Articles and Interviews by John Robles From February 09, 2013 to April 21, 2013
21 April, 15:51
Kosovo is Serbia, territorial integrity must be respected
Serbia is on the verge of recognizing the legitimacy of the illegal breakaway territory of Kosovo and expanding Kosovo’s authority. According to many Serbians and analysts this may lead to the eventual disintegration of Serbia as a sovereign state. Kosovo’s declaration of independence was an illegal act and the support by the West in redefining Serbian borders is a clear act of international aggression. Whether a forced border change in Serbia is carried out by economic pressure from the European Union or by the military aggression of NATO, it is still illegal and contrary to international law. The maintaining of the territorial integrity of sovereign nations is enshrined in international law and the United Nations Charter and is an integral part of every country’s right to security, self-government and maintaining its exoistence. Every country has the right to use force if necessary to protect its sovereign territory both from internal and external threats and under international law the imposition by force of a border change is an act of aggression. Therefore the campaign by the West in attempting to bring about an independent state in Serbia runs contrary to the United Nations Charter, international law and is illegal and must no longer be supported. With regards to Serbia and the self-declared “independent state” of Kosovo the fact that the West is imposing a forced border change, militarily through its surrogates NATO and KFOR, extra-legally through its police arm EULEX, extra-judicially through the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and economically and politically through the European Union, is an affront to all the principles of international law and international conventions with regard to territorial integrity. All of these bodies together, acting under the color of law, are in fact acting illegally to impose a Western conceived plan for the Balkans and a reassignment of territory which also runs counter to all agreements reached after World War II with regard to territorial changes. Of course when dealing with the issue academically the West’s hypocrisy is none the more clearer, than it is when looking at the situation surrounding Kosovo and the fallacy of the West’s entire adventure in the former Yugoslavia. This hypocrisy can be seen when it comes to sovereign territories such as Las Malvinas, Palestine, Puerto Rico, the Koreas and a host of other locations. Forcing a border change or outright denying the sovereignty of nation states is an extreme example of Western meddling but it is the clearest example of Western flouting of international law when it comes to promoting its own interests. The international community and United Nations member countries should be up in arms over Serbia being forced by the European Union into accepting and recognizing the forceful border change taking place within its sovereign territory. Whether that force be military or economic (it is a matter for academic debate which is more illegal when the goal is forced border change) it must not be allowed to continue and all parties placing pressure on Serbia to accept an internal border change to its sovereign territory must cease and desist immediately. If the world community allows the West and its geopolitical architects to get away with redefining the borders of Serbia it is allowing a dangerous precedent that will make it much easier the next time they target a country for territorial transformation. Serbia is a broken and devastated country which makes the leadership more susceptible to western manipulation and it has been kept unstable and marginalized for so long by an ongoing and conscious western effort that the Serbian people have little recourse to defend themselves against this attack by the West. The united Nations and the international community must pull together and support Serbia and support its right to maintain its territorial integrity, otherwise the whole concept of the United Nations and international law is a farce and the two are in fact only tools for use by the West when they see fit to use them for their own ends. Western hypocrisy is also clear when it comes to allowing Israel to continue building illegal settlements in Palestinian territory, arming terrorists to bring about regime change in Syria and in countries such as Puerto Rico, that the U.S. deems are not intelligent enough to govern themselves. States that have supported and promoted the secession of Kosovo from Serbia should, in reality, face sanctions from the UN and member countries. However the United Nations has shown, time and time again, that it is merely an instrument of the West and will continue to be thus as long as it is funded by and based in the United States of America. In my opinion the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, Venezuela and all other countries that have independent foreign policies must pull together and do more to assist the Serbian Government and the Serbian people in saving their country from the eventual complete destruction of their sovereign state which a recognition of Kosovo will lead to. If there were more economic and political assistance perhaps Serbian politicians would not be forced to look to the European Union to solve the country’s economic woes and more energetic moves could be made to return Kosovo to Serbia. With regard to the current residents of Kosovo claiming it is their nation state, they must be integrated into Serbian society and the international community should aid in that integration, not allow for the separation and breaking up of the country. This was not done by the West because Serbia was aligned with Russia and therefore was a “problem” country that they had to destroy.
Lastly if the international community continues to support the independence of Kosovo and the violations of international law that are ongoing there, then they should do the same if, for example the State of Texas decides to secede, from the United States. If you think this sounds ludicrous then you understand the hypocrisy of the situation in Serbia with regards to Kosovo. Kosovo is Serbia and territorial integrity must be respected and protected, no matter how small or weak a country may be. 19 April, 23:02
Boston bombings and the root of terror: the 9-11 generation coming of age?
Boston SWAT team member takes up as posistion as they search for 19-year-old bombing suspect Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev. The latest information that the alleged bombers responsible for the terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon were originally from Chechnya is a fact from which many conclusions may be reached. It is also a fact that should not be used as an excuse to demonize a particular group or religion. In this single event the U.S. war on terror has proven that it has failed. Americans are now in more danger than they were before 9-11. One might have postulated that the U.S. support of terrorists, from Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban to Chechen terrorists, right wing Central American paramilitaries, Irish Republicans, Syrian and Libyan insurgents and an array of others, was going to backfire. This has now been proven. You cannot support, fund and sponsor violent extremist elements one day, because they are helping you fight a mutual enemy, and then demonize them and kill their women and children the next day with careless drone strikes and the like. Russia knows this and has never negotiated, supported or worked with such elements let alone create fund and arm them as the U.S. has done around the world. But the U.S. does not care which side of the fence it is currently playing as long as its geopolitical goals are being fulfilled, that I believe is a given. One day they will support Muslim fanatics committing genocide in Serbia, the next day they will bomb and annihilate Muslims in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and where have you, and then act surprised and indignant when they are attacked in return. Russia has taken a much wiser and mature approach in dealing with Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, and the U.S. might learn from that approach if it in fact wishes to win its war on terror, which at this point is doubtful. As I said before the whole war on terror needs and breeds terrorists, something necessary to continue the paradigm. Russia’s approach has been to separate the Muslim faith, which in reality preaches peace and respect, and the criminal actions of terrorists and has shown genuine respect for the sovereignty of other countries and the religious beliefs of others. The U.S and the West has taken the approach of demonizing an entire religion and people on the one hand to providing the most extremist elements with support and asylum when it is convenient, on the other. Cases in point are Chechen terrorists and police killers who currently enjoy asylum and protection in the West for the sole reason that they were killing Russians and this served the United States’ geopolitical goals of destabilization and further conflict in the Caucuses. The head of the Russian Republic of Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov was right when he stated through his spokesman “"The persons in question did not live in Chechnya as adults. If they have become 'bad guys' save your questions for those who reared them." In this case the United States and their agents. If it turns out that the suspects were followers of the Faith of Islam, a faith I have the utmost respect for, which is most likely, then what the U.S. and the world is seeing is the new generation of anti-American terrorists who have been raised watching their people being slaughtered by the “War on Terror”. There can be no doubt in my mind, unless the U.S. changes its policies, this is just the beginning. The sad part here is that the American people, American civilians and innocent people will be the ones paying the price for American meddling and the faulty U.S. Government planning and execution of their war on terror. Which as I have said before is a tactic and hence is not something that a war can be waged against. The war on terror, for all intents and purposes, has clearly shown itself to be a war on Islam and an excuse for the United States to expand NATO and its military arsenals around the world. It has done more for creating anti-American sentiment and breeding terrorists than it has for eradicating extremist sentiment and anti-American hate and securing the safety of the American people. Perhaps and more likely than not, this was by design. According to the neoconservative authors of the Project for a New American Century, which could be called the blueprint for the whole endless-global-war-on-terror-paradigm that the U.S. has pulled the entire planet into, a catalyst was needed to justify U.S. military expansion worldwide, the necessary ingredient for the complete and total domination of the planet by the United States. That catalyst was 9-11. The perpetrators of the Boston Marathon bombing have played into their hands as this is will no doubt be used as an excuse for the continuation of the endless “War on Terror” and the global military expansionism by the U.S. and it allies. Both of which require there to be constant threats and constant attacks to maintain the façade of legitimacy and continue to terrorize the population into supporting every possible nefarious deed and stripping of rights all being done in the name of security. What is being missed in the debate on the attacks in Boston, and I have said this before, is that the U.S. authorities have proven that they are incapable of protecting the population from terrorist attacks. This one act has nullified and negated the entire reasoning and logic for the war on terror, the stripping away of rights in the name of security and the introduction of the hyper security state and thus it must all be stopped. Of course this event will be played in a different light but in reality it has also proven everything that has been done since 9-11 in the name of security is a farce and in reality the state is impotent and unable to truly guarantee the safety of the people. Other than turning the U.S. into a homogonous-one-race-one-religion hyper security state along the lines of Israel, the U.S will never be safe from terrorism until it finally stops its constant and endless meddling into the affairs of the foreign countries and attempting to dictate to the world and force the world to succumb to its own image of how it should be. These being primary goals of the Project for a New American Century. On another level the U.S. has possibly forgotten the human factor, or is counting on it which is a matter for further debate, and that being if one continues to kill, degrade, subjugate, exploit and annihilate a people, whether they be Serbian, Muslims, Afghans, American Indians, Mayans, Russians, Puerto Ricans, Syrians, Palestinians or anyone else, there will always be a lone individual who is ready to do anything to avenge those wrongs and there is nothing they can do to protect themselves against a lone individual acting autonomously. Respect, dialogue, diplomacy and genuine care on all levels are the only ways to stop terror from breeding and pinpoint surgical eradication is the only way to stop terrorists from striking. This must be done mercilessly before they strike, but it must be done to the guilty, not to innocents and there must be no room for collateral damage. Force breeds force, hate breeds hate, violence breeds violence, and war breeds war. Maybe it is time the U.S. thought about making peace, respecting the sovereignty of nations and respecting the will of the people, and stopped trying to force the world to bend to its own image? If not, this may be just the beginning. 18 April, 05:03
Russian children not singled out, last year 221 children died in Texas - official
The deaths, abuse and neglect of children in the United States is not limited to Russian orphans and in the State of Texas alone last year there were 221 children who died while in the care of their parents or caregivers. The Texas authorities are working with Russian Officials and keeping the Russian Government apprised of the situation of three Russian siblings, with the surname Klimov, who were adopted and taken to the United States. The Voice of Russia’s John Robles interviewed Shari Pulliam, with the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (the department handling the case), for the latest in a case that has attracted international attention.
Hello this John Robles I am speaking with Shari Pulliam, she’s the Media Specialist for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. Greeting Robles: I understand there was a hearing yesterday there in Texas regarding the Russian children; the sisters Anastasia and Svetlana Klimova and their brother, they were adopted there in Texas. Can you tell us what is the State of Texas doing right now to ensure the safety of the children? Pulliam: Right, there was a court hearing today in Hardin County, Texas, where the children have lived since they’ve been here in Texas. The judge granted our department, Child Protective Services, temporary managing conservatorship of those children. They were removed on March 21th from the home they had been living in, they are currently in the foster care system in Texas. Robles: Can you give us some details about why? Pulliam: Yes I can. The children made allegations of physical neglect and physical abuse by the adoptive parents.
We are currently investigating this case right now, we asked the parents to place them out of the home with family or friends. They were not able to give us any names of any family or friends that the children could stay with during the investigation, so the department took custody. Robles: Were the parents residents of Texas? Where do they come from? Pulliam: Yes, they are residents of Texas, they are residents of Hardin County. Robles: Are parents who adopt internationally given more leeway by state agencies? Pulliam: This case was handled just like any other Child Protective Services case, we had nothing to do with this initial adoption. We investigate abuse and neglect. Robles: Do parents who adopt internationally, in the United States, do they have to follow less stringent conditions to adopt children? Pulliam: When we get an allegation of abuse and neglect, we are going to treat every family the exact same, it is not going to matter if the child was adopted internationally or here, or if they are biological children. Robles: What about the brother? Apparently the sisters had a brother named Alex, he ran away from home. Do you know anything about him? What is his status right now? Pulliam: The brother, his name Zackary here in the states, he is 17 years old at this time, he has been missing since June of 2012. He is on a “Missing and Exploited Children” website, we have been actively pursuing his whereabouts with law enforcement, but we have had no luck so far. Robles: There is no clue as to where he may be? Pulliam: No. Robles: Is there any suspicion on the parents that something happened to him, or…? God forbid! Pulliam: No, not at all. There have been no allegations as to that. Robles: Have the sisters expressed any desire to return to Russia? Pulliam: No, they have not. Robles: What is the current status of the case, I mean, do you think they will be going back to the parents soon or do you think they will not ever be going back? Pulliam: We don’t look for them to go back to the parents. They are currently in foster care, where they will be until another court hearing on May 1st. We will present more facts of the case then, to the judge. It depends on what the parents plan to do, we have heard that they want to relinquish their parental rights. We are going to just have to look at that, when that time comes. Robles: At that time if the girls decide to come back to Russia, will they be allowed to do that? Pulliam: Well, I mean they are minors right now, if there was some that came forward, that we wanted to do a home study on, that wanted to adopt them, or they could prove that they were family or something like, that could be something we could look at. But right now we have no plans for that. Robles: Has your office been in contact with any Russian officials since this case began? Pulliam: There was a Russian official in court today. Robles: Can you tell us anything what happened? Pulliam: He was just there observing, taking note. We have been in touch with the Russian authorities all throughout this case, so they are apprised of what is going on. Robles: You, guys, are pretty much working together, there is no conflict there? Pulliam: No, not at all, we are working very much together for whatever is best for the girls, that’s what we want. We want them to be safe and healthy and Texas is providing a home for them right now, they are happy, they are together and they are safe, that is what we want for them. Robles: Do you think the brother might show up if things kind of stabilize? Pulliam: Maybe that is possible. If he has any contact here, or he is talking to anyone here, maybe. If he is listening we would like to help him also, we want to offer him a place to stay. We want him to know that his sisters are ok, that they would like to speak to him. We would like to have all of the kids placed together if at all possible. Robles: If you’d like, since we are here on the radio, maybe he is listening, would you like to give us a phone number, he might want to call? Pulliam: Sure, he can call the local CPS office, my personal number at 409-951-3351. We would love to send someone to pick him up. We want to make sure that he knows that his sisters are safe and they are doing fine. Robles: And that was 409-951-3351, and his name in Russian is Alex, in the United States it is Zackary, correct? Pulliam: Yes sir, that is correct. Robles: On a cultural note, do you think that there is a culture of violence in the US that might be transposed on children? Do you think it is just unfortunate incident? Pulliam: I think it is unfortunate, the investigation is still ongoing. We are not placing any blame on anyone at this point. Law enforcement is also investigating. We will have to see what the outcome of the investigation is. Robles: What would you say to people that say that Russian children are being targeted or being abused more than other children? Pulliam: I think the statistics do not show that at all. You know, Texas children are abused, we had 221 Texas children die last year in the hands of their parents or caregivers. I don’t think that any type of children, race or nationality is singled out. It happens in homes all across America every day and we treat every case as the exact same. We are going to protect children, that is our job, and that is what we do. Robles: You don’t think Russian orphans are just being targeted or something, right? Pulliam: No, I do not. Not at all. Robles: Is there anything that you think that the government could do, or society could do, in general to ensure the safety of these little people? Pulliam: I think that adoption agencies need to be held maybe to higher standards. We need to make sure there are the correct home studies. Checks are done on families that are going to adopt anywhere across the USA, or in Texas, and I think people need to make reports if they think that a child has been abused or neglected, they need to call their local hotline immediately. Robles: Do you think economic factors.. I mean if there is an economic downturn, do you see more cases of abuse in children, whereas for more affluent individuals there might be less abuse? Do you see a correlation? Pulliam: It is across the board, you know. Economics do play a part sometimes and when families are stressed, they are stressed! They’re stressed about financial problems about personal problems and sometimes that does bring out more abuse and neglect but I don’t think it happens in any certain economic bracket more than others. Robles: Apparently the parents were on hard times or something, at the beginning things were better. Is that true? Pulliam: I don’t have any information on that now. Robles: Anything else you would like to tell the world? Pulliam: Texas has removed these 2 children, we are protecting them, they are in foster care and they are doing fine right now. We are going to do everything we can to make sure that they stay safe. Robles: Your number if anybody is interested in the case or has some information, they can call from anywhere in the world, right: (00-1)-409-951-3351. Pulliam: That is correct. Robles: Thank you very much. I really appreciate it Sheri. Pulliam: Okay. Thank you. You were listening to an interview with Shari Pulliam, she’s the Media Specialist for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. Thanks for listening. Update: According to Shari Pulliam the correct number of child deaths in Texas was 212 and not 221.
18 April, 04:18 2 Failure of U.S. war on terror and hyper security state: clueless on Boston
Photo: EPA The bombing at the Boston Marathon was a tragic event, which like the events of 9-11, caused, are causing and have caused, untold suffering and pain to innocent unsuspecting civilians, and my heart and I am sure the hearts of all normal, thinking people go out to the innocent people who were killed or had their lives torn apart. Condolences certainly go out to all of those affected by this, but in light of more than a decade of a U.S. war on terror, the tragedy would indicate a complete and utter failure in protecting the citizenry. Even before the dust had settled the finger pointing began worldwide and the usual suspects were named: Al-Qaeda, Muslims, Tuareg sympathizers, terrorists of every persuasion and, according to one Russian media outlet citing CNN, a “dark-skinned” suspect. Of course it is a natural function, when an event like this occurs, after the initial shock and trauma recede, to feel anger and a desire for retribution, yet no one has really pointed the finger where it should be pointed because people are too afraid or too conditioned or both to actually face the truth that is right before their eyes. Americans love to point to the perpetrators of their endless events of mass violence, child killings, mass shootings and now terrorism as being some sort of abomination and isolated single events or as being in some way “evil victimizing innocents” yet refuse, no matter how clear and in their faces the evidence is, that American society, their own government and they themselves and the culture they support are directly to blame. Americans also love to play the label game and generalize, not everyone of course but it is a fact. If the perp in this case is dark-skinned all browns and dark-skinned people will be demonized, if he or she is Muslim, then all Muslims, if it turns out to be a white person then off course the generalization stops and it will of course be some “deranged” or sick individual. Regardless of the individual reasoning behind the planning of this act, the loss of innocent lives cannot be forgiven, and a whole group of people must not be demonized. Unless of course it was members of the government or the black-ops community seeking to justify and heighten the entire “war on terror” paradigm, the further stripping of the freedoms and the rights of common Americans and the expansion of the all powerful security state to new levels beyond the Orwellian one that it has already attained. The failure here is clear: the U.S. authorities and the U.S. government failed and they failed miserably. Despite the stripping away of civil liberties, personal freedoms, constitutional rights, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of movement, coupled with turning the United States into a militarized hyper security state, engaging in an endless global “war on terror”, decimating country after country, torturing, indefinitely detaining people without trial, committing crimes against humanity by aggressively invading sovereign nations, placing missile batteries all over the planet, installing puppet regimes all over the world, clamping down on protests, censoring communications and the media, stifling the internet and meddling in everything and anything they please, all in the name of “TERROR” and “making the American people safe”, they failed to prevent what should have been a preventable act of terrorism. What is clear here and from statements by counter-terrorism experts and security officials both in the U.S. and the world over is that; no matter how much they monitor and spy on the activities of the people, no matter how many billions of Americans tax dollars they spend on surveillance, programs like Echelon, satellite monitoring, communication intercepts and every other form of security measure known to man, they are incapable of stopping a lone individual or small group operating autonomously and off the grid. Have Americans been lied to then? You make that judgment. Sure they tell the American people they need Echelon, the CIA, the NSA, the DHS, fusion centers, tracking devices, RFID chips, drones, indefinite illegal detention, illegal torture prisons that provide no actionable reliable intelligence, satellites, gun control, pre-crime arrest, a stifling of freedom of speech and expression, militarized police armed to the teeth, control of every channel of communication, censorship of the media, complete control of the internet and a cowed and dumbed down population to keep “Americans” safe, but doesn’t this act in Boston prove that all of that is a lie? Could it be the elites and the corporations who now own and control the U.S. Government have another agenda they are carrying out, one which includes total and complete control over the population? Or are we to continue to believe that they care about your safety? Why then did no one inspect the area under the bleachers where the parents of the victims of the Connecticut shootings were sitting and where there were reports that an unexploded bomb was found? Why were these bombs allowed to sit where they were unnoticed for hours, or perhaps days? Why didn’t the U.S. security apparatus think to conduct a sweep of the area before the marathon started, or did they and they were so inept they failed to notice what some reports say were 9 bombs? Whilst doing all of the above and after over 12 years of the “War on Terror” the American people are supposed to accept that the FBI, CIA, DHS, etc. and the entire U.S. security establishment haven’t got a clue as to who carried this out. Americans are supposed to accept that despite the trillions spent on the war-on-terror-post 9-11-paradigm some individual with pressure cookers, radio-controlled model batteries and black duffel bags, outsmarted the entire U.S. security apparatus and pulled off a heinous act. To top it all off everyone is supposed to accept that the FBI and police are begging the public for assistance, because they are, in reality, clueless. I wonder how Americans digest the fact that their president, who signs off on an illegal extra-judicial global assassination list every “Terror Tuesday”, authorizing precision surgical drone assassinations based on real-time and iron-clad intelligence, then appears on television after a terrorist attack takes place in his back yard and says things like, “We have no sense of motive in Boston Marathon bombing”, without suffering total brain meltdown. The bombing at the Boston Marathon might call for questions to be raised as to whether the entire U.S. security and intelligence apparatus really cares one iota about the American people, and whether they exist only to advance and protect themselves and their elite corporate masters. But we won’t go there will we? The latest news has been that a suspect was arrested and then was not arrested and the ineptness of the authorities continues to go unquestioned and the main point in all of this continues to be missed. That point being that the U.S. with all of its meddling, invasions, extra-judicial assassinations, wars, droning, bellicose rhetoric, sabre-rattling, military expansion, missile shields, internal crack downs, security measures and all the rest, has done absolutely nothing to curb anti-American sentiment, achieve peace, respect foreign cultures and sovereign nations, stop terrorists from being created both inside the U.S. and abroad and guarantee real security for the American people. Instead they continue to create more and more terrorists worldwide and internally, whether this is by design has yet to be seen. No sense of motive they say? I could list thousands of motives why a terrorist might attack the United States of America, from the destruction of the Serbian people and their country, to North Korea, to the droning of small children in Pakistan, but we won’t go there either will we? Meanwhile for the rest of the world it is business as usual as U.S. backed terrorists continue killing thousands in Syria, U.S. drone strikes continue massacring entire families and children in Afghanistan, North Korea continues to be pushed into a corner which might lead to nuclear war and yet the world is engaged in round-the-clock coverage of a terrorist attack which took three lives in New York. Not that those lives are not important but why aren’t the lives of poor innocent Afghan children given the same import? The coverage will continue, as will the debate but on a closing note, I would like to add that unlike the waves of international support that flowed into the U.S. after 9-11, this time the international response seems much more muted, with many thinking people the world over seeming to possibly share the opinion that: “you reap what you sow”. The views and opinions expressed above are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru. World, US, terrorist attack, bomb, Boston explosions, Boston Marathon Terror, Society · Share: · · · · · · thanks... · 100% agree with your views John. Its better if American people realize all these things as well. 16 April, 20:33 We are for bringing information to the public - Hrafnsson
Kristinn Hrafnsson Photo: AFP The troubling trend in the United States of reclassifying hitherto declassified material and the hiding of what is supposed to be publically available information from the public through making access complicated and perpetual obfuscation is just one of the things that WikiLeaks and Project K are striving to battle. WikiLeaks’ case against Visa Iceland is soon to go to the Supreme Court, a battle they expect to win, while the so-called “case” in Sweden appears to be falling apart. The VOR caught up with WikiLeaks number two, Kristinn Hrafnsson and discussed these issues and more.
Robles: Hello Sir! I wanted to ask you about the press-conference this morning. Was it pretty much what you were expecting? Did the audience seem hostile or receptive? What is your impression? Hrafnsson: I believe that the media at the press-conference was rather respective, and certainly it is a very important contribution that Wikileaks was making to bringing to light extremely important historical documents. In the few hours that have elapsed we have seen a lot of stories that have been focusing on the material and the news angles of the story itself, which is of course a good thing, and what we always want to see, and that is a very positive thing and it is very to have these documents out in the public domain, and we are showing that we are working on strengthening our infrastructure and our capacity to bring to the general public large caches of documents, like this one 1.7 million merged with 1,000 Cablegate documents, 2 million documents in a very atypical and easily navigated space on the internet for everybody to search. That is our modus operandi, that is what we are for, we are for bringing information to the public. So, I am rather pleased with the events of the day. Robles: I’d like to ask you some more questions on the files, but first: now you’ve made another trip to the United States, have any problems whatsoever with the US authorities? I mean surely your role is as important “almost” as Julian’s. Hrafnsson: I have had no problems in the US after I entered here a few days ago and I had no problems at the borders and no problems with that of any sort and I hope that will continue. I hope that’s an indication that there is some change of approach, I am a journalist and I have been a journalist for all my working life. What I am doing now with Wikileaks is a very natural continuation of my journalistic work and personally I would be extremely dissatisfied if the US administration would try to meddle with my work as a journalist in this new field, bringing forth to light information to the general public, that kind of approach would be extremely anti-American actually and I hope that the administration will not go there. Even though have indications that they are spending huge resources on the attempts at indicting individuals in the leadership of Wikileaks. Robles: Back to the project K files, you said you are getting this information out to the public. Many of the files were supposed to be available to the public but they are not. How does the US government keep information that should be in the public domain, is paid for by tax dollars, away from the general public and why do they do that? Hrafnsson: What we are facing here is secrecy by complexity, basically having this information in a format that is so difficult to access that they are basically kept secret and you have to be an academic or have expertise knowledge to be able to navigate and to find anything of interest in these documents, as they are being presented by the government. That is one of the reasons why we decided to bring it to the surface in the manner we did, it is also worth noting that there has been a very troubling trend in the last decade or two in the US where there has been a reversal of declassification after president Clinton in the mid 90s, had declassified by an executive order a lot of documents, the the Bush Administration came to power and there was an attempt to take these documents back into the darkness and actually reclassify what has previously been declassified and it was revealed by investigative journalists in 2006, that already by that time 55,500 pages of documents had been reclassified again. And that is of course an extremely troubling trend and it makes you wonder whether actually the administration in the U.S. can be trusted with this kind of information. So, at least now these documents, and many more to come I would hope, are now in the public domain, and revealing a lot of interesting stories in our contemporary history. Robles: Has anyone come up with accusations that this is a threat to U.S. security or something? Hrafnsson: No, I have not heard any accusations, it would be absurd and easily dismissed so, no that has not been voiced. Robles: Can I ask you your impression about the trip by the Swedish justice last week to Australia? Would you like to give us your impression on that? Hrafnsson: Only very briefly. It was very interesting that somebody who works on behalf of the Swedish Supreme Court would actually be discussing a case that might end up in the Supreme Court. It raised eyebrows all over the world and in my mind this might be an indication that all of it is falling apart and we will finally see an end to this ridiculous situation. Robles: I know you are very short on time. I wanted to ask you: are you going to be playing any role in the Wikileaks Party or in the upcoming senatorial election in Australia? Hrafnsson: No, I am not. This is very good move in many ways, to bring people’s attention to the agenda that we are fighting for and I hope that he will get good support, and the WikLeaks Party will get support in Australia, there is an indication that that’s going to happen. Robles: Last question regarding Wikileaks and the Project K files: if somebody gets on your site there, what are some of the big areas to look into or bombshells they could find in the Kissinger files in particular? Have you been suffering any attacks lately on your servers? And what is going on with the banking blockade, if you could tell us really quickly? Hrafnsson: With regard to the banking blockade we are still fighting that. We have been making some progress in getting beyond this blockade by other means and the Freedom of the Press Foundation in the US was an extremely important step but we are still fighting the blockade legally. And there is a case that is going to be heard in the Iceland Supreme Court, a case that we won in a lower court, against Visa Iceland and I am very confident we are going to win the Supreme Court case as well which will force Visa to basically open up donations directly. That is one important step, we have of course other measures when it comes to the measures against WikiLeaks, we are basically committed to continue our work, and I think that we shown today that we are continuing the strengthening of our base and continuing the work we set out to do years ago. Robles: Last question on the project K files. Are these files going to be available to the general public or to media organizations? Hrafnsson: Anybody can go on Wikileaks.org and access this database. It is open to everybody. They can search by key words. It is very user-friendly and they can find information that is extremely important to contemporary history, and what has already been revealed to our media partners, is that these are very important stories that are very revealing to our position today. So, it should be a reference point for not only journalists of every kind of folio and work, but a very good source for the general public to go online and search topics of interest. Robles: Wonderful. Thank you Krisitnn, I really appreciate it. Do you want to give us the URL? Hrafnsson: Wikileaks.org and on that you can find links to all the database.
16 April, 12:19 Horrific tragedy at Boston Marathon leads to tightened security throughout US
Photo: EPA The number of those injured continues to grow and more questions remain in the wake of the multiple blasts which ripped through the crowds of innocent spectators at the Boston Marathon, the Voice of Russia’s Washington correspondent Stephen Schaeber spoke to the VOR’s John Robles amid the aftermath of the terrorist act that has affected people worldwide. Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with the Voice of Russia's Washington DC Correspondent Stephen Schaeber. Hello, Steven! How are you this morning? "I'm doing well. How are you?" Pretty good. We've got some pretty bad news going on over there in Boston. Can you give our listeners the latest? "The latest is that the number of the dead was just up to three. There was a press conference with the FBI, Boston Special Agent in Charge, including as well the Boston Police Commissioner and the District Attorney. They updated that number. More than that, the Boston Special Agent in Charge said that the investigation is active, but he couldn't comment on specifics. He said though that it is very fluid and evidence analysis is going on right now." What about the latest victim, the third victim? We heard there was an 8-year-old child. Can you give us some details on the victims? Did they release any information? "The stories are only releasing information on one victim - that's an 8-year-old child. We don't know whether it is a boy or a girl. There have been conflicting reports about that. I’ve seen both. CNN is reporting that there have been at least 130 injured. Continuing on, Police Commissioner at the press conference reiterated that there are no suspects and said that there's a lot of information going around social media and various news outlets. He also said that the police are talking with people that are at hospitals, but they're not suspects." There's nothing yet as to motive or was this international terrorism or home-grown terrorism or maybe just a lone terrorist? "There's no information on the motive. They don't know if this is domestic or international, if this is a single person or a group working in coordination." Do you think that there was an unexploded bomb under the platform where were the parents of some of the children that were killed in Connecticut recently? Do you think that it has anything to do with it or gun laws in the U.S. or anything like that? "That would be just pure speculation. I don't know. And I have not heard about unexploded device underneath. At the press conference police said that there were a number of suspicious packages. They wouldn't say whether these were actual unexploded devices." We've had reports that there were five unexploded bombs found around the Boston area, but they didn’t say exactly where. "They reiterated at this press conference that they won't state how many unexploded devices there were and they stated that there were a number of suspicious packages. They were pretty clear about that." Have you heard anything about the Penske truck they were looking for or the person that they were questioning? "Yes, that wasn't addressed. They just said that authorities were looking "desperately for a Penske rental truck that was seen leaving the race site". Apparently, it was seen turning away. But there’s nothing more on that. I should add also that a number of outlets are reporting that a 20-year-old Saudi was being questioned. He's here in the U.S. on a student visa, and they're saying that he's not - again he is not - considered a suspect. They have only asked him questions, but he's not considered a suspect." Have the police or has the FBI released any information about the explosives? Were they remote controlled? Were they timed? Or anything on that? "There hasn't been any information on that. They kept quiet during this press conference about the specific information on the devices. But they said that the ATF was currently doing data analysis." So they don't know what kind of explosives were there or they're not saying? "They're not saying." I see. We've seen a list of participants in the marathon. There was supposed to be 24 Russian nationals that were to take part. Have you heard anything about them or any Russians being among those injured? "I haven't heard any information on that. Just to give a little bit of background, today they confirmed that there were over 23,000 participants in the race and they represented over 50 countries. The Boston police and the FBI really reached out to people on social media, they've done a lot of crowd sourcing asking for people to send them any pictures or videos that they have of the finish line at the time of the explosion. And they received a lot of participation. There was a lot of flurry about the third incident at the JFK library - people initially thought that might have been connected with this event. And the police said that this is highly unlikely, that it is unrelated to this coordinated event. Security throughout the country has been tightened – in N.Y.C, San Francisco, as well. President Obama gave a press conference around 6.30 p.m. our time. He said that he has directed four resources of the federal government. Again, he said that they don't have all the answers and they don't know who or why would want to do this. They said that whoever is responsible would "feel the full weight of justice". “ Listen, is it normal for police departments to issue statements on Twitter? This is something new, I think, because the first reports we heard were coming out from Boston or some other police department on their Twitter feeds. "I think it is becoming more popular. I noticed that, I've been monitoring their feeds and they have been issuing very many statements and I don't think it is that much uncommon." You said security was tightened around the country. Have you heard anything about what they were doing in Los Angeles and San Francisco? Is that common for cities thousands of miles away from an event like that to also take measures if an act like this happens? "Yeah. I think that's standard protocol, that all major cities will go on and tighten security." Thanks a lot, Steven! I really appreciate it.
16 April, 04:55 US on high alert after triple explosions in Boston
Photo: EPA The prestigious Boston marathon became the scene of horror as two explosions ripped through the crowds gathered near the finish line to watch the end of the race. The blast occurred almost at the same time that the winning ceremony was to have taken place. Later another explosion occurred outside of Boston’s JFK library. The Voice of Russia’s Rob Sachs from the Washington bureau spoke to the VOR’s John Robles about the events shortly after they occurred. Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Rob Sachs. He is our Voice of Russia correspondent in Washington and the host of the American Edition. Robles: Hello Rob! Sachs: Hi! Good to speak with you. Robles: Good to be speaking with you too. Unfortunately, we have some pretty bad news. What’s going on down there in Boston? Sachs: Well, in Boston there were two blasts at the Boston Marathon today. This is the premier running event pretty much in the country, along with the New York Marathon. And it occurred right towards the end of the route, the 26 mile route. It happened a little bit before 3 o’clock this afternoon. There were two blasts, about, maybe, 50 yards from each other. And then we just heard from the police that about a half hour ago, maybe around 4:30 this afternoon, there was another explosion at the JFK Library in Boston. And it is not confirmed whether or not that blast was related, but the police are on the scene, we are seeing reports about unexploded bombs being found around the marathon. And so far, we are seeing 45 wounded, at least two dead from the scene. So, a pretty horrific event for the marathon runners and for what is going on, and a pretty big crime scene it appears for the law enforcement officials. Robles: Yes, we have reports that already 53 are injured. Was the JFK Library along the marathon route? Sachs: I don’t believe that the library is along the marathon route. It appears that this was a separate incident. The marathon was pretty much half way over. The top runners had finished two hours before these blasts occurred. And so, the blasts happened around 4:30, everything stopped once those blasts happened. The race was stopped. So, this would not have been necessarily in connection with anything, with the marathon, since that was already done. The police were on the scene, they cleared out the area around Copley Square where the blasts happened. And so, we are hearing reports as I mentioned, that a number of devices were found. And whether or not this was one that just was not timed along with the other ones, or whether this was a separate incident completely, it’s not clear. But the Police Commissioner just came on the national news, along with the Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and he mentioned this third blast at the JFK Library. Robles: I see. So, the actual explosions, they occurred not at the moment when there was the highest concentration of people at that location? Is that correct? Sachs: Well, no. It was right in the middle, the blasts happened right in the middle of the marathon. It happened on the sidewalk, so, not where the runners were going. So, it looks like a lot of people injured were spectators. There are pictures of runners who maybe fell over or were maybe hit by shrapnel from the blasts. It’s not clear how many actual runners were injured but it looks like the majority of the blasts happened on the sidewalk, where spectators were crowded around the grandstands right nearby. So, this was still in the middle of the marathon, however, the top runners had already finished. As you know, this marathon takes hours to finish. And so, the elite runners, the ones who ran in about two hours, they were already finishing up. I heard that they were actually about to have the ceremony for the winners right when the blasts occurred. But of course some runners may take up to 8 hours to finish. This was maybe right around the half way point from when the runners had started. Robles: So, it seems that these may have been pre-timed bombs, right? Sachs: Yes, it looks like, from what we are seeing from the federal sources, this was a well-planned event and a coordinated attack. It looks like this was something that was definitely timed to happen right in the middle of the marathon, a premier sporting event for the whole country, even internationally. You know, 26,000 people participated in this event. So, it looks like someone really wanted to get the attention of the US and the world with this attack. Robles: What I was saying is, it’s possible, I mean if there was somebody sitting in there with the remote controlled device or something, they probably would have waited till the award ceremony started or something. So, it is possible that those were placed there before. Sachs: Right! And the other location, this is actually right near where a Memorial for the Newtown Victims had been placed. So, not any word of whether or not there was a connection between them. But obviously, many are still reeling from that horrific event and gun control now being a big issue here in the United States because of that horrific massacre of the schoolchildren in Connecticut, so there is a lot going on with Americans dealing with awful violence. It’s very hard to get cell phone service in Boston. We are trying to report from the scene and it’s very hard to get into Boston to speak to anyone there because we are seeing now that cell phone services have been shut down in Boston to prevent the remote detonation of explosives. So, people are trying to report in and out of Boston, it’s been very difficult all day long. Robles: Yes, we are having problems too. We’ve heard the White House is under pretty much of a lockdown. Do you know anything or have you heard anything about that? Sachs: Yes, we’ve seen that for instance at Boston Logan Airport there are cancelled flights. And for instance in Times Square in New York, there’s been a stepped up presence. And here in Washington DC, there is a high-alert, there is more of a presence of police in around the city protecting vital areas. The President and the Vice President have been informed. Vice President Joe Biden has already commented on the incident. But this is seen as a national security alert. So, those measures that go into place have already happened. You have important officials under the highest surveillance now. Robles: Alright Rob, thanks a lot! We are out of time here, I appreciate you speaking with me. We’ll probably call you back later as the events develop. This is John Robles, I was speaking with Rob Sachs. He is the Voice of Russia’s correspondent in Washington and he is also a presenter at the Voice of Russia American Edition.
14 April, 02:24 Preemptive arrests and protests in UK on eve of Thatcher’s funeral
A protester holds up a doll depicting Margaret Thatcher during an event marking the death of the late Prime Minister at the Trafalgar square in London Photo: EPA On Wednesday the funeral for deceased former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher is to be held at St. Paul’s Cathedral in London in an event that will cost struggling UK taxpayers approximately 10 million pounds. In a rare move Queen Elizabeth II has stated she will be attending what in fact is not classified as a state funeral. For many Brits the death of Thatcher has reopened old wounds and public discontent with her legacy has the UK authorities on edge as the date nears. The government of the United Kingdom is going all out to guarantee that there will be no disturbances at the upcoming funeral of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. The initial muted reaction by the public surrounding the death of the former leader has been changed into one of open hostility partially due to attempts by the media and current officials to, as one UK blogger put it “beatify” the politician, and to “whitewash” the reality of what she had done to the country and the world. There can be no doubt she was a powerful figure in UK history, a fact that can be said for almost any of the world’s past leaders, but the true legacy that she leaves behind is one of broken cities, destroyed industries, broken lives, war, and the fact despite being a woman she did little if anything to champion women’s rights or causes. During her reign she divided Britain and even in death she has done more to inflame the discontent of the UK populace and divide the Kingdom than anything that has happened in recent memory. Her death has forced people to remember everything that she did and much of it was not good for citizens of the UK, much was collectively forgotten or put away, including how then Prime Minister Thatcher allowed ten Irish political prisoners who were on a hunger strike demanding to speak to her and negotiate a peace settlement to starve themselves to death, she outright refused and knowingly allowed 10 people, one by one, to die of starvation. Many of those who recall the destructive internal policies of Thatcher have begun to speak out and many groups are planning demonstrations that are supposed to take place in the lead up to the former PM’s funeral on Wednesday. The wave of dissatisfaction with the legacy of the “Iron Lady” that has gripped the UK is visible everywhere, on social media, in newspapers and on televised debates and continues to escalate as her funeral draws near. The death of the former prime minister has brought to light the divide between the British elites and the common people. For the common people of the UK the death of the former conservative leader comes at a time when they are facing benefits cuts and cuts to social programs while the country’s bankers and elites continue to enjoy tax breaks and continued financial growth. One of the signs of public dismay with the deceased former prime minister includes a protest campaign started on the internet to make the song “Ding Dong the Witch Dead” from the Wizard of Oz, number one on the UK music singles charts. The campaign has gone viral and the song has hit the top of the charts but according to the BBC they will not be playing the song in its entirety, this indicative of the division this has caused in British society. The level of social discontent surrounding the upcoming funeral has grown to the point where the country’s anti-terrorist apparati are now making statements and issuing thinly veiled threats against anyone who plans to demonstrate against the perceived white-washing of Thatcher’s record. Scotland Yard has requested that anyone who wants to protest should inform them of their intentions to guarantee that their freedom of speech is protected but according to Scotland Yard, so far there have been no takers. Part of Scotland Yard’s anti-terrorism command, the National Public Order Intelligence Unit, which runs a network of spies and informants in the UK, is receiving intelligence as to the nature of the planned protests. Protests are planned by organizations such as Class War, UK Uncut, and Stop G8, however as of yet no one has informed Scotland Yard of upcoming protest actions. According to activists most people are afraid of pre-emptive arrest and are even afraid to discuss any protest activities on social media. One worrying aspect of the situation is what appears to be the expansion of the powers of a hitherto little known UK team of police and psychiatrists called the Fixated Threat Assessment Center (FTAC). According to FTAC they are monitoring individuals who threatened Thatcher or any of the VIP guests in the past. What is troubling is that if the FTAC, which has been accused of being nothing but an instrument to get rid of political enemies, is monitoring protestors, they may use their powers to isolate and remove anybody who wishes to protest at the funeral. The UK’s FTAC has existed since at least 2006 and has the power to determine if someone has the psychological motivations to commit a specific crime before they do so, and in the words of the organization, to then remove the individual to a “safe place”. The trouble is that this is all done in secret and since they do not arrest people per se, those taken to the “safe place” are, for all intents and purposes simply disappeared. The FTAC operates as what might be call a pre-crime thought police unit, something it has been accused of being in the past and very little information about them is known. What is known is that if they determine someone a threat there is almost no recourse that person has and even following up on individuals who are known to have been reportedly taken to a “safe place” is almost impossible. One such person who ran a blog called FTAC Watch disappeared in 2009 after detailing his or her dealings with the FTAC on a blog. Many other prominent UK activists such as Dr. Chris Knight were also arrested by the FTAC but thanks to their high profiles they were not disappeared. According to Dr. Chris Knight there may be pre-emptive arrests as the authorities are attempting to deal with UK protestors and possible threats from Irish Republican groups which may use the media attention to plan an attack during the funeral. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru
13 April, 18:39 Russia’s Guantanamo List officially published
Photo: EPA With the publication of the US Magnitsky List the short-lived “reset” in Russian – US relations, for all intents and purposes, is dead and buried. The US attempt to further meddle in the internal affairs of the sovereign state which is the Russian Federation by passing a law and making public a list of Russian officials and individuals connected to the tragic case of Sergey Magnitsky, has now been officially answered by the Russian Federation. Moscow’s answer is not as broad but is based on fact rather than conjecture. Moscow has now issued an official list of US nationals who are now barred from setting foot on the territory of the Russian Federation. Whether this list will be taken up by other CIS countries and Russia’s allies is not yet clear and that question has not been addressed by officials as of yet. Moscow’s list differs greatly from the US Magnitsky List in that it is based on well documented and accepted facts and evidence and attempts to draw to light egregious violations of international law, human rights and the rights of Russian citizens abroad by the United States of America. The first part of Moscow’s list deals with individuals who are known architects of the US Government’s official yet illegal torture programs and are known to have been instrumental in ignoring the Geneva Conventions and implementing programs or policies in clear contradiction of international and even US laws. The listing of such individuals is one of the first moves by a country against Bush era war criminals and could logically be expanded to include hundreds if not thousands of names. Moscow’s list, as does the US Magnitsky List, also contains a secret section which has not been made available to the public. As a journalist I personally went over the documents that were available which were used in formulating the Magnitsky List and what I noticed was that most if not all of the documents used were one-sided, taken out of context and selectively hand-picked to portray Russia in a pre-determined light that had long before been set. A large amount of documents from mostly neoconservative US based entities were also present and further shed a questionable light on the Magnitsky List and the real intentions of its authors, which appears to be the further demonization of a sovereign state. After analyzing the material it seems clear that the US is in reality raising such a storm not because of the tragic death of Mr. Magnitsky, but due to the billions of dollars that the company in question was supposed to extract from the Russian Federation, again that is the conclusion one might come to after analyzing the documents, and is my opinion. The authors of the US list also took it upon themselves to include almost anyone who had even the slightest connection with the case in an attempt to grant legitimacy to their effort. Moscow’s list on the other hand is based on well known facts and well documented violations of international laws and human rights and hopefully the world community will take heed and attempt to implement further multi-lateral measures in order not to allow the United States of America to further violate international laws and standards with impunity. The following are the current persons on Russia’s US human rights violators list, “The Guantanamo List”, with the first four individuals being known architects and key figures in formulating of United States illegal torture programs: 1. David Spears Addington born January 22, 1957, as Chief of Staff to Vice President Richard Cheney, Addington was one of the key architects of the Bush torture program, the sidelining of the Geneva Conventions, the creation of the illegal prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba, the unlimited expansion of executive power, indefinite detention without recourse and the skirting of the US Constitution with regards to the above issues and the crack down on the US populace following 9-11. Addington is an extremist neoconservative with former ties to the CIA and according to the site NNB once an employee of the Long John Silver’s restaurant chain. For Addington’s role in enabling the US Government to ignore the Geneva Conventions alone, he could be classified as a war criminal. 2. John Choon Yoo born July 10, 1967, the author of the infamous Bush torture memos allowing for torture. Yoo’s views are so extreme and his manipulation of the law so egregious and have led to so much of the pain and suffering caused by the neoconservatives who took over the US Government after 9-11, that were the Hague War Crimes Tribunal and independent body many believe he would be a prime candidate for answering to the body. Yoo has openly stated that even crushing the testicles of a child is okay if the president deems it is needed. His role in enabling and promoting the state use of torture would qualify him as a war criminal. 3. US Major General Geoffrey D. Miller, born 1949, was directly responsible for formulating and implementing torture programs at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and in Afghanistan. In 2006 he was named in a war crimes complaint to the German Government along with Alberto Gonzales, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, John Yoo, David Addington, and others for their role in making policies for allowing torture by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Department of Defense (DOD). His direct involvements in ordering torure and specifying techniques would be classified as War Crimes. 4. Jeffrey Harbeson, as the Commander of the Guantanamo Bay torture prison Harbeson continued and oversaw the polices of torture and the continued holding of hundreds of suspects without trial, charges or legal recourse. He was denied a visa to travel to Russia due to his continued overseeing of human rights abuses. He currently holds the post of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff’s Deputy Director for Politico-Military Affairs for Europe, NATO and Russia. His violations would constitute him to be guilty of war crimes and thus a war criminal. Individuals responsible for human rights violations with regard to Russian citizens abroad: 5. Jed Saul Rakoff, born August 1, 1943 is a United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York. He is largely responsible for the illegal prosecutions and detentions of prisoners illegally captured overseas as part of the US practice of entrapping suspects in foreign countries, and in the case of Viktor Bout a third country, and then in illegally kidnapping and transporting them to the US where they stand trial in New York. Such suspects have almost no redress, are tortured and in the case of Viktor Bout, did not in fact commit any crimes. Viktor Bout’s case was illegally fabricated and he was illegally detained, transported and held. The Court has also prosecuted Russian citizen Konstantin Yaroshenko, also illegally detained and held on questionable evidence. 6. Preetinder S. Bharara is the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York and has prosecuted and been instrumental in convicting and imprisoning suspects who the US has unilaterally determined to be threats to US security and has illegally detained and brought to New York, most on flimsy or circumstantial evidence. 7. Michael J. Garcia former United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, made prejudicial statements to the press regarding the Viktor Bout case, was instrumental in the illegal detention and case against Mr. Bout and the illegal detentions and imprisonment of many others. 8. Brendan R. McGuire assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, while ignoring the illegal detention and kidnapping of Viktor Bout McGuire made prejudicial statements to the press and exaggerated the case against Mr. Bout. The case is a unilateral attempt by the US to claim jurisdiction over most of the world. As the entire case against Viktor Bout was based on hearsay and was in fact a pre-emptive prosecution before any actual “crime” was committed any and all persons involved in the case acted illegally under international law. Even if Viktor Bout had in fact been involved in transporting anything to FARC, under international law, this would not have been illegal, the fact that he did not must not be forgotten. Mr. Bout in fact did nothing illegal. The case was a litmus test whether the US could effectively take jurisdiction of any part of the world, and while Viktor Bout continues to be illegally detained, thus is the case. 9. Anjan S. Sahni, assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Viktor Bout and other cases. 10. Christian R. Everdell, assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. 11. Jenna Minicucci Dabbs, assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. 12. Christopher L. Lavigne, assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. 13. Michael Max Rosensaft, assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. 14. Louis J. Milione Senior Special Agent for the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), gave evidence implicating Bout, Yaroshenko and other cases. 15. Sam Gaye Senior Special Agent for the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) gave evidence against Bout and Yaroshenko. 16. Robert F. Zachariasiewicz, Special Agent for the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) also instrumental in Bout prosecution. 17. Derek S. Odney Special Agent for the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) gave fabricated evidence against Bout. 18. Gregory A. Coleman Special Agent for the FBI based in New York, instrumental in providing questionable evidence in various cases. This list may be preliminary in nature and may be expanded at anytime if Official Moscow deems it to be necessary. The list has been implemented to not allow known human rights violators and individuals who may be considered to be war criminals to engage in travel to the Russian Federation or federation subjects. In related news the family of Konstantin Yaroshenko, the Russian pilot who was illegally convicted and imprisoned in the United States, identified five people involved in his case on the list published by the Russian Foreign Ministry according to Yaroshenko’s wife. "In the list we saw the name of the Judge of the Federal Court of the Southern District of New York Jed Rakoff, federal prosecutor or the Southern District of the same state Preetinder S. Bharara and Deputy Federal Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Christopher L. Lavigne. The same list includes Louis J. Milione and Sam Gaye, Senior Special Agents for the US Drug Enforcement Administration who detained my husband in Liberia ", said Victoria Yaroshenko. Mrs Yaroshenko also stated: "These people deserve to be on the list of U.S. citizens who are denied entry to Russia, published by the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation. But we would like to get an answer from our Foreign Ministry and the Ministry of Justice, if it would be possible to add to the list people who will hear the forthcoming appeal in the case of my husband, which is set for May 15". She said that according to defense lawyers the time that they will be allowed to address the court of appeals in the case Yaroshenko will only be 8 minutes, while the U.S. prosecutor will have 12 minutes to speak, and that in itself creates unequal conditions in favor of the prosecution. Victoria Yaroshenko has also reported that her husband is in urgent need of surgery and that this was agreed on by American doctors who examined her husband in St. Patrick’s Hospital. However, prison officials have ignored the requests of the Russian pilot to undergo a necessary operation and have notified the Russian Consulate General in New York that he is healthy. It is clear that in this case, as Victoria Yaroshenko rightfully requests, that the list, if expanded, could grow to contain thousands of names. If Russian officials decide to do as the US has done they could follow up by listing those responsible for children’s rights violations, the deaths of Russian orphans and those responsible for a plethora of other illegal and questionable activities by the United States of America. During the presentation by Hillary Clinton to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov several years back of a “reset” button, the US State Department made the mistake of calling “reset” “overload”, perhaps they did so on purpose, it seems that is what we have ended up with.
11 April, 19:23 Sweden and Australia are trying to save face – Kostakidis
Julian Assange. Photo: EPA The recent talk in Australia by Swedish Supreme Court Justice Stefan Lindskog was a carefully planned public relations move by the Swedish and Australian governments, who need to try to save face after the egregious treatment of Australian citizen Julian Assange at their hands. Unfortunately for Sweden and Australia, Justice Lindskog’s appearance and his public comments on a case that has not even been charged, let alone appeared before a court, have backfired and brought to the public’s attention once again the subservient relationship between the countries in question to the United States, the policies of extra-judicial incarceration and rendition and other black practices that the West would rather the world knew nothing about. You are listening to an interview with Mary Kostakidis. This is an interview in progress.
Robles: This brings back into focus something that most people have either forgotten about or it’s been kind of forgotten in the media, I’m talking about Sweden’s rendition that you just mentioned, their extra-judicial incarceration of suspects, what you just mentioned, that they can just pick people up in the street on hearsay. It seems to me that Justice Lindskog has now brought to the forefront some pretty bad points on Sweden. Anything else you can add to that salad? Kostakidis: That’s right. The point he made was that he believed that in Julian’s case, that case would come before the Supreme Court. But really it is not up to him to determine that. That’s a matter for the Government and they decide whether they handover someone extra-judicially, they decide whether they handover someone on this temporary surrender agreement. So, he can only speak about a matter that may come before him. But in fact, this is extraordinary for a judge to be speaking about a matter that may come before him because it is prejudicial, so it’s quite a curious thing to do. Robles: In any normal country you would believe that that would be grounds to have the entire matter thrown out, I can’t say “case” or “thrown out of court”, because it’s never been in court. But do you think that there will be push in Sweden… I think there should be a legitimate push, to have their whole case just mothballed forever, after this? Kostakidis: I think clearly in Sweden, what the judge has done is quite acceptable, they talk about cases, matters, before they are heard, even though to the rest of the Western world that’s quite extraordinary. Going back to the key changes, and that is, the changing of the prosecutor and the fact that one of the women has sacked her lawyer, these I think, they are signals that there will be a change in strategy which will be very interesting indeed. Robles: They’ve already put so much out there, I mean what do you think they are going to change? Kostakidis: Well, they could drop the case, couldn’t they? Robles: I think that would be the prudent thing to do at this point. Kostakidis: It’s hard to say because it is a matter of saving face as well. And that’s where unfortunately the Australian Government had a diplomatic role to play because in this situation someone has to step in and provide a way of a matter being likely resolved, so that the parties can save faces. So, it is interesting to see that in fact the move has come from within Sweden to change the circumstances. So I hope that that’s going to lead to a resolution of the entire matter, so that Julian could leave the Ecuadorian Embassy and come home or indeed be a free person to go wherever he likes. Robles: A lot of questions just came up again. I think, to give your opinion about other directions that the Swedish case could go, besides abandoning their case, do you think they might try something else? Kostakidis: Well, they could continue to try and prosecute it. But really, the missing link here is the statement from Julian. We haven’t heard his side of the story. There is no document yet that can be leaked or not, and this is another point that the judge made, that this statement by the two women was. And in fact possibly I think, his response to that had the opposite effect to what he intended. There is no such statement there is nothing that they’ve written down following a discussion with Julian. And that needs to occur. Robles: Now, we are clear: Sweden does have mechanisms that, if they want to, they could extradite Julian if he were there to the United States. That’s a given, right? Kostakidis: Yes, I believe so. I think Justice Lindskog has admitted that. Robles: I’m thinking: ok, Sweden throws the case out the window, where it should have gone a long time ago, will he have problems, or could he have problems with the UK authorities then, if he actually leaves the embassy? Could they cook something up or something to incarcerate him there? There was the fact that… Kostakidis: Well, I hope not. I hope that’s going to be an end to that sorry saga. I assume, if Sweden would drop the matter, then Julian would be a free man. But we will just have to wait and see. Robles: I understand that there in the UK they don’t publicize, there is no news about Julian, even though the whole world is watching. Have you been to the UK recently? What’s the opinion in the U.K about Julian Assange? Kostakidis: No, that’s right there isn’t a lot of coverage about Julian’s plight, but there certainly is in Australia, there is a lot of interest in what is happening to an Australian citizen. And there is also now interest in the fact that this Australian citizen is going to be running for a seat in the Australian Senate in September. So, yes, there is certainly interest here. Robles: What do you think Julian’s chances are of winning a Senate seat? Kostakidis: I think he certainly has a good chance because he has about 25-27% support among the Australian public. And he and his party represent the very things that are missing from Australian politics. There is a great disillusionment with the two major parties and the two leaders of those parties. And Australians are more and more interested in independent voices. We can see that through their support of independent voices, Andrew Wilkie who is a former whistleblower, in fact the only Iraq war whistleblower, he was elected on a platform of two issues that he wished to achieve reform in: whistleblowing legislation (protection of whistleblowers) and gambling reform. So, Australians are very much interested in people who want to shift the needle on an issue or a set of issues. And with the WikiLeaks party of course the one issue, transparency and accountability, cuts across all issues because it is at the core of what politicians have to offer to the public, what they don’t have to offer to the public. In Australia at the moment there is very little faith in their integrity because they’re seen to be obliged to the interests that have helped them to achieve their position. And all they are interested in is hanging onto power. So, I think WikiLeaks is going to have support, and support that the major parties are going to be very surprised at. Julian is a person who is passionate about justice and human rights, and a citizens’ right to know and he has resilience and he is resourceful and he has perseverance and he is courageous. And he attracts people around him who have similar attributes and are similarly motivated. I was in London recently and spent some time with him, and for someone in his position he is in extraordinary good spirits. And I think it is because he is sustained by his work and he has gathered around him a team of people who are highly intelligent, highly articulate and very courageous. Robles: That’s wonderful! Can you give us any more details about Julian himself? Kostakidis: Well, I think he is very keen to have this matter resolved, I mean the Swedish matter because it really is a distraction from the main threat which is the US. And they’ve made it very clear that they want to shut down WikiLeaks, and they want to put Julian away forever. And the US Justice Department has reaffirmed its ongoing investigation into WikiLeaks. So, that is the major problem. Turning it into this Swedish problem is a distraction and that needs to be resolved. Robles: Yes, I mean they are attacking the messenger because they don’t want the message to get out and they don’t want people to pay attention to the message, pretty simple, classic attack policy. Did Julian have anything special that you might want to add as a response to this Swedish Justice, maybe something we haven’t heard? Did you speak to him after that event? Kostakidis: No, I haven’t spoken to him after that event. But Julian is more aware of what is going to happen than just about anyone else, I think. Robles: Does he have any ideas? Any predictions from Julian? Kostakidis: No, I would leave that to Julian. If he wished to make any predictions, I’m sure he would.
10 April, 16:04 Quite possible Julian Assange would be extradited from Sweden to the US - Kostakidis
Julian Assange. Photo: EPA During the unprecedented speech in Australia by Swedish Justice Lindskog, who commented in a public forum on the as yet to be charged or tried “case” of Julian Assange, part of the live feed was cut but fortunately, as has happened more and more often with modern technology, an anonymous person in the audience was able to record the session on a device. Human Rights champion Mary Kostakidis spoke with John Robles about the part of Lindskog’s speech that they would rather you do not know about.
Robles: I’d like to ask you a few things about Justice Lindskog’s speech; this is the Swedish Justice who appeared in Australia last week... You have some new information on that, don’t you? Kostakidis: Yes. The speech itself was quite a curious speech for a judge. He had been invited to speak about freedom of expression but spent most of his talk focusing on one side of a case that hasn’t been resolved yet. So, that’s unheard of in Australian and I think in most of the Western world for a judge to be speculating and talking about the two women’s statements in this case, naming them on a first name basis. Sofia and Anna said this and did that, he did this, he said that, she said that, it was quite extraordinary. What was more interesting though, was the response of the panelists to Justice Lindskog’s speech, which was not covered in the live stream, nor was the Q&A from the audience. And fortunately, it was recorded and there is an audio recording on the Internet of the Q&A session. And during that session Justice Lindskog was asked whether, despite his assertion that Sweden does not extradite on political or military grounds, whether Julian Assange could be extradited from Sweden to the US. And he admitted that yes, it was quite possible. Robles: He said that, he said it was quite possible? Kostakidis: Yes, it was quite possible. He was reminded that Sweden has extradited people extra-judicially. Two Egyptians were sent to Egypt, handed over to the CIA and tortured in Egypt, and that states do act extra-judicially, and Sweden in particular has acted extra-judicially. And he admitted that it was possible that Assange could be handed over to the US by Sweden. Secondly, he said that he didn’t know why Julian Assange had not been interviewed by the Swedish prosecutors in London. He seemed to be at a loss to understand that himself, which is very-very interesting and perhaps leads us to speculate whether this switch in the prosecutor, installing a new prosecutor, may be an opportunity for Sweden to adopt a different strategy with respect to Julian Assange. Robles: What do you think about their case, the Swedish case? Do you think it is falling apart and they are grasping for straws? Or do you think they are regrouping and they are going to come up with something even worse? Kostakidis: Well, we have to wait and see. But it is quite a significant step for one of the women to sack her lawyer. And it is quite a significant step to remove the prosecutor from the case. So, we will just have to wait and see why they have done that and whether that’s going to change the nature of the case. Reminder Robles: As I understood it, they actually replaced a very experienced prosecutor with someone who has very little experience leading me to believe they need someone in there to manipulate easier. What do you think about that? Kostakidis: I really don’t think we can come to any conclusion until we see what exactly they are going to do. We just have to wait and see. But there is an impasse here and a breakthrough needs to be created. And I’m hopeful that these changes are going to auger well for a resolution to this whole issue. The important issue that Julian Burnside raised in his response to Justice Lindskog, and Julian represents Julian Assange in Australia, was that Sweden has this temporary surrender agreement with the US, which means that if Julian were in Sweden and he would be in jail, he would be held without bail, the US could borrow him for another trial, and Sweden would hand him over. And again, when Justice Lindskog was asked about this, he refused to comment about it. So, it was very interesting that he has been very careful about this issue. Robles: I see …. Kostakidis: So I think the Swedes are very conscious that the whole exercise has been a very negative public relations exercise for Sweden. And indeed, we all know a lot more about Sweden as a result. For example, you and I may be in Stockholm, though I perhaps have never met you, I could walk into a police station with a couple of mates and allege all sorts of things about you. You would be picked up and put in jail, and you would remain there without bail until a prosecutor decided whether there was a valid case to answer. You could be in jail for several months. Now there are people in Sweden who think that this law is inconsistent with human rights, whereas the impression I suppose, that most people have of Sweden, and I’m not sure what brought about this impression, that it is in fact a very liberal society. But we know that in fact, what happens in Sweden, is that they have encroached more and more on the human rights of citizens. Robles: When you said he said this was quite possible, was that part of the live feed that was cut off? Are you aware of that? Kostakidis: That’s right. Robles: This would go completely against all the media reports that were coming out right after, especially in the mass media, right after the event occurred. Do you think that media was being manipulated or was being fed incorrect information? Kostakidis: I think it was an attempt at a public relations exercise. However, interestingly one part of the mainstream media in Australia, in fact the newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch, picked up on exactly that response, to that question. And the headline in fact was “Assange could be extradited”. Robles: What else can you tell us about that Q&A part? Kostakidis: Well, I think it is worth listening to the questions and answers because Lindskog clearly wasn’t prepared to be challenged in this way. And he was unable to provide answers to simple questions, like; “Why won’t the prosecutor go to London?” You were listening to part one of an interview with Mary Kostakidis. You can find part 2 on our website at english.ruvr.ru
9 April, 20:03 Complete assured annihilation, North Korea – US nuclear exchange, Rated XXX
© Flickr.com/tj.blackwell/cc-by-nc The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the United States have recently exchanged bellicose nuclear rhetoric, bringing that much closer, the greatest fear for all peace loving nations, namely the threat of nuclear war. The world has witnessed one US led war after the other since the late 1990s and all parties to this latest escalation, regardless of who is at fault, should be condemned, as should any act of aggressive war. “Those who would dominate their fellow man through force or trickery deserve neither liberty nor life, those who stand passively by and watch also deserve neither nor.” The once aqua marine glow of the Earth now shone a muted gray and white below. The planet lay in desolate burned out nuclear ruins, not a single square mile of it any longer able to sustain life. Gone were the lights of the cities at night, gone was all the radio chatter, and every other sign of the endless busyness that had been the human race. During the daylight passes over the wasteland below certain landmarks were still discernable, part of a fence in Australia, the Great Wall of China and parts of certain burned out cities. During the night nuclear fires could still be seen to glow in many areas and occasionally explosions lit up the night and quickly extinguished themselves. For the three Russian cosmonauts on the ISS, who were running out of food, this was all that was left of the planet they had watched blow itself into oblivion. The plan to take over the world had been the brainchild of a group of US Neo-Conservative planners and had been launched by implementing the most massive large-scale psychological operation in the history of all mankind, namely the cold blooded murder of 3,002 Americans right in the open, in front of the watching eyes of the entire world. Although the controlled demolitions of the skyscrapers was obvious, and all of the details were documented by humankind, no one had ever been able to bring those responsible to justice and people all over the world believed the post traumatic suggestions and thought implants carried out during a massive subliminal campaign that convinced them the murders were an attack on the country by foreign terrorists. For decades they had conditioned the American people to see foreigners as less than human, the government as all knowing and all powerful, and through thousands of Hollywood disaster epics and movies that the only humans worthy of remaining on Earth after everyone else was destroyed were Americans. The fake terrorist attack had worked exactly as had been planned and served as the catalyst for global military expansion and the waging of aggressive war after aggressive war, destroying each and every country that posed a threat to what was to be an “American” world. The crowning achievement of the plan had taken years to construct and paired with the expansion of the military to every corner of the world had brought the country to a complete economic collapse, making the US debt two times more than the GDP of the entire planet . That achievement was a global network of missiles and their related infrastructure which the world’s populace was told was a defensive system to keep America and its allies safe from rogue nations who were bent on destroying Americans. Through a massive misinformation campaign that had taken decades to carry out the US had carefully hidden the true nature of the global missile defense shield. This had been helped by the fact that the US was able to plug into almost every home, business and government in the world with the introduction of its global military computer network which the citizens of the world believed was just a harmless means of communicating. Phase five the Plan of the Centuries for America had called for fabricating a nuclear threat from North Korea and then blasting the country off the face of the Earth, this would have allowed for the complete taking over of the Asia Pacific Region and the complete neutralization of the first strike capabilities of the last two countries in the world who posed a challenge to the Fourth Reich, the American Reich, namely Russia and China. The hypersonic nuclear missile that ended the world left the Korean Silo at 04:15 in the morning and hugged the ground as it flew towards its target, evading all American warning systems and defense elements. It had been launched by a team of Korean officers who had been working for the CIA for decades and was supposed to reach its target, a city of 20 million, and wipe it off the face of the map, which it did at 04:29. With a flick of the switch all of the missiles in the US missile defense shield became lethal first strike weapons and at 04:30 they were launched on every major city and population center on the planet. The annihilation of 8.5 billion people was necessary as the world’s population had reached 9 billion and the Earth’s resources were not enough to sustain the planet for more than ten more years. The American people had been conditioned to see themselves as God’s chosen people and would forever pledge allegiance for having been saved. At 04:33 all targeted countries began launching their counter attacks on US targets and at 04:34 US interceptors were launched to nullify the threat. At 04:35 everything appeared to be going as planned and the US president was preparing to address what was left of humanity and claim the planet for the United States. At 04:36 the counter response to the launch of the interceptors was put into action and electromagnetic bombs began to go off near each and every US control facility rendering the entire US missile shield useless. At 04:37 Washington DC was wiped off the face of the planet, followed by every other city on the planet. At 05:03 the human race no longer existed and every trace of the folly that had been man was erased for all eternity. All that was left of the human species were three cosmonauts in the ISS, who now watched through a porthole as a missile launched from a US autonomous space drone became brighter and brighter against the backdrop of the moon, which for some reason, appeared to be crying. This was a warning and a work of fiction by John Robles. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru
Kosovo is part of Serbia, no to capitulation - interview © Flickr.com/nofrills/cc-by-nc Download audio file
Close You were listening to an interview with Jelisaveta Pavlovic, she’s a law student at Belgrade University and one of the protest organizers for protests that are scheduled for April, 8th and 9th in Serbia. Thanks for listening! And I wish you the best.
8 April, 07:14 1 WikiLeaks Special Project K: The Kissinger Cables go live
Collage: The Voice of Russia The anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks has gone live with another huge release called the Kissinger Cables, which are part of an even greater effort named the WikiLeaks Public Library of US Diplomacy (PlusD). Wikileaks says it is the world's largest searchable collection of United States confidential, or formerly confidential, diplomatic communications and that as of April 8, 2013 it holds 2 million records comprising approximately 1 billion words. Regarding the release WikiLeaks' publisher Julian Assange stated: "The collection covers US involvements in, and diplomatic or intelligence reporting on, every country on Earth. It is the single most significant body of geopolitical material ever published." According to WikiLeaks: “the Kissinger Cables comprise more than 1.7 million US diplomatic records for the period 1973 to 1976, including 205,901 records relating to former US Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger. Dating from January 1, 1973 to December 31, 1976 they cover a variety of diplomatic traffic including cables, intelligence reports and congressional correspondence. They include more than 1.3 million full diplomatic cables and 320,000 originally classified records. These include more than 227,000 cables classified as CONFIDENTIAL and 61,000 cables classified as SECRET. Perhaps more importantly, there are more than 12,000 documents with the sensitive handling restriction NODIS or 'no distribution,' and more than 9,000 labeled EYES ONLY.” At around 700 million words, the Kissinger Cables collection is approximately five times the size of WikiLeaks' Cablegate. The raw PDF data is more than 380 Gigabytes in size and is the largest WikiLeaks publication to date. WikiLeaks' says the significant revelations will include US involvements with fascist dictatorships, particularly in Latin America, under Franco's Spain (including about the Spanish royal family) and in Greece under the regime of the Colonels. The documents also contain hourly diplomatic reporting on the 1973 war between Israel, Egypt and Syria (the "Yom Kippur war"). The Kissinger Cables provide unparalleled access to journalists and the general public. Most of the records were reviewed by the United States Department of State's systematic 25-year declassification process. At review, the records were assessed and either declassified or kept classified with some or all of the metadata records declassified. Both sets of records were then subject to an additional review by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Once believed to be releasable, they were placed as individual PDFs at the National Archives as part of their Central Foreign Policy Files collection. The CIA and other agencies have attempted to reclassify or withhold sections of the US National Archives. Detailed minutes of US State Department meetings show that these attempts, which originated under the Bush II administration, have continued on through until at least 2009. A 2006 analysis by the US National Security Archives, an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at George Washington University, found that 55,000 pages had been secretly reclassified. The censorship of the US National Archives was thrown into stark relief in November last year when the Archive censored all searches for 'WikiLeaks' from its records. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, said: "The US administration cannot be trusted to maintain the history of its interactions with the world. Fortunately, an organisation with an unbroken record in resisting censorship attempts now has a copy." Voice of Russia, WikiLeaks WikiLeaks publishes 1.7 million fresh US secret cables The whistle blowing WikiLeaks website has made public1.7 million fresh US Intelligence and State Department cables for 1973-1976, mostly telegrams, reports and correspondence. According to a statement posted on the site of the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange of Australia, part of the cables has been declassified, while the other part has been marked as “not for distribution”. A juicy scandal around WikiLeaks flared up after the site published, in November 2010, secret US diplomatic cables, presenting Washington’s policy in a poor light. The US accused Assange of divulging official secrets and espionage, so he’s been compelled to hide in Ecuador’s Embassy in London since June last year. Assange is facing death penalty in the United States. Voice of Russia, TASS US, CIA, Wikileaks, John Robles, Politics · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · _Why bother, no one will go to jail for any unmoral behavior by the politicians; so we may know now; big deal. sin only will hied to hide fore awhile and for another time and return retune for more sinning and wiles on more people and nations. Devils work. ( God's Judgment is coming ) . 7 April, 23:53 Serbian students to protest capitulation of Kosovo
Photo: AFP Students from the University of Belgrade and citizens of Serbia are up in arms over a proposed agreement with Pristina over Kosovo which is for all intents and purposes entails the complete and total capitulation of Kosovo and will cement the loss of an area that many Serbs consider to be the heart of Serbia. The embattled Serbian people continue fighting for their very existence something the western press does not report. The EU continues to dangle the carrot of EU integration before the noses of officials but most of the people of Serbia have no desire to be a part of the EU leading to a further conflict inside Serbia. The west and their surrogate, the war lord, drug trafficker, mafia boss and dealer in death and murdering for human organs Hashim Thaci, are currently attempting to force Serbia, in any way that they can into capitulating Kosovo and allowing them to not only consolidate control over the rogue breakaway republic but also to expand that illegal power base into further territory. Currently the eighth round of negotiations, if we can call the one-sided setting of conditions that it currently taking place that, between Belgrade and Pristina in Brussels, has proven to be, in the words of diplomats taking part in the process, nothing more than a capitulation. Heading up the West’s renewed assault on the Serbian people, an assault designed to cement the Western backed and recognized separation of Kosovo from Serbia, is the head of European “diplomacy” Catherine Ashton, who despite evidence of the horrendous crimes involving the trafficking of human organs and rampant narcotics trafficking continues to support the criminals running Kosovo. Students at Belgrade University are up in arms about the prospect of captiulaion and are planning massive demonstrations for the 9th of April. The students claim that: the Republic of Serbia has been given an unambiguous ultimatum, that the ultimatum requests the assignation of a treaty which would abolish all Serbian institutions in North Kosovo and therefore spread the jurisdiction of self-declared state of Kosovo into northern territories and that the acceptance of the current “treaty” would mean recognition of Kosovo’s independence, something the West has been longing for to cement their control over the breakaway republic. According to the students at the University of Belgrade they will be publishing a statement and in the next few days will organize several protest actions under the slogan, “NO TO CAPITULATION!” The student organizers are fearful of a continued western media blackout and have asked me and the Voice of Russia to bring much needed attention to their plight and the plight of the Serbian people. The student will organize delegations who will address the Serbian Academy of Science and Art and the Rector of the University of Belgrade demanding that both institutions request the Government of Serbia to decline the ultimatum. The students are to also planning to take up positions in front of the Serbia’s Government building on Monday, April 8th, starting at 14:00 local time and will spend the night there. According to the student representative who wishes to currently remain anonymous the protest will be held on Tuesday, April 9th, “when the students and the citizens gathered will march to the government building where the following requests will be handed to official government reesentatives, namely the Prime Minister Mr. Ivica Dacic and Government Vice-President Mr. Aleksandar Vucic. According to sources the demands will be the following: “1. We require of them not to sign any kind of treaty with Pristina according to the Brussels, USA or Germany’s ultimatum.” 2. We require that the citizens of Serbia, as holders of the sovereignty are given the opportunity to decide the following question on a national referendum: ‘Are you willing to denounce the right to Kosovo for the sole purpose of gaining the start date of the beginning of negotiations for the EU membership?’ 3. Resolve the Kosovo question in the framework of the United Nations.” and finally, “4. Insistence on respecting Resolution 1244.” According to the students they will take every other needed action in order to ensure that these requests are fulfilled. Our source says the protests are: “… meant to be peaceful and without the involvement of any political party” and that they, “are inviting all citizens and all of their colleagues to join them, so that they can unanimously say a loud, strong and decisive ‘‘NO!’’ to capitulation. In showing their resolve the students have clearly stated that: “In the case that our Government still decides to sign the treaty with Pristina, the students will not stop taking all the actions necessary in order to preserve the territorial integrity of the Republic of Serbia.” Hopefully the authorities in Belgrade will listen to the voice of the people and do whatever they can to preserve that integrity and keep peace and unity in the country.
7 April, 17:11 Australian politicians in a quandary over Assange senate run - Castro
Julian Assange Photo: AFP Julian Assange has repeatedly stated he is willing to answer allegations in Sweden and despite his efforts and those of everyone involved in the case, including the Government of Ecuador, the Swedish authorities have refused to speak to him and have now even gone so far as to engage in an extremely outrageous and unusual smear campaign in Australia. Julian’s run for Senate has politicians in Canberra nervous and at a loss. Sam Castro, the head of the Australian Citizen’s Alliance spoke to the VOR’s John Robles on these issues and more. Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Sam Castro, the Co-Founder of the WikiLeaks Australian Citizens Alliance. Julian hasn’t had a chance to counter these allegations. They’ve never given him a chance to tell his side of the story. Is there anything that you think he’d want people to know? Castro: Well, I think that Julian has, made it quite clear all along. His concern in going to Sweden is about onward extradition. The fact that the Swedish Government will not guarantee that there won’t be any onward extradition is the reason that he sought political asylum and received it. So, I think Julian, if he was able to speak on this, would quite clearly say: "I am willing to be interviewed. We have requested that they come and interview me. If they won't guarantee they won’t onward extradite me, I'm not going to jeopardize my life and liberty to the American Government." So, I think it's important that people understand that Julian has no qualms about answering these questions. He's quite eager to clear his name, but the Swedish are unable and unwilling to guarantee they won't onward extradite him." Robles: Sure. I mean, they could have interviewed him a million times since all this began and they've refused to do anything to make that possible. Castro: Well, the Ecuadorian government has repeatedly requested this. They've offered all sorts of compromises that would still protect Julian, but enable this to take place. And the Swedish Government refuses to give any explanation as to why they won't interview him, and the judge conveniently left that out of his talks here in Australia. Robles: Would you agree, I mean, it’s probably a given, they just want to physically have him in custody so they can send him onward. I mean, I think that's the whole thing. Castro: Absolutely, and I think that there is a timing in this that is connected to Bradley Manning’s trial. Robles: What do you think that connection is? Castro: Well, I think that the Justice Department in America, you know, is going to use that trial to try and further ensnare Julian, and I think it suits the purpose of the American Government to have Julian quietly, locked away in another country. You know, it was quite clear in the Stratfor and the GI Files, that the process they were going to engage in was to destroy his, organisation, to destroy his support base, and to move him from country to country until he was emotionally and mentally broken. And this is the way America has been doing things since the “Cold War”, and they think that they can continue on this path and with frequency Sweden and Australia, as a Government, seem to be willing participants in that Robles: They sure are. Can you tell us about the reaction from Australians to this speech? Do you think it’s adversely affected Julian politically in any way, or the public opinion down there? Castro: No, I don’t think it’s affected it at all. If anything it’s probably strengthened many of, the thinking people’s perspective that this was merely a PR stunt, and, I don’t know if you saw that the live stream of the event was actually cut. When Julian Burnside tried to respond, the live stream was cut. So, you know, you have to wonder what’s going on. Robles: And it’s been completely pulled off the University of Adelaide’s site. Castro: Yeah, exactly, so why did they pull it down, unless they’ve realized that it was prejudicial, and, you know, there were concerns about it. So, I think if anything, the speech by this judge and the appearance of this judge, following on the heels of Foreign Minister visiting, clearly demonstrates that the Australian people realize what’s going on, and we’ve had confirmation now that the Grand Jury is continuing, and really it’s getting to the point where the Australian Government and the Swedish Government are starting to look completely ridiculous. Robles: As far as legal experts go, I was wondering from a legal standpoint, I mean, such an unprecedented statement from a Supreme Court Justice in a foreign country. Wouldn’t that be grounds to have the whole case thrown out in Sweden, I mean if it were a fair system? Castro: Yeah,absolutely, I mean that was the statement made by barrister Greg Barns who was the previous head of the Australian Lawyers Alliance. He said it’s just absolutely unprecedented, and there is no way the Australian Judicial System would tolerate a judge of that standing commenting in such detail on a case that had not even come to be charged and trialed. Robles: I talked to Greg on Monday about the campaign and then hearing this the next day was kind of, I want to say surprising, but it was sad really. Do you think this may have been arranged or pushed by internal Australian enemies, or is the US behind this, or just Sweden tryingto make themselves look good for their own …? Castro: Well, I, I think that Prime Minister Gillard, and Foreign Minister Carr have been scrambling for quite a few months now to justify the scripts that they have been trotting out for the last year and a half, that they know nothing of the threat to Julian, and I think there is such a huge body of evidence that we now have in Australia that they absolutely know what’s going on. One can only conclude that they discussed this with the Foreign Minister when he was out here and that this event is an attempt to move the population’s position on Sweden, and quite frankly I think it’s backfired on them. Robles: What about, Julia Gillard. She’s been very vocal in the past. Has she said anything, or made any public statements regarding Julian’s Senate campaign? Castro: No, both sides of politics have been absolutely silent on the fact that the Wikileaks Party is being formed, and that Julian is running for the Senate, and I think that just demonstrates the nervousness that they hold for the support that is here for Julian. Julian has a very good chance of winning a Senate seat in Victoria. People in this country, as we’ve just discussed before, are fed up with the lies and the corruption, and the whole narrative of Wikileaks and Julian Assange has really just confirmed the way Australian politicians are not prepared to tell the truth. So, I think they are very, very nervous about a new force coming into politics whose foundational stones are around truthfulness and transparency and accountability, and many of them have questions to answer, not just about Julian, but about many other issues in this country, so they’ve been extraordinarily silent on Julian’s Senate run, because I don’t think they know how to handle that because they know how popular he is. Robles: It’s like the mice have been playing and the cat’s coming home sort of type, thing, yeah? Castro: Yes, exactly. That’s the only way to get the rats out of Canberra! Robles: I didn’t want to say the word “rats”, but thanks for saying it for me. Listen, can you tell us a little bit about the Australian Citizens Alliance, what you guys are doing right now? Castro: Sure, so our organization, the Wikileaks Australian Citizens Alliance, has been over the last several months even more actively engaged in helping to build the foundation stones for the Wikileaks Party. We see it as a natural extension of our political campaigning and activism, both for Julian and whistle-blowers and the work of Wikileaks, and it’s quite clear to us that those in positions of power are not prepared to cede that power, and so we need to, as a citizenry, step in and be prepared to take up positions of power ourselves, to bring that that truthfulness to our political system. So, myself, and the co-founder of my organization, we are both now members of the National Council for the Wikileaks Party here in Australia, and we will be participating in a very in-depth struggle in the build-up to the campaign and Julian’s run for the Senate. Robles: What’s the exact status of the Party right now? Have you guys officially been launched, have you gotten all the signatures and everything that you needed? Castro: We’ve been taking membership. We’re very close to being ready to lodge our application for official registration as a party. That’s maybe only a couple of weeks away, and once that process is completed then we can, as a party, endorse the candidates that will be, going to run in this year’s election, and it looks like, yeah, there’ll be a few candidates. I think people will be surprised at how broad and incredibly dynamic those people are. Robles: Can you give us any hints, or … you’re probably not allowed to talk about that? Castro: I kind of guess, you probably know, Julian will be at the top of the list Robles: Well, of course, of course. Castro: Look, I’m unable to do that, at this point,but, you know, it will be coming very soon, and you know, let’s just say, it won’t be in just one state, it will be in multiple states that we’ll be running candidates. Robles: You can’t give us any names? Castro: I can’t, I can’t give you any names at this point, or Greg, Greg might get very upset with me, but what I can say to you is that our focus is on the Senate. The Senate has consistently been used over the last decade as a “house of deals” to support the major parties, and Wikileaks is very squarely focussed on returning that to a “house of review”, where legislation is scrutinized and the people’s voice is heard. So that will be our focus. Robles: That sounds wonderful. Castro: The only thing that I would like to add is: for people who don’t know Australian politics, and haven’t heard anything about polling, Julian Assange, at the last polling that was done very late last year, his chances of winning a Senate seat, he was voting at 27%, which is more than the entire Labour Party in the Senate Robles: Than the entire labour party? Castro: And they’re the current Government. So, I think it’s really important that people understand that the outcome of this election is very likely to be, a Liberal victory, and Tony Abbot will probably be the next Prime Minister, and the only way to stop further erosion of our civil liberties, our environment and our social justice in this country, is to ensure that we don’t hand him the Senate on a platter. And, and that really means that the Australian voters we need to get out there and vote for independent voices that will actually respect the wishes of the people. Robles: One thing about Australian politics, are there very many other like third parties or? Castro: Yeah, I mean there are quite a few, minor parties. You basically have, the Labour and the Liberal Party, followed by, probably the third power voice has been the Greens, and then you have a whole heap of smaller parties. But you know, really what we’ve had is a situation where, Labour and Liberal have consistently abandoned their values and their voters to side with each other and certainly blocking out the minor voices. So, this is an opportunity for the minor parties, and for a new party like Wikileaks, to actually unite, and demonstrate that, you know, Labour and Liberal cannot control the politics of this country if they continue to behave in the way they have. Robles: Samantha, thank you very much, I really … or Sam, I’m sorry, thank you very much, I really appreciate you speaking with me. Castro: No worries, you’re very welcome. This is John Robles. I was speaking with Samantha Castro, the co-founder of the Wikileaks Australian Citizen’s Alliance. Thanks for listening.
5 April, 16:50 1 Sweden’s case against Assange is falling apart - Castro
Julian Assange. Photo: EPA A high profile Swedish Supreme Court Justice named Stefan Lindskog recently flew from Sweden all the way to Australia to give a talk at the University of Adelaide in which he detailed the Swedish allegations against Julian Assange. Legal experts and scholars around the world are crying foul as such actions go against all accepted judicial protocols and the “case”, if you can call allegations that, is ongoing, no charges have been files and it has not even appeared before a court. Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Sam Castro, the Co-Founder of the WikiLeaks Australian Citizens Alliance. Robles: Hello, Sam! How are you this afternoon, I believe it is? Castro: Yes, it is. I'm good, John. How are you?" Robles: I'm very well. Thank you for asking and thanks for agreeing to speak with me. I'd like to ask you about your opinion on this unusual, speech by the Swedish Supreme Court Justice, Stefan Lindskog at the University of Adelaide. Castro: It's highly unusual. I think one of the things that Greg Barns, who has been appointed the campaign director for Julian Assange's Senate run, and is also a preeminent barrister here in Australia. He said it's quite extraordinary to have such a high-profile judge coming to a country to talk about an individual in a case that may sit in his court. So this is quite extraordinary. And he came out here on the pretense of talking about transparency, but then proceeded to discuss Julian Assange and actually even read out the statements of the two women involved in the allegations. So it's an extraordinary situation which is further made unusual kind of by the timing of it. So…Here in Australia we recently had Julian announce; of course his Senate run, then we had the Foreign Minister of Sweden with us, and then of course we had the recent situation going on with the Swedish case, with the prosecutor Nye stepping aside for another prosecutor, we've had one of the women involved in the case sacking the lawyer. So there's a lot going on where the Swedish case appears to be falling apart. And then of course we had Alexa O'Brien who has been covering the Manning trial, receive confirmation via e-mail from the Department of Justice in America, that the WikiLeaks Grand Jury is ongoing in the United States, which, our Foreign Minister has been claiming for over a year now, that he knows nothing about that. And then all of a sudden we have a Swedish Judge appear in Australia in the build-up to an election in which Julian Assange is running, on the pretense of talking about transparency and whistleblowers and he spends the entire speech talking about Julian Assange, but he doesn't discuss that they could interview him in the United Kingdom, he doesn’t discuss the temporary surrender component of the bilateral relationship between Sweden and America, and he doesn't discuss the fact that Julian could quite easily be extradited on charges under copyright or subpoenaed as a witness, for example Bradley Manning or another whistleblower. So it seems to be a confirmation that this is really a highly-politicized situation and it’s quite extraordinary to have him in this country prejudicing a potential (garbled) many people in this country can’t believe what’s happened. Robles: I noticed that the video of his speech was taken off the University of Adelaide site and in it, I guess, it was posted that at the 25 minute he started giving explicit details on the case. Anywhere else that would be considered poisoning the jury pool, to put it lightly. I also found that the timing of this seems to be very strange. Do you think this may have been organized by Julian's political enemies in Australia to try to railroad his Senate bid? Castro: Well I guess that's a possibility. The timing of it is quite extraordinary. The Foreign Minister has just been out here, our Foreign Minister is clearly in close communication with the U.S. Ambassador and his counterparts in the U.S. And then, yes, suddenly this is organized as Julian Assange announces that: he's running for Senate and his campaign director. So… I don't know if it was necessarily orchestrated by the Labor or the Liberal party, but there's definitely something going on here, and it's a highly unusual situation and in fact most people in Australia, whether they agree with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks or not, would be horrified if an Australian judge went to another country to speak on a potential case that may come before their court. This is just another example how Sweden has no ability or intention to follow judicial and due process. Robles: Do you think there will be more of these kinds of tricks down the line? Castro: It certainly does appear to be a PR stunt which serves the purposes of the Australian government further not having to do anything to help Julian. And of course having Julian in the Senate would be something that would be quite scary for them. And it certainly seems to be from Sweden's perspective an attempt to separate out the work of WikiLeaks from its founder and editor in chief Julian Assange, and that’s an impossibility, we know this is politicized. So, I think it was a failed attempt to try and divert people's attention from Sweden's misbehavior in this case, and the fact that this judge read out the females’ statements in this case is just further evidence of the lack of respect or consideration that they've actually given to all parties in this matter for receiving justice. If they really want to look after the interests of the women, they should be interviewing Julian Assange in the United Kingdom, instead they are exploiting these women's statements to manipulate political situations that prejudice Julian Assange. Robles: What do you make of the fact that he did say some positive things about Julian and WikiLeaks? Why do you think he did that? Castro: I think Sweden is manipulating situations to try and present itself as fair and reasonable, and actually that is completely countered by this judge's behavior in discussing a matter that is yet to even be charged or come before the court. So I think it's a very clever attempt to manipulate the Australian population into viewing Sweden as a fair and reasonable and democratic state that values and respects human rights, when, in fact, this is the same country that was quite willing to participate in CIA rendetioning of people for torture. This is a country that uses pretrial detention, this is a country that trials people in secret with lay judges. So I see this is an attempted move by Sweden and its friends in Australia to present themselves as fair and reasonable so that the people of Australia will back down in defending Julian Assange. Fortunately, there are enough critical thinkers and smart people in this country not to buy this attempted PR stunt which is absolutely prejudicial in any way you look at it. I really think it's going to backfire on them if they were trying to win the hearts and minds of the Australian people, and I think that there's enough truth and information out there in support for Julian to actually recognize that regardless of what a judge may say in broad terms about the work of WikiLeaks or Julian Assange they are not applying fair and due process. And he even acknowledged that the case is a mess. Well, I would say to the judge, "If the case is such a mess, you can fly to Australia to tell the Australian people that. Why not send a prosecutor to interview Julian in London? Robles: Right. Julian had a chance to counter these allegations. They've never given him a chance to tell his side of the story. Is there anything he'd want people to know? Castro: I think that Julian has made it quite clear all along. His concern in going to Sweden is about onward extradition. World, Wikileaks, Julian Assange, Society · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · Sweden is a US puppet, like the rest of the EU countries. 4 April, 19:04 Julian Assange “supported” by Swedish Justice
Julian Assange Photo: EPA Swedish Supreme Court Justice Stefan Lindskog made a surprising appearance at University of Adelaide and spoke to an audience about the ongoing case of Julian Assange. He spoke in support of Assange, WikiLeaks and even Bradley Manning, but he also went into the allegations against Assange in Sweden, which is something almost unheard of as the case is ongoing. Was this an innocent lecture or a sinister political gambit? It will be up to Australians to decide. Under normally accepted standards and rules of jurisprudence it is very unusual for a member of the prosecuting legal establishment to speak in public regarding the details of an ongoing case, but the Swedish Justice apparently has got away with it because he spoke in a foreign country, Australia, and is not presiding over the case. Julian Assange was quoted as saying the stunt was “absolutely outrageous” no doubt taken aback by the sheer deviation from the norm. He may also be worried about the possible negative impact the event could have on his case and possibly his political campaign for Senate. Greg Barns, the President of Australian Lawyers Alliance, and the head of Julian’s campaign, who I spoke to earlier in the week told the Sydney Morning Herald: "That a Swedish supreme court judge thinks this is acceptable tends to confirm the fears people have about the impartiality and robustness of the Swedish judicial system.” And;”It gives great currency to the belief that Mr. Assange's case in Sweden has been heavily politicized." In a tweet WikiLeaks said: “The head of Swedish Supreme Court campaigning on a case they expect to judge with $ from the embassy in the run up to an election", portraying the event as part of a conspiracy. Despite many words in support of WikiLeaks and the case of Assange and even Bradley Manning, the talk by the judge was troubling on several fronts, not only the most obvious, the fact that it took place at all, but also in the context of the current situation surrounding Assange and WikiLeaks. First let’s look at what Justice Stefan Lindskog said in support of Assange and Bradley Manning, with regard to extradition: "Basically, I think there are some misunderstandings, especially when it comes to the issue of extradition, extradition shall not be granted when alleged crimes are military or political in nature.” With regard to leaking classified information: “What is classified under US law is probably not classified under Swedish law, and enemies to the US may not be enemies to Sweden.” With regard to Assange: “At the end of the day Assange will be thought of as someone who made public certain pieces of information”, and “… the Wikileaks’ leaks were good for society and should not be punished. The good made by leakage of such information cannot be underestimated. It should never be a crime to make known the crime of a state.” Justice Lindskog spoke about Bradley Manning: “The release of classified information was for the benefit of mankind, especially a secret combat video in Iraq that showed the American crew mowing down a group of civilians and a Reuters photographer.” And, “I hope Mr. Manning will have a fair trial. That is all nice and good and positive and on the surface it would appear Sweden is attempting to show that it is not the U.S. lapdog many would claim it to be, but there is a much more sinister side to this that few are seeing. In a video posted on the website of the University of Adelaide, since taken down, at about the 25 minute mark, Justice Lindskog speaks in surprising detail about the lurid sex-capades Julian is accused of. One point is clear there was no rape involved and all of the accusations involve the proper usage or non-usage of condoms, yet putting this out to the Australian public, again in a forum where Julian is not allowed to give his side of the story is an egregious offense against Assange. There can be no doubt that Assange has political enemies worldwide and in Australia these include people from the Prime Minister Julia Gillard on down. These are people who will most likely do anything to stop Assange from winning a seat in the country’s senate. Surely airing details of the sex antics of Assange is in bad taste to say the least, and had the case taken place in Sweden Justice Lindskog could have been accused of attempting to poison the jury pool, but having taken place in Australia, it might be said that he was attempting to poison the “voter pool”. Whether cutting the Assange campaign off at the pass was the Judge’s intention or not is yet to be seen, the information may have been known to the public and it may be brushed aside. What effect it will have depends on the character of the Australian electorate, will any hint of scandal send them running as Americans do, or will they be happy to have someone in office with an active sex life, or perhaps they will decide what he does in his bedroom is his business as the case should be. Another possible sinister motivations with all of the kind words and such may be Sweden’s own attempt to gain political capital and effect the case, so that Julian is allowed to be sent to Sweden, it may all be a ruse, which might be more likely as not to be the case, as the Swedish judiciary could have come out years ago in support of Julian and allowed him to give his side of the story a million times over.
4 April, 15:47 West infers Putin sunk Cyprus while ignoring Obama sunk the world
Vladimir Putin Photo: RIA Novosti With the world focused on the collapse of the Cyprus banking system and the seizing of depositor’s funds, an unprecedented move by western financial institutions, the demonization of Russia and President Putin by the West and its agents has once again taken off in full swing. This is necessary to hide the fact the West is in fact robbing Russian businessmen and Russian depositors of money that they in fact have no right to. In an Op-Ed piece for the New York Times, the favorite avenue for demonizing Russia and a column I have taken to task in the past for their acidic fantasy-based hyperbolic Russophobic rhetoric and propagation of out-dated cold war stereotypes, an offshore writer bashes Russian business and demonizes President Putin blaming him and Russian oligarch’s for the Cyprus banking crisis. The piece is so provocative, lacking in balance and the majority of the points it makes are so far from reality it demands an answer. The writer of this particular piece, Ben Judah, is apparently from Instanbul, Turkey, a fact that may point to the New York Times now farming out their vitriol to other countries. He begins his attack piece by deriding Russian Business, the demonization of which is clearly necessary amid the current scandal and as Russia is on the verge of becoming the new business hub of the modern world, a fact that has been assisted if not caused by the economic failure and the downfall of Europe and the West. His piece starts: “The blue-glass skyscrapers of Moscow City (fragments of Russia’s boom-time dream) are visible from the Kremlin walls, within which there was once hope that those towers could supplant the West’s financial centers. When the sun sets behind them, you can see that many of the offices lie empty.” First off and this is minor, the glass of the skyscrapers is not really blue and the offices are not visible as he states, unless one is hovering in a helicopter alongside them. Second calling them “fragments of Russia’s boom-time dream” and saying the many offices lie empty is completely disingenuous and detached from reality, for the simple reason that Moscow City is still under construction and the project is still in its inception phase. So strike one Mr. Judah. I could contrast the former World Trade Center in New York and how those building had hundreds of offices which were empty, and how the building were condemned due to asbestos and then destroyed with people inside as a catalyst for the PNAC plan for global domination, and I would be basing such an assessment on facts, not fantasy, but I won’t go there. His second paragraph begins his attack on Russia banking and financial practices, an attack which is nothing but conjecture and opinion parading as facts. Mr. Judah says: “In fact, the real hubs for Russian banking are in other countries. Moscow’s billionaires squirrel their fortunes abroad, and many businessmen register their companies as British, Dutch, Swiss or Cypriot — anything but Russian Whistle-blowers would have us believe that even President Vladimir V. Putin stashes his money offshore.” Mr. Judah is obviously unaware of Russian legislation to stop the flight of capital from Russia, and ignores the fact western businessmen and billionaires, in particular Americans, are the world’s experts in hiding capital and escaping their share of the tax burden. We could talk about Swiss Banks and the thousands of “offshore tax havens” used by the West and how American companies outsource all of their work overseas because it is cheaper, as apparently the New York Times now does, but we won’t go there either will we? As for Mr. Judah’s whistle blowers? First off too convenient, name one Mr. Judah, second off citing anonymous whistle blowers as a basis for accusations against the president of country is a cheap trick and third off where are the details and the facts? In contrast I could write thousands of pages detailing the financial machinations of the United States, the manipulations of foreign markets, the undermining and taking over of foreign economies, the flight of capital from the United States, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the ongoing attempt to take over the world militarily which will lead to the eventual total demise of the U.S. and its allies as their military adventurism, more and more overstretches their ability to pay for it. We are seeing that today. As for whistle blowers? Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, Jeremy Hammond, are true individuals I could cite for starters, but we won’t go there right now, will we? Mr. Judah says: “Russian money is frightened of Russia”, Russia has “crude capitalism”, “Mr. Putin never delivered secure property rights”, and “…Russian money is paranoid; since 2008 alone more than $350 billion in capital has fled the country.” I would like to know where he gets his figures. These statements are so obviously patently false when you look at projects like Moscow City, as Mr. Judah did, and Skolkovo, and hundreds of other massive ventures taking place all over Russia. And again there is Russian legislation banning the practice he mentions and Russia has in fact pursued criminals who have taken billions out of the country, criminals such as Boris Berezovsky, who are then given asylum and protected by the West. But we won’t go there either now will we? Nor will we mention the fact that even if the figure of $350 billion is correct, it pales to the trillions U.S. war profiteers have stolen from the American people since 9-11 He says; “These billions craved secrecy and security, and financial islands inside the European Union welcomed them”, ignoring the fact that by welcoming them these institutions to which he refers were taking part in illegal flight of capital from Russia and becoming fabulously rich. He continues by claiming Cyprus was the most important offshore location for Russian money and by inference caused the collapse in the Cypriot banking sector. This is completely false, Russian money kept and is keeping much of the European economy viable, including that of Cyprus. He says, “… its bloated banking sector was wrecked by a gigantic exposure to Greek bonds. To save Cyprus from bankruptcy, a decree from the European Union, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank (known as “the troika”) is now confronting depositors in Cypriot banks with the loss of as much as 60 percent of deposits greater than $100,000, alongside tough new capital controls.” This is closer to the truth but ignores the fact that taking 60% of deposits is in fact stealing the money of innocent depositors to pay for failed policies, something one might expect in a banana republic and not the EU. The demonization by the New York Times and its writers of Russia, Russian businessmen, Russian oligarchs and President Putin in necessary for the West and for their financial manipulators in this case for one simple reason: as I said above, through the IMF, the EU and the ECB, they are literally “legally” robbing Russia and Russian businessmen of billions upon billions of dollars that they have no right to. That is the real story here. The result of Western financial machinations in Cyprus will no doubt be felt well into the future. No doubt the “paranoid Russian money” will no longer be so readily at the disposal of the European and Western economies, already on the brink of total collapse, money which we have seen is keeping many major western financial entities afloat. Another result may be the fleeing of monies from other countries as it becomes clear that western “safe havens” are not in fact safe, and that financial regulators can just come in and seize whatever monies they see fit when they need a short-sighted and quick “fix”. Unlike the West, Russian businessmen and Russia will recover and the fiasco and the money grab in Cyprus are just more indicators that the West is faltering and on the brink of collapse. Perhaps now offshore monies will flow to other places, perhaps to Moscow City? Could be, you never know. As for Obama, who I mentioned in my headline, the current global financial situation, one I would say is on the brink of collapse, is the responsibility of U.S. based and American controlled financial bodies, so in answer to Mr. Judah’s question, no President Putin did not sink Cyprus, the West did. I offer this question then for everyone to ponder in response: Did Obama Sink the World? Look around you, the answers to that question are everywhere.
4 April, 03:20 The US and NATO need a reason to expand into the Asia-Pacific Region, and North Korea serves that purpose – Rick Rozoff
US Air Force B-2 Photo: AFP 213,000 military personnel are involved in live fire training “exercises” involving nuclear capable hardware near North Korea’s borders. Hence it is no surprise North Korea feels threatened. Even if North Korea did not exist as the “evil” threat in the region, the United States would need to create a boogey man to justify its pre-planned military expansion in the Asia-Pacific region. Voice of Russia regular contributor Rick Rozoff, from Stop NATO, spoke about these things and more in this interview. I am speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the Owner and Manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list.
Rick Rozoff Robles: Could we get your views on what is going on currently in North Korea? Rozoff: Yes, what we are seeing is intensification of saber-rattling, of gunboat diplomacy, by the United States in the first instance, but standing behind is its two major military allies in the area; the Republic of Korea, South Korea, and Japan. What is going on currently, as many of your listeners may know, is the second part of a two-part annual military exercise that the United States holds with the South Korean government. And those… It’s two parts as I mentioned, first, is something called “Key Resolve,” which started in February, is now completed, and currently now, until the end of April, until the last day of April, is basically a field exercise called “Eagle Foal” F-O-A-L. And all together this joint exercise… The first is a computer simulated… basically a command-post exercise, and the second is a live-fire field exercise, but all together they entail the participation of 13,000 US military personnel, 200,000 South Korean military personnel “troops.” What is most alarming about this year’s however, is the fact that in recent days the United States deployed two B-2 Strategic Long-Range Nuclear Bombers, they flew non-stop from the Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri to South Korea to fly over the Korean peninsula. These are nuclear capable bombers, that is they are capable of dropping nuclear payloads. The US has also deployed or is in the course of deploying B-52s which are also long-range strategic bombers used most infamously in the war against Vietnam in the 1960s and early 1970s. And most recently we heard that F-22 Stealth Fighter Jets are also being deployed as part of the exercises, and in addition to the USS McCain Guided Missile Warship which is an Aegis-Class, something I think we talked about several times in this program that is, it is equipped to fire the Standard Missile 3 Interceptor Missile. Robles: The B-2s, was that originally planned as part of the exercises? Rozoff: I think we can only speculate on whether, or rather at which point the United States decided to deploy the B-2s and whether this was an intentional provocation, you know to up the ante. The interpretation of course, in the ever obedient western media, obedient that is to the government line; is that this is to assure the South Koreans and perhaps Japan as well, the Japanese government, of US resolve vis-à-vis North Korea and such like. I mean this is blustering, I don’t think we have to take that seriously. What in fact the US is doing is raising the ante substantially, not simply against North Koreans, you know, it has been my contention, as you know John for years, that North Korean is really: I don’t want to play with words, a “Red Herring”, but it is really a pretext for US military buildup in the Far East and North East Asia, aimed not so much at North Korea, as at China and Russia. And what we’ve seen in recent days, the new Defense Chief Chuck Hagel, has announced the deployment of 14 more ground-based long-range interceptor missiles to Alaska, all together there will be 30, ostensibly again to exclusively address missile threat from North Korea, which I believe personally is probably exaggerated, I think there is a hyperbolical presentation of the threat posed by North Korea. But nevertheless, at the end of the day the US has consummated the Asia Pacific pivot with a vengence. Robles: North Korea is making statements themselves that are extremely bellicose, I guess. If they are saying they are going to hit targets in the US, what would you make of those statements? Rozoff: I would urge caution on two scores, first of all, I don’t know about the reliability of the translation of the North Koreans statements. That is not to say they have not made what are basically blustering statements. I think it is very simple for a small nation with a fairly ineffectual military to make threats. The rest of the world doesn’t have to take them tremendously seriously. When the US makes threats, the world should take it eminently seriously because the US has delivered on threats in the past, in the recent past. I think the most important thing to understand here is it is part of a pattern of behavior, that over the last two and a half years or so, where the US clearly, openly has announced that it is going to shift the preponderance of its military might, including first strike capabilities to the Asia Pacific Region, including 60% of Naval Forces, submarines and strategic air forces. So, if North Korea didn’t exist, it would almost have to be invented, I would argue, according to that scenario. There has to be some alleged reason, or rational, or threat in the region that would permit the United States, first of all, to increase its own military forces in the area but also to consolidate the creation of Asia Pacific analogue of NATO, which has been long in the offing and long in the making. South Korea, we have to recall, is one of 8 countries that roughly a year ago was announced to be part of North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s latest partnership program, Partners Across the Globe, that’s the name if it. Japan is another. And the Deputy Secretary General of NATO within the last 48-72 hours, I am talking about the former to U.S. Ambassador of Russia Alexander Vershbow, stated openly that if North Korea were to attack the United States, that is an unlikely possibility unless in retaliation, that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization could invoke its article 5, so called mutual defense clause, meaning the entire 28 nation North Atlantic Treaty Organization would be at war with North Korea. Robles: What would you make of the translations? I’ve also read some reports but they’ve pretty much been muffled I think and kind of brushed aside that the actual translations were wrong. But then again North Korea has not issued any redactions to those statements. Rozoff: Much along the lines of what you’ve just said is that, the “red Headlines,” maybe the opening paragraphs stating that the reports that North Korea was prepared to hit the mainland of the United States, or Guam, or Okinawa and so forth, I am sure they are, in the event of a war between the two countries, and let’s keep in mind there is truce, not a peace settlement, technically North Korean, The People’s Democratic Republic of Korea and the United States are in a state of armed hostilities, there has never been a formal peace settlement, so when one or the other launches hostilities, it is really a resumption of something that happened 60 years ago rather than something entirely new. Another factor though that needs to be addressed is the fact that North Korea is one of only 3 countries that borders both Russia and China. The other two are Mongolia and Kazakhstan and the United States and its NATO allies have been extremely aggressive in trying to consolidate their control, including the military sphere, over both Mongolia and Kazakhstan. Robles: This was an interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the Owner and Manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list.
3 April, 22:43 Since US invasion 1 million dead from Afghan heroin
© Flickr.com/Always Bë Cool/cc-by-nc-sa 3.0 The utter and dismal failure of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was further underlined on March 11 at a session of the UN Commission on Narcotics Drugs. Opium production which was almost completely stopped in 2001 now accounts for 90% of the world’s heroin, a fact that might lead to speculation as to the real motivations behind the invasion and occupation by the West of Afghanistan. On March 11, at the 56th session of the Commission on Narcotics Drugs held by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Victor Ivanov, the head of the Russian Federal Drug Control Service, revealed that since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan heroin production has increased 40 fold, more than 1 million people have died due to Afghan heroin and now 90% of the world’s heroin supply comes from Afghanistan. These are damning statistics which the western media and the U.S. Government will try to evade and further underline the complete failure of U.S. named “Operation Enduring Freedom,” an aggressive invasion, which has done nothing but decimate the country’s people, destroy almost all of the infrastructure and has further allowed America’s war profiteers to become fabulously rich. Ivanov told the conference that: “Afghan heroin has killed more than 1 million people worldwide since the ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ began and over a trillion dollars has been invested into transnational organized crime from drug sales… Any impartial observer must admit the sad fact that the international community has failed to curb heroin production in Afghanistan since the start of NATO’s operation.” With the Middle East, the Arctic, Venezuela and the slew of other countries that have been the subject of U.S. targeting both military and otherwise it is clear what the real objectives are, and were, first and foremost oil and energy resources. With Afghanistan the real reason will never be admitted as it is much more illicit. Although officials will not state this openly, both in Russia and elsewhere, judging from the U.S.’ past history of invading countries where there are large financial dividends to be had as well as ones of strategic importance, it would appear that the trillion dollar Afghan heroin industry is what the U.S. was after. This would explain why the U.S. has done nothing to eradicate the cultivation of opium in the country and has done nothing to stop the flow of heroin out of Afghanistan. Unlike the decades before 9-11 there is sadly little chance that anyone will ever come forward and expose the entire lie that has been the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. With the U.S. hyper-security state and its aggressive persecution of whistleblowers there will be no Iran-Contra like revelations pointing to U.S. narcotics profiteering or collusion with the drug trade. What we have are the statistics to look at and the aftermath of the U.S. invasion. According to data presented by Ivanov at the session opium production has increased to 154,000 hectares and according to reports from Afghanistan will be at 157,000 hectares this year. This is in sharp contrast to the situation before the U.S. invasion in October 2001 when the Taliban had banned the growing of all poppies. What is telling is that after the U.S. invasion all production resumed. In a graph used by Ivanov during his presentation opium production in Afghanistan in 2001 was at a paltry 185 tons a year compared to 8,200 in 2007 and 6,900 in 2009. This accounts for a huge amount of dirty money that Ivanonv says is nearly on par with the world’s oil and gas trade. Moscow believes that eradicating the Afghan poppy fields is the simplest solution to the problem, one that the U.S. for some reason has eschewed. Ivanov said:"Metaphorically speaking, instead of destroying the machine-gun nest, they suggest catching bullets flying from the machine-gun. We suggest eradicating the narcotic plants altogether. As long as there are opium poppy fields, there will be trafficking." And as long as there is trafficking there will be trillions of illicit dollars to fund U.S. expansionism, illegal invasions and the endless war on terror.
3 April, 19:10 1 Anonymous attacks North Korea: another US tool?
© Collage: Voice of Russia Members of the Anonymous collective have taken it upon themselves to once again become involved in a military confrontation and have once again seemingly been operating in conjunction with the US in mounting aggression against yet another small and almost defenseless country. Have the “Knights of the Internet” become nothing more than sadistic schoolyard bullies, and are they now an instrument of US geo-political interests? Judging from recent events in Syria and now in North Korea one might ask oneself if the hacker group Anonymous has allowed itself to become another extension and in fact a tool of the U.S. Government’s military adventurism and open policy of forcible regime change. According to certain “founders” of the group who I have communicated with in the past and active Anons the group is not political and does not “do politics”, yet what we have seen is something to the contrary. Due to its very nature and the fact that the organization, if we can call it that, has no hierarchy, it is impossible to ascertain if the attacks on North Korean sites and the demand for an end to nuclear threats and even the removal of power of the North Korean leader are supported by the group or not. Since Anonymous is so loosely knit and has almost no concrete rules or agenda it is not easy to determine if group has been infiltrated, which I would say is a given, and is in fact being used as a cover by the U.S. in launching cyber warfare operations against target countries. With the entire US war apparatus bearing down on small almost defenseless countries that the increasingly aggressive and dangerous U.S. Government deems to be “evil” for whatever reasons suits them at the moment, to see the once noble Anonymous collective increasingly being seemingly manipulated into advancing U.S. aggressive military objectives is a sad thing indeed. In my dealings with Anonymous, I have met and communicated with individuals with high ideals and noble goals as well as sadistic cyber criminals who prey on the weak and terrorize whoever they wish and even Russophobic lunatics and understand that due to their nature Anonymous might be seen as all inclusive. The very nature of Anon Operations makes it another area where Western Intelligence Operatives and Cyber War Specialists can manipulate and use the Anonymous brand for their own nefarious ends and to give credibility to their own questionable and illegal operations. When Anonymous launches an operation it might be called for through one of the many “forums” and methods they use to communicate. One Anon may call for a massive attack on me, for example, something which I was promised once by an individual who claimed to be an Anon leader and never materialized, and others may join in en-masse. Who is calling for an attack is usually someone with certain credentials in the organization and may be known to other members or not. Since the organization jealously guards and maintains their anonymity even for Anons it hard to determine who is exactly behind a call for an attack. In South Korea there is a South Korean Anonymous group, which calls itself Anonymous Korea in certain instances and which claims to have taken down or attacked five North Korean official web-sites including the main North Korean web portal, the site of the North Korean Foreign Relations Committee, the site of the North Korean Committee for Cultural Relations and also that of the state-owned airline Air Korea. North Korea’s leadership has shown tremendous restraint and the North Korean people are suffering enough with over 300,000 hostile troops amassed near their borders carrying out military exercises and an array of U.S. military hardware capable of launching nuclear strikes amassed off their borders, that once again it is sad to see Anonymous attacking the country as well. The fact that Anon Korea has made what they claim are 15,000 passwords available to the public and blamed innocent victims for being stupid in creating weak passwords leaves me with little sympathy for the group, although I have written well of them in the past and have applauded some of their exploits. In reality attacking North Korea is akin to telling a child to shut up who has been beaten to a pulp by a group of schoolyard bullies or screaming at a woman who is being gang raped to be quiet. Anonymous, if in fact this was an Anonymous operation, needs to stay out of military operations and international conflicts or study who the true geo-political aggressors are if they wish to continue to enjoy the support and the respect of the world’s populace. Maybe North Korea should not make such bellicose statements and maybe their leader should step down in the eyes of some, as I am sure there are those who would say the U.S. leader needs to step aside so Americans can breathe free, but attacking their web infrastructure serves no one except the imperialist aggressors. It is interesting and must be noted that all North Korean sites are back up and the site that was taken down, uriminzokkiri.com, has as its most prominent link, the neo-conservative “Project for a New American Century” blueprint for global American domination, a doctrine that has been in use since 9-11 and a plan which required 9-11 as a catalyst. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I may be reached at robles@ruvr.ru North Korea, hackers, Anonymous, U.S.-North Korea relations, North Korea-US Standoff, World · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · absurd. Maybe counterfeit Anonymous ? 2 April, 16:03 Julian Assange determined to win Senate seat – Greg Barns
Julian Assange
1 April, 21:29 1 The DPRK: another regime change target for the US
© Collage: Voice of Russia With reports that North Korea has stated that they are in a state of war with the South and the U.S. and their surrogates continuing and upping the demonization of North Korea, it is difficult to find an independent and fact based view on the conflict. One fact is getting lost, North Korea is for the unification of the Koreas and is for the betterment of all of the Korean people, while the South is for all intents and purposes serving their overseas masters. Regardless whose side you are on most of the world would agree, there must not be a military solution to the Korean crisis and it is an internal problem that must be solved by the Korean people without self serving outside interference. Most of the world’s media are towing the U.S. line on the conflict between the Koreas, with very few, if any, alternative media covering the subject with a view from the North Korean side of the equation. Diplomats worldwide are also showing restraint because no one wants to fuel a fire that could turn into a nuclear confrontation and even pundits and expert are unusually toned down in their views and statements. What is being missed by everyone and what almost no one wishes to talk about relates to North Korea’s position and the relationship that the world’s self-declared “sole military super power” has had in fueling and provoking yet another conflict, his time with possible nuclear repercussions. The fact that the U.S. continues to operate from the same tired old playbook and operate along completely predictable lines goes miles to point to the U.S. as a country in decline and country lacking the intellectual fortitude necessary to carry out its self-proclaimed role as the world’s policeman. This has long been the case but few in the world have woken up to that fact, few dare to stand up to the U.S. and even fewer will openly and publically question the U.S. motives in their global expansion. How the current and the ongoing Korean crisis ties into U.S. global military expansionism and regime change is truly a subject that would require several books to detail but it is something that must be mentioned and something that several of my readers have asked about. Over the years it has become clear, since the invasion of Yugoslavia and perhaps earlier, that the U.S. has a predetermined and global agenda of global military, energy, political, economic, religious and even racial domination, and North Korea is just another piece in the U.S. game of geo-political chess. In the past I have likened Mikheil Saakashvili to a “geo-political chess queen” because he could have moved in any direction, using chess logic we might call North Korea a rook, because they have a very limited range of moves they can make, either moving forward or back in straight lines. Back to the U.S. playbook; the U.S. has what one might call a “shopping list” of steps they must take to ensure complete and total global domination, a list of countries and regimes that they have targeted for change, forceful or otherwise. This is a fact the world is aware of and one that is verifiable by simply looking at the history of the last 30- 50 years, these countries, regimes and regions include but are not limited to: Afghanistan, The Arctic, Argentina, Africa, Asia, Belarus, Brazil, China, Cuba, Ecuador, India, Iceland, Iran, Palestine, Russia, Serbia, space, Syria, and many others not necessarily in that order. The goals in all regions are different but follow two memes: military neutralization through military saturation using the claim of “threat”, followed by political regime change to allow for the complete exploitation of resources with military resources to ensure security, and the second forcible military or other neutralization of “enemies” who are anti-U.S. or pursue independent policies which exclude U.S. participation or domination. North Korea falls into several categories as a prime target for U.S. extermination, although they may claim ideological differences we know this claim is a farce when we simply look at the U.S. relationship to other countries and the U.S, track record of, for example, placating Communist China, working and funding Al-Qaeda, funding and backing Serbian Muslims, backing despots and dictators worldwide, and a million other nefarious actions. So ideological reasons are merely a convenient political precept, as I might add are human rights and the most beloved but clerarly deceptive spread of democracy. The U.S. needs North Korea, and regardless of whether regime change is carried out, to expand its military presence in the region. This is one reason it is against U.S. interests that the Koreas actually unite and co-exist peacefully, if the Koreas were to reach an independent peace arrangement excluding U.S. interference this would block the U.S from continuing their military expansionism in the region, so they will do anything to ensure that there is never peace in the Koreas, or they will seek a pretext to annihilate the North and allow for the installing of another U.S. puppet regime which will allow them to do as they please in the region. The U.S. has several problems in the case of North Korea; one, their intelligence as to the real potential of North Korea’s military and their true ability to launch a nuclear attack is faulty. Two, there is no widespread support for an invasion of North Korea either internally or externally. Three, the U.S. is already over-extended and economically on the verge of collapse. Four, North Korea has beleaguered yet existing support from countries such as Russia and China, who are against an escalation of the conflict and do not really want to see another nuclear power, but who also do not wish to be further surrounded by U.S. military elements, including U.S. “missile defense” installations that will neutralize the Russian and Chinese strategic deterrence and their own first strike capabilities. We have seen the scenario repeated time and time again and through that repetition we have been able to see the weakness in U.S. military and strategic thinking, namely an uncreative and dinosaur like mindset that is unable to adapt or respond and that is blindly following a pre-set plan which I outlined above. As for the way they carry out their plan we first saw their methods of operation in Yugoslavia, then in Iraq, followed by Afghanistan, Libya and any other country they have recently desired to invade, including Syria, Iran and now North Korea. The formula they use is basically the same, terrorize the world and U.S. populace with stories of a horrible imminent and lethal threat, demonize the country in question endlessly in the media, stage and organize provocations, destabilize the country or region, and then organize, stage or provoke an event to allow for mobilization. If you doubt their intentions then simply ask yourself, citizen of the world, U.S. taxpayer and South Koreans in particular: Why has the U.S. never promoted a real political or social solution that might serve to unify the Koreas? After all that would be in the interests of all Koreans. Why does the U.S. keep insisting on a forceful military solution to the split in the Koreas? Because this is all they know how to do? Why do the U.S. and their manipulated surrogates in the media and elsewhere keep promoting the idea that North Korea is a dangerous threat to world peace and continue to demonize the country? The answer to all these questions is: to prepare for a forcible regime change. As almost any independent minded person, country or entity might agree the U.S. has shown it does not possess the necessary objectivity, intelligence, or even the moral high ground to interfere in international affairs and attempt to control the world, a role they have delegated to themselves and in my own opinion should be barred from interfering and operating internationally in the military sphere and in every other, that is the role of the UN and is what it was set up for: to not allow for one country to dominate the world by force, as the U.S. has been doing. So North Korea is completely right in pointing out, as they did on Sunday, that nuclear weapons are “the nation’s life” and will not be traded even for “billions of dollars”. Obviously the North Korean leadership has paid attention to Iraq and Libya, regimes that fell for U.S. lies when they got rid of their weapons and were later invaded and decimated and then annexed. Will North Korea attack? Experts the world over say this is highly unlikely, but that depends on how far into a corner they are pushed. Can North Korea attack? Now that is a question that even the U.S. “brain” the CIA cannot answer, if they could North Korea would have been invaded long ago. If the world is going to ever see peace, and the litmus test might be solving the Korean crisis, the United States of America must no longer be allowed to interfere anywhere it pleases in the world, the UN must be given independent “teeth” to allow it to bring about real changes, and the in the case of North Korea and Syria for that matter, an internal dialogue must be promoted and the opposing factions must be forced to negotiate for the good of all their people and not for the good of their imperialist or other masters. North Korea, U.S.-North Korea relations, North Korea-US Standoff, Politics · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · For the sake of Humanity, America must change of system and stop using the United-Nations Headquarters as a tool. Moreover that planetary institution should be removed from that sneaks'nest (New-York) and be set in a real neutral location. How much longer the 90% of humans who are not US and their NATO-mafia' states citizen will tolerate such an infamy. Leaders of countries (including the Vatican's new pope) sufficiently credible to initiate a new World-order are just plain "chicken". What are they waiting for ! JCM 30 March, 07:11 The DPRK has been pushed into declaring war on the South
Photo: EPA The wave of global condemnation that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea will be facing shortly after declaring a state of war with the South will be great and no doubt countries the world over including the Russian Federation will urge all sides to seek a peaceful resolution to the crisis, but the DPRK did not declare war arbitrarily, once again the U.S. is meddling in another region in the world, and the result was and is completely predictable. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has entered into a state of war with South Korea and has threatened to strike United States targets in South Korea as well as in the continental United States. The news may not be surprising as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has been making more and more bellicose statements as of late due in a large part to war games involving South Korean and US forces that have recently been taking place. North Korea has decided to go down a road which has lost it the support of even some of its staunchest allies, and will no doubt see a tidal wave of global condemnation for its declaration of war. However one thing is clear, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea did not make such a move for no reason, and the declaration of war was a predictable event for almost anyone who has been watching the tensions rise in the region. Rather than defusing the situation and the tensions in the region and toning down its war games, the United States chose to escalate tensions by doing the only thing it appears capable of doing anymore on the international arena, namely flexing its military muscles and drawing lines in the sand for its enemies to cross. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had the right to be concerned earlier this week when it released statements condemning U.S. nuclear attack submarines near its shores and U.S. nuclear missiles being aimed at its territory and the West had a chance to take heed and tone down it aggressive military posture but the U.S. decided rather to flex its muscles once again and fly 2 B-2 stealth nuclear bombers into Korean airspace. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea issued a statement before the unprecedented B-2 incident that nuclear war had become a real possibility on the Korean Peninsula. The statement was a warning as to the danger of escalating the conflict which the U.S. has not heeded. Instead the immature U.S. command structure decided to act like the schoolyard bullies they are and force North Korea further into a corner. There can be no doubt that U.S. analysts are aware that North Korea is ruled by a young ruler who needs to be seen as tough and strong in the face of mounting opposition by the West and the South, and this is dangerous for all parties concerned as the younger ruler may make more aggressive moves than his predecessor in order to show that he is a strong and capable leader. Regardless of the reasons behind it, few can support the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s declaration of war on the South, but nevertheless it was the predictable result of the West’s actions in the region, no matter how many times they repeat that their exercises are “defensive” in nature. It seems odd that the world’s self proclaimed single military super power has to conduct “defensive” exercises against such a small country as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and the claims to thus are disingenuous. The United States and its NATO and Western Allies as well as South Korea as its regional surrogate have no regard for peace, they wish to bring about a scenario in which they can justify a military invasion of North Korea, destroy the country, and allow for a permanent presence in the region, this would fit in with U.S. and NATO global expansion plans, and serve to allow for the further surrounding of China and Russia. Russia has been for peace in the region and has urged both sides in the conflict to show restraint and maturity and this includes during the latest escalation. Russia has also condemned the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for its recent nuclear tests because they only served to further destabilize and escalate the situation in the region. Regardless of who is at fault all sides in this escalation must stand down and sit down at the negotiating table, North Korea must not allow itself to be provoked into war and South Korea must not allow itself to be a surrogate for those hungry for war to break out in the region. The U.S. and its allies must also learn when to withdraw as their actions are only pouring fuel on the fire, a fire that could lead to a nuclear war, but apparently as long as the lives that will be lost are Korean, the West is not all that concerned. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru
28 March, 19:19 CyberBunker - Spamhaus battle leads to largest DDoS attack in Internet history
© Flickr.com/evaryont/cc-by-nc-sa 3.0 It has been identified as the largest DDoS attack in the history of the internet, at one point reaching a mind boggling 300,000,000,000 bits a second, that’s billion (300Gps), and it has affected servers, websites and web services all over the net, slowing down the net and making some sites completely inaccessible. Once again we see violent opposition to mediocre minds trying to control the internet and tell you what you can see and what you can not see, who is bad and must be shut down, and who should be allowed to speak. The internet was one of the few mediums where is information was free, however more and more we see attempts to limit and control the flow of information. We have even recently seen information activists become the subject for western military attack. One provider which offers access to anyone free of censorship is under attack and the net has decided to fight back. The attack is part of an ongoing battle for internet freedom between supporters of a provider name CyberBunker, which provides uncensored hosting for everything and anything, except for child pornography and terrorism, and a company called Spamhaus which claims to be battling spam but which has effectively become an internet censor by arbitrarily blocking entire domains and providers under the cover of battling spammers. At the heart of the cyber war between backers of CyberBunker and Spamhaus is the fact that Spamhaus placed the provider on a blacklist, and has effectively been blackmailing Internet Service Providers (ISPs), ISP providers and carriers into disconnecting clients and web services with a court order or legal redress. In October of 2011 Spamhaus single-handedly determined that Cyber Bunker was a “haven for spammers” and asked A2B, which is their upstream provider, to cancel their internet service and disconnect their servers. If Spamhaus, which claims to be a non-profit organization and is used by millions to filter internet traffic and e-mails every day, determines that a domain or provider is being used to send spam, Spamhaus adds the domain or, in this case, the entire provider to its blacklist, hence cutting them off from the net and their users. ISPs know this and are then forced to censor or cut off their clients, again without legal recourse or a legal order, just because Spamhaus says so. CyberBunker, which is housed in a real bunker; a five-story-deep ex-NATO cold-war-era bunker that was designed to withstand a nuclear attack, located near the town of Kloetinge in the Dutch countryside in the southern part of the Netherlands, says they are not responsible for the attacks but that a consortium of ISP and carrier organizations and thousands of unknown supporters are responsible for the onslaught on Spamhaus. In an interview with RT television CyberBunker spokesman Sven Olaf Kamphuis said that Spamhaus has angered ISP and carrier providers for years by using mafia tactics and blackmail to make providers disconnect clients without a court order. He said Spamhaus wants to control all of the platforms through which information passes. Kamphuis said if Spamhaus wishes to continue to exist they need to stop blocking entire subnets and ISPs by incorrectly listing IP addresses belonging to people who Spamhaus arbitrarily determines to be criminals, just because they say so. In a Skypechat where people unhappy about Spamhaus’ actions began to organize it became clear that many of Spamhaus’ targets are in Russia and China and that for some reason Spamhaus lists an inordinate number of Russian and Chinese “criminals” and “spammers” as subjects for blocking. Kamphius told RT that Spamhaus maintains an illegal list “without permission from the Information Commissioners Office and in contradiction to the data protection act, of all personal details and pictures and names and addresses of people that Spamhaus do not like.” He also said they believe Russia and China should not be allowed to access the internet and implied that this the motivation for their actions and their activities are aimed with that end in mind. Meanwhile on Thursday there were reports that on-line banking services were beginning to suffer, streaming media sites such as Netfix are being adversely affected and the Guardian reports that thousands of Britons are unsuspecting participants of the attacks as their router s have been subverted, although this last claim is highly dubious as there is no evidence that personal routers can be or have been “subverted” in order to carry out attacks by unknown individuals. Several media outlets have questioned the entire affair as a PR event for companies which provide internet security and other such services such CloudFlare which has sought to generate publicity for itself by becoming involved in the attack although in reality they are incapable of dealing with such a massive onslaught. What we see in the whole bloody affair is once again a trampling of freedom of speech and expression by an organization abusing their mandate, another egregious demonizing of Russia and China, profiteering in the name of security and fear mongering to continue to allow for the restriction of your freedom. As a regulator, which is the role Spamhaus has abrogated for itself, they should be beyond reproach and operate fairly and in keeping with the law. When they and others who purport to be in a position to dictate to the world how to behave prove they themselves are in need of oversight and can not follow the rule of law, they and those like them must be reigned in and shut down and their arbitrary trampling on the rights and freedoms of others must be stopped immediately. There are those in power who are afraid of information being free, in essence information that allows the world to bear witness to their nefarious activities, and these “individuals” will do anything to stop or control the flow of information, whether they use mafia tactics, threats of drone attack as NATO has done, or illegal indefinite detention as the US has done, these individuals must continue to be exposed, if the internet is to be the vehicle for that exposure, so be it. We as citizens of the world must be ever vigilant of anyone trying to restrict of control our freedom and right to be informed, under whatever guise they might be posing.
27 March, 18:22 Berezovsky was a source of friction between the UK and Russia - Smith
Boris Berezovsky Photo: EPA Boris Berezovsky was a rogue who plundered the wealth of the Russian people and Russia after the collapse of the USSR. In summarizing his life there are few who have anything positive to say about him and what he did. He lived a selfish life and did nothing to help those less “fortunate”. He was also a constant source of friction between the UK and Russia and in the end attempted to simply run away from problems he created for himself in the UK, problems similar to what he created in Russia. Michael John Smith, the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the world spoke to the VOR about Berezovsky and his legacy and stated the above and more. This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Michael John Smith. He was the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the UK. He is also an intelligence specialist. Robles: So, he went completely broke. Was this partially due to his catastrophic case against Abramovich? Smith: I think that’s probably one of the main reasons. But also he had a very expensive divorce case against his wife. You’ve only got to read through the history and see that he lost money all the way along the line. Considering he was such a wealthy guy who was slavishly rich, probably because he had stole the money from Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. These oligarchs just plundered the national wealth I think, they stole the money from the people and created vast empires that made them personally very rich people. And Berezovsky is obviously one of these rogues. He would have faced a prison sentence if he had stayed in Russia and that’s why he fled to the UK. Robles: In a previous interview we talked about Berezovsky. And now after his death, what’s the reaction? Is he still not very favorably viewed or what is the reaction there in the UK? Smith: I think people regard him as being a maverick. He did choose a very strange lifestyle where he was taking potshots at Vladimir Putin and he was asking for him to be removed from office at one point. So, he was seen as a bit of a rogue and some people liked him for that, some people thought: “Well he’s serving a purpose because he is attacking the Russian system and the Russian politicians”. On the other hand, people thought he was a troublemaker I think. And so today, I mean after his death was announced, some people are saying; “Oh, what a nice guy, what a friendly guy he was.” People who knew him personally were saying how they will miss him. On the other hand, there are a lot of people saying: “We’re glad to see the back of him, he didn’t do us any good.” Robles: They don’t know. People don’t know what he was really about. Smith: In any country when somebody becomes fabulously rich with billions of dollars of personal wealth, you have got to ask the question: “How did you get that sort of money in such a short time?” Some people work their whole lives and don’t make more than a few thousand bucks. Robles: He stole it, A lot of it, most of it, was Aeroflot’s money. Smith: Yes. And this is what a lot of people remember him for is that he just made a lot of money and he lost a lot of money. Robles: Did he do anything, while he was in UK, that would have been viewed as being positive for the UK? Smith: I believe he started a political party. He had fingers in various pies. He has a history in the UK. Robles: Have you heard of anything positive he did, like giving to charities or anything like that in the UK? Smith: Not really. That doesn’t come to mind. I don’t think of him as being a charitable sort of guy. Maybe he did. Overall, I don’t think he had a very positive influence in the UK. Robles: How much damage do you think he did to Russia? What do you think about what he did to Russia in the UK? And how was he used by the special services? Smith: I think the biggest role he played in the UK was to come out in public attacking Russia, attacking Putin personally, and creating a bad feeling towards Russia. He was complaining about the political system there. And this would be quite regular. I remember seeing him on the news, the day after in the newspapers making claims about Putin and, as I said, asking for his removal from office. So, no wonder Mr. Putin doesn’t consider Berezovsky as a friend. Robles: What do you think about… He apologized to President Putin for his mistakes and he was asking for permission to come home. What do you think about that? Smith: I can perfectly believe he would do that because having lost all his money and also facing possibly more charges here, because he wasn’t paying his bills, to go home to Russia, he would be doing what he did when he left Russia; just escaping from the mess he’s left behind. Robles: So, basically: he stole a lot of money in Russia. He got in a lot of trouble with the authorities. He ran to the UK and then he got in a bunch of financial problems in the UK. Lost all his money, got in a lot of trouble and wanted to run back to Russia. Smith: That’s what I think. I mean it’s fine, you can be very self-opinionated and say what you think about anybody you like when you’ve got pots full of gold in your pocket. But as soon as that money is gone, then you have to apologize and be humble. And that’s what I think he was doing, he was being humble because he realized there was no other way he could return to Russia. Robles: During the last elections he was trying to influence the process from the UK in order I guess to facilitate his own expedient return. Smith: Back in the 90s he was good friends with Yeltsin and supported Putin for president. And as one of those oligarchs at the time he would have been probably regarded as having quite a lot of influence in Russia. And having left Russia he lost a lot of that influence, and that’s why he was taking a Russia because it was giving him that sense of having that powerful position. Possibly he was thinking that in returning to Russia he could resume some sort of political role there, and possibly make a new life for himself having lost his money here. Robles: Your last words or your summary of Boris Berezovsky, the oligarch on the run. What would you say? Smith: I’m sure personally there will be a lot of people, his family, his friends who will miss him. No doubt when any human being dies it is not all bad and he must have people who will weep over his grave. On the other hand, I don’t see him as being a positive influence over the 20 or so years that he’s been a public figure. Robles: So, from negative to positive, to indifferent: Where would you put Berezovsky? Smith: I think he’s been a source of aggravation to a lot of people. And it’s not necessarily been a very good thing to have something like that in the UK because he has caused friction between the UK and Russian governments over the years just because he was there making arguments about Russia and they becoming publicized. And it can’t be a good thing for good relations between our two countries to have somebody like that constantly in the public arena. Robles: We talked about this before and you said that Berezovsky probably had very little relationship with the special services. Smith: I don’t believe he did. I somehow doubt that he did have, maybe he had a small amount of contact with them, but, through Litvinenko possibly. I think his main role was in the commercial field. Robles: And one more time, if you had to summarize Boris Berezovsky, how would you summarize him in one or two sentences? Smith: I think he was an opportunist I believe. He saw opportunities to make a lot of money in Russia in the 90s. And he took whatever opportunity he could. He tried to have influence through his money. And at the end of the day he ended up really, doing very little with that money I think, it’s just been squandered. Robles: So, from rags to riches, to rags. Smith: Exactly!
26 March, 04:22 2 Berezovsky died alone by hanging in a locked bathroom
Boris Berezovsky. Photo: AFP U.K. Home Office pathologists have determined that Boris Berezovsky died of hanging. This would indicate that the man, whose life seemed to be ruled by selfish greed and who would do anything to enrich himself, ended as selfishly as it had been led. Near the end he tried to run back to the country he had fled from in order to flee the country that had generously taken him in but sadly for Berezovsky this was not to be and apparently, sadly for those who cared about him, he ran to the only place he could. After a postmortem examination, according to officials in the UK, the cause of death of fugitive oligarch Boris Berezovsky was “consistent with hanging.” The Themes Valley police report that a Home Office pathologist stated Berezovsky was hanged and his body showed no signs that there was a struggle. British police have said that Berezovsky left no suicide note and that there was no evidence of injuries or damage that pointed to third-party involvement in the sudden death of the fugitive oligarch. All signs point to the fact that Berezovsky’s death was sudden and unexpected even for those around Berezovsky. He apparently left no suicide note and there are reports that it is unknown whether or not he left a will or instructions on where he was to be buried. If he did leave a will it may have been with lawyers who have made no comment to the press. Initially speculation that he may have been poisoned was fueled by the fact the authorities had called in biological, chemical and radiological emergency response teams and had cordoned off the area surrounding the ex-billionaire’s home in Ascot, Berkshire, not too far from London. These suspicions may now be laid to rest as the Themes Valley Police have made the announcement that his death bears the signs of hanging. What the exact signs are the police have not said. This also brings to question how it was that Berezovsky was reportedly found on the floor of the bathroom. Perhaps he had merely let his feet slide out from under him as he hung from a bathroom fixture. Some of the western media are of course bringing up the death of Alexander Litvinenko, who was poisoned with Polonium 210, as he was a close associate of Berezovsky, but as more information comes in, it is a possibility that Berezovsky had something to do with the death of Litvinenko and the fact that an upcoming inquest into Litvinenko’s death may in fact expose a connection, may have played a role in Berezovsky’s suicide, if it was in fact such. This was stated recently by Michael John Smith an intelligence expert who has been following both of these cases. The fact that his body was not removed for almost a day after his death has further fueled the speculation that his death was not accidental, and if he was in fact found hanged, this would explain the delay as investigators combed the scene for clues making sure absolutely no rock was unturned in a case the eyes of the world are watching. Perhaps those who found Berezovsky’s body were attempting to hide the fact of a suicide in order to obtain insurance money or for other reasons and may have tried to stage an alternative scenario which may explain why it took police this long to make an announcement and why it took those who found the body so long to call emergency services. According to verified accounts one of Berezovsky’s bodyguards had to force open a door to one of Berezovsky’s bathrooms in order to determine if his boss was okay as there was no response when he knocked and the billionaire had gone missing. It seems unlikely that foul play was involved as he died alone and in a locked bathroom and the absence of a ready will and the fact that he was broke leaves out the motive of foul play by someone close to him ready to take his money. The fact that the door was locked from the inside would rule out strange assassination theories even by the most intrepid conspiracy theorists but stranger things might happen. If the death was a suicide, which it appears more and more that it was, it might be worth noting that with Berezovsky’s business acumen and knowledge of the law and business practices, including no doubt insurance company policies, there is little chance he would have left a suicide note for the world to know about. Undoubtedly he had life insurance and he knew his beneficiaries would not receive anything if he committed suicide. The Guardian reported there was a scarf at the scene and that witnesses reported that Berezovsky had marks around his neck. The Guardian also reports that since the loss of the court case against Mr. Abramovich, Berezovsky was in a deep depression that apparently continued until his death. The widow of Alexander Litvinenko told the Telegraph she doubted that he had committed suicide but there are many signs he may have had a motive for taking the easy way out. Not only did he recently lose a lawsuit against Roman Abramovich, where he attempted to fabricate a case against the Russian billionaire, but he was called out on his fabrications in open court by the judge who called him an, “unimpressive, deliberately dishonest, inherently unreliable witness who viewed truth as a transitory, flexible concept.” Those words effectively obliterated what was left of his reputation. That and his subsequent rants against the Crown and the UK authorities made him seem a selfish figure convinced of his own righteousness and engaged in a battle against the world. The suit against Abramovich, seeking $5.6 billion for damages Berezovsky claimed were owed to him due to “machinations” involving Sibneft the result of which he claimed, caused him to be short changed and cheated, was supposed to infuse his shrinking bank accounts with billions. Instead of refilling his coffers with money gained from Abramovich, he instead was ordered to pay Mr. Abramovich more than $5 million. Berezovsky also recently lost more than $100 million in his recent divorce from Galina Besharova, the largest divorce payout in UK history, and may have racked up at least $100 million in legal bills since 2011. Recently Berezovsky began selling his paintings and several properties pointing to his growing desperation. That and his apology to Russian President Vladimir Putin and his pleas to be allowed to return home, no doubt untouched, point to a man at the end of his rope (excuse the paronomasia). Recently Berezovsky was calling for the overthrowing of the Russian Government and the Russian President so it seems rather odd that he would beg for forgiveness and beg to return home and it seems extremely generous that the President and the Government have been so gracious in their treatment of the news of his death. The end of the wanted fugitive, who survived several assassination attempts, no doubt due to his double crossing business deals and reported deals with Chechen terrorists, seems a selfish and cowardly way out. But for a man who ran from Russia because of the problems he created for himself, then tried to run away from the country which had taken him in due to the same kinds of problems he created in his new homeland, it seems logical. Instead of standing his ground and facing the music, he chose to run to the only place he could, a place where he will have no escape from justice and will have no one to blame but himself. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru Russia, Boris Berezovsky, John Robles, Society · Share: · · · · · Сomments 2 · He is gone, good riddance. He robbed billions from the Russian nation. He certainly will not be missed in Russia. · I don't think of suicide as being "selfish", especially in the case of Borya here. Several people were probably upset by his death, but a lot of Russians have demonized him and are probably already making jokes about it. 25 March, 21:55 The US Government sent an assassin for me - interview
© Collage: Voice of Russia Stratfor e-mails released by WikiLeaks regarding 9-11, the Iraq invasion and other events include the name Mary Jo Pullen Hughes, who was being tried for telephone harassment due to the volume of her phone calls to high-level American officials. She has been battling for the truth to be told about Vietnam POWs and has been battling for their rights. Ms. Hughes claims her efforts delayed the invasion of Iraq, something that was pre-planned, by 7 months. The VOR’s John Robles decided to track her down and ask her about what she says is persecution for trying to get to the truth. Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mary Jo Pullen Hughes. She was the subject of several Stratfor emails that were released by WikiLeaks and is a longtime whistleblower. Robles: Hello Mary! How are you? I’m doing just fine John, thank you for calling. Robles: Thanks for agreeing to speak with me. I understand that the persecution of yourself by the US Government is continuing and it has gone to new levels as a whistleblower. Can you tell our listeners a little bit about your case and what is going on? Hughes: Well, I had asked for years, starting as far back as 1988, to have the question of the late return of POWs looked into by my Government, when John Kerry, Senator John Kerry and Senator Bob Smith from New Hampshire were co-chairs at the POW\MIA Senate Select Committee. In real time with Mr. Kerry now being the Secretary of State this implicates him in the highest of crimes when the truth wasn’t told about men brought home. I have documented this material now almost for 25 years. Recently I was arrested in 2009 for telephone harassment. I filed a federal lawsuit in US District Court in Portland, Oregon. And as of last Friday the judge has determined that the defendants in the case were justified in arresting me and therefore the federal lawsuit is being dismissed. The nightmare of this is that not only has the Legislative Branch of my government has been proven to be broken, but the Executive Branch now, with the inclusion of John Kerry and John Brennan, as CIA Director who worked for Buzzy Krongard and Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense who had access to this material pre-September 11, and that’s all outlined in this memo how the POW issue ties into September 11th, now proves that the Executive Branch of my Government is taken and broken and the Judicial Branch of my Government is totally broken now too. Robles: Can you tell us about that connection between the POW issue and September 11 very quick? Hughes: The POW question tie into September 11 is that after 13 years of my saying; “Please talk and tell”, including a time in Canada on a political asylum claim. Men with Black Operations/Covert Ops backgrounds in this country, silenced on behalf of the power elite, after 14 years, not addressing the question, went silence and allowed the attacks to happen. And I will tell you John, in 1984, an active duty military man was sent to assassinate me in Denver, Colorado. I recently tracked down his son who confirmed to me that the man, his father, is still alive and well. I know where to find the man who my Government said: “Come and kill her”. This isn’t funny when I personally dealt with a man who was tasked by somebody in my Government and was sent to assassinate me. Initially in the 70s, I was married to someone who was onboard of fast attack nuclear submarine in the 70s, the USS Flying Fish out of Norfolk, Virginia, who had a TS SBI5 because he was a radioman, he had Crypto Access. I did active duty service for just over four years, late 70s early 80s, working with F-15 pilots, fairly new to F-15 at Langley Air Force Base. And then I was at Nellis AFB. I had a husband at the time who worked in Area 51 in the early 80s on the Stealth Fighter Project. And as a military wife I was down in Panama, during the Grenada invasion. I’ve had special access not only personally, but through other people to a community of men who are Delta, Seal, Marine, Recon(ers), etc who understand that policies and procedures, have misused and abused them for decades going back to Vietnam. Reminder Robles: I know there are a lot of secret connections between the Air Force and 9-11. Can you tell us about anything you know? Hughes: Silence was met with silence. What really bands everything I’ve just done a report on the WACs. I talked to Andrew Bacevich today, sent him everything that I have sent to you. And one thing they keep getting wrong after 10 years today when they went into Iraq, is that there was a preemption that was stopped at end of August 2002. I personally had put together the human intelligence work in Washington DC that they had a large constituency of our military in the country of Eritrea pre-emptively to go to strike against Iraq at the end of August 2002. By going to the Belarus Embassy and sharing that information with the military attaché at Belarus and calling the French and Germans and telling the Iraqis. We were able, as a knowledgeable group of people, to make people leave Eritrea and come home. And it was seven months later before we went in. Now that we have spent, as a nation, $2.2 trillion and about 200,000 dead. The real truth is: we need to know that this preemption was going and it was stopped. No men know, but unfortunately a decade later we are still not telling the truth. Much like with the Gulf Tonkin. We’re not saying that it was faked until 35 years later. We can’t speak 35 year later to tell the truth. Robles: You said you organized the HUMIT, the human intelligence. Can you give us a couple more details about that? Hughes: By the time I put human intelligence together the Belarus Government, the French, Germans, Iraqis, other people were able to confirm that our military was in Eritrea. But I had put it together and then I share, I mean I have always been somebody who understands that this isn’t about Communism, Democracy, Republican, Democrat, Muslim, Jew or Christian. This is about: we’ve got to do better to stop this constant warfare. It is like with Syria and North Korea. Yes, we cannot keep having people in positions with power and money destabilizing parts of the world where we’ve got the whole global community at high risk. Robles: Can you tell us a little bit about what the US Government has done to you personally? Hughes: I have two senators, one is on the Senate Intelligence Committee Ron Wyden who I have spoken with personally, asked his office for help, with Jeff Merkley and his office, who I’ve asked for help and talked to him. And Earl Blumenauer as my congressman. I’m a registered Democrat. I have three congressional members who are Democrats and who will do nothing to speak with me or deal with me. I have been marginalized by my Government. Now, when my Government works after they sent someone to assassinate me, then marginalize me by lying about a DNA provable mental illness, also now throw out a federal lawsuit and tell the world that it was terribly okay for people to come and arrest me for telephone harassment when I was simply going to Susan Rice our Ambassador to the UN, then Secretary of Defense Gates and Eric Holder to say, look, we have a problem. I deal with staff under them, I understand working in the chain of command from the bottom up. But then when you finally have to go to the persons themselves directly, I go to them because I know this is a serious business. This isn’t about me, this is about all sorts of people at this point who have been hurt in this country, American Service Personnel who know the truth but can’t say it. You were listening to an interview with Mary Jo Pullen Hughes. She is an American whistleblower. She is a former Air Force Officer and she was the subject of many Stratfor e-mails that were released by the WikiLeaks.
25 March, 19:52 A lot of people wanted to assassinate Berezovsky - Smith
© Photo: «Вести.Ru» The British Government recently issued a Public Interest Immunity Certificate in the Litvinenko inquest, in order to keep secret, evidence that may prove damaging to the UK Government, including ties between MI-6, Berezovsky and Litvinenko. Hours after Berzovsky’d death Michael John Smith, the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the world by the UK, spoke to the VOR and gave his views on the life and death of the fugitive oligarch Boris Berezovsky.
Robles: I’d like to hear your views, your opinions on the “Oligarch on the Run” who just died in London, Boris Berezovsky. What do you think about the circumstances surrounding his death? What is your opinion on how he died? Who may have been behind it, etc? Smith: It was a little bit of a shock because it came out of blue this afternoon when it suddenly popped up on the news. But maybe I am not so surprised because he has been such an opinionated guy over the years and a lot of people were possibly going to assassinate him. He certainly had a paranoia about being assassinated. He had bodyguards around him at all times. What apparently happened is rather unknown at the moment. The police are looking into this, the Themes Valley Police have put a cordon around his home in Ascot and are not allowing anybody near there at the moment. What they are doing is they are looking into what may be cause, who he may have met, all the possibilities about how he may have met his death. I’ve heard several rumors or stories in the news already. One is that maybe he died the night before on Friday. He was found in his bath about 11 o’clock in the morning by his bodyguard and this is what’s a bit strange; if at 11 o’clock he was found, but the ambulance wasn’t called until about 3:18 in the afternoon, and there was a woman Sasha Nerozina, a family friend was talking on the TV earlier today and she said she was phoned up and told about it around lunch time. So, obviously there are a few missing hours before the emergency services were called to look into things. Robles: So, it is possible he died last night and then they found his body this morning but they didn’t call the ambulance, as you say, until about 3 o’clock in the afternoon? Smith: 3:18 pm is the official time the ambulance was called. This might mean that there is nothing at all suspicious. That he possibly died of a heart attack because there were talks he had gone to Israel for medical treatment recently. Robles: But is it common in the UK if somebody dies out of heart-attack, and you just leave their body sitting there, for 8-10 hours? Smith: No, but it is possibly something surrounding him, maybe his bodyguards didn't know what to do or maybe there was a discussion about things before they called the ambulance. I have no idea. There is a possibility that was also being talked about. If it wasn't a heart-attack, he could have committed a suicide. People are saying there are no marks on his body, nothing to suggest that he had been attacked. So, he could have been poisoned and possibly had been poisoned. So, it is very mysterious and I guess we have to wait till we hear from the medical examiners to hear exactly what they think the cause of death was. Robles: He certainly was an individual who may have had reason for committing suicide. I mean recently he wrote a letter to president Putin asking for forgiveness for his mistakes and asking if he could come back home and then… there was that and I don't think he was very lucky in that, then there was also the Litvinenko affair, the inquest that is coming up. Smith: With Litvnenko obviously, as I said before in a previous interview with you, I think there is something suspicious going on in the background with Litvinenko and Berezovsky and maybe with MI-6. They don't want this to become public. As you are aware there is an inquest into Litvinenko’s death coming up and it is an ongoing affair. And very recently the British government issued a Public Interest Immunity Certificate, the PII certificate. Robles: Which certificate? Smith: This is the certificate that is raised by usually some government organization, it could be MI-5 asked for it, or MI-6, when they don't want certain information to become public, and that is why they say it is in the public interest, not to have this information divulged because possibly it could affect national interests, national security. But usually I think these things are more raised because of the embarrassment, they protect the interests of individuals or organizations in the UK but this information won’t become public. Robles: And again this is with regard to the Litvinenko inquest? Smith: Yes, precisely. And this is one of the reasons I think that Andrey Lugovoy said recently that he didn't want to become involved in this inquest any longer because he thought it was unfair or unjust. Justice wouldn't be found in this inquest because obviously if some of these evidences is not going to be put before the court, then there is cover-up going up of some sort, the cover-up of evidence that may involve Berezovsky. Reminder Robles: So, basically now MI6 or MI5, they have asked for any information that may damage UK security to be thrown out or kept secret, right? Smith: That is correct. So, the Public Interest Certificate is actually available on-line. There is a website called litvinenkoinquest.org. You can see a copy of this, William Hague, the Foreign Minister has signed it. So, it goes right to the top of government that they want to prevent this information becoming public. Robles: This may be a moot point but MI-6; do they commonly use, as the US does, calling something a national security issue when it is a national “embarrassment” issue? Smith: Yes, this is precisely what they do. I mean I wouldn't say it comes up in every case. It came up in my trial, the brought out a PII Certificate in my trial because obviously some of the evidence they wanted to keep secret, and as I know, people did produce false evidence at my trial, I know that that probably have something to do with this PII Certificate. And I am sure in the “Litvinenko Affair” it is going to be exactly the same thing: if there is any link between MI-6 and Litvinenko that was embarrassing to the British Government, this is precisely what they would do; they would bring out a PII Certificate and stop their evidence becoming available to the public. Robles: If I understand you right, they can present false evidence in this manner? Smith: Exactly, they can do what they like, because once the true evidence is withheld, obviously a lie or a false idea can be put into the court, because they know that the real evidence would be forthcoming. Robles: Does that put a muzzle on the entire process, or just on certain parts of it, or what? Smith: Usually it’s just certain parts, but usually it is the key parts, the parts that should be most embarrassing to people who don't want that evidence to come out obviously. Maybe it would be deeply embarrassing to the British Government, if that evidence that this certificate is withholding, was to come out and be revealed. Maybe it would show that government was lying to the public? Robles: Would you care to speculate on any connections between Berezovsky and Litvinenko and MI-6? Smith: Obviously Berezovsky bought a house for Litvinenko, he was giving him money, he also paid, for his widow, her legal expenses as part of his inquest. Somewhere down the line things had gone very seriously wrong for Berezovsky. He lost all his money and that was the other possibility he could have committed suicide because his was broke, he was actually selling property in the last week. You were listening to an interview with Mr. Michael John Smith, the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the world. He is also an Intelligence specialist.
25 March, 19:10 9-11 was massive mind control exercise – Dr. Kevin Barret
© Photo: ru.wikipedia.org The events in the United States on 9-11-2001, plunged the entire world into America’s own “War on Terror” paradigm. High level military officers, academics, doctors and professors from almost every field, citizens, scholars, legal specialists, and millions upon millions question what they witnessed before their very eyes, namely the controlled demolitions which took place on 9-11. Slowly as the collective shock of the world’s citizenry wears off and we see how it has been exploited and used by those who took power in the United States, more and more media outlets and individuals are beginning to realize that, yes, something is very, very wrong with 9-11. This is part 3 of interview with Dr. Kevin Barret. PART 1, PART 2 I am speaking with Kevin Barrett, a Doctor in Arabic and Islamic Studies and the Co-Founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth. He is also the owner of Truthjihad.com Robles: I’ve researched 9/11 myself, a lot, and I always suspected that there was something like you’ve just mentioned; the buildings were condemned due to asbestos. How widespread is that information, because I’ve never heard it before? Barret: There was a court case, so it’s a public record and I believe the court case was in something like February or March of 2001. It was early 2001 in any case, and a Federal Judge ordered the city of New York Port Authority, which then was the owner of the buildings, to do an asbestos abatement plan or to, basically remove the asbestos from these buildings, and as I said that would have been prohibitively expensive. There are some good pieces on this, I have cited some of the sources on this including that there was a lawyer from a New York law firm, a pretty straight-laced law firm and the guy was a little bit careful about the way he wrote it up but he did cover many of the bases and I’ve cited that article a number of times in my own essays on this topic at veteranstoday.com. Robles: That was actually ”another” reason to demolish these buildings, they were supposed to be demolished, “anyway”, right? Barret: Yes, the towers had become white elephants. They had outmoded communication equipment, they had high vacancy rates, they had all that asbestos and increasingly the city was seeing them as a big eyesore, so there had been all kinds of talk, in New York, about how to get rid of these things before 9/11. Of course it is kind of hilarious, they did it in such an obvious way, having notorious mobster Larry Silverstein, who got his start in the illicit sex industry, supposedly before he became a real estate mogul, buy the entire world trade complex, just 2 months before 9/11. It is kind of shocking that they can do it in such a obvious way, and then Silverstein actually goes and confesses to participating in the demolition of building 7 on national television. It really shows just how in control the US media is that can do these things so obviously. Robles: What is this confession? I mean can you “refresh” our memories? Barret: Yeah, sure. In a PBS documentary called “America Rebuilds”, Larry Silverstein is seen talking about what happened to building 7. He says: “You know I remember I was talking with, ah err, fire department commander and we said, ‘… you know, there’s been such a terrible loss of livf that maybe the best thing to do is, pull it!” “So, we made that decision to pull and we watched the buildings collapse.” Pull, “pull it” is a slang term for controlled demolition. It is quite stunning! That. If you want people to wake up to 9-11, you can show them a 3-minute film by Doctor Bob Bowman called WTC7 Smoking Gun, it shows the obvious controlled demolition of building 7 which starts with a little crimp in the middle of the roof and comes straight down at free-fall acceleration, 6.5 seconds for a 47 storey-building. Perfectly symmetrical like an elevator going straight into the ground, and then you can see, in the same little film WTC7 Smoking Gun, Larry Silverstein confessing to the demolition, and then you can see the BBC reporting that building 7 has collapsed 20 minutes before it actually did. Apparently somebody had planted the news a little early. Robles: I see. A lot of people who are against any kind of questioning of 9-11, one of the things they always bring up is: “Oh, our government could not have possibly killed, 2,999…or almost 3,000 people!”, and they say; “What about the people on the planes?” What do you think happened to the people on the planes? Especially the one that was supposedly… a “piece” of it was found in a field in Pennsylvania? They say those people were all murdered in Ohio. What can you tell us about all the people, the pilots and the planes? Barret: Well it’s still a bit of a mystery, what happened with these planes, or we could even say “alleged” planes, because there is no evidence, that should be there, for actual crashes of any of the 4 alleged attack jets, at any of the 4 locations, where they supposedly crashed. Not one coded part has ever produced from any of these planes from these alleged crash sites, and that has convinced a number of high-level former US military officers that there is something very, very wrong with this story. And anybody can see by simply closely examining the damage pattern at the Pentagon and this 15-foot hole in the ground in Shanksville, Pennsilvania, that there is no evidence of a big plane crash. At the Pentagon there is evidence of 2 separate bombings that are quite widely separated, but it is obvious that no single plane or even no single bomb could possibly create the 2 big bomb craters at the Pentagon. And in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, that 15-foot-hole-in-the-ground, without any plane debris, is the sorriest excuse for an alleged jet plane crash site that ever been used to deceive the public. It is actually kind of humorous. The government claims that this the huge 757 just disappeared. Robles: It evaporated! The whole thing evaporated. Barret: That was at the Pentagon, they said the Pentagon plane evaporated, that is why there was no wreckage, the hundred tons of wreckage just didn’t exist at the Pentagon because it all evaporated. But in Shanksville they actually claimed that the plane buried itself in the soft ground, and they claim that they excavated it but nobody has shown us where are the plane parts and the body parts and so on, that they excavated. There is no record whatsoever of any such excavation. It is really stunning how absurd this official story is. Robles: And people still buy it. I mean it is like the biggest lie in the history of mankind, I think, and… Why are Americans so fearful of questioning the official version? Barret: I think 9-11 was a very clever psychological operation. It is what we call “Trauma Based Mind Control”. The CIA has long researched how to mind-control people using severe trauma. We learned about this from among other sources from Naomi Klein’s book “The Shock Doctrine”, by using electro-shock and torture and things like that. It turns out if you shock people profoundly, they become extremely vulnerable to imprinting, and an authority figure can imprint, just about anything they want, on the brain of a person who has been profoundly shocked. Well in 9-11, more than half of the population has Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, clinical level PTSD, just from watching these images on the television. So, there was a profound shock to the nervous system of the people, especially the Americans who watched this, and there is a thing called coercion, which is this kind of Trauma-Based Mind Control where they shock someone or otherwise confuse the person so that they are disoriented and once the person is disoriented, then a parental authority figure steps in and seizes control and basically imprints anything they want on the victim’s mind. And that is what happened on 9-11. They shocked people with these horrible images and the authority figures were the newscasters and the politicians, President Bush who stepped in and told people what happened, and people just accepted it. It was imprinted on their brain in the same way as a baby duck is imprinted by whatever they first see, they think it is their mother and they follow it around. All of the American people were imprinted with this image of Bin Laden and this 19 Arab story immediately, and they have been following it around like a baby duck, following a dog around. Robles: Very interesting. Thank you very much Kevin, Dr. Barret. I really appreciate you speaking with me on this. That was John Robles. I was speaking with Dr. Kevin Barrett, the Doctor in Arabic and Islamic Studies and the Co-Founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth. He is also the owner of Truthjihad.com
25 March, 15:52 1 The world did not blink an eye over the recent genocide of Mayan Indians - interview
Mayan Indians mourn outside the Metropolitan Cathedral during the funeral of Bishop Juan Gerardi in Guatemala City, 29 April, 1998. Photo: AFP According to Indian teachings those governing and ruling our planet should plan seven generations ahead and ensure that our Mother Earth is being taken care of and respected. The world has also ignored the fact that in the 1980s genocide was committed against approximately 250,000 Mayan Indians in Guatemala and South and Central America with the support of the United States. Long time Indian Rights activist Robert Free Galvan spoke with the VOR’s John Robles about these matters and much more. This is part 2 of an interview in progress. You can find the first part here: PART 1 Hello! This is John Robles, I'm speaking with the Robert Free (Galvan). He is a long time Indian rights activist and a member of Tewa and Naua Nations. Free: It’s called the Doctrine of Discovery. Robles: How could you possibly discover a land where there were civilizations and people living for thousands of years in peace? Free: It’s “people” racism. If you are not white, then they are better than you. And they used racism to validate and justify their actions. That’s how they can “not see” the great civilizations and let their greed be their motivator. Robles: And they characterized most native peoples as being some sort of savages when they came in themselves and eradicated everyone they could possibly eradicate. Free: Well, at least we took bathes and washed daily. When they first got here they were reeking of their stench. Robles: Most of the Europeans that arrived in the Americas, they were outcasts and criminals and killers from the worst segments of British and European society. Free: Well, they are still the same people attacking the territories of North and South America and Central America. They just have different names and have “suits” but they are just as ruthless. They hired thugs and armies to do their security, these multinationals. And they hunt down activists and they shoot them, down there in Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Ecuador, Peru. That’s all happening today. While the numbers might be smaller, the effects of their industry is killing thousands with the cancers and the birth deffects. They also used government armies, such as in Guatemala, to annihilate a quarter of a million people, in the last ten years during the 80s and the world did not blink of an eye. Robles: A quarter of a million people? Free: Yes. It was supported by School of the Americas, by the United States. Robles: These were people where? Free: In Guatemala, the Mayan Indians. Robles: During which time period? Free: During the 80s. It is pretty well documented. And the armies which were supported by the United States, got their training at the School of the Americas in Georgia. Robles: What do know about the School of the Americas? Free: It’s a training place. The United States Government provides money and military assistance to the military regimes, especially in South America, and provides them training. In their training in the School of the Americas, they teach them how to torture people and extract information from them, and how to hunt down activists. I remember I went to a world youth and students gathering in East Berlin after the Wounded Knee shoot out in 1973. And I remember having these discussions, there were about 150,000 very different people from around the world, and I was get into these deep arguments with Communists, Leninists, Maoists, Trotskyists, all these people because at one time I made the statement, I said; “I don’t see anything different between the capitalists and the communists and the socialists, when it comes to how they treat this Mother Earth. They all extract minerals wantonly and destructively. And then I got all these people charging at me. And I said: “If you get the five minutes I will explain myself why I said what I said.” And I went on to explain to them why I said what I said, and they were all quiet. Robles: Why do you feel that way? Free: I only know what I’ve been taught by elders. At one time I used to travel around the country with Thomas Banyacya who was a Hopi Indian and Nazer Anderson who was a Tuscarora for the Six Nations Confederacy. And I went to the Six Nations Confederacy where they have a meeting of 52 chiefs of the Six Nations, and they speak the great law of peace that is the law of the Six Nations. And they spoke in their six different languages, and they added English, somebody would write and translate. And in there, in this Longhouse, as they spoke these great laws, like who is supposed to elect the chiefs: the women are, because they raise the kid and they know the character of somebody for instance. And as they were translating the Clan Mother Audrey Shenandoah looked down and mentioned to us: “Oh, that’s where Benjamin Franklin sat, that’s where George Washington sat, that’s where Thomas Jefferson sat. And there was one more person but I won’t mention it right now. But I’ve mentioned to the people in Berlin. I said: “If you are Communist, where do you get your doctrines from?” And they said, “Well, Lenin.” I said: “That’s good, what did Lenin base his theories on?” “He read Engels.” “Where did they get their doctrines from and formulate the theories?” And the more we did this, the less they knew. Finally, one of them said: “Lewis…”, Oh, I’ve forgot his name, “… who went around the country studying tribes and their forms of government.” And when they did that it was so funny! That years later they made a mistake. One turned out to be the great capitalist countries, the others turned out to be the great communist countries, based on their observations and learnings, looking at the Indigenous Governments of the Six Nations. Robles: The Indian nations had the world’s actual first real democracies, I mean, the Europeans did not have anything, they had monarchies, they had brutal dictatorships, they had no democracy. Free: Yes. And that’s what they were saying, that these folks came over and observed the teachings. And eventually, they both left out something. The capitalists did a separation of church and state, and the communists denied any of that. So, they both left out the spirituality that should dictate and be in harmony with the decisions that they will do on our planet. They are supposed to make decisions and treat our planet Earth with the impact it will have on seven generations ahead of us. And when they do that, then they are in more harmonious-caretaking of our planet Earth. So, that’s something I share. Robles: That was very interesting, thank you. Maybe for them deleting that part of the equation was the only way they could continue to exist or justify their own existence. Free: “Lewis Morgan!” That’s his name, Morgan. Lewis Morgan was studied by Engels and Marxists and then by Lenin. But they all extracted and left out the spiritual part. And then Thomas Jefferson and Washington, and Ben Franklin, all those studied and listened to the Six Nations, give power to different nations, a number of their representatives, and modeled the United States Constitution after that. But they separated the church and state, and by doing that, they all left out spirituality, in relation to our mother Earth and taking care of it. So, you have both of them, both the Communists and Capitalists assaulting our planet Earth, going after minerals and resources, and doing devastation with no accountability. This is John Robles, I was talking to Mr. Robert Free. He is a long time Indian activist and a member of Tewa and Naua Nations. Thanks for listening and as always I wish you the best. This is the end of part 2 please come back soon for part three of this interview. · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · it is Okay if The USA does it; especially on communist and or on labor union members and sympathizers, the US's 1% hates them. They Like free or payed as little as possible labor as laborers in their companies and corporations to be working for THEM. 24 March, 09:42 1 Boris Berezovsky: A long way to fall
Photo: EPA Russian oligarch on the run Boris Berezovsky is done running, and with his death it seems the end of an era. He met his end in the bath of his suburban London home and even though the official cause of death has not been determined or announced, already the world is beginning to look for answers and concoct theories. What is true is that the man lived big, climbed high, and then fell brutally from the very heights he had climbed. Toward the end he showed signs of humility, but sometimes a little too little can be a little too late. The mystery surrounding the death of Boris Berezovsky continues to grow as more and more facts continue to come in, with people all over the world trying to make sense of the man’s death, which now seems to many of them to be as much of a mystery as the man’s life. While experts and pundits try to clarify and define who Berezovsky was and give their opinion of a man the world felt symbolized what it meant to be a Russian Oligarch, many of the facts surrounding his life seem to be getting blown out of proportion or forgotten entirely. Regarding his death, it is useless to put forth or contemplate endless conspiracy theories as the official cause of death has not yet been announced although it is most likely he committed suicide, or died of a heart attack. Those are the first versions and in cases like sometimes the first versions are the most honest ones. But there are questions that need to be answered. For example there are reports that he may have died on Friday and that he was discovered on Saturday morning but an ambulance was not called until sometime Saturday afternoon. Why the delay? There are also reports that radiological, chemical, biological and nuclear emergency experts have closed off the entire scene, something I would not read too much into as the UK authorities are more likely than not just being thorough. Or are they? Berezovsky was man who had made many enemies during his life but he was surrounded by a cadre of body guards all of the time and since his humiliating loss of a lawsuit against Arkady Abramovich for $5.6 billion, an expensive venture designed to refill his deep coffers, he had kept a pretty low profile. Such a loss and the humiliation of being labeled an unreliable witness in front of the world, may have pushed Berezovsky over the edge. For those who want to contemplate suicide as a motive, there are many reasons to believe that this may have been true other than the lost lawsuit. Berezovsky’s last wife recently left him which might be enough to drive any man over the edge. He was also a man used to living an unbelievably, and in his case unsustainable, extravagant way of life, and there are widespread rumors that he was completely broke and selling off property to try to make ends meet. There was also the mystery apology he made to President Vladimir Putin, in which he asked for permission to return to Moscow and said he was sorry for the mistakes he had made. Apparently he was rebuffed, after all he was a man who had attempted to overthrow the Russian Government and the Russian President and made an attempt to influence the last Russian elections in order to try to open a door for him to return to Russia and be powerful again and regain his past glory and influence. In all this he failed and was called irrelevant and not to stick his nose where it did not belong, surely a humiliation. There was also the inquest into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, who some say was ordered assassinated by Berezovsky himself, or at least with his knowledge. And this was by far not the only dirty deal that Berezovsky was involved in. The fact that he was a fugitive from justice in Russia and attempted to paint a picture of being persecuted due to his “political persuasion” was also a disingenuous argument, he was a criminal who stole billions of dollars taking advantage of the instability and disorder that befell Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union and made billions upon billions of dollars doing so. The fact that he backed Chechen terrorists and along with Litvinenko attempted to initiate the overthrowing of the Russian Government both from within and without are also reasons that he may have been driven to suicide if these facts were becoming increasingly widespread. Despite all of the possibilities, the most likely is the simplest and most banal. He was broke and for a man used to such an extravagant lifestyle that was enough to drive him to suicide or simply cause him to suffer a heart attack. The Voice of Russia spoke to Fyodor Lukyanov and in an interview he stated that Berezovsky was one of the most talented and most visible figures who was able to obtain almost anything while manipulating the situation that existed after the fall of the Soviet Union. Mr. Lukyanov stated that at the end of the 90s Berezovsky was one of the five most influential people in Russia but that when that stage was over he happened to find himself out of the game. In an another interview shortly after the death of Berezovsky Michael John Smith, the last person who was convicted for spy ing for the Soviet Union in the world and a man who has become an expert on intelligence and such affairs since his wrongful conviction said that Berezovsky was not very loved in UK. Mr. Smith characterized him as a rude and loud inconvenience and an embarrassment for the government of the UK and some one who was in reality damaging Russian UK relations. Mr. Smith also broke the news that Berezovsky may have died on Friday night and that he was found in his bath at about 11 o’clock in the morning by his bodyguard. Mr. Smith also said that the ambulance was not called until 15:30 in the afternoon, a fact from which many conclusions could be made. In a previous interview Mr. Smith spoke about the likely connections between Berezovsky and the death of Litvinenko and he gave his views on the apology to President Vladimir Putin and his plea to be allowed to return home, no doubt, without having to face the courts for his crimes. Mr. Smith said he was a broken man, facing legal problems in the UK, who realized that he had nowhere left to run and would have rather faced what he had to face in Russia rather than what was coming up in the near future in the UK. Broken man or not one can not be that sympathetic to a man who did everything and anything to grab power and enrich himself, including but not limited to attempting to overthrow governments. Fugitive Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky has died in London at the age of 67 The report emerged in the Facebook account of his son-in-law Yegor Shuppe. Boris Berezovsky, a Russian business oligarch, government official and former mathematician, was born on 23 January 1946 in Moscow. He graduated from the Moscow Forestry Engineering Institute in 1968, then he worked as an engineer, from 1969 till 1987 serving as assistant research officer, then he headed a department in the Institute of Management Problems of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Berezovsky conducted research on optimization and control theory, publishing 16 books and articles between 1975 and 1989. Berezovsky made his fortune in Russia in the 1990s when the country went through privatisation of state property. He profited from gaining control over various assets, including the country's main television channel, Channel One. In 1997 Forbes magazine estimated Berezovsky's wealth at US$3 billion. Berezovsky helped fund Unity – the political party, which formed Vladimir Putin's parliamentary base, and was elected to the Duma on Putin's slate. However, following the Russian presidential election in March 2000, Berezovsky went into opposition and resigned from the Duma. Later he moved to Britain where he has been living until his death. Berezovsky established the International Foundation for Civil Liberties, to "support the abused and the vulnerable in society – prisoners, national minorities and business people" in Russia and criticized Putin's record in the West. In 2012 Berezovsky lost a High Court case he brought against Roman Abramovich in London over the ownership of Sibneft, where he sought over £3 billion in damages. The court judged Berezovsky as an "inherently unreliable" witness, who "regarded truth as a transitory, flexible concept, which could be moulded to suit his current purposes" and that "At times the evidence which he gave was deliberately dishonest; sometimes he was clearly making his evidence up as he went along in response to the perceived difficulty in answering the questions." The court concluded that Berezovsky had never been a co-owner of Sibneft. Voice of Russia, RIA, BBC, AFP, RT, Reuters · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · He stole billions from Russia. I am glad he is gone. 23 March, 15:57 1 NATO targets hackers and patriotism is a crime if you are not with NATO – Rozoff
Photo: EPA In a new directive, the “North Atlantic” Treaty Organization (NATO), has now made it part of its military doctrine to target hackers and hacktivists who are operating for “ideological, political, religious or patriotic” reasons, effectively making patriotism for a country not part of NATO, religion not in keeping with NATO’s approved religion, and anything opposed to NATO and its global expansion a crime and those guilty eligible for assassination by drone. Even George Orwell would have never dreamt up something so “Orwellian”. In an interview regular VOR contributor Rick Rozoff spoke to the Voice of Russia about this and more.
I am speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the Owner and Manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. Robles: NATO has been very active lately. Can you give us a few details about what they are up to and maybe a little bit about this new Cyber-War Directive where NATO is declaring hackers military targets? Rozoff: That is exactly what the new NATO manual identifies hackers as being: as fair game for military attacks, both cyber and otherwise, incidentally. So, it is not so much retaliation in the cyber sphere strictly, as potentially launching a cruise missile at them, I’m sorry, a drone-fired missile, as one of your guests recently, Bill Blum said about Julian Assange. I believe his words were that; “…there is drone with Julian Assange’s name on it.” And NATO then reserves the right to launch attacks, cyber and otherwise, on anyone they identify as being a hacktivist, that is hacking into military and even civilian sites in Europe and this is coordinated through what is called a “NATO Center of Excellence on Cyber Affairs” and “cyber warfare” really, in the capital of Estonia, Tallin which was set up directly to confront Russia several years ago after an alleged Russian-based series of attacks on websites in Estonia. But NATO has been active on a number of other fronts too, as you mentioned in your question. First of all, they have crafted the third or the latest annual national program for the nation of Georgia. Robles: I am sorry. Can I ask you one question regarding the cyber manual? Is this an official part of military operations or is this just some sort of “draft guidelines” or something? Rozoff: No, it is official NATO doctrine as of the publication of the manual. Robles: So, can they actually, seriously, physically, “target” anyone they deem to be a hacker threat with a drone missile? Rozoff: I didn’t hear them specify they would use “a Hellfire Missile fired from a Predator Drone” but the terminology I’ve seen is that the attacks against the hackers, incidentally anywhere in the world, could be done either: fighting fire with fire, that is through “cyber denial of access” or other attacks, on the hacktivists, or other measures deemed “legal”, is the language I am familiar with. But we have to keep in mind that the major military power, the founder of NATO and the “prime mover" to this day within it, the United States, reserves a right to use drone missile attacks within its own borders against its own citizens, according to Attorney General Eric Holder of late. So, it shouldn’t surprise us that the military bloc headed by the United States arrogates to itself the right to launch military attacks, and this is quite in keeping also incidentally, with the US Cyber Command, which has set up in 2010, the first “Cyber Warfare Command” set up in the world, and wherever the US goes, NATO is sure to follow, and very quickly thereafter, so it shouldn’t surprise us. This was discussed, incidentally, roughly a year ago at the NATO summit in Chicago; that cyber warfare was one of the major components, one of the major emphases that NATO was placing, in the addition to things, “matters” like so-called missile defense: that is interceptor missile programs and the development and extension of the NATO Response Force, for military interventions globally. It is worth noting that today news also quotes Supreme Allied Commander of Europe for NATO, who was also the commander of US-European Command, Admiral James Stavridis, stating that NATO essentially has contingency plans for replicating the Libyan scenario inside Syria. This is as of today. As I was about to explain NATO has crafted the latest annual national program for the nation of Georgia. So, NATO is active on a number of fronts, and some of the stories I’ve mentioned indicate: they are way out of the territorial area of responsibility for the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization, if they are talking about military actions in Syria, which incidentally follows the report of a couple of days ago, that the US is considering drone strike inside Syria. So, once again US and NATO are working in tandem. Georgia of course is in the South Caucasus and nowhere near the North-Atlantic Ocean, and hackers anywhere around the world, who are fair game for NATO attack, cyber and otherwise, extend the pervue for NATO operations globally, which is what they have striven for, and what they have arrived at. Reminder Robles: This manual, it says: “…a private citizen, who on his or her own, initiates, engages in hacking for, inter alia: ideological, political, religious or patriotic reasons”, if the hacktivist isn’t working directly within an “official military organization”, NATO says they could “still” be targeted. So, does that mean that “Anonymous” members could be targeted, or bloggers? Rozoff: I would certainly draw that conclusion, but you see, I would go a step further: when they mention that; if the motives are ideological, political, moral and so forth, then what is to prevent them considering somebody who is selling what they consider to be disinformation, or “inconvenient but accurate” information, then from being a target themselves. Robles: I could be a target! I mean my views, I think, would fall into all of those areas but… Rozoff: That is right, any political adversary who is using the Internet in any capacity, counter to what NATO, how NATO envisions the world being structured, technically I suspect. You know as you mentioned, even an individual hacker with no organizational affiliation could, according to the terminology of the excerpt you just read, be considered a target, a potential target. Robles: Hacking could be almost anything really! I mean it could be someone who’s just downloaded a picture from NATO’s site and added some words to it, or something. Rozoff: On the NATO website itself it expressly forbids the use of any material, print or image, if in anyway it mocks or ridicules NATO. So, now it is apparently a crime (copyright laws would be used) but in essence, this is political censorship. If anyone used material, garnered or gleaned, from the NATO site in a way that NATO didn’t approve. Keeping in mind that North-Atlantic Treaty Organization is a consortium of western military powers that is funded through those governments, of the respective member states of the country, the United States overwhelmingly, and that as a citizen of one of those countries, you do not have the right to use information on those sites even though your tax monies are being used to support it, if NATO determines that you are in some manner, not treating them with proper respect. So, this is another instance, another example, of the US dominated military bloc, essentially letting the world… “putting the world on notice” rather, that you either toe-the-line or you could be punished! Robles: This last phrase here, it says; that anyone who initiates, (in hacking), which could be almost anything, for “patriotic” reasons: so that would mean, any person, on the planet, who loves their own country, if it is not a NATO member and who does something on the Internet, could be targetted for NATO assassination? Rozoff: That certainly how I would interpret that comment and I think you are right to highlight, or to emphasize the world “patriotic”, as though somehow that is an evil motivation, ipso facto, that in the globalized militarized world envisioned by the United States and its NATO allies, if their patriotic sentiments are in opposition to having their country destroyed by NATO rockets and bombs, then they are, by that very fact “criminals”, I suspect, and can be targeted appropriately or correspondingly. · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · sounds like this so called group who outlaws freedom of speech against there interest has napoleon complex. 23 March, 15:30 Best media coverage in US from Russia - interview
Corporations are in complete control of the United States and are engaged in the colonizing and programming of the minds of Americans. Through subliminal and psychological manipulation, omission, demonization and fear they continue to enslave the American populace into becoming subservient slaves to the corporate, military, security state. Long time peace activist Bruce Gagnon, gives his views on this and more in an interview with the VOR.
Robles: The Obama Administration has announced that their missile defense plans now include a base on the East Coast of the United States. Can you tell our listeners a little bit about that? Gagnon: Yes. In addition to the existing missile defense sites that the US and NATO are deploying around the world, there has, already been for some time, since the Bush Administration, missile defense deployments in California at Vandenberg Air Force Base and also in the state of Alaska. The Obama administration just announced that they are going to deploy 17 additional missile defense interceptors, these are underground-based mid-course missile defense systems. So, 17 of them will go into Alaska. And then, an East Coast base, will also be constructed either in northern Maine or in northern New York State. This is being justified as a response to both Korean and Iranian missile testing, nuclear weapons, nuclear missile testing which of course we know is absurd because neither North Korea or Iran have the capability to reach the United States with a long-range missile today. And we know that Iran has no nuclear weapons. Clearly, the United States is expanding its missile defense program that is really aimed at Russia and China, and using the pretext of North Korea and Iran. Robles: Aren’t Americans asking any questions? I mean they are putting up all this stuff all over Europe, supposedly to contain that same “threat”. Aren’t they admitting that all that stuff is useless if they are trying to put missiles up on the East Coast or in the United States? Gagnon: I wouldn’t say it is useless. These systems really aren’t about defense whatsoever. Robles: That’s exactly what I’m driving at, I mean, if it was a defensive system and they got in Europe; what would be the use of putting it on the East Coast of the United States? So… Americans have no questions about that? Gagnon: Americans aren’t allowed to really have that information. For example, the news release that I sent to you, will not be covered in media in the United States, they just won’t talk about it. They won’t talk about how these systems are key elements in US first strike attack planning, and are really not at all about Iran and North Korea, but in fact they are aimed at Russia and China. This won’t make it into the dialogue in this country. So, the American people really can’t be expected to have an opinion or comment on an issue that they aren’t given any information about. And that’s why we are working so hard to try to get this information out to the people, but it is difficult. We have to through these very small and weak alternative media institutions in this country, which are helpful obviously to us, but they don’t have the power to reach the American people the way the mainstream media or the corporate media does, but that media, those doors, are essentially closed. Robles: Does everybody believe that North Korea and Iran are really threats to the United States? Gagnon: Well, I think increasingly, slowly but surely, more and more American citizens are beginning to figure out that our Government feeds us a pack of lies. The problem though is: what do we do about it? We have this corporate-dominated congress of the United States. We have the corporations fully in control of the Obama Presidency. And so, having an impact on this corporate strangulation of our democracy is really difficult. It is difficult for us to change policy in this country because the corporations now control virtually all the levers of power. We’ve had a capitalist takeover of our Congress. They’ve drowned democracy in America. So, it is very dispiriting and disheartening to many American people as we are now going over the 10th anniversary of Bush’s “Shock and Awe” in Iraq. And we see Obama continuing really the same policies of the Bush Administration when it comes to foreign policy, military policy. And so, it is extremely disheartening to the people how do we get out there and change that. And that is, as an organizer, our biggest struggle today. It is not so much always convincing people that our side of the story is true. Our more difficult challenge is to get people to act on it because they really feel overwhelmed and under control. And clearly the American people have been colonized, their minds have been colonized and their political process has been colonized by this corporate oligarchy. Reminder Robles: Isn’t it strange that now, in this day and age, Americans have to look to Russia for freedom of speech or freedom of press when 25-30 years ago people believed it was the opposite? Gagnon: As I was waiting to do this interview with you, I was thinking that very thing. How ironic for me and my life! I’ve been an organizer since the early 80s. So I was in the peace movement during the Cold War between the former Soviet Union and the United States, and I remember going on radio, radio in my community where I lived, and trying to defend, the idea of peaceful negotiations with the former Soviet Union. And so, how ironic it is to me today, absolutely, that the best media coverage we can get is from; RT, Russia Today Television and your radio station, it is absolutely amazing. Robles: Wow. Things have changed. Gagnon: No, I think things are becoming more clear. Things are becoming more clarified for many people in this country. The illusion is washing away. The Hollywood façade, the illusion of democracy is finally fading away and people are really beginning to see what stands behind it, and who stands behind it. They are beginning to see the face of the corporate domination. But again, what is the next step? How do you then move people to successfully take that down and put the people back in power again? That’s the struggle of our moment. Robles: Putting people in power sounds something Socialistic or Communistic. (Laughs) Gagnon: (Laughs) Yes, or Christian, or… you know, there are lots of ways to look at it. Robles: Well, anything that’s people based will be demonized as being Communist or something evil. I’m just further contrasting the situation. Gagnon: I’ve been doing kind of a study watching television commercials and seeing how the various corporations selling their products are trying to get rid of this idea of cooperation and sharing within, even the family! As these commercials are showing family members competing with each other for the last piece of chicken or for the last soda. They are trying to redefine what it means to be a human being in this country for the people. This is john Robles, you were listening to part 1 of an interview with Mr. Bruce Gagnon – the coordinator for theGlobal Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. You can find part 2 and the rest of this interview on our website at English.ruvr.ru. Thanks for listening, and as always we wish you the best, wherever you may be!
22 March, 18:40 After a decade without trial Guantanamo prisoners on hunger strike
Photo: EPA From the US President on down the world has been lied to again and again ad nauseum about the “War on Terror” and everything associated with it. They have been lied to about illegal aggressive invasions, the overthrowing of governments, the assassination of leaders, drones and the crowning jewel of U.S. arrogance, the illegal 21st century dungeon located at Guantanamo Bay Cuba. Inside sources say almost all of the detainees in Guantanamo are on a mass hunger strike, however a general tells the world just a handful of prisoners are on “hunger strike light”. Can we believe them now? According to human rights workers and lawyers, about 150 of the approximately 167 hopeless, forgotten, tortured prisoners at the illegal U.S. “War on Terror” prison and interrogation facility at Guantanamo Bay Cuba are on a prolonged and most likely indefinite hunger strike. For the helpless broken human beings that the ruthless, amoral, conscienceless, godless and insatiable U.S. war profiteers have held, almost all, without trial or redress for more than 11 years, this is their last resort, the last and final desperate plea for help from humiliated and broken souls in silent protest to treatment and conditions that have become no longer humanly bearable. According to the U.K.’s Guardian a lawyer working on Guantanamo “issues” and representing seven individuals at the illegal prison , Omar Farah, from the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, the true number and condition of men at the prison who are on a hunger strike is in stark contrast to the watered-down figures stated by General John Kelly, the head of US Southern Command which is responsible for Guantanamo and U.S. military forces and operations in Latin America, to the House Armed Services Committee and being quoted by the world’s press. In the Guardian, Mr. Farah is quoted as having said that Fahad Ghazy, an inmate from Yemen and his client, had recently told him that the number of those on a hunger strike is far greater than the official version: "They (the Pentagon) are not admitting the scale and scope of the hunger strike." He also said that in a telephone conversation with Mr. Ghazy, he was told that: “… all but two inmates in Guantánamo's Camp Six were on hunger strike, and that that likely represented almost 130 people. And ….some detainees at Camp Five were also on hunger strike.” Of course the U.S. Government and their spokes-tool General Kelly are going to downplay the desperate nature of the hopeless situation at Guantanamo, and spin as much propaganda as they can get away with, so their numbers and statements have to be taken with a grain of the harshest, most toxic rock salt possible. According to the BBC and reports from the session, the General told the rubber-stamping House Armed Services Committee that “some prisoners were eating a bit, but not a lot." He later stated at a press briefing at the Pentagon that some of the prisoners were on what he callously and arrogantly labeled “hunger strike light”. He of course added that allegations that the Koran, the holiest book for the Muslim prisoners, most of whom are being held for over a decade without trial, was not mishandled. According to reports citing human rights workers, lawyers and others who have contact with the prisoners, the protests are due to the fact that the few photographs, letters and other meager and precious personal possessions of the men, are being confiscated and possibly destroyed. This along with the desecration of only thing they have that gives them strength, their Korans, and the sheer and utter hopelessness of their predicament, over which it appears no just or fair individual or body on Earth has any control, has led to the current mass hunger strikes. The fact that all flights to and from the island are also soon to be cancelled and currently it is almost impossible for any outside forces to gain access to the prisoners and to the facility to observe what is really going on, make the believability of anything the US could possible say regarding the situation almost laughable, laughable if it were not for the horrors they are committing at the location. The deceptive illegal interrogation and torture facility, nothing more than a hellacious middle-age dungeon in the sun overlooking the sandy shores of a beautiful island, is the ultimate crowning jewel of U.S. arrogance and a continued symbol to the world that the United States of America is completely and utterly recalcitrant in its reckless, ruthless and bloody disregard for international law, human rights and humanity as a whole. It is the ultimate sign to the world that those in power in the United States care nothing for the rule of law and will do anything to anyone if it advances their own agenda. It is also a showpiece for bloodthirsty callous American greed, hypocrisy and the true hypocritical nature of the U.S. President who promised to close it and those who continue to line their pockets and make billions at the expense of their fellow human beings. This can in no way be more underlined or pronounced than recent news by RT and the Huffington Post that the temporary “torture and terror” prison, contrary to what have been proven to be lies by the Nobel Prize winning U.S. President, is not only NOT going to be closed, but is going to be expanded and a new $49 million prison is going to be built at the location. Where is the international outcry? Where are screaming American taxpayers whose money is being used to illegally hold men who have not been charged or tried for over a decade in a despicable, disgusting and egregious parody of justice and an affront to all mankind? Why does Cuba do nothing to be rid of the abomination which is an affront to everything it stands for? The answer my friend is most likely nobody can do anything because those responsible and blood-sucking greed, tragically, now and for quite some time, rule the world. The views and opinions expressed above are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru
19 March, 19:07 1 African-Americans are the most imprisoned and oppressed in US - Ford
Despite the fact that Barrack Obama may be the first President of the United States of African-American origin, life for African Americans and minorities in the US police state has gotten worse since he took power. Poverty levels are at 1960 levels, the incarceration of blacks which went viral in1970 has continued to grow and there is little hope for the future. However polls continue to contradict the truth of the numbers and attempt to show that black are “optimistic”. Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with the executive editor from Black Agenda Report, Mr. Glen Ford.
Robles: From what I’ve seen, I mean, things have gotten worse for black Americans, for black people, for minorities in general, since Obama has been President. Would you agree with that? Ford: Absolutely, and the numbers all say so. And what is crazy, and I have to use just that word “crazy” about this period, when by the numbers we can show, that black folks have been hurt, by far the worst, by the economic crisis since 2008, is a series of polls began by the Pew Polling organization, but duplicated by the others, that shows that black America, is more optimistic about the economy in general, black people’s fortunes in this economy and black people in terms of their expectations and optimism about their own, and their own families’ fortunes in this economy. It is an absolutely delusionary situation; that the group that objectively is faring worst in the society, because of one of their number, or someone that they perceive as being one of them is in power, somehow perceives that they are in better shape. Big majorities claim that they are better off than they were 10 years ago when in fact in the late 90s black America was by the numbers, objectively speaking, better off in terms of its living standards compared to whites than ever in the history of the country. And in the interim, and especially after the collapse of 2008, black folks have now slipped, relative to whites, to below 1979 levels. Poverty in the United States in general is now only a fraction of a point less severe than it was in 1965. Robles: 1965… Ford: 1965… And that’s poverty in general in the United States, it is probably an even starker figure for African Americans. Robles: Regarding the number of African Americans in prison, the number of African Americans dying in this “War on Terror” and civil rights in general: now, what I saw beginning with Reagan, I mean, I saw… the stripping away, beginning with Equal Employment Opportunities and things like that, the stripping away of civil rights and that was continued by Republicans under Bush. Would you agree that civil rights have been stripped away, and how has the “War on Terror” affected the civil rights of African Americans? Ford: The attrition, the incremental stripping away as you say, in the civil rights arena, has been going on for a long time. But in this so-called “War on Terror” period, and especially under Barack Obama, we have seen, I think a situation that, is nothing less than the absence of the rule of law. We do not have due process in this country and have not had it since the first passage, Congress has twice passed President Obama’s preventive detention law. It goes much further than Bush ever thought to reach. President Bush did not attempt to pass through the Congress a law giving the Executive Branch the right to preventive detention, to deny American citizens the right to access to the courts, to allow for the arrest without trial or charge of any American citizen. Bush would not have reached that far because he would have been resisted tooth-and-nail by most Democrats and the popular opposition to that would have been overwhelming. But Obama pulled it off and with only small minorities of opposition among Democrats in the House and the Senate. We do not have the rule of law, we have an Attorney General who tells us that do process, does not necessarily mean access to the courts, and apparently due process is whatever process the executive branch says it is. This is beyond conventional civil rights discussions. We are talking about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights becoming a dead letter, effectively. Reminder Robles: I see. Do you see this being arbitrarily applied towards minorities and African-Americans? Ford: We don’t have to look into contemporary realities or for a change in that regard. The United States imprisons 1\4 of the prison inmates on the planet, about half of them are black. That means: on planet Earth 1 out of every 8 prison inmates is an African American. Is that not amazing? 40 million people, out of 7 billion, representing 1 out of 8 prisoners. The United States, just by the numbers, is not only the biggest police state in the world, certainly the country with by far the highest incarceration rates must be the biggest police state, but African-Americans are the most imprisoned and oppressed by this police state of any group, in the biggest police state in the world. So, these “innovations” under the so-called “War on Terror” don’t introduce some new, in particular, chapter for black America, we have been in effectively a police state since the age of mass black incarceration again, and that’s about 1970 if you look at the numbers. It is as if following the black freedom movements of the 60s, it is as if the white population of the United States said collectively in chorus, sometime around 1970: “Okay, you guys don’t want stay in your place, so we’ve got another place for you, and it is the prison system.” It was amazing how mass black incarceration spread east, west, north and south to states in which the black population was a very small proportion, to states like Mississippi and South Carolina where there are large proportions. It was universal and took hold in seemed no time, as if by acclamation. So, this is something that we’ve been suffering under this regime of mass black incarceration since 1970, for more than two generations. Robles: I see. The US has a tremendous adept and agile propaganda machine. Right? Most of the world thinks African-Americans live very well, it’s the land of milk and honey, everybody is treated the same, but if you look at who is in power, if you look at the police forces, if you look at the Government: it is not racially equal, is it? Well, of course if you just look at the numbers. This is John Robles, I was speaking to Mr. Glen Ford. He is the executive editor at Black Agenda Report. Please visit our site in the near future for the final part of this interview with Glen Ford. US, human rights, John Robles, Society · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · Really what did you expect? Harlem paved with gold. Whites are in control of the factors of production, and thats that. Afrcan-Americans were never property owners, we received no repartiations like the Jews, no Holocaust Hall of Fame 19 March, 16:55 2 "Squatters" claim Malvinas, De Kirchner asks Pope Francis to intervene
AFP PHOTO/OSSERVATORE ROMANO Christina Fernandez de Kirchner has asked fellow countryman Pope Francis, a vocal proponent of Argentinean sovereignty over Las Malvinas, for his intervention in solving the question of the disputed Las Malvinas, or as the British call them the Falklands. The question over the islands brings to question the Catholic Church’s Doctrine of Discovery and shows that they may still be playing a role in what is nothing more than the stealing of lands. While Argentina’s claims hold more water than those of the UK, which is attempting to hold on to one of its last vestiges of empire, other questions do arise. The President of Argentina Christina Fernandez de Kirchner has asked the new head of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis to intervene in the conflict over Las Malvinas, or the Falklands, an issue which apparently unites the Argentinean president and the spiritual leader who is also from Argentina. One the eve of his coronation the Pope granted the president a private audience and she became the first head of state to meet with the Pope in Vatican City. President Fernandez de Kirchner has condemned the British militarization of the South Atlantic and this was her reason for asking for the intervention of the Holy See, in particular the Pope, her hope being that the Pope may assist in opening up channels for a dialogue on the issue and averting any possible confrontation over the Argentinean territory, claimed by the United Kingdom. The Catholic Church has intervened in conflicts in the region in the past, namely in 1978 when Pope John Paul II helped to defuse a conflict between Argentina and Chile over several islands in Patagonia and the Beagle Channel. During the meeting with the Argentinean Pope, the first non-European Pope in 1,300 years, the president is being quoted as having said: “Now the situation is different because Britain and Argentina are two democratic countries with governments elected by the people. The only thing we ask is that we can sit down and negotiate.” In the past Pope Francis, the former Argentinean Cardinal Bergoglio, has been vocal in his support of the sovereignty of the Las Malvinas Islands and has called for, the vindication of the soldiers who fought against Britain, saying the islands were usurped by Britain. The question over the possession of Las Malvinas is one that is of great historical importance and goes back hundreds of years to the very invasions of the “New World” by the Europeans, to the period of the British Empire and the Catholic Church’s Doctrine of Discovery, which allowed European “Christians” to steal the lands and riches of the indigenous people’s for their respective crowns in Europe. Since it was this Doctrine of Discovery that has allowed for Europeans to continue to possess and squabble over lands that in reality were stolen, and in the case of Las Malvinas belong to neither the Argentineans nor the British, the Pope is probably the most relevant figure to mitigate a resolution to the conflict. If we go back to the history of the islands, they have been claimed on and off by Britain since the mid 1770s with supposed possession of the islands passing back and forth and including French and other claims. Even Luis Vernet an Argentinean hero who was proclaimed the Military and Civil Commander of Falkland Islands and the Islands near Cape Horn by the Republic of Buenos Aires in 1829, was apparently playing both sides of the fence in his control over the islands, attempting to please both British and Argentinean interests. The United States was also involved in the conflict culminating in the destruction of the settlement on the islands by the USS Lexington after Vernet seized three US warships, the USS Breakwater, USS Superior and USS Harriet in 1831. When the British expelled the population of the islands in 1833, according to historical records, only 22 people remained in the major city of Port Louis. This included 12 Argentineans, 4 Charrúa Indians from Uruguay, 2 British nationals, 2 Germans, one French citizen and one person from Jamaica. In 1834 Charles Darwin made his second visit to the islands commenting: “After the possession of these miserable islands had been contested by France, Spain, and England, they were left uninhabited. The government of Buenos Aires then sold them to a private individual, but likewise used them, as old Spain had done before, for a penal settlement. England claimed her right and seized them. The Englishman who was left in charge of the flag was consequently murdered. A British officer was next sent, unsupported by any power: and when we arrived, we found him in charge of a population, of which rather more than half were runaway rebels and murderers.” If we judge ownership of the islands by the actual original population, leaving the indigenous issue aside for the time being, and not by the whims of ambitious colonial powers who needed the islands due to their strategic location, then of course the islands belong to Argentina and perhaps in part to the Charrúa Indians from Uruguay. In stark reality, with all political niceties aside, if we take the account of Charles Darwin at full value then, as with North America, Australia and other empirical conquests, the question is one of whether British murderers, criminals, outcasts, pirates and every sort of scum, and their descendants, who have been squatting on lands not their own for hundreds of years, can really be called the owners of said lands. As for Las Malvinas, asking these very descendents, as would be the case with the descendants of the same Europeans who call themselves “Americans”, who the land belongs to, is the same as asking an 8th generation squatter if they in fact own the home they live in. It is a farce. Falkland Islands, The New Pope Francis: symbol of changes, Pope Francis, Society · Share: · · · · · Сomments 2 · As an Irishman, I cannot but wholeheartedly agree with the statement "the question is whether British murderers... and every sort of scum, and their descendants, who have been squatting on lands not their own for hundreds of years, can really be called the owners of said lands". This is an excellent honest summation of the British Colonial legacy in so many parts of the world including my own. From Ireland I say "Las Malvinas son Argentinas - Viva Malvinas libres" · This is a very small challenge to face; a banal communication's exercise. There are a few more bigger ones to solve: Increasing misery all over the World; inequalities also more evident everywhere. Billionaires behaving like pegs when thousands of children die of starvation or are used by those creeps to increase their fortunes. Moreover, Francis must deal with the 1500 billions dollars wasted for mankind self-destruction each year. For this last subject he must have a serious talk with the most criminal politician of our time: Barack Obama, sufficiently hypocrite and cynical to have been one of the firsts to congratulate the new pope. Obama's drones kill thousands of innocent victims. His country has been and still is the initiator and first user of all the weapons of mass destruction known on Earth. 70% of all armaments build actually are made in America. This pope could start by excommunicate Obama, Hollande, Cameron, Merkel and many others. So far, it seems to me that this pope who has a great spiritual power is an other useless mirage; a simple smiling politician typical of our time. Citizen of the Malvines(or Falkland) need to be happy and have a decent life. In 2013, we are all on the same boat; citizenship is not that important. Jean-Claude Meslin: World's citizen of viking origin vikings'origin 18 March, 23:01 American right continues to demonize Islam, or death for blasphemy is not limited to Islam
© Collage: The Voice of Russia The death penalty for blasphemy is wrong but it is not just an Islamic issue. Although fanatical followers of Islam try to enforce such punishment, Christianity is also full of references of death for blasphemy, as are many other religions. For most religions forgiveness and brotherly love stop when you insult their gods, and then you must die. Is this right? It depends on where you are sitting, or kneeling as the case may be. How you view the argument depends on where you sit. So as always when you read something demonizing Muslims or Islam it is a good idea to get a bearing of who the messenger is. Recently a blog called the “American Thinker” a publication many sitting on the left would call: a “a rightwing rag” according to Daily Kos, and worse, published an intriguing piece doing something the US right loves to do more than anything else, namely, demonizing Islam, something necessary to continue bombing the hell out of Muslim countries. As always the right loves to look at others while failing to take into account their own egregious behavior. That is normal and as always it depends where you are sitting. Let’s take a look for a minute at some of the points brought up by the “thinker” in their article Ten Key Points on Islamic Blasphemy Law. Point one they claim the “Sunna” says any who one blasphemes Muhammad, Allah, or Islam put themselves on a war footing against Muslims, and their lives became licit. However they fail to mention that Christians have their own blasphemy laws where stoning to death was the punishment and even England had blasphemy laws on the books until 2008 when the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act of 2008 was passed. However some may still exist. Jews also have their own blasphemy laws and in ancient times even tried to accuse Jesus of blasphemy against God’s name. His own dad if you believe other versions. Buddhists’ have a “right” speech clause in their religion and Jainism has its own version of a blasphemy “law” as well. As it turns out Hinduism does not have any such laws and in theory even an atheist can be a Hindu. The intrepid “thinker” takes issue with the fact that in many Islamic countries official blasphemy laws exist which call for death as the penalty, which is wrong as it persecutes Christians and everyone else for that matter, but they make no mention of blasphemy laws which still exist in many US states, in the UK, Australia, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece Ireland, the Netherlands, Iceland, Italy Spain, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland. Although the issuing of Fatwahs seems like an evil thing for people like Salmon Rushdie depending on where you are sitting, one might say that Christian’s are guilty of worse offenses. Just ask American Indians about the Doctrine of Discovery. By the way Indians respected the Great Spirit and Mother Earth and also did not have blasphemy laws. Even a Christian could worship the Great Spirit. Indians welcomed everyone with peace and even took pity on the starving Calvinist and Puritan Pilgrims who gave thanks to God for allowing them to slaughter the Indians and steal their lands. Mormons who do not practice polygamy, I mean polygyny, also have blasphemy clauses with death as the proper punishment. The “thinker” is right in saying that these Islamic “Laws” should not be a part of the legal establishment or part of the criminal code in many countries but takes no issue with the fact that the US Government and the US system are so intertwined with God and weird esoteric ideology, even saying “In God We Trust” on their money and requiring leaders and citizens to swear on bibles and the like during all sorts of official processes. As for the esoteric, I mean things like the Pyramid with the all-seeing-eye on it on American currency and the like. The most serious blasphemy law across the board in almost all religions, and we must remember that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are basically all based on the same books and events, is attributing the acts of the Messiah, by whatever name you want to Satan. We might demonize Islam for the bloodshed it has caused but Christianity wins hands down for the massive slaughtering of human being that it has wrought on mankind. Maybe a billion Indians alone were slaughtered in North and South America in the name of Christianity. Regardless of what you believe do not attack other people’s faiths. It is just bad manners. Maybe all countries should have a Council of Atheists to handle these problems? The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
16 March, 12:53 We are still engaged in survival after the genocide of all Indians – Indian rights activist
1 / 2 © Photo: Robert Free · · The Doctrine of Discovery that allowed the stealing of Indian Lands and the genocide of the Indian peoples has never been rescinded by the Catholic Church. Today the Indians are still faced with ignorant racism and their lands are still being raped and destroyed by multi-national corporations and companies in their quest for oil and resources. The result has been poisoned water supplies and birth deformities and miscarriages because of pollutants and the poisoning of the Indian lands. I am speaking with Robert Free, a long-time Indian rights activist and the member of Tewa and Naua Nations. © Photo: Robert Free
© Photo: Robert Free
© Photo: Robert Free I am speaking with Robert Free, a long-time Indian rights activist and the member of Tewa and Naua Nations. Greeting Robles: What are some of the issues that you are fighting for now for the Indian people? Free: It is relevant to all indigenous people on the planet and to all people who live on this planet, the issues we’re struggling for our survival, to maintain our sacred mother Earth for the future generations to enjoy, to be able to live from. Now we are engaged in survival from the genocide that has happened particularly in the North and South Americas, we are still recovering from the Doctrine of Discovery that was given the green light for all the nations of Europe to come on to our continents and commit genocide and land theft if you were not the Christian, if you were not white, the invading armies were allowed to slaughter and take, for the crowns of Europe, the territories and any of the resources of gold and silver from it, and to enslave all the people there, to mine these resources for the Renaissance of Europe and the entrenchment of the churches on the planet. Robles: What is your opinion on what they did? Free: That is sad side of human nature, and the moral mask that some people can project, but actually do something else. Where you have the churches and you have the imperial invasions going on in the names of the crowns of Europe, coming to our parts of the world and after the rampage of disease, wiping out millions, just literally slaughtering any resistance to their incursions. So, it is no difference today. Today it has a different name and a different face but basically you have the multi-nationals representing the crowns of Europe, in a way, and you have these multi-nationals crossing all the territories now and not being held accountable to the incursions they are doing in indigenous territories for gold, silver, the same metals, and a few other new ones, oil and coal, so that is what is going on today. I will give you a very specific example, you have Canada, who has sold itself to the planet as being a very eco-friendly peace-loving country, actually committing 80% of the mineral extraction on the planet. To make it more specific, we take British Columbia, where there are about 1,500 mining companies registered. Those mining companies are in Central America, in South America, the Philippines, other parts of the world, Haiti, and doing devastating destruction to the land where it pollutes the waters where people, live causing great health issues amongst the people; from miscarriages to deformities to cancers. So, that is what is going on. You want me to tell you what is going on on the planet Earth, and in the name of struggle, stop free pass that multi-nationals have, to go into indigenous people’s territories or anyone on the planet, without any accountability to the destruction to the environment and to the people that they affect. Reminder Robles: Is there anything we can do to ensure that rights are being protected in some way? Free: We were directed 40 years by elders in the Standing Rock Reservation to… After Wounded Knee, after we did a stand-off of 72 days against 500 armed military US marshals who shot 900,000 bullets at us, after that truce we saw that we would get no justice in the United States. So, we were directed to go to the global communities of the world, so people went to the United Nations, and after 35 years finally got the Declaration of Indigenous People’s Rights passed by all the nations. So, we’ve gone to those areas of moral accountability to put pressure on these countries to hold their multi-nationals accountable, so that is a lot that is going on right now. That route is going on right now at the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous People and the preparations for the World Conference on Indigenous People in 2014 that is going to be held over in New York. Robles: Do you think they will actually change anything, or produce any visible results? Free: I don’t think so. The United Nations is not too good at having any enforcibility. We’ve seen that since its inception, hasn’t really been able, unless it is US driven or multi-national driven, that it gets a lot of results. It’s just that they fund the United Nations. I was up in Canada in the 70s and the Dene and Chippewyan up that way increased, took me hunting and trapping way up on some beautiful territory. It was so, you had to fly in 500 miles and land there, there are no roads. Now I just happened to bury a friend of mine up that ways, and all those folks were at this funeral, and they were telling me: they have to now bring their own water out into the bush, they to call it, because it is so polluted they can’t even make tea in the field, so they can only carry about 2-3 days worth of water. They can’t drink that water that was from the lake of Athabasca or Peace River because upstream is the tar sands of Alberta that is polluting all that beautiful area. So, they can’t even eat the fish, they are having miscarriages and nothing is being done for that. Robles: Can you tell us some of the other realities that American Indians are faced with in this day and age? Can you tell us a little bit about your tribes, the Tewa and Naua? Free: The issues faced right now by a lot of Indians is the pipelines that are going to come out of the tar sands areas of Alberta, down all the way to the Dakotas, all the way down to Louisiana, to pipe the oil over to Europe and to China. The other angle is the pipeline from Alberta all across British Columbia down to north of Vancouver and they are trying to make a pipeline over to the east coast of Canada, trying to ship it in that direction. Robles: What would you say to counter racist stereotypes against Indians? Free: They are ignorant and they are all products of educational systems that perpetuate this ignorance and until we write our own books and if they are not included in all the educational system curriculum, that ignorance will continue. Robles: What would you say is one of the biggest lies told by Europeans or their ancestors against the Indian peoples? Free: The Doctrine of Discovery that gave them permission to come onto lands and take them if they were not Christian, and that is still in effect and hasn’t been rescinded by the Catholic Church. A couple of years after Columbus landed over here the Church saw the abundance of gold and lands that came back, and so they did a Doctrine of Discovery where they got 10% of all armies’ acquisitions and 10% of all the gold and silver. Robles: Thank you. Free: Okay. Keep up the good work. This is John Robles, I was taking to Mr. Robert Free, a long-time Indian Rights activist and the member of Tewa and Naua nations. End of part 1. Visit our site in the near future for a continuation of this interview.
15 March, 20:04 First Nations alarmed by destruction of our planet – Dr. Paul
Photo: Per Ola Wiberg (Powi)/flickr.com As the environment is being destroyed and the planet continues to be raped for fossil fuels and natural resources, the effects of global warming are becoming more and visible worldwide. Although we may soon be reaching the point of no return Western governments and corporations continue to ignore this problem, which may lead to the very death of our planet and all of us. One group of people, the American Indians are doing what few others are, they are fighting to save the land and the planet they love and respect, like no other people’s on the Earth. Dr. Daniel Paul spoke with John Robles on this issue which is important to all of us. Hello! This is John Robles, I'm speaking with Dr. Daniel Paul. He is an Indian historian and a Mi'kmaq elder. He is in Nova Scotia, Canada.
Robles: Hello Sir! How are you this evening? Paul: Very good, thank you. Robles: It’s a pleasure to be speaking with you again. Can you give our listeners a little bit of information about the protests that have been going on up there in Canada? Paul: Well, actually the “Idle No More Protest, has not only been going on in Canada, but has been going on in the United States and it is to do with the environment, some pipelines and what have you, that are being built across North America, and one from Alberta down to Texas and the Gulf Coast. And that created quite a stir, quite a controversy actually because people were upset that perhaps it might have some very detrimental effects on the environment. And so, that was part of the protest. And I guess the unilateral actions of the government with no consultation and all the rest of it, that is another issue that was propelling the controversy. So, it is still on the go, it is not as pronounced as it was before but some people are still protesting. Robles: How does that affect the Indian Nations in Canada and in the United States? Why is that important? Paul: The environment mainly, that the people are concerned with, it’s all these different things that are being built, being developed, such as the oil sands in Alberta and again the pipeline that is supposed to be built from Alberta to Texas, and the chance of maybe a spill that would poison parts of the environment. Fracking is going on in both countries at this point in time and a lot of people are very concerned that may affect the water supply in various areas and contaminate the water supply. It is various, I guess an overview of the things that are concerning people in Canada, and in particular it is the perception by the First Nations’ people that the Canadian Government isn’t negotiating in good faith and maybe have a hidden agenda. Robles: What might that be? Can you give us some details on that? Paul: I guess what a lot of people are thinking is that perhaps the Federal Government is working towards the elimination of the First Nations in Canada and not working in good faith towards self-government and expanding the land base and Aboriginal rights and things of that nature. Robles: Now, these pipelines, are they going to be infringing on Indian lands? Paul: Well, in many cases they will be infringing in the sense that a great deal of that land in between Alberta and Texas is still up for negotiations. Aboriginal rights have not been extinguished and the settlement is sort of somewhere down the road. And what the people are looking at I believe is that perhaps the environment worldwide is not something that is causing great many people to be very concerned. I know myself I have some shots from Antarctica and the penguins are not hatching as they used to. So, global warming is beginning to concern a lot of people. And I think in this case the First Nation people in Canada have took it upon themselves to begin to do some protest about the march to world extinction if we don’t begin to become to, maybe, come to terms to what we are doing to the environment. Robles: Well, they’ve been pretty much in denial I think about global warming for at least 10 years. Reminder Robles : Here in Moscow, in the winter now, you can pretty much just look out the window and see the results of global warming. Why is that important to the Indian people? Paul: Well, it’s not only important to the Indian, the indigenous people of the Americas but it is also important to everybody across the world, including Russians and Germans, and English and so forth and so on. And what is the point of no return? If you poison the environment enough, we will create a world that will not sustain life any longer. You know, how far down the road can we go before we begin to realize that perhaps we’ve gone too far. And when you’ve gone too far it’s a little too late to begin to turn back and to try to fix things. Robles: Why do think people are not paying attention to this, in particular the US authorities, I mean they have all the data, they have all the information. I’m sure they know where things are headed. Why do you think they are ignoring the dangers? Paul: Well, the world has one God, besides the God in heaven, or wherever people believe the God should be, but there is a God that’s universal and it crisscrosses all religions, and it is “greed”. People are greedy and they will continue to go down a certain road and do what they do, and have no appreciation of what the consequences may be. Robles: What are some of the effects of the global warming that you are alarmed with, that you’ve seen? Paul: Here in Nova Scotia at this point in time, all winter long, I think we haven’t had more than five, perhaps 5 or 10 sunny days. It’s been nothing but cloud and drizzle, and fog, and snow, and all the rest, and it’s not a normal type of winter we have here. And it is warmer, a lot warmer. Robles: How much warmer than normal? Paul: If you are looking at Fahrenheit, we used to have 10-15 below zero which would be equal to -32 Celsius I suppose. And you can notice the difference, winters don’t come on, last winter we never had any snow until latter part of November. And it just seems like the seasons are shrinking. And other parts of North America are suffering a great drought at this point in time. And things seem to be moving in a way that… it’s being predicted, that if we don’t begin to clean up our acts, violent weather is being created, unheard of blizzards are going on right now across North America, they seem to be coming one right after the other. And things of this nature just seem to be getting out of balance. Robles: Kind of the same thing here in Russia with the winters. Normally it was like -20 -25 Celsius for most of the winter, now sometimes there is a couple weeks of that weather. It’s visible. Paul: The weather that’s happening here is not happening elsewhere and vice versa, and new things are beginning to occur in other areas also. It seems to me in Tornado Belt in the United States there are far more tornados beginning to occur and some are very early and some are very late in the season now. Robles: Thank you very much Dr. Paul. I really appreciate you speaking with me. Paul: Very good, and nice talking to you always. And I hope you’ll have nice and warm summer there in Moscow and we have a good one, get some sunshine here in Nova Scotia for a change. Parting You were listening to an interview with Dr. Daniel N Paul. He is an elder with the Mi'kmaq Tribe. Stay tuned to the Voice of Russia for part 2 of this interview. You can learn more about the Mi'kmaq and American Indians by visiting Dr. Paul's website at: www.danielnpaul.com
14 March, 14:08 Did Henrique Capriles have a falling out with his US handlers?
Photo: EPA The opposition politician in Venezuela, Henrique Capriles Radonski, is said to be in the sights of US assassins. This is not surprising as Capriles’ history and deep ties to the US and his key position in US operations to destabilize and usurp the Venezuelan Government, including involvement in the coup d’état that temporarily unseated Hugo Chavez, the attack on the Cuban Embassy in Venezuela and the ensuing assassination of the prosecutor who was investigating these events, would make him someone the US needs to keep quiet. On Wednesday the acting President of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro issued an official statement that Venezuelan security structures had uncovered a plot to assassinate opposition politician Henrique Capriles. According to the VOR in a televised speech he stated that: “We have detected plans by the far right, linked to the groups of (former Bush administration officials) Roger Noriega and Otto Reich, to make an attempt against the opposition presidential candidate,” Nicolas Maduro said. Maduro was not specific in how the plot was uncovered or in who the suspects are but added that the government had sent a senior general to meet with Capriles' team. Although obviously denied to the press by Noriega this means that Henrique Capriles Radonski has had a serious falling out with his American benefactors and former controllers, who may be after him for any number of reasons including financial ones as he is heavily indebted on many levels to the United States. Against the backdrop of the ongoing investigation into the death of Hugo Chavez there is also speculation that he might know too much about the, until proven “suspected”, assassination of the late Hugo Chavez, as he has a long history of “secret” dealings with the US Government, has made many trips to the United States even meeting with Congressional leaders and officials and is suspected in the assassination of the late Venezuelan Prosecutor, Danilo Anderson, who was prosecuting suspects in the coup d’état which temporarily ousted Hugo Chavez in April 2002 as well as the attack on the Cuban Embassy in Caracas during the same time. Capriles is a prize even by CIA standards, the gay politician in the poster boy for CIA implanted puppet leaders of Latin American countries. According to diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks and heavily redacted documents released by the US State Department in an attempt to soften the impact of the WikiLeaks revelations, Capriles’ relationship with the US goes back to his very creation as an “opposition” leader against official Caracas. According to the site venezuelawearewithyou.blogspot.ru citing Jean-Guy Allard at agenpress.info, even the formation of Capriles’ political party, Primero Jusiticia, was done under the control of and financed by USAID, a long time CIA Front, through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the International Republican Institute (IRI). After USAID’s assessment the right-wing Republican experts at these organizations designed the Capriles’ party platform, communications strategy and were instrumental in supporting and financing extreme right ideological groups such as that designed for Capriles. According to the resource USAID has reportedly given more than 5 million dollars to fund the extreme right in Venezuela “under the pretext of supporting democracy” in violation of the 2010 Venezuelan Law of Political Sovereignty and National Self-Determination, something USAID is well-known for and one of the reasons it was expelled from many countries including the Russian Federation. The details of the relationship between Capriles and the US Government which were published by WikiLeaks in the form of their own diplomatic cables, is stunning in its scope and nature and gives us an insight into just how far the US will go to install their own puppet leaders in countries that they wish to control. In one Diplomatic Cable marked Classified and titled: “Mayor Capriles - This May Be My Last Trip”, dated Tuesday, March 21, 2006, it is clear that the ties between Capriles and the US Government go to the highest levels. The cable shows Capriles meeting with the US Ambassador in Caracas and the Political Counselor Officer, suspected of being a CIA cover position in the country, and their concern for his well being after Capriles was involved in the attack the Cuban Embassy and what are described as terrorist activities and was facing prison time again for his subversive activities. The cable mentions that Capriles intended to “visit New York and Washington to talk to executive and legislative branch officials as well as representatives of international human rights organizations”, one of many trips that he then discussed and summarized with the Ambassador and the PolCouns, showing that he was regularly travelling to the US to receive instructions and no doubt funding, and that the information he had was sensitive enough and important enough for him to have to meet privately with the US Ambassador at the Embassy. According to the cables Capriles not only met with US Government Executive and Legislative Branch officials but also with the then Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Shannon, the US National Security Council Senior Director Dan Fisk and unnamed “others”. The WikiLeaks Cables connect Capriles to the attack on the Cuban Embassy stating that he was even filmed climbing over the wall of the Cuban Embassy Compound and threatening the Cuban Ambassador in Venezuela. They also show that Capriles was a prime suspect in the assassination of the Venezuelan Prosecutor Danilo Anderson, killed by a car bomb in November 2004, and that he was a key figure in the coup d’état that Danilo Anderson was investigating. Before his death Anderson had successfully imprisoned Capriles on charges of “violating international principles, private violence and abuse of office” in connection with the attack on the Cuban Embassy. The US Diplomatic cables take no issue with the fact Capriles was in fact committing terrorist activities, subverting the Venezuelan Government and involved in the assassination of a state prosecutor something it is almost a given he was doing at their behest. There is no doubt Capriles, who is now running for president, knows enough to seriously damage the United States and is so closely connected to US agents attempting to destabilize and overthrow the government of the country, so an assassination plot by US interests would be nothing more than damage control. That an individual who is according to the public record is involved in treason and is a paid servant to the interests of a foreign power, is being allowed to run for political office is strange in and of itself. That the government he is attempting to overthrow has warned him of the plot is only testament to the rule of law for everyone by the Venezuelan Government. Capriles is so intertwined with these US elements that if Hugo Chavez was in fact assassinated and infected with cancer Capriles is more likely than not involved or in the know. If there is an investigation going on into the death of Hugo Chavez then Capriles will be one of the first persons investigators would want to talk to, and for the organizers, the fear that he will talk is reason enough to take him out.
14 March, 10:53 The CIA has attempted to assassinate 50 foreign leaders including Chavez – William Blum
Photo: EPA The late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was warned by Fidel Castro to be careful of a very specific attack, namely a quick jab from an infected needle. Such a warning coming from a leader who has reportedly been the target of CIA assassination plots more than 600 times in over 50 years, was sure to be heeded. Was the illness of Hugo Chavez a completely deniable assassination by the CIA? William Blum spoke with the VOR’s John Robles and discussed this issue and more. Robles: I’ve read your Anti-Empire report regarding Hugo Chavez. Can you give us your comments on speculation that he was assassinated by the CIA? Blum: I cannot prove it of course, but I believe he was. It would be totally in keeping with the entire history of the CIA and its attitude towards people like Hugo Chavez. The CIA has attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders and successfully at least half the time. And very few of them were as despised by the US Government as Chavez was, I would say. So, there would be no reason at all to expect that the CIA would not at least plan on killing, and the nature of his ailment is very odd. He went from a cancer, which would not go away despite several sessions of chemotherapy and what have you. Then it went to serious lung infections, which would not go away no matter what they did. And then it went to a massive heart attack. All in the same man with no apparent cause, he was only 58 years old, and as far as we know he was a very healthy until this happened, it is all very odd. And given the great motivation that the US Government and the persons in the CIA has put for killing a man like Hugo Chavez, I’m pretty sure that the CIA played a role in this. Robles: Do you know are have you heard of any credible new technology or new programs that could deliver such a cancer? Blum: The means would be a needle with a quick sharp jab and what you need is getting one person close enough to Chavez to do that. Chavez was always in the public eye, he was always embracing people. There must have been countless occasions in the past few years when he was vulnerable to a quick jab by a needle that would be the method of transmitting the ailments. Robles: Did he ever complain that he had been poked by something in public? Were there any reports of anything like that happening that you had heard about? Blum: He did mention that Fidel Castro warned him about just that. He said: “A quick jab with a needle, and they’ll do… I don’t know what!” Actually he was told by Fidel. Robles: A quick jab with a needle. Do you think that happened with Fidel because he had become very ill? Blum: Well, Fidel… According to Cuban intelligence, there were more than 600 attempts on the life of Fidel Castro by the CIA. There is an entire book on that subject by Cuban Intelligence. And many of the methods were pretty bizarre, including an exploding cigar, but over the course of 50 years the Cubans claim there were more than 600 attempts on his life and it may have taken just one with Chavez. Robles: Have you heard anything from your sources or from where you get some of your information? Have you heard anything detailing any connection between these two US Air Force Attaches that were expelled from the country and the death of Hugo Chavez? Blum: No. I would assume that there is a connection but I don’t know if the Venezuelan Government has actually said so. Getting back to Chavez’s case,we have to keep in mind that four other South American leaders, prominent people on the left, all came down with cancer within the past year or two. Robles: I think it was seven, wasn’t it, altogether? Blum: The four that I named in my report… You can add the ones that you know just for my information… were Cristina Fernandez… Robles: … De Kirchner, right… Blum: of Argentina, Dilma Rousseff of Brazil, Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, the former Brazilian head of state Lula da Silva. Who would you add into that list? Robles: Well, and then of course Hugo Chavez himself… Blum: Castro is one of them… Robles: I would add Castro to the list and Kirchner’s husband who died of a mysterious heart attack as well. Blum: Right! Robles: We might add that as a mysterious illness, not exactly a cancer but… Blum: Right! If the CIA was involved it doesn’t have to be cancer necessarily of course. Robles: Oh, sure, it could be anything! Have you heard anything about cancer strains or any kind of killing weapons like this, any kind of biological weapons that would give maybe cancer-like symptoms, not exactly a certain type of cancer? Blum: I very well may have read of such over the years, I have read so much about the CIA, but at the moment I can’t think of anything to supply you with that information. Although we do know, it is well known, that for decades the CIA was looking for a method of killing somebody which would not leave a trace. The CIA itself has used those words. For the entire period of the Cold War that was a major stated project of the CIA. But where that stands today, I have no idea. Robles: Yes, of course that is all very secret and no one is going to talk about it, but perhaps there are some echoes or some whispers? Maybe somebody has come out and said something? What other reasons would you give to back up the argument that he was assassinated? Blum: I will mention there is no one in the entire universe who was more hated, no leader, more hated than Chavez was by the US Government. In the eyes of the US power that be, Chavez was worse than Fidel Castro and Salvador Allende. Robles: Why was he so hated? Blum: Because he was the most outspoken leader in the world when it came to criticizing the US foreign policy. He never pulled his punches for a moment, he made a claim that it was all crimes against humanity and the US leaders were war criminals, and he said so explicitly. It is unusual for a head of state to be talking that way. And at the UN he attacked Bush in front of the whole world. Robles: Oh yes, I remember he said that the Devil had been there the day before or something, and it still smelled like sulfur. Blum: Yes, Bush had spoken to the UN before Chavez from the same platform. And Chavez said there was a smell of sulfur in the air because of that. Robles: That’s usually the domain of the United States, I mean… Isn’t it? I mean Bush was calling everybody the axis of evil, and all this stuff, branding everyone evil. Wasn’t that kind of a shock to see the same thing done to an American leader? Blum: Yeah, it is a shock for anyone under any circumstances to be so outspoken in the criticism of the US foreign policy. It is a point in Chavez’s favor that he could have the honesty and the courage to say such things, which very much needed to be said. Robles: So, you supported the way he stood up? Blum: Well, in general yes. I think there certainly were times when he may have overdone it, even for me. I mean, he felt obliged to comment on everything under the sun, and I thought several times that he could have held off on saying certain things, they were not serving any good purpose. But that’s a minor criticism of his overall marvelous record. Robles: You say he had a marvelous record. What do you think were his major achievements in your opinion? Blum: What he’s brought to the poor people of Venezuela in the way of education and healthcare, and housing, and what have you. And what he brought to the rest of the South America, he formed various anti-US empire blocs which stood in the way of expansion of the US influence. He and others formed a new… A counter to the OAS, the Organization of American States, which for decades has been dominated and corrupted by the US and Canada. And they formed a new organization in South America excluding the US and Canada. So it was that simple. Robles: Do you think his achievements will continue or do you think the US will be successful in rolling back everything he did? Which of course I assume they would want to. Blum: Yes, they would want to. But if Maduro who was chosen and backed by Chavez, wins, and he is expected to win in the election next month, then most of it will continue, I assume.
13 March, 18:22 US says Syria will use chemical weapons again and again
© Collage: Voice of Russia The US has made the accusation that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is planning to use chemical weapons on his own people, something that experts, Syria watchers and the Government of Syria itself claim is a ludicrous accusation being promoted by the West to justify the forceful removal of the country’s elected leader. The chemical weapons lie has been used before, most notably in Iraq, but the West continues to use the same old playbook. Will the world listen again? Probably not. The United States of America has once again accused the Syrian Government of Bashar al Assad of being prepared to launch chemical weapons attacks on the Syrian people, which of course if true would then give the US and its allies the reason it needs to carry out yet another “humanitarian invasion” of yet another sovereign country, to remove yet another elected leader who the US can not manipulate and just simply, “Does not like.” Claims such as these have been attempted in the recent past with regards to Syria but the world’s public has not bought them or rallied behind the US and its allies in an invasion scenario to forcibly remove the elected Syrian leader as had been hoped by the US Government. The chemical weapons claim to justify an invasion by the US was first shown to have been falsely made in the run up to the Iraq war, when the American and the World populace were lied to and deceived by US officials including the Minister of Defense Colin Powell and the then Director of Central Intelligence Tenet, on that issue and many other including Uranium yellowcake and the famous 4 minute Weapons of Mass Destruction, that posed an imminent threat to the world and the United States. At that point in history the world was still naïve enough and believed the United States enough to believe whatever they were told. Things have changed and the world’s population has grown wiser. After it was seen that the entire war against Iraq, an illegal act of aggressive war and an unprovoked invasion on a sovereign nation staged to remove the leader Saddam Hussein from power, was based on lies, with every claim made by the US Government proven one after the other to have been completely fabricated, the world began to question the motives and actions of the US. This questioning by intelligent independent and free thinking people the world over has continued as we have seen crime after crime committed by the United States of America in their endless global War on Terror. A war which was properly named but has proven that it is not a battle against the methodology of terrorism and those who employ such methods, but a war which has time and again attempted to use terror itself to pacify the US and the Earth’s population into allowing the US to continue what in reality is a global war of domination with the end goal of obtaining complete and total control of the world, and more importantly the planet’s resources. We have continued to see with: Afghanistan, Guantanamo, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Libya, the Middle East, the Arctic, the drone assassination program, secret indefinite arrests, the war against whistle blowers, the clamping down on press freedoms, the global expansion of NATO, the attempts to control the world’s resources, financial manipulations, US meddling in countries all over the world, the stifling of dissent, the escalation of the police state, the deaths of foreign leaders, the attempts at starting color revolutions (in Russia in order to remove President Putin from power), the surrounding of Russia and China with American missiles, the military takeover of Africa and expansion into Asia and more, a country that is bent on world domination at any cost and has already successfully achieved much that goal. We have seen and the US has itself proven that they will say and do absolutely anything imaginable to bring about the fulfillment of their goals. The US goal in Syria has been repeated time and time again to be the forceful removal from power of the country’s elected leader Bashar al-Assad. The US has done everything to bring that goal about, from funding, arming and importing Al-Qaeda terrorists to arming and training the small number of Syrian extremist armed insurgents. Due to the wide support within Syria of the country’s beleaguered president the West’s efforts have been for the most part unsuccessful, with even the direct violation by Israel of launching a missile attack deep into Syria not provoking the reaction that the West was seeking. Bashar al- Assad was too smart to react then, as he should have, and he is too smart and reasonable to do anything even remotely close to using chemical weapons on his own people. Even if Assad had the desire or the intention to commit such a heinous act he knows that it would be suicide and it would give the West and the US the perfect pretext they are seeking to launch an invasion of Syria to remove and kill Assad and to allow them to control the country’s resources. No matter the propaganda by the West the record has shown that the majority of the Syrian people support Assad, that Assad would never even think of using chemical weapons and that what is failing in Syria is the US aggressive attempt at regime change. One has to look at the motivations of the messenger when ascertaining the truth of the message, and in this case the message by the West of supposed chemical weapons use by Assad has to be taken for the lie that it is. The views and opinion expressed here are my own, I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
13 March, 12:35 Cancer is a very convenient assassination tool – Dr. Kevin Barret
© Flickr.com/DerrickT/cc-by One of the prime suspects in the JFK Assassination, who dies mysteriously before he could testify in court, was working on cancer delivery mechanisms for the CIA. Such programs continue and assassination by cancer and other illnesses is convenient because of its deniability. In an interview with the VOR outspoken Professor Dr. Kevin Barret, details the above as well as the Mossad connection to 9/11.
Hello! This is John Robles, I'm speaking with Dr. Kevin Barret - a Doctor in Arabic and Islamic studies and the co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth. He is also the owner of truthjihad.com. Barret: This is quite a fascinating story given that David Ferrie, not only, was trying to give people cancer for the CIA at that time, working on delivery systems, that he was also a prime suspect in the JFK assassination. He was actually being prosecuted by New Orleans’s District attorney Jim Garrison. And he himself died suddenly and mysteriously shortly before he was scheduled to testify in court against his fellow JFK assassination conspirators. And his killing essentially killed Jim Garrison’s case and allowed JFK’s killers to walk free. Robles: Do you know any programs in existence right now that are, actually working on cancer delivery? Most of the stuff I found was a couple of decades old. Do you know anything that is going on right now? Barret: No, I don’t. And if I did, they’d probably have to kill me. Robles: Yes, right! Barret: Seriously, this sort of thing is, of course, normally kept secret, it is very rare when somebody talks about it. We know that there’ve been all sorts of assassination attempts, and you know, there were 600-some attempts on Castro’s life by the CIA, and they tried every methodology you could ever imagine. So, obviously they are working on this as well. And it is very convenient for them because this is deniable. You know, they can say: “Oh, our top 7 enemies in Latin America have all just either gotten canсer or dropped dead, it is just a coincidence! You must be a crazy conspiracy theorist to even think twice about it.” Robles: You’ve mentioned the connection between the author of the book and the NSA. Is the NSA also involved in stuff like this? Barret: Well, I think that at the top level, you have a lot of overlapping of people and agencies, and you also have some overlapping of the government agencies with private forces. And ultimately, I think the private forces are actually, probably more powerful than the government forces. John Perkins was basically working for the World Bank. There were some kind of NSA connections, but his official job title I believe was with World Bank. And he said that these “Asteroids”, these professional killers who like to cause plane crushes and other kinds of very exotic and elaborate ways of killing their victims, are essentially private contractors. And they sometimes work for the CIA, or other government agencies, they sometimes work for the World Bank or the leaders of these big banks, and they sometimes work for private individuals. And the same thing is true within the CIA. Some people are actually on the government payroll, and they are not all that well-paid, and then there are people that they recruit, like the CIA station chief recruits a bunch of so-called informants, and some of this people are thugs and killers and drug dealers and so on. So, when those informants do something, it is deniable because they are not actually collecting a regular government pay check. So, this kind of work is done in a very, kind of strange cross sections of ways of sending government and private people to do it. Robles: I see. I found it interesting that the Vice President, Nicolas Maduro, he expelled, on the eve of Hugo Chavez’s death, two US Air Force military attachés. They were accused of trying to recruit military personnel for destabilization exercises or programs. Obviously, that’s not something the US Air Force does I think. Or is it? And is this something new for, if it’s CIA, for them to be using US Air Force cover? Barret: Sure, the CIA always uses military cover, it happens all the time. There is a fellow named Brad, whose last name I’m forgetting. He is one of our best sources on what was going in organizing the JFK assassination at the CIA station in Miami. And he was actually there at that CIA station in Miami under, I believe it was US Marine Corp cover, either that or Army. It is one of the many-many examples of how the CIA runs people in all kinds of government covers, the military would be the number one form of doing this. Like these Air Force guys in Venezuela. But… When Jesse Ventura, for example, took over as governor of the State of Minnesota, the first thing he did, was… He was marched downstairs into a big room in the basement that he didn’t know existed in the state capital, and he was sat down with the whole bunch of CIA agents who were operating under the cover of state employees of the State of Minnesota. And these CIA agents proceeded to grill Jesse Ventura to find out precisely how he had managed to get himself elected governor without playing the usual game and being a third party candidate. The CIA has… It is totally illegal, they are not supposed to even operate within the borders of the US, but CIA has essentially run the US along with the other criminal organizations and big money people, at least since they killed President Kennedy in 1963. And even though their charter says they cannot operate in the US, they could care less about the charter. They are everywhere, they can do anything they want. And so, it is not at all surprising that these kinds of people with their bloated egos, are running around the world killing perceived enemies. Robles: So, you would say it is a given that Hugo Chavez was assassinated? Barret: Absolutely! As I said, they tried that coup in 2002. They tried to organize a more conventional assassination in 2004 and they missed, but these people always should keep on trying. And so, when all of these; the top enemies list of the US empire, suddenly they all get cancer, all at once. I just can’t see how anybody can be seriously claiming that it just happened. Robles: What do you think about Yasser Arafat, Milosevic, I mean would you like to talk about them for a minute? Barret: Sure. Well, Milosevic, I don’t know a whole lot about that, but it is rumored that he was killed. Arafat obviously was killed by his enemies, the Israelis. I actually suspect that Edward Said, who was the biggest intellectual enemy of the Israelis here in the US, was also killed. The Israelis are even more ruthless than the Americans, pound for pound, you know, population for population, they are an even more murderous country than the US is. And Arafat was a thorn in the side of the right-wing forces in Israel, that were, I believe, the number one force behind the 9-11 operation, which was a coup d’état here in the US by the hardliners! Notably Zionist Neoconservative hardliners, and they essentially were trying to redraw the map of the Middle East, allow Israel not just to survive, but to thrive. And everything they’ve done since 9-11 has been towards that end. And one of the things they needed to do was get rid of Arafat because Arafat had a certain amount of international prestige, he was able to command the loyalty of his people and hold the Palestinian people together. He was basically somebody that was in the way of destroying and fragmenting the Palestinian opposition to Zionism. They tried to kill him many times before. And so, when he drops dead of such a mysterious illness that the best French doctors can’t figure out, I don’t think you really have to be a paranoid to understand what probably happened. Robles: We talked about 9-11 in the past, we talked about the planned demolitions, that were the collapses of all the buildings. Can you give us a little bit of information about this Mossad and Israeli connection? Barret: Sure! You know, speaking of various heart attacks and cancers, we start with pointing out that one of the first couple of major researchers into the Israeli connection to 9-11, who is a guy at antiwar.com named Justin Raimondo, who was more responsible than anyone else for getting the story out to a broad audience, about how the Israelis had been running a massive spy operation against the US during the run up to 9-11 and this appeared to be tied into 9-11. Raimondo, right after he broke the story, suddenly he had a heart attack while working out in the gym. He is a young guy, in perfect condition… Robles: Yes, I remember that! Barret: And after that happened, he didn’t say another word about 9-11 and he still really hasn’t. So, the tie ins between the Israelis and 9-11 are certainly very interesting. Robles: So, you think that was an artificially induced assassination attempt, I mean the heart attack? Barret: Sure! You know, I don’t think it is a coincidence that the guy who is most responsible for exposing this Israeli connection to 9-11 suddenly gets a heart attack and then shuts up. And the Israeli connection to 9-11 is evident in many areas, one is the big smoking gun of 9-11, which is the controlled demolition of building 7. The landlord of the World Trade Center, who purchased the entire World Trade Center two months before 9-11 and doubled the insurance, is a fellow named Larry Silverstein. He is a big arch-Zionist billionaire and a close friend of Benjamin Netanyahu, who speaks to Netanyahu once a week on the phone. Silverstein actually, accidently, screwed up and confessed on the national TV to having demolished his own building, building 7. And he still managed to walk away with nearly $1 billion in insurance money for that building alone and another $4.5 billion for the rest of his property, even though he had only put down only $15 million of his own two months before 9-11. And of course the World Trade Center and the towers were condemned for asbestos. There was a court order that that asbestos had to be removed, from a court case earlier in 2001. It would have cost possibly in the double-digit billions, to scrape that asbestos off all of the steel frame members of the Twin Towers. So, when Larry Silverstein, the noted Zionist crime figure, purchased this complex and doubled the insurance two months before 9-11, he would have just gone broke in just a few months if those buildings had continued to stand. They had high vacancy rates, they were condemned for asbestos, the city had been desperately trying to figure out a way to take them down for more than a decade. And so, when a mobster buys them, doubles the insurance, confesses to having blown up one of them and walks away with a big pile of insurance money from a mobbed up court, it is pretty clear what happened. And the fact that he is a close friend of Netanyahu and an arch-Zionist is no coincidence. Other evidence surrounding the Israeli connection to 9-11 includes the so called “Dancing Israelis”, the team of Mossad Agents who were arrested after wildly celebrating the attacks on the Twin Towers and the destruction of the towers. They were dancing around, flicking cigarette lighters, taking pictures of each other, flicking lighters in front of the burning towers and then howling and cheering when they were blown up. These guys spent a couple of months in prison in the US. They failed lie detector tests and then they were sent back to Israel by Michael Chertoff; dual US-Israeli citizen. But the most important tie in between Israel and 9-11 possibly, among all of them, and there are so many, is the attempts to blow up the bridges and tunnels on 9-11. Most Americans have never even heard beyond the first news reports that Israelis were arrested on the George Washington Bridge with the truck full of explosives that then blew up. These guys were then sent back to Israel by Bernard Kerik, the then Police Commissioner who is now in prison for corruption, presumably under orders from the Bush Administration. And there were other trucks full of explosive which were intended to blow up other bridge tunnels. This story has been systematically suppressed. I’m told by inside sources, that there’ve been a number of murders designed to cover this up, witnesses have been killed, all kinds of efforts have been gone to, to keep this secret. So, these are just some example of the many-many ties-ins between Israel and 9-11 coup d'état. Robles: This was John Robles. I was speaking with Dr. Kevin Barret. He is a Doctor in Arabic and Islamic studies and the co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth, the site owner of truthjihad.com and the author of question The War on Terror. This was part 2 of a 3-part-interview. Please visit our site in the near future for part 3.
12 March, 10:34 Cancer epidemic among Latin American leaders not coincidental – Dr. Barret
Photo: EPA With the untimely death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez many respected experts and individuals are finally listening to what Hugo Chavez said when he publically contemplated the possibility that the fact that all anti-US imperialist Latin American leaders, including himself, had come down with cancer or heart conditions, was not coincidental. Dr. Kevin Barret adds his voice to those questioning the suspicious nature of the death and the “coincidental” epidemic of cancer among Latin American leaders. I am speaking with Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Doctor in Arabic and Islamic Studies and the Co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth. He is also the owner of TruthJihad.com.
Robles: Now, you wrote an article shortly after the death of Hugo Chavez and what he called “an epidemic of cancer” among anti-US Latin American leaders. Can you tell us why you are certain his death and those incidences of cancer were not coincidental? Barret: It really can’t be a coincidence that all of the leading opponents of the US Empire in Latin America suddenly caught cancer at the same time. Besides Hugo Chavez we have Argentina’s president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who got cancer symptoms although it may not have been cancer, but these weapons may not cause ordinary cancers anyway. Her husband Nestor had died of a serious heart attack at age 60 in 2010. Then we had Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, who caught cancer, Paraguay’s Fernando Lugo, Lula of Brazil and of course retired Cuban leader Fidel Castro, came down with cancer in 2006. This is really the top 6 or 7 people counting, Nestor Kirchner, that the US empire would want to take out. All of them except him had cancer, and he died of a heart attack, somehow I don’t think that is a coincidence. And if you look at the US history of meddling in Latin America and all over the world, assassinating leaders, overthrowing governments installing fascist regimes, this is pretty much all in a day’s work. Additionally we know that the US did try to assassinate Hugo Chavez before. Everybody knows about the coup d’etat attempt in 2002. What most people don’t know about is that Venezuelan prosecutor Danilo Anderson when was looking into and investigating that coup d’etat was killed in a car bomb in Caracas on November 18th, 2004, and later the prosecutors in Venezuela got a confession out of one of his killers, a man named Giovani Jose Vasquez De Armas. Who is a member of Colombia’s right-wing paramilitary group the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, that confessed, to the Venezuelan authorities that not only he had been involved in killing Danilo Anderson, and plotting to kill Chavez, but he did that with the help of the CIA and FBI. So they were trying to kill Hugo Chavez in 2004. Given the track record of the US Empire and this mysterious outbreak of 6 cancers among their top six enemies, I don’t see how anybody could write this off as a coincidence. Robles: Since when has FBI gone international in assassinations? Barret: You know, you’d be surprised John, the FBI is a profoundly corrupt agency at the top. There are plenty of honest low-level FBI agents but the FBI at the top is essentially is an appendage of organized crime. It is been like that for a long time. J. Edgar Hoover was the head of the FBI during its formative many, many decades and was viewed by some as the most powerful man in America. Reason was that he held blackmail and film and photos on all of the most important political leaders in the US, and in other countries in some cases, and of course he was controlled by the actual head of organized crime internationally Meyer Lansky who had similar blackmail photos on Hoover. So the FBI is profoundly corrupt, and they have worked with other US agencies and non-governmental private assassins in other operations. So, I don’t have any problem accepting the confession of De Armas that an FBI and a CIA agent were involved at the committee meeting that plotted the killings of Danilo Anderson and Hugo Chavez. Robles: You’ve mentioned in your article a group of assassins called the Asteroids. Can you tell us a little bit about them and what you know about them? Barret: Sure, the best single source on the Asteroids is the book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” by John Perkins. He knew the real hit men. In fact I think he knows 2 or 3 of them personally, and Perkins job when he was an the economic hit man was to travel to countries around the world on behalf of the big banks that own the US government, these are the IMF, the World Bank. He was working for them and I think he had a connection with the National Security Agency as well. So his job as an economic hit man was to go to these countries, approach the president, have a meeting with the president, sit down and say, “Okay, I’ve got fist-full of hundred dollar bills in this hand, I’ve got a bullet in the other. Which one do you want?” If the president cooperated, the president would take huge unpayable loans from the IMF and the World Bank, and then that country would drown in debt and go bankrupt and the Banksters would move in and seize control of its resources and its government. If the president of that country did not cooperate, then the Asteroids would be sent in. The Asteroids are the world’s highest level, highest-paid professional killers. They specialize in causing plane crashes. They are suspect in many, many plane crashes in the United States as well as abroad. They undoubtedly killed Senator Paul Wellstone in 2002 to prevent him from looking into 9/11 and stopping the Iraq war, and they’ve killed a number of Latin American leaders as well. So, the Asteroids are the next line of attack on these third world countries, and if they can’t succeed in assassinating the leader if his security is too good, this was the case with Fidel Castro, it was a case with Saddam Hussein, and it was the case in Panama with General Noriega. Robles: What about Muammar Gaddafi? Barret: Yeah, Gaddafi is another one, where they had to actually invade the country to get rid of the leader. So, that is the last final option, is to invade with the US forces. The only reason they didn’t do it to Cuba is that after the missile crisis in 1962 the US signed an agreement with Cuba and with Russia, that it would not invade Cuba. So, this kind of hamfisted, criminal attempts to take over the world through overthrowing and killing leaders is just business as usual for the US Empire. Robles: I wrote an article myself about this and I was doing a little bit of research on cancer delivery methods and things like this, and I kept coming up on these CIA programs like MKULTRA, Paperclip and Doctor Cornelius Rhoads etc. Can you tell us about any CIA programs that you know about involved in the delivery of biological agents or for example cancers? Barret: The most interesting one is the program described in the book “Dr. Mary’s Monkey” by Edward Haslam. Haslam is a very good thorough researcher and he documents the amazing story of the cancer laboratory in New Orleans that was operating out of a secret US government program and among the people involved in this program researching ways in delivering cancer to enemies was a guy named David Ferrie. David Ferrie was a defrocked priest, defrocked for his pedophilia, he was also a CIA agent and a pilot who had been involved in trying to overthrow Fidel Castro. David Ferrie had a huge home laboratory, he was testing ways of delivering cancer, he and the CIA who employed him of course, were planning to use it to go after Castro, Castro’s associates and presumably other non-cooperative leaders, people like Hugo Chavez would one day become. End part one visit our site in the near future for the rest of this interview with Dr. Kevin Barret.
11 March, 15:22 Karzai accuses US of collusion to destabilize Afghanistan
Photo: EPA The President of Afghanistan has made several statements of late and has taken a stance against the American occupiers of his country that have many in Washington bristling, with the latest being his statements that the US is in collusion with the Taliban to further destabilize the country in order to justify a continuing US presence and the prolongation of their “Security Assistance Invasion” and occupation of the strategically important country. There have been hundreds, if not thousands, of reports and articles written detailing US involvement and ties with the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden but to finally hear President Hamid Karzai, the acting head of state of Afghanistan, the country where all of the above got their start with the support of the US in their “secret” Afghan war against the Soviet Union, is another matter entirely. In statements made during a speech celebrating the once Soviet holiday of Women’s Day on Sunday and after the unannounced “secret” visit by the new US War Secretary Chuck Hagel, President Karzai leveled harsh accusations at his American benefactors in an obvious attempt to try to maintain support among the Afghan people, save face and show that he is in control despite the fact, and moreover, especially after the US refused to hand-over control of the Bagram prison, despite Karzai’s claims before Parliament and the nation this was soon to occur. The hand-over was promoted and seen as a sign that Afghanistan was reasserting its sovereignty. Karzai’s harshest statement accused the United States of America of being in collusion with the Taliban and in fact working together with them to continue destabilizing the country, a fact that is not surprising, given the proven US track record of destabilizing countries to facilitate control over them, the US geopolitical goals in the region, the strategic importance of Afghanistan for the Americans and the US desire to stay in the country indefinitely further underlined by Rick Rozoff in an interview with Press TV. Karzai did not mince words when he said the Taliban and the US were in bed together in Afghanistan after the US bombed Kabul in the lead up to the visit by Hagel to Afghanistan. According to Reuters Karzai said: "Those bombs that went off in Kabul and Khost were not a show of force to America. They were in service of America. It was in the service of the 2014 slogan to warn us if they (Americans) are not here then Taliban will come. In fact those bombs, set off yesterday in the name of the Taliban, were in the service of Americans to keep foreigners longer in Afghanistan." In an interview I conducted with three time Nobel Peace Prize nominee Kathy Kelly who has been on almost a dozen extended stays in Afghanistan for the Voice of Russia she took it one step further and stated that the US had even built Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden’s encampments in the country. One has to wonder as to the sincerity of Hamid Karzai however as he has proven in the past, and continues to prove, that he is almost completely impotent in dealing with the Americans who have invaded his country and continue to occupy it for the13th year running. He has repeatedly made statements condemning the slaughter of civilian women and children by US and ISAF forces, the non-stop night raids that are designed to terrorize the Afghan civilian population and the continuing US control of Afghan prisons where the US conducts torture and arbitrary incarceration. Yet until now he has taken almost no real concrete measures to end any of these abuses by the US invaders. To the chagrin of what many call his US paymasters and “allies” Karzai has surprisingly taken steps recently, if not to protect Afghan Sovereignty, then at least to show he is capable of standing up to the American invaders and prohibited US commandos from conducting “Special Operations” in the Wardak Province. He also came out in, as the New York Times reports, “bristling” terms against the US insistence on maintaining control over how Afghans, who are for the most part simply defending their homeland, are detained, interrogated and released. Karzai’s new-found independence caused the US to cancel plans to hand over Bagram Prison and Hagel to cancel a joint photo opportunity and press conference that had been planned to show Americans just how wonderful the US failure is going in Afghanistan. The American occupiers are of course bristling themselves at Karzai’s independent and anti-US rhetoric, withBloomberg quoting a retired U.S. Army colonel David Maxwell as saying; “On the surface and to this outside observer, it appears that Karzai has gone way off the reservation, perhaps more so than he has in the past,” and “I cannot see how we could work with such an apparently delusional leader much longer, but unfortunately I do not know if we have any other good options.” Such arrogant rhetoric as well as statements by Hagel himself and Western military commanders, point to counted days for Karzai as president, yet have to be taken in the context of the political theater that Karzai himself has been a leading actor in during almost 13 years of US occupation after their aggressive invasion of the country on false grounds. Using the American idiom derived from the term used for Indians who left their prison-like reservations and were murdered and calling Karzai delusional for saying anything against the imperialist US occupiers further underlines the unbelievable arrogance, all encompassing ignorance and unwavering self-righteous hypocrisy that US has when dealing with foreign countries and anyone they want to control. President Karzai is in a difficult position, on the one hand the Americans support him and guarantee his safety as long as he is pliable and on the other he has to somehow respond the Afghan people’s anger at the US occupiers who have brought nothing but war and misery to the Afghan people, unlike the Soviets who came in and built almost all of the infrastructure in the country and brought peace, much of which has been destroyed by the Americans. A fact recently underlined in an interview with Afghan native and expert Dr. Zalmay Gulzad aired by the Voice of Russia. Knowing the US Geopolitical goals in the region and Afghanistan’s strategic location bordering China, Iran and former Soviet Republics, and against the backdrop of those goals which require the Americans to maintain a huge military presence in Afghanistan, makes everything the US does or says with regard to the nobility of their invasion; hypocritical, laughable and an insult to every intelligent independent thinking individual on the planet On Sunday in attacks killing at least 19 people underlining the blood and carnage the Americans have brought to Afghanistan, as Hagel was leaving a U.S. military compound in Kabul, a Taliban suicide bomber blew himself up outside the Ministry of Defense and another suicide bomber detonated his explosives in Khost province, prompting Karzai to say: “There are ongoing daily talks between Taliban, American and foreigners in Europe and in the Gulf states.” He also said the attacks show that; “The Taliban want a longer presence of foreigners, not their departure from Afghanistan." If we look at the US support of Al-Qaeda in Syria and their close relationship with the Taliban in the past and we know the US and Israel want to invade Iran and destabilize Iran and China and through former Soviet Republics, Russia, where else will their mercenaries and terrorists need to be based? In Afghanistan of course, and perhaps at the US built fortifications at Tora-Bora. Further complicating Karzai’s and the Afghan people’s predicament are Afghan resources. Sure they are many and will be exploited by the US but the main reason for the US presence will be to guarantee the security and the exploitation of pipelines delivering oil and gas to the US’ main financial backer, China. For US planners once Iran and Syria are “taken care of” this will open up the possibility of oil to flow all the way from/to China to the Mediterranean and on to the ravenous US market.
8 March, 16:37 Class struggle in the microcosm of Southend-On-Sea
Photo: AFP Fascism begins on a local scale so the apology by the Southend-On-Sea Council to peaceful protestors who had their clothing removed is like a ray of sunlight through the dark cloud that has been overshadowing the world for the past decades. Unfortunately the system in the UK is broken and people are suffering and as the UK follows the US blindly down the road to totalitarianism we may be seeing more of the same. But for now, they have apologized. After we ran an interview with Mike Smith regarding the strange cancellation of the Southend-On-Sea air show, one of the largest free air shows in Europe and one that had brought about 7 million people and 10 million pounds of revenue to the restive English resort every year, and the fact that some protestors showed up at a council meeting to protest, wearing t-shirts with benign slogans and were forced to remove them, the council has apologized and called for an investigation. Whether the publication of Mr. Smith’s interview and his words in anyway had any influence on the council is unknown to me but to see them do the right thing is something that must be brought to attention and is in stark contrast to many of the things we report on a daily basis. In particular the treatment by US authorities of protestors, including the all but forgotten Occupy Movement, which regularly sees police stripping, beating, gassing and arresting peaceful protestors on a regular basis. What was alarming for Southend residents and for myself was that such fascist behavior by the authorities was taking place in such a restive and peaceful city as Southend and for such a benign act of silent protest. The protestors showed up at a meeting where they were supposed to be quiet with t-shirts merely stating “Scrap the Council” and did not engage in yelling or screaming or in another way bringing attention to themselves. As far as protest slogans go “Scrap the Council”, in my opinion, is a very mild set of words and even former Conservative cabinet member Mark Flewitt agrees that, Scrap the Cabinet, is a legitimate point of view. In light of that and the non-belligerent behavior of protestors Mark Sharp, Patsy Link and Sheena Walker, yes two women were also forced to stand in the public gallery half-naked, the actions of the authorities were way out of line. The Echo, a local South End publication, reports that several Councilors themselves have come out in support of the protestors quoting Labor Councilor Julian Ware-Lane as having said: “Not only is it an indignity to disrobe people, it is a suppression of free speech.” Yes, an indignity indeed. The Echo quotes the Chief Executive of the Council, Robert Tinlin as having said: “Please accept my apologies for the situation you found yourselves in on Thursday evening….” and “…“I have asked a senior member of my management group to deal with your complaint. I will also be personally reviewing the guidance for our facilities and security staff to avoid any similar circumstances in the future.” The reason I find events such as these alarming is because fascism begins on a small scale and such behavior by elected officials and those in power against the very people they are supposed to serve echoes and mirrors what has happened in the United States. That the UK, Australia, Canada and many of their allies follow the US blindly down almost any road is a given fact, but if the sensible Brits, who pride themselves on their politeness and proper behavior, begin to spit on the rights of their own citizens, then as they say, all is lost for the Western world. Such events are symptomatic and point to the widespread and cancerous decline of Western civilization, for no civilization based on democratic principles, freedom, rule of law and respect for the individual can stand long when the rights of the individual are so wantonly ignored and violated. Brits may see themselves trapped in an economic mess and a “War on Terror” paradigm brought down upon them from the outside without their permission or participation and may live with that but such American style crackdowns on freedom of expression will most likely not go down well with the population. Free thinking and progressive Brits are living with a deep political and sociological crisis as are black Americans who can not criticize the fascist policies of the black man in the White House. The crisis is symbolized in Julian Assange who remains trapped in the Ecuadorian Embassy unable to leave because the government of the UK is not capable of doing the right thing, making an independent decision and standing up to the descendants of British criminals across the water and allowing him to leave unhindered to Ecuador. The man in the street knows that Julian Assange is not a criminal, he is a fighter for truth and he is a hero for all of us, but they see their leaders and government blindly and subserviently toe the US line and sell off their very sovereignty every day he remains trapped in the embassy. But Brits are a stoic lot and will put their heads down and grit their teeth and bear it whether out of respect, or politeness, or perhaps out of meek subservience, is not really important. What is important is that they wake up before it is too late and stand up to the people who are supposed to serve them when their interests are no longer being served. The fact that the little drama in Southend-On-Sea ended with an apology by the Council, this simple and minor event in the grand scheme of things shows that perhaps goodness does have a chance after all and the ugly face of fascism may not rear its head in Europe once again.
8 March, 01:26 Cancer: "epidemic" among anti-US Latin American leaders?
Photo: EPA Before his death during many public speeches Hugo Chavez called cases of cancer among presidents throughout Latin America an “epidemic” and a strange and alarming phenomenon. Not only was cancer spreading with non-coincidental regularity at approximately the same time to leaders in Latin America but it was attacking Latin America’s leading left leaning anti-US Imperialists, including Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff, Paraguay’s Fernando Lugo, the former President of Brazil Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Argentinean President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. We might also add the mysterious illness of Fidel Castro to the list. Was this possibly a coincidence? Is it possible in 2013 to deliver and infect cancer in an individual? The CIA has been experimenting with just such an assassination tool since at least the early 1960s, so the answer to that question is an almost definite yes. On the same night that we were informed about the death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez we were also informed by Venezuelan Vice President Nicolas Maduro that the was expelling two American military attaches from the country. He stated that he was sure that the cancer of the late President Hugo Chavez was caused and delivered by “enemies”. A commission has been set up to investigate and we await its findings. The claim may seem extreme but if we look at the history of the CIA and secret US programs to deliver and cause cancer in Latin American leaders and even attempts by Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate Fidel Castro using cancer causing biological agents, the claim not only seems reasonable but also likely. In an address to the nation on Venezuelan national radio the late Hugo Chavez stated: "I don't know but... it is very odd that we have seen Lugo affected by cancer, Dilma when she was a candidate, me, going into an election year, not long ago Lula and now Cristina... It is very hard to explain, even with the law of probabilities, what has been happening to some leaders in Latin America. It's at the very least strange, very strange." It is obvious to anyone in the world that all of these anti-US imperialist leaders were a problem for one country, the USA and we also know they will do anything to advance their policies, yet when dealing with super secret assassins delivering toxins and untraceable viruses which cause cancer, even though it may have been obvious who the beneficiary would be, Hugo Chavez never openly accused the United States, he knew he had to have proof. If this were a court of law the circumstantial evidence would be enough to convict the US but unfortunately that is not the case. When I started researching for this article and the subject of the spread and delivery of cancer causing pathogens and viruses several old and well known names and CIA projects began popping up including MKULTRA, Project PAPERCLIP, Program F, CIA agent David Ferrie, Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, MKNAOMI, MKCHIKWIT, MKDELTA, MKOFTEN, Dr. Charles F. Geschickter, Ethnic Weapons that attack DNA, the Kennedy Assassination, Dr. Alton Ochsner Sr. and Dr. Mary Stults Sherman and her research into delivering cancer to Fidel Castro in a secret operation involving Lee Harvey Oswald. Although the MK designation refers to mind control and many of the experiments and operations in the MK-SERIES of programs were focused on mind control and behavioral modification and creation experiments as well as the substances to bring those changes about, they also focused on the development, transformation, mutation, use and delivery of almost every kind of disease and illness known to man. According to Dr. David Barret who I spoke to last year regarding the “events” of 9-11, the CIA, according to Fidel Castro’s bodyguard Fabian Escalante, has attempted to kill the Cuban president an astonishing 638 times. Dr. Barret says, “The CIA's methods included exploding cigars, biological warfare agents painted on Castro's diving suit, deadly pills, toxic bacteria in coffee, an exploding speaker's podium, snipers, poison-wielding female friends, and explosive underwater sea shells.” In an article on the matter of President Chavez’s assassination Dr. Barret even names the possible assassins as being a group called the Asteroids “the world's most expensive and accomplished professional killers” who specialize in plane crashes and assassinating heads of state. Dr. Barret does not go so far as blaming the US Government but he does say it was probably the “Banksters” who truly run the United States who were responsible for the assassination of Chavez. Vice President Nicolas Maduro’s expulsion of US Air Force Attache Colonel David Delmonaco, and Assistant Air Force Attache Major Devlin Kostal for attempting to coerce active Venezuelan military officials to join in destabilization projects and for attempting to instigate a military plot against the Venezuelan government, may be just the tip of the iceberand no doubt the Venezuelan Security Services have more information than they are letting out. Maduro has recently also lashed out at what he called "the corrupt Venezuelan right" for engaging in a psychological war seeking "scenarios of violence as a pretext for foreign intervention," Meaning of course US intervention. Vice President Maduro has also referred to the late leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Yasser Arafat, as someone who was “inoculated with an illness” and another victim of US secret assassination. In 2011 Chavez said: ““Wouldn't it be weird if they had developed a technology for inducing cancer and nobody knows up until now?” Some bacteria that cause cancer are the following: Helicobacter Pylori can cause stomach cancer, Streptococcus Bovis is associated with colorectal cancer, Chlamydia Pneumoniea is connected to lung cancer, Salmonella Typhi can lead to gallbladder cancer and Mychoplasma. There are also viruses that cause cancer and they include: the most common Hepatitis viruses, including hepatitis B and C, Human Papilloma viruses, the Human T-Lymphotropic virus, Kaposi’s Herpesvirus, Merkel Cell Polyomavirus and the Epstein–Barr virus. The most common and widespread and perhaps difficult to fight as it spreads throughout the tissues of the stomach area is the Helicobacter Pylori virus. Media reports say Chavez was in a great deal of pain and the repeated treatments he received may point to this virus and we might postulate it was the one which may have infected the late president. However as I am not an expert I am only speculating. Common means of delivering this virus may be saliva, from a kiss for example, or through drinking water or other liquid such as a soup. There are vaccines and cures for this kind of virus meaning that if an assassin was infected and kissed the target, they could be quickly cured. As this virus is so common and widespread, especially in the developing world, it would be almost impossible to trace. If President Hugo Chavez was in fact assassinated we do not know at this point. Was it possible? Yes. Was it likely? Unfortunately the answer to that question may also be yes.
7 March, 14:40 'People are really having a tough time here in the UK' – Michael Smith, interview
Photo: AFP One of the largest air shows in Europe was cancelled recently reflecting the growing economic crisis in the UK. More and more Brits are losing their jobs and salaries are being kept down as the price of living skyrockets, although most Brits try not to complain and toe-the-line, things are beginning to reach crisis levels. Voice of Russia contributor Mike Smith spoke with John Robles and gives us a local view of some of the problems faced by Brits as the government tries in desperation to stay solvent.
Robles: Can you tell our listeners a little bit about what’s going on there in Southend? I understand a very important event was cancelled and this has had a large resonance. Smith: Yes, it’s been very upsetting for a lot of people who live in my town. 27 years now we’ve been staging an air show along the seafront, which is a very spectacular event. It draws up to 700,000 people every year, and brings in something like £10 million of revenue for the local businesses. But for some reason this year it’s been cancelled by our local council and it doesn’t make a lot of sense to people who live here. But what the council is saying is that because of David Cameron’s cuts, the coalition Government in the UK is obviously cutting as much as they can, all over the country, they are removing benefits and welfare, and all sorts of things to local people. And in our town we’ve been told we’ve got a cut of our budget by something like £10.4 million this year, in order to stay solvent. And what this means in effect is; the council have looked at everything they can cut and they have decided that £130,000 which they need to pay to support this air show can’t be provided this year. So, for the sake of £130,000 they are going to cut the air show which brings in all these tourists and also lose of the revenue of £10 million which doesn’t make any sense to me. I mean I know myself if you go on a seafront when this air show is on, it is completely packed with people who have come down from London and all over the country. People come from Wales and all over the country to come to this air show because it’s such a big event, it is one of the biggest free air shows in Europe. And for some reason cutting it seems to make sense for the council, but local people don’t quite understand the reason. Robles: I’ve heard some reports that security personnel or police, they were actually removing T-shirts from protesters in front of the City Council building who were protesting the cancellation of the air show. Is that true, have you heard anything about that? Smith: Well, that’s right. That’s one that I’ve heard of as well because I went to a meeting at the Civic Centre in Southend, they had a meeting on Thursday, that’s only two nights ago, at which this budget was going to be approved by the council, which included, among other things cancelling air show, but also cutting a lot of other things that the council does for the local population. And at this meeting people who were attending, some of them were wearing white T-shirts with black lettering saying “Scrap the Cabinet”, the Cabinet is the central body of the council. Robles: Just that? Smith: This is just a slogan, you know, obviously people are upset, they think “Scrap the Cabinet”. It is a sort of wild slogan to try to create a demonstration I guess against what the council is doing. Robles: It doesn’t sound that wild to me, I mean if they said “String up the Cabinet”… Smith: No, it’s not a violent thing. There is no sort of threat there really. But the security staff when saw these people with these slogans on their chests and on their T-shirts obviously got very upset about it and said you got to remove your T-shirts before you can come into the public galleries to view the meeting. And some of this people had nothing underneath, except for, some of the women were only wearing a bra. And I would say it was really unpleasant when you are supposed to be told to remove the only thing you’ve got covering your chest. Robles: Unbelievable! Really, they even made women do this? Smith: Yes. That’s right! Robles: Couldn’t they turn them inside out or something, I mean they just made them remove them? Smith: You would have thought there was a lot more possibilities there, then just saying: “Remove your T-shirt!”, but that’s the way these people operate, they don’t think rationally, they don’t really regard this as being a democratic process. They see these people as a threat, obviously, that coming into the council wearing a T-shirt is going to cause some sort of disruption. It obviously doesn’t, because you can’t say anything on the council meeting. The way it works in the UK is - if you attend a meeting like this in the public gallery, you have to remain silent, you can’t speak. So, it’s just for viewing what the council is up to, you can’t actually make a contribution. So, wearing a T-shirt is a silent protest really. Reminder Robles: Is this something new for the UK? Smith: Well, I have not heard about this before, especially in a place like Southend. It is a very quiet sort of seaside resort, you don’t get this thing going on usually. And I’m very surprised that the council would feel it was necessary to do this type of thing, of removing T-shirts, because the council has already make their minds up. What this meeting was about, really, it was a rubber stamp to say that the budget has already been approved and there was no room for discussion or anything. So, this process, really, it was wasted because we couldn’t change the minds of the council because it had already been decided. Robles: Are these elected officials there? Smith: Well, they are elected. And that’s what some people are saying, that next year may be some of these councilors who have gone along with this idea of cutting the air show and other things in Southend, that some of these people are going to be, perhaps removed from the office by the elections next year. Robles: Southend is also a port of call for famous Russian ship, isn’t it? Smith: Yes, “the Sedov” came here some years ago, but for some reason it was cancelled last time, it was due to come here, I think due to some sort of political issue between the British and Russian Governments. Robles: Oh, goodness gracious! The Occupy Movement kind of just disappeared there. Have you noticed a tightening of the security state? Smith: Well, in London, because obviously the capital is the place where most of this goes on. In the capital of London we had the process outside St Paul’s Cathedral last year. But usually these things are rather isolated in certain areas. But people are really having a tough time here in the UK. I think a lot of people just keep their heads down and just try to get through the week to afford their cost of living. And we had a problem here that in our local community centre, we use it as a food bank. Lots of people are turning up here every day expecting to get free food because they can’t afford to buy food in the shops. And this is a sort of situation we are getting into here. So, cuts are occurring everywhere and in the meantime bankers are being told that they are going to have their bonuses capped at a year’s salary. It is really quite a difference between those who have and those who have not. The standard of living is dropping all the time because wages are being held down while food prices are rising and rents are rising. And things are getting tough in the UK, I mean you know what’s happening in Greece, Portugal and Spain. And the same sort of thing is going on undercover in the UK, but people don’t talk about it as much as they do in Spain I guess, but it is happening here as well and people are suffering.
7 March, 13:29 Obama’s is a corporate war mongering administration - Ford
© Flickr.com/The White House/United States Government Work The placing of a black man in the ultimate seat of power by the true corporate rulers of America was a pacifying face-lift and now black America is living with the worst, most profound, political crisis in history, a much deeper crisis than during the civil rights era and the time when Booker T. Washington and his advocates of accommodation with white supremacy clashed with W.E.B. Du Bois and the NAACP and the advocates of full equality for black people. This comes in an interview with Glen Ford by the VOR’s John Robles.
Robles: Obama has continued Bush’s policies although everybody thought there would be some return to sanity, if I may express it that way. Ford: Not everybody, certainly we at Black Agenda Report didn’t think that. Obama has built on the Bush administration policies and added new dimensions of his own. Although the doctrine of R2P, responsibility to protect, or humanitarian military intervention, existed prior to president Obama’s assumption of office, he has made that doctrine his own. Humanitarian military intervention is designed to fundamentally undermine international law as it has evolved over 100s of years and especially as it was left to us in the wake of World War II. At the heart of international law is the sovereignty of nations. If there is no sovereignty of nations, there really can be no sovereignty of peoples and individuals either. But humanitarian military intervention throws national sovereignty out of the window. It says that the world community and de facto that means the United States and its allies, can declare any regime to be unworthy of its people and therefore subject to regime change, and frame that as not a violation of the fundamental principles of international law, which it is, but as a good deed, as another step up in the ladder of civilization. It has turned world international order, international law on its head and that is the advance in imperial ideology that Obama has wrought; building on George Bush’s depredations in the world. Robles: Now more people are realizing this, do you think this is just going to continue until… What end? In your opinion, or do you think there is any chance that we can bring order back to the world somehow? Ford: In terms of what people in the United States can do, the landscape looks rather bleak, polls show something like 83% of Americans are in favor of Obama’s drone assassination policy, which violates international law and US law in multiple ways. So, to whatever extent people are depending upon US resistance to the United States government’s policies, they will be, I believe, quite disappointed. This is made even more complicated because historically the most progressive constituency in the United States, by far, has been black America. This is shown by every study and just by the polls over the last several generations as long as black people have been polled. But with the elevation of a black man to the White House, that had the effect of short circuiting African American political sensibilities, instincts and behavior, so that just by installing, and of course Obama was Wall Street’s candidate, they have neutered the most anti-war constituency in the country. White progressives in the United States historically have tended to follow black people’s cues and so when black folks are neutralized, that tends to neutralize white progressives as well, and that is why the political picture is so bleak in the United States. That doesn’t mean that, what works in the United States doesn’t not necessarily determine, where history marches off to, but this is a bleak political situation here. Robles: I had this impression, towards the end of the Bush regime there, that a lot of black Americans and minorities in general were almost ready to revolt, if you would. I mean things were getting pretty bad. And I saw Obama comes in, he had no political base of his own, he was pretty much an unknown, he was pretty much placed in the White House. Do you think that was done to appease and, like you said, neutralize black elements? Ford: It certainly had that effect domestically. I believe however that the folks who rule this country, and we are talking about multinational capital and we’re talking mainly about finance capital, Wall Street, they wanted to do a makeover, a cosmetic face-change, in the wake of the foreign policy debacles of the Bush administration, for international global purposes, to literally put a radically different face on US imperialism, and how better to do that than to put an African American in the White House. I think that audience was a global one. Robles: It was. It was. Ford: It had the added advantage, in terms of domestic politics, of neutralizing that domestic constituency. But, you know, it had similar effects in Africa and, I note, elsewhere in the non-white world: that somehow this black guy could not possibly be as bad as that Texas cowboy white man George Bush, and in fact he is far more effective. We at Black Agenda Report describe Barack Obama as not the lesser of evils, but the more effective evil, because he gets away, with so much more. Robles: And it is hard to criticize him, I mean if you are not black, people are afraid to say anything bad about him. Do you think that he plays on that? Ford: Well, of course, he takes that for granted. In fact, early in 2009 a number of organizations, and I was involved with this, put together a coalition called The Black is Back Coalition. We did so not just because there needed to be a black left coalition of forces, at this point in history, but also secondarily, but importantly, to give political cover to those white progressives who wanted to do a critique of this Obama-corporate-war-mongering-administration, so that they could point to the Black is Back Coalition and say, “Hey, don’t call me racist”, the Black is Back Coalition shares the same general world view. So, yes, it is important on that racial end as well. Robles: How do African Americans feel about… and how do black people feel about, Obama? I mean: what is the general consensus? Ford: We’ve been wrestling with that for more than 4 years now, more like 6 years since Obama became a viable topic for presidential talk. What has occurred is black America at large has made an emotional commitment to the idea of a black president and to the success, whatever that means, of this black president. So that any attack on him, any critique of him is perceived as an attack on black folks. Any attempt to rein him in, in his corporatist and belligerent war mongering policies is perceived by a large segment of black America as an attack on black America. So we see that all of the political instincts that made black America unique and guided us in a progressive direction over all these generations, at the heart of which was our deep skepticism of power, because we knew what power had done to us. These instincts have been short-circuited by the implanting of a black person in the ultimate seat in power. So, we are not having a discussion in black America of what Obama is doing, we have a discussion of “how he is doing” and that is profoundly different, it is a discussion of: who is attacking Obama, how Obama can be supported, what black America needs to do to beat back the racists who are attacking Obama. There is very, very, very negligible amount of discussion of what Obama’s policies, domestically and internationally do to us. How they harm interests that we saw as our own only 4-5 years ago. This has created the worst, most profound, political crisis in black America, I believe, ever. I believe it is a much deeper crisis than, that which occurred at the turn of 20th century, between Booker T. Washington and his advocates of accommodation with white supremacy and W.E.B. Du Bois and the NAACP and the advocates of full equality for black folks at the time. That was one hell of a fight. This is of a different nature. This is a crisis manifested in the breakdown of the black policy. So, it can not even do an analysis of the behavior of power, because the black man is sitting in that seat. This is John Robles. I was speaking with Mr. Glen Ford, he is the Executive Editor at Black Agenda Report.
7 March, 12:27 Hugo Chavez was a humble man who transformed the world - Rozoff
Photo: EPA Hugo Chavez was a humble man from humble origins who did more than anyone else to lift up and unite the countries and the people of Latin America after being subjugated to decades of US imperialism. He was an inspiration and a beacon who will be sorely missed by many. Hours after the passing of the late President of Venezuela Hugo Chavez, Rick Rozoff spoke with John Robles about the legacy and the positive changes the late leader single-handedly brought to the world. Robles: In our discussions of NATO expansion, US imperialistic movements all over the globe, many times we’ve talked about Hugo Chavez and his independence and the way he stood up to the US. Can you give us your opinions of the great achievements of Mr. Hugo Chavez? Rozoff: The late and very much lamented, Hugo Chavez was a remarkable man but in many ways remarkable despite the fact that he was not remarkable. That is: he was born in a very humble family, one that might even be described as impoverished. He was born in a village. He was of part Indigenous, that is: Native American, Indian background, as well as reportedly of African background. He was somebody who resembles people like you or me, our parents, our grandparents: people who haven’t gone to elite schools, people who have not been born in privilege and have been selected from birth, if you will, for positions of honor and power. A simple man who applied himself and developed his talents and his abilities, but most of all his dedication. We have to remember that his election as President of Venezuela in 1999 set the stage for, heralded, a whole series of election victories and transformations throughout Latin America, Central as well as South America, in countries like Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, Brazil, Nicaragua, El Salvador, that he himself was the prime mover in setting up what is known by the acronym of ALBA (The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America) that he was the prime mover in setting up something by the acronym of CELAC (The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States), the Bank of the South, TeleSur (the television network for the South America). It was this one man instrumental in turning the tide of Latin America and in many ways of the southern hemisphere of the world that has been wracked by the neoliberalism of the 1990s. And his actions have been described, I think very accurately John, as having, on his initiative that we have seen the reversal of 200 years of the Monroe Doctrine. A few years ago when Russian and Venezuelan vessels participated in a joint naval exercise in the Caribbean. It was exactly in that context, it was remarked that this had basically reversed the 200 years of the Monroe Doctrine, that is of Washington and the United States claiming exclusive sphere of influence throughout the entire western hemisphere. And that this was the doing of Hugo Chavez, this humble former soldier, who became 14-year-president of Venezuela, one who read distributed the wealth from petroleum and other industries in the country to benefit the agrarian, as well as the rural poor, or offered major economic assistance, including to subsidize energy deals with countries throughout the Caribbean and Latin America, even with parts of the United States, as a matter of fact, New York City. He reconfigured the power relationships not only in the Western Hemisphere, but globally, in a way that could not had been foreseen. You know, the head of state of a country that isn’t a tremendously large one, isn’t a tremendously powerful one, certainly not in military terms, but this is a man who made frequent visits to Russia, to the African continent, to the Middle East, to China, who cultivated relationships with the emerging multi-polar world, particularly those nations represented in BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, Russia, China and South Africa. And he was arguably the most persuasive advocate for a newly emerging system of multi-polarity in the world, of anyone I know. Reminder Robles: Let me ask you about Nicolas Maduro the Vice President. Yesterday he said that Hugo Chavez’s cancer was part of a conspiracy against him and basically he had been poisoned by enemies. He also expelled two US military attachés from the country. Would you care to speculate on those accusations, thta he made? Rozoff: On the first accusation, you know that the suspicious incidents of cancer amongst independent Latin American heads of state; in Argentina, in Bolivia, earlier in Brazil, in Venezuela, even one can argue, with Fidel Castro in Cuba, that there certainly is room for legitimate suspicion and investigation. I might recommend a book that was published in the last couple of years with the intriguing title “Mary’s Monkey”, a book written about the late Mary Sherman and about CIA linked operations in the early 1960s to actually develop the types of cancer for use against political adversaries. So, it’s not that far-fetched an accusation. On the second score, the fact that the two US Embassy personnel have been declared persona-non-grata and expelled from, or invited to leave Venezuela, I think what is of most concern to us right now is the fact that, should a new election be held because of the death of Hugo Chavez, that the United States would certainly kick into high gear the entire color revolution operation that has been employed in the past; in Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Lebanon and so forth. But we may see it done on a much more ambitious scale even than we saw in the countries that I’ve just mentioned, just as Venezuela has been the bellwether, has been the prototype for the transformation that has occurred throughout Latin America in the last 14 years. So, the US sees it, I suppose as the transformation, the revolution, that needs to be reversed first. Robles: Rick, if we could maybe about a minute more and I really appreciate you speaking with me at this late hour. Rozoff: Thank you for the opportunity. You know, I think when talking about somebody like Chavez, who again was as humble and unpretentious person as any of us could hope to be, that in speaking of him nevertheless, you know it is almost a paradox, I am reminded of the lines in the Bible, in the Gospel, that I don’t feel worthy to lace his sandals. I mean I can pay him a tribute, but it’s a tribute of a very simple person who was immensely grateful and stands in eternal admiration of everything that he has done. And all the people that he has made enthusiastic about the process that he in many ways initiated, and that his faith and the faith that he has instilled in them will continue. And I’m very much saddened with his demise. I’m very proud of his accomplishments. I’m very confident that Latin America and the world will continue towards a world that is really worthy of mankind.
5 March, 15:25 Foreign actors must be removed from Syrian equation
Photo: EPA With the internal Syrian conflict being fueled from the outside by U.S. backed terrorists and insurgents appearing to escalate, perhaps it is time for the international community to take measures to stop U.S. meddling in foreign countries and, once and for all, respect the sovereignty of foreign nations. Wishful thinking? Perhaps. Necessary? Absolutely. The danger of the internal Syria conflict, which is being fueled from the outside, spreading to include other regional actors is growing and is threatening to plunge the entire Middle East region, already in chaos, into a state of all out war. With the continued meddling of the West and the United States in other countries in the region the threat of the conflict spreading to a global scale seems like more of a possibility with each passing day. The irresponsibility of the West in continuing to insist on installing its own regime in the country has already reached the level of criminality on an international level. The most egregious crime in this case being the arming, funding, recruiting, importation and support of terrorist groups and elements into the country, something which is only continuing and propagating the bloodshed and the misery of the Syrian people. It is obvious to anyone who has seen reports from within Syria and who has had any contact with the Syrian people, that the conflict in the country is not an internally fueled one and that there is no popular and widespread support amongst the Syrian people for the ousting of their elected president Bashar Al-Assad. It is already academic that had there been popular support among the Syrian people, President Assad would have been gone long ago. Since the beginning of the conflict there have been undisputed and verified reports of the U.S., the West, regional allies and Israel, colluding with every sort of terrorist or mercenary organization, including Al-Qaeda, to bring about the ouster of President Assad and the government of Syria, one of the most secular in the Middle East. This outside interference has in no way “helped” the Syrian people, including the intelligent and peace loving members of the opposition who have been willing to enter into dialogue with President Assad and the elected leaders in the country. What it has done is help the most extreme and violent criminal elements in the country, who support the West’s position of no dialogue with President Assad and who steadfastly and stubbornly insistent that Assad be forcibly removed from office. The accent here should be on “forcibly”. President Assad and his supporters have said themselves that they would step down if it would bring peace to the country and if a peaceful transition could be made, but the U.S. and the West have blindly insisted that he must be forced from power, scoffing at and ignoring every attempt at intelligent dialogue and at bringing about a peaceful resolution to the internal conflict. This includes attempts not only by Assad himself but by international mediators, including by the Russian Federation as well as reasonable opposition powers who have announced they are ready to sit down at the negotiating table. The western media is also at fault and effectively in disservice to the Syrian people. Watching the western media coverage and their spin of the events in Syria is an exercise in futility and an almost useless unless one is simply gathering certain facts amidst an almost complete blackout of any news of Syrian origin. The western media report on attack after attack, on terrorist act after terrorist act, yet take no issue with the fact (and yes this is a fact) that the U.S. is actively working with and supporting Al-Qaeda, terrorists of all colors, mercenaries and every kind of killer under the sun to bring about its goal. Again I underline: the goal of the “U.S.”, not the Syrian people and not even regional actors, unless of course you take into account violent, extremist U.S. allies, fanatical Shiites and even Israel. A recent report by the BBC regarding the spreading of the conflict to the borders of Syria attempts to detail the international character of the conflict, as have many reports before, and goes into some of the international players and terrorist groups operating in Syria but takes no issue with the reality that they are being imported by the West itself. The BBC also tries to infer that Kurdish supporters of Assad are connected with the PKK without offering evidence of any such connection. They report that the terrorist organization FSA (Free Syrian Army) is being assisted by Chechen, Ingush and Kurdish terrorists and the Islamic terroritst groups: Ghuraba al-Sham, Ahrar al-Sham, the al-Nusra front and Al-Qaeda. According to the BBC, hundreds of other sources, witness statements and the accounts of people on the ground in Syria, these groups are actively attempting to recruit anyone they can to join them, again, if this were a popular uprising that would not be needed. RT reports that Iraq is attempting the assist Syria, the only independent non-U.S. aligned country in the entire region other than Iran, and has shelled FSA positions near the border and even moved in Iraqi regular forces to regain a strategic border crossing that had been “seized by the insurgency”. In an interview with the Associated Press, RT reports, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki gave one of his most serious warnings to date, stating that a Syrian rebel victory could spark sectarian violence in his own country and the whole region. “Neither the opposition nor the regime can finish each other off. If the opposition is victorious, there will be a civil war in Lebanon, divisions in Jordan and a sectarian war in Iraq.” Such a statement coming from Iraq, a country recently invaded and decimated by the U.S. along with Afghanistan, and the fact that Iraq is assisting Syria further underlines the complete and utter failure of U.S. policy and meddling in the region and on a broader scale the entire “War on Terror”. The New York Times has just reported that the new U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is following lockstep in recently departed Hillary Clinton’s footsteps and demonizing Russia and supporting the insurgents in Syria. They report that officials have said: “The United States has also been training a select cadre of Syrian rebels in Jordan under a covert program run by the C.I.A.” With Israel’s entering into the mix with the launching of an airstrike deep into Syrian territory, an attack which killed a top Iranian General, the West has shown to what extremes it will go to bring about regime change in countries that are not its allies, are not aligned with it and pursue an independent stance. The amount of meddling even brings into question the origins of the conflict to begin with. But we know this and thousands of experts and reports bear this out; the West is operating according to a plan. A plan which was brought into play using the “events of 9-11” as a catalyst and which includes regime change and military domination of every country in the world not pliable to U.S. interests. In keeping with the plan, Syria must go, then Iran, then China and then Russia. The international community must stand up to the U.S. and end this meddling and military takeover of the planet by the West and the first step would be in no longer allowing the U.S. to support insurgents and terrorists in Syria to overthrow the elected president. The West must not be allowed to continue to fuel the war in Syria and must in fact be removed from the theater and it is the United Nations and perhaps their peacekeepers, who should be called into Syria, if of course a conflict remains once foreign actors are removed. Unfortunately the West continues to do what it pleases and for the time being, we are at their mercy. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached robles@ruvr.ru.
5 March, 12:46 'US behaving like warlords in the world' – exclusive interview with Glen Ford
© Flickr.com/The U.S. Army/cc-by As the entire Middle East is in chaos and on the verge of slipping into a state of further conflict and all-out war, the United States, “imperialists and their junior partners in imperialism”, are moving away from the region and now focusing on Africa. The West is in decline and no longer the master of the world economically, so there are playing the only card they have: military might. In an assessment of AFRICOM Glen Ford laid out the facts above and more.
Robles: My first question now, it seems that NATO and the US have moved their war on terror from the Middle East and they are moving into Africa. Why is that? Ford: Africa is the unclaimed space, but you know when we are talking about empire, when we are talking about imperialism, US imperialism and its junior partners in imperialism, in NATO, every space on earth is actually of strategic value, but Africa of course in terms of resources is of immense value and as far as they are concerned it is unclaimed. Certainly they don’t respect the claims of Africans and Africans themselves to Africa. Robles: So, there’re racial motivations to this you think? Ford: No, but racial realities, the realities of the racism of much of the populations of Europe and the United States make the militarization and the assaults on sovereign nations in Africa much more palatable to public opinion in the home countries. For example, the demonization of Muammar Kaddafi that dates back almost two generations may the massive natal US assault on Libya something that was quite palatable to most sectors of the American public and, as it appears, to European publics as well, the wide-spread in racist assumption that Africans cannot govern themselves, are incapable of such, makes US intervention in the affairs of African states appear to the home countries, the public, as something that is beneficial to the Africans as opposed to an infringement of their human rights. What is striking here is the United States since the beginning of the decolonization period in Africa had a policy of imposing an environment of chaos in those regions that it cannot control. We saw that play out in Congo for example, that is Congo was plunged into chaos at the time of independence and Patrice Lumumba, the democratically elected leader of the Congo was assassinated by the Belgians and the Americans. The chaos imposed from the outside did not end until they got their guy Mobutu as head of the Congo and Mobutu served their purposes for decades. When he no longer served their purposes in the mid-90s, they then plunged Congo again into chaos working through their two henchmen regimes, in Rwanda and Uganda, America’s strongest allies in black Africa and created such chaos that 6 million Congolese have died as a result since 1996. This is long been the policy in Africa. We could make the comparison in Somalia for example as well, which the United States spent a great deal of money perpetuating an environment of chaos there since the early 90s. Now it appears, I just wanted to make this connection, that the objective condition that decay of imperialism is such that they are willing to impose chaos as a matter of policy in the Middle East and in North Africa as well. And so we see the chaos of Libya as being preferable to the United States and NATO to the orderliness and in fact good trade relations that existed with Kaddafi’s regime and the chaos and carnage in Syria are being preferable to orderly relations with the Assad government. This is quite disturbing. Robles: I see. Why is disorder and revolution and revolt and upheaval more positive for the US and NATO? Ford: Because the United States and the Europeans, I am talking about the advanced capitalists countries, Europe as well as the United States, is now ruled by finance capitalists, this is the profound change that has occurred over the last 30 years in the capitalist system that the long struggle “contention” between manufacturing capital and financial capital have now been resolved in favor of finance capital, finance capital does not make things, it does not produce anything, it is simply monetizes everything that it can, it makes its money from rigging markets, and from manipulation and it is in no shape, no position to compete in terms of conventional trade with the rising economic powers of the global south and China. This is a really unique period that we’ve entered in the world where in a country like Brazil that we referred to as part of the third world not too long ago, its development bank now has a much larger portfolio than the World Bank does. And so we see India and China and Brazil and other nations, Indonesia and Malaysia are playing a vigorous, robust role in world trade, China having captured a larger portion of the African trade and even the South American trade right there in the Western Hemisphere, in the US’s backyard, so at this point, at this juncture in history, the Europeans and the Americans cannot compete with these rising economic forces and they don’t even try. The one advantage that they have in the world is that the NATO countries account for 70% of the arms spending on the planet and have a war machine that is second to none, the clear and absolute superiority on that score. And so they play the only card that they have and that is their military, for example in Africa by suborning the militaries of most African states. You know, most African countries, all but a handful, notably Zimbabwe, and Eritrea, and now Sudan, all but a handful of African countries have agreements, relations, ongoing connections with AFRICOM. So, although China, India and Brazil have long eclipsed the United States and Europe in terms of trade, the United States has in a hip-pocket a relationship with African militaries that can veto, through coup d’état, through military means any geopolitical realignments of forces. So, that is why they are moving in this fashion. If they didn’t see their destiny in conventional trade as we’ve come to know it in the world, then chaos is a good default kind of position and they are willing to risk it. They are not businessmen anymore. They are intimidators, they are behaving like warlords in the world and warlords can take, can stand, can live, with a lot more chaos than people who want to conduct business. Close
4 March, 16:11 Persecution of Manning to continue
Photo: AFP Bradley Manning took full responsibility for the information he has pleaded guilty to releasing and has bravely faced the 20 year sentence he could have been handed down, yet for US prosecutors this is not enough, they wish to show that Manning aided the enemy, a charge for which they have the option of executing him. Despite the importance the US Government has placed on the information he released, to date no one has been prosecuted for the crimes exposed by Manning, making the whole process appear to be the workings of a Kangaroo Court. After Bradley Manning pleaded guilty to 10 charges and stoically faced the fact that he may be imprisoned for 20 years, the US prosecutors decided to continue with his prosecution on 12 more charges including the rarely used charge of aiding the enemy which carries with it the possibility of the death sentence, something the prosecution has said they will not pursue. Mr. Manning’s plea was not part of a deal to have other charges dropped but the prosecution could have proven its wisdom and used the option it presented them to drop the other charges and move directly to the sentencing phase of the trial. In a statement released to the public the prosecution stated the following: “Given the scope of the alleged misconduct, the seriousness of the charged offenses, and the evidence and testimony available, the United States intends to proceed with the court-martial to prove Manning committed the charged offenses beyond the lesser charges to which he has already pled guilty.” The case of Bradley Manning has proven beyond all doubt that real justice is not of real importance to the US, and perhaps in the world if we are to judge the world by the corrupt and illegal rogue country that the United States of America has proven itself to have become and the way they continue to be blindly followed by subservient states and their allies. According to media reports the prosecutors intend to call 141 witnesses to Manning’s court martial which is scheduled to begin on June 13, 2013, and show that some of the open source documents released by Manning were found in the former compound of Osama Bin Laden. Whether they will provide evidence that the information was used in the planning of any terrorist acts against the United States by Al-Qaeda is yet to be known, but apparently for US prosecutors, at this point, mere possession is enough. Despite the fact that Mr. Manning exposed war crimes and the illegality of the US execution of the “War on Terror”, despite the fact that he was detained without trial or charges for over 1,000 days and his egregious treatment and pre-trial punishment has been in contradiction of US and international law, US prosecutors plan to continue his trial on charges of aiding Al-Qaeda and the enemy, rather than doing the correct and legal thing and dismissing the charges against him and giving Mr. Manning the right that many feel he he has earned more than most, to be a free man and a hero. Unfortunately the treatment of Mr. Manning, rather than being an abomination or an egregious exception triggering massive protests and the widespread questioning by the general public of the real motivations behind the actions of their government, a government which is supposed to serve them, for the majority of the misinformed, fearful and subservient population in the United States, it is something that they have become accustomed to, and which in their continuing silence, they support with no import being given to freedom of the press, accountability and the very principles of democracy. Private Manning is the embodiment of what is wrong with America, and if what he did, did not trigger an internal US debate, it has surely triggered a massive international debate. Mr. Manning is what those hiding behind a veil of secrecy and committing crimes against all humanity fear most, that being an individual with access to information proving their criminal conduct with a conscience and higher moral ideals willing to sacrifice themselves, and his case has exposed that fact to the world. Whether anything will change or whether anyone will ever be prosecuted for the crimes exposed by Manning is highly doubtful as those who committed and ordered them and their support network are still in power, yet his actions did expose the illegality and the hypocrisy of the US to the entire world, and showed that it is possible for one person to effect, if not change, then at least embarrassment. It is that embarrassment and the attempt to bring those guilty into account as well as the fact that Mr. Manning is being used an example to scare away others who may be considering blowing the whistle that are behind his persecution and rather than paying proper attention to the message the system has gone after the messenger and all conduits of that message, as they have with WikiLeaks, Assange, Hammond, Swartz, and thousands of other journalists and truth seekers. Without a doubt those who have subverted the US Government, propagated the whole “war on Terror” paradigm, continue to conduct illegal wars against poor defenseless nations and who remain in power are not interested in pursuing those who are committing crimes in the process of executing their illegal policies, they are in fact protecting them. The list of those who should have been prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity but are being protected, is too long to list here, but includes everyone from Bush down to Lynndie England, and hence the ongoing persecution of Manning. According to the military and the hawks in power Manning was supposed to keep his mouth shut and follow orders, just like every other soldier or tool of the US apparatus, that was his sin and the most expeditious way to prosecute him is by saying he was aiding terrorists and Al-Qaeda. What in fact Mr. Manning has done, is aid the American people, the world’s populace, the rule of law and true democracy. The fact that he did so knowing the risk he faced and the fact that he has stood up in open court and took full responsibility for the largest leak of sensitive information in US history is something that makes him one of the greatest heroes of modern times. The US Government and those in power have got it so terribly wrong on so many levels in the case of Manning but above all his case has proven that soldiers and those who witness horrendous acts and illegality being carried out under the color of power have nowhere to go and no one to turn to, proving the true rule of law and legal oversight in the United States have become nothing but a farce and something that lip service is being paid to. In his almost two hour statement to the court Manning detailed how he came to be an intelligence analyst, how due to his diminutive stature he had a torturous time getting through basic training, the nature and his views on the information he was processing, the problems he had in the field and in carrying out his mission, how WikiLeaks (WLO) came to his attention after they published 500,000 text messages related to September 11, 2001 and the circumstances surrounding each release. His most telling statement which sheds light on his motivations was the following regarding the diplomatic cable he had access to: “The more I read, the more I was fascinated with the way that we dealt with other nations and organizations. I also began to think the documented backdoor deals and seemingly criminal activity that didn't seem characteristic of the de facto leader of the free world.” Truly a prisoner of conscience, Bradley Manning is a hero, and should be treated as such and those responsible for the crimes he has revealed to the world should be gone after, but in reality, this will never occur because in the paradigm that the US is trapped in and our world is being pulled into, the messenger is of more importance than the message, and anyone who goes against the criminality of those in power must be eradicated with extreme prejudice.
2 March, 13:18 Manning pleads guilty to ten counts, Kangaroo Trial continues
Photo: AFP Although Bradley Manning exposed war crimes, the malfeasance of US Government officials in a plethora of situations, the inherent hypocrisy and illegality of the entire paradigm US foreign policy is trapped in as well as the flawed and illegal nature of the entire "War on Terror", he has been illegally detained, persecuted, tortured, prosecuted and demonized by the very people and the very government he was attempting to assist. On Thursday in a US military court room at Fort Meade, Maryland, US Private First Class Bradley Manning pleaded guilty to providing the WikiLeaks Organization (WLO) with expansive archives of US battlefield reports, military incident logs, hundreds of thousands of sensitive US State Department diplomatic cables, detainee assessment files from Guantánamo Bay, Cuba and videos documenting air-strikes, the killings of civilians and war crimes. The sheer volume of information released by Manning makes it the largest leak of sensitive and classified information in the history of the United States. Although Mr. Manning did plead guilty to 10 charges involved in providing the information to the WLO he did not plead guilty to 12 more serious charges related to the aiding the enemy accusation, apparently in this case Al-Qaeda. If Manning is found guilty of aiding the enemy charges he faces life in prison or potentially the death penalty. However the possibility of the death penalty has been played down in the press. For the 10 charges he did plead guilty to Mr. Manning is facing approximately 20 years behind bars. Mr. Manning has the right to withdraw the guilty pleas any time before the actual trial begins if he chooses to.. Earlier motions by the defense to have the case thrown out or dismissed, due to the illegality of Mr. Manning’s treatment under US and international law (treatment which has amounted to torture), the denial by the court of the right to a speedy trial, the fact that evidence against Mr. Manning was not being provided by prosecutors and the fact that he was not charged with any crime within the time frame guidelines set by US law, were ignored and it was decided by the court that the trial would go on regardless of all of the violations by the prosecution and the government against the rights of Mr. Manning. During the pretrial hearing, taking place after a mind-boggling 1,000 days since his arrest, Mr. Manning read a 35-page statement for over an hour detailing the reasoning behind his actions. Mr. Manning admitted to misusing classified information and breaking the law but justified his actions because they were done for the greater good and they were an act of conscience. Looking pale, diminutive, gaunt and like an individual under intense pressure after close to three years of arbitrary “pretrial” punishment, torture and egregious treatment, Mr. Manning addressed the court and read his statement in clear polite tones showing little emotion and a herculean amount of self-control. He stated that the first material that he had wanted to release to the public were the battlefield reports but that his initial efforts to contact The Washington Post and The New York Times were rebuffed leading him to approach the WLO, which he added did not pressure him in any way to provide information. In court he took full responsibility for the release of the information. With regards to the battlefield reports Mr. Manning detailed how he had had to store them on a disc because they were needed on a daily basis by his colleagues and himself in military intelligence and the base’s Internet connection kept failing. He also stated some of his reasons for deciding to release them first including the fact that they showed the illegality and the blood lust of the US forces and flaws in US policies in executing its War on Terror. He said files were a testament to the fact that the US military were: “…obsessed with capturing or killing people…” who appeared on US kill lists and were in no way concerned with the “collateral” killing that was taking place at an alarming rate. Regarding the files, which he had stored on his camera’s memory card and then uploaded to WikiLeaks from a Barnes and Noble bookstore in Maryland while on leave, he said: “I believed if the public, in particular the American public, had access to the information, this could spark a debate about foreign policy in relation to Iraq and Afghanistan”. Mr. Manning also said: “I believed and still believe these are some of most important documents of our time…” and added that he; “… only wanted docs I was absolutely sure wouldn’t cause harm to the United States.” In particular Mr. Manning made mention of a video called “Collateral Murder” which showed the crew of an Apache Gunship gunning down journalists from the Reuters News Agency and people who had driven up in a van to assist the fallen. His characterization of the U.S. gunner in the “Collateral Murder” video was stunning, “… he seemed similar to a child torturing ants with a magnifying glass.” With all of the violations with regards to the rights of Bradley Manning and the fact that he exposed war crimes and the blatant illegality of many of the actions of the US Government in their execution of the “War on Terror”, the entire case and the proceedings seem like a poorly orchestrated farce thinly disguised to, obfuscate from and cover up, crimes committed by the government itself. To give legitimacy to what can only be described as a US Kangaroo Court seems absurd but unfortunately for Mr. Manning he is trapped by the very criminals he was attempting to expose. Given the nature of the material and the way it was released and sifted through by first Manning and then the WLO makes the Government’s charge of aiding the enemy seems even more ridiculous than it already is and begs one to ask the question: who exactly is the enemy? Are the American people the enemy, or perhaps journalists, maybe WikiLeaks (after all Julian Assange has been declared an enemy of the state), or is the enemy journalists like us or the Reuters reporters who were mercilessly gunned down? The case against Manning just like the US hysteria over WikiLeaks continues to go far to underline the hypocrisy and the illegality of the US Government and the lengths they will go hide and cover up their own crimes. When the facts that were uncovered and exposed to the world by Mr. Manning came to light, those involved in the crimes he uncovered should have been prosecuted, there should have been an explosion of public outcry and calls for investigations to be initiated but the US public were largely quiet, like sheep to the slaughter, and the US Government instead went after Manning and WikiLeaks. In a country where the true rule of law is the most important factor which governs it, the persecution of Manning would never have happened. The conditions under which Manning has been held and the behavior of the state in prosecuting his case have contained so many unconstitutionally egregious violations that if the US followed its own laws the entire show trial would have been dismissed long ago, and Bradley Manning would be a free man receiving reparations.
1 March, 22:50 Horse meat is safe, microbial pathogens are the danger - Dr. Clare Narrod
Photo: EPA While Europe is gripped by a wave of hysteria over horsemeat, an issue that involves mostly consumer's right to know what they are eating, we are reminded that horsemeat is, overall, safe to eat and the real danger to all of us in the spread of microbial pathogens and micro toxins. The debate also continues over genetically modified foods, but in many case these modifications may have benefits. Dr. Clare Narrod, from the University of Maryland's Joint Institute for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition spoke with the Voice of Russia on food related issues against the backdrop of the current horse meat scandals and stated the above and more.
Robles: Europe is an ongoing uproar over horsemeat. How dangerous horsemeat is? Is it dangerous at all? Narrod: I wouldn’t consider dangerous, I think it’s more of an issue people not being happy that the product was labeled correctly. Consumers get very upset when they think something is one type of product and it turns out it has adulteration in it and that upsets them. The issue that people should be more concerned with the issue of whether or not it has any microbial pathogens in it, such as Ecoli, Salmonella, those are the things that from a health standpoint, a food safety issue, that can result in food-borne disease, people should be worried about. Robles: How concerned should people be about viruses and things like that? Narrod: Well, in terms of microbial pathogens, basically, what is happening on farms, dictates often what’s happening once the animal goes into the slaughterhouse and goes through the fabrication process, at that time if there are any microbial pathogens, on the carcass, growth and decline can occur, but most slaughterhouses in industrialized world have decontamination processes in place to ensure that they have a safe product coming out. Often what happens when the product leaves the processor and goes into the retail, then other things can occur and once it leaves retail and goes to the consumer if things aren’t kept and checked, growth and decline can occur, of microbial pathogens. Consumers can cross contaminate a product by just not having a clean cutting board or using a dirty knife at home or having a poor refrigeration or ones that are not turned to the right temperature. Robles: What are some things that common people can do to safeguard themselves? Narrod: One thing is to ensure that they don’t allow for cross contamination to occur, make sure that they don’t cut lettuce and meat or fish, or chicken on the same cutting board, make sure that they washed their knife, make sure they don’t keep raw products out of the refrigeration process. Robles: Say they are going to eat some contaminated meat, I mean, what’s the difference if they then eat contaminated lettuce, I mean they are going to be you’ll anyway, aren’t they? Narrod: Well, with meat, you can cook and kill the pathogen, but with your ready-to-eat-products, such as vegetables, if you come across contamination with a dirty knife, then individuals can be sick from that. Robles: Is that common, like, to have something harmful in meat that is then cooked away? Narrod: No, I think safeguards are in process to prevent that but that is why there are a lot of campaigns. There is a “Thermi-under” campaign to try to get people to get to certain temperatures so that you are not just relying on a color of meet being brown or such, like that, or white. You’re trying to get to the correct temperatures. A lot of people consume meat products in different ways. The concern is making sure you cook it thoroughly to kill any type of pathogen. But that being said, usually by the time the individual gets it, it shouldn’t be contaminated. It’s only when… It can occur that you may have something that results in growth that occurs once it leaves the retail center. You would hope that it would be caught at the retail centre before. Robles: I see. Is this more of a danger with meat products or, are there similar dangers with fruits and vegetables? Narrod: You can have the microbial pathogens on fruit and vegetables. How it is grown for instance: if you are using manures that have not been composted properly, they may have microbial pathogens in them that leafy greens are grown on, and that can be a problem also. Robles: Sounds a little scary! Narrod: I think there is a lot of work currently being done to try to ensure that that’s part of what the research is doing with the produce rules, as such trying to make sure that we get the right risk-mitigation-measures in place to ensure that this microbial pathogens aren’t on these vegetable products and such. Reminder Robles: What are some of the dangers in genetically modified foods? Can you tell us anything about that? Narrod: There is a perception of risk out there. I think it’s more, people are worried about eating something that is not labeled being genetically modified. I don’t think there is a demonstrated real risk. In fact for some places and parts of the world where you have crops that can’t grow under certain conditions or there are pests associated with that, there may be some real benefit. Robles: Do believe it’s true that maybe we don’t know the risks yet because this is kind of a new science and a new technology? Narrod: There’s been a lot of research on the bio-tech area trying to show if there is a real risk associated with that. And I think when people use genetically modified crops they are trying to contain them to make sure that there won’t be any gene flow. But I think, again it’s a similar thing people more being concerned about mis-labeling and not being told correctly what was the product that they were consuming. Robles: I see. I know a lot of people in Europe and here in Russia, they are concerned about genetically modified chicken that is grown with additives and other things to make it grow quicker. Are there dangers to that process? Narrod: You have your chickens and your beef cattle, over the years the genes have been manipulated to produce a uniform product. That’s been done, and that’s the demand for a certain product, like white breast or something occurs people are breeding for those traits. A marble piece of meat they bred for that, the demand has changed from the marble to more leaner over the years and that’s more what consumer is demanding. I don’t think that’s a big risk. You have the dietary issues, but otherwise there is a demand for this product. Robles: What are some real dangers that people should be worried about, as opposed to horsemeat? Narrod: I think it is the food borne safety hazards associated with any type of high-value agricultural product where you can have microbial pathogens or in some cases you might have a toxin, like a micro toxin. Those are things that people should be worried about, but you have in all these countries in Europe and in the developed world, you do have processes in place to measure the levels that are allowed to be in there, and I think the system works, pretty well! Robles: So, we’re the Voice of Russia World Service, so a lot of people that listen to us, they may be in the developing world. What are some of the other dangers that people in developing countries may face? And what advice would you have for them to make sure they are eating safely? Narrod: Well, I think in the developing world you have a situation where you might have laws and rules and limits on the books, but there is very limited capacity to actually measure the levels of a particular toxin in the country or people are measuring the levels of a microbial pathogen at the market place. I think that rarely it’s done, even though that might be on the books, so increasing the capacity at the Ministry level or through private labs to do that type of monitoring would be really important. Robles: Is there anything that the common people can do? Narrod: I think in the developing world you see people cook products quite thoroughly to get rid of the some microbial pathogens and stuff like that. And I think that there many methods to try to do that. But as people move more to ready-to-eat products and high-value agriculture, it is harder to control some of those things, so I think testing is becoming more and more important throughout the world. Robles: Are there any additives or anything that you can add to food to lessen the risks? Narrod: There are some experiments with clays associated with some of the micro toxins so that people don’t absorb in their gut. On the microbial pathogens it would be making sure you don’t have cross contamination, but also making sure the product gets cooked properly. You were listening to an interview with Dr. Clare Narrod. She is an assistant research scientist at the University of Maryland’s Joint Institute for Food Safety in Applied Nutrition. Update: Robles writes: After the interview Dr. Narrod e-mailed me and asked me to add the following information. Quote:“Basically with meats some organisms are tolerated at low levels because of the "kill-step" of cooking. One of the safety issues for horsemeat is that the antibiotics used in horses are not approved for human food and residues are not measured, but the main issue for the public is the concern over mislabeling.”
28 February, 20:28 'I salute the former Soviet Union' - interview with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad
Photo: RIA Novosti The former Soviet Union built everything in Afghanistan including the bases which the US is now occupying, the United States is supporting Radical Islamic groups, including Chechen terrorists, to destabilize countries they are targetting. Syria is the most secular progressive country in the Muslim World yet i being attacked by the West and all of the US actions are back-firing on them, they believe that quick victory is the proper route. They are worng. All of theses issues were discussed in an interview with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad, an Afghan native who teaches Political Science at Harold Washington College in Chicago.
Gulzad: The point is that what the United States is doing and NATO is doing: they want to prolong this war with the collaboration of the Pakistani army. The very government in Pakistan is a joke, is silly, is nothing. The decisions are made by the military, the military is with the United States. Robles: What are the reasons, I mean, why does the US want to be in Afghanistan and in your opinion, resources or what? Gulzad: It is very important geopolitically and I will tell you why. Afghanistan is now very poor and I salute the Soviet people because the Soviet Union (the former Soviet Union) because Afghanistan has so many resources and now they have revealed how many resources they have. The Soviet Union did not take any of it. They did not take advantage of it, because we have petroleum, we have copper, we have so many things now. They gave the biggest copper mine to Chinese now, and in the Central Afghanistan they have the steel and all that kind of stuff. So anyway, the reason that United States wants to prolong this war and stay there is because; first of all we have a 150 mile border with China. Then we are very close to Russia, if you pass Tadzhikistan, it’s Russia, and then we have Iran, then we have Persian Gulf, so Afghanistan is a very important. Now I’ll tell you that these bases that United States is using today which were made by the Soviet Union. One in the north of Afghanistan is American base now, and Shindand, the Soviet Union built it, it is bordering with Iran and Pakistan, then Kandahar, then you have Bagram, which is north of Kabul, now they are building a base almost everywhere including Badakhshan. Badakhshan is not too far from Tadzhikistan and the Chinese borders. And also the United States is supporting the Uyghur Muslim group and Tadjiks in Xinjiang Province, which is bordering Afghanistan. They are making trouble for the Chinese Muslims. And also United States is supporting the Chechen group in Russia. Robles: Which group did you say in Russia? Gulzad: In Russia, the Chechen group. Robles: Sure. Gulzad: And also in China they are supporting Uyghur and Tadjiks. Robles: I think they would support any group that will destabilize or weaken any country that they want to attack, I think. Gulzad: Absolutely. My point is that when they are saying that the Cold War is over, they were anti-communists. What the hell? I mean today Russia is not a Communist country. Robles: No, we are not. Gulzad: But the point is that United States have a phobia and they want to be the imperialist power. What they are doing with the world today: my God!! I always discuss with my colleagues here that… Okay, how many countries did the Soviet Union invade? How many countries has the United States invaded in our lifetime? How many wars? Just recently: Panama, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Iraq, for no reason, for no reason. Robles: Iraq, Iran, the list goes on and on. Gulzad: In Syria, they want to know, why doesn’t the United States want to… (if they are such champions of human rights and democracy) …why don’t they say anything about Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, all these kingdoms? Robles: Sure. Gulzad: Why Syria? Syria is more secular, more progressive country. Robles: I don’t understand… Okay Syria; they were just attacked, about 50 people, this was yesterday, 53 people are said to have been dead by an Al-Qaeda group. Israel is bombing Syria, and the United States, so we have Israel, Al-Qaeda and the United States working together (Working together right?) to destroy Syria. Doesn’t that seem strange? Gulzad: Absolutely. And how it’s backfiring!! Let me tell you something. Just a few months ago I did an interview on American television here, on the so-called Arab Spring. So what’s happened? I told them, the United States is not supporting the progressive group; intellectuals. They don’t have to be left group but just regular progressive secular groups. What they did: they supported the most radical Islamist group, the problem was Mubarak, because they were sick and tired of Mubarak. They wanted to find a new puppet. What happened is it backfired! Guess what? Who won? The Islamic fundamentalists. In Libya they did the same thing because they are too stupid here because they think that quick victory will bring them happiness and glory. So, what they did in Libya. they did the same thing. Guess who took over? Islamic fundamentalists. This is what happened in Tunisia: Islamic fundamentalists. Right now, yesterday, the Congress of the United States decided to give millions of dollars to the radicals of Syria. They are not giving it to intellectuals, to secular groups, they claim that they are fighting for democracy and secular regimes. But they are giving it to them because they want to get over, through this in a blink. A lot of this is backfiring, 3-4 countries backfired on them. And then after Syria, mark my words for it, it is Iran. It’s not that I love Iran, Iran regime is a fascist regime, but my point is that the United States will go there because if you look from Morocco to Iran, to Afghanistan, to India and everything, guess what? All of them are pro-American except Iran and Syria. These two places are not puppets. And the expansion of NATO against who? Now the Warsaw pact is not there! Against who? Why do you expand this? You took Saakashvili from Chicago. Do you know Saakashvili is from Chicago, he was the lawyer here, they picked him up and made him the president of Georgia, and now they find another puppet. Do you know that Karzai’s brother had a restaurant in Chicago? They picked him up from Chicago and gave him the same thing. Robles: Bashar Assad was a dentist in London. I couldn’t understand why they went against him. Gulzad: It is amazing, isn’t it? If you look at Lithuania, so many places, look at Ukraine, the guy who was the former president of Ukraine, his wife was from the United States, from Chicago. Robles: I’ve talked to many people and it seems like most of the world is being controlled by some part of Chicago for some reason. Gulzad: Chicago is the mafia city. It is just amazing. Robles: Now listen, here is a hypothetical that I don’t think anyone has ever talked about, but… You say the plan is backfiring. We see, everybody sees: ok, they are funding these terrorists, they are promoting terrorism actually. They are creating more terrorists. They are financing radical-Islamic-violent-people, right? Gulzad: Absolutely. Robles: Is it possible that that is, what they want? Gulzad: Well, they want to destabilize their enemy, the only way you can weaken a country and society is with a civil war, and how you do it? Like for example in China, you promote Tibet, you promote the idea of Islamist Uyghur and Tadjiks, it’s one problem. You go to Russia, make Russia very busy with the terrorists through Georgia, which Sakashvili was helping. From Georgia you head then to Dagestan, and, you know, Chechen area and you could create problems for Russia. That is the only way, see? And then you make excuses that I am staying in Afghanistan because the Taliban are still in power and al-Qaeda is still alive. Robles: That is what I am talking about. And then they can continue the endless War on Terror because they keep creating more and more terrorists themselves. Gulzad: You know there is key reason, the weak countries in the world, what they do; they are diverting attention from the inside misery of the people, from internal forces because inside it is empty and miserable and worse economy, so what they do they tell the people that outside is going to… That’s the history of United States, think about it. Castro is going to attack Florida. The Soviet Union is going to come and get us! The Russians are coming!! Okay? Then Saddam Hussein is going to come and invade the United States. Then they created this man, this stupid man with a beard called Osama, Bin Laden, okay? So, what they did, they made Americans wave the flag! “We are Americans!” And the became very patriotic and all this. So, they continue finding these external unbelievable forces. And their motive is this: as I said before and just recently I gave another interview, that what they want to do is they want to stay in Afghanistan. They want to stay in Iraq. Permanently, they will stay in Afghanistan because of Russia, because of China, because of the BRICs, China, India, and Russia, in this part of the world. Plus they don’t like Iran, so they want to destabilize Iran through Afghanistan. These are all excuses. Where are these terrorists? If you want to finish this thing, tomorrow you tell Pakistan that: “You will not get a penny”, Pakistan is a very poor country, and it is all over, give me these terrorist groups, one by one”. Robles: Listen Doctor Gulzad, we have to finish. I really loved speaking with you. Can I call you again? Gulzad: Call me any time. Robles: Thank you very much sir! Gulzad: You’re welcome, alright! You were listening to an interview with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad, a Professor at Harold Washington College in Chicago. Thanks for listening, and as always I wish you the best.
28 February, 13:10 The US built Al-Qaeda and Osama's encampments - exclusive interview Kathy Kelly
Afghanistan. Photo: EPA In Afghanistan any 15-30 year-old-male is a target for US "elimination", activists were arrested and sent to prison in the US for attempting to deliver a letter to Whiteman Air Force Base, where drone operations are conducted, stating why the United Nations believes drone are illegal, war and killing people is profitable for war-profiteers and the US Government knew about war crimes and the stealing of US weapons by former "Blackwater-XE" Academy but looks the other way. All of these matters and more were discussed in an interview with 3 time Nobel Peace Prize nominee Kathy Kelly, the co-coordinator for Voices for Creative Non-Violence.
Kelly: Well, if they do it’s not because they heard it on the mainstream media, they would have had to do some investigating. One of the reasons why initially the United States knew where to bomb potential encampments for Osama Bin Laden and the al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, was because the United States built them. Robles: Recently there was this white paper came out justifying drone attacks on US citizens and basically it says: “… anyone who is a senior… A US citizen who is a senior al-Qaeda operative or associate…”, back to al-Qaeda: how many American senior operatives of Al-Qaeda do you know in the world, or have you ever heard of, or known about? Kelly: You know there’re some real tragedies associated with that. There was a 16-year-old boy who had gone to a conference in Pakistan and at the conference they had given the youngsters cameras and said: “Try to… because we can’t get journalists into North and South Waziristan, we can’t document what’s happening but maybe you can, and then send the footage out.” And he was targeted for assassination and killed. He wasn’t an American but al-Awlaki of course was, and this means that people with no due process, with no judge, jury, no trial, sometimes no charges whatsoever, people are targeted for assassination. They actually say that if you are a young man between the ages of 15 and 30, you potentially could be a figure that the United States could eliminate, without any consultation. The President has a Tuesday morning meeting with about 100 people sometimes, on a conference call, and then they draw up their list. Robles: Medea Benjamin told me that’s called Terror Tuesdays, is that correct? Kelly: Yes. She has done such a wonderful job. I hope people will read her book. And of course she stays on top of these issues. There are many people all across the country right now who are protesting drone warfare. Our co-coordinator Brian Terrell is serving a six-month prison sentence because he crossed the line at the Whiteman Air Force Base where they are operating drones. And he just wanted to deliver a letter with Mark Kenney who served four months in prison for the same action, and Ron Faust who was given five years probation. They had a letter showing the Air Force, how it is, that the United Nations believes, that the usage of drones is a violation of international law. Robles: Before we started the interview you mentioned some peace volunteers in Afghanistan. Can you tell our listeners a little bit about them and what they’re doing? And some of the things you are doing on your trips to Afghanistan? Kelly: Well, a group of youngsters have decided that they want to live without wars. They are not interested in revenge and retaliation, even though some of them lost their fathers, their brothers, uncles. Even though they’ve been among those displaced by the war. Young Abdullah, when he was just a toddler had to be held over an open flame so that they could thaw out his body when they lived in a wretched refugee camp. But these kids… (I shouldn’t say kids) …these young men and women have decided that it is in their best interests by far, to try to overcome ethnic divisions. So, the young men living together inter-ethnically and every morning they welcome seamstresses and students from different tribes and backgrounds and ethnic groups, to come into their home, and some are heading to an English class and some are part of seamstress cooperative. And they delivered 2,000 very heavy quilts, (they’re called duvets) to the neediest of families, and they fanned out up the mountainside and into the refugee camps to find out, where these duvets would most be needed. The women seamstresses made them: they came every day and collected materials and then they’d send their little kids with wheelbarrows bringing back the finished duvets. And it is a very astounding project to me. All the duvets were delivered free of charge and the women were paid a meager salary. And it was international, through Voices’ outreach that paid for the materials and for this meager salary. So we see small microcosmic examples of people wanting to work together to alleviate suffering, to build a better world. I find it so hopeful when I go to Afghanistan, but I’ll tell you it’s also really cold, and the harsh winters are hard even if you are in a room with a wood burning or coal burning stove, and people have respiratory diseases all across the country. The conditions are very-very hard because the infrastructure is so awful, I mean the electricity goes out and your water might be dependent on a well linked to the electricity, and then you are without water. And you know, that’s how people get cholera; they can’t flush down their own waste. Robles: Who is causing all this suffering in your opinion? Kelly: Well, I do want to remind us that: United States has been spending $2 billion a week, much of it lining the pockets of corrupt warlords. $2 billion a week on its military presence, while right across the street from some of the military bases there are sprawling refugee camps. So, I think any time the US public wages a war of choice and chooses as its target civilians who are living in one of the poorest countries in the world, then I think we have to do with, the cause, of a great deal of suffering, we may not know it, but we are not innocent. Robles: $2 billion a week. How many years has it been, over 12 years now? You’d think that every single Afghan person would be living in a mansion driving a Bentley for that much money. Kelly: Yes, of course there are people who have ammassed huge fortunes, and before we point fingers at Afghans who have, through corruption amassed fortunes, we should look at the war profiteers and major US companies in the United States and the universities that take their contracts, and the faith-based communities that look the other way and the media people that refuse to tell the story. So, there is plenty of blame to go around, and there are plenty of other countries that have fought their wars within Afghanistan. Pakistan and Iran are fighting proxy wars as we speak today, and in many ways there are Cold War competitions going on between the United States and China, the United States and Russia, and all of those could be solved through negotiation and dialogue and coming to our senses, but instead people like to continue these wars because there is profitability in killing people. Robles: You talked about war profiteers. Can you tell us a little bit, because we are almost out of time, about the former Blackwater who was then XE, and are now called Academy I believe? Kelly: This is a group of mercenaries. They are people who have contracted themselves out at great profit, I mean: the going rate for the high-end security contractors is a salary of $129,000 a year, first 89,000 of it, tax free. And uh, they’re adapted Special Forces Operations, and Academy, the new Blackwater incarnation I suppose, is building Camp Integrity on 10 acres of land just outside of Kabul, which will train people in Special Forces Operations. They got the contract from the United States Government, even though the US Government certainly knew that their antecedents in Blackwater had been convicted of killing Afghan civilians and also allegedly killing Iraqi civilians in Tahrir Square and also of stealing weapons from the United States military, but they must have fantastic inner connections to keep getting these contracts. Robles: Before they changed their name to XE they were being investigated for war crimes in Iraq. What percentage would you say there are of private mercenaries and contractors in Afghanistan? And are those counted in any way when the US Government talks about a drawdown or a withdrawal of forces? Kelly: You know, it is so hard to learn that information, I honestly don’t know. You don’t see Westerners at all in the neighborhood where I am, when I’m moving around the city, it’s odd because when you are in the airports, you see plenty of Westerners and most of them seem to be connected to some kind of military or security group. But I don’t have any numbers. I think that also the CIA must have many-many operatives and they don’t have to give that kind of information out, but it is a good thing to keep exploring and trying to better understand. At one point there were as many security contractors in Iraq, as there were US military, and the same could be true for Afghanistan. Robles: Last point, this training base they are building, I was going to ask, is this supposedly to train Afghan peacekeeping forces or Afghan security services? Kelly: I certainly wouldn’t call it peacekeeping. I think that would be euphemistic. Robles: Yeah sure! Kelly:The different versions of Afghan armed troops are staggering in their number; there is the Afghan local police and the Afghan National Security Force, you’ve got special operations now being trained amongst quite a few different military branches. So, it is not certain but the more armaments, the more weapons that flow into the country the more rage that is being felt between different ethnic groups, the more of a prescription for civil war there is, and so it is very alarming to see more sophisticated weaponry coming in and people being trained, to train their weapons on their own people. Robles: Ok, thank you very Kathy. Unfortunately we are out of time. I really appreciate you speaking with me. Kelly: Thank you! This is John Robles you were listening to an interview with Kathy Kelly the co-coordinator for Voices for Creative Nonviolence. Thanks for listening, and I wish you the best.
26 February, 14:31 10 Countries will start to shoot down US drones - exclusive interview with Rick Rozoff
© Photo: en.wikipedia.org The world is just starting to take notice of the expansion of US drone usage worldwide. US drones are becoming increasingly larger, deadlier and greater in number (now at approximately 8,000) and pose a threat to world peace. In addition for NATO’s AFRICOM and the US, Mali is important due to its strategic location near uranium reserves, hence the recent military operations in the country, which are characterized as another “energy grab” by Voice of Russia regular contributor Rick Rozoff. This is John Robles. I am speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the Owner, Manager and Editor of the Stop NATO website and mailing list. This is part 2 of an interview in progress. 1Robles: There were reports that Iran captured a US drone last year and they reverse-engineered it and are now producing massive quantities of their own drones. Would you like to comment on that? Rozoff: It would serve Washington right if they did, I mean it truthfully would. The US has pioneered international drone warfare, this is something that has developed over the last decade, actually over the last 12 years. It is a new form of warfare, it is global in scope, it is deadly, as we know. My personal estimates are the amount of people killed by the drone missile attacks, Hellfire missiles fired by drones in no fewer than 6 countries at this point John: in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen, probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 5,000, by some accounts including Pakistan’s Dawn Newspaper a couple of years ago, they estimated the 96% of those killed in Pakistan were civilians and had no connection with Al-Qaeda. So, the fact that the US is covering the globe, including our own country I fear, with surveillance drones, but also with lethal drones capable of firing missiles, is something the world should counteract, and if one of their drones gets taken down and is duplicated by another country, I don’t see how the US could complain, except for copyright violations. Robles: How are they going to react if one day Iran decides to assassinate somebody in the United States with the drone? Rozoff: That’s an unlikely possibility. Unfortunately, there is only one nation that has done that, at least on any scale. I don’t know what Israel has done in that respect with their drones but I believe that the US is really alone. And we have to keep in mind incidentally that in the year where the so-called “Global War on Terror” was inaugurated, or launched, in 2001, the Pentagon had 200 drones in its arsenal, these are almost entirely surveillance drones. As of last year the estimate is the Pentagon had 8,000 drones, which is a 40 fold increase. These are increasingly larger, capable of carrying more, and larger, and more lethal weaponry, we are talking for example about the Predator drone, the most common one, now being superseded by the Raptor and perhaps even more sophisticated and deadly versions of unmanned aerial vehicles in the future. So, this is something the world is finally, a bit belatedly, taking note of: is that once again one country and one country only reserves to itself the right to launch aerial assassinations around the globe without having to account to its own laws in Congress, much less to the international community. Robles: So, you don’t think it is possible that in the coming years other countries will start countering US drone strikes with their own? Rozoff: I think they will shoot them down, I mean as has happened in Afghanistan. It was brought down by the Iranians evidently according to the account you related. There will be anti-drone measures taken by other countries. I don’t know of any other country that advances the interest targeting people for murder around the world. Robles: Sure, they could start targeting the people who are running the drone programs as being a threat to their citizens. Rozoff: I would hate to speculate on that score and I would probably end up in penitentiary somewhere if I did. Sorry. (coughs) Robles: Let’s not do that. Reminder Rozoff: We do have to see that the US is substantively engaged in supporting the French military operation, indeed the French “war” in Mali, that US aircraft are refueling French war planes, Rafaels and Mirages, for air attacks inside the country, US cargo planes are transporting… the US Air Force is running an operation in France to transport troops and material including weapons inside Mali for the campaign. And we have to recall that the US military has been involved in Mali itself for several years now. An incident perhaps four or five, perhaps even more, years ago, occurred where a US military transport plane was shot at, and caught fire, that is, from gunfire from the ground by Tuareg Rebels in the north where the US was aiding and abetting the government of Mali against the rebels in the north, engaged in the counterinsurgency war. So, that is something not new to the United States and that is part of what is called Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative, which is a misnomer, it grew out of the Pan Sahel Initiative of the US state department supposedly to combat Islamic terrorism in the Sahel Region, that is the area south of the Sahara Desert, that runs all the way from the Atlantic Ocean to the horn of Africa, that is very strategically vital part of the world, and US-Africa Command, AFRICOM, has run any number of special forces war games, you know, military exercises in Mali, but in the general region under the code name of Operation Flintlock, so the US has been involved pretty substantially in that. The same US air units that are supporting the French in Mali currently are those who supported AFRICOM and NATO’s war against Libya two years ago. You know, operating out of Britain in the first place. So, what we see is further expansion of military operations inside Africa, which have included in recent years, NATO air-lifting Burundian and Rwandan troops into Somalia for the ongoing fighting there, the US assisting that, including with air strikes, drone missile attacks. So, what you are seeing is kind of a war front extending around the same latitude that Sahel is at, but all the way from West African and Mali to East Africa and Somalia, and in-between increasingly in areas like the western part of Sudan, Darfur, the Central African Republic. The US and its NATO allies, and its NATO allies are, we have to recall, all the major colonial powers that had formally divided up and ruled the African continent: Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, later on Germany and Italy, also Turkey during the Ottoman period, and this is a force that is not going back to supposedly restore order or pacify Africa again. I am sure the Africans on the ground, if not their governments, are nervous, they recollect what happened the last time these guys were there. Robles: Now, Rick, back to Mali there for a minute: a few minutes ago you mentioned something about NATO being a guarantor of energy supplies. Right? Rozoff: Uh huh. Robles: I read an article by somebody, I can’t exactly remember where it was, they said the whole purpose for the French assistance of the Malian Government was to ensure the delivery of Uranium to France from Niger. Do you know anything about that? Rozoff: It is extremely good point, the estimates I’ve read is that 80% of energy produced in France is from nuclear power plants. They are dependent of course on Uranium to run those plants, and Mali and neighboring Niger, area sources for a good deal of that Uranium, and the fighting that’s been going on for a number of years in the north of Mali with the Tuareg Rebels: in large part the Tuaregs wanted not only autonomy and a certain degree of participation in the central government in Bamako, but also wanted some say into what happened with the proceeds of the Uranium mines in the north of the country where they reside. So, in large part I think we can see this, as being another energy resource grab! You were listening to the interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the Owner, Manager and Editor of the Stop NATO website and mailing list. End of Part 2. Please visit our site in the near future for the third and final part of this interview. World, Opinion & Analysis, NATO, US drones, Interview, Mali, Politics · Share: · · · · · Сomments 10 · It's rather difficult to shoot down drones because they fly at a very high altitude. As for Africa, they had their chance to establish peace, order and prosperity, and instead the continent is plagued with disease, starvation, human rights abuses and even cannibalism. I'd love to see the EU take an active interest in restoring the colonial status quo, but it's more likely that China and various multinationals will simply set up raw material extraction fiefdoms. · Poor Travis Jones. You have all wrong. You should read the France-Afrique story initiated by De Gaulle and followed by all his successor presidents. Most African leaders have been trained and installed by the former colonial powers. They have beautiful residences in the Riviera-Coast and insured fortunes at he condition to be obedient collabos. The process of abusing peoples is even more cynical that it was during the colonial time. The energies'grab has never stopped and now BHL, Bouygues and consorts fear the Chinese'arrival on the continent... JCM · If Africa is a mess, the Europeans and Americans shouldn't be involved. It's not their business. Africa poses no threat to them. · As if US and Europe are there to fight threats! Their corporations are there to get natural resources - it's their business! · It seems we are migrating off topic here. This second part of the conversation is focused on Drone use. In Africa there is probably little to no defense for these military weapons. With its inclusion in Africa it would appear that NATO should be able to remove all enemies of the inhabiting countries. My concern is why is there still conflict? With such a gross overpowering on the sides of African officials and governments why have they not stomped out all resistance? The only conclusion my mind can generate is that someone, or some group, doesn't want the wars to end. I know that the African officials do not directly control this tech, but all NATO officials need is an OK of sorts. Any thoughts? · Question: How many countries are capable to shot down US drones? · The Pantsir-S1 (Russian: Панцирь-С1, NATO reporting name SA-22 Greyhound) is a combined short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system produced by KBP of Tula, Russia. The system is a further development of SA-19/SA-N-11 and represents the latest air defence technology by using phased-array radars for both target acquisition and tracking. This would be an excellent system to shoot nearly all drones now or in future use! · When has the US EVER had a colony in Africa? Liberia doesn't count, we never had a colonial administration there and its entire purpose was to get Africans back TO Africa. · Why shoot down, it is civil to bring all countries in a request not to fly over their territories and for Americans to demand their government to stop spending money on them and using them. When will people learn they are making the world worse with their behavior and neither safer for their children. · But we have an African as President so we are involved............ 25 February, 22:34 Freedom House crackdown
© Collage: The Voice of Russia Bringing the problem to center stage again is a U.S. taxpayer funded NGO called Freedom House, which has gathered an all star cast of U.S. backed and funded Russian “opposition” members, U.S. Congressmen, NGO representatives from the United States and Russia as well as European Officials for an upcoming forum titled: “New Approach or Business As Usual? US-EU-Russia Relations After Putin's Crackdown.” The United States of America does not even try to hide the fact anymore that it is actively attempting to subvert the Russian Government and funding and supporting those within the Russian Federation who would attempt to do so for their own selfish gains. American backed Russian Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and their American colleagues continue to push for “tougher measures” against the Russian Federation, many even calling for the U.S. and the West to implement a policy of “containment,” something Washington did during Soviet times to “stop the spread of Communism.” One has to wonder as to the real motivations of these organizations and individuals as they are on the U.S. payroll and are funded by U.S. taxpayer monies routed to them by hawkish mainly right-wing organizations and individuals who seek to propagate out-dated cold war clichés and Russo-phobic hysteria. Their reasoning is also to question: contain what? Some sort of undefined “evil” ideology or some non-existent military expansionism? Utterly ludicrous. The continuing activities of most of these bodies, many of whom only exist for the sole reason of subverting (in this case) the Russian Government, weakening the Russian Federation internationally on all fronts and giving reason and justification to U.S. expansionism, military buildup, meddling and interference in the internal and external affairs of the Russian Federation have proven the wisdom and the necessity for the recently passed Russian legislation requiring all members of foreign funded NGOs to register with the government as foreign agents. Bringing the problem to center stage again is a U.S. taxpayer funded NGO called Freedom House, which has gathered an all star cast of U.S. backed and funded Russian “opposition” members, U.S. Congressmen, NGO representatives from the United States and Russia as well as European Officials for an upcoming forum titled: “New Approach or Business As Usual? US-EU-Russia Relations After Putin's Crackdown." I am still wondering what “crackdown” they are talking about, but I would suppose they are referring to the recent law mentioned above and perhaps to the recently adopted Dima Yakovlev law which protects Russian children, or perhaps the expulsion of USAID for their questionable activities throughout the country. The real reason I believe is that Russia is strengthening ties and increasing trade with Europe, especially in the energy sector, and this has not pleased Washington who sees Europe as their subordinate. The adeptness with which the U.S. continues to demonize Russia is daunting due to the level and the massive scale it has attained, as well as increasingly more obvious, this time the more so, especially in light of the fact that the two above mentioned laws were enacted because there were and continue to be clear and present threats against the sovereignty of Russia and against the Russia people. We know the following is true for the United States: Russia must be kept weak politically, militarily, economically and socially. This is for the sole reason that Russia must be brought under the control of the United States of America and that control must permanent and complete. A strong Democracy and civil society are bad for the U.S. because a well off and satisfied citizenry are not as pliable and less subject to go against the state. Hence the funding of NGOs and the Russian opposition to sow discontent and strife with false flag arguments, straw man evils and phantom wrongs and injustices. Just ask any member of the so called “opposition:” what would you change, give me an example of what is wrong with Russia? Like brainwashed hypnotized people just waking from a sleep they will probably answer something to the effect: “Putin bad. America good!” I oversimplify but that is basically what it boils down too. America does not want a strong leader in Russia, they need someone they can manipulate. The President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, unfortunately for the U.S., is not that man. Keeping a country economically weak is also good for the U.S. as a country that is weak economically is easy to manipulate, its markets are easier to access for the dumping of goods and for exploitation, its workforce is easier to exploit, its citizens are easier to manipulate and direct against the state, and its officials are easier to bribe and buy. Any country, such as Russia, which has an assertive and independent foreign policy is also bad for the obvious reason that it is not under the control of the U.S. This is particularly bad when such countries form alliances, groupings, organizations, treaties and cooperate independently and without the control of the U.S. or the cow-towing to Washington. In a recent analysis for the Voice of Russia Edward Lozansky, President of the American University in Moscow gave some insights into Freedom House. According to Mr. Lozansky Freedom House is damaging the national interests of the United States while being paid for by taxpayers. He said: “This organization has already wasted enormous amounts of taxpayers' money on supporting the color revolutions in the post-Soviet space, which ended in total fiascoes… Now they want America not only to "stand in solidarity with Russian activists… but also to "challenge the various authoritarian groupings in which Russia plays a prominent role, such as the Eurasian Union, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)." Calling these groups “authoritarian” I am sure was a tongue-in-cheek stab at the ridiculousness of the classification. He continued: “one item on that agenda is particularly laughable: the call to challenge the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, where China plays a key role. In other words, Freedom House expects China, a top foreign U.S. lender, to provide more funds to the U.S. Treasury to finance the challenge against itself.” As for the Russian division of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, he says: “… one of its senior associates, (a U.S. paid Russian) finds the Freedom House challenge approach too modest; she calls for a "new way to contain Russia," no more and no less.” Of course we are all used to U.S. hypocrisy but they are growing bolder and bolder with every passing day. If the shoe were on the other foot, as I love to point out, things would be entirely different. Were a group of American politicians and civic “leaders” to appear before the Federation Council or the Federal Duma and plea to the Russian Government to expand sanctions, implement harsher measures against the elected government of the U.S. and continue to isolate and “contain” the United States of America, those involved would surely be charged with treason and put in front of a firing squad. But when it comes to Russia, this is supposed to be okay and any move against these individuals, whose sole aim is to assist an increasingly hostile foreign power to harm their own country, should be called a “crackdown.” As for the shoe being on the other foot, Russia would have far more justifiable and legitimate reasons to take such actions as I detailed above. Russia would have the moral high ground in areas such as droning, the unbelievable numbers of civilians killed in the war on terror, the meddling into the affairs of countries worldwide, the expansion of NATO and the U.S. military presence all over the planet and even in the deaths of so many Russian orphans. Yet as always it is the kettle calling… 24 February, 15:59
The West is adept at demonizing whoever they want to go after - exclusive interview with Dr. Edward Herman
Photo: AFP Renowned author Dr. Edward Herman spoke with the Voice of Russia's John Robles regarding the facts surrounding the Srebrenica Massacre. In part 2 of the full interview Dr. Herman speaks about how the West, the CIA and NATO manipulate the media to demonize whoever they want to attack and how friends become evil enemies at the drop of a hat. His opinion of the War Crimes Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia is something you have to listen to or read for yourself. Enjoy.
Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Dr. Edward Herman. He is a Professor Emeritus of Finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. And he is also the author of several books, namely “The Manufacturing of Consent”, he wrote that with the Noam Chomsky, and “The Srebrenica Massacre: Evidence, Context and Politics”. Robles: You said the West wanted, or the United States, wanted a reason to get Serbia. What exactly were those reasons? Herman: After the fall of the Soviet Union, the West: the United States and its allies, no longer wanted to support an independent Yugoslavia. It was a social-democratic state, it was relatively independent and they didn’t want it to continue and would prefer to have it broken into pieces which they could control. So, they encouraged Slovenia and the Bosnian Muslims, in Bosnia, and the Croatians, they encouraged them to leave Yugoslavia. And the only ones who wanted to keep Yugoslavia together were the Serbs. So, the Serbs did try to keep them together but there was mutual fighting and there were efforts to settle the whole business and let them exit more or less peaceably, but the West sabotaged those agreements. This is a famous set of episodes, there was an attempt called the Lisbon Agreement in 1992, to sort of solve some of the problems with peaceful resolution and the Bosnian Muslims were encouraged by the United States to reject that agreement. So, they fought one another mutually trying to establish land control and this caused the tremendous amount of killings. The Srebrenica massacre was part of this mutual ethnic cleansing and struggle for land control. But behind it all was the fact that the West supported the dismantling of Yugoslavia. And the Serbs were their enemy because the Serbs opposed this dismantling. So, the Serbs were the victims of all the West’s activity. Most important, possibly, apart from the sabotaging of this peace agreement, was the setup of Yugoslavia Tribunal. And the Tribunal was, and remains a complete instrument of NATO and the United States and it went almost entirely after Serbs, and it actually helped to sabotage peace. It was really a phony judicial arm of NATO with the Serbs as victims. And so, eventually they went after Milosevic. All these efforts of the Tribunal were the dismantling of Yugoslavia in a proper political light. If you could criminalize all the Serb leaders, you could prove that Serbia was the bad guy and that NATO and its activities, including the bombing war against Kosovo, that NATO would look like it was engaging in humanitarian intervention, here it had this judicial backup of the Yugoslav Tribunal which was a fraud, which was a travesty. There is a wonderful book by John Laughland entitled “Travesty”. It is a study of the Yugoslav Tribunal and its devastating. Actually another good book is by Michael Mandel called “How America Gets Away with Murder” which also has a very good discussion of the Tribunal and International Criminal Court, and the extent to which they are effectively arms of the West, they are not judicial institutions at all, really Public Realtions arms of the West. Robles: After WW II there was an agreement not to reorganize Europe. And I’ve read some material saying that Yugoslavia was the first experiment for the US in their game of geopolitical chess to reestablish or redefine the borders of Europe. Do you think that was successful and where do you think that has led us today? Herman: I think it was a very successful operation from the standpoint of the United States and NATO, because this independent social-democratic entity was destroyed by the West and it left a series of states that are dependent on the United States and the West. Serbia which was once an independent state is now a groveling, kind of pathetic failed state. It was failed, by the bombing and by the long blockade or sanctions against Serbia, it is now groveling before the West trying to get into the European Union. It was dismantled and taken apart. Robles: There are “some” people in Serbia, who are as you say, groveling for the West. But there is a large percentage of Serbians who know the reality of what happened and really, hate the West because they know that their country was destroyed. Herman: I agree with you completely. I’m talking about the people who run this, those in power. It is true that there is a very significant minority, or maybe it is even a majority… Robles: I think it is a majority, but you just said the key words there “those in power”. Right! Herman: You know, I think that the vast number of Serbs are resentful of what has been done to them. But the West has arranged and the power structure has been fixed so that the friends of the West retain political power and they do the groveling. Robles: And there is so much of a media blackout of anything that counters that “evil Serb” stereotype that they promoted in the West. Herman: Absolutely, yes. The standard procedure of the United States and the NATO powers is to demonize whoever they are going to go after. So, Milosevic was made into a devil and the Serbs were made into an evil population. And of course the Bosnian Muslims loved that and latched onto that and they are still using it to achieve some of their aims. Countries finds it extremely difficult to throw off the burden of demonization and hatred by the West. After we crushed Vietnam, we allegedly lost that war, but we damaged Vietnam horribly, we actually succeeded in maintaining an 18 year boycott of this victim to whom we ought to have been paying huge reparations. We actually should be paying gigantic reparations to Serbia for the illegal bombing war. But the West does this demonization and the demon charge hangs on. So, each successful target you find this demonization process at work and the hypocrisy involved here is absolutely mindboggling because sometimes you have us changing our mind in mid-stream as with Saddam Hussein, when he was warring against Iran in the 1980s, he was a friend of the United States and they actually provided him with weapons of mass destruction. And then he became worse than Hitler. But the media doesn’t stress this and avoid it, they ignore the fact that he was our ally and then the next day he is a demon. Robles: Same thing with Muammar Gaddafi, I mean he became a friend, again, what you were saying. Disarm! Disarm! Ok, he disarmed. The same with Hussein, he disarmed. Herman: I don’t think we ever really loved Gaddafi or Assad but we did get along with them at least for a while. But Gaddafi was always a handy villain we could turn to, like in a Lockerbie case, that was really an amazing business, because after Pan Am 103 was shot down. Robles: Sure! Do you think he was behind that? Do you believe that? Herman: No, absolutely not! Right off the bat. The shoot down of Pan Am 103 followed by six months the United States shooting down an Iranian airliner killing 290 people. And six months after that there was Lockerbie, the Pan Am 103, so everybody knew. And in fact the CIA claimed for two years it was clear fact that Iran and Syria had been behind that bombing. But the geopolitics changed and suddenly we were having to deal with Saddam Hussein, we needed Iran and Syria to be our temporary friends and Gaddafi was brought into the picture. The convenient villain. I’m totally sure, I’ve studied that Lockerbie case and it had nothing whatsoever to do with the shooting down of Pan Am 103. But it is like the Srebrenica massacre. The capability of the West and the media to manipulate facts, and the CIA to manipulate facts and demonize, and have an effective case against whomever we have demonized, it is amazing how the West does this. That was the end of part 2. You can find part three on our website at english.ruvr.ru
24 February, 12:33
‘Our country is fully under the control of corporate power’ - interview with Bruce Gagnon
In part 3 of the interview with the Voice of Russia, Bruce Gagnon the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space describes how the United States has become a country that clearly fits in to Mussolini's definition of fascism. There is no democracy in America today, Gagnon claims. Robles: Now what you’re describing to me, I mean in the dictionary, if you look up the word “fascism”, it is a government controlled by corporations basically. You mentioned Nazi planners in the background starting all this stuff up. Would you characterize the US as being a fascist state at this point? Gagnon:Well, I think it is true that Mussolini's classic definition of fascism was the wedding of government and corporations. And there can be no doubt that’s what we have in America today. We have no democracy. Our country is fully under the control of corporate power. They buy the elections now, buy the Supreme Court. In a decision just a couple of years ago: now allows corporations to put as much money into election campaigns as they like, they don’t even have to publicly declare where the money comes from. And so our ability to have fair and free elections has been destroyed, has been drowned by the Supreme Court’s decision allowing unlimited corporate money. They basically said that corporations have the rights of people. Robles: Unfortunately, Bruce we are about out of time. Is there anything you’d like to finish up with? Gagnon:I’d just like to invite people to check out our website, which is spaceforpeace.org: the Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. We were created 21 years ago and today we have a global membership. People all over the world who are working hard to get their country out of the program that the United States has developed, that is now swallowing up other countries around the world, pulling them into this very expensive Starwars program, so expensive that the US cannot afford to pay for it itself. It is now pulling in the so-called allied countries to help them pay for the entire program. Robles: Ok, thank you very much. I visited your website, very interesting, a lot of material there. So, I recommend it for anybody out there. Thanks a lot, it was very interesting. You were listening to an interview with Bruce Gagnon. He is the coordinator for the Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. 23 February, 23:35
The USSR brought peace, the USA brought war - interview with Dr. Gulzad
Afghanistan. Photo: EPA Dr Zalmay Gulzad spoke to the Voice of Russia's John Robles about the history of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and about how the USSR assisted the Afghan people and built almost everything there is in the country. Dr. Gulzad details how the US turned their own "freedom fighters" into the very "terrorists" that they are now fighting and he says the US wants to stay in Afghanistan for a very long time due to its strategic geopolitical location. Hello! This is John Robles, I’m talking with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad. He is a professor at Harold Washington College in Chicago, in the Political Science Department. Robles: Hello Sir! How are you this evening? Gulzad: Very good, thank you very much. Robles: First question I’d like to ask you. Now: you were born in Afghanistan and live in the US, you work in the US. How do you feel about the invasion of Afghanistan by the United States of America? Gulzad: Let me start with this: I was a young member of PDPA (People Democratic Party of Afghanistan). I supported the Afghan revolution. Unfortunately at that time I was in the United States, but I did support the revolution in Afghanistan and I supported the Soviet Union’s support for the Afghan revolution. There was one Soviet Union journalist Vladimir Pozner, at the Soviet time. Him and I did a review “Question and Answer for American people”. I was a student, I was getting my Phd and he came to Madison Wisconsin. I know Vladimir Pozner very well and we met. So, my point is that it is an aggression. These are the people who the United States supported, they are the criminals, they’re bandits, the so-called “freedom fighters” because they were fighting the Soviets and the communism and all this. And today the same people are attacking the United States and they call them terrorists. Why didn’t they call them terrorists in 1980s? Robles: I’ve been trying to get that point across to a lot of people and people are missing that for some reason. Gulzad: 15,000 Soviet troops were killed to fight these bandits, but the United States always went with the short victories, went with the criminals. The criminals that they trained: Bin Laden and the Arab terrorists, and the Pakistanis, and all these Taliban and Mujahidin, and “they” turned against them (U.S.). Unfortunately, this land of democracy that I live in is a joke because nobody is asking their leader: “Why did you make that mistake.?” I used to call them freedom fighters, today they are terrorists. How come it changed in one day? Robles: Do you have any details yourself about how the Taliban got their start, how Al Qaeda got their start, how Osama Bin Laden got his start fighting the Soviet Army in Afghanistan? Gulzad: 1978 Afghan revolution, the Soviet Union recognized us and most progressive countries in the world recognized that revolution. Jimmy Carter was the President of the United States. He started it: with Zbigniew Brzezinski, they started it to arm, to find the people to oppose the Afghan state because they considered, they thought: that this is the soft belly of the Soviet Union. They thought that from Afghanistan they are going to infiltrate in the Muslim Soviet republics of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. So what they did… Now, they couldn’t find too many Afghans, very few Afghans opposed it, because the Communist Government gave them land and everything else, so they couldn’t find too many Afghans. So, what they did is they went to Anwar Sadat and to the Arab reactionary regimes, they found unemployed Arabs, unemployed Pakistanis (the Pakistani regime was a dictatorship, not only military, but it was a religious Zia-ul-Haq regime in Pakistan). What they did, they brought all these criminals to Pakistan which is bordering with Afghanistan for almost 1000 miles. So what they did, the CIA started training them and sending them to kill the Afghans, destroy the Afghan revolution. So, then naturally, “naturally”, it is a very natural thing, the Soviet Union had to… because there was a friendship treaty with Afghanistan. The Soviet Union and Afghanistan signed the friendship treaty in September 1978. So according to that treaty the Afghan Government was able to ask the Soviet Union, in case they were in trouble, to ask for the Soviet Union to help and the Soviet Union provided that help. So, the point is that the United States taught these criminals, dropped them there to fight not only the Afghan Communists, but then they thought they will make it the Soviet Union but now… And that is how all that process started through Pakistan. Pakistan was a reactionary regime of military. So, Afghanistan became a sandwich between two: Shia and Sunni Muslim fundamentalists. Reminder Robles: Can you give us a few more details? Can you compare what the United States is doing now and what the Soviet Union was doing when they were in there, in Afghanistan? Because now some people are trying to say: “Oh, well!! The Soviet Union “INVADED” Afghanistan… The Soviet Union… Gulzad: I fight it every day. I fought it even at that time when Ronald Reagan was in power. Vladimir Ponzner will be the witness on that. We had a Progressive Afghan Student Organization and I was the head of it. My point is that you cannot compare the Soviet Union because Afghanistan People’s Democratic Party had the same ideology as the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
So, the idea was that Afghanistan PDPA was giving land, Afghanistan was a very poor country, an almost feudal society, so we were giving land to the poor. What person is going to rise against you if you give them a piece of land? If you teach their daughter and son? They (The U.S.S.R.) built schools, they built everything that is in Afghanistan today, I am telling you as an Afghan! Every road, highway, dam, factory, airport that you can see, the infrastructure of Afghanistan is made in the USSR. Robles: Few people know that. Gulzad: Including Bagram that today the American Imperialists are sitting there. It is the Soviet Union that built everything. Thousands of Afghan students, including my brother, became educated in the Soviet Union. I mean “what the hell?” people are going to… It was Not the people! Do you know that there was a recent interview on BBC and CNN. They went to Kandahar and to Ghazni, two cities in Afghanistan. They were asking people… An Afghan farmer he spit on the American journalist! He said: “The Soviet Union brought a lot of things to this country, peace, but you brought war.” Certainly! And they showed it on TV, I saw it on BBC and Aljazeera. Robles: So, what is the real situation in Afghanistan right now, after almost 13 years of US occupation? Gulzad: My point is this: that if you want to stop this war, you should go to Pakistan. Pakistan is a very poor country. Pakistan is controlling the Taliban, the Al Qaeda, everybody. If United States wants to stop this war, then United States could squeeze Pakistan economically and in many ways! Pakistan is a joke! So, my point is that the United States wants to prolong this war because they want to stay in Afghanistan. The United States has total control economically and militarily over Pakistan. End of part 1 You were listening to an interview with Dr. Zalmay Gulzad – a professor at Harold Washington College in Chicago. You can find part 2 on our website at english.ruvr.ru.
22 February, 09:47 'A 'humanitarian war' is an oxymoron' - exclusive interview with Kathy Kelly
Photo: EPA One hundred billion dollars has been spent on Afghan reconstruction by the United States, yet nothing has improved for the Afghan people. Two billion dollars a week has been spent for over a decade to fight 55 Al-Qaeda operatives. The US continues to slaughter civilians on a regular basis, yet Hamid Karzai has done nothing. Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama says he will "... get the heart of Al-Qaeda", yet few people in Afghanistan know anything about Al-Qaeda, and yes, the U.S. did torture people in Afghanistan. After close to a dozen extended trips to Afghanistan, 3 time Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Kathy Kelly, the co-cordinator for Voices for Creative Nonviolence spoke to the VOR's John Robles about all of the above and more, painting a horrendously grim picture of the U.S. "success" in Afghanistan.
Robles: You’ve been to Afghanistan almost a dozen times, right? How has life changed for the common Afghan people? Kelly: One of the main changes I think is that the corruption has gone viral. You know, the SIGAR (Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction) report, the special investigative report on Afghan reconstruction was issued and it said that the amount of money the United States has spent on development aid now approaches $100 billion. But $100 billion has not gone into repairing the infrastructure or enabling healthcare delivery, or improving education, not by a long shot which just brings about a tremendous weariness, because people can’t get their basic needs met and the economy isn’t functioning properly at all. Many people lay blame for that on the United States for not having had any shred of wisdom about how to help form an entrepreneurial class that could give people a stake in their economy. And of course $2 billion was spent every single week on maintaining the United States military, while starvation, disease and unemployment were on the rise. Robles: How has the US managed, or how have they attempted to sell their occupation of Afghanistan to the Afghan people? Kelly: The United States Government has become adept at selling their wars, marketing their wars to the US public as “humanitarian wars”. Now, that’s an oxymoron. How could there be a humanitarian war? But they try to make it sound as if the US has been protecting and looking after women and children, protecting them from the Taliban, looking after their needs. And both of those statements just simply don’t pan out when you look at statistics and when you talk with everyday ordinary people. One out of every eleven Afghan women dies in childbirth – that’s a torturous way to die. One out of five children doesn’t make it beyond their fifth birthday. In places like Bamyan, a relatively peaceful province, the only hours when you can get any electricity at all are between 1 and 3 in the morning. Afghanistan is a country that has an alarming rate of acute malnutrition according to the United Nations, particularly in the south, and they say one million children suffer from acute malnutrition. There are 400 new refugees every day driven into the Afghan cities by the war. And you can see sprawling camps where people in the snow during this harsh cold are living in lean-tos and poorly constructed tents. So, the idea that somehow the United States is engaged in something humanitarian is just outlandish. Robles: Ok, I understand that and I understand all of the propaganda in the West, but what kind of propaganda do they feed the “Afghan people” to get them to somehow accept the occupation? Kelly: One of the most fearsome intelligence secret police agencies in the world is the NDS, the National Directorate of Security. And we should also note that the latest UNAMA (United Nations Assistance Mission to Afghanistan) report said that over half of the Afghan people in jail were tortured. So, no one wants to be identified as someone who in any way is subverting the Government’s aims. And President Hamid Karzai will try to appease and mollify the public after, say ten civilians are killed, which just happened the night of Obama’s State of the Union Address. A United States aerial attack killed ten people, there were four little girls and a little boy and five women, and one man and they were all civilians. And this sort of thing happens again and again and again, and then President Hamid Karzai will say: “Well, I won’t tolerate this and the United States has to stop this and this is unacceptable.” And it just seems as though he issues these statements to try to appease public anger. You know, sometimes people are burning effigies of US leaders. But he hasn’t been able to stop the United States from engaging in the despicable night raids and in drone bombardments. People are very afraid to speak up and with a good reason, because the Afghan secret police could do them grievous-grievous harm. Reminder Robles: Who is doing all that torturing, in your opinion? Kelly: Sometimes the United States will put people in prison and then turn them over to the Afghan authorities. And if the United States hadn’t imprisoned them in the first place, and sometimes they are held without charge for months, then they wouldn’t have been vulnerable to being tortured by the Afghan authorities. In the Bagram prison and in secret sites within the Bagram prison there have been complaints about the United States engaging in torture. I think in more recent years the United States has been turning over more and more of its prison authorities and facilities to the Afghan people. Robles: I’d like to ask you a hypothetical: what if, for example; China invaded theUnited States and they started killing people left and right, and anyone who fought against them was thrown into a prison for being a criminal, I mean: How would Americans feel? Kelly: I think if the shoe were on the other foot and the Golden Rule were invoked, people all across this country would understand why it is that people start to join fighting forces. There is a very interesting quote from a staff sergeant who is fictitiously named by an embedded reporter, in an article in The American Prospect John Frey embedded himself with a group doing night raids. And after a week of these night raids, which are just horrendous invasions of other people’s homes… He said they tornadoed through houses, they broke people’s dishes and deliberately destroyed their furniture, shot the dog that was sleeping, hog-tied the householders. They didn’t do things that you could accuse as being war crimes but they create a huge antagonism. At the end of that week the staff sergeant said: “You could say we just did a week long recruiting drive for the Taliban.” And then he continued, “ …and you know what; we had fun doing it! I like recruiting for the Taliban, you could call it job security for us.” And that’s the end of the quote… Robles: In Obama’s State of the Union address, he quite proudly said they: “… would get the heart of Al Qaeda”. He said that with great pride, to a standing ovation. I wanted to ask you; how many Al-Qaeda “operatives or fighters or terrorists” are operating in Afghanistan? And are the Afghan people, or the Taliban: is that the heart of Al Qaeda in your opinion? Kelly: When Leon Panetta was asked that question in December of 2011, I was shocked by his answer, you know (How many Al Qaeda operatives are there in Afghanistan?) He said: “Oh, about 55”. Robles: 55!?! Kelly: 55. $2 billion a week the United States is spending to maintain a full military presence and there might be as many as 55 Al Qaeda figures in the country? I don’t think that that’s the reason why the United States’ war has been perpetuated in Afghanistan. I think that Al Qaeda has been used and that there are many different kinds of Taliban fighters, that some of them wouldn’t have even heard of the aims of Al Qaeda, and what’s more, I think, that the US insisting that the solution to every problem has to be a military solution; using threat and force, is in a sense endorsing the same aims as the Al Qaeda figures. Parting You were listening to an interview with Kathy Kelly – the co-coordinator for Voices for Creative Nonviolence.
21 February, 19:23 New York Times promotion of tired old cold war clichés
Photo: AFP In an “Op-Docs” video the New York Times published, a “KGB Agent” endorses and congratulates the stripping away of Americans’ rights and freedoms, the authorization to kill Americans and the out of control spread of drones in the United States. The use of Russia and the KGB to somehow imply any connection between the hyper-security state paradigm that exists in America is an affront to Russia. The New York Times recently published a very odd and provocative video on its web-site which seriously brings into question, once again, the editorial policies of the publication, its journalistic ethics, its independence and the hidden motivations behind its editorial decisions. Who the New York Times truly serves has been a matter for debate for a very long time with an almost endless list of scandals ranging from outing CIA agents to charges of fabrication and plagiarism to libeling the Premier of China Wen Jiabao. Do they serve the right-wing, the US Government, commercial interests or as some Americans call it, the “liberal” mass media establishment? Perhaps all of the above, but more likely than not, at the end of the day the true masters of the New York Times are extremely powerful right-wing hawks with deep pockets and with an agenda, which does not include the betterment of the American people, world peace or respect for the international community but which does include the advancement of their own goals: those being global domination, continued militarization and aggression and the economic takeover of the entire globe. You can call them neo-conservatives or members of America’s “black” government or what have you, that is not of primary import. What is important is that these individuals and those who serve them, in regard to Russia, are continuously maintaining the old tired cliché’s of the “evil Soviet Union” and “Reds under the bed” and perpetually demonizing the Russian Federation, President Vladimir Putin, the Russian people in general, and any parties who promote Russian interests or strive to rid the world of these old stereo types, which were fabricated to begin with, but that is another story. Sometimes the New York Times’ bias towards Russia and anything Russian is not so easy to spot and sometimes you might miss it unless you are looking for it and know the key words, just like American racism, but it has been the subject of my work in the past and a continuous affront to myself, my colleagues and many other Russians in all spheres including those in diplomatic and commercial circles, and those who are trying to build relations and end the tired old stereotypical “profiling” and bias that the West continues to hold and promote. This time the biased promotion of outdated cold war thinking by the New York Times is so blatant and patently fabricated that it demands an answer. Under the “Op-Docs” video the author, Drew Christie, writes: “When I began thinking of this animated Op-Docs video, I had two things in mind. The first was the adoption of drones by the Seattle Police Department. (The program has since been scuttled.) The second was Yevgeny Zamyatin’s 1924 novel ‘We,’ which was a forerunner to dystopian novels including George Orwell’s ‘1984,’ Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ and Kurt Vonnegut’s ‘Player Piano.’” Fair enough I suppose. The problem that we have with it, and by we I mean my humble self most of the Russian people, my colleagues and fair thinking reasonably intelligent people everywhere, is the fact that Mr. Christie chose to portray a KGB General as one applauding the U.S. obsession with drones and the hyper-security state. First off I would like to underline this fact for the entire planet to read, in particular those who do not know this at the New York Times, and please, if you need to repeat it three times to make sure it sets in your memory do so: “THE KGB NO LONGER EXISTS.” The portrayal by Mr. Christie and the New York Times of a KGB General, that is if we are to assume his uniform is pre 1974 since his epaulettes had four stars, is disingenuous and offense on many levels and in many ways. The most obvious I mentioned above. The next is that it attempts to portray Russia, Russian Intelligence and the Russian people by proxy as somehow being behind or supporting the stripping away of the rights and freedoms of Americans by their own government. In all fairness if the New York Times had wanted to make a statement on the stripping away of the civil rights, liberties and freedoms of the American people, they could and should have portrayed the Director of the CIA, a “Black Operations” General, Obama, Petraeus, Bush, Cheney, Bin-Laden or any of the other architects of the entire hyper-security state paradigm that has existed in the US and brought suffering to the entire planet since 9-11. If you are a regular reader or listener of the Voice of Russia, then you know that we, my colleagues and I, do not personally, nor as an Official State Broadcaster, support the paradigm that has come into existence in the United States since the tragic events of 9-11 and the Neo-Conservative takeover over a decade ago. If I dare to speak for all of “us”, my colleagues, myself, Russian Officials, Russian Diplomats, Russia’s business professionals, Academics, and so on down the line, and even Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, for decades “we” have done nothing but attempt to improve relations between our two countries, improve economic and diplomatic cooperation, end cold war stereo types and the unnecessary heightened militarization between our countries and fight for the rule of law and liberty and justice. The Voice of Russia and I personally have been and continue to document and report on the illegality of drones (the subject of the video) and the close to 5,000 human beings they have eradicated, the stripping away of Americans’ rights and the continuation of cold war stereo types by the West and in no way do we support or endorse the American Government’s unregulated use of drones, or their illegal use to assassinate or further commit activities that further unjustly cause harm to the American people or take away their liberties, wherever they may be. Fortunately, the Russian people are intelligent and mature enough to take this and every other previous affront, with a grain of salt and not to go out and burn embassies and such and we will continue to work to better understand each other so that we may all live in peace.
20 February, 23:02 Anonymous, LULSEC and TylerSec continue fighting back, U.S. State Department hacked
Photo: EPA The internet activist group Anonymous has released statements saying they have penetrated the U.S. State Department's website and gained access to information which they have published. This is just another in what is a growing series of attacks in retribution for the "suicide" of Reddit co-founder and internet activist Aaron Swartz who was being persecuted by the US and facing over three decades in prison for apparently hoping to release research papers and scientific documents that were paid for by taxpayer money. Many people worldwide agree, the US security state is out of control, and when pushed, Anonymous is pushing back. Anonymous is continuing to strike back as mercilessly as those who they are after, those who pursue anyone who seeks to make a positive change in the world by bring knowledge to the people, and those responsible for the death of one of the world’s most brilliant and promising young internet activists. The latest “victim” of Anonymous, or the last organization they have “owned,” is the US State Department, and there is little likelihood that they will back down anytime soon. On January 11, 2013, as many of us were recovering in way or another after celebrating the New Year’s holidays, 26 year-old Aaron Swartz, an accomplished internet activist, apparently committed suicide after being literally hounded to death by the overzealous and the brutal US Federal Authorities and in particular U.S. Federal Prosecutor Carmen Ortiz. Young Mr. Swartz’s crime? An act of terrorism? Exposing war crimes? Blowing the whistle on war profiteers? No dear reader, he merely downloaded too many free articles from the Internet according to blogger Daniel Wright, who obtained and published 21 pages of a 23 page FBI file on Mr. Swartz. In particular the FBI was after Mr. Swartz for accessing what are called “Public Access to Court Electronic Records” (PACER) documents. Where these secret documents? No. Did he hack a government site to get them? No. Did he use the information in the documents to commit a crime? Again no. Did he commit any crime whatsoever? Even the FBI decided that NO! No crime had been committed and they closed the case, but it did not end there. Once they had decided to make an example of young Mr. Aaron Swartzthe ruthlessly pursued him until the end, until they effectively killed him. The Federal Government and the US Authorities apparently have to prove to the world by force that you and I will do what they say or we will pay the price, including the ultimate price paid by Mr. Swartz. They continued the persecution. For the alleged gathering of Scientific material and research from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) paid for by US taxpayers, and technically belonging to them, material that the US Government alleges Mr. Swartz was going to release to the public, he was facing 35 years in prison. Is this excessive? Of course? Is this an exception? No. Has the United States of America become a murderous torturing brutal hyper security state? Ready to kill, maim and destroy anyone who voices an opinion against theirs? Ask Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Jeremy Hammond and millions of others whose lives have been quietly destroyed for believing in freedom and justice. You could have asked young Mr. Swartz too, but they killed him. The “authorities”, in particular Ms. Ortiz, see nothing wrong and congratulate themselves, believing they have now terrorized everyone into submission perhaps, but quite the opposite is taking place. Anonymous, LULZSEC and TylerSec are continuing their attacks and their activism in honor of Mr. Swartz attacking those who brought about his death. So far they have attacked, hacked, defaced and taken down such sites as those of MIT, the State Department, George K. Baum & Company, the US Sentencing Commission and many others in what they are calling round “five” of “Operation Last Resort.” The groups attempted to interrupt the State of the Union Address by Obama as well, as Obama was continuing his calls for even more crackdowns and heightened Cyber Security. Something which would have been symbolic. Anonymous and TylerSec released a joint pastebin statement which reads as follows: Hello there Attorney Carmen Ortiz, Stephen Heymann and MIT corporate “expletive” HIS NAME IS Aaron Swartz and he is twenty-six years old. His name is Aaron Swartz, and Aaron Swartz will be twenty-six years old forever because you killed him. HIS NAME IS Aaron Swartz. He is twenty-six years old,and he was part of the fight for internet freedom against people like you. HIS NAME IS Aaron Swartz. He is twenty-six years old, and you wanted to use him to prove that the state always wins and that resistance is futile. HIS NAME IS Aaron Swartz. He is twenty-six years old, and you wanted to divide us so that we will turn on each other rather than stand up for our rights. The people you are after are the people that society depends on: we write songs, we create art, we build, we invent, we feel love and laugh, we will defend our freedom to our last breath. Do not “expletive” with us. The First leak from the Anonymous Tyler Network: 33 GB of the JSTOR files that Aaron Swartz died to bring to the world. The U.S. Government appears to be growing more and more desperate and continues cracking down and using more and more force. Recently I reported about Anonymous and their petition to U.S. President Barack Obama and his administration to make DDoS attacks the equivalent of a simple sit-in protest. A completely reasonable proposal which will never take place, apparently reason has long ago left the room and will not be returning. Anonymous placed the following message on MIT’s site: In Memoriam, Aaron Swartz, November 8, 1986 – January 11, 2013, Requiescat in pace. A brief message from Anonymous. Whether or not the government contributed to his suicide, the government's prosecution of Swartz was a grotesque miscarriage of justice, a distorted and perverse shadow of the justice that Aaron died fighting for — freeing the publicly-funded scientific literature from a publishing system that makes it inaccessible to most of those who paid for it — enabling the collective betterment of the world through the facilitation of sharing — an ideal that we should all support. Moreover, the situation Aaron found himself in highlights the injustice of U.S. computer crime laws, particularly their punishment regimes, and the highly-questionable justice of pre-trial bargaining. Aaron's act was undoubtedly political activism; it had tragic consequences. Our wishes We call for this tragedy to be a basis for reform of computer crime laws, and the overzealous prosecutors who use them. We call for this tragedy to be a basis for reform of copyright and intellectual property law, returning it to the proper principles of common good to the many, rather than private gain to the few. We call for this tragedy to be a basis for greater recognition of the oppression and injustices heaped daily by certain persons and institutions of authority upon anyone who dares to stand up and be counted for their beliefs, and for greater solidarity and mutual aid in response. We call for this tragedy to be a basis for a renewed and unwavering commitment to a free and unfettered internet, spared from censorship with equality of access and franchise for all. For in the end, we will not be judged according to what we give, but according to what we keep to ourselves. Aaron, we will sorely miss your friendship, and your help in building a better world. May you read in peace. Anonymous is in currently in hyper security mode so they would not comment on continuing operations. The opinions and views expressed above are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
20 February, 19:14 ‘If Australia handed a Senator to America for exposing war crimes the country would explode’ – WikiLeak’s Sam Castro
Photo: AFP Samantha Castro, the co-founder of the WikiLeaks Australian Citizens Alliance recently spoke with the Voice of Russia about Julian Assange's senate bid and the political situation in Australia. In part 2 she says that mainstream Australians are beginning to be wary of the "rogue nation" that has become the United States of America, talks about how she would like to see the paradigm of the "post 9-11 world, become the "post WikiLeaks world, and much more. Robles: People have characterized Australia as being a lapdog to the US. Would you agree with that statement? http://www.jar2.com/Interviews/Sam_Castro.html
20 February, 11:46 Ugly Gorilla and Chinese Unit 61398 to replace Osama and Al-Qaeda as the new global threat, or “How do we sell our overpriced product?”
© Photo: SXC.hu A company selling network security services has issued an extremely detailed report on how the Chinese Army is relentlessly attacking Western computer networks and companies. With the war on terror not really producing enough terrorists to justify the hyper security state of America, they need a new focus to justify cracking down on the last bit of freedom Americans have, namely the Internet. The threat to the world is now from the Chinese Army and the evil hacker UglyGorilla, and they will get you. Really! Run for the hills! When a message is being delivered by a messenger whose self interests are served by the message, one must always be wary. A cyber security firm named Mandiant, based in Alexandria, Virginia, 26 minutes from the unincorporated community of Langley (the metonym for the CIA) in McLean, Virginia, has come out with a much publicized and self-serving report detailing the evil and dangerous threat posed by relentless Chinese hackers. The report claims that advanced threat “actors”, or the more ominous sounding “Advanced Persistent Threat” (APT), operating in China and with the blessing of the Chinese Government, have been conducting, quote: “… a cyber espionage campaign against a wide range of victims since 2006” unquote. The experts at Mandiant have no doubt done a huge amount of hacking themselves because they have, according to their own claims, “discovered” a mountain of information about that these evil Chinese “hackers” who are a part of the 2nd Bureau of the People’s Liberation Army, General Staff Department Unit 61398. Mandiant claims their information is from “open source observations” yet they make many claims that, if they are true, point to a concentrated attack on a very well defined location and the accessing of information that for China would be considered secret. The hackers at Mandiant, or as the West would call them “cybersecurity personnel”, (U.K. Guardian calls Western hackers who attack China “cybersecurity forces”), have apparently discovered that Unit 61398 is involved in work that for China is a “state secret” and that they are involved in “harmful Computer Network Operations”. The spying that the hackers at Mandiant have done on China does not stop there, they have named the exact building where Unit 61398 is apparently located, its physical address, the layout of the compound and the buildings, its square footage, when it was built, how many people work there, the kind of wiring and infrastructure at the facility, the training requirements of the personnel, how many networks they use, the exact data they have “stolen”, the tools the Chinese supposedly use, the exact length of time they have accessed a “victims” network (example 1,764 days), the number of victims, exactly how many terabytes of data were stolen and even three individuals who are guilty of “following orders”. Mandiant’s hacking is superb, (Oh I am sorry when they do it, it is called “cyber security”), and they even give names to these evil Chinese “hackers”: UglyGorilla, DOTA and SuperHard! (Very Chinese sounding names of course) They even claim to have: “… videos showing actual attacker sessions and their intrusion activities”! They state this on page 5 of their report, right above a paragraph detailing their “security” products and which ones you can buy. On page 6 Mandiant does say they are: quite possibly, perhaps a little, maybe a wee bit: mistaken, and the operations may be taking place not in the headquarters of Unit 61398 itself but quote: “… right outside of Unit 61398’s gates.” The rest of the 74 page report gives details about the structure of the Communist Party of China and includes many pages detailing how the information was obtained, what the threats are and how you can purchase their products. According to Mandiant’s website the threat is dire and the only one who can save you is Mandiant. Their site says, quote: “Mandiant is the ONLY information security company that can both: A) TELL A COMPANY WHEN IT HAS BEEN COMPROMISED AND B) TELL WHAT THE MATERIAL IMPACT OF THE BREECH WAS!!! They call this an “extraordinary statement” but personally I would go with a company that could STOP THE THREAT BEFORE IT HAPPENED! Not tell me about it afterwards. Mandiant is in the business of selling threats, (well okay in the business of responding to attacks), so the entire report may only be a self-serving marketing gimmick and it would seem China is the great (APT). This assessment can only be further backed up by their own gratuitous plugging of their products and the exaggerated language present on their site. Some examples: “makes us the go-to company for organizations that are looking to protect their most valuable assets”, “advanced persistent threat (APT) and other targeted attackers that are attempting to compromise your most valuable assets”, “known nefarious domains to perform malicious activity”, “persistent attackers execute a series of activities to entrench themselves and compromise your systems. If you manage to kick them out, rest assured they will be back”, “Skilled, determined attackers can break, enter and succeed within minutes. Other times, they spend days plotting, establishing backdoors and fortifying their positions inside your company” and “There is no such thing as perfect security. Attackers get smarter and change tactics all of the time.” But with all this they will help you, for a price of course. According to SC Magazine “Mandiant Intelligent Response”, the only thing to protect you from the Chinese super hackers will only cost you a mere $86,000.00. Yes that’s right ONLY $86,000.00. (Mandiant was too modest to post pricing anywhere on their site hence SC’s price quote and no other prices were found). The Guardian seems to agree and so does Obama, the threat is real and you are a target and China is everywhere, just like Al-Qaeda: behind every tree. $86,000.00. No problem. OR if you only have $80,000 and can’t seem to find that other $6,000 measly bucks, I will give you John’s security advice for free, two simple and cheap things any organization handling sensitive information knows: NEVER connect a sensitive and/or secure network to the Internet and ALWAYS hire people you know you can trust. As for China, I think they might have grounds to file a complaint as it seems that they have been hacked. Or then again, maybe Obama needs to target UglyGorilla with a drone. Imminent threats! Evil plots and relentless Communist attack! That is what has made (Langley) Virginia great and the profiteers rich! Is that UglyGorrila in your server? The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru
18 February, 18:40 Burned by AISO, suicided by MOSSAD?
Photo: AFP The details in the case of MOSSAD agent Ben Zygier, the Australian-Israeli national who reportedly committed suicide in a high security Israeli prison cell continue to come out, thanks in large part to the Australian side in this case, something that has occurred while Israel has asked for their media to not report on the matter. By leaking news about Mr. Zygier to the press and continuing to do so, Australia’s AISO effectively burned him. Or did they? Perhaps they were protecting their own asset? Had it not been finally loudly leaked to the press by the Australian last week we may have never heard about Israel’s now infamous Prisoner “X”. Prisoner “X” whose real name is reported to have been Ben Zygier, as we had reported earlier, had held or applied for Australian passports using the names Ben Alon, Ben Allen and Benjamin Burrows. As more and more details surrounding the case and the “suicide” of Prisoner “X” begin to come out the web of intrigue and double-crossings grows in magnitude. The biggest revelations that have come out in the past 24 hours are that “X” was not only working for Israel’s Institute for Intelligence and Special Operations “MOSSAD” but also for the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO). There are also reports that he had contact with the Intelligence Services of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It is this last that most likely led to his death. According to media reports and open source intelligence Mr. Zygier approached the UAE in order to obtain their protection after he supposedly took part in the operation to assassinate Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mahbouh in Dubai. Whether he did in fact take part is not clear. According to reports one of Zygier’s Australian passports may have been used by one of the MOSSAD assassins sent to exterminate Al-Mahbouh. Regardless of Zygier’s involvement in the plot, and if he did have details on the operation, he is more likely than not to have been involved in the plot, as it is not likely MOSSAD gave him operational information if they were just simply borrowing his passport for the mission, this would have amounted to treason for the Israelis. The fact that he contacted the UAE Intelligence Services coupled with the fact that he was already working for MOSSAD, explains why the Australian authorities and namely the AISO, whom he was reportedly passing detailed information about MOSSAD to, did nothing to intervene after Zygier was arrested. There is even speculation that he was burned by the AISO itself for several reasons, one might be due to the illegal use of Australian passports by MOSSAD, as he was the main suspect in the investigation and AISO was getting nowhere in the case. According to media reports it was the AISO which “used” the media to put pressure on Zygier in order to get more information out of him during ASIO’s investigation of Zygier and two other Australian nationals who had been recruited by MOSSAD. It has come out that Australia knew from day one that Zygier had been arrested on National Security grounds, yet did nothing to secure the release or protect their national. According to Ron Ben-Yishai at ynet.com, not only was official Canberra not willing to make waves with Israel, but the Australian Secret Intelligence Agency (ASIS) which operates overseas, unlike the AISO which is responsible for internal Australian security, did nothing because of their close working relationship with MOSSAD. The portrayal of Zygier as an innocent victim is partially valid, he was a young idealistic man who found himself way in over his head, playing different sides amongst the most ruthless spies on the planet, but it is also disingenuous in some regards. Namely in that he knew what he was doing and he repeatedly broke the most sacred rule of all that governs life and death in the “secret” world. He did not keep his “secret” life a secret. According to Haaretz and RT Zygier told two friends that he had been recruited by MOSSAD. Haaretz reports that a close friend of Zygier admitted that he had bragged about the MOSSAD recruitment immediately after it had taken place: “He told me he’d just been recruited, I was in shock. It’s the sort of thing people usually joke about but I had no reason to doubt him at all.” Perhaps the key to unraveling the case may lie with Jason Katsoukis, the journalist from Australian who first investigated charges that Ben Zygier was a Mossad agent. Only Mr. Katsoukis knows who his “anonymous source with connections to the intelligence world” is. Given that the story was leaked in Australia by an Australian intelligence operative and many clues in the article on the matter by Mr. Katsoukis, it is plausible that indeed the AISO burned Mr. Zygier after questioning him and getting nowhere. If one is to believe that Mr. Zygier committed suicide of his own will, then he may have done so in order to protect those he was truly working for, if he was a hardened operative. If he was not then he may have been pushed into it by the Israelis, who threatened him with lengthy prison time and even his being separated from his family and the Jewish people. His being a “passionate Zionist” as Mr. Ben-Yishai says in his article may have caused him to feel shamed and to kill himself out of disgrace. There is also the very real possibility that Mr. Zygier was suicided by MOSSAD for violating his secret oath and passing secrets to the ASIS or AISO or even worse the UAE. After all simply being burned is usually not enough to grant a lethal finding by intelligence agencies, which also points to the fact that Zygier was perhaps involved in something much darker than we have so far been made privy too. More questions still remain for the Australian side in this case. Why did Australia do nothing when they knew their citizen was arrested? Why did Australia not negotiate to free Zygier or arrange an exchange when they found out? Why did Australian Intelligence provide details to the press about Mr. Zygier, in short, burning him? Why do they continue to do so when MOSSAD is a “friendly” agency to Australia? Could it be that Zygier was working for the Australians all along and they have done everything possible to distance themselves from him, even to the point of burning him, to protect him as their own source? For the Israeli side the questions are perhaps less, but nonetheless important. What was it that Zygier knew that was vital to Israeli security and warranted a “national security arrest”? The mere fact that MOSSAD used genuine foreign passports was well known before Zygier. What exactly did he do for them and what exactly did he tell the UAE? What did they accuse him of that would have caused him to be banished from his family and the Jewish people? And most pressing perhaps, how is it possible he committed suicide under 24 hour surveillance? Perhaps we will never know the truth behind Mr. Zygier’s death. Maybe the truth should not be sought in the web of lies spread by the intelligence services but in the simple truth adorning Mr. Zygier’s tombstone: the Jewish Star of David and the words “In loving memory”. A final declaration of whose side he was on.
15 February, 23:40 "Our government refused to listen to us" - WikiLeaks' co-founder Castro
Sam Castro, the co-founder of the WikiLeaks Australian Citizens Alliance, spoke with the VOR's John Robles about Julian Assange's Australian Senate bid, internal Australian politics and the rules and current condition of Australian government policies, the public's support of Mr. Assange and the soon-to-be-official WikiLeaks Party and what has happened to Australia and the Australian people since the United States of America pulled Australia into the endless "War on Terror". Her viewpoint from the inside of Australia is both refreshing and informative as she details everything from surveillance to foreign policy.
15 February, 11:14 Iran's drones would serve Washington right - Rozoff
© Photo: ru.wikipedia.org NATO continues to surround the Russian Federation with their missiles, which according to Mr. Rozoff, may soon number in the thousands and NATO also continues to aggressively seek to "integrate" country after country into their "alliance". Rick tells us why the Western media has gone quiet on Syria and comments on the fact that Iran is now producing its own drones, which were reversed engineered from captured American drones. As always Rick has his finger on the pulse. Robles: Can you give our listeners an update on the latest happenings with NATO please? Rozoff: Yes. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is continuing its expansion, at least its efforts to expand globally. Within the last few days we’ve seen overtures made by leading NATO officials to previously neutral countries like Ireland, Finland, Sweden in efforts to recruit them into the alliance. The Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen is in Ireland now, but prior to departing for Ireland, which historically has been a neutral nation during the Cold War, he gave an interview to the Irish Times where he extended an invitation essentially for Ireland to join NATO as a full member. The Deputy Commander of Allied Command Transformation, the NATO command in the United States in Norfolk Virginia, within the last week or two as well, has welcomed Finland which borders Russia, as a strategic partner of NATO and talked about the further integration of that nation into the NATO sphere of influence and military operations. And then the commander of the military forces, the top commander in Sweden a couple of days ago made a very provocative statement to the effect that if a war ensued between Sweden and Russia (How probable is that, right?) that Sweden wouldn’t last two days against Russia’s military might and that’s why Sweden needs to be in NATO. So, as we are seeing there is a concerted effort to consolidate North Atlantic Treaty Organization control over the entire European continent, I mean they are not going to rest until every nation has been pulled in it as a full member. So, we have that going on. And then we have, although not formally a NATO operation, we have the French military campaign in Mali in northwest Africa with the active assistance of the US, Britain, Germany and other major NATO powers. And so, you know, just off the top of my head, I mean that’s what is going on with NATO: it is consolidating its domination of Europe and it is extending its reach outside of Europe to the point where, an official with the German Marshall Fund of the United States, recently stated that NATO is basically, I don’t want to say a three-ring circus, but something to that effect, saying that there is a ring that is Europe and there is beyond that ring Asia and Africa (this is from Mark Jacobson an Atlantasist think tank expert). So, we see the persistence of the US dominated military bloc’s efforts to extend itself. As a matter of fact, something I don’t want to forget, the current Russian Ambassador to NATO Alexander Grushko said a couple of days ago at a meeting in NATO headquarters, that Russia would not tolerate NATO declaring itself and functioning as, I believe his words were “an international energy security guarantor”, which is another role that NATO has arrogated onto itself. Reminder Robles: Can you tell us anything about, there were reports last week that the infamous missile shield, including Romanian installations, was not workable? Have you heard anything about that? Rozoff: Yes, there were reports to that effect and one wonders, you know, if these are calculated leaks or if they have any authenticity. I don’t know. But you might recall there were similar concerns expressed about the earlier George W. Bush Administration’s plans for interceptor missiles in Poland that are called ground-based midcourse interceptors. But the concerns that you’ve read or you are alluding to rather are premised on the fact that Iran is supposedly going to be able to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles that need interception in places like Romania and Poland, and I would argue that’s an absurd contention in the first place. So, the basic premises and the conclusions drawn from them would be similarly inaccurate. So, I wouldn’t give too much credence to those reports. The US is still going ahead them. As a matter of fact in a recent statement by Anders Fogh Rasmussen “the NATO chieftain”, he boasted particularly about the missile defense “so called” or the interceptor missile system as being, as he put it, at the core of NATO’s defense posture. He boasted about the deployment of 6 Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Interceptor Missile Batteries to southeastern Turkey which have now come unde formal NATO command and control. And he also talked about European countries emulating or joining the US by providing warship with interceptor missile radar and with the interceptor missiles themselves. We should keep in mind, and I don’t know how well it is known in Russia and elsewhere, is that the United States currently has 62 what are called Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers and 22 Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruisers, that is altogether 84 warships, that currently, at least the destroyers, can carry as many as 90 missiles apiece. And it is precisely these ships that are now referred to as Aegis-Class or are in the process of becoming such: that is are equipped to carry, or will be carrying, standard Missile-3Interceptor Missiles of the sort that are going to be based on the ground in Poland and Romania from 2015 to 2018. But the 48 missiles that are going to be in Poland and Romania, 24 apiece, are a formidable challenge enough to Russia. But the fact that there may be several hundred, even thousands, of missiles placed on the US cruisers and destroyers is a much more serious consideration. Robles: Can you tell us a little bit about what is going on with Syria right now? Everything’s gotten real quiet. After they’ve put those missiles in Turkey, the Patriots you just spoke about, and as we’ve said in the past in our discussions: when they go quiet something is up. Rozoff: I know what you are talking about John. Watching old adventure films whenever the insects and the animals in the forest or the jungle became quiet, you became nervous. And a situation similar to that I’m sure is obtaining in relation to Syria. We also have to remember though there is a changing of the guard in Washington. With the Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, who more than anyone else I’m sure has been instrumental in pushing through a campaign of regime change in Damascus, out and John Kerry replacing her as the chief foreign policy diplomat in the US, similarly with the Pentagon with Defense Secretary and with the CIA Director. So, there may be a short reprise for Damascus, for Syria at this point until the second term Obama Administration’s foreign policy team is in place in which case we may see even mounting offensive again. Robles: There were reports we’ve just had that Iran captured a US drone, last year, and they reverse engineered it and are now producing massive quantities of their own drones. Rozoff: It would serve Washington right if they did, I mean it truthfully would. The US has pioneered international drone warfare, this is something it has developed over the last decade, actually over the last 12 years. It is a new form of warfare, it is global in scope, it is deadly as we know. You were listening to an interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff the manager of the stop NATO website and mailing list. Visit our site in the near future for part 2 of this talk.
14 February, 23:22 Assange officially files to run for Australian Senate
Photo: EPA Julian Assange, the most famous whistleblower and fighter for transparency in the world, something that has made him enemy number one of the United States of America, has officially filed documents with the Australian Electoral Commission to run for a senate seat in the Australian state of Victoria in the upcoming September federal elections. The fight proves to be a test not only for Mr. Assange but also for the Australian people who now will have a choice for real positive change in their country or to keep the status quo. Will he win? Chances are good.
."
14 February, 12:45 Mossad gets their man: Australian Prisoner X commits ‘suicide’ in Israeli prison
© Photo: SXC.hu Threatening an all out diplomatic storm between Australia and Israel, the details surrounding the death in 2010 in a prison in Israel of the now famous, Prisoner X are just now starting to come out, sending the Israeli Government into panic mode and even causing them to ban the reporting of information about the case. He died on December 12, 2010 in solitary confinement in a top-security cell of the Ayalon Prison prison in the same cell which had previously held and been designed for Yigal Amir the assassin of Yitzhak Rabin. Dual Israeli-Australian Ben Zygier, also known by his Israeli name of Ben Alon, reportedly committed suicide by hanging himself on Dec. 15, 2010 at the age of 34. Although the death occurred over two years ago details about the case are just now coming to light as the veil of secrecy has been partially lifted amid a growing diplomatic storm between Israel and Australia. Up until now the man was only known as “Prisoner X”, whose identity was vigorously guarded. One of the facts that have recently emerged is that Prisoner X was an Australian citizen working for Mossad, the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service, although in what exact capacity has not been reported. Another fact that has come to light is that he was already under surveillance by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) who was investigating him on suspicion of espionage and for being one of three citizens reported to have been using Australian passports to fulfill missions for Mossad. According to various media reports Mr Alon was also known by the name of Ben Allen, among others, and had changed his name four times in just as many years, which initially caught the attention of the ASIO. According to the Guardian under Australian law citizens can change their name every year and Mr. Alon did so at least four times. This would have allowed him to put together several sets of documents, including Australian passports, which may have been used by Mossad, either as cover for Alon “X”, or passed along to other operatives. The publication The Age reported that Ben Zygier had held or applied for Australian passports using the names Ben Alon, Ben Allen and Benjamin Burrows. The case is particularly embarrassing for Mossad because it exposes one of the ways that they produce or obtain false identities for their operatives. This is not the first time that Australian passports have been linked to Mossad operations, nor is it the first time they have bungled operations or been exposed using foreign passports as cover for their agents. According to media reports and other sources the assassination in January 2010 of Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai was the responsibility of MOSSAD. At the time Israel received strong condemnation from Australia and Britain because apparently Mossad had use passports from their countries to carry out the hit. There are not many details that have emerged about what Alon was really doing for Mossad, or even if he was in fact an agent, but what has is potentially damaging for Israel and the Israeli intelligence service if one is to judge by the official reaction. The potential fallout is apparently so great that Israel has effectively issued a complete bans on publishing details about the case. After calling an emergency meeting between the editors and owners of major Israeli media outlets and Israeli security officials the government instructed them not to publish any new material or details on the case, however according to RT Israeli media are still allowed to cite reports from foreign sources. There is speculation that Alon was providing passports for Mossad, however this is unlikely due to his military service for Israel and the way he was imprisoned and mysteriously committed suicide, in a cell with cameras and sensors which monitored heart rate and the physical condition of the prisoner. Another clue as to the seriousness of the operations that Alon may have been involved with along with the mysterious other tow Australians was reported by Haartz, which quotes one Tzvika Levy, who heads the Lone Soldier Project: “Suddenly I made the connection, and realized that Ben Zygier arrived to Kibbutz Gazit as a lone soldier about 13 years ago, along with two other young men from Australia. I remember his friends went to serve in the Armored Corps, and he wanted me to help him get into the paratroopers. He served for two and a half years, even though his age required him to serve only six months. For that, he had to sign a form, agreeing to lengthen his service." So who were the other two Australians? Why did Alon enlist for extended service? And why was it that he died in an Israeli prison without the proper Australian authorities being informed? There is speculation that he was a double or triple agent, and that his end was the obvious one for anyone playing both sides of the fence. If he was working for the Australians as well as Mossad, his death is perfectly in keeping with what a former intelligence officer once told me, “Mossad always gets their man”, even if he is one of their own.
13 February, 17:00 US Missile Shield: It is like a loaded gun pointed at someone's head - interview
© Flickr.com/Br3nda/cc-by-nc-sa 3.0 In part 2 of an exclusive interview with the Voice of Russia, Bruce Gagnon the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space shares more little known facts about the hidden Pentagon secret black budget program, militarization of space by the United States and details the way the US will carry out a "successful" first strike attack against China and Russia. If you thought NATO expansion, the US Missile Shield and space drones were bad, listen to how they will all work together to help the US take over the world.
Hello, this is John Robles, I’m speaking with Bruce Gagnon, he’s the Coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. Robles: Very, I think, important, what you mentioned about the first-strike capability of the X37B in the space war games. Can you tell us a little bit more about that and anything related to Russia that you’ve heard about? Gagnon: The X37B, being hailed, being promoted to the public as a successor to the space shuttle, is indeed much more than that. It was a hidden Pentagon secret black budget program, initially costing more than a billion dollars. Again, it had three tests, the last test kept the X37B in space for about a whole year. It was able to do many things, including, we’re told: spy on a Chinese satellite. Many people believe it could also serve as an anti-satellite weapon, while up in space, obviously it would have the ability to take out of commission another country’s satellites. So, prior to a first-strike attack, for example, if you took out another country’s satellite, Russia or China, then you would essentially help to blind them to the incoming attack from the United States. So, I think this military space plane would play those kinds of roles. But this is coupled with the deployments of U.S. missile-defense systems that are today being used to surround Russia and China, both on ground-based launchers and on ships, and this program has really accelerated under the Obama Administration. The Patriot, PAC-3 missile defense systems that are going into Poland and Turkey, the SM-3, the Standard Missile 3 interceptors that are onboard, Navy Aegis Destroyers are being now put into the Mediterranean Sea and eventually will be deployed in the Black, the Baltic and the Barents Seas. And these same interceptor missiles are going to be also ground-based in Poland and Romania in the years to come. So this same encirclement that is now happening around Russia is being deployed around China. The U.S. is deploying the so-called missile defense systems in Taiwan, in Japan, Okinawa, South Korea and on these Navy Aegis Destroyers bumping up against the coast of mainland China. Missile defense systems are key elements in this overall U.S. first-strike attack program. In fact, referring again to the computer war game that I told you about earlier, that in the year 2016, after the initial U.S. attack of China (and China has very small nuclear force of about 20 nuclear missiles that are capable of hitting the West Coast in the U.S.), after that initial first-strike attack by the U.S., China then tries to fire its remaining retaliatory capability. And it is at that time that the missile defense system is used to take out China’s remaining retaliatory capability, giving the U.S. a quote unquote “successful first-strike attack”. And so, again at the same time, the U.S. is deploying these missile defense systems really misnamed because they’re such key elements in the offensive first-strike attack program. But the U.S. is deploying these to surround Russia and China. At the same time the Obama Administration has been encouraging Russia and China and other nations to get rid of their nuclear weapons, to reduce their numbers of nuclear weapons something I’m in favor of. I want everyone to get rid of all of their nuclear weapons, but clearly there’s a hidden agenda here, on the part of the United States because clearly the U.S. wants Russia and China to reduce their numbers of nuclear weapons, which makes a first-strike attack more possible, especially it makes it more possible for missile defense system then to pick off a smaller retaliatory capability. So, one has to look at U.S. first-strike planning, both in terms of a nuclear attack and also this so-called missile defense system. So coupled with satellites, coupled with the first-strike attack programs that are being developed from space this is all, very much, a dangerous, dangerous system that is under way. Reminder Robles: You spoke about the Nazim and he was speaking about WWIII. Do you see all these systems actually being put into use in the near future? I’m talking about U.S. actually launching World War III against Russia and China. Gagnon: Well, you know, sometimes you don’t have to actually launch, sometimes these things serve as a loaded gun pointed at someone’s head, as a threat, so sometimes you don’t necessarily have to launch, but they still serve essentially the same function. So I cannot predict whether or not the U.S. will actually launch nuclear weapons. Although I must say that we’re the only country on the planet that has ever used a nuclear weapon against other people. Robles: Twice. Gagnon: Like we did in Japan. So, clearly the U.S. is using these systems today, the deployment of these systems, to drive a new arms race. Think of that, as you surround Russia and China, those countries inevitably respond by modernizing their own capability, in China’s case; increasing their capabilities, getting submarines, taking their nuclear weapons off land, where they’re vulnerable to U.S. first-strike attack, putting them in more survivable submarines under the oceans. So this creates new arms race. And I can promise you that American politicians are running around our country saying, “Oh my god, look what China is doing today! They’re increasing their military. We need more! They’re trying to take over the world.” And so by the U.S. escalating in the way it has since the end of the, quote unquote, “Cold War”, that, in my mind, has never really ended, by the U.S. constant escalation, and now encirclement of Russia and China, the expansion of NATO to essentially surround Russia; this forces Russia and China to upgrade. And then the U.S. uses that as an excuse to continue its own military operations. In the United States today out of every discretionary tax dollar 57% of every tax dollar, today in Amerika, goes to the United States military. It’s unrelenting. And they’re hollowing out our economy, they’re destroying social progress, cutting back on education, on health care, on mental health care; every kind of necessary program to run a decent society is under attack as the money is being moved into the military. So clearly the United States Pentagon has become, there’s no doubt about it, the military arm of corporate globalization, and their primary job is to function as a resource extraction service for corporate globalization, corporate capitalism. Close End of Part 2 Part 3 will be posted in the near future. Stay “tuned”.
12 February, 22:55 Why were weapons cached in Russia by the West? - Rozoff
Photo: RIA Novosti Voice of Russia regular contributor Rick Rozoff continues with the story of the Polar Bear Expedition or what was also called the American North-Russia Expeditionary Force. The operation took place between 1918 and 1919 and saw at least 5,000 US troops sent into Russian territory to kill Bolsheviks in the North of Russia and to secure weapons that had been cached there. To this day it remains a mystery why exactly the weapons were there and sadly the killing of Russians continues to be something to be proud of for certain American polticians. First part of the interview with Rick Rozoff
Rick Rozoff Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff. He is the manager and the owner of the stop NATO website and mailing list, and a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia. Robles: And this was actually US troops on Russian territory killing Russians? Rozoff: The people defending their soil, you know, their territory. Robles: Why were they placed under the UK Command? Rozoff: I suspect because the fact that British soldiers had been sent to the same area, the Archangel-Murmansk region, a month earlier to prepare, it was easier for them to get there I guess. But we know that Britain had played a role in the interim period between the February Revolution in 1917 in Russia and the October one, that is during the provisional Government of the Kerensky period, in trying to secure the continued involvement of the Russian Government, whatever it was, whatever it turned out to be, in the war. And the Kerensky Government indeed, I’m sure under the pressure and perhaps no little bribery from Britain, France and the United States did continue the Russian involvement in the war, one which cost several million Russian lives. And with the accession to power of the Bolsheviks in the October Revolution the first thing they did was withdrawal from the war. I would suspect that the British military and intelligence personnel were already situated in northern Russia with the intent of not only continuing the Russian war efforts while Russia was in the war during the tsar’s period, but also to ensure that no Russian government would come to and maintain itself in power, that would withdraw from the fighting. Robles: Murmansk is very-very far from the center of power, from Moscow and from what was Leningrad. For the listeners one more time, can you clarify why they were deployed in such a remote location? Rozoff: I can’t honesty give you an explanation for that, except that the their official reason for the deployment were to secure ammunitions that have been shipped there by the British, I’m not sure for whom. Robles: Geographically, if you would picture it like Washington DC and troops fighting in northern Maine for example…. Rozoff: Murmansk is not that terribly far north from St. Petersburg which was the capital until October 1917 when the capital was shifted to Moscow. So, I mean if they wanted to advance on the Russian capital, let’s say, with the Czech and other foreign fighters commanded by the British and French, and American troops. I don’t think it would have been out of the question to have launched an offensive from the north on the capital. Robles: And that would have been totally unexpected I think. Rozoff: Possibly! This is beyond my expertise, I have to confess. Robles: Ok, so no real reason other than that there were possible weapons there. Why would that they’ve been storing weapons that far north in the first place? Rozoff: What I’ve read doesn’t really give me a definitive answer to that question. Rather for example, these were weapons that have been shipped there earlier in the war for using by the tsarist Russian government. Or it seems likely that these were weapons shipped by Britain and perhaps France after the… well, of course you know the deployment of September 1918 predates the Armistice actually at that time which didn’t occur until November. It is possible, because of the revolution in February and in the subsequent October Revolution, which I guess could not have been anticipated but it occurred, that these weapons may have been intended precisely for Czech and other fighters, either White Russian fighters or foreign fighters inside Russia to be used against the new government in Moscow when it came to power in October, and perhaps as a safeguard against the Kerensky Provisional Government. But again, this is something that is completely beyond my expertise. Robles: This is a real mystery. What became of the weapons? Rozoff: The weapons, according to the accounts that I’m familiar with, the Russian forces anticipated the American move and moved them upstream on the Dvina River and out of reach for the American soldiers who were sent to seize them, which led as I alluded to earlier to the fact that the American forces actually somehow managed to move up river in pursuit of both the weapons and the Russian forces that had removed them, and in my understanding successfully, but along the way engaged in fighting that resulted in the deaths not only of 110 troops but I would assume an equal, if not a larger number of Russian forces. Robles: Has there ever been an official apology or exchange of notes, or anything on these operations and this incident? Rozoff: No, to the best of my knowledge. And the fact that a senior senator, one of the longest serving senators in the country, Carl Levin as I mentioned, almost four years ago applauded this military operation and stated that it is a lesson for the future and so forth, which suggests that far from there being any remorse or misgivings by the US Government, they seem to be particularly proud of what they’ve done. Interestingly enough, my paternal grandfather had been born in Russia, as my last name might suggest, and he came to the US before World War I. And my maternal grandfather was born in the US and was sent on the Polar Bear Expedition. So, in 1918-1919 I had one grandfather who was born in Russia who was in the US and one who was born in the US who was in Russia. That’s an interesting twist of fate. Robles: Was your Russian grandfather battling American forces? Rozoff: My Russian grandfather was working at steel mill and not even making munitions to the best of my knowledge. Robles: Well, maybe you just don’t know that. Rozoff: That’s true, he died when I was very young I’m afraid. Robles: That’s sad to hear. Rick thank you very much for this bit of history and this bit of a mystery, I think. Rozoff: Well put! History and mystery, it may be the beginning of further research into the subject. Robles: Very interesting subject I think. Thanks for sharing that with us and sharing your insights. That was an interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff – the manager and the owner of the stop NATO website and mailing list.
12 February, 21:16 Cashing in on Osama: SEAL who killed Osama complains to the media
Photo: EPA A Navy SEAL who claims to have been the one who killed Osama Bin Laden has told the press that he has been forgotten by the U.S. Government, however there are so many holes in his story that it is hard to believe. Has he been forgotten, or is he just trying to cash in on the killing of an unarmed Osama Bin Laden. Whatever the case may be, the world’s press is all abuzz with speculation, and the Armed Forces are none to happy for the unjustified bad publicity. In an article for Esquire magazine a supposed Navy SEAL Team 6 member who claims to have been the one who shot Bin Laden three times in the forehead, once as he was already dead, states that he is forgotten and has been treated unfairly by the military after his voluntary retirement. Among the allegations of the SEAL, who Esquire calls “The Shooter”, are that he will not receive his pension, that he and his family have no healthcare and that the government has offered him no protection. The problem is that all of his allegations are not true and judging from the article the ex-Seal is disgruntled because he cannot cash in on his “service” to America. The claim that he has no healthcare has been refuted and proven to be false: according to Stars and Stripes: “All combat veterans, including the SEAL, are eligible for five years of free health care through the Department of Veterans Affairs. And no service member who does less than 20 years gets a pension, unless he or she has to medically retire.” According to the Center for Investigative Reporting: “…in an interview, Col. Tim Nye, spokesman for the U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., said that the Shooter was treated according to military regulations. He did not deserve a pension, Nye said, because he served for 16 years, not the required 20. Those are the rules that are in place, and he was well aware of those.” The article also states that “Shooter” has a disability claim that has been slightly slowed down by a backlog of claims at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Stars and Stripes says; “… the story’s claims are getting a lot of buzz… … disconcerting veteran advocates like Brandon Friedman, who served as an Army infantry officer in Iraq and Afghanistan and used to be a VA public affairs officer. “Misinformation like this doesn’t help veterans,” he said. “When one veteran hears in a high-profile story that another veteran was denied care, it makes him or her less likely to enroll in the VA system.’” According to the author of the article we are supposed to believe that “Shooter”, after serving 16 in the U.S. Military and taking part in “Secret” operations, was not aware that he had benefits. As for protection, while “Shooter” claims none was offered, in particular he wanted free fortifications done on his home, the government did offer to place him in a witness protection program which apparently did not meet the standards of “Shooter” who told Esquire: “The best he was offered was a witness-protection program similar to that provided for Mafia snitches – he could be given a new identity driving a beer truck in Milwaukee.” Apparently “driving a beer truck” is not good enough. Nye, the spokesman for U.S. Special Operation’s Command, said that if the Shooter was concerned for his safety, he should have not spoken to the media. “He’s made himself a public figure,” Nye said. “That doesn’t track that well.” The noise generated by the article surrounding the claims that he is forgotten are overshadowing the fact that according to quotes by “Shooter” himself, the Seals trained to kill Osama, and not capture him, and that Osama was unarmed when shot in the head. However these facts are being ignored by the western media. Human rights defenders made a point of this right after the execution, when it was clear that no contingency had been made for capturing Osama. The “Shooter” stated in the article: “For me, it was a snapshot of a target ID, definitely him. Even in our kill houses where we train, there are targets with his face on them. This was repetition and muscle memory. That's him, boom, done.” “I'm just looking at him from right here [he moves his hand out from his face about ten inches]. He's got a gun on a shelf right there, the short AK he's famous for. And he's moving forward. I don't know if she's got a vest and she's being pushed to martyr them both. He's got a gun within reach. He's a threat. I need to get a head shot so he won't have a chance to clack himself off [blow himself up].” “Shooter” did not dispute another account which stated that two more SEALS entered the third-floor room after bin Laden was already dead, and “continued to fire shots into the al-Qaida leader until his body was torn apart.” Despite the fact that his granting an interview with Esquire violates his disclosure agreements, as all of those involved in the “operation” were sworn to secrecy, Esquire quite openly published details concerning the entire operation. A fact in and of itself that might question the credibility of the story and the motivations of the “Shooter” who is obviously in need of finances, although Esquire says he was not paid anything for the story. Whether the whole thing is a ploy organized to support the official version of the Obama/Osama extra-judicial execution and to take away credibility from those who say Osama died at a location very far from away from Abbottabad a long time before, is yet to be seen. As for “Shooter” being mistreated, all I can say is that the US Armed Forces are probably the best paid and have the most benefits of any in the world. For soldiers worldwide who live hard while serving their countries and who know this fact, it seems ludicrous for “Shooter” to be complaining. Unlike most countries where soldiers are required to serve, the US Army pays and aims to make the lives of soldiers comfortable, they state: “… we offer money for education, comprehensive health care, generous vacation time, family services and support groups, special pay for special duties and cash allowances to cover the cost of living.” However that is not all, they do not say that soldiers do not pay taxes, have access to credit programs at low rates and are given food and other allowances which allow a soldier to live and not spend a dime of their salary. If “Shooter” claims he cannot find a job, according to the Guardian, this is disputed by “Zach Iscol, a former marine captain who runs Hire Purpose, a group that matches military veterans with civilian companies, and who said the department of defense had made strides in recent years in improving its help for veterans. Iscol predicted that the Shooter's doubts about his ability to find a meaningful role in civvy street would prove to be unfounded. As an operator in the Navy Seals he has incredibly marketable leadership skills that countless companies would be delighted to benefit from." If this were a court of law then “Shooter’s” credibility may have just been compromised, so much so that perhaps we can doubt the rest of the “story”. Or is it that he just wants to cash in on the “Execution of the Century” and become a star? Rather than being like everybody else who quietly serves their respective countries. 11 February, 22:53
Under the Radar - 4: More Al-Qaeda/ U.S. links, more drones and a "new" New World Order
© Collage: «Voice of Russia» According to some reports Al-Qaeda is not only working with the United States but assisting in carrying out attacks to blame and frame other entities that the West wants to target. The entire War on Terror is a pretext to invade for resources and advance geopolitical goals. Meanwhile while the U.S. is assassinating people worldwide with drones, they are also expanding their usage with the U.S. All of these events are currently taking place "Under the Radar". Every week hundreds of important events occur that are important to all of us but which do not get enough media attention, either because they are over-shadowed by other major news or because they do not fit the pre-planned message that many of the world's media are trying to promote, there is a journalistic responsibility to tell the whole story which we always attempt to do. Although we keep our eyes on the world this week's most pressing issues that have been suppressed come from the US. 1. Bulgaria Last summer’s terrorist bombing of a bus full of tourists was immediately attributed to being carrying out by Hezbollah, however now there is evidence that the attack was actually carried out by Al-Qaeda, an organization with a history of attacks on Israeli civilian targets, and the Hezbollah connection may have been stated under pressure by Israel and the United States. “Bulgarian Interior Minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov’s dramatic announcement Tuesday on the Bulgarian investigation of the July 2012 terror bombing of an Israeli tourist bus was initially reported by Western news media as suggesting clear evidence of Hezbollah’s responsibility for the killings.” “But more accurate reports on the minister’s statement and the only details he provided reveal that the alleged link between the bomb suspects and Hezbollah was merely an “assumption” rather than a conclusion based on specific evidence.” 2. Germany According to a report by the website Phantom News a former member of the German Parliament has exposed the West’s Alliance with al-Qaeda. The report is one of hundreds that have appeared in the last few years connecting U.S. Government activities to those Al-Qaeda adding to the almost universally known fact that Al-Qaeda and the U.S. are working hand in hand, just as they did from the start in Afghanistan. This article lays out some of the reasons for supposed “War on Terror” operations worldwide. “The Syrian rebels receive money and weapons predominantly from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Saudi Arabia is mainly supplying Al Qaeda, with the U.S.A. knowing about it. The West is providing political cover for the entire rebellion, including al-Qaeda. It is de facto an ally of al-Qaeda. In Mali against, in Syria for al-Qaeda—it can’t be more cynical.” “Whenever the western war on terror leads or calls, it’s about completely different things. In Afghanistan, the central geostrategic position in Asia, in Iraq for oil, in conflict with the alleged nuclear addicted “terrorist state” Iran for dominance in the Middle East and Mali to uranium in neighboring Niger.” 3. World Apparently the New World Order has nothing to do with nation states but everything to do with bankers and money and according to this report the West and all its war and violence are nothing but killing for the sake of killing. Judging from the current economic state of the West, this may be completely and totally true. “The real new world order has emerged–the world’s downtrodden against the West and its puppet, surrogate colonial governments. These non-state but similarly minded actors will determine the course of future world history. There is now a new world order that the West cannot control, that military force cannot subdue, and that concessions cannot placate. Ancien régimes relied on military power to influence events. The true new world order renders military power effete. All it can now accomplish is kill for killing’s sake. Pure barbarity is what the promise of Western Civilization has been reduced to. What a wonderful world we have made!” 4. China It may be propaganda being used to advance an agenda or it may be that China is preparing for a military confrontation with Japan over territory that is rightfully China’s but which Japan, desperate for territory, has claimed as its own. “If that is indeed the case, and its story of major troop movements and mobilization of various types of military vehicles and artillery into the Fujian and Zhejian provinces, bordering the East China Sea and closest to the Diaoyu islands, is accurate, then hostilities between China and Japan may be about to take a major turn for the worse.” 5. United States U.S. drone usage is spreading worldwide but it is also spreading within the United States itself, with everything from mining companies to universities being licensed to operate drones. Will Americans tolerate yet another tool to strip them of their “freedoms”? Most likely, in the name of security, the answer to that question is yes. Electronic Frontier Foundation “The Federal Aviation Administration has finally released a new drone authorization list. This list, released in response to EFF’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, includes law enforcement agencies and universities across the country, and—for the first time—an Indian tribal agency. In all, the list includes more than 20 new entities over the FAA’s original list, bringing to 81 the total number of public entities that have applied for FAA drone authorizations through October 2012.” 11 February, 20:30
'You might call the United States CIA: ‘Murder Inc.’' – exclusive interview with Assange's lawyer Ratner 9 February, 22:03
Assange is trapped, the U.S. is in decline - exclusive interview with Assange's lawyer
|
Page Under Construction
