“it was unclear whether it was deliberate or an accident”, sure, if you’re a blind man being led around by right-wing zionist tour guides

Israeli bus hits Plastelinans in West Bank
Al Garbage Brain Tame Arab News, Nov 26 2014

One Plastelinan has been killed and two others injured after they were run over by a bus with an Israeli number plate in the occupied West Bank, al-Jazeera’s correspondent reported. The incident took place on Tuesday evening near an Israeli military checkpoint at the entrance on the village of Bartaa, which lies on the Green Line between Israel and the Plastelinan territories. Nour Hassan Salem, 21, died of his injuries, while his cousin and his friend remain were being treated in a hospital. Shaher Balalem, who was with his friends but survived the incident, said the young men were crossing the street before the bus hit them directly. It was unclear if the incident was an intentional attack or an accident. A cousin of the deceased told al-Jazeera that the men, who come from Nablus, worked at shops in Bartaa and had permits from the Israeli authorities to enter the village. Since Israel built the separation wall in 2003, the eastern part of Bartaa became a totally enclosed enclave with two Israeli-controlled gates to the rest of the West Bank. Plastelinan residents in the village of Bartaa, south west of Jenin city, complain of restrictions imposed of them by the IDF and attacks by Jewish settlers. The UN condemned the restrictions imposed by Israeli military, saying that residents faced “abuse and intimidation at the gates of the enclave on a number of occasions.” Tensions in Jayloomia and the West Bank have been high since June, when Plastelinans kidnapped and killed three Israeli teenagers in the West Bank (or not, who the fuck knows – RB). Israelis retaliated by abducting and burning alive a Plastelinan teenager in East Jayloomia. The kidnappings set off a series of events that led to (provided the intended pretext for – RB) the 50-day Gaza war, which left more than 2,100 Plastelinans and 71 Israelis dead. Revenge attacks from both sides have been happening since summer.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

evidently, the attempt to isolate steinmeier for saying this, has been unsuccessful

Merkel Said to Reject Ukraine NATO Bid
Patrick Donahue, Arne Delfs, Ilya Arkhipov, Bloomberg ‘News’, Nov 26 2014

Merkel’s government is alarmed by Poroshenko’s plan to hold a referendum on Ukraine joining NATO, seeing it as a dead end that would only inflame tensions with Russia. Ukrainian membership of the NATO is not on the table for Merkel, according to one German official, who said that a referendum wouldn’t bring Ukraine closer to NATO since decisions on membership are made by NATO countries and not voters. Any bid to join NATO can only end badly, a second official said. It’s a stance that Merkel and Vladimir Putin can agree on, even as she vents frustration at her inability to sway the Russian president to resolve the crisis. Michael Grosse-Broemer, the parliamentary whip for Merkel’s Christian Democratic bloc, said in an interview in Berlin yesterday:

NATO membership for Ukraine isn’t on the agenda at this point.

German resistance to Ukraine’s membership in NATO, echoed by France, is a warning to Poroshenko not to aggravate the conflict with pro-Kremlin separatists that has claimed more than 4,300 (24,300, whatever – RB) lives in almost eight months. For Putin, the alliance once arrayed against the Soviet Union remains an adversary. Ukrainian membership in NATO would be absolutely unacceptable, a Russian government official said yesterday. Any referendum that backed NATO membership in Ukraine would lead to further escalation which Russia wouldn’t tolerate, the official said. While Merkel has repeatedly pressed Putin to use his influence to rein in rebels in eastern Ukraine, her rejection of the referendum proposal shows the limits of Europe’s support for Ukraine’s incoming government. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said on France Inter radio yesterday:

In recent days there have been a number of statements from the Ukraine side that have not helped.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier told Spiegel Online this week that he sees “a cooperative relationship between Ukraine and NATO, but no membership.” Germany is concerned that the new government isn’t going far enough in tackling corruption, the second official said. Suggestions in Kiev that welfare or pension payments to regions under the control of separatists could be cut off (The fact that they have been cut off – RB) would result in a quagmire and offer a golden opportunity to Russia to intervene, the official said. Merkel helped block a Pindosi push to put Ukraine on a path to eventual NATO membership in 2008. Last week, she said she hadn’t changed her mind because beckoning Ukraine into the military alliance is “qualitatively different” from bringing the former Soviet republic closer to the European Union. Merkel said at a foreign-policy forum (the fucking Frank Lowy ultra-hard-line right-wing Zionist institute – RB) in Sydney on Nov 17:

At the very least, one has to be cautious.

German industry is also wary of (totally opposed to – RB) Poroshenko’s plans. Rainer Lindner, the head of Germany’s Ost-Ausschuss that fosters business ties with Russia, said in Hamburg:

Poroshenko’s push toward NATO will lead to further worsening of Russian-Ukrainian relations. That’s something we don’t want to see.

Merkel is striking a harsher public tone toward Putin after she became convinced that he isn’t willing to abide by the Sep 5 truce signed in Minsk, Belarus, the first official said. That recognition took hold after he committed to the peace deal in talks with European leaders including Merkel on Oct 17, then failed to deliver, the official said. Putin kept Merkel waiting at those talks to attend a military parade in Belgrade, Serbia, marking the Soviet army’s role in liberating former Yugoslavia from the Nazis in WW2 (That whole paragraph is basically bollocks – RB). Merkel said yesterday:

As long as Russia contributes very little or nothing to overcome this crisis, we need economic sanctions. They’re unavoidable, although I know they impact the German and the European economies.

Here are a number of good reasons not to include 404 in NATO’s “attack on one is attack on all” system:

From the official reports of the militia: Total losses in the Ukrainian forces during counter-insurgency operations in the South-East of the country since Apr 3 has now has passed the figure of 20,000 and is close to 21,000. IA “Novorossia” publishes calculations based on open sources whose data are shocking. 20,904 military personnel never came back from the front, including members of the military and paramilitary units of the Ukrainian security forces. There are divisions and departments. Of the total number of losses, 3,282 action Right Sector, mainly joined the National Guard, as well as 30 mercenaries from special battalions oligarch Igor Kolomoisky “Dnepr”, “Azov” and “Aidar”. According to the operative data, the corpses were taken out in Dnepropetrovsk and destroyed at a local crematorium, or buried at the site of the shooting and listed as missing. The Ukrainian army (Mat) lost 11,590 soldiers (mainly from 25th landing Dnipropetrovsk brigade and 95th airmobile Zhytomyr brigade, 24th motorized brigade of the Lvov region, 79th airmobile brigade, 51st mechanized brigade, 24th mechanized brigade, 72nd separate mechanised brigade, Kremenchug brigade of the defence intelligence and other units of the Ukrainian army, mainly from Western Ukraine. Followed by:

- 4,192 employees from among the so-called “nazvanie”;
– 379 employees of security service of Ukraine;
– 243 – man state border service of Ukraine;
– 88 employees of the CIA, FBI, SWAT RUMO USA;
Foreign mercenaries:

- 630 people from the Polish PMC “ASBS Othago”, Pindosi PMC Асаdemi and “daughter” Greystone Limited PMC, Canada, Germany, Britain, Lithuania, Estonia, Italy, Sweden, Turkey, Czech Republic, Finland, African, Arab and other countries. Other categories of armed forces of Ukraine – 1779 men.

Note that to consider these data are approximate. Popular publicist Lev Vershinin (putnik1) writes in his blog: “According to the very knowledgeable people on both sides, we asked around, to not be trapped, the general order of the numbers is correct. However, included in those documents are the “disappeared” or “deserted”, but the error here and there not more than a couple of hundred.”

Posted in Uncategorized | 9 Comments

there’s a sort of limited hangout regarding 9/11 in here, which i’ve redlined

Talking to James Risen About Pay Any Price, the GWOT and Press Freedom
Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept, Nov 25 2014

James Risen, who won the Pulitzer Prize in 2005 for exposing the NSA warrantless eavesdropping program, has long been one of the nation’s most aggressive and adversarial investigative journalists. Over the past several years, he has received at least as much attention for being threatened with prison by the Obama Justice Dept (ostensibly) for refusing to reveal the source of one of his stories, a persecution that, in reality, is almost certainly the vindictive by-product of the Pindosi government’s anger over his NSA reporting. He has published a new book on the GWOT entitled Pay Any Price: Greed, Power and Endless War. There have been lots of critiques of the GWOT on its own terms, but Risen’s is one of the first to offer large amounts of original reporting on what is almost certainly the most overlooked aspect of this war: the role corporate profiteering plays in ensuring its endless continuation, and how the beneficiaries use rank fear-mongering to sustain it.

risen

That alone makes the book very worth reading, but what independently interests me about Risen is how he seems to have become entirely radicalized by what he’s discovered in the last decade of reporting, as well as by the years-long battle he has had to wage with the Pindosi government to stay out of prison. He now so often eschews the modulated, safe, uncontroversial tones of the standard establishment reporter (such as when he called Obama “the greatest enemy of press freedom in a generation” and said about the administration’s press freedom attacks: “Nice to see the Pindosi government is becoming more like the Iranian government”). He at times even channels radical thinkers, sounding almost Chomsky-esque when he delivered a multiple-tweet denunciation, taken from a speech he delivered at Colby College, of how establishment journalists cling to mandated orthodoxies out of fear:

It is difficult to recognize the limits a society places on accepted thought at the time it is doing it. When everyone accepts basic assumptions, there don’t seem to be constraints on ideas. That truth often only reveals itself in hindsight. Today, the basic prerequisite to being taken seriously in American politics is to accept the legitimacy of the new national security state. The new basic American assumption is that there really is a need for a global war on terror. Anyone who doesn’t accept that basic assumption is considered dangerous and maybe even a traitor. The crackdown on leaks by the Obama administration has been designed to suppress the truth about the war on terror. Stay on the interstate highway of conventional wisdom with your journalism, and you will have no problems. Try to get off and challenge basic assumptions, and you will face punishment.

I spent roughly 30 minutes talking to Risen about the book, what he’s endured in his legal case, attacks on press freedoms, and what is and is not new about the War on Terror’s corporate profiteering. The discussion can be heard here, and a transcript is provided. As Risen put it: “I wrote Pay Any Price as my answer to the government’s campaign against me.”

* * * * *

GREENWALD: This is Glenn Greenwald with The Intercept and I am speaking today with Jim Risen, the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for the NYT who has released a new book, the title of which is Pay Any Price: Greed, Power, and Endless War. Hey Jim, thanks so much for taking some time to talk to me.
RISEN: Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.
GREENWALD: My pleasure. So, I’ve read your entire book, and I have several questions about it, beginning with a general one, which is: there have been a lot of books written about the failures of the GWOT, deceit kind of embedded with the GWOT, most of which have taken the war on its own terms, and critiqued it because of strategic failures or of failure to achieve the claims which have been made to justify the war, and I actually have written a couple of books myself about the GWOT from that perspective. Yours is really one of the first that has focused on a particular part of the GWOT, namely the way in which economic motives, what you call the Homeland Security Industrial Complex, has driven a huge part of the war, and there’s a lot of new reporting about how that functions. I wanted to ask you two things about that. One is, is that something that you intended to do; that you set out to do when you began writing the book, and if so, what led you to do that, and the second part of it is, how much of this economic motive is the cause of the fact that we’ve now been at war for 13 years as opposed to traditional war objectives such as increasing domestic power or asserting foreign influence. How big of a role do you think it actually plays?
RISEN: That was my goal. That was one of the key objectives of writing the book, and I think it plays a really central role in why the war is continuing. I think it’s basically that after so many years there’s a whole class of people that have developed. A post-9/11 mercenary class that’s developed that have invested in their own lives an incentive to keep the war going. Not just people who are making money, but people who are in the government who their status and their power within the government are invested in continuing the war. So I was trying to show that it wasn’t just greed. It was partly greed, but it was also status, and power, and ambition that all intertwined to make it so that there’s very little debate about whether to continue the war, and whether we should have any real re-assessment on a basic level. So you’re right, I was trying to get at those motivations, I was trying to understand how we could have this prolonged period of war with such little debate. And I think it’s both economic incentives and personal power incentives and ambition and status.
GREENWALD: Let’s talk about the economic part of the motive, because obviously one of the most striking things about the war is not just its duration but the fact that it’s continued essentially unimpeded, notwithstanding these wild swings in election outcomes. You have the Republicans, who were in power when the war commenced, get smashed in 2006 and 2008 as a result of, at least primarily, as a result of dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq and the general state of things, but then you had the war continue under a president who kind of vowed to reign it all in, and then even when the Democrats get killed in 2010 and then again in 2014, there’s no signs of any of this letting up. It’s easy to see why there’s this private sector, you know, the weapons manufacturers and the defense contractors, sort of a General Dynamics, Booz Allen world, that want the GWOT to continue. They do really well when they’re selling huge amounts of machinery, weapons, and drones. But what causes the political class to be so willing to serve their interests so brazenly, even when public opinion is so overwhelmingly against it?
RISEN: That’s a question I’ve struggled with myself. I’ve tried to understand. I think we had one or two real moments when we could have gone in a different direction. The primary one was, of course, 2008. I think Obama had a chance. He had a mandate to do something different. And he didn’t do it. I think part of it was that he was never exactly what we thought he was, I think he was never really as liberal as people thought he was. I think a lot of voters invested in him their hopes and dreams without exactly realizing what he really was. I think he was always really more conservative than how he presented himself in 2008. To give him a little bit of the benefit of the doubt, I think it’s very easy for the intelligence community to scare the hell out of politicians when they come in, and I think that Obama probably got seduced a little bit by the intelligence community when he arrived. All you have to do is look at a lot of raw intelligence to scare somebody. Convince them that “Oh, it’s much worse than you ever realized.” But at the same time, he must take some of the blame. He surrounded himself with a lot of the Bush people from the get-go. Brennan was on his campaign. Most of his team had some ties to the Bush years in the GWOT. To me, that’s the hardest thing to really sort out, the factors that led Obama. At that one moment, I think there was one opportunity he had in 2008 to make a significant change and he didn’t do it. And I think historians are going to be struggling with that for a long time.
GREENWALD: Well, let me struggle with that with you for a little bit because the idea, and I think it’s a commonly expressed one,there’s probably an element of truth to it, that a new president who doesn’t really have a great deal of experience with the military or the intelligence community has these impressive generals and CIA people coming in with medals on their chest and decades of experience and, as you say, purposefully scaring them. But at the same time, anybody who’s remotely sophisticated about the world understands that that’s going to happen. Dwight Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex 50 years ago. And you know that there are factions in Washington who maintain their power by scaring you, and you have your own advisors. If you and I know that so much of that is fear-mongering, he has to know, right?
RISEN: Right, and I’m not trying to excuse it at all, and in fact I think it’s what he wanted. My own gut tells me that what he decided to do was in early 2009 was to focus on economic and healthcare policies and that in order to do those things on the domestic side, he had to protect his flank on national security and not fight the Republicans on national security, so I think there was a calculated move by Obama to prolong the GWOT in order to try to focus on domestic issues. And I think that after a while, he lost control of that narrative.
GREENWALD: It’s always hard to talk about somebody’s motives, right? I think we have a hard time knowing our own motives, let alone other people’s, who are complicated. As you say, he had this great opportunity in 2008 because things like closing Guantanamo and reining in the GWOT and stopping torture, these were all things that he ran on, and won on, right?
RISEN: Right.
GREENWALD: And you’ve been really outspoken about the fact that it’s not just the continuation of the Bush national security agenda but the even, or especially, rather, an escalation of the attack on journalism. I’ve seen you have some pretty extreme quotes on that, that he’s the worst president on press freedom since at least Nixon, maybe worse. Do you think that’s a byproduct of the fact that every president gets progressively worse, or do you think there’s something unique and specific about his worldview and approach that has made him so bad on these press freedom issues?
RISEN: I think one of his legacies is going to be that on a broad scale he normalized the GWOT. He took what Bush and Cheney kind of had started on an emergency, ad-hoc basis and turned it into a permanent state and allowed it to grow much more dramatically than it ever had under Bush or Cheney, and part of that, I think within that, was his attack on whistleblowers and journalists. I think it’s all part and parcel of the same thing. If you believe in the national security state in the way Obama does, then you have to also believe in squashing dissent.
GREENWALD: And I think that’s part of what makes war so degrading, right, for a political culture and a country is that it always gets accompanied by those kinds of things. Let me ask you a little bit about your own personal experience as part of that war on whistleblowing and journalism. I know you’re a little constrained because your case is still pending. But one of the things I always find so interesting is that whenever your case is talked about, it always gets talked about in this very narrow sense: that you had a source for a story that you published in your book about some inept and ultimately counterproductive attempts to infiltrate the Iranian nuclear program and the case is about trying to force you to reveal your source, and like every good journalist should, you refuse to do so and therefore face a possibility of being held in contempt of court and being sent to prison. But the background of your case, that I want to just step back and talk about a little bit, is that you’ve had this very adversarial relationship with the intelligence community, this increasingly adversarial relationship with the intelligence community, as a result of a lot of the reporting that you did, including exposing the warrantless NSA program in 2005, for which you won the Pulitzer Prize. Can you talk about that, the tensions you’ve had with the government in the War on Terror reporting that you’ve done and how that has manifested and affected your life?
RISEN: Yeah, sure. In fact, I’ve said in affidavits in the case that I believe that the reason they came after me on this subpoena is because of the NSA stories that we did for the NYT. I’m convinced, and I believe there’s a lot of evidence to show that they decided ultimately not to come after the NYT on the NSA stories and instead wanted to isolate me by looking at something in my book. In fact, I know for a fact that they conducted leak investigations of at least three or four separate chapters in my book. They interviewed a lot of people about totally unrelated things to the case that they ultimately came after me on and I think they were looking for something in my book to isolate me from the NYT, and in their court papers they have repeatedly cited the fact that the NYT decided not to run the story as one of the arguments for why it’s justified for them to come after me on it. And so I pride myself on the fact that I developed an adversarial relationship with the government because I think that’s what every reporter should do.
GREENWALD: I know from my own experience doing NSA reporting over the last 18 months, and I’ve heard you say before that you’re not going to let these kind of threats and recriminations affect your reporting. That was my mindset as well and I was actually even more determined a lot of times whenever I felt threatened to do the reporting even more aggressively, to make sure that those bullying tactics weren’t going to work. At the same time, when you hear top level government officials openly muse about the crimes that you’ve committed, when you hear privately through your attorney that the Justice Dept might arrest you when you come back to Pindostan, of course it does have an effect on you. It occupies a mental space. You spend a lot of time talking to your lawyers instead of focusing on journalism. And one of the things I’ve always found so fascinating about your case is that you have a Pulitzer, you work for the NYT, you’re one of the best known investigative journalists in the country, one of the most institutionally protected, even though they did separate you from the NYT by focusing on your book. Still, though, the fact that they were able to target you this way, for this many years, I thought was a very powerful message that if we can even go after Jim Risen, we can go after anybody. I know you want to maintain the idea, and I know that it’s true, that none of this consciously deterred you from doing the journalism. But how does being at the center of a case like this, where people are openly talking about you going to prison, including people in the Justice Dept, how does this have an effect on your journalism, on your relationship to your sources, just on your ability to do your work?
RISEN: Well, you know, it’s interesting. It affected me a lot at first, for the first couple of years. It’s one of those weird things that I’m sure you know now, these things go on forever and they take a long time and most of the time nobody’s paying any attention except you and your lawyers. During the first several years, nobody paid much attention, and it did have an effect on me then. And it took a long time for me to realize I’ve got to just keep going. But the fact that now a lot of people are supporting me has really helped me, this year in particular. In the last six months to a year, when I’ve gotten a lot more attention and people supporting me, I feel like now I have to represent the industry, represent the profession, and so it’s changed the way I even think about the case.
GREENWALD: You have become this kind of increasingly prolific user of Twitter, out of nowhere. You were never on Twitter. You were a very late joiner. I clearly see all the signs of addiction forming, and I say this as someone who recognizes it personally. You’ve evolved. You had a Twitter egg for a long time, and now you have a real picture.
RISEN: (Laughs) My son took that picture.
GREENWALD: (Laughs) Alright, well I knew it was going to be somebody else who caused you to leave the egg behind. But one of the things I find really interesting is Twitter is a venue in which you get to speak in a different way about different things than you do, say, in an article that you write for the NYT, where you’re a little bit more constrained in how you’re talking. And you’ve expressed some ideas that I think are very rare for someone who is a reporter at a large, establishment institution like the NYT to express, and I want to ask you a couple of questions about that. You had this multi-part tweet maybe about a month ago. It almost sounded like something Noam Chomsky might say, or other people might say like that, about how the big plague of establishment thought in Pindostan is a fear of deviating from conventional wisdom, and it’s only after generation or two later when people who do that get vindicated, and so there’s this really strong incentive not to do that. Can you elaborate on the kinds of things you were talking about that and what you’ve experienced that has led you to see those things?
RISEN: That was actually part of a speech I gave at Colby College. I think the best thing I’ve written on this whole issue. I compared how Elijah Lovejoy, who was an abolitionist in the 1830s who was murdered because he was trying to run a newspaper in St Louis that was pro-abolitionism, how he was so far ahead of his time that people thought he was crazy. He was so far outside the mainstream, and people thought abolitionism and the end of slavery was this idea that was insane. And I was trying to compare that to what we have today, where anybody who says we shouldn’t have a GWOT is considered delusional. And I was trying to show that conventional wisdom is a creature of our time. It’s not inherently true or not true. And that the mainstream press’s dependence on conventional wisdom ultimately cripples it in a lot of different ways.
GREENWALD: The impression that I have, and I’ve known you personally only for a few years, so it’s more just a speculative observation from having seen your work before that is that a combination of your going through this case with the government where your own liberty is very much at risk as a result of the government’s actions, combined with a lot of the reporting that lead to this book kind of has radicalized you in a way that I think is a pretty common thing that people in the GWOT have gone through, where people look at their country differently, much more so than they ever did before, look at institutions differently. Am I right about that? Is the Jim Risen of today more willing to experiment with novel ideas that aren’t conventional than the Jim Risen of 20 years ago as a result of those experiences?
RISEN: Probably, probably. I have to think about that. I’m trying to think back. I think my real change came after 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. I was covering the CIA as a beat then. And to me, it was fascinating talking to CIA people right after the invasion of Iraq and right before the invasion of Iraq, because it was kind of like privately talking to a bunch of Howard Deans. They were all radicalized against what Bush was doing. To me it was wild to hear all of these people inside the intelligence community, especially in 2003, 2004, who were just going nuts. They couldn’t believe the radical change that Pindostan was going through, and that nobody was opposed to it. And that led me to write my last book, State of War, because I was hearing things from within the intelligence community and the Pindosi government that you weren’t hearing publicly from anybody. So that really led me to realize, and to step back and look at—the radical departure of Pindosi policy that has happened since 9/11 and since the invasion of Iraq. To me, it’s not like I’ve been radicalized, I feel like I stayed in the same place and the country changed. The country became more radicalized in a different direction.
GREENWALD: I wonder about that a lot. Obviously, I started writing about politics in 2005, and a huge part of it was that perception, that the country had radically changed, that things that we took for granted were no longer the case, and I’ve definitely had a rapid and significant evolution in my views of how I look at those things the more I focus on them and the more the country changed. But if you go back and look at some media critics of the ’50s and ’60s, people like I F Stone who were kind of placed on the outside of conventional wisdom, and were viewed as fringe or crazy at the time, a lot of that can be traced to way before 9/11. Lies about the Vietnam War. The huge military industrial complex around the Cold War. Do you think 9/11 was this radical break from how things were done in the country, or was it more an injection of steroids into processes that were already underway?
RISEN: There have always been problems. But we’ve taken this to a new level. Both because the technology has allowed the government to do things it would never have done before, but also because of the willingness of the country to accept security measures and a reduction in civil liberties that I think would not have been contemplated before. I keep thinking that if you had a Rip Van Winkle from 1995 who woke up today, I don’t think they would really recognize the country. And that’s what I’m trying to write about, and what I view, because that’s the Pindostan that I remember.
GREENWALD: There’s this fascinating debate that took place in the ’90s, after the Timothy McVeigh attack on the Oklahoma City federal building, when the Clinton administration introduced these proposals to require backdoors into all encryption, for all computers and internet usage. And it didn’t happen, and the reason it didn’t happen is because all of these Republicans in Congress, led by John Ashcroft, stood up with a bunch of Democrats in alliance with them, saying “We’re not the kind of country that gives the government access to all of our communications. Privacy is actually a crucial value.” And just a few short years later, all of that reversed, and that debate became inconceivable.
RISEN: When Dick Cheney said, “the gloves come off,” I don’t think we realized how important that was, and what that really meant. As I’ve said before, that really meant, “We’re going to deregulate national security, and we’re going to take off all the rules that were imposed in the ’70s after Watergate.” And that was just a dramatic change in the way we conduct foreign policy and national security. And I think it’s been extended to this whole new homeland security apparatus. People think that terrorism is an existential threat, even though it’s not, and so they’re willing to go along with all this, and that’s what’s so scary to me.
GREENWALD: Let me ask you a few questions about some specific examples in your book, including one that relates to what you just said. You kind of have these different wars that you conceive of and one is called the “War on Normalcy.” One of the examples is, there’s this area on the Pindosi-Canadian border that used to be kind of tranquil and now there’s a ton of GWOT money that has gone to the state police there, and it’s kind of militarized that zone, and made it so the citizens are just interfered with in all kinds of ways. One of the most overlooked trends, I think, you mentioned Cheney taking the gloves off, all of these things we were doing overseas aimed at ostensibly foreign terrorists have now begun to be imported onto Pindosi soil, like the militarization of our police force using techniques from Baghdad, the use of drones, that “Collect it All” NSA model, which was first pioneered by Keith Alexander in Baghdad, is now aimed at Pindosi citizens. Do you think that’s an important trend? Is that something that’s really happened, that what was the GWOT aimed outward is now being aimed domestically?
RISEN: Absolutely, and that’s one of the most scary elements of it. To me, when the NSA started spying domestically, that was like Caesar crossing the Rubicon. It was a really important shift. People thought that was absolutely forbidden. And when the NSA started doing it, and then when you started fooling around with creating a new Dept of Homeland Security, merging all of these departments, creating Immigration and Customs Enforcement and all of this stuff, I think you’ve created a much more efficient federal domestic law enforcement apparatus, and efficiency is not always a good thing when it comes to that. One of the things I always think about, and one of my earlier books was comparing the CIA and the KGB during the Cold War, and I always remember somebody telling me that the only countries that have really efficient security services are dictatorships.
GREENWALD: Right, and you can basically only have a really efficient security service if you’re willing to at least kind of go into that realm of authoritarianism. They kind of go hand in hand. Let me ask you: there’s this pretty new reporting you have on this company General Atomics, which is the maker of drones, and you kind of describe them as the new oligarchs. In 2001 they had $100m in government contractsm and now in 2012 they have $1.8b, an obscene increase. At the same time, coincidentally enough, you cite a good governance group documenting that they’ve spent more to fund congressional staff travel than any other company. One of the things that always amazes me, I remember that there was this reporting that was done by Wired, during the debate over whether to give immunity to the telecoms that participated in the NSA program that you uncovered. An extraordinary thing to do, to retroactively immunize the biggest companies in Pindostan, and Sen Jay Rockefeller became the leading spokesman for it at the time. He was the Democratic chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and there were studies showing that right around the time when he became the leading proponent of telecom immunity, AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint began donating lots of money to his campaign, they threw parties for him, but still, in the context of Jay Rockefeller, a Rockefeller, with a super-safe seat in West Virginia, they were pretty trivial amounts to be able to just dominate congressional policy that way. And that was what struck me too about General Atomics. So they fund some congressional staff travel. What is it about the DC culture that lets these kind of seemingly trivial amounts in the scheme of things end up translating into this massive influence?
RISEN: You know, I don’t think that it’s the money that really does the trick. I think what really, you’ve got to look at is that all of the staffers, and all of the members of Congress are thinking about what are they going to do after they leave those jobs. The same is true for military officers. What are you going to do when you retire from the military, or from the House Intelligence Committee, or whatever? You’re going to need a job at a defense contractor. And so I think that the real incentive for a lot of these people is not to upset their potential employers in the future. The campaign contributions themselves are just tokens, as you said.
GREENWALD: To say that, on one hand it seems kind of self-evident, but on the one hand, it’s a pretty extraordinary observation because it’s a form of the most extreme corruption. Public officials are serving the interests of really rich corporations in exchange for lucrative private sector jobs that they get when they leave after serving their interests.
RISEN: What really hit home was when I was working on a chapter on KBR, and one of the guys who I describe was kind of a whistleblower, Charles Smith. He was an auditor for the army who tried to stop about a billion dollars of payments to KBR because they didn’t have any proof that they’d actually spent the money, or they didn’t have sufficient records to prove it, and he lost his job over his fight with KBR, he believes. And after I started talking to him he said, “There’s this one general you could talk to who was one of my bosses for a while. He was a good guy and he would vouch for me.” So I called that general, and he had since retired, and he said, “Well, I think Charlie was a great guy, but I now work for a contractor that does business with KBR, and I don’t want to say anything publicly about Charlie because that might upset KBR.” And that’s the kind of thing that you see all the time.
GREENWALD: There’s a case that you talk about in the book that’s Burnett v Al Baraka, where 9/11 families sued the Saudis. There are lots of influential people in DC, like Sen Bob Graham, the former head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and others, who have said that the role that the Saudis have played in the GWOT, and specifically the 9/11 attack, has been really actively suppressed, because of the Pindosi alliance with Saudi Arabia. And there is this sort of bizarre aspect that we’ve gone to war against a huge number of countries, one of the few exceptions to which has been the country that had the most nationals involved in that attack, and whose government has been the most persuasively implicated. How persuasive or credible do you find those questions about the Saudi involvement in the GWOT generally, 9/11 specifically, and whether that’s been actively suppressed?
RISEN: Well, as you said, I don’t really get into the substance of that in that chapter because it’s really about this bizarre operation and how crazy that operation became. But I think you’re right. I think it’s one of the unanswered questions of 9/11 that, as you said, Graham became fixated on, and they still have not unredacted parts of that report. I think the role of the Saudi government is probably different from the role of wealthy people in the Persian Gulf. And that’s the distinction that people have tried to grapple with for a long time. Are these just individually wealthy people in the Gulf, either in Saudi Arabia or in the Emirates, or is there some direction from any of these governments? And that’s the question that the Pindosi government has never wanted to address publicly.
GREENWALD: You said in an interview within the last week, it might have been at the Firedog Lake Book Salon, I’m not exactly sure where it was, but you described the period of time in 2004 and 2005 when you were trying to get the NSA eavesdropping story published as one of the most stressful times of your life. I think you even said the quote “most stressful period of your professional life.” The NYT, to its credit, did eventually publish that story, and did a great job on it, but can you talk a little bit about what you meant by that? Why that period was so stressful?
RISEN: Eric Lichtblau and I were trying to get that in the paper beginning in Oct 2004, and they killed it, or they stopped it. They agreed with the White House not to run it before the election and then we tried again after the election, and they killed it again, and by that time it was pretty well dead. So I went on a book leave and I put it in my book, and I knew that by doing that, I was putting my career at the NYT in jeopardy. It was very stressful about what was going to happen between me, the NYT and the Bush administration. I really credit my wife more than anybody else. I told her at one point that if I do this, if I keep it in the book, and the NYT doesn’t run it, I’m probably going to get fired, and I remember she told me, “I won’t respect you if you don’t do that.” And so that was enough for me to keep going, but I didn’t sleep for about six months.
GREENWALD: It’s got to be incredibly difficult knowing that you have a story of that magnitude, and that the story has been nailed down and you can’t get it out into the world. Your book, which I literally finished reading about 24 hours ago, is really riveting, and it’s not just a book that is a polemical indictment of the GWOT, like you’ve read before, it really is an incredible amount of individual reporting on one of the most under-reported aspects of this war, which is just how many people are gorging on huge amounts of profit and waste at the expense of the taxpayer, and what a big part of the war that is. Congratulations on writing such a great book, and I really appreciate your talking to me.
RISEN: Well, thank you.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

gubarev & mozgovoi chew the fat (in alchevsk i suppose) – illegible transcript

Pointless, inconsequential chatter, just done for the camera, IMO. These people just are not relevant any more. Zach & Plotz will let Mozgovoi burn himself out, fighting the junta – RB

~
… I am the leader of the public political movement, but 8 key state positions while the Germans international Governor of struggle
… Shuya we there were already formed the government and its formed literally the next day after delivery
… I helped h Elena immediately tried to remember armed resistance volunteers Slavyansk humanitarian
our Slav (or Slavyansk) like the front court we will strengthen meanwhile
… implemented information is political, public political, the price movement
… Elizovo indeed participated in the invitation
… in the second anti-fascist Congress said I don’t so much in a year Alba the fascism much about the day of the Ukrainian fascism and those values, our values and values kV aim and opposite side
… here I draw attention, that is because he our conflict, our civil war, it is impossible to stop, across the country this Fund, mental contrary when one side wants Evrodon AST side, one part former unified European countries wish future, another part of the country wants Eurasian, the future in the court within the framework of the Russian world, and to resolve this contradiction in my opinion in two ways, either by peaceful policy dialogue dialogue peaceful, or through war, and as a politician I suggest the Czechoslovak option, referendum, even if it will only be advisory, at least to cut public,
but my script utopian ago, absolutely nothing some, business here is utopian
… I didn’t know Zimbalist say option regarding the referendum on gold, writes IMC those who do not want to know the truth, primarily because in order for the referendum, this is primarily the opinion of ordinary citizens
… in Chile lives and are generally of existence, depends what you when her decisions, who the Verkhovna Rada, the state Duma in Russia, forecast Department of the exhaust making, then when you have a few people who decide how to live, what to do, so on and so forth, and I think that Ukraine will reach such stage when another choice will not be, the fight will be nothing
… the collection is thriving, the perpetrator thrives, people ideological seasoned who are fighting for their people, constantly pursued
… PSV was just terrible person and referenda now, if his on the territory of our regions was the ability to conduct a referendum about independence here is the opinion of Kiev, that may not always seen as here the population lives, what it needs is better that you need to do to better live if it was at that time, had the opportunity to hold referendums on any of the interesting questions, I think
the current situation was not если бы бога атона было намного гатчина lying with contract close the legal field, because people had the opportunity to express your opinion, and would be able to take any the solution according to the report of strong opinions, but it is people they are simply individual personally sitting Cabinet, this situation closed cabinets, Priora to open war you can call yourself presidents and Ministers but if thousands of people no good, no good, the positions the Central ring security have брандт wrecking new year joint steps, the organizer of the amount the state political activities, but it then I will say so and so
… the anti-fascists now interest rates wakes up with a Bang, not only here but all over the world, because by and large simple ideology to it is not the first centuries, the younger generation current Affairs and bright, colorful, absolutely legal, she is nothing creative only
… anti-fascist you must create the end when already on planet earth there are those forces which will begin always allies and enemies, we constantly looking for enemies for this article, but no always always easier, there is a choice of money, you must seek allies so long ago
… well everyone is different, if it is not noted at the Congress according to the Ukrainian Nazism, and we very specific in the sense that it external this ideology which, which is to be set foreign state to to embroil them Russians, Yes a little other with Ukrainians, other Russians such that this opening is caving маркос рохо меня тасс, as well as as good with яркой крупской, within the company, and if let’s just say a special feature of the Ukrainian return of the sailors
… now take the Ukrainian the nationalists Russophobia and put him to talk and I’m very the fact that the entire Ukrainian Nazism courses note that decides, it turns out the main enemies, although we are not citizens of the Russian Federation, we are different because we speak Russian we think in Russian, in the shower Russian, we are the number one enemies but by and large account, the first marriage is the one which you католики подписке in this practical push foreheads, the first marriage is exactly that which sells through with guts, that is all now sitting of the Verkhovna Rada and the government of Ukraine, people who do not value their people, which give it at the mercy of each other, so then the cover earns now they are enemies, it’s all equal consequences Pro-Western ideology which planted planted and all tougher and tougher where these values are already working, best price of alcohol value, the price of the securities, banking relationships, this attitude from a purely consumer all

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

personally i think this is a load of utopian fantasy, but some people believe in it

This Anastasia Mikhailovskaya is the same woman who did those rather demented Strelkov videos that Dugin wrote – RB

Battalion Commander “Kerch”, MO DND Vadim Pogodin about the fighting in Novorossia, patriotism and Russian world

~
Anastasia Mikhailovskaya: – Today’s guest on “Open Studio”, battalion commander “Kerch” the Ministry of defence DND Vadim Pogodin. Vadim, in your opinion, what was the beginning of the war in Ukraine? Who needs it?
Vadim Pogodin: The War on Ukraine is needed by Pindostan: first of all, for its impact on Russia. Ukraine itself they don’t need. Pindostan survives only through wars and suppression of other States. The first attempt to wage war was in 2005, Then Ukraine gave their protege Yushchenko, and as if the war never happened. But Ukraine has penetrated many Western agents of influence, and, in fact, have prepared these orange revolution. Compare with the same Syrian revolution, Libya, is all one plan, with slight variations everywhere in effect. The aim of the current revolution in Ukraine was to wage war. You remember, Yanukovych concessions any, to the extent that he was willing to limit his powers fully to take the power to the opposition. But they didn’t need this power. They needed a war. There was a coup: Donbass rebelled against it. Rallies started. I thought it would happen here in the Crimea, without war, victims, destruction. But what I saw, it was clearly disorganized bunch of people who in anger from what happened a coup d’etat, mock Pindostan, went to capture the regional administration.
A. M: You’ve done with politics, had its own organization?
VP: Up to 2004, before the orange revolution policy was not particularly interested in, I have normal business was. But the revolution I took it as a war that we captured a Pindosi agent.
A. M.: ” Whom do you mean?
VP: Well, of course, Yushchenko and the company all: this Sabbath on the square in front of my eyes was happening. I once visited, I went to see what it is, the Maidan. And then just with friends, to be honest, I flew once a week there to laugh: there were some farmers. In the crowd at first there were a lot of Kiev, they went, looked, some from curiosity, some out of conviction. But even I, a native of Donetsk, after spending 3-4 hours on the Maidan, I almost began to cry: “Yushchenko”. So acted on the psyche constant flickering flags, drumming rhythmic. Plus in the crowd constantly say the same thing, monotonously. These were educated people who knew how to behave. There clearly was prepared a coup. This tried and tested technology. All revolutions usually someone suck, grow. When the coup happened, I was outraged. His indignation on inauguration day Yushchenko our organization, “We” expressed directly on the Maidan Nezalezhnosti square in front of his podium. There’s about 300 people, around us stood in pomaranchewych ribbons, clearly prepared. Scandals tried to impose, but we tried not to get involved. Later went to Kiev, came in Mariinsky Park in garter camp. There just planted my friend for political reasons. In Kiev, I was delayed and would often come in this Mariinsky Park, supported the people who opposed Yushchenko, that was released Kolesnikov. There were clearly political repression, after 4-5 months he was released. Here came from there, I there became acquainted with the young guys. The idea arose to create a social organization that will fight against the power that Pindostan us has imposed. Well, somewhere within six months, maybe years, held the shares, there Donetsk airport – it was creative, Yushchenko even, as far as I know, for some time the visits were postponed…
A. M.: How Yushchenko postponed their visits, what did you do?
VP: – Our organization is several people, and in the press inflated nicely that we were there 5,000. Brought sandbags, barbed wire, Jerzy… that is more hype. Clearly, we would be anyone there, not stopped, but it was done…
A. M.: But Yushchenko has not arrived…
VP: In 2003, all in Donetsk was not allowed. Him through the fence had to move, then the whole crowd chanted, drove him from Donetsk. It was literally a year and a half before the event. Then we were judged, demanded to stop the action at the airport. Remember, the judge asked why urchins, sand bags, how many? Then asked why the barbed wire at the airport? And barbed wire, as Yulia Tymoshenko promised Donbass barbed wire fencing, here we are and ohgodyes.
A. M: – That is, protests you made long before the current events?
VP: Yes. The business I broke it, and well, I’m not particularly upset. After some time went to the Crimea to live. I think it’s OK going well until in Slavyansk didn’t start shooting first. I was worried, but she was sitting there doing the work, it is necessary to feed the family. When did really like something on the war, I couldn’t stand together and went…
A. M.: – the war was reasoned protests, that is, people really didn’t want to live under the Ukrainian government, under the rule of the Nazis.
VP: – You see, I treat this situation like this: at the moment the legitimate President of Ukraine is Viktor Yanukovych. Whether he is good or bad is a secondary question. This election must be solved. And all of the current Ukrainian government, as the majority of people believes, there were elections or were not, it usurpers who fascist ideology, with the help of an enemy state seized power in our country. Clearly, Donetsk will not tolerate it. Moreover, not only the Donetsk, but also Kharkov, Odessa, Dnipropetrovsk, which now are silent, they are simply crushed and scored, the same guys Kolomoisky and all the rest. Of course, we didn’t want to put in Donetsk enemy forces… Those who agreed to serve the usurpers, actually criminals under the laws of any state. Any European court, if they consider relevant, will take the same decision. Yanukovych is President. I’m not for it or against it, there is a law that exists. We fought for the law as it actually is. And now fighting for the law.
A. M: So you are the only region in Ukraine, who fought for the true President and legitimate authority?
VP: We were fighting for the legitimate authority in the country. I personally, can at someone there was another motivation, the more people looked Crimea loose, many have experienced the hope that it will happen quickly. The majority of people thought that Russia would help. For example, I knew that would not help, it is impossible in this situation to get involved.
A. M.: Do you think that Russia could be drawn into this war, to arrange the Third world war?
VP: – To be involved in the war, of course. You know, the goal of Pindostan is to involve Russia in the war. It does not aim to seize the Ukraine, why she needs Ukraine, this piece, well fertile land, no questions, I love her as part of the Russian Empire, or as part of the USSR, this as part of the Russian world, as you call it, but for Pindostan to make such large analyses for the state with Russia especially makes no sense.
A. M: So are you against a United Ukraine or for a United Ukraine?
VP: ” I, of course, for a United Ukraine. All our land, you know, in my childhood still sits song “From Moscow to the suburbs, from the southern mountains to the Northern seas.” Only that this one Ukraine in principle, this is my conviction, must be part of the Eurasian Union or the Russian Federation, or as you wish, but we have a common Russian world, which should be together. In addition, the Potsdam conference of 1946 approved boundaries of the postwar world. How could so blatantly razderbanit country?! Got three people in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, in principle, to the fact without any legal grounds, as far as I know, divided it by the decree of a foreign state. Our ancestors a thousand years together, they built a huge state, in which all peoples considered themselves equal. General culture was common customs. Sought to something one. Built world. And this world then was separated. Now Kiev is obtained say: don’t give me the land that our ancestors came together, and why we let them refuse. And join somewhere to Europe.
A. M.: The more, Europe is absolutely not necessary.
VP: It is not necessary, You see – she refuses, it explicitly in any EU us never take. They only have at our expense to deal with Russia, this is the most common option. And they wanted chaos to arrange. And arranged in the end, they have achieved this. And that’s why the people of Donbass stood up and began to defend their land. This is called the latent occupation. In 1991, we are not specifically on occupation zone just. They are easier to manage. If in 2000, Putin would not have come to power, after Chechnya, after the Khasavyurt peace and Russia would not specifically exactly the same. The goal is a small state, a raw materials appendage to the “Golden billion” who live well. It all shows, it shows and current events. Europe that rushed to help Ukraine? Helps only military forces that were at war, and so, financial, where there? No. It is only necessary, it is reasonable to look at things calmly aside from the fact that the ears are blown from all sides.
A. M: So, despite the fact that Putin has not invaded, you still for Putin?
VP: Oh, I just realize, I am sure, the majority of Russians, Putin really want to help us, but do not have the right. We would now outlawed, but fight for the truth.
A. M.: Do you think that Russia could not send troops to Ukraine, because there is an agreement, as I understand it, yes?
VP: Is the contract with Pindostan, which is guaranteed by Russia and Pindostan, when we removed nuclear weapons, for some unknown reason, that they protect our sovereignty, roughly speaking. Although at first it had violated the Pindosis, propanol in power Yushchenko.
A. M.: And what is this contract?
B. N.: The agreement that Russia and Pindostan guarantee immunity. If Russia will now introduce troops to Ukraine, then, strictly speaking, violate this agreement. Pindostan will be entitled to start a third world war, considering that it has the right to do it.
A. M: So you believe that they are now speculating that agreement? And consequently, because of this pressure on us…
VP: Well, so, yes. And in principle, how can Russia send troops? What will happen next? Then begins a guerrilla war in the Carpathians.
A. M: That is, Pindostan will disburse guerrilla movement…
VP: Of course, it initially and calculated everything was, I say, these battalions there, the Right Sector, all else, remember how many years they had studied abroad, there are also frames, they studied in order to wage war. Because they didn’t think for a second that Yanukovych will take power. You see where there are professionals in the government build the economy, or something else? They didn’t think. Thought the usual scenario to wage war. To gather a crowd of sacrificial sheep, otherwise they will not be called. Then, when they go up, shoot, it’s the same in other countries did not happen again. To shoot, then to start a guerrilla war in the West of Ukraine. And that’s all. Would like our people, we are one people, to keep afloat economy. And raise it you couldn’t, because there’s a war, sabotage, and everything else, it spread to the Crimea, and in Russia this war. It is 100%.
A. M.: The fact that Yanukovych’s so gone, you think it was correct step?
VP: I think the right move at 100%. Here it is not necessary to be seven spans in a forehead. Everything was calculated that Yanukovych will go to disperse the crowd, starts shots, hit men, and, as always, Pindostan will begin: the criminal regime of Yanukovych beats his people, supported by Russia. And it would start a war somewhere in the Carpathian mountains, the forests, it would be a hard war, unnecessary war. And everywhere, all over the world we would be criminals that terrorise his people. While sitting there, the terrorists, as they are now fighting against us, Poles, Pindosis, Blacks…
A. M: You saw them there?
VP: Yes, of course, seen. Moreover, we captured took mercenaries from Sierra Leone, now personally we took with documents. We are in the third division once it has passed, let them do. There I saw many times foreign prisoners. Saw the murdered Poles, not one. Yes the Poles, the whole airport Donetsk in the bulk of the Poles. Ukrainians show there some part of Ukrainians, while the majority of Poles there fighting. The mercenaries.
A. M: Do you think that with the resignation of Yanukovych, behold now, we have mixed cards to Pindosis?
VP: We are 100% mixed cards to Pindosis, of course.
A. M.: Now many accused Strelkov that he went to war. I understand he supported the mood of the people, who wanted what happened?
VP: Igor Ivanovich, in my opinion, is a true Russian. That means he went to war? He put in Slavyansk border against seized power geeks. All. Why attack Slavyansk? He wasn’t going to attack. As he went to war? Unleashed those who attacked him. After the referendum passed already. He kept the defense after the will of the people. Went to war, those who went to attack it. And that’s all.

~
A. M: So that those who went to attack it, in fact, they — We can’t say that you are fighting against the Ukrainians against the people. You, I understand, fight against fascism?
B. N.: The Ukrainians are Ukrainians, and “ukrop” is “ukrop”. This is the fascists. Can’t even now not to condemn, I feel sorry for them. This Pindosi technology. People who a year ago thought one thing, now I think completely different, they have everything in their head upside down. I don’t know how they do it, really, but there’s also the brains upside down completely. These are our people, which now has to kill, that’s going to kill us and bombed our cities. I know, many refused. But nevertheless, began the war, arose hatred, we have started to hate them, they began to hate us. Eventually got what I got was a full-scale war within his own nation. That’s sometimes weird to many Russians incomprehensible, that “ukrop”, Ukrainians, so and so… no! Ukrainians are exactly the same as the Muscovites, or exactly the same as in Vladivostok people. Simply, if Mr Putin since 2000, he slowly began to pull the country from this Pindosi threat, we have all this time been brainwashed, especially in Western Ukraine. And, in fact, turned out to be what happened: the dislike of his people to his people. And that’s all.
A. M.: That is, again according to plan Sharpe (Gene Sharp, colour revolution theorist – RB) to embroil the Slavic people inside?
VP: of Course, they want the war was between his, embroil. Just imagine, this war happened, the blood spilt from one to the other parties. I believe that in principle we will make it up, although this requires a Herculean effort.
A. M: – What would be the output for reconciliation?
VP: When really, I think, now it’s getting colder. Freeze would be the situation at least until spring. Even if that part of the Ukraine wants to live together with Europe, let them live together with Europe for some time, will feel all the charm of European life, look, if they don’t have the example of the Greeks, Spaniards, Italians, whose awful decreased level of life, let them feel. I think, maybe then they will start in the head a little bit to realize who the real enemy. Clear, it is necessary to promote enhanced…
A. M.: Do you think if there will be hunger and cold, they will turn their guns against their own rulers?
VP: – Cold and hunger best. Even in religion, the hunger and the cold very well clean. Let попостятся a bit. No, God forbid, I’m not against it, suddenly they will start an economic boom, suddenly Europe and Pindostan send forces to Ukraine flourished? I’m also happy. Excellent: our brothers live well and happily! Okay, let live, we do not go to them.
A. M.: But they will not stop bombing your cities, to kill civilians?
VP: Yes, I agree, that’s exactly it should until their recapture. Where bombed, there need to bomb. We have a truce was, there’s Granitnoye, is a large group, there’s no war there. Sometimes shootings happen officers talk on the phone: “Are you out there shooting, truce?” There is no war, and in the district of Donetsk is because they need a victim, they need to destroy infrastructure, airport keep in the first place, because im from there you can shoot at Donetsk, destroy substation, gas station and so on. They need us to be in hunger and cold. They already understand that Ukraine has no chance of Donetsk, Lugansk. You see, they have 27,000 or 29,000 deserters according to the Ukrainian statistics.
A. M.: Why are people so he tears the roof that they do not understand: it is one and the same people that dumbasses that this is not the English, against whom they are fighting?
VP: – Hysteria so overtaken. Such technology. I don’t know why they do so. If I was there, I would have felt. I explain: when I’m on the Maidan came after 4-5 hours of standing there ready to shout their slogans.
A. M.: Is This brainwashing?
VP: Yes! Despite the fact that I know that I, for whom, where, how. I have firm beliefs. I then had to go, when adapted, looked at them, laughed. Brainwashed them to treat it. They are sick people, they are not enemies, they are sick people.
A. M: You said that you have gradually increased military power. Now all units be eliminated, commanders transferred to some other groups. Do you think this benefit is the Donetsk Republic?
VP: You know, it was, in principle, popular protest, different people came in the militia. So to put things in the army the order must, in any case. But as it happens, I am extremely against it. My opinion is that after Strelkov had gone, discipline and order in the army have fallen significantly. And to assess the current reform, I to it a few negative attitude, how she goes. But the reform I have a positive attitude. All right, should be the Ministry of defence DND, and all must obey him, should be structuring, as it should be.
A. M: And how much you have subordinates?
VP: At the end of 300 people, then another company I gave.
A. M.: And how many died from yours?
VP: That’s the defense I have 6 people were killed. Thanks to our Colonel, he skillfully painted the defensive line of trenches. I think if the other side of Donetsk окопали as well, then, perhaps, would be to Donetsk closer.
A. M.: – Do you think we need to consolidate around our President and it every support that we in Russia have not been to the orange revolution and not spilled all in this terrible war…
VP: Yes, of course, necessary! First, know that I’m in Moscow I was displeased to hear? I heard, but came and personally from the taxi driver heard: “They’re all bad!” Once we’ve had. “Deputies so get these so much, and we get so much.” People need to understand that getting all will be well, exactly when will be strong, mighty power, when it will cease to plunder the neighbouring powers. Putin is very difficult, because by the year 2000, when he came to power, there was corruption, hidden control system and so on. Virtually Russia has already been absorbed. Russia cannot capture stupidly simple, given its nuclear capabilities. Therefore, it should be captured only from the inside. By 2000, it has almost been fulfilled. Look at the war in Chechnya, the same, yes everywhere, it was understandable. All revenues from oil left in the middle of nowhere. And so forth, and the like. Putin pulls it all. Growing standards of living. People somehow gradually, you know, forget growing, well-well-well. You look like you 10 years ago lived and now live: better or worse? It is clear at once, all in chocolate does not happen gradually. I think it goes really properly, it should only help. And traitors around him too much. Recently he did a final warning fifth column, it is already clean. You need to cultivate patriotism in the country. People should love their country, for the sake of the country to work, so she was powerful, and then they will live well. And not vice versa, as I understand it. And we have many people: “Oh, Pindostan, Europe!” It somehow helped? Well, except that gay pride parades want to spend, maybe someone likes it. And I don’t see any help from them – put our economy cheap goods, credits. They are killing us, and they say, “Oh, Pindostan, Europe!” Putin’s goal is to bring the country under foreign influence, to return revenues to the state, and it is successfully obtained. And, in fact, to unite our country, which раздербанена. That is, to release. Ukraine, once again, Russia is one country. I would call it not Russia, not Ukraine and the Eurasian Union, the USSR, the Russian Empire, but this one state. And Georgia, our state, our people live. How we live together already? And Uzbekistan is the same. Our people are. I remember in my childhood I full Union with the father circled, he was a pilot. I flew everywhere, like home. There Uzbek, Tajik, what’s the difference. Actually, I have the best memories of any area of the USSR.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

this breedlove is a really nasty piece of work, every photo is uglier than the last

Breedlove: NATO concerned about the possibility of Russian military on the border with Ukraine
RIA Novosti, Nov 26 2014 17:13

1035280624

KIEV – NATO SACEUR Gen Philip Breedlove stated that NATO was more worried about the number of Russian troops on the border with Ukraine, including the Crimea, and their fighting capabilities. On Wednesday, the head of Department of information security of the Black Sea fleet, Captain 1st rank Vyacheslav Trukhachev, told RIA Novosti that today at the military airport “Belbek” in the Crimea arrive 14 fighters: ten modernized su-27SM and four su-30 (both belong to a generation 4+). UNIAN quotes Breedlove, currently in Kiev, that the possibility of Russian troops in the Crimea measured a serious impact on the situation in almost the entire region of the Black Sea. He said:

We are very concerned about the militarization of the Crimea. And this is our concern, as posted in the Crimea, cruise missiles, air defense system, and other features show that they are able to create military influence in the Black Sea.

Speaking about the Russian troops on the border with Ukraine in General, he again stressed that it is not quantity, but in their capabilities. He said:

The numbers that we use for the past few weeks, not much has changed. It’s 8,000 to 10,000 people, situated on the border, but this is not important. It is important that these are troops on the border, namely the capabilities of these forces. They have great opportunities, and the question is, will decide whether Russia to use these troops to cross the border.

According to UNIAN, the General explained that these forces are located very close to the Ukrainian border, can enable those forces that are already in the East of Ukraine to continue destabilizing actions. In addition, in his opinion, these forces create opportunities for ongoing delivery to the militia of Donbass of necessary weapons. Earlier, NATO has repeatedly accused the Russian Federation of the importation into Ukraine of military equipment and soldiers, without giving any evidence. In response Russia has repeatedly said that is not a party to domestic conflict and completely uninvolved in the events in the South-East of Ukraine, and that it has no intelligence agents or troops there. RF Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that there are no grounds for accusations of Russia in the complication of the situation in the South and South-East of Ukraine, and the Russian Defense Ministry has repeatedly said that is not supplying the militia with military equipment, ammunition and other assistance.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

here’s an extremely revealing text, which will require a lot of work to interpret

There has been a lot of kerfuffle because of a recent interview with Borodai. I personally am not interested in Borodai’s efforts to diminish the mythology of Strelkov. I don’t need Borodai to do that. I have my own critique, which I have already explained. But various people are crawling out of the woodwork with previously unexposed revelations, either because they want to defend Strelkov (as on the Secret Forum), or because they are sick of Zakharchenko (as here). The original text is here in Russian, and here in raw Yandexian – RB

In fact everything is even more complicated than it seems at first glance. Time went this trend is publicly exposed – reveal a few secrets to look, to justify them then participating (most of what was said in the summer is now confirmed). I must say, the truth do not claim. I like akin that was seen and heard in April in Donetsk, and then in Slavyansk, that told other friends and say. If anyone believes that this compilation has already been said, let them check the archive, may well repeat the already said. I myself did not know much, and revelations of former folded puzzle. Yes, another. There will be several parallel lines, you can get confused, so closely.

I will start with the information I had heard. Since the end of November last year, from the beginning of Euro-Maidan, then-Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Zakharchenko (Vitaliy Yurіyovich, not our own dear Alexander Vladimirovich – RB) is included naturally in agreement with the ruling then рыгами began to create a power group (not a group of intimate & like-minded friends: this is purely Philistine group of former police officers, employees of PMC (mostly former security forces), and is controlled by the Ministry of interior semi-legal structures. As an example of the latter is the protection and employees копанок (illegal mines) or the same балки Средней (on the forum a lot of people from Zaporozhia; they know more and will say what for “field of miracles”, like the metal is mined). Why? They had intelligence information (primarily from the large Eastern neighbour) about the coup attempt under the guise of mass demonstrations for signing the Association Agreement with the EU. Somewhere managed to create, somewhere there. That’s why attempts to capture the regional administrations in the middle of Jan 2014, Хунтятами completely failed. They were repulsed, not by conscious citizens of the South-East, but by these groups. Their Кукировал was Zakharchenko. But after his resignation (as sought by the Maidan), these groups were left without guidance, though the local cops considered them their own. Yes, most importantly, they were funded of course by the local багатеями. This is important information, namely, the existence of parallel MVD power groups.

The following. Not trusting in fact, private security services Yanukovich introduced for his own protection some US advisers and even specialists. Their role in the ensuing coup is more than significant. They evacuated Yanokovich on Feb 21 from Kiev, they insulated him for almost a week. This was an important moment of isolation. Under the plan, Zakharchenko already under the guise of protest moods in the East, which were supposed to lead Rybak, then-speaker of the Verkhovna Rada, should have taken under their protection of the public buildings. And after the Congress in Kharkov, they were supposed to organize a trip to Kiev, where together with loyal security forces they would have finally cleared the Maidan. Какизвестно, Rybak did not want to do anything and went into an agreement with the junta. Similarly did the majority of the deputies of the Party of Regions and the Communists, атакже governors. Vegetables actually they all are. Yanukovich wandered, and in the end reached the Crimea, and then Russia. The betrayal by the Party of Regions of the Donbass was a shock, but all believed that it was a cunning plan. Also, Donetsk really other. They have a core. Therefore, Anti-Maidan and power of the group did not disperse (as in other areas of the South-East). This process continued for several months. Was rigidly proposals from junta just sent to the Party of Regions, believing that all will bring. And finally, the Party of Regions just decided to sell the protesters for the guarantee of the inviolability of their capital, and personal safety. The junta agreed.

All the leaders in the DND/LNR were the leaders of the established power groups: Zakharchenko (Alexander), Bolotov, Plotnitsky, Beszler and many others are all there. They were sold by the Party of Regions. They and their people were supposed to vanish without a trace in the mines of Donbass, or flee to Russia. Here they refused to be just sacrificial animals. The fact that the protest mood and aversion to the junta in the Donbass was the mass that resulted in the seizure of the administration. And, paradoxically, a driving role in this was played by the real marginal groups, supporters of independent Donbass, DND. If earlier they were a small group of radicals, now their ideas, in the vacuum of the other mind, became popular. That is, Gubarev and Putilin belonged to a totally different group. It is also important to remember this. There have been numerous autonomous groups that сейчаспочти all joined with Mozgovoi. Lugansk region analogues almost was not, but the idea later picked up. I will remind you was a vacuum. The idea of a Pro-Russian Ukraine was utopian, the Party of Regions surrendered the so-called “South-East”. There were only two other possibilities: joining Russia (the Crimean script) and DND. Zakharchenko chose DND. That is also necessary to remember. The third group was the employees of “Berkut” and “Alpha”, but they were also in the position of sacrificial animals, which the Party of Regions already sold. Zakharchenko (Alexander), Khodakovsky and the other commanders were not intended to become politicians. They were supposed to be what were the security forces. They were prepared under the direction of the Party of Regions to do the stripping of Maidan. No more. And not to advertise themselves. That’s why they have long been in the shadows.

Now: all events should be looked at from the perspective of these three groups, the Party of Regions and Communists to revolt in the South-East and the subsequent betrayal of this population. The resulting vacuum was filled with ideas either of the DND or of reunification with Russia. On the ground for a long time it was believed that everything was going according to plan, that the absence of Yanukovich was temporary, and that he would return together with the Russian army. The Russian State Duma gave its consent to the use of Russian troops in Ukraine. This led to the situation in the same Gorlovka, Kramatorsk and the district. In Slavyansk was a pool of local leaders, government officials and influential political parties. It was they who, knowing that the head of the local power groups, Ponomarev, was clearly not a person who could provide security (lack of credibility, charisma and knowledge), invited Strelkov, as an active participant of the Crimean events. Oh, and the Cossacks. I must say that previously the city was Putilin already have as a group Zakharchenko. But ideas DND did not find Ponomarev and pool support. The fact that Zakharchenko had weight in the mining region, Slavyansk-Kramatorsk, purely industrial regions, where no mines and spit they wanted to Zakharchenko. Let me quote: “we have our own bandits.” (Popular guards with guns were not really organized in Slavyansk before the arrivak of Strelkov).

The arrival of the Strelkov group was originally considered by Shtepa (This is Nelly Shtepa; we met here before, remember? Here in Ponomarev’s account of events in Slavyansk. She must have been the local Party of Regions secretary – RB) as implementation of the plan of the Party of Regions. So she met them and said “these are our guys!”. But learning that the Party of Regions and Yanukovich have no relation to “these guys”, she not only disowned them, but attempted to turn them over to the Ukrainian security forces. And that led to her dismissal, and then arrest. At that point it became clear that the Strelkov group had nothing to do with the Party of Regions, therefore they were not met as “our boys” by official leaders (members, deputies). Let’s say that we watched the end was not openly sabotaged, but nothing happened. So, (plus many nuances). Yes, of Slavyansk pool only one now in DND. Others resigned from the junta and even have MP from them today in the Verkhovna Rada.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment