Monday, September 01, 2014

Viet Nam Celebrates 
69th Anniversary of 
National Independence Day
(September 2, 1945 - September 2, 2014)

Ho Chi Minh and the
 Declaration of Independence

Ho Chi Minh, took inspiration from the U.S. Declaration of Independence 
when he wrote the Vietnamese Declaration of Independence. 

Archimedes Patti from the U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS) 
relied upon Viet Minh intelligence and logistics to track and to 
disrupt Japanese activities in Vietnam during World War 2. 

Once the Japanese surrendered, Patti was invited by Ho Chi Minh to a 
meeting to comment on his draft Vietnamese Declaration of Independence.



Excerpts from 1981 Interview by Martin Smith (WGBH) with former 
Office of Strategic Services (OSS) Major Archimedes Patti, who 
during World War Two provided support to the Vietnamese Resistance (Viet Minh) 
under the command of Ho Chi Minh fighting the Japanese occupation.



The complete 1981 interview by Martin Smith with Archimedes Patti: 


Link to this article:

More reading on the August Revolution and Declaration of Independence:



Sunday, August 31, 2014

"If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.”
- Joseph Goebbels (Hitler’s Propaganda Minister)

This is obviously the inspiration behind the campaign of lies by Western political leaders and their 'news' media. 


Russia demands publication of recordings from downed flight MH17


By Mark Trevelyan
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is demanding to know why international investigators have yet to publish the black box data from a Malaysian airliner that was shot down over eastern Ukraine in July, a deputy defense minister said in an interview published on Saturday.
Moscow blames Ukraine for the disaster, in which all 298 passengers and crew were killed. In a version of events widely believed in the West, Ukraine says the Boeing 777 was shot down by pro-Russian separatists with a surface-to-air missile.
"The Boeing catastrophe throws up more and more questions. But lately not many people are talking about this," Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov told RIA news agency.
"Why have the data still not been published about the conversations between the air traffic controllers and the pilots of the Boeing? Why haven't the data been presented from the international investigation of the black boxes? Who doesn't want this to happen?"
...Antonov said Russia had established that a Ukrainian Su-25 military aircraft was in the vicinity of the Malaysian airliner.
"Where is the transcript of the recordings of conversations between the pilot of this plane and his command? How did a military aircraft come to be alongside a civilian one?
"If people are saying today that a rocket was fired from the ground towards that military plane, then I'd like to look that military pilot in the eye who used a civilian plane as cover, if of course that's what happened," Antonov said.
His comments appeared to allow for the possibility that rebels might have downed the airliner in a failed attempt to hit a Ukrainian military plane, although he said these were only "working versions" of what may have happened.
Antonov said his ministry was pressing for answers about the tragedy from the United States, Ukraine and European countries.
He reiterated Russia's denials of military intervention in Ukraine: "When people say today that Russia has launched aggression or war against Ukraine, that is all nonsense."

(Editing by Mark Heinrich)





Dutch Intellectuals Apologize to Putin for Lies on MH17, Syria, Ukraine...

"...Please accept our apologies on behalf of a great many people here in the Netherlands for our Government and our Media. The facts concerning MH17 are twisted to defame you and your country..."




Dutch Intellectuals Apologize to Putin for Lies on MH17, Syria, Ukraine...
Wednesday, 27 August 2014

 
A letter sent by a prominent Dutch Professor to Russian president Vladimir Putin has attracted much media attention in Europe.  The letter was written by Professor Cees Hamelink and signed by dozens of Dutch intellectuals and professors. 

Below is the letter in its entirety.


Dear Mr. President Putin,

Please accept our apologies on behalf of a great many people here in the Netherlands for our Government and our Media. The facts concerning MH17 are twisted to defame you and your country.

We are powerless onlookers, as we witness how the Western Nations, led by the United States, accuse Russia of crimes they commit themselves more than anybody else. We reject the double standards that are used for Russia and the West. In our societies, sufficient evidence is required for a conviction. The way you and your Nation are convicted for 'crimes' without evidence, is ruthless and despicable.

You have saved us from a conflict in Syria that could have escalated into a World War. The mass killing of innocent Syrian civilians through gassing by ‘Al-­‐Qaeda’ terrorists, trained and armed by the US and paid for by Saudi Arabia, was blamed on Assad. In doing so, the West hoped public opinion would turn against Assad, paving the way for an attack on Syria.

Not long after this, Western forces have built up, trained and armed an ‘opposition’ in the Ukraine, to prepare a coup against the legitimate Government in Kiev. The putschists taking over were quickly recognized by Western Governments. They were provided with loans from our tax money to prop their new Government up.

The people of the Crimea did not agree with this and showed this with peaceful demonstrations. Anonymous snipers and violence by Ukrainian troops turned these demonstrations into demands for independence from Kiev. Whether you support these separatist movements is immaterial, considering the blatant Imperialism of the West.

Russia is wrongly accused, without evidence or investigation, of delivering the weapons systems that allegedly brought down MH17. For this reason Western Governments claim they have a right to economically pressure Russia.

We, awake citizens of the West, who see the lies and machinations of our Governments, wish to offer you our apologies for what is done in our name.
It’s unfortunately true, that our media have lost all independence and are just mouthpieces for the Powers that Be. Because of this, Western people tend to have a warped view of reality and are unable to hold their politicians to account.

Our hopes are focused on your wisdom. We want Peace. We see that Western Governments do not serve the people but are working towards a New World Order. The destruction of sovereign nations and the killing of millions of innocent people is, seemingly, a price worth paying for them, to achieve this goal.

We, the people of the Netherlands, want Peace and Justice, also for and with Russia.
We hope to make clear that the Dutch Government speaks for itself only. We pray our efforts will help to diffuse the rising tensions between our Nations.

Sincerely,

Professor Cees Hamelink 






‘Anything US touches turns into Libya or Iraq’
Top Putin quotes at youth forum
Published time: August 29, 2014 20:23
Edited time: August 29, 2014 23:10

August 29, 2014. Russian President Vladimir Putin talks to the participants in the Seliger 2014 National Youth Forum in the Tver Region. (RIA Novosti / Michael Klimentyev)
August 29, 2014. Russian President Vladimir Putin talks to the participants in the Seliger 2014 National Youth Forum in the Tver Region. (RIA Novosti / Michael Klimentyev)
Unilateral decisions made outside the United Nations are usually doomed to failure, Putin said Friday, while speaking at the “Seliger-2014” annual youth forum.
Vladimir Putin has criticized Washington’s unilateral actions on the international arena, saying that whatever it touches seems to be turning into Libya or Iraq. Below are the top 10 quotes from the Russian President’s speech at the Seliger youth forum.
Do you remember the joke: ‘Whatever Russians make, they always end up with a Kalashnikov?’ I get an impression that whatever Americans touch they always end up with Libya or Iraq,” Putin told the participants of the 10th forum held on Lake Seliger in Tver region, some 370 km north of Moscow.
When decisions are made unilaterally, they always turn out to be short lived. And the other way round: it’s difficult to reach consensus at the UN because often opposite opinions and positions collide. But that is the only way to achieve long-term decisions,” he said.
When a decision is balanced and supported by key members of the international community, Putin said, everyone starts working in order fulfill it perfectly.

'UN won’t be needed if it serves only US and its allies'

Putin totally disagreed that the UN is inefficient. But the organization needs to be reformed and its instruments should be used efficiently.
The reform should become a result of a consensus reached by the overwhelming majority of the members of the organization, he said.
It is also necessary to preserve the fundamental grounds of the UN’s efficiency. In particular, only the Security Council should have the power to make decision on sanctions and the use of military force, Putin said. And these decisions must be obligatory for everyone. Such mechanisms should not be eroded. “Otherwise the UN will turn into the League of Nations,” the Russian President said.
The organization will lose its purpose if it is only an “instrument to serve foreign policy interests of only one country – in this case the US and its allies,” Putin. “Then it is not needed.”
Putin compared the shelling of east Ukrainian towns and cities by Kiev army to actions by the Nazi forces during the World War Two.
Sad as it might seem, this reminds me of the events of World War II, when the German Nazi troops surrounded our cities, like Leningrad, and directly shelled those cities and their residents,” Putin said.
Why they (Kiev) call this a military-humanitarian operation?” he said, adding that the conflicting sides should get to a negotiating table.
Ukrainians who did not support the coup mounted by “our western partners” with the backing of radical nationalists, are being suppressed by the military force, Putin said speaking about the situation in the neighboring state.
We’re no fools. We saw symbolic cookies handed out on [by Victoria Nuland] Maidan, information support, political support. What that means? A full involvement of the US and European nations into the process of the power change: a violent unconstitutional power change.”
And the part of the country that disagreed with that is being suppressed with the use of jets, artillery, multiple launch systems and tanks,” Putin said. “If these are today’s European values – I’m gravely disappointed.”
Putin said that Russia did not “annex” Crimea, as the peninsula’s reunion with Russia is often described by foreign media and politicians.
We didn’t not annex it, we didn’t take it away. We gave people an opportunity to have their say and make a decision, which we took with respect. We protected them, I believe.”
We had to protect our compatriots, who live there (in Crimea). When we look at events in Donbass, Lugansk, Odessa, it becomes clear to us what would have happened to Crimea if we had not taken measures to provide free expression of will to people.”

'Russia to beef up nuclear deterrence potential'

Russia is going to boost its military forces and nuclear deterrence potential, Putin told the youth forum.
Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear states. It’s not words, it is the reality,” he said. “We are strengthening our nuclear deterrence forces, we are strengthening our armed forces…We are beefing up our potential and will continue doing so.”
This is being done “not to threaten anyone, “but to feel secure,” he added.

'Russia is not going to get involved in large-scale conflicts'

Russia will not get engaged in any large conflicts, but will defend itself in case of aggression, Putin warned.
Russia is far from getting involved any large-scale conflicts. We don’t want that and we are not going to do it. And, naturally, we should always be ready to repel any aggression against Russia,” Putin said.
Our partners – whatever condition their countries are in and whatever foreign policy concept they adhere to – should understand that it’s better not to mess with us,” Putin said. “Thank God, I believe it doesn’t occur to anyone to unleash a large-scale conflict with Russia.”

'Russia will seek acceptable compromises on Arctic'

Russia admits that other states have their interests in the Arctic – the region that is thought to contain vast reserves of oil and gas.
Both Russia and Canada, who along with the US, Norway and Denmark constitute the five states with Polar claims, have made legal attempts to secure their rights to large swathes of the Arctic, which is thought to contain 15 percent of the oil reserves and 30 percent of all natural gas in the world.
We will take the interests of these states into consideration and seek acceptable compromises,” Putin said, adding that Russia would “naturally” also defend its own interests.
The five Arctic states - Canada, Denmark, Norway, the Russia and the US – have for several years now been in a bitter dispute over how to divide up this resource-rich ‘pie’.

'Crimea recognition will be long and tedious'

It will take a long while for Crimea to be internationally recognizes as part of Russia, Putin believes.
He said he finds it “strange” and referred to an example with the recognition of Kosovo independence where a political will and desire were enough to make such a decision “easily.
He also recalled that in case with Kosovo, no referendum was held: the decision on independence was made by the parliament of the Serbian breakaway republic. In the situation with Crimea, there was both a decision by the parliament and a referendum. In Putin’s view, the latter was a more democratic way for a nation’s self-determination.

Link to the article, and public comments:



Thursday, August 28, 2014


Did Certain Foreign Governments Facilitate the 9/11 Attacks?
– and why is the US government keeping the evidence a secret?
by , August 29, 2014
This was supposed to have been the purpose of the 9/11 Commission, whose massivereport is now looked to as the primary source on the subject. Yet there is another, far more specific investigative report, the one issued by the intelligence committees of both houses of Congress, entitled "Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001."
If you actually take the time to read the report, all goes along swimmingly (except for occasional redactions) until you get to p. 369, whereupon the text is blacked out for the next twenty-eight pages.
What is in the twenty-eight censored pages? You aren’t allowed to know that, but members of Congress can read them provided they write to the heads of the Senate and House intelligence committees and get permission. If such is granted, they are escorted into a soundproof carefully guarded room in the company of various spooks, where they get to read the material: they aren’t allowed to take notes.
Do you get the impression someone has something to hide?
The censored section is entitled "Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters," and the introduction – left largely intact – is instructive:
"Through its investigation, the Joint Inquiry developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. The Joint Inquiry’s review confirmed that the Intelligence Community also has information, much of which has yet to be independently verified, concerning these potential sources of support. In their testimony, neither CIA nor FBI officials were able to address definitively the extent of such support for the hijackers globally or within the United States or the extent to which such support, if it exists, is knowing or inadvertent in nature."
The alleged Saudi connection to the 9/11 attacks has had a lot of play: it is widely believed that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 special permission was given to fly members of the Saudi royal family out of the country when the whole nation was in lockdown. This raised suspicions, along with the incontrovertible fact that the majorityof the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens. In a 2002 interview with Gwen Ifill on PBS, Senator Bob Graham of Florida, then on the Senate Intelligence Committee, went public with the news that foreign governments were in on the 9/11 attacks:
"GWEN IFILL: “Senator Graham, are there elements in this report, which are classified that Americans should know about but can’t?”
SEN. BOB GRAHAM: “Yes, going back to your question about what was the greatest surprise. I agree with what Senator Shelby said the degree to which agencies were not communicating was certainly a surprise but also I was surprised at the evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States.”
In the years since his retirement, Sen. Graham has been steadily pounding away at this point, and his persistence has usually been interpreted as a demand to reveal the extent of Saudi complicity in the attacks. And while the Saudis may well have been involved, either directly or otherwise, I would bring your attention to Graham’s statement and the introduction to the Joint Inquiry report, which indicate that more than one foreign government was involved. But if it wasn’t just the Saudis, then who else was involved?
We don’t have to rely on pure speculation, in spite of the fact that us ordinary peons in flyover country aren’t allowed to read those 28 pages. That’s because a few members of Congress have taken the trouble to apply for permission to read them, including Representatives Walter Jones (R-North Carolina), Tom Massie (R-Kentucky), and Stephen Lynch (D-Massachusetts). According to their own accounts, they came out of that soundproof spy-proof room reeling. Here’s what Jones says:
"I was absolutely shocked by what I read. What was so surprising was that those whom we thought we could trust really disappointed me…It does not deal with national security per se; it is more about relationships. The information is critical to our foreign policy moving forward and should thus be available to the American people. If the 9/11 hijackers had outside help – particularly from one or more foreign governments – the press and the public have a right to know what our government has or has not done to bring justice to the perpetrators."
"One or more foreign governments," eh? Who in the Middle East – or anywhere else, for that matter – are among "those whom we thought we could trust"? That doesn’t sound like the Saudis to me. Would anyone really be surprised or "disappointed" to learn that they were playing games behind our back?
Rep. Massie’s statement is even more revealing:
"I had to stop every two or three pages and rearrange my perception of history. And it’s that fundamental – those 28 pages….It certainly changes your view of the Middle East."
Would the discovery of Saudi perfidy "change your view of the Middle East" in a "fundamental" way? The Kingdom has been exporting its fanatic brand of Wahabism – fundamentalist Sunni ideology – spreading terrorism and political instability across the region for many years. So this is nothing new: and for those of us old enough to remember the Arab oil embargo of the 1970s, their two-timing nature is taken for granted.
Graham has been explicit in accusing the Saudis of financing at least some of the 9/11 hijackers, as well as facilitating their entry into the United States. However, the Joint Inquiry indicates that more than this was involved: the phrase "foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States" jumps out at me, at least implying that it wasn’t just financing – after all, how much did the 9/11 attacks actually cost Al Qaeda in terms of dollars and cents? – but also that operational assistance was given on the ground.
Given – by whom?
In the wake of 9/11, while the smoke from the downed World Trade Building was still clouding the skies over Manhattan, I noticed a news item in the Washington Post that rang all kinds of alarm bells, or at least it should have – although our vaunted Fourth Estate was too busy signing on to the newly-minted "war on terrorism" to notice. The story was headlined "Government Calls Several Cases ‘of Special Interest,’ Meaning Related to Post-Attacks Investigation." Reporter John Mintz related that at least 60 Israelis "of special interest to the government" had been rounded up and that several of these had training in counter-terrorist techniques. As I noted at the time:
"Well, spying is indeed a time-honored tradition, and something tells me these guys are no ordinary tourists, but since the US Government is keeping mum about everything connected with this investigation, we just don’t know. In rounding up untold hundreds of mostly Arab Muslim men, and interviewing thousands more, the Ashcroft Sweep is clearly designed to gather information that might lead them to the remaining conspirators. It could be that the Israelis, or at least some of them, fall into this category: while not being directly involved, maybe they know something. Nothing else could account for the government’s ‘special interest.’"
Not long after that, in the hard winter of 2001, Fox News ran a four-part series – part 1part 2part 3, and part 4 – reported by Carl Cameron that let the cat out of the bag.Part one started out with a bang:
"Since September 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, either under the new patriot anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations. A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States.
"There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9-11 attacks, but investigators suspect that they Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are ‘tie-ins.’ But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, ‘evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.’"
The Fox series detailed an extensive and highly sophisticated Israeli spy network inside the US – including not only hundreds of agents on the ground masquerading as "art students," but also hi-tech spying tapping into our phone system and US eavesdropping capabilities – with the first part ending in this dialogue between Cameron and Fox News anchor Brit Hume:
“HUME: Carl, what about this question of advanced knowledge of what was going to happen on 9-11? How clear are investigators that some Israeli agents may have known something? 
CAMERON: It’s very explosive information, obviously, and there’s a great deal of evidence that they say they have collected – none of it necessarily conclusive. It’s more when they put it all together. A bigger question, they say, is how could they not have know? Almost a direct quote."
Days after the broadcast of part four, the whole series disappeared from the Fox News site. The powerful pro-Israel lobby went after reporter Cameron, accusing him of anti-Semitism on account of his upbringing: he had grown up, in part, in the Middle East, where his father was an archeologist working in Iran. Pressure was applied to media organizations not to do any follow up reporting on this story of Israeli complicity.
Yet some major media organizations did pursue the story: Le Monde did a piece that added some new information:
"Six of the intercepted “students” had a cellular telephone bought by an Israeli ex-vice-consul in the United States. Two others, at an unspecified time, arrived in Miami by direct flight from Hamburg, and went to the residence of an FBI agent, to try to sell him artwork, left again for the Chicago airport to go to the residence of an agent of the justice department, then again took a plane directly for Toronto – all in one day.
"More than a third of these ‘students,’ who, according to the report, moved in at least 42 American cities, stated they resided in Florida. Five at least were intercepted in Hollywood, and two in Fort Lauderdale. Hollywood is a town of 25,000 inhabitants to the north of Miami, close to Fort Lauderdale. At least 10 of the 19 terrorists of 9/11 were residing in Florida."
Noting that Hollywood, Florida, was the stomping grounds of "four of the five members of the group that diverted American Airlines flight number 11," including ringleader Mohammed Atta, and going on to link others to the same area, Le Monde concluded:
"This convergence is, inter alia, the origin of the American conviction that one of the tasks of the Israeli ‘students’ would have been to track the Al-Qaida terrorists on their territory, without informing the federal authorities of the existence of the plot."
Salon.com did an excellent follow up by ace reporter Christopher Ketcham, and some others followed suit, but only here at Antiwar.com did we continue to consistentlyreport on this important story – arguably, along with the Snowden revelations, one of the biggest stories in the history of modern journalism.
When I first started writing about the question of Israeli complicity in the 9/11 attacks, I was told that I would henceforth be consigned to the margins: I was a "truther," a crackpot, and, naturally, an "anti-Semite." But why, I asked, would Fox News – surely one of the most pro-Israel news organizations on the planet – have run a four-part series pointing the finger directly at Israel if it didn’t comport with the facts? Why is this a "conspiracy theory" if the CIA’s own National Counterintelligence Center was concerned enough about those "art students" to post a warning about them on its official web site? The NCC noted, in March, 2001:
“In the past six weeks, employees in federal office buildings located throughout the United States have reported suspicious activities connected with individuals representing themselves as foreign students selling or delivering artwork. Employees have observed both males and females attempting to bypass facility security and enter federal buildings.”
Ketcham, writing in Salon, theorized that the "art students" were a ploy to divert attention away from the hijackers, and, perhaps, to simultaneously shield Atta and his crew from US counterintelligence.
It would serve the Israelis well to concentrate exclusively on the alleged Saudi connection to 9/11, and this has been the case so far. Yet the public statements of those who have actually seen the censored 28 pages in the Joint Inquiry report do not comport with this narrow focus. What else other than evidence of Israeli complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks would cause these members of Congress to "rearrange" their "perception of history"? Can you think of a better description of the Israelis than "those whom we thought we could trust," as Rep. Jones put it?
I would also note that both Massie and Jones took the unusual step of voting "no" on funding the Israeli "Iron Dome" antimissile system, along with a tiny minority in both parties. Why do you suppose that is?
So the question boils down to – Why? Why would the Israelis, who were tracking the Israelis on our territory, not only fail to let us know but perhaps act to shield them from law enforcement’s gaze? The answer, I believe, is indicated by the role played byIsrael since the attacks in agitating for US military action in the Middle East. In 2003, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, anticipating the Iraq war, declared that Syria, Iran, and Libya had to be "disarmed" as well. And Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking to a conference at Bar Ilan University in 2008, was more direct. As reported by Israeli news outlets Ha’aretz and Ma’ariv:
“’We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq,’ Ma’ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events ‘swung American public opinion in our favor.’” 
What’s in the 28 censored pages of the Joint Inquiry into 9/11? We don’t know for sure – but if Israel is involved, then we do know why they won’t let us read those pages.
Representatives Jones, Lynch, and Massie have sparked a movement to declassify the 28 pages: go here for more information. This is a fight we need to win – but we can only do it by raising a huge stink. Call or write your congressional representatives and urge them to join the three congressmen who are fighting for your right to know. And spread the word.
Whatever Western political leaders say, and the Western "news" media report. . . 
it ain't necessarily so!

"Russian Invasion" Of Ukraine, Turns Out to Have Been a Translation Error

By Moon Of Alabama


After all major news-entities repeated the "invasion" claim and the public damage is done they simply take it back.


...This is a quite amazing "information operation" without doubt of U.S. origin.

Consider: The Ukrainian President talks about Russian affiliated insurgents in east-Ukraine and Reuters and others distribute this as "invasion". After all major news-entities repeated the "invasion" claim and the public damage is done they simply take it back.

Consider this from Tagesschau, the highest rated German TV news show:
Translation:
On #Ukraine there was a translation error by the agency Reuters: According to the correction Poroshenko did not talk of an invasion.
So there was an "invasion", distributed by major news agencies, which then turns out to have been a translation error or an intentional Poroshenko 'screw up'.

Notice that one author of the NYT piece above is Michael Gordon, who, together with Judith Miller, wrote sensational reports about proof of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. 

The current head of NATO who is promoting war against Russia, Fogh-of-war Rassmussen, said 11 years ago: "Iraq has WMDs. It is not something we think, it is something we know".

These folks and the western news agencies that promoted the WMD in Iraq claims are now claiming a Russian "invasion" in Ukraine only to retract it when the damage is done. Warmongers. All of them.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/ 






The U.S. bullying of Russia and China will have “unintended consequences”. Why should we be surprised?!

The Nail In The Petrodollar Coffin
Gazprom Begins Accepting Payment For Oil In Ruble, Yuan

By Tyler Durden

"...The president's policies put an end to dollar hegemony and end the reserve currency status of the dollar once and for all, thereby starting the rapid, and uncontrolled, collapse of the US empire..."

...According to the newspaper, the change in currency was made because of the Western sanctions against Russia.

As a protective measure, Russia decided to avoid making its payments in US dollars, which can be tracked and controlled by the United States government...


...In retrospect it will be very fitting that the crowning legacy of Obama's disastrous reign, both domestically and certainly internationally, will be to force the world's key ascendent superpowers (we certainly don't envision broke, insolvent Europe among them) to drop the Petrodollar and end the reserve status of the US currency.
As of this moment, both Russia and China have shown not only that it can be done, but it is done. Expect everyone to jump onboard the new superpower axis bandwagon soon enough."



Wednesday, August 27, 2014


The Pentagon’s Strategy for World Domination: Full Spectrum Dominance, from Asia to Africa

By Bruce K. Gagnon 
20 August, 2014. 
 Missile-Defense-How-it-would-work
The Pentagon’s missile system.

Current US military space policy is primarily geared toward two countries, China and Russia.

In May 2000 the Washington Post published an article called “For Pentagon, Asia Moving to Forefront.” The article stated that, “The Pentagon is looking at Asia as the most likely arena for future military conflict, or at least competition.” The article said the US would double its military presence in the region and essentially attempt to manage China.
The Pentagon has become the primary resource extraction service for corporate capital. 
Whether it is Caspian Sea oil and natural gas, rare earth minerals found in Africa, Libya’s oil deposits, or Venezuelan oil, the US’s increasingly high-tech military is on the case.
President Obama’s former National Security Adviser, Gen. James Jones had previously served as the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. In 2006, Gen. Jones told the media, “NATO is developing a special plan to safeguard oil and gas fields in the [Caspian Sea] region…. Our strategic goal is to expand to Eastern Europe and Africa.”
In a past quadrennial National Intelligence Strategy report, former U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair claimed that Russia “may continue to seek avenues for reasserting power and influence in ways that complicate U.S. interests…[and] China competes for the same resources the United States needs, and is in the process of rapidly modernizing its military.”
Using NATO as a military tool, the US is now surrounding Russia and easily dragged the supposedly European-based alliance into the Afghanistan war and Libya attack. The US is turning NATO into a global military alliance, even to be used in the Asian-Pacific region.

ENERGY & MISSILE OFFENSE

In mid-March of 2009 the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency (MDA) held a conference in Washington. At that meeting Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) stated, “Missile defense is an important element of our nation’s defense. For example, it is a high priority to field effective defenses for our forward-deployed forces against the many hundreds of existing short- and medium-range missiles.” 
patriot
Patriot missiles.

The Obama administration is currently deploying “missile defense” (MD) systems in Turkey, Romania, Poland and on Navy destroyers entering the Black Sea. The NATO military noose is tightening around Russia.
Russia has the world’s largest deposits of natural gas and significant supplies of oil. The US has recently built military bases in Romania and Bulgaria and will soon be adding more in Albania. NATO has expanded eastward into Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, right on Russia’s border. Georgia, Ukraine, Sweden and Finland are also on the list to become members of the cancerous NATO.

An Indian journalist observes,
“The arc of encirclement of Russia gets strengthened. NATO ties facilitate the [eventual] deployment of the US missile defense system in Georgia. The US aims to have a chain of countries tied to ‘partnerships’ with NATO brought into its missile defense system – stretching from its allies in the Baltic to those in Central Europe. The ultimate objective of this is to neutralize the strategic capability of Russia and China and to establish its nuclear superiority. The National Defense Strategy document, issued by the Pentagon on July 31, 2008, portrays Washington’s perception of a resurgent Russia and a rising China as potential adversaries.”

Just as we have seen the balkanization of Yugoslavia, Libya, and Iraq by US-NATO it appears that the same strategy has been developed for Russia. With NATO’s continuing military encirclement of Russia the plan appears to be to draw Moscow into a military quagmire in Ukraine that will weaken that nation. The Rand Corporation has studies that call for the break-up of Russia into many smaller pieces thus giving western corporations better access to the vast resource base available there.
The recent announcement by BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) that they have created a $100 billion international development bank to rival the IMF and World Bank has angered western corporate controlled governments who don’t want any challenge to their management of the global economy. Directly after the BRICS announcement we witnessed an escalation of the US-NATO funded and directed civil war in Ukraine.
The Harper government is now recommending that Canada join the US missile defense program. Canadian military corporations are itching to open the flood gates to the national treasury – the profits from a junior partnership with the US in an arms race in space are too much to pass up. But first more cuts must be made to the Canadian national health care program and other valuable social welfare programs. In the US the military industrial complex has targeted the “entitlement programs” – Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and what is left of “welfare” for defunding to help pay for the expensive military space technology agenda.
Canada has also undertaken the construction of “armed combat vessels” at the Irving Shipyard in Halifax. This $25 billion program, the largest military appropriation in Canadian history, was supported by every political party in the country. Why does Canada need such a monumental war ship building program?

 THE NAVY’S EXPANDING ROLE

As ice melts in the Arctic, the US Navy anticipates that it will have to increase its presence in the region to “protect shipping”. Over the past 25 years, the Arctic has seen a 40% reduction in ice as a result of global warming. Maine’s Independent Senator Angus King recently wrote “gas and oil reserves that were previously inaccessible” will soon be available for extraction. Last spring Sen. King took a ride on a US nuclear submarine under the Arctic ice. Also along for the ride was Admiral Jonathan Greenert, the chief of naval operations, who told the New York Times: “We need to be sure that our sensors, weapons and people are proficient in this part of the world,” so that we can “own the undersea domain and get anywhere there.”

aegis

A new Navy report called “US Navy Arctic Roadmap: 2014-2030” states: “Ice in the Arctic has been receding faster than we previously thought…and offers an increase in activity.” The Arctic region holds a plethora of undiscovered fossil fuels and natural resources, including an estimated 90 billion barrels of oil, 1,669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 44 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, the roadmap says.
The report warns that the Navy will face serious logistical challenges and will need to examine ways to distribute fuel in the region to “air and surface platforms”. Operating bases will be needed to host deployed military personnel. Partnerships with nations that border the Arctic and more warships will be needed to ensure that the undersea resources are kept in the hands of US-NATO and away from competitors like Russia.
US Secretary of War Chuck Hagel stated in late 2013 that, “By taking advantage of multilateral training opportunities with partners in the region, we will enhance our cold-weather operational experience, and strengthen our military-to-military ties with other Arctic nations.”

 SCUPPERING PEACE

President Obama has in the past called for the abolition of nuclear weapons. The Russians, watching an advancing NATO and MD deployments near their borders, are telling the world that any real hopes for serious nuclear weapons reductions are in jeopardy.

images9J5XIP4U
Russia and China attempt to prohibit space weapons at the United Nations.

Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev delivered the opening address at the “Overcoming Nuclear Dangers” conference in Rome on April 16, 2009. He noted, “Unless we address the need to demilitarize international relations, reduce military budgets, put an end to the creation of new kinds of weapons and prevent weaponization of outer space, all talk about a nuclear-weapon-free world will be just inconsequential rhetoric.”
The entire US military empire is tied together using space technology. With military satellites in space the US can see virtually everything on the Earth, can intercept all communications on the planet, and can target virtually any place at any time. Russia and China understand that the US military goal is to achieve “full spectrum dominance” on behalf of corporate capital.
Using new space technologies to coordinate and direct modern warfare also enables the military industrial complex to reap massive profits as it constructs the architecture for what the aerospace industry claims will be the “largest industrial project” in Earth history.

 TARGET: ASIA

The deployment of Navy Aegis destroyers in the Asian-Pacific region, with MD interceptors on-board, ostensibly to protect against North Korean missile launches, gives the US greater ability to launch preemptive first-strike attacks on China.
The US now has 30 ground-based MD interceptors deployed in South Korea. Many peace activists there maintain that the ultimate target of these systems is not North Korea, but China and Russia.

Europian_Missile_Defense
Europe’s leaders are complicit in Full Spectrum Dominance.

The current US military expansion underway in Hawaii, South Korea, Japan, Guam, Okinawa, Taiwan, Australia, Philippines and other Pacific nations is indeed a key strategy in this offensive “pivot” to control China. An additional US goal is to have the “host” countries make significant contributions toward helping the Pentagon cover the cost of this massively expensive escalation.
For many years the US Space Command has been annually war gaming a first-strike attack on China. Set in the year 2017 the Pentagon first launches the military space plan that flies through the heavens and unleashes a devastating first-strike attack on China’s nuclear forces – part of the new “Global Strike” program. 
In the war game China then attempts to launch a retaliatory strike with its tens of nuclear missiles capable of hitting the west coast of the continental US. But US “missile defense” systems, currently deployed in Japan, South Korea, Australia, Guam and Taiwan, help take out China’s disabled nuclear response.

 base protest
Peaceful protestors, Japan.

Obama’s former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ comments were quite revealing in 2009 when he said, “We’re converting more Navy Aegis ships to have ballistic missile defense that would help against China.”
Missile defense, sold to the public as a purely defensive system, is really designed by the Pentagon to be the shield after the first-strike sword has lunged into the heart of a particular nation’s nuclear arsenal.
Living in Bath, Maine, I have a special perspective on this US-China military competition. In my town, the Navy builds the Aegis destroyers that are outfitted with MD systems. Congressional leaders from my state maintain that more Pentagon funds for Aegis shipbuilding are needed to “contain” China.
Renowned author Noam Chomsky says US foreign and military policy is now all about controlling most of the world’s oil supply as a “lever of world domination.” One way to keep Europe, China, India and other emerging markets dependent on the US and in sync with its policies is to maintain control of the fossil fuel supply they’re reliant on. Even as the US economy is collapsing, the Pentagon appears to be saying, whoever controls the keys to the world’s economic engine still remains in charge.
China, for example, imports up to 80% of its oil on ships through the Yellow Sea. If any competitor nation was able to militarily control that transit route and choke off China’s oil supply, its economy could be held hostage.
One is able to see how the Pentagon will use the South Korean Navy base on Jeju Island, now being constructed despite a seven-year determined non-violent campaign opposing the base, to support the potential coastal blockade of China.

hiroshima
Victim of US nuclear weapons: Hiroshima, 1945.

fallujah
Victim of Anglo-American nuclear weapons: Fallujah, 2004.


CONCLUSIONS

For many years Russia and China have introduced resolutions at the UN calling for negotiations on a new treaty that would ban weapons in space. Since the mid-‘80s every UN member nation has supported the “Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space” (PAROS) resolution, with the exception of the US, Israel, and Micronesia. This was true during the Clinton presidency as well as during the reign of George W. Bush and now under Obama as well.
A full-blown arms race between the US, Russia and China will be a disaster for the world and would make life on Earth less secure. At the very time that global resources are urgently needed to deal with the coming harsh realities of climate change and growing poverty, we can hardly afford to see more money wasted on the further militarization of space and greater superpower conflict.
The Pentagon actually has the largest carbon boot print on the planet. 
The US insisted that the Pentagon be excluded from the Kyoto climate change protocols and refused to sign the agreements unless the Pentagon was exempted.
As the US undertakes arming the world to the benefit of corporate globalization our local communities have become addicted to military spending. As we oppose the aggressive US military empire overseas we must also talk about the job issue back at home. Calling for conversion of the military industrial complex, demanding that our industrial base be transformed to create a renewable energy infrastructure for the 21st century, helps us come into coalition with weapons production workers who must now support the killing machine if they hope to feed their families.

nuclear explosion
UK Ministry of Defence warns of new technologies’ potential to trigger a ‘doomsday scenario’.

Studies have long shown that conversion from military production to creating needed systems like rail, solar or wind turbines not only help deal with the challenges of climate change but also create many more jobs.
It’s ultimately a question about the soul of the nation – what does it say about us as a people when we continue to build weapons to kill people around the world so workers can put food on the table back home?
What is needed now more than ever is unified global campaigning across issue lines. Peace, social justice, environment, labor and other movements must work harder to link our issues and build integrated grassroots movements against the destructive power of the corporate oligarchies that run most of our western governments. The rush to privatize social welfare and the privatization of foreign and military policy must be challenged if we are to successfully protect the future generations.

Bruce K. Gagnon is the Coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space and is author of the book Come Together Right Now: Organizing Stories from a Fading Empire. He lives in Bath, Maine.   www.space4peace.org 




When you want more than the 'junk news' in the mainstream media, watch The Real News:

donate to The Real News



The Powers Behind The Islamic State
Investigative journalist Nafeez Ahmed gives specific examples of how Saudi, Qatari, and American interests have supported the group formerly known as ISIS, and what the global community can do now to reign them in
Go to story | Go to homepage

What Is the Dahiya Doctrine?
Michael Ratner: A recent release by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange shows brutal depths of Israeli policy towards Gaza
Go to story | Go to homepage

Falk: US Limits Ability of UN To Hold Israel Accountable for War Crimes
Princeton University Professor Richard Falk discusses how the powers of the UN are limited since the United States sets the agenda
Go to story | Go to homepage