Articles and Interviews by John Robles from February 01, 2014 to February 28, 2014
On this page you will find interviews with, and articles by: John Robles, Craig Murray, Medea Benjamin, David Shayler
1 February, 01:54
The Economist's Rabid Hate of President Putin
As the Olympic games approach the American media just cannot seem to get enough of demonizing Russia and rolling out their tired old stereotypes and continue to do so on such a scale that it should be getting ridiculous even for the people that the US media is apparently writing for, namely the under informed and non too worldly. One thing is sure however when the demonizing of other countries starts, especially Russia, you can have no doubt that there are serious problems at home and a distraction is desperately needed. Normally, as history has shown, a new humanitarian resource war is begun on some far off poor little country as was planned in Syria, but alas launching the Hellfires was not to be. So they pull out all of the old tired Cold War clichés and xenophobic stereotypes and sling the falsehoods, half-truths and lies like only the American Murdoch owned media can.
Why does it seem that Americans are obsessed with our President Vladimir Putin? Could it be that he is a strong leader whose policies and actions match his words? Or perhaps Americans really are sore because President Putin stopped the invasion of Syria? Maybe it is not the American people who hate Putin so much but the government controlled media, regardless if they are playing to their base or attempting to manipulate public opinion the latest hit by the Economist is truly in poor taste and playing to the lowest common denominator (no link sorry).
Apparently the Economist has lost all journalistic ethics if it ever had them with a new cover featuring a poor Photoshop job of a falling skater and President Putin. The photo and the article both have one thing in common they are full of fake “data”. It si quite remarkable, and extremely telling that the article in question is unauthored. It is nothing more than a hit piece that would be laughable if it weren’t for the fact that the American public might believe the false points it makes while being led into ignoring the catastrophe that is the Obama Administration and their own government.
The first sentence gives away the intention of the writer (anonymous) by saying Russia won a competition to “stage” the Olympics. Strange yet when the US does it they are “held” or “hosted”. The “writer” then improperly quotes President Putin and ridicules the fact that others “heed” Russia and that Mother Russia can “stand up for itself”. Could this be due to the end of US hegemony in much of the world? As for standing up for itself, sure the US only loves countries that are broken or weak and cannot defend themselves. If you doubt then why is it that the US always forces small countries to disarm and prove they have no weapons before moving in and destroying the country and killing the president? Kind of hard to do with Russia so of course they are indignant.
The “writer” then says the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin has had a good year because the western organized and backed protests have somehow disappeared, failing to mention this was after NGOs were required to become transparent and show where their funds were coming from and USAID was expelled. Not to mentioned the failed color revolution plans of certain US functionaries that completely fell flat on their faces.
Yes the Russophobes and the lunatic fringe are angry, Russia is hosting what looks to be a very successful Olympics and the Russian economy is on the rise and Russia has made the world a multi-polar place again. They know the days of their empire are over and no matter how much they rattle their sabers and scream terrorism no one is really listening.
In the article the “writer” laments that the US missiles were not allowed to fly in Syria proving that he/she is obviously oblivious to the suffering that US missiles bring around the world and has obviously never seen the results of US “humanitarian” intervention as he/she derides and makes little of our president for preventing the US from destroying Syria.
The person (idiot) who wrote the thing thinks brokering peace and destroying chemical weapons is something bad and has the nerve to compare the US catastrophe and loss in Afghanistan with the assistance that was requested and then granted to that country by the USSR. He also obviously does not know that almost all Afghan infrastructure was built by the USSR and then destroyed by US/NATO. But that is okay fact don’t appear to be part of the debate in the American media.
The “writer” also has no idea what is really going on in Ukraine and does not have any idea that a country might make a sovereign decision and of its own will say no to America and the West. He/she derides the President of Russia on Ukraine because Europeans looked “flat-footed”, ignoring the fact that if they in fact did, they made themselves look that way themselves. As did Victoria Nuland handing out cookie to street hooligans. He/she obviously does not know the math either, Ukraine had a choice of $1 billion over 7 years by signing the EU deal or $100 billion over the same period by joining the Russian led Customs Union.
The “writer” derides President Putin for positive economic growth in Russia and even for raising standards of living and paid pensions. Simply shameless. He of course does not mention the desperate situation that his own president has brought about and the fact that Americans cannot even afford health care and the military industrial complex and big corporations want to steal Social Security from the old and Food Stamps from the poor and the lives of American have never been worse or more desperate with no outlook for the future.
The rest of the “article” is full of pseudo economic arguments that do not wash and are not even worth countering or repeating but the last one is rich and almost as good as the promotion of fracking described as how America will take over the world. The “writer” also ignores that recent American government shut down and that the paper that dollars are printed on are worth more than the figures on them and that the US is effectively bankrupt, well not effectively, literally, and has been for a long time, and not only economically but also morally.
As you see I have had the manners not to smear Obama. Every American already knows he is a complete failure and guilty of war crimes, why rub it in?
I will not publish my article anonymously and will even include my e-mail address:email@example.com. Have a nice day. Really!
1 February, 22:31
At the beginning of the US war on terror, and even to this day, the US literally kidnapped "suspects" and took them to countries where the could torture and even kill suspects. This practice of kidnapping and usually flying suspects around the world and then torturing or killing them in countries with poor human rights records or brutal regimes happened so much that the practice soon became known to all and the name for it "extraordinary rendition" became a household word.
The Voice of Russia's John Robles spoke to Craig Murray the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan and he stated that during his time as ambassador over 126 people were renditioned to Uzbekistan and never heard from again. He personally learned the name of the airline the CIA was using from CIA pilots. That airline was called Premier Executives.
Hello this is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Craig Murray, he is a former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, an author and a former whistle blower. This is part 3 of an interview in progress.
Murray: The most prestigious BBC current affairs program really is Question Time, where a studio audience get to ask political questions of guests. I was invited to take part in that and the episode I was invited to take part, it was being recorded in Leeds. Now I was actually on the train to Leeds, on my way to take part in the program, when they phoned up and cancelled it.
This wasn’t the first time, and yet some of my views in this interview, they are not startling or unusual, and when it comes to opposing the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan and one can say the civil liberties - those are views which are held by the majority of citizens of the United Kingdom, but they are not views you will hear on television very often.
During the war in Iraq although there were at all times, around two weeks immediately after the invasion and of course it just surged, a deep surge of patriotism. And opinion polls at all times, the majority of people were against the war in Iraq, and yet the BBC, the people interviewed by the BBC, or talking about the war on the BBC reject war by a majority of 13 to 1. And which … and that remains fairly constant throughout the war. The only thing, it’s quite extraordinary, we consider in the UK that we have liberty and freedom of speech, but we don’t; it’s very cynical, and these things are done quite subtly.
And the truth is that anyone who has genuinely radical views would never be given that kind of media exposure. I just give the BBC as a single example. But the entire media game in effect works much the same way. After Glenn Greenwald, you know that problem with the Guardian about the Snowden revelations where the Guardian, which is supposed to be a left-wing newspaper in the UK, would only published certain revelations with both Snowden and WikiLeaks.
The Guardian heavily censored what was published, didn’t publish the vast majority of it, and the Guardian actually handed over lots and lots of classified material back to the UK security services. We have the gate-keeper system out there, which will prevent any genuinely radical politician being able to get over his views to the public in order to succeed.
Robles: If I can comment on that, I had an interview with Jeselyn Raddack, she was a US Department of Justice legal ethics advisor. And I talked to her about the revelations - now she is an advisor for Snowden - and she told me matter-of-factly and I was quite taken aback actually, she said that: ‘You know, all the journalists’, she said ‘there is no danger of injury or damage to National Security because all of the journalists run this stuff by the government first’. And I thought, she said it like it was a normal procedure - I guess it is in the US. My jaw just dropped, I was like ‘what the… what’s going on here? And yeah, so there you go. She said the Guardian does the same thing, she said anyone … it’s all vetted first. So I mean, so basically these revelations they are revelations they want people to know about, because if there is anything damaging they tell the journalists – ‘well that’s a danger to national security’, and the journalists cut it out. Which, I found that shocking.
Murray: I am absolutely sure that it is true, but it is also interesting that journalists, and certainly in the UK. All the best media repeated the mantra again and again with regard to Bradley Manning’s revelations, and making of these revelations have put life at risk to people, this was Hillary Clinton’s great claim.
Robles: The woman responsible for so much death and destruction that her hands were almost bloodier than Bush’s, and she is going to talk about protecting lives, OK. I wonder if our Ambassador Stevens would have liked to have heard that from her. But anyway, I’m sorry, go ahead Sir.
Murray: No, well you’re quite right, because of course what Manning things revealing: illegal war, war crimes, killing of people, and despite the fact that all mainstream journalists again and again parrot it, and when people were interviewed on the subject of these revelations, journalists ask … I saw Glen Greenwald being very aggressively asked on BBC Hard Talk: was he not putting lives at risk, was he not putting lives at risk.
But the mainstream media have not been able to name one single person, not one single person who was killed as a result of Manning’s and Snowden’s revelations. And yet, there are undoubtedly millions of people being killed as the result of the illegal wars and war crimes that whistle-blowing has been revealing.
Robles: Right, what about the attack on patriotism for whistleblowers? I am sure you are no doubt a patriot. You were an Ambassador for your country; of course you were promoting your country’s interests abroad etc. Was your patriotism ever questioned when you blew the whistle on some of the things you saw, and what is your opinion on that, on questioning patriotism?
Murray: Well, no it … it was in fact very, very directly. I recall when I was essentially trying to stop our collusion with extraordinary rendition and torture in Uzbekistan. The Council of Europe set up an inquiry into extraordinary rendition. I think it revealed 127 extraordinary rendition flights that went into Tashkent. Of the people flown into Uzbekistan on extraordinary rendition not one came out alive again. I think that is worth stating, and obviously there’s no records of what happened to them, but I’m pretty sure they were all killed.
Robles: One more time,126 people, and none of them got out of there alive?
Murray: It’s a minimum of 126 people because of course some of those flights may have contained more than one person. So several hundred people probably, and not one of them came out alive again. And when I was attempting to query this and fight against it internally, I should say this is the ploy that I took. My line boss was flown out to Uzbekistan to see me and told me that I was regarded unpatriotic and apparently no opposings torture and murder was unpatriotic.
I think it is quite extraordinary because the values which the western world is supposed to support plainly are not upheld by their entire leadership and political governments. And the people who are upholding the supposed values of the west, who actually seem to believe in them or try to enforce them, and its people like Snowden and Bradley Manning, and I would humbly put myself in the company of them trying to do something similar but in a less spectacular and successful way.
But no, it’s the people who are upholding what are supposed to be western values, are the people who are condemned as unpatriotic. But they in fact are the patriots because they are the only people who are in fact implementing the ideology of the state, whereas the governments, as I state, are doing something absolutely different.
Robles: What is patriotic about extraordinary rendition? What is patriotic about torture? What is patriotic about launching aggressive Hitler-style preventive wars against small countries? What is patriotic about surveillance on everything and anything everybody does? What is patriotic about committing war crimes and murder? What is patriotic about all that? Can you answer one question?
Murray: No, I think you actually … I think that’s a rhetorical question which you put beautifully. So you ask, you are absolutely right that the twisting of the idea of patriotism is extraordinary and the ability of Blair media to sell that to the people is scary.
Robles: Now it is really unbelievable. I don’t know if you remember, Dick Cheney, he signed off “Oh we can puncture an eyeball, yes, that is good, we can slice a testicle, yeah that is good, we can do that, we can crush the testicle of a child in front of his father, yeah that’s good. Hey we can put him in boxes with like spiders crawling on their eyelids. Hey that is cool, yeah. Oh, you are going to tell someone I do this stuff? You are a traitor. I am a patriot.” It is like the most unbelievable evil, criminal, psychopaths controlling everything. It is crazy.
Murray: Yeah. What we … everything which, I think it’s important to say this, I’m … I often meet people particularly on the leftist of politics in the UK who say have things always like this. They look at what the British Empire did, look at the other, but it has not always been this bad. You know there are, there are degrees of evil, that there are some states that are worse than other states.
Undoubtedly, when I was a much younger man, if anybody had said what … those things that Dick Cheney said, it would have prompted absolute outrage among pretty well-off and all classes of people. It’s really, the world has changed, fair wind. The idea that the defense of torture was an intellectually respectable position would in my lifetime have, would have seemed impossible when I look at it. It really is quite extraordinary change in public opinion, which has been manipulated and achieved by the media in the last couple of decades. It is very very scary.
Robles: I remember a time when just one of these crimes that were committed by Bush and Cheney and Blair. Just one of them, would have been enough, I thought, back like 20 years ago, have the person censured, imprisoned; it would have just been the scandal of the century. But here it’s like people have been programmed to just accept this stuff again and again and again, and nobody is shocked by it anymore. I don’t know. I’m sorry Sir, go ahead.
Murray: It’s a … No, it’s a …
Robles: I get a little emotional. I deal with this stuff all the time, and I get pretty fed up with it sometimes, because I have to document, I have to talk to people about it. Everybody is telling me, hundreds of people, thousands are saying the same thing over and over again, and these monsters are still in power and still running everything and all we can do is talk about how horrible they are. I’m sorry.
Murray: No, you are absolutely right. I’d like to make one point which is a bit lengthy and historical, but I think is actually quite important. During the Second Afghan War, would you believe, back in the1880s, William Gladstone who had been Prime Minister of the United Kingdom twice, campaigning - he was in opposition, and campaigning to become Prime Minister for the third time, and he made a speech against the invasion of Afghanistan, against the Second Afghan War, the second Anglian Afghan War.
And he spoke of an incidence where British troops had burned down a village, and he said that they had given the wives and children of the Afghans into the snows of winter, children, and he said the hearts of the humble Afghans should be as sacred as is yours and mine. And of the Afghans who were fighting the British troops, he said: ‘if they resist invasion, would you not do the same?’ If they resist, would you not do the same?’
And that speech was extremely widely reported in the media at the time, and he won the election, he became Prime Minister again. And it is unthinkable now, it is absolutely unthinkable that any mainstream opposition leader in anywhere in the west, it is unthinkable that they would say of Afghans fighting the British or American forces in Afghanistan, “if they resist, would you not do the same?”
Nowadays we are conditioned to any Afghans who was fighting the invaders, must be the Taliban, must be a mad Islamic extremist, must be crazy. The idea that somebody enters your country, and you fight them, and that is a natural instinct and we would all do the same, of which is self-evidently actually true, is an idea which no politician can say now, because no politician can ever say anything convincing anymore because we have become such militarist societies. Any politician in the UK who said that Afghans fighting British troops might be in the right, would be absolutely divided by all of the mainstream media undoubtedly, called unpatriotic, called a killer of British troops.
And1880 was the height of the British Empire, and then, it was possible then for a politician to win an election saying look “the people fighting us is in the right, we invaded their country”, and it is not possible now, it is not conceivable now, because we are a much less liberal and free society than we were historically. And we don’t live in a space of freedom of open critical debate anymore. And that is something which I think is extremely sad and extremely important.
That was the end of part 3 of an interview with Mr. Craig Murray, he is a former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you the best wherever you may be.
2 February, 2014 23:42
Hunger Strikes Continue at Guantanamo
There is a complete and almost total media blackout at the illegal extra-territorial prison being maintained by the US at Guantanamo Bay Cuba. Prisoners who have been there for more than a decade being held in conditions amounting to torture without charge and without trial have lost all hope and for over a year have been on a hunger strike attempting to end the torture they are being forced to live through day after day and year after year. The torture of having no recourse, no rights and no hope. Rather than letting these men end their own misery and starve themselves to death to end their misery, the US is force feeding them using a procedure that can only be described as torture. Famous Peace Activist Medea Benjamin spoke to the Voice of Russia and revealed that the hunger strikes continue.
Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Medea Benjamin, the cofounder and manager of Code Pink. This is part 2 of an interview in progress published earlier.
Benjamin: So Obama has less of an excuse than he had before to keep these prisoners in indefinite detention.
So I think it is a question of will he… (every excuse is starting to be peeled away) … will he really do something about this?
And I think the prisoners are sick and tired of hearing Obama say he is going to close Guantanamo, certainly what they need after all these years now is action, not words.
Robles: Yeah right! Your personal opinion, do you think he is going to do something or..?
Benjamin: I think he does want to start releasing more of these prisoners, I think he has boxed himself in, in the case of the Yemenis, the 56 Yemenis, because he had previously declared self-imposed moratorium on sending people back to Yemen. He lifted that himself.
But he has now shone of spotlight that the Republicans and others can really focus on to say Yemen is unstable, they need a rehabilitation center and it is going to take time to get that running and all kinds of things that will get in the way of a release. So I think that is a situation that he himself created it is going to be difficult to get out of.
But then there are over 20 other prisoners from other countries that could easily be released. We talked about the case of Shaker Aamer, but he is not the only one.
And then there are the countries that said that they would take other prisoners. Kuwait has its own rehabilitation center, Saudi Arabia has its rehabilitation center, there are plenty of places to send people.
So the excuses are quite threadbare at this point. I unfortunately think Obama will not be quick in doing the right thing in the year to come.
Robles: I see. There were demonstrations, I don't know if we discussed this, on the news wires a couple hours ago that there were huge demonstrations in Yemen outside the US embassy. So people there are aware, apparently there was no violence or anything. I guess that was good. And also..
Benjamin: Yes we... I'm sorry.
Robles: Go ahead, please.
Benjamin: We have been in touch with the families in Yemen, in fact we went and visited with some of them in June of last year and heard the agonizing stories of these families and the way that they would get their hopes up when their lawyers would give them news of things like they have been put on a list of cleared for release. But then their hopes have constantly been dashed.
And just like we talked about Shaker Aamer having a child that he has never met, so we met with a 12-year old girl who had never seen her father. She has been born while her father was in prison and she said that her father at that time was on a hunger strike and that he was so weak when he had a chance through the Red Cross to have a video conference with him, he could not even pick up his head.
So we heard these very agonizing stories, we continue to be in touch with the organizations in Yemen that work with these prisoners' families as well as the Human Rights Ministry in Yemen, the Minister herself is very outraged that these prisoners have not been released. And we knew they were having a demonstration today as we were having ours here in Washington DC and there were other demonstrations in the US. So it was good to be in solidarity together.
Robles: That is wonderful. Do you have anything big coming up that we should be looking out for?
Benjamin: Well, we have a lot of things that we are doing as Code Pink we are on our way to Geneva next week when the peace talks around Syria are supposed to happen.
We are there with women that are coming from different parts of the world, mostly from war-torn countries to be calling for a cease-fire and end to all from all sides being sent to the warring parties and to be calling for women to have a voice at the peace table.
We are also planning in March to have a trip to Gaza for International Women's Day, that is March, 8 to have women from different countries around the world saying:' It's time to break the siege of Gaza, the conditions there are so terrible'.
We will continue to do our efforts around the prisoners in Guantanamo as well as people who have been whistleblowers in the US giving support to Chelsea Manning, to Edward Snowden. We are doing work to try to counter the NSA spying. And then Iran and the terrible legislation that Congress is trying to pass in the Senate that would increase the sanctions against Iran just as negotiations that are taking place. So we are trying to stop that from happening. So we have a full plate in a coming month.
Robles: I see. Can I ask you about your Geneva protest?
Benjamin: We really are not doing a protest, we are actually in favor of the peace talks. But we are there to be a voice and a presence, we don't want to take any sides. We are just saying that the fighting is hurting the civilian population, that there is no military solution to this.
This is coming from a position, the reason that Code Pink is going there, is that we were very active in trying to stop the US government from getting involved militarily in Syria. And we felt very proud that we were able to stop our government from doing that, yet on the other hand to see the agony that the Syrian people are going through it doesn't seem enough to say:' We are glad, we didn't get involved militarily'.
We have to do more than that. And I think certainly we want to be calling for more humanitarian aid, for open corridors for that aid to get through. But the main thing is to say, the world has to stand up and say: 'Let's put an end in the fighting'.
Robles: Definitely. I don't know if you are aware, right now, currently as we speak, right now Al Qaeda affiliated groups are battling each other there. I mean, it is complete insanity.
Benjamin: Well, yes. I mean, the level of..I've read that there is over 1,000 armed groups in Syria right now. I mean, this is just insane.
So anybody who thinks that there is a military solution is just not watching how much splintering has gone on and how much suffering for the civilian population, the millions of refugees, the people who are internally displaced.
There has really got to be a cease-fire.
Robles: Really, really. Most of the world I think agrees 100% on that. I want to ask you regarding Guantanamo. Have you seen any movement, or whispers, or anything, amongst the lawyers or anyone regarding a possible boycott of all proceedings at that location?
Benjamin: I'm not close enough to the lawyers to know that. But I can say that there were several lawyers out on the streets with us today in the pouring rain and the cold in Washington DC in front of the White House and then the march that we had and they were just unbelievably angry.
They just could not believe what Obama has been doing, the lies they have been said in terms of things supposedly changing, the violations. And it is very interesting to see these lawyers, some of whom come from prestigious law firms that were very supportive of the Obama Administration, and to see how angry they have become.
One thing we did today which was quite profound is that we had a march that went from the White House to the National Museum of American History. And inside we set up displays of people in orange jumpsuits with hoods over their heads and signs attesting to the violation of the US Constitution.
And at first the security in the museum wanted to arrest people, throw them out and then decided no, that they were going to let this exhibit stand and so for hours we were inside the museum giving all of the visitors not only a visual but an oral discussion of how the US is violating its own constitution.
And yes, President Obama, “the constitutional lawyer” and of course “the Nobel Peace Prize winner” should have a hard time sleeping at night knowing that thanks to him these men remain in indefinite detention in the US GULAG.
Robles: I don't think he does. I mean, when I saw him laughing… laughing it up, at Nelson Mandela's funeral, any humanistic ideas I had about Obama were completely out the window, but anyway...
Benjamin: Politics is dirty and he has gotten down in the dogs and you are right probably he doesn't think very much about it when he goes to bed at night.
Robles: So, Medea, how do you do that? I mean, you put that display up there in the museum and it seems… I’ve got to hand it you sometimes you pull off some things that nobody else can. What is your secret?
Benjamin: Well, this was a coalition of groups led by a group called Witness Against Torture that is namely people from a faith-based background and there were about 60 people who are willing to get arrested in the museum if that was the way things were going to evolve.
But luckily they didn't and I think it was very beautiful to be in there and to be singing and chanting with the message 'Make Guantanamo history', so in the Museum of American History to be saying: 'Let's not just look at these rooms full of, depictions of the US Revolutionary War, the Civil War, other things throughout the history. Let's look at what we are doing right now. And how this is going to go down in history as such a shameful mark on the US.
Robles: They will have to open up an exhibit 'The Hall of Shame' or something..
Benjamin: That is right, but I don't think it is going to happen because even in the exhibit that I poked into today looking at the depiction of the War in Vietnam, it was not a very clear one talking about the use of Agent Orange, the killing of 2 million Vietnamese, the reall shame of that war.
So there is a lot of our history that is hidden from the American public.
Robles: I see. Medea, have you had… (I just want to ask you one last question if I could and anything you would like to say, please go ahead) …have you had any experience with media being more inaccessible than say it was a year ago in the US?
Have you seen anything like that going on? I mean stricter control on the media, more people being, basically shut up.
Benjamin: Are you talking about in relationship to Guantanamo?
Robles: In general, with the Snowden revelations, with Guantanamo, with government secrecy. I mean, are they winning are they losing? Are things getting out the way they were a year ago? What is the situation with media access, etc?
Benjamin: I really can’t answer that what I can say is from my own experience, in that, a lot of the times that we have had actions like the one we had today we used to get mainstream media that would cover them. We used to have CNN there, MSNBC would come there and these days we don't get any mainstream US media.
The media that we get is Russia Today, maybe we would get Al Jazeera, maybe we would get TV from Europe, from Japan, but the US media tends to ignore what the activists are doing, tends to ignore a lot of these key issues that are so damming of US foreign policy.
So unfortunately I think we have a media that is obviously under corporate control and has also been cutting back on the funding of reporters and so we have fewer and fewer reporters especially on weekends.
And it means that there is not a lot of information through the mainstream channels that can educate the American people and just to circle back to the issue of Guantanamo I would think that if there would be a poll done that most Americans wouldn't even know that we still have people in Guantanamo. They probably think everybody there was let go, it has been shut down or if they thought that anybody was left it is because they have been tried and convicted and happened to be the worst of the worst which is not true at all.
So, unfortunately I think that a lot of the reasons that the Administration can get away with policies like this is because the US mainstream media has not been doing its job.
Robles: Oh boy. And that is a problem, that is not going to be corrected any time soon as far as I know. What do you think?
Benjamin: No but thank goodness we do have alternative kinds of media from other countries and people who are anxious to get information from other sources, at least have that opportunity.
So let's hope more and more people start searching for that and it perhaps will even shame the mainstream media to start covering more of these things.
Robles: Yeah, sure, right. Let's hope they don't take the Internet away from us. What do you think?
Benjamin: Yeah, I think we have a huge movement on our hands to try to stop that from happening but it is very scary to see not only the NSA spying but in general the government and corporate control of more and more of our lives.
But thank you for the work that you are doing and for this interview and I'm actually optimistic that in 2014 we can fight back against these policies and take back some of the freedoms that we've lost in the past years.
Robles: I hope so. I've gotten some rumblings that big changes are coming up, hopefully they will be for the best.
Listen, you're going to be in Geneva, I'm sorry, what date?
Benjamin: We are going to be there from January 20 to January 24.
Robles: If people want to support you or take part or learn more about your activities where should they go?
Benjamin: They should go to our website which is codepink.org and the summit that we are having the Women’s Summit the day before the official talks start, we will be live-streaming and you can find all that information on our website.
Robles: Of course this is not only for women, you welcome men into your activities, right?
Benjamin: We welcome men into all of our activities, the summit I'm talking about is a summit for women to speak but everybody is invited to be part of it.
Robles: Ok, I'm just making sure so nobody is scared off or anything. One more time, that will be January..
Benjamin: January 20 – January 24.
Robles: January 20 – January 24 and one more time for the listeners your website..
Robles: Ok. Thank you very much, I appreciate it.
Benjamin: Ok, bye bye.
Bye bye, take care.
This is the final installment of an interview with Medea Benjamin, the cofounder and manager of Code Pink. You can find the previous parts of this interview on our website at Voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening.
Truth and Mainstream Lies: a Divided Planet
The western mass media and the security services are happy to allow left-wing parties, activists and even subversive left-wing groups to flourish, because they are in fact part of the system. The system is controlled by bankers and the what might be labeled the New World Order and when someone actually threatens their system, one largely based on usury that person needs to be quickly shut up or even assassinated. This was stated by Mr. David Shayler, a former MI5 officer, in an interview for the Voice of Russia.
4 February, 14:56
Targeting Snowden: Expelled Plagiarist, CIA/NSA/MI6 and Media Manipulation
Constant targets of Western media operations conducted by the special services are of course whistleblowers, Hacktivists, truth seekers, 9/11 truthers, anyone who is active in attempting to expose US and western government illegality and, due to his leaks and celebrity status, Edward Snowden, and everybody connected to him.
One of the most shameless attempts as of late at discrediting and making money off lies and half truths was made by what many thought was an stand up publication called the Guardian. Through the use of a serial plagiarizer they published and are promoting a book about Edward Snowden although the author has never had contact with Mr. Snowden. Egregious? Disgusting? Business as usual? You decide.
I am writing a book about you. The inside story on your life and your dealings and who stands behind you. I will make a million dollars off the book and I will claim to know all your deepest and darkest secrets. Even though we have never met I will not contact you or interview you or even attempt to speak with those close to you. Yet I am an expert on your life, and will tell the world all about you. Along with my book I will give interviews on the radio and on television and tell the world all about you and there is nothing you can do because you can’t. You are trapped in your own little world and your life is part of the public record so you can not touch me and you can not sue me or even protest. We have never met but that is not important, I will make up whatever I need, and I will not pay you a penny as I exploit you and your life. Sound scary? Weird? Ridiculous? Unbelievable? You bet! But that is exactly what the Guardian's plagiarizer-Russophobe-hater-of-truth, copy and paste "award winning journalist" Luke Harding has done to Edward Snowden.
What is Luke Harding?
Award winning insipid venomous perennial Russia hater and one of the few western journalists to ever be expelled from the Russian Federation, Luke Harding, who I have taken to task before for his insidious, factually-challenged, horrendously disgusting and completely biased articles about Russia, yet who claims to be a "Russia expert", has recently published another book called "The Snowden Files" about something he also knows nothing about, this time the inside story on Edward Snowden.
His "work" if we can call it that, and any intelligent individual out there can easily access it and analyze it themselves has one constantly underlining theme: demonize Russia and its president, and one underlining method; take anything you can find and spin it to match that meme.
In this regard it is thus almost obvious that the individual is performing a function and that someone behind the scenes is pulling the strings. With the case of the "The Snowden Files" this attempt at either spinning, misconstruing facts or claiming to have inside knowledge is so blatantly obvious that any thinking person can see the strings being pulled. In this regard the "book" is a so poorly constructed that is exposes more about the people behind it than the person it attempts to have intimate knowledge about.
As for the "author", and his material says this more than anything, he is a mere instrument for continued for the dissemination of Russo phobia, anti-Russia/Putin propaganda and obviously has little regard for journalistic ethics, sourcing and all of the other issues that real journalists are concerned about.
So what is the hack writer and why would he publish books claiming to have inside information on people he has never met (The Snowden Files), publish outlandish right wing talking points and claims demonizing Russia and President Putin (The Mafia State) and take part in hits jobs (The Fifth Estate) on organizations such as WikiLeaks which he knows nothing about? There are two possibilities: either he is just a profiteer looking to make a buck or he is employed in carrying out carefully orchestrated disinformation operations for the security services. If the latter is true then it shows that UK security's standards have definitely fallen.
The Guardian: Independent Media?
Glen Greenwald was one of Edward Snowden’s choices as a journalist he felt he could trust and one with a good reputation who called the above writer's latest book "The Inside Story of Edward Snowden by Someone Who Never Met or Spoke With Edward Snowden", but did Snowden know that the Guardian would then abandon him when the stuff-hit-the-fan in Hong Kong or that they would try to blatantly just try to make a profit off his story? Well, sadly, at the end of the day for the corporate mass media outlets it is all about the money and only about the money.
The Guardian, while many believed it to be a beacon of truth and to have fair and more liberal views is after all is said and done simply a commercial publication, and its writers do not really have a chance to practice "real journalism" without the constraints corporate sponsors, selling papers, pleasing the security services or the paper’s customers.
The Guardian was a respectable publication once and at least maintained a modicum of being a champion of the truth, or so at least I thought, especially when I defended its Editor in Chief Alan Rusbridger when he was grilled by a UK Parliamentary Committee regarding the Snowden material. So why he would have someone like Luke Harding in his employ is beyond me. Why would he publish a book claiming to be have inside information on Snowden from a writer who already participated in the hit job flop called The Fifth Estate about WikiLeaks? Another expert inside view from someone with a personal beef and irrelevant information and connections. Maybe the Guardian is being duped? Or could it just be that it is all about the money?
Maybe Rusbridger and Guardian are being blackmailed by the security services? After all Rusbridger and the Guardian are looking at terrorism related charges with regard to the Snowden material. That of course is all conjecture but within the realm of possibility.
Of course there are displeased members of the West's power elite and surveillance establishment who want to do anything to discredit and taint the Guardian's reputation (but it has done that itself) for having the audacity to have anything to do with Snowden. And then there are the continuing attempts to discredit Snowden and to damage his relationship with Russia.
Reaction from the Principals
WikiLeaks (who I am awaiting a comment from as I wrote Mr. Hrafnsson at 4 am or so his time and no doubt he was sleeping) is calling for a boycott of the book. The WikiLeaks organization first stated: "Guardian hacks who abandoned Snowden in Hong Kong are now attempting to make millions off his back. It should be noted that only Mr. Snowden and WikiLeaks have the inside story, Guardian abandoned him in Hong Kong. The Guardian's recycling of an anti-WikiLeaks anti-Russian plagiarist into profiteering off the Snowden situation is the last straw. Snowden has never spoken to Luke Harding. Harding, a proven plagiarist, is trying to cash in on book/film rights, as he did with WikiLeaks. Russia has its share of problems but Harding is so hostile that he may destabilize Snowden's asylum renewal."
WikiLeaks was a little less conspiratorial than I in their initial assessment pointing mainly to the financial motivations but there are other matters on the agenda and those involve CIA, MI6 and their masters in Washington, who we are aware will stop at nothing to get Mr. Snowden. However, I dare say WikiLeaks overestimates Harding’s effectiveness. Russia and the Russian Security Services are usually ahead of the curve when it comes to these kinds of "information operations" and there is almost no chance whatsoever that a well known and expelled Russia-hater (no matter how venomous anything he could muster might be) could do or say to change or damage the opinion of official Moscow with regard to Mr. Snowden. Moscow is well aware at how CIA/MI6 and all their underlings operate and how they attempt to demonize and marginalize those who they views as enemies, this is a moot point.
These attempts only serve to support Mr. Snowden's claims even more and other than getting more people in the West to possibly hate Mr. Snowden the continued information operations against Mr. Snowden will no doubt backfire. But just like the US annulling Mr. Snowden's passport while he was overseas forcing him to seek asylum (an orchestrated plot?) we have seen time and time again that the US Government is really behind the curve on how to get their man.
Later WikiLeaks did point to more nefarious motivations behind the Guardian/Harding operation stating: "This is the "2nd attempt in as many weeks by the Guardian to undermine Snowden's character. Neither Snowden, nor WikiLeaks has ever spoken to Luke Harding. The book is unattributed re-writes of press reports."
Which if one looks at snippets available on the Guardian's website is clearly the case. So has the Guardian been duped by a hack writer who operates with his own agenda or is the Guardian part of the plan?
WikiLeaks says: "The Guardian, who abandoned Snowden in Hong Kong, is giving Snowden's defense zero percent of the proceeds from their cash-in book. Boycott it."
Elegant solution and perhaps if the hack writer is guilty of bringing about another "flop" his possibilities for spreading his vitriol will be limited by market forces.
MI6 Hunting Snowden
In a recent article on the Voice of Russia it was detailed how MI6 is desperate to rendition Mr. Snowden, Wayne Madsen, who I interviewed recently stated: "… the British government seems to be the most interested in renditioning Snowden than its other partners of the FIVE EYES, which, besides, the US, includes Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The British are willing to catch Snowden mostly out of urge to get back at him for "the alleged damage his revelations caused British electronic surveillance operations around the world’ rather than a ‘desire to ingratiate Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GHCQ) and Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) with their American counterparts’, the NSA and CIA, respectively."
Lies Lies Lies - Jesselyn Radack
Jesselyn Radack a legal advisor for Mr. Snowden recently told me that the US was manipulating the media and telling outright lies about Mr. Snowden in particular to claims that he took over 1.7 million files: "I would say the 1.7 million number materialized out of nowhere. In fact, I don't know how the government, the US government, came up with that considering they have admitted they don't know how much information he took – number one. And also if you look at this whole scandal, over and over and over again the US has lied and lied and lied even before Congress on camera, under oath. And Mr. Snowden has not. Mr. Snowden has told the truth, the US government has lied over and over and over again and every week we have a new rumor, we have to try to quash that the US puts out."
Information War: Truth vs. Orchestrated Media Operations
Personally, as a writer, I can say it is a pleasure working and writing for the Voice of Russia. Mainly because management basically gives me two rules: tell the truth and don’t be too hard, because as my readers know I can be brutal at times. The reason I am letting you in on that little secret is because it bears a striking contrast to what is going on at many western publications. If you are a regular reader of mine, you know that I often take publications, media outlets and journalists to task when they try to twist the truth about Russia, promote Russo phobia, tell outright lies, obfuscate, or write particularly odious pieces about this country or other important issues that are of major concern, as was the case with the Economist recently and their "anonymous" Russia/Putin smear in their latest issue.
So is the western media merely an instrument of the security services, the banks and other monied and powerful special interests and do the special services plant people in media outlets to control and manipulate the flow of information? You bet they do and it has gotten so bad that the world is currently divided into two types of people, those who seek the truth and those who blindly believe the mass media which is fed lies by the intelligence services according to former MI6 officer David Shayler.
I recently spoke to David Shayler regarding the issue of media manipulation by the special servicesand he stated the following: "You've got to look at all this stuff and it is all a distraction, and all the stuff that goes on the main-stream, all these people who come on from these so-called defense experts and so on, they are just in the pay of the intelligence services, they are just out there to put out propaganda, and it is in the interests of these private security services to put these messages out there, and in principle because that is how they make their money."
"It is like there is this division going on on the planet at the moment – the nonsense that goes on on the mainstream and the truth, which you can get at by using the Internet."
Will the US ever forget Snowden and leave him alone? Not likely. According to Mr. Shayler: "… these people they never forget. And as I say they will only be happy when people are either dead or they’ve given up the fight basically. That’s what they want. So, if you constantly keep protesting in a meaningful way, in an effective way, not in just going through the motions. You know, you keep getting under their skin and that works you know."
Michael John Smith on Harding Op
I recently asked Michael John Smith, the last person prosecuted for spying for the USSR in the world about how the special services manipulate the media and plant operatives in media outlets, something that happened in his case and he provided a written response on the issue answering thus: "I can’t comment on whether Luke Harding may be working for the intelligence services or not. We have some very strict libel laws in the UK and he might consider my opinion libellous. What I can say is that there are journalists who have been known to be MI5 or MI6 agents working in the UK media, and their involvement with the intelligence services is usually fairly obvious by the sort of material that they include in their articles. Heavily biased opinions supporting a particular agenda will often stand out as being influenced by MI5 or MI6, and we have previously discussed the role of somebody like Oleg Gordievsky as playing such a role in the media, where an anti-Russian bias is evident."
"But I would like to draw your attention to David Rose, who is a good example of how the intelligence services use an apparently normal journalist to spread their propaganda into the media. According to Rose he was recruited by MI6 in May 1992, and he later admitted his involvement as their agent in an article he wrote for the New Statesman magazine in September 2007."
"In 1999 David Rose had an important role in publicising information about the then recently disclosed Mitrokhin Archive, and it is significant to know that at that time he was already an MI6 agent. The intelligence services want the general public to absorb certain details as “the truth”, but they do not want the readers to discover that the articles their hack journalists write are merely propaganda to brainwash the public."
"I first became aware of David Rose when he had been tasked to approach Melita Norwood in 1999 - she was the woman who had been exposed as a spy for the Soviet Union. Rose went to interview Norwood and extracted a confession from her, when she admitted to him that she had been a Soviet agent. Rose refers to this meeting in one of his articles".
"One of the anomalies of Stella Rimington's book: "Open Secret: the Autobiography of the Former Director General of MI5" is that she never mentions anything about Vasili Mitrokhin, which is odd as it was such a big issue during Rimington’s period in office. It is even more incredible to me that Rimmington never referred to my case in her book either, especially as this was the biggest espionage event that led up to her becoming Director General of MI5.”
"To try to resolve some of my questions I wrote to David Rose in 2001, asking for his assistance to expose errors in the Mitrokhin Archive about my case. However, Rose went out of his way to mislead by warning me not to pursue my request for access to the original Mitrokhin material. This is the reply David Rose sent me in November 2001: "I can tell you I got to know Mitrokhin well and I understand from conversations both with him and with other, confidential sources, that there was indeed material in his files which related to your case. However, I ought to warn you that were you to acquire access to it through some form of the legal disclosure process, it might not be at all helpful to you. I cannot assist you as to any of its details, nor can I give “chapter and verse” as to the conversations I’ve had about you and Mitrokhin. But I am certain that this material exists, and that those behind your prosecution must be aware of its nature."
"With the knowledge that Rose was acting on behalf of MI6 for about a decade or more, it is now very clear who gave him the order to reply to me in this way, and the intention must have been to avoid the risk that important errors in the Mitrokhin Archive would be exposed by my lawyers in Court."
"There was no reference anywhere in my trial (1993) or appeal (1995) to the existence of evidence obtained from Mitrokhin. However, only days after my arrest in August 1992, during interrogation by British Special Branch Police, the head of the investigating team told me that they were in possession of information from Russian “archival leaks”. This must have been a reference to Mitrokhin, but I was given no opportunity to challenge the source behind the Police questions."
Real dissenting views not heard on BBC
On a BBC radio chat called Start Week, titled: "Spying and Surveillance: The Snowden Files" Former Director of GCHQ David Omand spoke to Mr. Harding, which just to shows that Mr. Harding no matter how vile he is is only fulfilling the agenda for the state because you do not get on the BBC if you have a real dissenting view. David Shayler has said it, Smith has said and even a former UK Ambassador named Craig Murray who questioned rendition flights internally can not get on the BBC. We won’t even talk about the media blackout on poor trapped Julian Assange.
AMB Craig Murray
Regarding his multiple bans from appearing on the BBC: "They usually do it quite subtly. I am very frequently called by BBC producers of individual programs. They called me up saying "Oh we would like you on the news at 10 o'clock or whatever," and then about 10 minutes later I get a phone call saying "Oh no, we have had to cancel you."
"And this has happened to me 60 or 70 times in a row, not once or twice, this has happened again and again and again."
"The program producer calls you up and books you, and then 10 minutes later they have to phone back and unbook you because at some point in the system a banning order has come into effect."
Undermining leaders, demonizing Russia
Part of western intelligence operations focus on media manipulation and one constant target since Soviet times has been Russia. Another widely used methods for toppling regimes and undermining leaders we have seen in the western media portrayal of President Putin and now the president of Ukraine. With the Olympics coming up we have seen an increase in anti-Russian propaganda and while the focus is still on Russia and Mr. Snowden, publishing a demonizing book serves two purposes and Mr. Harding can get rich in the process. I agree with WikiLeaks. Boycott it.
Thankfully for us here in Russia, and that includes Mr. Snowden, Russia's intrepid security service, the FSB, is busy guaranteeing security and not playing media manipulation games, and you can take that to the bank.
Most of the views and opinions expressed in this piece are those of the author. I can be reached firstname.lastname@example.org
5 February, 20:29
For many Australians it is embarrassing the way the Australian Government blindly obeys whatever the US tells it to do. Even joining in the US’ illegal wars. The scorched earth policy of divide and conquer, decimate and destroy, destabilize and control is in stark contrast to the efforts of the Russian Federation, the BRICS and SCO countries. In an exclusive interview with the Voice of Russia, John Shipton, the Executive Officer of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia gave his views on those issues and much more. Having just returned from a fact finding mission to Syria Mr. Shipton praised Russian diplomatic skills and Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, whose efforts he called triumphs, second to none. Mr. Shipton and the WikiLeaks Party believe that the Russian President and Foreign Ministry are forces for peace. Peace which will allow development and growth. He contrasted these positive forces with the US and its allies who wish to restrict development so that they will have no competition. He called it a “phenomenon” that the US has destroyed 73 countries and killed 26 million people since 1945 and said is must stop.
Hello this is John Robles I’m speaking with Mr. John Shipton, he’s the Chief Executive Officer of the Wikileaks Party in Australia. This is part one of a longer interview.
Robles: My first question is regarding your feelings about the Australian government’s lack of any kind of support for Julian Assange if you could touch on that…
Shipton: The Australian government’s treatment of Julian is appalling and savage. It’s been 3.5 years and still nothing is done. Even to the extent the mass Swedish mass newspaper Aftonbladet is now running a debate on whether the investigation, the questioning, was wrong. The issue of a warrant was incorrect, the European arrest warrant was incorrect and the whole matter ought to be dropped straight away. Still the Australian government won’t respond and won’t do anything.
Robles: How likely do you think that is going to happen? That Swedish authorities will drop the allegations because there are no charges, Julian hasn’t been charged with anything at all? They are just allegations. So, the whole thing is completely ridiculous.
Shipton: Yes, when they wanted him for questioning Julian went and answered their questions and they indicated that Julian was free to go, free to leave. As soon as he got on the airplane, they issued a European Arrest Warrant. These people are only acting at the behest of others.
Robles: Do you think it is likely that the Swedish authorities would drop everything in the near future?
Shipton: My feeling is that it is becoming more and more likely as the embarrassment to the Swedish judicial system increases, and as now all of the evidences is available as well as the falsification of evidence by the prosecuting investigators, and also the shopping around for three prosecutors and now finally another prosecutor has been appointed.
Robles: The fourth one now?
Robles: Moving away from that right now if we could. You recently were on a trip to Syria, on a fact-finding mission for the Wikileaks Party. Some of the right wing in your country were very critical of that. Can you tell us about that trip to Syria and what you saw and what that was about?
Shipton: We were well received in Syria and we spoke with a lot of ordinary people. Mostly we were concerned with the damage that sanctions do to the provision of medical health. The Australian right-wing as far as geopolitics is concerned, the Australian Government, differs not at all from the American government, from the United States.
Robles: Some people call it another lapdog for the US. Would you characterize Australia that way?
Shipton: Yes, I think it embarrasses me entirely, the way the Australian Government just obeys whatever the US requests of it, even to the extent of them backing an illegal war and invasion of Iraq.
Robles: Is there anything legally that you can do or that is being done? Surely it must be against the Australian constitution or the legal framework for the Australian government to ignore their citizen in need, namely Julian Assange. Is there anything that could be done that hasn’t been tried yet legally or constitutionally to get them to act?
Shipton: We pursue every avenue that the solicitors make available to us and lawyers make available to us, and I am sure Julian’s legal advisors do the same. But they are recalcitrant, they simply refuse to do anything.
Robles: Back to Syria and geopolitics: what is your view on Russian president Vladimir Putin and his handling of the situation in Syria and Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov?
Shipton: The Russian diplomatic skills are a triumph, and with the Shanghai Cooperative Organization, the BRICs last year in Far East and this year Syria and the Ukraine. There is diplomatic triumph second to none, and in our view the Russian President and Foreign Ministry people wish to bring peace to allow development.
The US and its allies wish to restrict development so that they will have no competition. This is the truth of the matter. They just wish to have states that are dependent ill organized and not undergoing any social or industrial development at all.
Robles: What about the role of promoting war and promoting peace? How would you rate Russia as opposed to the US in Syria?
Shipton: I think Russia, because it wishes to develop and it wishes its allies to develop, is a force for peace in the world along with the BRICs.
Those who don’t want development and don’t want nations to have peace so that they can develop are the US and its allies.
Robles: And in what ways would you say it is profitable for the US and its allies to, for example: decimate and destroy countries and keep an ongoing endless war… ?
Shipton: That is the phenomenon of the US. Since 1945 they’ve destroyed 73 countries and were directly involved in the deaths of 26 million people. It is a horror show. It just must stop!
Robles: That is a lot of countries. And they just want to continue that endlessly. Can you tell us a little bit about what you saw, actually, in Syria first hand?
Shipton: First hand, we experienced the random mortar fire that happens every night as the insurgents that come into, as close as they can, into the heart of Damascus and fire random mortar shells and heavy machine gun fire and then run away.
So, 350 meters from where we were staying a mortar shell landed and claimed some lives. So, we’ve experienced that. That happened every night.
Robles: You just said these were the insurgents coming in, they come in and strike and move out, right? Did you see any Syrian military forces bombing Damascus?
Shipton: No, not at all. In fact, the people of Damascus, the Syrian people of Damascus make every effort to make life continue as normal even under the difficulties of 3 hours electricity a day.
Robles: Did you witness a mass hatred or anti-Assad feelings among the population?
Shipton: No, most of the rhetoric we experienced was distress about what is happening to the country and they focus on the involvement of Saudi Arabia in organizing and financing “the Gulf States”, in organizing and financing this terrorist plague that extends from Malaysia right through to the Balkans.
Robles: This terrorist plague you are talking about, we know Saudi Arabia is backing and controlling it, I mean Saudi prince himself admitted that he controls the terrorist groups in Syria. Of course, he is not working by himself, Saudi Arabia has the perennial support of the US. Who do you think is really behind this? Maybe a redundant question but….
Shipton: Yes, it doesn’t take much to understand the true nature… that the movement of thousands of men and the missions that are required and the movement of troops through Turkey requires more influence and logistical adeptness than Saudi Arabia has.
So, we can safely assume that as the activity in the north of Syria is next to the Incirlik base in Turkey, that NATO is involved, either passively or actively involved. And as the logistics are great, it must also be the American security services involved.
This is the technique that the US developed over the last 70 years of destroying a country from within. They don’t really invade because from their experience its unnecessary, in the case of Iraq they… I don’t know what they thought but in the case of Iraq the went in and destroyed it and made it obvious to everybody that the American military is a huge weapon with no effect.
Robles: Do you see that “internal destruction machinery” working in Ukraine right now?
Shipton: Yes, similar techniques. First of all the Color Revolutions in Ukraine’s case worked for a little while and then the Ukrainian people naturally went with their sister nation Mother Russia.
That failing, the EU in US setup an organization which has got an NGO, in your country, a non-government organization, they are financed by one or another group in America, for example the Open Society Group run by George Soros, but they have got problems.
The Color Revolution having failed now they financed the gains, the discontented and the malcontents and disgruntled into moving against the elected government of the Ukraine, an “elected government”!
And the EU and the US wish to kick out an elected government and replace it with a group that is more favorable to them.
Robles: Can you comment on that? They are supporting the worst neo-Nazi nationalist elements in Ukraine. These are people that are saying: “We can’t let the country be run by “an expletive for black people” and “expletive for Jews” and an “expletive for Russians”.
They say those people are trying to take over Ukraine and the US is supporting these people. Victoria Nuland is handing them cookies on Independent Square. And in Syria it is the same thing these homicidal maniacal murderous Al-Qaeda (lunatics really) are being supported also by the US and being armed and being called “freedom fighters”. Can you comment on this so-called “opposition”?
Shipton: To destroy a country from the inside you need savages and barbarians, and that is what all of these pseudo games are composed of.
They are really mercenaries and you may notice that they do all their savage work against hospitals, against schools, against men and women in ordinary life going about their business. Against children, that is appalling.
It is a plague that the United Nations, the group of nations must get together and stop.
Robles: You are absolutely right and I don’t think that has been brought up too much anywhere but… The same thing happened in Russia, in Beslan, where they attacked a school and killed children, I mean, in Latakia, Syria, 426 children brutally murdered in order to bring about a pretext for the invasion they wanted, and I am sure the western media, they are not wanting that to be publicized at all, no one is really calling for investigation into exactly who killed those 426 children. Unbelievable.
I would say they are cowards, wouldn’t you?
Shipton: They are cowards and also in my view they are maniacs, they are savages. The social bonds that hold us together and prevent us doing those things they intent to break.
They destroy schools… and how you subdue people. How you subdue them and make them passive is you murder the babies. This has been a policy in Iraq, in Afghanistan, I mean you don’t see it in writing but you see the policy enacted the blowing up of wedding parties, and the blowing up of funerals.
All of the things that bind groups together and make them healthy, they attack and destroy.
6 February, 13:23
Australia is Becoming a Rouge State
The Australian Navy has been conducting incursions into Indonesia's territorial waters, apparently, in an attempt to stop ships with refugees from reaching Australia. The Australian Government's crackdown on marginalized people, fleeing warzones and oppression shows the callousness that has poisoned the West. This was stated in an interview with the Voice of Russia by the former Head of the WikiLeaks Party and the Founder of the Australian Lawyers Alliance Mr. Greg Barns. He also stated that Australia’s Government has still not moved on protecting Julian Assange and is still a client of the US.
This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. Greg Barns. He is a regular Voice of Russia contributor, the former campaign director of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia and the official spokesperson for the Australian Lawyers Alliance. He is also the founder and the former president of that alliance.
Robles: Hello Greg! How are you this fine morning? Morning for you and middle of the night for me…
Barns: It is a fine, it’s a beautiful morning in Tasmania, Australia, John. So, I’m sorry you are not here.
Robles: It is minus 23 here in downtown Moscow.
Barns: It is about plus 23 degrees Celsius here.
Robles: That’s great! So, what is going on in Australia right now as far as Indonesia, refugees, AISO etc? If you could, give our listeners an on the ground Australia update?
Barns: Yes, the newly-elected conservative government headed by Tony Abbott, the Prime Minister, had a policy of turning back boats.
What had happened was that there were a number of asylum seekers, seeking to come to Australia on boats which were organized by people smugglers out of Indonesia.
People were simply coming because the queues, the so-called official queue that the UN runs, simply doesn’t work. People just wait for years and years in refugee camps.
What’s happened is that the Australian Navy has made incursions into the Indonesian territorial waters in a bid to turn back boats.
Now, what is extraordinary is that the Australian navy and the Minister for Immigration Scott Morrison have both said that these incursions into the Indonesian waters were in fact a “mistake”.
Now it just seems extraordinary that highly trained members of the Australian Navy on highly sophisticated ships, would on a number of occasions, go into the Indonesian waters and not know about it.
One of the other issues is the great secrecy with which this exercise has been conducted. The minister and the military are refusing to allow journalists any real access to the program.
We don’t know whether, for example, the Navy is abusing asylum seekers. There have been some unconfirmed reports about that. But it’s been conducted in such secrecy that, really, one has to wonder what the Australian Navy and what the Abbott Government have to hide.
Robles: What kinds of abuse have been reported? Have there been any clashes or contacts with Indonesian security forces or naval forces?
Barns: There have been no clashes at this point, but the Indonesians have indicated that they will be patrolling their waters very-very strongly.
It comes on the back of the Edward Snowden leaks, which have confirmed that Australia spied on the Indonesian President Yudhoyono and members of his family. And that really I think has been catastrophic for Australian-Indonesian relations, in the same way that US spying on Angela Merkel has been for German-US relations.
The second point is that the Indonesians, you know, it is a developing world country and just believe that Australia is being extraordinarily selfish and xenophobic in the way in which it is dealing with this issue of asylum seekers.
Indonesia is a country teeming with people who’ve come from other countries. Australia should be doing more to support asylum seekers, but it is instead running, for its own domestic political purposes, a very nasty campaign.
In terms of abuse, the allegations were that some asylum seekers were forced to put their hands on hot engines on the boats by Australian Navy personnel.
Those allegations have not been confirmed, I should say, but nor have they been able to be explicitly put to bed as not being correct. There is also an allegation of some physical abuse. There is also an allegation about a pepper-spray and mace incident. Now again one of the difficulties is that you’ll never know the truth of this because the Minister and the Navy, and the military are simply in complete denial and there is no way of knowing whether those allegations are true or not.
Robles: I see. A couple of things here: Why would they be putting people’s hands on hot engines? Is that some sort of torture or punishment? What is it?
Barns: That’s right, and that was the allegation that was made. Certainly, as I say, at this point in time I think it would be fair to say that that allegation is being vigorously denied by the Australian Navy, but because of the secrecy with which this exercise has been conducted, there is no real accountability on the part of the military and/or the government for what is happening in relation to interactions between the Australian Navy and people on these asylum seeker boats.
Robles: So, you’re saying this was like torture, is that what you are saying?
Barns: The allegation was that people have got burns, had their hands badly burnt as a result of being forced to hold hot engines on the boats by the Australian Navy. Now, as I said, the Australian navy is vehemently denying it and the Australian Navy is being backed up by the conservative elements in the Australian media.
Robles: You know yourself, I mean, that sounds so bizarre, that I don’t think it is made up. Who would make up something like that? I don’t know.
Barns: I think the problem is, John, that the Government … in fact, what the minister said was that people shouldn’t sledge the Australian navy or shouldn’t criticize the Australian navy. An extraordinary comment to make.
You know, in a democratic society the military is not above reproach and the people are entitled to put allegations to the military, and they should answer them, they should answer in a way that is respectful rather than simply getting into a huff like a small kid. And that’s what has been happening with the Minister for Immigration and with the Australian navy.
Robles: Sounds like the same thing that is going on in the UK, I mean, as far as the security services and stuff go, where illegality is not questionable, right?
Regarding immigration and the refugees trying to get to Australia, I thought it had a pretty liberal immigration policy. But a lot of it was based on economic means. I mean, basically, if you have a lot of money…
Barns: It used to.
Robles: That no longer exists?
Barns: What no longer exists is generosity in Australia. In the late 1970s Australia took in vast numbers of Vietnamese who, again, came on boats from Indonesia fleeing Vietnam’s Communist Regime. But in the last 12 years Australia has shown an extraordinary mean-spiritedness in relation to asylum seekers coming from Iraq, Afghanistan – places where Australia has caused displaced persons, because we’ve participated in those wars.
And what we’ve done in Australia is – children and women in particular have been detained in hellish detention centers in places such as Nauru, which is effectively a client state of Australia, and also Papua New Guinea. People are being held in terrible conditions.
There has been widespread condemnation from Human Rights Watch, from UNHCR and from Amnesty International. And both sides of politics in Australia – the previous Government and the current Government – effectively say “We don’t care!”. Australia is becoming a rouge state when it comes to the human rights of asylum seekers.
Robles: Very serious statement to make. How many people are we talking here, Greg, in these camps?
Barns: In any stage we are talking anywhere from between 5, 10 to 15,000 it just depends on how many. We did have a number of people coming on boats over the last couple of years. The reason for that happening was effectively because of deterioration of conditions in Afghanistan.
I mean, it is a bit rich for countries like Australia and the US, which caused this displacement in those countries, to then turn around and say – “Well, we are not going to look out for desperate people.”
I should say, as a lawyer, I’ve acted for a number of people who have sought asylum and the stories are just horrific. And it is just difficult to believe that Australia can’t find a way for these people coming into our community.
Asylum seekers, generally speaking, are extremely law-abiding, hard-working, and they are terrific members of the Australian community. And with some really good positive leadership Australians could, again I think, become more generous towards asylum seekers, but we are living here through a horrific period in this country’s history. As I say, Australia is becoming a rogue state when it comes to the freedom of asylum seekers.
Robles: That’s horrible! Up to 15 000, that’s a very large quantity of people. That’s a huge amount of people, I think! I think what you are talking about is something that is a problem in the world in general, as far as the callousness and the uncaring. That seems to have become the norm rather than the abomination. I’m sure you remember the 1970s and the 1980s, we tried to be kinder, right?
Barns: Yes, I think you are absolutely right.
The other issue that has emerged, that we should talk about is the visit by some members of the WikiLeaks Party to President Bashar Assad in late December.
John Shipton, Julian Assange’s father, went on that trip with some other members of the party. It was widely condemned by the conservative elements media.
The issue of course is – Australians seem to see Syria in very black and white terms. That is that the opposition is thwarting Assad and he bad.
The complexity of Syria is such, that there are as many nefarious forces on the side of the opposition, as there are within the Government.
And the trip I think was blown out of all proportions by the conservative elements in Australia, but also some on the left, who see Syria in very black and white terms. And it was made clear by the WikiLeaks Party that it was a fact-finding mission.
Certainly, I had nothing to do with the trip, but I didn’t see any endorsement of Assad by those who were on the trip. And as I say, I think it was blown out of proportion given that the Syrian situation is a complex situation.
Robles: What did they see? Can you tell us about that? You said they didn’t endorse Assad, but did they condemn him or did they see anything damning against the government?
Barns: I think the trip was very much around fact-finding. I wasn’t on the trip, I had no involvement. My involvement with the party has been sort of unofficial, since the election campaign. But I think it was organized by a guy called Tim Anderson who is an academic in Australia. It should be said that Andersen has been fairly pro-Assad in the past.
My understanding is that they met with the members of the Syrian opposition. It was a short trip and I think John Shipton made a point that Assad was glad to see them go because they were certainly meeting with members of the opposition.
Robles: That’s the problem in Damascus and in Syria. I mean, the opposition controls or tries to control who human rights workers talk to, who, I’m sure, you guys talk to, and they try to make sure you only hear what they want you to hear. So, I mean, it is almost impossible… that’s why I’m really interested in hearing….
Barns: I think the point John is that there are no angels in Syria at the moment. It is a complex situation and there is a lot of hypocrisy in the West. At the same time, that the West condemns Assad, you’ve got back channel discussion going on with Assad because there is a recognition that he might still be around in any talks. So, I think from that perspective, it is silly to see it in purely black and white terms.
Robles: I personally believe it was the terrorist elements and the Western-backed elements, and I think this is a big point and nobody wants it to come out, about those 426 children that were murdered as a pretext to cause that invasion. And I’m sure that is something the West does not want to come out, because this was really their own homicidal maniacal Al-Qaeda lunatics who did it.
Barns: But certainly there are some serious human rights abuses on both sides of this conflict.
Robles: Can you tell us anything about Julian on the record?
Barns: I don’t have any great update on Julian at the moment. He is still in the embassy and there is no sign that the new Australian Government will assist him. And that is because they are in the thrall of the US, in the same way as the previous government. But Julian is continuing his work and WikiLeaks is continuing to put out some very important material.
Robles: Okay, but there is no movement within Australia.
Barns: No movement that I know of, John.
Robles: I saw Julian, he grew a beard and he looks a little worse for wear, I mean it looks like he is being under, extremely, a lot of pressure and it is showing.
Barns: It is a very-very tough gig and it is extraordinary the inhumanity of the British Government, the Australian Government and the US Government that they would leave someone in that situation.
Robles: Yes, it is. I mean, that’s a human rights abuse in itself. It is an abomination I think, that he is still there.
Barns: Absolutely, it is a human rights abuse, there is no doubt that.
Robles: Thank you Greg, I really appreciate it. And thanks for letting us know what is going on with Indonesia.
You were listening to an interview with Greg Barns – the former campaign director of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia, the official spokesperson for the Australian Lawyers Alliance and the founder and the former President for that alliance. He is also a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia.
7 February, 09:07
"We will struggle with every breath and strength in our body"
© Collage "Voice of Russia"
President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov have wiped the floor with the West in every diplomatic scenario and for this reason the West is so determined and will stop at nothing to see the Olympics fail and continue demonizing Russia so that world opinion and Russia's prestige are damaged. This was stated by the Executive Officer of the WikiLeaks Party John Shipton, in an interview with the Voice of Russia. Mr. Shipton expects that President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov will silently wait for their opportunity to balance the field. He also believes that if you want to know what the western security services want one thing is to look at the work of hacks like Luke Harding which will show you which way the security services want you to look now. Mr. Shipton says that the only thing the West still has that works efficiently is the propaganda machine. He also says that countries in the FVEY have been able to monitor all of the financial transactions of terrorist organization that stretch from the end of the Philippines right up through to the Balkans, since 1985 and their lack of intervention clearly shows it serves their purposes. During the interview Mr. Shipton also reveals how the security service in Australia attempted to smear him by releases parts of recorded telephone conversations on the internet.
This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with John Shipton the Chief-Executive Officer of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia. This is part 2 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com
Robles: I'd like to get your opinion, it is kind of going around in the media right now; this book, I am sure you've heard about it, by… He was also a party to the 5th Estate smear job on WikiLeaks, that film, this book by Harding about Edward Snowden. I'd like to get your opinion on Mr. Harding, if you could, and on his so-called "inside scoop on Edward Snowden" a person he's never spoken to or had any contact with. Same thing with 5th Estate, I mean he was part of that project and he had nothing to do with Wikileaks.
Shipton: Luke Harding is a notorious Russophobe and he is one of that group of journalists that infest the Guardian, that are really close to the security services.
Everything he writes, you look at to see which way the security services want you to look now. He is associated with plagiarizing work in Russia.
Luke Harding was expelled from Russia for visiting restricted areas, in other words spying, and he moved right on in life and works with the British establishment paper that is notoriously anti-Russian. Nothing changes with those people.
Robles: In that regard it was very refreshing to hear your view on President Putin, who I think has shown through his actions, as well as Foreign Minister Lavrov and the entire Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russian Government, that they are working for peace and for rule of law.
And it is sometimes disheartening for me, maybe not even sometimes, all the time, to see such a demonization in the western press, even right now about the Olympics. It seems like they've gone a full-court press to demonize the Olympics. What do you think about the Olympics in Sochi, I mean from what you know about them?
Shipton: The last thing that the West has that works efficiently is the propaganda machine. Everything else is breaking down – the financial systems are breaking down, states of warring against each other. The last thing that works somewhat effectively is the propaganda system, and even that is breaking down. But that's mass propaganda against anything Russian. Particularly, in order to make the Sochi games fail, to lessen the prestige of Russia, they will do anything.
They are not reliable partners in the management of the world at the moment.
Robles: They wanted to put US warships into Russian waters in the Black Sea. What do you think about that?
Shipton: That is just another provocation in the diplomatic game that they are playing against Putin and Lavrov.
You know, Lavrov and Putin have wiped the floor with them in every one of those little diplomatic scenarios. So, I expect that President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov will silently wait for their opportunity to balance the field.
Robles: As the Chief-Executive Officer of the Wikileaks Party, can you tell us what the party is involved in right now? What are your plans for the future with the party? What is party going to do in the next elections?
Shipton: Our job is bringing truth, or as close to the truth as you can get, to the Australian public and also to involve ourselves outside of Australia in matters like Syria, where unilateral sanctions with no UN permission, the unilateral sanctions, restricting medical supplies to men, women and children in Syria.
We wouldn't care to see ever a repeat of the question that was put to Madeleine Albright; that 532,000 children had died as a result of the sanctions in Iraq and Ms. Albright replied: "Well, we think it is worth it".
Well, we don't and with every breath and strength in our body we will struggle against those sort of sanctions being brought against societies.
Robles: Who would you say is blocking the aid to the Syrian people? This has been a very serious issue. I know who I think is doing it and we know who is doing it, but in your opinion who is blocking the aid?
Shipton: You mean to the Palestinian camp Yarmouk or generally?
Robles: To camp Yarmouk, in Syria itself, all the humanitarian aid is being prevented from reaching the intended recipients, etc.
Shipton: There is no value to the Syrian Government to stop people receiving aid. There is no value to them at all.
It is of value to the insurgents, pseudo-gangs and thieves, and groups of murderers that wander around Syria at the expense of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. It is of some value to them to further ruin the social fabric of Syria. That is all they want. They don't care about people.
Robles: I see. I recently talked to David Shayler, he was a MI-5 whistleblower. Have you heard of David Shayler?
Shipton: Yes, I have.
Robles: He said that the world right now is divided into two "camps", if you would: people who seek the truth, for example, like what Wikileaks is publishing, what other sites on the Internet are publishing, and those who follow the mass media. When you mentioned Australia, you said bringing as close to the truth as possible to the people. Can you tell us about this division? Is this getting worse, is this getting better? And can you comment on the fact that the mass media, this is probably why they have demonized Wikileaks from the beginning?
Shipton: The mass media, as we all know, is failing and the shares of newspaper combines are now junk bonds. And the reason for that is because the do not publish anything truthful. And the other thing is that as their failure increases and stares them in the face, they are becoming more shrill and more notorious in order to attract what little bit of attention is still around. And further than that, there is not a war that the mass media and newspaper didn't find they could support since 1945.
So, really they placed themselves in service of the worst aspect of governments and corporations and consequently they've got into a serious decline. They still attempt to have a lot of influence but as far as we can see, if you want to know close to the truth, you only have to look, spend some time searching and looking and you'll get an idea of what is going on.
Another example the Guardian, which is a well-known newspaper around the world, they are going broke and they have just sold their most profitable division in order to sustain themselves.
Robles: Is it why they are putting out things like Harding, getting a known plagiarist to write books about people he has never met?
Shipton: I think that the Guardian is a left-wing Labour Party newspaper in England. But in order for it to continue to exist, it has to make some arrangement with the establishment.
As you saw when they published Snowden's revelations from the NSA, the secret service of MI-5 came and smashed the hard-drives on their computers. This is just an intimidation, it doesn't do anything because the information is stored elsewhere on servers. It just intimidates, that is all.
And public announcement of the information…you know, when the Guardian stops the publication, or limits the publication, as they have done with the NSA files from Snowden, stopping or limiting the publication, the loud action of the security service coming and smashing up their computers, gives them an opportunity to revile from the obligations of publication. That's what it is about.
Robles: We know why the US is viciously after Edward Snowden, why they are after Julian Assange. If you could, comment on why MI-6 is so actively interested in getting Mr. Snowden in particular?
Shipton: Because the GCHQ…
Robles: Some people call GCHQ just as a subsidiary of the NSA.
Shipton: We here have the same thing, it is called Five Eyes, the English-speaking countries – Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the UK and America. They are all integrated, I mean the listening services and GCHQ is probably the worst.
The UK has profited for 30 years on what it extracts out of the EU and the Snowden's revelations allowed us to see what the GCHQ is doing. And it is mostly blackmail and industrial spying, that is all they are interested in, and not in terrorism. If they were interested in terrorism, they wouldn't be in it.
And another example is that since 1985 all of the inter-bank transactions have been able to be watched in real time by the NSA and the CIA and another American security service that I have forgotten the name of.
So, that is since 1985. The provision of finances to these vast terrorist organizations that stretch from the end of the Philippines right up through to the Balkans, is known, they know where the money comes from and how its transferred and clearly, under those circumstances it serves their purposes.
Robles: Now, by their own admission or lack of admission or lack of proof, the NSA, although it claims its mass surveillance "web" or whatever you want to call it, that is sucking in all the information from all of the users everywhere in the world, that it is there to stop terrorism. Although the NSA cannot cite or give proof, or even talk about one terrorist act that it has actually prevented or one terrorist group that it has actually dismantled, or caused to be dismantled.
Even with 9-11, I mean they claim to be able to get everything, they claim to be watching Osama Bin Laden, the NSA was monitoring Bin Laden and they did not pass that over to the CIA's Al Qaeda unit.
So, all this super-mega-hyper-security-anti-terrorist-state has not been able to stop one terrorist act. What does that tell us about the NSA?
Shipton: To repeat myself, the NSA is there for the industrial spying and blackmail. They are there in order to make money and to get people to do what you want. That's all they do.
Robles: I see. Have you have you been a victim of persecution and surveillance by the security services and your own government because of your work with WikiLeaks?
Shipton: Not that I know of.
Robles: Do you think you are being surveilled 24/7?
Shipton: I have no idea. You know, I speak as frankly as I can to everybody and I go about my life as though it was private. But I have no idea.
Some voice recordings of telephone conversations that I had during the election appeared on the Internet, which was quite a surprise, or excerpts from them. So, I guess, people are listening to everything.
Robles: What do you think is going to need to happen in Australia for things to change and do you see a grassroots movement in Australia that will change the leadership to something that is more just for the people?
Shipton: Not presently. I mean, I don't think the leadership is composed of bad people. Just what they are required to do is adhere to a neoliberal philosophy and follow the Washington consensus, and attend to their master their hegemon – the US. So, this describes most of what they are able to do here.
As it becomes more evident that the US empire is clearly in decline, which it clearly is, as the American empire declines, as it declines and decays, the attachment of Australia will become a little more shrill, until it realizes that Australia's security is within Asia. Not from Asia, but "within" Asia.
You were listening to an interview with John Shipton – the Chief-Executive Officer of the WikiLeaks Party in Australia. That was part 2 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. And as always I wish you the best, wherever in the world you may be.
7 February, 11:06
American Insult to WWII Monument a Sign of Ignorance and Demonization of Russia
US broadcaster CNN, which for all intents and purposes has been leading the anti-Russia US propaganda effort to denigrate and attempt to take away Russia's prestige as the Russian Federation hosts the Olympic Games in Sochi is apparently stopping at nothing in their effort to insult Russia and the Russian people.
The latest offending remarks came in a "list" of the world's ugliest monuments and concerns the Courage Monument at the Brest Hero-Fortress Complex in the Republic of Belarus.
The objective of such egregious comments is clear, as is the bad taste, and indignation over the blasphemous remarks is also completely understandable but what may be hard for Russians and the international audience to understand is the psychology of the American people and their own lack of any normal respect or indignation over such offensive remarks.
Quite frankly the pathetic ignorant American propaganda effort to demonize Russia is something that shows that they are to be pitied and points to the lack of intelligence prevalent in their mindless society.
CNN has in fact apologized for the listing, giving a glib reasoning but has not removed the proud and heroic monument from its ridiculous list showing the recalcitrant and transparently obtuse endemic American penchant for unapologetically "sticking to their guns" even when what they are doing is offensive and has been proven to be wrong and in this case absolutely callously ignorant.
The reaction to the "listing" has been almost completely united against the broadcaster across the board with bloggers condemning CNN for their "bile" and "ignorance," the Head of the Russian Presidential Human Rights Council Mikhail Fedotov saying it was an inappropriate joke and that such things cannot be joked about, the administration of the Brest Hero-Fortress complex saying the listing was blasphemy and demanding CNN officially apologize and the even the Moscow Helsinki Group's head Lyudmila Alexeyeva saying that the monument is one to heroes whom we cherish greatly and that she was sorry it is seen this way.
CNN should remove the listing and apologize to every country on it but that is not the American way. They are recalcitrant in their own self-propagated endemic exceptionalism which is such an integral part of American society that perhaps it cannot be removed without killing the patient and they will certainly never sincerely apologize.
Having been raised and educated from elementary school to the university level in the US and in fact being an educator myself for almost two decades I can say with utmost certainty that the American educational system and the US media promotes myths, institutionally implements omissions and spreads falsehoods about the Great Patriotic War, known in the West as World War II. Hence it is normal for the populace to see their broadcasters insulting monuments to WWII heroes in other countries. But this is not the sole reason and I will get into that in a minute.
To hide US collusion with the Nazis, even after the war when over 40,000 of them were given refuge in the US, and to glorify their own small effort in the war, Americans and many countries in the West are taught and continue to believe that it was the US and its "allies" that won World War II on the Western Front. Nowhere do American historical textbooks (and if I am wrong and some have been updated please e-mail me) fairly portray the effort of the USSR in winning the war on the Eastern Front. For it was won on the Eastern Front, the West's D-Day was for all intents and purposes a mopping up operation on the Western Front and mere support for the Soviet Forces, I would boldly state with the historical record on my side and the numbers clearly support and prove this point.
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) lost more than 28 million people in their heroic effort to rid the world of the nazi [sic] scourge and blood flowed all over its territory. In contrast the US lost about 400 thousand which is about how many Italy lost and less than half of what Yugoslavia lost but is still worthy of mentioning, but to say they won the war is an egregious lie and historical revisionism. Of which the US is clearly unapologetically guilty but which follows the endemic US belief that for some reason their lives are worth more than the lives of others. This belief is founded on their own exceptionalism, the genocidal nature of the basis of the “American” state, their endemic racism and their long history of enslavement and exploitation of other peoples.
Another key reason why Americans can be so callous as to ignorantly insult monuments to heroes who defeated the nazi scourge is that for Americans war is an abstraction, something that happens to others, in faraway lands and to strange and "foreign" people. And this fact can be no more clearer than the American outcry when "American boys" start coming home in body bags or beautifully flag covered coffins. Rarely if ever is there an outcry if some poor Afghan family is droned into oblivion, this on the other hand is seen as normal.
Americans have never faced and enemy on "their" territory (other than fighting the French, English and Spanish for stolen Indian lands) and they have never seen their cities destroyed, or their neighbors butchered, or their daughters raped, or their people slaughtered. Blood has never flown on their territory as it did in Belarus and Russia and all of Europe and as it is flowing in Iraq and Afghanistan and as it has flowed in all of the other places where the US has committed it "sanitary" remote "humanitarian" wars such as Yugoslavia, Serbia, Libya and the over 70 other countries the US has destroyed.
Yes there is a complete disconnect in America, for them war is something that they wage from bunkers in California, from hundreds of miles away, using robotic drones where there is not even a real pilot involved in the process. No real witness to the murder and bloodshed they are carrying out and absolutely no risk to themselves.
Which is why 9/11 was such a shock for Americans that even to this day they refuse to believe that it was their own government who committed or was complicit in the "events" of that fateful day.
The world has looked away from the fact that America is a country founded by invaders who stole the lands and committed genocide on the peaceful Indian Nations that called it their home for thousands of years. "America" is a stolen country founded on the blood of over 400 million Indian lives, so their callousness towards other peoples is understandable and their disregard for the lives of the people they eradicate in their “humanitarian” wars is also understandable. But that does not make anything about it right or justifiable.
"Americans" have never had to fight for or defend their homeland, on the contrary the ancestors of "Americans" cowardly fled their own homelands and committed genocide to steal a new one. So it is understandable that the ancestors of British filth and genocidal maniacs are taught to ignore and even glorify the deeds of their forefathers who built a country on blood and used slaves to do it. But that also does not make it right.
America is a nation that feeds on and glorifies violence and death and destruction, even from the cartoons children watch from the earliest of ages, so it is also understandable why they can denigrate a monument to heroes who died and gave their lives to fight the nazi scourge. One might say that the nazis and their racist genocidal war of extermination is much closer to American history than any American is comfortable admitting. Just change the names and the era around a little bit and the situations are the same.
As for monuments I personally think Mount Rushmore is an abomination, the complete defacement of a mountain on land where the Indians put up one of their last and most heroic fights. Completely inappropriate and historically egregious, but of course a sign of the "victors."
As for other American monuments in my personal opinion the Washington Monument is completely lacking in any creative, artistic or appealing esthetics, a boring overbearing obelisk polluting the sky, but again that is my opinion. The Statue of Liberty on the other hand is quite appealing but that was a gift from the French. The St. Louis arch is also not much of a wonder and the stench inside is enough to make the eyes water and the most memorable thing about being inside of it, I could go on but I won’t. I would not want the Americans to demand I apologize. Which I will do now in advance as I am sure "Americans" are sorry for committing genocide on my people. I am sorry the designers of your monuments were so austere and lacking in creativity. As for your monuments to those killed in your wars I will not have the bad taste to denigrate them, but perhaps you do not care America, after all you built new buildings on the site where 3,000 of your own countrymen died.
The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached email@example.com.
7 February, 20:00
Native Americans to Stop Keystone Pipeline
It is an issue that has galvanized Native Americans, environmentalists, activists and even the Green Party and is not one that is going to go away as conveniently as the Obama Administration hopes it will. The Trans Canada Keystone XL (Export Limited) Pipeline, which will destroy and poison huge swathes of Indian lands and irreversibly pollute large parts of Alberta, Canada and the United States all the way to the Gulf of Mexico should also be galvanizing Canadians but they are for the large part silent. Will Obama and Washington politicians beholden to corporate and big oil interests do the right thing and say no to the pipeline? Not likely.
The effects of oil exploitation from the tars sands is already being felt and things are only getting worse for the Native Americans. People are dying women are having miscarriages and the people cannot farm or even find clean drinking water. What is left of the once great and proud nations and tribes of North America are again fighting for their very survival as the Earth around them is being destroyed.
According to Robert Free, an Indian rights activist and a member of Tewa and Naua Nations in an interview with the Voice of Russia ”They can’t drink that water that was from the lake of Athabasca or Peace River because upstream is the tar sands of Alberta that is polluting all that beautiful area. So, they can’t even eat the fish, they are having miscarriages and nothing is being done for that.”
So oil company sponsored environmental reports saying the Keystone Pipeline is safe are a laughable farce when the reality is that they are already killing thousands and destroying water supplies and lands that the Indians, and all of us, depend on for existence.
Native Americans Rise Up
The Indians of the seven tribes of the Lakota Nation and tribes from Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Oregon, as well as dozens of other organizations and Indian Nations are preparing to stop the construction of the pipeline.
In a statement released by the organizations Honor the Earth, Owe Aku, Protect the Sacred and the Oglala Sioux Nation the Native Americans make their position clear and it is one that concerns their very survival as the project will for the most part destroy Indian Lands and violates existing treaties.
The statement reads in part: “The Oglala Lakota Nation has taken leadership by saying “NO” to the Keystone XL Pipeline. They have done what is right for the land, for their people, who, from grassroots organizers like Owe Aku and Protect the Sacred have called on their leaders to stand and protect their sacred lands. And they have: KXL will NOT cross their treaty territory, which extends past the reservation boundaries. Their horses are ready. So are ours. We stand with the Lakota Nation, we stand on the side of protecting sacred water, we stand for Indigenous land-based lifeways which will NOT be corrupted by a hazardous, toxic pipeline. WE ALL NEED TO STAND WITH THEM.”
“On Friday, January 27th, the State Department issued its Environmental Impact Statement on the Keystone XL Pipeline. President Obama said that he won’t approve the pipeline if it increases carbon emissions. The report was drafted in coordination with consultants who have worked for TransCanada — the company seeking to build the pipeline. Jack Gerard, the head of the American Petroleum Institute, was briefed by “sources within the administration” on the timing and content of the report before its release, and was pleased to say that it will not impact the environment.”
At the heart of the debate is that the pipeline violates treaties signed with the Indians. According to the statement the Lakota Nation is a sovereign governmental body which is united against the pipeline, and “the United States needs to honor treaty rights by denying the pipeline.”The US Government is a serial violator of treaties, not only with the Indian Nations but also on the international level and also believes itself to be above international law so this call will most likely be scoffed at by Washington and any gains made by the Indians will have to come at a heavy price.
The statement cites a real and proven conflict of interest with yet another “environmental study” sanctioned by oil companies to further their own ends. Independent sources support the position of the Native Americans that: “the pipeline will increase carbon emissions and cause grave and irreversible environmental harm globally.”
Regardless of any study the pipeline will impact Indian Lands and this is entirely their decision under law. However the recalcitrant corporate controlled US Government will no doubt do everything to get its own way. False environmental reports are nothing to a government who will murder, attack countries and destroy millions for oil, resources and corporate gain.
The statement by the Indians underlines the responsibility of the native people to protect Mother Earth, says that they will not allow the pipeline to cross treaty areas and that they will defend their lives and our mother Earth, and calls on Barack Obama to do the same. However it is a call on deaf ears as Obama has proven by his record that he is an instrument of the corporations, has no respect for treaties or international law and at the end of the day will do as he pleases. Asking a man who laughs it up and takes selfies at the funeral of one of the last great leaders of bygone age is like asking a New York cop not to write you a ticket or a Guantanamo interrogator not to torture you.
The Green Party says that the bi-partisan rhetoric of Washington politicians about energy independence is completely without basis and the final destination of the pipeline, at major shipping ports in the gulf of Mexico, only proves that the oil is destined for export to foreign markets and thus will enrich the oil companies.
According to the site Green Party Watch Darryl L.C. Moch, the co-chair of the Green Party of the US said that: “President Obama is standing at a crossroads right now. He can say no to the Keystone XL pipeline and prove that his administration is serious about reducing production and consumption of fossil fuels. Or he can satisfy Big Oil and major investors by okaying the pipeline’s conveyance of dirty, dangerous tar-sands crude oil from Canada across the US”.
I would say the Green Party’s pleas will also fall on deaf ears as the US is ready to destroy and poison trillions of gallons of un-renewable fresh water in their bid to spread the practice of fracking and again Obama has proven he is an instrument of corporations and has done nothing to lessen dependence on fossil fuels and it can be almost said to be a given that he will not. Like his Nobel Peace Prize it is not an issue that particularly means or matters to him at all.
The Green Party goes on to state on their site: “The Green Party has strongly opposed the pipeline and is urging the Secretary of State John Kerry and the State Dept., as well as other agencies, to reject it.”
“The goal of domestic ‘energy independence’ is a distraction from the real goal - ending subsidies for fossil fuels and averting a global climate catastrophe in the coming decades,” said Kate Culver, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States.
“The bipartisan rhetoric of energy dependence proves that Democrats and Republicans are too beholden to corporate contributions and lobbyists’ influence to effectively deal with the climate crisis. This is why we call the Green Party an imperative for the 21st century,” added Audrey Clement, co-chair of the Green Party’s Eco-Action Committee
“The development of the tar-sands oil fields in Alberta, Canada, is one of several energy-industry projects that must be halted. Others include fracking, mountaintop detonation mining, offshore drilling in U.S. coastal waters, and “clean coal.” The Elk River chemical spill on Jan. 9, which left 300,000 West Virginians without drinkable or usable water, proved “clean coal” to be a public-relations myth. The spilled chemical was a foam used to wash coal and remove polluting impurities.”
Battle Lines Are Drawn
Writer Jorge Barrera at Aboriginal Peoples Television Network (APTN) National News writes that the project will now go into a final phase which focuses on whether Keystone XL serves the US national interest and that at least eight agencies will have input on the outcome, including the Defense Department, the Department of Justice, Interior, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security and the Environmental Protection Agency.
He wrote that the Lakota Nation has formed projects called “Shielding the People” and “Moccasins on the Ground” to stop the pipeline. “It will band all Lakota to live together and you can’t cross a living area if it’s occupied,” said Greg Grey Cloud, of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. “If it does get approved we aim to stop it.”
Gary Dorr, from the Nez Perce Tribe in Idaho, which has already used its treaty rights to block the transport of so-called megaloads of mining equipment headed to Alberta’s tar sands said the following: “It will be obvious, it will be concrete, and I think once it starts and they start building you will start to see the momentum and the force of the tribal people…it is an epic project, it will have an epic response from the tribal people. The tar sands is already affecting the people (for Fort Chipewyan in Alberta), climate change is already obvious. To facilitate that is not something the Native people of the US are going to do. We are not going to sit idly by and let it happen.”
The pipeline has been called the ‘black snake’ in reference to prophecies
APTN reports that the Oglala Sioux Tribe passed a resolution banning TransCanada and former Assembly of First Nations chief Phil Fontaine, who was a turncoat hired to deal with First Nations opposition, from entering its territory.
According to APTN the Lakota, Dakota and Nakota make up the Lakota Nation which includes the tribes of Rosebud, Oglala and the Cheyenne Indian reservation, the Yankton Sioux Tribe, Standing Rock, Flandreau Sioux Tribe and the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe.
Sadly and the record has shown, the Obama Administration and the US Government are completely under the control of the corporations and given the fact that they are willing to commit crimes against humanity, start wars of aggression and destroy entire countries for the sake of profiting from resources, there is little doubt that American Indians and a few Greens will be able to stop them.
The invaders killed over 400 million Indigenous People in the Americas and continue to profit from resources that belong to the Indians. When they need to they just pass “laws” and “treaties” or declare the Indians not to be human. As Mohawk Elder Kahandinetha Horn told the Voice of Russia: “They passed this law, that declared us non-persons, they take our Indian Trust Fund and they use it to build Canada and now the trust fund is maybe a hundred trillion.”
Yet: “We lack communications and it is very hard for us to contact people around the world to support us because I think people would support us because we are trying to save the environment. That is what we are trying to do. We are here and we are surviving for a reason and that is to be the caregivers of our Mother Earth.”
Will Obama and big oil take care of Mother Earth? Don’t count on it.
The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached firstname.lastname@example.org.
9 February, 01:52
Western Envy of Russia and Slavs Boundless
Through all of his work with WikiLeaks Julian Assange has been instrumental in bringing about a revolution in the way that people perceive the world and has made it possible to see actuality better than was previously possible. After over three years in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London Mr. Assange may be showing the wear of his confinement although he is well and welcoming to his guests. In an interview with the Voice of Russia John Shipton spoke about the conditions of Mr. Assange’s confined life and despite the admirable treatment of Mr. Assange by the Ecuadorians, revealed that Mr. Assange has not been outside for over three years and is forced to use special lamps and take vitamin D because of a lack of elementary sunshine. With regard to Russia and the asylum granted to Edward Snowden, Mr. Shipton praised the Russian authorities and President Putin and said the envy of Russia and the Slavic civilization by the West may be behind their continued anti-Russian stance.
This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with John Shipton, the Chief Executive Officer of the Wikileaks Party in Australia. This is part three of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. This interview is in progress.
Robles: Speaking about politicians now. These recordings that you said came out, were they used to try to smear you or demonize you; were they used by politicians, or by the security services, or why do you think they were released, and can you talk about those?
Shipton:Well they were just excerpts from conversations, and they were just to smear, yes, of course, yes, yes, whipped together by, I don’t know, somebody who doesn’t like me. And I don’t know how they got hold of the conversations but there they were
Robles: Did they try to prosecute you or anything, with those recordings, or with words taken out of the context?
Shipton:No, no. Just the only thing that happened was that they were put up on the Net, and recomposed - the wording recomposed - to make it appear that I was saying, you know saying… sentences taken out of context, to make it appear that I was doing something that I wasn’t doing.
Robles: I see. I’ve had that problem myself, actually, one phrase taken out of context, a famous incident where I said a certain person’s days were numbered in Russia, if the person continued behaving that way. And they took out ‘days were numbered’ as if I was threatening his life or something. They are very good at that.
Shipton:Yes, it can be quite dangerous, that sort of thing.
Robles: Yeah, and they are quite good at it.
Shipton:Yeah, I’d just like to say inclosing, that Julian has brought about a revolution in the perception of the world and brought the capacity to see actuality closer than we ever had before.
And I’d like to thank you John. The reason why I asked your name is because I had heard your voice so much, and read your name. When you told me your name I realized I had read it, so I am a fan for a few years. So congratulations and keep up the good work.
Robles: You are a fan of mine. Wow, thank you, sir. I’m a fan of yours and of Julian’s and WikiLeaks and all of you guys. I usually ask people that might have contact with Julian – how is he? Because I saw him, he gave an interview, he was commenting on Obama’s empty NSA speech and he looked a little worse for wear with the beard and everything. How is Julian?
Shipton: It must be getting quite wearing. I saw Julian at Christmas time, and he was well and welcoming and warm. We are going over in April, so I can let you know after April.
Robles: That would be great. I’m very honored that you heard my voice before. Listen, one more thing, and I think this is very important and people are not focusing on it and I think they deserve a huge round of applause, maybe a standing ovation. I’m referring to the authorities of the small country of Ecuador – who, they in their little embassy in London are single-handedly making a stand against the empire. What can you say about Ecuadorian authorities? Would you like to say anything to them?
Shipton:The Ecuadorians are people who have enormous courage and their treatment of Julian is just admirable. And their treatment of Julian is just admirable, and their treatment of me when I go there is welcoming and warm. I can’t imagine a finer group of people, they are just, you know, they’re very, very strong and warm and intelligent people.
Robles: Wow. What would you say about the Russian authorities and their asylum for Edward Snowden. Were you surprised by that?
Shipton:No, I admire President Putin’s colorful turn of phrase when the matter came up. And I also think he is probably correct: ‘It is like shaving a pig, in there’s not much hair and a lot of noise’.
So, and I think that the Russians acted well, and I think gathered support from ordinary people all around the world for their actions, which of course the United States and the United Kingdom are doing their best to undo this admiration with publications like Luke Harding’s book which goes to say idiotic statements like: ‘a captive of the FSB’. I mean it’s just absurd, what he’s a captive of is his native country’s determination to lock him up.
Robles: Right, right. He would have never been here if it wasn’t for the US revoking his passport when he was in Sheremetyevo airport. And the statement you said about, the quote by President Putin – ‘it was like shaving a pig’, was right on, because Edward Snowden was never Russia’s agent. He didn’t come here to provide the Russian intelligence services with all of the NSA’s secrets. So really, I mean, Russia didn’t ask for him to come here.
So, Edward Snowden,he had no relationship with Russia, he is obviously an American patriot and he would like to return there. So I was quite proud of the Russian government for taking that kind of a stance on an issue such as this.
Shipton:Me too, me too. Particularly as the envy of Russia and the Slavic civilization by the west seems to be boundless at the present time though. I did admire, I think it was Schröder, who was the Chancellor of Germany, and his closeness to Russia in building the pipeline from the north. I thought that would bring in integrationofRussia and the European economy which would bring further development of peaceful congress.
Robles: Well, and stability and better conditions for all of Europe and the people I think. Anyway if you’d like to finish up – here is your chance for the big knock-out punch if you would?
Shipton:No, I would. My hope is that, my daily hope is that Julian will be out of the embassy pretty soon and able to move around freely, that’s my only concern. That’s what we work for: the just treatment of Julian Assange- he can move about freely in the world.
Robles: Yes. Can I ask you a question now? Maybe this is a stupid question but I haven’t heard anything in any reports or seen anything but, maybe it is a silly question, but is Julian … can he go outside anywhere? Is there like an internal courtyard in the embassy or something where he can at least see the sunshine sometimes?
Shipton:No. The sunshine is artificial. That’s a, a UV-light and an infrared light, and a vitamin D tablet.
Robles: So he hasn’t even been outside for over three years?
Shipton:No, since being at the embassy, he hasn’t been outside.
Robles: Oh my god, that is worse than being in prison.
Shipton:Very, very similarly except the Ecuadorians do everything they can to make the suffering bearable.
Robles: I see. Well thank God for the Ecuadorians I guess, right. OK. Ok Sir, thank you Sir, it was an honor really, thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Robles: Dosvidanya. Bye bye.
You were listening to an interview with John Shipton, the Chief Executive Officer of the Wikileaks Party in Australia. That is part three of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.
9 February, 19:26
Nuland instructed US ambassador on Makeup of Ukrainian Government
Last December Victoria Nuland returned to the US after handing out cookies and doughnuts to what can only be described as insurgents in Kiev’s Maidan Square and then returned to give a briefing in Washington to the US-Ukraine Foundation, during which she stated that the US has already “invested” $5 billion dollars in order to bring US “democracy” to Ukraine.
The speech was remarkable in that Ms. Nuland, despite all of the “democratic” and “humanitarian” rhetoric admitted that the US was attempting to overthrow the government. Her recently leaked conversation with the US Ambassador is also historically unprecedented in that it is the first time that proof of plans to overthrow and install a government have been released before the fact. NATO specialist and Voice of Russia regular Rick Rozoff spoke about the implications of the leaked conversation and what it really means in an interview.
Hello. This is John Robles, I'm speaking to Mr. Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. He is also a regular contributor to the Voice of Russia and a geopolitical specialist.
Robles: Again, you were ahead of the curve and ahead of the times here. I'm talking about “Rocky Balboa and the new government lineup for Ukraine” and I'd like to get your comments on that and if possible Victoria Nuland's “staged conversation” or what was it? What is going on over there?
Rozoff: It is yet to be determined the exact nature of the conversation, what appears to be indisputable however, is that the US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian affairs Victoria Nuland, had a conversation (the real question is when?) but had a recent conversation with US Ambassador to Ukraine in Kiev, one Geoffrey Pyatt, and that during this discussion they very “matter of factly”, almost “mundanely” discussed who would comprise, who would constitute a new Ukrainian government, presumably post Yanukovich or at least transitionally.
There is some speculation that the conversation may have been held not during Ms. Nuland's current stay in Ukraine, she arrived there on the 6th of February, but perhaps earlier on January,25th. But whenever the conversation occurred what is remarkable about it is the absolute cynicism, the notion that the Secretary of State can determine who is the most likely person to be Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister of a sovereign nation, Ukraine.
Robles: So the conversation was with the ambassador to Ukraine. What were they discussing?
Rozoff: There is no room for opinion, it was blunt and irrefutable what they were discussing which was: what the future Ukrainian Government would look like.
And what Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US envoy Geoffrey Pyatt were talking about which is, determining among themselves, which of the three major opposition leaders would occupy key posts within the government, a future government to the US' liking and perhaps of the US' design, and which would remain outside the government as an opposition figure. But it was not a matter of expressing opinions on this, the conversation which I have heard and as many of your listeners have, is clearly one where the stage director is giving cues to the actors.
And it is understood that Arseny Yatsenyuk, the head of the Fatherland Party, would become presumably a Prime Minister either under a Yanukovich government (a unity government if you will) or post Yanukovich but that Vitaly Klitschko and the head of Svoboda Party would remain outside the government. That is what Nuland was (I don't even think so much recommending but) dictating.
Robles: They were planning the makeup of the Ukrainian Government amongst themselves?
Rozoff: I would even say the word “ordering” the composition of the next government would not have been an overstatement.
By the way the US ambassador clearly was taking his orders from Nuland. Nuland as Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and he being an ambassador of course works for the State Department and works for her.
We have to remember of course Victoria Nuland was State Department Spokesman under John Kerry's predecessor Hillary Clinton and was herself under the George W. Bush Administration, the US permanent representative which is, say, an ambassador to NATO.
So she is somebody in a pretty high level operative and is focused on Eurasia but most particularly former Soviet space and it is to be assumed that Mr. Pyatt, about whom I know nothing else, that is he is the Ambassador to Ukraine, may very well be someone comparable to Michael McFaul who is now leaving the ambassadorial post in Moscow. Somebody who you were the first to recognize at his proper value when he arrived, as somebody with no diplomatic experience or training, but someone who is very adept at sponsoring so called “color revolutions” and I assume Mr. Pyatt in Kiev is somebody of the same stripe.
Robles: I think Ukraine is the “color revolution playground” for the US State Department, I don't know. Do you think this may have been a staged leak to try to show that there is no real support for Klitschko, because maybe that was hurting his chances in Ukraine. Maybe he was even possibly facing treason charges or something if he was seen as being their puppet in Ukraine?
Rozoff: That is a technique that has been employed before: where you give the impression of putting distance between yourself and a client so as to boost the independent credentials of that client, I can't rule out the possibility that that is true.
Robles: Was Russia mentioned in this conversation at all?
Rozoff: Yes. Nuland indicated to her underling (I suppose we'd have to say) Pyatt the US Ambassador in Ukraine when she made the infamous statement about the “expletive”, of telling the European Union what to do, I assume your listeners are going to know what I'm talking about, the indication was that she could count on support from the United Nations, that is from Ban Ki-Moon and a Dutch diplomat working for the UN, I'm going to pronounce it in an English manner, Robert Serry, that they would come in and in the words of Nuland “glue this together” or words to that effect, and that the EU presumably (she wasn't quite explicit about this) wasn't moving fast enough for political, regime change in Kiev and that she felt it was imperative that the dates, I suppose, of the color revolution be stepped up because otherwise Russia might be able to intervene and counteract, or act against some of the momentum that was building up in the streets.
So she clearly indicated this was in opposition to Russian actions and clearly implicitly in opposition to Russian interests.
Robles: I see. So she used the expletive because the EU was not moving quickly enough for her.
Rozoff: Right. These are comparatively minor tactical differences. I suppose one has to keep in mind that Nuland came back to Kiev the second time, this was the same moment she was handing out pastries and cookies to protestors in Maidan, in Independent square and elsewhere in Ukraine, so openly and one-sidedly sympathizing with anti-government protestors, protestors is a euphemistic term, I think members of an uprising, of a violent uprising, and was suckering them, was giving them aid, support, moral and material.
And she came back on February 6th to meet with this triumvirate of opposition leaders that we've talked about, Nuland met with them two days ago, yesterday, and then Catherine Ashton from the EU came in exactly the same time to meet with exactly the same three leaders.
So there is every reason to believe what Ashton and Nuland are doing now is what they have been doing all along which is acting in unison, acting in tandem.
Robles: I said before, you were ahead of the curve again. We mentioned… last time we talked about Ukraine pretty much kind of “out of the blue” Rocky Balboa or Sylvester Stallone's role, right? Can you tell our listeners about this picture that has been spread around the Internet and what is all that about?
Rozoff: I have to give you the credit. I think you first conjured up the image of Sylvester Stallone's cinema alter ego, Rocky Balboa, in referenced to Vitaly (Vladimir) Klitschko. But what in fact surfaced, today we are able to circulate it a bit, is a photograph from 2011, of Sylvester Stallone with the Klitschko brothers, altogether the five people in the photograph at least two of them are Klitschko brothers, one of them Vitaly, to announce the launching of “Rocky the Musical”, I swear to God, “Rocky the Musical!!”
Robles: Rocky the Musical?!?!
Rozoff: Rocky the Musical! Which was to have been launched, I suppose it was, in the following year 2012 and in the background the print is in German so I assume this event was staged in Germany, but it was clearly the fictional Rocky Rambo as we talked about in your program if you recollect, Sylvester Stallone composite creature, who is an anti-Russian guerrilla war fighter par excellence and Rocky 4 who wins boxing matches against Russian boxers and so forth. This is the kind of crudely crafted image that is being passed off as politics.
The third figure in this category is supposed to be somebody like Arnold Schwarzenegger. I've been trying to find a photograph of the three together, I believe one exists by the way, if some of your listeners want to try to hunt it up, of Klitschko, Stallone and Schwarzenegger together. This would be the image of politics as they are trying to pass it off to a certain sector of the Ukrainian populace, I don't think too successfully.
Robles: Is Sylvester Stallone popular in Ukraine? I don't think so.
Rozoff: I can't imagine that he is. But I think that Klitschko may very well be trying to model himself not after the real-world “Sly” Stallone but after the cinema fantasies of a combination again of Rocky and Rambo and this may be an image crafted by perhaps some overpaid but not particularly creative or innovative public relations firms that have been hired to support the “Orange Revolution Phase II”.
Robles: So, we have the US State Department now openly, now it is clear, I mean we have been talking about it but now we have evidence and it is perfectly out there, it is clear, that they are actually assigning leaders to countries. Would it be fair to characterize it like that?
Rozoff: That is exactly what it is. And it is not just number two as you made the allusion to the original so called Orange Revolution.
Robles: So, Rick, unprecedented, I think, statements, but maybe they are planted statements, I don't know. What do you think about that?
Rozoff: Again we are talking about Nuland Pyatt conversation, one never knows. But I'll say this: that the fact that Victoria Nuland apologized to the EU suggests that she is part of the game if it is a ploy, and if it is genuine she has just acknowledged that that is her voice, and that is precisely what she said, obscenity and all.
As it had been pointed out by other observers the apologies have not to be extended to the EU, the apologies, if we are in a better world, would be extended to the government and the people of Ukraine who she is attempting to ride roughshod over and to implant a US designed proxy, or equivalent government instead of that elected legally four years ago in Ukraine. So that is where the apology ought to be.
But one thing too that it is a case where perhaps it is fortunate she used the infamous four letter word she did, because as a result of it, the audio has now achieved a degree of exposure circulation, I'm sure it would not have otherwise.
Although the contents of it is starkly almost unprecedented, if we take it at face value; for the first time a major US official is explaining precisely how they institute a government change, a regime change, a coup in fact, and is boasting of it, discussing it in detail “before” the fact.
This is something wasn’t available in Iran in 1953. or Guatemala in 1954 or Iraq in 1963 or the Belgian Congo in 60s. This is something, a historical artifact, that really needs to be paid attention to.
Robles: Do you think it is possible that it is just another distractor from the Sochi Olympics?
Rozoff: The timing of it is certainly a suspect, that much I grant. And we have to maybe take the next chapter in the story which is that: a State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki (Jen I presume is short for Jennifer) refers to the fact that ostensibly/supposedly this audio tape was revealed to the world, posted on Youtube or what have you, by a Russian official, feeds right into the mounting Russophobic campaign that is being built up right now.
And as a matter of fact in the words of State Department spokesman Psaki this is “a new low”, that is a quote from her “a new low”. That is even assuming this is a case that a Russian official has released the audio tape, how he obtained it begs questioning of course, but even if that were true, to suggest something as innocuous as that is an offense to the State Department when State Department members, heads rather, like Nuland herself no less, her attitude to the Europeasn Union seems to be a a new low.
But her former boss Hillary Clinton was constantly berating Russia, saying that Russia and China have got “pay a price” for their positions on Syria, using words such as despicable and so forth to talk about those partners. The low is what the State Department practice is on an ongoing basis.
But the fact was again that it is being used, like you say on the occasion of the opening ceremony of the Winter Olympics in Sochi in Russia, suggest that this is part of yet another attempt to discredit Russia, rather than looking at the context of the discussion itself which ought to be enough to disgrace the US at least diplomatically for some.
Robles: Did anybody offer any evidence that it came from Russia or it is just they are again demonizing Russia as usual?
Rozoff: Yeah, but at a very sensitive moment when Russia is rightly the center of world attention with the opening of the Winter Olympics. And this is not at all different than, for example the fact that the US backed the Saakashivili regime and triggered a Five Day War with Russia in August 2008 exactly as the summer Olympics in Beijing were opened.
Robles: Ok, Rick, thank you very much. I really appreciate you taking the time to speak with me. Take care. Bye.
That was the end of an interview with Rick Rozoff, the owner and manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you the best wherever you may be.
10 February, 11:43
Blaming Russia is Natural in US
Recent comments of a leaked conversation between US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt in which Nuland said “F-the EU” are causing quite a resonance worldwide. During the conversation Nuland reveals US/UN/EU collusion in the overthrow of the Ukrainian Government. They openly and matter-of-factly discuss the overthrow of the elected government of Ukraine, who they are assigning to posts in the new US installed government and the use of the UN and Ban Ki-Moon as an extension of their plan and help the US “glue” their plan for Ukraine together.
Victoria Nuland is not just a simple diplomat according to Andrew Kreig a Washington based author and analyst and in an interview with the Voice of Russia he points out Ms. Nuland’s background and connections to the Bilderberg Group and chickenhawks in Washington. Her husband Robert Kagen is a long-time Bilderberg antagonist, of first the USSR and Russia, and he along with Nuland are “puppet strings” propagating war and the agenda of a secret government according to Mr. Kreig.
“For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. No President should fear public scrutiny of his programs, for from that scrutiny comes understanding and from that understanding comes support or opposition and both are necessary.” – John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Mr Andrew Kreig, he is the author of Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney and Their Masters. He is also the editor and director of the Justice Integrity Project.
Robles: Hello, sir.
Kreig: Hello, John. Good to talk to you.
Robles: It is good to talk to you. Tell us what is going on with the topic of the hour: Victoria Nuland and her comments about the EU and basically an admission that they are attempting to affect regime change in Ukraine. Who is Victoria Nuland exactly?
Kreig: Well, her formal title is US Ambassador to the European Union and that makes her one of the country's (the US) most important diplomat but it is also important to realize that she is bipartisan. So she has very strong connections with both Republicans under whom she served in the Bush/Cheney Administration as well as Democrats.
And part of this is because she is a member of the Kagan family and there is three people in that: the father, Donald Kagan and two brothers, including her husband Robert Kagan, and they are all long time antagonists of the Soviet Union and Russia.
They are very military oriented, they are extremely interested in destabilizing the former Soviet Republics and the three men were prominent, at least two of them were, in advocating for war against Iraq in the 1990s. So I guess I would just say that this is no ordinary diplomat, it is one who is capable of quite a bit of arrogance as indicated by her phone call.
Robles: Her family has connections with the Bilderberg Group (or the Bilderberg meetings) the group that meets. Can you tell us about that? Do you know anything about that?
Kreig: Well, actually I devoted part of my book Presidential Puppetry to her and her husband, so this scandal is not quite of surprise. And in terms of Bilderberg her husband Robert is an attendee of this group and briefly the Bilderberg Group is named after hotel in the Netherlands where the Rockefeller and Rothschild banking families took the lead in inviting approximately 130 prominent individuals in 1954 to the Bilderberg hotel in the Netherlands.
These were extremely prominent people handpicked by the Rockefeller and the Rothschilds to shape in secret an agenda, or at least have discussions and annual discussions.
Most recently this was in a fancy suburb of London last June and the interesting thing is that this involves through the years people at the level of royalty, the Queen of England has attended, also media executives including from the Washington Post, both the old family and the new owner Jeffrey Bezos of Amazon.com.
So you have media executives as part of the secret meeting and so by extension her husband is one of them. He is certainly not known as a billionaire but he is, what I would call, a puppet string, to use my analogy, who connects puppet masters to the puppets in government.
And of course his wife, I don't know if she is a puppet string or a puppet, but it is all something that is fundamentally is not part of the elections process, it is part of the, almost “secret government”.
Robles: Victoria Nuland, now again you said you don't know if she is a puppet string or she is a puppet herself. What do you think in your opinion? Judging from her record?
Kreig: Well it doesn't make any difference at some point, where the puppet string attaches the government, it is all the same. But you know, as Ambassador to NATO under Bush/Cheney she is clearly part of, let me be blunt, warmongering.
In fact the chapter of my book, actually it is a subchapter about her husband I labeled it: “Robert Kagan: Fearless Chicken Hawk”.
Chicken in the US is kind of a contemptuous term for a coward and hawk is a term for someone who likes wars. So a chicken hawk is someone who likes wars but doesn't want to serve in them.
And I write that there is no evidence that any of the Kagans or Nulands has ever been in military service.
Their role is to urge wars for other people's children and families hence they are very deserving of the name “chicken hawk” and just to leap, when could go into specifics but let me get to a conclusion here.
Particularly after a gaff like this where she is using profanity, she is caught trying to interfere in the running of other countries, but more than that there is an arrogance that is being displayed here.
And even if it never happened, John, in fact I wrote this in the book months ago that she and her entire family instead of being honored columnists and experts on foreign policy, what they should do is go to Veteran’s Hospitals in the US and volunteer to help the amputated, wounded veterans. That is what they should be doing and they should be looking every single day at the result of what they concocted in Iraq, in Afghanistan and they should be a long way away from any kind of phone call like this to do more damage to anyone anywhere.
Robles: I see. A lot of Russian officials like to say: “What would happen in Washington if…?” (for example what is happening in Ukraine) “… what would happen in Washington if there were massive antigovernment rallies and say, Foreign Minister Lavrov showed up, let's say, in the National Mall and started handing people cookies and biscuits, and supporting people that wanted to overthrow the US government.”
Kreig: Well, I think we know, people in the US would be outraged and they would be furious and they would be saying: “What is this?!” And we don't even have to imagine too much because that is exactly what happened during the war of 1812 when the British invaded Washington and someone wrote the Star Spangled Banner because of that Francis Scott Key which is the national anthem to express the feelings of Americans about that kind of meddling.
So I actually agree that it would be quite outrages and in fact in a column I wrote on the Justice Integrity Project site today I used that same analogy to try to say a lot of these foreign affairs are very complicated and everybody is doing things in secret that do not stand the light of day. So I wanted to be clear about that. But I said we are never going to have peace or progress or move forward if we don't have some empathy. And if somebody was handing out doughnuts at the White House we would be furious.
Just a reminder, you are listening to an interview with Andrew Kreig.
Robles: Would you agree…? I know you are based in Washington in the US, I don't know if you can comment on this, but would you agree that it is beneficial for, let's say the Neo-Cons, the chicken hawks, the military industrial complex, to destroy countries such as Ukraine, to cause instability like in Libya, in Iraq in the Middle East, in Kosovo, in Serbia, in Yugoslavia etc. I mean there is about over 70 countries the US government has destroyed in the last 30 or 40 years. Would you agree that that is profitable for the US and actually development and peace are not?
Kreig: Well, I think the way you formulated it, John, is too extreme for me. For example what is good for the average American, is different from somebody who is a war contractor or making leveraged investments that are contingent on a war.
So there is many different players. I do think that the warmongers have undo influence and hurt the world and certainly some of the results in many of the places that you've described, it is obvious that the results, are what you've described, but I am somehow hesitant to get to the blanket area but I certainly think it is something that Americans, particularly in Washington need to study.
I can say that I'm on many lists of study groups in Washington that focus on these countries but they seldom take a look at the important issues as you've described it.
Usually it is well-funded groups that look at the same countries and it is all about; democracy, humanitarianism and stuff like that, and I think that is just, frankly, outrageous because it is totally one-sided and if you look at what some of these democracy movements end up with, clearly there needs to be much more of a debate along those lines that you’ve...
Robles: Would you agree that for a lot of these groups the word democracy just means subservience to US policy; pliable, usable…?
Kreig: Yes. Again that is somewhat of a more extreme formulation. I addressed a lot of this is somewhat more subtle terms in my book and one of the ways I mentioned it is I said: “the idea of having people like Samantha Powers, Susan Rice and a lot of these diplomats, many of whom are female and minority race, and all of them talk about democracy, is that it becomes much easier to have wars if you have female people spouting humanitarian rhetoric and I think it is very important to say “war is just so awful that we can't just cloak it as a nice thing for democracy”. So basically I'm agreeing with you but not quite in the language.
Robles: Well, I don't like to mince words, maybe sometimes I'm too hard, too strong and too direct on some of this stuff, but that is… maybe my style, I don’t know but, what I see in Ukraine is there are neo-nazis who are going around saying: “We don't want an expletive for Jews, an expletive for blacks and an expletive for Russians running our country”. These are the Bandera people, I mean they are neo-nazi thugs.
Klitschko is a guy with an IQ of maybe 85 or something, he is not a president, he is not even a politician. He would be a puppet, he would be just the marionette for the US. I think that is why Nuland and the State Department are so upset. Their plan didn't work, I don’t know.
Kreig: The conversation is very manipulative and one aspect of this, I think is worth at least a brief mention, is the whole concept of surveillance. Because one of the Public Relations ways to get out of an embarrassing situation is to attack and the State Department is already doing that saying that this was a private conversation, it is horrible that it should be leaked.
But of course I guess I would say just to be contrary to that is: here you have exposure that the US government is monitoring all kinds of conversations, in fact is the world leader in doing it because of the Internet and satellite capabilities.
So the act of collecting these conversations which virtually all governments do, that should be the matter for concern for the public, not whether it is made public. Because the act of collecting it gives people the power over the situation whether or not they release it.
Robles: I'm sorry, are you implying that that it was the NSA that did this or CIA or the US, or that it was that apparatus?
Kreig: Well No, no I think…
Robles: Well, what do you think about them demonizing Russia all of a sudden? It is like the eternal-perpetual distracting move: “Oh, look, over here Russia! Every time they do something illegal or egregious or scandalous it is like “Oh, look at Russia! Oh! It’s Russia's fault”.
Kreig: That is natural, that is the game. They look at it as game.
Robles: I think it is disgusting and egregious and despicable and slimy, I'm sorry! Ok, but that is my language. I get tired of it, I mean all the stuff with the Olympics and everything else.
Kreig: Look, many Americans are trained and groomed to find that a popular appeal and whether it is true and accurate or not, the reality is that they become more popular when they say it.
You were listening to part 1 of an interview with Andrew Kreig, the author of Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney and their Masters. You can find part 2 of this interview on our website voiceofrussia.com in the near future. Thank you very much for listening and I wish you the best.
10 February, 15:04
Mass Protests Planned Against NSA Mass Surveillence
Worldwide protests against NSA led mass surveillance are planned for November 11, 2014 in a protest billed by organizers as “The Day We Fight Back”. Although the protest actions are largely US based and even the countdown clock is timed to US Pacific Time, the on-line activities and protests will affect internet users worldwide as many of the world’s top sites are joining in.
The planned activities on the cyber front are being led by the Internet Defense League, a group of which led the Internet blackout that effectively killed the US Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act, attempts by the US Government to bring the Internet under complete censorship and control. Those protests were successful in permanently shelving SOPA and PIPA and now the hope of the organizers is that tomorrow’s actions will reign in the NSA, and by default its spying network FVEY, and shelve a new bill sponsored by US Senator Dianne Feinstein called the FISA Improvements Act, as well as garner support for what is called the USA Freedom Act and finally enact protections for non-Americans.
In a statement released by the Internet Defense League website the organizers say the new protests are planned in memory of Mr. Aaron Swartz, the creator of RSS technology, one of the founders of Reddit and an Internet activist who was persecuted for sharing taxpayer funded research material from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) JSTOR (Journal Storage) system.
Although the research material and academic journals downloaded by Mr. Swartz were not secret in nature and publically funded, over-zealous prosecutors sought to force Mr. Swartz to pay a $1 million fine and serve 35 years in prison. Mr. Swartz, his lawyers and supporters fought the US Government’s case to no avail and after his second plea bargain offer was denied by prosecutors who sought to make him pay the maximum penalty, Mr. Swartz was found dead in his New York apartment having been persecuted into apparently committing suicide.
Aaron Swartz was instrumental in organizing the anti-SOPA/PIPA protests, which many believe was the real reason the US Government persecuted him on the trumped up charges for downloading academic journals. The US was desperate to prosecute high-profile Hacktivists and in the end, as with many of their heavy handed persecutions, they turned him into a legend and a martyr for the cause of internet freedom and the right of the people to benefit from academic work that they in fact pay for but are not allowed to openly see or use.
The participants of the Day We Fight Back protests so far include such respected organizations as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the ACLU, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, Reddit, Mozilla and Amnesty International but it is yet to be seen if giants like Google and Wikipedia will be taking part, as of publication it is still not clear.
Two years ago the internet blackout against SOPA/PIPA included the participation of Wikipedia and Google, whose support was instrumental in bringing an end to proposed SOPA/PIPA legislation. That protest, according to SOPA Strike dot com also included the blacking out of sites such as Reddit, Wordpress, Tumblr, Drudge Report, Wired and over 115,000 other sites. The unprecedented resistance to SOPA/PIPA also gathered 10 million signatures on a petition, over 8 million phone calls to legislators, more than 4 million e-mails sent and caused over 1 billion users to be blocked from websites.
The organizers of the February 11th protests say there will not be an internet blackout but that banners will be spread all over the internet and on prominent sites calling for people in the US to call or e-mail the US Congress in protest of the FISA Improvements Act and in support of the USA Freedom Act. Internationally the organizers are asking for supporters of internet freedom to urge their proper authorities to institute privacy protections for Internet users.
In the statement released on the day we fight back dot org, organizers say: “Together we will push back against powers that seek to observe, collect, and analyze our every digital action. Together, we will make it clear that such behavior is not compatible with democratic governance. Together, if we persist, we will win this fight.”
So far there are no calls for international targeting of NSA partners by the organizers and there is no mention of protesting the intelligence organizations which make up the FVEY signals intelligence alliance which are vital for the NSA’s global reach. Realistically for the world’s Internet users protests should also include NSA partners and the signals intelligence organizations of the NSA’s FVEY alliance as well. These include Australia’s Australian Signals Directorate (ASD), Canada’s Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC), New Zealand’s Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) and the United Kingdom’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).
On a global level protesting the NSA and instituting or opposing US legislation means little or nothing when the NSA’s foreign subordinates are pulling most of the weight for the NSA on the international arena. However this may also point to the NSA’s subordination of its FVEY partners. Tellingly such intrusive surveillance as is being carried by FVEY on its own citizens is not being protested in other countries such as Russia, where the internet remains largely as free as it was at the time of its inception.
11 February, 23:46
9-11 Was an Inside Job Says FBI Informant
The Occupy Movement was poorly organized and had too many causes which fractured it and caused it fall apart. In the spring of 2014 there are plans for a revival of the Occupy Movement and according to one of the organizers of the Anonymous Million Mask March, Christine Ann Sands, the focus needs to be on the root of all of the evil and the heart of the corruption, namely the corporate bankers who control the media, the government and are promoting and getting rich off of the endless wars that the US has been waging.
According to Ms. Sands the people are beginning to wake up and realize that, no matter how horrible the realization is, 9-11 was an inside job and those responsible must be brought to justice.
Hello, this is John Robles. I am speaking with Ms. Christine Ann Sands. She is the manager and domain owner of www.MillionMaskMarch.org and a supporter of the Anonymous hacktivist collective, the Occupy movement, WikiLeaks, and the Pirate Party.
Robles: Hello, Christine. How are you this afternoon or evening over there?
Sands: Hi, John. I’m very well, thank you. How are you?
Robles: I’m pretty good, nice to be speaking with you. Can you give our listeners an update about what is going on with Anonymous, with you, with the Anon Mobile, with WikiLeaks? I understand you are down there in Nashville.
Sands: Yes, that is right. I’m in Nashville. I’ve been here since about Thanksgiving. And I’ll be here until the end of March and my plan is to then go back up to Washington DC and become part of the Occupy DC movement.
Robles: When are they planning to occupy DC again?
Sands: There are a lot of pages popping up on Facebook now and on the Internet.
So, some say May, 1st, other say 4-4-14, so my plan is to get there in the beginning of April and to go with the 4-4-14.
Now this one in particular which was a Facebook page Occupy DC was forwarded to me by a member of Anonymous and they say that they are not associated with any groups or organizations because we don’t want it to be just one group, or one association that says they are doing it.
I mean, occupying DC will have to be a collective action by a lot of people like Oath Keepers and Anonymous and Occupy and all sorts of activists.
Robles: What differences do you think are going to be implemented in the Occupy movement if there is to be a revival? What mistakes were made the first time around?
Sands: In my view the first thing is to get the timing right. You have got to do this early enough in the spring, so I think that is going to be really good.
We have a lot of people coming out on November, 5 for the Million Mask March, one great day for Anonymous.
That is not really the time to look at an occupation because it is right before the winter. So coming out in spring is good.
And I believe that an occupation takes momentum. So there is definitely been a buildup of concern in mainstream America as 75% of Americans don’t trust the government, now with the Snowden revelations….
I mean, this is a growing movement, there is a buildup, the time is right, the season is ready.
So, in terms of some of the mistakes, now you can just look at it as growing pains more than mistakes in my view, you know, so...
Robles: Some people say that the occupiers were kind of lackadaisical, I mean in their attitude, “oh let’s sit up in library, let’s sit around and talk about peace and stuff”’.
Sands: Well, I can tell you that: I was part of the Occupy Los Angeles movement and there was a guy named Mario Britto. He was big with the Unions. Eventually he got ousted by the movement.
So when I was there some people would just accuse it of being a bunch of homeless and hippies. And it is true that you can’t have just a bunch of homeless hippies there saying something is going to happen, it is going to take something like what happened on the streets of Egypt with its over 30 million, or Brazil, or Turkey, or Spain. It is going to take millions of people out on the streets.
So, I think the last time we spoke I mentioned how I believed that the people on the streets of Washington DC were just numb. An example of the numbness was the young man in Tunisia who burned himself alive in protest and that is what some contribute the beginning of the Arab Spring to.
We just had that in DC when government shut down and it never made the news practically. So the people… the people are numb.
But I think that if we can get the word out and make it one place, you can’t be scattered . It is nice to have Anonymous day November, 5 where there are over 450 locations, and those are growing and building, that is nice. But if you are going to have a change I think in the states (the United States) that will have to be millions of people on the streets of Washington.
What will it take to get that to happen? Historically sometimes an activist will spark something and have no idea that something would take off as big or as great as it did. So we will see what happens.
Part of the Occupy Movement when I was in Los Angeles what I was seeing – there were so many causes and so many fronts that it seemed to dull the punch. You got to get in one place really hard, if you have a million causes and a million things and a million protest things, it just gets so unorganized because there is so much to do.
So if the people for example don’t like the private bankers, the Federal Reserve, the banksters: these guys that are running organized crime through the CIA controlling both political parties, then let’s do something about the Fed. Let’s start with that.
If we are going to occupy, let’s get together against one cause and say: okay, we are going to start with this, we are going to start with the same banksters who are quashing humanity through their wars for example.
Robles: You mentioned a lot of people who are very upset about NSA spying. Do you think that might be the straw that breaks the camel’s back and galvanizes people to stand up or?
Sands: I think that people are already upset but they don’t know what to do. They feel helpless.
So I think if everyone saw and they knew: “Ok, there is one thing we are going to do. We are going to go for the jugular vein of corruption in Washington DC. For the banksters.”
If we get together in one place which has got to be Washington DC and we get together at the poisonous head of snake, the banksters, making up these false wars on terror, then we are going to have a chance at this. But it is almost like there are all these charitable organizations, and they are standing around and just catching the blood of victims. That is all they are doing.
Why stand around and just catch the blood of victims, and all your charities will just end up being plutocracies anyway.
Why stand around, catching blood all day long on these different fronts when what is really needed doing is going after the murders, the banksters.
The quick analogy is anybody who has got a leaky tub doesn’t stand there all day long and catch the water. No, he goes and finds out where the leak is.
Well we have got to get to Washington DC, it does involve the federal reserve, it does involve the private bankers who control the corporations, who control the media, they have got the judges in their back pockets.
It is like George Carlin was saying when he talked about the American dream. So you have got to attack it at its source.
If people think they have the chance to attack corruption at its source and be motivated to come out, they will. But until we see a show of people, I think, on streets like they did in these other countries (Turkey and Spain, Egypt) I don’t know what is going to happen. Because there are a lot of people who are already know, there are 2,000 books that came out already about how they killed Kennedy.
In Nashville I spoke with the son of someone who was on original investigations committee for the assassination of Martin Luther King and someone who was appointed by the government on a committee and he was convinced it was an assassination: Martin Luther King.
So we have got to stop messing with all the symptoms and go after the banksters. In the same way that if we occupy and we go just with a hundred different causes instead of the root cause – the bansters, that is what I am saying: “We have to sharpen the point to penetrate.”
Robles: Can I ask you two questions? Are you doing anything about Keystone and what is your opinion of Obama on that issue?
Sands: First, yes, I just attended a rally here in Nashville on Monday. So I had my Anon Mobile, my 33 foot black RV with Anonymous and WikiLeaks on it and I pulled it right upon to the sidewalk of the federal building during that protest and of course I was surrounded and they were like “get this thing out of the sidewalk”.
Meanwhile I’m very calm, you know, they don’t bother me too much. And people in Nashville are talking about it.
I came in Nashville to inspire song writers to write more songs to rally the people, write more songs about saving the world and about fighting back and fighting corruption. Because the way that I look at it it is the same banksters that own the corporations and in the media, so we are not going to get the information from them.
Who do we have left? Who are we going to have to count on to get the information to the people or to rally that people, indeed the people who have following right? Movie stars, rock stars, sport stars, porn stars? Porn stars are not doing it, neither will the sport stars. Movie stars are not doing a great job. Rock stars, maybe the rock stars can rally the people like Bob Dylan to fight back.
Robles: Don’t you think a lot of the musicians and the rock stars like Bono, I mean they are pretty much just corporate spokespeople now?
Sands: I hear what you are saying. But as I’m in the music city, the capital of the world, and I’m here. I’m meeting a lot of activists, a lot of musicians and there are two parts to that story; one is that in order to get on the air, to get really promoted you are going to have to satisfy the sponsors and the sponsors are the same corporations that we know are owned by the banksters so they are not going to get anywhere with that. But I think that there are other bands that can have a following.
So I’m in here, in Nashville and part of my efforts in Nashville while I’m here; the Discovery Channel did contact me from the UK and said that they were interested in doing an episode on Anonymous, in preparation for November and the Million Mask March 2014.
And I have found some people in local Nashville that have also been contacted by the Discovery Channel saying Nashville is really hot right now, give us some story ideas.
So, we have a story idea about doing a reality show or a variety show that includes activists and we are putting an ad on Craig’s List saying we are rallying rock stars now to inspire people to take back our country. And why? Because they will have a following.
This is the information age, we are getting information out thanks to WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks has been at the forefront, you know, the pipe line. So people are aware of that. They are growing more aware of WikiLeaks, more aware of the Anonymous Movement.
They want to do something . They don’t like the government, they know it was a missile. They just feel like they are so scattered, they don’t know where to go, where to penetrate.
That is why I think that this Occupy DC is important. Because they can be in one place right there and Snowden was a great benefit to the US.
Sometimes it takes people a little while to for things to sink in. They have been of the mentality that it is ok to be spied on lock stock and barrel because it is protecting them. But then they realize no, that is not right.
Robles: Two things here, I don’t know if we could, I’d like you to comment on the fact that the NSA, I mean they are saying that they are protecting people from terrorism, but they have not stopped, prevented or dismantled any terrorist acts or operations, or organizations since they started the massive spying which was actually started sometime in about 1985. If you could comment on that. Then I’d like to ask you in more detail if you could tell us what is going on with Anonymous?
Sands: I remember the documentary where Aaron Russo was talking with Alex Jonesabout a meeting he had with Rockefeller, he mentioned how Rockefeller said they were going to create this event and that he was going to be something that they create and shortly after that 9-11 happened.
So this war on terror from the 9-11 event and now we are seeing and so many people know 9-11 was an inside job.
It sounds too unbelievable that people just couldn’t fathom it, couldn’t swallow it. But as years go by and they really see ‘wow, well, I guess there was a reason why we never saw the plane that hit the Pentagon. Because there never was a plane.
There was a reason we never saw plane wreckage. There never weas a plane.
It is taking time for people to wake up but they are seeing that. But in that documentary where Aaron Russo was talking to Alex Jones, he said it was all made up.
On the greatamericanrevolt.org website that I run there are some videos of Donald Rumsfeld Secretary of Defense saying there was no plane wreckage on the site. There is a CNN video saying there was no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon and there are a lot of other videos, former CIA agents saying and talking exactly how this false war on terror is just made up.
So we’ve been lied to and it seems just too intensely gross that is just not really believable.
You were listening to an interview with Christine Ann Sands. She is the manager and domain owner of millionmasks.org and a supporter of the Anonymous hacktivist collective, the Occupy movement, WikiLeaks, and the Pirate Party. Thank you very much for listening.
12 February, 13:12
Canada's $650 Trillion Indian Trust Being Stolen
It is an already centuries old conspiracy of exploitation and theft beginning with the Catholic Church's Doctrine of Discovery that allowed Europeans to commit genocide against the indigenous peoples of the Americas and steal their lands and resources as long as the Church received a share of the spoils.
To this day the exploitation of stolen lands continues as does the abuse and theft of trusts that were set up for the indigenous peoples.
The Indian Trust in Canada is worth approximately $650 trillion and the Indian Trust in the US holds at least $450 billion at any one time, yet these monies are never given to the indigenous people and they continue to be controlled, held and exploited by the invaders who are controlling the system. Legally Canada is a Corporation which is traded on the New York Stock Exchange and according to Mohawk Nation Elder Kahentinetha Horn the Corporation of Canada is being dissolved and the Indian Trust is being absconded with to Europe. In an interview with the Voice of Russia Ms. Horn says the indigenous people of North America, who have no recourse, wish to meet with President Putin. She calls Russians, as the indigenous people of Russia, allies, and calls for unity against a shared enemy.
12 February, 2014 21:07
US Wars Against Afghanistan and Iraq: Crimes Against Humanity
The US has failed miserably in Afghanistan, the way they failed in Iraq, in Vietnam, and in dozens of other places and even though they are finally leaving with their tail between their legs, military "commanders" continue to make bold statements and try to put a positive spin on the fiasco that seem to be disconnected from reality and might cause the average person to question their competence.
It may be difficult for the average American and for citizens of the world to understand those who have launched all of the US wars, in the same way that it is difficult for the sane person to understand the mind and the motivations of a homicidal serial killer, yet if we look closely maybe we can. Or not? These are people who have caused the deaths of millions and for you and I it might be difficult to comprehend why despite the failures in Afghanistan and the price the world is having to pay for their "lessons" they want to continue with their adventure.
For Americans it should be vital to understand why their country is at war, but they are bogged down trying to survive without healthcare, with homes being foreclosed, education becoming privatized and everything growing astronomically expensive. Every day those who still have jobs work and attempt to pay for a gallon of gas at the pump so they can stay employed, the same gallon that was $0.69 in 1980 and is already predicted and forecast to be at over $10.00 by the year 2030, yet few question.
Americans should be concerned, if not for the over 1 million lives that have been brutally extinguished since the "War on Terror" began, including the initial 2,999 of their fellow countrymen and innocent civilians who perished on 9-11, then for the simple economic reason that every household in America, whether they support the unfounded and illegal wars and invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq or not, are going to foot the bill for generations to come as the military adventures started by their leaders will cost every household approximately $75,000.00 so far.
Yes American taxpayer, like it or not, justified or not, you will pay as much as $6 trillion for your government’s illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, that breaks down to the equivalent of $75,000 for every household according to the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government.
Costs of wars
In an article for Global Research Sabir Shah detailed the costs of the US wars which Bush and the wars’ proponents said would pay for themselves through oil revenues. So then why isn’t gas at the pump now $0.30 a gallon but has instead skyrocketed? Ask them.
Overall the illegal wars have cost the US $6 trillion dollars, $2 trillion which they have already borrowed and already paid $260 billion just on the interest of those loans. But the war profiteers don’t care, at the same time they are also giving themselves tax cuts of historic proportions.
Those are just the preliminary financial costs there are also long term costs and the cost in destroyed lives and human suffering that the US tries to ignore.
Of course no one in the US has seriously done any study on how many Afghan lives they have extinguished or destroyed either, but there have been many studies done on the lives of US soldiers that have been affected. According to Global Research approximately 1.56 million US Afghanistan and Iraq veterans are receiving treatment at Veterans Administration Hospitals and will be receiving benefits for the rest of their lives with %50 of all veterans having already applied for permanent disability benefits.
Citing the Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government report Global Research says the US government has already spent $134 billion on medical care and disability benefits and that they will pay out $836 billion more in the coming decades. But that is not the worst thing, according to the Harvard report, even if the warmongers ended their wars in Iraq and Afghanistan it would not help in easing the growing and widespread poverty, unemployment and declining living standards for working people in the US. Quite the opposite, no matter what happens Americans will be paying for the American adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq for many, many decades to come.
Detached from Reality: No Accoutability
Perhaps through no fault of their own but rather because their government has been taken over by war profiteers, the military industrial complex and the security structures that only serve those promoting war for the sake of war, American have lost the backbone to question and the ability to call for accountability.
Putting aside, as Americans love to do, that the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were crimes against humanity and unprovoked aggressive wars launched on countries that never posed a threat to the US, one of the real insanities of the wars is that the commanders and the wars’ proponents have the audacity to openly discuss the "lessons that are to be learned" over their failed military adventures. As if they were on a training run and their decades of war, the millions of civilians killed, the hundreds of thousands of American soldiers crippled and the decimated US economy were not even worth mentioning.
Lessons Learned ?!?!
In an unapologetic article the site UT San Diego matter-of-factly reports that retired Marine General John Allen and retired Navy Admiral James Stavridis two key former commanders in Afghanistan spoke at a conference dedicated to the "lessons to be learned" from their devastating wars.
Of course the conference itself, the "commanders" and the publication ignore the fact that the US was the cause of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and that these invasions were based on lie after lie, but the remorselessly discuss the "lessons to be learned" as if they are discussing some training exercise and not decades of war that caused millions of deaths.
Perhaps I am mistaken but if someone has the authority to send soldiers off to die and order the invasions of countries they damn well better have already learned their "lessons" and actually know what they are doing.
So what lessons did these commanders learn? Well one is that: "… long-term engagement leveraging multinational alliances is key to global stability, in that country and others from Iraq to the Balkans and China." In other words use your allies in your illegal wars.
The publication calls the aggressive wars which killed millions the "US experience" and says the two commanders "… cautioned against the isolationist streak in American sentiment emerging in the post-Afghanistan, post-Iraq war era." Sure people are beginning to wake up and see the war criminals for what they are and most normal countries do not want to be involved in crimes against humanity and endless resource wars.
Mr. Allen’s Lessons
Mr. Allen was very nice in telling the audience about the lessons he had learned in Afghanistan. Very expensive lessons paid coming at a cost of trillions of dollars and millions of lives, but since they were so expensive no doubt the things he learned need repeating. Among his comments he said: "… without security almost nothing is possible in the future in Afghanistan." Sure but I think any idiot will tell you that you cannot build a future when your country has been invaded and is occupied.
Regardless, that was not Mr. Allen’s main lesson learned. According to him his top lesson learned was that the invaded people might actually fight back and kill his "advisers". "That development, together with innovations in the method and prevalence of roadside bombs, or improvised explosive devices (IEDs), is among Allen’s top lessons learned from the war."reports UT San Diego.
Mr. Allen also said: "It took us awhile to recognize the strategic implications, killing our advisers, created a huge political crisis ... that began to create a dissolution of the coalition. This was the biggest political challenge I faced."
Mr. Stavridis’ Lessons
Neither of the "commanders" took responsibility for bringing Al-Qaeda to Iraq, a country where they did not exist before, and did not mention the fall of Fallujah a city for which hundreds of Americans had died, so I guess it was not that important.
Mr. Stavridis did acknowledge "enormous fatigue" in the US with Middle Eastern problems, from the Palestinian crisis to Iraq and Afghanistan in what is perceived as "this enormous, disastrous crescent of crisis." but did not take any responsibility. Even worse he said they should continue their adventure: "The worst thing we could do in my view is walk away from this turbulent part of the world or come home to our shores."
Mr. Stavridis was regretful on one point however when he said: "… the US failed to leave behind a residual force of troops. Options for nurturing stability in volatile areas include ‘strategic communication’ about American values such as democracy, NATO military advisers, private-sector weapons sales, and cultural exchanges to build ‘secondary linkages.’" Yes, the families of those one million Iraqis the US killed need to be taught about "American values, democracy and weapons sales.
Mr. Stravidis was candid however when he stated the real reason for destroying Iraq: "All is not lost. If we use the tools we have, we’ve got a reasonable chance of keeping Iraq where it needs to be, a friend of the United States, engaged in the region." No mention of Al-Qaeda or 9-11 or WMDs there. Strange?
The award for the best lesson learned goes to Mr. Stravidis and he gets the award for saying: "In the end, we won’t deliver security strictly from the barrel of a gun. We are going to do it through building teams."
Apparently they love learning because they want more
The American Forces Press Service reports that apparently the lessons continue. This time the student is Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel who said that despite the fact that Afghan President Hamid Karzai will not sign an agreement that would allow for a continued US/NATO presence he: "… continues to plan for a post-2014 training and assistance mission in Afghanistan."
The publication says that Mr. Hagel recently met US President Obama and discussed the retreat and the pulling out of forces and equipment from Afghanistan. The US position has not changed, Mr. Hagel said, adding that "Karzai has so far refused to sign the pact…", but that, "We continue to hope and believe that it will be signed, and we will continue to plan and work with our NATO and International Security Assistance Force commanders for a post-2014 mission."
People keep dying as apparently the hardest lesson which the US refuses to learn is that they are simply "not wanted". Time to finally go home.
13 February, 19:30
Escalation of Violence in Ukraine: Martial Law May Be Only Option
The situation in Ukraine continues to escalate as the western-backed Ukrainian opposition becomes militarized and grows bolder and more violent in their attempts to overthrow the government. It has been clear for some time that what is taking place in Ukraine can in no way be called civil unrest or a popular uprising, what is taking place is a clear western-backed-insurrection and an attempt to overthrow the government by force. The recent killing of a judge for passing a minor sentence on "oppositionists" who attempted to storm a government building shows that soon the government will have no choice but to use maximum force.
What may have begun as peaceful protests to a government decision to join the Russian led Customs Union have escalated beyond all proportion due to the activation of the complete array of western color revolution infrastructure that was already in place. This included threats against judges, police, officials and members of their families yet the government was forced to attempt to appease the thugs even offering amnesty and top government posts to the opposition.
Rather than cracking down as the government had every right to do, these moves at appeasement and attempts to enter into dialogue only emboldened the "opposition" further and led to the taking of government buildings, the militarization of the opposition and now the assassination of a judge, whose job it was to uphold the laws of Ukraine. With all this it appears that the time to declare a state of emergency and, if needed, martial law has already passed. Or will we wait until more judges and police officers are killed in the streets or burned alive or crippled for life?
Assassination of Judge
The latest ugly twist in the Ukrainian "Orange Revolution 2.0" saga come as a young judge named Alexander Lobodenko was assassinated in the street near his home. Justice Lobodenko, who was only 34-years-old, was shot multiple times in the back by two assailants and left for dead.
Police are investigating and believe the execution style murder was carried out as a result of his judicial work, however they would not speculate on the exact suspects as the investigation is still ongoing.
According to local media on the 28th of January Judge Lobodenko sentenced two, so-called "pro-European activists" to two months of house arrest after they tried to break into the city hall building during a rally in Kremenchug days before.
President Yanukovich has since issued a decree amending legislation in order to better protect judges and their family members and hopefully other officials and police who have also been targeted by an increasingly violent and even armed "opposition".
The "opposition" in Ukraine continues to receive support from the West and this is not just innocuous doughnuts handed out by Victoria Nuland, witnesses and people on the ground report that the going rate for the hooligans is 30 euros a day, they are equipped with NATO issue tents and they are increasingly being supplied with military uniforms, helmets, body armor, shields, materials to make weapons with and even weaponhs themselves.
The latest addition to their arsenal, which also includes offices, headquarters, media support and the entire color revolution infrastructure long ago placed in Ukraine by the West includes fortifications to the barricades at Maidan Square.
Local media are citing what they are calling "one of the commandants of Maidan" lawmaker Stepan Kubiv as saying that: "… sand and empty bags have been purchased and are at storehouses in Kiev and will be delivered to Maidan in order to strengthen the barricades but that they will start strengthening the barricades at Hrushevskogo and Instytutska Streets firstly."
Many, including myself, have been questioning why the proper authorities are letting this continue. It has obviously escalated to something far beyond peaceful protests and the government has the right, if not the primary responsibility, to defend the integrity of the state and maintain civil order.
Blackmail by the West
The western-backed protests have escalated to the point that the government has been forced to resign amid call that the elected President of Ukraine Vicotr Yanukovich step down. These unprecedented calls came almost immediately after he chose to sign agreements with Russia rather than an association agreement with the EU, and came from EU officials and were spread throughout the western media.
The outside pressure and that from Ukraine’s "opposition" has been so great that on January 31st President Yanukovich was forced to sign a bill declaring amnesty for protesters and canceling anti-demonstration laws on January 31, in effect giving the insurrectionists impunity and allowing them to do whatever they pleased.
Not only was it made crystal clear from the recent conversation released on the Internet between US "diplomat" Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, that the US is actively and almost completely transparently now, involved in attempting a coup in Ukraine and the overthrowing of the elected government to be replaced with hand-picked western puppets, but an array of other threats and statements from a broad range of western and NATO affiliated officials have also made it clear the West’s intent.
The European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton has publically admitted that she clearly warned the Ukrainian leadership that the EU could: "… exert ‘all possible types of pressure on it’ and even publically stated when asked about sanctions against Ukraine during a meeting of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament that: ‘…none of the options has been removed from the agenda.’"
We have to recall and underline that this all came about due to an EU association agreement. Ukraine said no to the EU, but as Victoria Nuland recently admitted the US has spent over $52 billion to "own" Ukraine and they will not take no for an answer.
Divide and Conquer
The divide and conquer strategy of the West in Ukraine is similar to what was planned for the Russian Federation and has already begun with the country effectively now operating as a federation. According to the Russian Minister/Counselor to Ukraine in Kiev Andrei Vorobyov, Ukraine has: "… already informally turned into a federation, as alternative government bodies have been set up in a number of regions."
"I am sure that, regardless of political wishes, the country is developing toward federalization. Whether it will be formally stipulated by the constitution or whether it will formally remain to be a unitary state, but informally it is already a federation," Mr. Vorobyov said at a debate titled the "Federalization of Ukraine: From Split to Unity".
According Interfax Vorobyov stated that: "… the priority now is to resolve the crisis in a peaceful way, and Russia is interested in a peaceful settlement through negotiations."
Government’s Hands Tied
It is clear that the authorities and the Security Services of Ukraine have been unable to deal with the threat to the state, for whatever reasons, and the situation has escalated to the point where the debate is now about sending in the armed forces. However the Defense Minister of Ukraine Pavlo Lebedev, in an interview with Interfax said that: "Under the law 'On the Armed Forces of Ukraine,' it is only possible if a state of emergency or martial law is introduced in the country. Under the Constitution, it may be introduced by a presidential decree and is subject to approval by the Verkhovna Rada, and currently there exists no such decree."
When Will Enough be Enough?
The question now is how many more judges, police officers and members of the security forces are going to have to die before the western-backed insurrectionists, neo-nazi extremists and those who storm government buildings face the full wrath of the government that they are trying to overthrow?
A legitimate "opposition" exists in any country, it elects leaders, argues policy, holds peaceful demonstrations and works within the rules. They DO NOT receive funding and orders from foreign powers, set police on fire, shoot judges in the back, demand high government positions by force, cause instability and mayhem and seize government buildings. These are insurrectionists who only understand force and in reality there is only one cure.
Hopefully the "opposition" in Ukraine will finally see that force is not the way forward and enter into a peaceful dialogue with the government and the sovereignty and integrity of Ukraine will no longer be under threat. The problem is one for the Ukrainian people to work out peacefully and outside interference must not be allowed, but the government does have a responsibility to the Ukrainian people and under the Ukrainian Constitution to guarantee the integrity of the state and the country. They do not have a responsibility to the US/NATO/EU to run their country as the West sees fit.
My thoughts are with the Ukrainian people.
The views and opinions above are my own. I can be reached email@example.com.
14 February, 22:57
The Keystone Pipeline Will Not Happen
Sovereign Indian Nations
hundreds of years ago and it was their ignorance and insane, godless lust for riches which were not theirs which drove them to commit the worst genocide in the history of mankind. This hollow, selfish and vicious greed continues to drive the western world and continues to destroy our one and only planet, Earth.
Wars are being fought, populations are being enslaved, millions are being killed and our irreplaceable Mother Earth is being destroyed, all for the greed of the few elites and the corporations whose only goal is enriching themselves and dominating the world. In reality the Americas are still stolen lands which belong to the indigenous people and those living on their land are nothing more than the next generation of squatters. The Corporation of Canada is dissolving and the oil companies are continuing to develop new ways to rape and destroy the Earth to get every possible drop of oil and gas out of it with no regard for the death they are causing our planet. According to Kahentinetha Horn a Mohawk Indian Elder in an interview with the Voice of Russia, the latest super-scale oil scheme, the Keystone Pipeline will make the land unlivable for a thousand years. The indigenous peoples of the Americas are the last hope for saving mother Earth.
16 February, 04:07
Global Warming: What Big Oil Doesn't Want Known
It is a subject that is largely debated while at the same time being quietly pushed onto page 23 but global warming and rising sea levels are topics that affect all of us and are issues we must all pay more attention to. It is however understandable that the issue is not given the importance that it should be because the key cause of global warming is the combustion of fossil fuels and our civilization is driven and dependent on fossil fuels.
The carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases that we have released into the atmosphere through our industries and by driving our cars and heating our homes have warmed the overall atmosphere of the Earth by more than 1 full degree Fahrenheit in the last one hundred years and cause sea levels to rise by approximately 8 inches. Experts say that even if we completely stopped burning all fossil fuels the gasses that have already accumulated will continue to warm the Earth for hundreds of years to come. Understandably this is something the huge multinational oil corporations and the car makers would not want to happen, hence the information on global warming, even the scientific studies are all obfuscated, conflicting and inaccurate.
Green House Gasses
The damage has already been done and the results are visible more and more every day. I would argue that the constant reports of anomalous weather conditions that are taking place all over the world and that we are seeing with alarming frequency are a direct result of global warming and rising sea levels and the effects are worse than even the most doomsday predictions.
Last spring scientists conducted studies of the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and determined that it had reached 400 parts per million, this is the highest that it has been in the past three million years according to researchers. This will be almost impossible to get rid of until perhaps some new methods are invented to clean up the atmosphere and will continue to cause global warming in what some say will be an accelerated rate even if we somehow manage to limit future greenhouse gas emissions.
Rising Sea Levels, Facts and Figures
Global temperature increases melt ice and affects sea level in two ways, both from thermal expansion, when water grows in volume as it becomes warmer, meaning water at 15 degrees Celsius has more volume than water at 3 degrees Celsius. The rest of the rising sea levels are cause by melting ice. The big concern is that giant ice flows and permafrost in Greenland and Antarctica will begin to melt at an accelerated rate.
In 2007 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a report predicting that sea levels would rise by a maximum of 58 centimeters by the end of this century. However that report intentionally omitted taking into account the possibility that the ice sheets might begin to melt into the seas more rapidly as the physics of the process were not yet fully understood.
The September 2013 IPCC report put the above figure of maximum seal level rise by 2100 at 98 centimeters and actually published figures on ice flow from the poles. The result was an estimate of sea level rise of 28 to 98 centimeters (a maximum of almost one meter) by 2100. However they are still unclear as to the rate that ice will melt from the ice sheets of Greenland or the Antarctic. These are the two most important areas to be concerned with as those two ice sheets, should they melt, hold enough water to cause a 65 meter rise in global sea levels.
In order for sea levels to not be affected and to maintain their levels there must be equilibrium between the water that is falling on the ice sheets in Antarctica and Greenland, which over time because glacial ice, and that which returns to the sea in the form of icebergs and melting at the edges, this is called the mass balance. Due to increased global atmospheric temperatures a non-zero balance has occurred which is causing global sea levels to rise.
Highly precise satellite gravimetry (the measurement of the strength of the gravitational field) and altimetry (the measurement of elevation or altitude) have allowed scientists to make exact measurements determining that Greenland alone is losing more than 200 billion tons of ice per year. Between 2003 and 2010, a period for which studies have been conducted the total loss to the ice mass from Antarctica, Greenland and the Earth's glaciers and ice caps was about 4.3 trillion tons (1,000 cubic miles). This amount of melted ice added 12mm (0.5 inches) to global sea levels.
Another Method, Worse Results
While most research attempts to measurer sea level changes by attempting to understand and model the physics behind every process involved some have decided that a better and more accurate way to predict the results of global warming and the corresponding sea level rise is to simply calculate sea level changes in correlation with temperature levels over hundreds of years.
The resulting studies are called “semi-empirical” models and tend to be ignored or discounted or not used at all because they show levels as much as twice that of the “process-based” models and show a sea level rise of 2 meters possible by 2100.
One such study was conducted by Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research and another by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and they both predict the sea levels rising by up to 2 meters by 2100.
Historical Sea Levels
During the last 2,000 years sea level changes were insignificant with geological observations giving scientists indications that the average rate of sea level rise was only 0.0–0.2 millimeters per year. Sea levels rose by 6 centimeters during the 19th century alone and a stunning 19 centimeters in the 20th century. Between 1870 and 2004 the average yearly rate was 1.95 millimeters. According to satellite data from 1993 to 2009 there was a 3.3 millimeter rise yearly average. This shows that the levels have begun to rise in correlation with human advancements in industry and the amount of fossil fuels we burn.
Threatened Cities Worldwide
By the year 2070 the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development estimates that over 150 million people who live in the largest port cities of the world will be affected by rising sea levels. If the 2 meters by 2100 scenario is accurate at least 187 million people will be affected. However that conservative estimate fails to account for those in smaller countries and small cities along coasts, where the numbers could be in the billions.
The United States will see the most cities going under water. These cities are already locked into a doomsday forecast and there is nothing that they can do because as I wrote above, even if we stop burning all fossil fuels tomorrow and stopped producing green house gasses, the effects being caused from what is already there will continue to be felt for at least a thousand years. Unless someone invents something to “clean” the atmosphere of course.
Miami Florida, built almost at sea level will be the one of the first US cities to be submerged. Fort Lauderdale Florida and Hoboken New Jersey are also on lists as being the first to go under by 2023 and by 2050 Palm Beach Florida will also join them under water. According to a 2013 report by the World Bank the other major US cities “most at risk”, meaning those that will definitely be under water (as the changes to sea levels are already locked in) are: New York, New Orleans, Tampa and Boston.
The list of cities listed by the World Bank Worldwide include: Guangzhou, China; Mumbai, India; Nagoya, Japan; Shenzen, China and Osaka, Japan, which all top the list. Other cities of note include: Guayaquil, Ecuador; Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Abidjan, Ivory Coast; Zhanjing, China; Khulna, Bangladesh; Palembang, Indonesia; Alexandria, Egypt; Barranquilla, Colombia; Naples, Italy; Sapporo, Japan; and Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.
A study by Nature Climate Change list other cities that will be seriously affected by rising seal-levels and be partially flooded or necessitate the building of complex barriers and waterways, these include: Alexandria, Egypt; Barranquilla, Columbia; Sapporo, Japan; Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic; Beirut, Lebanon; Houston, Texas; Istanbul, Turkey; Jakarta, Indonesia; Izmir, Turkey; Marseille, France; Athens, Greece; Shanghai, China; Benghazi, Libya; Tel Aviv, Israel; Fuzhou, China; Ningbo, China; Havana, Cuba; Port Au Prince, Haiti and Algiers, Algeria.
That is not all, one study by the National Academy of Sciences of the United States says that 1,700 US cities will be affected with cities as far inland as Sacramento, California seeing flooding by 2100. Cambridge Massachusetts will be partially under water by the early 2060s and that is not all.
Disappearing Islands and Nations
For people who live in cities that will eventually disappear it is bad enough but for the inhabitants small islands and island nations, who entire countries may be under water, the option of moving inland will not be there. This is what happened to the people of Tegua, part of the Torres Strait Islands in the South Pacific. In 2005 the United Nations declared 100 residents who had to be evacuated because the island was going under water, as the world’s first climate change refugees.
Bermeja Island was a small island near the Gulf of Mexico and has already disappeared into the ocean.
The Carteret Islands are in the south-west Pacific Ocean, are home to over 2,500 people and will be uninhabitable by 2015.
Kiribati Island is officially called the Republic of Kiribati and is located in the central Pacific Ocean. It is already experiencing rising water levels.
The Lohachara and Suparibhanga Islands were Indian islands and have already disappeared under the sea. More than 10,000 people lived there.
The Maldives are an island nation in the Indian Ocean. The high point of the islands is only about 2.5 meters with the average being 1.3 meters. This nation will soon disappear.
The Marshall Islands in the middle of the Pacific Ocean will also soon be gone.
Palau consists of more than 250 islands and is about 500 miles southeast of the Philippines. More than 20,000 people live there. It is under serious threat.
Tonga Island is located in the South Pacific and if ocean levels rise any further it will be affected.
The Tuvalu Islands are located between Australia and Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean. Approximately 11,000 people live there and they have already started evacuating. New Zealand has agreed to grant refuge to 75 Tuvaluans every year. The nation will disappear by 2060.
Vanuatu Island or the Republic of Vanuatu is in the South Pacific and may soon be submerged.
Anomalous Weather and Global Warming
Have you noticed the crazy weather we are having? Just this past year we have seen: record breaking cold in South America last winter; balmy weather and no snow in January in Moscow (becoming the norm), snow in Jerusalem in September, flooding and hurricane force winds throughout the UK, heat waves in Australia and the US, massive flooding throughout Asia and Oceania, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, snow in the Middle East, current massive snow and ice storms in the US, record rains and then heat in Tasmania, sever snowstorms in southern Italy and Sicily, record cold in China, droughts in Brazil, and the list goes on and on.
According to the New York Times Omar Baddour, of the World Meteorological Organization in Geneva said: “Each year we have extreme weather, but it’s unusual to have so many extreme events around the world at once. The heat wave in Australia; the flooding in the U.K., and most recently the flooding and extensive snowstorm in the Middle East it’s already a big year in terms of extreme weather calamity. Such events are increasing in intensity as well as frequency, a sign that climate change is not just about rising temperatures, but also about intense, unpleasant, anomalous weather of all kinds.”
Climate Change Denial: a New Phenomena
Of course there are climate change skeptics and these are almost totally people who are backed by oil companies or fossil energy concerns. Just like proponents of fracking and the Keystone Pipeline they cite their own oil company funded studies and the like to deny what is visible all around us.
Unfortunately global warming has become an issue of widespread political debate, particularly in the US where it is usually split along party lines, with Republicans of course being the biggest deniers. For economic or political reason many attempt to downplay or discredit the issue even proven scientific data, something which academics and scientists have named “Climate Change Denial”, prevalent in the US.
Sadly climate scientists, especially in the US, have complained of attempts by government officials and oil-industry representatives to censor or suppress their work and to hide scientific data. Some have even been ordered not to publically discuss global warming.
One such denier, Mr. Myron Ebell the Director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute was quoted in multiple media outlets as saying: "We don't know how much sea levels will rise or fall, models can't reliably predict the climate, because its changes are "non-linear" or irregular, so flood walls and other measures might waste money.”
Tell that to the people of Tegua.
16 February, 23:13
Western Color Revolution Architecture Activated in Bosnia-Herzegovina
The color revolution that is being carried out in Ukraine is not the only recent attempt to overthrow a government by western architects, color revolution architecture was also recently activated in Bosnia-Herzegovina by groups using the giveaway OTPOR symbol.
The “uprising” staged by almost entirely young thugs started and ended suddenly, a clear sign that it had been orchestrated. According to Stephan Karganovic, a geopolitical specialist and the President of the Srebrenica Historical Project, whoever was directing it concluded that it was not bearing fruit the way it had been set up and so they told everybody to go home. Mr. Karganovic is certain that intense consultations and analysis are currently taking place and that another attempt will be made soon to get rid of President Dodik and to derail the Republic of Srpska and the leadership in Sarajevo. The West want to bring the country into NATO and integrate it more closely within the western structures. That is their goal and they will not stop. Mr. Karganovic says: “… be prepared, and keep your eye on the ball.”
This is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with Stefan Karganovic. He is the president of the Srebrenica Historical Project. This is part 1 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com.
Robles: Hello, sir! How are you this evening?
Karganovic: Hello, I'm fine. I hope you are also.
Robles: I'm very well, thank you very much for agreeing to do the interview.
Karganovic: My pleasure.
Robles: Thank you. A lot of things going on in Bosnia and Ukraine simultaneously. I don't know if one is supposed to distract from the other or what is going on?
I'd like to ask you some questions about the correlations that you see between what is happening in Ukraine right now, what happened in Serbia, in the former Yugoslavia with color revolutions and in particular a logo that was used by the group OTPOR which the world has come to know was the US’ instrument for implementing the color revolution there? So, anyway...
Robles: What is going on there in Bosnia right now, please?
Karganovic: Well, right now, today not much is going on, but plenty was going on a few days ago. And basically what happened is that a color revolution type uprising erupted last Friday and it lasted for about two and a half days.
The interesting thing about it is that it started suddenly and ended suddenly. And that, in and of itself, I think strongly suggests that there is a guiding hand behind it because a spontaneous uprising by people who are hungry, disaffected for various reasons, and so forth, probably would have started more slowly and gradually and would have gone on or would have tapered off more gradually.
What we have seen in Bosnia was a sudden upheaval that ended just as suddenly and it is only my assumption that it ended suddenly because whoever was directing it concluded that it was not bearing fruit the way it was set up and so they told everybody to go home.
And I'm sure that right now there are intense consultations and analysis going on as to why the plan didn't work as anticipated and what can be done to improve it for the next time around.
So I anticipate that within a couple of weeks, maybe a month or two we will have the same situation again, probably with a slightly modified scenario reflecting the lessons learnt. But what we have to bear in mind is that the objective continues to be the same, and in Bosnia what I discern are two fundamental objectives: the main one is to destabilize the Serbian entity, the Republic of Srpska and to get rid of its president Milorad Dodik, who has led a very independent minded policy and a policy of friendship with Russia.
When I say independent minded that is slightly ambiguous, we can debate whether he has in mind ultimately independence for the Republic of Srpska, but the policies that he is pursuing are his own, they are not policies that he is just implementing as dictated from abroad or somewhere else. In that sense that is the main sense in which I use the word independent when I describe him and that is of course a no no that has to be taken care of because it is a bad example for other countries, especially small countries.
He has been defiant for too long. I can perfectly understand from the standpoint of the organizers of these upheavals why they want to get rid of him. But the slightly surprising aspect of the violence in Bosnia is that apparently the goal is not just to get rid of Dodik and to derail the Republic of Srpska, but also to get rid of the leadership in Sarajevo which is surprising because unlike Dodik it has been very cooperative.
So why would they want to get rid of it? Well, I see an analogy between that and the Shevardnadze case in Georgia in 2003. He was very cooperative but it was obvious by that time that his luck was running out, the Georgian people were getting tired of him, he was not delivering the goods. So, it was probably a preemptive strike when they organized a color revolution in Georgia and brought in Saakashvili who of course was their guy also maybe even more so because he was educated in the West. But the idea was to change the ruling team while you had an opportunity to control the process. So the change wouldn't come from below.
And of course that this artificial color revolution change comes with all kinds of promises and slogans for better life and blah-blah-blah so that duped masses think that something is going to happen to improve their lives and it gives the new regime a new lease on life.
And I think that they have something similar in mind for Sarajevo because these guys are just very querulous, they are very narrow minded, they want to cooperate but they are not flexible enough. They do not fit into the new concept of governance which calls for a centralistically ruled Bosnia and Herzegovina, the entity is being gradually fazed-out and a trans-ethnic team is being installed in Sarajevo to rule the country under a simplified constitution and I agree that the present set up is cumbersome and not very functional. But they want to simplify it, not to make the lives of the people easier but to make it more easily governable for their own purposes which is to bring the country into NATO and integrate it more closely within the western structures.
When you get rid of all these leaders who have ethnic ties to their own constituencies even if they are trying to be cooperative and you bring in the new people that you educated abroad like Saakashvili, I think a bunch of the Bosnian Saakashvilis are probably being trained somewhere and will be brought onto the scene pretty soon, then ruling the country becomes much easier.
Robles: I see. Now, most of these protests as I understand took place in the Muslim Croatian parts of the country. I'd like you to comment on that if you could.
Karganovic: Yes, well, that is one very interesting aspect of what happened because the conventional wisdom until a week ago literally, was that they would try to stir something up in the Republic of Srpska because that is their main objective right now to, let's use the proper word, “overthrow” the Republic of Srpska and certainly to get rid of its leadership.
Instead they started in the federation and that is very interesting and susceptible to various interpretations. I would personally say that it was a clever move because first of all it points to what I mentioned earlier; that their goal is not just the removal of Dodik and his team but also of their satellites in Sarajevo and their replacement by a new group. So, for that you need pressure from below in the Federation but more importantly the idea I think was to stir up socio-economic trouble in the federation.
Initially they were not talking about political issues, but about the miserable economic and social conditions which truly are miserable and they are miserable on both sides of the entity lines, in the Federation and in the Republic of Srpska. So they probably counted on the Federation being a model for a similar uprising in the Republic of Srpska.
In other words they misread completely the psychology of the people, the ethnic component, the memory of the enmity from the war in Bosnia is still very much alive and while everybody likes the idea of living better, that is undeniable, the Serbs are very suspicious of anything coming from the Federation.
So they just didn't take the bait, there was absolutely no movement even remotely resembling that in the Republic of Srpska. All that happened was that two western backed NGOs in Banja Luka staged a support rally which drew a huge crowd of about 50 people.
The same thing happened in Belgrade by the way, they had a support rally where more policemen were in attendance than people showing support for what was going on in the Federation.
So what we saw was, and I hate to sound as if I thought there was a big conspiracy, there is no conspiracy because if you are carefully watching the sides as I have been for the last year and a half, I could clearly see it coming and they were not even trying to hide it. So there is no conspiracy, it was all in the open, if you had eyes to see it but they were setting up the infrastructure of the color revolution going back about the year and a half that I could clearly see it in the Republic of Srpska.
So at the certain moment when the signal was given all these structures were activated, not only in the Republic of Srpska but in the Federation and even in Serbia and very curiously if you now follow the reactions the commentary in the Western press (a wide variety of media and analysts) they are saying: “Well, here, at last we are witnessing people of all ethnicities in Bosnia united by social concerns, they are forgetting ethnicity and they are all demanding a new constitution,” which of course by their definition has to be centralistic and doing away with the separate ethnic homelands, “… and they are all in it together. It is time to revisit the Dayton Agreement and to change it radically,” to conform to what is termed “the wishes of the people.”
But it didn't work. So what happened, well, it is sad really, as I read the last couple of days’ comments from the Western analysts. They missed the fact that what started that way ended abruptly and in failure. They just didn't notice that. They assumed that what started last week is still going on successfully, so they are writing, analyzing a fictitious reality. But that fiction has already been exposed as a fiction.
There is no common set of values uniting the people of all ethnicities in Bosnia. Sure, having a dissent life and the job and a good income is something everyone would welcome, but there are other concerns as well, that are even more important.
So, at this point what was started last week, I think we can confidently say is a complete failure, but they are now analyzing their mistakes and they will be back in a very short time. So you have to be prepared, you have to keep your eye on the ball.
END PART 1
You were listening to an interview with Stefan Karganovic. He is the president of the Srebrenica Historical Project. That is part 1 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening and as always we wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.
17 February, 22:13
In a continuation of a discussion on the construction and implementation of color revolutions, something that is topical and alarming to people in countries targeted for regime change by the US, Stephan Karganovic the President of the Srebrenica Historical Project, and an expert on the issue, discusses the recent fabricated uprising in Bosnia and also in Ukraine.
This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Stephan Karganovic. He is the President of the Srebrenica Historical Project. This is part two of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com
PART 1 PART 3
Robles: Okay, I’d like to say a couple of things: first of all you were talking about uniting territories, so that there were no territorial disputes or other ethnic homelands or arguments about that, I don’t know if you are aware, but that is one of the conditions for (A) joining NATO, that is why Saakashvili….
Karganovic: Of course, I’m aware of that. And that is exactly the idea. They have to centralize the country for the convenience of the EU and of NATO.
Karganovic: And they are not really concerned about the local people and how they feel about it.
Robles: Right! And speaking about NATO again, that is one reason why they did not allow Russian peacekeepers in Kosovo at the beginning, because one of the NATO’s conditions is that there should be no foreign military forces, be they peacekeepers or anybody else, that’s why they were killing Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, when Saakashvili was going all out to try to get into NATO.
Karganovic: That’s right!
Robles: Anyway, I’d like to comment again on… and ask you to expand on what you were talking about in light of what is going on in Ukraine. You were talking about analysts. I think they’ve lost something in the chain of command there. I mean, these were people that were already going to publish results and you said it seems like they are reporting on a false reality.
Karganovic: Yes, they are creating their own reality and they are believing their own fictions. And that is what I was saying just a moment ago about the reporting on what was going on in Bosnia. A similar procedure is being applied to the Ukraine. And I think… well, I’m not trying to give them any useful lessons, but if they ask me for advice, I would that is a huge mistake, because if you do that, it is more likely that you are going to make false moves that will cost you politically.
It is better, if you want deceive them, but don’t believe your own lies. And I think that is one of the huge mistakes that they are making. They are so arrogant that they think that they can produce reality and they become also the victims of their own mendacity.
Robles: Right! And I think arrogant is an understatement. I mean, we’ve heard and I'm sure you’ve heard those comments between Victoria Nuland and…I’ve forgot his name…
Karganovic: Of course I have.
Robles: Klitchy, and they are giving everybody these little nicknames, how he is not going to be the Prime Minister and he is going to be here, and oh we’ve spent $52 billion, Ukraine is pretty much ours, going over to Ukraine, because that’s continuing…. Another thing you’ve mentioned, I think it was right and I’d like to underline this as well, was that the same thing was attempted here in Moscow. And the Russian security services and the President, they took a very proper line, they shut down all the instruments that were supposed to bring about this color revolution here. Again, they use the same playbook all the time. We are dealing with people who are extremely arrogant, extremely powerful, but not very creative and not very bright. And you mentioned yourself a few minutes ago that they do not understand the psychology. and they do not understand the people of these countries they are trying to destroy. They don’t understand the Syrian people….
Karganovic: Well, of course, let’s not deny that in some instances they have been successful. But Bosnia is a particularly complicated case, because of its ethnic and religious divisions.
So, you cannot take a college course in Central Europe with a few chapters on Bosnia and then act as if you knew what was going on there, as if you understood the thinking of the people and how they would react in certain situations. It is very-very complex.
And that is where Western analysts are weak and, I would say, the Americans in particular.
So, that is reflected in some of their failures, definitely, and it is clearly reflected in what’s happened in Bosnia last week, which doesn’t mean that they are not going to regroup, analyze what happened and maybe call the British in for help, for some advice. I would do that if were in their place, because the British usually handle these things a lot more subtly. They have a better understanding of these cultural issues. But anyway, I don’t want to give them practical advice.
Robles: If that happens I think the British are famous for using more extreme measures sometimes and I think we would be seeing something like a terrorist act or something taking place. And I’m saying that to stop it from happening. But I would say that any sort of provocation that they can bring about – be it the murder of… Something like they did in Syria with 426 children etc.
Karganovic: Yes, of course. In addition to Gene Sharp’s quote/unquote “Nonviolent Resistance Playbook” there is also this other very sinister playbook to which you are alluding, and where they are going to put an emphasis on…. We just have to keep an eye on this situation and we’ll find out. But the main thing is not to, as they say in Spanish, cantara victoria, because it is not over before it is over, as Yogi Berra said. So, it is going to last for a while yet.
I think that the Republika of Srpska has a very good chance to make it to through this crisis, it has a very good politically savvy leader and people who are not susceptible to this deception, as some of the other targeted societies have been. So, I’m moderately confident, but it is not over.
Robles: I don’t think it is over myself. And I think there needs to be a very intensive effort of the security services of the countries that are currently being targeted and there is an overall theme here. And I think you’ll agree that every country that is friendly or pursues policies with the Russia Federation right now is being targeted intensely.
Karganovic: Yes, absolutely! You can see that in Venezuela. You are probably keeping up with the news from there. They are trying to create their own Maidan in Caracas. I don’t know whether that will work or not, but at least the Venezuelan Government is responding very forcefully, very resolutely.
And then, also, curiously in Brazil when the current president started acting in a more independent way, there was a wave of violence. Again, the pretext was something banal, I think raising the price on buses or something like that.
Robles: Right, and building the stadium for the World Cup or something like that.
Karganovic: Right! But then it escalates from there, because this is a magnet that draws people who are politically unsophisticated and then those who are managing the process escalate by bringing in political slogans, political concerns and so on and so forth. They are very skilled technicians.
Robles: Except for they are not very creative. And they are not very creative, you just mentioned slogans. On the Internet there have appeared… there was the group Otpor which served to destroy Yugoslavia. It was like colour revolution 1.0.
Karganovic: Yes, it is beyond me why they are doing that. I mean, I’ve known uncreative people in my life and so have you, I’m sure, and this is downright stupid.
You just identify yourself immediately by using that fist. I mean, there are other symbols that I could think of. They should come and talk to me, I think I could give them some useful advice, creative advice.
But the fist is a dead giveaway, it immediately classifies this movement as something akin to what happened in Yugoslavia in the year of 2000 and in Georgia, and in other places. So, you see it as a managed process, not a spontaneous one. It is not a popular movement, but an artificial, synthetic movement that has been put together by the same set of political manipulators.
Why they do that? I don’t know.
Robles: With the Femen group, it was visible this punk rock group. I don’t really want to say their name on the air because I don’t say words like that. And the logos are all in what language?
Karganovic: In English. I can talk about the logos right now in Bosnia. And I’ve seen it, of course. I’ve seen it in Kiev: the demonstrators with banners in English. Not all of course, most of them are in Ukrainian, and that is also very significant, because the main language of the majority of the people in Ukraine is Russian actually. And the banners are mostly in Ukrainian and there are a few in English, which obviously are designed to impress the western audiences. They are put on display in front of the Western media to convey a message in a language that people in the West would understand, which means absolutely nothing to Ukrainian grandmothers, of course.
And then, there is another thing that I’d like to point out with respect to the Ukraine. If you listened to the terminology of Mrs. Nuland, she never says [‘ki:ev], she says [‘ki:ef]. So, she is pandering to the Ukrainian nationalist separatist mentality. I think that is very interesting. I don’t think it is a major issue, but certainly she is not doing it by accident. She is appealing to a certain audience and she is snubbing another audience which shouldn’t be snubbing, because they are actually the majority of the population. But again, we were talking about arrogance and its effects, and I think that is another small reflection of that arrogance.
Robles: The narrative in the West about the Ukrainian Government…I’ll be honest, I’ve gotten hate mails, I’ve gotten death threats and stuff for writing some articles on Ukraine. The narrative is that the Government is some sort of evil mafia state and they are like suppressing demonstrators and everything. Can you tell us who is the US State Department (and who in reality) is Victoria Nuland and the EU supporting in Ukraine to overthrow the Government?
Karganovic: Well, it is hard for me to really deal with that question because it was never within my purview to concern myself with those issues. All I know is that she popped up as Assistant Secretary of State. She has this aggressive, decidedly unfeminine demeanor that these women in government now have. That’s one of the basic qualifications for the job.
Robles: She was the ambassador to NATO. That should tell you something.
Karganovic: Right! As far as her background is concerned, I don’t really know the details, all I know is what I see on my television screen and that is bad enough.
You were listening to an interview with Stephan Karganovic. He is the President of the Srebrenica Historical Project.
PART 1 PART 3
18 February, 10:00
Color revolution infection? Tell the West: Get out!
The conversation that was leaked on the Internet between Victoria Nuland, the US Assistant Secretary of State, and the US Ambassador to Ukraine clearly and unarguable proves and demonstrates the US interfering with and in fact manipulating the political events in a sovereign country on its own territory. The rare look at the real workings of US color revolution architects blatantly shows the relationship between the puppeteers and the puppets. In an interview on the construction and implementation of color revolutions Stephan Karganovic, the President of the Srebrenica Historical Project, discussed these issues and much more.
This is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with Stefan Karganovic. He is the president of the Srebrenica Historical Project. This is part 3 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com.
PART 1 PART 2
Robles: Who in reality is Victoria Nuland and the EU supporting in Ukraine to overthrow the government?
Karganovic: Well, it is hard for me to really deal with that question because it was never within my purview to concern myself with those issues. All I know is that she popped up as Assistant Secretary of State. She has this aggressive, decidedly unfeminine demeanor that these women in government now have. That’s one of the basic qualifications for the job.
Robles: She was the ambassador to NATO. That should tell you something.
Karganovic: Right! As far as her background is concerned, I don’t really know the details, all I know is what I see on my television screen and that is bad enough.
Not to mention the scandalous conversation with an ambassador which clearly demonstrates the intention to manipulate political events in a sovereign foreign country, on its territory by the way, which I think is wonderful for the Balkans, we had translated it into Serbian by the way. And it is going around on the Internet.
Karganovic: Because it gives people here, some of them are idealists, they think that..
Robles: They think this doesn't happen?
Karganovic:...things like this may come from the West. But basically they can analyze things if you give then material to analyze and that conversation is pretty blatant because it shows the relationship between the masters (the puppeteers) and the puppets.
Where they are discussing how to distribute government posts, who is acceptable, who is not acceptable, among these opposition leaders. Where are the Ukrainian people in that conversation?
Mrs. Nuland apologized to, I think the EU for her vulgarity, she should have apologized to the people of the Ukraine, not the government, to the people of the Ukraine. I think it never occurred to her to do that.
Robles: Of course not, of course not. And I don't know if you know this about Nuland her husband, his name is Kagan, he is one of the Bilderbergers. So, there you go.
Robles: A few minutes ago you mentioned the demonstrations that were taking place there. And you mentioned that there were more police than there were actual demonstrators, that actually happened here in Moscow as well.
Karganovic: That happened in Belgrade a few days ago certainly. I think it was on Sunday or Monday, I'm not sure.
Robles: What other areas or countries do you think are going to be targeted in the near future? And why do you think there is this big push right now? Do you think this has something to do with the failure to start a war in Syria that they were supposed to profit from? And if you could: we were talking about the revolutions that they are organizing in countries that are friendly with Russia. What about the Middle East? Because they pretty much use the same formula, I think, all over the world.
Karganovic: Yes. Yes. It starts with something trivial but then there is always an organized group waiting in the wings to take over the protest which often is based on very legitimate grievances, certainly in Bosnia it is.
My sympathies are entirely on the side of the poor people who are demonstrating, I would not encourage them to destroy their own country in the illusory search for a better life, because that is not going to take them anywhere. But certainly I understand their feelings. They have rights to be outraged. But you see, nobody talks over there in Bosnia, nobody talks about the real root cause of the miserable conditions of these workers and young people and so on and so forth, it is the imposition of western neoliberal policies which destroyed their economies, destroyed their societies…
Robles: In the first place.
That is the real culprit. So do they really think that they are going to get any “assistance” from western countries who are themselves deeply in trouble.
But of course since the media is completely controlled, many people, if not most are not even aware of that. They still think that in Western Europe and other western countries life is like it was 30 or 50 years ago. So they are actually unaware of changes and the trends. If they were, I think they would look at their prospects within the European Union and the western alliances in general much more critically.
But anyway if you look at the direct causes of that economic and social conditions that are oppressing them, it is the imposition of western inspired policies. But the local elite, the commentators and the people in general do not seem to get that. So many of them are looking for the remedy in the West which is where the disease came from. That is a paradox.
Robles: Yeah. If you could comment on President Dodik, so as I understand his policies are to unify Serbian space?
Karganovic: Well, based on what he said today as a matter of fact, he said that even if the Republic of Srpska opted for independence, it would continue to be a separate political entity and would not draw in Serbia. Whether that is just a political statement or a genuine reflection of the way he feels, I really don't know.
But I would say that the best policy would be to take it one step at the time – the first step is to run away from Bosnia as quickly as possible, to get rid of this unnatural and unworkable union with the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina which is being maintained by force and pressure from the West.
Other regions are given a free hand to secede like Kosovo for example, but the Republic of Srpska is denied even the thought of seceding even though it would be probably in its best interests to do that and certainly it is the wish of the overwhelming majority of the people. So it is clearly the application of double standards at work.
Robles: I see. Would you agree that the EU will do anything to stop, or to oust, Dodik because of his orientation towards Russia?
Karganovic: Absolutely. I think that they will try to do everything they can to undermine him. And just to point out to you, that few days ago when the violence was at its most intense, the High Representative in Bosnia, Valentin Inzko, who is from Austria, gave an interview to a Viennese newspaper, the Courier, where he said that the Dayton Agreement was good when it came to ending the war, but that it is obsolete now and that the new solution has to be implemented and that if the violence continued then it might be possible that the international peace keeping contingent in Bosnia might need reinforcement and might be used to impose order. So that is a pretty obvious threat.
They are inciting violence from below and they are contemplating the use of force from above to impose the synthetic solution that they envisaged and which obviously is best in their interests, not in the interests of the people of Bosnia.
Robles: In other words those were code words to “bring in the troops.”
Karganovic: Yes. That is the way I interpret it.
Robles: About Ukraine, I'd like your comment on the authorities, what seems to me and I think it seems to a lot of people who are watching the situation: why haven't they cracked down?
Karganovic: That is incomprehensible to me. I would like to hope that the Government of President Yanukovich is cooperating closely with Moscow and that Moscow knows more about the situation on the ground than I do and that it is giving correct tactical advice to Mr. Yanukovich. That is the best case scenario that I can think of.
The other scenario is that Yanukovich is simply an incompetent fool. So between the two I hope it is the first scenario.
Robles: I think the Ukrainian people and I think that he made very, very proper and normal decision when they just looked at the numbers and they figured that if they joined the Customs Union over 7 years Ukraine would bring in about $100 billion in the same seven year period where they would bring in $1 billion by joining the EU. It is just a simple economic decision that was good for the country, yeah?
Karganovic: Yes. And he is now paying the political price for making that decision.
Robles: Only because in the West they are so anti-Russian I think they have gone insane. I don't know what it is anymore. They are definitely not interested in peace, definitely not interested in development, definitely not interested in the economic well-being of all of us together as we could all work together and make a wonderful world, but..
Karganovic: Well, I should hope so. But political elites are rarely interested in the well-being of anybody but themselves.
Karganovic: And what you are saying fits in with that analysis I believe.
Robles: Yeah. Predictions or what would you say to people who want to stop anything from getting worse? Where do you see that going? Do you think they are going to intensify their efforts? Or do you think they are going to back off?
Karganovic: Well, that is a tough question. The orchestrators of the color revolution..they come back over and over again. They have their objectives and they are pursuing them.
But of course when you have opposed interests, you are on one side and your opponents are on the other, your opponent is going to pursue his objectives and interests and you have to pursue yours and defend yourself.
So, you just have to analyze the situation and make the right moves to protect what you hold dear, in this case the independence or the autonomy of the Republic of Srpska and the chance for its people to lead a peaceful and independent life, independent in the sense of being able to make their own basic decisions.
So if that is your objective then you have to work hard to educate them, I think that is the most important thing right now about the threat of a color revolution. They have to understand how it works, the mechanism, so they can recognize the tricks when they see them and not fall for them. That is I think fundamental.
The other thing is security arrangements have to be made. I'm not of course competent to say what exactly should be done but certainly things like what happened in Russia, the law that regulates the activities of these phony NGOs, that is urgently needed in the Republic of Srpska and I believe that the government is thinking of asking the legislature to pass such a law. That would be a very good step in the right direction and so on and so forth, and you have to keep a vigilant eye on the activities of these subversive groups and you have to inform the public, because a public made aware of the threat is immunized against it.
These color revolutions are phony mass movements and they can succeed only when they can successfully act under a false flag of social concern, they pick out whatever the biggest grievance is at the moment and they pretend to support the people who are aggrieved but really they are out to manipulate for their own agenda. People have to be made aware of that.
Once they understand it, the whole scheme crashes like a lead balloon. And I think so far we have seen that in the Republic of Srpska and I am happy about that. But I'm not putting my guard down, it is not over yet.
Robles: No, it is not. Ok, if we could in closing, I'd like to ask your reaction to this scenario: pretend we are in Washington DC, right? There is a mass protest, right? And in flies for example; Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, for example. And he starts handing out pancakes with sausages, or something, or doughnuts to the protestors.
Karganovic: He would be declared a persona non grata and put on the next plane out of the country. And that is exactly what the Ukrainian Government should have done a long time ago with the western agitators who were coming in a continues stream to Kiev to stir things up.
Robles: And now just for our American listeners: this happens, then all of a sudden all these demonstrators, they are burning tires, they are running on the streets and they unfurl banners in the Russian language. Can you picture that happening? What would happen then?
Karganovic: Well, I think the American people would not take kindly to such a development. There would be a huge outpouring of revulsion at that type of interference in the internal affairs of the US. And that would be entirely proper and of course Russia would never do such a thing because the Russian Government has a firm position of respecting the sovereignty of other countries.
Robles: That is right!
Karganovic: And this is a pure hypothesis, but if it were to happen, it would very much perturb the American people and rightly so.
Robles: So why are the Russian people and the Serbian people and the Ukrainian people – why are we supposed to swallow this? And I'd like to finish on that.
Karganovic: You don't have to swallow it. You are at liberty to react appropriately and to tell these intruders: get out! That is my message to them.
Robles: That is a very good message! Ok, thank you very much, sir. A very good message, thank you, sir. It was a pleasure speaking with you. I appreciate it.
Karganovic: Same here. Hasta luego me llamas cuando quieres.
Robles: Esta bien, gracias.
Karganovic: Ok, bye-bye.
Robles: Bye-bye, take care.
You were listening to an interview with Stefan Karganovic. He is the president of the Srebrenica Historical Project. That was part 3 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening and as always we wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.
19 February, 21:38
Heathrow Harassment, Snowden, NSA Spying
The US Government and their war on journalism has taken a new and dangerous twist, now the US and its surrogates have taken the unprecedented move of going after the lawyers. Recently Jesselyn Radack, an attorney for Edward Snowden was detained at Heathrow airport in the UK, the same airport that has detained many journalists and associates connected to WikiLeaks and the Snowden case.
In an interview with the Voice of Russia Radack spoke her "interrogation at Heathrow", about NSA spying, Mr. Snowden and Obama’s "unhinged" war on whistleblowers.
Hello! This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Jesselyn Radack. She is the National Security and Human Rights Director at the Government Accountability Project. She is also a lawyer and legal advisor for Edward Snowden.
Robles: Hello Jesselyn! How are you this evening? Thanks for agreeing to speak with me, I really appreciate it.
Radack: I'm doing fine, thank you.
Robles: Can you tell our listeners a little bit about what happened?
Radack: Sure! Two mornings ago, when I arrived at Heathrow in the UK they called Border Force and an agent has directed me to a specific booth. And the agent asked the usual questions.
You know, "Why are you here?"
And I said: "To see friends".
And he said: "Who?"
And I said: "Well, the Sam Adams Associates who are going to be giving an award"
And then he wanted to know who were the members of the Sam Adams Associates. And so I named the members.
And then he noted: "Why have you been to Russia two times in the past three months?"
And I said: "I have a client there."
Again, he said: "Who?"
And I said: "Edward Snowden."
Then he said: "Do you represent Bradley Manning?"
And I said: "No."
It was very odd, he was just like: "Who is Bradley Manning?" And then, the same thing: "Who is Edward Snowden?"
Snowden – I said – "a whistleblower and an asylee". And Bradley Manning – I said – "a whistleblower".
And then he: "Where is Bradley Manning?"
I said: "In jail."
And he said: "So, he is a criminal"
And I said: "He is a political prisoner."
He said: "Did you represent Snowden?"
And I said: "Yes, I'm a human rights attorney."
And at that point I was allowed to go through. But obviously grilling into my clients and where they are, and where I've met with them, all this stuff is attorney-client privilege and is completely irrelevant for the purposes of immigrations and way above and beyond the usual set of questions I've gotten in the last 14 countries I've travelled to.
Robles: I see. So, how long did this interrogation take?
Radack: Between five and ten minutes.
Robles: Okay, not as bad as we were thinking. Was the fact that you were in Russia… is that now a warning flag or something for what they are going to take people off to the side and question them more?
Radack: I don't think it should be. I think the reason I've got these extra questions was clearly because I represented Snowden, because I was with Tom Drake and we've been through similar things, we first gotten the Sam Adams Award, we were there to give the award to Bradley Manning and he didn't get stopped.
So, we were trying to figure out the difference and the only thing that we did really come up with was the fact that I'm representing Snowden, that this was just being done to intimidate me and harass me, and mess with me, which is not acceptable. They do it with someone just because they happen to be an attorney representing someone who is socially unpopular.
Robles: I'd like to bring up, I spoke to Michael Ratner recently and he said that they haven't gone after the lawyers yet. And now, this is very frightening I think, if they are going to start harassing lawyers. Do you think this is the beginning or do you think there is going to be enough backlash where they are going to back off? Or is this going to be a procedure now? What is going on?
Radack: It's hard to know. I mean, there have been a couple of things that have revealed them spying on attorneys. I know they've been spying on attorneys, but the question is – whether or not attorneys en-mass are going to get up and say what journalists said, like – "No, absolutely no spying on us!"
The American Bar Association would need to make a decision I think about whether or not it is going to engage in some sort of collective action. I've no doubt that they don't care if it's attorney-client privilege, there is no carve out for attorney-client privileged conversations, or doctor-patient conversations, or accountant-client conversations. The NSA collects it all.
And that's the whole problem with indiscriminate bulk collection on innocent people. There is a lot of supposedly privileged and protected information in there and the government simply does not care.
Robles: I don't see any change coming up soon, but we are hoping there would be. What do you think about anything changing? I mean, the regulations or some sort of reigning in of all of this. It seems like they are just continuing with complete and utter impunity.
Radack: I think we would need to have powerful people get spied upon or find the records of them spying on Supreme Court members or on incredibly powerful people to get them to wake up and realize that there is a problem.
I mean, if they are spying on the Supreme Court to see which way it is going to rule on something, that would then maybe be something that would shake things up, a revelations like that.
Robles: Can you tell us anything about Edward Snowden's latest revelation that GCHQ and, of course, the NSA since that's their subsidiary, that they were spying on WikiLeaks? And if you could, give us a tidbit on how Edward Snowden is?
Radack: It confirms what a lot of us suspected for years, that they have this coordinated campaign against Julian Assange personally and WikiLeaks as an organization. And now, obviously, WikiLeaks affiliates – people who have visited with WikiLeaks, people who have worked for WikiLeaks, people who have had contacts with WikiLeaks – it is really frightening and also, at the same time, staggering that the US Government has spent more time and money going after Julian Assange and WikiLeaks than it has going after terrorists.
And it debunks the whole myth that these programs are meant to catch terrorists, because they are obviously not. They've been used to go after people against whom the US has the vendetta.
Robles: Do you fear for your safety now, I mean, if you travel back to the US? Have you been threatened in any other ways?
Radack: I have been told, I could have troubles getting back to the US. In general, I haven't feared for my safety in the same kind of way my client has had to worry. But to the extent that this is now considered fair game – going after lawyers – yes, it definitely makes me more concerned.
What happened is completely inappropriate. I hope my story is the end of this kind of thing. But I feel like there is an increase of journalists and lawyers, and people who are dissidents being harassed at the border, whether it is Jacob Appelbaum, or Laura Poitras, or David Miranda. You know, there is a growing list in it and it is not acceptable.
Robles: I know, this might be a foolish question, because, I'm sure, it's been talked about and discussed, but isn't there some international mechanism to reign in the US? I mean, couldn't, for example, lawyers all get together and write some petition to the UN or something for stuff like this?
Radack: Yes, I think there probably is. There is an international right to travel free of encumbrances under the international law. But the US Supreme Court has said it doesn't care about international law. So, yes, there probably are some creative mechanisms we could come up with to challenge that. But, again, it would be more symbolic, I think, than necessarily enforcement.
Robles: I'm talking about some enforcement mechanism. I know you are an American citizen and talking about this stuff may not be politically healthy for you, but I think there should be some concrete enforcement mechanism to stop things like re-routing presidential aircraft and things like that, because that stuff is just unbelievable.
Radack: It is, it's been extreme. Obama has been completely unhinged over the Snowden case and over the leaks in general, and going after whistleblowers. It really gets to the point where the emperor is running around buck naked and even all the higher-ups are saying: "No, there is a problem with these programs, they cannot survive intact, especially 215 and the bulk collection program."
And the President alone is saying – I'm keeping this program. It is really becoming quite embarrassing, I would think, for him but…
Robles: I don't think he is embarrassed by anything. Do you really think he'd be embarrassed?
Radack: Yes, really. Exactly! I mean, I don't think…. A lot of people are uncomfortable that his own White House internal review panel said the program should be killed, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board said the same thing, a Federal Judge said the same thing, the Tech Giants said the same thing – everyone has been unanimous in their course about doing that, which is interesting, and yet he still persists.
Robles: So, the President of the US serves himself and the people are his servants. I mean, that's what it seems to be that it's become.
Radack: I think he forgot that in a constitutional democracy the people run the government, not the other way around.
Robles: I know, that's my point. That's how it should be, right? It is no longer like that, that was my whole point.
Radack: Right! It is well-taken. That's exactly true.
Robles: I mean, that's what I see from everything that is going on. I mean, it is like he is not concerned with the constituency, the government is not concerned with serving the people. The people are basically supposed to be subservient and completely in-line with whatever the government wants, whether it is spying on them or taking their rights away, or harassing them every time they want to go somewhere.
Radack: Right! It would work really well if we were living in a monarchy or a country without a constitution. We fought an entire revolution to have the rights we have and the First, the Fourth and the Fifth are being violated repeatedly. I am going to have to go in a minute.
Robles: Anything you want to tell us? What are you doing in London right now?
Radack: In London right now I'm going to the launch of a new organization. And we will be giving the Sam Adams Award tomorrow.
Robles: Who are the recipients?
Radack: Bradley Manning is receiving this year's award. We went to Russia last year to deliver the same award to Snowden.
Robles: How is Edward Snowden?
Radack: He is doing fine.
Robles: And last point, I just want to underline. Remember, we talked about this 1.7 million files that he was supposedly to have had. I find that really interesting and telling the mainstream media never picked it up, that you yourself said it was around 50 thousand, right?
Radack: Right! That was my understanding. I don't know why the government is coming up with this number other than to make it sound really huge and impossible for him to have reviewed or done responsibly. I don't know where the government is pulling this number out of. But again, the government has lied over and over, and over again in this case. And Edward Snowden has been the truthful line.
Robles: You comment on the media in the light of that, you are right there at the source, you know how many files he has better than anybody and nobody wants to pick up on that. So, your comment on the western media coverage, if you could?
Radack: I have no idea of the actual number. I think Glen Greenwald said it was in the order of 55 thousand. That is my recollection.
Robles: Can you comment on western media?
Radack: The western media is slowly becoming a little more neutral towards Mr. Snowden. And the NY Times of course did a great editorial in his favour, which is wonderful. So, I hope the western media continues to really cover the people who should be held accountable, which is the NSA. The real criminals in this case are the NSA, not Mr. Snowden.
Robles: Thank you very much, I really appreciate it.
You were listening to an interview with Jesselyn Radack – the National Security and Human Rights Director at the Government Accountability Project. She is also a lawyer and legal advisor for Edward Snowden. Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you the best wherever in this big world you may be.
20 February, 22:39
Snowden Docs Prove GCHQ/NSA Spying on WikiLeaks
More documents supplied by Edward Snowden have proven the UK's signals intelligence agency GCHQ and the NSA have been monitoring and gathering information about everyone that has visited the Wikileaks website and supporters and anyone associated with WikiLeaks. In an interview with the Voice of Russia Kristinn Hrafnsson reveals that WikiLeaks was classified as a "malicious foreign actor" which allows western spy agencies to target the organization and even simple visitors in the same aggressive manner that they can target terrorists, this includes US nationals.
Mr. Hrafnsson also sates that Julian Assange and other WikiLeaks members were also placed on a man-hunt list as if they were as dangerous as al-Qaeda terrorists planning an attack. Mr. Hrafnsson believes that it is about time this was stopped.
Hello. This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson, the official spokesperson and the number two at the Wikileaks Organization.
Robles: Can you tell us about the GCHQ/NSA spying on Wikileaks that was revealed earlier?
Hrafnsson: Yes, it was an incredibly revealing document, basically confirming what we had been claiming for a long time and maintaining that we were under this kind of persecution by the US spying agency and their partners in Britain.
What is revealed today in the documents that are supplied by Edward Snowden is the fact that GCHQ, the spy agency in the UK, has been monitoring and gathering information about everyone that has visited the Wikileaks website, gathered the IP addresses of the individuals who have gone to the website, and through that, of course, they can identify each and every individual.
And they have supplied this information to the US, to the National Security Agency, the NSA, which is in total contrast to their previous claim that the Americans and the Brits were not spying on each other’s nationals.
Now furthermore, there is a document revealed by Snowden that shows that the NSA was contemplating to designate Wikileaks as a quote: malicious foreign actor, unquote, for the purpose of targeting.
Now that would have meant that they could use increased methods in surveillance against individuals within Wikileaks and supporters that Wikileaks has and that would include of course the US nationals, who are supporters of this so-called "malicious foreign actor".
Furthermore, there is a document released that shows that the NSA was putting Julian Assange and others in the Wikileaks groups on man-hunt list, which meant that Julian Assange was put in the same category as a member of Al-Qaeda, as a member of terrorist organizations.
This is extremely disturbing of course and we have never seen before a proof of how far these organizations were willing to go in attacking and trying to take down a media organization that is fighting for transparency and holding truth to power.
So, it is a dark day in journalism. It should be a very serious wakeup call to all of those who are interested in defending media freedom and the ability of the media to do its duty in a healthy civil society.
Robles: A lot of questions came up regarding the lists first off. Are your privy to the lists themselves, have you seen other names of other journalists perhaps? You don’t have to name names, but are there other journalists? Are there other people that you know about on that list?
Hrafnsson: No, I don’t have the actual list of names but you can expect that this is a considerable list because it includes basically, and mentions, not just the core group around Wikileaks but also volunteers, journalists that have worked with Wikileaks and have been in frequent contact, I would gather, and a wider net of individuals that are in the support group of Wikileaks. So, it is quite a considerable and sizable number of people.
Robles: I wonder if my name is on there. I wish I could find out.
Hrafnsson: It is quite possible that your name is there.
Robles: Malicious foreign actor – now you said that they can go after US nationals of course. What does that mean with you, yourself? I am sure you are on that list. You must be on the list.
Hrafnsson: I would gather that I would be on that list and it is chilling to read that, for me as a journalist for 25 years, that it would come into mind of these organizations to categorize me personally (I speak for myself) as something that would be on par with Al-Qaeda or terrorists planning to cause great harm to a nation.
This just shows to me how outright craziness has caught on in these circles.
We of course have seen and heard the response of the politicians and those who speak on behalf of political powers in the US but we and I did not expect that they were willing to take it this far down this illegal road to use tools, and methods, and strategies, which has been defended in resistance because it was supposed to be in defense of national security and against terrorist operations, but now it is used against proper journalism, which should be in every society and should be practiced vigorously.
So, it is of grave concern not only to us of course but to all journalists who believe that journalism is an important element in a healthy society.
Robles: Yes, I agree 100%. A colleague of mine who I respect recently said they’ve gone insane with the droning, with everything. They’ve just completely gone insane. And last month I talked to Michael Ratner and he mentioned that "at least they haven’t gone after the lawyers yet". I talked to Jesselyn Radack not long ago, and now it seems like they are going after the lawyers. So, what is next? They continue with complete unmitigated impunity. It is unbelievable.
Hrafnsson: Yes, this needs to stop because this has gone way too far. And as you point out when they are going after the lawyers that are supporting or representing the organizations, or whistleblowers, that is simply totally insanity.
And what happened to Jesselyn Radack where she was intimidated at Heathrow Airport is totally inexcusable. Jennifer Robinson, the Australian lawyer that has been advisor to Wikileaks had also an unpleasant experience at the same airport. So, this seems to be escalating.
Robles: Can you tell us about that?
Hrafnsson: If you are referring to Jennifer Robinson, she was boarding a flight when she got the message that she was on a list that she needs the security checking, and when that was questioned, we found out that it was the list of those who were basically suspected of being in connection with spurious entities, probably malicious foreign actors. This is a very serious trend.
Robles: This is a new category for me "malicious foreign actor". That could be almost anyone. I am probably a malicious foreign actor, I guess.
Hrafnsson: I am sure that the NSA could categorize anybody that is questioning the interests of those in power in the US as a malicious foreign actor.
Robles: I have an idea, I was wondering about this: (and Jesselyn Radack mentioned it), about getting some information out there about big names and powerful people that have been spied on. Is there any way you could go through all the information you have and compile a list of these big American politicians or Senators, or Supreme Court Justices that have been spied on? Maybe that would actually help them to come over to the side of the light.
Hrafnsson: As Edward Snowden has revealed in interviews, nobody is excluded from the dragnet surveillance in the US. He said that he could have access to the information about and spied upon people in Congress.
So, we don’t know where this stops and who has been included really in the illegal surveillance. So, the lawmakers are included, but we would need direct proof that they were spied upon. Of course, we have the evidences and proves that they were spying on foreign dignitaries and leaders of friendly nations including Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, president Dilma in Brazil, creating serious rifts in relations with these countries.
So, this has gone far and your friend said that this is insane - I would actually say that your friend is right. This is insane.
Robles: How is that going to affect users and visitors and supporters of Wikileaks? Do you think there is going to be some negative that they found out they’ve been spied upon? Is there any chance that you could publish something regarding that list of these malicious foreign actors or people who you know have been spied upon? Are you planning to warn people or do anything about that?
Hrafnsson: I actually urge people to totally ignore this and, yes, go to the website and support the organization, buy a T-shirt and declare and show support for Wikileaks because millions of people are doing that – supporting us. And the more they do is a show of force against the outrageous and ridiculous manner this is carried out.
So, we will urge people not to stay away, on the contrary, show your support for the organization. By doing that you are showing corrupt powers that they will not have their way, you cannot take down millions of people.
Robles: I would like to tell our listeners get 10 friends to get 10 friends, to get 10 friends to visit Wikileaks. There is no way they are going to spy on the entire planet and if they do, they need to be locked up somewhere.
Hrafnsson: Absolutely. That is a good idea. The news of today is only strengthening our determination in our fight. It is our duty as journalists and publishers to continue and we urge people to show us support so we can continue.
Robles: How are you personally?
Hrafnsson: It is in my own way quite a relief to get a confirmation in documents about what we have suspected and that we have been claiming for a very long time.
We have been called paranoid, we have been called conspiracy theorists but go to our website, go to the documents and see for yourself. The proof is there. Sometimes the truth is more incredible than any lie or fabrication. This is an incredible revelation that we see out of Snowden’s documents today.
Robles: Is there any international mechanism or do you think there is going to be one or something that can be done to stop this? They are obliterating the rights not only of American citizens but of people all over the world. What they are doing is illegal. Somebody has to be able to do something about it.
Hrafnsson: We have gone on the offensive, we have launched campaigns demanding investigation into illegal doings of the NSA. We’ve done that in several European countries and we are investigating ways to do that in the US as well.
So, we are definitely gathering forces around us to fight back because this cannot go on. If it is not stopped, it will basically silence the national security journalists in any country and it cannot go on.
Robles: Any chance of getting something like, this might sound a little naïve, international petition? I think you could easily gather maybe hundreds of millions of people.
Hrafnsson: I am hoping of course that there will be an international outcry against these attempts of blatant attack on journalism. Let’s hope that journalists will understand that this is an attack on their basic platform that they are operating on, and let’s hope that people all around the world will understand that this is extremely serious attack on journalism, it’s the time for people to wake up.
You were listening to an interview with Kristinn Hrafnsson, he’s the official spokesperson and the number two at the Wikileaks Organization. Thank you very much for listening and we wish you the best.
20 February, 23:00
Ukraine: "Sick fascist filth and gangland violence as political opposition"
With the release of a recent conversation between the US Ambassador to Ukraine and Victoria Nuland plotting the downfall of the current legitimate elected government in Kiev, it is clear who is behind the attempted coup in Ukraine. US backed "activists" with sniper rifles and hand guns are openly firing on police something that would not be tolerated anywhere in the world but which is being portrayed by western leaders as being legitimate opposition protest behavior. However such cold-blooded murder would lead to brains being swept off the street in their cities. According to Voice of Russia regular Rick Rozoff, who spoke on these issues, what we are color revolution techniques in action and the western media is playing along as a propaganda tool for those behind the scenes.
Hello. This is John Robles Rick Rozoff, I am speaking with Rick Rozoff the Owner and Manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. This is a regular feature of the Voice of Russia.
Robles: Can you give us an update on what is going on with NATO? A lot of stuff is going on, a lot of attention on Ukraine. And I’d like to ask you about Ukraine. But, first, what is going on with NATO right now?
Rozoff: It is acting true to its new purpose in the post cold war period, as an international military block. For example, just in the last week or so, for the first time ever, a delegation from the NATO military committee, and the military committee in its full form consists of the military chiefs of staff, of all the 28 full NATO members, visited Georgia. And this again is a first, it is unprecedented, and clearly acknowledging, or demonstrating how strategically important Georgia is to NATO’s Eurasia, but ultimately European plans. That is number one.
NATO’s also commenced its air patrols over the North-Atlantic nation of Iceland including warplanes of both Finland and Sweden with the expressed intention of further integrating Finland and Sweden, with an expressed intention of further integrating Finland and Sweden. Of course Finland has a lengthy border with Russia, those two countries into NATO as ultimately four NATO members.
We have to recall that both those nations have troops fighting under NATO command with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, that Sweden has supplied Griffin military aircraft for the war against Libya 3 years ago (in parts of the word).
Also, the NATO warships have docked in both Puntland, which is a semi-autonomous, really at this point, an independent part of Somalia as well as in the Seychelles, an island nation in the Indian Ocean of the east coast of Africa in recent days. This is part of the permanent NATO military operation, military presence in the Indian Ocean called Ocean Shield, which complements their permanent military naval deployment in the Mediterranean, Active Endeavor, and so forth.
We also noticed the first US guided-missile-warship arriving at the Rota Naval Base in Spain, on the Atlantic coast of Spain, as part of what eventually will be 4 US warships with interceptor missiles, part of the European phased adaptive approach, but ultimately part of the international US and Allied missile shield program, interceptor missile program. So, this gives you some indication of what is going on throughout the world.
There have been other initiatives by NATO in other parts of the world, including in Africa most notably, something that isn’t directly NATO but for all the difference it make, it may as well be. Just a few days ago, in Brussels, which is the headquarters of both the European Union and NATO, the European Union announced a joint military operation in the Central African Republic (CAR). This is done through the military committee of the European Union, comparable to what was done in neighboring Chad a few years ago.
But it is noteworthy that NATO has recruited several non-EU member states to provide troops for that mission including Georgia, Serbia, Canada, Norway, Turkey and the US. This was at an alleged Fourth Generation Conference in Brussels on February the 13th, 5 days ago. That gives you an idea of what is happening internationally.
To segue into our main topic of discussion: today the Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen, again called on quote: "All parties of Ukraine to desist from violence."
I could only imagine if a comparable situation, one that’s… what is occurring in Kiev right now, were to be occurring in Brussels, if he say: "All parties in Belgium to refrain from violence", when state security personnel are being shot to death and set on fire with Molotov cocktails, if he would have such a balanced perspective, of course he would not.
Robles: Regarding Ukraine, how many policemen have been injured already there?
Rozoff: The number is rising of course. But the latest report I see is that over 184 police officers have been wounded, 35 of them critically, and at least 7 of them have been shot to death.
Robles: What is the reaction from the US right now? Has Nuland come out condemning any of this? Has anybody in the US condemned this or are they all supporting it?
Rozoff: The US Ambassador to Ukraine, the same Geoffrey Pyatt who was caught on tape with Victoria Nuland in recent weeks, plotting the downfall of the current legitimate elected government in Kiev, threatened sanctions, mentioned the fact that sanctions could be enforced against all parties.
It is impossible to levy sanctions against fascist guttersnipes and mobsters who are on a rampage, they have no assets that can be seized and no trade that can be halted and so forth. So, this is a unilateral threat to the Government of Ukraine, which is under siege, quite literally under siege, with government buildings being stormed, personnel being seized captive, even killed. In the case of the central headquarters of the ruling party in the country, the Party of Regions, where a member… presumably a member… a security office by one account, at their central headquarters in Kiev was murdered.
What we are seeing is almost gangland violence trying to pass itself off as political opposition.
What is very important to noted is that the president of the country Victor Yanukovich is to meet with three major opposition leaders: Yatsenyuk and Klitschko and Tyagnibok at 11:00. So something is going to be breaking at that point but there is a clear coordination between the opposition figures within the Parliament, within the Verkhovna Rada and the Molotov-cocktail-hurling-rifle-wielding so-called opposition outside.
Robles: I’m sorry, Rick, are there charges? Haven’t charges been pressed against Klitschko and, what is his name, Yatsenyuk? Aren’t they facing charges already? And if you could, can you tell us about..you told me before we started about videos you saw, that they were actually… someone had a sniper rifle or something, a rifle with a scope and they were actually just shooting policemen.
Rozoff: That is exactly it, you know anyone who e-mails me at firstname.lastname@example.org, I’d be glad to give then a link to that video. It is circulating, somebody in Italy has sent it out and there are several similar videos. This is one of the more stark I’ve seen.
It shows a young, so-called "activist" as US would portray him, with (exactly) a sniper rifle with a scope, firing presumably at police or other security personnel, somebody else has a hand gone and is firing.
So there are weapons on the street. And clearly the fact that 7 security personnel have been shot dead confirms of that that firearms are being used.
Again, I don’t know in which other capital city in the world this sort of behavior would be tolerated, much less portrayed by western leaders as being legitimate opposition protest behavior when what you are talking about is cold blooded murder.
Robles: Can you imagine in the US that people have started shooting police just openly on the street?
Rozoff:I hate to put it in such stark and graphic terms, but the only way I could characterize this is: they’d be sweeping their brains off the street for the next day.
Robles: I mean how can they possibly get away with trying to support this? What are the American people, I mean the average people, thinking about this?
Rozoff:Unfortunately the average person doesn’t go to the Internet and look up videos which are readily accessible. But I would have to say largely in the Russian media as I don’t know anywhere else in the world we are seeing these videos, even there are often times western news agencies – Reuters, BBC and so forth. But because of the controlled nature of news particularly in relation to foreign affairs in the US and other NATO countries we are only seeing the doctored and sanitized version.
And I often argue this, John, I think perhaps even on your show – it is an equivalent of somebody walking into a movie theater where the hero has finally taken enough from the villain and starts fighting back. And when you see that, and only that, it is very difficult to confuse the characters and to believe that the perpetrator is the victim and vice versa. It is one of the methods used by the western establishment. So called news media, which are really propaganda outlets, to portray the "peaceful protestors being assaulted without provocation by brutal security forces".
But again, you are correct in stating: where something like this to happen in Washington DC, or Paris, or London, I can assure you the first police officer who was injured in any manner, would be the cause for a crackdown, the likes of which wouldn’t be forgotten in a hurry. However the trick about the "regime change", so-called "color revolution technique", which is: to place the targeted government in a situation where if they do not respond harshly, they are seen as vulnerable and then the violence is escalated. If they make any effort, no matter how belated, to even defend themselves, it is seen as being a gross violation of human rights and portrayed that way by the western governments and their rather formidable media outlets.
And this is a situation that I believe is occurring right now in Kiev. But we have to..anyone who has seen this, who has gone to my website or Russian websites and has seen the actual fires in downtown Kiev, this is again the capital city of a European country going up in flames, for the second time in 15 years we saw Belgrade similarly set of fire by NATO bombers, what will be 15 years from next month, if this is a new world order what you are seeing is a resumption of fascistic brutal violent uprisings which ultimately are backed by the US and its cohort of NATO military powers. And what I fear right now, if the violence is not halted very quickly in Ukraine you are going to see full-fledged, if not civil war, you are going to see foreign-backed-armed-insurgency, if not comparable in every particular to what’s happening in Syria at least similar in terms of its basic dynamic.
Robles: I’d like to make a comment here for… and this might be a little unusual… for American law enforcement officers, police officers in the US. I’d like to make a plea for them, look at what’s happening to their colleagues in Ukraine and call their senators or whoever and ask them: "How can they possibly support this?" What do you think?
Rozoff: That is a very good point. A lot of Chicago police officers incidentally are of Ukrainian ethnic background, there is a neighborhood not terribly far from where I am called Ukrainian Village, as a matter of fact. And to see their colleagues and there is, let’s be honest, there is a special sense of fraternity or comradery between people of the same professions around the world particularly those that entail some degree of personal danger. And for police officers around the world to be watching this: you know, I would suggest that there is an understanding they themselves could be next if some western supported insurgent uprising of the sort that is occurring on the streets of Kiev.
Incidentally there is a report by INTERFAX Ukraine that armed groups in Western Ukraine and Lviv have been intercepted by security personnel on route to Kiev. So what you are talking about is something almost comparable to, say, Generalissimo Franko’s march on Madrid, Spain in the late 30s counting on the fifth column (the infamous fifth column) supporters within the city to assist them and so forth. But this is nothing less than an effort to topple a legitimate government in Europe in the 21st century through vicious street violence, the sort one may have associated with Adolf Hitler’s attempt to Beer Hall Putsch in 1923 or Mussolini’s March on Rome. This is the kind of sick fascist filth we are seeing in Ukraine.
Robles: I see.
This is John Robles. You were listening to an interview with Mr Rick Rozoff, the Owner and Manager of the Stop NATO website and international mailing list. This is a weekly feature of the Voice of Russia. You can find other work by me and by Mr Rick Rozoff on our website at voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening and we wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.
21 February, 18:00
Ukraine: Another Piece in US/NATO/EU Neo-Con Puzzle
A monstrous crime is being committed in Ukraine right before the eyes of the world and the western media is helping to cover it up and distract the attention of the entire world from the core fact that the events in Ukraine are not a popular uprising but a carefully orchestrated synthetic coup d’état brought about by long entrenched western color revolution infrastructure that was installed by US/NATO/EU to bring about the illegal act of regime change on the sovereign country of Ukraine.
The unprecedented violent actions by the armed insurgents, who openly use deadly force on law enforcement and have set Kiev in flames, attempting to overthrow the government by force, are in fact treasonous crimes against the Ukraine and the people of Ukraine as they are being controlled from the outside and violate all internationally accepted democratic principles as well as all of the internal laws and constitutionally dictated standards of conduct enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine.
It is illegal under international law for any country to carry out measures to bring about the illegal change of the government in any other sovereign state, this includes support of any kind for insurgent forces, the implementation of economic and other measures to pressure the government to step down or dissolve and all other instruments and measures both covert and overt that may be used to bring about what is now popularly called "regime change" by the West and the US Government.
Overthrowing governments and removing presidents by force is illegal and covered in laws and ruling by bodies such as the World Court and even the International Criminal Court, which has become a mere instrument of the West, however the United Nations Charter is the most important document and widely respected of all of these instruments and one which all countries that attempt to abide by international law attempt to follow.
Under the UN Charter all attempts by the US/NATO/EU to influence the events in Ukraine so as to bring about a resolution that conforms to their own interests are illegal.
The debate over US/NATO/EU meddling in Ukraine and the use of US/NATO/EU military force, economic measures, political pressure and all of the other "tools" they use, including aggressive military attack and occupation, to effect regime changes in countries such as Afghanistan, Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Serbia, Venezuela, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Sudan and the other targeted countries, has conveniently been absent of one key fact: coercive, forced and outside regime change violates basic all of the accepted tenets of international law.
According to Article 1 (2) of the UN Charterdeveloping peaceful international relations based on the "principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples" is one of the founding principles of the United Nations, and by default the UN Security Council. Therefore any attempt by any country to subjugate or pressure another into implementing measures or carrying out an agenda not instigated from within and not in keeping with the will of the people is illegal. The "will of the people" can only be known through referendums and democratic political processes and debates, not through fabricated pogroms in the streets, which the US is expert at organizing. As for pressure on the government, even the implementation of sanctions is therefore illegal as this is done to pressure a government from the outside.
It is prohibited under international law to threaten to use force and Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter states this clearly and requires all UN member states to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of other states. US/NATO/EU have not threatened military force against Ukraine, as they already have their ground force installed as they did in Syria, Libya, etc. but this applies to other countries they have invaded recently.
Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter states clearly that the United Nations and its members have no authority to intervene in matters which are within the domestic jurisdiction of any state (sovereign country). However the US/NATO/EU have gotten around this by implementing and using what they call the Responsibility to Protect. Uprisings and violent demonstrations such as what is happening in Ukraine fall within the definition of domestic jurisdiction, therefore any outside attempt to interfere is illegal.
What is alarming in Ukraine is the violent and militarized nature of what the West is endlessly painting as a legitimate opposition. This portrayal runs contrary to what the most of the world is seeing right in front of their eyes on their TV screens. Even multiple statements by US officials themselves and a recently released telephone conversation between US official Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, show that these are not members of a legitimate internal opposition, but rather radicalized, militarized, trained, planted, funded and supported members of western "color revolution" infrastructure.
The US/NATO/EU continue to egregiously blame the government and are criminally silent when the opposition they support, and in fact planted, murder members of the security forces and policemen. The outright murder, kidnapping and extreme violence against police and security forces should be something that would cause an outcry among police officers worldwide, especially in the US, where their police are given almost god-like reverence, yet the so called "international community" and members of the world’s law enforcement bodies are silent.
Nothing that the insurgents have done would be supported in any US/NATO/EU country or city, yet they continue to call on, threaten and pressure the authorities in Ukraine to not interfere or take required measures. The violent insurgents have made a mockery of law and order and have literally set the capital of a civilized, democratic European country on fire.
Storming, seizing and burning down the buildings which house the instruments and bodies of the state; openly shooting, murdering, kidnapping and falsely detaining members of law enforcement; destroying and setting alight the property of the state and the people; organizing the pogrom we are seeing in Ukraine; violating the law and acting against their own constitution; blackmailing and threatening officials to step down or be complaint and finally promoting policies that are not in keeping with the desires of the Ukrainian people, are all factual aspects of the Ukrainian "opposition". So why is US/NATO/EU openly supporting them?
Business As Usual for US/NATO/EU
In my journalistic work I have attempted to robustly detail for years what US/NATO have been doing in their redesigning of world’s geopolitical landscape and I cannot repeat this enough, what we are seeing in Ukraine is just another regime change for the West. The tactics they use are always the same, we have seen them and documented them time and again and they continue to be illegal and egregious. Yet they continue with impunity.
All of the regime change actions and provocations that US/NATO/EU have used in Ukraine have been documented and exposed before the fact, yet the US president, EU leaders and their compliant media continue to egregiously stick to their own artificial pre-planned narrative.
The goal was regime change because US/NATO/EU understood that the Ukrainian Government and more importantly the Ukrainian people would not allow their country to be subverted and become yet another US/NATO/EU client state. More importantly this turn to Russia seriously interferes with US/NATO/EU military plans to base US/NATO missiles in Ukraine, evict the Russian Black Sea Fleet and achieve their prime military objective of neutralizing Russia and eliminating Russia’s response to a first strike nuclear attack, which at the end of the day is the goal. The people of Ukraine and the organs of government are just inconveniences for US/NATO/EU and even if the country is completely destroyed and divided, their goal will be carried out. The destruction of the state of Ukraine will in fact benefit the US/NATO/EU and this fact we have seen repeatedly in the last 15 years.
Obama Connects Syria and Ukraine
In comments related to a soon to be released Voice of Russia interview Professor Francis Boyle a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law told me the following: "Obama said that the people of the Ukraine should be able to determine their own future just like the people of Syria should be able to determine their own future. So Obama himself linked the two. The strategy is the same: regime change, civil war, destruction of the State. So this elevates the call by the State Department for a transition to a government of technocrats to the presidential level. The cat is out of the bag. Regime Change of the democratically elected government of Ukraine is openly admitted to be USG policy. Even worse than Syria, whose government was arguably not really democratic. Nevertheless as I point out in my book, the demand for regime change by one government against another government is illegal and violates the World Court's ruling against the United States in the Nicaragua decision (1996)."
The western mass media continues to promote and spread a phony slanted narrative of the events in Ukraine and their attempts have been formidable and almost impossible to counter. This concerns mostly the nature and portrayal of the police murdering opposition which, like the cop killers in the Caucuses, the West portrays as heroes and some sort of freedom fighters.
Again the hypocrisy of the West in Ukraine is resounding and completely obvious, yet they continue with impunity. US illegality and their complete and total disregard for international law continue to stare the world in the face in Guantanamo and worldwide, yet the compliant media has failed as US illegality has now spread like a cancer to include all NATO/EU countries.
It is another black day for the world as we see that the mass media has completely failed and been corrupted in the West. All of the facts surrounding the murderous insurgents in Ukraine and their bloody uprising and the collusion of the Central Intelligence Agency, US/NATO/EU and the West are being conveniently ignored as the subservient media chooses to attempt to go so far as to blame Russia which has from day one made it a point not to interfere.
Nowhere do we see debates going on regarding: the over $50 billion the US has spent buying out Ukraine; the admission by Victoria Nuland of US meddling in her telephone conversation, during which she implicated the head of the UN in US/NATO/EU plans; the training and equipping of the insurgents by US/NATO/EU; the fact that all outside pressure and meddling is illegal nor the fact that if anything similar happened in the West it would in no way be allowed.
Wake Up Call
They have won and Ukraine has fallen. The President of Ukraine has stated he will step down, which was the first call by the US/NATO/EU, when the first encampments appeared on Maidan Square. This was their clear goal and even though we documented it they have won. However what they have in fact done is committed another crime on an international scale.
Will anyone answer for the crime of subversion and for violating the sovereignty of Ukraine? Not likely. Therefore this should be a serious wake up call to all countries of the world, but will it? Also not likely.
What is striking in Ukraine was that it was a democratically elected government, that all of the US/NATO/EU plans were know from the start and that it was still allowed to proceed.
Once again, as we saw in Iraq, Libya and all other countries where the governments have been recently overthrown and the leader executed or otherwise removed (with North Korea being the perfect example) the only protection that any country has from the imposition of US/NATO/EU regime change is quite simply nuclear weapons.
US/NATO Obama/Neo-Con Plans and Impunity
After 9-11 Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz, the then US Deputy Secretary of Defense stated that the US Government is now in the business of destroying countries, executing presidents and changing governments at will.
General Wesley Clark who was the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, took issue with the Neo-Con architects from the Project for a New American Century (LINK 5) and gave testimony that the US planned to overthrow seven countries after 9/11: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
Mr. Clark called the post 9-11 overtaking of the US Government a coup and said it was plotted by Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and "a half dozen other collaborators from the Project for the New American Century". In a report Glen Greenwald cites a US Secretary of Defense Memo which gave even more detail and put a timeframe on the plan: "I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office. It says we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years – we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran."
Greenwald reported that General Clark was shocked and wrote about the following exchange: "And we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes – Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq – before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us." Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: "the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?"." Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz’s desires because, as Clark put it: "the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It’s not to deter conflicts?"
A New Regime Would Be Illegal
Any regime installed in any way other than trough democratic elections in Ukraine and under the current crisis will be illegal. President Yanukovich despite being weak and some might argue incompetent in maintaining stability in his country, was democratically elected in elections that were recognized by the entire world. This is important to underline.
Even though he was placed in a Catch 22 situation by the West where if he cracked down he would be demonized and if he did not he would be overthrown, his handling of the internal crisis leaves a lot of questions to be answered.
Timing of Ukrainian Coup
It is also important to note the similarities between the timing of the events in Ukraine and the invasion by Georgia of South OssetiaBoth taking place during Olympics and again the words of Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz: "… we’ve got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us."
Ukraine is the crowning jewel and it looks like they will obtain it.
The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at email@example.com.
21 February, 23:38
NATO Moving East, Building 'Roman Empire' in Europe
Yugoslav FM Živadin Jovanović
NATO’s first act of illegal "humanitarian" aggressive war called "Operation Deliberate Force" in 1995 against the Republic Srpska which it got away with and emboldened it to later carry out "Operation Allied Force", the merciless brutal air campaign against civilian targets in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The fact that NATO was allowed to get away with these acts of aggressive war and that the US/NATO architects were allowed to carry out such scenarios emboldened the "alliance" even further and has led to the recent global expansion by NATO and the scores of "regime change" and "resource wars" presented as "humanitarian interventions". The scenario is almost identical every time and is currently being played out in Ukraine. On the 15 year anniversary of the aggression on Yugoslavia, in an exclusive interview, the Voice of Russia spoke to the last Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Živadin Jovanović.
This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Živadin Jovanović. He is the former Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia and the Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals. This is part 1 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com.
Robles: Hello Sir! How are you this evening?
Jovanović: Fine, John. I’m glad to be able to talk for the Voice of Russia.
Robles: Thank you! And it is a pleasure for me to speaking with you. I’ve read a lot of your work. Given your background as the Foreign Minister of the former Yugoslavia, you were the Foreign Minister during the upheavals and the foreign-initiated revolutions that destroyed the country, can you tell us a little bit about the histories, maybe, something we don’t know about and give us your views on what is happening now in Ukraine and in Bosnia etc?
Jovanović: Well, I would like to recall that the Dayton Peace Agreement about peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina was reached in 1995 and the key figure in reaching the peace in Bosnia was Slobodan Milosevic, at the time President of the Republic of Serbia and later on the President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
I would like to say that his role was widely recognized, at that time, as a peace-maker in the Balkans. And indeed, no one of the other leaders of the former Yugoslav Republics did contribute to reaching peace in the civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as Slobodan Milosevic did. This was repeatedly stated at the Paris Conference which formally marks the signing of the peace agreement and he was hailed by the presidents of the US, of France and many other countries.
But we know now that in Dayton Americans wanted also to discuss the problem of the Serbian southern province of Kosovo and Metohija. And they wanted to include this into the Dayton Negotiations agenda. Slobodan Milosevic and the Yugoslav delegation decisively refused this, even saying that if the Americans want to discuss the internal issue of Yugoslavia, of Serbia, at an international forum, they would not take part in such an exercise.
So, faced with this refusal of Slobodan Milosevic, Americans, first of all, Richard Holbrook (the then State Secretary) and the other officials of the US accepted to discuss only how to reach the peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. And the peace was really reached in Dayton.
But later on they needed Milosevic in the process of implementing the Dayton peace agreement. Many conferences, many meetings were held all over Europe: in Geneva, in Rome, in Berlin and various other capitals and in Moscow too, as to how secure the implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement.
All this time Yugoslavia and President Milosevic were needed as a key peace factor. Without Yugoslavia and President Milosevic nobody could imagine reaching the implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement. But this was also a period when Yugoslavia was freed from UN sanctions, which were based on accusations that Yugoslavia was committing aggression in the Bosnian civil war.
The sanctions were adopted at the Security Council in May 1992 and they lasted until 1995 when the Dayton Peace Agreement was reached. They were afterwards abolished, first suspended and then, finally, abolished. But the USA did not abolish its own sanctions, the so-called "outer wall" of sanctions. That means that the Americans did not allow Yugoslavia to renew its membership in OSCE, in the UN, position in the World Bank, in IMF and many other international organizations.
They kept these tools for the reason that they had other plans. And they didn’t actually forget that Milosevic was not willing to allow treatment of the internal issue of Kosovo and Metohija on the international scene.
So, after the stability in Bosnia and Herzegovina was settled, after Milosevic was not needed any longer to cooperate on Bosnia and Herzegovina, they opened the problem of Kosovo and Metohija.
Well, they not only opened, but they were financing, training and organizing terrorist organization: the so-called KLA. It was not actually only the US who did it, but the American European allies, like Germany, like Great Britain and some other countries were very cooperative in supporting separatist movements and the terrorist organization of KLA in Kosovo and Metohija.
So, they were bringing up this internal problem of Serbia in various international forums and they were actually provoking clashes on the territory of Serbia. Many policemen, many teachers, many soldiers and many Serbian public workers were killed in 1997-1998. And so in 1998 the government did not have any other possibility than to confront the rising terrorism in Kosovo and Metohija.
At that time the US started to initiate negotiations with Milosevic. Richard Holbrook was leading negotiations, tere were rounds and rounds of negotiations. All the time it was clearly seen that Americans are siding and propping up separatism in Kosovo and Metohija, and squeezing Serbia, squeezing Milosevic to accept various conditions that in principle were not acceptable.
So, in June 1998 the American administration actually recognized the terrorist organization called KLA as a "liberation" organization. And we have a witness in British Colonel John Crosland, who was the British military attaché in Belgrade who had (gave) a written a testimony to the Hague Tribunal stating among other things that in June 1998 President Clinton, Richard Holbrook and Madeline Albright decided to overthrow Milosevic and they considered that the KLA (terrorist organization KLA) in Kosovo could be a "tool" in achieving this objective.
John Crosland said: "From that moment onwards it was absolutely irrelevant what we thought about KLA, whether it was a terrorist or a liberation organization, because "the center of power" decided it was an ally."
This organization will later on, when there was a military aggression of NATO against Yugoslavia in March 1999, it turned to be a ground force of NATO. NATO was in the air and KLA was on the ground.
So, we actually see a certain period of preparation of this aggression. Preparations were going on to stigmatize the Government of Yugoslavia with Milosevic as not cooperating, not predictable and authoritarian. And the whole network of western propaganda, of NATO propaganda was repeating what was the position of the State Department and of the Foreign Office in London. The stigmatization was the first stage of preparing the European and international public for what was to follow later.
Then, they staged the so-called massacre of Albanian civilians in Račak, in Kosovo and Metohija. In Račak there was a security action of the security forces of Yugoslavia against units of KLA. And it was announced to the OSCE and to the so-called "international community" that there will be a security operation against the terrorist organization.
And everybody in place, in Kosovo and Metohija and from the international community were informed. And some of them really did observe, some of them even filmed the operation. It was a legitimate operation of the government forces against terrorism.
But nevertheless, the American Ambassador Walker who was in charge of the OSCE mission in Kosovo and Metohija proclaimed: "It was a massacre of civilians!"
This was like a triggering moment for NATO to take action. And this is a detail which was to be repeated in many ways later on.
Before that we had, in Bosnia, the so-called Markale incident when civilians queuing in front of a bakery were bombed and killed and accusations were immediately directed at the Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina, while today we have even the military from the former Muslim side and Izetbegović’s side, and Russian experts and other experts from the UN claiming that there was no proof of the Serbian side being involved in that. Everybody says that Muslims had provoked this massacre themselves in order to attribute it to the Serbian "enemy".
We have in Syria, you know, about the Sarin gas and so on.
Robles: If we could, before we get too far along here, because I have a lot of questions, because this is the exact same thing that they’ve done in Libya, in Syria, in Ukraine, now in Bosnia they are trying to do it again, in Egypt... Every country they want to overthrow they do the same thing. They’ll support any terrorist. In Ukraine they are supporting neo-Nazis. It doesn’t matter, as long as they can overthrow the government. In the Middle East they are supporting Al-Qaeda. In Libya, in Syria it is Al-Qaeda terrorists. I agree with you 100%. I’d like to ask you some questions. If you could, give me some more details about… you were the Foreign Minister, you knew what was going on: why and when exactly did they start talking about Kosovo? That appears to be their initial goal – Kosovo – from the beginning.
Robles: Why is that?
Jovanović: Well, I always claimed from the very beginning, it was not for regional or local objectives. It was a matter of geopolitical objectives of the US and of the leading NATO countries.
Recently at one conference in Germany I was asked: "What were the geopolitical reasons for the aggression of NATO on Kosovo?"
I said: "Well it is first of all the realization of the policy of expansion of NATO towards the east. The objective was to make a base for further military expansion towards the Russian borders."
I was even blunt to say that they want to get closer to the resources of Siberia, to the resources of the Middle East, to the Caspian Basin and so on and so forth.
And the people who asked me the question were quite silent after that, they didn’t have any other comments. I think everybody realized that we completely understand the essence of the American strategy.
The American strategy has been tabled in April 2002 at the NATO summit in Bratislava. We have a written document of the German politician Willy Wimmer, who was present at that NATO summit, in the form of his report to the then Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. Willy Wimmer among other things in his report quotes that the American strategist informed the NATO allies in Bratislava in April 2000 that the NATO strategy is to establish a similar situation in Europe as it was in times when the Roman Empire was at the peak of its might.
So, they said from the Baltic to Anatolia in Turkey there should be the same situation as in the era of the Roman Empire. And they quoted some concrete examples. They said Poland should be surrounded by friendly countries. Bulgaria and Romania should be a bridge towards Asia. And Serbia should be permanently kept out of European development.
So, we see that Kosovo was a starting point of a military expansion towards the East. In 1999, exactly 15 years ago the Americans established their military base Bondsteel, which by many political analysts is considered to be the largest American military base in the world outside of the American territory.
Robles: Yet it is!
Jovanović: And if we presume that it is the largest or one of the largest, the question is why it should be based in Kosovo, when Kosovo and Serbia are so small, so tiny places. And there is no explanation from a regional point of view.
You were listening to part 1 of an interview with Živadin Jovanović. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com.
22 February, 19:57
Ukraine: The Brownshirt Revolution
Professor Francis Boyle
It is a fact that since 9-11-2001, the US Government has been in the business of destroying countries and using NATO as it principle instrument. That was stated more than a decade ago by then US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and later by General Wesley Clark. The Pentagon drew up a list of 7 states that were to be destroyed: Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Syria and they have systematically proceeded to destroy all of the Countries on the list. The strategy in Ukraine is the same, US/NATO/EU are promoting the destabilization and the breakup of Ukraine in order to achieve the NATO goal of moving into Ukrainian territory closer to Russia. Harvard Professor Francis Boyle, a US based Russian expert who was invited to the Soviet Union to lecture spoke on these issues and more in an interview with the Voice of Russia.
While Russia was distracted into believing that the US wanted a reset US foreign policy was being planned and dictated by rabid Russia haters like Zbignew Brzezinski and Richard Pipes. Brzezinski wants to breakup Russia into approximately 68 parts and has placed his protégés in key US foreign policy posts. According to Mr. Boyle Brezezinski has staffed the Obama administration with his acolytes and protégées, including the US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, a specialist in color revolutions. At the end of the day the US plan is to see the breakup of the Russian Federation, that is the goal.
This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Professor Francis Boyle. He is a Professor in International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign, Illinois. This is part 1 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com
Robles: Hello Sir! How are you this evening?
Boyle: Very fine. Thanks for having me on, John, and my best to your listening audience.
Robles: Thank you Sir! And thanks for agreeing to speak with us. News of the day is Ukraine. Now you've recently made some statements and done some work regarding Syria. I'd like to ask for your correlations between what is going on right now in Syria and what is going on right now in Ukraine. Do you see a connection? Some people are saying that Ukraine, the push there was because the US was not allowed to carry out military operations against Syria. Do you see a relationship between them?
Boyle: Well I wouldn't say that is "necessarily" the reason. As we know, Ukraine has for a long time been a strategic objective of the United States and trying to get Ukraine into NATO. And this EU plan was simply a first step in that direction. The EU wasn't really offering anything to Ukraine. But it was very clear, if they could move Ukraine closer to the EU, that would be a step closer to NATO. In fact, I regret to say over the years, even though I have EU citizenship and carry an EU passport, the EU now has become nothing but an anteroom to NATO.
So, I think this really has to be understood in terms of the gradual movement of NATO further to the east in violation of the pledge that George Bush Senior and Jim Baker gave to then President Gorbachev that if he agreed to the reunification of Germany, NATO would move no farther east, towards Russia's boundaries.
Robles: Well, we've seen those promises, similar promises were made to President Gorbachev – the first and last President of the Soviet Union – those were also ignored. And regarding …
Boyle: The problem was – he never got them in writing.
Robles: That's exactly what I was going to say.
Boyle: That is incredibly naive on his part not to get them in writing. And I would point out, right now the United States is trying to do the exact same thing on the deployment of BMDs (ballistic missile defense) into Europe and around the borders of Russia saying "you have to accept our assurances, but we are not going to give you anything in writing."
You know, it is preposterous. In fact, we had something in writing and that was the Anti-ballistic Missile System Treaty of 1972 that prevented all of this. And then Bush Junior pulled out of that treaty. So, as it stands now, really anything goes, these verbal assurances mean nothing.
Robles: Getting away a little bit from the ABM system now, you mentioned NATO and Ukraine; there is a military objective, if you could tell us about that? And is there a similar military objective for Syria? Or what is the objective of the US Government in Syria?
Boyle: Since 9/11 2001, as publicly admitted by then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, the United States Government would be getting into the business of destroying states. And that was later confirmed by General Wesley Clark, as you know in his memoirs, his meeting there at the Pentagon where they had the list of seven states they were going to proceed to take over.
Afghanistan was first, Iraq was second, Sudan was on the list, Libya was on the list and Syria was on the list, Iran was on the list. So, they are proceeding systematically down that list of destroying states. Syria is now near the top, Iran might be next. And it also appears now the same strategy is being applied to Ukraine to promote the crackup of Ukraine between east and west and, I would hate to say it, the dissolution of Ukraine as a state.
Robles: Can you repeat that quote again? He said…
Boyle: Yes Wolfowitz said… I have the citation in my book "The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence", where Wolfowitz said: "We are going to get into the business of destroying states". And then, soon thereafter General Wesley Clark (head of NATO) was in the Pentagon and can confirm they drew up a list of seven states that they were systematically going to go after.
So, that's really, the objective here of Syria, against Syria, is as they did to Libya: to crackup Syria as a state into its constituent, religious and ethnic units not only for the United States but also for the benefit of Israel.
As you know, Israel has been a long time opponent to Syria. They headed a plan there, the Yi Nolan Plan to crackup surrounding states in order to better manage them and keep them under control. So, here you see a congruence of interests certainly between the United States and Israel.
And I regret to say it, but pretty much they have cracked up Syria in its constituent units, as they had done to Iraq. We now have basically three mini states in Iraq. The same has been done to Afghanistan and also Libya, where you have, you know it is hard to say there is a meaningful state there anymore. I have a new book out called "Destroying Libya and World Order" where I have all these citations in there and an analysis. And then, I tried to extend this to Syria near the end of the book.
And it does appear we are seeing a similar pattern of behavior here on Ukraine: to destabilize Ukraine, promote a crack up, some type of civil war or who knows what. And I guess the theory is, well if NATO-EU can get western Ukraine – fine! – they can extend the borders of NATO, the EU that far.
So, it is a very dangerous situation, because, as you know, Ukraine is of utmost strategic significance to Russia. And second, Russia believes that Ukraine is the cradle of its civilization.
Robles: Well it is, that's not a belief. Ukraine is the mother of Rus.
Boyle: I've been to Ukraine and I've been to where Nestor wrote his chronicles, and I have studied Russian and Ukrainian history, sure, at Harvard. And I went through the same PhD program at Harvard that produced Zbigniew Brzezinski before me and Richard Pipes, both of whom were, are ardent Russia haters, there is no question at all about it. And that is really part of the problem here in the United States, when it comes to Russian studies, that so much of it is biased against Russia inherently.
Robles: Why is that, please, if you could? You've been through the system, you know the system. Why does the US hate Russia so much? Why?
Boyle: Well I spent ten years at the University of Chicago and Harvard Law School studying Russian history, Russian literature, Soviet politics, Russian politics. Indeed I even offered Soviet politics and Russian history on my PhD General Exams at Harvard, which qualified me to teach both those subjects to undergraduates at Harvard. But I never learned the language because that was not what I was intending to do.
And all those years, ten years of studying, I only had two professors who I thought were fair, reasonable and balanced when it came to Russia and the Soviet Union. And understand Harvard and Chicago are two of the leading centers in the United States for training Russian experts. They train professors and experts, government officials and things of that nature.
Boyle: So, and again, you had Brzezinski, I went through the same PhD program that produced Brzezinski and Kissinger. You know Brzezinski is an expatriate Pole who hates the Russians with a passion.
Robles: Oh God yes, yeah…
Boyle: Indeed Brzezinski wants to crackup Russia into its constituent units.
Robles: Right, I think it was 68 autonomous regions, if that's what it was.
Boyle: It's more dangerous than that! In that Obama's mentor at Columbia was Brzezinski. And Brzezinski ran the foreign affairs apparatus for Obama's campaign and he has staffed the Obama administration with his acolytes and protégés, like McFaul – the recently resigning ambassador.
Robles: I'm sorry, can you expand a little bit on McFaul? You said he is one of Brzezinski'sprotégé.
Boyle: Yes, he is from the Hoover Institute at Stanford, which is a neo-conservative operation out there, and Brzezinski is one of these people.
Robles: Was McFaul chosen by Brzezinski?
Boyle: I think all the high-level appointments in the Obama administration in foreign affairs have been run by Brzezinski. That is my personal feeling looking at it. Yes, Brzezinski decided not to take a position himself, but all these people that have surrounded Obama, not just on Russia, but other areas, are Brzezinski protégés and indeed that goes back in the Democratic Party I think since Carter came to power and Brzezinski was his National Security Advisor. You know, he was the one who started the Afghan Mujahidin war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and bragged about it.
So, within the Democratic Party Brzezinski is considered to be their foreign affairs guru and he was Obama's mentor at Columbia, and it is a matter of public record that Brzezinski was running the foreign affairs apparatus for the Obama campaign.
Boyle: So, I certainly believe he helped staff this administration on foreign affairs matters.
Robles: People are thinking about a reset and trying to improve relations. And I don't think anyone knew that it was all Brzezinski, because people knew who Brzezinski was a long time ago.
Boyle: Right. Well, this I think is part of their plan to see the crackup of the Russian Federation, at the end of the day. Sure, that's I think what his objective is.
You know, if you want to get credentialed as an expert on Russia, you have to go to somewhere like Columbia or Harvard, or Chicago and get your Master's degree or PhD from people like that. At Harvard they also had Richard Pipes, he was the Reagan's top guru on the Soviet Union, The Committee on the Present Danger.
I had Pipes for imperial Russian history, again, another expatriate Pole who hates the Russians with passion. Pipes was so bad in his course on Imperial Russian history, he used to break into sweat when he was lecturing on Peter the Great or Catherine the Great and had to take a handkerchief out of his pocket and wipe his brow. So, he is another fanatic against the Russians, only prominent in the Republican Party.
So, we don't really have … you know Professor Cohen at NYU I think is fair, balanced and reasonable when it comes to Russia. He just wrote something in The Nation on Ukraine. And I think he wrote a very good book on Russia. But you know, he is really the exception to a pretty abysmal rule here in the United States when it comes to training and credentialing what were Soviet and now Russian experts.
Robles: So, why are you fair-minded Sir?
Boyle: I try to come at Russia and the Soviet Union with an open mind. I lived through the Cuban missile crisis and I concluded that probably the most important issue of my time would be to learn to understand Russia across the board and the Soviet Union. So, that's why I spent the ten years studying at the University of Chicago and Harvard and getting formally credentialed in these areas.
And I have to say I was pretty appalled. I did have Professor Edward Keenan at Harvard who was my teacher, mentor and friend. And he was Director of the Russian Research Center. And he is very fair, balanced and reasonable, and Professor Harold Berman at Harvard Law School, again, very fair, balanced and reasonable. But that was pretty much about it.
I was invited over twice by the Soviet Government to lecture, once around the country in 1986 and then in 1989. And I guess they just figured I was a reasonable American to talk to. And I was open, I met with people and lectured and I seemed to get along with everyone. We didn't necessarily agree about everything, but at least we could try to talk it out.
But that's not what we are seeing now. That's for sure! As we know from the Nuland tape here with the Ambassador in Kiev, she admits they had spent at least $5 million right away now trying to promote opposition to the democratically elected government in Ukraine. Whatever you think of Yanukovych, he is democratically elected and so far I think he's shown a remarkable restraint.
You were listening to an interview with Professor Francis Boyle. He is a Professor in International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law. That was part 1 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com
23 February, 01:23
Anonymous Ukraine Releases Klitschko E-Mails Showing Treason By Vitaly Klitschko
Anonymous Ukraine is battling the forces in Ukraine that are funded and directed from the West and attempting to overthrow the democratically elected government of the sovereign country of Ukraine.
Anonymous Ukraine is operating in what can only now be described as a war zone and the security measures they are forced to take are extreme. A member of Anonymous Ukraine who wishes to remain anonymous spoke to the Voice of Russia about the operations and the recent release of e-mails between Vitaly Klischko and the Lithuanian Presidential advisor. The e-mails show that Klitschko was intentionally planning to destabilize the country, is being instructed and funded from abroad and has his accounts in Germany.
Greetings citizens of the world. We are Anonymous Ukraine.
The Anonymous Hacktivist Collective worldwide is partially divided on the issue of Ukraine. This has to do with the western mass media propaganda and the conflicting reports that are coming out of the country. This is sad as some Anons are unknowingly supporting the dark forces at work in Ukraine. Members of Anonymous Ukraine are aware of the internal meddling by the United States, NATO and the European Union into the internal sovereign affairs of Ukraine. Anonymous Ukraine supports peace and the right of the people to self determination. The Bandera Nazis and fascist thugs that are beating and killing police and members of the security services of Ukraine do not represent the will or the wishes of the people of Ukraine. The people of Ukraine do not want European Union integration. The people of Ukraine do not want NATO on their territory. The people of Ukraine voted for President Yanukovich to lead them in fair and just democratic elections. The people of Ukraine plea to the President and to Russia for help in stopping the siege of Ukraine by Nazi thugs and murderous gangs. The people of Ukraine do not want to see their beloved capital Kiev occupied by Nazi killers and burned to the ground. The people of Ukraine want their independence to be recognized and be allowed to determine their own fate without pressure from US, NATO, European Union. The people of Ukraine want peace and want the Bandera Nazis to be stopped once and for all. Anonymous Ukraine does not like nor support what is happening in Ukraine now. The so-called opposition is trying to tear Ukraine apart. Anonymous Ukraine has released the e-mails of one of the leaders of the so called opposition and will continue to expose the moves by the west to subvert the sovereign country of Ukraine. The e mails released by Anonymous prove that Vitaly Klichko is a puppet of the West and is being financed through intermediaries in Lithuania. The e mails also prove that Klitchko has bank accounts in Germany and is receiving funding for his coup d’état from the West. We will continue fighting these puppets. The western puppet opposition leaders will hurl Ukraine into chaos. We appeal to the president of our country. The people of Ukraine urge you. President Yanukovich, to restore order and bring calm and stability and disperse the gangs of robbers and Nazis. Anonymous Ukraine will strike at all of the web resources of western hirelings and fascists. Anonymous Ukraine calls for Ukraine to be unified and independent. The government of Ukraine promoted the country's integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions despite the reluctance of Ukrainian people. Ukrainian citizens realize that signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union will lead to the collapse of Ukrainian economy in the near future. We express our support to the people of our country. We want Ukrainian government and EU leadership to understand that people of Ukraine do not want their country to become a raw material donor to Europe. Ukraine must be free. We do not want to be dependent on other countries or organizations. Ukrainian people do not need a speculative Association Agreement with the European Union. Ukraine does not need to be a part of Russia-led Eurasian customs union. We do not need to be servants of NATO. Ukraine does not need European Union. Ukraine does not need NATO. Ukraine should not be anybody's servant. We stand for independent Ukraine. We declare the continuation of Operation Independence. We will strike at the web resources of countries and organizations that pose a threat to freedom and independence of Ukraine!
Operation Independence continues… Expect us
We are Anonymous Ukraine.
We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We Do Not Forgive.
We Do Not Forget.
Here are screenshots of some Klitschko emails leaked by Anonymous Ukraine:
24 February, 00:05
Ex-USSR, Russian Allies: Targets of US, NATO Color Revolution
It is unprecedented that simultaneously three countries that are allies of Russia are being threatened by color revolutions: Venezuela, the Bosnian and the Serb Republic (The Republika Srpska) and Ukraine.
These synthetic uprisings orchestrated by the US/NATO/EU would have been identified as the uprisings of fascistic guttersnipes 100 years ago, but in 2014 they are being portrayed as democracy or freedom movements, by the same people who are organizing them to destroy country after country. Voice of Russia regular contributor Rick Rozoff says that if something like this was to happen in Washington, London, Paris, Berlin or Rome, this would not have been tolerated for hours, much less days, weeks and months.
Mr. Rozoff also stated that since the fragmentation of the Soviet Union the US and other Western nations have insinuated themselves very deeply into the political structures of former Soviet states, especially in Ukraine and into its internal security apparatus and military through a NATO integration and Partnership for Peace Agreement and the NATO-Ukraine Commission. It should be known, says Mr. Rozoff that the NATO Association Agreement with Ukraine is meant to: “… bring a country with a 1400 km border with Russia firmly into the military pen of the United States and NATO.”
This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Rick Rozoff – the owner and manager of the stop NATO website and international mailing list. This is part 2 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com
Robles: The timing Rick – protests in Venezuela, Bosnia at the same time. It is like they are working on some schedule or something. The Olympics are going on right now and this is all happening in the background. Anything on the timing that you could comment on?
Rozoff: That’s a keen point you are making. There is no question about that – somebody has decided to ignite several fires simultaneously, so as to prevent the timely response, particularly I would argue, by Russia, which is a close political and even, ultimately, military ally of Venezuela, as well as the Bosnian and the Serb Republic (The Republika Srpska) and Ukraine. So that, what you see is three nations, one of them a quasi-nation or, let’s say, an autonomous Bosnian Serb republic, with close political affiliation with Russia being threatened simultaneously through these wretched color revolution scenarios.
That, again, if they were occurring a hundred years ago, say, in the 1920’s or 1930’s in Europe, would be identified for what they were – which is an uprising of fascistic guttersnipes. And the fact that this is being portrayed in any way or form as a democracy or freedom movement is outrageous. And it just shows how far the US domination, if not almost monopoly, controlled international news dissemination has led to black being portrayed as white and vice versa.
Robles: It was 6 p.m. Moscow time when the Ukrainian security services announced that they would be clearing out Maidan Square. They gave them a warning and the Russian Foreign Ministry has called on these oppositionists not to use violence etc. They had a chance to peacefully just break camp and call it a day, just clear the square.
Again, you’ve commented on the violent tactics already, but I just wanted to get that out there, that they were warned in advance. This wasn’t some sudden swoop or something by the security forces. It wasn’t a surprise thing, they knew it and I think it’s a long time in coming. Why do you think they took so long? In my opinion they took way too long to react.
Rozoff: Again, the reason by analogy – were something like this to happen in Washington, or in London or Paris, or Berlin, or Rome, this would not have been tolerated for hours, much less days, weeks and months. If nothing else, the established authorities would have portrayed the existence of the so-called tent cities as being a threat to public health, to impeding the flow of traffic, you know security obviously, a problem or threat, and it would have been cleared up right quickly. That you could be assured of that.
But if you are a government that is under siege by the US and its allies, then no matter what you do it’s wrong. If you demonstrate any lack of resolve, you are seen weak and ready for the kill. If you attempt howsoever timidly to enforce the basic functions of a government by ensuring public security, then you are seen as being heavy-handed and overbearing, and violent, and so forth.
And I would have to say, if I were Viktor Yanukovych (and this applies, by the way, to a lot of heads of state. You know, Maduro in Venezuela, perhaps Lukashenko in Belarus. I don’t know how many around the world), have got to be thinking that what we’ve seen in the past 15 years is that any time a head of state tries to defend his nation against a Western onslaught, he ends up in a prison cell and he ends up dead.
And this has happened with several heads of state, from Ivory Coast to Yugoslavia, from Libya to Iraq. And the message is: it is riding a tiger, it is literally that. If you continue with the process, you are going to be mauled and killed. And if you try to get off, you are going to be assaulted.
Robles: I’m sorry, I think you are right, you are absolutely right. And I think putting that out there like that, I think the presidents of all the countries in the world, especially countries that may be targeted, I don’t think they should be afraid to make a move.
I think the opposite. I think they should get together – all of the independent thinking and all the presidents of countries that are seeking to maintain an independent or sovereign foreign policy, stance or decision, or policies, I think they should all get together and form some sort of alliance so this does not happen again. And I think this stuff has to be just cut off before even it is allowed to grow.
We already know, and I think it is obvious to the world who the actors are, who the puppeteers are, who is pulling the strings, where the financing is coming from. I just don’t understand why, for example, presidents don’t get together and just make this not possible anymore.
Rozoff: You are absolutely correct about that John! And if I could, there is the Aesopian fable, many of your listeners may know about the Cats and the Mouse, where its decided the cat is picking up a mouse, a different mouse every day to devour it. The mice hold a council, and they determine they have to put a bell around the cat in order to know when he is coming. And the world has to bell this cat right now, it should have done it a long time ago.
But on the upside, the Community of Latin America and Caribbean States (CELAC as it from the acronym is known) held a meeting a couple of weeks ago in Havana, Cuba, where they declared the western hemisphere to be a nuclear free zone and a zone of peace. And that is the sort of initiative that has to be taken not only throughout Latin America, but throughout the world.
We have to declare the world to be a zone of peace, free of nuclear and all other weapons, and certainly free of interfering in the internal affairs of sovereign nations and plunging capital cities of countries into violence, such as we are seeing in Kiev right now.
Robles: For one goal, and that’s to replace the president, as far as I see it.
Rozoff: To implant a puppet regime that will be brought into the military orbit of the United States and NATO, that’s the objective.
Robles: I don’t understand it myself. These people they are organizing a coup d'йtat… I mean, the minute they started storming government buildings, I think they forfeited every possible reasonable right, that even unreasonable right they had, to be called an opposition or to be dealt with peacefully. I don’t understand why he is even negotiating with them. They should all be, in my opinion, arrested immediately on the spot.
Rozoff: We have to keep in mind that since the fragmentation of the Soviet Union in 1991, that the US and other Western nations have insinuated themselves very deeply into the political structures of former Soviet states, Ukraine I think as much as any other. And that means into the internal security apparatus of the interior ministry, through the military, through NATO integration and Partnership for Peace, and the NATO-Ukraine Commission, and similar measures where it is a question of how much you can even depend on people within the internal and the external security apparatus because of 23 years of penetration by the West.
Incidentally, before I sign off, I just want to read a couple of brief excerpts from title 2 of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and European Union. The agreement, that not having been signed on November 21st, was the alleged cause for this violent uprising in Ukraine. It included comments like the following:
“The Association Agreement will promote gradual convergence on foreign and security matters with the aim of Ukraine’s ever deeper involvement in the European security area.”
It calls to strengthen cooperation and dialog on international security and crisis management, and so forth. It talks very precisely about the military integration of Ukraine into that of western Europe, into the European Union in the first place, which itself is almost…
Rozoff: Yes, it is NATO. It goes through the Berlin Plus and other agreements. It also calls for: “taking full and timely advantage of all diplomatic and military channels between the Parties” and so forth.
And this goes on. People should know what this Association Agreement is. It is not meant to have workshops and multiculturalism or humanitarian festivals or something of the sort. This is a security-military agreement which is meant to bring a country with a 1400 km border with Russia firmly into the military pen of the United States and NATO.
Robles: And last comment, if you would Rick. You are US-based, you live in Chicago. A lot of people here still entertain an idea, and some of them might be listening right now, people in Ukraine, people in Bosnia, people in Serbia, that somehow the answer to all their problems lies in the West. That somehow, if they welcome the United States into their countries, that they are going to be taken care of and they are going to have better lives and everything else. Can you comment on that?
Rozoff: Yes, two scores. All they need to do is ask the people of Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy – the southern flank of the European Union – what integration into the Western power structures portents for them.
It portents misery, insecurity, unemployment, indebtedness, bankruptcy, old pensioners jumping out of windows because life doesn’t mean anything to them anymore. This is what subordination to the West means for the people of southern and eastern Europe, and ultimately for the people of the world. That is number one.
Number two, we have to remember that Arseniy Yatsenyuk was Foreign Minister during the Government of Viktor Yushchenko – the US puppet who was implanted in the so-called Orange Revolution – and while he was Foreign Minister, 2000 Ukrainian troops were dragooned to be stationed in a warzone in Iraq.
This is what integration with the West means. It means supplying cannon fodder – unemployed Ukrainian men and women who will be sent to warzones around the world to kill and die. This is what the new world order is. If this is what the West offers the people of the world, the world would be well advised to reject it.
Robles : Are you serious Rick? Come on! Everything is great in America! Isn’t it?
Rozoff: Yes, well they can have Lady Gaga, but they are going to have their son coming home in a coffin.
Robles : Hey Rick, thank you very much. We’ll be speaking with you again next week. I really appreciate it.
Rozoff: Thanks for the opportunity John.
This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Mr. Rick Rozoff – the owner and manager of the stop NATO website and international mailing list. This is a weekly feature of the Voice of Russia. You can find other work by me and Mr. Rick Rozoff on our website at the voiceofrussia.com. Thank you very much for listening and we wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.
25 February, 19:27
Anonymous Ukraine Klitschko E-Mails and Nuland/Pyatt Dialogue Prove US Organized Coup
A coup d’état has occurred in Ukraine and all of the signs and even the actors behind it were known to the world before it happened. Before the democratically elected president went into hiding and the parliament was taken over by western puppets and neo-nazi [sic] thugs we all knew what the western geopolitical architects were planning on their chessboard.
Warnings were repeatedly issued and broadcast and calls were made, before the situation spiraled out of control, for those in power to maintain order and prevent what has happened in Ukraine. These warning came from across the spectrum, from analysts to high level government officials and leaders, yet those in power in Ukraine were either negligent in preventing the coup or were in fact totally impotent to stop it. In either case the failure by President Yanukovich to keep order and protect the Ukrainian people (all of the Ukrainian people) from the horror that has been unleashed on Ukraine (a horror we are only seeing the beginning of) is a betrayal to his people and a failure on his part in fulfilling his duties, no matter how Machiavellian the plots and the actors were, who successfully overthrew the government and sent him into hiding.
Proof of Treason by the Opposition
It is not, and has not been for some time, a secret that the West was behind the previous color revolution in Ukraine and it was not a secret that the same infrastructure was being used by the US/NATO/CIA to destabilize Ukraine after Ukraine made a brave and independent sovereign decision to say no to a European Union deal which in fact offered it nothing and say yes to the Russian led Customs Union which offered it $100 billion over 7 years.
Yes dear reader in reality the EU deal offered nothing for Ukraine other than some tenuous abstract idea spread by false propaganda that somehow life would be better for Ukrainians if they became the stepchildren of the EU. What EU integration would have done, and what the goal is and what it will do, is to cement plans for including Ukraine in NATO and placing NATO military infrastructure in Ukraine. This is the crowning jewel of US/NATO expansion plans to move right up to Russian borders.
These plans are being aided and abetted by the so-called Ukrainian opposition, who in reality have no interest in supporting the Ukrainian people and have now aided foreign forces in destroying and taking over their own country. Not only have they now sold out their country to foreign forces but they have allowed the worst elements of their population to achieve and unprecedented power grab as the neo-nazi forces of Dmitry Yarosh have now through the use of terror, violence and murder taken control of Kiev and are spreading their wave of terror and hate to other parts of Ukraine taking region after region.
Not only does the now infamous conversation between US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt that was released on the internet show firsthand the level of US meddling in Ukraine and even the collusion of the United Nations in bringing about an illegal change of government in Ukraine, but e-mails released by the hacktivist group Anonymous Ukraine and other evidence prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the leading opposition figures are clearly just puppets for western forces.
The e-mails that were released by Anonymous Ukraine have been suppressed by the West and were commented on by Anonymous Ukraine in an interview for the Voice of Russia. The fact that they are genuine is backed up by the silence from all of the parties involved and the attempts by western special services to have them permanently removed from the Internet.
The e-mails released by Anonymous between Laurynas Jonavicius an Advisor to the President of Lithuania, a country that has been active in Nazi historical revisionism, and Vitaly Klitschko were accidentally uncovered by Anonymous when they hacked the e-mails of the Lithuanian Administration and show how Klitschko is controlled by the West through a Lithuanian intermediary.
The text of the first e-mail, rewritten verbatim below is apparently one of the first as he addresses the advisor as “Mr. Jonavicius”. In the e-mail Klitschko refers to plans for his future inferring that he agrees to their terms. He also mentions the money him and his circle are to be paid, a visit to the Lithuanian Embassy and his bank account in Germany where the said monies are to be transferred.
Klitschko’s e-mail source IP information shows that his e-mails emanate from his own domain “k-mg.com” which expires August 26th, 2014. His domain is registered to Klitschko Management Group GmbH, located at Grosse Elbstr. Street 275 in Hamburg, Germany. Klitschko is known to have travelled to Germany several times before the upheavals.
Wed, 27 Nov 2013 13:18:41 +0100 (CET)
Dear Mr. Jonavicius,
I am writing to thank you for your assistance. The meeting with Mrs. Grauziniene was very productive. We exchanged views on current events and discussed our plans for the future. Mrs. Grauziniene made some interesting proposals concerning my future. I need to give it some thought but in general I am willing to accept your terms.
Special thanks to all Lithuanian friends for financial assistance. Today my assistant visited your embassy where he met the Counselor. They discussed financial issues and plans for future cooperation. My assistant also provided Valentina with the details of my bank account in Germany.
I look forward to a successful working relationship in the future.
The next e-mail is dated December 7th which is exactly 3 days before Victoria Nuland appeared on Maidan Square to hand out doughnuts to protestors. Klitschko has obviously had a lot of phone or other contact with the Lithuanian advisor at this point and refers to a phone conversation and addresses him as simply Laurynas. He discusses officials from other countries visiting Maidan for moral support, which shows that the entire charade has nothing to do with the Ukrainian people nor with Ukraine. In the e-mail he even mentions Nuland directly and someone from the US Congress. Hence John McCain showed up. This may not be illegal at this point but in light of the fact that they were involved in the organizing of a coup and the overthrowing of a legitimate democratically elected government, it is highly illegal.
Klitschko also requests information on President Yanukovich, in other words for intelligence and for the President of Ukraine to be spied on by a foreign power. An egregious treasonous act if there ever was one.
Sat, 07 Dec 2013 15:48:32 +0100 (CET)
Following up upon our telephone conversation I think it would be useful to schedule a visit of some high-ranking officials from the EU. Maidan is in need of constant moral support. It would be appropriate to invite someone from Berlin. I have some top-ranking friends there but for some reason they hesitate.
Our American friends promised to pay a visit in the coming days, we may even see Nuland or someone from the Congress.
Another concern I want to raise is that Yanukovych keeps a low profile. It looks very suspicious. What's he up to? We would really appreciate some more information on this issue.
In the third e-mail Klitschko again says he is grateful for support (again we must underline they are working on overthrowing a government) and promises to do a good job for his new masters. These promises should be made to the Ukrainian people not a foreign power. He also shows knowledge and intention to destabilize Ukraine and thanks the foreign power for intelligence it has provided on his own president.
December 14, 2013
I am very grateful to the President and all Lithuanian friends for such strong support. I will do everything possible to meet the expectations of my European partners.
Your colleague has arrived and started working with my team. He's a real pro and I think his services may be required even after the country is destabilized.
I've also met your people from the Embassy. The information about Yanukovych's plans they handed me is very important for our common cause. I would like to receive this kind of information on a permanent basis.
In the final and fourth e-mail Klitschko seems impatient to start real violence and calls for a “radical escalation”. He also asks for more money for the “services of supporters” removing all possible doubt about the nature of the “opposition” which are nothing but paid thugs and killers.
Thu, 09 Jan 2014 14:43:35 +0200
I think we've paved the way for more radical escalation of the situation. Isn't it time to proceed with more decisive actions?
I also want you to consider the possibility of increasing funding to pay for the services of our supporters.
Proof of US Meddling
A conversation released on the Internet on about February 6th (timed for the Olympics) between US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt is even more damning. It is important to underline that under international law planning and carrying out the overthrow of the government of a foreign country is completely illegal. This is especially odious when you consider that Ukraine had a democratically elected government and was not ruled by some tyrannical dictator or monarch but a democratically elected president.
Pyatt believes that everything is going according to plan and discussed matter of factly plans to install the opposition in Ukraine in government posts and where they would be most effective. He also mentions an apparent conversation between Nuland and Arseniy Yatseniuk in which she apparently put him in his place and he submitted to their plans. The hint is to a threat of some sort, or pressure of some kind which Pyatt says needs to be applied to Klitschko.
During the conversation they also mention Oleh Tyahnybok another opposition leader apparently under their control and perhaps most damning is United Nations collusion, which goes against the United Natios Charter and all international laws and conventions regarding the respect for sovereignty and the integrity of nations and the right of the people for self-determination.
The arrogance of Nuland and Pyatt to use pet names with their puppets, typical of American government officials but nonetheless shocking: Klitschko is Klitsch and Arseniy Yatseniuk is Yats. The admission that Ban Ki Moon is part of the plot is something that should be causing an outcry worldwide but no one seems to have noticed.
Pyatt: I think we're in play. The Klitschko piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you've seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we're trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make, I think that's the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I'm very glad that he said what he said in response.
Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.
Pyatt: Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok and his guys and I'm sure that's part of what is calculating on all this.
Nuland: I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in... he's going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it's just not going to work.
Pyatt: No. I think... I mean that's what he proposed but I think, just knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he's going to take a while to show up for whatever meeting they've got and he's probably talking to his guys at this point, so I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn't like it.
Nuland: OK, good. I'm happy. Why don't you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.
Pyatt: OK, will do. Thanks.
Nuland: OK... one more wrinkle for you Geoff. I can't remember if I told you this, or if I only told Washington this, that when I talked to Jeff Feltman (United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs) this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning?
Pyatt: Yeah I saw that.
Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.
The goal in Ukraine is clear, install a western puppet government and base US/NATO military infrastructure in the country. Yanukovich attempted to achieve closer ties with Russia and almost immediately the paid western backed protestors appeared on Maidan Square and instantly the West was calling for early elections. Why didn’t they call for early elections in the US when several thousand protestors appeared in Washington and in front of the White House last November? Again hypocrisy.
The goal was removing the leader, as has been the goal in Syria, in Venezuela, in Libya, in Iraq, and anywhere else the government or the leader has maintained a modicum of independence from the US or attempted to have ties with Russia. Even in Russia attempts were made at removing President Putin which failed.
The leader is now gone but the armed neo-nazi thugs have not disappeared from Maidan, they demand spots in the government and at the head of the security services and they demand that their policies are passed into law as we saw with the immediate outlawing of the Russian language. This is not something wanted by the Ukrainian people, over 50% of whom speak Russian as their native language.
They are there for another reason, the final goal has not yet been met, and that is the integration of Ukraine into NATO, whether the people of Ukraine want it or not. The Maidan will not be cleared until all goals and infrastructure are in place to expel Russia and end any chance of Ukraine being in the sphere of influence of Russia. There must also be mechanisms installed to make sure that NATO is allowed to enter the sovereign territory of Ukraine and station their war machine in Ukraine. The West will not have another chance at Ukraine so the bandera nazis will stay and occupy Kiev until the end
The NATO war machine and the neo-conservatives architects are still living in a Cold War fantasy and cannot see the world in any other way. They are blind to the realities of the modern world and are attempting and in fact are changing the world to fit their fantasy. This anti-Russian psychosis is what NATO was founded on and what it continues to exist for to this very day.
Any Means to an End
Thepeople of Ukraine mean nothing to the far right forces that have toppled the government. They mean even less to the western architects and pay masters of the coup in Ukraine. Ukraine has a long history of problems with extremist nazi groups and they have been organizing and training, by some estimates for 10 years, to bring them to level of readiness that we saw on Maidan. These are lunatics that are calling for the killing of Jews and Russians and for anyone else who does not share their views.
These are groups who are armed and trained and openly murder police and are engaged in a campaign of terror against the people and the government of Ukraine. They are using violence and threats and terrorist tactics to force officials to resign and to take over the houses and building of government. They have succeeded in Kiev and now they are pretending to be a legitimate power.
It is these neo-nazi groups that Victoria Nuland and Klitschko are supporting because they think they will help them to obtain and maintain power, but both of them are wrong. These groups hate Jews and as they are both Jewish (Nuland and Klitschko) it is highly unlikely that the likes of Dmitry Yarosh and his minions will support the opposition for long. Once the Right Sector, controls the security and the police structures they will be able to do whatever they want in Ukraine. And that includes mass arrests of anyone who opposes them, namely Russians and Jews.
In their blind ambition to bring Ukraine into NATO and expel Russia, the US has supported the worst ultra-nationalist nazi elements in Ukraine and the death and destruction ahead are nothing compared to what we have already seen them do.
The US supported the opposition led by Klitschko and supported those who were gathered to bring death and destruction to Ukraine, and US ignorance of the forces in the countries where they unleash mayhem and what they will do continues to call into question the sanity of those who are behind these revolutions.
What is happening in Ukraine is the same thing that happened in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. In those country there were murderous Islamists and terrorists that were supported, funded and armed. They were the worst elements of those countries.
In Ukraine it is murderous nationalist terrorists and neo-nazis, but it does not matter, as long as the government is overthrown. If the country is destroyed that is even better because then the country will be easier to control. And again the people mean nothing. Democracy means nothing. If Democracy meant something the Ukrainian people would have been offered a referendum to change their president and constitution, not seeing people come into power backed by thugs who murder police in front of cameras.
US Threats Against Peace
Since the very start of the troubles in Ukraine the United States has been issuing threats to all parties who might put an end to the mayhem. Yanhukovich was immediately warned not to interfere. He was warned not to crack down and he heeded these warnings. He did nothing until it was too late. He was caught in the classic catch 22. If he did something he would be demonized and if he did not he would be seen as weak. He was seen as weak and this only compounded his problems. The US has also made thinly veiled threats to Russia not to interfere: let the killers kill, that is the plan.
The End of the Ukraine
There is now no government in Ukraine US/NATO/CIA have made sure that the country is completely destroyed. It does not matter to them if the country spirals into anarchy or is divided into East and West. Which is something that is being suggested as the only solution. What is important is that it is pliable and NATO is allowed in.
As for the masses, the Russian population of Ukraine is almost 50% and getting rid of them would require genocide, so dividing the country into a Russian part and a Ukrainian part is the only possible solution and one that they nationalists are bringing about.
Outlawing the Russian language, threatening Jews and Russians with death and threatening the Orthodox Church leave only one option and actually give the Russian/Jewish/Orthodox population a legal basis for that option, which is to secede from Ukraine and take half of the country with them which is what will probably happen. Can these right wing fascist groups that have been training for decades be brought under control? Not likely, and such a solution will not be supported.
Why is the West going to support these groups? Because they are anti-Russian and their rabid Russo-phobia has driven them mad.
Anonymous Ukraine releases Klitschko e-mails showing treason
26 February, 03:58
NATO Expansion New ‘Drang Nach Osten’ Doctrine
Yugoslav FM Živadin Jovanović
After NATO military aggression against the former Fedral Republic of Yugoslavia ended in 1999 and after the establishment of the US/NATO Camp Bondsteel military base, American military bases began sprouting up all over Eastern Europe like mushrooms after a drenching rain.
On the 15 year anniversary of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in an interview with the Voice of Russia Živadin Jovanović, the former and last Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals stated that all of these bases are directed against Russia and Eurasia.
All of the NATO infrastructure and military elements have nothing to do with democracy or with some struggle against organized international crime. All of the bases, warships, aircraft, nuclear missiles and anti-ballistic missile systems in Germany, Poland, Romania, Spain and elsewhere are all part of a new “Drang Nach Osten Doctrine” (the German Imperial and nazi [sic] “Drive to the East”). Mr. Jovanović believes this push to the East warrants very serious attention and is a very dangerous development.
This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Živadin Jovanović. He is the former Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia and the Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals. This is part 2 of a longer interview. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com.
Jovanović: In June, 1999, after NATO aggression was ended, then I can recall that soon after that there was a reconstruction and construction of four new American military bases in Bulgaria, and after that four new American bases in Romania. And how many they have in Czech or Slovak Republic, in Poland, in Baltic Republics and so on, it is not really so important, but what is important that after military aggression on Yugoslavia in 1999 and after establishment of the Bondsteel military base, American military bases in eastern part of the continent were mushrooming like after rain.
And now I would like to ask question for your listeners: how to explain the fact that in Europe today there are much more foreign military bases than at the time of the peak of Cold War era? Why they are needed? Is democracy in danger? Who is endangering democracy? Or what are the reasons? Can we believe that these bases are to fight terrorism, or what? It is really what is never recognized.
These bases to my sincere belief are directed against Russia, against Eurasia. And they have nothing to do with democracy, with struggle against organized international crime, with struggling against cyber dangers or anything else. We should be extremely naive to believe that these anti-ballistic systems in Poland, in Romania and elsewhere, in Spain, in Germany, that they are to relieve Europe of the dangers from Iran or from North Korea and so on and so forth.
Robles: Those are all lies. It is just part of the empire, it is part of their military force in order to increase and continue and expand their empire, and surround Russia of course, which they’ve continued to see as a threat even since the Cold War finished. NATO is the foreign military wing of their empire, they are trying to do and they are actually doing what Nazi Germany did: they are taking over the entire world through NATO.
Jovanović: I would only recall that this is new edition of a Drang nach Osten, and it really deserves high attention and very serious approaches. How to discourage, how to stop this extremely dangerous development?
I would like to add to this consideration another element, this is element of the world economic and financial crisis which seem not to be ending in foreseeable future. And I see that this global interventionism which is propped up by United States using NATO as a tool and I see that they actually are trying to pass the burden and consequences of the world economic crisis provoked by themselves to the back bone of other countries, especially to those countries which are rich with strategic minerals, strategic energy resources and so on in order to safeguard their privileged position and their good living standards and their privileged position in world economic relations. They are not ready to give up.
Robles: Can I comment on what you’ve just said about the living conditions? Because people in the West, a lot of people, and this is … it is a myth ... the people themselves, they are living worse than they have since the 1960s. Things are bad for everybody. So this is only benefiting a small group of elites, I think.
Jovanović: Yes, I think you are right, because the victims of the world crisis are generally speaking poorer countries of the world, countries rich with energy and strategic mineral resources and the population of the West equally as the population all over the world. I think the hardest hit are peoples of Africa, of Asia, of Latin America and so on. And this using NATO as a tool of corporate capitalism is aimed at preserving privileged position of these corporate capital companies to preserve the monopolies and privileged position of industrial financial capital and especially military-industrial sector. And so, actually, all of us we are victims of militarization of Europe and militarization of the world relations in general.
I think that we should be aware of that military factor is dominating economy, dominating trade, dominating politics. And it is just a reason to ask a question: where we are leading to? Where does it lead to, and what is the future of such a strategy? I think we are faced with a very disturbing development and we should not allow ourselves such a luxury to become wise when it is useless, when it is late. We should be aware now, although we should have been aware much earlier.
I myself as a Minister of Foreign Affairs of Yugoslavia in 1999, when there was aggression of NATO against my country, I said: ‘Do you understand who is next?’ Today we know who were, who have been next so far. But each time, each stage has, let’s say, more ambitious objective of this military-industrial sector.
So, Serbia was a very tiny, small sanctions exhausted country, it was not perhaps so risky to attack by the strongest military alliance in the history of civilization. But later on they were going on and we know that they were attacking much bigger countries and having a plan to expand this. And I think all leads us to one conclusion: developments in the world relations, and especially in Europe, are very, very disturbing. Let us be aware about it.
Robles: Libya, Syria, Ukraine – it is basically one formula they are using. You mentioned supporting terrorists, you mentioned synthetic revolutions. What other mechanisms did you see as the Foreign Minister to bring about the destruction of Yugoslavia? And what can you say about Libya, Syria, Ukraine, the Middle East, Egypt? The list is almost too long to mention already.
Jovanović: Well, let me first of all say that NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999, exactly 15 years ago, was a turning point in world relations point of starting global interventionism. NATO did empower itself, illegally of course, contrary to all the laws existing in the world relations to intervene in any spot of the globe.
Just it was necessary to proclaim that United States or NATO have national or state interests in certain part of the world and they then prepare for aggression for invasions. To do so they in most instances use so called formula of humanitarian interventions. They invoke obligation to protect as they recently reformulated this humanitarian intervention pattern.
They in Yugoslavia accused Yugoslav government of massively violating human rights of Albanian national minority in Kosovo and Metohija. There was not anything similar to that. We have, let’s say, documents including written documents of German diplomats, of Austrian; one German general said: ‘before the aggression there were no systematic, no organized violations of human rights of Albanians in Kosovo and Metohija’. Another German diplomat Dietmar Hartwig said that accusations of that sort were perceived by himself as preparation for the aggression and so on.
In Libya you recall that they said that civilians were in danger and that they needed protection, in Mali they also said that terrorists were endangering stability and civil life in general. In Syria they say sarin gas was used by the government forces while the UN observers never indicated such a thing. They said only that there were proofs of sarin having been used but they could not state who used the sarin gas, while later on it was linked to the opposition forces and to Saudi Arabia, and whomever else.
In various other places this was also formula: protect civilians, protect human rights, and when such a signal comes from Washington then the whole network of so-called NGO, financed from Washington, from Soros Foundation, from Norway, from Great Britain, from Germany – they accelerate such an accusation and they make atmosphere of transforming lie into truth. Because mass media would accept such directives, and like CNN and some other networks of global nature would be disseminating such accusation. And they would at the same time later, at a later stage that were parallel with this, they finance opposition, inside opposition of targeted country.
They finance so-called democracy, democratization apparently to counter or to remove the totalitarian regimes. Then they would arm them. Next stage they would finance armament and train them in many directions for military actions: how to write paroles and symbols like symbol of OTPOR or the other symbols that we have seen in Maidan in Ukraine, in Kiev or in Cairo or in many other places, in South America and so on and so forth. So they then would provoke a staged event which should be signal that there is no other solution than to use military force. In case of Yugoslavia that was Reka case, in Bosnia and Herzegovina that was Markale Incident, we know the places in Syrian and other countries.
And then sometimes they have apparent diplomatic efforts, but not aimed at finding a political diplomatic solution, only saving diplomatic efforts in order to show that the regimes, so-called regimes, are unbearable and that they are not cooperating and that there is no other means than military means to resolve the problem. So this is mainly the pattern: humanitarian or intervention or responsibility to protect.
Robles: Right. Can you give us your opinion on what is going on now in Ukraine? So we’ve seen everything you’ve been talking about, we’ve seen everything that a lot of analysts and experts have been talking about, we‘ve seen this artificial outside implemented color revolution, we’ve seen and we’ve heard US officials having conversations about who is going to be in power. It is, just everything is out in the open now. But do you see something like a terrorist act or some big act going to happen soon in Ukraine? That would be the next step, I think.
Jovanović: Of course, I presume that Russian analysts and journalists and editors, like yourself, would be much better to interpret the events in Ukraine because it is not only geographically closer to you, but from any point of view, but I can imagine that most thinking people in Europe and the world would have their own assessments of events in Ukraine. As far as I’m concerned I think it is a repetition of the colored revolutions, so-called colored revolutions, and some of the elements of the pattern that I have previously elaborating are being clearly seen in developments in Ukraine.
But perhaps I would like first of all to say that it is part of the western strategy of expansion toward East. It is indeed to my profound belief the part of strategy to reach Russian borders and, well, they are abusing social, economic and other problems which partly resulted from their strategies and their policies of crediting or not crediting, policies implemented through IMF and World Bank, through European banks and so on. Sometimes I believe that they make people hungry in order to finish their strategy.
You were listening to part 2 of an interview with Ћivadin Jovanovic, the former Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia. He is also the Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. Thanks for listening and we wish you the best.
26 February, 23:00
Right Sector a Threat to Ukraine
© Photo: RIA
The level of information warfare about what is going on in Ukraine is currently at the highest level. The West and its interests have a narrative of the events in Ukraine that has been carefully thought and planned. This is also true of all of the actions of the so called opposition in Ukraine, who were carefully instructed, trained and are being controlled and funded by forces outside of Ukraine who seek to see a certain scenario played out to the end.
The objective for Ukraine has been determined by a small circle of planners in Washington and most importantly by the Pentagon and its international surrogate NATO. It does not matter to them if Ukraine is completely destroyed or divided as long as they achieve their aim, and the good of the Ukrainian people is of absolutely no interest to them.
This is John Robles I am speaking to Mr. Sergey Belous, he is a specialist in contemporary history and international relations, he is also an assistant for the former Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia and is an observer of the Ukrainian situation for the Serbian weekly Pichat.
Robles: Can you tell us about the similarities between what happened in Yugoslavia, then in Kosovo and what is now happening in Ukraine?
Belous: As a historian, who specializes in the Kosovo conflict and the Yugoslavian crisis, and a political observer of the Ukrainian issue, I’ve noticed a lot of historical parallels between the current situation which has developed in Kiev and that which existed in Serbia in Milosevic’s time. There was also a huge stream of propaganda and disinformation, as well as the powerful influence and sly actions of western intelligence.
Robles: How were you able to find the truth despite all of the disinformation?
Belous: To figure out the real situation in my country I got in touch with some different, but very credible people, some of them on the ground, some at the political "top" - let’s call them "informers" - who gave me some interesting information to think over.
Robles: What kind of information did they give you?
Belous: First of all there are those "mysterious" snipers, who were proclaimed by the opposition as Yanukovich’s murderers. The real fact is that those snipers were shooting at people on BOTH sides, I mean not just the so called demonstrators, but also at the security forces.
I know from a very reliable source that more than 30 people were killed by them. And they did it so professionally and precisely that the Ukrainian authorities needed to involve between 10 to12 of their own snipers to stop just one of those skilled killers, who obviously had extensive experience in urban combat.
Some people also died later, after being wounded in the back by 7,62 caliber bullets, that means the so called "SVD", or Dragunov, sniper rifle was used. And some wounds were made by more powerful hunting-rifle bullets.
Robles: Where did these snipers come from?
Belous: Investigators have investigated the many different versions but they are not allowed to talk about them.
Robles: Are members of the opposition involved?
Belous: Investigators from the Special Forces tried to research the crimes I mentioned, and the role played by an opposition Member of Parliament named Sergey Pashinsky. Some of the Maidan demonstrators stopped a car and they found a sniper rifle inside, Pashinsky just jumped in that car and quickly vanished with unknown persons. Unfortunately, that investigation has now been put on hold after the overthrow of the government.
Robles: What can you tell us about far right and neo Nazi activists in the opposition?
Belous: The Second interesting point is that most of the radical opposition movement, the so-called "Right Sector", in fact represents a union of ultra-radical organizations, and appeared last summer literally out of nowhere.
Robles: Weren’t the Ukrainian security services alarmed?
Belous: The full dossiers on key right movement leaders was delivered to the appropriate departments of the Ukrainian special services, but they disappeared straightaway!
And then the SBU (Ukraine Security Service) just took away all the documents on all of their suspects, so now, according to the Interior Ministry data bases their biographies look absolutely clean! They are well coordinated, well trained and some of them even have several years of training using firearms - and they have all managed to avoid arrest. That all looks suspicious, doesn’t it?
So the various reports about a great number of double agents in the Ukrainian security services are receiving more attention.
Robles: What plans do they have for the country?
Belous: The political position and the future plans of the "Right Sector" actually look very dangerous. They are not only opposing the idea of European integration, but they really hate the current opposition leaders, including the recently released Yulia Timoshenko. Their genuine vision for the Ukrainian political system is some kind of nationalistic, almost Nazi type dictatorship, and it does not include the acting Euromaidan leaders.
Robles: What else can you tell us?
Belous: There is also a third point. The decision of the new Ukrainian Minister of Internal Affairs, Arsen Avakov, from the opposition, is to hire representatives of the "Right Sector". This may have far-reaching and catastrophic consequences, especially for his Party’s boss Yulia Timoshenko, who is going to be the new leader of the country.
Robles: Timoshenko used to have good relations with Russia didn’t she?
Belous: It may seem like a ridiculous scenario, but releasing Timoshenko from jail may be even profitable for Moscow. Despite her pro-western orientation she has normal relations with the ruling Russian political elite, including President Vladimir Putin, and especially people from Gazprom, which was her business partner during the mid-1990s.
She is talented speaker and has significant support, not just in the West, but also in the East of Ukraine. Of course, at that moment she is getting a lot of criticism directed at her from pro-euro demonstrators, notwithstanding she has no more real powerful opponents.
Robles: What will her role be?
Belous: Apparently, Timoshenko will be used to keep working the key points of agreements signed with Russia before December, and, at the same time, to implement the new concept of Ukrainian bi-vector foreign policy, that fits into the framework of the recent Moscow-Berlin accords on close cooperation between the European Union and the soon to be established Eurasian Economic Union.
Robles: What about the European Eurasian Union? What can you tell us about that?
Belous: Such a format of partnership was announced by President Putin at the Munich Security Conference, where it was proposed to make a free trade zone between the European Union and the Euro-Asian Economic Union by 2020.
A similar idea was mentioned by a reputable and informed German political expert named Alexander Rar, who admitted a few days ago on a Ukrainian TV show that Berlin realized its mistake about giving Ukraine just one option of foreign policy orientation and cooperation – either the European Union, or the Customs Union. So now they will design a new agreement and project that will also consider Moscow’s interests.
In the aforementioned context, the most dangerous player on the Ukrainian political scene is the growing "Right Sector" that will try to prevent the realization of a new geopolitical scheme by armed force, or to nominate its own candidate for elections against the alternative of Timoshenko. Thereby this carries forward and fulfils the United States’ interests, which wants to bring the European Union "to reason".
Robles: I see, I see. Alright, well I really appreciate the interview thank you very much for speaking with me.
Belous: I thank you very much also.
Robles: OK I really appreciate it.
You were listening to an interview with Mr. Sergey Belous, he is a specialist in contemporary history and international relations, he is also an assistant for the former Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia and is an observer of the Ukrainian situation for the Serbian publication Pichat. Thank you very much for listening, and I wish you the best wherever you may be.
27 February, 05:44
15-year Anniversary of NATO Aggression on Yugoslavia
In March 1999, at the direction of the United States of America, NATO engaged in its first act of illegal aggressive war, beginning what can only be called the “dark age of intervention” in which we are living today. The fact that NATO was allowed to get away with the aggression on Serbia and Montenegro emboldened US/NATO and the US military industrial intelligence banking complex and since that day, under a doctrine of Responsibility to Protect, Humanitarian Interventionism, Preventive War and then the all encompassing “War on Terror”, US/NATO have proceeded to destroy country after country and do away with leaders that they have not found to be submissive enough to their will.
The events of 9-11-2001 were a watershed moment for the geopolitical architects and served as a catalyst to allow them to expand their military machine to every corner of the world and invade countries at will and conduct operations with complete disregard for international law and accepted international norms.
In light of the 15th Anniversary of the NATO aggression the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals and other independent Civic associations in Serbia will hold an international conference from the 21st to the 24th of March 2014. The conference will gather 100 prominent intellectuals from all over the world, in addition to those from Serbia, Montenegro, the Republica Srpska and 10 to 15 guests from Russia, including Academician and retired Russian Army General Leonid Ivashov. The conference will also include the participation of the Veterans Alliance of Serbia and the Club of Generals and Admirals of Serbia.
The President of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals and the last Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Zivadin Jovanovic wrote the following summary of the events in light of the 15 year anniversary of the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia. (John Robles)
Do Not Forget, by Zivadin Jovanovic
Fifteen years have passed since the beginning of NATO aggression against Serbia and Montenegro (24 March 1999). This aggression resulted in the loss of 4,000 human lives, including 88 children, and 10,000 people were severely wounded. Over two third of these victims were civilians. How many human lives have been lost in the meantime due to the consequences of weapons with depleted uranium, as well as of remaining cluster bombs, will hardly ever be established.
Breaching the basic norms of international law, its own founding act as well as constitutions of member countries, NATO was bombing Serbia and Montenegro during 78 days continuously destroying the economy, infrastructure, public services, radio and TV centers and transmitters, cultural and historical monuments. NATO bears responsibility for polluting the environment and endangering the health of present and future generations. Economic damage caused by the aggression is estimated at over USD 120 billion. War damage compensation has not yet been claimed, and judgments ruled by our court, by which the leaders of aggressor countries were convicted for the crimes against peace and humanity, were annulled after the coup d’état in 2000.
Governments of aggressor countries seized and occupied the Province of Kosovo and Metohija, and then formally delivered it to former terrorists, separatists and international organized crime bosses. An American military base was established in the Province – “Bondstill”, one of the largest beyond the U.S. territory.
After the aggression, over 250,000 Serbs and other non-Albanians have been forced out the Province of Kosovo and Metohija; even today, 15 years later they are not allowed to return freely and safely to their homes. Ethnic cleansing and even drastic change of ethnic population structure are tolerated by so called international community if only to the detriment of Serbs. The remaining Serbian population in the Province of about 120.000 continues to live in fear and uncertainty. Attacks upon Serbs, detentions and killings, including liquidations of their political leaders, have been continuing up to these days, and nobody is held responsible.
NATO aggression against Serbia and Montenegro (FRY) in 1999 is a crime against peace and humanity. It is a precedent and a turning point towards global interventionism, arbitrary violation of the international legal order and the negation of the role of the UN. The “Bondstill” military base is the first and crucial ring in the chain of new American military bases reflecting strategy of expansion towards East, Caspian Basin, Middle East, towards Russia and its Siberia natural resources. Europe has thus got overall militarization and the new edition of the strategy “Drang nach Osten” (“Thrust to the East”). Destabilization and the tragic developments in Ukraine are just the most recent consequence of that strategy.
15 years after objectives of US/NATO military aggression continue to be pursued by other means. Serbia has been blackmailed to de facto recognize illegal secession of its Province of Kosovo and Metohija through so called Brussels negotiations. The most of the puppet states of the former Yugoslavia are much dependant on and indebted to the leading NATO/EU countries, their financial institutions and corporations so that they could hardly be considered independent states but rather neo-colonies. There is no stability in the Balkans, redrawing of borders has not ended, overall situation is dominated by devastated economy, unemployment, social tensions and misery. Europe, particularly its south-east regions, are experiencing profound economic, social and moral crisis.
Preparations for NATO military aggression against Serbia and Montenegro (FRY) and 1999 aggression itself have been used in the meantime as a blueprint for many other NATO aggressions and occupations - Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Mali and so on. Wherever NATO undertook “humanitarian intervention”, like in former Yugoslavia, it left thousands of dead and mutilated, millions of refugees and displaced persons, ethnic and religious divisions, terrorism and separatism, economic disaster and social misery. NATO expansionist strategy made Europe militarized. There are more US/NATO military bases in Europe today than at the peak of the Cold War era. What for? NATO imperial expansionist strategy has provoked new arms race with unforeseen consequences. Who really needs an organization threatening global peace and stability?
During and after the aggression, 150 Serb monasteries and churches built in the Middle Ages were destroyed. Killed or abducted were some 3,500 Serbs and other non-Albanians, and fates of many of them have not been established until today. Not even one of the thousands of crimes against Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija got a court clarification. Even such terrorist crimes as was blowing up the “Nis-express” bus on 16 February 2001, when 12 people were killed and 43 wounded, neither the murder of 14 Serb farmers reaping in the field in Staro Gracko, on 23 July 2009 remained without thorough investigation, be it by UNMIK, be it by EULEX, or by any other of so many structures of the so called international community.
The Swiss senator, Dick Marty, revealed documented report on trafficking in human organs of Serbs abducted in Kosovo and Metohija. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the oldest European democratic institution, adopted his Report as the official CE document. Although all factors stand verbally for an efficient investigation and bringing the perpetrators to justice, for many years now there have been no results whatsoever. The documentation on human organ trafficking submitted to The Hague Tribunal had been – destroyed!
The Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals, with support of other non-partisan and independent associations from Serbia, from the region and from the Serb Diaspora throughout the world, are organizing a number of activities under the common title “NOT TO FORGET”, with the aim to remind domestic and international public of human loss, destructions and other consequences of NATO aggression.
On Friday, 21 March 2014 at 6 p.m., in Sava Conference Centre, Belgrade (Milentija Popovica No. 1) an opening ceremony will launch a photographic exhibition presenting consequences of NATO aggression.
On Saturday, March 22 and on Sunday, March 23rd, 2014, International conference “Global Peace vs. Global Interventionism and Imperialism” will be held (Sava Conference Centre. Conference starts at 10 a.m. Some 100 prominent personalities from all over the world have confirmed their participation.
On Monday, March 24th, 2014, at 09.30 a.m., the International Memorial Marathon Belgrade-Hilandar will start in front of Saint Sava Church.
The same day, at 11 a.m., civic associations, representatives of Serb Diaspora, guests from abroad and individuals will lay flowers at the monument to children - victims of the aggression, in the Tašmajdan park, and the same day at 12 a.m. flowers will be laid at the Monument to all victims of the aggression, Friendship park, Ušće, New Belgrade.
27 February, 07:22
US/NATO Plans to Control and Dominate Space
With social programs, education, medical insurance and all forms of social aid and assistance being cut in the United States and the people losing their jobs and homes and being forced to pay more and more taxes, the outlook for the future is grim for the common people.
Despite all of this corporations are continuing to maintain huge profits and growth and the military industrial complex in the US continues to grow beyond all reason. Plans by US/NATO to expand their global militarization into space have been the subject of extensive work by peace activist Bruce Gagnon and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.
According to specialists at the organization US/NATO missile and space “defense” are all plans to install a system that will allow the US/NATO a first strike nuclear capability against the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China and any other country they target. Such a military expansion is unprecedented in the history of the world and a threat to world peace and to all of humankind. The Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power provided the following press release regarding their latest annual conference.
The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space (GN) will hold its 22nd annual space organizing conference in Santa Barbara, California, located near Vandenberg space warfare base on March 14-16. The GN is made up of 150 peace and religious groups around the world who are working to oppose the development of a new arms race in space. The theme for the conference will be Vandenberg’s Role in US Global Domination: Implications of US ‘Pivot’ into the Asia-Pacific.
Vandenberg AFB plays a key role in Pentagon military satellite launching, testing nuclear missiles, and most recently as a deployment site for so-called “missile defense” interceptors. Increasingly the US military is aiming at the Asia-Pacific region as the Obama announced ‘pivot’ of 60% of Pentagon forces moves to encircle China.
The conference weekend will begin with a protest at Vandenberg AFB at 4:00 pm on Friday, March 14. A public forum will be held on March 15 at the Trinity Episcopal Church in Santa Barbara at 7:00 pm.
GN Coordinator Bruce Gagnon stated, “For years there have been peace protests outside Vandenberg AFB with many people arrested for their non-violent witness. GN members are coming from all over the world to honor and encourage these dedicated local citizens. We will share our deep concerns about current US plans to ‘control and dominate space’ and the Pentagon’s pivot into the Asia-Pacific.”
he GN has long maintained, having studied the Space Command’s Vision for 2020 planning document, that space domination was ‘necessary’ in order for full corporate control of everything. With resources declining around the planet corporations are using Pentagon space-directed surveillance and targeting to ensure their control. The public, facing growing cuts in social spending, are paying for these costly military space programs.
Dave Webb, National Chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in the UK, said, “We are coming from England and other countries to support the groups who are concerned about the role of Vandenberg in aggressive, destabilizing and dangerous military projects such as ‘missile defense’. Far from being defensive, these systems are part of a strategy involving the possible use of nuclear weapons without having to worry about retaliation. The US has so much to offer the world – but the defiling of the Pacific Ocean and its peoples through this expanding militarism is shameful.”
Each year the Global Network holds its space organizing conference in a different part of the world. Last year the group met in the ‘high north’ of Sweden, where the US and NATO are creating a space surveillance and testing center. People will come to the March 14-16 Santa Barbara events from Norway, England, Canada, Japan, India, South Korea, and from throughout the US.
Please contact the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space in the US at (207) 443-9502, Bruce Gagnon at firstname.lastname@example.org or visit their website at http://www.space4peace.org/actions/gnconf_2014.htm
The Voice of Russia is not associated with the above group. Any opinions are those of the author who can be reached at email@example.com. Thank you.
27 February, 11:48
Obama "Warns" Karzai: US/NATO May "Leave" Afghanistan. Thank God Afghans Say!
The self serving spin is almost mind numbing in its complete twisting of the facts as the western press reports that in a telephone conversation on Tuesday US President Barrack Hussein Obama "warned his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai that the US may pull all of its troops out of his country by the year's end." First of all the statement flies in the face of the fact that the US/NATO are supposed to (not may) leave Afghanistan this year.
Secondly the use of the word "warn" implies that somehow President Karzai wants the invaders to continue to occupy his country, something unlikely as he has refused to sign a "security agreement" with the occupiers who want to stay in his country until the end of time to guarantee their military plans and takeover of the entire region.
The Afghanistan narrative by the western media and the US Government is almost the same as the one they were trying to spin as they were chased out of Iraq in 2011. Of course the US Government and US President Obama have to paint as positive a portrait as they can on the Afghanistan fiasco, this is understandable, but given the facts it is pathetic to watch. As in the illegal invasion of Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan, was portrayed as somehow connected to the events of September 11, 2001 but all connections were quickly proven to be nothing but lies and spin making the US guilty of not one but two (and more) acts of aggressive war (crimes against peace and humanity) based on false pre-fabricated evidence.
Those crimes against humanity have been ignored by the so-called "international community" as they continue to ignore the illegal extra-territorial torture dungeon at Guantanamo Bay Cuba, the ongoing extra-judicial drone assassination operations by the CIA and Obama, the illegal massive spying by the NSA and the persecution of whistleblowers like Julian Assange who remains trapped in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London even though he has asylum in Ecuador and has not been charged with a single crime. The ignoring of these crimes continues to fly in the face of international law and is an abomination which continues to undermine the very foundations and belief in the rule of law for all citizens of the world.
Yet the western media continues to spin away everything as if nothing has happened and paint its leaders and military industrial complex as somehow being noble and even more unbelievable, wanted. That is part of the delusional architecture at work here, just as they are ignoring that it is public knowledge that the US/CIA orchestrated the overthrowing of yet another democratically elected government in Ukraine, they continue to ignore and are in denial of the fact that they were never wanted in Afghanistan.
The US invasion and over 12 year occupation of Afghanistan has done nothing positive whatsoever for the Afghan people or the Afghan Government. By some estimates the fighting has killed up to a million Afghanis, opium production has now risen 40 fold making Afghanistan the world’s number one opium producer and the Taliban, who the western media continue to say were somehow defeated are now stronger than ever. As for the 10 or so al-Qaeda fighters that were operating in Afghanistan and who the US supposedly brought in several hundred thousand troops to fight, well they are probably still hanging around somewhere.
We can tell all of the poor Afghan families who have lost children, brothers, husbands and entire families to wanton drone attacks and night raids that it is okay. The US commanders and those in charge of the carnage have learned "lessons." A repeated claim by Generals and politicians. Yes, your country was decimated and destroyed so US/NATO/ISAF could "learn" how to improve their interoperability, fly their little killer drones and use all of their cool night vision murder equipment during their night raids. They also learned how to torture and hone their “enhanced interrogation” skills on your people. As for the opium, well, they learned how to protect the opium fields and in front of the eyes of the world increase production 40 fold while pretending to be fighting against the illegal narcotics trade.
The US is battling a thousand in Afghanistan and is unfortunately also having a problem getting President Karzai to agree to give US personnel legal immunity for its soldiers and contractors. President Karzai may be slightly upset by the thousands of innocent civilians that the US has slaughtered in their wanton drone attacks, but just like in Iraq the "exceptional" Americans believe they should be immune from any law whatsoever when it applies to anywhere other than their own country. This belief that they are above the law everywhere is a psychosis for which there will be no cure until prosecutions begin to be handed down. Something not likely to happen soon as the US even has an act called the "Hague Invasion Act" in case anyone has the nerve to prosecute any American for war crimes.
So back to the pull out. The US wants to keep, what is for them a "small" number of troops (just 10 thousand or so) in Afghanistan until the end of time or has threatened to go for what they are calling a "zero option" (withdrawing all troops), as it did in Iraq, leaving the Afghan forces to battle the bogeymen terrorists by themselves, namely the 5 or so al-Qaeda fighters that may be somewhere in Afghanistan.
The problem is that President Karzai will not sign the security agreement the US wants him to sign to guarantee they can stay. After the phone call between Obama and Karzai White House spokesperson Jay Carney said:"We have made clear that our commitment to Afghanistan – separate from the troop presence – is in our national security interests." He also said: "It is preposterous to suggest [that Karzai’s refusal to sign the BSA] is because we have not made clear that it is to be signed."
Yes that was a correct quote. The US made it clear to Karzai that "… it is to be signed," meaning that Karzai has not followed orders. Let us recall for a moment, Hamid Karzai is not a US Government employee or a member of the White House’s lower level staff, he is the President of Afghanistan. The statement underlines the complete arrogance of the White House and the fact that they really do believe that they own Karzai.
The US White House released a statement which said: "… we will leave open the possibility of concluding a BSA (bilateral security agreement) later this year. However, the longer we go without a BSA, the more challenging it will be to plan and execute any US mission and the more likely it will be that any post-2014 US mission will be smaller in scale and ambition."
If this is true, that the US will actually leave Afghanistan without their BSA, a fact I doubt, then this will surely have the Afghan people dancing in the streets and finally allow the government and the people to concentrate or rebuilding their country, something they will have to do as the US has destroyed all of the infrastructure and annihilated what little the people did have before their invasion. As for the hundreds of thousands if not a million dead civilians, well the US has gotten away with murder so far….
According to Al-Jazeera Chuck Hagel, the US Secretary of Defense (War), said planning for the "zero option" was a prudent step given that Karzai had made clear he is unlikely to sign the security deal. However Hagel is recalcitrant, the US wants to stay, whether they are wanted or not. Hagel added: "The United States will consult closely with NATO allies and ISAF partners in the months ahead, and I look forward to discussing our planning with defence ministers in Brussels this week."
All views and opinions are those of the author. I can be reached firstname.lastname@example.org
28 February, 00:40
Collage: Voice of Russia
The Hacktivist Group Anonymous Ukraine has been able to hack the e-mail accounts of the Udar Party as well as the electronic correspondence of the deputy head of the Ukrainian nationalist party, The Stepan Bandera Trident, one Andrey Tarasenko.
Anonymous Ukraine released an e-mail between Tarasenko and the Deputy Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People Aslan Omer Qirimli in which he asks for more powerful weapons, information on the location weapons caches in Kerch, Feodosia, Simferopol, Sevastopol and Yalta. The e-mail released by Anonymous Ukraine is dated January 28, 2014 so its operational value is questionable but it does show the true nature of the “peaceful demonstrators” on the Maidan and in Ukraine. Anonymous Ukraine has also hacked the e-mails of NATO offices and bodies in Ukraine and those of several US officials operating in Ukraine with more releases soon to appear on the internet, according to sources in Anonymous.
The e-mail between Tarasenko has been independently verified and appears authentic. It has not been translated into English as of publication so this is the first. The original was in Russian with some grammar errors. Unlike Klitschko who speaks English and German as well as Ukrainian and Russia, Tarasenko appears to speak only Russian and Ukrainian.
Text with comments:
"Everything is going according to plan. We are ready to proceed to the second part of the play.”
He referenced the “play” and the “plan” this provides further evidence of the staged and controlled nature of the coup in Ukraine.
“As agreed last week, my guys together with our brothers from the "Carpathian Sich" and UNA-UNSO are ready at first command to take the instruments where they are needed.”
The Carpathian Sich is apparently a new formation that little is known about but the UNA-UNSO is a neo-nazi [sic] nationalist organization, like most “Defense Leagues” and stands for the Ukrainian National Assembly - Ukrainian National Defense. The “instruments” is obviously a reference to weapons and the other “tools” the armed neo-nazis are using to overthrow the government and terrorize the Ukrainian people.
“From you we only need you to identify the coordinates of the caches in Simferopol, Sevastopol, Kerch, Feodosia and Yalta and the times we are to meet.”
This is an important sentence because it shows the compartmentalized nature of the command structure and the cells. Obviously the members are well-trained and judging by their infiltration of the security services and their ties to foreign intelligence and financial sources, as well as public meetings with US officials and intercepted communications there again appears to be the hand of CIA planners at work, however US/NATO/CIA have been extremely careful in covering their tracks, choosing to use German, Turkish and other intermediaries to control their agents in Ukraine.
“Yes, there is one more request. There is a lot of game, we need more hunting gear, helmets and sticks. Do not forget the soda in glass bottles, as well as fuel for them. Also, more gas masks and first aid supplies would not hurt.”
Referring to police and security forces as “game”, as if they are animals, shows how the neo-nazis have dehumanized their targets, also clear from the way they are killing police and beating them to death with steel pipes in the street. His reference to “soda” or “carbonated fluid” is not clear but the follwng request “fuel” might indicate a chemical weapon of some sort, active when mixed.
“I understand that our Turkish friends and have already done a lot, but you know me - I never ask for anything extra.”
The Turkish connection is the most complex but Crimea has long established Turkish- Islamist underground consisting of Crimean Tatars and surprisingly, according to sources, Uighurs from Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China. The Crimean Tatar groups have long been preparing for the proclamation of an independent state and pursue conflicting goals from the Ukrainian Nationalist. However they are united against one enemy which they must both neutralize, namely the Russian-speaking population of the peninsula. The fact that he says “you know me” shows that they have “worked” together before.
“The game was not easy to scare off and the Molotov cocktails do not work on them. We need something more serious. I hope you understand me.”
Again calling the police and law enforcement “game” is chilling and his call for something more serious is obviously a reference to either heavier weapons or possibly some sort of homemade or other “chemical weapon” as I stated earlier.
“As for the money, do not worry: everything will be in the best possible form, but at a later date. In the end, you know that if we are successful you will get a lot more."
This sentence appears to show that money has already changed hands but that currently the neo-nazis may be short of funds. Saying the “best form” apparently implies that there are several methods of payment acceptable but one is preferred. The fact that they will pay much more later shows they have already agreed on a sum but that they will pay more.
Statement from Anonymous Ukraine
Greetings citizens of the world. We are Anonymous Ukraine.
Divisions within Anonymous worldwide and Anonymous Ukraine have been resolved as Anons see more and more evidence of the forces at work in Ukraine. Members of Anonymous Ukraine are working to uncover and expose to the world the internal meddling by the United States, NATO, the European Union, the NSA and the CIA into the internal sovereign affairs of Ukraine.
Anonymous Ukraine continues to support peace and the right of the people of Ukraine to self determination. The Bandera Nazis and fascist thugs that are pretending to be the voice of the people will be stopped. Murderers and fascist thugs who kill police and members of the security services of Ukraine do not represent the will or the wishes of the people of Ukraine.
The people of Ukraine do not want European Union integration. The people of Ukraine do not want NATO on their territory. The people of Ukraine voted for President Yanukovich to lead them in fair and just democratic elections.
The people of Ukraine plea to the President and to Russia for help in stopping the siege of Ukraine by Nazi thugs and murderous gangs. The people of Ukraine do not want to see their beloved capital Kiev occupied by Nazi killers and burned to the ground. The people of Ukraine ask for order to be restored. The people of Ukraine want their independence to be recognized and be allowed to determine their own fate without pressure from US, NATO, European Union. The people of Ukraine want peace and want the Bandera Nazis to be stopped once and for all.
Anonymous Ukraine does not like nor support what is happening in Ukraine now. Anonymous Ukraine thanks President Putin for protecting President Yanukovich and asks him to restore order.
The so-called opposition is tearing Ukraine apart. Anonymous Ukraine will continue to expose the moves by the west to subvert the sovereign country of Ukraine. The latest e mails released by Anonymous prove that the Bandera Nazis are allied with Islamic extremists. We will continue fighting these puppets. The western puppet opposition leaders will lead to the breakup of Ukraine.
We appeal to the president of our country. The people of Ukraine urge you. President Yanukovich, to return to Ukraine and restore order and bring calm and stability and disperse the gangs of robbers and Nazis. Anonymous Ukraine will strike at all of the web resources of western hirelings and fascists.
Anonymous Ukraine calls for Ukraine to be unified and independent. The government of Ukraine promoted the country's integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions despite the reluctance of Ukrainian people. Ukrainian citizens realize that signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union will lead to the collapse of Ukrainian economy in the near future. We express our support to the people of our country. We want Ukrainian government and EU leadership to understand that people of Ukraine do not want their country to become a raw material donor to Europe.
Ukraine must be free. We do not want to be dependent on other countries or organizations. Ukrainian people do not need a speculative Association Agreement with the European Union. Ukraine does not need the International Monetary Fund or the western banksters and their conditions. We do not need to be servants of NATO. Ukraine does not need European Union. Ukraine does not need NATO. Ukraine should not be anybody's servant.
The Russian people of Ukraine make up a hardworking and intelligent part of Ukrainian society. The Russian people are brothers and sisters to the Ukrainian people. We do not support demonizing the Russian people. We do not support making the Russian language illegal and we do not support the destruction of monuments and churches by the Bandera Nazis.
We stand for independent Ukraine. We declare the continuation of Operation Independence. We will strike at the web resources of countries and organizations that pose a threat to freedom and independence of Ukraine!
The Bandera Nazis did not listen. They have proven the weak cowards that we knew they were. They can continue to expect us. We will continue to take their sites down and publish every communication they make. Anyone who supports them can also soon expect us.
Operation Independence continues… You should have expected us
We are Anonymous Ukraine.
We are the Real Patriots of Ukraine
We are Legion.
We Do Not Forgive.
We Do Not Forget.
Do Not Expect Us.
We Are Already Here.
28 February, 07:01
Ukraine was a Playbook CIA Coup D'état
Professor Francis Boyle
The very first act of the western-backed insurrectionists which represent a small percentage of the population and have managed to overthrow the government was to attempt rob Russian speakers in Ukraine of their language.
This denial by the Bandera nazi [sic] extremists and the illegitimate power in Kiev of a basic human rights for a huge percentage of the population runs contrary to international law and the European Convention of Human Rights to which Ukraine is a signatory.
According to the United Nations General Assembly Declaration of Principles of International Law and under the terms of the United Nations Charter, effectively the Russia population have a right to secede from Ukraine. In an interview with the Voice of Russia Harvard Professor Francis Boyle says that there is no real government in Ukraine right now, and called it a gang of neo-Nazis, fascists and rightist thugs. There is clear cut discrimination against Russians in Ukraine with public demands in Kiev that Russians be killed. According to Professor Boyle what happened in Kiev was a playbook coup d'état by the CIA. Victoria Nuland, the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, working with the US Ambassador, were instrumental in carrying out the coup d'état, as it has been proven they were working with “the brown shirts”: Svoboda, the right sector, the Bandera Nazis and skinheads.
This is John Robles, you are listening to an interview with Professor Francis Boyle. He is a Professor in International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign in Illinois. And he also holds multiple doctorates.
Robles: Hello, sir.
Boyle: Hi, John, how are you doing? My best to your listening audience.
Robles: And thanks for agreeing to speak with me. I’m doing well by the way. You’ve made several comments and you‘ve written several very hard-hitting pieces regarding the rights of people to secede. In this case we are speaking about Ukraine and the Russian speaking population which is a very large percentage of the population in that country. Can you give us some details on that and your views on what is going on in Ukraine right now, please?
Boyle: Right, John. Well,let me just look at it to start out as a legal matter. What you had here, as you know, was this rump Ukrainian Parliament voted to terminate Russian as one of the official languages of Ukraine and you have, I would say, maybe a 30% or more of the population are native Russian speakers.
Now the problem with this is that it does provide, or at least start to provide, grounds for succession under international law. I’m not saying here I’m asking for succession, although I do note there are now people in the Russian speaking areas of Ukraine especially in Crimea and Sevastopol asking for succession.
So the test for succession, and let me read it here for you, taken from the United Nations General Assembly Declaration of Principles of International Law under the terms of the United Nation’s Charter, and it’s set forth in a paragraph which I sent to you, effectively what it says is that if a government, and here in Ukraine right now there is no government, there is just a gang of neo-Nazis, fascists, rightist thugs and whatever in charge of Kiev
But if a government does not quote: “conduct themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples and possess a government representing the whole people, belonging to the territory without distinction as to race, creed or color”, then that provides grounds for succession.
And here you have the Russians being stripped of their language, so it’s clear cut discrimination here against Russians. You are hearing public demands in Kiev that Russians be killed, and things of this nature.
So I’m not saying that I’m supporting succession, but this is very dangerous what the rabble in charge of Kiev have done here in stripping the Russian speakers of their native language, and as we know the capability to speak a language goes to the very heart of any people, no matter who they are.
And this is a serious issue between the First and Second World War, when you had collapse of all these empires and the arbitrary creation of nation states, and speakers of one language put in, as a minority in another state.
So it is a very dangerous step they have taken here. As you know they have also outlawed the Communist Party - that is serious. I don’t think legally it is as serious as stripping Russian speakers of their language, in dealing with the state. But even there, Ukraine is a party to the European Convention of Human Rights.
There is a right of association, and political association, and to establish political parties. I’m not a Communist myself, I’m a political independent, but they certainly have a right to have a Communist Party if they want to, and today we just saw that the leader of the Communist Party in Kiev – they burned his home down. So, we have a chance that Russians and Communists and Jews should be killed over there. So it’s a very bad sign for maintaining the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
Now so far, I think Foreign Minister Lavrov has taken the correct position, that is: ‘we are not going to interfere in the domestic affairs of Ukraine’, which is correct under international law. But he said ‘others should not do the same either’, but unfortunately, as we know, the United States and Germany, at a minimum, are over there interfering in the domestic affairs of Ukraine.
So, it is a very difficult, dangerous situation. I think the thugs ruling there in Kiev right now are playing with fire.
Robles: Now you mentioned some things that are very alarming, and they have been alarming for many Russian officials. I’d like your comment, if you could, first off: Russia’s Human Rights Ombudsman, he said that this was a violation. Let me pull up the quote here, he said: ‘the attack on the Russian language in Ukraine is a blatant violation of the rights of the ethnic minority;it is against the principal of the rule of law’. That was stated by Konstantin Dolgov today. The figures that we have …
Boyle: He is correct, he is certainly correct, and I’m suggesting it’s far more serious than that – in that it provides a legal basis for the Russian speakers in the Russian areas of Ukraine to declare succession,if that’s what they want to do.
So it’s even far more serious than your minister there is pointing out, there was far more grave, serious violation of their basic human rights. Yes, but I agree with what he is said, yes.
Just a reminder you are listening to an interview with Professor Francis Boyle.
Robles: You mentioned death threats against Russians and Jews. Can you tell us about a little bit about those? And how is it possible that the West is continuing to support these people, these thugs that have basically just occupied all the houses of government?
Boyle: But, the United States’ government has been overthrowing democratically elected governments since the Mosaddegh Government in Iran and putting the Shah of Iran in power - that was Kermit Roosevelt - and even as he publicly bragged about it in his book Countercoup, and even have a manual in circulation there at the CIA based on this, on how you overthrow governments.
So it seems to me this was a playbook coup d'état by the CIA. Nuland, the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, working with the US Ambassador, we now have the tape on that. So this is a classic coup d'état, and working with what I can call ‘the brown shirts’ over there: Svoboda, the right sector, the Bandera people, skinheads– they list these types of people they want.
So that is people that they were working with to overthrow ademocratically elected government, and basically shred the Constitution. They are paying no attention at all to any constitutional arrangement there. And as we know, as of today, Tuesday evening my time, they still don’t have a government in Kiev, they can’t agree on one.
So, it does appear the Americans favor putting Tymoshenko back in power, because you had that very famous picture of her with Ambassador Pyatt, that was clearly a symbol that she is the American favorite. But I think the neo-Nazis, and the fascists, right sector don’t even want her.
So I don’t know how all this is going to shake out. And in the meantime, it is extremely dangerous in Kiev and the non-Russian speaking parts for Communists, Jews,Russian speakers. We will have to see what happens, I really don’t know.
Robles: Couple of other things here now. Klitschko said, earlier today Moscow time, that he wanted to run for president. Then we have Yarosh, he is the leader of the nationalists who have been training in western Ukraine for about a decade to carry all this out - he wants to be the president - he wants to lead the country. And it would be something unbelievable in modern times, something like a Nazi regime is what he wants to bring about. People call him “The Führer”.
Also, Jewish leaders have called for Jews to leave Kiev, and possibly leave the country. Was the US aware of all this? I find that hard to believe they were that ignorant what they were unleashing.
Boyle: I’m sure they knew exactly what they were doing. Look, the United States government works with anyone they need to work with, to accomplish their objectives, as you see in Syria-they are working with Muslim extremist terrorist groups to overthrow the Assad government in Syria - I’m not saying he is democratically elected.
They did the same thing in Libya to overthrow Colonel Gaddafi - I’m not saying he was democratically elected. So it doesn’t really matter, whatever gets the job done- they will do.
So in Ukraine they decided to work with the neo-Nazis, fascists, right sector, Bandera people, those who trace their origins back to the German invasion of Ukraine and exterminating millions of Ukrainians, including maybe 2 million Jews, we don’t even know the exact number.
Nuland made it clear in that conversation that she does not support Klitschko, and she called him Klits, he is basically a creation of the German government, and Yatsenyuk, he is in there, and Svoboda- they don’t support them, they are too far right.
But they made it clear they support Tymoshenko. She is their errand girl, and they want her in power. They figure she is the best ‘face’, but as Nuland said: she should be talking to Klitschko and the head of Svoboda there, was it four times a week? Or something like that.
Robles: Yeah, four times a week she said.
Boyle: So, that is what the Americans want. Whether they’ll get it, I don’t know.
Robles: There’s one problem – that is not what the Ukrainian people want. I mean, when Tymoshenko was rolled out, most of the people were not that happy to see her.
So, I mean, sure that’s somebody the US wants, but how they are going to put her in power if the Ukrainian people don’t want her?
Boyle: Well I agree with you, but this is a coup d’état. I mean, the Iranian people didnot want the Shah of Iran either, but that is what they got. The Americans working with the rabble over there, and the brown shirts in Iran, they, against the wishes of the Iranian people, put the Shah in power and he stayed there from 1953 until 1979.
So if it doesn’t appear she is going to work, the Americans willplay a little around and find someone else who does work, and is more acceptable. I can’t say, John.
But the Americans want their person in power, in Kiev, and if it is not Tymoshenko, then maybe they will go with Klitschko first -who knows? If that doesn’t work out they could even go with Svoboda, and try to rehabilitate Svoboda. I can’t say. I’m still trying to figure this out now.
Robles: Yeah, we are talking about this matter-of-factly, like we are discussing like the choosing of a team, but what we are talking about here is completely illegal under international law, isn’t it? You can’t install governments at will no matter who you are.
Boyle: Well, that is correct. It is clearlyillegal, we discussed this before – it’s condemned by the World Court and the Nicaragua decision,when the Reagan Administration tried to overthrow theSandinistagovernment in Nicaragua, and they were not democratically elected at all, but the United States government has been doing this starting with the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran, then Guatemala, and moving on from there, I mean, I can’t recall the exact number of governments they’ve overthrown.
Robles: Over 70.
Boyle: Yeah, Bill Blum has a book called ‘Killing Hope’.
Robles: Yeah, I read it, I know Bill, I know Bill. I think 77 he said.
Boyle: He has got the exact number and the circumstances - all in his book “Killing Hope”. And Bill used to work for the State Department, and resigned in protest over the Vietnam War. He is a very solid person.
Robles: Yeah, I’ve interviewed him several times.Professor Boyle, we are out of time. I really appreciate it, if maybe if you could in less in a minute if you could give us your prediction and your advice for all the players in this.
Boyle: Oh, John, I mean, we did discuss this the last time, and at this point I really don’t know what to say. All I can say is that Foreign Minister Lavrov has so far - I’ve commended him before - I think he is an outstanding diplomat and representative of the Russian Federation and far superior to Secretary of State Clinton and Secretary of State Kerry, but he has taken the principle position under international law, that Russia is not going to interfere in Ukraine’s domestic affairs. And that is a correct position to take.
Now, beyond that, I would not know how to advise the Russian government right now what to do. I think president Putin and his National Security Council, as you know they met last week, are trying to sort all this out. You know, it could be, President Putin might decide to try to stabilize the situation in Ukraine. He might decide that he doesn’t really want a civil war in Ukraine right on the borders with Russia.
So those, very well, might be his calculations, and I certainly would not disagree with those conclusions if that was what he and his National Security Council were to decide. I think if there were to be a civil war in Ukraine it would make what happened in Yugoslavia child’s play. So, that might be the way President Putin is seeing things now as we speak.
Robles: Ok, thank you, Professor Boyle. I really appreciate your views.
Boyle: Fine! Thanks a lot John, and my best again to your listening audience.
Robles: OK. Thank you,sir. I’ll be in touch, thank you very much. Thank you.
This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Professor Francis Boyle. He is a Professor in International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign, Illinois. Thank you very much for listening and we wish you the best wherever you may be.