Aletho News


China rejects latest US hacking accusation


China’s Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying

Press TV – June 11, 2014

China has dismissed the recent allegation by the US that the Chinese military has been involved in hacking a US security firm, describing Washington’s approach on the issue as unconstructive.

A private US cyber security firm accused a unit of China’s military on Monday of hacking attempts to access information on US satellite and aerospace programs, Xinhua reported.

China’s Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying rejected the allegation at a press briefing on Tuesday.

“I have noticed the report you mentioned, its wording and style looks familiar, citing the names of the hackers and their claims of their military identity,” she said, responding to a question about US reports alleging Chinese hacking attempts. “Have you ever seen thieves bearing a name tag saying ‘thieves?’” she said.

Washington had issued an indictment against five Chinese military officers on charges of cyber theft earlier on May 19.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman further challenged the integrity of the US allegations against her country, referring to the massive American espionage efforts across the globe as part of its PRISM program under the US National Security Agency (NSA).

The program, which was revealed by former NSA contract employee Edward Snowden in 2013, showed that the US was spying on the phone and email communications of top world leaders, including those of Washington’s allied countries as well as China.

“The US is a hacking empire,” Hua said. “It is not constructive for the US to attack others instead of repenting and correcting its own mistakes.”

The Chinese official further pointed out that cyber attacks are a global challenge – transnational and anonymous in nature – requiring cooperation among all countries to be countered.

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Deception, Economics | , , , , | 1 Comment

Behind the smoke: Gareth Porter and the Iranian nuclear story

By Yazan al-Saadi | Al-Akhbar | June 11, 2014

Iran’s nuclear program has been a subject of obsession for Western governments and media agencies for decades, as far back as the final years of Western-backed Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi’s reign. But over the course of the last decade, the subject has reached new hysterical heights, propelled by mainstream media coverage mired with distortion and misinformation. Enter: Gareth Porter.

Porter, 71 years old, is a man of many trades. He is a historian, an author, a policy analyst, and of late, has made a name for himself as a successful investigative journalist.

He began his career in journalism during the US war on Vietnam, serving as the Saigon Bureau Chief for the Dispatch News Service International from 1970-71. He then decided to leave journalism for decades, working in a variety of jobs as an anti-war activist, a university teacher, and sustainable development environment work.

It was after another American war at the dawn of the 21st century, this time against Afghanistan and Iraq, that Porter found himself back into the journalistic fold, mainly writing for the InterPress Service.

“It was only from the year 2000 I started writing this book on Vietnam, how the Americans went to war there. It was such an eye-opener. I realized that the problem of America’s wanton wars was not the problem of a president gone wrong or starting from the wrong values or ideas. It was a systemic problem that the war state was the real problem. That has shaped my political consciousness and my scholarship in journalism ever since then,” Porter told Al-Akhbar.

While working on the book, titled “Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam”, which was eventually published in 2005, Porter started to write investigative journalistic articles, the first of which was on how Iraqi Kurdish groups were stealing and forging parliamentary elections at the time.

“That’s what started me on the road of becoming an investigative journalist. I never imagined it would happen but it just developed really quickly,” he said with a light laugh.

Porter started covering the Iranian nuclear issue in 2006; at first, he said, he had believed the overall narrative produced by various agencies.

One key evidence used in the allegations by the West of Iran’s attempts to militarize its nuclear program is the more than one thousand pages of documents that were supposedly acquired from the laptop of an Iranian nuclear scientist by intelligence agencies. They are known informally as the “Laptop Documents.”

But when Porter decided to examine the evidence presented against Iran, he began to discover certain anomalies.

“I went back to look at the recent history of the Iran nuclear issue, and that is when I came across a Wall Street Journal article quoting a German foreign office official, Karsten Voigt, saying this very intriguing thing: ‘Don’t rely on these documents because they came from an Iranian dissident group’ – meaning Mujihedin-E-Khalq (MEK).”

“It pushed me in the direction of questioning the narrative. As time went by I saw more and more of the pieces that didn’t fit the puzzle, particularly about these Laptop Documents,” he added.

