SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
the high jump...All eyes are on Mariupol. As of Wednesday night, over 70% of residential areas were under control of Donetsk and Russian forces, while Russian Marines, Donetsk’s 107thbatallion and Chechen Spetsnaz, led by the charismatic Adam Delimkhanov, had entered the Azov-Stal plant – the HQ of the neo-Nazi Azov batallion. Azov was sent a last ultimatum: surrender until midnight – or else, as in a take no prisoners highway to hell. That implies a major game-changer in the Ukrainian battlefield; Mariupol is finally about to be thoroughly denazified – as the Azov contingent long entrenched in the city and using civilians as human shields were their most hardened fighting force. Meanwhile, echoes from the Empire of Lies all but gave the whole game away. There’s no intention whatsoever in Washington to facilitate a peace plan in Ukraine – and that explains Comedian Zelensky’s non-stop stalling tactics. The supreme target is regime change in Russia, and for that Totalen Krieg against Russia and all things Russian is warranted. Ukraine is just a pawn in the game – or worse, mere cannon fodder. This also means that the 14,000 deaths in Donbass for the past 8 years should be directly attributed to the Exceptionalists. As for Ukrainian neo-Nazis of all stripes, they are as expendable as “moderate rebels” in Syria, be they al-Qaeda or Daesh-linked. Those that may eventually survive can always join the budding CIA-sponsored Neo-Nazi Inc. – the tawdry remix of the 1980s Jihad Inc. in Afghanistan. They will be properly “Kalibrated”.
A quick neo-Nazi recap By now only the brain dead across NATOstan – and there are hordes – are not aware of Maidan in 2014. Yet few know that it was then Ukrainian Minister of Interior Arsen Avakov, a former governor of Kharkov, who gave the green light for a 12,000 paramilitary outfit to materialize out of Sect 82 soccer hooligans who supported Dynamo Kiev. That was the birth of the Azov batallion, in May 2014, led by Andriy Biletsky, a.k.a. the White Fuhrer, and former leader of the neo-nazi gang Patriots of Ukraine. Together with NATO stay-behind agent Dmitro Yarosh, Biletsky founded Pravy Sektor, financed by Ukrainian mafia godfather and Jewish billionaire Ihor Kolomoysky (later the benefactor of the meta-conversion of Zelensky from mediocre comedian to mediocre President.) Pravy Sektor happened to be rabidly anti-EU – tell that to Ursula von der Lugen – and politically obsessed with linking Central Europe and the Baltics in a new, tawdry Intermarium. Crucially, Pravy Sektor and other nazi gangs were duly trained by NATO instructors. Biletsky and Yarosh are of course disciples of notorious WWII-era Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, for whom pure Ukrainians are proto-Germanic or Scandinavian, and Slavs are untermenschen. Azov ended up absorbing nearly all neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine and were dispatched to fight against Donbass – with their acolytes making more money than regular soldiers. Biletsky and another neo-Nazi leader, Oleh Petrenko, were elected to the Rada. The White Führer stood on his own. Petrenko decided to support then President Poroshenko. Soon the Azov battalion was incorporated as the Azov Regiment to the Ukrainian National Guard. They went on a foreign mercenary recruiting drive – with people coming from Western Europe, Scandinavia and even South America. That was strictly forbidden by the Minsk Agreements guaranteed by France and Germany (and now de facto defunct). Azov set up training camps for teenagers and soon reached 10,000 members. Erik “Blackwater” Prince, in 2020, struck a deal with the Ukrainian military that would enable his renamed outfit, Academi, to supervise Azov. It was none other than sinister Maidan cookie distributor Vicky “F**k the EU” Nuland who suggested to Zelensky – both of them, by the way, Ukrainian Jews – to appoint avowed Nazi Yarosh as an adviser to the Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Gen Valerii Zaluzhnyi. The target: organize a blitzkrieg on Donbass and Crimea – the same blitzkrieg that SVR, Russian foreign intel, concluded would be launched on February 22, thus propelling the launch of Operation Z. All of the above, in fact just a quick recap, shows that in Ukraine there’s no difference whatsoever between white neo-Nazis and brown-colored al-Qaeda/ISIS/Daesh, as much as neo-Nazis are just as “Christian” as takfiri Salafi-jihadis are “Muslim”. When Putin denounced a “bunch of neo-Nazis” in power in Kiev, the Comedian replied that it was impossible because he was Jewish. Nonsense. Zelensky and his patron Kolomoysky, for all practical purposes, are Zio-Nazis. Even as branches of the United States government admitted to neo-Nazis entrenched in the Kiev apparatus, the Exceptionalist machine made the daily shelling of Donbass for 8 years simply disappear. These thousands of civilian victims never existed. U.S. mainstream media even ventured the odd piece or report on Azov and Aidar neo-Nazis. But then a neo-Orwellian narrative was set in stone: there are no Nazis in Ukraine. CIA offshoot NED even started deleting records about training members of Aidar. Recently a crappy news network duly promoted a video of a NATO-trained and weaponized Azov commander – complete with Nazi iconography.
