Tag Archives: russia

Imperial Hubris: Ukraine as a ‘regime change’ too far for the American Empire

Posted on by Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Reply

As usual, Joe has dug up the dirt and put the puzzle together. There are a few things in this article that are just shocking like: “Based on its 1970-1990 growth rate, Ukraine’s population should today be 57 million. Thus, it can be argued, the IMF is responsible for the death of up to one third of Ukraine’s population these last two decades.”

Imperial Hubris: Ukraine as a ‘regime change’ too far for the American Empire

All anti-imperialists that have been secretly longing for the day when the last great Empire of our ‘modern’ era would finally do what all the ‘best’ Empires have done – overextend itself in both reach and hubris for all to see and usher in its collapse – should be looking at the situation in Ukraine with hope and expectation.

Well, maybe I’m getting a little carried away there, but the US-Ukraine-Russia debacle does seem to be presenting ‘we the people’ with a rare opportunity to see the great American Empire as the monolithic edifice, composed largely of lies, propaganda, rhetoric, fear and public credulity that it is. There is, perhaps, a chance to see that the emperor really is naked, and that our overblown overlords and their “greatest democracy on earth” exist and persist only because we all believe their carefully crafted lies served up to us in the yellow journalism of the Empire’s fourth estate, the mainstream media.

As the empire fades and the hubris of its leaders increases however, it seems even those carefully crafted lies aren’t having the desired effect. This week, both Obama and John Kerry exposed America’s vaunted ‘exceptionalism’ as being based on exceptional dishonesty when they made statements about Russian intervention in Ukraine. The funny thing is, both Obama and Kerry were actually trying to do the opposite – present themselves as paragons of righteousness. Apparently the Neocons from whom they take their orders failed to mention to these two spokesmen for Empire that ‘chutzpah’ should never be pushed too far, lest you expose your unmitigated effrontery and impudence for all the world to see.

In attempting to rally world public opinion behind him and against Russian President Putin, Kerry stated:

“You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext.”

Emphasizing the point, he inadvisedly added:

“You just don’t invade another country on a phony pretext in order to assert your interests.”

Obama stated:

“any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity […] would represent a profound interference in matters that must be determined by the Ukrainian people. Throughout this crisis we have been very clear about one fundamental principle, the Ukrainian people deserve the opportunity to determine their own future […] human beings have a universal right to determine their own future”.

I probably don’t need to go into too much detail about why, on the basis of these statements alone, the Nobel Committee should invent a new category called ‘most hypocritical statement by a politician in the history of the world‘ and immediately present it jointly to Kerry and Obama, so I’ll just throw out a few country names: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria. On Iraq, Kerry voted for the 2003 US military invasion on completely trumped up charges about non-existent WMDs that were used as a phony pretext so that people like Kerry could ‘assert their interests’. 1.5 million Iraqi civilians died as a result and today the country is in ruins and plagued by bombings and assassinations. Kerry went on to defend his vote during his run for president in 2004 against Bush. Obama authorized the March 2011 NATO bombing of Libya without congressional approval on completely trumped up charges of “protecting civilians” and justified by “right to protect” that completely denied the Libyan people their purported ‘universal right to determine their own future’. The bombing ultimately caused the deaths of 40,000 Libyan civilians and installed a fundamentalist Islamic government.

RT reacts to anchor Liz Wahl quitting on air

Posted on by Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Reply

This situation with Abby Martin and Liz Wahl appears to me to be a perfect example of what Glenn Greenwald recently exposed as the NSA program to control and disrupt society via media and social network manipulation.

We see here that Abby and Liz have both fallen into that trap whether wittingly or unwittingly, and have become the grist for the NSA mill. All the NSA had to do was activate their vast network of social media drones and the whole issue is covered in veil of black smoke.

And we notice how much raging coverage this gets, while the FACTS ON THE GROUND get almost NO coverage in the MSM.

Thanks Abby and Liz for being Benedict Arnolds and giving aid to the psychopathic enemy.

RT reacts to anchor Liz Wahl quitting on air

During a live broadcast on Wednesday, RT America presenter Liz Wahl announced she was stepping down, citing her disagreements with the network’s editorial policy. RT issued a statement following her resignation.

Ms. Wahl’s resignation comes on the heels of her colleague Abby Martin’s recent comments in which she voiced her disagreement with certain policies of the Russian government and asserted her editorial independence. The difference is, Ms. Martin spoke in the context of her own talk show, to the viewers who have been tuning in for years to hear her opinions on current events – the opinions that most media did not care about until two days ago. For years, Ms. Martin has been speaking out against US military intervention, only to be ignored by the mainstream news outlets – but with that one comment, branded as an act of defiance, she became an overnight sensation. It is a tempting example to follow.

When a journalist disagrees with the editorial position of his or her organization, the usual course of action is to address those grievances with the editor, and, if they cannot be resolved, to quit like a professional. But when someone makes a big public show of a personal decision, it is nothing more than a self-promotional stunt.

We wish Liz the best of luck on her chosen path.

Staggering new depths of hypocrisy: Kerry tells Russia ‘You don’t invade a country on completely phony pretexts’

Posted on by Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Reply

It really is horrifying to realize that we live in a world run by these cretins.

Staggering new depths of hypocrisy: Kerry tells Russia ‘You don’t invade a country on completely phony pretexts’

The US Secretary of State spoke today of the unacceptability of invading a sovereign country on phony pretexts in order to assert one’s own interests in the 21st century. But no, he was not speaking about the United States, as one might have thought.

“You just don’t invade another country on phony pretext in order to assert your interests,” John Kerry said during an interview with NBC’s Meet the Press. “This is an act of aggression that is completely trumped up in terms of its pretext. It’s really 19th century behaviour in the 21st century.”

Kerry has also threatened to isolate Russia economically and politically and warned of potential asset freezes and visa bans, adding to media and political hype that followed Russia authorization of sending a stabilization force in Crimea on official request from the authorities.

“There could be certainly disruption of any of the normal trade routine, there could be business drawback on investment in the country,” he said. “There could even be ultimately asset freezes, visa bans.”

Although Kerry was never challenged by the interviewer to comment in terms of that statement on Washington’s own constant threats to use force and military invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan, those who watched the interview immediately smelled the hypocrisy.

“Since when does the United States government genuinely subscribe and defend the concept of sovereignty and territorial integrity? They certainly are not doing that at the moment in Syria,” Marcus Papadopoulos, commentator for Politics First told RT. “They certainly did not do that when they attacked Libya. They certainly didn’t do that when they invaded Iraq. They certainly didn’t do that when they attacked Serbia over Kosovo and then later on recognized Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence. The United States government merely pays lip service to sovereignty and territorial integrity, it picks and choses.”