Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts

Monday, March 22, 2010

The Mystery of Dyatlov Pass‏

I'm a sucker for cold case files and unsolved mysteries, and I've never encountered one more bizarre this -- the Dyatlov Pass incident in Russia, 1959. A group of 9 college students go on a hiking/skiing trip in the Urals -- all found dead in inexplicable circumstances.

SF Chronicle columnist Mark Morford wrote a brief article about it here:

How creepy do you want it?

The famously eerie tale of nine dead Russian hikers, with all the bizarre details you can handle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/02/27/notes022708.DTL#ixzz0ilCDCA7B)

Here are the basic facts:

• The victims’ tent was “cut from the inside”.
• Five in the group exited the tent wearing little or no clothing. Four others were dressed normally.
• There were many internal injuries and broken bones, but little or no external damage was found.
• One person was missing her tongue.
• The victims had a “strange orange tan” and grey hair at their funeral.
• High levels of radiation were found at the scene of the accident and on the victims’ clothes.
• Some of the victims may have been blinded.
• There were “strange orange spheres” in the sky during the time of the Dyatlov pass accident.
This site (http://www.aquiziam.com/dyatlov_pass_answers.html) dispels much of the misinfo grown up around the case, and uses new sources and evidence to disprove the avalanche theory and the secret Soviet weapons testing theory -- the favorite explanations of so-called "skeptics," despite the total lack of evidence for such explanations. This site concludes:

However, these now broadly accepted facts do not diminish the mystery – in a strange way they enhance it. As we have repeatedly said throughout these pages ... Why did nine, experienced and sensible, ski-hikers abandon their tent in such a hurry and in weather conditions that were hostile and almost certain to lead to their deaths? What really happened that night?

For a laugh, and to demonstrate the absurd lengths to which purported "rationalists" will go to shoehorn the inexplicable into their comforting frame of reference, see this account:

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4108

The whole "debunking" screed is pretty well debunked by a commentator:

igor PERMALINK

It’s very funny how people with zero knowledge about the living conditions in USSR at that time (almost 50 years ago) and the weather and terrain specifics of the northern Urals can make some assumptions and prove or disprove theories. I was born in Sverdlovsk and graduated from the same Urals Polytechnic College as all the nine from the Dyatlov’s group so IMHO can shed some light on the questionable facts.

The temperature on February 1, 1959 was minus 21 -25 C (about minus 10-12 F) with winds on the top of the mountain up to 15 m/s (45 ft/s). Nobody in the sound mind would venture to go outside undressed in this kind of weather expecting “to survive for a time outside the tent” … “if it was bearable”. They just acted in panic with no logical reasoning and no expectations, like people jumping down from the WTC didn’t really expect to stay alive.

There were no bruises and breaks in the skin of the injured except unremarkable cuts and scratches, but the injuries were massive: one girl had 12 (!!!) ribs broken on left and right sides. These injuries can’t be explained by a mere fall on the snow or even a force of explosion as there were no broken limbs and signs of hematomas. The girl with the missing tongue could not have “bitten it off due to the panic” since not only the tongue but the entire oral cavity lining was missing as it was torn off.

Even more hilarious for me was reading the comments. Darling Sarah H, they didn’t have Coleman-type gas lanterns with thorium mantles in Russia in 1959. They didn’t have any camping gas lanterns, period. They didn’t have sleeping bags, camping pads as well as other essential camping gear. The tent was self-made sewn from 2 old smaller tents. The Dyatlov’s slept on the empty rucksacks wrapped themselves in the wool blankets. They only had one flashlight and used it sparingly to save the battery. It was later found on the tent’s roof left in the switched-on position as if somebody tried to mark the tent’s location.

As for answering the question why the investigators even checked the radioactive contamination of the bodies in the first place one has to be in the state of mind of policemen in the midst of the cold war hysteria in Urals, where every city had secret weaponry manufactures.

The case is very similar to the famous Mary Celeste mystery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Celeste), which I consider solved by a brilliant piece of sleuthing and deduction by author Brian Hicks (http://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Ship-Mysterious-Celeste-Missing/dp/0345466659/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1269131130&sr=8-2), without resort to any "paranormal" explanations. Dyatlov Pass, however, still defies any plausible explanation.

The party before the incident:
Memorial to the lost party in the Urals
Addendum:
For those interested in this most bizarre mystery, this page has a timeline of events and chart showing the victims' locations and determination of death (the most baffling element of the tragedy), along with a good narrative and exploration of the various theories on page 2.
http://www.aquiziam.com/dyatlov_pass_1.html
This Fortean Times page also has a good narrative, with some additional information:
Many people gravitate toward "paranormal" explanations for such events that defy "normal" explanation. While I am convinced of the reality of much paranormal phenomena, those solutions should be excluded until all else fails. The Mary Celeste mystery is a case in point -- a much more mundane, though equally horrifying solution was proposed by author Brian Hicks -- one that accounts for ALL of the known evidence and anomalies, which any theory must do.
Mystery finally solved, at least to my satisfaction -- after over 100 years of troubled speculation.
In the Dyatlov case, many have pointed to the radiation contamination, and the eyewitness accounts of "glowing orbs" in the sky as evidence of a UFO event, prompting the "skeptics" to launch attacks and ride roughshod over facts construed as indicative of otherworldly agency.
Although "UFO" has become synonymous with "aliens in flying saucers" in popular parlance, it means only "Unidentified Flying Object," which could include many things, both natural (Earth Lights and ball lightning) and man-made. There is considerable evidence that some governments have been experimenting with novel propulsion systems in "deep black" projects since the end of WWII, when Nazi scientists first produced experimental saucer-shaped aircraft -- yes, "anti-gravity" craft, that might account for many UFO sightings.
Another factor proposed to explain the anomalous injuries, as well as the party's seeming disorientation and terror: infrasound, produced by both natural and artificial processes:

Infrasound
This site notes:
"Acoustic Bullets. High power, very low frequency waves emitted from one to two meter antenna dishes. Results in blunt object trauma from waves generated in front of the target. Effects range from discomfort to death. A Russian device that can propel a 10-hertz sonic bullet the size of a baseball hundreds of yards is thought to exist. Proposed fixed site defense. Also known as sonic bullets."
Families of the Dyatlov victims have established a foundation and are prodding the Russian government to re-investigate the case and release any documents that might still be classified.


Travis Kelly Graphics
http://www.tkellygraphics.com
435-259-1198

Editorial & History Cartoons
http://www.traviskelly.com

CafePress:
Cartoons on T-Shirts, Posters, Calendars, Mugs and more
http://www.cafepress.com/traviskelly

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Samizdat - 10/28/2009


Two Smackdowns • The U.S. as Failed State • Russia's Daring Vote

TWO SMACKDOWNS

Al Franken eviscerates a Stepford spokeswoman from the Hudson Institute on medical bankruptcies. Anyone who thought "Stuart Smiley" would be a lightweight in the Senate is wrong -- he's tough, well-prepared and he doesn't pull any punches:

"How many medical bankruptcies were there in Switzerland last year?"

"How many medical bankruptcies were there in France last year?"

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/22/795842/-Watch-Franken-slice-and-dice-the-nice-wingnut-lady-(updated-w-transcript)

MSNBC anchor Dylan Ratigan takes on Chamber of Commerce chief Tom Donohue:

Ratigan: "Unless the government and people like you that lobby to the exemptions that allow banks to [speculate with taxpayer money] get out of the way, we will never have fair play again in this country and we'll have job creation by virtue of taxpayer theft, which is ultimately destructive, and I would argue, treasonous to this country... Especially when you talk nonsense."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/14/dylan-ratigan-to-chamber_n_320397.html


________________________________________________________


The US as Failed State

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

http://www.counterpunch.com/roberts10222009.html


The US has every characteristic of a failed state.

The US government’s current operating budget is dependent on foreign financing and money creation.

Too politically weak to be able to advance its interests through diplomacy, the US relies on terrorism and military aggression.

Costs are out of control, and priorities are skewed in the interest of rich organized interest groups at the expense of the vast majority of citizens. For example, war at all cost, which enriches the armaments industry, the officer corps and the financial firms that handle the war’s financing, takes precedence over the needs of American citizens. There is no money to provide the uninsured with health care, but Pentagon officials have told the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee in the House that every gallon of gasoline delivered to US troops in Afghanistan costs American taxpayers $400.

“It is a number that we were not aware of and it is worrisome,” said Rep. John Murtha, chairman of the subcommittee.

According to reports, the US Marines in Afghanistan use 800,000 gallons of gasoline per day. At $400 per gallon, that comes to a $320,000,000 daily fuel bill for the Marines alone. Only a country totally out of control would squander resources in this way.

While the US government squanders $400 per gallon of gasoline in order to kill women and children in Afghanistan, many millions of Americans have lost their jobs and their homes and are experiencing the kind of misery that is the daily life of poor third world peoples. Americans are living in their cars and in public parks. America’s cities, towns, and states are suffering from the costs of economic dislocations and the reduction in tax revenues from the economy’s decline. Yet, Obama has sent more troops to Afghanistan, a country half way around the world that is not a threat to America.