Why “denazification” makes sense The Banderastan ideology harks back to when this part of Ukraine was in fact controlled by the Austro-Hungarian empire, the Russian empire and Poland. Stepan Bandera was born in Austro-Hungary in 1909, near Ivano-Frankovsk, in the – then autonomous – Kingdom of Galicia. WWI dismembered European empires into frequently non-viable small entities. In western Ukraine – an imperial intersection – that inevitably led to the proliferation of extremely intolerant ideologies. Banderastan ideologues profited from the Nazi arrival in 1941 to try to proclaim an independent territory. But Berlin not only blocked it but sent them to concentration camps. In 1944 though the Nazis changed tactics: they liberated the Banderanistas and manipulated them into anti-Russian hate, thus creating a destabilization force in the Ukrainian USSR.
So Nazism is not exactly the same as Banderastan fanatics: they are in fact competing ideologies. What happened since Maidan is that the CIA kept a laser focus on inciting Russian hatred by whatever fringe groups it could instrumentalize. So Ukraine is not a case of “white nationalism” – to put it mildly – but of anti-Russian Ukrainian nationalism, for all practical purposes manifested via Nazi-style salutes and Nazi-style symbols. So when Putin and the Russian leadership refer to Ukrainian Nazism, that may not be 100% correct, conceptually, but it strikes a chord with every Russian. Russians viscerally reject Nazism – considering that virtually every Russian family has at least one ancestor killed during the Great Patriotic War. From the perspective of wartime psychology, it makes total sense to talk of “Ukro-nazism” or, straight to the point, a “denazification” campaign.
How the Anglos loved the Nazis The United States government openly cheerleading neo-Nazis in Ukraine is hardly a novelty, considering how it supported Hitler alongside England in 1933 for balance of power reasons. In 1933, Roosevelt lent Hitler one billion gold dollars while England lent him two billion gold dollars. That should be multiplied 200 times to arrive at today’s fiat dollars. The Anglo-Americans wanted to build up Germany as a bulwark against Russia. In 1941 Roosevelt wrote to Hitler that if he invaded Russia the U.S. would side with Russia, and wrote Stalin that if Stalin invaded Germany the U.S. would back Germany. Talk about a graphic illustration of Mackinderesque balance of power. The Brits had become very concerned with the rise of Russian power under Stalin while observing that Germany was on its knees with 50% unemployment in 1933, if one counted unregistered itinerant Germans. Even Lloyd George had misgivings about the Versailles Treaty, unbearably weakening Germany after its surrender in WWI. The purpose of WWI, in Lloyd George’s worldview, was to destroy Russia and Germany together. Germany was threatening England with the Kaiser building a fleet to take over the oceans, while the Tsar was too close to India for comfort. For a while Britannia won – and continued to rule the waves. Then building up Germany to fight Russia became the number one priority – complete with rewriting of History. The uniting of Austrian Germans and Sudetenland Germans with Germany, for instance, was totally approved by the Brits. But then came the Polish problem. When Germany invaded Poland, France and Britain stood on the sidelines. That placed Germany on the border of Russia, and Germany and Russia divided up Poland. That’s exactly what Britain and France wanted. Britain and France had promised Poland that they would invade Germany from the west while Poland fought Germany from the east. In the end, the Poles were double-crossed. Churchill even praised Russia for invading Poland. Hitler was advised by MI6 that England and France would not invade Poland – as part of their plan for a German-Russian war. Hitler had been supported financially since the 1920s by MI6 for his favorable words about England in Mein Kampf. MI6 de facto encouraged Hitler to invade Russia. Fast forward to 2022, and here we go again – as farce, with the Anglo-Americans “encouraging” Germany under feeble Scholz to put itself back together militarily, with 100 billion euros (that the Germans don’t have), and setting up in thesis a revamped European force to later go to war against Russia. Cue to the Russophobic hysteria in Anglo-American media about the Russia-China strategic partnership. The mortal Anglo-American fear is Mackinder/Mahan/Spykman/Kissinger/Brzezinski all rolled into one: Russia-China as peer competitor twins take over the Eurasian land mass – the Belt and Road Initiative meets the Greater Eurasia Partnership – and thus rule the planet, with the U.S. relegated to inconsequential island status, as much as the previous “Rule Britannia”. England, France and later the Americans had prevented it when Germany aspired to do the same, controlling Eurasia side by side with Japan, from the English Channel to the Pacific. Now it’s a completely different ball game. So Ukraine, with its pathetic neo-Nazi gangs, is just an – expendable – pawn in the desperate drive to stop something that is beyond anathema, from Washington’s perspective: a totally peaceful German-Russian-Chinese New Silk Road. Russophobia, massively imprinted in the West’s DNA, never really went away. Cultivated by the Brits since Catherine the Great – and then with The Great Game. By the French since Napoleon. By the Germans because the Red Army liberated Berlin. By the Americans because Stalin forced to them the mapping of Europe – and then it went on and on and on throughout the Cold War. We are at just the early stages of the final push by the dying Empire to attempt arresting the flow of History. They are being outsmarted, they are already outgunned by the top military power in the world, and they will be checkmated. Existentially, they are not equipped to kill the Bear – and that hurts. Cosmically.
READ MORE: https://www.unz.com/pescobar/make-nazism-great-again/
FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW ••••••••••••••••••••••••
|
User login |
pepe escobar….
Pepe Escobar (born 1954) is a Brazilian journalist and geopolitical analyst.[1][2] His column "The Roving Eye" for Asia Times regularly discusses the multi-national "competition for dominance over the Middle East and Central Asia."[3]
"Pipelineistan" is a term coined by Escobar to describe "the vast network of oil and gas pipelines that crisscross the potential imperial battlefields of the planet," particularly in Central Asia.[16][17] Articles by Escobar about his "Pipelineistan" theory, many first published in TomDispatch, have been re-published in Al-Jazeera, Grist, Mother Jones, The Nation, and elsewhere.[18][19][20]
As Escobar argued in a 2009 article published by CBS News, running energy pipelines from the energy-rich nations near the Caspian Sea would let Europe be less dependent on the natural gas that it currently gets from Russia, and would potentially help the West rely less on OPEC. This situation results in an international conflict of interest over the region. Escobar has asserted that the West's war on terror is "always over energy."[21][22]
Some writers have supported but others have criticized Escobar's "Pipelineistan" theory "that the bloodshed in Syria is simply another war over Middle Eastern energy resources."[23][18][24] A recent (2021) scholarly critique of Escobar's theory that "oil and gas interests are central factors for understanding foreign intervention in Syria" concludes that Russia is more likely to be motivated by "regime consolidation."[25] Others criticizing the theory state that "the timing is wrong" and that unless "Syria and Iraq stabilise, and political relations with Saudi Arabia and Iraq improve" any pipeline involving Syria remains a "pipe dream."[23]
GUSNOTE: PEPE ESCOBAR'S PIPELINEISTAN THEORY OF THE WAR IS SYRIA IS SOLID. IN 2009(?), OBAMA MADE A REQUEST ON BEHALF OF THE SAUDIS TO CONSTRUCT A (GAS) PIPELINE THROUGH SYRIA. ASSAD REFUSED AS HE WAS A "FRIEND" OF RUSSIA AND THIS NEW PIPELINE WOULD COMPETE WITH RUSSIAN GAS. FROM THEN ON, THE US ORGANISED UNREST IN SYRIA, WHICH LED TO THE INTERVENTION OF RUSSIA IN 2015. THE USA IS STILL STEALING SYRIAN OIL TO PAY THE KURDS...
According to Arnaud De Borchgrave, during the 2011 Libyan Civil War Escobar wrote a piece "uncovering" the background of Abdelhakim Belhaj, whose military leadership against Gaddafi was being aided by NATO, had trained with al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.[4] According to Escobar's story, published by Asia Times on August 30, 2011, Belhaj's background was well-known to Western intelligence but had been concealed from the public.[26]
Documents revealed by Wikileaks in the 2012–13 Stratfor email leak show this story being shared by Stratfor employees as they review media articles on Libya.[27][unreliable source?]
Interviewed about his story by Radio New Zealand, Escobar warned that Belhaj and his close associates were fundamentalists whose goal was to impose Islamic law once they defeated Gaddafi.[28] Escobar's story was further reported by others, including PBS and The New American.[29][30]
The State Department's Global Engagement Center (GEC) has identified several outlets that publish or republish work by Escobar as being used by Russia for propaganda and disinformation.[31][32] In 2020, the GEC stated that both the Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF) and Global Research, two online journals where Escobar's work has appeared, acted as pro-Russian propaganda sites.[33] According to the GEC, "Pepe Escobar began writing articles for Global Research in 2005 and ten years later became an SCF author.[31]
Escobar has also been a commentator for RT and Sputnik News; both outlets were highlighted in a 2022 GEC report as members of "Russia's disinformation and propaganda ecosystem."[32] Ukrainian journalist Volodymyr Yermolenko describes Escobar as an example of "anti-Western intellectuals" hosted by RT, adding that Escobar suggests "dividing Ukraine between Poland and Russia."[34]
In 2012, Jesse Zwick at The New Republic asked Escobar why he was willing to work with RT; Escobar replied, "I knew the Kremlin involvement, but I said, why not use it? After a few months, I was very impressed by the American audience. There are dozens of thousands of viewers. A very simple story can get 20,000 hits on YouTube. The feedback was huge.”[35]
On February 25, 2022, the Spanish newspaper ABC criticized Escobar's Sputnik comments concerning Ukraine and other topics, calling them "los habituales de la desinformación rusa: imperialismo 'yanqui', excesos de la OTAN, victimismo ruso" (tr. "the usual ones of Russian disinformation: 'Yankee' imperialism, NATO excesses, Russian victimization.")[36]
Other outlets that have published his work include Al Jazeera (2011 – 2013),[37][38] Common Dreams (2009 – 2015),[39] HuffPost (2011 – 2017),[40] Mother Jones(2009 – 2015),[41] Salon.com (2010 –2015),[42] The Nation (2009 – 2015),[43] and Brasil 247 [pt][44] Russia Insider (2015 –2020),[45]The Unz Review and Strategic Culture Foundation have republished many of Escobar's articles written for other publications.[46][47]
READ MORE:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepe_Escobar
READ FROM TOP.
We don't shy from publishing Pepe Escobar's articles (one at top) because they're much closer to the truth than the Western media rubbish... often dished out by the CIA and its lying masters.
FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.....