In late 2007, Porter met with a German source in Washington DC, and asked him about the Wall Street Journal article. The German source confirmed Voigt’s statement, and thus cemented Porter’s belief that there was more to the story. He began working full-time examining the various evidence and raging debates over Iran’s nuclear program.

Many of his articles, however, have never garnered the attention of the mainstream press and traditional policy institutions within the US.

“The feedback was very weak. The biggest problem, of course, is that the news media and political elite in the US are very powerful, don’t need to respond to information and analysis that contradicts their narratives,” Porter said in regards to the reasons behind this general disinterest in his reports.

Nevertheless, his work in uncovering propaganda and unveiling uncomfortable truths about the problematic narratives regarding Iran’s nuclear program earned him the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, an annual award given by the London-based Frontline Club that celebrates courageous and ground-breaking journalism.

“The single biggest factor driving the elite’s obsession over Iran as a threat and as an enemy is that the basic premise was laid down early at the end of the Cold War,” Porter explained in terms of the reasons behind the American and European honing in on the Islamic republic.

“That the US must take a hand in constraining and preventing Iran from extending its power. It became a fundamental premise of post-Cold War US policy. It fit the interests of the national security state and the Israeli lobby together. Once that happened, and pretty quickly during the Clinton Administration, successive governments naturally followed the general lines set down.”

“Even Obama, just in the early days of office, had the NSA and Israelis come in and tell him about their plans for a cyberwar against Iran. Here he is, a guy who is allegedly planning to enter serious diplomatic engagement with Iran, was essentially conspiring with the Israelis to carry out cyberwarfare. He was going to be the first president to wage cyberwar against another country. That’s very serious,” Porter further remarked.

Overall, Porter mused, the biggest obstacles to any attempt to work out a deal with Iran and end a consideration of military action comes down to Israel.

“Even if there was a settlement of the issue that led to détente between the US and Iran, both of which I’m skeptical about, that would not change the Israeli point of view – which is they have to possess nuclear weapons to maintain superiority over every other country in the Middle East,” he said.

Porter has authored a new book entitled “Manufactured Crisis: The Secret History of the Iranian Nuclear Scare,” which recounts his journalistic work on the allegations about Iran’s nuclear program by the Americans and Israelis since 2006, and discusses in greater detail the numerous evidences and counter-evidences at play.

He recently presented a round table discussion on the topic and his book at the Issam Fares Institute (IFI) building within the American University of Beirut campus on June 9.

Below is the video of the entire talk, and subsequent discussion between Porter and the audience, posted on YouTube by IFI:

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , | 1 Comment

News Coverage Misinforms Americans on the Bergdahl Swap

By Sheldon Richman | FFF | June 10, 2014

In national-security matters, the news media couldn’t do a better job misinforming the public if they tried. The latest example is their portrayal of the five Taliban officials traded for Bowe Bergdahl.

The media of course have an incentive to accentuate controversy. In the Bergdahl deal, this includes portraying the five Taliban prisoners as, in Sen. John McCain’s words, “hard-core jihadis responsible for 9/11.” McCain is wrong, but the major news outlets don’t care. Over and over, the five are identified as terrorists. Facts take a back seat to drama and conflict.

President Obama fed this narrative:

In terms of potential threats, the release of the Taliban who were being held in Guantánamo was conditioned on the Qataris keeping eyes on them and creating a structure in which we can monitor their activities. We will be keeping eyes on them. Is there a possibility of some of them trying to return to activities that are detrimental to us? Absolutely.

The media simply take the government’s word that the five Taliban figures are international terrorists. But the Taliban are not al-Qaeda. They were the theocratic government overthrown by U.S. forces. So when Taliban insurgents attack American forces, it is not terrorism but war, which the U.S government started.

There have been a few hints that the prisoners are not accurately described. A rare example is from the government’s former chief prosecutor at the American prison at Guantánamo Bay, retired Air Force Colonel Morris Davis. Davis punctured the “hardest of the hard-core” narrative when he said:

We had screened all of the detainees and we had focused on about 75 that had the potential to be charged with a crime. When I saw the names [of those traded] … [I] wasn’t familiar with any of these names.… If we could have proven that they had done something wrong that we could prosecute them for I’m confident we would have done it, and we didn’t.

