SEARCHLIGHT: The World on the Brink of War / A Roundup of Insightful Commentary
SearchLight
Annotated by Patrice Greanville
1. BY JOHN WIGHT: Of sycophants & lickspittles
Sanity, says John Wight, an uncompromising observer of contemporary society, died in Britain along with Queen Elizabeth. I tend to differ with that assertion, thinking that QE II actually buttressed the whole rotten edifice of privilege for generations, and that the British realm has seen plenty of rottenness and insanity in the recent past, all under her dignified watch. Still, what Wight says under that headline is largely irrefutable:
The madness that has ensued since the death of the UK’s longest reigning monarch bears witness to a failed revolution, while watching thousands flock to be part of this public spectacle leaves you pondering a human condition that reveals a propensity to idolatry. It also leaves you in no doubt of the chilling effect of a media that provides no space for dissenting voices when it comes to this regressive and rebarbative institution that sits at the apex of British society and public affairs.Since Elizabeths’s death a carnival of royal worship has ensued, during which off the wall sycophancy has spewed from every mainstream news channel, every newspaper, and every correspondent, royal or otherwise. Even more chilling has been the arrest of various anti-monarchy protesters for merely protesting. Such a prolonged period of gushing royal worship is chilling to behold, providing us with a glimpse of what totalitarianism would look like in Britain.
And Wight, obviously, has not succumbed to Prince Charles'—I mean King Charles—slender charms:
Charles in truth is a corrupt, tax dodging reprobate, who reminds us that you can get away with just about anything in Britain if you’ve got a posh accent. Currently he’s getting away with being a king, aided and abetted in the doing by a media and political class colonised by lickspittles and moral midgets.
Read the rest of this provocative essay here.
2. WHODUNIT? BY BERNHARD (MOON OF ALABAMA)
Moon of Alabama (MoA), edited by "B" (Supposedly Bernhard, a German citizen who prefers to remain anonymous) is one of the Internet's most potent disseminators of truth. His analyses are seldom off the mark. And so it is with the blowing up of the Russian gas pipelines, Nordstream I and Nordstream II, indisputably an act of brazen terrorism designed to damage, not just the Russian interests involved (not exactly of minor consequence as the pipelines cost billions to plan and build, and the Baltic has already absorbed about a $1 billion in escaped gas) but, some would say in disbelief, the European Union itself. The question is why? Who carried out this outrageous act of sabotage precisely as European populations are beginning to stir for a restoration of gas supplies (and heating in the face of a threatening freezing winter), all of which would imply a lifting of sanctions against Russia?
MoA (along with Gonzalo Lira and a small number of other astute observers) have already rounded up the most logical suspect in this crime, and we entirely agree. It is none other than Uncle Sam:
Whodunnit? - Facts Related to The Sabotage Attack On The Nord Stream Pipelines
For decades the U.S. opposed European projects to receive energy from Russia. It wants Europe to buy more expensive U.S. oil and gas.
the Lemniscat @theLemniscat - 15:56 UTC · Sep 27, 2022
US plan was always to stop EU buying Russia's gas
2014
Rice:"You want to change the structure of energy dependence. You want to depend more on the North America energy platform ... to have pipelines that don't go through Ukraine & Russia"
https://youtube.com/watch?v=aF0uYIjaTNEEurope's, and especially Germany's industry, depends on cheap energy from Russia. Without it Europe will be de-industrialized and go broke.
The U.S. had threatened to disable the pipelines connecting Europe to Russia.
ABC News @ABC - 9:59pm · 7 Feb 2022
Pres. Biden: "If Russia invades...then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."
Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?"
Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that."
abcn.ws/3B5SScxCurrently the U.S. is winning its war on Europe's, mainly Germany's, industries and people. Yesterday's sabotage attack on the Nord Stream I and II pipelines, which are supposed to bring Russian natural gas to Germany, mean that the the war on Germany has entered its hot phase.
A question remains: Whodunnit?
Russia has no motive to destroy the pipelines it owns. These are valuable, long term assets and the gas that escaped from them yesterday was on its own worth some $600 to $800 million.
Indeed. As we pointed out a few days back elsewhere in this site, Russia had no need to destroy her own infrastructure to cut gas supplies to the annoying, Washington-controlled pygmies in the EU. All it had to do was simply shut off the pipelines valves.
I should remind our audience that MoA had already ably dissected the situation and pretty much named the culprit in a previous, equally superb analysis the day before (Sep 27, 2022):
Just yesterday I laid out how the U.S. is winning its war on Europe's industries and people.
That war, hidden behind the U.S. created Ukraine crisis, is designed to destroy Europe's manufacturing advantage compared to the U.S. It is more likely though to strengthen the economic position of China and other Asian economies.
I have argued that Germany must open the Nord Stream II pipeline which can bring Russian natural gas to Germany without crossing other countries' territory. It must also allow Siemens to repair the defect Nord Stream I compressors. It is in fact inevitable if German's industry is to survive.
Others have come to similar conclusion and decided to sabotage the pipelines to make their re-opening impossible:
Three offshore lines of the Nord Stream gas pipeline system have sustained "unprecedented" damage in one day, Nord Stream AG, the operator of the network, said on Tuesday in what one German official has suggested is a "targeted attack”. Nord Stream 2 suffered a gas leak which was then followed by a drop of pressure on Nord Stream 1.
The company also said that it was impossible to estimate when the gas network system's working capability would be restored.
The simultaneous sub sea damage to three pipelines is obviously not an accident.
A German economy official told Tagesspiegel: "We can't imagine a scenario that isn't a targeted attack."
They added: "Everything speaks against a coincidence."
MoA, so far, provides the most comprehensive and impressive overview of this entire sordid affair, so if you want to learn all the pertinent facts, which are, indeed, sensational, as befits an act liable to go down in history as a turning point, pay a visit. Nothing like this is liable to appear now or in the near future in the whore Western mainstream press, busily selling you cynical US disinformation.
Read the rest of this provocative essay here.
3. IN THE MATTER OF DECEPTION & GENERAL SKULDUGGERY—
REPLY BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Russia and China (and other challengers of the Empire of Chaos and Hypocrisy) are simply pikers when it comes to mass disinformation. This is —by definition—an underhanded tool historically developed and perfected by the Anglo-Americans, whose early mastery of this field issues directly from the natural dynamic of capitalism, a form of weaponised marketing, really, like malignant p.r.
The Anglos had the benefit of early industrialisation, which permitted them a huge leap in media technology that their rivals have yet to match. The Germans are said to have been masters of propaganda, but I doubt it. The claims of such proficiency have been grossly inflated by the Anglos themselves, clearly an effort to reduce the visibility of their own gianormous machinery of undemocratic mass manipulation. The Soviets have also been proclaimed—by the same coterie of Western worthies— to have been masters of public deception, but, friends, let's get real, the Soviet system and Russian culture in general are not exactly cut out for the refined, consistent dispensation of lies. Just by examining the last 75 years of the postwar period we can easily see that, as a rule, while the Soviets and later "capitalist" Russkies generally told the truth and kept their promises (treaties, etc.), the Americans and the Brits did not. Deviousness and chicanery in fact and deed have been the Anglos' official syntax in international relations, and this extends to dealings with their own allies (as the current situation with the EU seem to confirm). This lack of loyalty extends to recent war allies, mind you. The CIA-redacted Wikipedia, no less, offers the following info on just one such incident of mind-boggling treachery concocted by the Brits against the Soviets, who had just emerged as victors over the Nazi horde at the cost of 27 million dead and a country in ruins:
Operation Unthinkable was the name given to two related possible future war plans by the British Chiefs of Staff against the Soviet Union in 1945. The plans were never approved nor implemented. The creation of the plans was ordered by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in May 1945 and developed by the British Armed Forces' Joint Planning Staff in May 1945 at the end of World War II in Europe.[1]
One plan assumed a surprise attack on the Soviet forces stationed in Germany to "impose the will of the Western Allies" on the Soviets. "The will" was qualified as "a square deal for Poland",[2] which probably meant enforcing the recently signed Yalta Agreement. The planners decided that without massive American help Britain would probably fail. The assessment, signed by the Chief of Army Staff on 9 June 1945, concluded: "It would be beyond our power to win a quick but limited success and we would be committed to a protracted war against heavy odds."[3][not specific enough to verify] The code name was now reused instead for a second plan, which was a defensive scenario in which the British were to defend against a Soviet drive towards the North Sea and the Atlantic following the withdrawal of the American forces from the Continent. At no time was either plan shared with the United States or anyone else.[citation needed] When the Labour Party came to power in the 1945 general election, it ignored the draft plan.
The study became the first Cold War-era contingency plan for war with the Soviet Union.[4] Both plans were highly secret and were not made public until 1998[5] – although a British spy for the Soviets, Guy Burgess, had passed on some details at the time.[6]
A similar case of heinous deceit, this time directed at their own population, was seen in the US in 1962, as the Pentagon shuffled pretexts to attack Cuba. I'm talking here about the notorious Operation Northwoods, which every American should know about, but which only a minuscule and mostly impotent fraction do, for reasons easy to discern. Again, the Wiki:
Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation against American citizens that originated within the US Department of Defense of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for CIA operatives to both stage and actually commit acts of violent terrorism against American military and civilian targets, blaming them on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The possibilities detailed in the document included the remote control of civilian aircraft which would be secretly a repainted US Air Force plane,[2] the possible assassination of Cuban immigrants, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas,[3] blowing up a U.S. ship, and orchestrating terrorism in U.S. cities.[2] The attacks on Americans were not supposed to be violent, while the attacks on Cuban refugee boats were supposed to be "real or simulated", with the maximum extent of wounding them for media publicity.[4] The proposals were rejected by President John F. Kennedy.[5][6][7]
It is useful to keep in mind that in both cases of averred "totalitarian" propaganda (Nazi Germany, Communist USSR) the mind manipulation was, by Western standards. crude or, as some pundits put it, "brutish". Why? Simply because the population was at all times well aware that what they heard and saw came from state agencies and government officials. The powers that be had not succeeded in implanting the approved narrative inside people's heads. The brainwash from cradle to grave had failed. It was not subtle enough and not pervasive enough. This, said the Western savants, helped to discount much of the impact of such blatant propaganda, although I doubt it. For one thing, while the Nazis were almost routinely involved in the Big Lie technique, the Soviets were not. That both omitted some important truths during wartime (in the case of Moscow, including the Cold War) does not make them equally guilty of routine falsifications, nor, to wax teleological, of ultimate evil intent, as the Soviets' goal was to give their population a decent living standard grounded in an honest and fair economic system, something the West, mired in rotting capitalism, was and is completely unable and unwilling to do, except for exogenous historical conditions, such as the immediate postwar boom, which, given America's virtually intact industrial base and impressive natural resources, facilitated the creation of the American middle class, envy of the world for a couple of generations.
In a photo op, Zelensky—the ultimate propaganda symbol of Ukraine's heroic destiny—inspects the "Bucha massacre".
All things being equal, however, the Soviet/Russian leadership was far more trusted and trustworthy than their enemies', as confirmed by sociological studies among USSR populations and international diplomats, because, what they said—sooner or later—usually aligned with the truth. In the case of the Ukraine war, by far one of the most repulsively propagandised wars in modern history, with the Big Lie shamelessly distributed by the West through countless propaganda assets and platforms, plus myriad dishonest stratagems developed over more than a century of practice, the average mind is virtually helpless to sort out truth from deceit, a considerable advantage in a world of hybrid wars.
To this day, the Western public has been flooded with cynical lies about the motives and conduct of Russian forces in Ukraine. Accusations of horrid crimes such as the cavalier bombing of maternities, mass rape of minors followed by torture and murder; of intentional starvation of entire populations; of wholesale torture and murder of innocent civilians and the reckless shelling of their abodes, have been common since the conflict began in February (2022), and, if anything, gotten even more inflammatory as time wore on. Many if not the vast majority of these lies were concocted by the Ukrainians. They received unquestioned acceptance among Western media, with precisely the calculated effect of brainwashing multitudes throughout Europe and North America—precisely the people without whose consent and support this entire filthy operation couldn't have taken off. In the art of lying the Ukrainians have shown themselves extremely gifted, adept at executing their NATO tutors' directions in all areas of competence, callousness, and depravity, often even surpassing them.
Facts on the ground ultimately count a great deal, however, even if the truth, when it finally emerges, may no longer be able to punish the guilty or spare the innocent. In this context, and rather belatedly, the Russian information apparatus is beginning to stir. The Russians' strength resides in the truth, and they are trying, as usual, to make it count. This is far from easy, as recent events at the United Nations show. Widespread political corruption in the West, radiating from the Empire itself to its many vassals and cowed nations and individuals around the globe, prevent the swift dissemination and acceptance of any important truth. Still, the Russian government has to try, for many outside the West—the global citadel of "Woke imperialism"— believe in its word and mission, and the values it represents. On Sep 27, 2022 the Russian government released the following document, which, literally speaks for itself:
Statement by the Russian Federation on the false allegations against the Russian Federation made by the Ukraine to cover-up its own violations of international law and military crimes against the civilian population of the Donbass in in the Kharkov, Kherson and Zaporozhie regions
- Ukraine's allegations are based on distortion of facts, unproven allegations and fraudulent arguments.
In the media, as well as on international platforms including the International Court of Justice Ukraine groundlessly blames Russia for 'brutal use of force against Ukraine, including indiscriminate shelling of residential areas, systematic executions of civilians, deportation of children, razing of Mariupol, blockade of ports and other atrocities' during the special military
operation commenced by the Russian Federation on 24 February 2022.
The Ukraine’s allegations are based on the blatant distortion of facts, unsubstantiated allegations, and fraudulent arguments. With clearly selective and manipulative approach, Ukraine blames Russia for military crimes committed by its own armed forces and other security agencies, as well as by the nationalistic battalions.
Kiev has descended to staging bloody incidents to demonize Russia in the eyes of the international community and create an emotional background in order swing foreign states and international bodies into adopting anti-Russian political decisions. Such incidents have been already seen in Bucha, Mariupol, Kramatorsk, and Kremenchug.
1. Bucha The most egregious example of Ukraine's misrepresentation of facts is a fictional story of the Bucha massacre’. The Ukrainian and western mass-media have also distributed multiple picture of the 'bodies found in a street in Bucha in April 2022’, taken from propagandist visuals spread by Ukrainian mas-media in early April 2022.
You can read the whole document here.
China, by the way, although making steady progress in the area of mass political and cultural communications, still leaves much to be desired. Which means that, as far as China and Russia are concerned, the cultural ambit needs to be improved for world consumption, something that, for a variety of complicated reasons—including the huge globalised cultural power of the West (think Hollywood, Netflix, Marvel comics, Game of Thrones, other big household TV shows, globally influential legacy media, plus mostly American-owned social media and the rest), is not liable to happen overnight. To protect herself from Washington's constant torrent of lies, cultural corruption, and distortions, and prevent the manipulation of their own population, China wisely decided to protect her information space by erecting an Internet wall, the "Great Firewall". Other nations would be well advised to do the same. I'll leave you with this quote by Caity Johnstone, which sums up rather niely the disparity in disinformation between the US and its self-assigned rivals:
One of the craziest things happening in the world today is the way westerners are being trained to freak out all the time about Russian propaganda, which barely exists in the west, even as we are hammered every day with extreme aggression by the immensely influential propaganda of the US-centralized empire. You know you are living in a profoundly sick society when the world’s most influential newspaper runs propaganda for World War Three while voices pushing for truth, transparency and peace are marginalized, silenced, shunned, and imprisoned.
—PG
Media critic and geopolitical analyst Patrice Greanville is founding editor of The Greanville Post.
Print this article
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.
Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin? This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORSRead it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读The US Empire Is Accelerating Toward Global Conflict On Two FrontsBe sure to distribute this article as widely as possible. Pushing back against the Big Lie is really up to you. Caitlin Johnstone Vladimir Putin has announced that referenda will be held in four regions of the eastern part of Ukraine whose populations will now vote on whether to join the Russian Federation, much like the Crimea referendum of 2014 which resulted in Russia’s annexation of that territory. Putin announced that 300,000 additional troops will be mobilized for the war to help facilitate this action, which is a major escalation in the conflict by any measure. Putin also issued a stern nuclear warning that’s being hysterically spun by empire managers as a shocking and unprecedentedly bellicose threat, but if you read what he actually said it’s clear that he’s really reminding the west of the same principles of Mutually Assured Destruction that have been in place for generations, and isn’t expressing any position that western nuclear powers don’t also hold:
So while this war is indeed insanely dangerous, it’s not because of any of the words coming out of Vladimir Putin’s mouth. Westerners who are expressing shock and astonishment at Putin’s frank acknowledgement of what’s at stake in Russia’s increasingly direct confrontation with the US empire are really just admitting that they haven’t been paying attention. The risk of nuclear war is why sensible people have spent years calling for de-escalation and detente between the US and Russia while tensions have been steadily building since long before the invasion of Ukraine. Now there are western officials who say the world is actually at greater risk of nuclear war than it ever was during the last cold war. A nuclear conflict could be sparked by either side making a calculated decision to use nuclear weapons (and you’re fooling yourself if you believe the US is any less trigger-happy in that regard than Russia), but it can also be sparked by either side due to a mistake resulting from a technological malfunction, miscommunication, misunderstanding or miscalculation, as nearly happened many times during the last cold war. The more things escalate, the more likely both such possibilities become. And, clearly, things are escalating.
There’s Little More Washington Can Do To Convince China To Invade Taiwan,” Andrew Corbley describes the frighteningly extensive provocations the US has been pouring into another massive geopolitical powderkeg just in the past few weeks. People who, in 2016, refused to support Clinton, (given the Dems' shameless embrace of the warmongering national security state and open subservience to Wall Street), while also rejecting the disgusting charlatan Donald Trump, see themselves sadly vindicated at this historical juncture. The truth is out there, as this article proves. But who's listening? Almost all the media oxygen is consumed by the corporate disinformers. “In the last 50 days, the executive and legislative branches in Washington have done more than in the last 50 years to convince China that America’s imperial policy is simply relentless, and must be met with force,” Corbley writes. “That’s not to say it’s by any means a given that the People’s Republic of China will invade its cross-straits neighbor of Taiwan, but that is to say that if strategic planners in Washington sat down and created a bulleted list of how to facilitate such an invasion, they would have probably gone through all the bullets by now.” Corbley notes the incendiary visit to Taiwan by Nancy Pelosi (which has since been followed by a deluge of additional US officials), President Biden’s repeated and increasingly explicit commitment to plunge the US into direct hot war with China if there’s an attack on Taiwan, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s insanely escalatory Taiwan Policy Act. When you look at the brazenness, ferocity and aggression of these provocations between two nations who logically should never go to war with each other, it really does look as though the empire is putting the pedal to the metal in acceleration toward global conflict. On paper it looks completely irrational for the US empire to be ramping up aggressions against two powerful military and economic forces simultaneously, but it’s undeniable at this point that that is what’s happening. Clearly, our rulers have some kind of strategy for how they’re going to see this through, though it remains to be seen whether that strategy is the desperate Hail Mary pass of a dying empire or a potentially highly effective plan using tools that aren’t currently visible to the public. Either way, it looks like it’s probably a good time to relish human life on this planet while it’s here to be relished. Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.
Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2 This is a dispatch from our ongoing series by Caitlin Johnstone  Caitlin Johnstone is a brave journalist, political junkie, relentless feminist, champion of the 99 percent. And a powerful counter-propaganda tactician.
[premium_newsticker id=”213661″] Photo Credit: GDA via AP Covid-19 has put this site on ventilators.
NOTE : ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS. By Gonzalo Lira (Coach Red Pill): Who Is Zelensky? A Puppet Of Jewish Oligarch Ihor Valeriyovych KolomoyskyiPlease make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
|
| Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin? This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORSRead it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读Empire of Lies Christens the New World Order. Part I of II: Overthrow RussiaPlease make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
|
 |
 Yuri Gagarin with peace dove during his world tour |
Upon re-entering the earth’s atmosphere, Yuri encountered serious technical problems that could have meant death had he not ejected himself from the capsule. From 7,000 meters above the earth Gagarin free-fell several kilometers before opening his parachute and floated down to the ground. Soon he embarked on a trip around the world talking passionately about the wonders of the earth.
Yuri’s message in 30 countries over two years: “Circling the earth in orbital space, I marveled at the beauty of our planet. I saw clouds and their light shadows on the distant dear earth… I enjoyed the rich color spectrum of the earth. It is surrounded by a light blue halo that gradually darkens, becoming turquoise, dark blue, violet, and finally coal black. People of the world! Let us safeguard and enhance this beauty—not destroy it!” Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin (inyourpocket.com).
It took Cuban farmer militias and some units of the new revolutionary army just three days to put down U.S.’s invasion for “democracy”. Since then, the CIA has concocted numerous terrorist operations, hundreds of plans to murder President Fidel Castro, used chemical-biological warfare killing humans, animals, and crops. The most insidious proposal by the nefarious CIA-Pentagon Mafia was the false flagging plan Operation Northwoods. Operation Northwoods – Wikipedia
The plan called for a few personnel at the illegal Guantanamo Naval Base to be killed by CIA installed covert operators. Some of the victims would have been U.S. Americans, and Cuban asylum seekers trying to get to the U.S. Fidel Castro would have been blamed, and then Pentagon-CIA forces could do a real war for regime change. President Kennedy rejected that plan. With that denial, President Kennedy signed his own death warrant.
§ The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis
Following the Bay of Pigs invasion, Cuba and the Soviet governments decided to install nuclear weapons in Cuba as a defense against Pentagon-CIA ominous threats of bombing, perhaps with nuclear weapons, Cuba back to the stone-age. The Cuban Missile Crisis: A Timeline – HISTORY
Captain Vasili Arkhipov probably saved the world from nuclear apocalypse.
In October 1962, U.S. spy planes observed nuclear missiles being placed in Cuba. The Pentagon and the CIA wanted to invade Cuba and the Soviet Union with nuclear weapons. No nuclear weapons close to U.S. territory could be allowed. When President Kennedy asked how many Americans would be killed, the militarists flippingly estimated one million. JFK knew there would be more. Instead, he ordered a naval blockade of Cuba and demanded that Premiere Nikita Khrushchev remove all missiles. During negotiations, four Russian submarines carrying one nuclear missile each were en route to Cuba. These U-boats were pursued by many U.S. naval vessels. One Russian submarine, K-19, was bombarded with depth charges. Her communications were cut off. The captain believed war had begun and discussed firing their missile. Captain, Vasili Arkhipov convinced others not to fire the missile and they returned to Russia. Over a two-week period, negotiations ended with the withdrawal of missiles. The U.S. promised not to invade Cuba again, and it would remove its nuclear missiles from Turkey.
The next year on November 22, the CIA murdered Kennedy in broad daylight for seeking world peace. Five months earlier, June 10, Kennedy spoke at the American University.
“What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace; the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living; the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children—not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women—not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.
“I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces.” Speech on peace delivered by President John F. Kennedy – Peace Corps Worldwide
Kennedy’s vice-president got the message. Once president, Lyndon Baines Johnson ordered the reluctant Chief Justice Earl Warren to head an investigating commission. Allen Dulles was appointed chief investigator. Kennedy had fired him for heading the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Dulles hated Kennedy.
Even gullible U.S.-Americans have not believed the government lie that one man, Lee Harvey Oswald, murdered the president with one “magic bullet”. The highest percentage believing it was a plot was 81%, polled in 1976. Fifty years following his murder, still 61% believed more than one was involved. Those who offered opinions as to who may have committed this crime thought it was the Mafia, and/or the federal government itself, and/or the CIA. Majority in U.S. Still Believe JFK Killed in a Conspiracy (gallup.com)
There is a wealth of evidence that it was an inside job. The One Paragraph from the JFK Assassination Files that Reveals Everything – Page 3 of 3 – Truth And Action
Oliver Stone’s two films: JFK and JFK Revisited. A leading CIA officer, Howard Hunt, names names. Who Killed JFK? The Last Confession of E. Howard Hunt – Rolling Stone. One of the Mafia bosses involved, Sam Giancana, also names names.
The CIA continues to engage in subversion and clandestine warfare against Cubans—even using biological-chemical warfare that has caused deadly diseases for humans, pigs, chickens, and plants. This history is too long to go into here. See, Backfire: The CIA’s Biggest Burn: Ridenour, Ron: 9780962497513: Amazon.com: Books, chapter four, The Germ Warriors.
§ 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Lie Brings Total War to Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos
During Kennedy’s last year, he quietly approached Cuba and Vietnam leaders to probe how they might assist him in pulling out of warring against them so that they could maintain their sovereignty. The weapons industry, Wall Street, Pentagon-CIA would not tolerate such “treason”.
Following their assassination of John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson told the lie that U.S. ships had been attacked in or near North Vietnam. That lie led Congress to pass the “Gulf of Tonkin Resolution”, allowing for full war powers. The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident: The Lie That Sparked The Vietnam War (allthatsinteresting.com)
The Vietnamese people won their liberation by defeating the U.S. military and its proxy South Vietnam regime, on Mayday 1975. Millions of decent U.S. Americans had protested U.S. wanton aggression over many years, as did many millions throughout much of the world. Daniel Ellsberg, an insider in the warmonger’s world, came over to our side and became the great whistleblower of the Pentagon Papers. Pentagon Papers | National Archives and The Pentagon Papers: Secrets, lies and leaks – Reveal (revealnews.org)
Julian Assange follows in Ellsberg’s footsteps. Dan has been a supporting activist ever since the war-maker system first arrested Julian 12 years ago. Dan has been arrested scores of times protesting U.S. wars. We anti-war activists filled jails and helped convince the U.S. government to pull out earlier than would have happened. In the end, as many between 3.5 and 5 million people were killed. Of those only 58,000 U.S. military. The CIA’s Phoenix Program assassinated about 40,000 Vietnamese defenders and their families between 1965 and 1972, picking them off one at a time. The United States sent 8.6 million military personnel to Vietnam/Southeast Asia over the war years. Vietnam War casualties – Wikipedia
(Skipping over history to the period of Gorbachov, Reagan and Bush.)
§ Afghanistan/Soviet/U.S. War 1978-89
I interviewed Russia’s ambassador to Denmark, Mikjail Vanin, in 2017. He told me, “Russia’s war in Afghanistan was ideologically and expansionist based. A great mistake! Russia went in without knowing the country’s real history and culture. So feudalist was it that it is not possible to be transformed into a socialist society—not in reality, nor according to Marx’s analysis.
“But Russia did not invade. We were asked by the Afghanistan government several times to come to its aid against a counter-revolutionary patriarchy supported by a foreign power [the United States] which financed and armed terrorism. We paid a terrible price—one that we feel even today. Because of our losses in this conflict, with our own lives and for our economy, internal opposition arose. We lost economic stability. We were nearly ruined by the war, and this influenced the demise of the Soviet Union.”
The Saur Revolution was staged on 27–28 April 1978 by the communist-led People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA). They overthrew Mohammed Daoud Khan, who had conducted a coup d’état in 1973 and established an autocratic one-party system based on traditional patriarchy. Saur Revolution – Wikipedia.
Upon initiating a socialist course, the October Decree granted “equality of genders” and the patriarchal mujahideen armed uproar began. The CIA stepped in with money, arms, training. The CIA and its Pakistan companion, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), helped jihadist youth start Taliban (meaning students seeking knowledge). China also aided them with money. After 9/11, the U.S. overthrew the Taliban government. The U.S. also supported the rich Saudi Arabian Osama bin Laden, who later formed al-Qaeda to terrorize his mentors.
Robert Gates, former CIA director under Bush #1 and defense secretary under Bush#2, explained U.S. involvement. In March 1979, “CIA sent several covert action options relating to Afghanistan to the SCC [Special Coordination Committee]” of the U.S. National Security Council. At a March 30 meeting, U.S. Department of Defense representative Walter B. Slocombe “asked if there was value in keeping the Afghan insurgency going, ‘sucking the Soviets into a Vietnamese quagmire?’” From the Shadows: The Ultimate Insider’s Story of Five Presidents and How They Won the Cold War: Gates, Robert M.: 9781416543367: Amazon.com: Books
It is important to stress that the Soviets waited 20 months after dismissing several Afghanistan government requests before they reluctantly sent troops to protect the new secular state. The U.S. preferred jihad and patriarchy than equal rights. U.S. war-makers were delighted with the events in Afghanistan, just as they are today with Ukraine-Russia. The current war, however, will not be a “Soviet Vietnamese quagmire”, rather it is bringing about a division of world forces in which World War III will flare up from one place after another, I’m afraid. Finland is also now provoking such.
With Ronald Reagan’s 1980 election, he established the Reagan Doctrine (like the Truman Doctrine), which aided anti-communist forces throughout the world. When Mikhail Gorbachev became Soviet Premiere (March 1985-December 25, 1991), he sought to end the war in Afghanistan, and hoped the Iran-Iraq war could be resolved. Soviets backed Iran while the U.S. backed Iraq, albeit Reagan did the treacherous and illegal Iran-Contragate deal—selling arms to U.S. enemy Iran used to finance the ruthless Nicaraguan contras. Iran-Contra Affair – HISTORY.
Gorbachev called the occupation of Afghanistan a “bleeding wound”. The last Soviet forces left in February 1989, but warfare continued until 1992. During the Afghan-Soviet part of the war, 620,000 Soviet troops served—14,453 were killed; 53,753 were wounded or injured. Afghanistan fatalities amounted to around 1.5 million (mujahideen, government soldiers and noncombatants), and three million maimed or wounded, mainly noncombatants. A Russian daily newspaper, “Russian Beyond” (“Russkaya Semoyorka”) wrote, in 2017, that the war had cost $2-$3 billion annually. That would mean $18 to $27 billion.
Despite these wars, Gorbachev tried to convince Reagan that everyone would be much safer if both sides would destroy all nuclear weapons, and the SU admitted into NATO. Wall Street and Pentagon/CIA would not tolerate such a state of peaceful affairs. Nevertheless, Gorbachev convinced Reagan to make the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Treaty, in 1987. The INF treaty banned all of the two nations’ land-based ballistic and cruise missiles, and missile launchers with ranges of 500–1,000 kilometers short medium-range, and 1,000–5,500 km intermediate-range. The treaty did not apply to air- or sea-launched missiles. Another Republican president, Donald Trump, withdrew from the treaty, in 2019. Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty – Wikipedia.
Reagan also agreed to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which George H.W. Bush signed in 1991. When fully implemented, the treaty resulted in the removal of about 80 percent of all strategic nuclear weapons then in existence. The treaty restricted the United States to approximately 8,556 and the Soviet Union to approximately 6,449 nuclear warheads. The United States and the Russian Federation have agreed to extend the treaty through February 4, 2026. Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty of 1991 (U.S. National Park Service) (nps.gov)
Glasnost-Perestroika
(What follows is taken from my book, “The Russian Peace Threat: Pentagon on Alert” chapter 12)
Gorbachev realized Russian society needed opening, and more welfare as the Afghanistan and Iran-Iraq wars, and the need to keep up with U.S. weapons escalation, was too costly. By increasing local, regional and republican controls, allowing for greater media reportage, reducing civil service-bureaucracy and executive branch corruption, Gorbachev sought to make the country’s management more transparent, thus circumventing the circle of apparatchiks who exercised too much control.
Russian media began exposing problems previously unreported: poor housing, food shortages, alcoholism, widespread pollution, creeping mortality rates, the second-rate position of most women, as well as some state crimes against the population. However, this caused more disillusionment and more curiosity about U.S./European cultures and politics. Perestroika allowed more independent actions for ministries, and permitted enterprises to be self-financing with some market-like reforms. The goal of perestroika, however, was not to end central planning but rather to make socialism work more efficiently, in order to better meet citizenry needs.
Many communists in Russia and other socialist countries, such as Cuba where I lived for eight years, thought these reforms came too late and would encourage disintegration, which did occur.
Gorbachev’s original goal of reforming the Soviet Union with the Communist Party still in partial control were failing. Reforms that did not resolve fundamental problems also led to discord and violence in several Warsaw Pact countries, especially in Poland, Hungary, Romania and Czechoslovakia. March 1990, Hungary legalized a multi-party system. East Germany, Bulgaria, Romania and Czechoslovakia followed suit.
Civil unrest grew in constituent republics Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Uzbekistan. Lithuania sought independence. While Gorbachev used military force to suppress bloody interethnic strife in several of the Central Asian republics in 1989–90, he introduced mechanisms that provided for the lawful secession of republics. In 1990, Gorbachev accelerated the transfer of power from the party to elected governmental institutions. On March 15, the Congress of People’s Deputies elected him to the newly created post of president of the USSR with extensive executive powers. Congress abolished the Communist Party’s constitutionally guaranteed monopoly of political power, paving the way for legalization of other political parties. Gorbachev was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, in 1990, for his “leading role in the peace process”.
§ U.S./NATO Promise to Gorbachev-Another Lie Aimed at Dissolving the Soviet Union
During these turbulent times, U.S. and West Germany leaders discussed with Gorbachev the possibility that NATO would not move closer to the Soviet Union, and Gorbachev’s idea of joining NATO was considered.
“U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous ‘not one inch eastward’ assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991.”
On December 12, 2017, the National Security Archive, based at George Washington University, posted this information, which included declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents. NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard | National Security Archive (gwu.edu)
“President George H.W. Bush had assured Gorbachev, during the Malta summit in December 1989, that the U.S. would not take advantage (“I have not jumped up and down on the Berlin Wall”) of the revolutions in Eastern Europe to harm Soviet interests. But neither Bush nor Gorbachev at that point (or for that matter, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl) expected so soon the collapse of East Germany or the speed of German unification.”
“The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991. [Also] that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels.
The Washington summit arrival on May 31, 1990, featured high ceremony on the White House lawn, here with formal greetings from President Bush for Mikhail Gorbachev. (Credit: George H.W. Bush Presidential Library, P13298-18)
“The first concrete assurances by Western leaders on NATO began on January 31, 1990, when West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher opened the bidding with a major public speech at Tutzing, in Bavaria, on German unification. The U.S. Embassy in Bonn (see Document 1) informed Washington that Genscher made clear “that the changes in Eastern Europe and the German unification process must not lead to an ‘impairment of Soviet security interests.’ Therefore, NATO should rule out an ‘expansion of its territory towards the east, i.e. moving it closer to the Soviet borders.’” The Bonn cable also noted Genscher’s proposal to leave the East German territory out of NATO military structures even in a unified Germany in NATO.
“This latter idea of special status for the GDR territory was codified in the final German unification treaty signed on September 12, 1990, by the Two-Plus-Four foreign ministers. The former idea about ‘closer to the Soviet borders’ is written down not in treaties but in multiple memoranda of conversation between the Soviets and the highest-level Western interlocutors (Genscher, Kohl, Baker, Gates, Bush, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Major, Woerner, and others) offering assurances throughout 1990 and into 1991. [These talks and memoranda guaranteed] protecting Soviet security interests and including the USSR in new European security structures. The two issues were related but not the same. Subsequent analysis sometimes conflated the two and argued that the discussion did not involve all of Europe. The documents published below show clearly that it did.” (2)
On March 17, 1991, the Russian government called for the first referendum in Soviet history. It concerned whether the SU should continue or not.
“While the vote was boycotted by the authorities in Armenia, Estonia, Georgia (though not the breakaway province of Abkhazia where the result was over 98% in favor, and in South Ossetia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Moldova (though not Transnistria or Gagauzia) turnout was 80% across the rest of the Soviet Union. The referendum’s question was approved by nearly 80% of voters in all nine other republics that took part.” 1991 Soviet Union referendum – Wikipedia.
Given NATO assurances not to threaten the SU, and with discontent in much of the Warsaw Pact countries damaging unity and productivity, Gorbachev absolved the Warsaw Pact on July 1, 1991. Some hardline members of the Communist party-led government were upset and tried to take control. The coup d’état attempt lasted only two days, August 19-21, 1991. An effective campaign of civil resistance led by the new president of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, elected in the first popular vote for the presidency on June 12, 1991, put it down. Yeltsin had been both an ally and critic of Gorbachev. Although the coup collapsed, and Gorbachev returned to government, the event destabilized the Soviet Union and contributed to its demise.
On Christmas day 1991, Gorbachev called his friend President George H.W. Bush.
Gorbachev: Let me say that in about two hours I will speak on Moscow TV and will make a short statement about my decision…I would like to reaffirm to you that I greatly value what we did working together with you, first as vice president and then as president of the United States. I hope that all leaders of the commonwealth and, above all Russia, understand what kind of assets we have accrued among the leaders of our two countries. I hope they understand their responsibility to preserve and expand this important source of capital. The debate in our union on what kind of state to create took a different track from what I thought right. But let me say that I will use my political authority and role to make sure that this new commonwealth will be effective.
Bush: Mikhail, let me say first how grateful I am for this call…We will stay involved, particularly with the Russian republic, whose enormous problems could get worse this winter. I am delighted you won’t plan to hide in the woods and that you will be active politically. I have total confidence that will benefit the new commonwealth.
The next day, the Soviet Union was dissolved. Eleven republics became independent: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. The Baltic states—Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania—regained their independence. The rest of the Soviet Union became Russia. Albania and Yugoslavia ceased being communist states (1990-1992). In the same period, U.S./NATO split Yugoslavia into five states: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Slovenia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).
§ 1991-1999 Yeltsin-Clinton Weaken Russian Sovereignty. NATO Reneged on its Promise Not to Move Eastward
Boris Yeltsin immediately launched a counter-revolution modelled after a classic neo-liberal capitalist economy. He started by banning Communist Party activities in Russia. The U.S. jumped for joy. First Bush and then President Bill Clinton sent in top economic and political aides. U.S. corporations swarmed into the once mighty independent nation.
Yeltsin cut most of the aid the SU had given to many countries. Cuba, where I lived at the time, was plunged into “Special Period in Peacetime”. Cuba lost 85% of its exports overnight, and 63% of its food supply, all from Soviet countries. The government opened for some controlled market economy measures. Foreign investments were allowed for non-U.S. capitalists who dared to defy the U.S. blockade against Cuba. The U.S. even fines foreign capitalist companies for doing business with Cuba. They must pay, and stop trade with Cuba, to continue trading with the Yankees.
Thousands of Cubans lost partial eyesight from malnutrition. No one starved, as so many do in some Latin American countries and elsewhere, but we often went to bed hungry. Many social programs had to be cut, but not free education and health care, albeit there were fewer medicines.
In Russia, due to the total economic shift, much of national property and wealth fell into the hands of a small number of people. Many had been communists. The millionaire-billionaire oligarchs now likened themselves to 19th century robber barons.
Clinton-Yeltsin met first in April 1993—the first of 18 meetings they held. Soon thereafter, a constitutional crisis occurred. Most parliamentarians were in uproar against the chaotic economy, which was already plunging tens of millions into poverty.
In October, soldiers and civilians demonstrated and collided on the streets. Pro-Yeltsin demonstrators removed police cordons around the parliament, took over the mayor’s offices and tried to storm the Ostankino television center. Initially, most of the army declared neutrality. Some backed the parliament, but most generals did not want to take chances. On the morning of October 4, under Yeltsin’s orders, generals instructed soldiers to storm the Supreme Soviet building. By noon, troops occupied the White House, and arrested the leaders of the legal resistance. The “second October Revolution”, as some called it, was much more deadly than in October 1917. According to government estimates, 187 people were killed and 437 wounded. Non-governmental sources put the death toll as high as 2,000. Many of the deaths, including legislators, occurred when Yeltsin ordered the parliament bombed.
Western political leaders and their mass media all but applauded the death toll as “necessary for democracy”. Even the small but unquestionably loyal vassal state, Denmark (where the author now lives), heralded Yeltsin’s victory. Its foreign minister, Niels Helvig Petersen, called Yeltsin “our hope. He stands as a guarantee for democratic development.”
George H.W. Bush had secretly rescinded his promise not to move eastward, and let Clinton begin the dirty deed. In 1999, Clinton added Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. George W. Bush added Bulgaria, Romania, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, plus Slovakia and Slovenia. (3)
Gorbachev foolishly let Clinton’ aides and U.S. corporations take over much of Russia’s economy. U.S. agribusiness exported food to the once self-sufficient food-producing country. Consequently, 80% of Russian farms went bankrupt by 1998. Some of the economy still in Russia’s hands was owned by the new capitalist oligarchs. Yeltsin let them pay few taxes.
On 25 July 1998, Yeltsin appointed Putin director of the Federal Security Service (FSB), the primary intelligence and security organization of the Russian Federation and the successor to the KGB. Putin had been a KGB Lt. Colonel. He resigned in protest of the coup attempt.
On 9 August 1999, Putin was appointed acting prime minister. Yeltsin also announced he wanted Putin to succeed him. Later that same day, Putin agreed to run for the presidency. While not formally associated with any party, Putin pledged his support to the newly formed Unity Party, which won the second largest percentage of the popular vote (23.3%) in the December 1999 Duma elections. It supported Putin.
On 31 December 1999, Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned. Putin became Russia’s acting president. On March 26, 2000, he won the popular vote on the first ballot—40 million votes (53%). Communist Party’s Gennady Zyuganov obtained 22 million votes (30%), and social-liberal Yabloko candidate Grigory Yavloinsky received 4.4 million votes (6%).
By the end of Yeltsin’s failed rule, life expectancy had fallen by five years (from 69 to 64). Russians’ poverty rate pummeled from 1.5% at the end of the SU to 43.4%. (President Putin changed that dramatically as he reclaimed the nation’s sovereignty. In 2020, poverty rate stood at 2.9%.) Russia Poverty Rate 1997-2022 | MacroTrends
§ 2000 Project for a New American Century and 9/11.
PNAC was the Republican far-right blueprint for world domination by using “shock & awe”. The 25 signers realized that it would be unpopular and maybe impossible to accomplished without a huge crisis against the United States, perhaps a “Pearl Harbor like event” the authors projected. The Twenty Year Shadow of 9/11: U.S. Complicity in the Terror Spectacle and the Urgent Need to End It – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization
Just eight months after PNAC-sponsored candidate George W. Bush became president, the 9/11 attacks occurred. Bush had placed many PNAC authors in key posts. One was Richard Perle.
Real journalist John Pilger had interviewed Perle when he was advising President Reagan. Pilger wrote: “When he spoke about ‘total war’, I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently used the term again in describing America’s ‘war on terror’. ‘No stages,’ he said. ‘This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don’t try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now.’ New Statesman – John Pilger reveals the American plan (archive.org)
How 19 foreigners—15 from Saudi Arabia and four from United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon—could pull off attacks in four places of the most armed and surveilled country in the world is simply unbelievable. Our Mission – 911Truth.Org, and World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11? | AE911Truth
After those mysterious explosions, any war the U.S. wanted could be accepted by Western governments and populations. For the last two decades, Bush’s American Exceptionalists’ slogan is extant: “Either you are with us, or with the terrorists.”
§ 2001-2022 U.S. Afghanistan War and President Putin Policies
Western politicians and their MSM refuse to tell us how much President Putin wanted to be partners with the U.S. and NATO, and how hard he tried until February 24, 2022. When the United States empire got what its leaders wanted—that is, the new Pearl Harbor 9/11 so that they could launch “total war against terror”—President Putin called President Bush to say he and his wife had prayed for those killed, and offered assistance for his war against Taliban—bad mistake.
Despite the history of U.S. subversion against Russia, the new president provided Bush II with intelligence concerning the Taliban, and the use of two military bases for his war in Afghanistan.
President Putin said the two countries “are not enemies” and he asked to join NATO. “We could be good allies.” Putin only wanted Bush to stop the CIA from arming, training and funding terrorist opposition groups in Russia’s area of influence.
President Putin met with President George W. Bush several times, and they described themselves as friends. At their first meeting, June 16, 2001, held in Slovenia, Bush said: “I looked him in the eye and got a sense of his soul. I could trust him.” But could Putin trust Bush?
Bush could not, or would not, stop the CIA, which sent a letter to Russia’s intelligence agency stating that, the CIA would continue to do what it wished. Bush/Pentagon/CIA also rejected Russia’s offer to join NATO—the third successive Russian president attempt to end military conflict with the U.S.-ARME. Bush’s government even tore up the important Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty signed by Republican right-winger Richard Nixon and the Soviet Union, in 1972.
Russian Presidents Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin have complained bitterly about NATO expansion towards their borders. “What happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today?” Putin said at the Munich Conference on Security Policy in 2007.
“No one even remembers them. But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr. Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: ‘the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee.’ Where are these guarantees?” TRANSCRIPT: 2007 Putin Speech and the Following Discussion at the Munich Conference on Security Policy – Johnson’s Russia List
§ 2008-16 Barak Obama immediately extended Bush’s wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, and added five more. Seven wars at once, the greatest number of any U.S. president.
Barak Obama, the “peace candidate, was supported by many progressive and former radical U.S. Americans. Yet he immediately became the rich white man’s best Uncle Tom ever. Obama extended Bush’s wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, and added half of Pakistan, secular Libya where no one lived in poverty or inequality, Yemen, Somalia, and secular Syria. (See: Ron Ridenour: Obama: The Worst President Ever and Obama And His Seven Wars – Shadowproof, and even CNN: Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration | CNN Politics)
Without Russia’s assistance, the legitimate Syrian government would have been illegally overthrown by the U.S., its European allies, Israel, the Gulf States and Turkey. This mish-mash of allies sometimes supported and sometimes fought the most extremist and brutal Islamic State terrorists, al-Qaeda, al-Nursa and other terrorists. The U.S. still wages war against Syria’s secular state, and steals its oil.
President Putin convinced President Bashar al-Assad to hand over whatever nerve gases he had to the world’s number one terrorist state with the greatest amount of chemical-biological weapons, which it uses. In the same period, President Putin convinced Iran not to build atomic weapons. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran, U.S., France, Germany, China and Russia initially was the work of President Vladimir Putin. It lifted the West’s economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for limits on its nuclear energy program. Donald Trump stopped that.
Ukraine was Obama’s Eighth War-in-the-Making
Obama had so many wars on his hands that he gave Ukraine to his V-P Joe Biden. The mission was to get rid of President Victor Yanukovych, who tried to be friendly and trade with both the U.S./EU and Russia. The imperialists would not allow that. Yanukovych had to go.
Victoria Nuland, who had been Bush’s ambassador to NATO, was just one of many Bush appointees that Obama brought with him. He made her Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, and turned her over to Biden to be his chief liaison with pro-fascist and other rightest groups—such as Right Sector and Svoboda-Social Nacional, whose hero was Stepan Bandera. They honor him with many marches. Nuland worked with U.S. ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt to prepare the coup.
February 4, 2014, three weeks before the coup, they held a telephone conversation concerning who should sit in the forthcoming coup government. Fortunately, this conversation was tapped into and sent around the world. Listen to who became the next governors under the U.S.-ARME. (927) Nuland-Pyatt leaked phone conversation _COMPLETE with SUBTITLES – YouTube
The Euromaidan demonstrations took place and became violent later in February following the Nuland-Pyatt coup plan decision. Over 100 people were killed; mainly by snipers. Fascists tried to murder the president. He was forced to flee. On February 22, U.S. got the desired “regime change”.
“Chocolate Oligarch” Petro Poroshenko was deemed rightest and U.S. friendly enough to be made president. Still president in 2015, he admitted he became president through a coup.
“Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko requests the supreme court of Ukraine to declare that his predecessor, Viktor Yanukovych, was overthrown by an illegal operation; in other words, that the post-Yanukovych government, including Poroshenko’s own Presidency.” Ukraine’s President Poroshenko Says Overthrow of Yanukovych Was a Coup – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization
One of Nuland’s men, Andriy Biletsky, co-founder of the Social-National Assembly, founded the Azov Battalion, one of several fascist battalions soon to coalesce. Azov killed many policemen during the coup process. Thereafter, they began waging war against ethnic Russians in the Donbas region. Well over 14,000 have been killed. Despite pleas from ethnic Russians them, President Putin did not agree to let them into Russia until this year.
This Sonnenrad is just one of Azov’s symbols, also used by German Nazis.
Even the U.S. military Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty admits Azov’s fascist roots. In Ukraine, Ultranationalist Militia Strikes Fear In Some Quarters (rferl.org)
In the early days of the coup government, Biden sent his son Hunter to Ukraine to make a living. He was granted a job as “advisor” to Burisma, one of Ukraine’s private energy companies. Salary: $83,000 monthly. Hunter Biden: What was he doing in China and Ukraine? – BBC News.
The pro-fascist government approved the U.S. take-over of the Crimean naval base at Sevastopol, which Russia had built (1772-83) during the Russo-Turkish War. Imagine what would happen if Russia moved to take over Guantanamo naval base, or build one at a Mexico-U.S. border.
On February 23, the day coup-makers issued an arrest warrant for President Yanukovych, pro-Russian Crimeans seized government buildings at Crimea’s capitol in Simferopol. On March 11, the parliament declared Crimea’s independence from Ukraine, following a vote of 78 in favor and 22 against secession. March 16 referendum results of 1,274,096 voters (83% of potential): 1,233,002 for integration into Russian Federation (96.8%); 32,000 for remaining in Ukraine (2.5%).
There were no charges of rigged voting. March 17, Crimea parliament recognized the results and applied to become an independent state within the Russian Federation. President Putin accepted the application, and recognized the parliament and Sergey Aksyonov as PM.
One year after the referendum, capitalism’s Forbes magazine wrote: “The U.S. and European Union may want to save Crimeans from themselves. But the Crimeans are happy right where they are. One year after the annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula in the Black Sea, poll after poll shows that the locals there—be they Ukrainians, ethnic Russians or Tatars are mostly all in agreement: life with Russia is better than life with Ukraine.” One Year After Russia Annexed Crimea, Locals Prefer Moscow To Kiev (forbes.com).
At the same time, The Guardian headlined Welcome to Ukraine, the most corrupt nation in Europe | Ukraine | The Guardian
In 2018, I interviewed President Putin’s ambassador to Denmark. Mikjail Vanin, for my book, The Russian Peace Threat: Pentagon on Alert. Ambassador Vanin referred to the United States as “our partners”. When I pointed out that the U.S. did not want Russia as partner, Vanin chuckled. “Well, our president is still hoping.” This was four years after the U.S.-planned coup in Ukraine.
The Russian Peace Threat: Pentagon on Alert”.(3) Barak Obama added Albania and Croatia. Donald Trump added Montenegro and North Macedonia. Joe Biden is adding Sweden and Finland, which will encircle Russia as much as seas can allow with the exceptions of Georgia and Ukraine, which is why the CIA has been endeavoring to annex those two through terrorist actions and coup attempts. See part two for more of Clinton’s imperial crimes.
Print this article
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.
| Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin? This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORSRead it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读Establishment smear merchants The Daily Beast, Rolling Stone and their perceptible intelligence tiesPlease make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
|
| Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin? This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORSRead it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读 |