Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 05, 2015

Open Thread 2015-24

Some news & views from me. Please add yours in the comments.

The Ukrainian government intensifies the economic war against the people in the area of Luhansk and Donetsk:

Luhansk Oblast Governor Hennadiy Moskal has completely cut off the water supply to Russian-occupied territories in retaliation for shelling by the Kremlin-separatist forces.

More general this in the NYT!

Senior officials in Kiev, complaining about Russian violations of the agreement and knowing their army can never defeat the Russian-backed separatists militarily, have decided simply to cut off the eastern regions from the rest of the country.

That policy would violate the Minsk accord, ...

The Ukrainian government never adhered to the Minsk agreements but now its official policy.

Don't ever give money to these folks until they completely changed their leadership: How the Red Cross Raised Half a Billion Dollars for Haiti ­and Built Six Homes.

The U.S. seems to (again) move the goal posts in the nuclear negotiations with Iran. China (and Russia) do not agree with this: China urges no new demands at Iran nuclear talks. My bet is still that the U.S. wants the talks to fail.

Did you know?

  • Number of genuine terrorist plots in the US since 9/11: 6
  • Number of terrorist plots manipulated by the FBI since 9/11: 175

But they need to spy on you because ... terrorism!!!

To defend against these revelations of illegal surveillance the administration is pulling out stories it has obviously held back especially for this purpose: Federal Government Suffers Massive Hacking Attack. The claim is "the Chinese did it" but there is zero proof (and no good motive) for that. But claiming so helps to justify the illegal NSA activities.

Last but not least: A good one for its historic background by Gary Sick: Saudi Arabia's Widening War

Posted by b on June 5, 2015 at 18:31 UTC | Permalink

Comments
next page »
US might deploy missiles in Europe to counter Russia | AP Big Story |

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration is weighing a range of aggressive responses to Russia's alleged violation of a Cold War-era nuclear treaty, including deploying land-based missiles in Europe that could pre-emptively destroy the Russian weapons.

This "counterforce" option is among possibilities the administration is considering as it reviews its entire policy toward Russia in light of Moscow's military intervention in Ukraine, its annexation of Crimea and other actions the U.S. deems confrontational in Europe and beyond.

Covered in article of mine - Obama Russian Reset: Pre-emptive Nuclear Strike Capability

Posted by: Oui | Jun 5 2015 19:15 utc | 1

G7 Protest In Munich

G7 protest in Munich hot, but not heated | Deutsche Welle |

Almost 35,000 people have held a demonstration in the southern German city of Munich ahead of the upcoming G7 summit in Bavaria. Climate change, global poverty and the TTIP trade deal were among protesters' concerns.

Opinion: Schloss Elmau is the last chance for the G7

Posted by: Oui | Jun 5 2015 19:18 utc | 2

Don't ever give money to these folks until they completely changed their leadership ...

Virtually every major us based charity/ngo is engaged in serious fraud and are collaborating with the us state department--most specifically Amnesty International which is little better than a fifth column for us imperialism. That's why China is currently in the process of purging foreign ngos.

Posted by: Some Guy | Jun 5 2015 19:19 utc | 3

So former FIFA vp Warner took a bribe, how did Germany secure the last votes for 2006 WM?

Vor der Wahl im Juli 2000 lag Südafrika lange vorne | Der Zeit |

Die Regierung von Gerhard Schröder beschloss eine Woche vor der WM-Vergabe die Lieferung von Panzerfäusten an Saudi-Arabien. Deutschland habe "kurzfristig das Waffenembargo aufgehoben", sagte Guido Tognoni, damals Fifa-Mitarbeiter, später.

Germany bought 2006 World Cup votes by sending Saudi Arabia RPGs

Where did these grenades end up? Which jihadist group battling a proxy war against Iran …

Posted by: Oui | Jun 5 2015 19:34 utc | 5


Wikileaks releases 17 secret documents of the TISA (Trade In Services Agreement) negotiations.

Se also Leaked TISA Docs Expose Corporate Plan For Reshaping Global Economy…

While analysts are still poring over the contents of the new revelations, civil society organizations released some preliminary analysis of the accord’s potential implications for transportation, communication, democratic controls, and non-participating nations:

Telecommunications: “The leaked telecommunications annex, among others, demonstrate potentially grave impacts for deregulation of state owned enterprises like their national telephone company,” wrote the global network Our World Is Not for Sale (OWINFS) in a statement issued Wednesday.

Transportation: The International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), comprised of roughly 700 unions from more than 150 countries, warned on Wednesday that the just-published documents “foresee consolidated power for big transport industry players and threaten the public interest, jobs and a voice for workers.” ITF president Paddy Crumlin said: “This text would supercharge the most powerful companies in the transport industry, giving them preferential treatment. What’s missing from this equation is any value at all for workers and citizens.”

Bypassing democratic regulations: “Preliminary analysis notes that the goal of domestic regulation texts is to remove domestic policies, laws and regulations that make it harder for transnational corporations to sell their services in other countries (actually or virtually), to dominate their local suppliers, and to maximize their profits and withdraw their investment, services and profits at will,” writes OWINFS. “Since this requires restricting the right of governments to regulate in the public interest, the corporate lobby is using TISA to bypass elected officials in order to apply a set of across-the-board rules that would never be approved on their own by democratic governments.”

Broad impact: “The documents show that the TISA will impact even non-participating countries,” wrote OWINFS. “The TISA is exposed as a developed countries’ corporate wish lists for services which seeks to bypass resistance from the global South to this agenda inside the WTO, and to secure and agreement on servcies without confronting the continued inequities on agriculture, intellectual property, cotton subsidies, and many other issues.”

also:

Secret WTO Trade Deal Threatens Internet Freedom, New Leak Reveals

Posted by: juannie | Jun 5 2015 20:23 utc | 6

So we either meekly accept peonage, or...

Probably a moot point as our glorious leaders--per @1--are cooking up their own little August, 1914.

Posted by: chuckvw | Jun 5 2015 22:07 utc | 7

@1 Even our most bellicose presidents have avoided a direct confrontation with Russia. I guess it just took a little change we can believe in with a dollop of Nuland...

Posted by: chuckvw | Jun 5 2015 22:33 utc | 8

@b

Don't ever give money to these folks until they completely changed their leadership: How the Red Cross Raised Half a Billion Dollars for Haiti ­and Built Six Homes.

When is the FBI going to raid the Red Cross HQ? Any chance the DoJ has them in their crosshairs?

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Jun 5 2015 22:53 utc | 9

@Lone Wolf

Or the Clinton Foundation...

Posted by: chuckvw | Jun 5 2015 23:23 utc | 10

Note that 3 of the four regimes targeted by the U.S. for destruction -- Iraq, Syria, and Libya -- were all secular. Only Afghanistan.was ruled by Sunni fundamentalits. Funny kind of kind of war against Sunni Moslem terrorists -- destroy the secular governments fighting them.

Posted by: Andoheb | Jun 5 2015 23:53 utc | 11

While the fighting seems to have subsided, for now, problems and tensions continue to accumulate in the Ukraine.

New Cold War has a report on a draft labor code, Ukraine’s labour reforms threaten workers’ rights. Though extensively revised in 1971, the core dates from the Soviet era (1922); can't that now, can we? "The exploitation of workers, it seems, is an issue where the interests of the Ukrainian elite trump all other political and personal differences." Here's a surprise -- workers will have fewer rights, and under present conditions of economic decline and political instability, few if any ability to vindicated them.

Sunset and/or Sunrise of the Ukrainian Oligarchs After the Euromaidan Revolution? discusses the various oligarchs, their rivalries, and their political allies. Author Serhiy Leshchenko, presently an MP and a former Ukrainska Pravda editor, takes his turn as Captain Obvious: "More than anything, Ukraine needs to find a way of reducing the influence that oligarchs have on all aspects of life. This might take years, but if it does not happen, it will be impossible to build a fair and just society without corruption at the highest levels of government." Thanks, Captain!

On one level, I hope this is a little wishful thinking on the part of the NAF, but sadly it rings true. I pity the poor conscripts. The Dysfunctional Ukrainian Military is a failure on so many levels. To cite just one problem, though a fairly depressing one:

Ukrainian soldiers aren’t trained to evacuate their wounded and dead. “The command considers this training unpractical as evacuation attempts result in mounting death(s) among the personnel,” a Kiev report said.

Mass desertion by the poorly trained conscripts is thought likely, and the difficulties with conscription noted. "In contrast, Donbass freedom fighters are highly motivated. They reject fascist rule. They want real democracy. They routed Ukrainian forces earlier. They’re prepared to do it again if necessary."

Finally, Rostislav Ishchenko considers that It's Just a Question of Time Before War Resumes in Ukraine. But the outcome he predicts and the reasons for it might surprise you.

[T]he US is pushing Kiev to the escalation of the armed conflict knowing full well that any more or less serious Kiev offensive would be used by Novorossia to inflict yet another catastrophic defeat on the Ukrainian army. Washington also understands that the next catastrophe would be the last – even if the militia lacked the numbers to occupy the whole territory of Ukraine at once, a coup in Kiev and subsequent free for all anarchy on the territories not controlled by the Novorossian militia would become inevitable. In any case, there would not be any Ukraine (united or split).

In other words, everybody is preparing for the war with the full understanding of the outcome of that war. The maneuvers of the actual players in the conflict hiding behind the leaders in Kiev, Donetsk, and Lugansk are aimed at being able to convincingly blame the opponent for the renewal of the fighting, its inevitable escalation and increased gore.

Yes, Moscow and Brussels do not need the war in Ukraine. Yes, it would be desirable to find a peaceful solution. But because Washington is intent on fighting, and Kiev has no choice but to fight, the start of the second phase of the civil war in Ukraine could be postponed, the army of Novorossia could be prepared so that to avoid officially deployment of the Russian army, but the war cannot be canceled.

The outcome will not be independence for Novorossiya. "Novorossia remains a geographic and historic term but is not becoming a political reality. The army was needed – it had been organized, whereas the government structures are not needed – and they have not emerged. This means that Novorossia is not planned." NATO is already on Russian borders in the Baltic, a buffer state is superfluous, he believes.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 6 2015 0:30 utc | 12

Andoheb at 11 --

Actually, we're four for four. We destroyed the secular PDPA government with mujaheddin back in the 80's.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 6 2015 0:32 utc | 13

#9-10
I decide to not hold my breath and I truly think that was a good decision on my part:)

Posted by: jo6pac | Jun 6 2015 0:42 utc | 14

Leaked Soros emails re: Ukraine. Eye-opening, as it seems Soros needs to open his eyes, among other things. Like disappearing from the face of the earth. A man can dream can't he?


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/06/confidential-document-soross-plan-for-ukraine.html

Posted by: Colinjames | Jun 6 2015 1:14 utc | 15

Galloway's recent episode of Comment is tremendous. He goes over the D.I.A. leaks that were presented here on MoA a week ago. He's telling it like it is. It's really excellent.

http://www.presstv.ir/Video/2015/06/05/414445/US-ISIL-Ramadi

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 6 2015 1:45 utc | 16

If there was any justice in the world, Saudi Arabia would be carved up by Iraq, Yemen, and Egypt, and the oil wealth used to benefit the impoverished 150 million people those nations plus those in Arabia. This is of course as opposed now where the beneficiaries the 5000 rotten royals wasting it now in the casinos and whore houses of Europe, and the US Military Industrial Complex.

The hardest part would be constructing a gallows big enough for the whole family.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 6 2015 1:58 utc | 17

@9 Lone Wolf - I saw that story, and it is absolutely in line with all I know about those crooks. I wouldn't give them a penny. Sadly, many people all over do, because of their slick promotions and text donations. Its sad for the people of Haiti, its sad for the people who donated thinking they were lending a helping hand. It's not sad for the millionaire CEO of course (last figre I heard, he was making north of half a million a year).

It's so perfectly American though, such a great example of the "convenience" of technology gone awry - people thinking they're "doing something" by clacking a few keys on their cellphones, only to find out its going to some corrupt organization that overpays their CEO.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 6 2015 2:16 utc | 18

guest77@18

Its sad for the people of Haiti, its sad for the people who donated thinking they were lending a helping hand.

Stealing from Haitians is the equivalent of drawing blood from a moribund. Haiti as a society has been raped, pillaged, despoiled, plundered, ransacked, ravaged and looted by the Western powers, who never forgave their former black slaves for the defeat of Napoleon's white armies, the checking of Spain and UK's ambitions over Haiti, and the example set for the slaves in the US. A humiliated Napoleon called L'Ouverture, leader of Haiti's revolution, to negotiate, provided him with a safe conduct, betrayed his word and had L'Ouverture arrested and sent to France, where he was tortured and died in prison. Once exiled in St. Helena, Napoleon was asked about his traitorous treatment of L'Ouverture, his answer was "What could the death of one wretched Negro mean to me?"

The Red Cross, an agent of yet another empire looting from the Haitians seems to be paraphrasing Napoleon by saying after all, what could the homelessness and suffering of a few million Negroes mean to us?

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Jun 6 2015 3:47 utc | 19

Soros more dangerous than billionaire Zionist fanatic Sheldon Adelson. Shel wants war with Iran while Soros wants a confrontation with Russia.

Posted by: Vollin | Jun 6 2015 4:07 utc | 20

guest77@18

Its sad for the people of Haiti, its sad for the people who donated thinking they were lending a helping hand.

Diverting aid purported for Haitians is the equivalent of drawing blood from a moribund. Haiti as a society has been raped, pillaged, despoiled, plundered, ransacked, ravaged and looted by the Western powers, who never forgave their former slaves for the defeat of Napoleon's white armies, the checking of Spain and UK's ambitions over Haiti, and the example set for the slaves in the USA.

A humiliated Napoleon called L'Ouverture, leader of Haiti's revolution, to negotiate, provided him with a safe conduct, betrayed his word and had L'Ouverture arrested and sent to France, where he was tortured and died in prison. Once exiled in St. Helena, Napoleon was asked about his traitorous treatment of L'Ouverture, his answer was "What could the death of one wretched Negro mean to me?"

The Red Cross, by denying housing and better conditions to Haitians seems to be paraphrasing Napoleon, saying after all, what could the homelessness and suffering of a few million wretched Negroes mean to us?

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Jun 6 2015 4:22 utc | 21

"This Constitution is said to have beautiful features; but when I come to examine these features, sir, they appear to me horribly frightful. Among other deformities, it has an awful squinting; it squints toward monarchy; and does not this raise indignation in the breast of every true American?

Your President may easily become king. Your Senate is so imperfectly constructed that your dearest rights may be sacrificed by what may be a small minority; and a very small minority may continue forever unchangeably this government, although horridly defective. Where are your checks in this government? Your strongholds will be in the hands of your enemies. It is on a supposition that your American governors shall be honest, that all the good qualities of this government are founded; but its defective and imperfect construction puts it in their power to perpetrate the worst of mischiefs, should they be bad men; and, sir, would not all the World, from the eastern to the western hemisphere, blame our distracted folly in resting our rights upon the contingency of our rulers being good or bad?

Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt."

--Patrick "Slavemeister" Henry

Hat tip to, Wombaticus Rex over at

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38628&p=567793#p567793

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jun 6 2015 5:52 utc | 22

What is former Georgian clown, now Ukrainian clown Saakashvili real role as a, ehem, "governor" of Odessa? What is his assigned task as member of the Ukrainian circus troupe? In a deeply insightful article, Russian analyst yurasumy coalesce the Donbass conflict with the squeezing of Transnistria by Ukraine and Moldova into a

(...)one big civil war in the Former Soviet Union, which, like last time (1917-1921)*, is initiated from abroad, conducted with foreign money, and done for the sake of foreign interests. And, in fact, from the same playbook.

CIA clown Saakashvili is to prepare Odessa for an onslaught against Transnistria, turning the blockade into a squeeze between Moldova and Ukraine, forcing the landlocked PMR for a breakout in the direction of Odessa.

(...)What is the meaning of this operation? The blockade, which Ukraine is now setting out in due form, very soon may force Transnistria to action. "Do something -- or die" - that is the choice the "neighbors" want to leave Transnistria. Once in such a situation, the leadership of the unrecognized republic may decide to take a desperate step - a blow in the direction of Odessa. That would cue the junta units, counting on their built-up fortifications, to intervene. And further, proclaiming the Transnistrians "aggressors and terrorists," Kiev will help Moldovan army to deal with them.

For this, so that the blockade would be solid and so that no Odessa citizens would try playing cat and mouse with the state, the oversight of the Odessa region had to be firm, unscrupulous, and ruthless to the people. The man to do it has been found. Anyone who could embroil his own people in a suicidal war will not tremble at the prospect of doing the same thing in a foreign land.

His task is to clarify for the smugglers that they mustn't interfere with Kiev in its dealings with the DMR. And anyone who does not get it will be stripped. To this end, there has been a decree about replacing almost all local leaders. It seems to me that they been replaced by certain individuals of the Maidan participants. Their hands don't falter, as has been repeatedly proved. All the more since many of them are not local.(...)

Ukrainians started preparations to blockade PNR weeks ago under orders from the US/Eurostan, denouncing the Ukraine/Russia agreement over transit of Russian military equipment to the PNR, and deploying S-300 complexes to Odessa suburbs. Russia has threatened to open a no-fly zone over the Odessa region by means of electronic warfare.

(...) According to the expert, the modern electronic warfare equipment, which Ukraine does not possess, but Russia does, is able to simply "turn off" and close for Ukrainian aviation the district from Ishmael to Kherson. And devices able to arrange such electronic "mayhem", will be located in international waters. If any Russian aircraft will fly 70 miles in the airspace of Ukraine and land in Tiraspol — then who can blame the "lost" crews? The most important thing in this scenario is that we have crews able to navigate and fly in conditions of radio blackout and lack of communication, and Ukrainian air force doesn't have such pilots.

With regards to S-300, the expert assured that in such circumstances the "fossil" system S-300PS just won't work, especially against our aircraft. (...)

In the meantime, in anticipation of the upcoming G-7 meeting (June 7/8), and of the Eurostan Council meeting (June 25/26), both of which will treat the future of sanctions against Russia, warmonger US Sec. of Def. Ashton Carter is meeting with US brass and Euro diplomats in Germany,

(...) to “assess and strategize on how the United States and key allies should think about heightened tensions with Russia over the past year.” The official also said Carter was open to providing the Ukrainian regime with lethal weapons, a proposal which had been put forward earlier in the year.

Most provocatively, a report published by the Associated Press yesterday reports that the Pentagon has been actively considering the use of nuclear missiles against military targets inside Russia, in response to what it alleges are violations of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Russia denies US claims that it has violated the INF by flight-testing ground-launched cruise missiles with a prohibited range. (...)

We can be sure that Transnistria is high in their short-term planning on how to deal with "heightened tensions with Russia," which they create, exacerbate, and then use as a pretext to heighten them even more. Since every crisis is an opportunity, and the Russians are ready to counter US/Eurostan threats, Ukraine might end up a landlocked country, or not a country at all, if as Molotov's grandson recently warned, Russian deputy/Molotov's grandson doesn't guarantee territorial integrity of Ukraine

Can someone be so kind and send a copy of Churchill's quotes on Russia to the WH, the DoD, Eurostan Union, and the Ukrainian circus? Please send a copy to the clown "governor" in Odessa.

Russian may seem narrow-minded, impudent, or even stupid people, but can only pray for those who are against them.

Winston Churchill

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Jun 6 2015 7:49 utc | 23

What is former Georgian clown, now Ukrainian clown Saakashvili real role as a, ehem, "governor" of Odessa? What is his assigned task as member of the Ukrainian circus troupe? In a deeply insightful article, Russian analyst yurasumy coalesce the Donbass conflict with the squeezing of Transnistria by Ukraine and Moldova into a

(...)one big civil war in the Former Soviet Union, which, like last time (1917-1921)*, is initiated from abroad, conducted with foreign money, and done for the sake of foreign interests. And, in fact, from the same playbook.

CIA clown Saakashvili is to prepare Odessa for an onslaught against Transnistria, turning the blockade into a squeeze between Moldova and Ukraine, forcing the landlocked PMR for a breakout in the direction of Odessa.

(...)What is the meaning of this operation? The blockade, which Ukraine is now setting out in due form, very soon may force Transnistria to action. "Do something -- or die" - that is the choice the "neighbors" want to leave Transnistria. Once in such a situation, the leadership of the unrecognized republic may decide to take a desperate step - a blow in the direction of Odessa. That would cue the junta units, counting on their built-up fortifications, to intervene. And further, proclaiming the Transnistrians "aggressors and terrorists," Kiev will help Moldovan army to deal with them.

For this, so that the blockade would be solid and so that no Odessa citizens would try playing cat and mouse with the state, the oversight of the Odessa region had to be firm, unscrupulous, and ruthless to the people. The man to do it has been found. Anyone who could embroil his own people in a suicidal war will not tremble at the prospect of doing the same thing in a foreign land.

His task is to clarify for the smugglers that they mustn't interfere with Kiev in its dealings with the DMR. And anyone who does not get it will be stripped. To this end, there has been a decree about replacing almost all local leaders. It seems to me that they been replaced by certain individuals of the Maidan participants. Their hands don't falter, as has been repeatedly proved. All the more since many of them are not local.(...)

Ukrainians started preparations to blockade PNR weeks ago under orders from the US/Eurostan, denouncing the Ukraine/Russia agreement over transit of Russian military equipment to the PNR, and deploying S-300 complexes to Odessa suburbs. Russia has threatened to open a no-fly zone over the Odessa region by means of electronic warfare.

(...) According to the expert, the modern electronic warfare equipment, which Ukraine does not possess, but Russia does, is able to simply "turn off" and close for Ukrainian aviation the district from Ishmael to Kherson. And devices able to arrange such electronic "mayhem", will be located in international waters. If any Russian aircraft will fly 70 miles in the airspace of Ukraine and land in Tiraspol — then who can blame the "lost" crews? The most important thing in this scenario is that we have crews able to navigate and fly in conditions of radio blackout and lack of communication, and Ukrainian air force doesn't have such pilots.

With regards to S-300, the expert assured that in such circumstances the "fossil" system S-300PS just won't work, especially against our aircraft. (...)

In the meantime, in anticipation of the upcoming G-7 meeting (June 7/8), and of the Eurostan Council meeting (June 25/26), both of which will treat the future of sanctions against Russia, warmonger US Sec. of Def. Ashton Carter is meeting with US brass and Euro diplomats in Germany,

(...) to “assess and strategize on how the United States and key allies should think about heightened tensions with Russia over the past year.” The official also said Carter was open to providing the Ukrainian regime with lethal weapons, a proposal which had been put forward earlier in the year.

Most provocatively, a report published by the Associated Press yesterday reports that the Pentagon has been actively considering the use of nuclear missiles against military targets inside Russia, in response to what it alleges are violations of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Russia denies US claims that it has violated the INF by flight-testing ground-launched cruise missiles with a prohibited range. (...)

We can be sure that Transnistria is high in their short-term planning on how to deal with "heightened tensions with Russia," which they create, exacerbate, and then use as a pretext to heighten them even more. Since every crisis is an opportunity, and the Russians are ready to counter US/Eurostan threats, Ukraine might end up a landlocked country, or not a country at all, if as Molotov's grandson recently warned, Russian deputy/Molotov's grandson doesn't guarantee territorial integrity of Ukraine

Can someone be so kind as to send a copy of Churchill's quotes on Russia to the WH, DoD, Eurostan Union, and the Ukrainian circus? Please don't forget to send one to the clown on show as Odessa "governor."

Russian may seem narrow-minded, impudent, or even stupid people, but can only pray for those who are against them.

Winston Churchill

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Jun 6 2015 7:59 utc | 24

No. Both Kerry & Obama want the talks with Iran to succeed. Then that will be something they can claim they have achieved. It then will be their legacy.

Kerry tried to accomplish a peace deal between Israel & the palestinians and got stonewalled by the Israelis. Finally Kerry gave up after say 6 to 12 months.

Posted by: Willy2 | Jun 6 2015 8:05 utc | 25

During the time that Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State a number of countries & arms manufactures donated to the Clinton Foundation. Then the State Department approved weapon sales to those same countries. Of course, that was coincedence, right ?

Posted by: Willy2 | Jun 6 2015 8:20 utc | 26

Weblink (see previous post).

http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

The Clinton Foundation also had to refile its taxreturn.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/23/us-usa-election-clinton-taxes-exclusive-idUSKBN0NE0CA20150423

(Is there a smear campaign going on to damage Hillary Cliton ???)

Posted by: Willy2 | Jun 6 2015 8:26 utc | 27

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-04/wikileaks-reveals-full-text-trans-pacific-partnership

Full text file of TPP...quick!

Posted by: Chipnik | Jun 6 2015 10:12 utc | 28

re Gary Sick: Saudi Arabia's Widening War

I didn't think it was that great an article, though the remarks on the haste with which Saudi went to war were interesting. He doesn't explain why it might be that the Saudis are paranoid about Iran. In effect he must be thinking of the so-called eternal mutual hatred between Shi'a and Sunni. That's what the US public wants to hear, so he gives it (even by omission). Well, a public academic in the States is limited in what he can say, if he wants to get, or retain, government confidence.

As I've said often before, the reason for Saudi paranoia about Iran is very specific. It is the Saudi Shi'a of the Eastern Province, potential traitors daring to sit on top of the totality of Saudi oil-fields. Funny that Sick doesn't get to mention this point.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 6 2015 11:43 utc | 29

On Ukraine, http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature/saakashvili-the-stanislavski-school-governance-13048'>profile of Saakashvili


Former Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili has made a career of being at the right place, at the right time: making the audition, taking the part, acting the role, and even having a word with the director if need be. Now he’s done it again.

Laguerre, re Saudi's "internal" Shia problem, check out John Dolan/Gary Brecher/The War Nerd's piece about living in Najran and gradually finding out about a full-scale insurrection the Saudis have kept very quiet about.

Posted by: Gabriel | Jun 6 2015 14:42 utc | 30

Laguerre @26:

Why Saudi 'paranoia' about Iran? The Saudi leadership just hates Shias. The US/Israel hates Iran. The US military-industrial complex needs war and conflict. The preceding generates 'paranoia' but more importantly fake paranoia, i.e., official cover/justification for 'why we're killing Shias again' ...

Posted by: fairleft | Jun 6 2015 14:53 utc | 31

Interesting article here (recommend by Alexander Mercouris on FB).

Ukraine's Petro Poroshenko has appointed former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili to be governor of Ukraine's southern Odessa region. Saakashvili is a controversial pro-western exile, who fought a war with Russia, in August 2008 (and lost).

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/saakashvili-legend/

Russia reclaimed Crimea in 2014 and kept NATO out. There is little doubt that a war between Russia and what's left of Ukraine would be short. Like the 6-day war between Israel and the Arabs in the 1960s, over in days. And there is little doubt Russia is ready for it and are also preparing for the broader geopolitical 'fall out' is it occurs. The key to understanding this situation and its timing is found in the 'rules of war'. As with Israel in the 1967 war, defenders who win territory largely get to keep it.

Therefore, Ukraine and its supporters (NATO etc) desperately want Russia to be the aggressor and start the war. Then 'international law' (which does not actually exist) would allow long-term condemnation and foreign policy response against Russia by the West.

On the other hand, Russia wants Ukraine to start the war as the aggressor so that any Ukrainian territory captured (and a lot would be up to the Dnieper River -- basically an old regional boundary between the western Catholic and eastern Orthodox churches) would be kept as a winners prize (a la Israel's claim for keeping land beyond the 1967 UN approved borders). The timing and actual events surrounding this very likely Russian-Ukrainian military exchange will be very hard to read and any minor trigger may, like the WW1, set things in motion.

Posted by: x | Jun 6 2015 15:36 utc | 32

Latest from Cannonfire, with a shout-out for MOA:

http://cannonfire.blogspot.ca/

Posted by: ben | Jun 6 2015 15:37 utc | 33

Latest from TRNN:

http://therealnews.com/t2/

Posted by: ben | Jun 6 2015 15:40 utc | 34

re 28

The Saudi leadership just hates Shias.
That ain't good enough for a country to go to war. It's on the level of GW Bush's "They hate us for our freedoms", when he expressed his incomprehension that anyone could ever want to attack the US.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 6 2015 15:43 utc | 35

b wrote: My bet is still that the U.S. wants the talks to fail. (about US-Iran nukulear.)

For once, I can disagree with b.

I think what happened here is that the Iranian leaders, Mollahs, were, are, divided, with some wanting more collaboration with the US, others a more radical stance against. (Big Bad Satan is essential in a way for maintaining their hold.) The latter won out with Ahmedinejad, but economically the results were near disastrous; this may be one of cases where sanctions did actually have an effect.

Came a change of heart and strategy, and the ‘nomination’ of Rouhani, who was, wildly guessing here, charged with getting the sanctions lifted, although ‘secret talks’ have been ongoing for at least 7 years (here in Switz.) By all accounts, he is the right man for this job, the media here have unanimously painted him as amiable, easy-going, conciliatory, and tireless. He and Kerry get along great, though Rouhani’s sport (walking) is not compatible and less dangerous...

I’m taking it for granted that the Iranians don’t care about nuclear matters beyond civil development and national pride - it is a bargaining chip. Now, it appears to me, although the content aren’t really known (or, I have not read them only some descriptions and comments etc.), that what has been agreed to so far is not favorable for Iran.

It implies giving up a lot in terms of civil development, centrifuges, research, and the like, plus submitting to more consequent, arbitrary, and rigid inspections and controls, beyond the usual, 'normal' IAEA procedures.

The sticking point - again in my interpretation - is the lifting of sanctions, which ones, and when. Iran and its supporters (Russia..) appear to insist that if Iran agrees to this (imho unfair?) deal, some of the sanctions, those resting on the arms/nuclear etc. issue, should be lifted immediately and without a clause specifying (or hinting etc.) that they could be applied at will by the US at any time. Because that is what the US is trying to do: lift sanctions but remain in control by having the right to instore them once more! (At the slightest mis-step, suspect thingie, etc. one can imagine how that goes.)

Naturally neo-cons and Benyamin N. scream at ANY dealings with Iran. This isn’t too important imho, it is for the pol gallery (funds and corruption etc.) and the tv-watching public, and only means that Israel will have an excuse to ask for more arms/money from the US…!

To sum up, the US wants the deal to succeed, but on its own terms. Iran wants it to succeed as well -- in Iran the ‘agreement’ has been presented as a fantastic victory of innovative, smart, diplomacy, the whole of Teheran was partying like mad. What we see here is a real negotiation, that may yet fail, naturally. I give it middling to highish probability that ‘the deal,’ or some form, version of it, will see the light of day.

Remember, there are also extremely powerful business interests that see great money-making opportunities, delegations from all over the world are already pouring money into Teheran, vying to grab contracts, partnerships, influence, contacts (pre-agreements) etc. That includes banksters / finance I presume though no word about them in the news.

In a way, for these negotiations to fail would be a bad loss of face for the US - as well as for the Iranian directorate. The US does not enter negotiations that are publicised, if weakly and inaccurately, lightly. It is expected that the negotiations reinforce US position and control, that they succeed. It is a show of power. Failure is loss, miscalculation, effort and money spent, etc. Therefore, the US, in case of failure, needs to do everything to maintain the “Iran crazy unreasonable treacherous islamists” image, to blame them if it fails.

(see also Willy2 at 22)

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 6 2015 15:44 utc | 36

Laguerre @32

I'll elaborate, in order to point out how you're falling into a 'hide the Western imperialism' way of looking at Saudi Arabia ...

It's important to understand the oil in KSA's eastern provinces is only officially and not _really_ under the control of Saudi Arabia ("You and what army?" "THAT army?"), it's under control of the West, primarily the US military. Talking about Saudi paranoia about 'their' oil on majority-Shia lands leads you to accept the Western propaganda premise that KSA exercises sovereignty over that resource.

In fact, the US (or 'The West') uses the insecurity of eastern Saudi Arabia as just another tool/weapon against Saudi Arabia exercising real sovereignty over its oil resources. "Yeah, if we looked the other way or found a pretext to help the Shias, they'd 'control' the oil and you'd be cut off. That's one possibility, sure, make up with the Shias and Iran ... So listen up, for our anti-Russian purposes cut the price in half of your no. 1 resource, pronto!" And KSA does what the West orders.

With the exception perhaps of India, unless 95-99% of the populace shares the same religion, religion-based regimes are always subject to that sort of outsider, imperialist blackmail, which is why the West _loves_ those sorts of regimes in places where there is a mix of religions. Divide and rule as usual.

Posted by: fairleft | Jun 6 2015 15:48 utc | 37

Russia is not a threat to Nato, President Vladimir Putin says.

"Only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack Nato," Mr Putin told Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

The Western alliance is bolstering its military presence in its eastern European members in response to their fears of Russian threat, following its involvement in the Ukraine conflict.

Nato says that Russia is backing rebels in Ukraine - a claim denied by Moscow.

Early this month, Nato pledged to counter "hybrid warfare" from Russia - which included a mixture of conventional military tactics, subversive campaigns and cyber-warfare that Russia was using in Ukraine.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33034844

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 6 2015 16:06 utc | 38

@Willy2 #22 - Of course Kerry and Obama want a deal … capitalism will be the winner!
Foreign businesses stream into Iran as sanctions may end

h/t Tikun Olam

Posted by: Oui | Jun 6 2015 16:16 utc | 39

@36 Some countries will obviously do OK if sanctions are lifted. Britain need not apply.

Posted by: dh | Jun 6 2015 17:01 utc | 40

Best report, so far, on Operation JADE HELM 15

Posted by: Copeland | Jun 6 2015 17:03 utc | 41

I think that there is a common theme between the failure of Red Cross to transform cash into housing and health improvements in Haiti, and the failures of US policy in Afghanistan, Iraq and even Vietnam. All those activities: housing, security, military, rural development and so on require tremendous local knowledge, and cultural barriers can kill chances of success, especially when you have interaction of "superior culture" with the natives. Throwing billions at problems in Ukraine would probably have the same outcome -- very mediocre.

One frequent dynamic is that the "helpers from the superior culture" cannot do anything without the local people and mutual loathing develops. Rather then identifying the most qualified local people and broadening the web of productive contacts, virtually all locals are viewed as untrustworthy, and as the feelings are shared they are also increasingly justified. In my opinion, Stalin's Soviet Union had a much better success rate in Central/Eastern Europe than imperial experience of USA (compare resources committed to outcomes), because it was much closer culturally. In Afghanistan the cultural divide was wider, and thus the outcomes correspondingly worse, but if we compare those outcomes to the quality of arms supplied to the opponents (a huge program to supply Mujahedeens compared to self-sufficient Taliban), perhaps Soviets did a much better job, and having their own Central Asia, they had much better cultural connection.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 6 2015 18:04 utc | 42

Piotr Berman @39- the common theme that I've noticed throughout the west is the willingness to insouciantly turn reality on it's head- the Red Cross, the IMF, NATO, the media. The whole west is run on the fumes of the audacity of bullshit artists. Clowns. It's sickening.

Posted by: Nana2007 | Jun 6 2015 19:06 utc | 43

@39 Piotr - your statement "helpers from the superior culture" reminds me of Bush wiping his hand on the back of Bill Clinton's shirt after having "filthied himself" by daring to shake hands with a Haitian earthquake victim. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oHOUnQ0gYI It's actually the relationship between the Democratic and Republican parties in a nutshell if you ask me.

As for attributing the failures to cultural barriers rather than simple greed and negligence, I'll have to get back to you. ;) The fact is that US attempts to "do good" flounder wether they are directly by government agencies or through NGOs like the Red Cross. I'd suggest that this is mostly because it is a core principal of the neo-liberal ideology that no one is actually "doing good", they're all trying to make money. And any "good" done in the course of that (often "none at all") is a sort of side effect of market altruism (if there is such a... ok, there's no such a thing).

You're point on the Soviet experience in Afghanistan is well taken. The Soviets were there fighting a political war where as the US is clearly fighting an economic one. The USSR were trying to push, perhaps foolishly and heavy handedly, changes already started by the Afghan Government through (for their own tribal, corrupt purposes). They actually had a good chance of changing Afghan society precisely because Central Asia was an integral part over the USSR. It was a far more organic effort and much more closely tied to the aspirations of a great many Afghans than this war of the USA, which is focused on, as is usual in any colonial war, the creation of an oligarchy with some window-dressing about women's rights for domestic consumption (concerns that will vanish in the course of the necessary "understandings" with the Taliban). From what I've read (J. Steele's Ghosts of Afghanistan, the docu b posted a few weeks ago, and various whatever else), the Soviet troops were able to move amongst the people in Kabul and other places relatively freely and without much protection, more akin to US soldiers having the run of Saigon (without as much prostitution - though drugs might be a different matter). A 180 degree difference from the US, who as I understand are barricaded in wherever they go and face the famous "green on blue" attacks even in their own bases.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 6 2015 19:11 utc | 44

guest77 at 41 -- I am unclear why land reform and the education of women would be corrupt and tribal. The PDPA, though badly divided internally, were committed to progressive reforms. I would label their efforts socio-economic.

While their may be economic overtones to America's actions (involved with "The Great Game" of oil pipelines and warm-water ports), our involvement has been focused on political ends. With the help of the Pakistanis and the always-progressive theocratic absolutists of the House of Saud, we gingered up the conservative Islamists of the mujaheddin to give the Soviets their own Vietnam.

But if payback is a bitch, all the more so is blowback. The various warlords who emerged from the blood-soaked ranks of the mujaheddin proved incapable of rule, let along progress, no matter how conservatively defined.

With the patronage of our always-reliable and transparent friends in the Pakistani military (the ones whom we let get the bomb), the Taliban came to power. Though even more backward (though less corrupt and perhaps less brutal) than the warlords, they at least brought a measure of stability to the country.

In the aftermath of September 11th., that they harbored the principal author of the deed, bin Laden, with whom we had worked to develop and operate the mujaheddin, made them rightly or wrongly the chief object of American revenge.

Despite this horrendous track record of using Islamists to destabilize secular governments, we doubled down during the Arab Spring, destroying Libya and convulsing Syria in paroxysms of violence. This all with Iraq still reeling from sectarian bloodletting unleashed by our war. The Ba'ath regime was of course uninvolved in with the al-Qaeda Islamsists (who hated reds almost as much as Americans) and had no active, serious nuclear program. In fact, thanks to sanctions, they barely had a functioning economy and infrastructure.

Such have been amongst the consequences of the fall of the Soviet Union. We believe in the illusion of the "end of history," or put it simply, the permanent existence of a unipolar world of the Sole and Indispensable Superpower and Austerity Forever.

The related illusion of the righteousness and benefits of our rule requires going through the motions of providing tokens of relief to deserving and telegenic sufferers. See the related selling of exploitative secret trade treaties as promoting jobs and the middle class. Should these PR efforts fail, we blame the victims, forgetting that our policies are largely responsible for the problems in the first place.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 6 2015 20:37 utc | 45

My bet is still that the U.S. wants the talks to fail

my bet is that the U.S. could give a flying fuck if the talks fail or succeed. the idea that the psychopathic imperialistic agenda is susceptible to diplomacy is risible.

G5+1, Minsk ll, TBTF, R2P = hieroglyphic newspeak for the somnambulant masses.

Posted by: john | Jun 6 2015 20:38 utc | 46

Ron Paul Stunned That George Soros Seeks To "Expand War In Ukraine"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-05/ron-paul-stunned-george-soros-seeks-expand-war-ukraine

Posted by: ALAN | Jun 6 2015 20:52 utc | 47

Piotr Berman at 39 --

Given the backwardness of much of Eastern Europe (Bohemia being an exception), the Soviets brought land reform, industrialization, education, and social mobility. While much of the population was Slavic, much of that Slavic population was Catholic and more in the tow of Germany.

Though the distance between cultures is of course an issue, the relative nature of the Soviet vs. the American projects accounts for their different outcomes. You will recall, during the First Cold War the Third World was much more aligned with Moscow then with Washington, the successor to the Eurostan colonialists (I'm too lazy to look through the threads to see who coined this, but I am quite taken by this styling, a piece with Banderastan, thanks!).

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 6 2015 21:17 utc | 48

"Number of genuine terrorist plots in the US since 9/11: 6"

Can you specify these?

I bet all of them are sting operation.

Posted by: neretva'43 | Jun 6 2015 21:25 utc | 49

RM@42

You presented a fairly accurate history of that Afghan war until you stated 'OBL with whom we had worked to develop and operate the Mujahidin'. There is no valid evidence to back up that claim because the ISI controlled all contact, arming and training of the Mujahidin and AQ was a very small part of that conflict and they certainly didn't develop or operate anyone but themselves while in Afghanistan.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jun 6 2015 21:27 utc | 50

@Copeland #38 - where else is there an opportunity for a dry run military exercise. The experiment can be very useful within SOCEUR ... Baltic states, Poland, Moldava and Ukraine. Under the Obama administration, the countries where Special Ops operate has greatly expanded.

Posted by: Oui | Jun 6 2015 21:39 utc | 51

@b oops, my bad with the hyperlink. so sorry!

Posted by: Oui | Jun 6 2015 21:43 utc | 52

@b pls delete above comment #48.

Another post has all links embedded here – Strengthening Partnerships for Global Security.

@Copeland #38 - where else is there an opportunity for a dry run military exercise. The experiment can be very useful within SOCEUR ... Baltic states, Poland, Moldava and Ukraine. Under the Obama administration, the countries where Special Ops operate has greatly expanded.

Posted by: Oui | Jun 6 2015 22:05 utc | 53

There is a good report of Vladimir Putin's Interview to the Italian newspaper Il Corriere della Sera
at http://rusemb.org.uk/foreignpolicy/3184....
Its good, because it coherently argues for peace, not war.. And not a teleprompter in sight :-)

Posted by: DavidKNZ | Jun 6 2015 22:20 utc | 54

re 34

I'll elaborate, in order to point out how you're falling into a 'hide the Western imperialism' way of looking at Saudi Arabia ...

It's curious that you refuse agency to Saudi Arabia. They've acted pretty independently up to now.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 6 2015 22:56 utc | 55

Wayout at 47 --

Let me begin by saying, I would agree, when he returned to Afghanistan (having been driven there from the Sudan) his interest was primarily, if not exclusively, on developing his network. It was a convenient refuge amongst appreciative fans.

As you might know, I am not in the habit of making statements I can't back up. My intent was to emphasize the shortsightedness of American promotion of Islamic fundamentalism. Bin Laden evolved from a bit player in that effort, to a leading figure in its expansion.

From the Wiki on the mujahideen:

Many Muslims from other countries assisted the various mujahideen groups in Afghanistan. Some groups of these veterans became significant players in later conflicts in and around the Muslim world. Osama bin Laden, originally from a wealthy family in Saudi Arabia, was a prominent organizer and financier of an all-Arab Islamist group of foreign volunteers; his Maktab al-Khadamat funneled money, arms, and Muslim fighters from around the Muslim world into Afghanistan, with the assistance and support of the Saudi and Pakistani governments.

See also this item from The Guardian, dated Jan. 1999, on the Frankenstein the CIA created. It notes some 15,000 foreign fighters flowed into Afghanistan from 1982, most prior to 1992. Bin Laden fought at Jalabad, but his talents lay in logistics.

From his base in the Pakistani city of Peshawar, he used his experience of the construction trade, and his money, to build a series of bases where the mujahideen could be trained by their Pakistani, American and, if some recent press reports are to be believed, British advisers....

Afghan veterans have now joined bin Laden's al-Qaeda group.

Some have returned to former battlegrounds, like the university-educated Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, a key figure in the Egyptian al-Jihad terrorist group. Al-Zawahiri ran his own operation during the Afghan war, bringing in and training volunteers from the Middle East. Some of the $500 million the CIA poured into Afghanistan reached his group. Al-Zawahiri has become a close aide of bin Laden and has now returned to Afghanistan to work with him....

Despite reports that bin Laden was effectively funded by the Americans, it is impossible to gauge how much American aid he received. He was not a major figure in the Afghan war. Most American weapons, including Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, were channelled by the Pakistanis to the Hezb-i-Islami faction of the mujahideen led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

Bin Laden was only loosely connected with the group, serving under another Hezb-i-Islami commander known as Engineer Machmud. However, bin Laden's Office of Services, set up to recruit overseas for the war, received some US cash.

But according to one American official, concentrating on bin Laden is a mistake. 'The point is not the individuals,' he said last week. 'The point is that we created a whole cadre of trained and motivated people who turned against us. It's a classic Frankenstein's monster situation.'

So at a minimum, he worked with people with whom we worked closely; I did originally note the leading role our Saudi and Pakistani allies. Without our promotion of the conflict, there would not have been mujahideen there for him to aid. The experience and connections he gained aiding us in developing them - even if only indirectly - certainly permitted him to undertake more independent action once the mujahideen were no longer of use to us. Their success in Afghanistan inspired imitation in Chechnaya, the Balkans, Nigeria, and elsewhere.

There is a separate Wiki on the CIA/al-Qaeda controversy. Weigh the official Washington denials (quoted at some length) against the statements former Foreign Secretary Robin Cook and especially Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who told Larry King:

In the mid-'80s, if you remember, we and the United - Saudi Arabia and the United States were supporting the Mujahideen to liberate Afghanistan from the Soviets. He [Osama bin Laden] came to thank me for my efforts to bring the Americans, our friends, to help us against the atheists, he said the communists. Isn't it ironic?

As an atheist and socialist who drinks liquor, eats pork, listens to music, and is regularly in mixed company, I do try to keep an eye on those who might do me harm on one or all of those counts.

And on a separate vice, as one who occasionally plays the ponies, I'm glad to report that American Phaorah has won the Triple Crown. I missed the race, but Mrs. M. says he took it easily by five lengths.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 7 2015 0:45 utc | 56

MI5 answer to the CIA Pomerantsev and Weiss- John Helmer on http://johnhelmer.net/?p=13537/>Chatham House


Entitled “The Russian Challenge”, the Chatham House report runs to 72 pages. Signing it as authors are six associates of the house — Keir Giles, Philip Hanson (below, left), Roderic Lyne (centre), James Nixey, James Sherr and Andrew Wood (right). Except for Nixey, the authors have held British government positions related to security, intelligence and war. Hanson says he served for a time at the US government radio, Radio Liberty. Lyne and Wood were British ambassadors to Russia between 1995 and 2004; they are also on retainer for companies doing business in Russia. Their report can be read here.
Propaganda – that’s to say, the word — appears twice, meaning what the Russian government claims. Thus: “Patriotism and propaganda may for a while obscure economic failure (Putin has taken to making Orwellian boasts: ‘Our produce is of course much better and healthier’ but they do not put bread on the table.” And: “The West should also explain its policies towards Russia, including of course those affecting Ukraine, to Russia’s post-Soviet neighbours – and to China. They deserve to hear directly how the West understands the position, and how Western countries propose to proceed. At the least, Russia’s propaganda effort needs to be balanced in this way.”
The word false appears six times. It’s a synonym for Russian. It refers to things Russians believe or do, or else want others to think they mean. For example: “By either undermining the will or support for deterrent measures, or creating an entirely false impression that Russia is justified in its actions, Russia adjusts key variables in the security calculus, reducing the risk inherent in any future assertive action against its neighbours”. And: “The current Kremlin may want to develop the false promise of a separate, self-sufficient and introverted Russia dominating the former Soviet space.” And: “As noted over the Russian interpretation of NATO’s intentions in Crimea, such false perceptions are nevertheless a reality to the Russian leadership.”
Truth, the word again, is much more frequent, appearing 12 times. It means what Chatham House authors say it is. For example: “[President Vladimir] Putin is a fundamentally anti-Western leader whose serial disregard for the truth has destroyed his credibility as a negotiating partner.” “Western societies put faith in their own independent media to arrive at and report the truth thanks to their relative freedom.” And: “while truth is supposed to be a fundamental requirement of Western communications strategies, Russian campaigns need not even remotely resemble the truth to be successful.”
The capstone of the case for Chatham House truth against Russian falsehood appears in this analysis of the transformation of Crimea in March 2014, followed by the destruction in eastern Ukraine of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 on July 17, 2014. According to Keir Giles, “Western media organizations were entirely unprepared for a targeted and consistent hostile disinformation campaign organized and resourced at state level. The result was an initial startling success for the Russian approach in the early stages of operations in Crimea, where reports from journalists on the ground identifying Russian troops did not reach mainstream audiences because editors in their newsrooms were baffled by inexplicable Russian denials….A key example of this approach followed the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. Four days after the crash, by which time it was already clear that Russia held ultimate responsibility for the tragedy, the Russian Ministry of Defence held a press conference to present explanations absolving Russia.231 The scenarios presented were diverse and mutually contradictory, and did not stand up to the briefest examination by experts with even basic knowledge of the aircraft and missile systems claimed to have been involved.232.” (See page 47.)

Posted by: Nana2007 | Jun 7 2015 1:21 utc | 57

The Ukraine is taking the opportunity to remind us of its commitment to peace and Western values.

Poroshenko promises to do all in his power to liquidate the Transnistrian Republic. "Ukraine, for my part, perhaps with my participation, will do everything to restore the territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova," he said. His bang-up job defending Banderastan's territorial integrity vouches for his skills.

Today's New York Times reports that he is also trolling for support independent of the Nuland/Obama/Kerry Axis, meeting with Harper and Abe in Kiev. Ahead of the G-7 meeting, "President Petro O. Poroshenko of Ukraine tried on Friday to rally international support for his country and to maintain pressure on President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, including economic sanctions." It quotes his remarks "to a small group of foreign journalists"

We will defend our country, our territorial integrity and our independence by ourselves.... We have weapons for that. But unfortunately we are fighting with the weapons from the 20th century, from the time of the Soviet Union, against the Russian — most modern — weapons of the 21st century.....

Here we are defending freedom, we are defending democracy, we are defending European values, and the actual reason of this war is the right of the Ukrainian people to live under European standards, with European values, in the European Union.

This may account for the handling of the recent Gay Pride parade in Kiev. Kiev Mayor Klitschko Gives in to Neo-Nazis: Opposes Gay Parade.

Did he publicly complain about Right Sector’s blackmail and demand action against them?

Did he say that putting public pressure on him to ban a peaceful parade was totally unacceptable?...

No, what he did was ask the organisers of the parade to call it off.

What about the Western media, vigilant defenders as they are of LGBT rights everywhere but especially in Russia? Are they loudly denouncing Right Sector for its homophobia and Klitschko for his weakness?

No. They are saying nothing.

The organizers declined, and the parade went off with police protection. But I'm sure you're glad to know, Pravyi Sektor was as good as its word. New Cold War has coverage via RT of their attack on the March of Dignity.

The march of around 300 LGBT supporters reportedly lasted for only half an hour and came under attack despite the presence of police in riot gear. The attackers hurled flares, smoke bombs and teargas at the crowd walking along bank of the Dnipro River....

With the conflict in eastern Ukraine under way, Kiev has been seeking a closer alliance with Europe to promote civil liberties widely enjoyed overseas. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko told a press conference on Friday that although he won’t participate in the “March of Equality,” he doesn’t “see any reason to impede this march because it’s a constitutional right of every citizen of Ukraine.”

Right Sector leader Dmytro Yarosh, in contrast, complained on his Facebook post on Thursday that LGBT communities have been boosting the scale of their activities in Ukraine.

“Even as the fighting in the East has intensified, they plan a series of measures including their ‘mini gay parade’ – “March of Equality”. It’s not just an activity aimed at the moral decay of the Ukrainian people, it’s spitting on the graves of those who died fighting for Ukraine, and on the living defenders of the Motherland too.... Thank God, we remain a rather conservative nation,” Yarosh wrote, adding that “propaganda of homosexuality and gender ideology has been reinforced by the West.”

I'm a little unclear why allowing a modicum of visibility and respect amounts to dissing the defenders of the Ukraine. After all, People are People, no?

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 7 2015 3:15 utc | 58

Further to okie farmer's item at 35, Fort Russ highlights the fact that Putin makes his first reference to DPR/LPR autonomy in the Corriere della Sera interview.

"Naturally, the first step should be a constitutional reform that would ensure the autonomous rights to the corresponding territories of the non-recognized republics.... As to our European partners--and it is they who introduced that language into the Minsk Agreements--they already have deciphered what decentralization ought to mean: it's the right to own language, cultural identity, border trade. Nothing special, nothing that goes against civilized norms of what is the natural due of national minorities in a European country. One must adopt a law on carrying out municipal elections on these territories, and likewise a law on amnesty. All of that should be done, that's what the Minsk Agreements say, in coordination with the Donetsk People's Republic and the Lugansk People's Republic, with those territories."

J. Hawk's "Comments" note "Poroshenko's failure to implement the political provisions of Minsk-2 is not only an act of defiance aimed at Russia, but the West as well."

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 7 2015 3:26 utc | 59

Laguerre @52: No they haven't. In order to acquire agency vis a vis the West, the Saud clan would need an actual desire for that, and a credible army and real popular support. They do have agency 'downward', relative to less wealthy and similarly West-dependent 'nations' like Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and maybe Yemen.

Piotr Berman @39: You started an interesting discussion. Anyway, I agree with guest77 and others here, that in a sense it all comes down to greed, though NGO careerist greed looks different than private greed. Looking at an international NGO careerist on a ‘micro level’, she likely has two goals: 1, she wants to be on excellent terms with her real clients, Western government funding agencies and associated rich people. The goal of Western neoliberal governments’ ‘humanitarian and development’ aid is to provide profits for their clients, large international corporations like Bechtel and Halliburton. Without local or international oversight, such corporations do what comes natural to them: shoddy, overpaid, and overpriced work, when work sensitive to local conditions and means and employing local, ‘underpaid’ workers, is what’s needed. The role of the NGO careerist in the preceding is not to make the career-damaging move of noticing the inappropriateness for local conditions and needs, the shoddiness, overpricing, and overpaid-ness. 2 (less important but still significant), she wants to be on excellent terms with the other NGOs, facilitating her next career move. This causes such organizations to spend an inordinate amount of their funds on other NGOs. So when an NGO is not doing its usual money raising and wheel spinning, other similar Western NGOs are funded and asked to publish studies, bring in local and international big wigs, put on seminars, conduct workshops, train locals for NGO-type jobs, and so on.

Posted by: fairleft | Jun 7 2015 5:01 utc | 60

@36: Precisely.

But US arms manufacturers OPPOSE a deal with Iran. Because they still benefit from the tensions between e.g. Saudi Arabia & Iran. The "outbreak" of peace in the Middle East will hurt those arms sales.

Posted by: Willy2 | Jun 7 2015 5:44 utc | 61

Patrick Cockburn:

- The new saudi king Salman and his brother (minister of defense) have decided to follow a (much) more aggressive foreing policy. And that has led to flare up of violence in Iraq (think "Ramadi") and Syria (think Palmyra).
- ISIS receives a lot of money from individuals in the Gulf states, as well.
- The US should help Syria/Assad only when ISIS is attacking. That will help to fend off ISIS.
- The goal of ISIS is conquering Damascus (Surprise, surprise) and then violence will spill over into Jordan & Lebanon. (Remember: unrest in Jordan is/seem to be the red line for Israel)
- The government in Baghdad has only ~ 5.000 well trained fighters. The rest of the army is useless. And even those 5.000 fighters don't seem to have the will to take on ISIS.
- The US is losing the "War on Terror" one G.W. Bush began unless they come up with a GOOD solid plan to contain the problem.

F. William Engdahl:
- Up to say the year 2003 the US and the saudi agenda for the Middle East were almost the same but the 2003 invasion of Iraq was the point where the agendas began to diverge.


It seems to me that all the interest groups in Washington DC are still fighting each other what the US foreign policy for the Middle East should be. US influence grew in the
What a fine mess the US left behind !!!!!!!!!!!


Posted by: Willy2 | Jun 7 2015 9:59 utc | 62

re 57.

In order to acquire agency vis a vis the West, the Saud clan would need an actual desire for that, and a credible army and real popular support. They do have agency 'downward', relative to less wealthy and similarly West-dependent 'nations' like Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and maybe Yemen.

I don't think you can know very much about how the Saudis work. It's as easy for the Saudis to manipulate the US, as it is for Netanyahu. The Saudis are perfectly free to run their own foreign policy, and they do, and the US is unable to disengage. The Saudi militaristic foreign policy is likely to prove catastrophic in the long run, but that's a different question.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 7 2015 12:53 utc | 63

Netanyahu has far more power over the US than do the Saudis. You're giving the US way too little agency and the Saudis way too much. Consider this: if the Saudis had agency vis a vis the West, what would they most want to use it for? Keeping the price of oil high, of course. How's that going?

Is there a semantic miscommunication? By the US I mean the Wall Street controlled state fighting for world hegemony. That state has a clear course it is trying to steer, and it won't be pushed off that path by Saudi dollars or whatever else you think the Saudis can throw at the US.

In the case of Israel, we have a good example of the limits of its power in the case of Iran. My impression is that Wall Street, as a key element of its drive for global rule, sees that it needs to sway Iran away from the Russia-China axis, and so is pushing for a nuclear deal. Israel, for its internal reasons, is against such a deal. The deal may or may not get done, but it'll be close. That's an impressive amount of power, and there is no similar Saudi example. The things the Saudis have over time 'wanted to get done' have always advanced US/Israeli interests. Those things then get done because of the latter not the former, in my opinion.

Posted by: fairleft | Jun 7 2015 14:49 utc | 64

The Saudi Royals and Israel are not going to step on each others' toes.. Israel is like our 51st state that keeps browbeating us into their bidding.. Saudi Arabia is like a non-family member that has something on us, holding us by the balls.

20,30 years down the line, will either exist? What will their demise take with them? Nuked cities? a devastating oil-supply catastrophe?
There's much to worry about

Posted by: DamascusFalling | Jun 7 2015 17:26 utc | 65

John at 43 wrote: b, “My bet is still that the U.S. wants the talks to fail” ..(Iran nukulear)

.. my bet is that the U.S. could give a flying fuck if the talks fail or succeed.

the idea that the psychopathic imperialistic agenda is susceptible to diplomacy is risible.

I was going to add in my post, that on the face of it, the US does not much care either way.

If it works, wow, the Iranians are charming ppl and love McDonalds.

If not, the US tried but the Iranian regime is dead set on making the bomb to attack Israel. Or whatever.

I refrained, as what such arguments obscure is that what we see now is a break-down of the Westphalian order of Nation States,

with hybrid and passed off as low-level warfare (much of it guerrila type upped two jots further, see Ukraine for ex.) multiplying alarmingly,

economic warfare of different types/levels, corporate/multinationals undermining and take-over of other structures, growing

uncontrolled ‘trade’ of the illegal kind (humans, drugs, etc.), the rise of ‘revolutionary’ powers and groups as para-state actors or new ones, etc. -

All these criss-cross, mulitple aims interact and may clash, so it becomes very difficult to tease out what the underlying interests,

driving forces, are, and what aims (wacky, ideological, power-hungry, sadistic, crassly commercial or financial-banks,

territory controlling, peace-loving even, etc.) are in play.

Not new in itself, but has bloomed on the ground and become more evident, visible.

The US probably has many other reasons for making moves to bring Iran back into some kind of gingerly, controlled, ‘fold.’

Or at least halt Iran’s relative economic isolation (from the W) somewhat, and the perception of the US as Satan.

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 7 2015 17:54 utc | 66

"But US arms manufacturers OPPOSE a deal with Iran. Because they still benefit from the tensions between e.g. Saudi Arabia & Iran. The "outbreak" of peace in the Middle East will hurt those arms sales."

I don't forsee a USA-Iran deal being a harbinger of peace between Iran and KSA/Israel. In fact, the tensions will certainly only rise. That's precisely how the deal can be made.
The US has been setting up this Shia/Sunni dynamic for 10 years or so now (whenever they bombed that Golden domed mosque). That's their plan. Of course Israel is trying to use
it to get rid of Hezbollah in the meantime. And the Saudis are happy to do anything that keeps them in power.

But the Western MIC is in a win/win bigger situation with this peace deal, IMHO.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 7 2015 18:23 utc | 67

"The US has been setting up this Shia/Sunni dynamic for 10 years or so now"

But all they've managed to create is a moderate/fanatic split. With the Shia all on the moderate side, and about 30-50% of the Sunnis with them.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 7 2015 18:24 utc | 68

re 64

You're giving the US way too little agency

Yeah, Americans can only see the US as the centre of the world. I didn't say that the US doesn't have its own policy too. But the saudis are pretty much out of control, and nothing can be done about it. I don't understand all of why.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 7 2015 19:20 utc | 69

@67 I've never understood why the US wants a deal with Iran. They can drag the negotiations out for ever if they want. Israel doesn't want it. The Saudis don't want it.

Arms makers don't want it. Oil companies can't sell the oil they've got.

Iran can still make side deals with Russia and China. And no deal will ever be verifiable to everybody's satisfaction. They can even buy a bomb or two.

Posted by: dh | Jun 7 2015 19:38 utc | 70

DH@70

The EU is the real winners if this deal is completed, they can't wait and haven't waited to flock to Tehran to cut new investment and trade deals. The oil companies are there too for gas and oil production investments and to bid on infrastructure improvements badly needed by Iran

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jun 7 2015 23:55 utc | 71

The EU always was lukewarm about the sanctions. The IAEA report wasn't conclusive. But the usual arm-twisting had the desired effect.

Posted by: dh | Jun 8 2015 0:29 utc | 72

Saakashvili's a two-fer. Not only can he be counted on, as an outsider, to do the political dirty work of brutally repressing Odessa and, when the time comes, launching an unsuccessful assault on Transnistria (Georgian style), he talks smack too.

Newsweek favors us with his vocal stylings, singing the praises of his boss, with this lovely aria, Poroshenko’s First Year Has Set Ukraine On The Road to Reform.

Poroshenko has succeeded in nation-building, at a rapid pace, where previous presidents have failed. In a recent speech before the Rada, he explained that getting rid of Soviet monuments wouldn’t be enough to get rid of a communist mindset....

The dual goals of victory remain the same: the containment of Russian neo-imperialism and the defeat of neo-sovietism as an anti-model of society and governance.

For 24 years, Ukraine has been plundered and hijacked by a nihilistic elite—dubbed as oligarchs. They were serving their own interests, and, occasionally, when it mattered, Moscow's as well. The civil service was cumbersome, its rules Kafkaesque, designed explicitly to create a labyrinth inside which corruption flourished.

The Maidan totally changed the equation. For the first time since 1991, a comprehensive reform agenda has been shaped that makes legitimate rule of law achievable. Oligarchs will be confronted; corruption will be tackled; regulation will be simplified; the civil service will be drastically down-sized; and local government will be empowered.

On this front, there have been many successes—many aided and led by the international experts [read: foreign hacks like me - rm] Poroshenko has recruited to bring an outsider’s perspective to Ukraine’s internal challenges.

In the midst of war, Ukraine has rebuilt its armed forces and halted a military offensive by the largest army in Europe. Defense reforms are underway—with the help of the RAND Corporation....

The Ukrainian people have rallied around the potential of the post-Maidan nation—coming together to contribute to the supply, support and combat-readiness of the military and volunteer forces; being demanding, but patient, as President Poroshenko pushes forward his reforms.

That's why folks are fleeing conscription and economic collapse, and even the right is on the streets decrying the ruined economy; see this from New Cold War.

I've been seeing a clip of former Polish PM and present EU Council head Tusk saying, "Russia isn't at the G-7 because they don't share our values."

Let's look at some recent activities and parse what those values might include. That would be illegal wars of aggression (Iraq), destabilizing legitimate governments even though they cooperated with you (Libya), or simply that your regional satrap (Israel) dislikes them (Syria). It also includes torture, rendition (Poles very helpful on both counts), mass surveillance of population and leaders, friend and foe, drone strikes, illegal and abusive detention (Abu Ghraib, Gitmo), and the police killing and assaulting citizens 'cause they don't like any backtalk or somehow cause large nos. of heavily armed paramilitary police to fear for their lives from unarmed minority citizens (examples too numerous to mention). Not to mention stripping workers of their jobs, security, and dignity though secret trade treaties and telling them they're better off, so stop the bellyaching and just suck it up.

Because, freedom.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 8 2015 0:59 utc | 73

"I didn't say that the US doesn't have its own policy too." I didn't accuse you of that. You did say the Saudis have as much influence on US policy as Israel does, and I was trying my best to dissuade you of that severely 'off' point of view.

"But the saudis are pretty much out of control..." Yeah, so out of control they're trying to overthrow Assad (US policy makers: "Oh no!"), keep most of Iraq out of the Iran sphere of influence (US policy makers: "Oh how terrible!"), and flood the market with oil, dropping its value to a third what it was a couple years ago.

Posted by: fairleft | Jun 8 2015 1:04 utc | 74

RN@56

One further point on Afghanistan and the rise of Political Islam. I just learned that China was a major supporter of the Mujahideen supplying hundreds of millions of dollars worth arms to fight the Russians. They also set up camps in China to directly train the Muj. fighters. If this is the metric used to assign blame for todays rise of the IS then China shares some if not equal blame for their creation.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jun 8 2015 2:12 utc | 75

Wayout at 75 --

Reference, please?

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 8 2015 3:57 utc | 76

@76.. don't hold yer breathe...

john helmer is always worth reading.. i liked this article.. did demiann ever come back to moa? he seems to have completely disappeared..

Posted by: james | Jun 8 2015 5:22 utc | 77

A bit random but it turns out 'Al Qaeda' counted as a Rada vote for Yanukovich's removal!

Full list here
link

After some googling it turns out there is an Alexey Qaeda of Svoboda

link

This is lighthearted of course, I dont claim Bin Laden voted Yanukovich out :) I'm curious though as his name sounds odd for a Ukrainian. Anyone able to shed more light on this guy?

Posted by: Bill | Jun 8 2015 10:26 utc | 78

james at 77 --

You might recall, he communicated privately with Vintage Red and myself. He's gone dark there as well. I was able to use some of the details to try to find out what was up. He seems to be having some very distracting personal difficulties. I'll let you know if I hear anything.

I saw that piece on Chatham House in the links at Naked Capitalism. They seem to be the research center of choice for the UK gov't. and the City. Helmer is good, but tends to be a dense read, worth it usually.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 8 2015 11:47 utc | 79

RM@76

See the PLA's wiki section 2.2, history 50's, 60's, 70's.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jun 8 2015 15:11 utc | 80

re 74

"But the saudis are pretty much out of control..." Yeah, so out of control they're trying to overthrow Assad (US policy makers: "Oh no!"), keep most of Iraq out of the Iran sphere of influence (US policy makers: "Oh how terrible!"), and flood the market with oil, dropping its value to a third what it was a couple years ago.

So you agree with me. The problem with Americans is that they tend to see everything as a product of American policy, good or bad.

The Saudis do what they want, e.g. the attack on Yemen. The US feels obliged to conform.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 8 2015 20:02 utc | 81

By the way, for those who might think that tickling Putin might be a good idea (not frequent on MoA), I give you the URL of a British film of 1965, which represents the consequences of a Soviet nuclear attack on Britain. Ok it's very British, but worth watching (50 mins). Horrifying.

The War Game

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 8 2015 20:48 utc | 82

Wayout --

Thanks for the reference.

Since we've shifted to the question of putative Chinese responsibility, I presume that we have settled the question of Washington's involvement with Osama bin Laden. The exact dollar amount and degree of separation may be unclear (and in whose interest is that, do you think?), but the association is not.

I did a little checking yesterday in advance. The assertion appears not only in the Wiki for the Peoples Liberation Army, it also appears in that on the Soviet-Afghan War. Both cite (incorrectly) the same underlying source.

It is an essay by Israeli academic in S.F. Starr, ed., Xinjiang: China's Muslim Borderland (M.E. Sharpe, 2004). Yitzhak Shichor's "Great Wall of Steel: Military & Strategy in Xinjiang," (available on line here) discusses it breifly at pp. 157-158.

He cites a number of works for this section, but the most on point is Ahmad Lufti's "Blowback: China & the Afghan Arabs," Issues & Studies, v.37 n.1 (Jan.-Feb. 2001, pp. 202-204). I was unable to find the text online, but I was able to find Lufti and the journal.

A former employee of the British Council in Yemen (see here) Lufti has produced a number of items for the Jamestown Foundation, and repeated the accusation (with no documentation) in their China Brief, v.4 n.3 of February 4, 2004 in a short piece on Uyghur Separatism And China's Crisis Of Credibility In The War On Terror. Jamestown describes him as "a political and terrorism analyst."

Voltaire.net describes the The Jamestown Foundation as follows:

Created by the CIA to publicly unveil the communist rogues of Reagan’s times [providing them with publicity and additional income - rm], the Jamestown Foundation has resumed its services in the Bush Administration. It publishes specialized bulletins on both the post-communist world and terrorism, which serve as reference for Washington’s think tanks. University scholars and journalists are dedicated to depict a ghost-filled world whose very same hostility justifies the U.S. empire.

The Institute for Policy Studies profiled it as part of its Right Web.

The organization prides itself on using "indigenous and primary sources" and it claims that its material is "delivered without political bias, filter, or agenda." At various times in its history, however, the group has been dogged by allegations that it secretly works with the CIA or governments allied with the United States....

Jamestown's work in the Caucasus region became the subject of scrutiny in April 2013 when Russian news sources reported that key Boston marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev—an ethnic Chechen who was raised in the United States but reportedly visited with Islamic militants in the restive Russian state of Dagestan—had attended Jamestown-funded workshops in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi in 2011. The workshops were hosted by an organization called the Caucasian Fund (sometimes rendered as Fund for the Caucasus or the Kavkazsky Fund), which has an office in Boston and has been linked to the Georgian government.

Documents released by the Georgian Interior Ministry in 2013 suggest that at the time of Tsarnaev's alleged visit, the Georgian government was actively training and ferrying militants into neighboring Dagestan as part of its rivalry with Russia, with whom it fought a brief war in 2008. Some observers have speculated that the Jamestown-sponsored workshops may have been part of this effort. Former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has denied the claims.

All of sudden Saakashvili is turning up everywhere. And apparently, for Jamestown, like other inside-the-Beltway institutions, there are good Islamic terrorists and bad Islamic terrorists. Anti-Russian, anti-Syrian, good. Anti-Iraqi, bad.

Issues & Studies for its part is a publication of Taipeh's Institute of International Relations of National Chengchi University, which Wikipedia describes as "founded by the Kuomintang-dominated Nationalist government of Nanjing in 1927 as an incubator for senior civil service in China.... [It] specializes in Arts & Humanities, Social Sciences, Management, Politics, and International Affairs programs. A great number of graduate students work in government departments."

Given the links of the sources to Western intelligence and Taiwan, I cannot consider the information presented as either unbiased or reliable.

The most I would venture to say that China, urged on by its long-time regional protege Pakistan and its new-found (ca. 1980) friend in Washington, permitted Chinese arms shipped to Pakistan to be supplied to the mujaheddin, and gave permission for supply overflights by their Western and Arabic patrons. Given that the Taliban, if not the mujaheddin themselves, supplied Uighur separatists with arms, training, and bases for their own terror campaign in China, Peking is paying the price for the errors of its friends.

Primary responsibility still resides in Washington, whose idea it was, as well as in Islamabad and Riyadh.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 8 2015 23:57 utc | 83

Another incident video making the rounds over perceived police brutality of a minority.

Is there a campaign brewing to bring local police under a new federal system, or what?

Posted by: DamascusFalling | Jun 9 2015 3:34 utc | 84

Terrific piece by Alfred W. McCoy via naked capitalism The Geopolitics of American Global Decline: Washington Versus China in the Twenty-First Century

Posted by: Nana2007 | Jun 9 2015 4:49 utc | 85

in re 84 -- Perceived idiocy. There is absolutely no campaign for a national police force.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 9 2015 11:31 utc | 86

@86 Oh really? https://www.google.com/search?q=federalizing+police&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Posted by: DamascusFalling | Jun 9 2015 15:23 utc | 87

The spokespeople for the Luhansk & Donetsk People’s Republics has just submitted amendments to the Ukrainian constitution that identify Crimea as Ukrainian territory. And Pavel Gubarev was just arrested yesterday.

Posted by: MapInto | Jun 9 2015 15:59 utc | 88

DF@87

The police have long been integrated with the Feds if not actually federalized especially since 9/11 and the creation of Homeland Security. The new federal programs for some city's forces are little more than window dressing trying to put lipstick on the pigs and convince the rubes that these Ruling Class occupying forces are really made up of Officer Friendlies.

The links you provided only show that the authors don't understand that local people have never had control of these occupying forces.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jun 9 2015 19:04 utc | 89

hi, b, re:Broken Layout

You can try to add the following in the CSS rules to fix the bug with large URLs:

div.comments-body {
-ms-word-break: break-all;
word-break: break-all;
/* Non standard for webkit */
word-break: break-word;
}

I tried with this old Open Thread and works ok for me in Opera.

Based on this solution:
How to force a line break in a loooooong word in a DIV?
http://stackoverflow.com/a/18706058

Posted by: citizen X | Jun 9 2015 23:38 utc | 90

in re 87 --

Uh, yeah, really.

I’m downgrading the report from "perceived" through "suspected" all the way down to "confirmed idiocy." I thought I caught the aroma of freshly brewed tea in "perceived police brutality of a minority," and then you kindly poured a cup. So let's party.

Let me think, how many videos have we seen of late of white folks getting shot down by police for just walking away? Here's how prosecutors in South Carolina perceived that, BTW. How many times have white couples been gunned down in a stopped car by an officer who jumped on the hood? Why is it that minorities are disproportionately arrested and incarcerated? I guess its just a matter of perception.

The lead result from your Google search is Obama Federalizes Police Forces in Six US Cities from the Tea Party News Network. Most of what I see there is similar hyperventilation. No campaign, but plenty of fear-mongering by the usual suspects.

How does under $5 mil. in grant money for pilot programs from a program active since 1994 (the Community Oriented Policing Service, or COPS) put you in control of 1/2 doz. police depts.? Let alone start federalizing the police. The Feds have been doling out money to local police since at least Johnson Administration.

Apparently, the TPNN has a serious credibility problem, even amongst “constitutional patriots.” Staffers Quit Tea Party News Network, Say Site Sees Readers As 'Unsophisticated Simpletons'. It notes that Joe the Plumber doesn't like them. Breitbart.com had a problem with them as early as 2013, over their trashing of Caribou Barbie.

Sheriffs – beloved by Tea Partiers everywhere – like COPS, while the NAACP approves of it as well.

Thought experiment -- lets say a group of minorities launched a confrontation like Cliven Bundy did out West recently? What do you think law enforcement might do?

Wayout at 89 --

They're under control of local folks, that being the local "in crowd" -- local oligarchies using their local money for local power.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 10 2015 0:00 utc | 91

Thank goodness for Alexander Mercouris. With re-fighting our intervention in Afghanistan, I'd fallen behind in keeping up with the Banderists. But here he comes to the rescue, linking the recent suppression of assorted protests. Crushing Gays and Maidan 3.0: How Right Wing Gang Violence Works in Ukraine

Given the economic crisis in Ukraine and the widespread disaffection it has caused, popular protests on Maidan Square might easily evolve into a serious challenge to the Maidan regime. After the trauma of the Maidan coup, the police and security services probably cannot be relied on. The militants of the far right groups however can, and they were quickly brought in to disperse the protests, which they did, just as they did in Odessa in May last year.

In return the Maidan regime has to tolerate the violence and criminal behaviour of these groups, the violence against Ukraine’s LGBT community being a case in point.

Every so often things go just a bit too far, provoking the odd crackdown on the groups’ wilder members....

However the reality of today’s Ukraine is that street-level violence and criminality have now become an integral element of its political system.

And Red Star over Donbass does the heavy lifting on the renewed fighting with Washington, Kiev open new military attack on Donbass republics. I might have been a little to sanguine about the front quieting down, it seems.

Though initially centered near Marinka, fighting has now spread across the entire “contact line” between Ukraine and the Donbass republics – the buffer zone established by the Minsk 2 ceasefire agreement in February.

The latest attack by the Kiev junta of oligarchs, neoliberal politicians and fascists comes after a month of steadily growing ceasefire violations by the Ukrainian military, mostly through indiscriminate shelling of civilian targets....

It was from the vicinity of Marinka that Ukrainian occupation forces launched many deadly artillery attacks targeting Gorlovka, Donetsk city, and other residential areas.

For weeks, the anti-fascist militias in Donetsk and Lugansk had warned of the quickening buildup of Kiev’s military forces in the region, including heavy weaponry expressly forbidden by the ceasefire agreement.

And for weeks, political leaders of Donbass shouted to the world that new provocations would likely coincide with a major meeting of the European Union powers, timed to help Washington gets it way with pursuing the war and extending sanctions against the Russian Federation....

The corporate media ignored all the warnings, while U.S. State Department officials denied Kiev’s continuous violations of the ceasefire.

On cue, Ukraine President Peter Poroshenko addressed parliament June 5, claiming that there were more than 9,000 Russian troops within 14 tactical groups on Ukrainian territory.

“I wonder how he counted them?” was the caustic response of Donetsk leader Zakharchenko. “The Ukrainian president’s talent is unique. It is very difficult to hide 9,000 troops of the Russian Armed Forces, not only from the OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe], but also from us....

“If there were 9,000 [Russian forces] here, I wouldn’t be explaining what happened in Krasnogorovka or Marinka. We would talk about [fighting in] Kiev or Kharkov.” (Dan-News.info, June 5)

Now that would be a discussion worth having, I think. With enough external pressure applied, hopefully internal contradictions will cause the junta's fall.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 10 2015 0:24 utc | 92

"The militants of the far right groups however can, and they were quickly brought in to disperse the protests"

Ukraine is under proper, textbook fascism. Paramilitary thugs (attracted by promises of social advancement and the right to plunder dissenters) are using violence to keep the oligarchy in power. Falling living standards for the working class and the working class political parties are outright suppressed, with public displays of ultra-nationalism and a war to keep the people occupied. This is precisely Naziism, with a small twist on the leader - in the case of the Ukraine, he is an oligarch and not a former military man. But, give them time - if Poroshenko goes, I doubt it will be another oligarch.

A perfect case study of fascism in the 21st Century, as a great many people predicted would arise. After all, the USA had the ideology following the Second World War and during the Cold War (instead of destroying it as they should have) in complete opposition to their ideological claims of "liberty" and "freedom" and "fighting the Nazis". And though they haven't adopted or rehabilitated the Nazis, they have tried to polish the form itself.* In fact, European fascism is the model for all of the governments the US installed during the Cold War and continues to put into power today - Pinochet in Chile, Suharto in Indonesia, Thieu in Vietnam, Mobutu in the DRC, the Taliban in Afghanistan, etc... etc... and now Poroshenko in Ukraine.

* The ideolgical battle is still waged. saw yesterday a YouTube video titled "The Nazis were Socialists, Not Right Wingers". You'd have to have an IQ of below room temperature to not catch that "socialist" aspects of Fascism are just a ruse. Just look at the difference between the treatment of the Czar and the Russian nobility during the Revolution, versus that which was faced by their German counterparts.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 10 2015 6:06 utc | 93

change last sentence to:

...treatment of the Czar and the Russian nobility during the Russian Revolution, versus that which was faced by their German counterparts during the Nazis' seizure of power.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 10 2015 6:13 utc | 94

Wayoutwest is the perfect foil for MoA. He comes off as a progressive concerned with civil rights, violence, etc etc... all the good things MoA is about. But his concern, like so many "progressives" in the Obama-era, stops right at the US border. Outside, he's a big fan of ISIS, he is always tearing down Iran and Hezbollah, tries to tell us how "autocratic" Russia is, and even boosts Israel.

It's a brilliant strategy for the Democratic party. Of course, it has only one flaw: it is completely hypocritical.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 10 2015 6:28 utc | 95

@rufus / 45

"I am unclear why land reform and the education of women would be corrupt and tribal."

Well, as Will Rogers used to say: "all I know is what I read in the papers". And according to that documentary b linked to, it was suggested that the land reform - certainly positive in principal and often in practice - faced the common problem of corruption. One tribe was using the reforms to unfairly give out parcels based on tribal affiliation or something of this nature, I don't recall precisely. Not that the whole program was worthless, but the best laid plans of mice and men of course.... The education of women was not criticized, you brought that up, not I.

-------

Unrelated: speaking of that Will Rogers quote, that's one of my all time favorites. It is just full of tremendous meaning if you ask me. Its precisely true - for the vast majority of people, we only have interaction with these events, and form all of our opinions based on, what we have read. There are certainly people here on MoA who have first hand experience with some of these topics, but most, myself included, don't. So it is interesting to consider, then, how it is we piece together opinions, claims, etc... anyway. Its amazing how involved we can be with issues that really we have no relationship with. Something we can only think about, not feel or touch for the most part.

It definitely has struck me, though, that since the internet has become common, the level of intensity that people regard the news and current events has become greatly raised. People seem, to me, to be much more intensely psychically involved with whatever earthquake or Ebola or whatever is happening that day than they used to be. And I don't think this is a positive development, because it means very clearly a huge increase in the power of the Media. I think social media is an extremely powerful force that the public doesn't yet understand its power. And I think that people are clearly being manipulated more than ever, and have less "private space" in their heads than ever before, and pay less personal attention to their personal issues than ever before.

It's amazing, and a little scary. Its good to read some of the scholarship on the effects of social media on people. We have to educate ourselves on these new forms of communication, just as the world had to understand the effects of television on people's thinking. Facebook Politica and Social Media

It's good to look at scholarship on these things, because rarely will serious discussions make it to the news anymore, or in time. The only thing I can even recall being in the news concerning these issues was when Facebook was caught experimenting with how to affect people's emotions without their permission.

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 10 2015 6:57 utc | 96

I saw the Israelis are already squawking for more US weapons - this time (amusingly) the excuse is that the Gulf States are being heavily by the US to prepare them for a fight with Iran. Apparently the Israelis are worried that the Gulf States will turn around and attack Tel Aviv....

It comes down to more and more foreign demands for cash from the completely tapped out US taxpayer. Though I'm sure the deficit hawks will figure out a way to pay for this by letting a few more Americans go cold, or hungry, or without medical care. WE HAVE OUR PRIORITIES.

Of course, it will just happen to work out for the Military Industrial Complex. They'll be getting all that money, those good US Corporate Citizens... what are the chances the pay taxes though?

Ya'alon: US supply of advanced arms to Gulf can challenge Israel

At Herzliya Conference, defense minister voices concern over Gulf armament against Iran.

Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon voiced concern on Tuesday that Washington's supply of advanced arms to Gulf Arab states to deter Iran could eventually challenge Israel's US-backed regional military supremacy.

"Even if there are not now any hostile designs (among them) against us, as we know in the Middle East intentions are liable to change. The capability will without a doubt be there and this must be prepared for," he said.

Setting the stage for talks later in the day with General Martin Dempsey, the head of the US armed forces, Ya'alon spoke at a security conference of a need to maintain Israel's "qualitative edge" as it seeks increased defense grants from Washington.

link to ynet.com

Posted by: guest77 | Jun 10 2015 7:21 utc | 97

@92 Unfortunately, OSCE say something completely opposite: it was the DNR that accumulated heavy battle vehicles and started the attack in Marinka. Also in the earlier reports OSCE clearly notes that the artillery attacks violating the Minsk agreement were performed by both sides equally.

Posted by: Massi | Jun 10 2015 7:27 utc | 98

Laguerre @81: No, I was ridiculing your position, since the three _major_ recent moves by the Saudis and their unofficial armies have all been major positive moves for American imperial interests as well.

As I (but not you) said, downward, toward regimes and lands lower on the imperial totem pole, like Yemen (at least Saudi and the US _think_ it is lower on the totem pole), Saudi Arabia is allowed to kill and maim to its hearts' content.

Posted by: fairleft | Jun 10 2015 7:43 utc | 99

who would deny a pilgrim water on the temple mount.who would put a rock upon a sapling ....a blind man searching for a blessing

weep for what you sow

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/196113

Posted by: mcohen | Jun 10 2015 8:04 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.