Articles and Interviews by John Robles From  July 03, 2013 to August 31, 2013



 Under COnstruction Page Under Construction

31 August, 01:46 3 

Saudi Prince Bandar delivered Israeli chemicals to Syrian terrorists - official

2012 июль коллаж газ сирия газ сирия химическое оружие сирия

© Collage: «Voice of Russia»

Download audio file

A high-level anonymous official with the Libyan Ministry of Defense granted an interview to the Voice of Russia and discussed matters of intelligence surrounding the chemical attack in Syria. After recent threats by Saudi Arabia against Russia for supporting Syria, this area was focused on. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, when asked if he could verify admissions by Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan that he controlled the terrorists groups in Syria, including Chechen terrorist formations, stated that this was true. The official then stated that there were rumors in the Libyan Defense Ministry that it was actually Bandar who delivered the chemical weapons from Israel to the Syrian insurgents and that it was Israel who was pushing the United States for a military attack on Syria.

Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with an anonymous member of the Libyan Defense Ministry.

Robles: Hello Sir! How are you?

Source: I’m fine, thank you.

Robles: I’d like to ask you some very serious questions regarding, first, the Saudi involvement in the Middle East, in particular with regard to terrorist organizations and formations. Can you tell me anything that you might know about US and Saudi involvement with terrorist formations in Libya and how they might be operating in Syria?

Source: Well, most of the organizations that have been working here have been; not eradicated, but rather exiled to the eastern part of Libya. That’s where they are most active.

In the western part of the country criminal activity is very low, but in the eastern part – Benghazi, Derna, Tobruk – the criminal activity is quite high and most of these are extremist groups, funded mostly by Qatar, more than by Saudi Arabia.

Robles: I see. Would you say these are US-backed groups?

Source: It is possible that they are backed by the United States because these groups do not operate without their consent. Saudi Arabia does not operate without the consent of the United States, because they consider any move from Middle Eastern countries to be a threat to their national interests. So, they ask first advice and then permission.

Robles: So, all the countries in the Middle East, they ask the United States for permission before they do anything, is that what you say?

Source: Exactly! Especially after the invasion in Iraq most Arab countries have felt they are under threat. In fact I remember in 2004 there was a meeting between Arab countries and we were present there, it was near Tripoli. At that time there was Gaddafi and he received a letter during the meeting and jokingly he said “the fax from America just arrived”. But it was more a confession than a joke, I think.

Robles: Do you know the contents of that fax?

Source: No, we weren’t allowed to see any of those documentations.

Robles: I see. But this happened all the time?

Source: It happened all the time. In fact, most of the meetings were attended even by foreigners, non-Arabs.

Robles: And these were meetings between Libyan defense officials and who else? Who was present?

Source: Libyan defense officials, interior ministries of all Arab countries. In fact, all the Arab countries have a unified protocol in case of protests, in case of “cracks”in their governments. The recent Saudi aid in Bahrain and the recent financial support by Qatar to Kuwait under crisis, this shows that they are unified. And most of the Gulf countries have been pressuring for Hosni Mubarak to be released. And Saudi Arabia gave no support for our liberation from Gaddafi, nor to the Tunisians against Ben Ali.

Robles: Saudi Arabia gave no support.

Source: Absolutely no support and in any case.

Robles: What I’ve heard, I'm very concerned about reports that Saudi Prince Bandar, he threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin that he would release Chechen terrorists at the Sochi Olympics. And during part of the conversation which was released, which I’m sure he thought would be secret, he admitted and he said that they control Chechen terrorists, they control the terrorists in Syria, according to his words. Is that true?

Source: Yes, I believe that is true. Some rumors were spoken here in our Defense Ministry that the nerve gasses, that the chemical weapons used against Syrian civilians were brought by Bandar from Israel and given to the rebels. I don’t believe that Assad used chemical weapons against his own people.

Robles: I don’t think so either. So, the rumors have it there that the chemical weapons that were used in Syria, that actually Bandar was involved in this and they came from Israel, originally?

Source: Yes, those are the rumors. And who benefits from this? Mostly Israel. They are the ones which would want it in fact more than the United States.

Robles: What about Saudi Arabia? What is Saudi Arabia’s role then in the Middle East? What are their goals? Is this religious or is this oil?

Source: It is neither, I think. They just follow the orders. From the oil’s they give only 11 million barrels. They have no natural gas resources. And from the religionthey are mostly conservative closed in their areas.

And as the continuing Shia fight, Syria is now 85% Sunni. So, there is absolutely no role. They just provide what the American and British governments want, that’s all.

Prince Bandar is just under something that’s been in force for many years, I think for all his life. He wants the throne for himself and maybe he thinks that allying with the United States that they might help him to become the king of Saudi Arabia. But it is very difficult because there are about 5,000 princes,and only 40 are eligible and he is out of the race for that part.

Robles: So, Prince Banda, his ambition was to become the king?

Source: Exactly! His father, late father, was the heir to the throne, but he passed away a year ago, Prince Sultan. But because his mother is from a legitimate background, not from a royal background, he is not eligible to take the throne, even if he is the eldest son.

Robles: I see. But he was supposed to be helped by the United States or has that been stopped? Or what is going on?

Source: Exactly! He is trying to buy their graces so they might pressurize the Saudi Government to let him be heir of the throne, something which in the Arab world we know about.

Robles: That’s not something most of the rest “us” know about. So basically, what you are telling, I mean, this is pretty shocking. You are telling me that, basically, every country in the Middle East is following the US’s instructions.

Source: That’s what it is essentially especially in the Gulf countries. Before the revolution maybe Russia had a greater influence over North Africa, France over the Maghreb countries from Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and so on. But after the revolution mostly the Americans have gained upper hand from this point of view.

The real battle is between Russia and America. Thetwo superpowers that control most of the region. And the Russian economy has been speeding up in the past 8 years and this is something (for the first time in which) the American administrationhas no say.

Robles: And the US economy has been going down, and it’s in a very dire state right now. Can you tell us a little bit about what you know about the Muslim Brotherhood? What kind of an organization is it?

Source: Looking first at the origin of the Muslim Brotherhood, it was formed in 1940 by the British Government as a form of response to King Farouk who did not like the British occupation of Egypt. They were supported, they were funded, they were trained and they were armed.

President Gamal Abdel Nasser joined them when he was 18 years old, because he was a very strong Muslim conservative and he thought they were nationalists. But after two years he left them, found them very radical and their focus on supporting political candidates. So, nothing related to religion.

They had a strong development under the dictatorship of Gaddafi, Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak. They became a radical armed force. Prior to the revolution they became more popular. In the civil protests they gained the respect of the people as a solution against dictatorship. But after one year people in Egypt and Libya found them more oppressive, than the previous dictators. The recent changes in Egypt show that that armed forces were actually called upon by the people.

Robles: You said the Muslim Brotherhood has no religious agenda.

Source: They have no religious agenda at all, because in Islam something called a political party, political religion is a violation of the Islamic law in principle. It is the way the Hezbollah and all other political factions related to religion – they just want to gain massive support. But in Islam itself religion and politics should not go hand by hand.

Robles: I don’t know if you are aware of these threats by the Saudi prince against Russia. Do the Saudis really control Chechen terrorists, in your opinion?

Source: Yes, even long ago, even the Bosnians. The Bosnian war you know,in the Balkan war, the Bosnian actions were supported and funded by Saudi Arabia, because the opposing side, the Serbianside was supported by Russia. And this is something everyone knows.

It is very difficult toopenly say that - I’m going to support Chechen terrorists against Russia – because that would be a violation of international law. And I don’t believe the Chechens are ready for this, nor they believe in it.

Robles: OK, what do you think about this now, this would technically make Saudi Arabia a sponsor of terrorism?

Source: This is something which everybody knows. I mean,the Bin Laden family they are still operating normally. Osama bin Laden was never questioned in Saudi Arabia and he was never considered a terrorist at all. And most of the money that is going to terrorists held in Iraq are all from Saudi Arabia and all from Qatar.

Robles: Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Source: I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Tarek Bin Laden about 5 years ago in Dubai.MrTarek Bin Laden, Osama’s brother.He had an office near the palace, and I met him by chance through another Saudi Mr. Mohammed Dohteri, his lawyer. And I saw this man was always going heavily guarded, but like he is distanced from the family. He doesn’t seem like someone who is very religious or something like that, on the contrary. So, I don’t know what kind of family, not a loving family, he’s a member of the family.

Robles: Can you tell us about that meeting? What happened? What can you tell us about Osama bin Laden’s brother?

Source: It was a meeting between the Libyan Ambassador and other ambassadors when they were there at security forum. He shook our hands “with me and one of my colleagues”. He was talking there only English, his Arabic was quite weak. I started talking with him in English, and nothing like like that. He didn’t seem a very calm person. But he was always going heavily guarded, I don’t know why.

Robles: You say his Arabic was bad but his English was better. Was his English British or American?

Source: It was more American.

That was the end on an interview in progress. For the continuation of this interview, please, visit our website at voiceofrussia.com

News item on topic

Details of Prince Bandar and his threat of a terrorist attack on Sochi Olympics

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

IsraelUSSyriaSaudi Arabiachemical weaponsterrorismSyria. Elimination of chemical weaponsSyrian conflictWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 3

·         Bridey MurphyBridey Murphy, 31 August, 08:24#

This is interesting....

·         Michael John SmithMichael John Smith, 4 September, 05:35#

So why has Prince Bandar not been arrested and questioned over his involvement with supplying chemical weapons to the Syrian rebels? Perhaps he has some sort of protective shield around him - because he is doing the dirty work of the USA? The bad guy always gets away with the crime, at this level of criminality - because he is protected by the USA's political intent. Undercover operations by the USA will always be denied.

·         Jean-Claude MeslinJean-Claude Meslin, 28 October, 22:31#

I wrote a book (in English) which relate what could happen, independently of human action for giving to Humanity a chance to survive our actual sad worldwide governance. Call or click the edition: Edilivre.com and ask in the science-fiction roman: 2039 A Preventive Fiction
Read more: 


30 August, 10:44 1 

Attack on Syria is an attack against Russia – Libyan military official

сирия дамаск взрыв дым заминированный атомобиль


Photo: EPA

In an interview with the Voice of Russia, a high-level anonymous official with direct working knowledge of the United States missile defense system stated that the system allows 30-40 percent of all missiles to get through and is highly ineffective against small missiles.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, when asked if he could verify admissions by Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan that he controlled the terrorists groups in Syria, including Chechen terrorist formations, stated that this was true.

The official then stated that there were rumors in the Libyan Defense Ministry that it was actually Bandar who delivered the chemical weapons from Israel to the Syrian insurgents and that it was Israel who was pushing the United States for a military attack on Syria.

The official stated that all countries in the Middle East were controlled by the United States except Syria, Iran and for the most part Lebanon, with US representatives normally present at all meetings between the leaders and heads of the Middle East states.

The source also stated that it the ambition of Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan to become the King of Saudi Arabia, that drives him to do whatever the US asks of him as he needs their support to make him the king. His mother is not of royal lineage so he is ineligible to be the king.

The official explained the urgency of the United States and US President Barrack Hussein Obama to invade Syria as being due a drive to diminish growing Russian influence in the Middle East and surprisingly as revenge for Russia’s refusal to hand over Edward Snowden.

He stated that Russia’s growing and prospering economy and the US’s ever weakening economic condition is causing countries in the region to look towards Russia and this is unacceptable to the US administration.

When asked about the Muslim Brotherhood, he stated that since its creation by MI6 in the 1940s it had been under the control of the West and was in fact in no way a religious organization. Under several dictators over the decades the Muslim Brotherhood has become a radical armed force.

When asked if the Saudis in fact really controlled Chechen terrorist formations the official revealed that even during the Bosnian War the Bosnian Muslims were controlled and funded by the Saudis, who are controlled by the US and that the Bosnian War was also staged to weaken Russian influence in the region.

The source said he had met with Osama Bin Laden’s brother and that the Bin Laden family were still operating in Saudi Arabia. He added that Osama Bin Laden was never questioned or impeded in Saudi Arabia.

As in Iraq and other post-US-invasion countries such as Afghanistan and Serbia, the United States through its surrogates in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who said is also sponsoring Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups operating in Syria and the Middle East, attempted to instruct the regulate the reformation of the Libyan Army. Qatar attempted to persuade Libya to forego plans for tanks divisions and air-force formations and insisted that Libya merely maintain a small fractured army so it would not pose a threat.

When asked about Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad the official said that he was a very peaceful and intelligent man who limited his own role to dealing with the social circumstances and well being of his people. He said the West’s attempt to portray President Assad as some sort of mad dictator were ridiculous and that there was no way he would ever have launched a chemical attack on his own people in an area that was completely under the control of the Syrian forces. Especially since President Assad is winning.

The urgency of the US attacking is also due to the fact that, as he said, the Syrian insurgents and terrorist forces cannot hold out anymore than 3 or 4 months, they have effectively been almost beaten. The fact that the West has spent millions funding and arming and training these groups makes their urgency that much more pressing.

Full transcript of interview to be available soon on the Voice of Russia.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

RussiaWorldSyriastrikeSyrian oppositionSyrian rebelsPolitics

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         Benjamin ContrerasBenjamin Contreras, 30 August, 22:33#

No war in Syria, no real evidence, no public support, no international support except from France. But do we really want France as a war ally. I don't think so, barrettes and scooters aren't going to intimidate the Russians, Iranians, and Chinese. World War 3 with us and France against the world not a good.
Read more: 




The West will benefit from WWIII – David Shayler

The whistleblower who outed an MI6 plan to assassinate late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi spoke to the Voice of Russia about what is going on behind the scenes in Syria. Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad would never use chemical weapons as he knows the whole world is watching and he is winning the war. Former MI5 officer Michael Shayler also said the British foreign intelligence service MI6, is a law to itself and does not have to be held accountable to the British people. This is part 2 of a larger interview.

30 August, 09:25     Moved to David Shayler Page


29 August, 03:43 7 

Bandar Bush threatens President Putin with Sochi terrorist attack

11 сентября башни близнецы Нью-Йорк трагедия взрыв

© Flickr.com/savethedave/cc-by-nc-sa 3.0

Warning: What you are about to read will destroy any illusions you may have left as to who is really controlling the world and who is really using terror to bring about their own ends. It will also bring into question everything that has occurred in the world since 9-10-2001 and shed new light as to the intricacies of the relationships between the power elites in the United States and those who are funding and controlling them.

The truth goes to oil and it has its roots in the relationship between former CIA director George Bush Senior’s family and Saudi Arabian intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan also named “Bandar Bush” by the Bush clan. This story has implications on the events 9-11, Bush and his being placed into power, the entire War on Terror paradigm and the acts of aggressive war by the United States and its allies on Iraq and Afghanistan. It also affects everything from the entire Middle East upheaval, Sunni/Shia strife, the death of Hugo Chavez, the attack on the Boston Marathon, the death of Litvinenko, Princess Diana, terrorist attacks by Chechens and the true nature of al-Qaeda.

If this story takes off and is given the attention it deserves it may end the entire “War on Terror” and finally see an end to the wanton illegality being perpetuated by the West and it all boils down to a single conversation between Prince Bandar bin Sultan and the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin.

The conversation between President Putin and the “Bushie” was apparently released to the Russian press and then made its rounds worldwide and gives a rare glimpse into the real conversations that take place between world leaders before the handshakes, smiles and photo opportunities. This one is particularly chilling and it is clear why it was released to press.

What is almost unbelievable is that it clearly shows, apart from what I mentioned above, who has been benefitting and working with the United States to destabilize the Middle East, who is assisting in controlling the terrorists that the United States is arming, funding and giving asylum to and why Israel has nothing to fear from the chaos around it. In this short snippet of conversation, everything has become clearer, almost crystal.

It is also important to note that Bandar Bush spoke with the full backing of the United States. So what is the bombshell? Well there are three main ones actually.

The first is an admission by the Bandar to Saudia Arabia’s and the United States support and knowledge of the true nature of the Muslim Brotherhood and the screaming hypocrisy with which they operate: “There are many common values and goals that bring us together, most notably the fight against terrorism and extremism all over the world. Russia, the US, the EU and the Saudis agree on promoting and consolidating international peace and security. The terrorist threat is growing in light of the phenomena spawned by the Arab Spring.” Here we must note it was the West which drove the Arab Spring.

He continued: “We have lost some regimes. And what we got in return were terrorist experiences, as evidenced by the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the extremist groups in Libya.”

The second and most shocking is this: ”As an example, I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.”

So Chechen terrorists, who supposedly carried out the attack in Boston and have killed hundreds of Russians including Russian police officers, are being controlled by the US and the Saudis? And what is more the Saudis and the US are admittedly controlling terrorists in Syria? And lastly this arrogant “Prince” has the audacity to threaten the president of the largest country in the world with terrorist attacks if he does not do his bidding?

Not only is this an admission that the United States and Saudi Arabia are state sponsors of terrorism, but they are actually using the terrorists themselves to do their bidding and as instruments to terrorize leaders into submission! This means they have become nothing more than terrorists themselves!

Bandar attempted at first to bribe President Putin with promises of oil and gas deals, arms purchases and more, to pull Russian support for Syria. He then moved on to the threats of attacks on the Olympics by the Saudi and US' terrorists.

President Putin responded by saying: “We know that you have supported the Chechen terrorist groups for a decade. And that support, which you have frankly talked about just now, is completely incompatible with the common objectives of fighting global terrorism that you mentioned. We are interested in developing friendly relations according to clear and strong principles. Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters.”

The Bushie, after failing in all attempts to get President Putin to pull his support for Assad then responded by saying:“… there is no escape from the military option (in Syria), because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate. We believe that the Geneva II Conference will be very difficult in light of this raging situation.”

And today we are on the eve of an invasion because a terrorist Saudi Prince wants to protect the petro dollar and kill all Muslims who are not Sunnis.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

RussiaUSCIASyriaSaudi ArabiaterrorismAl-Qaeda9/11 terrorist attacksWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 7

·         Konny KonnyKonny Konny, 30 August, 22:03#

That is unbelievable! Thats how our world works!? Thank you Russians for being strong and not getting scaried by terrorists! Greating from Germany.

·         Konny KonnyKonny Konny, 30 August, 22:03#


·         Ahmed OmairAhmed Omair, 1 September, 07:15#

It is wrong to say that Saudis want to kill all Muslims who are not Sunnis. Saudis paid Egypt huge amount of money to finish Muslim Brotherhood govt. & then for killing them who are 100% Sunni.

·         KatherineB2013KatherineB2013, 2 September, 09:26#

Lol. What a dumb goat-herder! Imagine showing up at Putin's place admitting that the Saudis control the Chechen terrorists that Putin vehemently HATES and who have given him nothing but trouble. As if Putin is going to sit there and just pussyfoot around with that mob of idiots. As if Putin wouldn't record the conversation, with evidence that the Arabs are funding terrorists, and GIVE the recording to the press. Now he has PROOF to legally bomb a country that is funding terrorism against Russia. No wonder today's papers are full of threats by Putin to nuke Arabia with a US strike on Syria, which in the Saudis' words is unavoidable. Catholic prophecies say that Arabia will burn, and that was before anybody knew there was oil beneath the sands. Those dumb Arabs should stick to goat-herding.

·         KatherineB2013KatherineB2013, 2 September, 09:29#

... and not to mention what that losing Arabian oil imports would do to the USA - send it into the stone age. lol.

·         Michael John SmithMichael John Smith, 4 September, 05:48#

This article shows the true nature of the link between the USA and Saudi inspired terrorism. It always seemed likely that the US was behind the Islamic terrorist attacks around the world. This story fits in well with the principle that the US needs a constant enemy, that they can use to frighten the public - the bogey man that can be used to justify any attack on foreign countries. A perfect let-out clause in any US constitution.

·         Dixiea GreyDixiea Grey, 2 October, 08:43#

I think you might be confusing the US with Israel. They take part in killing Americans in order for us to think this country or that did it to put us into wars against their enemies. They bombed our USS Liberty to make us nuke Egypt and we almost did. Then they planed bombs throughout Egypt where Americans were, but it failed when they accidently blew a bomb too soon and during 9-11 they were caught there too, but they were released. We can't bomb Israel either because there are good people, (Jewish, Christian, Muslim,) there too.
Read more: 



28 August, 21:23  

US attack on Syria may cause WWIII - Rick Rozoff

сирия война разрушения хомс

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

If the West is allowed to launch military aggression in Syria, using any pretext, Iran, Russia and China and the few remaining countries in the world who possess independent foreign policies will be left with no remaining buffer between themselves and the US – NATO war machine. Voice of Russia contributor Rick Rozoff spoke about this and more in the second part of an interview covering the current crisis involving US aggression against Syria.

Rick Rozoff

This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff – the manager and owner of the stop NATO website and mailing list.

Robles: There was a statement from China that there is a threat, that this could culminate into beginning of World War III. Can you comment on that?

Rozoff: People are using this language and I think not without justification. If the parallel we established a few minutes ago about events in Asia and Europe from 1931 to 1941, and we should mention, by the way, that at the end of that decade there was Nazi Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union with the largest invasion force in human history and, in the end, the deadliest war in human history. But if at that time World War was grounded in a series of unprovoked and, unfortunately, unopposed acts of military aggression, then the parallel certainly could be extended to include that.

A comment today by a leading Prelate, a leading church official in Syria Antoine Audo, who is the head of what is called the Chaldean Catholic Church in Syria, he made precisely that statement.

He said that: “If there is outside” – which is to say Western and allied – “military intervention inside the country, it could lead to World War III”. Those are exactly his terms. And this is what he said in an interview with Vatican Radio.

Robles: What can you tell us about the region? I mean, in your opinion, for example Israel. I keep thinking that if they are going to destabilize the entire Middle East, right in the middle of it you’ve got Israel. You’ve got all these Islamic fundamentalists, extremists and terrorists and none of them are much in love with the Jewish state. How is Israel going to deal with this? Or is this part of the plan?

Rozoff: It appears to be counterintuitive but we have to recollect that the US’s second closest ally in the entire Middle Eastern region is of course Saudi Arabia, which is theocratic, it is Wahabist at root, you know, a severe form of theocratic government, it is medieval in many respects and particularly brutal.

But the US has no problem and Israel has no problem. You know, reconciling support for the Jewish secular state of Israel on the one hand, and for the medieval hereditary despotism in Saudi Arabia on the other. And the Obama Administration, which now is once again invoking humanitarianism as an excuse for a war, has no problem at all having just completed the largest bilateral arms deal in history with Saudi Arabia.

So, I suppose the average citizen of the US and of the world is not supposed to make comparisons and see just how egregiously contradictory those policies are. And then you claim to be fighting religious extremism, and on the other hand you are arming to the teeth the bastion of religious extremism in the Islamic world.

Robles: You mentioned Obama, you mentioned Egypt and the hypocrisy, and the double dealing that is going on. Have you heard anything about the fact that Obama was connected with Morsi, with the Egyptians, to the attack on the CIA installation in Benghazi where the CIA long-term agent Christopher Stevens was killed? Apparently, he was working on transferring Stinger Missiles to Al Qaeda elements in Syria and Libya.

Rozoff: Yes, that’s the interpretation I’m familiar with too without being able to substantiate it of course. But nevertheless, the US was simply going from strength to strength, it slipped from one massive bombing campaign on behalf of foreign mercenaries and domestic religious extremists in Libya to spreading the Washington- as well as the Saudi-backed Jihad, if you will, from Libya to Syria. And then, of course, that Stevens who incidentally was ensconced in Benghazi in the opening days of the attack against Libya in March 2011, basically, running weapons and Jihadi fighters into Libya for the war against the established Government of Muammar Gaddafi.

So, if the line in the Gospels about “he, who lives by the sword will perish by the sword” has any meaning, I think in the case of Mr. Stevens it is pretty obvious that what he put out in the world, is what came back to get him.

Robles: What about Obama now? Some people are saying that the fact that he was actively funding Al Qaeda and they ended up killing four Americans, is it possible that even with all these illegal aggressive wars and millions of people that have been killed by Bush and Obama – is it possible that these four Americans, including Stevens, might lead to the downfall of this regime, and Obama in particular? Is that realistic?

Rozoff: I don’t think it is realistic, I think it is possible. But I believe that nobody looks too closely into matters like that. And the so-called other side, the Republican Party, on foreign policy issues the political differences end at the shoreline, as has been remarked, and they are not going to look too closely at anything like that.

In fact, even during the two impeachment trials of Nixon in the early 1970s and Clinton at the end of the 1990s, and for that matter the Iran Contra Affair, you know, whenever one party can make some political capital out of embarrassing the other during congressional hearings, they’ll bring them right to the edge of the abyss and then pull them back out of the fear of really exposing what is going on.

I wouldn’t anticipate anything in that respect. I think, if I were a family member of one of those four killed in Benghazi, and I had strong feelings about it, I would be willing to dedicate the rest of my life to investigating what actually happened and who was ultimately responsible for that. But I wouldn’t expect anyone in our suborned and corrupt, and arrogant, and aloof political system to really care about the four people who were killed. And they’ll make points demagogically trying to blame somebody, but I don’t believe anyone has lost any sleep over the demise of Mr. Stevens and his three colleagues.

Robles: One more question. We’ve been going over this for years literally now and it looks like an invasion is just maybe hours away. Any other things you want to say about Bashar Assad and Syria?

Rozoff: I won’t characterize it as an invasion at this point any more than, say, the six-month war against Libya two years ago, it is technically speaking an invasion. And it is a very common modality now. It is one that we saw I think, first of all, in 1999 with the 78-day air war against Yugoslavia, and then saw it with Libya two and a half years ago.

But what we are seeing is that on the ground a heterogeneous grouping of the so-called opposition figures, some domestic extremists, some foreign, and mercenaries are used to be the spotters on the ground and those that attack government installations, and, if possible, bring about retaliation that can then be construed as a massacre, a crime against humanity, which then provides the West – the US and its NATO allies – with the justification for a military intervention, such as the Račak events in early 1999 in Kosovo which were characterized as a massacre by the US and its allies and that led to the air war.

We saw something very similar in Libya and of course that scenario is being played out again in Syria currently. And that permits the US and its allies with the overwhelming superiority and firepower, particularly in terms of missiles and aircraft, to just bombard an essentially defenseless nation which is much smaller than any of the major NATO members of course, and surely the US, with outdated and for the most part ineffective air defenses, to bomb that country into submission on behalf of the rebel forces that have been trained and armed from outside by the US and its allies.

So, we are seeing that scenario played out to perfection. And the only thing missing up until now of course was the sort of Račak massacre pretext. And now we have it.

Robles: So, your final assessment on this supposed chemical attack?

Rozoff: Considering that a year ago the Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces Barack Obama stated specifically, tipping the hand of the West in terms of what they would use as the alleged reason for military aggression against Syria, that the use of chemical weapons was crossing a red line, and knowing that the Government of Syria would commit political suicide by doing such a thing – it is more than I think any sensible person would expect or could understand. And in fact, I think whatever the details are… and let’s be honest about it, it doesn’t matter what the details are. If Washington wants war, Washington is going to have war. And if it not this pretext, it is going to be another one.

Robles: I think for most sane and intelligent, and peace-loving civilized people in the world the details do matter. But when you have people and all they want is bloodshed, I guess you are right, the details don’t matter.

Rozoff: I mean they do not matter in that. We could spend the few remaining hours we may have left before Damascus is in flames arguing about whether the US lies can be disproven or not, or we can try at the 11th hour to try to marshal international outrage to get this stopped before it begins. That’s my plea.

Robles: What would you tell the international community?

Rozoff: Stop it here, or it is coming to your home! After Syria Lebanon, after Lebanon Iran, after Iran who knows who.

Robles: Last year it was what? Venezuela, China and Russia.

Rozoff: And two years ago it was both Libya and Ivory Coast, let’s not forget. And at this point, honestly, as we’ve talked about before, I sincerely doubt there are a dozen nations in the world, out of 194 members of the United Nations currently, that dare pursue any independent foreign policy and including explicitly in an expressly in military manner, are not tied to the Pentagon’s evolving and expanding international military nexus.

And having one of those dozen picked off today or tomorrow, or any time in the near future, means there are fewer and fewer left. And it is only a matter of time, seriously, before Iran, Russia and China are going to find there are no buffers left, there is nothing between them and the US-NATO war machine.

Robles: Rick, thank you very much. I’ll be speaking to you as this develops, if possible.

You were listening to an interview in progress with Rick Rozoff – the manager and owner of the stop NATO website and mailing list.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



28 August, 18:25 23 

Attack on Syria may cause massive damage to the US

сирия сша сирия турция сирия патриот пэтриот сша флот сша карта 2012 декабрь коллаж гр

© Collage: Voice of Russia

The United States of America and their leader Barrack Hussein Obama have spent billions of dollars in Syria, at a time when US taxpayers are suffering, attempting to bring about a change of regime. The money has been spent funding al-Qaeda and Islamic terrorists to destabilize the country, groups that they have parroted time and time again as being the number one enemies of the American people.

Their strategy was failing, like all of their strategies are bound to fail because they lack vision and true understanding of the world and its people. They created a red line, most likely launched a black operation to make that red line a reality and now with extreme desperate irrational urgency, they want to carry out their plan to attack Syria. That is their goal, they set it, and no matter what happens they will obtusely carry it out without regard for the consequences and without forward planning.

I would put forward that the goal of the United States is not to remove President Bashar Al-Assad, just as it is not to protect the Syrian people. As for Al-Assad he offered to step down multiple times in the past and if the true goal was simply removing him, they could have assassinated him years ago. Unless the CIA has grown completely incompetent that is.

As for the Syrian people, it is clear that all of the bloodshed and loss of life in the country has been caused because of, and almost exclusively by, the terrorist elements that the United States has been training, funding, arming and importing.

So if they do not want to remove Assad what do they want? Now this is part of the secret geopolitical agenda they seek for the Middle East. I would put forward that the real goal is to destabilize and destroy the country and the people and throw Syria into anarchy. This will create yet another weak and broken country from which they can steal resources and which they can manipulate as they wish. Look at the record: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and all of the other countries in the Middle East that they have destabilized and destroyed through other means.

Ala Zbigniew Brzeznski and his plans to destabilize Russia into sixty-some-odd autonomous republics, the plans for the Middle East are almost identical, and the people of all of these countries just get in the way. Why else attack countries that pose no threat? Iraq never threatened America, nor did Afghanistan or Libya. Neither has Syria.

These states did possess independent foreign policies and that has been their only crime. Other than of course, in the case of Iraq and Libya, the fact that hours before the attacks on their countries, the leaders changed the trade in oil from the dollar to the euro. Something that would completely destroy the United States if all of the countries of the world followed suit. Hence they need to destabilize the economy of Europe and all of the instruments that have been implemented to carry that out. The US cannot allow the euro to grow as an alternative currency, because the US economy will be destroyed. The United States has technically long been economically bankrupt. As for moral, well that is also obvious.

It is interesting to note, from a militarily strategic viewpoint, that by intentionally telegraphing that they are planning to attack, and even setting the date, they are guaranteeing that President Al-Assad will be protected and they are contributing to the massive civilian losses that will occur.

There will be no chance of a “surgical strike” because all of the important targets will already be moved or protected. So in order to achieve whatever military objectives there are this will require even more fire power and more missiles, something which of course will be very profitable and beneficial for Raytheon and all of the other US war contractors. Telegraphing will also allow for Syria to set up defenses, if it has not already, to knock all of the US’s million dollar missiles out of the sky. Something it has every right to do.

The plan to strike Syria is not only one of cowardice and an admission of utter and complete failure by the United States on the diplomatic front but it is also illegal without a United Nations resolution and an imminent threat to America itself. It is obviously cowardly because launching missiles while fearfully hiding behind a shield where there is no threat to yourself is not something that an honorable soldier on a battlefield would do. It is the tactic of a coward.

This tactic however is necessary for Obama because when the massive loss of American lives begins, the American people will rise up and no longer support all of the callous unthinking military adventures. Hence what some view as the illogical funding of Al-Qaeda and terrorists to carry out the dirty work.

What will happen when these terrorist elements begin to realize that they have been merely disposable pawns for the US and that they have been killing their own brothers and mothers and sisters? Of course the US has not thought of that. The backlash when Al-Qaeda and all of the motley groups of terrorists realize they have been killing their brethren for the enemy will be monumental and Americans will finally see what real terrorism is all about, I believe that is a given. But that is okay for Washington too, they have all of the plans in place and this will allow the military industrial complex to expand and invade even more countries. What are a few American lives?

What about Israel? As I have said in the past, in reality the United States does not care about Israel. The maelstrom that will occur if the US strikes Syria will be monumental and right in the middle of it will be the Jewish state. Washington, thousands of miles away, behind a missile shield, with all of its leaders protected and hiding in bunkers, will be safe. Of course the US has convinced Israel that they are safe, but I beg to differ.

Let this be a warning then to reactionary proponents of an attack on Syria: the results will be monumental and may lead to the self-destruction of America both economically and politically. Why? For one it will further bankrupt an already decimated economy. Two, it will also polarize enemies and cause countries around the world to strike back, meaning the world community may in fact realize that it is time to reign in and end the continual invasions and aggressive wars being waged by the US

This will be particularly true when it is revealed that the chemical attack in Syria was a black operation to give Obama his pretext to carry out another Nobel-Peace-Prize-winning-act-of-aggression. If the world wakes up that is.

This last point will no doubt fall on deaf ears, or in this case “on blind eyes”, but in reality the US is missing a very important opportunity in Syria, and that is a chance to rebuild its reputation and become a respected intelligent and grown up member and leader of the world community by simply promoting a peaceful resolution. The world is truly tired of US bombs and bellicose rhetoric and the actions of an arrogant one-world-power wantonly bashing and bullying its way across the globe.

My thoughts are with the Syrian people and my hope is that someone, somewhere, with the power to stop this madness will listen. How about it President of the United States of America Barrack Hussein Obama? Maybe it is time to use diplomacy and work for peace and to finally put the weapons down? You have a Nobel Peace Prize after all. Or does that mean nothing?

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

USSyriaSyria-U.S. relationsattackSyria. Elimination of chemical weaponsSyrian conflictWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 23

·         TeleMedia PressTeleMedia Press, 28 August, 18:55#

He is a Wall Street kind face `Hope' after all, Ha, I doubt he even remembers what that means except the fact that as a DC insider, just as the Clintons before him and Bush Family Inc. ... it is an exclusive club to be a member and he is part of it! Along with Saudi ties and Prince Bandar Bush hopping around the globe with threats of Jihadi/Salafist fervor if they don't go along with the grand plan!

·         Daniel SandersDaniel Sanders, 29 August, 00:34#

We in America, do not want this. We do not want another meaningless war. But we are screaming at our "leaders" from behind a soundproof window.

·         Trinity FirestarTrinity Firestar, 29 August, 01:04#

As an American, I have no clue what we're doing over there. News came out today that it was Assad's brother that ordered the attack, not Assad. If true, let's see how Assad deals with it. Come on, President Obama, please don't attack Syria. I struggle to find work here as it is, we really don't need more war at the moment. Let's focus on fixing home.

·         lloyd69rtlloyd69rt, 29 August, 02:42#

We only go after countries that do not follow our political agenda or subvert the one that our government wants on the home front. A war or conflict that advances the agenda 21 proposition of the UN or the reductions of our personal rights in the US is all that is on the minds of those in power and I do not mean our Congress. They are nothing but people on strings that are pulled from above. We are not in control of our lives and all we can do is run and hide and pray that there is a God that hears and will protect us in some way. Our government lives to us in manor of things from WMD to the food and air we breathe,so why not on chemical weapons used. Watch your backs and prepare for the worst we are heading for our own mass destruction and not by our own hands.

