Nazism: History is Repeating itself in Ukraine

Spinning the Odessa Massacre

May 5, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - After the brutal massacre of over 40 anti-regime protesters in the southern port city of Odessa - most of whom were burned to death after being trapped within the city's Trade Unions House - the Western narrative of "Russian aggression" driving the current unrest in Ukraine is ringing particularly hollow.

Unable to spin the massacre carried out by the very ultra-right Neo-Nazi mobs that propelled the current unelected regime into power, both the West's media machine and its politicians have attempted to remain as ambiguous as possible regarding the recent brutality resulting from what Kiev calls "anti-terror" operations. 

The US condemned the violence in Odessa, but failed to identify the provocateurs or assign blame and instead called for an "investigation" into the deaths - the diplomatic equivalent of shrugging one's shoulders. This response comes in sharp contrast to the West's politically motivated responses to alleged government-sanctioned violence elsewhere in the world, most notably in Libya in 2011, and currently in Syria. 

Additionally, as evidence emerges regarding the details of the Odessa massacre, only Russian news sources are covering it, while the West neither confirms nor denies reports, but rather misinforms its audiences through lies of omission. A particularly damning RT report titled, "Radicals shooting at people in Odessa’s burning building caught on tape," stated: 

New video has emerged online which shows a man shooting at the windows of Odessa’s burning House of Trade Unions. At least 39 anti-government activists died in the flames on May 2 in the building besieged and set ablaze by radicals. 

A man in the video is wearing a bulletproof vest and is shooting several times in the direction of the burning House of Trade Unions.

The article would also report that: 

Another video of the same man shows him speaking on the phone passionately arguing that he and his people are unarmed, while having to confront armed anti-government protesters. The man introduces himself as sotnik Mykola (“sotnik” is what Maidan group leaders in Kiev call themselves).

The report, complete with multiple videos and photographs, portrays a massacre of horrific and intentional brutality, trapping anti-regime protesters inside a building, torching it, and firing at the victims as they attempted to escape from being burned to death. The US' calls to "investigate" the deaths and its refusal to acknowledge that the regime it has elected to back was responsible for the massacre, only further weakens its hand as the crisis continues to unfold.

Western Military “Monitors” Turn Up in Eastern Ukraine

May 1, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Bloomberg reported in their article, “Russia Faces More Sanctions as Monitors Held in Ukraine,” that:

In Ukraine, pro-Russian militants yesterday captured a bus carrying observers sent by member states of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, a 57-nation group that includes Russia and the U.S. focusing on conflict prevention and preserving human rights, Ukraine’s Interior Ministry said in a statement on its website. They were holding 13 people hostage in Slovyansk, it said. 

The observers — who include four Germans and citizens of the Czech Republic, Denmark, Poland and Sweden — were sent under the Vienna Document on military transparency and included no OSCE monitors, according to the Vienna-based organization. They were accompanied by Ukrainian military officers.

That the team members, all drawn from NATO member states, are not actual OSCE monitors, raises doubts over the legitimacy of their mission. NATO has decisively sided with the unelected regime currently occupying Kiev. The objectivity therefore of  ”monitors” drawn from NATO states presents an immense conflict of interest.

Just as other international organizations, including the United Nations itself, are used by the West as cover for covert extraterritorial operations, it appears that the OSCE Vienna Document on military transparency has been abused in an effort to support Kiev’s unelected regime and its on going armed operations in the east of Ukraine.

Muted Propaganda Value 

While the West attempts to use the capture of these so-called “international monitors” to their rhetorical advantage, the propaganda value is minimal. Had these been real monitors carrying out an objective assessment within the mandate of the Vienna Document on military transparency, the backlash from across the West would have been enormous. It is clear, however, that these “monitors” were most likely using the Vienna Document as cover for a NATO intelligence assessment.

Leading the rather muted propaganda campaign is the US State Department’s Voice of America, which stated in their article, “Captured European Monitors in Ukraine say They are Well,” that:

A group of European monitors detained by pro-Russia insurgents in eastern Ukraine appeared in public Sunday to give assurances they are not being mistreated, even as negotiations began to secure their release. 

With armed rebels watching as they spoke, the leader of the monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, German Colonel Axel Schneider, assured reporters in Slovyansk they were in good health. 

Voice of America’s rhetoric, calling NATO officers “European monitors,” strains credibility. Calling anti-fascist eastern Ukrainians “pro-Russia insurgents” also presents a factual discrepancy - an insurgent being defined as “a person who fights against an established government or authority,” and the regime currently occupying Kiev being neither an “established government” nor an “authority.”

One must wonder how the Western media would react had it been Russian military “monitors” captured in Kiev claiming they were operating under the auspices of the OSCE Vienna Document.

Irrevocable Damage to West’s “International Institutions” 

West Hangs Syrian-Style War Over Egypt’s Future

April 29, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Al-Akhbar English in an article titled, “Egypt: Free Egyptian Army being formed in Libya,” reported that:

Egyptian security forces continue to chase armed groups active in the country. The confrontation does not seem it will come to end soon, with the information unfolding daily to security agencies about plans by those group to destabilize Egypt.

Security sources revealed to Al-Akhbar that “intelligence and security agencies succeeded in monitoring the movements of terrorist groups and arrested some of them inside the towns and villages of northern Egypt, as well as the eastern, western, and southern borders of Egypt.”

The report would also claim that a “Free Egyptian Army” was being prepared in neighboring Libya along the Libyan-Egyptian border, where the epicenter of heavily armed sectarian extremists from Al Qaeda’s Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) began NATO-backed operations against the Libyan government in 2011. While the Al-Akhbar article only cites unnamed “sources,” recent and escalating violence lends credibility to concern regarding a Syrian-style conflict fueled by foreign interests to destabilize and overthrow the current Egyptian sociopolitical order.

The Syrian Connection

The recent violence spearheaded by supporters of ousted Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, particularly his Muslim Brotherhood political party and its network of armed militant affiliates, is a cause of particular concern. It was the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria that began receiving cash and backing by the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel as far back as 2007 in preparation for the ongoing armed conflict now raging across Syria for the past 3 years. 

In Reuters ‘May 6, 2012 article titled, “Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood rise from the ashes,” it stated:

“Working quietly, the Brotherhood has been financing Free Syrian Army defectors based in Turkey and channeling money and supplies to Syria, reviving their base among small Sunni farmers and middle class Syrians, opposition sources say.”

The Muslim Brotherhood was nearing extinction in Syria before unrest began in 2011, and while Reuters categorically fails in its report to explain the “how” behind the Brotherhood’s resurrection, it was revealed in a 2007 New Yorker article titled, “The Redirection” by Seymour Hersh. 

The Brotherhood was being directly backed by the US and Israel who were funneling support through the Saudis so as to not compromise the “credibility” of the so-called “Islamic” movement. Hersh revealed that members of the Lebanese Saad Hariri clique, then led by Fouad Siniora, had been the go-between for US planners and the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

Unelected Regime Begins Killing Spree in Eastern Ukraine

Image: Kiev has unleashed heavy armor, warplanes, and gunships on its
own population with substantial NATO backing in direct contradiction to
the West's policy over the last 3 years of alleged "responsibility to protect." 

April 25, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Deadly clashed broke out as the unelected regime occupying Kiev attempted to restart what it is calling “anti-terror” operations in eastern Ukraine where anti-fascist protesters have begun rising up. Several have been killed during clashes in the eastern Ukrainian town of Slavyansk where Kiev has set armored vehicles and helicopter gunships upon its own population.

The Western media continues to refer to those opposing the unelected regime in Kiev as “pro-Russian,” and continues to insist that the uprising in the east is either backed by Moscow or in fact, being carried out directly by Russians operating in Ukrainian territory. However, the US and EU have failed categorically to prove such claims with evidence, and have since been caught circulating falsified images and news in attempts to bolster their claims.

The current regime in Kiev came to power at the height of the so-called “Euromaidan” protests where admittedly armed Neo-Nazi militants seized power, ransacking the headquarters of their political opponents and driving out the elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych. While the armed, violent seizure of power was initially covered up by the Western media, the BBC itself would later admit in a short video report that indeed armed Neo-Nazi militants spearheaded the coup.

Image: Via the BBC, heavy attack helicopters were seen buzzing the Ukrainian people in the restive east in attempts to terrorize the population into submission. The use of heavy war weapons against protesters is disproportionate and has been regularly described as a "war crime" by the West where it claims it has been done in Libya, Syria, and Egypt. Such hypocrisy further undermines the West's agenda not only in Ukraine, but elsewhere around the world where its credibility and influence are in irreversible decline. 

The nature of the regime in Kiev is also being papered over by the Western media, covering up the fact that the two main opposition parties that seized power, Svoboda and “Fatherland,” are in fact led by a collection of Neo-Nazis, bigots, racists, and anti-Semites. In a desperate attempt to cover up this lack of legitimacy, the West has sent many high level officials including a leading US Senator and the US Vice President to Kiev to lend both political and material support.

The latest visit by Vice President Joseph Biden appears to have been timed specifically to help coordinate a renewed push into eastern Ukraine, after Ukrainian troops surrendered en masse last week – refusing to carry out operations against their fellow countrymen. Reports indicate that Kiev has now turned to fanatical ultra-right militant groups in an attempt to put down growing unrest against the unelected regime. The Voice of Russia reported in its article, “Ukrainian Right Sector says it will join crackdown on pro-federalization protesters,” that:

The ultranationalist Ukrainian Right Sector movement said Thursday members of organization will join paramilitary units currently being formed to crackdown on pro-federalization protests in eastern Ukraine. The movement said in a statement on its website that its members will join so-called “battalions of territorial defense” and military units.  

Right Sector was an important force at the Euromaidan protests that began in November in Kiev. Its members were notorious for using clubs, Molotov cocktails, and firearms against Ukrainian police during the protests, and for wearing Nazi-inspired insignia. 

Image: Ultra-right Neo-Nazi militants have been seen across Ukraine in
possession of heavy weapons, including armored vehicles flying not the
Ukrainian flag, but the Nazi-inspired red and black banners of groups like
"Fatherland" and "Right Sector." 

The use of fanatical, irregular forces, armored vehicles, and aircraft including warplanes and helicopter gunships, signifies an escalation of violence by Kiev against its own people through the use of clearly disproportionate force aimed at terrorizing the population. That the United States and European Union have spent the past 3 years engaged in what they called the “responsibility to protect” in both Libya and Syria, and are now backing a regime that is arraying military forces against its own people, marks a new low in both the impartial application of “international law” and the perceived legitimacy of the Western nations now increasingly involved in Ukraine’s political crisis.

West’s Hypocrisy: Libya vs. Ukraine 

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

How the West Gassed Thousands to Death in Damascus

April 19, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The bombshell report by Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh titled, “The Red Line and the Rat Line,” contains many shocking revelations for those following the West’s version of reality regarding the Syrian conflict. It particularly sheds new light on the August 2013 chemical attack that left over a thousand dead (US estimates) and thousands more affected.
 

It reveals that not only was the Syrian government not behind the attack, but that it was a false flag operation designed specifically to serve as an impetus for Western military intervention.  It also reveals that the West’s desire to intervene in the wake of the chemical attack was not to disarm Syria of its chemical weapons as was stated to the public, but instead was intended to completely destroy the Syrian military and save its militant proxies who were already well on their way to losing the war.

However, for all the revelations it contains, it provides only a glimpse into the greater conspiracy the West has been engaged in, grossly understating the unfolding truth of the West’s role behind the devastating conflict that is consuming Syria. To understand the entire picture, one must examine Hersh’s work stretching back as far as 2007. 

Hersh’s Syrian Trilogy  

 

Taken alone, Hersh’s latest report is damning. Taken together with two previous pieces, spanning a total of 7 years of analysis and investigative journalism, Hersh’s work paints a picture of a West engaged in a diabolical, premeditated conspiracy to mire Syria in a sectarian bloodbath for the purpose of achieving regime change in Damascus and undermining neighboring Iran. It becomes clear upon reading Hersh’s work, that the chemical attack in Damascus was not only perpetrated by the West, but was done to trigger a greater war on top of the carnage the West has already intentionally sown.

Hersh’s first piece published in the New Yorker in March 2007 titled, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” reveals that the current conflict in Syria was in fact first engineered during the Bush administration. It states in no uncertain terms that (emphasis added):

“To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”

The same report would reveal that the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel had already begun funding Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood to begin preparations for the impending conflict, and that analysts within the US intelligence community foresaw a humanitarian catastrophe in the making, spurred by the arming of large groups of sectarian extremists.
 

Hersh’s second piece would come in the aftermath of the August 2013 chemical attack in Damascus. Published in December of 2013, Hersh’s piece titled, “Whose Sarin?” stated (emphasis added):

Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad.

The lengthy report goes on in detail, covering the manner in which Western leaders intentionally manipulated or even outright fabricated intelligence to justify military intervention in Syria – eerily similar to the lies told to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the escalation of the war in Vietnam after the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

The report also reveals that Al Nusra, Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, was identified by US intelligence agencies long ago for possessing chemical weapons. These are the same terrorists Hersh warned about in his 2007 article, and mentioned again as being at the center of Western designs in his most recent piece.

 The West’s Coverup… 

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

US GITMO Detainee Killed in Syria While Leading NATO-backed Death Squad

April 17, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The Long War Journal reported in its post, “Former Guantanamo detainee killed while leading jihadist group in Syria,” that:

Ibrahim Bin Shakaran, a Moroccan who spent more than three years at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility before being released to Moroccan custody, has been killed while leading a jihadist group that fights Syrian government forces.

 

Bin Shakaran, who is also known as Abu Ahmad al Maghribi, Abu Ahmad al Muhajir, and Brahim Benchekroune, was “martyred, Insha’Allah, in battles for Hilltop # 45 in Latakia,” according to Kavkaz Center, a propaganda arm of the Islamic Caucasus Emirate.

Bin Shakaran led a jihadist group known as Sham al Islam, which is based in Latakia and is comprised primarily of fighters from Morocco, according to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Bin Shakaran created the group “not only to recruit fighters for the Syria war, but also to establish a jihadist organization within Morocco itself.”

Sham al Islam has been fighting alongside the al Qaeda’s Syrian branch, the Al Nusrah Front for the People of the Levant, as well as Ahrar al Sham and the Army of the Emigrants and Supporters in an ongoing offensive in the coastal province of Latakia.

Curiously absent from The Long War Journal’s report is any mention of how Bin Shakaran made it into northern Syria in the first place. Clearly this is because it would involve mentioning Turkey, a long-standing NATO member, with NATO being the organization that invaded and occupied Afghanistan, and whom Bin Shakaran had been fighting and ultimately fled from before being captured. 
 

The Long War Journal also makes mention of the Kavkaz Center, calling it “a propaganda arm of the Islamic Caucasus Emirate.” Only the Kavkaz Center had been backed by the now defunct US National Endowment for Democracy-funded ”Russian-Chechen Friendship Society.” While The Long War Journal poses as a stalwart fighter of terrorism, its Western-backed counterpart, the Kavkaz Center is promoting terrorism in Russia.
 

“The Long War Journal” itself is a project of the Neo-Con Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD). The FDD has counted among its membership US politicians and policy makers such as current US Vice President Joseph Biden, William Kristol, Steve Forbes, Charles Krauthammer, Paula Dobriansky – many of whom were signatories of the now notorious Project for a New American Century and who had been the chief proponents of the so-called “War on Terror” and the two costly conflicts fought in its name – the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
 

The detention center in Guantanamo is part of the “War on Terror’s” legacy, a continuous point of contention between the US government and rights activists, and clearly a failure in its alleged role of keeping dangerous terrorists off the battlefield. 
 

A Pattern That Fits Conspiracy  

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

Easter Greetings...

April 17, 2014 (New Eastern Outlook)

The world is what we make of it.

Regardless of our differences, we have many similarities, including our desire for peace and prosperity. Understanding our differences and our similarities allows us to move forward together, creating a vibrant, colorful tapestry made by the very best we have within.

Happy Easter from the editorial board of New Eastern Outlook.

Audio: The song is "We are singing to you," composed by Sergei Rachmaninoff. Performed by the Dzvinochok Boys Choir.

Ukraine: The Anti-Maidan Begins

April 14, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - It was predicted that the regime in Kiev would not last long, and that almost immediately there would be a backlash. First, opposition would come from eastern Ukraine where Ukrainians stand by their nation’s long historical, linguistic, cultural, economic, and strategic ties to Russia. Then opposition would come from western Ukraine, where people, despite their perceived anti-Russian sentiments and initial support for the “Euromaidan” protests, would find the corrupt client regime in Kiev intolerable as it integrated the nation into the EU while imposing IMF-engineered austerity measures already spreading socioeconomic chaos across the rest of Europe.

 

It was also predicted that the regime in Kiev, backed by the US and EU, would use the pretext of “war with Russia” to arm itself against the inevitable uprising to come.

 

It now appears that the “anti-Maidan” has begun, and that the military backing by NATO will be mobilized against fellow Ukrainians much sooner than expected.

 

With Crimea now beginning its integration with Russia, others in eastern Ukraine see a window of opportunity to escape out from beneath the regime in Kiev before it is able to consolidate its power and stamp out resistance to its inevitably disastrous policies. Protesters have been gathering in key cities across eastern Ukraine, while armed militias begin digging in against Kiev’s overt threats and now demonstrably preparations to carry out violence.  CNN would report in their article, “Ukraine unrest will be resolved by force or talks in 48 hours, minister says,” that:

Ukrainian acting Interior Minister Arsen Avakov said Wednesday that the separatist protests in Ukraine’s eastern region would be resolved within 48 hours — either through negotiations or the use of force. 

The Guardian in its article, “Armed pro-Russian protesters seize city in eastern Ukraine,” describes multiple cities being taken over by Ukrainians opposed to the regime in Kiev. While the Guardian continues to spin the narrative that Russia is “annexing” eastern Ukraine like it did Crimea – this sidesteps the reality that Crimea voted overwhelmingly (93% according to the BBC) to voluntarily declare independence from Kiev, and integrate with Russia. Claims that Russian troops have “invaded” Ukraine, intentionally omit that Russian troops, per long standing treaties, have been stationed in Ukrainian territory for decades.

 

Despite the referendum, the Western media still refers to the newly integrated peninsula as “Russian-occupied Crimea.”

 

Who are Ukrainians Fleeing via Pro-Russian Movement? 

 

Another crucial aspect omitted or blatantly covered up by the Western media is the very nature of the regime that recently seized power in Kiev at the height of the so-called “Euromaidan” protests. As growing public awareness has highlighted the ultra-right, literal Nazis that led “Euromaidan,” the Western media has succeeded in sowing enough doubt to keep many on the fence regarding the ongoing Ukrainian crisis.

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

The Troubling Truth Behind the Ebola Outbreak

April 13, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - In the Guardian’s article, “Panic as deadly Ebola virus spreads across West Africa,” it reports:

Since the outbreak of the deadly strain of Zaire Ebola in Guinea in February, around 90 people have died as the disease has travelled to neighbouring Sierra Leone, Liberia and Mali. The outbreak has sent shock waves through communities who know little of the disease or how it is transmitted. The cases in Mali have added to fears that it is spreading through West Africa.

The Guardian also reported that  Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), also known in English as Doctors Without Borders, had established treatment centers in Guinea, one of which came under attack as locals accused the foreign aid group of bringing the disease into the country. Also under fire is the government of Guinea itself, which has proved incapable of handling the crisis.

 

This latest outbreak, which has yet to be contained and is being considered by Doctors Without Borders as an “unprecedented epidemic,” illustrates several troubling truths about global health care, emergency response to outbreaks, and the perception many have of a West subjecting the developing world to a “medical tyranny.”

 

Failure to Prepare

 

In 2012, when Doctors Without Borders concluded its response to an Ebola outbreak in Uganda, it claimed in its post, “MSF Concludes Emergency Ebola Response in Uganda,” that:

The Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) emergency response to an outbreak of Ebola in Uganda has come to an end. The MSF team handed over the Ebola treatment center it set up in Uganda’s western Kibaale district to the Ugandan Ministry of Health (MoH).

The statement also claimed:

As part of a preparation plan for future outbreaks, MSF also restored a treatment unit in Mulago hospital, located in Kampala, Uganda’s capital. “Uganda has developed the capacity to respond to Ebola emergencies,” said MSF emergency coordinator Olimpia de la Rosa. “We can rely on the capability of Ministry of Health staff to take over and manage Ebola cases with all safety guarantees.”

One must wonder then, if MSF and other global health agencies can train Ugandan medical staff and hand over responsibilities to prevent a future outbreak to the government of Uganda, why haven’t similar provisions been undertaken in nations like Guinea, Liberia, Mali, and Sierra Leone. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Ebola outbreaks occur “primarily in remote villages in Central and West Africa, near tropical rainforests.” Why then have nations in Central and West Africa not been prepared for such outbreaks – particularly when the many of the nations that back MSF are already heavily involved in the internal affairs of many of these nations?

 

France alone has expended hundreds of millions of euros during its ongoing military operations in Mali, reported by France 24 in 2013 to be costing the European nation approximately 2.7 million euros a day. Money spent on costly military operations designed to project Western hegemony across Northern and Western Africa, an extension of the West’s intervention in Libya, would lead one to believe that funds should also be available to prevent “unprecedented epidemics” of deadly diseases like Ebola, but apparently the same preparations made in Uganda have been neglected in French-occupied Mali, as well as other Ebola-prone nations.

 

While the West poses as chief arbiter of humanity and through its international organizations, intervening when crises strike, its failure to prepare other nations prone to Ebola outbreaks with a management formula already perfected in Uganda at the very least shakes public confidence and trust. When it intervenes in these very nations for geopolitical ambitions under the pretenses of “democracy,” “development,” and “human rights” but utterly fails to address the dire needs of the very people it claims to be rushing to the aid of, such confidence and trust is only further shaken.

 

Distrust Leads to Suspicion

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

The Weaponization of Western “Aid” for Syria

April 11, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The UN and the United States have laid blame squarely on the Syrian government for blocking international aid convoys from reaching victims of Syria’s ongoing conflict. The BBC in its article, “Syria crisis: UN says no aid improvement despite vote,” claimed:

The UN has said that there has been no humanitarian improvement for millions of Syrians since the Security Council passed a resolution last month to increase aid deliveries.

UN humanitarian chief Valerie Amos said that much of the blame lay with President Bashar al-Assad’s government. She accused it of an arbitrary and unjustified refusal to grant aid convoys access to remoter areas. Baroness Amos said violence, including sexual violence, continued to increase.The Syrian government has yet to respond to her allegations but has consistently argued that it is doing its utmost to get food and medical supplies to people in less accessible areas. In February, the Security Council called on all parties to allow aid to cross conflict lines and borders.

However, what the UN and the US have both failed to mention is the disingenuous intentions, means, and methods behind these so-called “aid convoys” attempting to reach “people in less accessible areas.” These would be areas held by foreign-backed militants, including members of the US State Department designated terrorist organization, Jabhat Al Nusra – Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise and guilty of some of the worst atrocities carried out during the conflict real or imagined on either side.

To see how “arbitrary and unjustified” the Syrian government’s refusals are to grant access to remote areas controlled by terrorists by Western “aid convoys,” one must consider emerging evidence regarding the nature of these so-called convoys and the general practice of the West sending relief into a conflict of their own design.

 

Aid as “Trojan Horses”  

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

NATO's "Mystery Gunmen" Seek to Strengthen Kiev Regime's Hand

Image: Provoking a confrontation with Russia allows the West to further
arm and aid the regime in Kiev - not against a military conflict it has no
hope of winning against Moscow, but against the inevitable uprising it
faces from the Ukrainian people. Nazi thugs were able to blitz the
elected government out of power, but will not be able to hold on without
extensive Western aid. 

March 20, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci-NEO) - In yet another attempt to widen the confrontation between Russia, Crimea, and the Western-backed regime in Kiev, snipers have opened fire on both Ukrainian and Crimean defense forces at a small military base within the heart of the Crimean peninsula, the administrative city of Simferopol.

The BBC immediately penned a report titled, "Ukraine officer 'killed in attack on Crimea base'," citing the regime in Kiev's official statements which included Ukrainian Defense Ministry spokesman Vladislav Seleznyov admitting the attack was carried out by "unknown forces, fully equipped and their faces covered." Despite absolutely no confirmation over the identity of the attackers, the Kiev regime, headed by self-appointed Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, claimed:

"The conflict is shifting from a political to a military stage. Russian soldiers have started shooting at Ukrainian military servicemen and that is a war crime."  

Yatsenyuk's rushed and hamhanded political exploitation of an admittedly ambiguous attack carried out by unidentified gunmen exposes both the likely party behind the violence, and the most likely motivation for carrying out the fatal attack. 

One must wonder what Yatsenyuk's regime in Kiev has to gain by jumping to conclusions, thus stoking tensions that will inevitably lead to a military confrontation with Russia - a confrontation his regime has no hope of winning. To answer that question, Ian Bremmer's TIME Magazine piece, "It's Time to Look Beyond Crimea: The U.S. and Europe need to focus on supporting the fragile new government in Kiev," offers some clues.

Military Confrontation Opens Doors to Otherwise Unjustified Material Support

"Supporting the fragile new government in Kiev," is first and foremost among the priorities of the US and EU in Ukraine. Bremmer is kind in calling what resides in Kiev a "government," considering it was not elected, and instead seized power violently.

The US and EU's support of the regime in Kiev is also problematic, though Bremmer refuses to address the complications which include the self-proclaimed Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk being a documented bigot and a member of the Hiteresque "Fatherland Party," and the fact that the ruling regime is buttressed by a network of ultra-right wing parties including the anti-Semitic, homophobic, and anti-Russian Svoboda Party, and even further to its right, its armed affiliate "Right Sector."

Despite this, Bremmer of the "Eurasia Group" - a partner of notorious corporate tax evasion facilitator PricewaterhouseCoopers, claims:

The results of the Crimean referendum on March 16, which will give the peninsula’s inhabitants the option of voting to leave Ukraine and formally retreat into Moscow’s shadow, are a foregone conclusion. Ukraine’s new government cannot stop the referendum from taking place, because it will not be baited into a military confrontation with Russia that it can’t win. There is nothing Americans and Europeans can do about it because there is no popular support in the West for NATO troops riding to the rescue. And there is no way for the Ukrainian side to win the vote, because Crimea is the only Ukrainian province in which ethnic Russians form a majority.

Bremmer continues by outlining what the US and EU should do:

The real test for the West will be in bolstering the fragile Ukrainian government in Kiev, providing it with  the financing it needs to avoid a crippling default on its debt and helping Ukraine as it strives to become more European. 

But how exactly can the West justify infusing billions of dollars into a nation run by an unelected fascist regime composed of literal Nazis, when the West itself is crushing its own population under the ever expanding bootprint of crippling austerity? Enter NATO's "mystery gunmen" and the subsequent fabrication of an omnipresent "Russian threat" against which the West must defend.

Mystery Gunmen: A Familiar Tool Dusted Off Once Again 

Bremmer himself admits that there is no popular support in the West for what it is doing in Ukraine. Despite this, he contradicts himself in mid-essay claiming that the West should satisfy public demand "for a get-tough response to Russian bullying."

But Russia's response to Kiev's seizure by literal Nazis who immediately and demonstrably began oppressing the population, including through legislation targeting Russian-speaking Ukrainians and the censorship of Russian media across the country, was to utilize troops already long-stationed in Crimea under treaty to protect against further incursions by ultra-right wing extremists and to diplomatically back a democratic referendum in which the people of Crimea overwhelmingly voted for both independence from the regime in Kiev, and unity with Russia.

Image: US-backed dictator Thaksin Shinawatra's militants can be seen here clearly deploying both AK-47s and an M16 during an armed confrontation with the Thai military on April 10, 2010. The purpose of deploying M16s was to blame the resulting injuries and deaths from its distinct 5.56mm rounds squarely on the Thai military, thus serving to expand and escalate the conflict. 

Since this could hardly be considered "Russian bullying," the West as it is oft to doing, has decided to fabricate it instead. As it had done through the US-backed "red shirt" mobs in Bangkok, Thailand in 2010, in Libya, Egypt, and Syria during the opening phases of the US-engineered "Arab Spring," and again documented in Ukraine itself during the height of the "Euromaidan" riots - it appears to be deploying "mystery gunmen" across Crimea to create the perception that Russia is not only stripping Ukraine of its "territorial integrity," but doing so through deadly violence.

In the Daily Mail's report, "Estonian Foreign Ministry confirms authenticity of leaked phone call discussing how Kiev snipers who shot protesters were possibly hired by Ukraine's new leaders," it stated explicitly that:

Estonia has confirmed the authenticity of a leaked telephone call between its foreign minister and an EU chief which suggested the sniper killings in Ukraine last month were ordered by the new coalition. 

The 11-minute call between the EU's foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and her Estonian counterpart Urmas Paet was made on February 25 in the aftermath of the massacre. 

During the call, Paet claims a doctor told him both protesters and police were shot by snipers during clashes in Kiev allegedly on the orders of the opposition.

If the elected government of Ukraine refused to use deadly force against armed Neo-Nazi militants, necessitating the West to employ covert snipers to further escalate the crisis themselves, why would Russia, who already has won any possible Ukrainian-Russian confrontation on paper long before firing a single shot, be interested in covert attacks on an already defeated, rudderless, leaderless impotent Ukrainian military? 

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

Crimea: Democracy Is Not Democracy…Unless Obama Says It Is…

Source: Flickr

March 12, 2014 (Eric Draitser - New Eastern Outlook) - As Crimea prepares to vote on Saturday March 16th in a crucial referendum on its future, the rhetoric coming from the West and its propaganda machine has hit a new and ridiculous low. Not only has US President Barack Obama and his administration done everything to undermine democracy in Ukraine, they have now resorted to the most naked forms of hypocrisy in an attempt to delegitimize the democratic process.

On Thursday March 6th President Obama spoke at the White House on the referendum and the issue of Crimea. In his prepared remarks, Obama stated categorically that the United States would not recognize the results of the Crimean referendum. He argued that the it would violate both the “Ukrainian Constitution and international law.” Obama kept the comedy coming when he noted that, “In 2014 we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders.” As with all statements made by the US government, and the President specifically, this must be contextualized and deconstructed in order to be effectively critiqued.

First and foremost is the question of democracy and, more specifically, how exactly Washington is choosing to define this gravely abused word. In referring to the so-called “interim government” in Kiev, headed by Yatsenyuk and his associates, as “democratic leaders”, Obama demonstrates either a complete lack of understanding of the word democracy, or as I think is more likely, an utter contempt for democratic principles. By referring to an unelected entity that has seized political power in Kiev by force, and through collaboration with Nazi elements, as “democratic leaders,” Obama exposes himself and his administration to be cynical opportunists whose interests rest not in democracy but in a geopolitical agenda guided solely by strategic interests.

Naturally, the references to the Ukrainian Constitution and international law are also deeply disingenuous. Obama, and the US imperial system more generally, speak of international law purely when it suits their interests, eschewing it completely when it does not. This fact has been illustrated quite clearly with Washington’s wars of aggression throughout that last two decades, including the illegal wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, not to mention the habitual violations of international law in Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan and around the world.

The most significant point here is that the US recognizes democracy and international law only when it suits their interests. Moreover, US hypocrisy regarding democracy becomes self evident if one examines the recent historical precedents of Kosovo and South Sudan. In both these cases, precisely the same individuals who today cry about international law and argue against the democratic right of Crimea to determine its own future, were then eloquently and unabashedly in favor of precisely the same sort “democratic aspirations.”

 Kosovo, South Sudan, and Washington’s Amnesia

Read the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

Colour Revolutions - Opium of the People

March 3, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - New Eastern Outlook) - Karl Marx said of religion: 

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. 

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

When Karl Marx wrote this, organized religion was very much the solace of so many people -people who might have otherwise sought more effective means of alleviating their daily suffering had this opiate not been available. Overtime, that solace was slowly eroded and replaced by an entire medicine cabinet full of “opiates.” From sports to TV, to video games and social media, there is a vast multitude of illusions we cling to today that provide a “soul to soulless conditions.”

Among them, it can easily be argued, is modern Western-style “democracy” which is perhaps one of the most insidious. Perpetually offering the promise of a better tomorrow, never actually delivered but always just one elections away from being realized – it is the strongest of all the opiates we sedate our anger, dissatisfaction, and will to effect change ourselves with.

US 2012 Elections

US elections in 2012 pitted “conservative Republican” Mitt Romney against “liberal Democrat,” Barack Obama. To so many millions of people, it was a pivotal moment in American history, with the fate of the nation, and in many ways the world, at the mercy of the electorate. In reality, the same corporate-funded policy think tanks were authoring the agendas of both men, who, while holding the position of “commander in chief,” would ultimately be at the mercy of an unelected “board of directors” consisting of corporate-financier interests that hide behind the facade of “democracy.”

Indeed, the wars, geopolitical maneuvering, and extraterritorial economic pursuits of the United States unfolding for 8 years under US President George Bush, continued or were expanded in earnest under President Obama. Wars engineered years ago under Bush were rebranded and sold under Obama. Instead of being a component of the unending “War on Terror,” they took on a more suitable “liberal,” “humanitarian” theme, however, these conflicts were nonetheless part of a predetermined, decades-spanning geopolitical campaign to maintain and expand US hegemony across the planet.

What then did the 2012 elections accomplish? They gave people the fleeting hope that the policies they’ve held in contempt under Bush would somehow be reversed, that justice would be served, and that progress would be made. Instead of effecting real change, locally and pragmatically, the people turned to their opiate of voting booths, campaign slogans, and the promise of a quick fix and in the end simply compounded their problems further.

The Arab Spring

Continue reading the rest at New Eastern Outlook... 

Why Occupy Bangkok is Working and Occupy Wall Street Didn't

Power flows from institutions and those without them have no power.
February 14, 2014 (New Eastern Outlook - Tony Cartalucci) - Occupy Wall Street, ideologically speaking, could not have been any more universally appealing. It was the 99% against the 1% (or more accurately - the 99.9% vs. the 0.1%), with the realization that big money had taken over politics and society to the detriment of all, regardless of political affiliation. With such a broadly appealing message, how come the movement fizzled?

Image: Occupy Bangkok has exposed and hobbled the Wall Street-backed regime of Thaksin Shinawatra. It has succeeded where Occupy Wall Street hasn't because it is backed by numerous, influential institutions with wide and varied operational capacities. Tactically, economically, and politically, cornering, undermining or otherwise ending the protests have proved impossible for the regime. 

....

Conversely, on the other side of the planet, "Occupy Bangkok" seeks to overthrow a regime propped up by Wall Street - that of billionaire despot Thaksin Shinawatra who for over a decade has served Western interests at great cost to the Southeast Asian nation of Thailand. Unlike Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Bangkok has been greatly successful. It has united unions, students, farmers, workers, business owners both big and small, against the corrosive influence of Thaksin Shinawatra and his Western backers.

Recent elections overseen by the regime unraveled in humiliation with less than half of the nation even choosing to vote. Of those that did, many defaced their ballots or checked "no vote" in protest. The protests which have been ongoing for months, have effectively hobbled the regime. Its collapse is now inevitable. 

They have done so because they have institutions standing behind them, from media, to military, to courts, and large, influential political parties, as well as genuine, indigenous NGOs - all combining and coordinating against the regime and its foreign backers to equal or best every move they make.

The regime has been unable to move police against them in fear of provoking the military. They have been unable to financially cripple the protesters because of the large and diverse interests backing them through creative and ever shifting means. They have been unable to drown out the voice of the protesters because the protesters possess themselves large media platforms within Thailand, and alternative voices beyond, that are able to tell their side of the story.

None of this was present at Occupy Wall Street. The Western media was easily able to first turn it into a "left/right" wedge issue, then turn the "right" against the "left," before labeling the protesters as "fringe left," just before police swept protesters from the streets in swift, coordinated, and utterly unopposed operations across the country. The little political and institutional backing the movement did receive was merely superficial opportunism and theater to perpetuate America's false "left/right" political paradigm - some backing from establishment institutions like George Soros' Open Society, was designed in fact to undermine, not support the movement. .

Institutions Make the World Go Round 

Power stems from organized institutions. Empires were not built by mere armies and navies - they also included financial, economic, and institutional power projected beyond their borders into their colonies and subjects of conquest.

Today, individuals, or groups of individuals with no operational capacity are merely mobs in the streets - like barbarian raiders of ancient times - with no real plan, manifesto, or potential. They may be able to temporarily seize territory from their opponents but have absolutely no means to fortify it, let alone project power beyond it.