, the Duke of Windsor. Until his exposure in 1964, Blunt was Knighted and Curator of the Queen’s art collection. He received immunity from prosecution in exchange for his confession.

Many believe this conspiracy is “Jewish.” Yes but “generational Satanist” would be more accurate. These  Sabbatean Jews intermarry with Gentiles. The current Lord Jacob Rothschild, the Fourth Baron Rothschild is Victor’s son by his first wife Barbara Hutchinson, pictured above, a non-Jew who converted. In Jewish law, Jacob Rothschild is not a Jew. He married Serena Dunn. By the way, Meyer Amschel,  Victor’s only son by his second marriage, also to a non-Jew, ‘committed suicide’ in 1996. 

While Victor Rothschild pretended to “socialist ideals,” this was just a ruse to entrap misguided idealists. The banker was a conscious traitor. Treason is the template for contemporary politics. The central banking cartel is erecting its “world governance” dictatorship and anyone who wants to succeed must be loyal to the sick new paradigm and a traitor to the genuine old.
While distracting us with sex and sports, our political and cultural “leaders” attack our national, religious, racial and family foundations using  war, homosexuality, pornography, feminism, migration and “diversity.”

Clearly, we need new leaders who will stand up to the owners of the world monetary system. The destiny of humanity is at stake.

——
First Comment by James Perloff

I read Perry’s book years ago; it was very enlightening, and further affirmed the intimacy between bankers and communists. The Fabian Society’s Nicholas Murray Butler explained it well in 1937: “Communism is the instrument with which the financial world can topple national governments and then erect a world government with a world police and a world money.” 
The Protocols of Zion also affirmed it: “We appear on the scene as alleged saviors of the worker from this oppression when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces – Socialists, Anarchists, Communists . . . . By want and the envy and hatred which it engenders we shall move the mobs and with their hands shall wipe out all those who hinder us on our way.”
The only reason Victor Rothschild gave Britain’s World War 2 nuclear secrets to the USSR instead of Israel: Israel did not yet exist! The Soviet Union was the Rothschilds’ first proxy state. But with the establishment of their REAL proxy state–Israel–in 1948, the Soviets became expendable. So we had the Cold War, which gave the Zionists a pretext for building up and weaponizing Israel as our “ally.” 
Then, in the mid 1980s, the Rothschilds were ready to have America switch its enemies. In 1985, Gorbachev came to power, signalling the end of the Cold War, and in 1986 Reagan bombed Libya based on a Mossad ruse, marking the start of the “War on Terror.” After all, the goyim couldn’t very well die fighting Muslims for Israel in Middle East wars if the dreaded Commies were still a threat.—————–NK wrote- ROTHSCHILD WAS A SOVIET AGENT 
In the sixties the Daily Express ran a sensational series of articles on Soviet penetration and control of the UK, it made the reputation of the journalist Chapman Pincher. Intel personel said their fears were being ignored so began to whistleblow My stepfather worked for the Express, and he would come home with astonishing news the world beating British aircraft the TSR2 was cancelled by Socialist sympathizers who wanted to weaken the UK defence capability Peter Wright and Trevor Stokes, and to a lesser extent Arthur Martin, were passing on info direct to the British public. Stokes said Rothschild was not the 5th man he was the first man Stokes said all along Philby was a traitor and so was Blunt, and its untrue that Rothschild had an intelligence rating of 184. 
Peter Wright left Marconi to work for our intel people,Rothschild told him if the the government do not honour your old age pension i will make it up, when Wright retired he was only entitled to a very small pension , and Rothschild the worlds richest man went back on his word, so wright wrote a tell all book naming Rothschild, Rothschild sent Wright a first class ticket to come to the UK to discuss it Rothschilds threats meant the first chapter on Rothschild and the jews getting the UK into 2 world wars, was removed. 
This man Stokes was one of those who interviewed Bunt on spying homosexual killings of young boys and running messages from our Royals to Hitler, also said all along Winston Churchill was a spy for Russia, and the defector Anatoli Vrinski passed over the same info that Constantin Volkov did, that Churchill worked for Rothschild. Cambridge was a vile nest of socialists, its tutors were put in place by Rothschild.

LIVE: Putin holds annual press conference in Moscow

December 19, 2019

The version from RT on Twitter is the best one available currently:

https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1dRKZLQDDYDJB

English Soundtrack:

Putin holds annual press conference in Moscow

Vladimir Putin addressed State Duma deputies, Federation Council members, heads of Russian regions and civil society representatives in the Kremlin.

Dear friends, we have gathered here today in connection with an issue that is of vital, historic significance to all of us. A referendum was held in Crimea on March 16 in full compliance with democratic procedures and international norms.


More than 82 percent of the electorate took part in the vote. Over 96 percent of them spoke out in favour of reuniting with Russia. These numbers speak for themselves.

To understand the reason behind such a choice it is enough to know the history of Crimea and what Russia and Crimea have always meant for each other.

Everything in Crimea speaks of our shared history and pride. This is the location of ancient Khersones, where Prince Vladimir was baptised. His spiritual feat of adopting Orthodoxy predetermined the overall basis of the culture, civilisation and human values that unite the peoples of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. The graves of Russian soldiers whose bravery brought Crimea into the Russian empire are also in Crimea. This is also Sevastopol – a legendary city with an outstanding history, a fortress that serves as the birthplace of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. Crimea is Balaklava and Kerch, Malakhov Kurgan and Sapun Ridge. Each one of these places is dear to our hearts, symbolising Russian military glory and outstanding valour.

Crimea is a unique blend of different peoples’ cultures and traditions. This makes it similar to Russia as a whole, where not a single ethnic group has been lost over the centuries. Russians and Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars and people of other ethnic groups have lived side by side in Crimea, retaining their own identity, traditions, languages and faith.

Incidentally, the total population of the Crimean Peninsula today is 2.2 million people, of whom almost 1.5 million are Russians, 350,000 are Ukrainians who predominantly consider Russian their native language, and about 290,000–300,000 are Crimean Tatars, who, as the referendum has shown, also lean towards Russia.

True, there was a time when Crimean Tatars were treated unfairly, just as a number of other peoples in the USSR. There is only one thing I can say here: millions of people of various ethnicities suffered during those repressions, and primarily Russians.

Crimean Tatars returned to their homeland. I believe we should make all the necessary political and legislative decisions to finalise the rehabilitation of Crimean Tatars, restore them in their rights and clear their good name.

We have great respect for people of all the ethnic groups living in Crimea. This is their common home, their motherland, and it would be right – I know the local population supports this – for Crimea to have three equal national languages: Russian, Ukrainian and Tatar.

Colleagues,

In people’s hearts and minds, Crimea has always been an inseparable part of Russia. This firm conviction is based on truth and justice and was passed from generation to generation, over time, under any circumstances, despite all the dramatic changes our country went through during the entire 20th century.

After the revolution, the Bolsheviks, for a number of reasons – may God judge them – added large sections of the historical South of Russia to the Republic of Ukraine. This was done with no consideration for the ethnic make-up of the population, and today these areas form the southeast of Ukraine. Then, in 1954, a decision was made to transfer Crimean Region to Ukraine, along with Sevastopol, despite the fact that it was a federal city. This was the personal initiative of the Communist Party head Nikita Khrushchev. What stood behind this decision of his – a desire to win the support of the Ukrainian political establishment or to atone for the mass repressions of the 1930’s in Ukraine – is for historians to figure out.

What matters now is that this decision was made in clear violation of the constitutional norms that were in place even then. The decision was made behind the scenes. Naturally, in a totalitarian state nobody bothered to ask the citizens of Crimea and Sevastopol. They were faced with the fact. People, of course, wondered why all of a sudden Crimea became part of Ukraine. But on the whole – and we must state this clearly, we all know it – this decision was treated as a formality of sorts because the territory was transferred within the boundaries of a single state. Back then, it was impossible to imagine that Ukraine and Russia may split up and become two separate states. However, this has happened.

Unfortunately, what seemed impossible became a reality. The USSR fell apart. Things developed so swiftly that few people realised how truly dramatic those events and their consequences would be. Many people both in Russia and in Ukraine, as well as in other republics hoped that the Commonwealth of Independent States that was created at the time would become the new common form of statehood. They were told that there would be a single currency, a single economic space, joint armed forces; however, all this remained empty promises, while the big country was gone. It was only when Crimea ended up as part of a different country that Russia realised that it was not simply robbed, it was plundered.

At the same time, we have to admit that by launching the sovereignty parade Russia itself aided in the collapse of the Soviet Union. And as this collapse was legalised, everyone forgot about Crimea and Sevastopol ­– the main base of the Black Sea Fleet. Millions of people went to bed in one country and awoke in different ones, overnight becoming ethnic minorities in former Union republics, while the Russian nation became one of the biggest, if not the biggest ethnic group in the world to be divided by borders.

Now, many years later, I heard residents of Crimea say that back in 1991 they were handed over like a sack of potatoes. This is hard to disagree with. And what about the Russian state? What about Russia? It humbly accepted the situation. This country was going through such hard times then that realistically it was incapable of protecting its interests. However, the people could not reconcile themselves to this outrageous historical injustice. All these years, citizens and many public figures came back to this issue, saying that Crimea is historically Russian land and Sevastopol is a Russian city. Yes, we all knew this in our hearts and minds, but we had to proceed from the existing reality and build our good-neighbourly relations with independent Ukraine on a new basis. Meanwhile, our relations with Ukraine, with the fraternal Ukrainian people have always been and will remain of foremost importance for us.

Today we can speak about it openly, and I would like to share with you some details of the negotiations that took place in the early 2000s. The then President of Ukraine Mr Kuchma asked me to expedite the process of delimiting the Russian-Ukrainian border. At that time, the process was practically at a standstill. Russia seemed to have recognised Crimea as part of Ukraine, but there were no negotiations on delimiting the borders. Despite the complexity of the situation, I immediately issued instructions to Russian government agencies to speed up their work to document the borders, so that everyone had a clear understanding that by agreeing to delimit the border we admitted de facto and de jure that Crimea was Ukrainian territory, thereby closing the issue.

We accommodated Ukraine not only regarding Crimea, but also on such a complicated matter as the maritime boundary in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait. What we proceeded from back then was that good relations with Ukraine matter most for us and they should not fall hostage to deadlock territorial disputes. However, we expected Ukraine to remain our good neighbour, we hoped that Russian citizens and Russian speakers in Ukraine, especially its southeast and Crimea, would live in a friendly, democratic and civilised state that would protect their rights in line with the norms of international law.

However, this is not how the situation developed. Time and time again attempts were made to deprive Russians of their historical memory, even of their language and to subject them to forced assimilation. Moreover, Russians, just as other citizens of Ukraine are suffering from the constant political and state crisis that has been rocking the country for over 20 years.

I understand why Ukrainian people wanted change. They have had enough of the authorities in power during the years of Ukraine’s independence. Presidents, prime ministers and parliamentarians changed, but their attitude to the country and its people remained the same. They milked the country, fought among themselves for power, assets and cash flows and did not care much about the ordinary people. They did not wonder why it was that millions of Ukrainian citizens saw no prospects at home and went to other countries to work as day labourers. I would like to stress this: it was not some Silicon Valley they fled to, but to become day labourers. Last year alone almost 3 million people found such jobs in Russia. According to some sources, in 2013 their earnings in Russia totalled over $20 billion, which is about 12% of Ukraine’s GDP.

I would like to reiterate that I understand those who came out on Maidan with peaceful slogans against corruption, inefficient state management and poverty. The right to peaceful protest, democratic procedures and elections exist for the sole purpose of replacing the authorities that do not satisfy the people. However, those who stood behind the latest events in Ukraine had a different agenda: they were preparing yet another government takeover; they wanted to seize power and would stop short of nothing. They resorted to terror, murder and riots. Nationalists, neo-Nazis, Russophobes and anti-Semites executed this coup. They continue to set the tone in Ukraine to this day.

The new so-called authorities began by introducing a draft law to revise the language policy, which was a direct infringement on the rights of ethnic minorities. However, they were immediately ‘disciplined’ by the foreign sponsors of these so-called politicians. One has to admit that the mentors of these current authorities are smart and know well what such attempts to build a purely Ukrainian state may lead to. The draft law was set aside, but clearly reserved for the future. Hardly any mention is made of this attempt now, probably on the presumption that people have a short memory. Nevertheless, we can all clearly see the intentions of these ideological heirs of Bandera, Hitler’s accomplice during World War II.

It is also obvious that there is no legitimate executive authority in Ukraine now, nobody to talk to. Many government agencies have been taken over by the impostors, but they do not have any control in the country, while they themselves – and I would like to stress this – are often controlled by radicals. In some cases, you need a special permit from the militants on Maidan to meet with certain ministers of the current government. This is not a joke – this is reality.

Those who opposed the coup were immediately threatened with repression. Naturally, the first in line here was Crimea, the Russian-speaking Crimea. In view of this, the residents of Crimea and Sevastopol turned to Russia for help in defending their rights and lives, in preventing the events that were unfolding and are still underway in Kiev, Donetsk, Kharkov and other Ukrainian cities.

Naturally, we could not leave this plea unheeded; we could not abandon Crimea and its residents in distress. This would have been betrayal on our part.