·         vmavma, 29 August, 04:08#

Dear John, you spoiled a rather good analysis by writing that the US does not care about Israel. Rather naive donchya think, given that Israel provided the so-called 'intel' on the Syrian government's use of CWs and has trained and harbored some of the al-Qadea rebels sent there. They also furnished the yellow cake 'intel' that destroyed Iraq and the disinfo that destroyed Libya. After destabilising Egypt, their dual-national neo-cons are busy suckering the US into spending their treasure and blood to remove their arch-enemy Syria. In fact all the 'Wars of Terror' have only benefited Israel so you don't need to feel sorry for the illegal terror state.

·         enigmaenigma, 29 August, 05:46#

If you will please take note, that in fact the defacto United States/NATO wanton aggression against any nation that does not buckle under to their domination has nothing what so ever to do with who is in control of the White House (unless of course their is a radical change in the political and economic elite). The United States is not ruled by a government of the people and for the people or by law, but by a group of international thugs and criminals and like the thugs and criminals that came before them believe in a manifest destiny for themselves to rule the world. "American Exceptionalism" is how it is referred to, very akin to the "Aryan" doctrine of the Nazi's. According to the US elite, they and only they have the correct political, social and economic model that must be crammed down the worlds throat even by force for their own good. Now, everyone knows there is only one way to deal with this type fanatical ideology, that there is only one language fascists understand and that is force, period. Every time the international community turns a blind eye to their aggression it is only asking for more and greater aggression and bloodshed. The sacrifice as painful as it may be must be undertaken by those who wish to rid the world of those elements that wish to enslave us all.

·         Aleksandr KalininAleksandr Kalinin, 29 August, 06:16#

That is not true Trinity, that is pure fraud and Mossad propaganda provided by Israeli intel, which is unrefutable, provided by secret sources, fabricated evidence ( just like Iraq WMD was provided by Mossad and Israel intel - which as we know were all lies). This lie has been spread by Mossad news site DebkaFILE. ALL BOGUS.

·         MikaelMikael, 29 August, 06:44#

Russia and China need to put our rouge American government in check. The American people are being held hostage by our government. I would love a moral leader like Putin in the white house.

·         Craig ReynoldsCraig Reynolds, 29 August, 06:53#

War is a needed distraction for their failure to fix the economy. It is also justification for ever increased spying on our own citizens. Peace is impossible as the American military industrial complex is too big. War unfortunately is a highly profitable form of wealth distribution. All members of the government own shares in all these companies. It could be said that world peace would actually bankrupt America. There would be no need for a massive military force if there were no wars or even the threat of war. Peace and stability would also cause the price of oil and other commodities to plummet. Millions of jobs related to the military and energy sectors would be lost. There would be no need for massive spy and security agencies. The goal of washington is to continue conflict. They create, arm and train the very enemies they need to continue the vicious circle. The final goal is no doubt to control most if not all the worlds resources. Washington cares nothing of the lives lost. Not even those of our own soldiers. can anyone stop washington? russia could if it wanted to, but it also benefits from the other side of arms sales to its allies. Also it is pretty much a given that and direct conflict between Russia and America would likely rapidly escalate to a nuclear conflict. That type of escalation is not profitable as the very industries relied upon to wage war would themselves be targeted and destroyed. Also Russia fears America is now capable of a highly successful first strike or is at least capable of severely limiting a Russian one while dealing an annihilating retalliation.

·         BMJOregonBMJOregon, 29 August, 08:25#

Americans dont want this insane ,constant war business...Our represenatives do nothing but give "lip service"...The white house phones and mails ,I know are going crazy with people calling and saying NO.....but noone listens...We in America are also being pushed to the edge and want Obama impeached ..You are right in that he is no leader , he is a power hungry coward...along with all his "good ol boys" in DC..MY heart hurts for our own service men and woman..as well as the people of Syria... and all the other countries we have devestated...for the greed of a few. People dont matter to war mongers..they are expendable.

·         DanJRDanJR, 31 August, 00:57#

We don't want a war and actually only 6% of the American people support a war in Syria. There is no clear objective in the Middle East. But let me tell you clairvoyant Russians this. Syria isn't the archenemy of Israel and it isn't even the prime concern of Israel. They have chemical weapons which are pretty devastating but Assad would know it is the end of his regime and life if he were to use them on Israel. The prime concern is Iran and their nuclear capability. Syria is a sideshow that is just delaying Iran and their capability. You will cry that they should have nuclear technology but you are ignoring the fact that a cultic maniac has controlled them for the better part of 40 years now. It is a medieval religious psychology with the ability to use modern weapons. Not such a great combination, when their leader and faithful muhammed, the so called prophet of peace had his author write such violent verses in the Koran to kill Jews and Christians. You even have your own Islamic problem on your southwest border of Chechnya. You can't continue supporting an evil regime for economic reasons forever, eventually iron will have to come hither for Ayatollah and his sadistic control of Iran.

·         Jo FlemingsJo Flemings, 31 August, 08:16#

Our own black ops murdered 1400 Syrians this past week with Sarin gas? So we can swoop into Syria and further siphon off more of our own money to dump it into muslim coffers to what possible good end for any of us back here in the US- that is a pretty foolish strategy, even from the vantage point of a bloodstained hawk like myself. Seriously, we would all really rather see the UN security council deal with Assad's crimes against humanity for a change and leave us out of it, as long as the Russians and the Chinese and oh yeah, the Iranians play nice without nukes that is, and without endangering our access to cheaper oil. (Playing nice is not your Russsian forte, in case you have forgotten- a lot lot lot of dead folks in your paths to independence and in your choice of national leaders there, for some reason we don't have the same history of atrocities on the same scale that I can recall... not even in Afghanistan, go figure.) Maybe that is why everyone else in the civilized western world is actually waiting for the US to give Assad an illegal spanking for gassing his own people instead of functioning like they ought to through the UN. It certainly costs everyone less money for us to pay to punish I mean play on the world stage but then again maybe that is the actual cost of hegemony even on its way out.

·         gogogogo, 31 August, 16:41#

Israel and America are the same country.

·         zainzain, 1 September, 15:38#

i think that it is the right time for Russia to come out of hesitation and show their reliability as a friend, (show is deliberate here as the Russians always had stepped back from supporting their allies when needed). But this time his only Arabian friend is in dire need of support apart for the support of world masses, Iran, Africa, and Hezbollah. I thin that if Russians now rush to supply Syria and/or Iran with all weapon systems having strategic strike capability immediately on lease, small/midsize conventional Subs with missile launch capability (7-12) Strategic Iskandar Missiles(3000) to destroy Israeli, Jordanian and Turkish Strategic Assets like Air Bases, NATO radar system, Nuclear Reactors/ Power generation and other infrastructure. Drones with Deep Strike capability (1500) and Nuclear cover in case of any unconventional attack on Syria. like Nuclear,chemical etccc atleast 200 SU30 with all strategic capabilities for All resistance allies. and S300 for iran and syria on lease . this whole package will cost around 10billion dollars and the resistance block will be more than happy to buy this if not able to pay immediately then give them on lease. by this Russia will not only benefit from this crises to settle pending contracts as a dependable partner but will also gain economically and politically. This deal can be financed by 4billion Iran, 3 Billion by latin American Allies. and the rest by Lending from russia. and will add up strategic capabilities ti the resistance fire power against which enemies will not succeed without paying bloody price.

·         Lee GarrardLee Garrard, 3 September, 06:08#

all a part of the new world order...the bigger the deception, the easier it is for people to believe...

·         Ann LambertAnn Lambert, 3 September, 21:29#

All of the countries of the world have a common enemy--- THE NEW WORLD ORDER. Fight accordingly.

·         Peter DuveenPeter Duveen, 4 September, 02:18#

A small rock jutting just microns above the water level can sink a huge ship. Libya, with few million people, was the first of these "small rocks." Thus, Benghazi. Syria is also a small rock, but will prove bow ripping in a major way.

·         TeleMedia PressTeleMedia Press, 5 September, 03:12#

Here is the thing, a false flag attack has been staged in Damascus to try and put the Russian Federation in a bind during their hosting of the G20 in St. Pete on Sept. 5. It is better for the Duma, the Federation Council and inner workings of the Kremlin and Presidential staff to work very quietly with the leadership to move assets ... conventional and strategic in position in the Med and near the Syrian ports and bases they have control of like Tartus and Latakia like they already are currently doing and wait, let the NATO fleets come and be prepared to wage regional conflict basically with Russia itself!

·         Julio  César Gómez Julio César Gómez , 13 September, 07:49#

Of course

·         Jean-Claude MeslinJean-Claude Meslin, 15 September, 16:53#

The analyses and comments of that topic are good. They describe relatively well what is going on in this sad World community. If we do nothing to change such a mediocre World governance, the ultimate apocalypse will soon extinguish the human specie. Let us be objective and face the facts: One country has been since 1945 and still is the initiator and first user of all weapons of mass destruction actually available for humans. That same nation has at her disposal the greatest war-machine seen during the whole humanity history. Each year between 800 and a 1000 billions $ are used for that purpose. Why! Simply because America believe (like the Romans used to do) that they must govern the whole planet and impose their way of life. Not all Americans think likewise, most are decent people but a tiny minority has betrayed the US Constitution and the country's funding fathers'dreams...Repairing, peacefully the whole situation is not impossible. Telling that Obama is a partner, that harmony between Kerry: the greatest liar on Earth, implicated in the bombing of Vietnamese with agent-orange and Mister Lavrov is perfect; receiving war-criminal: Mc Cain on Russian TV and binding over to so many bad peoples'wishes is not the way to do. Moreover, we must also deal with all the corrupt citizen of other countries (including Russians) who are plain US collabos...Then what to do! Simply, what Americans do so well when they are mad at someone: BOYCOTT of everything being made in USA (including, peoples and mos of all: the dollars). You will see how quickly the American society will react and put all the creeps who caused so much damages in jail. For the success of such a project which almost mean saving mankind, well known, honest and respectable persons like Mister Putin must talk and expose the truth facts...

·         PaulPaul, 24 September, 23:53#

What makes things happen in the USA, and outside is about profit. It has been this way for many years. Only the people that are seen have changed, and it is not just the USA but many other countries as well. Profit is the biggest motivator, and that is why we have the most people in prison out of all the countries in the world. It is the reason for our military, they are there to secure resources for the country and our allies, and other countries do the same thing. Even the Romans did this centuries ago. Attacking the USA will change nothing, as the people that profit from the actions here are all around the world. During WWII the people backing the USA also backed Germany, and many other countries so that regardless of who came out a winner they would come out ahead. Also it makes little sense to think of boycotting our products, as it will harm the majority of countries around the world. At one time this may have made a difference, but now days there are very few products made in the USA, and I can attest to this because I work in manufacturing, and there really are not that many places that have jobs for people that are skilled with experience in programming, electronics, robotics, PLCs, and everything else that is used in manufacturing. I have only seen my take home go down and down, while expences go up. If there really was a recovery and a demand for engineering I would easily be earning twice as much after deductions. However there are jobs that pay far more and have better benefits such as a prison guard, and many in California earn twice or more what many engineers do here. The talk about new world order scares me because I know what it will mean, it basically will mean that if someone owes debts those debts, or any other thing that can be held against someone, people will never be able to escape. The main part of the American dream has always been a place for people to change their lives for the better not just of themselves but for the better of those around them as well. A chance to start over from bad decisions of the past, and help others in the process. Sure there are some very evil people here in high places, but the same can be said for about any country. It is just easier for the most motivated people here to rise to the top, and there is not much in the way of a safety net for people either. If you are not motivated to get ahead there is a good chance you will either die on the streets or in prison. The way to get ahead is to have hopes and dreams of a better future, find others that share those dreams, and work to make the dreams happen. This applies to all things in life, be it business, personal, religious, or anything else.

·         Trank Anonim ŞirketiTrank Anonim Şirketi, 14 October, 19:21#


·         IAMCorungIAMCorung, 27 October, 09:55#

I really don't care what happens to those imposters posing as the American Government. Just remember if you go past Washington there will be a gun behind every blade of grass.
Read more: 



28 August, 08:45  

Attack on Syria will cause regional conflagration – Rick Rozoff

армия солдат сша флаг война

Photo: Flickr.com/familymwr/cc-by

Download audio file

With what appears to an imminent western military adventure and yet another act of aggression against a small country on the other side of the world, meaning what appears to be the upcoming unprovoked attack on the sovereign nation of Syria by the United States, Rick Rozoff spoke about the military buildup and the reasons for the West’s continued meddling in the Middle East.


Robles: Hello. This is John Robles. I’m speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop Nato website and mailing list. Hello, Sir.

Rozoff: Hello, John. How are you?

Robles: Not too good in light of the events that are currently taking place. As I’m sure you’re aware…

Rozoff: I think it is a very dramatic and I fear a tragic moment that we are speaking.

Robles: And it seems like there is very little we can do or that anybody can do to influence what has apparently been in the works and a plan by those geopolitical…

Rozoff: Mad men

Robles: Mad men

Rozoff: … or geniuses that constitutes the foreign policy elite of the United States and other western nations to complete your thought, John.

Robles: Thank you.

Rozoff: Yes. That’s exactly what I fear is the case.

Robles: Can you tell us a little bit on the military hardware aspect of this. There is not too many reports out there on that.

Rozoff: We have to keep in mind that, you know, until the people of the Mediterranean basin demand that the US pick up and leave its military, the US is always… the Pentagon is always in position to strike any nation in or near the Mediterranean Sea. But what we do know is that currently assigned to the SixthFleet, permanently stationed in the Mediterranean, are no fewer than four guided missile destroyers that are in the eastern part of the Mediterranean even as wespeak, including one which played an instrumental role in the opening salvo ofcruise missile attacks against Libya in March of 2011.

These are what are referred to in US military parlance as Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. In other words they are the type that will be equipped to carry interceptor missiles, standard missile three, interceptors of the sort that are part of the US missile shield that has been deployed in and around Europe and in the middle East. We know for a fact there are four of those.

There are reports that at least one and possibly two US submarines, and these are the USS Florida and USS Georgia, are deployed off the eastern Mediterranean,each of which … by the way, the Arleigh Burke destroyers I mentioned, the 4 of them, are capable of carrying 70 missiles each. These include cruise as well as other missiles, but the submarines are far more deadly, far more lethal. Each of them is equipped to carry 150 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

One of these two I mention- USS Florida- was, you know, fired something in the neighborhood of a 100 missiles in the attack against Libya, you know also in the Mediterranean, of course, two and a half years ago. So this is what the US has in play.

Robles: Sir, they’re planning to use Tomahawks on Syria, is that correct?

Rozoff: This is what they used of course against Libya two and a half years ago, what they used against Yugoslavia in 1999, it was used against Iraq in 2003. You know, again, it’s a coward’s way of waging warfare. You don’t endanger pilots or fixed wing aircraft by flying strikes into the country. You simply fire a cruise missile.

It has devastating effect, of course. And you don’t endanger the life of any US service men, which in a waywe have to hark back to the war against Libya again - 2011 - and the fact that after 60 days of waging war, unprovoked war, against a defenseless nation of some six million people.

According to the War Power Resolution, introduced in the US Congress in the early 1970s, President Barack Obama was obligated to come before Congress and present his case for a continuation of the war. He arrogantly refused to do so,stating in his estimate it was not a war because US military personnel were not in harm’s way.

So you can wreakas much devastation, material and human, as one wants to against a smaller defenseless country, but if US service men aren’t danger themselves and it doesn’t constitute a war then the President of the United States (Commander-in-Chief, US Armed Forces), in his opinion, doesn’t feel obligated even to explain to the US Congress what he is doing. So this is what we are talking about with Syria right now.

We also have to remember that Syria and Lebanon, really now, are the only countries in the entire Mediterranean region that have not become US military partners and US military stooges for the most part. And that each new country that falls into the orbit of the Pentagon becomes a military base for attacks on other countries.

I’ve read reports today that the British military bases in Cyprus are being … you know are seeingwarplanes coming in. We know the Soudanaval base in Crete in Greececould be used for any attack against Syria. With a change in government in Cyprus at the beginning of this year we can see an even more compliant client regime willing to do the US’s dirty work.

Robles: What have you heard about Iraq, there were some statements by Iraqi officials that they were against the use of their airspace for an invasion of Syria? And then I’d like you to get into what your views on the aftereffects of what this invasion is going to cause.

Rozoff: It’s standard operating procedure, if you will, for countries you know not to openly acknowledge that they’re granting the US and its allies the right to use their airspace to launch attacks. When we’re talking about the cruise missile attacks, in large part depending on where the vessel, whether a surface vessel, or a submarine is firing them, of necessity Syria has a fairly short coast line compared to Libya and to other countries. And we could count on the fact that a goodly number of the cruise missiles, you know, being fired inside Syria would have to pass over the territory of other countries: Jordan, Iraq, come most immediately to mind.

But of course, if there was plausible deniability, and they simply don’t acknowledge that … Saudi Arabia is another … that the US is firing missiles over their territory then no one is the wiser I suppose. But, in the long run, the regime that was put into power and is beholden to the United States and Baghdad says publicly and what it does in fact I think are two different things. And until there’s a larger community of nations in the world ready to stand up for peace and against armed barbarism, then no one country is going to say no to Washington for fear if nothing else it will be the next target.

And I think if you want a parallel with what’s going on right now, you’ll look at that decade that began say with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and China in 1931. It included attack after attack on country after country by the Axis Powers, by imperial Japan, by fascist Italy andby Nazi Germany, which culminated in 1940 with nations like Norway and Denmark, and Greece, and Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, France overrun by these hordes of militarists. For ten years the world saw this naked aggression going on, and the League of Nations could not or would not do anything about it.

Robles: That’s what the United States is doing right now and the United Nations which was organized and formed to stop that from happening ever again has done nothing.

Rozoff: It is worse than has done nothing; it is in fact a complicit partner in the arrangement. The Russian government amongst others has been warning over the last 24 hours that any exacerbation of the conflict in Syria by internationalizing it, that is by having major western military powers and their Persian Gulf allies launch military attacks inside Syria is only going to inflame, exacerbate and worsen. The situation is going to cause a massive conflagration not only in Syria but in the surrounding area.

Countries like Iraq, Jordan, Turkey and others are going to be pulled into this maelstrom, into this vortex, inevitably. And what we are seeing now is maybe a culmination of the decades long so-called broader Middle-East initiative of the United States which is simply to remake the political map from the nation of Mauritania on the Atlantic coast to Kazakhstan on the Chinese border and the US is going to throw this entire area into turmoil in furtherance of its own selfish and for the most part undisclosed geopolitical objective.

There is no way Assad would use chemical weapons _ DAVID SHAYLER

28 August, 07:17       Download audio file  Moved to David Shayler Page

The war on whistleblowers and the illegality that they have exposed as well as the pretext to war in Syria were discussed with the Voice of Russia’s John Robles by Former MI5 officer David Shayler, the whistleblower who exposed the organization of an assassination plot on Muammar Gaddafi by MI6. Mr. Shayler discussed the situation in Syria as well and gave his opinion on the current Syrian crisis.

28 August, 06:38 2 

The US policy of terror and the invasion of Syria

россия сша сирия флаг

© Collage: «Voice of Russia»

The Russian Federation had no evidence of a chemical attack in Syria, but it does have evidence that one may have been staged and that those who did so were the so-called “rebels”, who we know are US backed, armed and funded. The Syrian regular army and President Bashar al-Assad have been winning the war so the urgency with which the United States is calling for an armed intervention is alarming but obvious. They have spent billions and they cannot see their plans for the destruction of the Syria state fail.

A great man once said, “the pen is mightier than the sword” and in this age of information technology and global information warfare this phrase still rings true and is even more topical in fact today than when it was first coined. With this in mind it is of utmost important that the war that is currently being fought with words, one that if lost will have the United States launching missiles into Syria, be fought with the utmost urgency and efforts by all who cherish peace.

You cannot trust the statements of a country, state, body or individual when they already have an agenda and a set and concrete goal and the statements that they make only go to back up that goal. In this case we have to consider the United States and their clear and unwavering plans for a military adventure in Syria which will forcibly remove the president Bashar al-Assad from power. A goal that has been repeated over and over again by the United States and its minions.

Fear is a powerful tool and one that the US uses better than anyone. If you agree with that statement, “that fear is an effective tool”, then it must be logically acceptable and reasonable to say that terror, fear taken to its extreme, must be an even more effective tool.

I say the US uses fear as a tool because it is a fact. They have used fear since time immemorial to control and subjugate their own populace, other countries and the world. This is a very broad statement and a serious assessment that requires in depth study but as my space, time and resources are limited, I can only provide a few examples or I risk turning my piece on Syria into a treatise on American terror. Please bear with me dear reader, the terror propagated by the “American” state is not a side issue when it comes to Syria, it is part of their modus operandi.

From the first stages of life Americans use fear to control and dominate, starting with the belt, the corner, the ruler across the knuckles, the father coming home, the monster under the bed, the principal and the police, fear is used in almost every stage of childhood development in America. This does not stop with adulthood but continues and is expanded to include police, the greatest tool of American fear, the courts, the boss, death, sickness and the like. Tools of fear for mass control include: the water, secret experiments, the Ku Klux Klan (to control and terrorize blacks), the government and all of its bodies and power, imprisonment, mass destruction and death, terrorism, epidemics and war. Since 9-11 the government has also used and promoted ideas of mass secret arrest, FEMA camps for millions, starvation, surveillance, droning, torture, Guantanamo, a terrorist behind every street post and other tools to instill terror into the hearts of Americans so that they are cowed and pliant and completely under control.

Why is this important and related to Syria? Because they are about to launch another “War on Terror”. This is not another war “against” terror, but another war using terror as a pretext and a justification. Hence for native speakers the simplistic beauty of the use of the preposition “on” to show the reasoning and/or engine behind something, has been cleverly implemented to honestly yet deceptively state the whole paradigm of today and the last several decades. The “War on Drugs” was a war being funded by and supposedly waged against drugs, as was the war on crime etc. It is simplistic but effective, and one last point before I return to Syria. The use of the wording “War on” be it drugs, crime or terror, allows for the US Government to take advantage of a plethora of secret and all encompassing tools and funding that were reserved in American law in the case of a real war.

Back to Syria. For the informed and even partially informed masses the ridiculousness and the transparent self-serving nature of the entire US effort may seem ludicrous. They have used the same old playbook of lies and fear to launch wars of aggression for too long and to devastate country after country to gain control of resources, that this time the world community is not so eager to jump on the US bomb launching wagon.

The White House really believes that if you create a lie and run with it, repeating it endlessly, the world will eventually take it to be the truth, and this is usually the case. They decided long ago, when it became clear that funding, arming and importing terrorists and waging an information war inside Syria to foment a color revolution would not work that they would launch another “humanitarian” invasion using the pretext of “chemical weapons”. Imagine a country that uses depleted uranium shells and white phosphorous could actually care about some Syrian people be killed by chemical agents.

They do not care. And that is the illusion that must be shattered. They do not care about you American citizen, or your (what for them are) “little” lives and they sure do not care for the lives of anyone in the Middle East and I would even say this includes Israeli lives. Why I am saying this is because when you understand that it is a fallacy that the United States Government cares about “humanitarian” issues, you may be able to accept the reality that they are capable of importing chemical weapons and killing massive numbers of children to bring about their pretext to justify another murderous and bloody “humanitarian” intervention. The only way to devastate the country, remap the political landscape and control the resources.

The credibility issues that the United States has at this point should be reason enough to set off massive warning bells every time they make any statement regarding launching yet another act of military aggression. Any country that has shown the massive level of illegality that the United States has during the last several decades I have argued, must be disarmed completely, especially one that wantonly commits war crimes, violates the Geneva Conventions and launches aggressive war no matter what the pretext.

Statements by the White House through their spokes-tool Jay Carney and Secretary of State John Kerry are disingenuous at best and bald-faced lies at worst when it comes to Syria and the supposed chemical weapons attacks. Their constantly repeated assertions, statements as facts and comments about the Syrian government defy credibility and seem even more circus-like when they say they have intelligence that they will release sometime later. The argument is: “President Bashar al-Assad is evil, he gassed his own people, we will go to war, trust us on this and you are too stupid to see the real intelligence.”

Invading a country is a serious matter and in this case not one the United States has shown it is capable of carrying out justifiably. If they have the intelligence, present it to the United Nations and let the United Nations launch a peace-keeping mission. That is the only way.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and President Vladimir Putin’s assessments should be listened to very carefully. Russia has no vested interest in bringing about bloodshed in Syria. Russia has had one position on Syria since day one and Russian President Vladimir Putin is not one to make “light” statements not based on the undeniable facts. Unlike his American counterpart who has shown recently that he has grown imbalanced in his war against whistleblowers and is drowning in his own illegality and illegitimacy.

President Putin said there is no evidence that a chemical attack took place. For me that is enough. Foreign Minister Lavrov said the symptoms of the victims do not coincide with a chemical attack, the fact that all of the children were rounded up in one location is strange, and that there are several other discrepancies as well, including the fact that chemical agents were delivered to Washington’s “rebels”.

Listening to Kerry and Carney on Syria is nauseating, despite their hard language and the repetition of their orchestrated lies, every time they make a statement I am half-waiting for them to add “You believe me don’t you?” Any country with the record of destabilizing the Middle-East, launching wars of aggression, backing terrorists, removing leaders, stealing resources, violating international law and the rules of war should not be allowed to continue attacking country after country, no matter the pretext.

If the United Nations is truly an independent body, let them carry out the investigation in Syria, and then let the United Nations and all members countries launch a peacekeeping mission if one is needed to stop the armed insurgents causing the bloodshed and to restore peace. The world has had enough war and any country that so enthusiastically and on the slightest pretext would launch missiles on other countries who are not its “friends” must not be allowed to be a member of any sort of intervention.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru. Please visit my column athttp://voiceofrussia.com/by_author/62493347/ and thank you all for your letters and words of support.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

RussiaBarack ObamaUSSyriachemical weaponsBashar AssadSyrian conflictinvasionWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 2

·         LocutusLocutus, 28 August, 11:31#

marx stated, that it is possible for gb and usa to reach the socialism by peaceful means. but already stalin stated, that this thesis is false since usa and gb started imperialist policy in the 19th century, therefore only violent change is possible in the united states and great britain. obviously and unfortunately this is true still today.

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 28 August, 23:50#

The UN stopped being an 'independent body' long time ago. Another toothless lap dog in the American kennel.
Read more: 



26 August, 18:53 3 

Global Drone Ban Treaty drafted in Sweden

MQ-9 Reaper Дрон США ВВС беспилотник  БПЛА военного назначения

Photo: en.wikipedia.org

The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space has drafted and submitted to the global populace a draft Drone Ban Treaty. The decision came as a result of the organization’s recent Global Network annual space organizing conference in Kiruna, Sweden. The Global Network states that the Drone Ban Treaty is a way to begin to create conversation about taking steps to ban the immoral and illegal killing weapons.

The organization is accepting comments, revisions and letters regarding the treaty, a document that would be of interest to policy makers, government officials, international organizations interested in peace and rule of law, legal experts and members of international bodies such as the United Nations.

Text of first draft:

Agreement on banning the use of unmanned armed aerial vehicles against civilians, living and official quarters, transport, communication, energy and industrial infrastructure.

The High Contracting Parties to this Agreement, hereinafter called as Parties to the Agreement, being alarmed by the use of unmanned armed aerial vehicles against civilians, living and official quarters, transport, communication, energy and industrial infrastructure, noting with regret that the number of unmanned armed aerial vehicles is increasing, expressing concern that the use of such vehicles sometimes have indiscriminate effects and collateral damage inflicted upon civilians, living and official quarters, transport, communication, energy and industrial infrastructure, understanding the negative psychological effects in a form of depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder among unmanned armed aerial vehicles’ operators stemming from using unmanned combat aerial vehicles against civilians, living and official quarters, transport, communication, energy and industrial infrastructure, realizing that the use of such vehicles is a violation of humanitarian and the basic international law, including the inviolability of interstate borders and respecting sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of the states that became targets of such vehicles, have agreed as follows:

1. Parties to the Agreement have agreed to freeze the number of unmanned armed aerial vehicles as it stands for the 1st September 2013.

2. Parties to the Agreement have agreed to exercise the total ban on the use of unmanned armed aerial vehicles against civilians, living and official quarters, transport, communication, energy and industrial infrastructure beginning from the 1st September 2013.

3. Parties to the Agreement have agreed not use unmanned armed aerial vehicles to carry nuclear and missile defense weapons on board and pledge not to use such vehicles for conducting nuclear strikes and fulfilling missile defense missions.

4. Parties to the Agreement have agreed to close from the 1st September 2013 all military bases and installations, including command and control centers that have been earlier constructed or leased on the territories of foreign states for the purpose of storing or using unmanned armed aerial vehicles that have been used to conduct remotely controlled operations.

5. Parties to the Agreement have agreed to cease all research, testing, training or manufacturer of such vehicles from the 1st September 2013.

6. Parties to the Agreement have agreed to offer its territory to conduct international inspections for the purpose of verification of implementation of this Agreement.

7. This Agreement enters in force on the date of signature of at least of five independent and sovereign states.

The treaty is an important step in bring the issue to the international community and in laying out a legal basis for the elimination of one of the most illegal weapons that have been created thanks to new technologies which could have better been used to create peaceful tools for the betterment of mankind.

Long time peace activist Bruce Gagnon, the coordinator for the global network has appeared on the Voice of Russia several times in the past  and can be reached for comments and information regarding the treaty at: Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, PO Box 652, Brunswick, ME, USA 04011, and you can reach him at globalnet@mindspring.com.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

SwedenarmyUS droneslawmilitary hardwaredroneWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 3

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 26 August, 20:17#

Good intentions but those countries, like the US, will continue to do as they please. The US is not about to adhere to any convention not suiting it.

·         NivaNiva, 27 August, 10:55#

Agreed with this view that there are many things in black and white but the basic question is how to make states to adhere and comply with these. Like arms control and disarmament, there is arms race because there is no force to make states comply and adhere. Good to have counter drone attacks document but important is to make the states compliance and adherence to it.

·         John RoblesJohn Robles, 28 August, 09:08#

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union the balance of power in the world has disappeared and as they say, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Thanks for commenting
Read more: 



26 August, 05:48 3 

Obama, Morsi and Muslim Brotherhood linked to Benghazi attack

ливия протест сша консульство пожар бенгази беспорядки посол Кристофер Стивенс

Photo: EPA

The attack on the CIA base in Benghazi, Libya which killed four American nationals has once again come into the spotlight in many media outlets all over the world, but not because of events that have occurred in Libya but due to the collapse of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the fall of Mohamed Morsi and the ensuing arrest of many of the “Brotherhoods” leaders.

What were initially dismissed as conspiracy theories linking Morsi to the attack on the Benghazi facility have over time, as more and more evidence comes out, begun to not only seem plausible but have almost become accepted as the most likely true scenario of what was going on behind the scenes before and after the attacks.

The revelations may be startling in and of themselves, but the true nature and the seriousness of the events, some are saying, may actually open up the possibility for US President Barack Hussein Obama to go to prison. Of course this is unlikely to happen as we have seen time and time again, when US Presidents commit crimes, even acts of aggressive war and violations of the Geneva Conventions, they are never forced to account for their crimes.

This was brought home by the presidency of George Bush, an administration guilty of everything from war crimes to torture to indefinite detention. And one who many believed orchestrated the cold blooded murder of almost 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001.

What is different with Benghazi, if everything that the reports are saying is true, is that Obama could possibly be tried for treason because he apparently funded and had a hand in the attack on the CIA installation in Benghazi, and that funding and involvement caused the deaths of American nationals.

According to sources in Libyan intelligence, members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and other independent sources, Mohamed Morsi the US educated and backed puppet leader, whose children all have American citizenship and who was supported in his rise to power and is now under arrest in Egypt on charges of treason, was up to his neck in secret deals with the United States and may even have made a deal with Obama to kidnap Stevens and exchange him for the “Blind Sheik” Omar Abdel Rahman.

Morsi was the missing link and until recently reports that gunmen at the scene of the attack in Benghazi spoke with Egyptian dialects and that they apparently said “Don’t shoot Dr. Morsi sent us!” seemed far-fetched. However a recently released report on the attack that was produced by Libyan Intelligence after their investigation of the incident connects Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to the attack.

Journalist Raymond Ibrahim who translated the Libyan Intelligence reportfirst released by the Kuwaiti newspaper, Al Ra’I, states that according to the Libyan Intelligence services the Muslim Brotherhood and former Egyptian President Morsi, were involved in the September 11, 2012 attack.

The findings were based largely on statements and confessions from 6 members of an “Egyptian cell” which was involved in the consulate attack. All of those arrested were Egyptians connected to the jihadist group Ansar al-Sharia (“Supporters of Islamic Law).

A further problem for the United States was that they were apparently paying an Al-Qaeda linked group called the “February 17 Martyrs Brigade” for security of the four-building compound to provide security at the consulate, and Mr. Stevens who was a long-time CIA operative was instrumental in providing Al-Qaeda linked groups with advanced weapons including stinger missiles.

Another report in the Voice of Russia cites a Turkish News Agency report and states that: "In an interview with the Anatolia News Agency, Saad Al-Shater, the son of a Muslim Brotherhood leader, the detained Khairat Al-Shater, said that his father had in his hands evidence that will land the head of United States of America, President Obama, in prison.”

“Such documents, he says, were placed in the hands of people who were entrusted inside and outside Egypt, and that the release of his father is the only way for them to prevent a great catastrophe.”

The Voice of Russia also reported that Tahani al-Gebali, Vice President of the Supreme Constitutional Court in Egypt, said “… the time was nearing when all the conspiracies against Egypt would be exposed—conspiracies explaining why the Obama administration is so vehemently supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Longtime support by the United States and the West for the Muslim Brotherhood and even the CIA’s hand in the creation of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan are not news but matters of historical fact, but for many Americans they are facts that they are not aware of. So the death of four Americans due to involvement with Al-Qaeda and extremist Islamic elements seems shocking and may be in fact the straw that breaks the camel’s back when it comes to the illegality of the US' policies and activities in destabilizing and invading foreign countries, particularly in the Middle East.

These facts are even more topical and alarming as the United States continues to beat the drums of war and prepare for an invasion of Syria. Another example of an aggressive invasion of a country in the Middle East that the United States has destabilized using Al-Qaeda affiliated groups as well as every kind of mercenary and terrorist they could find.

There have been reports that the US may have even provided and organized chemical weapons and attacks to serve as the pretext it needs to carry out its aggression, install a puppet government and gain control of the resources.

Will Obama go to prison for treason as Morsi has? Not likely. Those with absolute power almost never have to account for their crimes. Especially in the United States of America.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

Barack ObamaUSCIASyriaAl-QaedaLibyaEgyptMuslim BrotherhoodMohamed MorsiUS EmbassyWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 3

·         Colin BallColin Ball, 26 August, 07:00#

Good article. The truth is spreading.

·         Shein ArielyShein Ariely, 27 August, 10:05#

Imagine that the German Nazi (DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED) party was outlawed and party members arrested because their ideology in 1934. 50 million lives and unprecedented destruction could be avoided. -- After their WW2 experience people worldwide should know that: ** Democracy without boundaries may lead to power taking by extreme dangerous ideologies with the agenda of imposing by force antidemocratic violent and oppressing ideology worldwide. ** Pls verify the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Examples: 1:" The beginnings of all of the religious terrorism that we are witnessing today were in the MB ideology" Kuweit Minister, Al-Ruba'I in an article "A Bit of Shame in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat 2: “Their work in America is a grand Jihad in eliminating,destroying Western civilization from within" Federal court documents on the trial of the Holy Land Foundation of the MB. 3:" Ben Laden was a Muslim martyr" MB leaders declaration. 4:" A Muslim can come closer to Allah by jihad against all non-Muslims,Christians,Jews, atheists, in every possible manner"" Ahmad 'Abd MB leader in his publications "Al-Walaa Wa'l-Bar" 5: the mastermind of the 9/ was Khalid Muhammad a MB member 6: "jihad is our path; martyrdom is our aspiration" MB publication in London, Risalat al-Ikhwan, on the top of its cover carries the MB motto 7:" Waging jihad against infidels is a commandment of Allah that cannot be disregarded" Said by MB head leader Mohammed Badie 8:"Hitler didn’t finish the job- The Muslims will finish the Job" MB leader speech in Cairo before 1 million people, broadcasted by BBC. 9:Russia Court banned MB in Russia in 2003,describing it as a terrorist organization 10: Egypt President Sadat was murdered by Islamist nationalists associated with the Muslim Brotherhood under the name of Islamic Jihad.

·         John RoblesJohn Robles, 28 August, 09:10#

Thank you for the great comments
Read more: 



25 August, 21:30 1 

Obama a Bush clone in drive for Syrian invasion - Pushkov

обама буш обама президент сша

Barack Obama and George W. Bush

© Photo: Flickr.com/Ethan Hein/cc-by-nc-sa 3.0

The United States of America, under the leadership of Nobel Peace Prize winning President Barack Hussein Obama, is on the verge of invading the sovereign nation of Syria and beginning yet another war. The pretext for the unilaterally led invasion is one that the U.S. has been attempting to get the world to believe for approximately a year now, namely the supposed use of chemical weapons by the Syrian Army.

On Sunday the Russian Federation issued a warning to the United States using some of its strongest language yet. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said in an official statement: “We strongly urge those who, by attempting to impose their own results on the UN experts, are raising the possibility of a military operation in Syria to use their common sense and refrain from committing a tragic mistake".

Mr. Lukashevich was referring to the expected results of a mission by United Nations investigators, which has been welcomed and approved by the Syrian Government, to ascertain the usage of chemical weapons in Syria in light of a massive attack on August 21st which killed hundreds. Russia has also welcomed Damascus' decision to allow the UN inspectors to fulfill their mission and has repeatedly stated that the Syrian Government and President Bashar al-Assad’s approach has been constructive and positive. Russia has also noted on numerous occasions the lack of similar cooperation by the so-called armed “opposition” forces.

On Friday Mr. Lukashevich stated that the chemical weapons attack was pre-planned and that there is mounting evidence that it was organized as a provocation. “We’re getting more new evidence that this criminal act was of a provocative nature. In particular, there are reports that the materials used in the incident and accusations against government troops had been posted for several hours before the so-called attack. Thus, it was a pre-planned action”.

The Damascus chemical attack accusations indicate the launch of “another anti-Syrian propaganda wave” and, in this context, calls on the UN Security Council to immediately use force in Syria “heard from some EU capitals” are“unacceptable”, Lukashevich said.

The United States has planned a Syrian invasion and that is their goal. The use of chemical weapons, just like Sadam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction, is the pretext that the U.S. has determined they will use to invade the country and remove the elected leader of a secular country from power despite the fact that such an invasion will throw the entire Middle East into chaos and provoke armed conflict.

The United States has blindly refused to deal diplomatically with the Syrian Government instead following its own preconceived plan for the country. Not only has the U.S. refused to seek a diplomatic resolution to the internal conflict in the country, but the United States has imported, trained, funded, armed and otherwise supported every kind of extremist mercenary and radical element in a bid to force President Bashar al-Assad from power.

Evidence has shown that groups such as the U.S. backed terrorist group, the al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front, have been orchestrating attacks with (and stockpiling) chemical weapons against regular Syrian Army forces and civilians. On Sunday Al-Nusra pledged to attack Syria’s Alawites and President al-Assad.

It is important to note that not only would the Alawites be in danger if U.S. backed Islamic terrorists succeed in Syria but all minorities including Jews, Christians, other Muslim denominations, as well as ethnic minorities would also face what could become massive genocide and ethnic cleansing.

A witness on the ground, Journalist Yara Saleh of the Al-Ihbariya Syrian information channel, recently provided The Voice of Russia with details of a chemical weapons stash discovered near Damascus. She said: “The rebels launched two missiles filled with poisonous gas in the Jobar neighbourhood which caused Syrian soldiers’ nausea and asphyxia”.

“Some time later, when the Syrian army managed to take that suburb by storm, they found the warehouse and laboratory where shells were stored and stuffed with poisonous agents. Boxes with new gas masks were also found, they carried labels ‘Made in US’. The fact that the rebels did not use those gas masks proves that they had not been attacked with any poisonous gases”.

“Two glass vessels with labels ‘Made in Saudi Arabia’ were also found there. Weapons and explosives made in Saudi Arabia were found in Syria in the past as well. Experts will determine the contents of those vessels”.

“In addition, they found plastic vessels containing unidentified chemicals, some strange white powder and a lot of various explosives and munitions.”

“The Syrian government is concerned that the rebels might have more stocks of such chemical agents that they could use against civilians.”

These are not the first such reports but the United States has refused to listen to or consider any information that does not fit its preconceived invasion scenario. The U.S. also refuses, either due to ignorance or by design, to consider the fact that an armed invasion of Syria will throw the entire region into utter chaos and even place its staunch ally Israel in the worst danger it may ever have been in.

It would appear that the U.S. and Israeli military intelligence bodies believe they can contain the ensuing massive bloodshed, or at least they claim so to their respective populaces, but it is unlikely that they will escape unscathed. Obama has stated that there will be no U.S. troops in Syria, which means that the U.S. will attempt to fight its war by proxy or using air strikes and other means.

Another senior Russian official, Alexei Pushkov, the head of the Lower House of the Russian Parliament’s International Affairs Committee, lashed out at U.S. Nobel Peace Prize winning President Obama, calling him a “clone” of George W. Bush in his drive for war.

“Obama is restlessly heading towards war in Syria as Bush was heading towards war in Iraq. Like in Iraq, this war would be illegitimate and Obama will become Bush’s clone,” said Pushkov.

Syria’s information minister, Omran Zoabi, said on Saturday that any US-led military action against Syria would be“no picnic”.

“US military intervention will create a very serious fallout and a ball of fire that will inflame the Middle East”, Syria’s official SANA news agency quoted him as saying.

United Nations inspectors are set to begin their work on Monday, hopefully Washington will await the results of those inspections before launching another near-sighted self-serving aggressive invasion of yet another small country.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

RussiaIsraelEuropean UnionRussian Foreign MinistryBarack ObamaUSSyriachemical weaponsterrorismSaddam Hussein,Al-QaedaGeorge W. BushBashar AssadSyrian oppositionUS foreign policySyria-U.S. relationsSyrian rebelsSyria. Elimination of chemical weaponsSyrian conflictAl-NusraSyrian governmentAlawitesAlexei PushkovAlexander LukashevichWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         Marlene PapasMarlene Papas, 30 August, 21:06#

Only sane voice remains Russia's.
Read more: 




25 August, 07:25 1 

Google’s agenda inextricable from US Government’s – Julian Assange

сша слежка фбр спецслужбы дядя сэм америка

© Collage: Voice of Russia

The latest revelation being credited to Edward Snowden concerning top-secret U.S. Government documents that he leaked to the Guardian, is that the U.S. Government paid millions of dollars to certain tech companies participating in the PRISM program to make them compliant. This fact further brings into question the true “independence” of the known PRISM program participants and may have a resoundingly chilling effect on the World Wide Web.

Initial claims by all companies involved that they had never heard of PRISM and/or never provided the U.S. Government with their users' private data now ring hollow but, it also shows an even higher level of involvement than may have previously been suspected or provable. It also shows that U.S. taxpayers were footing the bill and subsidizing the huge corporations while education, healthcare and social programs were being cut.

According to the NSA’s own documents the companies currently known to be involved in PRISM, and subsidized “to bring them into compliance” with FISA decisions are: Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook, Apple, PalTalk, YouTube, Skype and AOL.

Documents released to the Guardian and hence by the U.S. White House claim that the millions of dollars in costs were incurred as a result of the companies being forced to comply with “program” requirements and restrictions set out in an October 2011 U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ruling which clearly stated that: “… the NSA’s inability to separate the communications of U.S. based American nationals from those of foreign individuals violated the U.S. fourth amendment rights of U.S. citizens”.

Although the collection methods were deemed to be unconstitutional, the companies and the NSA continue to operate under temporary authority as they seek to bring the programs into compliance with the law.

While the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is supposed to guarantee U.S. citizens the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures this in no way does anything to protect the rest of the world’s population from U.S. spying.

In an article by Julian Assange, published in the independent news source, The Stringer, Mr. Assange recalls a meeting he had in 2011 with the then chairman of Google Eric Schmidt. In summarizing the meeting Mr. Assange concludes that Google’s true agenda was: “… inextricable from that of the US State Department”.

Mr. Assange recalls that the meeting, a transcript of which can be found on WikiLeaks, was arranged under the pretext of a book that was “pre-endorsed” by the likes of “Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Michael Hayden (former head of the CIA and NSA) and Tony Blair”.

Using the book as an example, and the related meeting, Mr. Assange reveals the role that Jared Cohen, advisor to both Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice and its co-writer, played. In effect Cohen, the director of Google Ideas, is the bridge between the U.S. State Department and Google.

Regarding the book Mr. Assange says “… the book is a mechanism by which Google seeks to project itself into Washington. It shows Washington that Google can be its partner, its geopolitical visionary, who will help Washington see further about America’s interests. And by tying itself to the US state, Google thereby cements its own security, at the expense of all competitors”.

He then goes on to cite Stratfor e-mails, published by WikiLeaks in which Fred Burton, the Vice President for Intelligence and a former senior State Department official describes Google: “Google is getting WH [White House] and State Dept support and air cover. In reality they are doing things the CIA cannot do…[Cohen] is going to get himself kidnapped or killed. Might be the best thing to happen to expose Google’s covert role in foaming up-risings, to be blunt. The US Gov’t can then disavow knowledge and Google is left holding the shit-bag”

Mr. Assange also wrote that: “WikiLeaks cables also reveal that previously Cohen, when working for the State Department, was in Afghanistan trying to convince the four major Afghan mobile phone companies to move their antennas onto US military bases. In Lebanon he covertly worked to establish, on behalf of the State Department, an anti-Hezbollah Shia think tank.” and ”Cohen is effectively Google’s director of regime change. He is the State Department channeling Silicon Valley”.

Assange concludes: “That Google was taking NSA money in exchange for handing over people’s data comes as no surprise.”

So Google, which is now into everything from satellite navigation systems to instant messaging, is in effect just another tool of the U.S. Government. Which explains its monopolistic rise to global dominance and why it has more lobbyists than most major weapons contractors in Washington.

If all of these companies are taking millions of U.S. taxpayer’s dollars to bring them into compliance with FISA requirements so that they can continue to spy on the world’s populace then all of the aforementioned companies; Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc. can also be assumed to be just such tools.

Which leaves most of the world’s populace with what may no doubt be the uncomfortable realization, and here it is important to recall, the NSA and the U.S. intelligence community can “legally” target you if you are not a U.S. citizen so even disingenuous claims and the discomfort they may have with admitting they are spying on Americans do not apply to you.

If Google is a U.S. “tool”, then Microsoft, a company which produces nothing tangible, other than a few peripherals, is as well. One might step back and wonder about all of the secret code in Windows and why the founder of Microsoft is the richest man in the world.

With all of the super advanced technology of the NSA it would not be a stretch to assume that they have access to all of the data on all the computers worldwide which are connected to the internet. Including those being operated by the world’s governments.

In article in the New York Times in 1983 the boundless scope of the NSA’s activities is taken to task. David Burnham wrote regarding the investigation of the Church Committee: “Senator Frank Church stressed that the equipment used to watch the Russians could just as easily ''monitor the private communications of Americans.'' If such forces were ever turned against the country's communications system, Senator Church said, ''no American would have any privacy left. ... There would be no place to hide.''

Remember he wrote this in 1983, before the internet: “No laws define the limits of the N.S.A.'s power. No Congressional committee subjects the agency's budget to a systematic, informed and skeptical review. With unknown billions of Federal dollars, the agency purchases the most sophisticated communications and computer equipment in the world. But truly to comprehend the growing reach of this formidable organization, it is necessary to recall once again how the computers that power the N.S.A. are also gradually changing lives of Americans - the way they bank, obtain benefits from the Government and communicate with family and friends. Every day, in almost every area of culture and commerce, systems and procedures are being adopted by private companies and organizations as well as by the nation's security leaders that make it easier for the N.S.A. to dominate American society should it ever decide such action is necessary.”

With all of the revelations by Snowden it may be time to do what the Russian FSB has done. Go back to typewriters and pens and paper. Can we live without Google and the internet giants when they are tied into everything?

Sure we can, but it might be hard. We will all have to get smart again. As one of my favorite anecdotes go: “You have to respect your elders, they finished their education before the internet, when you had to actually remember things.”

If we are over dependent on devices and the internet and we cannot extricate them from our lives, the reality appears to be, we are in the hands of the U.S. Government. And that is just the way they want it. Time to get smart.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

USCIAinternetWikileaksJulian AssangesurveillancePRISMNSATotal electronic surveillance scandalWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         Max CookMax Cook, 25 August, 11:37#

Risking being virused, this has yet to bring up the question of whether internet security companies, have been or always were compromised by said PRISM government players et al? I know from my own experiences in dealing with some of them that they have been willing players in such as PRISM, and lesser monitoring, to the point of having "agency" operatives chatting to me, as company "chat" employees. Snowden spoke the obvious. Good on him. He is one of the Best for it! But the internet [and telcomms generally] has never been secure, and I doubt will ever be, for yer average 95% of users. As for Google? HA! One of my ongoing jokes....!
Read more: 


21 August, 18:37  

Manning conviction: a line the US should not have crossed

Брэдли Мэннинг WikiLeaks утечка секретные материалы

Photo: EPA

The government of the United States of America has crossed a red-line in the sentencing of US Army Private First Class Bradley Manning to 35 years in prison. The government has proven that it has ceased to be legitimate and does not uphold the rule of law. By failing to prosecute those guilty of the war crimes exposed by Mr. Manning the US Government continues to flaunt international laws and norms, as war crimes are a crime against humanity, and it continues to selectively and prejudicially prosecute those who expose egregious illegality while protecting criminals who have committed crimes against all of humanity.

The record has shown that the United States of America has become a rogue authoritarian police state. The global military expansion of NATO, massive economic and political manipulation, the control and manipulation of information (in particular through its operations on the World Wide Web), illegal wars of aggression, all of the illegal actions associated with its “War on Terror” and its wanton disregard for international law and democratically accepted norms point to a state corrupted by absolute power and attempting to annex the entire planet and force all countries to be pliant surrogates. This is also underlined by its war against whistleblowers and journalists.

Mr. Manning is just one individual, but his persecution and unjust torture and confinement, for revealing war crimes, is beyond the pale and must not be allowed to stand. His sentencing proves that the United States Government has become a government unto itself, which refuses to listen to the voice of its own people, and egregiously prosecutes the innocent while protecting the worst kind of criminal known to mankind, namely those who commit crimes during a time of war under the color of their respective flags.

This is a call to the international community, to legal scholars, policy makers, the heads of international bodies, the leaders of all countries the world over (even those who have forsaken their own sovereignty to sheepishly comply with all U.S. demands) and in particular to all countries which are members of the United Nations.

This global call is necessary because the U.S. Government refuses to abide by international laws, as well as its own constitution, and has failed to be an instrument of its own people. It has shown itself to be unable to monitor and control itself and is dangerously and alarmingly growing more and more out of control.


I would propose that the international community demand that the United States of America cease the following practices and form a truly independent body to ascertain that these practices are stopped or are in the process of being remedied and that those responsible are being brought to justice. Until such is thus I propose sanctions to be implemented which are listed later. The United States of America must immediately cease:

1. The illegal profiling, suppression, arrest, detention, repression and brutality against peaceful protestors and the stifling of dissent in all forms. This would include freeing all political prisoners and the payment of restitution.

2. All questionable police, military and security service actions under the color of the “War on Terror” against innocent civilians, journalists and anyone else the state deems to be a threat. As well, the payment of restitution to all parties who have been falsely imprisoned, detained or harassed under terrorism statutes. This would not apply to real terrorists of course.

3. The highly illegal practice of extra judicial execution by drone or in special operations or by any other means that they are being carried out regularly by order of the U.S. president and his agents.

4. The practice of using drones for illegal surveillance, military operations where there is not an equal theater of operations, and for carrying out extra-judicial executions. This would include paying reparations to all of those who have suffered or been adversely affected as a result of the wanton killing of innocents that the U.S. drone war has brought about.

5. The practice of aggressive war under any guise, be it preventive, humanitarian or otherwise. This would include an end to the ability to go to war unilaterally or with the agreement of “allies” and would only allow the United States to go to war in a situation where there is a full United Nations mandate. This includes “secretly” funding, supporting or training warring parties on either side of any international or internal conflict. These practices must be ceased immediately.

6. The internal and now international practice of racial or other profiling by police, military, special services and other government bodies and compensation to those who have been unjustly victimized by such.

7. The practices of racial and other discrimination in, housing, health care, education, politics, banking, freedom of movement and freedom of residence within the United States and its territories.

8. The abolition of corporate donations to political parties and widespread reforms to make elections transparent and democratic. This includes an abolition of the two-party system, fair and equal opportunities for third parties, an end to harassment and even illegal detention of third party candidates and equal access for third parties to election resources including media and government funds.

9. Collecting, storing and using information on the world’s citizens,

international bodies, sovereign countries and international organizations and entities through the internet and by other illegal and secret means.

10. The practice of state sponsored executions and the death penalty, in keeping in line with the highest international norms and standards.

11. Discrimination against and pay repatriations to native American Indians and the ancestors of slaves.

12. All operations at the illegal offshore extra-judicial Guantanamo Bay Cuba detention facility and the freeing and repatriation of all of those held there.

13. The practice of pre-arrest or preventive arrest and detention.

14. The practice of secret arrest and detention and the denial of Habeas Corpus rights to all persons regardless of who they may be.

15. State sponsored racism. This includes segregation, grants, education and all forms of exclusion where race plays a factor. These practices must no longer be decided or regulated by the white minority or the power elites.

16. All practices that unfairly limit or infringe on worker’s rights, pensions, health care, education, housing and all social spheres.

17. All wars and occupations on invaded lands. This includes paying reparations and rebuilding infrastructure in invaded countries. This would go back to the invasion of Yugoslavia.

18. Promoting and attempting to coerce states and peoples to accept and adopt what for them are foreign and unacceptable concepts, such as equating homosexual relations to marriage, and other religious, cultural or social concepts that are endemic to the United States.

19. All war profiteering in countries that have been invaded by the United States or its surrogates. This includes charging countries to rebuild infrastructure which has been destroyed by U.S. aggression. Thus the United States must rebuild what they have destroyed at their own cost. This would also prohibit private U.S. bodies from profiteering in such rebuilding.

20. All operations and actions to subvert and over-throw the government of Syria and to depose its elected head of state.

21. Funding and supporting terrorists and all such destabilizing operations including fomenting revolutions, funding insurgents and overthrowing governments.

22. All persecution of journalists, whistleblowers and truth seekers including Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Jeremy Hammond, Edward Snowden hacktivists, and all individuals, organizations and countries that have in any way supported them. This includes their immediate release.

23. The practice of illegally kidnapping and renditioning to the United States the citizens of third countries. This would include the freeing of such victims as Victor Bout and Constantin Yaroshenko.

24. Meddling in the internal affairs of sovereign nations and attempting to pressure foreign governments and organizations through any and all means. This includes compensation to all who have suffered because of overzealous U.S. persecution of individuals such as Julian Assange and Edward Snowden.

25. Manipulating, stealing and otherwise unfairly obtaining the resources of sovereign nations, including “all” resources from human to energy.

26. Torture and illegal detention in any way shape or form and in any location in, or outside of U.S. territory, by the U.S. Government and/or its agents be they public, private or foreign.

27. Monopolizing and controlling all international and extra-U.S. segments of the World Wide Web and committing spying and espionage through public worldwide channels.

28. The global expansion of NATO and all unilateral military formations on a worldwide level.

29. Protecting those guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity, torture, aggressive war, illegal detention and extra-judicial executions. This would include their immediate arrest.

30. All practices which lead to the continued imprisonment of native Americans and which contribute to genocide. This includes reparations to native Americans.

31. Obfuscating the events of 9-11. This includes a true and independent international investigation of the events of 9-11-2001.

32. Cease the detention of all persons being held under secret arrest and indefinitely since 9-11. Reports say almost 9,000 people are currently being held.

33. Using terrorism as a pretext to get away with everything under the sun.

34. An immediate closure of the U.S./NATO military base on the territory of Kosovo, Serbia.

I am not a legal scholar nor an official and the aforementioned and consequent suggestions are in no way connected to the Russian Government. They are my views and recommendations as a fair minded and concerned citizen of the world and a journalist who has been documenting and attempting to bring to light all of the aforementioned crimes for years now. You may take the above points as food for thought. They are chiefly directed at those able to affect policy or bring about change but if you agree with them I would ask you to spread this document around.


Until the previous points are remedied or steps are taken by the U.S. to remedy them I propose the following sanctions:

The prohibition by all states to allow U.S. military bases to be based in, or military operations to be carried out of, their countries. This includes allied countries and surrogates including those who are NATO members or members of other military alliances.

A prohibition on all U.S. corporations, persons and entities both public and private from profiteering or taking advantage of resources, rebuilding operations or any other area in which they may obtain gains in any war zone, conflict zone or area that has been the subject to U.S. invasion or internal meddling. Including Iraq, Afghanistan, the former Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Iran and all other countries in which the U.S. has had a hand in destabilizing or in destroying the country or its government.

Economic, travel, trade, political, communications and military sanctions as determined by international bodies to be applied justly and fairly against those guilt of the aforementioned affronts to humanity.

Given all of the previous points and the current climate in the United States I would also call on all independent and just countries of the world to change their stance and policies on allowing U.S. citizens to obtain asylum and protection in their countries. Asylum should be granted to all of those seeking rule of law and who are exposing the illegality of the U.S. Government. It should also be granted to any member of the U.S. Government, military, or even special services who refuses to participate in illegality or attempts to expose it or stop it. Journalists, citizens, activists and all others who have suffered at the hands of the U.S. Government or due to the actions of its agents or surrogates should also be protected, including victims of racial, religious and other discrimination. Those whose conscience also leads the to cease to be willing to support the U.S. Government in any way shape or form should also be eligible for asylum if they wish to leave the United States.

The sentencing of Bradley Manning is a sign to all who would dare to expose illegality, it is designed to terrorize anyone who would speak out. I propose we make it a Red Line they have crossed, one which will force us (the world community) to end their illegality.

 The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached robles@ruvr.ru

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



20 August, 06:17  

Associate of Glen Greenwald labeled a terrorist in UK

сноуден шереметьево москва

Photo: RIA Novosti

The United States was given a 'heads up' by the United Kingdom before they recently detained an associate of Glen Greenwald at Heathrow Airport under the pretext of being suspected of being involved in terrorism. The 'officials' held the individual, David Miranda, under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 for the maximum allowable 9 hours and confiscated his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, DVDs and games consoles, according to reports. According to statements by Mr. Miranda he was detained by Heathrow officials, reportedly Metropolitan Police but more likely than not members of Special Branch, while in the transit area.

Note from John

Hello dear reader. Technically I am on vacation, a fact you might be aware of if you caught my last newscast or follow me on Twitter or Facebook, unfortunate places I have to provide the NSA with information in order to keep up with the Joneses, but if you are not then let that little fact answer any questions you may or may not have had as to where I have been and what I have been up to. Spent a few days in the hospital as well but that is another story. Would have liked to have been in some undisclosed location by a sea but hey, can’t have everything right?

I count myself very fortunate that I do not have to travel out of Russia because sitting over here in Moscow it would appear that the entire western world (and not only) has gone completely mad. I am not making some broad unsourced opinionated statement but will explain why in detail in a minute. Bear with me please dear reader.

Do you remember those old science fiction movies where some brutal Orwellian police state was burning books and brainwashing the masses, liquidating those who were a threat to the state, showed emotion, valued literature, were fond of classical music or showed kindness, love or mercy, well it seems we are in just such a universe.

The endless war and the threat to “Oceania” is the phantom menace of an imminent “terrorist” threat and it is now being used in the U.K. in much the same manner that it has been used in the United States since 9-11. Namely to arbitrarily go after anyone and everyone that the “Big Brother” deems to be a threat or undesirable for whatever reason they may have concocted.

Less than 15 years ago who would have thought that we would be living in a world where acquaintances of journalists who exposed government criminality would be stopped as terrorists in an internationally protected transit zone? Or that soldiers who exposed war crimes would be given life sentences? Who could have imagined that a government (the U.S.) which committed acts of aggressive war, torture, extra judicial executions, trampled and all but flushed international law and the U.S. Constitution down the toilet, renditioned people, held them indefinitely without charge, arrested the citizens of other states in third countries, spied on absolutely everyone and perpetually meddled in the affairs of sovereign nations while expanding militarily even into space, would be allowed to continue its criminality with impunity and even have its head, a president named Barack Hussein Obama, who is responsible for mass murder and extra-judicial executions, receive the Nobel Peace Prize? And to finally turn all logic on its head to have gay lovers being given the title of husband and having this somehow viewed as normal?

We are living in such a world, well at least those in the west are. Somewhere a wrong turn was taken and they entered into some weird sick Orwellian parallel universe, and to be quite frank, this was not the kind of world that I wanted for our kids to live in dear reader. Fortunately the encroachment on the sovereignty of most nations that the United States has been successful in achieving across most of the planet has not yet been allowed to infect Russia, but clearly attempts have been made, as we saw with the USAID scandal and the attempts by U.S. agents to bring about a color revolution in Russia.

War on truth

We know that the U.S. is currently engaged in a war against journalists and whistleblowers and attempting to paint them as somehow being terrorists or involved in espionage. The Edward Snowden affair has proven since it began that the U.S. has gone completely insane with its own power and its attempts to hide its own criminality.

Of course the latest incident, the detention of the associate of a reporter whose source exposed a massive illegal worldwide spying operation being run by the United States, did not take place in the United States, and is not as egregious as the incident with the presidential airliner of Bolivian President Evo Morales, it does show how the United States has successful annexed yet another nation into following it down a road that most sane countries would rather not go down.

United Kingdom’s participation in “War on Terror”

The United Kingdom was once the moral beacon of the world but due to its kowtowing to the U.S. has become just another egregious violator of human rights, and this under the pretext of a war on terror. Here it is important to note that the U.K. never had a problem with Islamic terrorism until it joined the United States in meddling in, and launching acts of aggression against, Islamic countries. The only reason that the United States has ever had a problem with Islamic terrorism, and this is also important to note, is because of its intentional meddling in Islamic countries.

David Miranda: violation of international law and human rights

According to the Guardian: “Unable immediately to find a flight for him back to Rio, Miranda says the Heathrow police then escorted him to passport control so he could enter Britain and wait there.”

"It was ridiculous," Miranda told the Guardian. "First they treat me like a terrorist suspect. Then they are ready to release me in the UK." Violation of international law

Thus it would appear that Mr. Miranda was actually detained by the London special services in the transit zone of Heathrow International Airport, which would be a violation of international law. This is a fact that I am still investigating as it has not been mentioned in the western press but is very important to note.

Moscow / London contrast

In contrast Edward Snowden who was “trapped” in the transit zone at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo, was never taken to a room by security personnel and threatened, or interrogated, or had his possessions stolen.

Unlike Mr. Snowden whose human rights and dignity were respected, Mr. Miranda had no rights. He could not make a phone call, have an interpreter present, or have a lawyer. He was not even allowed the protections that an enemy soldier would have on a field of war. He was coerced, threatened and subjected to Gestapo like tactics under a law that is used to question people regarding terrorism.

Security sources told the U.K.s Independent that among the 7 agents that interrogated Mr. Miranda MI-6 officers may have been involved.

Terrorism as a pretext to strip away rights

In the whole post 9-11 “War on Terror” paradigm basic things that those of us old enough to remember used to take for granted no longer exist: freedom of speech, dissent, accountability, rule of law, human rights, freedom of travel, personal privacy, freedom from arbitrary detention, what exists is now is a criminal U.S. state and in the homogenous American world created by the PNAC the citizens of the world are literally slaves to that state and anyone who attempts to expose the criminality of the rogue state, or is even remotely associated with anyone who does so, is branded a terrorist.

Terrorism hype

According to the BBC: 61,145 were detained between 2012 and 2013 under Schedule 7 of Terrorism Act 2000. This figure is 12,000 less than the previous one year period and 30% lower than the 2009-2010 period. The BBC says that there were only 24 terrorism related arrests during the 2011-2012 period after being questioned under Schedule 7. 24 arrests represents 0.03% of all of those examined. There are no reports of even a single terrorist act being averted due to the implementation of this legislation in the U.K.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached in a week when I am back from vacation at robles@ruvr.ru.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



15 August, 10:14  

Britain joining aggressive capitalist American model – Tim Summers

Лондон Тауэр вид


Photo: Piero Sierra/flickr.com

Download audio file

The economic situation in the United Kingdom continues to worsen and the prospects for the future are looking bleaker and bleaker. The Voice of Russia recently interviewed Tim Summers on the worsening social situation in the U.K.. Amid heightened surveillance, rampant xenophobia, the resurgence of nationalist parties, increased police brutality, rising unemployment, cuts in welfare and benefits, and what appears to be a complete breakdown of the social system, the right wing forces are retaking power and what was once a fair and free society is closely beginning to resemble that of the “decrepit” United States model, according to Mr. Summers.

Part I of the interview


Robles: Hello. This is John Robles. I’m speaking with Mr. Tim Summers. He is a political activist in the United Kingdom and a former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party of England and Wales in the UK.

Summers: It’s now got up to the point where Britain is almost joining the aggressive American capitalist kind of model against its 1945 welfarist traditions.

Robles: Very sad. It should have been the other way around. I mean, I used to admire the English Bobbies and their manners and their civility and now it seems like they’re modeling themselves after the brutal US police.

Summers: It was hoped that Europe, the European Union might provide some sort of counter-position to the strength of America. But this doesn’t seem to be the case. And that the decrepit American world order, although it’s falling apart everywhere, is of absolute decisive importance, I think everywhere. And in Britain it will see that Britain doesn’t leave European Union. We’ll see that Britain supports American foreign policy in the United Nations and everywhere else that matters.

So I think this is a very bad sad reflection, because in British elections the politicians never talk about foreign policy. They only talk about snouts in the trough and that the neglect of foreign policy has led to, in Britain’s case, a complete collapse of it, it is now American foreign policy. And I think everybody now knows that.

Robles: Do you think the UK has completely lost any sort of independence it had?

Summers: Yes. I’m absolutely sure of it. I think that if you examine the record it will show that in every instance – Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, I mean, the puppet-like robotic nature of British Governments whatever they let call themselves is utter toadying and despicable. But the critics are so marginalized now that there’s no effective hope of any big change.

British society’s been so changed now, the goalposts have been so moved. Trade unions used to play a big factor in British politics. But the Trade Union Act that Thatcher introduced, forcing them to ballot their members before they could take any effective action, gives the entire initiative to the employers. And trade unions have now been marginalized. They tried a few protest actions a few years back, but they led to nothing. And now the New Labor want to make a ceremonial, kind of distance from trade unions.

The Labor Party was created to put trade unions into Parliament, but now after the Tories had had a go at Labor’s links with trade unions, the New Labor is anxious to distance itself from trade unions to be equal and opposite to the Tories. This is a measure of how serious things have become in Britain. And without the power of trade unions, small campaigning groups can’t look forward to the future with much optimism.

Robles: There was a report the other night of the increased usage of temporary workers with no contract or anything. Is this becoming widespread in the UK?

Summers: Oh yes, absolutely, the undermining of all standards of employment. The use of part-time and casual workers has got to a point now where huge amounts of employees don’t have a set for amount of hours. They are essentially called in when they are needed and sent home when they are not needed. This is like casual labor that was abolished in the Docklands in the early 1960s.

Casual labor is a third world kind of phenomena, but it’s reappeared in Britain. And it’s a mark of how the power has changed, the power relationships, how the goalposts have moved. How the employees have absolutely no influence or power on negotiation with employers.

Robles: It sounds really bad. Do you see things getting worse and worse or do you see any political changes coming up in the near future? What’s the landscape …

Summers: I’m afraid I see the right wing as being very, and the super-rich being very firmly in the saddle, and that if the Tories can continue to supply even minute figures of economic growth, then their position is secure. But if it isn’t it would probably lead to a switch to New Labor, which now is absolutely no better and exactly the same as the Conservative Party. So in that sense whatever little changes there are of management I think this drift to the right is epochal, I think is the right word. I don’t mean it will never change, but it’s going to be quite a long time in coming I think.

Robles: I see. Back to the Police and their profiling, if I could ask you a couple of questions, because I was just curious myself. Are the UK Police, or the London Police, now all armed and do citizens now have to carry proof of citizenship everywhere they go?

Summers: Well, effectively they do, because there are police racist raids upon employees and probably there is a shift now to them carrying proof of their immigration or of their citizenship status. I should imagine that is a shift going on.


Robles: So is it normal, I mean, like in the United States people used to just carrying your driving license or something or if you had memorized your social security number or something. That was enough.

Summers: Not yet. Not precisely. There was a whole move towards everybody having a dog tag, an ID card, put forward by the New Labor Government, but actually the Tories were opposed to ID cards, and scuppered the move. But it was mooted, and it was in line. But it was abandoned and isn’t currently the practice. But as I say with Police harassment of black people many employees might now be inclined to feel a need to carry some proof of their legitimacy.

Robles: I see. Regarding all these revelations from Snowden, now Europe was upset, but then they jumped right in line after the US and just kept along with their subservient attitude. Has there been any outcry in the UK about the massive NSA surveillance? Is that affecting politics in any way or relations?

Summers: Only among the vigorous, small marginalized campaigns. They are still alive and pulsing through all the cities of Britain. Life goes on in that sense. But it’s very much in the margins. The newspapers are overwhelmingly pro-Conservative, pro-Government. And the television insidiously so, it’s a much more subtle thing to prove, but there is enormous enthusiasm and respect for people like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden who have put forward the interests of the world, acted as world citizens over the so-called natural interest. By all those people that understand that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. But that’s certainly the minority of the population.

It was very welcome to hear that Bradley Manning was no longer charged with aiding the enemy which could have led to a death sentence and that now he has been jailed for 156 years, something called the Bradley Manning Foundation will campaign for his better treatment and release, so not all is lost. But these things are an underground. The progressive campaigning activities are an underground in Britain now. The mainstream is absolutely decisively and overwhelmingly oppressive right wing rich-poor agenda. The whole country’s development has been set back by this right wing wave. This is continually socially engineering the whole situation to steer this American-style future that we were talking about.

Robles: OK, Tim. Thanks a lot. I really appreciate it. Do you have anything you wanted to finish up with?

Summers: No, I think I’ve had a good burst, and I thank you for listening.

Robles: OK, I really appreciate it. Thanks a lot.

Summers: My pleasure. Any time, John.

Robles: OK, thanks a lot, OK good night, Tim. Thanks.


http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 




15 August, 08:10  

The Fourth Estate “abdicated their role” in the US – Edward Snowden

Эдвард Сноуден Шереметьево Сноуден

Photo: RIA Novosti

In an interview with Peter Maass published for the New York Times Edward Snowden answered questions regarding the reasons he went public with the information he had amassed and explained why he chose Laura Poitras and Glen Greenwald as the people to whom he would leak information to, a deed that continues to cause shockwaves around the world.

Judging from the content of the questions and the general tone of the interview it would appear that the interview was conducted sometime in the early days of the entire Snowden affair. There is no mention of Russia or any of the loud events that have occurred since June. All of the questions are regarding the initial disclosure and Mr. Snowden’s reasons for doing what he did.

It is also doubtful that Mr. Snowden would have given an interview to the New York Times after being given asylum in Russia, especially knowing as he must that, the mainstream U.S. media has become nothing more than a tool which parrots the talking points of Washington and does not dare to stray too far from the official government line.

Regarding the U.S. media Mr. Snowden stated: “After 9/11, many of the most important news outlets in America abdicated their role as a check to power — the journalistic responsibility to challenge the excesses of government — for fear of being seen as unpatriotic and punished in the market during a period of heightened nationalism.”

Mr. Snowden was absolutely correct in his choice of Glen Greenwald and Laura Poitras, the American media not only fails to fulfill the responsibilities of the Fourth Estate in holding the government to task but papers like the Washington Post have shown time and time again that they are merely instruments of the power elite in Washington.

Papers such as the Washington Post have no qualms about outing spies, as Robert Novak and the Washington Post did in the case of Valerie Plame, for mere political expediency and they (the U.S. media) are even now under such intense pressure from the government it would be dangerous and in fact insane for a whistleblower to approach U.S. media.

Not only do whistleblowers risk being exposed and persecuted but the reporters and media outlets also risk being prosecuted and having the full weight of the U.S. Government falling on them like a ton a bricks. This should be crystal clear to anyone who has followed the stories of Julian Assange, Bradley Manning or Edward Snowden.

The hypocrisy is mind boggling. The Washington Post outed CIA agent Valerie Plame and in effect caused the deaths of what were reported to be as many as 210 agents and assets that had been under Valerie Plame’s control or associated with her or the cover companies where she had worked. The damage to “national security” could not have been greater but the Washington Post and Robert Novak suffered little.

My own experience with the Washington Post, in which they used me without my permission in an attempt to write a piece bashing Russia and portraying life as hard for anyone who flees the west and makes their home here, literally brought it home to me that the U.S. media is nothing but a tool for the U.S. Government which uses it to manipulate the masses and go after those it deems as enemies.

So these outlets, which continuously show their obedience to the government are truly not to be trusted when it comes to exposing government illegality or the corruption and excesses of those in power. The western media has been rather kind to Mr. Snowden, compared with the way they demonized Julian Assange and Bradley Manning, but they have still not taken President Obama or the power elite to task for their criminal behavior. And this includes the most heinous crimes of aggressive wars and extra-judicial executions.

Back to Mr. Snowden, for those who wondered why he decided to out himself he made it clear in the interview. Mr. Snowden: “Had I intended to skulk away anonymously, I think it would have been far harder to work with Laura, but we all knew what was at stake. The weight of the situation actually made it easier to focus on what was in the public interest rather than our own.”

Apparently it was decided that the world would listen to the revelations and take them more seriously if they knew the source, I would argue that perhaps the opposite has happened and the fact that I am reporting and commenting on Mr. Snowden right now is exactly why. Rather than reporting on the egregious illegality and criminality running rampant in Washington and like a cancer through the U.S. Government, and the U.S. president running roughshod over international law and the world’s populace and countries, I am focused on comments by the brave and honorable Mr. Snowden.

I believe he would not want it this way and that we in the media and you the readers and the consumers of information should begin to focus on what Mr. Snowden has revealed. Namely that everything you do and everything you are is being used against you to manipulate you and advance the interests of the United States and their agents.

The New York Times must be commended for publishing the interview with Mr. Snowden but can we the trust the paper? This is the very same publication that habitually demonizes Russia and is one of the premier distributors of Russophobic mindless propaganda.

For example in yesterday’s op-ed the New York Times wrote: “Considering the breadth of reforms that President Obama is now proposing to prevent privacy abuses in intelligence gathering, in the wake of Snowden’s disclosures, Snowden deserves a chance to make a second impression — that he truly is a whistle-blower, not a traitor.”

The paper does not and has not taken Obama to task for his allowing the program to exist in the first place (and for much worse) nor for his nonchalant way of telling the American public that they will just have to eat it.

They also write: “The fact is, he dumped his data and fled to countries that are hostile to us and to the very principles he espoused. To make a second impression, Snowden would need to come home, make his case and face his accusers. It would mean risking a lengthy jail term, but also trusting the fair-mindedness of the American people, who, I believe, will not allow an authentic whistle-blower to be unfairly punished.”

Again we see Russia and other countries labeled as enemies and as somehow opposed to openness and rule of law. Here it is important to note that Mr. Snowden was not handed to the United States because the President of the Russian Federation followed the rule of law, international and domestic, and the protections outlined in the Russian Constitution. It is also important to note that, especially in light of the Bradley Manning case (where a young man faces life in prison for exposing war crimes), that there is no way on earth that Mr. Snowden would have a snowball’s chance in a U.S. court being accused of crimes against the very government controlling the court. Any fool would know that.

And this: “Dealing with Putin always involved a certain trade-off for America: accepting a degree of Putin authoritarianism in return for cooperation on global issues that mattered to us, as long as Putin “sort of” kept Russia moving toward a more open, consensual society.”

Always the Putin bashing! The “trade off” means that in “dealing” with President Putin the United States is forced to treat Russia as an equal and respect its sovereignty. This is something the United States is not used to. They are used to dictating to the world what to do, when to do it and who to do it with.

This is why Obama and the entire U.S. Government has gone completely off the reservation in their pursuit of Mr. Snowden. Russia stood up to the goliath-run-rampant and did so in that it followed the rule of law, despite the fact that it had nothing to gain in doing so and much to lose with regard to relations.

So in closing I think we should all applaud president Putin and the Russian Government for their independent, grown up, forward thinking and intelligent decisions, ones based on international laws and norms, with regard to Mr. Snowden.

We should also say thank you to Mr. Snowden for his heroic sacrifice and focus on what he has allowed us to know.

Lastly I would also like to take this chance to ask Mr. Snowden to perhaps grant me an interview, if he reads this of course.

As I am the first U.S. citizen to have been granted asylum in Russia, a fact my regular readers are aware of as well as many Chinese television viewers and my Serbian friends, it might be an interesting discussion.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



14 August, 20:00 2 

Facebook: largest database of bio-metric facial coordinates – Katherine Albrecht

фэйсбук компьютер интернет ноутбук facebook

Photo: Flickr.com

Download audio file

“Facebook went public and they made so much money not because people were so excited about the ability to share information with their friends, but because the recognized the value of being able to identify individuals specifically and know all of their interests,” say Dr. Katherine Albrecht. Shock waves have travelled across the globe with the recent revelations by Edward Snowden about the NSA and U.S. spying on private law-abiding citizens the world over. As a result people are beginning to shy away from  internet giants and looking for more secure ways to go about their business on-line and avoid US prying, some US companies have even closed down completely to avoid a knock on their doors by “Big Brother” with a FISA order. We spoke to privacy rights advocate and the co-founder of a much needed internet privacy provider, Dr. Katherine Albrecht, about the current paradigm.


Hello. This is John Robles. I am speaking with Dr. Katherine Albrecht, one of the co-founders of the Startpage.com web resource and a long-time privacy-rights champion and advocate. This is part 2 of an interview in progress.

Albrecht: Once you are in the proxy you can click additional links and surf the Internet using the proxy, and no one ever sees you. The only thing I could add is that when you connect to us – whether it is your search connection or your proxied web-surfing – it is protected by SSL encryption. And not just generic SSL encryption: we just finished installing the latest form, which is called Perfect Forward Secrecy, a type of layer security, the latest, absolute state-of-the-art version of SSL encryption. And what that means is that even if someone were to intercept your communication with us, all they would be able to see would be gobbledygook, they would not be able to actually make sense of it because it is in encrypted in streams.

Even your ISP, which may be watching your traffic, like Verizon and AT&T has been caught doing, even if you are under Verizon or AT&T and they capture your traffic with us, all they will see is an encrypted stream that they can’t make sense of.

Robles: Regarding the Onion Browser program, how effective is that? Can you tell us about Oinion? The Tor project. I’m sure you are familiar with it.

Albrecht: We are actually big fans of Tor. I’ve been doing privacy work since 1999, since long before I helped create the Startpage, so certainly I have been following a lot of these privacy services.

I think the real key is that, as much as we would like to have the perfect, secure solution, it really is a back-and-forth kind of an “arms race” with the privacy people working to deploy the latest technologies and malicious governments and oppressive regimes and others who want to invade people’s privacy, finding ways around it and vice versa. So, it’s a kind of spy versus spy world we are living in right now.

Robles: Right. Some of our listeners, Some of the normal Internet users are saying “So what if the NSA knows I shop at Safeway every Friday, or that I drive such and such a route to work, that I sent a birthday card to my sister?” They say “so what?” But how can that information be used maliciously or why should people be afraid that such information is being collected?

Albrecht: I think here in the U.S. we had an example of that with the IRS scandal that has been unfolding at the same time with this NSA scandal, in which we found that people, who had particular political views, were being denied the same legal privileges as other people.

How do they know what political views you hold? Well, where would you go to find that information? The biggest dossier of personal information ever collected in the history of humanity is now in the hands of the NSA, and much of that has been collected by the services offered by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and other big companies, and they do it through your willing contract with them, I should point out, the information they have collected on people they’ve collected through your voluntary participation in their service.

They say it very plainly. In fact, Yahoo, when they switched over users to their new Yahoo account in June, they specifically said: “By agreeing to accept this new Yahoo, you agree to let us scan and review the appropriateness of all of your e-mail messages.”

People agree to do it, they consent.

Robles: But they don’t say they will go ahead and send it off to the US government, do they?

Albrecht: Right, so there’s where the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution comes into play, because the Constitution says that you can’t go prying around in people’s private information.

So, I think it gets into an interesting grey area of the law they use in the letterwork on this. If they allow the private sector to collect all of the data and then simply go to the private sector, then the argument that they make is that they are not directly accessing your information – you’ve already shared that information elsewhere – and I think probably the next ten years of legal decisions will be heavily looking into that.

What I’d like to suggest to people is that, if they are concerned about it, there are alternatives to virtually all of those privacy-invading services, and you don’t really have to sign the “I agree box” on the Yahoo e-mail and agree to let them read all of your messages.

There are alternatives, and in fact we are developing what we call the world’s most private e-mail, StartMail, which people can sign up for at StartMail.com. That will be coming out at the end of this year and then a paid version of it next year. But that’s fully encrypted. We are using all of the absolute, state-of-the-art technology in light of what we know about NSA tactics to lock it down.

So, that can be coming out next year, and you know, those sorts of things – StartMail is not free, but it’s not going to be terribly expensive, but it’s not free – and people say “hang on a second, my Yahoo e-mail is free.”

And I say if I gave you a hotel room and told you, hey, the hotel room is free, why are you paying $200 a night for a hotel room, but yet I had eqipped the hotel room with cameras, and microphones, and bugged the phones, and had a camera in the shower because I wanted to watch what you did while you used the free hotel room, then you might say “Gee, I’d rather pay for it.” So, that’s how we really view e-mail.

Robles: That’s a wonderful way to put it.

Albrecht: Yeah, the free e-mail services, that’s really what they are doing. They are giving you a space to reveal your personal information about yourself so that they can capture it. And that’s not free as far as we are concerned.

Robles: I always thought the same thing about Facebook. I mean they must have massive infrastructure for Facebook worldwide, which must be extremely expensive, and they just provide this for free.

Albrecht: Immensely! And the thing about Facebook, if you think about what Facebook has really done – even its name gives it away – Facebook has the largest collection of photographs of people’s faces, of any organization or government or agency anywhere on Earth.

And they have that not because they’ve surreptitiously gone around snapping secret photos of people, but because people voluntarily submitted those photos. So, now that immense treasure trove of biometric facial coordinates of people’s faces are certainly being put to use, and we contributed it all ourselves without even thinking it’s through.

Robles: Is that the main treasure of Facebook?

Albrecht: It is a big part of it. I think it goes far beyond that. And I think one of the reasons Facebook went public and they made so much money not because people were so excited about the ability to share information with their friends, but because the recognized the value of being able to identify individuals specifically and know all of their interests.

So, you know, the people who want to abuse this information are typically criminals, marketers and governments. Those are really the groups you are looking at. And criminal hackers, of course.

I live in the city where we had a Facebook bandit. What he was doing, he was going online and see when people talked about their vacations on Facebook. They’d say “oh, yeah, I’m leaving Friday! SO excited! I’m going to Hawaii!” And then he would break into their homes and rob them blind while they were out of town – and he did that all on the basis of their Facebook information. So, I say whatever you wouldn’t put on a billboard, don’t put it on Facebook.

And then you’ve got the marketers, that’s where the money is being made right now. If I can figure out every one who is interested in my competitor’s products and I can lead them all over to my products.

And then, of course, the governments, which some would argue in the US have gone way overboard and suspecting that all Americans as being potential terrorists, even those of us who are completely law-abiding. It’s really those three groups.

If you have something like Facebook that you can fund with marketing money, all the better, at least as far as the government is concerned, because then they can just come in and scuff it up.

The websites are Startpage.com, and Ixquick.com. If you would like to sign up for an early access to Startmail, our upcoming e-mail program, go to Startmail.com. My personal website is kmashow.com.

That was the end of a two part interview with Dr. Katherine Albrecht

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles


·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 2

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 15 August, 00:00#

From day one I've been suspicious of Facebook and all the other 'social' networks and never joined any one of them. There are other ways I can communicate with family and friends.

·         John RoblesJohn Robles, 28 August, 09:23#

You are right Vera
Read more: 



14 August, 19:54  

UK suffers from wave of xenophobic intolerance – Tim Summers

Великобритания северная Ирландия протест белфаст лоялисты

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

Things are getting worse in the United Kingdom as the economic situation worsens, social programs are being gutted and the job market is going down the tubes. All of these social ills have led to the classic move to the right and authoritarianism as those who wish to exploit the masses use xenophobic fears and blame immigrants for the country’s ills. The UK has been subjected to an American social model as well. Tim Summers gave an update to Voice of Russia on the worsening situation in the UK.


Hello! This is john Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Tim Summers. He is a political activist in the UK and a former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party of England and Wales in the UK.

Robles: Hello Tim! Nice to be speaking with you. Can you tell our listeners what is going on there in the UK? I mean it looks like things are moving dangerously towards some sort of fascism, if we could characterize it like that.

Summers: Well, it seems we are moving to the right, that’s for sure. And it is very disturbing. I wouldn’t say it is a move to fascism. I would just say it is a move towards greater conservative partyism, greater conservatism. I mean there is a wave of xenophobic intolerance since the Woolwich murder of a soldier.

There’ve been attacks on mosques all over the country. The priests have been powerless to deal with it. Mosques have been burned down and graffitied with racial hatred and Islamophobic remarks and so on.

And recently, there’s been a Home Office “go home” campaign that involved police raids on employees on the basis of their skin color, inquiring about their immigration status.

This was not an intelligence-led operation and it has been widely criticized. The police have come in for a lot of criticism because so much of their bad misdeeds have been coming to light recently.

Today Liberty has an antiracist van touring around Westminster, as a repost to the Government police racism.

Robles: These raids you are talking about, is this organized by something like the immigration department or is this the police? Who is doing this, who is behind this?

Summers: It is a Home Office “go home” campaign that instructs police to make raids on employees. And the complaint has been that the police simply use skin color, not intelligence-led operations in this pursuit for illegal immigrants. That is just being really antagonistic to ethnic minorities.

There is always some kind of countercurrent, an opposition in Britain but it is marginalized by this swing to the right.

Robles: You’ve mentioned this sort of drift to the right.

Summers: The police are more authoritarian in lots of ways now.

It’s come out about their secret political surveillance of ecologists.

Their attempt to smear the family of a famously murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence. The police secretly tried to smear his family with being violent political activists. And also his friend and witness to the murder of Stephen Lawrence, somebody called Duwayne Brooks was also attempted to be smeared to deflect attention from the bungle murder inquiry of Stephen done by the police.

Secret surveillance has come out, as I said, with these ecologists.

And quite recently, only a couple of days ago the policeman, who murdered somebody called Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protest in the east end of the city of London, was acquitted of man slaughter, simply sacked from the police force.

The police here really do get away with murder and it’s blatant, right in front of the people.

And the Government is very pleased with this because they want to win back electoral support from the UK Independence Party, which has leaped over the Greens for fourth place and is about to leap over the Liberal Democrats for third place. Perhaps, it already has done.

But this kind of xenophobia strikes a chord with this mad right-wing mood in Britain, since the capitalist crisis.

Robles: They are like stopping people in the street, racial profiling people and demanding documents or what is going on?

Summers: That’s right, yes! There is a general crackdown. Britain has become a very repressive place. And I’ve mentioned that these racist crackdowns, not intelligence-led operations on employees.

Similarly, there is a campaigns against “benefit scroungers”, as they call it now. Not the poor anymore, they are known as benefit scroungers. They are pushed out of city centers and increasingly have their welfare cut.

The gap between the superrich and the very poor widens and this becomes very clear and obvious in the UK now.

The Chancellor George Osborne, he has cited the notoriously horrible man Mick Philpott who ended up burning his 5 children. The Chancellor cited Mick Philpott as an example of benefit culture. This was really the worst kind of rhetoric to create a wave of hostility towards the poor being able to obtain welfare.

The cuts in the health services, now it is health market, paid for by the taxpayers through Government, but nevertheless, the building and the facilities are now in private ownership.

This was pioneered by Labour but it is now completely worked through under the Tories. And it is leading to a huge breakdown in the health treatment that people are obtaining.

Enormous neglect occasioning the death of people at Mid Staffordshire Hospital and elsewhere has led to another concern about that and a huge local campaign to save the Accident and Emergency in maternity services at Lewisham Hospital recently.

So, these things can be changed, but generally the right-wing are in the saddle. Particularly now, as small economic growth figure has been ensued, the

Conservatives are now safe from any challenge from the UK Independence Party. So, the superrich are clearly in the saddle. But on the margins there are lots of small vigorous effective campaigns challenging all kinds of things – corporate tax evasion, the renewal of nuclear weapons, £ 20 billion to renew Trident submarines, challenging nuclear energy, fracking, for solidarity with Palestine, for Bradley Manning, for Edward Snowden, for welfare against warfare etc. And this will go on.

Robles: You are talking about the breakdown of the social system in the UK, of the medical system, of the social net that the citizens have. Do you see some influence? Because I mean this sounds like what is wrong with America.

Summers: Yes, influence from the US. Absolutely! The privatization of the health services, it is a clear Americanization and the destruction of the British welfare, to a health market system, which is the American system.

A brutal, politically right-wing police force is an American norm that we’ve almost got used to. And the British police seem to be taking their lessons from them.

A Government of the superrich with a distressing unanswered need from the poor also seems to be a feature of the American society.

Yes, all these things are part of how Britain is becoming nothing more than another state of the US.

All the British governments are simply puppet governments to American foreign policy. That could be seen ever since the World War II.

You were listening to an interview with Tim Summers – a political activist in the UK and a former National Campaigns Officer of the Green Party of England and Wales in the UK.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



14 August, 08:42 1 

Lavrov never loses his cool, Obama infantile – Rick Rozoff

 АТЭС Сергей Лавров АТЭС

Sergey Lavrov

Photo: RIA Novosti

Download audio file

Any US claim that they are going to launch lethal drone strikes inside Syria as they did several months ago, without even the pretense of having the authorization of the government, is an act of yet further international lawlessness. Voice of Russia regular Rick Rozoff gives his analysis of the recent statements by the CIA with regard to Syria.

This is John Robles. I am speaking to Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner and menager of the Stop NATO website and the International mailing list.

Robles: How do you think that's going to play out with Russia, this new possible pretext? Do you think maybe they are looking for a way out, maybe, or... Do you think that's possible?

Rozoff: There was a comment today by the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, kind of a back handed slap at the infantile and provocative antics of President Obama, who has postponed, or has canceled, indeed, proposed or scheduled summit with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, and Sergey Lavrov said about the meeting today US time of the Foreign and Defense Ministers, both Secretaries and Ministers of both countries that, you know, it's time for a “grown-up” discussion, on these issues and I think that, you know it, quite clearly, you know, somebody like Sergey Lavrov, the Foreign Minister of Russia, you know, he is a seasoned diplomat, he is mature, he is able to control his emotions and not to make unwanted, almost childlike comments like the ones coming out of the White House...

Robles: No, I think he is a very true diplomat. I mean, I've been watching him for years and years, I've never seen him once... you know...

Rozoff: … lose his cool or say something untoward. You would have to define to Americans certainly anyone 50 years of age or younger what the word “diplomat” means. We've not seen any.

Robles: And it was wonderful, I am sorry, I just want underline it, it was wonderful today, because I actually heard him speak for the first time in English, and his English is wonderful.

Rozoff: I've never heard Lavrov speak in English, but there's again... I can't think of an American Secretary of State...

Robles: Perfect!

Rozoff: … who spoke a second language. That's not necessary if you are the global empire. You know, your tributariers and vassals to quote Zbigniew Brzezinski have to speak your language. And pay you their tribute in the coin of the realm, they have to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s in Caesar’s language moreover.

Robles: So, anyway, back to the CIA proclamation by the Deputy Director. What other insights can you tell us about his comments?

Rozoff: You know, it could be a question as we've eluded to of kind of hedging his bets, should the worst case scenario, (worst case scenario for the world and for Syria) not necessarily for the US occur, and that there is a toppling of the government in Syria and then you have a new hotbed of terrorism that spreads across the border, we have to remember one of the three major fighting groups that the US and company are supporting. In addition to the Free Syrian Army and the Al Nusra Front, is something called the Islamic State of Iraq.

What you have are Sunni extremists, Wahabi extremists, unquestionably supported, armed, financed by Saudi Arabia, fighting inside Syria.

So, not only perpetrating bombings, killings of Shiite, Christians and other minorities inside Iraq, they are spreading this dubious jihad across the border into Syria, and certainly into Lebanon. So, you know what the US may be doing is: in the event the US would succeed in regime change in Syria, they have then already prepared the groundwork for saying: “See we warned you that certain unsavory elements might gain influence or come to the fore, something of that sort...

Robles: O.K., so, no one is going to blame them for arming these enemies to begin with, right?

Rozoff: Yeah they have plausible deniability, we warned you that they were not all a nice group of characters. However it was also roughly almost a year ago when the Obama administration, the White House was talking about the necessity perhaps of waging drone warfare against some of their non-preferred fighters among the rebel groups within Syria, which, I don’t think one was to have taken seriously at that time either.

What it was was that the US would reserve the right to launch drone or perhaps even cruise missile attacks inside the country, and then sugar-coat that by saying they are trying to weed out extremist elements amongst the rebel groups, the rebel armed groups fighting inside Syria.

Robles: Right.

Rozoff: But you know that no country has the right to state that they reserve the prerogative of launching lethal missile strikes inside the territory of any other country.

Robles: Sure, sure. No matter how you paint it, I mean, you can call ti a “preventive air strike” or “humanitarian invention”, or whatever you want to call it, but it is still an act of aggression, which is illegal under international law.

Rozoff: Sure, and we know that just in recent hours the US has succeeded in killing some 34 people in Yemen in drone strikes, but the assumption, as in the case of the Yemen or Pakistan that the government, at least passively permits the United States to do it, if it doesn’t acknowledge it is doing so. But, you know, in the case of Syria, self-evidently, they would not have the permission of the government.

So for the US to claim they are going to launch lethal drone strikes inside Syria as they did several months ago, without even the pretense of having the authorization of the government, it's an act of yet further international lawlessness.

Robles: Yeah, completely. Thanks a lot, Rick, it was a pleasure speaking to you.

Rozoff: Yes, same here, thanks.

You were listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and mailing list.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

RussiaSergei LavrovVladimir PutinBarack ObamaUSRussian-US relationsPolitics

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         Marlene PapasMarlene Papas, 30 August, 19:02#

Sergei Lavrov... Well he is a real statesman and many won't even learn what he's forgotten already! Trouble with the US gov is, their out and out arrogance. They think they own the planet and as such is so powerful, that they can say what they like & treat all other countries as US serfs. Obama is famous for his petulant remarks or on occasion, his "deer in the headlights" stuttering. Most countries' leaders will benefit their people if they follow the example set by Russian politicians. Sergei Lavrov, similar to Pres Putin and so many other members of the Russian gov, have become well known not only for their perfect civility, but their compassion, sensitivity and understanding of World issues today. When Russian politicians speak, they have done their homework and then divulging the unadulterated truth, this forthright & positive approach is very much in touch with and has a great impact in today's world of vicious propaganda and blatantly covered up lies. Thank you for sharing this lovely conversation on VOR!
Read more: 


14 August, 07:40  

Presidents Putin and Aliyev hold successful talks in Azerbaijan

Путин Азербайджан Путин

Photo: RIA Novosti

The President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin has completed an official visit to Azerbaijan during which he met with the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev. According to the Kremlin press service the main focus of the talks between the two leaders was the area of humanitarian cooperation, although a very broad range of issues were discussed and numerous documents signed covering matters from energy cooperation to intergovernmental agreements on search and rescue operations.

After talks between the two presidents delegations from both countries held talks during which they expanded on the topics already discussed by the leaders as well as other pressing and topical matters on the agenda, including the expansion of trade and economic cooperation, the development of joint energy projects and major issues of international and regional importance.

The Kremlin reports that among the major agreements that were signed were the following:

The signing of a number of agreements and documents, witnessed by the presidents, between Russia’s Rosneft oil company and the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR), including those covering the general terms and conditions for current and future oil deliveries and the expansion of cooperation.

The signing of relevant agreements under the framework of the Comprehensive Plan for Cooperation of the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense, Emergencies and Elimination of Consequences of Natural Disasters and the Ministry of Emergency Situations of the Republic of Azerbaijan for the period 2013-2015.

An agreement on cooperation in aviation search and rescue operations between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan

A construction agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan to build a road bridge across the river Samur.

And lastly agreements covering cooperation in the humanitarian sphere between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Azerbaijan until 2015.

The Kremlin press service reports that during the opening of talks President Putin stated in his address: “It’s been a long time since my last visit to Azerbaijan, which was in 2006. A lot of time has passed since then. Azerbaijan is changing rapidly and vigorously, it is a dynamic country that is developing very quickly. Its economic growth rate is one of the highest in the world. That’s impressive, and we wish our friends further successes.”

President Putin stated that Azerbaijan has one the highest economic growth rates in the world and wished Azerbaijan continuing success. He also pointed out that despite the current global economic crisis, trade between Russia and Azerbaijan grew as high as by 47%.

The President also stated some very impressive numbers among them being that over 500 Russian companies operate in Azerbaijan and that over 70 Russian regions continue to develop and enjoy mutually beneficial cooperation and agreement.

During the visit Presidents Putin and Aliyev paid a visit to a war ship of the Russian Caspian Flotilla called the Dagestan. The leaders listened to reports by the Caspian flotilla commander of the Russian Navy and the Navy of Azerbaijan, and then boarded the Dagestan.

Officials sources report that bilateral military and technical cooperation will be expanded, something that may not be pleasing for the United States as they were recently in talks regarding the placing of a NATO base in Azerbaijan during a seven day visit by the Minister of Defense of Azerbaijan to Washington.

Today we also discussed regional issues, particularly the issues of regional security issues related to the settlement of Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

 The President of Azerbaijan stated: “I believe that the relationship between Russia and Azerbaijan in the humanitarian sector can serve as an example. I should note again, in front of the press, as we said, in Azerbaijan there are 335 schools where teaching is carried out in Russian, of which 15 schools where teaching is purely in Russian, 27 in our universities is taught in Russian, and the number of pupils in secondary, vocational and higher education institutions, students in Russian, more than 100,000 people. This is an important indicator of the relationship that we experience in the Russian language, Russian culture, to the Russian literature. All the positive traditions of the past are carefully stored in Azerbaijan.”

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 


14 August, 06:19 1 

Obama is as spineless as they come – William Blum

ЦРУ Америка логотип эмблема штаб-квартира

© Photo: Central Intelligence Agency

Download audio file

The mission of most normal intelligence agencies is to provide the leadership of a country with vital information that they need to formulate and implement policy, protect the country and deal with enemies and allies alike. The seeming reversal which exists today in the United States, as the military industrial complex has taken over the country, where intelligence is created to give a reason or pretext for war and aggression is an alarming trend. Renown author William Blum adds his voice to a growing course fed up with war crimes, illegality, spying, a war on whistleblowers and a president, Barack Obama, who lied his way into the White House and lacks the moral fortitude to bring about accountability and rule of law.


Hello. This is John Robles. I’m speaking with Mr. William Blum. He is an American author and historian and a long-standing critic of US foreign policy.

Robles: We’ve had a lot of talk regarding the cancellation by Barack Obama of talks with President Putin here, in Moscow, in September. I’ve just got a report that talks were not cancelled they were postponed. A lot of this has to do with Syria, but mainly it has to do with Edward Snowden. Why such a huge, it seems, unbalanced reaction towards this one individual, in your opinion?

Blum: Because the US Congress and the US media are full of crazies they are fully accustomed to being on top of the world. Anybody who stands up to them, as Snowden has, or Bradley Manning, they simply lose their cool completely. They cannot take such opposition.

They are so unaccustomed to being opposed by anyone of any influence that it immediately bends them out of shape and so Snowden has and Manning and Julianne Assange. those three guys have really stood up to the Empire and the Empire cannot take that. You hear the expression “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. OK. I would add “Hell hath no fury like an Empire embarrassed”.

Robles: Very good, Bill.

Blum: And the revelations by Manning really embarrassed the Empire.

Robles: It just seems like ridiculous, especially since it was the US’s own idiocy that led Snowden get away in the first place and, you know, left him stranded in Moscow. If they hadn’t revoked his passport, he would have just moved on.

Blum: Yes but by then in Washington they had no choice. Such a man had to be punished as a warning to anyone who wants to act like him. They have to get very tough to make it clear to every possible future whistleblower, that is what I would call it.

They refuse to use that word because it’s an acceptable word, a whistleblower, so they refuse to call him a whistleblower and they call him by traitor.

Robles: I’ve got some hate mail today. It was really interesting by somebody in the United States. He said that Snowden was a traitor and he was US property and he needs to be handed back.

Blum: Par for the course.

Robles: Can I ask you a question now about the CIA. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe, you’re an older hand than I am and you remember further back than I do I’m sure. And you’ve been in the game much longer than I have.

It seemed to me that the USA, they CIA, they used to provide intelligence and then policy was formulated, right. So, for example, the CIA says “Oh, this country A has moved a nuclear bomb to country D”, right? So the government makes a policy okay: “We have to go for the country A” or something like that.

Now it seems that the CIA is formulating intelligence in order to back up policy. I see they want an invasion of Syria, the CIA is going to create the intelligence for it, and they wanted an invasion of Iraq, the CIA created yellow cake and all this other stuff. What do you think about that?

Blum: Your point is well taken but it’s not entirely that way. The CIA, during its heyday in the 50s and 60s and 710s. I could find examples of them in effect making policy. Subtlety now maybe it’s more open. But it’s not entirely new that the agency would attempt to make policy.

You see in those days the CIA had the whole power to do such things and now there is also the NSA and the Homeland Security and the Defense Department which has its own intelligence agencies. There are more players in the game so the CIA doesn’t have as much power as it used to have.

Robles: Ok, who would you say is controlling the US government now: the military industrial complex, or the “war department” or the Defense Department? Who is calling the shot?

Blum: I don’t usually think in such terms. The defense corporations which are actually war corporations, they have a lot of influence they make a lot of money out of war and their people, executives with these corporations go the government in high positions and when they leave the government they go back to the corporations.

The revolving door between these two institutions. They have a lot of chances to influence matters.

I think the president if had any backbone could counter much of these things we’re talking about, but Obama has no backbone. He is as spineless as they come. and he has taken out the presidency from this equation.

So we are left with the Defense Department and the CIA and the NSA and so on. Obama doesn’t really care, it’s not that he wanted to do something but he didn’t have the nerve, he doesn’t care. I’ve said this about him since he took office and even when he was a candidate. The man has no strong beliefs except to be president of the United States. That is all that he cares about. There is nothing overridingly important to him.

Robles: Yes, you’ve said that before. And I think the more of him we see the more that your words are becoming unarguably correct. I agree with you 100%. But he was very careful in making all his promises about change and everything else. So…

Blum: Yes, people called him Mr. Hopey-Changey.

Robles: Mr. Hopey-Changey?

Blum: Yes. Those were the two leading points of his platform: Hope and Change.

Robles: And now he is Mr. Hopey-Changey. Ok. I like that, Bill. I appreciate that.

On Syria: do you see an expansion of the front there or do you think maybe the US government is just trying to find a way to back out off the whole conflict or… Do you think that is a possibility?

Blum: In light of the statement of today which you quoted from the CIA official I really can’t predict. I seldom engage in predicitions I prefer to analyze what have already taken place.

Robles: Yes. OK. You’re more of a historian than a fortuneteller if you will. Okay.

Blum: Have a nice weekend!

Robles: Okay you too! You have a wonderful weekend and thanks a lot.

Blum: You’re welcome. Bye bye.

That was an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author and historian and a long-standing critic of US foreign policy. Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you all the best wherever you may be. Stay with us.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

Barack ObamaUSCIAWikileaksBradley ManningNSAManning trial: traitor or hero?Politics

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 14 August, 23:55#

Who is calling the shots? The psychopaths, that is who.
Read more: 



14 August, 04:16 1 

US "embarrassed" by their crimes against humanity – Michael John Smith

Барак Обама

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

Something is very, very wrong in the world when part of a civilized intelligent debate includes the following sentences: “It’s hugely embarrassing to people like George Bush or Barack Obama – they don’t want to be seen and labelled war criminals. You would expect a war criminal to be executed but it seems in modern times, if a Government like the US does a war crime, it’s sort of brushed under the carpet, and it’s the person who exposes it, the whistle blower, who spends time in prison for it.” Michael John Smith spoke to the Voice of Russia and discussed those issues and more.


Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Michael John Smith. He is the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the UK. He is also an intelligence specialist and a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia.

Smith: The US decided that they were going to listen in and snoop on what those countries were doing, and what possibilities there were to swing those countries into that camp of attacking Iraq.

Now that was illegal, and at that time, it may not have been obvious, but I think that was an early indication of what the US was up to. The US was snooping on its allies and on other countries, and maybe it wasn’t to the extent that what Snowden has now exposed, but back in those days that was the same thing. They were snooping on these countries. They were using their intelligence of what these countries were planning to swing them in favor of a pro-war stance, which would have led; well it did lead to a loss of civilian life.

Katharine Gun at the time, she stood up, and she said “no, I don’t agree with this”, and she exposed it and she publicised it. I think people have forgotten this - at that time she was like a Snowden of that age. She stood up and said: “this is wrong, that the US shouldn’t be snooping on other United Nations offices in New York”.

And the effect was that she faced trial under the Official Secrets Act in the UK and could have gone to prison for some time. But there was such an outcry about it,because people thought “well no she’s done a good thing”, that they actually dropped the case; she was never prosecuted. So, that shows that at that time - because obviously there was so much else going on over the Iraq War - that it was in her favor to expose it and to be a whistle blower in thatenvironment, and it was difficult for the Government to really do anything about it.

Now it’s different, because Snowden, he’s caused enormous embarrassment, and although he is a whistle blower and a hero, he stands now to spend many years in prison and it’s very strange that Katharine Gun, really she got away with it.

Robles: Where do you think whistle blowers fit into things, and why are they going after whistle blowers like Snowden and Manning the way they are? It seems like no matter what the world says or the US public says, Obama and the US Government they’re just obsessed with Snowden.

Smith: When whistle blowers are saying what is in the public interest, and the public agree with that, then it’s very hard to prosecute because a whistle blower will then, he’s got to face a trial by jury possibly, and the jury might support him. There was a very important case back in the 80’s, a man named Clive Ponting. I don’t know if you remember that case when they sunk that battleship in the Falklands War, and Clive Ponting said that it was sailing away from the Falklands at the time, and that was very embarrassing. He exposed that, and again he was breaking his agreement under the Official Secrets Act – he shouldn’t say that, he shouldn’t tell the public that. Again this is classified information that is being given to the public, but it’s in the public interest. He also faced a trial but the jury found him innocent because he was again seen as being a hero.

Robles: Come on Mike! I mean, like Snowden, he broke his oath and Manning broke their oaths, they are traitors to the Government. They are traitors to the country; they must die!

Smith: That’s the way the Government, and especially the US Government, would like to see it, but what these people are exposing is really lies, wrongdoing, even war crimes.

Robles: Yes, but according to the Government, these are the Government’s war crimes, these are their lies, these are their crimes. They must be protected.

Smith: Well, it’s obviously the embarrassment, the embarrassment of being found out to be a war criminal. It’s hugely embarrassing to people like George Bush or Barak Obama – they don’t want to be seen and labelled war criminals. And the information that people like Bradley Manning have put in the public domain show that it’s Government policy to create war crimes in countries like Iraq, and that’sjust completely unacceptable.

Robles: So you think they’re so confident ... I mean normally, aren’t war criminals supposed to be executed? And you’re trying out they’re embarrassed?

Smith: You would expect a war criminal to be executed but it seems in modern times, if a Government like the US does a war crime, it’s sort of brushed under the carpet, and it’s the person who exposes it, the whistle blower, who spends time in prison for it.

Robles: Unbelievable.

Smith: I also I think if you look at war crimes. I mean, one of the biggest war crimes of all time was what Adolf Hitler did in theSecond World War: the genocide of the Jews, putting people in concentration camps like Auschwitz. People didn’t know about that at the time, it was brushed under the carpet, again it was hushed up. Those people who did know didn’t really talk about it too much. It was only after the war that we discovered the full horror of how many people had died and what suffering there was.

But then we’ve got this modern Auschwitz in Guantanamo Bay. People aren’t being exterminated; it’s not the same thing at all, but …

Robles: That we know about.

Smith: … these people are going to prison endlessly. They don’t know if they’ll ever get out of prison. They’re stuck there in Guantanamo Bay, they’re being force fed, they are being put through water-boarding and all sorts of psychological torture, and the US is making this a public thing, it’s actually bragging about it, “look what we are doing to these people - these horrible so-called terrorists - we are doing these things to these people and this will be a lesson to anybody who comes up against us, we’ll lock you away indefinitely and we’ll force you to go through this treatment that we’ll give you.” And I think in many ways that’s worse than Auschwitz.

Robles: In what ways?

Smith:Well, because it’s a psychological fear that anybody who is arrested and possibly extradited to the US or to Guantanamo Bay – this extraordinary rendition that they put people through – they could suddenly disappear off their street in somewhere like Pakistan, end up in Guantanamo Bay and maybe spend the rest of their life being tortured and force fed. I mean, it's not a very pleasant thing at all is it to look forward to, and so that in a way it’s a sort of a fear factor. The US can say “we can do this to you, we have the power to control anybody, really anybody in the world, we can take you and put you in this place.”

Robles: They go around like they have the right to break every international rule and law and standard and convention at left and right. Sure these are war crimes, they admit them, right? They torture, you say maybe they’re a little embarrassed?

Smith:People like Snowden have hugely embarrassed the US.

Robles: He should be causing people to be thrown into prison...

Smith: Exactly.

Robles: … not to be embarrassed. I mean, where’s the rule of law in the world?

Smith:That’s what should be happening John.

Robles: I mean, George Bush and Richard Cheney and their torture memos, and Obama and his extra-judicial executions. I mean, these people should be put away to protect humanity.

Smith: But they get away with it because the Government system is the way it is. Now this is where intelligence and spying is so important to the US, because it gives it the information that it knows where to find the people who are opposed to the US Government, it can find them, it has agents all over the world, and it is a huge spy network that the US has. And it uses the Internet as one of those means to get hold of information that it can use in its favor.

Robles: What do you think about the collection of information about average people? What’s the purpose of all that?

Smith: On the surface it appears to mean almost nothing, doesn’t it? Because why would you want to know about the guy who lives down the street? I mean, does it really bother anybody? But at some point in a year or maybe two years, some bit of information about that guy might become very important. You might need to put pressure on that man, maybe because you know something about his sexual orientation or he’s got some friends who have got suspicious tendencies towards terrorism maybe.

You can use anything you know about somebody, you can use potentially to blackmail them or to control them in some way to do what you want, and that’s a very powerful weapon. If you can control all of the people through your knowledge of their weaknesses, their indiscretions, you can control the world, I think. Intelligence is key to this.

Robles: Now in your opinion what can we do to protect ourselves from false prosecution, from misrepresented information that might be gathered? What can people do to protect themselves?

Smith: Well, I think we can only protect ourselves by electing the Governments which will do what the people want, and electing a Government that will ban the keeping of personal information about people is the only way forward I think, because the US Government at the moment have free rein, they can do what they like. And while the people allow them to get away with that, and it seems they have, if you listen to what’s been said about the recent exposures about Prism and the fact all these US people are having their data read, you would expect in any normal society there would be a complete outcry, and people demanding that their Government change the law.

But you don’t see that, it seems almost like people have got accustomed, that this is normal, this is a normal thing for a Government to do to spy on its population.

Robles: Well apparently Americans think that. I mean everybody’s “Oh, it’s going to keep us safe. You know, these terrorists are going to get us. We know they’re going to get us because we are free, and we’re Americans, so we have to be watched and everything we do has to be surveilled, because we’re free”. Right?

Smith: Well, it’s a very distorted view of life if you start going down that road where the Government can virtually do anything and get away with it. We’re in a 1984 situation then, where you’ve got Big Brother looking at you in every room you go into, through some camera.

Already we have that in the UK. There’s camera on every street corner. You can’t go down the street without being watched and followed. The Government can see where you are, everything you’re doing. Do we want to go down that road? I don’t know. And while the US is getting away with this mass trawling through our Internet communications, all that’s doing is empowering it to do yet more.

You were listening to an interview with Michael John Smith, an intelligence specialist and the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the world. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at English.ruvr.ru

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

Barack ObamaUSforeign policysecret servicescrimes against humanityManning trial: traitor or hero?World

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         Canada West CoastCanada West Coast, 15 August, 01:42#

Perhaps fluoride in the water systems is responsible for the apathy of Americans ? I read this is used in the prison population to keeep them calm.
Read more: 



13 August, 16:42 1 

Bashar al-Assad is engaged in self-defense – Libyan military official

Сирия Сирийская армия Башар Асад

Collage: Voice Of Russia

Download audio file

The Deputy Director of the US Central Intelligence Agency recently stated if the government of Bashar Al-Assad falls, something the West has been orchestrating, the small country on the other side of the world will become the largest “threat to US security”. The Voice of Russia spoke to a Libyan Defense Ministry official who wishes to remain anonymous for his views on the issue. Libya was just one of a recent series of countries to fall victim to US “humanitarian” invasion or “intervention” and the reality there is particularly topical, especially given the light that the situation on the ground negates all of the “democracy spreading” claims of the West.

Part 1

Robles: Hello. This is John Robles. I am speaking with an anonymous member of the Libyan Defense Ministry.

Source: They are sort of blood-drunk in the sense of violence.

Robles: Both sides?

Source: Yes. This happens on both sides and the international community just tries to evidence more Bashar al-Assad’s “violence”, while this violence is made really to protect himself, in self-defense, as you could say.

Robles: Do you think the government of Syria has the right to protect the governmental structures of the country, even, maybe they weren’t the best government, but…?

Source: I believe that the Syrian government has the right to protect its people, not its government at the expense of its people. Using heavy artillery in a random manner is absolutely incorrect.

Robles: You think that is taking place in a random manner?

Source: Yes, obviously most of the Grad missiles, the Russian Grad missiles, they use, they have no radar control over the position of the target. There is a military tactic known as “burning blind” that is at random, wherever it shoots, it shoots.

Robles: I see. Syria was pretty much of a secular country, I think. There were many different ethnic groups and different religions before all of this started. What do you think is going to happen if the government falls? There have been people saying that all the Coptics, all of the Jews, all of the Sunnis, Alawites, or “Shia” I’m sorry, would be killed.

Source: Exactly. That’s what will happen. And the Druze in the “Swada?” area because they took no position, and the Kurds in the northern area. It will happen pretty much as in Iraq.

During Saddam’s regime it was a pretty secular country. There was no such thing as Sunnis, or Shia, or Christians, or anything else. But they split because one side was supported over the other side, which created the sectarian violence.

This will happen if Assad’s regime falls. But if he maintains his actual governing position, or he defeats the opposition, he has learnt a lesson also.

He will surely start reforms because he knows he will never last with the military power. Pretty much even now there are many Syrian refugees here, and there are Christians, there are Alawites, there are Shias and they are certainly remembering the old times.

Robles: Were the old times bad?

Source: Pretty much, I think.

Robles: What about in Libya? Do you think it’s better today than it was before?

Source: Some things have improved but some things haven’t, you know. There is less corruption in the institutions, there is more freedom of speech, but at the expense of the security situation. I mean, financially the businesses are doing well, there is money flowing in, the wages are going well. There is no… That’s the problem, the security situation, there’s a difficult as well situation .

Robles: I see. As far as I understood, before under Gaddafi the Libyan people had anything they wanted. Everybody had the right to a home, free healthcare and free education. Is that true?

Source: No. Regarding the healthcare, even the national or state-owned hospitals, had been making the patients pay. Free education, that was relative. In the form of money you had to pay some sort of fee.

Robles: Listen, back to the CIA now. What do you think their plan is for Syria?

Source: I believe that they were misled by the Saudis and the Gulf countries, the Gulf states and they realized that they know nothing about the real situation in Syria.

The Syrian government is backed by a superpower like Russia. I think they will always look backwards. They realized that their strategy has in a word of manner “failed”.

Robles: What do you think they are going to do next? Any predictions?

Source: No. I believe that they realize that democracy in the Middle East does not work and the “Islamic Democracy” does not work at all because religion should not be mixed with politics and politics should not dilute religion. They are returning to military-style dictatorships, realizing that it’s the better form of government for the people.

Robles: What do you think is the best form of government for the people, especially in Libya?

Source: The average Libyan person is a very peaceful person. We are not violent, nor have sectarian problems nor have issues, from that point of view. All they ask is a simple life, that’s all. Dignity in life, mostly.

Robles: I heard the same thing about Iraq. I had some friends who were there for a few years. And they said before a Shia man could marry a Sunni woman and everything was normal. Now there is so much sectarian hatred that Sunni people are leaving barrels of blood on the doorstep of Shia families to tell them to leave and stuff. Is that true?

Source: Exactly. Exactly. That happened. But here, in Libya, there is no problem even with family members, you know the Bathetite women here in Tripoli and no one is harming them, no one is telling them anything, or taunting them, or preventing them from living a normal life. We have no sectarian problems or even tribal problems.

Our main problems are small criminal gangs, which have bought weapons because there was obviously an outbreak of weapons from the military bases and trade was very extensive and we couldn’t control it.

Robles: So, the biggest threat right now to security in Libya would be these armed criminals that are still running around free in the country, right?

Source: Exactly. That’s the problem, the contraband and stuff. But in terms of violence related to extremism, or Islamic extremism, it doesn’t exist at all.

Robles: Oh! Okay.Anything else you’d like to finish up with, because I’ve taken about 20 minutes of your time already, so if there is something else you’d like to add, I’d really appreciate it.

Source: I believe the situation can return to normal if we have a very strong-back government. Our government is very weak, very, very weak.

We don’t know even the names of the foreign minister, the minister responsible for economic development. They hardly give any TV interviews. That’s something! It’s like, you know, leaving the kids at home without parents.

Robles: You don’t even know the names of your foreign minister and your officials?

Source: Absolutely not. We know the Prime Minister only and they keep changing all the time. They keep resigning all the time.

Robles: Why is that?

Source: The answer to that is difficult. Maybe because they find themselves not adequate, or maybe they are being threatened, or… Difficult situation that’s the problem. If we have a strong-back government, I think even the security situation will improve.

Robles: As a member of the military, how would you say the command structure is operating? Is it operating normally? How is your command structure?

Source: From the point of the Army, the Army is operating very well, it is very well organized and very well armed. Our biggest deficit is the police. There is no police in place in the cities so we have to take their job and our job and there’s no coordination, from that point of view.

If we have a very strongly trained police force I think we can improve the security situation. But we find ourselves sometimes outnumbered. And many ask police officers why they are not returning to their posts. They tell us they are afraid, they don’t have weapons, they don’t have backing.

I remember a police officer telling me once that they captured two murderers and these murderers were freed by their cousins, in a raid on the prison and they couldn’t do anything about them. They just stood watching.

Robles: All these weapons that were introduced into Libya, where do you think they came from?

Source: Most of the weapons have come from the military bases of Gaddafi we found large stockpiles at the bases and we know that when there was a financial problem many people started selling rifles, guns and all that. But that is to say with the number of weapons that have been flowing and comparing it to the security situation I think it’s very positive.

There are very few gun-related fights, especially in the capital. Outside the capital like Misrata, like Rawalia, like Lairn, all these have strong tribal systems the flow of weapons was near zero, gun fights are near zero, because tribal rules control these districts, but in Tripoli there’s a mix of ethnicities and no tribal rules.

Robles: Before we started recording you said something had happened there in Tripoli, that there was a gunfight or something?

Source: Just 15 minutes ago there was a gunfight between two gangs. They called us to intervene about 15 minutes ago. They called us to intervene and the gunfight was so heavy and they were killing each other that the police force and the army decided just to control the perimeter and leave them killing each other. Over drugs or something like that it wasn’t a fight involving civilians.

Robles: Did any people die, or can you talk about that?

Source: As far as they told me, about 18 people died and 25 were injured. That’s the approximate estimate.

Robles: This was like two drug gangs or something?

Source: Exactly. Two gangs that might be related to drugs, or alcohol, or like that. There were no civilians. But it was an initial report.

Robles: Is that normal in Tripoli right now? Does that happen often?

Source: It happened in one of the poorest districts in Tripoli.

Robles: Does that happen often?

Source: No, absolutely not. At the end of Ramadan, for example, there were no fighting incidents reported. Absolutely, the security situation was fine.

Robles: Your predictions and then we’ll finish up, if you can.

Source: My predictions, I believe, I see that there is a slow progress towards stability. But since we have a government that is volatile we will never improve, nearly enough to be stable. Truly stable.

Robles: Have you seen the West and the United States playing a stabilizing role in Libya or a destabilizing role?

Source: The only concrete steps taken by Western governments have been the Turkish government and the German government. So far that’s what they’ve seen with our own eyes, because there are German, Turkish and also British citizens here in Tripoli. They feel very welcome here. They walk in the streets normally even at night, and I hear from them very positive comments, and some were even surprised to see families walking during Ramadan at 2 or 3 o’clock in the morning.

Robles: Any US influence, since it doesn’t sound like they are doing anything there?

Source: No we don’t see, from that point of view, even investments, or in education or any support or charity that’s supported by interests in the U.S. involved.

Robles: Nothing? What about the resources? Are they taking all the resources?

Source: What I said sir. We are a country that produces 2.4 million barrels of oil a day and we have problems with electricity. So, I don’t know where it is going.

Robles: You have no idea?

Source: No idea.

Robles: It’s not going to the Libyan people, I guess.

Source: Well that’s definitely not from what I see now.

Robles: Thank you very much for agreeing to speak with me!

Source: You are most welcome!

Robles: It was very interesting thank you very much! I’d like to be able to contact you in the future if it’s okay?

Source: I’ll hope so, I hope so John.

 Part 1

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

SyriaLibyaBashar AssadSyrian oppositionSyrian rebelsSyrian conflictPolitics

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         ZahchikZahchik, 13 August, 17:15#

Most interesting conversation, Mr Robles. Though I am a little doubtful of the opinions expressed by this unnamed individual. He does seem to be very well informed. Libya is politically and economically disturbed.
Read more: 



13 August, 08:51  

Snowden found the safest place on the planet in Russia - Jiang Xiaofeng

сноуден шереметьево аэропорт агент

© Photo: Vesti.Ru

Download audio file

Edward Snowden has finally left the transit area of Sheremetyevo International Airport in Moscow, finding freedom again after approximately a month. Snowden has been the focus of an unprecedented manhunt by the US and has had the world's media watching and recording his every move. Finally, maybe he will find peace after making revelations that have focused the world's attention once again on the illegal actions of the US. The manhunt that the US launched against Mr. Snowden was unprecedented in scale having threatened countries, even interfered with the flight of a president of a sovereign nation and even more intense than anything the US ever did to capture or find Osama bin Laden. The US are still after Mr. Snowden, even though he's been granted political asylum. When it was reported that Mr. Snowden went to Cuba, Russian journalists and journalists from around the world also went to Cuba. When he left Hong Kong journalists flew to Moscow to try to record the fate of this historic whistleblower. I spoke with one such journalist from Hong Kong.


I’m speaking with Mr. Xiaofeng Jiang, a correspondent for Phoenix television in Hong Kong.

Robles: I’m happy to see that Hong Kong stood up to the United States, I think China did. It was wonderful to see that they were independent, that Hong Kong followed the rule of law which is something the United States did not want them to do. Do you feel proud for Hong Kong and China that they were able to stand up like this?

Jiang: Being a citizen of Hong Kong which reverted to the Chinese rule in the year of 1997 and it retains an independent legal system and its own extradition laws and it treated him in a way that many Hong Kong citizens are proud of, as you correctly mention.

Robles: How would you characterize the Russian reaction and the Russian treatment of Mr. Snowden compared to the treatment he received in Hong Kong?

Jiang: Well, Hong Kong, as I said, is a semi-autonomous region. When the Snowden case exploded many foreign affairs got involved. But according to the current system Beijing still controls the foreign affairs and that’s different from what we see here in Russia, where the Russian Federation Government can control everything by itself.

I personally think Mr. Snowden has found the best place, maybe on this planet, to provide himself with a safe place. As we see, Russia is probably one of the very few countries in this world to withstand US pressure.

Robles: I’m very proud of Russia myself. Can I ask you a question, because this came up, you know, we’ve been watching, you’ve been reporting on this, I’ve been reporting on this, everybody wondered: why didn’t he just go to China? Can you comment on that? I think he could have had some sort of a good life there.

Jiang: Probably yes. Why China, why Hong Kong? It’s a good question.

Mr. Snowden started from Hawaii right? Yeah. If we draw a circle we could find out that Hong Kong was probably the nearest place Mr. Snowden could find himself a safe place in that atmosphere. You might ask why not Japan, South Korea or the Philippines.

Robles: No, that’s a moot point, I wouldn’t even ask. That’s an obvious. They would just hand him right over.

Jiang: Exactly.

Robles: Do you think he considered going to the People’s Republic of China?

Jiang: I wouldn’t think he would go to Beijing or the People’s Republic of China for that. That might make things more complicated. And China’s way of handling Snowden’s case is trying not to get too many things involved, I think.

Robles: I see. Really Russia didn’t ask for this, he wasn’t a Russian agent, he wasn’t helping Russia, he didn’t provide this information to Russia but he just showed up. How would you characterize the Russian government’s response?

Jiang: I think Russia’s way of handling the Snowden case is… I would personally give applause. As we see, the highest-ranking Russian officials are saying not making a mountain out of a molehill over Snowden’s case. They have more important issues to deal with, either the United States or other countries.

In reality Snowden’s case is important for Russia’s foreign affairs. I think Russia-US relations are affected to some extent but not out of control. So it’s like a card or a tool played by both sides. I think the Russian Federation has gained the upper hand.

Robles: I see. Do you think the US response is… you said the words “out of control” I think? Doesn’t it seem that the US is out of control on the Snowden affair. They are like going crazy trying to get him back. I mean, stopping Evo Morales’ aircraft, and all the letters and threats they’ve made to other countries around the world.

Jiang: Sometimes it’s self-contradictory, as I see, when President Obama said that he wouldn’t suggest catching Mr. Snowden but they are using every legal way to catch him or extradite him. It’s lucky for Mr. Snowden to hide in Sheremetyevo airport which is relatively safe. Although we do not see him personally but I can feel that he is safe here in the Russian Federation.

Robles: Well. He is not going to be given back!

Jiang: No.

Robles: Now, can we finish up with: what are your impressions about Moscow? You’ve been here, how long now?

Jiang: Three or four days. It’s a short visit but very impressive. As a journalist I would hope to cover Russia issue more and even if Mr. Snowden is not in Moscow, I hope Chinese people can know more about Russia and Moscow, just like my father’s generation.

Robles: That would be great. What’s the best thing you’ve seen here? What’s your best experience here in Moscow?

Jiang: My best experience journalistically speaking, when I was covering Mr. Snowden’s case at the airport, I can work in a very free way, not bothered by certain authorities. Journalists can work, (Russia) provides a very good environment for journalists!

Robles: Really? You feel as a journalist that you are very free to move around?

Jiang: Yes, at least it was like this today. Maybe if I stay here longer I will feel some difficulties.

Robles: I doubt it. It’s nice to hear. Have you tried Russian food?

Jiang: Oh, yes I have. We have Moscow restaurants in Beijing. They have been operating for decades. I used to try that and they are still popular and they help people to relate back to the days when China and the Soviet Union shared the same ideology. It’s food, memory, it’s history- very interesting.

Robles: What’s your favorite Russian dish?

Jiang: For many Chinese people and for me as well it is red soup!

Robles: Borsch!

Jiang: Yes, Borsch!

Robles: What has been your favorite place in Moscow?

Jiang: I didn’t have a chance to see many places but I am always moving around. Many interesting places, I wouldn’t say which is my favorite place, but the whole city is very interesting to me.

Robles: Thanks a lot.

 Jiang: Thanks for having me!

You were listening to an interview with Xiaofeng Jiang, he's a correspondent with Phoenix Television in Hong Kong. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



12 August, 20:31  

Syria is a toe-to-toe conflict between Russia and US - Rozoff

Россия сша Россия

Collage: Voice of Russia

Download audio file

Reactions to recent statements by the outgoing Deputy Director of the CIA recently regarding the supposed threat to US security from the government of Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, have caused and precipitated reactions and debate far and wide. The seeming 360 degree complete about face, after more than two years of known US efforts to topple the government of Bashar Al-Assad has many wondering as to the mental fortitude of Washington’s Geopolitical Architect’s.

Rick Rozoff

This is John Robles I am speaking to Mister Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list.

Greeting between Robles and Rozoff

Robles: You know what’s going on, I think, better than anybody. The CIA switches the flip in Syria. First they start secretly arming the extremists, importing mercenaries, terrorists, al-Qaeda to destabilize and overthrow Assad, then they decide they’re going openly arm these people. Now they’re saying the biggest danger is: “… if the government of Bashar al-Assad falls.” Can you make any sense of this for us?

Rozoff: I wish I could. I know what you’re alluding to: a statement by the outgoing, if he has not already left the position, Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, a 33-year veteran of the agency, incidentally, Michael Morell.

He made a statement stating that not only would the overthrow of the Bashar al-Assad government in Damascus be a catastrophe for Syria but for the region, his exact comments according to an interview he granted to the Wall Street Journal, is that the government’s weapons, in the event of an overthrow of the government, would be up for grabs and up for sale, just as in Libya. So it’s a replication of the Libyan model as we warned about!

Now how seriously are we to take this? Is this the deathbed conversion, if you will, of someone who is now leaving ”The Company”, the Central Intelligence Agency, after almost a third of a century there and is able to speak freely, or is this something off the cuff that isn’t to be seen as indicative, or emblematic of a general position, or this is a trial balloon?

You know, we’re dealing with some pretty disreputable people when we talk about intelligence operatives in Langley Virginia and so forth. Their motives are never pure. Let’s be sure about that.

Robles: I seriously doubt that there is some possibility that it’s some independent comment. Calling Syria:”… a top threat to US security” and I quote him, is completely ridiculous.

Rozoff: You know, under the seeming guise, the apparent guise of warning about the unforeseen consequences, or “unintended” consequences, let’s say, of the U.S. getting what it wants in Syria: that is having the government toppled by a motley hodge-podge of terrorists and mercenary elements, who then could go with weapons appropriated from the Syrian government.

He doesn’t say a word, by the way, about the advanced weaponry presented to the Free Syrian Army and getting into the hands of people like al-Nusra, a terrorist organization that’s being supplied by NATO countries and by their allies in the Persian Gulf. That he hasn’t a word to say about of course.

But the models he’s evoking, he explicitly referred to Libya two years ago, but I think the original, once again, is Afghanistan in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, where the U.S. armed a motley coalition of extremist elements with Stinger Missiles and other advanced weaponry a lot of which is still not accounted for, or has been used in internecine fights between the rival groups of rebels that the U.S. supported in Afghanistan, just as in Libya.

Even as we speak, what there is of a government in Libya has apparently sent a hundred armored vehicles into the capital of Tripoli to try to maintain order, even in the capital of the country. The rest of the country is presumably up for grabs.

Robles: This was just a few hours ago.

Rozoff: That’s correct, I mean just in recent hours. And if this is a model indeed as Morrell (I don’t know if he pronounces his surname MOrell or MorEll, I don’t know where he puts the stress) but, the deputy CIA director is indicating this would happen, he, at another point says, (this by the way is factually true): that the overthrow of the government in Damascus would lead to a destabilization of the region and would affect countries like Jordan and Iraq and so forth. But the U.S. knew that when it began the effort to destabilize and overthrow the government in Syria.


Rozoff: The fact that he’s “got religion” or that he’s had a “Damascus Road Conversion” and is all of the sudden concerned about what’s going on seems disingenuous surely, and as you mention, the fact that he would portray a destabilized, or a new regime in Syria, as presenting any sort of national security threat to the United States, is as ludicrous, if not bizarre and delusional, as you indicate it is.

Robles: Do you think there is some possibility… (I mean this is maybe a little far-fetched),but okay! Worst-case-scenario: Is this opening a can-of-worms where they are just going to go in and wipe everybody out?

Rozoff: That’s a distinct possibility but we have to keep in mind the Benghazi incident, U.S. officials may in fact be preparing their own domestic populous for the eventuality that: should the US’s desire be fulfilled and a puppet regime of some sort is installed in Syria, then a similar situation may evolve as to what has occurred, and is occurring in Libya, where there’s anarchy, chaos, internecine bloody fighting throughout the country and where some “innocent” U.S. CIA agents may end up, you know, on the wrong end of a bullet, which is the only concern, of course, they would have in Washington.

I mean what would happen to the Syrian or Libyan people is of absolutely no concern to them, any more than what has happened to the people of Iraq or Afghanistan, for example. But the fact that they concerted effort has been made on the diplomatic front and covertly, in terms of providing fighters, “rat lines” for bringing in terrorist mercenaries into Syria, coordinated by the United States, its NATO allies in Europe and their so-called “democratic” allies, and NATO partners, incidentally, in the Persian Gulf, like Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Everything is in place… (I don’t know how much importance to really attribute to these statements by Morell) except that some of them, indeed are true. But have been self-evident, appaddictive if you will, for the last year and a half, I mean any sensible person could have told you what would happen, based on similar experiences in Iraq, in Kosovo and certainly most recently in Libya.

We know what to expect. For that matter again, in 1992 in Afghanistan, we know exactly what to expect when the U.S.‘s cohorts and proxies take power. They start carving each other up, they plunge the entire country and the society of that country, into lawlessness and brutality, And then you have the destruction of a nation and a culture.

Robles: Do you think that this is another “repackaging” of a “pretext” for military intervention?

Rozoff: There’s really no enthusiasm about entering into another military conflict in Syria, though we do have to recall that John McCain and Lindsay Graham, once again, a propos the Edward Snowden affair, have threatened Russia with bringing countries like Georgia into NATO, increasing the missile system in Europe, but also, by implication, forcing Russia down, in Syria because this is much larger than just simply replacing the government in Damascus.

This is a question of Russia having more firmly and more consistently than I know post-Soviet Russia to have ever done before in a foreign policy issue, with the possible exception of the Caucasus War five years ago, in South Ossetia. But what we’ve seen over the last two and a half years is that Russia, three times exercising its veto in the United Nations Security Council in conjunction with China. That’s an unprecedented triple veto by two permanent members of the Security Council.

On the question of Syria Russia has committed itself with a persistence and a strength that I believe is unprecedented in the entire post-Soviet period. Whereas Russia has certainly opposed, you know, acts of unjustified military aggression in the post-Cold War period with Iraq ten years ago, with Libya to some degree too, two years ago, with Yugoslavia in 1999 and so forth, you know this is a precedent that Russia has established by defending international law in Syria.

Without any indication that it’s going to back down, meaning that the stakes have been raised appreciably, where for the U.S. to persist in its hell-bent desire to topple the government and effect a regime in Syria is more an open toe to toe conflict with Russia, than it is (as we talked about on previous occasions) than it is simply a matter of changing the government by overthrowing it in Damascus. We are talking about a much more serious proposition right now.

 You were listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff of Stop NATO.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



12 August, 20:11 3 

Fighting PRISM: Privacy is a human right – Katherine Albrecht

Эдвард Сноуден шпион Цру CIA Призма Призм Prism слежка шпионаж США

Collage: Voice of Russia

Download audio file

Shock waves have travelled across the globe with the recent revelations by Edward Snowden about NSA and U.S. spying on private law-abiding citizens the world over. As a result people are beginning to shy away from the internet giants and looking for more secure ways to go about their business on-line and avoid US prying, some US companies have even closed down completely to avoid a knock on their doors by “Big Brother” with a FISA order. We spoke to privacy rights advocate and the co-founder of a much needed internet privacy provider, Dr. Katherine Albrecht, about the current paradigm.


Hello. This is John Robles. I am speaking with Dr. Katherine Albrecht, she’s one of the co-founders of the Startpage.com web resource andshe’s a long-time privacy-rights champion and advocate.

Robles: Hello, Katherine. How are you this afternoon or evening?

Albrecht: Hi, John, I’m doing great. Thanks for having me on the show.

Robles: It’s a pleasure to be speaking with you. Can you tell our listeners a little bit about what your project is offering Internet users, especially in light of the recent alarming NSA revelations?

Albrecht: Absolutely! Startpage.com, we refer to it as the world’s most private search engine and we actually run two search engines: Startpage.com and Ixquick.com.

Startpage returns Google results in complete privacy and Ixquick returns private results from other search engines.

So, if I can focus on Startpage here, when you want to do a Google search, if you go on to Google.com and you search we know now that the NSA has the ability to access the information that you search for, the websites that you receive in response in which one you click on. Google also, of course, makes a record of that. And I don’t mean to single out Google, because Microsoft’s Bing search engine does the same thing, the Yahoo search engine also does the same thing.

So, basically all of the big search engines, they keep a record of everything you search for and they use that information to create a quite detailed personal dossier of information about individuals all over the globe.

So, what we did in developing Ixquick and Startpage is we said: people need the ability to access that information without having their personal information captured. So when you go to Startpage.com and you enter in a search term, we submit it to Google servers for you through our server, so Google never sees you they only see us, they only make contact with us, and then we take the information that we get from Google and then we serve it to you completely anonymously and privately.

Google never sees you. There are no tracking cookies, there’s no opportunity for them to detect your IP address or in any way know who you are. And then we delete all records of your visit, so we don’t store your IP address. We do not make a record of your searches and we don’t use tracking cookies.

We really have no idea who uses our website because we don’t want to keep track of that. We believe their privacy is a fundamental human right and that everyone should have the ability to access information freely, because that’s really the whole purpose of the Internet.

Robles: Can I ask you a question, now it sounds great. A lot of people are extremely skeptical now. How can they be sure that you are not secretly, also, working with the NSA or something?

Albrecht: That’s actually an extraordinarily good question, given the recent developments.

There are actually a couple of reasons why we are a trustworthy company. One of them is the fact that we are third-party certified, so we actually... We’ve been certified actually for several years through an extensive auditing procedure through an organization called the EuroPriSe, which is based over in Europe, they’re the European privacy certifying authority.

They have extensively used all of the European privacy laws and regulations about protecting consumer privacy and gone through all of our data-handling practices and given us their highest possible grade every time they’ve reviewed us.

We’ve also been certified by an organization called Certified Secure out of the Netherlands. And all those certifications are online. People can actually view those. That’s one assurance. It the third-party independent assurance. And then the other reason, I think in light of what has been happening with the NSA scandals and the concerns about the United States Government accessing the web traffic of people through large companies, like Google, and Yahoo, and Microsoft, etc, through the PRISM program, because our company is based in the Netherlands we are actually not under U.S. jurisdiction, and what that means is that FISA Court requests, or Patriot Act requests, or FBI requests, or data collection programs like PRISM do not directly apply to us.

We have never been approached by any governmental agency and requested to turn over any information; we’ve never been asked to be part of a PRISM program. Those kinds of requests have been of course, issued to American companies, but as a Dutch company we have not received those sorts of requests. And if we did, at that point our immediate response would be ‘we are not under US jurisdiction’ and there are certainly legal protections there for us and also the people who use our service.

Robles: You yourself, you are an American citizen. Could you be pressured personally somehow to cooperate with them?

Albrecht: Well, I actually don’t work directly for the company, which is kind of an interesting arrangement. They are 100% held by a Dutch family. It’s not a publically traded company, it’s a privately held company. I am actually a contractor with the company so I am not actually in...

I suppose if somebody came up to me and said; “Hey, Katherine, we really want to put pressure on you as an American to provide information.”

If that were to happen, even if I wanted to provide information, I could not, because I don’t have access to our servers. All of the data that flows to our servers is all encrypted and it’s part of the certification to guarantee the privacy that we have under all of our certifications. I don’t have access to anything.

So, at the end of the day, if someone were to lean, even in the Dutch Government on the Dutch arm of our company, there would literally be no records to provide. And that’s kind of an interesting case, because when you land on a particular website that website gets your IP address automatically, any website, even if it’s the local animal hospital, they get your IP address…

Robles: Sure. And a lot more than that, actually. They get a lot more information than that.

Albrecht: Yeah. Any tracking cookies, they can put cookies on your browser, if they are malicious they can put malicious code on your browser. There are a lot of things that a website can do to you. We have actually engineered an architected Startpage and Ixquick, so that when your computer may contact with our server we don’t even temporarily store your IP address so we never get it.

In fact, the place in the architecture that would normally put your IP address, we overwrite it instantly with zeros. So even if someone were to come with a warrant or, God forbid, a hacker, I mean, it happened to Google. if someone were able to get into those records, there would literally be no records to get into.

Robles: Great! You mentioned Ixquick. Can you describe what that is for our listeners?

Albrecht: I can. Ixquick.com is the same privacy protections, the same third-party certification. The only difference is that when you go to Ixquick.com and you put in a search, we take your search and we submit it to multiple search engines, including some very small ones and some far-flung ones all over the world.

And, on the fly – our founder has actually developed a proprietary algorithm that takes your search, submits it to all kind of different places and then gets the best results from all of them and then serves them to you instantly.

It’s kind of like a Google Search, but it’s not Google, it’s a metasearch engine, meaning that we go out to other search engines. We found that in Europe a lot of people like the Ixquick search engine because you get the actual Google results.

Robles: Two questions: one does this slow down any traffic on the user side, and two, what about browsing?

Albrecht: Because we are a search engine, what we do is we simply provide you with links to external websites. So, if you search something, you know I am a cancer survivor, so when I had to look up cancer treatment, I certainly didn’t want that information going out to Google and being in their hands.

So, when you search for something sensitive along those lines, you have the reassurance of knowing that your search did not get catalogued by the big search engine companies, which are really marketing research companies.

But when you click on an actual link and you leave the protection of Start page, let’s say, you go to the national institutes of health or wherever you go, then you are leaving our protection and you make direct contact with their servers and now you are just out in the wild west on the internet.

We have developed the first and only proxy associated with a search engine, which is available both through Start Page and Ixquick, so if you are doing a particularly sensitive search, and the website that you find from your search is a website that you want to visit but you don’t necessarily want that website to see you, then there is a link that you can click on to your search result that says “view by Ixquick proxy”, it is on both websites Start Page and Ixquick, and if you click that, what we do is we go to the, national institutes of health website, for example, load the contents of their page onto our servers and then we serve it to you. So you see it through our servers.

There is a little frame around it that says “proxy” so that you know your viewing it through us not through them. That means they can’t see you, they can’t put any Malware on your browser, for example that is one of the reasons people use it.

It is a little bit slower to use the proxy because we have to double-load it. So, we download it and then you load it to view, so there is kind of a dual step. And the other difference on our proxy, we do not use java script or flash for security reasons because those actually have big security holes in them and we do not transmit that.

Robles: Can you give our listeners your website addresses one more time?

Albrecht: Absolutely The websites are Startpage.com, and Ixquick.com. If you would like to sign up for an early access to Startmail, our upcoming e-mail program, go to Startmail.com. My personal website is kmashow.com, I am a radio host.

Robles: Thank you Doctor Albrecht I really appreciate it.

Albrecht: Thank you so much John it’s been a pleasure.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

USespionageinfo leaksurveillancePRISMNSAEdward SnowdenWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 3

·         Abney WeeksAbney Weeks, 12 August, 22:58#

It used to be that talk of SmartPage, personal cloud devices that store your files at home like Cloudlocker or email encryption services like TOR would be considered paranoia. These days though, I fully expect this market to continue to grow.

·         GHCroGHCro, 13 August, 00:23#

It's great to see new tools like startpage and ixquick come about. We need help to protect us from the people supposed to protect us. I think you also have to get your stuff off the cloud where it's a sitting duck for NSA, not to mention Google, Microsoft, Apple, Dropbox or whoever is hosting it for you. They're ALL looking at your stuff, either to find reasons to get you or find ways to get your money. Still want to get to your files over the Internet? Then put them in something like a Cloudlocker (cloudlocker.it), which stays in your house where no one can get to it without a warrant issued on probable cause you're a bad guy. That's the way it's supposed to work. Hopefully, we'll see more products like these to help us ordinary folks protect what little of our privacy we have left. I think it's a sad commentary on our nation that we need such things, but I guess that's life in the Internet age.

·         Виктор РомаинВиктор Ромаин, 13 August, 00:44#

Thanks for this very informative piece Mr. Robles.
Read more: 




11 August, 08:40 2 

The US only cares about expanding the empire and Israel - William Blum

Аль-Каида террор терроризм

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

On the surface, recent comments by the Deputy Director of the US Central Intelligence Michael Morrel seem to point to a shift in U.S. policy towards Syria and an admission to the failure of the United States in their War on Terror and against al-Qaeda and their funding, supporting and arming of extremist elements in Syria who have been fighting to overthrow the elected president of the country. Renown author and U.S. foreign policy critic William Blum characterizes U.S. policy on Syria as just a continuation of endless absurdity.

William Blum

Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Mr. William Blum, he is an American author, a historian and a long-standing critic of US foreign policy.

Robles: Hello, William, how are you this evening?

Blum: Fine, thank you.

Robles: Thanks for agreeing to speak with me, appreciate it. Recently, the Deputy Director of the US Central Intelligence Agency Michael Morrel stated to the “Wall Street Journal” that Syria was a top threat to US security. Now, it's a small country on the other side of the planet. I don't think it was ever really a threat to US security. He said that there are now more foreign fighters flowing into Syria each month to take up arms with Al-Qaeda affiliated groups, I quote, then there were going to Iraq. He's also stated that the Syrian Government's weapons, if the Bashar al-Assad Government falls, will be up for grabs and up for sale by Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. What do you make of these statements? Do you think this is a change in the US position in the country?

Blum: Well, certainly a change in public to admit that they've been supporting all these Al Qaeda types for a long time. That's quite an admission, quite a change. Will this have any effect on the US foreign policy remains to be seen, but if the past is any indication we can’t expect too much change.

The US is committed to overthrowing Assad because of Israel. That's the main motivation for the US. Israel doesn't want Assad to be there and that is not going to change. It just makes their position more absurd than before.

The US's foreign policy is a continuous piece of absurdity, and to get it even more absurd at times like now.

They've been supporting these terrible people in Syria for a couple of years now and now all of a sudden one of their officials wakes up and says: “Hey, these are really bad guys we've been supporting, maybe, we should stop doing that?” It's almost comical.

Robles: Yeah, if there weren't so many people dying, it would be laughable, I think. So, they seem to have flipped the switch or switched the flip, but in an absence of a statement saying they would support the government of Bashar al-Assad, if they are going to be against Assad and they are going to be against the insurgents, what kind of a scenario could that possibly bring about?

Blum: They may just stop giving any kind of support to the insurgents. They have given them all kinds of intelligence support and so-called non-lethal military support. Probably more than that but that is what they have admitted to, but they gave them arms as well. So, they gave them all this support. In such a case, it was difficult for Assad's government to be victorious. And, Israel may pick up the slack and invade Syria, I wouldn’t put it past them.

Robles: Do you think Israel is the one behind all this, pushing for Bashar Assad's demise?

Blum: In fact, Israel is certainly the root here if Israel was not a factor the US would not be fighting in Syria they would not have been fighting in Iraq and they would have to be threatening Iran the way they are. Israel is the important key in each of these battles. So they may do more in Syria than they have been doing.

Robles: I came to my own conclusion, if I may... it seems to me that this new flip of the switch which Israeli just... much of a switch... is just another reason for an armed, if you want to call it, “intervention” into Syria. I mean, O.K., they wanna get rid of Assad, to get chemical weapons, that didn't seem to work, and now, they can say: well, if Assad falls, these terrorists are getting all these weapons. They might have to go in and invade and kill everybody, without statements of support for Assad. What do you think of that?

Blum: I can see logic in what you are saying. I can see the US government doing that. But then, what will happen? If they interfere in force, who would they actually be shooting at? It's not clear what the repercussions of this statement would be.

Would they fight against the so-called insurgents, the jihadists – or will they fight against the government? It's an absurd situation, and I cannot predict what's going to happen.

Robles: Do you think that they are going to fight against everybody and just wipe everybody out?

Blum: I'm sure there are people in the US establishment who would like to see that, yes. They are crazy and evil enough to want to kill them all. That is the name of a new book in the US about Iraq, it's called “Kill Them All”!

Robles: That's interesting. There are those in US policy establishment who would promote an idea of just wiping everybody out if they could?

Blum: When Iran and Iraq fought against each other in the 1980s, the expressed wish of some leading American politicians like Henry Kissinger was “give aid to both sides and let them kill as many of each other as they can”. That was expressed by Kissinger and probably somebody else at the time. They did give more aid to Iraq than to Iran, but still, they were not above saying that they hoped that both sides would maximize death and destruction as much as possible.

Robles: That's a very interesting point you've raised, because it has seemed to me – well, I'm sure that its clear to everybody – that they have promoted and stoked sectarian violence between Sunni and Shias, but in reality, I think, the US does not support either group. Would you agree with that?

Blum: The US supports only one group – and that's the United States. Maybe, Israel but that is the other side of the same coin. There is the only reason – expanding the American empire. And, the US is not anti-Islam as you often hear people saying on the left and on the right that it's anti-Islam. It's not anti-Islam. What they've been doing in recent years in the Middle East – they've wiped out the three leading secular societies in the Middle East.

Robles: Right, right, right. Unbelievable!

Blum: In Iraq, then, Libya, and, then, Syria. The public says good we are fighting Islam we are fighting these terrorists but to the powers that be in Washington there is no such thing. They just want to expand the empire and to protect Israel, and that's all that counts.

Robles: Very, very good point, Bill, because in Syria, there were Orthodox Christians, there were Coptic Christians, there were hundreds of different ethnic groups, all living peacefully side by side, the same thing in Iraq, I mean, Sunnis and Shias... Sunni women were marrying Shia men, marrying and living together side by side before the invasion. Now I've heard that many Shia in Iraq wake up with a pot of blood on the doorstep, left by Sunnis stirring them to leave. And there is no more intermarriage.

Blum: Right. The same thing in Libya, any coexistence between various sects has been wiped out by the revolution, and the jihadists have a great influence in the new government.


Please return to our site in the near future for the rest of this interview with William Blum. If you are interested in Mr. Blum's work visit his website at: http://williamblum.org/ 

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

IsraelUSSyriaAl-Qaedaforeign policyinvasionWorld

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 2

·         ZahchikZahchik, 11 August, 14:01#

America acts without vision or purpose. It is in effect a lunatic state.

·         ferhatferhat, 12 August, 20:48#

I am from Turkey. We have around two million refugees in Turkey. But We don t want them. Because they are fighting against to their govenment, and our government support them, teach them how to fight, gives them weapon, and they killed many innocent people. US and Europe gave Turkey weapons and Turkey gave the terrorist groups the weapons then terrorist groups killed many people in Syria even in Turkey. our prime minister ( Erdogan) and Asad used to have a good relationship just before two years ago, you can see their happily photographs on intnernet. and suddenly something happened and Erdogan said Asad is a terrorist. actually he is terrorist.
Read more: 



10 August, 22:46  

What is happening in Syria is an international conspiracy - Official

сирия война разрушения хомс сирийская армия

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

Recent statements by the Deputy Director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency seem to point to a change or shift in U.S. policy towards Syria but things are not so simple and the war hawks in Washington branding Syria, a small country on the other side of the world as a “threat to U.S. security” is dangerous provocative and points to the continued beating of the war drums and plans for an invasion of Syria. As in Libya the West is after the resources. A member of the Libyan Defense Ministry spoke to the Voice of Russia on condition of anonymity and sheds light on the real reasons for the invasion of Libya by NATO and their plans for Syria.

Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking an anonymous member of the Libyan Defense Ministry.

Robles: You responded to my article about Syria. You were involved in the situation when they overthrew Gaddafi. Can you tell us a little bit about what was going on with the West there and how they were targeting people?

Source: It was in Nadyut, in the mountain area. We actually repaired there 20 tanks from a seized military base. And we had contacts with the NATO Air Force that we were holding the tanks and repairing the tanks. There were about 20, as I’ve mentioned. And we placed them near the Zayer Area, which is a bastion for supporters of Gaddafi.

We were preparing not for an attack, but just surrounding it. And we had informed the NATO forces about it. And the next day at about dawn, maybe an hour or two after dawn prayers the NATO air force completely destroyed the 20 tanks without any prior reason, without anything and explaining nothing to us.

And that many times our advancements were pushed back by, as they said, mistaken attacks.

We had no trust at that point. So, for a long-long time we were stationed stable in a stalemate position, for about two months. We had no direct contact with Gaddafi troops. We were shooting with heavy artillery and they were answering back with heavy artillery. So that was the main point.

Robles: You were fighting against the Gaddafi forces, but you were also being attacked by NATO?

Source: Exactly! On both sides. They were like keeping us in a stationary position. We couldn’t advance. There was like a red line every advancement we were pushed back by sky. And the same thing for them.

Robles: I’d really like to hear a lot more of what actually really happened there in Libya. And I’d like to hear your opinions on what is going on in Syria. Because now, it seems that the United States, the CIA, has stated that: first they are against Bashar Assad, the y arm the rebels and now they are saying the rebels are going to be a danger. Apparently, the same situation occurred in Libya. Can you give us your opinion on that and tell us more about what happened in Libya?

Source: I will start with Libya. In Libya we have a very strong tribal system which excludes, sometimes tribes within the same country. So, it is difficult for example for someone to come and work in the Tripoli Brigade because by his surname we know from where he comes. And we refused many foreign militants coming from Tunisia because most of our fighters, they were based in Tripoli, coming from Tunisia and coming from Wazen, which is a small village close to the Tunisian borders.

And many Tunisians, Egyptians, Algerians were coming from that side and we were pushing them back because we didn’t want any foreign militant intervention, because we knew most of them were either there for looting or they were members of extremist groups.

So, we decided to set up our brigades according to our cities – Zawiya, Misrata, Benghazi, in this way everyone knew his… It was like neighborhood vigilantes. Each one knew his neighbor. Each one knew his brother. Each one knew his cousin. So, it was difficult for anyone to infiltrate.

Robles: Can you tell us in more detail how was the West involved in all this? How was NATO involved? And if you could, shed some light on what happened in Benghazi? That would be wonderful, if you know anything about that.

Source: You mean during the war, right?

Robles: During the war and when so-called Ambassador Stevens was killed. And during the war, you said many of you comrades were killed by NATO forces.

Source: Exactly! About the American Ambassador, I don’t know really honestly what happened there. But some of my comrades in the army who were at a meeting the day before, they said there was a meeting with some ambassadors from European countries and he was actually warning them about the situation in Libya, that there was actually raising, not extremism, but rather militia control.

And that is something we suffer from right now because the police has absolutely no control. They lost the power they had a long time ago. As for the army because the militias have more power, they have more firepower and they have more numbers and obviously, they have been involved in looting. Most of them are former prisoners, or former regime members who have hidden behind the militias.

About the American Ambassador, honestly, we are very sorry for what happened to him. He was a good man, he was working for the interests. But I don’t know what’s happened there.

Robles: We have heard reports that it was not actually an embassy in Benghazi, but a CIA base and they were actually passing arms to Al Qaeda terrorists that were imported into Libya. Have you heard anything about that?

Source: Honestly, no. But we know that Al Qaeda in Libya does not actually exist. We have extremist groups who have fought in Afghanistan. But Al Qaeda, as an ideology does not exist.

Most of them even opposed the ideology of Bin Laden. And no one here has any support for him. It is just a geopolitical situation you know, as I told you, we have a strong tribal system which refuses any foreign militants and foreign ideology, even within the militias.

Robles: So then, how would NATO explain its foreign intervention? How could NATO be allowed to be involved in the country then? And can you give us some more details on how NATO was bombing your comrades, please?

Source: I believe that… What are the rumors that we were talking about during the war, is that we were very, very much surprised that NATO intervened within months, maybe a month or two. And it was the French President who pushed them because he was promised a share of the oils in Brega Area by the so-called transitional Government at the expense of the Russian and Turkish interests.

That’s why the Russians and the Turks were mostly opposing the intervention of NATO, because NATO is more like a cancer. It is more that a national or international police force, or military intervention force. They were seeking, exactly, what resources we have here.

Robles: So, they were only after the resources.

Source: That’s obvious. We are a country that produces about 2.4 million barrels of oil a day and we have electricity shortages for about 8 hours a day. Where is this all going?

Robles: It is not going to help the Libyan people. Who is in control of Libya right now would you say? Is anybody in control other than these militias? And if the militias are in control, who is controlling the militias?

Source: You see, for example, in Tripoli there are three main militias here controlling the area. But they are working well and they are being opposed by the Government. They are not receiving their wages and withstanding that, they are still working as if nothing is happening. They are under due stress. The militias are controlled by people and trusted by the people themselves. They have been elected you can say sort of in a democratic manner.

But people have been strained by the so called pseudo militias who have been set up in a vacancy because the police officers left their jobs.

Robles: I see.

Source: At the beginning, I remember, after the fall of Tripoli there were 300 policemen for the capital only. So, we had to recruit as many people as we could, and sometimes without control, without knowing their past or whether they were prisoners or addicts, or criminals, or anything.

But now the situation, sorry for interrupting you, is that the people are exhausted by the militias and even the members of militias are exhausted by the unstable situation. For example, there are about 30 militias that have broken up and they have joined the National Army. Very-very slow process.

Robles: Do you think that the National Army is somehow going to be able to bring all these militias under its own wings? Is that a reality? I mean would that be possible?

Source: I believe it could be a reality because they are actually backed by the people. Before, I remember when we used to walk in the streets patrolling, we were saluted by the people, we were given presents, we were hailed as heroes.

Then, two-three months after that it seemed they were looking at us in a different manner. They were exhausted by the successive power, lying on one side without any control. So, we have to make a drastic solution because by removing a dictator and then putting in another dictator…it is a very difficult situation.

Robles: I see. As far as this situation in Syria, if we can talk about that. I’d like to get your opinion on the US’s supposed change of position. What do you think is going on in Syria? I mean, they are supporting, they are importing mercenaries, they are importing terrorists to fight the Government. What do you think the goal is in Syria?

Source: I believe that what is happening in Syria is obviously an international conspiracy. And it is all targeting for two things: targeting to reduce the Russian power on gas and protecting the Israeli border by breaking the supply between Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran. That is an obvious situation. And second and most important of all, the CIA agent, director or co-director said that Syria poses a threat to the United States. So Syria poses a threat to the United States in any case.

Robles: It seems very odd to me because Syria is a small country, it is on the other side of the world, it has never threatened the United States, but all of a sudden it is a threat to the United States.

Okay, they’ve said they want to get rid of Assad as the leader, they want to forcibly remove him. And now they are saying that all these imported mercenaries and freedom fighters are going to be a threat. So, my thinking is that they are preparing for some scenario where they go in and just kill everybody. Do you think that’s possible?

Source: From the military point of view I believe that the Europeans and the Americans realize that the war… supporting the rebellion has been lost in this sort of manner. And they want to take a side in the future. So, they want to start talks first with Iran and through Iran with Syria, not direct talks with Syria.

The Free Syrian Army is composed mainly of the former military who have been court martialled in a way or another either for theft or rape or murder, or something like that. And most of the militants, for example, that left for Syria from Libya, they have been either former drug addicts or prisoners, or extremist groups. Honestly, we got rid of them more than anything else.

Robles: So, a lot of them you think came from Libya, like Libyan criminals and killers.

Source: Yes. Just a couple of weeks ago a colleague of mine was showing me a video of a friend of his who has had a video from Syria. And he told me this friend of his was imprisoned for 11 years for drug dealing and all that and now he is a freedom fighter. So we were joking about it. This just one example. They are not going there to save the country, they are going there either loot steal or to trade weapons, nothing more.

Robles: We had a very maybe dark humor joke about, they had this video… what was it? About a month and a half ago of one of their leaders cutting out and eating what he thought was the heart of a soldier. So, they have cannibals there as well. It is horrible!

Source: And that happens on both sides, unfortunately. I saw a video also of a Syrian military beheading an opposition fighter with a mechanical chainsaw. So, these things happen. They are sort of blood-drunk.

This is John Robles. You were listening to an interview with a member of the Libyan Defense Ministry.

 Part 2

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



9 August, 18:31  

CIA repackages Syrian intervention

2012 июль коллаж сша сирия сша асад

Collage: Voice of Russia

On the surface, recent comments by the Deputy Director of the US Central Intelligence Michael Morrel seem to point to a shift in U.S. policy towards Syria and an admission to the failure of the United States in their War on Terror and against al-Qaeda and their funding, supporting and arming of extremist elements in Syria who have been fighting to overthrow the elected president of the country. But in reality yet another reason has been created for yet another military intervention.

Russian policy towards the conflict in Syria has not wavered since day one and has been one of supporting the Syrian people and the Syrian Government in reaching a peaceful resolution to what Moscow has repeatedly stated is an internal conflict. Moscow has therefore steadfastly concentrated all of its continuing efforts both internationally and bilaterally in eschewing any possibility of external intervention in Syria. This has included the stepping aside of Bashar Al-Assad if that is the will of the Syrian people provided that is accomplished in a peaceful, orderly and democratic process.

President Assad has repeated time and again that he would be willing to step aside if the Syrian people wished it thus and if the process involved fair and transparent elections. His fight has been not in maintaining his own hold on power but in preserving the governmental and social structures of what was a peaceful secular society.

The clash between the Russian Federation and the West has rarely been more evident or confrontational than it has been in Syria. Russia has viewed Syria as a sovereign nation with which it maintains peaceful relations and normal mutually beneficial cooperation on various fronts while the West views Syria as yet another nation marked for regime change where the leader must be forcibly removed from power.

Rather than respecting the sovereignty of Syria, and other countries as well, the U.S. continuously seeks to force the countries of the world to bend to it will. This policy has failed time and time again but the U.S. refuses to treat countries as equals and that includes its allies. In Syria, rather than negotiating with the Government of Bashar Al-Assad and reaching its goals through diplomacy and normal relations, as well as helping the Syrian people and the country maintain peace and order, the U.S. set the goal of removing Assad and has formulated all policy and propaganda to meet that goal no matter the reality on the ground.

Recent comments by the CIA through its deputy director seem to say that the CIA and the U.S. Government have woken up and realized that supporting the extremist terrorist elements in Syria and allowing them to overthrow the secular government and achieve positions of power will be a worse scenario than anything they have now. However the conclusion, that Syria, a small country on the other side of the planet which has never posed a threat to Washington is a “TOP THREAT TO US SECURITY” is fraught with danger, disingenuous and yet another reason to justify an act of aggressive war under the guise of a “self-defense intervention.”

We have criticized the U.S. for seeming to be stuck in using one play book over and over again in carrying out their “humanitarian invasions” so this time the creativity is to be applauded but the goal remains the same. The U.S. is intent on invading Syria, this is just another pretext.

The Deputy Director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Michael Morrel stated to the Washington Post with regard to Syria: "It's probably the most important issue in the world today, because of where it is currently heading. Its current track is toward the collapse of its central government.”

It must be underlined that the collapse of the government has been the goal of the United States since the word go.

“There are now more foreign fighters flowing into Syria each month to take up arms with al Qaeda-affiliated groups, than there were going to Iraq to fight with al Qaeda at the height of the war there.”

Here it is important to recall that these very fighters have been funded, trained and “secretly” armed by the West and will now be openly armed.

“The Syrian government's weapons, are going to be up for grabs and up for sale. Al Qaeda has had its own victory as well, not only has the group spread its ideology and geographic reach, but it also has a less rigid command and control structure and less religious fidelity than in the past. That makes it more difficult for the U.S. to identify threats ahead of time.”

Again such statements on their own might seem promising but if we consider the history of the conflict and the history of the United States and their funding and creation and cooperation with Al-Qaeda and the ways they have done everything possible to destabilize Syria and bring down the regime of Bashsar Al-Assad the current position is fraught with the danger. One key point here is that if there is no U.S. support for Assad, a scenario then raises its head where the U.S. will move into Syria with everyone as a target. From their own “freedom fighters” to the Syrian regular military forces.

The weakness of U.S. foreign policy, and this statement should be key to all concerned, is that U.S. foreign and war policy are predictable, this should be clear to any observer. The United States sets a goal, in this case remove Assad and invade Syria, and then formulates policy, propaganda and reasoning around that goal. The difference now in Syria is that the U.S. seems to be moving to a position where those who have helped it to destabilize the country are now going to be targeted as well.

When the military industrial complex is in control of a government, as is now clearly the case in the United States, then the world community has to be very careful in giving such a power the ability to do as it wishes. The military industrial complex thrives on war and bloodshed and instability, a peace loving world that hopes for the advancement of humanity will always be the enemy of the military industrial complex.

Peace is not profitable and no matter the cause, a reason for war will always be found and when the “enemies” are vanquished their sights will turn to their “allies” because a war machine without a war is useless.

Syria, like Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iran and Libya in reality was and never has been a threat to the U.S. this point must be driven home. We can add Russia, North Korea, China, Venezuela, and every other independent country in the world to the list as well. No one wants to invade or destroy the United States, the world wants to live in peace and have their sovereignty and independence respected.

 The world wants to co-exist in peace, but for those who profit from war, this is something that must never be allowed to happen.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



8 August, 00:04 6 

Moscow disappointed once again by Washington

обама путин Владимир Путин барак обама

Photo: EPA

US President Barrack Obama has decided to cancel what were hoped by the Russian side to have been productive and constructive one to one talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, both here in Moscow and in Saint Petersburg on the sidelines of the G-20 Summit.

Official Moscow is disappointed by the decision by Washington to cancel Obama’s visit said Russian Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov.

Of course this is not the first time that Moscow has been disappointed by the largely unilateral self-serving decisions of Washington. Such snubs have been almost par-for-the-course since the end of the Cold War with such moves by Washington on almost every level.

Snubs from US have been hundreds including such loud events as the denial to Russia of allowing it to play the peacekeeping role it was promised in Kosovo, the support of Georgia and ensuing demonization of Russia with regard to South Ossetia, real cooperation on missile defense as the United States surrounds Russia with missiles that could be turned into first strike weapons with the flick of a switch, cases of Russian nationals renditioned to the United States from third countries to stand show trials, denial of protections for Russian orphans, the fabricated reasons for making a "Magnitsky List" to replace Jackson Vannick, the granting of asylum and the support of Chechen terrorists and police killers, the funding of, and attempted subversion of the Russian state and the creation of a "Color Revolution", the use of NGO to interfere with the political internal political processes of Russia, the aggressive attempted and continuing attempts at the recruitment of members of the special services and the law enforcement bodies, the constant demonization of Russia in the western media and the non-stop degrading statements and threats by American politicians and officials, and sadly the list goes on and on.

"We are disappointed with the decision of the US administration to cancel President Obama's visit to Moscow, which was planned for early September," Ushakov said speaking to reporters on Wednesday.

The Kremlin has characterized the cancellation of Obama's visit as an indication that the US is unprepared to build a relationship with Russia on an equal footing.

"This problem testifies to the remaining unpreparedness of the United States to build an equal relationship," he stated adding that Obama's decision relates to the situation surrounding the situation of Edward Snowden, which he underlined is not Russia's fault.

Of course the United States does not want to build partnerships with nations on an equal basis, this is and has been obvious to anyone who has observed the behavior of the United States for the last several decades and this more clear than ever with Russia. A country which is much larger and for all intents and purposes is in far better economic and social condition than the United States of America.

This is a fact that is becoming clearer by the day as Russia shakes off the instability and historic changes that occurred after the collapse of the USSR and the Soviet State.

Russia has been forging alliances and increasing cooperation worldwide, with countries of all political and ideological leanings, in particular with those who are fed up with U.S. imperialist dictatorial polices and the way it snubs its nose at international law and conventions and shows complete disregard for the sovereignty of nations.

The United States, unlike Russia which approaches all countries, great and small with respect and dignity, is the undisputed world champion is treading over the rights and the sovereignty of all nations and people’s the world over, perpetually dictating to the world on how it should behave and who it should befriend and what it should provide to the world’s sole self-declared "super power".

The Kremlin aide also stressed that the invitation for Obama to visit Moscow remains open. Once again underlining the fact Russia has steadfastly maintained an open door to the United States and has always been open for partnership and good relations on an equal level.

"The president of the United States was and remains invited to make a visit to Russia," Ushakov said, and "Russia is ready to work with American partners on all items of our bilateral and multilateral agendas."

Leaving the door open has been the Russian stance on everything from Syria to the American’s ABM system, but surely there will have to come a day when that door will have to be closed securely, that is my own opinion, but there is a point when disregard and disrespect will reach and unforgiveable level, as was the case with the recent treatment of the Russian flag by some idiot American rock group in Ukraine.

Some American politicians are now questioning the mental state of the Obama, even calling his behavior schizophrenic with regard to al-Qaeda and the supposed credible threats of al-Qaeda attacking somewhere in the world in the next few weeks. I could tell you the same thing, al-Qaeda will attack somewhere in the world in the next few days, that is now a given like the sun coming up and going down. The claim, according to many is a distraction from the fact that Edward Snowden has revealed the true depth of the American Government’s complete disregard for the rights of the American populace and the world community and it seems that for Obama, the case of Edward Snowden has become a sick and twisted obsession.

Russia was operating under international laws and conventions and following its own laws and its own Constitution when it came to giving Edward Snowden asylum and it was in fact the US’s own idiocy that let him get away in the first place and caused him to be trapped in Sheremetyevo and left stateless in the second.

The insanity with which Obama has gone after Snowden and even caused the interference of the flight of the president of a sovereign nation, points to a leader that has gone beyond reason and been corrupted beyond any acceptable scope. Perhaps the Imperial Presidency of Obama and his self delegated right to order extra-judicial executions as well as the now almost uncontested "right" of the United States to expand militarily and commit acts of aggressive war and detain and execute whoever they wish at will has truly begun to cause the collapse of the Western Civilization and its leaders to have lost all touch with reality?

Like the school house bully being confronted by a kid who refuses to give up his lunch money and then becoming completely obsessed, the United States has threatened Russia in any way it can to get Russia to ignore international law and its own Constitution and to just hand Edward Snowden over, not extradite as the US Ambassador tried to tell the Russian Government.

Of course for the President of the Russian Federation and other leaders to abide by international law and their own Constitutions is something the US has difficulty understanding but it is what makes the world a civilized place and what sets us apart from anarchy.

Attempts by the United States to pressure Russia into compliance with their policies through the use of economic instruments and measures would not receive any significant level of international support either and even if the US decides to cut off all trade between Russia and the US the insignificant trade turnover of approximately 40 billion dollars a year would have little effect on Russia’s economy as the country is currently maintaining a global trade turnover with positive trends at a level approaching 900 billion dollars per annum.

The US needs Russia more than Russia needs the US in Afghanistan, Iran, the Middle East, Syria, North Korea and in other areas and countries and Russia has always been willing to cooperate, but I would dare say that there has to be a point when that willingness will dry up.

Obama’s recent comments about Russia behaving in a Cold War manner seems ludicrous to anyone who has been following world events even casually for the last decade or so, as did the recent hollow guarantees by Eric Holder that Edward Snowden would not be tortured, but it shows the complete arrogance and disconnect with reality that Obama is living with and the complete lack of regard the US has for the intelligence of the world’s populace.

Perhaps Americans live in a Mickey Mouse fantasy world where everything that happens around the world is dictated to them to them by the Ministry of Truth, that Russia is a Cold War menace and that there is an al-Qaeda terrorist behind every street post, and such comments as Obama made, not to a respected intellectual forum, but to a comedy show, are actually believed. However such comments as portraying Russia as maintaining a Cold War mentality could be nowhere further from the truth.

It is in fact the US and the West that has maintained the Cold War stance evidenced by the expansion and the continued existence of NATO and it is the United States who has mounted a war to hide their own illegitimacy and illegality against journalists and whistleblowers and has forced the world to protect these individuals the best they can.

For me it is the height of insanity to have such a country preach to the world on "Democracy and Freedom" and in all honesty Obama should have been grateful at the graciousness and respect and intelligence and forward thinking of President Vladimir Putin in agreeing to speak with him at all, especially after the recent insults to Russia by the United States due to the Snowden affair.

That the respected and intelligent leader of the largest country in the world would grant an audience to the leader of the country in the world with the biggest guns and who continues to run roughshod over the international community is something that they in the US should be grateful for. But of course they are living in their Mickey Mouse, Faux News, Guantanamo is good, Ministry of Truth fantasy world and do not see the reality of US policy.

The opinions and views expressed here are my own. I can be reached at robles@ruvr.ru.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

RussiaVladimir PutinBarack ObamaUSRussian-US relationsG-20Edward SnowdenPolitics

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 6

·         James ParksJames Parks, 8 August, 00:31#

I read this and just pictured Mr. Putin receiving the news, smiling dryly, shrugging his shoulders, and kind of laughing on the inside.

·         EgadsNoEgadsNo, 8 August, 00:43#

Who cares if a puppet would visit- just makes a bunch of traffic and nonsense anyway. I am certain that millions of Americans agree with your displeasure. Just not millions enough yet.

·         moat frogmoat frog, 8 August, 01:09#

Let's keep this in perspective. Russia, being disappointed in our government's requesting the return of the described traitor, is what is paramount here -- not cold war history. Any disappointment expressed should be expressed by the United States. It is the traitor that should have been immediately returned to the U.S. Is that clear enough? Russia has something of ours and continues to smack its lips over it. Understand that Russia, under the devil named Putin, will never be a friend to our requests or needs. As such it remains what it has always been -- an arch enemy. Deception is the deck of cards being dealt by Putin. We should never doubt that fact. We should never let our guard down. We should better protect our digital files from his hackers who are given hero status when they get into our sensitive data files. Beware of Russia or be consumed by it.

·         Kido ButaiKido Butai, 8 August, 14:45#

correct if I'm wrong,but since when Russia stopped being America's Main Enemy? because surely is not Iran,North Korea and much less China.after all the whole missile affair is for one country in mind,right?

·         albinaalbina, 8 August, 16:38#

I think Mr.moat frog rejected that this person is crazy. I have a question? If someone like Mr.Snowden from Russia or any other country which came to America. Whether America was running back to his country? No, never send him back, did not. I think President Obama should not have to make this decision was taken. Mr. snowden was not a big deal.

·         John RoblesJohn Robles, 8 August, 16:46#

Dear Moat Frog. I think you know that you have been fed lies and are looking for the truth. Please continue visiting the Voice of Russia, since you have happened on this you are probably looking for the truth. Snowden told you that you are being spied on by your government. He exposed illegality that is not treason by any twisted stretch of the word. Your president's continued violations of your US Constitution and international law, now that is another matter. Have a nice day.
Read more: 


7 August, 18:20 1 

'Obama has given himself the power of extra-judicial executions' - Debra Sweet

афганистан солдат США армия

Photo: Flickr.com

Download audio file

For many people of the world the Bradley Manning case seems absurd and his persecution by the US Government something difficult to comprehend. He was something that the US government is afraid of, he was a soldier with a conscience who exposed war crimes being committed by US forces. The way the US has turned logic upside down by going after one who exposed crimes while protecting those who commit crimes should have the world up in arms. Only an illegal and illegitimate government would protect criminals while persecuting and even torturing a moral and upstanding brave individual who had the courage to stand up and blow the whistle on what he saw. Rather than being rewarded and seen as a hero, hose protecting the criminals have decided to make Mr. Manning an example in order to throw fear into the hearts of anyone who would dare to expose their illegality.

Debra Sweet

Part 2

You are listening to an interview in progress with Debra Sweet from the World Can’t Wait. You can find the previous parts to this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru.

Sweet: In Iraq just six years before Bradley Manning was stationed there and revealed some of these crimes that had happened, there was wanton abuse of detainees, that was completely without oversight, where the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) which is still in existence, and increasingly how the United States plans to fight wars through secret so-called “black operations”, was given impunity, and still never has suffered not only any punishment but no investigation to speak of for carrying out interrogations that probably caused the deaths of a hundred Iraqi civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. And yet, Bradley Manning is in prison.

Robles: Yeah… Back for a minute to Eric Holder’s letter, the hypocrisy of his letter was unbelievable. I mean to me, because it’s so obvious the U.S. has no respect for international law and any promises they would make to another country or if there were conventions or anything, I think they would easily violate them, I mean that goes with the way they’ve arrested Russian citizens in third countries, and brought them back to the United States illegally, basically kidnapping them and renditioning them.

Now all of these crimes you are talking about: Guantanamo… it’s all taking place outside of the United States, so it seems like the U.S. government… anything that they do that’s illegal as long as it’s outside the United States, no one will ever be prosecuted for it.

How’s the world supposed to believe that the U.S. is the “moral beacon” of the planet if they are behaving in that manner?

Sweet: Yeah, well, as I mentioned it’s a huge contradiction and there certainly are… I would argue that there are no governments in the world right now that are really free of these contradictions, but the U.S. posing and putting itself forward as the “guardian of freedom in the world”, “freedom and democracy” has made a sham and shambles of the very term.

And there is no way through the legitimate political structure in the United States at this point, as you said, to bring those criminals to justice or even to have a serious investigation, including by the current President who won the Nobel Prize for Peace but has said, “No, we prefer to look forward and not backward,” and you know, “we don’t torture.”

So therefore, because the President said this, it’s a fact, while this very same President has taken to himself the power of targeted assassination, every other Tuesday meeting with a few people in his office to decide who is going to be targeted and killed by drones or by other means in sovereign countries, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, without any investigation, with no indictment, with no trial, with no charges. People are just killed. This is the situation we find ourselves in.

Robles: These are extrajudicial executions that you are speaking about … Now they can target…

Sweet: Which are clearly against international law!

Robles: Sure. Yeah! It’s against the UN conventions and, as the U.S. is supposed to be a U.N. member it’s not abiding by the rules of the United Nations or by other international conventions of course.

Do you think there’ll be any chance that some… for example like a church commission, comes up and begins to bring back some sort of sanity?

Sweet: I always know there is a chance, but the chances for that is not going to come from within the ruling political structure, they will not investigate themselves.

The Church Committee came about 1974 and 5, because there was an anti-war movement that was very robust in the 1960s really spread across the world, you know, there could have been a revolution in this country, there wasn’t, but there was a very deep feeling by a lot of people, that the government actually was not legitimate in what it was doing, and I think it will take people coming back to that point which could happen, given the revelations of Edward Snowden about the vast surveillance of whole populations across the world within and without the United States.

So that’s the kind of political situation it would take to have an impeachment or another Church Committee that really looked at how is that the U.S. projects its power across the world and put some fairly minor curbs on it by the way, which were then trodden over, in succeeding administrations.

Robles: Back to Manning’s revelations. Is there any way that those crimes could be brought before an international body? I mean it’s very clear these were war crimes that were committed.

Sweet: I think this is why the U.S. never signed the International Criminal Court, don’t you? Because they fear exactly this: there has been a chance in Europe to bring charges against various levels of the CIA, from things that happened in Italy and Spain, and nothing has been able to take hold because of the incredible power and threats from the U.S. Government itself towards any country that would even think about that.

Think about this: here’s Edward Snowden who was offered asylum by three countries in Latin America, and the U.S. has put incredible power and threat against that ever happening. They are determined that Snowden is not going to leave Russia and that he will be brought back to the U.S., and yes, promising in writing that he wouldn’t be tortured or given the death penalty. But how can we trust that?

Robles: That’s a joke. I mean I as soon as he got back to the United States they would do whatever they wanted with him and of course he would be tortured, okay “enhancely interrogated” or whatever they want to call it.

The European Parliament… 17 members urged the U.S. lawmakers to set Bradley Manning free. And they sent a letter to President Obama and the Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel in light of the human rights abuses and the war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan he exposed…

Sweet: There should be a massive outcry from everywhere against the U.S. for prosecuting Bradley.

Robles: Is that having any effect, do you think, in court itself, you were there in the court today. Have you seen any softening of positioning because of international outcry there?

Sweet: I don’t pretend to think that the judge is operating, there as a single agent. She is accountable to her whole chain of command, and the commander-in-chief, who, as we know, said two summers ago that Bradley Manning committed a crime. So we never had any idea that he was really going to have a fair trial.

We do know that in the court of the public opinion, internationally, he’s seen as a hero, not as a traitor, he’s seen as a whistleblower and not someone who endangered the people of the world, but someone who in fact provided information to open up people’s eyes, and we hope and we are working very hard on this, always and very urgently right now, to get the real story out to people about what did happen in Iraq and Afghanistan during those terrible years, which continue in both countries by the way, those wars are not over and the damage is just beginning to be discovered, I believe.

This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Debra Sweet, the director of The World Can’t Wait dot net. You can find the previous part to this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru. Thanks for listening and I wish you the best.

Part 1Part 3

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

UShuman rightsUS droneslawWikileaksJulian AssangeBradley ManningtorturetrialdroneManning trial: traitor or hero?,World

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 1

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 7 August, 19:28#

Obama must return his Nobel prize! He didn't deserve it then and he most certainly doesn't deserve it now. Someone who states that 'war is peace' shouldn't even be in the White House.
Read more: 



7 August, 16:32  

Microdots and dead letter drops have given way to hacking – Mike Smith

flame флейм компьютер вирус компьютер код

Photo: Flickr.com

Download audio file

With the revelations by Edward Snowden and moves by certain western governments to classify whistleblowers and journalists as being involved in espionage, it appears that the world of spying and real espionage has changed. Is it proper for governments to invade the privacy of their citizens just to make sure that their own security is obtained. It would seem that in the west the populace whom the government is supposed to serve has become the adversary of those in power.

Michael John Smith

Hello. This is John Robles. I’m speaking with Mr Michael John Smith. He was the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the UK. He is also an intelligence specialist and a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia. Hello, Mike, how are you?

Smith: Hi, John. Yes, I’m fine.

Robles: It’s nice to be speaking with you again.

Smith: Good to speak to you too.

Robles: Now, I’d like to ask your opinion about spying currently, with all these revelations by Edward Snowden and accusations that he is involved in some sort of espionage.

Before, back in the old days you’ve been exposed to a lot of this through your trial and your efforts and how you were forced to defend yourself. Spies used to meet in dark alleys. They would meet their agents in the dead of night. They had number stations, secret code words, dead drops.

Now it seems that they are running around with wigs in their backpacks and unencrypted messages on how to open Gmail accounts in Internet cafés and collecting information on everybody under the sun with the help of Facebook and other Internet sites.

In your opinion, how has espionage changed? What is the difference between now and how it used to be?

Smith: Back in the days when I was facing trial on espionage, back in 1992-1993, about that time, it was very much based on human resources. The idea was to try to find somebody who was in a place of useful access to secrets or classified information, and to try to use that person to gain information. And in many ways this was part of that era, the old Soviet Union and the USA were obviously in a very Cold war situation at the time, which was putting a lot of pressure on society, I think, at the time. And so there was an ideological aspect to this as well because people would either fall on one side or the other. And this tended to, sort of, mean that people would do things for ideological reasons, as they still do.

Back in those days, I mean, technology was a bit different and things like Minox cameras and the use of microdots, dead letter drops, all that sort of thing came into play because things were very much… It was as you say - meeting in a dark corner, in a place where people wouldn’t be overheard and passing secrets. It could be paperwork or possibly microfilm of some sort, and those sort of things used to go on in the past.

Nowadays, it’s very much different I think, because of the Internet and new technology. They don’t need to perhaps do so much of that sort of thing because they can gain access to people’s computers through hacking, through checking what’s going on on the Internet, because almost everything that is going on in the world is going through the Internet in some form.

So those who have access to that, and obviously this comes to the recent revelations that the USA - because the Internet was largely set up as a military operation – that the USA has huge resources there to gain access to all the information that is going through the Internet, and to see what connections are being made between various countries and various individuals. And they can virtually gain anything they want now from just tapping into that connection.

Robles: The real secrets are not going to be out there on the Internet. So why collect all this social and networking data and personal information on common Internet users?

Smith: In times gone by, and it still applies now, military information was very important and countries wanted to know what the other side was doing: what sort of weaponry they were developing, what their policies were on maybe expansionism or their views on various world events.

So a lot of intelligence that was being gathered in the past was very much to do with keeping abreast and not falling behind in the race. And the same is going on today, but now, because so much is going on on the Internet, a lot of things are being planned through the Internet like we saw in the recent developments in Libya, in Syria, in Egypt now.

A lot of this is being planned and developed through Internet, through electronic communications, and so those who can detect what is being said, what connections are being made between individuals, those people will now be in a much better position to plan how to counteract that, because as we saw in the occupation movement in the USA, an awful lot of this was being discussed on things like Facebook and Twitter.

So I’m sure the authorities would be following all those sort of moves that people are making, where they are planning to go next. And that gives them a great start in planning how to thwart the activities of any group who threatens the government.

Robles: That’s not real espionage, is it? I mean, that’s not about the military or other countries, I mean, this is like totalitarian surveillance on their own citizens.

Smith: Well, surveillance, intelligence, I think it all comes down to the same thing – it’s about information. Governments want to know information on their inhabitants. What the groups are, who are plotting to overthrow the government, or to… even things like strikes and public unrest, I mean, anything that could be a stepping stone to something bigger. Because very often these movements, they start very small and they develop into some massive sort of public campaign which could damage governments, overthrow governments.

So that intelligence, I think, is very important to any government in the world and I think all governments do look very much at what is going on in their country, and how better to find that out than to see what is going on on the Internet and on the electronic means of media.

Robles: So, I mean, are you saying this blanket spying on everybody under the sun is ok?

Smith: Oh no, no, I don’t think it’s ok at all. I think it’s a very negative thing from the point of view of free speech and civil rights. But I can understand how it has developed the way it has.

It’s been a long slow process and you can see how over the centuries, well, over the decades recently, but over centuries governments have always been very keen to find out what is going on. And even back in Elizabethan times, in the 16th century, spying was going on in the UK then, and it’s still taking place today, obviously it just uses the new technology.

Robles: During the Cold war would you have heard of like the US spying on UK citizens, for example, the US spying on all of its allies and on their citizens?

Smith: I think this always went on. Allies are only allies as far as they are useful to other countries, I think. And I’m sure the US always has an idea of what say the UK is doing, and however that best suits its own policies.

I mean, you saw this very much so in the time of the Iraq war back in 2003 when it was said in the UK that Tony Blair was just like George Bush’s poodle, because he was doing what George Bush wanted, and backing the move to attack and invade Iraq.

If you go back to that time - I mentioned to you before - that there was a woman called Katharine Gun who opened up a big can of worms because she found out, because she worked at GCHQ, she found out that there was a plan to try and swing the United Nations at the time to back the US’s aim to attack Iraq. Because if you remember, back in 2003, there were six countries who were not really sure if they wanted to back this or not. And those countries were being influenced by the US.

You were listening to an interview with Michael John Smith, an intelligence specialist and the last person convicted of spying for the Soviet Union in the world. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



6 August, 19:23 2 

Bradley Manning cared about humanity – Debra Sweet

Брэдли Мэннинг WikiLeaks утечка секретные материалы

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

For many people of the world the Bradley Manning case seems absurd and his persecution by the US Government something difficult to comprehend. He was something that the US government is afraid of, he was a soldier with a conscience who exposed war crimes being committed by US forces. The way the US has turned logic upside down by going after one who exposed crimes while protecting those who commit crimes should have the world up in arms. Only an illegal and illegitimate government would protect criminals while persecuting and even torturing a moral and upstanding brave individual who had the courage to stand up and blow the whistle on what he saw, rather than being rewarded and seen as a hero. Those protecting the criminals have decided to make Mr. Manning an example in order to throw fear into the hearts of anyone who would dare to expose their illegality.

Debra Sweet

You are listening to an interview in progress with Debra Sweet from the World Can’t Wait. You can find the previous parts to this interview on our website at english.ruvr.

Robles: In your opinion, was this a fair trial? Or is it just a kangaroo court that’s going to do whatever they’ve decided to do in the first place?

Sweet: Well, you know I think Glenn Greenwald referred to it as a show trial and I tend to agree with that.

Here’s the entire power of the US government, through its military, arrayed, prosecutors walking in and out all day long, and endless amounts of money arrayed against the resources that we have been able to raise for a private attorney working as a sole practitioner and some jag lawyers that is the U.S. military lawyers assigned to help him, who had a huge amount of materials to go through, a lot of which was kept secret from the defense, they were not allowed to see and their motions were continually denied by this judge.

Even a motion today, that was trying to reargue whether the charge of aiding the enemy should be dismissed altogether was denied and all of that makes me say that there was a presumption of guilt in this case, not a presumption of innocence. The fact that he was tried in military court, is very telling.

Robles: You would not characterize this as being a legitimate court process?

Sweet: It’s not a fair situation whatsoever. Also given all we know about Bradley Manning. Just on the face of it here comes the U.S. Government arguing that on the one hand that he was acting as a spy and on the other hand that he sought fame and fortune from doing this action, those two modes of operation are mutually exclusive.

Spies don’t look for fame and fortune, and people who are exposing this kind of information to the public are in fact risking their lives and liberty and free lives and their futures in order to bring the truth out and that is the definition for many-many people around the world of a hero as opposed to the definition of a traitor, which is what the U.S. had argued.

Nobody has been able to show a shred of evidence that Bradley did this for money, fame, or another government or any entity other than the public and he was very clear at times when he didn’t know that he was being monitored, or he didn’t have the expectation that his words would ever come to light, that he was doing this because he cared about the humanity, and he was so angered, and offended, and hurt when he heard people in the U.S. Military laughing when Iraqis were killed, for instance, that’s what set him on the course of saying: “People have to know about this and we need to be able to do something about it.”

The whole picture here is of, again, all the power of the state arrayed against a small person, in stature and a person without very much power at all, who was put in a position of seeing this information and could not keep quiet. And the world was certainly richer for the fact that he didn’t keep quiet. And we owe him the great debt.

Part of what the anti-war movement and the people supporting Bradley want to do is to take the charges that the U.S. made against him for releasing the video of the massacre from an Apache Helicopter if 2007 over Baghdad of 12 civilians, that was then released to WikiLeaks in 2010 by Bradley Manning and called “Collateral Murder”.

The prosecution made a big deal about this footage and how much it endangered the country because people got to see the war crimes being carried out, and so we feel it’s very important during this sentencing period to get that video seen by as many people as possible.

We are doubling and tripling our effort to show it outdoors, we’re going to be projecting it on buildings, showing it in theaters and all over the place, so that people can really follow through on why Bradley did this in the first place.

That was to get this in front of the people and so we want to honor his sacrifice and his action by really working very hard to get that footage in front of the people, but there is a twisting by somebody who was brought… by Obama in particular, who was brought into office as an answer to the complete rampant utter criminality of the Bush regime.

People thought that they were getting someone who would… who said he would adhere to the rule of law, would go for transparency, protect whistleblowers, stop these wars, even though he was always very careful about how he made his promises he did say he wanted to end this, what he called, “the stupid war in Iraq”, but he said from the very beginning he wanted to expand the U.S. presence and efforts in Afghanistan, he actually increased the number of Afghan civilians being killed because he has refused to stop these night raids and now, as Jeremy Scahill revealed in “Dirty Wars”, both the book and the film, this democratic administration is moving much more towards “Special Operations”, “Black Operations”, “JSOC” run military exercises which go beyond national borders, which have no oversight, no limit on budget, and really run roughshod over whole countries at this point. Without respecting the status of non-combatants, without giving people the basic rights, the basic democratic rights that people should have anywhere and this has been the pattern that’s been set through choosing to pursue targeted assassination and indefinite detention, as the Obama administration has done over the last four and a half years.

Robles: I see…

Sweet: It’s really outrageous, and the worst part of it is that people who should know better, democratic liberals, are some of the people who are most supportive right now of condemning Bradley Manning, of keeping Guantanamo open, and the use of the drone program and the targeted assassination. Shame on them.

Robles: Anything else you’d like to finish up with, Debra? And it’s been a pleasure speaking with you.

Sweet: Thank you. “World Can’t Wait” the organization that we began in 2005 to drive out the Bush Regime has continued since Obama’s been President to stop the crimes of our government at home and abroad, and we have been supporting Bradley, before we even knew who he was, by distributing copies of the “Collateral Murder” DVD, which also includes significant parts of the Wikileaks revelations about Iraq and Afghanistan. People are welcome to write to us and get a copy of it. We are worldcantwait.net. We can also be reached at,. in the U.S. at 866-973-4463

Robles: How much is the DVD, is there a fee for that?

Sweet: We send them free to everyone and we ask for donations to help us make more.

Robles: Sounds like a good deal and for a good cause.

Sweet: It’s very important. To get it out there

Robles: Right, right, right

Sweet: Do it for Bradley. If there is one thing that you can do is help him deliver this message to the world that he sacrificed so much for.

Robles: Alright, thank you, Debra, I really appreciate it

Sweet: Thank you, John. Bye.

This is John Rubles, you were listening to an interview with Debra Sweet, the director of World Can’t Wait dot net. Thank you very much for listening and I wish you the best wherever you may be.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

USWikileaksBradley Manningespionageinfo leakwhistleblowerManning trial: traitor or hero?World

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 2

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 6 August, 23:32#

Isn't it always this way, unfortunately? The little fish is made to pay while the big fish swim happily ever after. Where is justice?

·         enigmaenigma, 7 August, 07:34#

This is a very good interview and Ms. Sweet in my opinion is right on the mark with her analysis. However, when Ms. Sweet refers to the "liberal Democrats" as if this group of corporate flunkies are any different from the other corporate facists of either party I would take exception with that point. The American people are constantly lead to believe that there is some plurality or political chasim between the two ruling elitist parties. This is a falsehood, Oh there are minor differences but on major issues the two elitist parties are corporate shills and represent not the American people but the economic and financial elite only. The two party system myth needs to be destroyed, so the American people can see the reality of the political situation in the United States.
Read more: 



5 August, 21:44  

NATO will make sure Russia is an enemy – Rick Rozoff

Россия НАТО

Collage: Voice of Russia

Download audio file

Upcoming NATO military exercises envisage an attack on Poland and an Article 5 NATO intervention against A4 in power. To the dismay of Russia, these exercises continue the outdated Cold War thinking of the West, which refuses to let go of such stereotypes and continues to assure peace and understanding between the nations. NATO and the West have an agenda, and that agenda is complete and total military domination of the world. Operation Steadfast Jazz 2013 underlines the real intentions of the alliance and further serves to destabilize the world in a region where countries should be working for peace. It is clear that the West is being controlled by the military industrial complex and that peace is not something they envision. NATO, as an organization, should have been disbanded after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact. But they have done quite the opposite and have continued with a global expansion that has made NATO the single largest military power in the history of the world.

This is John Robles. I’m speaking to Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list.

Robles: Rick, how are you this evening for you and morning for me. How are you doing?

Rozoff: I’m doing well, John. I hope you are also.

Robles: Thanks. Very busy lately. We have a lot of stuff going on. NATO is up and jumping almost everywhere we look, making threats to Russia, getting very active in the Baltics. What’s going on, Rick?

Rozoff: You’ve begun the discussion well I think, that’s a string we can pull to bring in the entire fabric. What’s happening indeed, you know, most recently a statement occurred in YLE News in Finland, a news story rather, quoting a Pentagon official, a fairly high-ranking one, one James Townsend, a civilian, he’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO Policy, I think the fact that the Pentagon views Europe and NATO as one entity essentially is revealing, as the title suggests.

Townsend, the Pentagon official, was basically telling Russia it’s none of their business if the U.S. drags Finland into the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization, and that if Russia is going to say something about it, the U.S. can demonstrate that it too has a say in the matter, or words to that effect. In other words, the US can back down Russia or bluff or threaten it. I mean it really was a threat, and it had a very intimidating quality to his comments.

We have talked, I believe, on your program not too long ago John, about the fact that the military in Sweden, Sweden’s top military commander, not too long ago, a couple or three months ago, came up with an absolutely absurd but dangerous scenario stating that Sweden, hither to of course a neutral country, might have to join NATO because, if Russia attacked it, the Swedish armed forces couldn’t withstand it for five minutes. And we are seeing similar scenarios play out throughout Scandinavia and in the Baltic region.

Basically, this is a concentrated and concerted effort by the United States and its allies to build up a Nordic-Baltic military force. And you had an article yourself in just the last two or three days, the NATO so-called “Phantom Menace” in relation to military activity in Norway.

Of course, Norway has a short border with Russia. Finland has a lengthy borer with Russia. And what we are seeing just in the last few days the fact that the Army Corp of Engineers issued a contract to Kellog, Brown and Root and began the construction of a military facility in Romania, where US interceptor missiles are going to be stationed, that’s right across the Black Sea from Russia, that currently, or very shortly the U.S. is leading air exercises, including paratroop exercises, in Bulgaria.

The US is increasingly expanding and consolidating its military influence in Georgia, which borders Russia, the same as Azerbaijan. But what we are seeing most of right now, another dangerous statement, one you alluded to I believe in your article, is the fact that a deputy defense minister in Russia pointed out the fact that the upcoming military exercise that will be conducted by the US and NATO, this year’s iteration of what’s called Steadfast Jazz, Steadfast Jazz 2013, which is going to occur in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, according to the Russian Deputy Defense Minister statement under the Article 5 scenario, Article 5 is, of course, NATO’s Washington Treaty, the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 treaty, it is the part of the NATO founding document that states that all NATO members are obligated to militarily defend another one.

So as you clearly indicated in your article, there is no conceivable adversary that fits in that scenario, except for Russia. There would be some potential threat to Poland and to the Baltic states, clearly even with the overly imaginative capabilities of NATO and US officials to attribute military capacities to nations like Iran and north Korea, which they certainly do not have and could not develop.

In the case of the Baltic Sea and Russia’s north-west borders, that would be even beyond absurd, it would be an absolutely ludicrous contention, so that clearly Russia is the portrayed aggressor in this Article 5 scenario. And that goes quite in keeping with the statement by the military chief of Sweden recently, the statement by the Pentagon official about Finland joining NATO.

We have to recall that Finland maintained its neutrality during the Cold War, the half century or more of the Cold War, as did Sweden, only to have both countries right now standing on the doorstep of the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization, where, when they join, they become essentially military outposts for the Pentagon.

Robles: Rick, we talked about that these kind of training exercises by NATO, The Defense Ministry said they were bewildered by these exercises, again we are talking about Steadfast Jazz 2013, that you’ve mentioned I wrote about and you’ve commented about yourself, I believe it was Anatoly Antonov, deputy defense minister of the Russian Federation.

Nobody can understand, and they are baffled by this, why do they continue demonizing Russia, when Russia has done nothing and has no intention and no geopolitical reasoning to engage in any aggression against Poland or these countries. Why do you think, if we can voice it, why are they doing this?

Rozoff: There are two points. The North-Atlantic Treaty Organization, which again I have to give you credit, you mentioned in your article, is the largest – in terms of membership, in terms of its military capability, military alliance or bloc in history, it’s one that is growing daily through partnerships and eventually will expand yet further with full members. But it is one which came into existence in 1949 under the guise of protecting Europe from the Soviet menace, so that the Russian Federation being the successor state to the Soviet Union, I suppose it is incumbent on NATO to keep it around as a boogieman to justify military expansion of the United States into Eastern Europe, from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea and eventually if they have their way into the Caspian Sea.

So, the facts speak for themselves. It is painfully evident to me that the U.S. is using an implied if not overtly stated Russian threat as a justification for its military expansion throughout Eastern Europe.

Robles: If there’s no enemy then why do this?

Rozoff: They will make sure that Russia is an enemy. They will do it by baiting it, by intimidating it, by encircling it militarily.

There was an article incidentally today by way of parallel, in Stars and Stripes, the Armed Forces publication in the United States, that quite openly said, you know with a degree of candor you’ll find in a military which you won’t find in a civilian one, that the U.S. is moving sophisticated warplanes to the nations where they have never divulged they are going to be deployed before, including Singapore, Philippines and Australia, in an effort to “surround China.” Those are the exact words in the article of yesterday’s Stars and Stripes.

 And they mentioned that what is going now with the Asia Pacific pivot in surrounding China militarily is comparable to what the U.S. did during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, but I would say, and the facts incontestably back this up, that the United States has done in the post-Cold War, post- Soviet period is surrounding the Russian Federation far more than they ever succeeded in doing during the Cold War.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



4 August, 22:27  

The PNAC, 9-11, "shadow government" and FEMA: Connecting the dots and the big picture

11 сентября 9/11 атака взрыв

© Photo: en.wikipedia.org/upstateNYer/cc-by-sa 3.0

The recent resurgence of information on the existence of FEMA internment camps, revelations of total surveillance by Edward Snowden, and several instruments of total power passed into law by US President Obama, have forced many denizens of the internet and seekers of truth, to take yet another look at what the world is becoming. Although there is still time to fight it appears that there is little we can do to stop the United States and its attempts to turn the world into a complete and total Orwellian security state. For Americans the time to rise up may have passed as plans for a mass uprising are already in place and include prisons that will be able to house millions.

Post 9-11 takeover by the “shadow government”

Recently the existence of FEMA internment camps, or as some are calling them “concentration camps”, once again as has been the case periodically since 9-11 and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, has become the focus of some of the world’s alternative media.

Usually such reports are dismissed and marginalized by the US Government subservient “mainstream” media, and only alternative media or “conspiracy theorists” such as Alex Jones or Jesse Ventura, are the only ones who have the courage to report on the subject.

Since 9-11, when the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City were intentionally imploded in a controlled demolition providing the, for lack of better term, “shadow government”, with the catalyst they needed to start a global war of domination and strip away the rights of Americans, the existence of FEMA “Camps”, plans for the implementation of martial law, and thousands of Draconian and Machiavellian moves by the US Federal Government to strip away the rights and freedoms of Americans all on the basis of security, have been the subject of much debate but even the exposure of massive illegality and the waging of wars of aggression have not brought caused a single individual to account for such egresses.

Silencing those who question 9-11

The shadow government has done everything they can to punish and silence anyone who has questioned the events of 9-11. This first started with the silencing and marginalizing of the entire 9-11 truth movement. A movement based and founded on the simple observation that even a three year old child could have made, namely that if you hit something on the side, it falls over following the same path of force that the impacting object was following, and it does not implode into its own footprint.

Immediately after the events of 9-11 questions began to be raised and everyone from FBI agents to structural engineers got involved voicing very credible, plausible and even concrete scientifically based evidence questioning the official version, sadly everyone was eventually silenced, marginalized and even killed.

One of the most reputable voices who stated that 9-11 was an inside job was a man who died last year, Ted Gunderson, a 30 year veteran of the FBI who was the Los Angeles Bureau Chief and had approximately 800 FBI Agents working under his command. He was also most famous for handling the case of the John F. Kennedy assassination and the death of Marilyn Monroe.

Before his death Mr. Gunderson openly questioned 9-11, gave talks on the issue and also started to investigate the existence of FEMA camps. This was one of the most troubling issues that he fought to get to the truth of until his death and one that has to this day not been properly addressed by the authorities or anyone in power.

Although the 9-11 Commission was the last instrument to silence the populace and their questions on 9-11 there has been no official response to questions about FEMA camps.

The entire post 9-11 paradigm

To understand the entire current post 9-11 world very uncomfortable questions need to be asked and the evidence has shown that it all goes back to Nazi gold, Preston Bush, and 40,000 Nazis who found refuge in the United States after WWII.

Ronald Reagan, his Star wars, Aids and the “cleansing” of America of blacks and homosexuals were just some of the steps of the plan.

Then came along Clinton and he began downsizing the military and closing military bases. After all the Cold War was over and there was no need for such a global military structure. This angered the military industrial complex and along came Monica Lewinsky from the Pentagon to help get rid of Clinton. Clinton fought back and was convinced to allow the military industrial complex and the “shadow government” to invade Yugoslavia as a test to the concept of aggressive war disguised as humanitarian intervention.

The plan worked and to this day no one has had to answer for the aggressive invasion and the breaking up of Yugoslavia nor for the slaughter and genocide of the Serbs.

Post Clinton expansion, the PNAC and Bush

The “shadow government” and the military industrial complex had tasted the “success” of the Yugoslavia operation and were hungry for more so a plan was devised by the Project for the New American Century which would allow for all of their goals to be fulfilled, global expansion, aggressive wars and the subjugation of the American people, something that would require the American Constitution to be, for lack of a better expression, flushed down the toilet.

Their plan required a mass casualty event to serve as a catalyst and to force the US populace into accepting the stripping of their liberties and thus 9-11 was carried out. 9-11 was the catalyst, everything that has happened since has been a part of their plan.

Obama and the continuation of the plan

Towards the end of the second Bush regime the dissent of the American populace was growing, in particular the Liberal and minority populations so the planners had to think of a way to silence the left and those who were questioning their activities. The planners decided that installing a black president who promised change would be the best way to deal with dissent and for the most part it has completely silenced the left and everyone who would otherwise protest, refusing to believe that a black president could be a party to anything nefarious. However this is about installing a “Big Brother” and Obama fits the bill. It is not important that his skin is dark, this is about absolute power and control of the masses, race has no real role, except when it comes to the end game.

FEMA, the Board of Governors and dealing with American dissent

All of the matters listed above have been well-documented and would each require volumes to cover properly, however one area that has been under reported and under investigated is FEMA.

FEMA stands for the Federal Emergency Management Agency and they are one of the bodies that will control the entire United States after the implementation of martial law if such an event is allowed to take place. They will be under the head of the Department of Homeland Security, the newly created Board of Governors and the President of the United States who will become a new imperial power.

The Board of Governors was created under Obama and consists of 10 governors who will rule and take power away from the governors of the states which find themselves in the 10 regions which the United States has already been divided into.

With the implementation of martial law the US military, FEMA, Homeland Security, and the President will control the entire United States and anyone who dissents will be dealt with according to the level of threat that they are determined to pose.

Instruments of control

According to hundreds of reports FEMA has already built from 600 to 800 internment camps in the United States. Many of them have been documented, recorded and filmed, however there has been no admission by the government, nor explanation as to their purpose.

Even when confronted openly, even at the very facilities in question, the response has always been denial. Many of the internment facilities are supposedly already in use and are housing entire families and children, these have been filmed. Yet despite obvious evidence that they are essentially high-security prisons the authorities claim they are family care centers and the like.

Information available from open sources and a large part of the independent investigations by Ten Gunderson have allowed for some insight into the FEMA camps, the fact that they exist and the way they will be used.

It is reported that all of the camps share several chilling characteristics including access to railway infrastructure, high multiple fences with barbed wire pointing inward, huge territories, airplane and/or helicopter access, and the ability to house huge numbers of people including children. One center which is in use was filmed for a conspiracy theory program by Jesse Ventura and Alex Jones and has since been banned but has found a following on the net.

According to conflicting reports there are centers that can house as many as 5 million people. According to Mr. Gunderson evidence one center exists on an island off Alaska that is said to be capable of housing up to five million people and would be impossible to escape from.

Some evidence, which cannot be proven, but is available on the internet points to the installation of gas chambers, the stockpiling of massive numbers of coffins and even a color coding system which calls for those deemed “red” to be killed immediately, those marked “blue” to be reprogrammed, and the least threatening “yellow” to be exterminated or set free as they are useless and there are too many of them.

Legal framework

A bill called HR 645 has set up the legal framework for these camps to be built in the United States and the way in which they may be used is chilling. In the event of martial law entire segments of the population may be interred in the camps.

One reason for the internment may be mass opposition to a US military invasion, for example if the US decides to invade Central America. Another may be a mass-uprising by the black population, or the perceived threat of a possible uprising. In such an event African Americans may be interred.

These are just some of the plans in place and approved by Obama and the current US Government and laid out in HR 645.What is chilling is that all of these plans and instruments are in place and no one has been able to do anything about it.

Other instruments of control

Almost all of the instruments of totalitarian total control are already in place in the United and many have been finalized only recently. For example the right to broadcast state created propaganda to the internal US population, something I wrote about recently. This will allow for an Orwellian Ministry of Truth to be created in the United States.

Edward Snowden has revealed the total surveillance infrastructure already in place and being used under secret directives and in the name of security.

Uncontrolled fusion centers with no accountability have popped up all over America to serve as command and control centers in the event of martial law and to assist in identifying enemies of the state.

Billions of bullets have been ordered by the US Government in preparation for massive unrest and the killing of American citizens, according to reports on the web.

False flag terrorist attacks and the perpetuation of the terrorist threat as a pretext for taking away liberties and freedoms and rights.

The war on journalists and whistle-blowers and the clamp down and monitoring of the press have allowed them to control and deal with anyone who might have access to the truth or who is able to connect the dots.

Drones and other new technologies have allowed for the monitoring, remote assassination and spying on anyone anywhere in the world.

Extra judicial executions, indefinite detention, the cancellation of Habeas Corpus rights and secret off shore prisons have all been in place for years and are to be expanded on as no one has been able to stop these practices.

Total and complete surveillance, facial recognition, advanced profiling, and the ability to accurately predict the movements of the populace allow for the complete control of anyone they choose as a target.

Those with the proof silenced

If you have followed the cases of Julian Assange, Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden and have taken an interest in the number of people with inside knowledge that died mysterious deaths after 9-11, you might come to the conclusion, as I have that Manning, Assange and Snowden have facts that they have not released to the public and that point to collusion by the shadow government into the events of 9-11.

Whether they know it or not, and it is quite possible the three of them are not aware, they most definitely hold key pieces of the puzzle that would unravel the “shadow government” and cause the collapse of the US system as we know it. I would offer that this is the true reason for the way the US Government has gone after these three individuals they way they have. It is not merely some obsession of Obama’s.

Assange may know this and it may be contained in his famous insurance file, which is why he is still alive. Snowden may know these things which is why the US Government has gone so far and begged Russia not to give him a “platform”. Unfortunately we do not know and can only guess but if it is and they have been silent then we can only postulate that the information they have may cause revolution and resulting mass casualties and a complete end to the United States and the so called New World Order.

What can we do?

The only thing that can be done is to remove those who have taken over power and to roll back everything that they have done to usurp the US Constitution and international law. Will or can anyone do this? It is unlikely but we have to keep exposing and questioning and demanding accountability.

The key lies with the American populace, if they rise up and refuse to allow this to continue it can be stopped. But there is no will among the general population to do so. Everyone has been cowed into submission and inactivity by the endless mind controlling flow of propaganda being fed to them by those in power.

I oversimplify here but those are the conclusions I have reached after conducting hundreds of interviews and investigating these matters for over 15 years. There is no real terrorist involved in the “War on Terror” and it is not a war “against” terror or terrorism, it is a war “using terror as a pretext” and the target of that war is you, free thinking and independent citizen of the world.


I invite any official with solid and credible information regarding the hundreds of FEMA camps in the United States, who can show that they are really being built in case of a natural disaster, or who can prove that they do not even exist to contact me and tell their side of the story.


The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be droned at robles@ruvr.ru.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



4 August, 22:25  

FEMA building camps to house millions - Ken Adachi

FEMA building camps to house millions - Ken Adachi

Photo: AFP

Download audio file

Rex 84, or Readiness Exercise 1984, was a secretive scenario and drill developed by the US federal government to suspend the US Constitution, declare martial law and place military commanders in charge of state and local governments and detain large numbers of American citizens who are deemed to be a national security threat in the event the President declares a state of domestic national emergency.

The plan, Rex 84 states that events that might cause such a declaration might be widespread US opposition, for example to a US military invasion abroad, such as if the US were to directly invade Central America, to combat what the government perceived as “subversive activities.”

The plan also authorized the military to direct ordered movements of civilian populations at state and regional levels. Such a plan would call for the building of large facilities to house those dissidents.

In a course of such an event, the responsibility for the detaining and housing US citizens would come under the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Information which has appeared on the Internet has shown that FEMA is building detention facilities all over the US. There are claims on the Internet and in alternative media that over 800 such facilities have been built. However the US government continues to deny the existence of such locations.


Hello. This is John Robles. I’m speaking with Mr. Ken Adachi, the owner and the editor of educate-yourself.org.

Robles: There have been some revelations recently on the Internet about some FEMA internment camps that have been appearing in the US, and the name of Ted Gunderson came up. I believe you were a good friend of his for about 13 years. He was a former FBI bureau chief, and he was with the bureau for about 30 years, I believe. Can you tell us a little bit about Mr. Gunderson and your relationship to him? I’d also like to ask you about these FEMA camps, if possible.

Adachi: Ted Gunderson was with the FBI for about 27 years or so. He retired in 1979 and became a private investigator. I first saw him or heard him in 1998, had a talk to him locally and we became more close with each other in 1999.

I began to share some information with him that I had been acquiring over the years. There had been a lot in his own investigative work, and camps were one area that Ted had talked about, but not the only one that Ted talked about or written articles about, these FEMA detention centers. But he certainly did cover it as one of his areas of investigation.

FEMA was established in 1979 under the Carter Administration, and I believe that in the late 1980s to early 1990s FEMA began building detention centers all over the continent, the US, and Alaska, and Hawaii, and other US possessions around the world.

Ted retired from the FBI in 1979 and became a private investigator from his retirement till the time he passed away in 2011. So, this work we are talking about is Ted’s private investigation on the camps. He was not connected with the FBI at that point. Ted did this as a private investigator, researcher who was digging up information about FEMA camps.

FEMA was not created until 1979. At that time Ted had retired, and when he was with the FBI there was no FEMA. So all of this investigative work – let’s say research work – was done mostly in the 1990s and in the 2000 decade, when most of the detention centers were being built in the US.

Many his articles about the detention centers – Ted said there were well over 800 of them – and some of them have the capacity to hold very large numbers of people, in some cases between 2-5 million people. I’ve read that one camp that is located on an island off Alaska can hold up to 5 million people.

Robles: Five million people off the coast of Alaska? In your opinion, why would they build such a horrendous-sounding place?

Adachi: There is no official explanation for the purpose of building this detention center – and has never been. Even the existence of them has never been – let’s say –made known by the government. Local people have taken photos of these camps. They live in the areas where the construction has taken place, so they have been photographed, etc. So, you’d think all the information has appeared on the Internet.

But because the government has not openly stated anything about these centers at all, there is no justification presented at all. So the people wrote to their Congress people and inquired about this, but got back either a nonsensical reply like ‘we’ve never heard of that so we don’t believe they exist,’ or they were told those were just routine emergency centers pending an event such as when we need bases for earthquake victims and that type of thing.

There is no adequate explanation by the government to this date for the building of these high-security detention centers with very high fences with barbed wire that’s pointed inward.

These so-called “detention centers” are intended to keep people in, in much the way Nazi concentration camps were designed to keep people in. And the reason Ted talked about it is that it’s very disturbing information. What country in the world would build all these detention centers without stating the reason for it?

Robles: You are saying there are 800 of these?

Adachi: I can’t confirm it. I’ve read on the internet that there are over 800 of these centers.

Robles: How well documented is the one you were speaking about, off Alaska?

Adachi: I did read about it from a couple of sources. I’ve seen videos. If you do a YouTube search and fill in “detention centers,” you’ll see videos of people who took videos outside these detention camps.

There’s a very good reason for heightened concern. I don’t know the extent of it. I first learnt about this in the late 90s. There was a former military man, a chaplain. Emettson, I believe, was the name. He is a former army chaplain.

He started to report about these centers. I heard it on a radio show, and I was taken aback. Then later, I started to research the Internet and other people were talking about it. So, if you simply do a Google search and fill in “detention camps,” you will come up with thousands of articles that talk about this and many other cases.

Robles: Very disturbing, what you have said about the camp that can hold 5 million people off Alaska. I believe these are not even five million people in Alaska itself, are there.

Adachi: I’m rather worried, you know, that it’s such a remote location. Imagine, if people get transported to this island in a high-security enclosure, so they have a little chance of getting out. And let’s say they did, where would they go? It’s like a devil’s island.

That’s really bad news for all of us. We are concerned that the alternative purpose for these camps would be to house very large numbers of American citizens who aren’t willing to play ball with the New World Order or takeover of America.

This country is being subverted through subterfuge and deceit into a fascist police state, and not all of us are pleased with those who are trying to subvert and nullify the right guaranteed by the US constitution. That’s why I’m talking to you here. I’m very much interested in preserving the constitutional framework that has characterized the US since its inception.

Robles: Mr. Gunderson was also interested in protecting the constitution.

Adachi: Absolutely! This was his prime motivation – as everyone who understands the great miracle that was the US. And we want to not allow it to pass into oblivion. That’s why we are talking.


 End of Part 1 of the interview

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 



3 August, 13:37 3 

Regarding Snowden and Russia, the US is Kafkaesque – WikiLeaks’ Hrafnsson

Брэдли Мэннинг суд

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

For many people of the world over the Bradley Manning case seems absurd and his persecution by the US Government something difficult to comprehend. He was something that the US Government is afraid of. He was the soldier with a conscience who exposed war crimes being committed by the US forces. The way the US has turned the logic upside down by going after one who exposed crimes, while protecting those who commit crimes, should have the world up in arms.

Only an illegal and illegitimate government would protect criminals, while persecuting and even torturing a moral and upstanding, brave individual who have the courage to stand up and blow the whistle on what he saw.

Rather than being rewarded and seen as a hero, those protecting the criminals have decided to make Mr. Manning an example in order to throw fear into the hearts of anyone who would dare to expose their illegality.

Part 1 of the interview


Robles: What would you characterize the goal of a whistleblower is? Why publish this information? What was the goal of Bradley Manning? Why did Edward Snowden publish the information that he published and allowed that into the public domain?

Hrafnsson: Well, I think Edward Snowden in his own words, by his declaration and the interviews that he has given, has given a very clear example of a whistleblower that acts upon higher ideals.

Edward Snowden was acting upon values that are totally forgotten by the current administration and the political system. Bradley Manning, we see a glimpse of his ideals through the chat log that has been published. And it was obvious that he was simply a man acting upon conscience seeing the abuse of power, seeing war crimes, seeing things that should be revealed to spark a public debate and hopefully lead to some changes.

And that has happened. That has happened as a result of what Bradley Manning did. It has happened as a result of what Snowden has revealed, not just in the U.S. but mainly in other countries around the world.

So, we see a public awakening and that underscores the importance of information that should be out there. That is the fundamental element of a healthy society, to bring about changes with a weapon of information.

Robles: Very well said! There’s been a huge focus now in the world media on Edward Snowden, on the price he is paying, and we know that Julian Assange has been trapped in that Ecuadorian Embassy in the U.K. for over a year now, we see the huge price that Bradley Manning is going to pay, probably, I would say spend the rest of his life in prison. What are some of the sacrifices that whistleblowers make?

Hrafnsson: Well, the history of the most important whistleblowers we have in recent times, including of course Snowden and Manning, simply exempy how much sacrifice these individuals are making. I can name other names. From the U.S. for example Thomas Drake and William Binney both from the NSA, John Kiriakou from the CIA and many others that have stepped forward and blown the whistle on wrongdoing and had to pay an extremely high price.

They are made outcasts from their society, often unemployable, they have to spend all their savings on defense costs, and the list goes on. It is a tremendous sacrifice. Therefore, there is a need for an awakening among the public in every country to create some shield law for whistleblowers and to understand the importance of whistleblowers and their work. Because I do agree with what President Obama said in 2008 that whistleblowers are essential, what they do often can save people’s lives and it can save taxpayers’ dollars – those were the exact words of the Obama Campaign in 2008. I believe in those words, even though the Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama has totally forgotten his promises.

Robles: He has actually launched the biggest, most aggressive and most unbelievable war against whistleblowers, I think in the history of the United States. Why do you think he did such an about-face?

Hrafnsson: Well, that is a good question. And he is obviously under pressure from those in power, those who are corrupting power. And we saw a little glimpse of how that comes forth in the Senate vote just recently in the U.S. where a motion to limit the scope of the NSA spying on the general public was voted down narrowly. There was a split basically in both the Democrats and the Republicans were on either side.

However, there was one very important distinction that was revealed by the journalists who went and investigated it. Those were supporting the NSA and its spying practices were getting far more money from the military industrial complex than the others. So, that should be an indication of the system that is in place.

It is a huge industry and it is outsourced. Just one example. The company that Edward Snowden was working for – Booz Allen Hamilton – has a turnover of $5 billion, mostly through government contracts. So, you can see what kind of interests are at stake. And apparently, money in the coffers of politicians do obviously swing votes.

Robles: Do you see a light at the end of the tunnel?

Hrafnsson: Absolutely! I’m extremely optimistic because I believe that what began in earnest with these massive releases of information in 2010, it started a precedent, it started a trend, it created an understanding and hope to people that you can bypass even, the inerty of the mainstream media, you can get information to the public and an inform the public is of course the basic and fundamental element that you need to found social change.

So, I believe we are seeing a start of a new era which will of course create confident acts and desperate measures that we are now seeing on the part of the Obama Administration and by other governments. But it is a positive reflection because they see the power of information, they see the power of information on the Internet and through the new technological means. And that should be a focus of hope. We need to protect the freedom of the Internet and through that we have a hope to change the world.

Robles: The reaction from Obama, from the U.S. Government to Mr. Snowden has been so extreme. Do you think they are losing a grip on their power and striking out in desperation? Would you characterize that maybe in that manner?

Hrafnsson: I think it is obvious that the extreme reaction to Edward Snowden is an act of desperation. Everything is being done to try to silence and force this individual because the administration and those who are corrupting power understand what kind of precedent he is setting. There will be other Snowdens, I’m certain.

Robles: How much more information does Mr. Snowden have, in your opinion? Do you think it was just the tip of the iceberg?

Hrafnsson: Well, I can only cite the journalists that have been working with him. I read somewhere that Glenn Greenwald had stated that he has material to work on for months to come.

Robles: I’d like to ask you a little bit about Julian Assange and how he is doing, and how the Senate campaign is going, if we could get away from the topic of Manning and Snowden for a minute.

Hrafnsson: Julian has kicked off his campaign in Australia which of course is an exciting new period and he has a real chance of winning a seat in the Senate in Australia.

He is of course working on that, but as well on our WikiLeaks work. It is pretty optimist that he has a good chance to win the seat there and it will create a new challenge for the situation that he is in, the more pressure to find a solution to this ridiculous standoff and the situation he is finding himself under for more than a year now.

Robles: Yes, it is unbelievable that this has gone on this long. Can I also ask you, what’s your opinion, honestly, about the way that the Russian Government has handled Edward Snowden’s case?

Hrafnsson: I think it was not a correct thing to place any restriction upon his admission for an asylum. But now we are getting into geopolitics. I am not a big fan of very few governments around the world. They seem to be having negative elements wherever you look around the world. But it is important to keep in mind, when you look at the criticism from the U.S. pointing at Russia and Putin, that it is their idiotic work that actually left Snowden stranded in Moscow.

So, it is quite absurd and Kafkaesque for them to turn around and criticize Snowden for being in Russia, where they have made it totally impossible for him to carry on onward. And even that absurd and serious measure of forcing down the airplane of President Morales with the help of the allies, and the puppet regimes in Europe, which they now have apologized for in shame, but it shows the extent of what is now the manhunt and pursuit for Edward Snowden.

Robles: I wanted to talk to you when that happened. For me that was unprecedented and unbelievable, I mean this was the president of a sovereign nation. You don’t do that with presidential aircraft, I mean I couldn’t believe it when that happened.

Now, the US has been pressuring the world, they’ve been pressuring Russia every way they possibly can. And they were pressuring Hong Kong and China, I mean they are threatening everybody left and right. What would you say about the independence of the Russian Government in not just handing him over?

Hrafnsson: Of course, there are governments around the world that are not subjects to pressure and have the strength to take an independent decision. We have seen a few good examples that in Latin America and in Russia. I was hoping to see more spine in the European mainland, especially after the criticism by the French and the German governments based on the revelations of Snowden.

Of course, the logical thing would have been to offer him an asylum immediately. But they showed to be spineless and subservient to U.S. interests. But it is comforting though, that even though the governments are behaving in this manner, we see in the European countries, the people being on the opposite side and fully supporting Snowden and recognizing his right to a political asylum, and recognizing him as an important whistleblower who has done a great service to everybody in the world.

Robles: Would you like to talk about Iceland, because Mr. Snowden was planning to go to Iceland as well?

Hrafnsson: I, of course, was disappointed that my own government and my home country did not welcome the words of Snowden where he specifically mentioned Iceland as a place that he could imagine he would get an asylum.

The Icelandic Government hid behind a technicality saying that they couldn’t offer him an asylum unless he was on the Icelandic soil. That of course was the technical reaction from many countries.

We are disappointed but I can assure you that the majority of the people in my home country support Snowden and they support Bradley Manning and Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.

We see a growing support all over the world to these individuals, to the organization and to the ideals that connect all these elements. And it is in line with what I said earlier, this is giving people hope and a belief that things can change. And that is a possibility.

Robles: Take care! Thanks a lot Kristinn, I appreciate it.

Hrafnsson: You’re welcome. Bye bye.

 You were listening to an interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson – the official spokesperson and a number two at the WikiLeaks organization.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

WikileaksBradley Manningtrialinfo leakwhistleblowerEdward SnowdenManning trial: traitor or hero?Politics

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 3

·         Dr Leslie Dean BrownDr Leslie Dean Brown, 3 August, 15:46#

Very interesting interview. Thank you

·         Rhoid SlayerRhoid Slayer, 3 August, 16:18#

"The way the US has turned the logic upside down by going after one who exposed crimes, while protecting those who commit crimes, should have the world up in arms. " this US Citizen agrees

·         Ser_Korz_53Ser_Korz_53, 3 August, 19:31#

Read more: 



3 August, 02:06  

Mysterious man told Snowden to flee from Hong-Kong – Jiang Xiaofeng

Эдвард Сноуден

Photo: RIA Novosti

Download audio file

Edward Snowden has finally left the transit area of Sheremetyevo International Airport in Moscow, finding freedom again after approximately a month. Snowden has been the focus of an unprecedented man hunt by the U.S. and has had the world's media watching and recording his every move. Finally, he maybe will find peace after making revelations that have focused the world's attention once again on the illegality of the U.S. The manhunt that the U.S. launched against Mr. Snowden was unprecedented in scale having threatened countries, even interfered with the flight of a president of a sovereign nation and even more intense than anything the U.S. ever did to capture or find Osama bin Laden. The U.S. are still after Mr. Snowden, even though he's been granted political asylum. When it was reported that Mr. Snowden went to Cuba, Russian journalists and journalists from around the world also went to Cuba. When he left Hong Kong journalists flew to Moscow to try to record the fate of this historic whistleblower. I spoke with one such journalist from Hong Kong.

Xiaofeng Jiang

Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Mr. Xiaofeng Jiang, he's a correspondent for Phoenix Television in Hong Kong.

Robles: Hello, Xiaofeng how are you?

Jiang: Hey, John, how are you doing?

Robles: I'm very well, thank you! You came to Moscow, I believe, with Edward Snowden, or right after he did. Can you tell us a little bit about your impression, about the case and about Moscow and Russia?

Jiang: As you rightly pointed, I'm here to see how Mr. Snowden's case is going and in related service I also want to observe what U.S.-Russian relations are affected by this and of course I'm here to experience Russia's progress and the changes. Because it's my first time to visit Russia, so I'm very personally interested in Russian history. Probably you know that.

I guess, younger generation in China are more interested in America than Russia. They're sort of westernized, but the older generation, like my mom and dad, although they had no opportunity to visit Russia, but they grew up with Communist system and all Soviet related memories, like Soviet movies and Soviet songs.

Sometimes Moscow means as much as Beijing to them. And them seeing my picture sent from here would make them excited to some extent.

As a journalist I feel that news coverage of Russia is not as much as of the United States and so I really hope we can know more about Russia in the future through media outlets, even when Mr. Snowden is not here.

Robles: So, even in Hong Kong there's not much news from Russia there? Is there some sort of Western control of the media in Hong Kong?

Jiang: No, Hong Kong is a society where we enjoy free expression and media is not controlled by the government. Interestingly enough I see that Hong Kong is the place where Mr. Snowden started to blow his whistle and here, Russia, is where Snowden had to face the consequence of whistleblowing. Hong Kong and Moscow are two dots on maps, but they are connected in this regard.

Robles: You've seen the situation in both places with Mr. Snowden. What was the reaction in Hong Kong? What have you seen of the reaction of Russia and how would you compare the two?

Jiang: Well, in Hong Kong people are more interested in how Hong Kong treated Snowden's case, but when the United States asked Hong Kong for Snowden's provisionary arrest, the official response was: “Who exactly do you mean?”

Probably there was a technical mistake involved at that time. The Hong Kong Justice Secretary said that they were not sure who the United States were looking for, because the U.S. government got Snowden's middle name wrong in the documents filed to back its arrest request.

The Secretary said Hong Kong immigration record listed his middle name as Joseph, but the U.S. government used name James in some documents and referred to him only as Edward J Snowden in others. So there were names exactly, and Hong Kong officials did believe that there was a need to clarify. And U.S. authorities also failed to provide Snowden's passport number.

So there were mistakes involved or miscommunication involved in that. As for Hong Kong’s attitude to Snowden's case, people were sort of pro-Snowden at that time. As we know Hong Kong is society where people enjoy free expression and they love to see people like Snowden to blow whistle and let people know what exactly was going on inside the government.

Robles: I see. Do you think that Hong Kong would have sent him or extradited him back to the U.S. if it was for the documents? And do you think that document story was a real story? Maybe they were just coming up with an excuse? Do you think they would have sent him back?

Jiang: In Hong Kong there was a legal system and at that time there was no legal basis for the requested provisional arrest warrant. In absence of such a warrant Hong Kong government has no legal basis for restricting or prohibiting Snowden leaving Hong Kong.

But later we found out that the U.S. officials didn't buy Hong Kong’s explanation and neither do some experts, the decision to let Snowden go has raised tensions, between the U.S. and Hong Kong. And U.S. officials suggested that Beijing might have a hand in letting Snowden leave Hong Kong, which is a former British colony, and now a semi-autonomous region with its own legal system.

But the Hong Kong leaders, I mean, the Executive Chief of Hong Kong said they were following the city's rule of law in processing the U.S. request. As I have personally observed, Hong Kong courts always looked at things very closely and they do not take short cuts. So I believe Hong Kong was treating in a normal way, in a legal way.

Robles: Sure, they followed the Hong Kong laws, right? Even if he had requested asylum, they would have to look at his case, I don't think they could have sent him back anyway.

How do you feel about that U.S. arrogance? Apparently Hong Kong they believe supposed to abide by what Washington says and if, for some reason, if Beijing says something, it's something evil. Doesn't that seem ridiculous to you?

Jiang: Personally, I think that Mr. Snowden has exposed anything that people were thinking of, but they had no concrete proof. But all of a sudden, they see what they were suspicious of was true. And we later found out the United States expressed strong objection to authorities both in Hong Kong and in Beijing at their decision to let Snowden flee.

And I can tell you that a lawyer for Snowden that was in Hong Kong said that he was told to flee Hong Kong by a middle man, claiming to represent the local government, but actually who was probably acting on behalf of Beijing.

And some analysts believe the move was orchestrated by China to avoid a long diplomatic tussle with the United States over his extradition. And later China compromised by deciding to neither grant Snowden protection, nor hand him over, as the U.S. requested.

It's not difficult to imagine handing Snowden over would have been an unpopular move within China.

Robles: Yeah, I think so.

You were listening to an interview with Xiaofeng Jiang, he's a correspondent with Phoenix Television in Hong Kong. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru

 Thanks for listening! And as always I wish you the best.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 


31 July, 21:45 2 

Bradley Manning must not spend another minute in prison – Debra Sweet

Bradley Manning must not spend another minute in prison – Debra Sweet

Photo: AFP

Download audio file

For many people of the world the Bradley Manning case seems absurd and his persecution by the US Government something difficult to comprehend. He was something that the US Government is afraid of. He was the soldier with the conscience who exposed war crimes being committed by the US forces. For many people of the world the Bradley Manning case seems absurd and his persecution by the US Government something difficult to comprehend. He was something that the US Government is afraid of. He was the soldier with the conscience who exposed war crimes being committed by the US forces.

Only an illegal and illegitimate government would protect criminals, while prosecuting and even torturing a moral and upstanding brave individual who have the courage to stand up and blow the whistle on what he saw.

Rather than being rewarded and seen as a hero, those protecting the criminals have decided to make Mr. Manning an example in order to throw fear into the hearts of anyone who would dare to expose their illegality.


Robles: Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Debra Sweet. She is the director of the World Can’t Wait.

Robles: Hello, Debra! How are you?

Sweet: Hi, John!

Robles: Nice to be speaking with you again. I’d like to ask you some questions about the Manning verdict which happened a couple of hours ago. He was acquitted of aiding the enemy but faces 136 years in prison. Were you in the court today?

Sweet: I was in the court, yes. It was a very-very short session. There were 21 counts that the Government filed against Bradley Manning, including, as you’ve mentioned, the most serious, aiding the enemy, which would have potentially been a death penalty offense, or could have carried life in prison.

And the judge found him not guilty of that charge, which is a good thing because the government didn’t show any evidence that he aided the enemy. And he was also found not guilty on providing encrypted video which we still haven’t seen of the U.S. Air Force bombing mission in Afghanistan, in Gharani that led to the deaths of many civilians. He was found not guilty of releasing that video.

But he was found guilty of 19 charges, including five charges that are part of the Espionage Act. And as you’ve mentioned, the maximum he could get at this point is 136 years in prison. Of course there are different amounts for each charge, but there are 19 charges, some of which Bradley has pleaded guilty to, some of the lesser charges.

So, those charges right now add up to a possible 20 years in prison. And the demand of the supporters of Bradley is that when the sentencing phase is over, over the next few weeks, that he be released for time served he should not serve one more second in prison, especially when the people who perpetrated these vast crimes on behalf of the US Government, in Iraq and Afghanistan in particular, are running free and have been promoted. They are running corporations, they are in the US Government, they are teaching in major universities, while Bradley who revealed many of these crimes to the public at great personal risk and with much integrity and personal courage, is facing being locked up for the rest of his life.

Robles: We’ll get back to that in one second. I wanted to ask you what was the mood like in the court room? What happened in the court room, anything that we may not have heard about?

Sweet: For such a historic moment it went by very quickly. The judge is a very hard-boiled character. There is no life or imagination in the court room. The prosecutors are all doing their military jobs. they’re stiffly at attention. And Bradley’s attorneys and him provide some humanity in the court room, but of course there are all of the supporters. We were allowed 30 supporters in the court room today. And we had more than 36 out in the overflow area.

After the four minute proceedings where she announced her verdict and left we were able to meet briefly with Bradley’s Chief Defense Attorney David Coombs where he said that the battle has been won, but the war is certainly not over and immediately turning his attention, right now to the sentencing and fighting legally and politically to make sure that Bradley gets the minimum amount of time in being convicted of these charges, which we all feel are very unjust. But we cheered the work of Mr. Coombs and we’ve sent messages of support, and respect and love to Bradley as people do every day at the end of court.

Robles: Was anyone able to communicate with Bradley? Was that possible?

Sweet: No, it is very difficult. Of course we can write to Bradley, but even though we are sitting as close as ten feet from Bradley, he is kept under orders that he cannot have any contact with us. No eye contact, no acknowledgement of us whatsoever. So, he has to be face forward towards the judge and we never get any interaction with him.

Robles: He can’t even look at the audience?

Sweet: No. He is under orders that he can’t look at us. It is to maintain court order and discipline, I suppose. But really, it is a form of punishment and revenge.

He is in the situation where he may never be out among the public for years or decades and his last times that he is able to be among his peers and people who are thinking and critical of the Government are being very demained. They are out for revenge for what Bradley did.

Robles: I’m sure they want to make him an example for anyone else who would have the audacity to expose their illegality again. Would you agree?

Sweet: Right! And that include journalists. I’ve seen the news coverage since the verdict and there were some journalists who are breathing a sigh of relief because Bradley was not found guilty of aiding the enemy. And of course, that charge has a lot of implications for any journalist because essentially the Government was arguing, with that charge that Bradley, along with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks essentially conspired to get information from the US, post it on the Internet, that would be delivered directly to who they define as the enemy.

And if you interpret it that vaguely and broadly, of course any news gathering operation could be charged with aiding the enemy because, after all, you are putting something out on the Internet and anybody can see it. So, it is very-very dangerous.

And I think it is important for everybody to look at the fact that even though Bradley was not found guilty of that charge, he was still found guilty of five counts of espionage, which are essentially the same situation where information about what the U.S. does, in this case leaked by someone who is whistle blowing with the intention of reveling bad conduct to the public (which is what whistle blowing is) is charged with a crime in the process of doing that. And this again could apply to all journalists.

So, people should be very-very alarmed about this verdict and very much demanding, and joining our demand that Bradley serves not one second more time in prison.

Robles: Back to the war crimes that he exposed. How can the U.S. Government continue to pretend it is legitimate and that there is some sort of rule of law when people have committed war crimes, they are allowed to go free, and the person who exposed those crimes is punished? That would tell me that the criminals are ruling the government.

Sweet: We certainly could pose this in very many different ways. There is a huge contradiction that this Government maintains its rule by spreading a military empire across the globe. Very interesting, and tied into this Eric Holder recently had to write to Russia, to the government saying that it would be fine if Edward Snowden comes back to the U.S., as they guarantee that he won’t have the death penalty and he wouldn’t be tortured because torture is illegal in the US.

Robles: I’ve wrote an answer to that letter for the Voice of Russia, it is on the website. But of course, the U.S. has…

Sweet: But what about Guantanamo and the Baghram, and the black sites spread all over the world?

Robles: Yes!

Sweet: In Iraq, six years before Bradley Manning was stationed there and revealed some of these crimes that have happened, there was a wide abuse of detainees that was completely without oversight where the Joint Special Operations Command, which is still in existence, and increasingly helps the United States plans to fight wars, through secret, so-called black operations.

This is john Robles, you were listening to an interview with Debra Sweet, the Director of the World can’t Wait. Thank you very much for listening and I wish the best, wherever you may be!

Visit our website in the near future for part 2 of this interview.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles

USWikileaksBradley Manningtrialinfo leakwhistleblowerManning trial: traitor or hero?World

·         Share:




·         submit to reddit

·         http://voiceofrussia.com/img/addthis-ico.png

Сomments 2

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 31 July, 22:21#

Weren't Hitler's goons prosecuted at Nuremberg for blindly following Nazi orders? So Manning is being punished for showing he has a conscience? Morals and ethics don't seem to count any longer. Yanks...stop preaching to the world and take a very close look at yourselves.

·         BillyBilly, 2 August, 02:45#

"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act"....George Orwell.
Read more: 



31 July, 16:07  

Manning verdict shows we’re entering a dark era – WikiLeaks’ Hrafnsson

Manning verdict shows we’re entering a dark era – WikiLeaks’ Hrafnsson

Photo: AFP

Download audio file

For many people the world over the Bradley Manning case seems absurd and his prosecution by the U.S. government - something difficult to comprehend. He was something that the U.S. government is afraid of, he was a soldier with a conscience who exposed war crimes being committed by U.S. forces. The way the U.S. has turned logic upside down by going after one who exposed crimes while protecting those who commit crimes should have the world up in arms. Only an illegal and illegitimate government would protect criminals while prosecuting and even torturing a moral and upstanding, brave individual who had the courage to stand up and blow the whistle on what he saw. Rather than being rewarded and seen as a hero those protecting the criminals have decided to make Mr. Manning an example in order to throw fear into the hearts of anyone who would dare to expose their illegality.


Robles: Hello, Kristinn!

Hrafnsson: Hello, John!

Robles: Nice to be speaking with you again. I wish it was under better circumstances, but... We're getting a lot of commentary: WikiLeaks said this, WikiLeaks said that, about Bradley Manning's verdict today. What's your position? What's WikiLeaks' position? And what statement can you make on this?

Hrafnsson: Well, there's a lot of emphasis now today on the fact that Bradley Manning was not convicted on the more serious charge of aiding the enemy, and that seems to be creating a lot of joy and of course it is a relief for not only supporters of Bradley Manning, but supporters of journalism all around the world, because if that would have been a base for conviction, it'd mean the most serious blow to journalism in recent times.

So it was an outrageous charge and it should have been thrown out of court much earlier, but keep in mind that Bradley Manning is found guilty of, on the basis of 19 offences and he could face a maximum prison sentence of 136 years.

Of course, the sentencing hearing will start tomorrow and I'm extremely pessimistic about the outcome of that. This case has been extremely reluctant to take into account anything that explains the higher ideals and the motives behind what Bradley Manning did.

He has been stripped of the opportunity to be portrayed as truly a whistleblower which of course he is.

There are of course a lot of abnormalities in the trial. It was closed off partly, limited journalists could attend, the journalists who did attend were reporting that they were intimidated, the prosecution was allowed to alter the charges on the last day of the trial and on top of all of that, the judge in the hearing for some strange reason got promoted to a higher court in the middle of the trial.

So it doesn't leave any room for big optimism for the outcome of the sentencing hearing and I'm pessimistic when I'm looking forward of that, looking to that. I think that Bradley Manning will get a very-very high sentence. And keep in mind that this is a historic dark day for whistleblowers and journalists, because never before, except in one minor case, has a whistleblower been charged and then convicted under the Espionage Act of 1917.

This is of course, I think, is a dangerous precedent, and of course is in line with the ongoing persecution of whistleblowers by the Obama administration, persecution that extends over to the journalistic community, not just against WikiLeaks, but against the mainstream media journalism, now with the apprehension of phone records from journalists and an attempt to brand journalists like James Rosen at the Fox News, from the New York Times as a co-conspirator in a similar case, involving a leak of information.

So we're entering a dark era and there's no room for great joy, even though this aiding the enemy charge was thrown out.

Robles: Right. A quote we have from WikiLeaks says that the verdict is “dangerous national security extremism”. Would you like to elaborate?

Hrafnsson: It is totally in line, I mentioned earlier the Obama's war on whistleblowers which is of course totally contrary to what he promised when he was fighting to become president in 2008. He promised to protect the whistleblowers and said that whistleblowers should be encouraged, not stifled and he's now and while he is in office has done exactly the opposite and gone after whistleblowers in an extreme fashion that has no precedent in the history of the country.

This is of course at the same time when we see an absurd escalation in the secrecy of the state. The numbers of documents being classified in a year has eight-folded now in the last decade. All this put together, we see an extremely dark period for journalists and for whistleblowers.

The interesting thing is though that even though this has been known for some time, it is not stopping whistleblowers. It is simply the fact that we see courage being contagious and I'm quite certain that this fight, this conviction and sentencing of Bradley Manning and the way he was treated, more whistleblowers will step forward.

We saw the example of Edward Snowden, extremely important whistleblower, and I'm convinced that there are enough honest courageous people with conscience who have beliefs in higher ideals and who will step forward revealing information about wrongdoing to the public.

Robles: You commented on a court case and I think many of the things you mentioned in a normal system would have been reasons for at least a retrial, if not to have the case completely thrown out. How would you characterize the court proceedings in the Manning case? Would say it's a legitimate process?

Hrafnsson: In my mind, after having read through the transcripts from the trials and read the reports from journalists who have been sitting in in the proceedings. It is an absolutely show trial. It has nothing to do with justice at all. There are so many abnormalities there that should raise an eyebrow of any individual that is interested in a healthy legal system. And anything that happened in that trial, including the outcome, is still another example why Edward Snowden did the right thing, not to place his trust in the U.S. justice system.

Robles: I agree 100% with you. You mentioned the word justice. I'd like to get your views on the fact that no one, as far as I know, to this date has been prosecuted for the crimes that Bradley Manning exposed. Yet he has been prosecuted as a criminal since day 1. How can the U.S. government continue to pretend it's a legitimate and legal entity if it will not prosecute people for things like war crimes?

Hrafnsson: Well, that's a good question. And we see an example of many war crimes that were exposed in the WikiLeaks, material that was released in 2010 and 2011. It is worrying that people committing those crimes have not been held accountable for it.

It undermines, of course, the entire façade by the U.S. government in trying to maintain a position that there are some higher ideals embroiled in their community, and it makes it quite hypocritical to try to teach other nations anything about justice, human rights and freedom of speech.

Robles: And rule of law, I think.

You were listening to the first part of an interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson, the official spokesperson for the WikiLeaks organization. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru

Thanks for listening! And, as always, I wish you the best wherever you may be! Stay with us.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 


30 July, 22:59  

Obama is completely useless to black America – Glen Ford

People demonstrate in suppport of slained teen Trayvon Martin

People demonstrate in suppport of slained teen Trayvon Martin

Photo: AFP

Download audio file

The shooting and killing of Trayvon Martin and the ensuing acquittal of George Zimmerman was not just a tragedy, not just a crime, but a gross insult to the dignity of black people. With people who have been in solitary confinement for up to 40 years and one in eight prison inmates in the world being a black American, the United States attempts to fulfill the imperative of making the country a white country, by banishing and burying blacks in the prison system. More and more African Americans are realizing that for them, Obama is absolutely useless, and yet he's the president. Glen Ford spoke to the VoR’s John Robles about these matters and more in the third part of an almost one hour interview he was gracious enough to give the VoR.

This is John Robles. You're listening to an interview with Glen Ford, the Executive Editor of Black Agenda Report. You can find the previous parts to this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru


Robles: In Europe, in Russia people can't believe the extreme sentences people get for… like the Three Strikes Law you get in California, if you steal a Snickers bar three times in a row, you get life in prison. People can't believe that. What is with that?

Ford: Of course, it makes no sense. It makes no sense in terms of sociology or criminology. It only makes sense if you understand what the intent of the system is and the white public that supports the system.

Mass black incarceration is designed to purge the country to the extent possible of black people. There is this imperative to make this a white men's country, as it was conceived of by the white settlers. And that imperative remains.

So it's not about rehabilitation, it's not even about punishment. It's about removing these black folks from the country or from society and putting them as far away as possible for as long as possible. And it is such an evil imperative!

It is what explains the fact that on any given day in the United States 80,000 people, prison-inmates, are in solitary confinement. That's the population of a small city! And many of these people have been in solitary confinement for 10 years, some 20 years! There are people who have been in solitary confinement for almost 40 years. The barbarity of that I'm sure is unthinkable everywhere.

Robles: That's considered torture.

Ford: It's considered torture, if it's more than 15 days. When we're talking about 10, 20, 30 and 40 years, we're talking about a system and society that wants to bury, banish and bury forever these types of people, because you can't apply that kind of punishment to any individual with justification. There has to be some kind of type that you're trying to eliminate. And we know what that type is. It's the type that Trayvon Martin represented to George Zimmerman.

Robles: President Obama, he got his wish to indefinitely detain US citizens anywhere in the world in military prisons. Do you see that transferring in the not so distant future onto the civilian population?

Ford: This regime has declared war against the world. And you can't declare war against the world and somehow leave your own large population out of the war. After all, they're the closest ones to you.

The federal courts upholding preventive detention and preventive detention by the military, the judges went through this farce, in that they acted as if they believed the president's and Eric Holder's promise that he would not enforce the law in ways that violated Posse Comitatus Statutes.

Robles: No, come on! I know you don't believe that.

Ford: Who should believe it? If you did not have the intention of having the option of using the military as police force, you could easily have written the legislation in ways that prohibited it.

Robles: Sure, he could have vetoed it!

Ford: But this bill was written by a Democratic Senator, Levin – who says himself that he was working under orders from the White House – and by John McCain, the Republican.

So it's a bipartisan bill speaking for both parties, purposely worded, so that if the president chooses he can use the military. He simply promises, and has signed a paper that is ---

Robles: A signing statement.

Ford: A signing statement, which doesn't even make him, that he's not even beholden to because he can sign another statement that lets him ---

Robles: It means nothing, it's just ---

Ford: that negates the first one, it means nothing legally. But what's important here is that they put it into law, so that they could use it when they see fit, so they certainly see it as a possibility that they would use the military as a police force.

Robles: What would you say to young black men that look like Trayvon Martin?

Ford: Young black men were challenged and confronted that reality back in the 1960s and they formed what were essentially cop watches.

People today are proposing that in black communities across the nation, that cop watches be formed, kind of like real community watches, like Zimmerman's community watch which was designed to surveil black people, but community watches that are designed to make sure that people do not abuse members of the community.

Well, that's what the Black Panther Party started off as in 1966. It was a cop watch and it was a logical response to a police force in Oakland, California which acted just like all the other police forces, that were violating the rights and taking the lives of the same demographic that Trayvon Martin was a part of. If it was correct then, and I believe it was and that is why I was a member of the party, it is correct now.

Robles: I'd like to share with you a little incident just to highlight the racism in the United States and also some of my Russian friends, they don't believe this could have happened, but I was 17 years old, I was working in a fast food restaurant. I was riding my motorbike home and the headlight burned out. And it was dusk, my friends were in their car and I was following them home. And these cops stopped me, all of a sudden there were three cop cars, we had to drive through like this little white suburb section to get to my place. And this policeman pulls out like this 3.57 long barrel Magnum and he points it at my head and he tells me if I even look the wrong way, he'll blow my hardware off.

Ford: Effing head off. That's rather routine and it is considered to be reasonable conduct, if you are a member of that inherently dangerous class.

We have this whole mythology in the United States that the police are putting their lives on the line every day because they patrol in black communities. White people seem to think that proximity to black people, whether voluntary or involuntary, is taking your life into your hands. That is the common worldview of most people in this country.

So that cop pulled out that weapon and brandished it and threatened you with it, as happens thousands of times a night in the United States, because not only could he get away with it, but his community would applaud him for doing so.

These people are not thought of as being ogres and bullies and folks who should be drummed out of the force. They are romanticized for their brutality in popular television shows.

Robles: Sure, sure.

Ford: You see them, I'm sure, in Russia.

Robles: Do you see any hope for the future here and what do we need to do to or is there anything we can do to set things right?