The Circus!

From the surreal world of Russian opposition...

Comments

[jack]

Lyudmila Alexeyeva works for the Moscow Helsinki Group which is supported by:

-European Commission

-Ford Foundation (USA)

-MacArthur’s Foundation (USA)

-MATRA (Netherlands)

-National Endowment for Democracy (USA) (CIA)

-Open Society Institute/Budapest (George Soros)

-USAID (CIA)

I had a discussion on another blog about a genuine Russian national opposition party outlining the issues I think should be addressed which we could start a blog as an idea and reference point to Russians in Russia to start a political party because the way current things are progressing Russia is doomed especially under Gorbachev 2.0 who is making all the wrong discussions listening to these Soros trained reformer lead by Kudrin who destroyed and helped colonise Russia with the engineered “shock therapy”.

The problem is it is easier the current system with Putin/Medvedev or nothing and if something happened to Putin like a terrorist attack or assassination then the western states could capitalise and get there long desired civil war.

Anyway here is some of the crucial issue I think should be covered.

Reclaiming a trillion dollars worth of money taken out of the country into offshore tax havens and shutting them down, western and Mid East support for international terrorism investigating those involved and shutting down this network, the same with drugs and sex trafficking which is off course linked the terrorist organisations.

The establishment and research committee of the genocide of Russia during the 90’s to the present starting with theses Oligarchs.

Another committee examining and researching the individuals, states, banks, countries, organisations, etc that supported Marxist terrorism for decades and supported the coup of 1917 as well as transfer of Russia wealth abroad overseas by the Bolsheviks to the same banks that financed them as well as investigating claims that forged archive material was inserted in the archive to fit the western propaganda line and any possible connections to those directing Gorbachevs openness campaign dealing with Soviet archive material.

And the most important thing and the most frustrating things about Russia is the total lack of information on any level with the biased anti-Russian viewpoint as the only reference. As the number 1 priority they should publish research, analysis, statistical data, etc of academic quality which debunks western press propaganda and institutions which are usually affiliated with organisations with an anti-Russian agenda financing research, institutions, historian’s and journalists.

[Leoš Tomíček]

All those organisations are obviously pi$$ing their funds away on such a Mardi Gras.

[Misha]

It seems to be an enjoyable and financially lucrative enough living for some.

On some possibly related matters are these two articles from this week in Moscow based English language media on the former Moldavian SSR:

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/thawing-the-frozen-conflict-in-transdnestr/412483.html

http://www.russiaprofile.org/page.php?pageid=International&articleid=a1282150677

Among the suggested themes:

- Russian military involvement in its "near abroad" gets second guessed in a way that the Western military presence further away from the West's geographic zone doesn't.

- Romania has reason to be wary of Russia and Pridnestrovie and not vice versa. It seems to be an enjoyable and financially lucrative enough living for some. When referring to the 1992 war in Pridnestrovie, no reference is made of Romanian involvement in that war. The Russian and Ukrainian involvement in that war relates to that territory’s historical relationship with Russia and pro-Russian elements in Ukraine.

- Selective belittling of Pridnestrovie's existence as a disputed territory seeking international recognition. From time in memorial, numerous independence movements have heavily relied on outside support. Meantime, it's not as if Moldova itself doesn't rely on a good deal of foreign aid.

- The crime issue brought up on Pridnestrovie. On the other hand, how relative is it to others areas like Kosovo and Moldova?

Rhetorically put, ehere's the diversity of views evident in these two articles which appear at two different venues having a relationship with the non-Russian owned joint media operations of Sanamot and Independent Media?

[Leoš Tomíček]

@ jack

Here is the film "Plan Caucasus" you spoke of under another post... only it is in Russian...
http://rutube.ru/tracks/638200.html?v=b9dabcc815e2bc3868ab2053cfa0cceb

[jack]

@Leoš Tomíček

Not really the point of these groups is to show Russia and Putin as “authoritarian” and “dictatorial” to the Russian public I guess but mainly to their western audience that’s why they hold protests and speak in English using the same tactics as Soros trained Otpor youth activists used against Milosevic attacking police, holding illegal protest rallies and breaking designated cordins of protest rallies permitted to an awaiting and compliant western media.

Why about my idea of a political party and the issues I think should be addressed?

Ever heard of a Russian documentary called “Plan Caucasus” aired on Russian Channel 1 TV station a couple of years ago?

I posted what was written in the original Pravda article in the Second US Base in Kyrgyzstan video post.

Interesting that they planned for a full scale Chechen insurrection and annexation supported by Germany, France, Great Britain, Turkey and Saudi with networks and training set up prior before the first Gulf war even taking Chechens to London but the war in Iraq broke out and lasted longer than expected.

It would be good is they had it on the net with English subs or even just the original Russian documentary so I could try and an English translation.

Maybe will you are scouring the internet you could see if it is posted on any Russian websites/blogs or video hosting sites?

[jack]

@Leoš Tomíček

Thank you very much have you watched it yet?

[Leoš Tomíček]

Watching it now. ;-)

[jack]

@Leoš Tomíček

Did you watch the documentary?

[Leoš Tomíček]

Yes, I did, sorry for no replys, I am busy writing my paper at the moment, When I finnish with it, which should be soon, I will post the film here on this site with English commentary on the main points. There are other things comming up but at present I am too busy, you can see the posts here are nothing much.

[Leoš Tomíček]

RFE/RL attempted hit-piece...

http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1109623.html

[Leoš Tomíček]

http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2010/08/it-is-now-known-that-twenty-year-old.html

[Leoš Tomíček]

Here is Jamestown basically repeating the RFE/RL with some addition of Newsru

http://www.jamestown.org/programs/ncw/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=4877&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=169&no_cache=1

[Misha]

Regarding RFE/RL, is this just released interview with Andrew Wilson on Ukraine:

http://www.rferl.org/content/Interview_Scholar_Says_Ukraines_Greatest_Achievement_Survival/2136252.html

Nothing new while being an improved difference over some other propped commentary on the subject.

As for the links about the Russian documentary on Chechnya, it's one of several examples of the manner in how a given slant will pounce on something expressing another view.

Of course, the Chechen separatist drive of the 1990s had home grown elements inside that part of Russia. At the same time, there's no denying the support and sympathy it received from others - whether in propaganda or other forms.

Concerning the propping of an unsubstantiated and questionable claim that can be viewed as propaganda (having to do with a supposed Russo-Ukrainian plan to put Pridnestrovie/Transnistria into Ukraine):

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/2010/05/window-on-eurasia-do-medvedev-and.html

Besides here, where is the critical follow-up?

http://www.eurasiareview.com/201007064424/differences-over-disputed-territories.html

http://www.eurasiareview.com/20100527393/haggling-over-the-former-moldavian-ssr-dispute.html

[Leoš Tomíček]

@ Misha

I have made several searches and Babitsky does not deny the factuality of the film...

[Misha]

Leos

Without having seen the film (at least not yet), I sense a possible propaganda spin depicting the documentary as taking away from the internal separatist dynamics within Chechnya.

It's ethical to do a well researched documentary that primarily deals with foreign support for Chechen separatism.

On a related matter, is this excerpt which I feel is indicative of a predominating bias evident within neocon/neolib circles:

http://trueslant.com/juliaioffe/2010/03/23/hillary-clinton-gets-the-russian-larry-king-treatment/

"There were also Pozner’s amazingly Russian questions. Like, how is Kosovo different from Abkhazia or South Ossetia? (No mention, of course, of Chechnya.)"

****

I prefer journalists who challenge questionable slants as opposed to supporting them. On issues like the one being discussed, how well are such journalists encouraged at the Western media outlets paying the best wage?

"No mention of course" that Chechnya has zero independence recognition which includes an existing government acknowledging that it's part of the Russian Federation. This is in line with a referendum that republic had on its status.

The appeal of Chechen separatism declined as a result of the increased lawlessness that happened when that republic had great autonomy in two different instances during the 1990s under two different presidents. At its peak in the 1990s, there's reason to doubt whether Chechen separatism had a clear majority of support in Chechnya.

[jack]

@Misha

The issue with all Russian commentators regarding Chechnya and Islamic movements in Eurasia is the most basic question that they refuse to answer or address is the overwhelming evidence that western intelligence and there allied Mid East vassal states since the very beginning have supported terrorism and separatism in Russia and Eurasia which is part of an overall process of breaking apart Russia like Yugoslavia and seizing control of the Eurasian sphere because they know the West is sponsoring terrorism and organised crime in Russia which fundamentally changes the scope of debate from that of semantic discussion to that of long overdue serious discussion regarding western policy towards Russia with the post Soviet colonisation and genocide to all out assault when it tries to reassert sovereignty and independence over the development of its own country.

The same names, people and groups, some for the past 3 decades like Holbrooke, Kissinger and Brzezinski have been directing and supporting US lead foreign policy towards Russia sitting on various NGO’s and organisations not just supporting Chechen separatism and terrorism and the major shareholder of companies created by shock therapy economic during the 90’s like YUKOS but the neighbouring Russian friendly states as well directing policies to undermine Russia mainly in energy policy.

And they have made there agenda perfectly clear not just Brzezinski’s Chessboard but others like Carnegie Endowment for Democracy a Rothschild’s front organisation which is the hub for western aligned groups operating in Russia.

Has anybody apart from Paul Murphy and myself even bothered to reference any connection between the major terrorist attacks in Europe and the US especially 9/11 and there links to Chechen terrorism and god forbid western intelligence?

[jack]

@Misha

"Without having seen the film (at least not yet), I sense a possible propaganda spin depicting the documentary as taking away from the internal separatist dynamics within Chechnya."

That matters not there legitimacy revolves around the point that the official western backed Chechen separatist movement does not support or any connection to terrorism which this documentary disproves.

If they are acting in the interests of foreign countries and interests with there primary objective to grab as much territory as possible, then the dynamics of the Chechen separatist’s movement matters not. The main issue is what is the objective of there backers and handlers.

Do we really care about the dynamics of KLA separatists or what there place is regarding US, EU and Germany position in the Balkans?

“The appeal of Chechen separatism declined as a result of the increased lawlessness that happened when that republic had great autonomy in two different instances during the 1990s under two different presidents. At its peak in the 1990s, there's reason to doubt whether Chechen separatism had a clear majority of support in Chechnya.”

They had no legal or moral right to succession given that the North of the Republic is not Chechen but Tesek Cossack territory, was never an independent country with defined borders and has from the very beginning collaborated with international Islamic militants and terrorism, organized crime and foreign intelligence conducting a program of mass ethnic cleansing.

After the first war they were given partial independence including a Chechen Embassy in Moscow with Chechen leaders traveling abroad like Maskhadov touring Muslim states like Sudan for support as well as off course Chechens training in camps in Turkey and Afghanistan fighting alongside the Taliban setting up Chechen camps like in the Khost region.

[Misha]

http://www.russiablog.org/2010/08/chechen_terrorist_trained_in_pakistan_money_from_jordan.php

[jack]

@Misha

That’s it? That’s nothing! We already know groups from Jordan and Pakistan are supporting and training terrorists as well as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the entire Mid East but what the article doesn’t mention is that they are state sponsored.

Even the US inadvertently admitted in its bogus lead up to the Iraq war UN presentation by Colin Powell that “Al Qaeda” are in the Panski Gorge developing chemical and biological weapons to use on Russian soldiers and inevitably the civilian population.

If anybody even remotely bothered to investigate 9/11 then they would realise that it was a western and Mid East intelligence operation in Europe working through Bosnia and originally recruited to fight in Chechnya with ties to various western intelligence services.