War-Whore of Wall Street: Hillary Clinton

WAR-WHORE of WALL STREET https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCOv7C9g7xo&feature=youtu.be DANGER EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO ALL HUMANITY Divert the nuclear nightmare that is now coming into view. Hillary Clinton a threat to all humanity: neo-con warhawk liar unindicted criminal Wall Street puppet 'Progressive left', instead of warning against her, is lecturing that it is 'duty' to help her get elected Professor Michel Chossudovsky "In so many words, Hillary Clinton's foreign stands as:  "to blow up the planet". She has made statements to the effect that a first strike nuclear attack against Russia or Iran is "on the table", so that if she in the White House she could, in fact, unleash the unspoken, which is World War III. I think this is something we have to address, both in terms of analysis, but in terms of political choice, so that anybody that wants to blow up the planet is not 'progressive'. Secondly, she has a criminal record.  Not only in regards to the e-mail scandal, but also in relation to the Clinton Foundation, which is involved in fraud, money laundering, political cronyism etc.  It is amply documented. So that, in effect, the choice for the American people is to elect a war criminal." end Narrator Too many people become attached to the personality of these political personas, or fixated on the 'D' or the 'R' after their name.  This clouds their judgement and stops them from seeing their policies and agenda for what they really are. Of: Diana Johnstone author:  'Queen of Chaos:  The Misadventures of Hillary Clinton' Narrator says Johnson believes: Hillary is best understood, not as a person, but as the instrument for the think tanks, Wall Street financiers and other connected insiders who want to embroil the United States in more illegal wars and plunder the country and its people even further. Diana Johnstone author:  'Queen of Chaos:  The Misadventures of Hillary Clinton' [Hillary Clinton] "... is a shallow, ambitious woman, who has decided to make herself the instrument of the Washington think tank persuasion, and is using that to pose as a great 'expert' on world affairs, to be elected as president. She simply is the embodiment of all that is terrible in American foreign policy, that has developed over the past decades." Narrator "It is no hyperbole to say that the election of Hillary Clinton as president this November would be one of the great tragedies in the history of the United States and perhaps the world." Globeral Research - GRTV.ca The Globalisation of War:  America's "Long War" Against Humanity Prof. Michel Chossudovsky globalresearch.ca Professor Michel Chossudovsky America's hegemonic project in the post 9/11 era is the globalisation of war, whereby the US-NATO military machine, coupled with: covert intelligence operations; economic sanctions; and the thrust of regime change; is deployed in all major regions of the world. "The threat of pre-emptive nuclear war is also used to blackmail countries into submission." This long war against humanity is carried out at the height of the most serious economic crisis in modern history; it is intimately related to a process of financial restructuring, which has resulted in the collapse of national economies and impoverishment of large sectors of the world population. "The ultimate objective is WORLD CONQUEST UNDER THE CLOAK OF 'HUMAN RIGHTS' and 'WESTERN DEMOCRACY'." Michel Chossudovsky (Russian Jewish ancestry) Canadian economist & author Professor of economics at the University of Ottawa President & Director of Centre for Research on Globalisation, f. 2001 located Montreal, Canada economic adviser to governments developing countries consultant for international orgs incl:  UN, UN Economic Commission for Latin America & Caribbean other: visiting professor Chile during the 1970–1973 government of Salvador Allende led to examination of economic policies associated with: International Monetary Fund and/or World Bank programs conclusion: CRIMINALISATION OF GLOBAL ECONOMY increasingly mobile capital & tax havens facilitated the criminalization of the global economy via movements of large amounts of: drug money other illegal finance draining billions of dollars in CAPITAL FLIGHT = dramatically REDUCING TAX REVENUES = paralysing SOCIAL PROGRAMS = driving up BUDGET DEFICITS = accumulation of LARGE PUBLIC DEBT RUSSIA 1993 Chossudovsky authored article in The New York Times WARNING:  Boris Yeltsin's neoliberal reforms and privatization policies would lead to disaster contributor to: Le Monde Diplomatique (France) RT News (Russia) Press TV (Iran) UKRAINE - CIA COUP Chossudovsky: deaths of protesters during the Euromaidan demonstrations in Ukraine =  "triggered by Neo-Nazi elements", used "to break the legitimacy of a duly elected government." SYRIA 2012 article, Chossudovsky:  "characterized the Free Syrian Army as "a de facto paramilitary creation of NATO."" Interviewed in documentary:   'The Weight of Chains' 2014:  awarded Gold Medal of Merit by Serbia government wikipedia COMMENT That was interesting. I think I like Professor Michel Chossudovsky.

Filthy Wall Street & London Banker Swindlers in Collusion with Arabs, Knee-Capping Targeted Economies

Filthy Wall Street & London Banker Swindlers in Collusion with Arabs, Knee-Capping Targeted Economies SOURCE http://www.mintpressnews.com/brics-attack-western-banks-governments-launch-full-spectrum-assault-russia-part/215761/ Eric Draitser BRICS Under Attack: Western Banks, Governments Launch Full-Spectrum Assault On Russia (Part I) Russia is the target of a multi-faceted, asymmetric campaign of destabilization that has employed economic, political, and psychological forms of warfare -- each of which has been specifically designed to inflict maximum damage on the Kremlin. By Eric Draitser @stopimperialism | April 20, 2016  This article is part of a series on Western meddling to foment unrest and destabilize BRICS nations in an effort to ensure the continuation of Western economic and political control over the Global South. The first two parts, focusing on Brazil and South Africa, can be found here and here. Up next: Part II on the assault on Russia, which focuses on the political, psychological and military aspects that run in tandem with the economic war on Moscow. NEW YORK — The U.S.-NATO Empire, with its centers of power in Washington, on Wall Street, and in the city of London, is on the offensive against the BRICS countries. This assault takes many forms, each tailored to its specific target. The ongoing soft coup in Brazil has recently entered a new stage with the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff of the left-wing Workers’ Party. Simultaneously, the destabilization of the ANC-led government in South Africa continues as political forces align to remove President Jacob Zuma. These two situations illustrate clearly the very potent forms of subversion via Western-funded political formations and movements being employed against Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, the bloc of emerging economies also known as BRICS.  However, when it comes to a country as large as Russia, with its vast military capabilities, consolidated and wildly popular political leadership, and growing antagonism toward the West, the tools available to the Empire to undermine and destabilize are in some ways more limited. Indeed, in the context of Russia, the popular mobilization pretext does not apply, and so that weapon in the imperial arsenal is blunted considerably. But there are other, equally potent (and equally dangerous) methods to achieve the desired effect.  Russia is the target of a multi-faceted, asymmetric campaign of destabilization that has employed economic, political, and psychological forms of warfare, each of which has been specifically designed to inflict maximum damage on the Kremlin. While the results of this multi-pronged assault have been mixed, and their ultimate effect being the subject of much debate, Moscow is, without a doubt, ground zero in a global assault against the BRICS nations. Economic war: Hitting Russia where it’s vulnerable While Russia is a world class power militarily, it is highly vulnerable economically. For that obvious reason, this area has been a primary focus of the destabilization thrust. Russia has for decades been overly reliant, if not entirely dependent, on revenues from the energy sector to maintain its economic growth and fund its budget. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration and Russia’s Federal Customs Service, oil and gas sales accounted for 68 percent of Russia’s total export revenues in 2013. With more than two-thirds of total export revenues and roughly 50 percent of the federal budget, not to mention 25 percent of total GDP, coming from oil and gas revenue, Russia’s very economic survival has been as dependent on energy as almost any country in the world. In light of this, it’s no surprise that the drop in oil prices over the 18-month period from April 2014 to January 2016, which saw prices dive from $105 per barrel to under $30 per barrel, has caused tremendous economic instability in Russia. Even many leading Russian officials have conceded that the negative impact to Russia’s economy is substantial, to say the least.  At the World Economic Forum in January, former Russian Finance Minister Alexey Kudrin explained that not only has the drop in oil prices badly hurt the Russian economy, but the worst may be yet to come. Kudrin noted the potential for prices to drop even further, possibly even below $20 per barrel, and he warned that the impact to the economy will be significant. Specifically, it’s not just the loss of revenue, but the negative effect on wages and the currency which have many economic analysts and political figures worried.  According to the Russian Federal Statistics Service, real wages for Russian workers have dropped significantly since the end of 2014, with steep declines throughout 2015 continuing into early 2016. This has been felt by ordinary Russians, whose wages have stagnated while inflation causes prices to shoot upwards and who have had to endure belt-tightening in terms of personal consumption, and at the national level, where the Russian government has been facing a potentially large budget shortfall for 2016. It must be noted, however, that recent months have seen an improvement in the relative performance of the ruble, but the long-term outlook from experts remains gloomy. This has led many Russian analysts and policymakers to advocate yet again for a decreased dependence on energy revenues. They argue that the current climate could force economic restructuring away from the critical energy sector. Aside from Kudrin, Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Trutnev made the case for potential “structural economic reforms,” as did Vladimir Mau of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.  Writing earlier this year in Vedomosti, Russia’s leading business publication, Mau explained: “The demand for oil as a commodity depends on technological progress…And it’s not obvious that oil as a fuel will be always in demand in times of economic growth. With the change of the technological model, it is not ruled out that oil will become just a stock commodity for the energy and chemical industry.” This last point — how oil is used relative to the market — is the most salient; in other words, it’s the financialization of oil. But the analysis must go a step further and explore how the financialization is, in effect, a weaponization process as oil prices become increasingly the playthings of powerful financial institutions, particularly the major banks on Wall Street and in the city of London. And this is no mere conspiracy theory. How Wall Street targeted Russia using oil In July 2013, Sen. Sherrod Brown, chair of the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection, opened a hearing to probe just how connected major Wall Street banks were to the holding of physical oil assets, and the attendant ability of these companies to manipulate oil prices. The findings of the hearing, considered damning by multiple analysts knowledgeable on the subject, prompted an investigation by the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, published as “Wall Street Bank Involvement with Physical Commodities.” The report highlighted just one of the big banks, Morgan Stanley, noting:   “One of Morgan Stanley’s primary physical oil activities was to store vast quantities of oil in facilities located within the United States and abroad. According to Morgan Stanley, in the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut area alone, by 2011, it had leases on oil storage facilities with a total capacity of 8.2 million barrels, increasing to 9.1 million barrels in 2012, and then decreasing to 7.7 million barrels in 2013. Morgan Stanley also had storage facilities in Europe and Asia.  According to the Federal Reserve, by 2012, Morgan Stanley held ‘operating leases on over 100 oil storage tank fields with 58 million barrels of storage capacity globally.’” Pam and Russ Martens of the well-respected financial analysis site WallStreetOnParade.com succinctly noted in their analysis of this issue: “With financial derivatives and 58 million barrels of physical storage capacity, it might not be so hard to manipulate the oil market.” Indeed, the sheer scope of Morgan Stanley’s market influence demonstrates the obvious fact that the major Wall Street banks, and their cousins in the city of London, are able to significantly affect global prices using multiple levers like supply and derivatives, among others. The Senate report’s brazen honesty is likely the main reason the corporate media failed to cover it all.  As noted in the report: “Due to their physical commodity activities, Goldman, JPMorgan, and Morgan Stanley incurred increased financial, operational, and catastrophic event risks, faced accusations of unfair trading advantages, conflicts of interest, and market manipulation, and intensified problems with being too big to manage or regulate, introducing new systemic risks into the U.S. financial system.” But perhaps most jaw-dropping is this January 2014 statement by Norman Bay, director of the Office of Enforcement at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, who testified before the Committee on Banking and Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection Subcommittee. He plainly outlined how the big banks manipulate global oil markets: “A fundamental point necessary to understanding many of our manipulation cases is that financial and physical energy markets are interrelated … a manipulator can use physical trades (or other energy transactions that affect physical prices) to move prices in a way that benefits his overall financial position. One useful way of looking at manipulation is that the physical transaction is a ‘tool’ that is used to ‘target’ a physical price.” When one considers how much influence these large banks have on global prices, it’s almost self-evident that they would be able to use oil prices to execute a political and geopolitical agenda. With that in mind, it seems highly suspicious (to say the least) that the collapse of the oil price coincided directly with Russia’s move to annex Crimea and assert its dominance over its sphere of influence, thereby effectively stopping the eastward expansion of NATO in Ukraine. It’s amusing then when one reads The New York Times reporting this month that “simple economics” explains the drop in oil prices. In fact, it’s clear that it’s just the opposite: The collapse of oil is the result of financial manipulation by Wall Street in the service of the broader agenda of the Empire. Indeed, in late 2014 Russian President Vladimir Putin implied strongly that the oil plunge had less to do with economic factors than with political decisions. Putin openly theorized: “There’s lots of talk about what’s causing (the lowering of the oil price). Could it be the agreement between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to punish Iran and affect the economies of Russia and Venezuela? It could.” Of course, Putin was not alone in this assessment, as many international observers spread “conspiracy theories” about collusion between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to deliberately depress oil prices by not cutting production despite all market indicators pointing to a needed decrease. With U.S.-Russia relations having reached their nadir at precisely that moment, and with Venezuela and Iran also on the enemies list, it is no surprise that many analysts around the world concluded that Washington and Riyadh were conspiring on oil for political reasons. Of course, the other major impact of the oil plunge on Russia has to do with the burgeoning energy-trade relationship between Russia and China. After the massive oil and gas deals announced between Russia and China in 2014 — deals worth hundreds of billions of dollars over the next three decades, it seems that Washington calculated that while it could not prevent the deals from moving forward, it could undermine them by fundamentally changing the calculus of the deals by tanking oil prices. In so doing, not only have the contracts been rendered less profitable for Russia, they are now subject to decreasing demand from China, which is experiencing its own economic slowdown.    In short, Russia’s attempt to break free of its dependence on revenue from gas sales to Europe by shifting its focus eastward has left Moscow in a bind. Facing the prospect of significantly less revenue than it anticipated coming from the deals with Beijing, Russia has been forced to adjust its own estimates and outlook for the coming years. Sanctions: The other economic weapon The overall impact of Western sanctions against Russia is a hotly debated subject. Russian media tends to downplay the overall impact of the sanctions, while the Western media paints a picture of imminent collapse. Notably, Paul Krugman, the leading liberal doomsayer, prognosticated in The New York Times in 2014 that “Putin’s Bubble Bursts,” warning that Russia was headed for economic meltdown thanks to the courageous sanctions regime imposed by the fearless leader President Barack Obama.  In reality, the sanctions had little immediate, direct impact on the Russian economy, but the indirect bruising might be significant, particularly over the medium- and long-term. Last year, the International Monetary Fund issued a report, noting: “IMF estimates suggest that sanctions and counter sanctions might have initially reduced real GDP by 1 to 1½ percent. Prolonged sanctions may compound already declining productivity growth. The cumulative output loss could amount to 9 percent of GDP over the medium term. However, the report’s authors underline that these model-driven results are subject to significant uncertainty.” But, looking beyond the raw numbers, one must realize that the policy prescriptions outlined by the IMF and leading economists internationally are perhaps the actual target for the West.  The IMF recommended “reforming the pension system” (read: reduce pensions), reducing energy subsidies, reducing tax exemptions, and other measures, while also suggesting that education, health care, and public investment be safeguarded. However, the subtext of the recommendations is that austerity, which by its very definition starves public programs of much needed funding, is the way to go for Russia. There are likely strategic planners in Washington who recognize that the political subversion model employed in Brazil and South Africa simply won’t work in Russia. If nothing else, the failed “White Revolution” protests of late 2011 led by Russian liberals and various pro-Western political forces, demonstrated unequivocally that the Russian state was prepared to prevent precisely this sort of outcome.  And so it seems that those who play on what former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski famously called “The Grand Chessboard,” have made their moves in an attempt to corner Russia economically. Whether that strategy has been, or will be, effective likely depends on perspective. While it alone will not bring about the Western pipe dream of regime change in Russia, the Empire’s elites are banking on the collective assault on Russia and the BRICS broadly to do what political subversion alone could not. About the author Eric Draitser Eric Draitser is a geopolitical analyst based in New York and the founder of StopImperialism. More articles by Eric Draitser [MintPress] SOURCE http://www.mintpressnews.com/brics-attack-western-banks-governments-launch-full-spectrum-assault-russia-part/215761/ -------/\/\/ Eric Draitser "Eric Draitser is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City and the founder of StopImperialism.com. He is a regular contributor to RT, Counterpunch, New Eastern Outlook, Press TV, and many other news outlets. Visit StopImperialism.com for all his work."   [RTNews] -------/\/\/ Enemies of the Free World: Morgan Stanley Goldman Sachs JP Morgan City of London Wall Street International Monetary Fund The New York Times -------/\/\/ COMMENT Help save Russia & Brics countries from greedy Wall Street & city of London banks.  Call for worldwide privatisation of their foreign assets ... that ought to throw a spanner in the works.  *Not sure I'll remember much of this.

Yugoslavia, Serbia, Kosovo: Global Pax Americana Post-Modern Colonialism / UN Security Council Breaks International Law

Yugoslavia, Serbia, Kosovo: Global Pax Americana Post-Modern Colonialism / UN Security Council Breaks International Law (UN Resolution:  1244) Assoc. Professor Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirovic, Mykolas Romeris University, Institute of Political Sciences, vladislav@sotirovic.eu www.sotirovic.eu http://www.globalresearch.ca/ethnic-cleansing-in-kosovo-and-the-rights-of-the-serbian-minority-ten-years-after-the-march-pogrom-2004/5416867 Ethnic Cleansing in Kosovo and the Rights of the Serbian Minority: Ten Years After The “March Pogrom 2004″ By Vladislav B. Sotirović Global Research, November 29, 2014 This article deals with the question of political and human/minority rights in the region of Kosovo & Metohija ten years after the "March Pogrom 2004“ and fifteen years after the NATO’s military aggression on Serbia and Montenegro and occupation of the region. An importance of this research topic is in a fact that for the first time in the European history a terrorist-style and mafia-ruled (quasi)independent state was created by a full diplomatic, political, economic, military and financial sponsorship by the West under the umbrella of the NATO’s and the EU’s protective administration. The precedence of Kosovo’s self-proclaimed independence in February 2008 already had several negative 'domino effect' consequences elsewhere in Europe (the Caucasus, the Crimean Peninsula…). The aim of the paper is to present a current situation in Kosovo & Metohija and possible consequences of the Kosovo case for the international relations and the post-Cold War world’s order. Global Pax Americana and post-modern colonialism It passed ten years after the "March Pogrom 2004“ in Kosovo & Metohija against the local Serbs organized and done by Kosovo Albanians, led by the veterans from the Kosovo Liberation Army – the KLA and logistically suported by the NATO’s occupation troops in Kosovo & Metohija under the name of the Kosovo Forces – the KFOR. That was simply a continuation of the last stage (up to now) of dismemberment of ex-Yugoslavia – the Kosovo War (1998-1999) and the NATO’s military intervention (March 24th–June 10th, 1999) against and aggression on Serbia and Montenegro (at that time composing the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia – the FRY) by violating the international law.[1] In this context, we can say that at the end of the 20th century the fate of ex-Yugoslavia was being determined by several international organizations, but not decisively by the Yugoslavs themselves.[2] The NATO’s military intervention against the FRY in March-June of 1999 (led by the USA) for the formal reason of protection of the human (Albanian) rights in Kosovo,[3] marked a crucial step toward finishing the process of creation of the global "Pax Americana“ in the form of the NATO’s World Order – the NWO.[4] As the NATO used force against the FRY without the UN Security Council sanctions and permission and also without an official proclamation of the war, we can call this military intervention in fact as a pure "agression“ against one sovereign state.[5] In the Balkans NATO acquired not only a big military experience and an opportunity to exhaust old and use new weapons,[6] but also managed to enhance its activities, making its way to a global organization. After the Kosovo War the UN’s Security Council Resolution 1244 (from June 1999) gave the mandate for the effective protection of the universal human and minority rights values of all inhabitants on the territory of the southern Serbia’s Autonomous Region of Kosovo & Metohija (in English language known only as Kosovo).[7] At such a way, the responsibility for protection of human lives, freedom and security in Kosovo was thus transferred to the “international” public authorities, but in fact only to the NATO: the administration of the United Nations’ Mission in Kosovo – the UNMIK, and the “international” military forces – (the KFOR, Kosovo Forces). Unfortunately, very soon this responsibility was totally challenged as around 200,000 ethnic Serbs and members of other non-Albanian communities were expelled from the region by the local ethnic Albanians led by the KLA’s veterans. At any case, mostly suffered the ethnic Serbs. It left today only up to 3% of the non-Albanians in Kosovo in comparison to the pre-war situation out of a total number of the non-Albanians in this province that was at least 12%. Only up to March 2004 around 120 Serb Orthodox Christian religious objects and cultural monuments were devastated or destroyed.[8] However, the most terrible in the series of Kosovo Albanian eruptions of violence against the Serbs living in this region was organized and carried out between March 17th-19th, 2004, having all the features of the Nazi-style organized pogroms. During the tragic events of the “March Pogrom 2004”, in a destructive assault of tens of thousands by Kosovo Albanians led by armed groups of redressed the KLA’s veterans (the Kosovo Protection Corpus – the KPC, a future Kosovo Albanian regular army), a systematic ethnic cleansing of the remaining Serbs was carried out, together with destruction of houses, other property, cultural monuments and Serbian Orthodox Christian religious sites. Nevertheless, the international civil and military forces in the region have been only “stunned” and “surprised” what was going on. The “March Pogrom 2004”, which resulted, according to the documentary sources, in the loss of several tens of lives, several hundreds of wounded (including and the members of the KFOR as well), more than 4.000 exiled ethnic Serbs, more than 800 Serbian houses set on fire and 35 destroyed or severely damaged Serbian Orthodox Christian churches and cultural monuments,[9] surely revealed the real situation on the ground in Kosovo even 60 years after the Holocaust during the WWII. Unfortunately, the attempts of the Serbs and especially by the government of Serbia at that time led by Dr. Vojislav Koštunica (a leader of the Democratic Party of Serbia) to call an international attention to the human and minority rights violation situation in this region proved to have been both unsuccessful and justified. It is thus necessary to reiterate that ethnic cleansing of the Serbs (and other non-Albanian population) in the region of Kosovo by the local Albanians after the mid-June 1999 means putting into practice the annihilation of a Serbian territory of exquisite historic, spiritual, political and cultural top-level significance in terms of the Serbian nation, state and the Church, and its every-day visible transformation into another Albanian state in the Balkans with a real wish and possibility to unify it with a neighboring motherland Albania. At such a way, the main geopolitical goal of the First Albanian Prizren League from June 1878 is being brought to its attainment, including its implications for the Preševo Valley in South-East Serbia, Western Macedonia up to the River of Vardar, a Greek portion of the Epirus province and the Eastern Montenegro. It is known that the Albanian political workers required within a framework of the First Albanian Prizren League (1878-1881) a creation of a Greater Albania as an autonomous province in the Ottoman Empire composed by “all Albanian ethnic territories”. More precisely, it was required that four Ottoman provinces (vilayets) of Scodra, Ioannina, Bitola and Kosovo would be combined into a single Albanian national Ottoman province of Vilayet of Albania. However, in two out of four required “Albanian” provinces – Bitola and Kosovo, the ethnic Albanians did not compose even a single majority at that time.[10] Nevertheless, such a Greater Albania with a capital in Tirana existed during the WWII under Mussolini’s and Hitler’s protectorate. The Albanian national movement, established in accordance with the program of the First Albanian Prizren League in 1878, is keeping on with its terrorist activities up today. It was particularly active in the period of Italian and German supported Greater Albania from April 1941 to May 1945, when it undertook the organization of the Albanian Quisling network of agents. During this period of time around 100,000 Serbs from Kosovo & Metohija have been expelled from their homes to addition of around 200,000 expelled during Socialist Yugoslavia from 1945 to 1980 lead by Josip Broz Tito who was of Slovene and Croat ethnic origin born in Croatia and notorious anti-Serb.[11] The process of articulation of the Albanian secessionist movement in Kosovo & Metohija continued during the post-WWII Yugoslavia and was carried out by Kosovo Albanian anti-Serb communist partocracy. The process became particularly intense and successful in the period between 1968-1989. For instance, only from 1981 to 1987 there were 22,307 Serbs and Montenegrins who were forced to leave Kosovo & Metohija.[12] The entrance of the NATO’s troops in the region in June 1999 marks the beginning of the last stage of the Albanian-planned and carried out the “Final Solution” of the Serbian Question on the territory of Kosovo & Metohija – a historical and cultural cradle of the Serbian nation, but in which only the ethnic Albanians ... [are?] to live in the future. In the light of the main Albanian goal – to establish ethnically pure Greater Albania – it is “understandable” why it is so important to destroy any Serbian trace on the territory defined by the aspirations. The Albanian terrorism has been developing for more than two centuries. It has the profile of ethnically, i.e. the Nazi-racist style motivated terrorism (like the Croat one), marked by excessive animosity against the Serbs.[13] Its principal features are the following: All kinds of repressive measures directed against the Serbian population. Carrying practical actions to force the Serbs to leave their homes. Devastation of the Serbian Orthodox Christian religious objects and other cultural monuments belonging to the Serbian nation which are clearly testifying ten centuries long presence of the Serbs in Kosovo & Metohija. Destruction of the complete infrastructure used by the members of the Serbian community. Destruction of the Serbian cemeteries what means de facto destruction of the historical roots of the Serbs in the region. A long standing Muslim Albanian oppression and terror against the Christian Orthodox Serbian community in Kosovo & Metohija is a specific phenomenon with the grave consequences not only for the local Serbs. It became, however, clear that sooner or later it will bring about severe problems for the rest of Europe as well. Ten years have passed from the "March Pogrom 2004“ and fifteen years  since the NATO’s military aggression against a sovereign European state of the FRY. At the moment, the crucial questions are: 1) What goals did NATO pursue? 2) Whether it managed to cope with its tasks in the following (15) years? 3) What did these years bring to those who threw bombs and those who were attacked? It has to be made clear that during the Kosovo War the NATO did not achieve a military victory as it failed to destroy the army of the FRY and the soldiers’ morale. However, a campaign of bombing got the right political atmosphere for destroying Serbia (purposely not so much Montenegro) and for imposing their conditions on the Serbian government, including the rules of the cooperation with the EU, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (in the Hague) and with the NATO as well. After June 1999 Serbia lost almost all opportunities to control its own state’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and national security becoming in a pure sense of meaning a western political and economic colony. After several years of injustice and punishment by the West before 1999 the Serbs as a nation lost the will to fight, to resist as they were practically alone when tried to repel the attack of the powerful western military alliance in March-June 1999. As a consequence, after June 1999 it became much easier for the West to continue a process of destruction of Yugoslavia and to carry out a policy of transforming the region into its own colonial domain with occupied Kosovo & Metohija as the best example of "die rückkehr des kolonialismus“.[14]  [Germ. / Eng:  ie.  "the return of colonialism"] In October 2000 Slobodan Milosević, who was a head of Serbia for ten years, was ousted by the street revolution putsch-style like it was done with Ukrainian president Viktor Janukovich in Kiev in February 2004.[15] At first sight, the move came as unexpected, easy and legal, in the other words – Yugoslavia’s home affair. However, the "Revolution of the Fifth October 2000“ in Belgrade, in fact, had been very thoroughly prepared by special divisions ("Otpor“ or "Resistance“) sponsored by the West, especially by the CIA. The method proved to be so successful that, according to one western documentary movie based on the testimonies by the members of the Serbian “Otpor“ movement, it was later used in Georgia (the "Rose Revolution“ in November 2003) and Ukraine (the "Orange Revolution“ from late November 2004 to January 2005 and finally in 2013/2014), but failed in Moldova and Iran in 2009. The same source claims that the Georgian opposition were taught in Serbia, while their Ukrainian colleagues of the "Orange Revolution“ were drilled also in Serbia and in Georgia.[16] From the time of the end of the Cold War (1989) Serbia remained as a symbol of independence and disobedience to the NATO’s World Order in Europe. However, the new authorities in Serbia after October 2000 obeyed to the NATO’s World Order and everything went smoothly. The dismemberment of the FRY started when having arrived in Belgrade in February 2003, Javier Solana, a top the EU representative and official, suggested to a group of officials from Serbia and Montenegro to admit that the FRY ceased to exist, and adopt the Constitution charter, written in Brussels. Its text was proclaiming, for the beginning, the appearance of a new country. Solana did not face any resistance. Consequently, the FRY was renamed to the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, and officially abolished the name ”Yugoslavia” that was in official use from 1929. In 2006 Montenegro and  Serbia declared independence, thereby ending the common South Slavic state (only Bulgarians have been out from this state as the South Slavs) established in 1918 under the original name of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (this name was used till 1929). It was Javier Solana who did it regardless the fact that he up today remains a war criminal for majority of the Serbs as he bombed their country in 1999 as the General Secretary of the NATO killing 3,500 citizens of Serbia including and children and women with a material damage to the country around 200,000 billion US $.[17] After the year of 2000 it was easier to implement the NATO’s plans which seemed simply fantastic under Slobodan Milošević as president of Serbia and later the FRY.[18] The last Yugoslavia (Serbia & Montenegro) was undermined, its integration slowed down till final dissolution in 2006 and Serbia’s strength exhausted. What the NATO, USA and EU failed to achieve in the castle of Rambouillet (in France) in 1998/1999 (during the ultimatum-negotiations with S. Milošević on Kosovo crisis) and through 78 days of cruel and inhuman bombing in March-June 1999, they got on July 18th, 2005, when Serbia and Montenegro signed a deal with the NATO “On the Lines of Communication”. This was a technical agreement which allows the NATO’s personnel and equipment to transit through the country. Under the deal, the NATO could enjoy such opportunities for quite a long time – “until all peacekeeping operations in the Balkans are over”. Thus the NATO was given the green light to enlarge its presence in the region and control the army of both Serbia and Montenegro. On April 1st, 2009 Albania and Croatia have completed the accession process, and have joined the NATO as full members and at a such a way surrounding Serbia and Montenegro by NATO members from all sides except from Bosnian-Herzegovinian. Today the Balkans are NATO’s permanent military base. For instance, in October 2008 Serbia’s defence minister and the NATO’s officials signed agreement on information security, which allows the NATO to control everyone who deals with their documents or just cooperates with them. For the very reason the NATO insisted on secrecy of the negotiations with Serbia. The aftermath of the 1999 aggression on Serbia and Montenegro for the NATO was the most favourable. Nobody condemned NATO and they felt even more confident in global perspective (Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003…). In the recent years the world has witnessed that the NATO was making several attempts of its own expansion. Currently, the NATO’s military bloc is occupying more positions at the Balkans, using old and building new military camps with attempt to include into its organization Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina (the later one after cancellation of the Republic of Srpska). Still existing a huge NATO’s military camp "Bondsteel“ in Kosovo & Metohija is the best proof that the region is going to be under the US/NATO’s dominance for a longer period of time if the balance between the Great Powers (the US/Russia/China) will not be changed. However, the current crisis over Ukraine is the first herald of such change, i.e. of the beginning of the new Cold War era. The most disappointed fact in the present post-war Kosovo reality is for sure an ethnic and cultural cleansing of all non-Albanians and not-Albanian cultural heritage under the NATO/KFOR/EULEX/UNMIK umbrella. The proofs are evident and visible on every corner of Kosovo territory, but purposely not covered by the western mass media and politicians. For instance, on the arrival of the KFOR (an international, but in fact the NATO’s "Kosovo Forces“) and the UNMIK (the "United Nations’ Mission in Kosovo“) to Kosovo & Metohija in 1999, all names of the towns and streets in this province were renamed to have the (Muslim) Albanian forms or new names. The monuments to Serbian heroes like the monument  devoted to duke Lazar (who led the Serbian Christian army during the Kosovo Battle on June 28th, 1389 against the Muslim Turks) in the town of Gnjilane, were demolished. The Serbs were and are getting killed, assassinated, wounded and abducted, their houses burned to the ground. As we mentioned earlier, the most infamous ethnic cleansing was done between March 17th and 19th 2004 – the "March Pogrom“. As of today, a number of the Serbs that were killed or went missing in Kosovo & Metohija from June 1999 onward (after the KFOR arrived), is measured in thousands, the number of demolished Serbian Christian Orthodox churches and monasteries is measured in hundreds, and the number of burned down Serbian houses in tens of thousands. Even though the KFOR had as much as 50,000 soldiers in the beginning as well as several thousand of policemen and civilian mission members, mainly none of the above mentioned crimes have been solved. In fact, murdering a Serb in Kosovo is not considered as a crime, on a contrary, the murderers of children and the elderly are being rewarded as heroes by their ethnic Albanian compatriots. The province is almost ethnically cleaned like Albania and Croatia. For the matter-of-fact, according to the last pre-war official Yugoslav census of 1991 there were 13% of non-Albanians in Kosovo & Metohija (in reality surely more). However, it is estimated that today 97% of Kosovo & Metohija’s population is only the ethnic Albanian. In the light of the main national goal by the Albanians – the establishment of another Albanian state in the Balkans and Europe, as the first step towards the pan-Albanian state unification – we can "understand“ why it is important to destroy any Serbian trace in the "territory defined by the aspirations“.[19] In the name of a Greater Albania The final stage of cutting of Kosovo & Metohija from their motherland of Serbia came on February 17th, 2008 when Kosovo Albanians received Washington’s permission to proclaim its formal (quasi)independence what happened in fact later than expected by Russia and China. At the UN Security Council Moscow said "no“ to Kosovo’s independence as Russia respects interests of Serbia and officially condemns all attempts to impose decisions on other members of the international community by breaking the international law (in the Kosovo & Metohija case it is the UN Resolution 1244). The fact is that the Serbs have not forgotten Kosovo, but have not done much about it either. Now there are some 80 states that recognized Kosovo independence, including 23 EU and 24 NATO members (out of 192 UNO members).[20] Almost all of them are the neighbours of Serbia and with the exception of Bosnia-Herzegovina all the ex-Yugoslav republics have recognized Kosovo. Bosnia-Herzegovina did not recognize it for the very reason: the Republic of Srpska, still as an autonomous political unit within Bosnia-Herzegovina alongside with the Muslim-Croat Federation according to the Dayton/Paris Peace Agreement in 1995, has and use the veto right. At the moment, in Kosovo there is the EULEX (European civil mission) and the Kosovo issue is gradually being moved out of the UNO jurisdiction and out of reach of the Russian veto in the UN Security Council becoming more and more the NATO and the EU governed territory. There is and the so-called Kosovo Security Forces (in fact the redressed members of the KLA, which is formed according to Martti Ahtisaari’s plan with active support from the NATO to be in the next years transformed into the regular Army of the Republic of Kosovo. What is true about today political reality in Kosovo & Metohija is a fact that this territory in a form of a client (quasi)state is given to be administered by the members of the KLA – a military organization which was in 1998 proclaimed by the US administration as a terrorist one. Anyway, the KLA is the first successful rebellious movement and terrorist organisation in Europe after the WWII. The movement was originally developed from a tiny Albanian diaspora in Switzerland in the second half of the 1980s to around 18.000 soldiers[21] financed and clearly supported by all means by the US administration.[22] In order to realize its own crucial political task – a separation of Kosovo & Metohija province from the rest of Serbia with a possibility to unite it with Albania, the KLA was allied with the NATO between 1997-1999. The KLA’s strategy of the war terror was based on a long tradition of the Albanians to oppose by arms any organized authority in a form of a state from the Ottoman time up today. However, the military intervention by the NATO in 1999 against Serbia and Montenegro over the Kosovo question was portrayed in the American and the West European media as a necessary step to prevent the Serbian armed forces from repeating the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia-Herzegovina. But the truth was that Serbia trained its military on Kosovo & Metohija because of an ongoing armed struggle by the KLA’s terrorist and separatist organization to wrest independence from Serbia for the sake of creation of a Greater Albania with ethnically pure Kosovo & Metohija and later on the western parts of the FYR of Macedonia, the Eastern Montenegro and the Greek Epirus.[23] Nevertheless, an active US President Barrack Obama congratulated at the very beginning of his presidential mandate the leaders of the "multiethnic, independent and democratic Kosovo“ regardless to the facts that those leaders (especially Hashim Tachi – the "Snake“ and Ramush Haradinay) are proved to be notorious war criminals, that the region (state?) is not either multicultural, nor really independent and particularly not democratic one. However, there are several official EU’s declarations and unofficial political statements encouraging Belgrade and Priština to cooperate and "develop neighbourly relations“ what practically means for Serbia that Belgrade has firstly to recognize Albanian Kosovo independence in order to become the EU member state after the years or even decades of negotiations. The another fact is that the process of international recognizing of the Kosovo’s independence is much slower that Priština and Washington expected at the beginning. From the time of Kosovo’s self-proclamation of independence Serbia’s greatest diplomatic "success“ is the majority of votes in 2008 of the UNO General Assembly supporting the decision that the case of Kosovo independence should be considered by the International Court of Justice in the Hague (established in 1899). On the one hand, the Court’s decision on the issue in July 2010 was very favourable for Kosovo’s Albanian (the KLA’s) separatists and terrorists as it was concluded a verdict that an unilateral proclamation of Kosovo’s independence in February 2008 was done within a framework of the international law. However, on the other hand, the Court’s verdict in 2010 already became also very favourable for separatism movements elsewhere like in March 2014 for the separatists in Crimean Peninsula or maybe soon for their colleagues from Catalonia, Scotland, the Northern Italy (Lega Nord)…[24] Kosovo’s self-proclamation of independence has a direct domino effect only a few months later when in August 2008 the South Ossetia and Abkhazia did the same from Georgia.[25] The (murky) reality in the present day Kosovo & Metohija, on the other side, is that there is not a single ethnic Albanian party at the deeply divided Kosovo’s political scene which would be ready to accept a "peaceful reintegration“ of the region into Serbia’s political sphere and there is not a single ethnic Albanian politician who is not concerned about the danger posed by the "division of Kosovo“ to the Albanian (major) part and Serbian (minor) part and does not oppose slightest suggestions of the Serbian autonomy for the northern portion of Kosovo & Metohija. However, what is more important: Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian leaders and even the citizens of the Albanian ethnic origin do not even consider national dilemma like "Europe or independence!“ There is no doubt what their answer is going to be in that case. On the other side, what is going on about and in Serbia? The answer is that a nation unable to make a choice between a territorial integrity on the one side, and a membership in an international association (although an important one) on the other, i.e. a nation who cannot choose between these two "priorities“ really deserves to lose both. At the end, if the international law and fixed order are broken on the one side of the globe (ex. Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq) it is nothing strange to expect that the same law and order are going to be broken somewhere else (ex. at the Caucasus, Ukraine, Spain, United Kingdom, Italy, France…) following the logic of the so-called "domino effect“ reaction in the international relations. Finally, it has to be noted that if the Albanian extremism is not stopped, the FYR of Macedonia and Montenegro will have to give parts of their territories populated by the ethnic Albanians (the Western Macedonia and the Eastern Montenegro). In this case, Europe will have to decide how to discuss the issue of the borders’ revision and how to recognize a new enlarged state of a Greater Albania. Bibliography & Notes [listed in source article] Assoc. Professor Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirovic, Mykolas Romeris University, Institute of Political Sciences, vladislav@sotirovic.eu www.sotirovic.eu http://www.globalresearch.ca/ethnic-cleansing-in-kosovo-and-the-rights-of-the-serbian-minority-ten-years-after-the-march-pogrom-2004/5416867 HILLARY 2016 HILLARY 2016 CLINTON 1999 ILLEGAL BOMBING SERBIA & MONTENEGRO HEAD-HUNTING Facilitated by US-NATO & European Union Madeleine Albright US Secretary of State 500,000 Iraqi Dead Kids Worth It "From the position of the USA Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright pushed for the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999, when NATO planes bombed without a UN mandate. She also supported the jihad in Bosnia during 1992-1995, and the manipulation of the facts about Srebrenica, but also personally earned from privatization of Kosovo Telecommunications. She should therefore bear the consequences of her political decisions and acknowledge responsibility for the bloodshed, in which thousands of civilians were killed." [here] US-NATO Drops Graffiti Bombs on Kids Targets Serbian Ethnicity "As Secretary of State, she will be remembered for two acts: the expansion of NATO to the East and the bombing of Yugoslavia. Being a native of Prague, she strongly lobbied for the accession of the Czech Republic and other former socialist countries to the North Atlantic alliance. All the objections of Russia were swept aside. In 1997, the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary joined the ranks of NATO. Thus began the advancement of U.S. military vehicles towards Russia's borders." "In March of 1999, Albright was among those who made the decision to bomb Yugoslavia. It is interesting that she spent part of her childhood in Belgrade with her father. She knows the local language. At one time her father left for the West from Yugoslavia. But for the sake of U.S. interests in Europe and NATO's eastward advance her personal issues were swept aside." [here] US-Supported BOSNIA Mutilated & Roasted Corpse (Serbian) US-NATO Bombing 78-day US-NATO Bombing Destruction: abt. USD $200,000-billion   US Empire Empire Twitter Troll Mike McFaul Sings the Praises of: 'legitimate use of force within one's borders' as definition of sovereignty COMMENT Great article. Really enjoyed examining this. Check out the lies Obama told the American and world's public not long after his appointment.  The same Obama, with the weekly kill-list was awarded the farce of a 'Peace Prize'. What mostly stood out for me (but my retention etc. is on the scant side ... lol): US-NATO, European Union and the joke that is United Nations, align themselves with a bunch of mafia criminals and terrorist clans, backing formation of a US-NATO client state run by organ harvesting, drug dealing, crooks (crooks who are aligned with this US-NATO lot, for the sake of creating a greater Albania)? The bonus for US-NATO, European Union and the joke that is United Nations is that this creates a domino effect elsewhere in Europe, leveraging pressure, drama and threat to Russia, which the greedy, grasping, thieves with aims of world domination, seek to weaken in order to destroy, dismantle and dominate.  Dismembering the Federation of Russia, like they did the Balkans states (which they now control), so that they can likewise control the Russian region. US-NATO used force in 1999 without US Security Council approval, which is illegal under international law and is described as an act of PURE (US-NATO LED) AGGRESSION. The attack on the sovereignty and integrity of Yugoslavia (Serbia, Montenegro) served to enhance the US empire's global domination strategy. However, it also set a precedent for wars of aggression under the pretext of 'humanitarian' intervention -- and this went unchallenged by the Western media. The ILLEGAL US-NATO LED WAR OF AGGRESSION ON SERBIA paved the way to more of the same: Afghanistan 2001 Iraq 2003 UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999), shored up the US-NATO farce re 'protection of universal human & minority rights', essentially TRANSFERRING Serbia's Autonomous Region of Kosovo & Metohija (the proper title & legal standing for same), to US-NATO (in the guise of assumption of 'protection' pursuant to 'responsibility to protect' doctrine of lies, that was to see the region come under 'international' authorities ... which is itself a lie:  the region has, in effect, come under US-NATO control,  and US-NATO has set itself up a HUGE military base and military presence (not for protection -- see slaughter & destruction by ethnic Albanian -- US-NATO pretexts for US-NATO presence in Balkans) -- but for the purposes of US-NATO's wider strategic ambitions). Meanwhile, there is NO ETHNIC diversity etc, & the US is lying:  there is ethnic cleansing of Serbs, mass destruction, the "March Pogrom of 2004" right under US-NATO noses and the ERASURE of Serbian historical roots in a region with centuries' long-standing Serbian presence. CIA had a hand in this:  via 'Otpor' (ie 'Resistance'), which was sponsored by CIA and the West, mounting the 'Revolution of the Fifth of October 2000' in Belgrade, Serbia. Method applied elsewhere: * 'Rose Revolution' - Georgia - Nov. 2003     -- CIA trained in Serbia * 'Orange Revolution' - Ukraine  - Nov. 2004  - Jan 2005 - final CIA coup:  2013-2014     -- CIA trained in Serbia & Georgia * failed attempts 2009:     * Moldova     * Iran Dismemberment of Serbia Montenegro -- look to:  2003, Javier Solana -- EU representative -- CONSTITUTION CHARTER written Brussels -- proclaims new country:  State Union of Serbia & Montenegro -- officially abolishing Yugoslavia name (entity?), officially in use since  1929 -- orig. est. 1918 as 'Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats & Slovenes' -- 2006 - Serbia & Montenegro 'declare independence' - split -- ending common south Slavic state -- Bulgarians appear to be the only south Slav state left (?) -- what US-NATO & the EU got out of 'On the Lines of Communication' 2005 NATO/Serbia/Montenegro deal     -- *open-ended deal     -- is what imperialist sought to achieve with: 1998/1999:  castle of Rambouillet (France) ULTIMATUM negs. w. Slobodan Milosevic 78 days of ILLEGAL US-NATO BOMBING of Serbia & Montenegro -- NATO was thus given     -- go-ahead to ENLARGE its presence in Balkans region     -- control of Serbia & Montenegro armies -- 2009:  Albania & Croatia join NATO as full members -- Serbia & Montenegro SURROUNDED (bar BiH state) -- 2008:  Agreement on Information Security (US-NATO / Serbia) -- secrecy provisions re NATO negotiations w/ Serbia -= NATO control over parties to NATO agreements Global Perspective: -- US-NATO:  NATO expansion attempts:     -- Afghanistan 2001     -- Iraq 2003     -- US-NATO military bloc Balkans occupation     The 'International Court of Justice' -- another Hague body est. 1899 -- sounds like more of the supranational US empire serving institutions -- backed US-NATO-Kosovo theft of Serbian territory -- likely to produce domino effects elsewhere, when international law & fixed order is reversed Not sure how much of this I'll remember, but it's been good reading this.  Think I might need to make a point-form list to help me remember. It makes sense of all that MASSIVE and unprecedented Hollywood and slaphead William Hague's propaganda campaigning.  What a bunch of deceitful, manipulative, lying creeps. And nobody in the controlled media challenges this? So the controlled media is then also responsible for the subsequent illegal war of aggression on Iraq (2003) and the war on Afghanistan ... oh, Libya & whoever else there is in this trail of US-NATO colonialist destruction. And what do they use for the purposes of sowing:   regime change; pretext for invasion; aggression; and dismemberment of sovereign states, as a prelude to Western control and exploitation: Saturation marketed, hijacked, & exploited 'hoomanitarian grounds', along with a bunch of liberal fairy floss that they've been flogging in the corporate media and in Western institutions for decades ... ahead of sending in brainwashed, useful idiots, to man Western-sponsored NGO fifth columns, to pave the way to destruction from the inside, as a modern-day colonialists' trojan. CHECK OUT THIS PROPAGANDA MONSTROSITY from the Wikipedia CIA instrument of public opinion shaping: Subject:  Dnevni Telegraph Danas (ie. Daily Telegraph Today) -- here "At a time when NATO threatened with airstrikes, the regime was becoming more radicalized by the second."  Wikipedia's only good for dates and locations, maybe.  Even they're suspect.  The rest ought to be read with a cautious and critical eye. The only thing that was 'radicalised' is America's CIA trained useful idiots and their criminal clan puppets.