Friday, October 31, 2014

The victory of Bandera ideology will shrink Ukraine to the size of Banderastan | Oleg Bondarenko

The victory of Bandera ideology will shrink Ukraine to the size of Banderastan



Oleg Bondarenko

The Last Rada, or Elections Without Donbass.

Political analyst Oleg Bondarenko discusses why the current parliamentary elections could be the last Ukraine will witness.

On the 26th of October 2014 parliamentary elections were held, which for the first time in the whole history of modern Ukraine have resulted in a Supreme Rada consisting of less than the legally stipulated minimal number of 450 elected representatives, of only just about 420.


Without taking into account the areas where elections will be deemed to not have taken place, the unrepresented mandates include 10 Crimean and 16 Donbass regions. Thus, the official Kiev authorities accept that these territories (pointedly referred to as “Lungandon” by Poroschenko’s outspoken advisor, Yulia Lutsenko) are no longer located within the borders of today’s Ukraine. This is in contrast to the May 25th presidential elections, during which an attempt was made to make a show of conducting elections for both Donbass and Crimea by arranging external polling stations at which large numbers of refugees with registration permits were forcibly gathered.

Currently there are also six Donbass ghost regions, the so-called ATO (Anti-Terrorist Operation) zones, in which Kolomoisky has already bought victory for his candidates - a theme that was part of a phone conversation now available on the internet, that he had with Poroschenko’s long-time comrade-in-arms David Zhvania. Nevertheless, this can perhaps be considered progress when compared to previous attempts to pass off Crimean votes as having been cast for Poroschenko. Inevitably, the Kiev authorities must come to terms with the new political reality that confronts them.

Thus, the new Rada (which, according to the current constitution is the main organ of state power - despite questions surrounding its real significance in the absence of a constitutional court), will for the first time operate without representatives from Donbass - one of the two key bases of the regional Ukrainian elite. The relative stability of the previous political model (lard has no cracks, ha-ha) was achieved, to a large extent, as a result of a permanent struggle between two clans - Donetsk and Dnepropetrovsk. This is the industrial heritage of the Soviet Union, whose principle product was Ukraine.

Kuchma versus Kravchuk, Yuschenko against Yanukovich, Yanukovich versus Timoschenko. All the political and business rivalry was rooted in this. Of course, over the past ten years, these clans have been challenged by a new one - from Lvov. However due to their obvious financial and man-power deficiencies, it did not work out for the Lvovians. Today it's a different story - a 'Pride' revolution, built not with the hands of the cold-fearing Kievan clans, but by the unassuming gangs from Galicia. It has brought to power a government whose cabinet consists of a significant proportion of graduates from Lvov institutions. It is telling that the level of grooming they have shown noticeably falls below even that of the least intelligent among those from Donetsk.

Today, in the absence of one of the oldest pillars of her statehood, Ukraine will rapidly fall apart, literally before our eyes. Before the 'Russian Spring' all was held together by the resources and iron will of the Donbass elite. Here's a rather seditious or politically incorrect idea: had it not been for the Donetsk 'paratroopers' running Crimea over the past three years, it is unclear whether Crimea would have become ours. The replacement of Donetsk elite that took place as a result of the total bankruptcy of its previous members after the flight of Yanukovich, cleared the path to the top for a number of new politicians such as Alexander Zakharchenko and Dennis Pushilin. On November 2nd the residents of the Donetsk and Lugansk Republics will go to the polls to elect their own local councils and leaders, thereby removing questions surrounding their legitimacy.

The new Dnepropetrovsk-Lvov intra-elite stand off will naturally transfer the borders of the country further westwards, where Bandera is truly revered and where Soviet power and Moscow are fiercely detested. The one issue that was overlooked by the architects of the New Ukrainian Order is the sharply rising division and dichotomy in the troubled land. After Donbass, Odessa and Kharkov cannot but follow. And the belated awareness of the Rusyns, Hungarians and Bulgarians of their options and possibilities pose a real challenge for the disorganised and unprepared Kiev authorities.

Self-determination of the towns and peoples of Ukraine will be significantly enhanced by the composition of the Rada. The presence of around 100 militiamen, punitive death squad commanders and regular criminals with deputy status will perhaps turn the Ukrainian parliamentary session into something resembling a war zone.


Convicted of attempted murder for the brutal beating of human rights defender and released as a result of the coup d'état on February 22, Igor Mosiychuk (10-th in the Radical party of Oleg Lyashko) and head of the 'Social National Assembly' - Andre Biletsky (single-mandate from the People's Front of Arseniy Yatsenyuk in Kyiv) will continue to pursue ideas so beloved by Hitler in the new Parliament. And this is just an example.

Beasts from 'Azov'  battalion with a deputy's immunity as a face of the highest organ of State power what can be a better anti-publicity for the United Ukraine for voters of different ethnicity of this multinational country?

This is why I am absolutely convinced that the convening of the Verkhovnaja Rada of Ukraine in its current multi-ethnic boundaries will be the last. It will be followed by numerous replicas of only Central and Western Ukrainian Rada model.

The victory of Bandera ideology will organically shrink the country to the size of Banderastan. And Rada will help make it happen.
 


Translated by Edmund Lubega

Rally "We are one": November 4, 2014 at 13.00 on Tverskaya Street, 10, building 1

Dmitry Dzygovbrodsky
 Posted Today at 10:52

 Rally "We are one": November 4, 2014 at 13.00 on Tverskaya Street, 10, building 1

What would not say quiet dreamers of Independence in Moscow as disguised under pseudo-patriots and the "professional" Russian nationalists, and outspoken pro-Western liberals, the rally is supported by the Government of the New Russia.

November 4, 2014 at 13.00 on Tverskaya Street will be allowed to form colonies demonstration - rally "We are one."

Participation will take all parliamentary parties, MPs, senators, who will go in the same row.

Them will the representatives of nations living in Russia. Then the columns of citizens willing to support the rally.

Antifascist Council has made the creation of a separate column Novorossia militias. The slogan of the column - "For Novorossia For the Motherland, for Putin, for the victory! Death to fascism!"

At the head of the column will be representatives Militia Donbass.

Will extend the 25-meter flag of St. George.

The demonstration will translirovatsya live RTR "RUSSIA".

First fighters for the liberation of New Russia will be held in one system with all deputies and senators and statesmen of Russia.

This recognition Novorossia in the political field of Russia!

Very important is the presence of anyone who supports the New Russia, as "professional" nationalists are preparing to hold their march with banners and battalions of the National Guard under pravosekov, and yet at the same time with the flags Novorosii - thereby gloss over Russia in support of fascism for the entire Western world. And of course they will scream about the need to offset Vladimir Putin.

