Wednesday, May 27, 2015

America's "Oh heck, lets commit genocide" in Laos: “One of the most shattering revelations about the bombing was discovering why it had so vastly increased in 1969, as described by the refugees. [Antiwar activist Fred Branfman] learned that after President Lyndon Johnson had declared a bombing halt over North Vietnam in November 1968, he had simply diverted the planes into northern Laos. There was no military reason for doing so. It was simply because, as U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission Monteagle Stearns testified to the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in October 1969, `Well, we had all those planes sitting around and couldn’t just let them stay there with nothing to do’.”


Guest Column by Noam Chomsky

May 25, 2015 | Original Here                                            Go here to sign up to receive email notice of this news letter

Noam Chomsky Holds the New York Times to Account


Paul Craig Roberts


I can remember when the New York Times was only partly a CIA asset using its ink in support of Washington’s lies. The other part of the paper was the upper class paternalistic liberalism of that time. The New York Times helped to destroy America.


Washington has taken the place of America and now the Times serves full time to protect Washington. All the troubles in the world originate independently of Washington, which is always trying to do good for everybody and to maintain stability for the One Percent.


Stability trickles down. If the One Percent couldn’t afford their $750,000 Franck Muller wrist watches and their $700,000 Mont Blanc jewel-encrusted pens, their $50,000,000 yachts, and $42,000 Louis Vitton handbags carried by $100,000 bodyguards, the rest of us would be down and out. I mean, really, what would be our fate if hedge fund managers didn’t collect their $575,000,000 bonuses each year and the Federal Reserve didn’t print trillions of dollars with which to buy the bad assets of the deregulated banks too-big-to-fail”? There would be nothing to trickle down to those minimum wage part-time Walmart jobs. If the rich weren’t ripping us off, we would be even worse off!


That’s the way the New York Times and its chief fool, Thomas Friedman, reason.


Here is Noam Chomsky explaining how the Times covers up Washington’s crimes with platitudes:


The “Paper of Record” Is Pure Propaganda
Noam Chomsky


A front-page article is devoted to a flawed story about a campus rape in the journal Rolling Stone, exposed in the leading academic journal of media critique. So severe is this departure from journalistic integrity that it is also the subject of the lead story in the business section, with a full inside page devoted to the continuation of the two reports. The shocked reports refer to several past crimes of the press: a few cases of fabrication, quickly exposed, and cases of plagiarism (“too numerous to list”). The specific crime of Rolling Stone is “lack of skepticism,” which is “in many ways the most insidious” of the three categories.


It is refreshing to see the commitment of the Times to the integrity of journalism.


On page 7 of the same issue, there is an important story by Thomas Fuller headlined “One Woman’s Mission to free Laos from Unexploded Bombs.” It reports the “single-minded effort” of a Lao-American woman, Channapha Khamvongsa, “to rid her native land of millions of bombs still buried there, the legacy of a nine-year American air campaign that made Laos one of the most heavily bombed places on earth” – soon to be outstripped by rural Cambodia, following the orders of Henry Kissinger to the US air force: “A massive bombing campaign in Cambodia. Anything that flies on anything that moves.” A comparable call for virtual genocide would be very hard to find in the archival record. It was mentioned in the Times in an article on released tapes of President Nixon, and elicited little notice.


The Fuller story on Laos reports that as a result of Ms. Khamvongsa’s lobbying, the US increased its annual spending on removal of unexploded bombs by a munificent $12 million. The most lethal are cluster bombs, which are designed to “cause maximum casualties to troops” by spraying “hundreds of bomblets onto the ground.” About 30 percent remain unexploded, so that they kill and maim children who pick up the pieces, farmers who strike them while working, and other unfortunates. An accompanying map features Xieng Khouang province in northern Laos, better known as the Plain of Jars, the primary target of the intensive bombing, which reached its peak of fury in 1969.


Fuller reports that Ms. Khamvongsa “was spurred into action when she came across a collection of drawings of the bombings made by refugees and collected by Fred Branfman, an antiwar activist who helped expose the Secret War.” The drawings appear in the late Fred Branfman’s remarkable book Voices from the Plain of Jars, published in 1972, republished by the U. of Wisconsin press in 2013 with a new introduction. The drawings vividly display the torment of the victims, poor peasants in a remote area that had virtually nothing to do with the Vietnam war, as officially conceded. One typical report by a 26 year-old nurse captures the nature of the air war: “There wasn’t a night when we thought we’d live until morning, never a morning we thought we’d survive until night. Did our children cry? Oh, yes, and we did also. I just stayed in my cave. I didn’t see the sunlight for two years. What did I think about? Oh, I used to repeat, `please don’t let the planes come, please don’t let the planes come, please don’t let the planes come.'”


Branfman’s valiant efforts did indeed bring some awareness of this hideous atrocity. His assiduous researches also unearthed the reasons for the savage destruction of a helpless peasant society. He exposes the reasons once again in the introduction to the new edition of Voices. In his words:

“One of the most shattering revelations about the bombing was discovering why it had so vastly increased in 1969, as described by the refugees. I learned that after President Lyndon Johnson had declared a bombing halt over North Vietnam in November 1968, he had simply diverted the planes into northern Laos. There was no military reason for doing so. It was simply because, as U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission Monteagle Stearns testified to the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in October 1969, `Well, we had all those planes sitting around and couldn’t just let them stay there with nothing to do’.”


Therefore the unused planes were unleashed on poor peasants, devastating the peaceful Plain of Jars, far from the ravages of Washington’s murderous wars of aggression in Indochina.


Let us now see how these revelations are transmuted into New York Times Newspeak: “The targets were North Vietnamese troops — especially along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, a large part of which passed through Laos — as well as North Vietnam’s Laotian Communist allies.”


Compare the words of the U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission, and the heart-rending drawings and testimony in Fred Branfman’s cited collection.


True, the reporter has a source: U.S. propaganda. That surely suffices to overwhelm mere fact about one of the major crimes of the post-World War II era, as detailed in the very source he cites: Fred Branfman’s crucial revelations.


We can be confident that this colossal lie in the service of the state will not merit lengthy exposure and denunciation of disgraceful misdeeds of the Free Press, such as plagiarism and lack of skepticism. The same issue of the New York Times treats us to a report by the inimitable Thomas Friedman, earnestly relaying the words of President Obama presenting what Friedman labels “the Obama Doctrine” – every President has to have a Doctrine. The profound Doctrine is “’engagement,’ combined with meeting core strategic needs.


The President illustrated with a crucial case: “You take a country like Cuba. For us to test the possibility that engagement leads to a better outcome for the Cuban people, there aren’t that many risks for us. It’s a tiny little country. It’s not one that threatens our core security interests, and so [there’s no reason not] to test the proposition. And if it turns out that it doesn’t lead to better outcomes, we can adjust our policies.”


Here the Nobel Peace laureate expands on his reasons for undertaking what the leading US left-liberal intellectual journal, the New York Review, hails as the “brave” and “truly historic step” of reestablishing diplomatic relations with Cuba. It is a move undertaken in order to “more effectively empower the Cuban people,” the hero explained, our earlier efforts to bring them freedom and democracy having failed to achieve our noble goals. The earlier efforts included a crushing embargo condemned by the entire world (Israel excepted) and a brutal terrorist war. The latter is as usual wiped out of history, apart from failed attempts to assassinate Castro, a very minor feature, acceptable because it can be dismissed with scorn as ridiculous CIA shenanigans. Turning to the declassified internal record, we learn that these crimes were undertaken because of Cuba’s “successful defiance” of US policy going back to the Monroe Doctrine, which declared Washington’s intent to rule the hemisphere. All unmentionable, along with too much else to recount here.


Searching further we find other gems, for example, the front-page think piece on the Iran deal by Peter Baker a few days earlier, warning about the Iranian crimes regularly listed by Washington’s propaganda system. All prove to be quite revealing on analysis, though none more so than the ultimate Iranian crime: “destabilizing” the region by supporting “Shiite militias that killed American soldiers in Iraq.” Here again is the standard picture. When the US invades Iraq, virtually destroying it and inciting sectarian conflicts that are tearing the country and now the whole region apart, that counts as “stabilization” in official and hence media rhetoric. When Iran supports militias resisting the aggression, that is “destabilization.” And there could hardly be a more heinous crime than killing American soldiers attacking one’s homes.


All of this, and far, far more, makes perfect sense if we show due obedience and uncritically accept approved doctrine: The US owns the world, and it does so by right, for reasons also explained lucidly in the New York Review, in a March 2015 article by Jessica Matthews, former president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: “American contributions to international security, global economic growth, freedom, and human well-being have been so self-evidently unique and have been so clearly directed to others’ benefit that Americans have long believed that the US amounts to a different kind of country. Where others push their national interests, the US tries to advance universal principles.” Defense rests.


Noam Chomsky is a professor of linguistics and philosophy at MIT.


Article originally published here: http://www.alternet.org/media/noam-chomsky-reads-new-york-times-explains-why-paper-record-pure-propaganda




Sunday, May 24, 2015

The Empire of Chaos, as Pepe Escobar terms the US Government, is fast becoming circumvented by parnterships between the major countries of the southern hemisphere, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, South Africa and others financed correctly by China and Russia, i.e., both the lenders and the borrowers will profit (as distinguished from the International Monitory Fund, which first pays off the banksters and then extracts the money supposedly owed them from the people's salaries, health care, pensions, etc., making it impossible for the people to ever get out of debt). The biggest deal will be "the proposed $30 billion, 3,500 kilometer-long, Atlantic-Pacific mega-railway, that is slated to run from the Brazilian port of Santos to the Peruvian Pacific port of Ilo." This mega-money making project contrasts with the U.S. Congress refusing to upgrade the decaying US railroads even in the face of the recent disaster.


OpEdNews Op Eds

BRICS trample US in South America

By (about the author)     Permalink      

Original Here

Reprinted from RT

Russia's President Vladimir Putin (R) and Argentina's
President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner
(image by YouTube)
  License   DMCA
It started in April with a rash of deals between Argentina and Russia during President Cristina Kirchner's visit to Moscow.

And it continues with a $53 billion investment bang as Chinese Premier Li Keqiang visits Brazil during the first stop of yet another South American commercial offensive -- complete with a sweet metaphor: Li riding on a made in China subway train that will ply a new metro line in Rio de Janeiro ahead of the 2016 Olympics.

Where is the US in all this? Nowhere; little by little, yet inexorably, BRICS members China -- and in a smaller measure, Russia -- have been no less than restructuring commerce and infrastructure all across Latin America.

Countless Chinese commercial missions have been plying these shores non-stop, much as the US did between World War I and II. In a key meeting in January with Latin American business leaders, President Xi Jinping promised to channel $250 billion for infrastructure projects in the next 10 years.

Top infrastructure projects in Latin America are all being financed by Chinese capital -- except the Mariel port in Cuba, whose financing comes from Brazil's BNDES and whose operation will be managed by Singaporean port operator PSA International Pte Ltd. Construction of the Nicaragua canal -- bigger, wider and deeper than Panama's -- started last year by a Hong Kong firm, to be finished by 2019. Argentina, for its part, clinched a $4.7 billion Chinese deal for the construction of two hydroelectric dams in Patagonia.

Premier Li Keqiang arrived in Brasilia, the capital of Brazil on Monday,
to start an official visit. He was welcomed by Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff.
(image by YouTube)
  License   DMCA
Among the 35 deals clinched during Li's visit to Brazil, there was financing worth $7 billion for Brazil's oil giant Petrobras; 22 Brazilian Embraer commercial jets to be sold to Tianjin Airlines for $1.3 billion; and a raft of agreements involving top iron ore producer Vale. Chinese investment might go some way into overhauling Brazil's appalling network of roads, railways and ports; airports are in slightly better condition due to upgrades prior to the World Cup last year.

The star of the whole show is undoubtedly the proposed $30 billion, 3,500 kilometer-long, Atlantic-Pacific mega-railway, that is slated to run from the Brazilian port of Santos to the Peruvian Pacific port of Ilo via Amazonia. Logistically, this is a must for Brazil, offering it a Pacific gateway. Winners will inevitably be commodity producers -- from iron ore to soya beans -- exporting to Asia, mostly China.

The Atlantic-Pacific railway may be an extremely complex project -- involving everything from environmental and land rights issues to, crucially, the preference for Chinese firms every time Chinese banks deliberate on extending lines of credit. But this time, it's a go. The usual suspects are -- what else -- worried.

Watch the geopolitics

Official Brazilian policy, since the Lula years, has been to attract top Chinese investment. China is Brazil's top trading partner since 2009; it used to be the US. The trend started with food production, now it moves to investment in ports and railways, and the next stage will be technology transfer. The BRICS New Development Bank and the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), of which Brazil is a key founding member, will definitely be part of the picture.

