JAR2 Custom Banner John Lenin

Jar2

Articles and Interviews by John Robles From September 02, 2013 to  October 25, 2013

 Under COnstruction Page Under Construction

"When government does not hear truth, it is a sign of conspiracy" - David Shayler

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/09/02/04/220px-David_Shayler_Axis_for_Peace_2005-11-18.jpg Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zidan holds up copies of foreign newspapers reporting the kidnapping of Abu Anas al-Libi by US special forces

Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zidan holds up copies of foreign newspapers reporting the kidnapping of Abu Anas al-Libi by US special forces

Download audio file  25 October, 19:33   Part 1     Moved to David Shayler Page

The situation surrounding the recent rendition of Libyan "terrorist" Al-Libi from Libya has raised many questions worldwide and many have cited it as an example of "American Exceptionalism", which is merely an excuse to ignore international law. Actions such as these have characterized the paradigm that has existed worldwide since 9-11. The real truth is beginning to come out and can be largely credited to Hacktivists, who access information that should be known by the people in the interest of the public good. Former MI5 whistleblower David Shayler gave an interview to the Voice of Russia and stated those things and more, and gave his unique perspective on issues affecting all of us today. Mr. Shayler was marginalized by British Security for exposing illegality yet he has had the strength to continue fighting to get the truth to the people in order to attempt to "correct" the world.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

To End the US Empire There Must Be No Hegemony and Their Accountability Must Be Forced

John Anthony Robles II

By John Robles,  25 October, 03:16

The United States is growing ever more desperate in the Middle East and around the world as it is becoming increasingly clearer with each passing day, no matter how US officials attempt to portray their country as in control and relevant, that things have changed and the US is a “world superpower” in decline. Unfortunately that decline is not going to be a pretty one, especially for the Washington elites and the geopolitical architects that have brought upon the world the current war-on-terror-hyper-security-state-paradigm. These “planners” may have to finally account for the way they have run roughshod over international laws and norms and there is a danger they may lash out in irrational ways.

A key clue to unraveling the web of lies around 9-11

As I wrote when the story broke, the revelations that Saudi Arabia, while admitting full control of Al-Qaeda and terrorist groups and with the full backing of the United States, attempted to first bribe, then threaten the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and the Russian people with terrorist acts at the Sochi Olympics, were important keys into solving who the real architects of the entire “War on Terror” paradigm are. It is now almost perfectly clear who brought down the World Trade Center and who is responsible for the state of endless war and illegality that the peace-loving-world has been subject to since September 10, 2001.

The planners are clearly known but the executors have always been a mystery. A mountain of evidence exists that 9-11 was a joint US/Saudi/Israeli effort but now with the revelations that the Saudis control US created Al-Qaeda, and the long record of “cooperation” between (wants-to-be-king) Prince Bandar and the Bush family, it has become unquestionable that the Saudi role has been much greater than was once believed.

A blueprint for global American hegemony

To truly understand 9-11 one must first study the Project for a New American Century and a September 2000 reporttitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources for a New Century” which the official website of the North Korean Government, has been prominently hosting, since it was released.

The document is the actual working plan for global American hegemony concocted by the neo-conservative authors, chiefly Dick Cheney, from what was named the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). The People’s Republic of Korea understood from the very beginning that the document was a blueprint. They knew it was being used by the US to, in effect, take over the world.

The PNAC plan, in plain black and white required a “… new Pearl Harbor ....” as a catalyst in order to be implemented and carried out. That “catalyst” was 9-11.

The NYET(s) heard around the world

It is now become clearer, millions of annihilated shattered lives later, that their plan has failed. Forcing the world into submission will never work the end of the “War on Terror” is nigh.

As I have repeated in the recent past, that end was marked, when President Vladimir Putin stated to Saudi Prince Bandar one word: NYET. The word of course means no in Russian and President Putin said NO we will not be bribed and NO we will not be threatened. The impunity with which Bandar threatened the President of the biggest country in the world and a nuclear power clearly shows the arrogance and self-arrogated “above-the-law” status held by the West and its allies.

That was the NYET heard around the world and marked the end to the arrogant egregiously illegal and relentless drive towards the terrorist backed domination of the entire planet by the United States and its allies.

The next one was when Russia said NO to an invasion of Syria.

The end of empire

There comes a point when any nefarious and evil imperialist empire, no matter how it attempts to desperately hold on to its domination over those it controls and has power over, has to collapse and implode into a what it started as or as most often in the case with the grandest of scales, disappear entirely. And that point may have come for the United States of America and it is well aware of it.

The signs are there, and they have been for some time. Signs that we are truly seeing the end of Western Civilization as it has come to be known.

From covert to open subversion by force

The move from conducting its actions under the pretense of abiding by international laws and norms, while conducting worldwide subversive activities aimed at undermining the states of the world in order to make them pliable to the US will in secret, to one of openly acting with brazen impunity, military force and illegality, while to western geopolitical planners and architects might have seemed like a way to cement their own “exceptionalism”, in fact it was in and of itself a sign and a forbearer of the end times. No such strategy would ever work when a country with only 4% of the population wants to force the other 96% into submission. Nazi Germany learned that lesson, the PNAC obviously did not.

World War III as an instrument for domination

More than two decades ago experts predicted that World War III would either start in the Middle East or in the Russian Caucuses and this almost occurred last month in Syria. The simple fact that invading Syria under any pretext would spark a regional conflagration leading to a global one should raise serious questions as to the motivations of any state which is pushing for war in the region or any state which is actively supporting and even “admittedly” controlling terrorist groups and formations which are destabilizing the area. Is World War III the end goal that the West and its allies were seeking? Many experts around the world are raising this question.

Ongoing threat

Is the threat of an aggressive attack by the United States on the Arab Republic of Syria past and over? On the contrary as the recent meeting of the “Friends of Syria” has shown (a misnomer if there ever was one) as the language coming from those “friends” has now once again moved into “military intervention” rhetoric.

Complete lack of credibility and total illegality

In light of their “hidden agenda” (destruction of states to obtain control), any move made by the United States and its allies with regard to Syria must be viewed with extreme suspicion and caution given the proven track record and willingness to ignore international law and launch unilateral wars of aggression.

Any country which also maintains an illegal offshore prison and continues to hold hundreds, if not thousands, indefinitely and without charge or trial must also be questioned when attempting to push a doctrine of superiority in rule of law.

If we go further and add the massive spying by the US (even on staunch allies) the daily war crimes and extra judicial assassinations and the continued infringement on the sovereignty of nations, to the crippled economy (one controlled by the military industrial complex) and you have a very dangerous mix indeed.

Fractured “coalition of the willing”

Along with Israel, Saudi Arabia was one of the countries that had documented ties to the events of 9-11. It is also one that has counted on, if not orchestrated the US policies of military interventionism in the Middle East to bring about its own regional goals.

This close partnership between Saudi Arabia (which has admitted to controlling Al-Qaeda and even Chechen terrorists), Israel, Al-Qaeda themselves and the United States is now beginning to show fractures.

Israel is attempting to maintain its own agenda, Saudi Arabia has said its relationship with the US has taken a turn for the worse, and Al-Qaeda is beginning to pursue their own agenda, in Libya for example. Whether these fractures are window dressing or real remains to be seen.

Saudi not getting its share of the spoils?

After the debacle of Saudi Prince Bandar “Bush” threatening President Putin and the ensuing showdown over Syria, Saudi Arabia is beginning to show its true role in the grand scheme of things. And they are not happy. It is like watching a “falling out of thieves” fighting over the spoils.

Saudi Arabia has refused a coveted rotating spot on the United Nations Security Council, because an invasion on Syria was not carried out as it had apparently been promised.

If reports are true that it was Saudi Arabia and their Al-Qaeda controlled elements who orchestrated the heinous chemical weapons attack outside of Damascus, then it is also understandable why Saudi Arabia has now stated that its relationship with the United States will change dramatically.

Convenience of dealing with war lords

If it was not clear before it should be clear now, to anyone with even a passing interest in the situation in the Middle East, in light of the recent reports coming out of Libya, statements by President Bashar Al-Assad, the situation in Afghanistan, the strange flip-flop of affairs in Egypt and the continuing quagmire in Iraq and other states, that destabilization of the Middle East was the goal all along.

From a business and resource stand point it makes sense. Shatter the cou8ntry and then do “business” with little fiefdoms that pop up. It was the plan for Russia (ala Brzhinsky) and the oldest strategy in the book “Divide and Conquer”, no governments to deal with, no central banks to change oil trade currencies, no treaties or bothersome energy agreements, just pay some cash and take what you wish.

“Humanitarian” genocide or just business as usual?

Any pretense of “humanitarianism” and “democracy” by the West have long ago lost their credibility. Libya is in a state of anarchy, being now “owned” by the same fanatical cannibal terrorists that want to own Syria, Afghanistan is shattered, Iraq is shattered, Egypt is in a shambles, and the same awaits the rest of the region, in particular Iran, if Syria is allowed to fall. But business continues; the opium continues to flow out of Afghanistan, oil out of Iraq and Libya, however unlike before now it is almost flowing completely unhindered without bothersome agreements and controls, and the weapons trade is flourishing beyond the dreams of the US military industrial complex.

War and more war and endless spying

The world is tired as are the American people, of endless pointless war which has devastated their economy, one that was in the black when George Bush took office the first time, and it appears the US has nothing else to offer to the world. Not entirely true there is the internet and the cool gadgets that we now know are only tools to spy on us and facilitate even more US war and control.

The world is a complicated place

Interlacing aggressive war with historic illegality, support for terrorist elements, unprecedented global military buildup, massive spying programs and endless manipulation, may have seemed like a great strategy to the nefarious geopolitical strategists behind the current paradigm, and it may have worked, but the world is complicated place, as one western geopolitical architect named Brzhinsky recently stated.

Yes the world is complicated place, especially for 1% of 4% of the world’s population, when they want to subjugate it, enslave it and possess global hegemony, over peoples and states that they simply know almost nothing about. Complicated? Yes! As the PNAC engineers must be saying: there are all those pesky humans on it!

Operation: vigilance for peace

We must all be vigilant that the wounded beast does not begin to strike out in desperation and all talk by that country, about terrorism, invasion pretexts and intelligence must be viewed with the greatest of suspicion. We know, thanks to Bandar Bush who really controls Al-Qaeda and when the truth comes out (if it ever does) about who actually killed 426 children from Latakia, Syria as a pretext for war, we will then be closer to knowing the whole story. And believe me, it will not be pretty.

The opinions and views expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com. 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

The Invasion of Libya Was an Orchestrated and Pre-Planned Aggressive Attack – Mr. and Mrs. Moriarty

Libyan invasion was planned in advance – Mr. and Mrs. Moriarty

Download audio file  24 October, 10:23 

During the US/NATO invasion of Libya there were many people on the ground who survived and witnessed the true horrors of the events taking place in that country. Due to eyewitness accounts such as those of James and JoAnne Moriarty, who gave an exclusive interview to the Voice of Russia, a picture has emerged of a campaign where al-Qaeda invaded Libya and was provided air support by the US/NATO. If this is true it goes against all of the accepted norms of international law and conduct. In effect paid non-state mercenaries staging an illegal invasion with air support from the West to make the resources available.

Robles: Hello, Sir, and hello, Ma'am. How are you this evening?

Moriartys: Fine. Thank you so much for having us in your program.

Robles: Thank you for agreeing to speak with me. I've heard some disturbing reports from sources in Libya regarding a campaign to assassinate and murder officers who were trained in Russia. How far-fetched does that sound to you? Do you think that's true?

James Moriarity: You are 100% correct. When you have a group of fundamentalist radical psychopathic murderous Islamists trying to control the country of Libya, of course, any possible group that would confront them is a threat. So they don't want to happen in Libya, what happened in Egypt, so they are systematically killing every officer in Libya.

Robles: All the officers?

James Moriarity: And most of them were trained in Russia..and the really quality officers in Libya were trained in Russia. As well as Muammar Gaddafi's sons, and he was a fantastic military tactician.

So they are killing these officers. Every day they go to prayers and when they step out they are murdered, they are assassinated and this is a sustained effort, it happens every day.

I think they have killed almost 200 military officers, by now, in the last few weeks, and they are doing that, and that's so that they can try to hold their position. And of course the country is in total anarchy, it's a failed state. And they have no food, water, nor the normal accouterments that are required for human existence. So, the people are unhappy, there are 2 million Libyans in the exile, there are only 3 million Libyans left in the country and they have to stay locked in their homes every time. And they are hungry now.

All of the things that happen when you have a bunch of radicals, that are not considering the needs of the people.

Robles: Now, who is behind all these murders?

JoAnne Moriarity: Libya does not support any radical Islamists. They were not ever allowed in Libya, and that's why NATO joined hands with Abdelhakim Belhadj and these other radical Islamist, Al-Hasidi and some of the other ones that were actually fighting the United States in Afghanistan.

There is the Misrata mafia that are Turkish, they come from Turkey. They joined hands with these people, because the Libyan people were not against their own government.

So you have five percent of the people who are radical Islamists and NATO took over Libya for them and handed it to them.

So you have 2 million in exile, 3 million living in fear everyday because you have armed gangs of militia, what they call "militia" but they are armed gangs of extremists. They walk the streets with guns and they attack periodically.

In fact today we heard, there was an attack of the militias, of these extremists, of the Al-Zawia extremist militia, they attacked Ajulet tribe and the Ajulet tribe actually beat them this time. They burned their cars and beat them, so that Libyan people begin to fight back. This is not their normal lifestyle, they don't like the extremists. They call them "rubbish people".

Robles: Two important questions: either of you if you could answer them, one; who is behind this systematic killing of Russian trained and other officers, and two; can you tell us anything you know about Muammar Gaddafi's widow? She contacted the Voice of Russia just yesterday, with a plea to the international community to investigate the murder. What can you tell us about the murder, the widow and who is behind these killings?

James Moriarity: First of all, let me address the first question: Libya is now owned by al-Qaeda, Ansar Al-Sharia and every other radical Islamist group. They change their names every day, but that's who the United States uses as their attack force, their "junkyard dog" if you would. And what happened in Libya: Libya was such a rich country, there was such a small population, that when the United States paid for 250,000 radical Islamists to be brought into Libya as mercenaries, these mercenaries were well-trained, they are psychopaths, they would kill, rape, torture murder everybody, and now those guys own the country, and they told the United States to go "pound sand", "we now own this country, we have all the resources of the country, we have all the money to commit our type of Jihad worldwide".

And so the junkyard dog is now biting the hand of the United States and those are the guys that are committing these heinous acts. They call themselves militias, but they are trying to legitimatize their psychopathy. They are murders. They are not militia, they are murders.

They are jockeying for position, jockeying for control. And they are fighting each other and they are going through all these machinations. And in the meantime there is no base of population in Libya that is able to defend themselves.

So if you can imagine the old western era, the old United States West where there were gangs of outlaws: they would ride into a town, shoot everybody up, they'd rape the women and kill the kids and take whatever they want and ride out. That's Libya and that's from one end of Libya to the other.

And that is "thank you very much", to the United States for directing NATO to bring in these radical Islamists psychopaths. And to call them Muslims is a misnomer, because they have nothing to do with the Muslim religion.

We know lots of good Muslims and Muslims don't drink, they don't do drugs, they don't rape women and they don't kill women and they don't cut their breasts off, they don't chop off heads. These are only these psychopathic mercenaries of the United States that are doing this.

And the appeal to the international humanitarian organizations worldwide, has been going on since February of 2011. And the latest appeal from Gaddafi's widow is another appeal to Russia, because Russia, you know all of us, that are trying to be independent in this, we prayed that Russia and China would step in and veto those original orders from the UN and NATO to invade Libya and, of course, a no-fly zone was just an absolute joke. They went in and started blowing the country up.

If the people don't know it, there were 60,000 sorties committed by the UN and NATO into Libya. That was more than in the entire span of WWII combined for a population of five and a half million and half a million Libyans were killed or are missing. Libya is a really tight society and if any of those Libyans were alive, I can promise, they would be contacting their families.

So in our calculations, there were half a million Libyans killed, out of five and a half million, under the auspices of protecting the civilians. Please! It was a joke, it was just terrible. And Russia has stepped forward in Syria and they have drawn a line and they have said: "We aren't going to allow it to happen".

The world needs to realize that there is an absolute radical One World Order Government controlling the United States. and their agenda is to knock off country after country after country, cause complete disruption and make slaves out of everybody.

And the latest appeal to try to have a humanitarian organization go back and investigate the assassination of Gaddafi should be done. But you know, in the laws of the United States (JoAnne and I are US citizens), in the laws of the United States, no one, and I am talking about a government official all the way down to a guy driving a taxi, no one, is allowed to propagate insurrection and absolutely not allowed to talk about the assassination of a world leader.

Yet we had Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and all these other politicians of the United States asking for the assassination of Gaddafi. Those were criminal acts by government officials of the United States.

And we are business people. So this is such a shocking thing for us to be involved in, in the first place. But second, to see it happen and to be in Libya and to be subjected to bombing raids and to see these poor families, where their sons were having their heads cut off and they were being to0ld by the media that these beheadings and this cannibalism were being conducted by Gaddafi's troops, which is just not true.

JoAnne and I were there, we are eye-witnesses, we saw it. We videotaped over 200 Gbs of the information and now JoAnne and I are targeted individuals by the US government, we've been blacklisted. We can't do any business, they bankrupted us they've exploited us to the point that we have nothing but our story.

And we have a great business, we rejuvenate oil wells all over the world. We rejuvenated more than 7,000 oil wells with less than a hundred failures. We cleaned up pipelines, sludge pits, we have a great product. They've destroyed our business.

And the great hope for the world today is really the country where you are sitting right now. Russia needs to keep a strong back and a strong heart and try to counteract this terrible influence.

Robles: You said, "Russia is the great hope of the world right now"?

James Moriarity: I think so.

Robles: I'd like to go back a little bit. You said there were 250,000 of these Islamic psychopaths, that were sent in there? 250,000?

James Moriarity: Yes, that's how many were brought in by the US, because they are the mercenaries. There were no Libyans who wanted to fight their government. There were about 5% radicals, there may have been another 10 to 15% that didn't like their government much, but there were not enough people in Libya that wanted to fight the government, so they bring in all these radicals and they started flowing in the country in 2010. And this was all planned.

You can go back to Dennis Kucinich and he outed the United States, France and England, Conressman Dennis Kucinich, he brought forward copies of the war games that were planned, the invasion of Libya, in 2010. And those war games had been planned for many, many years in advance. And the date of the takeover of Libya was set to be March 16th 2011, it happened a month before that. This was all planned in advance.

This was no popular uprising, this was nothing but a coup d’état, it was a takeover of the government, and the reason for it was gold-backed Dinars, the African Bank, a gold backed currency for the continent of Africa would have destroyed the paper bankers, they couldn't allow that to happen, and therefore they wanted to kill Gaddafi and overthrow government.

The United States wanted to have AFRICOM as a unit, so they could keep China away from the natural resources of Africa. Libya South Africa and half a dozen other countries would not sign on to AFRICOM, which is the military control of Africa by the United States, so the United States wanted to kill Gaddafi for that reason.

And the third thing was Gaddafi, on behalf of the African countries, had brought forward a large and major lawsuit in international court for all the broken treaties and violations of the treaties that all the countries that had invaded Africa, taken them over for a century, and that law suit totaled more than $ 7 trillion and the attorney said it had teeth.

Therefore France and England and Germany and Italy and Turkey and all these other countries that had been invaders, and had been raiding Africa they7 joined hands to throw Libya out.

So there were three reasons. It had nothing to do with oil and gas. The fact that Libya had $500 billion in cash or cash equivalents in the Feb or in Euro, Libya had another $39 billion in cash in country had 179 tons of gold and 2,000 tons of silver, etc., etc., etc., means that all these invading countries could share the spoils.

Robles: There was one thing you didn't mention, but I know this was a key moment also in Iraq the day, I think that was 9 hours before Iraq was invaded, Saddam Hussein had decided to change oil trade into the Euro. Now, Muammar Gaddafi, if you recall, he was a friend to the UK and to the United States and then he decided to do the same thing right before they invaded the country. And now the oil trade has now been pegged at the dollar again and all trade has been done in the dollar out of Libya, I don't know if you knew that..

JoAnne Moriarity: It's absolutely the truth. I mean, these are the Zionists, these are the bankers that control the world, the paper bankers, and it's really a crime that their attitude is: this is "acceptable collateral damage", because they are not going to have their power and their control changed to the good of any country or any person.

They're going to kill or destroy anything that get in their way. It's really heinous. And they did it.

The thing about Gaddafi was that he had stepped down in 2006, he wasn't even in control of that country. It was required by the treaty of 2006 that they sign with the United States, with Condoleezza Rice. He was required to step down and he did it. It's interesting that it never came up. They blamed everything on him. And that was not true. Media is the propaganda machine.

Robles: James and Joanne, you would consider yourselves to be patriots, wouldn't you?

JoAnne Moriarity: Oh yeah, absolutely. We support our military, we are absolutely patriots. We thought that we had woken up in some alternate universe, when we were in Libya .We could not believe this was happening.

Robles: James just mentioned a minute ago, that even a taxi driver could not talk about insurrection and plan on assassinating heads of state. How did you react, Joanne, when you saw Hillary Clinton, I'm sure you saw that, I think it was… I don't want to deride a network… NBC News or ABC when she said: "We came, we saw, he died", with this girlish glee as if she was talking about buying a puppy. How did you feel about that?

JoAnne Moriarity: She does not represent the people of the United States. None of us claim her. She represents the oligarchs, the "One World Order" people. We do not claim her, she doesn't speak for us. She is absolutely as far too into evil as you can get, as far as I'm concerned.

Robles: She's as far into evil as you can get, you say?

JoAnne Moriarity: Yeah, I mean, she is an evil person. She has more blood on her hands than, pick anybody in history.

James Moriarity: You should hear all the comments that her secret service people… The language this woman uses is worse than any swash mouthed, gutter mouthed sailor you've ever heard.

There is nothing about this woman that should garner any respect from anybody. She is absolutely the devil incarnate, and so is Barack Obama and so are all of these other "One World Order" people. And it's unfortunate, the people of the United States have no idea what's going on.

And JoaAnne and we were the same. We were so blind about what our government did, that everyday shocked us what we saw in Libya, but we are eyewitnesses. We saw it with our own eyes.

Robles: That was the end of Part I of an interview with James and Joanne Moriarty, they are whistleblowers on war crimes in Libya. They were part of an NGO 100 day Fact Finding Mission during the recent NATO and US bombings of Libya. Due to their work with the tribes of Libya they were elected official spokespeople for the tribal nations of that country.

You can find the rest of this interview on our website Voiceofrussia.com. Thanks for listening and as always I wish all of you all the best wherever you may be.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

After 70 years, Germany and Japan meet in Georgia Interview with Rick Rozoff

rick rozoff

Download audio file   23 October, 11:18  

As the US and NATO begin to pull out of Afghanistan what might wonder and attempt to fathom what they have achieved by invading and occupying the country for over a decade. According to Voice of Russia regular Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and mailing list, the entire campaign has been a debacle. Mr. Rozoff is another voice repeating what has clearly been discovered to be the US strategy in the Middle East: import murderous terrorists and Al-Qaeda fanatical mercenaries into a country and use them to destroy it and divide it up.

Hello, this is John Robles, I am speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner of Stop NATO and the Stop NATO international mailing list.

Rozoff: The US supports what are clearly unprovoked, armed attacks by insurgents who are in most instances based in outside countries, usually contiguous ones but not necessarily, and then they launch what are just "murderous" raids inside the country, when the government then takes measures to protect the civilian population and government personnel including elementary: letter carriers, or school teachers, or police officers.

They are then accused of disproportionate use of force, of gross human rights violations and then the US, increasingly now and recent years under the so-called responsibility to protect proviso, then intervenes militarily on behalf of these armed brigands and bandits, calling them rebels in most cases. That’s what happened in Libya.

So what you had was for 19 days the fairly recently inaugurated US Africa Command, that's the first overseas regional military command created by the United States since the end of the Cold war, we should note, you know, has to then be tried out, has to be tested and it was.

For 19 days they launched so-called Operation Odyssey Dawn and absolutely blistered Libya with Tomahawk Cruise Missile attacks, bombing raids, Hellfire Missiles and drones, without any… long surpassing any pretense of their intervening to protect the civilian population and then NATO picks up under Operation Unified Protector and launches something like 30,000 air sorties of the country, almost 10,000 combat sorties!

This is a small country of 6 million people. And this goes on for 6 months, of concentrated NATO air bombardment. And the end result is, not surprisingly, people like ourselves warned people exactly what was going to come out of this, which is what we see now; is that the country is divided into three basically, based on tribal and other differences, that rival militias and little armed groupings that may vary from day to day in terms of their allegiance or their composition, you know, are fighting over the spoils.

But at the same time, again, NATO was reiterated, just in recent weeks in the last 2 or 3 weeks, NATO has reiterated that they are prepared (NATO is prepared) to provide military training and guidance to the Armed Forces of Libya, where there are no armed forces of Libya, you indicated that in your comment.

So what you have instead is something, almost like the 30-years-war in Europe in the early 1600s, rival groups of looters fighting for dominance in a given area.

Robles: Let’s not denigrate the Libyan people too much here because I mean, there is an army in Libya. I mean it’s fragmented, it’s weak but there is a loyal core army in Libya but they are having a very difficult time fighting all these groups that were armed to the teeth.

Rozoff: Then NATO steps in and arms them and trains them, much as they did with the NATO training mission Iraq, NATO training mission Afghanistan, and they walk-in and they train a central army, central armed forces in Libya, to fight the very same Islamic extremists that you indicated, you know, that they bombed the country on behalf of for 6 months.

Robles: About NATO and Georgia, now it seems like they are focusing very closely on Georgia. Where do you see that going? Japan has been there recently. A post on your site says that they are going to be included in the Global Strike Force. Can you tell us about that?

Rozoff: Yes, Georgia remains a major linchpin for US and NATO interests. In the words of various pro-US Georgian officials, really proxies, like Mikhail Saakashvili, who has repeatedly referred to his country as being the gateway between Europe and Asia, which in fact it is geographically and politically perhaps less so, but the intent is the geopolitical purpose of Georgia, is to plant the US and its NATO allies squarely (really where not only Europe and Asia meet) but Europe and Asia and the Middle East meet with Africa not too far away and of course we know there has been a whole series of pipelines: gas, natural gas, rail lines, other fairly strategic enterprises under way, or project under way, of which Georgia is the pivot or the center piece but what is happening most recently, is just today one of the NATO websites announced that Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen announced Georgia will now join the NATO Response Force to bring this discussion full circle. That is the global military expeditionary force that NATO is crafting, Georgia, of course, is not a full member of NATO at this point.

The other allusion you make is even more fascinating. The fact that the Japanese delegation met with the Defense Ministry, meet at the Defense Ministry, in Georgia and the photograph on the Ministry of Defense of Georgia’s website showed a Japanese Officer in a military uniform shaking hands with the Defense Minister of Georgia.

Japan has insinuated itself into Georgia for energy purposes. You know that ultimately the oil and natural gas that’s to flow from the Caspian Sea through Georgia into the Eastern or Mediterranean Eastern Europe…

Robles: Yeah, but Japan?

Rozoff: … could also go in the opposite direction into east Asia.

Robles: I suppose. Very strange to see Japan in Georgia, I was quite astounded by that.

Rozoff: Well, this is where Japan and Germany finally link up, how many years later, almost 70 years later. But whatever they had intended during World War II, here they meet in the caucuses. The German military influence already established there and a Japanese "military official" that was the phenomenal thing about that photograph.

Had they even simply sent a civilian in Japanese defense (so-called self-defense force) you know their equivalent of the defense ministry over there that's one thing, but to send a military official suggests something is on their mind and in the post Afghanistan world, post Afghan war world, NATO in it's own words (and I roughly paraphrasing it) is looking for some way of applying the lessons of Afghanistan elsewhere in the world and the Caucuses, the South Caucuses may indeed be where they intend to move.

Robles: The lessons of Afghanistan? A more than decade long quagmire!? What lessons are there to be applied? I think the main lesson to be applied is fight for peace and keep the soldiers at home. And stop invading other countries.

Rozoff: That's what a sensible and sane and humane person would look at it, that's precisely why NATO views it from the opposite perspective, and what NATO officials talk about, Rasmussen in the first place, is Afghanistan…(this is something that I have contended from the very beginning and we do have to note that as of October 7th) that is at least hear in Chicago 3 days ago, we are now in year 13 of the US and NATO war in Afghanistan. Year 13.

Robles: It's longer than Vietnam already.

Rozoff: It has been for a while, but this is definitely the longest war in American history. It’s NATO's first war in Asia, it's NATO first ground war.

You know, prior to this, NATO essentially waged air wars over Bosnia and the Serb Republic, and then in Yugoslavia in 1999, but this is you know, but what NATO officials are alluding to is the fact that under the structure of the International Security Assistance Force, that NATO took over shortly after the invasion of the country, that troops from over 50 countries, over 50 countries are integrated into a common military command under NATO leadership and that’s something that the world has not taken note of sufficiently in my estimate, and it’s a fact that NATO in fact has reached that degree of integrating a global military force. And when the NATO officials talk about deriving the necessary lessons and so forth from Afghanistan that is what they are talking about. They are talking about the ability to put out an integrated military command including troops, in over a quarter of the countries in the world.

Robles: Another point I think that no one is paying attention to though: I would say, Afghanistan, was a complete failure.

Rozoff: Yeah, it has been a debacle, it truly has. You know, for a while I think there was a fallback position which was; US and company didn't want to win the war, they wanted to maintain military presence in that general area, but now it looks like they may well leave with their tails between their legs. And hundreds of thousands of Afghan people killed, maimed, displaced, traumatized, an entire generation of Afghan children who in many parts of the country never been to school, have no future. This is the legacy that they are going to leave behind. And they could leave, callously indifferent to the consequences of their "intervention". But you know, the Afghan people are going to bear the consequences of course.

Robles: Okay, Rick, I really appreciate you speaking with me.

Rozoff: Yes, thanks for the opportunity. I appreciate it. What I said about the invigorating conversations, the sort creating new ideas is absolutely the truth.

 Robles: Thank you very much, Rick. I really appreciate it.

Read more:

US shutdown a contrived “Punch and Judy” show – Rick Rozoff

'The magniloquence of the US’ language is almost pharaonic' – Rick Rozoff

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Despite America's Belief in its Own Exceptionalism, No Country and No People are Indispensable – Viseslav Simic

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/10/16/15/Sima.png

Download audio file  22 October, 20:59  

“At any moment any one of us could be executed by a drone anywhere in the world and you can be just indefinitely detained in the US or anywhere in the world,” says Vladislav Simic, a Serbian Professor in International Affairs currently teaching in Monterey Mexico. In an interview for the Voice of Russia Simic talks about the fallacy of American Exceptionalism and the dangers behind it. According to Simic, the dangers of exceptionalism lie within particular countries signing agreements that give the US special treatment thereby “legalizing” such a concept.

This is John Robles I am speaking with Mr. Viseslav Simic, a Doctoral Candidate at the Technology Institute in Monterrey, Mexico, he is a native of Serbia.

Robles: Now, I went through the American school system from first grade. Actually I started in second grade, but that’s not important, and the patriotism is brainwashed into everybody from the very beginning, and Americans are taught to believe that they were the winners of World War II. Nowhere was there any mention of Russia losing, or the Soviet Union losing 27 million people, and that World War II was actually won on the Eastern Front, etc, etc.

And in light of that, I would call brainwashing, because even most Americans believe that everyone in Mexico, everyone is just like dying to come to America. But I was in Mexico City, it’s an urban city, it’s a cosmopolitan city, people live their own lives, people study, people actually want to go to places like Europe. Nobody’s really worried about America.

Simic: Yes, this is a world quality, world level city, it’s a beautiful place. It has its problems but it is a very beautiful city to live in and it’s very exciting.

Robles: So my … what I was getting at was this concept that has been going around the world media lately, since Obama’s speech at the United Nations: “American Exceptionalism”. What’s your opinion? You’ve been there, you’ve been here, you’ve seen it from both sides. What’s your opinion on American exceptionalism?

Simic: Well, it’s a very dangerous concept. It’s of course normal that the most powerful country, militarily powerful right now, and its politicians can say that, it’s been like that for the last … at least one century, that belief is very strong, but it’s very dangerous.

In certain cases it could be said that it is an exceptional country, or it had been because of so many wonderful things that came out of America. I’m talking about general culture and many valuable and wonderful things, innovations and scientific progress and all that stuff, but politically it’s a very dangerous thing because no nation is exceptional, and we remember, hopefully, Madeleine Albright saying that America is an indispensable nation, which is even worse, because nobody’s indispensable, it’s a clear fact, its logic.

Robles: Well apparently to the so-called Americans. The “real” quote Americans, they were expendable and nobody … and I think that’s the biggest lie, and it’s almost a psychosis in the United States that the country was founded on the genocide of a people …

Simic: Absolutely that’s correct.

Robles: … and it was built by slaves and from a historical perspective this was only a few minutes ago. I mean, we are talking about 200 and something years ago. Historically, that’s a drop in the bucket…

Simic: Yesterday.

Robles: … it’s nothing.

Simic: A blink of an eye, but the thing is, when you start talking about exceptionalism it can lead to many dangerous and many nasty things, because people start believing that whatever they do is righteous and correct and extremely important and the only way.

The only problem is that formally it is an exceptional nation, it is an exceptional country, it is an exceptional government, because look at all the bilateral agreements that so many countries have signed with the United States. I mean, where the United States is exempt from prosecution, US citizens cannot be arrested, US officials have special treatment.

Serbia is one of those countries, Croatia, Bosnia, and most of Eastern Europe. Any country that is weak enough, that was forced to decide between foreign aid, or some humanitarian aid, or any other political or economic or financial aid or support, and signing the bilateral treaty that exempts Americans from prosecution and from any problems in any of these countries.

Well, if you work for the government, if you are in that system and you see that the whole world actually signed it, it’s a legal document that has to be respected, it makes you feel like that, and you know that it’s true.

So we have to distinguish this general statement, you know, I can say I’m exceptional, but if you sign a treaty with me, a contract, where it says that I can come to your house, I can do whatever I want, and you cannot even say a word, then it is a legal document. It’s a binding document that actually makes America exceptional.

Robles: They can invade The Hague; they have war plans in place if an American is arrested for war crimes. They have plans in place to invade The Hague, to invade the Netherlands.

Their agreements you are talking about, they signed one in Iraq after Abu Ghraib and the Iraqi people were up in arms with the torture and the murder and the rape and the desecrations, and even private contractors were exempt from any sort of prosecution in Iraq.

When we say the word exceptionalism, I … to my mind I see goose-stepping troops in black wearing swastikas, and for me, I mean that was the first country that really used this policy, nazi Germany of course, exceptionalism. Do you see a correlation?

Simic: Yes, it’s very possible and we don’t know, of course, I don’t like to predict the future because we never know what’s going to happen, but then we can always hope that the people, the ordinary people will get organised and change things, but it’s very possible because as we know from history one thing leads to another.

There are some historical laws, some repetitions, history never repeats itself 100%, but there are some things that we can say are indicators that should tell you that certain things are to be expected. It’s very dangerous, it’s very scary.

Robles: What would you say we should be expecting soon?

Simic: I hope with … well at least from a perspective of other people outside of the United States it could even be a good thing for the rest of the world if they get busy on their own territory and start abandoning or forgetting the rest of the world for a while so that the other people can actually get on with their lives and try to organise something that’s not completely controlled or imposed or observed at least by US embassies but I hope not because it could just be another ugly period, not only ugly but horrible and tragic period in human history.

Robles: What do you mean exactly?

Simic: Well if things go as some of these people that we can read on the Internet and some of the dire predictions about totalitarian regimes taking over and eliminating civil liberties, which have actually been eliminated even though they claim that it’s only against terrorists,but at any moment any one of us could be executed by a drone anywhere in the world and you can be just indefinitely detained in the US or anywhere in the world.

Robles: In the US.

Simic: If it pleases somebody to do so.

Robles: Well I feel pretty safe in Russia. So, I mean, thank God.

Simic: Well you are lucky that you are there because it is a sovereign country, one of the few that remain in this world.

Robles: Yes, that is true.

Simic: That is why Snowden is there.

Robles: Yes, Yes. That’s why I am here.

Simic: I agree. You are smart.

Robles: Maybe I am just lucky. So, I am actually very grateful. Anyway, we’ve got to finish up. We’ve already got about 40 minutes. I really appreciate speaking with you.

Simic: The same. Thank you very much.

Robles: It was a great pleasure. Thank you very much.

 Simic: It was a great honor for me.

Robles: OK, thank you.

You were listening to an interview with Viseslav Simic, a professor and doctoral candidate, at the Technology Institute in Monterey, Mexico, you can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com, thank you very much for listening and I wish you the best, wherever you may be.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

"Instead of spying on terrorists abroad the UK just brought them home" – David Shayler

Download audio file  22 October, 00:33    Moved to David Shayler Page

Former Military Intelligence (MI5) Officer David Shayler, a whistleblower whose conscience caused him to foil a plot by MI6 to assassinate the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, spoke to the Voice of Russia regarding the recent rendition of Abu Anas al-Libi, one of the main figures in that plot, by the United States. As an English Intelligence Officer working on the Libya desk, Mr. Shayler’s insights into operations by the West in the Middle East and against “terrorists” such as al-Qaeda are revealing and help to paint a truer picture of what is currently happening there.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Gaddafi’s Grieving Widow’s Pleas Regarding Remains of her Husband Killed by the CIA and Son are Finally Heard

John Anthony Robles II  Gaddafi’s grieving widow’s pleas regarding remains and son finally heard

By John Robles,  21 October, 18:51

The widow of assassinated Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, Safia Farkash Gaddafi, has made a plea to the world community, finding a place for her voice to be heard on the Voice of Russia. Obviously this is something that may cause certain countries a bit of discomfort, especially as they have become accustomed to doing whatever they please with impunity.

Certain countries have grown entirely too comfortable and over-confident in their own power and their ability to demonize and marginalize anyone they wish and along with their having become accustomed to even assassinating with impunity, it must be quite a bad day indeed when one of their victims finally speaks out.

Seeing the grief and humanity in the face of the widow of Muammar Gaddafi, makes the infamous reaction to the brutal assassination of the late leader by former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seem that much more monstrous, namely her infamous and ever so gleeful: “We came, we saw, he died!” comment on US media!

Of course the western media is not going to allow someone such as Safia Farkash Gaddafi to speak out, nor are many in the rest of the world, but with it becoming clearer to the world that the Russian Federation and its leader Vladimir Putin are willing to take a hard stance for the rule of law, her reasonable calls for nothing more than a normal investigation and an accounting for the assassination of a head of state are being made on Russian media.

A pivotal moment in history occurred not long ago, which in my opinion has made the world, once again, a multi-polar place where one state is no longer going to dominate, dictate and get away with everything possible under the sun.

That moment occurred recently when Saudi Arabia, with the full backing of the United States, first attempted to bribe Russian President Vladimir Putin, then threatened the world leader and Russia with terrorists acts during the upcoming Olympics in Sochi.

In that single moment, when Russian President Vladimir Putin, said “NYET” [No] to Saudi Prince Bandar, the world became multi-polar again and it was made clear that the illegality of the “War on Terror Paradigm” is in its last days.

That event and the ensuing prevention of military aggression by the US against Syria, aggression which admittedly had one repeated goal “to forcibly remove President Bashar Al-Assad”, in other words to assassinate him, like Muammar Gaddafi and former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein were, (as well as Yasser Arafat who not long ago was discovered to have been poisoned by Polonium), has shown the world that there is a leader and a country willing to stand up for the rule of law and more importantly to US aggression.

The Voice of Russia received a letter from Muammar Gaddafi's widow Safia Farkash, which the VOR calls “a proclamation addressed to the entire world” and has been receiving other material from Libyan sources attempting to get the truth to the world. Something that of course has caused blowback for the VOR and staff (which may not be entirely relevant to this matter but it is something I think the staff of the VOR deserve to be applauded for).

In her letter to the VOR Mrs. Gaddafi writes: “In the memory of NATO's aggression against my country, which turned Libya into chaos, and in the memory of my husband, whom I consider to be a martyr, my dear son and the people who were with them on October 20, 2011, when NATO air forces shelled the cortege of Libya's leader, and then, their wounded bodies were butchered by a crowd of people whom I can call no other way than criminals.

Some might say she is being restrained in her wording, I could think of much stronger words to describe the butchers, but that is to her credit.

Mrs. Gaddafi: “What this crowd did to my husband and my son cannot be justified from the point of view of any religion. But I also consider it to be a no lesser crime that the remains of these martyrs are still being hid from their relatives, which is something unprecedented in the entire history.”

Her statement regarding the remains of her beloved husband and son are true and they must not be hidden, they deserve a proper burial, as any human does, (here we can recall how mass murders and maniacs in the United States are regularly offered normal burials as are nazi war criminals), yet it should be underlined that this is not an exception.

Mrs. Gaddafi: “I demand that all the members of the UN Security Council, the European Union and everyone who has direct or indirect connection with this murder must tell where the remains of these martyrs are and allow their relatives to bury them in a proper way. I also demand that the African Union, of which Muammar Gaddafi was a founder, should investigate into the murder of him and all the people who were with him on that day.”

“I demand that the world community should help me to come in touch with my son Saif al-Islam, who has been isolated from all members of our family from the moment of his arrest. Saif's only “crime” is that he has warned that this revolution can only lead Libya to a chaos – which is something that we are witnessing now.”

Her statement addressed to specific world bodies points to knowledge as to who was behind the invasion of her country and the assassination of her family and her pleas to know where her son are normal requests that any grieving mother would make, regardless of race or nation.

Hopefully the UN and the European Union will show that they understand humanity, despite the efforts of one state to demonize and marginalize anyone who they do not particularly care for.

Mrs. Gaddafi: “Saif al-Islam has always been concerned about the situation with human rights in Libya. He has taken many former radical Islamists from American and European prisons and persuaded them to become law-abiding citizens. Many of them have promised him that they would never come back to terrorist activities. But now, some of the people whom Saif has saved from prison are demanding that he should be executed.”

This statement forces one to recall the way that Gaddafi and his sons were demonized, then befriended, then demonized again by the West at their convenience, and it is a sad statement indeed.

We recall how Saif met with Hillary Clinton and Gaddafi met with Tony Blair and they were openly considered friends not long ago but when the oil trade was to be changed to another currency they became enemies again and their country was decimated.

Mrs. Gaddafi: “Two years after the barbarous murder of my husband, my son and their associates, I am demanding that my voice – the voice of an exiled widow of a country's leader and a mother – must be heard.”

She has every right to be heard and with President Putin and the Russian Federation more energetically and unyieldingly defending sovereignty and the rule of law for the world community, we may be hearing more from the weak, demonized and oppressed.

With recent revelations that Yasser Arafat was poisoned by Polonium and the strange cancer epidemic which struck South American leaders and took Hugo Chavez from humanity, the voices may become a roar calling for a certain state to be held to account.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Attack on Russian Embassy in Libya: U.S. "intervention" the Reason Interview with Secret Source

 

 

Russian Embassy in Tripoli

Russian Embassy in Tripoli     Download audio file  19 October, 20:56  

The situation in Libya after the United States and NATO "intervention" has been extremely unstable and continues to spiral into a condition that can only be described as anarchy. With the recent attacks on the Russian Embassy, the rendition of a Libyan citizen by the United States and the reported kidnapping of the country’s Prime Minister, the instability and violence appears to be growing. The Voice of Russia spoke to an anonymous source in the Libyan Defense Ministry to try to understand the reality of the situation on the ground after the Western military operation and the assassination of Muammar Gaddafi. This is the first part of a full text of a longer interview on the latest developments in Libya.

Robles: Following up on the previous information you gave me, I was wondering if you could give us some more details regarding, first off the attack on the Russian Embassy in Tripoli. Now was this actually… in your opinion, was this ordered by the Prime Minister, or was this an independent move by his …?

Source: No, we have no details that the Prime Minister actually ordered the attack. But strangely enough the militia man who was caught and there was another one killed, they were both from the Al-Qaqaa Brigade and the Al-Qaqaa Brigade is related to Mahmoud Jibril who established the Brigade at the end of 2011, and Mahmoud Jibril is a close follower of Mister Zeidan, but that’s the question we are asking ourselves. So these people have also the identification of the Libyan National Army

Robles: So it’s not … so are they …?

Source: So they are not extremists or terrorists or something like that, but they are actual part of the army.

Robles: What conclusion can you reach from that? Was this …?

Source: Well the investigation has gone on and some information is classified, but it’s something that has been organised and something that has been ordered from someone, therefore, it’s not a random attack, and it shows.

Robles: So this was somebody in the Libyan Army, or somebody in the Libyan Government who organised that attack on the Russian Embassy?

Source: Let’s just make one thing clear. Now, the National Army has been set up by elements of these militias, and these militias have their loyalty close to the people who pay their wages, not to the Government. So these elements receive orders not from the Ministry of Defense, sometimes the Ministry gives orders, but they receive orders from their private leaders, or people who they know.

Robles: And who do you think those paymasters are in this case?

Source: Well, as I said the information is still classified because the investigation is still going on, and I don’t want to come to conclusions, but one would logic. These people are part of a brigade, this brigade has been established by this person and attacking an embassy, the Russian Embassy, what cause has this, what reason has this?

It is very simple, they see the American and the Western weakness, they attack Russia because they want to see foreign troops on the ground.

They think foreign troops on the ground, they can create an emergency government, and this emergency government can last 2, 3, 4 years

Robles: So they think that they can actually cause Russia to put troops into Libya and then support them?

Source: That’s the strong theory that we have. Even our chief has a strong theory about it.

Robles: Very strange, very strange. That’s not normally a role that Russia would go about but. Do you think there will be any more attacks like this?

Source: There was an attack 4 days ago in Benghazi on the Swedish Consulate with a car bomb, and half the building is gone, and the area was evacuated then the Swedish staff was evacuated too. Now we have news that the Belgian Embassy and the Greek Embassy want to close their headquarters here in Tripoli. So the situation is a bit difficult.

Robles: So they don’t care what country, or are they targeting specific countries?

Source: So far that the countries targeted have been members of NATO.

Robles: Except for Russia.

Source: They say that the political situation now with Russia is more strong than the United States.

Robles: What about the Prime Minister then?

Source: That’s one thing we were asking. We interviewed people from the area near the hotel, because the Prime Minister claimed that there were one hundred cars, and about I don’t know how many militia men, but the people in the area said they saw nothing. They didn’t even hear anyone when they left or something like that.

Then we interviewed one of his bodyguards, and one of his bodyguards said that there were only 4 people who came, and that 20 minutes before the Prime Minister phoned him and asked him to let pass 2 people who were coming for him, and this personally one of his bodyguards told me.

