In his essay on politics and the English language written in 1946, Orwell argued that fascism became a meaningless word. Orwell knew what he was doing. Very likely, he was told to assert the sudden meaningless of the term fascism and Nazism as one of the alleged abuses of language and reason.
The use of Nazism in today's Ukraine has a very important precedent, one that happened exactly 70 years ago in Greece, and the Guardian, for some good reason, brought it back from oblivion (although it was never forgotten in Greece). The precedent also shows and confirms the strange, criminal, and deliberate symbiosis between Western imperialism and Nazism--even when the British Empire was still officially at war with Nazism.
Here is a greater portion of the Guardian article:
70 years ago, on December 3, 1944, this is what the British did in Greece:
"[On the morning of 3 December 1944 ... 70 years ago, the British army, still at war with Germany, opened fire upon – and gave locals who had collaborated with the Nazis the guns to fire upon – a civilian crowd demonstrating in support of the partisans with whom Britain had been allied for three years.
The crowd carried Greek, American, British and Soviet flags, and chanted: “Viva Churchill, Viva Roosevelt, Viva Stalin’” in endorsement of the wartime alliance.
Twenty-eight civilians, mostly young boys and girls, were killed and hundreds injured. ... Britain’s logic was brutal and perfidious: Prime minister Winston Churchill considered the influence of the Communist Party within the resistance movement he had backed throughout the war – the National Liberation Front, EAM – to have grown stronger than he had calculated .... So he switched allegiances to back the supporters of Hitler against his own erstwhile allies.
... Within days, RAF Spitfires and Beaufighters were strafing leftist strongholds as the Battle of Athens – known in Greece as the Dekemvriana – began, fought not between the British and the Nazis, but the British alongside supporters of the Nazis against the partisans. .... [This] remains curiously untold in Britain, perhaps out of shame, maybe the arrogance of a lack of interest. ...In France or Italy, if you fought the Nazis, you were respected in society after the war, regardless of ideology. In Greece, you found yourself fighting – or imprisoned and tortured by – the people who had collaborated with the Nazis, on British orders. There has never been a reckoning with that crime, and much of what is happening in Greece now is the result of not coming to terms with the past.
... the British started releasing Security Battalion officers… and soon some of them were freely walking the streets of Athens wearing new uniforms... The British army continued to provide protection to assist the gradual rehabilitation of the former quisling units in the Greek army and police forces.... and now some senior officers of the Security Battalions and Special Security Branch [collaborationist units which had been integrated into the SS] were seen walking freely in the streets. ... By recruiting the collaborators, the British changed the paradigm, signalling that the old order was back. ....
It is illuminating to read the dispatches by British soldiers themselves, as extracted by the head censor, Capt JB Gibson, now stored at the Public Record Office. They give no indication that the enemy they fight was once a partisan ally, indeed many troops think they are fighting a German-backed force. A warrant officer writes: “Mr Churchill and his speech bucked us no end, we know now what we are fighting for and against, it is obviously a Hun element behind all this trouble.” From “An Officer”: “You may ask: why should our boys give their lives to settle Greek political differences, but they are only Greek political differences? I say: no, it is all part of the war against the Hun, and we must go on and exterminate this rebellious element.”
... And so began a chapter known in Greek history as the “White Terror”, as anyone suspected of helping ELAS during the Dekemvriana or even Nazi occupation was rounded up and sent to a gulag of camps established for their internment, torture, often murder – or else repentance, as under the Metaxas dictatorship.
....
Patríkios was among the relatively fortunate; thousands of others were executed, usually in public, their severed heads or hanging bodies routinely displayed in public squares. His Majesty’s embassy in Athens commented by saying the exhibition of severed heads “is a regular custom in this country which cannot be judged by western European standards”.
The name of the man in command of the “British Police Mission” to Greece is little known. Sir Charles Wickham had been assigned by Churchill to oversee the new Greek security forces – in effect, to recruit the collaborators. Anthropologist Neni Panourgia describes Wickham as “one of the persons who traversed the empire establishing the infrastructure needed for its survival,” and credits him with the establishment of one of the most vicious camps in which prisoners were tortured and murdered, at Giaros.
From Yorkshire, Wickham was a military man who served in the Boer War, during which concentration camps in the modern sense were invented by the British. He then fought in Russia, as part of the allied Expeditionary Force sent in 1918 to aid White Russian Czarist forces in opposition to the Bolshevik revolution. After Greece, he moved on in 1948 to Palestine. But his qualification for Greece was this: Sir Charles was the first Inspector General of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, from 1922 to 1945.
The RUC was founded in 1922, following what became known as the Belfast pogroms of 1920-22, when Catholic streets were attacked and burned. It was, writes the historian Tim Pat Coogan, “conceived not as a regular police body, but as a counter-insurgency one… The new force contained many recruits who joined up wishing to be ordinary policemen, but it also contained murder gangs headed by men like a head constable who used bayonets on his victims because it prolonged their agonies.”
...
Coogan, Ireland’s greatest and veteran historian, stakes no claim to neutrality over matters concerning the Republic and Union, but historical facts are objective and he has a command of those that none can match. We talk at his home outside Dublin over a glass of whiskey appositely called “Writer’s Tears”.
“It’s the narrative of empire,” says Coogan, “and, of course, they applied it to Greece. That same combination of concentration camps, putting the murder gangs in uniform, and calling it the police. That’s colonialism, that’s how it works. You use whatever means are necessary, one of which is terror and collusion with terrorists. It works.
...
The head of MI5 reported in 1940 that “in the personality and experience of Sir Charles Wickham, the fighting services have at their elbow a most valuable friend and counsellor”. When the intelligence services needed to integrate the Greek Security Battalions – the Third Reich’s “Special Constabulary” – into a new police force, they had found their man.
...
Gerolymatos adds: “The British – and that means Wickham – knew who these people were. And that’s what makes it so frightening. They were the people who had been in the torture chambers during occupation, pulling out the fingernails and applying thumbscrews.” By September 1947, the year the Communist Party was outlawed, 19,620 leftists were held in Greek camps and prisons, 12,000 of them in Makronissos, with a further 39,948 exiled internally or in British camps across the Middle East. There exist many terrifying accounts of torture, murder and sadism in the Greek concentration camps – one of the outrageous atrocities in postwar Europe. Polymeris Volgis of New York University describes how a system of repentance was introduced as though by a “latter-day secular Inquisition”, with confessions extracted through “endless and violent degradation”.
Women detainees would have their children taken away until they confessed to being “Bulgarians” and “whores”. The repentance system led Makronissos to be seen as a “school” and “National University” for those now convinced that “Our life belongs to Mother Greece,’ in which converts were visited by the king and queen, ministers and foreign officials. “The idea”, says Patríkios, who never repented, “was to reform and create patriots who would serve the homeland.”
Minors in the Kifissa prison were beaten with wires and socks filled with concrete. “On the boys’ chests, they sewed name tags”, writes Voglis, “with Slavic endings added to the names; many boys were raped”. A female prisoner was forced, after a severe beating, to stand in the square of Kastoria holding the severed heads of her uncle and brother-in-law. One detainee at Patras prison in May 1945 writes simply this: “They beat me furiously on the soles of my feet until I lost my sight. I lost the world.”
...
Nowhere else in newly liberated Europe were Nazi sympathisers enabled to penetrate the state structure – the army, security forces, judiciary – so effectively. The resurgence of neo-fascism in the form of present-day far-right party Golden Dawn has direct links to the failure to purge the state of right-wing extremists; many of Golden Dawn’s supporters are descendants of Battalionists, as were the “The Colonels” who seized power in 1967.
Glezos says: “I know exactly who executed my brother and I guarantee they all got off scot-free. I know that the people who did it are in government, and no one was ever punished.” Glezos has dedicated years to creating a library in his brother’s honour. In Brussels, he unabashedly asks interlocutors to contribute to the fund by popping a “frango” (a euro) into a silk purse. It is, along with the issue of war reparations, his other great campaign, his last wish: to erect a building worthy of the library that will honour Nikos. “The story of my brother is the story of Greece,” he says....
Back in the rebel-held quarter of Exarcheia, a young woman called Marina pulls off her balaclava and draws air. Over coffee, she answers the question: why Greece? Why is it so different from the rest of Europe in this regard – the especially bitter war between left and right? “Because,” she replies, “of what was done to us in 1944. The persecution of the partisans who fought the Nazis, for which they were honoured in France, Italy, Belgium or the Netherlands – but for which, here, they were tortured and killed on orders from your government.”
She continues: “I come from a family that has been detained and tortured for two generations before me: my grandfather after the Second World War, my father under the Junta of the colonels – and now it could be me, any day now. We are the grandchildren of the andartes, and our enemies are Churchill’s Greek grandchildren.”
“The whole thing”, spits Dr Gerolymatos, “was for nothing. None of this need have happened, and the British crime was to legitimise people whose record under occupation by the Third Reich put them beyond legitimacy. It happened because Churchill believed he had to bring back the Greek king. And the last thing the Greek people wanted or needed was the return of a de-frocked monarchy backed by Nazi collaborators. But that is what the British imposed, and it has scarred Greece ever since.”
“All those collaborators went into the system,” says Manilos Glezos. “Into the government mechanism – during and after the civil war, and their sons went into the military junta. The deposits remain, like malignant cells in the system. Although we liberated Greece, the Nazi collaborators won the war, thanks to the British. And the deposits remain, like bacilli in the system.”
But there is one last thing Glezos would like to make clear. “You haven’t asked: ‘Why do I go on? Why I am doing this when I am 92 years and two months old?’ he says, fixing us with his eyes. “I could, after all, be sitting on a sofa in slippers with my feet up,” he jests. “So why do I do this?”
He answers himself: “You think the man sitting opposite you is Manolis but you are wrong. I am not him. And I am not him because I have not forgotten that every time someone was about to be executed, they said: ‘Don’t forget me. When you say good morning, think of me. When you raise a glass, say my name.’ And that is what I am doing talking to you, or doing any of this. The man you see before you is all those people. And all this is about not forgetting them.”
Sunday, November 30, 2014
Saturday, November 29, 2014
Novorossiya as Revolution and Rebirth versus Oligarchic Counter-Revolution and Mortification of Honor, Justice and Conscience
Here is an excellent, perhaps even ground breaking and not just leftist, but genuinely leftist [which increases its importance] analysis of the Ukrainian question and which also establishes the importance of Novorossiya not just for Ukraine or Russia, but for the rest of us as well.
The political vector and character of Novorossiya, as set initially by the people themselves, started off spontaneously--as a political, spiritual, and ideological renaissance, which openly claimed the Soviet legacy, the idea of social justice (now together with conscience and honor) and strong commons as the basis of national strength, in a word, as reborn and revived power of the people (narodovlastie) and people's socialism.
I would add that one key paradox of Novorossiya is that, unlike Crimea, this people's, socialist and soviet character of Novorossiya was led by Strelkov and others who might be called traditionalists or even monarchists, but whose sense of what needs to be done, the sense of duty, honor, integrity, and spirit fit the spirit of Novorossiya better than "materialism" of the clever, the base, even he greedy and devoid of spirit. For, indeed, one of the greatest sins (to use the language of faith) of later "real socialism," which, under post-Soviet oligarchy, became even significantly worse, was the ignorance of and sinning against the spirit which resides in humanity unless humanity is zombified, mortified, and hollowed out.
However, after this spontaneous revival and revolution from below, which was a synthesis of new people's socialism and the spirit reborn, came the "clever and cunning" plans from Moscow, involving not only Strelkov's removal, but also the "spirit" and letter of the Minsk Agreement/Appeasement with the Nazi junta, and essentially counter-revolutionary, neo-oligarchic restoration. Management from the outside began to deconstruct and replace the people with all the problems of legitimacy and inadequate, criminally inadequate institution building when, it is obvious, that, both for Russia and Novorossiya to save themselves, technocratic and PR clever management assumes that one can and should replace the action and energy of the people with the manipulative shallowness of self-admiring managers whose policies contradict and even oppose the will and the interests of the people themselves.
Post-Soviet oligarchy (here both Western oligarchy and oligarchs in the former East) brought us this war and brought us into this crisis, and post-soviet oligarchy means spiritual and political death and is inadequate for leading the people. Oligarchy, trying to save itself, is always bound to betray and sacrifice the people for its own narrow interests.
The West wants to see Russia's disintegration. But Russian Westernized oligarchs are more afraid of the people and hence Novorossiya than of the threat from the West.
Just to put it more plainly and simply, starting in May with the negative attitude toward the people's referendum in Novorossiya, besides the series of direct sabotage against Strelkov's fighters and the formation of people's power and the new anti-oligarchic state (and hence the revolution), the course started to be interfered with and managed in a distinctly counter-revolutionary way. And,besides the actions of the junta and the pressure from the West, it was this counter-revolution from above that has brought not only the large vacillations, costs, and setbacks. Far from solving anything, this counter-revolution is only deepening the crisis and further dividing the oligarchic elites from the people themselves.
Novorossiya is thus not only an attempt at political and spiritual renaissance, which is not only needed, but which is also a basic imperative for salvation. It is also a great new school both in revolution and counter-revolution.
The analysis to which I referred in the beginning comes from Basque comrades who, it seems to me, represent now the actual ideological vanguard, the most progressive part of the left and socialist thought in Europe. It is in Russian. Hopefully, it will also be available in English.
The political vector and character of Novorossiya, as set initially by the people themselves, started off spontaneously--as a political, spiritual, and ideological renaissance, which openly claimed the Soviet legacy, the idea of social justice (now together with conscience and honor) and strong commons as the basis of national strength, in a word, as reborn and revived power of the people (narodovlastie) and people's socialism.
I would add that one key paradox of Novorossiya is that, unlike Crimea, this people's, socialist and soviet character of Novorossiya was led by Strelkov and others who might be called traditionalists or even monarchists, but whose sense of what needs to be done, the sense of duty, honor, integrity, and spirit fit the spirit of Novorossiya better than "materialism" of the clever, the base, even he greedy and devoid of spirit. For, indeed, one of the greatest sins (to use the language of faith) of later "real socialism," which, under post-Soviet oligarchy, became even significantly worse, was the ignorance of and sinning against the spirit which resides in humanity unless humanity is zombified, mortified, and hollowed out.
However, after this spontaneous revival and revolution from below, which was a synthesis of new people's socialism and the spirit reborn, came the "clever and cunning" plans from Moscow, involving not only Strelkov's removal, but also the "spirit" and letter of the Minsk Agreement/Appeasement with the Nazi junta, and essentially counter-revolutionary, neo-oligarchic restoration. Management from the outside began to deconstruct and replace the people with all the problems of legitimacy and inadequate, criminally inadequate institution building when, it is obvious, that, both for Russia and Novorossiya to save themselves, technocratic and PR clever management assumes that one can and should replace the action and energy of the people with the manipulative shallowness of self-admiring managers whose policies contradict and even oppose the will and the interests of the people themselves.
Post-Soviet oligarchy (here both Western oligarchy and oligarchs in the former East) brought us this war and brought us into this crisis, and post-soviet oligarchy means spiritual and political death and is inadequate for leading the people. Oligarchy, trying to save itself, is always bound to betray and sacrifice the people for its own narrow interests.
The West wants to see Russia's disintegration. But Russian Westernized oligarchs are more afraid of the people and hence Novorossiya than of the threat from the West.
Just to put it more plainly and simply, starting in May with the negative attitude toward the people's referendum in Novorossiya, besides the series of direct sabotage against Strelkov's fighters and the formation of people's power and the new anti-oligarchic state (and hence the revolution), the course started to be interfered with and managed in a distinctly counter-revolutionary way. And,besides the actions of the junta and the pressure from the West, it was this counter-revolution from above that has brought not only the large vacillations, costs, and setbacks. Far from solving anything, this counter-revolution is only deepening the crisis and further dividing the oligarchic elites from the people themselves.
Novorossiya is thus not only an attempt at political and spiritual renaissance, which is not only needed, but which is also a basic imperative for salvation. It is also a great new school both in revolution and counter-revolution.
The analysis to which I referred in the beginning comes from Basque comrades who, it seems to me, represent now the actual ideological vanguard, the most progressive part of the left and socialist thought in Europe. It is in Russian. Hopefully, it will also be available in English.
Thursday, November 27, 2014
Nazi Swastika, NATO (Cross and) Flag, and Nazi Wolfsangel: One Unitary Meaning of Azov Battalion's Creed
Azov Battalion is one of the main battalions of the Kiev junta. Its official insignia is openly and declaratively Nazi (Wolfsangel). Its fighters leave no doubt about how they understand what they are fighting for: for Nazism and NATO, side by side, as the symbols which they display here testify. They are confident that the NATO and Nazi flags deserve to stand side by side and with them and under them they are going to the battle.
Nazism and NATO thus also sums up what Azov Battalion and the Maidan stand for and what they are fighting for. The elite fighters of the Maidan have no doubt about this, for it is their creed, their faith, their understanding--regardless of what political correctness of PR technicians want the rest of the world to believe.
During the Inauguration of the "New" Old Maidan/Junta Government, Poroshenko Confirmed and Declared Its Nazi Character and Program
Poroshenko today in Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Parliament): "100% of Ukrainians are for one unitary state .... [however] there are still many people who support the Customs Union [with Russia], the Russian language as an official language, but we will never give them the right to veto our course."
So 100% plus "many people" who think otherwise and who will have their right denied ... to what does this add up? Clearly, for Poroshenko, only those who support Ukraine's Nazification count. They are "100%" of the people, and Poroshenko has just declared that the many others ought to count for nothing and be treated as already non-existent from now on. In other words, Poroshenko has just declared and confirmed the essence of his Nazi program and this program to be the program of the "new" government.
"Выступая в Раде, Порошенко заявил, что 100% украинцев выступают за единое унитарное государство. Однако, прекрасно понимая, что на фоне идущей войны на Донбассе его заявление выглядит несколько нелепо, был вынужден оговориться: "еще немало людей поддерживает Таможенный союз, русский язык в качестве государственного, но мы никогда не дадим им право вето на наш курс".
So 100% plus "many people" who think otherwise and who will have their right denied ... to what does this add up? Clearly, for Poroshenko, only those who support Ukraine's Nazification count. They are "100%" of the people, and Poroshenko has just declared that the many others ought to count for nothing and be treated as already non-existent from now on. In other words, Poroshenko has just declared and confirmed the essence of his Nazi program and this program to be the program of the "new" government.
"Выступая в Раде, Порошенко заявил, что 100% украинцев выступают за единое унитарное государство. Однако, прекрасно понимая, что на фоне идущей войны на Донбассе его заявление выглядит несколько нелепо, был вынужден оговориться: "еще немало людей поддерживает Таможенный союз, русский язык в качестве государственного, но мы никогда не дадим им право вето на наш курс".
Dmitry Orlov's Collapse Deficit of Capitalism Ought to Be the Subject of Global Debate
Following one of the Alice in the Wonderland rabbit holes, I found a gem in the form of Dmitry Orlov's study of the "collapse gap" comparing the USA and the USSR in terms of their institutional, structural, and cultural preparedness for a collapse of the system. It is a classic, I must say. It was published nearly exactly 8 years ago and it deserves to become a subject of a national, if not global debate.
Whatever one may say against "communism," it was based on the idea of building strong and freely accessible "commons." Capitalism is based on the Tower of Babel of predatory egoism (best rendered by de Sade from one side and Ayn Rand from the other side) where, as Marx put it correctly in the Communist Manifesto, all human relations are progressively (regressively) reduced to money--no money, no relations, no dignity, no property, no freedom, no life.
At the end of World War I, Max Weber, being one of the right-wing theoreticians, was paving the way for the emergence of Nazism and fascism in which, under the conditions of an acute crisis and last stage of capitalism, cash payment is being replaced by the "monopoly on violence," as the "bond" and "new essence" that takes place when the fiction and fiat of money dissolves.
If communism was based on the dictatorship of the party, which tried to be a vulgar form of the rule of the philosopher-kings, who were neither philosophers nor kings, capitalism is a dictatorship of money--dictatorship of tokens without which one's humanity is not recognized. As we see in Ukraine and elsewhere, capitalism in its today's late or last? form,is now trying to save itself through Nazification (hence the meaning of all these Maidans). And to do so, it tries to impose and enforce a monopoly on violence, even if it means doing so through proxies, such as ISIS or al Qaeda or other death squads turned into whole armies now, or by other formations the true allegiance of which is still partially denied, or through the expansion of NATO.
In this light, one cannot but conclude that the elites themselves, the world capitalist oligarchy is already busy not only preparing itself for a possible collapse of the capitalist system, but that it is even trying to direct and control the process.
But here is a link to the remarkable study by Dimitry Orlov itself:
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2006-12-04/closing-collapse-gap-ussr-was-better-prepared-collapse-us
Whatever one may say against "communism," it was based on the idea of building strong and freely accessible "commons." Capitalism is based on the Tower of Babel of predatory egoism (best rendered by de Sade from one side and Ayn Rand from the other side) where, as Marx put it correctly in the Communist Manifesto, all human relations are progressively (regressively) reduced to money--no money, no relations, no dignity, no property, no freedom, no life.
At the end of World War I, Max Weber, being one of the right-wing theoreticians, was paving the way for the emergence of Nazism and fascism in which, under the conditions of an acute crisis and last stage of capitalism, cash payment is being replaced by the "monopoly on violence," as the "bond" and "new essence" that takes place when the fiction and fiat of money dissolves.
If communism was based on the dictatorship of the party, which tried to be a vulgar form of the rule of the philosopher-kings, who were neither philosophers nor kings, capitalism is a dictatorship of money--dictatorship of tokens without which one's humanity is not recognized. As we see in Ukraine and elsewhere, capitalism in its today's late or last? form,is now trying to save itself through Nazification (hence the meaning of all these Maidans). And to do so, it tries to impose and enforce a monopoly on violence, even if it means doing so through proxies, such as ISIS or al Qaeda or other death squads turned into whole armies now, or by other formations the true allegiance of which is still partially denied, or through the expansion of NATO.
In this light, one cannot but conclude that the elites themselves, the world capitalist oligarchy is already busy not only preparing itself for a possible collapse of the capitalist system, but that it is even trying to direct and control the process.
But here is a link to the remarkable study by Dimitry Orlov itself:
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2006-12-04/closing-collapse-gap-ussr-was-better-prepared-collapse-us
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
A Kremlin Insider Brings Putin's Stance on Ukraine and Novorossiya to Us, Outsiders [Or Does He?]
Oleg Matveychev, a professor at the Moscow Higher School of Economics and one of the advisers linked to the Kremlin, gave an interview to Neiromir TV. In the last ten minutes of the interview, after making a case for Russia's optimism, he offered an insider's look at Putin's strategy toward Ukraine.
1. Yes, for the last twenty years, Russia did not have a Ukrainian strategy. Russia relied on and trusted in the inter-elite rapport and inter-oligarchic relations.
2. As a result, Banderization of Ukraine proceeded unhampered.
3. However, this Banderization was spreading even to Sevastopol and the Kremlin itself.
4. Putid did want to limit his actions to Crimea.
5. Putin was [naively?] hoping that his Crimean speech would make an impression on his Western partners and that, together with the referendum, they would more or less come to terms with the incorporation of Crimea into Russia.
6. My comment: nothing of what Matveychev says would thus indicate some serious understanding of the nature of US geopolitical strategy or the nature of (resurrected) Nazism.
7. Putin's next (still standing) expectation was that Time (Saturn) is on his side and that the Kiev junta would hardly survive for more than a year and that it would fall perhaps thanks to another Maidan. In a Maidan do we trust?
8. This cunning plan was thwarted by the West's apparently unexpected response and by the unsanctioned of the people at the "base [low] level" represented by the working people of Donbass, pro-Russian patriots, anti-fascists, and Strelkov.
9. As a result of this double opposition to Putin's chess plan, Putin aka Bear got his paw caught in a trap (Matveychev's own figure of speech).
10. In addition, some Russian oligarchs (i.e. Yevtushenkov) and US investment funds (Franklin Templeton and Vanguard?) tried to use the crisis as a raid on other oligarchs' holdings (i.e. Akhmetov's).
11. Some punitive actions against these Russian oligarchs have already been undertaken by the Kremlin.
12. Next, Putin also tasked Surkov to turn the war in Donbass into a more low-level chronic conflict and, if possible, to freeze it. [that's exactly what Yatsenyuk accused Putin of trying to do]
13. Strelkov is not going to be punished because too many people see him as a hero.
14. Still it is expected that the Kiev regime would somehow implode even if the war stops, as Putin would like to see.
15. Moscow also foresees first a renewal of the demand for federalization by Galicia or Western Europe and then its possible cessation from the rest of Ukraine in order to become the West's or EU trust fund Banderite kid.
A good deal of what Matveychev says seems to fit a good deal of the available information. Still one may wonder why Matveychev is telling all this and why now. I can think of two or three basic possibilities:
1) Putin himself tried to avoid as much as he could offering too much clarity on his position, strategy, and goals (in Brisbane, it is said that Merkel was keeping Putin for four hours just to find that). Matveychev can tell all this because Putin decided that, in the face of the mounting pressure, some explanation is needed after all.
2) The explanation can, moreover, be given because the old strategy is already old, if not dead now. So it can be told.
3) Or Moscow is trying its last ditch effort for striking a deal with the Kiev junta and the West over pacification of Donbass and phasing out of the conflict.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWMJaIsQ5Xg
1. Yes, for the last twenty years, Russia did not have a Ukrainian strategy. Russia relied on and trusted in the inter-elite rapport and inter-oligarchic relations.
2. As a result, Banderization of Ukraine proceeded unhampered.
3. However, this Banderization was spreading even to Sevastopol and the Kremlin itself.
4. Putid did want to limit his actions to Crimea.
5. Putin was [naively?] hoping that his Crimean speech would make an impression on his Western partners and that, together with the referendum, they would more or less come to terms with the incorporation of Crimea into Russia.
6. My comment: nothing of what Matveychev says would thus indicate some serious understanding of the nature of US geopolitical strategy or the nature of (resurrected) Nazism.
7. Putin's next (still standing) expectation was that Time (Saturn) is on his side and that the Kiev junta would hardly survive for more than a year and that it would fall perhaps thanks to another Maidan. In a Maidan do we trust?
8. This cunning plan was thwarted by the West's apparently unexpected response and by the unsanctioned of the people at the "base [low] level" represented by the working people of Donbass, pro-Russian patriots, anti-fascists, and Strelkov.
9. As a result of this double opposition to Putin's chess plan, Putin aka Bear got his paw caught in a trap (Matveychev's own figure of speech).
10. In addition, some Russian oligarchs (i.e. Yevtushenkov) and US investment funds (Franklin Templeton and Vanguard?) tried to use the crisis as a raid on other oligarchs' holdings (i.e. Akhmetov's).
11. Some punitive actions against these Russian oligarchs have already been undertaken by the Kremlin.
12. Next, Putin also tasked Surkov to turn the war in Donbass into a more low-level chronic conflict and, if possible, to freeze it. [that's exactly what Yatsenyuk accused Putin of trying to do]
13. Strelkov is not going to be punished because too many people see him as a hero.
14. Still it is expected that the Kiev regime would somehow implode even if the war stops, as Putin would like to see.
15. Moscow also foresees first a renewal of the demand for federalization by Galicia or Western Europe and then its possible cessation from the rest of Ukraine in order to become the West's or EU trust fund Banderite kid.
A good deal of what Matveychev says seems to fit a good deal of the available information. Still one may wonder why Matveychev is telling all this and why now. I can think of two or three basic possibilities:
1) Putin himself tried to avoid as much as he could offering too much clarity on his position, strategy, and goals (in Brisbane, it is said that Merkel was keeping Putin for four hours just to find that). Matveychev can tell all this because Putin decided that, in the face of the mounting pressure, some explanation is needed after all.
2) The explanation can, moreover, be given because the old strategy is already old, if not dead now. So it can be told.
3) Or Moscow is trying its last ditch effort for striking a deal with the Kiev junta and the West over pacification of Donbass and phasing out of the conflict.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWMJaIsQ5Xg
Does the Militant Logic of US-designed Maidan in Ukraine Demand Maidans in Prague or even in Washington?
Business Insider hardly ever fails to present an interesting propaganda piece.
This time it offered a summary of a special US report on hybrid warfare, which is how the US and the Kiev junta (which copies and pastes) call Russia's perceived response to their violent Banderite regime change through the Maidan in Ukraine. According to the report, the trouble is that whatever Russia was doing or not doing is already way too much effective.
So how did we get there? According to the report published Sept. 26 by the Fort Bragg, North Carolina command, it appears that it is Fukuyama's fault. For he argued that, with the fall of the Soviet Union, ideological battles and hence also fundamental political battles ended and all what was left was just shopping and the hunting expeditions of the otherwise bored elites who, instead of golf, wanted to be recognized as superior to others. The report of the Fort Bragg command, no longer giving Fukuyama any credit, says in this way:
According to the certainly not very cheap report, what happened was that, all the trillions spent on war and the military budget notwithstanding, the US "ceased using political warfare at the end of the Cold War" and focused instead only on trying to "tell America's story." Neoliberalism, the Washington Consensus, austerity programs, the bombing of Yugoslavia, the destruction of Iraq's society and economy, the Iraq War, Drang nach Osten must have been just story-telling efforts. We were just told stories, while Russia, China, and Iran were doing all the ideological, political, and hybrid fighting.
The most obvious proof of this comes in a picture attached to the article which shows some Chinese officers at an unknown time and at a unknown place doing something at their laptops. Business Insider, however, helps the reader to know all of what is there to know. The caption provided by Business Insider reads "Chinese hackers."
I am puzzled to see that Chinese hackers would be hacking into US systems under such powerful man's protection as steel helmets. However, for now, I am willing to go with the program.
The evidence includes a direct threat to the White House itself: "Chinese news outlets also are used in media warfare, including at the White House. "'The Chinese state-controlled television station network CCTV has a White House pool reporter that could influence US media reporting on China issues,” the report said.'" I am thus told that a Chinese White House pool reporter is clearly both very unrestricted and aggressive. Unlike Western reporters who introduced short skirts and high heels into news.
Other examples of the unrestricted nature of China's warfare against the US "include China’s threat several years ago to sell off large US debt holdings to protest US arms sales to Taiwan, and cutting off sales of rare earth minerals to Japan in a dispute over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea."
In other words, if China decides to sell what it bought from the US--i.e. the bonds--this too counts at Fort Bragg and, plausibly, at the White House as a military action against the US. Cutting off sales of minerals to Japan is another example of China's unrestricted aggression.
One has to wonder how the former unpolitical and non-ideological "telling of the American story" needs to be changed to counter such threats. The report is mercifully helpful in this regard. It says:
You see, one just needs to repeat the word "warfare" as many times possible. Here 15 times in one brief passage, and 14 times in one sentence. If your mind is warfare's mind, then whatever you see in the world cries back to you "warfare." Whatever China does (or does not do) is from now on defined as warfare. One's stylistic skills just need to be commensurately unrestricted and unconventional.
In other regards, the report is also telling us that to be a Russophile now means in the book of the Pentagon and NATO to be "a dissenter": "“The brazen audacity of unconventional warfare within Russian hybrid warfare has produced urgent concern among America’s NATO and non-NATO partners that Russia may apply similar approaches to other regional countries in the region with dissenting Russophile populations, such as the Baltic States, Moldova, and Georgia."
Importantly, the report--published just some two weeks after the Minsk Agreements of September 5--is effectively declaring the beginning of new "political warfare," which appears to mean for the strategists use of all peacetime weapons ("peacetime efforts")... actually "ALL MEANS" for war.
Business Insider then cites Sebastian Gorka, the Horner professor of military theory at the Marine Corps University and an adviser to Army Special Operations Command, who seems to have something to do with the report. According to Gorka, "China, Iran, Russia, and the jihadis are all at war with us right now.”
It is not that often to have a professor declare war on three states at once, representing some 1.5 billion people and to throw into the basket also ISIS, al Qaeda and other proxies which the US was nurturing as part of its new hybrid wars.
Bill Cowan, a former Army Special operations officer, is used to draw a conclusion. He argues that, as of now, the US government or the Obama leadership is a problem for him: "We don’t have the leadership to make this concept/doctrine the core doctrine of our fight against our enemies.”
Does the implementation of this new declared unrestricted (and not just hybrid) warfare requires an American Maidan too--according to these special forces strategists from Fort Bragg?
http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gertz-us-lacks-unconventional-warfare-strategy-2014-11
This time it offered a summary of a special US report on hybrid warfare, which is how the US and the Kiev junta (which copies and pastes) call Russia's perceived response to their violent Banderite regime change through the Maidan in Ukraine. According to the report, the trouble is that whatever Russia was doing or not doing is already way too much effective.
So how did we get there? According to the report published Sept. 26 by the Fort Bragg, North Carolina command, it appears that it is Fukuyama's fault. For he argued that, with the fall of the Soviet Union, ideological battles and hence also fundamental political battles ended and all what was left was just shopping and the hunting expeditions of the otherwise bored elites who, instead of golf, wanted to be recognized as superior to others. The report of the Fort Bragg command, no longer giving Fukuyama any credit, says in this way:
"The future geopolitical environment will feature ideological battles among states, the report said, noting that “Russia, China, and Iran currently conduct political warfare activities to further their individual goals. The United States, by contrast, ceased using political warfare at the end of the Cold War and instead is focused on “public diplomacy” that seeks to “tell America’s story” rather than influencing events in support of US and allied interests."
According to the certainly not very cheap report, what happened was that, all the trillions spent on war and the military budget notwithstanding, the US "ceased using political warfare at the end of the Cold War" and focused instead only on trying to "tell America's story." Neoliberalism, the Washington Consensus, austerity programs, the bombing of Yugoslavia, the destruction of Iraq's society and economy, the Iraq War, Drang nach Osten must have been just story-telling efforts. We were just told stories, while Russia, China, and Iran were doing all the ideological, political, and hybrid fighting.
The most obvious proof of this comes in a picture attached to the article which shows some Chinese officers at an unknown time and at a unknown place doing something at their laptops. Business Insider, however, helps the reader to know all of what is there to know. The caption provided by Business Insider reads "Chinese hackers."
I am puzzled to see that Chinese hackers would be hacking into US systems under such powerful man's protection as steel helmets. However, for now, I am willing to go with the program.
The evidence includes a direct threat to the White House itself: "Chinese news outlets also are used in media warfare, including at the White House. "'The Chinese state-controlled television station network CCTV has a White House pool reporter that could influence US media reporting on China issues,” the report said.'" I am thus told that a Chinese White House pool reporter is clearly both very unrestricted and aggressive. Unlike Western reporters who introduced short skirts and high heels into news.
Other examples of the unrestricted nature of China's warfare against the US "include China’s threat several years ago to sell off large US debt holdings to protest US arms sales to Taiwan, and cutting off sales of rare earth minerals to Japan in a dispute over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea."
In other words, if China decides to sell what it bought from the US--i.e. the bonds--this too counts at Fort Bragg and, plausibly, at the White House as a military action against the US. Cutting off sales of minerals to Japan is another example of China's unrestricted aggression.
One has to wonder how the former unpolitical and non-ideological "telling of the American story" needs to be changed to counter such threats. The report is mercifully helpful in this regard. It says:
China will use a host of methods, many of which lie out of the realm of conventional warfare,” the report said. “These methods include trade warfare, financial warfare, ecological warfare, psychological warfare, smuggling warfare, media warfare, drug warfare, network warfare, technological warfare, fabrication warfare, resources warfare, economic aid warfare, cultural warfare, and international law warfare.
You see, one just needs to repeat the word "warfare" as many times possible. Here 15 times in one brief passage, and 14 times in one sentence. If your mind is warfare's mind, then whatever you see in the world cries back to you "warfare." Whatever China does (or does not do) is from now on defined as warfare. One's stylistic skills just need to be commensurately unrestricted and unconventional.
In other regards, the report is also telling us that to be a Russophile now means in the book of the Pentagon and NATO to be "a dissenter": "“The brazen audacity of unconventional warfare within Russian hybrid warfare has produced urgent concern among America’s NATO and non-NATO partners that Russia may apply similar approaches to other regional countries in the region with dissenting Russophile populations, such as the Baltic States, Moldova, and Georgia."
Importantly, the report--published just some two weeks after the Minsk Agreements of September 5--is effectively declaring the beginning of new "political warfare," which appears to mean for the strategists use of all peacetime weapons ("peacetime efforts")... actually "ALL MEANS" for war.
Business Insider then cites Sebastian Gorka, the Horner professor of military theory at the Marine Corps University and an adviser to Army Special Operations Command, who seems to have something to do with the report. According to Gorka, "China, Iran, Russia, and the jihadis are all at war with us right now.”
It is not that often to have a professor declare war on three states at once, representing some 1.5 billion people and to throw into the basket also ISIS, al Qaeda and other proxies which the US was nurturing as part of its new hybrid wars.
Bill Cowan, a former Army Special operations officer, is used to draw a conclusion. He argues that, as of now, the US government or the Obama leadership is a problem for him: "We don’t have the leadership to make this concept/doctrine the core doctrine of our fight against our enemies.”
Does the implementation of this new declared unrestricted (and not just hybrid) warfare requires an American Maidan too--according to these special forces strategists from Fort Bragg?
http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gertz-us-lacks-unconventional-warfare-strategy-2014-11
Monday, November 24, 2014
Strelkov Responded to Murid, But Chose to React to Murid's Apparently Least Repugnant and hence Not Gravest "Bred" (Delirium)
Igor Strelkov has come out with his own comment on El Murid's early peek on his forthcoming book in which he tries to compare the US Armed Forces and ISIS. Oh, sorry, he means to draw parallels between the Army of Novorossiya and ISIS--in the name of some previous order, so it seems.
When I published my own blasting of El Murid, I did not run it with Strelkov. But I did have a feeling that Strelkov himself would need to respond.
And here is Strelkov's reaction: "I've read from El Murid this huuuge expose of what needed to be done when leaving Slavyansk in order to "save Russian Mir." It is a long time since I something so mad from respected Anatoliy. Apparently, we should have stormed Dniepropetrovsk. Without armor, without munition, without bullets, without gasoline, but with a thousand of women and children in the train, while breaking through several defense lines and fortified positions. Not to mention the fact that the military experience of even the most combat ready troops of the militia was exclusively that of defense."
"Прочитал у Эль-Мюрида ба-а-альшую портянку про то, как надо было действовать при выходе из Славянска, чтобы "спасти Русский Мир". Давно не читал такого бреда в исполнении ув.Анатолия... На Днепропетровск надо было идти, оказывается... Без бронетехники, без снарядов, без патронов, без бензина и с тысячей женщин-детей в обозе... Прорываясь через несколько линий блок-постов... И это при том, что весь боевой опыт даже самых боеспособных подразделений ополчения был на тот момент исключительно оборонительный."
https://vk.com/strelkov_info?w=wall-57424472_30961
As I said before, charging Strelkov with the ostensible neglect of the "need" to throw his outgunned troops hundreds of kilometers away from the nearest support base and into the middle of the junta's state is one thing. But trying to associate the antifascist militia with the ISIS/al Qaeda terrorists and mercenaries is a much more serious matter. Murid is going to have a whole book on this now. Not difficult to see whose interests this is to serve. On top of this, Murid also claims that Novorossiya is lost and so is the war ... because of Russia's policies and Strelkov's inability to see Murid's ingenuous plan of how to destroy Strelkov's troops if they had just agreed to move not into Donetsk, but in the opposite direction ...
When I published my own blasting of El Murid, I did not run it with Strelkov. But I did have a feeling that Strelkov himself would need to respond.
And here is Strelkov's reaction: "I've read from El Murid this huuuge expose of what needed to be done when leaving Slavyansk in order to "save Russian Mir." It is a long time since I something so mad from respected Anatoliy. Apparently, we should have stormed Dniepropetrovsk. Without armor, without munition, without bullets, without gasoline, but with a thousand of women and children in the train, while breaking through several defense lines and fortified positions. Not to mention the fact that the military experience of even the most combat ready troops of the militia was exclusively that of defense."
"Прочитал у Эль-Мюрида ба-а-альшую портянку про то, как надо было действовать при выходе из Славянска, чтобы "спасти Русский Мир". Давно не читал такого бреда в исполнении ув.Анатолия... На Днепропетровск надо было идти, оказывается... Без бронетехники, без снарядов, без патронов, без бензина и с тысячей женщин-детей в обозе... Прорываясь через несколько линий блок-постов... И это при том, что весь боевой опыт даже самых боеспособных подразделений ополчения был на тот момент исключительно оборонительный."
https://vk.com/strelkov_info?w=wall-57424472_30961
As I said before, charging Strelkov with the ostensible neglect of the "need" to throw his outgunned troops hundreds of kilometers away from the nearest support base and into the middle of the junta's state is one thing. But trying to associate the antifascist militia with the ISIS/al Qaeda terrorists and mercenaries is a much more serious matter. Murid is going to have a whole book on this now. Not difficult to see whose interests this is to serve. On top of this, Murid also claims that Novorossiya is lost and so is the war ... because of Russia's policies and Strelkov's inability to see Murid's ingenuous plan of how to destroy Strelkov's troops if they had just agreed to move not into Donetsk, but in the opposite direction ...
El Murid's "Bear Service" (refers to the Russian/Slavic expression) and Here Is Not One, but Three Very Strong Reasons (At Least) Why
Disclosure: I've changed the animal to a "bear." El Murid is an excellent analyst, but, here, he lapsed and regressed. But now I would call this idea of his rather clumsy and misplaced than nasty, thus displacing my own reaction, which was in part due to my then openness and willingness to listen to a guy whom "The truth about the events in Ukraine."
The plots around Ukraine and Novorossiya are quite "Byzantine" or, to be more current, Machiavellian.We are trying to our best, others are trying their worst, and much gets mixed up.
In his post, which seems to be an early revealed portion of his forthcoming book, in which he was bound on comparing the militia of Novorossiya and ISIS (whose interests is this going to serve?), El Murid offers his new view on Strelkov, Novorossiya, and Russia. What he says of Strelkov should dispel the last illusions that he is Strelkov's friend or, at least, ally or associate or help. According to Murid, Novorosssiya and the Russian Mir have been crushed, and, supposedly, it is by and large Strelkov's fault. The first assertion is false and so is the second.
According to Murid, Strelkov should have led his forces with no armor, no artillery, and hardly any ammunition left from the encirclement in Slavyansk not into the city of Donetsk, but deeper into the enemy's territory and to seize some large city like Kharkov, Dniepropetrovsk, or Zaporozhie. According to Murid what prevented Strelkov from doing so was Strelkov's limited vision or narrow-mindedness from which Murid himself as a civilian does not suffer because he does not like to go to the frontline--not because he is afraid (he claims that the chance he might suffer a car accident where he lives is as large as a chance of being injured in a war zone), but because being so far away supposedly gives Murid an incomparably greater view and understanding.
In trying very hard to present Novorossiya as an already failed and defeated entity (in whose interests again?) and boasting of his wisdom, Murid could not help but boasting also of this: "Более того — по мнению моих друзей из Киева, близких к нынешней хунте, даже в период самых тяжелых боев летом в киевском руководстве сохранялось весьма пренебрежительное отношение к ополчению и ситуации на Юго-Востоке в целом. Считалось, что все идет как надо, и временные проблемы никак не влияют на конечный результат, который будет достигнут самое позднее к концу августа."
Translation: "Moreover, according to my friends from Kiev, close to today's junta, even during the time of the most difficult battles in the summer, the Kiev leadership remained convinced of its victory over the militia and was confident about the whole situation in the South-East of Ukraine. They thought that everything went as planned and that current problems would not effect the final result, which would be achieved by the end of August."
The key words are Murid's "friends from Kiev, close to today's junta" sharing with Murid their assessment of the realization of their plans against Novorossiya and Strelkov. http://el-murid.livejournal.com/2103774.html#cutid1
The plots around Ukraine and Novorossiya are quite "Byzantine" or, to be more current, Machiavellian.We are trying to our best, others are trying their worst, and much gets mixed up.
In his post, which seems to be an early revealed portion of his forthcoming book, in which he was bound on comparing the militia of Novorossiya and ISIS (whose interests is this going to serve?), El Murid offers his new view on Strelkov, Novorossiya, and Russia. What he says of Strelkov should dispel the last illusions that he is Strelkov's friend or, at least, ally or associate or help. According to Murid, Novorosssiya and the Russian Mir have been crushed, and, supposedly, it is by and large Strelkov's fault. The first assertion is false and so is the second.
According to Murid, Strelkov should have led his forces with no armor, no artillery, and hardly any ammunition left from the encirclement in Slavyansk not into the city of Donetsk, but deeper into the enemy's territory and to seize some large city like Kharkov, Dniepropetrovsk, or Zaporozhie. According to Murid what prevented Strelkov from doing so was Strelkov's limited vision or narrow-mindedness from which Murid himself as a civilian does not suffer because he does not like to go to the frontline--not because he is afraid (he claims that the chance he might suffer a car accident where he lives is as large as a chance of being injured in a war zone), but because being so far away supposedly gives Murid an incomparably greater view and understanding.
In trying very hard to present Novorossiya as an already failed and defeated entity (in whose interests again?) and boasting of his wisdom, Murid could not help but boasting also of this: "Более того — по мнению моих друзей из Киева, близких к нынешней хунте, даже в период самых тяжелых боев летом в киевском руководстве сохранялось весьма пренебрежительное отношение к ополчению и ситуации на Юго-Востоке в целом. Считалось, что все идет как надо, и временные проблемы никак не влияют на конечный результат, который будет достигнут самое позднее к концу августа."
Translation: "Moreover, according to my friends from Kiev, close to today's junta, even during the time of the most difficult battles in the summer, the Kiev leadership remained convinced of its victory over the militia and was confident about the whole situation in the South-East of Ukraine. They thought that everything went as planned and that current problems would not effect the final result, which would be achieved by the end of August."
The key words are Murid's "friends from Kiev, close to today's junta" sharing with Murid their assessment of the realization of their plans against Novorossiya and Strelkov. http://el-murid.livejournal.com/2103774.html#cutid1
Sunday, November 23, 2014
[Why] Can US Machiavellians Outsmart the "Russian Bear"? An RT Article is a Case in Point
Phillip Butler wrote a great article for RT on Obama and the Machiavellianism of the US Empire. What seems to have been safely lost on the readership is that the article too is written in a knowledgeably Machiavellian way, which comes out at the end of the article, where Butler turns the table so to speak and indicates that what he was saying about Obama is applicable not only to Obama. So what does Butler say of Obama? That he is no genius, that is, no Machiavellian genius; but he is a zombie, a Frankenstein of a Machiavellian genius ("first rate political scientists around him"). And what does then Butler say in the conclusion in one single revealing sentence? That what he said of Obama applies in his view to Putin as well: "But in studying Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli you’ll soon learn, all princes named Putin, Bush, or Obama, they practice the kingly game. What’s important for us all is the purpose of the underlying Machiavellianism."
Butler is clever. He wrote a great article on Obama and was able to sell it to RT, when he was actually writing an article on Putin--minus all the think tanks which constitute the supposed Machiavellian might of the US Empire. In other words, the US has a plethora of think tanks generously paid and staffed, while Russia or Putin has only Surkov, Boroday and few others.
The few remaining Last Mohicans of the Platonists walking the electronic global Agora can do little either for the Machiavellian geniuses or for these Fankensteins or their monsters (popularly, but, to some extent, not quite wrongly, mistaken for the Frakensteins themselves) or the many who are deadly set on thinking as Machiavelli prescribed to them.
On this note, let leave the remaining note to Butler and Machiavelli: "Much has been written about Machiavelli’s “The Prince,” but this quote reveals the essence of Machiavellian intent:
“The vulgar crowd always is taken by appearances, and the world consists chiefly of the vulgar.” - Niccolo Machiaveli"
On a second thought, let's give some thought to Butler's actual ending or to his last thought:
Here, however, one more thing needs to be added. The assumption that the popular" Frakenstein (popularly or vulgarly mistaken for Frankenstein's monster, Frankenstein's creation) and the new (American) Prometheus (and Butler calls this new Prometheus "American Prometheus") is valid in a sense in which the maker of the zombie-slave is to be expected to be a monster too and perhaps even a bigger and more dangerous than the one whom he created from a corpse.
The new Prometheus is a reference to "the Modern Prometheus" of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein for which "the Modern Prometheus" serves as a subtitle or rather as the full title of the book, which reads Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus." In Greek mythology, Prometheus is not just a Titan who tricked Zeus, for which he is most popularly known. He is also the Maker of Man. A God-Creator whose creation is, however, limited only to making man, but this creation, as far as we are concerned, might be for us the most essential one.
Mary Shelly thus tells us that the modern "liberal," Baconian Empire took it upon itself to make a new man (Hobbes said this openly in the Introduction to his Leviathan, and Hobbes was Bacon's secretary). Mary Shelly just told the other part of the story. The new man created by the British "liberal" empire is to be a slave-machine, an animated corpse, a man turned into a monster. And also a killer to a point of self-destruction. Romantics, i.e., Mary Shelly, found a plausible apparent design flaw: the zombie-slave might turn against his slave master, his maker. What then?
Butler now appears to say that the Russian elite might be such a Frankenstein's creation in revolt because all that the beast, the manipulated machine, supposedly wanted was the love of its maker and its master instead of getting to love its abuse at the hands of its maker to the point of its willing self-destruction.
One can agree that to a good portion of Russia's liberal class and the elite, this diagnosis applies. But does it apply to Putin too?
Here it might be helpful to distinguish cleverness and wisdom. Machiavellians are very clever, but they are not wise. Milosevic tried to be a Machiavellian and outsmart Machiavellians by trying to make Machiavellian and Faustian deals with them. The last of such deals was his extradition to the Hague into the clutches of a perfectly Nazi tribunal or imperial inquisition. That's where he abandoned the tricks and started relying on wisdom. And the Empire, to her horror, found itself beaten by Milosevic during the trials.
Similarly, both Surkov and Boroday are very clever, but they lack wisdom as Boroday showed when, out of self-love (the opposite of honor and wisdom) he agreed to be interviewed by the most popular liberal presstitute in post-Soviet Russia, Madam Sobchak.
In contrast, what Strelkov lacks in cleverness, he makes up in wisdom and understanding of the code of honor, which, for Boroday, is a strangely Romantic and very unclever. But the fact is that the true lovers of the people are people like Strelkov. For the Machiavellians are in love only with power.
But since most of the article by Butler appears to be a very potent and so well written piece critical of Obama, RT published it, thus proving one of two things: either RT is "vulgar" in the Machiavellian sense or itself Machiavellian.
From the point of view of the Empire (and Machiavelli), love is but a second hand emotion, but a Romantic illusion, which is good as long as the masses do what they are told; otherwise, as Machiavelli taught the fear and stupidity of the masses is better and more reliable than love.
The "ethos" of this Machiavellian, Frankensteinian, capitalist Empire is summed up well in the famous song of Tina Turner, which a whole generation of the Americans fell in love with and which Tina Turner herself hated, but which brought her so much money and fame:
http://rt.com/op-edge/189592-us-obama-policy-nato/
Butler is clever. He wrote a great article on Obama and was able to sell it to RT, when he was actually writing an article on Putin--minus all the think tanks which constitute the supposed Machiavellian might of the US Empire. In other words, the US has a plethora of think tanks generously paid and staffed, while Russia or Putin has only Surkov, Boroday and few others.
The few remaining Last Mohicans of the Platonists walking the electronic global Agora can do little either for the Machiavellian geniuses or for these Fankensteins or their monsters (popularly, but, to some extent, not quite wrongly, mistaken for the Frakensteins themselves) or the many who are deadly set on thinking as Machiavelli prescribed to them.
On this note, let leave the remaining note to Butler and Machiavelli: "Much has been written about Machiavelli’s “The Prince,” but this quote reveals the essence of Machiavellian intent:
“The vulgar crowd always is taken by appearances, and the world consists chiefly of the vulgar.” - Niccolo Machiaveli"
On a second thought, let's give some thought to Butler's actual ending or to his last thought:
"I think Mary Shelley’s modern Prometheus is upon us. We have this passage from Frankenstein:I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other.Correctly combining Machiavelli with Frankenstein, Butler seems to be talking about Obama or "American Prometheus Rising." However, a good reader might recall that Mary Shelly's Frankenstein or "modern Prometheus," as she also calls him, is a zombie made into a beast by a British or Anglo-Saxon scientist. Thus what Butler calls an "American Prometheus" could also mean just a US-made Prometheus (robot-zombie etc.). Butler does not explicitly say that this needs to be Obama. What he does say explicitly is that he is putting Obama, Bush, and Putin into the same class--into the same class of would-be Machiavellian Princes who are not the real Princes or Machiavellian geniuses, but just machine-zombies of Machiavellian geniuses behind them. Furthermore, leaving the reader with the last thought on what turned Mary Shelly's Frankenstein[s monster, artificial man, zombie brought to life from death] against his own maker (the British Baconian scientist) would seem to be even more applicable to Putin than to Obama. For it was Russia, that is, the Russian new elite, oligarchs, and Putin and Lavrov who have had the "fetish" (to use Butler's own key word) for Western recognition, "partnership," and love, if you want, and who feel bitterly disappointed and let down on this score. Thus, reading carefully Butler's piece one is left with an impression that Butler cleverly accuses Putin of being a US/Western Frankestein's creature, a monster whose love for his maker was spurned ... for he should have understood that, from the very start, love had nothing to do with it.
Here, however, one more thing needs to be added. The assumption that the popular" Frakenstein (popularly or vulgarly mistaken for Frankenstein's monster, Frankenstein's creation) and the new (American) Prometheus (and Butler calls this new Prometheus "American Prometheus") is valid in a sense in which the maker of the zombie-slave is to be expected to be a monster too and perhaps even a bigger and more dangerous than the one whom he created from a corpse.
The new Prometheus is a reference to "the Modern Prometheus" of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein for which "the Modern Prometheus" serves as a subtitle or rather as the full title of the book, which reads Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus." In Greek mythology, Prometheus is not just a Titan who tricked Zeus, for which he is most popularly known. He is also the Maker of Man. A God-Creator whose creation is, however, limited only to making man, but this creation, as far as we are concerned, might be for us the most essential one.
Mary Shelly thus tells us that the modern "liberal," Baconian Empire took it upon itself to make a new man (Hobbes said this openly in the Introduction to his Leviathan, and Hobbes was Bacon's secretary). Mary Shelly just told the other part of the story. The new man created by the British "liberal" empire is to be a slave-machine, an animated corpse, a man turned into a monster. And also a killer to a point of self-destruction. Romantics, i.e., Mary Shelly, found a plausible apparent design flaw: the zombie-slave might turn against his slave master, his maker. What then?
Butler now appears to say that the Russian elite might be such a Frankenstein's creation in revolt because all that the beast, the manipulated machine, supposedly wanted was the love of its maker and its master instead of getting to love its abuse at the hands of its maker to the point of its willing self-destruction.
One can agree that to a good portion of Russia's liberal class and the elite, this diagnosis applies. But does it apply to Putin too?
Here it might be helpful to distinguish cleverness and wisdom. Machiavellians are very clever, but they are not wise. Milosevic tried to be a Machiavellian and outsmart Machiavellians by trying to make Machiavellian and Faustian deals with them. The last of such deals was his extradition to the Hague into the clutches of a perfectly Nazi tribunal or imperial inquisition. That's where he abandoned the tricks and started relying on wisdom. And the Empire, to her horror, found itself beaten by Milosevic during the trials.
Similarly, both Surkov and Boroday are very clever, but they lack wisdom as Boroday showed when, out of self-love (the opposite of honor and wisdom) he agreed to be interviewed by the most popular liberal presstitute in post-Soviet Russia, Madam Sobchak.
In contrast, what Strelkov lacks in cleverness, he makes up in wisdom and understanding of the code of honor, which, for Boroday, is a strangely Romantic and very unclever. But the fact is that the true lovers of the people are people like Strelkov. For the Machiavellians are in love only with power.
But since most of the article by Butler appears to be a very potent and so well written piece critical of Obama, RT published it, thus proving one of two things: either RT is "vulgar" in the Machiavellian sense or itself Machiavellian.
From the point of view of the Empire (and Machiavelli), love is but a second hand emotion, but a Romantic illusion, which is good as long as the masses do what they are told; otherwise, as Machiavelli taught the fear and stupidity of the masses is better and more reliable than love.
The "ethos" of this Machiavellian, Frankensteinian, capitalist Empire is summed up well in the famous song of Tina Turner, which a whole generation of the Americans fell in love with and which Tina Turner herself hated, but which brought her so much money and fame:
Opposites attract
It's physical
Only logical
You must try to ignore that it means more than that
It's physical
Only logical
You must try to ignore that it means more than that
Oh oh
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
What's love but a second hand emotion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
What's love but a second hand emotion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
It may seem to you that I'm acting confused
When you're close to me
If I tend to look dazed I've read it someplace
I've got cause to be
There's a name for it
There's a phrase that fits
But whatever the reason you do it for me
When you're close to me
If I tend to look dazed I've read it someplace
I've got cause to be
There's a name for it
There's a phrase that fits
But whatever the reason you do it for me
Oh oh
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
What's love but a second hand emotion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
Huh
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
What's love but a second hand emotion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
Huh
I've been takin' on a new direction
But I have to say
I've been thinkin' about my own protection
It scares me to feel this way
But I have to say
I've been thinkin' about my own protection
It scares me to feel this way
Ho oh
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
What's love but a second hand emotion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
What's love but a second hand emotion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
(What's love?)
Got to do, got to do with it
What's love but a sweet old fashioned notion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
Got to do, got to do with it
What's love but a sweet old fashioned notion?
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
(What's love?)
Got to do
Huh, got to do with it
(What's love but a second hand emotion?)
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
What's love?
(Ooh, ooh)
Got to do it
Got to do it
What's love?
(But a second hand emotion?)
Got to do
Huh, got to do with it
(What's love but a second hand emotion?)
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?
What's love?
(Ooh, ooh)
Got to do it
Got to do it
What's love?
(But a second hand emotion?)
http://rt.com/op-edge/189592-us-obama-policy-nato/
Saturday, November 22, 2014
Sergey Glazyev on Ukrainian Nazism and the Reasons why the Empire Has Turned to Nazism
What is below is not my text, but rather a simple copy and paste of the greater part of Glayzev' reported translated into English.
Sergey Glazyev who is in the top five Russians whom the White House hates most has this to say on the nature of the conflict in Ukraine:
"Ideologically this war is Nazism-fuelled – the Kiev junta’s propaganda works hard to instill into the public mind a misanthropic view of its opponents. They are targets for beastly comparisons; they are denied the right to speak their mind, with beatings and arrests being the sole alternatives; it is allowed to burn them alive, and the Ukrainian military is ordered not to hesitate to take their lives. The leaders of the Kiev regime have been making public calls for massacres of Ukrainian citizens in Donbass who dare express dissent. As he distributed awards among the butchers of Slavyansk, so-called President Poroshenko openly referred to their victims as “non-humans” and the head of government Arseny Yatsenyuk in his public statements called the Russians in the east of Ukraine subhumans. Their main political opponent before the political conflict – Yulia Timoshenko – said Donbass deserved atomic bombing, and number three candidate in the presidential election race Oleg Lyashko personally participated in organizing mass repression against Russian citizens of Ukraine. In a word, the Kiev junta manifests a full neo-Nazi consensus regarding the genocide of Russian citizens, who have been stripped of all human rights, including the right to life.
The Nazi semantic field generates the main tensions of the conflict and explains the use of violence in attempts to tackle it. Nazism always excuses violence against other ethnic groups, who are labeled as second-rate races and against whom any crime is declared permissible. This is precisely the path that the regime in Kiev has taken to foment hatred towards those people who disagree with the Ukrainian exclusiveness. In fact, to all Russians, because all other European and world ethnoses have never heard of a Ukrainian nation. In the other countries of the world all those born in the territory of the former USSR, including Ukrainians, are called Russians. In the meantime, the chiefs of the Kiev junta and the media on their payroll are emphasizing the superiority of Ukrainians over Russians in full conformity with the principles of Nazism. Russians are described as born slaves worthy of no other fate than ruthless exploitation in the interests of Ukrainians. Ethnic Russians residing in Ukraine have no option left other than taking up arms to defend themselves from the neo-Nazis.
International historical experience and Russia’s own experience provides convincing proof that Nazism can be resisted only by force. The Nazis understand no other language. This is not surprising: differentiation of human rights on account of race is incompatible with the rule of law. ...
It is noteworthy that none of today’s Nazism-leaning Ukrainian leaders is an ethnic Ukrainian. All of them are very far from Ukraine and from its cultural, historical and spiritual bonds. Possibly this is the reason why they lack the slightest moral self-restrictions and display such super-cruelty against their own people. They have been trying to assert themselves as Nazi fuehrers by involving their followers in mass murders of fellow citizens, turning the former into the country’s new elite, and the latter, into a dumb and obedient herd.
In the article titled Nazi Mistakes its author, Alexander Rogers, convincingly shows that the cult of violence is the key feature of Ukrainian Nazis. By the level of senseless cruelty and misanthropy they have surpassed their Hitlerite idols, finding special pleasure in posing for pictures next to the charred bodies of Odessa residents burnt alive or openly rejoicing at the killings of children and women in Slavyansk. As the same author indicates, Ukrainian society has developed all fourteen essential traits of Nazism the prominent Italian philosopher, Umberto Eco, pointed at a while ago. The cult of force, contempt for the weak and condemnation of pacifism as a form of betrayal are most important for understanding the way in which the conflict will be unfolding. It also explains why the negotiations on the cessation of hostilities and resolution of the Ukrainian crisis have reached nowhere. ...
Any legislator, journalist or just passer-by who may have dared to questioned the Ukrainian Nazis’ actions is instantly humiliated and beaten up and Ukrainian special services instantly launch criminal proceedings. This is done in in full conformity with one of the key features of Nazism that Umberto Eco identified as “Dissent is betrayal.”
The conflict field Ukrainian Nazism is generating is the main driving force of violence in Ukraine in general and of the punitive operation in Donbass in particular. ...
For today’s European bureaucrats, Ukraine is nothing but a source of cheap labor, a market for European goods, a dump for industrial waste, and a backyard for ecologically hazardous industries. It is hard to imagine any realistically minded national leaders genuinely concerned about national interests who should be eager to put their signature to anything like Ukraine’s Agreement of Association with the European Union, an agreement that unilaterally delegates to the other party the sovereign functions of the state to govern foreign economic activity and conduct foreign and defense policies. Moreover, an agreement that hamstrings the competitiveness of the Ukrainian economy and undermines its balance of payments.
Ukrainian Nazism is evolving within the conflict field of Western aggression against Russia. This explains its amazing upsurge. Without a consistent policy pursued by the United States and its NATO allies it would have never emerged and grown, because there were no objective prerequisites for it. But heavy sponsorship for a bunch of nationalist organizations and consistent efforts to cultivate hatred towards Russia worked. The country’s nationalist leaders do not care about the discrepancy of their ideology and the historical reality. ...
Lastly, as the national financial and economic system cannot be kept in balance without powerful and growing outside support, the United States is objectively forced to escalate military and political tensions and eventually start a world war." http://anna-news.info/node/26096
Sergey Glazyev who is in the top five Russians whom the White House hates most has this to say on the nature of the conflict in Ukraine:
"Ideologically this war is Nazism-fuelled – the Kiev junta’s propaganda works hard to instill into the public mind a misanthropic view of its opponents. They are targets for beastly comparisons; they are denied the right to speak their mind, with beatings and arrests being the sole alternatives; it is allowed to burn them alive, and the Ukrainian military is ordered not to hesitate to take their lives. The leaders of the Kiev regime have been making public calls for massacres of Ukrainian citizens in Donbass who dare express dissent. As he distributed awards among the butchers of Slavyansk, so-called President Poroshenko openly referred to their victims as “non-humans” and the head of government Arseny Yatsenyuk in his public statements called the Russians in the east of Ukraine subhumans. Their main political opponent before the political conflict – Yulia Timoshenko – said Donbass deserved atomic bombing, and number three candidate in the presidential election race Oleg Lyashko personally participated in organizing mass repression against Russian citizens of Ukraine. In a word, the Kiev junta manifests a full neo-Nazi consensus regarding the genocide of Russian citizens, who have been stripped of all human rights, including the right to life.
The Nazi semantic field generates the main tensions of the conflict and explains the use of violence in attempts to tackle it. Nazism always excuses violence against other ethnic groups, who are labeled as second-rate races and against whom any crime is declared permissible. This is precisely the path that the regime in Kiev has taken to foment hatred towards those people who disagree with the Ukrainian exclusiveness. In fact, to all Russians, because all other European and world ethnoses have never heard of a Ukrainian nation. In the other countries of the world all those born in the territory of the former USSR, including Ukrainians, are called Russians. In the meantime, the chiefs of the Kiev junta and the media on their payroll are emphasizing the superiority of Ukrainians over Russians in full conformity with the principles of Nazism. Russians are described as born slaves worthy of no other fate than ruthless exploitation in the interests of Ukrainians. Ethnic Russians residing in Ukraine have no option left other than taking up arms to defend themselves from the neo-Nazis.
International historical experience and Russia’s own experience provides convincing proof that Nazism can be resisted only by force. The Nazis understand no other language. This is not surprising: differentiation of human rights on account of race is incompatible with the rule of law. ...
It is noteworthy that none of today’s Nazism-leaning Ukrainian leaders is an ethnic Ukrainian. All of them are very far from Ukraine and from its cultural, historical and spiritual bonds. Possibly this is the reason why they lack the slightest moral self-restrictions and display such super-cruelty against their own people. They have been trying to assert themselves as Nazi fuehrers by involving their followers in mass murders of fellow citizens, turning the former into the country’s new elite, and the latter, into a dumb and obedient herd.
In the article titled Nazi Mistakes its author, Alexander Rogers, convincingly shows that the cult of violence is the key feature of Ukrainian Nazis. By the level of senseless cruelty and misanthropy they have surpassed their Hitlerite idols, finding special pleasure in posing for pictures next to the charred bodies of Odessa residents burnt alive or openly rejoicing at the killings of children and women in Slavyansk. As the same author indicates, Ukrainian society has developed all fourteen essential traits of Nazism the prominent Italian philosopher, Umberto Eco, pointed at a while ago. The cult of force, contempt for the weak and condemnation of pacifism as a form of betrayal are most important for understanding the way in which the conflict will be unfolding. It also explains why the negotiations on the cessation of hostilities and resolution of the Ukrainian crisis have reached nowhere. ...
Any legislator, journalist or just passer-by who may have dared to questioned the Ukrainian Nazis’ actions is instantly humiliated and beaten up and Ukrainian special services instantly launch criminal proceedings. This is done in in full conformity with one of the key features of Nazism that Umberto Eco identified as “Dissent is betrayal.”
The conflict field Ukrainian Nazism is generating is the main driving force of violence in Ukraine in general and of the punitive operation in Donbass in particular. ...
For today’s European bureaucrats, Ukraine is nothing but a source of cheap labor, a market for European goods, a dump for industrial waste, and a backyard for ecologically hazardous industries. It is hard to imagine any realistically minded national leaders genuinely concerned about national interests who should be eager to put their signature to anything like Ukraine’s Agreement of Association with the European Union, an agreement that unilaterally delegates to the other party the sovereign functions of the state to govern foreign economic activity and conduct foreign and defense policies. Moreover, an agreement that hamstrings the competitiveness of the Ukrainian economy and undermines its balance of payments.
Ukrainian Nazism is evolving within the conflict field of Western aggression against Russia. This explains its amazing upsurge. Without a consistent policy pursued by the United States and its NATO allies it would have never emerged and grown, because there were no objective prerequisites for it. But heavy sponsorship for a bunch of nationalist organizations and consistent efforts to cultivate hatred towards Russia worked. The country’s nationalist leaders do not care about the discrepancy of their ideology and the historical reality. ...
Lastly, as the national financial and economic system cannot be kept in balance without powerful and growing outside support, the United States is objectively forced to escalate military and political tensions and eventually start a world war." http://anna-news.info/node/26096
Immorality of Obama, the New York Times, and the liberal Empire--the case of Kassig's beheading by ISIS
1. Obama called Mr. Kassig's execution "an act of pure evil by a terrorist group." Obama also added: “Today we offer our prayers and condolences to the parents and family of Abdul-Rahman Kassig, also known to us as Peter." The New York Times explains that "the president used the Muslim name that Mr. Kassig adopted after his capture." US President thus used the name which was imposed on Kassig by the "evil terrorist group" after Kassig lost freedom and was under ISIS total control. A contentious person has to ask how renaming Kassig, a US veteran (an Army Ranger, in fact) who fought in Iraq, in accordance with the orders of ISIS is pious or a right thing to do. Should US POWs want to be known and remembered by the names which their captors choose for them and which the US president is to use in his official, public statements?
2. If Obama completely ignored the fact ISIS also executed 18 (some even say 30) captured Syrian soldiers and made their death the main theme of their video, the New York Times devoted in its article to the execution of the Syrian POWs only one single sentence placed toward the very end of the article. Furthermore, not to spill any tears or to show any sympathy over the deaths of the Syrian soldiers who were actually fighting ISIS, this "pure evil," the New York Times referred to them only in the context of emphasizing the technical "professionalism" in which their beheading was filmed with an emphasis on the image of the "shining blade of the knife": "In one extended sequence, a mass beheading of captured Syrian soldiers is shown, filmed with long close-ups of details, like the shining blade of the executioner’s knife, mirroring the high production quality of the first four beheading videos." This is one and only reference to the execution of the many Syrian soldiers that took place there.
3. On November 21, the US together with Ukraine, that is, the US-sponsored and supported Nazi regime in Kiev, (plus Harper's Canada) were also the only 3 countries that voted AGAINST the UN resolution condemning support and glorification of Nazism.
The representative of the Ukrainian delegation argued that Ukraine was opposing the resolution merely because the document should have also included the condemnation of "Stalinism."
Well, the fact is that Stalin was the leader who led and organized the defeat of Nazism in WWII. The Ukrainian demand to condemn Stalin (or Stalinism), really just a foil for the Soviet Union, in the resolution against Nazism is as good as demanding that the main enemy and victim of Nazism be condemned together with Nazism itself. Further, to assume that Stalin and Nazism represent the same thing is a thought which liberalism propagated and behind which new Nazis try to shield themselves and advance their own interests. Moreover, the demand to condemn Nazism today has a direct bearing on today's politics, while Stalin does not present any obvious direct threat to anyone. And it was Nazism that started World War II. Not Stalin. Nazis carried out the Odessa massacre, and among the victims were also Odessa communists. At the earthly plane, no one is without the dark or sins, as Christianity says. However, this does not mean that there is moral/immoral equivalence or that complete relativism or pretentious neutrality is the way to go. A cut and determination has to be made, and a stance (and side) has to be taken.
It is also not that hard to see that Ukraine's Nazi regime is trying to use "Stalinism" as a code-word for anyone who fights today's Nazism--for the opponents of Nazism. They thus tried to destroy the resolution by insisting on including in it their own opponents--enemies of Nazism. A cynical and sophistic move. It would be similar to insisting that a resolution against communism should also include a condemnation of US genocide against the Native people and slavery in the US, the latest to be officially abolished in the "democratic" and "developed" world. Or if, in a resolution praising the Allied victory in World War II, someone would insist on condemning the nuclear holocaust of Hiroshima.
So who is fighting Nazism today? Certainly not the US or Ukraine.
Thus, on the key question of our time and today's politics, it is the US, not Russia, that is devastatingly isolated and on the wrong side (of the truth, history, ethics, and the right): a committee of the General Assembly voted on the resolution condemning glorification of Nazism. So what happened (this year again)? 115 countries voted for, and only three (3) countries voted against. Who opposed the condemnation of Nazism? The US, Ukraine, and, well, Harper's Canada. Other US allies, mainly the EU, decided to play it neutral and chose to abstain.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/16/statement-president-death-abdul-rahman-kassig
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/world/middleeast/peter-kassig-isis-video-execution.html
Friday, November 21, 2014
Afghan Orphan Who Is Fighting for Russia and Novorossiya: To Be Truly a Russian Is a Peculiar State of the Soul, It Is Not Nationality
Riza (Abdullah) Jabar, the now famous Afghan orphan who is fighting for Russia and Novorossiya in Vostok Battalion gave another impromptu interview. In the end, he says the following not just in perfect Russian, but beautiful Russian:
"Listen, Ukraine is Russia--they are one. And you are getting encircled. Look at Central Asia, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan ... All these used to be allies of the Russians. They almost finished us off, now they are already coming for you. And they will not stop. The main goal is not us or Ukraine; it is you, the Russians. ... And you will be retreating to other towns further and further, thinking that Russia is still big. ... Either you will be slaves or you will rise up and say your word. Someone from your great thinkers said: "The Russian language [Logos] will save itself and also the world." I think that what is happening now is God's trial. He wants to see what each of us is worth. And God was almost completely chased out of the soul by the media and Western values. But not in everyone. There are still many people who remember who they are and from what their roots are. And the vast majority of the volunteers here are the proof. Great powers tried to take this land many times, and they are trying now again. But they will never succeed. We will not bomb Kiev as they want us make us to. It is our city, and this is our land. And people who are sitting there are waiting. Yes, they are still jumping on cue, but, at the same time, they are looking when we come to free them. And we will come. It takes just a bit patience."
Risa (Abdullah) Jabar, - Слушайте, Украина и Россия - это одно и то же. Вас просто окружают. Посмотрите: Средняя Азия, Ливия, Сирия, Ирак, Афганистан... Это же все союзники русских. С нами почти разобрались, теперь к вам пришли. И они не остановятся. Основная цель - не мы, не Украина, а вы, русские. Все, кто ездит на моря, работает в шикарных кабинетах, - и до вас дойдут. Вы будете уходить в другие города все дальше, думая, что Россия велика. Нельзя спокойно смотреть на происходящее здесь. Или вы будете рабами, или вы встанете и скажете свое слово. Кто-то из ваших великих сказал: «Русский язык спасет и себя, и мир». Я думаю, происходящее сейчас - это испытание Бога. Чтобы посмотреть, кто чего стоит. Телевидением, западными ценностями бога практически вытеснили из души. Но не у всех. Людей, помнящих, кто они и откуда, еще очень много. И огромное количество добровольцев тому доказательство. Эту землю забрать пытались много раз, сейчас снова пытаются. Но никогда они ее не возьмут. А Киев мы бомбить не будем, как они этого хотят. Это наш город, это наша страна. И люди, которые там сидят, ждут... Они прыгают, скачут и смотрят, когда же мы придем. А мы придем. Потерпите чуть-чуть."
https://vk.com/strelkov_info?w=wall-57424472_30233
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Prague Maidan: Maidan's Clone with a Czech Face (and Few Tzchechishen Idiosyncracies)
US best new friends from Ukraine
are now saying Hi and Thanks to Europe together with the message that, in their
unreformed view, “might and Hitler make right.”
US, EU and Merkel's anti-Russian
sanctions in support of fascism in Ukraine, its butchers from Odessa (Avakov,
Yatsenyuk, and company), and beyond.
Fascism and Maidan Import to Prague
begins with a smile. At first, a happy and friendly face. Even after Odessa.
A Prague Maidanist (actually a Polish journalist/blogger living in Prague) is displaying a
happy and friendly strangling of a “Colorado Beetle” standing here for a blond “Russian
woman.” “Fascism is fun.” And many of the Czechs are clearly nuts. Nazi nutts
in the making.
Here is another photo from the
Prague Maidan celebration of a genocide: after the Odessa Massacre (more than
100 people burned alive; the official figure reached some 48 because the junta
police under Avakov’s direct orders took most of the victims away to unknown
locations in the guise of the arrests of some of “the surviving victims;” those
survivors who were arrested more or less alive and kept in Odessa where
released to Avakov’s great anger and displeasure the day after the massacre under the pressure of the brave
Odessites who came out to demand their freedom). Immediately after the Odessa
massacre, the Maidanites launched the memes of “barbecued Colorados [Colorado
beetles en lieu of people]” as part of their new Nazi dehumanizing “humor.” The
same fascist “humor” is being displayed here on the streets of Prague by Czech
fans of the Kiev junta and NATO—a “humorous” celebration of genocide:
As one commentator put it on my FB page: “They are all coming out the woods - defending
Ukrainian territorial integrity became an excuse for rapes, armed robbery and
looting. All it took is to call someone separatist and this gave them license
to do whatever they pleased to do, including sadistic murders and mass rapes. Thus atrocities are taking place in the name of European
democracy in this terminally sick state once known as United Ukraine. It's
people like them who fatally wounded the integrity and unity of this country, they
got only them self to blame for committing those despicable crimes.”
Like this one--the Odessa massacre of May 2, 2014
:
Yet hardly anyone of the zombies now that they are buying into a possible
NATO war with Russia, in which the Czechs would be commanded to die for a
completely wrong cause--just like the many Ukrainians who are thus betraying
the legacy of their grandfathers.
Prague Maidan has now also its
official site, including its English version. Prague Maidan identifies its
mission as a “fight against Putinism.” Today’s fascism is no longer considering
communism worth even noting. Creating an enemy out of the face and name of one
person is enough--just enough for the average brain in the age of today's
consumerism.
Prague Maidan has already its
logo--conveniently using the English form of the Czech capital, thus already in
a CNN- and Fox-friendly form. It also sports the colors of the Ukrainian state:
“We are all Banderites now.”
More information on the direct
involvement of the US Embassy in organizing Prague Maidain against Czech
President Milos Zeman.
The organizational, logistical and PR cover for the "Maidan" demonstration against the presiding head of the state Yesterday Czech Maidan was officially hansdled by a PR agency led by
Martin Prikryl (his name happens to mean literally "Cover" or "Covered"). It was also apparently also his agency that mass produced the
red cards used by some 5000 people in Prague. Prikryl explains his
PR/propaganda/advertising philosophy as follows: "I love advertising. But
when, after work, I go with my buddies to a pub, I am honestly saying to myself
that it is really me, you little bastard [literally, castrated bull/oxen] who
is moving the world ... We are those who decide what thousands of people are
going to do ... And that's really funny. The feeling that you simply talked
someone into doing something, that you persuaded him, made him, pushed him to
do something, is I think great."
Czech activists report
that a close-up zeroed on the address on the box from which red cards for Czech
Maidan were distributed to the people in the city of Brno on November 17 in the
picture yielded a name of Šárka Kadlecová as the receiver of the package, professionally
connected both to the US Embassy in Prague and the Czech Ministry of Foreign
Affairs:
The receiver was Sarka Kadlecova, an activist and former employee of the US Embassy. Her career is listed on LinkedIn ... In 2009 she worked for the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In 2010, she taught English in Vienna. From 2011 till 2013, she taught “languages” at the US Embassy in Prague where she was employed from time to time already since 2007. From 2010 she also worked for a non-profit organization In iustitia, which is a multicultural think-tank financed by the US Embassy in Prague ...The Prague Mayor's Office registered company Opona [yes, it means, a curtain!] as the organizer of Prague Maidan [tabled as “merry procession”] ... From the website of this PR firm one learns that its principal sponsor is the US Embassy. The company's founder Marek Vocel was also a manager of the PR presidential campaign of Karl Karel Schwarzenberg, an Austrian aristocrat naturalized in the Czech Republic and Havel's long close ally. Mr. Vocel received for his PR campaign for Schwarzenberg a “Czech Prize for PR.” On Facebook, the public face of Prague Maidan was, otherwise, a man whose name Prikryl means in Czech “Cover.” http://aeronet.cz/news/vime-kdo-organizoval-rozdavani-cervenych-karet-proti-zemanovi-dukaz-o-bezprecedentnim-vmesovani-se-americkeho-velvyslanectvi-do-vnitrnich-zalezitosti-republiky-americane-organizuji-demonstrace-skrz/
Adam
Bartos, Chairman of the National Party, writes in his article that Prague
Maidan is already been planned to continue and to last at least through January
of 2015. According to his information (as in Kiev), some of the Maidan
participants in Prague are being paid for showing up--here 1,000 Czech crowns
(about $50). He concludes his article with this question: “Is the US planning
to provoke a civil war in the Czech Republic?” “Chystají se Spojené státy
vyvolat i v České republice občanskou válku?” As in Ukraine, nearly all the
media, including the state TV, are decisively on the side of Prague Maidan
against the present President of the country.http://www.bezpolitickekorektnosti.cz/?p=25525
On November 20, the Kiev regime “calledon the carpet” (as Czechs say) the Czech Ambassador to Ukraine to criticize
Czech President Zeman for suggesting that the war in Ukraine is a civil war and
not a Russian aggression. http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/evropa/354078-zemanovy-vyroky-ohledne-ukrajiny-jsou-neprijatelne-kyjev-si-predvolal-ceskeho-velvyslance.html
Meanwhile, according to localsources, many people have been disappearing or rather disappeared in Kiev at
the hands of the masked storm troopers organized into various battalions, which
are ultimately under Avakov's command, since the Banderite coup on February 22.
Together with the many disappeared people, the same masked storm troopers of
this force, which represents both terror and the pseudo-police (the new SA and
SS) are also seizing the properties (i.e., apartments) of the disappeared
people. Thus, besides directing the war and terror in the east of Ukraine,
Avakov is also carrying out a Nazification campaign in Ukraine's cities.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1496273183979961&set=a.1381533192120628.1073741828.100007918809476&type=1&theater
Prague Maidan
serves as a rallying point for most of the right-wing (excluding Czech
nationalists and patriots), all pro-NATO, all-pro-Banderite-Ukraine,
all-pro-Maidan, all anti-Russian, all anti-communist Czechs and all the fans of
the late Havel among the Czechs (this might add up to half the nation). It has
just started.
John McCain is continuing with his
heroic quest to change the world to his own image and to his own liking. After
Libya, Syria, and Ukraine, he has just cast his godly gaze on the benign
Czechs. In his view, they too now need a radical Maidanization (read:
Nazification of Eastern and Central Europe in order to make safe for the Last
Empire). By now, nearly everyone knows what it means. Those who do not know, to
them the verb “to know” no longer applies. Whenever the US is to unleash human blood and chaos under
the pretext of „human rights“ and „democratization,“ bloody John McCain
immediately sprang into action. We saw it in Lybia, Syria, Ukraine. And, for a
change or for the sake of „the eternal return of the same,“ McCain now senses
his new chance and raison d’etre in the
Czech Republic.
On the occasion of the unveiling of an ugly bust of Havel at
the Capitol on November 19, McCain effectively put his authority behind thePrague Maidan demands for Zeman’s resignation by declaring among other things: “What we need to do is to think about how can we best counter
this vast propaganda machine Putin has set up. It’s time that we all went back
to Havel’s principles, those guiding the pursuit of democracy for free and open
societies.” http://thegazette.com/subject/news/havels-commitment-to-freedom-honored-at-capitol-20141120
According to McCain, Havel would feel today he himself feels about “some Zeman’s
statements,” especially about Czech President’s attitude toward Russia andPutin—“he too would be very concerned.” McCain is alarmed by the “trends in
some countries of eastern Europe, including the Czech Republic. The other head
of the state whom McCain criticized in this connection was Hungary’s Prime
Minister Viktor Orban. Coincidentally, both in the Czech Republic and Hungary, well
organized attempts are now underway at cloning Ukraine’s Maidan against the
elected leaders of these countries. McCain praised the Prague Maidan protest
against Zeman as a “very spirited” one. http://www.tyden.cz/rubriky/zahranici/amerika/senator-mccain-jsem-znepokojen-postojem-zemana-k-rusku_324714.html#.VG5zNPnF8uE
Daniel McAdams of theRon Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity published the following informativearticle on the same day when the first
demonstration for Zeman’s resignation took place in Prague—on November 17:
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is a most troublesome entity. It is funded nearly entirely by the US government, but as a non-government entity it is not at all answerable … the US government can task it with regime change overseas while keeping the appearance of clean hands; the NED has free reign to pursue its mission (regime change) with zero governmental oversight. As one of the founders of the NED, Allan Weinstein, said, ”A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”
NED President Carl Gershman perfectly embodies why it is a bad idea for the US to keep an unaccountable entity dedicated to subversion and destabilization in the foreign policy stable. Though over decades he has spent many millions of US taxpayer dollars on regime change overseas, there has never been a regime change in the National Endowment for Democracy. Gershman, a former Trotskyite, has been president-for-life of that organization. He overthrows elected governments overseas, but has never been elected to any office himself.
… That is why the Czech Republic had better watch out.
Yesterday [just one day before the “Maidan” demonstration for Czech President’s resignation in Prague] , Gershman took to the Washington Post to sound the alarm over Czech President Milos Zeman. In a piece titled “Are Czechs giving up on moral responsibility?” Gershman warned that the Czech president has “strayed drastically” from the late Vaclav Havel's legacy. Havel, a saint of the US establishment, was, in his continued dedication to collectivism and the cult of “human rights,” a marked contrast to his nemesis at the time, former Czech President and Prime Minister Vaclav Klaus, who championed individual liberty and post-communist national sovereignty.
What horrible crime has President Zeman committed to earn the wrath of Carl Gershman? At the NATO summit in September he had the gall to dispute neocon Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt's claim (without evidence) that Russia had invaded Ukraine.
He also had the temerity to assert the guilt of US-favorite anti-Putin oligarch, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and to rue that more criminal oligarchs in Russia had not been imprisoned. One might think that would earn him points with a US government that just read fellow former-Soviet bloc member Hungary the riot act over alleged corruption, but when the oligarch is “pro-West” the US tends to turn a blind eye to the rule of law.
All of that was bad, but what really irritated Gershman was that the Czech president recently affirmed to China that his country was open to increased commercial ties with Beijing and would not make “human rights” in China a prerequisite for improved trade ties. Gershman fumed over Prague's “policy of appeasing Vladimir Putin and putting economic relations with China above human rights.”
But even this was not the worst. Tsar Gershman became apoplectic over the Czech foreign ministry's decision to stop funding regime change operations in Cuba, Belarus and China through its “TRANS” program. The program had until last month been part of the network of government-provided largesse to the likes of George Soros' “Transitions Online“ publication, which closely tracks US foreign policy goals.
Gershman attacked Deputy Foreign Minister Petr Drulák for rejecting what Drulák called the “false universalism” that seeks to ”impose on others our idea of the ideal society.” And he fumed over Drulák's write-off of the cult of Havel as a bunch of “American neoconservatives” (like Havel-worshipping neoconservative Carl Gershman).
The truth hurts and Gershman is clearly upset with the Czech Republic. When Gershman gets upset, however, destabilization begins and soon gives way to full-out regime change operations.
Prague had better watch out. If Czech President Milos Zeman had any sense he would expel any operatives from the National Endowment for Democracy or its various US government-funded sub-organizations like the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute. These organizations are no doubt planning to undermine Czech democracy as we speak.
NED President Carl Gershman perfectly embodies why it is a bad idea for the US to keep an unaccountable entity dedicated to subversion and destabilization in the foreign policy stable. Though over decades he has spent many millions of US taxpayer dollars on regime change overseas, there has never been a regime change in the National Endowment for Democracy. Gershman, a former Trotskyite, has been president-for-life of that organization. He overthrows elected governments overseas, but has never been elected to any office himself.
… That is why the Czech Republic had better watch out.
Yesterday [just one day before the “Maidan” demonstration for Czech President’s resignation in Prague] , Gershman took to the Washington Post to sound the alarm over Czech President Milos Zeman. In a piece titled “Are Czechs giving up on moral responsibility?” Gershman warned that the Czech president has “strayed drastically” from the late Vaclav Havel's legacy. Havel, a saint of the US establishment, was, in his continued dedication to collectivism and the cult of “human rights,” a marked contrast to his nemesis at the time, former Czech President and Prime Minister Vaclav Klaus, who championed individual liberty and post-communist national sovereignty.
What horrible crime has President Zeman committed to earn the wrath of Carl Gershman? At the NATO summit in September he had the gall to dispute neocon Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt's claim (without evidence) that Russia had invaded Ukraine.
He also had the temerity to assert the guilt of US-favorite anti-Putin oligarch, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and to rue that more criminal oligarchs in Russia had not been imprisoned. One might think that would earn him points with a US government that just read fellow former-Soviet bloc member Hungary the riot act over alleged corruption, but when the oligarch is “pro-West” the US tends to turn a blind eye to the rule of law.
All of that was bad, but what really irritated Gershman was that the Czech president recently affirmed to China that his country was open to increased commercial ties with Beijing and would not make “human rights” in China a prerequisite for improved trade ties. Gershman fumed over Prague's “policy of appeasing Vladimir Putin and putting economic relations with China above human rights.”
But even this was not the worst. Tsar Gershman became apoplectic over the Czech foreign ministry's decision to stop funding regime change operations in Cuba, Belarus and China through its “TRANS” program. The program had until last month been part of the network of government-provided largesse to the likes of George Soros' “Transitions Online“ publication, which closely tracks US foreign policy goals.
Gershman attacked Deputy Foreign Minister Petr Drulák for rejecting what Drulák called the “false universalism” that seeks to ”impose on others our idea of the ideal society.” And he fumed over Drulák's write-off of the cult of Havel as a bunch of “American neoconservatives” (like Havel-worshipping neoconservative Carl Gershman).
He also had the temerity to assert the guilt of US-favorite anti-Putin oligarch, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and to rue that more criminal oligarchs in Russia had not been imprisoned. One might think that would earn him points with a US government that just read fellow former-Soviet bloc member Hungary the riot act over alleged corruption, but when the oligarch is “pro-West” the US tends to turn a blind eye to the rule of law.
All of that was bad, but what really irritated Gershman was that the Czech president recently affirmed to China that his country was open to increased commercial ties with Beijing and would not make “human rights” in China a prerequisite for improved trade ties. Gershman fumed over Prague's “policy of appeasing Vladimir Putin and putting economic relations with China above human rights.”
But even this was not the worst. Tsar Gershman became apoplectic over the Czech foreign ministry's decision to stop funding regime change operations in Cuba, Belarus and China through its “TRANS” program. The program had until last month been part of the network of government-provided largesse to the likes of George Soros' “Transitions Online“ publication, which closely tracks US foreign policy goals.
Gershman attacked Deputy Foreign Minister Petr Drulák for rejecting what Drulák called the “false universalism” that seeks to ”impose on others our idea of the ideal society.” And he fumed over Drulák's write-off of the cult of Havel as a bunch of “American neoconservatives” (like Havel-worshipping neoconservative Carl Gershman).
All of that was bad, but what really irritated Gershman was that the Czech president recently affirmed to China that his country was open to increased commercial ties with Beijing and would not make “human rights” in China a prerequisite for improved trade ties. Gershman fumed over Prague's “policy of appeasing Vladimir Putin and putting economic relations with China above human rights.”
But even this was not the worst. Tsar Gershman became apoplectic over the Czech foreign ministry's decision to stop funding regime change operations in Cuba, Belarus and China through its “TRANS” program. The program had until last month been part of the network of government-provided largesse to the likes of George Soros' “Transitions Online“ publication, which closely tracks US foreign policy goals.
Gershman attacked Deputy Foreign Minister Petr Drulák for rejecting what Drulák called the “false universalism” that seeks to ”impose on others our idea of the ideal society.” And he fumed over Drulák's write-off of the cult of Havel as a bunch of “American neoconservatives” (like Havel-worshipping neoconservative Carl Gershman).
The truth hurts and Gershman is clearly upset with the Czech Republic. When Gershman gets upset, however, destabilization begins and soon gives way to full-out regime change operations. Prague had better watch out. If Czech President Milos Zeman had any sense he would expel any operatives from the National Endowment for Democracy or its various US government-funded sub-organizations like the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute. These organizations are no doubt planning to undermine Czech democracy as we speak. http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2014/november/17/neds-regime-change-tsar-eyes-czech-republic/
According to NormanEisen, a former US Ambassador to the Czech Republic, to criticize the false idolof Vaclav Havel (i.e., his many lies or „humanitarian bomardment of Belgrade“
by NATO) would mean to „destroy the brand,“ which is „madness.“ Eisen thinks
that only „idiots“ would do that. All the others who keep the lie would be then
smart.
Tomio Okamura, the only Czech
politician of Japanese origin, gave Eisen this response: “To live in truth
means not be silence about the crimes of anyone, including the United States,
including the Nazis at Maidan, including the EU governments. To stand up for a
man or people or a woman who are ostracized when they are right, can be pragmatically
perceived as idiocy [as Eisen sees criticism of Havel and Western hypocrisy],
but it is a must [literally, it is vital as salt].”
Petr Adam, a member
of Okamura’s party, added the following: „The fact is that a great part of the
nation does not see Havel as made of God’s beam, but as a sellout of the soul
to a demon. Pride of the Czech nation does not need to and should not reside in
annal Alpinism.“
Prague Maidan Framed as Zemangate: Throwing overboard one's own for "greater good"
Meanwile, thePrague Maidan received another impulse from a Czech lady Hana Jacobsson (residing
in Sweden) who, on her FB page, posted on November 19 an interesting material,
which claims that Zeman is/war a Czechoslovak secret police agent (code name „Man,“
which does not make much sense in Czech) and that he is in cohouts with a company
PPF founded by the Czechoslovak Secret Police agents in the Netherlands with a
capital of $10 billion [?]. According to Jacobsson, PPF now wants to monopolize
all Internet and cellphone business in the Czech Republic. Zeman is allegedly
now conspiring with Czech Minister of Interior and tries to fake terrorist
attacks under operation Cisnik (Waiter) which is, however, well known to the intelligence
agencies of the US and Sweden. Zeman allegedly exposed himself by lying about
who accompanied him to his recent visit to China—allegedly Western spying
satellites did not see the person (Kellner) there. Former Czech President is
allegedly also involved, and the proof is that he bought his villa with PPF
money. According to Jacobsson, Zeman and his buddies are about to start a
series of false flag terrorist attacks against government buildins in the Czech
Republic. These terrorist attacks will be used as a pretext for arresting
people from Prague Maidan and who criticize him on the Internet. According to
Jacobsson, „even the CIA does not know which form of terrorism was chosen by Czech
Interior Minister Chovanec.“ Zeman’s invation of Putin to the Czech Republic is
explained as Zeman’s „panic fear“ of the US (allegedly shared by Klaus) and
their desire to „get away from the reach of the CIA, FBI, and the US.“ Jacobsson
concludes by asking people to report all they can to the CIA (with the link
provided) because „the CIA takes all this very seriously.“ https://www.facebook.com/hana.jakobova.754/posts/430481057104483
Here is the full
post of Jacobsson as accessed on November 20:
Hana Jacobsson
Prezident
Miloš Zeman se obává spolu s dalšími osobami, které jsou zainteresovány na
projektu "Číšník" že došlo k prozrazení tajemství z roku 1991, kdy
byl on spolu s Václavem Klausem vybrán jako budoucí vůdce politické
reprezentace v následovníích ČSSR.
V tomto roce byla založena ODS a další strany, které měly okamžitě po sametové revoluci zabrat místo ve vrcholové poltiice.
StB tehdy přesouvala peníze na místa mimo ČR a mimochodem do Nizozemska. Tam založili agenti Státní bezpečnosti fond pod názvem PPF Group.
Postupně tak komunisté převedli na účet PPF částku odpovídající deseti miliardám amerických dolarů a začal velký byznys.
PPF skupovala takřka vše, banky, pojišťovny, média, později mobilní operátory.
Dnes PPF chce zcela ovládnout mobilní a telefonní síť O2 a proto se snaží dostat se z burzy pryč, aby nikdo nezasvěcený nemohl vlastnit ani jednu akcii O2, které v podstatě ovládá v ČR veškeré mobilní sítě a internetovou síť.
Přístup k informacím tak bude mít PPF.
Zeman ze strachu z prozrazení zaúkoloval Chovance, českého ministra vnitra, aby začal pátrat po lidech, kteří šíří pravdu o PPF na internetu.
Chovanec tehdy reagoval smyšleným teroristickým útokem na české vládní úřady a tuto informaci podal i některým agenturám, zejména v USA a Švédsku.
Protože však agentury USA vědí o komunistickém projektu "Číšník" a o PPF Group i o financování teroristických skupin touto finanční skupinou, následovalo sledování osob kolem zainteresovaných lidí.
Tím došlo k zachycení další komunikace mezi Zemanem a Chovancem.
Chovanec má za úkol najít a zbavit svobody všechny možné šiřitele informace o PPF. Záminkou pro jejich zadržení má být smyšlený teroristický útok v ČR.
Česká vláda tak chystá totéž, co před 25 lety - likvidaci všech, kdo ji ohrožují, tedy kdo ohrožuje PPF a Zemana a ostaní aktéry tehdejšího komunistického spiknutí agentů bývalé StB.
Zeman se prozradil tvrzením, že na palubě letadla PPF, které Zeman použil pro cestu z Číny, byl údajně Kellner, což nepotvrdily satelitní snímky letiště a oblasti, kde se delegace v tu dobu pohybovala a ani snímky pořízené jinými osobami na zemi.
Klaus se prozradil tím, že si pořídil vilu na pražské Hanspaulce z peněz PPF.
PPF proniká do všech strategickcýh sfér České republiky a Zeman i Klaus se cítí ohroženi.
Česko tak čeká nahánění lidí, kteří budou dnes demonstrovat proti prezidentu Zemanovi a odpůrce na internetu.
Bolševický kádr Zeman, který byl veden v StB pod přezdívkou Man nyní zneužívá české ministerstvo vnitra svým člověkem Chovancem k tomu, aby se opět v ČR začalo zavírat - za nesouhlas se současnou vládou, ale pod smyšlenými záminkami vymyšlených teroristických útoků na vládní úřady.
V nejbližších hodinách patrně začne policie, která nebude mít tušení oč jde, nahánět různé lidi a vy se v médiích budete dozvídat, že šlo o teroristy.
Jaká forma terorismu byla nakonec Chovancem vymyšlena, nikdo neví ani v ústředí CIA. Ví se pouze, že se chystá zadržení asi 200 až 300 osob na území ČR a rovněž se ví, že česká strana se začala zajímat o osoby české příslušnosti zde ve Švédsku, což švédská SÄPO odmítá.
několik osob bylo údajně pověřeno tím, aby zajistily prostory, kde budou tyto osoby vězněni v naprosté izolaci.
Začala éra, kdy těžce nemocný a umírající Miloš Zeman chce za každou cenu udržet svůj podíl na PPF a také jejich verzi listopadu 1989. Znovu se bude zavírat, znovu se budou falšovat důkazy a znovu se budou věznit lidé pro pravdu pro názor proti současné moci v Česku.
Je šokující, že po aféře se zneužitím vojenské informační služby minulou vládou Petra Nečase, začalo opět zneužívání policejního aparátu a to přímo prezidentem České republiky.
Zeman se bojí tak, že si dokonce pozval svého někdejšího kolegu z KGB Vladimíra Putina do ČR a doufá, že se mu podaří vymanit za pomoci militantního velitele ruských vojsk z moci a dosahu FBI, CIA a USA.
Zeman a Klaus mají z USA doslova panický strach a tak jsou schopni všeho!
Buďte velmi vnímaví na události, které se budou niní odehrávat v následujících 48 hodinách.
Prosím hlaste vše, co by mohlo souviset se zatýkání lidí v ČR z politických důvodů na níže uvedené adrese, nebo telefonech, nebo e-mailech:
Veškeré informace mají závažný charakter a jsou orgány CIA brány závazně a vážně, proto prosím o pouze pravdivá oznámení a také upozorňuji na fakt, že oznámení nebude zneužito a není třeba se obávat prozrazení vaší totožnosti:
https://www.cia.gov/contact-cia
V tomto roce byla založena ODS a další strany, které měly okamžitě po sametové revoluci zabrat místo ve vrcholové poltiice.
StB tehdy přesouvala peníze na místa mimo ČR a mimochodem do Nizozemska. Tam založili agenti Státní bezpečnosti fond pod názvem PPF Group.
Postupně tak komunisté převedli na účet PPF částku odpovídající deseti miliardám amerických dolarů a začal velký byznys.
PPF skupovala takřka vše, banky, pojišťovny, média, později mobilní operátory.
Dnes PPF chce zcela ovládnout mobilní a telefonní síť O2 a proto se snaží dostat se z burzy pryč, aby nikdo nezasvěcený nemohl vlastnit ani jednu akcii O2, které v podstatě ovládá v ČR veškeré mobilní sítě a internetovou síť.
Přístup k informacím tak bude mít PPF.
Zeman ze strachu z prozrazení zaúkoloval Chovance, českého ministra vnitra, aby začal pátrat po lidech, kteří šíří pravdu o PPF na internetu.
Chovanec tehdy reagoval smyšleným teroristickým útokem na české vládní úřady a tuto informaci podal i některým agenturám, zejména v USA a Švédsku.
Protože však agentury USA vědí o komunistickém projektu "Číšník" a o PPF Group i o financování teroristických skupin touto finanční skupinou, následovalo sledování osob kolem zainteresovaných lidí.
Tím došlo k zachycení další komunikace mezi Zemanem a Chovancem.
Chovanec má za úkol najít a zbavit svobody všechny možné šiřitele informace o PPF. Záminkou pro jejich zadržení má být smyšlený teroristický útok v ČR.
Česká vláda tak chystá totéž, co před 25 lety - likvidaci všech, kdo ji ohrožují, tedy kdo ohrožuje PPF a Zemana a ostaní aktéry tehdejšího komunistického spiknutí agentů bývalé StB.
Zeman se prozradil tvrzením, že na palubě letadla PPF, které Zeman použil pro cestu z Číny, byl údajně Kellner, což nepotvrdily satelitní snímky letiště a oblasti, kde se delegace v tu dobu pohybovala a ani snímky pořízené jinými osobami na zemi.
Klaus se prozradil tím, že si pořídil vilu na pražské Hanspaulce z peněz PPF.
PPF proniká do všech strategickcýh sfér České republiky a Zeman i Klaus se cítí ohroženi.
Česko tak čeká nahánění lidí, kteří budou dnes demonstrovat proti prezidentu Zemanovi a odpůrce na internetu.
Bolševický kádr Zeman, který byl veden v StB pod přezdívkou Man nyní zneužívá české ministerstvo vnitra svým člověkem Chovancem k tomu, aby se opět v ČR začalo zavírat - za nesouhlas se současnou vládou, ale pod smyšlenými záminkami vymyšlených teroristických útoků na vládní úřady.
V nejbližších hodinách patrně začne policie, která nebude mít tušení oč jde, nahánět různé lidi a vy se v médiích budete dozvídat, že šlo o teroristy.
Jaká forma terorismu byla nakonec Chovancem vymyšlena, nikdo neví ani v ústředí CIA. Ví se pouze, že se chystá zadržení asi 200 až 300 osob na území ČR a rovněž se ví, že česká strana se začala zajímat o osoby české příslušnosti zde ve Švédsku, což švédská SÄPO odmítá.
několik osob bylo údajně pověřeno tím, aby zajistily prostory, kde budou tyto osoby vězněni v naprosté izolaci.
Začala éra, kdy těžce nemocný a umírající Miloš Zeman chce za každou cenu udržet svůj podíl na PPF a také jejich verzi listopadu 1989. Znovu se bude zavírat, znovu se budou falšovat důkazy a znovu se budou věznit lidé pro pravdu pro názor proti současné moci v Česku.
Je šokující, že po aféře se zneužitím vojenské informační služby minulou vládou Petra Nečase, začalo opět zneužívání policejního aparátu a to přímo prezidentem České republiky.
Zeman se bojí tak, že si dokonce pozval svého někdejšího kolegu z KGB Vladimíra Putina do ČR a doufá, že se mu podaří vymanit za pomoci militantního velitele ruských vojsk z moci a dosahu FBI, CIA a USA.
Zeman a Klaus mají z USA doslova panický strach a tak jsou schopni všeho!
Buďte velmi vnímaví na události, které se budou niní odehrávat v následujících 48 hodinách.
Prosím hlaste vše, co by mohlo souviset se zatýkání lidí v ČR z politických důvodů na níže uvedené adrese, nebo telefonech, nebo e-mailech:
Veškeré informace mají závažný charakter a jsou orgány CIA brány závazně a vážně, proto prosím o pouze pravdivá oznámení a také upozorňuji na fakt, že oznámení nebude zneužito a není třeba se obávat prozrazení vaší totožnosti:
https://www.cia.gov/contact-cia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)