First, we had to help create conditions so that the residents of Crimea for the first time in history were able to peacefully express their free will regarding their own future. However, what do we hear from our colleagues in Western Europe and North America? They say we are violating norms of international law. Firstly, it’s a good thing that they at least remember that there exists such a thing as international law – better late than never.

Secondly, and most importantly – what exactly are we violating? True, the President of the Russian Federation received permission from the Upper House of Parliament to use the Armed Forces in Ukraine. However, strictly speaking, nobody has acted on this permission yet. Russia’s Armed Forces never entered Crimea; they were there already in line with an international agreement. True, we did enhance our forces there; however – this is something I would like everyone to hear and know – we did not exceed the personnel limit of our Armed Forces in Crimea, which is set at 25,000, because there was no need to do so.

Next. As it declared independence and decided to hold a referendum, the Supreme Council of Crimea referred to the United Nations Charter, which speaks of the right of nations to self-determination. Incidentally, I would like to remind you that when Ukraine seceded from the USSR it did exactly the same thing, almost word for word. Ukraine used this right, yet the residents of Crimea are denied it. Why is that?

Moreover, the Crimean authorities referred to the well-known Kosovo precedent – a precedent our western colleagues created with their own hands in a very similar situation, when they agreed that the unilateral separation of Kosovo from Serbia, exactly what Crimea is doing now, was legitimate and did not require any permission from the country’s central authorities. Pursuant to Article 2, Chapter 1 of the United Nations Charter, the UN International Court agreed with this approach and made the following comment in its ruling of July 22, 2010, and I quote: “No general prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council with regard to declarations of independence,” and “General international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence.” Crystal clear, as they say.

I do not like to resort to quotes, but in this case, I cannot help it. Here is a quote from another official document: the Written Statement of the United States America of April 17, 2009, submitted to the same UN International Court in connection with the hearings on Kosovo. Again, I quote: “Declarations of independence may, and often do, violate domestic legislation. However, this does not make them violations of international law.” End of quote. They wrote this, disseminated it all over the world, had everyone agree and now they are outraged. Over what? The actions of Crimean people completely fit in with these instructions, as it were. For some reason, things that Kosovo Albanians (and we have full respect for them) were permitted to do, Russians, Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars in Crimea are not allowed. Again, one wonders why.

We keep hearing from the United States and Western Europe that Kosovo is some special case. What makes it so special in the eyes of our colleagues? It turns out that it is the fact that the conflict in Kosovo resulted in so many human casualties. Is this a legal argument? The ruling of the International Court says nothing about this. This is not even double standards; this is amazing, primitive, blunt cynicism. One should not try so crudely to make everything suit their interests, calling the same thing white today and black tomorrow. According to this logic, we have to make sure every conflict leads to human losses.

I will state clearly — if the Crimean local self-defence units had not taken the situation under control, there could have been casualties as well. Fortunately this did not happen. There was not a single armed confrontation in Crimea and no casualties. Why do you think this was so? The answer is simple: because it is very difficult, practically impossible to fight against the will of the people. Here I would like to thank the Ukrainian military – and this is 22,000 fully armed servicemen. I would like to thank those Ukrainian service members who refrained from bloodshed and did not smear their uniforms in blood.

Other thoughts come to mind in this connection. They keep talking of some Russian intervention in Crimea, some sort of aggression. This is strange to hear. I cannot recall a single case in history of an intervention without a single shot being fired and with no human casualties.

Colleagues,

Like a mirror, the situation in Ukraine reflects what is going on and what has been happening in the world over the past several decades. After the dissolutionof bipolarity on the planet, we no longer have stability. Key international institutions are not getting any stronger; on the contrary, in many cases, they are sadly degrading. Our western partners, led by the United States of America, prefer not to be guided by international law in their practical policies, but by the rule of the gun. They have come to believe in their exclusivity and exceptionalism, that they can decide the destinies of the world, that only they can ever be right. They act as they please: here and there, they use force against sovereign states, building coalitions based on the principle “If you are not with us, you are against us.” To make this aggression look legitimate, they force the necessary resolutions from international organisations, and if for some reason this does not work, they simply ignore the UN Security Council and the UN overall.

This happened in Yugoslavia; we remember 1999 very well. It was hard to believe, even seeing it with my own eyes, that at the end of the 20th century, one of Europe’s capitals, Belgrade, was under missile attack for several weeks, and then came the real intervention. Was there a UN Security Council resolution on this matter, allowing for these actions? Nothing of the sort. And then, they hit Afghanistan, Iraq, and frankly violated the UN Security Council resolution on Libya, when instead of imposing the so-called no-fly zone over it they started bombing it too.

There was a whole series of controlled “colour” revolutions. Clearly, the people in those nations, where these events took place, were sick of tyranny and poverty, of their lack of prospects; but these feelings were taken advantage of cynically. Standards were imposed on these nations that did not in any way correspond to their way of life, traditions, or these peoples’ cultures. As a result, instead of democracy and freedom, there was chaos, outbreaks in violence and a series of upheavals. The Arab Spring turned into the Arab Winter.

A similar situation unfolded in Ukraine. In 2004, to push the necessary candidate through at the presidential elections, they thought up some sort of third round that was not stipulated by the law. It was absurd and a mockery of the constitution. And now, they have thrown in an organised and well-equipped army of militants.

We understand what is happening; we understand that these actions were aimed against Ukraine and Russia and against Eurasian integration. And all this while Russia strived to engage in dialogue with our colleagues in the West. We are constantly proposing cooperation on all key issues; we want to strengthen our level of trust and for our relations to be equal, open and fair. But we saw no reciprocal steps.

On the contrary, they have lied to us many times, made decisions behind our backs, placed us before an accomplished fact.This happened with NATO’s expansion to the East, as well as the deployment of military infrastructure at our borders. They kept telling us the same thing: “Well, this does not concern you.” That’s easy to say.

It happened with the deployment of a missile defence system. In spite of all our apprehensions, the project is working and moving forward. It happened with the endless foot-dragging in the talks on visa issues, promises of fair competition and free access to global markets.

Today, we are being threatened with sanctions, but we already experiencemany limitations, ones that are quite significant for us, our economy and our nation. For example, still during the times of the Cold War, the US and subsequently other nations restricted a large list of technologies and equipment from being sold to the USSR, creating the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls list. Today, they have formally been eliminated, but only formally; and in reality, many limitations are still in effect.

In short, we have every reason to assume that the infamous policy of containment, led in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, continues today. They are constantly trying to sweep us into a cornerbecause we have an independent position, because we maintain it and because we call things like they are and do not engage in hypocrisy. But there is a limit to everything. And with Ukraine, our western partners have crossed the line, playing the bear and acting irresponsibly and unprofessionally.

After all, they were fully aware that there are millions of Russians living in Ukraine and in Crimea. They must have really lacked political instinct and common sense not to foresee all the consequences of their actions. Russia found itself in a position it could not retreat from. If you compress the spring all the way to its limit, it will snap back hard. You must always remember this.

Today, it is imperative to end this hysteria, to refute the rhetoric of the cold war and to accept the obvious fact: Russia is an independent, active participant in international affairs; like other countries, it has its own national interests that need to be taken into account and respected.

At the same time, we are grateful to all those who understood our actions in Crimea; we are grateful to the people of China, whose leaders have always consideredthe situation in Ukraine and Crimea taking into account the full historical and political context, and greatly appreciate India’s reserve and objectivity.

Today, I would like to address the people of the United States of America, the people who, since the foundation of their nation and adoption of the Declaration of Independence, have been proud to hold freedom above all else. Isn’t the desire of Crimea’s residents to freely choose their fate such a value? Please understand us.

I believe that the Europeans, first and foremost, the Germans, will also understand me. Let me remind you that in the course of political consultations on the unification of East and West Germany, at the expert, though very high level, some nations that were then and are now Germany’s allies did not support the idea of unification. Our nation, however, unequivocally supported the sincere, unstoppable desire of the Germans for national unity. I am confident that you have not forgotten this, and I expect that the citizens of Germany will also support the aspiration of the Russians, of historical Russia, to restore unity.

I also want to address the people of Ukraine. I sincerely want you to understand us: we do not want to harm you in any way, or to hurt your national feelings. We have always respected the territorial integrity of the Ukrainian state, incidentally, unlike those who sacrificed Ukraine’s unity for their political ambitions. They flaunt slogans about Ukraine’s greatness, but they are the ones who did everything to divide the nation. Today’s civil standoff is entirely on their conscience. I want you to hear me, my dear friends. Do not believe those who want you to fear Russia, shouting that other regions will follow Crimea. We do not want to divide Ukraine; we do not need that. As for Crimea, it was and remains a Russian, Ukrainian, and Crimean-Tatar land.

I repeat, just as it has been for centuries, it will be a home to all the peoples living there. What it will never be and do is follow in Bandera’s footsteps!

Crimea is our common historical legacy and a very important factor in regional stability. And this strategic territory should be part of a strong and stable sovereignty, which today can only be Russian. Otherwise, dear friends (I am addressing both Ukraine and Russia), you and we – the Russians and the Ukrainians – could lose Crimea completely, and that could happen in the near historical perspective. Please think about it.

Let me note too that we have already heard declarations from Kiev about Ukraine soon joining NATO. What would this have meant for Crimea and Sevastopol in the future? It would have meant that NATO’s navy would be right there in this city of Russia’s military glory, and this would create not an illusory but a perfectly real threat to the whole of southern Russia. These are things that could have become reality were it not for the choice the Crimean people made, and I want to say thank you to them for this.

But let me say too that we are not opposed to cooperation with NATO, for this is certainly not the case. For all the internal processes within the organisation, NATO remains a military alliance, and we are against having a military alliance making itself at home right in our backyard or in our historic territory. I simply cannot imagine that we would travel to Sevastopol to visit NATO sailors. Of course, most of them are wonderful guys, but it would be better to have them come and visit us, be our guests, rather than the other way round.

Let me say quite frankly that it pains our hearts to see what is happening in Ukraine at the moment, see the people’s suffering and their uncertainty about how to get through today and what awaits them tomorrow. Our concerns are understandable because we are not simply close neighbours but, as I have said many times already, we are one people. Kiev is the mother of Russian cities. Ancient Rus is our common source and we cannot live without each other.

Let me say one other thing too. Millions of Russians and Russian-speaking people live in Ukraine and will continue to do so. Russia will always defend their interests using political, diplomatic and legal means. But it should be above all in Ukraine’s own interest to ensure that these people’s rights and interests are fully protected. This is the guarantee of Ukraine’s state stability and territorial integrity.

We want to be friends with Ukraine and we want Ukraine to be a strong, sovereign and self-sufficient country. Ukraine is one of our biggest partners after all. We have many joint projects and I believe in their success no matter what the current difficulties. Most importantly, we want peace and harmony to reign in Ukraine, and we are ready to work together with other countries to do everything possible to facilitate and support this. But as I said, only Ukraine’s own people can put their own house in order.

Residents of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, the whole of Russia admired your courage, dignity and bravery. It was you who decided Crimea’s future. We were closer than ever over these days, supporting each other. These were sincere feelings of solidarity. It is at historic turning points such as these that a nation demonstrates its maturity and strength of spirit. The Russian people showed this maturity and strength through their united support for their compatriots.

Russia’s foreign policy position on this matter drew its firmness from the will of millions of our people, our national unity and the support of our country’s main political and public forces. I want to thank everyone for this patriotic spirit, everyone without exception. Now, we need to continue and maintain this kind of consolidation so as to resolve the tasks our country faces on its road ahead.

Obviously, we will encounter external opposition, but this is a decision that we need to make for ourselves. Are we ready to consistently defend our national interests, or will we forever give in, retreat to who knows where? Some Western politicians are already threatening us with not just sanctions but also the prospect of increasingly serious problems on the domestic front. I would like to know what it is they have in mind exactly: action by a fifth column, this disparate bunch of ‘national traitors’, or are they hoping to put us in a worsening social and economic situation so as to provoke public discontent? We consider such statements irresponsible and clearly aggressive in tone, and we will respond to them accordingly. At the same time, we will never seek confrontation with our partners, whether in the East or the West, but on the contrary, will do everything we can to build civilised and good-neighbourly relations as one is supposed to in the modern world. 

Colleagues,

I understand the people of Crimea, who put the question in the clearest possible terms in the referendum: should Crimea be with Ukraine or with Russia? We can be sure in saying that the authorities in Crimea and Sevastopol, the legislative authorities, when they formulated the question, set aside group and political interests and made the people’s fundamental interests alone the cornerstone of their work. The particular historic, population, political and economic circumstances of Crimea would have made any other proposed option — however tempting it could be at the first glance — only temporary and fragile and would have inevitably led to further worsening of the situation there, which would have had disastrous effects on people’s lives. The people of Crimea thus decided to put the question in firm and uncompromising form, with no grey areas. The referendum was fair and transparent, and the people of Crimea clearly and convincingly expressed their will and stated that they want to be with Russia.

Russia will also have to make a difficult decision now, taking into account the various domestic and external considerations. What do people here in Russia think? Here, like in any democratic country, people have different points of view, but I want to make the point that the absolute majority of our people clearly do support what is happening.

The most recent public opinion surveys conducted here in Russia show that 95 percent of people think that Russia should protect the interests of Russians and members of other ethnic groups living in Crimea – 95 percent of our citizens. More than 83 percent think that Russia should do this even if it will complicate our relations with some other countries. A total of 86 percent of our people see Crimea as still being Russian territory and part of our country’s lands. And one particularly important figure, which corresponds exactly with the result in Crimea’s referendum: almost 92 percent of our people support Crimea’s reunification with Russia. 

Thus we see that the overwhelming majority of people in Crimea and the absolute majority of the Russian Federation’s people support the reunification of the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol with Russia.

Now this is a matter for Russia’s own political decision, and any decision here can be based only on the people’s will, because the people is the ultimate source of all authority.

Members of the Federation Council, deputies of the State Duma, citizens of Russia, residents of Crimea and Sevastopol, today, in accordance with the people’s will, I submit to the Federal Assembly a request to consider a Constitutional Law on the creation of two new constituent entities within the Russian Federation: the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, and to ratify the treaty on admitting to the Russian Federation Crimea and Sevastopol, which is already ready for signing. I stand assured of your support.

الوقوع في الفِخّ

ديسمبر 7, 2019

د. عماد عكوش 

عندما بدأ الحراك في 17 تشرين الأول، تأمّلنا خيراً في تحقيق الإصلاح السياسي، والاقتصادي، وكان مفترضاً أن يلاقي الحراك السياسيين الذين يحملون لواء محاربة الفساد ليكونوا سنداً داعماً ضاغطاً لتحقيق هذه الإصلاحات، وكان يمكن ان يحدث هذا التعاون تغييراً جذرياً في السياسة والاقتصاد. ولا زلنا نأمل هذا التعاون علنا نستطيع ان نحدث تغييراً في الواقع الطائفي الحالي.

في بداية الحراك نزلت الناس وبشكل عفوي تطالب بمحاسبة الفاسدين وإعادة المال المنهوب، لكن هل يمكن تحقيق ذلك بالشعارات فقط أم نحن بحاجة الى من يقدّم قوانين في هذا المضمار، وبالتالي بحاجة الى نواب نظيفي الكفّ يقفون الى جانب هذا الحراك؟

لقد كانت هذه البداية مخيفة للولايات المتحدة الأميركية لكون معظم المتهمين بالفساد هم حلفاء لها، لذلك لجأت الى زرع مجموعات منظمة ضمن الحراك تنادي بشعار “كلن يعني كلن” حتى تضمن عدم قيادة هذا الحراك أو على الأقل دخول الحزب بكل ثقله في هذا الحراك.

نعم لقد استطاعت هذه المجموعة إخراج كل الأحزاب حتى مَن لا يوجد لديه أي ملف فساد، وبالتالي أخرجتها من إمكانية الاستفادة منها في عملية الإصلاح عبر رفع شعار “كلن يعني كلن”. وكانت هذه الشعارات مقصودة ومقصود من ورائها إخراج هذه الأحزاب، لأن دخول هذه الأحزاب ضمن المنظومة الحركية للثوار كان يمكن أن يضاعف من شعبية هذه الأحزاب؛ وبالتالي فإن المقصود من وراء خروج هذا الحراك عبر مجموعات منظمة بهذه الشعارات لن يحقق الهدف الأساسي منها وهو إضعاف قوى الإصلاح والسيادة.

كما وقعت أيضاً هذه الأحزاب الإصلاحية في الفخ الذي نصبه لها هذا الجزء من الحراك، بحيث أصبحت في الجانب الآخر من الضفة، وبدأت تدافع بها عن نفسها تجاه من يتهمها بالشراكة مع الفساد، وبالتالي أصبحت أسيرة هذا الدفاع، ولم تعد تتمكن من الوقوف الى جانب هذا الحراك أو الاستفادة منه لفرض محاربة الفساد ولفرض الإصلاح السياسي والاقتصادي في البلد.

كما فرضت في المقابل الولايات المتحدة على الأحزاب الحليفة أن تخرج من الحكومة فكانت استقالة الرئيس سعد الحريري واستقالة وزراء القوات والضغط لاستقالة وزراء الاشتراكي. كما فرضوا على هذه الأحزاب ان تدخل بطريقة او بأخرى في هذا الحراك مع القيام ببعض الخطوات الاستفزازية والتي طالت الحزب وبيئته حتى تستدرجه هو وبيئته الى الشارع، وبالتالي حصول صدام على الأرض يبرر تدخلاً أممياً أو دولياً.

لقد استطاع مَن رسم هذا الفخّ أن يوقع بين الناس العفوية التي نزلت الى الشارع بكل عفوية وبين الأحزاب الإصلاحية والتي تبنت قوانين إصلاحية كثيرة ولازلنا نأمل أن يتم، لكن بالتأكيد هذا الأمر أصبح صعباً جداً، لكن هل يمكن إنجاز توافق أو تسوية معينة بين هذا الحراك وهذه الأحزاب مع تشكيل الحكومة الجديدة، أم أن هذا التوافق غير مقبول لا اليوم ولا في الغد؟

مواضيع متعلقة

القتلة الاقتصاديون!….| د. بسام أبو عبد الله

د. بسام أبو عبد الله

اختياري لعنوان مقالي اليوم مقصود مقصود، لكن ليس بهدف القول بأن كل من يعمل في الشأن الاقتصادي هو مجرم وقاتل كما قد يعتقد البعض، معاذ الله، لأنه في هذا القطاع هناك شرفاء كثر كما غيره من القطاعات،

ولكن أنا أعرف ويعرف الكثيرون أن هناك في القطاعات الاقتصادية من هم أكثر من قتلة، لا بل مجرمون مستعدون لتدمير بلدانهم وشعوبهم من أجل أنانيتهم، أرباحهم الفاحشة على حساب الفقراء والمساكين، وهناك من هو قولاً واحداً، إن أحب ذلك أو لم يحب، متآمر على بلده وشعبه، ويلعب بقوت الناس ما يعتبر تهديداً للأمن القومي للبلاد، وحساب أمثال هؤلاء يجب أن يكون عسيراً.

قبل شهر من الآن كان سعر صرف الليرة السورية مقابل الدولار قد وصل إلى 650 ليرة سورية، ومنذ ذلك الوقت وحتى الآن فقدت الليرة نحو 46 بالمئة من قيمتها ليصل سعر الصرف إلى حدود الألف ليرة سورية، وهو أمر ليس له سبب اقتصادي أبداً حسب رأي المختصين الذين سألناهم، وقبل يومين عاود سعر صرف الليرة ليهبط إلى 850 ل.س مقابل الدولار، ولا أدري حتى ساعة نشر مقالي كم سيهبط أو يصعد، وخاصة أن التبدلات أصبحت تحدث بالساعات وليست بالأيام، وكأن ما يحدث قضاء وقدر، لا إمكانية لوقفه، وخاصة أن الحالة تحولت إلى قضية خطرة للغاية، أثرت في الأسواق فتوقف بيع المواد، وارتفعت الأسعار بشكل جنوني من دون أي ضابط، وحصلت الفوضى الاقتصادية التي تشبه إلى حدّ كبير الفوضى التي كان الإرهابيون يعملون على إحداثها بعد كل تفجير، أو عملية إرهابية، إذ كان يرافقها إعلام معادٍ، ليزيد التأثير النفسي، ويؤدي إلى انهيار المعنويات، وإضعاف الثقة بالدولة، ودفع الناس دفعاً نحو الخوف واللجوء إلى حلولهم الخاصة، الأمر الذي يدفع الأمور نحو الفوضى التي تمس حياة الناس وقوت يومهم، وثباتهم وصمودهم.

سؤال مشروع يطرحه كل مواطن سوري على نفسه، وعلى المعنيين والمختصين، ماذا حدث بعد زيادة الرواتب الأخيرة شيء غريب عجيب؟ وكأن هناك من ينتظرنا حتى يفرغ الفرحة البسيطة التي شعر بها المواطنون السوريون إثر هذه الزيادة، وكأن هناك من يقصفنا فوراً، حتى لا نرتاح ولو للحظة، وكأن هناك طابوراً خامساً وسادساً يدار من غرفة عمليات مركزية تعطيه التعليمات فوراً، لأنه ليس معقولاً ما يحدث ويتطور بسرعة لإحداث الفوضى الاقتصادية، وهو ما يريده ويعمل عليه أعداؤنا وخصومنا، ويبقى سؤالي مشروعاً: الأعداء والخصوم معروفون في الخارج، ولكن ماذا عمن هم في الداخل! لا تقولوا لي: الوضع في لبنان! وغيره الكثير من الأسباب المبررة والمفهومة، والتي يمكن أن نعددها جميعاً، إلا أن أحداً لا يستطيع حتى الآن أن يقول لي: ماذا عن حيتان الفساد والاحتيال المالي، وذوي الارتباط الخارجي، الذين لم يعودوا يخجلون، ولا يوجد لديهم أدنى ارتباط وشعور بالوطن وشعبه وجيشه!
تذكروا أيها السادة أن في هذه اللحظة هناك من يستشهد في إدلب من جنودنا وضباطنا، وهناك من يقاتل بشرف وإباء وكرامة، دفاعاً عن سيادة سورية واستقلالها وعزتها، كي نعيش جميعاً رافعي الرأس، ولولا هؤلاء الأبطال لكنتم أيها الفاسدون الجشعون في مكان آخر، أفلا تشعرون وتحسون أن هناك وطناً لابد من دعمه، وشعباً بطلاً لابد من الوقوف إلى جانبه، وليس ابتزازه كالإرهابيين.

في عام 2004 نشر الخبير الاقتصادي الأميركي جون بيركنز كتاباً شهيراً بعنوان: «اعترافات قاتل اقتصادي» وترجم الكتاب لثلاثين لغة في العالم من ضمنها اللغة العربية تحت عنوان «الاغتيال الاقتصادي للأمم»، ويكشف بيركنز أن القتلة الاقتصاديين هم رجال محترفون يتقاضون أجراً عالياً مقابل قيامهم بخداع دول العالم، وابتزازها عبر التقارير المالية المحتالة، والانتخابات المزورة والرشاوى والجنس وجرائم القتل بهدف إقراضها، ثم العمل على إفلاسها لتصبح أهدافاً سهلة حين يطلب منها خدمات مثل القواعد العسكرية، التصويت في الأمم المتحدة، بيع ثرواتها بأسعار لا تحقق المصالح الوطنية، وهؤلاء يعتمدون على الرشوة باليد الأولى، والمسدس باليد الأخرى في حال عدم التعاون، وأرجو أن ننتبه إلى كلمة «رشوة» التي استخدمها بيركنز، وهؤلاء هم الأخطر لأنهم قابلون للبيع والشراء، أي إنهم مستعدون للخيانة.

ما من شك أن لمن يتابع التاريخ الأميركي فسوف يجد أن بيركنز كان ينفذ سياسة أسس لها وزير الدفاع الأميركي السابق روبرت ماكنمارا الذي سقط في حرب فيتنام، وأدرك أن القوة العسكرية ليست ذات جدوى، وأن القصف الجوي لن ينتج لأميركا شيئاً فانقلب باتجاه آخر، ليترأس البنك الدولي عام 1968، وليظل فيه حتى عام 1981 ليرسم من هناك سياسة أخرى اسمها «التطويع الاقتصادي» أي العمل على خنق الدول المنافسة لأميركا، وفي عهد رونالد ريغان انتقلت أميركا إلى سياسة اسمها «الإنهاك الاقتصادي» وهي السياسة التي أسس لها ماكنمارا نفسه من خلال كتاب نشره بعنوان: «مائة بلد وملياران من البشر.. أبعاد التنمية» ونشره عام 1973، وطبقت هذه السياسات ضد الاتحاد السوفييتي، الذي لم يسقط عسكرياً إنما اقتصادياً، وكذلك في دول أوروبا الشرقية.

في عهد الرئيس دونالد ترامب عادت أميركا إلى الأسس التي وضعها ماكنمارا بعد إخفاق سياسات المحافظين الجدد في الغزو العسكري أيام جورج بوش الابن، من خلال سياسات فرض العقوبات الاقتصادية وتطويرها باتجاه ما سموه «العقوبات الذكية» وهذا ما نجده الآن تجاه سورية، إيران، فنزويلا، كوريا الديمقراطية، كوبا، روسيا، الصين… إلخ.

ما أود إيصاله بوضوح شديد أن الحرب الاقتصادية هي أخطر أنواع الحروب، وأن مواجهتها لابد أن تتمتع بالصرامة والشدة، وفي الوقت نفسه المرونة والذكاء والتعاطي الاستباقي قبل وقوع الأزمات، والأهم ملاحقة القتلة الاقتصاديين الداخليين، الذين يجلس بعضهم في أبراج عاجية، ويتاجرون علينا بالوطنية والإخلاص، ولكنهم يرتشون ويفسدون، ويتاجرون بكل شيء من دون أدنى إحساس بالمسؤولية، وهؤلاء القتلة ليسوا بعض التجار ورجال الأعمال فقط، بل شركاؤهم الموجودون في أكثر من مكان وموقع، ومحاربة هؤلاء تحتاج إلى «هيئة أركان اقتصادية» تقود على مدار الساعة كل تفصيل وتدقق وتحلل التطورات كلها، لأن قناعتي ما زالت راسخة بأن الشعب والجيش والقائد الذي يهزم أعتى مؤامرة في التاريخ، قادر على التعامل والتعاطي بحزم مع القتلة الاقتصاديين ومن وراءهم، وكونوا واثقين بذلك.

الوطن 

فيديوات متعلقة

مواضيع متعلقة

فاسدون يقودون ثورة الإصلاح

نوفمبر 7, 2019

شوقي عواضة

«نتعاطف مع نضال الشعب العراقي من أجل الحرية والحياة الكريمة، ونستنكر بشدةٍ أعمال القمع والقتل ضدّ المتظاهرين بقيادة قاسم سليماني، وحرس الثورة الإيراني»، بتلك العبارة غرّد وزير الخارجية الإسرائيلي ووزير الشؤون الاستخباراتية سابقاً يسرائيل كاتس معلناً تضامنه وكيانه مع الشعب العراقي. تلا ذلك تغريدة للرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب لمشهد حرق جدار القنصلية الأميركية في محافظة كربلاء بالتزامن مع الذكرى الأربعين لاحتلال السفارة الأميركية في طهران واحتجاز رهائن أميركيين بُعيد انتصار الثورة الإسلامية. موقفان رسميان وواضحان فيهما تبنّ صريح لتعزيز العداء لإيران بل لمحاربتها ومحاولة الثأر منها والحدّ من تصاعد قوة محور المقاومة في المنطقة من خلال بعض أدواتها، حربٌ بوجه آخر أعلنتها صراحةً صحيفة «واشنطن بوست» في مقالٍ لها جاء فيه «إنّ التظاهرات في العراق ولبنانً من شأنها أن تحقق ما عجزت عنه الإدارة الأميركية من خلال سياسة الضغط الأقصى على إيران»، مضيفة أنه بالرغم من كلّ الخطوات التي اتخذها الرئيس ترامب للضغط على إيران من خلال العقوبات والانسحاب من الاتفاق النووي، فإنه أخفق في تحقيق أية نتيجة، بل جاءت النتائج عكسية عززت حالة المواجهة داخل إيران. ووفقاً للمؤشرات فإنّ مؤسّسات ومراكز الأبحاث الصهيونية التي تراقب عن كثبٍ تسابق الأحداث في لبنان بقيت عينها على منظار الأحداث من ناحية تأثيره على حزب الله وهو النقطة الأهمّ بالنسبة إلى الكيان الصهيوني الذي ينظر إلى دور التظاهرات وانعكاسه على حزب الله وحجم المطالبة بنزع سلاحه وتأثير المجريات على أداء الحزب في صراعه مع العدو ومدى إشغاله وإدخاله في معارك داخليةٍ تنعكس على أدائه في مواجهة العدو الذي يدرك يقيناً أنّ حزب الله سيبقى بكامل قوته وجهوزيته لأية معركة معه في ظلّ استمرار التظاهرات المطلبية أما في حال انتشار الفوضى فإنّ العدو الصهيوني يدرك تماماً أنّ حزب الله سيكون أكثر جهوزية وتسلحاً وتطويراً لقدراته القتالية من أيّ وقتٍ آخر وهذا ما أكدته الباحثة في معهد أبحاث الأمن القومي الاسرائيلي في جامعة تل أبيب أورنا مزراحي، التي رأت أنّ ضعضعة الاستقرار الداخلي في لبنان سيجلب المخاطر على كيان الاحتلال لا سيما في ظلّ تعاظم قوة ونفوذ حزب الله نظرية عززها معظم الصحافيين الإسرائيليين حين عبّروا عن خيبتهم من تحقيق أيّ تغيير جذري في لبنان في ظلّ طريقٍ مسدودٍ. وبناء عليه فإنّ الرهان على تحقيق أيّ إنجازٍ يضعف حزب الله في لبنان هو وهمٌ، لذلك يرى الخبراء الصهاينة أنّ التركيز الإعلامي والرسمي على العراق هو من أولويات المؤسسات الصهيونية نظراً لرؤية واشنطن وتل أبيب اللتين تريان في العراق الشريان الحيوي الأكبر والأهمّ لإيران في كسر العقوبات الدولية والأميركية المفروضة عليها ولأنها تشكل الرئة التي يتنفّس منها محور المقاومة حيث يعتبر العراق هو الممرّ الأهمّ لإمدادات المقاومة من إيران إلى العراق وسورية ولبنان وفلسطين بعد فتح معبر البو كمال، إضافةً إلى «أنّ الحركة المطلبية الاجتماعية في العراق ذات الأغلبية الشيعية التي خرجت طلباً للإصلاح ومحاكمة الفاسدين وهي حركة محقة لا بدّ من استثمارها إسرائيلياً وأميركياً وتحريف وجهتها باتجاه إيران من خلال دعم بعض القيادات السياسية والأمنية والإعلامية والشخصيات الدينية من خلال دفع المجموعات المندسّة داخل التظاهرات مثل مجموعات الصرخيّين التابعة للإرهابي محمود الصرخي

Image result for ‫للإرهابي محمود الصرخي‬‎

وهو معممٌ شيعي مدعومٌ أميركياً ومن حلفاء داعش والذي كان له الدور الأكبر في عمليات التخريب والقتل من خلال نشر مجموعاته داخل التظاهرات إضافةً إلى الهجوم على القنصلية الإيرانية في كربلاء مما دفع القوى الأمنية العراقية إلى شنّ حملة اعتقالاتٍ في صفوف مناصريه الذين بادروا لفتح معركةٍ مع القوى الأمنية أدّت إلى اعتقاله مع العديد من مناصريه في كربلاء بالأمس. وإلى جانب ذلك الإرهابي عملت مجموعات الحركة الشيرازية المدعومة من بريطانيا الى تأجيج الشارع والقيام بأعمالٍ تخريبيةٍ والاعتداء على القوى الأمنية، تلك الحركة التي تمّ اعتقال أربعة من عناصرها في آذار من العام الماضي بعد هجومهم على السفارة الإيرانية في لندن. إضافةً إلى ذلك وفرت الاستخبارات الأميركية والاسرائيلية والسعودية العديد من المعمّمين الشيعة شيعة الاستخبارات المهيّئين للتعبئة والتجييش ضدّ إيران منهم حسن الموسوي واسمه الحقيقي نزار جبار مطشر الذي يدّعي أنه مرجع وهو ضابط سابق في قسم الاغتيالات في مخابرات صدام حسين وإضافةً إلى قائمةٍ طويلةٍ من الأسماء لبعض المعمّمين منهم من يديرون الحملات على إيران من لبنان من خلال التواصل مع مشغليهم وبروزهم على بعض وسائل الإعلام السعودي لتأجيج الوضع.

لا يتوقف دورهم عند ذلك وبغضّ النظر عن الدعم المالي والمتاجرة بدماء الشعب العراقي فإنّ مجمل الأسماء لمجموعة شيعة الاستخبارات هم ثلة من الفاسدين يقدّمون أنفسهم رواد إصلاحٍ للشعب العراقي وترى فيهم واشنطن وتل أبيب رافعةً للأصوات الرافضة لإيران وتعوّل عليهم بأن يكونوا قياداتٍ في المستقبل ولهم دور بارز في القرار العراقي نظراً لعدائيتهم لإيران ولموقفهم الإيجابي تجاه الكيان الصهيوني، وهذا ما أكده أمين عام عصائب أهل الحق الشيخ قيس الخزعلي في مقابلته المتلفزة، حيث أشار إلى وجود نشاطٍ وإدارة مخابراتية إسرائيلية أميركية في العراق وتورّط أحد الرؤساء العراقيين الثلاثة في التآمر على الشعب العراقي، إضافةً إلى تقديم ثلاثة قادةٍ أمنيين طلباً إلى نائب رئيس هيئة الحشد الشعبي الحاج أبي مهدي المهندس بقمع الحشد للمتظاهرين لكن المهندس رفض الطلب.

على ضوء ذلك يتجلى المشهد العراقي واضحاً لا سيما في ظلّ مواكبة المرجعية لتطور الأحداث ونظراً لخطورة المرحلة التي تستهدف العراق وشعبه الذي دفع أثماناً باهظةً في مواجهة الاحتلال الأميركي والإرهاب. ثمة إنجازاتٍ ستدفع باتجاه الحلّ بدأت بشائرها ببلورة تفاهمٍ واتفاقٍ مع زعيم التيار الصدري السيد مقتدى الصدر والقوى السياسية المؤثرة والمتضامنة مع مطالب الشعب، وبقيام القوى الأمنية بحملة اعتقالاتٍ تطال كلّ المندسّين والمرتزقين الذين تسبّبوا بتأزيم الأوضاع وكادوا أن يضيّعوا مطالب الشعب المحقة.

كاتب وإعلامي

Related Videos

خياران متصادمان في العراق: الدولة/ اللادولة وأميركا/ اللاأميركا

أكتوبر 7, 2019

د. عصام نعمان

الصراع في العراق وعليه ليس في الشارع وحسب بل بين أهل السلطة ايضاً. في الشارع، لم يكن للمتظاهرين قائد. في أروقة السلطة ثمة قادة كثر من دون ان يكون اولٌ بينهم. انها ظاهرة فريدة وغير مسبوقة.

المتظاهرون كان لهم دعاة لا قادة. كانت ثمة دعوة للتظاهر تداولتها وسائل التواصل الإجتماعي وفعلت فعلها بسرعة قياسية. الناشطون في الشارع اطلقوا شعاراً لافتاً: لا للسياسيين، لا للمعمَمين . مطلقو الشعار لم يحددوا هوية معيّنة للسياسيين والمعمَمين المطلوب إستبعادهم. ذلك سمح للمراقب الحصيف باستنتاج سريع: المتظاهرون يعارضون، وربما يعادون، كل المسؤولين الناشطين في المشهد السياسي منذ احتلال أميركا للعراق سنة 2003.

ثمة دليل على صحة هذا الإستنتاج: لم يَسْلَم من التخريب مقرّ ايّ حزب او تنظيم مشارك في السلطة في مناطق عدّة من البلاد. ربما لهذا السبب امتنعت المرجعية الدينية العليا ممثلةً بآية الله العظمى السيد علي السيستاني في الايام الثلاثة الاولى للحراك الشعبي عن التعليق على ما رافقه من حوادث واحداث.

الى ذلك ثمة ظاهرات اخرى استوقفت المراقبين:

أكثف التظاهرات كانت في مدن الجنوب الشيعي الكبرى: البصرة والنجف وكربلاء والناصرية، ناهيك عن الحلّة في الوسط.

امتناع التيار الصدري، بقيادة السيد مقتدى الصدر، عن المشاركة في التظاهرات. إلاّ ان الصدر طوّر قراره لاحقاً بإعلانه سحب كتلته، سائرون ، من البرلمان ومطالبته الحكومة بالإستقالة وإجراء انتخابات نيابية مبكرة.

معظم الاحزاب ايّد، بادئ الأمر، مطالب المتظاهرين إلاّ ان عمار الحكيم، زعيم تيار الحكمة، ورئيس الوزراء السابق حيدر العبادي حزب الدعوة سارعا لاحقاً الى تأييد مقتدى الصدر في دعوته الحكومة الى الاستقالة وإجراء انتخابات.

حتى رئيس الوزراء عادل عبد المهدي – ابن الناصرية – ايّد مطالب المتظاهرين، وحرص على القول بأنّ البلاد تقف امام خيارين: الدولة او اللادولة . في مفهومه، الدولةُ تعني الأمن والنظام كما تعني ايضاً الفئة الحاكمة التي تقبض على ناصية السلطة.

معظم المتظاهرين وضعوا اهل النظام كلهم في سلة واحدة وطالبوا بإسقاطهم. أقسى التهم الموجهة اليهم واكثرها رواجاً هي الفساد والسطو على المال العام. لعل احداً لا يجادلهم بأن الفساد في العراق سلطان. ثمة تقارير رسمية تكشف انه، منذ إسقاط نظام صدام حسين بفعل الإحتلال الأميركي، ابتلع الفساد نحو 450 مليار دولار من الأموال العامة، ايّ أربعة اضعاف ميزانية الدولة وأكثر من ضعفيّ الناتج المحلي الإجمالي للبلاد. مفكر وباحث عراقي يساري رصين من اهل النجف اكّد لي انّ دخل العراق من النفط منذ 2004 فصاعداً تجاوز مبلغ تريليون ألف مليون دولار، ومع ذلك لا اثر لمردود مجزٍ لهذا الدخل في ايٍّ من ميادين الصناعة او الزراعة او الخدمات العامة، اذ ما زالت مناطق عدّة في البلاد بلا كهرباء وبلا مياه نظيفة للشرب، وما زال اكثر من 30 في المئة من الشباب عاطلين عن العمل، واكثر من 25 في المئة من العراقيين تحت خط الفقر.

اذ يتضح عداء الشعب العراقي، في معظمه، لأميركا وما جرّته على البلاد منذ احتلالها من ويلات، استوقفت المراقبين فورة الغضب التي تبدّت في تظاهراتٍ عمّت مدن الجنوب الشيعية ما يحمل على التساؤل عمّا اذا كانت هذه الغضبة تطال ايضاً إيران والاحزاب التي تدعم انصارها في السلطة. في هذا السياق، أشار مراقبون الى أحزابٍ معادية لأميركا والسعودية اكدت ثبوت قيام موظفي السفارة الأميركية في بغداد بتحريض منظمات المجتمع المدني المدعومة من قبلها على المشاركة في التظاهرات وإطلاق شعارات ضد إيران وضد حكومة عبد المهدي.

الحقيقة ان ثمة اختلافاً وانزعاجاً متبادلين بين أميركا وعادل عبد المهدي سببهما خطوات خمسة اعتبرتها واشنطن استفزازية اتخذها الرجل وحكومته في الآونة الأخيرة تتمحور حول امورٍ خمسة:

اولاها، زيارته الصين منتصفَ الشهر الماضي وتوقيعه اتفاقات معها لبناء وتطوير بنى تحتية عراقية.

ثانيها، تنديده بـ صفقة القرن واتهامه إسرائيل بالوقوف وراء استهداف عدد من مقار الحشد الشعبي خلال شهريّ تموز/ يوليو وآب/ اغسطس الماضيين.

ثالثها، قيامه بتوقيع اتفاقيات مع شركة سيمنس الالمانية لتطوير قطاع الطاقة الكهربائية، مستبعداً بذلك شركة جنرال الكتريك الأميركية.

رابعها، توجهه الى روسيا لشراء منظومات دفاع جوي من طـراز أس 400 بعد اتهامه إسرائيل بإستهداف مقار الحشد الشعبي .

خامسها، قيامه بكسر اكبر المحظورات الأميركيـة وهو إفتتاح معبر القائم – البوكمال الحدودي مع سورية، معبّداً بذلك طريق طهران بغداد دمشق – بيروت ما يدعم لوجستياً قوى المقاومة العربية الناشطة ضد إسرائيل .

التطور الأهم تخلّي المرجعية الدينية العليا عن موقف الصمت. آية الله السيستاني أصدر بياناً أيّد فيه مطالب المتظاهرين المحقة ودعا الحكومة الى استجابتها بلا إبطاء، مؤكداً على وجوب تأليف لجنة خاصة من خبراء اختصاصيين من خارج الحكومة وخارج محيط الاحزاب المؤيدة لها مهمتها درس الاوضاع الإقتصادية والإجتماعية وتحديد مفاصل الاصلاح الشامل ومتطلبات مكافحة الفساد. عادل عبد المهدي سارع الى تأييد موقف السيستاني ومطالبه والإشادة بمرجعيته كصمام امان للبلاد.

إذ حدّد السيستاني لأهل السلطة طريق الخروج من الأزمة التي عصفت بالبلاد وهدّدت الدولة الهشة بالإنهيار، فإنّ عبد المهدي أدرك بلا شك أنّ ما حدث هو حصيلة سنوات طويلة من صراعات اهل السلطة أنفسهم الذين عاد معظمهم بمواكبة الأميركيين مع احتلال البلاد، وان تهافتهم على إحتلاب مواردها وتقاسم خيراتها أنهك بنيتها الاجتماعية ومؤسساتها الاقتصادية، وأغرى قوى خارجية متعددة بإبتزازها واتخاذها ساحة لتصفية حسابات اقليمية ودولية. ولا يفوت عبد المهدي ايضاً الإدراك بأنّ القوتيّن الابرز في الصراع داخل العراق وفي الاقليم هما الولايات المتحدة وإيران، وانّ تداعيات الصراع بينهما وتكالب أهل السلطة على المال والنفوذ وضع البلاد أمام خيارات متصادمة، وانّ شراسة ادارة ترامب، ومن ورائها إسرائيل ، في مواجهة إيران مداورةً بمحاصرتها اقتصادياً، ومباشرةً بالضرب في عمق حلفائها الأقربين سورية والمقاومات اللبنانية والفلسطينية والعراقية دفع الى واجهة الصراع خياراً إضافياً لعله الأكثر إلحاحاً وأهمية هو وجوب بناء عراق بلا أميركا بعدما تمكّن العراقيون الأحرار، او كادوا، من تحرير العراق من الإرهاب والإرهابيين.

اجل، المطلوب من أحرار العراق اعتماد خيارين متكاملين: الدولة القوية الديمقراطية، وعراق متحرر من أميركا المستبطنة دائماً عدوانية صهيونية فاجرة، ومتحرر من مخططات ومطامع اقليمية ماثلة.

Related Videos

Related Articles

الإعدام للعملاء… ولكشف مَن يسوّق لهم

سبتمبر 13, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– تسقط السياسة عند أبواب الوطن، وتنتهي المجاملة وحملات العلاقات العامة عند دماء الشهداء. والعمالة لن تتحوّل إلى وجهة نظر. وما جرى في قضية تسهيل عودة جزار الخيام وجلاد المعتقل العميل الذي لا تزال صرخات الأسى ودماؤهم وأمراضهم وإعاقاتهم، شواهد على أفعاله، ليس مجرد خلل إداري بل هو عمل سياسي أمني خطير يكشف الوضع الهشّ للتعامل القضائي والأمني مع ملف العملاء، وسهولة التلاعب به، والنفاذ من بين ثقوب اللعبة السخيفة للطائفية المريضة، لجعله قابلاً للتساكن. وهذا ببساطة لن يحدث، لأن تلكؤ الدولة عن واجباتها سيعني شيئاً واحداً، أن تتشكل فرق الموت لملاحقة العملاء كما حدث في فرنسا بعد تحرّرها من النازيين قبل أن تتولى المحاكم القيام بواجبها. ومَن يريد أن تكون الدولة مرجعاً حصرياً للعقاب يجب أن يأخذ ذلك في الاعتبار.

عرض الصورة على تويتر

– القضية الآن في عهدة القضاء العسكري، الذي يستعدّ لتوجيه الاتهامات المناسبة للعميل عامر إلياس فاخوري، وستكون عيون الناس مفتوحة على كل تفصيل في القضية، وسيكون أهل المقاومة وأسراها المحررون مجندين قانونياً وإعلامياً كي لا تسهو عين عن سانحة، وصولاً للحكم العادل الذي لا يجب أن يكون دون الإعدام. فهذا العميل مجرم قاتل، سقط على يديه عشرات الأسرى مضرَجين بدمائهم، منهم مَن استشهد ومنهم من لا يزال يحمل ندوب جراحاته. والدعوة مفتوحة لمئات المحامين للتطوع للمرافعة في القضية التي يجب أن تشكل دعاوى مئات وآلاف الأسرى المحررين وأسر الشهداء منهم موضوعاً لها، والدعوة لكل الأحزاب والشخصيات المؤمنة بلبنان وطناً لا مكان فيه للعدو وعملائه للاستنفار لتصويب مسار الأداء القضائي والأمني الذي تقف وراء سقطاته السياسة بكل وضوح، لكشف الجهة التي حضرت ورتبت وسوقت لهذا الاختراق القذر والقبيح لصورتنا كوطن ودولة.

– الفارق كبير بين الحديث عن مبادرات لاستعادة الأسر التي فرت إلى فلسطين المحتلة خلال التحرير لاعتبار الخوف من حسابات طائفية، أو بعض الذين كانوا مجنّدين في جيش العملاء وليس في سجلهم ارتكابات، وبين الدعوة للصفح عن القتلة المأجورين من العملاء وعلى رأسهم جلاد سجن الخيام وجزار غرف التعذيب فيه، ومَن مثله من المرتكبين الذين لا يملك أحد لا في السياسة ولا في القانون حق الدعوة لاعتبار تجاهل تاريخهم، دعوة مشروعة تحت شعار استعادة الإبن الضال، أو منح فرصة ثانية للمخطئين، أو التلطي وراء قناع الطائفية والحديث عن الوحدة الوطنية في سياق تبرير العمالة وتقديمها كخطأ عابر، أو زلة قدم، أو تعبيراً عن انقسام أهلي. فالعمالة في عرف الوطن والقانون هي العمالة وليست لها شفاعة، لا طائفية ولا سياسية ولا حزبية ولا عائلية.

عرض الصورة على تويتر

– ما جرى خطير وخطير جداً، ولا يكفي لمسح سواده السير بمحاكمة الجلاد والجزار عامر فاخوري، فالمطلوب حملة متواصلة متصاعدة لكشف المستور في قضيته وجعل الحقيقة ملكاً للرأي العام، وجعل المحاكمة العلنية لهذا الخائن عبرة لسواه، تحت شعار الإعدام أقل القصاص للقتلة الذين باعوا وطنهم للعدو. ويبقى أن الأهم أن تصل بنا هذه الحملة لتأديب وردع من يظنّ أن هناك تبييضاً للعمالة، يشبه تبييض الأموال، ويمكن تمريره في ظل المنظومة الإجرامية المسماة قلب المفاهيم حيث يعاقب المقاومون بتهم الإرهاب والتبييض ويتم عبره تبييض صفحات العملاء.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Kidnapping as a tool of imperial statecraft?

Kidnapping as a tool of imperial statecraft?

September 06, 2019

[This column was written for the Unz Review]

There is nothing new about empires taking hostages and using them to put pressure on whatever rebel group needs to reminded “who is boss”. The recent arrest in Italy of Alexander Korshunov, the director for business development at Russia’s United Engine Corporation (UEC), is really nothing new but just the latest in a long string of kidnappings. And, as I already mentioned in distant 2017, that kind of thuggery is not a sign of strength but, in fact, a sign of weakness. Remember Michael Ledeen’s immortal words about how “”Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business“? Well, you could say that this latest spat of kidnappings is indicative of the same mindset and goal, just on a much smaller, individual, scale. And, finally, it ain’t just Russia, we all know about the kidnapping of Huawei’s CFO Meng Wanzhou by the Canadian authorities.

By the way, you might wonder how can I speak of “kidnapping” when, in reality, these were legal arrests made by the legitimate authorities of the countries in which these arrests were made? Simple! As I mentioned last weekwords matter and to speak of an “arrest” in this case wrongly suggest that 1) some crime was committed (when in reality there is ZERO evidence of that, hence the talk of “conspiracy” to do something illegal) 2) that this crime was investigated and that the authorities have gathered enough evidence to justify an arrest and 3) that the accused will have a fair trial. None of that applies to the cases of Viktor BoutKonstantin IaroshenkoMarina Butina or, for that matter, Meng Wanzhou or Wang Weijing. The truth is that these so-called “arrests” are simple kidnappings, the goal is hostage taking with the goal to either 1) try to force Russia (and China) to yield to US demands or 2) try to “get back” at Russia (and China) following some humiliating climb down by the US Administration (this was also the real reason behind the uncivilized seizure of Russian diplomatic buildings in the USA).

This is not unlike what the Gestapo and the SS liked to do during WWII and their kidnapping of hostages was also called “arrest” by the then state propaganda machine. By the way, the Bolsheviks also did a lot of that during the civil war, but on a much larger scale. In reality, both in the case of the Nazi authorities and in the case of the imperial USA, as soon as a person is arrested he/she is subjected to solitary confinement and other forms of psychological torture (Manning or Assange anybody?!) in order to either make them break or to at least show Russia and China that the US, being the World Hegemon gets to seize anybody worldwide, be it by a CIA kidnapping team or by using local colonial law enforcement authorities (aka local police forces).

US politicians love to “send messages” and this metaphor is used on a daily basis by US officials in all sorts of circumstances. Here the message is simple: we can do whatever the hell we want, and there ain’t nothing you can do about it!

But is that last statement really true?

Well, in order to reply to this we should look at the basic options available to Russia (this also applies to China, but here I want to focus on the Russian side of the issue). I guess the basic list of options is pretty straightforward:

Frankly, in the case of the USA, options one and two are useless: the AngloZionist leaders have long given up any hope of not being hated and despised by 99% of mankind and they have long dropped any pretense of legality, nevermind morality: they don’t give a damn what anybody thinks. Their main concern is to conceal their immense weakness, but they fail to do so time and time again. Truly, when wannabe “empires” can’t even bring an extremely weakened country such as Venezuela to heel, there ain’t much they can do to boot their credibility. If anything, this thuggery is nothing more than the evidence of a mind-blowing weakness of the Empire.

But that weakness in no way implies that Russia and China have good options. Sadly, they don’t.

Russia can engage in various types of sanctions, ranging from the petty bureaucratic harassment of US representations, diplomats, businessmen and the like to economic and political retaliations. But let’s not kid ourselves, there is very little Russia can do to seriously hurt the USA with such retaliations. Many would advocate retaliation in kind, but that poses a double problem for the Kremlin:

  • Once a country has gone down the road of illegal brute force, there is no way back. The examples of the US, Israel or, for that matter, the Ukraine show that once primitive thuggery becomes part of your political arsenal you will forever remain a thug and everybody will see this (whether everybody will have the courage to openly state this is a different issue altogether).
  • The reality is that double and triple standards have long become the essential key feature of all western ideological systems, from the Papacy to modern capitalism. The Kremlin fully understands that in the AngloZionist Empire “some are more equal than others” and that that which is “allowed” to the World Hegemon is categorically forbidden to everybody else. Thus if Russia retaliates in kind, there will be an explosion of hysterical protests not only by the western legacy corporate and state ziomedia, but also from the 5th columnist in the Russian “liberal” press.

And yes, unlike the USA, Russia does have a vibrant, diverse and pluralistic media and each time when Putin agrees to a press conference (especially one several hours long) he knows that he will be asked the tough, unpleasant, questions. But since he, unlike most western leaders, can intelligently answer them he does not fear them. As for Dmitrii Peskov and Maria Zakharova, they have heard it all a gazillion during the past years, including often the most ridiculously biased, mis-informed and outright ridiculous “questions” (accusations, really) from the western presstitute corps in Russia.

So yes, Russia could, in theory, retaliate by arresting US citizens in Russia (or by staging Cold War type provocations) or by kidnapping them abroad (Russia does have special forces trained for this kind of operation). But this is most unlikely to yield any meaningful results and it would create a PR nightmare for the Kremlin.

The truth is that in most of these cases we always come down to the fundamental dichotomy: on one hand we have a rogue state gone bonkers with imperial hubris, arrogance and crass ignorance (say, the USA and/or Israel) while on the other we have states which try to uphold a civilized international order (Russia, China, Iran, etc.). This is by logical necessity a lop-sided struggle in which the thugs will almost always have the advantage.

[Sidebar: here I want to address a logical fallacy which I regularly hear in the West: when one political system proves stronger, or more capable of survival, than another one, this supposedly proves that the stronger state is also somehow “superior”. This is the argument used by those who claim that the Soviet Union “lost the Cold War” and that “Capitalism has proven much more sustainable/efficient than Communism”. This is utter nonsense for at least two reasons: first, the USSR did not “lose” the Cold War – the CPSU and the Soviet ruling Nomenklatura decided to break-up the USSR (against the will of the people!) and, second, the fact is that the Soviet Union was squandering its wealth all over the planet while the USA was robbing the entire planet blind. How can we compare the two? Finally, allow me this metaphor to make my point: if we would lock up a human being and a hyena in a small empty cell to see who will survive we can be pretty darn sure that the hyena will immediately and very “effectively” kill the human and eat him. Does that “victory” somehow prove the hyena’s “superiority”? Of course not! For one thing, capitalism implies infinite growth in a finite environment, which is exactly what a malignant tumor does for a living and which is self-evidently non-sustainable. So are we going to compare one political system – Communism – which does not rely on growth and which is therefore sustainable, and which spread its wealth all over the planet with one based on (international) “highway robbery” (don’t take my word for it, take it from Paul Craig Roberts himself who unambiguously stated recently that “American Capitalism is Based on Plunder”). Yes, the Soviet system was fundamentally rotten, profoundly dysfunctional and ineffective (only imbeciles or ignoramuses would deny that!), but it was not in any way “defeated” by the West nor is Capitalism any “better” or “superior” (whatever you want that to mean) than Communism (more on this here if you are interested).]

For all these reasons, there is really nothing much Russia (or China) can do about this situation besides publishing an official warning to the Russian people saying that if they travel abroad they should realize that “US intelligence agencies continue their current hunt for Russians around the world”. They also made public the list of countries which have extradition treaties with the USA: Australia, Austria, Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Belgium, Bulgaria, Bolivia, Brazil, United Kingdom, Hungary, Canada, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Dominica, Greece, Guyana, Haiti, Guatemala, Germany, Honduras, Greece, Israel, India, Jordan, Iraq, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Kenya, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Lithuania, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, Monaco, Myanmar, Nauru, Nigeria, Netherlands, Nicaragua, new Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, El Salvador, San Marino, Swaziland, Seychelles, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Lucia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Suriname, Sierra Leone, Thailand, Tanzania, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Turkey, Uruguay, Philippines, Finland, France, Czech Republic, Chile, Switzerland, Sweden, Sri Lanka, Ecuador, Estonia, South Africa, South Korea, Jamaica and Japan.

The MoFA concluded by warning that “The Russian foreign Ministry strongly urges all Russian citizens planning trips abroad to carefully weigh all the risks, especially if there is reason to assume the possibility of claims against them by American law enforcement agencies”.

Some caveat emptor before buying your airline ticket, right?!

Conclusion: it will get a lot worse before it gets better

First, we need to always remember that kidnappings are just the latest manifestation of an overall pattern of thuggery by the USA. The attitude is pervasive, and US citizens are not free of this climate of thuggery. Another good example are the outright bribes offered to the ships captains of Iran, to sail their crude carriers to somewhere were the US can literally pirate the carrier. Remember the amazing confession by Pompeo himself:

We lied, we cheated, we stole…. it reminds you of the glory of the American experiment”?

You don’t?

Then here is a quick refresher:

It can almost be rewritten and expanded like this:

We lie, we cheat, we steal, we kidnap, we bribe, we extort, we pirate, then we threaten, and then we tell everyone how exceptionally morally superior we are.

Yet a certain limit has been crossed. It is as if their own belief in their own moral superiority has inverted to the extent that their own moral superiority is so big, and so certain, that any small actions of thuggery is allowed to them. This will not change any time soon and even the most innocent traveler must have awareness of this. This is why the Chinese are now openly wondering if sending Chinese students to the USA is such a good idea after all.

So the first thing we have to accept is that this pattern of thuggery will not stop, if anything – it will expand.

Second, we have to also realize that there are no good options for the Russians or the Chinese. In fact, this is normal: civilized actors often find themselves “out-gunned”, so to speak, by thugs, sociopaths and criminals. Over time, however, thuggery is always self-defeating because it is inevitably linked to a delusion of impunity. As for civilized states, while it is true that they are at a fundamental disadvantage when faced by uncivilized thugs but, again, over time they eventually prevail if only because everybody always ends up fed up and disgusted with the thugs. Finally, while thuggery can seem attractive to people with sociopathic inclinations, most human beings need a higher ideal than just unbridled consumption to inspire them. Communism had (and I would argue, still has) this ability. Capitalism does not.

For the foreseeable future, however, we can only expect more of the same. Thanks to the ceaseless efforts of Obama and Trump the Empire is collapsing even faster than it normally would and we can expect that the current sequence of humiliating defeats for the USA (and, of course, Israel which has its own humiliating wounds to lick!) will continue and that the USA (and, of course, Israel!) will have to find more small targets (be it kidnapped Russian nationals or empty buildings in Syria) to kidnap or destroy and feel powerful again.

This will be revolting, disgusting and simply plain stupid.

But there is nothing Russia (or China) can do to stop it, at least not for the foreseeable future.

The Saker

بين حروب الكلام… وقوانين الحرب

Image result for Avivim strike

سبتمبر 4, 2019

ناصر قنديل

بين حروب الكلام… وقوانين الحرب

– حجم التهالك الذي يعيشه الحلف الذي تقوده واشنطن، ويشكل كيان الاحتلال عموده الفقري ورأس حربته، وعنوان قوته، وقدرة ردعه، بلغ حداً صارت الحروب عند كلمنجية العرب في السياسة والإعلام، حروب كلام، ولعبة خداع بصري، وذكاء اصطناعي. ففي مرحلة سبقت الحشود الأميركية في الخليج، كان كل الحشد الكتابي والكلامي والخطابي يجري تحت عنوان، الويل والثبور وعظائم الأمور، وها هي إيران تواجه ساعة الحقيقة والعقاب آتٍ، والحشود العسكرية تأتي للحرب أو للتلويح بالحرب، وهذا هو الردع. ولكن إيران لم تمتثل ولم تفت في عضدها لا الحشود الحربية ولا التهديدات، ووقعت أول مواجهة وأسقطت إيران أهم الطائرات الأميركية في العالم، وصمتت واشنطن وهربت من المواجهة، وبدأت تتحدّث عن استفزاز إيراني لجرها إلى حرب لا تريدها، دون أن تفسر إذن لماذا جاءت بالحشود. ثم تفتقت عبقرية الكلمنجية عن تسخيف إسقاط الطائرة، والبعض قال إنها خدعة أميركية لكشف الدفاعات الإيرانية، ومعلمهم دونالد ترامب قال إنه خشي من الرد على الضربة لأنها ستزهق أرواح مدنيين.

– في تداعيات ما فعله جيش الاحتلال عبر العدوان المزدوج في سورية ولبنان، وأسفر عن شهيدين للمقاومة، وخرق عدواني للأجواء اللبنانية، وإعلان المقاومة عزمها على الرد، عادت حشود الكلمنجية لصف الحكي، واجترار الكلام ذاته، لبنان معرض للدمار بسبب مغامرات حزب الله، أو حزب الله لن يجرؤ على الرد لأن إيران في حال مفاوضات، أو خطر الحرب وشيك وخطير وكبير، أو أن حزب الله كما محور المقاومة يكثرون الكلام عن حق الرد، ولكنهم يحتفظون به في ثلاجة مبردة طويلة الأمد، لكن ماذا حدث عندما وقع رد المقاومة بما فيه من جديد نوعي يتمثل باستهداف موقع للاحتلال في فلسطين المحتلة عام 48، وتهرب جيش الاحتلال من الرد، مكتفياً بقذائف القشرة كتقليد عسكري لكل الجيوش بعد كل تعرض للاستهداف لا يعتبر رداً، الذي حدث أن كيان الاحتلال انكفأ تحو حرب الكلام، ومن ورائه هبت حشود الكلام، تارة تسخف العملية، وتنسى أنه لو أطلقت طلقة عبر الحدود، وخصوصاً نحو فلسطين المحتلة عام 48 قبل سنوات أو من غير حدود لبنان لخاض كيان الاحتلال حرباً. وكما أغرقوا الناس بطوفان من الشائعات والفبركات بالتشكيك بكون الطائرتين للكيان وجيشه، صارت القضية عدم وقوع قتلى أو إصابات في جيش الاحتلال كما في الطائرة الأميركية في هرمز، لكن الحقيقة بقيت، أن الضربة التي تلقاها الأميركي والإسرائيلي قد أصابته في صميم قوة ردعه، لكنها رغم الألم أقل مخاطرة من الحرب، فيبحث عن ذريعة للهروب، الحقيقة التي باتت قانون حرب، هي أن واشنطن ومثلها تل أبيب تريدان الحرب على محور المقاومة ولكنهما تخشيانها، وأن محور المقاومة لا يريد هذه الحرب لكنه لا يخشاها.

– ببساطة الردع مهابة، وإعلان جهوزية لدخول الحرب عند مجرد تخطي الآخر الخطوط الحمراء، والهزيمة اختراع الذرائع والمبررات للتهرب من خوض حرب جرى التهديد بخوضها رغم دوس الآخر على الخطوط الحمراء، وثمة مهابة تتمرغ بالوحل ومهابة تعانق عنان السماء.

Related Videos

Related Articles

 

Aoun’s Adviser to Al-Ahed: ’Israel’ to Receive Strong Response

By Al-Ahed

Beirut – The Advisor of Political Affairs to the Lebanese President Pierre Raffoul told Al-Ahed News Website that President Michel Aoun’s decision to respond to “Israel” would be carried out despite those disapproving of it. He warned of a strong response to the latest “Israeli” aggression. The position of the president of the republic is clear in this regard.

“There are positions from those who claim to be sovereign and they do not even issue a statement of condemnation against ‘Israel’. On the contrary, they are attacking the sovereign decisions and protection of Lebanon,” Raffoul said. “We are preserving our dignity and our country. Anyone who opposes the decisions of the state that protect Lebanon and defends “Israel” in one form or another must be prosecuted. People who do not adopt a national position do not know the taste of freedom and sovereignty. Unfortunately, they only know how to be subordinate. ”

The president’s advisor for political affairs explains to Al-Ahed that “Israel has reached Dahiyeh [Beirut’s southern suburbs] and the Bekaa and attacked us, and we must preserve the sovereignty of Lebanon. There are some voices that must be tried because we are under ‘Israeli’ aggression and there are those who refuse to defend our homeland. This also happened during the July war when certain figures got involved and wanted the war to continue to eliminate the resistance.”

He stressed that today in Lebanon there is national unity. The three levels of leadership in the state want to defend Lebanon and protect its territory. He pointed out that “the position in the Council of Ministers is aligned with this direction.”

Raffoul praised the position of the Supreme Defense Council regarding the recent “Israeli” aggression against Lebanon, which he described as “a national and honorable position that can be relied on now and in the future to protect Lebanon.”

Related News

مَن هم أعداء الوطن؟

أغسطس 29, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– عندما يقول رئيس الجمهورية إن العدوان الإسرائيلي إعلان حرب، فهذا يعني أننا في حالة حرب. وعندما يقول رئيس الحكومة على طاولة مجلس الوزراء إننا في مواجهة عدوان وليس الأوان لسجالات مؤذية، فهذا يعني أن الوضع على درجة عالية من الوضوح وعلى درجة عالية من الخطورة، كي يلتقي رئيسا الجمهورية والحكومة بما يمثلان دستورياً وما يرمزان إليه من اختلاف في اللون السياسي، على تشخيص واحد دقيق هو درجة الخطورة ووضوح العدوان وإعلان الحرب. ولمثل هذه الحالات تمّ سن القوانين التي تتحدث عن تهوين الروح الوطنية وتوهينها، ببث الشائعات أو إطلاق المواقف المشككة التي تزعزع التماسك الداخلي وتفتح نقاشات وسجالات تعرف أن العدو يحتاجها للتعامل مع جبهة داخلية مفككة.

– لا يجوز الخضوع في مواجهة الذين يبيعون الوطن لأعدائه بداعي العمالة أو الأحقاد أو النفوس الصغيرة المناكفة، لابتزاز عنوانه التخوين، على قاعدة أنه لا يجوز تخوين أحد ويجب أخذ كل ما يُقال بصفته وجهة نظر وحق مشروع في التعبير عن الرأي، لأن الخضوع للابتزاز هنا يتم على حساب الوطن باسم الديمقراطية. ونحن لا ندعو إلى إجراء قانوني بحق هؤلاء، بل على الأقل إلى عدم منحهم شرف كونهم أصحاب رأي. فهم الطابور الخامس الذي تتحدّث عنه أدبيات الحروب، وهم حالة الإشغال الداخلي التي تتولى العمل خلف خطوطنا لحساب العدو. أدركوا ذلك بسبب عمالة بعضهم أم لم يدركوا بعدما أعماهم الحقد والكيد. فالواجب الوطني يقتضي فضح دورهم ورفض تسميته وجهة نظر وحق بإبداء الرأي.

– نحن لا نعلن حرباً كي يسألوا عن الممسك بقرار الحرب، بل نحن نمارس حق الدفاع بوجه عدوان، وأقلّ الخسائر في المواجهة التي أرادها العدو، هي أن لا يتولى الجيش الردّ، وهم لا يطالبون بأن يفعل الجيش ذلك بل يطلبون أن نمسح العدوان بجلدنا ونصمت بداعي العجز والخوف. والبديهي رفض مطلبهم بداعي الوطنية، كما البديهي طالما أن المقاومة كركن من أركان قوة لبنان هي المستهدفة فأقل الواجب الوطني أن يصطف اللبنانيون وراءها بتفويض وطني شامل يربك العدو، لتتولى الردّ الذي يعيد الأمور إلى نصابها ويمنع تغيير قواعد الاشتباك الذي يريده العدو، كما قال رئيس الحكومة.

– المشوّشون والمشككون اليوم، والمتبرّعون بالنق وقسمة الصفوف وزرع الوهن في النفوس، وتوهين الشعور الوطني والقومي، هم طابور خامس يجب عزله. والإشارة بالإصبع إليه، والقول له بواضح الكلام صفته الخبيثة بين عينيه، فذلك واجب وطني، وأن يعرف الناس اليوم وغداً وقبل الرد وبعده وما قد يترتب عليه، وما يستعدّ المتربّصون من هؤلاء للمتاجرة بالبكاء على الخسائر واستغلالها، لمواصلة المهمة المشبوهة. هؤلاء يجب أن يصنفوا اليوم كأعداء للوطن يراقب الناس كلماتهم وتصرفاتهم ويحسبونها ليحاسبوهم عليها، بعد النصر، ومنعهم من تصدّر الصفوف بين المهنئين مرة أخرى كما فعلوا عام 2000 بعد التحرير. وقد كانوا يشتمون المقاومة صبحاً ومساء ويشككون بوطنية شهدائها وتضحيات دمائها.. وفجأة قفزوا إلى مقدمة صفوف المهنئين يحاضرون في العفة.

Related Videos

Fifth Column الطابور الخامس

 

 

Related Articles

The Terrorists Among US- Cyber War and Privateers are the true Domestic Terrorists

August 14, 2019

by George Eliason for The Saker Blog

The Terrorists Among US- Cyber War and Privateers are the true Domestic Terrorists

What are Cyber Privateers and should you be afraid of them? Cyber privateers and cyber bounty hunters are criminals that are not covered under international law as government agents. In reality, this almost nullifies the chance for war to start over any particular hacking or compromised data event.

The problems hired or volunteer contractors create include a projectable legal attribution. You don’t have to be able to prove a country was behind a cyber attack or hack as long as you meet certain conditions. You can literally project the blame entirely to a different entity. The legal aspects will be covered in the next article.

It also nullifies the myth cyber privateers/ bounty hunters can use government tools on civilian or otherwise protected classes of people and infrastructure at will. International law doesn’t give people hired or volunteering to commit crimes under any auspices a free pass.

This is a new class of terrorism which separates a cowardly criminal element from the victim the same way a remotely detonated explosive would when used at a shopping mall. This criminal activity is spreading at a rate that raises alarm bells especially with the projection of 3 million untrained new hires over the next few years.

In the last article, I introduced you to Jimmy and Gary. After three difficult months of online Youtube training, both of our heroes were ready to take on careers as international men of mystery.

The absolute risk this presents to international peace and security should be obvious regardless of what accepted policy is. Everybody gets to spy or nobody gets to spy is the mantra this generation of Intel managers was brought along with. Most of the tools in the NSA arsenal have their start or at the very least a counterpart that is freeware.

Disgruntled people have access to software that can literally trigger a heart attack for someone with a pacemaker, cause a seizure, or even take control of your car.

More than 70 percent of the Pentagon’s Counterintelligence Field Activity: CIFA is staffed by green badge contractors. The majority of personnel at the DIA, the CIA National Clandestine Service, the National Counter Terrorism Center, and more than 80% of the NSA budget goes to private contractors.

All of the agencies are filled with what amounts to day labor. How many of them already have the keys to the barn that potentially starts the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse on their way?

State sized tools give emotionally inadequate and politically repulsive people the ability to illegally mimic or ply actions that are inherently governmental in nature. These same disgruntled overpaid groups fill out the do not fly lists. They are putting people on domestic terrorist watch lists. They are deplatforming journalists and people expressing opinions contrary to their employers and taking over social media and opinion for their employers.

The same groups are hacking websites and stealing financial account information. They gain access to bank accounts through phishing exploits and siphon your account dry. One group I am writing about did this to a family member of mine because of the exposure I’m giving. I’ll get back to that later in the series.

Over the last five years, I’ve not only described the role cyber privateers are playing in world affairs, but have been documenting the players and the damage they are causing.

This article will describe the now accepted US cyber policies that were written by cybercriminals to give themselves cover so they can use the American people and people of the world as their own personal cash cow or reservoir. If they don’t like you, no need to wonder who gets to pay for that.

The inherent problem with cyber privateers is covered in the job description as well as their rather fanciful notion they are anything but criminals.

Privateers operate as sanctioned pirates. These throwbacks pretend to operate like their 18th century inspirations did. Back in the day, the sponsor country allowed them to make money attacking merchant and military vessels they didn’t like but didn’t necessarily want a war with. When mistakes were made, privateers supposedly made reparations to the groups they victimized. They had to identify themselves and offer a remedy for damages.

The 2019 cyber privateer or bounty hunter is under no such compunction. They don’t identify themselves and their victims rarely know who hit them. In fact, when they do identify themselves, it’s just to gloat. They do it in a setting that implies the message that needs to get across without confessions that would hold up in a court.

If this sounds wordy, cutesy, or alarmist, private contractors have interrupted the power grid in Venezuela and hacked into Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. They are penetrating the power grid in Russia. This is an ongoing problem that’s exasperated by the fact legislators rely on the terrorists to draft the laws to protect them from everyone else.

Think of it this way, if Joey, going by the cool hacker name HedCh33z3, decides he doesn’t like Latvia, can he disrupt their electrical infrastructure, medical infrastructure, or elections?

The fact is they move in and out of government service so often, they never bother to switch hats or status. Think of it this way, Joey works for the NSA for a week under a subcontractor and picks up a ton of tools to stalk his Ex and sadistically destroy her life piece by piece.  This is what happens when people assume the right to government powers without the authority or responsibility to use them.

Are you willing to send your kid to war or go yourself because Joey HedCh33z3’s ex-girlfriend’s family thinks he’s a creep and they are from XXX country? Yet, we are now snugly very close to being put in this horrific position by politically and emotionally stunted people.

Privateers are Terrorists

So, where do they get the right to do this? Starting right after September 11, 2001, OSINT and cyber started as a serious money-making cottage industry. In the last article, we closed with the DOD actively hiring cyber Bounty Hunters to hack into foreign countries infrastructure.

This practice didn’t just start yesterday. Since 2001, there have been many attempts to codify US hiring of cyber privateers or bounty hunters into law. What this has done is enshrine it in US cyber-policy. The DOD use of subcontractors says a lot.

  • What are cyber bounty hunters and cyber privateers and what do they actually do?
  • Work with direct action military subcontractors
  • Work for NGOs, corporations, lobby groups
  • Work for US government agencies like the FBI, CIA, DIA, DOD, DNI
  • Work for political parties and causes
  • Work for foreign governments like Ukraine as shown in this series against the interests of the American people
  • Work for themselves

They provide Intel through OSINT and hacking. They provide direct action through hacking and Information Operations. Today, they are taking on inherently governmental responsibilities and making decisions they don’t have the authority to make and they make decisions that belong to State agencies.

  • Who is the enemy?
  • Who is friendly (or are there really any friends out there)?
  • Who is a danger and how?
  • Why are they a danger?
  • What is their motivation?
  • What steps will the US need to take to stop them, turn them in a different direction, or make peace with them?

One attempt to legalize this activity is called the Morgan Doctrine.

You’re aware that the U.S. Secretary of State is actually dumb enough to host her own email server. Even if you’re a third-world country without the infrastructure to create serious cyber attacks yourself, a few thousand dollars in Bitcoins to Hackers-R-US will get you zero-day exploits to crack just about any individual server. Either way, you’re going to OWN that server before the next national holiday (pick your country, pick your holiday).

The Morgan Doctrine states simply that if you attack my computers (or my banking assets held in US-based computers), then under a certain set of well-defined conditions, a licensed and bonded “cyber privateer” may attack you in your home country and split the proceeds with the U.S. government…You raid our bank accounts, we raid yours. You make money from off-shore child pornography, we’re going to loot your bank accounts and, with some REALLY creative black hat operations, you will be taken off the grid worldwide to the extent that you’ll not even complete a cell phone conversation for the remainder of your miserable depraved life.- The Morgan Doctrine

Who decides what is right, legal, or legally binding? Is it right when someone who gets paid to find you and accuse you also makes his money from destroying your life and reputation, or directly by stealing money directly from you?

According to the Morgan doctrine blogger who does this kind of work for Oracle, Salesforce.com, BIGFIX, and other technology companies, the answer is a big yes.

The USA followed by Ukraine makes up the highest percentage of over 50,000 readers which reflects the numbers the Ukrainian Diaspora hired to create the illusion of Russian aggression in Ukraine and the 2016 election interference meme. This is a serious attempt to push legislators for legal cover for what is accepted at the policy level.

Let’s spell this out. If a cyber bounty hunter or cyber privateer say you work for Russia while they work against Russia, according to this, you picked your side in the war they get paid to fight. It doesn’t matter if you don’t know you’re in one.

When they work for NGOs, foreign governments, political parties, and companies, they are given cover. They found out along the way they are entitled to your bank account as part of their payment as well as the joy of ruining your life every way they can. It means no more than a video game to them.

In the private sector they now illegally, harass, stalk, and locate people with no legal justification. They are trying to facilitate renditions and executions. Let’s be clear, these are your neighbors doing this to your neighbors.

Aric Toler and Bellingcat helped set up the functionality of Ukraine’s hit for hire website Myrotvorets (peacemaker). The only goal of the site is to publish personal and contact information of anyone they consider standing against Ukrainian nationalism so they can be dealt with by private parties.

toler go get him.JPG

The above clipped from Christelle Neant’s article should be clear enough to understand on its own and she asks the right questions. Bellingcat’s work with privateer groups has included trying to leverage their collective expertise and locate and rendition me.

Almost every time I’ve been threatened by Ukraine, it’s an American collaborator making the threat for them. The linked article shows one such person who also designed Ukraine’s Information Policy. He also wrote the policy paper for the US government’s cyber policy.

The people that testify for the US Congress on cyber and OSINT are the same people doing these things. They are training and setting up groups in multiple countries and under different auspices.

More than one of them trained the full spectrum of alphabet agencies. CIA, NSA, DIA, FBI, DNI, DOD, and we can keep going across the board.

They were behind setting up the policy that guided the Tallinn Manual defining cyberwar and international law. We’ll be opening that up within a couple of articles.

As a testament of their cyber mojo, they spent the last few years collectively trying to locate someone who didn’t change locations often and used normal communications and social media. I publish articles in 5 or 6 publications regularly. I have 4 or 5 different social platform accounts.

helfire missile targeter.jpg

They couldn’t figure out that I was where I said I was for the last 5 years. This spring I wrote a Victory Day article with local video and interviews. Even though I clearly showed my location, they still weren’t too sure.

The one thing you can say about them and their ally Bellingcat is they are consistent. Consistently wrong that is. In Ukraine, Bellingcat’s chief source of Intel is Ukrainian Intelligence. This includes the Ukrainian State hackers that contacted me after my sister was hacked. Journalism from the Donbass side of the contact line is a crime against Ukrainian sensibilities.

This group supplies Intel to NATO and individual EU countries and makes the rounds in Congress. Bellingcat’s work in Syria is chiefly supplied by the other side of Bellingcat’s Intel fabricators who also work for Ukraine.

We now have Americans working with foreign Intel stalking Americans and foreign citizens/ journalists for foreign countries they know will be tortured and killed. This clearly falls under terrorist activity.

One side of the group that works for Ukrainian Intel contacted me for the first time the day after the bank account was hacked and cleaned out using the hacker’s preferred method. What was the reason for the sudden communication? He wanted me to know how smart he really was.

Yet, these same so-called super spies claim to be able to find information about things people are actively trying to hide like weapons systems, motive. Most of the time they don’t speak the language of the country they claim to have expertise for. They decide guilt even though reality shows they aren’t able to actually do the job. Strange, isn’t it?

It was US policy to make them extra-legal but not illegal in the US after 9-11. Congress worked with these groups to write laws that refuse to criminalize what they do when it’s done on citizens. In fact, it no longer matters which side of the spectrum holds the reins, they feel empowered and will continue to do so until laws are written regulating their industry.

Over the last articles, I developed a slow-burn look into the world of the private spy. The idea that in less than 4 years the industry wants to hire 3 million unlicensed, unbonded, and untrained experts to work both government and corporate Intel and spy gigs should scare the hell out of you.

Can you give me a reason why the US which already collects and analyzes every piece of data on the internet needs so many more of what amounts to interns working with state sized software packages?

That’s 82 US citizens per new hire private sector OSINT agent. They have to literally spend 4 days on each person they investigate (82 per year including babies) just to get a full year’s worth of work because of the existing DNI, FBI, CIA, DIA, DOD OSINT agents have the rest of the world covered.

How serious is the information I’m providing? The EU Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-EU) sent the articles to the EU institutions, agencies and bodies as well as outside governments and agencies. This means the EU has real concerns about the practice, laws, and policies allowing the practice because of the inherent damage so-called bit-players in private Intel and Information Operations (IO) can do at home and abroad not to mention diplomatically.

cert-eu for article.JPG

After you grasp the magnitude of the problem and begin unwinding the moving parts it can become manageable again through lawfare. Legal and societal protections you take for granted no matter where you live went out the window as soon as these practices became the norm.

Even from street level, people can make large sweeping changes to the world. Before you poo-poo, the idea, look at the CERT-EU screenshot again. I believe this can be done because I have already done it.

Towards the bottom of the article, we’ll get into the international policy for cyberwar and non-war situations. The same people that I’ve been writing about for the last 5 years exposing how they go after groups with protected status also wrote the policy for the US Government, all the agencies. While they didn’t write international policy directly, people they trained or work with closely did.

Four years ago, I exposed a flaw that exposes them to justice in the Tallinn Manual and threatened to pursue it. I did this because to win, I needed that gap closed. Tallinn is about applying the laws of war to cyber. It is something that otherwise would get no mention at all because it’s not considered a gap in any other context.

They closed that specific gap verbosely and gave me the opportunity to show how sordid this mess is. This also paves the way to provide a real resolution from private spies attacking civilians, social groups, political groups, journalists and other protected parties. Myrotvorets and Propornot should take note as should the other better and lesser-known companies and personalities.

No one has the right to use what they, themselves, rightfully label as Al Qaeda tactics on civilian populations, social activists, journalists, and other protected groups without assuming the legal definition of a terrorist, i.e. cyber terrorist.

Should lawfare (legal activism) fail to provide a remedy, the penalties for cyber assault (terrorism) and the right to a vigorous defense against perpetrators is what can make the laws change-FAST. Terrorism is terrorism is terrorism.

Once that fact is established anyone supporting them or hiring them in any way shape or form is guilty of material or direct support of terrorist activities against their own nation. Congressman, what say ye?

Law and policy makers fell in love with this power they never had before because it gives them the ability to shape policy they have no right to change for the sake of constituent and lobbyist cash and gift donations. They create loopholes in the cyber laws they write with the help of the companies and practitioners engaged in criminal behavior (under every other circumstance). Today, they hire the same criminals to help them with elections.  Oppo-research, reputation management, Information Operations, and even projecting their (congressman’s private) own foreign policy agenda into the international arena.

Imagine Congress asking a cybercriminal what kind of regulation or oversight their industry needed? What if Congress then asked the same societal deviants to write the laws that define the limit to what is legal they would agree to. Real criminals decided what the laws protecting their victims should be. They decided what the penalties should be if they got caught.

The tradeoff is this same Congress that was never allowed access to Top Secret information unless they have security clearance on their committee can get the actionable Intel before it’s marked “secret” if it’s gathered through OSINT by a private contractor working for US Intel agencies. That loophole makes it ok for anybody to move information before it’s been vetted and resell it.

Imagine these same legislators hiring you because you’re the expert they trust and they knowingly wink at the crimes you’re committing against your own people. They haven’t updated labeling the new twist on criminal law yet, and they won’t because you don’t want them to. And hardly anyone is referencing the same crimes using older precedent as a reference for prosecution or lawsuits.

This creates huge gray zones in the law. Gray zones are areas of law where even though something is illegal, there is no law on the books against a specific method of a known crime. Stalking is the easiest example. If someone is stalking you, follows you, and threatens you, we can all agree a crime was committed.

So is stalking a crime? Not if you are an OSINT practitioner doing it online because there is no legal or regulatory system you have to justify yourself to.

The gray zone, in this case, exists in a couple of areas. The first is attribution or identifying the perpetrator. This isn’t a small thing. The person with the Twitter handle “little ice cream girl” could actually be Stan from Milwaukee who was hired to sway the vote for his candidate. You annoyed him. The state sized software package he inherited working for XXX contractor that was working for the CIA toppling Antarctica is going to come in handy wrecking your life as thoroughly as the preverbal bull in the china shop.

The second is time and distance. Money concerns aside, if you are stalked, harassed, or threatened from the other side of the country or globe, what local prosecutor can even get his head around this new dimension of law?

Last year when I was originally going to publish this series, I spoke to an attorney specializing in international law. He listened for a short time and told me to stop. He didn’t want to hear any more. It wasn’t because of a lack of proof. His reasoned that the substance of what I was saying would put him in a very dangerous position.

It wasn’t his first rodeo and he claimed the last time around, his own national government refused to give him any cover or come to his aid. In his words, his government views taking on private Intel contractors as akin to taking on the CIA directly. And they weren’t willing to do that.

This is the attitude most people and even Congress takes. You can’t beat the deep state. But, the deep state ISN’T sworn-in law enforcement or agency personnel anymore. The illegal hiring practices for almost 2 decades gave private sector (green badges) oversight of agency personnel and projects. The problem multiplies because they trained the managers at the agencies and wield tremendous influence.

A fundamental truth is private industry cannot take on inherently governmental responsibilities legally or successfully. In the end, a company’s only consideration is their bottom line. Patriotism and companies part ways when it is no longer profitable. That’s just business.

What Congress and policymakers have done is to allow a huge gray area to be created where criminals are allowed to thrive because they provide political candy in the form of mostly fake Intel that supports whatever project a member of Congress needs to appease his pet cause lobbyists.

This could all be cleaned up by applying existing stalking and assault laws to online stalkers by making the punishment extreme. The same goes for political activists that are doing this under the cover written for them. As long as they volunteer, they are not targetable for retribution internationally. If they are provably working with a country or company working with a country, as soon as they stop, they can’t be touched. How’s that for a policy?

Fixes for Online Troll Remediation

Putting all these online Intel related cottage industries under rigid government oversight and forcing them to document what they are doing and to whom both domestically and internationally is the one way any type of privateer scenario that is already OK’d by the current policy can actually work. It also gives protected classes the opportunity to stop harassment and demand damages. This is precisely why it won’t happen unless it is pushed hard.

Congress could write and pass a one-page bill to write protection against this if they had the inclination. The crimes exist in the law already. The only expansion is applying them to technology. They won’t.

The other more realistic approach is to demand US president Donald Trump takes out his magic pen and write an executive order guaranteeing reasonable protections and appropriate punishment.

This is unlikely to happen because the move would literally box in this already metastasized invasive cancer commonly called the deep state. The celebrated work of the CIA and FBI infiltrating perfectly legal civil groups or dispersing propaganda through news platforms like the New York Times has been rendered child’s play in both scope and impact.

And we’re still waiting to see what kind of trouble 3 or 4 million unregulated new hires will bring domestically and internationally.

International Law and Policy for Online and Cyberattacks

Next, let’s establish a few things directly from Tallinn Manual I. From a 2015 article I’ll be highlighting a lot more in the next article I showed clearly that:

  • Civilians are a protected class.
  • If you work with a foreign country against their perceived enemies you are considered a military asset even if you work for a private contractor. You are targetable in every sense that word conveys.
  • If you work with a foreign country against their perceived enemies you are considered a military asset and attacks against civilians is a terrorist act.
  • To my knowledge no western country allows its citizens to make war on each other or citizens of other countries they are at peace with. The Black Letter Rules include: Rule 23.3 Cyber attacks against civilians is a war crime defined by rule 32.
  • Rule 26.7 The concept of “belonging to” defines whether you can be targeted or not. This rule defines civilians as off limits unless they are “engaged” in real war duties. It includes undeclared relationships where behavior makes it clear which side a person is fighting for.
  • Rule 26.9 Virtual online communities and people expressing opinions do not qualify as combatants.
  • Rule 30 defines a cyber attack as a non-kinetic attack reasonably expected to cause damage or death to persons resulting from the attack. If attacker mistakenly calls civilians lawful targets, the attack on civilians still occurred. It is a crime. This is an important consideration considering how interconnected the internet has made people.
  • Rule 31 Psy-Ops including leaflets, mass emails is not prohibited behavior.
  • Rule 33 If there is doubt to the status of a person, that person is to be considered a civilian and not targetable.
  • Rule 35.5 Gathering information for the military makes you a combatant.
  • Journalists are prohibited targets.
  • Once an attack is made, the retribution is legal and does not necessarily need to be in kind.

A cyber attack can be met with conventional weapons.

  • Rule 41 Means and Methods describes cyber weapons broadly as the means to carry out cyber war by use, or intended use of cyber “munitions” designed to cause damage, destruction, or death to its targets. The breadth of the rule is required because of the wide array of possible attacks through cyber means.

Now, the first loophole I wanted to be closed comes from an inverse look at a cyber war attack including stalking and targeting protected classes. Here’s how this can be elevated to war crimes.

Cyber can come from anywhere across the globe, anonymously, and stealthily (you may not even realize you were attacked). Because of today’s events people being attacked are from different parts of a given country and even spread across the globe.

This means if political or social activists are targeted, it may look like random events even though the numbers of victims could be in the hundreds of thousands or potentially millions. Here’s the two-minute example from one of the industry pioneers that attack civilians.

If the attack is considered as a single event because one single protected class or group is targeted even though they are physically at different geographical locations, we can reach the threshold for a cyber attack governed by the laws of war. Since it’s civilians, it would need to be litigated but the settlement would come from the offending country. Cha-ching!

Nevertheless, I collected a sample of 50+- IP addresses. Thank you, Mr. Justin, you are an eminently useful idiot.. . Also, many (most?) of the US readers were at work when they visited antiwar.com. Those US readers are concentrated in New York metro, Washington DC, greater Boston, the Bay Area, and Illinois (Chicago and main campus, U of I). Meanwhile, the Russian readers (there are only two in the dataset) are split between Moscow and Saint-Petersburg.”- Andrew Aaron Weisburd @webradius

https://www.opednews.com/populum/visuals/2015/10/2015-10-58313-500-ImagesAttr-populum_uploadnic_anti-war-10-15--jpg_58313_20151022-534.jpg

I ask why is this Info war agent that trained all the US Intel agencies, NATO, and works for Ukraine geolocating American citizens for Ukrainian purposes?

This group is a political social group reading and commenting at a media platform in a country that still has the 1st Amendment. It is a protected class.

THIS IS ONLY ONE STEP FROM A WAR CRIME. As soon as it’s established Weisburd is doing this for less than Ukraine’s hit for hire site Myrotvorets, we are in the neighborhood of WAR CRIMES. Interestingly, Weisburd helped spawn Myrotvorets and enhanced Ukraine’s geolocation abilities.

Secondly, if it doesn’t meet the war threshold, it is still a terrorist attack on protected groups. When I proposed that injured parties have the right to robust self-defense, Tallinn II closed up the language by barring civilians the right of redress, self-defense, or preemptive assault because this was the domain of nations.

But, that language also makes it imperative for them to persuade Congress to step up to bat and write restrictive laws or the future looks very bleak for private industry spies and IO working against the public interest.

But, that language also makes it an imperative for them to persuade Congress to step up to bat and write restrictive laws or the future looks very bleak for private industry spies and IO working against the public interest.

Did Andy Weisburd take that final step? Stay tuned, it’s detailed in the next articles. Next up, we’ll show the same small groups of OISINT and IO trailblazers are responsible for most fake news, bad Intel, and are covering up crimes against humanity.

Make no doubt about it, they are terrorists. They can be treated like terrorists and people have the right to robustly defend themselves.

%d bloggers like this: