Articles and Interviews by John Robles From April 24, 2013 to July 02, 2013
2 July, 19:11 Crisis actors: real or fantasy?
Photo: EPA Disturbing pictures have appeared on the internet, showing what appear to be “crisis actors” pretending to be bombing victims and involved in multiple tragedies. Theorists claim some of these individuals were at the scene of the Sandy Hook tragedy and the Boston Marathon bombing as well as other events. Photos have also appeared apparently showing staged scenes, fake blood, smiling victims, fake smoke and the glass and mirrors of a fabricated event. Are there really people who perform in staged events for the government? Believe it or not the answer to that question is yes A new “job description” has recently entered into the mainstream of English vocabulary usage that is at once both disturbing, in the context that it has repeatedly appeared, and quite normal and benign in the context that it was supposed to be used originally. That job description or “job title” is Crisis Actor and it has recently been repeated all over the net along with the words “false flag” to describe the events at the Boston Marathon. The reason for the widespread discussion and conspiracy theories that have sprung from the otherwise completely healthy debate of the event, is pictures that have been making the rounds which show what appears to be staged scenes among publically available footage of the Boston Marathon bombing and its aftermath. Many of the photos are cause for serious concern as they show what appears to be paint, instead of blood, smiling and relaxed looking “victims” and other obvious anomalies that do not fit into the events at the Boston Marathon or a terrorist act. Many on the net claim that part of the footage was made by “crisis actors” and specially staged, so as to ensure maximum effect and shock was achieved by the footage. But what is a crisis actor? Do they really exist? Well the answer to that question is a resounding and quite factually based “Yes”! No crisis actors are not some made up player in a “false flag attack conspiracy theory” but an actual job usually filled by U.S. Federal Government or state employees, government connected actors and actresses or even military personnel. There is a page on Facebook called, quite unceremoniously, “Crisis Actors”, and the Denver Colorado based owners of the page state: “The members of Crisis Actors are experienced, passionate actors committed to creating superior training events and programs for professional and non-traditional first responders. They deliver intense, realistic performances of people under stress - on location, in the studio, or in a 3D motion-capture lab - while response agencies work to improve their ability to manage life-threatening incidents large and small.” According to the page the actors of the Denver group have apparently performed in events concerning: “… domestic violence, community turmoil, and risk behaviors. Played the roles of: “…frantic parents, nosey neighbors, aggressive reporters, injured victims, victims in shock, hecklers in the crowd, motorists blocking traffic, bystanders giving wrong information, victims suddenly fighting those saving them, online conspiracy-mongers…” The events they perform in have included: “… active shooter and intruder emergencies, teen suicide, bullying, cutting, building collapse, severe weather, HAZMAT spill, concussion, gang violence, bus accidents, and many others.” The site claims: “Our actors register with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for their training certificates…” They then call for participants (But why New York urban theater?): “If you are an actor with exceptional talent we invite you to come to our next audition in Denver, to be announced on our site. We are looking for actors comfortable with both classical and modern theater, and are particularly interested in actors familiar with the Group Theatre in New York.” The job of the Crisis Actor is to help first responders, emergency personnel and command structures train to make real-time decisions and experience real world situations and is summarized like this by the site crisisactors.org:“Story-driven simulation is a technology that expands on previous research efforts to create interactive experiences in virtual worlds where the outcomes are known and specified in advance by instructional designers (e.g., Cleave, 1997). This approach allows instructional designers to work with storyline writers to create a training experience that is dramatically engaging and includes a specific set of training experiences, but to do so in a manner that allows for a high degree of interactivity.” So far it all sounds reasonable, plausible and above board. But what if you take this to the next level, as the CIA and certain agencies always do. I mean we know the pretexts for the war in Iraq were fabricated. We know building 7 at the WTC was a controlled demolition, then why would it be such a stretch to believe that the U.S. authorities might go live with a terrorist training exercise or perhaps spice it up to gain maximum impact? Possible? Perhaps. There are disturbing photographs making the rounds on the internet right now that show fake blood and supposed “crisis actors” playing roles as victims. If they are real they need to be followed up on, if they are fakes they need to be gotten to the bottom of. Regardless, crisis actors are real and the role they play is necessary albeit it, a little unusual and disturbing.
2 July, 15:13 'A legal approach for trying Bush has been found' – Hollywood director
Photo: EPA The casus belli used by George W. Bush to take the United States to war in Iraq was a façade and a lie, fabricated to meet international requirements for going to war. Hollywood director David Hagen has teamed up with writer and former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi to produce an unreleased film called ‘The Prosecution of an American President". Mr. Hagen spoke to the Voice of Russia on how Bush could be tried for murder in the U.S. legal system. This is part one of a much longer interview. Robles:Hello, Dave! How are you this evening? Hagen: I'm good, John, thanks for having me on! Robles: Thanks for agreeing to speak with us! Can you tell us a little bit about your film? Why it's unusual? What your experiences are in directing etc.? And why you've had problems getting this film to the viewers? Hagen: Yeah. Sure. Wow! That's a little menu of questions! I started working in Hollywood as an editor and found myself working on lots of projects, that I was very fond of the topics, and while I was working at a particular small studio doing a bunch of films with them, I was working on maybe two other projects at the time, I met the executive producer, Peter Miller, who actually is a literary agent for Vincent Bugliosi who has written some great books that I have read. We started talking and he asked me if I watched the film and I did. And after a while of just talking to him about the film, and just giving him notes about the film, he asked me if I would come on as the director of the film and just take the film from where it was to the finish line. And I said, "Yes." The project had been begun by the previous director David J. Burke and they had worked for about a year and they had a pretty good amount of footage shot and they had done a tremendous amount of work alreadf, but David had to leave for a creative reason. And so I came on and I was interested in this project, because I had read Vincent's book "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder". When I saw that book on the shelf, I was like, "You've got to be kidding! That's a book? Somebody wrote that book?” So I picked it up, read it, I loved it, I bought a few copies and gave them out to my friends as gifts. I was shocked by the level of journalism that I read in Vincent's books. So I just started reading Vincent's books after that. I found him to be a really interesting and innovative writer, because he has such a legal mind. He was prosecutor understand? So his take on why things worked was so unusual! So I felt I was privy to the inside scoop! You know. What was really going on with things. So I am telling this to the executive producer and he’s introducing me to Vince, and I told him these things and we just hit it off immediately and became fast friends. I was very familiar with his work, with his thinking, with his argumentation. And he was pretty shocked to hear that from a filmmaker. He was like, "You're kidding! You know my books? Really?" So we started working together on what we would do with this film and this film really is the documentary film version of his book "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder". And the film itself is only about hour and a half long, so we didn't have much time to go into scope of Vincent's approach, but essentially Vince felt that there was ample evidence for our President George Bush to be tried for murder, for taking us to war illegally. Lying to us to take us to war the way that he did. And he was surprised no one had thought about that as a legal case. Robles: I don't think he's the only person who believes that, I mean actually George Bush is afraid to travel around the world; to leave the U.S. Hagen: You know, John, that is exactly what it's come to. So many years after the fact Bush can’t go anywhere he wants to in the world, because I think the world is beginning to catch up to looking at what he did as crime as well. There were people who thought that it was a crime right away. They were millions of protestors who protested the Iraq war. They were record numbers of protests in record numbers of cities around the world. Amazingly that just did not deter this war machine and they just ruled forward with their war. We’ve never seen anything like that in world history before, we’ve never seen a world power have that much power, where they could just lie their way into a global action like that with millions of people protesting, and it has no effect. It has no effect at all. People talked a lot in America about what they could do. They were talking about impeaching Bush for a couple of years. They were talking about if there was some way to get him to international criminal courts, because he violated U.N. treaties in the way we prosecuted presenting evidence, you know a casus belli which didn’t actually exist. The U.N. Charter we have says we can go to war legally if we can prove there's some just cause, so they went out their way to basically manufacture something that would satisfy that international requirement. And when you look at what they did, the degree to which they were mindful of the international codes to present a casus belliwhich would be agreed as a justification for war. Robles: But then all of those were proved to be falsifications. Hagen: That's right. Amazingly! Not only were they false they were transparent, they were like facades, you know. Like an old movie set, where it looks like a town, but when you walk behind the set, you see; it's just a bunch of wooden structures, it’s just scaffolding. It's trick! It only looks like a city from the distance or if you look really quickly. And that's exactly the strength of the legal arguments that the Bush administration put up. So Vince took his legal mind and applied it to this subject and came up with an astounding book that's just full of so much detail on a legal approach that would actually work, because that's how the American system of justice works! That’s what the court system is now, those are type of case histories and case precedents that have previously won their way into becoming cases. And he said, "Why not this one?" And that's why he wrote this book and what his voice in wilderness is sort of saying. And I was very attracted to how brave that is. I think Vincent Bugliosi must be the bravest man in the world. Robles: Are there chances that any actions will be taken? Or is that the hope? If your film is released to a larger audience, to the world, that maybe something will happen? Hagen: Well, I think that's exactly what Vince is hoping, is that getting the message out in a public way will help many, many more people agree that there actually may be a legitimate legal course of action, and there are a fairly simple series of steps that can be taken here in America, in the U.S. justice system, that actually would initiate a legal proceeding. Almost like lighting a dynamite fuse.
2 July, 05:09 The end of Morsi; another U.S. backed failure?
Photo: EPA The Egyptian military and opposition groups have given Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood an ultimatum to step down from power. For a leader who was expected to harken in change in Egypt such a short time ago the people have proven that even if Islamic Fundamentalists are supported by America they are not necessarily welcome or wanted in their countries. Will Morsi step down? If he cares about the Egyptian people and is really their leader, perhaps he will listen, unless he has another agenda. This week’s CIA-planted-little-despot-in-trouble-with-his-own-people is Mohamed Morsi so I’ve decided to take a look at Mohamed Morsi and his not so shadowy past in order to shed some light on exactly who Mohamed Morsi and what exactly is the true nature of the Muslim Brotherhood. For further reading just type in the words morsi cia into your PRISM/Google browser and you will be presented with thousands of pages of information connecting and detailing the long and sordid relationship between Morsi and the CIA. I am sure you are following the news dear reader and are aware that the latest popular uprising in Egypt has given Mr. Morsi until tomorrow evening, Tuesday July 2, 2013 to step down from power along with the Muslim Brotherhood, if he doesn’t the more than 17 million people who took to the streets on Sunday will take to the streets again and the country will be plunged into a state nearing civil war. This is astounding news for many as he was just placed in power a few days over a year ago after the popular revolts of the now infamous Arab Spring and much of the world believed that perhaps there would be some stability in Egypt. That is not to be the case and it is possible that the Arab Spring was a geopolitical plan by Israel and the U.S. for fomenting permanent instability in the region and things have gone exactly as planned. Calls for the stepping down from power of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood have now come from the Egyptian military. On Monday the Egyptian Army issued an ultimatum to Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood giving them 48 hours to meet the demands of the people and promising that if those demands are not met that they will be forced to intervene. According to the Washington Post the statement aired on national television by military commander Abdel Fatah al-Sissi was as follows: “The armed forces reiterates its call to meet the demands of the people, and it gives everyone 48 hours as a last chance to carry the burden of the ongoing historic circumstances that the country is going through”. “If the demands of the people are not met within the given period of time, the military will be compelled by its national and historic responsibilities, and in respect for the demands of Egypt’s great people, to announce a roadmap for the future, and procedures that it will supervise involving the participation of all the factions and groups.” The warning came as millions of people took to the streets for a second day on Monday calling for Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to step down from power. The ultimatum from the army is remarkable as the army of any country is supposed to follow the commander in chief which in almost every country is the president. The fact that army has issued such a warning to Morsi guarantees that they will in fact intervene on behalf of the Egyptian people who in the millions are calling for Morsi and his Western backed “brotherhood” to step down. The military said the ultimatum was Morsi’s “last chance”. A youth movement in Egypt called “Rebel” has issued the call for Morsi’s removal from by Tuesday evening as the standoff between Mori and the Muslim Brotherhoods’ supporters and opposition forces continues and have already left at least 17 people dead and nearly 800 injured. In light of the recent history of crackdowns and repression by leaders by the militaries of many countries of the world blindly following the orders of presidents who are no longer the legitimate leaders of their countries, this announcement is at once refreshing and at the same time a worrisome precedent and a warning for all of the other Western backed leaders in the region and around the world. This may be a sign that the day of the CIA backed Western puppet regime is numbered and that the world is becoming well enough informed about the so-called “Democracy spreading” United States of America and their surrogates around the world, that they will not be tolerating leaders who have been put into power to serve their true masters in Washington. To underline that this is just another failure by the West in it’s never ending quest to take over countries, while pretending to install and promote “democracy”, and install leaders who will bend to the American and Western will, is in fact a disservice to the Egyptian people, but from a global geopolitical perspective, this is exactly what it is, another puppet, in another resource rich country, and another failure. Some say that instability in the Middle East was designed and planned to allow for constant NATO and Western intervention as having weak and unstable countries all over the world is something that Washington’s geopolitical planners desire and need to fulfill their plans of global domination. The history of the Muslim Brotherhood and Mohamed Morsi show ties with the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and there are claims that it was actually the CIA that has helped the Muslim Brotherhood come to power and that it was created in the 1920’s by the MI-6 to weaken Egyptian secular forces and in fact recruited Morsi many years ago. The Muslim Brotherhood is claimed to have been used in the 70s in Afghanistan, around the same time that the CIA created al-Qaeda and was funding and recruiting fighters from Madrases in Afghanistan. It is said that Anwar Sadat was killed by the Muslim Brotherhood in 1981, that they attempted to take power in Syria in 1982 and that they have been involved in revolts in Algeria, Libya, Yemen and even in Somalia. Morsi himself is said to have been recruited by the CIA many years ago and it is interesting to note that his children have U.S. citizenship and that he was in prison for treason when he was pulled out of prison and placed at the head of the Muslim Brotherhood after the fall of Hosni Mubarak and then into the presidency. Once again, we see the policy of the U.S. in recruiting and using radical elements to overthrow regimes and install their own version of what they want in foreign countries regardless of the wishes or the well-being of the people, leading to failure. This is a clear in Egypt. Whereas as in Kosovo, with Haqim Thaci, it has succeeded. Will we see the rest of the Arab Spring countries go the same way? If we do it would not be surprising. People know what democracy is, and the U.S. labeling their puppet regimes and their despots as such does not necessarily make it the case. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
29 June, 19:12 Holy Day of Vidovdan celebrated in Serbia
Belgrad, Serbia © Photo: Flickr.com/m.a.r.c./cc-by-sa 3.0 On Friday the Serbian people and Serbian Orthodox Christians celebrated Vidovdan their most important Holy Day. The Holy Day is celebrated on the 28th of June, according to the Gregorian Calendar, and on the 15th of June according to the Julian calendar. The Holy Day is also referred to as St. Vitus Day or the Feast of St. Vitus. It is important for many reasons. This year the capitulation of Kosovo has overshadowed the important date. Kosovo is Serbia. The opinions and views expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
29 June, 07:10 Under the Radar - 5: U.S. F-35 stealth secrets stolen and Israel depends on Iranian oil
© Collage: «Voice of Russia» When one story monopolizes the attention of the world media there is a responsibility to make sure that events which may affect the lives of all of us do not pass by unnoticed and under the radar. Welcome to this special Snowden 24/7 edition. 1. Remember those peaceful activists of the Occupy Movement? The FBI knew that certain bodies had contingency plans to assassinate peaceful protestors in a major American city and did nothing to intervene. According to the FBI itself this is true and we know about it because of a document obtained from the Houston office of the FBI as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the Washington, DC-based Partnership for Civil Justice Fund. 2. Not hearing anything from Serbia or Kosovo? The approval of an EU-brokered deal by the so called parliament of Kosovo led to clashes between protestors and police with over 70 people arrested and 17 police officers injured in Pristina. Protesters also attempted to stop U.S. Ambassador Tracey Jacobson from entering the parliament building. 3. Palestine and the Third and Fourth Intifada Many conditions for an uprising are objectively in place: political discontent, lack of hope, economic fragility, increased violence and an overwhelming sense that security cooperation serves an Israeli, not Palestinian, interest. 4. The FBI paid and 18-year-old volunteer to spy on WikiLeaks Showing the ridiculous level of paranoia and the fact that the U.S, Government considers WikiLeaks to be some kind of criminal organization. It has been revealed that the FBI paid an 18-year-old-kid who was volunteering for WikiLeaks to spy on the organization. 5. Natanyahu admits attacking Syria Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday that Israeli Air Force planes carried out a number of secret military missions in the past year in order to secure the country. Speaking at an IAF cadet graduation ceremony, Netanyahu said the IDF was ready for any scenario that may arise. 6. UAE tortures detainees Three human rights organizations have released details of what they call "credible allegations of torture" of detainees by authorities in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The groups, including Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, were given 22 letters smuggled out of prison. The letters described sleep deprivation and beatings. They include some from 94 activists… 7. Israel is dependent on Iranian oil? According to Rich, Israel was dependent on Iranian oil even after diplomatic relations between the countries were severed. He said that his business connections with Iran began before the revolution, with the knowledge of senior officials in the Iranian regime, and he simply continued doing business despite the American sanctions. He said that the Iranians continued "to honor the contracts." 8. More accusations of hypocrisy against U.S., this time China Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman, Col. Yang Yujun, stated: “The Prism-gate affair is itself just like a prism that reveals the true face and hypocritical conduct regarding Internet security of the country concerned,” Colonel Yang said at a monthly news conference in Beijing. “The Prism-gate affair again reminds us that we must attach even more importance to Internet and information security protection, and resolutely protect Internet security and national security,” Colonel Yang said. 9. Ecuador offers U.S. aid on respecting privacy and cancels trade pact President Rafael Correa said that his nation would not tolerate US blackmail and that the trade pact wasn’t worth the harm it would do to Ecuadoran sovereignty. With most of its neighbors getting free trade with the US, the loss of the pact may put Ecuador at an economic disadvantage. 10. Drawing on sidewalks with chalk in the U.S. is a reason for holding a secret trial In San Diego: corrupt officials, powerful criminal bankers, and politicians on the take all team up to prosecute an activist who wrote chalk messages on the ground. If that was not bad enough, the judge issues a gag order on the parties involved. 11. U.S. F-35 Stealth Fighter secrets stolen Yesterday, at a subcommittee hearing attended by just half a dozen Senators, the Pentagon’s top weapons buyer made a blunt admission: The military’s most expensive program, the stealthy F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, has been hacked and the stolen data used by America’s adversaries.
29 June, 05:36 Best bet for Edward Snowden, stay in Russia
© Screenshot: YouTube There is always a human story of pain and grief and sometimes even victory or exoneration behind every headline making news event and the case of Edward Snowden, still safe in the transit area at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo International Airport, is no exception. Lonnie Snowden, the father of the NSA leaker Edward Snowden, certainly, like any father worries about his son and concerned for his son’s safety and his well being. His statements to the press while on the surface seem to be a plea for his son to return to the United States and the words of a genuinely concerned father, the undertones of his statements speak of a man who is either under intense pressure and being forced to say what he is saying, or is in fact so brainwashed into towing the official “patriotic” American line as to be willing to sacrifice his son’s freedom, and quite possibly, life. Or on the other hand he is naïve enough to believe that his son might have some chance of receiving some sort of a fair trial and some chance of returning to his former life if he returns to the U.S.. For starters Mr. Snowden’s father blasts an organization that has provided real help to his son, namely WikiLeaks, when there were few other independent organizations who would or could lift a finger to help him, and which has actually helped the younger Snowden to so far maintain his freedom and stay alive, a fact that can not be forgotten. Another point with WikiLeaks is also the courageousness of all of those who have helped Mr. Snowden knowing full well the future blowback they may face and the risk one has in aiding an enemy of the U.S. Government, especially one bent on protecting itself and escaping its own illegality. Sure his son is in Russia, a fact which is very fortunate for him, and currently in limbo, in the transit area of Sheremetyevo, but he is not undergoing torture, inhumane incarceration or even extra-judicial execution at the hands of the Obamaites. Here it is important to note that Mr. Snowden not only was a CIA agent but also an NSA operative (or contractor) and when workers for these organizations go off the grid or go rogue and then spend time in places like China and Russia, associating with people like the WikiLeaks organizations, or even a simple reporter, they are seen as being guilty of treason and are subject to secret yet real lethal findings. Meaning when Mr. Snowden made his choice he knew he was forfeiting every aspect of his former life and perhaps that very life as well. Which is a testament to his bravery. In light of the recently revealed drone policies of the Obamaites, which say they can target enemies of the United States even American nationals anywhere in the world, it is ludicrous to believe that Mr. Snowden, who has done more than some mere Al-Qaeda affiliated Islamist could ever do to the United States, would stand any chance at all if he ever allows himself to fall into American clutches. The older Snowden says he is concerned that WikiLeaks’ focus isn’t on the Constitution of the United States. I would argue that since George Bush took office neither is that of the United States Government. And why should WikiLeaks focus on the U.S. Constitution? They are an international organization focused on exposing the illegality and corruption of governments and the United States has proven they are the most in need of this kind of exposure. Perhaps such a statement was meant to play on his son’s patriotic sentiments and get him to return, regardless, with his son being hunted like an animal for exposing an illegal spying program it seems ridiculous to make such statements. The PRISM program not only tramples on the U.S. Constitution but chews it up and spits it out in tiny unrecoverable pieces. All of the above and the rest make it seem like an orchestrated attempt to get him back into U.S. hands with the strings being pulled by the CIA and the NSA. There is no way the older Snowden could be so naïve to believe the U.S. Government could be trusted or has good intentions or is concerned about the well-being of his son. Or even more important actually believes and would follow the rule of law. That may be true in fairy tale but not here kids. Lonnie Snowden says his son did break U.S. law and could be classified as a traitor for betraying the U.S. Government but makes the distinction that he has not betrayed the American people. This is a very important and an admission that the U.S. Government and the American people are two separate and distinct entities. No longer are Abraham Lincoln’s famous words: "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth", relevant or even remotely connected to the current paradigm. All hopes for that government perished on 9-11-01. No father wants his son to be assassinated, or tortured or locked up in small dark damp cell never to see another human face for the rest of his life, enduring torture and whatever his handlers want to do to him. But perhaps the older Snowden still has the illusion that Eric Holder and the U.S. Government can be trusted or have good intentions. After talking to many experts and speaking from experience I would say the first thing that would happen to Snowden if he were to fall into U.S. clutches and after he was renditioned back to America, if he survies, is that he would be tortured to the point of insanity or near death until the NSA and the CIA were very clear as to whom he spoke to and could make a proper and sweeping damage control assessment and knew every bit of information that he had passed on to anybody. After that there would be a show trial, possible ending in the death penalty if they threw in the China and Russian stays and attempted to claim he passed information to Russian or Chinese intelligence. Even if he did not, no matter what he will be charged with, he will be found guilty and sentenced. The best he could hope for would be to spend the rest of his short life in a damp cell subjugated to torturous conditions and never see another person for the rest of his life. Except perhaps very rarely. My advice to the older Snowden: pray your son stays safe and free and whole and out of U.S. clutches, like many people in the world are. For the younger Snowden, listen to people in the know, choose either China or Russia, there are no other countries in the world big enough, powerful enough or independent enough to protect you. Even though Ecuador means well there is already dissent in their ranks and we all know how widespread CIA operations are in Latin and South America. My sympathies are with the Snowdens, no matter what political leaning we all may have, no father should ever have to face the worry and heartache that Lonnie Snowden has to and no person should have to face the utter destruction of their life, like Edward Snowden has to, for exposing the truth and illegality. No matter how secret that truth may be. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
29 June, 04:08 From PRISM to open censorship, lessons not learned
Photo: The U.S. Army/flickr.com In what can only be described as an assault on freedom of speech and access to information, the U.S. Government has made the decision to block and filter internet access to the site of the U.K.’s Guardian on its U.S. Army networks, with the revelation coming to light after complaints from soldiers at the Presidio in San Francisco, California. According to the Voice of Russia one Gordon Van Vleet, a spokesman for the Army Network Enterprise Technology Command, or NETCOM, stated that press coverage and online content about NSA leaks is being filtered and blocked. Media reports say the blocks do not only apply to the facility in San Francisco but that they in fact cover the entire global U.S. Army network and while this is supposed to prevent U.S. Army personnel from accessing data that is available to the rest of the planet (more or less) it is not preventing them from viewing the information on their cell phones or their personal laptops or computers at home. The hypocrisy here seems self evident. Here we have the people that are supposed to die for America and they are not allowed to view information concerning their government that is available to everyone else. The claims that the Department of Defense has made that the documents and the information on the PRISM program that are available online are classified and therefore can not be shown on unclassified sections of the U.S. military network seem plausible and credible until you consider that the information is now in the public domain and anything that was “classified” about it can no longer be the case. While this is preventing soldiers from accessing the information on the PRISM program, surely one of the biggest revelations in the last several years, it is also preventing, or attempting to prevent soldiers from viewing or taking part in the debate and viewing the reaction from Americans and the world on the matter. The fact the U.S. Government is attempting to censor what is viewed by American soldiers, people who are supposed to be ready to give up their lives to protect the American people and that very same government, throws the unbelievable arrogance of the United States once again, right out there for the world to see. It is also an indication of the almost lunatic level that the U.S. Government is going to in its attempts to hide its own illegitimacy and criminality from the American people, a people whom they are supposed to serve. Like the assault on whistleblowers and anyone who attempts to expose the thugs in Washington and the criminality of the U.S. Government, this attempt to keep soldiers in the dark and dumbed down just adds to the overall mosaic of illegitimacy that the U.S. continues to paint of itself for the eyes of the world to see. Of course from a command point of view it is not expedient that the troops on the ground and GI Joe and Jane know that the government that they are serving and that they must be ready to make the ultimate sacrifice for is no longer a legitimate government adhering to the constitution that they are all sworn to protect and must also be ready to die for. Soldiers, analysts, diplomats and everyone up and down the chain of command are supposed to blindly follow orders and do exactly as they are told and it is now clear that anyone with a conscience or an ounce of human decency who has the courage, as Mr. Snowden, Mr. Manning and scores of others, to stand up and report illegality, they will be branded as traitors and persecuted with extreme prejudice. The criminal cabal that has taken over the United States Government, under the control of the biggest criminal of all sitting in the U.S. White House, has proven time and time again that the law only applies to those that it itself determines they apply to. The unapologetic, arrogant and absolutely remorseless and conscienceless way that the extra-judicial executioner in chief and the government react to revelation after revelation is as frightening as it is nauseating. The PRISM revelations which should be a damning indicator on the true state of the U.S. Government and which have proven that the entire terror paradigm is a complete and utter fabrication and has been since day one, have once again shown that the illegality that has been exposed and the egregious violations of law and the U.S. Constitution that are being uncovered on a regular basis, mean nothing to those in power who are committing them. The criminal cabal calling the shots in the United States from the Kingpin in the White House to every single one of his henchmen, are all above the law and have become a law unto themselves. The sanctimonious and hypocritical way that they go on and on dictating to the world about freedom, justice and human rights and pursuing policies dictated by double standards is becoming ever the more laughable with each and every passing day. Mr. Snowden and what he has revealed about PRISM and the violent reaction his revelations have evoked from the criminal corporate military cabal in Washington should prove once and for that a plague of historic proportions has spread through the U.S. Government and the only way to cure the disease will be to put down the patient. The fact that they are facing worldwide condemnation for their global spying network has not fazed them in the least, like a huge bully with an IQ of 40, rather than making corrections to their behavior they continue to employ the only tool they have, a sledgehammer. A sledgehammer which they continue to employ brutally against anyone they see as a threat to their own endless power, power they believe is absolute, but as absolute power corrupts absolutely, in the end it also destroys absolutely. PRISM was created to control the world, it is illegal an abomination and must be shut down, however those controlling it are blind in the greed for control and power and now, rather than admitting they are wrong they will continue to snub their noses at all of us continue to violate international law and international norms right in our faces. Normally the bad child caught with his hand in the cookie jar pulls his hand out and apologizes to his mother. This child has grown insane with its own power and instead picks up the cookie and brains his mother with it so he can continue eating the cookies he has no right to. Illegality, subjugation, invasions, destruction, spying, assassinations, droning and a relentless mindless effort to bring the world to its knees and to achieve complete and total control over every single person on the planet are what we can expect from the U.S.. Or is it? After all, despite the surveillance monster that is PRISM, Edward Snowden did get away. Perhaps the human spirit is really undefeatable. Then again perhaps not. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
28 June, 23:42 Terrorism, politicians and security agencies: a toxic mix – Greg Barns
Photo: EPA Revelations by Julian Assange and Ed Snowden will come out in the few days that put the entire surveillance paradigm and the PRISM revelation in an Australian context. Robert John “Bob” Carr the Foreign Minister of Australia has been on the record as characterizing abandoned Australian citizen Julian Assange as an “over serviced case” in the consular sense, with regard the perfunctory phone calls to the Ecuadorian Embassy to find out if Julian is still ”ok”. The Australian Government has still not lifted a finger to assist Mr. Assange. This was all covered by Greg Barns, former government legal advisor, president of the Australian Lawyers Alliance and the head of Julian Assange’s Senate Campaign. This is part 2 of a 3 part interview. You are listening to an interview in progress with Greg Barns, the Campaign Manager for the Wikileaks Party and the Head of the Julian Assange Senate Campaign. You can find part one on our website at English.ruvr.ru. This is a continuation of an interview which has aired on the Voice of Russia’s world service.
Robles: You’ve mentioned the word “sanctimonious” and “hypocrisy”, which is I think exactly what this is, and you mentioned accessing U.S. servers. Barns: I think the access was very pronounced and I think that these, now it’s out, that companies like Google and other effectively “rollover and get tickles” every time a security agency barks, and it is unfortunately the case, that in countries like Australia, you couldn’t say that internet service providers and telecoms in this country or in the United Kingdom or in other countries weren’t employing similar guarantors to the agencies. Robles: A friend of mine and me were discussing the fact that, for example: Skype was free, Facebook was free, all these chats and voice messaging services were free. Do you think they were funded from the beginning by U.S. intelligence.? Do you think that is a possibility? Barns: Look I don’t know that. I haven’t seen the evidence to that. But what I think people should be disappointed about is the fact that misinformation gets churn over, I think people ought to realize also, people have been very tolerant and have said; “Oh well, you know, what with 9-11, and the Madrid and the London bombings, we’ve got to be more scrupulous and you know, we’re happy to hand material over.” I think people now should realize that that is what these agencies haven’t been about that. Big thing about overall mass surveillance, and that of course is a nightmare for any democracy, and I think people ought to take a very hard look at the way in which they have been blasé at the post 9-11 environment. Robles: So you agree that, and that is my view exactly, the entire terrorism paradigm has been overused and I think at this point it is clear that it is a false flag? Barns: Well it is and in the same way that we saw Communism used, as a ruse to destroy the lives of many, many people. And surveil people in a way that was totally inappropriate through 1950s and 19860s. We’re seeing the same thing with terrorism. Politicians like that and security agencies love it even more. And when they get into bed together it’s a toxic mix. Robles: Back to the Wikileaks party. You are the campaign chairman for Julian Assange’s campaign, and I’d like to know what is going on? What kind of progress is going on with the party? You mentioned several candidates? Can you name them now? Last time we talked you told me that was all still a little bit secret. Barns: John, we’re… Unfortunately I can’t name the names right now. We’re about 3 weeks away from doing that but the party will go through its final registration phase with the electoral authorities here in the next couple of weeks. What I can say is that there is very strong support for Julian Assange in Victoria where he will be running which is starting the struggle, and we’ll have candidates in three states. But the sorts of issues that Julian’s been raising and Ed Snowden is raising have been making news here and I think that you’ll see in the next few days a development which will put it in an Australian context, so I think that you’ll see strong support in Australia amongst voters, for a party which is, we’re going to make politicians accountable, we are going to lift the lid on secrecy when it comes to the security agencies and the way in which government does business. Robles: That is great! I mean, the world needs that. Absolutely! The world is dying from lack of that right now I think. What is the reaction from Australians? Are Australians so easily… I don’t want to deride Americans, but they’ve become completely like “sheep”, are Australians so easily… are there concerns so easily brushed aside about their privacy when the security services scream the word “terror”? Barns: I think Australians have been very soft on politicians when it comes to the post 9-11 environment, I think they have had to hand over enormous powers, which of course have been abused by police and security agencies since 9-11. However, I do think Australians would take a very dim view of a government, which is effectively just rolling over and doing what it is told by Washington and handing over great slabs of information about Australian’s privacy. Which matters for Australians. So, I do think that there is certainly some concern in Australia about that. I think as this issue develops, we are going to see the abject lack of leadership among Australian politicians on this issue in the last two weeks will change. We might see some serious back-peddling Robles: You are close to the Internet, you are close to information, you are close to all this stuff. Can you give our listeners a few of the ways that all this personal information could be used by the security services to control and manipulate the masses? I am talking about people saying; “Who cares if they know that I bought 10 pounds of beef last week and I drive to work on Elm Street”. But that information is valuable. Can you tell us about some of the ways they can use that? Barns: Yes! Well it’s valuable. You’re really going to get a person, who for example, might be a very respectable member of the middle class in Australia or the United States, who suddenly finds that their data is matched to… or their name for example is John Smith and the security agencies latch on to the wrong John Smith and then they find that their lives have been turned over because there’s been a wrong identification by the security agencies, and all of the information that was private, is then public. We might also see, in terms of the way people do banking transactions and the security agencies know that they logged on to their banks 15 times in one week. They, for example, will not be wrongly under suspicion for fraud. We might also see in terms of surveillance of particular areas, where security agencies believe that there are particular people living in that community and if they’ve been communicating with other people in their community, those people will then find themselves under surveillance and information thrown back into their face. So, it is never a good thing, for any citizen, even the most innocent citizen to allow security agencies to invade your privacy to that extent. It’s unhealthy and it shouldn’t happen. Robles: You are talking about particular targeted situations. I am talking about mass data-mining, I am talking about taking all this data, I mean they are building billion dollar data-collection centers, and they are going to set up on in Utah in the United States to deal with all this stuff because; we’re talking about a billion e-mails every minute, or something, that they have to go through. The mass-data mining, the big picture, I mean how can that information be used? Barns: I think that can be used to influence policies and legislation. And governments are fond of telling their security agencies, say, that there is a particular trend in the way certain information is flowing so, you know, we’re going to legislate to stop that! Or alternatively to be used in racial profiling, you see it, where you get enormous amounts of information being shared amongst people of a certain ethnic group and then you find governments move in to surveil that particular group, but to allow government to have that much information, means that it has any number of uses that it can be put to, and the sky is the limit and that is the problem. Robles: I see. And those include economic uses, financial uses, political uses, anything right? Barns: Of course, there are any number of uses. Robles: Back to Julian’s campaign and, I call it a tragic anniversary, because he has been in the Embassy now a year and nine or ten days. How is Julian and how has that anniversary affected the case? What is going on, if you can tell us, behind the scenes? Anything that might be of interest. Barns: I saw Julian about 3 weeks ago when I was in London for about 3 days, and as I said to… right on one of the Australian radio outlets; “He seemed remarkably chipper for someone who’s spent a year behind the walls of the embassy and literally behind the walls. On the other hand, I think there are a lot of Australians tend to view that this could be their son or daughter, left high and dry by the Australian Government. I think that what has been important, has been we’ve seen the lies of the Foreign Minister in Australia, who has indicated a number of times that Julian’s case is what he calls “over-serviced”, in the consular sense. All of this happened. Julian, I think, has said he hasn’t seen anyone from the Australian diplomatic service since 2002 and all that happens is that the High Commission in London, the Australian High Commission, rings the Ecuadorian Embassy on a regular basis, reaches the front desk and they call that “diplomatic service” and “looking out” for a person! Robles: They still haven’t done anything? Barns: The Australian government has not lifted a finger to assist Julian Assange for years and yet Foreign Minister Bob Carr says that this is an “over serviced case”, he then tried to back off a day later but the point was made. You were listening to an interview of Greg Barns, he’s the head of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia and the Chairman of the Julian Assange Campaign. Thanks for listening. This was the end of part 2 of a 3 part interview.
28 June, 15:24 8 Kosovo is Serbia and Russia has not evacuated personnel from Syria
A woman walks past a map of Kosovo painted on a wall, with the words “Kosovo is Serbia” Photo: AFP The information war and information operations by the West appear to have been geared up to full capacity in Serbia as the West tries to force the Serbian people into accepting the independence of Kosovo and European Union integration. From a geopolitical point of view Serbia may not seem like that big of a country but it is of great importance for the United States and its NATO allies because right in the heart of Serbia, in Kosovo, a territory the US and NATO planners have literally stolen from the Serbian people, is the largest U.S. military installation outside of the continental United States. From hundreds of contacts, interviews, documents and observations regarding Serbia and the Serbian people, it is clear that the government of Serbia is not following the wishes of the majority of the Serbian people when it comes to Kosovo, European integration and relations with the Russian Federation. The vast majority of the Serbian people in no way recognize the independence of Kosovo and for almost every single Serbian Kosovo is viewed not only as an integral part of the sovereign territory of Serbia but also as the heart of the Serbian people. When I first started reporting about Kosovo and Serbia I was at first confronted with claims and even evidence that there was a complete and total media blackout in effect when it came to Serbia and the views of the Serbian people. This has not gone away and until now the western media operations seemed to be limited to stifling dissent and muzzling the voice of the Serbian people. Like I just said, that is, until now. Now there is increasing evidence that U.S. and NATO led media and information operations in Serbia are taking the form of sinister PSYOPS, the abbreviation for covert Psychological Operations. It is important to note that the former Yugoslavia and Serbia in particular have been something akin to a geopolitical laboratory since the first invasion of Yugoslavia by the U.S. and NATO. Here it is important to recall that it was in fact Yugoslavia that served as the first blueprint for the “humanitarian” based US/NATO tactic of aggressive invasion. A blueprint that has since gone on to be used in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and other countries. Serbia was the first such invasion and as the guinea pig for everything since from massively covered up genocide (Srebrenica), to the taking away of sovereign territory (Kosovo). It seems that the U.S., NATO and their allies are testing the limits of evil once again. Before it was things like murdering for organs, human trafficking and illicit trade in everything from narcotics to gold, now it seems they are testing the limits of PSYOPS and media operations attempting to manipulate and force the people of the country into sheepish submission. The level and nature of the way the media is Serbia is being manipulated has reached a shocking level with the push for the Serbian people to accept what has already been decided on as being the fate of their country by those pulling the strings behind the scenes. Recently I was contacted by several of my contacts in Serbia who were alarmed and asked me if it was true that Russia had pulled all of its military and other personnel out of Syria. I checked around using my confidential channels, searched for media reports and the like, and came back with the answer that this was nonsense. Reports that there were currently no staff of the Russian Armed Forces in Tartus which appeared in the Al-Hayat pan-Arabic had been twisted and misconstrued to paint the picture of an evacuation or other sudden removal of personnel. Taking the point out of context, inflating it and spinning it into something it is not is a specialty of many in the western press. It is important to note that the maintenance facility in Tartus is not a base and it was staffed by only several dozen civilian personnel. The Russian Defense ministry has stated that it was concerned with the safety of the civilian personnel but there was no evacuation of any personnel and the ridiculous assertion by the Western media and in particular certain Serbian media outlets, that Russia had evacuated soldiers and had left civilians behind is outrageous and a fabrication. There was no evacuation. One might also ask the question: Why would Russia be pulling its personnel out of Syria if Assad is winning? This is usually done only if an invasion is imminent or the government is about to fall, or perhaps if there is an imminent threat to the lives of the personnel due to natural or other causes. Then one of my sources in Serbia who had sent me a link to the story made the logical conclusion that with the Snowden story currently showing the world the true impotence of the United States, the West about to obtain complete and total victory in Serbia and the fact that the only hope for many of the Serbian people is Russia, the West needs a way to make Russia looks weak and incapable, especially in light of its unyielding support for president Assad and the Syrian people. The parallels between the situation in Syria and the former Yugoslavia are almost so many that it appears that the US has used the same blueprint and like Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, and in every other country it has invaded or destroyed by causing revolutions or coup d’états, and as the latest country where a military base or other objective is the key and is being subjected to western global remapping and geopolitical manipulation, Syria is of particular interest but more so because of the staunch support by Russia. Some may say that Syria is the final litmus test for Russia. Russia was tricked out of Serbia although it stood up to the West and has maintained, even more so than some Serbians, that Kosovo is Serbia and there is no legitimate “other” power that can control the sovereign territory, other than the Serbs. Stories that Russia has failed in Syria would then further help top demoralize and throw the Serbian people in grudging acceptance that giving up Kosovo and following the sell out of Serbia that many of the Serbian leaders are pushing through even though more than 80% of the people of Serbia are against European Union integration and even more against recognizing any kind of independence from Kosovo. The students at Belgrade University, many of whom I have spoken to and who are typical well-educated intelligent and proud patriotic Serbian young people, sent me a statement regarding the Prime Minister of Serbia’s recent statements which have attempted to paint a picture of the broad (although nonexistent) popular support for European integration and the recognition of the independence of Kosovo. These statements and recent media reports regarding the Kosovo Parliament, the very recognition of such a body existing on the Sovereign territory of Serbia an admission as to the independent nature of Kosovo, are all part of a clever yet so obviously patently fabricated, information war campaign, to legitimize the illegal and egregious meddling in Serbia by the West, and the abomination that is Western recognition for the separation of the heart of Serbia from Serbia proper. The students at Belgrade University sent me the following statement through one of their fellow students on the Political Science Faculty and a student protest organizer named Nenad Uzelac: The statement by the Serbian Prime Minister Ivica Dacic, that he hopes that Serbia will become a member of EU in four or five years is nothing but cheap propaganda for the economically, socially and mentally numbed Serbian people. He is serving us an illusion on a silver platter. Every country of the ex SSSR has experienced a fiasco upon entering the EU with regard to at least four economic parameters: growth of the external debt, growth of unemployment, growth of poverty and the destruction of the agricultural sector. The EU is an American protectorate, as Bzezinski would say, therefore it serves the American interests in the modern colonization of the Eastern European countries, with the goal of '' surrounding'' Russia, and Serbia plays an important factor, as the pivot of the Balkans. Entering the EU today, is a ticket for a voyage on the Titanic. Serbia will never become a member of the EU, or at least not for decades to come, and this road is a road to disaster. It has been said to us by former German ambassador Cobel, that we will not become a member before 2030-2035, and Angela Merkel recently stated that ''The door of the EU will close for a longer period of time, and that Serbia can gain membership, at the earliest in 2019''. Serbia has yet to meet a lot of ''conditions'', besides Kosova and implementation of the agreement: it will have to accept and convince Serbian Republic of it's own annulment and the unification of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Besides that, there is no doubt that the EU has designs for Vojvodina as well as the internationalization of the Vojvodina issue. What is interesting is that Croatia is about to become a member of EU, and we shouldn't be surprised if Croatia demands an admission by Serbia that it is to blame and in fact the aggressor in the last war, admitting to the accusations of genocide, and thus dealing with border and territorial issues in favor of Croatia. In conclusion, I'll mention a detail from the letter in which Willy Wimmer wrote to Gerhard Shroeder: ''Serbia has to be permanently excluded from European development, thus securing the military presence of the USA''. Ivica Dacic knows all this, but, as the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung stated: ''Dacic is a politician who loves money''. His statement can thus be better understood in the context of him being, a small, corrupted politician, who has to tell fairy tales about the EU to his own people. The students of Belgrade University Russia, Serbia, Syria, Kosovo, Kosovo Serbs, Serbia-Kosovo border conflict, Kosovo independence, Serbia-Kosovo talks, Serbia-Kosovo relations, Syrian conflict, Politics · Share: · · · · · · I must ask who are those speaking in name of all students of Belgrade, ignoring the majority of those who are not locked in Serbian myths and stories about fake Russian friendship? · Syrian is following the same recipe of Yugoslavia; foreign intervention in the internal affairs by Western power by planned, prepared, assisted, and prolonged the internal conflict. Later, desmantling and destruction of the country, and finally broke apart the country. · With all due respect Bill, what gives you the authority or the expertise to deride the friendship that exists between tow nations and two peoples. I will refrain from launching on a diatribe on sanctimonious US and Western hypocrisy, but really.... · "... who are those speaking in name of all students of Belgrade..." C'mon Bill, did you read the before you started bashing independent non-western leaning Serbs? "The students at Belgrade University sent me the following statement through one of their fellow students on the Political Science Faculty and a student protest organizer named Nenad Uzelac." · to Bill V. Dylan The USA bombed Yugoslavia twice. We shall never forget or forgive. The policy of the White House is and has been fascist legacy. Sur le site du Bundestag, on peut s’informer sur la manière dont le Parlement allemand a conquis son droit budgétaire au cours de l’histoire de la Constitution allemande. Et l’on peut également y lire qu’un des buts essentiels de la Loi des pleins pouvoirs d’Adolf Hitler était de retirer au Parlement son droit budgétaire. L’euro n’a jamais été le choix des peuples d’Europe, il est le produit de la libre circulation des capitaux, des multinationales et avant tout de la haute finance et de leurs auxiliaires d’exécution aussi bien au sein de l’UE qu’au sein des gouvernements des grands Etats européens, notamment celui de l’Allemagne. Celui qui saura reconnaître que la propagande au sujet de l’euro, destinée aux populations, n’est qu’une illusion, saura se libérer et de l’euro, et de l’UE! · Let's once use right description word for Serbia today: Occupation! Serbia is under occupation. You can not see any foreign soldier on streets today, but perhaps that's why this state has a more biter taste that one that had our predecessors in world wars. Every state in world has few obligations: to secure prosper of it's people, their economical and territorial independence. Today Serbia is securing only foreign interest's, totally neglecting will of it's people, and that's why we must face the truth and said: we are occupied. Without any fallen soldier, without any resistance allowed. · As long as Kosovo and Metohija are occupied by NATO and Albanian military and paramilitary forces, there will never be a true peace neither in Serbia, nor on the Balkans. We've waited six hundred years to liberate the cradle of the great Serbian nation, do you really think that we will be defeated in no more than 13? But the sad truth is that our economy is in ruins, and that no country has ever won a war with destroyed economy. And while we stumble and crawl, the West is forcing us to concede defeat and allow secession of a part of our territory, knowing damn well that Serbia is not going to be on her knees permanently. However, no peril has ever lasted indefinitely, and we will rise again, both economically and militarily. A student of University of Belgrade · NATO practices territorial occupation backed by information operations, that's how they suppress countries. I agree that while KFOR stays in the region, occupation continues. Though, NATO secretary-general recently said that they do not plan to change anything and wil further maintain presence in Kosovo. However, after the decision to begin talks on eurointegration has been taken we'll see interesting developments, that's for sure. It's high time that NATO gets it hands off Balkans! 28 June, 11:11 Snowden is a whistleblower and a hero – William Blum
Photo: Reuters Snowden’s revelations are just one embarrassment for the U.S. unlike the 100s of WikiLeaks revelations. According to William Blum it would not be surprising if the Obama administration attempts to go after Glenn Greenwald for his role in exposing the NSA’s PRISM program. Despite all of the noise about PRISM and Snowden, Mr. Blum is convinced that nothing at all will change. Robles: What’s your opinion of the revelations that he’s made? And how do you see his case in contrast to an average espionage case? Blum: Compared to WikiLeaks, it is not quite as dramatic as WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks exposed all kinds of very-very embarrassing things concerning U.S. foreign policy. Snowden revelation is just one big embarrassment, it is not 100 different small embarrassments. It is just the embarrassment that they are spying even more than most people thought. I’ve seen many people who assumed that the NSA was spying on everyone, those people would not be surprised. To me, it was not quite as embarrassing to U.S. foreign policy as the WikiLeaks revelations were. Robles: To the world’s public though, I mean I have always had this suspicion and I think you had, and any thinking person on the Internet has had this suspicion that they are being watched. But this is right in our face now: we are all being watched, we are all being spied on, they are into absolutely everything. Do you personally feel uncomfortable getting online anymore? What effect do you think this is going to have on the Internet? Blum: I was always careful about what I said online and in e-mails. That’s not going to change… well, I may be more cautious than usual, but not too much. So, to me it is not going to be a big change. Robles: What about other people? I mean most people think they watch terrorists or something, they are not watching me, I’m just Joe Blow from Des Moines Iowa. But they are actually watching everybody. Blum: Anybody is a subject to being watched at any moment and for any reason. It is too much even for the US Government to read each e-mail every day as they appear. But what they are doing is saving up all this information, meta data they call it, and when any individual comes into their focus on any reason, then they have all the files they can turn to on him and then read them. But they can’t read them as they come each day, that would be too much even for the U.S. Government. Robles: That doesn’t ease my mind at all, anyway. Back to Snowden, would you say he, in your opinion, is a hero, is he a whistleblower, is he a spy? Blum: He is the whistleblower and a hero, I think. He really put his life on the line now. Whatever life he had before, that is over forever. He is very brave, or unless he is somewhat suicidal, I don’t know. But it certainly was a brave act and he’s chosen as his foes the toughest bastards in the world. Robles: Yes, I mean, they are even worse than the CIA. Blum: It is all one big happy family; the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, they are all combined against this one individual, and the American media at the same time. The American media they’re just playing their usual subservient role. Leading correspondents on TV were attacking Glenn Greenwald yesterday. That’s a sign of what is going to happen. Robles: What exactly are they saying in the media and what’s the American reaction to Snowden? Blum: This guy, one of the leading reporters, interviewing Greenwald said; “Is there any reason why you shouldn’t be arrested for what you’ve done?” Robles: Greenwald should be arrested? Blum: Yes, that’s what he said. Greenwald should be arrested. That’s the kind of thing we can expect to happen. But no one has mentioned the former Washington Post reporter, Barton Gellman I think his name is, who was also involved in this story along with Greenwald. They didn’t mention him because he is from Washington Post, he is on left. Greenwald has made it very clear that he is on the left, so that’s why he is the subject of such attacks. Robles: So, do you think Greenwald is going to have problems? Blum: I don’t know what is going to happen. We’ll have to wait and see. Robles: Do you think that it is possible that they could try to prosecute Greenwald for this? Blum: Well, yes, I wouldn’t put anything past them. They could prosecute you and I for this interview I wouldn’t rule out anything. Robles: I don’t want to make a joke out of this, but do you think it is possible the Ecuadorian Embassy could have another permanent resident? Blum: But how would Snowden get to London? Robles: No, I mean Greenwald. Blum: Greenwald! Oh, I don’t think that will happen. He himself is a constitutional lawyer. I think he would love fighting this in court, not while he was in prison like Bradley Manning, and that might be the case. Greenwald lives in Brazil and I think he might be able to get sanctuary there. Robles: Is this going to affect the NSA in any way or is this going to affect the US policy in any way? Blum: That can make them all feel so guilty that they are going to change all their policies. They will stop attacking people and stop bombing people, and stop overthrowing governments because they are so embarrassed. Yes! NOT! Robles: Is there going to be any backlash against Microsoft and Skype etc? Blum: No, the consumers’ love their toys, they can’t do without them. Nothing will change there. Robles: You don’t think anything will change. Do you think this is kind of part of a plan? I mean I see this now, people are so dependent on their devices, people are so dependent on the Internet, people are so dependent on their computers and all their electronics. Do you think this was part of a larger plan to get people dependent and then start watching them, and then let them know they are being watched so they are kind of controlling themselves? Blum: That’s a bit conspiracy minded to my taste. It is a bit too grandiose. So, for the moment I would say I partly don’t know and partly my answer is “no”. Robles: Okay, that’s my own conspiracy idea, but that’s okay. People are saying this is going to spark a wave of other whistleblowers. Do you see that coming out? Blum: We’ve had quite a few in the past few years under Obama. Snowden makes I think the 7th person that they have brought charges against, the 7th whistleblower, which is more than in the entire history of the US. In all the previous administrations there have been two of three, and now there have been seven under Obama. Robles: Is this problem because of the illegality of the Obama Administration is outdoing all previous administrations or is this because they are being more strict than other administrations on whistleblowers? Blum: I can’t say. Obama anyway is not what he was thought to be. Robles: Thanks a lot Bill, I really appreciate it. This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author, historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy.
27 June, 16:42 US applying sledgehammer to whistleblowers – Michael Ratner
Michael Ratner Photo: Reuters Edward Snowden should choose a big country to seek asylum in that can stand up to the U.S., such as Russia or China or a country that has followed an independent line, but those countries are very few. The biggest danger for Mr. Snowden is that a CIA team might find him, drug him, put him in a box and illegally take him back to the United States. World renown lawyer Michael Ranter spoke about these issues with the Voice of Russia. Robles: A lot of people in Russia are kind of, the feel good because Edward Snowden chose transit through Moscow. Why do you think he chose that? What does that say about the Russian government? Are you up-to-date on that latest statements from President Putin, etc.? Ratner: I saw president Putin’s statement yesterday, which I think was quite courageous, despite the fact that it is a powerful country and he really doesn’t have to worry about being whipped around by the United States like smaller countries do. It was quite a courageous statement because he said: “He is in transit, he is free to go where he is”. And first thing that was important I think for the world to hear, is they don’t plan on rendering him to the United States which of course Russia could do. You don’t need an extradition treaty to just pick someone up, put them on a plane and send to the United States, you just do it. There is no law either way but you just do it. Robles: There are laws but the US doesn’t pay attention to them. Ratner: Right, exactly. Robles: I want to underline it really quick because I heard a statement by John Kerry. He said: “Well we don’t have an extradition treaty,” I am paraphrasing, “but that shouldn’t bother the Russians, they should just put him on the plane”. Ratner: He did say that and then he said that there is common law and that is just BS. There is no law that authorizes Russia to put him on a plane, I mean there isn’t that they have to obey. They could in their sovereignty do that, but there is certainly no law that obligates them to do that. It is just not something that is regulated by law that tells Russia they have to do it. Russia is a sovereign country and they can decide who comes into their country and who doesn’t and who they expel, and that is what they can do. But certainly Kerry… He is begging, he is trying to find some basis for sounding publically that Russia has to do something, but it absolutely has to do, nothing! The first thing that was really impressive about President Putin’s statement was that he said, “We are not going to send him to the United States!” and that’s a huge deal. That is number one. And number two, he used words to describe Snowden, and Julian Assange as well, as people engaged in human rights by revealing this kind of material. And that is also very remarkable that the president of one of the most powerful countries in the world is saying that. So, it is sort of saying to Senator Kerry, or… the State Department head now, to back off, and Kerry has backed off, as I’m sure you are aware of, and said: “We don’t want a confrontation with Russia.” But President Putin didn’t have to go that far to actually say – I think he is a human rights activist, essentially. Robles: Yes, I was glad to hear that myself, although, it is a strain on relations. And the only real Russian law that would cause him to be extradited would be some immigration violation if he decided to leave the airport without a visa or something, I mean he is in the transit zone. Ratner: President Putin referred to that. He said he hasn’t violated any Russian law. Of course, these are big issues with any country. But Russia made a certain kind of position which at this point seems to be a very strong decision. Robles: Have you heard any hints or anything about whether Mr Snowden has made a request or is planning making a request to the Russian authorities for asylum? Ratner: I haven’t heard anything. The only one that has come out is that he has made an application to Ecuador. And that came out through Minister Pitino, at his press conference in Vietnam. Robles: And the President of Venezuela I think made a statement today, he said he should be protected for all of mankind or something. Ratner: That was also interesting, I mean we don’t know… assuming he is able to leave that transit zone for somewhere, there are not many places in the world that can stand up to the US. Obviously big countries like Russia and China can. Robles: And that’s my next question. Why Ecuador? I mean Latin American countries, classically, South American countries, they’re prone to coup d'états and revolutions, and everything. If some right-winger takes the presidency of Ecuador next round, what would happen then? And why Ecuador? It is such a small country. Ratner: There obviously high risks with all of this. And you make an immediate decision based on where you can actually get to safely, and you can’t predict the future. And of course, yes, there could be a change in government in Ecuador, although it is four more years for Correa now. In Venezuela I guess it is the same number of years for Maduro. So, some stability. And where else can you go? I mean you have some real problems here. Latin America, to its credit, over the last decade has begun to be able to establish through its popular governments an independent line from the United States. And you obviously see that in Ecuador and Venezuela, in Argentina and Bolivia, in Uruguay as well, and perhaps some other places. And that’s quite important. But on the other hand, these are small countries with all kinds of leverages from the United States… I mean Ecuador, there is a huge article in our paper today on the trade preferences that they have for their cut roses and broccoli or something else. And it is a huge number of jobs, at least a lot of jobs in Ecuador. It is up for renewal in July and, who knows, I mean in the end, you can’t put the whole country’s economy at the behest of saving one person. I mean I think Ecuador would like to, and hopefully the US won’t take the preferences away, and maybe Ecuador will still stand up if they do. But the pressures of the United States particularly on small countries; economic, political and military are just gigantic. The big thing now is these trade preferences that expire in July. Ecuador has been making a huge effort to keep those trade preferences and even trying to get popular support for them. And we will have to see because this article in the Times today, and actually when Ecuador gave asylum to Julian Assange there were also calls in the Washington Post, no less in their editorial board, to take away the trade preferences of Ecuador. This is a hot issue and my guess is that right now, they don’t know. I think Venezuela is probably more able to withstand this. They are a richer and bigger country, 15% of our oil comes from Venezuela, but Ecuador has shown itself to be very strong, but the US of course has a very big stick and will we’ll have to see what happens, I just don’t know the answer. Robles: What are the chances… you are up on international law and everything, if you could answer this, about the transit. What are the chances that the plane could be forced down or something like that in international air space? Ratner: I think in the international air space it would be a complete outrage. That would be illegal and you can’t do that. I don’t even think there is an Interpol warrant for Ed Snowden, or whatever it’s called, a Red Notice or something, which the countries don’t have to obey anyway. But I don’t think there is a warrant even. Just look at it, the charges against him, two of the three charges are the espionage charges. It is not even recognized in most of the countries as a crime, it is considered a political offence and it is not extractable. So, the idea that you would force a plane down on and non-extraditable crime, especially one that is not doing anything, I mean the plane just has got a person. Robles: The US has done so many things that were beyond the pale, I mean with Viktor Bout and Yaroshenko arresting them in third countries and things like that. I wouldn’t put it past the CIA to even shoot the plane down or something. Ratner: I think rendering Ed Snowden is a real fear. In any country he goes to a team of CIA people finding him, picking him up and getting him out of the country illegally, and drugging him and putting him in a box or whatever and getting him to the United States – I think that’s a serious possibility. I think the idea of shooting down a plane would be… you know, I’ve been proven wrong before, but I don’t think that would be a possibility. Robles: Last question regarding any more information that you might have, any further leaks that you might know about through WikiLeaks. What do you think Mr. Snowden’s next move is as well? Ratner: Well, I don’t know. I think he has to find a place to go that’s going to give him safe entry and asylum, or at least consider his asylum application. Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who has been writing in the Guardian, has said he has more information and more material. And he said on a show I was on with him that he would be vetting that material and writing more about I guess the surveillance programs. So, I think we can expect more. Robles: What would you recommend for him, I mean if you were his lawyer, what would you tell him to do right now? Ratner: The main thing to do is to figure out a country to go to and get there. That’s what he has to do. Robles: What country would you recommend? Ratner: Well, as I said either big countries that can stand up to the US such as China, Russia or countries that have had an independent line from the United States and might be able to withstand the pressure of the United States. And there is very few: Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador. Bolivia hasn’t come up yet but I’ve seen, Nicaragua, which I think is unlikely, but there is a handful. And even then, I think it is guaranteed that the US starts going after a small country. Russia is one thing, they can’t do much or can’t do anything… Robles: Yes, even trade turnover with the United States is less than with Great Britain. It is something at the level of like 40 million or something and that’s it. So, they could do without completely. Ratner: Exactly, just not relevant. But places like Ecuador and Venezuela, the US traditionally believes they have the right to control them from an imperial point of view. And also they don’t have big armies like Russia and China. You know, those countries can be squashed like bugs if the US wants, although I think there is a popular support for Snowden that’s going to make that impossible. And the US already looks like a bumbling clumsy bully. Here you have, and we’ll end on this note, this massive surveillance system that they’ve set up to spy on all of us, they couldn’t even figure out that Ed Snowden might be someone who would reveal some of their surveillance system while he was working for them. Then, this whole system couldn’t even figure out where he was in Hong Kong. And then, they couldn’t figure out how he was getting on a plane to go to Russia. So, this whole system is completely ridiculous from that point of view. It is not, from the point of view of knowing what everyone of us does and being able to stop popular rebellions in places like Egypt and Tunisia, it’s not ridiculous from that point of view when they know who everybody is in the opposition. But just tracking down… I mean, think about it, they couldn’t track down Ed Snowden. And then, what are we talking about here? Ridiculous! Robles: That was my first thought. Ratner: We’ll end on that! Robles: Okay, thank you very much. Michael Ratner (born 1943, Cleveland, Ohio) is an attorney, President Emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), a non-profit human rights litigation organization based in New York City and president of the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) based in Berlin. Ratner is known for his human rights activism. Ratner and CCR are currently the attorneys in the United States for publishers Julian Assange and Wikileaks. He was co-counsel in representing the Guantanamo Baydetainees in the United States Supreme Court, where, in June 2004, the court decided his clients have the right to test the legality of their detentions in court.
27 June, 15:19 American refugees and Snowden: refugee or asylee
Photo: EPA The case of Edward Snowden is not an exception, he is just another in a long line of individuals, already perhaps numbering in the tens of thousands who have attempted to expose the illegality of the United States and have had to flee that country or been persecuted for their efforts. Snowden’s case is loud, its big and it is not an exception, but the rule for anyone who goes against the U.S. line. There are thousands of other Americans in similar or worse conditions yet you will never hear about them. Welcome to the age of the American refugee. Under the guidelines that the United States has set forth in defining the requirements that an individual must meet to be considered a refugee or an asylum seeker, and we will get into the differences in those two terms shortly, the country from which the asylum seeker is fleeing or has fled must have, among other criteria; imprisoned or tortured political dissidents or undesirable individuals, committed genocide against a race of people, excluded certain religions or those holding certain views from the political process and fired on or violently repressed protestors. The guidelines of the U.S. are important to underline as classically the United States has: been the destination of choice for the world’s refugees, dictated to the world on human rights, has itself committed egregious violations under international refugee conventions and has seen growing numbers of its population fleeing its borders, renouncing their citizenship overseas, seeking permanent residence in other countries or seeking asylum. In the simplest terms an asylum seeker is one who has arrived or resided in the country where refuge is being sought and has officially applied for asylum through the relevant bodies of a country or if outside the country’s borders, before the relevant officials, such as at an embassy, before an authorized representative or through other proper government bodies of the host country. The term asylum seeker describes an individual and the status of a person who case is being considered and in no way means that the person’s claim is valid or justified. This term simply means an application has been filed to obtain refugee status. However the terms are often confused or misused which may lead to the further marginalization of already marginalized and vulnerable individuals. The United States, under its laws, incorrectly or perhaps by design, states that an asylum seeker must be inside the territory of the United States to apply for asylum while only those outside of its borders can only apply for refugee status, this has led to much confusion between the terms. An interesting U.S. caveat that further obfuscates the meaning of the two terms is that in order for someone to apply for asylum within the United States they must meet the definition of a refugee and it would appear that a catch 22 situation has been created. Regardless of the U.S. legalese and location relevant conditions for most of the world a refugee is someone who has fled his or her country of origin or permanent residence due to the fact that they have suffered, or are fearful of suffering persecution based on the fact of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or due to the fact that they are a member of a persecuted social group. Refugees may also be fleeing a war or a natural disaster which has made normal life impossible in their home countries. And an asylum seeker is simply someone who has applied for asylum. A refugee is also anyone who has for whatever reason ceased to be under the protection of their own government and can not return home because they are afraid of persecution or facing injustice. On the whole both asylum seekers and refugees are extremely marginalized and vulnerable people, and should not be confused with economic migrants who are merely seeking better living conditions than those available in their home countries. Under its own definitions the United States itself is guilty of offenses which have led to the rise of U.S. citizens seeking asylum in other countries and which should allow countries to grant them asylum despite no support by bodies such as the UNHCR, which is a U.S. controlled entity, and the widely held fallacy that the United States is a some sort of beacon of human rights. The false belief that the U.S. is a democratic country that follows the rule of law makes asylum seekers from the U.S. that much more vulnerable and marginalized. In brief, using their own criteria, the U.S. has imprisoned or tortured political dissidents or undesirable individuals. This includes whistleblowers, hacktivists, Muslims, blacks, non-whites, 9-11 truthers and almost anyone who has gone against the official line. Bradley Manning, Jeremy Hammond, and many others have had to endure conditions that have amounted to torture as have all of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay Cuba. A prison and torture facility that was placed outside of U.S. borders of the U.S. to circumnavigate international law. This does not remove the fact that the U.S. is guilty of torture. The U.S. habitually tortures and imprisons “undesirable” elements. The U.S. has also committed genocide directly or through surrogates or supported those committing genocide. This mainly includes the indigenous peoples and the American Indians but their policies and allies have also caused the genocide of millions worldwide including Mayans, Serbs, Iraqis, Afghans, and many people of the Middle East including Shia, Alawites and others. The U.S. has also excluded certain religions or those holding certain views from the political process. This includes Muslims, Orthodox Christians, Buddhists, Atheists and others. This has become a marked problem since the events of 9-11 and the open persecution of Muslims, Seiks and other non-Evangelical, non-Catholic Christians. As for firing on or violently repressing protestors, the branding and detention of protestors such as the NATO 5 as terrorists and the complete and utter annihilation of the Occupy Movement including violent and brutal methods to stop their peaceful demonstrations, has proven without a doubt that dissent is not tolerated and free speech is just a catchphrase in America. Another very important point is that the U.S. can now legally target its own citizens for extra-judicial execution. No country in the world has such a policy and this fact alone points to the complete and total illegality of the U.S. as a legitimate world power. Lastly the war on whistleblowers and the way the U.S. has actively persecuted anyone who attempts to expose the truth surrounding the illegality of the U.S. Government points to a horrendous criminal regime and a government fumbling to save itself from the abomination that it has become. Can an American like Mr. Snowden be a refugee? Why not? I am, so was Albert Einstein. Stay tuned for my upcoming article on his status.
26 June, 23:56
Download audio file As Edward Snowden remains in the transit area at Moscow’s Sheremyetevo people who support Mr. Snowden worldwide are growing more and more concerned as to what fate has in store for the brave young man and where he will finally find a safe haven. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated Russia will not hand him over to the U.S. because there is no basis for such a move. The Voice of Russia’s John Robles spoke with Michael Ratner, the American lawyer for Julian Assange and discussed Snowden, PRISM and much more. 26 June, 17:55 PRISM: Every move you make, “they” will be watching you
Collage: Voice of Russia The US Government and the unified global communications network operated by an alliance of the secret SIGINT units of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States called UKUSA, has developed, expanded and spread unhindered to such a point that everything and anything you do on the internet, on a cell phone and through every other means of electronic based communications can, and now we know, is being collected, recorded and spied upon. Like United States military infrastructure, through its international global military arm NATO, U.S. signals intelligence operations have now spread to every corner of the globe and are greedily gobbling up anything and everything that is flowing through cyber space, regardless of its origin or the rights of those being spied upon. Two points are important to recall here, one that the Internet that we all so love and use and which has taken over the way the world does business and exchanges information was initially a U.S. global military network, and two that the expansion of the surveillance of the Internet to today’s present level and form was made possible by the “War on Terror” paradigm which has existed since 9-11 and has cowed most of the world’s population into fearful submission allowing the security services to expand their scope with almost complete and unhindered impunity. Despite the reported efforts of the Global Network Initiative, a non-governmental organization (NGO) with the stated goals of preventing Internet censorship and protecting the Internet privacy of individuals there has been little that they have been willing and/or able to effectively do against the massive expansion and scope of spying programs being run by the National Security Agency (NSA) and the United States SIGINT System (USSS). According to open source intelligence the PRISM SIGINT Activity Designator (SIGAD) replaced the post 9-11 Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP) which was operating illegally without the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). However such programs, once the foundations and infrastructure are in place and if they have proven to be effective, may just be temporarily closed and re-launched using different names, locations, personnel and financial and administrative bodies and methods to hide and obfuscate their existence and true nature. Hence programs like TSP, ECHELON, CARNIVORE may be shut down, paused and then restarted and repackaged and renamed. PRISM is the likely product of such projects and the unification of platforms across the SIGINT intelligence operations sphere. PRISM was approved by the U.S. judiciary and hence has been operating with impunity since at least 2007, controlled and operated by the Special Source Operations (SSO) unit of the United States National Security Agency (NSA). PRISM is just the tip of the iceberg and is just a small part of the U.S. Government’s mechanism for spying on and controlling the countries and the peoples of the world. I mentioned the UKUSA group, their efforts are also worth noting, especially in light of the recent revelations made by ex-NSA/CIA systems administrator and whistleblower Edward Snowden. What about the other partner countries in the spying alliance? Are they innocent of such egregious spying? Yes they are and even worse because they pass the private information of their citizens to the United States. In this article I am dealing with Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) as it effects the average citizen of the world, this in no way means that the programs and the methods that I am discussing are by far the only instruments they are using to dominate the globe, all allowed and tolerated in the name of security. SIGINT involves many different intelligence collection instruments and methods and with the recent advances in technology these have grown incredibly. The basic areas of SIGINT can be grouped into two broad categories: communications intelligence (COMINT) and electronic intelligence (ELINT). As technology advances the crossovers and combinations of the two grow by the day, meaning for example information from a Skype chat would fall under both COMINT and ELINT, not a fact of vital importance but one that should be noted. The members of the UKUSA Security Agreement: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, are also referred to by a number of abbreviations, further obfuscating their nature and existence such as AUSCANNZUKUS and Five Eyes. All of these countries are members of the ECHELON spy network. Which was originally, like NATO a program set up to spy on the former USSR and the Eastern Block and has been expanded, like NATO, at an incredibly rate since the end of the cold war and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Gone are the days when the CIA would spend years attempting to dig tunnels and splice into the telephone networks of Soviet cities. Today they are connected to absolutely everything and anything. According to a report on ECHELON it is capable of intercepting telephone calls, faxes, e-mails and other data traffic worldwide including satellite based transmission, public switched telephone networks (which once carried most Internet traffic), microwave links, fiber optic communications and cell phone line of site networks. With the revelations of the PRISM program which they say has been operating since 2007 it is now evident that the data collection capabilities include: e-mail, voice and video chats, streaming and other video, any and all photos, stored data on your hard drive, voice over IP (VoIP) conversations, file transfers, notifications of logins, etc., social networking details and a special category called “special requests”. If we throw in satellite surveillance, CST systems, RFID chips, cell phone location and usage monitoring including interception of text messages, automobile tracking devices, credit card and purchasing information collection and GPS device related transmissions, then almost everything you do is subject to surveillance and monitoring, in a nutshell this means the spooks can now find out what you had for dinner last night, with whom and how much you paid for it, as well as every other private aspect of your lives. United Kingdom The U.K.’s programs are more hidden than those of the U.S. and there is less information available about them either because they are better at hiding them or they are less in number but their scope is almost equal to that of the U.S. however they are more restrained than their American “special friends”. We know that the U.K. is an active member of the ECHELON based infrastructure and now we know that they are also active in the PRISM SIGINT Activity Designator (SIGAD), or simply PRISM. There are still calls from people like Stella Rimington for the expansion of U.K. spying so it is possible that the U.K. is lagging behind their American friends although judging by the number of CCTV cameras in London this is doubtful. As for data collection stations the main ones for the United Kingdom are the Menwith Hill (US) facility, the Aiyos Nicolas Station in Cyprus and of course GCHQ, the U.K.’s version of the NSA. Again there is little information available on specific programs, which come under the aegis of directorates of Military Intelligence and GCHQ. A little known fact about the U.K.’s Military Intelligence is that they have at least 20 directorates that are known about. With regards to SIGINT these might be handled by MI-1 (codes and ciphers), MI-5 and 6, MI-8 (signals and communications), MI-10 (technical), and perhaps MI-13 which like the NSA until recently doesn’t exist. Australia Although you may have thought Australia might be behind when it comes to the level of its secret bureaucracies and the amount of spying it does think again. Among entities in Australia that provide for governance and policy over the secret service and operations are: the NSC, the SCNS, the NCTC, the NICC, the NICMC, the NIOSC, the HIAM, the NSIPC, the NSA (not that one), the DNSA, the NSCIO, the ISD and more. Intelligence agencies include the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO), the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS), the Defense Intelligence Organization (DIO) and but not limited to, the Defense Signals Directorate (DSD). However it is probably the DSD that we are most interested in as they handle the analysis, collection and distribution of foreign SIGINT and are responsible for communications, information, cyber and computer security. Their main global station is located right in the center of Australia at Pine Gap but they have stations throughout Australia. Canada Canada’s Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) in not only part of the UKUSA group but shares intelligence with the U.S., the U.K., and Australia under what is called the “Quadpartite Pact”. CSIS is the principle Canadian intelligence service and are a civilian service unlike the MIs and the NSA and CIA. However Canada’s Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC) is responsible for SIGINT in Canada. CSEC has facilities at CFS Leitrim, the main SIGINT facility, and at other locations such as CFB Gander Newfoundland, CFS Masset, BC and CFS Alert, Nunavut. CSEC relies mainly on the U.S., U.K., Australia and New Zealand for its intelligence collection and benefits substantially from UKUSA, especially when it comes to foreign communications. Currently Canadian programs are still largely secret although involvement with PRISM, ECHELON and other programs has been documented, to what level they provide the CIA and the NSA information on Canadians remains to be seen. New Zealand The Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) listens to phone calls and intercepts e-mail and other communications but is not supposed to do so on citizens of New Zealand, they have been reported to be a part of ECHELON. New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS or SIS) is responsible for foreign intelligence operations and information gathering. However it is the super secret Combined Signals Organization (CSO) that handles SIGINT, ECHELON operations and the like. PRISM operations in New Zealand would fall under the GCSB and the CSO, but again their level of participation may be minimal and due to New Zealand’s small size they are more likely largely beneficiaries of UKUSA and PRISM operations.
26 June, 13:25 Self-defense has become act of war for the U.S. and NATO – Rick Rozoff
S-300. Photo: RIA Novosti The delivery of S-300 defensive missile batteries to Syria would protect the country from the types of attacks carried out by Israel and the U.S. but the West views such self-defense measures as an act of war and says that the ability of countries not friendly to the U.S. and its allies to defend themselves, in particular Syria, would upset the “balance of power”. Regular Voice of Russia contributor spoke about this, Manning and more in his latest interview with the Voice of Russia. You are listening to an interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner of the Stop NATO website and International Mailing List.
Robles: What is your opinion on S-300s? What can you tell us about S-300s? How will that change the situation? Rozoff: A retired General stated that with batteries, I think the estimate was 10 to 12 S-300 missiles, that the territory of Syria as a whole would effectively be protected from what are the likely sorts of attacks the United States and Israel would launch against it, which are cruise missiles and missiles launched from aircraft, fixed-wing aircraft, and in that sense give Syria something that the previous victims of US-NATO attacks, Libya, Yugoslavia, Iraq, surely did not have, which is effective control of their air-space and the ability to defend their air-force and other military assets from marauding western war planes bombing them. So, it is very significant if they obtain them. Of course like most of your listeners, I have heard disparate, and at times conflicting, accounts of how imminent the arrival of S-300 is and everything from next year to they’re on their way, there is probably misrepresentation of statements by President Bashar Assad that they are already there. Then of course there have been statements by Israeli government officials that they “would not tolerate” that. Can you imagine? They “would not tolerate” a sovereign nation Russia, delivering on a contractual agreement to supply strictly defensive weapons. Robles: That was a 2010 agreement. I just wanted to remind everybody out there. That agreement between Russia and Syria that goes back to 2010 and these are defensive weapons as well. Russia stated that all the contracts were legal, they’re transparent, they don’t go against any international sanctions or anything. These were long ago in the making. You’ve mentioned Israel as well and several statements were made by prominent politicians and officials in the west that this would upset the balance of power between Israel and Syria. What do you make of that statement? In other words, Israel can’t just bomb Syria with impunity any time it wants or what? Rozoff: That is exactly how I would interpret that statement, and what a hubristic statement, and the fact that comments like that would be reported dutifully and uncritically by the major press wire services of the west, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if U.S. government officials echoed sentiments of that sort. The balance of power means: “My side has uncontested superiority over yours, and I can strike your side without having to worry about retaliation”. Anyone who upsets that balance of power, I mean it is not an equal balance of power is it? It is a very one-sided one. It suggests that; heaven forbid somebody had the audacity to try to defend themselves, because once they do that, then it is a call for direct military attack on them because we can’t allow them the ability to defend their own territory. This is what I hear. So that means that the old-fashioned notions, if you will, that each country has the right to defend its own territory are no longer operational and that now if you are with the U.S., or one of its major allies, you have the right not only to set up impenetrable missile shields over your country, but you have the right to demand that bordering nations, that they not protect their skies and they not protect themselves and if they do, that is seen as what? An act of war? Robles: Unbelievable. Rick we haven’t talked about Bradley Manning before but I’d like to get some of your opinions because he did attempt to expose a lot of the stuff that we talk about all the time. What is your opinion on the Bradley Manning case it just started off, his so-called trial, if you want to call it that? Rozoff: It is a travesty not a trial and it’s drumhead justice, with the “justice” in italic or quotation mark. He is being prosecuted as an example to others so that anyone within the military with a shred of decency that is appalled by atrocities of the sort that he, the noted video that I think most people are familiar with, was able to help the Wikileaks expose, will think twice about it because they can see the example that has been made out of Manning. And this is, for a country that prides itself, or dictates rather, to the rest for the world the need of transparency and so forth, and command responsibility, even with the leaders of other nations to conduct trials of this sort is a self-indictment and I think it will go down in history as some of the most infamous show trials. Robles: They are trying to say that he aided the enemy. Do you know any actual damage that he did or in some way that he actually aided the enemy? Some damage he did to NATO or the west other than revealing crimes and the criminality of their behavior? Rozoff: I do not. You know that what I’ve read, this is very basic synopsis of it, but the prosecution is claiming that he directly or indirectly, at first hand or second hand, I can’t see how it could be a first hand really, delivered information directly into the hands of our enemies, or words to that effect. That is what I’ve read earlier today. I don’t know what they could conceivably be speaking about that out there. Unless they are suggesting by releasing information to Wikileaks and that in turn somehow getting on the Internet, that anyone in this world of 7 billion people who has access to the internet could see. Robles: So, basically what they are saying, is if you have some information, you publish it, if Osama bin Laden had read it, then you are guilty of aiding the enemy. Rozoff: That is the sort of perverse and reverse logic they are using right now. And first of all that excludes motive, if I had no motive to provide information that would, in any way or form, embolden so-called enemy combatants anywhere in the world, but if inadvertently through no intention and no action on my own such as the result, and I am held accountable for it as though I deliberately intended that to come about. Robles: We are on the short wave here, probably going out to anybody in the world, penguins in Arctic and little green men on the moon could probably listen to us if they wanted to. Are we giving the enemy information if somebody in Al-Qaeda has a short wave tuned in or they get on a satellite radio or something and tune us in? Rozoff: I think there is a distinction between information and encouragement and I think what we are getting dangerously close to right now, is that government privacy is now paralleling in many ways very dubious concepts of copyright infringement, the intent of which is to make the dissemination of almost any kind of information illegal. Either it is branded as espionage or as piracy and the idea that something I say may be heard by somebody who passes it on to ten generations of other people and/or different links in the chain and eventually somebody says; “That encourages me to go out and do something violent or illegal”, that is no justification for preventing free speech. Nobody can control what happens with comments, innocent, peaceful comments that a person makes, how they could be distorted and passed on and viewed inaccurately by a third or a tenth or a hundredth party who then acts on it in some manner. You know that is so farfetched. Really it shouldn’t be even discussed but in the case of Bradley Manning unfortunately, this is what I understand pretty much to be the case. If he were the conduit through which information that might not otherwise have appeared on the internet, appears there, and then months or years later somebody sees it and uses that as the pretext, if not as the reason, for doing something that he is exp facto held accountable for what somebody he has never met, has done, seems ludicrous to me, it really does. But it is a frightening precedent of course. And it has a chilling effect on anyone who wants to do disseminate information that the government might find to be inexpedient. Robles: Are you getting any blowback or feedback or anything from your efforts? Rozoff: As with anyone in this situation you can well imagine, I have a website Stop NATO and every so often somebody posts comments from the U.S., somewhere from the Defense Department or the British Ministry of Defense most recently and these are people who try to be very chummy as if that they just happened across the website in the course of their reading and take issue with an article or something that is there. But they are clearly information officers and it is their job to troll the internet and to find… Against the billions of dollars they have to propagandize, billions of dollars they have to conduct operations both overt and covert and to influence people’s thinking, heaven forbid one, there’s one individual sitting with a website some place trying to disseminate contrary information, that person has to be silenced, in the name of “democracy” or “freedom” or “free flow” of information or something. Robles: They watch everybody. It is crazy. Rozoff: They have a zero tolerance towards dissent, and that is what the Bradley Manning and the Julian Assange cases really should demonstrate to the world: is that somebody who uses freedom of expression and so forth as an excuse to criticize other governments around the world, will tolerate absolutely no dissent in their own country, and will brand any kind of dissent as being espionage. Robles: But any dissent anywhere else is ok, it is freedom of speech and democracy. Rozoff: It is to be applauded. As a matter of fact we were speaking of Hillary Clinton earlier announcing that she was going to tweet in Russian, Chinese, Hindu and Farsi. Robles: That never worked out, did it? Rozoff: Evidently the governments of those countries know how to combat a propaganda campaign. Robles: I mean the State Department couldn’t get the word “restart” right,the wrote “ocerload” so I don’t see how they could actually come up with a legible and intelligent tweet once a day. I think that would be too much. Rozoff: I believe you are right. Robles: Especially in 4 or 5 languages. I mean come on, they couldn’t translate one word right. Rozoff: I’ve seen the State Department stumble over standard English on occasion, I can only imagine how they would do with the foreign tongues. Robles: Okay. Let’s not… They deserve to be bashed Rick. Anyway, are you still there or what? Rozoff: I’m still here. Robles: I thought maybe they cut the line already. Alright, anyway. So we are probably going through Menwith Hill to the NSA and all this so, do you want to say hi to the spooks? No it’s okay, just kidding. Rozoff: I’ve known them for so long that it’s almost… but who knows? But you know, there are figures right now, I just saw the NATO analysis of the Syrian situation that even though something like 80% of the Syrian population now supports Assad even if they didn’t before. The ratings have never been higher, that 20% supports the opposition. So, the numbers are shifting. This is a pragmatic consideration. This is somebody who may have opposed the government 2 years ago but this has been given by the alternative of a bunch of armed gangs running around the country, better the government than anyone else. Robles: What about the minority populations? There are certain Jewish parts of the population in Syria, Christians, there are Coptics,a host of … There is an Armenian population. How do they all feel about arming these Islamic lunatics? I’m sorry. Rozoff: I mean the armed extremists, who are in a large part, foreign mercenaries. That is something else we have to recollect. These are not just domestic extremists and others, including cannibals, as we have established. But in many cases, from around the Islamic world, this very much parallels with what happened in Afghanistan in the 1980s where the United States and Saudi Arabia helped organize Jihadis from around the world to come to north-west Pakistan to fight in Afghanistan and against Afghanistan. And we are seeing a parallel that now we have an international mercenary squad with combat experience not only in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but in Russian North Caucuses and the Balkans and North Africa, and the minorities, we have to recall that Syria is an extremely diverse, mosaic of cultures and traditions and religions, confessions. Going back millennia, going back as a matter of fact to 6-7 thousand years, Syria is Mesopotamia. There are a good number of ethnic Syrians to this day in the country. Robles: What is going to happen to all these… To this wonderful mosaic of humanity? What is going to happen if these insurgents come into power? Rozoff: We know exactly what is going to happen based on the experiences in Kosovo and Iraq is that the ethnic and religious minorities are going to be terrorized into fleeing the country, they are going to be murdered and persecuted in large numbers. Several weeks ago 2 Orthodox bishops were kidnapped in Syria and they are still being held incommunicado. One was a Greek Orthodox Bishop, another was a Syriac, you know a Syrian Orthodox Christian Bishop and for all we know they could be dead. And this is what other religious and ethnic minorities within the country know to expect, in the event of a so-called “rebel” victory in the country. Much as what we’ve seen in Iraq were prior to the invasion of the country 10 years ago, you had an estimated population of half a million Chrisitans, for the most part Syrians, that number has been cut by 50% with 250,000 who have fled or been killed. And what you see is an ethnic and confessional purging of a country. The just horrid mass killings in Iraq, which are also similarly motivated, the attacks tend to be overwhelmingly against Shiite Muslims and against Christians, perpetrated by the same kind of Wahhabi extremists backed by Saudi Arabia, backed by the United States. Similar things have occurred in Kosovo. We do know the groups, apparently the premier fighting force within that armed opposition is Al-Nusra, which is a Wahhabi extremist Saudi-oriented or backed Sunni theocratic fighting force, one the U.S. even dissociates them from, essentially considering it a terrorist organization. But you know, that’s been exactly the model that was used in Afghanistan in the 1980s and subsequently in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s and was used in Libya 2 years ago and is being used in Syria now. You were listening to an interview in progress with Rick Rozoff, the Owner of the Stop NATO website and International Mailing List. You can find the previous parts of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru.
26 June, 03:20 1 Snowden case is saturated with American hypocrisy - Barns
Photo: www.vesti.ru In an exclusive interview to the Voice of Russia's John Robles Greg Barns, the President of Australian Lawyers Alliance, and the head of Julian Assange’s senatorial campaign, shares his opinion on the intelligence alliance between the US and UK, America's failure to rationally perceive the reaction of other countries, and the connection between Wikileaks' Assange and Edward Snowden. Hello this is John Robles I’m speaking with Greg Barns, he’s the campaign manager for the WikiLeaks Party in Australia and the head of Julian Assange’s senate campaign. Robles: I’d like to ask you some questions regarding whistleblower Edward Snowden, in particular the connection between WikiLeaks and Snowden, and what your impressions are of that whole situation, if you could. Barns: Look, there is no doubt that WikiLeaks organization as parts to the political party here in Australia, but the organization has had some links with Snowden. And I think it is doing a very good job in protecting someone who has, in a quite marked way, in the same way that Julian Assange did, exposed what effectively are secret spying operations which are being run by the United States and its allies. And I think it is important that that’s the story that is told to the world and that the person who tells that story ought to be protected. Robles: That’s right! As far as the level of embarrassment to the United States Government, I mean, I think this pales in comparison to what Julian did. How far do you think the US is going to go to try to get Snowden? And what do you know about his current situation? Barns: I don’t know a lot about his current situation, other than to say that I think the United States has the same determination to get him as it has to get Julian Assange. The United States fails to see what the rest of the world is saying to it: there is an enormous amount of hypocrisy here. This is a country which has fulminated against other counties, such as Russia, such as China, about spying programs, and invasions of the privacy of its citizens. And yet here we have the United States and its allies, including the United Kingdom and probably Australia, doing exactly the same things. And I think that their determination to get Edward Snowden will be quite extreme, as it has been in the case of Julian Assange. Robles: Can you tell us, through your channels, do you know where he is? That’s the question of the hour, or do you have any indication of what might be going on that you could tell us without endangering anybody? Barns: I don’t. If I did, I’d share as much as I could with you. But I certainly don’t. We are focusing on running Julian Assange and other WikiLeaks Party candidates’ election campaign in Australia. And I should say those developments have been very good for the campaign because what they are saying is that we live in a world now where democratic governments effectively are spying on their citizens. One question which remains unanswered and which the Australian Government and the opposition parties here are refusing to answer is the extent to which Australia is involved in these US and UK activities. I think that there is absolutely no doubt that Australian security agencies will have involvement. And I think there is also absolutely no doubt that we will see some revelations about that in the forthcoming days. Robles: Are you aware of the signals intelligence alliance UKUSA? As far as I understand the whole situation, New Zealand, Australia, Great Britain, the US and Canada, all share this type of information. I’m not sure to what extent they allow access to the servers of the US Internet giants. What do you think about that blanket, overall surveillance on everything and everyone in the world? Which is what it has come down to. Barns: I think that China got it absolutely right in the way it’s characterized that this is the hypocrisy and the sanctimonious way in which the United States has acted towards other countries, has now been exposed for what it is, gross hypocrisy. And I think what’s disturbing is that countries like the United Kingdom and Australia and Canada and New Zealand, their citizens are subjected to the similar regimes and yet their political leaders are not jumping up and down saying: “This is outrageous we should do something about it!” Robles: In fact, the UK authorities are calling for more surveillance. I’m not sure if you remember, about two weeks ago Stella Rimington came out saying; ”Oh! UK’s subjects should be the eyes and ears of the special services!”, trying to push through the terrorism meme again. I mean at that time it was pretty fresh… What’s your opinion on the whole... Barns: The abuses which have occurred in the light of 9-11 have been manifold and we have seen innocent people, they have been skewered, they’ve been crucified as a result of post-9-11 activities. Security agencies are running rampant in Australia, in the United Kingdom, in the United States and other so-called democratic countries. And it is time to rein them in. There is no reason why citizens ought to be surveilled to the extent that they are. And calls by people like Stella Rimington just show how out of touch she is with democratic values. This is one of the most overblown rhetoric of governments about terrorism threats. It is absolutely absurd, it is nonsense. I appeared in a case in Australia a number of years ago, it was alleged that people were running around indulging in terrorist activities. It was effectively Mickey-Mouse stuff and it was blown up by elements of the media. In this country these developments, allege an essential threat to Australia, it is just absurd and it is time to put the genie back in a bottle. Robles: Yes, there is a terrorist behind every street post, lamppost and on every corner. Now, for years I’ve seen myself 9-11 as a catalyst for complete world domination militarily, electronically etc. And 5 years ago people would say: “John, come on, that’s a conspiracy theory.” How far away do you that is now, those kinds of ideas, from being a “conspiracy theory”? Barns: I think your views were presentient because I think that there is no doubt that we have allowed in democracies, governments to be effectively run by security agencies. Security agencies have had enormous increases in their budgets. They get whatever they want. When they want increases in powers, they get those increases. They are not accountable in the way that they should be to the citizens of the country. And now we’ve found that effectively they spy on us, and not only those they consider a threat, but every Tom, Dick and Harry. Russia, China, US, Wikileaks, Julian Assange, privacy, info leak, whistleblower, surveillance, PRISM, NSA, Edward Snowden, World · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · Well said Barns, it is the every Tom Dick and Harry that makes the point clearly than anything else along with the foreign minister sitting on his hands in stead of assisting an Australian, that irritates a Vietnam veteran like me who never likes to see an Australian hung out to dry. It is in the Australian psyche to not leave any Australian behind. I expect an Australian minister to respect this above all other considerations. 25 June, 13:53 Snowden would be better off in Cuba, chance of coup d'état is much less than elsewhere - Blum
Photo: AFP Speaking about the latest Edward Snowden’s travel ‘plans’ and the confusion the world has been exposed to in the media on the subject of his whereabouts, Mr. William Blum, an American author, historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy and an outer of CIA agents, claims that Cuba would be Snowden’s best bet, as it’s “the most guaranteed place not to buckle to any kind of American pressure” and “the chance of coup d'état is much less than elsewhere”. He also thinks the American whistleblower allegedly chose Ecuador “because of their record with Julian Assange” and says the Russians are purposefully prpogating confusion in the media to make it difficult for the CIA to capture or assassinate the NSA leaker.
William Blum Robles: I’d really like to get your opinion on the whole Snowden affair, since this is something I think you are pretty close to, as far as the whistleblowing. What do you make of the whole situation? And what do you think his chances are of making it to Ecuador, and why Ecuador? Blum:He’s a very brave man. I hope he makes it somewhere. I think that Cuba would be his best bet, as Cuba is the place most guaranteed not to buckle to any kind of American pressure. Where he is now, I have no idea. I think all the confusion that we’ve been exposed to in the media is not by chance. I think the Russians are purposely doing this to make it difficult for the CIA to capture and/or assassinate Snowden, which in fact they would love to do. That’s all I know about it. Robles: You know a lot about South American countries, and Latin American countries and the instability in a lot of those countries. Why would he go to Ecuador, I mean it is a small country? I’m sure the knowledge he has, I don’t see what real huge use it would have to Ecuadorian intelligence. Blum:His knowledge concerning who was being spied upon by the U.S. Government I don’t think wouldbe of much value to any foreign nation. I don’t think that’s the issue. I think he chose Ecuador because of their record with Julian Assange. They have proven themselves to be a capable protector of someone like him. And so, that’s probably maybe the only reason he’d chosen Ecuador. Of course the President, Correa, is a leftist and the people under him in the high positions are also leftist, so that’s a protection. Robles: You know as well as I know Latin American countries they can be very volatile. What if Correa is voted out of office next time and some right-wing president comes in? Blum:Correa was re-elected as president within the past six months I think. Robles: Yes, he was. Blum:So, he stays for a few years. Although, I would not put it past the CIA instigating a coup; they tried in the past to do the same. But now they may be more serious about it, andthey could certainly pour their heart and soul into it, and use all their assets and all their wealth, and their wealth is their main asset and they can buy almost anything and anyone. So, that’s the reason I think Snowden would be better off in Cuba, the chance of coup d'état is much less there than elsewhere. Robles: Yeah, sure, sure, I mean they’ve been trying, what was it 600 and … more than 650 …? Blum:Oh yeah, they’ve been trying to assassinate Castro 600 times or so, but they haven’t succeeded, and they won’t (unintelligible). Robles: Why didn’t he stay in Russia, I mean there is a very little chance that Russia would buckle to U.S.? Blum:Russia does not want to have all these headaches that might entail,and keep in mind, this is not quite the Cold War. Russia is not a Communist country, it’s not at war ideologically with the US. It’s at war on a different level. The US has surrounded Russia with military bases. It’s incorporated many of the former Soviet leading republics into NATO; all of them are not far from Russia. So, the US is really threatening Russia and Russia has reason to be hostile towards the U.S., not as much as during the Cold War, but enough. They could have kept Snowden there. I don’t know. He may even still be there, for all we know he’s still there, for all we know he may be there. Who knows? Robles: I think if Russia made a decision to give him asylum, and Russian officials have said he would have been granted it had he requested it, I’m sure Russia would be in much more of a position to protect him. It’s not that easy for the CIA to operate here and manipulate politicians and everything as it is I think in many Latin American countries - same thing for China. First, I thought maybe he went from Hong Kong into mainland China, but apparently not. Blum:The point is well taken. I don’t know what’s going to happen. He could wind up in Russia or in Ecuador, or Cuba, or Venezuela. But he is not going to wind up in California, I’m sure of that. Robles: What do you think the CIA’s going to try to do, or the NSA’s going to try to do to get him back? How far do think they’re going to go? Blum:Physically get him back? Robles: Or get rid of him. Blum:It depends on how many opportunities they have. The Russians and the other countries we’ve mentioned have to be super careful to avoid giving the CIA any special opportunity, which probably is why we have all this confusion. This is some kind of master plan. Robles: Once he gets to Ecuador, if that’s where he’s going, what do you think is going to happen? Blum:It’s hard to imagine him living a peaceful life there. He will always be looking over his shoulder. The CIA can have 1000 assassins on the loosewith a large reward. I cannot see him having a peaceful, stable life there. But he must have thought of all this in advance, I hope he has a master plan. Robles: Well, I think he was very clever in getting out of their clutches and getting to Hong Kong. That was actually a pretty wise move, because he was able to get there without a visa or anything. Which, I guess he fell off the grid for a while. What’s your opinion of the revelations that he’s made? How do you see his case in contrast to an average espionage case? Blum:Compared to WikiLeaks, it’s not quite as dramatic as WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks exposed all kinds of very, very embarrassing things concerning US foreign policy. Snowden’s revelationsare embarrassing,it’s just it’sone big embarrassment, it’s not 100 different small embarrassments. It’s just the embarrassment of they were spying even more than what people thought. I’ll tell you many people who assumed that NSA was covering everyone, so even those people would not be surprised. In any event, to me, it’s not quite as embarrassing to US foreign policy as the WikiLeaks revelations were. Robles: To the world’s public though, I mean I’ve always had the suspicion and I think you have, and any thinking person on the Internet has had the suspicion that they’re being watched or something. But this is right in our face now – we are all being watched, we are all being spied on, they are into absolutely everything. Do you personally feel uncomfortable getting online anymore? What effect do you think this is going to have on the Internet? Blum:I was always careful about what I said online and in emails. That’s not going to change… well,maybe I’ll be a bit more cautiousness than usual, but not much. So, to me it is not going to be a big change. You can find part 2 of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru
25 June, 07:28 PRISM revelations will boost security, the mainstream media has failed - Hrafnsson
Kristinn Hrafnsson Photo: AFP In the continuation of our latest interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson marking the one year anniversary of the Julian Assange being trapped in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, Mr. Hrafnsson gives us his views on the PRISM revelations and the effect that they will have on the internet and the current state of the world’s mass media. You are listening to an interview in progress with Kristinn Hrafnsson, the official spokesperson and the number two at the Wikileaks organization. You can find part one on our website at English.ruvr.ru. Robles: What is your advice to someone who doesn’t want the NSA in their life, I mean, does encryption work anymore? Is there anything people can do to protect their privacy anymore on the internet, or is it pretty much all, “finished”? Hrafnsson: There are technical means to safeguard yourself from snooping, there are browsers you can download, or something from the TOR Project that is available, relatively safe, encryption methods, it is known for example PGP that stands for Pretty Good Protection. Robles: PGP up to version 6.5 was pretty much, I heard, unbreakable and then after that it was bought out by network associates and it’s been monkeyed around with. Hrafnsson: I am a simple journalist and would not be the best one to recommend specific programs but there are programs that allow you to maintain security on the internet. They’re being upgraded and developed constantly and people should be aware and find out about the latest developments in their field and I am sure that with all of the latest revelations there is going to be a boost in developing secure mechanisms for communications and security on the internet. It will be a constant battle because the situation is not done. Things that are now secure will probably be insecure in few months, or in a year or two. Robles: How is Julian? Any comments from him on this one-year “horrible” anniversary? How is he? Hrafnsson: He has been maintaining a positive attitude. He is doing fine. And as he has been busy and he has been working leading our work under these rather difficult conditions but it hasn’t stopped. I think that he has an incredible ability to adapt to difficult situations he continues work. He is getting a bit used to that now, it is not just the year in the Ecuadorian Embassy, before that we had imprisonment, and house arrest, so this is a situation that is becoming easier, he has a strong character and he is capable of adapting to the situation. Robles: Did he have a special message on the anniversary for his supporters? Hrafnsson: In general, we are totally based of course, on the people and we are very appreciative of the great support that we have had and I hope that continues and increases and extends to others who really are dealing with hard situations as a result of doing work based on the same sort of principles that we have adhered to and of course I am referring to Bradley Manning and now Edward Snowden. We have a growing understanding among people about the importance of this subject and people are being fed up with being the victims of this invasion of privacy and corruption. That is what we report and let’s hope that that continues. Robles: How are you doing there in Ecuador? Is there anything you want to tell us about that? What are you doing down there? Anything going to come out of that conference you are at? Would you like to talk about that? Hrafnsson: I am here on a conference, interesting enough, called “Responsible Journalism” and it is quite interesting to listen to voices about the criticism of the mainstream media, how they have failed and there needs to be a reform and a rethinking of the role of journalism in our society. For me as a journalist for all my working life I find this repressing and a discussion that should be expanded to the whole world because I do recognize that the mainstream media has failed fundamentally especially in the recent years. Robles: Kristinn I really appreciate it. I am sure you have other things to do. I really appreciate your talking with me. That was the end of an interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson, the official spokesperson for Wikileaks. You can find part one of this interview at our website at English.ruvr.ru.
24 June, 08:55 If an incompetent person runs security, morality goes out the window - Holland
Stella Rimington Photo: Reuters Calling on British subjects to be the “eyes and ears of the security services” Stella Rimington, the publicity loving ex-director of the UK’s security service, Military Intelligence 5 (MI-5), attempted to promote expanded surveillance on the people of the UK by using the terrorist straw man to through fear into the hearts of Brits and make them give up more of their liberties and freedoms. Tony Holland, and individual who has had dealings with Rimington in the past, spoke to the Voice of Russia about culture of incompetence that he says runs rampant in the security services. In light of the recent PRISM revelations this is more topical than ever. Hello, this is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Tony Holland a security expert from Australia. Holland: Security are even worse than that because they can create what they wish, do what they wish. Don’t forget, Rimington had the ear of the Prime Minister, she could start a war. She could sit down next to the Prime Minister and say “Oh Russia’s going to drop an atom bomb on the UK tomorrow, you’d better do something”, and the Prime Minister would believe her. But this woman is an unmitigated liar.
Tony Holland has drinks with Stella Rimington © Photo "The Voice of Russia" Robles: Why do you say that? Holland: Well I think anybody that’s prepared to fabricate statements in a court of law can be called a liar and there is no possibility that that person will ever sue or contest for libel because it can be proved that that person has lied. I mean, the easiest proof to show that Mike Smith had done nothing wrong is that the ALARM missile is still there today. Robles: Sure, and the part … Holland: It would have been removed, had it been a problem. Right? Robles: The part that he was accused of passing along, as far as I remember, it involved some radio frequencies that were already outdated and not in use, and the part was actually an old part or something. Holland: Yes, when it boils down to it, you could have gone into any hardware store anywhere in the world and bought that part. Robles: Right Holland: That part that Mike Smith was supposed to have stolen and said to have been so central and so critical to the ALARM missile, it simply wasn’t a secret. Robles: Yeah, right, right. Holland: You know, and yet, you see the tragedy of it was, once she was believed, once she got the conviction, right-minded men and women had to promote her. So they ended up promoting incompetence, and when you promote incompetence you get a lousy service, you in fact do a disservice to your country. Robles: Right, now what about the, currently she got in the news again regarding expanding surveillance on UK citizens in light of the terrorist attack in London. Holland: Well you know, John, don’t you think that’s a dreadful tragedy that that woman could even be listened to? Think of it this way: if you have a big family, right, you’ve got say 50 members – 50 aunts, uncles, cousins, nephews, right – and I’ve got one person in my family, me and my son. And I fall out with 50 people, right, and they all go and say “Tony Holland, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah …”. That’s 50 reports going in against me, and suddenly Security are interested in me as a person of ill repute. And Rimington, you see, she will make the most of that. Why Michael John Smith came under notice to Rimington was he had joined the Communist Party in the UK, and the list of people who had joined that party was given to Security. So anybody on that list was simply followed up on. If you expand such lists to include anybody that wants to report on you, then Security, people like Rimington can fabricate anything against anybody.
Tony Holland accuses Stella Rimington of telling lies © Photo "The Voice of Russia" Robles: What do you think about the hyper security state that the world has become, I mean the electronic surveillance, the droning, the RFID chips, and everything else, and now they want to expand even more into “everything”? Holland: Look, I think you can expect things like that. I mean, there’s nothing wrong with Security getting the latest gadgets that sort of perform better than human beings. And don’t forget what Security’s role is, it is to protect your country. It can use any means whatsoever to do that. I think that’s right. I think to sort of hobble the country; to say; “Look, you can’t do this, or you can’t do that” is wrong. I mean, if somebody was coming to kill you, or nuke your city, or harm your water supply, and you say “Oh I can’t stop him going up to that water supply with those chemicals that will kill everybody” … Robles: Well, that’s understandable. Holland: … until he’s put the chemicals in the river. Robles: Well sure, sure. I’m talking about like overly broad, massive surveillance of everybody, looking for anything, which is kind of what they are doing now. Holland: John, why I have little difficulty with it is because its technology and it’s the way the world is moving. It’s going to be developed to the Nth degree, and you can’t stop it. You can’t stop, you don’t want to stop human endeavour like that. You want to encourage people to reach for the stars in all walks of life. Robles: Yeah, but this will prevent endeavour by many people. It will leave the elites at the top, and everybody else as subservient and slaves to them. I mean, what about Julian Assange, he exposed war crimes, Bradley Manning, and they’re paying a price that they shouldn’t be paying? Holland: I agree with that. I mean, that is the tragedy of the elites at the top where they’re not as bright as they once were, and that is why I talk so strongly about Rimington. Rimington was promoted basically on incompetence. She was never ever a capable person to run British Security. What, on paper, she had caught the biggest spy in the last 50 years. It sort of said: “look I am capable, look I am bright, look I can do my job”. And in actual fact she was way, way out of her depth. Robles: Do you want someone like that like controlling every aspect of your life? I don’t think so. Holland: You don’t, you don’t, you’ve got to stop that. You’ve really got to sort of start saying: “Look we want the best we can get in our top positions. We don’t want sycophants, we don’t want people who are time-served and ready to retire. We want the best brains that we can get to give us that insight to how far we can reach decent goals – kindness and caring for each other, loving each other, if you like.” I mean, it’s a soft word is that but it’s probably one of the nicest words you could probably think of to equate to decency and the highest morality you can aim for. Robles: Yeah, that’s right. Morality, great question, no one wants to talk about that any more, especially with all the droning and terrorism and illegal wars and everything else. What has happened with morality in the world, in your opinion? Holland: Well, look, if you put an incompetent person in charge of British Security, morality goes out the window, simply because they don’t know what it is. Or they can excuse it more easily than somebody who actually knows that they’ve made a mistake and that mistake has been profound. I mean, people who are leading some of the world’s countries these days have got no concept of; “I’ve made a mistake, it’s a dreadful mistake, I’d better sort of put this right”. They don’t think like that. Robles: Guantanamo for example, it’s an illegal prison. They’re holding at least 82 of the guys there, have not been guilty of anything, they’ve been there for 10 years. I mean, the whole thing is illegal. Where’s the morality there? Holland: It’s got to be sorted. It has got to be sorted and somebody has got to spend time getting to the bottom of that and getting rid of it. Robles: And then you have someone like Bradley Manning. He exposes everything and they hit him with a sledgehammer, and they want to lock him up for the rest of his life. Holland: That’s right. I think you said that right. They hit him with a sledgehammer, right Robles: Where’s the morality? Holland: That’s not very helpful to hit him with a sledgehammer. He has done something which has helped a lot of people, no question about that. And I use the word “help” a lot of people understand what’s going on, and I think it was necessary that we all got to know that. But, having said that, it’s the volume of what he’s done I think that has upset a lot of people. It’s like he’s shown a lot of people to be in positions where they really shouldn’t be. This is what the argument that I’m bringing up to you now is, and those people have very small minds. They want to hurt him, and unfortunately they’ve got their clones in place to do just that. Robles: I see, I see. Holland: Don’t forget Rimington clones people who talk her language, right, the language of incompetence, right. It’s not sort of for nothing you can see that the British Security have gone backwards and not forwards in terms of intellect. Robles: And you think that’s still true today? Holland: Yeah, I do. Robles: OK. It was a pleasure speaking with you. Thank you very much. Holland: Anytime! You were listening to an interview with Mr. Tony Holland – a security expert from Australia.
23 June, 19:27 Snowden must be protected to save mankind – VOR’s Robles
Photo: EPA While the world focuses on the fate of Mr. Edward Snowden, truly a hero for the world’s free and thinking population, we must not forget about what he has revealed. We are all being watched, everything we do is being used by the U.S. Government to control and manipulate all of us. This is an extremely uncomfortable reality for the entire planet but we must deal with it. As Mr. Snowden arrives in Moscow we must not forget what he has done. Mr. Snowden is currently somewhere several kilometers away on his way to his final safe haven. We are all focused on his epic journey but we must not forget the information he has given the world. The world is concerned for Mr. Snowden’s safety, recognizing the heroic nature of his deeds. According to the WikiLeaks organization: “Mr. Edward Snowden, the American whistleblower who exposed evidence of a global surveillance regime conducted by US and UK intelligence agencies, has left Hong Kong legally. He is bound for a democratic nation via a safe route for the purposes of asylum, and is being escorted by diplomats and legal advisors from WikiLeaks.” “Mr. Snowden requested that WikiLeaks use its legal expertise and experience to secure his safety. Once Mr. Snowden arrives at his final destination his request will be formally processed.” “Former Spanish Judge Mr Baltasar Garzon, legal director of Wikileaks and lawyer for Julian Assange has made the following statement: "The WikiLeaks legal team and I are interested in preserving Mr Snowden’s rights and protecting him as a person. What is being done to Mr Snowden and to Mr Julian Assange - for making or facilitating disclosures in the public interest - is an assault against the people". We now know the entire internet, which we all know and love and which most of use on a daily basis is controlled and used by the United States Government to spy on each and every citizen of the world, and for many that realization, which has been a suspicion for many others for a long time, will have a chilling effect on how people use the net. It should be clear to everyone now that U.S. spying has nothing to do with terrorism, even those thrown into shock by the tragic events of 9-11 and since then ready to give up their freedoms and liberties in order to guarantee their own security, must now face the real and uncomfortable truth that is beginning to appear thanks to whistleblowers like Edward Snowden. The U.S. Government has become a tool a small group of individuals bent on world domination through military expansion, destabilization, and the control usage and manipulation of information. The irony is that none of this is secret, it has been out there for more than a decade, the dots had to be connected is all. It was all spelt out in the Plan for a New American Century, the result being a U.S. controlled homogonous American world ruled and controlled by the world’s single super power. They came into power by computer manipulation of election results putting their surrogate in the White House and using the events of 9-11 to terrorize the world’s population into becoming terrified sheep begging for protection and willing to give up their freedoms to endure their own security. The press was supposed to be the last bastion of truth for the free world but this too has now become a target for U.S. attack and control, we are seeing this more and more with attacks on AP journalists, mass media outlets, whistleblowers and anyone who goes against the criminality of the illegitimate regime controlling the U.S. Government. We depend on the internet for almost everything now. We are dependent on our devices and our computers and have become so dumbed down that modern children cannot even write a simple letter without a computer and a spell checker, they just don’t know how. This dependence was phase one, Phase to involves complete and total surveillance and forcing the world to accept it through fear of terrorists, fear of extra-judicial assassination, drones and all of the other nefarious tools the U.S. is using to terrorize the planet. Snowden got away, which further proves that the human factor is still something that the CIA, NSA, etc. can not properly deal with and control. Human free will and human minds are not as easy to control as the tools humans use to communicate and share information. This is good and as it should be unless we are subjugated into some Matrix like world, living in embryonic pods with data connections plugged into our cerebral cortexes they will lose because the human factor and the human spirit are invincible. James Corbett of the Corbett report had this to say as Edward Snowden arrived in Moscow: “While the world focuses on the drama of Snowden's escape from Hong Kong and the clutches of US extradition, we lose sight of the NSA scandal itself. Mainstream consensus has centered on the idea that this surveillance was contained (only targeting metadata, limiting NSA access to data of non-US persons, etc.) and legal (having been approved by the DOJ and overseen by Congress).” “Swept under the rug is the fact that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court admitted two weeks ago that it had determined the NSA's surveillance program was unconstitutional in 2011 but had been prevented from releasing that ruling by the DOJ, who has argued for its classification. And no one is talking about the revelations of actual NSA whistleblower Russ Tice who last week admitted that not only is the NSA collecting all electronic communications (content and metadata) but that they have wiretapped such figures as Justice Alito, General Petraeus and even President Obama back when he was running for Senate.” “The issue of what country Snowden ends up in or how the US will attempt to bring him back to face charges of espionage pale in comparison to these stories.” Mr. Snowden must be protected, he must be rewarded and what he has given to the world must be valued and viewed for what it is: evidence that there is no “War on Terror”, there is a war on you and me, and the end goal is complete and total world domination.
23 June, 16:33 Snowden leaves Hong Kong, heading to Venezuela via Moscow
Photo: RIA Novosti Edward Snowden has left Hong Kong on an Aeroflot plane and is headed for Venezuela on an Aeroflot flight. He will arrive at Moscow’s Shermetyevo International airport this evening where he will be waiting in the transit lounge for his next flight. Mr. Snowden has not received a Russian visa and has not requested asylum from the Russian authorities. According to a press release from the Hong Authorities “Mr. Edward Snowden left Hong Kong today (June 23) on his own accord for a third country through a lawful and normal channel,” the statement also says with regard to the U.S. extradition request that; “Since the documents did not fully comply with the legal requirements under Hong Kong law, the HKSAR Government has requested the US government to provide additional information so that the Department of Justice could consider whether the US government's request can meet the relevant legal conditions.” "As the HKSAR government has yet to have sufficient information to process the request for provisional warrant of arrest, there is no legal basis to restrict Mr. Snowden from leaving Hong Kong.” "The HKSAR government has already informed the US government of Mr Snowden's departure.” "Meanwhile, the HKSAR government has formally written to the US government requesting clarification on earlier reports about the hacking of computer systems in Hong Kong by US government agencies. The HKSAR government will continue to follow up on the matter so as to protect the legal rights of the people of Hong Kong .” The Interfax news agency reports citing sources close to Snowden that: "Edward Snowden will fly via Moscow and Havana to Venezuela He chose such a complex route in the hope that he will not be detained and he will be able to reach his ultimate destination - Venezuela - unhindered. Thus he is to make a total of three flights: Hong Kong - Moscow, Moscow - Havana, Havana – Caracas." Interfax also reports that: “According to a source at Aeroflot airlines which is carrying Snowden to Moscow from Hong Kong, he will fly to Caracas from Havana on the V-04101 flight.” The South China Morning Post reports that he departed from the airport at 10.55am on flight SU213 on Sunday morning and was due to arrive at Moscow's Shermetyevo International Airport at 5.15pm local time. According to media reports Mr. Snowden was assisted by the WikiLeaks organization and that he was being accompanied by Sara Harrison from WikiLeaks and members of the WikiLeaks legal team. WikiLeaks tweeted that it had "assisted Mr Snowden's political asylum in a democratic country, travel papers and safe exit from Hong Kong". On Friday, Icelandic businessman Olafur Vignir Sigurvinsson, a director of DataCell, which processed payments for WikiLeaks told Reuters: "A private jet is in place in China and we could fly Snowden over tomorrow if we get positive reaction from the interior ministry. We need to get confirmation of asylum and that he will not be extradited to the US. We would most want him to get a citizenship as well." According to the laws of Iceland Mr. Snowden would have to apply for asylum in person and so far the Icelandic government has not stated whether it would in fact grant a request of asylum to Mr. Snowden. Whistleblowing organization WikiLeaks has rallied behind Snowden and said they are assisting him in his bid for political asylum in a “democratic country.” The group announced on Twitter that they helped obtain “travel documents” and ensured his safe exit from Hong Kong. A member of the WikiLeaks legal team is also accompanying the NSA leaker on his flight to Moscow. Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for Russian president Vladimir Putin, said: "I don't know if he's planning to stay in Moscow. I heard about the potential arrival from the press. I know nothing." On whether Moscow would still consider a request for asylum from Snowden: "Every application is considered so it's standard procedure … We are not tracing his movements and I know nothing." Many in Russia, including myself, are pleased that Snowden chose the Russian airlines Aeroflot and that Mr. Snowden’s and all the principles in the matter trust the Russian authorities not to interfere with his safe passage as he travels through Moscow. The Russian Government is not interfering in any way with the safe transit of Snowden through the territory of the Russian Federation and although Moscow has indicated it would grant Mr. Snowden asylum, no formal request has been made either by Mr. Snowden or those assisting him.
U.S. courts Taliban to keep nine bases in Afghanistan – Zalmay Gulzad
Download audio file
He is a Professor at Harold Washington College in Chicago. You can find part two on our website at english.ruvr.ru
23 June, 04:42 The U.S. is violating the Treaty of Svalbard – Bruce Gagnon
Collage: Voice of Russia Kiruna Sweden will be hosting the 21st International Space Conference from the 27th to the 29th of June 2013, during which U.S. and NATO violations of the Treaty of Svalbard will be one of the hottest topics of discussion. Bruce Gagnon, one of the key organizers of the event spoke to the Voice of Russia about the event and the U.S.-NATO militarization of the far north. ABOUT THE CONFERENCE: Concerned activists and writers from around the world will gather in Kiruna, Sweden on June 27-29 to discuss how the ‘High North’ of Sweden has become one of the largest training places (called NEAT) for NATO war exercises and advanced weapons testing. The High North also hosts ground stations for military satellites and tests drones that are increasingly being used in the US-NATO war in Afghanistan. Indigenous Samic people will be present at the conference to talk about the impact of these military operations on their lives. Swedish Peace Council Vice-Chair Agneta Norberg stated: “US-NATO wants to control Russia and eventually get a hold of the enormous resources under the Arctic ice cap that is now melting due to climate change. To make Russia obedient the US-NATO is surrounding Russia with missile defense interceptors – key elements in their first strike system. For this purpose huge radars are installed in Vardö, Norway, close to Russian border, and on Thule base in Greenland. Norway and the US have established satellite stations on the Island of Svalbard which violate the Treaty of Svalbard that forbids the deployment of any war making technology.” Global Network board convener Dave Webb (Chair of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in the UK) said: “Not many people know that the satellite receiving stations in Sweden and Norway fulfill an important role for NATO and the US military. Space technology is vital to the military’s global reach and we really need to support and stand with those campaigning for alternatives to war in their protest against these installations spread around the world.” The three days of events are being sponsored by the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space (GN), Women for Peace, and the Folke Bernadotte Academy. People will be coming to the conference from Japan, Germany, England, Russia, France, United States, Norway, Finland and Sweden. 2013 marks the 21st annual meeting of the Global Network. Each year the organization holds a space organizing conference in a different country. In 2012 the group met on Jeju Island, South Korea where villagers are protesting the construction of a Navy base for US warships. The GN was founded in 1992 to stop the nuclearization and weaponization of space. Today the GN has 150 affiliate groups located on all continents of the world.
INTERVIEW: Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Bruce Gagnon. He is the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. Robles: Hello Bruce! How are you? Nice to be speaking with you again. Gagnon: Good to talk to you. Robles: The upcoming conference in Sweden, what is that all about? Gagnon: This is the Global Network’s 21st anniversary and each year we hold an international conference, a space conference, in a different country in order to illustrate the growing militarization of space, particularly by the United States. We were invited to come to Sweden, to northern Sweden, to Kiruna, because it is a region that is being highly militarized by the U.S. and NATO and turned into a major space downlink receiving area. It is hosting ground stations for military satellites. This part of Sweden is also becoming a major drone test area for both the U.S. and NATO. And so, people there are increasingly concerned about how they see NATO taking over a significant part of Sweden. Sweden is not presently a NATO member, although they are being pushed into this new role where they are calling various countries partners “NATO Partners”. And so, there is an effort underway to bring Sweden in, particularly because of this large land mass that they have available for high-tech weapons testing. Then, in addition, obviously their proximity to Russia is very important to NATO and the United States, particularly as they develop these ground stations that are talking to military satellites and are used by the US and NATO for war fighting. So, in addition, Norway which controls an island called Svalbard, there is a Treaty of Svalbard that forbids the deployment of any war-making technology on that island. Norway and the United States have established satellite stations on the island over the recent years, and we will also be talking about that. There is a Norwegian journalist that has just come out with a book on this subject called Satellite War. He is going to be speaking at the conference and we are very excited about hearing from him. He has really blown the cover on this U.S. and Norwegian program to essentially militarize the Island of Svalbard. It is in a prime location to send signals from satellites to ground stations and it is playing a key role in the US war-making operations. Anyway, these are the kinds of things that we are going to be talking about. Robles: The Treaty of Svalbard, can you give our listeners a few details about it? And what does this mean that the U.S. is violating it? Gagnon: The Norwegian journalist by the name of Bard Wormdal, he is the author of the book and he really dug very deeply to prove that in fact the United States has been funding some of the major technological improvements there on Svalbard as they increasingly are doing the work of the United States military by downloading information from satellites and feeding it to the Pentagon. The US has put major money into this operation. And so, he has really blown the cover on it and the Norwegian Government has been very reluctant to acknowledge that they were doing military operations through those satellite downlink stations there on Svalbard. But through his digging he was able to prove it. The Norwegian Government and various agencies kept denying that they were really doing anything, that they were in fact violating the treaty, they were denying it over and over again. But through a series of research and interviews and everything else, he has been able to really prove that that island is dramatically involved in the US war fighting operations. In addition, in his book he also talks about the missile defense radar in Vardo, in Norway, that is very close to the Russian border. That is a key radar in the U.S. missile defense system, missile defense being the shield that the U.S. would use after they launch a first strike attack on Russia or China, something that they are war-gaming now annually. And these missile defense radars are very important in that operation. Again, the Norwegian Government is trying to downplay the role of the radar saying that its role is only to listen to or to look for space debris and to track space debris. But in fact, the experts and scientists at MIT, in the United States, for example, and others have acknowledged that in fact this radar is a key player in the whole U.S. missile defense program that is being used today to surround Russia. So, these issues are very important. We will have a person from Russia speaking about the U.S. missile defense system and Russia’s position on it. Vladimir Kozin will be speaking about that. We will have activists from Germany, the leaders of the campaign for nuclear disarmament in the U.K. will be there as well. People from throughout the Nordic countries and several other countries as well. It is an important conference for us and we really think it’s going to blow the cover in a big way on the whole Norwegian and Swedish collaboration with the Pentagon in their whole space military program. In addition, one key topic is the melting of the Arctic ice. As the result of that the U.S. and the NATO countries are scrambling to militarize the Arctic region and to be able to control it for extraction of oil as the Arctic ice melts. And of course this is going to put U.S. and NATO in direct conflict with Russia. Right now the United States has got Canada to appropriate the largest military appropriation in Canadian history in order to build warships to patrol the Arctic zone. And so, Canada who really doesn’t have enemies in the world, is embarking on this massive military expenditure, cutting back on their social programs in order to build these ships. Lockheed Martin, the big American weapons contractor is heavily involved in this as are some others as well. So, this kind of militarization of the Arctic is also going to be an important topic for us. And we will end the conference by agreeing to a declaration. You were listening to an interview with Bruce Gagnon. He is the coordinator for the global network against weapons and nuclear power in space. You can find part two of this interview, in the near future, on our website at english.ruvr.ru For more information about the conference check the GN's website at http://www.space4peace.org or contact Bruce Gagnon (GN Coordinator) at globalnet@mindspring.com or Agneta Norberg (Stockholm)lappland.norberg@gmail.com
23 June, 03:00 WikiLeaks, Assange, Snowden and all of us are winning - Hrafnsson
Kristinn Hrafnsson Photo: AFP The world and Julian Assange recently marked the one year anniversary of his being trapped in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. The unprecedented egregious and illegal interference by the United Kingdom in the case has shed any and all possible illusions that the U.K. is anything other than merely a surrogate of America. By not allowing someone who has received political asylum safe passage to travel to the country where the person has been granted asylum, the U.K. has also shown that the rule of law and abiding by international laws and conventions is something that is apparently optional if America is calling the shots. Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Kristinn Hrafnsson he is the official spokesperson and the number two at the WikiLeaks organization. Robles: Hello Sir! It is a pleasure to be speaking with you. Hrafnsson: It is my pleasure as well. Robles: I understand that you are in Ecuador right now. I’d like to get your views and your comments on the fact that Julian Assange has now spent more than a year in that embassy in London, and if you see any hope that that situation may change soon? Hrafnsson: Yes, I’m always optimistic that the situation will change. Of course it is quite outrageous that he has had to spend a year and a day now in the Ecuadorian Embassy without there being a solution to the situation. There has of course been some dialogue going on. The Foreign Minister of Ecuador did meet with his counterpart in London. So, one will hope that there is a solution very soon, but this could of course drag on for some time. But this has of course, to come to an end fairly soon. It is just ridiculous to continue this standoff. Robles: There’ve been some media reports, I don’t know how credible they are, stating that Julian is resigned to being extradited. Would you grant those any credibility? I hope not. Hrafnsson: No, I haven’t even seen these reports. But there are so many false reports flying about with regards to his situation and with regards to WikiLeaks and my colleagues in the media, many of them seem to enjoy all kinds of fabrications when it comes to the organization and to Julian. Robles: That’s why I wanted to speak to you. Listen, are there any concrete positive moves going on right now as far as with the Ecuadorians and with William Hague? Can you tell us anything about that? Hrafnsson: I believe that there was some progress made. But it remains to be seen how all that can materialize into a solution to the situation. Robles: You know all of the stories right now going on about the NSA whistleblower Snowden. Do you see any correlations, any connections there? Hrafnsson: The Snowden case has a strong connection to WikiLeaks and the revelations that we were publishing three years ago now and ongoing. We have seen a continuous trend of leaks and whistleblowers stepping forth. And now of course Snowden is informing of the overreaching surveillance and spying of the NSA, which is a matter not just for the Americans but for the entire world. And more and more information is coming out on that. This is something that has been maintained of course by the WikiLeaks and by Julian for years. And it is confirming what other whistleblowers that have stepped forth earlier from the NSA and from the CIA. I can mention that John Kiriakou, Bill Binnie, and Thomas Drake who all were telling a similar story about the activities of the NSA and had to suffer badly because of that, they were even threatened with being charged and prosecuted on the basis of Espionage Act in the U.S. which carries the maximum of the death penalty. This is, in my mind, a signal that thing are going forward and we are going to see more information and we are going to see more people stepping forth and blowing the whistle. And we are going to be seeing people who will leak information about the corrupt practices of governments. Robles:Kristinn, do you think all our efforts and everybody’s efforts, Snowden, Julian, yours, I mean thousands of good people with high moral standards, do you think we have a chance of fighting this monster? It just seems like over and over again we have the same thing happening and their crimes are getting worse and worse. Hrafnsson: I think we have more than just a chance of succeeding. I absolutely think we are winning. That is a feeling that I have and is confirmed by the reaction that I’ve seen to the revelations of Snowden, and other recent example of government surveillance and even snooping into journalists’ matters, accessing their telephone logs, as happened with the 20 journalist at the Associated Press. With an attempt to make even a Fox journalist Rosen a co-conspirator in a leak. This is basically an attack now going on on the media, and it is now being recognized by journalists more and more who have been a little bit asleep to this terrible reality, that this is an attack on journalists and this is an attack on the free press. This is now being reported as such and the general public of course will get the information about the seriousness and grave situation. And in my mind, no question about it, that people will not allow this to continue and they will stop this. So, I believe we are seeing a tidal change and this is a winning situation. I think that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks were part of a trend in the right direction and the explosive leaks that have come out form our organization have been of course a wakeup call to people. There is a tremendous support we feel in all of the work of WikiLeaks and what we are doing. There have even been surveys done I believe in 24 or 25 countries as afr back as in the early year 2011, at the same time that we were basically being branded as terrorists by the U.S. Administration and there were calls for assassination of Julian Assange and others who work in WikiLeaks, and there was an overwhelming support in all these countries and the majorities supported what we were doing. Countries where there was a minority of the population supporting what WikiLeaks was doing and that was the United States, but even so 40% of the respondents, were saying that they appreciated what WikiLeaks was doing. So, I believe that that is an indication of the simple fact that the general public do want more transparency. Robles: Can I get your reaction and maybe can you tell us Julian’s reaction, if you know, to the absolute massive capability of this PRISM program? What was Julian’s reaction? And what is your reaction to the enormity of the NSA’s capabilities? Hrafnsson: Well, it does not came as a surprise to Julian Assange nor does it come as a surprise to anybody in WikiLeaks because this is what we have been saying for quite some time. And in the book that has come out by Julian, The Cypherpunks this is basically what we have been maintaining. This is the capability this is what has been done, as it has been, for some time and it has also been confirmed by other whistleblowers who have stepped forth from the NSA as far back as 2003. That was the end of part one of an interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson the official spokesperson for the WikiLeaks.
22 June, 18:40 1 Snowden in hiding, U.S. officially files charges
Edward Snowden Photo: EPA The United States Government has officially charged former CIA and NSA systems administrator and analyst and admitted leaker Edward Snowden under the U.S. Espionage Act, charges which carry the death penalty. In a sealed criminal complaint dated June 14th filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the U.S. charges that on unspecified dates in May 2013 Edward Joseph Snowden, born June 21, 1983, committed offenses including: Theft of Government Property, Unauthorized Communication of National Defense Information and Willful Communication of Classified Intelligence Information to an Unauthorized Person, the last two charges coming under the U.S. Espionage Act. As the indictment is sealed all related documents and information are being kept secret. The criminal complaint signed by FBI Counter Intelligence Special Agent John A. Kralik Jr. and U.S. Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson in Alexandria Virginia is extremely brief and contains a redaction of the reviewing party’s name and identifier, presumably someone at NSA. The official charges now give the U.S. a legal framework to request the extradition of Mr. Snowden to the United States from Hong Kong. However an extradition request from the Chinese territory of Hong Kong could take years and be blocked by the People’s Republic of China. So legally Mr. Snowden is currently safe from the clutches of his former employers. According to the Guardian whose reporter Glenn Greenwald broke the entire PRISM story through its direct contact with Mr. Snowden, legislators in Hong Kong have requested the direct intervention of mainland China. Something that will no doubt be granted due to the value that Mr. Snowden would have as an intelligence asset, especially in light of the current cyber war being waged on the People’s Republic of China and the world by the United States of America. According to the Guardian, citing legal experts and human rights workers, if Hong Kong takes the, what would be a ridiculous step, of charging Mr. Snowden with the theft of government property and espionage, it would open the door for Mr. Snowden’s extradition and even then the process could take from three to five years. If the Hong Kong authorities actually do consider the revelations made by Mr. Snowden a crime, it would lead to serious questions as to the actually sovereignty of the Chinese territory and even though Hong Kong has had an extradition treaty with the U.S. since 1998, the revealing of illegal U.S. Government spying programs by a whistleblower can hardly be something that would realistically and seriously be called a crime anywhere in the world, except in countries that could be called U.S. surrogates. But Hong Kong has extradited Americans back to the U.S. before. There is also the problem of the death penalty that Mr. Snowden could receive from the U.S. and the impossibility of him receiving a fair trial in the United States. Another problem with the case is that Mr. Snowden did not commit the classic act of espionage, meaning he did not reveal damaging secrets to an enemy power, unless humankind has now become the enemy of the United States of America. On June 10, 2013 Edward Snowden went completely off the grid and has no doubt done so as only someone who worked for the NSA could have and there is a very real and probable possibility that the world will never hear of him again, especially if the Chinese authorities decide to give Mr. Snowden the protection that he is in no doubt in need of. The public criminal charges are just the outward manifestation of what the United States is currently doing against Mr. Snowden. There is no doubt that there have been secret directives issued by the CIA, the NSA and the extra-judicial-drone-assassinating-White-House of U.S. President Barrack Hussein Obama, including those issuing open kill orders, rendition protocols, black operations activation and the providing of rewards for Mr. Snowden’s detraction, rendition or delivery to U.S. territory. Mr. Snowden’s revelations to mankind have no doubt unleashed the fury and full weight of the entire secret U.S. clandestine community which will stop at nothing to liquidate him as quickly, quietly and as soon as possible. However as Mr. Snowden himself said, even if the U.S. murders him, they will not be able to stop the information he has from getting out. Meaning there is more to come apart from the PRISM revelations. All of the hoopla and the questions and the media storm may now quietly die down and disappear and now we must face and deal with the truth that Mr. Snowden delivered to the world and deal with the facts that now stand before us. This young man informed the world about injustice and another example of a power gone insane with its own ability to do whatever it pleases with impunity. Mr. Snowden travelled to Hong Kong, perhaps not because he is Communist or ideologically against Capitalism or what have you but simply because he could do so without a visa and he had to get out quick. It might also be supposed that he has disappeared into the People’s Republic of China, one of the few countries in the world that will be able to protect him. If he did so I would say he has done the right thing, he protected himself and got himself out of the jaws of the beast before it could devour him which no doubt it will try to do. Mr. Snowden was a spook and for spies, especially one with an organization such as the NSA, there are not a lot of options when one goes out as loud as Mr. Snowden did. Although his actions were not typical of a classic spy or treason scenario, meaning when a government’s secrets are divulged to a rival government for ideological, financial, or other reasons. Mr. Snowden exposed massive worldwide criminality by the United States and he is a hero for all of mankind and to the people. China, US, death penalty, CIA, extradition, intelligence, cyber war, spy scandal, Court, Hong Kong, trial, PRISM, NSA, Edward Snowden, World · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · Absolutely agree!!!! American stupid beasts are taking into the public shame, because of their gangster-bully actions. China must to protect him!! 21 June, 22:18 From PRISM to Syrian organ eaters; bad week for Obama and Co.
Photo: EPA Revelations that the NSA, the CIA and Obama have been spying on every move you make and every call you take has not really outraged the American people, they were cowed into submission long ago, but the news that this has been taking place in Europe has now riled Europeans from Germany to Italy. With the continuing calls by Western leaders to back human organ eating Syrian insurgents maybe it is time the American people stopped looking at their leaders through a PRISM reflecting light through an anti-terror paradigm and use a mirror, perhaps their leaders reflections will disappear. John Robles comments on the latest. It hasn’t been a very good week for certain Western leaders. Like a voyeur caught with his pants down and faced with a high-powered telescope pointed right at him from his favorite window, U.S. President Barack Obama has had a lot of explaining to do and his back and forth waffling and “in the name of security” meme have done little to appease the leaders of other countries in particular Angela Merkel, whose country was the focus of the NSA PRISM program more than any other. For the brainwashed American sheeple and the internet giants who sheepishly allowed their servers to be accessed by the NSA, CIA and more likely than not the FBI, namely Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, Skype, AOL, Apple, YouTube and others, the terrorist behind every tree nonsense may still be holding water, but for leaders of U.S. allies and other countries, who actually have to deal with real terrorists, the massive spying on their citizens has not been welcomed so easily. Germany has been particularly critical of the PRISM program with Angel Merkel reportedly saying she was surprised by the revelations and would “… tackle Obama on surveillance, … call for more transparency,” and stating; “We have to be clear, what is being used and what is not being used!” She promised to confront Obama on the matter when he arrives in Germany next week. German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger has also spoken out against the NSA Prism program calling it "alarming" and saying the massive spy program is “… unjustifiable - even in light of the threats of international terrorism. The fight against enemies of the state does not legitimate any means available.” While Obama says the U.S.’ massive spying programs have prevented at least 50 unspecified and hereto-never-before-mentioned threats, a clearly questionable and self-serving claim, other European leaders also not buying it. Also voicing their concerns about the legality of the spying program were many other leaders including: European Commissioner for Justice Viviane Reding who said; “… a clear legal framework for the protection of personal data is not a luxury or constraint but a fundamental right.” The Data Protection Commissioner of Italy Antonello Soro who said; “ The programs would not be legal in Italy, and are contrary to the principles of our legislation and would represent a very serious violation.” The European Union has also warned of the "grave adverse consequences" to the rights of European citizens that the U.S. spying programs have inflicted. Is Obama apologetic for spying on innocent and unsuspecting users of Facebook and the like all over the world? No! Do the internet giants have anything to say on the matter, or have they been totally silenced by U.S. “National Security Letters”? Probably. Can there be any justification for Obama and his American “security” minions to be collecting information on where you eat, who you have contact with and who your friends are in real life, where you live and how you travel to work, how and where you shop and what your income level is and every other minor detail about your life, from your retinal eye print to your facial recognition parameters? No! Do they have the right to read every e-mail, text message and instant message you send and intercept and listen in on your phones calls or Skype calls to your boss, your family and your loved ones? No! Do they have the right to read and open every single image file you open or transfer or listen to, every MP-3 file you send or download, or know the passwords to your private e-mail accounts, or read and analyze every site you visit and everything you buy or think about buying or where you have been for every moment over the last year or two or three? No! Despite the almost unanimous yet fabricated outcry by European countries, similar to the outcry by all of the internet giants, that they are “shocked and amazed and knew nothing about the NSA’s spying”. Many of the countries now voicing indignation also have had their own spying programs in place for years now and/or are planning to implement new ones or expand the ones already in place . According to report in Der Spiegel the German foreign intelligence service (BND) has plans in place to invest over 100 million to expand its monitoring of the Internet. Although with the revelations by Snowden it is clear the U.S. NSA already has the ability to read, record and store nearly every type of digital communication worldwide, thanks to their direct access to the servers of the world’s internet giants. Germany in particular wants emulate the NSA and in effect become a mini-NSA according to a report by the Der Spiegel. Their goal is to compete in the “global internet espionage business”. The BND already has its own access points at key junctions and switching stations where digital traffic flows through the country allowing them to collect at least 20% of all foreign based or destined traffic including cell phone conversations, Facebook chats or instant messaging such as using AOL Messenger. Germany uses the rule that any communication with a “foreign element involved” is a target for spying, this is a very clever and sneaky rule that the NSA, the BND, GCHQ, ASIO, CIA and others use to allow them to monitor their own citizens and the citizens of other countries. I say sneaky because the definition of a “foreign element” could be merely communicating through a site based in another country, such as Facebook, or a .gif logo hosted on a “foreign” server, as part of a program such as Skype. A “foreign” element might include a keyword about a foreign country or national, it could be almost anything, even a foreign made communication device or operating system. The GCQH operates almost the same way as does AISO and all of the other agencies of the secret SIGINT alliance called UKUSA. The reason for the apparent indignation about PRISM is now clear. PRISM is a monster of global proportions that none of the other countries allied with the U.S. could have dreamed about. PRISM is ECHELEON and CARNIVORE on steroids expanded to included the entire planet and gobble up absolutely everything. Do other countries want such power? Although they may publically say they do not, of course they do. So back to the political problems involved. For the American sheeple who say Snowden was a traitor, apparently in the name of “security”, Obama and his spy machines can do whatever they want. For the rest of the world however, fictitious terrorists will not cut it. If the U.S. really wanted to fight terrorists they would stop creating, funding, arming and then provoking them. That is one, but the world community will not tolerate the same style American repression that the U.S. is attempting to export. The difference between America and much of the world is that Americans have gone from being free into an absolute dictatorial fascist state, while most of the rest of the world, especially Europe has already been there and wants to be free. The hypocrisy here is incredible and mind boggling actually. They are openly saying let us monitor and spy on and control you for your own safety. Or the terrorists will get you. As President Putin recently said at a joint press conference at Downing Street ahead of the G-8 Summit with a desperate looking and fearful David Cameron with regards to Syria: “You will not deny that one does not really need to support the people who not only kill their enemies, but open up their bodies, eat their intestines in front of the public and cameras. Are these the people you want to support? Is it them who you want to supply with weapons? Then this probably has little relation to humanitarian values that have been preached in Europe for hundreds of years.” I think it is now becoming more and more clear that the power hungry sociopaths who have been running the U.S. Government since September 11, 2001, when they orchestrated the greatest coup d'état in history, are beginning to make their real intentions known, and that is complete and told world domination at any cost. According to Deutsche Welle Markus Ferber, a European Parliament Member, told Reuters that; “The U.S. Government is using American-style Stasi methods. I thought this era had ended when the German Democratic Republic fell." Aggressive wars, corporate fascism, genocide, preventive aggressive military attacks, global domination and ethnic cleansing were also things the rest of us thought ended with the NAZIs, but then I guess we are all wrong. As the German group Rammstein sang: “We’re all living in Amerika” and it’s just another day in the Amerika we are living in. Ever wonder why Facebook wants to know if you have real-world contact with the people you befriend on their “free” social networking platform? Still wondering? I’m not. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
21 June, 06:48 Will Syrian “rebels” swear they’re not going to eat someone’s organs? - Rozoff
Photo: EPA The US and its NATO allies are backing what can only be described as murderous cannibalistic savages in Syria but according to Voice of Russia regular contributor Rick Rozoff: “Apparently, nobody is too gruesome, too ghoulish, too fiendish for the US and its NATO allies not to portray them as freedom fighters, fund them, arm them, train them and bomb the country they're attacking on their behalf.”
Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. Robles: Advance planning for after these invasions and stuff: they don't do that anymore, do they? They just go in, take out the leader and who cares what happens afterwards, right? Rozoff: Yes, you know, “after me the deluge” (Après moi, le déluge) or “after me the catastrophe”, and that’s in fact, that’s a good description of it John. That’s what the Balkans look like, that’s what Iraq looks like, Afghanistan and now Libya, and you know should the West have its way, that’s what Syria would look like, in short order, you’d have gangs like Al Nusra and others, running rampant, running riot, throughout the country, and throwing it into complete chaos and pandemonium. Robles: I'm glad you mentioned Syria. Before we began recording, you mentioned something about President Vladimir Putin and something he said, which I think reflects really well on the situation that the West is promoting in Syria. Rozoff: Yes, I didn’t get to read the entirety of it but on Interfax today Russian President Vladimir Putin, in discussing the upcoming Geneva meeting on Syria, the one negotiated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and American Secretary of State John Kerry, made the comment, I don’t know off the cuff, or quite directly perhaps, that he hopes that the Western-backed opposition forces don't include in their numbers any cannibals. And that was clearly an allusion to a videotape that has been making the rounds for the last month or so, where a commander of the so-called “rebel” outfit in Syria (I assume it was a corpse at the time they got started on it) carved up the body of a Syrian soldier identified, they condemned the victim, as having been a member of another branch of Islam, Alawite, and apparently he thought he was eating the heart, I mean he needs some remedial anatomy lessons. But the people who watched the video (I’ve seen it and it it is enough to sicken one) but people watching suggest he actually cut out part of a lung and ate it, red and steaming. Robles: Oh my God!! Rozoff: And from what I’ve read subsequent to that, somebody interviewed this very same person about it and he defended that action, and suggested in so many words that the Alawite religious minority in Syria as a whole could face such a fate. Robles: And these are…? I just want to underline this. These are the same “opposition freedom fighters” quote unquote, that the US wants to arm to the teeth and deliver weapons to? Rozoff: That’s it, exactly! When the US Senator John McCain, a self-appointed ambassador of war around the world… Robles: Didn't McCain say that they'll make sure the weapons are only going to the hands of those…what word did he use? The…? Rozoff: “Moderates, responsible” forces. What do they do? Take the Scouts Pledge? I mean, they’ll put the hand in the air and swear that they are not fanatics and they are not going to ingest and eat somebody’s internal organs? I think they obviously know who's going to receive the weapons. But again, if the lessons of Libya, Kosovo, Afghanistan tell us anything – it is that the US not only cannot and will not prevent weapons going into the hands of the most extreme and brutal elements, it will exactly select those elements for the lion’s share of the weapons, as it did with the likes of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and others in Afghanistan in 1980s, as it did with Hashim Thaçi and Ramush Haradinaj and creatures like that in Kosovo in the late 1990s. So, this is not to be taken seriously. But the fact is, yes, these are exactly the elements that would likely be the beneficiary of US and European arms, with the EU also dropping the ban on weapons for opposition forces within Syria, a move that has been condemned rightly by Russia, amongst other nations. In the “proud” tradition of the Afghan Mujahidins, supported by the US in the 80s, that skinned the Soviet conscripts alive and threw acid in the face of female teachers while being funded to the tune of billions by the US Government. Or the organ harvesting and sex slaving, and drugs smuggling Kosovo Liberation Army in the Balkans. And now we are seeing something quite similar in Syria. Apparently, nobody is too gruesome, too ghoulish, too fiendish for the US and its NATO allies not to portray them as freedom fighters, fund them, arm them, train them and bomb the country they're attacking on their behalf. Robles: My goodness! John Kerry, he's made some pretty reasonable sounding statements regarding Syria. He also made some pretty harsh statements to Israel which I found refreshing, I might say. Rozoff: Yes, he could hardly not appear to be comparatively better, you know, coming on the heels of Hillary Clinton. You know, the devil incarnate, if he were to succeed Clinton, would probably have the world’s sympathy for a short period of time only because of how horrendous his predecessor would have been. And we have to keep in mind, this is Hilary Clinton who roundly condemned Russia and China saying not long ago – a year ago – that Russia and China would have to "pay a price", that’s a quote from her, vis-a-vis Syria. She condemned the Russian federal elections in December of 2011 as "being neither free, nor fair”. This is somebody who was on a rampage almost every week ordering some head of state to step down from Ivory Coast to Yemen, from Libya to Syria, so that any modicum of moderation or civility, as Kerry, I agree with you is exhibiting currently, appears all that is much better and contrast to what came before him. I'm a little bit upset about the statement, however, that the US has now entered late and perhaps so belatedly as to be ineffectual in the process of reaching a political decision in Syria, because that certainly leaves open the prospect that as no diplomatic solution of the crisis inside the country is possible, the US may reserve a military option and intervene in some other manner. But I think you're absolutely correct that those comments were at least an indirect jibe at his predecessor Hilary Clinton, who instead of demanding a regime change and taking the most hostile and uncompromising, and recalcitrant position on the issue, you know, had she even gone through the motions of suggesting genuine diplomatic measures, including at the UN… Robles: Oh no, she constantly went on and on about the “forceful removal”…. And that's all she wanted to talk about. Rozoff: That's true. And even if that was the US objective, and clearly it was and remains so, there are certain diplomatic protocols one can abide by in civilized nations, where you don't make it so overtly obvious and you don’t insult other people in the way that she did Russia and China. I mean truthfully in my life, I’m 60 years of age, and I can remember Secretaries of State going back to the Kennedy administration and perhaps the Eisenhower one, and I can’t remember anyone making statements quite as insulting and uncompromising, and just gratuitously hostile as Clinton, the one I just cited about “Russia and China would have to pay a price”. Robles: Oh yes! Well, that was one of the more I think moderate ones coming from her. Rozoff: Yes, this is the same person who, you know, the day after she had gone to Tripoli to order the hit on Muammar Gaddafi, who was in hiding and the following day was killed in a very brutal and appalling manner, and she was shown the picture of his battered and mutilated corpse, and her first comment was: “Wow!” You know, as though you are talking about some 11-year-old girl seeing a new dance step or something. And shortly thereafter she was shown something else on a cell phone and her exact comment was: “We came, we saw he is dead”. Robles: This was the one she did I think with Barbara Walters, where she was giggling and seemed to be beside herself with joy, right? Rozoff: That’s it. You know, some pretty adolescent girl on her first date or something, but you are talking about the gruesome murder of a head of state and a man who was almost 70 years of age. This is the sort of person we are talking about. We also have to recall that Kerry was the Democratic Party nominee for the Presidency in 2004, and he lost. And Clinton, I think it’s no secret, is the front-runner for the democratic nomination three years from now for the presidency. And there may be a certain amount of professional rivalry, resentment on the behalf of Kerry towards Clinton. He certainly cannot appreciate coming into the State Department and inheriting a good deal of what Ms. Clinton I’m sure has left him, but not that the world unfortunately, really holds Foggy Bottom to account, the way it ought to. And Hilary Clinton still even has a celebrity status around the world for reasons that really defy my imagination. But, yes, I agree that Kerry's statement seemed to be in some manner an admission that the US diplomacy had been dismally unsuccessful in the question of Syria, and that perhaps it's too late to really do much diplomatically. But I don't think it's the best statement to say ahead of the Geneva meeting that was agreed upon by him and by the Russian Foreign Minister. I think holding out some optimism might not be a bad idea. Robles: Coming into this Geneva conference, the Foreign Minister of France made statements that he had “no doubt” that chemical weapons” were used” in Syria. Gennady Gatilov, he's the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister, said he doubted the likelihood that there were chemical weapons used in Syria, so far these have been mostly media reports. He's also shed doubts on reports that chemical weapons were intercepted in Turkey that were supposed to have gone to the Syrian opposition. What do you make of all this chemical weapons talk right before the summit? Mr. Gatilov said all that stuff should be put on a backburner and we should concentrate on convening this summit. Rozoff: Maybe an effort of sabotage the meeting, in fact. And we have to recall two things, President Barack Obama several months ago talked about the use of chemical weapons by the Government forces. He said nothing about the opposition ones. In Syria, his expression "a red line" that would have been crossed by the Government in Damascus with the unavoidable conclusion, you know, the weapons of mass destruction, or chemical weapons argument, exactly is an integral part, and really the major justification of the US attack on and the invasion of Iraq ten years ago. And we are not talking about people who are terribly imaginative or innovative, they are going to use the samecasus belli, the same excuse they used last time for a war, if they can do it. And the accusation of the Sarin gas or some other chemical weapon is being used by the Syrian Government forces would provide as close an approximation to the excuse of a rationale used to the attack on Iraq 10 years ago as any I can think of. And then, moreover, as it’s already been identified, as you’ve mentioned, by the Secretary of State and by the President of the United States as being the so-called red line that cannot be crossed, a line on the sand, which would then I suppose permit the United States to circumvent a traditional alleys or avenues of resolution like the United Nations and perhaps just plunge in militarily claiming it was such an emergency situation they had no choice but to act unilaterally. So, it is fraught with dangers certainly. You were listening to an interview in progress with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. Visit our website in the near future for the continuation of this interview with Rick Rozoff.
21 June, 04:05 Stella Rimington made her career on case against innocent man - Holland
Stella Rimington Photo: Reuters Recently Stella Rimington, the publicity loving ex-director of the UK’s security service, Military Intelligence 5 (MI-5), once again threw herself into the spotlight by backing calls for more widespread cyber spying on British subjects. Tony Holland, and individual who has had dealings with Rimington in the past, spoke to the Voice of Russia’s John Robles about Rimington and her past. Hello, this is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Tony Holland a security expert from Australia. Robles: Last week we briefly talked about Stella Rimington. Now, that I’ve got you here on the line, I’d like to ask you some more questions about her, about your relationship with her, your impressions of her and her calls for increased surveillance of UK citizens, if you could give us your views on that. Holland: With pleasure! I don’t know if people are aware that Stella Rimington started work as a typist in British security. She wasn’t a very well qualified analyst. She was basically a lady who wanted to type to earn some extra money. And she was working as a typist and getting to know the nuance between what her boss thought of several operatives and how she could file away those reports to make the most of those reports in the circles that they would be eventually circulating.
Tony Holland has drinks with Stella Rimington © Photo "The Voice of Russia" She got good at that job and as a result she was asked to join the service. She built her way up and along the way she was one of the few women that was power-hungry, if you want to have a word for it, she wanted women to be well-represented in security. And the tragedy of that was that she was a lady that would insist on a lady’s toilet, or a powder room, or a timeout if a lady’s feelings were exposed. And she was getting up her boss’s nose, no question about it. She would have been fired. She’d made it to the Russian Desk and I think her next stop was out the door. So, she had to do something spectacular to keep her job. And what she did – she fabricated a case against Mike Smith. Why I say fabricated? Because Mike Smith got 25 years imprisonment on the basis that he stole the secrets of the Alarm missile, the missile which is still the first choice frontline missile for the Western defense. So, if he’s stolen the secrets and passed them to Russia, that’s a major crime. And of course it is praiseworthy, it is a crime that is under anybody’s thinking process a rightful prosecution and a rightful result, 25 years, except Rimington doesn’t brag about it. Rimington doesn’t sort of tell anybody that she’s caught the biggest spy in the last 50 years.
Tony Holland accuses Stella Rimington of telling lies © Photo "The Voice of Russia" Robles: I just want to remind our listeners, we are speaking about Michael John Smith. He is kind of regular here on the Voice of Russia. I’ve known him for quite some time and he was the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the world actually. Just for our listeners, so they know exactly who we are talking about. Go ahead please, Tony. Holland: I’ve been involved in legal circles most of my life. And we attended a conference that Stella put on to tell people about her successes in the service. And when I got a chance to ask her why doesn’t she brag about catching the biggest spy in the last 50 years, she wouldn’t answer, she ran away. I mean it was the sort of, if you looked her in the eye, you would see a rabbit. She is not really a woman that you would associate with the Head of British security. And that’s a concern to me. You expect somebody that’s the Head of a security service to be absolutely ruthless in what they do in protecting their country. And you can’t fault such a person, I mean it is his or her job to be ruthless in putting down any threat whatsoever to that person’s country, and that it does unfortunately include an official sanction of some dissident, I’ve got no qualms with that, none at all. But I do have qualms when a person that has so much power will fabricate a case and make an innocent man guilty. That’s wrong! Robles: Now, she did this, and this pretty much saved her job and catapulted her to the position of Director, right? Holland: That’s right! I mean, logically, you’ve got to praise that. Even if you don’t like the woman because she is advocating lady’s toilets and powder rooms, and timeout for ladies, she is on that Russian Desk to catch a spy. She caught one, she caught Michael John Smith. She didn’t have enough evidence against him, so she fabricated it and he got 25 years imprisonment, and that’s wrong. I don’t mind it if he’s actually done the spying, if he’s actually got that missile part, if he’s actually prevented the Western defense from defending itself against Russia, I don’t mind that, that’s right. She’s caught him, well done! She has to be promoted – that’s the thinking of any right-minded Englishman. She has to be promoted because she’s caught a dreadful man. Robles: But it was all a fabrication? Holland: People who were doing the right thing by her have been duped. And it should come out, it should be told. And that’s why you get somebody like Julian Assange who is giving out information which is right. People can read what’s being said and it’s like “Ah, we understand it now”. Robles: What can you tell about the Mike’s case from your point of view, I mean the fabrication? Holland: Mike was accused of stealing the Alarm missile, parts in the Alarm missile, which, if they were stolen and given to Russia or a power that was against the UK, would cause great harm to the Western defense simply because the Alarm missile was the first frontline choice missile to defend all the Western countries – Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, Britain – everybody. And the fact that she had to fabricate the information about the part that he stole to get somebody to come down there and talk about it, who didn’t even know about it. It is like you put a technical man there with a reputation – “I’m professor so and so, I’m talking about this part, this part was in the Alarm missile” – and he doesn’t know, he is prepared to fabricate in order to enhance his career. Because don’t forget John, security can do anything they want. They can give you a passport in the name of President Putin if they want. They can give you a career in charge of a big business because they fund it for you. They can do anything they want. So, promising a man an enhancement to his career is low down on the totem pole of rewards that can be offered and given to anybody who is unscrupulous enough to wish to go ahead with the fabrication. You see this more often when a policeman “verbals” an accused person and he stands in front of the judge and he says – “your honour, this thief told me that he bashed and thrashed and burgled this person”. And the thief stands up and he says – “your honour, I’ve got no idea what this policeman is saying”. But the judge has to support the policeman because that’s the fabric of society. So, that you get a situation where the thief knows he hasn’t done it but the policeman is saying he has. Security are even worse than that because they can create what they wish, do what they wish. Don’t forget, Rimington had the ear of the Prime Minister, she could start a war. Robles: You were listening to an interview with Mr. Mr. Tony Holland – a security expert from Australia.
The Klimov sisters are safe, brother still missing – Shari Pulliam
Alexei and Anastassia Klimov © Photo: «Vesti.Ru» Download audio file
19 June, 07:10 Snowden, PRISM and asylum: from the NSA to the PRC
Edward Snowden Photo: EPA The story line is beginning to sound familiar, too familiar. Young intelligent individual with high moral ideals attempts to expose the egregious clear and unarguable criminality of the U.S. Government, a government which is out of control and trampling on the rule of law and the rights of people worldwide, only to be villainized and forced to seek refuge and protection in a foreign country. Rather than focusing on the crimes that have been revealed and the criminals committing them once again the U.S. Government and the subservient U.S. media have “switched the flip” and the evil doer is in fact the whistleblower. This time the case of Edward Snowden has merited the “reversal of evil treatment”. Something which has been happening on a regular basis since 9-11-2001. What Snowden has been able to reveal, even with his relatively low level clearance, is proof to what many the world over have known or suspected for decades, namely that the U.S. Government and in particular the CIA and the NSA are spying on anybody and everybody without limitations and with almost complete impunity. Since the inception of the internet this was always feared and it has proven that the initial fears of those who were worried about privacy in the beginning are almost nothing compared to the current reality as these minor fears have been proven to be just the tip on the iceberg. Despite his detractors calling him a traitor and all the rest, what Edward Snowden has revealed is that the U.S. corporate-controlled-government is engaged in massive spying operations on everybody, including foreign allies and their citizens, American nationals inside the U.S. and millions of innocent people worldwide. According to Snowden not only is the NSA engaged in spying on every form of internet communication and operation possible and spying on all of the phone calls of American citizens inside the U.S., but the NSA is running network operations against allies such as the U.K. without receiving public permission and which affect millions. The initial questions as to the validity of the claims about the PRISM program that many of us had at the beginning, amidst the denials of the companies involved in the PRISM program such as Facebook and Microsoft, the first which has a known CIA interface and the second which may prove to be the initial building block of a global spying network, seem to have been put to rest as more and more revelations begin to come out and according to the latest statements from Snowden himself, PRISM was just the start of what he may reveal. According to media reports Snowden may have arrived in Hong Kong with as many as 5 laptops full of classified top secret NSA and CIA information and the PRISM revelations may be just the tip of the iceberg. What could be worse than what we already know? Will we learn that every computer, laptop, cell phone, smart phone, GPS device, portable media player, ATM machine, Closed Circuit Television System, phone system, FAX, satellite phone, satellite TV receiver and everything else electronic in the world is being used by the U.S. Government to spy on the world’s citizenry, manipulate markets and nations and subjugate the entire planet? Would any of these things be surprising? Not to me. What would be surprising if such revelations are made and the free countries of the world do nothing about it. With open accusations made against the People’s Republic of China of engaging in cyber operations against the U.S. by the U.S. Government and counter evidence already revealed worldwide against the U.S. it will be very interesting to see how independent China, and in particular Hong Kong, can be against the United States. As Hong Kong has an extradition treaty with the U.S. it is already doubtful that Snowden will find refuge there. Which has led to much debate as to why Snowden chose Hong Kong. One reason may be that Snowden knows about a recent Honk Kong high court ruling that says the government must come up with official procedures for dealing with asylum seekers and that until that is done all seekers will be allowed to stay. Another may be the fact that China itself does not have an extradition treaty with the U.S. and may force Hong Kong into offering Snowden protection. If he is not allowed to stay in Honk Kong what may happen, depending on how much information Snowden gives the Chinese, is that Snowden will be allowed to continue to country that may in fact give him asylum or one that does not have an extradition treaty with the U.S., which in and of itself is not a guarantee that he will be protected. A lot will depend on how sincere Snowden is in his claims to be fighting against U.S. Government secrecy and what intelligence he might provide to the country that gives him asylum either in exchange for protection up front or after the fact. Countries that do not have extradition treaties with the U.S. are many but this is not a guarantee that he will not be extradited. These countries include but are not limited to: Brunei, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Guinea Bissau, Indonesia, Iran, the Ivory Coast, Jordan, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Madagascar, Mali, Maldives, Mauritania, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Samoa, Senegal, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Uganda, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Yemen and Zaire For Snowden even if he finds refuge in one of these countries or in Hong Kong, there is always the chance that the country changes their political leanings or a sufficient enough financial or other offer is made by the U.S. that the country in question may just give him up. There is also the possibility that he may just by thrown in prison or into some kind of holding until his case can be worked out. As we have seen with Julian Assange who is trapped in an embassy even though he has received full political asylum. If Snowden truly wants to disappear, and it would appear he may, he needs to ensure safe passage to a country that will not pass him on to the U.S., perhaps China, he needs to cut off all ties with the West, his family, friends and acquaintances, he needs to live somewhere where he will not stand out and he needs to completely disappear from the internet and all forms of electronic money and financial transactions, so he cannot be tracked. Knowing what he knows about PRISM and networking operations this should be obvious to him. Will the revelations made by Snowden change anything that the U.S. Government is doing? Not likely. Will they do anything to get him? You can take that to the bank.
Previous parts to this interview with Michael Ratner: PART 1, PART 2, PART 3
9 June, 02:21 NATO is antithetical to the spirit of the United Nations - Rozoff
Photo: Flickr.com/Hanoi Mark/cc-by-nc Columbia may be on a list for membership in NATO further expanding what was originally a North Atlantic defense organization, into a global offensive military bloc, in effect taking over the world. Rick Rozoff spoke about this and more in an interview with the Voice of Russia.
Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff the owner of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. Robles: Hello Rick! How are you? Rozoff: Very good John, thanks for having me on. Robles: Can you give us a little bit of your insights into what is going on down there in Columbia? Now NATO seems to be expanding to South America as well? Rozoff: Yes, I’m glad you raised that issue. It’s been in the news for the last 24 hours or so. And there have been disclaimers being issued already, particularly by the Colombian Government, which I don’t believe wants to acknowledge it. But the story from Agence France-Presse, the French press service quoted some Assistant Secretary State for the State Department, one Roberta Jacobson, stating exactly, here’s the quote: “Our goal is certainly to support Columbia as being a capable and strong member of lots of different international organizations, and that might well include NATO.” So, the reference was to Columbia, we’ll talk about this in a moment, but her phraseology certainly suggests that not only is Columbia being prepared as a partner for NATO, but conceivably at some point in the future it might be the first country outside of the Euro-Atlantic area, or the North Atlantic Ocean area to become a member of NATO, according to her language. There’s been some backtracking on that since, particularly by the Columbian Government. But I think it is important to realize that the last Chief Military Commander of NATO, Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, James Stavridis, an American Admiral, who prior to coming to that position as both the European Commander… the top military commander of NATO, was the top military commander for Southern Command, which takes in Latin America as a whole: Central America, South America and the Caribbean. And he had mentioned several months ago that Columbia might well be a troop contributing nation, that’s an official designation by NATO, for the war in Afghanistan. Though for several years now John, there’ve been reports fairly credible that Columbia had already sent security personnel, as well as troops (regular army troops, counterinsurgency troops to be exact) to Afghanistan to serve under NATO, even if not officially. So, this is simply a consolidation and concretization of a relationship that’s been in the making for some time. Robles: Isn’t there some problem with the international law or NATO’s own charter to just keep expanding like this? Rozoff: With the international law no, unless somebody goes to the United Nations, I think it’s long overdue incidentally, and stipulates that no nation or group of nations has the right to form an offensive international military bloc that is waging war, legally or illegally, but certainly aggressively, in three continents over the last 14 years as we know, in Southeastern Europe, South Asia… Robles: Wasn’t that one of the reasons that the United Nations itself was setup to prevent something like what happened with the Nazi Germany? Rozoff: You’re exactly correct. Wars of aggression or settling border and other disputes between nations by military means was to have been banned. That was also the intent of the League of Nations after WW I and the Kellog-Briand Treaty, and a number of other efforts. So, in spirit, if not in direct letter, of the United Nations Charter, of course, NATO is antithetical, contrary to the very spirit, as you’re indicating, of why the United Nations was setup, and to trust NATO’s own charter, if in fact they are or ever were supposedly a defensive military alliance set up to defend nations in Western and to some extent Southern, Europe against the perceived threat from Eastern Europe at that time, then we have to recollect that both the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union itself formally dissolved themselves in 1991, 22 years ago. So, even if people, more credulous than myself I suppose, believe that NATO has anything to do with being a defensive alliance up until 1991, surely they cannot make that representation, that argument currently. I think what is significant about Columbia is that although the nation of El Salvador is an official troop contributing nation for the war in Afghanistan with a small contingent serving under NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), Columbia, should it be made an official partner of NATO, becomes one on the sixth continent in which NATO will have members and partners. Obviously, from its inception, in both North America and Europe and subsequent to that there’ve been, in the Mediterranean dialog for example, there are five partner states in North Africa, Libya is soon to be the sixth. The story that just broke yesterday where; at a defense ministers’ meeting at NATO headquarters, Chuck Hagel the US Defense Secretary and other NATO defense secretaries were talking about NATO offering to train, which is to say build, the armed forces and other security personnel in Libya. So, at least six countries in Africa have, or will shortly have, partnerships with NATO. Same thing in Asia. And of course Australia is a major NATO ally. It is the second largest non-NATO contributor of troops for the war in Afghanistan, Georgia has now supersceded it as being the first. So, you have a US-led military alliance that now has, with the inclusion of Columbia, as full members and partners, in every inhabited continent, in every continent but Antarctica. And I actually wrote, a year or more ago, that Columbia, when it joins a broader NATO network around the world, and will do so under the aegis of the newest NATO program called, aptly enough, Partners Across the Globe. Robles: You’ve predicted all kinds of stuff in the past. You mentioned Libya a minute ago, what’s the situation right now in Libya? Because the last I heard, it was sinking into a state of anarchy and they were talking about moving in troops, to stabilize the country that was destroyed by their previous invasion. Rozoff: That’s it, exactly. You know, a six month long NATO bombing campaign and naval blockade had its desired effect. You are talking about the military of 28 countries, altogether in NATO, representing almost a sixth of the human race with a combined military budget of over a trillion dollars a year, taking on a small, practically defenseless nation, Libya in 2011, and waging a six-month-long so-called operation Unified Protector. The reason the NATO is now talking about training the security personnel inside Libya, much as it’s done already in Iraq and in Afghanistan, is because the country is devolved into an, almost European 30 Years War sort of scenario, with rival gangs fighting each other, plundering the resources of the country, throwing the country, as you indicate, into turmoil. And it’s been going on for a good two years. Robles: I remember way back when, I mean, people used to talk about nation building and advanced planning for after these invasions and stuff. They don’t do that anymore, do they? They just go in, take out the leader and who cares what happens afterwards, right? Rozoff: Yes, you know, “after me the deluge” (Après moi, le déluge) or “after me the catastrophe”, and that’s in fact, that’s a good description of it John. That’s what the Balkans look like, that’s what Iraq looks like, Afghanistan and now Libya, and you know should the West have its way, that’s what Syria would look like, in sort order, you’d have gangs like Al Nusra and others, running rampant, running riot, throughout the country, and throwing it into complete chaos and pandemonium… You were listening to an interview in progress with Mr. Rick Rozoff the owner and manager of the stop NATO website and international mailing list. Thanks for listening and we wish you the best. You can find part 2 on our website at english.ruvr.ru
8 June, 12:46 Verizon and PRISM spying: the tip of the iceberg from the Puzzle Palace
© Flickr.com/The U.S. Army/сс-by The Washington Post recently revealed the existence of a top secret NSA public data mining program called PRISM which has been operating since 2007 and which involves the willing participation of nine internet giants who have been forced into hyper damage control mode as the news of the program spreads and public discord begins to mount.
7 June, 19:01 1 Canada is in fact a corporation – Mohawk Indian elder
Photo: EPA When the Europeans first arrived in the Americas the native people’s welcomed them and allowed them to stay on their lands. The European invaders soon decided that the only way to steal the lands and all of their riches was to classify the people that were living there as non-humans. This precipitated the worst genocide in the history of the world. Kahentinetha Horn, a Mohawk Indian elder and a member of the Bear Clan retells the tragic history of the Mohawks and the rightful inhabitants of Great Turtle Island.
This is John Robles, I am speaking with Kahentinetha Horn, she’s a Mohawk Indian and a member of the Bear Clan. She is also the owner and publisher of the Mohawk News web resource. (Kahentinetha Horn, Bear Clan, Mohawk Nation, Kahnawake community on Great Turtle Island.) Interview in progress PART 1 Robles: Western democracies were based on Indian law and Indian relationships between nations and tribes and clans. In Europe they had monarchies, there was no such concept as democracy. Horn: No, they didn’t and they still don’t understand true democracy. They call it democracy, they call themselves liberal democracies but in fact the way we see it looking at it, it is very autocratic, it is a very autocratic hierarchical governing system with somebody at the top and then everybody else beneath obeying that person at the top. That is totally opposite to our system. I mean ours is kind of like an upside-down pyramid; the people are the ones that make all the decisions and we have a criteria we have to follow, peace, righteousness in power, and it all comes from our philosophy. We can’t violate our philosophy. We have to think about it, we have to enforce it and basically what it is is that it creates a peace that we want, the balance between us and let’s say we have adversaries, well, we have to find a way to balance the peaceful relationship with whoever our adversaries are. If they don’t want to become peaceful with us and follow the Great Law, then we have to fight with them. Robles: What advice would you give to current world leaders to solve all the problems in the world? Horn: Well, the Great Law peace is there, that is our philosophy. They can follow the roots of peace to the source, sit and take shade under the tree and learn about the Great Law. That is what we do, that is what we are trying to train and put into the minds of the people all over the world. There doesn’t have to be war. War is part of the way the world is run, you have people that want money and more money, and more money, and so what they do is they create war and it’s an ongoing war there is never an end to war and they want money and then they want resources and the resources they want belong to somebody else, so they’ve got to go on in there and create a war and start destroying those people and bringing them into submission and they take the land of the indigenous people, they take the resources and so on, and then when the people fight back, you know like here, we, the indigenous people have been the target of genocide from the day that Europeans arrived here, that the invaders first set foot here. They came to us, and we said well, the only way you can live on Great Turtle Island is that you have to follow the Two Row Wampum, they said “what is that?”. Well the Two Row is the two paths, the two paths that are parallel and you have to follow your path and we have to follow ours, and you have to maintain your own ways, your own language and we will show you how to live here and you can run your own communities but you can never ever have the land because the land belongs to the future generations, and we in our canoe, you in your ship and we in our canoe, we go down that river and we maintain all of the land, all of the waters, all of the resources, they don’t belong to us, we belong to it, to the natural world. So, when we have that peace, called the Great Peace of Montreal in 1701, all of the nations of Great Turtle Island came to make this agreement with the French, French said yes, we said “Ok, if you agree to the Two Row Wampum, then we will allow you to live here, this will be kind of like your visa or your passport or whatever. You can stay here but if you violate that, then you have no right to be here. That means you haven’t come to one mind with us, you are breaking, you are breaching this agreement”. So, then at the same time we went down to Albany, the British were down there and they said they wanted to have the same kind of agreement as the one we had in the Great Peace of Montreal. Now that was signed by 49 of our nations on behalf of all of the nations of Great Turtle Island, so the British agreed to it and they wrote it up themselves and they called it the Nanfan Treaty of 1701. Robles: But then they violated it. Horn: Then they breached it as well. So, that was the only treaty that ever gave the immigrants, or the invaders, any right to live here and they breached it. So, they are occupiers, illegal occupiers of Great Turtle Island today, from that time on till today. On top of that we never gave up our land and we never gave up our resources. Nothing, we never gave up any of it because we can’t and so, the corporation was set up called “The Corporation of the United States” and “the Corporation of Canada”. Corporation of Canada, which has the same shareholders, the old royal families in Europe are the shareholders of these corporations. Actually their the bankers, who are the shareholders, they set up this Corporation of Canada. And I was speaking at a college and I pulled up this… I said “look at this number”, and the students looked at it. I said “Do you know what that number is?” They said; “No.” I said “that is the number of the corporation of Canada, you can find it on the Internet”. It is incorporated in Washington DC. It is a corporation with shareholders and it is under the admiralty laws, the laws of the sea. So they have no right to come to our land and place themselves on our land and set up these courts and governments and everything else, they have no right to do that. That is a complete and total violation of the Great Peace of Montreal and Two Row Wampum, the basic foundations of that peace and it also even violates their own laws of the seas. So, now, right now what has happened is they have no right to our resources but Canada has the most resources that are necessary to make war. We have all the resources that are needed plus, I will tell you what else; in 1867 the British North-America Act was passed and it supposedly set up Canada, it was supposedly the constitution, but it was passed by the British parliament and in it is section 109. Section 109 says that an account will be set up for the indigenous people and all of the monies coming from all of the royalties or anything that is made, of their rents, everything that is made on the resources of Canada, a portion of it first it shall go into this account, and it is called the Indian Trust Fund. So, all the monies went into that account and immediately upon that happening the corporation of Canada passed an illegal law, a bylaw, which is all a corporation can do, and they called it the Indian Act and in it they said that a person is anybody other than an Indian. So, we then were declared as non-person. And so they became the trustees of our money, of our funds, of the Indian Trust Fund, and now they have been using our Indian Trust Fund to build Canada. You were listening to an interview with Kahentinetha Horn, a Mohawk Indian an a member of a Bear Clan, and an owner and publisher of the Mohawknationnews.com. Visit our website in the near future to listen to the final part of this interview. The Mohawk: Keepers of the Eastern Door of Great Turtle Island - interview Many of the indigenous peoples of North America called the continent “Great Turtle Island.” A part of their advanced philosophy and culture included a complex and extremely developed constitution called the Great Path. The Mohawk were responsible for maintaining the peace and were the guardians of the Great Law which was supposed to bring peace not only to North America but to the entire world. Kahentinetha Horn spoke to John Robles about the history of the Mohawk, American Indian culture and beliefs and current issues of important to the indigenous people of “Great Turtle Island.” Please visit our website in the near future for a continuation of this very revealing interview. This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Kahentinetha Horn she is Mohawk Indian Elder and a member of the Bear Clan. She is also the owner and publisher of the Mohawk News web-resource. Robles: Hello Kahentinetha! How are you this evening? Kahentinetha:(Speaks Mohawk: "it is nice to speak with you. we have much to tell you about what we are doing on great turtle island. our great law of peace is the path to peace based on our understanding of the great natural power kasatstensera kowa sa oiera) Robles: Can you translate that now for us? Kahentinetha: Those are my greetings in Mohawk. And I introduced which is the Great Turtle Island, which is what we call North America; we never call it that, we call it “Great Turtle Island.” People who live on Great Turtle Island are the (Speaks Mohawk) which means “the True Natural People of Great Turtle Island.” And we follow: we have a developed constitution called <Speaks Mohawk> which means the “Great Path”. And the Great Path is the great path to peace. Our philosophy is based on our understanding and our awareness of the natural world. That’s a little bit about us. Robles: Okay. As all North American Indians, the basis of beliefs are: respect for nature and the Great Spirit. Can you tell us a little bit in particular about the Mohawk Nation and what you are doing to promote the issues that are important to the indigenous peoples? Kahentinetha: The Mohawk, also known as (Kanien'gehaga), are the “Keepers of the Eastern Door of Great Turtle Island.” So, we are in the east and we were placed there by our (Speaks Mohawk) that’s the Great Natural Power. That’s where we were placed. And we were to watch for people who would be coming from the east. And so, that’s why we are called the Keepers of the Eastern Door. We traversed throughout the eastern part of Great Turtle Island right from the north all the way down to the south. We traveled and we met all the other indigenous peoples, and we got to know each other. And we formed friendships and alliances that last to this day. There were hundreds and hundreds of indigenous nations. The Mohawk had the responsibility to maintain the peace. We always feel that we have to do that because the Great Law which is our philosophy (Speaks Mohawk) we were the first ones to take it, to accept it. And because we were the first ones to do that, we have always been responsible for maintaining it and to maintain the peace which is what the Great Law is all about. The Great Law of Peace is to bring peace not just to the Great Turtle Island but throughout the world. That’s why that law was given to our people. The Mohawk have this very… you know. We feel it! Right inside ourselves. We are the eagle that sits on top of the Tree of Peace and we look out to see any danger that is coming towards us. And we give a warning, a loud scream to the people. That’s how the Mohawk Nation News came into existence. I was raised as … I only spoke Mohawk until I was about 10 years old. Robles: Wonderful! Kahentinetha: Then, I had to learn to speak English. So, then, in 1990 we were defending the land. The women are what we call the “Title Holders of the Land” because we are tired to the land and we are the creators, and we hold the land for the future generations that are not here yet. The women are the ones that have the children, that bear the children and the men have the duty of protecting the women and the children along with all their other duties. They imitate the responsibilities of the Sun; to provide heat, provide warmth, provide protection, help provide food and to teach the children, all these things to be our diplomats, our teachers, to travel and meet other native people. The women: our responsibilities come from whatever the Earth does, which is to create the children, to help create the food, to feed the children, to raise them, to help them to become advocates of the Great Law of Peace. There is a male and female balance, not male or patriarchal or matriarchal, there is a balance between the male and the female. Robles: In most tribes the women chose the leaders because they knew the character of the children. Is that also true with the Mohawks? Kahentinetha: Yes. Well the people because each one of us has a “Fire,” we have the individual fire of ourselves which is what inside of us; it is our intuition, our minds, our energy, that’s called the “Fire of Life.” And we have the “Fire of the Family” which is people close to us, then the extended family and then the community, then the clan and then that extends into the nation, and that extends to the confederacy that we formed. So, all these relationships are connected, all circular and in the very center is myself, for example. I’m in the center, all of these other circles around me, these are all my connections. So, my responsibility is immediately to my own children. When a clan selects somebody to become a leader, or to represent us or to be a spokesman…we don’t have leaders, there is no such thing as a leader because we are equal, we are all equal and we all have a voice. So, what happens is that both the men and the women “the People” have a Fire, the women’s Fire and the men’s Fire, and the men and the women have a combined Fire, we come together and we will make a selection of somebody to speak for us, we don’t call them leaders, we call them spokespeople. And so the spokesperson represents us for the day only, just for that day. And the women will tell the chiefs and they will say: “This is the person we’ve selected and that is the person that will speak for us for the day.” So, that’s very different from the kind of situation that you people have, you now. (laughs) Robles: Sure! As I understand Western democracies were based on Indian law and Indian relationships between nations and tribes, and clans. In Europe they had monarchies, there was no such concept as democracy. Kahentinetha: No, they didn’t. And they still don’t understand true democracy. You were listening to an interview with Kahentinetha Horn – she is a member of the Mohawk Nation, the Bear Clan, and the owner and publisher of mohawknationnews.com. Part one of this interview, the Mohawks Keepers of the Eastern Door of Great Turtle Island. · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · What tribe is pictured at the top of the article? 6 June, 11:14 Israel is in shock over the US government revealing details of top-secret Israeli missile base
Photo: AFP Last December the United States “accidentally” and very publically revealed extensive details about what had been a planned “top-secret” missile base in Israel that was supposed to have hosted a new ballistic-missile defense system called the Arrow 3. Of course the top-secret missile base in Tel Shahar was not to be a U.S. installation, otherwise heads would be rolling left and right, but an installation that the U.S. Defense Department was to have built for the U.S.’ perennial ally Israel at a cost of $25 to $100 million. The base was so secret that Israeli military commanders and those in the know would not even admit to its existence or it location in Sdot Micha (Tal Shahar) near Beit Shemesh about 26 kilometers from Jerusalem. Unfortunately for the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) the secret is out of the bag and the information available on the internet alone is so detailed that it is questionable if Israel will in fact go ahead with the planned construction. According to media reports the “top secret” location is also an area where Israel reportedly keeps its Jericho 3 nuclear missiles and was to have been built deep underground and hardened to the point where it could withstand a nuclear attack. Military reports say the facility was to have been built and the Arrow 3 arsenal operational by 2015, and was initiated under the dubious pretext that Iran would have nuclear missiles that could reach Israel by that time. Global Research reports that the installation would allow Israel to launch 24 Arrow 3s to supposedly intercept any incoming missiles and then attack with its Arrow 2 arsenal, or in the reverse scenario, Israel could launch a first strike with its Arrow 2s, or even Jerichos and then eliminate any responsive attack with its Arrow 3s, making it untouchable. The publication Jane’s Defense Weekly broke the story last December but it has apparently only reached the masses now, leaving to question why Israel is currently so livid at the revelation. The thousands of pages of plans for the facility, which had been published on a site for companies to bid on the project have since been heavily redacted and even the Jane’s article has all but been buried, but enough is already known to reasonably question if the project will in fact be carried out. The plans and requirement s were so detailed that even the religious requirements as to the construction were laid out in detail. According to Global Research the cost of the project may have been in the neighborhood of $100 million with conflicting reports citing a new airfield in the same area and information that the $25 million figure was just for the first stage of the project. In reality the whole story may be a carefully planned diversion to hide the real location of the new systems and Israel may already have such capabilities, which might explain its impunity in attacking the sovereign territory of Syria, or on the other hand it is true and the U.S. just sold the Israeli ABM dream down the river, at least for the time being. If we are to believe the Israeli version, that all of this was completely and totally top secret and the U.S. let the cat out of the bag then I would say Israel needs to reconsider who its real friends are and whether the U.S. will in fact support it to the level it assumes if it decides to attack Iran for example. Not that we would believe it would do so unilaterally without its American “special” friends, but then again anything is possible. For Israel may be a few words of warning might be appropriate: it is no secret that the U.S. has over 900 military bases spread out all over the world and it is also no secret that the U.S. is a self-serving super power bent on world domination and actively engaged in a campaign of global military expansion unprecedented in the history of the world. That having been said it is important to underline a very important fact that the record has shown time and time again to be true, the planners in Washington and the imperial war machine will stop at nothing to achieve their goals and have time and time again amorally formed and broken alliances to fit their own current conveniences, something that U.S. “allies” must take to heart, and Israel in particular if it is true that their top secret plans were truly exposed by America. I have said this many times in the past and it should be something that military intelligence officials in Israel should have already been aware of if they did not go through life with U.S. made blinders on giving them tunnel vision; for the U.S. it is normal to one day be funding al-Qaeda and delivering weapons to Saddam Hussein and then the next to be calling them “the axis of evil” and “enemies of the free world”. In reality, from Syria to Libya to Serbia to Afghanistan and to every other place the U.S. has meddled and destroyed, it is just about the money and resources, and quite possibly an emboldened Israel, bombing its oil rich Muslim neighbors, is not exactly something that may be financially expedient. Another thought: perhaps the dubious claim and the constant propaganda by America that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons was just a marketing ploy to get Israel to spend the $500 million they have recently on intelligence headquarters, air bases and missile defense systems? Who knows? Stranger things have happened. A real friend does not give up your secrets, no matter how much it costs them, and for Israel with fanatical Islamic regimes and anarchy springing up all around them it might be time to consider a reassessment of their strategy and alliances.
5 June, 16:01
01: The very war Manning was reporting on was illegal -
Michael Ratner
As the trial of Bradley Manning, one of the greatest whistleblowers in history, gets under way, the U.S. government continues to show that it has no concern for the war crimes and the illegality of the U.S. actions, that were exposed by Manning, instead it has been further revealed that Manning was tortured and continues to be unfairly persecuted for doing the morally correct and right thing. According to Michael Ratner, the President Emeritus for the Center for Constitutional Rights, the trial is an embarrassment for the U.S. and the U.S. mass media has already assumed that Manning is some sort of traitor for revealing murderous war crimes.
Download audio file 6 June, 18:17
02: U.S. illegality and Guantanamo are completely crazy –
Michael Ratner The ridiculous hyper secrecy of the Bradley Manning trial and the refusal of the U.S. to go after the war criminals exposed by Bradley Manning and WikiLeaks, are a symptom of an empire grown irrational by its own power. Bradley Manning did the right thing yet it is he who is paying the price. The illegal wars and invasions of the “War: on Terror” and the illegal prison at Guantanamo are also criminal acts. Michael Ratner called the holding of innocent men at Guantanamo and the refusal by the U.S. to close the extra-judicial prison “crazy”! 7 June, 11:17
03: U.S. weaving Assange persecution into Manning trial – Michael Ratner The current hunger strike at Guantanamo has focused the world’s attention on the plight of the mostly innocent detainees and currently there is a window of opportunity to close the prison if enough pressure is put on Obama to make him fulfill his past promises to close the illegal prison. In the third part of a recent interview with Michael Ratner he spoke about this and much more 19 June, 00:19
04: We are in the middle of a plague – Michael Ratner
The attacks and the persecution of whistleblowers and truth seekers in the United States is part of a plague that is only going to get worse before it gets better. Despite knowing that he is under surveillance Michael Ratner spoke candidly to the Voice of Russia about Julian Assange, Jeremy Hammond, Guantanamo and the hunger strike and the entire illegality of the U.S. hyper-security state.
5 June, 03:46
Syria has the right to peace and to self-defense, despite western claims
Photo: EPA There can be little doubt that the lifting of the arms embargo to the armed insurgents and terrorist groups operating in Syria is one of the most egregiously callous, self-serving, reckless and irresponsible moves made by the international community since the beginning of the internal conflict in the country. The West’s complete and total lack of regard for the precious lives of innocent Syrian civilians, including all non-Muslims, non-Sunnis, Jews, Christians and ethnic minority groups is mind-boggling in its persistency, premeditation and complete and total lack of anything resembling humanity. The West has once again truly shown the entire planet, that is anyone with their eyes half open, its monstrous and evil face when it comes to Syria. It is evident in everything the West has done in Syria. From the day the western “masters” decided that elected President Bashar al-Assad had to go because he was not a Western puppet, to the instigating and fueling of the internal conflict, to the bellicose rhetoric and endless sanctions, to the actual real and documented funding, arming and importing of every kind of terrorist, mercenary and killer under the sun, the West has shown time and time again that they will do absolutely anything to bring about their ends, while packaging it in marketable terms evoking righteousness and pride by calling it “iron resolve”, “taking the lead” and “ridding the world of evil”. Even the world’s “poster boy of persecution” Israel, which has been allowed to do what it pleases, act with impunity in violating international laws and norms and has remained untouchable since the Holocaust, has shown that they too have forfeited their humanity for mere geo-political goals, by bombing Syria with reckless disregard and using the Nazi pretext of preventive attacks, disgracefully showing ignorance to the lesson that should have been learned from the Great Patriotic War, that all life is precious and no group has the right to eradicate another. There is nothing noble in what the West is doing in Syria. There is nothing noble is war and death and destruction and those who promote it and use it and spread it have forfeited their right to be members of humanity. Recently the new U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that it was too late for the U.S. to take an active role in seeking a peaceful settlement in Syria, he may be right after the years of rhetoric and the importing and funding of terrorists into the conflict, but I bear to differ, it is never too late to do the right thing, and the right thing here would be to completely ban all weapons deliveries to Syria, to sanction those who would use them, to force the warring factions to the negotiating table sanctioning those who refuse and to bring about an immediate and unconditional ceasefire. That would be the noble and human thing to do but will the West do that, perhaps Kerry would, but then again he is not the “decider” and the those who make the decisions in the West want war and are obtuse and ignorantly stubborn in their foolish and unyielding “resolve” to forcefully remove a leader who has stated time and time again that he will leave if he is voted out of office. Who is suffering in the Western power play in Syria? The Syrian people, the civilians, the women and children and anyone who keeps the vicious cycle going must be restrained and removed from the conflict, even if that is the mighty dictator of the world, the United States of America and all of their surrogates. Russian President Vladimir Putin recently stated regarding the lifting of the arms embargo to the terrorist groups:"We have, of course, given our assessment to the decision adopted by the Foreign Ministers of the EU last week on the lifting of the embargo on arms supplies to the Syrian opposition. I will not hide the fact that it has disappointed us." The president very wisely noted: "Any attempt to influence the situation by force or direct military intervention is doomed to failure and will inevitably lead to grave humanitarian consequences." The main proponents to lifting the arms embargo within the EU were the UK and France, classically U.S. surrogates, while a number of other states rightfully opposed, knowing it would only aggravate the already difficult and violent situation in Syria. President Putin also recently spoke about the supply of S-300 air defense systems to Syria; "The S-300, is really one of the best air defense systems in the world, if not the best. The best, I think. This, of course, a serious weapon. However we do not want to disturb the balance in the region. Russian arms supplies to Syria are solely and entirely within the framework of international law and transparent, internationally recognized contracts that do not violate any international regulations." The supply of S-300s to Syria has of course been met with bellicose and indignant rhetoric from the West and in particular from Israel with comments such as “this will upset the strategic balance between Israel and Syria” taking the forefront. This is of course true, Israel reserves to itself the right to bomb Syria with impunity whenever it so chooses, and the West of course does not want anything to interfere should it bring about the conditions for a military intervention. It is of course more convenient for the West when they can bomb and destroy a country and do so with no threat to themselves, as they did in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. The U.N., perhaps the last voice of reason in the world and the last hope for peace recently released a report on the matter asking the nations of the world to “counter the escalation of the conflict” by not delivering weapons “given the clear risk that the arms will be used to commit serious violations of international human rights or humanitarian law.” The report says right at the beginning: “Anti-government armed groups have also besieged towns, especially in Aleppo governorate. They are committing war crimes on an increasing scale, including extra-judicial executions, torture, hostage-taking, and pillage. The violations and abuses committed by anti-Government armed groups did not reach the intensity and scale of those committed by Government forces and affiliated militias.” The UN report also states: “The desperation of the parties to the conflict has resulted in new levels of cruelty and brutality, bolstered by an increase in the availability of weapons. Increased arm transfers hurt the prospect of a political settlement to the conflict, fuel the multiplication of armed actors at the national and regional levels and have devastating consequences for civilians." Peace can never be attained with the barrel of a gun and anyone who would tell you so is either delusional or has their own agenda, and those would supply terrorists with arms and promote the killing of civilians have forfeited their place among civilized nations. The opinions and views expressed here are my own, I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru. Best wishes to you.
30 May, 10:57 When spies call for more spying: Rimington called on Britons to be “eyes and ears” of security services
Stella Rimington Photo: Reuters A former director of the U.K.’s Military Intelligence 5 (MI-5) has called on all Britons and residents of the United Kingdom to act as the “eyes and ears” of the country’s security services in order to help in the fight against terrorists. Dame Stella Rimington was speaking after the attack by two lunatics, whom the U.K. has labeled as being terrorists, against a lone soldier on a Woolwich street in which they hacked him to death. While ignoring the true reasons behind the attack and the failure by the security services to prevent it she has issued a call for the security services to be allowed to openly “monitor every phone call, e-mail and web visit” made by those in the U.K.
Tony Holland has drinks with Stella Rimington © Photo "The Voice of Russia" The call by the ex-head of MI-5, while an admission of the inability of the security services to ensure the safety of the citizenry, has been marketed as some sort of patriotic call to duty that all loyal Brits should rise up to and they should accept the further stripping of their freedom from surveillance and their rights in order to ensure their own safety. This shameful call by Rimington for the giving up of liberty for the sake of safety is obviously something that has worked so well in America that the U.K. is once again blindly going down the same path as their “special American friends”. The argument is a false one and disingenuous on many levels because it ignores the true realities of the threat. The first and most obvious reality, and that was underlined by the revelations last week that MI-5 had attempted to recruit the homicidal cleaver killers on multiple occasions, is that no amount of electronic surveillance will ever help to stop true terrorist attacks.
Tony Holland accuses Stella Rimington of telling lies © Photo "The Voice of Russia" The security services know, and unless Dame Rimington has been completely out of the loop and perhaps hiding under a rock somewhere for too long she knows as well, that real terrorists, be they Irish Republican Army members, fanatical Islamists or any other type, do not send each other e-mails, make phone calls or post information on the internet, regarding attacks. It is a dishonest argument designed to deceive the public, allow for the expansion of the powers of the security services into domains they have no real reason to be involved in and hide their own incompetence. The Woolwich attack and the 7/7 attack are very similar in that MI-5 supposedly had the perpetrators under surveillance and in their crosshairs and yet they failed to prevent the attacks and it would be ridiculous to assume that the surveillance that was being conducted did not include the monitoring of the subjects e-mails, web visits and phone calls. It is also impossible to believe that had MI-5 asked for permission, whether behind the scenes or in a court, to monitor the subjects’ communications, they would have been denied, hence making the call for unfettered surveillance completely unnecessary. Dame Rimington and MI-5 have once again shown that they are following another agenda, one of their own making, and it does not include the safety or the betterment of the British people. The U.K., just like the Americans, knows the real reason for the continued threat of attacks by Muslim fanatics has nothing to do with stripping away the freedoms of the populace, other than that is the pretext for it. They know that it is the meddling in Muslim countries, the millions of deaths and shattered lives caused by Western military adventures throughout the Muslim world and the complete lack of respect for the sovereignty and humanity of those countries they have targeted for intervention, regime change or resources. Therefore rather than telling Brits they need to be the “eyes and ears” of the intelligence services and allow for themselves to be watched like the terrorists should be watched, they should be saying “We need to stop all of our military campaigns, stop indefinite detention, droning and torture and make peace with the Muslim world, but unfortunately that will never happen because there is too much money to be made in war and the resources are something that they cannot live without. Rimington herself has shown time and time again that she has other interests in mind other than what is best for the U.K. and the British people, this is no exception. In the past she has consistently advanced her own interests and her own agenda with little regard for those around her or those she damages. Those who have known her, her own words in her books and the record itself has shown that she will do and say anything to advance her own purpose, she also jealously guards her own privacy yet expects the populace to give up theirs, something she detailed in her book “Open Secrets”. In this case exactly what her purpose might be remains to be seen. Tony Holland, an individual who met and says he knew Dame Rimington, said she was, “… mediocre and totally uninspiring, lacking bounce in her step and thoughts.” And that before she became the director of MI-5 “her career was on the nose at ‘5’ because she was advocating female progressions, wages status etc.” So how did she become the director of MI-5 when there were far better qualified personnel to fill the position and she was extremely unpopular with those within the organization, which she took it upon herself to reform? According to Mr. Holland, the event that catapulted her to the directorship, rather than out the door, was the fabricated prosecution of the last spy ever convicted of spying for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Mr. Michael John Smith. Since day one Mr. Smith has maintained his innocence and according to Holland she was given a promotion for “catching” Mr. Smith rather than being fired. Mr. Holland has taken issue in the past and even confronted Dame Rimington with the fact that in her book “Open Secrets” she made no mention of Smith. Something she should have bragged about but which was omitted according to Holland because the whole case against Mr. Smith was fabricated and based on circumstantial evidence, hearsay and lies. There was never a connection revealed in the case between Mr. Smith and Russian intelligence, and there was never any evidence presented to the court to indicate Mr. Smith had spied for the USSR. According to testimony by Rimington the lack of evidence was the proof that Mr. Smith was a spy because as she put it “that is how spies work”. I contacted Mr. Smith, whose life was destroyed by the former director and who was in prison for 10 years and 3 months for alleged espionage for the USSR, about his involvement with Dame Rimington. He stated that his impression of Stella Rimington was that she was a dishonest person, who used her position to distort information to achieve her goals. During the trial Smith stated Rimington wore a disguise and was referred to as “Mrs C” and that although there was no evidence he had met any Russian intelligence officers, Rimington claimed he had contact with a Russian SVR officer named Viktor Oshchenko who defected to the U.K. in 1992. However, when challenged under oath, Rimington was forced to admit that MI-5 had no intelligence or evidence to prove he had ever met Mr Oshchenko. When asked about the typical equipment used in spying, such as code books, Minox cameras, microdots, secret writing materials, radio transmitters, secret containers (e.g. false-bottomed suitcases), etc, Rimington had to admit that none of this spy paraphernalia was found during the MI5 search of his home. Her explanation was that it proved he was a spy because using such equipment could be incriminating. Smith stated: “When Oleg Kalugin, a former Head of Soviet Counter Intelligence, came to give evidence at my trial he was arrested as he arrived at Heathrow on 30 October 1993. This was designed to damage my main Defense witness. The order for Kalugin’s arrest must have been taken at the highest level, and this would have involved Stella Rimington. She knew that Kalugin’s evidence would have been effective in establishing that my case was not typical of a Russian espionage operation.” “Following my arrest in 1992, it was revealed that MI5 had me under surveillance from 1977 to 1992. After my conviction in 1993, when I was given a 20 year prison sentence, Rimington was promoted to the top job as MI5 Director, but later when she published her autobiography “Open Secret”, she made no mention whatsoever of my case, or the role it had played in her promotion.” So with regard to increased surveillance powers for MI-5, coming from Stella Rimington such statements are the height of absurdity and hypocrisy but then again hypocrisy, duplicity and outright lies are not things that Dame Rimington is not intimately familiar with. Rimington’s call for allowing unfettered snooping on all Brits in the name of security and in a supposed battle against fanatical Islamists is disingenuous and a promotion of an erroneous fallacy and as the former head of MI-5 she should be ashamed of herself for promoting such an idea because surely she herself knows that allowing such broad surveillance powers will do nothing to stop attacks by fanatics, what it will do is allow MI-5 and the government to know anything about anyone at anytime, and that is something that must surely be of interest to all involved.
Russian orphans placed in new home, Texas cooperating with Russia - Pulliam
© Photo: «Vesti.Ru» Download audio file
This is John Robles. I am speaking with Shari Pulliam, the Media Specialist for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. Previous interview with Shari Pulliam on the matter
You were listening to an interview with Shari Pulliam, the media specialist for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services.
29 May, 17:52 Anti-American terrorism no mystery. U.S. Gov does not mean well - Blum
© Photo "The Voice of Russia" There all always conspiracies regarding violent events and the Boston Marathon bombing is not different but proof must be solid, said William Blum in an interview with the Voice of Russia. Anti-American terrorism is not just a Muslim phenomenon, it is the result of U.S. “intervention” all over the world and is in no way a mystery. This is obvious, but people want to believe the U.S. Government means well, even when the fact that they do not is right in front of them. Mr. Blum spoke on these matters and more in this interview.
William Blum This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. William Blum. He is an American author, historian and a critic of United States foreign policy. He is also the manager, editor and owner of killinghope.org Robles: Hello Mr. Blum! How are you this evening? Blum: Fine, thank you. Robles: This is a unique book for Russia. Blum: Well, it’s a Russian language version of my book, which in English is called “Killing Hope”, in Russian I think it is called “Killing Democracy”. It is a very detailed list of American interventions all over the world; all the invasions and bombings, and overthrowing governments, and assassinations and so on. It is the only book of its kind, as far as I know, which has gone into great detail about each of these interventions. Robles: How many of your books have been translated into other languages? Blum: I have more than 30 foreign language editions of my books. My book “Rogue State” has very close to 10 languages. But the total of my foreign language editions is at least 30 now. Robles: You had one book, I believe, quoted by Osama Bin Laden? Blum: Yes, that was “Rogue State”. In 2006 I think it was. In one of his audio recordings, he spoke to the American people and told them if they wanted to understand what motivates he and his people, they should read my book “Rogue State”. And I sold about 20 000 copies because of that. But I lost more money because I lost speaking engagements. University campuses, university officials didn’t want to have their school associated with somebody who has been recommended by Osama Bin Laden. And my paid speaking engagements in campuses fell from, about, close to 10 a year, to almost nothing. Robles: Did that come back up? Did it bounce back? Blum: No, I’m still almost never invited to speak. Not by universities, it is only by some other private group or individual. Robles: What are your views on the Boston bombing? Blum: The surviving brother said that he and his brother were motivated by anger at U.S. actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. This has been stated by many anti-American terrorists over the past 20 years or so, I’ve written about this. There is a whole list of terrorist actions which explicitly blame US foreign policy. That’s a very important point which I try to emphasize. We shouldn’t think of this anti-American terrorism as a big mystery, we know why it takes place. Robles: You are in the U.S. Have you heard anything about photographs on the Internet saying that the Boston bombing was a false flag terrorist attack? Blum: You find that claim following every terrorist action. I’m personally beleaguered by all these conspiracy people for not following in their footsteps. I am not opposed to the idea of conspiracy. There are many and have been many conspiracies carried out in the US. But that doesn’t mean I have to look for that in every violent action. Robles: Have you seen the photographs and some of what they are calling the “evidence”? The guy in the wheelchair who is actually already a double amputee and stuff? Have you seen any of that? Blum: I’ve had a few emails about, supposedly, there was a photo or a video of the older brother captured by the police and he is shown naked, or almost naked, and then his death was announced. So, they wonder what happened; that he was captured, he wasn’t shot. So, how did he wind up being shot to death. It is a valid question. Robles: There is a lot of suspicion about: okay… he was killed, his brother was rendered mute, their friend was killed in Orlando Florida after midnight questioning in his home, two FBI agents were killed falling out of a helicopter that were involved in the Boston investigation, as a great author and mind, what do you think about all that? Blum: (Laughs) Those things are always very intriguing. There are not too many cases, if any, of the FBI murdering its own people. Robles: What if it was somebody else in the Government? They are talking about Navy Seal teams or something like this. Blum: I would have to be shown very good proof. Robles: Are there going to be any changes in U.S. Government policy because of this? Blum: I don’t know. I can predict: as long as the U.S. keeps intervening all over the world and doing these terrible things, anti-American acts of terrorism will continue. Robles: Do you think there is going to be many more attacks in the next 10 or 15 years from people, or, “Muslim people” who’ve come of age since 9-11? Blum: Listen, now this applies to all other people in parts of Latin America. From the 1950s, to the 1980s, the U.S. intervened in Latin America on many-many occasions in bloody ways. What was the result? Many anti-American acts of terrorism in Latin America. Many, many attacks against these American targets. So, it is the same thing all over the world. It is not just a Muslim phenomenon. People don’t like being invaded and bombed, and overthrown, and tortured. It is that simple. Robles: You just mentioned torture, it brought to mind Guantanamo. Do you have any opinion, or anything, about the hunger strike that’s going on there? Blum: Those people are very desperate. Many of them had been cleared to leave years ago and they are still there. Any human being would find that totally intolerable. Years and years of being locked up under horrible conditions without being charged with a crime, without being found guilty even. Who can blame them for being so desperate. Their hunger campaign is an act of desperation. I hope, for their sake, that they are finally released and back to their home countries. Robles: Do you think Obama is going to release them? Blum: Obama has no backbone whatsoever. You can’t count on him to do the right thing ever. It depends on how the winds are blowing, the “political” and “public relations” winds, that is all he cares about. The man has no basic core beliefs. Robles: What’s your opinion on his Nobel Peace Prize? Blum: What do you think it is? That “prize” should be abolished. And it is not just because of Obama, Henry Kissinger and Menachem Begin, and a bunch of other people have gotten that prize. Total war-mongers and war-lovers and mass-murderers have gotten the Peace Prize! What is the point of that? Robles: Yes, I agree with you 1,000%. Blum: Give it to Bradley Manning! Robles: Yeah! Give it to you even! Blum: Even me, I would accept the money, although, in my acceptance speech I would not hold back my views. I would say: “I’m taking the money because I want to give it all to anti-war organizations.” Robles: That’s wonderful! Hey Bill, it was a pleasure speaking with you. Anything that you want to finish up with? Blum: Yes, my usual standard message is that: “Do not believe that the U.S. Government and its foreign policy, means well. It doesn’t!” And that is the main barrier to people like me in convincing other Americans to oppose American policies. They have this basic belief that the U.S. Government “means well” and that is very tough to get around. Robles: And people do want to hear it. Blum: They don’t want to believe it, yes. Robles: They don’t want to believe it. Even if it is right in their face, right? Blum: Yes, it is painful. Robles: Bill, thank you very much. I really appreciate you speaking with me. Blum: Thank you, John. Can I mention my website. It is williamblum.org This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author, historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy. Official website of the author, historian, and U.S. foreign policy critic William Blum
28 May, 08:50 The suffering of Muslims will lead to more terrorism - Michael John Smith
© Flickr.com/Please! Don't Smile/cc-by The demonization of Muslims and the suffering they face at the hands of the UK and the USA will no doubt cause even more terrorist attacks like the one which occurred in Woolich in the future. According to Michael John Smith, who spoke about this to the Voice of Russia, the West needs to view Muslim countries as trading partners and with due respect.
This is John Robles. I am speaking with Mr. Michael John Smith, an intelligence specialist from the UK. Robles: Do you think the government of the UK, the US, the special services, the proponents of this campaign, don’t you think they are responsible in a way? Smith: Unfortunately, I think this incident, terrible as it is, is a wakeup call for people to think; “What is going on in our society?” Because this one death it’s just one soldier and we know the war on terror involves tens of thousands of innocent civilians. One of the reasons behind this radicalization of young Muslims in the UK is not just for what’s going on in the UK, it is the way they perceive Muslims in other countries, in Arab countries, in Afghanistan, Iraq, suffering at the hands of the UK and USA forces. This is where the bigger story comes I think because if anybody has got blood on their hands, it should be Tony Blair in the UK, because he was the Prime Minister who led Britain into war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians are on his hands. And the occupation of these countries has caused enormous strain to relationships within the UK. Now you say “the war on terror” and we know the passion of the US and the UK is to impose some sort of their own democracy on these countries and that’s what I think is making the radicalization more likely to happen in places like the US and the UK. Robles: I have a problem with the fact that now we have a whole generation of people that have come of age, or now are coming of age since 9/11. We have young people who all of their lives almost have been witnesses to more or less this entire paradigm. Do you think we’ll be seeing a lot more of attacks like this in the near future? Smith: The problem here is I think this is an unknown quantity what is going on in people’s minds. But we do see in the UK over quite a period of time, a growing feeling of discontent and this has to be put in context with the economic situation in the world, the changing forces between the West and the East and now China emerging, and all these things are affecting living standards and our future and I see a lot of people are very uneasy. They feel very unsatisfied with their lives and they see people in countries, and they think themselves: “we are living a hard time here and yet we see billions of dollars poured into the war machine, to go to the war on countries like Iraq”, and that money should be spent on people at home. Robles: But isn’t that anger going to come back at the government and the war machine itself or is it going to be transposed onto the poor victims that have been wiped out for the last decade? Smith: You see the victim in this case, this poor soldier. Why did he deserve this? The person who perpetrated this crime, because it is a crime, he did this because he couldn’t get to the army, he couldn’t break into one of these army camps, and damage a tank, say. He wasn’t capable, so he’s taken an easy target: somebody walking down the street. But the people who live in these countries,who see these forces, UK and USA forces like Iraq, Afghanistan, they see that invasion of troops as little different from earlier attempts at colonization or imperialism that happened in the past. Robles: The key word you just said there, “invasion”, because that’s what they are. Smith:That’s what it is. It’s been seen as we are protecting UK interests by going into places like Afghanistan. Now I don’t see it as being in my interest for that to happen, I see the hundreds of troops, British troops that have died in Afghanistan as being just a complete waste of life. I think those people have died unnecessarily. We don’t need to be in Afghanistan, we didn’t need to be in Iraq either. The only reason we are there I think is to try and control the futures of those countries, to set up puppet governments who will be in the pocket of the West years to come. We can see what happened in Libya recently. You know the attempts there to change their government. Now it’s happening in Syria. Robles: Getting away a little bit from the MI-5 and stuff, wouldn’t you agree that in Afghanistan and Iraq, I would call it a complete and utter dismal failure of historic proportions, I mean radical Islamists are coming to power. Smith: All I can think is this is what the UK and the USA governments want. They want destabilization in these countries because it prevents them from causing perhaps a wider problem in their area, I don’t know. In Afghanistan we can see quite clearly that as soon as foreign troops leave that country, the puppet government will probably fall and they will go back to some or maybe worse situation than they had before. Robles: Can we get back to Mr. Michael Adebolajo and an interview that was given on the BBC regarding MI-5 and connections. Can you tell us anything else? Smith:Well, the main thing I think is that he has been presented as being somebody who is quite a monster, and the guy who was his friend for some years, said that: “No, he was a nice guy, he was quite good humored, quite good natured” and he couldn’t imagine that his friend would have done something like this. So, obviously in this guy’s case something seriously has happened to his mental state to turn him into a killer and I think that needs to be investigated because it is no good, if we don’t understand why these things happen we can never make any progress. The other thing that was interesting after the interview, I don’t think we discussed this, was that the man Abu Nusaybah he went to give the interview and he came on TV, before the interview was aired, the guy who interviewed him, he is an investigative journalist called Richard Watson, he does a lot of these interviews, he was quite shocked, he said he never experienced this because while they were doing the interview, there were 3 Special Branch, now they are anti-terrorism police, waiting in the BBC reception area to arrest Nusaybah as he left the building and it seems very strange that they wouldn’t have arrested him maybe a day or two earlier. Why allow him to give an interview? And this sort of shocked the BBC presenter, he found this quite unusual. Robles: That is strange. Do you think they were just being polite? Smith: You see the interview in a way is giving more information to the public about the guy who was involved in carrying out the murder and obviously people want to know what sort of person is this, why would they do a thing like this and this chap was giving some useful information about his knowledge of this man over many years because he was a good friend of his. So, for somebody like this to say that he finds unexplainable that this man would suddenly murder a man in the street,it does sort of make it very intriguing I think. Robles: Why was he arrested in Kenya? Smith: This is the other very mysterious thing because apparently the British government knew that he had been arrested. It was alleged that he went over to Kenya to do some studying in a Kenyan village and some people suggested, well possibly,because nearby in Sudan [sic Somalia]they have these militant groups there and possibly he might have had some link with them when he was there, but we don’t know anything about that. But certainly he was arrested by Kenyan government troops and he was interrogated, he claims he had been tortured and sexually threatened and it had deeply affected his mental state by the time he arrived back in the UK. Robles: If he had been recruited by MI-5, why would he have attacked a British soldier? Any insight there? Smith: That’s what makes me think he wasn’t recruited because it seems unlikely, I believe he turned the offer down, from what he told his friend Nusaybah. He was saying to his friend that he wanted to go and live in a Muslim country where he could feel more free and not have the restrictions he had in the UK. But obviously he decided he wouldcarry out this murder and that was what happened last week. You have got to realize, that since the Cold War ended, one of the biggest threats perceived in MI-5 and MI-6 is from Muslim extremism, terrorism, and so a lot of the staff that they used to have looking at the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries was disbanded and they built a much bigger department looking at terrorism, Arabic affairs and that sort of thing since about the early 90s. So, they must be spending a lot of money, public money on recruiting agents either in countries where terrorism, like Pakistan or Afghanistan, where terrorism is perceived as being a problem. Also in this country where they know that there are these growing groups of radicals who willcarry out things like the 7/7 bombing or 9/11, or are prepared to do that sort of thing, and if they can prevent it, then it’s in public interest, I think. Robles: In your opinion, what can a society, be it the war machine, let’s call it, say, politicians, what can they do to make sure that such attacks don’t take place if that’s possible and do you think that is possible? Smith: I think the trouble with the UK. When we were living in the period of Tony Blair and Bush, that alliance caused a lot of harm to the UK and to the USA in the minds of those who live in Arabic countries where they were being invaded. Those people didn’t see the USA and the UK as friends, they saw them as - as we said before - invaders. I believe that there has got to be a political change in outlook, that we’ve got to see these countries not as threats but we’ve got to see them as trading partners, people that we can get on with, like we get on with other people in other parts of the world, and religion shouldn’t be seen as being the thing that separates us. Robles: Russia has no problem maintaining normal diplomatic and social and societal and other relations with Islamic countries. Why do you think that is? Smith:What I believe is the case, certainly in the UK’s position,is that if you go back over centuries, the UK used these countries as part of its empire, I mean, Egypt was part of the British Empire and lots of Palestine and lots of places were under the control of British, and so I think there is a sort of historical link there that Britain has got this thing in its closet that has caused these problems to some extent, that we think of these people as people that we colonized and so I think that has been part of our problem, we don’t see them as legitimate independent countries. You were listening to an interview with Michael John Smith, the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the world. You can find part one on our website at english.ruvr.ru
27 May, 19:35 MI-5 recruits terrorists while pretending to not know they are dangerous - intelligence specialist
MI5 headquarters Фото: EPA The story behind the Woolwich attack once again brings to the forefront the relationship between the special services and Islamic extremists and terrorists who on the one hand the West recruits and on the other the West demonizes and eradicates. It is a duplicitous game and it is civilians who are paying the price. Michael John Smith spoke about this to the Voice of Russia. This is John Robles. I am speaking with Mr. Michael John Smith, he’s an intelligence specialist from the UK. Robles: I’d like to get your views on the recent revelations regarding MI-5 trying to recruit the perpetrators of that horrendous act in London. Can you give us some of your views on what you know about MI-5’s relationship with internal British Islamists and groups? Smith: The interesting thing John was, there was an interview on TV late last night, a program called News Night, and they interviewed a guy called Abu Nusaybah. He is a friend, an old friend of one of the 2 killers in this Woolwich murder, called Michael Adebolajo. Adebolajo had apparently gone to Kenya last year and had been arrested by Kenyan troops and he was interrogated, tortured, possibly sexually abused and he came back rather shell-shocked from this and it seems that might have started things off. Now at that time when he arrived back in the UK, he was interviewed by MI-5. He was obviously on their radar as being a possible Islamist extremist and they made an offer to him, but his friend said Adebolajo said to him that MI-5 had persistently tried to recruit him, they had knocked on his door, they had tried to discuss things with him, they wanted to ask him questions about possible extremists that he might know. He said he didn’t know any of these people’s names. But they did make an approach to him and said: “Could we recruit you and use you as an agent?”, and this is quite surprising considering what happened last week in Woolwich because obviously at that time they were looking upon Adebolajo as a sort of possible friend of the UK and somebody who could work with MI5. Robles: Does it happen regularly? Smith: I am not aware that this is a regular thing but from the MI-5 point of view it is very difficult for them to get information about these extremist groups because they usually work out of sight of public domain and those sort of people, if they are planning anything, MI-5 wants to know about it. So, I guess that having an asset on the inside is exactly what MI-5 were looking for and somebody with the sort of contacts this guy has got, it would be very understandable if they would approach him and try to recruit him because of his connections. Having a live agent in a radical cell like that is far better than relying on, say, electronic surveillance, which might be unreliable and some of these groups are so secretive that they don’t use phones or even e-mail. Robles: Isn’t there a point where the danger to the public might outweigh the possible intelligence gains they might make? Smith: Exactly, I think this is precisely what had happened in this case. The public obviously think MI-5 are there looking after our interests, protecting public good and, on the other hand, they’re working with these extremists, trying to do deals with them of some sort. There’s been some sort of outcry from the public this week: “How was it that MI-5 didn’t know about these 2 killers before, they made their attack last week?” And now we know that is not true, MI-5 knew all about these guys, tried to recruit at least one of them as an agent. And this is what I said to you before I think, the sort of amateurism within MI-5 that they work this way, they mess things up, it’s misfired on them in this case and they’ve been caught out and then probably next week they will have to explain themselves in the public domain: “How did we get into this situation?” Robles: I don’t want to be an apologist or anything but I mean the CIA, MI-5, Russian intelligence, I mean, all intelligence agencies, Mossad, whoever, AISO, to some point, to get some sort of intelligence sometimes they have to deal with people who are not entirely upstanding citizens. Wouldn’t you agree? Smith: I agree entirely but it always has to be balanced against what is in the public interest and I think in this case having such good contacts with these people over some months I would have thought they would be aware there was a possibility they would not behave the way they were expected to behave. The other guy, we concentrated on was the older one, who has the most, sort of public image here, but the other guy also called Michael “Adebowale”, he has also been a long term, on the watch list for MI-5, possibly up to 8 years. So, there is no excuse to say that MI-5 didn’t know about him as well. Adebowale, he was arrested only 2 months ago because he was running some sort of stall in a market place in Greenwich, which is just down the road from Wollich. He was trying to recruit young men to radical Islam I believe in the streets of Greenwich and other street traders who were living nearby, working nearby, they complained to the police about him because he was causing a nuisance and he was arrested. So, only 2 months ago there was a perfect opportunity there to say; “Why is this guy doing this on one of our public streets and possibly showing signs of being a militant extremist.” Robles: Maybe he was working for MI-5 at that point already and he was just trying to get some intel? Smith: Well, say this is where we just don’t know, do we? I mean the whole thing is shrouded in secrecy. MI-5 won’t come out and say these 2 guys were agents or they weren’t. Maybe they were, maybe they weren’t, who knows? But the damage that’s being done here is that people will look at MI-5 and say: “We can’t trust them because they are, on the one hand, trying to recruit these people, and, on the other hand, they are being condemned because they didn’t identify the threat sooner.” Robles: How else would they get information in your opinion? Smith: There are lots of ways of getting information. Now what I think is important about what happened last week is that, obviously there is a lot of sympathy in the general public for the guy, Lee Rigby, the soldier who died because it is quite tragic for somebody to be hacked to death in the street. That sort of thing doesn’t happen in the UK very often. So, this has caused enormous uproar amongst people who are obviously turning against any Muslim elements in their society. They are thinking: “Well can we trust these people we live alongside.” Now the Muslim Council of Britain has said that this murder was: “A truly barbaric act and that it has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly.” So, Muslim organizations are coming out also against these terrorist elements, these radicals. And on the other hand you’ve got the right wing, the fascist elements in the UK like the English Defense League, are also jumping on the bandwagon, they are using this murder to call for attacks on mosques, Muslim property and this has fueled a lot of right-wing backlash, which has frightened a lot of very moderate Muslims into feeling they can’t go out on the street. Robles: This is already… more than a decade of Western demonization of Muslims, the war on terror, which is really, I would quite frankly call it “a war on Islam” or to put it milder “a war on radical Islamists”. Do, you think the government of the UK, the US, the special services, the proponents of this campaign, don’t you think they’re responsible in a way? Smith: Unfortunately, I think this incident, terrible as it is, is a wakeup call for people to think; “What is going on in our society?” Because this one death it’s just one soldier and we know the war on terror involves tens of thousands of innocent civilians. One of the reasons behind this radicalization of young Muslims in the UK is not just for what’s going on in the UK, it is the way they perceive Muslims in other countries, in Arab countries, in Afghanistan, Iraq, suffering at the hands of the UK and USA forces. This is where the bigger story comes I think because if anybody has got blood on their hands, it should be Tony Blair. You were listening to an interview with Michael John Smith. You can find part 2 on our website at English.ruvr.ru.
26 May, 05:08 1 The Mohawk: Keepers of the Eastern Door of Great Turtle Island - interview
Photo: AFP Many of the indigenous peoples of North America called the continent “Great Turtle Island.” A part of their advanced philosophy and culture included a complex and extremely developed constitution called the Great Path. The Mohawk were responsible for maintaining the peace and were the guardians of the Great Law which was supposed to bring peace not only to North America but to the entire world. Kahentinetha Horn spoke to John Robles about the history of the Mohawk, American Indian culture and beliefs and current issues of important to the indigenous people of “Great Turtle Island.” Please visit our website in the near future for a continuation of this very revealing interview. This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Kahentinetha Horn she is Mohawk Indian Elder and a member of the Bear Clan. She is also the owner and publisher of the Mohawk News web-resource. (Kahentinetha Horn, Bear Clan, Mohawk Nation, Kahnawake community on Great Turtle Island.)
Robles: Hello Kahentinetha! How are you this evening? Kahentinetha: (Speaks Mohawk: "it is nice to speak with you. we have much to tell you about what we are doing on great turtle island. our great law of peace is the path to peace based on our understanding of the great natural power kasatstensera kowa sa oiera) Robles: Can you translate that now for us? Kahentinetha: Those are my greetings in Mohawk. And I introduced which is the Great Turtle Island, which is what we call North America; we never call it that, we call it “Great Turtle Island.” People who live on Great Turtle Island are the (Speaks Mohawk) which means “the True Natural People of Great Turtle Island.” And we follow: we have a developed constitution called <Speaks Mohawk> which means the “Great Path”. And the Great Path is the great path to peace. Our philosophy is based on our understanding and our awareness of the natural world. That’s a little bit about us. Robles: Okay. As all North American Indians, the basis of beliefs are: respect for nature and the Great Spirit. Can you tell us a little bit in particular about the Mohawk Nation and what you are doing to promote the issues that are important to the indigenous peoples? Kahentinetha: The Mohawk, also known as (Kanien'gehaga), are the “Keepers of the Eastern Door of Great Turtle Island.” So, we are in the east and we were placed there by our (Speaks Mohawk) that’s the Great Natural Power. That’s where we were placed. And we were to watch for people who would be coming from the east. And so, that’s why we are called the Keepers of the Eastern Door. We traversed throughout the eastern part of Great Turtle Island right from the north all the way down to the south. We traveled and we met all the other indigenous peoples, and we got to know each other. And we formed friendships and alliances that last to this day. There were hundreds and hundreds of indigenous nations. The Mohawk had the responsibility to maintain the peace. We always feel that we have to do that because the Great Law which is our philosophy (Speaks Mohawk) we were the first ones to take it, to accept it. And because we were the first ones to do that, we have always been responsible for maintaining it and to maintain the peace which is what the Great Law is all about. The Great Law of Peace is to bring peace not just to the Great Turtle Island but throughout the world. That’s why that law was given to our people. The Mohawk have this very… you know. We feel it! Right inside ourselves. We are the eagle that sits on top of the Tree of Peace and we look out to see any danger that is coming towards us. And we give a warning, a loud scream to the people. That’s how the Mohawk Nation News came into existence. I was raised as … I only spoke Mohawk until I was about 10 years old. Robles: Wonderful! Kahentinetha: Then, I had to learn to speak English. So, then, in 1990 we were defending the land. The women are what we call the “Title Holders of the Land” because we are tired to the land and we are the creators, and we hold the land for the future generations that are not here yet. The women are the ones that have the children, that bear the children and the men have the duty of protecting the women and the children along with all their other duties. They imitate the responsibilities of the Sun; to provide heat, provide warmth, provide protection, help provide food and to teach the children, all these things to be our diplomats, our teachers, to travel and meet other native people. The women: our responsibilities come from whatever the Earth does, which is to create the children, to help create the food, to feed the children, to raise them, to help them to become advocates of the Great Law of Peace. There is a male and female balance, not male or patriarchal or matriarchal, there is a balance between the male and the female. Robles: In most tribes the women chose the leaders because they knew the character of the children. Is that also true with the Mohawks? Kahentinetha: Yes. Well the people because each one of us has a “Fire,” we have the individual fire of ourselves which is what inside of us; it is our intuition, our minds, our energy, that’s called the “Fire of Life.” And we have the “Fire of the Family” which is people close to us, then the extended family and then the community, then the clan and then that extends into the nation, and that extends to the confederacy that we formed. So, all these relationships are connected, all circular and in the very center is myself, for example. I’m in the center, all of these other circles around me, these are all my connections. So, my responsibility is immediately to my own children. When a clan selects somebody to become a leader, or to represent us or to be a spokesman…we don’t have leaders, there is no such thing as a leader because we are equal, we are all equal and we all have a voice. So, what happens is that both the men and the women “the People” have a Fire, the women’s Fire and the men’s Fire, and the men and the women have a combined Fire, we come together and we will make a selection of somebody to speak for us, we don’t call them leaders, we call them spokespeople. And so the spokesperson represents us for the day only, just for that day. And the women will tell the chiefs and they will say: “This is the person we’ve selected and that is the person that will speak for us for the day.” So, that’s very different from the kind of situation that you people have, you now. (laughs) Robles: Sure! As I understand Western democracies were based on Indian law and Indian relationships between nations and tribes, and clans. In Europe they had monarchies, there was no such concept as democracy. Kahentinetha: No, they didn’t. And they still don’t understand true democracy. You were listening to an interview with Kahentinetha Horn – she is a member of the Mohawk Nation, the Bear Clan, and the owner and publisher of mohawknationnews.com. You can find part 2 of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru World, US, US indians, John Robles, Society · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · If you have never heard the Mohawk language take a listen... IMO absolutely beautiful))) 24 May, 20:29 Obama blaming Congress on Guantanamo is ridiculous – Medea Benjamin
Medea Benjamin Photo: AFP After interrupting U.S. President Barack Obama’s recent speech on Guantanamo in which Obama expressed a desire to close the Guantanamo prison and allow for the transfer of prisoners to Yemen the co-founder of CodePink spoke to us on the event and on whether she thinks Obama is sincere in a desire to close Guantanamo. She said it is ridiculous that Obama is attempting to blame the U.S. Congress when he can close Guantanamo himself if he really desires to do so. Hello! This is John Robles, I'm speaking with Medea Benjamin the co-founder and manager of CODEPINK. Robles: Hello Medea! How are you? Benjamin: Good, thank you. Robles: We just got the news about this speech by Obama and he actually commented on your comments to him. What’s your opinion, will he actually change policy and what happened there? Benjamin: Well, I think he is being forced by the protests that are happening around the world to start shifting policy, but it is not nearly enough. And many of us thought that there would be a lot more specifics to his announcements today. We thought he was going to say that he was going to take the drones away from the CIA and have it only be in the hands of the military, that he was going to stop the authorization for signature strikes where people are killed just on the basis of suspicious activities. We thought he was going to say he would use his power as Commander-in-Chief to release the 86 innocent prisoners in Guantanamo who have been there for 11 years and are desperate. Yet, what he said was really more of a justification for US policy, than major changes. Robles: I see. We have reports that he said that he was is going to allow for prisoner transfers to Yemen, we just talked about it the other day, and possibly transferring some of the inmates to American high security prisons. Were those sincere claims? Is that something real? Benjamin: Yes, I think those are the positive things that he’ll lifted the ban on prisoners going to Yemen. But let’s see how long it takes for those 57 Yemenis who have been cleared to actually leave. It could take months, it could take years. He has been very hesitant to use his power to say: “I’m calling for them to be released immediately or within the next month.” I think he is going to release them slowly, one at a time. And I think it is going to be a torturous process for the people who are on hunger strike waiting to be reunited with their families. Robles: Obama said… You interrupted his speech three times, Is that correct? Benjamin: Yes. Robles: And he said he was willing to cut you some slack because it was worth being passionate about. Was he being serious or was he sincere with that? Or do you think he was just poking fun? Benjamin: I think he was being serious, the fact that I wasn’t arrested attests to that and I’m very grateful for that. Robles: That was my next question. Were you escorted out or anything? I mean did they allow you to continue? Benjamin: I was taken for questioning by the FBI and by the Secret Service and asked about my motivations. And I think they understood who I am and why I was doing this and then lets me go. Robles: They didn’t do anything terrible to you or anything? Benjamin: No. Robles: You have no complaints? Benjamin: I have complaints about the policies and all the innocent people being killed. And I have complaints about people being held indefinitely. But not complaints about today, no. Robles: Okay. I’m just wondering if you were abused or anything happened to you. Benjamin: No, not at all and I’m very thankful for that. Robles: What about the hunger strikes? Did he mention anything about the hunger strikes and are they going to do anything? Are they going to stop force-feeding people? Benjamin: No, he didn’t mention whether he is going to stop force-feeding people. Robles: What about the other topics to the speech, droning and everything else? Benjamin: Well, there have already been changes in the sense that they have stopped using as many drone strikes, and that’s a positive thing. That means less people are getting killed. But he did not say that he is going to reign in the drones, that he is going to make sure that we uphold international law. It is really still in his purview as the executive branch. He didn’t say; “I’m going to make these policies open to the American public.” So, I think for us, for public, it is still a very secret policy. And I think that, unfortunately, too many innocent people are still going to be killed. Robles: Shouldn’t American taxpayers be allowed to vote on this stuff, I mean it’s their millions of dollars of tax money that’s being spent on all this stuff? Benjamin: Yes, they should be able to have a say in this and so far they haven’t. Robles: He called on Congress not to block efforts to shut down the prison, but he can close it himself. So, what was that about? Benjamin: Right! I think it is ridiculous that he keeps blaming Congress when he is the Commander-in-Chief. He has the power to wage war and he certainly has the power to close a prison. Robles: Do you have any plans coming up in the near future? Anything else, any concrete plans what are you going to continue doing to fight for justice at Guantanamo? Benjamin: We are going to continue the hunger strikes that people have been engaged in. We are going to take a group to the Cuban side of Guantanamo. We are going to take a group to Yemen to meet with the families there. And we will continue to pressure the President in every way we can. Robles: Okay, I see. Medea, thank you very much. Benjamin: Thanks so much for having me on! This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Medea Benjamin – the co-founder and manager of the peace group CODEPINK.
24 May, 06:50 For Obama Guantanamo is all about politics – Medea Benjamin
Medea Benjamin Photo: EPA Pressure on U.S. President Barack Obama, both from within the U.S. and internationally is mounting to close the extra-judicial prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba as over 100 prisoners are currently engaged in a massive hunger strike. Medea Benjamin spoke to the Voice of Russia and gave her opinions and views on this issue and more in an exclusive interview. Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Medea Benjamin – the co-founder and manager of CODEPINK. This is an interview in progress. Benjamin: There is mounting pressure on the President, and that includes pressure coming from overseas. So, we have to see if that pressure will be enough for him to feel that it is worth his political capital to do the right thing by these prisoners in Guantanamo. Robles: But just doing the right thing, he is not interested in that, it’s all politics? Benjamin: This is all politics, unfortunately. There have been reports saying that President Obama quote “feels badly”. And he felt badly when he heard reports that the real reason that the hunger strike began in February was not so much because of the ways that the prison guards were treating the Koran and other changes that had taken place, that were making life tougher for the prisoners; it was that the prisoners perceived that President Obama had abandoned them, that he had talked about closing Guantanamo but never did it, that he hadn’t talked about Guantanamo in a State of the Union speech since 2009 and they really felt abandoned. And so, some reporters have said that this made President Obama feel badly and this is why he wants to reopen the issue of Guantanamo. But I don’t know if I would put a lot of weight on the President feeling guilty about men who have been imprisoned unjustly for the last 11 years. He could have done something when he came into power immediately five years ago. Robles: I am sorry but that sounds ridiculous to me, I mean these guys have been in there for 10 or 12 years. I think he is pretty egotistical thinking that the hunger strike just started because they thought Obama abandoned them.... It doesn’t matter they were there for 12 years without trial locked up like animals. Benjamin: Of course, and there have been periodic hunger strikes before. But this one is involving a majority of the prisoners and it is going on for a long time. So, this one is different. And I think this one is just forcing change on a President who has indeed abandoned these people since he campaigned on the platform of closing Guantanamo and then never did anything when he had the entire congressional being controlled by the Democrats and could have easily done something when he first came in. Robles: His peace prize, his droning, I don’t think there is too much I can say very good about him but… What do you think? He is going to make this speech, he is going to unveil his new Guantanamo, drone policies, anti-terrorism policies. Do you think there will be any changes? Benjamin: I think that he will just try to justify a policy that has been killing a lot of innocent people and has been creating havoc internationally. And he will try to say that this is indeed a legal policy, and explain his reasons why he thinks this is not only legal but in the national interests of the United States. And I think there will be a lot of rhetoric to justify a program that contravenes international law, and I would even say the U.S. constitution. And as far as Guantanamo, I don’t know if he will announce anything new. He might announce that he is appointing somebody in the White House to be in charge of trying to transfer the cleared detainees. And that would be a positive move. That would be at least something because there had been that position that has been abandoned as of January of this year. So, filling that position would at least mark some kind of movement forward, probably not nearly enough to stop the hunger strike but better than nothing. Well, it is kind of window dressing I think at this point. How many people do think it will take to actually die, if it is possible to die there they are being force-fed, but I mean these men, they don’t want to live anymore. How many would have to die before Obama actually did something? Benjamin: I think one because I think if and when one prisoner dies, because the attention of the world’s on this issue, even more so outside of the United States than inside of the United States, this will spark a terrible reaction within the Muslim community and it will be politically unsustainable for the U.S. and Obama will have to do something. But I hope it doesn’t come down to that and he feels the pressure and does something or announces something on Thursday. Robles: I don’t think it’s just the Muslim world because Muslims for most Americans: if you are a Muslim, you don’t deserve to live anyway. They do not really care what’s happening to them down there. Benjamin: But it’s been the Muslim community and other countries, Muslim countries where people have protested in large numbers at the US embassies and this would certainly happen again if one of the prisoners were to die. Robles: So, you think mass civil unrest and mass damage, that’s the only thing that would move Obama? Benjamin: No, I think that perhaps what is already happening is going to move Obama. I think that there might be just enough pressure being put on him from the grassroots and from allied countries, like the UK, like Saudi Arabia, like Jordan, Yemen that will force some kind of change. So, I’m anticipating something being announced on Thursday that might lead us to some of the prisoners starting to be released. There have been no prisoners released in the last two years. So, anything that would start moving some of them out of there would be a tremendous sign of a change in policy. Robles: I see. Most of the world doesn’t really believe in Obama any more, I mean all we see, and most of the world sees, is just a horrible act after a horrible act from the droning, from Guantanamo, from the invasions. Most of the world sees bloodshed and destruction. So, I don’t think there are very many people in the world who are very optimistic he will do something but if you think that there might be a positive change, I hope so. Benjamin: You know, I think leaders of countries are forced to change when the risk of continuing the policy is greater than the risk of changing the policy. And I think that’s the point where we are now, certainly in terms of Guantanamo. And in terms of the drones, there’s been tremendous pressure on that front as well. The Obama Administration got away for four years with killing people in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and certainly in Afghanistan without much of a response. And now that has changed. And so, I think we’ve seen less drone strikes in Pakistan, for example, once the focus of attention and the media woke up and started talking about it. And so, I think that the policy is beginning to change. The President is talking about taking drones out of the hands of the CIA, which is a positive step, but it is not enough. So, I think we might hear some announcements of policy changes like that. Robles: That would be good if it actually changes anything, I mean you can pass them from the CIA, to the NSA, or to the military intelligence, but it is still just a cold-blooded killing tool. But the number of drone strikes and the number of massive, as they say, collateral casualties, has dropped in the last couple of years. So, maybe that’s something positive. Benjamin: Yes. On the other hand, there was another drone strike on Saturday in Yemen. And the drone strikes in Yemen are antagonizing the population, turning them against the United States becoming a recruitment tool, and they have been a recruitment tool for extremists. So, the policy, while it has lowered the number of drone strikes in Pakistan, it has been increasing them in Yemen. Robles: It was kind of funny for me that in the US media all of a sudden there is this AP scandal and this Tea Party scandal, and everything else right when this Guantanamo stuff was starting to come out in the media again, and then this was just kind of brushed it aside. Do you think it was timed in any way? Benjamin: No, I think it’s just the way things happen and I don’t think there was any scheme in terms of timing. Robles: Okay. Recently Islamists were calling for Muslims the world over to come up with the drone countermeasures and technology to fight drones. Can you comment on that or have you heard anything about that? Benjamin: There are drones that are in the hands of not only Muslim countries but are also in the hands of non-state entities. Iran has furnished Hezbollah with drones. That have actually been shot down over Israel. These are not weaponized drones, these are surveillence drones at this point. But there are many countries and non-state actors that are in the process of trying to acquire the same types of technology that the U.S. has. So, certainly there is a proliferation and an arms race in the drones right now and the U.S. is now coming out with ways to bring down other drones with lasers, as well as shooting them down. And so, there is a full-fledged race to not only try to get up to the U.S. level of technology with these drones but the U.S. is constantly trying to come out with new versions of the drones that would be harder to shoot down. Robles: Medea, anything you want to finish up with? I know I’ve taken up a lot of your time. Benjamin: No, I think we’ve covered it pretty well and thank you so much for having me on. Robles: Okay, I really appreciate it. Where are you headed? Benjamin: Going back home but we will have to get ready and mobilize for Obama’s talk on Thursday. Robles: Are you guys planning anything big or what? Benjamin: Sure, I mean I wouldn’t call it big because we just found out about it today and we don’t have much time to mobilize, and it is a weekday. But we will certainly mobilize whoever we can and bring our model drone out there and try to make sure that there is a voice of opposition there. Robles: Well, let’s try to make it big. Benjamin: Thanks, we will. That was the end of an interview with Medea Benjamin – the co-founder and manager of CODEPINK. You can find part one of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru
23 May, 21:46 2 Was Todashev extrajudicially executed by the FBI?
FBI personnel walk through the complex surrounding the apartment, where Ibragim Todashev, 27, was shot and killed by FBI Photo: Reuters There are questions being raised worldwide over the shooting death of an alleged acquaintance of Tamerlan Tsarnaev by an FBI agent in Orlando, Florida in the early hours of Wednesday morning shortly after midnight. Ibragim Todashev, a Chechen-born Muslim who reportedly was an acquaintance of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was killed after being interrogated by a lone U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent accompanied by two Massachusetts State Police officers and an unspecified number of other law enforcement officials. The FBI has released a terse statement but the details surrounding the late night interrogation are sketchy, leading to widespread speculation as to the legality of the killing, with some going so far as to say he was extrajudicially executed. According to Boston FBI Special Agent Greg Comcowich, in a posting on the FBI website: “The FBI is currently reviewing a shooting incident involving an FBI Special Agent. Based on preliminary information, the incident occurred in Orlando, Florida during the early morning hours of 5/22/2013. The agent along with two Massachusetts State Police troopers and other law enforcement personnel were interviewing an individual in connection with the Boston Marathon bombing investigation when a violent confrontation was initiated by the individual. During the confrontation, the individual was killed and the agent sustained non-life threatening injuries. As this incident is under review, we have no further details at this time." The FBI will no doubt issue more information after it concludes its own investigation but it would be in the best interests of the public and of the FBI itself to release all information relating to the shooting as quickly as possible. What we do know from media reports about the shooting and about the FBI’s involvement with Todashev is as follows: Todashev and another friend were questioned right after Tsarnaev was determined to be the perpetrator behind the Boston Marathon attack. They were under surveillance and there are multiple reports they were being followed. Todashev was cooperative with the FBI during the course of their investigation and it appears he had multiple and regular contacts with agents both over the phone and in person. Reports say that he was suspected of involvement in the triple murder of individuals who may have been drug dealers in Waltham, Massachusetts and that he was cooperative during questioning involving that event. Reports say he was shot just as he was about to sign a confession to being involved in that triple murder. That is what we know. What we do not know, and what should be explained as soon as possible, so that there can be no questions arising pointing to the fact that Todashev may have been the victim of an extra-judicial execution are many and extremely serious in nature. The first questions and most obvious ones are all involving the circumstances surrounding the interrogation, or questioning, if you will. Why was Todashev being questioned late at night? This is troubling because we know Todashev was cooperative and he was under surveillance and already had regular contact with the FBI. If the suspicions that he was involved in a triple murder came to light during the course of the FBI’s Boston Marathon investigation, the normal and prudent thing to have done was to call him into the FBI office and arrest him on the spot. Or they could have arrested him anytime during the questioning in his flat. Another question might be since when do FBI and state police interrogate and obtain confessions from triple murder suspects or terrorists in the comfort of the suspect’s home? Moreover if he was in fact such a dangerous individual why wasn’t he handcuffed, searched and secured before he was questioned? American law enforcement normally have no qualms about handcuffing people on the slightest of grounds. More questions arise as more details come out. Why was the FBI agent alone? Normally FBI agents do not operate without back up or partners and how was it that a knife suddenly appeared out of nowhere in the hands of Todashev warranting his being shot and killed? There are questions regarding the supposed confession as well. Why was the supposed confession never signed and again why was it obtained in the field and not in an interrogation room being filmed and recorded? Normally interrogations and questionings are filmed and recorded. Where is the film of Todashev’s interrogation? Does one exist? If one does why doesn’t the FBI release it? If it was filmed and the events did in fact take place as they claim, a film would exonerate the FBI and dispel all doubts instantly and once and for all. Reports point to at least six law enforcement officers in the room at the time. The obvious question then arises why were they not able to simply subdue Todashev or taser him but instead used deadly force? Witness reports say multiple shots were heard from the location, why was he shot multiple times? They say dead men can’t talk and Todashev was adamant that the Tsaranev brothers were set up. Why was Tamerlan Tsarnaev killed and why was his brother rendered mute during his arrest? Were they all eliminated because they were working for the CIA, or at least Tamerlan Tsarnaev was as had been reported by several media outlets. Was Todashev a loose end and that had to be shut up once and for all? Or under the new extra-judicial execution policies of the U.S. government with regards to enemies of the state, has this police now been broadened to not only include drone strikes but also bullets to the head on American soil? Khusen Taramov who was a friend of Todashev and was questioned on the same night gave his account of theevents to the press and even more questioned are raised: “One day they started questioning us, next day after the bombing, not the bombing, after they found out the bombers were Chechens, and they started following us, watching us. They pretty much told the guy from his apartment and they start following us, watching us like every day.” Khusen Taramov also said “The FBI took me and my friend, Ibragim Todashev. They were talking to us, both of us, right? And they said they need him for a little more, for a couple more hours, and I left, and they told me they’re going to bring him back. They never brought him back.” Why did the FBI insist on being alone with Todashev? As I said above; “they say dead men don’t speak” but in this case, through his friend Taramov, Ibragim Todashev has some last chilling words from the grave, he apparently knew that he would be shot by the FBI. Taramov spoke about Todashev in an interview and said:“He said he felt inside he was going to get shot.” Todashev: “I have a really bad feeling.” investigation, terrorism, Boston explosions, Tsarnayev brothers, World · Share: · · · · · Сomments 2 · Well with the atmosphere today it is possible. · It's said that sometimes "a cigar is just a cigar", but this cigar is flesh coloured.
23 May, 05:01 'The West is convinced that Serbians are always wrong' - Slobodan Eric Slobodan Eric © Photo: «Voice of Russia»
23 May, 01:24 NATO has never offered to cooperate with Russia - Rozoff
Western support for KLA terrorists and support for the self-declared independence of Kosovo are part of a pan-Albanian plan for the region, NATO is reaching its tentacles into space and there has never been any real offer of cooperation by NATO to Russia, all of these issues were recently discussed with regular Voice of Russia contributor Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and mailing list.
You're listening to an interview in progress with Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and mailing list. You can find part 1 of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru. Robles: So they needed a base somewhere in that area, geographically, and Kosovo fit the bill, right? Rozoff: Fairly much that. Again, I think we have to understand that there's no supervision. There's no oversight in terms of what's going on in Kosovo. Certainly there's no real government in Pristina. I mean the Thaçis and Haradinajs, and these other terrorist cutthroats from the former Kosovo Liberation Army are neither able to question the US, nor would they have any desire to, I mean they are simply puppets. Robles: Right! That was a terrorist organization and it always was. It never was anything else. Rozoff: An American official in 1998 Robert Gelbard actually at the time, and he reversed himself subsequently, but at the time stated that the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army was a terrorist organization in his estimate. In fact, it was and is. I mean it's formally disbanded, but in effect, I'm sure there are late-night-meetings where they get together and reminiscence over dragging people on barbed wire and murdering them to harvest their organs, and dealing in narcotics and women and weapons, and body parts, and so forth. This is the nature of the monsters that the U.S. and its NATO allies have waged war on behalf of. Robles: That would explain, I think, to a lot of people who might not understand why the U.S. would have supported, what I could describe as Muslim terrorists, against Christian victims. Rozoff: I would de-emphasize the religious aspect, I truly would, in the sense that: Kosovo was an amazingly rich and diverse mosaic of ethnic and religious cultures prior to the U.S. and NATO intervening. That is in addition to ethnic Albanians who comprise the majority and ethnic Serbs… Robles: I just mentioned that because even at the time a lot of Americans themselves couldn't understand why the US was supporting Muslims against Christians. Rozoff: We have to recall that other ethnic minorities: Roma (so called Gypsies), Egyptians, Ashkalies, Bosnians, Gorans, Turks and others who are predominantly Muslim have also been harassed and killed and driven out of the province by Thaçi and his former KLA officials. So, it seems to be more racial. In terms of pan-Albanian than it is religious. Robles: Do you really think there's that angle there? Or is it just whoever cut a better deal with the United States? Rozoff: There's Albanian-American Civic League, former U.S. Congressman Joseph DioGuardi is the godfather of that. And he's been amazingly successful at lobbying, and I use that term loosely and perhaps charitably, but influencing American politicians: everyone from Robert Dole to the current Vice President Joseph Biden who is someone who has appeared at the Albanian-American Civic League functions and fundraisers, with hefty honoraria I am sure. And I'm sure Mr. Biden walked away with a lot of money. I've heard them and I’ve seen the videos on YouTube and some amazingly provocative statements, openly calling for the use of military force against the government of Yugoslavia and Serbia at that time but clearly on behalf of a pan-Albanian agenda. And I think that’s very important to realize, that the five stars on the Kosovo flag supposedly represent five different ethnic groups within the province. But I think the more seasoned observer realizes that that means five different nations in which ethnic Albanians reside and which are envisioned by the likes of Hashim Thaçi to be united in one greater Albania. Those would of course be not only Kosovo and Albania itself, but parts of Monte-Negro, other parts of Serbia and Macedonia and Greece. So, you have an irredentist expansionist mindset there and you have NATO go to war for 78 days on behalf of that project. Robles: I see, Rick, we have to move on because I want to ask you a little bit about the US Strategic Command. Now it appears that NATO and the US are planning to not only take over the world, but take over the universe. Rozoff: Very good! That's it. Do you want me to comment on that? Robles: Sure, can you give our listeners some details about what is going on with NATO and space, if you would? Rozoff: That's true, I mean not content with expanding its tentacles around the Earth, now the heavens are going to be an area for NATO expansion. And I'm thinking particularly about a story that came out yesterday, it was issued by the press wire service of the U.S. Armed Forces, what’s called American Forces Press Service from the Pentagon. And a Deputy Commander of the US Strategic Command, and it is one of nine unified combatant commands the Pentagon has, and most of them tend to be regional in nature: Northern Command, Southern Command, Africa Command and so forth. But this one is strategic and as you are indicating covers not only the entire world, but reaches into space. Strategic Command was actually… replaced the former Strategic Air Command during the Cold War period. In 1992 it was renamed Strategic Command and then in 2002 it merged with the US Space Command. So, it is a command that takes in all nuclear weapons, you know, strategic forces, the so-called missile defense, which we’ve talked about many times before, that is encircling the planet with interceptor missile systems. But also it takes in the heavens, takes in space. And the statement was made by the Deputy Commander of the Strategic Command or the report on it was a couple days ago, he is actually the Deputy Director of Global Operation, and he talked about building an alliance in space, partnerships in space comparable to what the U.S. has on earth. So, I think we’d be safe in understanding that being some approximation of a parallel to: the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and other military alliances the US has. And again, when you read the Pentagon’s own accounts of these things, often times the statements are amazingly candid, I mean they would be cleaned up appreciably by the time they got to the mainstream media. But this fellow in question, the Deputy Commander of Global Operations, actually this is a paraphrase, but he said that space is vital to military operations providing an array of capabilities that give space-faring nations’ forces’ a military advantage. In other words, if you control space you could win a war on earth. I think it is essentially what he was saying. And you know, he again drew the parallel that just as on, paraphrasing again on this of the same account, he said: recognizing the value of multinational coalitions for operations in the land, maritime and air domains, the officials of U.S. Strategic Command here, hope to forge a coalition that shares assets and capabilities in space. That’s the opening sentence of the article. Robles: Listen, one more question, I just recalled this, now, the U.S. made a statement a couple of weeks ago, I don’t know if you recall this, that they were thinking of declassifying some missile parameters to assuage Russia's concerns regarding the ABM shield. Have you heard anything about that? Can you comment on that? Do you think that’s sincere and… any ideas? Rozoff: I’m vaguely familiar with that. Is it sincere? No it is not. I mean they’ll try to assuage Russian concerns by giving them a sense a false confidence, perhaps. There is no indication that the United States intends to fully incorporate Russia as a partner, even in regional missile defense systems, such as that in Europe, much less into a global missile system, which Russia would be kept quite clearly outside of. So, assuaging Russian concerns: that sounds like more talk, to me, and we’ve had several years of that talk without any results. Robles: I see. This was after the recent Russia-NATO Council meeting. And that was supposed to be one of the results from it, but you think that’s just hot air, right? Rozoff: It is. It is window dressing, it’s cosmetic and it is meant to make the U.S. and NATO look like they are trying to reach some understanding with the “paranoid recalcitrant” Russia that “refuses to work with them”. We know how these propaganda tricks work and this is simply another indication of it. So that U.S. and NATO officials can go back and say: “We’ve made repeated offers to our Russian partner which, unfortunately, misinterprets what the intent of the global interceptor missile system is.” Even though, every now and again Ronald Reagan is invoked or evoked as the inspiration for this program, which means “Strategic Defense Initiative”, which means “Star Wars”. Robles: I’ve read a news item last week titled something like: “Russia refuses NATO offer of cooperation.” Do you know of any NATO offers of cooperation that Russia has refused? Rozoff: None whatsoever. There are no such offers. Again, when Russia has asked to, if you will, compartmentalize the missile defense of Europe, to engage into what is called sectoral or regional components where Russia takes responsibility for a certain area, what we hear time and again is: “NATO will not outsource its security to a non-NATO member”, meaning Russia. So, that Russia will have no role whatsoever in any joint or collaborative efforts to create a genuine missile shield, but instead it will be consulted, as you were alluding to at the beginning of the discussion on this subject. Russia will be consulted or, in other words, the U.S. and NATO will tell Russia damn well what they want to tell them and nothing else. Robles: What exactly would you say to someone who says: “NATO has offered to cooperate with Russia?” Rozoff: John, we are next-door neighbors and I’m building a shield over my house as I’m arming myself to the teeth. And I’m telling you: “Don’t worry about it because I’m not your enemy”. And your weapons very shortly will not be able to retaliate against me if I should open fire on you first, but… “Don’t worry about it because we are friends and partners”, I mean nobody falls for something like that. Robles: Okay… Rozoff: I mean, if you make yourself impregnable, if you make yourself invulnerable as you are moving… Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov again, just three or four days ago, said: “NATO military hardware is moving up to the Russian border”, as indeed it is. And this includes the fact that just a couple of days ago the U.S. moved the first squadron of F-16 strategic fighter jets into Poland for permanent deployment, in a country that borders Russian territory, the Kaliningrad District. And already, as of three years ago, the U.S. moved interceptor missiles into Poland, maybe 35-40 miles from the Russian border. Robles: I wanted to underline that fact for some people who may not really follow NATO and maybe don’t really know what they are really doing. And people might actually believe that for some reason Russia refused to cooperate. That’s why I just wanted to get that point very well across. Rozoff: Russia has been begging for genuine cooperation and has been rebuffed at every turn, as again, the U.S. and NATO are saying: “This is our operation and we’ll tell you what we want to about it, but you are not going to influence it in any way or form.” Robles: Okay. I know that. You know that. I just want to make sure our listeners know that as well. Rozoff: Good. Robles: Rick, thank you very much. Unfortunately, we are out of time. Rozoff: I understand. But thanks again John, I appreciate it. You were listening to an interview with You're listening to an interview in progress with Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. You can find the part 1 of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru.
22 May, 21:05 Stifling dissent, muzzling the press: WikiLeaks was just the beginning
© Flickr.com/Nils Geylen/cc-by-sa 3.0 The Freedom of the Press Foundation has published an article in which they detail how almost everything that was done to WikiLeaks is now being done to the mainstream media. This includes the recent revelations of U.S. government spying on the Associated Press, which has almost always stayed close to the official government line and even Fox News, the beloved biased propaganda tool of the far right and neo-conservatives, an outlet which has publicized calls for the assassination of Julian Assange. According to the Freedom of the Press Foundation the silence of the media when the all out attack by the U.S. government on WikiLeaks began has led to the same tactics now being used on other mainstream media outlets. For the likes of Fox News this is no doubt a shock as they no doubt believed they were invulnerable to any attempt at censorship or government intimidation, after all they goose marched lock stock and barrel alongside corporate-neo-conservative-far-right-interests that control the United States Government and America in general. It was in fact Fox News which appeared out of nowhere in 2000 to announce to the American people, before the fact, that George Bush had surprisingly won the presidency and that some claim was instrumental in allowing the neo-conservative extremist right-wing elements to take over the United States Government and throw the world into the black era in history that we are all living in today. These very media outlets have been instrumental since the very beginning in bashing and demonizing WikiLeaks, Fox News first and foremost, so it is very interesting to watch the same people they have been bashing stand up for them and their freedom of expression. I would argue that Fox News is not a media outlet and is not a member of the press, as they are in fact a mere propaganda tool for right-wing corporate interests but the Freedom of the Press Foundation is much more gracious and makes the point at the opposite end of the spectrum, that WikiLeaks is no different than the AP and Fox. In a perfect world both ends of the spectrum would have equal rights, perhaps even Fox News and their manipulative biased propaganda, and organizations like WikiLekas which fight for transparency and accountability would be the champions of all that is good and right. Unfortunately we, and in particular Americans, live in a far from perfect world and in this case America is largely responsible for making it thus. Since 2000 the world has been plunged into a paradigm that was created by the neo-conservative planners at the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and that includes the Orwellian American hyper-security state engaged in an endless world war against phantom menaces and everything under the sun. The tools that the U.S. has used are many and the targets are as widespread and diverse as their number. Targets have included everything from bloggers, social media, hackers, and everyone and anything that the U.S. deems to be a threat or an enemy. According to the Freedom of the Press Foundation the U.S. Government has now taken to using the same “tools” against mass media as they have on WikiLeaks, these include: potential conspiracy to commit espionage charges, equating journalist to spies and espionage, refusing to notify journalists that they are being watched and requesting data without a warrant. The U.S. government has even introduced legislation which would allow the U.S. to extra-judicially execute anyone anywhere in the world as long as they are deemed an enemy, and this includes journalists. This in the context of drone legislation. The victims of the out of control U.S. state, doing anything to ensure that it avoids accountability are not limited to WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. They include thousands of smaller and unheard of individuals, like myself who have been marginalized and have not had the resources that WikiLeaks has had to fight back. I myself was told to shut down my site by U.S. officials and had my passport revoked, so I can tell you firsthand they will stop at nothing to shut up anyone who is able to expose their crimes and anyone who can get at the truth. It can only be a criminal government that fears and persecutes proponents of transparency and it can only be a criminal government that attempts to silence the press while at the same time refusing to prosecute those responsible for crimes that are revealed. The criminal government in the United States has already stifled the press to the point that many Americans now seek alternative and foreign media in order to learn the truth and this has been a trend for years now and the further stifling that will occur with the latest revelations surrounding AP will only make that worse. Would I write what I have just written for an American publication? That’s a no-brainer.
22 May, 02:41 Even intelligence officers at GCQH know Assange was set up, so why is his criminal persecution continuing?
Julian Assange Photo: EPA WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange remains in Limbo in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and soon will be marking one year since he was forced to seek refuge there. Although he has never been charged with a crime the U.K. authorities have already spent almost $5 million dollars surrounding the embassy. Amidst austerity measures and economic woes being felt by citizens of the U.K. this expenditure, to persecute a whistleblower seems outrageous and even ludicrous. The U.K. has proven they will do whatever the U.S. wants, and hence Mr. Assange is in great danger indeed. Soon it will be the one year anniversary since Julian Assange entered the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the latest revelation made by Mr. Assange to a Spanish TV program called Salvados, will probably do little to end his dangerous predicament. During an interview which Mr. Assange granted to the program, he revealed that he had obtained unclassified, but damning, information related to himself and WikiLeaks contained in the internal communication of the United Kingdom’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), through a Data Protection Act request. What could well be the most damning information is a communication sent by a GCHQ officer to an unidentified colleague regarding the allegations against Mr. Assange in Sweden. On the television program Mr. Assange broke the story and read one of the items he had been able to obtain which showed that the staff of one of the U.K.’s most secretive agencies, akin to the American National Security Agency (NSA), believed that Mr. Assange was being set up. The e-mail in question, an internal unclassified communication between to members of the Signals Intelligence body from September 2012 reads as follows: "They are trying to arrest him on suspicion of XYZ … It is definitely a fit-up… Their timings are too convenient right after Cablegate." Although the conversation regarding a “fit-up,” the U.K. term for the North American “set-up,” is damning coming from members within the intelligence community, they are not something the world does not already know. What they do show is that even though members of intelligence agencies are aware that Mr. Assange is being wrongly and groundlessly persecuted, there is nothing that can be done since the decisions are made at the top. This fact screams for the very thing Mr. Assange has come to personify, namely a need for government transparency, accountability and rule of law. Unfortunately Mr. Assange has also shown the world what happens to whistleblowers, something no doubt needed not only at GCHQ but at almost every level of every western government. The statements also point to the fact that U. K. intelligence and the government are not in any way independent but follow orders from Washington. In an August 2012 e-mail another GCHQ "He reckons he will stay in the Ecuadorian embassy for six to 12 months when the charges against him will be dropped, but that is not really how it works now, is it? He's a fool... Yeah... A highly optimistic fool.” Christine Assange said it best a year ago when she stated to the AAP: "What the US wants, the US gets from its allies, regardless of if it's legal or if it's ethical or in breach of human or legal rights." We might also add regardless of the fact that the entire world knows the allegations in Sweden are trumped up and that they are just that, allegations. It is important to remember that Mr. Assange has not been charged or tried for any crime. The U.K.’s Independent reported that a GCHQ spokesman stated: "We acknowledge that some of these comments were inappropriate but emphasize that no decisions were taken by GCHQ on the basis of these comments, nor was any reliance placed on them. We have reminded staff of the importance of professional behavior at all times." Overall this is just another example of how far the U.S. and its surrogate the U.K. will go to get a whistleblower who exposed the crimes and illegality of government actions. The actions of the authorities show that the people and even the government have no rights, the only people with rights are those at the top who are controlling things and who are guilty of the highest of crimes. The length they are going to and the absolute unilateral way the authorities, against the public’s interest and trust, are conducting the persecution of Mr. Assange can only be underlined by the unbelievable amount of resources they are spending surrounding the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. To date the U.K. authorities have spent over $4.5 million of the taxpayers money to ensure that Mr. Assange does not manage to get out of the embassy and board a plane to Ecuador. It can only be a criminal state that would go to such extreme measures to attempt to go after a whistleblower. It can only be a criminal state that would not go after criminals who have been exposed by that whistleblower, and it could only be a criminal state, or in this case its surrogate, that would continue to trample on the basic human rights of an innocent man.
21 May, 12:33 ‘Majority of Americans think people in Guantanamo are worst of the worst’ – CodePink
The Guantanamo Bay Prison is a US detainment and interrogation facility located within the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Photo: EPA Medea Benjamin, the co-founder and manager of CodePink, spoke to the Voice of Russia about the ongoing hunger strike by over a hundred inmates at the extra-judicial American prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba and the reasons why indefinite detention is possible in freedom-loving America. According to Ms. Benjamin, the myth stigmatizing Guantanamo inmates in the eyes of Americans as "the worst of the worst" means further injustice for its prisoners, the majority of whom are being held without charge or trial.
Robles: The hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay, it’s over 100 days since it has taken a massive form. Do you think this will result in any change of policy by the US government? Benjamin:I think it has to result in a change of policy because it’s a real crisis that has forced President Obama to address this issue again. There are 102 men, as we have heard through the lawyers, that are on hunger strike out of 166 still in Guantanamo, thirty of them being force-fed, which just can’t continue. Somebody will die, that will be a major crisis with reactions all around the globe. So, I think this is going to force the president to do something. Robles: As far as force-feeding, they are being force-fed in such horrible conditions that I would say it amounts to torture. The tubes through the noses, they are put in some sort of special ‘dry-rooms’ so they can’t throw up. What do you think about that, about the force-feeding? Benjamin: Well, it’s not just you who says this amounts to torture. It’s the American Medical Association and all over the country there are experts who say that this is a form of torture and it’s unethical and that it should be stopped. Of course, way to stop it is to meet the demands for justice for the prisoners, and that is something that so far the Administration has been opposed to doing. But they can’t continue, with the condemnation they are receiving around the world, to strap these prisoners in chairs, to stuff tubes down their nose and their throat into their stomach, to have them like that for two hours every day. I mean, it’s just untenable. Robles: So, are Americans upset? I mean, as much as… The world’s in shock, I mean, what’s the reaction from Americans? Are these guys still the worst of the worst and evil Muslims that should die, or, I mean, what’s the view, overall? Benjamin:Unfortunately, the majority of Americans still do think that the people in Guantanamo are the worst of the worst, even though of 166, 86 of them have been cleared by the US government, meaning the government says they pose no threat and in most cases have been innocent of any crime. So, that has not been portrayed to the American people. Certainly, the tragic stories of individuals have rarely been in the US media. And so, I think it perpetuates this myth among Americans that, as Dick Cheney said in the last administration, “these are the worst of the worst”, and he said that at a time when there were 800 prisoners. Over 600 of them have been released, so they couldn’t have been the worst of the worst. But there are still, unfortunately, the 166 left, for the most part have not been charged and have not been tried and certainly have not been found guilty of any crime. Robles: So, we are talking down from 800 to about 80 who may have been guilty of something that still have not been tried and have not gone to court or been charged with anything, basically. Benjamin: Right. Only a handful of them have been charged. And we see that with the rest of them, the ones who have been cleared, there are countries that they are from that have said: “We can take them. We can handle these people, just send them back!” One of them is Shaker Aamer, a citizen of the U.K. and the U.K. is certainly capable of taking back prisoners who have been cleared for release. In fact, the U.K. has taken back many prisoners already and not had problems, but the U.S. will not release Shaker Aamer. And then there are 57 of the 86 cleared are from Yemen. Yemen is a country whose government is an ally of the United States. The Human Rights Minister of Yemen has been to the United States and said, "We want these people back. We can handle them," and has not gotten a response from U.S. government. Robles: So they've said they will take them back, they want them back and the U.S. still will not release them? Benjamin: There is pretty much unanimous opinion inside Yemen that they want these prisoners to come back and they have been writing memorandum of understanding to be signed with the U.S. government to release these prisoners. The Human Rights Minister could not get a high-level meeting at the White House and after a day in the U.S. turned around and went home very upset that she had not been taken seriously. So the U.S. is upsetting a major ally, Yemen, an ally it depends on for its counterterrorism policy including the drone strikes, which the government of Yemen has approved of. So it is causing a major riff. Robles: Why do you think they will not release these people? And if you could: does this tie in to plans for a new prison facility in Guantanamo? Do you think that ties in there? Or why do you think they won't release these people? Benjamin: It seems that it's an issue of politics that the democratic administration fears that if there is one prisoner who is released who goes back into the struggle, that will be used against the entire Democratic Party to say that they are soft on defense, that they can't be trusted. This is all very fierce partisan politics right now and it has nothing to do with the human rights of the prisoners, unfortunately. Now the president says that he cannot release these prisoners because the Congress, which is dominated by Republicans, has put restrictions on him. And that is true. There are more restrictions now than there were under the Bush administration. But it doesn't mean that the president can't make change. In fact, he could release all of the cleared prisoners, he could push forward the trial for the others and he could even close Guantanamo. But he would have to extend political capital that he has not been willing to extend. Robles: Why do you think that is? I mean this is his last term, I was kind of “cautiously hoping” that maybe after he won the second term, that maybe he would actually do something then. And are those political concerns from Republicans? I mean is that worse than people who are, rightfully I think, accusing him of just being a Republican and Democratic clothing? Benjamin: Unfortunately, the president so far has not seen enough push from the human rights and the peace and other communities to make it worth his while. Now I think this is changing and we might hear something in the speech that he is scheduled to give on Thursday. Last week we handed in petitions that were signed by 300,000 U.S. citizens calling for him to provide some form of justice to the prisoners in Guantanamo. There were 13 people arrested in front of the White House. There are people in the U.S., including a co-founder of my organization Code Pink, who are on an indefinite hunger strike in solidarity with the prisoners. One of the people, Dianne Wilson, is on her nineteenth day of a hunger strike with water only. So there is mounting pressure on the president and that includes pressure coming from overseas. So we have to see if that pressure will be enough for him to feel that it is worth his political capital to do the right thing by these prisoners in Guantanamo. End of part 1
17 May, 16:33 European Guantanamo or the reason the US wants Serbia to give up Kosovo
Photo: EPA The U.S. military base in Kosovo was constructed in 1999 without consulting with the government of Serbia and the largest U.S. military base built outside of the U.S. since the Vietnam War. The site was apparently used for extraordinary renditions and has been referred to as a “little Guantanamo”. This is a very little known fact as NATO, the U.S., the European Union and the West are in the process of forcing Serbia to effectively give up Kosovo, and indicates the real motive for the West’s support of the Kosovo Liberation Army which it had deemed a terrorist organization in the past. Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of Stop NATO spoke about this and more in an interview with the Voice of Russia.
Hello! This is John Robles, I'm speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner of the stop NATO website and international mailing list. Robles: Hello Rick! How are you? Rozoff: Very good John! Thanks for having me on. Robles: It’s a pleasure to be speaking with you. How much importance would you give to the 200 US-NATO troops being stationed in Italy? And why US-NATO troops? These troops are being stationed for possible operations in Libya. How do you think that reflects on the operations to remove Muammar Gaddafi by the US? Rozoff: It’s a continuation of that policy, of course. And as it is now, you know, two years ago and two months, 26 months ago that the military campaign against Libya was launched, initially, as we have to recall, by the US Africa Command (AFRICOM) that began it for the first 19 days and then it was taken up by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for six months thereafter. And this meant to signal and meant in fact to be the first activation of AFRICOM as a war fighting force on the African continent, and also the NATO’s first open military incursion on the Africa, and certainly not the last. This was meant to be an opening salvo and not an isolated incident. What is significant about the impending deployment of what is minimally, and I think we should emphasize, 200 US Marines, and some reports estimate up to 500, these are members of what the US Marine Corps refer to as the Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force that only recently was moved into Spain, and then it is being transitioned from Spain into Italy for use in North Africa. So, I think we can see the push to the south and the east to employ State Department slogan or expression of few years ago where the US is going to deploy very shortly four guided missile cruisers to the Naval Station Rota in Spain, a Marine Expeditionary Strike Forces really of the sort we are talking about going to the Sigonella base in Sicily. This is the same base that the US has another Marine Corps detachment already deployed to. And this is actually a separate one that has already been assigned to the same naval station Sigonella. We should also recall that in the beginning of this year, in January the Governor of Sicily put a stop to plans that the US had for putting on its missile on a satellite surveillance facility in Sicily, on the island. You know, big plans are afoot and the US is going to move in something called the Mobile User Objective System, global satellite facility, to Sicily. That seems to have been stopped but the troops are coming in, with the avowed purpose John, of intervening in Libya and Benghazi or elsewhere as the U.S. sees fit. Robles: What exactly is that system that you just mentioned? Rozoff: The photographs I’ve seen of it suggest that it truly is mobile, I mean it is something comparable to some of the Patriot Advanced Capability Missile Systems that the US has put in Poland and Turkey and Israel. It is described as being a satellite communication system. I’m not sure what precisely it was meant to monitor in Sicily, but I would guess the entire Mediterranean Sea, perhaps most notably part of the eastern Mediterranean. But as to the precise range and purpose of the missile system, I’m not familiar with that. Robles: I see. So, this is some new technology? Rozoff: Yes… There are similar ones, that are called Mobile User Objective Systems deployed in Australia, as well as in the US states of Hawaii and Virginia. But I’m not sure how they are integrated with other military capabilities. Robles: What else has happened with NATO in the last month that you think our listeners should know about? Rozoff: They’ve had series of meetings of foreign ministers, of chiefs of defense staff and others in the recent months. The focus, according to NATO of course, is wrapping up the Afghan mission which I don’t think will ever be definitively finished. But the drawing down or the eventual phased withdrawal from Afghanistan, the continuation of the operation in Kosovo, the Serbian province (the province wrenched from Serbia), and the continued naval operations in the Mediterranean Sea, what is called operation Active Endeavour, and ongoing, presumably permanent, naval operations in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean, the so-called operation Ocean Shield. So, NATO is still in ways that we have discussed on many an occasion in the past continuing permanent military operations way outside the area of the North Atlantic Ocean, ultimately globally. Nothing outstanding in any particular regard but I think the continuation of these policies. Robles: How many bases was NATO going to leave in Afghanistan? And what can you tell us about Kosovo, can you give us some details on that as well? Rozoff: The statement about the US maintaining military bases in Afghanistan after the complete withdrawal of US-NATO troops, well, we can’t say complete, I mean there are estimates that as many as 14,000 US NATO troops will stay in the country; but after the bulk, at one time 152,000 US and other NATO troops in Afghanistan are withdrawn, according to President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, the US has clearly indicated to him, I think the word “demanded” would not be too strong a word, that the US or the Pentagon wants to maintain nine military bases inside the country. And they are situated in the north, south, east and west, and that is near the borders of the former Soviet Central Asian Republics, but also Iran and Pakistan, and in some cases not terribly far from the narrow strip of land that connects Afghanistan to China. And they include of course the major, you know, arguably, at any point in future, strategic air bases like Bagram and Kandahar and Shindand and elsewhere in the country. As we’ve talked about on many occasions I think any sensible person has figured out that the US and its Western allies don’t intend to vacate the southern Central Asian region in the immanent future, if at all. Robles: You just mentioned Karzai, I was just reminded about his recent revelation that he’d been receiving garbage bags full of money from the CIA for over a decade. Can you comment on that as far as NATO goes? And regarding the US-NATO troops, do you think there is any specific reason why only US-NATO troops are going to be staying in Afghanistan? Rozoff: Let me start with the second one first because I think it is the easiest. The facts are fairly incontestable, It is not going to be only US troops. The US will maintain 9 military bases evidently, that’s what it intends to do. But NATO itself is transitioning from what is currently known as the International Security Assistance Force, initially it was presented, if you can believe this, under the rubric of a peacekeeping force in the early part of this century, and it quickly devolved into a war fighting force and to a combat force. And once that mission ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) is finished, then NATO will continue in Afghanistan training the Afghan National Army and other security personnel basically to be a Western proxy army in the south Central Asian region. That’s the easy part. The question about Mr. Karzai being lavished with a good deal of American largesse, that shouldn’t surprise anybody. It is to be assumed I suppose that the US buys off foreign leaders, certainly those it’s implanted in power, like Mr. Karzai, who is not a foreigner, is not an alien to American shores. One of his brothers for example ran, for years, a restaurant pretty much in my neighborhood here in Chicago. And the family, I’m sure, already has a mansion set up in this country to flee to, when they have to, and to take as much of the CIA cash as they can with them back home, repatriate it if you will. Robles: You mentioned Kosovo a few minutes ago. You said that NATO had met regarding Kosovo and KFOR. Anything new there? Rozoff: The US and its Western allies, in the later case I’m talking about people in Brussels whether they are wearing the European Union or the NATO hat, it doesn’t seem to matter much, but I’m sure they employed all their typical subversive powers of persuasion to convince the Coalition Government in Belgrade, in Serbia to acknowledge the independence of Kosovo, not formally, practically . And NATO has pretty substantially withdrawn the amount of troops in Kosovo because they turned the province over to their proxy forces there. The former leaders of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army, whose leaders are heading up the Kosovo Security Force which is a fledging army being trained by NATO. So, once the country is turned over to surrogates, the NATO troops can clear out and go on to the next war zone which is effectively what happened since 1999. At one point, in June of 1999 there were 50,000 troops in Kosovo under NATO command or under KFOR, the Kosovo force. And that number has dwindled down to perhaps a tenth of that right now. But the US still maintains Camp Bondsteel and Camp Monteith. The first, Camp Bondsteel is repeatedly the largest overseas U.S. military base built since the war in Vietnam. And there is no indication that it intends to vacate that base. As to what it is doing with it, that’s a question worth pursuing. Robles: Where is that base? Rozoff: In Kosovo. Robles: And you say that’s the largest foreign base that the U.S. has? Rozoff: What I’ve read and given the acreage, the size of the base, it seems to be the case. It is the largest base that the U.S. has built overseas since the war in Vietnam. Since the 1960s. Robles: And that’s in Kosovo? Rozoff: That’s in Kosovo. It was constructed in 1999, I think it was with Kellog Brown and Root, that built the bases almost everywhere else. It’s in Kosovo and it is a fairly mammoth complex. Camp Monteith is a sister base considerably smaller than Bondsteel. But Bondsteel, which is by the way named after a US serviceman who was killed in Vietnam, there’s been speculation that Camp Bondsteel could have been used for extraordinary renditions during the so-called global war on terrorism. There’s also been discussion from the sources in Russia amongst other places, that should the US want to deploy strategic resources in Camp Bondsteel. And by that we mean either interceptor missiles or perhaps even nuclear weapons. Who would be the wiser and who in the inner circle, Hashim Taci and Pristina, would say “no”. Robles: When was this base built? Rozoff: In 1999 it was constructed and it’s been operating ever since. So, you are talking about 14 years now. And there is no indication, you know, unless you accept the US and NATO line, matters have been stabilized in Kosovo and they are going to step down troops, again, which I think they have, I think about 90% of the initial deployment, amount of troops rather, 15,000 troops have been withdrawn but Camp Bondsteel is still there. It is in the eastern part of Kosovo. And in addition to being a US military base it is also NATO headquarters for what’s called Multinational Brigade East. And ahem… I am looking at the exact size of the place, it is 955 acres. That’s pretty sizeable! And it was built on Serbian land without consulting with the Government of Serbia. I gues the KLA Official in Pristina rubber stamped it. By August of 1999, two months after the US and other NATO troops came into Kosovo, the construction of the base was pretty much under way. Apparently 52 helipads were constructed and shortly thereafter franchise restaurants. Robles: Right there at the beginning, was it like that it was already constructed as if it would be a permanent fixture? Rozoff: By all indications exactly that. I cannot see what the motivation would be to build something that large which is still operative to this day… Robles: You said they had “franchise restaurants” and things like that in there? Rozoff: I’m looking at it on the computer now. You know, Burger King, Taco Bell and so forth built in there. You know, gymnasiums, health clubs. It is a whole city practically. And evidently, somebody with the Council of Europe, Álvaro Gil-Robles (There’s a name for you John!) Human Rights NEvoy to the Council of Europe, referred to Camp Bondsteel in 2005, and this is a quote: as a “smaller version of Guantanamo” after visiting the facility. So, evidently the US did use it for extraordinary renditions, and so-called black operations or black renditions. Robles: So, that would give us a very-very-very clear and undisputable reason why the West is so interested in guaranteeing the independence of Kosovo. Rozoff: Right! And that was the statement made by many of us who opposed the war against Yugoslavia in 1999. When the US constructed that base, it was almost began immediately after the NATO coming into Kosovo, that it was ex post facto proof that the US had military designs in the region and that the war against Yugoslavia was simply an opportunity to expand its military into the region. Robles: I see. Rozoff: Which in fact is what has ensued! You were listening to an interview in progress with Rick Rozoff the owner and manager of the stop NATO website and mailing list. You can find part 2 on our website at english.ruvr.ru
17 May, 16:14 Obama’s Benghazi lies, Corporate Fascism and the National Security Paradigm
Barack Obama Photo: AFP U.S. president Barack Obama has all of a sudden found himself in the middle of three scandals at once. For a president who has skated along doing almost anything he wants since day one, it would seem that there is an unusual political crisis brewing in Washington. It would also appear that Tea Party Republicans are more powerful than the IRS, that finding out who leaked illegality is a reason to cancel freedom of the press, and that no matter how egregious the actions of those in power are, they must be protected at all costs. It has been said time and time again all over the world for ages and it is an understanding that applies to one of the most powerful offices on the planet, more so than anywhere else, namely the office of president of the United States.“Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”, and the absolutely all-powerful-out-of-control-imperial-executive that was handed to Obama, has been further corrupted to levels that even the previous unapologetic occupier of the White House would not have dared dream about. U.S. President Barack Obama certainly is not having a good week and to use another expression “when it rains it pours” seems to just about fit the bill for the current U.S. President. This week saw Obama finally faced with a fairly serious political crisis, well, three to be exact, where responsibility has to be taken, and he has done what he has done so well from the beginning, he has passed the buck and obfuscated and played the world’s smallest violin to the tune of “my heart bleeds for national security.” Although the three scandals currently causing more gray hairs for Obama may seem to be unrelated it appears that one, the supposed targeting of Tea Party Groups by the IRS, may have precipitated the others and I will explain why in a minute. All three scandals including the new revelations about the attack on the CIA station in Benghazi Libya and the seizing, and quite possibly, tapping of the phones of the Associated Press, all point to a corrupt government ready to do anything to protect itself from having to account for its illegitimate and illegal actions. Sure I know there are no current charges or revelations regarding wiretapping but it would be silly to assume that the all-powerful-warrantless-wiretapping-hyper-security United States Government, through the NSA or the CIA didNOT tap the phones of the Associated Press. We know that in the name of national security the U.S. and Obama, as the second imperial president of the United States after George Bush, will do anything including engage in extra-judicial executions, torture, extraordinary rendition, illegal indefinite detention, the targeting of its own nationals for assassination, massive data collection, the aforementioned warrantless wiretapping, preemptive arrests, violations of the Geneva conventions and even acts of aggressive war, which are crimes against humanity. And Obama has gotten off scot-free until now because he has not upset those who placed him in power. “Has not upset those who placed him in power.” That is a very dangerous and presumptive statement but it is one that I think the record shows is the truth. It is important to recall, and one does not have to have an overly intimate amount of knowledge of the U.S. political game to know this, that the U.S. is no longer a Democracy, if it ever was to begin with. It is a corporate controlled, hyper-security, fascist state where corporations and big money call all of the shots. Obama, who had no political support base or broad popular appeal before he was thrust into the White House was merely a tool of the corporate, right-wing neo-conservative architects of the current paradigm need to placate and silence dissent among the U.S. populace. The big money neo-conservative architects needed someone to silence the population into quiet submission and Obama was that man. His own record to date has proven that he is almost no different than his neo-conservative “Republican” predecessor, in fact he is worse because he has gotten away with more than Bush, the drawling cowboy white man from Texas (Connecticut) whose daddy was a former president and CIA director and who came from a long line figures risen to power by oil and Nazi gold money. Obama, because he was a Democrat and more importantly black, was made of Teflon. All progressives, blacks and Democrats could not say anything bad about this man, the dream of black people for centuries. Why was this important for neo-conservative, war profiteering war criminals? Because at the end of the reign of Bush, the left was a real threat to their security and they faced the possibility of having to answer for the crimes they had committed. Obama, I think it is important to note, as most American politicians do who attain powerful positions, received his billion dollars in campaign monies not from liberal or progressive voters (you don’t gather a billion dollars in campaign funds from Joe Blow Democrat) but from well-oiled political money making machines that need the imperial presidential office to continue to exist and thrive. So Obama was placed in office and from day one (from his lie to close Guantanamo to his phony Nobel Peace Prize, which he won while engaged in two wars and while continuing the war crimes of his predecessor) he has been guilty of violating the trust and the hopes and the beliefs of the world and U.S. populace but has gotten away with everything, while facing almost no turbulence until now. Why now? Obama has committed the gravest of sins in American politics, he has gone, or has been blamed for going, after the well-oiled-above-the-law-monied-special interests that power the American political machine, namely one of the last haven for right-wing tax evading political power brokers, the IRS untouchable “Tea Party” movement. This is a fact and the hypocrisy is monumental when you consider that now, only now, people like John Boehner, that champion of trust and humility, is accusing Obama of “violating the public’s trust” and possessing “remarkable arrogance”. Obama, the record will show, has been violating the people’s trust since day one, what is different now is that he went against the Republican monied interests, who are used to not being touched. Sounds grim? If you think that is bad, it gets worse. The situation with the IRS accusations is a complete abomination of how things should be and how things were. It used to be, way back when, during the last century sometime, that people were terrified of the IRS. The IRS was irreproachable and not to be questioned. The IRS used to be the taxes in “death and taxes” and no one was beyond their reach. Well things have changed, and this is another sad day for America because now it is clear the US government has been so corrupted that the president will fire the head of the IRS because the IRS went against people who have placed themselves above the law, the same architects of aggressive war, torture and some would even say the shadowy figures behind the events of 9-11, but we won’t go there, no need to right now. I think it would almost be a certainty that the other two scandals would never have come to light had the IRS mess not come about. These were things that had already been largely forgotten and Obama and his administration have already gotten away with much worse. Terror Tuesdays and the extra-judicial weekly assassination list? Guantanamo? Aggressive war anyone? So the Republicans want to blame and demonize Obama for collecting the phone records of the AP and for the talking points collaboration between all of the guilty parties in the Benghazi attack? Fine let’s grab the bait and run, but wait… Wasn’t it the Bushies who started these policies? Is it only Obama who is guilty? Not by a long shot. Let’s recall, as I am sure you all have much longer memories than US politicians are counting on you having, that Benghazi attack was principally an embarrassment for the next well-monied president Hillary Clinton and for the CIA and the State Department and it showed to the world the entire lie of the Libyan fiasco. Namely that the CIA, whose base was attacked in Benghazi (if you recall it was not an “embassy”) was in bed with Al-Qaeda and terrorist groups in Libya in order to get rid of the departed Muammar al-Gaddafi. So the fact that the CIA, the FBI, the U.S. State Department and the Obama Administration were all working together on formulating talking points in a damage control scenario is not surprising, but blaming only Obama is disingenuous. Here we see another across the board effort by the entire U.S. Government, from the top down, to keep the truth from the American people. And from bad to worse to even more egregious, now we have to watch Obama try to take the blame for the fact that in the name of security and in an another attempt to go after whistleblowers and hide criminality, the U.S. has effectively and literally killed freedom of the press. In that long ago naïve world of the last century (which I mentioned above) where the “Fourth Estate” was untouchable and the corrupt government would have tapped the phones of its own departments and conducted a campaign to go after the hero who was the source of information regarding crimes, it would have been unthinkable that the government would have gone after the press. But those days are gone and now the criminals are in complete control. So you think the U.S. hyper security state is needed to protect the world from terrorists, whom the U.S. has shown it cooperates with, creates, backs and funds? Do you think the hyper security state, indefinite detention without charge, warrantless wiretapping, extra judicial executions, the war on whistleblowers and all the rest are needed to protect the American people and the U.S. “national security”? Sorry, but just like in the Bourne films, where Jason Bourne decides to go after the people who organized illegal assassination squads and turned him into soulless killer and the criminals (CIA, NSA, etc) start running around killing everyone who knew anything while screaming “national security emergency” the entire paradigm is designed to protect the criminal thugs who usurped power and installed that good old Connecticut cowboy George Bush in power way back when. If you want to call them neo-conservatives or the Project for the New American Century do as you may it doesn’t really matter what label they wear. Think about it for a minute… If it was all about terrorism perhaps they would have listened to Russia when they were warned about Tsarnaev? Perhaps Bush would have gone after Bin Laden when he was located at Tora Bora? Perhaps a real terrorist would have been held at Guantanamo, or someone would have actually been prosecuted for 9-11? Are you seeing a pattern, are you getting an idea of the big picture? Does it make you uncomfortable? If it does you are normal because for most people imagining such evil is something the mind refuses or cannot do, for others orchestrating such evil is just all in a days work. Meanwhile Obama says he is unapologetic about going after the AP (after all it was national security), I don’t know about you but that kind of reminds me about the time Dick Cheney shot a man in the face, and the victim had to apologize to Cheney. That poor bloke was the perfect example of where the world has gone. Like Bradley Manning, the hero being prosecuted for exposing war crimes, Julian Assange fearing for his life for exposing crimes, the men at Guantanamo being held for nothing and all of the hundreds of thousands of other victims of the criminal regime in America, including yours truly, we must all be very afraid because those criminals who have stolen power, will stop at nothing to keep it. And like George Bush and his daddy’s CIA director background, those three letters keep coming up, C-I-A. In Benghazi, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, on 9-11, in Pakistan, in Venezuela, in Cuba, in Syria, at Guantanamo, in Abu Grhaib, with drones, with Osama Bin Laden, in the Middle East, the Arab Spring, in the DHS, the FBI but less and less in the press. See a pattern? It should be clear. Weird conspiracy theory? No just facts. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru. Best wishes to you, wherever you may be
15 May, 19:46 As Guantanamo prisoners continue their hunger strike, they are being sexually assaulted and tortured
Photo: EPA The situation at the illegal US terror prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba is growing more alarming by the day as a hunger strike by a majority of the inmates continues. Rather than trying to address their grievances and resolve issues surrounding the release and the fates of innocent inmates who have been held for as many as 12 years without trial or charge, the US has done what is apparently the only thing it knows how to do, use force, torture and the threat of sexual assault to make them be quiet and to prevent them from finding their own ultimate exit out of their hopeless predicament. Despite all of the efforts by the US Government to stifle the flow of information press reports are becoming more numerous and more alarming regarding the situation at the illegal war on terror prison that the United States is maintaining in Guantanamo Bay Cuba. The situation surrounding the treatment of the detainees and the ongoing hunger strike is alarmingly getting worse by the day. Reports by the lawyers and the human rights workers who are trying to assist the largely innocent group of men being held in extra-judicial limbo in Guantanamo, show that the inmates are now being threatened with, and in fact have to undergo, body cavity searches before they can meet or call their legal representatives. This is just another in a long and sordid series of human rights violations and violations of international laws and conventions that have been going on at the extra-judicial prison since the day it was opened. The violations include torture, illegal detention, mistreatment, detention without charge or trial, and now force feeding and intimidation by requiring unnecessary body cavity searches. The location of the prison was specially selected so that US law did not apply and international mechanisms are almost non-existent which may be used to bring those responsible for the crimes taking place there to be held responsible. Despite calls by the international community to close the illegal prison, the United States has been recalcitrant and continues to operate the illegal facility despite being fully aware of its egregious violations of the Geneva Conventions and international laws and conventions. The Guardian reports that recently leading human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, who founded the human rights group Reprieve, has sent letters to the Hague and to British foreign secretary William Hague detailing the egregious violations to the rights of the inmates at Guantanamo and the current situation regarding the unnecessary and forced cavity searches. The Guardian wrote: “In a letter to the Hague Smith wrote that US guards insist on a body search before any detainee can contact their lawyer, either via an in-person interview at the base or with a phone call. ‘The US military has started directly abusing prisoners who want to contact their lawyers to tell them what is happening. So anyone who wants to see a lawyer, or have a legal phone call, must have fingers put up his anus and his genitals touched.’" Reports by the Agence France-Press (AFP) news agency also back up the claims with RT reporting that the AFP: “… has independently reported that another lawyer, David Remes, had two detainees he currently represents decline calls due to the new search procedures. Under the new search policy, a detainee who leaves his camp is subject to a search including his private parts and holding his private parts, Remes said.” The Guardian quoted Smith as saying: "Any pretext given for these new rules is just that: a pretext. The prisoners do not need to be sexually assaulted in order to be taken to a telephone to talk to their lawyer." In a recent interview with the Voice of Russia Michael Ratner, the President Emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights which also represents several of the inmates at the Guantanamo detention camp stated that: Our lawyers have visited recently, we get reports from many of our lawyers. There are 166 people at Guantanamo. We think there are well over a hundred on a hunger strike, perhaps, 120. At least 20 of them are being force fed and the US, of course, tries to minimize the number and tries to diminish the reasons for it, but it’s pretty clear to us. We are now in the 12th year of many of those people having been at Guantanamo. The majority have been cleared for release.” The number of prisoners on a hunger strike is increasing and so are the violations of international law by the United States. This includes not only the forced cavity searches but the force feeding of inmates. In an effort to keep a lid on the growing catastrophe that is occurring at Guantanamo the United States is not only illegally force feeding prisoners who have decided to end their indefinite detention but is also attempting to silence the prisoners and stop them from communicating with their lawyers by implementing the egregious policy of requiring the inmates to undergo what amounts to a sexual assault every time they wish to use the phone or contact their lawyers. Regarding the force feeding of inmates the Guardian and the Miami Herald have reported that 20 organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch, the Center for Constitutional Rights and NYU School of Law's Global Justice Clinic, as well as other human rights activists, pressure groups and law bodies have issued a direct plea to US defense secretary Chuck Hagel to end the practice of force feeding at Guantanamo Bay. In the letter the publications report that the groups write: “We urgently request that you order the immediate and permanent cessation of all force-feeding of Guantánamo prisoners who are competent and capable of forming a rational judgment as to the consequences of refusing food, force-feeding of competent prisoners constitutes "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment". And “International medical bodies have come out against the force-feeding of detainees. Moreover, as practiced at Guantánamo Bay, it violates the Geneva Conventions, the signatories claim.” The Miami Herald reports that 29 people are currently being force fed using a brutal procedure which is detailed by the Guardian report and which amounts to torture. In his interview Ratner also stated that; “… under medical ethics it’s illegal to force feed people. If someone is making a decision, and it’s a conscious decision, and they’re sane when they make it; they are allowed to not eat and force themselves to die if that’s where it goes. They don’t have a right medically, to force feed someone. It’s just like if you are in the hospital and you say-take me off the machines; you have that right to do it. But Obama has insisted on force-feeding people.” The United States does not want the people at Guantanamo to have any contact with the outside world because they are trying to hide the true and atrocious nature of what is happening at their illegal and extra-judicial prison. Hence they are attempting to shut down any communication these already isolated people have with the outside world. Obama has proven he does not care one iota about the detainees and his election campaign promises of closing the prison were just as empty as his Nobel Peace Prize but he does not want the bad publicity that US will have if men who have been held and tortured illegally for over 12 years without recourse or redress start dying by the dozens after taking their own lives. The illegality and inhumanity of what is going on at Guantanamo is mind boggling in its monstrosity but is only to be overshadowed by the helplessness felt by the detainees and mirrored by their lawyers and human rights workers who despite all of their noble and legal efforts are unable to stop what the United States is unilaterally doing. Due to their owns actions the people who run Guantanamo, and this includes Obama, can only be described as criminals, and it is time that these criminals were forced to account for their crimes before the world as their crimes have taken place internationally and are an affront to civilized people the world over. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
14 May, 19:48 FSB catches CIA Agent Controller red handed
Photo: RIA Novosti According to the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) on Tuesday night May 13th a career US Central Intelligence Agency agent controller was arrested while in the process of attempting to recruit a member of one of the Russian special services. The FSB has not specified which service the potential spy was supposed to be attached to but has said the CIA officer was caught red handed in the act of attempting to recruit an agent. According to the FSB the CIA officer who was arrested was one Ryan Christopher Fogle who was working for the CIA under official cover as the Third Secretary of the Political Section of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. The Political Section of the US Embassy, headed by one Michael Klecheski, according to the embassy site, reportedly: “… interprets Russia's major foreign, defense and security policies. Analyzes and reports on significant events and trends in Russian domestic politics (elections, political parties, Kremlin-regional relations, media, human rights etc.) and consists of three units: External Affairs, Political-Military Affairs, Internal Affairs.” While the CIA may place an agent or officer under official cover in any position, even ambassador, it is important to note that the section this particular agent was working in would have been responsible for whatever operations the US has connected to the recent Russian opposition and meddling in the elections processes in Russia. The FSB reports that that when Fogle was arrested he had in his possession technical devices, objects to disguise his appearance, a large sum of cash and instructions written in Russian for the person he was supposed to recruit. The FSB was not specific on the exact nature of the technical devices but from photographs published in the media Fogle had in his possession an RFID shield, a foldable locking hunting knife, a service grade canister of mace, a US Army compass, a flashlight, a Moscow street map listing all buildings and addresses, what appear to be three envelopes containing money, 2 wigs, 3 pairs of glasses, a cell phone with an ear piece and a spiral notepad. The size of one of the stacks of 500 euro notes, a photo of which was published on the web, would indicate an amount close to the $100,000.00 the CIA was offering as first payment. From the fact that three white envelopes apparently containing money were in Fogle’s possession, who indicate that he was prepared to meet with 3 sources. The most interesting and damning object in the possession of Fogle was a letter in Russian detailing the new “spy’s” relationship with the CIA. The letter starts out Dear Friend, and explains that “this” is an advance from “those who are extremely impressed with your professionalism”, the letter continues that the US is ready to pay the $100, 000 to discuss experience and cooperation but that they amount could be much higher if the source is able to answer concrete questions. The letter says that they are ready to pay $1 million dollars a year for long term cooperation with bonus money for information that “helps us”. The letter then details how to set up an anonymous Gmail account, in an internet café and to write to the address unbacggdA[at]gmail.com and then wait exactly one week and check for an answer. The letter closes by saying: “Thank you for reading this. We are very anxious for the opportunity to be working with you in the near future. Your friends”. The implications of the entire case are extremely damaging for the US and for their “covert” operations in Russia. The fact that a political officer at the embassy was used for cover is so old school that it is not even worth commenting on, what is interesting is the apparent desperation the CIA is operating under in attempting to obtain intelligence about Russia. What is also interesting as far as tradecraft is concerned is the use of internet cafés and G-Mail accounts to communicate with agent controllers at the CIA. The name of the CIA Google mail account is also interesting as it gives insight into CIA naming conventions and code. The FSB reports that: “Recently, the U.S. intelligence community has repeatedly attempted to recruit employees of Russian law enforcement agencies and special departments,” and that these attempts have been, “… recorded and passed to FSB Counter-Intelligence.” It is not surprising that the CIA is desperate to recruit agents and spies what with new anti-corruption measures in Russia, the exposure of plots and groups exposed which attempted to foment and bring about color revolution scenarios, the expulsion of USAID and the widespread internal meddling they were discovered to be engaged in and the recent laws on NGOs and foreign agents. All of these things have made it difficult for the US Government, the CIA and the US Embassy to fulfill their secret objectives within the territory of the Russian Federation. With the expulsion of USAID and new strict reporting measures regarding NGOs, there are less holes in the security architecture of Russia that are available to be exploited by foreign intelligence agencies. Although Russia has repeatedly offered to cooperate with the US and been continuously turned down on a number of fronts, the US continues to wage its secret war against Russia. The capture of the CIA controller and the active way with which the CIA has been attempting to gather information points to the fact that there is no doubt a very large gap in US intelligence on Russia. This is good, it means that the Russian Government and the Russian Special Services are doing their jobs and keeping the country’s secrets secure. The CIA is apparently desperate to find agents in the special services making one wonder if the Cold War in fact really ended. Advice to foreign agents: the FSB Counter Intelligence is on the job, better update your “Moscow Rules”. The fact that FSB Counter Intelligence was able to catch an enemy of the state red-handed and then throw him back as apparently useless also quite frankly warms the heart. To know that true professionals are protecting Russia makes it possible to sleep well at night. Once again we see the quiet professionalism with which the FSB operates, not only in countless unsung anti-terrorist operations but in dozens of anti-espionage operations. The US would have been wise to listen many times in the past and should seriously accept Russian offers of cooperation, rather than sending some half-baked clown with wigs and a back-pack to do the work of real intelligence officers. It might be interesting to ponder why the FSB let Mr. Fogle go. Was he just a little fish or perhaps he was turned? Not that would be interesting. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru
14 May, 05:04 Amid media blackout Serbians continue to protest capitulation of Kosovo
Photo: Courtesy of Jelisaveta Pavlovic On May 10th at 12:44 as many 10,000 Serbs from Kosovo and all over Serbia descended on Republic Square in Belgrade to protest the signing of a treaty with the self-declared independent republic of Kosovo. Amidst the continuing media blackout, which has existed for decades there was little if any news in the world’s media regarding the peaceful demonstration. The protest action, under the title “We’re staying in Serbia,” an implication by Kosovo Serbs that the signing of the treaty would mean accepting the independence of Kosovo, something Serbs do not want, met at 12:44 to symbolically underline the number of the United Nations Resolution 1244 which was to guarantee that the territorial integrity of Serbia be respected and under which Kosovo is an integral and undividable part of the sovereign state of Serbia. One of the student organizers Jelisaveta Pavlovic, who was present at the demonstration along with approximately 200 students from Belgrade University printed out 5,000 copies of the treaty with Kosovo at their own expense and handed them out to some of those gathered on Republic Square. When Pavlovic took the stage she symbolically ripped up the treaty patriotically saying ''I'm not ripping up the state - I'm ripping up the treaty!'' after which the crowd joined in leaving Republic Square covered in torn up pages of the treaty. Pavlovic told the Voice of Russia that the speakers at the event included two municipality heads from Northern Kosovo: Slaviša Ristić and Zvonko Mihajlović; law professor Kosta Čavoški; political analyst Đorđe Vukadinović; famous rock musician Bora Đorđević; the Vice President of Serbian Republic in Bosnia and Herzegovina Emil Vlajki, a student representative from Kosovo Jovan Aleksić and high officials of the Serbian Orthodox Church including metropolitan Amfilohije and Atanasije. Also present were members of political parties and other organizations including: the Democratic party of Serbia (DSS), the Serbian Radical Party (SRS), the group Dveri (Doors), Nikad Granica (Never Borders), a citizen’s group formed with the goal of saving Kosovo, the Zavetnici group from Belgrade. The groups that attended are from all walks of life and represent almost the entire socio-economic and political spectrum of Serbia. Although they normally do not work together they did unite in supporting the demands set forth by the Kosovo. The Serbs from Kosovo are demanding that the Serbian Constitutional Court urgently reaches a decision on the constitutionality of the treaty and do so in 30 days at most well as all of the legal acts that were made by the current and the former government, which interfere with the legal and constitutional position of the Republic of Serbia and the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija. The groups have also warned that if the constitutional court doesn't follow their request and fulfill its duties a people's initiative will be started, with the goal of calling forth a referendum so that people can vote on the treaty and the unconstitutional secession of Kosovo and Metohija from the sovereign Serbian state. The parties are also requesting that Serbia’s printed and electronic media operating on national frequencies and especially the national television station RTS, immediately suspend all media black outs and allow for debate and for the voices of those who oppose the treaty to be heard, especially those opinions which are critical towards the treaty and its protagonists According to activists a new meeting is scheduled in the same location on the very important Serbian holiday of Vidovdan which takes place on the 28th of June this year during which further measures will be decided on if necessary.
14 May, 00:32 Thatchuration caused a backlash in the UK – Tim Summers
Photo: EPA As the economic situation worsens in the UK the media and the government are trying to establish a move to the right which is a causing a backlash, but with the marginalization of the left and progressive voices and issues and with the working class without a voice there is little that people can do. In part two of a recent interview with the Voice of Russia, Tim Summers, the former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party of England and Wales, spoke about these issues and more and expressed deep concern for the safety of Julian Assange. You are listening to an interview in progress with Tim Summers, a political activist in the UK and the former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party of England and Wales in the UK. Tim Summers Summers: Trade union resistance to this movement to the right, this growing inequality between rich and poor, has been tested and this now has been seen off. Nobody is worried about any resistance by trade unions. The left wing groups have been utterly marginalized by huge state-managed events, not just Thatcher’s funeral recently, but the Olympics, the Queen’s Jubilee, all these things were part of a sort of massive political engineering to manufacture a right wing consensus in the United Kingdom. Robles: And the working class and the poor people they are buying into this? They are supporting it? Summers: Well, they have no leadership to oppose it.I mentioned that the trade unions have lost their backbone, lost their will, lost their strength. The TUC only has, I think, six million affiliated members now. The working class have no outlet for their anger and grievance, and so, they are being crushed and absolutely driven down into an appalling situation now in the United Kingdom. But, nevertheless, as I say, this turbulence will blow in another course at some other time, and who knows. Robles: Would you say the right wing’s agenda in the UK is for the elites and more for the big business? Summers: Yes, absolutely. You have it in a nutshell. That’s exactly the position and the reason that people are making a running at the moment. But underneath that there is a sea of discontent waiting for some form of expression and organization, and that will be found within the turbulent winds that are blowing. Robles: Now, how did the recent death of Margaret Thatcher further dividd people in the United Kingdom and what has become of the ‘Occupy’ movement in the UK? Summers: Well, that, like the left wing groups has simply been marginalized. The’ve literally disappeared since the I last gave an interview to the Voice of Russia. This is part of the moving right show. It is taking a terrible toll. Thatcher always was divisive, but her funeral was more divisive than ever. They overloaded the whole thing. The right wing conservative government, and the establishment generally, overloaded it with the cost of ten million pounds of tax-payers’ money that caused extreme indignation when everyone else is having to make sacrifices for this global austeruty. Even the Big Ben clock at the Houses of Parliament had to be stopped for this great state occasion. Even the Prime Minister’s question time in Parliament was cancelled because of Thatcher’s funeral, and all the MPs had to come back to Parliament at an enormous expense as part of this great, enormous occasion. Four thousand police, many of them were armed, were lining the roads from Westminster down to the funeral at Westminster Abbey. Seven hundred armed services were there too. Protesters were really intimidated by police that they may be arrested for alarming and distressing mourners and pre-emptive mass arrests were threatened. I don’t think they were made. But that was the kind of scale of it where this new right wing consensus was being state-managed. But, in fact, it all turned into its opposite because the ‘song Ding Dong the Witch is Dead,’ from that ancient musical ‘The Wizard of Oz.’ Took position number one, as top of the pops. This right wing thing dissolved into street parties of celebration of Thatcher’s death breaking out all over Britain. That’s the measure of the division in Britain between rich and poor, ever-widening division. Robles: I just wanted to protest your characterization of ‘Ding-Dong the Witch is Dead’ as being ancient. I mean, that was from my childhood and I don’t think I’m ancient yet. Summers: Ah, I beg your pardon, yes. Robles: Laughs. Would you say there were more celebrations upon Margaret Thatcher’s death than there were events of mourning? Summers: Oh, yes, very much so. You see, the media tried to manufacture this massive right wing consent that Thatcher was some kind of spiritual leader of the British nation, whereas she was just a divisive and utterly wrecking figure, a threat to world peace, a war criminal, I could go on, but I don’t think I need to. I think she is remembered by the world in those terms, but in Britain they were trying to get some sort of patriotic approval for this authoritarian, divisive, rich-versus-poor style. But, it was very much a sort of media thing. If I may make a pun, the “MoUrning Papers” that is the papers in mourning reached ‘Thatchuration’ point, I would call it. Sorry, but I have to say ‘Thatchuration’ point. People were simply overloaded with this projection of ‘Thatcher, the great national leader’ that deserved all this sacrifice of expense and media attention, just a rebellion broke out. That’s a sign of the turbulence. It’s a strange thing, this turbulence, you can never quite tell how it’s going to go. Just like climate change involves warming generally, in Britain it caused an extra-cold winter to flow into April. Just as this economic crisis, made many people think that it’ll produce a massive Greek-style opposition in the United Kingdom to austerity, in fact it proved the other way. It created this great right wing climate, the UKIP. But that’s, with turbulence, it changes very-very fast, and I am expecting droughts in the United Kingdom this summer. So, although it’s quite drastic and spurious the rise of UKIP I am against taking it too seriously and getting ‘doomy’ about it. Robles: How is the Green Party doing, I mean, your party? How are they faring? Summers: It has generally been doing well for all the over thirty years of its existence, but never in a sensational way, more, in a steady kind of way. We’ve built up an enormous understanding of the ecological crisis. All the wind farms across the Western side of our country are products of the Green Party and nowhere else. We have an MP now, that really helps. We are popular among the divisions of Britain. We want to take energy, water, and rail to public ownership, invest in green jobs, scrap Trident for example, save ten million pounds of tax payers’ money, stop tax evasion, we want affordable home-buying. But the rise of the UKIP has displaced us. We thought we were the fourth party until recently, now, I think, we are the fifth party down the list. So, we are hit by this turbulence, but we’ll be back. Robles: Can you comment on how this move to the right might affect relations with Russia? Is there like growing ‘Rusophobia’ in the UK? Summers: I think there’s been a narrative of the Cold War, as I’ve said in previous Voice of Russia interviews. That continues where the Prime Minister has to be regarded as some kind of Russian Stalin, and misrepresented horribly. His real achievements for Russia go unstated in the British media. He is regarded with suspicion. Falsely I think, accused of the assassination of various individuals. At least there is no evidence whatsoever to sustain such suspicions. This kind of ‘Rusophobia’ continues. I can’t say it’s particularly got worse because the enemies ever loom large to the British patriotic imperialist kind of imagination. There is resentment at the way that Russia cannot be pushed into the American agenda and the United Nations Security Council. That’s sort of a regular feature. But I can’t think it got markedly worse of recency. Robles: Another quick question that just came to mind. You are involved in politics in the UK, you got your finger on the pulse there, there is no news about Julian Assange in the UK, is there? Summers: No, not for a long time. Another example of this marginalization which I’ve been mentioning. All progressive issues are being marginalized as a conscious political policy in this trying to steal the right wing consensus. Julian Assange is a victim of that. I care for his safety enormously. Robles: So, there’s like absolutely no coverage of the fact that he has been trapped in that embassy for almost a year now? Summers: They are very quiet now. There is simply no story there now. There is a kind of impasse situation. Robles: Oh my goodness. Hey, Tim, thank you very much! Summers: My pleasure! Robles: I really appreciate speaking with you. Summers:Thank you, good night! You were listening to an interview in progress with Tim Summers, a political activist in the UK and the former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party of England and Wales in the UK. You can find part 1 on our website at english.ruvr.ru.
13 May, 15:58 1 Tsarnaev robbed Americans of their “revenge” so they took it out on his corpse
© Photo: http://www.vesti.ru The unprecedented refusal by authorities all over the US to bury Boston Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev and quietly be done with it has once again underlined the American thirst for revenge and the disrespect for the sanctity of life and the dead. Sure no one wants to be buried next to a monster but civilized intelligent societies do not play games with corpses and unfortunately that is a fact. While the US has buried thousands of mass murderers and psychopaths, with little fanfare, for some reason, this young Muslim, who showed the fallacy of the police state, has not been offered the same regard. Sure he was evil, but you don’t play politics with a corpse. The disgrace of the Tsarnaev burial debacle is a story most Americans would want to go away as quickly as possible (move along nothing to see here), some publications even openly saying as much with the Boston Globe even going so far as to publish a piece titled “It’s time to bury this story”. Of course it is time to bury the story because it is a very uncomfortable one for Americans as it shows the complete idiocy and lack of common human decency that exists in the American masses. The author of the Boston Globe article (Perhaps he was playing with words when he titled it?) cites the author of the book “Payback: The Case for Revenge” one Thane Rosenbaum as saying: “There’s a difference between an ordinary crime and an atrocity. Someone went to the hardware store and picked out nails and bolts and ball bearings for the purpose of dismembering children. They knew the purpose was not just to kill but to dismember. The atrocious deserve very different treatment. They deserve to be ostracized and banished from the community.” Sure what Tamerlan Tsarnaev did was an atrocity (assuming he was in fact guilty of the crime as he was still only a suspect, a fact few wish to be reminded of), no one would argue to the contrary, yet civilized intelligent humans would not do something as distasteful as then playing revenge with a corpse. The fact that Tamerlan died a horrendous death, being shot by police and run over by his own brother, apparently was not enough for the American thirst for blood and revenge and by not allowing him to be quietly be buried we are once again reminded of that particular characteristic of the “American experience”: the love and enthusiasm for bloody revenge, at once appalling and disgraceful and made even more so by the self-righteous indignation and the holier-than-thou-zeal with which it is sought. The refusal by officials in the US to allow Tamerlan to be buried has had a resonance around the world and the spectacle of a body rotting away and waiting to be buried being refused left and right has the world’s population again focused on the idiocy of the American people. The refusal to bury Tamerlan was unprecedented, as every type of killer, pedophile, rapist, mass murderer and even those guilty of treason are buried somewhere when they die. Usually it is done quietly in a prison cemetery or some other obscure location, perhaps in an unmarked grave, as the Jackal was buried in France and as the Boston Globe notes: “Albert DeSalvo, the Boston Strangler, confessed to 12 murders during a crime wave that ranks among the most famous and heinous in American history. Yet he is interred at Puritan Lawn Memorial Park in Peabody, Massachusetts.” There are of course others: Ted Bundy who confessed to killing over 30 women was cremated and his ashes spread over the Cascade Mountains in Washington, according to his own wishes. John Wayne Gacy who killed 33 young men and boys was quietly cremated although it was later learned a psychiatrist saved part of his brain in a basement for years. Jeffrey Dahmer, responsible for the deaths of 16 people and whose crimes included cannibalism and necrophilia was cremated after much debate over what to do with his brain which had been saved in a jar. John Geoghan, the defrocked priest who molested more than 150 children was buried in Massachusetts in the same cemetery as many of the Kennedy clan. Jim Jones responsible for over 900 deaths was quietly cremated in Dover, Maryland. David Koresh the infamous Branch Davidian leader who was buried a month after being shot in the head by federal agents was laid to rest in Tyler Texas. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, the Columbine killers who killed 12 classmates and a teacher were cremated and buried respectively. Adam Lanza, the Sandy Hook Elementary School killer who killed his own mother and then 20 first graders and 6 school staff was buried under private arrangements organized by his father. Osama Bin Laden, even though his body was thrown off a ship at sea, the US government vehemently claimed he was buried following 24 hours of death according to Muslim tradition. US home-grown terrorist Timothy McVeigh who killed 168 people was almost buried as a war hero at Arlington National Cemetery before being cremated, the US even passed a law to stop him from being buried at Arlington. Lee Harvey Oswald was buried twice in Fort Worth Texas, the second time after being exhumed. So we see death row inmates, presidential assassins, cannibals, mass murderers and terrorists of all kind get a normal burial all over the US alongside other “normal” people. So why the disgraceful treatment of Tamerlan Tsarnaev? Some say the idea of honoring the dead would be violated and the dead desecrated by burying a monster amongst them. That is an argument which may be valid as no one would want to be buried next to Oswald or Hitler, whose remains were flushed into the sewer by the way, but why desecrate the living by playing games and politics with a corpse? What Tamerlan reportedly did was horrible there can be no doubt, but what he did was not as bad as others who received respect in death. Part of the reason is the American lust for revenge, something they were robbed of when Tamerlan died. There would be no sensational trial, where he and his family would have been demonized daily and the American populace could feed on all of the gory details of the case, there would be no execution at the hands of the “civilized” state, satisfying the blood lust for revenge. By dying Tamerlan did what was worst of all, he robbed Americans of revenge so what did they have left? Take revenge on a corpse. Why was this acceptable in the case of Tamerlan? Well like all of the men at Guantanamo who are being held for nothing, Tamerlan was Muslim. Americans are aware that Muslims should be buried within 24 hours of death, so this was a way of getting back at the religion most demonized and hated by Americans. Tamerlan was also from Russia, another country continually demonized by the West. So what could be worse than a Muslim from Russia who tricked the American authorities and showed Americans what a complete failure their beloved security state is? What could be worse? One who died before revenge could be had, that’s what. So once again Americans have done worlds to offend and insult Muslims and have once again made another martyr out of a sick individual all in their pursuit of revenge. It is also important to note that Tamerlan and his family had renounced Russia and were living in the United States with asylum and that Tamerlan was raised in America and was in fact a home-grown terrorist, also robbing Americans of the chance to transfer the blame to Russia. To make things worse the US authorities were warned by Russia about Tamerlan. So strike three there as well. The endless debate over what to do with the body has been positive in one regard for those in power, it has taken the focus off the authorities who allowed the attack to occur. It has also overshadowed any reports as to the victims whom the American populace is not really interested in. What about all of the people who were injured and had to have amputations and whose lives were shattered? Where were the press reports about them while the mass media focused on a rotting corpse nobody wants? Bury it and be done with it should have been the call. This aspect of the American psyche, this lust for revenge and disrespect for the dead is only outdone by the American disrespect for the living, if those living are “different”, or “Muslim”, or “brown”. This goes back to the very foundations of America, and I have said this many times, a country founded on genocide and built by slaves on stolen lands will never be “normal” or “moral”. Just as Americans reveled in the deaths of the indigenous people (The remains of Geronimo are still kept as souvenirs by the Skull and Bones Society), displaying heads for months on stakes, and keeping body parts as trophies (something still done today in Afghanistan for example), the sheer joy obtained by many Americans when someone “evil” is killed is unparalleled anywhere in the world and if that joy and lust can not be satiated by the act of taking the life then the next best thing is playing with the corpse. All of this begs a question asked by the peaceful Indians who met the Europeans with open arms: “Who is the real savage?” funerals, Boston explosions, Tsarnayev brothers, Boston marathon terror: investigation continues, Politics · Share: · · · · · Сomments 1 · Wouldn't surprise me if Tamerlan was still alive. The morgue photo did not show his massive arm muscles. He may have been a CIA asset. Was he loaned to the Russians? Is it pure coincidence that 2 Chechen rebels were killed shortly after meeting with him? 12 May, 03:45 The “real hacking empire” and the war on truth
Photo: Flickr.com/goulao/cc-by The cyber war continues, with the People’s Republic of China and the United States, trading accusations of cyber attacks, but the real war is a war to control and manipulate information and to keep the “inconvenient truth” from reaching the world’s internet denizens. A sign of an empire in decline is the stifling of truth that shows its illegitimacy and a war on those who would expose the truth. Attacks on China have to be seen as part of a larger US effort and the next victim could be anyone. Back in February we reported on a cyber security firm called Mandiant, in Alexandria, Virginia, less than half an hour from the unincorporated community of Langley (the metonym for the CIA) in McLean, Virginia. The firm had made public a report detailing threats posed by Chinese hackers. They claimed the “Advanced Persistent Threat” (APT), actors operating in China and with the blessing of the Chinese Government, had been conducting, quote: “… a cyber espionage campaign against a wide range of victims since 2006” unquote. I took them to task for their self-serving claims, their security suite according to SC Magazine, called “Mandiant Intelligent Response”, which will protect anyone from Chinese super hackers costs $86,000.00. I also took them to task for the amount of surveillance and penetration of Chinese government sites and Chinese internet infrastructure, the level of which was astounding. Just to produce the report they released they had to launch their own massive penetration campaign and hack into thousands of Chinese sites and systems. So the recent claims by the Chinese Government, after the Pentagon released a report accusing China of launching cyber attacks, that the United States of America is the “real hacking empire” and has “an extensive espionage network” are not surprising in the least and I would say a given. In a recent article on the matter the website Quartz details some of the ways in which the US hacks into the systems of other countries. Quartz wrote: “The US has some of the most powerful cyber warfare resources in the world and has long been one of the leading sources of cyber attacks on companies and people. According to cyber security firm McAfee, the US is home to the largest number of botnets in the world, the control servers used to hack computers in the US and elsewhere. Data from Deutsche Telekom shows that far more attacks against its networks come from Russia and the US than China. And according to HostExploit, which tracks malware activity, the US and Russia, not China, have the world’s most malicious servers.” They also wrote: “In some ways, Beijing is right to argue that China is also a victim, wrote Jason Healy, director of Cyber Statecraft at the Atlantic Council, last month. Between September 2012 and March of this year, 85 Chinese government and company websites were hacked, with 39 of the attacks originating in the US, according to Chinese state media. Chinese authorities also said that US-based servers had hosted 73% of phishing attacks on Chinese residents during roughly the same period.” This is all not surprising as the US continues to attempt to control the flow of information worldwide, wage a war on whistleblowers and shut down resources and silence people who go against the official US line or expose the criminality of those in Washington and the United States. Along with the illegal global war on terror and all of the crimes being committed in its execution and the global military expansion by the US through its surrogate NATO, the United States had proven that it is the single biggest security threat in the world, not only a threat to freedom of speech and expression on the internet, but even more importantly to world peace. Although many of the world’s internet denizens see the internet as a wonderful source of information and a way to share information and reach out to others, governments, particularly the US, which created the internet in order to hide a military computer network, see the internet as a tool to collect intelligence on foreign governments and on the world’s populace. One reason Facebook has a special CIA interface. Some of the aspects of this militarization of the net and the war on information activists and whistleblowers by the US government were chillingly described by Julian Assange in a recent interview he gave to the Nation. Mr. Assange remains trapped in limbo in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and will soon mark his one year anniversary there as the UK authorities refuse to grant him safe passage to the airport in a continuing violation to international norms and diplomatic etiquette. According to Assange however the US has lost: “The status quo, for them, is a loss… The Pentagon threatened WikiLeaks and me personally, threatened us before the whole world, demanded that we destroy everything we had published, demanded we cease ‘soliciting’ new information from US government whistle-blowers, demanded, in other words, the total annihilation of a publisher. It stated that if we did not self-destruct in this way that we would be ‘compelled’ to do so.” The Nation continues: “Assange, Manning and WikiLeaks: … effectively exposed the empire’s hypocrisy, indiscriminate violence and its use of torture, lies, bribery and crude tactics of intimidation. WikiLeaks shone a spotlight into the inner workings of empire (the most important role of a press) and for this it has become empire’s prey. Those around the globe with the computer skills to search out the secrets of empire are now those whom empire fears most. If we lose this battle, if these rebels are defeated, it means the dark night of corporate totalitarianism. If we win, if the corporate state is unmasked, it can be destroyed.” The persecution of WikiLeaks, the recent shut down of the Cyber Bunker, attacks on Chinese, Russian, North Korean, Syrian, and Palestinian servers and web sites show just how concerted the efforts are by the US in attempting to control the flow of information worldwide. With regards to WikiLeaks alone the Nation said: “At least a dozen American governmental agencies, including the Pentagon, the FBI, the Army’s Criminal Investigative Department, the Department of Justice, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Diplomatic Security Service, are assigned to the WikiLeaks case, while the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence are assigned to track down WikiLeaks’ supposed breaches of security.” Rather than hunt down the criminals exposed by the whistleblowers they continue to attempt to go after the messengers of truth and control the world’s flow of information. In the context of China, I think it is important to recall that China is a working and successful Communist country, something the US is usual quiet about as China’s economic stake in the US is so large that if it pulls out the US would no doubt collapse, and geopolitically China along with Russia are seen as enemies by Washington, so it is a given that the US will try to do anything it can to undermine not only China but Russia and any other country it sees as a challenge. That the single largest military threat to the planet and the world’s policeman and censor is also the “real hacking empire” is not surprising.
10 May, 03:26 As economic conditions worsen, racist groups make gains in UK - Summers
Tim Summers Photo: Courtesy of Tim Summers The UK has been moving to the right politically with the worsening economic situation in the country. The people are feeling the pinch of UK economic austerity measures and cuts in social spending and are looking for a scapegoat. Right wing parties have done what they do best, they have demonized foreigners and minorities and blamed the country’s woes on these vulnerable segments of society, and by providing the people a platform to bash the current government they are thus attractive and quietly able to advance their agenda of racist hate. Hello! This is John Robles, I'm speaking with Mr. Tim Summers. He is a political activist in the United Kingdom and the former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party in England and Wales. Robles: Hello Sir! Summers: Good evening! Robles: Good evening, nice to be speaking with you. After the good showing by the United Kingdom Independence Party in the recent elections in the UK, what are the chances of the UK actually pulling out of the EU? Summers: I think that they are certainly doing well. They are making a very good showing. They are putting enormous demands and strains on the former big three parties. But I don’t think their demand for withdrawal from the European Union will ultimately be successful. In the current turbulence of the economic situation people are looking for scapegoats. Lots of people are feeling the pinch in some way or another. Working class people obviously are suffering cuts in welfare spending and a lot of the middle class are feeling the pinch, a course that their called the squeezed middle as the private rents go up 8 times higher than their wages, and so on. It’s the time that a lot of people are unhappy and they’re turbulently lashing around. And the UKIP gives them a chance to bash Government and to register a very strong protest. Quite what the protest means, remains to be seen. For example, a lot of the protest is just, you know, British xenophobia going back to its empire that is recycled by the media, inflated by the corporate media with incessant tales of European bureaucracy, regulations endless tales of the criminal, benefits scrounging, asylum seeking, foreigners all trying to come here and takeover. You know the kind of narrative. Well that is certainly having its result. And there’s rallies to sort of forge a strange alliance between jobless workers in South Shields, a very prominent by-election two weeks ago, with rural West Country fox-hunters. And that strange British barometer of British political change, that is known in our media as Essex Man. People in Essex seem to predict the trends in our politics. UKIP has achieved this with a careful code of opposing multiculturalism, to start repatriation, yet denying it is a racist party, but in the UK politics, and I think in most politics, people talking in such terms make it very clear the xenophobic or racist kind of appeal that they are making. But the UKIP hasn’t really convinced anybody, particularly the British bourgeoisie, of the economic sufficiency of such an independent United Kingdom outside of the European Union. Nobody is really buying into that. It’s not really a very serious thing, and also America pulls the strings. I’ll give you an example: just over a week ago the American Government wrote a memo to the British UK Government, the Conservative Government led by David Cameron, arrogantly instructing Britain to stay in Europe because that’s what America wants. It wants Britain to act as its surrogate voice in Europe, and simply instructed the British Government, as it does, to get on with it. That would actually decide everything. So, after a lot of hot air and bellicose turbulence Britain will in the long run stay in Europe. Robles: How many people in UK actually would support the UK pulling out of the EU? Summers: Ultimately, when it is spelt out to them, the vagaries of what an independent United Kingdom would be, they will pull away from it I think. Over the course of years now, since the 1970s, the parties who are normally pro-European Union, like the Labor Party and the Liberal Democrats, simply haven’t got the backbone to argue for a stay-in-Europe policy, stay quiet while the right-wing corporate press does the running, and particularly UKIP does the running in these sensational election results that they are achieving. They haven’t finished their ride yet UKIP, but ultimately, if you look at their political policies and so on, they are a bit lightweight really, to say the least. Not the Golden Dawn of Greece, they are another fascist party, they are sort of an ultra-right conservative party, breakaway really. Robles: They have ties with some far-right, even neo-Nazi groups in the UK, don’t they? Summers: Well, yes. They dissowned the British National Party, but clearly they’ve got links with the English Defense League, that’s a rabble of thugs who organized provocative marches against ethnic minorities. And within the European Union they are associated directly, affiliated to a sort of broad European footing, a grouping, and they are linked up with: Lega Nord, the Northern League of Italy, who are similarly racist- fascists. Sorry similarly racist the Northern League are actually fascists; a group called the True Finns, who you may have heard of, but they are that same kind of red neck nationalistic narrow-minded sort of people; and the Danish People’s Party. So they do have some very bad friends. Robles: How are right-wing groups taking advantage of the difficult economic situation in the UK? And does that have anything to do with rise of the UKIP and other such parties? Summers: Oh, yes, certainly! The British National Party was eventually disgraced, media-ambushed and driven, from its rising place in British politics. And support for the erstwhile directly fascist British National Party moves through to the English Defense League and now in a softly spoken voice within the United Kingdom Independence Party, and that the United Kingdom Independence Party provides a much smoother shoehorning into processes of government and influence. So, the racist vote in Britain, the far-right vote now has a strategy of supporting the UKIP, something that UKIP will have to deal with along with all kinds of things the UKIP will have to deal with, but that’s their position. There has been a whole movement to the right in this country that has been achieved by political engineering. Student loans make students much more hardworking, less inclined to provide the radical media that universities have in the past, in the post-war period, provided. I’ve mentioned the new Labour moving to the right and abandoning all its earlier concepts, Liberal Democrats as well. But trade unions have been tamed. Our British Trade Union Congress held big marches, big demonstrations against austerity cuts in 2011 and again in 2012. But that was really not the beginning of something, but the end of something. And the trade union resistance to this movement to the right, this growing inequality between rich and poor has been tested and now been seen off. Nobody is worried about any resistance by trade unions. You were listening to part 1 of an interview with Tim Summers – a political activist and a former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party of England and Wales. You can find part 2 on our website at english.ruvr.ru
8 May, 21:53 The fallacy of the security state, the new generation of terrorists coming of age
Photo: EPA Over 2 trillion dollars has been spent by the US since the events of 9-11 on their wars and the rise of the surveillance state. America has also spent all of its moral capital in its illegal invasions and illegal indefinite detention and the American people have also paid, with their liberty and freedom. Despite all of this more violence and terror are on the horizon for the US because the execution of their war on terror is flawed and the simple fact that you can not make peace and friends with force, nor can you stop terror with terror. Recently there have been reports on a spate of arrests of teens and young people making or attempting to make bombs or improvised explosive devices in different parts of the United States amidst widespread questioning as to the effectiveness of the massive US national security apparatus that took over the country in the wake of the events of 9-11. These arrests were of people roughly the same age although slightly younger than the Boston Bombing suspects, their age important due to the fact that these young people are the first generation that has come to age after the questionable events that began the whole war on terror paradigm. I have predicted many times in the past that this was going to happen and that as that generation gets older there will be more terrorism and more violence unleashed on America not only from within but also from without. This should be simple to understand on the premise that violence breeds violence and force breeds force. Not only has the entire massive US security apparatus proven itself to be incapable of preventing a terrorist attack, and this has been made obvious and hopefully this fact has been driven home by the Boston bombing, but the entire hyper-security state has created an even more dangerous and unpredictable situation for those charged with ensuring the security of the country. Since the events of 9-11, and I always say “events” because there are too many questions and holes in the official version to allow it to be believable, first of all the building came down in controlled demolitions, and second of all the absence of plane wreckage, the United States has spent more than $700 billion on beefing up its national security and somewhere in the neighborhood of a trillion and half dollars on its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. With TSA flight lists, drone attacks, massive surveillance, all encompassing data collection, watch lists, black lists, facial recognition software, satellites, RFID chips, tracking devices, police armed to the teeth and militarized, massive networks of informants and spies, internet monitoring, Echelon, Carnivore, fusion centers, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA and all of the other “weapons” against terror, the United States has not prevented one terrorist attack. They have however created more animosity and more fascination with the concept of terror amongst the youth than anything else could possibly have done. The entire war on terror paradigm has only served those running it and profiting from it and reaping the dividends the massive data collection and unparalleled controls on the population has allowed. If it were not for the fact that the population has lost most of its freedom and liberty and that generations to come will be paying the bill for the horrendously nearsighted and poorly executed war on terror it would be laughable that in the last decade of the intense war on terror and the hyper-security state the US has only managed to prosecute alleged terror plotters who were entrapped by informants, charge peaceful protestors as terrorists, arrest harmless hackers, demonize whistleblowers and now apparently catch some teens who were attempting to make bombs. No terrorists, but the real terrorists were let go and never captured. The US is itself at fault, both in the Boston bombing and in the new breed of terrorists that are coming of age. The government and the authorities as well the media and educational establishments are all responsible for the culture of violence, attempting to use force and fear to control the population and the glorification of violence and the celebrity status society and the media grant those who commit heinous acts. The Aurora shooting was just one example of a nobody who became a global celebrity by killing as many people as he could. Nothing stopped him. The Boston bombers were another pair of nobodies and even though the US was warned by Russian intelligence they were still not stopped. If that is not a monumental failure what is? Russian intelligence warned the Americans of individuals living on their soil while the entire FBI, DHS and surveillance state could not see what was under their own noses. They were warned but they decided they know best and people died. The same blind arrogance has been used in the faulty execution of the war on terror and it is this myopic, self-assured, arrogant attitude that will guarantee that more and more violence and more terror will strike the US, I would say that is guaranteed. Like I said, force breeds force, violence breeds violence and death breeds death. This proving true with the escalating radicalization of the world’s Muslims, and this will also apply to the youth and oppressed masses of the United States. As the 9-11 generation comes of age in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, as well as all over the Muslim world, and I think it is important to note that these are young people who have only known about America as a country that has been waging a merciless war against their people since they can remember, there will no doubt be more and more violence against America. Sadly for those in power and those in charge of the surveillance state the real well being of the people is not the first priority. If people were important they would perhaps think of ways to reach out to the people, to use diplomacy, instead of guns and force, and to try to bring about a state of peace while eradicating conditions that produce violence and hatred. For a country where force, fear, violence, and more force are the only tools used the youth will grow up as thus. Children grow up and do what they see and if all they see is death, violence and terror, driven into them every day, they will grow to do the same. Diplomacy, dialogue, respect and understanding, those are the only things that bring about piece, you can not bring peace with a drone, you can not make friends with Hellfire missiles and you can use force to forever keep people subservient. Let that also be another warning, which no doubt, will go unheard. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
7 May, 19:43 Islamists call on world’s Muslims for drone countermeasures
Photo: EPA In its first issue a new Islamist publication called Azan Magazine, has issued a call for Muslims around the world to assist in providing and devising technology to assist the Ummah, a word for the world’s Muslim community, in the war against US drones. The article seemingly unknowingly reveals the entirely faulty methodology with which the US tracks and targets those it has chosen for drone assassination, detailing how a poor local might be paid a huge sum to simply toss a transmitter chip on someone’s home. According to estimates quoted by the magazine from 2,229 to approximately 2,586 people have been killed by US drones strikes since 2004. The publication cites the New American Foundation which says from June 2004 to October 2011, 2,586 people were killed in 329 drone strikes in the tribal areas of Pakistan. They also cite the London Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which reported that from 2004-2011, 2,229 people were killed in drone attacks out of which 168 were children. According to the publication in one attack on a Madrassa in 2006, 69 children were killed in a drone strike. The article which is really a call for help by the Islamists, is backed by facts and figures including this statement they claim was made by a former UN Rapporteur on Extra Judicial Killings: “Clearly, the CIA is engaging in systematic assassination of individuals. There is no review of what they do and of course there is no accountability. So, it ’s a zone in which law has been effectively excluded. The justification would be that oh, we were attacked on 9/11 therefore we have a right based on the UN charter’s provisions for self defense to kill anyone anywhere in the world any time as long as we argue that they are linked to that initial attack which may be years ago.” The article gives some details about how the CIA and the US forces mark their targets and it is stunning. One method they use is an RFID or other tracking chip that they apparently pay a local spy to place on the home of a target, whether he actually puts it on the right place is not important. Another method used is to mark the targets car or other object with special ink that is only visible to the drones, again there is no guarantee that they right object is marked. The article details yet another method and describes how a satellite phone was used to spy on and then assassinate a Mujahedeen target by the Pakistani Army. If this is all true it goes completely against the picture the US military has attempted to portray as to the precision and surgical accuracy they use in drones strikes. Instead it proves the unreliability and borderline reckless of the way that drone targets are tracked and targeted and goes far to explain the huge numbers of civilians that the US has killed during their drone war. Another point the article makes is that it blames Pakistan and claims the Pakistani Army are actively assisting the US and providing logistical support for all phases of drone operations. The publishers say that Pakistan falsely blames the US because they would face political hell at home if the Pakistani people know the army’s true role in the US drone war. Although the article does make a good argument regarding the illegality of the use of unmanned aerial vehicles to carry out faulty extra-judicial assassinations, it is overly religious in its calls for assistance and almost 90% of the article is filled with religious references. According to the publication assisting in the fight against drones is the holy duty of all Muslims and those who help will be greatly rewarded by Allah. Just as the war on terror, Guantanamo, and the use of drones are wars and actions being carried out beyond the framework of normal conventional warfare and international law, so is the call to defend against them. Unconventional warfare requires unconventional defense and just as with any new weapon thought up by my man, a new defense will also be thought up. How about electro-magnetic wave bursts?
7 May, 19:07 Radicalization of Muslims growing as war on terror drags on
Photo: EPA A large percentage of the world’s Muslim population condones and supports suicide bombings, the killing of women and even men who dishonor their families and faith, and wishes to see Sharia law as the law of the land, even though they have different understandings of what that means, a report by the Pew Reasearch Center reveals. After the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan those two countries are now among the most radicalized of Muslim countries. After more than a decade of the US global war on terror, which many see as a war on Islam, it is not surprising that the number of Muslims the world over who support suicide attacks and have become radicalized has grown. In the US that number may be as much as 20% or more. According to a recent report by the Pew Research Center, an organization funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts which has US $5 billion in assets, and whose stated mission is to serve the public interest by improving public policy, informing the public and stimulating civic life, the number of Muslims who answered that they support suicide bombings in America is much less than those around the world, but even that number is extremely high at possibly close to 20%. The report titled “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society” attempts to give insight into the Islamic world by looking at seven areas it believes are important in understanding Muslims worldwide. The report includes areas titled: Beliefs About Sharia; Religion and Politics; Morality; Women in Society; Relations Among Muslims; Interfaith Relations; and Religion, Science, and Pop Culture. At the end there is an appendix titled “U.S. Muslims”. With regard to suicide bombings the researchers asked the question in 21 countries. Respondents who agreed to take part in the survey mostly did not endorse the tactic when they were asked if they: “… endorsed suicide bombings and other forms of violence against civilian targets as a means of defending Islam against its enemies.” However according to Pew: “… in a few countries, substantial minorities believe suicide bombing can be often justified or sometimes justified.” This is a dangerous number and points to the widespread radicalization of the world’s Muslim community. Breaking it down by region the Pew study reports those who support attacks on civilians in defense of Islam are as follows: in Southern and Eastern Europe: 11% of Kosovan; 6% of Albanian; 4% of Russian and 3% of Bosnian Muslims answered in the affirmative. Of Central Asia’s Muslims: 15% in Turkey; 10% in Kyrgystan; 3% in Tadjikistan; 2% in Kazakhstan and only 1% in Azerbaijan support suicide bombings. In Southeast Asia: a formidable 18% of Malaysian and 7% of Indonesian Muslims support the tactic. For those regions the numbers are much less than in South Asia and the Middle East and North Africa. In Afghanistan a whopping 39% of respondents support suicide bombing as a method to defend Islam. In Bangladesh the number is also high with the number being at around 26%. In Pakistan 13% said they were in support. In the Middle East and North Africa, Israel’s neighbor Palestine was the number one supporter of suicide bombings, with an astounding 40% of respondents answering in the affirmative. Egypt’s Muslims came out with an extremely high 29%, Jordan 15%, Tunisia 12%, Morocco 9% and post invasion Iraq with only 7%. The results for the US were separate and based on a 2011 poll and were based on a different question (Do you believe suicide bombings are never justified?) but show that 81% as opposed to 72% worldwide say that bombings are never justified. By staging the question thus the researchers have obfuscated the fact that 19% of US Muslims believe that such attacks are sometimes or rarely justified or refused to answer which would indicate support for the tactic, or belief, that they are always justified. Of course US Muslims would be very foolish to answer in the affirmative whether they believed this as they would very likely immediately end up on a terrorist watch list. The number of Muslims in countries wishing to make Sharia Law the law of the land is extremely surprising with majorities of those responding in all of the countries surveyed in Southeast Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa saying they believe Islamic law should be the law of their country. Post invasion Iraq and Afghanistan lead the world with 91% and 99% respectively. While US Muslims were not even asked the question. With regard to Sharia law, in Central Asia and Eastern and Southern Europe, Russia was supposedly the leader with 42% of Muslims saying they favor Sharia law. At the other end of the spectrum in Azerbaijan, where only 8% of respondents wish Sharia law to be the law of the land. When it comes to the “honor” killing of women who engage in extra-marital sex the Pew researchers posed the question if “… honor killings were never justified”. Judging from the results 20% to 78% of Muslims worldwide believe that honor killings are in fact justified.This also points to the further radicalization of the Islamic community and a dangerous intolerance for women’s rights and the further viewing of women as possessions or less than human. In nearly all countries a majority of Muslims agree that a wife should obey her husband with support for women’s rights mainly held by women respondents. In the context of the “War on Terror” which has been seen as a war on Islam, are the results surprising? No they are not and if the War on Terror continues, surely in ten years the numbers of those condoning suicide attacks will sky rocket as will the number of radicalized Muslims. And who will be paying the price? Not the drone pilots, who sit in their comfortable air-conditioned control rooms, but civilians all over the world. It is a simple lesson that the West just does not seem to want to learn, terror and fear and violence breed the same, and although this may be an abstract concept from their comfortable offices along the beltway the Boston bombing may have brought this fact home. Around 24% of the world’s population are Muslims so it is important to understand and respect this religion, just as it is important to understand and respect all religions. A message that might be sent to Muslims, especially of the fanatical ilk, who according to Pew agree that Islam is the one true faith, know little about Christianity, and believe it is their duty to convert others. This is just as dangerous as Western insensitivity to followers of Islam. What the West has done and what it is doing by meddling in Muslim countries without the foresight for the consequences is creating more radicalized Muslims and fomenting more hatred and anti-democratic anti-western sentiment than existed anywhere in the world before the start of the global war on terror. Whether this is by accident due to callous unthinking planning or by design as a way to guarantee the continuation of the war on terror is yet to be seen. As long as Americans live detached from the rest of the world and see these as just figures in a report things will continue as they are and the results will be more bloodshed and more death.
6 May, 18:06 Israel, the West and anti-Alawite Muslims joined against Bashar Al-Assad
Photo: EPA The attacks on Syria by Israel are an open act of war and aggression against Syria and the free world. Despite claiming their aggressive attack was “preventive” in nature, a concept first used by the Nazis, the unprovoked attack on Syria was a clear act of aggressive war and the Jewish state has now crossed the line and committed a crime against humanity. Will the Muslim world stand by as Israel attacks its Muslim brothers? With the US acting as the protector of Israel perhaps it does not matter, perhaps Muslim backlash is exactly what the geopolitical chess players in Washington are planning on. The possibility that the conflict expands to a global level grow on an hourly basis. Experts and analysts around the world have been stating for years that the US and its Western allies have plans which call for invasions and forceful regime changes, not only around the world but in particular, Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Independent experts, academics, diplomats, politicians, investigative journalists, political commentators and analysts almost all agree that the U.S. has been looking for and trying to create a pretext for invading these countries for close to five years now. Despite the fact that almost every move that the US makes and every new pretext is shown to be based on error or all out lies, the US continues to attempt to bring about a regime change in both countries or a pretext for launching an invasion. Almost every lie that was used to invade the former Yugoslavia, Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq and then Libya have been used with regard to Iran and Syria but the world community has for the most part seen through them and because of this the US has been hesitant to unilaterally invade these two countries. I have said many times before that the US will do anything, including aggressively invading countries, exploiting and using allies and backing any group that is convenient to attain its geopolitical goals. This is a matter of historical fact and is clear to anyone who has followed the events of the last century with an independent and critical eye. This should be clear to Israel as well and Israel should be alarmed for in Israel the US has found the perfect surrogate for bringing about an invasion of both Iran and Syria. The geopolitical architects of the remapping and recreation of the Middle East must know that once they invade Syria they will have little credibility left to move on to Iran and North Korea and the pretexts used there will no longer be believed. The world may even rise up and demand an end to the aggressive invader that many believe is taking over the entire planet. Israel is the perfect surrogate for the US and the Jewish people are the perfect aggressor, in particular for launching a “preventive invasion” or “preventive air strikes” and using the security and safety of Israel as the perfect pretext. Israel may be surrounded by Islamic countries and neighbors that it does not get along with at all, it may even have been threatened and the like, but this does not change the very simple fact that “preventive” invasions and acts of war are still acts of aggression and aggressive war is illegal under international law and is considered a crime against humanity. The recent airstrikes by Israel on Damascus are crimes against humanity and acts of aggressive war because there is no concept in international law for “preventive” invasions or “preventive” aggression. It is important to recall that this was the strategy used by the Nazis at the beginning of the Great Patriotc War (World War II) and is a road that the US has followed the Nazis down. The US has manipulated and used every form of Islamic terrorist and mercenary in its “secret” war against Bashar Al-Assad, and now it has used Israel, one of the most vulnerable countries in the world, to advance it agenda for Syria. I say Israel is vulnerable because it is surrounded by Islamic countries and even though the Israelis and Mossad believe the US will defend it no matter what, will they be able to escape unscathed if the entire Muslim world wakes up and asks; “What is really going on here?” Will the Muslim world really stand by as the Jewish states bombs and kills its Muslim brothers? Apparently the Western geopolitical planners and Israel are counting on the fact that the Sunni, the Shia, the Alawites, the Wahabi, and all of the followers of other forms of Islam hate each other enough and in the particular, other groups hate the Shia and the Alawites enough to allow the Jewish state to invade its Muslim brothers. The mix in Syria is complex and now having the Jewish state joining the fray seems very odd indeed. Will the Sunnis back Israel in bombing and murdering the Alawite Syrians. Apparently the answer to that, so far, is yes. Perhaps Israel has not only made deals with the United States but with Sunni run governments around it? Although Israel claims its airstrikes were targeting Iranian missiles meant for Hezbollah, this has proven to be a lie. As were the recent chemical weapons claims made against the Syrian government and every pretext the US has used in its aggressive invasions in the past from Srebrenica to Iraq’s supposed chemical weapons to all of the recent pretexts used against Syria. Israel did not only target missiles, as if Syria does not have the right to have missiles in the first place. It targeted the presidential guards, it targeted research installations and it killed over 300 Syrian soldiers. That my friend, no matter how you want to look at it is an open and aggressive act of war. Will Israel get away with it? Will Syria assert its right to defend itself and strike back? Will the Muslim world stand by and watch the Jewish state bombs its Muslim neighbor? We have been predicting that the US and its allies are planning to invade Syria and Iran for years, could it be that even with foreknowledge of an aggressive invasion there is nothing the world can do to stop it? Time will tell but apparently that seems to be the case and explains why the US has never called for a peaceful resolution to Syria’s internal problem. As president Assad recently said, “… the terrorists are cowards”, but apparently these terrorists attacking Syria are now allied with Israel, or Israel is allied with them, and all are backed by the West. I think he was right, who else would launch missiles on sleeping soldiers? And if you are wondering what did the former dentist do to America to warrant a death sentence, well that is simple, he failed to be dictated to by America, that was his only “sin”. The opinions and views expressed above are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru
3 May, 08:20
01: Obama is holding people at Guantanamo for no reason and force feeding them illegally – Michael Ratner
The men being held at the illegal Guantanamo terror prison have been in literal limbo for over 12 years. The fact that they are Muslim and kept offshore makes them an abstraction for the American people, who along with the media have forgotten about their plight. More than half of the illegally detained inmates have been deemed completely innocent, but U.S. President Obama, despite his endless “nice words” has refused to release them. The people at Guantanamo have reached such a level of hopelessness that almost all of them have decided to end their own lives by doing the only thing they can; stop eating. Obama has decided once again to break the law and force-feed them. Michael Ratner, the U.S. lawyer for Julian Assange and the lawyer for many of the inmates at Guantanamo, spoke to John Robles on the matter. 4 May, 14:20
02: Obama has prosecuted twice the number of whistleblowers than all other presidents combined - Ratner
The United States is locking people up and destroying lives and entire families for no reason and holding people indefinitely for no reason without charge or trial is illegal, as is preventive detention, a concept which is non-existent in jurisprudence, these are some of the reasons the prison in Guantanamo has to be closed. Michael Ratner spoke with the Voice of Russia on these matters and more. Ratner is the U.S. lawyer for Julian Assange and also represents many of the inmates at Guantanamo. He also says that 86 Guantanamo prisoners were cleared for release but they continue to be held and 46 people are being indefinitely detained without any charges. Discussing Obama's persecution of whistleblowers, Ratner states that "There is obviously a war on information sharing and information revealing and revealing the crimes of the United States" and states that by doing so the U.S. is “killing democracy”.
1 May, 12:26 Terrorism: It is a duplicitous game which the US is good at playing - Rozoff
Photo: EPA One of the Boston Marathon bombers praised U.S.-backed-terrorists operating in Syria against President Bashar Al-Assad shortly before he set off the bombs which tore through the crowds at the finish line in Boston. Rick Rozoff considers the implications of the fact that these Chechen born terrorists were given asylum by the United States. For the U.S. terrorism is okay when it happens to other countries, especially if it assists in attaining geopolitical goals. Mr. Rozoff from Stop NATO, also talks about plans by NATO, already in place, to pull Syria and Lebanon into NATO once their regimes are changed.
1 May, 09:52 Obama continues the secret US war on whistleblowers
Photo: AFP US President Obama has continued not only Bush wars and policies, but has continued and expanded the Bush war on whistleblowers, the last hope for many that the truth may prevail. In a sane world if one were to witness a crime or some other clearly egregious or amoral conduct, one would think that one could report it and the guilty would be dealt with, however we do not live in a sane world. For whistleblowers this is the initial dilemma, but due to their consciences or their belief in a higher morality they decide to blow the whistle, almost always knowing that they will suffer for it. Whistleblowers are heroes who risk everything to get the truth out, something which should be rewarded, in a sane world that is. “Assange,” it is the first word that most people think about when they hear the word “whistleblower” but this association is in fact a slightly disingenuous one. Although the making of the surname of the co-founder of the WikiLeaks organization a household name worldwide by the global media has done a lot to focus on the case of WikiLeaks and has helped to keep Julian Assange alive, it has done little to help the plight of whistleblowers worldwide. WikiLeaks and Julian Assange are technically not really whistleblowers themselves, they are something much worse and I will tell you why in a minute. What the WikiLeaks organization did was far more insidious than what any whistleblower could do; they provided an anonymous platform for whistleblowers who had nowhere else to turn. They gave whistleblowers a place to at least try to get the truth out, something that is usually the domain of the Fourth Estate, which has proven since the Bush years to be incapable or unwilling to go against the government line and to expose malfeasance and crimes by officials, no matter how egregious. Why is WikiLeaks insidious and evil? They of course are not! I say that from the point of view of the U.S. Government and the Obama Administration. If you doubt for one instant that the criminals in Washington are afraid of the truth all you have to do is look at the reaction to WikiLeaks and the persecution of Mr. Assange and everyone else connected to WikiLeaks. The way they have used almost every method known to man to try to shut down WikiLeaks is a true real and damning testament not to the “evil” of WikiLeaks but to the evil of the criminals in Washington hiding in the dark, behind cloaks of secrecy and the all encompassing mien of “national security.” The “case” against Julian Assange (I used the term case which is for lack of a better word as there is no “case” against him, there are trumped up “allegations” of a sexual nature involving a ruptured condom but no official complaint or criminal charges) and WikiLeaks has done perhaps what it was designed to do and has detracted from the mission of WikiLeaks by taking the focus away from the actual leaks and putting it on the leakers. This has been voiced by WikiLeaks principals, by the Anonymous collective, whistleblower advocates and proponents of transparency regarding the fabricated Swedish claims and the U.S. persecution of Julian. WikiLeaks and Julian Assange are very fortunate as they have been able to weather the storm, a fact that must be repeated and respected, as they have survived an all out sustained and prolonged assault by the full force of the U.S. Government and all its mechanisms, and have managed to survive. Albeit for Julian, being forced to seek refuge in an embassy and be deprived of his freedom may be wanting, he has managed to stay alive and out of the claws of the U.S. police state. Their survival is due in a large part to the media coverage the charismatic Assange has managed to maintain but for whistleblowers like Bradley Manning and others, fate has not been so kind. Whistleblowers are usually marginalized, their reputations are destroyed, many are imprisoned, lose their jobs or have outright “accidents” leading to their deaths. This is not an exaggeration but a documented fact. The motivations of whistleblowers may be different but the attempt to correct wrongs, for whatever reason is a noble act and should be rewarded and applauded, in a sane world this would be the case. What we see now, and I am writing about the U.S. but this applies to other countries as well, in particular U.S. lapdogs like the U.K., Australia, Canada, and others, is that these brave and upstanding individuals are demonized and the very criminals they are attempting to expose are protected and rewarded. The hypocrisy and reversal of logic is mind boggling and leaves one gasping in disbelief. Currently the Obama Administration is carrying out a shameful and, according to Bill Moyers dot com, “… unprecedented campaign against whistleblowers, particularly on those who have divulged information that relates to national security.” Of course one cannot say shameful or disgraceful or criminally negligent on U.S. media when referring to the “imperial Executive,” but I think all of these words apply, and others as well. Whistleblowers are individuals who may see criminal activity, waste, violations of regulations or unethical, immoral or other egregious behavior and attempt to correct these wrongs but are then demonized by the very system they are trying to bring in line with what is acceptable, moral and legal. A system that goes after these individuals, by doing so proves itself to be either criminally corrupt, morally bankrupt, guilty as sin or all of the three. In the case of the U.S. this goes all the way to the Oval office as it has since the Bush coup and the creation of the all powerful imperial executive. Moyers and Company and two of their weriters, John Light and Laureen Sweeney, have done what most in the U.S. toe-the-line-mass-media have feared to do and have been negligent in doing, and have reported on six individual whistleblowers and their plights and theie stories deserve attention and they must all be applauded and rewarded. These are individuals who followed their conscience, like Bradley Manning, and have had to pay a high price for their morality. The Obama Administration, following in the footsteps of the first imperial U.S. president George Bush, has gone after these persons using the Espionage Act, an archaic law which had only been used three times in U.S. history until Obama was placed in office. Obama has used it six times against six individuals. Citing Moyers and Company, these six are: Thomas Drake a former senior executive at the U.S. National Security Agency who was charged under the Espionage Act. He attempted to report government waste on an NSA program called Trailblazer, which cost $1.2 billion and one called ThinThread which cost $3 million. He decided to blow the whistle on waste when the Bush administration began the illegal warrantless surveillance of American citizens, something he could not do anything about but which he disagreed with. According to Moyers he initially faced up to 35 years in prison but eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. 2: Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, a specialist in nuclear proliferation who worked as a contractor for the U.S. State Department. He made a statement about a North Korean nuclear test to the U.S. media, in a usual conversation between expert and press, and was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury, but the case has not yet been brought to trial. 3: John Kiriakou, was a CIA agent who followed his conscience when it came to the illegal interrogation methods and torture that was being carried out by the U.S. and was sentenced to two and a half years in prison for giving journalists the names of two former colleagues who tortured detainees. 4: Shamai K. Leibowitz, who was an FBI Hebrew translator and was worried that Israel would take the disastrous step of bombing nuclear facilities Iran. His leak of a wire tap to a blogger cost him 20 months in prison. 5: Bradley Manning who believe the American public had the right to know of the crimes being committed by the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq. He leaked documents and videos to Wikileaks. Myers wrote: “A military judge ruled earlier this month that for Manning to be convicted under the Espionage Act, the prosecution would have to prove that Manning had ‘reason to believe’ that the files could be used to harm the U.S. or to aid a foreign power.” 6: Jeffrey Sterling was a CIA officer who was privy to the details of a plan to derail plans Iran may have had in building a nuclear bomb. He is cited as a source who believed that a U.S. plan to sabotage Iran’s nuclear operations may have in fact brought Iran closer to developing a nuclear weapon. Sterling has maintained his innocence and the U.S. Justice Department says it has effectively terminated the case. These are unfortunately just some cases which are being prosecuted under the Espionage Act. The U.S. has myriad ways to deal with whistleblowers, including outright assassination. There are many different areas where whistleblowers have attempted to get the truth out and the people behind the cases are as varied as the information. Sadly the result for most is violent opposition by the authorities and unjust persecution. Cases of whistleblowers and truth proponents being persecuted are too many to go into here and the sad part is that there are many people who we will never know about, and who paid the ultimate price. Of the loud cases the Valerie Plame affair comes to mind, where CIA Agent Controller Plame was burned by the New York Times and Karl Rove, leading to the deaths of possibly hundreds of her previous agents worldwide. Her husband was a diplomat who was against one of the false pretexts for invading Iraq. Then there are thousands of others including: Daniel Ellsburg and Anthony Russo (Pentagon Papers), W. Mark Felt (Deepthroat/Nixon), A. Ernest Fitzgerald (Cost overruns/Nixon), Gregory C. Minor, Richard B. Hubbard, and Dale G. Bridenbaugh (nuclear power plant flaws), Mordechai Vanunu (Israeli Nuclear Program, 17 years in prison 11 in solitary confinement), Frederic Whitehurst (FBI whistleblower), Gary Webb (CIA, Iran Contra, Drug funding) shot twice in the head, Jesselyn Radack (John Walker Lindh), Katharine Gun (GCHQ Iraq invasion crimes), Joseph Wilson (Plame Affair, Iraq invasion lies), Richard Convertino (lack of Bush Administration support in prosecuting terrorists), Joe Darby (Abu Ghraib), Sibel Edmonds (FBI post 9-11 issues), Bunnatine "Bunny" H. Greenhouse (Halliburton war profiteering), Mark Klein (NSA illegal surveillance), Karen Kwiatkowski (USAF Iraq lies), William Sanjour (EPA), Russ Tice (NSA, CIA, DIA), and Linda Tripp (Clinton). Then there are those who had knowledge of 9-11 who have been killed: Barry Jennings, Beverly Eckert, Kenneth Johanneman, Michael H. Doran, Christopher Landis, Paul Smith, Deborah Palfrey, Major General David Wherley, Salvatore Princiotta, David Graham, Prasanna Kalahasthi, Wendy Burlingame, Katherine Smith, Daniel Pearl, Benazir Bhutto, William Cooper, Michael Zebuhr, Hunter S Thompson, Dan Wallace, Michael Connell (Bush vote fraud, dead), and then you can add the thousands killed over the Kennedy assassination and the list goes on and on. When writing this I remembered a strange event that happened to me in Mexico. I met an American woman there who had been living there since after the Kennedy assassination and she told me a story how a woman ran up to her house one night and was pounding on the door saying killers were after her. The woman and her husband let her in and proceeded to listen to the woman telling a story about how she had witnessed where the shooting came from during the Kennedy assassination. The couple thought she was insane but humored her and drove her as far from the town as they could. The next morning it was reported by the local press that an unknown woman had been found shot to death in a ditch. The woman’s husband soon after died mysteriously and she ran to Mexico. I thought it sounded like a stretch but today I doubt it was. That is the problem with government secrecy and the way they marginalize whistleblowers, people don’t believe you if you talk against those in power, they either think you are crazy or making things up, then when you are suicide or killed, it is a coincidence. My own whistleblowing case in the US which involved hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal money being stolen by local officials and the murder of a man in prison ended with the same office I complained to a grand jury against destroying my life. Unfortunately for me, like many of the people listed above, no one wanted to listen. Will the criminals in power use every instrument they can to get truth seekers? Sure they will, and do. Will they kill to keep their crimes secret? You bet. Just ask Julian Assange, credited with being the most prolific whistleblower in history with a reported 1.2 million individual leaks to his credit. May all of these heroes be remembered and honored, for that is what whistleblowers are, true heroes and of a higher morality than those around them who would extinguish the light of truth to continue their nefarious activities in the dark. The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
30 April, 09:18 CIA fueling corruption and war in Afghanistan: Karzai’s millions
© Photo: SXC.hu The violence and instability in the Middle East is getting worse as summer approaches, it is being fueled by Shiite - Sunni strife, regional animosity, civil war, shattered economies, rising Islamic fundamentalism, the ongoing conflict in Syria, Israeli moves against it neighbors, the instability in post invasion Libya and Iraq, and US military expansion. It is no coincidence that right in the middle of almost every single Middle Eastern conflict is the CIA, with suitcases of money for Karzai, money for Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria, money for NGOs in Egypt and support for insurgents and terrorists in almost every single recent conflict. A pretext is needed by US “nation builders” for an all out invasion of Syria and Iran, will the CIA give them one or can be peace be brought about in the Middle East despite US efforts? The Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki, recently made a very astute, topical and insightful statement to the world’s press regarding the situation in Syria. As a man in the leadership of a country targeted, destroyed and haphazardly reconfigured by the nefarious Western geopolitical empire builders, sitting in their comfortable offices in Washington while safely wreaking death, destruction and havoc on poor weak countries across the globe, he is a man who surely must know what he is talking about when he talks about forces that could tear the Middle East completely apart. The prime minister warned that if the Syrian insurgents, a grouping made up almost in its entirety of U.S and Western backed terrorists, mercenaries, criminals and killers, succeeds in ousting the elected President of Syria Bashar al-Assad, it will lead to more violence and instability not only in Syria, but it will spillover into the rest of the region. He said if the U.S. backed insurgents, a motley mix of Al-Qaeda, Chechen, and every other color of terrorist wins, Syria will become a haven for extremists, a sectarian war will be sparked in Iraq, a civil war will start in Lebanon and divisions will be created in Jordan. This is something that the nefarious Washington planners must also be aware of and perhaps are counting on. Washington itself has become even more bellicose than usual as of late, attempting to fabricate a Syrian chemical weapons story and trying to connect it to an invasion of Iran. The U.S. planners are clearly behind schedule on Syria and Iran and surely the pretexts for yet more aggressive invasions disguised as “interventions” will be coming one after the other in haste as summer begins. Washington’s Iranian uranium pretext has not panned out so well and President Bashar al-Assad has clearly shown more resiliency than Washington expected. The statement by the prime minister is particularly topical with the recent news that the President of Afghanistan has been receiving millions upon millions of CIA dollars for the last decade, which explains a lot actually. Namely and most importantly for me this explains, President Karzai’s complacency when it comes to the constant, seemingly never ending stream of civilian casualties and the death and destruction wreaked on the innocent Afghan civilian population by the “Bush coalition of the willing”. It also explains why Karzai has allied himself with what are nothing more than aggressive invaders of his country. These were always question I pondered but the answer is now simple and clear, it appears, that he was simply bought-off by the CIA. The New York Times reported that; “… money was delivered monthly by the CIA in suitcases, backpacks and plastic shopping bags and the sums were in the tens of millions of dollars”. Were such a revelation made of almost any other leader in the world, the outrage in the president’s country would be unbelievable. In almost any country the president receiving money from a foreign power’s spy agency, the CIA in this case, would be an outrageous act of treason. Hamid Karzai has admitted that the accusations, which were revealed by members of his own administration, are true and has tried to say that the money was used for innocent and benign “humanitarian” issues and paying unspecified “rents”. No corruption or treason here, move along, nothing to see. Never mind the CIA was doing the money delivery. Normal. Move along. The Iraqi PM stated that the violence of those wishing to replace President Bashar al-Assad will lead to more violence, this is completely logical and pragmatic reasoning and could be expanded on to reach the conclusion that a country rebuilt by corrupt officials will also spread more corruption. This black budget, or the new politer term “Ghost Money”, was paid to Karzai in secret by the CIA, not because it was for “humanitarian assistance” or “rent”, but because it was illegal and what in fact they were doing was buying favor. How will American politicians, diplomats, State Department officials and the sanctimonious idiots at the CIA who allowed this to become known, now dictate to the world on corruption? Even more importantly for their own political necks, how will they be able to explain to poor over-taxed, over controlled American taxpayers and voters, why they are pouring millions upon millions into the pockets of a foreign leader in a country where they have already failed miserably and have burdened the next dozen or so generations of American taxpayer with a bill of over half a trillion dollars? As of today, according to cost of war dot com, the war in Afghanistan has cost American taxpayers $624,885,950,261.00. This burden on Americans continues to grow as the government continues to close schools, cut social spending, continues to behave as if the basic human rights of housing, education and medical care are for the elites and continues to raise taxes. Now tell Americans the CIA was delivering millions of their tax dollars to the president of a country they invaded. Doubtful they will support that. Expanding on the theme; the US always knows exactly how much the opium trade is making in Afghanistan, how many tons are produced etc, just as they claim to have information on and be able to determine who is corrupt. Now we know they are engaged in the very corruption they preach to the world about, clearly giving them a true position as experts on the matter. Perhaps they are also involved in the opium trade? After all that “business” has skyrocketed since they invaded Afghanistan, maybe I am reaching but it does raise questions. Of course this would be through the CIA, an “agency” which engages in some of the worst evils being carried out by humankind, and these are questions American tax payers and voters should be asking. Why the CIA and the US need to control and pay off Karzai is clear, but what about the statements by the Iraqi PM? Why would the US want to bring about what could be the complete destruction of the entire Middle East, by continuing to fund insurgents in Syria, and the deaths of millions if all out war breaks out? The answer to US meddling and destabilization efforts in the Middle East is quiet simple and boils down to three main things: oil, Israel and money. I have said this in the past many times: a country founded by genocidal killers and the worst elements of European society and based on that genocide and built by slaves, will never be able to truly carry out anything worthy of mankind, other than more death and destruction. The Iraqi PM’s statement, in all its honesty, if applied historically and with a 200-year-retrospect, could apply to the US as well. Back to Karzai: the New York Times quotes Karzai as having said the money was "very useful, and we are grateful for it." Sure you are all those billions must have helped a lot in securing yourself a nice little life while the Afghan people are some of the poorest in the world. They also quote Khalil Roman, the deputy chief of staff for Karzai from 2002 until 2005, as saying the huge sums were "ghost money" that "came in secret, and it left in secret." The publication also quotes anonymous US officials as saying: "… the cash has fueled corruption and empowered warlords, undermining Washington's exit strategy from Afghanistan." As I have said many times, the US needs conflict, it needs and feeds war, all over the world. This justifies its own global military expansion, and it has never ever, not for a minute, been truly concerned about human rights, democracy, rule of law, corruption, justice or peace. So should a country spreading so much war, death, suffering and corruption continue to be allowed to do? I think the answer to that is clear. The US has shown itself to be the single largest threat to peace and regional stability on the entire planet Earth. It has started and been involved in more wars, aggressive invasions and has violated more international laws and conventions than any other country on the planet. Maybe it is time the world said no to the CIA and Washington’s geopolitical global architects, or perhaps they CIA might start delivering suitcases of dollars to poor and hungry kids around the world so they can build schools, pay for medical care, buy food and perhaps get a new toy? Doubt that will ever happen, no profit in helping humans! The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.
27 April, 08:45 NATO’s global expansion unparalleled in history and fraught with catastrophe - Rozoff
Photo: © en.wikipedia.org/Cantus US controlled NATO dangerously and relentlessly continues its global expansion, "something unparalleled in history and something fraught with, not only danger, but with catastrophe." In order to further hide the fact that the United States is taking over the world militarily through NATO, cleverly designed and marketed "programs" such as the Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue, the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, the Partners Across the Globe and the newly created Aspirant Nation category, are being used to hasten their, for the most part quiet, yet massive expansion. Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr Rick Rozoff, the owner and editor of the stop NATO website and mailing list.
R This is John Robles, you were listening to part one of an interview with Rick Rozoff – the owner of the stop NATO website and mailing list.
24 April, 14:49 Boston bombing: Russia warned FBI, advisors warned Obama, terror continues
Photo: EPA Russian Intelligence warned the United States about Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the U.S. President’s Intelligence Advisory Board warned President Obama about weaknesses in the CIA, NSA, FBI and other agencies which have de facto become drone assassination support agencies. But like the warnings to Bush before 9-11, they were ignored by the now imperial U.S. presidency. Is the safety of ordinary peaceful civilians really of any interest to the U.S. or has the open-ended war on terror become a machine that requires endless violence and the endless creation of new terrorists and is the number one priority? The United States used to flaunt the fact that it did not have a problem with radicalized extremist followers of Islam, that was always a problem in Europe, Asia or Africa, but after more than a decade engaged in an open-ended global war, the U.S. is beginning to see the result of its aggressive invasions and efforts at brutally dealing with an “enemy” that was exaggerated and largely made up from the beginning. Whether or not you believe the official version of 9-11 and the entire U.S. war on terror paradigm, it is impossible to believe that the results of how the war on terror has been executed are, and will be, somehow unexpected or surprising for the U.S. intelligence community, one of those results being the creation of large numbers of even more violent, sophisticated, radicalized and determined terrorists. The official version of 9-11 would have us believe that Egyptian terrorists operating for Al-Qaeda flew planes whose wreckage was never found into buildings causing controlled demolitions and that the mastermind who initially denied any connection to those events, Osama Bin Laden, was supported by countries that he had no connection to, hence necessitating aggressive invasions of those Muslim countries. The U.S. has never come clean on 9-11and this is a fact that is known by the thinking part of the U.S. population and the world. Too many questions have never been adequately answered or addressed and brushing aside the concerns of the people and relegating anyone to the margins who question 9-11 will backfire and lead to even more terrorists both homegrown and international. The root of the war on terror is also the root of the justified questioning of the legitimacy of the U.S. government and this fact alone will lead to the creation and radicalization of internal U.S. “terrorists”. This is also true for reasoning and propaganda the U.S. spreads about the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, and planned wars in Iran and elsewhere. No matter how much the U.S. spreads the words “democracy” “humanitarian” and “freedom”, these apparently transient concepts espoused by the U.S., pale when it comes to what the people see before their very eyes: one devastated and destroyed country after the other. It is not possible to believe that anything worth backing can be created at gunpoint and by force when women and children are being brutally murdered and the very infrastructure and society of country after country are being destroyed and nothing is being done to remedy such egregious destruction. When you add the fact that most of the countries being targeted and meddled with are Muslim countries then the possibility that this will create radicalized Islamic terrorists is multiplied a thousand fold. Since the U.S. war on terror began experts have warned about the next generation of terrorists, like 19-year-old Tsarnev, the Boston bomber, these are young people who have spent most of their lives exposed to the faulty U.S. execution of their prized “War on Terror”. They have been witness to merciless unjustifiable violence brought down on their people in a global war that was supposed to be against Al-Qaeda and the bogeyman Osama Bin Laden, and have repeatedly had to try to accept duplicitous hypocrisy when U.S. officials make statements such as Bush’s famous: “Osama Bin Laden, I don’t think about him much, he is not that important.” One has to ponder if knowingly creating terrorists is by design, as a war such as the endless global war on terror needs terrorists to sustain itself or if the U.S. intelligence community is so inept and so near-sighted that the results of their actions have never been considered. When one takes into consideration that the CIA and the U.S. were in bed with Osama Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda and even the Taliban, and in fact helped to fund them and create them in their “covert” efforts to fight the USSR which was asked to assist in Afghanistan and in other past and current conflict zones, one has to seriously question the “intelligence” of the U.S. intelligence community. There are reports that the Tsarnaev brothers were recruited by the CIA as double agents and that they were supposed to infiltrate Caucasian Wahhabi jihadist networks supported by the Saudis but then joined the very terrorists they were supposed to infiltrate. This would not be surprising as the U.S. is currently financing and aiding Al-Qaeda, Chechen, and other terrorist groups in Syria and other locations to assist them in achieving geopolitical goals and regime change in countries they have targeted. If the U.S. intelligence community really believes that they can recruit and use terrorists whilst at the same time waging what is seen as a war against Islam, then once again we have to seriously question the intelligence and the true motivations of those making such decisions. The Voice of Russia reported that: “the surviving Boston Marathon bombings suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, told interrogators that US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had motivated him and his brother to carry out the attack.”This would back up the argument that the entire war on terror paradigm is flawed and causes more terror than it eradicates. The intelligence failure in the case of the Boston Marathon bombing once again sheds credible doubt and casts suspicion on the competence and even the true nature of the U.S. surveillance state and the CIA. On the one hand you have innocent activists like Chicago Occupiers being called terrorists when they posed no real threat and real terrorists being let go even after being warned by foreign intelligence agencies. According to the Washington Post shortly before the Boston bombing U.S. President Barack Obama was warned that “U.S. spy agencies had become too focused on military operations and drone strikes.” “The secret report by the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board calls for the first significant shift in intelligence resources since the events of 9-11.” The seemingly coincidental timing of the report and the Boston blasts will no doubt fuel conspiracy theories that the attack was planned to allow for the continuation of the current war on terror and the further stripping away of rights in the U.S. as well as further crackdowns by the security state, and this may all be true, or not. However what is clear is that the CIA being turned into the assassination support system for the imperial U.S. executive, and the NSA, FBI and other U.S. intelligence bodies being redirected to roles in an endless global war on terror, as the world’s policeman and a support system for global U.S. military expansion, has left the U.S. “homeland” more vulnerable than ever to terrorist attacks. In summary the U.S. should stop antagonizing people around the globe (Muslims in particular) with illegal aggressive wars, extra-judicial drone executions and indefinite detention and torture, focus its efforts on bringing about diplomatic solutions to conflicts it chooses to become embroiled in rather than constant force and threats, and stop duplicitous polices and cooperation with terrorists and any other group for the sole purpose of advancing its own geopolitical ambitions. That is if the U.S. really wants to be safe and protect Americans rather than propagate reasons to continue its military expansion and endless war on terror. Had the U.S. not been so busy drawing up phony lists to demonize Russia, going after whistleblowers, stifling dissent, meddling in countries all over the world, arresting harmless hackers and planning who to drone tomorrow, they may have listened to a Russian warning about Tamerlan Tsarnaev, then again maybe this was just another inconvenient truth for America.
Serbians do not want to lose Kosovo or be a part of the EU
Jelisaveta Pavlovic Photo: Voice of Russia Download audio file http://www.jar2.com/Interviews/Jelisaveta_Pavlovic.html
|
Page Under Construction
