Connect with us

Latest

Red Pill

Analysis

Snowflakes: Vote for the War Party

Published

on

1,799 Views

Young as they are, Clinton Snowflakes have the most to lose from a nuclear holocaust. Basically, everything. The life that they’ve been planning. Everything! Like sheep to the slaughter, millions will vote for the Obama-Clinton War Party.

Even Bernie Sanders is in the November 2018 mix, seeking a third Senate term on the same good ol’ War Party ticket.

Like Clinton, Sanders is a seasoned interventionist. Writer Jeffrey St. Clair makes the point that both Clinton and Sanders are in the business of advancing “hawkish policies under the ragged banner of ‘humanitarianism.’”

CLICK HERE to Support The Duran >>

St. Clair adds, “Sanders supported Bill Clinton’s war on Serbia, voted for the 2001 Authorization Unilateral Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), which pretty much allowed Bush to wage war wherever he wanted, backed Obama’s Libyan debacle and he supported an expanded US role in the Syrian Civil War.” There’s
more.

The perception of Sanders as a hunched, peacenik professor is effective in garnering support from liberals with a limp. That is, he strikes a chord in those with low grades in history and geography yet who are high on voting from the heart – one sculpted by CNN and MSNBC. As incomprehensible as it might be to a conscientious Snowflake, the policies of Sanders, like those of Obama and Clinton, make him a murderer. Indeed, murder, he wrote. His vote helped tighten
the noose that snapped the neck of Saddam Hussein, separating his body from his soul.

Dear Snowflakes, Sanders is also on record for voting twice in favor of resolutions for regime change in Iraq. The War Party justification for the dastardly execution of Iraq’s national leader, following the cruise missile invasion and rape of the country, remains unrepentant – it was a humanitarian act, implemented for the good of Iraqi citizens and for all humankind.

Might hindsight offer a different perspective? More than one million died, including up to 500,000 Iraqi children. Fifteen years after our fearless leader, G.W. Bush proclaimed, “Mission Accomplished,” Iraq remains in tatters.

Some 4,000 Americans died in vain unless dying for Halliburton counts for something. Tell this to grieving parents! All the while, Iraq has teetered
on the brink of civil war. High living standards and the prosperous middle class under Saddam are history. Oil, architectural treasures, and bank accounts have been looted. A number of major cities are beyond repair. Gifted and educated

Iraqis have fled. The chaos, sown by Hillary and the War Party, gave rise to ISIS and all of its attendant evil.

Such are some of the fruits of the War Party’s humanitarianism. Can you empathize with the gratitude that Iraqis feel for Bernie, Hillary, Obama, as well as
Bush, a “Republican?” Is it unfair to blame only the War Party? After all, Bush, Cheney and their neocons –Republicans – pushed the button on naked, US
aggression.

In the year 2016, masks came off thanks to the Trump miracle. The electorate became a witness to who is really who.

Bush, Jr., along with his father and brother Jeb, can be viewed as sore losers. Fair play on their part was left wanting. Mostly, they showed their true colors. By not supporting the Republican Party’s presidential nominee, Donald Trump, they became de facto sympathizers of the War Party.

Benedict Arnold’s betrayal was more noble, considering that his actions were largely motivated by love. He, after all, sought to win the affection of Peggy Shippen, who was from a loyalist family.

One can only imagine how grateful Iraqis are to Bush, Jr. considering the nightmare that he wrought on their nation. It appears that it will remain prudent for Americans on globe-trotting adventures to side-step Iraq, for the foreseeable future.

Recall Obama’s rhetoric about Putin isolating Russia? In fact, it’s Clinton, Bush, and Obama, who have increasingly isolated America from prospective business in large swaths of the Earth’s surface.

Aging hippies might display a peace symbol on a tie dye T-shirt for fun, yet the generation that was a witness to the horrors of the Viet Nam War has not forgotten
that it was the left-leaning War Party that was responsible for, “Apocalypse Now.” May it never be forgotten that President Johnson lied to the baby boomer
generation, justifying America’s entry into the war on the basis of the premeditated, false flag, Tonkin Gulf incident.

As reported in the Washington Times, “A jumbo-sized Gallup poll now reveals that baby boomers — who once espoused free love, flower power and took to the
streets to protest most anything — now constitute a conservative stronghold.” The “jumbo-sized Gallup poll” is actually 14 Gallup polls conducted throughout 2014,
among 16,479 U.S. adults. The statistics are a nightmare for the War Party, considering that baby-boomers account for the largest voting bloc. You don’t turn down a lunch invitation with the King of Norway. Or do you?

That is, you do if you lack upbringing or if you’re Obama. In the spirit of Woody Allen’s film, you take the money and run, hightailing it out of Oslo before petitions
circulating with the speed of light attain the one million signatures needed for a candidate to have to return the Noble Peace Prize. In fact, prize money cannot be taken back by the committee but did Obama know this?

Despite Obama lacking culture, tradition, and good manners, when pitted against predecessor Bill Clinton preying on interns or of “W” greeting the British Queen
with his hands in his pockets, Obama’s swagger of success accepting undeserved prize money isn’t too far out of bounds.

How he managed to keep a straight face during his laureate acceptance speech is anyone’s guess. It might be recalled that he received the lucrative prize some 12
weeks after being elected, despite no feet-on-the-ground work and no Praise Ye the Lord peace accomplishments. Looking back, Obama apparently duped the prize committee with eloquent speeches festered as they were with unfulfilled hopes, promises and, as time would demonstrate, hypocrisy. The LA Times put it, bluntly:
“U.S. military forces have been at war for all eight years of Obama’s tenure, the first two-term president with that distinction.”

Obama loved rehashing Bill Clinton’s line about being on “the right side of history.” Obama also never hesitated threatening world leaders and nations like
Russia with being on “the wrong side of history.” Is it not curious that, outside of the US, the Obama-Clinton legacy is etched on the wrong side of history, with Obama known as the “Destroyer of Nations?”

It includes Kenya, where Obama’s half-brother Malik lives. He openly expressed his disgust with the Obama-Clinton tag team, as well as with the Democratic Party. He accused them of hypocrisy and for taking the African Continent backward not forward by murdering Qaddafi, a leader who Malik respected and knew well.

Despite US propaganda to the contrary, Qaddafi, was leading by way of example. Without belaboring the positives, they included: free electricity, medicine, and education. Free land was dispensed to farmers and everyone as eligible for interest-free loans. Newlyweds received $50,000 for a mortgage down-payment. Citizens even earned a percentage of oil sales.

Libya had no debt and about 150 billion USD in reserves. (Today, Brussels cannot explain the disappearance of billions!). Considering that Clinton spearheaded the brutal murder of Gaddafi, it was out of the question for Malik to vote for her. In fact, he voted for Trump and he made it a point for the press to know about it.

If Malik helped pin the tail on the Democratic donkey describing his brother as a hypocrite, Obama’s peace laureate, acceptance speech also magnifies vanity, if not
arrogance. Picking up on Obama’s prepared text:

“Throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it’s also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of
causes. And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action.” Did Obama have in mind “action” like destroying Libya, the promise of Africa?
Did it include action like butchering Muammar Qaddafi? To the discredit of Obama and a much-bemused Hillary, they overturned the most stable and the most prosperous nation in Africa, transforming it into a lawless, jihadist, spawning ground.

Is it possible to forget Clinton’s satanic laugh and her fascination – if not arousal – over the bloodied, Libyan leader being impaled on a splintered, shovel handle?
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange believes there is, “Something wrong with Hillary Clinton. It is not just her constant lying. It is not just that she throws off menacing glares and seethes thwarted entitlement.

“Something much darker rides along with it.” Assange gets to the center of her personality calling it, “A cold creepiness rarely seen.”
Might a “multiple personality disorder,” diagnosis be too euphemistic? Any diagnosis has to include her calls to action to murder children. Not only those in
the womb.

Didn’t she brag about being the one who convinced Billy to bomb Serbia? To this day – and for no few years to come – children are born in Belgrade with depleted
uranium deformities and cancers. Ever since her Ouija board, rule-the-world séances in the White House, Clinton has been arm-in-arm with another infanticide advocate, Madeleine Albright of, “We think it was worth it,” notoriety regarding the killing one-half million Iraqi children. If the New Testament might offer any
advice to monsters who hurt children, it might be best for these two, so-called women, to tie millstones around their necks and to drown themselves in the depths
of the sea. Or, might such punishment be insufficient?

Hello? Folks? Hillary has not disappeared. To the demise of the Democratic Party, she’s running in 2020, despite routinely flip-flopping when asked. The Devil, after
all, promised her the World.

God forbid that she should be in a position of real authority to threaten Putin. Recall her calling for a “no-fly zone” in Syria? For what? To save her jihadists
from annihilation by those bent on really destroying the dragons of Arabia? 2 Esdras 15:29. Biden (remember him?) threatened Putin with war but, fortunately for humanity, Biden is rarely taken seriously by “partners” with more-than-serious weapons.

Biden’s down-to-earth fear was that Putin might release information damaging to Hillary. Such information, apparently, could have really swayed the
election. I’m curious, aren’t you? What information could be so damaging that Biden would go out of his way to meet with Putin and threaten him? What does Putin know about her that the world doesn’t already know?

Wasn’t another one of Obama’s “calls to action” the pilfering of Gaddafi’s impressive, weapon stockpiles, including some 20,000 Stinger, heat-seeking
missiles? More precisely, with Hillary’s oversight weren’t they smuggled through NATO partner Turkey to the head-chopping, heart-eating “moderate opposition” in
Iraq and Syria?

Thanks to WikiLeaks, the world knows that most of the 30,000 “missing” emails reveal Clinton’s terrorist-sponsoring complicity. On her “conscience” is much
more than the gruesome murder of Ambassador Stevens. Hundreds of thousands of innocent souls have perished as a result of her adventurism in the greater, Levant.
Many more have become refugees.

Then again, Arab and Syrian lives don’t matter. At least not in Obama’s “American Exceptionalism” script – a rather repulsive form of elitism, which is a
euphemism for not-so-thinly-veiled racism laced with double standards. Racism can be defined a number of ways but in every definition the perception of
one entity being superior to another is the common denominator. The perception can be racial, cultural, religious, institutional, or national superiority. Obama’s racism aka “American Exceptionalism” is closer to supremacism – a Hitleresque variant of racism because of inevitable consequences for its victims.

In other words, Obama’s supremacism is an ideology of superiority and domination. In his view, America is superior to other nations, which justifies its
entitlement to dominate, to control, and to subjugate nations like Iraq, Libya, and Syria with impunity. Look at the horrific crimes being committed in Yemen. Is
anyone in Washington planning any retaliatory strikes on Saudi Arabia? After the Saudi consulate murder in Istanbul, we learned the answer. The value of US
democracy tops out at $110 billion.

A supposedly superior or exceptional America is entitled to bomb, blackmail, kill, torture, (“extraordinary rendition”) and commit heinous, international war crimes
without legal consequences. Let not the International Tribunal in The Hague dare bring it up! It just got threatened by Bolton with sanctions for just considering to look into US war crimes!

Let us not forget that it was the humanist, Clinton duo, which first violated international law and basic ethics by authorizing extraordinary rendition or US torture by proxy. Correct, it wasn’t Bush’s invention. He is just another swamp creature – who also masqueraded as president – one who jumped on the occasion to execute the Clintons’ sadistic workings. Was it to satisfy his own psychiatric whims? We may never fully know. “Mission accomplished!” was proclaimed over
the moans of human bones trafficked through the extraordinary rendition gulag and left to fossilize in dark, far corners of US dungeons without a post-mortem right to
a family burial.

The United Nations considers any nation that abducts the citizens of another nation a crime against humanity. The European Court of Human Rights has actually taken action against American collaborators of torture and human rights abuse. Not against America; just against its collaborators.

The Polish government, for one, was condemned for participating in extraordinary CIA rendition. Poland had to pay restitution to those who were abducted and taken
to a CIA-run black site on Polish soil and tortured. Obama’s election promises included shutting down these “black sites” but, to the present day, they’re blacker-
than-ever and ever-so-functional. Stalin’s beast, Beria, is rolling over in his grave with envy over the Clinton’s program. In all, some 54 nations collaborated in human abuse and torture, included the core nations of Europe – those that are heard, most often, espousing and advertising vaunted, “West European values,” namely, France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, and Ireland. Picture the following enactment of those who seek to rule the world – the US
government in action.

The Commander-in-Chief of the more humane, torture program is sitting brandishing improper education – feet routinely high up on the desk – as his
Secretary of State approaches in black leather stroking a whip handle, “Hey, there, big boy, ready to power-play?”

Obama cringes from word abuse yet manages to express his delight with a moan. “Arab Spring! What d’ya think? Nice, promotional ring!” she chuckles. “Imagine
the fresh crop of rendition recruits it’ll bring! Hotel guests waterboarded by brother Bush have gone somewhat stale. All of the drugged suppositories, you know. Should’ve been laced with Viagra instead of sedatives,” bemuses Hillary, pursing her lips, wickedly.

“Money allocated; money spent. Never waste a dime. And funding has to be justified, you know. One hundred and forty-three tons of Libyan gold is there for
the take.” Obama looks on, squirming with sequestered pleasure recalling how his SOS eliminated Gaddafi with the help of President Sarkozy.

