Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
April 25, 2014

Kerry Lies, Repeats Debunked State Department Claim

The Russian President Vladimir Putin once famously called John Kerry a "liar". Kerry now again confirmed Putin's claim.

In Remarks on Ukraine U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday asserted:

Some of the individual special operations personnel, who were active on Russia’s behalf in Chechnya, Georgia, and Crimea have been photographed in Slovyansk, Donetsk, and Luhansk.

Pictures allegedly proving that some protesters in east-Ukraine were Russian "special operation personal" were "reported" on on page 1 of Monday's New York Times. The pictures were distributed by the State Department but originally from the Ukrainian coup-government.

With a little open source research Internet commentators at Reddit immediately found that some of those pictures:

  • allegedly taken in Russia were actually taken in Ukraine
  • showing allegedly the same person were of two different ones
  • were intentionally lowered in resolution to disguise them while high resolution copies were available elsewhere
  • showing "Russian equipment" were of Ukrainian weapons and U.S./EU sourced equipment.

On Wednesday the New York Times somewhat retracted and corrected the story but now only on page 9 of its print edition.

Veteran journalist Robert Parry compared the NYT behavior with the NYT distributed lies about "Saddam's centrifuges":

Many of the flaws in the photographic evidence were there to see before Monday’s front-page article, but the newspaper was apparently blinded by its anti-Russian bias.

For instance, the article devoted much attention to the Russian skill at “masking” the presence of its troops, but that claim would seem to be contradicted by these allegedly secret warriors posing for public photos.

Parry was interviewed on The Real News.

TIME magazine talked with one of the Russian "special operations personal" in east-Ukraine who had been depicted as having served with Russia in the war with Georgia and found him to be a Cossack petty criminal under indictment in Russia:

His men then gathered around to laugh at the photos of Mozhaev and the man in Georgia, slapping Mozhaev on the back as he learned that he was not only famous, but a famous Russian special-forces agent. “That guy looks more like Osama bin Laden than our Babay,” one of the gunmen remarked.

Yesterday the New York Times Public Editor criticized the paper's handling of the story:

It all feels rather familiar – the rushed publication of something exciting, often based on an executive branch leak. And then, afterward, with a kind of “morning after” feeling, here comes a more sober, less prominently displayed followup story, to deal with objections while not clarifying much of anything.

The pictures from the coup government in Ukraine distributed through the U.S. State Department are obviously fakery and purely anti-Russian propaganda. The story of Russian "special operations personnel" in east-Ukraine is a lie. It has been debunked as such in several U.S. publications. Despite that Kerry yesterday repeated it proving himself to be exactly what Putin had claimed, a liar.

Posted by b on April 25, 2014 at 8:55 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Time to ship the Kerry-bot to the recyclers. I wonder if it is possible to start a "fire Kerry" petition at the White House site?

Posted by: scalawag | Apr 25 2014 9:06 utc | 1

Very interesting post on ZH with huge implications for escalation IMO

Posted by: anti-zionist | Apr 25 2014 9:52 utc | 2

Looks like the latrine has hit the windmill :(

Posted by: anti-zionist | Apr 25 2014 9:56 utc | 3

Waiting to see how horse face Kerry will spin these explosions into Russian agression.

Posted by: anti-zionist | Apr 25 2014 10:07 utc | 4 Вертолет в Краматорске взорвался во время погрузки боеприпасов

"Kramatorsk helicopter exploded during loading ammunition"

This is a Google translation.

"According to preliminary reports, three people were killed.

Eyewitnesses occurred in Kramatorsk reported that the explosion at a military airfield, killing three people. Also, according to preliminary data, in the moment of the explosion near the helicopter was An-2 plane. He also caught fire.

The MIA Kramators'k assure that undermine militia fired. While security forces said that there were no casualties. Locals say the opposite. According to them, the explosion occurred during the loading of ammunition in the Ukrainian military helicopter and killed at least three people.

Also, according to unconfirmed reports, BMD and military exploded immediately surrounded by the territory of the explosion. At the same time, have been exposed to snipers. At the aerodrome SBU will not let anyone.

- There will not let anyone until I was in the city, but here we had all heard. From the airport to the city 3-4 km, near the airfield buildings glass trembled - rasskazad LifeNews one of the witnesses of the explosion.

- According to our data, Mi-8 helicopter burned completely. The AN-2 continues to burn - said a source in the police Kramatorsk. - On-site fire works."

A video at the site.

Posted by: scalawag | Apr 25 2014 10:07 utc | 5


US must love this, they support terrorists in syria shooting at planes, oh they dont like it now?

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 25 2014 10:10 utc | 6

Pretty sure that was their only Mi-8 helecopter. This is what happens when a bunch of neo-nazi knuckleheads put in power by a bunch of zio-nazi ideologues try to draw a major world power into a proxy war using the mothballed tech of the cold war. Clusterf*ck tastic!

Posted by: anti-zionist | Apr 25 2014 10:27 utc | 7

Kerry is vile. I uploaded his speech, notice he didn't take any questions:
I'll be making another video highlighting the part where he lies, meanwhile I did add an annotation suggesting people read this blog post.

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 25 2014 10:48 utc | 8

These fuckers are playing a dangerous game. Russia isn't some third world country we can kick the crap out of in a second. They have nuclear weapons, just in case someone forgot. It'd be great to see an exchange of nuclear weapons because the propagandists in this country needed to enrich their friends in the MIC.

Posted by: Pathman | Apr 25 2014 10:50 utc | 9

If Kiev Holographic War Goes Live

Posted by: john | Apr 25 2014 12:09 utc | 10

The eastern people have RPGs

“Our people approached the airfield, shot a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) in the direction of the helicopter.

Obama are you crying?

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 25 2014 12:22 utc | 11

Russian Market @russian_market · 2h
TV crew with Russian journalists kidnapped in Donetsk.
- Twitter ignores it because they are all Russians, right? But if it were a CNN?
Russian Market ‏@russian_market 2h
Yulia Pustoplesnova and Mikhail Pudovkin @robinmonotti: @russian_market do you know the journalist's name?

Posted by: brian | Apr 25 2014 12:35 utc | 12

Kerry has bn attacking real media: Russia Today
RT shows how Kerry attacks RT and says it is a propaganda machine, while Lavrov and RT are replying. WATCH AND DEEM YOURSELF.

Posted by: brian | Apr 25 2014 12:47 utc | 13

Breathe easy, brian, they are back in Russia

Posted by: somebody | Apr 25 2014 12:49 utc | 14

The story of Russian "special operations personnel" in east-Ukraine is a lie.

No, that story is a lie, but it doesn't preclude the strong possibility that Russian "special operations personnel" are in East Ukraine even though there's really no need. So long as West Ukraine and the West are willing to lay the groundwork for them, all the better. It's all part of the joint East-West effort of what's fast becoming, and will heretofore be referred to as, Ukrainization. If you look backstage in this Kabuki Theater, you'll see that it's business as usual.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Apr 25 2014 12:50 utc | 15

Eastern Ukranian Polls

"The interpretation a US Government-funded polling operation draws from this is quite different from the conclusions the Ukrainians themselves are drawing. That’s because there are questions the US poll didn’t ask, and Ukrainian pollsters did. Publication of the US Government polling also reveals there were Ukrainian answers in March which Washington has omitted to report in April."

Posted by: Tea | Apr 25 2014 12:53 utc | 16

"But what we saw suggests the need for caution about claims and counterclaims in this conflict."

Steve Rosenberg BBC News, Sloviansk

We drove into Sloviansk expecting to see signs of a major confrontation between Ukrainian security forces and heavily armed pro-Russian militiamen. Earlier, Ukraine's interior ministry reported that a number of "terrorists" had been killed in a gun battle and three roadblocks cleared.
We saw people strolling through the town centre, children walking down the street, and traffic on the roads. The makeshift checkpoints, set up by the militiamen remained.

We've also been to Artemivsk. The interior ministry said a military base there had been attacked by up to 70 armed separatists and that they had been repelled. Apart from a broken window and a damaged door, there was little sign of a battle. Kiev says its military operations against pro-Russia militants continue. But what we saw suggests the need for caution about claims and counterclaims in this conflict.

Posted by: virgile | Apr 25 2014 13:06 utc | 17

AN-2 airplane:

Posted by: ben | Apr 25 2014 13:25 utc | 18

Mi-8 chopper:

Posted by: ben | Apr 25 2014 13:44 utc | 20

actually Ukrainian Security services semi contradict Kerry now

“This is the most difficult of the 17,000 operations upon which the (SBU’s) counter-terrorism Alpha Group has embarked,” first deputy SBU chief Vasyl Krutov said at an April 25 briefing, in reference to the mission in Donetsk Oblast.

Slovyansk and Kramatorsk are the most vitriolic, said the 64-year-old SBU Anti-Terrorist Center chief. There, local enforcement, including the SBU, “have not only broken down but sometimes sabotage (our anti-terrorist operation),” said Krutov.

In addition, many residents sympathize “with the enemy,” he continued, “while others work for them” including elements of local governments.

Kremlin-backed militants control some 30 government buildings, including SBU and police stations in Donetsk Oblast. Besieged and without local support, Ukraine’s counterterrorism team has had to rely on a network of military bases, many of which get constantly attacked or harassed by pro-Russian militants, from which to engage.

And because the SBU wants to avoid the loss of civilian lives, according to Krutov, the operation has progressed slowly. “Our big, complex, operation aims to locate, contain, and neutralize the terrorists, the subversives, the weapons and ammunition channels, the separatists…” he said.

To do that he needs more public support, “including in Slovyansk, he said, adding that it is every citizen’s responsibility to be allies with us.”

On April 24, Ukrainian aircraft dropped leaflets to residents in northern Donetsk Oblast, including Slovyansk, instructing them how to behave during the anti-terrorist operation.

Moreover, the core Kremlin-backed militants and their leaders, believed to be high-ranking Russian military intelligence officers, hide behind human shields, which make it nearly impossible to reach them, said Krutov.

Officials in Moscow have denied any involvement in the unrest in eastern Ukraine.

Believed to be, is somewhat different.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 25 2014 13:46 utc | 21

John Kerry seems to be channeling Colin Powell's lies leading up to the Iraq war. Both, paid liars for the Empire.

Posted by: ben | Apr 25 2014 13:53 utc | 22

NYT foreign editor, James Khan, explained

"the first article – published on a tight deadline, because of competitive pressures.."

Have you ever heard such a crass excuse for publishing blatant propaganda? You have? How about this one..

"He [Khan] rejects the idea that The Times’s coverage has lacked skepticism and sees this instance as a result of a simple mistake: the State Department’s mislabelling.

Jesus wept.

Shit sticks, but maybe that's the point. I wasn't aware that the NYT had even issued a retraction until now - but I knew what this was referring to because their "scoop", at the time, reverberated around the world.

And despite their apparent retraction, the same author of the same article, Andrew Higgins, has today included Kerry's remarks concerning the "identified Russians" in a new article - without so much as a word explaining that Kerry is calling on false information.

So it continues. If you repeat a lie often enough..

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Apr 25 2014 14:23 utc | 23

Pat Bateman@22
"...So it continues. If you repeat a lie often enough.."

Nobody believes a word you say. And that is what is currently happening, over the past few years the steady drip, drip of falsehood and invention has steadily eroded the credibility of the US government, not just in the world as a whole but at home in the centres of the Empire.
That is why Kerry devotes so much time and energy to attacking RT for, in effect, being just as bad as the CNN and the BBC and almost as mendacious as Fox News or NBC.
How many people are looking at RT English? Not very many, I suspect, and very few "average voters." Still it counts, its steady refutation of propaganda claims matters to Kerry et al, in a way that Radio Moscow never used to.
And nothing, not the Snowden revelations, not Seymour Hersh's exposures of the Sarin scam, not even the Nuland phone calls or the Erdogan false flag attack revelations, is more subversive of the credibility of governments in the west than the unending stream of denials that the economy is in a Depression, unemployment is increasing and is at dangerously high levels and capitalism is in crisis.
Authority always rests on its credibility. Once that becomes significantly eroded and substantial minorities begin to jeer "Yeah, right!" when government speaks, the end is near. In the face of widespread popular contempt no state will long survive.
So, in a sense, Kerry's picayune criticisms are not as trivial as they seem, he is engaged in a life and death struggle to hold the ear of a public opinion which is nearing the "Won't get fooled again" stage.

Posted by: bevin | Apr 25 2014 15:22 utc | 24

The above Committee of 300 is extremely old shit from a man now probably dead called John Coleman who claims to be an ex MI6 man and writes the usual John Birch Society type crap. If yanks weren't basically superstitious, they would dismiss all variants of this shit outright. Perhaps they do. But there are always a few JBS types who drag it up again. The whole book is here, and frankly, you meaninglessly named 'proPeace' person, you can stick it somewhere where the sun won't get at it.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Apr 25 2014 15:24 utc | 25

@22 It's Joseph Kahn. Son of Leo Kahn. Co-founder of Staples.

Posted by: dh | Apr 25 2014 15:38 utc | 26

Another liar

Who believes this nazi looking yats?!

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 25 2014 15:46 utc | 27

Once again, if one goes to Parry's site to read all of his work done on just how f*cking absurd the propaganda concerning Ukraine is but especially his recent piece on Michael R. Gordon everyone will just be regaled with how great of fucking journo Parry is in re-exposing these tawdry propagandists whores for their recent work as it so closely hews to their previous war crime commission concerning Iraq in 2002.

HOWEVER, if Parry were HALF the fucking the journalist that he would like us all to believe and TWICE the man that I'm sure he thinks he is, then why does he stop his scathing analysis in 2002? Why doesn't Parry speak to THIS NYT article that Gordon wrote on September 12, 2001 and which is an AMAZINGLY complete and succinct - almost official sounding, huh? - descriptive narrative of had occurred the day before. I will not waste everyone's time going over a point by point rebuttal of what Gordon prints as every thinking person should do their own work but let's just have a little taste of what Gordo dished out a mere 24 hours or so after 9/11 as he admonishes the world onto war:

They [the terrorists] took over civilian airliners on domestic flights, which have less security than those on international routes. The flights originated from several cities and involved different airplanes. So this was not a simple inside job. Indeed, it is likely that the terrorists had the skills to fly the aircraft, at least for the final seconds that were needed to put them on their suicide courses.

In another reflection of careful planning, the structures hit, while symbols of the United States might, were soft targets. The Pentagon, a vast and essentially undefended office building, sits astride a major airline route and highway. It has barriers to stop truck bomb attacks, and metal protectors and bomb detection machines at its entrances. Like the World Trade Center in New York, it had no protection from the air.

So, let me get this straight, once again, Bobbie!! Gordon's pieces on Ukraine? Obvious propaganda horseshite. Gordon's pieces on Iraq? Obvious propaganda horseshit. Gordon's pieces on 9/11? The GOD'S HONEST TRUTH!!!

Here's Gordon on September 13th, 2001 laying out the entire blueprint for the now decade+ long GWOT - 48 hours after the attack:

It is certainly wrong to think that the threat of terrorism can be addressed through military force alone. There is a role for diplomacy in marshaling international pressure against regimes that shelter terrorists. There is also a need for improved security at home. But it seems certain that the Pentagon will develop plans to punish state sponsors of terrorism with air strikes, air and sea embargoes and, in extreme cases, the use of ground troops.

Punishing terrorist groups in the remote terrain of distant countries like Afghanistan will require rapid military operations to maintain some element of surprise. It may require repeated raids as they move from country to country.

Gee, isn't 48 hours the same amount of time it took people to verify if some fucking Ukrainians in a newspaper photo were Russian soldiers or not? No matter, Parry tells us to trust Gordon and his ilk just two days after the most singular and spectacular "terrorist" event had taken place? Why come so fucking stupid?

Here's a Gordon piece from Sept 17th:

Administration officials indicated that military action against Afghanistan need not be an urgent matter without the element of surprise. Indeed, the Pentagon will need time to position its forces if it decides to carry out a major attack in a distant region like Afghanistan, far from American bases.

But administration officials also know that politically it will be easier to take action while world outrage over the terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon is still fresh.

The military action being planned for Afghanistan is part of a broader diplomatic as well as military policy of holding nations accountable that provide aid and comfort to terrorists.

The administration's goal is clear: it wants to rip apart the terrorists' networks. But since the terrorists are hard to find, Washington is focusing not just on them but on the governments that back them. Certainly capturing a terrorist or enemy leader is one of the most difficult of military tasks.


In other cases, political, economic and limited military pressure may be applied. The Bush administration has certainly not committed itself to invading all the nations on the State Department's list of those found to help terrorists — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Cuba and North Korea.

Nice, huh? So, Michael R. Gordon who is an evil fucking war criminal pig who - Parry tells us - is once again trying to help create more murderous bloodshed was was really really busy right after the false flag event and lead up to the beginning of the GWOT but Parry just somehow fails to mention that. Oopsie!

So, Bobbie, what was that other war criminal you mention - y'know, Judith Miller - yeah, what was SHE writing about right after September 11, 2001? Why, her job was to create the official OBL profile in the MSM!! From her September 14th NYT piece:

His [OBL's] goal has been consistent for a decade: victory in a self-proclaimed jihad, or Islamic holy war, against the United States and its allies. Now he is suspected of having added thousands of new deaths to an already impressive terrorist toll.

As he has done before, Mr. bin Laden summoned Arab reporters on Wednesday to a compound in Afghanistan to deny responsibility for the stunning strikes while praising those who conducted them.

American intelligence officials now dismiss such denials. While they once debated Mr. bin Laden's specific connection to the terrorism his networks have spawned, they now acknowledge that this frail, squeaky- voiced Saudi has mobilized hundreds of Muslims in far-flung countries to fight and die for his embittered vision of Islam, if not for him.

So, Judith Fucking Miller - just 3 days after said event - was relaying the message to the world that even though the chimerical - although she does a nice job of character creation, doesn't she? - OBL DENIED being involved in the 9/11 attacks unnamed US intelligence officials - sound familiar, Bobby, you fuck? - say that his denials are just no believable.

Why isn't that just fucking adorable, Bobbie? No really, keep up the good work, you effing gatekeeper.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Apr 25 2014 16:31 utc | 28


Forgot link to Parry's Sept 17th NYT piece. Here's a link to his vicious 2011 ridiculing of those who would dare question how the entire GWOT got under way.

Yup, Parry implies that Gordon and Miller are war criminal propagandist scum but not when they tell him what he wants to hear, right, Bobby? Stupid bitch.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Apr 25 2014 16:42 utc | 29

Really sorry, this is the link to Parry's 2011 piece.

It's five o'clock somewhere.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Apr 25 2014 16:44 utc | 30

What are the chances of a FALSE FLAG terror event in Rome on Sunday during the JP2 canonization ceremony resulting in a massacre to be blamed on Russia?

Posted by: ProPeace | Apr 25 2014 17:10 utc | 31

More Judith Miller (co-written) on September 16th regaling us with the ubiquity of Al CIAda and how they flew those planes so well:

In the latest attack, hijackers who took over American Airlines Flight 11 from Boston were said to have repeatedly cased the airport before the hijacking, according to published accounts. One of the hijackers spent four years in pilot school in Florida learning how to fly airplanes. He was one of those who the F.B.I. said helped commandeer that plane and crash it into the first twin tower.

''The evidence indicates,'' Mr. Ashcroft said on Thursday, ''that flight training was received in the United States and that their capacity to operate the aircraft was substantial.''

It [OBL's terrorism] also transcends geographic, religious, and ideological boundaries. In the current investigation, officials suspect that the conspirators come from several terrorist groups based in different countries who were working together. Historically, Mr. bin Laden has forged alliances with a cross section of jihad groups, some of which were traditional rivals, like Egypt's Islamic Group and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

In an indictment, the government has said that Al Qaeda acted as an umbrella organization for jihad groups in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bosnia, Croatia, Albania, Algeria, Tunisia, Lebanon, the Philippines, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Chechnya and Kashmir.

The government has also said that there was a ''working agreement'' among Mr. bin Laden, Iran and the National Islamic Front of Sudan to ''work together against the United States, Israel and the West.''

But the war crimes propaganda only REALLY started in the lead-up to Iraq, huh? Fucking pathetic.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Apr 25 2014 17:11 utc | 32

The point that you make, @28-32, and with which nobody is likely to disagree, is that Gordon acts as a conduit for propaganda. He has done since 2001. He did so before then. He will continue to do so until his demise.
It is what NY Times journalists do.

Parry's case is somewhat different: he criticises Gordon and his stenographic style. He exposes Gordon's errors and the lies in the propaganda he enables.
That is all easy enough to understand.

What is less so is the treatment they get from J Sorrentine, who regards not Gordon but Parry as the main problem. Instead of approving of the good that Parry does, the exposures and the truth telling, Sorrentine insists that he ought to have done more.

In particular, and here comes King Charles's head, he ought to have taken the opportunity to contradict the official US account of the conspiracy behind the events of 9/11.

J gives a link @30 to a piece by Parry attacking 9/11 "truthers." It is an article well worth reading, if only to understand the sort of liberal beliefs that guide Parry's journalism. For my own part I care very little who did what to whom in New York city on September 11, thirteen years ago, which, as I have pointed out before, is as far in the past as the Reichstag fire was when Hitler and Eva Braun committed suicide in the Wilhelmstrasse.

The one thing that is important about 9/11 and the theories regarding its causes is that these are indications of the way in which things are falling apart for the ruling class. Nobody believes them any more.

There is enormous scepticism throughout society about anything the government says. This is one explanation for the success that the oil companies and the polluters have had in turning the tide on climate change. In 2000 there was a widespread public sense that there was a crisis and that swift action was needed. Fourteen years later, thanks in large part to a new cynicism about "experts" and "science"- both discredited daily by the eagerness with which researchers fall into line behind corporate agendas and the state's desires- not only is the Kyoto accord dead but so, also, is the pressure on government to "do something" about, for example, the rapid disappearance of Arctic ice.

Parry, one suspects, would not find this surprising. Whatever the truth about 9/11 may be, the general truth is that official narratives of any kind are no longer blindly accepted. Critics are no longer voices crying in the wilderness but voices that sensible people listen to and encourage. This should lead to reasoned discussion and a broadening of minds, not ad hominem rants and a narrow sectarian refusal to countenance opposing opinions.

Posted by: bevin | Apr 25 2014 19:15 utc | 33

I really don't give a fuck if you blame the british, you socalled propeace person. That was not my point. my point was that you live in a primitive mentality of magical conspiracy.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Apr 25 2014 19:35 utc | 34 Unelected Regime Begins Killing Spree in Eastern Ukraine

An account of the recent western war crimes that ends this way:

"The West Has Already Lost in Ukraine

Ukraine, like the rest of Eastern Europe, was meant to be peeled away from its traditional place within Russia’s sphere of cultural, historical, economic and strategic influence, and added to a growing collection of EU and NATO member states that are forming the basis of the West’s encirclement and containment of both Russia and China. With the people of Crimea choosing to rejoin Russia and with unrest spreading across eastern Ukraine, the notion of a “united” Ukraine shifting West is unlikely if not indefinitely impossible.

What is left for the West is to perpetually destabilize Ukraine, denying Russia a stable and beneficial relationship with its neighbor. However, this strategy hinges on keeping a useful and obedient regime in power in Kiev – a feat likewise unlikely if not impossible. The regime is sitting on a seat of power still warm after the departure of President Yanukovych, who despite being ousted from power, is playing a continuing role in countering the new regime’s occupation of the Ukrainian capital.

Additionally, the abhorrent nature of the new regime is exposed through its daily actions and as an increasingly astute global public dig into its past. This, coupled with a looming economic catastrophe that will be compounded by the regime’s very willing cooperation and capitation to IMF-proposed austerity measures, will ensure whatever little support it does have will quickly melt away.

Many see NATO and their client regime in Kiev’s actions in eastern Ukraine and along Russia’s borders elsewhere as an attempt to provoke Moscow into acting first – justifying a wider conflict. For Russia and the anti-fascists in eastern and southern Ukraine, patience to weather these provocations will eventually lead to the self-inflicted collapse of the regime in Kiev, and a reunited Ukraine standing stronger still with its eastern neighbors."

Posted by: scalawag | Apr 25 2014 19:47 utc | 35

Good rant by Escobar from RT:

Posted by: ben | Apr 25 2014 20:15 utc | 36

From RT:

Posted by: ben | Apr 25 2014 20:15 utc | 37

Sorry about the double post. Glitch

Posted by: ben | Apr 25 2014 20:20 utc | 38

What you rather they be murdered in cold blood.
Nobody pays attention to you, well your boyfriend somebody does.

I read somewhere, Maduro is one of the most influential people, OMG. The imperial soccer games are failing, everywhere!

Hasta luego

Posted by: Fernando | Apr 25 2014 21:34 utc | 39

The 9/11/2001 report, however incomplete (and with no one punished for criminal negligence) did make one thing clear.
One of the, perhaps the biggest motive for the blowback as Ron Paul calls it, is support for Israel. Conceded within the report.
More than enough for Americans who gave a damn to demand a re-examination of the aid and alliance.
With that kind of apathy no more conspiracy theories are necessary-though Justin Raimondo's is arguably viable. viable.

Posted by: amspirnational | Apr 25 2014 21:48 utc | 40

@41 "Conceded within the report." BUT downplayed and as I show several mentions of Israel omitted. you can look at the staff statements prepared for the 9/11 Report and the compare them the the 9/11 Report and see several mentions of Israel were omitted:
And the two top 9/11 Commissioners admitted in their book that the concern was over Americans reassessing the policy of supporting Israel. That's right, Americans suffer the most traumatic terrorist attack in our history and the concern elites have is whether the favorite foreign policy, supporting Israel, will be reassessed by the American people and that dictated how they put the 9/11 Report together!

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 25 2014 22:11 utc | 41

And Ron Paul really don't call attention to the main motive which was anger at US support of Israel. If you listen to what he says, often he omits support of Israel as a motivation or he downplays it by listing secondary motives first.

As far as intel, the US had warnings of a bin Laden attack (we don't know how specific those warning were) BUT we know top neocons had the audacity to insist that the intel waring of an attack was a trick! see Neoconservative deviousness put us at risk and paved the way for 9/11

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 25 2014 22:21 utc | 42

@28 The reason for denying involvement is that at the very time the Taliban was saying it would capture bin Laden if the US could offer proof of his guilt, if bin Laden had admitted it right at that moment, when he was still in the grasp of Afghanistan Taliban, he would have risked being handed over or being captured since the US would have said his admission was proof:

"The Taliban have offered to hand over Bin Laden before but only if sufficient evidence was presented. Bin Laden is wanted both for the September 11 attacks and for masterminding the bombings of two US embassies in East Africa in 1998 in which 224 people were killed. He is also suspected of involvement in other terrorist attacks, including the suicide bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen last year.
But until now the Taliban regime has consistently said it has not seen any convincing evidence to implicate the Saudi dissident in any crime."
Right at that moment it would not have been wise for bin Laden to admit it unless his goal was to be captured and handed over. Clearly that was not his goal.

For years bin Laden advocated attacking, openly declared war and go years after he took credit for the attack. The problem is people with poor reasoning skills have been allowed to damage the public discourse. I have shown the pattern of suppression of the main motive and the "9/11 Truth" movement dovetails right into it, see videos:
"The Taliban have offered to hand over Bin Laden before but only if sufficient evidence was presented. Bin Laden is wanted both for the September 11 attacks and for masterminding the bombings of two US embassies in East Africa in 1998 in which 224 people were killed. He is also suspected of involvement in other terrorist attacks, including the suicide bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen last year.
But until now the Taliban regime has consistently said it has not seen any convincing evidence to implicate the Saudi dissident in any crime."
do you now understand why bin Laden couldn't admit his role right at that moment?

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 25 2014 22:28 utc | 43

The Truthers are wont to accuse each other of perfidy according to rather slight variations in their theories.

As for Raimondo's LIHOP theory, he and others like him do not, shall we say, have the marked tendency to get on boards like this and take a position of "if you-this writer (ex Parry)- don't accept my book's propositions, you are suspect of gatekeeping treason to the cause which is keeping millions from hitting the streets and demanding a change of government."

Posted by: amspirnational | Apr 25 2014 22:38 utc | 44

I do think Russian forces our on the ground in the Donbass. I agree with b's post that the NYT story was based on bogus sourcing. I think Russia has a presence on the ground because to think otherwise would be to accept that Russia was being irresponsibly negligent. There is no doubt in my mind that the putschists are relying heavily on U.S. guidance here, and that guidance is being extended through Xe Services et al. For Russia not to have a check in place would be to greenlight a massacre.

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Apr 25 2014 22:53 utc | 45

What is less so is the treatment they get from J Sorrentine, who regards not Gordon but Parry as the main problem. Instead of approving of the good that Parry does, the exposures and the truth telling, Sorrentine insists that he ought to have done more.

Yes, Parry should do more, that effing phony. Why? Because when millions and millions of other conscientious people who do not invesigate the deep-state and its machinations FOR A FUCKING LIVING have taken the time to inform themselves - especially in the beginning in the face of near universal ridicule and castigation - as to the utter horseshit narrative that is all things 9/11 is it really so much to ask that again a person who writes about said topics DO A LITTLE HONEST work and NOT BE such an obvious gate-keeping bitch? Oh but then he wouldn't be able to do all the other "good" work his fake left fans clamor for, right? Effing bullshit.

With 9/11 it's EVEN WORSE that Parry et al keep their mouths shut (or open them to ridicule people, the fucking hack). Why? Because most of us personally never saw the empty WMD bunkers that Saddam supposedly had. Our rejection of that and other narratives had to be culled from second-hand accounts. However, with 9/11 we ALL WITNESSED the narrative being rolled out in "real" time and after the initial shock wore off many people started to realize that it just couldn't have happened the way were told it did. But Parry, Chomsky and every other gatekeeping whore - when they were NEEDED MOST - abandoned the people - their loving fans even - that needed their investigative talents. And those gatekeeping whores still renounce the "the people" they claim to work on behalf of to this fucking day. How many times has the cock crowed, Robert Parry? Noam Chomsky? Chris Hedges?

All the good they've done, huh? That's the same tired horseshit TPTB roll out when someone like Thatcher or Reagan dies when they want to mitigate their criminal lives. Well, Maggie did attend an Easter Egg hunt for handicapped children once. Oh yeah, and she also ass-rapped an entire generation. You've got to take the good with the bad! Yup, every major investigative reporter some how missed the story of the CENTURY and still do to this day but they've done some wonderful work on how there might be something fishy going on in Syria, Libya blah blah fucking blah. Yup, their "truth-telling" tour-guideism is just so valuable! Why, if it wasn't for Parry et al we wouldn't know ANYTHING important. Hey, maybe if they had led the call that 9/11 was bullshit from the beginning then might not as a planet have had to experience much of the ensuing murder and destruction that Parry et al are now so Johnny-On-The-Spot about? Hmmm, "job security" anyone?

Sins of omission are still sins. They are just harder to spot.

For my own part I care very little who did what to whom in New York city on September 11, thirteen years ago, which, as I have pointed out before, is as far in the past as the Reichstag fire was when Hitler and Eva Braun committed suicide in the Wilhelmstrasse.

And so you concede that you are blissfully content in not caring about major events that shook the course of human history no matter HOW fucking fantastical, common sense- or physical law-defying after a certain time period has elapsed ? Gee, bevin, do you think - now take some time and really ponder this - do you maybe think that TPTB and their minion intelligence propagandists may have built in half-lives for the narratives they create? Do you? That they KNOW BEFORE and DURING the creation of a narrative that it will only be effective on the populace for so long? That in time the erudite bourgeois crowd will grow tired of rehashing events and the demands for new investigations and justice? That given enough NEW NARRATIVE creation their willing bourgeois water-carriers will help push their blatant crimes into the fogs of the past because...why there are blog posts to craft about the NEW completely absurd horseshit narrative du jour? Because their champions like Parry and Chomsky tell them it's TIME TO MOVE ON!!!

I'm glad, bevin, that you've not only heard the clarion call of Parry, Chomsky and the boys but are also walking the walk. Onward progressive soldier. Look forward and never back. Especially like 13 whole fucking years ago! EON!!

Posted by: JSorrentine | Apr 26 2014 0:25 utc | 46

RT under threat by US regime

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2014 0:26 utc | 47

No false flag should be expected in Rome tomorrow, Sunday, for the J23/JP2 false canonisations because that pair of anti-Christian popes represent the World Hate Establishment’s mighty triumph over the Church—crucified dead and buried these fifty years. International terrorism is strictly an Anglo-American-Israeli false flag edifice. The Hate freaks are unlikely to soil their own sewerage.

Posted by: Michaël | Apr 26 2014 0:29 utc | 48

JSorrentine ,

you really don't seem like someone who can be reasoned with. you need to realize that the people on the Internet who your are trusting for your information don't know what they are talking about. FIrst of all, to call what happened "a narrative" or "the official story" is framing it in a manipulative way AND serves the same agenda which many powerful people were enforcing that day, before that day and after. The framing and narrative you have swallowed serves to misdirect people from the main motive for the attack. Contrary to your claims that many accept "an official version"," we can see that many reject what was fed to millions, the notion that we were attacked "because of our freedoms." The reality is it was anger at specific foreign policies with the policy of supporting Israel being the main one.

What you are doing with your irrationality is undermining the efforts to set the record straight. I have proven the pattern of suppression and I addressed your claims about bin Laden: focus on the atrocities that America is committing

You are oblivious to the fact that this was on the Reuters newswire YET almost all reporters suppressed it and played along with "hatred of our freedoms" as the motive: Expert: Bin Laden Warned of 'Unprecedented' Attack
(Reuters) Sep 11, 11:19 AM ET
Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he and his followers would carry out an unprecedented attack on U.S. interests for its support of Israel, an Arab journalist with access to him said Tuesday

I show Dan Rather omitting mention of the word "Israel" on that day:

and regarding the 9/11 report, see several mentions of Israel were omitted:

Ahd I showed you why they did that, their priority was whether the American people would reassess the policy of supporting Israel:

Even some of the top promoters of the narrative you have swallowed have realized that they were wrong: "What does Avery think of 9/11 conspiracy theories now? ... "Where I am now is, I've whittled it down to a very basic statement that I think a lot of people can agree on: There was a cover-up of some kind," Avery says. "The only question is what they were covering up, how far [up] it goes, how deep it runs, and how many asses would be on the line if the truth actually came out."

In answer to Dylan Avery's question, the cover-up was of the main motive for the attack and also that neocons were arguing that the intel waring of an attack should be ignored!

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 26 2014 0:50 utc | 50

@50 Huh?


Why, here's (future POTUS?) Hillary Clinton invoking 9/11 just this week! Gee, I guess 9/11 might still be relevant, huh, bev? Don't worry I won't even talk (much) about her dissing on everyone's favorite hero and star of the latest psyop narrative, Edward Snowden.

"People [after 9/11] were desperate to avoid another attack, and I saw enough intelligence as a senator from New York, and then certainly as secretary [of State], that this is a constant—there are people right this minute trying to figure out how to do harm to Americans and to other innocent people," Clinton said. "So it was a debate that needs to happen, so that we make sure that we're not infringing on Americans' privacy, which is a valued, cherished personal belief that we have. But we also had to figure out how to get the right amount of security."

Wait a second...even though Clinton says she just hates Snowden why she's using the EXACT SAME WORDING that Snowden and Greenwald have also been using during this entire narrative. It's that weird?

Yup, Snowden and Greenwald and Clinton all agree. Us pissants just need to have a nice fucking "DEBATE" about how much freedom we should have, huh? Isn't that special?

Nah, nothing to see here either.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Apr 26 2014 1:14 utc | 51

The USS Donald Cook has left the Black Sea and is now in the Aegean. I guess being buzzed a dozen times by an unarmed Su-24 was just too much for those hardened sailors.

Posted by: scalawag | Apr 26 2014 1:22 utc | 52

bevin | Apr 25, 2014 3:15:41 PM | 34

Oh please bevin do not give JS any credibility. He rages against every rational observer who does not agree with his insane view of the world. Parry has done some great reporting. Snowden has performed a great service to humanity. Greenwald is another great reporter. They all have done much to educate the people of the world. JS hates them all because they do not ascribe to his absurd conspiracy theories. To agree with him you must agree that airplanes did not crash into the twin towers. You must agree that the resulting fires did not weaken the load bearing strength of the structural steel supports that held those buildings up. To agree with him you must accept some conspiracy involving thousands of Americans involved in emergency services.

I am sure you do not agree with that nonsense. Perhaps you should just ignore JS as I have since I first noticed him. He is nothing but a distraction.

Posted by: ToivoS | Apr 26 2014 2:35 utc | 53

Glad to see the censorship is working so well. In 2 short weeks +/- this blog went from a great resource to an #NGO poster who is allowed along w/ gloating scoundrals who actually roam aound to other blogs looking for the censored ones comments to come back and gossip about them.

Few post news links and have hours long conversations by people named somebody ( or is it anybody?) and other creative and illusive ID's which mostly center on their own, shall we say, "schools of thought".

I'm personally crestfallen and I've got a feeling I'm not alone.

The demise of a once great resource w/ equal participation, although controversial at times is rapidly degenerating into a damn chat board for cronnies.

Posted by: rouge | Apr 26 2014 2:55 utc | 54

Yeah, this is turning into a menagerie of shit again. Maybe it's just that these commenters are frightened of nuclear annihilation and are taking refuge in their various dogmas and superstitions. Doubtless some of these people who drag up gigantic and endless disputes about bygones are here to disrupt. Personally I don't consider MoA as unique and irreplaceable. Indeed that is the whole point, to maintain process rather than personality. I am certainly fed up with religious rambling and pseudo-occult revelations from all & sundry. When I see old garbage I have seen many times before (on US sites), old 'revelations' that necessitate the repetition of old debunkings, I strongly suspect paid (or possibly unpaid) deliberate time-wasters. Yet more time can be wasted by accusing me of being no better. Let the whole site go down the drain with a little gurgle of schoolchild mutual accusations. Who the hell is toivos and why does he think it's so clever and relevant to bait sorrentine? No, don't tell me. I don't give a shit about it. I'm just pointing out. And by the way, I am pretty sure from the awful gung-ho crap he posted at Saker that golden ballsfield is a paid troll from fort bragg army psyops. I had one of these characters, looked up his IP, and run a whois on it, and there it was, fort bragg.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Apr 26 2014 3:23 utc | 55

"Shale gas behind the Ukraine trouble".

Posted by: Willy2 | Apr 26 2014 3:24 utc | 56

cute! some happy girls that Crimea rejoined Russia
Russia: Blondes and brunettes celebrate Russian Crimea.

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2014 3:57 utc | 57

I promote Moon of Alabama in my latest video: "

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 26 2014 4:37 utc | 58

I promote Moon of Alabama in my latest video: Russians in Ukraine Photo Scoop NYT Pushed Turns Out Wrong

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 26 2014 4:38 utc | 59

New York Review of Books retracts

Is Putin behind all this, and if so what is his goal? No one seemed to know for sure. Yuriy Temirov, an analyst at Donetsk’s university, says that he believes some local oligarchs have been financing the rebel organization, though others are clearly supporting Ukraine. Russia certainly has its interests in Ukraine and there is strong, although disputed, evidence suggesting that Russian military and intelligence agents were involved in the takeovers; but Putin’s interests are not the same as those of the oligarchs financing the rebels. “The local bosses don’t want any authority here, either state or Russia,” Temirov told me. But Putin, he believes, has made “efficient” use of the local bosses, who have unwittingly “done the dirty work of the Kremlin.” One of them is widely believed to be Oleksandr Yanukovych, the son of the former president, who had been a dentist and then became fabulously wealthy when his father was in power.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 4:48 utc | 60

@somebody #60:

"retracts"? What is your point?

Articles in The New York Review used to be full of footnotes. Not anymore, I guess. The only clear difference now between the New York Review of Books and the New York Post is that articles in the former are longer.

I stopped subscribing to the New York Review years ago, because its articles started taking a mainstream American propagandistic line. But this article is ridiculous. Doesn't the author know that RT and other Russian English language news sites as well as the blogosphere exist? It is as if his target audience is pensioners in wheelchairs with no access to a computer with an internet connection.

The New York Review used to be a serious publication read by intellectuals. Now it is just another part of the echo chamber for the official line being proclaimed by the Empire.

Posted by: Demian | Apr 26 2014 6:33 utc | 61

The curious case of the "OSCE observer team" arrested by Sloviansk "self defense".

No, they were not the official observers accepted by Russia - though this fact will get lost in the headlines, they were - led by Germany, including 5 German soldiers - , I translate from German a

Military observer team not officially sent by OSCE, but seemingly invited by the Kyiv government. According to OSCE their presence is covered by a Viennese Agreement 2011 on measures taken to build trust and security accepted by all OSCE states meaning forces and weapons systems can be inspected.

I guess, Germans should begin to quiz their government what they are doing in Ukraine.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 6:41 utc | 62

Posted by: Demian | Apr 26, 2014 2:33:02 AM | 61

I consider it as mainstream. So yes, they retract the official line that all this is Putin.

Which to me, signifies, that Kerry has become too ridiculous to listen to for the target audience of the New Yorker and the New York Review of Books.

Who I assume are the main people funding the Democrats.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 6:45 utc | 63

ToivoS @53
JS may rage but he is not irrational because of that and his view of the world is not insane. You obviously do not agree with him. Fine! You really dislike his style. Fine! But he is surely quite entertaining at times – something you seem to miss. And his conspiracy theories may be false as with a good deal I see posted on this site so he is not alone in that regard. Because of all this you advocate that people ignore him. Well you can and you can do it without boring the rest of is by actually telling us that you are doing it. But you are in no position to tell others to do so. What rubbish!
And do I detect a note of hero worship regarding people like Snowden, Greenwald and Parry? That strikes me as completely the wrong stance to take with regard to such people. You may hold what they write or say in high esteem for reasons that you are prepared to articulate. But to recommend the people themselves as heroes is a totally different matter and one which is quite out of place on a blog designed to discuss geopolitical issues.

Posted by: Phantastron | Apr 26 2014 7:02 utc | 64

meanwhile, Crimea is drying up because Ukraine has drastically cut back on water supplies...and why shouldn't they?

Posted by: ralphieboy | Apr 26 2014 7:07 utc | 65

plus 63) there is another strong backlash to Kerry's claims
- that Jews were forced to register in Eastern Ukraine.

It might be the usual policy of putting out lies and then backtrack for respectability, trusting that most people register the first headline and then lose interest.

I don't believe politicians and politics can survive this continuously in a row.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 7:13 utc | 66


It wasnt only germans it was other westerners too, but more concrete, what are these people doing in Ukraine? Smells spying against east..

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 26 2014 7:43 utc | 67

From a press conference with the members of the Right Sector arrested in Donetsk who were sent there on a reconnaissance and terrorist mission. At 6:30-8:15 of the video, the interviewed member of the Right Sector says that he received military training from a foreigner, "Colonel Alexander Edwards," who had a very good command of Russian. The Right Sector member also says that he was paid $1000 for his information on the situation in Donetsk.

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2014 7:46 utc | 68

67) It was bilateral Kyiv-Germany not via OSCE - OSCE said they are not involved.

Es sei eine bilaterale Mission unter Leitung des Verifikationszentrums der Bundeswehr auf Einladung der ukrainischen Regierung. Daher würden Verhandlungen durch die Bundesrepublik geführt, sagte Neukirch.

Translation: It was a bilateral mission under the direction of the German military verification center on invitation by the Ukrainian government. Therefore negotiations will be conducted by the German government.

It is a brilliant (irony) move in case you want to reenact World War I and II plus the Cold War.

Germany has historically supported Ukrainian independence against Russia/the Soviet Union. Stepan Bandera continued the partisan fight against the Soviet Union after the Second World War from Munich.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 8:04 utc | 69

So-called OSCE observers.

official osce tweet

Not OSCE monitors but military observers.

Posted by: peter radiator | Apr 26 2014 8:08 utc | 70

"The usual policy of putting lies"
Takes one to know one right?
Your "petite ami"...
Cold and Baking powder is waiting for you to keep shoveling it out so he can then jump in the troll suit.

Posted by: Fernando | Apr 26 2014 8:10 utc | 71

Crimea&East ‏@IndependentKrym 7h
@NinaByzantina @Victor_100 unrelated to OSCE. it's a germany/kiev bilateral army intel convoy under Vienna doc.which tried to pass for OSCE

Crimea&East ‏@IndependentKrym 9h
@MarkSleboda1 well that's pretty much an official source considering dailybeast is their new "trying to be trendy media" mouthpiece.

Crimea&East ‏@IndependentKrym 9h
@carlbildt OSCE itself says it has no affiliation with that convoy of army intel you sent in deceit

Crimea&East ‏@IndependentKrym 10h
@PiwowarMicha @GrahamWP_UK they had OSCE label on the bus,a couple of handpicked real OSCE obs to make"we are the OSCE convoy"credible. sly

Crimea&East ‏@IndependentKrym 10h
@PiwowarMicha @GrahamWP_UK issue is Sloviansk mayor agreed to receive OSCE convoy, instead they sent this armyintel CON-voy in total deceit

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2014 8:40 utc | 72

OSCEVerified account
1/4 Comms with military observers in Donetsk region lost.Team not OSCE monitors but sent by States under Vienna Doc on military transparency
military transparency???

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2014 8:41 utc | 73

I call spying! "military transparency" give me break!


I have heard there are more than germans running around..

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 26 2014 8:47 utc | 74

VIENNA, April 10. /ITAR-TASS/. More than 20 Russian journalists were not permitted to enter Ukraine to perform their professional duties, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Representative for the Freedom of Media Dunja Mijatovic told reporters on Thursday.
She expressed deep concern over the restrictions imposed by Ukrainian authorities that hamper the freedom of media.
"I can only say that the situation is not moving in the direction that we would call vibrant and healthy media freedom environment," Dunja Mijatovic stated. "We have many reports on journalists being harassed, intimidated, media houses raided."
"We still have reports about Russian journalists not being able to travel to Ukraine. More than 20 cases now from several media outlets," the OSCE representative confirmed. She added that the journalists who have been denied the right to enter Ukraine should be able to challenge such a decision.
Dunja Mijatovic added: "What we plan to do is travel to Ukraine next week; we're going to go to Kharkiv, Kiev and Odessa to meet journalists from all parts of Ukraine."

Four Russian journalists banned from entering Ukraine since Wednesday
Since Wednesday, another four Russian journalists have been banned from entering Ukraine. These are special correspondent and photographer for Kommersant Publishing House, as well as cameraman and soundman of Rossiya TV channel, according to spokesperson for Border Directorate of the Federal Security Service (FSB) in Belgorod and Voronezh oblasts Dmitry Zhukov.
“All of them were forced to get off the train en route to Ukraine and sent back to Russia,” the representative said, adding that the deportation of journalists was made under the pretext of “lack of finances for staying in the territory of Ukraine”.
The FSB spokesperson also said that the fifth one to be sent back to Russia was a common train passenger.

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2014 8:47 utc | 75

74) Most Germans "running around" presumably are businessmen. But who knows ...

It is time our parliaments asked about the legal basis of this mission. There will be one as Germany has recognized the Kyiv government. It reminds a lot of the role Germany played in recognizing Croatia.

I am sure though it will be a hard sell to the German public.

There seems to be an overdrive in reverse spin - trying to regain control of the narrative that got lost - FAZ now blames Al Qeida on "Russian agression" - in German

If they continue like this they will lose their readership not just face a revolt in the comment section.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 8:56 utc | 76

Russian Market @russian_market · 41m
Ein Lied über Putin. Er kommt.

Posted by: brian | Apr 26 2014 9:03 utc | 77


Right, I just meant that the military caught were also czech, swede, danes too, not only germans.

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 26 2014 9:12 utc | 78

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 26, 2014 5:12:14 AM | 80

Germany would never act without some kind of European umbrella, be it the Weimar triangle or in this case some Scandinavian/new Europe/NATO participation.

Them taking the lead is new and probably what was meant in the last NATO summit.

This here is very ominous - US Must Pull Germany Into Helping Lead NATO Against Russia.

This is planning World War III.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 9:30 utc | 79

add to 81

It means planning a security architecture not with Russia but against Russia - and sure Al Qeida has a role in this as the FAZ article linked above reminds us.

So will NATO again be backing the Taliban as they seem to do with Chechen separatists fighting in Syria? And as they have done with Fascist Ukrainian Nationalists?

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 9:38 utc | 80

In other news Ukrainian "separatists" have occupied a Donetzk border post. So there is free flow between Russia and the Donetzk republic now.

Posted by: somebody | Apr 26 2014 9:44 utc | 81

J Sorrentine, I would like to thank you for the constant devotion to the expression of the un-varnished truth you exhibit in all your posts. I come to blogs such as B's to enjoy open and honest debate of geo-political issues with intelligent observers such as Bevin, Rowan, Phantastron and yourself. We do not need to agree all the time but open minds are essential. Yours is one of the most open around here and I deeply appreciate your constant candour.

Posted by: anti-zionist | Apr 26 2014 11:07 utc | 82

Perhaps you should just ignore JS as I have since I first noticed him.

Posted by: ToivoS | Apr 25, 2014 10:35:27 PM | 55

There's a lie right there - why do all you opponents of JS have to lie so much?

YOU certainly have not ignored him - why do you lie about that?

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 11:31 utc | 83

Sorrentine's anger is righteous. In a lawless world of secrets and lies, manufactured needless wars for theft.... I can only marvel at the fact there are so few like him...and so many who are aware more than most in places like MOA comments section who would rather knock him down than support him or at lest let him rock and roll righteously. It's much easier to shun him than to hear him... a massive failure on the pearl-clutching lefts part for so long, imo. I for one want to hear him, even at his most difficult. A rare bird.

Posted by: Eureka Springs | Apr 26 2014 15:06 utc | 84

He's certainly an antidote to the trite pseudo-revolutionary overly verbose tripe his "coincidence/ineptidude theorist" opponents regularly spew

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 15:31 utc | 85

Eureka Springs@86
I have not the least desire to silence J Sorrentine. I regard him as being on the same side as myself and his views are always of interest.

My objections are, firstly, that he is overly sectarian: more anxious to attack critics of the state for being insufficiently critical and, secondly, to his defeatist exaggeration of the power and reach of the US government.

I disagree with the pessimism which informs the idea that, for example, 9/11 could not have been carried out by freelance militants angered by US and Israeli policies and intent on demonstrating the vulnerability of the state.

It may well be that 9/11 was carried out by agents of the deep state, though I very much doubt it; it may well be that factions within the government deliberately looked away as the plans for 9/11 were advanced, though I prefer to believe that the state is simply riddled with self serving idiots and other incompetents. The narrative that I prefer, however, if given the choice is that it was an act of revenge designed to carry a simple message to the United States and its citizens, to stop attacking the Arab world and to end its colonial wars against the Palestinian people.

J. Sorrentine disagrees. So be it.
Nothing could be worse than for us all to have to conform to any one opinion, his or mine included. It might improve the efficiency of our debates however if we treated each other with a minimal courtesy and without engaging in the intellectual dishonesty of demagogic arguments.

Posted by: bevin | Apr 26 2014 15:36 utc | 86

 It might improve the efficiency of our debates however if we treated each other with a minimal courtesy and without engaging in the intellectual dishonesty of demagogic arguments.

Posted by: bevin | Apr 26, 2014 11:36:01 AM | 88

Well then I for one certainly hope you will start practicing what you're preaching. Cant happen a moment too soon imho

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 16:09 utc | 87

 The narrative that I prefer, however, if given the choice is that it was an act of revenge designed to carry a simple message to the United States and its citizens, to stop attacking the Arab world and to end its colonial wars against the Palestinian people.

The Anglo-Zionist narrative? Why am I not surprised?

Oh dear.

So some guy in a cave managed to organise all that, you say? All due to someone elses incompetence, no less.

Oh boy.

This aint gonna end well

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 16:16 utc | 88


designed to carry a simple message to the United States and its citizens, to stop attacking the Arab world and to end its colonial wars against the Palestinian people.

It should be 100% clear by now, to any intelligent individual, that Al Q does not give a damn about Palestinians, so this ridiculous "preferred narrative" of yours is absolute nonsense.

That ridiculous nonsense might have been forgivable 10 years ago, but not now. Now, such nonsense serves mainly as a useful method to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 16:24 utc | 89

@90 & @91

tst, for God sakes, the last thing Zionists want is for the American people to understand that supporting Israel's brutality is making them a target of terrorism! The reality of what the main motive for the attack was has been suppressed to a very large degree and denied by many Zionists, it is not what Zionists want the public to be thinking about. I show the pattern of suppression in my latest video:

"Sheikh Mohammed said that the purpose of the attack on the Twin Towers was to "wake the American people up." Sheikh Mohammed said that if the target would have been strictly military or government, the American people would not focus on the atrocities that America is committing by supporting Israel against the Palestinian people and America's self-serving foreign policy that corrupts Arab governments and leads to further exploitation of the Arab/Muslim peoples."

Bin Laden had been complaining about U.S. support of Israel for decades, even before he resorted to supporting terrorism to go after the head of the snake: In 1984, Jamal Ismail met Osama bin Laden,“I knew from the beginning that [bin Laden] was not willing to drink any soft drinks from American companies, Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Sprite, 7-Up. He was trying to boycott all American products because he believed that without Americans, Israel cannot exist.”

Zionists have been spreading canards in order to deny this reality of what the main motive for the repeated terrorist attacks is, see the above link. Also see what Zionists have been doing which has been denying what you claim they support. You can see Thomas Friedman LYING about the specific demands and LYING about what bin Laden has said about Palestine:

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 26 2014 17:32 utc | 90

"Sheik Mohomad said . ."

Who cares ?

Since SM and Bin Laden were working for the Anglo-Zionists thats exactly the sort of bullshit one would expect them to say.

All part of the Anglo-Zionist "preferred narrative"

Next you be telling me what Adam Gadhan (Pearlman) says about it all

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 17:38 utc | 91

As I stated before

It should be obvious to any intelligent individual by now that despite the many statements about poor old Palestinians, Al Q don't give a damn about Palestinians.

We even have Al Q types and Zios collaborating in the Syrian war.

Their actions prove their statements to be false.

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 17:44 utc | 92


No, the bullshit I would expect is what the NYT & Bush claimed which was that we are attacked because of our freedoms. I just posted this blog entry, please read it to understand that Zionists work to suppress the main motive why we keep getting attacked:

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 26 2014 17:58 utc | 93

tst, for God sakes, the last thing Zionists want is for the American people to understand that supporting Israel's brutality is making them a target of terrorism!

Absolute Nonsense

Here’s how The New York Times reported it:

Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied,
    It’s very good.

Then he edited himself:

    “Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.

He predicted that the attack would

    “strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because we’ve experienced terror over so many decades, but the United States has now experienced a massive haemorrhaging of terror.”

He may have been lying about strengthening the bond "between our two people" but it certainly strengthened the military/Industrial/technological-bond between those two States.

In my opinion that was exactly what the perpetrators wanted

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 18:11 utc | 94

even CNN acknowledges that Bin Laden initially claimed that he did not do it

Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks -

DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- Islamic militant leader Osama bin Laden, the man the United States considers the prime suspect in last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, denied any role Sunday in the actions believed to have killed thousands.

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 18:19 utc | 95

Osama bin Laden Responsible for the 9/11 Attacks? Where is the Evidence?

The “Bin Laden Confession Tapes”

As we have seen, neither the 9/11 Commission, the Bush-Cheney White House, the FBI, the British government, nor the 9/11 Commission provided good evidence that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Many people, however, have assumed that the question of his responsibility was settled by the existence of videotapes and audiotapes in which he himself confessed to the attacks. There are, however, good reasons to believe that these so-called confession tapes are fakes. I will illustrate this point in terms of the two best-known videotapes of this nature.

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 18:21 utc | 96

What part of the fact that the NYT and President Bush telling the public that we were "attacked because of our freedoms" didn't you understand? ANd the point you are stubbornly refusing to get is what I wrote: "the last thing Zionists want is for the American people to understand that supporting Israel's brutality is making them a target of terrorism!"

What Netanyahu and Sharon claim is NOT that we are attacked because we support Israel's ACTIONS, but rather because the terrorists "hate our freedoms" or "our values."

Read: "Sharon repeatedly placed Israel on the same ground as the United States, calling the assault an attack on ''our common values''
All the evidence points to who the perpetrators were and they were Sheikh Mohammed, Mohammed Atta and the others working with them.

All the evidence points the the reality of what happened, you have no evidence to support the irrationality you picked up on the Internet. did you read this or not?:

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 26 2014 18:24 utc | 97

You really should calm down

what part of Benny's "It's very Good" statement did YOU not get?

you have no evidence to support the irrationality you picked up on the Internet

Right, cos quoting Benny Netanyahu's own words couldn't possibly be classed as evidence

All the evidence points to who the perpetrators were and they were Sheikh Mohammed, Mohammed Atta and the others working with them

Sorry, but KSM was tortured and Atta is dead (or so we are lead to believe) so there is absolutely no evidence of the sort you are claiming - and if there were you would have able to link to it - but you didn't because you cannot, because it does not exist

You keep believing in fairy-tales if you want, but please don't shrilly demand that everyone do so also.

Posted by: tst | Apr 26 2014 18:34 utc | 98

West will surely put sanctions on RT or block it etc.

Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 26 2014 18:40 utc | 99

What the hell would you want Netanyahu to say? You think he should say "it is bad?" Should Netanyahu have said, "this could be bad because Americans might want to reassess the policy of supporting Israel"? Seriously, what is wrong with your thinking that you think his statement is evidence of Israeli involvement?!

Notice he didn't admit that we got attacked because we support Israel, he was spinning it as we were attacked because of "our values."

KSM was interviewed before he was captured and was saying the same kinds of things. His nephew sent a letter to the NYT saying he same kinds of things for the motive for the 1993 attack.

And who the hell is supposedly writing things like this if what you claim is true: "... the Mujahideen saw the black gang of thugs in the White House hiding the Truth, and their stupid and foolish leader, who is elected and supported by his people, denying reality and proclaiming that we (the Mujahideen) were striking them because we were jealous of them (the Americans), whereas the reality is that we are striking them because of their evil and injustice in the whole of the Islamic World, especially in Iraq and Palestine and their occupation of the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries." -Osama Bin Laden , February 14 , 2003

WHy the hell wrote that if your theory is true? Why would people you think "did it" make themselves look bad, why would they call themselves liars?

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Apr 26 2014 18:51 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.