In fact, the story behind the five Taliban prisoners reflects poorly on the U.S. government’s conduct of its supposedly good war. Maybe that’s why this story gets so little attention.

Before being captured, these Taliban officers were treated as potential allies by the CIA or the U.S.-installed government of Hamid Karzai. Anand Gopal, author of No Good Men Among the Living: America, the Taliban, and the War Through Afghan Eyes, writes that

all five of the swapped prisoners were initially captured while trying to cut deals, and … three had been attempting to join, or had already joined, the Afghan government at the time of their arrest.

This history shows that the categories we take as rigid and unchanging, such as “terrorist,” are in fact remarkably fluid in the context of Afghan politics. Uncovering the stories of these men tells us much about Guantanamo, the Taliban, and the possibility of a negotiated end to the conflict.

How did these men end up in U.S. custody? The U.S. government offered attractive bounties to Afghans who turned alleged Taliban and al-Qaeda members over to American authorities. This created a strong incentive to rat out personal enemies, rival warlords, and others, many of whom had nothing to do with the Afghan insurgency or international terrorism. Many were sent to Guantánamo.

For example, Gopal writes, Mohammad Nabi Omari, who was part of the Bergdahl exchange,

was a small-time commander linked to pro-Taliban strongman Jalaluddin Haqqani in the 1990s. After 2001, he was among the many Haqqani followers who switched allegiances to the Karzai government.… [Omari] and other former Haqqani commanders began working for the CIA.… Some Afghan officials in Khost allege that Omari reaped profits from falsely accusing others of al Qaeda membership. If so, he certainly accrued enemies, and in September 2002, he, too, was accused of insurgent membership by rival warlords and politicians, despite being publicly aligned with the Karzai government.

His next stop was Guantánamo.

“Instead of being recalcitrant terrorists bent on fighting America,” Gopal concludes, “this history indicates that all five can make pragmatic deals if the conditions are right.”

The U.S. invasion-occupation of Afghanistan was a war of choice not necessity. American forces made it worse by indiscriminately placing a price on the head of any Afghan whom someone else was willing to destroy.

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Nuclear bomb nearly detonated after falling on North Carolina – declassified report

RT | June 11, 2014

1961-Goldsboro-M39-453x600In a scenario that could’ve been extremely devastating, the United States narrowly averted a nuclear disaster in 1961 when an atomic bomb nearly detonated after falling out of a B-52 bomber that broke up in the sky.

According to the Washington Post, the incident took place on January 21, 1961 – less than 20 years after nuclear bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki – and is explained further in a recently declassified report published by the National Security Archives.

When the US Air Force aircraft went into a tailspin and broke up, the two bombs fell towards Goldsboro, North Carolina. The parachute for one of the weapons failed to deploy, and the plane crash had actually pushed the bomb into “armed” mode by the time it hit the ground. Luckily for North Carolina, the plane’s destruction also damaged the switch necessary to trigger detonation.

“The report implied that because Weapon 2 landed in a free-fall, without the parachute operating, the timer did not initiate the bomb’s high voltage battery (“trajectory arming”), a step in the arming sequence,” wrote Bill Burr of the National Security Archives.

“For Weapon 2, the Arm/Safe switch was in the “safe” position, yet it was virtually armed because the impact shock had rotated the indicator drum to the “armed” position. But the shock also damaged the switch contacts, which had to be intact for the weapon to detonate.”

Burr noted in his report just how fine the line was and is between safety and destruction.

“Perhaps this is what Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara had in mind, a few years later, when he observed that, ‘by the slightest margin of chance, literally the failure of two wires to cross, a nuclear explosion was averted,” he wrote.

These details are just the latest to surface about the incident, which was first revealed by nuclear weapons expert Eric Schlosser last year in a book titled, “Command and Control.” Through a Freedom of Information Act request, Schlosser was able to obtain documentation regarding the incident for the first time, and helped shed light on just how close the Air Force came to witnessing an atomic bomb explode on US soil.

As RT reported last year, the documents revealed that three of the four safety switches on the other bomb failed to work properly, meaning, as Schlosser noted, that only “one simple, dynamo-technology, low voltage switch stood between the United States and a major catastrophe.” The parachute on this one deployed, but when the bomb struck the ground the final firing signal triggered, only to be halted by that fourth safety switch.

The bombs contained a payload of four megatons each and could have generated explosions 260 times more powerful than the one that occurred in Hiroshima.

Before the documents related to the Goldsboro incident surfaced, the US government had denied that its nuclear weapons stockpile had ever put the nation at risk.

“The US government has consistently tried to withhold information from the American people in order to prevent questions being asked about our nuclear weapons policy,” Schlosser told the Guardian. “We were told there was no possibility of these weapons accidentally detonating, yet here’s one that very nearly did.”

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia, China present new joint draft to prevent outer space war

The BRICS Post | June 11, 2014

China and Russia have jointly submitted an updated draft international treaty on banning the deployment of weapons in outer space to a UN-sponsored disarmament conference.

The US and Israel have repeatedly voted against UN resolutions on the prevention of an arms race in outer space.

The updated draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects, was presented at a plenary session of the Conference on Disarmament, the world’s sole multilateral forum for disarmament negotiations.

The new draft treaty prepared by Russia and China is a revised version of the one the two allies had presented earlier, including definition and scope of the treaty, organizations as well as mechanisms to solve disputes, said Wu Haitao, China’s ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary for disarmament affairs.

The Treaty on Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects (PPWT) was first proposed by China and Russia in February 2008 as an international legally binding treaty that would outlaw the weaponization of space.

Wu said this new draft treaty is aimed at advancing the Conference on Disarmament toward negotiations for signing an international legal document.

Space assets like satellites are at increasing threat of being disabled from hostile countries as risk of cyber-warfare grows.

Beijing has warned of the growing risks of the weaponization of outer space with the rapid development of space technology, which the Chinese Ambassador said will “hinder the peaceful use of outer space, break global strategic balance and stability and hamper nuclear disarmament”.

The existing legislation on outer space cannot prevent the use or the threat of force against outer space assets, Wu said.

Telecommunications, GPS navigation systems, power etc could be easily switched off with the disabling of satellites in the backdrop of a militarized outer space.

China has stressed during the UN conference on the urgent need to sign a new international legal document to prevent the weaponization of outer space.

China and Russia are willing to include suggestions and ideas from other parties and continue to improve the draft treat in order to lay a foundation for the start of practical negotiations at the Conference on Disarmament, Wu said.

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Fabius’ bad blood infects Iran-P5+1 talks

By Finian Cunningham | Press TV | June 11, 2014

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius has once again poisoned international efforts to settle the nuclear dispute, with his latest effort to sabotage talks between Iran and the P5+1.

Negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 group – US, Britain, France Russia and China plus Germany – are due to reconvene next week in Austria with the tentative prospect of a comprehensive settlement to the long-running nuclear dispute.

A successful outcome would see Western-imposed trade sanctions on Iran being lifted. The onerous impact of these legally questionable Western sanctions on the Iranian people make that outcome long overdue.

However, this week – just days before sensitive talks re-open in Vienna – France’s top diplomat raised a new obstacle to finding a possible final agreement. Fabius is now telling French media that Iran must reduce the number of its nuclear-enrichment centrifuges, by a 10-fold factor, from a few thousand to a few hundred instruments.

Iran has already agreed to significant guarantees that its nuclear program is for peaceful civilian purposes – and not for weaponization, as the US, Britain and France have long been claiming – by agreeing to cap uranium enrichment at levels far below that required to make atomic bombs.

Fabius’ latest demand that Iran must now also drastically scale back on the number of its centrifuges used in uranium enrichment represents a new pre-condition for settling the nuclear impasse. The number of centrifuges is irrelevant given that Iran has already agreed to impose a limit on uranium enrichment – a generous concession by Iran given that it is not mandated to do so by the Non-Proliferation Treaty. That self-imposed restriction led to the interim agreement being signed between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers last November.

That initial groundbreaking nuclear deal at the end of last year was also nearly scuppered back then by Laurent Fabius, when days before he suddenly raised the issue of “guarantees for Israeli security”. That was also seen as a mischievous intervention from Fabius, even by other Western diplomats, which in the event did not prevent the interim deal being signed on November 26.

Days before the next round of crucial talks, Fabius is up to his toxic diplomacy yet again.

Without exaggeration, no other contemporary Western diplomat has as much bad blood in his political veins than the French foreign minister.

He is currently overseeing French state-sponsored terrorism in Syria to illegally overthrow the elected government of President Bashar al Assad. Fabius is also currently overseeing the illegal French invasion of two African countries – Mali and Central Africa Republic – which has sparked the death of thousands of people from internecine violence. And yet this politician has the temerity and arrogance to hold the Iranian nation to ransom over trumped-up nuclear concerns.

But there is much more to this politician’s contaminated career. Fabius’ sinister political history has previously seen him involved in other acts of state terrorism, nuclear destruction of the environment on a massive scale, and the manslaughter of thousands of people around the world through the criminal selling of poisoned blood products.

Let’s start with the latter point first. During the 1980s when Fabius was then French prime minister, his government knowingly supplied blood transfusion products to its own citizens and those of many other countries around the world – to safeguard French commercial profits. It became known as the “blood transfusion scandal” – the biggest health controversy ever to hit France. More than 4,000 French citizens were infected by blood contaminated with HIV and Hepatitis C – of which at least 40 per cent were to die. Among several countries affected by importing blood products from France was Iran. An unknown number of sick Iranian patients would also later die from these toxic
French imports.

As head of the French government between 1984-86, Fabius was subsequently charged with manslaughter relating to the scandal. He was later acquitted by a French court in 1999, along with another minister, while his former Health Minister Edmond Herve was found guilty. At least two other government officials were sent to jail for their part in the systematic crime. Angry campaigners denounced Fabius’ acquittal as an example of the French political elite being “untouchable”.

At the same time that Fabius’ government was overseeing the mass poisoning of blood patients to protect the commercial interests of French pharmaceutical companies, this same government committed one of the most audacious acts of state terrorism in recent decades.

In July 1985, French military agents carried out the bombing of a civilian ship, The Rainbow Warrior. The ship belonged to Greenpeace, the environmental campaign group, and was moored in the New Zealand port of Auckland at the time of the deadly attack, which resulted in the death of one Greenpeace activist and several others injured. French divers had mined the vessel with two explosives.

The incident brought an outpouring of international condemnation, and initially Fabius’ government denied any involvement. However, New Zealand police later arrested two French agents belonging to the foreign intelligence service, the DGSE. The pair were convicted and jailed. Fabius was then forced to come clean, in September 1985, when he made the shocking admission to world media that the French government had indeed ordered the murderous attack on a civilian vessel in a sovereign foreign territory. He famously said at the time: “The truth is cruel.”

But the background to this French act of state terrorism on the Rainbow Warrior is even more criminal. The Greenpeace ship was in New Zealand at that time to lead international protests against rampant French testing of nuclear weapons in the South Pacific. Ever since 1962, France unilaterally declared its colonial territories of Polynesia and surrounding seas to be nuclear test sites. Between 1966 and 1996, successive French governments, including that of Laurent Fabius, carried out nearly 200 test explosions on the Pacific coral reef islands of Mururoa and Fangataufa.

The nuclear explosions were carried out with air, sea and underground devices and have been responsible for radioactive pollution spreading to New Zealand, Australia and even as far away as Peru in South America. The French weapons of mass destruction have also destroyed countless natural habitats in the South Pacific.

A year before the Rainbow Warrior terror attack, the New Zealand government introduced a law designating its territorial waters a nuclear-free zone. But that legal restriction did not stop Fabius’ government from committing an act of murder against civilians – civilians who were protesting against French acts of mass extermination in the South Pacific.

This is the criminal quality of former French Prime Minister and now Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius – who has the audacity to lecture the people of Iran about their legally entitled use of peaceful nuclear technology.

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Deception, Militarism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US to maintain Special Forces in Eastern Europe permanently

ITAR-TASS | June 11, 2014

WASHINGTON – US will deploy more troops on the territory of NATO members in Eastern Europe to assist them in the preparation of similar elite units. The US European Command (Eurocom) reported that the decision was dictated by the necessity to provide additional support to the Eastern European allies after the crisis in Ukraine and Russia’s actions in Crimea.

“Training with our partners in their home countries is something that we have always done,” Special Operations Command Europe (SOCEUR) spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Nick Sternberg said. “The difference is that now we will maintain a (permanent) Special Operations Forces presence in theater along the eastern front of NATO on this training mission,” Sternberg added.

US Special Forces units took part in maneuvers in Poland, Slovakia and the Baltic countries since the end of last month. It is expected that the number of joint exercises of elite units of the US and other NATO countries will increase. The total number of US Special Forces will not exceed 100 people in Eastern Europe, one of the EUROCOM representatives told Reuters.

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Leave a comment

Sikorski and Dziewulski: The Strategy and Tactics of the Neo-Commonwealth

By Andrew Korybko | Oriental Review | June 10, 2014

As the war in the southeast of (former) Ukraine rages on, more proof is emerging of active Polish participation there. This participation has thus far been indirect (i.e. no official Polish military units), although this does not mean that it is no less lethal. Not only has Poland been complicit in training urban terrorists in the run-up to the EuroMaidan chaos, but it has also sent loads of mercenaries to forcibly put down the anti-coup protesters rising up against the junta. Now, photographic proof linking Poland to the Ukrainian madness has arisen. Jerzy Dziewulski, the security advisor to former Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski, was photographed last week with Turchynov in Slavyansk. Dziewulski is a notorious counter-terrorism expert, having been trained in the US, Israel, France, and Germany, and he currently runs his own private ‘security’ organization. Despite Sikorski playing dumb about the presence of Polish mercenaries in Ukraine and saying he’d “report the fact to the country’s prosecution office”, Dziewulski’s photo with Turchynov proves that he is lying. In reality, Sikorski and Dziewulski represent Poland’s strategic and tactical interference in Ukraine’s civil conflict, and one can no longer be separated from the other.

Photo taken at the outskirts of Slavyansk, at the HQ of Ukrainian "antiterrorist operation" command. Jerzy Dziewulski (left) and Alexander Turchinov (center).

Reports of mercenary teams operating in (former) Ukraine started sprouting up on the eve of the Kievan junta’s punitive operation in April, but only recently has proof begun to emerge of Poland’s contribution to this force. The late-May report about Polish mercenaries being shipped to Ukraine was almost immediately challenged by Sikorski, despite Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister stressing that foreign mercenaries, “particularly from Poland”, are active on the ground. Sikorski is now just as easily dismissing the actual capturing of these mercenaries and their Polish commanders, with the Polish Foreign Ministry simply stating that such information is “black propaganda”. This shouldn’t come as a surprise since Sikorski is on record nearly a week prior speaking about the illegality of these mercenaries in the first place, and thus, he will never confirm that they exist. Now that the photo of Dziewulski (dressed in full combat fatigues, helmet, and appearing to have a pistol holstered to his chest) with Turchynov in Slavyansk has hit the internet, it is impossible to deny Poland’s participation in that conflict zone.

To properly understand the significance of the photo in catching the Polish government red-handed, a few words must be said about Dziewulski. As taken from his website, he is an anti-terrorism expert who founded Poland’s Commission for Special Services (special forces). He is licensed in mine warfare, pyrotechnics, and as a sniper. He underwent operational training in Israel, the US, Germany, and France, even training with the State Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms during his time in America. He advertises himself as the premier expert on all things related to security, including the use of security companies (read: private military companies) and the “customization of security plans” (read: directing the mercenary offensives). Considering his previous intimate association with Kwasniewski, it is highly probable that he is an important cog in Poland’s national security complex. This makes it all the less likely that Sikorski would not know about such a high-profile government-connected individual’s militant involvement in a festering conflict next door.

Jerzy Dziewulski

What has transpired is that Sikorski and Dziewulski have commandeered Polish policy towards Ukraine and now present a unified two-pronged offensive against the people in Donbass. Sikorski, maneuvering for the EU’s top foreign policy spot, has almost completely overshadowed Poland’s own Prime Minister, whom 69% of Europeans can’t even recognize. Sikorski’s approach is to present the high-level strategy that Poland uses to advance its interests in the lands of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the revival of which the Yanukovich-era head of Ukraine’s security services credits as motivating Polish participation in the February coup). Dziewulski represents a more underhanded and, prior to the photo’s publication, covert approach towards the east. He is the on-the-ground militant power that tactically carries out Sikorski’s strategy. His extensive previous experience could even possibly mean that it is he who is controlling the legions of mercenaries scouring Donbass (and thus responsible for any war crimes carried out by them. After all, it is not likely that Turchynov would waste his time being photographed with an insignificant (which we know Dziewulski is not) figure near the front lines of his offensive. Sikorski and Dziewulski together thus form a unified and aggressive combination of ‘brains and brawn’ that represent the arm and hammer of the ‘Slavic Turkey’s’ Neo-Commonwealth plans.

Andrew Korybko is the American Master’s Degree student at the Moscow State University of International Relations (MGIMO).

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Deception, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s president-elect Reuven Rivlin in his own words


‘I have a vision that suddenly all the Jewish people will come to live here… And if there were 10 million Jews here, we wouldn’t have to give up on anything.’
MEMO | June 11, 2014

Reuven Rivlin was elected yesterday the tenth president of Israel. He has previously served as Speaker of the Knesset (2003-’06, 2009-’13), and has been a Member of Knesset since 1988. Hailing from PM Netanyahu’s Likud party, Rivlin also served as a minister in Ariel Sharon’s government (2001-’03). He will replace Shimon Peres when the latter’s term ends in July.

“I whole-heartedly believe that the land of Israel is ours in its entirety.”

“The communities in Judea and Samaria [Ed. referring to West Bank settlements] do not threaten our existence, they guarantee our existence.”

“Today, almost 20 years after Oslo, we can see clearly that the idea of separating the [Israeli and Palestinian] nations failed.”

“For some reason the settlement enterprise is being accused of being an obstacle to peace. Personally, I explain at each possible forum that the obstacle to peace is the objection by the Arabs to it and the fact that they do not want us here”.

Israeli citizens who marry Palestinians need to move to “the other side“.

“Dividing Jerusalem will bring disaster for the city. It cannot be that every time something is built in Jerusalem, the international community censures it. This constant criticism is a mark of disgrace for the international community.”

“We will not apologize – not for conquering Katamon or Jaffa or Tzfat, nor for liberating Hebron, and not for building Jerusalem our capital.”

“The residents here [in Migron settlement] are not thieves and are not trying to banish people from their land. They came here innocently, with the encouragement of the State of Israel.”

“There is no consensus in Israel regarding the two state formula. We will not, under any circumstances, allow the establishment of a neighbouring state that will be a genuine threat on our existence.”

“Zionism from its outset was a settlement movement. If we stop going on this path, how can we justify the faith that all of Zion belongs to us?”

“There are red lines that I as a democrat, say you cannot cross. I see it as defiance against Israel and Jerusalem as its capital as well as another protest against the historical narrative, a matter already pending before the High Court.” (Responding to a MK Tibi-proposed bill recognising Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state)

“I have a vision that suddenly all the Jewish people [from around the world] will come to live here… And if there were 10 million Jews here, we wouldn’t have to give up on anything.”

“If the Nakba is a tragedy, then the establishment of the State of Israel is a tragedy. The Palestinians experienced a catastrophe that was brought on by their leaders, but the establishment of the State of Israel is not the reason for it.”

“Terrorism is trying to paralyze and silence democracies fighting against it, exactly as was manifest in the world’s reaction to Israel’s counter-terrorist offensive Cast Lead in light of the Goldstone Report.”

“We miss [Rehavam Ze’evi’s] clear, ideological voice, his leadership, his larger than life presence.”

June 11, 2014 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment