Blog Archives

Putin tells US-journalists and everyone else exactly Who created ISIS

It seems that it is time for this video to be re-posted again… Here’s something you probably never saw or heard about in the west. This is Putin answering questions regarding ISIS from a US journalist at the Valdai International Discussion Club in late 2014.


Putin Destroy 60 Minutes News

The entire interview here:

Charlie Rose told lie after lie for his CIA masters!  If you see nothing else go to the 6:53 mark in the interview and watch Putin absolutely DESTROY Charlie Rose and the Fake News outlet 60 Minutes on the issue of Ukraine! Charlie Rose actually has the gall to ask Putin if he believes the US had something to do with the coup!  This has been admitted by George Soros who said we paid $5 billion to take out Ukraine!  There have been releases of telephone conversations from US puppets in Ukraine bragging about it!

Go to 6:53 to see Putin destroy the lies of the fake news!  He hints about the US doing an illegal coups in Ukraine and other countries.  At which point, disgusting Rose says  ”You believe the US had something to do with the ousting of Yanukovch?”

Putin responds with

“We Know Who and Where, When, Who Exactly Met with Someone and worked with those that ousted Yanukovch, how they were supported, how much they were paid, how they were trained, where, in what countries and who those instructors were, we know everything!”   (at this point Charlie has to insert that for the record the lying US government denies any involvement!)  (what a joke!)



Putin to the Western Elites: World War III Is Inevitable

Posted on by Dave Hodges in DC Clothesline

In his strongest speech, ever, directed at the United States, in front of the rest of key members of the Western world, Putin drew a line in the sand with regard to American imperialism.

The following are excerpts of Putin’s speech delivered at the Valdai conference in Sochi, just a few days ago. The speech was directed at Western elites.

“Russia will no longer play games with the United States and engagein back-room negotiations… Russia is prepared for serious agreements, but only if these agreements are conducive to collective security… All systems of global collective security now lie in ruins. There are no longer any international security guarantees at all and the party responsible for the destruction of global collective security is The United States of America…

…The builders of the New World Order have failed by having built a sand castleRussia favors a conservative approach to introducing innovations into the social order, but is not opposed to investigating and discussing such innovations, to see if introducing any of them might be justified…

…Russia has no intention of building an empire of their own, but will not go fishing in the murky waters created by America’s ever-expanding “empire of chaos…

…Russia’s challenges lie in developing her already vast territory)…Russia will not attempt to reformat the world in her own image, but neither will she allow anyone to reformat her in their image. Russia will not close herself off from the world, but anyone who tries to close her off from the world will be sure to reap a whirlwind. Neither is Russia willing to act as a savior of the world, as she has in the past…

…Russia does not wish for the chaos to spread, does not want war, and has no intention of starting one. However, todayRussia sees the outbreak of global war as almost inevitable, is prepared for it, and is continuing to prepare for it. Russia does not war, nor does she fear it…

…Russia does not intend to take an active role in thwarting those who are still attempting to construct their New World Order, However, Russia will oppose their efforts if they begin  to impinge on Russia’s key interests. Russia would prefer to stand by and watch them give themselves as many lumps as their poor heads can take. But those who manage to drag Russia into this process, through disregard for her interests, will be taught the true meaning of pain…

…Russia’s will rely not on the elites to set the tone for the future, and these decisions will result from the will of the people…”

Russia Is In War Mode

Russian air incursions are the worst that they have been since the height of the cold war between the Soviet Union and the United States.

The RAF has intercepted Russian military aircraft as they neared UK airspace for the second time  in the past week. This incident follows Norwegian interception of two Russian bombers last Wednesday.

The Baltic countries are also witnessing a dramatic increase in Russian military violations of NATO air space in which the Russians appear to be testing their ability to penetrate NATO’s air defenses.

Even the number of times that Japanese fighter jets have been forced to scramble to intercept Russian military aircraft has more than doubled in the last six months, amid  the escalating diplomatic tensions between Japan and Russia.

Russia has even violated American airspace in Alaska with multiple air incursions designed to test and discover the sophistications of  America’s ability to detect and intercept Russian fighters and nuclear bombers.

russian arctic oil and gas fields

Coupled with the air incursions, Putin has the Russian economy in war mode. He even has the Russian military prepared to militarily seize the “resource rich” Arctic.


Maybe we can call a "Mulligan" on his presidency.

Putin has warned that “I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations,” Putin said. “This is a reality, not just words.”

The United States would be wise to prepare in kind. Is anyone else concerned that our first and last line of defense is Barack “let’s play nine” Obama?

Video of the Valdai Speech



by Paul Craig Roberts


The latest Washington lie, this one coming from NATO, is that Russia has invaded Ukraine with 1,000 troops and self-propelled artillery.

How do we know that this is a lie? Is it because we have heard nothing but lies about Russia from NATO, from US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power, from assistant secretary of state Victoria Nuland, from Obama and his entire regime of pathological liars, and from the British, German, and French governments along with the BBC and the entirety of the Western media?

This, of course, is a good reason for knowing that the latest Western propaganda is a lie. Those who are pathological liars don’t suddenly start telling the truth.

But there are even better reasons for understanding that Russia has not invaded Ukraine with 1,000 troops.

One reason is that Putin has invested heavily in diplomacy backed by unprovocative behavior. He would not risk his bet on diplomacy by sending in troops too few in number to have a decisive effect on the outcome.

Another reason is that if Putin decides he has no alternative to sending the Russian military to protect the Russian residents in eastern and southern Ukraine, Putin will send in enough troops to do the job quickly as he did in Georgia when the American and Israeli trained Georgian army invaded South Ossetia and was destroyed in a few hours by the Russian response. If you hear that 100,000 Russian troops accompanied by air cover have invaded Ukraine, it would be a more believable claim.

A third reason is that the Russian military does not need to send troops into Ukraine in order to stop the bombing and artillery shelling of the Russian populations by Washington’s puppet government in Kiev. The Russian air force can easily and quickly destroy the Ukrainian air force and artillery and, thereby, stop the Ukrainian attack on the secessionist provinces.

It was only two weeks ago that a fabricated report spread by the UK Guardian and the BBC that a Russian armored convoy entered Ukraine and was destroyed by the Ukrainian Military. And two weeks prior to that we had the hoax of the satellite images allegedly released by the US State Department that the corrupt US ambassador in Kiev spread around the world on social media allegedly showing that Russian forces were firing into Ukraine. One or two weeks from now we will have another lie, and another a week or two after that, and so on.

The cumulative effect of lie piled upon lie for most people is to build the view that the Russians are up to no good. Once this view is established, Western governments can take more serious moves against Russia.

The alleged entry of 1,000 Russian soldiers into Ukraine has been declared by NATO Brigadier General Niko Tak to be a “significant escalation in Russia’s military interference in Ukraine.” The champion liar Samantha Power told the US Security Council that “Russia has to stop lying.” The UK ambassador to the UN said that Russia was guilty of “a clear violation of sovereign Ukrainian territory.” UK prime minister Cameron warned Russia of “further consequences.” German chancellor Merkel announced that there would be more sanctions. A German Security Council advisor declared that “war with Russia is an option.” Polish foreign minister Sikorski called it Russian aggression that required international action. French president Hollande declared Russia’s behavior to be “intolerable.” Ukraine’s security council imposed mandatory conscription.

This suicidal drive toward war with Russia by Europe’s leaders is based entirely on a transparent lie that 1,000 Russian troops crossed into Ukraine

Of course the Western media followed in lock-step. The BBC, CNN, and Die Welt are among the most reckless and irresponsible.

The mountain of lies piled up by Western governments and media has obscured the true story. The US government orchestrated the overthrow of the elected government in Ukraine and imposed a US puppet in Kiev. Washington’s puppet government began issuing threats and committing violent acts against the Russian populations in the former Russian territories that Soviet leaders attached to Ukraine. The Russian people in eastern and southern Ukraine resisted the threat brought to them by Washington’s puppet government in Kiev.

Washington continually accuses the Russian government of supporting the people in the territories who have voted their separation from Ukraine. There would be no war, Washington alleges, except for Russian support. But, of course, Washington could easily stop the violence by ordering its puppet government in Kiev to stop the bombing and shelling of the former Russian provinces. If Russia can tell the “separatists” not to fight, Washington can tell Kiev not to fight.

The only possible conclusion from the facts is that Washington is determined to involve Europe in a war with Russia or at least in an armed standoff in order to break up Europe’s political and economic relations with Russia.

Europe’s leaders are going along with this because European countries, except for Charles de Gaulle’s France, have not had independent foreign policies since the end of World War II. They follow Washington’s lead and are well paid for doing so.

The inability of Europe to produce independent leadership dooms Russian President Putin’s diplomacy to failure. If European capitals cannot make decisions independently of Washington, there is no scope for Putin’s diplomacy.

Notice that the very day after Putin met with Washington’s Ukrainian vassal in an effort to resolve the situation, the new lie of Russian invasion was issued in order to ensure that no good can come of the meeting in which Putin invested his time and energy.

Washington’s only interest is in hegemony. Washington has no interest in resolving the situation that Washington itself created in order to bring discomfort and confusion to Russia. With the caveat that the situation could be resolved by Ukrainian economic collapse, otherwise the longer Putin waits to resolve the situation by force, the more difficult the task will be.

The Kiev Putsch: Rebel Workers Take Power in the East


Introduction: Not since the US and EU took over Eastern Europe, including the Baltic countries, East Germany, Poland and the Balkans and converted them into military outposts of NATO and economic vassals, have the Western powers moved so aggressively to seize a strategic country, such as the Ukraine, posing an existential threat to Russia.

Up until 2013 the Ukraine was a ‘buffer state’, basically a non-aligned country, with economic ties to both the EU and Russia. Ruled by a regime closely tied to local, European, Israeli and Russian based oligarchs, the political elite was a product of a political upheaval in 2004, (the so-called “Orange Revolution”) funded by the US. Subsequently, for the better part of a decade the Ukraine underwent a failed experiment in Western backed ‘neo-liberal’ economic policies. After nearly two decades of political penetration, the US and EU were deeply entrenched in the political system via long-standing funding of so-called non-governmental organizations (NGO’s), political parties and paramilitary groups.

The strategy of the US and EU was to install a pliant regime which would bring Ukraine into the European Common Market and NATO as a subordinate client state. Negotiations between the EU and the Ukraine government proceeded slowly. They eventually faltered because of the onerous conditions demanded by the EU and the more favorable economic concessions and subsidies offered by Russia. Having failed to negotiate the annexation of the Ukraine to the EU, and not willing to await scheduled constitutional elections, the NATO powers activated their well-financed and organized NGOs, client political leaders and armed paramilitary groups to violently overthrow the elected government. The violent putsch succeeded and a US-appointed civilian-military junta took power.

The junta was composed of pliant neo-liberal and chauvinist neo-fascist ‘ministers’. The former were hand-picked by the US, to administer and enforce a new political and economic order, including privatization of public firms and resources, breaking trade and investment ties with Russia, eliminating a treaty allowing the Russian naval base in Crimea and ending military-industrial exports to Russia. The neo-fascists and sectors of the military and police were appointed to ministerial positions in order to violently repress any pro-democracy opposition in the West and East. They oversaw the repression of bilingual speakers (Russian-Ukrainian), institutions and practices – turning the opposition to the US-NATO imposed coup regime into an ethnic opposition. They purged all elected opposition office holders in the West and East and appointed local governors by fiat – essentially creating a martial law regime.

The Strategic Targets of the NATO-Junta

NATOs violent, high-risk seizure of the Ukraine was driven by several strategic military objectives. These included:

1.) The ousting of Russia from its military bases in Crimea – turning them into NATO bases facing Russia.

2.) The conversion of the Ukraine into a springboard for penetrating Southern Russia and the Caucasus; a forward position to politically manage and support liberal pro-NATO parties and NGOs within Russia.

3.) The disruption of key sectors of the Russian military defense industry, linked to the Ukrainian factories, by ending the export of critical engines and parts to Russia.

The Ukraine had long been an important part of the Soviet Union’s military industrial complex. NATO planners behind the putsch were keenly aware that one-third of the Soviet defense industry had remained in the Ukraine after the break-up of the USSR and that forty percent of the Ukraine’s exports to Russia, until recently, consisted of armaments and related machinery. More specifically, the Motor-Sikh plant in Eastern Ukraine manufactured most of the engines for Russian military helicopters including a current contract to supply engines for one thousand attack helicopters. NATO strategists immediately directed their political stooges in Kiev to suspend all military deliveries to Russia, including medium-range air-to air-missiles, inter-continental ballistic missiles, transport planes and space rockets (Financial Times, 4/21/14, p3). US and EU military strategists viewed the Kiev putsch as a way to undermine Russian air, sea and border defenses. President Putin has acknowledged the blow but insists that Russia will be able to substitute domestic production for the critical parts within two years. This means the loss of thousands of skilled factory jobs in Eastern Ukraine.

4.) The military encirclement of Russia with forward NATO bases in the Ukraine matching those from the Baltic to the Balkans, from Turkey to the Caucasus and then onward from Georgia into the autonomous Russian Federation.

The US-EU encirclement of Russia is designed to end Russian access to the North Sea, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. By encircling and confining Russia to an isolated landmass without ‘outlets to the sea’, US-EU empire builders seek to limit Russia’s role as a rival power center and possible counter-weight to its imperial ambitions in the Middle East, North Africa, Southwest Asia and the North Atlantic.

Ukraine Putsch: Integral to Imperial Expansion

The US and EU are intent on destroying independent, nationalist and non-aligned governments throughout the world and converting them into imperial satellites by whatever means are effective. For example, the current NATO-armed mercenary invasion of Syria is directed at overthrowing the nationalist, secular Assad government and establishing a pro-NATO vassal state, regardless of the bloody consequences to the diverse Syrian people. The attack on Syria serves multiple purposes: Eliminating a Russian ally and its Mediterranean naval base; undermining a supporter of Palestine and adversary of Israel; encircling the Islamic Republic of Iran and the powerful militant Hezbollah Party in Lebanon and establishing new military bases on Syrian soil.

The NATO seizure of the Ukraine has a multiplier effect that reaches ‘upward’ toward Russia and ‘downward’ toward the Middle East and consolidates control over its vast oil wealth.

The recent NATO wars against Russian allies or trading partners confirm this prognosis. In Libya, the independent, non-aligned policies of the Gadhafi regime stood out in stark contrast to the servile Western satellites like Morocco, Egypt and Tunisia. Gadhafi was overthrown and Libya destroyed via a massive NATO air assault. Egypt’s mass popular anti-Mubarak rebellion and emerging democracy were subverted by a military coup and eventually returned the country to the US-Israeli-NATO orbit – under a brutal dictator. Armed incursions by NATO proxy, Israel, against Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon as well as the US-EU sanctions against Iran are all directed against potential allies or trading partners of Russia.

The US has moved forcefully from encircling Russia via ‘elections and free markets’ in Eastern Europe to relying on military force, death squads, terror and economic sanctions in the Ukraine, the Caucasus, the Middle East and Asia.

Regime Change in Russia: from Global Power to Vassal State

Washington’s strategic objective is to isolate Russia from without, undermine its military capability and erode its economy, in order to strengthen NATO’s political and economic collaborators inside Russia – leading to its further fragmentation and return to the semi-vassal status.

The imperial strategic goal is to place neo-liberal political proxies in power in Moscow, just like the ones who oversaw the pillage and destruction of Russia during the infamous Yeltsin decade. The US-EU power grab in the Ukraine is a big step in that direction.

Evaluating the Encirclement and Conquest Strategy

So far NATO’s seizure of the Ukraine has not moved forward as planned. First of all, the violent seizure of power by overtly pro-NATO elites openly reneging on military treaty agreements with Russia over bases in Crimea, had forced Russia to intervene in support of the local, overwhelmingly ethnic Russian population. Following a free and open referendum, Russia annexed the region and secured its strategic military presence.

While Russia retained its naval presence on the Black Sea … the NATO junta in Kiev unleashed a large-scale military offensive against the pro-democracy, anti-coup Russian-speaking majority in the eastern half of the Ukraine who have been demanding a federal form of government reflecting Ukraine’s cultural diversity. The US-EU promoted a “military response” to mass popular dissent and encouraged the coup-regime to eliminate the civil rights of the Russian speaking majority through neo-Nazi terror and to force the population to accept junta-appointed regional rulers in place of their elected leaders. In response to this repression, popular self-defense committees and local militias quickly sprang up and the Ukrainian army was initially forced back with thousands of soldiers refusing to shoot their own compatriots on behalf of the Western –installed regime in Kiev. For a while, the NATO-backed neo-liberal-neo-fascist coalition junta had to contend with the disintegration of its ‘power base’. At the same time, ‘aid’ from the EU, IMF and the US failed to compensate for the cut-off of Russian trade and energy subsidies. Under the advise of visiting US CIA Director, Brenner, the Kiev Junta then dispatched its elite “special forces” trained by the CIA and FBI to carry out massacres against pro-democracy civilians and popular militias. They bussed in armed thugs to the diverse city of Odessa who staged an ‘exemplary’ massacre: Burning the city’s major trade union headquarters and slaughtering 41, mostly unarmed civilians who were trapped in the building with its exits blocked by neo-Nazis. The dead included many women and teenagers who had sought shelter from the rampaging neo-Nazis. The survivors were brutally beaten and imprisoned by the ‘police’ who had passively watched while the building burned.

The Coming Collapse of the Putsch-Junta

Obama’s Ukraine power grab and his efforts to isolate Russia have provoked some opposition in the EU. Clearly US sanctions prejudice major European multi-nationals with deep ties in Russia. The US military build-up in Eastern Europe, the Balkans and the Black Sea raises tensions and threatens a large-scale military conflagration, disrupting major economic contracts. US-EU threats on Russia’s border have increased popular support for President Putin and strengthened the Russian leadership. The strategic power grab in the Ukraine has radicalized and deepened the polarization of Ukrainian politics-between neo-fascist and pro-democracy forces.

While the imperial strategists are extending and escalating their military build-up in Estonia and Poland and pouring arms into the Ukraine, the entire power grab rests on very precarious political and economic foundations- which could collapse within the year – amidst a bloody civil war/ inter-ethnic slaughter.

The Ukraine junta has already lost political control of over a third of the country to pro-democracy, anti-coup movements and self-defense militias. By cutting off strategic exports to Russia to serve US military interests, the Ukraine lost one of its most important markets, which cannot be replaced. Under NATO control, Ukraine will have to buy NATO-specified military hardware leading to the closure of its factories geared to the Russian market. The loss of Russian trade is already leading to mass unemployment, especially among skilled industrial workers in the East who may be forced to immigrate to Russia. Ballooning trade deficits and the erosion of state revenues will bring a total economic collapse. Thirdly, as a result of the Kiev junta’s submission to NATO, the Ukraine has lost billions of dollars in subsidized energy from Russia. High energy costs make Ukrainian industries non-competitive in global markets. Fourthly, in order to secure loans from the IMF and the EU, the junta has agreed to eliminate food and energy price subsidies, severely depressing household incomes and plunging pensioners into destitution. Bankruptcies are on the rise, as imports from the EU and elsewhere displace formerly protected local industries.

No new investments are flowing in because of the violence, instability and conflicts between neo-fascists and neo-liberals within he junta. Just to stabilize the day-to-day operations of government, the junta needs a no-interest $30 billion dollar handout – from its NATO patrons, an amount, which is not forthcoming now or in the immediate future.

It is clear that NATO ‘strategists’ who planned the putsch were only thinking about weakening Russia militarily and gave no thought to the political, economic and social costs of sustaining a puppet regime in Kiev when Ukraine had been so dependent on Russian markets, loans and subsidized energy. Moreover, they appear to have overlooked the political, industrial and agricultural dynamics of the predictably hostile Eastern regions of the country. Alternately, Washington strategists may have based their calculations on instigating a Yugoslavia-style break-up accompanied by massive ethnic cleansing amidst population transfers and slaughter. Undeterred by the millions of civilian casualties, Washington considers its policy of dismantling Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya to have been great political-military successes.

Ukraine most certainly will enter a prolonged and deep depression, including a precipitous decline in its exports, employment and output. Possibly, economic collapse will lead to nationwide protests and social unrest: spreading from East to West, from South to North. Social upheavals and mass misery may further undermine the morale of the Ukrainian armed forces. Even now, Kiev can barely afford to feed its soldiers and has to rely on neo-Fascist volunteer militias who may be hard to control. The US-EU are not likely to intervene directly with an Libya-style bombing campaign since they would face a prolonged war on Russia’s border at a time when public opinion in the US is suffering from imperial war exhaustion, and European business interests with links to Russian resource companies are resisting consequential sanctions.

The US-EU putsch has produced a failing regime and a society riven by violent conflicts – spinning into open ethnic violence. What, in fact, has ensued is a system of dual power with contenders cutting across regional boundaries. The Kiev junta lacks the coherence and stability to serve as a reliable NATO military link in the encirclement of Russia. On the contrary, US-EU sanctions, military threats and bellicose rhetoric are forcing Russians to quickly rethink their ‘openness’ to the West. The strategic threats to its national security are leading Russia to review its ties to Western banks and corporations. Russia may have to resort to a policy of expanded industrialization via public investments and import substitution. Russian oligarchs, having lost their overseas holdings, may become less central to Russian economic policy.

What is clear is that the power grab in Kiev will not result in a ‘knife pointed at the heartland of Russia’. The ultimate defeat and overthrow of the Kiev junta can lead to a radicalized self-governing Ukraine, based on the burgeoning democratic movements and rising working class consciousness. This will have to emerge from their struggle against IMF austerity programs and Western asset stripping of Ukraine’s resources and enterprises. The industrial workers of Ukraine who succeed in throwing off the yoke of the western vassals in Kiev have no intention of submitting themselves to the yoke of the Russian oligarchs. Their struggle is for a democratic state, capable of developing an independent economic policy, free of imperial military alliances.


May Day 2014: Dual Popular Power in the East, Fascism Rising in the West

The predictable falling out between the neo-fascists and neo-liberal partners in the Kiev junta was evidenced by large-scale riots, between rival street gangs and police on May Day. The US-EU strategy envisioned using the neo-fascists as ‘shock troops’ and street fighters in overthrowing the elected regime of Yankovich and later discarding them. As exemplified by the notorious taped conversation between Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Kiev, the EU-US strategists promote their own handpicked neoliberal proxies to represent foreign capital, impose austerity policies and sign treaties for foreign military bases. In contrast, the neo-fascist militias and parties would favor nationalist economic policies, retaining state enterprises and are likely to be hostile to oligarchs, especially those with ‘dual Israeli-Ukraine’ citizenship.

The Kiev junta’s inability to develop an economic strategy, its violent seizure of power and repression of pro-democracy dissidents in the East has led to a situation of ‘dual power’. In many cases, troops sent to repress the pro-democracy movements have abandoned their weapons, abandoned the Kiev junta and joined the self-governing movements in the East.

Apart from its outside backers-the White House, Brussels and IMF – the Kiev junta has been abandoned by its rightwing allies in Kiev for being too subservient to NATO and resisted by the pro-democracy movement in the East for being authoritarian and centralist. The Kiev junta has fallen between two chairs: it lacks legitimacy among most Ukrainians and has lost control of all but a small patch of land occupied by government offices in Kiev and even those are under siege by the neo-fascist right and increasingly from its own disenchanted former supporters.

Let us be absolutely clear, the struggle in the Ukraine is not between the US and Russia, it is between a NATO-imposed junta composed of neo-liberal oligarchs and fascists on one side and the industrial workers and their local militias and democratic councils on the other. The former defends and obeys the IMF and Washington; the latter relies on the productive capacity of local industry and rules by responding to the majority.



About James Petras

He is the author of more than 62 books published in 29 languages, and over 600 articles in professional journals, including the American Sociological Review, British Journal of Sociology, Social Research, and Journal of Peasant Studies. He has published over 2000 articles in nonprofessional journals such as the New York Times, the Guardian, the Nation, Christian Science Monitor, Foreign Policy, New Left Review, Partisan Review, TempsModerne, Le Monde Diplomatique, and his commentary is widely carried on the internet.

His publishers have included Random House, John Wiley, Westview, Routledge, Macmillan, Verso, Zed Books and Pluto Books. He is winner of the Career of Distinguished Service Award from the American Sociological Association’s Marxist Sociology Section, the Robert Kenny Award for Best Book, 2002, and the Best Dissertation, Western Political Science Association in 1968. His most recent titles include Unmasking Globalization: Imperialism of the Twenty-First Century (2001); co-author The Dynamics of Social Change in Latin America (2000), System in Crisis (2003), co-author Social Movements and State Power (2003), co-author Empire With Imperialism (2005), co-author)Multinationals on Trial (2006).

He has a long history of commitment to social justice, working in particular with the Brazilian Landless Workers Movement for 11 years. In 1973-76 he was a member of the Bertrand Russell Tribunal on Repression in Latin America. He writes a monthly column for the Mexican newspaper, La Jornada, and previously, for the Spanish daily, El Mundo. He received his B.A. from Boston University and Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley.



Van Rompuy: If The Public Doesn’t Want EU Expansion, ‘We Do It Anyway’

In a crass and ill-timed intervention, the unelected president of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy has warned Vladimir Putin that the EU intends ultimately to control every country on the western flank of Russia.


by M.E. Synon 1 May 2014

In an interview with De Standaard newspaper, Van Rompuy speaks about his “dreams” that all the Balkan states will join the EU. He calls it an “inspiring thought” that in the long term “the whole of European territory outside Russia” will be tied in some way to the EU.

He admits he does not know if there is public support for such a move, “But we do it anyway.”

Van Rompuy’s comments, released in the midst of the tensions which have followed moves by Brussels to put Ukraine on the path to EU membership, give credence to Putin’s fears that ultimately the EU intends to put its tanks on Russia’s lawn.

Building a common EU defence is one of the strategic priorities for the Brussels elite who are trying to build “a country called Europe.”

Most people in Britain are unaware of it, but a commitment by Britain and the other member states to common foreign, security and defence policies was written into the Maastricht Treaty of 1992.

In recent years the EU has deepened the integration of the military forces of member states with the framing of the Common Security and Defence Policy.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande are the leading voices for a common defence force for the EU.

In 2008, a report by a respected Dutch think tank warned that the EU is pursuing a secretive “military space policy.” It accused the EU of using the cover of the European Space Agency to develop technologies such as the Galileo satellite system for use by military as well as civilian. authorities

Last July, Martin Schulz, the German socialist President of the European Parliament who is now one of the top candidates to be the next president of the European Commission, said: “We need a headquarters for civil and military missions in Brussels and deployable troops.”

At the same time the European Commission proposed that it should “own and operate” its own surveillance drones.

Last December at a European Council meeting, member states agreed to “deepen defence cooperation.” At a press conference afterwards, David Cameron insisted Britain would block EU institutions from owning and operating their own military assets.

However, the fact is there is nothing Britain can do to stop a group of EU member states from creating their own “intergovernmental” defence force and asking the EU to administer it.

Now in this latest interview, Van Rompuy has said Brussels intends in effect to create an EU national border from the Arctic Circle to the Turkish border with Iraq.

This could threaten Russia’s historic, trade and political ties with Eastern Europe, so it is unlikely Russians will believe Van Rompuy when he insists the EU does not intend to create a “geopolitical shift.”

As long ago as 2007, José Manuel Barroso, the Portuguese former Maoist who is the president of the European Commission, said he liked to compare the EU “to the organisation of an empire.” He said “We have the dimension of an empire. I believe it is a great construction.”

Van Rompuy’s interview makes it clear that the EU elite intend for the empire to go right to the edge of the Russian Motherland.

In reply to Van Rompuy’s interview, a spokesman for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office said: “Europe’s diversity means a one-size-fits-all Europe will not work. You cannot impose a federal, close-knit union on such a varied group of states. There is not the political will to do so.”

“Only 31 per cent of the people across the European Union have a positive view of the EU. Two-thirds believe their voice does not count in the EU. This is not the voice of people who think a ‘United States of Europe’ is the answer to their problems. You have to treat Europe like a network not like a bloc.”

UKIP deputy leader Paul Nuttall said Van Rompuy’s words “demonstrate the frightening expansionist mentality of federalist fanatics.” He said Van Rompuy “does show a rare glimpse of honesty when he admits that the EU’s desire to expand comes without any public approval.”


And let us remember :

What Obama’s Claim that “Russia is Acting Out of Weakness” ACTUALLY Tells Us

26.Mar.2014 | SCG


Obama’s statements at the G7 were very revealing, and not in the way he intended them to be.

You might have noticed that immediately following a speech Obama made at the G7 meeting yesterday, virtually every single mainstream news outlet faithfully parroted out the same handpicked one liner: “Obama says Russia ‘acting out of weakness'” and Russia is a “regional power”. This is revealing on a number of levels.

3917774796520289094Any time you see a choreographed media blitz like this you should pay attention. They are attempting to redefine the narrative.

Controlling the narrative is key. In the world of media, politics and public relations, the facts are not nearly as important as the way those facts are interpreted.

The first thing we can gather from Obama’s statement, and the way it was promoted by the corporate media, is that they are not at all happy with the fact that Washington’s so called “sanctions” on a handful of Russian politicians are being widely interpreted as toothless, or that Putin is being depicted as having outmaneuvered the Obama administration yet again (the first time of course being in the Syrian crisis of 2013). They are attempting to distract the public from their own weakness by projecting it onto Putin.

Related: Videos From Ukraine that The U.S. Media Will Never Show You

The second thing we can gather here, is that the corporate media is losing its ability to control the narrative. The media campaign to demonize Putin and to imbue Obama’s new threats with gravity over the past week has been frenetic, and yet it utterly failed. Putin’s approval rating skyrocketed to its all time high, while Obama’s approval rating hit a new all time low. More importantly, they utterly failed to alter the perception that Putin is fundamentally stronger and better at diplomacy than anyone in the Obama administration.

That perception of weakness is dangerous. Especially for an empire that is less and less capable of projecting physical power. Though the United States has used its military and covert operations to bring down non-cooperative governments many times since World War II, most of the time this hasn’t been necessary. The U.S. government and its NATO satellites have been running the world like a mafia runs a neighborhood: with a little bit of force and a lot of intimidation. Most of the time just a threat is enough to bend a nation to their will, but that’s changing.

Related: Making Sense of the Chaos in Venezuela

What Putin did in the Syrian crisis and again in the Ukrainian crisis was historic; not because of the specifics of either situation, but because for the first time since the fall of the Soviet Union a nation has stood up to the U.S. and won. Not once, but twice. Russia set an example that others might copy.

Since their attempts at bringing Russia to heal with threats and petty punishments has failed, they are now in damage control mode. They are attempting to downplay the importance of this showdown in a desperate attempt to save face.

Related: BREAKING: Leaked Phone Call Reveals New Coalition Government Was Behind Sniper Shootings in Ukraine

The jab about Russia being a “regional power” is significant as well. This is the precise wording used by Obama’s mentor Zbigniew Brzezinski in his analysis of Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However Zbigniew himself was the first to say that this “regional power” status hinges directly on Russia’s relationship with Ukraine:

“Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire. Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status, but it would then become a predominantly Asian imperial state, more likely to be drawn into debilitating conflicts with aroused Central Asians, who would then be resentful of the loss of their recent independence and would be supported by their fellow Islamic states to the south. China would also be likely to oppose any restoration of Russian domination over Central Asia, given its increasing interest in the newly independent states there. However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as its access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia.” From “The Grand Chess Board” by Zbigniew Brzezinski

So again, Obama’s statement is trying to convince to persuade the rest of the world (or at least the political figureheads) that the game hasn’t changed at all, and that the balance of power is still the same as it was back in 1991.


Kapitalister är bra på två saker – att döda för plundringens skull och att få det att se ut som om andra gjort det

Med anledning av Carl Hamiltons krönika ”Kommunister är bra på en sak – att döda” i Aftonbladet 12 Mars, vill jag påpeka några aspekter som Carl lämnat därhän i sin likräkning. Att bedöma vem som egentligen dödar vem handlar om att klart kunna se motiv, uppsåt och metod för dödandet och då är det en klar fördel att inte vara ‘skymd’ av något under den iaktagelsen. Hur man fastställer skuldbördan för olagliga invasionskrig med miljoner dödsoffer, men också för omedelbara och långsiktiga ekonomiska, sociala och ekologiska ‘utrensningar’ och ‘förintelser’ som dagligen kräver hundratusentals liv får Carl förklara i någon annan krönika kanske.

Då var det dags för rättning i ledet igen för svenskarna enligt det förhållningssätt USA bestämt att man måste ha till världshändelserna. Denna gången är det Carl Hamilton som är magistern.

I Sep 2001 höjde man i Sverige beredskapen emot terrordåd p.g.a attacken i N.Y.C den 9/11. En skrattretande reflex som t.o.m Arabvärldens värsta jihadister måste skrattat sig fördärvade åt, som Jan Guillou påpekar i en omtalad artikel i Aftonbladet de dagarna. Efter Putins intåg i östra Ukraina och Krim, flyttade dagens regering JAS-plan från Kallinge till Gotland. Återigen en lika skrattretande reflex som enbart syftar till att stämma svensken enligt USA’s och EU-oligarkins syften. 17 september 2001 publicerade Aftonbladet Jan Guilou’s artikel ”Vi blev tvångs- kommenderade att bli amerikaner“, där han skriver “Alltså blev vi alla tvångskommenderade att vara amerikaner. Vår sorg, som vi befalldes att manifestera kollektivt, var enligt order större än för någon annan händelse efter andra världskriget.” och lite längre ner skriver Jan “USA är den stora massmördaren i vår tid. Enbart krigen mot Vietnam och de angränsande sydostasiatiska länderna krävde fyra miljoner liv. Utan en enda tyst minut i Sverige.” Sedan Jan’s artikel har ytterligare ett par miljoner människoliv skördats av enbart USA med medbrottslingar.

Den artikeln är värd att läsa om idag, som ett mentalt motgift till de mediala gifter som alldeles för många experter sprider. Den gruppsykologiska Le Bon-modellen som regeringen tydligt använder i sin propagandaföring, försätter svensken i djup vanmakt och leder honom att känna just de sympatier och antipatier USA och EU-oligarkin, vill. Idag befalls vi i enlighet med den viljan, via herr Hamilton, att samstämmigt se med ökad avsky på kommunismen och med ökad förståelse på nazismen.

Han har kommit med sin tes, och det blir inget annat än hans tes, då man inte riktigt förstår hur han kommit fram till vilka som är kommunismens lik och vilka som inte är det. Det jag kan se över de senaste 30 åren i vart fall är att för varje decennium som går så ökar uppenbarligen kommunismens dödsoffer under 2:a världskriget och nazismens minskar. Detta enligt de mest spridda encyclopedierna, läroböckerna, de populära historiska magasinen och de systemtrogna essäerna. Man måste själv gå till detaljskildringarna, dagböckerna, originalarkiven, vittnesmålen och domsluten för att kunna matcha verkliga fakta med vår tids frisserade berättelse.

Wikipedia exempelvis, som många vanliga ‘sökare’ använder, för att nämna en av de absolut värsta historieförvrängarna på internet, men långt ifrån den enda, skriver systematiskt om historien genom att antingen utelämna centrala fakta helt eller på lämpligt vis sy om dem så att de skall passa den numera hårt marknadsförda ny-liberalistiska doktrinens berättelseEnligt detta propagandaredskap blir exempelvis befrielsearméer terrorister och terrorister blir befrielsearméer, false-flag-operationer blir terroristers dåd och anledningar till krigshandlingar, de döda byter sida, mördarna byter sida och miljontals lik försvinner och förmodas glömmas bort. I takt med att ögonvittnena dör och dagböckerna försvinner så misshandlas de historiska faktumen än mer hejdlöst och utan skam av dagens historie-redigerare  

Utan en antites till Carls tes, märks det inte vilka “mätmetoder” eller rent individuella tolkningar han använt för att tillskriva kommunister det antal dödsoffer han tror kan jämna ut nazismens och fascismens. Han vill ju tro att nazismens dödande endast varade i 13 år. Man kan inte begränsa nazismens dödande till de år den officiellt existerade genom en nations regering då den hållts vid liv sedan dess av de västerländska säkerhetstjänsterna. 

I vår tid i vart fall (d.v.s från mitten av 40-talet) och med facit i hand, är både Fascism och Nazism bäst bevarade inom USA’s imperialistiska version av Diktatorisk Skendemokrati och inte inom de olika karikatyr-organisationerna. Högerextremist-organisationerna som, genom långvarig, konstgjord livsuppehållande vård ifrån just CIA, MI6 och Mossad, men också ifrån Tyska BND och Franska DGSE, nu agerar “revolutionärer” i Europa och USA. I princip alla dessa extremistorganisationer agerar under CIA’s och NATO’s befäl. När man förstått detta förstår man också bättre varför USA’s regering, direkt efter Nazitysklands kapitulation och i skydd av massinvandringen från Europa, räddade och smugglade tusentals nazistbefäl och ‘vetenskapsmän’ över Atlanten, som alla var skyldiga till ohyggliga krigsbrott personligen. De smugglades till USA via bl.a allierade handelsfartyg. Man var tvungen att rädda dem undan röda arméns exekutionsplutoner, därför man behövde deras “ovärderliga” kunskaper och färdigheter i folkmord, brott emot mänskligheten, etnisk rensning och propagandaföring. NATO’s ‘nazistiska’ mördare blev inplanterade i västerländska samhällen över hela världen efter 1948. Hur många lik kommunisterna lämnat efter sig går bara att bedöma om man också tar hänsyn till säkerhetstjänsternas operationer, metoder och taktik genom den ‘tysta’ krigsföringen.

Gladio                  logo

Efter andra världskriget bestämde sig Storbritannien och USA för att inleda paramilitära stay-behind-operationer. Ett exempel är NATO’s stay-behind-operationer under kodnamnet, ”Operation Gladio”. Det är samlingsnamnet på alla anti-kommunistiska operationer sedan 1948 och fram till våra dagar. Winston Churchills framprovocerade, blodiga inbördeskrig i Grekland 1946 -1949 genom sitt plötsliga stöd till grekiska högerextremister och nazistkollaboratörer, var operationen som födde de organiserade stay-behind operationerna. CIA-chefen Allen Dulles var en av nyckelpersonerna i skapandet av “Operation Gladio”, och de flesta av dess aktiviteter finansierades av CIA. Mottot “tystnaden tjänar friheten” pryder Gladios emblem. Vems frihet och vilken typ av frihet man egentligen skyddar med dolk, eld och paramilitära fallskärmstrupper förklarar just nazismen och fascismen väl inom sina grundfilosofier i vilka också dödandet av “orena” eller “olika oss” ges en alldeles speciell vikt. Lojala medlemmar rekryterades i hela Europa: det vill säga brutala anti-kommunister, i huvudsak nazister och fascister. De har sedan dess hängivit sig åt nazismens återuppståndelse och false-flag-operationer av främst  paramiltär karaktär, men också av politisk karaktär. De har infiltrerat och bedrivit omstörtande verksamhet, inte bara inom västnationers och neutrala nationers politiska partier, regeringar och oppositioner, utan också inom socialistiska och kommunistiska nationer

Normalt erkänns, ifrån västs regeringar och västmedia, endast vissa extremhögra organisationer vara “Operation Gladios” verk, men det är bevisat från flera håll idag att deras verksamhet till hög grad innehöll infiltrering och organisering av kommunistiska grupperingar. Det drama den dubbelrollen resulterat i spelas för övrigt upp idag på de geopolitiska arenorna, både i Europa, Afrika, Latinamerika, Asien och i Arabvärlden. Kapitalisterna hoppas att genom att deras paramilitära organisationer eskalerar en våldsspiral mellan “ytterligheterna”, så skall självaste demokratin tvingas att visa nacken och ta emot nådastöten av fascismen och nazismen, som alltså under hela efterkrigstiden främst levererats av CIA och NATO. Därför talas det väldigt tyst om någon som helst inblandning i de ‘kommunistiska’ gruppernas organisationer och operationer.

Under “Operation Gladio” infiltrerades bl.a de ’kommunistiska’ Brigate Rosse i Italien på 70-talet. Italienska domare bekräftade i slutet av 90-talet att huvudmedlemmarna Mario Moretti och Giovanni Senzani arbetat för den Italienska säkerhetspolisen Polizia di Prevenzione (DIGOS) och den Italienska militära underrättelsetjänsten, Servizio Informazioni Militare (SIM) som tillsammans med CIA blev ‘lyckliga föräldrar’ till den konstgjorda röda ultra-terrorismen i Italien. I Västtyskland, i BND’s arkiv, existerar dossierer som bevisar något liknande om gruppen Rote armé-fraktion, RAF, eller Baader-Meinhof-ligan. Det existerar dokument som starkt pekar på att Andreas Baader hade nära samröre med den Västtyska militära underrättelsetjänsten, Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) som föddes ur Gehlen Organization, den största arbetsgivaren för gamla nazister i Västtyskland. Gehlen-organisationens hemliga “celler” skulle stanna kvar i “fiendekontrollerade områden” och fungera som ‘motståndsrörelser’, bedriva sabotage, omstörtande verksamhet, gerillakrig och mord. Horst Mahler, en av grundarna av RAF, som enligt egen utsago då var en ‘socialitisk’ advokat och som hade mycket nära samröre med både Andreas Baader och Ulriche Meinhof är idag en nyckelfigur inom den Tyska Nynazist-rörelsen, och en Gehlen-skapelse. Dessa är endast två exempel ur den uppsjö av uppgifter, som onekligen väcker frågor kring säkerhetstjänsternas inblandning i konstruktionen av dessa ’kommunister’ och kring vilka det verkligen var som lämnade lik efter sig “i högar”.

En operation som inspirerade till Operation Gladio är den operation som General-löjtnant Sir Ronald MacKenzie Scobie ledde på Churchills order i Grekland i slutet av 2:a världskriget och som ledde till det blodiga inbördeskriget 1946 – 1949. Man beväpnade nazist-kollaboratörer, gamla Metaxa-agenter och högerextrema royalister för att rensa Grekland på EAM/ELAS motståndsmän och kvinnor. Hetsjakten och den rena slakten på dessa, skedde efter att dessa först avväpnats i ett, skulle det visa sig, svekfullt “fredsavtal” som Churchill lurade in EAM/ELAS i. BBC-dokumentären “A Hidden War” som visades en enda gång i Brittisk TV 1983 innan den bannlystes, har dokumenterat dessa fakta väl. Churchill själv uttryckte om än lite kryptiskt att stay-behind-operationerna fötts genom det framprovocerade inbördeskriget i Grekland.

“Jag tycktes befinna mig i otakt med händelserna i Grekland 1944-45. Men idag förefaller det som om jag förde exakt den politik, som Förenta staterna något mer än två år senare med djup övertygelse gjort till sin. Det bereder mig en mycket stor tillfredsställelse.” – Winston Churchill, citerad i New York Times, 12 april 1947

I Grekland i nutid, närmare bestämt den 17 November 2013 tog, en rätt klantigt ihopsatt anarkist-kommunistisk, militant grupp, på sig dubbelmordet på två medlemmar ur brottssyndikatet och nynazistpartiet Gyllene Gryning, efter över två veckors tystnad. Man tåtar nämligen inte ihop ett ‘revolutionärt’ manifest, om än fiktivt, på endast några dagar. De allra flesta vakna och tänkande människorna i Grekland fnös och skrattade åt de uppenbara, ideologiska och sakliga ’felen’ i detta anarkist-kommunistiska manifest som säkerhetspolisen producerat under namnet Folkets Kämpande Revolutionära Krafter. Det var uppenbart att de som producerat detta dokument inte hade så värst bra historisk och ideologisk koll på sådana organisationer. Det var ännu mer uppenbart att man försökte provocera fram och skapa förutsättningar för en ny militärjunta eller ett nytt inbördeskrig genom att “tutta på” de konstgjorda ytterligheternas stubin.

Det existerar en hel del liknande CIA eller NATO-stödda ”kommunistorganisationer” i Mellanöstern, i Sydostasien, i Afrika, I Europa och i Latinamerika som haft och har den egna säkerhetspolisens och några utländska ambassaders välsignelse (företrädesvis USA’s och Storbritanniens innan 1960 men också Israels efteråt). Det har startats en hel del blodiga inbördeskrig, diktaturer och invasionskrig via “Operation Gladios” verksamhet inom både de högerradikala och de vänsterradikala grupperna. Bara man har lust att titta lite i historieböckernas fotnoter och det ‘finstilta’ så förstår man att nazismens och fascismens verkliga ‘kuvös’ varit CIA och NATO med ett par militärbaser som “fostrare”. Exempelvis f.d Fort Benning i Georgia, eller School of the Americas eller Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC), som det döptes om till efter att det exponerats som världens främsta ‘växthus’ för jordens grymmaste fascistiska och nazistiska bödlar, mördare, torterare och diktatorer. 30 000 av dessa kapitalismens svarta riddare pumpade man ut därifrån under ett par decennier och de i sin tur hade efter sin framfart lämnat miljoner lik efter sig.

Under en tid då varje organiserat rop för medborgerliga och mänskliga rättigheter och demokrati, sågs  som kommunistiska yttringar av Kapitalismen, ledde det till att det dödades och förföljdes miljoner människor som inte var kommunister. Det blev nämligen regel från de kapitalistiska staterna i väst (och är än idag) att ge alla som vågar resa sig, organisera sig och slåss för sina rättigheter och sin frihet, samlingsnamnet “kommunister”, oavsett samröre med något kommunistiskt parti eller ej. Denna långa hetsjakt på alla som kämpade för demokrati och rättvisa i sitt land, skapade säkerligen fler “kommunister” än vad de klassiska kommuniststaternas samhällsskick gjorde.

gladio“Operation Gladios” verksamheter anses och på mycket goda grunder ha placerat presidenter, premiärministrar, utrikesministrar, polischefer, domare och chefredaktörer inom de västerländska nationernas politiska system och institutioner under hela det kalla kriget. En sådan nation är bl.a Grekland, där socialistpartiet PASOK bildades efter ett “lån” på 100 milj dollar till Andreas Papandreou från Manhattan Chase Bank, Rockefellers egna bank. Innan “lånet” betalades ut skrev A. Papandreou under ett dokument där tiotalet punkter utgjorde villkoren. Inte alls överraskande dikterade en punkt att Papandreou fick kritisera USA’s utrikespolitik rätt öppet i tal men aldrig i handling och en annan punkt där han förband sig att hålla kommunistpartiet KKE under 7%-strecket och fackföreningarna splittrade.

Denna strypkoppelförsedda typ av socialism blev den som CIA  implementerade i Europa och i världen från mitten av 70-talet till slutet av 80-talet. I allra högsta grad också i Sverige där ett statsministermord ‘blev nödvändigt’ för att man skulle kunna introducera den nya, “nyliberala” pseudo-socialismen.

Mätmetoderna för att kunna se vem som dödat vem, betvivlar jag behöver vara så värst “förfinade” för att klara av att visa sanningen. Det är oftast när man vill förvanska sanningen man behöver “förfina” metoderna. Det går att fastställa dödssiffror och vem som gjorde vad med ganska stor pricksäkerhet då det ju, förutom båda sidors förlustrapporter, också finns vittnesmål och domslut kring krigsbrott, brott emot mänskligheten och folkmord i hyllhav i flera olika offentliga arkiv. Några av dessa arkiv finns under Interagency Working Group (IWG) under National Archives, ett arkiv med nästan 8 miljoner sidor av dokument inklusive 1,2 miljoner sidor ur (OSS) Office of Strategic Service’s register, 74.000 sidor ur CIA namn- och ämnes-register, mer än 350.000 sidor ur FBI ämnes-register, och nästan 300.000 sidor ur Amerikanska arméns underrättelseregister. Vad som dock kan sägas om dem som använder sig av dessa “förfinade” mätmetoder är att de trots dessa metoder tydligen har svårt att ta med i beräkningarna de styrande säkerhetstjänsternas operationer, strategier, metoder och taktik. Dessa har ju onekligen betytt en hel del för hur förövare och offer framställs i väst, hur dödssiffror tolkas och hos vem skulden ligger. Det går alltså inte att endast titta på vem som bär hakkors och vem som bär hammaren och skäranDe iscensatta inbördeskrigen, invasionskrigen, låtsas-revolutionerna, mord-patrullerna, de etniska rensningarna, sanktionerna och bankirernas stöd till plundrar-regeringar är oftast resultatet av dessa säkerhetstjänsters ’projekt’ och operationer. 

Att siffran för antalet döda som kan tillskrivas kommunismen stiger de senaste 40 åren, beror nog delvis på vad kapitalisterna gärna vill identifiera som kommunistiskt våld än vad som de facto är det. Man kan misstänka att mätmetoderna Carl säger förfinades, kanske “förfinades” på ett, för kapitalismen “lämpligt” sätt, strax efter Sovjetunionens fall, då motargumenten inte längre är så självklara. Kusligt nog är kapitalisternas definition på kommunistiskt våld på pricken densamma som de största västerländska säkerhetstjänsternas definition. Vems definition det var från början är en fråga man själv ganska lätt kan räkna ut svaret på, om man följer Latinamerikas politiska historia under 50-, 60- och 70-talet samt Irans, Vietnams, Cambodjas, Indonesiens och flertalet Afrikanska länders och Arab-länders historia, under samma period.

Sättet som kommunismen beskrivs på av paranoida McCarthy-stöpta amerikaner med följe (den västerländska massmedian) och hur exempelvis Islam beskrivs idag av desamma, ger klara indikationer på att den ‘skenande kapitalismen’ alltid behöver skapa fiender att ”rädda folken ifrån”. I synnerhet, för att inte säga, uteslutande och enbart om dessa folk råkar sitta på¨rika naturresurser eller råkar bo i ett geopolitiskt och därför strategiskt intressant läge. Då skall minsann demokrati och “mänskliga rättigheter” implementeras,.. alltså Wall Street- och Hollywood-versionen, i vilken inte alls folken har makten utan storföretagen, bankerna och den politiska eliten (inom de stora partierna) och i vilken tillgången till rättvisa och de mänskliga rättigheterna är en kostnadsfråga. Verklig demokrati, verkliga mänskliga rättigheter och verklig rättvisa är ju ‘kommunism’ och ‘terrorism’ för ny-liberalerna och kapitalisterna. Det är när folken kräver DETTA som kapitalist-hydrans alla huvuden slår gnistor. Alla storföretagen, bankerna, median och den politiska eliten skriker sig hesa och försöker febrilt hitta sätt att splittra ropen för rättvisa och skapa konflikter mellan de olika samhällsgrupperna. Detta har USA och NATO gjort i Latinamerika, Asien, Arabvärlden, Afrika och i Europa och de gör det i detta nu, på alla dessa platser. Det är då de ultraextrema grupperna man vårdat, närt och klappat medhårs kommer till nytta. I Ukraina lyckades man på så sätt t.o.m bilda en nazistisk regering, när man ville öppna en front emot Ryssland.

När kapitalist-hydran far iväg på ett nytt Mammon’s korståg med antingen IMF eller NATO som spjutspets, vet vi idag att det innebär någon miljon eller några miljoner lik. Alldeles för många civila och kvinnor och barn och alldeles för få invaderande soldater, för att man skall kunna kalla det krig egentligen. I mina ögon ser det mer ut som regelrätta utrensningar av befolkningar som inte behagar låta sig förslavas av USA’s och NATO’s obligatoriska, ekonomiska slav-modeller. Vi vet idag mer än väl att invasionerna beordras för naturrikedomarnas skull, för att etablera centralbanker som är direkt kopplade till FED och ECB så att man kan skuldsätta landet och dess invånare och för att tvinga in ett land i den amerikanska skendemokratins skuld- och beroende-karusell.

För att uppnå dessa ny-koloniala mål, vill man rädda folken från religiösa tyranner och ‘blodtörstiga kommunister’ så innerligt så man konstruerar dem själva i de allra flesta fallen, har det visat sig. De egna ‘religiösa tyrannerna’ däremot som fanatiskt bekänner sig till den ny-liberalistiska trosuppfattningen och den egna strukturella, socialdarwinistiska ‘vampyrismen’, tilldelas olika priser och medaljer och de kallas filantroper istället.

Kommunismen begravde man i och med Sovjetunionens fall påstod man, men för att vara en -ism som enligt kapitalisterna gått under, rör den ändå upp väl mycket oro och rädsla hos dem. Kapitalisterna fruktar, som vampyren fruktar vitlök, att den eller en nytappning av den skall bli det ideologiska “fotstödet” för ansatsen till en ny fransk revolution, fast på global nivå denna gången.

De mänskliga och de medborgerliga rättigheterna och Demokratin i sin helhet står nämligen på spel nu och det är inte någon annan än väst-regeringarna som utgör det allvarligaste hotet emot bägge, oavsett vad Rupert Murdoch’s och Conrad Black’s västerländska media-monopol vill få dig att tro. Just deras monopol vittnar för övrigt om bristen på verklig demokrati i väst. Av alla odemokratiska och rent antidemokratiska system på den här planeten så borde det te sig självklart att det av dem som har störst global kontroll, också är det absolut farligaste och speciellt om det får total kontroll. Putin är ingen vidare demokrat själv, men absolut inte mindre demokrat än Obama eller EU-oligarkin, men hans klara position som starkt kritisk emot USA’s, och NATO’s våldsmonopol har positiv effekt för mänskligheten. Effekten är att det redan snabbt växande globala motståndet till USA’s skenheliga, men ack så dödliga, imperialism avsevärt stärks och det är bara braDet krävs för att alla hålögda, materiellt ‘påtända’, vart-fjärde-års-demokrater i väst som köpt Wall Street’s och Washington’s version, skall fatta att det de facto är en ihålig, elit-anpassad Diktatorisk Skendemokrati som man via lögner och propaganda från TV-kanaler, Press, Hollywood, Musikindustri och Nöjesbranscher mycket hårt marknadsförs som den enda verkliga. Det mest djävulska är att man marknadsför den som den enda möjliga dessutom. Att man fattar det innebär ju inte per automatik att man tyr sig till Putins skendemokrati eller att man blir kommunist. Människan är gudskelov mycket smartare än vad våra ledare tror och därför kommer också mänskligheten att så småningom svara på ett mycket adekvat sätt.

Det räckte med att Putin gav Washington, Bryssel och Berlin fingret, så börjar kapitalisterna sätta arrogansen i halsen och de beordrar alla i sin makt att skälla sig mörkblå på den hutlösa Putin. Det rör sig om samma kapitalister som med halvslutna ögon och öron låg och slickade på ett ‘unket ben’ (kärnvapen i Irak), eller på sin höjd gläfste till lite, då en annan invasion ägde rum framför nosen på dem den 19 Mars 2003, utan FN-resolution och med medvetet konstruerade lögner som förevändning. Det är som sagt den skenande kapitalismens syfte idag att få oss att se med ökad avsky på kommunismen och med ökad förståelse på nazismen, nu när det ‘skits knäck’ hela vägen från Krim till 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Kosmas Loumakis

Stockholm 19-03-2014


%d bloggers like this: