Featured The Eurasian Big Bang

Obama is on a hot war footing. Western civilization is allegedly “threatened by the Islamic State”.

The “Global War on Terrorism” is heralded as a humanitarian endeavor.

We have a “Responsibility to Protect”. Humanitarian warfare is the solution.

Evil folks are lurking. ‘Take ‘em out”, said George W. Bush.

The Western media is beating the drums of war. Obama’s military agenda is supported by a vast propaganda apparatus.

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to “fabricate an enemy”. As the political legitimacy of the Obama Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this “outside enemy”, namely Al Qaeda and its network of (CIA sponsored) affiliates must be dispelled.

The purpose is to tacitly instil, through repeated media reports, ad nauseam, within people’s inner consciousness, the notion that Muslims constitute a threat to the security of the Western World.

Humanitarian warfare is waged on several fronts: Russia, China and the Middle East are currently the main targets.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory-what-is-the-truth/5429344

The conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen are all fronts in a multi-dimensional war being waged by the US and its allies. This multi-dimensional war aims to encircle Eurasia. China, Iran, and Russia are the main targets.

The US also has an order of operations with which to takeout these countries. Iran is first, followed by Russia, with China as the last part of the Eurasian set comprised of this «Eurasian Triple Entente.» It is no coincidence that the conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen are near the borders of Iran and Russia, because Tehran and Moscow are the nearer term targets of Washington.

In the same vein as the interlinked nature of the conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen, there is also a connection between the violent, racist, xenophobic, and sectarian forces that have been unleashed as «agents of chaos.» It is no mere coincidence that Newsweek had a headline saying «Ukrainian Nationalist Volunteers Committing ‘ISIS-Style’ War Crimes» on September 10, 2014. [1] Whether they know it or not, these deviant forces, whether they are the ultra-nationalist Pravy Sektor militias in Ukraine or the head-cutting gangs of Al-Nusra and the ISIS/ISIL/IS/DAISH/DAESH in Syria and Iraq, all serve one master. These agents of chaos are unleashing different waves of constructive chaos to prevent Eurasian integration and a world order that is free of US dictates.

The «constructive chaos» that is being unleashed in Eurasia will eventually wreck havoc in India. If New Delhi thinks that it will be left alone, it is foolishly mistaken. The same agents of chaos will plague it as well. It too is a target like China, Iran, and Russia.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-isil-is-in-ukraine-americas-agents-of-chaos-unleashed-in-eurasia/5446989

In this episode of Alternative views, former CIA agent John Stockwell explains “how CIA ‘disinformation’ tactics manipulate public opinion by planting stories in the press and by financing and supporting right-wing newspapers“.

Planting stories in the media is a standard CIA technique:

A common Agency tactic was writing editorials and phony news stories to be knowingly published by Latin American media with no indication of the CIA authorship or CIA payment to the media. The propaganda value of such a “news” item might be multiplied by being picked up by other CIA stations in Latin America who would disseminate it through a CIA-owned news agency or a CIA-owned radio station. Some of these stories made their way back to the United States to be read or heard by unknowing North Americans. (Blum, op. cit.)

Moreover several journalists are members of the very influential foreign policy think tank Council on Foreign Relations, which has among its corporate members:

1. Major financial institutions such as:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/dont-be-fooled-by-mainstream-media-journalists-independent-experts-and-the-cia/5361986

 

Yes consortium news. I find it more credible than your corporate sponsored news agencies and think tanks for a simple reason. They don't try to paint everyone that questions the official narratives as "conspiracy theorists". They actually try to put everything together and make sense out of what we see happening. Your sources do the opposite. They try to portray everything as separate issues in some kind of vacuum and demonize anyone that questions or has doubts as "conspiracy theorists".

Zbigniew Brzezinski served as counselor to Lyndon B. Johnson from 1966 to 1968 and national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. In 1981, he received the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his role in the normalization of U.S.-China relations.

On Monday, he attended a private dinner at the White House with President Obama, Vice President Biden and other top policy experts to discuss critical U.S. national security and foreign policy challenges; before that meeting, he spoke with msnbc in a conversation on those same issues.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/zbigniew-brzezinski-isis-ukraine-and-the-future-american-power

Read the Grand Chessboard and compare it to what you have seen taking place in Eurasia since ZB wrote the book. Read what the Brookings Institute has written and compare it to what has been taking place in the mid east. Read the corporate sponsored think tanks policy papers instead of listening to TV talking heads and compare it to what you see happening. In other words read what the people who formulate Washington's foreign policy are writing instead of listening to their paid propagandists that are there to convince you that there is a "democrat" foreign policy and "republican" foreign policy. There isn't. There's one foreign policy and it benefits the banks and corporations, not the American people, not the Iraqis, not the Libyans, not the Syrians, not the Ukrainians but the banks and corporations that sponsor (control) the think tanks and "mainstream" media you put so much trust in.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/09/ukraine-jewish-community-israel/380515/

Putin planned, maybe. Washington definitely made it happen.

Coax changes. :laugh: How very euphemistic.

Washington didn't invade Libya either, or Syria. It just funded and armed the opposition who turned out be radical Islamists. Now Washington is pretending to fight the same radical Islamists in order to bring Assad down.

It's more politically expedient to fund and arm the opposition in order to bring about "regime change" than invade. I doubt even you would go along with invading every country Washington has used proxies to destabilize and replace the existing government.

But then that all depends on how well the media did it's job to scare you and demonize the opposition.

You haven't said anywhere in this thread that the US shouldn't be funding and arming proxies to intervene in Eastern Europe or Central Asia either. From what I've read you're doing everything you can to avoid admitting this "policy" has been taking place since the Afghan Soviet war.

Russia and China have seen how Washington's NGOs have been used to destabilize other countries and they are taking steps to make sure they can't do the same in their countries. Now they are being demonized for taking steps to protect themselves from something they see as a threat to their security.

 

U.S. Propaganda: It’s Not Just False, but Absurd.

By Eric Zuesse, as originally published at strategic-culture.org.

It’s so ridiculous, no intelligent and informed person would give it any serious consideration whatsoever. It insults the public’s intelligence.

Here’s a typical example of the ridiculousness of U.S. propaganda: On July 16th, the U.S. State Department issued a “Ukraine Travel Warning.” It says:

Continue . . . http://www.washingtonsblog.com/

What, then, are the facts on that matter, of Crimea?

First, we must make note of the fact that this annexation occurred on 16 March 2014, when Crimeans went to the polls and voted in a referendum on whether to remain ruled by the Ukrainian national Government in Kiev, as they had been ruled only since 1954, or instead by the Russian national Government in Moscow, as they had been ruled from 1783 to 1954; and we must also keep in mind that this referendum had occurred as a direct result of Obama’s coup against the man, Viktor Yanukovych, for whom Crimeans had voted at around 75% throughout Crimea. In the United States, that type of election, one in which the leading candidate had received 75% of the vote, would be called a “landslide.”

How would Americans feel if they had voted 75% for a President in 2010, for a six-year term, only to find him overthrown in an extremely violent coup four years later by a foreign power that they despised and feared as an aggressor, as Crimeans overwhelmingly, and by far more than 75%, felt about the United States? Specifically, if you’ll look there (at that link) at those polls by Gallup (and you can get to each one of them there by just two clicks, so it’s quick), what you’ll find is that even before Obama’s February 2014 coup which overthrew the Ukrainian President whom nearly 80% of Crimeans had voted for, the Crimean people overwhelmingly wanted to secede from Ukraine — and, especially now they did, right after the President for whom they had overwhelmingly voted, Viktor Yanukovych, had been overthrown in this extremely bloody coup. Furthermore, in April 2014, Gallup again polled Crimea, and they found that 71.3% of Crimeans viewed as “Mostly positive” the role of Russia there, and 4.0% viewed it as “Mostly negative”; by contrast, only 2.8% of Crimeans viewed the role of the United States there as “Mostly positive,” and a whopping 76.2% viewed it as “Mostly negative.” During the intervening year (i.e., both before and after Obama’s coup and the resulting secession-referendum), Crimeans’ favorability toward America had plunged down to 2.8%, from its year-earlier 6%. Clearly, what Obama had done in Ukraine (his violent coup in Kiev) had antagonized the Crimeans. And, as if that weren’t enough, the 2014 poll provided yet more evidence:

http://web.archive.org/web/20150731105101/http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/entire-case-sanctions-russia-pure-lies/

U.S. Tries to Stir Ethnic Division in Crimea

On Saturday, August 1st, Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko (who now acknowledges that his government is illegitimate and that his predecessor Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown in a February 2014 coup), sent greetings to an international conference of supporters of Tatars in Crimea, at the Second World Congress of the Crimean Tatars. He charged the current Crimean government (the government that Crimeans elected on 16 March 2014, rejoining Russia) of discriminating against Tatars. His message attacked the “torn imperial policies of the Kremlin,” and the “temporary occupation of Crimea by Russia.” He said that, “The Crimean Tatar people are again experiencing terror, and tens of thousands are thus forced to flee.” He thanked America’s Sunni ally Turkey for hosting this conference of pro-Saudi, Sunni Muslim, Crimeans.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/08/u-s-tries-to-stir-ethnic-division-in-crimea.html

Crimea: Was It Seized by Russia, or Did Russia Block Its Seizure by the U.S.?


Both before and after Crimea left Ukraine and joined Russia in a public referendum on 16 March 2014, the Gallup Organization polled Crimeans on behalf of the U.S. Government, and found them to be extremely pro-Russian and anti-American, and also anti-Ukrainian. (Neither poll was subsequently publicized, because the results of each were the opposite of what the sponsor had wished.) Both polls were done on behalf of the U.S. Government, in order to find Crimeans’ attitudes toward the United States and toward Russia, and also toward Ukraine, not only before but also after the planned U.S. coup in Ukraine, which occurred in February 2014 but was actually kicked off on 20 November 2013, the day before Ukraine’s democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych publicly announced that Ukraine had received a better economic offer from Russia’s Eurasian Economic Community than from America’s European Union. (The EEC subsequently became the Eurasian Economic Union, now that it was clear that Ukraine was going with the EU.) That decision by Yanukovych in favor of the EEC was mistakenly thought by him to be merely an economic one, and he didn’t know the extent to which the U.S. Government had set up an operation to overthrow him if he didn’t go along with the EU’s offer. (If some of these basic historical facts don’t come through from merely the wikipedia articles alone, that’s because the CIA is among the organizations that edit wikipedia articles, and so wikipedia is unwittingly a political propaganda vehicle. It is especially used for propaganda by the CIA and FBI.)

http://web.archive.org/web/20150711213316/http://rinf.com/alt-news/featured/crimea-seized-russia-russia-block-seizure-u-s/

 

Nulandistan: 9 facts that prove the U.S. is behind Ukraine crisis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ufj5hqQ__A0

Neo-Nazi threat in new Ukraine: NEWSNIGHT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY

Under sniper fire - the unseen footage from Kiev. NEWSNIGHT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg3R_BSz0Cc

Who Was Behind Ukrainian Sniper Attacks?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agYvRtX9axA

 

It's done like this . . . CLICK HERE for map.


Russian Presidential advisor Academician Sergei Glazyev reported that the U.S. is funding and training the armed opposition in Ukraine, and that a 1994 Russian-U.S. agreement gives Russia the legal basis to take action in the situation, if necessary. Glazyev made the statements in an extensive interview with the Ukrainian edition of the Russian paper Kommersant, published Thursday.

Glazyev's remark about the 1994 treaty is being hugely misreported in the British and American press as a Russian threat. In fact, what Glazyev said in reply to a question about possible "active intervention" by Russia, is that Russia and the USA are obligated to take action in situations like the present one:

http://schillerinstitute.org/news_briefs/2014/0207-glazyev-ukraine.html

Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994

The Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom signed three memorandums (UN Document A/49/765) on December 5, 1994, with the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Through this agreement, these countries (later to include China and France in individual statements) gave national security assurances to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. The Joint Declaration by the Russian Federation and the United States of America of December 4, 2009 confirmed their commitment.

Excerpt:

http://www.cfr.org/nonproliferation-arms-control-and-disarmament/budapest-memorandums-security-assurances-1994/p32484

 

We're already involved in a war with Russia and China.

Right now it's in the form of proxy wars on the periphery. You really should read the Grand Chessboard.

You might actually learn something about geopolitics other than what Fox News and CNN tell you. :smilewinkgrin:

ISIS in Afghanistan: Proxy War against Iran and China

The emergence of ISIS in Afghanistan, along with the impending withdrawal of US-NATO troops from the country, has driven the Taliban into a marriage of convenience, if not an outright alliance, with Iran. What seemed like an unfathomable scenario just a few years ago, Shia Iran’s support for the hardline Sunni Taliban has become a reality due to the changing circumstances of the war. Though it may be hard to believe, such an alliance is now a critical element of the situation on the ground in Afghanistan. But its significance is far larger than just shifting the balance of power within the country.

Instead, Afghanistan is now in many ways a proxy conflict between the US and its western and Gulf allies on the one hand, and Iran and certain non-western countries, most notably China, on the other. If the contours of the conflict might not be immediately apparent, that is only because the western media, and all the alleged brainiacs of the corporate think tanks, have failed to present the conflict in its true context. The narrative of Afghanistan, to the extent that it’s discussed at all, continues to be about terrorism and stability, nation-building and “support.” But this is a fundamental misunderstanding and mischaracterization of the current war, and the agenda driving it.

And what is this new and dangerous agenda?

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2015/08/isis-in-afghanistan-proxy-war-against.html

 

US Invasion of Syria: The Deep Breath Before the Plunge

When Foreign Policy magazine recently claimed, "Turkey Goes to War," in their article of the same title, what they really meant was "the US goes to war." That is because the lengthy plan they described in their article is not of the Turks' creation, but a long-standing US plan committed to policy papers since at least as early as 2012.

The article claims:

Both the United States and Turkey agree that the Islamic State should be driven from its territory along the Turkish border, though U.S. officials only speak of an “ISIL-free zone” while Turkish officials describe a vision for a “de facto safe zone” where displaced Syrians could find refuge from both regime and jihadi attacks.

However, these "safe zones" are precisely what US policy think tank the Brookings Institution has conspired to create over the entire course of the Syrian conflict, under different pretexts - first predicated on feigned "humanitarian" concern similar to the ruse used to justify NATO's war on Libya in 2011, and now using the so-called "Islamic State" (ISIS) as a pretext.

Brookings' 2012 "Middle East Memo #21" "Assessing Options for Regime Change" would state:

Continue . . . http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/us-invasion-of-syria-deep-breath-before.html

U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency Head: “It Was A Willful Decision [By America] To” “Support An Insurgency That Had Salafists, Al Qaeda And The Muslim Brotherhood”

An internal Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document produced recently shows that the U.S. knew that the actions of “the West, Gulf countries and Turkey” in Syria might create a terrorist group like ISIS and an Islamic caliphate.

While the powers-that-be have tried to downplay the significance of the document, the former head of the DIA – Lieutenant General Michael Flynn – just confirmed its importance.

By any measure, Flynn was a top-level American military commander. Flynn served as:

The Director of the U.S. Intelligence Agency

The Director of intelligence for Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the main military agency responsible for targeting Al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists

The Commander of the Joint Functional Component Command for

Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance

The Chair of the Military Intelligence Board

Assistant director of national intelligence

Flynn confirmed the authenticity of the document in a new interview, and said:

Continue . . . http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/08/u-s-defense-intelligence-agency-head-it-was-a-willful-decision-by-america-to-support-an-insurgency-that-had-salafists-al-qaeda-and-the-muslim-brotherhood.html

Pentagon begins training third class of Syrian rebels

The Pentagon is now training its third class of Syrian rebels in its plan to build a force to take on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), a spokesman said Friday.

In total, the Pentagon is now currently training two classes, in a sign that the program is speeding up after a shaky beginning.

"We currently have two classes in training, and we continue to see significant interests and opposition forces volunteering for the program," U.S. Central Command spoesman Col. Pat Ryder said Friday.

Members of the first class of 54 rebels deployed into Syria last month, only to be attacked by forces the Pentagon believes are al Nusra militants.

Continue . . . http://thehill.com/policy/defense/250640-pentagon-begins-training-third-class-of-syrian-rebels