Victoria Nuland is a terrorist. She should be banned from Russia.

Victoria Nuland visits Moscow May 17-18.

From Sputnik News [i]

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland will visit Moscow on May 17 and 18 to discuss the implementation of the Minsk peace agreements on Ukraine, the US State Department said in a statement Sunday. 

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — During her visit, Nuland will meet with senior Russian government officials and civil society representatives. In addition to the Ukraine peace process, she is set to discuss bilateral US-Russian issues.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko (L) greets U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland during a meeting in Kiev, Ukraine, May 15, 2015

Nuland’s Moscow visit follows her May 14-16 trip to Ukraine’s capital Kiev, and State Secretary John Kerry’s recent visit to the Russian resort city of Sochi.

Allowing Victoria Nuland into Russia is very dangerous. She should be barred from entry. While in Russia, she will make good use of her time, including conferring with her partner Ambassador John Tefft on how best to ignite a Russian Maidan, destroy Russian society and Russia’s future, and meeting with Russian “liberals”, who label themselves as “pro-human rights”.

She is a very dangerous person. She should be viewed as a terrorist. Her work and her deeds are well known. Everything she does is to undermine the well-being of peoples and nations. Her skills as a mastermind and fomenter of civil catastrophe make her a powerful foe. Her movements predict unrest, turmoil, and coups. What is further despicable is that she pays others to commit her foul deeds of bloodshed and the terror.

On May 15, US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland arrived in Kiev – officially “to discuss a range of bilateral and regional issues.” 

In fact, to review plans for renewed aggression on Donbass. She was Obama’s point person in replacing Ukraine’s democratically elected government with overt Nazis assuming high regime positions.[ii]

She should be put on the official terrorist list and banned from the Russian Federation.
—————————————————–

[i] http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150517/1022228426.html

[ii] http://www.globalresearch.ca/kiev-heads-closer-to-resuming-full-scale-war-on-donbass/5449783

Also here for her role in Macedonia’s attempted coup

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/02/16/nuland-attempts-kiev-version-2-skopje.html

Her partnership with Robert Kagan

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2013/12/18/meet-neocon-doughnut-dolly-victoria-nuland.html

There is a great deal of information available on Victoria Nuland.

Odessa massacre coordinator killed in Kharkov terrorist attack

Posted on Fort Russ

February 23, 2015
Translated by Kristina Rus
“No Condolences”
“Internet militia” reports: Kharkov explosion during Maidan anniversary march on February 22 killed the coordinator of Kharkov Maidan, who brought the football fans of “Metallist” to burn people in Odessa Trade Unions building on May 2, 2014.
Kristina Rus:
 
Without looking at any other information, two theories about yesterday’s Kharkov explosion have a right to exist: either it was done by the Kiev junta or by it’s opponents.
 
Kiev junta of course is a terrorist government. It came to power by provocations and resorted to provocations in order to stay in power. As soon as it was done with one provocation it would begin plotting the next. If the information above is indeed true, then the Kiev junta could kill two birds with one stone: get rid of a key witness and earn some reputation points by “proving” that the “separatists” are indeed “terrorists”, just when the public opinion was shifting away from the war after Kiev’s devastating loss of 3,500 soldiers in Debaltsevo.
 
If it was done by the “Kharkov anti-junta underground”, then they could set out to eliminate a key participant of the Odessa massacre, and terrorize junta supporters, who are not welcome by the majority Russian-speaking Kharkov. But then they would be resorting to the same tactics as the junta. No doubt, that it is possible that there could be some in the resistance who could turn to such methods on their own, just like the anti-fascist underground in the 1940’s. But it would also a gift to the junta and the Western media supporting it in justifying their narrative and would be contrary to the overall mission of the anti-junta movement to create an all-inclusive truly democratic society without terror and nationalist slogans in Ukraine (or at least their own regions-republics).
 
At least 700 people have been detained in Kharkov on charges of separatism, and Kharkov was of course the only other city besides Lugansk and Donetsk, were the resistance had seized the regional administration building in April, trying to set up a Kharkov Republic. In a way Kharkov saved Lugansk and Donetsk, since it was geographically closer to Kiev and was the only location were the junta could manage to direct it’s storm troopers, who stormed the building arrested the activists inside, and surrounded it’s perimeter, but would not respond to locals’ questions in Russian or Ukrainian.
 
The fact that administration buildings were seized by the Right Sector and other militants (previously trained for years in Poland and Lithuania) in Western Ukraine and downtown Kiev as part of a coup to overthrow the government of Yanukovich did not seem to upset junta’s Western backers. 

CIA carried out terrorist bombing in Syria’s capital; why are they claiming it now?

By Richard Becker
Liberation News, February 4, 2015

The news that the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency carried out a meticulously planned terrorist car bombing in Damascus, Syria, in February 2008 appeared on the front page of the Jan. 31, 2015, Washington Post. It was an outrageous action in the capital of a sovereign state. By all definitions, a state-sponsored car bombing in the capital city of another nation is defined as terrorism.

It doesn’t take much imagination to picture what the U.S. response would be if the scenario were reversed and such an attack took place in Washington, D.C. At the very least, bombs and missiles would fall like rain on Syria.

That the CIA would carry out such an act is hardly a surprise. In its near-seven decades’ existence, the CIA has been responsible for the murder of millions and the destruction of scores of progressive movements and governments in Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe.

Virtually every progressive leader in the countries liberated from colonialism or neo-colonialism in the post-World War II era has been targeted for assassination by the CIA at one time or another. From Vietnam to Haiti to Afghanistan and beyond, U.S. clients who had outlived their usefulness in the eyes of Washington were set up for elimination.

CIA engineered or assisted coups in Iran, Guatemala, Congo, Iraq, Indonesia, Greece, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and more, and brought to power regimes that used extreme brutality in the interests of U.S. corporations and local elites.

Organized in 1947, the agency’s first coup was in newly independent Syria just two years later. Its bloody trail confirms that the CIA is the deadliest terrorist organization in the world, bar none.

What was unusual about the 2008 assassination of a top Hezbollah commander, Imad Mughniyah, was the public revelation that the CIA, in partnership with Israel’s Mossad secret service, had carried it out.

While the CIA formally declined comment on the story, the sources for the article were past and present CIA officials, something unthinkable unless approved from inside the agency.

Standard CIA practice has long been to refuse to comment on its coups and murders—and for good reason. Regardless of whether they are “signed off on” by the president or any other U.S. official, all are blatant violations of international and U.S. domestic laws. Agency officials seek to maintain a “window of deniability” to protect themselves from possible future legal consequences.

Why, then, did the agency break with its usual practice of treating such an operation as classified and instead boast through the mass media of the assassination?

Targeting Hezbollah to derail Iran negotiations

The Post report followed two weeks after an Israeli air attack that killed six members of Hezbollah, including Jihad Mughniyah, son of Imad Mughniyah, and a high-ranking Iranian officer inside Syria. Both Hezbollah and Iran have been supporting the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria against the armed opposition, led by al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Hezbollah responded to the Jan. 18 air assault by destroying an Israeli tank in the Shebaa Farms region, the last part of Lebanon still under Israeli occupation. Hezbollah played a key role in the Lebanese resistance that drove Israel out of much of Lebanese territory it occupied in 1982-2000. In 2006, it fought the powerful, U.S.-backed Israeli army to a standstill in a month-long war.

Two Israeli soldiers were killed and seven wounded in Shebaa Farms. Israeli shelling killed a Spanish soldier who was part of the UN “peacekeeping” force in southern Lebanon. The Hezbollah leadership made it clear that their response was a limited one.

The Jan. 18 attack in Syria was a clear provocation, intended to draw a Hezbollah reaction. So, too, was the Post article. The aim of both was to push Hezbollah – as an ally of Iran — toward stronger retaliation.

The publication of the Post story should be understood as a form of taunting Hezbollah by elements in the U.S. establishment who are seeking a pretext for subverting the Iran nuclear negotiations.

Talal Atrissi, a Lebanese political commentator reportedly close to Hezbollah, said of the leaked CIA report on the 2008 assassination: “The leak is meant to undermine the talks, and that benefits Israel because it opposes these negotiations.”

A Lebanese professor at the American University in Beirut, Imad Salamey, pointed to the psychological warfare aspect of the Post report: “Your [Hezbollah’s] leadership has been targeted by the United States, so what do you do?”

The negotiations with Iran are at a critical stage, with late March set as the deadline to reach an agreement. There is a major division in U.S. ruling-class political circles over the negotiations.

While the Obama administration and its allies are seeking an agreement that they believe would weaken Iran, an opposing faction wants to scuttle the negotiations and impose even harsher sanctions.

Iran has stated that additional sanctions would mean an end to the negotiating process. Such an outcome could well lead to a new U.S. or U.S.-Israeli war against Iran, something that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as well as many in Washington clearly desire.

On Jan. 21, in a highly unusual breach of bourgeois protocol, Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner invited the rabidly anti-Iranian Netanyahu to lecture a Joint Session of Congress on Mar. 3 on the so-called “danger” from Iran and in support of imposing even tighter sanctions on that country. Boehner’s invitation was made without consultation with the administration.

Protests calling for “No New War Against Iran,” “End the Colonial Occupation of Palestine, “ and “End All U.S. Aid to Israel” are being planned to coincide with Netanyahu’s appearance before Congress on Mar. 3.

Source:
http://www.liberationnews.org/yes-cia-carried-terrorist-car-bombing-nations-capital/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-carried-out-terrorist-bombing-in-syrias-capital-why-are-they-claiming-it-now/5429775