Muscovites and visitors come and support our motherland Russia, New Russia and our national leader Vladimir Putin.

P.S. Please maximum spread. And I ask your presence at this important for Russia and New Russia rally. Gathering place - November 4, 2014 at 13.00 on Tverskaya Street, 10, building 1

Lugansk and Donetsk To Choose Their Own Parliament

Lugansk and Donetsk to choose their own parliament

October 31, 2014, 18:10 clock
Despite the protests from Kiev Donetsk and Lugansk regions which will on Sunday hold their own elections - with Putin's blessing. Moscow recognizes the polls and calls for the same from the west.
Ukraine, Ostukraine, Donezk, Lugansk, Wahlen, Separatisten, Russland, Neurussland, Wladimir Putin, Kiew  
Pro-Russian activists wear during a demonstration in Donetsk, the flag of the self-proclaimed People's Republic. On Sunday a separate "People's Council" is selected. ©
T he pro-European forces in the Ukraine have their victory in the parliamentary elections already booked, now the separatists to control their own elections in the east. Although warned in Kiev Foreign Minister Pawel Klimkin urgently, the vote this Sunday (November 2) is illegal. No one will recognize them. But his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov has surprised even before days so that Moscow would very probably recognize the new pro-Russian guides and people's representatives in Donzek and Lugansk.
 
The Russian chief diplomat also spoke freely of the self-proclaimed "people's republics" Donetsk and Lugansk. The government in Moscow is not only much further with the announced recognition of separatists choice than in the referendums in May. At that time, the Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin , the insurgents still asked publicly to renounce the referendum on secession from the Ukraine. The Russians want the West but also show that they can not be of the sanctions of the EU and the USA deterred.
 
With the elections, the controversial tours of the areas would now legitimized, Lavrov said in an interview. Russia had ultimately brought the Ukrainian leadership to after long hesitation to take any dialogue with the forces. 100 MPs will be selected in the "People's Council" of the Republic of Donetsk and 50 in the "People's Council" of Lugansk.

Ukraine will lose Donetsk and Lugansk likely

Separatist leader Alexander Sachartschenko had an offer of the pro-Western government in Kiev, on 7 December to organize regional elections to Ukrainian law, rejected. The new Kievan law on a special status for the Russian embossed area is among the insurgents no followers.
 
Therefore foreign minister Klimkin warns of a "hotbed of instability" with criminal structures in the conflict zone. He hopes that the EU organized a donors' conference next year in Brussels. So should the conflict area economically get back on their feet and remain part of the Ukrainian state. But the risk is great that Ukraine still loses after connecting the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea to Russia in March a part of the country.
 
Although threaten new penalties, Russia should push for independence in eastern Ukraine. However, the Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin speaks further of the public taboo in Ukraine Noworossija (New Russia). So hot the Russian dominated region historically, the president emphasized at every opportunity. And he saves the people in the war zones Donetsk and Lugansk repeatedly to support. No coincidence, therefore, that on Friday - shortly before the vote - again a Russian truck convoy in the region distributed relief supplies.

Army could prevent the elections

The public fundraising campaigns run at high speed for months - and the Russian state television reported from the Ukrainian regions, as it were regions of their own country. Caused a stir on Friday about the visit of prominent Moscow Actor Mikhail Poretschenkow in Donetsk, like an insurgent with army helmet, protective vest, uniform allowed themselves to be filmed while shooting - out of compassion for Noworossija, as he explained.
 
Although fear the separatists that the Ukrainian military could prevent the vote. But still holds the beginning of September in the Belarusian capital Minsk, negotiated by the parties to the conflict ceasefire largely. The Ukrainian leadership warned the separatists that their regions alone were not viable. But the border areas with Russia long ago benefit from their neighborhood - such as the gas supplies.
 
Observers believe the choice for a "farce". Because about electoral lists were missing and a vote even on the Internet is permitted only could an "imitation of elections" of the question, the Donetsk political scientist Sergei Tkachenko said the newspaper "Segodnja". "There is a picture of massive vote generated to obtain the haggling with the Ukraine and Russia for their own interests trump cards," he says. He considers it possible that the frozen conflict is hot again and start fighting again.

Russia-Ukraine Gas Conflict....A deal that never will work in practice?


Friday, October 31, 2014
Russia-Ukraine Gas Conflict....A deal that never will work in practice?


Russia-Ukraine Gas Conflict....A deal that never will work in practice? (RN).

1. Ukraine to Pay off $1.45 Bln in Russian Gas Debt Immediately: Oettinger
Ukraine has confirmed that it is ready to pay off $1.451 billion in Russian gas debt immediately, and to cover $3.1 billion of its debt to Russian energy giant Gazprom by the end of the year, EU Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger said.

“Ukraine is ready to pay $1.451 billion for gas deliveries during November-December 2013 and April-May-June 2014,” Oettinger said following a trilateral gas meeting late on Thursday.

“Until the end of the year Naftogaz will send a second tranche to pay for the open gas bills, which will amount to $1.65 billion. This way, Naftogaz will pay Gazprom 3.1 billion, so the disputable amount will decrease, the decision on which will be taken by the Stockholm Arbitration Court,” he added.

Ukraine also agreed to pay for at least 4 billion cubic meters of Russian gas, allowing uninterrupted supplies to the European Union during winter.

“Ukraine would be able to prepay for 4 billion cubic meters of gas,” Oettinger added.

Guenther Oettinger stated that Russia agreed to give Ukraine a $100 per 1,000 cubic meters discount until March 2015 in a form of export duty reduction.

2. Ukraine, EU Jointly Found Financing to Ensure Gas Purchases From Russia: Prodan?
Energy Minister Yuriy Prodan :
"Together with the European Commission we have managed to secure financing to purchase the necessary volumes of [Russian] gas," Prodan said following a trilateral gas meeting late on Thursday.
"These volumes will guarantee secure and reliable gas deliveries through Ukraine to the European Union," Prodan said.

Following the talks, EU Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger said* that the EU, however, has not agreed to pay for future gas deliveries to Ukraine and has not guaranteed to pay for the majority of the country's open bills Nevertheless, Oettinger stated that the EU together with the International Monetary Fund are currently working on a financial aid program to Ukraine for year 2015, which would help Kiev to pay for gas deliveries in February-March 2015.

Russia and Ukraine on Thursday held the final round of talks, mediated by the European Commission, to find an interim solution to the standoff over Ukraine's unpaid gas bills and the price Kiev will pay for Russian gas supplies during the upcoming winter.

 Update:

BRUSSELS, October 31 (RIA Novosti) - The European Commission has agreed to stipulate financial guarantees of payments for Russian gas supplies to Ukraine through March 2015 in an official letter to Kiev, Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller said.

A separate bilateral protocol on gas payment guarantees between the EC and Ukraine was expected to be signed on Thursday as the Russian side considered it a key precondition for implementation of the so-called "winter package" trilateral gas deal.

The protocol, however, was not signed, and EC Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger told reporters, following trilateral gas talks in Brussels on Thursday, that the European Union had not provided binding guarantees to Russia. Following the talks in Brussels, Oettinger said that the EU has not agreed to pay for future gas deliveries to Ukraine and has not guaranteed to pay for the majority of the country's open bills.

"It will all be detailed in a letter from the European Commission to Ukraine. The letter will mention certain financial guarantees, certain agreements between the EC and Ukraine," Miller told reorters in a separate press point.

Hmmm....*It's Pretty obvious there is NO deal on financing future gas deliveries, Get ready for gas shut off once Ukraine starts siphoning gas designated for Europe.
Full oversight of the Gas story here

Russia will continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the residents of eastern Ukraine

Hundred of trucks driven for residents of Luhansk and Donetsk regions around 1 thousand tons of cargo. Russia will continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the residents of eastern Ukraine, including help to prepare for winter.
 
Vladimir Stepanov.
Deputy Russian Emergencies Ministry

 

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

US has new occupation tactics in world: Joe Iosbaker


 US has new occupation tactics in world: Joe Iosbaker

 Mon Oct 27, 2014 5:41PM GMT

An anti-war leader says while the United States might be ending its traditional military occupations in Afghanistan, it has “new tactics” for occupying more nations around the world.

“The occupations that were launched under the Bush administration have brought them (the US) defeat,” Joe Iosbaker, a leader of the United National Antiwar Coalition, told Press TV in an interview on Monday. 

The US is now using “new tactics” around the world to occupy and control other countries, he said. The US is using “proxy armies, as they are using in Syria, drone wars, like in Pakistan or Yemen, Special Operations, too many to even count, and the so-called color revolutions, the democratic counter-revolutions, like the one they sponsored-- the fascist coup-- in Ukraine.”

The American and British forces on Sunday officially ended their military operations in Afghanistan after a 13-year war campaign that started in the context of “war on terror” following the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks.

The US-led occupation of Afghanistan started under former president George Bush but continued well into President Barack Obama’s second term.

“President Obama’s promises to get our troops out of Iraq and get them out of Afghanistan have fooled a lot of people, but the truth is that the US is fighting more wars than ever before,” said Iosbaker.
 
By Jan. 1, 2015, the international forces remaining in Afghanistan will be about 12,500, including 10,000 American.

“We are leaving almost 10,000 [American] troops in Afghanistan. That occupation is not over yet,” said Iosbaker.

Whether it be the US occupying Iraq or Afghanistan, or the “Zionists occupation of Palestine”, Iosbaker said, “Foreign occupations are unjust.”

Monday, October 27, 2014

Turmoil in Hong Kong, Terrorism in Xinjiang: America’s Covert War on China

Turmoil in Hong Kong, Terrorism in Xinjiang: America’s Covert War on China

ISIS_CIA_Inroads 
China is facing increasing pressure along two fronts. In its western province of Xinjiang, terrorists have been stepping up destabilization and separatist activities.

In China’s southeast Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong, protests have disrupted normality in the dense urban streets, with protest leaders seeking to directly confront Beijing while dividing and destabilizing both Hong Kong society and attempting to “infect” the mainland.

What is more troubling is the greater geopolitical agenda driving both of these seemingly “internal” conflicts – and that they both lead back to a single source beyond China’s borders. With the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS) now implicated in receiving, training, and employing terrorists from China’s Xinjiang province, and considering the fact that ISIS is the result of an intentional, engineered proxy war the US and its allies are waging in the Middle East, along with the fact that the unrest in Hong Kong is also traced back to Washington and London, presents a narrative of an ongoing confrontation between East and West being fought on the battlefield of fourth generation warfare.

ISIS: Washington’s Global Expeditionary Force 
If one was asked to name a global-spanning military and intelligence operation opposed to Syria, Iran, Russia, and China, they might say the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the US Government – and they would be right. But they could also easily answer by saying the “Islamic State” or ISIS/ISIL as it is also known. This is especially true after revelations surfaced that US-backed Uyghur separatists in China’s western-most province of Xinjiang have joined ISIS for training with intentions of leading an armed rebellion against Beijing upon their return.
Reuters in their article, “China militants getting IS ‘training’,” would claim:
Chinese militants from the western region of Xinjiang have fled from the country to get “terrorist training” from Islamic State group fighters for attacks at home, state media reported on Monday.
The report was the first time state-run media had linked militants from Xinjiang, home to ethnic minority Uighur Muslims, to militants of the Islamic State group of radical Sunni Muslims.
China’s government has blamed a surge of violence over the past year on Islamist militants from Xinjiang who China says are fighting for an independent state called East Turkestan.

However, it isn’t just China’s government that claims militants in Xinjiang seek to carve out an independent state in western China – the militants themselves have stated as much, and the United States government fully backs their agenda to do so. Indeed, first and foremost in backing the Xinjiang Uyghur separatists is the United States through the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED). For China, the Western region referred to as “Xinjiang/East Turkistan” has its own webpage on NED’s site covering the various fronts funded by the US which include:
International Uyghur Human Rights and Democracy Foundation $187,918To advance the human rights of ethnic Uyghur women and children. The Foundation will maintain an English- and Uyghur-language website and advocate on the human rights situation of Uyghur women and children.
International Uyghur PEN Club $45,000To promote freedom of expression for Uyghurs. The International Uyghur PEN Club will maintain a website providing information about banned writings and the work and status of persecuted poets, historians, journalists, and others. Uyghur PEN will also conduct international advocacy campaigns on behalf of imprisoned writers.
Uyghur American Association $280,000To raise awareness of Uyghur human rights issues. UAA’s Uyghur Human Rights Project will research, document, and bring to international attention, independent and accurate information about human rights violations affecting the Turkic populations of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.
World Uyghur Congress $185,000To enhance the ability of Uyghur prodemocracy groups and leaders to implement effective human rights and democracy campaigns. The World Uyghur Congress will organize a conference for pro-democracy Uyghur groups and leaders on interethnic issues and conduct advocacy work on Uyghur human rights.
ISIS Conveniently Targets Washington’s Adversaries Worldwide
The next step Washington appears to be taking in China is an attempts to enhance the menace of terrorists in Xinjiang. In addition to assisting US attempts to destabilize territory in China, ISIS has also threatened to launch a campaign against another US enemy – Russia – this in addition to already directly fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon, the governments of Syria and Iraq, and with ISIS claiming to be behind attacks in Egypt against the military-led government that ousted the West’s Muslim Brotherhood proxies.

With both Russia and China now in ISIS’ sights, the global public must begin asking questions as to how and why ISIS just so happens to be arraying itself against all of Washington’s enemies, by-passing all of its allies including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, and where exactly they are getting the weapons, cash, intelligence, logistical, and administrative capabilities to do so.
 
So suspicious is ISIS’ appearance, agenda, and actions, many across the world have long-ago concluded they are simply the latest creation of the US and other Western-aligned intelligence agencies, just as Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood was before them, So loud has this narrative become, establishment newspapers like the New York Times have begun writing columns to tamp down what they are calling “conspiracy theories.”

05china-02-videoSixteenByNine600cThe New York Times would report in a piece titled, “Suspicions Run Deep in Iraq That C.I.A. and the Islamic State Are United,” that:
The United States has conducted an escalating campaign of deadly airstrikes against the extremists of the Islamic State for more than a month. But that appears to have done little to tamp down the conspiracy theories still circulating from the streets of Baghdad to the highest levels of Iraqi government that the C.I.A. is secretly behind the same extremists that it is now attacking.
The New York Times dismisses these claims, despite reporting for the past 4 years on the CIA’s presence along the Turkish-Syrian border dumping weapons and cash into the very hotbeds of extremism and terrorism ISIS rose from. Upon closer examination, not only are these claims plausible, they are documented fact.

As far back as 2007, Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh would warn of the creation of just such a terror group in his 9-page report in the New Yorker titled, “The Redirection Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” He stated 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.
That “by-product” is ISIS. It is through America’s own premeditated conspiracy to plunge not only Syria, but the entire region and now potentially Russia and even China into genocidal sectarian bloodshed that gave intentional rise to ISIS. The creation of ISIS and its use as a proxy mercenary force for Western designs is once again revealed in ISIS’ otherwise irrational declaration of war on Russia first, and now China.

America Opens Second Front in Hong Kong

It was in April of 2014 that two co-organizers of the so-called “Occupy Central” protests now ongoing in Hong Kong, would sit in Washington DC giving a talk hosted by the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED). There, Martin Lee and Anson Chan set the stage for the impending “Occupy Central” demonstrations, introducing soon-to-be famous “characters” like US-cultivated “activist” Joshua Wong, as well as repeating, verbatim, the agenda, talking points, and slogans now flooding the airwaves and headlines regarding Hong Kong’s unrest.


While the US attempts to peel off Xinjiang province by brute force, it is using a more subtle and insidious method in Hong Kong. During Lee and Chan’s talk in DC earlier this year, a representative from the Council on Foreign Relations would literally proclaim it was hoped that ongoing movements in Hong Kong would “infect” mainland China. Indeed, while militancy and terrorism is being sown in China’s west, sedition, political instability, and social divisions are being cultivated in China’s east.



America’s Long War With China  
The adversarial nature of Washington’s posture toward Beijing has become increasingly obvious as tensions are intentionally ratcheted up in the South China Sea between US proxies and mainland China, as well as in Hong Kong. This is simply the latest in a much longer proxy war waged against Beijing since as early as the Vietnam War, with the so-called “Pentagon Papers” released in 1969 revealing the conflict as simply one part of a greater strategy aimed at containing and controlling China. While the US would ultimately lose the Vietnam War and any chance of using the Vietnamese as a proxy force against Beijing, the long war against Beijing would continue elsewhere.

This containment strategy would be updated and detailed in the 2006 Strategic Studies Institute report “String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power across the Asian Littoral” where it outlines China’s efforts to secure its oil lifeline from the Middle East to its shores in the South China Sea as well as means by which the US can maintain American hegemony throughout the Indian and Pacific Ocean. The premise is that, should Western foreign policy fail to entice China into participating in the “international system” as responsible stakeholders, an increasingly confrontational posture must be taken to contain the rising nation.

Aung San Suu Kyi with Obama


This includes funding, arming, and backing terrorists and proxy regimes from Africa, across the Middle East, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and even within China’s territory itself. Documented support of these movements not only include Xinjiang separatists and the leaders of “Occupy Central” in Hong Kong, but also militants and separatists in Baluchistan, Pakistan where the West seeks to disrupt a newly christened Chinese port and pipeline, as well as the machete wielding supporters of Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar’s Rakhine state – yet another site the Chinese hope to establish a logistical hub.

It is not a coincidence that ISIS is standing in for and fulfilling America’s deepest imperial aspirations from North Africa, across the Middle East, and now inching toward the borders of the West’s two largest competitors, Russia and China. Nor is it a coincidence that “Occupy Central” protesters are parroting verbatim talking points scripted in Washington earlier this year. It is no coincidence that the US State Department’s NED is found involved in every hotspot of instability and conflict both within China’s borders and beyond them. It is a documented conspiracy that is now increasingly seeing the light truth cast upon it. Whether or not that is enough to end the unnecessary barbarism and bloodshed that has resulted from the West’s hegemonic aspirations remains to be seen.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.
First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2014/10/21/turmoil-in-hong-kong-terrorism-in-xinjiang-america-s-covert-war-on-china/

Mariupol Locals Aggressively Block Ukrainian Military Column

Under Mariupol locals aggressively block column Ukrainian military

At that time, as the militias are unquestioning support of local residents, the militants nats.gvardii and MAT are increasingly faced with resistance from the unarmed locals.
 
eNudC-6QNlg
 
So, the villagers Sartana that Iyichevck district of Mariupol, today they have been blocked the road going to the village Talovka. The perturbation of the local residents is the fact that the soldiers of the Ukrainian army in order to protect themselves from return fire by militia fighters set their guns directly in the courtyards of houses. Local failed to stop the advance of the column, which forced the commander of the column to enter the talks to the audience. Those announced that they refuse to pass the military to their homes even under pain of death.

The tragedy of Afghanistan: UK troops withdraw, what’s left behind? | by John Wight

The tragedy of Afghanistan: UK troops withdraw, what’s left behind?

John Wight is a writer and commentator specializing in geopolitics, UK domestic
politics, culture and sport.

Published time: October 27, 2014 14:53
AFP Photo / Wakil Kohsar
AFP Photo / Wakil Kohsar

As British military forces finally leave Afghanistan after 13 years of conflict, which left 453 British troops dead and 3,000 wounded, the curtain comes down on one of the most futile, incompetent, and inglorious conflicts fought in recent history.

The balance sheet shows that far from helping the transition of Afghanistan from backward state plagued by violence and warlordism into a beacon of liberty and democracy, the British and US military presence failed to prevent it being labelled one of the three most corrupt countries in the world in 2013, along with North Korea and Somalia. It also failed to stem the upsurge in heroin production, which has risen to the point where three quarters of the entire world’s production of the drug now takes place in Afghanistan.

The common depiction of Afghanistan in the West is of a barbarous, primitive and backward country, irredeemably corrupt with a largely illiterate population. It was this characterization which allowed the Afghan people to be so easily dehumanized as part of the process of gaining the support and acquiescence of public opinion in the West for the war that was unleashed against them in the wake of 9/11.

Yet there was a period in Afghanistan’s tumultuous history when a determined effort to lift the country and its people out of backward agrarian feudalism and develop the country’s economy was attempted. The failure of that attempt was directly linked to the recent conflict waged by Britain and the US, and provides yet another salutary lesson into the role of Western intervention and imperialism as a major destabilizing factor throughout the developing world.

The communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) was formed in 1965 in opposition to the autocratic rule of the country’s then King Zahir Shar. They helped to overthrow the regime in 1973 in a coup led by Mohammed Daud, the king’s cousin. In the years following Daud sought to distance himself from the PDPA and from the Soviet Union, which was Afghanistan’s biggest trading partner and source of aid throughout the 1970s. In 1978, when Daud’s intention to purge the army of its communist officers and cadre became known, he fell victim to a coup staged by the PDPA with support from the Afghan army.

The coup enjoyed popular support in the towns and cities, evidenced in reports carried in US newspapers. The Wall Street Journal, no friend of revolutionary movements, reported at the time that, “150,000 persons marched to honor the new flag and the participants appeared genuinely enthusiastic.” The Washington Post reported that, «Afghan loyalty to the government can scarcely be questioned.”
 
Upon taking power, the new government introduced a program of reforms designed to abolish feudal power in the countryside, guarantee freedom of religion, along with equal rights for women and ethnic minorities. Thousands of prisoners under the old regime were set free and police files burned in a gesture designed to emphasize an end to repression. In the poorest parts of Afghanistan, where life expectancy was 35 years, where infant mortality was one in three, free medical care was provided. In addition a mass literacy campaign was undertaken, desperately needed in a society in which ninety percent of the population could neither read nor write.


Afghan girls reading in a library, Kabul, Afghanistan, 1979 (RIA Novosti / Sobolev)
Afghan girls reading in a library, Kabul, Afghanistan, 1979 (RIA Novosti / Sobolev)

The resulting rate of progress was staggering. By the late 1980s half of all university students in Afghanistan were women, and women made up 40 percent of the country’s doctors, 70 percent of its teachers, and 30 percent of its civil servants. Australian journalist John Pilger relates the memory of the period in his book - ‘New Rulers of the World’ (Verso, 2002) - through the eyes of an Afghan woman, Saira Noorani, a female surgeon who escaped the Taliban in 2001. “Every girl could go to high school and university,” she is quoted. “We could go where we wanted and wear what we liked. We used to go to cafes and the cinema to see the latest Indian movies. It all started to go wrong when the Mujahideen started winning. They used to kill teachers and burn schools. It was sad to think that these were the people the West had supported.”
 
Be that as it may, the government’s crude attempt to impose its reforms on the countryside and dismantle the feudal structure which predominated there proved deeply unpopular, opening the door to US covert support and funding of opposition tribal groups. This covert support began under the Carter administration.

An initial $500 million was allocated to arm and train the rebels in the art of insurgency in secret camps set up specifically for the task across the border in Pakistan. This opposition came to be known as the Mujahedeen (those engaged in jihad), and so began a campaign of murder and terror which, six months later, led the Afghan government in Kabul to request the help of the Soviet Union in 1979. The ensuing military intervention by the Soviet Union lasted ten years at the cost of 15,000 dead and 35,000 wounded. Upon the departure of Soviet military forces, Afghanistan descended into an abyss of religious intolerance, abject poverty, “warlordism,” and violence.

The point is worth emphasizing, however – namely that contrary to the official Western history of the period, the Mujahedeen did not arise in response to a hostile Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but rather the Soviet Union intervened at the request of the Afghan government in response to the instability being wrought by a US funded and armed insurgency.

To the question of why the US would arm, fund and train an insurgency comprising religious zealots in Afghanistan, the answer is the same reason successive US administrations have armed, funded and trained insurgents and death squads in any part of the world where progressive, secular and left-leaning governments and movements have attempted to institute social and economic justice: to halt the spread of a good example.


A column of armored personnel carriers crossing the Afghan-Soviet border on the Bridge of Friendship across the Amu Darya river. The withdrawal of the limited contingent of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. (RIA Novosti / V. Kiselev)
A column of armored personnel carriers crossing the Afghan-Soviet border on the Bridge of Friendship across the Amu Darya river. The withdrawal of the limited contingent of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. (RIA Novosti / V. Kiselev)

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, three years after the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan, the US began a reach for global hegemony which continues to this day. With regard to Afghanistan in particular, just as with the rivalry between the British and the Russians back in the 19th century, its strategic location was the primary reason for the presence of Western troops.

The collapse of the Soviet Union meant that the huge deposits of crude oil located in the Caspian Basin were now up for grabs. What US and Western energy corporations required was a pipeline to transport this crude to the nearest friendly port from where it could be shipped out. Iran wasn’t an option, which left Afghanistan as the only viable alternative; with the proposed pipeline to pass through and on into Pakistan to the port of Karachi on the coast of the Arabian Sea.
In fact so important was this pipeline to the US that in 1996 a high level Taliban delegation flew to meet Unocal executives at their headquarters in Houston, Texas, to discuss its construction. The Governor of Texas at the time was none other than George W. Bush.


An Afghan farmer works in a poppy field on the outskirts of Jalalabad, capital of Nangarhar province (AFP Photo / Noorullah Shirzada)
An Afghan farmer works in a poppy field on the outskirts of Jalalabad, capital of Nangarhar province (AFP Photo / Noorullah Shirzada)

Despite ruling a country in which women were stoned to death for adultery, in which men were tortured and had their limbs amputated for misdemeanor crimes, in which music and television was banned, in which it was illegal for girls to attend school, these high-ranking representatives of the Taliban were given the red-carpet treatment, put up in a five-star hotel and even accorded a VIP visit to Disneyworld in Florida. However, after they left it was felt that they could not be trusted and the plan for the pipeline was shelved.

With 9/11 came the opportunity the US “oilocracy” had been waiting for to achieve their long-held desire for a pipeline through Afghanistan. It was an opportunity that undoubtedly added impetus to the invasion that was mounted to clear the country of former US allies like the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. Thirteen years on, Afghanistan holds the onerous distinction of being one of the poorest, least developed, and most corrupt countries in the world; not to mention the largest producer of heroin. Add to this the fact that the writ of the government in Kabul does not run throughout the entire country and we are talking about a military and political disaster of monumental proportions.
For the families and loved ones of the British troops who lost their lives or were permanently maimed, the thousands of Afghans who were killed or maimed, many of them civilians, the past 13 years have merely confirmed that in a time of oppression and war politics can either be an affirmation of life or an alliance with death.

Source:  http://rt.com/op-edge/199651-afghanistan-history-uk-military-war/

The House of Saud is Sticking it to Washington the “Empire of Chaos”

The Saudi oil war against Russia, Iran and the US

Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia.
  Published time: October 15, 2014 11:52
A fisherman pulls in his net as an oil tanker is seen at the port in the northwestern city of Duba.(Reuters / Mohamed Al Hwaity)
A fisherman pulls in his net as an oil tanker is seen at the port in the 
northwestern city of Duba.(Reuters / Mohamed Al Hwaity)


Saudi Arabia has unleashed an economic war against selected oil producers. The strategy masks the House of Saud’s real agenda. But will it work?

Rosneft Vice President Mikhail Leontyev; “Prices can be manipulative…Saudi Arabia has begun making big discounts on oil. This is political manipulation, and Saudi Arabia is being manipulated, which could end badly.”
 
A correction is in order; the Saudis are not being manipulated. What the House of Saud is launching is “Tomahawks of spin,” insisting they’re OK with oil at $90 a barrel; also at $80 for the next two years; and even at $50 to $60 for Asian and North American clients.

The fact is Brent crude had already fallen to below $90 a barrel because China – and Asia as a whole – was already slowing down economically, although to a lesser degree compared to the West. Production, though, remained high – especially by Saudi Arabia and Kuwait - even with very little Libyan and Syrian oil on the market and with Iran forced to cut exports by a million barrels a day because of the US economic war, a.k.a. sanctions.

The House of Saud is applying a highly predatory pricing strategy, which boils down to reducing market share of its competitors, in the middle- to long-term. At least in theory, this could make life miserable for a lot of players – from the US (energy development, fracking and deepwater drilling become unprofitable) to producers of heavy, sour crude such as Iran and Venezuela. Yet the key target, make no mistake, is Russia.

A strategy that simultaneously hurts Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Ecuador and Russia cannot escape the temptation of being regarded as an “Empire of Chaos” power play, as in Washington cutting a deal with Riyadh. A deal would imply bombing ISIS/ISIL/Daesh leader Caliph Ibrahim is just a prelude to bombing Bashar al-Assad’s forces; in exchange, the Saudis squeeze oil prices to hurt the enemies of the “Empire of Chaos.”
Yet it’s way more complicated than that.

Sticking it to Washington

Russia’s state budget for 2015 requires oil at least at $100 a barrel. Still, the Kremlin is borrowing no more than $7 billion in 2015 from the usual “foreign investors”, plus $27.2 billion internally. Hardly an economic earthquake.

Besides, the ruble has already fallen over 14 percent since July against the US dollar. By the way, the currencies of key BRICS members have also fallen; 7.8 percent for the Brazilian real, 1.6 percent for the Indian rupee. And Russia, unlike the Yeltsin era, is not broke; it holds at least $455 billion in foreign reserves.

The House of Saud’s target of trying to bypass Russia as a top supplier of oil to the EU is nothing but a pipe dream; EU refineries would have to be reframed to process Saudi light crude, and that costs a fortune.

Geopolitically, it gets juicier when we see that central to the House of Saud strategy is to stick it to Washington for not fulfilling its “Assad must go” promise, as well as the neo-con obsession in bombing Iran. It gets worse (for the Saudis) because Washington – at least for now – seems more concentrated in toppling Caliph Ibrahim than Bashar al-Assad, and might be on the verge of signing a nuclear deal with Tehran as part of the P5+1 on November 24.

On the energy front, the ultimate House of Saud nightmare would be both Iran and Iraq soon being able to take over the Saudi status as key swing oil producers in the world. Thus the Saudi drive to deprive both of much-needed oil revenue. It might work – as in the sanctions biting Tehran even harder. Yet Tehran can always compensate by selling more gas to Asia.

So here's the bottom line. A beleaguered House of Saud believes it may force Moscow to abandon its support of Damascus, and Washington to scotch a deal with Tehran. All this by selling oil below the average spot price. That smacks of desperation. Additionally, it may be interpreted as the House of Saud dithering if not sabotaging the coalition of the cowards/clueless in its campaign against Caliph Ibrahim’s goons.

Compounding the gloom, the EU might be allowed to muddle through this winter – even considering possible gas supply problems with Russia because of Ukraine. Still, low Saudi oil prices won’t prevent a near certain fourth recession in six years just around the EU corner.


 Reuters / Hamad I Mohammed
Reuters / Hamad I Mohammed

Go East, young Russian

Russia, meanwhile, slowly but surely looks East. China’s Vice Premier Wang Yang has neatly summarized it; “China is willing to export to Russia such competitive products as agricultural goods, oil and gas equipment, and is ready to import Russian engineering products.” Couple that with increased food imports from Latin America, and it doesn’t look like Moscow is on the ropes.

A hefty Chinese delegation led by Premier Li Keqiang has just signed a package of deals in Moscow ranging from energy to finance, and from satellite navigation to high-speed rail cooperation. For China, which overtook Germany as Russia’s top trading partner in 2011, this is pure win-win.
The central banks of China and Russia have just signed a crucial, 3-year, 150 billion yuan bilateral local-currency swap deal. And the deal is expandable. The City of London basically grumbles- but that’s what they usually do.
 
This new deal, crucially, bypasses the US dollar. No wonder it’s now a key component of the no holds barred proxy economic war between the US and Asia. Moscow cannot but hail it as sidelining many of the side effects of the Saudi strategy.

The Russia-China strategic partnership has been on the up and up since the “epochal” (Putin’s definition) $400 billion, 30-year gas deal of the century” clinched in May. And the economic reverberations won't stop.

There’s bound to be an alignment of the Chinese-driven New Silk Roads with a revamped Trans-Siberian railway. At the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit last month in Dushanbe, President Putin praised the “great potential” of developing a “common SCO transport system” linking “Russia’s Trans-Siberian railway and the Baikal-Amur mainline” with the Chinese Silk Roads, thus “benefiting all countries in Eurasia.”
 
Moscow is progressively lifting restrictions and is now offering Beijing a wealth of potential investments. Beijing is progressively accessing not only much-needed Russian raw materials but acquiring cutting-edge technology and advanced weapons.

Beijing will get S-400 missile systems and Su-35 fighter jets as soon as the first quarter of 2015. Further on down the road will come Russia’s brand new submarine, the Amur 1650, as well as components for nuclear-powered satellites.


Reuters / Hamad I Mohammed
Reuters / Hamad I Mohammed

The road is paved with yuan

Presidents Putin and Xi, who have met no less than nine times since Xi came to power last year, are scaring the hell out of the “Empire of Chaos.” No wonder; their number one shared priority is to dent the hegemony of the US dollar – and especially the petrodollar - in the global financial system.
The yuan has been trading on the Moscow Exchange - the first bourse outside of China to offer regulated yuan trading. It’s still at only $1.1 billion (in September). Russian importers pay for 8 percent of all Chinese goods with yuan instead of dollars, but that’s rising fast. And it will rise exponentially when Moscow finally decides to accept yuan under Gazprom’s $400 billion “gas deal of the century.”
 
This is the way the multipolar world goes. The House of Saud deploys the petrodollar weapon? The counterpunch is increased trade in a basket of currencies. Additionally, Moscow sends a message to the EU, which is losing a lot of Russia trade because of counter-productive sanctions, thus accelerating the EU’s next recession. Economic war does work both ways.

The House of Saud believes it can dump a tsunami of oil in the market and back it up with a tsunami of spin – creating the illusion the Saudis control oil prices. They don’t. As much as this strategy will fail, Beijing is showing the way out; trading in other currencies stabilizes prices. The only losers, in the end, will be those who stick to trade in US dollars.

Source:  http://rt.com/op-edge/196148-saudiarabia-oil-russia-economic-confrontation/

Friday, October 24, 2014

Washington Hopes Crimea Will Participate in Ukrainian Elections: US State Department

Washington Hopes Crimea Will Participate in Ukrainian Elections: US State Department

US hopes that people from Crimea will vote in the upcoming snap parliamentary elections in Ukraine, a spokesperson for the US Department of State said
23:59 23/10/2014


WASHINGTON, October 23 (RIA Novosti) – The United States hopes that people from Crimea will vote in the upcoming snap parliamentary elections in Ukraine, a spokesperson for the US Department of State said Thursday.

"We hope to see wide participations in the elections by all Ukrainians including Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk," Jen Psaki said during a press briefing, adding that Washington would strongly condemn any interference in this legitimate democratic process and the ability of the people of Ukraine to peacefully choose their own leaders.

"We commend the Ukrainian government on its continuing preparations for free, fair and inclusive elections and look to authorities and all political parties to ensure the vote is in line with international democratic norms," she added.

The early elections to the Ukrainian parliament, known as the Verkhovna Rada, will take place on October 26. Ukrainians will vote for the parliament's 424 members: 225 of them are to be elected by party lists, with the election threshold set at five percent, and 199 by single-seat constituencies.
Authorities in Ukraine’s breakaway regions of Donetsk and Luhansk said they would not go to polls on October 26 or on December 7, which is a separate election day stipulated by President Poroshenko’s law that also granted them a special status. Instead, the regions are set to vote on November 2.

"The only legitimate elections in Ukraine are the Rada elections on October 26, and the December 7 elections of local leaders in the Donbas special status zones," the spokesperson said.
"The United States sits ready to work with the parliament to fight corruption, promote reforms, and pursue peaceful resolutions for conflict in the east of the country," Psaki concluded.
Russia will recognize the parliamentary elections in Ukraine, Kremlin chief of staff Sergei Ivanov said Thursday.

Crimea, a former Ukrainian republic, refused to recognize the legitimacy of the new authorities in Kiev after the February coup and signed a reunification deal with Russia on March 18, two days after an independence referendum. It is therefore not expected to participate.

Blind Lust for Global Hegemony is Leading America Over a Cliff By: Tony Cartalucci

Blind Lust for Global Hegemony is Leading America Over a Cliff
By: Tony
Cartalucci


What it says about American foreign policy, to trick US servicemen and women into dying in far off lands to “fight terrorism” when US politicians in the highest positions of power openly pledge support to terrorism – using it as a battering ram against its enemies abroad, and failing to topple them by proxy, using their own terrorist hordes as a pretext for direct military intervention to do so – is that such policy is underpinned by nothing more than blind lust for power, wealth, and influence in senseless pursuit of global hegemony. There is no guiding principles of peace, stability, democracy, freedom, or any confining principles of humanity that prohibit US foreign policy from exercising the most abhorrent practices in order to achieve its goals.

Failure to identify these interests blindly chasing hegemony at the cost of global peace and prosperity leads not only America over a cliff into a ravine of madness, but the entire world as well. That a US general can stand before terrorists even as the US bombs two nations in the name of fighting terrorism, is but a glimpse into this madness.For America and the Western aligned nations and interests caught in its orbit, there is no future. Chasing hegemony for the sake of hegemony alone leaves no room for actual progress. When anything and everything obstructing the path to hegemony is seen as an “enemy” to be destroyed by any means necessary, that includes setting aside resources and attention to solving some of the most pressing issues of our time – health care, infrastructure, education, better jobs, peace, and prosperity. All of these are seen as obstacles toward hegemony, and the very same interests standing before MEK terrorists pledging America’s resources to their campaign of terrorism against Iran, are the same interests calling for and implementing austerity upon the American people to continuously fuel its foreign adventures.

  

US War on Iran Takes Bizarre Turn


It is not merely hyperbole when it is said the US created terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda or the so-called “Islamic State.” It is documented fact. The current conflict in the Middle East may appear to be a chaotic conflagration beyond the control of the United States and its many eager allies, but in reality it is the intentional, engineered creation of regional fronts in a war against Iran and its powerful arc of influence.

It is not Western policy that indirectly spurs the creation and perpetuation of terrorist organizations, but in fact, direct, intentional, unmistakable support.

This support would manifest itself in perhaps the most overt and bizarre declaration of allegiance to terrorism to date, US Army General Hugh Shelton on stage before terrorists of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) and their Wahabist counterparts fighting in Syria, hysterically pledging American material, political, and strategic backing. MEK was listed for years by the US State Department as a foreign terrorist organization, but has received funding, arms, and safe haven by the United States for almost as long.

General Hugh’s speech titled, “Making Iranian mullahs fear, the MEK, come true,” was most likely never meant to be seen or fully understood by Americans. In titled alone, it is clear that US foreign policy intends to use the tool of terrorism to exact concessions from Tehran. If the true nature of America’s support for terrorist organizations like MEK were more widely known, the current narrative driving US intervention in Iraq and Syria would crumble.

MEK Has Killed US Servicemen, Contractors, and Iranian Civilians For Decades

MEK has carried out decades of brutal terrorist attacks, assassinations, and espionage against the Iranian government and its people, as well as targeting Americans including the attempted kidnapping of US Ambassador Douglas MacArthur II, the attempted assassination of USAF Brigadier General Harold Price, the successful assassination of Lieutenant Colonel Louis Lee Hawkins, the double assassinations of Colonel Paul Shaffer and Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner, and the successful ambush and killing of American Rockwell International employees William Cottrell, Donald Smith, and Robert Krongard.

Admissions to the deaths of the Rockwell International employees can be found within a report written by former US State Department and Department of Defense official Lincoln Bloomfield Jr. on behalf of the lobbying firm Akin Gump in an attempt to dismiss concerns over MEK’s violent past and how it connects to its current campaign of armed terror – a testament to the depths of depravity from which Washington and London lobbyists operate.

To this day MEK terrorists have been carrying out attacks inside of Iran killing political opponents, attacking civilian targets, as well as carrying out the US-Israeli program of targeting and assassinating Iranian scientists. MEK terrorists are also suspected of handling patsies in recent false flag operations carried out in India, Georgia, and Thailand, which have been ham-handedly blamed on the Iranian government by the United States and Israel.

MEK is described by Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow Ray Takeyh as a “cult-like organization” with “totalitarian tendencies.” While Takeyh fails to expand on what he meant by “cult-like” and “totalitarian,” an interview with US State Department-run Radio Free Europe-Radio Liberty reported that a MEK Camp Ashraf escapee claimed the terrorist organization bans marriage, using radios, the Internet, and holds many members against their will with the threat of death if ever they are caught attempting to escape.

US Has Been Eagerly Supporting MEK Terrorists For Years

Besides providing MEK terrorists with now two former US military bases in Iraq as safe havens, the US has conspired to arm, fund, and back MEK for years in a proxy war against Iran.

Covert support for the US-listed terrorist group Mujahedeen e-Khalq (MEK) has been ongoing since at least 2008 under the Bush administration, when Seymour Hersh’s 2008 New Yorker article “Preparing the Battlefield,” reported that not only had MEK been considered for their role as a possible proxy, but that the US had already begun arming and financing them to wage war inside Iran:


The M.E.K. has been on the State Department’s terrorist list for more than a decade, yet in recent years the group has received arms and intelligence, directly or indirectly, from the United States. Some of the newly authorized covert funds, the Pentagon consultant told me, may well end up in M.E.K. coffers. “The new task force will work with the M.E.K. The Administration is desperate for results.” He added, “The M.E.K. has no C.P.A. auditing the books, and its leaders are thought to have been lining their pockets for years. If people only knew what the M.E.K. is getting, and how much is going to its bank accounts—and yet it is almost useless for the purposes the Administration intends.

More recently, the British Daily Mail published a stunning admission by “US officials” that Israel is currently funding, training, arming, and working directly with MEK. The Daily Mail article states:Seymore Hersh in an NPR interview, also claims that select MEK members have already received trainingin the US.


U.S. officials confirmed today that Israel has been funding and training Iranian dissidents to assassinate nuclear scientists involved in Iran’s nuclear program. Washington insiders confirmed there is a close relationship between Mossad and MEK.

In 2009, an extensive conspiracy was formulated within US policy think-tank Brookings Institution’s 2009 “Which Path to Persia?” report, proposing to fully arm, train, and back MEK as it waged a campaign of armed terror against the Iranian people. In their report, they openly conspire to use what is an admitted terrorist organization as a “US proxy” (emphasis added):


“Perhaps the most prominent (and certainly the most controversial) opposition group that has attracted attention as a potential U.S. proxy is the NCRI (National Council of Resistance of Iran), the political movement established by the MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq). Critics believe the group to be undemocratic and unpopular, and indeed anti-American.


In contrast, the group’s champions contend that the movement’s long-standing opposition to the Iranian regime and record of successful attacks on and intelligence-gathering operations against the regime make it worthy of U.S. support. They also argue that the group is no longer anti-American and question the merit of earlier accusations. Raymond Tanter, one of the group’s supporters in the United States, contends that the MEK and the NCRI are allies for regime change in Tehran and also act as a useful proxy for gathering intelligence. The MEK’s greatest intelligence coup was the provision of intelligence in 2002 that led to the discovery of a secret site in Iran for enriching uranium.


Despite its defenders’ claims, the MEK remains on the U.S. government list of foreign terrorist organizations. In the 1970s, the group killed three U.S. officers and three civilian contractors in Iran. During the 1979-1980 hostage crisis, the group praised the decision to take America hostages and Elaine Sciolino reported that while group leaders publicly condemned the 9/11 attacks, within the group celebrations were widespread.


Undeniably, the group has conducted terrorist attacks—often excused by the MEK’s advocates because they are directed against the Iranian government. For example, in 1981, the group bombed the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party, which was then the clerical leadership’s main political organization, killing an estimated 70 senior officials. More recently, the group has claimed credit for over a dozen mortar attacks, assassinations, and other assaults on Iranian civilian and military targets between 1998 and 2001. At the very least, to work more closely with the group (at least in an overt manner), Washington would need to remove it from the list of foreign terrorist organizations.”

Besides US Army General Hugh Shelton, other prominent US politicians to literally stand before crowds of baying MEK terrorists and their supporters include former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Howard Dean, Tom Ridge, John Lewis, Ed Rendell, former ambassador John Bolton, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, retired General Wesley Clark, Lee Hamilton, former US Marine Corps Commandant General James Jones, and Alan Dershowitz. US Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi would also stand in front of MEK terrorists to deliver to them an Iranian New Year “greeting.”