THE 'MASSING OF RUSSIAN TROOPS' SCAM & THE CRACKING OF THE CODE BEHIND IT

 

Astute geopolitical analyst Alexander Mercouris has finally cracked the code on the pseudo-crisis concerning 'Russian Troops' near 'Ukraine's Border'.

The key to the complex web of deceit is the NordStream 2 pipeline and the pressurising of Germany to state baldly that it will cancel it under certain circumstances, circumstances both it and France are anxious to avoid but which the USA is anxious to see occur.

 

This situation remained a conundrum until the latest clues provided by the recent press conferences of the German Chancellor in Washington and his Foreign Minister in Kiev.

 

In both, concurrent conferences, despite repeated questioning both refused to state baldly that the NordStream 2 pipeline (requested of Russia that it build it by Germany in 2015) would be refused a certificate of operation if Russia was seen to have invaded Ukraine.

 

The Germans quite clearly see the trap being laid for them whereby the moment they state that NordStream 2 is finished and will remain inoperational if Russian troops and tanks cross the Ukrainian border, an attack provoking such an event will be initiated by Kiev.

 

The broader picture is that it is the USA more than Kiev that needs this eventuality. If such an event does not take place before the pipeline gets the go-ahead the U.S. will lose the leverage it has had on Germany since 2015 to refrain from pressurising Kiev to implement the Minsk agreements.

 

The Minsk agreement process brought to fulfilment would not be in the interests of the U.S. neoconservative establishment which requires the use of a constant supply of geopolitical weaponry against Russia.

 

In addition, if the Minsk process was completed successfully and peace was established both within Ukraine and between Ukraine and Russia then both France and Germany could move forward more independently from the overwhelmingly dominant and constant U.S. pressure upon them and establish a new geopolitical architecture for Europe in agreement with the Russians.

 

This in turn would diminish the need for and role of NATO while diminishing also the requirement for the presence and influence of the USA within Europe. In addition, with Germany, France and others once again free to do unhindered business with Russia, and also China, the USA would be further sidelined and its goods and services less in demand, particularly as China’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ moves toward completion.

 

There is no incentive for the USA to work toward peace in Europe nor to peacefully resolve the Ukraine crisis. The start of natural gas flowing to Germany from Russia would signal the beginning of the end of U.S. influence in Europe in the most crucial stage of U.S. plans to weaken both Russia and China while retaining its patrician grip on Europe and the wider world.

 

Germany, in the view from Washington cannot be set free to formulate its own economic and foreign policies. Neither must France however it is primarily Germany that Washington has leverage over due to NordStream 2. However, The window to retain that leverage is closing fast. NordStream 2 will most likely receive its certificate of operation this coming summer.

 

The final completion of NordStream 2 as a going concern supplying the boost to Germany's and Europe’s natural gas supplies that they need, and cannot gain from any other source at anything approaching similar prices, and that Germany must have to wind down and end its reliance on nuclear and coal will strike several blows concurrently at the edifice of American elite power in Europe. This is why this whole pseudo-crisis has been arranged at this moment in time between the completion of the pipeline and its certification.

 

Alexander Mercouris was able to fit the very last pieces of this puzzle together on recognizing the significance of the serial resistance of both German officials to give a definitive answer on whether NordStream 2 would be cancelled and never certified under certain circumstances. They would not let themselves and German policy on this matter be held a hostage to fortune.

 

The Ukrainian president has also shown a degree of resistance also, realising that the object of the entire exercise regarding the constant reporting of an imminent 'Russian invasion' is not at all to do with his country and indeed if the U.S. plan is brought to its ultimate conclusion his country could very well be brought to total ruin from the extremely parlous condition it is already in with its military decimated and potentially half his country lost and the half he is not longer viable as a functioning state without forever onward being a beggar nation requiring constant infusions of cash in the trillions per year.

This in a nutshell are the details of the breaking of the code achieved by Alexander Mercouris.

 

He has made an individual analysis on his YouTube channel which you can find immediately below:

 

And another in a conversation with his colleague Alex Christoforou both of which I recommend watching for the entire detailed picture that explains the extremely dangerous ploy which the USA is running currently in relation to the so-called "massing of Russian troops on the Ukrainian border".

 

THE ELITES OF THE WEST APPEAR READY TO HAVE NO WORLD AT ALL THAN A WORLD THEY NO LONGER DOMINATE

 

 

The powers of the western world have defined the rules of the global game for centuries now. This has fed down to every part of its linked bureaucracy of states to the point where no other status, mission, responsibility or destiny is conceivable. The simultaneous loss of every all the attributes involved simply cannot be tolerated and even a mere diminishing of them is anathema.

It is impossible to mentally innumerate the vast scale of the ingrained sense of entitlement this entails. It runs from the highest positions of government and political elites through every department of state, to the intelligence agencies, military and beyond to all ambassadorial staff. This vast bureaucracy of agendas and vested interests is intimately interlinked with the world of business where the foreign policy of governments feeds into the internal policies relating to the corporate world and most intimately of all to the various military industrial complexes.

In addition to all of the above there are the vast number of benefits, large and small, that accrue from having a successful empire with all the leverage and influence it brings. From surface dealings to covert manipulations, thinly veiled bribes and outright graft, a powerful entity such as that of the communal West garners to itself all manner of positive outcomes, increasing influence and the benefits accruing to the individuals running that successful empire. And the West's empire has been successful now for hundreds of years.

Along the way during the centuries western powers have reinforced their grip on more than half the world, in particular upon the weaker nations of the world unable to rest their charms or threats. Naturally this level of power has raised those holding the reins of that power to an extraordinary degree, to a degree where it was taken completely for granted as their rightful place, their natural status, where they always belonged. Thus the various mythologies of power arose, the beneficient goodness of their rule, the sanctity of their actions, the unquestionable integrity of their intentions and so on. An opaque facade totally believed in so submerged within the consciences of the established elite that most of them even came to believe all these things true and inalienably true and that anyone who said otherwise was at best bad mannered, uncouth and below consideration or a virtual devil of an enemy requiring elimination.

It was this way for many long years well before our time too. The Great Game of international ambition was the chief occupation of elites across the globe as they maneuvered for position and played their geopolitical chess games with hearts usually much colder than ice could ever be. However, let us stick to events closer to our own time.

So it was then that these western elites, so comfortable in their long-held status and unable to conceive of any other reality that could ever even approach their perfection, saw certain trends arise that began to make them feel distinctly UNcomfortable. This also took the form of one singular event which shocked them awake to the need to act with huge and united force to ensure the status quo of indomitable power they had known was secured in perpetuity.

That event was of course 9/11. Not that the empire, led by the USA was completely complacent before it, no, it undermined, manipulated, subverted and waged war to maintain and increase its influence before, but 9/11 gave this entire process booster rockets and a near frantic urgency.

Then we have the trends.

China was not expected to take the course it has. At the time of Deng Xiaoping, leader of China in the Eighties, economic reforms were pursued which gave the western powers the strong impression that the country was headed for a form of free market capitalism they could live with, work with and of course, exploit. They believed the Communist Party of China would retreat from the economic system of China completely given time. Their shock as the years passed by with no such development with the CPC remaining firmly in power while the economy went into a steep incline and then into powerhouse mode must certainly have turned the previous smiles on many faces among western elites to frowns.

Now turning to Russia. At the dissolution of the Soviet Union again the western powers settled back into a mode of self-satisfaction. They had 'done it' or so they thought, they had brought a system that was more or less immune to their products, need for access and geopolitical demands, to its knees. Now they would reap the rewards. Yeltsin was their man and a plethora of "advisers", "consultants" and "experts" of all kinds flooded Russia and its previous satellite states of the Warsaw Pact. Yeltsin did stay more or less their man as the fabric of Russian life frayed, buckled and collapsed leaving an increasingly small percentage with absolutely enormous wealth. Others who sought that same wealth by more traditionally criminal ways than the oligarchs close to the levers of power wanted their share. The everyday Russian, especially the old, suffered incredible hardships and often an early death in a society where all social safety nets had collapsed.

Then, out of the blue, a now often drunken Yeltsin decided to call it a day. Making up a list for himself of potential candidates he might pick to succeed him he picked one particular man from relative obscurity. Yes, he had been head of the KGB and so had nous aplenty but he was a virtual unknown in everyday Russian culture in anything approaching detail. Yeltsin, still as crafty as a fox on this particular issue of a replacement, despite his apparent declining mental powers towards the end, of course chose Putin as his successor. The shock waves in Washington, Whitehall and elsewhere across the entire western world of self-satisfied, smug as can be 'winners' of the Cold War must have been rocked back on their heels.

That Putin then proceeded to bring Yeltsin's oligarchs to heel, force them to pay taxes on their business incomes (though letting them keep hold of their businesses) , stipulating also that they take no part in politics (something their wealth could easily allow them to do) and then slowly but surely deal with the Russian mafia the economy, the war in the Caucuses and much else besides, must surely have caused the warrior class of the West many sleepless nights. This too, along with China, was absolutely not going according to plan.

Over the years things only got worse. China ascended to ever greater economic success while the CPC continued to control the planning and coordination of that success while concurrently distributing the income earned in ways that benefited millions upon millions of the Chinese people over each successive year bringing them up from poverty along with the vast majority of the population who saw their living standards inexorably rise. The expectations in the West were now dust. China was a success DUE to communism as much as it was due to capitalism. This would not do AT ALL.

Meanwhile Russia was using its natural reserves to expand its own economy albeit in lesser percentages than in China. But step by step Putin initiated the changes afforded by ever greater flows of tax entering state coffers from increasingly profitable concerns. Oil, natural gas and wheat became enormously profitable resources. Russia became self-sufficient in food, all the while rejecting genetic hybrids, GMOs, improvements in living standards, a drop in alcohol consumption and greater longevity came about. A renewed pride began to be felt in the country alongside the feeling of stability and sustainability. All bad news for the western powers who had believed Russia would be a basket case until firmly woven into the western capitalist net as the ex-Warsaw Pact nations had been.

What to do?

It became clear that not only were Russia and China not going according to their plan they were, (heaven forbid!) beginning to give every appearance of becoming a combined rival to their own powers held for so long they had become totally taken for granted as permanent (as described above). Okay, it was disappointing that they were thriving without their help... but rising to the point where they lost the domination of the world that as far as they were concerned had ALWAYS been there's? This was incredible, outrageous and unthinkable, TOTALLY unthinkable.

And then 9/11 happened and gimlet eyes in Washington looked with new suspicion at every possible entity that was not in their control, compliant with their will or already a supplicant to and proxy for their power. 'Enemies' appeared to be everywhere, hiding under every rock waiting to pounce, sleeper cells, foreign agents, fifth columns of traitors in their midst. The genesis of cancel culture began to be seen. Anyone speaking of reasons for 9/11 other than that the terrorist ragheads were jealous of American freedoms was someone to be pilloried, verbally assaulted with cries of anti-American traitor and any other epithet that might shame them into getting back into line.

Standing in obedient lines parroting the official foreign policy narrative became utterly essential for all, including of course the entirety of mainstream press and media.

The initial targets we know very well. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, these being the most active target campaigns. Then Iran, Yemen and Venezuela as relatively top priorities (but lower than the others first mentioned). Then Bolivia, Cuba and Nicaragua on the back burner for somewhat later campaigns. Others without doubt also exist in the files awaiting their turn.

But time began to run short for dealing with the main events, Russia and China. Rushing past all others eventually though with the CIA, MI6 and other intelligence agencies keeping up constant harassment campaigns, the big guns turned on Russia and began the first thrusts toward China.

Ukraine and Taiwan were identified as the levers or areas of vulnerability. Alo of course any and all other areas where the West could profit from sowing confusion through its carefully planned and coordinated playbooks whereby destabilization or demonization could be affected all leading to subversion, chaos creation and general undermining of stability, reputation and economic outlook for both Russia and China. For Russia: Chechnya (initially), South Ossetia. Georgia. Navalny. Novichok. The Skripals. Electoral Interference. Collusion. Chechnya. For China: Tibet & Tiananmen Square (originally), Hong Kong. The Uyghurs. Xinjiang. Genocide. Forced Sterilization. Forced Labor. All juicy areas to open up vulnerabilities, all pounced upon not to bring about their resolution whether there was any reality to them or not, only to keep them festering and feeding on them as weapons in acts of war.

Coming back to Ukraine and Taiwan, there we see two primary tools as conceived by the western allies, tools to effect damage to their targets by whichever methodologies and tactics seem best to them. Tactics which will keep the issues burning and made favorable to western plans, not necessarily at all conducive to the plans, hopes and goals of Ukraine or Taiwan you understand?

And so it has gone and continues to go. Since 2000, or at least 2007 when Putin made his famous address at Munich in front of the assembled power-brokers of the western world, the combined elites of the western world whether in the political sphere, that of press, media or the business world there has been a unified approach, a strictly defined goal and strictly defined narratives to cleave to under all circumstances. Putin is to be personified in this and that way and none other. The West's wars are to be reported in this and that way and none other (leaving out any inconvenient events or narratives/facts from the other side). In short the West arrived at war mode where truth is always relative to your needs and opposition is treason, where all must pull together for mutual survival... all even when the other side is waging no war at all, only attempting to build their economies.

This is where we are and this is what you see going on.

The elites of the western world appear ready to have no world at all than a world they no longer dominate.

That is about the long and short of it and you will be told every possible lie during this war being waged by one side only denying it. The West has decided it can no longer afford the truth. Its very existence as global hegemon is at stake and it must fight this most important of all existential fights... even if that is right to the death.

 

 

 

HOW HARD CAN IT BE TO AGREE A SECURITY ARRANGEMENT TO SUIT BOTH EUROPE & RUSSIA?

 

Sometimes the easiest of things in the world of geopolitics are made excruciatingly hard by factors ranging from group-thought narratives blinding the sight of one party or another, rampant paranoia about possible trickery where trust is in short supply, and an inability to overcome the ingrained image of a leader outside your cozy club that you've worked for a decade and a half to demonize.

How hard could it be to achieve what everyone wants, security of their nation and people living within it? Is that so hard when the end goal is agreed in advance by all parties. With the factors enumerated above, pretty bloody hard it seems. Perhaps the leaders of the most powerful nations of the West simply needed it spelled out to them by Russia, that's why they didn't offer to get this thing on the road earlier? If only. No. They knew what Russia needed but that was totally irrelevant while they thought they were riding high and unassailable and Russia simply had to take it and shut up.

Things have changed radically over the last few years. Russia has responded to everything thrown at it by finding a solution for every economic bullet aimed its way. Yes, it staggered a bit when they first hit. But the 'Stalingrad Spirit' ensured they got back up on their feet soon after and ever since they have made their defenses steel hard. Russia's economy is now in vastly better shape than it was, it is now a resilient beast with strong sinews and larger muscles, it stands ready to take on its attackers with newly sharpened horns. It also has an even bigger beast at its back, one that in recent years has also regained its warrior soul. Between the two of them they are now actively daring any wannabe aggressor to try their hand and see where it gets them.

So the table has been laid for the western powers on a take it or leave it basis where no menu of choices apply. You agree to our terms, you acknowledge our red lines or we will make it our business to make you bitterly regret that decision. They have laid out what they want, something that all sides want. Security. An end to continual aggression, to slander, spurious accusations, demonization attempts and heinous and highly mendacious regime change tactics designed to undermine them, notably through NATO in respect of Russia.

Too hard to achieve when Russia is offering the same guarantee to all others? It is when there is no mutual respect offered by the other side. When all Russia hears are veiled insults, a talking down to it as some kind of villainous entity when in fact it is a proud nation with a recent history to be far more proud of than the blood-soaked track lined with lies the West has taken recently.

While your president and nation is attacked as if it and not those attacking had the reputation for invasion things get quite difficult. Putin has been called almost every terrible thing under the sun making him out to be worse than Hitler, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein and Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi combined. What was he to make of all that? Especially when political figures of note across the USA, in Britain and parts of Europe chimed in signifying they agreed and offering not a single world of caution regarding anything in the whole pile of steaming slanders. If you were pilloried like Putin is constantly, how readily would you talk in even tones to those whose minions are left free to vent their spleen and spill their black bile in this way?

So yes, if all sides agree that national security, universal national security where no nation fights or threatens another, is the goal they have in common, why shouldn't it be possible to arrange something in writing, get it signed and get to live in peace and hopefully some semblance of harmony?

But the fly in the ointment is Ukraine. Ukraine that refuses its own agreed solution to its internal problems. An entire region, almost half of the country was denied the fundamental right to elect a president and government and have them run their term until the next election on both counts. When they were both made to end the terms they were democratically elected to serve by a howling, ultra-violent mob of thugs the people of the eastern half of the country were essentially told that they should just shut up and take it and wave goodbye to a whole series of rights quite apart from their democratic rights spoken of above. The very right to speak their native language was to be denied them. And much more. Indicative of what was to come was the sight of the new Minister of Education walking round a classroom of five to ten year olds asking their names and criticizing them if it was a traditional Russian rather than Ukrainian name. Would you stand for such things? Not for a moment. So neither did those affected in this way in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine signed up to talk to the leaders of those who came to power in a bloodless insurrection to claim their democratic rights removed on Maidan Square, Kiev in the winter of 2013-14. They demanded to be given a high degree of autonomy so that their way of life, culture, historical allegiances and language could be safeguarded and preserved. To these demands Kiev sent a military force to begin the killings which now after eight years of them have amounted to over 15,000 dead. Ukraine said it would grant these people autonomy in Minsk in the year 2015. It said it would hold direct talks with the leadership of the two autonomy-seeking republics. It has done neither of these things and now says it never will.

There is the primary roadblock to a universal agreement on security for all in Europe and for Russia, the intransigence of the authorities in Ukraine. Taking the road to further aggression and potentially outright war and a determination to attack and occupy the Donbass they stand four square against peace and stand as a barrier to progress in achieving the goal all others desire, security and freedom from threat, war, attack and instability on both sides, all of Europe with Russia together assured of a mutually beneficial assured security.

It ought to be easy. But it is so hard. Because of Ukraine and its refusal to work for peace.

 

 

THE EVER-STRENGTHENING UNDERCURRENT OF SUPPORT FOR PUTIN & RUSSIA IN THE WEST

 

It is the affiliation that almost daren't speak its name. Yet its adherents are fiercely proud of it.

However, to relate the fact to some friends, some family members or employers is to court trouble. The majority within western nations appear to still labour under the delusion that their mainstream press and media are still dedicated sleuths doing their utmost to inform them accurately.

To those above of course the words Vladimir Putin and Russia make them spit feathers. That group-thought mentality, un-evidenced as it is, remains a totem of fixed belief systems across every mainstream hangout within the western world.

But nevertheless, the reality of thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, who have done a little more sleuthing than surf mainstream headlines or nod appreciatively watching the nightly news, appreciating the venality of western elites and approving eastern ones, is growing and growing strongly.

In a way it is a miracle of group myopia that this trend is not even stronger than found now. After all, didn't we all hear a veritable stream of lies from western politicians lusting for war over the last decade and a half? Havn't we all observed the murderous slaughter of hundreds of thousands at the hands of those liars we call leaders? We all know the facts about Tony Blair and his clever wheeze of creating a dossier based on some student's thesis to give the green light to the shock and awe circus of death the USA had lined up, don't we?

We know about the USA kidnapping and torturing people in black sites, we know about the rendition flights populating our airports. We know all about the covering up of war crimes and the shutting up of whistleblowers like Julian Assange. And not only shutting him up but shutting him in and threatening to assassinate him... or at the very least torture him with the kind of treatment the hypocrites in high places in the West lambast totalitarian states for.

Shall we list the regime change disasters? We all know them well. Afghanistan of course, lately yet another disastrous failure of western hubris mixed with military gung-ho enthusiasm and jingoistic irresponsibility. Iraq, a nation where a hundred thousand fatal errors lie breeding a lust for revenge. Libya where NATO brought an entire nation to its knees within weeks as we watched its leader tortured and murdered before our eyes. Syria, where our sanctimonious leaders used violent extremists to further their desire to topple yet another president, opening the door to a plethora of blood-thirsty jihadists who miraculously obtained the best of weapons along with brand new Toyota trucks. ISIS and al Qaeda must have saluted skyward when a U.S. plane went by, "Thanks for the helping hand suckers!" was surely the cry.

How many reasons do we need to despise western elites and look eastward at the more sober and peace-loving and peace-keeping political elites we find there? Those who ended the U.S. plot in Syria that would with absolute certainty have brought an unconscionably evil caliphate into existence there. Why wouldn't we appreciate the efforts of the Russia that created a forum to negotiate peace while the U.S. continued to hit the war-weary people of Syria with even more sanctions even after they must surely have seen the game was up. This surely out of sheer spite and rage that their designs for Syria had been completely shredded by Putin and Russia, enraged that peace was being established where they need ever more chaos, suffering, hunger, misery and war.

So tell me, how many reasons do we really need to despite the West and all it stands for? Hypocrisy. State criminality. Infinite levels of irresponsibility, hubris, cynical exploitation, mass murder, dirty tricks, propaganda, invasion and the fracturing of entire regions. Really and truly how many more acts of savagery are needed?

Yet millions still read the words of state stenographers transferring the latest lies and tall tales to their gullible brain cells. Millions will tell you just how bad Putin is and how you can't trust Russia to do the right thing, that Russia and China are not democratic, not at all like their sublime heroes in Whitehall and Washington. You will hear too how NATO is our friend, a stalwart and necessary guardian against the evil twine of the east and primarily Russia. No attention at all will remain on the bloody exploits of their own leaders in recent memory. That memory has been wiped clean, reformatted by the incessant conditioning of western press and media, deleted, overwritten and given new data that directs them to look elsewhere for evil.

But the agile minds of those who favour insight over shallow idiocy know better. Having taken the responsibility and time to probe deeper and yes, question more, they have informed themselves, sometimes with a rude awakening here and there. They have plumbed the depths of North America's involvement and murderous interference in Latin America, they have read down the full list of all the wars the USA has started or been involved in for most of its history, those along with all the assassinations, death squads and coups it has initiated. They have reached behind the headlines, looked unflinchingly and without a trace of jingoistic nationalism at America's war against Vietnam. In short they have cleansed their eyes and minds of the mythology of conditioning that serves as a views-service across the western world. That's right, a views-service, from viewspapers, and from talking heads on TV expounding on "Putin's plans" as if these paid by the word cretins know a single thing about them, from those vacuous beings who do all they can to make the minds up of the viewers with their brain sponges at the ready to lap up the latest lie.

It's a matter of comparison. Just like the comparison of CNN with RT, Russia Today. CNN, a fast failing network that rotted itself from the inside out peddling the fraudulent Russiagate lie. If CNN isn't sufficient, take any of the many corporate hack entities that spew their shallow garbage from U.S TV screens nightly into a USA riven by the discord they feed on and regurgitate in order to make ever more money. What's to like and what's not to like about far more well-ordered and traditional societies such as Russia or China where a high degree of unity is found, intellectual rigour and a whole range of other positives right across their nations. Not that they are perfect, they know that and the fact that they know it and are determined to do all they can to fix their problems (such as poverty in China for instance) just makes them all the more admirable.

Putin and Xi exude integrity and yes, decency, they have characters that reveal dedication to their people, not to sponsors or lobby groups, not to military industrial complex entities where they hope to get a seat on the board of directors later, not to 1 per centres or any other vested interest. Their interest is clearly to benefit their populations, to work their damndest for them and urge everyone they know to do the same.

So what could possibly be surprising that so many of us here in the West admire these guys that the western powers so love to hate? There is absolutely nothing surprising about it whatsoever. It is a completely natural and obvious inclination based on the most solid principles that good people have always held close to their hearts. Honesty. Decency. Trustworthiness. Hard work. Transparency of character and deed. Compassion and a heartfelt desire to improve conditions and bring about a peaceful harmonious and satisfying existence for as many of us as possible and in particular to those they have a duty to assist and benefit foremost, their own populations.

These are the reasons why we work daily to see geopolitical justice done. We see who the black hats are clearly and our minds cannot be swayed by their lies, their Machiavellian distortions of reality or their propaganda of cynical humanitarian warmongering. We are immune and will remain immune until the western empire fails, falls and dies and a new and vastly more tolerant one rises in the east.

 

 

THE U.S.A., ITS SELF-CREATED MESS AND THE TOILET BOWL OF HISTORY

 

If they had believed they had more time they could, and perhaps would, have done things differently. But the political elites of the USA were in a hurry.

9/11 spurred them to get the job done they had agreed upon in the days after very quickly. So, they rushed headlong into the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Their plan to take out all the nations who were in a potential rivalry situation with them was about to go horribly wrong all the way to the present day. But the impetus to get this done for the future defense of the USA ruled all.

The Taliban were guilty (in the eyes of Washington) only of providing a place where al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden have a base. Bad enough you might say, but a full scale invasion and occupation of a land impossible to tame? A huge tactical mistake.

Then came Iraq and the pressure to find a reason to attack and invade there too. In a rush the weapons of mass destruction gambit was fixed upon. To add a little more support to their invasion plans a bare-faced lie was told about a possible nuclear program and a fake story about buying Uranium Orange Cake was put together. Not content with this it was put about that Saddam Hussain was in league with the 9/11 plotters, al Qaeda. This was an even greater lie than that about the non-existent nuclear program. In any case, despite no clear mandate from the UN the attack and invasion took place as we all know well. And how that whole saga ended.

Libya was another primary target. Syria too, Both were attacked by one means or another. Libya had its economy obliterated and with it its social cohesion, governmental system ushering an anarchy that rumbles on yet where mutually exclusive rivalries fight it out, often literally... and the disgusting re-emergence of a slave trade leaks out to further despoil another failed regime change operation. As bad as Libya was in the delivery of its murderous and enthusiastically created devastation by NATO the war against Syria was at its heart far more evil in its methodologies. Not only would the previous enemies of America be utilized, armed and funded they would be encouraged to take over a country brought to its knees by every means possible. The rise of ISIS was engineered and encouraged by Washington. Speed was of the essence and both Afghanistan and Iraq had been too expensive in terms of blood and treasure. Now proxy forces would be used, any proxy forces, the more violent and ruthless the better.

Syria, like Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan before it quickly became yet another disaster for the White House. And after four years in, with Syria's president still firmly in place but losing his grip on ever more Syrian territory Russia stepped in to stymie the American's plans just as they believed they were finally getting somewhere. Putin was determined that no caliphate would arise in Syria, the ultimate outcome whether the USA wished it or not. Supplying logistical help, weapons and funding to extremists and losing track of which extremist was which and where the weapons migrated to made the ultimate destination of an ISIS caliphate inevitable. They were the most ruthless of all the ruthless actors fighting the Syrian government and it was inevitable that they would celebrate the final victory, until Russia entered the conflict and turned the tide of war against them. Yet another disaster for the U.S. policy to bring down all its targeted leaders and the economies of the nations that supported them in power.

With all this failure behind them next came the decision to support the rioting mobs on Kiev's Maidan, doing their utmost to bring down the democratically-elected president and government who had come to office in two elections called 'free and fair' by the thousands of presiding monitors. John McCain, Victoria Nuland, Geoffrey Pyatt and those who ran special courses for the leaders of the riots all got behind the chaos and anarchy supporting it to the hilt in complete contravention of all their noble pretensions to safeguarding democracy. The chief agency for the USA created to be involved in such episodes, The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was used, without a trace of irony to use an insurrection to level the democracy of an entire nation in a murderous coup. Ukraine of course is a nation of two distinct halves, the west looking west, the east to the east. The east had been responsible for voting in the president and government now ousted. What were they supposed to do as their democratic rights were subverted by those who had no qualms about telling those in the east just how much they hated them? They did what you would also have done, they took matters into their own hands using the example of what had transpired on Maidan, but WITHOUT the violence. It was Washington's proxies from western Ukraine who brought that.

And what do we see happening now in Ukraine eight years later? The conflict is still a running sore with two regions of the Donbass of south-eastern Ukraine constantly surrounded by Kiev's minions (both the Ukrainian military and the savage, hate-fueled ultra-nationalist and neo-Nazi 'volunteer battalions'. The crucial question in regard to all the USA's disastrous previous regime change ops is of course how this one is turning out for it. Not very well as it happens. America and its ally, the EU has had to pour hundreds of millions into the Kiev money-pit with little to show for it. Russia is now strong enough to insist that this whole malignant campaign end and America's chief warmongering tool, NATO, retreat from its borders. Ukraine is buckling under the increasingly disastrous economy which has shrunk down to a shadow of its former level before the U.S./EU intervention took place. Another disastrous campaign by the U.S. One more sore on its decaying level of influence and reputation.

Let us now turn to the primary targets the USA has had in its sights all along, Russia and China. The plan was to get to them as soon as possible, but to take the low-hanging fruit first denying them allies and in any case dealing with the weaker nations first, something that didn't come as easy as expected as we've seen. Those low-hanging fruit turned out to be pretty poisonous for the rapacious gullet of the American war machine. At this point a wild card entered the scene, Donald J. Trump, sociopath. Though a thoroughly self-interested corporate criminal and all round thug Trump may have been cannier than he looked. Was his scheme in currying favor with Putin and Russia in the presidential campaign and the earliest days of his presidency based on a certain obvious logic looking back from today when China and Russia have become closer to an unbreakable alliance than ever before?

If the USA was not in such a hurry to 'get the job done' demanded by 9/11, to eliminate all rivals and potential rivals to its global hegemony, it would have done the smart thing and attempted to win over Russia against China. Is it possible that through the almost totally vacant and narcissistic brain of Donald Trump (or that of Bannon, his chief adviser at the time) that if Russia could be made a friend they could both then do their utmost to bring China down together? When we compare this possibility to what actually transpired, the making of Russia into a despised enemy (on a totally false basis, Russiagate) and the driving of Russia into the arms of China we can see the USA creating yet another mess for itself. Because China has started to rise fast and Russia with it. New pipelines are being constructed from Siberia to China, they are trading more and more in Euros, not dollars, technical and military cooperation is becoming more and more common and a plethora of new agreements have just been signed off on. These two now present the USA with a challenge it cannot possibly surmount. It can certainly now no longer have any real hope of achieving the goals it set itself after 9/11. In fact, with its people at each other's throats, with its national debt now soaring over $30 trillion and Covid-19 having decimated great swathes of its population and inflation now soaring... North America will be lucky to achieve its goals even close to home. Venezuela and Cuba have both shown just how tough that can be and with Argentina now joining China's Belt and Road initiative the rot has only just begun.

Truly, the USA is its own worst enemy. Careering down the road to something approaching oblivion still thrashing its military arms in a vain attempt to hurt whoever is around akin to a terminally wounded animal feeling its power fast draining away. The sorry story of a great nation led by donkeys has been seen before, in Britain during World War One. Now an even more tragic concatenation of error, hubris, over-extended aggression and false pride named exceptionalism, has brought it on a road normally reserved for GOOD intentions, the name of the road being of course the road to ruin.

It is a total mess. A horrible, murderous mess of overweening ambition, hatred, false pride, jingoism, bare-faced lying, dirty tricks and legalized slaughter, torture and a litany of some of the most criminal acts by national elites ever known and serially perpetrated by a single nation. As they sometimes say in the USA, what goes around comes around. It's a little bit like a form of national karma. And we will, in our lifetimes see the outcome for all the crimes the elites of the USA have committed. We will finally see them quarantined as Russia-China rises to eclipse their malignant power and end their rampant criminality once and forever.

The U.S. and its self-created mess will then be dutifully consigned, with no regret observed, to the toilet bowl of history.

 

 

HOW LONG WILL THE WEST'S PICTURE OF 'POOR INNOCENT UKRAINE' BE BELIEVED?

 

Western populations have been sold a completely false narrative on Ukraine.

The actual story would have revolted the sensibilities and relatively recent sensitivities of populations in the USA, UK and across Europe. It was necessary to paint a completely fake scenario which would appeal to those emotional vulnerabilities rather than cause them to question western elite priorities.

Did western populations even see the violence that went on in Kiev's Maidan Square through the winter months of 2013-14? Did they watch lightly-armed young policemen assailed by bricks, clubs, toxic sprays and Molotov cocktails, not to mention heavy chains and on one occasion by a fork-lift truck? I suspect not.

Where western strategic and national interests are concerned the press and media of nations such as the USA, UK and elsewhere have dispensed with their scepticism and have begun to placidly relay the state narratives requested of them. Unlike during the final stages of the Vietnam war there arose a new mentality among the owners, editors and so-called journalists of the establishment press and media in the West. Gone were the reports and articles questioning America's wars, gone was the journalistic neutrality of previous years. Western states were no longer being held to account for their actions but instead were given explicit support.

It was after 9/11 that western states could hardly do any wrong in the eyes of western mass media. To criticise them was to be branded as a puppet organisation for whoever the USA was attacking or invading. And as everyone agreed that the USA deserved total sympathy for the atrocity perpetrated against them it became quite unthinkable to question its motives or that of any of its allies.

One regime change operation after another followed 9/11 as we all know. In general none of the nations within 'The Coalition of the Willing as it was called had the nerve or inclination to question any of them. Not even when the fabled weapons of mass destruction of Iraq failed to show up. Naturally the media giants had to say something or other, but it was muted and delivered to a permanent stay under the nearest group-thought carpet from then on. There was to be no scepticism regarding U.S. foreign policy no matter what. The BBC and Guardian in the UK learned their lessons well and speedily became the stenographers for western states' official narratives.

So it was that when the USA, with EU compliance, saw an opportunity to intervene in Ukraine and engineer the subversion of the democratically-elected president and government of Ukraine they jumped at the chance. Despite the obvious attempt to bring them down using ultra-violence it was seen as too good an opportunity to miss. John McCain made his way to Maidan Square and joined the leader of a party that was once called 'National Socialist Party' and known for his Hitler salutes, on stage. The U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt and the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria Nuland showed their support for those attempting to bring the government and president down by handing out cookies on Maidan Square. They subsequently discussed who the replacements should be in a leaked phone conversation.

The above was bad enough, but more was to come and none of the reality brought about by any of these or subsequent events could be allowed to be communicated verbatim or with any degree of honesty to the American people or the populations of European states.

Once the deed was done and the democratic process in Ukraine was in complete ruins the western allies acted surprised when those who had been primarily responsible for voting in the departed president and government in elections confirmed free and fair by observers began to respond.

The people of Crimea and south-eastern Ukraine knew what to expect next as they knew the kind of people who had collapsed their democratic rights. They knew also what their next steps would be, to damn them for being Russian-speakers, to condemn them for their good relations with Russia just across the border, condemn them too for honouring the memory of their liberation from the Nazis by the Red Army and treat them as wholly second-class citizens in their own land, given the epithet 'Moskals', a word of derision and hate in western Ukraine.

Ukraine is a country split virtually right down the middle a little akin to the situation prevailing in Ireland. Two distinct cultures, identities, histories, mythologies and languages. The voting patterns in innumerable elections showed this fact explicitly. Ukraine is split in two, one side facing west, the other facing east.

The people of Crimea reacted fast and, asking Russia to help them held a referendum on reuniting with Russia, the country that had been Crimea's long-term home until arbitrarily given to Ukraine in 1956 by the then Soviet leadership. This decision to rejoin Russia was labelled a 'Russian Invasion' in the West with both political and media elites uniting to cry foul against the big bad Russians.

In the Donbass of SE Ukraine those under the threats enumerated above and who had lost their democratic rights along with the people of Crimea on Maidan took things into their own hands too. All administration buildings in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions were taken over and the Kiev-loyal administrators replaced. Not one person died as a result of this takeover.

The new authorities in Donetsk and Lugansk demanded a high degree of autonomy so that the legacy, culture and affiliations the people there held could be preserved in the face of the overwhelming antagonism of those who had taken power in Kiev. The response from Kiev was almost immediate with a military force being sent to quell the uprising and deal with any resistance using the full power of its military and attendant militias formed of the ultra-nationalists and neo-Nazis who had been at the forefront of the violence on Maidan.

The resulting bloodbath where unguided mortar shells were sent into the communities of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions hitting residential tower blocks, hospitals and schools along with town centres and suburbs went almost totally unreported in the West. Instead a fervent anti-Russian cover story was designed and deployed to portray a completely false picture of what was going on. I watched intently from the winter of 2013-14 to late 2018 when the worst of the carnage went on. The bodies lying in the streets of the Donbass and Lugansk were heartbreaking to see. Women, children, grandfathers and mothers, all civilians, lying dead in their homes or on the streets, children playing football in a school playground, the decapitated body of a teacher and much, much else besides. Not a word of any of these atrocities reached the front pages (or any pages in fact) of western press and no such images (even blurred ones) were seen on any western TV screens or laptops of those devoted to the BBCs or CNNs of this world.

The one-sided articles, television programs and documentary footage available from western establishment sources totally skewed all coverage of Ukraine to a simple and simplistic black and white image where Russia was all bad, Ukraine all good and the choice of each reader and viewer was there, ready-made with ample conditioning relentlessly repeated years after years right up to the very minute you read this.

Poor Ukraine. Hateful Russia! Nice, innocent, freedom-loving Ukrainians evilly attacked and invaded by brutal enslaving Russians. The diatribes, the invective and the jingoism of every western elite complementing every other elite narrative made the western world one giant propaganda soup. It can hardly cause any amazement or surprise that this whole enterprise had one inevitable destination, war and more war.

The infinite arrogance and irresponsible goals of the USA to eliminate all those who are rivals to its unlimited power and be sole global hegemon for its own self-interest and preservation has brought us to the brink of a world war. Russia has responded to all this in the only ways it knew how, by advocating peace through the return of the democratic rights of the people of the Donbass and the retention of their pro-Russian culture, historic legacy of respect for Russia and its language itself which is and always has been Russian.

All of the features above that relate to the 'other side' of this story, this tragic story of modern Ukraine, have been kept hidden from western audiences by intent. But with each new day showing just how resilient the people of the Donbass are, and the growing in strength of Russian resistance to western attacks, I do wonder now, how long will the West's picture of 'Poor Innocent Ukraine' be believed?

 

UKRAINE, THE WEST, WESTERN PUBLIC OPINION & WHAT MAY EVENTUALLY PREVAIL

 

Western elites in both political and media spheres appear to believe that the general public of the western world will eternally accept the one-sided narrative on Ukraine that they have been transmitting for so long now.

Early in 2014 after a bloodless revolution against the bloody revolution in Kiev a Ukrainian army and ultra-nationalist militants arrived in SE Ukraine to attack the regions involved.

The resulting bloodbath that was to claim at least 15,000 lives began with the setting up of mortars around the villages, towns and cities that had been relieved from Kiev control. Whether the Ukrainian army was directly involved or not, it is an indisputable fact that the randomly-fired mortar shells that hit the high-rise buildings in those locations, such as residential tower blocks, hospitals and schools, came from those doing the surrounding, not those being surrounded. Those mortar shells which flew past the high buildings landed randomly among the civilian population killing ordinary housewives doing their shopping or heading home thereafter, they hit men and women on their way from work or heading home, they hit town centres and essentially anywhere within the radius of those locations being surrounded.

Anyone thinking to any depth about the circumstances above must surely come to the same logical and common sense conclusion, that the figures quoted time and time again of fatalities by western news agencies give the wrong impression entirely by not communicating which side was responsible.

Before the hostilities initiated by Kiev the BBC showed a high degree of neutrality in their reporting of public feeling in the Donbass, the region of Ukraine where a frozen war exists today. They published two short videos which reflected the wish of the people of that region to have greater autonomy from Kiev, to retain their close relationship with Russia and their anxieties over what had just taken place on Kiev’s Maidan. Since that time the BBC has resolutely refused to broadcast any such material and had included itself in the general agenda of total censorship regarding the views of ordinary members of the public there. More than that it has transmitted only and continually the narrative that the entire crisis has nothing to do with the people there but that it is a crisis manufactured only by Russia.

From the beginning of hostilities until now the entire panoply of western mass media has adhered to the narrative above, that the Ukrainian crisis is not about the wishes of the people of the Donbass focusing totally upon Russia. This flies in the face of all good journalistic principles adhered to in past times. No neutrality or impartiality is evidenced at any time, no right of reply is accorded and the narratives broadcast are uniformly anti-Russian. In addition, as I saw myself through intently observing events in the region from the winter of 2013-14 to late 2018 no reporting of attacks, atrocities or war crimes by the Ukrainian army or militias were reported and attacks occurred on a daily basis with many killed and unconscionable atrocities occurred all too frequently. Yet the coverage was on almost all occasions non-existent most times with a bloodless, Kiev-narrative-oriented few words expressed at the most heinous crimes of all such as the attack on the Lugansk administrative building in June of 2014 when five women and three men died from a jet strafing it and the street before it.

The coverage of ‘Poor Ukraine attacked and invaded by Russia’ as the sole primary motif, the complete absence of reporting on murderous attacks on the civilian populations of Donetsk and Lugansk by the Ukrainian army, ultra-nationalists and neo-Nazi militants and the broadly based partisan anti-Russian stance continues to this day.

How long can the western powers maintain this deeply immoral and unethical approach where their populations are constantly fed only one side of all the many crucial issues involved? Truly the way this situation has been approached by the political elites of the West and their complicit allies within its mass media has delivered a killing field situation in the Donbass where the primary victims are continually silenced. This has produced an aura in the West which fairly precisely reflects the predictions of George Orwell in his novel, ‘1984’. The people of the western world and their allies are constantly fed a completely one-sided rendering of reality to reinforce their elites war aims and agenda. The narratives told, the myths conveyed, the talking points raised and the language used in each and every one amount to the deepest levels of conditioning seen since the Cold War and outdo those seen then in a great many respects.

At least during the Cold War there was a certain dialogue based on mutual respect and a high degree of needful diplomacy was carried out. There is only a pale shadow of any such activity now. Since 9/11 I would suggest the U.S. (and therefore all its allies) adhere to the premise that nothing (including diplomacy) should hinder the goal decided in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 that no rivalry of any kind directed at the USA was now tolerable and that subsequently the sources of any such rivalry must be completely eliminated. This is why I use the term ‘Ice Cold War’ to denote the lack of any true diplomacy such as that seen during the Cold War. In my considered view the USA and its allies and proxies have fought a final world war, what I refer to as an end game war to undermine, destabilize and ultimately eliminate all those seen as opposing total global hegemony by the USA. ‘Full Spectrum Dominance’ is the goal and nothing less will do. No opposition to this is to be tolerated.

The above being the case and western public opinion being relentlessly moulded to suit, what chance is there for anything approaching peace in our world? For how long will western populations remain in thrall to its daily conditioning? Is there any potential at all for a greater understanding to arise and a substantial protest movement arising against what’s happening? The potentiality for this appears low. Far too many still (even after all the lies told regarding Iraq and elsewhere) believe their politicians and western mass media sources and remain herded into ghettos of support for their activities. Then there are those permanently distracted by their own personal difficulties and/or pleasures within the stressful consumer societies of the West. Those few informing themselves on a deeper level do what they can to alert the general public but against the vast power of western mainstream media their efforts can do little. Though the tide of western public opinion is gradually changing in favour of a more neutral stance on Russia and often toward a positive one it is not enough to affect the overall geopolitical situation dominated by the powerful political and media elites of the West.

What hope then is there for an outcome regarding Ukraine that brings a resolution to its problems and not one purely benefiting the western world and those in the western half of that nation? In my view Russia may well have to take the Donbass region of Ukraine as western intransigence by the USA, UK, NATO, the EU and Kiev against any equitable pathway to peace appears total. Continuing war, in one form or another is quite clearly the option they prefer, with the recent statements of the Ukrainian president Zelensky emphasizing this without any room for misinterpretation. If this is not Russia’s choice and it continues to seek a peaceful settlement despite all the odds against it I can only hope that the continual rise of the Eurasian powers, primarily by China have an eventual effect that serves to encompass new spheres of influence extending into Europe whereby a wholly new geopolitical paradigm of agreement, emphasis on tolerance of modes of governance and trade ensues taking the place of territorial aggression and nationalism. This I see as the long term hope for peace. In the short term we see the harbingers of war all around us and leading the charge as ever, is the USA.