The problem is this massive trade/commerce BRICS interplay is intersecting with a quite convoluted political process. The top three South American powers -- Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela, which also happen to be Mercosur members -- have been facing repeated "destabilization" attempts by the usual suspects, who routinely denounce the foreign policy of Presidents Dilma Rousseff, Cristina Kirchner and Nicolas Maduro and yearn for the good ol' days of a dependent relationship with Washington.

With different degrees of complexity -- and internal strife -- Brasilia, Buenos Aires and Caracas are all simultaneously facing plots against their institutional order. The usual suspects don't even try to dissimulate their near total diplomatic distance from the South American Top Three.

Venezuela, under US sanctions, is considered a threat to US national security -- something that does not even qualify as a bad joke. Kirchner has been under relentless diplomatic assault -- not to mention US vulture funds targeting Argentina. And with Brasilia, relations are practically frozen since September 2013, when Rousseff suspended a visit to Washington in response to the NSA spying on Petrobras, and herself personally.

And that leads us to a crucial geostrategic issue -- so far unresolved.

NSA spying may have leaked sensitive information on purpose to destabilize the Brazilian development agenda -- which includes, in the case of Petrobras, the exploration of the largest oil deposits (the pre-salt) found so far in the young 21st century.

What is unraveling is so crucial because Brazil is the second-biggest economy in the Americas (after the US); it is the biggest Latin American commercial and financial power; it hosts the former second-biggest development bank in the world, BNDES, now overtaken by the BRICS bank; and it also hosts the biggest corporation in Latin America, Petrobras, also one of the world's top energy giants.

The hardcore pressure against Petrobras comes essentially from US shareholders -- who act like the proverbial vultures, bent on bleeding the company and profit from it, allied with lobbyists who abhor Petrobras's status as the priority explorer of the pre-salt deposits.

In a nutshell, Brazil is the last great sovereign frontier against unbounded hegemonic domination in the Americas. The Empire of Chaos had to be annoyed.

Ride the continental wave The constantly evolving strategic partnership of the BRICS nations has been met by Washington circles not only with incredulity but fear. It's virtually impossible for Washington to do real damage to China -- but much "easier," comparatively, in the case of Brazil or Russia. Even though Washington's wrath targets essentially China -- which has dared to do deal after deal in the former "America's backyard."

Once again, the Chinese strategy -- as much as the Russian -- is to keep calm and carry a "win-win" profile. Xi Jinping met with Maduro in January to do -- what else -- deals. He met with Cristina Kirchner in February to do the same -- just as speculators were about to unleash another attack against the Argentine peso. Now there's Li's visit to South America.

Needless to say, trade between South America and China continues to boom. Argentina exports food and soya beans; Brazil the same, plus oil, minerals and timber; Colombia sells oil and minerals; Peru and Chile, copper, and iron; Venezuela sells oil; Bolivia, minerals. China exports mostly high-value-added manufactured products.

A key development to watch in the immediate future is the Transul project, which was first proposed at a BRICS conference last year in Rio. It boils down to a Brazil-China strategic alliance linking Brazilian industrial development to partial outsourcing of metals to China; as the Chinese increase their demand -- they are building no less than 30 megalopolises up to 2030 -- that will be met by Brazilian or Sino-Brazilian companies. Beijing has finally given its seal of approval.

So the long-term Big Picture remains inexorable; BRICS and South American nations -- which converge in the Unasur (The Union of South American Nations) -- are betting on a multipolar world order, and a continental process of independence.

It's easy to see how that is oceans away from a Monroe doctrine.


Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times. His regular column, "The Roving Eye," is widely read. He is an analyst for the online news channel Real News, the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia.  He argues that the world has become fragmented into "stans" -- we are now living an intestinal war, an undeclared global civil war. He has published three books on geopolitics, including the spectacularly-titled "Globalistan: How the Globalised World Is Dissolving Into Liquid War".
His latest book is "Obama Does Globalistan."


OpEdNews Member for 186 week(s) and 3 day(s)

344 Articles

Saturday, May 23, 2015

"Neoliberal Globalization is now looting its own constituent parts and the planet itself. Americans, Greeks, Irish, British, Italians, Ukrainians, Iraqis, Libyans, Argentinians, the Spanish and Portuguese are being looted of their savings, pensions, social services, and job opportunities, and the planet is being turned into a wasteland by capitalists sucking the last penny out of the environment." -- Paul Craig Roberts


Memorial Day Is A Hoax — Paul Craig Roberts

May 21, 2015 | Original Here                                            Go here to sign up to receive email notice of this news letter

Memorial Day Is A Hoax


Paul Craig Roberts


Memorial Day commemorates soldiers killed in war. We are told that the war dead died for us and our freedom. US Marine General Smedley Butler challenged this view. He said that our soldiers died for the profits of the bankers, Wall Street, Standard Oil, and the United Fruit Company. Here is an excerpt from a speech that he gave in 1933:


War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.


I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we’ll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn’t go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn’t a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its “finger men” to point out enemies, its “muscle men” to destroy enemies, its “brain men” to plan war preparations, and a “Big Boss” Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country’s most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.


Most American soldiers died fighting foes who posed no threat to the United States. Our soldiers died for secret agendas of which they knew nothing. Capitalists hid their self-interests behind the flag, and our boys died for the One Percent’s bottom line.


Jade Helm, an exercise that pits the US military against the US public, is scheduled to run July 15 through September 15. What is the secret agenda behind Jade Helm?


The Soviet Union was a partial check on capitalist looting in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. However, with the Soviet collapse capitalist looting intensified during the Clinton, Bush, and Obama regimes.


Neoliberal Globalization is now looting its own constituent parts and the planet itself. Americans, Greeks, Irish, British, Italians, Ukrainians, Iraqis, Libyans, Argentinians, the Spanish and Portuguese are being looted of their savings, pensions, social services, and job opportunities, and the planet is being turned into a wasteland by capitalists sucking the last penny out of the environment. As Claudia von Werlhof writes, predatory capitalism is consuming the globe. http://www.globalresearch.ca/neoliberal-globalization-is-there-an-alternative-to-plundering-the-earth/24403

We need a memorial day to commemorate the victims of neoliberal globalization. All of us are its victims, and in the end the capitalists also.




Tuesday, May 19, 2015

Ten days ago a massive Victory Parade was held in Moscow commemorating the 70-year anniversary of the surrender of Nazi Germany. You might not believe this, but the troops of 10 other nations took part in it, including the Chinese honor guard and a contingent of Grenadiers from India. Did the mainstream media tell you of the following spontaneously organized parade ...a half a million people marching through Moscow with portraits of their relatives who died in World War II? Did they tell you that similar processions took place in many cities throughout Russia, totaling around 4 million? Of course not, the mainstream media is the propaganda arm of the US government. When you look down at the mob in the second video, realize that this is a spontanious celebration, not a riot such as are breaking out all over the US as we speak. The despicable mainstream media would never tell you that...


America's Achilles' Heel

By Dmitry Orlov

May 12, 2015 "
Information Clearing House" -  Last Saturday, to the Red Army and the erection of the Soviet flag atop the Reichstag in Berlin. There were a few unusual aspects to this parade, which I would like to point out, because they conflict with the western official propaganda narrative. First, it wasn't just Russian troops that marched in the parade: the troops of 10 other nations took part in it, including the Chinese honor guard and a contingent of Grenadiers from India. Dignitaries from these nations were present in the stands, and the Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife were seated next to President Vladimir Putin, who, in his speech at the start of the parade, warned against attempts to create a unipolar world—sharp words aimed squarely at the United States and its western allies. Second, a look at the military hardware that rolled through Red Square or flew over it would indicate that, short of an outright nuclear mutual self-annihilation, there isn't much that the US military could throw at Russia that Russia couldn't neutralize.


https://youtu.be/3ps2jv0NpD8


It would appear that American attempts to isolate Russia have resulted in the exact opposite: if 10 nations, among them the world's largest economy, comprising some 3 billion people, are willing to set aside their differences and stand shoulder to shoulder with the Russians to counter American attempts at global dominance, then clearly the American plan isn't going to work at all. Western media focused on the fact that western leaders declined to attend the celebration, either in a fit of pique or because so ordered by the Obama administration, but this only highlights their combined irrelevance, be it in defeating Hitler, or in commemorating his defeat 70 years later. Nevertheless, in his speech Putin specifically thanked the French, the British and the Americans for their contribution to the war effort. I am sorry that he left out the Belgians, who had been so helpful at Dunkirk.

One small detail about the parade is nevertheless stunning: Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, a Tuvan Buddhist and one of the most respected Russian leaders, who presided over the Emergencies Ministry prior to becoming the Defense Minister, did something none of his predecessors ever did: at the beginning of the ceremony, he made the sign of the cross, in the Russian Orthodox manner. This simple gesture transformed the parade from a display of military pomp to a sacred ritual. Then followed the slow march with two flags side by side: the Russian flag, and the Soviet flag that flew on top of the Reichstag in Berlin on Victory Day 70 years ago. The march was accompanied by a popular World War II song? Its title? “The Sacred War.” The message is clear: the Russian military, and the Russian people, have put themselves in God's hands, to do God's work, to once again sacrifice themselves to save the world from the ravages of an evil empire.


https://youtu.be/B8tmji_2Q3w

If you try to dismiss any of this as Russian state propaganda, then here is something else you should be aware of. Did you hear of the spontaneously organized procession in which, after the official parade, half a million people marched through Moscow with portraits of their relatives who died in World War II? The event was called “The Eternal Regiment” (Бессмертный полк).  Western press either panned it or billed it as an attempt by Putin to whip up anti-western sentiment. Now that sort of “press coverage,” my fellow space travelers, is pure propaganda! No, it was an enthusiastic, spontaneous outpouring of genuine public sentiment. If you think about it just a tiny bit, nothing on this scale could be contrived artificially, and the thought that millions of people would prostitute their dead for propaganda purposes is, frankly, both cynical and insulting.

https://youtu.be/rWJM2wZb1Ew



* * *

Instead of collapsing quietly, the US has decided to pick a fight with Russia. It appears to have already lost the fight, but a question remains: How many more countries will the US manage to destroy before the reality of its inevitable defeat and disintegration finally catches up with it?

As Putin said last summer when speaking at the Seliger youth forum, “I get the feeling that no matter what the Americans touch, they end up with Libya or Iraq.” Indeed, the Americans have been on a tear, destroying one country after another. Iraq has been dismembered, Libya is a no-go zone, Syria is a humanitarian disaster, Egypt is a military dictatorship executing a program of mass imprisonment. The latest fiasco is Yemen, where the pro-American government was recently overthrown, and the American nationals who found themselves trapped there had to wait for the Russians and the Chinese to extract them and send them home. But it was the previous American foreign policy fiasco, in the Ukraine, which prompted the Russians, along with the Chinese, to signal that the US has taken a step too far, and that all further steps will result in automatic escalation.

The Russian plan, along with China, India, and much of the rest of the world, is to prepare for war with the US, but to do everything possible to avoid it. Time is on their side, because with each passing day they become stronger while America grows weaker. But while this process runs its course, America might “touch” a few more countries, turning them into a Libya or an Iraq. Is Greece next on the list? What about throwing under the bus the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania), which are now NATO members (i.e., sacrificial lambs)? Estonia is a short drive from Russia's second-largest city, St. Petersburg, it has a large Russian population, it has a majority-Russian capital city, and it has a rabidly anti-Russian government. Of those four facts, just one is incongruous. Is it being set up to self-destruct? Some Central Asian republics, in Russia's ticklish underbelly, might be ripe for being “touched” too.

There is no question that the Americans will continue to try to create mischief around the world, “touching” vulnerable, exploitable countries, for as long as they can. But there is another question that deserves to be asked: Do the Americans “touch” themselves? Because if they do, then the next candidate for extreme makeover into a bombed-out wasteland might be the United States itself. Let's consider this option.

As the events in Ferguson, and more recently in Baltimore, have indicated, the tensions between African-Americans and the police have escalated to a point where explosions become likely. The American “war on drugs” has been essentially a war on young black (and Latino) men; about a third of young blacks are behind bars. They also run a high risk of being shot by the police. To be fair, the police also run a high risk of getting shot by young black males, causing them to be jumpy and to overreact. Given the gradually collapsing economy—close to 100 million working-age Americans are unemployed (“outside the labor force,” if you wish to split hairs)—it would seem that for an ever-increasing chunk of the population cooperating with the authorities is no longer a useful strategy: you get locked up or killed anyway, but you get none of the temporary benefits that come from ignoring the law.

There is an interesting asymmetry in the American media's ability to block out information about civil unrest and insurgency: if it is happening overseas, then news of it can be carefully calibrated or suppressed outright. (Did American television tell you about the recent resumption of shelling of civilian districts by the Ukrainian military? Of course not!) This is possible because Americans are notoriously narcissistic and largely indifferent to the rest of the world, of which most of them know little, and what they think they know is often wrong. But if the unrest is within the US itself, then the various media outlets find themselves competing against each other in who can sensationalize it better, in order to get more viewership, and more advertising revenue. The mainstream media in the US is tightly controlled by a handful of large conglomerates, making it one big monopoly on information, but at the level of selling advertising market principles still prevail.

Thus there is the potential for a positive feedback loop: more civil unrest generates more sensationalized news coverage, which in turn amplifies the civil unrest, which further sensationalizes the news coverage. And there is a second positive feedback loop as well: the more civil unrest there is, the more the police overreact in trying to control the situation, thereby generating more rage, amplifying the civil unrest. These two positive feedback loops can continue to run out of control for a while, but the end result, in all such recent incidents, is the same: the introduction of National Guard troops and the imposition of curfew and martial law.

The swift introduction of the military might seem a bit odd, considering that most police departments, even small-town ones, have been heavily militarized in recent years, and even the security people at some school districts now have military vehicles and machine guns. But the progression is a natural one. On the one hand, when people who habitually resort to brute force find that it isn't working, they naturally assume that this is because they aren't using enough of it. On the other hand, if the criminal justice system is already a travesty and a shambles, then why not just cut through the red tape and impose martial law?

There is an awful lot of weapons of all sorts in the US already, and more will come in all the time as the US is forced to close overseas military bases due to lack of funds. And they will probably get used, for the same reason and in the same fashion that red bricks came to be used in Boston. You see, plenty of red bricks kept coming into Boston aboard British ships, where they were used as ballast for the return trip. This created the impetus to do something with them. But putting up brick buildings is a difficult, demanding process, especially if laborers are always drunk. And so the solution was to use the bricks to pave sidewalks—something one can do on one's hands and knees. Similarly with the military hardware sloshing back into the US from abroad. It will be used, because it's there; and it will be used in the stupidest way possible: shooting at one's own people.

But bad things happen to militaries when they are ordered to shoot at their own people. It is one thing to shoot at “towel-heads” in a far-away land; it is quite another to be ordered shoot at somebody who could be your own brother down the street from where you grew up. Such orders result in fragging (shooting your own officers), in refusal to follow orders, and in attempts to stand up for the other side.

And that's where things get interesting. Because, you see, if you shoot at, imprison, and otherwise abuse a defenseless civilian population long enough, what you get in response is an armed insurgency. The place insurgencies are easiest to organize is in prison. For instance, ISIS, or the Islamic Caliphate, was masterminded by people who had previously worked for Saddam Hussein, while they were imprisoned by the Americans. They took this opportunity to work out an efficient organizational structure and, upon release, found each other and got down to work. Having a third of young American blacks locked up gives them all the opportunity they need to organize an effective insurgency.

To be effective, an insurgency needs lots of weapons. Here, again, there is a procedure for acquiring military technology that has become almost routine. What weapons are being used by ISIS? Why, of course, American ones, which the Americans provided to the regime in Baghdad, and which ISIS took as trophies when the Iraqi army refused to fight and ran away. And what weapons are being used by the Houthi rebels in Yemen? Why, of course, the American ones, which the Americans provided to the now overthrown pro-American regime there. And what are some of the weapons being used by the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad? Why, of course, American ones, sold to them by the Ukrainian government, which got them from the Americans. There is a pattern here: it seems that whenever Americans arm, train and equip an army, that army stands a really big chance of simply melting away, with the weapons falling into the hands of those who want to use them against American interests. It is hard to see why this same pattern wouldn't hold once the US places much of itself under military occupation.

And that's where things get really interesting: a well-armed, well-organized insurgency composed of thoroughly radicalized, outraged people who have absolutely nothing to lose and are fighting for their home turf and their families squaring off against a demoralized, defeated US military that has just failed spectacularly in every country it “touched.”

They say that “You can't fight city hall.” But what if you have a tank battalion that can control four intersections all around city hall, turrets pointed in all directions, firing at anything that moves? And what if you have enough infantry to go around and ring the doorbells of all the key city hall bureaucrats? Wouldn't that change one's odds of victory in fighting city hall?

The US might get to “touch” a few more countries before this scenario unfolds, but it seems likely that (excepting the possibility of all-out war) eventually America will “touch” itself, and then all those countries whose troops marched through Red Square last Saturday won't have America to kick around any more.


https://youtu.be/ShKAo-vLe1E


Dmitry Orlov is a Russian-American engineer and a writer on subjects related to "potential economic, ecological and political decline and collapse in the United States," something he has called “permanent crisis”. http://cluborlov.blogspot.com

Sunday, May 17, 2015

"When the Washington-financed and orchestrated “Orange Revolution” failed to deliver Ukraine into Washington’s hands, Washington spent $5 billion dollars over the next decade cultivating and grooming Ukrainian politicians and creating Washington-funded NGOs capable of organizing mass protests in Kiev." "The democratically elected Ukrainian government was overthrown, and Washington’s chosen puppets were put in office as per the intercepted telephone call between Victoria Nuland the US ambassador in Kiev." -- from Paul Craig Roberts interview below

http://impactglassman.blogspot.mx/2015/02/paul-craig-roberts-is-interviewed-by.html






As a young woman, Victoria Nuland showed her contempt for Ukrainians


Victoria Nuland was in an exchange program and became a counselor at a Soviet children’s camp in Odessa in 1982. One of the ways she amused herself was to throw sunflower seeds into the dirt and laugh at the little Ukrainian children as they picked up and ate the dirty seeds. A Russian girl, also a counselor at the camp, got into a fight with her because of Nuland’s treatment of those children.

Victoria Nuland despises Ukrainians.

Did she laugh last year while they were burned alive, beaten, raped, killed, dismembered in Maidan and Odessa?

Ukrainian Banderites, do you think she is loyal to you? Do you think she actually believes in your cause? You are only pawns in the cynical game of the US and NATO. For years, they have been fueling your violence and inflaming your hatred. Those are their tools so they don’t have to dirty their hands.

Victoria Nuland, Geoffrey Pyatt, Joe Biden, Barack Obama, John McCain, David Cameron, Benjamin Netanyahu throw biscuits and dollars into the dirt for you today while they laugh, but beware: they are already planning the night of the long knives after they are finished amusing themselves.

What Nuland plans for anti-maidan protestors today, she is already planning for you. Nuland’s loyalty, goals, and objectives are for people you do not see — the weathy, the giant corporations, the bankers.

Do you think the pensions, prices, bank collapses, and disappearing jobs will only affect others? Nuland and her friends are destroying Ukraine – the long death – so that Ukraine can be taken by Western pirates. They want Ukraine for themselves and the few oligarchs they have bought and can control.

What the West is afraid of is Slavic unity, Slavic pride, and Slavic ancient traditions. Western conquerors are afraid of all the ancient people, their earth ethics and wisdom, afraid of their voices joining together in friendship, respect, harmony, and power. These conquerors divide and conquer in country after country, and bring in new “Western” ways to woo you from your birthright powers, knowledge, and traditions. They want to silence these ancient ways, so that they can rape and pillage the earth and enslave all the people.

Will you continue to kill your Russian friends,  your Russian brothers and sisters, who are your blood relatives, and favor Western traitors and predators that have always used you? Will you continue to support your Bandera of death and remain people of violence and hatred?

Or will you leave this darkness and insanity, embrace your Slavic and human brothers and sisters, and support life, family, and community for all in Ukraine and everywhere?

From Fort Russ

April 20, 2015
TVZvezda.ru
Translated by Krisitna Rus
Victoria Nuland was beaten up in a Soviet summer camp “Young Guard”


Russian writer Inna Metelskaya-Sheremetyeva shared memories on her Facebook page about the fight with Victoria Nuland. The story happened in Odessa in 1982 at a summer camp where an American girl came to work as a counselor. Future official representative of the U.S. State Department had to pay for the mockery of Ukrainian kids.

“In 1982 I worked in Odessa at a youth summer camp “Young Guard”. And, I confess, there I had a bloody fight with another American girl, also a counselor on exchange program, who amused herself by throwing sunflower seeds in the dust and laughing, watching Ukrainian kids picking up and eating the dirty seeds. I was kicked out of the camp for the fight and was officially reprimanded by Comsomol (youth communist organisation). I remembered her name “Vicky” for the rest of my life,” – said Inna Metelskaya-Sheremetyeva on Facebook.

However, despite the harsh decision of the administration of the camp, Inna has no regrets about her actions.

“And today I was surprised to read in the biography of Victoria Nuland, that in 1982, she worked as a counselor on exchange in the “Young Guard” and kept very negative impressions about the Soviet Union …  I did not regret the fight then and do not regret it now,” – wrote Metelskaya-Sheremetyeva.

Inna Metelskaya-Sheremetyeva – is a Russian writer, author of a series of books “Shards of Civilizations”.

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/04/how-victoria-nuland-got-beaten-up-at.html

http://tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/201504192022-fsko.htm

Continued from above...







Victoria Nuland is a terrorist. She should be banned from Russia.

Victoria Nuland visits Moscow May 17-18. 

From Sputnik News [i]

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland will visit Moscow on May 17 and 18 to discuss the implementation of the Minsk peace agreements on Ukraine, the US State Department said in a statement Sunday. 

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — During her visit, Nuland will meet with senior Russian government officials and civil society representatives. In addition to the Ukraine peace process, she is set to discuss bilateral US-Russian issues.


Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland will visit Moscow on May 17 and 18 to discuss the implementation of the Minsk peace agreements on Ukraine, the US State Department said in a statement Sunday. 

Allowing Victoria Nuland into Russia is very dangerous. She should be barred from entry. While in Russia, she will make good use of her time, including conferring with her partner Ambassador John Tefft on how best to ignite a Russian Maidan, destroy Russian society and Russia’s future, and meeting with Russian “liberals”, who label themselves as “pro-human rights”.

She is a very dangerous person. She should be viewed as a terrorist. Her work and her deeds are well known. Everything she does is to undermine the well-being of peoples and nations. Her skills as a mastermind and fomenter of civil catastrophe make her a powerful foe. Her movements predict unrest, turmoil, and coups. What is further despicable is that she pays others to commit her foul deeds of bloodshed and the terror.
On May 15, US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland arrived in Kiev – officially “to discuss a range of bilateral and regional issues.” 

In fact, to review plans for renewed aggression on Donbass. She was Obama’s point person in replacing Ukraine’s democratically elected government with overt Nazis assuming high regime positions.[ii]
She should be put on the official terrorist list and banned from the Russian Federation.
—————————————————–


[i] http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150517/1022228426.html

[ii] http://www.globalresearch.ca/kiev-heads-closer-to-resuming-full-scale-war-on-donbass/5449783

Also here for her role in Macedonia’s attempted coup

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/02/16/nuland-attempts-kiev-version-2-skopje.html

Her partnership with Robert Kagan

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2013/12/18/meet-neocon-doughnut-dolly-victoria-nuland.html

There is a great deal of information available on Victoria Nuland.

Friday, May 15, 2015

The Ukrainian civil war began with a massacre in Odessa, instigated by the US and carried out by neo Nazis, Right Sector troops in plain clothes and mercenaries in the private army of a Ukranian oligarch. At least forty six protestors were burned, shot, or clubbed to death. This is why the people of Crimea so quickly voted to rejoin Russia.


Ukraine “Disappears” Opponents of the Kiev Regime. Abductions of Independent Journalists

EDITOR'S CHOICE | 09.04.2015 | 21:35


In Odessa — the same city where the Ukrainian civil war started on 2 May 2014 with a massacre of opponents that had been carefully planned by a team connected to the U.S. White House — there are reported to be two bloggers for the “Voice of Odessa” political site who were seized by the Security Bureau of Ukraine on April 7th, and whose “whereabouts are unknown.” This report appeared in the local Odessa News. 

The “Voice of Odessa” site was formed right after the massacre, in order to get an independent investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators of that massacre, in which officially 46 people were burned, shot and clubbed to death, but unofficial estimates run over 200, all victims who have not been heard from since, and some of whom had allegedly even been abducted from hospitals after the massacre.

This report’s translated headline reads “SBU Detained Activists at Kulikov Field.”  Kulikov Field is the square or plaza in front of the former Odessa Trade Unions Building, which is the building where the massacre-victims, who had been printing and distributing pamphlets opposing the newly installed government, were murdered, by Right Sector troops in plain clothes, and also by mercenaries in the private army of Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoysky, who had allegedly announced in advance that he would pay $5,000 per corpse. (There has been no reported follow-up, regarding whether he actually paid everyone who participated, or how he paid them.)

The report on these disappearances says that the names of the missing bloggers are Svetlana Naboka and Marina Zhavoronkova, and that both women were seized at around 10 in the morning of April 7th. Furthermore, “one of the detainees seized during the search is now lacking her home computer, telephone and other personal belongings,” which presumably, were also taken by the state security force.

Whereas none of the perpetrators of the massacre has been prosecuted, the regime is trying to eliminate its opponents. On the same day that the two bloggers were seized, there was a related headline, “SBU reported on the closure of a number of sites for anti-Ukrainian propaganda.” That news report carried the following statement, from the SBU:

“The security service of Ukraine … has discontinued operation of a number of Internet sites that were used to perpetrate information campaigns of aggression on the part of the Russian Federation aimed at violent change or overthrow of the constitutional order and territorial integrity and inviolability of Ukraine.”

Presumably, the abduction, and perhaps elimination, of Svetlana Naboka and Marina Zhavoronkova, was part of that “discontinued operation” by the SBU against “aggression of the Russian Federation.”

The coup-established regime was not ‘the constitutional order’ in Ukraine. It overthrew the constitutionally elected President, and violated the Ukrainian constitution. However, “Big Brother” is based upon the Big Lie. So, it’s ‘the constitutional order.’ A good video shows the coup being carried out, but it actually started much earlier, in Spring of 2013. The same videographer also did a good video of the Odessa massacre.

Resistance to America’s Russia-hating Ukrainian regime is increasing, and it’s not only in Donbass — the region that has formally declared its separation from Ukraine, after Viktor Yanukovych, who had received 90+% of the vote there in the last democratic Ukrainian election, 2010, was overthrown by Obama. For example, barely more than three weeks ago, on March 12th, a column of Ukrainian tanks on trucks was blocked by overtly pro-Russian Ukrainians, who even showed the pre-communist (1710/1721-1858 &1883–1917/1918) flag of the then-single nation of Russia (from the time when Ukraine was part of Russia), which was until the Bolshevik Revolution. The video of this event, the courageous blocking of those trucks, was headlined “People stop military, sent by Kiev government, at Volnovaha.” The people who were blocking it are visible in the video carrying the three-striped — white, blue, and red —  flag of the Russian Empire. Russian Television on March 16th headlined about this, “Defensive blockade: Activists stop Kiev’s military trucks heading to Russian border,” and reported that, “Activists in eastern Ukraine in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions [but not in the part that’s in liberated Donbass] are blocking columns of heavy military equipment heading from Kiev to the border with Russia.” Ukraine is massing tanks on the Russian border to either invade Russia (which Ukraine repeatedly has threatened to do) or else to defend against a Russian invasion (which Russia has not threatened to do). These truckers encountered such hostility that they backtracked and took an alternate route (presumably more northerly).

Officially in Ukraine, all opponents of the Obama regime there are ‘terrorists.’ (Thus, the government’s constant bombings of them are in an ‘Anti Terrorist Operation’ or ATO.) The Obama team told its people to use this terminology because gullible individuals anywhere will oppose anyone who is merely labeled a ‘terrorist’ — even when the actual terrorism is on the part of the U.S. Government and its installed regimes, such as is the case in Ukraine.

The United States has become George Orwell’s Oceania. He got all the basics right. He is already the modern Nostradamus. However, Big Brother, the U.S. aristocracy, isn’t publishing that fact. Now, why would that be the case? Publishing that fact would confirm that they’re collectively Big Brother. That explains why the Brookings Institution is urging Obama to bomb Donbass longer and harder, and why over 98% of the U.S. Congress are urging him likewise, even though over two-thirds of the U.S. public who have any opinion on the matter, are against it. Obama, who did the coup, hasn’t pursued the extermination-program with the persistence that Big Brother demands. Big Brother demands more follow-through on his part. And, apparently, they’ll get it.

Eric Zuesse, globalresearch.ca

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

The Wolfowitz Doctrine: “Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”


War Threat Rises As Economy Declines — Paul Craig Roberts

May 11, 2015 | Original Here                                            Go here to sign up to receive email notice of this news letter

War Threat Rises As Economy Declines
Paul Craig Roberts, Keynote Address to the Annual Conference of the Financial West Group, New Orleans, May 7, 2015


The defining events of our time are the collapse of the Soviet Union, 9/11, jobs offshoring, and financial deregulation. In these events we find the basis of our foreign policy problems and our economic problems.


The United States has always had a good opinion of itself, but with the Soviet collapse self-satisfaction reached new heights. We became the exceptional people, the indispensable people, the country chosen by history to exercise hegemony over the world. This neoconservative doctrine releases the US government from constraints of international law and allows Washington to use coercion against sovereign states in order to remake the world in its own image.


To protect Washington’s unique Uni-power status that resulted from the Soviet collapse, Paul Wolfowitz in 1992 penned what is known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine. This doctrine is the basis for Washington’s foreign policy. The doctrine states:


“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”


In March of this year the Council on Foreign Relations extended this doctrine to China.


Washington is now committed to blocking the rise of two large nuclear-armed countries. This commitment is the reason for the crisis that Washington has created in Ukraine and for its use as anti-Russian propaganda. China is now confronted with the Pivot to Asia and the construction of new US naval and air bases to ensure Washington’s control of the South China Sea, now defined as an area of American National Interests.


9/11 served to launch the neoconservatives’ war for hegemony in the Middle East. 9/11 also served to launch the domestic police state. While civil liberties have shriveled at home, the US has been at war for almost the entirety of the 21st century, wars that have cost us, according to Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, at least $6 trillion dollars. These wars have gone very badly. They have destabilized governments in an important energy producing area. And the wars have vastly multiplied the “terrorists,” the quelling of which was the official reason for the wars.


Just as the Soviet collapse unleashed US hegemony, it gave rise to jobs offshoring. The Soviet collapse convinced China and India to open their massive underutilized labor markets to US capital. US corporations, with any reluctant ones pushed by large retailers and Wall Street’s threat of financing takeovers, moved manufacturing, industrial, and tradable professional service jobs, such as software engineering, abroad.


This decimated the American middle class and removed ladders of upward mobility. US GDP and tax base moved with the jobs to China and India. US real median family incomes ceased to grow and declined. Without income growth to drive the economy, Alan Greenspan resorted to an expansion of consumer debt, which has run its course. Currently there is nothing to drive the economy.


When the goods and services produced by offshored jobs are brought to the US to be sold, they enter as imports, thus worsening the trade balance. Foreigners use their trade surpluses to acquire US bonds, equities, companies, and real estate. Consequently, interests, dividends, capital gains, and rents are redirected from Americans to foreigners. This worsens the current account deficit.


In order to protect the dollar’s exchange value in the face of large current account deficits and money creation in support of the balance sheets of “banks too big to fail,” Washington has the Japanese and European central banks printing money hand over fist. The printing of yen and euros offsets the printing of dollars and thus protects the dollar’s exchange value.


The Glass-Steagall Act that separated commercial and investment banking had been somewhat eroded prior to the total repeal during the second term of the Clinton regime. This repeal, together with the failure to regulate over the counter derivatives, the removal of position limits on speculators, and the enormous financial concentration that resulted from the dead letter status of anti-trust laws, produced not free market utopia but a serious and ongoing financial crisis. The liquidity issued in behalf of this crisis has resulted in stock and bond market bubbles.


Implications, consequences, solutions:


When Russia blocked the Obama regime’s planned invasion of Syria and intended bombing of Iran, the neoconservatives realized that while they had been preoccupied with their wars in the Middle East and Africa for a decade, Putin had restored the Russian economy and military.


The first objective of the Wolfowitz doctrine–to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival–had been breached. Here was Russia telling the US “No.” The British Parliament joined in by vetoing UK participation in a US invasion of Syria. The Uni-Power status was shaken.


This redirected the attention of the neoconservatives from the Middle East to Russia. Over the previous decade Washington had invested $5 billion in financing up-and-coming politicians in Ukraine and non-governmental organizations that could be sent into the streets in protests.


When the president of Ukraine did a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed association of Ukraine with the EU, he saw that it didn’t pay and rejected it. At that point Washington called the NGOs into the streets. The neo-nazis added the violence and the government unprepared for violence collapsed.


Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt chose the new Ukrainian government and established a vassal regime in Ukraine.


Washington hoped to use the coup to evict Russia from its Black Sea naval base, Russia’s only warm water port. However, Crimea, for centuries a part of Russia, elected to return to Russia. Washington was frustrated, but recovered from disappointment and described Crimean self-determination as Russian invasion and annexation. Washington used this propaganda to break up Europe’s economic and political relationships with Russia by pressuring Europe into sanctions against Russia.


The sanctions have had adverse impacts on Europe. Additionally, Europeans are concerned with Washington’s growing belligerence. Europe has nothing to gain from conflict with Russia and fears being pushed into war. There are indications that some European governments are considering a foreign policy independent of Washington’s.


The virulent anti-Russian propaganda and demonization of Putin has destroyed Russian confidence in the West. With the NATO commander Breedlove demanding more money, more troops, more bases on Russia’s borders, the situation is dangerous. In a direct military challenge to Moscow, Washington is seeking to incorporate both Ukraine and Georgia, two former Russian provinces, into NATO.


On the economic scene the dollar as reserve currency is a problem for the entire world. Sanctions and other forms of American financial imperialism are causing countries, including very large ones, to leave the dollar payments system. As foreign trade is increasingly conducted without recourse to the US dollar, the demand for dollars drops, but the supply has been greatly expanded as a result of Quantitative Easing. Because of offshored production and US dependence on imports, a drop in the dollar’s exchange value would result in domestic inflation, further lowering US living standards and threatening the rigged, stock, bond, and precious metal markets.


The real reason for Quantitative Easing is to support the banks’ balance sheets. However, the official reason is to stimulate the economy and sustain economic recovery. The only sign of recovery is real GDP which shows up as positive only because the deflator is understated.


The evidence is clear that there has been no economic recovery. With the first quarter GDP negative and the second quarter likely to be negative as well, the second-leg of the long downturn could begin this summer.


Moreover, the current high unemployment (23 percent) is different from previous unemployment. In the postwar 20th century, the Federal Reserve dealt with inflation by cooling down the economy. Sales would decline, inventories would build up, and layoffs would occur. As unemployment rose, the Fed would reverse course and workers would be called back to their jobs. Today the jobs are no longer there. They have been moved offshore. The factories are gone. There are no jobs to which to call workers back.


To restore the economy requires that offshoring be reversed and the jobs brought back to the US. This could be done by changing the way corporations are taxed. The tax rate on corporate profit could be determined by the geographic location at which corporations add value to the products that they market in the US. If the goods and services are produced offshore, the tax rate would be high. If the goods and services are produced domestically, the tax rate could be low. The tax rates could be set to offset the lower costs of producing abroad.


Considering the lobbying power of transnational corporations and Wall Street, this is an unlikely reform. My conclusion is that the US economy will continue its decline.


On the foreign policy front, the hubris and arrogance of America’s self-image as the “exceptional, indispensable” country with hegemonic rights over other countries means that the world is primed for war. Neither Russia nor China will accept the vassalage status accepted by the UK, Germany, France and the rest of Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia. The Wolfowitz Doctrine makes it clear that the price of world peace is the world’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony.


Therefore, unless the dollar and with it US power collapses or Europe finds the courage to break with Washington and to pursue an independent foreign policy, saying good-bye to NATO, nuclear war is our likely future.


Washington’s aggression and blatant propaganda have convinced Russia and China that Washington intends war, and this realization has drawn the two countries into a strategic alliance. Russia’s May 9 Victory Day celebration of the defeat of Hitler is a historical turning point. Western governments boycotted the celebration, and the Chinese were there in their place. For the first time Chinese soldiers marched in the parade with Russian soldiers, and the president of China sat next to the president of Russia.


The Saker’s report on the Moscow celebration is interesting. http://thesaker.is/todays-victory-day-celebrations-in-moscow-mark-a-turning-point-in-russian-history/ Especially note the chart of World War II casualties. Russian casualties compared to the combined casualties of the US, UK, and France make it completely clear that it was Russia that defeated Hitler. In the Orwellian West, the latest rewriting of history leaves out of the story the Red Army’s destruction of the Wehrmacht. In line with the rewritten history, Obama’s remarks on the 70th anniversary of Germany’s surrender mentioned only US forces. In contrast Putin expressed gratitude to “the peoples of Great Britain, France and the United States of America for their contribution to the victory.” http://thesaker.is/15865/


For many years now the President of Russia has made the point publicly that the West does not listen to Russia. Washington and its vassal states in Europe, Canada, Australia, and Japan do not hear when Russia says “don’t push us this hard, we are not your enemy. We want to be your partners.”


As the years have passed without Washington hearing, Russia and China have finally realized that their choice is vassalage or war. Had there been any intelligent, qualified people in the National Security Council, the State Department, or the Pentagon, Washington would have been warned away from the neocon policy of sowing distrust. But with only neocon hubris present in the government, Washington made the mistake that could be fateful for humanity.