It really might be time for a clause to be added to the Nobel Peace Prize charter, an exit clause so that a laureate is stripped of the prize? If crimes against humanity,
international kidnapping and torture, aren’t enough what about a world in flames or even a nuclear winter? Malfeasance might have been the rudder of Clinton’s
foreign policy but as the captain of the ship, Obama is ultimately responsible. At the end of the day, it was the peace prize committee that got discredited, while
Obama snugly pocketed the cash, laughing all the way back to Washington. For their final, joint encore, the Harold and Maude, White House duo overthrew
the democratically elected, Ukrainian government with 5B USD according to another gem in the rough: neocon Victoria Nuland.

Transport C-130s, filled with pallets of hundred dollar bills, would land just outside of Kiev while the city bled and burned. Molotov cocktails lit up Berkut
police like Christmas trees. Whipped with chains and shot by snipers they demonstrated otherworldly restraint that no good, US cop would have
demonstrated for more than a few, trigger-happy seconds.

With a straight face mask, Obama referred to the scenes from Hell as “Peaceful protests.” Apparently, America’s interference and blatant meddling comprised yet
another “call to action” that he promised in Oslo. Obama’s in-your-face intrusion into Ukraine succeeded in antagonizing cousin neighbors, Ukraine and Russia – in
spite of thousands of years of joint history. And the Russian border is some 280 miles distant from Kiev, a fact that has raised a few security eyebrows in the
Kremlin.

What justification exists for the CIA to hang the American flag at the entrance to the SBU (Security Service of Ukraine) – a Gestapo-like entity, which – you might
have guessed it – “legally” engages in torture and routinely implements murder as a tool of State foreign policy. The address, 33 Vladimirskaya Street, fourth floor is
where CIA employees arrived daily in two oversized jeeps. From here, US genocide by proxy was implemented in the Donbass region, a “call to action” that
has resulted in 12,000-plus deaths of mostly children, their parents, the infirm, and the elderly.

The bloody successes of the American-Ukrainian Gestapo eventually entitled it to a comfier address near a church in Kiev’s city center. Every six months, the heads
of each security section travels to the States for professional grooming. Instruction centers on how to combat Russia, the inferred enemy. No method is too harsh; no
tactic is out-of-bounds. Judging from provocations, like the shoot-down of Malaysian airlines flight MH 17 out of Schiphol, the sacrifice of 298 lives is worth it if the slightest chance exists to ramp up propaganda, true or not, so as to denigrate Russia’s image.

Obama-Clinton neocons, cheered on by warlord McCain, invested no small chump change into destroying family ties between Russia and Ukraine. The money was
never intended to assist Ukrainians. It was all about geopolitics. Sir Halford Mackinder lay down the guidelines for Great Britain to control the
European Continent, some 112 years ago. In fact, it was a blueprint for World domination by the British yet Mackinder never dreamed that the US would get so
involved and would occupy Ukraine, one day.

The world witnessed how it was done, including the cynical, Maidan mockery, with Nuland handing out wheat buns to Maidan rabble-rousers. Is it not quite the
twist, considering that Ukraine was the breadbasket of Europe under the Tsars? NATO was supposed to occupy the port of Sevastopol, hence the outrage when
Russian inhabitants of the Crimean Peninsula – the vast majority – declared independence and, later, voted to join the Russian Federation. It was real
democracy at work but since it didn’t serve US interests, the right to self-determination of 3 million people was negated by Obama, who, promptly, imposed
sanctions. Think about Obama’s genius for how to make friends and influence people. Would you respect anyone who blackmailed you out of spite?

Correct, 5B USD was spent by the War Party to reset the Doomsday Clock at 2 minutes to midnight. So much for the Nobel Peace Laureate and his minions.
The first to extend a hand in friendship was Gorbachev. Yeltsin followed, and, finally, Putin did, as well. The average American citizen said, “Why not?” The
military industrial complex and the Establishment, corporate elite or the Deep State said, “No way!”

Today, the nations of the world are saying: “We don’t want it!” in plain, Jimmy Buffett talk. “We don’t want that much US organization in our lives!”
Murder and destruction – aptly summed up as the international war crimes of the past three, US presidents – is mere window dressing for the Snowflake
Establishment. It’s conveniently overlooked by Washington’s sycophant press whose success in steamrolling bias and propaganda over the American public
rather than presenting real news continues to make Goebbels blush neon red. America’s political, moral compass might have always deviated from true north considering all of the sex, lies, and videotape but beginning with the Clinton-Lewinsky, magnetite years it began doing 360s up through the reign of Obama-
Hillary. What moral right does Washington have to be instructing any nation on how to conduct its internal affairs?

The nonsensical madness of War Party doings – sometimes mistaken for US foreign policy – is not making anyone safer nor is it making the World a more
humane place.

Both Clinton and Trump are in business. However, Hillary, like her new-found Bush friends, are in demolition. Trump is in construction.
Can America be resurrected? What needs to be done. Is democracy the answer or an impediment? And what happened to the free America that we once knew?

Part 2

Part 1 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
9 Comments

9
Leave a Reply

avatar
6 Comment threads
3 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
JNDillardDonnajohn vieiraSeanRaymond Comeau Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Vera Gottlieb
Guest
Vera Gottlieb

ALL of humanity loses in a world nuclear holocaust…flakes and non flakes. What a mindless statement.

G George
Guest
G George

I think the point was that youth has the most to lose as they have their whole life ahead of them. I don´t want to die either, but I´m 76 years old so I don´t have as much time on this earth to lose as a thirty year old.

Tjoe
Guest
Tjoe

I couldn’t agree more! Citizens will never benefit from this nukes arms race. Did you read about puk theft in US?

Raymond Comeau
Guest
Raymond Comeau

And, both the Democrats and Republicans are War Parties on behalf When will the people of the USA wake up!f of Deep States which run the USA!

Tjoe
Guest
Tjoe

What a terrible dissertation, hard to read and stay on track, except blaming Democrats for everything. I think Bush knew about 9.11 coming down and he let them do it and that Hillary was involved with planning and execution, via patsy’s, demolitions and remote control planes. Bush is Republican.

Sean
Guest
Sean

So Ireland participated in US torture? This is new to me, who has been living in Ireland for 75 years. Will the author of this please supply evidence to support his claim?

john vieira
Guest

In just three more days your final question WILL be answered. Just hope that there are MORE conservative minded voting Americans than there are progressive liberal “left of centre” voters….

Donna
Guest
Donna

There are two war parties, or, rather, one war party with two wings. Both Dems and Republicans are war criminals — with the possible exception of one or two individuals (like Rand Paul).

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

Totally lame. Anyone who tells you that there is a hairs’ breadth of difference on foreign policy or economic policy between Democrats and Republicans is not to be trusted, because they are lying. Don’t listen to what the candidates say; look at what these plutocrats do once they gain power.

Latest

Is the Violent Dismemberment of Russia Official US Policy?

Neocons make the case that the West should not only seek to contain “Moscow’s imperial ambitions” but to actively seek the dismemberment of Russia as a whole.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Erik D’Amato via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity:


If there’s one thing everyone in today’s Washington can agree on, it’s that whenever an official or someone being paid by the government says something truly outrageous or dangerous, there should be consequences, if only a fleeting moment of media fury.

With one notable exception: Arguing that the US should be quietly working to promote the violent disintegration and carving up of the largest country on Earth.

Because so much of the discussion around US-Russian affairs is marked by hysteria and hyperbole, you are forgiven for assuming this is an exaggeration. Unfortunately it isn’t. Published in the Hill under the dispassionate title “Managing Russia’s dissolution,” author Janusz Bugajski makes the case that the West should not only seek to contain “Moscow’s imperial ambitions” but to actively seek the dismemberment of Russia as a whole.

Engagement, criticism and limited sanctions have simply reinforced Kremlin perceptions that the West is weak and predictable. To curtail Moscow’s neo-imperialism a new strategy is needed, one that nourishes Russia’s decline and manages the international consequences of its dissolution.

Like many contemporary cold warriors, Bugajski toggles back and forth between overhyping Russia’s might and its weaknesses, notably a lack of economic dynamism and a rise in ethnic and regional fragmentation.But his primary argument is unambiguous: That the West should actively stoke longstanding regional and ethnic tensions with the ultimate aim of a dissolution of the Russian Federation, which Bugajski dismisses as an “imperial construct.”

The rationale for dissolution should be logically framed: In order to survive, Russia needs a federal democracy and a robust economy; with no democratization on the horizon and economic conditions deteriorating, the federal structure will become increasingly ungovernable…

To manage the process of dissolution and lessen the likelihood of conflict that spills over state borders, the West needs to establish links with Russia’s diverse regions and promote their peaceful transition toward statehood.

Even more alarming is Bugajski’s argument that the goal should not be self-determination for breakaway Russian territories, but the annexing of these lands to other countries. “Some regions could join countries such as Finland, Ukraine, China and Japan, from whom Moscow has forcefully appropriated territories in the past.”

It is, needless to say, impossible to imagine anything like this happening without sparking a series of conflicts that could mirror the Yugoslav Wars. Except in this version the US would directly culpable in the ignition of the hostilities, and in range of 6,800 Serbian nuclear warheads.

So who is Janusz Bugajski, and who is he speaking for?

The author bio on the Hill’s piece identifies him as a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, a Washington, D.C. think-tank. But CEPA is no ordinary talk shop: Instead of the usual foundations and well-heeled individuals, its financial backers seem to be mostly arms of the US government, including the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the US Mission to NATO, the US-government-sponsored National Endowment for Democracy, as well as as veritable who’s who of defense contractors, including Raytheon, Bell Helicopter, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and Textron. Meanwhile, Bugajski chairs the South-Central Europe area studies program at the Foreign Service Institute of the US Department of State.

To put it in perspective, it is akin to a Russian with deep ties to the Kremlin and arms-makers arguing that the Kremlin needed to find ways to break up the United States and, if possible, have these breakaway regions absorbed by Mexico and Canada. (A scenario which alas is not as far-fetched as it might have been a few years ago; many thousands in California now openly talk of a “Calexit,” and many more in Mexico of a reconquista.)

Meanwhile, it’s hard to imagine a quasi-official voice like Bugajski’s coming out in favor of a similar policy vis-a-vis China, which has its own restive regions, and which in geopolitical terms is no more or less of a threat to the US than Russia. One reason may be that China would consider an American call for secession by the Tibetans or Uyghurs to be a serious intrusion into their internal affairs, unlike Russia, which doesn’t appear to have noticed or been ruffled by Bugajski’s immodest proposal.

Indeed, just as the real scandal in Washington is what’s legal rather than illegal, the real outrage in this case is that few or none in DC finds Bugajski’s virtual declaration of war notable.

But it is. It is the sort of provocation that international incidents are made of, and if you are a US taxpayer, it is being made in your name, and it should be among your outrages of the month.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Vladimir Putin visits Serbia, as NATO encircles the country it attacked in 1999 (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 171.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss Russian President Vladimir Putin’s official visit to Serbia.

Putin met with Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic to further develop bilateral trade and economic relations, as well as discuss pressing regional issues including the possibility of extending the Turkish Stream gas pipeline into Serbia, and the dangerous situation around Kosovo.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via RT


Russian President Vladimir Putin got a hero’s welcome in Belgrade. The one-day visit to the last holdout against NATO’s ambitions in the Balkans may have been somewhat short on substance, but was certainly loaded with symbolism.

Even before he landed, the Russian leader was given an honor guard by Serbian air force MiGs, a 2017 gift from Moscow to replace those destroyed by NATO during the 1999 air campaign that ended with the occupation of Serbia’s province of Kosovo. Russia has refused to recognize Kosovo’s US-backed declaration of independence, while the US and EU have insisted on it.

Upon landing, Putin began his first official trip of 2019 by paying respects to the Soviet soldiers who died liberating Belgrade from Nazi occupation in 1944. While most Serbians haven’t forgotten their historical brotherhood in arms with Russia, it did not hurt to remind the West just who did the bulk of the fighting against Nazi Germany back in World War II.

After official talks with Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, Putin visited the Church of St. Sava, the grand Orthodox basilica set on the spot where the Ottoman Turks torched the remains of the first Serbian archbishop back in 1594, in an effort to maintain power.

Sava, whose brother Stefan became the “first-crowned” king of medieval Serbia, was responsible for setting up the autocephalous Serbian Orthodox Church exactly eight centuries ago this year. For all its own troubles, the Serbian Church has sided with Moscow in the current Orthodox schism over Ukraine.

Russian artisans have been working on the grand mosaic inside the basilica, and asked Putin to complete the design by placing the last three pieces, in the colors of the Russian flag.

Whether by sheer coincidence or by design, Putin also weighed in on Serbia’s culture war, giving interviews ahead of his visit to two daily newspapers that still publish in Serbian Cyrillic – while the majority of the press, whether controlled by the West or by Vucic, prefers the Latin variant imported from Croatia.

Western media usually refer to Serbia as a “Russian ally.” While this is true in a historical and cultural sense, there is no formal military alliance between Moscow and Belgrade. Serbia officially follows the policy of military neutrality, with its armed forces taking part in exercises alongside both Russian and NATO troops.

This is a major source of irritation for NATO, which seeks dominion over the entire Balkans region. Most recently, the alliance extended membership to Montenegro in 2017 without putting the question to a referendum. It is widely expected that “Northern Macedonia” would get an invitation to NATO as soon as its name change process is complete – and that was arranged by a deal both Macedonia and Greece seem to have been pressured into by Washington.

That would leave only Serbia outside the alliance – partly, anyway, since NATO has a massive military base in the disputed province of Kosovo, and basically enjoys special status in that quasi-state. Yet despite Belgrade’s repeated declarations of Serbia wanting to join the EU, Brussels and Washington have set recognition of Kosovo as the key precondition – and no Serbian leader has been able to deliver on that just yet, though Vucic has certainly tried.

Putin’s repeated condemnations of NATO’s 1999 attack, and Russian support for Serbia’s territorial integrity guaranteed by the UN Security Council Resolution 1244, have made him genuinely popular among the Serbs, more so than Vucic himself. Tens of thousands of people showed up in Belgrade to greet the Russian president.

While Vucic’s critics have alleged that many of them were bused in by the government – which may well be true, complete with signs showing both Vucic and Putin – there is no denying the strong pro-Russian sentiment in Serbia, no matter how hard Integrity Initiative operatives have tried.

One of the signs spotted in Belgrade reportedly said “one of 300 million,” referring to the old Serbian joke about there being “300 million of us – and Russians.” However, it is also a send-up of the slogan used by current street protesters against Vucic. For the past six weeks, every Saturday, thousands of people have marched through Belgrade, declaring themselves “1 of 5 million” after Vucic said he wouldn’t give in to their demands even if “five million showed up.”

The opposition Democrats accuse him of corruption, nepotism, mismanagement, cronyism – all the sins they themselves have plenty of experience with during their 12-year reign following Serbia’s color revolution. Yet they’ve had to struggle for control of the marches with the nationalists, who accuse Vucic of preparing to betray Kosovo and want “him to go away, but [Democrats] not come back.”

There is plenty of genuine discontent in Serbia with Vucic, who first came to power in 2012 on a nationalist-populist platform but quickly began to rule as a pro-NATO liberal. It later emerged that western PR firms had a key role in his party’s “makeover” from Radicals to Progressives. Yet his subsequent balancing act between NATO and Russia has infuriated both the NGOs and politicians in Serbia beholden to Western interests, and US diplomats charged with keeping the Balkans conquered.

Washington is busy with its own troubles these days, so there was no official comment to Putin’s visit from the State Department – only a somewhat pitiful and tone-deaf tweet by Ambassador Kyle Scott, bemoaning the lack of punishment for $1 million in damages to the US Embassy during a 2008 protest against Kosovo “independence.” Yet as far as Western media outlets are concerned, why Moscow seems to be vastly more popular than Washington on the streets of Belgrade nonetheless remains a mystery.

By Nebojsa Malic

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Curious Bedfellows: The Neocon And Progressive Alliance To Destroy Donald Trump

The neocon metamorphosis is nearly complete as many of the neocons, who started out as Democrats, have returned home, where they are being welcomed for their hardline foreign policy viewpoint.

Published

on

Authored by Philip Giraldi via OffGuardian.com:


The Roman poet Ovid’s masterful epic The Metamorphoses includes the memorable opening line regarding the poem’s central theme of transformation. He wrote In nova fert animus mutatas dicere formas corpora, which has been translated as “Of shapes transformed to bodies strange, I purpose to entreat…”

Ovid framed his narrative around gods, heroes and quasi-historical events but if he were around today, he would no doubt be fascinated by the many transformations of the group that has defined itself as neoconservative.The movement began in a cafeteria in City College of New York in the 1930s, where a group of radical Jewish students would meet to discuss politics and developments in Europe. Many of the founders were from the far left, communists of the Trotskyite persuasion, which meant that they believed in permanent global revolution led by a vanguard party. The transformation into conservatives of a neo-persuasion took place when they were reportedly “mugged by reality” into accepting that the standard leftist formulae were not working to transform the world rapidly enough. As liberal hawks, they then hitched their wagon to the power of the United States to bring about transformation by force if necessary and began to infiltrate institutions like the Pentagon to give themselves the tools to achieve their objectives, which included promotion of regime change wars, full spectrum global dominance and unconditional support for Israel.

The neocons initially found a home with Democratic Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson, but they moved on in the 1970s and 1980s to prosper under Ronald Reagan as well as under Democrat Bill Clinton. Their ability to shape policy peaked under George W. Bush, when they virtually ran the Pentagon and were heavily represented in both the national security apparatus and in the White House. They became adept at selling their mantra of “strong national defense” to whomever was buying, including to President Obama, even while simultaneously complaining about his administration’s “weakness.”

The neoconservatives lined up behind Hillary Clinton in 2016, appalled by Donald Trump’s condemnation of their centerpiece war in Iraq and even more so by his pledge to end the wars in Asia and nation-building projects while also improving relations with the Russians. They worked actively against the Republican candidate both before he was nominated and elected and did everything they could to stop him, including libeling him as a Russian agent.

When Trump was elected, it, therefore, seemed that the reign of the neocons had ended, but chameleonlike, they have changed shape and are now ensconced both in some conservative as well as in an increasing number of progressive circles in Washington and in the media. Against all odds, they have even captured key posts in the White House itself with the naming of John Bolton as National Security Adviser and Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State. Bolton’s Chief of Staff is Fred Fleitz, a leading neocon and Islamophobe while last week Trump added Iran hawk Richard Goldberg to the National Security Council as director for countering Iranian weapons of mass destruction. Goldberg is an alumnus of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which is the leading neocon think tank calling incessantly for war with Iran.

Meanwhile, the neocon metamorphosis is nearly complete as many of the neocons, who started out as Democrats, have returned home, where they are being welcomed for their hardline foreign policy viewpoint. Glenn Greenwald reports that, based on polling of party supporters, the Democrats have gone full-Hillary and are now by far more hawkish than the Republicans, unwilling to leave either Syria or Afghanistan.

The neocon survival and rejuvenation is particularly astonishing in that they have been wrong about virtually everything, most notably the catastrophic Iraq War. They have never been held accountable for anything, though one should note that accountability is not a prominent American trait, at least since Vietnam. What is important is that neocon views have been perceived by the media and punditry as being part of the Establishment consensus, which provides them with access to programming all across the political spectrum. That is why neocon standard-bearers like Bill Kristol and Max Boot have been able to move effortlessly from Fox News to MSNBC where they are fêted by the likes of Rachel Maddow. They applauded the Iraq War when the Establishment was firmly behind it and are now trying to destroy Donald Trump’s presidency because America’s elite is behind that effort.

Indeed, the largely successful swing by the neocons from right to left has in some ways become more surreal, as an increasing number of progressive spokesmen and institutions have lined up behind their perpetual warfare banner. The ease with which the transformation took place reveals, interestingly, that the neocons have no real political constituency apart from voters who feel threatened and respond by supporting perpetual war, but they do share many common interests with the so-called liberal interventionists. Neocons see a global crisis for the United States defined in terms of power while the liberals see the struggle as a moral imperative, but the end result is the same: intervention by the United States. This fusion is clearly visible in Washington, where the Clintons’ Center for American Progress (CAP) is now working on position papers with the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

One of the most active groups attacking President Trump is “Republicans for the Rule of Law,” founded by Bill Kristol in January 2018, as a component of Defending Democracy Together(DDT), a 501(c)4 lobbying group that also incorporates projects called The Russia Tweets and Republicans Against Putin. Republicans Against Putin promotes the view that President Trump is not “stand[ing] up to [Vladimir] Putin” and calls for more aggressive investigation of the Russian role in the 2016 election.

DDT is a prime example of how the neoconservatives and traditional liberal interventionists have come together as it is in part funded by Pierre Omidyar, the billionaire co-founder of eBay who has provided DDT with $600,000 in two grants through his Democracy Fund Voice, also a 501(c)4. Omidyar is a political liberal who has given millions of dollars to progressive organizations and individuals since 1999. Indeed, he is regarded as a top funder of liberal causesin the United States and even globally together with Michael Bloomberg and George Soros. His Democracy Fund awarded $9 million in grants in 2015 alone.

Last week, the Omidyar-Kristol connection may have deepened with an announcement regarding the launch of the launch of a new webzine The Bulwark, which would clearly be at least somewhat intended to take the place of the recently deceased Weekly Standard. It is promoting itself as the center of the “Never Trump Resistance” and it is being assumed that at least some of the Omidyar money is behind it.

Iranian-born Omidyar’s relationship with Kristol is clearly based on the hatred that the two share regarding Donald Trump.

Omidyar has stated that Trump is a “dangerous authoritarian demagogue… endorsing Donald Trump immediately disqualifies you from any position of public trust.”

He has tweeted that Trump suffers from “failing mental capacity” and is both “corrupt and incapacitated.”

Omidyar is what he is – a hardcore social justice warrior who supports traditional big government and globalist liberal causes, most of which are antithetical to genuine conservatives. But what is interesting about the relationship with Kristol is that it also reveals what the neoconservatives are all about. Kristol and company have never been actual conservatives on social issues, a topic that they studiously avoid, and their foreign policy is based on two principles: creating a state of perpetual war based on fearmongering about foreign enemies while also providing unlimited support for Israel. Kristol hates Trump because he threatens the war agenda while Omidyar despises the president for traditional progressive reasons. That hatred is the tie that binds and it is why Bill Kristol, a man possessing no character and values whatsoever, is willing to take Pierre Omidyar’s money while Pierre is quite happy to provide it to destroy a common enemy, the President of the United States of America.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending