"World Leaders" Is A Propaganda Term For Country Bosses

We've been subjected to much blather about "world leaders" as the political class that rules countries meets at the UN to orate. This propaganda term is used ubiquitously in media. It is absurd. How many of the politicians who rise to the top political positions in their nations are inspirational leaders whose people are their followers? It is a conceit by politicians, and the propaganda systems use this term to support the political rulerships of their respective countries.

Here's another example of how propaganda media use the word "leader" to twist reality and gaslight people. Corporate bosses are NEVER "bosses" in capitalist media. They are always and only "leaders." The word "boss" is reserved for labor union officials. There are "union bosses," but no corporate bosses, no business bosses. So if you're a worker, your boss isn't your boss, he/she is your Leader, and you are inspired to follow! Your boss is a union official, if you're even in a union. 

This dishonest charade serves to hide the fact that corporate bosses are powerful rulers. In the United States and other countries, the governments are the servants of powerful corporations. After World War II the U.S. created entire organizations to enforce the power of U.S. corporations to exploit other nations. For example, the CIA exists to overthrow governments that don't serve U.S. corporate interests.

A "World Leader:"

                    Is he your leader? Do you follow him?

 

How The U.S. Uses Food As A Weapon In The Ukraine War

 Specifically as a propaganda weapon.

Western propagandists and politicians and imperialist apparatchiks want us to believe that Russia wants to starve Africans. They expect us to believe that Putin wants to use food as a "weapon" against the very African nations Russia is keen to keep neutral in the proxy war the U.S. is waging against Russia in Ukraine. Why in hell would Putin want to alienate those nations that have remained neutral in the NATO war to wreck Russia? It's as absurd and dishonest as Nazi anti-Semitic propaganda, completely ludicrous.

U.S. and Eurostooge media propagandists keep falsely "reporting" that "Russia pulled out of the [grain] deal." No, the "deal" expired, and Russia declined to renew it, for the very good reason that the deal WASN'T HONORED. Russia was double-crossed. (As the U.S. and its Eurolackeys have repeatedly double-crossed Russia again and again since defeating the Soviet Union in the Cold War.) The deal was that both Ukraine AND Russia would be allowed to export grains. Russia honored its side of the bargain, even though it was blocked from exporting.

Western imperialists claim Russian grain exports weren't banned, but this is deceptive. Russian grain exports weren't specifically banned, but they were effectively banned because Russia was and is barred from international payment systems by "Western sanctions." That is to say, by U.S. diktat. The U.S. controls the international financial system and payments mechanisms. So international trade is extremely difficult without U.S. permission. The world is under the yoke of a U.S.-controlled system of trade and finance. This is part of what is euphemised as "the international order." What it is is a system of U.S. global domination.  

Russia has made clear they will join a new agreement if this time they are not double-crossed. That is blocked from public consciousness by Western propagandists (aka "journalists" or "reporters") state apparatchiks like U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken (who repeatedly attacks Russia for "using food as a weapon" and allegedly starving people) and politicians.

The ones using food as a weapon are the U.S. and its satrapys. They are using it as a propaganda weapon to claim evil Russia wants to starve Africans.

Russia has responded to the U.S. refusal to permit a fair deal by shelling Ukraine regime food warehouses. At least that's what Western propaganda agencies claim. Given how mendacious so much of their "news" has been- they wanted us to believe Russia sabotaged its own undersea gas pipeline, that for months it shelled its own troops at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in Ukraine, and other absurdities- unfortunately we can't take for granted the accuracy of any "reportage" by Western propaganda outfits. These propagandists' jobs are to make Russia look as evil as possible, the the Kyiv regime noble freedom fighters. We the people are the targets and victims of their propaganda barrages.

 Postscript: I actually wrote this several weeks ago. Today the propagandists are still gaslighting the public about this issue. For example, on NPR, loathsome propagandist Greg Myrie yammered on and on about mean Russia causing hunger, while carefully omitting Russia's completely valid complaint, and the REAL party responsible for the impasse- the U.S., which refuses to allow Russia to sell its grain.

I Heard The Newa Today, Oh Boy...

 I woke up today at 6 am. It's "Presidents Day" in the U.S., a national holiday in honor of two Big Deal U.S. presidents, Washington and Lincoln. (All you need to know about them to be a Good American is Washington was "Father of the Nation" and Lincoln "freed the slaves." And don't ask any questions.)

I turned on the radio at 6:02 am (Eastern Standard Time) and what came out of the speaker was Joe Biden, saying this:

"America stands with you, the world stands with you. Kyiv has captured a part of my heart, I must say."

Then the nice NPR lady propagandist started speaking and I turned it off. (NPR, National Public Radio, is a U.S. government-created radio network.)

Biden was speaking in Kyiv, we're told it was a "surprise visit." 

 

The part about "the world stands with you" is a bald-faced lie. Biden knows that Africa, Latin America, and most of Asia, including China and India, most definitely are NOT supporting Ukraine, as the U.S. demands they do. Most of "the world" wants no part of the U.S. jihad against Russia.

The U.S. demands that every nation on earth adopt ITS foreign policy. It is right now threatening China not to supply "lethal weapons" to Russia. Every propaganda outlet in the U.S. uses that exact phrase, "lethal weapons." Not once has any of them described the U.S. and NATO weapons funneled to Ukraine, billions of dollars worth, as "lethal." Maybe they just tickle the enemy.

The power establishment's media has been bathing all our brains in non-stop Hate Russia Love Ukraine propaganda since October 2021, months before the Russian invasion of Ukraine- an invasion the U.S. apparently intended to provoke. So I've had more than enough of the propagandists' and politicians' guff.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think Russia's invasion was justified. But it was definitely provoked. 

We're supposed to think this is a uniquely horrific war. But countries have invaded other countries probably thousands of times over the past thousands of years. And we're supposed to have amnesia about the numerous times the U.S. has invaded other countries, and the uncountable atrocities and war crimes it has committed.

All this propaganda is meant to stoke popular outrage and hatred for Russia.

Deconstructing the mendacious propaganda about the situation in Ukraine is beyond the scope of this essay. I will just repeat that the invasion of Ukraine is not justified. Moreover, a famous statement attributed to Tallyrand is appropriate here: It is worse than a crime, it is a blunder. That is, Putin has well and truly put his country in a worse position than before. And as happens so often in Russian history, the Russian people suffer from the ineptitude of their rulers.

A Telling Shift In Ukrainian War Propaganda

  For the first months of the Russian invasion and war in Ukraine, Western politicians, propagandists, and government apparatchiks never, ever, said "Russia's invasion" or "Russia's war" without preceding those words with the adjective "brutal." As if other wars are NOT brutal. Just THIS one. A war BY RUSSIA is special, because it's a brutal war, unlike the NICE wars waged by the U.S. and its European lackeys, most of which were ruthless colonizing empires. [1]

But lately there's been an organized, and perhaps orchestrated, change in the propaganda jargon. Instead of "Russia's brutal war," now it's Russia's unprovoked war." (CNN's hyper-Zionist hack Wolf Blitzer gilded the lily, calling the war "totally unprovoked." Methinks thou doth protest too much, Bearded One!) 

The timing is rather odd. The time to screech "unprovoked" would have been when the war was launched, back in February, not seven months later, starting in September!

Why the inappropriate timing? Why now?

Perhaps because more and more people are hearing dissidents describe how indeed there was provocation. In fact, a lot of it.

I DIDN'T SAY JUSTIFICATION. Hold your horses! Provocation doesn't automatically justify a particular response or reaction. In this case I don't think it did. Indeed, Putin's decision to invade is the most disastrous decision he's ever made. It is causing the U.S. empire to wreck Russia's economy. It is costing the lives of Russians. The U.S. and its lackeys have stolen roughly a trillion dollars of Russia's money, which it will certainly hand over to its Ukrainian client regime to rebuild and as "reparations." Russia's strategic position is weakened, and its access to the Black Sea is in peril, as Kyiv regime president Zelensky has announced his intention to seize Crimea. And of course many Ukrainians have suffered, and died. (But this war has been great for at least one Ukrainian, namely Volodymyr Zelensky. He's built himself up into a Hero Of Western Democracy (so-called).

Before now, Putin played a weak hand deftly. But emotion apparently overcame better judgment. 

Maybe he didn't realize how weak his army actually was. On paper it may look strong, but in reality it is poorly trained, badly organized, and terribly led. And now Putin is conscripting 300,000 mostly untrained men to throw into the meatgrinder, to be senselessly killed and maimed. Which will achieve nothing militarily.

And make no mistake: This is a proxy war by the U.S. against Russia, using Ukraine to do the dirty work. The U.S. has been preparing for this war since the violent U.S. coup in 2014 that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government and replaced it with one that had (and has) neo-Nazis at its core. (Dishonestly, Western propagandists dismiss that fact as Russian propaganda.) For example, U.S. Special Operations Forces have been secretly training Ukrainian troops since 2014. [2]

But what were the provocations? you might ask. A fair question, and one that would require another essay to do justice to. So let me touch on some of the high points.

Overthrowing the Ukrainian government and installing an anti-Russian regime in its place, a regime SO anti-Russian that it subjected Russian-speaking Ukrainians to violence and persecution, resulting in the secession of two eastern districts. The new U.S.-created regime then proceeded to wage war on those districts, with an emphasis on bombing apartment buildings. This terrorist war was waged with full U.S. backing, and people like Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain went to Ukraine to exhort Kyiv regime troops to attack and crush the secessionists.

Russia has been very restrained until this year. While providing military support for the seceded Republics, it did not recognize their independence until this year, after the invasion. Meanwhile a truce agreement and possible path for reintegration of the Republics into the rest of Ukraine, the Minsk accords of 2015, was ignored from the outset by the U.S. client regime, even though it had agreed to them.

Now a thought experiment. Say China arranged a coup in Canada, and installed an anti-U.S. regime there. Do you think the U.S. would wait eight years to invade? It would invade in a fucking WEEK!

So really, by U.S. standards, Russia has been extraordinarily restrained. Contrary to Western propaganda that portrays Russia as relentlessly expansive. But Putin should have resisted U.S. provocation. The truth is, Ukraine is a divided nation, and the just and natural solution IS (or was) for the east to become separate. But I surmise that many easterners who were formerly pro-Russian have changed their attitude, now that Russia has brought death and destruction upon them with its very ill-advised war.

The U.S. creation of a hostile state right on Russia's border was extremely provocative. Worse, there is the threat to bring that hostile state into NATO. NATO was created by the U.S. as an anti-USSR military alliance. When cracks started appearing in the Soviet empire, the U.S. made a deal with the last Soviet premier, Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev would allow East Germany to cease to exist and be absorbed into West Germany, on the promise that NATO would not expand "one inch to the east." The U.S. didn't keep its word, and never intended to. When Gorbachev complained, he was told with a sneer that he should have gotten it in writing. Meanwhile, in public, U.S. imperialist elites and their European lackeys lied through their teeth and denied any such promise had ever been made. (Gorbachev recently died, and Western media saluted him as a man of peace, a great statesman. The man they stabbed in the back. There are truly no limits to the cynicism of the Western ruling class.)

More provocations, indeed hostile acts: There is the relentless NATO expansion right up to Russia's borders, now with 30 plus members, including the 3 Baltic states on Russia's border, and soon Finland too, also on the border. There is the U.S. basing offensive weapons closer and closer to Russia. There is the U.S. withdrawing from all the arms control treaties with Russia PRIOR to this invasion of Ukraine. And there is the takeover of Ukraine by the U.S. and the 8 year long preparation for war, which has now come to fruition. With the ultimate goal of overthrowing Vladimir Putin, as the then-head of the so-called National Endowment for Democracy, (created by the Reagan regime to do overtly what the CIA used to do covertly, namely subvert and destabilize governments disliked by the U.S.), as Carl Gershman, threatened in a Washington Post op-ed in 2013. [3]

But the U.S. is thrilled that its Ukrainian proxies are winning. And it is willing to risk nuclear war, as it refuses to back down and call for a truce even after repeated threats by Putin to use tactical nuclear weapons. (He never says that explicitly, but it is clearly understood that is what he means.) The U.S. could force its Ukrainian client regime to negotiate any time simply by not sending any more advanced weaponry and ordnance, especially the HIMARS multiple rocket system. [M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System.]

The reckless bastards did this before, more than once, but especially during the "Cuban Missile Crisis," when the U.S. decided to dictate to Cuba what weapons it was allowed to base on its own soil, and was willing to start a nuclear war to get its way. Now U.S. propagandists have the nerve to invoke that deadly crisis as if the U.S. wasn't the guilty party!

Some people are just too dangerous to be allowed to be in power.

 

Vladimir Putin: Not as crafty as Western propagandists habitually portrayed him, before now.

1] U.S. propagandists and I assume European ones too, never referred to the Vietnam War as "brutal." Consider the following: the U.S. dropped six MILLION tons of bombs on Vietnam, THREE TIMES the tonnage it dropped in World War II, according to U.S. Air Force statistics. It  murdered between 3,000,000 and 4,000,000 Vietnamese- there will never be a precise count. For good measure, the U.S. slaughtered 500,000 Cambodians, and half a million Laotians. Vietnam was poisoned with dioxins from defoliants like Agent Orange, as the U.S. attempted to erase the forests of Vietnam, resulting in devastating birth defects to this day, cancers, and other diseases. The U.S. military routinely massacred defenseless Vietnamese peasants. And committed horrible atrocities, as we learned from veterans of that war, such as tying Vietnamese women to the ground and setting off flares in their vaginas.

Committing atrocities is a habit the U.S. military just can't break itself of, from its genocidal wars against the Native Americans to the last act it did when leaving Afghanistan, assassinating an aid worker who worked for a foreign NGO and 7 children in his driveway in Kabul, by drone, and then lying about it until even the New York Times called them on it.

So yes, the Russian army is committing atrocities in Ukraine. And the fact that the U.S. has committed many more in recent decades can in no way justify those Russian atrocities. This is merely to expose the grotesque hyper-hypocrisy of the U.S. and its lackeys. But the U.S. bourgeoisie have cooked up a move to brush aside exposures of their hypocrisy. It's a single word: "whataboutism." Cute, huh? So easy, no need to assemble facts, or arguments, or engage in debate, much less justify their own crimes or why they are RIGHTEOUS when they hypocritically attack their enemies for doing what they themselves do relentlessly and refuse to acknowledge. Just say "whataboutism" and brush the ugly truth aside. Way to go, U.S. power elites!

2] The New York Times let the cat out of the bag, perhaps inadvertently: Quote: "The decision by Ukraine to tout its counteroffensive in the south before striking in the northeast is a standard technique for misdirection used by the American Special Operation troops, who have been training the Ukrainians since the annexation of Crimea in 2014." {Or to put it another way, since the U.S. coup of 2014. And "annexation" is a distortion of reality, as are the even more overheated propaganda terms "seizure" and "Russia's invasion of Crimea," which have also been used in Western propaganda. See my explanation below.]

The Times continued:

"'These guys have been trained for eight years by Special Ops,' said [U.S. imperialist apparatchik] Evelyn Farkas, the top Pentagon official for Ukraine and Russia in the Obama administration. 'They've been taught irregular warfare. They've been taught by our intelligence operators [i.e. CIA etc.] about deception and psychological operations." [And what a victory for Feminism and Women's Rights that a female got to occupy that post! See what a difference having women in power makes?]

And those "psychological operations" have been visibly aimed at Western publics using a very cooperative Western media. Every single day. Zelensky's pronouncements are treated as if he's president of the U.S., UK, Germany, etc.

The article also mentions that the Russian military's secure communications don't work. That is, the NSA is intercepting, decrypting, and passing on to the Ukrainians all the Russians military messages- a huge advantage for the Ukrainians. The U.S. has also enabled the Ukrainians to assassinate Russian generals by locating them in real time.

"Ukrainian Officials Drew On U.S. Intelligence to Plan Counteroffensive," New York Times, Sunday, September 11, 2022, page 10, paragraphs 11 and 12.

3] "Former Soviet states stand up to Russia. Will the U.S.?," Washington Post, September 26, 2013.

Did The Queen Of The United States Just Die?

 [AFTER you read this, check out my Tribute video at

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWxmPO8RZBs]

Finally they're going to bury her. After a mere TEN DAYS of dragging things out.

I don't have to pretend to be sad because some head of state I didn't know personally died. Let all the "world leaders" (country bosses) put on a show of feigned grief. They're all in the same racket, and birds of a feather flock together.

As for the ignorant masses lining up for a glimpse at her corpse, all I can say is- pathetic people laboring under false consciousness induced by a lifetime of imbibing propaganda.

I turned on the radio this morning to get some news. Instead I got British monarchy propaganda. From all "news" stations in New York City, self-proclaimed "Media Capital Of The World." NPR, the U.S.-Government created national radio network, started their morning broadcast at 5 am with these words: "Good morning, Britain is saying Goodbye to Queen Elizabeth The Second..." then I turned it off. They've been "saying Goodbye" for ten days. Indeed, the death of U.S. presidents don't get this grossly distended "coverage" from U.S. media! [1]

From the way U.S. media has been carrying on about the inevitable death of the 96-year-old "Queen" of Britain, you'd think she WAS the Queen of America! U.S. media have made the death of this "Queen" the top story, and are giving it saturation coverage. Since there really isn't much to say, every trivial detail is breathlessly conveyed, such as the new titles for her grandkids. We are being told such nonsense as that the entire world is affected by this. (Ron Elving, a senior NPR "commentator," compared the "queen" to the rock of Gibraltar. I kid you not. Saturday morning, Sept. 10.) U.S. (and of course British) media are pretending that every single person in Britain feels exactly the same way about this "Queen" and the British monarchy. Obviously a lie, as there are millions of republicans in Britain. Indeed, probably the  majority of people in Scotland do not want to be under the aegis of the British "crown." In the U.S., overt censorship is enforcing a totalitarian image of all citizens being of like mind. This is the essence of totalitarianism, the imposition of one mind on everybody. One example: Twitter has been busy deleting dissent from the "universal" adulation of the now dead career "Queen."

The incredible amount of gushing guff, of fawning admiration based on no actual accomplishments except that Elizabeth lasted in the post for so long, is not only cloying, and taxing to one's patience, as well as crowding out important news, but more importantly it reveals the true, anti-democratic nature of the bourgeois class dictatorships that "Western" countries are ruled by. Monarchies, which are systems of inherited power and privilege, and that originally claimed for centuries to be based on divine diktat, are completely anti-democratic. Yet the bourgeoisie promote aristocracy-worship, in both "news" media and "entertainment" media, which functions as an even more powerful indoctrination tool than "news." Think of Disney "princesses," to cite one ubiquitous and vastly influential example.

That's why I put "Queen" in quotes. I do not recognize the legitimacy of aristocracy! Nor should any normal human being. The idea that anyone is innately superior because their parents are innately superior and their parents were innately superior and their parents were and their parents were designated by a "god" to rule, and are entitled to special privileges, status, and wealth, by dint of this bogus designation, is a massive con game and the antithesis of democracy. Which doesn't stop the bourgeoisie from simultaneously claiming that democracy is one of their core values, and that all the wars they start and provoke, both hot and cold, are done to "defend democracy" or are "fighting for democracy," including the current Western proxy war between Ukraine and Russia, intended to bleed Russia white, or to "permanently weaken" it, as U.S. war secretary General Austin publicly revealed a few months ago.

Given the cravenness with which the UK government obeys every command of its U.S. masters, perhaps we could chalk up the U.S. power establishment's over-the-top treatment of yet another succession in the British monarchy, that barbaric, seemingly immortal medieval relic, as an imperialist courtesy. God knows the U.S. cares little for actual British interests. The only exception to that that I can think of was during the Falklands war, when the U.S. military provided support to the British war effort that was critical to Britain successfully defeating the Argentine invaders of those islands. [2]

Some facts obliterated by Western propagandists in their current campaign of aristocracy worship: The "Windsors" were a German monarchical family, but during the slaughter of World War I, that fact became a bit too awkward, so they conveniently changed their family name to something more appropriate to the country they were reigning over. (How does that affect their "divine" license to rule, I wonder? Never mind.) 

Here's another one: Elizabeth was the richest woman in Britain. And her and her family are subsidized by the government- meaning by the people of Britain, who pay for the government- to the tune of millions of pounds sterling a year.

Also totally whitewashed are the vicious crimes of the British empire during "Her Majesty's" reign, which began in 1953. These include the savage "counterinsurgency" campaigns Britain waged in several of its colonies to crush attempts to break free of oppressive British rule and the economic exploitation that enriched British elites. "Counterinsurgency" consists of torture and murder, mostly. In Kenya the British felt it necessary to castrate many of their prisoners. Who knows why. Was it to compensate for feelings of sexual inferiority that white racists commonly feel towards black men? Who knows. None of these savage beasts was ever put on a psychiatrist's couch to be asked. But there's an entire counterinsurgency literature explaining the theory and practice of oppressing the oppressed when they rebel, written by practitioners of the criminal arts and imperialist theorists.

Defenders of this barbaric medieval relic, "the monarchy," sometimes pretend that it's just for show, and doesn't actually have any power. This is nonsense. The current prime minister, Liz Truss, had to be appointed pm by the "Queen." The previous pm, Boris "Bojo the Clown" Johnson had to go to the "Queen" to submit his resignation. 

The monarchy exercises power in many ways semi-hidden from public view. The CIA-MI6 coup in Australia that overthrew a Labor government there needed the cooperation of the Queen's overseer in Australia to do that. . [Search "cia coup australia 1975" for details.]

Here's another example of power at work: At least 3 people are known to have been arrested for publicly voicing dissent from the Officially Required Monarchy Worship. One man was arrested for shouting a non-obscene rebuke to "Prince" Andrew referencing his sexual exploitation of the teenage girls in the harem of Jeffrey Epstein, the intelligence operative assassinated in a Federal jail in Manhattan to silence him.

The hereditary class of the Divinely Privileged are "Royal," and are high above mere humans, who are "Commoners," nobody special. Is British identity so insecure that only the glue of a monarchy can hold it together? That seems to be the hidden fear of British power elites. That certainly is one reason they have milked this death for all it's worth.

By modern convention, the monarch doesn't refuse to do what's expected. But this is a convention, not a law. What if the monarch refused? Then what? Would they call that a "Constitutional crisis"? This is a nation whose "Constitution" is unwritten. That is, it only exists as a mental construct. So what does it "say"? It is ideological vapor. It seems the power elite of Britain prefers not to be constrained by actual words that are written down. Very flexible, such a "system" with a notional, as opposed to an actual, Constitution. Having no fixed rules lets the powerful do as they wish.

One factor that partially accounts for some people's attraction to monarchy is political infantilism. They want a Big Mommy or a Big Daddy (the actual nickname for a number of African autocrats and dictators) to take care of them, to make all the decisions, to exercise power putatively on their behalf. (Then there is the periodic "shock" and "feeling of betrayal" when it turns out that people in power sre NOT the benevolent Parents Of The People but exercise power on their own behalf and for small elites.) 

The silver lining in this absurd obsession with the death of a desiccated relic of the middle ages is a partial respite from the Ukrainian war propaganda campaign that began really in October 2021 and was cranked up to World War II levels with the very ill-advised- and ill-starred- Russian invasion of February 24. The British elites have decided that it requires ten days of wallowing in her death to properly mark the passing of their "Queen,," so probably at least in Britain the Ukraine war propaganda noise machine will be turned down during that time. Although its substitute is hardly less noxious and psychologically harmful in the warping of minds.

I will acknowledge that Elizabeth was good at her job. The problem is, the job shouldn't exist.

 
But Elizabeth's lifetime of "duty" and "service" to British imperialist power extends past her death. Now the woman's corpse is being used to shore up support for the British power establishment, both among its "subjects" (including in the Commonwealth nations, the Commonwealth being Empire Lite) and in allied and any other nations that can be mesmerized by the ritual display of "pomp and circumstance."

But the "royal" family is well paid for its "sacrifice," not just in status and privilege, but in filthy lucre. At root, imperialism is about economic exploitation, so it is fitting that the "royals" should be rich.

1] I try again to get some news at 5:22 AM, and STILL no news, just more "royalty" propaganda: "I'm Rachel Martin in London. And today we are remembering the life of England's [sic] longest serving monarch..." Haven't "we" been "remembering" for the past 9 days, now 10? In other words, more lionization of that woman.  NPR flew a morning "news" anchor, Martin, over to London just to read bromides that could have been read from a studio in the U.S. The main NPR affiliate in NYC, WNYC, broadcasts BBC all night, which is easily 70% monarchy propaganda during this period. WNYC owns a classical music station, WQXR, which at 7 am treated its listeners to the following assertion masquerading as news, from the mouth of Kerry Nolan: "Britain and the world [sic!] are saying a final goodbye to Queen Elizabeth..." etc. The WHOLE WORLD is drafted into this compulsory mourning, according to UK and U.S. propagandists!

Among the most cravenly fawning "royalty" guff in U.S. media is aired courtesy of Michael Bloomberg Billionaire. He owns a network of radio stations, broadcasts on TV, and of course on youtube. He flew his morning economic chatter team over to London on his private jet to spew the same platitudes they'd already been spouting from their New York lair. No surprise that a billionaire would support monarchy. Monarchy teaches submission to "authority" in the form of ones "betters." And billionaires all think they're better than us.

2] It was only because Reagan's "Defense" Secretary, Caspar Weinberger, on his own initiative went to Britain's aid that the U.S. helped Britain. The fascist Jeane Kirkpatrick urged president Reagan to side with the fascist Argentine military junta, a criminal gang that tortured and murdered 30,000 defenseless Argentine civilians whose supposed political leanings were not to the fascist military dictators' liking. That regime was backed 100% by the U.S. government AND media, including the "liberal" New York Times, which for years lied about how many victims were murdered by the fascists the Sulzberger family was supporting. (The Sulzbergers have owned and controlled that rag for over a century.) The NYT hid the mass murders for years. Then they claimed the deaths were in the hundreds. Gradually they went into the thousands, but always well below the true figure. Finally, in only ONE ARTICLE, the true toll popped up. Then in subsequent articles the number was shrunk back down! Shades of George Orwell's "1984."

The NY Times, in this and many other instances, acted as an accomplice to state terrorism.

Reagan, acting to allow the fascist Argentine dictatorship to keep the now-occupied Falklands,  telephoned British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and urged her to back down, but she refused. The Falklands had been colonized by Britain in a previous century and was inhabited by Anglo British citizens who had no desire to come under the boot heel of the fascist Argentine military dictatorship.
See my video: "Jeane Kirkpatrick urged Reagan To Back Argentina In Falklands War. "

Slavishly Subservient To Zelensky Propaganda, Western Media Refuse To Report Kyiv Regime Is Shelling Ukraine Nuclear Power Plant

 "Someone" is shelling "Europe's largest nuclear reactor," which is occupied by Russian troops. Ukrainian president and frontman for U.S. imperialism Volodymyr Zelensky yells at the top of his lungs it is the Russians doing it. Russia, whose soldiers occupy the plant, say it is the Ukrainians. Who to believe? It is a baffling mystery to Western media propagandists, including the creme de la creme "quality" media like the BBC and NPR, government and quasi-government propaganda platforms of the UK and U.S., respectively. They "report" that "Ukraine" (the Kyiv regime installed by the U.S.) and Russia "each accuse the other." This absurd agnosticism is in fact an improvement over the first week or so, when they treated Zelensky's preposterous lie that the Russians were BOMBARDING THEIR OWN FORCES as true, and of course anything Russia says is a lie. Now we're in the "both sides blame the other" phase of hiding the obvious truth from Western publics.

We can be reasonably certain- in fact we can be 99.99999% certain, that the Russians are NOT shelling the Russian-occupied Z nuclear plant because as a general rule ARMIES DO NOT DELIBERATELY ATTTACK THEIR OWN SOLDIERS. Know what I mean? There are accidents, to be sure, but this has been a sustained campaign of shelling for weeks. Fires have been started, power lines and other infrastructure on the plant grounds damaged by the deranged Ukrainian bombardment campaign.

But Zelensky, with Western "journalists" and Western-controlled institutions in tow, are pretending that Russia is attacking its own position. Zelensky, an erstwhile comedian, has proven himself a breathtakingly mendacious demagogue at the leve of Donald J. Trump, an erstwhile "reality" TV show host and steak salesman.

Zelensky, with extreme cynicism, almost daily denunces Russia for shelling the nuclear facility AS HIS ARMY IS SHELLING IT! The Euroslug handmaidens to U.S. imperialism have taken to demanding stop risking nuclear disaster and vacate the plant. This is all an incredibly cynical and dangerous ploy to force the Russian army to retreat.

To be sure, the Russians are using the plant to fire munitions towards Ukranian positions. Apparently they thought the Kyiv regime forces wouldn't be so reckless and irresponsible as to return fire. Yet another Russian miscalculation. (Of course by far their biggest miscalculation, and it was a whopper, was invading western Ukraine in the first place.)

Examples abound in broadcast and print media of playing dumb about who is shelling the Russian position. "Each side blames the other" is what Western propagandists have settled on.

This is as far as U.S. propaganda radio network NPR will go towards telling the truth: "Russia and Ukraine blame each other for shelling that has damaged the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, there are concerms that [blah-blah]" "reports" Dave Mattingly, NPR "news," [1] The nuclear plant is being shelled and "both sides are blaming the other" says another NPR propagandist, Frank Langford, on "Morning Edition," the morning dose of NPR propaganda. [2]

On MIchael Bloomberg Billionaire's propaganda radio channel WBBR New York City, limey propagandist Leanne Garrels tells us that Russia is using the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant "to shield its troops according to [conveniently anonymous] European intelligence officials." [3]  Leanne won't even tell us which countries these faceless secret police are from.

Well, the plant doesn't seem to be "shielding" the Russian soldiers very well, since the Kyiv regime keeps bombarding it, then screeching that Russia is endangering Europe by being there, and the Eurolackeys of U.S. Imperialism chime in (as does the U.S.), and they all work to draft the UN bureaucracy and its head, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in the effort to force the Russians to retreat. 

You see, as long as the Russians are occupying the plant, all Europe and indeed the world is in danger of a nuclear disaster! Why? Well THAT part is left unsaid. It's because THE KYIV REGIME'S FORCES ARE SHELLING THE PLANT.

[Zelensky working to enlist UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and Turkey's president Recep Tayyip Erdogan in his war effort and scheme to for a Russian retreat from nuclear plant- Lviv, Ukraine, August 18, 2022.]

Zelensky, a supremely cynical man, is blaming the Russians for being shelled, repeating over and over the whopping lie that the Russians are shelling themselves, and no Western media or politician will contradict this preposterous lie.

All this obfuscates the obvious: the shelling by the Kyiv regime is what's endangering the plant. But Western propaganda works overtime to hide this obvious reality, with remarkable success.

                       Oh you devilishly clever comedian-president, you!

1]  NPR, "Morning Edition," August 18, 2022.
2] NPR, "MOrning Editon," August 19, 2022.
3] WBBR, New York City, August 19, 2022.

What's The Difference Between Bombing A Hospital In Ukraine And Bombing One In Afghanistan?

 The level of moral outrage in Western Media, is the difference.

In the case of Ukraine, where the Russians are the culprits, Maximum Outrage. In the case of Afghanistan, where the guilty party was the U.S., a yawn. Or more precisely,  curt, clinical reports,  devoid of emotion, completely neutral morally, with the most damning details omitted.

In addition to Western propagandists whipping up outrage against the Russian crime, add furious denunciations by Western politicians and government apparatchiks. You don't see that when the U.S. commits war crimes and lies through its teeth about it.

The Russians are accused to bombing a maternity hospital in the Ukrainian city of Mariupol. The U.S., during the regime of Barack "The Drone Assassin" Obama, attacked the Medicins Sans Frontieres  (Doctors Without Borders) hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, with a U.S. gunship. And "gunship" understates the power of the weapon used, an AC-130 outfitted with cannons and machine guns and much else, capable of directing hugely destructive attacks on the ground, massacring large numbers of people.

There are significant differences between the two attacks. In the case of the Russian attack, based on Western media reports, there is no clue as to whether the hospital was deliberately targeted or the victim of Russian random area bombardment by artillery and missiles fired from miles away. In the case of the MSF hospital destroyed by the U.S., MSF had REPEATEDLY given the exact location coordinates of the hospital to the U.S. military so it wouldn't accidentally attack it. Unfortunately this helped the criminal U.S. deliberately attack it.

The MSF hospital had giant red crosses on the roofs, clearly visible to the pilots of the attacking flying warship. That plane also carries numerous magnification equipment for suveillance, aiming, targeting, firing, and recording evidence of the military's own crimes. (Or "actions," if you prefer euphemisms.)

There is also a difference in the deaths that resulted. The total death toll in the Mariupol attack, as reported by the Kyiv regime and Western media, is 3. Two adults, and one child. A tragedy.

The number murdered in the deliberate U.S. attack in Kunduz- 22, plus dozens more maimed and wounded. More than 7 deaths in Kunduz for each one in Mariupol. Both staff and patients were casualties of the vicious U.S. attack.

Western media harped on the Mariupol attack for several days. But the later reports omitted the number of casualties. Apparently the propagandists decided 3 deaths wouldn't be shocking in the context of a war.

MSF described the attack on their hospital, which was actually a series of repeated bombings lasting an hour in the dead of night:

From 2:08 AM until 3:15 AM local time today, MSF’s trauma hospital in Kunduz was hit by a series of aerial bombing raids at approximately 15 minute intervals. The main central hospital building, housing the intensive care unit, emergency rooms, and physiotherapy ward, was repeatedly hit very precisely during each aerial raid, while surrounding buildings were left mostly untouched. [In contrast, apparently the Mariupol hospital was hit with a single munition.]

The U.S. then followed its usual playbook when caught dead to rights committing an atrocity that ends up publicly visible in "the West." (The people in the victim countries know all about U.S. war crimes. It is the Western publics that are blissfully unaware.) It insists the target was legitimate, a "terrorist" hit. Then when that lie loses all credibility, it switches to "oops, sorry, it was an accident." Apparently the U.S. didn't like the fact that MSF treats all comers, indeed HAS to do so to maintain neutrality and be tolerated by all sides. So Taliban combatants were among the patients there.

The MSF hospital was the ONLY hospital for the city of Kunduz. The U.S. forced its closing, a crimes against all the inhabitants of that city.

For good measure, while issuing soothing, evasive unctuous verbiage publicly, Obama had a U.S. army tank smash through the gates of the hopital days after the aerial attack, an act of intimidation intended to silence MSF. Obama could have a second career as a Mafia don.

For its part, Russia issued this excuse for attacking the Mariupol hospital, through foreign minister Sergey Lavrov: Lavrov said the hospital was being used by fighters. In other words, Russia used the standard Israeli justification for blowing up civilian targets. When Israel periodically devastates the open air concentration camp of Gaza,  "mows the lawn," as the Israeli rulers cynically refer to their periodic wars on the trapped population of Gaza, they claim Hamas fighters are hiding in the targets, using the population as "human shields." (So of course they are justified in murdering the "shields.") 

But the excuse doesn't work for Enemies of The West. Only for the West and its colonial settler implant in Palestine, Israel.

The current U.S. president, the grinning and semi-senile Joseph R. Biden, now has the unmitigated gall to call for war crimes investigations of Russian actions in Ukraine. This guy was vice president for 8 years during the Obama regime, a regime that committed thousands of war crimes and violations of the rules of war in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places such as Libya where it targeted civilian targets such as homes and infrastructure. He's the absolutely wrong guy for that task.

Except in the morally-inverted world of Western power politics.

The Western elites expressing outrage over the Ukraine attack are either guilty of selective outrage and applying a double standard, which makes their arrogation of moral judgship an act of insolence, or are flat out putting on an act, which is outrageous, cynical, and disgusting. It can be hard to tell who among them are "sincere," that is to say, feeling actual emotions, which are method actors getting into it, and which are totally feigned in their outrage.

One way to tell if a person or organization  genuine in its denunciations is to test for consistency in their behavior. In this case, we can go back and check if they denounced the U.S. bombing of the MSF hospital. If not, they are phonies. At best, they are self-indulgent poseurs. 

Well, do you really need to check if any Western "leader" (political boss) or major media or government apparatchik or favored house intellectual morally condemned the Obama-Biden regime and the U.S. military for the Kunduz atrocity? Do they EVER condemn ANY U.S. atrocity? Hell, they cooperated in CIA kidnappings and torture of "terrorism suspects"! For those of us with memories, who pay attention, there is no need to check. Feel free to do so as a research project. It would be useful to publish such a study.

I wrote four essays on the Kunduz atrocity by the U.S. in 2015, when it occurred. I wrote at the same time condemning Russia for bombing hospitals in Syria. So I am not motivated by "anti-Americanism," an invented ideology used to dismiss out of hand any critique of U.S. Imperialism and its crimes. I am motivated by NORMAL HUMAN MORALITY!

If you click this link, you will get a page with the four essays on the Kunduz atrocity, the one on Russia, and several other related articles. For details about the attack, see in particular "Why Did the U.S. Launch a Sustained Aerial Bombardment of a Doctors Without Borders Hospital?"
To learn about the murderous AC-130 warplane in particular, see "WikiLeaks Invites Obama to Bomb It," and  "What Happens When One Nobel Peace Prize Winner Bombs Another Nobel Peace Prize Winner?"

 

Russian Invasion of Ukraine Is A Political Godsend For Joseph Biden and Boris Johnson

Two corrupt and venal politicians, the top two politicians in the political power structures of the U.S. and UK respectively, have had a political life preserver tossed to them by Vladimir Putin. (Not that Putin intended that!) Yet the power establishment's "pundits," who spend so much time dissecting political minutiae, haven't deigned to take the slightest public notice of this obvious, major turn in the political fortunes of their "leaders," not in the U.S. anyway. (I haven't studied the UK media on this, but I suspect the same is largely true.) You see, there is a reason this blog is called "Taboo Truths."

Both of these ruthless, selfish individuals, with lifelong records of immoral and sometimes criminal behavior, were in deep political trouble prior to Putin's reckless and foolish move. 

For most of the past year, the chatterers of the U.S. media Blatherariat have been clucking their tongues like a bunch of malicious high school student gossips about how terrible Biden has been doing in the polls, with popularity around only 40% of the public, comparable to Trump's during his presidency. There has been a constant stream of yammering of the dire prospects for the Democratic Party in the 2022 Congressional elections and even the 2024 presidential one. Much ink has been spilled and much gas expelled criticizing the Democratic Party's failure to make itself more popular and to "sell its program" to "the American people."

Establishment power media chatterers said the party may be over for Smokin' Joe Biden.

Suddenly, along comes this great distraction, a foreign "crisis" that has absorbed almost all of the U.S. media propaganda system's attention. BIden, being the lifelong imperialist that he is, immediately started beating his breast and waxing moralistic about the blackness of Russia and the Evil Putin as contrasted with the purity and beauty of the U.S. and its bloc of "democracies" that love "freedom" so much. He and his subaltern lackeys running Europe (plus NATO frontman Jens Stoltenberg and even the ludicrous Justin Trudeau, prime minister of Canada, the U.S.' northern satellite nation) immediately and incessantly vomited forth an unending stream of high-handed, superior than thou denunciations of what they claimed was Putin "threatening to invade Ukraine." While this could be a reasonable inference as to Russia's intent (as indeed turned out to be the case) as a factual statement it was the opposite of reality, as  the Russians repeatedly denied they were going  to invade (while massing military forces along the Russian border with Ukraine). THey were either lying, or Putin changed his mind, but they NEVER THREATENED to invade Ukraine.

It doesn't matter, because BIden is now playing the role of "Leader of the Free World and Defender of Global Democracy" to the hilt. Thanks to the cooperation of most of the propaganda system excluding its neo-fascist organs like the Murdoch propaganda empire and others, Biden benefits from the rally-around-the-leader effect during a manufactured "crisis."  In point of fact, what happens in Ukraine CANNOT POSSIBLY BE A CRISIS FOR THE U.S. BECAUSE UKRAINE IS NOT A VITAL STRATEGIC AREA FOR THE U.S. It only matters because the U.S. is determined to shrink Russia down, to compress it as much as possible.

Unfortunately for the U.S., Russia is one of the two major nuclear weapons powers in the world, the other being the U.S., naturally. Between them, the two possess 93% of the world's nuclear weapons.
Now on to the British prime minister. Boris "Bojo The Clown" Johnson had seemingly been clinging to office as prime minister of Britain by his fingernails. A series of revelations of revelry and partying by him and his staff, in violation of COVID lockdown restrictions imposed by his regime, enraged the public. People had been prevented from visiting dying relatives by the restrictions. Revelations kept coming, with Johnson repeatedly lying, denying, playing dumb, and being just asinine, enraging people even more. (He's done this his whole life, and always gotten over with it, so he can be forgiven for sticking to habit.) Member of his own party, the "Conservaties" (also known as Tories) were publicly criticizing him, some advocating his replacement. (Britain has a parliamentary system, in which the party or coalition that controls Parliament, the legislature, gets to pick the prime minister, the chief executive of the nation.)

 Some wanted the PM to go!

Then, as a side effect of the Ukraine invasion, Vladimir Putin came to the rescue. For Bojo, Russia intimidated and then invaded Ukraine in the nick of time. Johnson has matched Biden in blistering rhetoric, self-righteously posing as an avatar of virtue against the Evil Putin, striving to outdo the stridency of Biden and calling for even stricter "sanctions" (economic warfare).

Bojo The Clown Socks It To Putin! (Rhetorically.)

U.S. elites (political and media) and the ducks lined up behind them (Europe, Canada, Japan) consistently claimed to be "the world." Apparently Africa, Latin America, India, China, indeed almost all of Asia, aren't part of "the world."( Jair Bolsonaro, president of the largest nation in population  in the Western Hemisphere south of the U.S., even sided with Putin!) But don't you call them "racist!" (While the motivation for their hyperbolic lying maybe wasn't racist, the effect sure comes off that way!) 

But finally a bit of evidence to support the notion that "the world" sees things the U.S. way. 140 nations at any rate, which voted in the UN general assembly to denounce the Russian invasion. But 35 nations, presumably on earth and thus part of "the world," abstained, and 5 voted against: Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Syria, and Eritrea. All are easy to understand, except Eritrea isn't so obvious. Presumably they need Russia for something. The Assad dictatorship of Syria needs the Russian air force to stay in power. The Belarus' dictator needs Russia to prop him up, and has allowed Russian forces to stage on Belarus' soil to invade Ukraie. North Korea is North Korea, and has been under brutal economic siege enforced by the U.S., which has pushed sanctions through the UN over N.K.'s missile and nuclear weapons programs. No love lost there.

Bottom line: for both Biden and Johnson, the invasion of Ukraine is a tremendous blessing, with perfect timing to boot. And that's not a "cynical" statement, it's a TRUE statement reflecting REALISM. Taboo truths are are often branded "cynicism" by the power establishment's propagandists. Their other go-to epithet to suppress unwanted facts is "conspiracy theory." Be aware.

"Ohhhh, What A Lucky Man, He IS!"

To understand what led up to the current Ukraine "crisis," you need to read my prior essays at https://jasonzenith.blogspot.com/search?q=UKRAINE, especially "Obama Dictates Terms to Russia To Keep Its Naval Base in Crimea." 

When you go there, you can click on"2022" on the side of the page to see my latest essays. Or just scroll down from where you are now! And put your email in the box on the right side of the page to be notified of future posts. You DO want to be NOTIFIED, DON'T you?

You Call This "Three-Dimensional Chess"? Putin's Boneheaded Invasion Of Ukraine Exposes U.S. Elites' Fatuous Blather

 

 

                                                         Putin: Chess Genius or Boob?

Over the years, a favorite propaganda trope of U.S. media "pundits," imperialist foreign policy apparatchiks and  "experts," and politicians scoring points against other politicians and presidents of the rival political party, has been that "Russia is playing chess" and the U.S. is playing checkers. Then imperialist yakkers trying to stand out in the babbling "foreign policy" mob hyped it up to "The Russians are playing three-dimensional chess," outclassing the asleep at the switch U.S. (This as the U.S. dominates the world, as it has done continuously since 1945.)

Well, if we're talking political strategy, Russian ruler Vladimir Putin is no chess Grandmaster. Incredibly, he has invaded Ukraine- for real this time. Western propagandists and politicians refer to this actual invasion as "another" invasion,  pretending Russia "invaded" the secessionist regions of Ukraine when in actuality they sent in small forces and aid to help defend the regions from attack by the Kyiv regime, which targeted apartment complexes and other civilian targets. Two new states were declared in 2014, which Russia only now recognized, putting U.S. president Joseph Biden into a state of high dudgeon. 

Unmentioned was the fact that for years, Russia has tried to bring about an accommodation between the Kyiv regime and the newly-declared Republics, whereby those Republics would be part of Ukraine but with some autonomy to protect their language and culture.  The Kyiv regimr signed the Minsk Accords, which called for ceasefire, yet the Kyiv regime has never stopped its military attack on the breakaway regions, killing over 10,000 people, committing many war crimes- targeting apartment buildings for shelling and bombing. (The twisted Western media refers to this as "Russian invasion" and a war forced on Kyiv!) 

Another tortured use of the word "invasion" is now even occasionally being applied to Russia and Crimea. Apparently calling it an "occupation" or "annexation" is too feeble a denunciation. Crimea is the site of a vital Russian naval base, which after the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia leased from Ukraine. After the U.S. coup of February 2014 and the installation of a regime which immediately targeted Russian-speaking Ukrainians for repression, local Crimea parliament and then the citizens both voted to reunite with Russia. (The people voted 97% in favor, with the Tatar inhabitants, 15% of the populace there, boycotting the referendum.) AFTER that, the Russian Duma voted to reunite with Crimea. (Crimea had been part of Russia until 1954, when Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev transferred it to the Ukranian Soviet Socialist Republic, part of the U.S.S.R.)

Russia is landlocked for virtually its entire southern border. Crimea is on the Black Sea, through which ships can navigate to the Mediterranean Ocean and hence to the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. Geostrategically, Russia had NO CHOICE but to make sure Crimea stayed in friendly hands. [To understand this, see my article with maps:  FOOTNOTE 1 BELOW.]

Why was it so dumb for Putin to invade Ukraine? I mean really invade. Because even if the Russian army successfully occupies it, it will have to stay there in force to prop up whatever government Russia installs. And it will be subjected to endless guerrilla warfare funded and armed by the U.S. and its Eurolackeys. It will be a bleeding wound, just as Afghanistan was for the Soviet Union. (Does Putin's pining for the defunct SU extend to its debacles?) And the "sanctions"- economic warfare- being waged by the U.S. and its lackeys will significantly damage the Russian economy and hurt its people. In fact, bringing misery to people is the main point of U.S. sanctions. The goal is to create discontent with the government and undermine it, hopefully to overthrow it, as the U.S. is trying to do to Venezuela and Iran, North Korea, Cuba for 60 plus years, and whoever else gets in its way or displeases it.

Ukraine as another Afghanistan brings to mind another interesting parallel. It has emerged that the U.S. WANTED the Soviets in Afghanistan to bleed their army and weaken the Soviet regime. Likewise, the invasion of Ukraine can only be destructive for Russia. The U.S. and its lackeys are doing much to wreck the Russian economy right now. And billions of people are being subjected to saturation, non-stop anti-Russian propaganda which is putting a saintly glow of plucky martyrdom around Ukraine, hiding the key role played by actual neo-Nazis in the regime and its wars. 

The truth is, the U.S. practically forced Russia to invade Ukraine. For weeks leading up to the invasion, the Russians reiterated the same demands they've been making since 1999, when the U.S. double-crossed them and expanded NATO into more nations, violating a deal made with Mikhail Gobachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, in 1989. The U.S. publicly, adamantly refused to budge; Biden himself rejected the Soviet demand to keep Ukraine out of NATO. The U.S. had NATO announce in 2008 that Ukraine (and Georgia) would be welcomed into NATO. Infuriatingly, U.S. propagandists ignore what Putin actually "wants" and invent imaginary goals for him.

The second outrageous provocation was the U.S.-neo-nazi coup in 2014 that overthrew the elected president and replaced the government with one so hostile to everything Russian that it passed laws aimed at oppressing Russian-speaking Ukrainians. 

Here's the echo of Afghanistan: The Soviet Union was lured into invading Afghanistan by a dastardly plot of the Carter regime, masterminded by Carter's "National Security" Advisor, the Russia-despising Pole, Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski actually went to Afghanistan to put his fiendish plot in motion, and shortly thereafter the Soviets fell for it. Years later, Brzezinski slipped up and blurted out a boast about what he had done to a French publication, Le Nouvel Observateur [Paris], January 15-21, 1998, p. 76.:

Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs that the American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahiddin in Afghanistan six months before the Soviet intervention. Is this period, you were the national securty advisor to President Carter. You therefore played a key role in this affair. Is this correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahiddin began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality, closely guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention [emphasis added throughout].

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into the war and looked for a way to provoke it?

B: It wasn’t quite like that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q : When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against secret US involvement in Afghanistan , nobody believed them . However, there was an element of truth in this. You don’t regret any of this today?

B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, essentially: “We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war." Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war that was unsustainable for the regime , a conflict that bought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported Islamic fundamentalism, which has given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B : What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So these supremely cynical U.S. imperialist brought the world Islamofascism. And people tolerate their continuance in power, their continued rule over us all.

And next time you hear propagandists and politicians describing Putin as diabolically cunning, remember they are building up a bogeyman to distract the people in the countries they rule and to rally support for their own imperialist aggressions.

Brzezinski interview translated from the French by William Blum and David N. Gibbs. This translation was published in Gibbs, "Afghanistan: The Soviet Invasion in Retrospect," International Politics 37, no. 2, 2000, pp. 241-242.

Original French version appeared in "Les Révélations d'un Ancien Conseilleur de Carter: ‘Oui, la CIA est Entrée en Afghanistan avant les Russes...’" Le Nouvel Observateur [Paris], January 15-21, 1998, p. 76. Click here for original French text.


1]  I published a series of articles on the Ukraine situation in 2014 which are still apropos today.. To see why the U.S. grabbing Ukraine is a dagger aiimed at Russia's vital strategic interests, read "Obama Dictates Terms to Russia To Keep Its Naval Base in Crimea."  When you go there, you can click on "2022" on the side of the page to see my latest essays.
You can search on that page the word "Ukraine" in the search box to pull up all the essays, or use this URL which is the search result: https://jasonzenith.blogspot.com/search?q=UKRAINE

What Is A "Crisis?"

It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Iraq.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Haiti (again).
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Haiti (again).
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Panama.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Grenada.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Cambodia.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Vietnam.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Cuba (again).
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Lebanon.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Haiti.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Cuba.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded Mexico (four or five times).
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded the Philippines.
It wasn't a crisis when the U.S. invaded the British colony that became Canada.
It's a crisis when Russia invades Ukraine.

Understand?

File under "Hyper-Hypocrisy."
And by the way, I've missed some.

Countries have been invading countries for as long as they have existed. War and conquest are thousands of years old.

Ukraine is over 6,000 airmiles from the U.S. at the closest points. Ukraine is right next to Russia. Seems that Russia would naturally have a much greater interest in Ukraine than the U.S. should. Yet the U.S. insisted on making Ukraine a U.S. vassal state with the 2014 violent coup.
Russia was wrong to invade Ukraine- morally and politically. To quote Tallyrand,in strategic terms it's worse than a crime, it's a blunder. But the U.S. created the situation, both with its hostile takeover of Ukraine, and it's treachery towards Russia by breaking its promise not to expand NATO, instead relentlessly pushing it right up to Russia's borders and vowing to bring in Ukraine and Georgia as NATO nations. Russia has said scores of times that this is unaccepotable to them. The U.S. answer is the same as what U.S. apparatchik had to say about the EU in her infamous phone calll to U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Jeffrey Pyass- "Fuck the EU." It's "Fuck You Russia. You're too weak to stop us."

The biggest loser from U.S. arrogance and aggressiveness is Ukraine.