Are weather warfare assaults devastating noncompliant countries around the globe?

For more on the subject of geoengineering, climate engineering, and weather modification programs, a few references are listed below following this article.

From Geoengineering Watch, December 9, 2014

Was Slovenia a target of a completely engineered catastrophe?
by Dane Wigington

Slovenia Ice Store 2The photo above was taken in Slovenia, 80% of the forests there were devastated by this completely unprecedented ice storm in February 2014. I was in regular communication with a contact in Slovenia just after the event. This individual made clear the fact that many of the citizens were absolutely convinced this destruction was the result of climate modification/weather warfare. Again, this magnitude of extreme ice storm is historically unprecedented, up to 6 inches of ice accumulation occurred. This is exactly the result that would be expected with massive chemical ice nucleation elements sprayed into a storm system. Is it just coincidence that many countries in recent years are annihilate by “natural cataclysms”? In 2010 Pakistan was resisting US policy just prior to record floods covering 20% of the country with water.

Pakistan Flooding

Record flooding in Pakistan shortly after the country showed resistance to US/NATO policies.

In 2011 Thailand refused an air base for the US government , shortly afterward Thailand was inundated with devastating floods.

Thailand-floods-007

Industry in Thailand was devastated during the floods of 2011 which came shortly after Thailand refused to allow a US air base in its borders.

Just over one year ago record strength typhoon Haiyan cut a swath through the Philippines. The US military went into the country under “humanitarian” pretexts, now the US is setting up military bases there.

Cyclone Haiyan

Cyclone Haiyan underwent intense and extremely anomalous strengthening just prior to it making landfall.

Available science data on the global ionosphere heaters (HAARP and SBX rf installations) indicate that they are capable of triggering seismic activity if the energy they transmit is concentrated in a seismically sensitive zone for a long enough duration. Even MIT confirmed the fact that there was extremely anomalous and unprecedented atmospheric heating directly over the epicenter of the Japanese quake of 2011. The Japanese were beginning to drift from their long alliance with the US prior to the quake, but have since completely solidified their alliance with the US. Is there a connection?

164537.MN.0314.japanquake.1.BRV.jpg

The devastation in Japan is far from over as the Fukushima meltdown still threatens the entire world.

What about Haiti? Is it just another coincidence that the US military went into the country under “humanitarian” pretexts and then occupied the country? Was the Haiti disaster just another convenient catastrophe?

bp1

Haiti has never recovered from the quake and the US military occupation continues.

Hungary has just been hit hard by a unprecedented ice storm and deadly “freezing fog”. Is it a just another coincidence that the relations between Hungary and the US/NATO powers have been steadily worsening, and just recently came to a head? Is Hungary only one of the latest victims for a global military industrial complex that is totally out of control?

Downed power lines

Downed power lines from the “freakish” ice storm that just decimated Hungary.

Militaries around the globe and throughout history have always desired weather and nature as the ultimate weapon. Are there wars now being waged around the globe without firing a shot? All available evidence says yes. Though there have always been climate related disasters, much of what we see today is unprecedented and seems to occur in correlation with geopolitical events or subsequent  occupations. The US military has boots on the ground in over 150 countries. The leaders of Iran have spoken out on the floor of the UN about NATO weather modification programs causing unprecedented drought in their country, are we to think Iran is the only country being covertly attacked with weather warfare? Many African countries have been devastated by drought for decades, most of those countries are now occupied by the US military. Is all this just coincidence? I think not.
DW
geoengineeringwatch.org

REFERENCES

US Military Weather Warfare Experiments
Owning the weather for military use
US occupies African countries
Additional references –Videos:What in the World are They Spraying?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9VcWkFrXWY

Climate Engineering, Weather Warfare, and the Collapse of Civilization
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/climate-engineering-weather-warfare-and-the-collapse-of-civilization/

Shasta County Board of Supervisors, Geoengineering presentation and comments, July 2014
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/geoengineering-investigation-demanded-by-shasta-county-residents/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4WhYKP83zo

Articles:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ultimate-weapon-of-mass-destruction-owning-the-weather-for-military-use-2/5306386
The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, January 12, 2014

http://worldvisionportal.org/wvpforum/viewtopic.php?t=296
Weather Weapons – A Present Reality; Excerpts from
“Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025
A Research Paper Presented To Air Force 2025, August 1996”
Posted on 08 Oct 2004

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/WOR406A.html
Chemtrails: Aerosol and Electromagnetic Weapons in the Age of Nuclear War
by Amy Worthington, June 2004

http://www.etcgroup.org/content/retooling-planet-new-etc-group-report-geoengineering
Report on Geoengineering: Retooling the Planet, 2000

Source:
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/are-weather-warfare-assaults-devastating-noncompliant-countries-around-the-globe/

U.S. airdrops weapons to ISIS as Iraqi Army makes gains

Iranian Brigadier General Hamid Taqavi was killed by sniper fire on Sunday in the Iraqi city of Samarra. He was advising Iraqi troops in their battle for the city against ISIS.
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/12/28/iranian-general-killed-by-sniper-fire-in-iraq/

Meanwhile…

From Press TV, December 30, 2014

Volunteer forces fighting against the ISIL Takfiri terrorists say US military aircraft have dropped weapons in areas held by the terrorist group in Iraq.

American helicopters dropped boxes of weapons in Yathrib and Balad districts in Iraq’s Salahuddin Province, according to the fighters.

The report comes as the Iraqi army and volunteer fighters appear to be gaining the upper hand and making significant gains against ISIL.

In October, a video showed the terrorist group captured a bundle of US weapons airdropped in the Syrian border town of Kobani.

The US military admitted that it had dropped 28 bundles filled with grenades, mortar rounds and other supplies that were intended for Kurdish fighters.

The video showed masked terrorists inspecting the military equipment, which was airdropped in areas controlled by ISIL near Kobani.

The US Central Command said that the airdrops, including weapons and ammunition, and medical supplies, were “intended to enable continued resistance against ISIL’s attempts to overtake Kobani.”

The US and its allies have been conducting airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria.

They say they are carrying out the airstrikes against the Takfiris in both countries in order to curb their advances in the region.

However, the air raids have so far failed to halt the insurgents’ military gains.

Posted on Global Research, December 30, 2014
by Kurt Nimmo

Iranian state media claims U.S. military aircraft have once again dropped weapons in areas held by the Islamic State.

Iraqi volunteers fighting against IS in the Yathrib and Balad districts in Iraq’s Salahuddin Province reported the air drops.

Iraq claims it now has the upper hand in the battle to regain territory from the terrorist group.

In October a purported errant airdrop of weapons fell into the hands Islamic State fighters outside Kobani in Syria.

In November Iraqi intelligence sources said the U.S. is actively supplying ISIS with weapons

<iframe width=”620″ height=”425″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/idba-EN_5QM” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

“The Iraqi intelligence sources reiterated that the US military planes have airdropped several aid cargoes for ISIL terrorists to help them resist the siege laid by the Iraqi army, security and popular forces,” a report stated.

“What is important is that the US sends these weapons to only those that cooperate with the Pentagon and this indicates that the US plays a role in arming the ISIL.”

The London-based organization Conflict Armament Research previously reported that ISIS fighters are using “significant quantities” of arms including M16 assault rifles marked “property of the US government.”

In June Aaron Klein, writing for WorldNetDaily, reported that members of ISIS were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan, according to informed Jordanian officials.

The U.S. does not admit arming and training ISIS terrorists, although General Martin E. Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, admitted in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee that United States’ Arab allies in the Middle East fund ISIS.

General Thomas McInerney told Fox News in September that the U.S. “helped build ISIS” as a result of the group obtaining weapons from the Benghazi consulate in Libya which was attacked by jihadists in September 2012.

“We backed I believe in some cases, some of the wrong people and not in the right part of the Free Syrian Army and that’s a little confusing to people, so I’ve always maintained… that we were backing the wrong types,” McInerney said.

The U.S. claims it is arming “moderate” mercenaries in Syria to fight against ISIS and the al-Assad government in Damascus despite the fact there are no longer any moderate forces active.

The CIA has shipped weapons to al-Qaeda affiliated groups in Syria since at least 2012, a fact revealed byThe New York Times.

The shipments included more than 160 military cargo flights by Jordanian, Saudi and Qatari military cargo planes landing at Esenboga Airport near Ankara and other Turkish and Jordanian airports. An effort to arm al-Nusra – now fully merged with ISIS – and other jihadist groups has been coordinated by American intelligence.

Sources:
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/12/27/392011/us-drops-weapons-in-areas-held-by-isil/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-airdrops-weapons-to-isis-as-iraqi-army-makes-gains/5422034

http://www.infowars.com/u-s-airdrops-weapons-to-isis-as-iraqi-army-makes-gains/

Project Camelot and Chile

Originally found at
http://www.randomcollection.info/mcf/project-camelot-chile.htm

From The Rise and Fall of Project Camelot: Studies in the Relationship Between Social Science and Practical Politics, Irving Louis Horowitz, ed. (Cambridge MA: The M.I.T. Press, 1967), pp. 47-49 (document) and 232-36 (Jorge Montes):

Document Number 1

The following description of Project Camelot was released on December 4, 1964, through the Office of the Director of the Special Operations Research Office (SORO) of the American University in Washington, D.C. It was sent to scholars who were presumed interested in the study of internal war potentials and who might be willing to assemble at a four-week conference at the Airlie House in Virginia in August 1965. This release, dated December 4, 1964, is a summary version of a larger set of documents made available in August 1964 and in December 1964 [I.L.H.].

Project CAMELOT is a study whose objective is to determine the feasibility of developing a general social systems model which would make it possible to predict and influence politically significant aspects of social change in the developing nations of the world. Somewhat more specifically, its objectives are:

First, to devise procedures for assessing the potential for internal war within national societies;

Second, to identify with increased degrees of confidence those actions which a government might take to relieve conditions which are assessed as giving rise to a potential for internal war; and

Finally, to assess the feasibility of prescribing the characteristics of a system for obtaining and using the essential information needed for doing the above two things.

The project is conceived as a three to four-year effort to be funded at around one and one-half million dollars annually. It is supported by the Army and the Department of Defense, and will be conducted with the cooperation of other agencies of the government. A large amount of primary data collection in the field is planned as well as the extensive utilization of already available data on social, economic and political functions. At this writing, it seems probable that the geographic orientation of the research will be toward Latin American countries. Present plans call for a field office in that region.

By way of background: Project CAMELOT is an outgrowth of the interplay of many factors and forces. Among these is the assignment in recent years of much additional emphasis to the U.S. Army’s role in the over-all U.S. policy of encouraging steady growth and change in the less developed countries in the world. The many programs of the U.S. Government directed toward this objective are often grouped under the sometimes misleading label of counterinsurgency (some pronounceable term standing for insurgency prophylaxis would be better). This places great importance on positive actions designed to reduce the sources of disaffection which often give rise to more conspicuous and violent activities disruptive in nature. The U.S. Army has an important mission in the positive and constructive aspects of nation building as well as a responsibility to assist friendly governments in dealing with active insurgency problems.

Another major factor is the recognition at the highest levels of the defense establishment of the fact that relatively little is known, with a high degree of surety, about the social processes which must be understood in order to deal effectively with problems of insurgency. Within the Army there is especially ready acceptance of the need to improve the general understanding of the processes of social change if the Army is to discharge its responsibilities in the over-all counterinsurgency program of the U.S. Government. Of considerable relevance here is a series of recent reports dealing with the problems of national security and the potential contributions that social science might make to solving these problems. One such report was published by a committee of the Smithsonian Institution’s research group under the title, “Social Science Research and National Security,” edited by Ithiel de Sola Pool. Another is a volume of the proceedings of a symposium, “The U.S. Army’s Limited-War Mission and Social Science Research.” These proceedings were published in 1962 by the Special Operations Research Office of the American University.

Project CAMELOT will be a multidisciplinary effort. It will be conducted both within the SORO organization and in close collaboration with universities and other research institutions within the United States and overseas. The first several months of work will be devoted to the refinement of the research design and to the identification of problems of research methodology as well as of substance. This will contribute to the important articulation of all component studies of the project toward the stated objectives. Early participants in the project will thus have an unusual opportunity to contribute to the shaping of the research program and also to take part in a seminar planned for the summer of 1965. The seminar, to be attended by leading behavioral scientists of the country, will be concerned with reviewing plans for the immediate future and further analyzing the long-run goals and plans for the project.

A Communist Commentary on Camelot

by Jorge Montes Chilean Chamber of Deputies, 1965

A number of newspapers, and particularly El Siglo, have been referring to a so-called “Project Camelot.” What is this project? In order to define it, we shall textually quote from an official document. [See Document No.1 above, from which excerpts were cited.]

These quotes from the project reveal the determination on the part of U.S. foreign policy to intervene in any country of the world where popular movements might threaten its interests. To this end, they use a covert form of espionage, which they try to present in terms of scientific research, thus violating the most elementary norms of sovereignty.

Indeed, our own country, Uruguay, Colombia, and Venezuela in Latin America, Senegal and Nigeria in Africa, and India, Vietnam, and Laos in Asia are the countries in which organized espionage, under the appearance of sociological investigation and under the rubric of “Project Camelot,” is being carried out. Continue reading

Kiev regime’s official policy of genocide for East Ukraine: starvation, torture, rape, and murder

From Global Research, December 30, 2014
by George Eliason

Imagine a sign pinned to the podium on the floor of the US Senate that reads Ferguson will be ours! Pictured on it is an armored personnel carrier with the United States flag driving over a mountain of corpses. This picture shown below says just that about Donbass. This is Kiev’s official statement on mass murder for the area. This was pinned to the podium on the floor of the Ukrainian Senate (Verkhovna Rada).

President Petro Poroshenko and his government have run out of wiggle room to deflect charges of genocide any more.

On December 18th the newly appointed Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Senate) deputy Semen Semenchenko, formerly commander of the battalion “Donbass” warned that Ukraine intends to pursue terrorists from Donbass anywhere in the world. The terrorists from Donbass Semenchenko wants to pursue is anyone that did not leave when the ATO began.

Andrey Biletsky, former “Azov” battalion commander, Ukrainian nationalist ideologist, and a favorite in Victoria Nuland’s circles ( Biletsky was made a Verkhovna Rada deputy by Arseni Yatsenyuk) made clear who those terrorists are in an interview with Foreign Policy .

“Unfortunately, among the Ukrainian people today there are a lot of ‘Russians’ (by their mentality, not their blood), ‘kikes,’ ‘Americans,’ ‘Europeans’ (of the democratic-liberal European Union), ‘Arabs,’ ‘Chinese’ and so forth, but there is not much specifically Ukrainian… It’s unclear how much time and effort will be needed to eradicate these dangerous viruses from our people.”

Biletsky, a new Senator who is being groomed for the Ukrainian presidency thinks even his American handlers are part of the virus infecting Ukraine.

Rape is Official Policy in Ukraine?

His Azov battalion (with Nazi insignia)  are showing their true American and European values in Mariupol by gang raping women prisoners at prison every night, torturing, and murdering some of them. This is someone that describes Americans and democratic values as a dangerous virus that need to be eradicated making sure your US tax dollars hard at work again.

According to an article that was published in the Kharkov News by Rita Samoilov on December 25th 15-20 women prisoners at penal colony #107 are taken to the military camp every night and raped by the Azov battalion. Earlier in the year I reported the same behavior at the mines in Lower Krynka by Aydar battalion which resulted in reports of mass rape, torture, and mass graves found on the site where over 5000 Ukrainian cleansing troops and national guard were camped. Upon checking the allegations the OSCE found them to be true. Kiev responded by making Aydar the new model of policing in Ukraine. Continue reading

President Poroshenko — U.S. State Department agent?

This article is from June. If anything, the situation has hardened since then.

President Petro Poroshenko, “Our Ukraine Insider” for the U.S. State Department
By Michael Collins
Global Research, June 13, 2014

Two diplomatic messages from the WikiLeaks Public Library on U.S. Diplomacy indicate that newly elected President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko was an agent for US States State Department. A confidential message from the U.S. Embassy in Kiev on April 29, 2006 mentions the newly elected Ukraine president twice.

“During an April 28 meeting with Ambassador, Our Ukraine (OU) insider Petro Poroshenko emphatically denied he was using his influence with the Prosecutor General to put pressure on Tymoshenko lieutenant Oleksandr.”

” During an April 28 meeting with Ambassador, Our Ukraine (OU) insider Petro Poroshenko denied that he was behind Prosecutor General Oleksandr Medvedko’s recent decision to issue an arrest warrant for Tymoshenko lieutenant Oleksandr Turchynov. … [to] question him about the alleged destruction of SBU [Ukraine intel] files on organized crime figure Seymon Mogilievich.” [Russian Mafia Boss of Bosses] WikiLeaks Public Library of U.S. Diplomacy

The motivation for alleged destruction of files appeared in an embassy message from April 14, 2006.

“– The files contained information about Tymoshenko’s cooperation with Mogilievich when she ran United Energy Systems in the mid-late 1990s.” WikiLeaks

Yulia Tymoshenko, an aspiring oligarch, is the darling of the both the Bush and Obama administrations for her role in the 2004 Orange Revolution that brought the first modern anti-Russian Ukraine government to power. She helped negotiate the natural gas deals between Ukraine and Russia. In the message above, Poroshenko is making excuses for seeking Timoshenko’s prosecution by Ukraine legal authorities.

Another mention of Poroshenko made it clear that the State Department saw the future value of Poroshenko’s insider role.

OU-insider Petro Poroshenko was in the running for the PM job.” WikiLeaks

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with the current president in 2009 when he served as Ukraine Foreign Minister. The content of the meeting was described in a confidential message from the U.S. Embassy in Kiev on December 18, 2009:

[Speaking to Ukraine Foreign Minister Petro Poroshenko] “She [Secretary of State Clinton] emphasized that the United States envisioned multiple pathways to NATO membership.” WikiLeaks

Ask yourself, how would you regard a high level U.S. politician who met regularly at a foreign embassy and consistently advanced the interests of that country. Poroshenko was instrumental in a now defunct Ukraine faction called Our Ukraine. However, the pertinent information is that newly elected president had meetings (recounted in secret State Department messages) with the U.S. Ambassador, staff, and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and others. The two cited concern critical U.S. interests (going light on Tymoshenko corruptions charges and plans to have Ukraine join NATO). Since he was doing his work in secret, he was “our insider.” It follows that Poroshenko played the role of agent: ” someone hired or recruited by an intelligence agency to do its bidding. The person to whom the agent reports — the actual agency employee–is known as an operative.” Encyclopedia of Espionage, Intelligence, and Security.

Poroshenko is a Ukrainian oligarch, one of the fifty or so wealthiest citizens who run the country. It is unlikely the president got cash for his services but highly likely that he extracted financial advantage as a result.

Amidst the chaos and ruin visited upon Ukraine, Poroshenko’s recent election may mean a full synchronization of U.S. – Ukraine policies regarding the eastern regions where citizens of Ukraine are subject to bombardment by land an air in their towns and cities.

False Hope at D-Day Gathering?

At the recent D-Day commemoration in France, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Holland arranged a fifteen-minute meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the newly elected Ukrainian president. Both leaders agreed that military actions must stop and set up a date for meetings to accomplish that goal. Putin went beyond military settlement by offering Ukraine its former discounts on Russian gas.

According to the Guardian, “Putin said he welcomed Poroshenko’s call for an end to the bloodshed and liked his approach to settling the crisis but wanted to wait until the Ukrainian leader could deliver it in detail to the nation.” (Authors emphasis) Poroshenko delivered some detail to the nation but it wasn’t what Putin wanted to hear in order to move forward. The inauguration speech in Kiev included the new president’s desire to sign the European Union (EU) association agreement and seek full integration into the EU, which implies NATO membership.

“Dear friends, my pen is already in my hands. I am ready now. As soon as the EU takes a relevant decision, the signature of the Ukrainian president will immediately appear under this document. We see the association agreement as only the first step towards Ukraine’s fully-fledged membership in the European Union ” Petro Poroshenko, June 7

As Poroshenko spoke, “Residents [of Slavyansk, eastern Ukraine] said the sounds of shelling reverberated around the city on Friday.” ABC, June 7

Which Poroshenko can we believe? The president who worked for the U.S. as “Our Ukraine insider” or the elected head of a sovereign state engaged in honest diplomacy?

Right now, it’s safe to stick with the bellicose rhetoric of the inaugural speech. In a heavily documented report, RT showed the handiwork of President Poroshenko’s troops in Slavyansk – eight dead yesterday from aerial bombardment of the separatist occupied city administrative building.

“Death and destruction is reported in eastern Ukraine as Kiev’s artillery has resumed shelling the rebellious city of Slavyansk. Locals tell RT they have been without running water and power for days, and that hope is fading.” RT, June 8

The $5 billion spent to get a U.S. friendly government in the Ukraine worked. “Our Ukraine insider,” Petro Poroshenko is president. He was informed five years ago that the U.S. wanted Ukraine in NATO, and he no doubt heard Vice President Joseph Biden’s speech in Kiev. Without a vote by Congress or a valid treaty, Biden assured the then coup-run government that our government would be there to help.

U.S. will stand by Ukraine in face of Russian aggression, Biden says

“I came here to Kiev to let you know, Mr. Prime Minister, and every Ukrainian know that the United States stands with you and is working to support all Ukrainians seeking a better future. You should know that you will not walk this road alone. We will walk it with you.” Vice President Joseph Biden, April 22

The players and plans have been in place for years and it’s all paid off. The White House and their masters finally have their insider in place in charge of Ukraine. It’s worth listening to the assessment of former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine John E. Herbst and his Deputy around the time they handled Poroshenko. The ambassador saw him as a “disgraced oligarch” and his deputy pointed out that “”Poroshenko was tainted by credible corruption allegations.”

Spreading brand democracy around the world is a tough job.

Somebody’s got to do it.

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/president-petro-poroshenko-our-ukraine-insider-for-the-u-s-state-department/5386891

The real meaning of the 1914 Christmas truce

From Antiwar, December 29, 2014
By Ron Paul

One hundred years ago last week, on Christmas Eve, 1914, German and British soldiers emerged from the horrors of World War One trench warfare to greet each other, exchange food and gifts, and to wish each other a Merry Christmas. What we remember now as the “Christmas Truce” began with soldiers singing Christmas carols together from in the trenches. Eventually the two sides climbed out of the trenches and met in person. In the course of this two day truce, which lasted until December 26, 1914, the two sides also exchanged prisoners, buried their dead, and even played soccer with each other.

How amazing to think that the celebration of the birth of the Prince of Peace could bring a brief pause in one of the most destructive wars in history. How sad that it was not to last.

The Christmas Truce showed that given the choice, people do not want to be out fighting and killing each other. It is incredibly damaging to most participants in war to face the task of killing their fellow man. That is one reason we see today an epidemic of PTSD and suicides among US soldiers sent overseas on multiple deployments.

The Christmas Truce in 1914 was joyous for the soldiers, but it was dangerous for the political leadership on both sides. Such fraternization with the “enemy” could not be tolerated by the war-makers. Never again was the Christmas Truce repeated on such a scale, as the governments of both sides explicitly prohibited any repeat of such a meeting. Those who had been greeting each other had to go back to killing each other on orders from those well out of harm’s way.

As much as governments would like to stamp out such humanization of the “enemy,” it is still the case today that soldiers on the ground will meet and share thoughts with those they are meant to be killing. Earlier this month, soldiers from opposing sides of the Ukraine civil war met in eastern Ukraine to facilitate the transfer of supplies and the rotation of troops. They shook hands and wished that the war would be over. One army battalion commander was quoted as saying at the meeting, “I think it’s a war between brothers that nobody wants. The top brass should sort things out. And us? We are soldiers, we do what we’re told.” [***]

I am sure these same sentiments exist in many of the ongoing conflicts that are pushed by the governments involved — and in many cases by third party governments seeking to benefit from the conflict.

The encouraging message we should take from the Christmas Truce of 100 years ago is that given the opportunity, most humans do not wish to kill each other. As Nazi leader Hermann Goring said during the Nuremberg war crimes trials, “naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany.” But, as he added, “the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity

http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2014/12/28/the-real-meaning-of-the-1914-christmas-truce/

[***]Editor’s comment: We have to move beyond society’s conditioning. We cannot just do what we’re told. It is not appropriate to say “I’m just doing my job” when that job harms other people.

If we don’t care about each other, no one else will. Unless we treat all people as part of our own family, there will never, ever be peace for any of us.

This message isn’t just for soldiers. This is for everyone. Each of us has to see where we compromise with truth and stop doing that — today, now.

The future of our families, our communities, and the entire world is at stake. It will only be saved if each of us take responsibility in every way we can.

We are family. We are kin. We must become clear about who our real enemies really are and work to defeat them together.

Not jumping for joy: Ukraine, a year later

By Nebojsa Malic

Published on RT, November 24, 2014

Just over a year ago, thousands of Ukrainians took to Kiev’s main square, angry at oligarchs and corruption. But instead of “Europe” and prosperity, they got a coup, more oligarchy, and war.

During the three-month “people power” spectacle in Kiev’s Independence Square (Maidan Nezalezhnosti) that began on November 21, 2013, one of the protesters’ favorite chants was “Who doesn’t jump is a Moskal” (a derogatory term for Russians). After three months of “jumping” – which involved attacking the police, attempting to storm government buildings, and cheering US and European officials who came to support them, the protesters overthrew the legally elected president and establish their own government on February 22, 2014. It has been nine months since then – and a whole year since the “Maidan” protests began; let’s try to see what they’ve been “jumping” for.

Much like the 2004 “Orange Revolution,” the Maidan protest was an exercise in perception management. Officially, the reason the protesters gathered was the government’s balking at signing the EU accession treaty. A TV, internet and social media campaign – the very name “EuroMaidan” was a Twitter hashtag coined by some clever PR professional – got the people riled up against the government presented as corrupt, incompetent and selfish.

Was this so? Part of the problem with the EU treaty was that it demanded Ukraine restructure its entire apparatus of state and society to the Union’s standards, which would have cost something like $19 billion a year for the next decade (per The Telegraph). But Brussels was willing to offer a paltry $750 million (€610 million) in loans. Ukraine needed much more just to stay solvent. It was, by all metrics, a bad deal for Ukraine.

Meanwhile, Russia was offering $15 billion in favorable loans – and warning that if Ukraine signed a treaty with the EU, that would mean breaking the free trade treaty it had with Russia (and several other countries), causing further economic losses. But the Maidan organizers spun this as Russia trying to “steal Ukraine’s European future.”

Early in December, EU’s Foreign Policy Commissioner Catherine Ashton and US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland came to Kiev and met with the protesters, giving them encouragement – in Nuland’s case, distributing biscuits as a publicity stunt. President Yanukovich’s cabinet was challenged in the legislature – but survived a no-confidence vote easily. But the Maidan refused to accept the outcome of this democratic process. Yanukovich tried to appease them, offering the premiership to one of the protest leaders, Arseny Yatsenyuk. The “Maidan” said no, as the original protesters gave way to masked, helmeted and armed thugs dubbing themselves the “Right Sector” and wearing Nazi insignia.

On February 18, the protests turned violent. After two days of violence that saw dozens of dead protesters and police – videos of “peaceful democratic protesters” butchering police officers and setting them on fire were quickly banished from public view in the West – Yanukovich gave in. On February 21, he signed an agreement with the Maidan leaders, brokered by German, Polish and French foreign ministers, to call early elections and give a general amnesty to rioters. The “Right Sector” refused to accept the surrender, and its “activists” stormed government offices the next day.

Celebrated in the West as a popular revolution for liberty and democracy, the Maidan was nothing of the sort. Research by independent journalists has revealed that the funding for various “non-governmental organizations,” “citizen initiatives,” and “free media” instrumental in mobilizing the Maidan rebellion came from the United States. Moreover, Nuland herself admitted in December 2013 that Washington had spent $5 billion since 1991 to “secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.” What that translated to in practice is best described by columnist Brendan O’Neill, writing three days after the February 22 coup: “we have just witnessed European and American leaders remove an elected politician and replace him with a friendlier new government.”

Reuters / Maxim Zmeyev

Reuters / Maxim Zmeyev

In late January, Nuland would be caught discussing how to “midwife this thing” with the US Ambassador to Kiev Geoffrey Pyatt, and having some choice words for the EU. Yet even though “our man Yats” was indeed appointed Prime Minister after the February coup, Nuland’s admission about her country pulling the Maidan’s strings has gone persistently unmentioned in the Western press.

The coup was not the end, but just the beginning of Ukraine’s agony. As “Right Sector” thugs went around brutalizing dissenters and intimidating legislators and the media, the new government proposed a law outlawing the use of Russian. Crowds gathered in multiple cities in the south and east of the country to protest the coup. Crimea seceded in mid-March, and was admitted to the Russian Federation within days. In the eastern regions of Donetsk and Lugansk, the local population declared independence. But while Washington and Brussels previously demanded Kiev refrain from violence against the Maidan, they fully endorsed a violent crackdown on these protests.

On May 2 in Odessa, pro-junta militants attacked demonstrators protesting the coup, surrounding them at the Trade Union House and setting it on fire. Official reports tell of 42 people who died in the blaze. Amateur video footage showed junta supporters shooting and beating to death people who tried to escape. Western and junta-loyal media spun this as “clashes” with “pro-Russian protesters.” A week later, junta militants opened fire on civilians in Mariupol.

On May 25, in this atmosphere of terror and intimidation, the presidential election called by the junta was won by Petro Poroshenko – an oligarch. Donetsk and Lugansk didn’t vote – they had held their own independence plebiscites earlier, with the overwhelming majority in favor. Poroshenko promised Ukraine would get massive aid from the West – “$15 to $25 billion” from the IMF, as he said in a Washington Post interview in April. All Kiev actually got was $1 billion in US loan guarantees.

Just days after Poroshenko was anointed president, Kiev began a massive military offensive to crush the rebels in the east. Tanks, airplanes, artillery and eventually missiles were used against cities and civilians. Thousands have died. Yet the military could not crush the rebels’ militia, prompting anguished cries of “Russian invasion” by Kiev’s spokesmen every week and dutifully echoed by the Western press and governments.

In mid-July, a Malaysian passenger jet routed over Donetsk by the air traffic control in Dnepropetrovsk (seat of the notorious oligarch and junta supporter Igor Kolomoisky) was shot down. Kiev and the West immediately blamed Russia outright, and then the “pro-Russian rebels”, then abruptly fell silent after Moscow presented radar and satellite evidence showing the plane could only have been shot down by the government forces.

In August, the Kiev forces suffered a catastrophic defeat, with their trapped units surrendering en masse to the rebels or even escaping across the border to Russia. By early September it looked like the rebels might take Mariupol. The advance was halted by the September 5 ceasefire signed in Minsk. An adviser to President Poroshenko has since stated that Kiev ought to follow the example of Croatia in 1995, and storm the rebel republics once it had enough American political and military support.

Mass riots at the Trade Union House in Odessa.(RIA Novosti / Maxim Voitenko)

Mass riots at the Trade Union House in Odessa.(RIA Novosti / Maxim Voitenko)

Officially, the Minsk ceasefire has been holding. Both Kiev and the rebels have held parliamentary elections earlier this month; as usual, the West praised the former and condemned the latter. But the war continues: over 300 people had died since the ceasefire went into effect, according to a UN report from early October. The same report cites the fighting had claimed “at least 3,660” lives, while 8,756 people had been injured and 375,000 displaced. Some 40,000 businesses were forced to shut down. These estimates are almost certainly too low.

Recently released official figures put Ukraine’s GDP as down by 7-8% in 2014. However, considering that most of the country’s industrial and mining output was in the now-disputed regions in the east, Kiev has literally destroyed its revenue stream. Ukraine has unpaid gas bills, mounting loans, and almost no gold left (as recently admitted by the Central Bank Governor Valeriya Gontareva) – credible reports indicate all of Kiev’s gold was taken to the US shortly after the February coup.

And what of the fabled EU agreement that supposedly started it all? The junta government signed the political part of it in March, while Poroshenko signed the economic portion in June – but the whole thing has been put on ice till December 2015. Far from the promised phantom prosperity, it always stood to cause “a great deal of pain and disruption” (a BBC description). Ukraine wasn’t able to handle it a year ago, before its society, economy and politics were destroyed by the coup and the civil war.

Leaders of the Maidan protests and their Western backers wanted a united Ukraine dominated by the anti-Russian ideology of Stepan Bandera and his heirs. Instead, they got a smoldering wreck, terrorized by Nazi militias, oligarchs and their private armies, and a government in Kiev entirely out of touch with reality.

All “color revolutions,” from Serbia to the so-called “Arab Spring” and now the Maidan, have only created a wasteland and called it democracy. Whether they knew it or not, that’s what the Maidan supporters were “jumping” for.

Nebojsa Malic for RT

Nebojsa Malic is a foreign policy analyst and blogger, working in Washington, DC. A columnist for Antiwar.com and Strategic Culture Foundation, he occasionally appears on RT.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

http://rt.com/op-edge/208363-ukraine-maidan-protest-coup/