19-07-2014, 05:59 PM
Russia
19-07-2014, 07:01 PM
City of London’s Imperialist Designs on Russia
Posted on 07/01/2014 | 1 Comment
1997 - 3-2 - Costa Rica - San Jose - Just short of paradiseYesterday the EU and US imposed additional sanctions on Russia, while 150 US troops landed in neighboring Estonia for military exercises. Two months after Ukraine’s democratically-elected President Viktor Yanukovych fled the country amidst the MI6/CIA/Mossad-orchestrated putsch in Kiev(http://deanhenderson.wordpress.com/2014/...ter-thumb/), the West continues to ramp up its aggression against Russia, despite repeated attempts at diplomacy by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
So what else is new?
The Rothschild-led City of London bankers have held grand imperialist designs on Russia’s rich natural resources for two centuries, always to be stymied by the odd nationalist czar or Stalinist. Putin thwarted their latest attempts when he jailed Israeli dual citizen Mikail Khodorkovsky and re-nationalized much of Russia’s energy sector. It is no coincidence that one Russian official sanctioned yesterday was Igor Sechin – president of Russian oil giant Rosneft, of which BP still owns a 20 % share.
(Excerpted from Chapter 17: Caspian Sea Oil Grab: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)
Unholy Alliance
While the international banking syndicates had always dealt with the Soviet Union, access to its vast oil resources remained limited until Ronald Reagan entered the White House in 1980, determined to splinter the Soviet Union into little pieces and open the country’s oilfields to the Four Horsemen. His point man in doing so was CIA Director Bill Casey, whose Roman Catholic Knights of Malta connections were thoroughly exploited.
The Vatican’s secretive Opus Dei “saintly Mafia” was behind the ascent of Polish Cardinal Karol Wojtyla to the Papacy. Wojtyla became Pope John Paul II and launched an Opus Dei/Vatican offensive to roll back Latin American liberation theology movements and East European communism. Fascism came naturally to Karol Wojtyla. During the 1940’s he was a chemical salesman for Nazi combine I. G. Farben. Wojtyla sold the Nazis the cyanide they used at their Auschwitz death camps. One of his best friends was Dr. Wolf Szmuness, mastermind of the 1978 Center for Disease Control Hepatitis B study in the US, through which the AIDS virus was introduced into the gay population. [722]
In 1982 Reagan met with Pope John Paul II. Prior to the meeting Reagan signed NSD-32, authorizing a wide range of economic, diplomatic and covert activities to “neutralize the USSR’s hold on Eastern Europe”. At the meeting the two agreed to launch a clandestine program to tear Eastern Europe away from the Soviets. Poland, the Pope’s country of origin, would be the key. Catholic priests, the AFL-CIO, the National Endowment for Democracy, the Vatican Bank and CIA would all be deployed.
The Vatican is the world’s largest owner of equities, using Swiss affiliate Banco di Roma per la Svizzera to conduct its more discretionary business. Italian fascist Benito Mussolini gave the Vatican generous tax exemptions which it still enjoys. Banco Ambrosiano’s P-2 leader Robert Calvi’s Grand Oriente Freemason’s supported reconciliation with the Vatican. Relations between the Vatican and the Freemasons were strained in the 11th century when the Greek Orthodox split from the Roman Catholics. Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaler of St. John factions emerged. The latter was the Catholic faction. They changed their name to the Knights of Malta, after the island where they found refuge after their Crusades defeat, with help from the Vatican. Malta is a nexus of CIA/MI6/Mossad intrigues.
In the 13th century Pope Clement V, backed by France’s King Philip, charged the Protestant Knights Templars with heresy, citing their penchant for drug running, arms peddling, gambling and prostitution rings. These activities are what made the Templars “filthy rich”. Pope Clement made an example of Templar leader Jaques de Molay, whom he burned at the stake on Friday the 13th. [723] The Templars took their loot and fled to Scotland to found Scottish Rite Freemasonry. They bankrolled the House of Windsor, which controls Britain and presides at the apex of Freemasonry around the world. Masonic Lodge members enroll their children in the de Molay Society, which is named in honor of the toasted Templar pirate.
Calvi’s attempt to reconcile protestant and Catholic secret societies was a success. He became paymaster to the Polish Solidarity movement, while Nixon Treasury Secretary David Kennedy’s dirty Continental Illinois Bank served as conduit for CIA funds sent by Bank of Cicero asset Bishop Paul Marcinkus to fund Solidarity. [724] The Vatican teamed up with Europe’s Black Nobility, the Bilderbergers and CIA to launch the top-secret JASON Society and armed South American dictators to quash liberation theology. In 1978 when Pope John Paul II took power, the Vatican issued a commemorative stamp featuring an Egyptian pyramid and the Roshaniya all-seeing eye. [725] The Vatican and the Illuminati Brotherhood were reunited.
Reagan’s meetings with Pope John Paul II were an affirmation of this powerful new alliance, which would now focus on bringing the Soviet Union to its knees. Even before Reagan met with the Pope the CIA had groomed an informant at the Polish Ministry of Defense- Colonel Ryszard Kuklinski. Kuklinski reported to the Vatican and helped organize the Polish Solidarity Movement, led by the wealthy Radziwill family who had funded JFK assassins via Permindex. Most Solidarity leaders were old-money aristocrats.
The precursor to Solidarity was the National Alliance of Solidarists, a Russian/Eastern European fascist hit squad funded by RD/Shell’s Sir Henry Deterding and German Vickers Arms Corporation President Sir Basil Zacharoff. Sir Auckland Geddes of Rio Tinto Zinc, which bankrolled Francisco Franco’s fascist coup in Spain, also contributed to the Solidarists. Geddes’ nephew- Ford Irvine Geddes- was chairman of the Inchcape’s Peninsular & Orient Navigation Company from 1971-1972. [726]
The Solidarist’s US headquarters was the Tolstoy Foundation, which is housed in the same building as Julius Klein Associates, which ran guns to the murderous Haganah and Stern Gang Zionist death squads who stole Palestinian lands to found Israel. Klein was an M16 Permindex insider who helped plan the JFK hit.
The Solidarists stepchild, the Solidarity Movement, was touted in the Western media as a great Polish liberating force. With boatloads of CIA help, Solidarity toppled the Communist government in Warsaw. Their straw man Lech Walesa became President of Poland. In 1995 Walesa was defeated by former Communist leader Aleksander Kwasniewski. Walesa was rewarded for his boot licking with a job at Pepsico.
CIA Director Casey demanded a constant focus on Eastern Europe at CIA. Casey met often with Philadelphia Roman Catholic Cardinal John Krol to discuss the Solidarity Movement. He utilized his Knights of Malta connections, leaning heavily on Brother Vernon Walters, whose spook resume read like a James Bond novel. Walter’s latest incarnation was Reagan Ambassador at Large to Vatican Secretary of State Agostino Cardinal Casaroli. [727] By 1991 Walters was US Ambassador to the UN, where he successfully beat the drums of war against Iraq. He was in Fiji that same year, just prior to the overthrow of that left-leaning government.
Other Knights of Malta members involved in the Eastern European destabilization effort were Reagan NSA and Robert Vesco lieutenant Richard Allen, Reagan NSA Judge William Clark, Reagan Ambassador to the Vatican William Wilson and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Other prominent Knights of Malta members include Prescott Bush, Nixon Treasury Secretary William Simon, Nixon coup-plotter Alexander Haig,contra supporter J. Peter Grace and Venezuelan Rockefeller lieutenant Gustavo Cisneros.
The Reagan team had a five-part strategy in its efforts to destroy the Soviet Union. First, it would pursue the JASON Society’s Star Wars concept in an attempt to engage the Soviets in a space-based arms race which they knew Moscow could not afford. Second, the CIA would launch covert operations in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary in attempts to overthrow those Soviet-allied governments. While Walesa emerged in Poland, poet Vaclev Havel became CIA white knight in Czechoslovakia. Like Walesa, Havel became unpopular and was soon tossed out of his puppet presidency.
A component of the CIA destabilization program was to buy weapons from these East European nations to arm CIA-sponsored rebels in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Angola and Mozambique, using BCCI and later BNL as conduits. The US also wanted to get their hands on the high-tech Soviet arsenal. Poland secretly sold the US an array of advanced Soviet weaponry worth $200 million. Romania did the same. Both countries saw their foreign debts reduced significantly. [728]
The third component of the Reagan strategy was to make financial aid to the Warsaw Pact contingent on economic privatization. Fourth, the US would blanket East European and Soviet airwaves with pro-Western propaganda, using fronts like Radio Liberty, Radio Free Europe and the Voice of America. The CIA financed local newspapers and magazines.
The Company got help inside the Soviet Union from its Mossad buddies in an effort spearheaded by media mogul and Mossad paymaster Robert Maxwell. When Maxwell threatened to reveal a meeting between KGB head Vladimir Kryuchkov and Mossad brass aboard his private yacht at which a coup against Mikhail Gorbachev was discussed, Mossad ordered a hit on Maxwell. On November 4, 1991 as he sailed around the Canary Islands Maxwell was assassinated by Israeli commandos. The mass exodus of Russian Jews to Israeli-occupied settlements in Palestine was part of the secret deal between Mossad and Kryuchkov, who is still serving time in a Moscow prison for his treasonous role in the Gorbachev coup. [729]
But it was the fifth and final component of Reagan’s strategy that had the Four Horsemen salivating. Reagan’s spooks initiated an economic warfare campaign against the Soviet Union, which included a freeze on technology transfers, counterfeiting of the Russianruble and the sponsoring of separatist Islamist groups in the Soviet Central Asian Caucasus. The jihadis who were instructed to target a key transcontinental natural gas pipeline which the Soviets were building. The Soviets had more natural gas than any country on earth and saw the completion of this pipeline as their cash cow for the 21st century. [730] Big Oil wanted to milk that cow.
It’s the Oil, Stupid
When the Soviet Union’s last President Mikhail Gorbachev announced his perestroika and glasnost campaigns to privatize his country’s economy, he was aiding the Illuminati in destroying his country. Was Gorbachev duped, an unwitting accomplice, a CIA deep-cover agent or a mind-controlled Operation Presidio Temple of Set victim? Whatever the case, he played a key role in dismantling the Soviet Union.
The Soviets controlled not only the vast resources of their own nation, but Third World resources in Soviet-allied Comecon nations. Part ofperestroika was to cease Soviet aid to these developing nations to ease the growing Soviet debt burden which, like the US debt, accrued largely from decades of Cold War military spending. The two superpowers’ debt was held by the same international banks, which now used this debt lever to pick a winner and to open Russian and Third World resource pools to their corporate tentacles. [731]
When the Berlin Wall fell and Gorbachev was overthrown in favor of IMF crony Boris Yeltsin, the Four Horsemen rushed to Moscow to begin making oil deals. Oil and natural gas had always been the Soviet’s main export and it remained so for the new Russia. In 1991, the country earned $13 billion in hard currency from oil exports. In 1992 Yeltsin announced that Russia’s world leading 9.2 billion barrel/day oil sector would be privatized.
Sixty percent of Russia’s Siberian reserves had never been tapped. [732] In 1993 the World Bank announced a $610 billion loan to modernize Russia’s oil industry- by far the largest loan in the bank’s history. World Bank subsidiary International Finance Corporation bought stock in several Russian oil companies and made an additional loan to the Bronfman’s Conoco for its purchase of Siberian Polar Lights Company. [733]
The main vehicle for international banker control over Russian oil was Lukoil, initially 20%-owned by BP Amoco and Credit Suisse First Boston, where Clinton Yugoslav envoy and Dayton Peace Accords architect Richard Holbrooke worked. Bush Sr. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, who orchestrated the BNL cover-up, was now CS First Boston’s Chief Financial Officer. A handful of Zionist Russian oligarchs, collectively known as the Russian Mafia, owned the rest of Lukoil, which served as the Saudi ARAMCO of Russia for the Four Horsemen, a partner to Big Oil in projects throughout the country which involved truly staggering amounts of capital.
These included Sakhalin Islands projects known as Sakhalin I, a $15 billion Exxon Mobil venture; and Sakhalin II, a $10 billion deal led by Royal Dutch/Shell which included Mitsubishi, Mitsui and Marathon Oil as partners. Siberian developments were even larger. RD/Shell is a 24.5% partner in Uganskneftegasin, which controls a huge Siberian natural gas field. At Priobskoye, BP Amoco operates a $53 billion project. At Timan Pechora on the Arctic Ocean a consortium made up of Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco and Norsk Hydo runs a $48 billion venture.
In November 2001 Exxon Mobil announced plans to invest another $12 billion in an oil and gas project in the Russian Far East. RD/Shell announced a $8.5 billion investment in its Sakhalin Islands concessions. BP Amoco made similar proclamations. [734] In 1994 Lukoil pumped 416 million barrels of oil, making it fourth largest producer in the world after RD/Shell, Exxon Mobil and part-owner BP Amoco. Its fifteen billion barrels in crude reserves rank second in the world to Royal Dutch/ Shell. [735]
The Soviet Caucasus, with encouragement from Langley, soon split from Russia. The map of Central Asia was re-written as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine and Georgia all declared their independence. The pipeline Reagan ordered targeted carried Soviet natural gas east to the North Pacific port of Vladivostok and west to the Black Sea port of Novorrossiysk from the world’s richest known natural gas fields lying beneath and abutting the shoreline of the Caspian Sea, which lies in the heart of Caucasus.
The Four Horsemen coveted this resource more than any in the world. They wanted to build their own private pipelines once they got their hands on the Caspian Sea natural gas fields, which also contain an estimated 200 billion barrels of crude oil. Oil industry privatizations were quickly announced in the new Central Asian Republics which had, by virtue of their independence, taken control of the vast Caspian Sea oil and gas reserves. By 1991 Chevron was holding talks with Kazakhstan. [736]
The Central Asian Republics became the largest recipients of USAID aid, as well as ExIm Bank, OPIC and CCC loans. Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan were especially favored. These countries control the shoreline of the Caspian Sea, along with Russia and Iran. In 1994 Kazakhstan received $311 million in US aid and another $85 million to help dismantle Soviet-era nuclear weapons. President Clinton met with Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev. They signed an array of agreements ranging from disarmament deals to space research cooperation. Kazakhstan, with an estimated 17.6 billion barrels of oil reserves, had been a strategic part of the Soviet nuclear weapons grid and was home to the Soviet space program.
The two leaders also signed an agreement providing investment protection for US multinationals. The Free Trade Institute and US Chamber of Commerce sent officials to train Kazakhs in the finer arts of global capitalism. The Four Horsemen moved in swiftly. Chevron Texaco laid claim to the biggest prize- the $20 billion Tenghiz oilfield- then grabbed another gusher at Korolev. Exxon Mobil signed a deal to develop an offshore concession in the Caspian. [737] Tengizchevroil is 45%-owned by Chevron Texaco and 25%-owned by Exxon Mobil. [738] President George W. Bush’s NSA and later Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice, an expert on Central Asia, sat on the board at Chevron alongside George Schultz from 1989-1992. She even had an oil tanker named after her.
Across the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan was receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in US aid. BP Amoco led a consortium of seven oil giants who spent an initial $8 billion to develop three concessions off the coast of the capital Baku- historic base camp of Big Oil in the region. [739] BP Amoco and Pennzoil- recently acquired by Royal Dutch/Shell- took control of the Azerbaijan Oil Company, whose board of directors included former Bush Sr. Secretary of State James Baker.
In 1991 Air America super spook Richard Secord showed up in Baku under the cover of MEGA Oil. [740] Secord & Company did military training, sold Israeli arms, passed “brown bags filled with cash” and shipped in over 2,000 Islamist fighters from Afghanistan with help from Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Afghan heroin began flooding into Baku. Russian economist Alexandre Datskevitch said of 184 heroin labs that police discovered in Moscow in 1991, “Every one of them was run by Azeris, who use the proceeds to buy arms for Azerbaijan’s war against Armenia in Nagorno-Karabakh”. [741]
A Turkish intelligence source claims that Exxon and Mobil were behind the 1993 coup against elected Armenian President Abulfaz Elchibey. Secord’s Islamists helped. Osama bin Laden set up an NGO in Baku as a base for attacking the Russians in Chechnya and Dagestan. A more pliant President Heidar Aliyev was installed. In 1996, at the behest of Amoco’s president, he was invited to the White House to meet President Clinton- whose NSA Sandy Berger held $90,000 worth of Amoco stock. [742]
Armenian separatists backed by the CIA took over the strategic Armenian regions of Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhnichevan which border Turkey and Iran. When Turkish President Turgut Ozal mentioned intervention in Nakhnichevan to back the Azerbaijani seizure, Turkish Premier Suleyman Demirel quickly played down the statement from the key US ally. These two regions are critical to Big Oil plans to build a pipeline from the Caspian Sea across Turkey to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorrossiysk. The same route is utilized by Turkey’s Gray Wolves mafia in their Central Asia to Europe heroin endeavors. When Gray Wolf Mehmet Ali Agca tried to assassinate Pope John Paul II in 1981, the CIA used its Gladio strategy, trying to pin it on Bulgaria’s Communist Lukashenko government.
Lukoil owns 26% of the Russian Black Sea port at Novorrossiysk. Its president Vayit Alekperov wanted to build the Caspian pipeline through Grozny in Chechnya, while the Four Horsemen preferred the route through Turkey. CIA support for Armenian separatists and Chechen Islamist rebels ensured chaos in Grozny. Alekperov finally agreed to the Turkish route.
In 2003 the Defense Department proposed a $3.8 million military training grant for Azerbaijan. Later they admitted it was to protect US access to oil. As author Michael Klare put it, “Slowly but surely, the US military is being converted into a global oil-protection service”. [743]
Turkmenistan, which borders the Caspian Sea on the southeast, is a virtual gas republic, containing massive deposits of natural gas. It also has vast reserves of oil, copper, coal, tungsten, zinc, uranium and gold. The biggest gas field is at Dauletabad in the southeast of the country, near the Afghan border. The Unocal-led Centgas set about building a pipeline which would connect the oil fields around Chardzhan to the Siberian oilfields further north. More crucial to Centgas was a gas pipeline from Dauletabad across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. [744] Advisers to the project included Henry Kissinger. Unocal is now part of Chevron.
With the Four Horsemen firmly in charge of Caspian Sea reserves, the Caspian Pipeline Consortium was born. Chevron Texaco took a 15% stake with the other three Horsemen and Lukoil splitting the rest. Pipeline security was provided by the Israeli firm Magal Security Systems, which is connected to Mossad. Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan have especially cozy relations with Israel via Special Ambassador Yusef Maiman, who is president of the Israeli Mehrav Group. Mehrav is involved in a project in Turkey to divert water from the upper Tigres and Euphrates Rivers to the southeast part of Turkey and away from Iraq. [745] The Caspian pipeline was built by Bechtel in partnership with GE and Wilbros Group. The pipeline quietly began moving oil and gas in November 2001, just two months after 911.
Bechtel also built the oilfield infrastructure at Tengiz for Chevron Texaco. In 1995 Bechtel led a USAID-funded consortium to restructure the energy sectors of eleven Central and Eastern European nations in line with IMF mandates. Bechtel received a massive contract to upgrade Russia’s many ailing aluminum smelters in tandem with Pechiney. Lukoil contracted with New Jersey-based ABB Lummus Crest (formed when engineering giants Asea Braun Boveri and Lummis Crest merged) to build a $1.3 billion refinery at the Novorrossysk port and to do a $700 million upgrade on its refinery at Perm.
The Bush Jr. Administration now planned a series of additional Caspian Sea pipelines to compliment the Tenghiz-Black Sea route. A Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pipeline was built by a Four Horsemen consortium led by BP Amoco. The law firm representing the BP-led consortium is James Baker’s family law firm- Baker Botts. The BP Amoco pipeline runs the length of the country of Georgia through its capital Tblisi.
In February 2002 the US announced plans to send 200 military advisers and attack helicopters to Georgia to “root our terrorism”. [746] The deployment was a smokescreen for pipeline protection. In September 2002 Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivaniov accused Georgia of harboring Chechen rebels. In October 2003 Georgian President Eduard Schevardnadze was forced to step down in a bloodless revolution. According to a December 11, 2003 article on the World Socialist Party website, CIA sponsored the coup.
In September 2004 hundreds of Russian school children were killed when Chechen separatists seized their school building. Russian President Vladimir Putin said of the incident, “Certain political circles in the West want to weaken Russia, just like the Romans wanted to weaken Carthage.” He accused “foreign intelligence services” of complicity in the attacks. His adviser Aslanbek Aslakhanov went further, stating on Russian Channel 2 News, “The men had their conversations not within Russia, but with other countries. They were led on a leash. Our self-styled friends have been working for several decades to dismember Russia… (they are the) puppeteers and are financing terror.” Russia’s KM News ran the headline, “School Seizure was Planned in Washington and London”. [747]
Lukoil epitomizes the corruption so rampant in Russia since the Soviet collapse. Bribery is the norm. Lukoil has given luxury jets to the mayor of Moscow, the head of Gazprom (the state-owned natural gas monopoly) and Kazakhstan President Nazarbayev. In the mid-1990’s Lukoil announced that it would sell another 15 % stake to foreign stockholders through its largest owner and financial adviser CS First Boston and the Bank of New York. [748] In 2002 they announced plans to sell off another big stake.
According to Kurt Wulff of the oil investment firm McDep Associates, the Four Horsemen, romping in their new Far East pastures, saw asset increases from 1988-1994 as follows: Exxon Mobil- 54%, Chevron Texaco- 74%, Royal Dutch/Shell- 52% and BP Amoco- 54%. The Horsemen had more than doubled their collective assets in six short years. This quantum leap in Anglo-American global power had everything to do with the takeover of the old Soviet oil patch and the subsequent impoverishment of its birthright owners.
[722] Behold a Pale Horse. William Cooper. Light Technology Publishing. Sedona, AZ. 1991.
[723] The Robot’s Rebellion: The Story of the Spiritual Renaissance. David Icke. Gateway Books. Bath, UK. 1994. p.94
[724] Hot Money and the Politics of Debt. R.T. Naylor. The Linden Press/Simon & Schuster. New York. 1987. p.78
[725] Ibid. p.165
[726] Dope Inc.: The Book that Drove Kissinger Crazy. The Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. Washington, DC. 1992
[727] “The Unholy Alliance”. Carl Bernstein. Time. 2-24-92. p.28
[728] “US Obtained Soviet Arsenal from Poland”. Eugene Register-Guard. 2-13-94
[729] The Other Side Of Deception. Victor Ostravsky. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 1994.
[730] Bernstein. p.28
[731] “The Dismantling of the Soviet Union”. Peter Symon. Philippine Currents. November/December 1991.
[732] “Drilling for a Miracle”. Fred Coleman. US News & World Report. 12-7-92. p.54
[733] Evening Edition. National Public Radio. 6-18-93
[734] “Exxon’s Russian Oil Deal Makes Other Firms Feel Lucky”. Wall Street Journal. 12-13-01
[735] “The Seven Sisters Have a Baby Brother”. Paul Klebnikov. Forbes. 1-22-96. p.70
[736] Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. Ahmed Rashid. Yale University Publishing. New Haven, CT. 2001. p.145
[737] “Christopher Promises Aid to Oil-Rich Kazakhstan”. AP. Northwest Arkansas Morning News. 10-24-93
[738] 10K Filings to SEC. Exxon Mobil and Chevron Corporations. 3-28-01
[739] “The Quietly Determined American”. Paul Klebnikov. Forbes. 10-24-94. p.48
[740] Azerbaijan Diary: A Rogue Reporter’s Adventures in a Oil-Rich, War-Torn, Post- Soviet Republic. Thomas Goltz. M.E. Sharpe. Armonk, NY. 1999. p.272
[741] “al-Qaeda, US Oil Companies and Central Asia”. Peter Dale Scott. Nexus. May-June, 2006. p.11-15
[742] See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA’s War on Terrorism. Robert Baer. Crown. New York. 2002. p.243-244
[743] Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Michael T. Klare. Metropolitan/Henry Holt. 2004. p.6-7
[744] Escobar. Part I
[745] “The Roving Eye: Pipelineistan, Part II: The Games Nations Play”. Pepe Escobar. Asia Times Online. 1-26-02
[746] “Wolf Blitzer Reports”. CNN. 2-27-02
[747] “Paranotes: Russian School Seige Conspiracy”. Al Hidell. Paranoia. Issue 37. Winter 2005.
[748] Klebnikov. 1-22-96. p.72
Dean Henderson is the author of five books: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network, The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries, Das Kartell der Federal Reserve, Stickin’ it to the Matrix & The Federal Reserve Cartel. You can subscribe free to his weekly Left Hook column @ www.hendersonlefthook.wordpress.com
Posted on 07/01/2014 | 1 Comment
1997 - 3-2 - Costa Rica - San Jose - Just short of paradiseYesterday the EU and US imposed additional sanctions on Russia, while 150 US troops landed in neighboring Estonia for military exercises. Two months after Ukraine’s democratically-elected President Viktor Yanukovych fled the country amidst the MI6/CIA/Mossad-orchestrated putsch in Kiev(http://deanhenderson.wordpress.com/2014/...ter-thumb/), the West continues to ramp up its aggression against Russia, despite repeated attempts at diplomacy by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
So what else is new?
The Rothschild-led City of London bankers have held grand imperialist designs on Russia’s rich natural resources for two centuries, always to be stymied by the odd nationalist czar or Stalinist. Putin thwarted their latest attempts when he jailed Israeli dual citizen Mikail Khodorkovsky and re-nationalized much of Russia’s energy sector. It is no coincidence that one Russian official sanctioned yesterday was Igor Sechin – president of Russian oil giant Rosneft, of which BP still owns a 20 % share.
(Excerpted from Chapter 17: Caspian Sea Oil Grab: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)
Unholy Alliance
While the international banking syndicates had always dealt with the Soviet Union, access to its vast oil resources remained limited until Ronald Reagan entered the White House in 1980, determined to splinter the Soviet Union into little pieces and open the country’s oilfields to the Four Horsemen. His point man in doing so was CIA Director Bill Casey, whose Roman Catholic Knights of Malta connections were thoroughly exploited.
The Vatican’s secretive Opus Dei “saintly Mafia” was behind the ascent of Polish Cardinal Karol Wojtyla to the Papacy. Wojtyla became Pope John Paul II and launched an Opus Dei/Vatican offensive to roll back Latin American liberation theology movements and East European communism. Fascism came naturally to Karol Wojtyla. During the 1940’s he was a chemical salesman for Nazi combine I. G. Farben. Wojtyla sold the Nazis the cyanide they used at their Auschwitz death camps. One of his best friends was Dr. Wolf Szmuness, mastermind of the 1978 Center for Disease Control Hepatitis B study in the US, through which the AIDS virus was introduced into the gay population. [722]
In 1982 Reagan met with Pope John Paul II. Prior to the meeting Reagan signed NSD-32, authorizing a wide range of economic, diplomatic and covert activities to “neutralize the USSR’s hold on Eastern Europe”. At the meeting the two agreed to launch a clandestine program to tear Eastern Europe away from the Soviets. Poland, the Pope’s country of origin, would be the key. Catholic priests, the AFL-CIO, the National Endowment for Democracy, the Vatican Bank and CIA would all be deployed.
The Vatican is the world’s largest owner of equities, using Swiss affiliate Banco di Roma per la Svizzera to conduct its more discretionary business. Italian fascist Benito Mussolini gave the Vatican generous tax exemptions which it still enjoys. Banco Ambrosiano’s P-2 leader Robert Calvi’s Grand Oriente Freemason’s supported reconciliation with the Vatican. Relations between the Vatican and the Freemasons were strained in the 11th century when the Greek Orthodox split from the Roman Catholics. Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaler of St. John factions emerged. The latter was the Catholic faction. They changed their name to the Knights of Malta, after the island where they found refuge after their Crusades defeat, with help from the Vatican. Malta is a nexus of CIA/MI6/Mossad intrigues.
In the 13th century Pope Clement V, backed by France’s King Philip, charged the Protestant Knights Templars with heresy, citing their penchant for drug running, arms peddling, gambling and prostitution rings. These activities are what made the Templars “filthy rich”. Pope Clement made an example of Templar leader Jaques de Molay, whom he burned at the stake on Friday the 13th. [723] The Templars took their loot and fled to Scotland to found Scottish Rite Freemasonry. They bankrolled the House of Windsor, which controls Britain and presides at the apex of Freemasonry around the world. Masonic Lodge members enroll their children in the de Molay Society, which is named in honor of the toasted Templar pirate.
Calvi’s attempt to reconcile protestant and Catholic secret societies was a success. He became paymaster to the Polish Solidarity movement, while Nixon Treasury Secretary David Kennedy’s dirty Continental Illinois Bank served as conduit for CIA funds sent by Bank of Cicero asset Bishop Paul Marcinkus to fund Solidarity. [724] The Vatican teamed up with Europe’s Black Nobility, the Bilderbergers and CIA to launch the top-secret JASON Society and armed South American dictators to quash liberation theology. In 1978 when Pope John Paul II took power, the Vatican issued a commemorative stamp featuring an Egyptian pyramid and the Roshaniya all-seeing eye. [725] The Vatican and the Illuminati Brotherhood were reunited.
Reagan’s meetings with Pope John Paul II were an affirmation of this powerful new alliance, which would now focus on bringing the Soviet Union to its knees. Even before Reagan met with the Pope the CIA had groomed an informant at the Polish Ministry of Defense- Colonel Ryszard Kuklinski. Kuklinski reported to the Vatican and helped organize the Polish Solidarity Movement, led by the wealthy Radziwill family who had funded JFK assassins via Permindex. Most Solidarity leaders were old-money aristocrats.
The precursor to Solidarity was the National Alliance of Solidarists, a Russian/Eastern European fascist hit squad funded by RD/Shell’s Sir Henry Deterding and German Vickers Arms Corporation President Sir Basil Zacharoff. Sir Auckland Geddes of Rio Tinto Zinc, which bankrolled Francisco Franco’s fascist coup in Spain, also contributed to the Solidarists. Geddes’ nephew- Ford Irvine Geddes- was chairman of the Inchcape’s Peninsular & Orient Navigation Company from 1971-1972. [726]
The Solidarist’s US headquarters was the Tolstoy Foundation, which is housed in the same building as Julius Klein Associates, which ran guns to the murderous Haganah and Stern Gang Zionist death squads who stole Palestinian lands to found Israel. Klein was an M16 Permindex insider who helped plan the JFK hit.
The Solidarists stepchild, the Solidarity Movement, was touted in the Western media as a great Polish liberating force. With boatloads of CIA help, Solidarity toppled the Communist government in Warsaw. Their straw man Lech Walesa became President of Poland. In 1995 Walesa was defeated by former Communist leader Aleksander Kwasniewski. Walesa was rewarded for his boot licking with a job at Pepsico.
CIA Director Casey demanded a constant focus on Eastern Europe at CIA. Casey met often with Philadelphia Roman Catholic Cardinal John Krol to discuss the Solidarity Movement. He utilized his Knights of Malta connections, leaning heavily on Brother Vernon Walters, whose spook resume read like a James Bond novel. Walter’s latest incarnation was Reagan Ambassador at Large to Vatican Secretary of State Agostino Cardinal Casaroli. [727] By 1991 Walters was US Ambassador to the UN, where he successfully beat the drums of war against Iraq. He was in Fiji that same year, just prior to the overthrow of that left-leaning government.
Other Knights of Malta members involved in the Eastern European destabilization effort were Reagan NSA and Robert Vesco lieutenant Richard Allen, Reagan NSA Judge William Clark, Reagan Ambassador to the Vatican William Wilson and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Other prominent Knights of Malta members include Prescott Bush, Nixon Treasury Secretary William Simon, Nixon coup-plotter Alexander Haig,contra supporter J. Peter Grace and Venezuelan Rockefeller lieutenant Gustavo Cisneros.
The Reagan team had a five-part strategy in its efforts to destroy the Soviet Union. First, it would pursue the JASON Society’s Star Wars concept in an attempt to engage the Soviets in a space-based arms race which they knew Moscow could not afford. Second, the CIA would launch covert operations in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary in attempts to overthrow those Soviet-allied governments. While Walesa emerged in Poland, poet Vaclev Havel became CIA white knight in Czechoslovakia. Like Walesa, Havel became unpopular and was soon tossed out of his puppet presidency.
A component of the CIA destabilization program was to buy weapons from these East European nations to arm CIA-sponsored rebels in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Angola and Mozambique, using BCCI and later BNL as conduits. The US also wanted to get their hands on the high-tech Soviet arsenal. Poland secretly sold the US an array of advanced Soviet weaponry worth $200 million. Romania did the same. Both countries saw their foreign debts reduced significantly. [728]
The third component of the Reagan strategy was to make financial aid to the Warsaw Pact contingent on economic privatization. Fourth, the US would blanket East European and Soviet airwaves with pro-Western propaganda, using fronts like Radio Liberty, Radio Free Europe and the Voice of America. The CIA financed local newspapers and magazines.
The Company got help inside the Soviet Union from its Mossad buddies in an effort spearheaded by media mogul and Mossad paymaster Robert Maxwell. When Maxwell threatened to reveal a meeting between KGB head Vladimir Kryuchkov and Mossad brass aboard his private yacht at which a coup against Mikhail Gorbachev was discussed, Mossad ordered a hit on Maxwell. On November 4, 1991 as he sailed around the Canary Islands Maxwell was assassinated by Israeli commandos. The mass exodus of Russian Jews to Israeli-occupied settlements in Palestine was part of the secret deal between Mossad and Kryuchkov, who is still serving time in a Moscow prison for his treasonous role in the Gorbachev coup. [729]
But it was the fifth and final component of Reagan’s strategy that had the Four Horsemen salivating. Reagan’s spooks initiated an economic warfare campaign against the Soviet Union, which included a freeze on technology transfers, counterfeiting of the Russianruble and the sponsoring of separatist Islamist groups in the Soviet Central Asian Caucasus. The jihadis who were instructed to target a key transcontinental natural gas pipeline which the Soviets were building. The Soviets had more natural gas than any country on earth and saw the completion of this pipeline as their cash cow for the 21st century. [730] Big Oil wanted to milk that cow.
It’s the Oil, Stupid
When the Soviet Union’s last President Mikhail Gorbachev announced his perestroika and glasnost campaigns to privatize his country’s economy, he was aiding the Illuminati in destroying his country. Was Gorbachev duped, an unwitting accomplice, a CIA deep-cover agent or a mind-controlled Operation Presidio Temple of Set victim? Whatever the case, he played a key role in dismantling the Soviet Union.
The Soviets controlled not only the vast resources of their own nation, but Third World resources in Soviet-allied Comecon nations. Part ofperestroika was to cease Soviet aid to these developing nations to ease the growing Soviet debt burden which, like the US debt, accrued largely from decades of Cold War military spending. The two superpowers’ debt was held by the same international banks, which now used this debt lever to pick a winner and to open Russian and Third World resource pools to their corporate tentacles. [731]
When the Berlin Wall fell and Gorbachev was overthrown in favor of IMF crony Boris Yeltsin, the Four Horsemen rushed to Moscow to begin making oil deals. Oil and natural gas had always been the Soviet’s main export and it remained so for the new Russia. In 1991, the country earned $13 billion in hard currency from oil exports. In 1992 Yeltsin announced that Russia’s world leading 9.2 billion barrel/day oil sector would be privatized.
Sixty percent of Russia’s Siberian reserves had never been tapped. [732] In 1993 the World Bank announced a $610 billion loan to modernize Russia’s oil industry- by far the largest loan in the bank’s history. World Bank subsidiary International Finance Corporation bought stock in several Russian oil companies and made an additional loan to the Bronfman’s Conoco for its purchase of Siberian Polar Lights Company. [733]
The main vehicle for international banker control over Russian oil was Lukoil, initially 20%-owned by BP Amoco and Credit Suisse First Boston, where Clinton Yugoslav envoy and Dayton Peace Accords architect Richard Holbrooke worked. Bush Sr. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, who orchestrated the BNL cover-up, was now CS First Boston’s Chief Financial Officer. A handful of Zionist Russian oligarchs, collectively known as the Russian Mafia, owned the rest of Lukoil, which served as the Saudi ARAMCO of Russia for the Four Horsemen, a partner to Big Oil in projects throughout the country which involved truly staggering amounts of capital.
These included Sakhalin Islands projects known as Sakhalin I, a $15 billion Exxon Mobil venture; and Sakhalin II, a $10 billion deal led by Royal Dutch/Shell which included Mitsubishi, Mitsui and Marathon Oil as partners. Siberian developments were even larger. RD/Shell is a 24.5% partner in Uganskneftegasin, which controls a huge Siberian natural gas field. At Priobskoye, BP Amoco operates a $53 billion project. At Timan Pechora on the Arctic Ocean a consortium made up of Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco and Norsk Hydo runs a $48 billion venture.
In November 2001 Exxon Mobil announced plans to invest another $12 billion in an oil and gas project in the Russian Far East. RD/Shell announced a $8.5 billion investment in its Sakhalin Islands concessions. BP Amoco made similar proclamations. [734] In 1994 Lukoil pumped 416 million barrels of oil, making it fourth largest producer in the world after RD/Shell, Exxon Mobil and part-owner BP Amoco. Its fifteen billion barrels in crude reserves rank second in the world to Royal Dutch/ Shell. [735]
The Soviet Caucasus, with encouragement from Langley, soon split from Russia. The map of Central Asia was re-written as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine and Georgia all declared their independence. The pipeline Reagan ordered targeted carried Soviet natural gas east to the North Pacific port of Vladivostok and west to the Black Sea port of Novorrossiysk from the world’s richest known natural gas fields lying beneath and abutting the shoreline of the Caspian Sea, which lies in the heart of Caucasus.
The Four Horsemen coveted this resource more than any in the world. They wanted to build their own private pipelines once they got their hands on the Caspian Sea natural gas fields, which also contain an estimated 200 billion barrels of crude oil. Oil industry privatizations were quickly announced in the new Central Asian Republics which had, by virtue of their independence, taken control of the vast Caspian Sea oil and gas reserves. By 1991 Chevron was holding talks with Kazakhstan. [736]
The Central Asian Republics became the largest recipients of USAID aid, as well as ExIm Bank, OPIC and CCC loans. Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan were especially favored. These countries control the shoreline of the Caspian Sea, along with Russia and Iran. In 1994 Kazakhstan received $311 million in US aid and another $85 million to help dismantle Soviet-era nuclear weapons. President Clinton met with Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev. They signed an array of agreements ranging from disarmament deals to space research cooperation. Kazakhstan, with an estimated 17.6 billion barrels of oil reserves, had been a strategic part of the Soviet nuclear weapons grid and was home to the Soviet space program.
The two leaders also signed an agreement providing investment protection for US multinationals. The Free Trade Institute and US Chamber of Commerce sent officials to train Kazakhs in the finer arts of global capitalism. The Four Horsemen moved in swiftly. Chevron Texaco laid claim to the biggest prize- the $20 billion Tenghiz oilfield- then grabbed another gusher at Korolev. Exxon Mobil signed a deal to develop an offshore concession in the Caspian. [737] Tengizchevroil is 45%-owned by Chevron Texaco and 25%-owned by Exxon Mobil. [738] President George W. Bush’s NSA and later Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice, an expert on Central Asia, sat on the board at Chevron alongside George Schultz from 1989-1992. She even had an oil tanker named after her.
Across the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan was receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in US aid. BP Amoco led a consortium of seven oil giants who spent an initial $8 billion to develop three concessions off the coast of the capital Baku- historic base camp of Big Oil in the region. [739] BP Amoco and Pennzoil- recently acquired by Royal Dutch/Shell- took control of the Azerbaijan Oil Company, whose board of directors included former Bush Sr. Secretary of State James Baker.
In 1991 Air America super spook Richard Secord showed up in Baku under the cover of MEGA Oil. [740] Secord & Company did military training, sold Israeli arms, passed “brown bags filled with cash” and shipped in over 2,000 Islamist fighters from Afghanistan with help from Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Afghan heroin began flooding into Baku. Russian economist Alexandre Datskevitch said of 184 heroin labs that police discovered in Moscow in 1991, “Every one of them was run by Azeris, who use the proceeds to buy arms for Azerbaijan’s war against Armenia in Nagorno-Karabakh”. [741]
A Turkish intelligence source claims that Exxon and Mobil were behind the 1993 coup against elected Armenian President Abulfaz Elchibey. Secord’s Islamists helped. Osama bin Laden set up an NGO in Baku as a base for attacking the Russians in Chechnya and Dagestan. A more pliant President Heidar Aliyev was installed. In 1996, at the behest of Amoco’s president, he was invited to the White House to meet President Clinton- whose NSA Sandy Berger held $90,000 worth of Amoco stock. [742]
Armenian separatists backed by the CIA took over the strategic Armenian regions of Nagorno-Karabakh and Nakhnichevan which border Turkey and Iran. When Turkish President Turgut Ozal mentioned intervention in Nakhnichevan to back the Azerbaijani seizure, Turkish Premier Suleyman Demirel quickly played down the statement from the key US ally. These two regions are critical to Big Oil plans to build a pipeline from the Caspian Sea across Turkey to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorrossiysk. The same route is utilized by Turkey’s Gray Wolves mafia in their Central Asia to Europe heroin endeavors. When Gray Wolf Mehmet Ali Agca tried to assassinate Pope John Paul II in 1981, the CIA used its Gladio strategy, trying to pin it on Bulgaria’s Communist Lukashenko government.
Lukoil owns 26% of the Russian Black Sea port at Novorrossiysk. Its president Vayit Alekperov wanted to build the Caspian pipeline through Grozny in Chechnya, while the Four Horsemen preferred the route through Turkey. CIA support for Armenian separatists and Chechen Islamist rebels ensured chaos in Grozny. Alekperov finally agreed to the Turkish route.
In 2003 the Defense Department proposed a $3.8 million military training grant for Azerbaijan. Later they admitted it was to protect US access to oil. As author Michael Klare put it, “Slowly but surely, the US military is being converted into a global oil-protection service”. [743]
Turkmenistan, which borders the Caspian Sea on the southeast, is a virtual gas republic, containing massive deposits of natural gas. It also has vast reserves of oil, copper, coal, tungsten, zinc, uranium and gold. The biggest gas field is at Dauletabad in the southeast of the country, near the Afghan border. The Unocal-led Centgas set about building a pipeline which would connect the oil fields around Chardzhan to the Siberian oilfields further north. More crucial to Centgas was a gas pipeline from Dauletabad across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. [744] Advisers to the project included Henry Kissinger. Unocal is now part of Chevron.
With the Four Horsemen firmly in charge of Caspian Sea reserves, the Caspian Pipeline Consortium was born. Chevron Texaco took a 15% stake with the other three Horsemen and Lukoil splitting the rest. Pipeline security was provided by the Israeli firm Magal Security Systems, which is connected to Mossad. Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan have especially cozy relations with Israel via Special Ambassador Yusef Maiman, who is president of the Israeli Mehrav Group. Mehrav is involved in a project in Turkey to divert water from the upper Tigres and Euphrates Rivers to the southeast part of Turkey and away from Iraq. [745] The Caspian pipeline was built by Bechtel in partnership with GE and Wilbros Group. The pipeline quietly began moving oil and gas in November 2001, just two months after 911.
Bechtel also built the oilfield infrastructure at Tengiz for Chevron Texaco. In 1995 Bechtel led a USAID-funded consortium to restructure the energy sectors of eleven Central and Eastern European nations in line with IMF mandates. Bechtel received a massive contract to upgrade Russia’s many ailing aluminum smelters in tandem with Pechiney. Lukoil contracted with New Jersey-based ABB Lummus Crest (formed when engineering giants Asea Braun Boveri and Lummis Crest merged) to build a $1.3 billion refinery at the Novorrossysk port and to do a $700 million upgrade on its refinery at Perm.
The Bush Jr. Administration now planned a series of additional Caspian Sea pipelines to compliment the Tenghiz-Black Sea route. A Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pipeline was built by a Four Horsemen consortium led by BP Amoco. The law firm representing the BP-led consortium is James Baker’s family law firm- Baker Botts. The BP Amoco pipeline runs the length of the country of Georgia through its capital Tblisi.
In February 2002 the US announced plans to send 200 military advisers and attack helicopters to Georgia to “root our terrorism”. [746] The deployment was a smokescreen for pipeline protection. In September 2002 Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivaniov accused Georgia of harboring Chechen rebels. In October 2003 Georgian President Eduard Schevardnadze was forced to step down in a bloodless revolution. According to a December 11, 2003 article on the World Socialist Party website, CIA sponsored the coup.
In September 2004 hundreds of Russian school children were killed when Chechen separatists seized their school building. Russian President Vladimir Putin said of the incident, “Certain political circles in the West want to weaken Russia, just like the Romans wanted to weaken Carthage.” He accused “foreign intelligence services” of complicity in the attacks. His adviser Aslanbek Aslakhanov went further, stating on Russian Channel 2 News, “The men had their conversations not within Russia, but with other countries. They were led on a leash. Our self-styled friends have been working for several decades to dismember Russia… (they are the) puppeteers and are financing terror.” Russia’s KM News ran the headline, “School Seizure was Planned in Washington and London”. [747]
Lukoil epitomizes the corruption so rampant in Russia since the Soviet collapse. Bribery is the norm. Lukoil has given luxury jets to the mayor of Moscow, the head of Gazprom (the state-owned natural gas monopoly) and Kazakhstan President Nazarbayev. In the mid-1990’s Lukoil announced that it would sell another 15 % stake to foreign stockholders through its largest owner and financial adviser CS First Boston and the Bank of New York. [748] In 2002 they announced plans to sell off another big stake.
According to Kurt Wulff of the oil investment firm McDep Associates, the Four Horsemen, romping in their new Far East pastures, saw asset increases from 1988-1994 as follows: Exxon Mobil- 54%, Chevron Texaco- 74%, Royal Dutch/Shell- 52% and BP Amoco- 54%. The Horsemen had more than doubled their collective assets in six short years. This quantum leap in Anglo-American global power had everything to do with the takeover of the old Soviet oil patch and the subsequent impoverishment of its birthright owners.
[722] Behold a Pale Horse. William Cooper. Light Technology Publishing. Sedona, AZ. 1991.
[723] The Robot’s Rebellion: The Story of the Spiritual Renaissance. David Icke. Gateway Books. Bath, UK. 1994. p.94
[724] Hot Money and the Politics of Debt. R.T. Naylor. The Linden Press/Simon & Schuster. New York. 1987. p.78
[725] Ibid. p.165
[726] Dope Inc.: The Book that Drove Kissinger Crazy. The Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. Washington, DC. 1992
[727] “The Unholy Alliance”. Carl Bernstein. Time. 2-24-92. p.28
[728] “US Obtained Soviet Arsenal from Poland”. Eugene Register-Guard. 2-13-94
[729] The Other Side Of Deception. Victor Ostravsky. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 1994.
[730] Bernstein. p.28
[731] “The Dismantling of the Soviet Union”. Peter Symon. Philippine Currents. November/December 1991.
[732] “Drilling for a Miracle”. Fred Coleman. US News & World Report. 12-7-92. p.54
[733] Evening Edition. National Public Radio. 6-18-93
[734] “Exxon’s Russian Oil Deal Makes Other Firms Feel Lucky”. Wall Street Journal. 12-13-01
[735] “The Seven Sisters Have a Baby Brother”. Paul Klebnikov. Forbes. 1-22-96. p.70
[736] Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. Ahmed Rashid. Yale University Publishing. New Haven, CT. 2001. p.145
[737] “Christopher Promises Aid to Oil-Rich Kazakhstan”. AP. Northwest Arkansas Morning News. 10-24-93
[738] 10K Filings to SEC. Exxon Mobil and Chevron Corporations. 3-28-01
[739] “The Quietly Determined American”. Paul Klebnikov. Forbes. 10-24-94. p.48
[740] Azerbaijan Diary: A Rogue Reporter’s Adventures in a Oil-Rich, War-Torn, Post- Soviet Republic. Thomas Goltz. M.E. Sharpe. Armonk, NY. 1999. p.272
[741] “al-Qaeda, US Oil Companies and Central Asia”. Peter Dale Scott. Nexus. May-June, 2006. p.11-15
[742] See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA’s War on Terrorism. Robert Baer. Crown. New York. 2002. p.243-244
[743] Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Michael T. Klare. Metropolitan/Henry Holt. 2004. p.6-7
[744] Escobar. Part I
[745] “The Roving Eye: Pipelineistan, Part II: The Games Nations Play”. Pepe Escobar. Asia Times Online. 1-26-02
[746] “Wolf Blitzer Reports”. CNN. 2-27-02
[747] “Paranotes: Russian School Seige Conspiracy”. Al Hidell. Paranoia. Issue 37. Winter 2005.
[748] Klebnikov. 1-22-96. p.72
Dean Henderson is the author of five books: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network, The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries, Das Kartell der Federal Reserve, Stickin’ it to the Matrix & The Federal Reserve Cartel. You can subscribe free to his weekly Left Hook column @ www.hendersonlefthook.wordpress.com
20-07-2014, 06:15 PM
Clintons Reinstigated the Cold War with Russia – Stop Hillary Clinton
Ever more antiwar voices are clamoring for a Stop Hillary Clinton movement in the Democratic primaries – and with very good reason. There are many alarming, indeed frightening, indictments of her tenures as one-half president in the 90s and then as Senator and Secretary of State. Her estranged relationship with truth, her callousness toward human life and her love for every imperial military adventure and regime change scheme are beyond worrisome. They are downright scary.
But the most damning indictment yet of the Clintons on the world stage comes in the book Superpower Illusions by former Ambassador to the USSR, Jack Matlock. The book came out way back in 2009, but it is worth examining again as we confront the possibility of a return to Clintonism. And Matlock is a man who knows whereof he speaks. Wikipedia gives a summary of his career thus:
Jack Foust Matlock, Jr. (born October 1, 1929) is a former American ambassador, career Foreign Service Officer, a teacher, a historian, and a linguist. He was a specialist in Soviet affairs during some of the most tumultuous years of the Cold War, and served as U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991.
After (graduate) studies at Columbia University…, (Matlock) entered the Foreign Service in 1956. His 35 year career encompassed much of the Cold War … His first assignment to Moscow was in 1961, and it was from the embassy there that he experienced the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, helping to translate diplomatic messages between the leaders.
At the beginning of détente, he was Director of Soviet Affairs in the State Department, ..(attended) all but one of the U.S. – Soviet summits held in the 20 year period 1972-91. Matlock was back in Moscow in 1974, serving in the number two position in the embassy for four years (including time under President Jimmy Carter, jw). Matlock was assigned to Moscow again in 1981 as acting ambassador during the first part of Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Reagan appointed him as ambassador to Czechoslovakia and later asked him to return to Washington in 1983 to work at the National Security Council, with the assignment to develop a negotiating strategy to end the arms race. When Mikhail Gorbachev became the leader of the Soviet Union in 1985, arms negotiations and summit meetings resumed. Matlock was appointed ambassador to the Soviet Union in 1987 and saw the last years of the Soviet Union before he retired from the Foreign Service in 1991.
There is no doubt that Matlock knew what was going on during this period, and he saw considerable promise for a peaceful, secure future at the end of the Bush I presidency. So when he forcefully condemns the Clintons for a disastrous turn in U.S. policy, he is a voice that must be heeded. The original sin of the era stains the Clintons, and they spawned their own inevitable Cain in the form of W.
Being a diplomat, Mattlock speaks diplomatically of the colossal, damaging shift in U.S. -Russia relations under the Clintons who reversed the approach of Reagan and Bush I. He gets to the point right away in the preface to Superpower Illusions: “The Clinton administration’s decision to expand NATO to the East rather than draw Russia into a cooperative arrangement to ensure European security undermined the prospects of democracy in Russia, made it more difficult to keep peace in the Balkans and slowed the process of nuclear disarmament started by Presidents Reagan and Gorbachev.”
That is a severely damaging condemnation of the Clintons, one of historic dimensions, as we see now as events unfold in Ukraine, with one of Hillary’s protégés, her State Department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, very much in charge of the U.S. intervention there. Matlock was so appalled by the Clintons that he changed his political affiliation: “After I retired from the Foreign Service, I left the Democratic Party early in the Clinton presidency. I felt that President Clinton… lacked both the vision and the competence to take advantage of the opportunity the end of the Cold War and the breakup of the Soviet Union provided. That opportunity was nothing less than a chance to create a world in which security tasks could be shared, weapons of mass destruction reduced rapidly and barriers to nuclear proliferation raised.”
Matlock is appalled that President Clinton lacked both the vision and the competence to proceed on a peaceful task. What else is there? Of course he should have said Presidents Clinton since, as Bill always reminded us, he and Hillary shared the task – “two for one,” as he put it, or Billary or Hillbillary as the alternative media labels the duo.
Matlock does not let Bush II off the hook. He is no apologist for the GOP hawks. He sees “W” as continuing and deepening the folly of the Clintons, writing: “In its sixteen years under Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, America went from being the most admired country on the planet in many opinion polls to the most feared….The majority of the people in many countries considered the United States the most dangerous country in the world. Nobody likes a bully…”
If anyone comes across as a hectoring bully in her public statements, it is surely Hillary. There are plenty of pundits, mostly of the Democrat or “progressive” persuasion, out there who are all too willing to blame Bush II for all this – even unto FOX’s Megyn Kelly. But in fact the latest bad turn in American imperialist policies began with the Clintons.
Matlock also reminds us that it was the Clintons who began NATO’s war on the Balkans, the precedent for other “humanitarian” interventions, including Libya and Syria. This too was a sharp break with Reagan-Bush I as Matlock notes: “Bush and Baker also injected caution in extending American involvement in disputes that were not directly relevant to American security. As tensions rose among Yugoslavia’s constituent republics, they tried to keep the United States aloof and leave the primary responsibility to America’s European allies. Regarding the growing conflict in Yugoslavia, Baker was quoted as saying, ‘We don’t have a dog in that fight.’”
But there is no fight for which Hillary lacks a dog, and almost always it is a dog of war. The war in the Balkans so engaged her that she declared that she came under fire while visiting there to cheer on the effort. The claim of bullets whizzing by her head turned out to be little more than another in the fabric of mistruths woven by this “congenital liar,” as the late William Safire, a master and connoisseur of the trade of deception himself, labeled her.
On locations 3236 to 6276 of the Kindle edition of Superpower Illusions, Matlock makes his case against the Clintons. Here are some of his words:
For all of its initial talk about a ‘partnership for reform,’ the Clinton administration dealt with Russia as if it no longer counted, even in European politics. Two decisions in particular turned Russian public opinion during the years of the Clinton administration from strongly pro-American to vigorous opposition to American policies abroad. The first was the decision to extend the NATO military structure into countries that had previously been members of the Warsaw Pact – something Gorbachev had understood would not happen if he allowed a united Germany to remain in NATO. The second was the decision to bomb Serbia without authorization from the United Nations Security Council. (A similar contempt for the UN showed up when Obama and Hillary won approval for a no fly zone over Gaddafi’s Libya to the UN Security Council in 2011 by getting China and Russia not to veto it – and then turned it into a bombing campaign, in violation of promises to Russia and China, something Putin labeled as the last straw in terms of trusting the U.S. — jw)
There was no need to expand NATO to ensure the security of the newly independent countries of Eastern Europe. There were other ways those countries could have been reassured and protected without seeming to re-divide Europe to Russia’s disadvantage. As for the bombing of Serbia (another favorite project of Hillary’s — jw), if NATO had not been enlarged in the manner that occurred, Russia’s government would been much more willing to put pressure on Slobodan Milosevic to come to terms with the Kosovars and – if unsuccessful in this effort – more willing to vote in the United Nations to authorize military intervention…. Clinton’s actions severely damaged the credibility of democratic leaders in Russia who appealed for a more considerate attitude toward Russian national interests.
Combined with claiming “victory” in the Cold War (something the Clintons did but Reagan had not done! — jw) expanding NATO suggested to the Russian public that throwing off communism and breaking up the Soviet Union had probably been a bad idea. Instead of getting credit for voluntarily joining the West, they were being treated as if they had been defeated and were not worthy to be allies.
The Clinton administration was deaf to these appeals as well as those of George Kennan the author of the successful containment policy, who warned that enlarging NATO in the proposed manner would be the ‘most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era.’ He then explained why: ‘Such a decision may be expected to … restore the atmosphere of the cold war in East-West relations and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking. And last but not least it may make it much more difficult, if not impossible, to secure the Russian Duma’s ratification of the START II agreement and to achieve further reductions of nuclear weapons.
Thus, the Clintons turned the United States in a very confrontational direction, something that is a hallmark of Hillary’s views to this day. Again Matlock:
The Clinton administration, without any provocation, in effect repeated a fundamental mistake made at Versailles in 1919. … The Clinton administration practically ensured that … Russia would lose its incentive to reduce nuclear weapons…. My point is that the United States should have made every effort to bring the European states, West and East, and including Russia into a new security arrangement…
Matlock concludes this section: “The Clinton administration’s action in bombing Serbia without U.N. approval not only enraged Russia and made close cooperation on nuclear issues more difficult, but it also sent a message to other countries with policies or practices that met American disapproval: Better get nuclear weapons as fast as you can! Otherwise, you can become a target for the U.S. Air Force.”
I would disagree with one point Matlock makes. He feels that the Clintons made the mistakes they did out of domestic political concerns, specifically to get the votes of Poles and others of Eastern European extraction who harbored considerable resentment against the Soviet Union and hence Russia. But the Clintons pursued these policies deep into his second administration right up to the 2000 election of GWB.
Moreover, Hillary espoused these policies consistently in her 2008 primary battle with Obama who defeated her, largely by presenting himself in contrast to her as the candidate of Peace. And she continued to espouse these hawkish policies right up to last week where she told the Wall Street Journal that she will be a more warlike president than Obama, saying that she would have sent more arms to the “moderate” Syrian rebels long ago – in contrast to Obama. (Of course the “moderate” Syrian rebels have the same base in reality as the Seven Dwarfs. They are a fairy tale.)
From watching the Clintons in the White House for eight years and from Hillary’s hawkish record as Senator and Secretary of State, there can be little doubt that her views are heartfelt. She remains a lethal admixture of neocon and humanitarian imperialist views, an American Exceptionalist, giddy with American military power, arrogantly confident that “our values” are universal and determined that no other power, however peaceful, will achieve the military or economic might to stand up to the U.S. As China rises, peacefully so far, consistent with its history and culture, and as Russia and Iran gain strength, her views could plunge us into a World War. She is far too shallow, arrogant and bellicose to be President at a time when new thinking and considerable wisdom is needed. The Clintons have already done quite enough damage to humanity. Let us not permit them to do more.
John V. Walsh can be reached at john.endwar@gmail.com
Ever more antiwar voices are clamoring for a Stop Hillary Clinton movement in the Democratic primaries – and with very good reason. There are many alarming, indeed frightening, indictments of her tenures as one-half president in the 90s and then as Senator and Secretary of State. Her estranged relationship with truth, her callousness toward human life and her love for every imperial military adventure and regime change scheme are beyond worrisome. They are downright scary.
But the most damning indictment yet of the Clintons on the world stage comes in the book Superpower Illusions by former Ambassador to the USSR, Jack Matlock. The book came out way back in 2009, but it is worth examining again as we confront the possibility of a return to Clintonism. And Matlock is a man who knows whereof he speaks. Wikipedia gives a summary of his career thus:
Jack Foust Matlock, Jr. (born October 1, 1929) is a former American ambassador, career Foreign Service Officer, a teacher, a historian, and a linguist. He was a specialist in Soviet affairs during some of the most tumultuous years of the Cold War, and served as U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991.
After (graduate) studies at Columbia University…, (Matlock) entered the Foreign Service in 1956. His 35 year career encompassed much of the Cold War … His first assignment to Moscow was in 1961, and it was from the embassy there that he experienced the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, helping to translate diplomatic messages between the leaders.
At the beginning of détente, he was Director of Soviet Affairs in the State Department, ..(attended) all but one of the U.S. – Soviet summits held in the 20 year period 1972-91. Matlock was back in Moscow in 1974, serving in the number two position in the embassy for four years (including time under President Jimmy Carter, jw). Matlock was assigned to Moscow again in 1981 as acting ambassador during the first part of Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Reagan appointed him as ambassador to Czechoslovakia and later asked him to return to Washington in 1983 to work at the National Security Council, with the assignment to develop a negotiating strategy to end the arms race. When Mikhail Gorbachev became the leader of the Soviet Union in 1985, arms negotiations and summit meetings resumed. Matlock was appointed ambassador to the Soviet Union in 1987 and saw the last years of the Soviet Union before he retired from the Foreign Service in 1991.
There is no doubt that Matlock knew what was going on during this period, and he saw considerable promise for a peaceful, secure future at the end of the Bush I presidency. So when he forcefully condemns the Clintons for a disastrous turn in U.S. policy, he is a voice that must be heeded. The original sin of the era stains the Clintons, and they spawned their own inevitable Cain in the form of W.
Being a diplomat, Mattlock speaks diplomatically of the colossal, damaging shift in U.S. -Russia relations under the Clintons who reversed the approach of Reagan and Bush I. He gets to the point right away in the preface to Superpower Illusions: “The Clinton administration’s decision to expand NATO to the East rather than draw Russia into a cooperative arrangement to ensure European security undermined the prospects of democracy in Russia, made it more difficult to keep peace in the Balkans and slowed the process of nuclear disarmament started by Presidents Reagan and Gorbachev.”
That is a severely damaging condemnation of the Clintons, one of historic dimensions, as we see now as events unfold in Ukraine, with one of Hillary’s protégés, her State Department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, very much in charge of the U.S. intervention there. Matlock was so appalled by the Clintons that he changed his political affiliation: “After I retired from the Foreign Service, I left the Democratic Party early in the Clinton presidency. I felt that President Clinton… lacked both the vision and the competence to take advantage of the opportunity the end of the Cold War and the breakup of the Soviet Union provided. That opportunity was nothing less than a chance to create a world in which security tasks could be shared, weapons of mass destruction reduced rapidly and barriers to nuclear proliferation raised.”
Matlock is appalled that President Clinton lacked both the vision and the competence to proceed on a peaceful task. What else is there? Of course he should have said Presidents Clinton since, as Bill always reminded us, he and Hillary shared the task – “two for one,” as he put it, or Billary or Hillbillary as the alternative media labels the duo.
Matlock does not let Bush II off the hook. He is no apologist for the GOP hawks. He sees “W” as continuing and deepening the folly of the Clintons, writing: “In its sixteen years under Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, America went from being the most admired country on the planet in many opinion polls to the most feared….The majority of the people in many countries considered the United States the most dangerous country in the world. Nobody likes a bully…”
If anyone comes across as a hectoring bully in her public statements, it is surely Hillary. There are plenty of pundits, mostly of the Democrat or “progressive” persuasion, out there who are all too willing to blame Bush II for all this – even unto FOX’s Megyn Kelly. But in fact the latest bad turn in American imperialist policies began with the Clintons.
Matlock also reminds us that it was the Clintons who began NATO’s war on the Balkans, the precedent for other “humanitarian” interventions, including Libya and Syria. This too was a sharp break with Reagan-Bush I as Matlock notes: “Bush and Baker also injected caution in extending American involvement in disputes that were not directly relevant to American security. As tensions rose among Yugoslavia’s constituent republics, they tried to keep the United States aloof and leave the primary responsibility to America’s European allies. Regarding the growing conflict in Yugoslavia, Baker was quoted as saying, ‘We don’t have a dog in that fight.’”
But there is no fight for which Hillary lacks a dog, and almost always it is a dog of war. The war in the Balkans so engaged her that she declared that she came under fire while visiting there to cheer on the effort. The claim of bullets whizzing by her head turned out to be little more than another in the fabric of mistruths woven by this “congenital liar,” as the late William Safire, a master and connoisseur of the trade of deception himself, labeled her.
On locations 3236 to 6276 of the Kindle edition of Superpower Illusions, Matlock makes his case against the Clintons. Here are some of his words:
For all of its initial talk about a ‘partnership for reform,’ the Clinton administration dealt with Russia as if it no longer counted, even in European politics. Two decisions in particular turned Russian public opinion during the years of the Clinton administration from strongly pro-American to vigorous opposition to American policies abroad. The first was the decision to extend the NATO military structure into countries that had previously been members of the Warsaw Pact – something Gorbachev had understood would not happen if he allowed a united Germany to remain in NATO. The second was the decision to bomb Serbia without authorization from the United Nations Security Council. (A similar contempt for the UN showed up when Obama and Hillary won approval for a no fly zone over Gaddafi’s Libya to the UN Security Council in 2011 by getting China and Russia not to veto it – and then turned it into a bombing campaign, in violation of promises to Russia and China, something Putin labeled as the last straw in terms of trusting the U.S. — jw)
There was no need to expand NATO to ensure the security of the newly independent countries of Eastern Europe. There were other ways those countries could have been reassured and protected without seeming to re-divide Europe to Russia’s disadvantage. As for the bombing of Serbia (another favorite project of Hillary’s — jw), if NATO had not been enlarged in the manner that occurred, Russia’s government would been much more willing to put pressure on Slobodan Milosevic to come to terms with the Kosovars and – if unsuccessful in this effort – more willing to vote in the United Nations to authorize military intervention…. Clinton’s actions severely damaged the credibility of democratic leaders in Russia who appealed for a more considerate attitude toward Russian national interests.
Combined with claiming “victory” in the Cold War (something the Clintons did but Reagan had not done! — jw) expanding NATO suggested to the Russian public that throwing off communism and breaking up the Soviet Union had probably been a bad idea. Instead of getting credit for voluntarily joining the West, they were being treated as if they had been defeated and were not worthy to be allies.
The Clinton administration was deaf to these appeals as well as those of George Kennan the author of the successful containment policy, who warned that enlarging NATO in the proposed manner would be the ‘most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era.’ He then explained why: ‘Such a decision may be expected to … restore the atmosphere of the cold war in East-West relations and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking. And last but not least it may make it much more difficult, if not impossible, to secure the Russian Duma’s ratification of the START II agreement and to achieve further reductions of nuclear weapons.
Thus, the Clintons turned the United States in a very confrontational direction, something that is a hallmark of Hillary’s views to this day. Again Matlock:
The Clinton administration, without any provocation, in effect repeated a fundamental mistake made at Versailles in 1919. … The Clinton administration practically ensured that … Russia would lose its incentive to reduce nuclear weapons…. My point is that the United States should have made every effort to bring the European states, West and East, and including Russia into a new security arrangement…
Matlock concludes this section: “The Clinton administration’s action in bombing Serbia without U.N. approval not only enraged Russia and made close cooperation on nuclear issues more difficult, but it also sent a message to other countries with policies or practices that met American disapproval: Better get nuclear weapons as fast as you can! Otherwise, you can become a target for the U.S. Air Force.”
I would disagree with one point Matlock makes. He feels that the Clintons made the mistakes they did out of domestic political concerns, specifically to get the votes of Poles and others of Eastern European extraction who harbored considerable resentment against the Soviet Union and hence Russia. But the Clintons pursued these policies deep into his second administration right up to the 2000 election of GWB.
Moreover, Hillary espoused these policies consistently in her 2008 primary battle with Obama who defeated her, largely by presenting himself in contrast to her as the candidate of Peace. And she continued to espouse these hawkish policies right up to last week where she told the Wall Street Journal that she will be a more warlike president than Obama, saying that she would have sent more arms to the “moderate” Syrian rebels long ago – in contrast to Obama. (Of course the “moderate” Syrian rebels have the same base in reality as the Seven Dwarfs. They are a fairy tale.)
From watching the Clintons in the White House for eight years and from Hillary’s hawkish record as Senator and Secretary of State, there can be little doubt that her views are heartfelt. She remains a lethal admixture of neocon and humanitarian imperialist views, an American Exceptionalist, giddy with American military power, arrogantly confident that “our values” are universal and determined that no other power, however peaceful, will achieve the military or economic might to stand up to the U.S. As China rises, peacefully so far, consistent with its history and culture, and as Russia and Iran gain strength, her views could plunge us into a World War. She is far too shallow, arrogant and bellicose to be President at a time when new thinking and considerable wisdom is needed. The Clintons have already done quite enough damage to humanity. Let us not permit them to do more.
John V. Walsh can be reached at john.endwar@gmail.com
24-07-2014, 06:40 PM
Obama administration sending military advisers to Ukraine within weeks
Published time: July 23, 2014 16:31 Get short URL
U.S. President Barack Obama (Reuters/Joshua Roberts)U.S. President Barack Obama (Reuters/Joshua Roberts)
595
391
1
Trends
Ukraine turmoil
Tags
Military, USA, Ukraine
The United States is reportedly preparing to send a team of military advisers into Ukraine to assist with revamping forces there in the midst of the ongoing crisis between government-loyal troops and an anti-Kiev militia.
On Tuesday this week, the Washington Times reported that a spokesperson for the US Department of Defense confirmed plans to put Pentagon advisers in Ukraine.
“Within the next few weeks, a group of Defense Department representatives who specialize in strategy and policy will head to Kiev to evaluate specific programs that the United States may want to help bolster,” reporter Maggie Ybarra wrote for the Times.
The newspaper says that Army Col. Steve Warren, a spokesperson for the Pentagon, told the Times that the objective of sending DoD advisers overseas is to “shape and establish an enduring program for future US efforts to support the Ukrainian military through subject-matter expert teams and long-term advisers.”
RT reported previously back in early June that US military advisers were being offered to Kiev “to help Ukraine build highly effective armed forces and defense institutions” and to “shape and establish an enduring program for future US efforts to support the Ukrainian military through training, education and assistance.”
Last month’s announcement came after the White House approved more than $23 million security assistance to Ukraine in a matter of weeks. As the crisis in eastern Ukraine intensifies, however, particularly in the aftermath of last week’s tragic plane crash that cost the lives of nearly 300 civilians, the US is once again reportedly offering assistance, this time by way of providing Pentagon advisers.
“Clearly, we have an interest in what happens in Ukraine and it’s far better to have an idea of where we can maximize any support we are willing to provide,” Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-California) told the Times this week.
“It’s important to keep in mind that one of the reasons we’re sending people over there now to help them establish enduring programs is because they don’t have enduring programs,” one defense official told the paper on condition of anonymity. “So two months ago, when they generated their request list, that list wasn’t a result of a well-established defense strategy.”
On Wednesday this week, The Daily Beast went even further by alleging that those earlier requests made by Kiev to the Pentagon were for “sensitive equipment to jam the radars that Russian anti-aircraft systems use to lock their missiles on planes.”
According to Eli Lake at the Beast, a former senior US official said on condition of anonymity that Kiev officials last month specifically “requested the radar jamming and detection equipment necessary to evade and counter the anti-aircraft systems Moscow was providing the country’s separatists.”
Col. Warren, the Pentagon official who confirmed to the Times that DOD advisers were being sent abroad, told the Beast that “The Ukrainian government has requested support, but we’re not going to detail the types of support they have requested.”
Feels like a belated April Fools article!
http://batr.org/negotium/072314.html
Russian Sanctions Backfire
The belief that calling for and instituting sanctions against Russia is a sound policy, illustrates the economic disconnect of the Obama administration. With the fervor for starting a new cold war, the propaganda machine is working overtime to paint a picture that ignores real economic synergism. Note the conflicting reports regarding the EU. Nine EU countries ready to block economic sanctions against Russia, quotes a diplomatic source to ITAR-TASS:
“France, Germany, Luxembourg, Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Cyprus, Slovenia, and EU President Italy see no reason in the current environment for the introduction of sectorial trade and economic sanctions against Russia and at the summit, will block the measure.”
“According to the source, the US sees slapping Russia with sanctions as a way to promote its own trade agenda with Europe, a side rarely explored in mainstream media. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the US and Europe would create the world's largest free trade zone, but some worry it could balloon into an "economic NATO" or could end up putting corporation interest above national.”
An article, EU and the USA have adopted new sanctions against Russia reports that the European Council has agreed to extend the restrictive measures for the entities in the Russian Federation. Romanian president Traian Basescu believes the EU needs to adopt tougher sanctions against Russia.
"My point of view was that unless the European Union takes tougher actions and moves on to the third stage of these sanctions, Ukraine might no longer be ready to move towards the European Union and would end up in a situation like that in the Republic of Moldova, currently facing the breakaway tendencies of the region of Transdniester, only with a greater impact for the EU, because Ukraine is a bigger country."
This contradiction between individual national economic interests and the quest for a technocrat administered system of trade that fosters and facilitates an internationalist foreign policy under NATO and EU rule, is the actual objective of Washington and Brussels interventionism. This arrogance and self-delusion treats economic commerce as conducted in a vacuum. As The Hill article cites Putin. “Sanctions are “driving into a corner” relations between the two countries and will damage the interests of U.S. companies and “the long-term national interests of the U.S. government and people.”
Russian warns that the US campaign will have consequences as the Alliance News writes, that Moscow Blasts US Sanctions As "Primitive," Promises Retaliation.
“Sergei Ryabkov, a deputy Foreign Minister, told the Interfax news agency that Moscow will hit back with measures that "will be felt in Washington painfully and sharply."
The Russian Foreign Ministry said US measures against a number of state corporations are "a primitive attempt at revenge because events in Ukraine are not developing according to Washington's scenario," and added that it reserves the right to retaliate.”
The preposterous strategy that international finance can force a country like Russia, with the world’s largest energy resources, into a capitulation dependent status is absurd. The minimal effect according to Russia's Finance Ministry, Says Harsher Sanctions Would Cost Russia 0.3% of GDP, does not sound like much of a threat. Then consider the counter response of Russian Sanctions Retaliation Escalates: Dumps Intel/AMD And Now Foreign Cars.
bricsnations.jpg
The cavalier and condescending manner by which the Western central banks assist the New World Order’s goal of global dominance has fortified opposition with the emergence of the BRICS Development Bank. Use your common sense, when Putin Wants Measures to Protect BRICS Nations From U.S. Sanctions, much of the rest of the world is listening.
"In an interview published as a two-day BRICS summit got under way in Brazil on Tuesday, Putin said he would urge Brazil, China, India and South Africa to draw "substantive conclusions" from sanctions imposed on Russia over its actions in the Ukraine crisis, and said it was time to dilute the dominance of the U.S.-led West and the U.S. dollar by boosting the role of the BRICS on the global stage."
The American press and media, especially is fueling the fires to demonize Putin’s Russia as a resurrected Stalinist Soviet belligerent. Absent in this narrative is an honest chronicle of NATO’s expansion to encircle the Russian Federation. At what point will Western journalists and academic scholars admit that the convergence of EU authoritarianism and American hegemony propagates an internationalist foreign policy, designed to isolate and destroy any opposition to this New World Order.
The lesson of these failed attempts for economic bullying a country, with real weapons of mass destruction, has the potential of starting a hot war. The essay, IMF and EU Capture of Ukraine, explains the circumstances and false justification of initiating "regime change". This Ukraine flashpoint may well commence a tangible economic union among countries, who recognize that American sanctions are nothing more than a desperate attempt to prop up a decaying globalist economic structure.
EU antagonism towards the citizens of their member countries is growing expediently. Within this context, US sanctions hurt Europe more than America.
"The Association of European Businesses (AEB), a Moscow-based business lobby, said that new US sanctions against Russia have a more severe effect on European than on American business.
The AEB says it "regrets" the US sanctions, and warns that they will stunt economic growth "not only in Russia".
"These sanctions are more focused on the partners of European businesses than on the partners of American companies," the group said in a statement on Thursday."
Obama’s State Department bears a heavy responsibility for promoting a civil war in Ukraine. Using sanctions to push Russia into accelerating a BRICS economic block will have far more adverse effects than can be envisioned by the lunatic proponents of "selective" Free Trade. The moneychanger’s financial system is imploding and their rescue plan requires a massive global crisis to bail out their "To Big to Fail" model. Mutually productive commerce will be among the first causalities of the prelude to World War III. Soon clamors for sanctions against American companies will begin, as the blame game diverts the real cause of this fabricated debacle.
James Hall – July 23, 2014
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...22025.html
Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash: Massive rise in sale of British arms to Russia
A powerful select committee of MPs added to Downing Street discomfort over the issue by today calling on the Government to show “more cautious judgment” when approving exports to Russia after the value of licences rocketed by more than half in the last year from £86m to £131.5m.
The increase of 52 per cent in the last 12 months took place despite Britain’s increasingly strident criticism of Russian support - including the supply of arms - for Ukrainian separatists, who have now been blamed for the killing of 298 people on board flight MH17.
As the European Union last night announced it was considering targeting defence sales as part of widened sanctions against Moscow, Labour claimed the Conservative Party had also accepted donations worth more than £900,00 since 2007 from Russians with alleged links to the Russian government.
The exhaustive report by MPs on sales to 28 countries deemed by the Government to be “of human rights concern” found that Britain last year issued 285 separate licences for the sale of weaponry and controlled goods to Russia, including £1.6m of small arms ammunition, 38 sniper rifles, components for assault rifles and combat shotguns, and cryptography equipment worth £74m.
A five-year licence was also granted last year by Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) for the shipping of multiple military components, including missile components and launching technology, to Russian territory.
Officials in Business Secretary Vince Cable’s department last night insisted the licence applied to a contingency agreement to supply emergency spare parts to the Brazilian navy in 23 countries, including Russia, and no missile parts had been sent to Russia under the deal.
But MPs questioned whether there were enough checks in place to ensure that a long list of arms and weaponry approved for export to Russia reached its declared end user and said Britain needed to be significantly more circumspect about what it agreed to sell to authoritarian countries.
Sir John Stanley, chairman of the House of Commons Committees on Arms Export Controls (CAEC), said: “Our view is that there should be a more cautious approach. We have been appealing for a more considered approach to Russia for some time. I think many people would be wondering why the UK is giving export approval to the considerable number of items on that list?”
The senior Conservative MP said last night he would be writing to Mr Cameron for clarification on which further weaponry exports to Russia have now been banned amid criticism from anti-arms trade campaigners that Britain was only taking action because of the international outcry over the Malaysia Airlines atrocity.
Andrew Smith, from the Campaign Against Arms Trade, said: “All too often it takes a humanitarian catastrophe before the UK Government practices arms control. We welcome tighter regulation of the arms trade, but when the UK’s target markets include oppressive Governments, it doesn’t just give them military support, it also indicates political support.”
Former Foreign Secretary William Hague announced in March that it was suspending all licences existing licences and applications of military and dual-use equipment to Russia where it was or could be used against Ukraine.
Sir John said this had resulted in the suspension of the “relatively small number” of just 34 of the 285 approved sales to Russia. The Government last night insisted that the “majority” of remaining export licences for Russia applied to items for “for commercial use”.
The annual report by the MPs, based on joint meetings of four separate Commons’ select committees, also accused Mr Cable of quietly dropping a longstanding plank of Britain’s arms export policy to make sales to oppressive regimes such as Russia easier.
The report found that the Government last year approved sales worth £11.9bn to 28 countries designated by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) as being “of human rights concern”, including £1.7bn each to Saudi Arabia and China. Sales to Israel, also named on the FCO list, were dominated by a single deal - worth £7.8bn - of cryptographic equipment and software to an unnamed customer in the country.
Since 2000, arms sales had been considered alongside criteria which states: “An export licence will not be issued if the arguments for doing so are outweighed by concern that the goods might be used for internal repression or international aggression”.
Nightvision goggles on display at the DSEI arms fair in London last year (Getty)
Despite being omitted from stated Government criteria, BIS officials last night insisted the move did constitute a change of policy and safeguards remains in place.
But the MPs strongly criticised the move. Sir John said: “We don’t accept that there has been no change of policy. This is very important policy wording and it has been dropped.”
The MPs were also strongly critical of the current Government and its Labour predecessor for approving the sale of chemical weapon precursors to Syria despite the knowledge that the country’s regime was developing a nerve gas stockpile.
The report described the decision under Labour to grant five export licences for “dual-use” nerve gas ingredients between 2004 and 2010 as “highly questionable” and said the decision by the Coalition to grant to further licences in 2012 - after the civil war had started - as “irresponsible”.
A Government spokesperson said: “The UK aims to operate one of the most robust and transparent export control systems in the world. Every application is examined rigorously against internationally recognised criteria and particular attention is paid to human rights risks.”
Alexander Temerko
A former vice-president of oil giant Yukos, Mr Temerko fled Russia and received UK citizenship after being charged with fraud. He is a director of Offshore Group Newcastle, who specialise in offshore wind, and gas and oil platforms. He has personally donated around £259,230 to the Conservative Party since 2012. OGN has also donated £185,325 to the Tories.
Lubov and Vladimir Chernukhin
Lubov Chernukhin paid £160,000 at the most recent Tory summer ball for a game of tennis with David Cameron. She is married to Vladimir Chernukhin, former deputy finance minister of Russia. Mr Chenhukhin is also a former director of Aeroflot, JCS Russian Agricultural Bank, Vnesheconombank, and Polyus Gold International Limited until April 2014.
New Century Media
Had a table at the Tory summer ball and have donated £91,000 to the Conservatives. The lobbying company has worked with organisations such as “Positive Russia” – which seeks to portray Vladimir Putin and Russia in a positive light, and invited Mr Putin’s judo partner Vasily Shestakov and billionaire Andrei Klyamko to the ball.
Published time: July 23, 2014 16:31 Get short URL
U.S. President Barack Obama (Reuters/Joshua Roberts)U.S. President Barack Obama (Reuters/Joshua Roberts)
595
391
1
Trends
Ukraine turmoil
Tags
Military, USA, Ukraine
The United States is reportedly preparing to send a team of military advisers into Ukraine to assist with revamping forces there in the midst of the ongoing crisis between government-loyal troops and an anti-Kiev militia.
On Tuesday this week, the Washington Times reported that a spokesperson for the US Department of Defense confirmed plans to put Pentagon advisers in Ukraine.
“Within the next few weeks, a group of Defense Department representatives who specialize in strategy and policy will head to Kiev to evaluate specific programs that the United States may want to help bolster,” reporter Maggie Ybarra wrote for the Times.
The newspaper says that Army Col. Steve Warren, a spokesperson for the Pentagon, told the Times that the objective of sending DoD advisers overseas is to “shape and establish an enduring program for future US efforts to support the Ukrainian military through subject-matter expert teams and long-term advisers.”
RT reported previously back in early June that US military advisers were being offered to Kiev “to help Ukraine build highly effective armed forces and defense institutions” and to “shape and establish an enduring program for future US efforts to support the Ukrainian military through training, education and assistance.”
Last month’s announcement came after the White House approved more than $23 million security assistance to Ukraine in a matter of weeks. As the crisis in eastern Ukraine intensifies, however, particularly in the aftermath of last week’s tragic plane crash that cost the lives of nearly 300 civilians, the US is once again reportedly offering assistance, this time by way of providing Pentagon advisers.
“Clearly, we have an interest in what happens in Ukraine and it’s far better to have an idea of where we can maximize any support we are willing to provide,” Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-California) told the Times this week.
“It’s important to keep in mind that one of the reasons we’re sending people over there now to help them establish enduring programs is because they don’t have enduring programs,” one defense official told the paper on condition of anonymity. “So two months ago, when they generated their request list, that list wasn’t a result of a well-established defense strategy.”
On Wednesday this week, The Daily Beast went even further by alleging that those earlier requests made by Kiev to the Pentagon were for “sensitive equipment to jam the radars that Russian anti-aircraft systems use to lock their missiles on planes.”
According to Eli Lake at the Beast, a former senior US official said on condition of anonymity that Kiev officials last month specifically “requested the radar jamming and detection equipment necessary to evade and counter the anti-aircraft systems Moscow was providing the country’s separatists.”
Col. Warren, the Pentagon official who confirmed to the Times that DOD advisers were being sent abroad, told the Beast that “The Ukrainian government has requested support, but we’re not going to detail the types of support they have requested.”
Feels like a belated April Fools article!
http://batr.org/negotium/072314.html
Russian Sanctions Backfire
The belief that calling for and instituting sanctions against Russia is a sound policy, illustrates the economic disconnect of the Obama administration. With the fervor for starting a new cold war, the propaganda machine is working overtime to paint a picture that ignores real economic synergism. Note the conflicting reports regarding the EU. Nine EU countries ready to block economic sanctions against Russia, quotes a diplomatic source to ITAR-TASS:
“France, Germany, Luxembourg, Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Cyprus, Slovenia, and EU President Italy see no reason in the current environment for the introduction of sectorial trade and economic sanctions against Russia and at the summit, will block the measure.”
“According to the source, the US sees slapping Russia with sanctions as a way to promote its own trade agenda with Europe, a side rarely explored in mainstream media. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the US and Europe would create the world's largest free trade zone, but some worry it could balloon into an "economic NATO" or could end up putting corporation interest above national.”
An article, EU and the USA have adopted new sanctions against Russia reports that the European Council has agreed to extend the restrictive measures for the entities in the Russian Federation. Romanian president Traian Basescu believes the EU needs to adopt tougher sanctions against Russia.
"My point of view was that unless the European Union takes tougher actions and moves on to the third stage of these sanctions, Ukraine might no longer be ready to move towards the European Union and would end up in a situation like that in the Republic of Moldova, currently facing the breakaway tendencies of the region of Transdniester, only with a greater impact for the EU, because Ukraine is a bigger country."
This contradiction between individual national economic interests and the quest for a technocrat administered system of trade that fosters and facilitates an internationalist foreign policy under NATO and EU rule, is the actual objective of Washington and Brussels interventionism. This arrogance and self-delusion treats economic commerce as conducted in a vacuum. As The Hill article cites Putin. “Sanctions are “driving into a corner” relations between the two countries and will damage the interests of U.S. companies and “the long-term national interests of the U.S. government and people.”
Russian warns that the US campaign will have consequences as the Alliance News writes, that Moscow Blasts US Sanctions As "Primitive," Promises Retaliation.
“Sergei Ryabkov, a deputy Foreign Minister, told the Interfax news agency that Moscow will hit back with measures that "will be felt in Washington painfully and sharply."
The Russian Foreign Ministry said US measures against a number of state corporations are "a primitive attempt at revenge because events in Ukraine are not developing according to Washington's scenario," and added that it reserves the right to retaliate.”
The preposterous strategy that international finance can force a country like Russia, with the world’s largest energy resources, into a capitulation dependent status is absurd. The minimal effect according to Russia's Finance Ministry, Says Harsher Sanctions Would Cost Russia 0.3% of GDP, does not sound like much of a threat. Then consider the counter response of Russian Sanctions Retaliation Escalates: Dumps Intel/AMD And Now Foreign Cars.
bricsnations.jpg
The cavalier and condescending manner by which the Western central banks assist the New World Order’s goal of global dominance has fortified opposition with the emergence of the BRICS Development Bank. Use your common sense, when Putin Wants Measures to Protect BRICS Nations From U.S. Sanctions, much of the rest of the world is listening.
"In an interview published as a two-day BRICS summit got under way in Brazil on Tuesday, Putin said he would urge Brazil, China, India and South Africa to draw "substantive conclusions" from sanctions imposed on Russia over its actions in the Ukraine crisis, and said it was time to dilute the dominance of the U.S.-led West and the U.S. dollar by boosting the role of the BRICS on the global stage."
The American press and media, especially is fueling the fires to demonize Putin’s Russia as a resurrected Stalinist Soviet belligerent. Absent in this narrative is an honest chronicle of NATO’s expansion to encircle the Russian Federation. At what point will Western journalists and academic scholars admit that the convergence of EU authoritarianism and American hegemony propagates an internationalist foreign policy, designed to isolate and destroy any opposition to this New World Order.
The lesson of these failed attempts for economic bullying a country, with real weapons of mass destruction, has the potential of starting a hot war. The essay, IMF and EU Capture of Ukraine, explains the circumstances and false justification of initiating "regime change". This Ukraine flashpoint may well commence a tangible economic union among countries, who recognize that American sanctions are nothing more than a desperate attempt to prop up a decaying globalist economic structure.
EU antagonism towards the citizens of their member countries is growing expediently. Within this context, US sanctions hurt Europe more than America.
"The Association of European Businesses (AEB), a Moscow-based business lobby, said that new US sanctions against Russia have a more severe effect on European than on American business.
The AEB says it "regrets" the US sanctions, and warns that they will stunt economic growth "not only in Russia".
"These sanctions are more focused on the partners of European businesses than on the partners of American companies," the group said in a statement on Thursday."
Obama’s State Department bears a heavy responsibility for promoting a civil war in Ukraine. Using sanctions to push Russia into accelerating a BRICS economic block will have far more adverse effects than can be envisioned by the lunatic proponents of "selective" Free Trade. The moneychanger’s financial system is imploding and their rescue plan requires a massive global crisis to bail out their "To Big to Fail" model. Mutually productive commerce will be among the first causalities of the prelude to World War III. Soon clamors for sanctions against American companies will begin, as the blame game diverts the real cause of this fabricated debacle.
James Hall – July 23, 2014
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...22025.html
Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash: Massive rise in sale of British arms to Russia
A powerful select committee of MPs added to Downing Street discomfort over the issue by today calling on the Government to show “more cautious judgment” when approving exports to Russia after the value of licences rocketed by more than half in the last year from £86m to £131.5m.
The increase of 52 per cent in the last 12 months took place despite Britain’s increasingly strident criticism of Russian support - including the supply of arms - for Ukrainian separatists, who have now been blamed for the killing of 298 people on board flight MH17.
As the European Union last night announced it was considering targeting defence sales as part of widened sanctions against Moscow, Labour claimed the Conservative Party had also accepted donations worth more than £900,00 since 2007 from Russians with alleged links to the Russian government.
The exhaustive report by MPs on sales to 28 countries deemed by the Government to be “of human rights concern” found that Britain last year issued 285 separate licences for the sale of weaponry and controlled goods to Russia, including £1.6m of small arms ammunition, 38 sniper rifles, components for assault rifles and combat shotguns, and cryptography equipment worth £74m.
A five-year licence was also granted last year by Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) for the shipping of multiple military components, including missile components and launching technology, to Russian territory.
Officials in Business Secretary Vince Cable’s department last night insisted the licence applied to a contingency agreement to supply emergency spare parts to the Brazilian navy in 23 countries, including Russia, and no missile parts had been sent to Russia under the deal.
But MPs questioned whether there were enough checks in place to ensure that a long list of arms and weaponry approved for export to Russia reached its declared end user and said Britain needed to be significantly more circumspect about what it agreed to sell to authoritarian countries.
Sir John Stanley, chairman of the House of Commons Committees on Arms Export Controls (CAEC), said: “Our view is that there should be a more cautious approach. We have been appealing for a more considered approach to Russia for some time. I think many people would be wondering why the UK is giving export approval to the considerable number of items on that list?”
The senior Conservative MP said last night he would be writing to Mr Cameron for clarification on which further weaponry exports to Russia have now been banned amid criticism from anti-arms trade campaigners that Britain was only taking action because of the international outcry over the Malaysia Airlines atrocity.
Andrew Smith, from the Campaign Against Arms Trade, said: “All too often it takes a humanitarian catastrophe before the UK Government practices arms control. We welcome tighter regulation of the arms trade, but when the UK’s target markets include oppressive Governments, it doesn’t just give them military support, it also indicates political support.”
Former Foreign Secretary William Hague announced in March that it was suspending all licences existing licences and applications of military and dual-use equipment to Russia where it was or could be used against Ukraine.
Sir John said this had resulted in the suspension of the “relatively small number” of just 34 of the 285 approved sales to Russia. The Government last night insisted that the “majority” of remaining export licences for Russia applied to items for “for commercial use”.
The annual report by the MPs, based on joint meetings of four separate Commons’ select committees, also accused Mr Cable of quietly dropping a longstanding plank of Britain’s arms export policy to make sales to oppressive regimes such as Russia easier.
The report found that the Government last year approved sales worth £11.9bn to 28 countries designated by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) as being “of human rights concern”, including £1.7bn each to Saudi Arabia and China. Sales to Israel, also named on the FCO list, were dominated by a single deal - worth £7.8bn - of cryptographic equipment and software to an unnamed customer in the country.
Since 2000, arms sales had been considered alongside criteria which states: “An export licence will not be issued if the arguments for doing so are outweighed by concern that the goods might be used for internal repression or international aggression”.
Nightvision goggles on display at the DSEI arms fair in London last year (Getty)
Despite being omitted from stated Government criteria, BIS officials last night insisted the move did constitute a change of policy and safeguards remains in place.
But the MPs strongly criticised the move. Sir John said: “We don’t accept that there has been no change of policy. This is very important policy wording and it has been dropped.”
The MPs were also strongly critical of the current Government and its Labour predecessor for approving the sale of chemical weapon precursors to Syria despite the knowledge that the country’s regime was developing a nerve gas stockpile.
The report described the decision under Labour to grant five export licences for “dual-use” nerve gas ingredients between 2004 and 2010 as “highly questionable” and said the decision by the Coalition to grant to further licences in 2012 - after the civil war had started - as “irresponsible”.
A Government spokesperson said: “The UK aims to operate one of the most robust and transparent export control systems in the world. Every application is examined rigorously against internationally recognised criteria and particular attention is paid to human rights risks.”
Alexander Temerko
A former vice-president of oil giant Yukos, Mr Temerko fled Russia and received UK citizenship after being charged with fraud. He is a director of Offshore Group Newcastle, who specialise in offshore wind, and gas and oil platforms. He has personally donated around £259,230 to the Conservative Party since 2012. OGN has also donated £185,325 to the Tories.
Lubov and Vladimir Chernukhin
Lubov Chernukhin paid £160,000 at the most recent Tory summer ball for a game of tennis with David Cameron. She is married to Vladimir Chernukhin, former deputy finance minister of Russia. Mr Chenhukhin is also a former director of Aeroflot, JCS Russian Agricultural Bank, Vnesheconombank, and Polyus Gold International Limited until April 2014.
New Century Media
Had a table at the Tory summer ball and have donated £91,000 to the Conservatives. The lobbying company has worked with organisations such as “Positive Russia” – which seeks to portray Vladimir Putin and Russia in a positive light, and invited Mr Putin’s judo partner Vasily Shestakov and billionaire Andrei Klyamko to the ball.
29-07-2014, 05:16 AM
Arrested Oil Tycoon Passed
Shares To Banker Rothschild
The Washington Times
11-3-3
LONDON (Agence France-Presse) - Control of Mikhail Khodorkovsky's shares in the Russian oil giant Yukos have passed to renowned banker Jacob Rothschild, under a deal they concluded prior to Mr. Khodorkovsky's arrest, the Sunday Times reported.
Voting rights to the shares passed to Mr. Rothschild, 67, under a "previously unknown arrangement" designed to take effect in the event that Mr. Khodorkovsky could no longer "act as a beneficiary" of the shares, it said.
Mr. Khodorkovsky, 40, whom Russian authorities arrested at gunpoint and jailed pending further investigation last week, was said by the Sunday Times to have made the arrangement with Mr. Rothschild when he realized he was facing arrest.
Mr. Rothschild now controls the voting rights on a stake in Yukos worth almost $13.5 billion, the newspaper said in a dispatch from Moscow.
Mr. Khodorkovsky owns 4 percent of Yukos directly and 22 percent through a trust of which he is the sole beneficiary, according to Russian analysts.
From the figures reported in the Sunday Times, it appeared Mr. Rothschild had received control of all Mr. Khodorkovsky's shares.
The two have known each other for years "through their mutual love of the arts" and their positions as directors of the Open Russia Foundation, Yukos' philanthropic branch, it said.
Russian authorities Thursday froze billions of dollars of shares held by Mr. Khodorkovsky and his top lieutenants in Yukos - throwing control of the country's largest oil company into limbo and causing frenzied selling on financial markets.
Russian prosecutors said owners of the shares are still entitled to dividends and retain voting rights, but can no longer sell their stakes.
They said the freeze was necessary as collateral for the $1 billion that Mr. Khodorkovsky and his associates are accused of misappropriating during the 1990s.
Mr. Rothschild is the British head of Europe's wealthy and influential Rothschild family, and runs his own investment empire.
http://washingtontimes.com/world/2003110...-3720r.htm
Russian-Born American Named To head Embattled Yukos
(AFP) -- A Russian-born American has been named to replace Mikhail Khodorkovsky to head Russia's largest oil company, Yukos, the company said in a statement posted on its website.
Simon Kukes, 56, has been nominated to head the board of directors, the statement said.
Kukes, a member of Yukos' board of directors, emigrated from the Soviet Union to the United States in the 1970s but has since returned to Russia. He once worked for Russian oil company TNK.
Kukes will head the board of YukosSibneft, a company that was created when Yukos merged with a smaller rival Sibneft earlier this year.
The merger, due to be finalized at a shareholders' meeting in late November, created the world's fourth largest oil and gas producer.
Kukes worked in the US oil industry in Texas before returning to Russia after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. He once told a reporter he chose to work in Russia because "the work is interesting -- every day there is a new challenge."
Kukes's appointment came a day after Khodorkovsky resigned as Yukos chief executive. Khordokovsky, Russia's richest man, has been jailed on charges of massive fraud and tax evasion while prosecutors continue an investigation into Yukos.
The billionaire businessman obtained control of Yukos, then a collection of oilfields and refineries in Siberia, during the shadowy privatization deals of the 1990s, when people picked up choice Russian assets for bargain-basement prices at questionable auctions.
Over the years, Khordokovsky added assets and invested massively in Yukos. The oil giant was the first Russian major to adopt international accounting standards and hire western managers, in the wake of the country's 1998 financial crash,.
Today, Yukos is considered the best governed and most transparent Russian business giant. It has a market capitalization of just under 30 billion dollars.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/031104/1/3fklf.html
Comment
From SCM
11-4-3
"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from its profits or so dependant
on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class." -- Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863. And now Rothschild has the Yukos oil fortune.
The Zionist political group controls the dollar through the Federal Reserve. The EU-Euro is creation of and supported by the Vatican to counter Zionist aspirations of world domination.
"The Zionists masquerading as Jews are not a race of people but a political group."
'The International Jew' by Henry Ford, Sr. is a series of extremely controversial articles printed in Ford's newspaper The Dearborn Independent during the years 1920 to 1922. His series of articles reveals quite clearly the plan for world domination by Zionism. The Zionists are not a race of people but a political group that can be easily traced through history back to the Pharisees of Esu Immanuel's day and beyond to Babylonia. Today, the Zionists are known as the Khazarian Zionist Bolsheviks or KZB, for their history extends back to the Khazars of Russia and forward to their initiation of communism a century ago. Henry Ford refers to the KZB as the 'International Jew'.
The word 'Jew' does not appear in any of the earlier historical or biblical writings, as it was first coined in the 1870's. Jew refers to those people of HEBREW descent or the Israelites of the Bible, who have SEMITIC ancestry. Zionists make up the political group which controls the government of the country of Israel today. Often the word 'Zionist' is wrongly used interchangeably with the word 'Jew'. Jews are considered to be Semites, therefore those who hate Jews are called anti-Semitic. Henry Ford was accused by the Zionists of being anti-Semitic. This is untrue because Ford did not hate Jews, but was only exposing the Truth of Zionism. - PHB
Comment
From D. Michael
11-4-3
Dear Jeff,
Your site is to be applauded for taking a hand's-off approach to the dissemination of information that is often sensational or inflammatory, but ultimately always helpful.
In this regard, your spate of articles grouped under "Zionism" is particularly informative, especially those penned by Jews who lend greater credence to the many valid - if highly controversial - historical and moral commentaries on the Zionists.
(This liberal approach to posting hypersensitive articles - on both sides of the right/left divide - will, of course, one day bring crushing forces to bear upon you, but by then it is to be supposed that we will all be caught in the great "press.")
As a freethinker, I am willing to tolerate the wide range of opinions expressed, even when some of these opinions are themselves absurd, inaccurate, or downright venomous.
IN THIS REGARD, MAY I TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT A READER'S POSTSCRIPT TO THE RECENT ARTICLE, "Khodorkovsky" Oil Shared Passed to Rothschild."
The reader comments that "The word 'Jew' does not appear in any of the earlier historical or biblical writings, as it was first coined in the 1870s. Jew refers to those people of HEBREW descent or the Israelites of the Bible, who have SEMITIC ancestry. Zionists make up the political group which controls the government of the country of Israel today."
This is blatantly false. The word Jew first occurs in the Old Testament in II Kings 16: 5-6, which reads
"Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war: and they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him. At that time Rezin king of Syria recovered Elath to Syria, and drave the Jews from Elath: and the Syrians came to Elath, and dwelt there unto this day."
This passage serves to illustrate two essential historical certainties: (1) Following Solomon's' death, Israel had split into two distinct kingdoms: the Kingdom of Judah and the Kingdom of Israel. (2) "JEWS" as a nickname was at that early date already used to refer to the people of the Kingdom of Judah.
A casual survey of the Scriptures will net many other passages referring to the "Jews." To those who are inclined to believe that the use of the term is of a recent coinage, one need only consider that the King James Bible was written in the 1600s and the term was obviously known to the translators. To say that the term was coined in the 1870s is truly absurd on many levels, and can only serve to misinform those readers who are not well-read.
As an aside, may I caution you and all your readers that there is a large body of so-called Christian groups who are of the opinion that today's Jews are not Jews at all, but descendants of gentile converts to Judaism who have, so to speak, stolen the Jewish identity and name. (You may have guessed that the this leaves the "true" Jews, the blue-eyed peoples of Nordic descent who will one day rise up to punish the "false" Jews.)
One must be careful to filter out the hateful biases and lies of these "hate" groups (and I use the term advisedly). Many articles purporting to provide the "true" history of the Jews are nothing more than virulent racism of a kind that any good Nazi (in any age) would be proud to claim.
In time, there is little doubt that the Jews - the majority of whom, it can be demonstrated, are doubtlessly descended from Judah - will once again suffer for their Jewishness.
In the meantime, I can only hope that more and more Jews will open their eyes, avail themselves of the sort of freethinking content that appears on your site, and prepare themselves for the next cruel onslaught.
The Jews will not be alone, of course. All men and women of conscience are likely to feel the heat along with them, as great Mystery Babylon readies its hosts to make war with those who refuse to bend the knee at the advent of the coming King of Forces (see Daniel 12).
Thanks again for many intelligent, reasoned articles on a myriad of subjects.
Sincerely,
D. Michael
MOSCOW, July 28 (RIA Novosti) – Moscow will use all of its legal capabilities to uphold its interests in a $50-billion court case by ex-Yukos shareholders in The Hague, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Monday.
“I heard an announcement that such a verdict is expected. It’s necessary to wait for the fact itself, so that it comes into being and then make some sort of comments … The Russian side, obviously, will use all of its legal capabilities at hand to uphold its position," Lavrov told journalists.
The Hague's arbitration court ruled Monday that Russia must pay a group of shareholders in the now-defunct oil giant Yukos some $50 billion, just under half of their $114 billion claim, for expropriating the company’s assets.
The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague published Monday the rulings in three separate lawsuits filed by companies representing the former shareholders of Yukos, formerly led by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, once Russia's richest man.
In 2003, Russia’s authorities accused the leadership of Yukos, once the largest oil company in the country, of economic crimes. A range of Yukos managers were convicted for fraud and tax evasion. Yukos was later declared bankrupt and Rosneft bought the bulk of its assets.
Yukos’ managers contended that the Russian government illegally forced the oil firm out of business and bankrupted it, which allowed state-controlled oil company Rosneft to snap up its assets and become Russia’s largest oil producer.
Yukos founder Mikhail Khodorkovsky had spent a decade in prison for fraud and tax evasion until he was pardoned in December 2013. He denied all charges against him, saying he was punished for supporting the tiny pro-Western opposition and that the liquidation of Yukos was engineered by corrupt government officials aiming to seize lucrative oil assets.
Khodorkovsky publicly said he had no role in the court process.
(Reuters) - An international arbitration court ruled on Monday that Russia must pay $50 billion (£29.44 billion) for expropriating the assets of Yukos, the former oil giant whose ex-owner Mikhail Khodorkovsky fell foul of the Kremlin. Finding that Russian authorities had subjected Yukos to politically-motivated attacks, the panel made an award to a group of former Yukos shareholders that equates to more than half the entire fund Moscow has set aside to cover budget holes.
Russia, whose economy is on the brink of recession, said it would appeal the ruling by the Dutch-based panel, which judges private business disputes. It also said the "politically biased decision" was based on "current events" - an apparent reference to Moscow's dispute with the West over Ukraine.
Independent lawyers said it would be difficult to enforce the award to shareholders in the GML group, who had claimed $114 billion to recover money they lost when the Kremlin seized Yukos a decade ago.
Tim Osborne, director of GML, hailed the ruling. "The award is a slam dunk. It is for $50 billion, and that cannot be disputed," he said. "It's now a question of enforcing it."
The ruling hit back at decisions made under President Vladimir Putin's rule during his first term as president to nationalise Yukos and jail Khodorkovsky, who had criticised him. The hardline approach was seen by Kremlin critics at the time as a stark message to oligarchs to stay out of politics.
Khodorkovsky, who used to be Russia's richest man, was arrested at gunpoint in 2003 and convicted of theft and tax evasion in 2005. Yukos, once worth $40 billion, was broken up and nationalised, with most assets handed to Rosneft, an energy giant run by an ally of Putin.
After 10 years in jail, Putin pardoned Khodorkovsky in December and he now lives in Switzerland.
Announcing it would appeal, the Russian Finance Ministry denounced the award. "Instead of an objective, impartial consideration of the case, the arbitration court ruled based on current developments and as a result adopted a politically biased decision," it said in a statement on its website.
Moscow's relations with the West are at their worst since the Cold War due to its annexation of Crimea and over a rebellion by separatists in Ukraine after a pro-Russian president was forced out of office.
Russia argued that the court in the Hague had ignored tax violations by Yukos and said it was senseless and speculative to value the company so long after the events. Lawyers, however, said there were only limited grounds on which to appeal. The panel of judges, which has been reviewing the case since 2005, concluded that officials under Putin had manipulated the legal system to bankrupt Yukos. "Yukos was the object of a series of politically motivated attacks by the Russian authorities that eventually led to its destruction," the court said. "The primary objective of the Russian Federation was not to collect taxes but rather to bankrupt Yukos and appropriate its valuable assets."
ECONOMIC IMPACT
Khodorkovsky was not a party to the GML action but welcomed its success. "It is fantastic that the company shareholders are being given a chance to recover their damages," he said in a statement, adding that he would not seek to benefit financially from the outcome.
Russia faces a tightening of international sanctions originally imposed after it annexed Crimea in March. The United States has said it has evidence of Russian complicity in the downing of a Malaysian airliner over eastern Ukraine earlier this month, which it blames on the pro-Moscow rebels.
Russia denies the charges and has blamed the Ukrainian military for the tragedy in which 298 people died.
Credit Suisse economist Aleksei Pogorelov said the ruling could have significant economic effects. "This decision affects the assessment of the long-term financial stability of Russia and could become the basis for arguments for revising Russia's ratings by international rating agencies," he said Credit.
$50 billion represents about 2.5 percent of Russia's total annual economic output or 57 percent of its Reserve Fund, which is earmarked to cover shortfalls in the state budget.
The ruling hit Russian stocks. The RTS index of Russian shares closed down 3 percent.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg is expected to announce a separate decision on Thursday on Yukos's multi-billion-dollar claim against Russia, ruling on "just satisfaction" or compensation, a Yukos spokeswoman said. The application in the Strasbourg court, which is on behalf of all Yukos shareholders, argued the company was unlawfully deprived of its possessions by the imposition of bogus taxes and a sham auction of its main asset.
Bruce Misamore, former chief financial officer for Yukos, said he hoped the ECHR would take "strong note" of the size of the award by the Dutch court in assessing the just satisfaction claim and described Monday's ruling as a "landmark".
One lawyer, who declined to be named, said the timing of both rulings coming together was probably a coincidence.
RECLAIMING ASSETS
GML may now face a battle to claim the money from Russia.
"The question is whether Russia will pay that award, which I very much doubt," said Jan Kleinheisterkamp, an Associate Professor of Law at the London School of Economics. "This means that ultimately the shareholders will start to chase Russian assets abroad, which is a very tedious and usually not very fruitful business."
Antonios Tzanakopoulos, a law professor at Britain's Oxford University, said if assets were to be seized, they would have to be commercial, meaning it would not be possible to get a court order on an embassy building or a docked Russian warship.
Russia must pay the compensation to subsidiaries of Gibraltar-based Group Menatep, a company through which Khodorkovsky controlled Yukos.
Group Menatep now exists as the holding company GML, and Khodorkovsky is no longer a shareholder in GML or Yukos.
"We didn’t go into this for a pyrrhic victory to make a point ... We still believe that we will ultimately collect on this award," said Osborne.
Former Russian presidential adviser Andrei Illarionov said if Russia avoided payment it could face asset arrests around the world.
Chris Weafer, senior partner at Macro-Advisory consultancy in Moscow, said GML may try to target revenues from Russia's energy exports.
The ruling leaves Russia with few options to fight back, experts said. The arbitration court's rules call decisions on awards "final and binding". "The Kremlin's lawyers will be looking at any way to appeal this," said Weafer. Tzanakopoulos said any appeal would effectively amount to a new arbitration procedure, which both parties would have to agree to.
Russia would be likely to challenge enforcement claims in the many national courts around the world where such proceedings would be launched, he said.
A LONG SHOT
Experts said fighting the decision could be a lengthy and uphill process.
"Appeals are difficult - it is a private arbitration," said a Moscow-based lawyer who declined to be named, adding that any counter-action would be a "long shot". Any funds claimed will be shared among the shareholders.
The biggest ultimate beneficial owner is Russian-born Leonid Nevzlin, a business partner who fled to Israel to avoid prosecution. He has a stake of around 70 percent.
Khodorkovsky ceded his controlling interest in Menatep, which owned 60 to 70 percent of Yukos, to Nevzlin, after he was jailed. "I am very pleased the international tribunal in the Hague decided that Russia violated international laws and illegally nationalised Yukos," said Nevzlin.
The other four ultimate beneficial owners, each of whom owns an equal stake, are Platon Lebedev, Mikhail Brudno, Vladimir Dubov and Vasilly Shaknovski.
Rosneft, which is not a defendant in the case, said it expected no claims to be made against the company and that the ruling would not have a negative impact on its "commercial activity and assets".
Rosneft bought the bulk of Yukos assets through auctions after the company was declared bankrupt. Its shares were down 2.6 percent.
(Reporting by Tom Miles in Geneva, Vladimir Soldatkin, Megan Davies, Oksana Kobzeva, Lidia Kelly, Denis Pinchuk, Dasha Korsunskaya and Alessandra Prentice in Moscow, Tova Cohen in Tel Aviv, Thomas Escritt and Anthony Deutsche in Amsterdam, Editing by Elizabeth Piper, Will Waterman and David Evans).....
Time you set up your own independant international jurisprudence system
The Shocking Reason Putin Isn't Worried About The $50 Billion Yukos Ruling
Posted By: igots2no
Date: Monday, 28-Jul-2014 18:52:31
In Response To: ‘Mega-arbitration’: Court orders Russia to pay $50bn in Yukos case (igots2no)
Very last line supposedly said by the Putin aid got my attention???
DG
___________________________________________________________
Having $50 billion of assets under potential seizure is enough to make anyone whince. However, despite a quickly worded statement on the Yukos award, Vladimir Putin seems less than anxious to find a resolution. We think we know why, and it's very concerning.
As The FT reports confirming our earlier comments:
The award is a landmark not just for its size – 20 times the previous record for an arbitration ruling. The tribunal also found definitively that Russia’s pursuit of Yukos and its independently-minded main shareholder, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a decade ago was politically motivated.
...
Though Russia cannot appeal against the award, Moscow said it would pursue all legal avenues for trying to get it “set aside”.
Even if the ruling stands, shareholders face a tortuous battle trying to enforce it. If Moscow refuses to pay, they must pursue Russian sovereign commercial assets in the 150 countries that are party to the so-called 1958 New York Convention on enforcing arbitration awards.
But perhaps this explains why Putin is not coming out swinging, as The FT concludes,
One person close to Mr Putin said the Yukos ruling was insignificant in light of the bigger geopolitical stand-off over Ukraine.
“There is a war coming in Europe,” he said. “Do you really think this matters?”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-28...kos-ruling
http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/07/russia-thr...h-u-s-e-u/
WASHINGTON – Moscow has threatened to end security arrangements with the United States and the European Union should they impose additional sanctions as a result of what they claims is Russian “complicity” in aiding the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 by pro-Russian fighters in eastern Ukraine.
In a strong statement, the Russian foreign ministry accused White House press secretary Josh Ernest of “slander” when he characterized the downing of MH-17 as “Russian complicity.”
“Judging by the relentless slander campaign against Russia organized by the American administration, they are being more and more guided by blatant lies when pursuing their foreign policy,” the foreign ministry said.
The ministry said that intentions to extend the list of Russian officials and organizations affected by travel bans and the freezing of assets could bring an end to cooperation on such security issues as terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and organized crime.
Claiming that such a development “would be greeted enthusiastically by international terrorists,” the ministry said that the EU countries “have set a course for complete termination of interaction with Russia in international and regional security issues.”
The EU last week announced further sanctions on the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service, or FSB, and the chief of the department overseeing international operations and intelligence, as well as four members of the Russian national security council already on the list.
The U.S. and EU accuse Russia of aiding pro-Russian separatists in bringing down MH-17, which killed all 298 people on board. They suspect a Russian-supplied missile was fired with Russian assistance.
Western sources also cite Russian involvement in the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula, which until recently was part of Ukraine but with a heavy pro-Russian population. They also pointed to the renewed buildup of Russian troops, said to number more than 10,000, along the Russian-Ukraine border.
The Kremlin has vehemently denied allegations it had any involvement in the downing of the aircraft and cite other scenarios that accuse the Ukrainian government in Kiev.
As for the origin of the Ukrainian crisis, Russian President Vladimir Putin blames the West and in particular the U.S. for initially backing rebels that violently ousted the pro-Russian but democratically-elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych, who remains in exile in Moscow.
From that ouster, an interim government was formed, and it in recent weeks has signed an agreement to join the EU, a development Yanukovych initially had rejected in favor of Moscow’s Eurasia Union. That action resulted in the demonstrations that led to his ouster.
Pro-Russian separatists continue to communicate closely with Russian military personnel, as WND recently reported, as the Kiev government seeks to recapture the two eastern Ukrainian cities of Donetsk and Luhansk, which are pro-Russian.
The Ukrainian military now is attempting to surround the cities, which are close to the Russian border, and sever transport and communications between the two locations. The intent is to cut off continued logistical supply lines that originate in Russia and supply both locations.
As the Ukrainian military moves closer to its eastern border with Russia, however, more resistance is likely along with the prospect of direct Russian military assistance.
The Pentagon already has released video said to be showing the multiple firing of Grad rockets from the Russian side of the border into Ukraine. The claim could not be independently verified.
Regional analysts say, however, that Moscow has no intention of backing down on its support for the pro-Russian Ukrainians despite added Western military advisers and intelligence, particularly from the U.S., being provided to the Ukrainian government.
Nevertheless, Moscow is expected to maintain its role in asserting its influence in Ukraine to develop a buffer against the West and intends to take advantage of potential fissures which appear to be developing in the Kiev government.
Moscow also maintains a stranglehold not only on Ukraine but Europe itself through the supply of natural gas on which Europe is highly dependent. Ukraine owes Moscow billions of dollars in back payments for the natural gas it has received.
As an added measure, Russia also could threaten to cut off Ukraine’s supply which, in turn, will have an impact on the flow of natural gas to Europe.
Future sanctions from Europe would add to that prospect, in addition to cutting off any further security ties.
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/07/russia-thr...jZrWryw.99
Shares To Banker Rothschild
The Washington Times
11-3-3
LONDON (Agence France-Presse) - Control of Mikhail Khodorkovsky's shares in the Russian oil giant Yukos have passed to renowned banker Jacob Rothschild, under a deal they concluded prior to Mr. Khodorkovsky's arrest, the Sunday Times reported.
Voting rights to the shares passed to Mr. Rothschild, 67, under a "previously unknown arrangement" designed to take effect in the event that Mr. Khodorkovsky could no longer "act as a beneficiary" of the shares, it said.
Mr. Khodorkovsky, 40, whom Russian authorities arrested at gunpoint and jailed pending further investigation last week, was said by the Sunday Times to have made the arrangement with Mr. Rothschild when he realized he was facing arrest.
Mr. Rothschild now controls the voting rights on a stake in Yukos worth almost $13.5 billion, the newspaper said in a dispatch from Moscow.
Mr. Khodorkovsky owns 4 percent of Yukos directly and 22 percent through a trust of which he is the sole beneficiary, according to Russian analysts.
From the figures reported in the Sunday Times, it appeared Mr. Rothschild had received control of all Mr. Khodorkovsky's shares.
The two have known each other for years "through their mutual love of the arts" and their positions as directors of the Open Russia Foundation, Yukos' philanthropic branch, it said.
Russian authorities Thursday froze billions of dollars of shares held by Mr. Khodorkovsky and his top lieutenants in Yukos - throwing control of the country's largest oil company into limbo and causing frenzied selling on financial markets.
Russian prosecutors said owners of the shares are still entitled to dividends and retain voting rights, but can no longer sell their stakes.
They said the freeze was necessary as collateral for the $1 billion that Mr. Khodorkovsky and his associates are accused of misappropriating during the 1990s.
Mr. Rothschild is the British head of Europe's wealthy and influential Rothschild family, and runs his own investment empire.
http://washingtontimes.com/world/2003110...-3720r.htm
Russian-Born American Named To head Embattled Yukos
(AFP) -- A Russian-born American has been named to replace Mikhail Khodorkovsky to head Russia's largest oil company, Yukos, the company said in a statement posted on its website.
Simon Kukes, 56, has been nominated to head the board of directors, the statement said.
Kukes, a member of Yukos' board of directors, emigrated from the Soviet Union to the United States in the 1970s but has since returned to Russia. He once worked for Russian oil company TNK.
Kukes will head the board of YukosSibneft, a company that was created when Yukos merged with a smaller rival Sibneft earlier this year.
The merger, due to be finalized at a shareholders' meeting in late November, created the world's fourth largest oil and gas producer.
Kukes worked in the US oil industry in Texas before returning to Russia after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. He once told a reporter he chose to work in Russia because "the work is interesting -- every day there is a new challenge."
Kukes's appointment came a day after Khodorkovsky resigned as Yukos chief executive. Khordokovsky, Russia's richest man, has been jailed on charges of massive fraud and tax evasion while prosecutors continue an investigation into Yukos.
The billionaire businessman obtained control of Yukos, then a collection of oilfields and refineries in Siberia, during the shadowy privatization deals of the 1990s, when people picked up choice Russian assets for bargain-basement prices at questionable auctions.
Over the years, Khordokovsky added assets and invested massively in Yukos. The oil giant was the first Russian major to adopt international accounting standards and hire western managers, in the wake of the country's 1998 financial crash,.
Today, Yukos is considered the best governed and most transparent Russian business giant. It has a market capitalization of just under 30 billion dollars.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/031104/1/3fklf.html
Comment
From SCM
11-4-3
"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from its profits or so dependant
on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class." -- Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863. And now Rothschild has the Yukos oil fortune.
The Zionist political group controls the dollar through the Federal Reserve. The EU-Euro is creation of and supported by the Vatican to counter Zionist aspirations of world domination.
"The Zionists masquerading as Jews are not a race of people but a political group."
'The International Jew' by Henry Ford, Sr. is a series of extremely controversial articles printed in Ford's newspaper The Dearborn Independent during the years 1920 to 1922. His series of articles reveals quite clearly the plan for world domination by Zionism. The Zionists are not a race of people but a political group that can be easily traced through history back to the Pharisees of Esu Immanuel's day and beyond to Babylonia. Today, the Zionists are known as the Khazarian Zionist Bolsheviks or KZB, for their history extends back to the Khazars of Russia and forward to their initiation of communism a century ago. Henry Ford refers to the KZB as the 'International Jew'.
The word 'Jew' does not appear in any of the earlier historical or biblical writings, as it was first coined in the 1870's. Jew refers to those people of HEBREW descent or the Israelites of the Bible, who have SEMITIC ancestry. Zionists make up the political group which controls the government of the country of Israel today. Often the word 'Zionist' is wrongly used interchangeably with the word 'Jew'. Jews are considered to be Semites, therefore those who hate Jews are called anti-Semitic. Henry Ford was accused by the Zionists of being anti-Semitic. This is untrue because Ford did not hate Jews, but was only exposing the Truth of Zionism. - PHB
Comment
From D. Michael
11-4-3
Dear Jeff,
Your site is to be applauded for taking a hand's-off approach to the dissemination of information that is often sensational or inflammatory, but ultimately always helpful.
In this regard, your spate of articles grouped under "Zionism" is particularly informative, especially those penned by Jews who lend greater credence to the many valid - if highly controversial - historical and moral commentaries on the Zionists.
(This liberal approach to posting hypersensitive articles - on both sides of the right/left divide - will, of course, one day bring crushing forces to bear upon you, but by then it is to be supposed that we will all be caught in the great "press.")
As a freethinker, I am willing to tolerate the wide range of opinions expressed, even when some of these opinions are themselves absurd, inaccurate, or downright venomous.
IN THIS REGARD, MAY I TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT A READER'S POSTSCRIPT TO THE RECENT ARTICLE, "Khodorkovsky" Oil Shared Passed to Rothschild."
The reader comments that "The word 'Jew' does not appear in any of the earlier historical or biblical writings, as it was first coined in the 1870s. Jew refers to those people of HEBREW descent or the Israelites of the Bible, who have SEMITIC ancestry. Zionists make up the political group which controls the government of the country of Israel today."
This is blatantly false. The word Jew first occurs in the Old Testament in II Kings 16: 5-6, which reads
"Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war: and they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him. At that time Rezin king of Syria recovered Elath to Syria, and drave the Jews from Elath: and the Syrians came to Elath, and dwelt there unto this day."
This passage serves to illustrate two essential historical certainties: (1) Following Solomon's' death, Israel had split into two distinct kingdoms: the Kingdom of Judah and the Kingdom of Israel. (2) "JEWS" as a nickname was at that early date already used to refer to the people of the Kingdom of Judah.
A casual survey of the Scriptures will net many other passages referring to the "Jews." To those who are inclined to believe that the use of the term is of a recent coinage, one need only consider that the King James Bible was written in the 1600s and the term was obviously known to the translators. To say that the term was coined in the 1870s is truly absurd on many levels, and can only serve to misinform those readers who are not well-read.
As an aside, may I caution you and all your readers that there is a large body of so-called Christian groups who are of the opinion that today's Jews are not Jews at all, but descendants of gentile converts to Judaism who have, so to speak, stolen the Jewish identity and name. (You may have guessed that the this leaves the "true" Jews, the blue-eyed peoples of Nordic descent who will one day rise up to punish the "false" Jews.)
One must be careful to filter out the hateful biases and lies of these "hate" groups (and I use the term advisedly). Many articles purporting to provide the "true" history of the Jews are nothing more than virulent racism of a kind that any good Nazi (in any age) would be proud to claim.
In time, there is little doubt that the Jews - the majority of whom, it can be demonstrated, are doubtlessly descended from Judah - will once again suffer for their Jewishness.
In the meantime, I can only hope that more and more Jews will open their eyes, avail themselves of the sort of freethinking content that appears on your site, and prepare themselves for the next cruel onslaught.
The Jews will not be alone, of course. All men and women of conscience are likely to feel the heat along with them, as great Mystery Babylon readies its hosts to make war with those who refuse to bend the knee at the advent of the coming King of Forces (see Daniel 12).
Thanks again for many intelligent, reasoned articles on a myriad of subjects.
Sincerely,
D. Michael
MOSCOW, July 28 (RIA Novosti) – Moscow will use all of its legal capabilities to uphold its interests in a $50-billion court case by ex-Yukos shareholders in The Hague, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Monday.
“I heard an announcement that such a verdict is expected. It’s necessary to wait for the fact itself, so that it comes into being and then make some sort of comments … The Russian side, obviously, will use all of its legal capabilities at hand to uphold its position," Lavrov told journalists.
The Hague's arbitration court ruled Monday that Russia must pay a group of shareholders in the now-defunct oil giant Yukos some $50 billion, just under half of their $114 billion claim, for expropriating the company’s assets.
The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague published Monday the rulings in three separate lawsuits filed by companies representing the former shareholders of Yukos, formerly led by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, once Russia's richest man.
In 2003, Russia’s authorities accused the leadership of Yukos, once the largest oil company in the country, of economic crimes. A range of Yukos managers were convicted for fraud and tax evasion. Yukos was later declared bankrupt and Rosneft bought the bulk of its assets.
Yukos’ managers contended that the Russian government illegally forced the oil firm out of business and bankrupted it, which allowed state-controlled oil company Rosneft to snap up its assets and become Russia’s largest oil producer.
Yukos founder Mikhail Khodorkovsky had spent a decade in prison for fraud and tax evasion until he was pardoned in December 2013. He denied all charges against him, saying he was punished for supporting the tiny pro-Western opposition and that the liquidation of Yukos was engineered by corrupt government officials aiming to seize lucrative oil assets.
Khodorkovsky publicly said he had no role in the court process.
(Reuters) - An international arbitration court ruled on Monday that Russia must pay $50 billion (£29.44 billion) for expropriating the assets of Yukos, the former oil giant whose ex-owner Mikhail Khodorkovsky fell foul of the Kremlin. Finding that Russian authorities had subjected Yukos to politically-motivated attacks, the panel made an award to a group of former Yukos shareholders that equates to more than half the entire fund Moscow has set aside to cover budget holes.
Russia, whose economy is on the brink of recession, said it would appeal the ruling by the Dutch-based panel, which judges private business disputes. It also said the "politically biased decision" was based on "current events" - an apparent reference to Moscow's dispute with the West over Ukraine.
Independent lawyers said it would be difficult to enforce the award to shareholders in the GML group, who had claimed $114 billion to recover money they lost when the Kremlin seized Yukos a decade ago.
Tim Osborne, director of GML, hailed the ruling. "The award is a slam dunk. It is for $50 billion, and that cannot be disputed," he said. "It's now a question of enforcing it."
The ruling hit back at decisions made under President Vladimir Putin's rule during his first term as president to nationalise Yukos and jail Khodorkovsky, who had criticised him. The hardline approach was seen by Kremlin critics at the time as a stark message to oligarchs to stay out of politics.
Khodorkovsky, who used to be Russia's richest man, was arrested at gunpoint in 2003 and convicted of theft and tax evasion in 2005. Yukos, once worth $40 billion, was broken up and nationalised, with most assets handed to Rosneft, an energy giant run by an ally of Putin.
After 10 years in jail, Putin pardoned Khodorkovsky in December and he now lives in Switzerland.
Announcing it would appeal, the Russian Finance Ministry denounced the award. "Instead of an objective, impartial consideration of the case, the arbitration court ruled based on current developments and as a result adopted a politically biased decision," it said in a statement on its website.
Moscow's relations with the West are at their worst since the Cold War due to its annexation of Crimea and over a rebellion by separatists in Ukraine after a pro-Russian president was forced out of office.
Russia argued that the court in the Hague had ignored tax violations by Yukos and said it was senseless and speculative to value the company so long after the events. Lawyers, however, said there were only limited grounds on which to appeal. The panel of judges, which has been reviewing the case since 2005, concluded that officials under Putin had manipulated the legal system to bankrupt Yukos. "Yukos was the object of a series of politically motivated attacks by the Russian authorities that eventually led to its destruction," the court said. "The primary objective of the Russian Federation was not to collect taxes but rather to bankrupt Yukos and appropriate its valuable assets."
ECONOMIC IMPACT
Khodorkovsky was not a party to the GML action but welcomed its success. "It is fantastic that the company shareholders are being given a chance to recover their damages," he said in a statement, adding that he would not seek to benefit financially from the outcome.
Russia faces a tightening of international sanctions originally imposed after it annexed Crimea in March. The United States has said it has evidence of Russian complicity in the downing of a Malaysian airliner over eastern Ukraine earlier this month, which it blames on the pro-Moscow rebels.
Russia denies the charges and has blamed the Ukrainian military for the tragedy in which 298 people died.
Credit Suisse economist Aleksei Pogorelov said the ruling could have significant economic effects. "This decision affects the assessment of the long-term financial stability of Russia and could become the basis for arguments for revising Russia's ratings by international rating agencies," he said Credit.
$50 billion represents about 2.5 percent of Russia's total annual economic output or 57 percent of its Reserve Fund, which is earmarked to cover shortfalls in the state budget.
The ruling hit Russian stocks. The RTS index of Russian shares closed down 3 percent.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg is expected to announce a separate decision on Thursday on Yukos's multi-billion-dollar claim against Russia, ruling on "just satisfaction" or compensation, a Yukos spokeswoman said. The application in the Strasbourg court, which is on behalf of all Yukos shareholders, argued the company was unlawfully deprived of its possessions by the imposition of bogus taxes and a sham auction of its main asset.
Bruce Misamore, former chief financial officer for Yukos, said he hoped the ECHR would take "strong note" of the size of the award by the Dutch court in assessing the just satisfaction claim and described Monday's ruling as a "landmark".
One lawyer, who declined to be named, said the timing of both rulings coming together was probably a coincidence.
RECLAIMING ASSETS
GML may now face a battle to claim the money from Russia.
"The question is whether Russia will pay that award, which I very much doubt," said Jan Kleinheisterkamp, an Associate Professor of Law at the London School of Economics. "This means that ultimately the shareholders will start to chase Russian assets abroad, which is a very tedious and usually not very fruitful business."
Antonios Tzanakopoulos, a law professor at Britain's Oxford University, said if assets were to be seized, they would have to be commercial, meaning it would not be possible to get a court order on an embassy building or a docked Russian warship.
Russia must pay the compensation to subsidiaries of Gibraltar-based Group Menatep, a company through which Khodorkovsky controlled Yukos.
Group Menatep now exists as the holding company GML, and Khodorkovsky is no longer a shareholder in GML or Yukos.
"We didn’t go into this for a pyrrhic victory to make a point ... We still believe that we will ultimately collect on this award," said Osborne.
Former Russian presidential adviser Andrei Illarionov said if Russia avoided payment it could face asset arrests around the world.
Chris Weafer, senior partner at Macro-Advisory consultancy in Moscow, said GML may try to target revenues from Russia's energy exports.
The ruling leaves Russia with few options to fight back, experts said. The arbitration court's rules call decisions on awards "final and binding". "The Kremlin's lawyers will be looking at any way to appeal this," said Weafer. Tzanakopoulos said any appeal would effectively amount to a new arbitration procedure, which both parties would have to agree to.
Russia would be likely to challenge enforcement claims in the many national courts around the world where such proceedings would be launched, he said.
A LONG SHOT
Experts said fighting the decision could be a lengthy and uphill process.
"Appeals are difficult - it is a private arbitration," said a Moscow-based lawyer who declined to be named, adding that any counter-action would be a "long shot". Any funds claimed will be shared among the shareholders.
The biggest ultimate beneficial owner is Russian-born Leonid Nevzlin, a business partner who fled to Israel to avoid prosecution. He has a stake of around 70 percent.
Khodorkovsky ceded his controlling interest in Menatep, which owned 60 to 70 percent of Yukos, to Nevzlin, after he was jailed. "I am very pleased the international tribunal in the Hague decided that Russia violated international laws and illegally nationalised Yukos," said Nevzlin.
The other four ultimate beneficial owners, each of whom owns an equal stake, are Platon Lebedev, Mikhail Brudno, Vladimir Dubov and Vasilly Shaknovski.
Rosneft, which is not a defendant in the case, said it expected no claims to be made against the company and that the ruling would not have a negative impact on its "commercial activity and assets".
Rosneft bought the bulk of Yukos assets through auctions after the company was declared bankrupt. Its shares were down 2.6 percent.
(Reporting by Tom Miles in Geneva, Vladimir Soldatkin, Megan Davies, Oksana Kobzeva, Lidia Kelly, Denis Pinchuk, Dasha Korsunskaya and Alessandra Prentice in Moscow, Tova Cohen in Tel Aviv, Thomas Escritt and Anthony Deutsche in Amsterdam, Editing by Elizabeth Piper, Will Waterman and David Evans).....
Time you set up your own independant international jurisprudence system
The Shocking Reason Putin Isn't Worried About The $50 Billion Yukos Ruling
Posted By: igots2no
Date: Monday, 28-Jul-2014 18:52:31
In Response To: ‘Mega-arbitration’: Court orders Russia to pay $50bn in Yukos case (igots2no)
Very last line supposedly said by the Putin aid got my attention???
DG
___________________________________________________________
Having $50 billion of assets under potential seizure is enough to make anyone whince. However, despite a quickly worded statement on the Yukos award, Vladimir Putin seems less than anxious to find a resolution. We think we know why, and it's very concerning.
As The FT reports confirming our earlier comments:
The award is a landmark not just for its size – 20 times the previous record for an arbitration ruling. The tribunal also found definitively that Russia’s pursuit of Yukos and its independently-minded main shareholder, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a decade ago was politically motivated.
...
Though Russia cannot appeal against the award, Moscow said it would pursue all legal avenues for trying to get it “set aside”.
Even if the ruling stands, shareholders face a tortuous battle trying to enforce it. If Moscow refuses to pay, they must pursue Russian sovereign commercial assets in the 150 countries that are party to the so-called 1958 New York Convention on enforcing arbitration awards.
But perhaps this explains why Putin is not coming out swinging, as The FT concludes,
One person close to Mr Putin said the Yukos ruling was insignificant in light of the bigger geopolitical stand-off over Ukraine.
“There is a war coming in Europe,” he said. “Do you really think this matters?”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-28...kos-ruling
http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/07/russia-thr...h-u-s-e-u/
WASHINGTON – Moscow has threatened to end security arrangements with the United States and the European Union should they impose additional sanctions as a result of what they claims is Russian “complicity” in aiding the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 by pro-Russian fighters in eastern Ukraine.
In a strong statement, the Russian foreign ministry accused White House press secretary Josh Ernest of “slander” when he characterized the downing of MH-17 as “Russian complicity.”
“Judging by the relentless slander campaign against Russia organized by the American administration, they are being more and more guided by blatant lies when pursuing their foreign policy,” the foreign ministry said.
The ministry said that intentions to extend the list of Russian officials and organizations affected by travel bans and the freezing of assets could bring an end to cooperation on such security issues as terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and organized crime.
Claiming that such a development “would be greeted enthusiastically by international terrorists,” the ministry said that the EU countries “have set a course for complete termination of interaction with Russia in international and regional security issues.”
The EU last week announced further sanctions on the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service, or FSB, and the chief of the department overseeing international operations and intelligence, as well as four members of the Russian national security council already on the list.
The U.S. and EU accuse Russia of aiding pro-Russian separatists in bringing down MH-17, which killed all 298 people on board. They suspect a Russian-supplied missile was fired with Russian assistance.
Western sources also cite Russian involvement in the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula, which until recently was part of Ukraine but with a heavy pro-Russian population. They also pointed to the renewed buildup of Russian troops, said to number more than 10,000, along the Russian-Ukraine border.
The Kremlin has vehemently denied allegations it had any involvement in the downing of the aircraft and cite other scenarios that accuse the Ukrainian government in Kiev.
As for the origin of the Ukrainian crisis, Russian President Vladimir Putin blames the West and in particular the U.S. for initially backing rebels that violently ousted the pro-Russian but democratically-elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych, who remains in exile in Moscow.
From that ouster, an interim government was formed, and it in recent weeks has signed an agreement to join the EU, a development Yanukovych initially had rejected in favor of Moscow’s Eurasia Union. That action resulted in the demonstrations that led to his ouster.
Pro-Russian separatists continue to communicate closely with Russian military personnel, as WND recently reported, as the Kiev government seeks to recapture the two eastern Ukrainian cities of Donetsk and Luhansk, which are pro-Russian.
The Ukrainian military now is attempting to surround the cities, which are close to the Russian border, and sever transport and communications between the two locations. The intent is to cut off continued logistical supply lines that originate in Russia and supply both locations.
As the Ukrainian military moves closer to its eastern border with Russia, however, more resistance is likely along with the prospect of direct Russian military assistance.
The Pentagon already has released video said to be showing the multiple firing of Grad rockets from the Russian side of the border into Ukraine. The claim could not be independently verified.
Regional analysts say, however, that Moscow has no intention of backing down on its support for the pro-Russian Ukrainians despite added Western military advisers and intelligence, particularly from the U.S., being provided to the Ukrainian government.
Nevertheless, Moscow is expected to maintain its role in asserting its influence in Ukraine to develop a buffer against the West and intends to take advantage of potential fissures which appear to be developing in the Kiev government.
Moscow also maintains a stranglehold not only on Ukraine but Europe itself through the supply of natural gas on which Europe is highly dependent. Ukraine owes Moscow billions of dollars in back payments for the natural gas it has received.
As an added measure, Russia also could threaten to cut off Ukraine’s supply which, in turn, will have an impact on the flow of natural gas to Europe.
Future sanctions from Europe would add to that prospect, in addition to cutting off any further security ties.
Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/07/russia-thr...jZrWryw.99
29-07-2014, 08:11 PM
http://www.globalresearch.ca/washington-...es/5393829
Washington Threatens to Intervene Militarily in East Ukraine. Danger of Direct Clash between US and Russian Forces?
In a reckless maneuver posing the risk of direct clashes between the United States and Russia, Washington is moving to escalate the civil war in east Ukraine by directly involving US forces in the targeting of Russian-backed separatist groups.
The Pentagon and the CIA have drawn up plans for providing “real time” information on the location of missile batteries or other targets controlled by pro-Russian forces. While the White House has yet to announce a decision on the precise course of action it will follow, the plans to escalate US involvement are strongly supported by Secretary of State John Kerry.
Discussion of the strategy makes clear that it amounts to a plan for US forces to direct fire against not only pro-Russian forces, but at Russia itself. An anonymous US official interviewed by the New York Times claimed that the White House has been “cautious to date about things that could directly hit Russia — principally its territory,” as well as its military equipment.
Reed Foster, an analyst for defense consultancy IHS Jane’s, warned that while providing targeting location data may seem like a solution, “the actual destruction of these mobile launchers by Ukrainian forces may prove quite a bit more difficult.”
The Times also reported that
“trucks transporting the missiles move frequently, often back and forth across the border. And if any strikes missed their targets, they could cause civilian casualties or land in Russia, giving Mr. Putin an excuse to enlarge the conflict.”
A senior official aware of the planning stated that the US military “could do it easily and be very effective, but there are issues of escalation with the Russians, and the decision about whether it’s wise to do it” is complex.
While US officials have not spelled out the details of their operational planning to the people of the United States or of the world, there is every indication that they are preparing for large-scale war with Russia. Speaking on Thursday at the Aspen Security Forum, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, the head of the US military, said that the Pentagon was revisiting Cold War-era contingency plans, “looking inside of our own readiness models to look at things we haven’t had to look at for 20 years.”
“Putin may light a fire that he loses control over,” Dempsey said. “There’s a rising tide of nationalism in Europe right now that has been created in many ways by these Russian activities.”
Claims by US officials that the government is seeking to assist the Kiev regime without risking war with Russia, and that Russians are the aggressor, are simply absurd. Washington’s discussion of a military strategy of attacking Russian or pro-Russian forces is a reckless provocation. One only need imagine how furiously Washington would react if Russia started giving targeting information to Mexican officials for attacks on US soil to see how provocative the US government’s actions are.
The US government is intervening in an increasingly bloody and chaotic conflict in east Ukraine. The Western-backed Kiev regime’s forces advanced against the Russian-backed separatists on multiple fronts Sunday, trying to seize the crash site of Malaysian airlines flight MH17 and the region’s largest city, Donetsk.
Andriy Lysenko, a spokesperson for Ukraine’s Security Council, told reporters that Ukrainian forces are “aiming to get there and liberate this territory so that we can guarantee that international experts can carry out a 100-percent investigation of the site and get all proof needed to deduce the real reason for this tragedy.”
Alexander Hug, the deputy head for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) monitoring mission in Ukraine, said on Sunday that due to heavy fighting and shelling in the area, OSCE observers would not attempt to reach the crash site until Monday.
Heavy fighting near the coal mining town of Torez forced Dutch police officers already dispatched to Ukraine to turn back after an initial attempt to reach the crash site. There were reports on Sunday of shelling to the north of the city, as well the sounding of air raid sirens.
Health officials reported that 13 people were killed in fighting in Horlivka, a city of approximately 350,000 about 27 miles northwest of Donetsk. Shelling of Horlivka by pro-regime forces reportedly resulted in damage to a maternity clinic, as well as the Donbasenergo power plant. Rebel militias also reported that five civilians were killed and another ten injured as result of shelling by Ukrainian forces in the nearby city of Avdiivka.
Ukrainian National Guard troops advanced on the city of Shakhtarsk, only 6 miles from the main crash site. According to a report by RIA Novosti, the sound of shelling could be heard outside the town, and residents took shelter as air raid sirens went off and cell phone service from some providers was down.
Over the last several weeks, Ukrainian forces have repeatedly launched artillery shells at border posts and into Russian territory. A case of shelling by Ukrainian forces across the border into Russia on July 13th resulted in multiple causalities, killing one person and seriously injuring two others in the Russian town of Donetsk.
Commander of NATO in Europe General Philip M. Breedlove used his Twitter account to highlight a video uploaded to social media on July 16th, allegedly showing Grad rockets being fired from Russian territory across the border into Ukraine. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence released low resolution satellite images on Sunday which it claims show Russian artillery firing across the border at Ukrainian military forces.
Were these allegations to be true, they would underscore above all that providing targeting information to Ukrainian forces in east Ukraine risks involving the United States and its European NATO allies in large-scale war with Russia. There are also concerns in Washington, due to likely Russian infiltration of Ukrainian intelligence and army units, that information provided to the Kiev regime would be transferred to the separatists, giving them enough advanced warning to move their equipment to evade attack.
If this is a concern, Washington will likely deepen its collaboration with the most far-right elements of the Kiev regime’s forces, which are the most ideologically united or hostile to Russia. These include the fascist Right Sector or Azov Battalion militias, the newly-formed National Guard, and mercenary outfits like the US private security firm formerly known as Blackwater.
Washington Threatens to Intervene Militarily in East Ukraine. Danger of Direct Clash between US and Russian Forces?
In a reckless maneuver posing the risk of direct clashes between the United States and Russia, Washington is moving to escalate the civil war in east Ukraine by directly involving US forces in the targeting of Russian-backed separatist groups.
The Pentagon and the CIA have drawn up plans for providing “real time” information on the location of missile batteries or other targets controlled by pro-Russian forces. While the White House has yet to announce a decision on the precise course of action it will follow, the plans to escalate US involvement are strongly supported by Secretary of State John Kerry.
Discussion of the strategy makes clear that it amounts to a plan for US forces to direct fire against not only pro-Russian forces, but at Russia itself. An anonymous US official interviewed by the New York Times claimed that the White House has been “cautious to date about things that could directly hit Russia — principally its territory,” as well as its military equipment.
Reed Foster, an analyst for defense consultancy IHS Jane’s, warned that while providing targeting location data may seem like a solution, “the actual destruction of these mobile launchers by Ukrainian forces may prove quite a bit more difficult.”
The Times also reported that
“trucks transporting the missiles move frequently, often back and forth across the border. And if any strikes missed their targets, they could cause civilian casualties or land in Russia, giving Mr. Putin an excuse to enlarge the conflict.”
A senior official aware of the planning stated that the US military “could do it easily and be very effective, but there are issues of escalation with the Russians, and the decision about whether it’s wise to do it” is complex.
While US officials have not spelled out the details of their operational planning to the people of the United States or of the world, there is every indication that they are preparing for large-scale war with Russia. Speaking on Thursday at the Aspen Security Forum, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, the head of the US military, said that the Pentagon was revisiting Cold War-era contingency plans, “looking inside of our own readiness models to look at things we haven’t had to look at for 20 years.”
“Putin may light a fire that he loses control over,” Dempsey said. “There’s a rising tide of nationalism in Europe right now that has been created in many ways by these Russian activities.”
Claims by US officials that the government is seeking to assist the Kiev regime without risking war with Russia, and that Russians are the aggressor, are simply absurd. Washington’s discussion of a military strategy of attacking Russian or pro-Russian forces is a reckless provocation. One only need imagine how furiously Washington would react if Russia started giving targeting information to Mexican officials for attacks on US soil to see how provocative the US government’s actions are.
The US government is intervening in an increasingly bloody and chaotic conflict in east Ukraine. The Western-backed Kiev regime’s forces advanced against the Russian-backed separatists on multiple fronts Sunday, trying to seize the crash site of Malaysian airlines flight MH17 and the region’s largest city, Donetsk.
Andriy Lysenko, a spokesperson for Ukraine’s Security Council, told reporters that Ukrainian forces are “aiming to get there and liberate this territory so that we can guarantee that international experts can carry out a 100-percent investigation of the site and get all proof needed to deduce the real reason for this tragedy.”
Alexander Hug, the deputy head for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) monitoring mission in Ukraine, said on Sunday that due to heavy fighting and shelling in the area, OSCE observers would not attempt to reach the crash site until Monday.
Heavy fighting near the coal mining town of Torez forced Dutch police officers already dispatched to Ukraine to turn back after an initial attempt to reach the crash site. There were reports on Sunday of shelling to the north of the city, as well the sounding of air raid sirens.
Health officials reported that 13 people were killed in fighting in Horlivka, a city of approximately 350,000 about 27 miles northwest of Donetsk. Shelling of Horlivka by pro-regime forces reportedly resulted in damage to a maternity clinic, as well as the Donbasenergo power plant. Rebel militias also reported that five civilians were killed and another ten injured as result of shelling by Ukrainian forces in the nearby city of Avdiivka.
Ukrainian National Guard troops advanced on the city of Shakhtarsk, only 6 miles from the main crash site. According to a report by RIA Novosti, the sound of shelling could be heard outside the town, and residents took shelter as air raid sirens went off and cell phone service from some providers was down.
Over the last several weeks, Ukrainian forces have repeatedly launched artillery shells at border posts and into Russian territory. A case of shelling by Ukrainian forces across the border into Russia on July 13th resulted in multiple causalities, killing one person and seriously injuring two others in the Russian town of Donetsk.
Commander of NATO in Europe General Philip M. Breedlove used his Twitter account to highlight a video uploaded to social media on July 16th, allegedly showing Grad rockets being fired from Russian territory across the border into Ukraine. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence released low resolution satellite images on Sunday which it claims show Russian artillery firing across the border at Ukrainian military forces.
Were these allegations to be true, they would underscore above all that providing targeting information to Ukrainian forces in east Ukraine risks involving the United States and its European NATO allies in large-scale war with Russia. There are also concerns in Washington, due to likely Russian infiltration of Ukrainian intelligence and army units, that information provided to the Kiev regime would be transferred to the separatists, giving them enough advanced warning to move their equipment to evade attack.
If this is a concern, Washington will likely deepen its collaboration with the most far-right elements of the Kiev regime’s forces, which are the most ideologically united or hostile to Russia. These include the fascist Right Sector or Azov Battalion militias, the newly-formed National Guard, and mercenary outfits like the US private security firm formerly known as Blackwater.
31-07-2014, 03:13 PM
Ruling party lawmakers propose altering Russian legislation to allow for automatic sanctions against foreign countries that the government includes on a special list of ‘aggressor nations’.
Once some country is included in this list, all its citizens, permanent residents and companies registered on its territory automatically lose the right to deliver legal services, business consultancy and financial audits on Russian territory. The Russian government also will be able to lift some of the sanctions or introduce additional restrictions on business activities on such people and companies if such necessity arises.
http://rt.com/politics/176348-russia...essor-nations/
Once some country is included in this list, all its citizens, permanent residents and companies registered on its territory automatically lose the right to deliver legal services, business consultancy and financial audits on Russian territory. The Russian government also will be able to lift some of the sanctions or introduce additional restrictions on business activities on such people and companies if such necessity arises.
http://rt.com/politics/176348-russia...essor-nations/
02-08-2014, 07:21 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...ident.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ju...re-new-law
Putin wants monasteries, church rebuilt inside Kremlin
(Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has called for two monasteries and a church that were demolished during Soviet times to be rebuilt in the Kremlin, the largest overhaul of the site's architectural landscape in nearly a century.
Putin has cultivated strong ties with Patriarch Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, adopting more conservative policies and prompting some critics to suggest the line separating state and church has become blurred.
At a meeting on Thursday with Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin and top administrators of the Kremlin site, Putin said his plan would involve tearing down a building used for administrative purposes to restore the site's "historic appearance".
Putin gave no indication of the costs of construction. Russia's economy is teetering on the brink of recession and faces reduced access to foreign capital after the West imposed sanctions over Moscow's policies in Ukraine.
The Kremlin, a fortified landmark sprawling across 28 hectares in central Moscow and home to the president's office and his administration, has seen many attacks in its six-century history and has come to symbolise Russia's enduring power.
"Here is the idea ... to restore the historic appearance of the place with two monasteries and a church, but giving them, considering today's realities, an exclusively cultural character," the Kremlin's website quoted Putin as saying.
UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE
Putin said the plan hinged on winning the support of the Russian public and UNESCO, the United Nations' cultural agency. The Kremlin, built between the 14th and 17th centuries, is a listed UNESCO World Heritage Site.
The monasteries and the church were torn down in 1929-1930, a time of religious persecution under the rule of Communist dictator Josef Stalin, to make space for the administrative building that has been undergoing refurbishment since 2011.
"I do not insist on anything, it's an idea, a proposal," said Putin, who enjoys popularity ratings of more than 80 percent since Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimea. "If the public deems it appropriate then all needs to be worked out calmly."
Putin also supported Sobyanin's idea to open another gate to the Kremlin for tourists, the Spassky Gate, which is currently closed off.
"If there is an immediate access from Red Square to Spassky Gate, it will be of course, more comfortable for residents and tourists," Sobyanin told Putin.
"Let's do it," Putin replied.
(Writing by Lidia Kelly, editing by Elizabeth Piper and Gareth Jones)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ju...re-new-law
Putin wants monasteries, church rebuilt inside Kremlin
(Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has called for two monasteries and a church that were demolished during Soviet times to be rebuilt in the Kremlin, the largest overhaul of the site's architectural landscape in nearly a century.
Putin has cultivated strong ties with Patriarch Kirill, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, adopting more conservative policies and prompting some critics to suggest the line separating state and church has become blurred.
At a meeting on Thursday with Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin and top administrators of the Kremlin site, Putin said his plan would involve tearing down a building used for administrative purposes to restore the site's "historic appearance".
Putin gave no indication of the costs of construction. Russia's economy is teetering on the brink of recession and faces reduced access to foreign capital after the West imposed sanctions over Moscow's policies in Ukraine.
The Kremlin, a fortified landmark sprawling across 28 hectares in central Moscow and home to the president's office and his administration, has seen many attacks in its six-century history and has come to symbolise Russia's enduring power.
"Here is the idea ... to restore the historic appearance of the place with two monasteries and a church, but giving them, considering today's realities, an exclusively cultural character," the Kremlin's website quoted Putin as saying.
UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE
Putin said the plan hinged on winning the support of the Russian public and UNESCO, the United Nations' cultural agency. The Kremlin, built between the 14th and 17th centuries, is a listed UNESCO World Heritage Site.
The monasteries and the church were torn down in 1929-1930, a time of religious persecution under the rule of Communist dictator Josef Stalin, to make space for the administrative building that has been undergoing refurbishment since 2011.
"I do not insist on anything, it's an idea, a proposal," said Putin, who enjoys popularity ratings of more than 80 percent since Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimea. "If the public deems it appropriate then all needs to be worked out calmly."
Putin also supported Sobyanin's idea to open another gate to the Kremlin for tourists, the Spassky Gate, which is currently closed off.
"If there is an immediate access from Red Square to Spassky Gate, it will be of course, more comfortable for residents and tourists," Sobyanin told Putin.
"Let's do it," Putin replied.
(Writing by Lidia Kelly, editing by Elizabeth Piper and Gareth Jones)
04-08-2014, 12:56 AM
President Putin Tells United States Citizens Not To Give Up Your Guns: We Learned From Experience Fighting Rothschild’s Banking Schemes!
These days, there are few few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bare arms and use deadly force to defend one’s self and possessions. NWO Chronology
This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items.
People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.
Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.
This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds.
It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.
Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lieing guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors.
Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed.
The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot. Peter Fonda: Obama is a ‘F – king Traitor’.
Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population.
From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.
To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense.
Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and to often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police.
The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.
While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.
ill Of Rights Are Unalienable Rights they are NOT Inalienable Rights. Inalienable Rights are a legal ease trapping in the court system. Know Your Rights!!! http://politicalvelcraft.org/2013/04/19/...n-control/
For those of us fighting to protect traditional rights from the World Gang Association , the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room.
Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases.
As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack.
What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.
The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?
There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed.
h, no, they do not.
What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology.
They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question.
They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.
So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.
Stanislav Mishin
These days, there are few few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bare arms and use deadly force to defend one’s self and possessions. NWO Chronology
This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items.
People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.
Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.
This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds.
It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.
Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lieing guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors.
Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed.
The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot. Peter Fonda: Obama is a ‘F – king Traitor’.
Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population.
From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.
To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense.
Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and to often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police.
The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.
While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.
ill Of Rights Are Unalienable Rights they are NOT Inalienable Rights. Inalienable Rights are a legal ease trapping in the court system. Know Your Rights!!! http://politicalvelcraft.org/2013/04/19/...n-control/
For those of us fighting to protect traditional rights from the World Gang Association , the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room.
Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases.
As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack.
What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.
The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?
There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed.
h, no, they do not.
What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology.
They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question.
They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.
So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.
Stanislav Mishin
05-08-2014, 06:34 PM
Date: Tuesday, 5-Aug-2014 11:27:31
Medvedev: Russia to consider retaliation to EU sanctions
Russia Today
Aug 5, 2014
http://on.rt.com/vc7fkh
On Tuesday, Vedomosti daily reported Russia was considering limiting, or even completely blocking European flights to Asia that cross Siberia, in response to EU sanctions that caused Aeroflot subsidiary Dobrolet to suspend flights on Monday.
Japanese Sanctions against Russia May Go into Force on August 5 - Reports
Russia | RIA Novosti
http://bit.ly/1nozecW
On July 28, the Japanese government released a list of new sanctions against Russia amid the Ukraine crisis. The sanctions foresee the freezing assets of people "involved in the Crimea annexation and responsible for destabilizing the situation in Ukraine."
Tokyo also plans to implement new projects in Russia in accordance with the policies of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) adopted by the European Union and impose limitations on Crimean goods.
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140805/1917296...rview.html
Medvedev: Russia to consider retaliation to EU sanctions
Russia Today
Aug 5, 2014
http://on.rt.com/vc7fkh
On Tuesday, Vedomosti daily reported Russia was considering limiting, or even completely blocking European flights to Asia that cross Siberia, in response to EU sanctions that caused Aeroflot subsidiary Dobrolet to suspend flights on Monday.
Japanese Sanctions against Russia May Go into Force on August 5 - Reports
Russia | RIA Novosti
http://bit.ly/1nozecW
On July 28, the Japanese government released a list of new sanctions against Russia amid the Ukraine crisis. The sanctions foresee the freezing assets of people "involved in the Crimea annexation and responsible for destabilizing the situation in Ukraine."
Tokyo also plans to implement new projects in Russia in accordance with the policies of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) adopted by the European Union and impose limitations on Crimean goods.
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140805/1917296...rview.html
06-08-2014, 02:55 AM
Germany scraps arms deal with Russia over Ukraine'
The German government has cancelled an arms contract with Russia over the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, a new report says.
Germany’s Economy Ministry revoked a permission to provide a fully equipped training camp to Russian forces, the daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported on Monday.
The Rheinmetall project, worth around 100 million euros (USD 134 million), involved training up to 30,000 soldiers a year.
Berlin put the deal on hold five months ago after a decision by Ukraine’s then autonomous region of Crimea to join the Russian Federation.
On March 19, German Vice Chancellor and Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel announced the suspension of the Rheinmetall project, saying any arms trading with Moscow was currently "indefensible."
Russian deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov, however, lashed out at Germany over its decision to halt the contract, describing the measure as "unconstructive" and taken under pressure from the United States.
The first round of sanctions against Russia was implemented by the United States and the EU following the Crimean territory’s integration into Russia.
Threats of sanctions intensified further after Malaysian flight MH17, heading from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was reportedly shot down over Ukraine’s volatile Donetsk region on July 17.
Western powers accuse pro-Russia forces of downing the civilian airliner. The pro-Russians deny any involvement and blame the Ukrainian army for the incident.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/04/...th-russia/
http://en.ria.ru/society/20140805/191737...istry.html
MOSCOW, August 5 (RIA Novosti) - The bias and partiality of the Euronews television channel are especially striking when it comes to covering the crisis in Ukraine, a spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova wrote on her Facebook page on Tuesday.
“Do you know how to find out what is really going on in Ukraine? Watch Euronews: if this channel does not mention the situation in Ukraine at all (as it did today, for example) it means that things are going bad for [the Ukrainian President Petro] Poroshenko. The unbelievable partiality and bias of the Euronews TV channel are especially striking when it comes to covering the crisis in Ukraine,” the Deputy Director of the Information and Press Department of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote.
It is not the first time Maria Zakharova has voiced concern with the Euronews’ partiality. In April, she wrote on her Facebook page that the channel tends to choose different facts and intonation when covering the same news stories in Russian and in English, citing two Euronews articles on Ukrainian gas debt to Russia.
The German government has cancelled an arms contract with Russia over the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, a new report says.
Germany’s Economy Ministry revoked a permission to provide a fully equipped training camp to Russian forces, the daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported on Monday.
The Rheinmetall project, worth around 100 million euros (USD 134 million), involved training up to 30,000 soldiers a year.
Berlin put the deal on hold five months ago after a decision by Ukraine’s then autonomous region of Crimea to join the Russian Federation.
On March 19, German Vice Chancellor and Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel announced the suspension of the Rheinmetall project, saying any arms trading with Moscow was currently "indefensible."
Russian deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov, however, lashed out at Germany over its decision to halt the contract, describing the measure as "unconstructive" and taken under pressure from the United States.
The first round of sanctions against Russia was implemented by the United States and the EU following the Crimean territory’s integration into Russia.
Threats of sanctions intensified further after Malaysian flight MH17, heading from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was reportedly shot down over Ukraine’s volatile Donetsk region on July 17.
Western powers accuse pro-Russia forces of downing the civilian airliner. The pro-Russians deny any involvement and blame the Ukrainian army for the incident.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/04/...th-russia/
http://en.ria.ru/society/20140805/191737...istry.html
MOSCOW, August 5 (RIA Novosti) - The bias and partiality of the Euronews television channel are especially striking when it comes to covering the crisis in Ukraine, a spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova wrote on her Facebook page on Tuesday.
“Do you know how to find out what is really going on in Ukraine? Watch Euronews: if this channel does not mention the situation in Ukraine at all (as it did today, for example) it means that things are going bad for [the Ukrainian President Petro] Poroshenko. The unbelievable partiality and bias of the Euronews TV channel are especially striking when it comes to covering the crisis in Ukraine,” the Deputy Director of the Information and Press Department of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote.
It is not the first time Maria Zakharova has voiced concern with the Euronews’ partiality. In April, she wrote on her Facebook page that the channel tends to choose different facts and intonation when covering the same news stories in Russian and in English, citing two Euronews articles on Ukrainian gas debt to Russia.
06-08-2014, 05:11 AM
Spetsnaz veterans to launch ‘anti-Maidan council’ in Russia
Published time: August 04, 2014 10:07 Get short URL
AFP Photo/Roberto EscobarAFP Photo/Roberto Escobar
1.6K
85
53
Trends
Ukraine turmoil
Tags
Clashes, Politics, Protest, Russia, Ukraine
Veterans of the Russian military and special forces, together with rights activists and representatives of Orthodox Christian community, are to jointly launch a group to try and thwart any attempts to forcefully change the political system in the country.
Immediately after the founding convention, scheduled for late August, The ‘Anti-Fascist Anti-Maidan Council’ will concentrate on informing Russian citizens on the methods of Western propaganda that seeks to disrupt the constitutional order in the country and forcefully overthrow the lawfully elected authorities, the activists told the mass circulation daily Izvestia.
The council’s founders claim they possess information that after the nearest all-Russian election day on September 14, anti-government activists will launch their own committees and headquarters for organizing street protest and other actions aimed at sowing discord in the Russian community.
Apart from disclosing the objectives and means of the Western propaganda, the council will organize own rallies and events in order to promote the interests of the Russian state and prevent ethnic tensions in Russian regions.
The body will also work help law enforcers who fight against extremism and other anti-constitutional attempts.
Leading members of the group include deputy head of the ‘Spetsnaz-Army Spetsnaz’ group, uniting the veterans of Russian military intelligence, Yury Kalitov, the head of the ‘Russians’ foundation, Major General Leonid Shershnev, the chairman of the Union of Russian Orthodox citizens of Russia, Valentin Lebedev, and a representative of the Night Wolves motorcycle club and State Duma MP, Viktor Vodolatsky (United Russia), who also represents the major South Russian Cossack organization, the Don Troop.
Analysts have labeled the initiative correct and timely, noting that the current events in Ukraine are a perfect example of where ‘Orange Revolutions’ could lead.
“We understand very well that the Ukrainian conflict is not just an internal event, but a point of application for all forces in the world that have declared a secret war against Russia,” said the head of the Institute of Eurasian Economic Union, Vladimir Lepekhin, who was also invited to participate in the anti-Maidan council.
He noted that the recent appointment of former US Ambassador to Ukraine, Georgia and Lithuania, John Tefft, as a new ambassador to Russia could be a sign that the information war will move on to Russian territory.
The head of the Institute of Political Research, Sergey Markov, agreed that though there was no immediate threat of revolution in Russia, the future situation was not safe, as the “party of war” in Washington was not hiding its desire to repeat the Kiev scenario in Moscow.
Markov also noted that the new anti-fascist committee should study the statements of leading politicians and activists in order to establish their attitude towards the Ukrainian crisis and duly inform the Russian public about the results of this study. He noted that those who had not resolutely denounced the coup in Ukraine and the current policy of terror towards civilians could be among the first to support the anti-constitutional attempts in Russia.
Natalija Vitrenko has highlighted the the rise of the Nazis in Ukraine in 2009.
This should have happened then possibly before!
Published time: August 04, 2014 10:07 Get short URL
AFP Photo/Roberto EscobarAFP Photo/Roberto Escobar
1.6K
85
53
Trends
Ukraine turmoil
Tags
Clashes, Politics, Protest, Russia, Ukraine
Veterans of the Russian military and special forces, together with rights activists and representatives of Orthodox Christian community, are to jointly launch a group to try and thwart any attempts to forcefully change the political system in the country.
Immediately after the founding convention, scheduled for late August, The ‘Anti-Fascist Anti-Maidan Council’ will concentrate on informing Russian citizens on the methods of Western propaganda that seeks to disrupt the constitutional order in the country and forcefully overthrow the lawfully elected authorities, the activists told the mass circulation daily Izvestia.
The council’s founders claim they possess information that after the nearest all-Russian election day on September 14, anti-government activists will launch their own committees and headquarters for organizing street protest and other actions aimed at sowing discord in the Russian community.
Apart from disclosing the objectives and means of the Western propaganda, the council will organize own rallies and events in order to promote the interests of the Russian state and prevent ethnic tensions in Russian regions.
The body will also work help law enforcers who fight against extremism and other anti-constitutional attempts.
Leading members of the group include deputy head of the ‘Spetsnaz-Army Spetsnaz’ group, uniting the veterans of Russian military intelligence, Yury Kalitov, the head of the ‘Russians’ foundation, Major General Leonid Shershnev, the chairman of the Union of Russian Orthodox citizens of Russia, Valentin Lebedev, and a representative of the Night Wolves motorcycle club and State Duma MP, Viktor Vodolatsky (United Russia), who also represents the major South Russian Cossack organization, the Don Troop.
Analysts have labeled the initiative correct and timely, noting that the current events in Ukraine are a perfect example of where ‘Orange Revolutions’ could lead.
“We understand very well that the Ukrainian conflict is not just an internal event, but a point of application for all forces in the world that have declared a secret war against Russia,” said the head of the Institute of Eurasian Economic Union, Vladimir Lepekhin, who was also invited to participate in the anti-Maidan council.
He noted that the recent appointment of former US Ambassador to Ukraine, Georgia and Lithuania, John Tefft, as a new ambassador to Russia could be a sign that the information war will move on to Russian territory.
The head of the Institute of Political Research, Sergey Markov, agreed that though there was no immediate threat of revolution in Russia, the future situation was not safe, as the “party of war” in Washington was not hiding its desire to repeat the Kiev scenario in Moscow.
Markov also noted that the new anti-fascist committee should study the statements of leading politicians and activists in order to establish their attitude towards the Ukrainian crisis and duly inform the Russian public about the results of this study. He noted that those who had not resolutely denounced the coup in Ukraine and the current policy of terror towards civilians could be among the first to support the anti-constitutional attempts in Russia.
Natalija Vitrenko has highlighted the the rise of the Nazis in Ukraine in 2009.
This should have happened then possibly before!
07-08-2014, 04:53 PM
Expanded sanctions list:
Individuals (Russian)
Sergei Orestovoch Beseda, Commander of the Fifth Service of the Russian Federal Security Service and Commander of the Service for Operational Information and International Communications of the Russian Federal Security Service.
Aleksandr Vasilievich Bortnikov, permanent member of the Russian Federation’s Security Council and Director of the Russian Federal Security Service.
Mikhail Vladimirovich Degtyarev, member of the State Duma.
Mikhail Efimovich Fradkov, permanent member of the Russian Federation’s Security Council and Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service.
Boris Vyacheslavovich Gryzlov, permanent member of the Russian Federation’s Security Council.
Ramzan Akhmadovich Kadyrov, President of the Republic of Chechnya.
Vladimir Georgyevich Kulishov, First Deputy Director of the Russian Federal Security Service, Chief of the Border Guards.
Konstantin Valerevich Malofeev, Russian business figure and financier of secessionist groups in Ukraine.
Rashid Gumarovich Nurgaliev, permanent member and Deputy Secretary of the Russian Federation’s Security Council.
Nikolai Platonovich Patrushev, permanent member and Secretary of the Russian Federation’s Security Council.
Nikolay Terentievich Shamalov, CEO and majority shareholder of Bank Rossiya.
Igor Shchegolev, aide to the President of the Russian Federation and the former Minister of Communications and Mass Media.
Alexander Nikolayevich Tkachyov, Governor of Krasnodar Krai.
Valerii Yuriovych Travkin, officer in the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
Individuals (Ukrainian)
Sergey Abisov, “Minister of Interior” of the “Republic of Crimea.”
Pavel Yurevich Gubarev, one of the self-described leaders of the so called “Donetsk People’s Republic.”
Ekaterina Yurevna Gubareva, so called “Minister of Foreign Affairs” of the “Donetsk People’s Republic.”
Boris Litvinov, Chairman of the “Supreme Council” of the so called “Donetsk People’s Republic.”
Oksana Tchigrina, spokesperson of the so called “government” of the ”Luhansk People’s Republic.”
Entities (Russian)
Bank of Moscow
Dobrolet (Dobrolyot) Airlines
Russian Agricultural Bank (Rosselkhozbank)
Russian National Commercial Bank
United Shipbuilding Corporation
VTB Bank OAO (former Vneshtorgbank)
Entities (Ukrainian)
“Army of the Southeast”
“Crimean enterprise ‘Azov distillery plant’”
“Donbass People’s Militia”
“Federal State of Novorossiya”
“International Union of Public Associations ‘Great Don Army’”
“Luhansk Guard”
“Resort ‘Nizhnyaya Oreanda’”
“Sobol
“State concern ‘National Association of producers Massandra’
“State enterprise ‘Factory of sparkling wine Novy Svet’”
“State enterprise ‘Kerch commercial seaport’”
“State enterprise ‘Magarach of the national institute of wine’
“State enterprise ‘Sevastopol commercial seaport’”
“State enterprise ‘Universal-Avia’”
“State ferry enterprise ‘Kerch Ferry’”
“Vostok battalion”
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-to...z39iacQrSG
http://lenta.ru/news/2014/08/07/gps/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjquQTQvCgo
Individuals (Russian)
Sergei Orestovoch Beseda, Commander of the Fifth Service of the Russian Federal Security Service and Commander of the Service for Operational Information and International Communications of the Russian Federal Security Service.
Aleksandr Vasilievich Bortnikov, permanent member of the Russian Federation’s Security Council and Director of the Russian Federal Security Service.
Mikhail Vladimirovich Degtyarev, member of the State Duma.
Mikhail Efimovich Fradkov, permanent member of the Russian Federation’s Security Council and Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service.
Boris Vyacheslavovich Gryzlov, permanent member of the Russian Federation’s Security Council.
Ramzan Akhmadovich Kadyrov, President of the Republic of Chechnya.
Vladimir Georgyevich Kulishov, First Deputy Director of the Russian Federal Security Service, Chief of the Border Guards.
Konstantin Valerevich Malofeev, Russian business figure and financier of secessionist groups in Ukraine.
Rashid Gumarovich Nurgaliev, permanent member and Deputy Secretary of the Russian Federation’s Security Council.
Nikolai Platonovich Patrushev, permanent member and Secretary of the Russian Federation’s Security Council.
Nikolay Terentievich Shamalov, CEO and majority shareholder of Bank Rossiya.
Igor Shchegolev, aide to the President of the Russian Federation and the former Minister of Communications and Mass Media.
Alexander Nikolayevich Tkachyov, Governor of Krasnodar Krai.
Valerii Yuriovych Travkin, officer in the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
Individuals (Ukrainian)
Sergey Abisov, “Minister of Interior” of the “Republic of Crimea.”
Pavel Yurevich Gubarev, one of the self-described leaders of the so called “Donetsk People’s Republic.”
Ekaterina Yurevna Gubareva, so called “Minister of Foreign Affairs” of the “Donetsk People’s Republic.”
Boris Litvinov, Chairman of the “Supreme Council” of the so called “Donetsk People’s Republic.”
Oksana Tchigrina, spokesperson of the so called “government” of the ”Luhansk People’s Republic.”
Entities (Russian)
Bank of Moscow
Dobrolet (Dobrolyot) Airlines
Russian Agricultural Bank (Rosselkhozbank)
Russian National Commercial Bank
United Shipbuilding Corporation
VTB Bank OAO (former Vneshtorgbank)
Entities (Ukrainian)
“Army of the Southeast”
“Crimean enterprise ‘Azov distillery plant’”
“Donbass People’s Militia”
“Federal State of Novorossiya”
“International Union of Public Associations ‘Great Don Army’”
“Luhansk Guard”
“Resort ‘Nizhnyaya Oreanda’”
“Sobol
“State concern ‘National Association of producers Massandra’
“State enterprise ‘Factory of sparkling wine Novy Svet’”
“State enterprise ‘Kerch commercial seaport’”
“State enterprise ‘Magarach of the national institute of wine’
“State enterprise ‘Sevastopol commercial seaport’”
“State enterprise ‘Universal-Avia’”
“State ferry enterprise ‘Kerch Ferry’”
“Vostok battalion”
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-to...z39iacQrSG
http://lenta.ru/news/2014/08/07/gps/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjquQTQvCgo
08-08-2014, 01:12 PM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-07/ru...eu/5656434
Russia responds to sanctions by banning western food imports
Dmitry Medvedev announces immediate import ban on meat, fish and dairy items from EU, US, Australia, Canada and Norway
Share 1016
Dmitry Medvedev
Dmitry Medvedev confirmed Russia's ban on food imports from countries that had imposed economic sanctions on the Kremlin. Photograph: Ria Novosti/Reuters
Russia has banned fruit, vegetables, meat, fish, milk and dairy imports from the US, the European Union, Australia, Canada and Norway, Russia's prime minister told a government meeting on Thursday.
Dmitry Medvedev said the ban was effective immediately and would last for one year.
Russian officials were on Wednesday asked to come up with a list of western agricultural products and raw materials to be banned.
The agriculture minister, Nikolai Fyodorov, said on Thursday that greater quantities of Brazilian meat and New Zealand cheese would be imported to offset the newly prohibited items. He added Moscow was in talks with Belarus and Kazakhstan to prevent the banned western foodstuffs being exported to Russia from the two countries.
The Kremlin's move comes in response to the grounding of the budget airline subsidiary of Aeroflot as a result of EU sanctions over Moscow's support for rebels in Ukraine.
Medvedev also said officials were considering a ban on European airlines flying to Asia over Siberia.
Russia is Europe's second-largest market for food and drink and has been an important consumer of Polish pig meat and Dutch fruit and vegetables. Exports of food and raw materials to Russia were worth €12.2bn (£9.7bn) in 2013, following several years of double-digit growth.
The UK is less likely to lose out; in 2013, its biggest food and drink export was £17m of frozen fish, followed by £5.7m of cheese and £5.3m of coffee.
Food has already been caught up in political tensions between Russia and the west. In recent days Russian food safety authorities have banned the import of Polish fruit and vegetables, while McDonald's cheeseburgers and milkshakes are being investigated by a regional branch of consumer protection agency Rospotrebnadzor.
EU pork was banned at the start of the year as the Ukraine crisis escalated, cutting off 25% of all European pig meat exports in a move that the European commission said exposed European farmers to significant losses.
EU countries and the US last week stepped up punitive action against Russia in response to Moscow's support for eastern separatists in Ukraine, which has been unwavering despite the downing of Malaysian airliner MH17.
Russia's state-owned banks have been cut off from Europe's capital markets, while its defence and energy firms will no longer be able to import hi-tech western equipment that could have been used for military purposes, fracking or Arctic oil exploration.
The banned items
• Cattle meat: fresh, chilled or frozen
• Pork: fresh, chilled or frozen
• Poultry and its subproducts: fresh, chilled or frozen
• Salted, dried or smoked meat
• Fish, shellfish, scallops and other aquatic invertebrates
• Milk and dairy products
• Vegetables
• Fruit
• Nuts
• Sausage and similar meat products
• Cheese and similar products
Russia responds to sanctions by banning western food imports
Dmitry Medvedev announces immediate import ban on meat, fish and dairy items from EU, US, Australia, Canada and Norway
Share 1016
Dmitry Medvedev
Dmitry Medvedev confirmed Russia's ban on food imports from countries that had imposed economic sanctions on the Kremlin. Photograph: Ria Novosti/Reuters
Russia has banned fruit, vegetables, meat, fish, milk and dairy imports from the US, the European Union, Australia, Canada and Norway, Russia's prime minister told a government meeting on Thursday.
Dmitry Medvedev said the ban was effective immediately and would last for one year.
Russian officials were on Wednesday asked to come up with a list of western agricultural products and raw materials to be banned.
The agriculture minister, Nikolai Fyodorov, said on Thursday that greater quantities of Brazilian meat and New Zealand cheese would be imported to offset the newly prohibited items. He added Moscow was in talks with Belarus and Kazakhstan to prevent the banned western foodstuffs being exported to Russia from the two countries.
The Kremlin's move comes in response to the grounding of the budget airline subsidiary of Aeroflot as a result of EU sanctions over Moscow's support for rebels in Ukraine.
Medvedev also said officials were considering a ban on European airlines flying to Asia over Siberia.
Russia is Europe's second-largest market for food and drink and has been an important consumer of Polish pig meat and Dutch fruit and vegetables. Exports of food and raw materials to Russia were worth €12.2bn (£9.7bn) in 2013, following several years of double-digit growth.
The UK is less likely to lose out; in 2013, its biggest food and drink export was £17m of frozen fish, followed by £5.7m of cheese and £5.3m of coffee.
Food has already been caught up in political tensions between Russia and the west. In recent days Russian food safety authorities have banned the import of Polish fruit and vegetables, while McDonald's cheeseburgers and milkshakes are being investigated by a regional branch of consumer protection agency Rospotrebnadzor.
EU pork was banned at the start of the year as the Ukraine crisis escalated, cutting off 25% of all European pig meat exports in a move that the European commission said exposed European farmers to significant losses.
EU countries and the US last week stepped up punitive action against Russia in response to Moscow's support for eastern separatists in Ukraine, which has been unwavering despite the downing of Malaysian airliner MH17.
Russia's state-owned banks have been cut off from Europe's capital markets, while its defence and energy firms will no longer be able to import hi-tech western equipment that could have been used for military purposes, fracking or Arctic oil exploration.
The banned items
• Cattle meat: fresh, chilled or frozen
• Pork: fresh, chilled or frozen
• Poultry and its subproducts: fresh, chilled or frozen
• Salted, dried or smoked meat
• Fish, shellfish, scallops and other aquatic invertebrates
• Milk and dairy products
• Vegetables
• Fruit
• Nuts
• Sausage and similar meat products
• Cheese and similar products
« Старије Теме | Новије Теме »
Корисника прегледа ову тему: 1 Гост(а)