Ukraine - Right-Wing Extremist US Coup Pawns Throw A Handgrenade & Corporate Press Blames Putin - Robert Parry Article

SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/maidan-2-0-ukraine-rightists-kill-police-putin-blamed/5473431 Maidan 2.0: Ukraine Rightists Kill Police; Putin Blamed By Robert Parry Global Research, September 02, 2015 Consortium News 1 September 2015 Region: Russia and FSU Theme: Intelligence, Media Disinformation, US NATO War Agenda In-depth Report: UKRAINE REPORT As I read the latest example of The New York Times’ propagandistic coverage of the Ukraine crisis on Tuesday, it struck me that if these same reporters and editors were around in 1953, they would have cheered the coup against Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh as a popular “revolution” putting the beloved and benevolent Shah back on the Peacock Throne. Similarly in 1954, these credulous journalists would have written about another people’s “revolution” in Guatemala removing President Jacobo Arbenz and restoring law and order behind well-regarded military commanders. The Times would have airily dismissed any suggestions of U.S. manipulation of events. And, for decades, that was how the Central Intelligence Agency wanted American journalists to write those stories – and the current crop of Times’ journalists would have fallen neatly into line. Of course, we know historically that the CIA organized and financed the disorders in Tehran that preceded Mossadegh’s removal and pulled together the rebel force that drove Arbenz from office. And, the evidence is even clearer that U.S. government operatives, particularly Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, helped orchestrate the 2014 coup that overthrew Ukraine’s elected President Viktor Yanukovych. Indeed, journalists knew more about the coup-plotting in Ukraine in real-time than we did about the coups in Iran and Guatemala six decades ago. In the Ukraine case, there was even an intercepted phone call just weeks before the Feb. 22, 2014 coup revealing Nuland handpicking the new Ukrainian leaders – “Yats is the guy,” she said referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who would become the post-coup prime minister – as Pyatt pondered how “to midwife this thing” and Nuland dismissed the European Union’s less aggressive approach with the pithy remark, “F**k the EU!” Several months earlier, on Sept. 26, 2013, Carl Gershman, president of the National Endowment for Democracy (a U.S. government-funded operation that was financing scores of Ukrainian activists, journalists and business leaders), stated in a Washington Post op-ed that Ukraine was “the biggest prize” and would serve as a steppingstone toward eventually destabilizing Russia and removing Russian President Vladimir Putin. After Gershman’s op-ed pronouncement, Nuland and Sen. John McCain personally cheered on anti-government protesters in Kiev’s Maidan square. Nuland literally passed out cookies, and McCain, standing on stage with right-wing extremists from the Svoboda Party, told the crowd that the United States was with them in their challenge to the Ukrainian government. Meanwhile, Pyatt advised the coup-makers from the U.S. Embassy. The U.S. interference was so blatant that George Friedman, founder of the global intelligence firm Stratfor, called Yanukovych’s ouster “the most blatant coup in history.” Blatant to anyone, that is, who wasn’t part of the U.S. government’s propaganda team, which included the foreign desk of The New York Times and virtually every mainstream U.S. media outlet. Following the script of the State Department’s propagandists, the Times and the MSM saw only a glorious people’s “revolution.” Resistance to the Coup However, ethnic Russians from Crimea and eastern Ukraine, the key bases of support for Yanukovych, resisted the new order in Kiev. The people of Crimea organized a referendum in which 96 percent of the voters favored seceding from Ukraine and rejoining Russia, ties that went back to the Eighteenth Century. When Putin and Russia agreed to accept Crimea, the Times and the MSM announced a “Russian invasion,” although in this case the Russian troops were already stationed in Crimea under the Sebastopol port agreement. Ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine also rose up demanding independence or at least autonomy from the hostile regime in Kiev. The new government responded by labeling the dissidents “terrorists” and mounting an “Anti-Terrorist Operation,” which killed thousands and was spearheaded by neo-Nazi and Islamist militias. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Ukraine Merges Nazis and Islamists.”] Although the Times at times would acknowledge the key role played by the neo-Nazis and other ultra-nationalists, that troublesome information – along with the Nuland-Pyatt phone call and other evidence of the coup – would disappear into the Memory Hole when the Times was summarizing the Ukraine narrative or was decrying anyone who dared use the word “coup.” As far as the Times was concerned, what has happened since February 2014 was simply a glorious “revolution” with “pro-democracy” Ukrainian idealists on one side and propaganda-deluded ethnic Russian automatons on the other, depersonalized and ready for the killing. And behind all the bloodshed was the evil Putin. The Times reprised its propagandistic narrative on Tuesday in an article by Andrew E. Kramer, who tried to put the best face possible on a violent protest by neo-Nazis and other right-wing nationalists against a proposed constitutional change that would grant more autonomy to eastern Ukraine as part of the Minsk II peace agreement reached last February between German, French, Ukrainian and Russian leaders. Authorities identified a member of Sych, the militant arm of the right-wing Svoboda Party (John McCain’s old friends), as the person who threw a grenade that killed three police officers, but the Times made clear that the real villain was Vladimir Putin. As Kramer wrote: “The [autonomy] measure is fiercely opposed by Ukrainian nationalists and many others, who loathe any concession to Mr. Putin and see him as the driving force behind a civil war that has claimed more than 6,500 lives. President Petro O. Poroshenko had conceded the constitutional change, which is included in the text of the Minsk agreement, with a metaphorical gun to his head: thousands of Ukrainian soldiers surrounded by Russian-backed rebels near the Ukrainian railroad town of Debaltseve. “Supporters of the change say granting special status to the eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk would co-opt the rebels’ major selling point, blunting the drive for separatism. Yet the war has angered Ukrainians to such an extent, opinion polls show, that members of Parliament are struggling to win support from voters for any concession.” While the Times’ narrative paints Putin as the instigator of all the trouble in Ukraine, it also portrays him as a villain who is on the run because his “aggression” led to Western sanctions, which along with lower oil prices, are collapsing the Russian economy. Kramer wrote: “Hopes for a peaceful settlement of the Ukraine crisis have been rising lately in Europe as oil prices have sunk, increasing financial pressure on Mr. Putin. With the Russian economy reeling, the thinking goes, he should be more willing to compromise on eastern Ukraine, the source of damaging Western economic sanctions. But that thinking was not shared by many in Ukraine. … “As Parliament approved the concessions, protesters outside the building scuffled with police, and shouted, ‘Shame! Shame!’ The demonstrators grew more agitated. Some tore helmets from the riot police and threw them on the paving stones. ‘They are trading in our blood and our corpses,’ said a veteran of the war in the east, Volodymyr Natuta, referring to members of Parliament who supported the measure. ‘They sold out Ukraine.’… “It [the right-wing killing of the first police officer on Monday] was the first death in politicized street violence in the capital since the 2014 revolution … Officially, the Russian government denies having any hand in propping up the two enclaves in eastern Ukraine. But Ukrainians — not to speak of virtually every Western government and NATO — universally reject that, holding Moscow responsible for all the carnage in the east.” So, having brushed aside the evidence of a U.S.-backed coup and ignoring the role of right-wing Ukrainian nationalists in both overthrowing an elected leader and launching attacks against ethnic Russians, the New York Times has settled on the only permissible view of the crisis: that it is all Vladimir Putin’s fault. Perhaps history will know better. Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/maidan-2-0-ukraine-rightists-kill-police-putin-blamed/5473431 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT The corporate press is worthless and politicians are disgusting creatures. I'm beginning to think that Western governments are criminal organisations, like the mafia or something.  They're criminal gangs. Maybe someone should refuse them insurance.  lol ꕤ

"Ecuadorian President Says The CIA Is Attempting To Overthrow His Government" Derrick Broze

SOURCE http://www.mintpressnews.com/ecuadorian-president-says-the-cia-is-attempting-to-overthrow-his-government/203701/ For Full Article (with links to further information, go to source) Ecuadorian President Says The CIA Is Attempting To Overthrow His Government The CIA has a history of contributing to coups in Ecuador. Back in 1963, the CIA led a coup which deposed President Carlos Julio Arosemena because he criticized the United States and supported Fidel Castro’s revolution in Cuba. By Derrick Broze | March 25, 2015 (ANTIMEDIA) Over the weekend several outlets reported that Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa made comments alluding to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) “being increasingly involved in the political opposition with the avowed aim of dragging the country into chaos.”  The reports also claim Correa stated the CIA was attempting to weaken the government through “a series of coordinated nationwide protests.” However, Ecuador has released a statement claiming the president was speaking about the role of U.S. intelligence services meddling the county’s affairs and support of opposition groups, but not direct involvement in the recent protests. President Correa tweeted that the AFP incorrectly reported the news and accused the news agency of distorting the truth and misrepresenting his statements. de los “resistentes” hubieran sido organizadas por la CIA, no hubiesen sido tan estruendosos fracasos. AFP mintió. — Rafael Correa (@MashiRafael) March 23, 2015 While it seems in this instance Correa’s word may have been taken out of context, it would not be too surprising if he did make the accusation. For one, there are several reasons relations between the nations have been strained in recent years. In 2013, the Ecuadorian news agency ANDES accused the CIA of plotting to assassinate Correa. Ecuador has not made many political allies in America following the 2009 decision to no longer allow the U.S. to continue to use air bases for surveillance. The country also angered American politicians by granting Wikileaks founder Julian Assange asylum in its London Embassy. Correa may not be ready to point fingers at the CIA, but Chilean journalist Patricio Mery has claimed the CIA is running a drug operation in Chile, trafficking “about 200 kilos of cocaine per month” from Bolivia in order to fund anti-Correa operations. In recent years Italian police discovered 40 kilos of cocaine in Ecuador’s diplomatic mail. Mery believes senior Chilean officials were involved, and claims to have proof implicating the Ecuadorian government. Check out this interview for more on those allegations. The CIA has a history of contributing to coups in Ecuador. Back in 1963, the CIA led a coup which deposed President Carlos Julio Arosemena because he criticized the United States and supported Fidel Castro’s revolution in Cuba. But Ecuador is not the only nation the CIA has had a hand in toppling. In fact, the history of U.S. intervention and subversion is so rich that even mainstream reporters have to laugh in the face of government propaganda. Recently, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki claimed “As a matter of long standing policy the United States does not support transitions by non-constitutional means. Political transitions must be democratic, constitutional, peaceful, and legal.” [Jen Psaki, US DoS, Spox] That statement drew a laugh and legitimate questioning from Associated Press reporter Matt Lee, who could not believe what he was hearing. [ ...] Iran, 1953 – The independent National Security Archive research institute published declassified documents that prove the CIA was involved in the 1953 overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh. The documents are part of the CIA’s internal history of Iran and clearly indicate the agency’s role in disposing of a sovereign ruler. Guatemala, 1954 – Operation PBSUCCESS was another CIA operation that overthrew an elected leader and created more problems than solutions. President Jacobo Árbenz was removed and replaced with the military regime of Carlos Castillo Armas. Árbenz was a progressive politician who sought to change centuries of feudalism and reduce dependence on foreign nations and companies, including the United States and the American United Fruit Company (UFCO). His policies affected the finances of UFCO and the military intelligence desires of the CIA, leading to a coordinated attack and coup. Operation Condor, 1970’s – The United States’ support of crimes against the peoples of Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, and Brazil are well-established fact. The CIA carried out Operation Condor, a campaign of political repression and terror involving assassination and intelligence operations implemented in 1975 by the dictatorships of South America. The United States government helped fund and support repressive regimes in each of these nations including Pinochet in Chile,  Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was heavily involved in Operation Condor. Argentina – It has been suspected for years that Kissinger influenced Argentina’s decision to move forward with their repressive campaign. This was finally confirmed since in 2004 when the National Security Archive released a secret memo recounting a conversation between assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights, Patt Derian, and the US ambassador in Buenos Aires, Robert Hill. The two met in April 1977 and discussed a meeting between Henry Kissinger and Argentine Foreign Minister Cesar Augusto Guzzetti. Kissinger gives Guzzetti explicit permission to move forward with whatever they must do to repress “terrorism”. Paraguay – Another document uncovered by the U.S. National Archives shows the CIA’s involvement in Paraguay as well. A formerly secret CIA Directorate of Intelligence’s Office of African and Latin American Analysis research paper details how the agency never planned on allowing any opposition leaders from ever succeeding Paraguayan dictator General Alfredo Stroessner. The dictator ruled from 1954 to 1989 with the full support of the U.S. Stroessner trained at the infamous School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia and supported the U.S. during the invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965. Bolivia, 1971 – Bolivia’s reign of terror including killings, disappearances, and torture of political opponents and activists during the rule of  General Hugo Banzer. A declassified documents includes official transcripts of conversations between Nixon and his chief foreign policy architect, Henry Kissinger.  The leaders of the U.S. government financed and supported the Banzer coup with no regard for the lives of the Bolivian people. Shortly after the U.S. perfected its support of dictators with the rise of Augusto Pinochet. Chile, 1973 – Nixon, Kissinger, and the CIA helped remove socialist President Salvador Allende, and, following a brief rule by another military junta,  Allende’s army chief, Augusto Pinochet, seized power. Pinochet’s terror and torture has been heavily documented so I won’t go in depth here but it should be another reminder that the United States government once again succeeded in destroying a thriving, sovereign nation and recognized  immoral, violent, and tyrannical dictatorship as a illegitimate form of governance. Haiti, 2004 – A more recent example of a coup comes from the people of Haiti. Former Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide told CNN that he was forced to leave Haiti as part of a coup organized by the United States. George W. Bush denied the accusations and former White House press secretary Scott McClellan said it was “nonsense”. Shortly after Aristide was removed from power, his ex-wife told U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, and Rep. Maxine Waters that he would be killed “and a lot of Haitians would be killed” if he did not voluntarily leave. The message had apparently been delivered by the chief of staff of the U.S. Embassy in Haiti. Honduras, 2009 – Wikileaks helped confirm that once more the U.S. was influencing foreign nations and overthrowing democratically elected governments. The U.S. embassy in Tegucigalpa sent a cable to D.C. making it clear that they believed the changing of power in Honduras that took place in June 2009, “constituted an illegal and unconstitutional coup.” The Embassy admitted that the military did not have the authority to remove President Zelaya, describing it as a “kidnapping”. The cable was viewed by Tom Shannon, then Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs; Harold Koh, the State Department’s Legal Adviser; and Dan Restrepo, Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the National Security Council, and former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton. Despite this knowledge the U.S. continued to support and aid the nation. Clinton would later admit to playing a role. The New York Times even called the US State Department on the coup:     “It’s time to acknowledge the foreign policy disaster that American support for the Porfirio Lobo administration in Honduras has become. Ever since the June 28, 2009, coup that deposed Honduras’s democratically elected president, José Manuel Zelaya, the country has been descending deeper into a human rights and security abyss. That abyss is in good part the State Department’s making.     The headlines have been full of horror stories about Honduras. According to the United Nations, it now has the world’s highest murder rate, and San Pedro Sula, its second city, is more dangerous than Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, a center for drug cartel violence.     Much of the press in the United States has attributed this violence solely to drug trafficking and gangs. But the coup was what threw open the doors to a huge increase in drug trafficking and violence, and it unleashed a continuing wave of state-sponsored repression.” This is a very short list that does not even touch on the recent military aggression in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and other Middle East nations that seem to be the next targets of US imperialism. It should be painfully clear that the United States government has a long history of creating, supporting, and funding illegal, unelected, military coups that fit into the current political narrative. For a more detailed list check here. (Yes, I know it is the Alternet. Follow the links, check sources and make up your own mind.) Without a doubt the United States has a history overthrowing sovereign nations that take steps to free their people from US and NATO hegemony. Is it that hard to believe they may working on similar plans in Ecuador? Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist, community activist, gardener and promoter from Houston, Texas. He is the co-founder of The Houston Free Thinkers, and The Conscious Resistance Network. Broze also hosts and produces a weekly podcast under the name the Conscious Resistance Live. His writing can be found on TheConsciousResistance.com , The Liberty Beat, the Anti-Media, Mint Press News, Occupy.com and Ben Swann.com SOURCE http://www.mintpressnews.com/ecuadorian-president-says-the-cia-is-attempting-to-overthrow-his-government/203701/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- TRANSCRIPT US State Dept False & Ludicrous Denial of Latin American & Ukraine US-Supported Coups | here   ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT The recent British government aggressive propaganda attack, as well as a follow-up corporate media smear attack on  both Julian Assange and on Ecuador, had me wondering how much of a hand the US government has possibly had, behind the scenes, in maybe directing the recent trans-Atlantic media assault, and wondering what else may be taking place behind the scenes in relation to Ecuador and the Evil Fruit Company Empire (especially, seeing there's an Ecuador opposition figure - 'journalist' and 'activist' - that's been mentioned). While there's not a lot of information on US activities in Ecuador (in this article), I think US history in the region speaks for itself.  Get a load of that list of destruction for US corporate profit.  It looks like US intelligence services are supporting the Ecuador opposition (but there's some kind of denial, as well - which is confusing).  Well, US support for the opposition is standard US practice before installing puppet governments, so it wouldn't be surprising if the US had some kind of input.  Look at the evil empire's handiwork in Ukraine. ꕤ

Thierry Meyssan - Mass Migration & Terrorism - Result of US Strategic Doctrine: Chaos Theory - Pillage of Middle Eastern & African Resources by Destruction of State

SOURCE http://www.voltairenet.org/article187588.html ARTICLE | THIERRY MEYSSAN The European Union is blind to the military strategy of the United States by Thierry Meyssan The political leaders of the European Union are entirely wrong about the Islamic terrorist attacks in Europe and the migration to the Union of people fleeing the war zones. Thierry Meyssan demonstrates here that these are not simply the accidental consequences of conflict in the wider Middle East and Africa, but a strategic objective of the United States. Voltaire Network | Damascus (Syria) | 14 May 2015 23rd April 2015 – the European Council observes a minute of silence in commemoration of the refugees who lost their lives in the Mediterranean. The leaders of the European Union are suddenly being confronted with unexpected situations. On the one hand, terrorist attacks or attempted attacks perpetrated or prepared by individuals who do not belong to any identified political groups; and on the other, an influx of refugees who cross the Mediterranean, several thousands of whom die along their coasts. In the absence of any strategic analysis, these two events are considered a priori as being unconnected, and are treated by different administrations. The former are handled by the Intelligence services and the police, the latter by Customs and Defence. However, they both share the same common origin – the political instability that reigns in the Levant and in Africa. The European Union has deprived itself of the means to understand If the military academies of the European Union had done their job, they would have been studying the doctrine of its « big brother », the United States, for the last fifteen years. Indeed, for many long years, the Pentagon has been publishing all sorts of documents on the « Chaos Theory» borrowed from the philosopher Leo Strauss. Only a few moths ago, an official who should have retired more than 25 years ago, Andrew Marshall, disposed of a budget of 10 million dollars annually to research this subject [1]. But no military academy of the Union has seriously studied this doctrine and its consequences. Partly because this is a barbaric form of warfare, and partly because it was conceived by one of the intellectual gurus of the US Jewish elite. And as everybody knows,the United-States-who-saved-us-all from-Nazism can not advocate such atrocities [2]. If the political personnel of the European Union had travelled a little, not only to Iraq, Syria, Libya, the horn of Africa, to Nigeria and Mali, but also to Ukraine, they would have seen with their own eyes the application of this strategic doctrine. Instead, the contented themselves with speeches delivered from a building in the Green Zone of Bagdhad, from a podium in Tripoli or on Maïdan Square in Kiev. They have no idea what these populations are really experiencing, and at the request of their « big brother », have often closed their embassies, thereby depriving themselves of eyes and ears on the ground. Even better, still at the request of their « big brother », they have participated in embargos, thus ensuring that no European businessmen will travel to these areas and see what is happening there. An undetermined number of refugees have died in the Mediterranean. Sometimes, the waves wash their bodies onto the beaches of Italy, where the Customs take charge of boats filled with corpses. Chaos is not an accident, it’s the goal Contrary to what President François Hollande has declared, the Libyan migration is not the consequence of a « lack of follow-through » of operation « Unified Protector », but the desired result of this operation, in which his country has played a leading role. Chaos did not evolve because the « Libyan revolutionaries » were unable to agree after the « fall » of Mouammar el-Kadhafi, it was the strategic goal of the United States, and they succeeded. There never was a « democratic revolution » in Libya, but a secession of Cyrenaïca. There never was an application of the UNO mandate aimed at « protecting the population »,  but the massacre of 160,000 Libyans, three quarters of whom were civilians, under the bombardments of the Alliance (numbers from the International Red Cross). Before I joined the government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, I remember having been solicited to act as a witness during a meeting in Tripoli between a US delegation and the Libyan representatives. During our long conversation, the head of the US delegation explained that the Pentagon was ready to save us from certain death, but demanded that the Guide [Leader? Gaddafi] be handed over to them. He added that once el-Kadhafi was dead, Libya’s tribal society would be unable to name a new leader for at least a generation, and that the country would be plunged into chaos such as it had never experienced. I spoke of this interview on a number of occasions, and since the lynching of the Guide [Leader? Gaddafi] in October 2011, I have never stopped predicting what is now happening. Leo Strauss (1899-1973) was a specialist in political philosophy. He gathered a small group of students, most of whom later worked for the Secretary of Defence. They formed a sort of cult, and inspired Pentagon strategy. « Chaos Theory » When, in 2003, the US Press began to speak of « Chaos Theory », the White House answered by using the term « constructive chaos », suggesting that the structures of oppression must be destroyed in order that life might evolve without constraint. But neither Leo Strauss nor the Pentagon had ever used the expression until then. On the contrary, according to them, chaos had to attain such a level that no structure could be built without the will of the Creator of the new Order, in other words, the United States [3]. The principle of this strategic doctrine may be resumed as follows - the simplest way to pillage the natural resources of a country over a long period is not to occupy the target, but destroy the state. Without a state, there can be no army. With no enemy army, there is no risk of defeat. Thus, the strategic goal of the US army and the alliance that it controls, the UNO, is exclusively the destruction of states. What then happens to the populations concerned is not Washington’s problem. Such a project is inconceivable for Europeans who, since the British civil war, have been convinced by Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan that it is necessary to give up certain freedoms, even accept a tyrannical state, to avoid being plunged into chaos. The European Union denies its complicity in US crimes The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have already cost the lives of 4 million people [4]. These wars were presented to the Security Council as necessary counter-attacks undertaken in « legitimate defence », but it is accepted today that the wars were planned long before the 11th September, in the much wider context of « the remodeling of a greater Middle East », and that the reasons given for launching them were in fact propaganda fabrications. It is common wisdom today to recognise the genocides committed by European colonialism, but rare are those who will accept the figure of 4 million dead, despite scientific studies which attest to its accuracy. It’s because our parents were « bad », but we are « good » and we can not be complicit in these horrors. It is common practice to mock the poor Germans who maintained their trust in their Nazi leaders right to the end, and only learned of the crimes committed in their name after their country’s defeat. But we are doing exactly the same thing. We maintain our confidence in our « big brother », and do not want to know about the crimes in which he has implicated us. Our children will certainly mock us in turn … The errors of interpretation by the European Union - No West European leader, absolutely none, has dared to publicly express the idea that the refugees from Iraq, Syria, Libya, the Horn of Africa, Nigeria and Mali are not fleeing dictatorships, but the chaos into which we have deliberately, though unconsciously, plunged their countries. - No West European leader, absolutely none, has dared to publicly express the idea that the « Islamist » attacks which are affecting Europe are not the extension of the wars in the « greater Middle East », but are directed by those who have also directed the chaos in this region. We prefer to continue believing that the « Islamists » are attacking Jews and Christians, although the great majority of their victims are neither Jews nor Christians, but Muslims. We calmly accuse them of promoting the « war of civilisations », although this concept was developed by the National Security Council of the United States, and remains alien to their culture [5]. - No West European leader, absolutely none, has dared to publicly express the idea that the next stage will be the « Islamisation » of the drug market, on the model of the Contras of Nicaragua, who sold drugs to the black community of California with the aid, and under the orders, of the CIA [6]. We have decided to ignore the fact that the Karzaï family has taken the distribution of Afghani heroin from the Kosovar mafia and handed it to Daesh [7]. The Under-Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, and the US ambassador in Kiev, Geoffrey R. Pyatt. In a telephone wire-tap revealed by the partisans of legality, she told him that she wanted to « fuck the European Union » (sic). The United States never wanted Ukraine to join the Union The military academies of the European Union have never studied the « Chaos Theory » because they were prevented from doing so. The few teachers and researchers who risked exploring this territory were heavily sanctioned, while the Press qualifies the civilian authors who show interest in the subject as « conspirationists ». The politicians of the European Union thought that the events of Maïdan Square were spontaneous, and that the demonstrators wanted to leave the orbit of authoritarian Russia and enter into the heavenly bosom of the Union. They were stupified when Under-Secretary of State Victoria Nuland’s comments were published, when they discovered that she spoke of her secret control of the events, and expressed her desire to « fuck the Union » (sic) [8]. VIDEO INSERT [ does not appear in article]  ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- From that moment on, they were unable to comprehend what was going on. If they had allowed free research in their own countries, they would have understood that by intervening in Ukraine and organising « régime change », the United States ensured that the European Union would remain at their service. Washington’s great fear, since the speech given by Vladimir Putin at the Munich Security Conference in 2007, is that Germany will realise where its true interests lie – not with Washington, but with Moscow [9]. By progressively destroying the Ukrainian state, the United States has cut the main communication route between the European Union and Russia. You may look at the succession of events from any angle, but you will find no other logical explanation. Washington does not want Ukraine to join the Union, as Madame Nuland’s comments demonstrate. Its only aim is to transform this territory into a zone which is dangerous to cross. The 8th May 2007 (the anniversary of the fall of the German Nazi régime), in Ternopol (West Ukraine), Nazi and Islamist groupuscules created a so-called Anti-Imperialist Front in order to fight against Russia. Organisations from Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine and Russia also participated, including Islamist separatists from Crimea, Adyguea, Dagestan, Ingouchia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karatchaïevo-Tcherkessia, Ossetia, and Tchetchenia. Blocked by international sanctions, Dokka Umarov asked for his contribution to be read. The Front is presided by Dmytro Yarosh, who is now an advisor to the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence. US military planning So now we are faced with two problems which are developing very rapidly - the « Islamist » attacks have only just begun. Migrations across the Mediterranean have tripled in a single year. If my analysis is correct, over the next decade we will see more « Islamist » attacks linked to the greater Middle East and Africa, doubled with « Nazi » attacks linked to Ukraine. We will then discover that al-Qaïda and the Ukrainian Nazis have been connected since their common inception, in 2007 at Ternopol (Ukraine). In reality, the grand-parents of both have known each other since the Second World War. The Nazis had at that time recruited Soviet Muslims for the fight against Moscow (that was Gerhard von Mende’s plan at the Ostministerium, or Reich Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories). At the end of the war, both organisations were recuperated by the CIA (Frank Wisner’s programme with the AmComLib, or the American Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia) in order to carry out sabotage operations in the USSR. The migrations across the Mediterranean, which for the moment remain a humanitarian problem (200,000 people in 2014), continue to increase to the point of becoming a serious economic problem. The recent decisions by the Union to go and sink the boats of Libyan drug traffickers will not serve to diminish the migrations, but to justify new military operations intended to maintain a state of chaos in Libya rather than solving the problem. All this will cause serious trouble in the European Union, which today seems like a haven of peace. It is out of the question for Washington to destroy this market which it still considers indispensable, but to ensure that Europe will never enter into competition with it, hence the desire to limit its development. In 1991, President Bush the elder asked one of Leo Strauss’ disciples, Paul Wolfowitz (as yet unknown to the general public), to elaborate a strategy for the post-Soviet era. The «Wolfowitz Doctrine » explained that the guarantee of US supremacy over the rest of the world demanded the curbing of the European Union [10]. In 2008, during the financial crisis in the United States, the President of the Economic Council of the White House, historian Christina Rohmer, explained that that the only way to refloat the banks was by closing the fiscal paradises in the third countries, and then to provoke trouble in Europe so that capital would flow back to the United States. Finally, today Washington is proposing to merge the NAFTA and the EU, the dollar and the Euro, dragging the member states of the Union down to the level of Mexico [11]. Unfortunately for them, neither the citizens of the European Union or their leaders have any idea what President Barack Obama is preparing for them. Thierry Meyssan Translation Pete Kimberley ------- Thierry Meyssan French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace Conference. His columns specializing in international relations feature in daily newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic, Spanish and Russian. His last two books published in English : 9/11 the Big Lie and Pentagate. SOURCE http://www.voltairenet.org/article187588.html ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT I like this guy a lot.  His articles are always good. Had no idea he was in the Libyan government. Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (1977–2011) Gaddafi was designated the "Leader" (Qā’id) of the Libyan state and was accorded the honorifics "Brotherly Leader and Guide to the First of September Great Revolution of the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya". Libyan government stated that the Libyan Jamahiriya was a direct democracy without any political parties, governed by its populace through local popular councils and communes (named Basic People's Congresses). Official rhetoric disdained the idea of a nation state, tribal bonds remaining primary, even within the ranks of the military of Libya. source | wikipedia | here ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- This stood out for me: al-Qaïda and the Ukrainian Nazis have been connected since their common inception, in 2007 at Ternopol (Ukraine) Not sure what to make of it. The original article has a bunch of citations.  So it might be worthwhile checking out the author's citations, to get more of a handle on this stuff.  Not sure I'm up to it.  I'm already way behind on the various information I'd hoped to check out, as I'm best at re-tweeting cats.  lol Lots to digest and lots of look-ups to do. Think Meyssan might be being too kind to the European politicians.  Nobody could be as stupid as these politicians make out to be.  The European politicians are US and corporate puppets who know exactly what the score is.  These people would readily sell out their own nations in the service of a triple-headed god:  their corporate backers, USA, and profits. ------- "In the absence of any strategic analysis, these two events are considered a priori as being unconnected ..." a priori  Inference by reasoning from general to specific - here Relating to or denoting reasoning or knowledge that proceeds from theoretical deduction rather than from observation or experience  | here So the EU just assume the events are unconnected, but the events (terrorists & immigrants) share the same origin (political instability), is what the author is saying? Isn't it easier just to say it's an assumption?  Would have saved me a heap of look ups.  lol ꕤ

Give That Fascist A Nobel Peace Prize

SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-pressures-nobel-committee-to-declare-ukraines-president-a-peace-prize-nominee-leaked-letter/5452448 U.S. Pressures Nobel Committee to Declare Ukraine’s President a Peace Prize Nominee, Leaked Letter By Eric Zuesse Global Research, May 29, 2015 Region: Russia and FSU, USA Theme: Politics and Religion, US NATO War Agenda In-depth Report: UKRAINE REPORT A leaked letter dated May 19th and sent by the Chairman of Ukraine’s parliament, Vladimir Groysman, to the chargé d’affaires of the U.S. Embassy in Oslo Norway, thanks her for “the efforts you have made to have Petro Oleksiyovych Poroshenko nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize,” but continues: “Still we consider your assurances of support by the two members of the Nobel Committee as insufficient,” because there are five members of the Committee, and the support of 3 of them is necessary.  Thus,     “We expect further efforts aimed at shifting the position of Berit Reiss-Andersen, Inger-Marie Ytterhorn and especially that of the Chair of the Nobel Committee Kaci Kullman Five. Regarding the latter, we recommend that you take advantage of the information you are going to receive from Germany. Your colleagues in Berlin have assured us that the dossier will soon be delivered to the U.S. Embassy in Oslo. It is of utmost importance for Mr. Poroshenko to have firm guarantees that he will be awarded the 2015 Nobel Peace Prize, since it could highlight the unanimous support of Ukrainian integrity by the democratic community of the world. Assistant Secretary of State Viktoria Nuland has highly estimated your job during her visit to Kyiv.” The three mentioned Nobel Peace Prize Committee members are a politically varied group. Ms. Reiss-Andersen is from the social democratic or “Labour” party; Ms. Ytterhorn is from the libertarian or “Progress” party; and Ms. Five is from the Conservative Party. The two unidentified members are Thorbjørn Jagland from the Labour Party, and Henrik Syse from the Conservative Party. If this letter is correct, those are the two who are referred to by the letter’s phrase, “your assurances of support by the two members.” The letter also makes a vague reference to the poor reputation that the Committee has engendered on account of the Committee’s having granted the Prize to Barack Obama in 2009 (a decision that the Committee’s Chairperson, Ms. Five, concurred with and has been criticized for):     “We understand the difficulties you face when promoting the candidacy of the President of Ukraine, therefore we ask you to exert additional leverages by engaging those U.S. Senators who effectively cooperated with the Committee in 2009.” Presumably, this means that whomever “those U.S. Senators” were, the Chairman of Ukraine’s parliament thinks that they were “effective.” President Poroshenko entered office on 25 May 2014 after a U.S.-sponsored coup in Kiev that installed Arseniy Yatsenyuk as Ukraine’s Prime Minister on 26 February 2014, after the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Asian Affairs, Victoria Nuland, had instructed the U.S. Ambassador in Kiev on 4 February 2014 to get “Yats” appointed as the junta’s leader; she issued that instruction to him by phone on February 4th and the coup occurred on February 22nd; Yatsenyuk was then appointed on February 26th, and he remains in power today. One pro-Russian part of Ukraine, Crimea, then seceded and joined Russia, and another, Donbass, seceded and was not accepted by Russia; it thus was bombed by the Ukrainian Government during May through December 2014, since Donbass’s repeated requests to be allowed to join Russia were spurned by Vladimir Putin. (Yet, Ukraine accuses Russia of providing the fighters who are actually the men of Donbass, who refuse to be ruled by the U.S.-coup regime. Russia sends them guns, and volunteers have come from Russia and many other countries to help the Donbass defenders.) German intelligence estimates that “up to 50,000” people were killed in that bombing campaign, but U.S. and other official estimates are only around 5,000. Even before Poroshenko took office, the new Ukrainian government of “Yats” Yatsenyuk invaded Donbass, using bombers, tanks, rocket-launchers, and everything it had; and, when Poroshenko gave his victory speech in the ceremonial Presidential election on May 25th, he promised, and it was very clear from him, that: “The anti-terrorist operation [he called the residents there ’terrorists’] cannot and should not last two or three months. It should and will last hours.” (Another translation of it was “Antiterrorist operation can not and will not continue for 2-3 months. It must and will last hours.”) But it did last months — Poroshenko’s prediction was certainly false; and, moreover, he lost first one round of the war, and then another — his prediction of its outcome was likewise false. And recently, he said that the war must be resumed for yet a third round, in order that Ukraine win back both Crimea and Donbass. However, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry warned him on May 12th that he must not do that, and that if he did he’d be violating the Minsk II ceasefire accords which had been arranged by France’s Francois Hollande and Germany’s Angela Merkel. Then, three days later, his Assistant Secretary Victoria Nuland, who had arranged the February 2014 coup, told both Yatsenyuk and Poroshenko to ignore what Kerry had just said, and that, “We continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Ukraine and reiterate our deep commitment to a single Ukrainian nation, including Crimea, and all the other regions of Ukraine.” Perhaps a reason why the Chairman of Ukraine’s parliament is boldly demanding the U.S. State Department to arrange for Poroshenko to get at least a nomination for the Peace Prize (and even goes so far as to assert that, “It is of utmost importance for Mr. Poroshenko to have firm guarantees that he will be awarded the 2015 Nobel Peace Prize”) is that otherwise they will follow through on Nuland’s statement of U.S. commitment, and re-invade Donbass. However, any invasion by Ukraine of Crimea would be exceedingly unlikely, because that would give Russia a virtual carte blanche to attack Ukraine, and neither the U.S. nor any other power will go to war against Russia in such an instance; Ukraine isn’'t yet a NATO member, and NATO would be exceedingly reluctant to go so far as a third world war, this time against Russia, in order to defend the Ukrainian Government from the consequences of that Government’s own then-blatant ceasefire violation — especially in the wake of what virtually everyone now recognizes to have been a U.S. coup that had installed the present Ukrainian regime (and even EU officials were shocked to find out that it had been a coup). And it was a very violent coup, which was followed shortly thereafter by the extremely violent ethnic-cleansing campaign to get rid of the residents in Donbass. SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-pressures-nobel-committee-to-declare-ukraines-president-a-peace-prize-nominee-leaked-letter/5452448 --------------------- COMMENT Surely this is a joke.   Yeah, it's a joke that Obama got the Peace Prize.  But now Poroshenko, as well? Is Ukraine Pressuring US to Secure Nobel Peace Prize for Poroshenko? EXTRACT The letter is addressed to Julie Furuta-Toy, chargé d'affaires (head of the diplomatic mission) at the Embassy of the United States in Oslo and acting US Ambassador to Norway. It is apparently signed by the Chairman of Ukraine’s parliament, Volodymyr Groysman and is dated May 19, 2015, with a registered number 01-5/126(90542). SOURCE http://sputniknews.com/world/20150530/1022745342.html No nominees listed for 2015 - here. But keep your eye on the nominees.  Might be a few laughs in this. United States to nominate Ukrainian President Poroshenko for a Nobel Peace Prize

UKRAINE Puppet State 'Ministry of Truth': Calling On Warrior-Trolls

Facebook frontline: Kiev calls up 'online army' amid information war Published time: February 25, 2015 04:40 A day after Ukraine announced it is joining the information war by creating an 'online army,' the Information Policy Ministry entered into its first controversy. It has reportedly called on bloggers to create accounts to spread information useful to Kiev. The ministry has begun accepting applications from people wanting to join the online army. Once users are registered, they reportedly receive instructions on how to proceed. One of the users published the first set of instructions he allegedly received from the “internet army headquarters.” The task outline is to create as many fake accounts on social media as possible without raising suspicion. The instructions explain that it is preferable to set up a new email account that uses a Western server. It also advises to set up new Twitter, Facebook, and VKontakte accounts (the Russian equivalent of Facebook). The instructions also detail that users must use real names, be careful not to add too many friends (in order to seem legitimate), and select their geographic location to be in eastern Ukraine or Crimea. In order for the account to seem more authentic, users are encouraged to write a few personal posts and comment on non-political issues. However, another instruction was distributed to bloggers on the same day. It gave the same blueprint for creating a fake account in Crimea or Donbass, but claimed that is the way “information agents of Kremlin work.” The fact that two versions of the text were being passed around received some negative comments on the Facebook page where in the information was published. Vesti, a Ukrainian media source, reported that blogger Aleksander Baraboshko – who is an aide to Ukrainian Information Policy Minister Yury Stets – said the version regarding “information agents of the Kremlin” is the correct one, while the other version may have been sent out to some users due to a computer glitch.  [Wow, in attacking Russians, they're constantly showing themselves up as obviously manipulative and rather vulgar.] Ukraine’s Information Policy Ministry was created in late 2014 to pursue information security in the country. Journalists dubbed the new institution the ‘Ministry of Truth’ after the propaganda ministry in George Orwell's novel '1984.' In early December, the ministry announced the creation of an information warfare department. “You don’t need trolls and bots to deliver truthful information to those communicating on the internet. It is obvious for social network veterans,” Tass news agency quoted Ukraine’s information policy minister, Yury Stets, as saying back in January. “To do so we need to unite people influential in social media and they will tell the truth to everyone who reads them.” [Ukraine's top trolls & bots are MFA:  Lithuania, Latvia, Sweden, as well as NATO & US Embassy UKR (Pyatt)]. These tactics follow Stets’ official announcement on Sunday, which revealed plans to create a national TV channel called ‘Ukrainian Tomorrow,’ which would broadcast to an international audience. [How about 'Ukraine Pillaged'?] Ukraine is taking the information war very seriously. On Saturday, Kiev said it is stripping more than 100 Russian media outlets of their accreditation. The list includes TASS, Rossiya Segodnya, and all Russian TV channels except Dozhd, according to government spokesperson Yelena Gitlyanskaya. The outlets will reportedly be without accreditation until the end of the Ukraine conflict. Russia has criticized Kiev’s decision. “The openly discriminatory decision by Ukraine's parliament to strip Russian mass media of accreditation at the bodies of state power is an extension of the policy to clear the country's media space of alternative points of view,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in a statement on Saturday.  [Lavrov's really cool.  Seems really savvy & laid back.] The decision comes as a “backdrop to the latest resolutions (the Minsk peace agreement) by the Normandy Quartet's leaders” and “calls into question Kiev's interest in a peace settlement,” Lavrov added. Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told TASS on Saturday that Moscow will not respond to Kiev’s actions by limiting the work of Ukrainian media. “Russia is a country where media activity is regulated by law, and where Russian and foreign journalists have equal rights to obtain information,” he said.  [The Russian govt is actually a real govt that knows how to conduct itself with dignity, unlike the clowns on a string in Ukraine.] SOURCE: http://on.rt.com/vjbnul COMMENT Saw an article about this elsewhere yesterday, but I dismissed the call for social media trolls as the effort of some desperate 'lone wolf' of the Ukraine troll world, as the site I checked out was registered on a hidden identity basis. Ukraine 'Ministry of Truth' can put lipstick on a pig all it likes, there's no hiding the truth from people: s  Source:  thicktoast.com Read about United Arab Emirates & US weapons to Ukraine: "Nothing says you want peace like shopping for weapons from the same country arming ISIS." http://www.thicktoast.com/uae-arms-kiev/