So when these people came the bodyguards refused to leave Zeidan. He forced them to take them with him. When he was on the way he phoned his brother, and his brother called up the national Army and he told them where he was calling from because he recognized the street. So they managed to release the Prime Minister and free him from that sort of situation.

We later learned that the still images most people saw in the world, there was a young man on the left side of the Prime Minister, and that man is member of the Qaqaa Brigade, the same brigade that attacked the Russian Embassy, and they gave us full details about him.

So when we went to interview him, when he was located in some area, he disappeared, he wasn’t there, even his brother said he left for Tunisia for a couple of weeks.

Robles: So whose orders were they following?

Source: So far the Qaqaa Brigade, the Head and the person who established the Al-Qaqa Brigade is Mister Mahmoud Jibril.

Robles: So the Prime Minister, he lets the 2 kidnappers in, to meet him …

Source: Exactly.

Robles: … and they supposedly kidnap him. Why would he want to stage his own kidnapping?

Source: Maybe to gain something on the public opinion, because there was going to be a vote maybe after Eid, after our holidays for the removal of Prime Minister because of corruption charges and money missing from the national budget, about 12 million, not a short sum, and other cases.

So we’ve heard I think, this is my opinion, but maybe it’s the general opinion that he tried to stage this just to change in public opinion, but it seems that it worked the reverse.

Robles : Doesn’t he have state bodyguards? Aren’t the security services protecting him, or he runs around with his own detail?

Source: Actually his bodyguards are not part either of the Army nor of the Police but of mixed militia. So even he relies on the militias to protect him because they are more heavily armed.

Robles: Oh, so the security services are not protecting the Prime Minister?

Source: Exactly, on his request.

Robles: Oh, on his request. I see.

Source: Exactly, on his personal request. No one of the National Army and no one of the National Police, but part of the militias affiliated to the Interior Ministry.

Robles: Why is that?

Source: Maybe he thinks they are more loyal, that they are paid, and a large part of the Army and the Police are related to the former government, so he is not that secure that they might be loyal to him.

Robles: The other situation that I wanted to ask you about was the situation with the “supposed” terrorist that was kidnapped, he had asylum in the UK.

Source: According to his son he was there for about 9 years, working in a restaurant and in a bakery and he had no problems, he had even British citizenship.

So, when he came back in 2010 after he was given pardon by the Libyan Government for being part of those militias in Afghanistan, which supposedly according to some he never took part in any activity in Afghanistan, he was just there, he did not receive formal training.

Robles: Did you talk to his son?

Source: Yes, we talked to his son.

Robles: This was after he was kidnapped?

Source: Exactly, and his son told us that the people who caught him were not actually American but they were Libyan.

Robles: They were Libyan, are you sure about that?

Source: Yes, 100% sure.

Robles: So this big “American, super-commando, FBI-CIA operation”, they weren’t even involved? Or what? Or were they involved somehow?

Source: According to what we managed to learn from his son directly, he said they were 100% Libyan because they spoke Libyan to him and they looked Libyan to him and they took him in a car and presumably maybe they took him to the central base in Tripoli and there he was transported to the American ship or frigate.

Robles: They took him where?

Source: The American ship, outside the Mediterranean.

Robles: How did they get him out of Libya?

Source: That could have been very simple: from the central base, military base, there’s a central military base near the city of Tajura and there maybe he was transported directly from there on orders from the government.

So our Government presumably knew everything, because in 2010 he was living like a civilian walking, clearly he had no problems at all.

So the question: why now? What’s the use; he was a practically helpless person?

Robles: In your division or department, you didn’t hear about this before it was going to happen, you didn’t hear any details about it?

Source: No, absolutely nothing, we knew nothing about it. So the brigade maybe was from outside of Tripoli, maybe from Benghazi or Misrata.

Robles: Really.

Source: Exactly, orders from Tripoli were not given at all. We knew nothing about it. Even the commander of the special troops from Tripoli were irritated about it.

Robles: Can you tell us about … you told me there were 17 Libyan soldiers that were killed by terrorists, but we didn’t see that, I didn’t see that, and friends of mine looked and we couldn’t find anything about that in the news. Can you tell us what happened?

Source: Yes, there were 27, actually, soldiers that day. They were on patrol in an area between the city of Tarhuna and Bani Walid and they staged a security block, and the terrorists with a car passed and he shot a rocket propelled grenade on the area, but presumably it was a Stinger Missile because the effect, it killed 15 on the spot and 2 died of their injuries later on.

Robles: A Stinger Missile?

Source: Yes, maybe it was a Stinger missile because even a rocket propelled grenade, usually the ones used here are Russian made.

No matter how close the targets are, it cannot kill 15 on the spot. But a Stinger missile can do that because it releases heat actually, and the effects were all devastating many…

When they carried the corpses some had no legs, others had no arms and most of them were burned. But if you check the website of I think, Al-Jazeera.com you will find something mentioned about it I think.

Robles: Oh, on Al-Jazeera there’s something, OK.

Source: Many were irritated because the Prime Minister didn’t attend the funerals at all.

Robles: He didn’t attend the funeral?.

Source: No he didn’t, he was in Germany that day.

Robles: Is it possible one of his groups was involved in that?

Source: No, I wouldn’t go so far as say that, but 2 of those captured we believe they look as though they received money from an agent of Aisha Gaddafi in Algeria.

Robles: I would like you to … if you could, if you could give me a few more details. You mentioned that Jibril, he has connections, if I understood correctly, with Germany. Right, you said?

Source: Yes. But according, that’s something that everyone knew, even after the revolution. He has many investments there, and he has many contacts there, and one thing that many of the lawmakers here have a grudge against Mister Zeidan is that he has no Libyan citizenship, but he has German citizenship, and when he was confronted on that day, just 4 days before he was captured, he said: “I have my German citizenship and I have my reasons for it”.

Robles: And what were his reasons do you think?

Source: He said, he mentioned it to the parliament and he doesn’t need to mention it to the people.

Robles: What is his position now in the country? Is he rising in power, is he a War Lord, or he’s just leading this militia, this brigade?

Source: So far his position has been more weak than he thought. Really, people want him to resign and he said he will not resign unless there is a vote of majority on the parliament and after the holidays on Sunday maybe t here’s going to be another vote for his removal.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

One Million Masks, Expect Us - Anonymous

хакер анонимус маски Anonymous is engaged in battle for truth over evil – Christine Ann Sands

By John Robles, 17 October, 21:56  

In 17 days a million human beings from all walks of life, and possibly even billions around the world, will stand up, don their ever classy Guy Fawkes masks and descend on Washington DC and other locations around the planet in an event being called the Million Mask March.

The massive peaceful demonstrations are being organized and “a call to masks” is being broadcast from all quarters of the globe by members (who may not be “members”) of an idea known as Anonymous.

Statements from Anonymous are hard to pin on anyone and no official spokesperson could be reached for comment, part of their beauty being the fact that Anonymous is a movement and an idea, without leaders and without a central command structure, as one “Anonymous member” was reminded on the supposed “official” Million Mask March page on Facebook, when another Anon politely reminded the page owner that he can't claim to be a leader or spokesperson for Anonymous because well, to put it quite simply, there are no leaders and as Anonymous repeats on the web: "All who claim anyone is in charge of Million Mask March knows little of Anonymous. There is no official site, and nobody is in charge: it’s a movement, not an organization.”

Loosely described as a “global hacktivist collective”, Anonymous is reaching out to all of the people (and peoples) of the world, or as Anonymous put it: “… people from all tribes, all religions and from all over the world”, to put on their masks (tuxedos and evening gowns optional) and join in one of over (350 and growing) planned peaceful marches to take place around the world."

The high-ideals of the event are noble and a call for a fight for the loftiest ideals for all of humankind. One Anonymous forum states the goal of the event as a way: "To remind this world what it has forgotten, That fairness, justice, and freedom are more than just words".

Whether the “groups” prediction that it will be the "largest peaceful march in the history of mankind" is yet to be seen, but the call away from secret Anon Ops to a more public show of protest is certainly a move away from the previous modus-operandi of the hactivists.

Strategically it is probably a good move for the group, especially with the way the US Government and other states have attempted to crack down on the group with an iron-fist and the full weight of all their power. Crack downs that have left the group slightly stunned but far from down and which have galvanized the resolve and the will to dissent of many members and fringe supporters of the group.

While the Anon Ops, in the depths of the cyberspace, against the evil empire that is stifling freedom of speech, expression and suffocating humanity, have been effective and ones that have been fought largely in secret, this new more tangible manifestation of the “Knights of the Internet” may be something more problematic for the “authorities”, especially in the United States.

The war that the US has fought against Anonymous has been one that they have waged using all of the secret and overt tools they have at their disposal and has been one they have succeeded at due to the degree they have by demonizing and marginalizing members and even going so far as to brand them as terrorists.

A case in point was a recent petition to US President Barack Obama to equate DDoS attacks to public “sit-ins”, even though a DDoS attack is even more of a benign event. The hope was that the extreme and insanely ridiculous harsh sentences (in the neighborhood of ten years) that DDoS attackers face might be reduced to that of sits-ins (one to three days), but of course Obama did not listen. Perhaps he will listen if a million peaceful Anons are surrounding the White House?

The fear that the US has about anyone who speaks out on the internet or is involved in Hacktivism is understandable as they have attempted to bring the entire planet under their control through the manipulation of, and spying on, the net and having anyone who can stand up to them or is savvy to the ways of cyberspace, is a dangerous thing indeed.

The insanity of the war that is being waged on information activists, Whistleblowers, Hacktivists and Truth-Seekers is clearly evident in the long list of victims of America’s choking grip, as they continue to stifle dissent and extinguish freedom of speech and expression and more importantly hide their illegality and (as we learned from Edward Snowden) spy on and attempt to manipulate the entire planet.

Although the clear goal of the march has not been announced, it is being held no doubt in support of victims of US oppression: such as Aaron Swartz, Julian Assange, Jeremy Hammond, Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, and everyone else who has been trampled on by authoritarian illegal governments while fighting for truth, justice, freedom of speech and the finer attributes that make us the civilized and beautiful creations that we all are. Well most of us.

Anonymous is an inclusive force, so if on the 5th of November (remember, remember) you want to join forces in support of the fight against evil, check on the net for an activity near year, or plan your own. After all we are all Anonymous. Masks are optional.

As the Knights of the Internet say:

We are Anonymous.

We are Legion.

We do not forgive.

We do not forget.

Expect us.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Libya: Attack on Russian Embassy Ordered by Zeidan Associates, PM's Kidnapping Fake - official

Download audio file  17 October, 16:14  

According to a high official in the Libyan Defense Ministry the recent attack on the Embassy of the Russian Federation in Tripoli, Libya was ordered by Mahmood Djebril, who along with the Qaqaa Brigade which he commands, has close ties to Prime Minister Ali Zeidan. The official wishes to remain anonymous due to concerns for his own safety. To honor his request, the Voice of Russia had his voice digitally altered.

Robles: Do you have any information you can share with us about the recent attack on the Russian Embassy in Tripoli?

Official: The attack on the Russian Embassy was carried out by the Qaqaa Brigade which was established by Mahmood Djebril, on orders from him.

Strangely this brigade has close ties with Prime Minister Ali Zeidan.

One of the militants was captured and he had I.D. of the Qaqaa Brigade and the Libyan National Army.

Robles: What happened next?

Official: Three days later a member of the Tripoli Brigade, was killed by unknown militia.

Now here comes the strange part the kidnapping of Ali Zeidan was a fake. There weren’t more than 4 people involved and one of them was identified as Usama Sweissi from Sirte, a member of Qaqaa Brigade. He is also the personal body guard of Mahmood Djebril.

Robles: Why would it serve the Prime Minister and his associates to stage his own kidnapping?

Official: The motive is clear Ali Zeidan wants to hold his grip on power and is desperate to see foreign troops on the ground. American or Russian, it makes no difference.

In Benghazi, only a day later, another member of NATO had its consulate destroyed by a car bomb.

Robles: You mentioned earlier that there have been many security officials and personnel murdered. Can you elaborate?

Official: So far 104 highly trained officials belonging to the army and the police have been murdered and one thing they had in common was that they had all received training either in Russia or Ukraine.

The second thing they had in common was the fact that the police officers who were killed were investigating corruption in the governments that have ruled after Gaddafi.

Robles: What can you tell us about the kidnapping of Abu Anas al-Libi?

Official: The kidnapping of Abu Anas al-Libi wasn’t done by American commandos but by Libyan Elite Troops based in Tripoli.

It was Prime Minister Ali Zeidan who indicated him on a list, on the suggestion of Abd Ihakim Belhaj.

This was a man who had British Citizenship and lived in the U.K. for 9 years. He was living in Tripoli, in broad daylight since 2010. Why now?

Robles: What else can you add before we have to cut off the connection

Official: Just to conclude sir, 17 Libyan soldiers were killed by a terrorist cell financed by Aisha Algheddaffi. 2 of them were captured and soon the rest will be in custody.

Also the Muslim Brotherhood here is fighting with the secular forces which are both financed by America and France .

Robles: Anything on the situation with the oil? You mentioned before that no one knows where it is going or to whom.

Official: Our oil is leaving the country and is going to Malta, Italy and France amid corruption and bribes.

Robles: Thank you.

Visit our site for a longer interview with this official in the near future.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

U.S. is Only Exceptional in its Impunity - Viseslav Simic

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/10/16/15/Sima.png флаг Сербия флаг сербский флаг

Download audio file   16 October, 19:19

Kosovo remains a protectorate of the United Nations, part of Serbia officially, which shows how bi-polar the US government is or has been in the last 20 years, because at the same time they guarantee the sovereignty of Yugoslavia and Serbia. While Yugoslavia doesn’t exist, but Serbia now is a successor state, the United States guarantees the sovereignty of Serbia over Kosovo, while at the same time it recognizes Kosovo as a sovereign country. Viseslav Simic, Doctoral Candidate at the Technology Institute in Monterrey, Mexico, stated that and more in his interview for the Voice of Russia. Mr. Simic also said that unless you get into the structure of the government and you impose your will through those institutions and organs of the government nothing will change. Change must come from within.

Robles: I just want to underline the fact that Israel is still, to this day, right now: they are importing oil from Iran. They are dependent on Iran, their so-called arch enemy, for oil.

Simic: Well for these basic necessities they don’t care they don’t recognize enemies or friends, it is need and it has to be satisfied, so it’s been going on, if you look into history, from the beginning of the world. The biggest enemies have been trading and you could have seen it in the former Yugoslavia; where Serbs, Croats and Muslims in Bosnia traded between each other while they were killing each other (and men and women) and burning villages at the same time, the semi-mafias or darker sides of those governments were trading and continuing business with each other.

The same thing in Kosovo, you could see that Kosovo used to produce enough electricity for basically Serbia and most of that part of former Yugoslavia or the Balkans. Now they have shortages in a place that has the largest reserves of lignite, and some of the best power plants for production of electricity. But it’s all transferred to somebody else’s hands or shutdown, and is being used for somebody’s profit, and we can go into more details about that, but I think it would take too much time.

But the same thing in Libya, or probably in Iran - if it ever comes to that, I hope not - that that very proud and old nation would be destroyed, regardless of its government we have to take into consideration that some people live there. Regardless of Milosevic, whatever you think of him, Serbs and Albanians, and Hungarians and others lived in that country that was bombed by NATO and destroyed.

So people suffer, resources are misused or not even used to benefit the nation, and somebody’s lining their pockets with the wealth of those nations.

Robles: I think, well it’s clear for me, that they absolutely do not care one iota if there’s people living there, if they need something, those people are …

Simic: Well I agree with you absolutely. I have this experience in working for the State Department in the US as an interpreter, and I was in many meetings where it was very obvious that neither US or Western leaders, because I worked for the UN and the World Bank and IMF as well, more the leaders of those nations like in Eastern Europe or in former Yugoslavia, they are very concerned only about the very specific group of interests for a very specific group of people. Everybody else can …

Robles: They’re expendable

Simic: … or could just disappear if they didn’t need them to work.

Robles: They’re expendable. They are not needed. They can just die, it doesn’t really matter, and there is no such thing as a, of course, a humanitarian intervention or bombing. I mean, that’s ridiculous.

Simic: Intervention, yes that’s absurd. A term completely.

Robles: Now back to the “International Community”, in quotation marks: UN protectorates, UN overseeing bodies. How many of these are there currently now in the world, and what countries? Somalia is still under the UN I believe, they have observer mission there. What about other countries?

Simic: Yes, but it’s not a protectorate, there are very few, and right now there is still a mission going on in Bosnia, which is basically just a civilian supervision of everything in Bosnia with enormous powers that even colonial governors would not have in those old and forgotten times. In Bosnia, an international representative for Bosnia Herzegovina can remove any official from power and change any law, or impose any law, or any decree on the country.

The protectorate is now, exists in Kosovo, even though it is basically kind of totally diminished, and the European Union has taken over even though it’s the same person. It’s the same … it sounds like the Emperor of Austro-Hungarian Empire, where he would wear the crown of Austria and the crown of Hungary on the same head, and it’s the same thing in Kosovo. The civilian representative is at the same time the representative of the European Union, which calls the shots there.

But essentially, even with … it’s written in the constitution of Kosovo in Article 153, it’s NATO, the Commander of NATO in Kosovo is the one who has the final authority.

Robles: I see

Simic: So basically it’s a NATO protectorate, not anything else.

Robles: How many other countries are there in the world like this, I mean, right now are territories or areas or …?

Simic: The official ones really don’t exist anymore, because everything … each one has completed its mission. There was one in East Timor which has been shut down, and there is presence in Iraq still, but it’s basically not doing anything, and it’s just kind of supervising or observing, but it’s not anymore a very active policy and I really believe that it’s being abandoned and it’s going to be completely forgotten.

Because in all of these cases you need all the countries from the Security Council to agree, or at least not to oppose it or not to veto. And now with Russia, with Putin in charge in Russia, and with the Chinese being very assertive, the West cannot impose it and even … I think they even regret the fact that they ever did it in Kosovo.

Robles: You think they regret something, in Kosovo?

Simic: Yes, I am quite sure, because I think the whole story would have been finished a long time ago, and now even they - with the new government in Serbia, which is completely a puppet government of the West - even that government would agree but the ones who guarantee the situation are the Russians, it’s Putin and the Russian Government, and it doesn’t matter what the Serbian Government says, the final word will be in the Security Council of the United Nations, where Russia will just block it, even any discussion of changing the status of Kosovo.

So Kosovo remains a protectorate of the United Nations, part of Serbia officially, which shows how bi-polar basically the US government is or has been in the last 20 years, because at the same time they guarantee the sovereignty of Yugoslavia and Serbia. While Yugoslavia doesn’t exist, but Serbia now is a successor state, the United States guarantees the sovereignty of Serbia over Kosovo, while at the same time it recognizes Kosovo as a sovereign country.

Robles: Well it has its biggest military base outside of the United States in Kosovo, which was …

Simic: Absolutely, and there you don’t need anyone’s permission to go in to do whatever you want: you can water board, you can torture, you can arrest people, you can experiment …

Robles: Well they’re killing Serbs and selling organs out of there.

Simic: Yes, that’s another big issue that is very important and that is one of the things that should be studied as the ultimate neo-liberal policy of privatization, privatizing human beings and human organs in this new world economy. Everything is on the market.

Robles: And banalizing evil, so almost anything is possible

Simic: Yes.

Robles: Some of the things that are going on, there should be just a huge international outcry, but it seems like the world has been accustomed to just endless evil. Would you agree with that?

Simic: Well, I would not agree with “we have become accustomed to it”, but as I said, you need an organized force to oppose it, or to at least voice your opposition to it if you cannot physically oppose it and defeat it. And right now at this time in our history, in human history, we are not really capable to organize ourselves in an efficient way to do something about it

Robles: Well I think there’s a big difference … I’m sorry if I said “we”, ok? By “we” I mean the general population, I mean most educated people and intelligent and independent thinking people are up in arms, and most people are doing something against all this monstrosity and illegality. You are one; I would count myself, many people I know are …

Simic: Yes, I agree positively.

Robles: … but the general population seem to be dumbed down with their gadgets and their YouTube and their iPhones, and their endless propaganda that anything’s OK, especially the American population, but I think they are beginning to wake up.

Simic: I hope so because I know many Americans, I have lived there, I am a US citizen, I have lived there for more than 20 years, 25 years, before coming to Mexico and I know how wonderful an average American is as a person, how much they believe that they are free and how much they hope that they can change.

It was obvious when Obama was elected, it was all about “change” and “hope”, and all this stuff, and of course we know what happened, but the problem is and maybe I am insisting on this as a professor, as a person who is studying public policy, unless you get into the structure of the government and you impose your will through those institutions and organs of the government nothing will change.

 We can talk, we can write, but as long as somebody else is commanding what’s going to happen, that is what’s going to happen, because they don’t obey us, they obey somebody else. That’s essentially what’s going on in Serbia, because I guarantee you that 99% of the population in Serbia disagrees with the most essential things that this government or the previous government have been doing, but nobody can change anything because the ones who command, the ones who press buttons, the ones who sign documents and treaties are different people, and their word is law.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

"U.S. shutdown a contrived 'Punch and Judy' show" – pRick Rozoff

Download audio file  16 October, 19:11  

Rather than being ashamed for causing the US Federal Government to shutdown, political forces in the US are using it to advance their own agendas and point fingers at each other turning it into a veritable “Punch and Judy” show. Voice of Russia regular Rick Rozoff spoke about this and more as a discussion on NATO and US military operations went into the funding aspect with a US Government continuing its global military adventures regardless of how hard the people back home have been hit.

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/10/16/15/Rozoff_1.jpg

Hello, this is John Robles, I am speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner of Stop NATO and the Stop NATO international mailing list.

Robles: What about the government shutdown in the US? There was this desperate push for this attack on Syria and then, you know, less than a month later the government shut down. Do you think that’s related?

Rozoff: Maybe the scheduling issues on both were related with each other, though… though you want to talk about “grandiosity” with the Federal Government in part is shutting down, I would have to say, I think most people haven’t even noticed that people would appropriate to themselves, arrogate to themselves, divine attributes.

I suppose nobody has really done that since the late Roman Emperors, in other words who deified and self-deified, who in at least one instance, deified their own horse but I am afraid, we are probably dangerously close to that in terms of the grandiosity, the magniloquence of the language, the arrogance of the attitude, the unlimited entitlement, and so forth that we were saying, something almost pharaonic, I mean it’s more the Egypt of the Pharaohs than it is of an “alleged” republic, some 250 years after its founding.

Robles: What about the government shutdown in the US? There was this desperate push for this attack on Syria and then, you know, less than a month later the government shut down. Do you think that’s related?

Rozoff: Maybe the scheduling issues on both were related with each other, though… though you want to talk about “grandiosity” with the Federal Government in part is shutting down, I would have to say, I think most people haven’t even noticed… And it's almost like the person who has grossly inflated opinion of him or herself..

I think in many ways the federal government is portraying itself as being indispensable. Of course, any federal government is indispensable to a degree. But the fact that life goes on pretty much the same, despite the petty bickering between the two wings of the dominant political model in the United States, which again is a pathetic spectacle. It is a contrived “Punch and Judy” show, meant I think to distract people more than anything else.

It should lead, in a healthy politicized society with an informed and active citizenry, it should result in a sense of repulsion for both political parties and their leaders, to the extent that people would vote them both out and in the next federal election and look for new political mechanisms or formations.

Robles: That would be wonderful.

Rozoff: Yes, it would.

Robles: I wanted to ask you… another question just came to mind when you're talking about the shutdown of the government, all this bickering and one of the contested points (again we are getting into another topic here but) has been Obama's, so-called, healthcare.

Now I don't see it's being too much of a big help for the poor and those who don't have health insurance. I don't know all the details on it, but what would you say, I mean, to the world audience? He is being characterized, as being some sort of socialist or something, because he is attempting to, or at least pretending to attempt to, provide the American people with healthcare.

Can you give our listeners a little bit of an insight there in the US? What's going on with healthcare and why is that such a contentious issue and what's the real state of healthcare in the United States? Why is that so important?

Rozoff: Although I have not indeed delved into and tried to understand the Affordable Health Care Act, perhaps to the degree I should have to be honest with you, but as we know it's lengthy, it's complicated, it's laborious. It's probably the ultimate omnibus bill that has a little bit of everything for everyone.

And it’s hard to disentangle all the threads of Obamacare, it’s also multi-phased, that is with each success year different components of it are activated.

And this year, for example, is the year at which individuals seeking to go to an insurance exchange and negotiate a private insurance contract are supposed not to be disadvantaged because of pre-existing conditions. That's a very real issue for a lot of people, including relatives of mine.

And I have now in my line of work encountered for the first time, patients who are of lower socioeconomic status, fairly destitute, who have local varieties or affiliations with the Affordable Health Care Act, “Obamacare”, that permits them health insurance they didn't have before, something almost comparable with medicate, to public aid.

But it is so complex that it’s… one would have to spend a good deal of time trying to understand it. And what we need is Occam's Razor, we need something to simplify the process, not complicate it.

In a country where you've got scores of hundreds of insurance providers that make things far more expensive and far more complex than they need to be.. But just to put the matters in perspective, John, the Obamacare initiative, what became Obamacare, the initiative was evocative of (similar to) what the Clinton Administration was attempting to launch in the opening days of their coming into the White House, that is in January of 1993.

Where Hillary Clinton, the first lady, was touring the country, supposedly gaining feedback from healthcare providers and others about launching a national healthcare plan to include, at that time perhaps, 35 million Americans who had no health care insurance, that figure is probably closer to 50 million right now.

And at the time, even though there was poll after poll suggesting that if you included the Canadian system, the single-payer plan system, without naming it's Canadian, (heaven forbid!) xenophobic Americans adopting the system from another country. But if you didn’t identify it as being a Canadian system, that a majority of Americans preferred that to any other alternatives. However, during the course of the debate on what became the Affordable Health Care Act, the Obamacare, that anything like that was not even mentioned, say a comprehensive medicare inclusive program or any kind of government administered, it didn't even have to be a government insurance policy, just government administered single-payer plan, a common program, wasn't even in the running.

So, at the end of the day what you are going to see is tens of millions of uninsured are going to be turned over to the insurance companies, as so many new accounts. That’s the long and short of it

Robles: That's what I was thinking, I mean that's why all the insurance companies are involved in this and it's just a huge “cash cow” for all of them. Especially if they privatize the whole system.

Why is that the Americans view providing something as necessary and normal to the citizens as healthcare is being some sort of move towards socialism? Not all Americans, but I mean, I've seen that accusation all over the place.

Rozoff: We have not progressed at all from, I remember as a teenager listening to former Alabama Governor George Wallace running as a third-party candidate in 1968, denouncing “International Communism” and “Creeping Socialism” and on, I recall it.

There of course was no creeping Socialism, and certainly there isn't now. The kind of Keynesian, modest attempts at a welfare state, that were implemented under the Truman, or the Kennedy or Johnson Administration are long passed, I mean they are discarded for decades.

So the idea that anything that the Federal Government does is “Socialism” is ludicrous of course.

For example, the bailout of the banks and General Motors and so forth was denounced by certain demagogues in the United States as being Socialism. When you bailout the worst representatives, which are considered to be, you know, of “Rapacious Capitalism” and you bail them out with public monies which is to say, working peoples tax-dollars, and that become Socialism: that’s Socialism in reverse. It's the opposite of Socialism.

Robles: Yeah… If we could back to Libya, there has been several events recently in Libya: the kidnapping of the Prime Minister, the kidnapping of this freedom-fighter turned Al Qaeda terrorist and various other events that are taking place and I think a spiral into more instability, because the situation there is getting worse. Can you comment on that?

This was supposed to be another US intervention to get rid of another horrible regime, that has resulted in another destroyed, devastated and completely unstable country. However the Central Bank, and the oil trade were taken over and the oil trade continued in dollars, and the trade from the Central Bank continued in dollars, which I think was the main goal there in Libya. If you could comment on the continuing situation in Libya and how NATO is involved?

Rozoff: That's revelation to me by the way about the stock-exchange and the bank it doesn't surprise me, but that's fascinating, isn't it?

Robles: Anyway, back to destabilized countries, interventions and continuing incursions, please. Sorry.

Rozoff: I mean your description of the scenario or the model is perfectly accurate and it could apply equally to the former Yugoslavia, or to Libya with the necessary changes, you know, perhaps to countries like Ivory Coast, Macedonia and others, Iraq, where the US supports what are clearly unprovoked armed attacks by insurgents who are.. (in most instances based in outside countries) usually contiguous ones but not necessarily..

And then they launch what are just “murderous” raids inside the country when the government then takes measures to protect the civilian population and government personnel, including elementary letter carriers or schoolteachers or police officers. They are then accused of disproportional use of force, of gross human rights violations. And then the US increasingly now and in recent years, under the so-called “Responsibility to Protect Proviso”, then interfere and intervene militarily on behalf of these armed brigands and bandits, calling them rebels in most cases, and that what's happened in Libya.

So what you had was, for 19 days, the fairly recently inaugurated US Africa Command, that's the first overseas regional military command created by the United States since the end of the Cold War we should note, has to then be tried out, has to be tested. And it was, for 19 days they launched so-called operation “Odyssey Dawn” and absolutely blistered Libya with Tomahawk Cruise Missile attacks, bombing raids, Hellfire Missiles from drones, without any… Long surpassing any pretense of their intervening to protect the civilian population.

And then NATO picks up, under operation “Unified Protector” and launches something like 30,000 air sorties over the country, almost 10,000 combat sorties. This is small country of 6 million people. And this goes on for 6 months of concentrated NATO air bombardment. And the end result is, not surprisingly, people like ourselves warned people exactly what was going to come out of this, which is what we see now.

The country is divided into three basically, based on tribal and other differences, that arrival militias and armed grouping that may vary from day-to-day in terms of their allegiance or composition, fighting over the spoils.

But at the same time again NATO has reiterated, just in recent weeks, in the last two or three weeks NATO has reiterated, they’re prepared (NATO is prepared) to provide military training and guidance to the armed forces of Libya. Well, there are no forces of Libya, you indicated that in your comment.

 What you have instead is something almost like the Thirty Years War in Europe in the early 1600s, rival groups of looters fighting for dominance in a given area.

You were listening to the interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff, a regular contributor to the VoR and the owner and manager of Stop NATO website and international mailing list. You can find part 1 of this interview at voiceofrussia.com. Thanks for listening and as always I wish you the best wherever you may be.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Republicans want open white male supremacy - Debra Sweet

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/10/16/04/Debra_Headshot_small.jpg

Download audio file  16 October, 10:16  

The US government shutdown has caused the cancellation of most social programs by the government. While the government has supposedly been “shut down” special interest projects and imperialistic activities by the US continue unabated, far-right elements in the US have decided to use the shutdown as a means to facilitate the further stripping of social programs for those most in need. The power elite in the US believe that the “poorer classes” of the population are expendable. I spoke to Debra Sweet of the World Can’t Wait! on these issues and more.

Robles: Hello, this is John Robles. I am speaking with Debra Sweet from the World Can’t Wait!. Hello, Debra. How are you his evening?

Sweet: Hi, John. I am well.

Robles: I am glad to hear that. Can you tell us a little bit about what’s going on there in Washington with the protests by the veterans?

Sweet: I am not in Washington. I have watched this online and a little bit from a distance and they could well be veterans or maybe not.

It seems to be the Tea Party with Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz with a bunch of American flags, and red white and blue, and their main complaint is that somehow the Obama Administration has shutdown the veteran monuments, specifically to lock them out, while there are other complaint is that and I am using this in quotes “the illegals were allowed to march”.

Robles: What does that mean “the illegals”?

Sweet: The “illegals” means that undocumented people came to Washington to protest the fact, specifically that the Obama Administration has deported more people than any president in history. And the deportations have not stopped even though the government has been shutdown, along with the “Wars for Empire” and Guantanamo and all the things that the US is doing, that has made it so hated; the targeted killing, the indefinite detention continues even while the government is shutdown.

And the government shutdown has amounted to as always, I think, hitting the people who work for the government and the people who really depend on government programs, for sustenance, including aged, women and infants and children which is really in jeopardy right now.

Robles: And food stamps I think are getting cut.

Sweet: Well, the food stamp system stopped working yesterday in 17 states. What the government says is that there was a computer problem that made that happen and that the money has not run out yet on food stamps, but it really did give you a little window on a picture into the volatility of the situation because people were very, very upset at not being able to get the food that they depend on.

Even people who work on one or two jobs already, qualify for food stamps because there are so many people in this country who work at minimum wage.

Robles: I recently talked to a gentleman who put forward the theory that this was a sort of genocide against the “expendable” populous in the US, I mean the poor, the unnecessary population. I mean, how would you react to that?

Sweet: That the government shut down?

Robles: No, that this is just a part of a bigger game by the elites. As you said, none of their pet programs or anything have stopped, just anything that affects the populace has stopped. Is that correct?

Sweet: Well, look, you can make the argument and I think that people do correctly that the mass incarceration of 2.4 million people in this country actually is a slow genocide which could speed up.

Yeah, to be poor in America right now is increasingly common and very difficult because there are forces at the top of the government, and this is what this argument about shutting down the government is really about, who want to remove all government services, all social services, from what the government does, they don’t believe in any social program at all other than defense.

Robles: You wrote a very interesting note on this titled, it was on your website, “The Shutdown the Showdown and the Urgent Need To Repolarize For Revolution”. You said that this is an extremely serious situation, that there is a core group of fascists within the Republican Party using this shutdown. Can you describe what you meant by that in detail?

Sweet: Well, I posted actually a long article from the website revcom.us by that title and I put a short introduction suggesting that people read it because I feel that article went really very, very deeply into what’s going on and was quite helpful in laying out some of the particulars, but I have been, in the meantime, talking to many, many people in person, on the phone and via e-mail over the last week to find out what people think about this shutdown and you know, to really explore what’s going on here.

And I felt really compelled to make a point that this is not just some temporarily glitch, some problem, this is not just about the Democrats vs. the Republicans on some minor political tiff that they are having.

It seems to be that there is very, very intense struggle within the ruling forces of this country, if I could put it this way: how best can they maintain their imperial stance towards the rest of the world?

Is it by bringing in what Obama has come to represent someone from the Democrats in general, somewhat of a more multicultural imperialism. You know, changing the nature of the mix, of the demographic: gay people out of the closet, having more Black people, Latinos and women in office and so forth, while, carrying out the same terrible… as you put it, invading the small countries and seeking the hegemony over the rest of the world.

Or as the Ted Cruz’s, and you know these other people, that I think are incorrectly labeled as idiots, what I call the fascist core of the Republican party, here they want to strip all this away and go for open white and male supremacy, going back to the so-called traditional core American values and get rid of all the social programs and completely, with the understanding they have, that they are going to be an elite minority and they don’t really care if anybody likes them or not!

They have a very small social base, maybe not very small, probably 15 or 20% of the population. Right now that they are whipping up with things like this March of the Veterans, around a very reactionary, thoroughly terrible social program which include, you know, let poor people die. They can go seek charity but we are not giving them anything. If the market won’t take care of them, then we don’t need them.

Robles: But they are supporting veterans because they can use them as a political tool, right?

Sweet: Who knows that they are even veterans really? Yeah, veterans of the Second World War are the ones they particularly like.

I think they have no use at all or the veterans of the current US imperialist wars they are certainly doing nothing to stop the tide of suicide, by actually caring for the people who have gotten really messed up in these wars.

This is just political, John. It doesn’t have anything to do with what they are actually striving to do in society there are willing to use this utterly superficial political ploy.

Robles: Though Republicans usually do that, don’t they.

Sweet: Well, you know the Democrats are not immune from that either.

Robles: Sure. What you said about Obama is very interesting, because I mean a lot of people have been analyzing him and his stance; the fact that he is supposedly a black man and the black people and the liberal left have been completely silenced because he is supposed to be “their” President.

Do you really believe he wants to sort of push forth this imperialism across the board for everybody? Or, to me it seems that he is just interested in his own skin, and making sure that he stays in power and he is just one of the elites and I don’t think he really cares about bringing in other people, I mean, okay, Holder is in but he is pretty much the same thing. Nothing has changed for the black population.

Sweet: Certainly, you are right but there is the appearance, right?

And what Obama thinks in his heart of hearts, I have just no idea. However, I think strategically, the Democrats have united around this strategy of inclusiveness. And this has been the way they are developing a distinction between themselves and the Republicans, with going after Latino votes.

Finally, after dragging along forever, getting rid of the “Defense of Marriage Act”, and “Don’t ask don’t tell” in the military so that gay people can serve openly. This is a significant social thing.

Robles: Do you think that is sincere? I mean are they really promoting this? Or are these just like policies that they’ve given lip service to at vote time.

Sweet: Well, he gave a lot of lip service to overturning (inaudible) but they finally did it.

So now actually gay people can be in the military which raises a whole other set of questions. Gay people are now allowed to be open in the military, but why the heck would they want to be?

Robles: So they have more canon fodder!

Sweet: Exactly, right?

So there is an appearance of openness but as I brought up when I introduced the way the Democrats approach things; it is in the service of Empire.

We see this across US society and it used to be that the trade unions, even 10-15 years ago in New York, were only run by old white men. The trade unions which are conservative as ever in many ways are now being run by people of color but their essence of keeping working people in check and under the thrall of the Democratic party is still the same.

Robles: I think it is easier for Obama to pretty much silence the leftand control dissent just by his appearance.

Sweet: Well and this is the essence of the Democratic Party’s role, is to keep its base quiet, whereas the essence of the Republican role is to inflame its base so that you have the situation coming up again where, the Tea Party which now has significant influence, very significant influence in the Republican Party, to the degree that even some of the established Republicans are getting nervous about this. They are not sure they want it to go in this direction.

Robles: Weren’t these the furthest right of the Neo-Conservatives, weren’t they the ones that started this whole, ridiculous sounding Tea Party Movement?

Sweet: There is a Neo-Cons, who were a very distinct feature of the Bush Regime, right? And the architects of the torture and war.

Robles: And I would say 9/11.

Sweet: And all of the policies that Obama is actually carrying-on, and John McCain, for instance, have a lot of unity about what Obama is doing internationally.

The Tea Party is vehemently racist, anti-Obama, namely on the basis that he is not supposedly a “real” American and that’s the whole subtext of what’s going on with shutting down the government.

Robles: I am almost half American Indian, I am not a real American either! And I never was when I was in the United States.

Sweet: And what is America anyway but Mexico and Native lands, right? It was all stolen so it’s all irrelevant. But the people running things perpetuate this myth that there’s a real “Anglo-Saxon American” that built this country.

Robles: Slaves built it, I mean.

Sweet: On slavery, it was built on slavery.

Robles: Thank you, Debra, I’ve written about that, I’ve said that. I appreciate you bringing that up. I wanted to ask you about the truth behind the “Core Interest” and can you talk about American exceptionalism?

Sweet: Yes, this is Obama. This is what he came to the UN and said. And I did write some things about this. He gave this speech two weeks ago during the opening of the General Assembly where he completely embraced, not only American Exceptionalism, but then interpreted that and he said very clearly America is going to use… America, first of all!

America? It is the United States of America, there are two continents that are the Americas.

Why are we even talking about the word “America” unless we are trying to evoke something. The “specialness” that comes with empire and this is what Obama is trying to do.

He said America is going to use everything at its disposal, first of all, military might, to push its interests in the world.

And the argument, you know, is that the US has some kind of special relationship with the rest of the world as an example, some sort of special license to push, to dictate to the rest of the world what the terms are going to be.

And Obama is a perfect “poster person” for this because here he is developing, on the basis of what the Bush regime did, which was so hated around the world, a policy that continues, both indefinite detention, targeted killing and now he is even making it more complex because he is holding this guy that was picked up in Libya on a naval ship in the Mediterranean, having him questioned by the FBI, with-out lawyers, you know without being read his rights and here you have both indefinite detention and potentially a targeted killing situation or a rendition situation in a whole new hybrid, that’s developed only by Obama.

So this is getting into a… Maybe this is the American exceptionalism that we should talk about. America holds other countries to a certain standard of obeying international law, Cuba or Venezuela, certainly can’t be allowed to do any of the things that the US has done. But the US gets a pass on the violations of the international law.

Every time it goes across a national border, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya, with drone killings or other secret operations, the “Dirty War”, America gets a pass because we, they say, we were attacked on 9-11. Therefore, we can go anywhere in the world, we are authorized to use military force. International law doesn’t say that, it says you can’t attack a country unless your country was attacked by that one.

Robles: That’s getting tired already. That’s not going to last much longer. And they’ve used as much of that capital as they possibly can . I think the world is beginning to realize it. Continuing an endless war anywhere on the planet, anywhere they want, whenever they want, doing whatever they want, was not part of (if we could say) “the deal”. Personally I see that finishing soon and I think Syria was a good case and point.

Sweet: Well, in terms of air strikes and naval invasions and so forth I think they were put off for a moment.

You were listening to an interview with Debra Sweet, the Director of the World’s Can’t Wait. You can find part 2 of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com.

Thanks for listening and as always I wish you the best wherever you may be.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

Users lose in Skype/PRISM spying

John Anthony Robles II

By John Robles, 15 October, 22:10  

Microsoft and its instant messaging and voice over IP provider Skype are under investigation by the Luxembourg's data protection commissioner for providing access to user data and communications to the United States National Intelligence Agency (NSA).

Although Skype, a company that has had its share of legal actions in the past, has been bought out by Microsoft Corporation, based in Redmond Washington in the USA, it is being investigated for passing information to the NSA by the European country because it has its headquarters in Luxembourg.

It is not clear exactly when Skype began passing information and allowing access to their data by US signals intelligence and spy agencies, and if it was after or before the Microsoft takeover, but it is clearly a disturbing development that a European based company has allowed itself to be used as a spy tool on European and in fact on users around the word.

A report by the UK’s Guardian points to pre Microsoft takeover spying by Skype, with a report saying that after the $8.5 billion acquisition by the computer and IT behemoth, data flow to the NSA increased by 300%. The Guardian also underlines the fact that Microsoft, one of the world’s richest corporations, which in fact produces almost nothing tangible, was the first to sign on to PRISM, a fact from which an number of conclusions can be reached.

Not only is this an incursion into the privacy of all users affected, but it is another serious incursion onto the sovereignty of yet another nation. This is not something that should be allowed to be hushed up ignored and allowed to be accepted as though it were something normal. It may seem like a minor manner due to the sheer magnitude of the NSA and CIA spying “apparati” and this is disturbing.

It is also disturbing that it appears that the fact that Skype is being investigated for allowing itself to become part of the infamous massive PRISM program is getting more attention from people around the world and the media than the revelations by Edward Snowden that they were in fact spying in the first place.

The world has grown so accustomed it would appear, to US infringement on their rights, privacy and territory that it is bigger news when someone challenges them or their proxies in any way, shape or form.

Skype (Microsoft) is facing fines, criminal and administrative sanctions and even “a temporary ban on sharing users data with US state agencies”, according to Softpedia.com, who also said that Luxembourg has vowed to protect users’ privacy unless state agencies fill in legal requests for a specific account. Softpedia cites Luxembourg’s data-protection chief, Gerard Lommel, as having confirmed an investigation is under way.

Skype, founded in 2003, was a success with users who were interested in privacy because of the encrypted peer-to-peer technology that allowed users to connect directly over the web rather than through some central server. It was so trusted that major corporations, banks and other large business players have employed it as a standard tool for holding video and audio conferencing with worldwide partners. Meeting where corporations and companies often discuss sensitive operational proprietary information that would be of interest to their competitors and of course the US if engaged in economic manipulation.

Skype cannot be trusted now, no matter how many times Microsoft says it is committed to protecting users’ privacy and the real losers of the free service are now the users.

Personally it is a real shame because I used to use Skype to talk to all sorts of people and it is a wonderful tool. I even use it to stay in touch with one of my best friends in the UK. We suspected all along that all of our communications were being monitored but thanks to Edward Snowden, we now know this to be true. We now begin every conversation with “Hello NSA analyst”, and are sympathetic that some poor guy has to listen to our conversations and can not join in even though we invite them to speak up. Even NSA analysts should have a voice.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com or on Skype.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

In many countries US imperialism operates by default – Viseslav Simic

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/10/16/15/Sima.png россия сербия россия флаг сербия флаг декабрь коллаж

Download audio file  15 October, 01:52  

World organizations and military blocks are being used by the West to subvert the sovereignty of nations. This is easier to do with broken countries where the West can destroy the legitimate government and the deal with the warlords for example, as is the case in Libya, where the country is shattered and the West has access to the resources by dealing directly with the authorities in the region where the resources are. The Voice of Russia spoke to Professor Viseslav Simic on these issues and more.

This is John Robles I am speaking with Mr. Viseslav Simic, Doctoral Candidate at the Technology Institute in Monterrey, Mexico, he is a native of Serbia.

Robles: Hello, how are you this afternoon?

Simic: I am very good, thank you very much!

Robles: It’s a pleasure to be speaking with you. You wrote a very well-written paper on… titles “the International Community in Territories with Altered Sovereignty”, in your opinion, in what ways is the so-called international community altering the sovereignty of nations in order to facilitate their own ends?

Simic: It is a subject that came up in the last 20 years, 15 years, the topic of sovereignty, and they have been ridiculing it in the West, the concept of sovereignty over the last couple of decades, trying to diminish it and to actually kind of cancel it out, in the countries that they want to intervene in, while they are of course preserving all the aspects of sovereignty, in the West and especially in the United States.

Right now they are trying to at least alter sovereignty, they are not cancelling it out completely, but we are experiencing this period where we cannot really define what is happening in many of the countries right now, or many of the territories, (That is why I said “territories” because many of these places are not even countries anymore), like Kosovo, and it has so many sovereignties overlapping and cancelling each other out at the same time. And we really don’t know what is going on in Libya, for example or what they are planning to do in Syria.

Robles: You see that these countries, and Kosovo, they really have no say in their own internal decision-making processes, the way you are talking about for example, Libya?

Simic: Yes, absolutely, because right now we have a situation where, as we just learned yesterday or today depending on where you live in the world, that the Prime Minister of Libya had been kidnapped and then released. We don’t know who did it, how it is possible to kidnap the Prime Minister of a sovereign nation.

And to go back to Kosovo for example, their own constitution says that the ultimate authority, which is sovereignty in just different kind of words, is NATO, even though their own constitution says that institutions of Kosovo are not going to be questioned, or even consulted and they have no right whatsoever to question or even request any explanation about anything they decide or the UN decides, even though officially at least for the United States it is a sovereign country and for many European countries too.

Robles: The organization such as NATO, first it was the United Nations in Somalia, and they tried to do the same thing in the former Yugoslavia. They set up a caretaker organization, or “oversight body”, for example with the case of Somalia, there is no central government. The ultimate authority there is the UN Mission “overseer mission”. How are these organizations being used and what other organizations are being used, to compromise the sovereignty of nations?

 Simic: It is a very interesting development because it was, I believe very strongly, when Russia was very weak under Yeltsin and when China was not really capable of getting involved too deeply in international relations and was keeping mostly to itself, they set up these missions through the UN and they totally hi-jacked the world organization and used it for the interests of a very small number of very specific countries in the west, but now the problem is that they try to make it that way and set up kind of like a “blueprint” for the way they would take over certain territories.

But now with Russia exercising its rights, especially in the UN, and China, at least not voting for, if not blocking completely, certain actions like in Libya or in Syria rather, now they are seeing in the West that this is not the way. It looked like the perfect way to control everything and to exercise the will of the West because Russia and China were complacent and following whatever the west was doing and right now the west is experiencing a setback if not a complete defeat in the international arena.

Robles: I’d argue that Russia was not agreeing with it. Originally in Kosovo the agreement was that Russian peacekeepers would be involved and then NATO just said “No, sorry Russia, no Russians are going to be involved”. And Russia was supposed to guarantee the sovereignty of Serbia, I don’t know if you remember that.

Simic: Yes, yes and Russia is guaranteeing and actually preserving it, at least legally-officially- technically-speaking, in the UN, even though Russia still has not been able to revoke the new status of Kosovo as it is established by the US and western European countries.

Robles: Don’t you think it would be very difficult for Russia to do that with the complacency of a lot of the population especially maybe the younger generation, they are apolitical, they don’t seem to really care, they don’t seem to understand what is going on? Would you say that is the case?

Simic: I disagree with that. I go to Serbia very often and I am in touch with lots of people and I actually think that the young generation is very political and very ready to change things. The problem is that we don’t have any leaders right now in the politics of Serbia. Any good ones have been eliminated and only the ones that are obedient to the west or that are being blackmailed by the west are being forced upon the population.

So, there is no organizational structure, there is no political party, there is nobody who can actually do anything. As probably you know they fire up the population, especially the young people, with gay parades and things like that that really don’t not matter in real terms, and it looks like nobody cares about Kosovo, when they do.

Reminder

Robles: I’ve heard that over and over again; that the government is not the government of the people and the government has its own agenda, which is the European integration, westernization and the people are upset with that. Isn’t there something more that the people can do?

Simic: There is always so much more that the people can do but “the people” is a term that doesn’t really mean much by itself. There is a need for leaders, or for at least some political movements or some political force that will organize and present a vision and a policy to the nation and be elected to the parliament and then start passing laws that will change things and take over and become the government and govern the country.

Right now we don’t have that and it is very chaotic, it is all ad-hoc as things come up and it is all retroactive, there is always at least one if not ten steps behind the west and the policy imposed by the West.

Robles: You’ve been in Mexico for quite some time.

Simic: Yes, now almost 4 years.

Robles: Mexico is on the borders of the greatest imperialistic power on the planet. How would you compare the western influence in Mexico to the western influence, or the American influence, in Europe and in Serbia?

Simic: I would say that here they don’t really have to impose anything because the upper class, the ruling class in Mexico, or the leading political groups in Mexico are basically by default very pro-US. They know where the money is, where their interests are and they push for it and they don’t consider the interests of the nation so much.

In Europe, at least in Serbia or in Eastern Europe, in some of the places, they do have to impose, here it goes on by default, even though the population, and I can tell you with my students, even though my students at this university are from… this is a private university and it is very expensive, and the kids are from kind of upper middle class and upper class levels, and still the young people see this and they feel very humiliated, especially for example now with the scandal with the spying of the president Mexico and the Mexican government activities by the US, and they compare it with what happened in Brazil or how Brazilian government reacted to it, in Mexico they just basically buried it and didn’t want to talk about it.

So, the young people are very upset about that and they want to exercise their sovereignty, they want to expand to other areas of the world, they want to have an opening to Europe, to Eastern Europe, to Russia, to China but they are stuck with NAFTA and many other agreements and with the general policy of the country totally with the US and they are heavily dependent on everything that is going on in the US.

Robles: I think maybe there is a concerted effort to keep Mexico away from Europe. Just a case in point for our listeners; it took me approximately 3 days to finally get a hold of you.

Simic: Yes, it was very strange, because I couldn’t believe that in this age we can not connect.

Robles: Yes, I make calls all over the world all the time, hundreds of calls, and I’ve never had as many problems getting into anywhere except Serbia, and the this problem with Mexico.

Simic: That is maybe why I feel at home in Mexico.

Robles: I see, that is actually not very funny.

Simic: Yeah, I know.

Reminder

Robles: Shouldn’t Mexico be looking towards South America, Central America? I mean the Latin American block and the South American Spanish-speaking nations, I mean; it’s actually a much larger force than all of the English-speaking world, I mean, population-wise and territorial-wise and resource-wise I believe. Why isn’t (or is) Mexico leaning towards more anti-imperialistic policy such as those in Bolivia and Venezuela, etc.?

Simic: I think there are possibilities here, especially among the young people, but the thing is that Mexico has been so integrated into the American system, into the western system that it is very difficult to change things. And the ruling parties have been so entrenched here that it is very, very difficult to even envision any way of getting people organized in different way.

The media are basically controlled by the same people who push for this pro-US policy, but you can feel it in the streets, in seeing all the protests all the time against policies of the government and you can see it even with the kids from upper classes I said. They are dissatisfied, they can see that something is not really going on the way it should be but just as in Serbia there is no organized political party. That is the way things function.

We need a political force some voice that will articulate all of these needs, present a policy and actually run for government offices and to the parliament and change the laws. It sounds very simple. I guess we, professors, have a tendency to see it as very simple but it is very difficult to do it in practice especially when there is no money to support all these activities.

Robles: Back to international organizations, and we can get back to political parties in a minute, the World Bank, the United Nations, other international organizations; how have they been used in Kosovo to subvert the sovereignty and how are they being used around the world with regard to resources, territory, etc?

Simic: I believe, when I started working on my thesis (doctoral thesis) in public policy and public policy of international organizations in territories under their jurisdiction and administration, which is something totally new, not too many people have actually even looked into this,

Robles: Very interesting.

Simic: … and it was very interesting. I thought in the beginning that Kosovo was a blueprint how things will be in the future, that they will follow this but I think that they figured out that it is much easier to have “no” sovereignty, or fake sovereignty, or altered sovereignty and to just burst in, mess things up, set up some war lords, like in Libya and then have businesses, especially concerning oil or any other important resources, deal directly with these people on the ground who control that specific area.

And of course you can always bring in NATO to liberate somebody and bomb the ones who are opposing you and then continue with the western businesses exploiting those areas.

So, I think the UN has basically outlived its role, its usefulness to the West. I don’t know if it had any usefulness to the rest of the world but we can see that it’s being ignored completely.

Robles: By the United States in particular, right?

Simic: Absolutely. Yes

Robles: Libya was a perfect model because right before they were attacked and Muammar Gaddafi was assassinated, they were planning to change the oil trade from dollars into the Euro as was Iraq.

Once they bombed Libya, they installed their own banking and economic system that was based on the dollar. They returned the oil trade to the dollar and they oil is flowing freely to the West and Libyan people live with continuous blackouts, nobody knows where these; upwards I think of about 40 million barrels a day, nobody knows where al that oil is going. And the Libyan people, they have an energy shortage, they have blackouts, they have problems fueling their vehicles.

How do you see that carried out for example in Iran? I just want to underline the fact that Israel is still, to this day, right now: they are importing oil from Iran. They are dependent on Iran, their so-called arch enemy, for oil.

Simic: Well for these basic necessities they don’t care they don’t recognize enemies or friends, it is need and it has to be satisfied, so it’s been going on, if you look into history, from the beginning of the world. The biggest enemies have been trading and you could have seen it in the former Yugoslavia; where Serbs, Croats and Muslims in Bosnia traded between each other while they were killing each other (and men and women) and burning villages at the same time, the semi-mafias or darker sides of those governments were trading and continuing business with each other.

The same thing in Kosovo, you could see that Kosovo used to produce enough electricity for basically Serbia.

End of Part 1

You were listening to an interview with Viseslav Simic, a professor and doctoral candidate, at the Technology Institute in Monterey, Mexico, you can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com, thank you very much for listening and I wish you the best, wherever you may be.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

14 October, 10:00  

'The magniloquence of the US’ language is almost pharaonic' – Rick Rozoff

'The magniloquence of the US’ language is almost pharaonic' – Rick Rozoff

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

While in fact being illegal aggressions and incursions onto the sovereign territories of foreign countries, recent "operations" by the US in Somalia as well as the kidnapping of a Libyan citizen go further to underline the illegality of United States government and their actions around the world. Sadly, the US media has portrayed such events and actions as being “bold military flexing of muscles” and somehow proving that their President and leadership is legitimate and powerful and not to be messed with. Most leaders of the world attempt to show that they are for peace or they are for diplomacy, however, due to the belief by Americans in their own exceptionalism acts of aggression are seen as events to be lauded, applauded and proud of. Nowhere has the western media focused in detail on the fact that the kidnapped Libyan citizen was actually one of the US’ own freedom-fighters and opposition members before he was branded a terrorist and was then kidnapped from his own country. These further acts by the United States against the sovereignty of other nations, while perhaps playing well back home, only go to underline the complete and total illegality of the current regime in America. Such aggression and rapid worldwide military expansion are the largest threat to world peace that has existed since WWII.

Hello, this is John Robles, I am speaking with Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner of Stop NATO and the Stop NATO international mailing list.

Robles: Hello, Sir.

Rozoff: Hello, John. Thank you for having me back.

Robles: It is a pleasure to be speaking with you again. Can you give our listeners an update on this NATO “quick reaction strike force”?

Rozoff: Well, the NATO response force, I am glad you raised that. It’s something that was inaugurated truthfully, and I don’t know how much of the world paid attention to that by the time of it, subsequently, but by a series of large scale war games off the coast of West Africa, and the former Portuguese possession, the island nation of Cape Verde, “Cabo Verde”, in 2006 and this was the launching of the NATO response force.

As its name indicates, this is slightly euphemized but more accurate characterization of it would be “global strike force” and the attempt is to employ air, naval and infantry ground forces by NATO forces to be deployed anywhere in the world, at short notice, for a comparatively prolonged period of time and even though there has been some scaling back in terms of the scope, or the dimensions of the force, because of the economic crisis the Western suffered over the last five years. Nevertheless, this is still very active project and we see for example what are going to be fairly large scale, naval-with-air-component, exercises in the Baltic Sea and the Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland area, very surely called steadfast jazz 2013, the latest iteration of that military exercise but also, you know, throughout the world, one needs only to go to the NATO website to see various activities related to launching the response force.

This might appear to be grandiose at this moment, John, you know, given the fact that the West is suffered and I think this is worth noting somewhere in the program, it’s definitely suffered a “diplomatic rebuff” and “political damage” over Syria; in that Russian intervention to prevent US and NATO military aggression against that country has resulted, I think temporarily… I compare to the West and NATO to a boxer, who’s just been hit pretty hard on the head and is still rather stunned and almost swaying, still dangerous, but you know, lacking direction currently and I think that is probably a safe summary of what NATO is up to.

However, we also know, that NATO officials have been traveling to countries like Jordan, to Djibouti, in the West of Africa, so they still entertain hopes of consolidating a global military network.

Robles: Can you comment on this, on these… Well they were actually hostile military incursions into Somalia and Libya, that were supposed to regain Obama’s war president image back in the United States? Can you comment on those events?

Rozoff: That’s an astute observation of yours. This is damage control, or trying to boost the “war credentials”.

The head of state of any other country of course would go out of his or her way to stress how peaceful they are, uniquely with the world’s “sole military super power”, and that term is of course Obama’s; issued on the occasion, in almost Orwellian Newspeak of his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize almost four years ago, but for the world’s sole military super power as you are indicating (I hadn’t thought of it, but I am sure you’re correct, he has to repair the damage occasioned by the fact that he wasn’t permitted to launch war against Syria, by performing bold and determined military actions around the world, his reputation and that of the US as a whole, I suppose, is still somewhat smarting because of the killing of Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Libya, over a year ago and the CIA and State Department personnel with him, so pulling off another “daring” mission, such as the alleged killing of Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan or something of that sort, or the storming of a pirate vessel off the coast of Somalia a couple of years ago.

A “Made in Hollywood” approach to restoring confidence in the commander-in-chief so that’s perhaps what in fact occurred in both Somalia and in Lybia.

Robles: I found it interesting that usually these NAVY 6 (Navy Seal Team 6 carried out the Bin Laden assassination and the Somali incursion) missions, they used to be done in secret, you know they were “secret operations”, here it’s all over the news a few minutes after it happens.

Rozoff: Yeah, they have the Kreg (Kragen) lights out to make sure that not a bit of the action is missed. Again though we have to keep in mind that the Obama Presidency, whereas just as militarily reckless, ambitious and irresponsible as its predecessors has focused on politically low cast operations. And they include of course drone warfare and special operations of the sort you are talking about, so that if you send a helicopter gunship, or parachute… however one gets special forces into an area and 2,000 of them get killed, nobody hears about it.

So they are usually low profile, but you are correct in this instance, they are being highlighted and emphasized and celebrated, as an act of “daring-do” but for the most part we can expect from the Obama administration, given the fact that war moral, or “war fatigue” is probably a good term for it, over the last 15 or so years, is such that no prolonged labor intensive military intervention with a lot of boots on the ground is going to “pass muster” with the American population for very long. So that special forces attacks and drone warfare are the trademarks of the Obama administration.

Just a reminder: you are listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff.

Robles: In the past we have talked about the breaking and destruction of countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia is a “broken country”, these were hostile incursions into the sovereign territories, in Libya they kidnapped a Libyan citizen. Can you comment on that?

Rozoff: You’re talking about the Prime Minister being kidnapped? Oh you,re talking about the US kidnapping the Libyan citizen..

Robles: I am talking about the “ex-CIA-poster-boy-for-the-opposition” that was…. Actually he had asylum in the UK, and then all of a sudden, he’s uh, (Surprise! Surprise!) al-Qaeda, and he had a 5 million dollar bounty on his head.

Rozoff: Yeah, “the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” evidently, and once again, let this be a lesson to any unprincipled mercenary extremist who wants to throw his lot in with the United States: he may thrive in the short term but he can be turned on and destroyed by the very power, Washington, that supported him.

You know, certainly, people like Jalaluddin Haqqani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar in Afghanistan can tell you that. Currently, and I am sure it is true for a lot of the, you know, Libyan Islamic fighting force veterans and Al-Qaeda veterans that the US generously supported with weapons and with the 6 months bombing campaign, two years ago in 2011, and they are now, you’re right, when needed, they go from “poster boy” to wanted poster.

Robles: He went from the classic “freedom fighter” to terrorist in not too long of a period.

Rozoff: And vice-versa, they can also go… as in the case of the Kosovo Liberation Army “so-called” in Serbia, they can go from State Department officials branding them terrorists, bonafied, dyed-in-the-wool terrorists and then a couple of months later, when it’s expedient to reappraise them they’re freedom fighters, heroes and democrats.

Robles: Osama Bin Laden is the classic case, I mean he was a great “Mujahidin freedom fighter” in Afghanistan who became terrorist number one.

Rozoff: He either outlived his usefulness or central casting determined in the next chapter of the serial he was going to be a villain whereas he had been a hero in the preceding one.

Robles: Back to the sovereignty question, do you see more of these attacks on these small broken countries coming in the future? I found it kind of disgusting: the media, I can’t remember one of the main media outlets in the US, called it “a powerful flexing of military muscle” in Somalia.

They snuck out of the ocean, they killed some terrorists or al-Qaeda or al-Shabab people, or whoever they killed and then they had to retreat. This was the big “flexing of military muscle”. As far as peace goes it sounds promising but as far as desperation to show: “Oh, we can do whatever we want!”, it sounds dangerous. That’s not really a question but can you give us your thoughts on that point?

Rozoff: Yeah, the muscle flexing, paraphrasing American mainstream media’s celebrating in Somalia, or for that matter, in Libya or anywhere else it occurs, you know, it is really very pitiable, you know, how the “Gods have fallen” indeed, this is a power that sent entire armies into Europe in World War II and waged war against actual formidable military adversaries in the past, which is now reduced to, you know, attacking a nation that’s been in a state of veritable anarchy for 35 years, Somalia, that is really been trifurcated, the US seem to like to trifurcate countries, Iraq and Libya come to mind, but you have Somali-land and other parts, Puntland, you have the country divided up, there is a transitional federal government which has only as much power as US and NATO allied trained troops from Uganda, and Burundi, and Kenya, give it.

Robles: And the United Nations…

Rozoff: Much like Afghanistan and others. So, you know, that the “world’s mightiest military super power and so forth” is reduced to celebrating triumphs of the sort you have describe, suggest far from it being “invincible” and “uncontested” in its military superiority, looks rather pathetic.

Robles: I don’t want to say that too much because, I mean, then they’ll a nuclear missile on some countries to prove how powerful they are.

Rozoff: Don’t “taunt and tempt the Devil”, I agree with you!

Robles: Right, right! I would really like to hear from you, we have been kind of focusing here in the Voice of Russia on the topic of “American Exceptionalism”, as a peace activist, as an expert on NATO what is your opinion on American exceptionalism?

Rozoff: You recall John, you and I discussed just this immediately after Obama’s speech and I think we were, to use the cliché that’s popular over here “ahead of the curve”.

Robles: We usually are, Rick! (laughs)

Rozoff: Well, thank you, sir! Let me return the compliment. But you provide a very comfortable and stimulating environment, where, you know, ideas germinate and come to fruition and I think that’s the case. It’s not something, you know, either of us have sat down and thought out on our own, but in the course of the give and take of a real dialogue, (the Socratic method), new ideas are born, or synthesized, but you know, in fact that’s what occurred and perhaps two days, later Vladimir Putin in a guest editorial at the New York Times focused on precisely that aspect of Obama’s speech, which was the US touting and reiterating and almost turning it into a “Divine Messianic Mission” of being exceptionable… “exceptional” nation.

Robles: Exceptionable, thank you.

Rozoff: Yeah, I am sorry, I am playing off your word, I remember in your column and you are correct. Objectionable, might be a little bit closer to truth but then Obama followed up after his Russian colleague counterpart, Vladimir Putin, statement in the New York Times, by going to the UN, as host, of course, to the General Assembly Meeting and reiterating that the US alone in the human history has not only sought to defend its own interests around the world but that of other nations around the world! I mean this is a degree of grandiosity, global grandiosity, that truly is the geopolitical equivalent of “delusions of grandeur in a bipolar patient” or in religious terms “messianic”, you know, believing they are the savior.

Just a reminder: you are listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff.

Robles: That was really evident during the Bush Presidency, I don’t know if you remember the Daily Briefs with the religious quotes and everything else on it.

Rozoff: I am laughing out of… “Bemused” rather than “amused”, I mean there is nothing funny of course that people would appropriate to themselves, arrogate to themselves, divine attributes.

I suppose nobody has really done that since the late Roman Emperors, in other words who deified and self-deified, who in at least one instance, deified their own horse but I am afraid, we are probably dangerously close to that in terms of the grandiosity, the magniloquence of the language, the arrogance of the attitude, the unlimited entitlement, and so forth that we were saying, something almost pharaonic, I mean it’s more the Egypt of the Pharaohs than it is of an “alleged” republic, some 250 years after its founding.

Robles: What about the government shutdown in the US? There was this desperate push for this attack on Syria and then, you know, less than a month later the government shut down. Do you think that’s related?

Rozoff: Maybe the scheduling issues on both were related with each other, though… though you want to talk about “grandiosity” with the Federal Government in part is shutting down, I would have to say, I think most people haven’t even noticed…

You were listening to part one of an interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff, a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia and the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. You can find part 2 of this interview at voiceofrussia.com. Thanks for listening and as always, I wish you the best wherever you may be.

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


Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_10_14/The-magniloquence-of-the-US-language-is-almost-pharaonic-Rick-Rozoff-7614/

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

12 October, 13:15 1 

Attack on diplomat(s) outrageous: Russia reacts, Netherlands apologizes

Гаага Посольство России Нидерланды Голландия

Russian Embassy in the Netherlands

© Photo: ru.wikipedia.org/Russavia/cc-by-sa 3.0

It is the year of the Netherlands in Russia and the year of Russia in the Netherlands, which may make it seem even stranger that relations between the countries appeared to be under threat by two events that had nothing to do with friendship but appear to be possible provocations aimed at ruining Russian-Dutch relations as they are warming and improving. The recent attacks, now two, and actions against Russia may also be tied to Russia’s recent diplomatic successes in averting war in Syria and are possibly being carried out by western provocateurs.

Provocations?

One might ask questions about who would benefit from the souring of relations between the Russian Federation and the Netherlands or who might want to see a stronger building of ties railroaded before it has a chance to get off the ground, and the answer is of course the West. However can this proven? Probably not but questions need to be raised as to whether the two recent events were provocations staged to ruin relation between the two states by those who would do anything to not allow the Netherlands to become too friendly with Russia.

Event one

The first event was a carefully planned provocation by the questionable group Greenpeace, an organization with huge western funding whose targets are usually those who damage the ecological balance of the planet, of course a noble fight, but who sometimes stage events that are truly questionable and violate sovereignty, private property and even territorial integrity.

The timing of the event near Murmansk when the crew of the Greenpeace ship "Arctic Sunrise" attempted to board the "Prirazlomnaja" Russian oil platform, seems odd to say the least. With the West hungry to consolidate their control of the oil reserves in the Arctic, the recent victory by Russia in averting a war in Syria, and the fact that the above mentioned year of friendship is taking place, point to a motive in giving Russia a black eye.

There is also the fact that even much more egregious damage to the environment is currently taking place at the hands of the West than a simple oil platform in the Arctic that is operating perfectly normally and without incident. These include the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the pipeline tearing through virgin forests in North America, fracking in North America and the nuclear disaster from General Electric designed nuclear power plants in Fukushima which continue to spew radiation into the Pacific. So why isn’t Greenpeace spending tens of thousands of dollars to protest those calamities?

On September 8th the "Arctic Sunrise" approached the offshore platform "Prirazlomnaja " and the "activists" attempted to board the platform. They were stopped by Federal Security Service (FSB) border control officers from the Murmansk region, who performed their job flawlessly. The vessel was then towed to the port of Murmansk.

At a court hearing last week, at the request of Russian investigative and prosecution bodies all of the 30 people who had been on the ship were charged with piracy and ordered detained for 2 months in several detention centers in the Murmansk region .

The Arctic Sunrise is a Dutch registered and based ship, which connects it and some say may be the reason for event two.

Event two

The Greenpeace provocation was clearly just that, plain and simple, a provocation, but what happened to Russian diplomat Dmitry Borodin is much worse because it involved representatives of the Dutch state (law enforcement officers) attacking a Diplomatic Representative of the Russian Federation, an individual with diplomatic immunity, in his home. Not only was the attack a violation of the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations but it took place in the Hague which is supposed to be the bastion of "rule of law" for the western world.

According to Itar-Tass on the night of Sunday, October 6, the Minister and Counselor of the Russian Embassy in the Netherlands was beaten by police at his apartment in The Hague. Four men in police uniform forcibly entered the apartment of the diplomat under a false pretext, saying they wanted to provide the diplomat with information about an accident involving his wife and then when they were let in they accused him of child abuse .

The diplomat advised the home invaders that he was a member of the diplomatic staff of the Embassy of Russia, and stated that the charges are groundless and that they did not have the right to invade the home of a diplomat . However they used, as Mr. Borodin said: "harshly coercive measures", including the use of physical force and the use of batons to beat him, throw him on the ground and without explanation, handcuff him and take him to a police station where he was held for several hours.

The diplomats two children, aged 2 and 4, were also brought to the police station, where they spent most of the night. At about 3 am Borodin was released along with the children and the police did not provide and explanation or offer an apology .

Event 3

While reports are just now coming in, according to media reports the Vice Consul of the Embassy of the Russian Federation in Panama was attacked and stabbed and taken to a nearby hospital. Official information is still coming in as well as reaction.

Reactions

President of Russia Vladimir Putin

President Putin demanded that the perpetrators of the attack on Mr. Borodino be punished and added that; "we will respond to the situation depending on how the Dutch side handles the situation."

Foreign Minister of Russia Sergey Lavrov

Foreign Minister Lavrov said that Russia should get an apology and information regarding the "penalties to be applied to the perpetrators. Then we will decide which in which direction to further develop relations with our Dutch partners."

Leader of Liberal Democrats Vladimir Zhirinovsky

The harshest reaction so far has come from the leader of the Liberal Democrats Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who blasted the Netherlands for their offensive actions against property on Russian territory and Russia’s diplomat.

Speaking at the beginning of the plenary session of the State Duma Zhirinovsky stated: "The Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR) fully supports the actions of Russian law enforcement agencies against the detained activists. It had nothing to do with ecology. This violence, the seizure of another's property (by Greenpeace) is the real piracy. Our law enforcement agencies, border guards, coast guard, platform security, the Investigative Committee, and everyone involved operated absolutely correctly, they performed their duties. We must strongly oppose any attack on Russian law enforcement agencies in this matter. They should have acted even more harshly, they acted gently," said Zhirinovsky.

The leader of LDPR also said that the Moscow branch of the party is planning to hold a rally tomorrow, October 12th, at the Embassy of the Netherlands in Moscow. "We are staging a protest against the actions of the Dutch police against our diplomat and what happened in the Pechora Sea. They are links of one chain," said Zhirinovsky.

Chairman of the State Duma Sergei Naryshkin

At a State Duma meeting Sergei Naryshkin said that it is impossible for Russia to not respond to hostile actions similar to the incident diplomat Borodin in the Netherlands.

"Vladimir Zhirinovsky rightly drew attention to the unacceptable illegal actions of the authorities of Holland and its law enforcement services in relation to our diplomats and then the non-critical and inadequate response by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands in response to these actions. That is how it really is," said Naryshkin.

At the same time Mr. Naryshkin said that: "between our two countries there are generally friendly and mutually beneficial relations, a large volume of trade and good economic relations, cooperation in the humanitarian sphere, and as confirmation of all this a lot of events are taking place this year, during the year of Russia in the Netherlands and the Year of the Netherlands in Russia."

Naryshkin hoped that: "… these isolated unfriendly actions will not spoil the overall business atmosphere and friendly cooperation." However even though this is the case, "… we can not ignore such hostile actions."

Minister of Russian Embassy Dmitry Borodin

The victim of the attack, Mr. Borodin, believes that by the apologizing to Russia for the incident against him, the Netherlands did the right thing in keeping with their obligations under international law. According to Itar-Tass the diplomat said: "I hope that the Year of the Netherlands in Russia and Russia in the Netherlands, which we named the "year of friendship," will in reality be thus. He also commented on gossip going through the Dutch press: "I hope that the torrents of mud that have been pouring onto my family from the pages of the Dutch press will now cease to flow."

Foreign Minister of the Netherlands

The Netherlands has apologized but will this be enough?

The Minister of Foreign Affairs Frans Timmermans came to the conclusion that: "… the arrest and detention of the Russian diplomat, who has full diplomatic immunity violated the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and in that regard, the Netherlands apologizes to the Russian Federation."

Brief history of attacks on Russian Foreign Service personnel

On October 8, 2013 the Russian Foreign Ministry sent a protest note to the Netherlands in connection with an attack by uniformed police on a Russian diplomat in his home in the Hague. The Minister of the Embassy of the Russian Federation Dmitry Borodin was beaten, handcuffed, taken to the police station and released without explanation or apology.

On September 9, 2013 in Sukhum the First Secretary of the Embassy of Russia in Abkhazia vice-consul Dmitry Vishernev was murdered. His wife, an employee of the Russian embassy, was also seriously injured and later died in the hospital.

On November 29, 2011 at the international airport of Doha, Qatar, multiple injuries were inflicted to the Head of the Russian Embassy in Qatar, Vladimir Titorenko and two accompanying embassy personnel. Airport security officials, customs agents and police used force in an attempt to seize a diplomatic pouch.

In August 2011, in the province of Hangzhou, China, Russian citizens were forcibly held by Chinese business partners in the office of a company. While attempting to assist a Russian diplomat was bullied while being filmed.

On May 9, 2011 in Lviv, Ukraine, Russian diplomat Oleg Astakhov was attacked and the criminals trampled on a wreath of flowers, which he was about to lay at the tomb of the unknown soldier on the Hill of Glory.

On April 1, 2011 in the city of Mazar-i-Sharif, Afghanistan, Russian Diplomat Pavel Ershov was injured in an attack by religious zealots on the UN Mission.

On June 23, 2007 Russian diplomat Vladimir Rashitko was killed near the capital Bujumbura, Burundi during an attack involving the shelling of his car by soldiers guarding a checkpoint on a road.

On October 28, 2006 in Skopje, Macedonia, four Russian embassy staff were beaten up by unknown attackers . The incident occurred when the diplomats left a cafe. The Russians diplomats were seriously injured in the attack.

On August 20, 2006 in Kenya, two unidentified men attacked and robbed Russian Ambassador Valery Yegoshkin and his attache Paul Strelkova. The Russian diplomats were stabbed during the attack.

On June 3, 2006 in Baghdad, Iraq, a Russian Embassy car in which five people were travelling, was attacked by gunmen in El Mansour far from the building of the diplomatic mission. During the attack, Embassy Security Officer Vitaly Titov was killed and four Russians: the Third Secretary Fyodor Zaitsev, embassy employees Rinat Agliulin, Anatoly Smirnov and Oleg Fedoseyev were taken to an unknown location by terrorists. On June 26, 2006 news was received that the four Russian diplomats had been killed.

On July 31, 2005 in Warsaw, three children of Russian diplomats were beaten as well as one teenager from Kazakhstan. The victims suffered numerous bruises, injuries and concussions. The attackers were shouting anti-Russian epithets.

On April 6, 2003 in Iraq during the shelling of a convoy of vehicles from the Russian Embassy a diplomat was injured .

On May 1, 1996 in Guatemala, an attack occurred on the Second Secretary of the Russian Embassy in Nicaragua, Mr. Trushkina, who was in Guatemala conducting a study trip. He died of his injuries on May 13, 1996 .

On March 28, 1994 in a suburb of Algiers, Russian Embassy employee, driver K.Kukushkin was murdered by reported "Islamic militants."

 Conclusion

Many of these incidents took place in conflict zones and during periods of unrest, so an attack on a Russian Diplomat, in his home, in a stable European Country, even more alarming in the "astion of rule of law", the Hague, by none other than uniformed police, is truly an alarming precedent and one which, in light of recent western interference into the travels of presidents, must be responded to with the utmost urgency and seriousness.

JAR2

11 October, 17:39  

'The West, like the Third Reich, decided Serbia was the problem' - Pavic

Сербия полиция армия солдаты флаг 28.07.1998

Фото: EPA

Download audio file

Divide and conquer, one of the oldest strategies in the world, is being applied over and over by the West in their endless campaign of global domination. Such a strategy has absolutely nothing to do with democracy or humanitarian ideals, it has to do with the defragmentation and the destruction of your enemy. Because Serbia had a strong national identity and was seen as an ally of Russia, Serbia was deemed to be the problem in the Balkans. Serbians do not accept the independence of Kosovo and the elected leaders know that which ultimately leads to a “schizophrenic” situation in Serbia. In an interview with the Voice of Russia, Aleksandar Pavic spoke on these issues and more.

Part 1

This is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with Aleksandar Pavic. He is a political analyst with the Strategic Culture Foundation. This interview is in progress

Robles: We know the West; right after the troops moved in 1999, and right after they recognized the “supposed” independence of the sovereign part of Serbia, they proceeded with instantly building the largest military base outside of the United States. Do you think it's possible that had the Serbian Government, at that time allowed for this base to be built, that things would have gone the other way?

Pavic: It's possible, but we have the testimony of government officials during Milosevic's time, meaning during the ‘90s, some of that was testimony (very recent), including the current Prime Minister of Serbia, who is now very cooperative, regarding vis-à-vis, the West but was a close associate of Milosevic during ‘90s. And he and the former president, who stood trial in the Hague; this is Milan Milutinovic, they said, that actually Serbia (Yugoslavia at that time of Milosevic), they offered to the West, both back in ‘93 and then again in ’98, that they were willing to even consider NATO membership in return for and end of sanctions, or in ’98, to avoid bombing. But they didn't receive any sort of response.

Meaning that probably, just as the Germans judged before World War II and World War I, the Serbian nation itself is the problem here. It's the only nation along with the Greeks in this part of Europe which has its own strong national identity and its own national vision and very strong feelings for national sovereignty. And they probably think, that this is not good material for a satellite state.

So what they did; they just made alliances, they broke up Yugoslavia into very small pieces and then they made little satellite states, with which they encircled Serbia. And I think, they figured out just as the Third Reich did back in 1940 and 1941, that that was really the best way to control Serbia and anything else would be much less reliable. So I don't think they really counted on the Serbs as being reliable allies.

Robles: I think you missed another very important point, because Serbia was the only country, and is, in that part of the world, that is allied with Russia. And we've seen that with Syria and every other country that allies with Russia, is demonized by the West.

Pavic: Absolutely. We are well aware of the fact here that the West, at least 150 years or so, especially British policy has always been to keep Russia away from the warm seas, and Serbia ever since it regained its freedom in the early 19th century from Turkey, has always been seen as an exponent of Russia, as a passage way of Russia to reach, reaching, the warm Mediterranean seas. And so, as a result, Serbia just can not be trusted by the West, because it's always seen as a potential Russian outpost in this part of the world. You are absolutely right in underlining that.

Robles: What is the current political climate there in Serbia? I've done quite a few interviews regarding European, quote un-quote” integration” etc. and the population, for the most part, being against allowing any recognition of Kosovo's independence, but then the government doing whatever it seems they want… What's the current situation with the people, with the government, and how do you see thing going in the near and far future?

Pavic: The situation is a little bit more complicated than it was, let’s say more than a year… a year and a half ago. A year and a half ago, in May 2012 we had Parliamentary and Presidential Elections, and the extremely pro-western government of Boris Tadic and his presidential administration were voted out of office, and people voted for the current president Nikolic, and the plurality of the people voted for the so-called “Progressive Party”, which has the most seats in Parliament and today is the strongest among the governing coalition here in Belgrade.

But the program they ran on was not the program they are executing now. Actually instead the Progressive Party along with their Socialist Party minority allies, they have actually taken Tadic's program and made it even more radically pro-western.

They completely, completely misrepresented their Kosovo policy. Now they are doing… they have gone at least not one, but three steps farther than Tadic in pushing Kosovo away from Serbia.

So in fact, the current government, although seemingly popular if you believe the opinion polls, which are traditionally unreliable here, and tight media control, it would seem like the government is popular. But this is not what people voted for in May 2012.

What they actually voted for was to slow down on the so-called European integration if that meant having to give up on Kosovo, and also people voted to… for closer relations with Russia, because many people forget, or maybe they don't know, but the Progressive Party, the party of Nikolic and Vucic who is the first Vice President of the current government, their election meetings, their election gatherings, at several of their big election gatherings the Russian Ambassador in Belgrade attended and he always receives standing ovations. And people were made to believe that they were voting for a pro-Russian Party, for a party that would bring Serbia and Russia closer together. Instead they got practically the opposite. So in that sense, we have a very schizophrenic situation here in Serbia.

Robles: I see. Is there any backlash growing out of this or is there anything come out of that, or are they just going to keep steam rolling in whatever they want to do?

Pavic: Well the point is the backlash, there is, but it's very unorganized. Because practically this was; the current government and the Progressive Party especially, they were supposed to be the main opposition, but now they’ve taken… they’ve came to power, and they are more pro-western than the party that was voted out of office.

Really right now Serbia doesn't have an organized opposition, because the so-called “opposition” in fact turned out to be like cuckoo’s egg. So as a result and with the media being so well controlled, with the political process being so well controlled, the challenge here is to organize a real political opposition to the current regime.

You were listening to an interview with Aleksandar Pavic. He is a political analyst with the Strategic Culture Foundation Online Journal. Thank you very much for listening and I wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_10_11/The-West-like-the-Third-Reich-decided-Serbia-was-the-problem-Pavic-1462/

 

 

JAR2

10 October, 16:17  

Serbia: breaking the back of a country's identity – Aleksandar Pavic

сербия протест сербия против договора с косово

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

Recent attempts by the west to promote its values in Belgrade were met with violent resistance from the Serbian people. The promotion of western culture and "alternative morality" is another tool the West is using to break the moral and ethical spine of nations in order to facilitate occupation. Promoting behavior that goes against the accepted norms of a country is also part of an ongoing attempt being promoted by western corporate media to normalize the way of life alien to Serbia. Political commentator and analyst Aleksandar Pavic spoke with the Voice of Russia on these matters and more from Belgrade.

 http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/10/10/12/Aleksandar-Pavic_2010..jpg

This is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with Aleksandar Pavic. He is a political analyst with the Strategic Culture Foundation. You can find the second part of this interview on our web site at voiceofrussia.com.

Robles: Hello, Aleksandar. How are you this evening?

Pavic: I'm fine, thank you. Great to speak with you as well.

Robles: And it's great finally getting a hold of you as well. I'd like to ask you “a little bit” about your opinion and what the Serbian people think about this promotion of I don’t know what to call it “alternate lifestyles” by the West, to put it in a political correct manner I guess?

Pavic: Well, the majority of the people here are definitely against equalizing. As you put it- alternate lifestyles – we are talking about homosexuality in the first place..

Robles: Right we’re talking about equating…

Pavic: … making it into something mainstream here in Serbia..The problem in Serbia is that the people aren’t really being asked, let's say by the “political class”. They are having this thing practically shoved down their throats and imposed from the outside. All disguised as some sort of Europeanization, of joining the European Union, “brighter future, freedom, tolerance, liberty”, things like that.

Robles: Now, what do the Serbian people think about equating the relationship between two men to the same thing as marriage? I mean, for a lot of Russians, for the majority of Russians, that's something hard to swallow..

I mean a marriage is supposed to be to create children and it should be between two people of the opposite sex.

Pavic: Absolutely. Here the vast majority of people have very traditional view of marriage – it's between a man and a woman. People here aren't intolerant of someone being homosexual as long as it's a private thing. But people react when that is something that is turned into a public matter manifestation and a public promotion of that. And that's been a problem here ever since so-called 'democratic reforms' that came here to Serbia after the revolution in October of the year 2000.

So, in any case, the traditional marriage here is being viewed as something normal and desirable and anything else is not viewed as a legitimate marriage.

Robles: Right! You talked a minute ago, you mentioned 'being promoted from the outside'. Of course, we pretty much know who you were talking about, but could you specify?

Pavic: Yes, it's definitely coming from the West. More specifically – it's coming from western funded NGOs and they spend a lot of money to fund pressure groups here in Serbia. And the media who is also controlled by western states, in the first place the United States followed by Germany, those are two most active and influential states here, in a public domain. And they finance very well these pressure groups especially the so-called 'pro-gay' groups, the gay lobby here (the LGBT as they are called)/

Robles: They are used to be GLBT until the Ls protested that their rights were not being respected because they were women.

Pavic: Ok, we will accommodate them.

Robles: That's kind of ridiculous footnote, but anyway…

Pavic: All right, ok. Well, yeah, we will be very generous in that regard. If that's how they want to be called – that's fine.

In any case, it's obvious very well that it's being orchestrated from the outside not only because of the money that's coming in to the NGOs, but also because all the various western officials here especially the ambassadors of the western countries, the main western powers, meaning the EU countries, but again in the first place the United States, France, Great Britain, Germany, Holland, Norway, Denmark..The diplomats of those countries are very vociferous when it comes to supporting so-called gay rights and actually pressuring the Serbian government to allow gay parades being staged here in Belgrade. So in any case they are being very public about it, it's obvious where the pressure and the money are coming from. They are coming from the West.

Robles: What is the real reason, do you think, behind this push to try to force this behavior to be acceptable by the Serbian people? Why change the moral fiber of a country in your opinion? What are the hidden reasons for this?

Pavic: Once you break a country's back, once you break its moral and ethical spine, pretty much, you can occupy it with no problem.

When Ottoman Empire, the the Turks came to the Balkans in the late 14th century, beginning of the 15th century, the attack was first of all on the state, but afterwards there was the attack on the Church. Because the Church was the carrier of the moral values and it's the same thing today.

Even where the Church is not, even among non-believers, agnostics or people who don't go to church very often, they still have a moral code, they picked it from home.

I think the reasoning is from the outside is if you really want break any sort of resistance to any foreign occupation of any sort, whether it's military, economic, cultural, you have to break the back of the country's identity. And I think, that's the main goal here.

The second goal, I think, that is something that's a global phenomenon. It's really forcing evil to become something common place: the negative to be equated with the positive, relativization of all moral values. And that's a global phenomenon, which is being pushed through all the global corporate media.

Robles: That's a very good point, you just raised, about evil becoming common place. I was talking to somebody the last… a couple of weeks ago about the events in Syria and we were discussing the killing of these 426 children as a pretext for war, like it was a normal event almost. And I stopped for a minute and it was quite disgusting really.

Pavic: Absolutely. The more I watch today's news and the agenda, the words of Hannah Arendt are always resumed - the banality of evil.

Evil has been banalized beyond all recognition it's almost becoming..they are trying to make it completely common place and something that has… Is not less good than anything else. It's a democratic choice you make : good, evil. It's not important whether something is good of evil, but you have the freedom to make that choice.

Robles: I see.

Just remind you, you are listening to an interview with Aleksandar Pavic.

Robles: In what other ways do you think the West is engaged in breaking the Serbian people's identity, if you could? This is just one instrument they use we know of that.

Pavic: The other, of course, main pathway is Kosovo, the attack on Kosovo. It's not just an attack on the territorial integrity of the country, it's also an attack on the very identity of Serbs, it’s what made Serbs survive.

For several centuries of mostly Islamic occupation. Kosovo is a place which probably has the biggest concentration of sacral objects, sacral buildings anywhere in Europe, meaning churches, more than a thousand churches dot this very small territory. And pretty much since western troops arrived in Kosovo in 1999 more that 150 churches have been destroyed. And dozens and dozens of cemeteries, old archeological sides, it's all being systematically wiped away one by one.

So Kosovo is something that people in Serbia very much identify with. And taking it away, not only physically, but also in the sense that's trying to convince the Serbs, that Kosovo is actually Albanian and it doesn't belong to them. That's the other main point of attack on the Serbian identity.

 END OF PART 1

You were listening to an interview with Aleksandar Pavic. He is a political analyst with the Strategic Culture Foundation Online Journal. Thank you very much for listening and I wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_10_10/Serbia-breaking-the-back-of-countrys-identity-Aleksandar-Pavic-6921/

 

 

JAR2

9 October, 14:09  

3,000 Mohawk girls disappear, Canada does nothing

Download audio file    MOVED HERE

The topic of “American Exceptionalism” has been making its rounds in the world media in an op-ed piece for the New York Times President Putin said "It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries", said President Putin, "rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. We must not forget that God created us equal".

Americans feel they are exceptional. Why? It is one of the fallacies of American history, American history ignores the big lie that America is a country founded on stolen land and based on genocide. I spoke with a native American, a member of the Mohawk Nation to see what she thought about “American Exceptionalism”. 

JAR2

7 October, 04:43 2 

“Values”: US violates sovereignty of Libya and Somalia

сша солдат сша армия военный военнослужащий американский солдат

Photo: EPA

Calling it a “foreign policy victory” and a “powerful flex of military muscle” the New York Times reported on twin military incursions on Saturday in Africa by the United States, one to assassinate a reported senior Al-Shabab leader whom officials refuse to name, in Somalia and another to kidnap a reported Al-Qaeda leader in Libya named Nazih Abdul-Hamed al-Ruqai.

The so called “raid” by Navy Seals in Somalia, if you can call a military incursion and assassination attempt on the sovereign territory of another country that, was apparently in response to the massacre by Al-Shabab at the Westgate Shopping Center in Nairobi two weeks ago.

According to reports the Navy Seal Team Six members attacked the home of the reported leader shortly before dawn in an attack where they snuck up on the seaside home from the Indian Ocean and immediately engaged the “militants”, killing several. The majority of US reports say the Navy Seal team had to disengage before they could confirm that their target was killed, pointing to the fact that they were outgunned and/or outnumbered and were forced to retreat without fulfilling their mission, something the American media is not mentioning as neither are officials who praise the Seal team.

Navy Seal Team Six was the group that supposedly executed Osama Bin Laden and were so outnumbered that they had to call in air support, which did nothing to save them.

American officials and the US media are promoting the fact that these two “operations” were against Al-Qaeda and how the United States will do whatever they want or can in ensuring their interests are protected, however it is not clear what their “interests” are in Somalia, Nairobi or Libya. Also it not mentioned as it should be every time the name Al-Qaeda comes up, the United States created them and that they were working alongside Al-Qaeda in Syria.

While US President Obama, who approved the operations, is facing backlash from Republicans in the United States and being perhaps “cautiously” praised around the world for not launching another illegal attack on a sovereign nation in Syria, some US media outlets are calling the operations a political stunt to gain support at home. No one in the western media however is mentioning that these attacks were military operations carried out in sovereign nations.

Another point that might be made here is that Obama desperately needed to launch operations against supposed Al-Qaeda members as more and more Americans are beginning to learn about how closely intertwined Al-Qaeda and its affiliates actually are with the US Government. In Syria they are being supported, armed, trained and imported to overthrow the government and kill the president and in Libya the same person who they now call a “militant” and a “terrorist”, Nazih Abdul-Hamed al-Ruqai, was actually a Gaddafi opposition poster boy for the West when he was assisting in bring down the government of Libya.

Another point that needs to made in these operations is the now self-declared international mandate of the American Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) which apparently had agents in Libya and Nairobi. Apparently Kenyan authorities asked the FBI for assistance in investigating the Westgate Mall attack, the fact that they could not stop the Boston Bombing or find anyone responsible for 9-11 not being a fact of contention apparently.

One might also wonder how it is the US Government always knows where Al-Qaeda is, until one is aware of the fact that they were originally created and trained by the CIA and they are still working in unison with the US all over Africa.

Sure terrorists should be liquidated wherever they may be, anyone who kills or mains innocent people in pursuit of their own goals should be, as should anyone who invades countries to get resources or destroys governments to protect their economy or supports terrorists or hires them to carry out their own dirty work, but there is the question of sovereignty here.

Libya was a sovereign nation, but it has spiraled down into anarchy after the US and its surrogates murdered its leader like a dog in the street. Since the US intervention and the destruction of the economy and government the oil has flowed, and almost no one in Syria knows to where, or why they continue to live with continuous blackouts and energy shortages, but the oil trade has continued in dollars, as the US wants it and the oil is theirs to control.

Somalia is another issue. Although the US claims there is no “real” government in Somalia, other than an internationally placed UN overseer, according to the US media the Somali authorities were warned of the attack on their territory. Why there were no Somali forces present is another question one might consider.

Another matter one might consider is the fact that the world has been questioning, as of late, the self-imposed-delusion of American Exceptionalism, and that these two “operations” were timed to take place on a Saturday, when they could be spread all over the world as heroic deeds, while most of the world’s official bodies and governments are having the day off.

The Libyan Government has asked Washington for an official explanation as to why a Libyan citizen was kidnapped without their knowledge and even someone as high up as the assistant to the Prime Minister of Libya has stated that, despite US claims to the contrary, no one in the government was aware of an operation to capture or rendition Nazih Abdul-Hamed al-Ruqai out of their country. The US says he is not in Libya and is under US control.

The fact that Washington went into the sovereign state of Libya and renditioned a Libyan citizen without the knowledge of the Libyans themselves leaves many questions to be answered. Especially when the new Libyan Government is almost subservient to the US and the West. Was this an operation to get one of their agents back? Perhaps. Or does the US feel it can rendition anyone from anywhere, extra-judicially execute whoever it wants and then claim it is heroic and brave and righteous and exceptional back home, most likely.

Serbia and Kosovo and the former Yugoslavia are the blueprints for the destruction and then endless controlling of sovereign states and the US’ own undeclared but endless global “War on Terror” allows it to use its military to go after whoever it wants and do whatever it wants, wherever it wants, whenever it wants.

Sure terrorists must all be liquidated or tried and locked up for life, even perhaps if they were once “freedom fighters” as in the case of Nazih Abdul-Hamed al-Ruqai who are no longer needed, but these prosecutions and liquidations must not be carried out by some third country because it unilaterally decides to do so.

So while the US is applauding itself and tapping itself on the back for “protecting their own interests” and “following their own values” they might stop and think that they have once again carried out unilateral acts of war on sovereign nations without an international mandate and even worse without the knowledge of the authorities or the states where they: a) attempted to kill a national of a sovereign nation and b) where they kidnapped a national of a sovereign nation in his own country.

So if violating the sovereignty of nations and the denial of due process for citizens of other countries is a matter of pride for Americans and reason to support their president, which it obviously is, there is little anyone can say to Americans to reign in their leaders.

American officials such as Chuck (War Secretary) Hagel saying we will do whatever we want as long as it is “consistent with our laws and our values”, may play well back home, but the fact is that US “laws and values” are not the world’s “laws and values”. There are still some countries in the world who still jealously hold on to concepts such as rule of law sovereignty and due process.

This is just another attempt by the US to impose its will and superimpose its “values” on the world. Whether the world will protest this latest infringement of international law and violation of the sovereignty of nations is highly unlikely. After all Libya and Somalia are broken and shattered countries with few allies ready to support them against the United States, which of course is how the US likes it. We will no doubt be seeing more of these “flexing of powerful military muscles” in broken and shattered countries all over Africa, as the US needs to keep pleasing its war lovers back home.

George Bush said “… either you are with us or you are against us!”, meaning everyone who is against the US is a terrorist. I am afraid I am against them again on this one, as I am sure many people the world over are. Not that we support terrorists, we just support the rule of law and the sanctity of sovereign nations.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com

JAR2

 

5 October, 22:03  

US continues war on Anonymous and 'evil' file sharers

2012 февраль коллаж Anonymous хакер хакеры взлом

© Collage: Voice of Russia

On October 3rd 2013 a US “institution” which has been called archaic since the 1950s and still exists today, namely a federal grand jury, “indicted 13 alleged members of the hacker collective Anonymous for conspiring to intentionally cause damage to protected computers.”

The grand jury, a body which meets in secret "independent of the courts", where defendants cannot confront their accusers or see the evidence against them and whose workings are all kept secret is an effective tool used by the US government for granting legitimacy to any persecution on false or flimsy grounds. Other countries such as Russia have determined that such bodies run contrary to guarantees of fairness and their "secrecy" and "independence" brings to question their impartiality.

The “grand jury” system was outlawed or disbanded in most democratic countries but continues to be used in the United States. While a grand jury is supposed to merely determine if there is enough evidence for an individual or entity to be prosecuted by the courts, for the most part a grand jury’s findings are taken as fact by the courts. Therefore in a case that might otherwise be thrown out for lacking sufficient evidence to go to trial, a grand jury adds legitimacy to such a prosecution.

Grand juries almost exclusively find for the government and it is almost unheard of for a grand jury to be used to indict government officials or other powerful individuals or bodies when such indictments are sought by citizens whose rights have been trampled on or who wish to expose or fight government illegality.

If the system worked properly and for everyone it would be where members of Anonymous (for example) or whistleblowers could go to seek a redress of their grievances. However this is not the case, quite the opposite in fact.

The finding of possible guilt or the indictment by a federal grand jury, is not secret although all of the workings of the system are, and are in fact made public in the loudest manner possible, as an effective way to poison the jury pool and sway public opinion which would allow the state to then get away with prosecuting and imprisoning unwanted members of the population who may have in fact done nothing more than going against the establishment.

The alleged Anonymous members are all charged with committing “cybercrimes” as part of an Anonymous operation called Payback. These horrible “crimes” were in fact nothing more than DDoS attacks on organizations that have lobbied for stricter copy right enforcement and were launched largely in response to government and private internet security usage of DDoS attacks to shut down sites that did not comply with US copyright laws. One such firm, Aiplex Software, based in India, was hired to launch their own DDoS attacks by organizations such as 20th Century Fox and other Hollywood corporations and when the file sharing site the Pirate Bay was attacked and shut down, Anonymous supposedly retaliated by taking down various entertainment industry websites, including that of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).

The “conviction” was based on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act which was used to persecute internet activist Aaron Swartz, the creator of Reddit and RSS technology, for allegedly illegally downloading academic journals and scientific research kept secret but paid for and funded by tax payers dollars. Mr. Swartz committed suicide while facing 35 years in prison for downloading educational material.

A member of Anonymous said the following regarding DDoS attacks on a site which publishes news and other items by Anonymous members“Let's consider anyone reading this knows the history of DDoS and how it became a form of digital protest.”

“There are many reasons people want a site to go offline. This will be about the protesting reason for it: The basic point of any protest is to get your voice out there and let people know you are unhappy. Imagine over 9,000 people went into a Wal-Mart to f*** around and not buy anything to protest how poorly Wal-Mart treats their employees. Compare this to DDoS and remember that one of them could possibly land you in jail for a night and the other could land you in jail for ten years.”

It is these long and extreme sentences that are the most troubling and point to a government overstepping any form of justice and entering territory of outright totalitarian persecution. Some would say the US has entered into a corporate fascist state where the government serves the corporations and the individual means nothing and this appears to be the case.

Anonymous says: “The U.S. government is set up to protect capitalism, not people. They claim to have come up with a quantitative monetary amount of damage from some of these sites that have been taken down like during OpPayPal. This is how they justify these long sentences even though the figures are a mere guess.”

Anonymous says the ease with which DDoS attacks are carried out and the fact that almost anyone can take part in them is what scares the government.

Anonymous: “The beauty of an online protest is that you are not limited in participating by where you are geographically. So if anyone can protest online and the programs are easy to use it means almost anyone can do it. This is really what is scaring the f*** out of governments worldwide. The people of the world can now make their voices heard.”

Anonymous and other Hacktivists have argued repeatedly that DDoS attacks do no permanent damage and merely make a resource inaccessible for a short time. Which is in fact true.

Anonymous: “… there has been no permanent damage caused by DDoS except for some hurt feelings, some embarrassment and a really bad day for their IT department.”

The Hacktivists say the worldwide internet should remain free for anyone and not be restricted or controlled by the US government, American corporations or other government for that matter and take issue with the draconian laws and extreme penalties for something as simple as downloading a song.

“The gross inadequacies of the new laws being passed internationally have been pointed out repeatedly. Our chief complaint is that such measures would restrict people’s access to the internet.”

“In these modern times access to the internet is fast becoming a basic human right. Just like any other basic human right, we believe that it is wrong to infringe upon it.”

The thinking of those wanting to punish Hacktivists and anyone who might dare share a file is best summed up by former blood-spitting, tongue-flicking, high-heel wearing lead singer for the 70s rock band Kiss, Gene Simmons, who attracted the focus of the Anonymous group and operation Payback when he famously stated in a speech: “Make sure your brand is protected...Make sure there are no incursions. Be litigious. Sue everybody. Take their homes, their cars. Don't let anybody cross that line.”

As a result the sites of the once teen hero turned enemy of youth, SimmonsRecords.com and GeneSimmons.com, were down for a total of 1 day and 14 hours and were redirected to ThePirateBay.org.

To underline how corporate and monied interests and the government have now teamed up to wage war on the kids, Simmons wrote in response to the attack: “Our legal team and the FBI have been on the case and we have found a few, shall we say ‘adventurous’ young people, who feel they are above the law. And, as stated in my MIPCOM speech, we will sue their pants off. First, they will be punished. Second, they might find their little butts in jail, right next to someone who's been there for years and is looking for a new girl friend.”

Simmons then goes on to imitate Anonymous with his own Anonymous type close, threatening anyone who dares to stand up by saying: “We will soon be printing their names and pictures. We will find you. You cannot hide.”

In a recent posting by Anonymous regarding Payback operations against SONY the group claims that when you buy something, even if it is electronic, it is really yours. For example: if I buy a pen and let you use it, you should not have to pay a royalty to the manufacturer. Sound fair?

They wrote: “Your corrupt business practices are indicative of a corporate philosophy that would deny consumers the right to use products they have paid for, and rightfully own, in the manner of their choosing. Perhaps you should alert your customers to the fact that they are apparently only renting your products?”

As always Anonymous finishes with their trademark:

“We are Anonymous.

We are Legion.

We do not Forgive.

We do not Forget.

 Expect us.”

So whether you agree with the position of the corporations or not, you might ask the question: “Why are they going after these kids when they are letting war criminals walk the streets?” A troubling question indeed.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_10_05/US-continues-war-on-Anonymous-and-evil-file-sharers-4375/

 

 

JAR2

5 October, 17:54 1 

It’s been a struggle being a Mohawk – Mohawk Elder

Download audio file  MOVED HERE

With the debate going on the supposed exceptionalism of a certain country it seemed like a good place to start to ask a native of that country their opinion on the exceptionalism of the invaders. In part 3 of a longer interview Mohawk Elder Kahentinetha Horn who spoke to the Voice of Russia, details how the Mohawk Community she lives in was surrounded by the Canadian military forces when they protested the destruction of an Indian graveyard and ceremonial site. She also told us how she was repeatedly beaten and describes an attempted sexual attack by Canadian border police.

JAR2

 

4 October, 09:59  

Indigenous people are exceptional, they survived a holocaust – Mohawk Elder

Download audio file   MOVED HERE

With the debate going on the supposed exceptionalism of a certain country it seemed like a good place to start to ask a native of that country their opinion on the exceptionalism of the invaders. The response was sobering. This exceptional nation based on genocide and built by slaves is morally bankrupt has not culture to offer, is running out of resources and its people have no jobs, are losing their homes, going hungry and have no hope for the future. Where then is the exceptionalism? Mohawk Elder Kahendinetha Horn spoke to the Voice of Russia on these issues and much more.

 

JAR2

2 October, 22:08  

President Putin spreads peace Nobel or not

Владимир Путин международный дискуссионный клуб Валдай валдайский клуб

Photo: RIA Novosti

Calls for the president of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin to receive the Nobel Peace Prize are growing around the world with support coming even from leaders of other countries who deserve the award as well in their own right.

The nomination was officially sent to the Nobel Committee on the 16th of September two days after President Putin reached an agreement in Geneva to bring Syria’s chemical weapons under international control. The request was received by the Committee on the 20th of September.

Part of the letter reads: “Being the leader of one of the leading nations of the world, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin makes efforts to maintain peace and tranquility not only on the territory of his own country but also actively promotes settlement of all conflicts arising on the planet.”

The submission for the 2014 prize was made before the deadline for nominations which is in February.

According to the Nobel Committee the prize is awarded to: “the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses”.

The Geneva agreement put a stop to the US aggressors’ and Nobel Peace Prize holder Obama’s plans to bomb the sovereign country of Syria into oblivion. A plan with the officially repeated goal of eventually killing (forcibly removing) its leader and overthrowing its government and in support of US backed and imported Al-Qaeda affiliated groups who have been warring with the Syrian Government at the behest of their Washington masters.

One of the main sponsors of the request Russian icon Iosif Kobzon told the Interfax news agency: “Barack Obama is the man who has initiated and approved the United States’ aggressive actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, now he is preparing for an invasion into Syria. He bears this title nevertheless. Our president, who tries to stop the bloodshed and who tries to help the conflict situation with political dialogue, is in my view more worthy of this high title.”

According to RT supporters of the Russian initiated request include the Vice-President of the International Academy of Spiritual Unity and Cooperation Beslan Kobakhiya, the head of the International Academy of Spiritual Unity and Cooperation Georgy Trapeznikov and a supporter of an earlier request the president of the All-Russian Education Fund Sergey Komkov.

Although much is being made of the Noble Peace Prize many would say its reputation has been seriously tinged since the award was given and then not removed from US President Obama while he continues to engage in acts of aggressive war, maintain an illegal torture prison and continue with extra-judicial executions of innocent people worldwide and then the fact that last year it was given to the European Union for questionable reasons has also not served to maintain the prestige of this award.

President Putin, who is a humble man and not influenced by awards or prizes has not commented on the nomination, nor discussed it with anyone and his spokesman, Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov told the ITAR-TASS news agency: “The main criterion for the president is his satisfaction from the results of his work.”

This is not Mr. Putin’s first peace prize in 2011 he received the "Confucius Peace Prize," with President Putin’s stance on the Libyan uprising cited as one of the reasons for the committee’s decision.

In November 2011 Qiao Damo an organizer for the award said: "This April or May, Putin was against NATO's idea to bomb Libya and he appeared to the world in a peaceful manner. This year's peace prize was given to him because his act this year was outstanding in keeping world peace."

The President is a realist and knows the true nature of what he is against and fully understands that he has only temporarily stopped an out of control self-proclaimed “sole super power” from wiping out yet another country. His relentless efforts along with those of his Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the Russian Government have not wavered and by standing his ground when push came to shove and not allowing the country to be annexed by the West by caving in to threats of a terrorist attack with the full backing of the United States by Saudi Arabia, he has in that victory, returned to our fragile planet to a healthier state of multi-polarity and given hope to the world.

President Putin has done everything to maintain peace including Putin addressing average Americans and US officials directly in a New York Times op-ed headlined ”A Plea for Caution From Russia”. A brilliant yet incredibly humble move filling this particular writer with an even deeper admiration. The idea of the leader of the largest country on our planet publishing a plea, yes a plea, to the citizens of a country to attempt to forestall aggression and make the leaders see reason is truly an act of quiet heroism.

This responsible, serious and intelligent move caused the mad men calling for bombs to drop to stop dead in their tracks. Here was a leader they do not understand and demonize on a daily basis asking for them in a reasonable intelligent and adult manner to see reason and follow the rule of law.

The empty aggressive claims by Obama and the war-mongers in Washington paled in the light of such reason and they knew it. No matter how many time a drugged looking Kerry repeated “We know”. There was no support. The world is truly tired of war and killing, and like Obama knew when he received the peace prize he lied his way into receiving, the world can become formidable when it is united against you.

Another leader who also deserves the Nobel Peace Prize in my opinion is Bolivian President Evo Morales who has been the target of US imperialist aggression and has introduced moves to bring the Washington war machine to stand to account for its war crimes at the International Criminal Court in the Hague.

Morales a staunch anti-US imperialist has stated Obama deserves the Nobel War Prize and has spoken out in favor of President Putin’s nomination for the Peace Prize.

The President of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro also expressed support, saying that his actions saved the world from war in Syria.

"If someone in this historic moment deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, this will be President Vladimir Putin, who helped to stop a war that threatened Syrian people, "said Maduro during a speech.

Last Saturday, Maduro announced that this week the head of the Venezuelan Parliament Diosdado Cabello will pay an official visit to Moscow and will give a letter to the Russian leader which contains congratulations "for the role he is playing in establishing a new world of peace."

In closing I would like to add the following, the UN Charter Preamble states: “We the peoples of the United Nations determined; to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom….”

 President Putin has been doing more to advance these ideals than almost any leader on Earth, while the US and its allies continue to wage war after illegal war, with their Nobel Peace Prize leader continuing aggression after aggression. Maybe President Putin has finally brought some sanity back into the world.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_10_02/President-Putin-spreads-peace-Nobel-or-not-4902/

 

 

JAR2

2 October, 17:51 5 

American 'exceptionablism'

политический фастфуд фаст фуд США Американская политика демократия Дядя Сэм Макдональдс

© Collage: Voice Of Russia

The United States of America is an exceptional nation. It truly is! In every way, shape and form it is the most exceptional country on this little blue orb floating in space. And Americans are the most truly exceptional people on the planet, this is a fact that we know just like America knows that every country it wants to bomb is deserving of their bombs because they are less than exceptional and even, to those exceptionally exceptional exceptionalists, they are in fact objectionable. No country on Earth is as exceptional as the US, if you argue then you too will become exceptionable to the exceptionals. If after being put in your place you remain argumentative and objectionable about your own worthlessness then you will become exceptionally exceptionable and warranting exceptional undebatable irretraceable destruction by exceptional means of annihilation. Exceptional to the max!

Perhaps certain Americans in their ignorance confused the words exceptionable and exceptional because if we look at the reality of what America is, the truly proper word, if we understate (Yes I said understate) the gravity of the situation, is exceptionable. Perhaps though I am wrong, Obama and all of the elites say America is exceptional, maybe they are right. What do I know? I am just an exceptionable expendable indigenous objectionable I suppose.

So let’s look at America for a minute and see why it is truly exceptional. Bear with me here.

America is exceptional because:

It has the highest rate of missing and exploited children in the world, in this it is exceptional.

It has an exceptionally high rate of illiteracy among countries in the modern world and probably one of the most dumbed down populaces on Earth while reportedly having the most advanced information technologies on this little planet. Exceptional!

It has a system of higher education that is exceptionally expensive and only allows the most exceptional of the exceptionals to obtain a higher education.

It has the most exceptional regime of endemic institutionalized racism while at the same time claiming it is the land of the free and equal. This is exceptional hypocrisy. Psychotic in degree. Exceptional.

The US has an exceptional internal white supremacist terrorist organization with exceptional white robes and hoods that have entered into agreement with those in power to maintain the status quo of racial inequality so that they remain more or less inactive. This is an exceptional arrangement with the government and the power elites.

The United States has exceptional laws that allow these and other hate groups to march and terrorize the less exceptional into fear and silence and even loathing of their ethnicity. This is exceptional. To make non-whites ashamed of their own color! Exceptional!

And the health care? World class! The highest paid doctors and nurses on the planet! But if you cut your finger with a fluorescent bulb and get that nasty anti-coagulant in the cut and don’t have insurance, you can bleed to death! Really! Ten thousand dollars a night for a hospital bed! Exceptional!

It has more guns and violence and the most militarized brutal police forces on the planet. Police so intimidatingly armed and exceptionally brutal, unless of course you are a fair maiden then you may be subject to their exceptional love. Exceptionalistically exceptional! To serve and protect!

The police have exceptional training and can shoot you in the head or slam your face into the concrete faster than you can even finish asking, “What did I do?” Exceptional!

The legal system is also exceptional, people can take a gun and shoot black teens walking down the street and then raise hundreds of thousands of dollars from supporters and then have the system say they are innocent. This is like no other system in the world! It is exceptional. They even have the understanding of the crime of walking while black! A capital offense! Exceptional! And the President and Attorney General, black on the outside too! Do nothing! Exceptional!

And the freedom! Like the KKK, neo-nazis [sic], and homicidal anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim lunatics, they can burn Qurans, hold marches, burn crosses and even kill minorities by hanging them from trees and get away with it. Just like the Third Reich! They are exceptional.

Speaking of the Third Reich, the most beautiful thing is that the elites in America include many members of the Jewish persuasion and even a black president and the system of hate flourishes! This is exceptional!

But that is not all. The country that consumes and uses more resources than any other country in the world and which produces almost nothing, is somehow also considered the richest. This is while being technically bankrupt and dependent on foreign resources to keep itself going. This is not only exceptional but unbelievable! Awesome!

And it only gets better. The United States has a leader involved in countless wars and threatening world peace on a daily basis, even threatening through a proxy the Russian Federation with terrorist acts during the Olympic games, and he has the Nobel Peace Prize! This is also exceptional. Yes indeed dear reader. Truly, deeply, undeniably and impressingly exceptional.

The country continues to operate and maintain an illegal torture prison right in front of the eyes of the whole world and gets away with it, while committing war crimes, acts of aggressive war, crimes against peace and now agreeing to use nuclear weapons on North Korea if the pretext is right, remains unprosecuted or unsactioned and its leaders prance around the globe unhindered. This is truly mind-bogglingly exceptional! Bravo! The AWE!

The country is even able to force down the presidential aircraft of objectionable leaders of sovereign nations whenever it wants and get away with it untouched, this my friend is truly exceptional.

But that is not all, that is not even the beginning, Oh no siree Bob! What about that poor Australian lad that exposed their illegality and has grown white haired while trapped in an embassy in a free surrogate country. Exceptionally exceptional. Yes, that! Wow! The true grit of that exceptionalism is mind-boggling!

Then there is the exceptional spying. PRISM, Key Stroke, and all of their corporate slaves allowing the system to be hosted on their servers. That system is truly exceptional! It even spies on the United Nations. Exceptional.

And the weapons! Oh my! The numbers of weapons! Only to be outdone by the different sort and types, oh how many ways to kill their fellow humans, and even make billions doing it! That is exceptional! And the best is when they bomb and devastate a country and then charge the country for reconstruction! That is the very definition of exceptional!

What about the population! Enslaved! Afraid to speak out! And paying for the endless wars and profiteering! While they themselves are having trouble finding food! These people are so exceptional they even give these huge corporations which have sent all of their jobs abroad tax breaks! Yes these billion dollar corporate monsters do not have to pay taxes like the poor homeless minions! That is truly exceptional!

Wait! Back to the legal system for a second! This is a country where parents can adopt and then kill foreign children and then spend a few months relaxing in a well equipped comfortable cell, eating three squares and then get out and do it again! Truly exceptional. While we are at it! The death penalty! Yes truly an exceptional punishment! And what about that little guy who exposed all of those war crimes? The war criminals got away with it and he went to prison forever! Exceptional! And the public has done nothing! Also exceptional.

While we are there, what about this? They can arrest citizens of other countries in third countries for intending to possibly think about assisting someone who may have had the inclination to consider breaking an American law, and then throw him in jail for 25 years just because they say he is a bad guy! Exceptional!

And the political system! A billion dollars plus to be president and two parties that are really one! Exceptionally. And the archaic Machiavellian political system where one can lose the popular vote but win the presidency! Exceptional. Yes indeed. Wow.

What about the warfare. Exceptional. They can sit in a bunker and kill people with a drone. Committing extra-judicial executions at will and even make up killing lists on a publicly known day called “Terror Tuesdays” and the people and the world do nothing! Because they are exceptional! And now these exceptional killing drones have become even more exceptional! They have become F-15 fighter aircraft and next? Bombers that will be drone-like! Exceptional! They will be able to bomb entire continents of the planet while watching their favorite programs on TV. EXCEPTIONAL beyond the exceptional.

But the most exceptional thing is that this exceptional country, which was founded on the genocide of over 100 million American Indians and built by slaves, calls itself the Land of the FREE! Truly and monumentally exceptional.

And lastly also worth mentioning for its exceptionability is that event that made it all possible! 9-11, the most exceptional controlled demolition in the history of the human race! And no one was prosecuted for it! Exceptional to the existential degree! Imagine three skyscrapers imploding into their own footprints after lateral impacts, and the third was not even hit. Exceptional… And the number of dead 2,999 almost exactly 3,000. The horror and monstrosity of this event is beyond words. Yet, the fact that all of the aircraft disintegrated, melted and disappeared into dust. Exceptional! And the best minds in science could never explain where the 767s disappeared to!!! Truly exceptional.

Yes America! You are exceptional. Oops, sorry, did I say exceptional? I meant exceptionable. So sorry.

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

JAR2

 

2 October, 12:05  

The United States is an exceptionable nation – Mohawk Elder

Download audio file      MOVED HERE

The topic of American exceptionalism has been making its rounds in the world media in an op-ed piece for the New York Times President Putin said "It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries", said President Putin, "rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. We must not forget that God created us equal". Americans feel they are exceptional. Why? It is one of the fallacies of American history, American history ignores the big lie that America is a country founded on stolen land and based on genocide. I spoke with a native American, a member of the Mohawk Nation to see what she thought about American exceptionalism.

 

JAR2

29 September, 16:04 2 

UN Syria resolution may allow action against rebel supporters - Rick Rozoff

Совет безопасности ООН Совбез ООН резолюция Сирия

© Photo "The Voice of Russia"

Download audio file

The full text of the United Nations Resolution on Syria has been published and, thanks to the efforts of  Russia and China, is one of the most balanced to be agreed in the last century. However there remains the threat of a western attack on Syria. In an interview with the Voice of Russia World Service, regular contributor Rick Rozoff also stated that some language in the resolution could even allow for measures to be taken against any party that provides or supports the Syrian “opposition” with chemical and or other non-conventional weapons.

Hello this is John Robles I am speaking with Rick Rozoff the owner of Stop NATO and the Stop NATO international mailing list.

rozoff

Robles: Can you tell us about the United Nations Resolution on Syria? Are there any holes or loops in it that the United States might use to go ahead with a bombing campaign on that country?

Rozoff: I fear there is indeed and actually there are two that I can think of immediately. The resolution itself was adopted unanimously by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: Russia, China, France, Britain, the United States, and the current ten rotating member states.

It makes some effort to be balanced. It is better than what, I’m sure, The US, Britain and France would have wanted and that’s because of Russia in the first place. The Russian and Chinese influence, I think, trying to introduce a balanced and moderate resolution.

However, it mandates a number of issues, including the monitoring of chemical and other non-conventional weapons inside Syria. Presumably, by all sides. Though, when it comes to compliance issues and ultimately the use of Chapter 7, as they are called, measures against the perpetrators of the violations of chemical weapons regulations but only the state could be held accountable. I hardly see how the rag tag and irregular military forces supported by the West could be held accountable. They could be sanctioned, for example, but I don’t know if they could be bombed.

But what’s most alarming is that the penultimate demand in the resolution, Number 21, and I’m reading it verbatim, decides in the event of non-compliance with this resolution including unauthorized transfer of chemical weapons or any use of chemical weapons by anyone in the Syrian Arab Republic, to impose measures under Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter and what’s important to realize in that, there are several articles under Chapter 7, but the operative one and the one that we are most concerned about right now is Article 42 which reads as follows: Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in the earlier Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, they may take such actions by air, sea and land forces as it may be necessary to maintain and restore international peace and security and these include, I’m quoting again, demonstrations, blockade and other operations by air, sea or land forces of members of the United Nations, in other words war.

And what we are talking about, of course, most recently is some equivalent of UN Resolution 1973 in March of 2011 that led to, contrary to what the Resolution asserts: a full six-month war by the Pentagon and NATO against the nation of Libya.

The resolution passed recently does not stipulate Chapter 7 measures, I mean that’s the Russian contribution to have that left out but at the end it leaves a little bit of room for the West – the United States, Britain, France and their allies – to come back to the Security Council and demand implementation of Chapter 7 Military Intervention against the government of Syria.

Robles: Right, but that would still require the approval of all the members of the UN Security Council, wouldn’t it?

Rozoff: Actually, it wouldn’t have to be all members. One permanent member alone could veto it, Russia or China.

In theory it would be unanimous but not necessarily. Russia and China could abstain, vote against and then not veto it and this is what happened with Libya indeed. So either assent or passive assent is guaranteed by voting for or abstaining. Or even voting against and not vetoing.

We’ll see but even though I think that we can pause for a little while and hope that in contravention of the UN Security Council and the recently passed Resolution 2118, the US will not once again act outside of and in direct contradiction to the United Nations, as it did 14 years ago against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and as it did 10 years ago against Iraq and as it has in any number of other cases since the creation of the United Nations.

So I think, a couple of things: there is still the real threat of a US and allied military action against Syria regardless of this resolution but I think that we can agree that the adept Russian diplomatic initiative has put a spoke in the wheel of the western war machine.

Robles: Rick, could you remind our listeners what is Chapter 7, as I’m sure not all people are aware of what it is exactly.

Rozoff: It’s a chapter in the Charter of the United Nations. It stipulates, as I mentioned, what actions the United Nations can take collectively (members of the United Nations).

The actual and full title of Chapter 7 is “Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of Aggression”. So you see how far we have descended the pathway to international lawlessness, when you see that Chapter 7, which was explicitly introduced in the aftermath of World War II, the deadliest war in history, of course, and the one that resulted from acts of territorial aggression by the axis powers, by the fascists and Nazis and imperial Japanese aggressors, has now been turned around, where the major western powers, the United States in the first place, apply Chapter 7 to strictly domestic developments within the borders of a country, a country moreover has not threatened any of its neighbors.

So, I think that’s an important consideration, particularly, the by now – and I’ll tip my hand – infamous “responsibility to protect” provision adopted by the United Nations, which equates the mistreatment of nationals and citizens within a nation to acts of military aggression against other countries, either neighboring or around the world, which in the latter category is something the United States is quite adept at.

I think another concern that we have is the final article in Chapter 7 by the way, and this cuts both ways, this is the sort of logic that could be used by the US and its NATO allies, I mentioned there were two persistent problems that we have to deal with: one of them is that the United States might succeed, in conjunction with its allies, in provoking another situation such as that in the summer of last year (2012), where a Turkish warplane violated the airspace of Syria and was shot down, and then provide the United States and other NATO allies to invoke their Article 5, the mutual military assistance clause, ostensibly in defense of a NATO member, that being Turkey, the only NATO member that borders Syria.

Article 51 reads real quickly: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,” and so forth.

So, failing to get UN Security Council approval, or even the preparatory stages of approval for a military attack against Syria, the US could contrive a situation in conjunction with Turkey, in the most apparent case, to provoke a military action or response from Syria and then go to Brussels and invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter, and the US could even push for Article 51 of Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter “Defending an Ally.”

Robles: Regarding the language in the text, as I understand, you just said that if “any party” in Syria uses chemical or forbidden weapons the government of Syria will be held responsible. There is no language in there about non-state actors, meaning all these al-Nusra and al-Qaeda affiliates?

Rozoff:No, actually no. Once again thanks to Russian intervention – clearly you see all the fingerprints of the respective permanent members, I think, on this resolution 2118 – but part of the Russian contribution is indeed a statement that neighboring countries have a responsibility to prevent the transfer of chemical and other non-traditional weapons into Syria.

This clause, I would have to assume, was authored by Russia and I’m rather surprised at the western countries for this (for a resolution which contains such a provision) but the immediate countries one suspects, of course, are Turkey and Jordan and possibly Israel – that would permit the transfer… They are already actively aiding the armed insurrection inside the country – and that they will now be held accountable, if I the read resolution properly, for that action.

My only question about that is how practically that could be implemented and which acts of diplomatic demarches, or sanctions, or even military actions would be enforced.

Robles: But there’s no language in there as to the consequences of those guilty of such support.

Rozoff: No specifics but we know what Chapter 7 permits, so technically that could be used even in reference to neighboring countries that are aiding and abetting the bloody uprising and threat against the national sovereignty of Syria.

Robles: Well, technically I think that would be a logical and proper implementation of Chapter 7, wouldn’t it?

Rozoff: Yes, I agree, rather than the way it has been misused, or the way people are talking about misusing it.

For example, the language exactly in the UN Resolution passed recently underscores, and I quote: “No party in Syria should use, develop, produce or so forth chemical weapons”.

It does dictate that the government shall comply with all aspect of the decisions of the Organization for Prevention of Chemical Weapons.

One of the problems is – we talked about adept Russian diplomacy, let’s give it the devil’s due and talk about the equally efficient, I’m afraid, maneuvers by western nations of the US, in the first instance, to create an amorphous, proxy organization, “the Free Syrian Army” and such like, inside the country where it’s very difficult to identify a command structure, much less to hold any individual or individuals responsible.

So, when we see people carving out the internal organs of murdered Syrian soldiers and eating them, when we see captives, civilian and military, beheaded when, as Russia asserts and I am sure it is the case, Syrian rebels are using chemicals weapons, as they did in March in a suburb outside the city of Aleppo and quite possibly did in August of this year, who do you hold accountable?

 You can’t sanction them, they are not a state actor and what military action can you take? I mean, the government of Syria is taking the ultimate military action against these people. They are trying to neutralize groups of bandits and brigands with chemical weapons.

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

RussiaUNUSSyriachemical weaponsUN Security CouncilUN resolution on Syriaconference on SyriaSyrian conflictGeneva peace conferenceGeneva-2

·         Share:

·          

·          

·          

·         submit to reddit

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

Сomments 2

·         MosMos, 29 September, 20:33#

The world community should stop the suffering of the Syrian people that continued for years .The word rebels is misleading they are mercenaries ,muderers and criminals.Why is it when Alqaada kills people in the USA they are called terrorists but same people killing Syrians are rebels?Syria has the right as the US to track and kill terrorists so does Syria they should go after the terrorists and all those that support them anywhere in the world.

·         Jean-Claude MeslinJean-Claude Meslin, 29 September, 21:46#

If negative actions from the Syrian rebels are proved it will be easy for Russia and China to take punitive actions against those who initiated the chemical weapons'transfer (no more nuclear fuel for America. No more gas for France and China take back all the money invested in the USA, France and G-B). It is a certainty that the U-N will never have the courage to punish the powerful culprits. Instead of binding over to all Western blackmails. Soon or later such actions will have to be taken to stop the USA-NATO's hegemony...
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_29/UN-resolution-on-Syria-may-allow-for-actions-against-supporters-of-rebels-Rick-Rozoff-6892/

 

 

JAR2

29 September, 03:31 1 

There is something going on across America right now – Bruce Gagnon

США Нью-Йорк

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

A corporate criminal syndicate made up of the military industrial complex and its related banking, media, pharmaceutical and other subsidiaries, is controlling the United States, according to Bruce Gagnon in an interview with the Voice of Russia. According to polls the American people are more interested in building infrastructure and helping their fellow citizens than supporting the paradigm of endless wars. Bruce Gagnon, the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space spoke to the Voice of Russia on these issues and more.

Part 1

Part 2

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/09/28/23/bruce_.jpg

Hello! This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Bruce Gagnon – the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. This is part three of an interview in progress. You can find the previous parts on our website at voiceofrussia.com

Robles: How do you feel personally, as a human being, that your own Government would consider you an enemy because you oppose a war?

Gagnon: I am beyond being surprised. You know, my father was in the military and I grew up as sort of a young patriot. I joined the Air Force myself during the Vietnam War. I was a young republican for Nixon in 1968.

So, my whole adult life has been one lesson after the other in what my Government is capable of doing.

When I was young I wanted to be an FBI agent, so I could fight organized crime.

Today, I realize that what I do in fact is fighting organized crime. I’m fighting against the criminal… what I call the corporate criminal syndicate; the military industrial complex and its related banking, and media, and pharmaceutical, and subsidiaries.

So, nothing surprises me anymore at this point in my life.

Robles: You’ve just said something that I think more and more and more people are beginning to realize. I think once most of the population understands who exactly is in control, maybe something can be done to stop funding them and take away that power they have, but I don’t know.

Gagnon: Polls are showing that people are with us on these issues. They want to cut the military budget, they want to convert the weapons production system, they want to build rail systems rather than weapons for endless wars, they want to deal with the coming effects of climate change, that we are seeing more and more around us. But we have this very serious obstacle in the Congress where the corporations control the politicians. It is a money game.

And we’ve lost our democracy in this country. We go around the world talking about it, lecturing other countries about it – about freedom and democracy, and everything else – but our country is a huge hypocrite. We are not the only country in the world that is a phony-baloney, but I happen to be an American citizen, so I feel like it is my job to try to change my own country before I go around the world lecturing other people about what they should do.

Robles: How much news is there in the United States regarding Syria and the fact that the US is supporting terrorists there? How much of an outrage would there be, if people realize that 426 children were slaughtered to create a pretext for a war? I mean, if it is found that the US is somehow involved in that or the corporations or the Rothschilds or whoever you want to blame for that.

Gagnon: If it ever really came to light that that’s what happened, I think there would be a huge reaction. And that's why the Obama team and their allies in France and England, and Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are working so hard to keep a lid on all of that.

I don’t know exactly what happened over there, but I’m inclined to believe that this was a rigged deal. But I will say this, that, again, this recent effort in this country to stop the Congress from giving Obama permission to attack Syria was remarkable, because we could not have stopped this attack without the support of the Republican rank and file across the country.

Alan Grayson, the Liberal Democrat from Orlando, Florida, reported that in the House of Representatives Democrats were four to one opposed to the attack.

Robles: Four to one!?

Gagnon: Republicans were ten to one opposed to the attack in the House. So, the Republicans were stronger in opposition to the attack.

Some people say – well, that's just because they don’t like Obama, they wanted to see him defeated. But again, what we were hearing from the people across the country, from conservative states, was identical articulation and they were talking about this very question.

They were talking about that we are arming Al Qaeda. So, that word is now getting out across the country and we have to thank the Internet for that. We can’t thank the American corporate media for that, but it is the Internet that has helped get that information out to the people.

Robles: That’s the first time I’ve heard there were such wide margins. I mean, what we are hearing over here is that there was just a slightly higher number of people in opposition of approving this aggression.

Gagnon: Oh, no! It was huge on the part of the Republicans. I wrote a blog about it. I thanked (something that I don’t normally do) the Republicans for this victory, because we couldn’t have done it without them.

Obama has, to a large extent, neutralized the left in this country: the liberal base or you can call it anything you want.

The peace movement is a shell of itself, because when Obama came into power many people, many quote unquote, “liberals” who identified themselves with peace activists, quit working in the peace movement, they quit donating to the peace movement, organizations fell apart, they had to lay off staff that they previously had during the Bush administration.

So, when Bush was waging wars, many liberals were opposed to those wars. When Obama is waging the same wars, many liberals don’t want to oppose those wars because Obama is their president.

Robles: Sure! How can you go against a black guy with a Nobel Peace Prize? I mean, if you are even a little bit, even marginally liberal.

Gagnon: So, we couldn’t have done this because we didn’t have enough strength to stop this congressional decision on Syria attack. We couldn’t have done it without the Republicans.

Robles: This is not a Liberal or a Conservative, or Neo-Conservative, or whatever issue. This is criminals just pillaging the system for their own good. That’s the way I see it. It is not Republican, it is just criminal.

Gagnon: Well, it is what it is. You know, I feel grateful.

Robles: What we hear over here, it gets all sanitized coming out of the US. So, we don’t hear a lot of the staff that’s actually going on there. And the world audience doesn’t hear, like you were saying, about all this police brutality. We only hear when there is like massive demonstrations or something. I mean, if you ever watched CNN international, I’m sure you have, have you noticed the difference?

Gagnon: Yes, I know what you are talking about.

Robles: Bruce, I think I took up too much of your time already but I appreciate… Anything you want to finish up with? Maybe, give us some details on the Peace Walk?

Gagnon: Well, we are very excited about it. There is a group of Buddhist nuns and monks from an order called Nipponzan Myohoji. All they do is peace walks all over the world, that’s what their order is all about. The founder of their order was a friend of Gandhi and this is one of the most active Buddhist sects there. It just does peace work and they build peace pagodas around the world as well. We are very fortunate to have these wonderful people that are going to lead our walk. And then, we have members of Veterans for Peace organization that I belong to, as well as other activists from the state and from the region who will be coming. And others will join us for a day or more along the way, as we pass though their community.

So, it is really exciting and I think it is going to be a really great walk. We are going to end on October 19th here in Bath, Maine, where I live.

There is going to be christening that day, such a crazy use of Christ’s name, to bless a Zumwalt-Class Stealth Destroyer on October 19th. So, our walk will come to my community here in Bath where we’ll hold a protest at this so-called “christening” of this first navy stealth destroyer. We are very excited about this whole process.

Robles: A stealth destroyer, now? The next thing we’ll get drone stealth destroyer, right?

Gagnon: Right! The idea is that we’ll be able to sneak up on other countries and fire shells from the distance between New York City and Philadelphia and electro-magnetic rail guns, they call it, are on board this stealthy destroyer. And the price tag, the normal, usual destroyer was $1.5 billion and this new stealth destroyer is $4 billion. So, more than double in price. You can see why the corporations are very eager to keep this endless war cycle going. They are making big money.

Robles: While the American people are losing their schools, their health, their dignity, their respect and their lives.

Gagnon: And in my town, this Bath Iron Works is owned by the General Dynamics Corporation. My town has 9,000 people.

Our annual budget, city municipal budget is $ 15 million. And General Dynamics is coming asking our broke, practically bankrupt town for another tax break.

Last year the CEO of General Dynamics made $18 million in compensation. One guy made more money than our entire municipal budget and now they are begging and asking for money from us. In the past they’ve received $197 million worth of tax breaks over the years from the state and from our town.

I’m organizing a campaign right now with some other people to try to block this corporate welfare request. And we just heard from the city tax assessor that the city council is hearing from boatloads of people, overwhelmingly, the public is opposed to the tax break.

So, even in this company town, you don’t go up against Bath Iron Works, you don’t stand up against General Dynamics in this town but we are doing it and apparently the public is on our side. Why? Because they’ve had enough.

Robles: Sure! The people are supposed to pay their taxes and if someone doesn’t pay their taxes, they lose everything they own. Yet the huge corporations are supposed to not pay any taxes. They are privileged, they are exceptional, they are above it all, right?

Gagnon: Yes! And they threaten that if you don’t give us this, we’ll move somewhere else. People are just tired of it and they are figuring that out.

So, there is something going on across America right now. Some might call it a prairie fire. But it is interesting times we are living in, for sure.

Robles: I think this can’t go on too long, something is going to break soon.

Gagnon: Yes, it has to.

Robles: Alright! Thank you very much Bruce, I really appreciate it. Best of luck to you on the walk! Can you give our listeners your website address?

Gagnon: I’ll give the Maine Veterans for Peace address. It is www.vfpmaine.org

Parting

That was the end of an interview with Bruce Gagnon – the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. You can find the previous parts on our website at voiceofrussia.com

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

WorldUSSyriademocracyUS economypublic opinion

·         Share:

·          

·          

·          

·         submit to reddit

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

Сomments 1

·         Vera GottliebVera Gottlieb, 29 September, 20:07#

A country that has it's priorities totally out of order. A country with a collapsing infrastructure and yet...there is always money for war, peace just has to wait. How long???
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_29/There-is-something-going-on-across-America-right-now-Bruce-Gagnon-2140/

 

 

 

JAR2

27 September, 15:36  

US Government engaged in genocide of the poor – Bruce Gagnon

F-15 ф-15 истребитель сша самолет полет ввс

© Photo: Flickr.com/dcbprime/cc-by

Download audio file

In an effort to robotize their war machine the United States has now turned fighter jets into drones. The US plans to convert their entire air force into a drone fleet from bombers to fighters, which will allow them to conduct secret “antiseptic” wars. The broadening of drone usage and the continuation of the endless war that the US is engaged in has become the object of bi-partisan ire with Republicans now “laying out an articulation that is identical to the one” that peace activists and Liberals use. Americans are saying we have: “… no jobs in our community. Our roads are falling apart, our bridges are falling apart, our schools are falling apart,” yet they want to launch another war. According to Bruce Gagnon, in an interview with the Voice of Russia, citing a nazi (sic) paper titled: ”The Caloric Reduction Intake Schedule in Hitler’s Warsaw, Poland”, the US Government is engaged in a modern day genocide of the poorest populations in the US by cutting Food Stamps, healthcare and other kinds of such programs that people need in order to survive. The upper 1% wants to eliminate the “superfluous populations” because there are no jobs anymore in the US and these people are a liability.

Part 1

photo

Hello! This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Bruce Gagnon – the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. This is part two of an interview in progress. You can find the previous parts on our website at voiceofrussia.com

Robles: About a week ago Boeing and the US Air Force, they actually turned an F-16 fighter into a drone. Have you heard about that?

Gagnon: Yeah, yeah, I have.

Robles: Where do you think that is going? Are they going to be launching their wars of aggression now with F-16 fighters?

Gagnon: It is clear that the Pentagon wants to, by the year 2025, turn their entire air force into a drone air force. They say that they want to be able to land drones on aircraft carriers, they want to have them for, essentially all of their military, fighter aircraft and other aircraft bombers, bombers, to be drones. They believe that it will save them money in the long run and that they won’t have to, quote unquote: “put any pilots at risk” this way.

This is one thing. I think what is driving all of this is the military industrial complex, it is a whole new variety of weapon systems that they can develop and to make more money. So, I think that’s bottom line what is driving it.

Robles: They could launch a war from a bunker somewhere in Virginia and it could all be run by computers. And they could, I see a worst case scenario, one person could just bomb an entire country.

Gagnon: Well, it would take a few more people to run the whole show. But clearly, they are trying to be able to run, quote unquote: “antiseptic wars”. They want to able to essentially, have wars that the American people would never really know were going on, because there are no body bags coming home and everything else. But the bottom line, the Achilles' Heel of this whole thing is money. This country is falling apart.

It was fascinating to watch the anti-Syria efforts by the American people across the country. I saw a Republican saying… (you know, I’m talking about grassroots, ranking-file republican in conservative states that always vote Republican, places like Oklahoma), … laying out an articulation that was identical to the one that we use.

I heard one woman say: “Hey, look, we’ve got no jobs in our community. Our roads are falling apart, our bridges are falling apart, our schools are falling apart. We don’t want to spend any more money on any more of these wars”.

So, the people are figuring this out. And again, because of that this makes them dangerous to the corporate oligarchy that runs this country.

Robles: How far-fetched do you think it is that once they feel threatened enough, they will start attempting to implement these FEMA plans, to start incarcerating mass numbers of the population? How threatened do you think there are going to be? Or do you think that will never happen?

Gagnon: I think that’s the last resort, but I think it is conceivable. I think there is something else that they are doing immediately. And that is to try to thin up the population.

I’ll never forget, when I was in college I got a part-time job working for a woman who was disabled. She was writing a book on the many different forms of genocide. And she had me go to the library and make copies of different pages of books for her.

And one of them that I did was a page called the; ”The Caloric Reduction Intake Schedule in Hitler’s Warsaw, Poland”. And what it was, it was a graph where they charted over a period of years...

The Nazis, they said:”If we reduce the caloric intake of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto in Poland, we will be able to kill them, they will die and so we don’t have to gas them, nobody will know that we are gassing them, this way we can kill them over a period of time.”

And so, just in the past week the Congress voted to cut Food Stamps for the poorest of people in this country. It was already too low. The amount of food stamps they were getting was already way too low. People were already running out of food by the third week in the month. But now that’s being cut back even further.

And I would submit that the Government knows exactly what they are doing. And by doing this, they are thinning out the population – by cutting food stamps, by cutting healthcare, by cutting other kinds of such programs that people need in order to survive, because there are no jobs anymore in this country.

The Government knows that over a period of time these poor people and lower income people are going to die earlier, and it is a way to thin out the population. I think it is a form of genocide that is already under way in this country. The concentration camps are the last resort, but in the intervening years they are going to try to thin up the population.

Robles: Do you think that’s possibly why they are promoting this gay marriage business? That’s another way to cut down the population, if you destroy the family unit and destroy the belief that family is a man and a woman who can create children.

Gagnon: I wouldn’t say so. I think that our country has just evolved to a point where we really believe that you have to respect everyone’s dignity, that you have to respect everyone’s choice for who they want to be in love with. I don’t think there should be any penalty for anyone just because they love someone. So, I think that’s really what is happening, especially amongst the younger generation.

Robles: So, they are trying to get rid of just the poor people, or who do you think they’re… ?

Gagnon: Yeah, yeah, that's what I call the “superfluous populations”. Because of computerization, mechanization, robotics and outsourcing they don’t need all these people in this country anymore, and especially, you don’t want to educate them because then they become potential revolutionaries against the system.

So, you cut education, you dumb down the population (they’ve been working on that for years. They are now moving to privatize education, corporatize it, basically to reduce people’s ability to think critically) and then, from there begin to take away healthcare and nutrition programs and things like that, even for senior citizens (they are cutting back on a program called Meals on Wheels, where volunteers deliver prepared meals to senior citizens).

Robles: Right. To shuts-ins…

Gagnon: They are cutting back on those programs. So, seniors are going to die earlier, poor people of all ages… Most poor people are children in this country. And when you don’t get a good meal, you go to school and you don’t learn as well. Scientists have proven that to be the case. So, it is clearly a program to thin out the population.

Robles: So, the poor struggling masses yearning to breathe free have become a liability for the upper 1%.

Gagnon: Yeah, they are not needed. Again, they are superfluous and they don’t want them around.

Robles: I read some stuff on these FEMA camps. I don’t know how much you know about them. I mean, there are a lot of conspiracy theories going on. There was one interesting location that was filmed on the Internet in Indiana. And apparently they had like these color-coded gates. Red was for instant disposal, blue was like for reprogramming and yellow or something was for whatever they needed to do. It was just like disposable people. Have you heard anything about that?

Gagnon: I don’t know about that particular situation. But I’ve seen this stuff about the FEMA camps for years. And I don’t in any way doubt that it is true.

Those camps could be used for locking up immigrants, because there is a strong anti-immigrant effort within some portions of the leadership in the country. Or they could be used to lock up activists like myself when the clamp comes down.

So, I personally would say that I think it is all possible, all conceivable but at this point in time I don’t believe that’s happening. But it is conceivable that it could.

Let’s remember that during WW II the Japanese were rounded up and placed in similar camps. They had property taken away from them, they were locked in camps, they lost everything they owned just because they were Japanese.

Our Government rounded up Indians, put them on reservations and to this day they are still the poorest people in the country, they’ve never recovered from that experience. So, our Government has done this kind of thing before…

Robles: It was founded on that.

Gagnon: Yeah! And then, they used the same model in Vietnam when they created these enclaves to supposedly protect the Vietnamese people, but the reason why they were really doing it was to control the population during that war. So, you know, I don’t put anything past our Government, frankly.

You were listening to part two of an interview with Bruce Gagnon the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. This is part two of an interview in progress. You can find the previous parts to this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_27/US-Government-engaged-in-genocide-of-the-poor-Bruce-Gagnon-2978/

 

 

JAR2

27 September, 07:31  

The American people are now the enemy of the state – Bruce Gagnon

секретная служба США безопасность агенты бинокль слежка охрана разведка

Photo: EPA

Download audio file

In the US, the corporate military industrial complex has completely taken over the Government. After the events of 9-11 the US Constitution has been completely shredded, leaving the American population the most surveilled, subjugated and restricted in the world. What was once considered the land of the free has now become the land of the surveilled, with average Americans afraid to do anything to protest a government which is out of control and looking after its own interests and not those of the people. Despite the almost complete and total surveillance state that has been implemented in the US, defense contractors, firms and governments continue to seek billions of dollars to develop even more means to surveil and control the populace, the classifying of peace activists and anyone who opposes the paradigm as terrorists is something the US populace has grown accustomed to. The Voice of Russia's John Robles spoke to long-time peace activist Bruce Gagnon on these issues and much more.

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/09/27/03/Bruce2004.jpg

Hello! This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Bruce Gagnon the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.

Robles: Hello Bruce! How are you?

Gagnon: I’m fine!

Robles: Can you tell our listeners about the Maine Drone Peace Walk? What is that all about?

Gagnon: It is a nine-day peace walk that we are going to start up in the very northern part of Maine where our Government has announced that they are trying to put up a weaponized drone test center.

So, our concerns are two: we are concerned about the domestic surveillance use of drones and, at the same time, we are obviously very concerned about the US military and the CIA using drones in Central Asia and Africa, on the African continent where they are killing and increasingly large numbers of civilians.

We are really reacting to President Obama and Congress’ announcement that 30,000 drones will be flying around the United States doing surveillance of the American people in the coming years.

In fact, 37 states have applied to be one of six drone test centers across the country and more than 500 drone manufacturing corporations are now bidding to be recipients of Pentagon funds.

Last spring here in Maine we worked with the ACLU (the American Civil Liberties Union) to try to get a bill passed in our state legislature that would require police to have warrants before they could spy on anyone with drones, and the Attorney General of Maine, a Democrat, tried to kill the bill and she began talking about drones being, quote: “… an economic driver here in Maine”. And it was then that we learned that up in the Aroostook County, one of the northern counties in the state, this is where they wanted to have a weaponized drone test center.

The bill eventually did pass the state legislature, primarily because there was a sort of a conjunction of interests between Democrats and Republicans. There are a lot of Republicans now, that are… grassroots Republicans that are very concerned, as well, about drone surveillance. So, they pressured their party leaders and the bill passed. But the Attorney General was able to get an amendment to the bill which had an exemption for weaponized drone testing up in the northern part of the state, something we weren’t obviously very happy about.

But then the Governor, a Republican Tea Party conservative Governor vetoed the bill anyway. So, in the end nothing passed. And so, it was out of that that we in Maine Veterans for Peace group that I belong to, as well as at the Bring our War Dollars Home Campaign here in Maine, which I co-coordinate, we decided to organize this walk through significant parts of the state in order to really help the public better understand this drone issue and how our privacy is really in danger, as well as how the militarization or the weaponization of these drones, both in this country and around the world, would be a growing problem.

Robles: Is the facility still going to be built there or is it cancelled?

Gagnon: The bill that the Governor vetoed was the surveillance warrant bill, and they had attached to it a provisal, allowing for a weaponized drone test center. But it has not yet been established.

Right now, actually, they don’t want to talk about it. The media doesn’t cover it, nobody in the Government is talking much about it, but we were lucky that we learned about it during those hearings last spring.

So, right now everything is sort of back to square one and we felt that it would be important to just literally walk across the state. And we are going to have a good number of people joining us to really bring this issue to the public.

Reminder

Robles: In the US, they normally have to have a warrant to spy on someone if they tap the phone lines or if they run surveillance on someone, right? So, why are drones different?

Gagnon: You know, they are saying that drones are no different from helicopters. They use helicopters to chase suspects and identify suspects, and they don’t necessarily need a warrant for that. But they really fear the warrant requirements across the country.

There is a lot of organization going on, demanding that police be made to use warrants. But increasingly we’ve learned in these NSA disclosures by Edward Snowden, has helped us all learn that a lot of this spying is going on without warrants, whether it is phone, fax, e-mail communications, So they are intercepting all those communications and they don’t have a warrant for any of that, really.

So, I think they are violating all of our constitutional rights. Our Constitution is being shredded now daily in this country. It started during the Bush administration and it’s accelerated under the Obama administration. So, it is really important for activists like us, who live and breathe because, supposedly, we have rights of assembly and free speech and other such things.

So, we are literally fighting for our rights in this country right now. And by getting out on the street and walking across our state, it will help the public be more aware of this issue because the corporate dominated media isn’t really covering it much anymore either. So, we literally have to get out on the street in order to bring it to the people.

Robles: I think the US Constitution, after 9-11 was pushed to the side. One quick point here, if you could comment on it: now, what you were talking about, helicopters and suspects, that would be something like a hot pursuit situation, right, where of course they have a cause, but I think that's a false reasoning to implement these drones, that they will be used for that, I think that’s pretty obvious, and then, them trying to tag this into another bill, is like what they do with so many of the other things that they are trying to get away with, by attaching things to defense bills and stuff. Can you comment on that, on the fact that they are trying to sneak this in on the people and what you are doing to fight that?

Gagnon: It is becoming more and more prevalent in our world here today in the US, that they are doing everything possible to find new ways to restrict our freedoms, to spy on us, surveil us, to monitor us, to intercept our communications. And I think, unfortunately, a lot of the public has begun to feel overwhelmed by it and sort of depressed by it and feeling like there isn’t anything we can do about it and that we are just going to have to get used to it.

You often hear people say: “Well, as long as you don’t do anything wrong, you don’t have anything to worry about.”

But of course, what they don’t understand is that when you get politically active, because you don’t like our wars, or you don’t appreciate the collapse of the economy and the way that the rich are getting richer, and the poor are increasingly getting poorer and the Government is cutting back on social spending, so, when you move into opposing things, you start being identified as… frankly, some government agencies are now calling people like us terrorists. They are using the word “terrorist” to describe nonviolent activists who are out in the streets, who are organizing the public on all these kinds of issues.

We are frequently hearing the word “terrorist” used as a justification for this kind of monitoring that is happening to us in an increasing manner. So, they are always trying to sneak in new ways, new technologies in order to carry out this corporate agenda of cracking down on our democracy in this country.

Robles: They’ve been labeling any independent country or anyone who is not under their control “terrorists” since 9-11. I also read, if you could comment on this, you were mentioning being labeled enemies of the state, recently there was some FEMA legislation that was passed that would allow them to incarcerate massive amounts of Americans if there was something like a large uprising against US war policies. Are you familiar with that?

Gagnon: For some years now there has been legislation and administrative decrees made by both the Bush Administration and even the Obama Administration essentially giving the Government unlimited powers to suspend the Constitution in any time of national emergency that is very broadly defined and could become a justification at any time. So, yes indeed, they now have these powers in this country and we increasingly are worried about it, because what we also see is the militarization of local police forces.

Local police forces are almost becoming indistinguishable from the US military and you have a growing number of local policemen who have been either through the National Guard or through the regular military. They’ve been deployed in war zones and they often come back feeling that they have the freedom and latitude to treat American citizens the way they’ve been treating people in the war zone, neither of which is acceptable. But they come back and increasingly we are seeing daily, we see stories of police overreacting, shooting people, killing people, beating people all over the country and not just people of color anymore, they are reaching now into white communities, middle class communities.

So, it is just becoming a crescendo of police brutality across the country, as they are trained in these ways of military tactics and everything else and they are starting to act like that. So, there is a real growing anger across the country about how local police are becoming militarized. And people clearly understand that this is being pointed to us, directly at us, that the American people have now become the enemy of this corporate state that intends to clamp down on us.

And so, these drones then become just another tool, a very significant tool to give them the capability to not only identify one person, but with this technology that they now have, via satellites they are able to literally see and monitor an entire city all at one time. They’ve used this in Afghanistan, Iraq and now they are bringing those technologies back to the United States and they are going to use them against us.

You were listening to part one of an interview with Bruce Gagnon – the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. Please check our website in the near future for the rest of this interview.


 

 


 

Press release from the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space regarding the upcoming events in protest of drone surveillance in the US state of Maine:

Maine Drone Peace Walk

Preserve Our Privacy: No Drone Spying in Maine

Limestone to Bath October 10-19

Contact: Bruce Gagnon (207) 443-9502 (office) or (904) 501-4494 (cell)

Peace activists from Maine and beyond will walk through large portions of our state from October 10-19 in order to bring the issue of drone surveillance at home and drone killing overseas to the public’s attention. The walk will begin in Limestone in Aroostook County and end in Bath.

President Obama has announced that as many as 30,000 drones will be flying around the US doing surveillance of the American people in the coming years. Thirty-seven states have applied to host one of six military drone test centers across the nation.

There is much talk about bringing drones to Maine and making the Presque Isle airport a weaponized drone test center, thus the reason for starting the walk in Aroostook County.

Last spring the Maine legislature passed a bill that would require police to obtain a warrant before snooping on citizens across the state. Gov. LePage vetoed the bill.

According to Lisa Savage, co-coordinator of the Maine Campaign to Bring Our War $$ Home, “This walk is important to raise awareness of how the government spends our tax dollars on very expensive drones to keep us all under surveillance. Drones are being used to kill thousands of innocent civilians, including hundreds of children, around the world. People here in the U.S. say they want their tax dollars spent on health care, education, jobs and veterans benefits -- not drones.”

Doug Rawlings from Maine Veterans For Peace said, “As I walk down these Maine roads that I have driven for the past 35 years, I will be going past bridges and schools that have been built since World War II military expenditures were converted over into infrastructure funds. My father's generation put away the munitions and started building the country that has given us the life we now lead. Over forty years ago I served in an artillery unit in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. Our howitzers dropped rounds on countless Vietnamese peasants, and I didn't blink an eye. Now I realize the anguish we wrought then, and visit now on Afghan and Pakistani children with our Predator drones. I cannot, in good conscience, accept or support such a use of my tax dollars.”

The drone walk begins in Limestone on October 10 and will pass through Caribou, Presque Isle, Old Town, Bangor, Skowhegan, Mercer, Farmington, Waterville, Belgrade, Augusta and Bath. (Some driving will be necessary between some of these communities. The walk will average about 13 miles per day. In the evenings walkers will be fed at local churches and will stay in local homes.)

On October 18 the walkers will hold a protest against drones inside the Hall of Flags at the state capital in Augusta at 3:00 pm.

The walk will conclude on October 19 with a 10:00 am protest in Bath at the “christening” of the Navy’s first “stealth” destroyer at Bath Iron Works.

Buddhist monks and nuns from the Nipponzan Myohoji order will lead the non-violent peace walk.

The walk is being organized by Maine Veterans For Peace and the Maine Campaign to Bring Our War $$ Home. The walk will be held during Keep Space for Peace Week and is just one of many such events that will be held around the world.

The daily schedule and entire walk route can be found at:http://www.bringourwardollarshome.org/Maine%20Drone%20Peace%20Walk%20Schedule.pdf

- END -

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space

PO Box 652

Brunswick, ME 04011

(207) 443-9502

 globalnet@mindspring.com

www.space4peace.org

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_27/The-American-people-are-now-the-enemy-of-the-state-Bruce-Gagnon-3614/

 

 

JAR2

24 September, 21:57  

9-11: a mythic event dividing time into before and after – Dr. Kevin Barrett

11 сентября 9/11 атака взрыв

Photo: en.wikipedia.org

Download audio file

9-11 was designed as a quasi-religious event that would divide time into a before 9-11 and an after. The architects needed the event to wage endless aggressive wars around the world and continue to stage false flag events, such as the Boston Marathon bombing to continue the myth that we are all being threatened by terrorists. The entire War on Terror paradigm that we have all lived with since 9-11 was recently turned on its head when through its proxy Saudi Arabia, the US and Al-Qaeda (the CIA Database) threatened Russia with a terrorist attack. Dr. Kevin Barrett explained in detail all of these events and more in an exclusive interview with the Voice of Russia.

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/09/24/17/images_9363.jpg

Hello, this is John Robles, You are listening to an interview with Doctor Kevin Barrett, a Doctor of Arabic and Islamic Studies and the co founder of Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth, he is also the owner and manager of truthjihad.com. This is part 3 of an interview in progress, you can find the previous parts on our website at Voice of Russia.com

PART 1PART 2

In progress

Barrett: …whenever there is country that is fairly cohesive and is not cooperating with their program and Syria would qualify, Iran would qualify, Russia would qualify, maybe tomorrow it will be China, then these nations and their leaders become targets.

So I think that is the way the game is being played. And when you cited this meeting between Bandar, who is sometimes know as Bandar “Bush” because he is an honorary member of the Bush Crime Family here in the US, and President Putin… in which Bandar Bush rather outrageously said: “Which do you want billions of dollars in this hand or do you want us to go stage a huge terrorist attack at the Winter Olympics next year?”

Talk about an outrageous Mafiosi style approach, it so crude and thuggish. The reports are that President Putin rejected this approach.

Robles: He just gave him a big “NYET”.

Barrett: A big “Nyet” saying that we are not interested in this kind of dealing. We want to be dealing in an above board way, with people that we can have confidence in. I think that is the best possible way…

Robles: With people who share our views, right?

Barrett: Yeah. So, but it is kind of stunning that someone like Bandar would come to Putin and threaten to bomb the Winter Olympics and claim that he was acting with the full support of the US Government. Since when is the US government, you know, going to be threatening to bomb the Olympic Games with Al-Qaeda, through its Saudi proxy, it kind of turns the whole “War on Terror Paradigm” on its head.

Robles: Exactly, exactly and, I mean, the western media has almost ignored that completely but I think it goes all the way to… the root of all this and 9-11 and the whole Bandar family connections with the Bush family, his mad desire to be king even though he is out of the running because of his mother etc.

What can you say about the Saudi connection to 9-11 again, to Boston for example, was there any connection there? When he made the revelation that the Saudis control the Chechen terrorists and can you tell us anything about Boston that you might know?

Barrett: Yes, I think that Saudis had some involvement in both 9-11 and probably the Boston attacks as well. Of the 19 hijackers, I believe it was 17 of them were Saudi nationals, and these guys were apparently intelligence connected Saudis, who were brought to the US on “snitch visas”. These are visas that the CIA issues to Saudis who are willing to spy for the CIA in Saudi Arabia, and as a reward they are given some money and then they are given special type of visa.

So 17 of these hijackers came over on CIA “snitch visas” meaning that they are all CIA agents and they are also presumably reporting to Saudi intelligence as well, which is very tight with the CIA.

While they were here, several of these hijackers did have connections with Royal family Saudis. And then after 9-11 suddenly all of these well connected Saudis, Ben Laden’s family, Bandar-Bush I believe, were packed up on planes and flown out of the country at a time when planes were not allowed to fly. They were basically evacuated to save them from being interrogated by the FBI.

So there are some interesting Saudi connections around 9-11, I don’t think they are quite as overwhelming as the Israeli connections, or even the US connections, but I think Saudi Arabia was a player in 9-11. And I think part of the purpose of 9-11 was to prevent Saudi Arabia from leaving the US orbit.

The king of Saudi Arabia had threatened to leave the US orbit in August of 2001, saying that: “The time has come for a partying of the ways.” And I believe that part of the purpose of 9-11 was to cut the knees off of the people in Saudi Arabia who wanted to move in the direction of independence and to restore that part of Saudi Arabia that is basically just a slave of the empire, people like Bandar Bush.

Robles: I see.

Barrett: And with Boston, I think that… To me at least it was very counter-intuitive that they would be telling us that radical Muslim Chechens would be bombing the Boston Marathon, because these radical Muslim Chechens, as you say, are part of this US-Saudi Axis, the element of so called Al-Qaeda that has been harassing Russia, ever since Al-Qaeda meaning: “the CIA Database”, was created during the Afghan war.

So why would radical Muslim Chechens want to bomb the US when it’s actually the US that’s supporting them in their fight against Russia? That makes no sense. And then all sorts of information popped up indicating that yes, these guys were probably patsies, they were controlled by these CIA-Saudi, so called Al-Qaeda types.

Apparently the older one had gone to Chechnya and maybe got trained. Their uncle is a CIA man, so it seems that probably the CIA and its Saudi, so called Al-Qaeda, proxies were involved in setting up these brothers for the Boston bombings. But I don’t believe that the Tsarnaev brothers actually carried out those bombings, I think they were probably set up as patsies.

Robles: The reason behind that is to increase defense and security spending to expand the police? What was the reason for that?

Barrett: It is actually to keep the post 9-11 regime going. 9-11 was designed as a kind of “mythic event” that would create what Philip D. Zelikow called a ‘whole new world’.

Philip D. Zelikow was the author of the 9-11 Report, who wrote the whole report in chapter outline before the commission ever convened, meaning he probably just took his script for the 9-11 attack itself, which he wrote before the attack and it was used to stage the attack and made that script into his 9-11 Commission Report.

Robles: Was he part of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)?

Barrett: No, I don’t believe that Zelikow was actually a member of PNAC but he was associated with the same people, and he was the author of the Bush Doctrine of the preemptive war. He was a member of the Bush Administration and in fact the guy that was most responsible for that change to a preemptive war doctrine.

He described himself as an expert in creation and maintenance of public myths, such as the myth of Pearl Harbor, which we’re told was a perfidious Japanese surprise attack and that was used to turn the American people away from this 85% anti-war sentiment on the eve of WWII. And since Pearl Harbor Americans have been willing to allow the US to run rampant all over the world, and so Zelikow is an expert in this kind of thing.

He wrote an article in 1998 speculating on the likely “psychological, social, political consequences of a massive Pearl Harbor style attack on the World Trade Center, such as the “destruction of the World Trade Center”, was a quote from his article. So he nailed that three years in advance.

Basically this whole new world that Zelikow created using myth-making techniques, it’s the same way that time is always divided into “a before and an after”, by all myths and Zelikow talks about this in his article. He says that the destruction of the world trade center will divide time into a before and an after.

Just like, the great myth such as Christianity, divided time into before Christ and after Christ, BC and AD. And in Islam its before the Hegira and after the Hegira. Every great mythic sacred system divides time into a before and after.

So Philip Zelikow, the expert in public myths, staged 9-11 as this epochal human sacrifice, that would be a kind of quasi-religious event, that would divide time into before 9-11, when there was the Constitution and one set of rules, and then post 9-11, when we are in this whole new world where the government can do anything it wants and waging aggressive war all over the world with no restraints.

And in order to maintain ‘this whole new world’ that was created with the September 11th attacks, they have to keep staging a lot of follow up attacks.

They can be relatively small but they have to be spectacular enough to get a lot of attention and convince the people that were still living in this whole new post 9-11 world where we are all threatened by terrorism.

This is not true. The average American is more likely to be hit by lightening or drown in his or her bathtub than to die of a terrorist attack. But the media is being used to brainwash Americans in an Orwellian fashion to believe that they are in danger from terrorism.

So these insiders who staged 9-11 have to keep staging follow up terrorist attacks in a way that they will get a lot of media attention in order to maintain this illusory “whole new world” that was created with this mythic event of September 11th.

Robles: Thank you very much sir, it was great hearing from you. Thank you.

Barrett: You too. Bye bye.

That was the end of part 3 and the final installment of an interview with Dr. Kevin Barret.

 PART 1 and PART 2

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_24/9-11-a-mythic-event-dividing-time-into-before-and-after-Dr-Kevin-Barret-2216/

 

 

 

JAR2

24 September, 17:35  

US/Al-Qaeda threatened Olympics through Saudi proxy – Dr. Kevin Barrett

Аль-Каида терроризм оружие террористическая организация

Photo: Flickr.com

Download audio file

Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Colin Powell, stepped forward regarding the Syrian chemical weapons attack, and said: “This was an Israeli false flag.” He cited his intelligence sources as saying that it was actually the Israelis that killed all those people with gas. He was just one of many people going “way off script” in the US regarding the heinous attack. Dr. Kevin Barrett in an exclusive interview with the Voice of Russia was very candid when he said it was stunning that someone like Saudi Prince Bandar would come to Putin and threaten to bomb the Winter Olympics and claim that he was acting with the full support of the US Government. According to Dr. Barrett the US government, threatening to bomb the Olympic Games with Al-Qaeda, through its Saudi proxy, turns the whole “War on Terror Paradigm” on its head.

Doctor Kevin Barrett

Hello, this is John Robles, You are listening to an interview with Doctor Kevin Barrett, a Doctor of Arabic and Islamic Studies and the co founder of Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for truth, he is also the owner and the manager of the truthjihad.com website. This is part 2 of an interview in progress, you can find the previous parts on our website at voiceofrussia.com.

In progress

Robles: Now in Syria there are all supporting what supposed to be the enemy of all mankind, Al-Qaeda.

Barrett: Right, and this is all so impossible to summarize and sell to the American people. So what they did in order to try to sell their war on Syria is; they took a page out of the same old book that they’ve used for the war on Iraq (9/11 was false flag terrorism), so here apparently they did a false flag attack in Syria, and then they did the same kind of rhetoric that they used against Saddaam Hussein. They said: “Oh it’s chemical weapons! Weapons of mass destruction! Etc., etc. They raised a big stink out about this horrible atrocity in Ghouta but actually it turns out, it was apparently a false flag.

And this one incident of a chemical weapons attack, you know, there is no evidence that Assad did it, all the circumstantial evidence was against it from the get go and then as more and more evidence has rolled in, it’s become ever more clear that this was a false flag attack and so these “war mongers” were trying to sell this completely inexplicable intervention in Syria on the basis of showing pictures of dead children and claiming: “look at these terrible, horrible pictures! It’s all the fault of this demonized guy Assad”, but that wasn’t enough.

The American people were not convinced and they asked all kind of questions, like number one: “Why is it so much more terrible to be killed by chemical weapons than to be killed by all these other weapons?”

Two: “What’s the evidence that Assad really did this?”

Three” “What is the end-game, what is the strategic purpose of bombing Syria?”

Four: “If the main opponents of the Assad are Al-Qaeda fanatics, are these really the people we want to put in charge of Syria?”

So these are the types of questions that even, fairly mainstream Americans have been asking. Conservative people like Pat Buchanan, Ron and Rand Paul, even Lawrence Wilkerson who was chief of staff to Colin Powell, a guy you might term as Colin Powell’s brain, in the same way that Karl Rove was Bush’s brain.

Wilkerson stepped forward and said: “This was an Israeli false flag.”

He cited his intelligent sources as saying that it was actually the Israelis that killed all those people with gas.

So there has been a whole lot of people going way off “script” here in the US and they have dismally failed to sell this war to the American people.

And I hope this will be the start of the movement away from the post 9-11 politics of endless wars on the Middle East.

Robles: I mean: we are talking about this, I mean… I kind of get the feeling like we are talking about normal events going on, but we are talking about: “426 children were killed as a pretext to invade a country!” Is anybody thinking about that? Is anybody thinking about going after the people who were behind this, because these are obviously, monsters of historic proportion?

Barrett: The reports are… It is hard to tell for sure what’s really going on on the ground in Syria, but from the available reports it sounds like children were kidnapped, these were apparently, at least according to some reports, Alawite children.

Robles: Right! From Latakia.

Barrett: Exactly! From the mountains, these are people from the same ethnic and religion group as President Assad. They were apparently kidnapped by these rebels and killed and then shown to the world as alleged dead victims of Assad and yes, that is very much like what happened on 9-11: where these insiders butchered nearly 3,000 people and showed horrible pictures to the world and then blamed the victims!

In other words the whole thing was staged, 9-11, to go after the Middle East, and go after the Muslims. And Muslims were falsely blamed for doing it. And then this time it is all staged to go to after Assad and the Alawites and it turns out that the Alawites were the victims, their kids were the ones that were apparently kidnapped and murdered.

So yeah, we need a real investigation of what’s going on in Syria and probably the only way that’s ever going to happen is if peace is allowed to break out and the only road to peace that I can see would be for essentially the West to stop supporting these co-called rebels and allow President Assad’s amnesty offer to work.

And apparently there have been over a thousand of these former rebels who have taken this amnesty offer, the actual Syrians who have been fighting against Assad and I would say with some reason: there is a real conflict in Syria that goes back decades and I don’t really blame some of these people for hating their government. But that joining these lunatics from Saudi Arabia in the pay of Israel and the US is not the solution, and more and more of them are seeing it.

So the best outcome I can think of would be for Assad to belatedly become a bit generous and really make sure that this amnesty offer really works and bring in the Syrians who have been fighting him, bring them back in the society and work out a way for peaceful change in Syria.

That would be the best possible outcome and then if Syria comes back under control, and there is law and order in the country, at that point it would be possible to do a real investigation of this atrocity.

Robles: I don’t think the United States wants that to happen. I mean 90% of the fighters there are being imported. I mean there are these Al-Qaeda affiliated groups, Al-Nusra, Wahhabbists and others. President Assad gave an interview yesterday to the US media and he said up to 90% of the so-called rebels are foreign fighters. So, I think they have to be extracted before anything can actually happen as far as peace goes.

Barrett: I agree. It is really a disguised war on Syria that they have managed to sell as a civil war. I think it was a set up, I think that there are plenty of indications that this has been planned for a long time, and that the Arab Spring provided an excuse.

They were able to get lots of people out into the streets, and of course, that wasn’t all that difficult, given the fact that there are these sectarian differences in Syria that have had a long bloody history.

So once they got those people out in the streets, then it appears that a lot of false flag activity was going on with snipers, firing on crowds, to make them think that government troops were shooting them and then other snipers firing on the government troops to make them think that the crowds were shooting them.

There were these mercenaries and killers sent into Syria to turn the Arab Spring demonstrations into a civil war and once they had this pretext of a civil war, then the mercenaries could start flooding in.

And it’s really a disgrace to Islam. I have been a Muslim since 1993 and it seems to me, that it is just tragic to have this kind of regime in Saudi Arabia run by playboy billionaire hypocrites, funding these kind of murderous activities on behalf of an empire that seeks to just keep on crushing Muslims all over the world.

And these poor people who are brainwashed into becoming mercenaries, for these extremist Saudi rulers are really not using their heads. I think that it’s a combination of: there is a certain element of fanaticism, that is being played with, there is also a lot of money being paid to people who are willing to go fight. But there is a noble intention to defend Islam, which really is what motivates a lot of people, when they want to go fight somewhere, is being warped and twisted and turned inside out by propagandists and in particular by the Saudis, who I think are really the worst offenders in this regard.

Robles: The Saudis, now they are the principle here, in funding, controlling, financing, organizing, importing/exporting, arming all of these terrorist groups. And Bandar “Bush”, or Prince Bandar, he even admitted to President Putin that they control the Chechen terrorists and threatened Russia with a terrorist event at the Sochi Olympics in 2014 if President Putin didn’t pull his support for Syria.

Do you see the US being supportive of a Saudi agenda bringing about all this violence, or do you see the US pushing this agenda and the Saudis going along with it? Who is really behind all this? And 9-11 as well, if you could comment.

Barrett: Right. I don’t think it’s any particular nation that’s behind any of this. I think it is a global ruling elite that has been very well explored by Peter Phillips, whose the professor in California who put together “Project Censored”.

His most recent work concerns figuring who are actually the members of this sort of hidden global elite that control most of the finance capital on earth. And so these are the people who are really making the decisions and they are making the decisions on behalf of their class, not really in the interest of any particular country.

Now it is true that these people tend to be overwhelmingly white and Euro-American, they are probably grossly disproportionally Jewish, but probably not the majority, but certainly more than 1 or 2% of the western population is Jewish and so there is a certain affinity for Israel in this group as well. But generally these people are just protecting their power and their class interest, and so: “Who are this people?”

Well, we have on the one hand, the Rothschild family, and these other big banking families and then we have all sorts of technicians who’ve risen to the top and are now the managers of these investment funds. Those kinds of people and the Saudis obviously control quite a bit of money.

They have cut a deal with this empire, they are allowed to pocket many many billions of dollars, in return for serving, as sort of the “custodians” of this oil rich peninsula.

So at the very top of this global elite, the people controlling most of the money. I think this are that people who are making these decisions.

They want to expand their empire which currently dominates Europe, the US, and several other parts of the world, but doesn’t really, fully control the world yet, but I think they would love to control the whole world, they want to keep expanding.

So that strategy they’re following, whenever there is country that is fairly cohesive and is not cooperating with their program and Syria would qualify, Iran would qualify, Russia would qualify, maybe tomorrow it would be China, then these nations and their leaders become targets.

So I think that is the way the game is being played. And when you cited this meeting between Bandar, who is sometimes know as Bandar “Bush” because he is an honorary member of the Bush Crime Family here in the US, and President Putin… in which Bandar Bush rather outrageously said: “Which do you want billions of dollars in this hand or do you want us to go stage a huge terrorist attack at the Winter Olympics next year?”

Talking about an outrageous Mafiosi style approach, it so crude and thuggish. The reports are that President Putin rejected this approach.

Robles: He just gave him a big “NYET”.

Barrett: A bit “Nyet” saying that we are not interested in this kind of dealing. We want to be dealing in an above board way, with people that we can have confidence in. I think that is the best possible way…

Robles: With people who share our views, right?

Barrett: Yeah. So, but it is kind of stunning that someone like Bandar would come to Putin and threaten to bomb the Winter Olympics and claim that he was acting with the full support of the US Government. Since when is the US government, you know, going to be threatening to bomb the Olympic Games with Al-Qaeda, through its Saudi proxy, it kind of turns the whole “War on Terror Paradigm” on its head.

That was the end of part 2 of an interview with Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Doctor in Arabic and Islamic Studies and the co founder of Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for truth, he is also the owner and the manager of the truthjihad.com.

This is part 2 of an interview in progress, you can find the previous parts on our website at voiceofrussia.com.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_24/US-Al-Qaeda-threatened-Olympics-through-Saudi-proxy-Dr-Kevin-Barret-9573/

 

 

JAR2

24 September, 14:58  

The US is an insane power like the Nazis – Dr. Edward Herman

сирия химическое оружие противогаз 2012 август коллаж

© Collage: Voice of Russia

Download audio file

The United States is behaving like an insane power, like the threat of the Nazis back in the 1930s and 40s. It’s out of control, and it’s engaging in war after war, violating international law and considers itself to be above the law. It is also the richest country in the world but it’s having trouble feeding its own citizens while preparing for yet another war. Dr. Edward Herman spoke to the Voice of Russia stating that and more, he also said it is time that the international community rose up and brought the US under control and has to take much more vigorous, hostile actions against the US war threats. He also called the Secretary General of NATO and NATO a menace and part of a US program for global domination. The world has to wake up and stop it!

PART 1 of the interview 

Dr. Edward Herman

Dr. Edward Herman

Hello. This is John Robles. I’m speaking with Dr. Edward Herman. He is a Professor Emeritus at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He is also the author of several books namely "Manufacturing Consent" which he wrote with Noam Chomsky and "The Srebrenica Massacre: Evidence, Context and Politics." 

In progress

Robles: My next question is: isn’t the US financially “stressed out” maybe if you would put it… to engage in yet another war? Is this financially viable for the US or maybe a move to actually save the economy?

Herman: For those of us that are critical of US policy, of the situation with respect to the use of resources, it’s amazing! The United States is in a financial crisis. It’s cutting back on all kinds of public expenditures, on Food Stamps, it’s cutting back on its schools and it’s really stripped for resources, and here it’s about to go into another war which is going to be extremely costly.

So we’re dealing with a country that is kind of a little “crazy”. It has unlimited resources for its military policies and its wars abroad but it’s struggling to provide for its own citizens. It’s amazing! This may be a good part why the public is against this war. The public is troubled, it’s getting very poor support from its government. And yet this government is preparing for another war of choice! It’s really quite amazing.

Robles: A lot of people in the United States seem to be, right now, afraid of losing food. Is the situation that bad in the United States?

Herman: Yeah! Republicans are certainly planning on cutting back Food Stamps. Food insecurity has increased greatly there are a lot of people in distress and a lot of people are really worried. So this is a remarkable situation: the richest country in the world, the richest country in history but it’s having trouble feeding its own people while it’s preparing for another war.

Robles: So this is a real serious problem in the United States right now? And people are truly afraid of running out of food or not being able to obtain or buy food? Right?

Herman: Yeah it is a serious problem but the high-level people don’t seem to recognize it. There’s Obama and his “crew” spending a lot of their time now organizing forces to justify another war, and meanwhile his base constituency is struggling. It’s lunacy. A lot of people consider that this is a country that is out of control. It’s kind of a lunatic asylum.

Robles: I see. Now. What drives the US government at this point into threatening yet another war? What are the real motivations behind this?

Herman: I think that there are a couple of things that are involved. One is the military forces in the United States, the military industrial complex is immensely powerful. Eisenhower warned about it back in 1960, that the military complex was getting out of control, it’s much more powerful now.

The United States has become a permanent war system and I read in a paper just the other day that the companies that are supplying cruise missiles and the rest, their stock prices are rising, Raytheon, Lockheed, they are doing very well.

So you’ve got the military industrial complex and all its affiliates pressing for war. You also have the pro-Israel lobby, the AIPAC (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee). The Israelis have been very influential on US policy, Syria is their enemy, Iran is their enemy, Iraq was their enemy, so they are pressing for a military operation and they have great in influence in Washington.

The United States is kind of “running wild”, globally you read about the fact that Obama says, and others say: “We have to maintain our credibility,” which can allow them to do these things and get away with them.

What about our credibility? Well, whose credibility? The American people? The United States? It’s the credibility of the imperial power. It is trying to dominate, really trying to dominate the world and it can’t stand setbacks.

Once Obama stuck his neck out and said we must stop these “bad guys,” we can’t back down. So there’s really a multiplicity of forces here but we are now in a permanent war system and the forces that support that permanent war system: the military industrial complex and the pro-Israel lobby, they are running wild here. The media follow along.

Robles: Intelligent, educated, informed people all over the world would equate credibility with following the rule of law. The world knows that an attack on Syria is a Crime Against Peace, there is no justification for it. So the hypocrisy of Obama saying: “Well we said we’re going to bomb…” and that (If we don’t) damages our credibility, I mean that could only possibly play to the internal US audience.

Herman: I think the American leaders think that they have to show foreigners that we mean business, that if we give orders and we say we are going to do something, we are going to follow through otherwise they won’t obey us.

So the claim is, draw a “Red Line” for Syria, and don’t follow through if it crosses the Red Line then Iran will take notice and it won’t follow orders either. I think the “credibility” applies to the little countries that we are trying to keep in line.

Robles: I would say 99% of the countries (other than a couple and we know who they are) are attempting to follow international law in implementing their economic policies and their interstate relationships, and to see this big bully come in and say: “We are going to kill you and we are going to do whatever we want”. A lot of people, a lot of states, a lot of countries, and this should be something that the US leadership really listens to: people are getting tired of it.

Herman:I think you have a point there. A lot of foreigners are really quite upset at the United States threatening Syria, and actually I am just hoping… I mean that’s part of the reason why the British Parliament voted down going along, that was an amazing vote that the British Parliament wouldn’t go along with Obama’s policies even our close European… other European allies, and the Canadians are not rushing in to back Obama. And that’s probably much more true of the general population.

Usually we get the leaders to go along and peoples of the world are not so enthused, but now even the leaders of the rest of the world are dragging their feet and Pope has made a powerful statement about the rule of law and even Ki-Moon, who is usually a puppet of the United States, even he is dragging his feet and calling for the rule of law.

So there is a reaction in the world, and let’s hope that it will constrain (make a difference) the trouble is in the United States the pro-war forces are extremely strong and the political parties too, the war-faction is important. Even in the United States there is a public reaction the public doesn’t want to go to war. It’s possible that it will affect the Obama administration. Let’s hope so.

Robles: Yeah, let’s hope so.

Do you think the chemical weapons attack in Damascus may have been a false flag operation?

Herman: I actually believe that it probably is. The bombing of August the 21st, if you ask the question: “Who benefits from that?” The Syrian government surely does not. It has given the Obama Administration the stimulus to go to war, it fits the needs of the rebels in Syria, and the Israelis who want the United States to go to war.

So if we ask that fundamental question: “Who benefits from this chemical warfare action?” The answer is: not the Syrian government.

So, that’s one factor, the other factor is that they haven’t collected the evidence yet. The Syrian government actually welcomed the UN people who were coming in to investigate an early chemical war action and they have not impeded the work of the UN investigators.

On the other hand, United States government said it was too late for them to do their work, which was false, the work that they have to do, is work that does not have a time limit, it’s not as if they have to be there 2 or 3 days after an event to be able to get very significant evidence.

So on one hand, you have the United States trying to avoid confirmation and Syrian Government, sort of, welcoming these investigators. That’s another consideration.

Robles: The Syrian government actually invited the UN Chemical Weapons Inspection Team, and they arrived on the same day in Damascus and all of a sudden there was this chemical attack in a neighborhood that was, despite western media reports, that neighborhood was under control of the government forces. That would be complete insanity for President Assad to launch a chemical weapons attack on the day that the UN inspectors that he invited to the country arrived, don’t you think?

Herman: Yeah, yeah… Absolutely!

Robles: It goes beyond belief really…

Herman: Well, it’s still “believable”, it could be that there was an accident, it could be that some lower level government persons did this, but it’s up in the air, it is certainly something that has to be investigated. The third important factor that is involved is that the rebels had access to these chemical weapons, they had been being supplied and trained in Jordan and Turkey and by the United States and by Israeli forces.

Robles: Are you aware of the reports that Saudi Prince Bandar (after three and a half weeks ago - four weeks ago threatening Russia with terrorist attacks at the Sochi Olympics: admitting that all the terrorists in Syria are under Saudi control, in particular Chechens), there are reports that “he” delivered, personally, he was involved in the operation to deliver the chemical weapons directly to the Syria insurgents, Wahhabis or Al-Qaeda elements or whatever you want to call them? Have you heard anything about that? Probably not in the western media but …

Herman: Yeah, that’s a very good point and I think that it is absolutely true that there “seems” to have been that threat, and evidence from Saudi Arabian sources themselves, that they were involved, that there was a threat by them and their allies to use chemical weapons, but the broad point is that the rebels surely had access to these weapons and they had the incentive to use them, and so at a minimum: it’s a serious question as to whether the Syrian Government did it, or in my view, more probably that the rebels did it.

Robles: Now.. (We could talk about this for weeks I think) Next question if we could?: Where is the international community in all of this maneuvering and why is the US so adamant about going in there so quickly and urgently? Why the urgency by the US, why the desperation to drop bombs?

Herman: Actually, the international community is looking relatively good, as I mentioned, Ki-Moon is actually dragging his feet and calling for restraint and Pope is calling for restraint and the allied governments to the United States are dragging their feet, they usually have lined-up with the United States when it wants to go to war, but they are dragging their feet.

So the international community, while actually it should be condemning the US action, the Syrian government has asked the Security Council to declare a forthcoming attack “illegal”, which it should do under the rules of the UN Charter, so if the international community was really “on its toes” and trying to prevent war and follow international law, it would be castigating the United States and bringing actions against it but it’s not doing that. But it’s an improvement that they are dragging their feet, suggesting that there should be delays until the facts are in. That’s a big deal.

Robles: Yeah. Yeah, that’s good. Maybe there is some hope then.

Herman: Yeah, exactly.

Robles: Dr. Herman what would you say to those responsible for all of this, to those in power who can prevent this war, what would your message be to them?

Herman: I think the United States is behaving like an insane power, it’s almost like the threat of the Nazis back in the 1930s and 40s, it’s out of control, and it’s engaging in war after war, and it’s violating international law, considers itself to be above the law.

The international community has to rise up and bring it under control, has to take a much more vigorous, hostile action to the US war threats.

I noticed today that this guy Rasmussen, the Secretary General of NATO, has come out in favor of action against Syria, he is a menace, and NATO is a menace, and the Warsaw Pact dissolved and the whole rational for NATO dissolved and NATO has been expanding, taking on more obligations. This is part of the US program for global domination. The world has to wake up and stop it!

Robles: Okay thank you Dr. Herman, I really appreciate it.

Herman: Okay. Good to be with you John.

That was the final installment of an interview with Dr. Edward Herman, a Professor Emeritus of Finance at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He is also the author of several books namely “Manufacturing Consent”, “The Srebrenica Massacre: Evidence, Context and Politics” and other works. 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
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_24/The-US-is-an-insane-power-like-the-Nazis-Dr-Edward-Herman-7741/

 

 

JAR2

22 September, 10:27  

Rule of law, morality and a return to multi-polarity - Putin at Valdai

Владимир Путин международный дискуссионный клуб Валдай валдайский клуб

Photo: RIA Novosti

President Vladimir Putin had a very busy and successful past week on the heels of a successfully hosted G-20 Summit . The President has been key to averting another act of aggressive war by a certain western power, and for those efforts alone is truly worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. President Putin took part in the yearly Valdai Discussion Club, an event where top experts and some of the sharpest minds from Russia and abroad meet in the context of a global dialogue about Russia.

At the 10th anniversary of the forum President Putin clearly showed he is a brilliant leader and statesman and why he was chosen by the Russian people as their president, his intelligent, forward thinking remarks covered everything from morality to the rule of international law to Syria as he laid out his views and his “roadmap” for the future of Russia and its interactions with a multi-polar world.

One of the biggest problems plaguing Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union is a unifying national idea or identity that applies to people of all walks of life and all political and ideological leanings. This problem has been one that has been difficult to address but at the same time pressing and urgent and the president and the forum did an excellent job in addressing this issue.

Another issue about which President Putin spoke was why patriotism is important for Russia. After years during which the country was being fragmented and the national pride of Russians was at an all time low after the collapse of the USSR, fortunately it is making a comeback.

In his opening comments president Putin touched upon many of the problems and challenges facing Russia today including that of mostly western ideology and “culture” which has eroded not only Russian society, but the world’s.

I have highlighted most of what was covered by President Putin and added some comments and invite you to read the entire transcript which we have published here and also to visit the site the president.

Erosion of Russian culture

In post Soviet Russia the nation is still searching for a tangible and unifying cultural and social idea and the amount of influence the ever changing world has had on Russia has made this particularly challenging.

President Putin said:“Today we need new strategies to preserve our identity in a rapidly changing world, a world that has become more open, transparent and interdependent. For us (and I am talking about Russians and Russia), questions about who we are and who we want to be are increasingly prominent in our society. We have left behind Soviet ideology, and there will be no return. It is evident that it is impossible to move forward without spiritual, cultural and national self-determination.”

On foreign influences

In reference to the ways other countries compete with Russia and each other and in contrast to the US model where their society is decimated, subjugated and oppressed while the military and monied interested attempt to completely dominate society and the geopolitical landscape President Putin stated that some countries forget the rule of law and even decency, undoubtedly referring to a certain western power.

“And today we see a new round of such competitions. Today their main focuses are economic-technological and ideological-informational. Military-political problems and general conditions are worsening. The world is sometimes forgoes not merely international law, but also basic decency. Every country has to have military, technological and economic strength, but nevertheless the main thing that will determine success is the quality of citizens, the quality of society: their intellectual, spiritual and moral strength. After all, in the end economic growth, prosperity and geopolitical influence are all derived from societal conditions,” said President Putin.

In reference to a national idea and profiteers such as Berezovsky

One problem Russia had after the collapse of the USSR was the lack of a national idea and President Putin commented on how this served the interests of those who wanted to pillage Russia.

“In addition, the lack of a national idea stemming from a national identity profited the quasi-colonial element of the elite – those determined to steal and remove capital, and who did not link their future to that of the country, the place where they earned their money,” said President Putin.

On attempts to force a western model on Russia

The failure of the west in reshaping Russia in their own image was due to the Russian people and not the state. This rejection was something the West tried to change through overt and covert efforts, such as through the influence of USAID and supporting an opposition which had only one agenda, to remove President Putin and the government, but their efforts failed due to the Russian people themselves. Something the West has failed to understand.

“A spontaneously constructed state and society does not work, and neither does mechanically copying other countries’ experiences. Such primitive borrowing and attempts to civilize Russia from abroad were not accepted by an absolute majority of our people. This is because the desire for independence and sovereignty in spiritual, ideological and foreign policy spheres is an integral part of our national character. Incidentally, such approaches have often failed in other nations too. The time when ready-made lifestyle models could be installed in foreign states like computer programs has passed,” said President Putin.

On accepting others and their differences

President Putin said it was important to listen to people with opposing views, to reject blind nationalism and racist models and be united by patriotism. True precepts of democracy and again something those in certain western countries should also follow.

President Putin stated: “All of us – so-called Neo-Slavophiles and Neo-Westernisers, statists and so-called liberals – all of society must work together to create common development goals. We need to break the habit of only listening to like-minded people, angrily – and even with hatred – rejecting any other point of view from the outset. You can’t flip or even kick the country's future like a football, plunging into unbridled nihilism, consumerism, criticism of anything and everything, or gloomy pessimism.”

“This means that liberals have to learn to talk with representatives of the left-wing and, conversely, that nationalists must remember that Russia was formed specifically as a multi-ethnic and multi-confessional country from its very inception. Nationalists must remember that by calling into question our multi-ethnic character, and exploiting the issue of Russian, Tatar, Caucasian, Siberian or any other nationalism or separatism, means that we are starting to destroy our genetic code. In effect, we will begin to destroy ourselves.”

Red lines

The president brought up the subject of “red lines that must not be crossed” but unlike some leaders did not do so as a threat to another sovereign power but as a matter of self-defense.

President Putin was very clear when he said: “Russia’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity are unconditional. These are red lines no one is allowed to cross. For all the differences in our views, debates about identity and about our national future are impossible unless their participants are patriotic. Of course I mean patriotism in the purest sense of the word.”

Opposition to Russia itself

Opposition to Russia as an entity and not to the government was a topic few have ever spoken about but the president touched upon this matter briefly:

“Too often in our nation's history, instead of opposition to the government we have been faced with opponents of Russia itself. I have already mentioned this; Pushkin also talked about it. And we know how it ended, with the demolition of the (Russian) state as such.”

On historical revisionism

There was a period after the collapse of the USSR where Soviet history was not taught in schools and even though the USSR was the greatest power in history people were being pushed by western agents to be ashamed of the Soviet period.

“We must be proud of our history, and we have things to be proud of. Our entire, uncensored history must be a part of Russian identity. Without recognising this it is impossible to establish mutual trust and allow society to move forward.”

On the degradation of morality in the West

Speaking about the decay in morality and the role that Christian values play in a healthy society, President Putin warned about the decay of morality in the West and the attempts to force that decay onto Russia. The implication is that Western Civilization is in decline.

“We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilization. They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious and even sexual.”

“They are implementing policies that equate large families with same-sex partnerships, belief in God with the belief in Satan. The excesses of political correctness have reached the point where people are seriously talking about registering political parties whose aim is to promote pedophilia. … And people are aggressively trying to export this model all over the world. I am convinced that this opens a direct path to degradation and primitivism, resulting in a profound demographic and moral crisis.”

“Without the values embedded in Christianity and other world religions, without the standards of morality that have taken shape over millennia, people will inevitably lose their human dignity. We consider it natural and right to defend these values. One must respect every minority’s right to be different, but the rights of the majority must not be put into question.”

On a unipolar world

The president’s comments on multi-polarity and why one country must not be allowed to subjugate and control the rest of humanity were refreshing.

“At the same time we see attempts to somehow revive a standardized model of a unipolar world and to blur the institutions of international law and national sovereignty. Such a unipolar, standardized world does not require sovereign states; it requires vassals. In a historical sense this amounts to a rejection of one’s own identity, of the God-given diversity of the world.”

On rule of law

President Putin and the Russian Federation have proven and the record has shown that the rule of law and mutual respect are the true basis for successful international relations and that above all the states of the world must abide by international law.

“Russia agrees with those who believe that key decisions should be worked out on a collective basis, rather than at the discretion of and in the interests of certain countries or groups of countries. Russia believes that international law, not the right of the strong, must apply. And we believe that every country, every nation is not exceptional, but unique, original and benefits from equal rights, including the right to independently choose their own development path.”

“This is our conceptual outlook, and it follows from our own historical destiny and Russia's role in global politics. Our present position has deep historical roots. Russia itself has evolved on the basis of diversity, harmony and balance, and brings such a balance to the international stage.”

On multiculturalism

President Putin spoke about multiculturalism and why it has failed in the West but has succeeded and is in fact an import part of Russia, Russian society and Russian heritage.

“There is one more fundamental aspect to which I want to draw your attention. In Europe and some other countries so-called multiculturalism is in many respects a transplanted, artificial model that is now being questioned, for understandable reasons. This is because it is based on paying for the colonial past. It is no accident that today European politicians and public figures are increasingly talking about the failures of multiculturalism, and that they are not able to integrate foreign languages or foreign cultural elements into their societies.”

“Over the past centuries in Russia, which some have tried to label as the "prison of nations", not even the smallest ethnic group has disappeared. And they have retained not only their internal autonomy and cultural identity, but also their historical space. You know, I was interested to learn (I did not even know this) that in Soviet times (the authorities) paid such careful attention to this that virtually every small ethnic group had its own print publication, support for its language, and for its national literature. We should bring back and take on board much of what has been done in this respect.”

“Along with this the different cultures in Russia have the unique experience of mutual influence, mutual enrichment and mutual respect. This multiculturalism and multi-ethnicity lives in our historical consciousness, in our spirit and in our historical makeup. Our state was built in the course of a millennium on this organic model.”

“Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and other religions are an integral part of Russia’s identity, its historical heritage and the present-day lives of its citizens. The main task of the state, as enshrined in the Constitution, is to ensure equal rights for members of traditional religions and atheists, and the right to freedom of conscience for all citizens.”

“However, it is clearly impossible to identify oneself only through one’s ethnicity or religion in such a large nation with a multi-ethnic population. In order to maintain the nation’s unity, people must develop a civic identity on the basis of shared values, a patriotic consciousness, civic responsibility and solidarity, respect for the law, and a sense of responsibility for their homeland’s fate, without losing touch with their ethnic or religious roots.”

On the individual

Respect for the individual is one of the most noble goals of democracy and society and for me personally it was like a breath of fresh air to hear a world leader speak about this as it seems to have become a forgotten concept.

“Unfortunately, throughout our nation’s history, little value was given at times to individual human lives. Too often, people were seen simply as a means, rather than a goal and a mission for development. We no longer have that right and we cannot throw millions of human lives into the fire for the sake of development. We must treasure every individual. Russia’s main strength in this and future centuries will lie in its educated, creative, physically and spiritually healthy people, rather than natural resources.”

On education

While some countries are cutting and decimating their education systems to pay for more weapons and war President Putin made it clear that theis should not happen in Russia.

“The role of education is all the more important because in order to educate an individual, a patriot, we must restore the role of great Russian culture and literature. They must serve as the foundation for people’s personal identity, the source of their uniqueness and their basis for understanding the national idea.”

On Russian Federalism

Tackling one of the problems that is endemic to the largest country in the world, the president made it clear the development of the entire country is vital to keep it healthy and strong.

“Speaking of any kind of reforms, it is important to bear in mind that there is more to our nation than just Moscow and St Petersburg. In developing Russian federalism, we must rely on our own historical experience, using flexible and diverse models.”

“The Russian model of federalism has a great deal of potential built into it. It is imperative that we learn to use it competently, not forgetting its most important aspect: the development of the regions and their independence should create equal opportunities for all of our nation’s citizens, regardless of where they live, to eliminate inequalities in the economic and social development of Russia’s territory, thereby strengthening the nation’s unity.”

Importance of the Eurasian Union

As one of many growing economic, geopolitical, trade and regional unions that have begun to gain strength throughout the world, President Putin spoke about the Eurasian Union and why it is important for the development of the region. Another step toward multi-polarity in our diverse world.

“The future Eurasian Economic Union, which we have declared and which we have discussed extensively as of late, is not just a collection of mutually beneficial agreements. The Eurasian Union is a project for maintaining the identity of nations in the historical Eurasian space in a new century and in a new world. Eurasian integration is a chance for the entire post-Soviet space to become an independent centre for global development, rather than remaining on the outskirts of Europe and Asia.”

On Syrian chemical weapons attack

Having almost single-handedly stopped another act of aggressive war by a certain power which has revived the doctrine of preventive war, President Putin was very frank when speaking about the situation in Syria and what the proper steps should be to resolve the internal conflict in that country.

“ We have equal rights and equal responsibilities with all our colleagues involved in the discussion on Syria. This is not the first time I hear that I now carry a special responsibility. We all carry a special responsibility; we all carry it equally. …it became clear that chemical weapons had been used. But this was clear to us from the very beginning, and our experts agreed. The only thing that is unclear is who used it.”

“We have every reason to believe that this was a provocation. You know, it was clever and smart, but at the same time, the execution was primitive. They used an ancient, Soviet-made projectile, taken from the Syrian army’s armaments from a long time ago – it even had “Made in the USSR” printed on it. But this was not the first time chemical weapons were used in Syria. Why didn’t they investigate the previous instances?”

“This matter should be investigated as thoroughly as possible. If we finally get an answer, despite all obstacles, to the question of who did this, who committed this crime – and there is no question that it was a crime – then we will take the next step; we will then work with other UN Security Council colleagues to determine the culpability of those who committed this crime, together and in solidarity.”

“Second, on whether we will manage to convince Assad or not, I don’t know. So far it looks as though Syria has fully agreed to our proposal and is ready to act according to the plan that the international community is putting together, working through the UN. Russia and the USA, in the persons of Secretary of State Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov have already practically drafted the outlines of this plan. There is a special organization that will work together with the UN on this matter of eliminating chemical weapons. Syria has declared that it will join and that it indeed already considers itself to have joined the International Chemical Weapons Convention. These are practical steps that the Syrian government has already taken.”

“Let me just remind you about how these chemical weapons came about. Syria got itself chemical weapons as an alternative to Israel’s nuclear arsenal, as we know. What can be done about the various issues associated with proliferation and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction remains a very relevant question today, perhaps the most important issue of our time. If this situation gets out of control, like it once happened with gunpowder, the consequences will be unimaginable. We therefore need to strive towards nuclear-free status in particular parts of the world, especially in such volatile regions as the Middle East.”

On NATO expansion

After the collapse of the USSR and the subsequent dissolving of the Warsaw Pact under the promise by NATO that they would not expand, the world has seen the opposite and now NATO exists on almost every continent on earth in one or another. The NATO lie is one of history’s most wide reaching.

“… we were promised at one point that NATO would not expand beyond the former Federal Republic of Germany’s eastern border. That was a promise directly made to Gorbachev. True, it was not actually set out and written down. But where is NATO today, where is the border? We got cheated, to put it quite simply. That’s the whole story.”

On McCain, the refusal by the US to receive a Russian delegation and freedom of the press

After President Putin’s eloquent, informed and well received “Plea for Caution” in the New York Times, octogenarian right-wing US Senator John McCain, who recently spent hearings on an invasion of Syria playing on-line poker, attempted to “fight back” and only showcased American ignorance. President Putin was asked about McCain and graciously invited him to visit Russia and improve his knowledge.

“He (McCain) is not well-informed about our country. Actually, I would have been happy to see him here at the Valdai Club say, taking part in the discussions. As far as I know, our big television channels, the national channels, proposed that he come and take part in an open and honest discussion. There you have it, freedom of speech, freedom of the press. He is welcome to share his point of view with the whole country. In this respect, I can only express my regret that our American colleagues did not react to our parliamentarians’ proposal and refused to receive them in Washington for a discussion on Syria. Why did they do this? “

Using force outside of international law

The using of military force outside of the framework of the United Nations is illegal, and in fact is a Crime Against Peace. President Putin made this clear.

“The threat of the use of force and actual use of force are far from being a cure-all for international problems. Look at what we are actually talking about after all. We are forgetting the heart of the matter. We are talking about using force outside the framework of current international law. We’ve just been saying how the US Congress and Senate are discussing whether to use force or not. But it is not there that this matter should be discussed. It should be discussed in the UN Security Council. That is the heart of the issue. That is my first point.”

American “Democracy”

There is no true democracy in America, their system has failed.

President Putin said this: “It has happened twice in US history that the President of the United States was chosen by a majority in the electoral colleges, but with a minority of the actual voters. This is an obvious flaw in the electoral procedure, that is to say, a flaw at the very heart of American democracy.”

“As for what kind of government Russia should have, this is something for our citizens to decide, and not for our colleagues from abroad. We held an election a year ago, not so long ago, and the majority of Russia’s citizens voted for me.”

 All of the views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com and once again I invite you to read the full transcript and share it with a friend.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_09_22/Rule-of-law-morality-and-a-return-to-multi-polarity-Putin-at-Valdai-2237/

 

 

JAR2

21 September, 16:42 1 

Morales to file crimes against humanity charges at ICC against US

боливия эво моралес

Photo: EPA

It may be finally getting to the point where the world has had enough of a certain country dictating to it, bombing it and attempting to shape it in its own morally bankrupt and ignorant image. The certain country’s illegality, ignorance, hypocrisy, flaunting of international law, wars of aggression, endless killing, threats of more violence, economic manipulation, spying and acts of aggression have gotten to the point where the elephant in the room that everyone has been trying to ignore the best they can is threatening to not only take over the room but to bring down the entire building.

Under the pretext of security against the bogeyman of terrorism that they have created, funded and supported themselves since 9-11, what can only be described as a monstrous criminal cabal, has been wreaking havoc on the entire planet since the day they got away with the murder of 2,999 innocent civilians on September 11, 2001.

Of late, thanks to the more and more revelations that are finally seeping through to the world’s populace and getting by the media filter set up globally by that country’s special services and the western government-controlled-mass-media, people are truly beginning to finally wake up, and now someone has finally had the courage, along with an undeniable justification, to stand up and do what the world should have done years ago, files charges against the monsters in Washington.

After watching the United States first deny visas to the Venezuelan delegation to the United Nations General Assembly and then prohibit the aircraft of the President of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro from flying over the US occupied Latin American Caribbean island of Puerto Rico, the President of Bolivia Evo Morales has decided enough is enough and will be filing charges against the criminal cabal in Washington with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague.

President Morales, himself the victim of US interference in the flight of the presidential aircraft of a sovereign nation recently, over unfounded suspicions that Edward Snowden may have been on his plane, has stated that he will be filling crimes against humanity charges with the ICC.

At a press conference in Bolivia President Morales made the following statement to the world’s press: "I would like to announce that we are preparing a lawsuit against (US President) Barack Obama to condemn him for crimes against humanity," further describing Obama as a "criminal" who willingly violates international law. “

“We cannot accept that the US carries on with politics of intimidation and the prohibition of flights by presidents,"said President Morales, and also that the latest incident "demonstrates the country's predisposition to humiliate other governments and committing crimes against other nations.”

During the same press conference President Morales also called for an emergency session of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) to decide on what joint actions could be take over recent US actions. He has also suggested that the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA) nations should consider a boycott of the upcoming United Nations General Assembly in New York City as a response.

The president of Venezuela Nicola Maduro called the US action "an act of intimidation by North American imperialism."

After the plane was denied the right to enter the airspace over the Atlantic near US occupied Puerto Rico, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Elias Jaua told reporters the action was an "insult."

"We denounce this as another insult of North American imperialism against the government," Foreign Minister Jaua said.

President Maduro’s flight, which was en route to China, was forced to find an alternate path according to Jaua, he called the action "An act of aggression,"and stated: "No one can deny airspace to a plane carrying a president on an international state visit. There is no valid argument to refuse airspace."

By its own actions the United States is continuing to isolate itself from the world community and prove itself to be the single most dangerous rogue nation in the world. With its plethora of actions that are illegal under international law (including aggressive war after aggressive war) its practice of branding anyone it does not like as rogue state and attempting to bomb them and kill their leader, and its continued unrepentant spying and interference into the affairs of other nations, even moderate states and staunch US allies are beginning to realize the true nature of the beast.

If the United States is taken to the Hague for war crimes and crimes against humanity the possibilities for the door opening to prosecution for a whole series of violations of international law may present itself. This includes the illegal and continuing indefinite detention going on at Guantanamo Bay Cuba, endless renditions, the arrests of Russian citizens in third countries, extra-judicial executions, illegal espionage and spying activities, droning, the support of terrorists such as Al-Qaeda and the use of non-state fighters to destabilize Syria and other countries, all of the crimes committed by Al-Qaeda acting on US direction and finally a true independent investigation into the animals who were behind 9-11.

The US of course will continue with their arrogant impunity and egregious violations of international law as they have plans in place to launch an invasion of the Netherlands and the Hague if one of their ilk is arrested, but once charges are filed there may be enough international support to actually bring about a serious accounting. Of course this may be wishful thinking but it does in fact appear that the world has truly had enough of US aggression.

Imagine a situation where NATO was supposed to protect the Netherlands and Europe from an American attack. If European countries fall into disfavor with the imperial psychopaths in Washington who support child-killing cannibal terrorists in Syria, they may risk being branded rogue nations as well and have their countries bombed.

The US on trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity? Could happen. It would mean that the world was finally beating a cancer that will destroy it, and to think that this may be brought about by the President of Bolivia Evo Morales, who was so easily dismissed by America, would be true and wonderful poetic justice. Regardless US illegality has to end and the cancer has to be cut out to save the patient.

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

Latin AmericaUNUSVenezuelaEcuadorInternational Criminal CourtEvo Moraleshuman rightsspy scandalfight against terrorismespionagescandalinfo leaksurveillancePRISMNSATotal electronic surveillance scandalNSA surveillancePolitics

·         Share:

·          

·          

·          

·         submit to reddit

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

Сomments 1

·         robert riegerrobert rieger, 1 October, 17:03#

thank you, mr. morales. since the amerikkkan press is no longer free, since it has it's collective head up the governments rectum,i need to say that there are litteraly millions of americans thirsty for immediate if not sooner radical change. do all you can. all power to all the people
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_21/Morales-to-file-crimes-against-humanity-charges-at-ICC-against-US-5492/

 

 

JAR2

 

21 September, 13:31  

'We have left behind Soviet ideology, and there will be no return' - Putin

Владимир Путин международный дискуссионный клуб Валдай валдайский клуб

Photo: RIA Novosti

The President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin took part in the final plenary meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club and spoke on some of the most important topics affecting Russia and the world today. One area that the president paid particular attention was the political and civil society landscape in the Russian Federation which is still undergoing changes and developing after the collapse of the USSR. The summit of the Valdai Club was especially important as it marked the 10 year anniversary of the forum. The session was attended by over 200 Russian and foreign experts, influential political and social leaders and leaders from many different fields of expertise. The 10th session was titled "Russia's Diversity for the Modern World".

The following are excerpts from the full transcript of the meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club courtesy of the Kremlin Press Service.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, friends, ladies and gentlemen, I hope that the place for your discussions, for our meetings is well chosen and that the timing is good. We are in the centre of Russia – not a geographical centre, but a spiritual one. [Novgorod Region] is a cradle of Russian statehood. Our outstanding historians believe and have analysed how the elements of Russian statehood came together right here. This is in the light of the fact that two great rivers – the Volkhov and Neva – acted as natural means of communication, providing a natural linkage at the time. And it was here that Russian statehood gradually began to emerge.

As has already been pointed out, this year the [Valdai] club has brought together an unprecedented list of participants: more than 200 Russian and foreign politicians, public and spiritual leaders, philosophers and cultural figures, people with very different, original and sometimes opposing views.

You have already been conferring here for a few days now, and I'll try not to bore you unduly. But nevertheless, I will allow myself to state my views on subjects that you have touched on during these discussions in one way or another. I am not only thinking about analysing Russian historical, cultural, and governance experiences. First and foremost, I am thinking of general debates, conversations about the future, strategies, and values, about the values underpinning our country’s development, how global processes will affect our national identity, what kind of twenty-first-century world we want to see, and what Russia, our country, can contribute to this world together with its partners.

Today we need new strategies to preserve our identity in a rapidly changing world, a world that has become more open, transparent and interdependent. This fact confronts virtually all countries and all peoples in one form or another: Russian, European, Chinese and American – the societies of virtually all countries. And naturally, including here in Valdai, we strive to better understand how our partners are attempting to meet this challenge, because we are meeting here with experts on Russia. But we proceed from the fact that our guests will state their views on the interaction and relationship between Russia and the countries that you represent.

For us (and I am talking about Russians and Russia), questions about who we are and who we want to be are increasingly prominent in our society. We have left behind Soviet ideology, and there will be no return. Proponents of fundamental conservatism who idealise pre-1917 Russia seem to be similarly far from reality, as are supporters of an extreme, western-style liberalism.

It is evident that it is impossible to move forward without spiritual, cultural and national self-determination. Without this we will not be able to withstand internal and external challenges, nor we will succeed in global competitions. And today we see a new round of such competitions. Today their main focuses are economic-technological and ideological-informational. Military-political problems and general conditions are worsening. The world is becoming more rigid, and sometimes forgoes not merely international law, but also basic decency.

[Every country] has to have military, technological and economic strength, but nevertheless the main thing that will determine success is the quality of citizens, the quality of society: their intellectual, spiritual and moral strength. After all, in the end economic growth, prosperity and geopolitical influence are all derived from societal conditions. They depend on whether the citizens of a given country consider themselves a nation, to what extent they identify with their own history, values and traditions, and whether they are united by common goals and responsibilities. In this sense, the question of finding and strengthening national identity really is fundamental for Russia.

Meanwhile, today Russia’s national identity is experiencing not only objective pressures stemming from globalisation, but also the consequences of the national catastrophes of the twentieth century, when we experienced the collapse of our state two different times. The result was a devastating blow to our nation’s cultural and spiritual codes; we were faced with the disruption of traditions and the consonance of history, with the demoralisation of society, with a deficit of trust and responsibility. These are the root causes of many pressing problems we face. After all, the question of responsibility for oneself, before society and the law, is something fundamental for both legal and everyday life.

After 1991 there was the illusion that a new national ideology, a development ideology, would simply appear by itself. The state, authorities, intellectual and political classes virtually rejected engaging in this work, all the more so since previous, semi-official ideology was hard to swallow. And in fact they were all simply afraid to even broach the subject. In addition, the lack of a national idea stemming from a national identity profited the quasi-colonial element of the elite – those determined to steal and remove capital, and who did not link their future to that of the country, the place where they earned their money.

Practice has shown that a new national idea does not simply appear, nor does it develop according to market rules. A spontaneously constructed state and society does not work, and neither does mechanically copying other countries’ experiences. Such primitive borrowing and attempts to civilize Russia from abroad were not accepted by an absolute majority of our people. This is because the desire for independence and sovereignty in spiritual, ideological and foreign policy spheres is an integral part of our national character. Incidentally, such approaches have often failed in other nations too. The time when ready-made lifestyle models could be installed in foreign states like computer programs has passed.

We also understand that identity and a national idea cannot be imposed from above, cannot be established on an ideological monopoly. Such a construction is very unstable and vulnerable; we know this from personal experience. It has no future in the modern world. We need historical creativity, a synthesis of the best national practices and ideas, an understanding of our cultural, spiritual and political traditions from different points of view, and to understand that [national identity] is not a rigid thing that will last forever, but rather a living organism. Only then will our identity be based on a solid foundation, be directed towards the future and not the past. This is the main argument demonstrating that a development ideology must be discussed by people who hold different views, and have different opinions about how and what to do to solve given problems.

All of us – so-called Neo-Slavophiles and Neo-Westernisers, statists and so-called liberals – all of society must work together to create common development goals. We need to break the habit of only listening to like-minded people, angrily – and even with hatred – rejecting any other point of view from the outset. You can’t flip or even kick the country's future like a football, plunging into unbridled nihilism, consumerism, criticism of anything and everything, or gloomy pessimism.

This means that liberals have to learn to talk with representatives of the left-wing and, conversely, that nationalists must remember that Russia was formed specifically as a multi-ethnic and multi-confessional country from its very inception. Nationalists must remember that by calling into question our multi-ethnic character, and exploiting the issue of Russian, Tatar, Caucasian, Siberian or any other nationalism or separatism, means that we are starting to destroy our genetic code. In effect, we will begin to destroy ourselves.

Russia’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity are unconditional. These are red lines no one is allowed to cross. For all the differences in our views, debates about identity and about our national future are impossible unless their participants are patriotic. Of course I mean patriotism in the purest sense of the word.

Too often in our nation's history, instead of opposition to the government we have been faced with opponents of Russia itself. I have already mentioned this; Pushkin also talked about it. And we know how it ended, with the demolition of the [Russian] state as such. There is virtually no Russian family that completely escaped the troubles of the past century. Questions about how to assess certain historical events still divide our country and society.

We need to heal these wounds, and repair the tissues of our historic fabric. We can no longer engage in self-deception, striking out unsightly or ideologically uncomfortable pages of our history, breaking links between generations, rushing to extremes, creating or debunking idols. It's time to stop only taking note of the bad in our history, and berating ourselves more than even our opponents would do. [Self-]criticism is necessary, but without a sense of self-worth, or love for our Fatherland, such criticism becomes humiliating and counterproductive.

We must be proud of our history, and we have things to be proud of. Our entire, uncensored history must be a part of Russian identity. Without recognising this it is impossible to establish mutual trust and allow society to move forward.

Another serious challenge to Russia's identity is linked to events taking place in the world. Here there are both foreign policy and moral aspects. We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilisation. They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious and even sexual. They are implementing policies that equate large families with same-sex partnerships, belief in God with the belief in Satan.

The excesses of political correctness have reached the point where people are seriously talking about registering political parties whose aim is to promote paedophilia. People in many European countries are embarrassed or afraid to talk about their religious affiliations. Holidays are abolished or even called something different; their essence is hidden away, as is their moral foundation. And people are aggressively trying to export this model all over the world. I am convinced that this opens a direct path to degradation and primitivism, resulting in a profound demographic and moral crisis.

What else but the loss of the ability to self-reproduce could act as the greatest testimony of the moral crisis facing a human society? Today almost all developed nations are no longer able to reproduce themselves, even with the help of migration. Without the values embedded in Christianity and other world religions, without the standards of morality that have taken shape over millennia, people will inevitably lose their human dignity. We consider it natural and right to defend these values. One must respect every minority’s right to be different, but the rights of the majority must not be put into question.

At the same time we see attempts to somehow revive a standardized model of a unipolar world and to blur the institutions of international law and national sovereignty. Such a unipolar, standardized world does not require sovereign states; it requires vassals. In a historical sense this amounts to a rejection of one’s own identity, of the God-given diversity of the world.

Russia agrees with those who believe that key decisions should be worked out on a collective basis, rather than at the discretion of and in the interests of certain countries or groups of countries. Russia believes that international law, not the right of the strong, must apply. And we believe that every country, every nation is not exceptional, but unique, original and benefits from equal rights, including the right to independently choose their own development path.

This is our conceptual outlook, and it follows from our own historical destiny and Russia's role in global politics. Our present position has deep historical roots. Russia itself has evolved on the basis of diversity, harmony and balance, and brings such a balance to the international stage.

I want to remind you that the Congress of Vienna of 1815 and the agreements made at Yalta in 1945, taken with Russia’s very active participation, secured a lasting peace. Russia’s strength, the strength of a winning nation at those critical junctures, manifested itself as generosity and justice. And let us remember [the Treaty of] Versailles, concluded without Russia’s participation. Many experts, and I absolutely agree with them, believe that Versailles laid the foundation for the Second World War because the Treaty of Versailles was unfair to the German people: it imposed restrictions with which they could not cope, and the course of the next century became clear.

There is one more fundamental aspect to which I want to draw your attention. In Europe and some other countries so-called multiculturalism is in many respects a transplanted, artificial model that is now being questioned, for understandable reasons. This is because it is based on paying for the colonial past. It is no accident that today European politicians and public figures are increasingly talking about the failures of multiculturalism, and that they are not able to integrate foreign languages or foreign cultural elements into their societies.

Over the past centuries in Russia, which some have tried to label as the "prison of nations", not even the smallest ethnic group has disappeared. And they have retained not only their internal autonomy and cultural identity, but also their historical space. You know, I was interested to learn (I did not even know this) that in Soviet times [authorities] paid such careful attention to this that virtually every small ethnic group had its own print publication, support for its language, and for its national literature. We should bring back and take on board much of what has been done in this respect.

Along with this the different cultures in Russia have the unique experience of mutual influence, mutual enrichment and mutual respect. This multiculturalism and multi-ethnicity lives in our historical consciousness, in our spirit and in our historical makeup. Our state was built in the course of a millennium on this organic model.

Russia – as philosopher Konstantin Leontyev vividly put it – has always evolved in "blossoming complexity" as a state-civilization, reinforced by the Russian people, Russian language, Russian culture, Russian Orthodox Church and the country’s other traditional religions. It is precisely the state-civilization model that has shaped our state polity. It has always sought to flexibly accommodate the ethnic and religious specificity of particular territories, ensuring diversity in unity.

Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and other religions are an integral part of Russia’s identity, its historical heritage and the present-day lives of its citizens. The main task of the state, as enshrined in the Constitution, is to ensure equal rights for members of traditional religions and atheists, and the right to freedom of conscience for all citizens.

However, it is clearly impossible to identify oneself only through one’s ethnicity or religion in such a large nation with a multi-ethnic population. In order to maintain the nation’s unity, people must develop a civic identity on the basis of shared values, a patriotic consciousness, civic responsibility and solidarity, respect for the law, and a sense of responsibility for their homeland’s fate, without losing touch with their ethnic or religious roots.

There are broad discussions on how the ideology of national development will be structured politically and conceptually – including with your participation, colleagues. But I deeply believe that individuals’ personal, moral, intellectual and physical development must remain at the heart of our philosophy. Back at the start of the 1990s, Solzhenitsyn stated that the nation’s main goal should be to preserve the population after a very difficult 20th century. Today, we must admit that we have not yet fully overcome the negative demographic trends, although we have veered away from a dangerous decline in the national potential.

Unfortunately, throughout our nation’s history, little value was given at times to individual human lives. Too often, people were seen simply as a means, rather than a goal and a mission for development. We no longer have that right and we cannot throw millions of human lives into the fire for the sake of development. We must treasure every individual. Russia’s main strength in this and future centuries will lie in its educated, creative, physically and spiritually healthy people, rather than natural resources.

The role of education is all the more important because in order to educate an individual, a patriot, we must restore the role of great Russian culture and literature. They must serve as the foundation for people’s personal identity, the source of their uniqueness and their basis for understanding the national idea. Here, a great deal depends on the teaching community, which has been and remains a highly important guardian of nationwide values, ideas and philosophies. This community speaks the same language – the language of science, knowledge and education, despite the fact that it is spread out over an enormous territory, from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok. In this way, the community of teachers, the educational community overall, in the broad sense of the word, binds the nation together. Supporting this community is one of the most important steps on the path toward a strong, flourishing Russia.

I want to stress again that without focusing our efforts on people’s education and health, creating mutual responsibility between the authorities and each individual, and establishing trust within society, we will be losers in the competition of history. Russia’s citizens must feel that they are the responsible owners of their country, region, hometown, property, belongings and their lives. A citizen is someone who is capable of independently managing his or her own affairs, freely cooperating with equals.

Local governments and self-regulated citizens’ organizations serve as the best school for civic consciousness. Of course, I’m referring to non-profits. Incidentally, one of the best Russian political traditions, the country council tradition, was also built on the principles of local government. A true civil society and a true, nationally-focused political elite, including the opposition with its own ideology, values and standards for good and evil – their own, rather than those dictated by the media or from abroad – can only grow through effective self-governing mechanisms. The government is prepared to trust self-regulating and self-governing associations, but we must know whom we are trusting. This is absolutely normal global practice, which is precisely why we have passed new legislation to increase the transparency of nongovernmental organizations.

Speaking of any kind of reforms, it is important to bear in mind that there is more to our nation than just Moscow and St Petersburg. In developing Russian federalism, we must rely on our own historical experience, using flexible and diverse models. The Russian model of federalism has a great deal of potential built into it. It is imperative that we learn to use it competently, not forgetting its most important aspect: the development of the regions and their independence should create equal opportunities for all of our nation’s citizens, regardless of where they live, to eliminate inequalities in the economic and social development of Russia’s territory, thereby strengthening the nation’s unity. Ultimately, this is a huge challenge because these territories’ development has been very unbalanced over the course of decades and even centuries.

I would like to touch on another topic. The 21st century promises to become the century of major changes, the era of the formation of major geopolitical zones, as well as financial and economic, cultural, civilisational, and military and political areas. That is why integrating with our neighbors is our absolute priority. The future Eurasian Economic Union, which we have declared and which we have discussed extensively as of late, is not just a collection of mutually beneficial agreements. The Eurasian Union is a project for maintaining the identity of nations in the historical Eurasian space in a new century and in a new world. Eurasian integration is a chance for the entire post-Soviet space to become an independent centre for global development, rather than remaining on the outskirts of Europe and Asia.

I want to stress that Eurasian integration will also be built on the principle of diversity. This is a union where everyone maintains their identity, their distinctive character and their political independence. Together with our partners, we will gradually implement this project, step by step. We expect that it will become our common input into maintaining diversity and stable global development.

Colleagues, the years after 1991 are often referred to as the post-Soviet era. We have lived through and overcome that turbulent, dramatic period. Russia has passed through these trials and tribulations and is returning to itself, to its own history, just as it did at other points in its history. After consolidating our national identity, strengthening our roots, and remaining open and receptive to the best ideas and practices of the East and the West, we must and will move forward.

Thank you very much for your attention.

Member of the Valdai Discussion Club advisory board Piotr Dutkiewicz: Mr. President, this is the tenth year that we are meeting with you here.

This is a unique platform and a unique format – there is nothing like it in the world. Thank you for these ten years of warm support for our club.

I have a two-part question concerning your article in The New York Times. It was an excellent idea and a brilliant article. Indeed, you are personally responsible for stopping the expansion and deepening of the Syrian conflict, which is an enormous achievement.

Question: who came up with this idea? Was it Lavrov, Shoigu, Peskov or someone else? And when did you discuss it for the first time with President Obama?

The second part of the question: it seems to me that you put yourself in a rather awkward position with this brilliant idea, this brilliant article, because you became a kind of hostage. You and Russia have taken on the burden of responsibility for the success of this agreement. You already have many detractors because they do not want to see major global policy to develop as a Putin and Obama duet. What happens if it doesn’t work?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you for your kind words.

My colleagues and I have always been pleased that there are people in the world interested in Russia, its history and its culture. Ten years ago, when I was told that these people would like to come to Russia, talk with us, engage in debate, and want to learn about our point of view on key issues in the development of the nation itself and its place in the world, well, naturally, we supported it immediately; I supported it and my colleagues supported it. I am very happy that over the last ten years, this platform has become even more prestigious compared to the first steps taken a decade ago. The interest in our nation is not waning; on the contrary, it is increasing and growing.

I want to respond to your words of gratitude in kind. I would like to thank all the experts on Russia who remain faithful to their love of our nation and their interest in our nation.

Now, regarding the article. I had this idea completely by chance. I saw that President Obama took the discussion on the possibility of attacking Syria to the Congress and Senate. I followed the course of that discussion and I just wanted to convey our position, my own position, to the people who will be forming their opinions on this issue, and to clarify it. Because unfortunately, the media often present various problems very one-sidedly, or simply stay completely silent.

So this was my idea; I called one of my aides and said that I would like to publish an article in an American newspaper – it didn’t matter which one, but one of the leading ones – so that this information would reach the readers, and dictated what I wanted to see written. You may have noticed that it does not contain anything I have not stated earlier, in various places in public. I have already talked about all of it in one way or another. So I just dictated it, and then when my colleagues put it together, I took a look. I didn’t like everything, so I rewrote and added a few things, gave it back to them, they worked on it some more and brought it to me again. I made some more changes and felt it was ready for publishing. We arranged through our partners that it would be in The New York Times; we came to an agreement with this respected publication that the article would be published without any cuts. If they didn’t like it, we could give it to another newspaper.

But I must give credit to the New York Times editors: they completely abided by our agreements and published everything as I wrote it. They even waived their usual requirements on the number of characters and words in the article; it was a little bit over the limit. They were going to submit it, but then one of my aides said, “President Obama is going to address the nation tomorrow. What if he announces that there won’t be any strikes, that they changed their minds? It’s better to wait.” I said, “Very well.” We waited, and the next morning, I was getting ready for work and I was given President Obama’s speech. I began to read it and realized that nothing had changed fundamentally, so I laid it aside without finishing it. But then I thought, “No, I need to read it to the end.” And when I read all of it, it became clear that my article was incomplete. As you understand, the matter at hand was America’s exceptionalism. So I picked up the article, and right then and there, I hand-wrote the last paragraph. I gave it to my colleagues, they passed it on to The New York Times, and there it was.

Now, concerning responsibility. You know, you are all very experienced, smart and clever people. Here is what I will say about Russia’s special responsibility. We have equal rights and equal responsibilities with all our colleagues involved in the discussion on Syria. This is not the first time I hear that I now carry a special responsibility. We all carry a special responsibility; we all carry it equally. If the attempt to resolve the problem by peaceful means is unsuccessful, that will be a tragedy. But we must investigate before we do take any other steps. My good friend Francois Fillon – we have known each other for a long time and have become friends during our years of working together – talked about how after the report was released by UN experts, it became clear that chemical weapons had been used. But this was clear to us from the very beginning, and our experts agreed. The only thing that is unclear is who used it.

We are constantly talking about responsibility on the part of Assad’s government, whether he used chemical weapons or not. But what if they were used by the opposition? Nobody is saying what we would then do with the opposition – but this, too, is an important question. We have every reason to believe that this was a provocation. You know, it was clever and smart, but at the same time, the execution was primitive. They used an ancient, Soviet-made projectile, taken from the Syrian army’s armaments from a long time ago – it even had “Made in the USSR” printed on it. But this was not the first time chemical weapons were used in Syria. Why didn’t they investigate the previous instances?

This matter should be investigated as thoroughly as possible. If we finally get an answer, despite all obstacles, to the question of who did this, who committed this crime – and there is no question that it was a crime – then we will take the next step; we will then work with other UN Security Council colleagues to determine the culpability of those who committed this crime, together and in solidarity.

Thank you.

Moderator Svetlana Mironyuk: They say that Senator McCain followed your example and published an article of his own in Pravda newspaper. He probably remembers from the Soviet years that Pravda was a well-known publication and the most popular newspaper in the country. True, a lot of time has passed and things have changed a bit since then, so it’s no longer true. I don’t know if you heard about this or not, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: No, I didn’t know about it. I have met the senator before. He was in Munich when I made the speech there that went on to become so famous. Actually, there was nothing anti-American in that speech. I simply stated our position frankly and honestly, and there was nothing aggressive in what I said, if you only take a closer look. What I said then was that we were promised at one point that NATO would not expand beyond the former Federal Republic of Germany’s eastern border. That was a promise directly made to Gorbachev. True, it was not actually set out and written down. But where is NATO today, where is the border? We got cheated, to put it quite simply. That’s the whole story. But there’s nothing aggressive here. It’s more just a reluctance to admit to what I just said. But I didn’t say those words to offend anyone. I said them so that we would be able to lay everything before each other plain and clear and discuss the problems in an honest, open fashion. It’s easier to reach agreements this way. You shouldn’t keep things hidden.

The senator has his own views. I do think though that he is lacking information about our country. The fact that he chose to publish his article in Pravda – and he wanted after all to publish it in the most influential and widely read newspaper – suggests that he is lacking information. Pravda is a respected publication of the Communist Party, which is now in opposition, but it does not have very wide circulation around the country now. He wants to get his views across to as many people as possible, and so his choice simply suggests that he is not well-informed about our country.

Actually, I would have been happy to see him here at the Valdai Club say, taking part in the discussions. As far as I know, our big television channels, the national channels, proposed that he come and take part in an open and honest discussion. There you have it, freedom of speech, freedom of the press. He is welcome to share his point of view with the whole country and discuss things with his equals, with political analysts and politicians, members of the State Duma or the Federation Council.

In this respect, I can only express my regret that our American colleagues did not react to our parliamentarians’ proposal and refused to receive them in Washington for a discussion on Syria. Why did they do this? To be honest, I don’t see anything so bad about this proposal, which, on the contrary, seems to me of interest and the right thing to do. The more we actually discuss things directly with each other, the easier it will be to find solutions.

Svetlana Mironyuk: Thank you.

Are there more questions from the floor?

Let’s stick to the subjects if we can, so as not to jump from one topic to another.

Bridget Kendall, go ahead.

Diplomatic correspondent for the BBC Bridget Kendall: Thank you.

Again about Syria, Russia has been lauded for its achievement for bringing about a deal which looks as though it could lead to the elimination of chemical weapons in Syria, all the more an achievement given that the Syrian government didn't admit it had them until very recently. Would you have been able to persuade President Assad to do this if there hadn't been a threat of American military strikes? In other words, did the threat of US military strikes actually play a rather useful role?

Vladimir Putin: Am I right in understanding that you are asking about whether it is the threat of military strikes that plays a part in Syria’s agreeing to have its weapons placed under control?

First, I’d like to ask you all to address your questions to everyone taking part in today’s discussion, so as not to turn this into a boring dialogue. If you permit, I will redirect your question to my colleagues and ask them to share their points of view on this issue.

The threat of the use of force and actual use of force are far from being a cure-all for international problems. Look at what we are actually talking about after all. We are forgetting the heart of the matter. We are talking about using force outside the framework of current international law. We’ve just been saying how the US Congress and Senate are discussing whether to use force or not. But it is not there that this matter should be discussed. It should be discussed in the UN Security Council. That is the heart of the issue. That is my first point.

Second, on whether we will manage to convince Assad or not, I don’t know. So far it looks as though Syria has fully agreed to our proposal and is ready to act according to the plan that the international community is putting together, working through the UN. Russia and the USA, in the persons of Secretary of State Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov have already practically drafted the outlines of this plan. There is a special organization that will work together with the UN on this matter of eliminating chemical weapons. Syria has declared that it will join and that it indeed already considers itself to have joined the International Chemical Weapons Convention. These are practical steps that the Syrian government has already taken. Will we succeed in taking the process through to completion? I cannot give a 100% guarantee. But what we have seen just lately, over these last few days, gives us hope that this is possible and will be done.

Let me just remind you about how these chemical weapons came about. Syria got itself chemical weapons as an alternative to Israel’s nuclear arsenal, as we know. What can be done about the various issues associated with proliferation and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction remains a very relevant question today, perhaps the most important issue of our time. If this situation gets out of control, like it once happened with gunpowder, the consequences will be unimaginable. We therefore need to strive towards nuclear-free status in particular parts of the world, especially in such volatile regions as the Middle East.

We need to be very careful in our action so as to give unconditional security guarantees for all participants in this process. After all, there are people in Israel itself who categorically oppose nuclear weapons. You remember the well-known case when a nuclear physicist was sent to prison, served his sentence and still continues to think that his position was right. Why? There is nothing anti-Israeli in his position. He is a Jew himself and a citizen of his country, but he simply believes that Israel’s technological superiority is such that the country does not need nuclear weapons. Israel is already technologically and militarily a long way ahead of the region’s other countries. But nuclear weapons only turn the country into a target and create foreign policy problems. In this respect, there is sense in the position of this nuclear physicist, who disclosed the existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons.

But to come back to your question about whether the plan will succeed or not, we hope that it will.

Svetlana Mironyuk: Mr. President, I suggest that since we have veered away from defense and security issues, we should give Mr. Rühe a chance to reply, ask a question, and express his opinion.

Mr. Rühe, you have the floor.

Former Defence Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany Volker Rühe: Well, I wanted to speak about the young generation in this country.

First, I would like to begin – because I’ve been here from the beginning – to also compliment our Russian friends on the format of Valdai, the architects – because it would not be enough to call them organizers. What we have seen here, I call the culture of inclusiveness and a love of pluralism. And I can tell you, Mr. President, we are quite fascinated by the pluralistic voices from Russia, including very powerful statements by people that are in opposition to your politics, and I think this shows the strength of the country, that it was organized in this way.

I’ve never looked at Russia with the somewhat narrow eyes of a defense minister, you know this. I was first here in 1971, and Sergei Karaganov is a friend of mine since the late 1970s. We don’t look it, but it’s a fact of life. We have lived through SS-20 and Pershing.

And what I would like to say is, I came here as Defense Minister in 1995 and I went to St Petersburg. And I said, I don’t want to see any tanks or artillery, or any generals. I want to see the Mayor, Sobchak. And I got to know you also, you were part of his team. Why? He was a lighthouse for me, as a young member of parliament in West Germany, still in the divided Germany, and I think what he was doing was much more important than tanks and artillery, and it has proved to be this way. So it’s a lifelong interest in a neighbor. And we all, I believe, on this continent, are interested in a successful, modern Russia.

Now, the young generation. What I’ve seen – and of course it was very interesting for me to listen to his daughter, who is a powerful voice for the young generation, two days ago.

So what I’ve seen here, what I’ve seen in Russia is you have really an asset to the country, your young generation. They are very intelligent. They want to have a good education. They want to be more internationally connected. And they want to have a bigger say in the politics of your country. They are knocking at the doors of the Kremlin.

The young generation in my country, they also want to build their private lives, they are very much internationally connected. The doors to our Kremlins, which is the parliament and the government, are very open, but they don’t knock at it. They leave it to politicians because they think things have been arranged very well. And we are very sad that some of the very best just want to have a successful private life, but don’t engage in public life.

So my message really is, Russia can be proud of a young generation, even if there are political opponents that want to engage in public life, which is not the case in many of the west European countries. And I’ve said earlier in Russia also, we should give up this visa regime in the West, because that would enable hundreds of thousands of young Russians to come and see our life and our political system. But I must say, it would also change Russia, because once they have studied in Rome or in London or in Washington, because they’ll be forces of change, the necessary change in this country. But I think it would make the country also more competitive.

Now what has that to do with security? I think this is the best way to ensure security and to develop common points of view. And I’m very glad that this culture of Valdai, I don’t think there’s anything – I have been to many conferences, and also to Munich, but Munich is very narrow security-wise, there’s no conference like this in the world.

And also when we listen for four hours to your people about ideas and politics – we very often just talk from Monday to Thursday about our politics. It was very fascinating to see that the Russian speakers are much more interested in fundamental questions of society than we are, which is very much on the surface, what we are debating. So I think this is something to start from, but the real message is, I think it would be a great project of your third term to integrate this young generation when they’re knocking at the door of the Kremlin, because don’t forget, we want more people to knock at the doors of political power in the West, and you can be proud of these people. That’s my message.

Svetlana Mironyuk: Thank you, Mr. Rühe.

Other questions, please.

President and founder of the Center on Global interests in Washington Nikolai Zlobin: Good afternoon.

Everyone seems to be expecting me to ask you about 2018 and whether you will run for a new term. But I’m not going to ask that question. Everyone else I have put this question to so far have all said no though, so you might have to run anyway in the end, or else there won’t be anyone at all.

But I want to come back to a question we have already discussed. Unlike you, I did read McCain’s article. It should be said that it is not exactly a reply to your article, because it is really quite a personal article and not related to Syria. I think it is not very politically correct really, but that is my personal view.

Actually, he says there that no criticism of Putin is allowed in Russia. I’m here as a living example of someone who is always criticizing you. Even here at Valdai I have often argued with you, but I’m still here as you can see, alive and well. To be honest, I do not entirely agree with the things you said today either. But McCain says that the government Russia has today does not adequately represent Russian society, and that Russia deserves a different government.

In this respect I have a question. I know that relations between the public and the authorities is indeed one of Russia’s big problems, an old, historical problem. Before last year’s election, I recall that you said that there is perhaps a need to change the Constitution, change the relations between government and society, change the mutual responsibility, develop local government and so on. There was the very good idea too of bringing more young people into government. Sometimes I hear voices among the opposition saying that this government should be swept aside and that a new government is needed. You are now serving your third term as President. How do you view today the relations between government and society in Russia? Are you happy with these relations? What should be changed? Is the Constitution really the issue, or is McCain perhaps right in a way? I do not think his argument is correct. But what is your vision now, in the twenty-first century, of the relations between Russia’s highest authorities and society?

Thank you, Mr. President.

Vladimir Putin: You recall the words of one of the world’s outstanding political leaders, a former British Prime Minister, who said of democracy that it “is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”. Probably then – not probably, but for certain – Russia does deserve a better quality of government. Is there an ideal form of government in other countries, including the one that you and Mr. McCain represent? This is a big question, a very big question, if we are talking about democracy.

It has happened twice in US history that the President of the United States was chosen by a majority in the electoral colleges, but with a minority of the actual voters. This is an obvious flaw in the electoral procedure, that is to say, a flaw at the very heart of American democracy. In other words, everyone has their own problems.

We perhaps have no fewer problems than you, and maybe even more, though this would only be natural. Russia has gone through the experience of rule under the tsars, then communism, then the disintegration of the 1990s. This has been a period of very difficult and complicated rebuilding. But it is very clear that Russia is on the road to democracy and is looking for its own ways to strengthen these democratic foundations. There is this very fact that for ten years now we have been getting together, debating, openly discussing, even when we used to meet behind closed doors, it all became public anyway. And this is not to mention the other aspects of our life.

As for what kind of government Russia should have, this is something for our citizens to decide, and not for our colleagues from abroad. We held an election a year ago, not so long ago, and the majority of Russia’s citizens voted for me. I base myself on this decision. That does not mean we can now sit on our laurels. I have to work on myself, and our institutions need to improve too. This is just what we are all doing.

Note that we have returned to holding gubernatorial elections in the regions. This practice is not so widespread in the world. Such elections are the practice in the United States, but India say, has a completely different procedure. Many countries do things very much their own way. Germany has its system, France has its way of doing things, and in Russia we have decided to elect regional governors by direct secret ballot.

 We have liberalized political parties’ activity. As a specialist on Russia, you know just how many new political parties took part in the regional elections. In many cases they achieved victory, and as far as I know, the winners of elections from these new political parties are here at Valdai too. The improvement process is therefore going ahead. I think it will never stop, because government organization, the political organization of society, and democratic procedures need to keep up more or less with a society’s current needs and demands, and society is developing and changing. The political system will change and develop with it.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_21/We-have-left-behind-Soviet-ideology-and-there-will-be-no-return-Putin-5419/

 

 

JAR2

21 September, 08:58  

US-Israel-Wahhabists-Saudis: 'an unholy alliance' – Dr. Kevin Barrett

сша флаг сша закат сша небо сша упадок закат америки

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

Download audio file

The United States of America continues to use the same playbook in their war for global domination against any country that they do not control: false flag terrorist attacks, demonization and then military attack disguised as intervention. 9-11 was the mother of all false flag attacks and was the catalyst for the endless war on terror that the unholy alliance between the USA, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Al-Qaeda have unleashed on the world. President Putin was absolutely right when he talked about the false concept certain countries have regarding their own exceptionalism in a recent. Dr. Kevin Barrett spoke with VOR’s John Robles on these issues and more in an exclusive interview for the Voice of Russia.

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/09/21/04/images.jpg

Hello, this is John Robles, I am speaking with Doctor Kevin Barrett, he is the owner and the manager of the truthjihad.com website and the long time critic of US foreign policy. Hello, sir.

Barrett: Hello, good to be with you John.

Robles: Thanks for agreeing to do the interview. We have been hearing more and more about links between Al-Qaeda, Islamist terrorist groupings, the Saudis and the US government. Yet they have been demonized as the end-all-enemy for the United States for years now. Can you comment on the fact that history and news reporters showing that Al-Qaeda is being supported in Syria, in particular, I think about 90% of the fighters at the US are supporting Syria are Al-Qaeda affiliated and if you could talk a little bit about the history of Al-Qaeda and the US?

Barrett:Right. That’s one of the things that the US government is having a hard time explaining to the American people, is why it is so urgent that the US should go to war in Syria on behalf of Al-Qaeda. That conflicts with the propaganda we have been given since 9-11.

We have been told that Al-Qaeda is a ruthless band of sort of suicidal homicidal fanatics and that the only way to respond to them is to basically: exterminate them with drone assassinations and so on, and yet, here we are, with the US straining at the leash looking for any opportunity to attack Syria on behalf of Al-Qaeda.

So that raises questions about what Al-Qaeda really is and the real history of Al-Qaeda is very different from the official history. It was actually created by the US along with its Pakistani and Saudi allies to fight against Russia in Afghanistan and since then most of what Al-Qaeda has done has been to smuggle drugs and attack Russia on behalf of the CIA. And every now and then Al-Qaeda manages to whip up a kind of a false flag attack to justify US interventions somewhere.

Of course, 9-11 was the mother of all false flag attacks so Al-Qaeda serves two purposes: one is to act as the CIA’s “Arab Legion”, and fight against whoever the US looks at as a geopolitical enemy, such as Russia or Syria, and then secondly, Al-Qaeda is a sort of permanent “false flag group” in that they built this legend about the evil radical Muslims of Al-Qaeda, which mobilizes American public opinion in favor of a fear based politics and justification of basically any intervention that the government wants.

Robles: Have you seen a changing in opinion by the US populace? I mean are people like backing off a little bit?

Barrett: Oh, they backed way off. Yeah!

I think after the Boston bombing there was a huge outburst of talk about false flag terrorism and questioning about what really happened in Boston and then with this latest round of US attempt to push through a bombing of Syria, once again, here we have seen vast majority of the American population seeing right through this and being so strongly against the war that even APAC, the lobby in DC, that usually gets everything it wants, was unable to push through its plan to have the US bomb Syria on behalf of Al-Qaeda.

And so as I said, the American public is just not understanding why it is so urgent to attack Syria for Al-Qaeda and the anti-war sentiment is at 2/3 to 3/4 of the population according to all the polls, and that’s really what has made it impossible for them to do this war.

Robles: I see.

Just a reminder you are listening to an interview with Doctor Kevin Barrett.

Robles: I mean it sounds insane to me that they would try to convince the American people that somehow Syria is some sort of a threat, and the other aspect, that somehow the United States has some sort of God given authority to bomb any place they want because they are the moral policeman of the planet.

Barrett: Right, well that is the whole issue of so-called American exceptionalism that President Putin brought up in his Op Ed in the New York Times which was very well received by the way. Frankly, right now, I think that now most Americans look at Putin as more of a statesman than Obama or really just about any other leader, he’s done very well out of this Syria fiasco that Americans hashed up so badly.

And I think he is absolutely right about this issue of American exceptionalism. And you know, I think that in President Putin’s Op Ed when he made those remarks about how it is very dangerous for any group of people to consider themselves exceptional.

He was obviously first and foremost talking about this tradition of American exceptionalism: the idea that America is the indispensable nation, which is this kind of mythology that makes no sense whatsoever, every nation is different, every nation is unique and the USA is maybe the strongest nation militarily, economically, but it’s ridiculous to think that there is some kind of God given right for the USA to run around the world bombing people and thinking it is the world’s policeman and so that was the first reference that I think President Putin was making.

The second reference and the slightly hidden reference he was also making was the issue of Israeli exceptionalism which is of course based on a kind of Jewish superiority complex, and Jewish culture like all other cultures has plenty of good points, as well as bad points, but one of the aspects of Jewish culture is this notion of “the chosen people”, which has managed to survive a transition among the Jewish people from a group of people who were very religious (Judaism was just another religion) and then in the 19th century it became more of a sort of intensely nationalistic secular movement.

Today the State of Israel is obviously even more convinced of its exceptionalism than the US is, so we have the US and Israel both teaming up to bomb Syria because they both think… (and then there is of course the Saudi regime which also seems to think it’s exceptional).

The Saudis have been paying the Wahhabi Movement which believes that its version of Islam is the only legitimate religion on earth and so the Saudis attack in fury. The people who condemn other Muslims as heretics and want to chop their heads off also seem to think that they are an exceptional nation that has the right to go around doing whatever it wants.

So we have this kind of “unholy alliance” of these grey Wahhabi-Saudis, backed by this insanely corrupt and wealthy royal family, these exceptional self-appointed-chosen-people over in Israel, and then the American exceptionalists who believe that it is their destiny is to bomb the world into peace.

And I think that President Putin responded very eloquently to the challenges posed by this alliance and so far he is winning the stand-off.

Robles: It is an odd alliance. Now in Syria they are all supporting what is supposed to be the enemy of all mankind, Al-Qaeda.

Barrett: Right, and this is all so impossible to summarize and sell to the American people.

So what they did in order to try to sell their war on Syria, is they took a page out of the same old book that they used for the war on Iraq (9-11 was false flag terrorism) so here they apparently did a false flag attack in Syria and then they did the same kind of rhetoric that they used against Saddam Hussein: they said that: “Oh it’s chemical weapons, weapons of mass destruction, etc. etc.!!”

They raised a big stink out about this horrible atrocity in Ghouta but actually turns out it was apparently a false flag attack.

END PART 1

That was the end of part one of an interview with Doctor Kevin Barrett, a doctor in Arabic and Islamic studies, and the co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for Truth, he is also the owner and manager of truthjihad.com. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at the voiceofrussia.com.

 Thanks for listening, and I wish you the best!

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_21/US-Israel-Wahhabists-Saudis-an-unholy-alliance-Dr-Kevin-Barret-2420/

 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

19 September, 21:36  

Syria: Al-Qaeda as the black operations wing of the US

Syria: Al-Qaeda as the black operations wing of the US

Collage: Voice of Russia

Plausible deniability, questionable “legal authority” cleverly inserted and obfuscated in appropriations bills and the like, lawmakers who are more interested in their own political well being, a terrified, disinterested, apolitical and pliable populace and a media that they fully control are just some of the things that the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the CIA’s National Clandestine Service (NCS) and the Black Operations Group under the Special Activities Division (SAD) of the CIA, the Psychological Operations Directorate (POD) and the Shadow Government controlling everything, count on to get away with everything they do.

At the end of July Saudi Prince Bandar met with Russian President Vladimir Putin and with the full support of the United States of America first attempted to bribe President Putin to pull Russian support for Syria and President Bashar Al-Assad and then threatened the President and the Russian Federation with terrorist acts during the Sochi Olympic Games.

The fact Bandar admitted that the Saudis control Chechen terrorists and Al-Qaeda elements in Syria (ties between the Saudis and the US Black Operations Community have been suspected and known about for years, as President Putin stated to Bandar during the conversation) was a watershed moment, but the fact that he threatened Russia, a sovereign nation, with a terrorist attack was an event of such magnitude that it would have served as a legitimate self-defense pretext for leveling Saudi Arabia had President Putin so desired.

This admission I would argue is the key to unlocking the events of 9-11 and showing who was actually involved in the murder of 2,999 civilians on that autumn morning in September of 2001. Osama Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda, the Saudis, MOSSAD, the CIA, the NSA and the Shadow Government controlling the United States are all clearly aligned and working together in efficient unison to bring about their goals.

The well documented fact that Al-Qaeda is now, as it was during the war in Afghanistan, operating under the command of JSOC and the Black Operations Command and in unison with the US Government should be causing heads to roll and a public outcry in America, but with a subservient government controlled media, little is being heard and the story of Bandar and Saudi Arabia actually being revealed for the true terrorist state that it in fact is, have gotten little attention.

Since 9-11 the US Shadow Government has used the bogeyman of terrorism to strip away the rights and liberties of its citizens and create the largest police and security state in history, so to learn that the very same terrorist bogeyman is being armed, funded, trained, supported and instructed by the government should, as I said cause an outcry. It has not.

Like the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, an Iranian “opposition” group known in the West as the M.E.K., Al-Nusra and Al-Qaeda affiliated groups in Syria are doing the dirty work for the CIA, JSOC and the Shadow Government. However plausible deniability has kept them secure until now.

The fact that these animals, who are under the direction of the US and their staunch “special” ally the Suadis, killed 426 children in Damascus on the eve of the arrival of a United Nations chemical weapons inspection team, and the fact that Obama and the Shadow Government were ready carry through with a long planned attack of Syria, are crimes on an international scale as was the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. The difference in Syria is that they are getting more and more obvious and their nefarious methods are becoming more and more well known.

According to Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad in an interview with American media yesterday 80-90% of the tens of thousands of “rebels” in Syria are Al-Qaeda linked affiliates and terrorists. These are the same “fighters” that the US is supporting with billions of taxpayer dollars and ready to send American Forces in to support, this fact alone should be making the American people scream and even revolt, but the reaction has been almost zero.

Fortunately for the Syrian people the US has been stopped from invading Syria for the time being, but just when the world thought it could rest for a minute from the fear of yet another US act of aggressive war, the greatest aggressor the world has seen since hitler (sic) has now set its gun sights on it next target, the Islamic Republic of Iran. As I have been saying for years, next the Arab Republic of Syria, then the Islamic Republic of Iran, then the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea with a couple South American countries thrown in when convenient, then the Russian Federation and final the People’s Republic of China, to cement complete and total global domination.

Syria did not work out so well for the Nobel-Peace-Prize-launcher-of-aggressive-wars-and-extra-judicial-terror-Tuesday-executioner-in-chief so with almost no pause he has moved on to the next target and the rhetoric, disinformation, lies and demonization has begun at a heightened rate against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

A website called tabletmag.com (Jewish News and Politics) is one of those on the cutting edge of beginning the propaganda campaign for the next US act of aggression against another country that follows an independent foreign policy line and is on good terms with Russia. In an article dated September the 18th and titled “How Iran Uses Terror Threats To Successfully Deter U.S. Military Action” the publication makes a good effort at starting the psychological operations against Iran and blames Iran for everything under the sun, from the war in Iraq to attacks in Beirut.

The Jewish News cites a “senior official at a Washington, D.C.-based pro-Israel organization” as saying: “The staffers left those briefings with the blood drained from their faces.” Regarding briefing on an attack on Syria. Could it be they understood that their government had just killed 426 children and was backing Al-Qaeda cannibals?

The recent seizure of a building in Manhattan also points to a government desperate for funds and on the verge of attacking the country. In an article on gawker.com, the US lays its case for the seizure of a skayscraper supposedly owned by Iran by saying the funds from its sale and liquidation will be used to provide funds for the “victims of Iranian terrorism”. What victims they are talking about is completely unclear and as the article does not list a single terrorist act carried out by Iran this is highly suspicious but then again they need their funding somehow and stealing it is one of the best ways to get it.

The fact that Iran, Libya, Iraq and Syria all fought against and refused to work with Al-Qaeda is also important to note. If the US Government were really engaged in a war on terror they would be providing support for the government of Bashar Al-Assad and cutting all ties with the Saudis. But that would be against the true nature of those in control of the US Government including the ex-Islamic President Barrack Hussein Obama.

We saw after 9-11 how the US helped the Bin Laden family and the Saudis leave the country and how they have not prosecuted anyone for 9-11 and this is now obvious why. One would not prosecute oneself now would one? Nor would one prosecute ones doing ones dirty work.

In another article by Seymour Hersh detailing how the US supports terrorists in Iran Hersh wrote: “Allan Gerson, a Washington attorney for the M.E.K., notes that the M.E.K. has publicly and repeatedly renounced terror. Gerson said he would not comment on the alleged training in Nevada. But such training, if true, he said, would be “especially incongruent with the State Department’s decision to continue to maintain the M.E.K. on the terrorist list. How can the U.S. train those on State’s foreign terrorist list, when others face criminal penalties for providing a nickel to the same organization?”

Did you know that Iran is not a nation but a terrorist organization according to the US Government in justifying their actions against the country. From a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Section 215 and the PRISM/702 programs I offer the following: “The Section 215 Business Records provision was created in 2001 in the PATRIOT for tangible things: hotel records, credit card statements, etcetera. Things that are not phone or email communications. The FBI uses that authority as part of its terrorism investigations. The NSA only uses Section 215 for phone call records — not for Google searches or other things. Under Section 215, NSA collects phone records pursuant to a court record. It can only look at that data after a showing that there is a reasonable, articulable that a specific individual is involved in terrorism, actually related to al Qaeda or Iran. At that point, the database can be searched.”

So while America is pointing the finger at the world for defending itself or having independent foreign policies or being allied with Russia and saying such things as everyone is ready to use violence against America, and all countries are terrorist, maybe they should start looking in the mirror and doing some soul searching, if in fact they have souls.

Their friends the Saudis just threatened the Russian Federation with terrorist acts and they are supporting Al-Qaeda while attacking every country that has been against Al-Qaeda in the Middle East and their violence and aggression is spreading with act after act of aggressive war. Are we getting the picture now?

  

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_19/Syria-Al-Qaeda-as-the-black-operations-wing-of-the-US-2104/

 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

18 September, 11:50 1 

People slowly waking up after Wikileaks' revelations – Kristinn Hrafnsson

декабрь коллаж WikiLeaks викиликс

© Colalge "The Voice of Russia"

Download audio file

US war criminals continue to escape justice and the only hope is for the people to finally stand up and do something about all of the government illegality and war crimes that have been exposed by WikiLeaks. The organization continues its fight to expose the truth and has opened a door through which whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden may pass. In the final installment of a recent interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson from the WikiLeaks Organization, Mr. Hrafnsson gives his views on those matters and more.

hrafnsson

Robles: Kristinn, I don’t know if you are aware about that law that the United States passed in 2002 (I wrote an article about it today), some people call it the “Hague Invasion Act”. Are you aware of that? I mean, for me that explains the impunity and why no one has yet to be prosecuted for any of this stuff. Is there any will that you know about in the international community to deal with all of this illegality? I mean, we are talking about the worst crimes possible against all of humanity that some of these people are committing.

Hrafnsson: I’m pinning my hopes on the individuals. And I see they are slowly and gradually waking up to the reality that I mentioned earlier. It will take time to mobilize. It will take time to materialize. But I have a strong belief in the democratic process. And I hope that through that process, the criticism and the awakening of people will result in a change, a fundamental change in the way where we are dealing with the international matters.

And the Internet comes strongly into play here. The fact that we started something in 2010, which has been a watershed moment I believe, in information dissemination, will affect that fundamentally, and is affecting that.

A door was opened through which Edward Snowden entered and other whistleblowers will come forth. There are people with conscience and people with courage that will submit information into the public domain. So, I’m rather optimistic that we are getting into a better place, but there will be turbulent times.

Robles: No one has been prosecuted. Those were clear, egregious, unbelievable war crimes. Basically, they are blackmailing anyone who might try to go after them.

Hrafnsson: Well, it is quite awful to see that people have not been held accountable by the 40 war crimes that we have exposed, for example. For me personally, it is quite sad that before we released the collateral murder video I did travel to Baghdad on a fact-finding mission and I located the two children who were injured in the attack on a minivan which is shown in that video. And I met their mother, now widowed.

There has been no prosecution for that obvious war crime. The only consolation that these two children now have and their mother, is the simple fact that now the world community knows what happened, and they know that, everybody knows, that this is an unforgivable and inexcusable crime. Of course, that is part of justice, but it is not full justice which has to be seen.

Robles: Julian, how is he? What happened with ­­Correa? Is there some big conflict going on there or is everything pretty much okay? Any opinion or comments you might have on Syria?

Hrafnsson: I already said what think is important about Syria. The relationship between Julian and the Ecuadorian authorities is fine. The Ecuadorian President has confirmed his commitments in supporting Assange.

He has been very busy, of course, in preparing for the elections this weekend in Australia. Even though they brought strokes in the outcome seem to be clear when it comes to the fact that there will be a conservative replacement in Canberra. The final outcome in the Senate’s election will take some days to come out, because the system there is extremely complicated. So, we will not know for certain a little time.

Robles: Can you comment on some of the parties? They have some very strange parties in Australia. There was something like the Sex Party and the Automobile Lovers Party or something, and the Animal Lovers Party. Is that normal, or what?

Hrafnsson: I’m not an expert on the politics of Australia. I only view this from afar and know sort of the broad picture. I can only say that as far as WikiLeaks is concerned neither of the two dominant parties in the country have been supportive of WikiLeaks.

So, even though there is a change in government. I doubt there will be any big changes with regards to the position against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. But it is true, in Australia they do have a lot of small parties that have been standing on a rather narrow subject. I even believe I saw a political party of tobacco consumers. So, this is quite an (un)interesting environment.

Robles: Have you heard anything about that the UK maybe pulling out of extradition agreements with Sweden next year? Have you heard anything about that?

Hrafnsson: This is actually a very interesting case, because the case of Julian Assange going through the three court stages in the UK actually put a focus on the flaws of the system in Europe, a part of the EU, called the European Arrest Warrant where the EU countries are committed to throw anybody on a plane and export him to another EU country to face, even questioning, as in the case of Julian Assange. This has actually caused huge debates in Britain and led to the fact that the authorizes are pulling out of that cooperation, and plan to do that I believe next year.

So, it is quite interesting in the context of the case against Julian Assange. I believe it influenced that decision by putting a focus on the flaws in that case. And of course, there will be an unusual set of agreements put in place. But that would not allow anyone to be extradited to another country just for questioning, which was the case of Julian Assange.

Robles: Let’s keep our fingers crossed. That sounds like a resolution to everything, maybe, possibly. I mean, let’s be cautiously optimistic. Do you feel any optimism in that regard?

Hrafnsson: In general, I'm very optimistic about it.

Robles: But you are always optimistic.

Hrafnsson: Yes. It is quite necessary when you are working in the core of WikiLeaks to be optimistic, focusing on the future with the view that actually the future can be changed to the better. That is what we are trying, that is what pushes us onward, that what keeps us going. And when it comes to Julian and his situation, I’m very hopeful that within a relatively short time we’ll see a resolution.

Robles: I'm sure this is important for all the supporters of WikiLeaks not to forget some of the people who have paid extremely high prices for trying to get to the bottom of all this illegality, like Bradley Manning, Jeremy Hammond.

Hrafnsson: We are extremely grateful for the support that we have been getting. We of course are very grateful to all our sources that through time are submitting information to us and believe in what we are doing.

Some people have paid a price for that, which is of course extremely sad.

We are committed to fighting for justice for those people and for all the whistleblowers who are doing extremely courageous work, and those who are fighting for information freedom. This is part of our core philosophy and it is part of our commitment. We will fight on and we hope to get ongoing support for people. Let’s call it a night!

Robles: Okay, I really appreciate it, thank you. You were listening to an interview in progress with Kristinn Hrafnsson – the official spokesperson for the WikiLeaks. You can find the previous parts of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru

PART 1

PART 2

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________   

 

JAR2

17 September, 13:17 1 

Syria and the endless fight between good and evil

Обама Сирия химическое оружие

Collage: Voice Of Russia

To understand what some might call a “battle of civilizations” that is seeing itself played out in the recent events surrounding Syria, one must understand the roots and intentions of the players in what has become an international conflict. On the one hand we have the US with its stated intention of killing the leader of Syria and toppling the government, in order to promote their own influence and gain further access to resources and which has imported the worst terrorist elements in the world into the country to bring about their ends. On the other we have Russia which is interested in protecting its ally, ending the bloodshed and maintaining the rule of law. In the hopes of promoting understanding and bringing about debate I offer the following.

The schism that is “America”

The so-called “freedom” that the country’s citizens used to enjoy and the “independence” and “rights” which they espouse to the world are all based on a constitution which was founded on a war against their colonial rulers. This supposed respect for freedom has led to just one of the schisms in what is America. Namely these very same people, who preach “freedom” want to subjugate and dictate to the rest of the world what to do, how to do it and who to do it with.

As a Native American I have always maintained that there is no way that a country founded and built on lands stolen through genocide and built by slaves could ever be democratic, or free, or just. The sons and ancestors of European killers, drunkards and every perceivable scum that were expunged from Europe to found the “New World” and who then proceeded to exterminate the true oldest democracy on the planet (that which was developed by the Indians, the original inhabitants of what was called Turtle Island) can never be on moral high ground until they cleanse their own filth.

This genocidal foundation and the building of the country by slaves are two more of America’s schisms. The slave issue has never been resolved or come to terms with but has led to a widespread psychosis-like state of endemic racism throughout the country’s society and is even reflected in their foreign policy. This institutionalized endemic racism affects the citizens of this country on every level every day, and having a president who is black has done nothing but muzzle dissent and silence the oppressed. This “black” president has led to a new schism in America.

Another schism destroying America is the fact that for all intents and purposes the country, once the richest in the world, produces practically nothing yet demands from the world, by some estimates over 45% of its resources for its own consumers which make up only 4% of the world’s population. It also used to hold over 80% of the world’s wealth, yet this is based mainly on financial machinations rather than on real wealth.

The hypocrisy does not end there, morally the country has long been bankrupt and the latest wave of immorality, the endless battle the US is waging to make the world accept their belief that a sodomous relationship between two males is the same as marriage is a perfect example. This clear immorality coupled with attempts to claim that somehow doing so is socially “fair” is an example of yet another schism.

The final schisms I would like to underline involves the entire War on Terror paradigm. Here we have the most surveilled and subjugated people on the planet being told they are the freest and have the most liberties, engaged in a war against what they believed were Muslim terrorists, while being told they have religious freedom and all religions are respected. They are supposedly at war for freedom and justice yet their own freedoms and justice have become the laughing stock of the planet.

The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.

A war of domination

Why was all of the previous important? Because it is important to know your enemy, and believe me they are not your friend dear reader (I am referring to the elites who are controlling the US not the American people who are just sheep to the slaughter). Even their closest allies are expendable if they are no longer conveniently useful or expediently controllable and able to serve some purpose. Even states such as Israel, whose “secret” missile programs they have no problem exposing may be sacrificed if that serves their ends.

They are engaged in a war of global domination. Every country they do not control is a target. it is not about ideology, freedom or any other high ideal, it is only about domination and control and resources, and for them any means are justified if it helps them attain their ends. Including providing military support for Al-Qaeda.

Rogue state

Stopping them from invading or bombing Syria may have been a victory for Russia and Syria but it was also a victory for sanity, rule of law and all civilized people throughout the world.

The US is a country that a month ago threatened Russia and President Putin with a terrorist attack on the Olympics through their surrogate Saudi Arabia in an attempt to get Russia to pull its support for Syria. Had Russia agreed it would have been party to a Crime Against Peace.

The US is country guilty of crimes against humanity, crimes against peace, aggressive war, extra-judicial executions, indefinite illegal detention, rendition, assassination, overturning governments, causing revolutions, illegal global spying, violating the United Nations Charter and raping the planet for their own gain, and that is just in the past decade.

The US is also a country that created the single most lethal terrorist organization on the planet, Al-Qaeda, who they are arming and funding to overthrow Syria and other countries and who they will use their military forces to support. This is a country that almost certainly had a hand in killing 426 children in Syria as an invasion pretext, 2,999 civilians on 9-11-2001 as a global war pretext and so on and so forth. This is a country whose reported goal in Syria is simply killing the president and destroying the government, one of the most modern and secular in the Middle East.

Sanctions

Were any other country on the planet known to have threatened another state with terrorist acts during an international event like the Olympics or known to be funding terrorist formations to wage war and overthrow a government, the international outcry would be historic, yet for the United States it is business as usual. The world has allowed them to get away with such egregious behavior and dares not even consider standing up for fear that they will be next. Until now.

The healthy and normal “minimal” response to the United States backing of Al-Qaeda, policy of aggressive war, delivery of chemical weapons, the threatening with terrorist acts, massive spying on allies and the United Nations, the illegal Guantanamo prison, extra-judicial executions and all the rest would be, at minimum, economic sanctions. Yet no state or leader has called for such.

In various articles on the matter I have mentioned sanctions against the United States, something that no one else has spoken about, and I stand by those statements because truly that is the only way that they will be forced to abide by the international laws and conventions that the rest of the world lives by.

It is the height of insanity in my opinion that a country with only 4% of the world’s population has any right to dictate to the world how it should conduct its affairs. Especially given the fact that the small circle of elites in that country does not represent the people and have proven that they have absolutely no respect for international law and even their own constitution.

What these elites do have is military might and economic manipulation and even worse they have shown that they will use that military might as they see fit with complete disregard for international law.

Battle of civilizations

The Soviet Union and the US, were once “ideological” foes, when the self-serving capitalist world fought to destroy an ideology that truly gave power to the people and was closer to true democracy than anything thought up by man since the Indian Nations were decimated. Now, thanks to US insistence on maintaining old stereotypes and complete disregard for international law we are now foes of a completely different nature. Yet the roles have been completely reversed.

The cold war propaganda was that the USSR was a subjugator and aggressor, even though this was false. For example the West never admitted that it was the Afghan Government who requested Soviet intervention as they fought US created Al-Qaeda elements. Nor has the West ever widely admitted that the USSR rebuilt Afghanistan and they are themselves responsible for destroying all of the wonderful Soviet built infrastructure in the country since their 9-11.

Yet the biggest lie, as the US claims to have some special relationship with Israel and insists that Israel not belong to Russia’s sphere of influence, is that it was the USSR which defeated fascism and the nazis (sic) in World War II, and that more than 28 million Soviet citizens lost their lives fighting the nazis. This original lie (or omission) and all of the anti-Stalin/Soviet propaganda, is historical revisionism at its worst, from a country that gave refuge to over 40,000 nazis after the war.

These are just some aspects that affect the relations between the two super powers and some of lies that have been promoted and spread by the West.

Russia today is a thriving democracy and a rising economic power that has risen from the ashes of the collapse of the USSR and is still struggling to build a free and democratic society based on the rule of law and the rights of the individual.

On the international arena Russia has forged its relationships and unions based on the rule of law and mutual respect and shared goals. This is clear. Although “democracy” may be a fairly new concept, although I would argue Communism was truly closer to “democracy” than any form of capitalism could be, Russia has done an excellent job of building its civil society and maintaining friendly relations with all of its neighbors and allies and even foes.

In contrast, the United States, a waning super power, in its death throes, has a democracy and a country based on genocide, revolution against its colonial power and slavery. Again I have said this many times in the past, no system built on such a foundation can ever be called just, free or fair.

Most Americans today will tell you they do not live in a democracy. Although few would call it outright fascism, they live in a society controlled by the military industrial complex, the elites and the corporations. That is not democracy.

Our nations could be working in peace together to meet common goals and reach mutually beneficial conditions but while the West continues to attempt to shape the world in its own selfish image this will not be possible as many politicians, diplomats, statesmen and even you dear reader are now beginning to realize. There can be no “one” ruler of the world. It will not happen.

Endless fight between good and evil

Anytime peace wins over war it is a victory for good against evil, for light over darkness and for all of the civilized world.

Those in the West who continue to say Syrian President Assad must pay a price must first understand the nature of the conflict in his country. They must first tell their “war” president to stop supporting Al-Qaeda, Wahhabist terrorist elements and cannibal terrorists and they must allow the United Nations to operate independently in preventing another act of aggressive war by the US. That is what the United Nations was set up to do.

Russia supports peace, rule of law and respect of sovereignty. It also supports a robust and “independent” United Nations. All of these “concepts” are real and must rule the international arena. They are not abstract conceptions that one country with a big gun can ignore at will as it attempts to bomb the world into subjugation.

Part I of this article can be found here

The opinions and views expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com.

 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

17 September, 12:25 2 

Syria: Victory for peace, President Putin and Russia

Женева Лавров Керри Сергей Лавров Джон Керри Сирия

Photo: EPA

For the time being Russian President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the Government of the Russian Federation have averted another act of aggressive war by the United States of America. However this victory of peace and diplomacy over war and violence is not only one for Russia and Russia’s brave leader to celebrate, if in fact at this stage there is cause to celebrate, but one for every single one of us, from presidents to bloggers, who has done what we could to finally convince an out-of-control leader of a self-declared “single military super power” that bombs are not the solution to solving a situation they have stoked from the very beginning.

Ever present danger

This not-so-small victory in staving off yet another act of aggressive war packaged as “humanitarian intervention” must not be overestimated. The world is currently engaged in a war of civilizations, not one it wanted but one brought on by one power which is continuously seeking to impose its will on the rest of the planet.

The fact that the world is in a state of ever present danger, not from the bogeyman of terrorism but from the out-of-control aforementioned power, can be underlined by statements made by the leader of that power after he decided to forego spearheading the commission of yet another Crime Against Peace by his country, and once again threatened the Islamic Republic of Iran with further aggression, stated that the fact that they did not attack Syria does not mean they will not attack Iran.

No real authority

The country operates under the self-promoted premise, and its people, for a large part, have been brainwashed since childhood into believing, that they have some sort of moral right or authority to dictate to and force other states to do bend to their will.

Without any international consensus or agreement that the world must bow to the US will, they have been engaged in shaping the world in their image for decades including by force, and thus the country has truly become a war waging pariah and a rogue nation trampling on international laws and norms.

For Americans it is almost impossible to understand that their leaders have illegally trampled on the world’s citizenry as they live in their own separate reality. Even for some of the staunchest critics of US foreign policy, the true nefarious nature of US policy is difficult to comprehend let alone accept. To put it quite plainly the world does not want America and has grown tired of its bombs and aggression.

What must be understood is that no country has the right to impose its will or vision on other countries who, it may be news to some in the West, also have the right to exist, to develop and to have their own cultures. And even to defend themselves against aggression and US “intervention”. These are not just rights possessed by certain western powers but rights possed by all sovereign nations, from Bora-Bora to the People’s Republic of China.

The only solution: compliance with international law

The only solution to bringing about peace and an end to the endless war that the United States of America has “declared” on the world is to put an end to that country’s lawlessness and bring them to account while forcing them to abide by the rules of international law which govern all nations and which countries such as the Russian Federation abide by.

One problem for international observers in attempting to understand why the US operates with such brazen impunity and violates even the most serious of international laws and statutes, ones that the rest of the world lives by and which the United Nations is supposed to enforce, is the ridiculous internal premise that citizens of that country have that somehow international laws and conventions do not apply to them and that somehow international law and organizations such as the United Nations that are responsible for upholding them, encroach on their “freedoms” and their “sovereignty”. Such a view is self-serving poppycock.

By ignoring and refusing to abide by international law (for example even going so far as to develop plans to invade the Netherlands and the Hague if one of their ilk is arrested for crimes against humanity or war crimes) they have placed themselves outside of the law. This is clear, and for once in the case of Syria, they may have reeled themselves in.

The contempt for international law and the world community that the US has shown as they wage their undeclared war of domination on the peace loving nations of the world, and their refusal to abide by international law (i.e. Guantanamo, drones, extra-judicial executions, aggressive wars, etc.) has thrown the world into a state of instability and placed nations in a quandary.

The Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Syrian Arab Republic are all countries that follow the rule of international law and abide by the United Nations Charter yet have independent foreign policies that do not coincide with the US vision of global domination. Therefore they are countries that have all been targeted for regime change by the US and have been the targets of concerted overt and covert efforts by the West. Efforts which seek to bring about a collapse or breakup of their governments and states, so they are easier to manipulate, with efforts ranging from color revolutions and meddling in civil society (Russia) to outright military attack (Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yugoslavia and so on).

Fortunately for the world and for peace an attack on Syria has been averted thanks to efforts led by President Putin. Certainly if the Nobel Peace Prize truly means anything President Putin more than anyone deserves one, he has championed peace and rule of law and has forced a warmonger with a Nobel Peace Prize to simply, follow the law.

 Part II of this article can be found here.

 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

14 September, 08:54  

'The enemies of Wikileaks are raking in money' - Kristinn Hrafnsson

Викиликс Wikileaks сайт материалы про Афганистан война

© Photo: www.wikileaks.org

Download audio file

One of the most important roles of the Fourth Estate worldwide has classically been reporting on and exposing the illegality of governments, corporations and military powers. The media used to function as an important check and balance which served to make sure those with power acted responsibly, within the law, and served the best interests of the people. WikiLeaks is a champion in this role. In an interview with the Voice of Russia Kristinn Hrafnsson expressed his displeasure at an attempt to marginalize WikiLeaks by being called The Fifth Estate and a movie that is supposedly about WikiLeaks but portrays everything they do in a bad light. This is just one more example of how the government and the corporations now completely control the media in the United States and how the media aid and abets them in their illegality and crimes.

Part 1

This is John Robles I’m speaking with Kristinn Hrafnsson, the official spokesperson and the number two at the Wikileaks Organization.

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/09/13/23/wikileaks.JPG

Robles: Do you think the release of this film was timed to coincide with Julian’s election and the Wikileaks party’s elections to the Australian Senate? Do you think there is any correlation?

Hrafnsson: I don’t see a relation there but it is quite obvious that the film is trying to cash in and capitalize on the talk on Wikileaks and Wikileaks matters, and a big support that Wikileaks has around the world.

Just as the two guys, the individuals who sold the film rights for their book capitalized on Wikileaks, now the Spielberg film company is trying to capitalize on the same good will that Wikileaks has around the world, which of course is ironic.

And I thought it was absolutely hilarious to see that at the party in Toronto two nights ago when the film was officially released, those who were drinking the champagne were standing under a canopy of VISA international, which had obviously sponsored the event in some way, when we had in fact been under a banking blockade by VISA for three years and by other financial companies which has wiped out almost all of our resources. So, that was ironic to say the least.

Robles: So, you have these people that are persecuting Wikileaks, they’ve been badmouthing you, they came out with a movie that is a hit job I think, it sounds like it to me, and they are going to make a lot of money off it and they are sitting around and drinking champagne. It is disgusting really. That sounds beyond the pale.

Hrafnsson: Yes, I was quite stunned to see a photograph of the guests of the premiere of The Fifth Estate drinking champagne under the logo of Visa. I thought that was quite ironic but totally in tune with what we’ve been seeing. The enemies of Wikileaks are raking in money.

Robles: They don’t care about lives, they don’t care about peace, they don’t care about anything – truth or rule of laws, just money and anything they can make money with, they’ll do it, even if it means slaughtering millions of people.

I’d just like to make this point, if I was making a film about Wikileaks, (I began communicating with you because I was interested in the real story), I mean if I was going to make a film, I would certainly have somebody from Wikileaks as an advisor, wouldn’t you? How can you make a film about an organization and not include the organization in the film? That sounds ridiculous.

Hrafnsson: There was an attempt by one of the actors to approach the organization. When the script was leaked to us and actually two copies of the script…

Robles: They didn’t just say: “Here you go, here’s the script. What do you think?” It had to be leaked.

Hrafnsson: It was leaked, yes, and it was obvious that this would not be in any way a positive portrayal or true portrayal of what we had been doing in 2010 and what Wikileaks was all about, so there was no interest on our behalf of giving any indication that we were supporting this film as it would be rather obvious that the outcome would be a very negative one simply by the fact that it is based on two books that are very negative in nature.

Robles: What comment does that make for you? I mean the film is called “The Fifth Estate”. What comment would you like to make on the fourth estate as far as Wikileaks goes, as far as all this war propaganda on Syria that is going on right now that everybody knows is false?

Hrafnsson: The title of the film is quite irritating to me as a journalist for 25 years. The media and the journalists refer to us as the Fourth Estate and Wikileaks is very much a part of that environment.

There are very sick elements in the environment of our contemporary media and in journalism that is a simple fact that everybody knows right now, the most notable failure that journalism has had was 10 years ago when the media around the world was echoing the fabrications and lies about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and basically without criticism, without digging underneath the surface, was helping in the drum beating that was running up to the invasion.

That was something that people haven’t forgotten and that is something that of course is affecting public opinion at this moment in the Syrian matter. However, I think there are other things that have come into play here and which explains why David Cameron, the Prime Minister of UK, suffered a historic humiliation in the parliament recently when his own party members would not support his efforts to start bombing Syria. And that of course led to the president Obama to change his position and that should he called to the parliamentarians in the US to secure support for an attack on Syria by the US, it is possible that he won’t get it.

Now this is a positive sign, partly it can be explained by the fact that people haven’t forgotten the fact that they were lied to 10 years ago including through the media as well as through any other means but also I suspect that the Wikileaks revelations three years ago about the reality of Iraq war and Afghan war has come to play as well and the information by Edward Snowden has made people more critical and rightfully so against their leaders.

So, possibly we are seeing an indication of a change that is occurring among people who are finally waking up to the reality that they cannot trust their governments.

Robles: What do you think about the speeches by Kerry, by Obama? First they started, and I heard more today by British officials and stuff that is going on in the UK media and in France.

They started out with: “There was an attack, we suspect it was the regime. Then oh we “allege” it was”.

Now they are just quoting it as fact. Kerry came out, he said “we know” 23 times during his speech but he offered no evidence that an attack had taken place or that it had taken place at the order of the government.,

The United States refuses to wait for that logical intelligent solution, which would be just to wait for UN investigation. They refuse to do that. I see a difference here in the Iraq war. They were presenting all these fabricated evidence, the Yellowcake, the WMDs and all these satellite pictures, the trailers, the chemical weapons trailers. This time they aren’t presenting any evidence. Can you comment on that?

Hrafnsson: That is correct that we have not seen an irrefutable evidence of the attack that it was the Syrian government that was accountable for this, no evidence has been presented that can be seen as the proof of the matter. That is true. But the flavor of the entire thing is quite in line with what happened 10 years ago even though there was fabricated evidence at the time being was presented and I have not forgotten and I think people have not forgotten in general, the performance of Colin Powell in front of the UN Security Council in March in 2003 presenting all this cocked-up evidence.

Now we are seeing and hearing words, that is correct, and the obvious thing of course is to push through UN vigorous investigation to find out the reality of the matter.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_09_14/The-enemies-of-Wikileaks-are-raking-in-money-Kristinn-Hrafnsson-7644/

 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

12 September, 22:32 2 

Syria: CIA, US paid cannibal lobbyists and endless war

Syria: CIA, US paid cannibal lobbyists and endless war

Photo: Flickr.com

The CIA has now openly begun delivering arms and weapons to the terrorists and mercenaries operating in Syria to further “assist” them in the armed insurrection that they had been losing. The next move is air support and a missile attack.

Despite the fact that the American people are beginning to wake up to the fact that they are paying billions of dollars for questionable aggressive wars in far off lands that they know nothing about and have never threatened them, the US continues to push to bomb yet another country into the dark ages.

Informed and independent thinking Americans are beginning to ask questions, and even more importantly to demand answers from those killing and invading in their name, and more importantly using their hard earned dollars to launch questionable acts of aggression.

As the economic situation worsens in America and the outlook becomes bleaker with each passing day, the man in the street is wondering why their government is closing schools and can not even provide minimal healthcare for its citizens, yet can spend billions to overthrow a leader and destroy the government of a country that was never an enemy or threat.

The answer is simple, special interests are making a killing, literally and figuratively. One such group which is lobbying the US Government for millions upon millions of dollars in support to what are nothing but terrorists and armed insurrectionists has recently become the focus of much needed attention by the alternative media. Here it is important to note that it is not the mass media, which in reality should be outraged by such news. That “should” be the case, but as they have become nothing but a propaganda wing of the special interests, they can not be expected to look out for what is best for the people or fulfill the role of the Fourth Estate.

The group in question, an organization called the Syrian Emergency Task Force, has been revealed to be receiving money from the US State Department in their billion dollar effort to overthrow the government of Syria and literally kill off the president of the country.

One might say: “So what?” Well if you come from the position that it is normal, as it has become, to hear that the US Government is being run and serves special interests and the elites, then yeah, so what. But this is much more nefarious than that. This is a case of the government funding a special interest to lobby it for money to carry out a plan that only it wants. In effect the US Government has become a government of the government, for the government, by the government and funded by its slaves, the people.

When discussing Syria it is important to note that the Syrian people have never been an enemy of the American people. There has never been a large Syrian population in America whose kin are in danger, and Syria was never a brutal dictatorial regime, oppressing and eradicating its own people, as the US State Department and those pushing for war would like the American people to believe. It was in fact one of the most progressive, secular, stable and modern regimes in the Middle East, until Saudi-controlled and US-backed-terrorist-Al-Qaeda-elements began tearing the country apart.

It was targeted for regime change and quite literally for destruction in what has become a not-so-secret geopolitical strategy for global domination. The reasons behind this are not so complex, namely: the country is in Russia’s sphere of influence (that is most important), it maintained an independent foreign policy outside of US control and manipulation, it shares a border with Israel (although this is questionable as it is hard to believe Israel would want another extremist fundamentalist Islamic terrorist state on it border, which is what Syria will become if President Assad is removed) and because it will serve as a corridor and facilitator in obtaining Middle Eastern natural resources.

So we have a very small group of people at the top in the United States who have decided to destroy another country and are paying and funding Saudi controlled Al-Qaeda Wahhabi terrorists to do their dirty work, including gassing over 400 children to bring about the pretext for providing the very same cannibal terrorists with US military air and missile support, and the very same people are using the State Department to fund a group to lobby lawmakers to allow them to continue their illegal war. Confusing? You bet. That is to their advantage and by design.

Who should be screaming stop!? US lawmakers of course and the American public who they are supposed to serve. Why? Not only because there is absolutely no reason for the bloodshed they have unleashed in Syria or the more massive bloodshed and regional conflagration that will occur if the US bombs Syria, but because: a) The US is backing and funding Al-Qaeda affiliated terrorists and b) because they want to risk American lives and call on American forces to support these very same Al-Qaeda elements who supposedly carried out the events of 9-11.

There has to be a point when even if the ends are worth it, and destroying Syria and removing president is really something the world does not need, the means can in no way be justified. To ask any US soldier to be prepared to kill and give up their life to support Al-Qaeda-cannibal-rapist-child-killing terrorists to overthrow a modern secular government is beyond the pale. And then to make the economically challenged American people pay for it is only criminal insult to injury.

The American people on the whole, and most of the world, despite US claims to the opposite, are against any US military action in Syria. But so-called “senior lawmakers” (in reality entrenched war profiteers) keep pushing for more war and the forceful removal of President Assad. So what do they do? What the US always does when they can not do something legally and above board. They call in the CIA, which has become nothing more than the personal killing tool for the White House.

In an article in the Washington Post (an unrepentant US propaganda tool) some details have been released about the CIA “finally” delivering “lethal aid” to the “rebels”. The article is full of catchy code language like calling advanced weapons “lethal aid”, Al-Qaeda Saudi controlled terrorists “rebels and the like, but that is what the Washington Post does best, white-wash and obfuscate to confuse and manipulate the public.

Why the CIA? Because it is illegal what they are doing. Which is also why most of the US’ efforts are said to be “covert” or “secret”. You dear reader and especially the American taxpayer, must be kept out of the loop and continue providing your hard earned tax dollars to fund their madness, and you must not question or you will be branded an enemy of the state.

The article takes no issue with (as neither does most of the American media) the fact that the “rebels” the US is funding, arming and supporting are in reality foreign Saudi controlled terrorist formations who are guilty of committing unspeakable atrocities, but attempts to spin the case for support not by explaining how it will help the poor war weary and decimated Syrian people, but how it will help the terrorists’ chief supporter Barack Hussein Obama and their “coalition groups” win their dirty war against the legitimate government and save face and avoid what is hated the most by all American politicians, embarrassment.

So dear readers, the world community and the American people must accept US illegality, aggressive war, war crimes, extra-judicial execution, support of terrorists, threat of attack, internal meddling, the armed overthrowing of governments, global destabilization, massive spying, the stealing of resources and all of the other wonderful gifts that the United States has brought to the world because some clowns in Washington might be “embarrassed” or “lose face”.

Kerry and Obama’s logic, that an attack on Syria must be approved because they will lose credibility is the height of self-serving arrogance and so far removed from reality that it is laughable. If they were not so out of touch and completely under the control of the military industrial complex they would realize that the world respects and needs peace, not endless US missiles and aggression, but the makers of the missiles need an endless market, so the US will do anything to continue their endless war.

It might be interesting to find out, after they finish bombing and placing the entire planet under their control, who will they sell their missiles to and who will they bomb? Will they create and fund a lunatic terrorist group to fight against and cause worldwide instability so the war machine can keep devouring the world? Oh wait, sorry. That has already happened.

The opinions and views expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

12 September, 17:29 1 

US created Al-Qaeda and their global domination - Rick Rozoff on 9/11

11 сентября башни близнецы Нью-Йорк трагедия взрыв

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

Download audio file

Most people in the world remember the September 11, 2001 very clearly. It was a day when the world changed for the worse, when the world was terrorized and outraged by one of the single worst events in world history. Twelve years later no one has been prosecuted for the event and the world now knows that those events served as a catalyst and pretext for endless wars of aggression and domination against any country not under control of the United States. By attempting to convince the public that every independent, and even Russian leaning country, is somehow connected to terrorism the US has managed to launch wars of aggression against countries that never posed it a threat. The world has grown weary of American aggression. One man who has fought the military expansion of NATO and the US for decades, Voice of Russia regular Rick Rozoff, helped put the events into perspective as the US attempts to engage in yet another war of aggression.

Rozoff

Hello this is John Robles, I am speaking with Rick Rozoff, a regular contributor with the Voice of Russia World Service. We are speaking on the 12 year anniversary of the events of 9/11.

Robles: Hello Rick, how are you?

Rozoff: Very good John, and you?

Robles: I’m very well. It is 9/11 2013. In retrospect can you give us your views regarding those events and how they’ve changed the world and brought us to where we are today?

Rozoff: Sure. If I can be anecdotal to begin with though, I came home from work working the night shift in the emergency room of a hospital, and the attacks on the Trade Tower and the Pentagon occurred in the interim between when I left work and when I returned home.

I returned home to 3 telephone messages, from what I could call the three women of my life: my mother, my only sister and my former lover, and my sister said “are we at war”, my mother said “we have got to change our behavior in the world”, and my former partner stated “did the Palestinians really do it”, because the initial report that many of us heard was that somebody in a phone booth in the Persian Gulf claimed responsibility for the attacks and attributed them to the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which is one of the three groups in the Palestine Liberation organization, but one that has never employed hijacking of aero planes, much less terrorist activity.

So, I think that puts things into perspective immediately for me. And then as the emotion started to die down a bit, and the sense of being stunned, I mean the spectacle, and the monstrous loss of life, and then the immediate fear of course, that the wounded beast that was the Pentagon - Donald Rumsfeld at that time - would really wreak vengeance, not only on the alleged perpetrators of the attacks in Washington and New York, but on any number of other countries and in short order if you recall, some of your listeners recall, that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld identified, as I recollect, no fewer than 63 countries who he accused of either harboring terrorists or supporting terrorism.

In the words of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld and other members of the administration at that time, that to harbor terrorists was the same as to be a terrorist and you would be dealt with accordingly, and sweeping statements like “you are either with us or with the terrorists”. So, what we all feared I think shortly after the events of 9/11, even as they were occurring in fact, was that the US might exploit this as excuse to settle scores around the world, which in fact happened in short order to the point where even though those accused of perpetrating the attacks - largely Saudi nationals, we should mention, with a Yemeni or Egyptian thrown in for good measure - but ones who had lived for years in Germany and the United States, had gone to flight school in Florida, here and so forth, apparently with complete impunity without any doubts arising in the mind of law enforcement agencies, if we are to believe the official account.

But even though they did not come from Iraq or Afghanistan or any of the other countries that have been attacked in the interim, under the pretext that we were combating the terrorism that led to the events of 9/11, we also have to remember that immediately the Bush administration started identifying as terrorist their political and ideological enemies during the cold war.

So, there was everything from the revolutionary armed forces of Colombia, the FARC rebels in Colombia, to the New People’s Army in the Philippines, to the Kurdistan Workers Party in Turkey. These are left-wing secular movements that were immediately identified as being terrorists, as though they had some connection with Al-Qaeda, which was ludicrous. But what was ignored from the very beginning was the fact that, if in fact there was a connection with Osama bin Laden, that the US bore direct responsibility for his arising to the level of the terrorist commando or chieftain they accused him of being, because he was one of an estimated 10,000 ethnic Arabs that with US and Saudi connivance, in the first place, were brought to north-western Pakistan in the 1980s.

Robles: I’d like to just underline the fact that Osama bin Laden also went by the CIA code name of Tom Osman, he was actually a CIA agent.

Rozoff: That doesn’t surprise me in the least. He was one of 10,000 alleged Afghan Arabs, as the term was, who had training in US-supported training camps in north-western Pakistan to be used against Soviet forces inside Afghanistan, but particularly against the government of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan, which was the party of long standing, which had members in parliament for decades, part of their coming to power in the April revolution of 1978.

But there would be no Al-Qaeda, there would be no international movement of extremist terrorist network if the US had not connived with their two major military allies in the Islamic world - Pakistan and Saudi Arabia - that set it up; and to arm them, to train them, to put them into contact with each other in a global network. And even the name of the Islamic extremists armed group in the Philippines, the Abu Sayyaf group has an Afghan connection as well.

So, the US is really at the genesis … was at the genesis of the creation of this international terrorist network. But another point that struck me at the time of 9/11 of 2001 was that there were only three countries at that time that recognized the originally Taliban government, I mean they didn’t have … weren’t represented at the United Nations, but the Taliban governing entity, whatever you want to call it was only recognized by three governments.

Robles: That never stopped the United States, regarding being recognized in the United Nations. I’d like to recall Kosovo again.

Rozoff: Had they chosen to recognize them, when the rest of the world didn’t, that wouldn’t have been an impediment for the United States. But the three nations that in fact did recognize it, and had embassies in Kabul, were Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the 2 nations that worked most closely with the United States to foster the entire Mujahidin organization and movement and war, which in turn spawned the Taliban as surely as night follows day. And the United Arab Emirates.

So, whatever we have seen in the interim, that Pakistan is our major military ally in fighting terrorism in Afghanistan - I mean please - that Saudi Arabia recently signed with the United States the largest bilateral arms deal in history, and that the United Arab Emirates has troops serving under NATO in Afghanistan. United Arab Emirates has troops serving under NATO’s international security assistance force in Afghanistan. They supplied dozens of war planes 2.5 years ago for the 6 months air war against Libya, a secular Arab government.

And these again, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Pakistan are the three US military allies pronounced in the Islamic world, whereas they were the only three governments to formally recognize the Taliban in Afghanistan, but again I suppose people … its assumed Americans aren’t informed about international affairs, and if they are, that they quickly forget yesterday’s news.

So that the entire story about 9/11 has not properly been explored, and instead what we have heard I think are two alternate red herrings, one of them was the Donald Rumsfeld, “we’ve got to drain the swamp … we’ve got to eliminate terrorists bases throughout the world including the 63 countries” and even that led by the way to Rumsfeld setting up a Train and Equip Program in the nation of Georgia where terrorists aided and abetted by the United States and its NATO allies were launching attacks into the Russian North Caucasus across both Pankisi Gorge and the Kodori Gorge. And that the Russian government is lodging complaint after complaint with the Georgian government about them, so Rumsfeld says: “well, in fact, yes there are terrorists operating in North Georgia and attacking Russia, so we are going to set up at first with the Green Berets, and then with the US Marine Corps”, what is now a permanent US military presence in Georgia, which was there of course during the 5-day war, 5 years ago last month, when Georgia attacked South Ossetia and dragged Russia into the conflict.

But the other thing, I think too, just to put it in perspective, 9/11 led to the US and NATO invasion of Afghanistan and spreading throughout the south and central Asian region. And what we now have of course is the longest war in the history of the United States; it will be 12 years old very shortly; its actuality the thirteenth calendar year, which is longer than the war in Vietnam.

Robles: Let’s not forget Iraq and all the other humanitarian interventions.

Rozoff: Yes, then gave rise to subsequent wars, their drone missile campaigns in Yemen and Somali and Libya and Iraq and now Syria of course, and the invasion of Afghanistan was the opening salvo in that effort too.

Really to put into practice, as we remembered 12 years ago, blueprints elaborated by the organizations, like Projects for the New American Century, and others, who had plotted to remake a new Middle East, a broader Greater Middle East, which would extend from Mauritania on the Atlantic Ocean to Kazakhstan on the Chinese border, and that is in fact what has happened. But as a result, we’ve seen the US and NATO bring over a 150,000 troops into Afghanistan at the extreme under NATO command, under ISAF, International Security Assistance Force, which is substantially larger than the peak strength of Soviet troops during the 1980s.

And this is then of course is the longest war in the history of Afghanistan as well, and has led to the expansion of US and NATO military bases in presence in countries like Kirgizstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan for a while. The effort by the United States and its NATO allies to ensconce themselves squarely in the convergence ground of major powers in the area, especially those gathered under the umbrella of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – Russia, China and the Central Asian Republics as well as observers like Iran, Turkey and India

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

11 September, 17:29 1 

Obama’s empty claims against Syria “imperial hubris” - Rick Rozoff

Obama’s empty claims against Syria “imperial hubris” - Rick Rozoff

Download audio file

The President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin called Obama’s claims that the Syrian Government used chemical weapons "unimaginable nonsense" and US Secretary of State John Kerry a liar, and these statements mildly characterize what the United States is attempting to get away with, another Crime Against Peace. The way the United States is attempting to attack another nation based on lies and empty rhetoric as they continue their geopolitical remapping of the world, is a sign of Imperial Hubris. Voice of Russia contributor Rick Rozoff, from Stop NATO, gave his candid reaction to the latest war speech by the US' "omniscient" Commander in Chief.

rozoff

Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with regular Voice of Russia contributor Rick Rozoff.

Robles: Hello Sir!

Rozoff: Hello John! It is good to be on your show again.

Robles: Thank you very much for speaking with us again. Your reaction to U.S. President Barack Obama’s speech on Syria?

Rozoff: It was short, there was no new information, to be honest with you, but what was, I think, most disturbing, aside from the almost diabolically self-assured and omniscient demeanor of the Commander in Chief of, again to use his expression, “the world's sole military superpower”, was the fact that he spoke repeatedly about, as everyone knows, their indisputable facts and so forth in relation to the putative or the alleged poison-gas or chemical weapons use in Syria on August of 21st .

His actual terms, if I can bring them up here, suggest that he is privy to information the rest of the world doesn’t have, which is a typical characteristic of Imperial Hubris and we certainly saw that come across in his presentation, statements that all sides agree on the need for action (that is military action against Syria) when, in fact, that’s not the case. This is on text of his address to the nation and, of course, to the world.

I’m reading quotes from the address; "No one disputes that there was a chemical attack in Syria", that’s a quote.

Another quote: "Moreover, we know that the Assad regime was responsible".

He alone, evidently, knows that, because the United Nations inspection team has not filed their report yet. So, we don’t have that to go on.

We have the head of state of Russia, Vladimir Putin referring to that claim as being, and I quote him: “unimaginable nonsense” but somehow Obama and his colleagues in the US Government know everything.

Robles: They keep saying “we know, we know, we know”, I mean Kerry said it 23 times in a recent speech but they haven’t offered any concrete evidence. Have you seen any of this concrete evidence?

I have a friend in England who said that Kerry recently made a reference to the material that was supposed to be on the US State Department’s website and he could not find it, anywhere. This was supposedly some real evidence. Have you seen any real evidence? and then please continue.

Rozoff: No, of course not and moreover, Obama himself, when spending a disproportionate amount of his address talking about, atrocity stories of course, because he knows that’s his trump card for egging on a war.

And again, it’s the equivalent of the so-called Račak Massacre in Yugoslavia, in Kosovo in January of 1999, which was the pretext for the war against that nation, but Obama is simply reiterating, or parroting the sort of information we’ve heard from the State Department’s spokesmen, from Kerry himself, as you alluded to.

You know the statement that “an intercepted telephone call”, I mean, please! This makes the George W. Bush administration look credible, doesn’t it? When a supposed intercepted telephone call, and the trajectory of the rockets that were fired into areas and such like, this is hardly evidence. Much less incontrovertible, or irrefutable evidence, this is instead a hastily concocted pretence.

But nevertheless, in the course of his talk he delves at great length, trying to conjure up in the minds of his listeners and viewers, I suppose, the image of corpses, particularly those of children in the suburbs of Damascus in the incident, whatever the true nature of it proves to be, of August of 21st.

He was pulling on every conceivable heartstring, you know, dead children laid out in rows. “If this can happen to Syrian children, it can happen to American children” and such like. I mean, it was really low demagoguery and it wasn’t even terribly creative.

Robles: He said this could happen to American children too?

Rozoff: He made a statement of that effect, you know, “… if we don’t stop chemical weapons use against the children of Syria, this could someday be American children”.

Robles: So, is he trying to imply that Syria is somehow a threat to America?

Rozoff: It is a very tortured logic, of course but we have to be able to kind of read the code language of the White House and the State Department.

And what we are hearing is: although the Syrian rebels, those who cut out people’s livers and eat them, and videotape it because they are so proud of what they’ve done, or people who kidnap Christian Bishops and hold them if they haven’t tortured them to death and such like are responsible democratic Jeffersonian advocates of liberty, which is basically what Obama asserted; and although there may be the “rare” extremists mixed with them…

And we know that the President of Russia Vladimir Putin called John Kerry what he was – a liar – for repeatedly claiming there were no extremists amongst the rebel factions in Syria.

But what the US has done is reserved the right to claim (talk about this being interesting John) that if the Government of Syria has chemical weapons, they could fall into the hands of extremist rebel groups who could then use them.

The US should know something about that having armed terrorist outfits in Afghanistan and the Balkans and Libya, and so forth. They know that’s exactly what is going to happen.

Robles: There is evidence that they were supplied by the US to these so-called “cannibal rebels”, that’s what I want to call them, and...

Rozoff: And that’s a fitting designation for them, I mean that sums them up perfectly.

And the same sort of Libyan-Islamic-fighting-group-types that killed the US Ambassador, Christopher Stevens, in Benghazi but the US acts like the model of outraged innocence when one of their own terrorist clients occasionally turns against them.

It is occurring incidentally in Afghanistan right now, as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Jalaluddin Haqqani who were two of the major recipients of US military aid during the war against the Soviets and the Afghan Government in the 1980s. So, this is nothing new. This is an old scenario.

But anyway, what the US is doing is once again playing on both sides of the street. On the one hand, they will accuse the Syrian Government of deliberately and seemingly capriciously, just gratuitously, killing their own citizens.

This is what Russian President Vladimir Putin took issue with, when he referred to the fact that the Syrian Government, scoring pretty substantial and even definitive military victory on the ground, why would they use chemical weapons at this point? And moreover, when there is a UN inspection team in the country, why do it then?

So, the US on the one hand will try to… you know, “as we all know”, as Mr. Obama said again today about the fact that supposedly the Syrian Government… “the facts cannot be denied” (that’s a quote actually from his presentation in regard of the Syrian regime).

Robles: What are those facts?

Rozoff: Again, we know there are no such facts but then, what happens is they turn around and state: “Well, if there are chemical weapons in the control of the Government and the rebels might be able to wrest those weapons away from the Government and use them”.

You know, this is disingenuous to the lowest degree and it is simply one or another Casus Belli, one or another alleged justification for going to war.

Robles: Okay, Rick unfortunately we are out of time. Thank you very much.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

10 September, 15:03 2 

UN has evidence that Syrian rebels used chemical weapons

россия сша сирия флаг

© Collage: Voice of Russia

The Government of the Russian Federation, including all of its ministries and governmental bodies whose scope of influence or operations include the exterior of Russia and in particular Syria and those countries influencing the situation in Syria, have from day one of the internal conflict fought to bring about a peaceful resolution to the conflict. The most visible efforts have of course been those of the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation and the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation and the President of Russia Vladimir Putin himself.

The unified and unwavering effort by Russia has been directed at: attempting to get all of the parties in the internal conflict to come to the negotiating table, obtaining a ceasefire and an end to the violence, and preventing external players from getting involved in the Syrian conflict. The last has been the most difficult because of the non-stop efforts of a certain country to recruit, finance, train, arm and import foreign terrorists and mercenaries into Syria to continue attempting to bring about the forcible removal of the president of the country Bashar al-Assad and a complete collapse of the government in Damascus.

The stance of the Russian Government on Syria has been consistent and based on international law, the respect for the sovereignty of all nations, the United Nations Charter as well as respect and understanding for all regional players. If a country could receive a Nobel Peace Prize for efforts to maintain peace then the Russian Federation should be a candidate for one, rather than a certain leader involved in three wars and itching to get involved in another.

Credibility

Any reasonable, intelligent, unbiased and informed member of the human race, which includes you dear reader, cannot for a minute trust the credibility of a certain country that has:

1) openly and consistently called only for the removal of Bashar al-Assad by force;

2) targeted Syria for regime change to advance its regional geopolitical agenda;

3) through a proxy (Saudi Arabia) threatened a sovereign nation, the Russian Federation, with terrorist acts during the Olympic Games if it did not pull its support for President Assad;

4) has already killed over 300 Syrian troops in an aggressive attack by one of its proxies, Israel;

5) continues to back, fund, arm, import and support the most violent elements in the conflict, including al-Qaeda and other violent genocidal terrorist elements;

6) refuses to respect the opinion of the international community in its call for following international law;

17) refuses to recognize the authority and the role of the United Nations in all matters concerning Syria;

8) refuses to even consider any evidence that does not fit into its preplanned scenario of a military action against the legimtimate government;

9) has a continuing and long history of waging wars of aggression, in particular in the recent past, and of using chemical weapons;

10) has committed crimes against humanity, crimes against peace, war crimes, torture, illegal detention and extra-judicial execution, with self granted impunity;

11) has placed itself outside of the law by passing laws and drawing up plans to invade the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Hague if one of its war criminals is arrested;

12) has also placed itself outside the law by attempting to launch and gain support for another war of aggression on a country which in no way threatens its own security, outside of the framework of the United Nations, the only body in the world with such an authority and one which was established to prevent exactly what that country is doing;

13) drew a “Red Line” for war and then brought about the conditions to make that war possible by orchestrating, through Saudi and al-Qaeda elements, a heinous crimes against humanity.

There are more reasons why you, dear reader, must not make the mistake of believing statements by that country but those are the main ones.

The Syrian "Opposition"

The term opposition is a misnomer when applied to the Wahabist-al-Qaeda-foreign mercenary- terrorist forces operating in Syria. These forces are non-state actors and are operating entirely outside of the law. The term "opposition" forces which has been applied by the West since day one seeks to add credibility to what are in fact genocidal, murderous, mass-killers-for-hire and even cannibal elements.

Opposition means a political force that has an alternative agenda and tries to bring that about through peaceful political means. Opposition is not a force that has one goal; to remove the president. That applies to the West’s "opposition" in Russia as well.

"Opposition" stands up and makes their voice heard during debates, votes, etc., it does not launch chemical weapons attacks or try to remove a government and president by force using foreign imported weapons and fighters.

True nature of Syrian "opposition"

The monsters that the country in question (US) is backing and whose army is getting ready to risk their own lives to support have committed and continue to commit crimes of such a brutal nature that there are almost no words one can use to describe the true horror. These include:

1) the infamous 'Cannibal Commander" who was filmed cutting out and eating the organs of a Syrian soldier;

2) the sawing off of the heads of two men of god, two innocent Christian Priests;

3) the regular brutal execution of countless captured soldiers, innocent civilians, women and children;

4) regularly raping and then executing women and girls and dumping their bodies in the street;

5) mass kidnappings, murders and executions of civilians and non-combatants;

6) treating non-Muslim civilians, women and children as animals by twisting and defiling Islamic Law;

7) real and ongoing genocide;

8) the launching of over 15 chemical weapons attacks on civilians;

9) and lastly the mass kidnapping and killing of over 426 children to allow for an invasion pretext by their paymasters.

Mass murder of children

According to Thierry Meyssan in an article at Voltaire net, "All observers have noted the high proportion of children among the victims. The United States has counted 426, or more than a third. Some observers, but neither those of the US nor their French counterparts, were intrigued to find that victims were almost all of the same age and they had no families to cry over them. The wide distribution of satellite channel images of victims allowed Alawite families near Latakia to recognize their children who had been abducted two weeks prior by the "rebels." This identification was long in coming because there are few survivors of the massacre by the allies of the United States, the United Kingdom and France in loyalist villages where more than a thousand bodies of civilians were discovered in mass graves."

Non-stop rape and execution

In a "Media Blackout" segment the San Francisco Examiner reported on the monstrous gang rape and execution of a 15-year-old girl named Miriam by the US and Western backed al-Nusra: "Once abducted, the girl identified only as "Miriam," was forced into a temporary marriage with the commander of Jabhat al-Nusra and raped. He then renounced their marriage, only to pass her onto another militant for the same treatment. One after another, a total of fifteen Islamist rebels "married" the young girl, raped her and renounced the marriage, a process which continued for more than two weeks. After all had their way with her, the girl was executed."

Use of chemical weapons

The supporters of the terrorists operating in Syria continue to suppress and manipulate evidence with one Turkish publication (one of many) publishing information about the possession of chemical weapons  by the "opposition": "Russia has called on Turkey to share its findings in the case of Syrian rebels who were seized on the Turkish-Syrian border with a 2 kg cylinder full of nerve gas sarin."

Coalition of crime against peace

It must be underlined and noted that any and all countries that engage in or support any kind of a military operation in Syria that is outside of the United Nations Charter and without a United Nations Resolution are guilty of committing a Crime Against Peace and an act of aggressive war. They are also guilty of supporting the atrocities listed above against the secular and peace-loving Syrian people.

According to Rick Rozff at Stop NATO the coalition of the war criminals is growing and now includes (brackets by Rozoff): "… U.S. President Barack Obama and leaders of 10 other countries issued a joint statement on Syria," these include: "The countries included Australia (NATO's Partners Across the Globe), Britain (NATO), Canada (NATO), France (NATO), Italy (NATO), Japan (NATO's Partners Across the Globe), Republic of Korea (NATO's Partners Across the Globe), Saudi Arabia (NATO's Istanbul Cooperation Initiative invitee), Spain (NATO) and Turkey (NATO).The new additions to the list of countries that stand behind the U.S. in its dealing with the Syria crisis included Albania (NATO), (neo-Ustasha) Croatia (NATO), Denmark (NATO), (apartheid) Estonia (NATO), Germany (NATO), (post-coup) Honduras, Hungary (NATO), Kosovo ("the world's first NATO state," not recognized by a majority of the nations in the world), (apartheid) Latvia (NATO), Lithuania (NATO), Morocco (NATO's Mediterranean Dialogue, illegal military occupier of Western Sahara since 1975), Qatar (NATO's Istanbul Cooperation Initiative), Romania (NATO) and the United Arab Emirates (NATO's Istanbul Cooperation Initiative).

[Qatar and the United Arab Emirates supplied NATO dozens of warplanes for its Operation Allied Protector six-month air war against Libya in 2011.]

Currently

The state which continues to call for a military operation in Syria and hopes to destroy the government must eventually answer (in a perfect world) for non-state actors it has imported into the Syrian conflict.

The plan is clear, they want to destroy the country’s government and kill Assad in order to bring it under their control. It does not matter if the al-Qaeda elements commit genocide on the civilian populations.

Bolivian President Evo Morales said it best: "This intervention is intended to kill the president, massacre of members of the Government and the people of Syria, and to take control of the country, the US seeks geopolitical control and control over the oil fields in the Middle East . Obama is behaving as a 'master of the world', despite the fact that the UN did not support his plan for a military operation in Syria."

Media suppression, lies and manipulation

The US has continued to ignore all of the facts and push for its one obtuse pre-planned objective, namely the killing of Assad and the destruction of the state, even ignoring the fact that the United Nations has had evidence that Syrian "rebels" have been using chemical weapons since May. 

Russia

The Russian Federation continues to call on all parties in the conflict to cease the bloodshed and begin peaceful negotiations. Russia also calls on all of those who wish to internationalize the conflict to follow the rule of international law and abide by the United Nations Charter.

As it has from the outset Russia also calls on every party who has influence or can sway the forces in Syria to assist in bringing about a peaceful resolution to the conflict and to help stop the loss of life.

Conclusion

Peace cannot be won or secured in Syria through the use of arms or by a foreign military invasion. Those who have caused the conflict to tear the country apart for so long by introducing violent insane "cannibal" elements must be removed from any equation as it has become clear that they are only interested in destroying the country and killing the leader and not in the well-being of the Syrian people.

Any views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at jar2@jar2.com.

 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

10 September, 13:17  

Anti-WikiLeaks film is propaganda from the outset - Kristinn Hrafnsson

викиликс wikileaks сша wikileaks дипломатия секретные материалы ноябрь коллаж ноябрь викиликс

WikiLeaks

© Collage: Voice of Russia

The release of the the new Hollywood film titled The Fifth Estate describing the early days of the WikiLeaks organization is "shockingly historically inaccurate" and is aimed at damaging Jullian Assange and his team's reputation, stated the official spokesperson for WikiLeaks, Kristinn Hrafnsson. The VOR’s John Robles spoke with him about the film and The Spy Files 3, the latest release by WikiLeaks. 

wikileakskristinnhrafnsson

This is John Robles. You're listening to an interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson, he's the official spokesperson and the No. 2 at the WikiLeaks organization.

Robles: Hello, sir! 

Hrafnsson: Hello, John! 

Robles: How are you? 

Hrafnsson: I'm fine, thank you, and how are you? 

Robles: Pretty good, pretty good. Can you tell us a little bit about the Spy 3 Files that were just released? What could readers and people on the Internet find in those files? 

Hrafnsson: Well, this is an addition to our previous releases on material pertaining to this private spy companies, companies that offer, on a very secret market, tools to buy on individuals. They have put together promotional material that we have had our hands on and we have been releasing that ever since 2011. 

The third phase of that project that came this week in collaboration with 19 media organizations around the world. It was an addition to show how unregulated this industry is. 

We have proven contracts showing that the European-based companies, some of them are selling technology to governments and countries where human rights abuses are notoriously common and the crackdown on dissidents in the Middle East, in Africa and many other countries and where there is a strong suspicious that this technology is used to crackdown on dissidents in prison and even torture and kill them. 

So it's a very serious unregulated business which probably has a turnover exceeding 3 to 4 billion dollars. And it is quite shocking to see how blatantly this is being sold to regimes that do not honor human rights at all." 

Robles: How much of this is going on against American - let's call them - dissidents? 

Hrafnsson: Well, we do have some private companies that have been assisting in basically spying upon human rights groups or even environmental groups that came out in the Stratfor files, for example, but we of course in the United States that the Government has the biggest spy operation on individuals and what they are doing. 

They do branch out and they spend enormous amounts of money in contract to private companies to do some other work for them. That is a reality. But a very important revelation by Edward Snowden, it is important to focus on this private industry which has vast capabilities and is quite scrupulous in selling the technology to spurious regimes. 

So this can all be seen in context. And it's very important to put a focus upon that this is an attack on privacy and the security and even life of individuals in some countries where it can be a death sentence involved when you oppose the political establishment and the regime." 

Robles: I see. And a lot of these companies, are they've been used to skirt or bypass existing laws or oversight or they are they just opportunists trying to make some money? 

Hrafnsson: Well, the fact of the matter is that there is absolutely very little oversight and laws pertaining to the sales of this technology. It of course should be monitored and viewed in the same way as we view arms sales to foreign countries, but the fact of the matter is - this not the case. And even though these companies claim on the surface that they are only selling to legitimate organizations, law enforcement agencies, etc. - there is strong suspicion that this technology has been used to crackdown and imprison dissidents and those who are opposing regimes in countries where human rights are not honored." 

Robles: Can you tell us a little bit about the film 'The Fifth Estate' and, if you could, at the same time, tell us what’s Julian’s situation right now is? How is he doing? - Especially with the elections going on right now? 

Hrafnsson:Well, none of us have actually seen that film. We have actually asked for a copy to view, but they have … refused for us to have … not given us the opportunity to see the film. So Julian hasn't seen the film. 

We, of course, have seen the script which was used in the beginning of shooting the film earlier this year and, not surprisingly, it was shockingly negative portrayal in many respects of what WikiLeaks is about. It is grossly historically inaccurate. And the most serious allegation that this dramatization basically is putting forth is suggesting that people were put in grave harm’s way as a result of the leaks of 2010 and 2011. 

Robles: They mean the war criminals that were never tried for their crimes, right? I'm being sarcastic here. 

Hrafnsson: Yes, I understand that. It is being portrayed in the film that individuals were almost killed or put in harm’s way because of this, which is absolutely outrageous and is not even anything that prosecution tried to maintain in the Chelsea Manning Trial, where there was no evidence that had any vitality introduced to support such a claim. 

This is simply something that is propaganda from the outset. And now it has found its way in Hollywood production which it claims to be balanced in its approach, but when you think of the fact that it’s based on two books by individuals who hold a grudge against the organization, especially former colleague of Julian Assange which had to be suspended from the organization and damaged material and wiped out important material that..

Robles: Who was that, can you say who that was? 

Hrafnsson:We're talking about Daniel Domscheit-Berg. One is not surprised that the film has this outcome. Now, of course, you cannot always quarrel about what the artists are doing and how they portray their interpretation of reality that is something justifiable as artistic license. But in this instance, this is a very-very serious thing, because it will shape public opinion. 

It has the aura of being a true portrayal of reality, wherein in fact it is absurdly lame and wrongful portrayal of what happened, according to the script. And this is not happening in a vacuum. 

This is not like the criticism against the film Zero Dark Thirty, about the Osama bin Laden killing. It is recent history which is ongoing history this is influencing individuals that have an interest at stake. 

Chelsea Manning has an interest here - an individual who has been sentenced to 35 years in prison and is now fighting for a pardon or an appeal. WikiLeaks staff and Julian Assange have a direct interest because we are still under a very serious criminal investigation and a blatant persecution by the US government in their attempt to find any way possible to charge the WikiLeaks staff." 

Robles: You were listening to an interview in progress with Kristinn Hrafnsson, the official spokesperson for WikiLeaks. You can find the remaining parts of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru.

Thanks for listening and, as always, I wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

9 September, 17:02  

Everything that could go wrong with WikiLeaks Party bid did – Greg Barns

Electoral workers count the votes at Sydney's Town Hall

Electoral workers count the votes at Sydney's Town Hall

Photo: AFP

Download audio file

The extremely complicated electoral system in Australia, where voters can choose several different parties, mass media that is hostile and biased towards WikiLeaks and Julian Assange and the fact that the party is new, were all factors in the loss at the polls for Julian Assange. The head of the WikiLeaks Party Greg Barns spoke to the VOR’s John Robles after the elections, and graciously conceded the loss and explained what lessons there were to be learnt.

This is John Robles. I'm speaking with Mr. Greg Barns, he's the head of the WikiLeaks Party, the campaign manager for Julian Assange and he's in Australia right now.

gregg barns

Robles: Hello, Greg! How are you?

Barns: Hi, John!

Robles: It was a pretty good run, I think, for the first time, but results not too good. Can you tell us about the elections down there?

Barns: The election was, as we all saw, Julian hasn’t won a seat in the Senate and our candidates in Western Australia and New South Wales haven’t won seats. However, this was the first campaign for the WikiLeaks Party and that was only set up in March of this year.

We had a number of issues in the campaign, relating to people who had disagreements about the line which we put our preferences to other parties, that is we recommend votes for other parties, and that meant that that we had to re-group the campaign very quickly which was done, I think, in a very professional way. But it did impact adversely on the vote. But for a first time, first shine, we’re still pretty happy.

Robles: Can you explain to our listeners a little bit and even to myself the(it seems very complicated) Australian election system and with the preferences and everything the voters have a one, two or three choice. Can you explain all of that?

Barns: Yeah. It's a very complicated system, many would say including myself, ridiculously complicated, but the way it works is that if you vote for your party at number one and, say, another party at number two. If you get less votes than the number two party, all of your votes go to the number two party, you just keep cascading down.

What happened with us was that our people made an error in the way they compiled the election form in New South Wales, Australia's biggest state, and that meant that we had some parties that we didn't want preference with, we put it in front of others that did want preference.

That created some real ruptures within the party and disappointing, some people left the campaign. One of our candidates resigned. And I was essentially left to re-group the campaign very quickly which we were able to do and I should say with Julians’s full support.

But one of the things that became obvious to me in this campaign is just how much many people in the mainstream media in Australia dislike Julian Assange, because essentially what he does is he undermines the way they do their business.

They want to filter information to people. The chaff at the fact that he has been able to get some extraordinary scoops over the years and of course he doesn’t filter the information, he puts it out there so people can make their own judgment. It did become clear to me that the media in general is hostile to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks and I think that that was one factor also in this campaign.

Robles: There was almost no media coverage of the WikiLeaks campaign, not that I could find, and then I did find something on like an official election commission site and the results didn't change for about 20 hours there was no change.

Barns: Yeah. That's probably John because of the way the Senate is counted it's a slow accounting. But, in terms of the campaign media coverage they were very happy to cover any splits in the campaign and the eruptions within the campaign.

They weren’t too keen on covering the good stuff in the campaign. And I think Julian was given a pretty rough time by any media interviews.

I saw him do and heard him do a number of media interviews. And they were tough interviews. Now, this sort of underlying hostility to Julian in Australia by some media, I suspect there is.

I think also there is a sense in which they just don't understand WikiLeaks and Julian Assange and what that movement is about. But I do think that what this shows: this is a test-run, in other words, the WikiLeaks political movement around the world, there are lessons learnt here that can be taken to other parts of the world and I’ll certainly be talking with Julian over the next couple of days about what I think those lessons are.

Robles: I see. Can you share with us what some of those lessons might be?

Barns: I think, John, that you've got to have a fairly tight structure in a political party.

The structure of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia is a little bit unwieldy, it has a national council which has enormous powers. Now this is in essence what the party wants to be but there's a tradeoff, I think, between having a very democratic party and having a party that can make quick decisions and which can follow the campaign term and getting that balance right is something that can be worked on.

I think the other thing that needs to be worked on is making sure that you got the right people on the campaigns.

This campaign was put together very quickly and we got some good people to work with us. As I said, disappointed, some people left, but those who did stay the distance, I think, did a really good job and really helped the campaign.

Having said that, you know, in relation to those who left, Julian's made some comments about those people and about Leslie Cannold who left the campaign and I will leave his comments to stand.

I certainly had a job to do which was to make sure this campaign saw it through election day, I did that job, along with others and, as I say, disappointing results, but it's pretty unusual for a first-up political party in Australia and its first election to get elected to the Senate.

In fact if I look at the Katter’s Party and the Palmer United Party which are the other two major names alongside Julian's, to my recollection any of them has not won a Senate seat. Certainly Katter hasn’t got a Senate seat in Queensland where he might have expected one. Palmer won his own seat in the House of Representatives although I don’t think he has got a senator elected.

Robles: I see. What's the media coverage like in Australia? Do minor parties, do they have any chance of getting equal coverage, or is it pretty much like in the United States.

Barns: No, they really have no chance. In this election campaign the Murdoch media essentially, well didn’t “essentially”, it supported “overtly” the coalition, the Conservative Coalition, and so this election campaign was one where you had one major media that effectively, every day of the week, supporting one side of politics. And that meant also that there was very little room for minor parties.

We got, probably, some good coverage and certainly Philip Dorling in The Age was an excellent journalist who has covered Julian for many years and produced some great stories on WikiLeaks. But other than Philip there was very little coverage.

Robles: That's a shame. That is a sign of a lack of democracy, I think, in the country. Can you tell us about all of the strange (I don't know what else to call them) it seems like one-issue parties that you have in Australia?

Barns: Well a whole lot of these parties have been established just because of the way in which the electoral system is, you know.

Minor parties, really “micro” parties, you can call them, can get elected if they get a good preference flow and we're seeing that now. I think in Western Australia, a “Sporting” Party is going to get elected (whatever that means)

So you get these quirky little parties who do get elected. But generally they only get one term. They do get elected. And, you know, it's a good thing or bad thing, you know it’s a good thing in some ways but it just means getting elected to the Senate is like winning a lottery. It really is, because you just don't know where the preferences are going to flow.

Robles: I saw there is some sort of “Sex Party”, an “Animal-Love Party” or something and “Automobile Lovers”.

Barns: Well the Australian Sex Party, they are actually a good party, they’re big supporters of Julian, as well as the Animal Justice Party. But I you’re your point actually the Sex Party is essentially a Libertarian Party and they would be better off calling themselves that name. They're actually one of the oklay ones.

There are parties that are, I mean the “Outdoor Recreation Party”,”The Shooters and Fishers Party”...

Robles: What is that about?

Barns: Well, that's essentially people who like hunting and shooting and fishing but who are essentially anti-Green. So, I think, John, that the electoral system real makes it a lottery as to whether or not you win a seat in the Senate.

Robles: I see. It seems almost mind-numbing that a party like the Sex Party would get more votes.

Barns: I think that the WikiLeaks Party represents a set of values that are extremely important in a democratic society John. And it's a party that will go far in the long term. I mean this was a hard campaign. We had people leaving the campaign, there were some errors made in preferences, so anything that could go wrong, went wrong, and yet we're still standing and Julian polled quite well!

Robles: What are the plans for the immediate future and any comments from Julian?

Barns: No, I haven't spoken to Julian today. But I will be communicating with him later on today.

My advice to him as a campaign manager and that was my role, would be: he should continue with this model. There are things to learn, I'm more than happy to help out, if he wants my assistance, in rolling the strategy out in other places, but certainly there are lessons to be learnt from here, which, I think, you can take into other forays. I have no doubt that the WikiLeaks will get elected somewhere in the world, somewhere in the next 12 months.

Robles: Couldn't Julian run for some sort of office in Ecuador or…?

Barns: I don't know the answer to that, John. I think Sweden is another place which you have to look at, because the electoral system there is good for minor parties, but certainly I think that the values are universal and WikiLeaks is a universal brand and it's something that you could apply in other parts of the world.

Robles: Oh sure. I agree with you 100%.

Barns: I have enjoyed talking to you John, and I'm more than happy to speak with you on WikiLeaks matters and other matters anytime. And I’m certainly going to have continued involvement with Julian and perhaps not on the political side but certainly assisting Julian in any way I can and I am a strong believer in the WikiLeaks mission and justice for Julian.

And I have to say one thing about him, that having worked with him now for six months he one of the best people I have worked with in the political sphere over many years, he’s calm, considerate, he takes advice. His interview doen’s suit some of the Australian political journalists but that is to his credit not theirs and I think that he's a very-very highly intelligent individual and the world is lucky to have people like him who are pushing the boundaries and ensuring that nations like the United States become more accountable.

Robles: Wonderful!

Barns: Thanks, John!

Robles: Ok, thanks a lot Greg! I really appreciate it! Good luck! Take care!

Barns: Thanks mate! See you. Bye-bye!

You were listening to an interview with Greg Barns, he's the head of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia and the Chairman of the Julian Assange Campaign. Thanks for listening!

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

JAR2

7 September, 22:01 1 

US use of chemical weapons extensive – Edward Herman

иран ирак иран война противогаз химическое оружие Газовая атака Ирано-иракская война Иранский солдат

© Photo: ru.wikipedia.org/Sa.vakilian /cc-by-sa 3.0

Download audio file

The United States has no legal or moral authority to bomb or attack Syria and they are chemical war criminals themselves, on a much grander scale than an other country in history. The US media has no problem with the fact that their leaders obtained positions of power by guaranteeing they would follow the rule of law but have become worse war criminals than their predecessors. In an interview with the Voice of Russia renown author Dr. Edward Herman discussed these matters and more.

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/09/07/18/edherman2.bmp

 

Dr. Edward Herman

Hello! This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Dr. Edward Herman. He is Professor Emeritus at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He is also the author of several books, namely “Manufacturing Consent”, which he wrote with Noam Chomsky, and the “Srebrenica Massacre: Evidence, Context, Politics”.

Robles: Hello Sir! It is a pleasure to be speaking with you again.

Herman: Good to be with you, John.

Robles: Regarding this situation in Syria, does the US in your opinion have the legal authority to launch military action or bomb Syria?

Herman:That’s one of the clearest things we can say “no” to. They certainly do not. The UN was organized to prevent war, aggression, cross-border attacks by individuals – it is very clear. And in fact, the Nuremberg Tribunal, should you actually read this: “war is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression therefore is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole”. That’s from the Nuremberg Tribunal.

So, the whole UN system was built in order to prevent war, to make it illegal to cross borders without the vote of the Security Council. And the only basis for crossing a border otherwise is immediate self-defense. And there is no way that Syria is threatening the United States, and that it doesn’t even pretend that it has anything to do with self-defense of the United States.

So, the answer is absolutely no, the legal status is non-existent. And if you read Secretary John Kerry’s and Obama’s statements, only the media picked up the fact, in past years they have both said that they will abide by International Law. International Law controls this great country’s behavior. But now that they are in power and want to go to war, they say that they are not constrained by this, they can just go across borders and bomb.

It is just amazing! And it is amazing how the mainstream media of the United States don’t pick this subject up. It’s since the United States is regularly crossing borders and attacking other countries in violation of the UN Charter, the media played down, they play as if this is not an issue. It is only when somebody else, one of our targets crosses a border that we get excited.

Robles: I see. Following that line of thought, I read recently… now this goes back to 2002, and I was wondering if you could comment on it. I read a piece of legislation in the US Government, some people called it the Hague Invasion Act. Are you familiar with that?

Herman:Uh-huh.

Robles: It protects all US personnel and allies from being subjected to International Law basically or being tried for war crimes. And it allows for, literally, a military action against the Hague which would require an invasion to physically remove, for example if they’ve arrested somebody. Can you comment on it?

Herman:It was a brazen piece of legislation. In fact I think that was the time they were discussing the International Criminal Court. And in the International Criminal Court it was theoretically going to be possible that the United States and its soldiers and leaders could be brought before the Court. And that got some of the members of the Congress and Senate very upset. So, they actually got through this incredible piece of legislation that if anybody tried to take one of our soldiers and try them, we would be prepared to invade that country. It was a lunatic piece of legislation and I doubt if it ever would be applied, but it shows the spirit of this country – we are above the Law.

Our leaders have impunity … in fact, Harry Truman made this famous statement that “the buck stops with him”. This is not true! Impunity starts with him. Here is a man who dropped two atomic bombs on two cities and wiped out quickly 200 000 civilians. I mean, this was one of the great war crimes in human history. But nobody has ever suggested that Harry should have been brought before a tribunal. And of course George Bush and these guys, they’re all immune. Bush in his autobiography openly acknowledges that he supported waterboarding, which is a well-known form of torture…

Robles: Yes, since the Korean war.

Herman:…which is internationally illegal, it is illegal in the US law. But Obama comes along having promised to enforce the law, but he won’t bring George Bush to trial. So, all these guys are immune from the law, they have impunity. This is the superpower right to have impunity. Only lesser peoples can be brought before a court.

Robles: Back to Syria, does the United States, do they have the moral authority and the support of the American people to launch any kind of an operation against Syria?

Herman:I don’t think they have the moral authority in the least. And in fact this whole business of pursuing of Syria, first, it is not even proven that the Syrian Government used chemical weapons. But even apart from that, the hypocrisy involved in this is amazing.

As the United States Government committed aggression against Iraq, it has used chemical weapons itself during the Vietnam War, the United States have used Agent Orange. In fact, its use of chemical weapons in the Vietnam War was the most extensive use of chemical weapons since World War I.

And we of course supported Iraq when it used chemical warfare against Iran. We even supplied Iraq with various kinds of arms, protected against being attacked in the United Nations, and were attacking our enemy – Iran. So, it was okay. And they were, actually, recently sold I think 600 some million dollars’ worth of cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia. And of course Israel famously used a huge number of cluster bombs in Lebanon in 2006, just before the truce. The cluster bomb is a vicious, essentially illegal weapon.

So, here is the United States doing all these horrible things, including chemical warfare, using white phosphorus in Fallujah, depleted uranium. It has dirty hands. The moral case falls because of this incredible hypocrisy. And the American people don’t go on the offensive - this other part of your question - does it have support at home, and the answer is – in spite of the huge propaganda effort that the Government and the media are carrying out, I think it still only 60% of the polled public is against attacking Syria. The public doesn’t want it. The moral case is badly compromised. So, it is really an outrage.

Robles: Thank you very much Dr. Herman. It was a pleasure speaking with you.

Herman: It was good to be on John.

Robles: Okay, thank you Sir, I appreciate it.

That was the end of part one of an interview with Dr. Edward Herman – a Professor Emeritus of Finance at the Wharton School, at the University of Pennsylvania and the author of “Manufacturing Consent”. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com