It costs $750,000 per year for each soldier we have in Afghanistan. The soldiers, who are at risk of life and limb, are paid a pittance, but all of the privatized services to the military are rolling in excess profits. One of the great frauds perpetuated on the American people was the privatization of services that the US military traditionally performed for itself. “Our” elected leaders could not resist any opportunity to create at taxpayers’ expense private wealth that could be recycled to politicians in campaign contributions.

Republicans and Democrats on the take from the private insurance companies maintain that the US cannot afford to provide Americans with health care and that cuts must be made even in Social Security and Medicare. So how can the US afford bankrupting wars, much less totally pointless wars that serve no American interest?

The enormous scale of foreign borrowing and money creation necessary to finance Washington’s wars are sending the dollar to historic lows. The dollar has even experienced large declines relative to currencies of third world countries such as Botswana and Brazil. The decline in the dollar’s value reduces the purchasing power of Americans’ already declining incomes.

Despite the lowest level of housing starts in 64 years, the US housing market is flooded with unsold homes, and financial institutions have a huge and rising inventory of foreclosed homes not yet on the market.

Industrial production has collapsed to the level of 1999, wiping out a decade of growth in industrial output.

The enormous bank reserves created by the Federal Reserve are not finding their way into the economy. Instead, the banks are hoarding the reserves as insurance against the fraudulent derivatives that they purchased from the gangster Wall Street investment banks.

The regulatory agencies have been corrupted by private interests. Frontline reports that Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, and Larry Summers blocked Brooksley Born, the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from regulating derivatives. President Obama rewarded Larry Summers for his idiocy by appointing him Director of the National Economic Council. What this means is that profits for Wall Street will continue to be leeched from the diminishing blood supply of the American economy.

An unmistakable sign of third world despotism is a police force that sees the pubic as the enemy. Thanks to the federal government, our local police forces are now militarized and imbued with hostile attitudes toward the public. SWAT teams have proliferated, and even small towns now have police forces with the firepower of US Special Forces. Summons are increasingly delivered by SWAT teams that tyrannize citizens with broken down doors, a $400 or $500 repair born by the tyrannized resident. Recently a mayor and his family were the recipients of incompetence by the town’s local SWAT team, which mistakenly wrecked the mayor’s home, terrorized his family, and killed the family’s two friendly Labrador dogs.

If a town’s mayor can be treated in this way, what do you think is the fate of the poor white or black? Or the idealistic student who protests his government’s inhumanity?

In any failed state, the greatest threat to the population comes from the government and the police. That is certainly the situation today in the USA. Americans have no greater enemy than their own government. Washington is controlled by interest groups that enrich themselves at the expense of the American people.

The one percent that comprise the superrich are laughing as they say, “let them eat cake.”



_________________________________________________________________________

Russia's Daring Vote

By ISRAEL SHAMIR

http://www.counterpunch.com/shamir10222009.html

Russia's vote to endorse the Goldstone Gaza report in the United Nations Human Rights Council last Friday was an important, milestone event both for Palestine and for Russia. For Palestine, this vote opened a way to try and sentence Israeli mass-murderers, and thus ushered Israel into a new era of responsibility after a long period of Wild West-style, Colt-45 justice. For Russia, this vote has proved to its own country and to the world that it is free from American and Zionist diktat and able to navigate its own policy...

Many people doubted his impartiality: Goldstone is a Jew -- a self-described Zionist, well-connected to Israel – he sits on the board of its University and his daughter even lived in Tel Aviv for a while. Goldstone was guided by his conscience and not by his blood. He went to Gaza, invested a lot of time and effort, and concluded: Israel has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. He recommended the case be transferred to the ICC court in the Hague. Israel did not cooperate and tried to undermine and block the report, but failed. That was the first Israeli defeat...

Israel was infuriated by this development. The Jewish State considered itself invulnerable behind the triple defense of the Sixth Fleet, the US Senate and the Holocaust Museum. President Obama's soft request to freeze the settlement building was met in Tel Aviv by what Internet chat calls "lol". He was ridiculed. Ehud Barak and Bibi Netanyahu even sped up their building plans in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in order to show that they could not care less. And now, all of a sudden, Jewish ministers of state are going to be judged as if they were Serbs or Sudanese.

Israeli leaders activated their main reserves, the US State Department and the Lobby. A few days ago I spoke with Martin Indyk, former US ambassador to Tel Aviv, and he confirmed that the US State Department will do all it can to stop the Goldstone report before it gets to the Security Council. Another American veto would not look good. Worse, an insulted and hurt Obama might just forget to veto an anti-Israeli decision...

A few years ago I wrote: "The world needs Russia, for since her star was obscured in 1990, for almost twenty years the runaway train of US and the loose cannon of Israel made a mess on the planet. Russia must stop their orgy of aggression and regain its place as the ultimate protector of the weak and the meek. This is her manifest destiny". The Geneva vote proved that Russia has done just that. We may once again connect our hopes with Russia in her friendship with China. They also can stop Israel from hurting itself and others.

So many people in the US and France, in Egypt and Palestine are tired of Israeli intransigence, egotism, hypocrisy and impunity. That is why so much hope was invested in Barack Obama after his Cairo talk. Obama had promised to cut Israel down to size, but meanwhile Israel cut him down to smaller-than-life. That is why the US is going down just like the Titanic, undermined by a Lobby iceberg and fleeced by financial wizards. Now Russia is coming under tremendous pressure from the US and other Zionist-led groups and states. We should pray she will withstand it and maintain her and our dignity.


Travis Kelly Graphics
http://www.tkellygraphics.com

Editorial & History Cartoons
http://www.traviskelly.com

CafePress:
Cartoons on T-Shirts, Posters, Calendars, Mugs and more
http://www.cafepress.com/traviskelly

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

USA And The World: At The Crossroads Or In The Crosshairs?‏ - Travis Kelly

A correction to my last Samizdat posting about Ahmadinejad -- the Daily Telegraph seems to have pulled this out of their ass, without any due diligence:

Ahmadinejad has no Jewish roots
Rumours that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's family converted to Islam from Judaism are false. In fact, they are proud Shias
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/05/mahmoud-ahmadinejad-jewish-family

One recently published claim about his background comes from an article in the Daily Telegraph. Entitled "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad revealed to have Jewish past", it claims that his family converted to Islam after his birth. The claim is based on a number of arguments, a key one being that his previous surname was Sabourjian which "derives from weaver of the sabour, the name for the Jewish tallit shawl in Persia".

Professor David Yeroshalmi, author of The Jews of Iran in the 19th Century and an expert on Iranian Jewish communities, disputes the validity of this argument. "There is no such meaning for the word 'sabour' in any of the Persian Jewish dialects, nor does it mean Jewish prayer shawl in Persian...

_______________________________________________________________________________________

This is a long but particularly cogent essay on the state of the world, and our nation's role in the future:


USA and the World: At the crossroads or in the crosshairs?
Come Carpentier de Gourdon
08 Oct 2009
http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=857

History is being written every day but there is little doubt that the years from 2008 to 2010 will be remembered in the future as the period during which the global system transitioned from almost unchallenged unipolar western dominance to a much more complex and uncharted chaotic state.

The after-effects of the financial meltdown in the USA brought about the rapid decline of the NATO-centered western security structure, already challenged by the tragic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while Israel, a pillar of the global US-led alliance, was put on the strategic defensive by its botched attack on Lebanon and on the moral defensive by its brutal assault on Gaza, which exposed the Jewish state to the charges of war crimes and even crimes against humanity, earlier levied against its American mentor in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Conversely, while the “metaphorical” West is being buffeted by economic and political storms, many of its own making, China, India, Brazil and other leading nations of Asia, Latin America and Africa are experiencing a new spring of hope as they see the centres of gravity of the old “order” shifting rapidly towards them. Indeed the problems that those developing countries are experiencing are often caused by their interactions with the poles of worldwide finance (New York, London) and by the contamination of America’s multiple woes to its neighbours and partners.

The perception of this situation has led to a number of rather predictable consequences. The socialist or nationalist anti-Wall Street (a fairer description than “anti-American” or “anti-globalization”) governments of Venezuela, Bolivia, Argentina, Ecuador, Iran and Belarus were reinforced and vindicated in their resolve to create an alternative order, while the “good students” of global liberalism such as Mexico, South Africa, Nigeria and even the United Arab Emirates were severely hurt and saw their socio-political stability challenged. Russia was provided with further reasons to review its commitment to capitalism and forced to increase Government intervention in the economy.

China likewise used its command and control structures to inject several hundred billion dollars worth of stimulus to support threatened companies and fight mounting unemployment. Japan elected to power, with an overwhelming majority, a party committed to reorganize the social dispensation, reshape its foreign policy, distance itself from the USA, and strike a closer collaboration with China and other Asian neighbours.

The Atlantic Alliance thus finds itself in a rapidly worsening predicament. Faced by formidable competition in all areas by the rising powers of Asia and South America, increasingly dependent upon Russia and other less-than-friendly countries for its energy, threatened with eviction from its traditional African backyard by China, India, Brazil and other new entrants on the continent, mined by social unrest as a result of the economic and unemployment crisis, weakened by ill-fated colonial wars in the Middle East, bled by the thousand pricks of Islam-inspired terrorism, demoralised by the fast spreading perception of a looming climatic and environmental Armageddon and deeply divided within, the “West” is less homogenous than ever perhaps since World War II, and is fighting to retain control over an international architecture it can no longer afford to support.

Hence the repeated appeals to Russia, China and India to become part of this system and take their share of responsibility in it. However those attempts to co-opt the three most significant “non western” states are inspired by the hope that they can be kept apart from each other and possibly on unfriendly terms, in order to avoid a coordination that would be ominous for the US-ruled alliance.

While sharp divisions emerged between the USA and Continental Western Europe with regard to the Iraq war and are widening on the Afghan theatre, even greater disagreements have been recorded on the subject of the economy and specifically on how to respond to the crisis.

Those divisions are also to be found within most countries in the Atlantic alliance, including the US, where President Barack Obama is torn between two bitterly opposed camps, i.e. those who elected him to carry out radical reforms in domestic and foreign policies on one side, and those who opposed or grudgingly supported him in order to prevent him from carrying out those very reforms on the other. That division is less obvious but much more real than the supposed cleavage between the Democratic and Republican parties which have long been rival but complementary interest groups in the service of the same system.

The division, in simple terms, manifests most visibly on four critical issues: the economy, the Israel-Palestine situation (which includes the policy towards Iran), the Russia-China conundrum and the Afghan situation. Iraq, at least temporarily ceased to be a major item of disagreement in the USA as a result of the relative but fragile status quo that has prevailed there since 2007. The only differences regard the pace of repatriation of US troops and the amount of forces that should be maintained there permanently or at least for the foreseeable future. However the four other issues have all appearances of being intractable.

The Economy

The Obama administration has disappointed the reformers of various persuasions as he gave every sign of being both unable and unwilling to challenge the power of the entrenched Wall Street lobbies and business interests. The massive and rabid opposition he faced on the issue of healthcare reform, especially with regard to any notion of public healthcare that is seen as “communistic” by too many Americans under the influence of the propaganda broadcast by insurance companies and pharmaceutical consortia, is symptomatic of a deadlocked system, controlled by its beneficiaries who refuse to concede their privileges under any circumstances.

This obduracy is indeed the major factor for the increasingly likely collapse of the United States, in spite of its being still an immensely wealthy country. On a smaller scale, California, the richest state of the Union is also rapidly declining under the weight of its own political-fiscal deadlock which has condemned it to bankruptcy. Though American military might cannot be matched by any other nation in the foreseeable future, it is unlikely that this power can remain effective when the underlying socio-political structures crumble and when the defence machinery itself cannot be properly oiled with the vast financial outlays it requires. At present the USA is gradually keeling over under the burden created by the 8 trillion Dollar real estate bubble when it burst.

Israel-Palestine

All American policies in the Near and Middle East are influenced, when not determined by, its equation with Israel. The Zionist lobby (both Jewish and Christian) propounds as an article of faith that Israel is a divinely ordained state which the US is duty-bound, according to its founding religious creed, to support and protect in all circumstances. Obama seems to have dual loyalties on this issue. He is a member of the African-American community, has Muslim origins in his father’s family, was like his wife Michelle long involved with black social action networks, and must respond in some way to the growing irritation felt in many domestic quarters against Israel’s foreign policies and the very high diplomatic, financial, human and image costs they entail for the United States.

Obama must also try to assuage a majority of public opinion abroad that sees the American government as a virtual hostage of Zionist interests, but he cannot afford to antagonize too much the Jewish elite in the country which has already shown its ability to jeopardize his presidency. For instance, the vociferous campaign of the so-called “Birthers” who claim that the first African-American President was not born in the territory of the USA and is in fact a Kenyan, hence not eligible to hold the highest office, gives every indication of having being inspired by Israeli agents, including the leader of the “Birthers”, Orly Taitz, who was reported to have both American and Israeli citizenships and rumoured to be close to Prime Minister Netanyahu.

In the same vein, the Israeli administration deliberately evinced its disdain for its counterpart in Washington, when the latter attempted to restart stalled negotiations with the Palestinian authority in August 2009, by announcing the construction of new settlements in occupied territories in spite of Obama’s requests.

On the larger theatre, Israel has been relentlessly pushing the US and its NATO allies to bomb Iran’s nuclear research facilities because of the suspicion that they may be used to develop a nuclear weapon. It is edifying that both Israel and the USA, which never seriously objected when Pakistan became a nuclear weapons state, with the not-so-covert help of the USA, are fixated on Iran’s alleged military nuclear capabilities. Why the dread of a “Shiite Islamic bomb” when the “Sunni bomb” was taken in stride?

For one, Pakistan is a client state of the United States and Britain, which is not expected to turn against them or their protégés, but Iran’s nuclear programme is also used as a bogey by Tel Aviv, just as when the Jewish state promoted the now discarded belief that Iraq was amassing weapons of mass destruction to call for the invasion of the country and Saddam Hussein’s overthrow.

It is in Israel’s interest to bring as much of the region as possible under US military and political control, or at least under the superpower’s attacks, so as to leave no potential enemy or challenger to its East or South. The calculus in Israel is that disarming Iran would ipso facto weaken Syria and the Hezbollah which could be subsequently defanged. In pursuit of this objective, Israel refuses now to seriously pursue negotiations with the Palestinians as long as the US does not “take care” of Tehran.

The implications of the Israeli government’s brinkmanship can of course be tragic for the Middle East and for the world. If Tel Aviv and Washington do not stop at covert destabilizing operations inside Iran and launch air attacks against the Islamic Republic, retaliations can be expected in all areas where Iran has the ability to strike at US and Jewish interests and a new wave of anti-western anger is sure to arise in many parts of the world.


Muslims populations may not be the only ones to express their outrage through violence. Too many disenfranchised and angry victims of the ongoing economic crisis are likely to find in this new “war for Zionism and oil” a channel to manifest their hostility to their rulers and their resolve to overthrow the global oligarchy. For Israel to press for a “final (military) solution” in the Middle East, though it will certainly not be final unless nuclear holocaust occurs, shows a state of desperation among some right-wing Zionists, or at least a worrisome recklessness of the type evinced by the Wall Street gamblers who brought about the multi-trillion dollar losses of 2008.

An indication of the acute tension reached in the Iran-Israel conflict could be found in a mysterious incident involving the Russian cargo ship Arctic Sea, which was bizarrely hijacked twice on its journey to Algeria in July 2009, by “pirates” on a speedboat posing as Swedish policemen, who took it to the Cape Verde islands, before the Russian navy was able to trace the vessel and take control of it on August 17, after deploying considerable resources in coordination with various other European states and the USA. The pirates, according to some intelligence sources hailed from Russia and the Baltic countries, but were rumoured to have acted on behalf of the Israeli Mossad. Russian Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov called them “CIA terrorists”, suggesting that they might have been rogue agents.

Not long after they were arrested and taken back to Russia to be tried, Prime Minister Netanyahu flew secretly to the Kubinka Air Force base on September 7, “in breach of all protocol,” to meet President Medvedev. He was accompanied by Meir Kalifi, his military adviser and Uzi Arad, his national security adviser. Though not much was learnt about the discussions, it was reported that apart from angrily demanding the release of his agents “Bibi the American” as he is nicknamed in Israel, tried to secure Russian non-intervention in the event of Israelis staging bombing raids over Iran.

The meeting appears to have been stormy. Medvedev later said in an interview with Fareed Zakaria on CNN, after news had leaked about the clandestine visit, that he had only agreed to the secrecy in response to Netanyahu’s request, though he did not see the need for it and would have preferred that the visit be official. The reason for the hijacking of MV Arctic Sea remains a mystery, but it appears that major strategic interests were at stake if one looks at the massive resources Russia deployed to recover the ship and defeat what was almost certainly a covert operation conducted for undisclosed reasons on a vessel whose real cargo was not ascertained.

Shortly afterwards, Russia sought assurances from Israeli President Shimon Peres that there would be no attack on Iran; Prime Minister Putin pointedly highlighted the Russian warning on the anniversary of September 11, 2001. It appears that the Russian Government sought to prevent a unilateral military move from the Netanyahu government by getting not only the Israeli head of state to commit that there would be no attack on Iran, but also the American administration.

Indeed, President Obama himself issued a veiled but stern warning to the bellicose Jewish premier through his informal but very influential adviser, Zbignew Brzezinski, who in an interview to the Daily Beast on 22nd, openly invoked the prospect of the US Air Force shooting down any Israeli planes heading to Iran. Brzezinski even recalled, -horribile dictu- the 1967 Israeli deadly bombing of the electronic spying ship USS Liberty to suggest that Americans might not be averse to getting even with Tsahal, thus breaking a taboo enforced from the White House since the day of that incident. This series of events reflect the fact that the wind is turning. An insolvent and deeply divided America is constrained to rethink its policies in the Middle East as they have become unsustainable and detrimental.

A number of strange and disturbing events, apparently caused by terrorism, took place in the territory of the Russian Federation during the month of September. On August 17, the very day when Russian special forces took control of the Arctic Sea from the hijackers, a massive explosion destroyed the Sayano Shusenskaya hydro-electrical power plant in Siberia, causing a large number of casualties, and on September 13 the Directorate of Military Intelligence situated on an Air Base at Tambov was the target of a commando who managed to penetrate it, killing various security personnel and setting fire to an archive reported to contain a number of sensitive government files.

Were those attacks related to the Arctic Sea incident and the stormy meeting between the Russian President and the Israeli Prime Minister? The verdict of various experts is that somebody was trying to apply intense pressure on the Kremlin, possibly to dissuade it from obstructing western designs against Iran.

On September 16, a trilateral meeting took place in Washington between President Obama, Prime Minister Putin and Prime Minister Harper of Canada, during which the US and Russia agreed on a number of surprisingly conciliatory moves. It has been reported that one of the points of agreement was the need to contain Israeli bellicosity and prevent the situation in the Middle East from getting out of hand, in line with the warnings recently issued by some eminent analysts, including Professor Immanuel Wallerstein, predicting a “firestorm” for US interests and forces in the region, if the worsening situation involving Israel, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan was not quickly brought under control.

Russia-China

Though the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation have very different situations vis-à-vis the United States, the fact that since the beginning of the twenty-first century they coordinate their foreign policies to some extent and especially their responses to the US, has forced Washington to take them into account in tandem on a number of sensitive issues, in the Middle East, Europe and Latin America, as in North Korea.

The economic power of the Middle Kingdom and the strategic-nuclear might of Russia combined with the latter’s energy and mineral resources make the world’s two largest nations, by population and land area respectively, indispensable or inevitable as the case may be. There is no assurance that the alliance of convenience struck between Beijing and Moscow will survive the likely divergence of some of their respective interests, but in the present context they need each other to defend themselves effectively against western hegemonic designs.

Evidently the colossal US debt to China and Europe’s dependence on Russian oil and gas give the two Eastern states decisive leverage over the Atlantic Alliance, and as of 2009 there are increasing signs that the US is caught in an economic vice by China, which is able to exercise informal vetting rights over American financial and foreign policies, while Russia wields its refurbished conventional and nuclear arsenal to restore and extend its influence in many regions, from the Mediterranean to the South Atlantic and from Venezuela to the Arctic Ocean, while its nuclear submarines and its long-range strategic bombers surround mainland America. Those may be theatrical moves but they convey a message clearer than words.

The situation of the USA vis-à-vis China may offer some grounds for comparison with the state of the United Kingdom and its empire in the years leading up to and during the Second World War when London became dependent on the United States, then the world’s largest factory and credit provider. That dependence was increased and made manifest by the lend lease programme which effectively gave the White House a right of veto over all of White Hall’s decisions.

Today, the USA must practically get China’s agreement before it can carry out any major domestic or foreign initiative. Many have said that the dependence is mutual and that a full-fledged collapse of the US would be disastrous for China’s economy, but this is cold comfort to clear-sighted American policy-makers, who see Beijing taking a number of measures to rapidly reduce its excessive reliance on the US export market.

Indeed, after the aforesaid 16 September meeting, the White House announced its intention to abandon the missile shield project in Eastern Europe and is so far resisting the obsessive Israeli calls for launching a war against Iran. More American concession are likely to follow, involving the tacit recognition of Russia’s preponderance in its traditional sphere of influence by shelving plans to induct Ukraine and Georgia into NATO and stopping the US moves to build a military presence in Central Asia.

In return, it appears that President Putin renounced the legal action pursued by the Russian state against the Bank of New York, seeking 22 billion Dollars in damages in exchange for a token 14 million Dollars in legal costs. More importantly, apart from confirming its willingness to allow American supplies passage through Russia on the way to Afghanistan, Russia toned down its call for replacing the US greenback with a new global reserve currency, endorsing instead the Chinese proposal for a basket of currencies including the Dollar.

Afghanistan

The so-called graveyard of empires is living up to its reputation by conjuring a nightmare of defeat and humiliation for NATO strategists. Both during his presidential campaign and after his election, Barack Obama had, like many other politicians, presented the Afghan war as a righteous and necessary conflict, as opposed to the invasion of Iraq which was illegal and staged under false pretenses. He thereby sought to reassure a majority of Americans who prefer to be seen as strong even if wrong, as opposed to being morally right but appearing weak.

Its perpetual insecurity, perhaps rooted in a lingering inferiority complex vis-à-vis older imperial nations, leads the world’s “sole superpower” to assume that it must prove itself by using overwhelming force whenever the occasion arises. Hence Afghanistan was to provide proof to doubters and naysayers that “America was not running away” and that the rather inglorious outcome in Iraq could be balanced by a successful pacification of the lands abutting the Hindu Kush, that in turn would facilitate the annexation of sprawling and energy-rich Central Asia into the Western fold. Perhaps unknowingly, modern day American strategists are echoing the views of British Prime Minister Disraeli, who claimed that the safety of the Empire hinged on those very Afghan mountains.

In September 2009 Obama, well aware that the USA had already spent 38 billion Dollars in economic assistance alone with little to show for it in the war-torn country, had second thoughts on the strategy to expand the war and increase the number of troops in Afghanistan until final victory. He could not fail to notice that many of his advisers were not sure of what victory meant in the local context and how durable or real it could be. The paradox is that both Russia and China, not to mention several other nations not directly involved, are vicariously satisfied to see the US bleed slowly, while exhausting itself in a seemingly endless campaign against resourceful and adamant guerillas.

They don’t want it to leave, abandoning the terrain to victorious Taliban, but neither do they want it to achieve full control of Afghanistan and use it as a base to interfere in adjacent countries in furtherance of its interests. Brzezinski pointed out in the above cited interview that the Kremlin might not be too sorry either if the USA opened another Pandora’s box by attacking Iran and having to live with the consequences which, though always uncertain, were likely to be dreadful not only for the Middle East but also for Washington and for Western Europe.

The Afghan question, like all others, brings into the open the divisions between the opposite sides within the USA and its main Atlantic allies. On one side are the “conservatives” who remain aligned with the Zionist Right Wing lobby and who believe that the West cannot afford to show weakness and must pursue the war effort at any cost while carrying on a policy of encirclement and intimidation towards Russia and even China; a policy inherited from the Bush administration. On the other are the centrist and leftist reformers who enjoy some support within the Euro-American Jewish liberal lobby in their attempt to bring about a radical change by mending fences with Russia and China and building a new global system that can take care of some of the major threats facing mankind.

There is little doubt that Obama personally belongs to the second faction, though he needs must appease the opposite camp. The moves made by his administration to enforce tighter sanctions on Iran may be part of that strategy, but are unlikely to satisfy the hawks who know that sanctions have rarely if ever brought a state to surrender or even negotiate, and that they are not expected to have all the desired effects on Iran because too many countries have an interest in bypassing them in order to do business with the energy-rich and strategically located Islamic republic. China and Russia in particular may be coaxed into paying lip service to the demands of the US, but are much less likely to gravely harm their own long term investments and interests in Iran by surrendering to “Atlantic” pressures, thereby losing credibility among all the states eager to shake the Western yoke.

What is being played in Iran, as is almost always the case in international politics, is “high stakes poker” as defined by Mehbod Seraji in a Truthout article of September 29, 2009. As George Friedman puts it in an article dated October 1, entitled “The BMD decision and the Global System” : “Ultimately the question of Iran is secondary. The question of US-Russian relations is paramount”, at least to the Americans and Russians, not to mention the world at large. The obsession with Iran, induced largely by Israeli interests in US foreign policy, may eventually take second place in the priorities of the White House and the State Department, signalling a major shift in the American position towards the Jewish state.

The two factions struggling to have their respective ways in both the USA and Europe are also found within NATO, where they have been called the “Europe Firsters” (who want to reduce the Alliance to a security pact mainly dedicated to protecting the continent from external threats) and the “globalists” (who would like to carry on the dream of using it as a world policeman to expand Western hegemony).

The courses advocated by those opposite groups would lead to very different outcomes. The former may bring about a form of effective international governance by facilitating coordination between the USA, the European Union, Russia, China and emerging power centres such as India and Brazil-centric Latin America. The conservatives would like to pursue the imperial outreach project that remained almost a constant of Anglo-Saxon powers since Britain achieved far-flung preponderance in the eighteenth century.

As Parag Khanna described it at the 2009 TED conference in London, the reformers effectively want to build “silk roads,” while the imperialists wish to play the Great Game. While the first course seems vastly more appealing to all peace loving people, it is difficult to ignore the fact that, as Khanna has convincingly shown, Beijing has created and is expanding day by day a Chinese co-prosperity sphere in East and Central Asia with which it will be increasingly difficult for any other power to compete in economic terms. He noted that modern nations are not effectively conquered by force, they are bought. China effectively leased out eastern Siberia from Russia and is rapidly drowning out the scant Slavic and indigenous population of that sprawling area under a torrent of Han immigrants.

By making most countries from Australia to North Korea, and from Japan to Kazakhstan increasingly dependent, the PRC has formed a commercial empire of unsurpassed size endowed with immense resources. Against that new Athens of trade, wielding soft power with growing skill, the over-armed but insolvent and internally conflicted USA looks a bit like the Sparta of the Peloponnesian wars: a militaristic, declining oligarchic state, constantly harking back to the halcyon days of its supremacy, while becoming steadily poorer and less socially stable.

If indeed the USA follows the trumpet calls of its hawks and heeds Israeli persuasion to wage a “decisive” battle in Iran, then its decline will become precipitous, while most other states in the world will keep distance with the crumbling giant in their search for new economic and strategic agreements. Russia and China will be among the greatest beneficiaries of that suicidal move, provided anyone benefits in the end.

Alternatively, Washington rebuffs the war-mongering party and gradually abandons its colonial military ventures in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to form a new global governance compact with other great powers. The USA will still lose its predominance as the ‘sole superpower,’ but it can at least hope to remain a member of the elite group of leading nations, especially if it knows how to exploit the inevitable divergences between Russia and China, in view of the fact that Russia seriously fears losing its oriental provinces and its Central Asian sphere of influence to its Eastern neighbour. The Kremlin is therefore understandably keen to join as an equal the potential partnership between the worlds’ leading powers.

Will the USA and the other great nations follow Montesquieu’s wise advice to “ride the waves of events,” or will the American ruling elite dig in its heels and try to resist them? Historical precedents are not encouraging, but hope should never be forsaken.

The author is Convener, Editorial Board, World Affairs Journal

Travis Kelly Graphics
http://www.tkellygraphics.com

Editorial & History Cartoons
http://www.traviskelly.com

CafePress:
Cartoons on T-Shirts, Posters, Calendars, Mugs and more
http://www.cafepress.com/traviskelly

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Wagging The Moondoggie - David McGowan

I love this guy's stuff!

David McGowan's blog, The Center for an Informed America, has some of the best political and satirical analysis ever posted. I don't know how the guy does it. Dave...I am planning to order one of your books - I'll want an autograph.

He produced a posting a number of years ago, titled Wagging The Moondoggie, which at the time, explained the ensuing events of the time (this link is no longer active). Well, he wasn't satisfied, and so, he has expanded the piece to a five-part posting, and it is fantastic. Dear readers...I present to you, for your reading pleasure, Dave's updated diatribe of what did or didn't happen some decades ago:

Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 1
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 2
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 3
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 4
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 5

Not to be outdone, Dave also smashes the entire Peak Oil agenda - this is at the end of WTM Part 5, so I don't wish for you to overlook it:

Before bidding adieu, I have one final note to add: a certain Dr. Thomas Gold was an early skeptic of the feasibility of landing on the Moon. He made headlines prior to the alleged flight of Apollo 11 when he predicted that any attempt at a Moon landing would be disastrous. NASA, of course, purportedly proved the good doctor wrong.

Longtime readers will remember that Dr. Gold was America’s most prominent proponent of the abiotic theory of oil and gas production, and that he went and dropped dead just before the ‘Peak Oil’ propaganda started to heat up. Dr. Gold was recently proven to be correct on the origins of so-called ‘fossil fuels.’ The article, curiously enough, refers to the research as “revolutionary” – which it is, I suppose, if you ignore the fact that the Soviets and Ukrainians did the same research and drew the same conclusions some fifty years ago.

We all know that that can’t be true, however, because it would be impossible to keep a secret of that magnitude from the entire Western world … right?

I brought this up because the Chimp-Gone-Wild, George Walker Bush, gave his oil buddies a going-away present before his term of office expired back in 2008 - maybe you remember it.

It was in the form of OIL GOING FOR $147 A GODDAMNED BARREL.

Remember the loopy predictions offered? We're going to have oil prices of $200 per barrel in 2009? It was TOTAL BULLSHITE. Remember the huge profits reported for those companies? All part of Georgie-Boy's going-away present to his A-oil buddies.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Mossad linked to 9/11 attacks

Good morning, dear readers - just a couple of days away from my national holiday! I understand that the title of this page may not necessarily correlate with every posting herein, but everything does tie together.

Scumbags are responsible for the scumbaggery that they perform, and one of the biggest loads of scumbaggery were the attacks that occurred on September 11th, 2001.

Over seven and a half years later, we are seeing items like the following appearing in articles: Mossad linked to 9/11 attacks: Report.

You have to take a lot of the information on faith, if you do not believe in the confluence of events:

$2.3 TRILLION "misplaced" by the Pentagon, under the auspices of Dov Zackheim, not to mention the fact of his being aligned with a company that specializes in remote controlling aircraft

$2.5 BILLION in (heretofore) unclaimed profits from put options on the affected airlines

Zim Shipping walking out on their WTC lease a week before the events of 9/11

Urban Moving Systems' involvement in both the Israelis traveling in a white van along with undocumented funds and miscellaneous items ascribed as being the possessions of the purported "hijackers", and having traces of anthrax found at the Weehauken location - and let's not forget the matter of the over half a MILLION dollars afforded to Dominik Suter

The unresolved question of the Odigo instant message sent two hours before the events of 9/11

The question of the feasibility of phone calls from the doomed passengers

The question of what caused the impact at the Pentagon

The question of the disposition of Flight 93

The (in)actions of pResident George Walker Bush, and the odd performances of vice pResident Richard Bruce Cheney

The comments of Larry "Two Sheds" Silverstein (the term "pull it" has been verified by my firefighter buddy as having jack-all to do with firefighting, but having everything to do with controlled demolition...and, may I add, that CD does not necessarily denote that EXPLOSIONS are solely involved - incendiaries such as thermite and thermate do not produce a sound commensurate with their effects); not to mention the odd coincidence of being able to collect from an insurance policy six weeks after its application

The Israeli Spy Ring and CALEA


As bad as all of this is...the worst thing has been the engaging in debate with clueless nitwits who insist that OPEN-AIR FIRES CAN MELT STEEL TO THE RESULT OF BUILDINGS NOT JUST COLLAPSING, BUT ACTUALLY DISINTEGRATING.

It's appalling to know that these unwitting quislings are assisting the scumbags with their bringing upon the world their so-called NEW WORLD ORDER.

Folks...if you wish to gauge how this New World Order will function...look no farther than Argentina.

The IMF owns them, lock, stock and barrel. The people of Argentina may as well walk around holding on to their ankles, since their "representatives" sold them all out. The "elite" don't appreciate having to work for their buggery, after all, so don't clench - just allow them their way with you, and it'll all go better.

With any luck, WE THE PEOPLE will take a look at past history, and if their is a huge collapse of our economy, we can take a lesson from Russia, and not suffer overlong.

I'll say this...I won't end up on line looking for toilet paper.

Friday, January 9, 2009

Why Exactly Are Newspapers Failing?

This post was prompted by the following headline - Taxing ISPs To Prop Up Failing Newspapers?

Why exactly are the newspapers failing? Maybe they should try TELLING THE TRUTH to WE THE PEOPLE for a change.

Their poor sales have EVERYTHING to do with our "watchdogs" becoming stenographers for the scumbags occupying our government.

For example:

The retail stores are decrying "low sales" this holiday season...but can they not make a correlation between job losses and people making more prudent decisions with their remaining monies? There seems to be a disconnect here, but let's go to a more cogent example.

Georgia attacks Russia...yet, our news organizations report EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE - and are caught when interviewing a 12-year old girl rescued by the Russian troops.

Here's another:

Israel was engaged in a cease-fire with HAMAS. The truce was broken by Israel, yet all that has been report in the "mainstream" media is that HAMAS broke the cease-fire!

This is just ridiculous.

Is there any reason to support a business that DOES NOT HAVE YOUR BEST INTEREST AT HEART?

I believe the PEOPLE have spoken.

In other news...it looks like the 51st State's main mouthpiece is in FULL LIE MODE...but luckily, my bud Ryan Dawson put his boot to the lying throat of the ADL.

Let's chat a bit about the Bernard Madoff scandal. This is an example of why our current laws simply DO NOT WORK.

If a man robs someone of their available funds, and is arrested, he can be guaranteed to enjoy a stay in the prison system and suffer a loss of his ill-gotten gains.

If a man robs people of exhorbitant funds, and is caught, they can be guaranteed that they will be placed in a minimum-security facility, and fined for a fraction of their ill-gotten gains.

Bernard Madoff has been placed on house arrest, and must wear an ankle bracelet. Considering he has access to whatever is within his domicile, and seems to be actively flouting his bail agreements, don't you see that the "punishment" afforded this individual absolutely does NOT serve as a deterrent?

What is the downside to ripping off people en masse?


If you ask me...there is NONE.

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

9/11 Mysteries - Demolitions



This is going to be broadcast during PRIME TIME on Russian television on Thursday, September 11, 2008.

It's a real bloody shame that Americans have to go to the internet to see what Russians can see readily on their televisions.

Just remember this when the scumbags attempt to paint Russian citizens as the enemy...just remember where the other three fingers are pointing.

Sunday, August 24, 2008

BUSH PUSHING WORLD TOWARD ARMAGEDDON


BUSH PUSHING WORLD TOWARD ARMAGEDDON

Russia refuses to become part of neo-con New World Order; sleeping bear now roused


By Paul Craig Roberts

THE NEO-CONNED BUSH REGIME and the Israeli-occupied American media are heading the innocent world toward nuclear war. Back in the Reagan years, the National Endowment for Democracy was created as a Cold War tool.

Today, the NED is a neo-con-controlled agent for U.S. world hegemony. Its main function is to pour U.S. money and election-rigging into former parts of the USSR in order to ring Russia with U.S. puppet states.

The neo-conservative Bush regime used the NED to intervene in Ukrainian and Georgian internal affairs in keeping with the neo-conservative plan to establish U.S.-friendly and Russia-hostile political regimes in these two former constituent parts of Russia and the Soviet Union.

The NED was also used to dismember the former Yugoslavia with its interventions in Slovakia, Serbia and Montenegro.

According to Wikipedia, Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, told The Washington Post in 1991 that much of what the NED does “today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”

The Bush regime, having established a puppet, Mikheil Saakashvili, as president of Georgia, tried to bring Georgia into NATO.

(For readers too young to know, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was a military alliance between the United States and Western European countries to resist any Soviet move into Western Europe. There has been no reason for NATO since the Soviet Union’s internal political collapse almost two decades ago. The neo-cons turned NATO into another tool, like the NED, for U.S. world hegemony. Subsequent U.S. administrations violated the understandings that President Reagan had reached with Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, and have incorporated former parts of the Soviet empire into NATO. The neo-con goal of ringing Russia with a hostile military alliance has been proclaimed many times.)

Western European members of NATO balked at the admission of Georgia, as they understood it as a provocative affront to Russia, on whom Western Europe is dependent for natural gas. Western Europeans are also disturbed at the Bush regime’s intentions to install ballistic missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic, as the consequence will be Russian nuclear cruise missiles targeted on European capitals.

Europeans don’t see the advantage of helping the U.S. block Russian nuclear retaliation against America at the expense of their own existence. Ballistic missile defenses are not useful against cruise missiles.

Every country is tired of war except for the United States. War, including nuclear war, is the neo-conservative strategy for world hegemony.

The entire world, except for Americans, knows that the outbreak of armed conflict between Russian and Georgian forces in South Ossetia was entirely due to the United States and its Georgia puppet, Saakashvili.

Americans, alone in the world, are unaware that the hostilities were initiated by Saakashvili, because Bush, Cheney and the Israeli-occupied American media have again lied to them. Everyone else in the world knows that the unstable and corrupt Saakashvili, who proclaims democracy and runs a police state, would not have taken on Russia by attacking South Ossetia unless given the go-ahead by Washington.

The purpose of the Georgian attack on the Russian population of South Ossetia is twofold:

� To convince Europeans that their action in delaying Georgia’s NATO membership is the cause of “the Russian aggression” and that to save Georgia from conquest Georgia must be given NATO membership.

� To ethnically cleanse South Ossetia of its Russian population. Two thousand Russian civilians were targeted and killed by the U.S.-equipped and trained Georgian army, and tens of thousands fled into Russia. The hope is that the Russian population will be afraid to return or can be prevented from returning, thus removing the secessionist threat.

No doubt the Bush regime can con the insouciant American population, just as it did with Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Iranian nukes and 9-11 itself, but the rest of the world is not buying it, least of all Moscow and
the Asia Times, and not even America’s bought-and-paid for European allies.

Writing in the Asia Times, Ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar, a former career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service, notes the disinformation that is being peddled by the Bush regime and the U.S. media and reports that “at the outbreak of violence, Russia had tried to have the United Nations Security Council issue a statement calling on Georgia and South Ossetia to immediately lay down weapons. However, Washington was uninterested.”

Bhadrakumar notes that the American and Georgian resort to violence and propaganda has brought an end to the Russian government’s belief that diplomacy and good will can bring about a settlement of the South Ossetia issue. If Russia wished, Russia could terminate Georgia’s existence as a separate country at will, and there is nothing the United States could do about it.

It is certain that the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia was a Bush regime orchestrated event. The U.S. media and the neo-con think tanks were ready with their propaganda blitzes. Neo-cons had ready a Wall Street Journal editorial page article for Saakashvili that declares “the war in Georgia is a war for the West.”

Faced with the collapse of his army when Russia sent in troops to protect South Ossetians from the Georgian troops, Saakashvili declared:

“This is not about Georgia anymore. It is about America, its values.”

The neo-con Heritage Foundation in Washington quickly called a conference hosted by warmonger Ariel Cohen, “Urgent! Event: Russian-Georgian War: a Challenge for the U.S. and theWorld.”

The Washington Post breathlessly promoted neo-con Robert Kagen’s war drums, “Putin Makes His Move.”

Only a fool like Kagen could think that if Putin intended to invade Georgia he would do so from Beijing, or that after sending the American-trained Georgian army in flight, he would not continue and conquer all of Georgia in order to put an end to American machinations on Russia’s most sensitive border—machinations that are likely to eventually end in nuclear war.

That despicable rag, The New York Times, printed Billy Kristol’s rant, “Will Russia Get Away With It?” Kristol thunders against “dictatorial and aggressive and fanatical regimes” that “seem happy to work together to weaken the influence of the United States and its democratic allies.”

Kristol presents a new axis of evil—Russia, China, North Korea and Iran—and warns against “delay and irresolution” that “simply invite future threats and graver dangers.”

In other words, “attack Russia now.”

What must be the effect on U.S. Intelligence services and the U.S. military of Vice President Dick Cheney’s propagandistic and irresponsible statement of U.S. support for Georgia’s war crimes? Does anyone really believe that the CIA or any U.S. intelligence service told the vice president that Russia opened the conflict with an invasion? Russian troops arrived in South Ossetia after thousands of Ossetians had been killed by the Georgian attack and after tens of thousands of Ossetians had fled into Russia to escape the Georgian attack.

According to news reports, Russian forces have captured Americans who were with the Georgian troops directing their attack on civilians.

The U.S. military certainly has no resources for a war against Russia on top of lost wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a planned war with Iran.

With its Georgian venture, the Bush regime is guilty of a new round of war crimes. What will be the consequence? Many will reply that having got away with 9-11, Afghanistan and Iraq, and with its preparations for attacking Iran, the Bush regime will get away with its Georgian venture, as well.

Possibly, however, this time the Bush regime has overreached. Certainly Russia now recognizes that the U.S. is determined to exert hegemony over
Russia and is Russia’s worst enemy. China realizes the U.S. threat to its own energy supply and, thereby, economy. Even America’s European allies, chafing under their role of supplying troops for America’s empire, must now realize that being an American ally is dangerous and has no benefits.

If Georgia becomes a NATO member and renews its attack on South Ossetia, it must drag Europe into a war with Russia, a main supplier of energy to Europe.

Moreover, if Russian troops are sent across European frontiers, there is nothing to stop them. What does America offer Europe, aside from the millions of dollars it pays to buy off Europe’s political leaders to ensure that they betray their own peoples?

Nothing whatsoever. The only military threat that Europe faces comes from being dragged into America’s wars for American hegemony.

The United States is financially bankrupt, with budget and trade deficits that exceed the combined deficits of the rest of the world together. The dollar has wilted. The American consumer market is dying from the offshoring of American jobs and, thereby, incomes, and from the wealth effect of the real estate and derivatives collapses. The United States has nothing to offer Europe. Indeed, American economic decline is killing European exports by driving up the value of the euro. America long ago lost the moral high ground.

Hypocrisy has become America’s best known hallmark. Bush, the invader of Afghanistan and Iraq on the basis of lies and deception, thunders at Russia for coming to the defense of its peacekeepers and Russian citizens in South Ossetia. Bush, the vampire who ripped Kosovo out of Serbia’s heart and handed it to the Albanians, has taken an adamant stand against other separatist movements, especially the South Ossetians who wish to be part of the Russian Federation.

The neo-conned Bush regime is furious that the Russian bear was not intimidated by the United States supported aggression of the American puppet state, Georgia. Instead of accepting the act of American hegemony
that the neo-con script called for, Russia sent the Americanized Georgian army fleeing in fear.

Moreover, do the morons who comprise the Bush regime really not understand that short of a surprise nuclear attack on Russia there is nothing whatsoever the United States can do to Moscow?

The Bush regime owns no Russian currency that it can dump. The Russians own U.S. dollars. The Bush regime owns no Russian bonds that it can dump. The Russians own U.S. bonds. The U.S. can cut Russia off from no energy supplies. Russia can cut America’s European allies off from energy.

President Reagan negotiated the end of the Cold War with Soviet President Gorbachev. The neo-cons, whom Reagan fired and drove from his administration, were furious. The neo-conservatives had hoped to win the Cold War, thereby establishing American hegemony.

The Republican establishment re-established its hegemony under Bush the First that it had lost to Ronald Reagan. With this feat, intelligence was driven from the Republican Party.

The neo-cons engineered their comeback with the First Gulf War and their propaganda, pure lies, that Iraqi troops bayoneted Kuwait babies in hospitals.

The neo-cons made a further comeback with President Clinton, whom they convinced to bomb Serbia in order to permit separatist movements to become independent states dependent on America.

With Bush the Second, the neo-cons took over. Their agenda, American world hegemony, includes Israeli hegemony in the Middle East.

So far the schemes of these dangerous ideologues have come a cropper. Iraq, formerly in the hands of secular Sunnis who were a check on Iran, is, after the American invasion and occupation, in the hands of religious Shiites allied with Iran. In Afghanistan, the Taliban are resurgent, and a large NATO-U.S. army there is unable to control the situation.

Those Americans stupid enough to think that America’s “super power” ensures its citizens from danger need to read the total contempt shown for President Bush in an editorial published in Russia’s “state” newspaper, Pravda (see below).

Nationally syndicated columnist, Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., a former editor at The Wall Street Journal, is the author of several books. He has been associated with the Hoover Institution, and the Institute for Political Economy and from 1981 to 1982 served as assistant secretary of the treasury for economic policy.

(Issue # 35, September 1, 2008)


Please make a donation to American Free Press


Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003


EMAIL A FRIEND ABOUT THIS PAGE


Russian Media Outlet Ridicules Dubya’s Hegemony, Hypocrisy

“President Bush, “Why don’t you shut up? began the open letter to George W. Bush in Pravda, Russia’s “official” newspaper.

“In your statement . . . regarding the legitimate actions of the Russian Federation in Georgia, you failed to mention the war crimes perpetrated by Georgian military forces, which American advisors support, against Russian and Ossetian civilians.

“President Bush, “Why don’t you shut up? Your faithful ally, Mikhail Saakashvili, was announcing a ceasefire deal while his troops, with your advisors, were massing on Ossetia’s border, which they crossed under cover of night and destroyed Tskhinvali, targeting civilian structures just like your forces did in Iraq.

“President Bush, “Why don’t you shut up? Your American transport aircraft gave a ride home to thousands of Georgian soldiers from Iraq directly into the combat zone.

“President Bush, “Why don’t you shut up? How do you account for the fact that among the Georgian soldiers fleeing the fighting yesterday you could clearly hear officers using American English giving orders to ‘Get back inside,’ and how do you account for the fact that there are reports of American soldiers among the Georgian casualties?

“President Bush, “Why don’t you shut up? Do you really think anyone gives any importance whatsoever to your words after eight years of your criminal and murderous regime and policies? Do you really believe you have any moral ground whatsoever, and do you really imagine there is a single human being anywhere on this planet who does not stick up his middle finger every time you appear on a TV screen?

“Do you really believe you have the right to give any opinion or advice after Abu Ghraib? After Guantanamo? After the massacre of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens? After the torture by CIA operatives?

“Do you really believe you have any right to make a statement on any point of international law after your trumped-up charges against Iraq and the subsequent criminal invasion?

“President Bush, “Why don’t you shut up? Suppose Russia, for instance, declares that Georgia has weapons of mass destruction? And that Russia knows where these WMD are, namely in Tbilisi and Poti and north, south, east and west of there? And that it must be true because there is ‘magnificent foreign intelligence,’ such as satellite photos of milk powder factories and baby cereals producing chemical weapons and which are currently being ‘driven around the country in vehicles’? Suppose Russia declares for instance that ‘Saakashvili stiffed the world’ and it is ‘time for regime change’?

“Nice and simple, isn’t it, President Bush?

“So, why don’t you shut up? Oh, and by the way, send some more of your military advisors to Georgia. They are doing a sterling job. And they look all funny in the night sight [vision], all green.”

--

Speaking of armageddon...

Found this on Michael Rivero's WRH Letters page:

This is a link to an IRS auction of someone's 2.5 million dollar (minimum bid) estate in Greenwich, Connecticut.

It seems all too clear by the pictures of the inside of this 2.5 million dollar estate in Connecticut (toward the bottom of the page in this link), showing the personal effects of a family including a child's rocking horse and some other toys, a brief case, a man's pair of pants hung over a chair, and some unpacked shopping bags, the owner of this property was literally "disappeared" by the IRS.

It just goes to show you, regardless your station in life, someone who thinks he is god can crush you in the palm of his hand.

http://www.treas.gov/auctions/irs/grct_real_3123.htm

You might ask your readers, if anyone can identify the victim of this IRS "disappearing".


I've posted links to sites such as DownsizeDC, Get Out Of Our House, and others...but I believe all of this amount to NAUGHT in the eyes of our so-called "elected" officials. They have made it clear the the will of WE THE PEOPLE means NOTHING to them.

I believe that there are necessary steps that must be made to enforece the will of WE THE PEOPLE against them.

One is the repealing of the fraudulent Fourteenth Amendment, which relegates WE THE PEOPLE to being vassals of our elected officials.

The second step would be the observance of the original Thirteenth Amendment, which would effectively REMOVE many of our elected officials, who are currently fattening their pockets on OUR dime, from being allowed to serve in public office, BY LAW.

The third step would be to remove the Federal Reserve from any role in our finances - the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was only allowed after the financial scare on 1907. This was done against the will of WE THE PEOPLE, and, as you can see, the Depression of the 1930s was made to occur by the machinations of the Federal Reserve and the quisling officials who stood to gain from the thirty pieces of silver they receive in exchange for selling out our great nation.

Watch the videos on Michael Badnarik's Constitutional Class - he covers many of the points I've stated, plus many more. You'll learn a terrible amount of information that you never learned in school - information that would have allowed for you to make REAL decisions regarding your future.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Georgia / S.Ossetia / Russia / US Crisis

Georgia/S.Ossetia/Russia/US Crisis

August 19, 2008

Dear CCI friends and funders,

Many of you have called and emailed regarding the Georgia/S.Ossetia/Russia debacle. We've followed the happenings day and night - at times over a hundred emails a day arrived from analysts and experts on Russia. These events occurred right after I arrived from Russia, so this is the first time I've had to write - though I hope you have checked our blog, www.russiaotherpointsofview.com for analyses of NYT, WP, and other articles on these issues.

This following piece is unforgivably long. If you have little time to read, please just scan the following bullets.

UNDENIABLE FACTS REGARDING THE GEORGIAN/S. OSSETIAN/RUSSIAN CRISIS:

* Georgia made an unprovoked military attack on S. Ossetia on August 7 - a fact which is virtually ignored by U.S. media - most reference it as the "invasion by Russia into Georgian territory." This tells us something. Why is the invading country not being faulted? Bush/Rice have castigated Russia for a "disproportionate" response. Can you think of a response to any invasion which has been "proportionate"?
* Russia counter attacked on August 8 after 1400 civilians and Russian peace keepers had been killed. The city was in shambles, with refugees streaming toward Russia to seek refuge.
* Since Georgia became a free state in 1991, S. Ossetia has had de facto independence and have operated as an autonomous area. Our media reports as though these facts don't matter.
* Josef Stalin drew the dividing lines between the two Ossetian communities and placed half of the Ossetians in Georgia, and the other half in Russia. It made no sense. What need is there today to honor Stalin's whim about carving up ethnic groups.
* Ossetians are a totally different ethnic group, they are not Georgian. Many Ossetians are Russians - and many hold Russian passports.
* Ossetians despise and distrust Georgians and want nothing to do with them.
* The South Ossetians fought a vicious war with Georgia in 1991-93 after first Georgian President Gamsakhurdia, a rabid nationalist, stripped them of their autonomy and sent militia in to establish Georgian dominance. The Ossetians finally won and since then have governed themselves with a president and a constitution.
* Russia to date has insured their autonomy for which South Ossetians are grateful.
* Russia has kept a "peace force" in Ossetia for years which was originally approved by Georgia, the US and others, to keep peace in the micro-region where tempers flare frequently.
* Ossetia's autonomy was approved in 1993 by presidents Yeltsin and by Shevardnadze, the then head of state of Georgia. Nothing about this fact has changed since.
* There has been continuous low-level sniping and firing between both Ossetian and Georgian villagers for decades.
* It would be impossible for Georgia to manage a successful takeover of the Ossetians. They would have to raze Ossetia to the ground to beat them into submission.
* U.S. and Israeli military have been stationed in Georgia, providing military hardware and training Georgians in battlefield tactics for some time now.

Despite US media coverage, this situation is not about a "big bad nation" (Russia) beating up on an "innocent little nation" (Georgia). Georgia initiated this all-out war, which they and US advisors could have predicted would turn ugly in a hurry.

~~~~~~~~~~

The question is: why would Georgia's president Saakashvili invade a sworn enemy which has a Russian peace keeping force stationed there to defend Ossetia's autonomy? It would appear to be a suicide mission.

Likely reasons: Either Saakashvili was totally deluded, and/or he gambled that Russia would not stand behind their word to the Ossetians, and/or he believed that the U.S. would support him and Georgia in a war against S. Ossetia and possibly Russia.


POLITICAL REALITIES WHICH COMPLICATE THIS PICTURE:

Since the implosion of the USSR in 1990, elements in Washington have encouraged and financially supported the independent states of the former USSR, to align with the the U.S. and Europe, and to forego their former relations with Russia. Some states welcomed this support, since they bristled under USSR rule (Baltic states, Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic and Georgia). Others, part of the Russian Empire, weren't interested in breaking relations. Russia provided incentives to these states and they remain in good political and trade relations.

Why has the U.S. been interested in dividing Russia's neighboring states from Russia? To: 1) to insure that collectively they wouldn't get strong again and become a threat; 2) to help bolster America's hegemony and dominance in the world; and 3) to insure America's energy future - oil and gas supplies along with the pipelines that carry it out to the west. Georgia, one part of this strategy, doesn't have oil or gas, but they do have pipelines, rails and ports and are considered strategically located.

A CURSORY RUNDOWN OF RUSSIA'S RESPONSES TO THIS POLITICAL REALITY:

1. In the 1990's when Russia underwent their debilitating transition to a private economy, the country was in massive debt to international lending institutions, and had no choice but to tolerate whatever major powers did, including the beginning of the bitterly resented NATO expansion. Russian leaders and citizens suffered this fate at the time, but not gladly.
2. After 2001 when Putin emerged as Russia's new leader, Russia became stronger by the year, paid off her debts, essentially nationalized the oil and gas industry and became more active in rebuilding Russia's economic interests.
3. By 2003 Putin's power was felt in internal politics and nation rebuilding. Khodorkovsky was imprisoned on tax evasion, but more because of his anti-Putin political ambitions. His incarceration helped rein in other oligarchs. Elements in Washington and US media were hyper critical and into actions seeming to Russia to destabilize her internal interests. U.S. money supported "opposition" politics in Russia and other states of the former USSR, which bristled the Russians. They began to push back.
4. By 2004/5, Georgia's Rose Revolution and Ukraine's Orange Revolution occurred (due to support from American NGOs and exiled oligarchs) which galled Russians since they were increasingly 'encircled by unfriendly nations.'
5. Russia became predictably reactive, clamped down on media, visas and in other spheres. They stopped subsidizing oil and gas to former USSR republics who joined the west, turned their 'portion' off when they refused to pay market prices. Ukrainians pilfered gas for themselves from the pipelines - but cut off contents destined for Europe. This created a squall of "oil politics."
6. By 2007, Putin, at a Munich meeting of heads of states, unveiled Russia's position on the U.S.' unipolar role in global politics - and made Russia's case for a multipolar world. This was a turning point in US-Russia relations - it alerted Washington that Russia no longer accepted their concept of sole superpower status (geopolitically, not militarily). Elements in DC next initiated the effort to put missile systems and monitoring devices on Russia's borders in Poland and the Czech Republic. This was the next-to-last straw for Russia.
7. August 7, 2008 Georgia attacked S. Ossetia's capital with full force. This was the last straw. Russian military responded to the attack within 15 hours, quickly moved down into Georgia proper to destroy military caches, cut off bridges and interrupt transit routes - to the shock of western media.

Ignoring who started the war, who was behind it, the devastation that occurred in S. Ossetia, and the history between the two ethnic groups, western media has spun a story line that looked convincing at first, but doesn't hold water once the facts are known.

Unfortunately, it is clear now that a resurgent Russia is back - and that they will do what is in Russia's best interests in the future - as any country in control of its destiny would.

IT DIDN'T HAVE TO HAPPEN THIS WAY

In the 1990s and even up to 2007, Russia and Russians, more than anything, wanted to be friends with America and to be accepted into the trans-Atlantic world community. As a country, we missed thousands of opportunities by being amazingly arrogant, pushy, resistant and totally insensitive to Russia's plight as it dug out of communism and tried to form a new nation. We at CCI were on the scene ad intimately involved with these years. We watched every little detail and rankled at the behaviors and attitudes we were observing.

The second Cold War really started years ago. In 2001 I began a folder of US newspaper articles which was labeled "The Rebuilding the Cold War" - articles that were demeaning to Russia, forcing them into situations that were "salt in the wounds." Why???? I asked myself, why would we go there again? Surely, we wouldn't! But we did.

It appears that elements of U.S. foreign policy makers and the U.S. media, were never able to let go of 'cold war mentality' and instinctively distorted any situation related to Russia - and often used standards to which they didn't hold other countries and trading partners around the world.

MEDIA - HYPE AND THE LACK OF INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM - an example:

On Sunday I watched CNN reporting on the Georgian/S. Ossetia crisis. They did a terrific piece on CCI in 2007 when we brought 100 Russians to DC to talk with Congress members re the US-Russia policy. But this morning I was stunned and disappointed to see how CNN sidestepped the evidence surrounding the Georgia/S.Ossetia/Russia events in subtle nuanced ways the audience would not normally register. For instance:

1. CNN chose only on-ground reporters sitting in the capital of Georgia - none sitting in South Ossetia - where on-ground newscasters reported the worst damage to have occurred. Footage of grim Georgian victims were shown, but no Ossetian tragedies mentioned. Would Russians have let CNN into S. Ossetia's capital city? With pleasure, to show the damage sustained there.

2. CNN chose Zbigniew Brzezinski as the hour's lead foreign policy specialist. This anti-Russia, Polish-American foreign policy specialist can be safely predicted to produce negatively-skewed opinions on anything Russian. Other similar choices of interviewees followed throughout the hour. There are dozens of equally or better-known Russian experts which could have been chosen for interview had facts and balance been of interest (Ambassadors to Russia, National Security Advisors on Russia, high-level academicians).

3. CNN chose for their last interview, Richard Holbrooke, who always has a one-sided view against Russia. He has been used extensively by the networks over the past ten days. At this point I turned off the television.

~~~~~~~~~

Friends, it seems not long ago that I wrote thousands of you during the build up to the Iraq War. I warned that the hype we were hearing day and night was based more on fiction and lies than reality. In January of 2001, I went to Washington to try to get an open ear. Options to war were offered, such as sending neutral Rotary or other American delegations to Iraq to learn if there were ways we could deal with them, rather than war. It was useless - the momentum for war, on both sides of the aisle, was too great by that time. The media bombardment, truthful or not, had been overly successful. For my efforts and strange thinking, I was labeled "unpatriotic." Months and now years have passed. We have slowly faced the truth about how we were taken into that war. And again in 2008, I am registering panic that we are going in that same dangerous direction again.

I fear the underlying intentions of this current situation are all about oil and gas, global dominance and hegemony - which means a show-down for any who might get in the way. Russia is in the way.

Unfortunately for us, Russia will no longer back down - like she was forced to in the 90s. Today she will go toe-to-toe if pushed; and will probably "over react" due to years of having had NATO shoved up to her borders; neighboring states turned against her; missiles and hi-tech invasive monitoring placed on her periphery; years of having been refused Jackson Vanik trade advantages; living with the endless info-war leveled at her; on and on and on.

The specter today is extraordinarily dangerous. Russia still has thousands of nuclear weapons. With cowboy mentality and brinksmanship in vogue in international politics, it's not inconceivable that WWIII could be launched over such an insignificant little place on earth as South Ossetia.

The only light in this tunnel is that there will be new leadership in Washington in a few short months. Let us hope and pray that which ever candidate wins, they will assess the ominous writing on the wall and create a radically new type of American foreign policy - that they will realize that we are in a totally new 'world-in-the-making' - and that the warring politics of the 20th century won't work in the 21st century - and that we face either change... or extinction.

~~~~~~~~~~

I will greatly appreciate your comments on the above. If you are comfortable this point of view, I urge you to send this message to your e-lists.

All the best, --

PS: If you know a local newspaper editor, please ask them if they will print an OpEd on the Georgia/Ossetia/Russia crisis. If so, let me know quickly - I will send one.

PS: Do check our blog, www.russiaotherpointsofview.com for the latest in analyses of NYT, WP and other major papers on the Georgia/Ossetia/Russia issues. You will see the full articles as they appeared in our key newspapers, the criteria by which the contents are judged, and the factual information behind often slanted comments or paragraphs.'

*** Excuse rough writing, no editors are present....

--

Excuse me while I eat my tie...