THE DARK SIDE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

Why does the support the US and its Atlanticist partners give to Kiev have nothing to do with a struggle for democracy?

 

By Sidney Hey

After the total seizure of the city of Artemosvk, we saw how the Kiev regime was exposed as being in a very difficult situation. Almost immediately, and as a way of covering up the disastrous failure, the CIA and its collaborators launched direct actions on Russian territory using mercenary groups equipped with NATO weapons and vehicles.

The desperation did not stop there and they soon showed how far they could go to try to reverse a situation that the Americans themselves knew was irreversible. Not many hours passed before the head of Ukrainian military intelligence Vadim Skibitski publicly acknowledged that his area has as targets to assassinate the head of the PMC Wagner Yevgeny Prigozhin and President Vladimir Putin himself, confirming (despite the silence of the Western media) that they have been behind all the attacks and assassinations carried out inside Russia.

In the light of this confession one has to ask where is international law?

But we know that these terrorist actions cannot be carried out without Washington's approval and even less without the coordination of its executive tool, the CIA. From the very beginning of Operation Special Military Operation we saw the CIA, special forces groups and their British colleagues manoeuvring in Ukraine.  Using proxy groups employing terror tactics, they are trying to extend the field of action to Russian territory.

The latest attacks on Russian territory in Belgorod using equipment, M1224 (MRAP) vehicles, Humvees and US man-portable weapons are evidence of this surreptitious cooperation.

As can be seen, we are faced with a discursive contradiction of the self-proclaimed “democratic” political administration of the USA, which clashes head-on with a sinister contemporary policy by means of which it invaded, destroyed countries, kidnapped, tortured and murdered tens of thousands of people under the argument of the “fight against terrorism” and in “defence of democracy”. 

It was in those dark years that all those actions were carried out that a fascist force can undertake against those it considers its enemies, degrading them to subhumanity. If we were to list just the Iraqi families who were killed and/or decimated by the Anglo-American “liberators” and their hired thugs, we would need thousands of pages and just as many pages to write those killed by the “Islamic State” hoax.

The worst of all this is the role of international justice, which seems to be a mute mimic of this power and which, because of this subjection, has not given a response to all these crimes against humanity. This is where the International Criminal Court's proclaimed and much publicised arrest warrants for the Russian president and his closest officials become not only illegitimate, but an overacted parody.

Skibistki's statements are a confession of crimes that do not seem to have moved the biased Western media or to have been heard by the ICC prosecutor.

What the CIA carried out on Russian territory and what we are seeing lately in Belgorod is nothing more than executing terrorist operations using Slavic assets and Russian opponents who have no scruples about killing civilians and the more they kill the better. Where have we seen this before? Ah yes. After those bizarre attacks of September 11, 2001, the federal government, controlled by a neo-conservative-Zionist clique, had the convenient path open -under the excuse of terrorism- to cancel the guarantees and freedoms of all.

Amusingly, the then administration bloated the budget through the roof by multiplying the intelligence bureaucracy by creating a dozen agencies and with them, thousands of jobs, and with them, thousands of black budgets to pay panderers and other unreliable sources of information.

We immediately saw the same foul play in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, using black budgets to pay irregular groups like those operating for Kiev today, only changing the origin of the human resources. Thus it was that with the use of criminals, Arab mercenaries and CIA assets from old secret programmes like “Al Qaeda”, the US breathed chaos into the Middle East and North Africa and today is trying to direct them against Russia and Belarus.

All that bloodshed and chaos not only served geopolitical purposes but also drove big business and stock market movements that ultimately enriched a few corporate firms and the public officials who made this whole scam possible, involving an endless chain of individuals (from the suppliers of toilet paper to the military to the psychiatrists who supervised the torture in Abu Graib, Bagram and Guantánamo) who, paid to serve this enterprise, have now been discarded from the system that used them.

The same interests also exist in Ukraine, which is why the same strategy is being replicated with similar tactics.

The latest declarations by Kiev's intelligence officer show that beyond the danger to the security of the Russian Federation, there is an evident connivance between Washington and London, which, together with the increase in arms that they are sending to the Ukrainians and the undeniable alliance they have forged with neo-Nazis throughout the region, sustain terrorist actions on Russian territory. In light of the evidence and despite Western media censorship, Washington's vaunted democracy is being called into question.

Many are asking, is the US seeking Russia's overreaction?

 

 

 

EL INTERMINABLE CICLO DEL FRACASO

¿Por qué las próximas elecciones hace previsible un cambio de ideología en el próximo gobierno, aunque ello no representara un cambio de rumbo para el país? El síndrome de Uróboro

Por Charles H. Slim

Un cambio cíclico se está produciendo en Argentina y muestra de ello lo vimos con el acto partidario de la vicepresidente Cristina Fernández realizado aprovechando un día patrio como es el 25 de mayo. Ese acto fue sin dudas una despedida, aunque algunos lo interpreten como un reimpulso de su carrera política que bajo una mirada realista, ya está muerta.

Lo que queda del Frente de Todos ya no contempla a CFK y mucho menos al insulso y policromático presidente Alberto Fernández quien (si logra completar su mandato) después de diciembre pasará al ostracismo sin esperanzas de volver.

El devenir de la situación político-económica del país estará signado por los gobiernos venideros y sus políticas, incluyendo por supuesto a éste último. Las elecciones que en apenas unos meses se llevaran a cabo traerán sorpresas telúricas que, aunque hoy imposibles de prever con precisión los resultados exactos, si advierten un cambio ideológico pero que no pondrán en peligro el sistema (partidocrático-negocial) ni desagradaran al llamado “círculo rojo” compuesto por los empresarios más prominentes y los medios más influyentes.

Muchas veces he dicho que “el pueblo” argentino no es una nación con diferentes identidades sino más bien, es un ente compuesto por individualidades volátiles que cambian de lealtad con mucha facilidad reflejándolo de forma colectiva en un carácter ciclotímico y hasta en cierta medida, esquizofrénico. Teniendo en mira ese diagnóstico puede predecirse con una curiosa precisión, cuál será la tendencia ideológica del próximo gobierno.

Sacando las especulaciones y las tendencias que fabrican las encuestadoras (que dicho sea de paso nunca aciertan), se puede intuir que la orientación política del próximo gobierno se ubicará a la “derecha” -aunque hoy estas categorías no existan- del espectro político local entendiéndose esto, como un decidido y hasta sugerente acercamiento a Washington y a sus aliados más recalcitrantes.

La palabra clave en este nuevo período será “liberalismo” y dentro de ese término se alinearán todos los adherentes de los partidos que los representan. Así los partidos “Avanza libertad” de José Luís Espert y “La libertad avanza” liderada por Javier Milei serán factores definitorios para desbancar al candidato del oficialismo y es por ello que se unirán al vencedor de la oposición que conforman el PRO, el radicalismo y ese peronismo residual que supieron saltarse antes del barco. Como no puede ser de otro modo, también se encolumnarán los economistas oportunistas que no querrán perder su oportunidad de colgarse del tren. Inexorablemente también se adunarán por conveniencia los sectores y referentes del peronismo del interior que a pesar de haber formado parte y hasta beneficiado de la “Era Kirchnerista” buscarán su lugar al calor del poder.

Las tendencias que se pueden advertir en las calles más allá de los resultados de encuestadoras de dudosa imparcialidad y de las opiniones de un periodismo operador, apuntan a un triunfo de “Juntos por el Cambio” indistintamente de quien sea el candidato más votado en las elecciones primarias abiertas, simultaneas y obligatorias (PASO). En cuanto a esto último, las tensiones y rencillas que existen dentro de este espacio están vislumbrando un firme posicionamiento de Patricia Bullrich quien representa a los duros de esta corriente precedida por un pasado montonero y su reciclamiento militarista de tendencia neoconservadora y sionista.

Precisamente podría ser Bullrich la próxima candidata de la derecha anglófila local y consecuentemente ganadora en las elecciones presidenciales ante una diluida propuesta del “peronismo K” que no tendría más candidatos a elegir en las PASO entre un ignoto Wado De pedro, un arribista político profesional como Sergio Massa y un ninguneado embajador Daniel Scioli. Si esto sucede, estaremos ante un escenario político similar al de Mauricio Macri en 2015 aunque claramente potenciado por una presidencia abiertamente pro-estadounidense con todo lo que ello implique.

Dentro de estas implicancias y viendo que Washington tiene las influencias necesarias para que el FMI le proporcione los dólares que la Argentina necesita y en el marco de una guerra que esta tomando dimensiones globales habría que ver que es lo que el nuevo gobierno estaría dispuesto a hacer por el “Tío Sam” lo que éste le pida en especial, para cooperar con sus esfuerzos para seguir con la guerra contra Rusia. Sobre esto último el gobierno no debe perder de vista la experiencia de enviar una fuerza naval al Golfo Pérsico en 1990 que bajo promesas (incumplidos) de una supuesta membrecía de “aliado-extra OTAN” se vio involucrado en una terrible guerra.

Pero esto obliga a que los argentinos se pregunten ¿Esto servirá para resolver las causas que han llevado al país a donde hoy se halla? E incluso ¿Estarán de acuerdo todos estos exponentes en la identificación de dichas causas? Para ser realistas, no se puede esperar ningún cambio superlativo a corto plazo aun cuando el nuevo gobierno tendrá las bendiciones de los polos anglosajones y por supuesto, de Israel.

A esto hay que considerar el complejo marco geopolítico actual que está insumiendo de EEUU y sus aliados europeos grandes cantidades de recursos materiales y financieros tratando de debilitar a Rusia y a China. Sumado a que si la guerra no se detiene o incluso escalara a otras zonas, las chances de que el gobierno argentino reciba la atención sustancial para reflotar su economía se reducen sensiblemente.

Habrá que ver si más allá de la obsecuencia y de las simpatías ideológicas que exudan los potenciales triunfadores, el nuevo gobierno reactiva su comercio exterior algo de para lo cual, además de necesitar reconstruir su logística (algo que podría llevar años) deberá plantarse firme ante los condicionamientos que Washington le pondrá para señalar a quién si y a quienes no la Argentina podrá vender sus productos.

 

¿OTAP?

Como la OTAN se halla exhausta en sus operaciones en Ucrania, a Biden se le ha ocurrido una magnifica idea ¿Por qué no creamos otra organización militar, pero en el pacífico?

 

Por Dany Smith

Mientras la guerra en Ucrania distrae la vista de la opinión pública mundial y en especial la de los europeos, Washington avanza en sus planes de conformar otro bloque político-militar al estilo OTAN pero en Asia Pacifico (OTAP). Como se puede intuir, lo que menos le interesa a la administración de Joe Biden es la paz.

Estas tratativas que se llevaron a cabo entre el 19 al 21 de mayo en la cumbre del G-7 en Hiroshima, Japón fueron denunciadas por Corea del Norte señalando que EEUU, Corea del sur y Japón buscan crear un organismo militar más amplio que supere a los ya existentes y provocativos operativos AUKUS y el QUAD.

Es importante señalar que si bien son los norcoreanos quienes han denunciado estos planes, el objetivo principal que persigue La Casa Blanca es China. El involucramiento de Seúl y Tokio en la estructuración de una organización militar supraestatal semejante potenciaría la inestabilidad regional e invitaría a una carrera armamentística. Pero más allá de los argumentos sobre la seguridad y el control de las rutas comerciales en el Mar Meridional existe un incentivo más interesante para la administración de Biden. Recordemos que Washington bajo la excusa de “proteger” a la isla de Taiwán y de “contener la influencia china en el Mar Meridional” en el fondo lo que se busca es apropiarse del formidable y estratégico negocio de los semiconductores.

Agregado a esto, en algún sentido también es una extensión geopolítica de las acciones contra Rusia en Ucrania.

La administración demócrata necesita distraer la atención del público de esta nueva estrategia para ampliar el escenario de guerra que ya gestiona en Ucrania. Cuando le comentaba esto a un amigo, al cabo de unos minutos me pregunto ¿Acaso crees que Biden tenga ganas de abrir un frente bélico en el sudeste asiático? Y le respondí con otra pregunta ¿Por qué no?

Le explique que La Casa Blanca aún no ha involucrado oficialmente al estado en la guerra que se desarrolla en Europa del Este pero, eso no significa que no estemos allí. Cuando vi lo que el gobierno federal ha estado fabricando contra el joven filtrador Jack Texeira para desacreditarle ante el jurado, me queda muy claro que una parte de la información que le dejaron a mano, es cierta. Es por eso que los burócratas del gobierno necesitan y por cualquier medio desacreditarlo de costa a costa.

Y sino ¿Por qué la fiscal Rachel S. Rollins expuso al conocimiento público y sin autorización supuestos antecedentes escolares de Texeira para usarlos como un argumento en su contra? Esto es algo que podrías ver muy corrientemente en países con administraciones de justicia altamente corruptas o bajo gobiernos dictatoriales o de estados con esas siniestras “policías secretas” ¿Pero aquí en América? Se supone que es una democracia.

Como sucede con todos los fusibles del Estado profundo, se achicharran para proteger al sistema y eso fue lo que sucedió con Rollins quien hoy ya no está en su cargo y por supuesto, guardará silencio ante cualquier cuestionamiento por este proceder. Eso te lleva a que cualquier escolar de la preparatoria que está siguiendo con atención esto se pregunte ¿Acaso esto sucede de forma excepcional o es una práctica usual del gobierno?

Con estos nuevos planes, Biden debería explicarle al pueblo estadounidense los alcances de estos en Asia-pacifico y claro ¿Cuánto le costara al erario público? A propósito, todavía estamos al borde de un Default y no creo que el pueblo americano tenga ganas de hundirse más profundo en el fango por los jueguitos sucios de los neoconservadores y sus socios que conforman el “parido de la guerra”.

Parece que Biden esta mal asesorado o mal interpreta lo que le susurran. Para ser honesto, nadie podría creer que un mandatario que ocupa el Salón Oval por más viejo que sea, no entienda lo que está haciendo, no lo creo.

Tal vez debería levantar el teléfono o enviar un mensaje de Whatsupp a Kissinger quien con sus recién 100 años cumplidos, encontrara pese a la avanzada edad, un razonamiento (pese a su maléfico uso que le dio) impecable tras décadas de conspirar, para que le dé un panorama de lo que podría costarle a los EEUU estas locuras.

Pero ni Kissinger querría gastar su aliento con el actual mandatario ni Biden estaría dispuesto a escuchar consejos mesurados de un lobo moribundo. Biden parece estar tentado a morder una manzana jugosa y grande y confía que su boca tiene suficiente capacidad para un buen mordisco. Pero no ha calculado que podría abrirla tanto que se acalambre y no pueda sacarse la manzana de su boca o peor aún, se atragante mortalmente.

 

OPERATION SELF-DELUSION

Why is the Ukrainian incursion into Russian territory a chokehold?

 

By Sidney Hey

On 20 May, the head of the Russian PMC Wagner appeared in a video broadcast on Telegram with a Russian flag in his hands and some of his men behind him brandishing the flag of his group, announcing the total takeover of the city of Artemovsk (Bakhmut). The news could not have been anything other than the consequence of an expected event. Although several US generals had raised scepticism about the Kiev regime's hopes of driving the Russians out, Volodymyr Zelensky, emulating Stalin's bloodthirsty and blind stubbornness with his order 227 (Not a step back), sent tens of thousands of his fighters to their deaths.

It has become clear that this was a crushing blow to Kiev but also to the sponsors in Washington, especially Biden. For months the media in the collective West had been making war propaganda about Bakhmut with all sorts of speculation, much of it fantastical, trying to cover up a lousy situation.

The desperation of those in Kiev and their backers to distract attention materialised last week with the attack on the airfield in “Berdiansk”, Russia. The raid involved the launching of British “Storm-Shadow” missiles from MIG-29 aircraft (delivered by Poland) which caused the destruction of Russian aircraft stationed on the runway. Beyond the material result of the attack, legally Moscow has the legal grounds for retaliation against Britain. From now on, the British could ask: Was the Foreign Office aware of this, did its advisers who put these missiles on the planes and those who train the Ukrainians know about this attack on Russian territory?

With Yevgeny Prigozhin's announcement, a Hollywood narrative that sought to dent the morale of the Russian population, maintain a triumphalist folklore in the European Union and at the same time feed the White House's political arguments as to “why” it was necessary to continue donating billions of dollars and armaments in bulk to a pro-Nazi regime led by an Ashkenazi Jew collapsed.

The Ukrainian failure in “Bakhmut”, now “Artemovsk”, despite the massive armoury that was sent in, is a subject for further analysis. For the time being, its total seizure is a conclusive and irreversible fact that the hemisphere's media are trying to deny with child's fables.

Along these lines, and with a clear intention to distract, the CIA and its British colleagues have set in motion a staging of another of their assets on Russian territory in Belgorod. In broad daylight and firing on Russian civilians, a column of US armoured vehicles, two T-90 tanks and some eighty men from the “Azov” battalion and another group in Ukrainian uniforms sought a strong publicity impact to distract attention from the catastrophe announced two days earlier by Prigozhin from “Artemovsk”.

The added value of this incursion was the dissemination of videos of an alleged Russian nationalist commando called “the Freedom of Russia Legion”, which, giving a speech in the Russian language, seeks -according to its contents- the overthrow of Vladimir Putin. Perhaps public opinion, which has no need to know about deception and war propaganda, believes that there are “internal opposition forces in Russia” and that they have risen up spontaneously. It is quite clear that there is nothing clear in all this.

It is a scam that has been widely used by the CIA and its British colleagues for decades. The involvement of the “Azov” fanatics in this suicide mission is no surprise (as several attempts have already failed), but a Russian nationalist commando joined with these Russian-hating extremists? That's not really explained. The renting of a handful of people who do not agree with the policies of their governments is the “ABC” of how to recruit unscrupulous or unwary elements to be used by these agencies. There are several examples, but at the same time the most notable are the Iraqi militias made up of Arab mercenaries and Iraqi criminals recruited by the CIA and trained in Jordan before the 2003 invasion, which were later set up in opposition to other shams such as “Al Qaeda-Iraq”, the “ISI” genesis of “ISIS” in 2014, or the FSA that the CIA set up in Jordan before the 2003 invasion; or the FSA that the CIA set up with the cooperation of the Turkish MIT by recruiting officers from the Syrian army and the Kurdish FSD groups trained by the US military to attempt a coup against Bashar Al Assad.

To set up all these “ventures”, all you need is money, and that is something that agencies like the CIA have at their discretion.

The staging of this raid on Belgorod is not new, nor does it escape this mechanics. This kind of deception is part of an Anglo-American intelligence engineering that has been exploited ad nauseam in the Middle East (with the cooperation of the Muslim Brotherhood) but which, in the case of Europe, has extensive precedents. One of NATO's Cold War-era “Stand Behind” programmes was the use of terrorism as a tactic to eliminate pro-Soviet or pro-communist targets in Europe.

While the White House has publicly stated that the resources given to Ukraine should not be used on Russian soil, we know that such talk is false and actually follows the twisted logic of "double standards" in which the federal government pretends that one hand does not know what the other is doing.

The uniformed men and their spokesman could be Russian nationals, recruited and employed (and that means paid) by the CIA to act on the occasion and lend their skins so that in just a few hours they could be eliminated by the Russian anti-terrorist reaction force. They are not the first dupes the Americans have used for this purpose. Even confidential sources confirmed that the FSB was already carrying out raids and arrests of subjects inside Russia linked to this operation.

The problem with self-deception is that those who act in this way cover up the reality and, far from making the problems disappear, they will only multiply them.

 

 

 

 

RETURNING HOME

Syria's return to the Arab League is a momentous event. What will be the effects for the entire region?

 

By Ali Al Najafi

The dark clouds of the storm have passed and the sunlight of a new dawn is once again warming the face. That is the feeling that the Arabs felt when they learned of Syria's return to the Arab League summit that took place and culminated last Friday, May 19, in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

The reception of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad was remarkable and highly promising. The reception at the airport by Prince Badr bin Sultan bin Abdulazi himself, the Saudi authorities and in particular Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was a great sign, and during the course of the summit there were even cordial talks with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, one of Washington's main allies in all that represented the export and financing of jihadists to overthrow Gadafi and the persistent attempts to repeat it with him under the media hoax of the “Arab Spring”.

Al Assad stepped off his plane as a victor, defeating nothing less than the Anglo-American hegemonic power and its ally Israel. His peers gathered in Jeddah knew that their disowned brother had undergone a trial by fire that has tempered him at the head of a Syrian Arab people, unjustly and criminally punished by some of the Arab governments that now salute him and occupy a seat in the League (especially the monarchies) subordinated to foreign agendas that are now in disarray.

What was unthinkable a year ago is now a reality. The nefarious influences of the US State Department seem to have dissipated, although we must never let our guard down. A transcendental step that opens the way to a new era that will seek regional development away from the intrigues and instigations of the West and, most importantly, without forgetting the situation of Palestine subjected to the constant colonialist advances of the State of Israel. It is also a chance for the Ummah to make a deep collective introspection and leave behind the discord and manipulations that the enemy used to penetrate its bosom and sow the tares.

But like all good news for some, it is bad news for others. While the Arab-Islamic world is entering a new dimension in relations between states and re-establishing a common agenda, from the Anglo-Saxon West and especially from Israel this cannot be good news. Even more so. For the Islamophobic sectors that are rampant in the high cenacles of Western power that aligns them ideologically with the Zionists and the state of Israel, it is very bad news.

For decades it has been a continuous and persistent policy to undermine the relations between the Arab Islamic states and these towards the West, with the big corporate media being especially insidious in marking differences between Arabs and Islamists in order to isolate the Islamic Republic of Iran during a good part of the second half of the last century (and seeking purely political objectives).

One of the most damaging agents in all of this deal was Turkey and its pan-Islamist government (at the service of NATO) headed by the now devalued Recep Tiyip Erdogan, who gave cover from his territory to the operation of the intelligence agencies' hoax called “ISIS”.

The cynical leadership of the USA that presented itself as mediator and party (with great Israeli influence) has no place in this new scenario and this was fully confirmed with the resumption of talks between Riyadh and Tehran under the auspices of China. In this regard, it is evident that in addition to the Chinese good offices to seek connections and channels for a conversation, Washington never sought this and on the contrary, when there were possibilities of normalizing relations, incidents and misunderstandings would magically appear, always involving some statement from the State Department.

The tragedies between Iran and Iraq, the civil war in Lebanon and the continuous attempts to reactivate it, the iniquities woven against the Palestinian PLO and, closer in time, the interventions in Iraq, Libya, Syria and the fratricidal war against Yemen are a sample of that sinister influence that ultimately tended to benefit Israel's geopolitical situation.

Despite the goodwill that marks this new beginning, the Arab-Islamic world will have to be vigilant not to fall into new deceptions and instigations by the Anglo-American agencies, always active and ready to foment subversion (through false humanitarian NGOs) in the name of “democracy”.

In this new era, the Arab countries and the entire region should join forces and create formulas for integration and growth in which each state, regardless of their systems of government, contribute their capabilities and wealth to act as a unified economic bloc and also to form a purely Arab-Islamic security and defense alliance, and that means, without Western interference (even when goodwill is invoked).

There is no doubt that each Arab state has its own characteristics and capabilities to contribute on this path. Syria's return to its seat in the Arab League will add much value in terms of experience in fighting terrorist conspiracies and all the dirty resources of a hybrid war supported by the US and some NATO partners. 

The possibilities for development and growth of such a bloc is as vast, if not more so, than the Arab-Islamic world itself, and therefore, apart from any attempt to create discord by the inevitable sectors that will continue to work in the shadows for Washington and Tel Aviv, it is a great prospect for everyone to win without harming anyone.