Escalating the Risky Fight with Russia

Exclusive: To box in President-elect Trump, the neocons and liberal hawks are pushing for “crippling sanctions” against Russia that they see as crucial to their dangerous “regime change” agenda in Moscow, reports Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

The neocons and their liberal-interventionist chums never seem to think through one of their “regime change” schemes. It’s enough that they wrote the plan down in some op-ed article or reached a consensus at a think-tank conference. After that, all there is to do is to generate the requisite propaganda, often accompanied by intelligence “leaks” and maybe some heartbreaking photos of children, to rile up the American people so they can be easily herded into the next slaughterhouse.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, flanked by Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria “Toria” Nuland, addresses Russian President Vladimir Putin in a meeting room at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia, on July 14, 2016. [State Department Photo]

We’ve seen this pattern play out over and over again, from Iraq to Libya to Syria to Ukraine. You could even go back to the 1980s and the project for arming Afghanistan’s mujahedeen and a collection of international jihadists led by Osama bin Laden, a project enthusiastically supported by both Republicans and Democrats.

The one consistent in these bloody follies is that the neocon/liberal-hawk plans never work out as they were drawn up. Time and again, it turns out that the great idea – looking so good on the op-ed page or sounding so smart at the think-tank conference – wasn’t all that great or smart after all.

Remember how the Iraqis were going to welcome U.S. troops with flowers and how neocon favorite Ahmed Chalabi would be hailed as Iraq’s new leader; or how the murder of Muammar Gaddafi would be followed by the flowering of Libyan democracy; or how enforcing the “must go” edict on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would be accomplished pretty quickly; or how overthrowing democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych was sure to put a stop to Ukraine’s endemic corruption.

Instead, the people in those countries were left bloodied and battered while the areas around them became destabilized, too, now with those social and economic disruptions extending all the way to Europe, which not that long ago was one of the world’s bastions of stability. And, oh, yes, the Afghan operation from the 1980s gave us the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

No Accountability

The neocon/liberal-hawk elitists never seem to get anything right but they are so well-connected that they never are held accountable. They just keep coming up with new gambits, expressed with the same confidence and certainty – all beautifully explained in the next round of op-eds and at the think-tank conferences.

President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney receive an Oval Office briefing from CIA Director George Tenet. Also present is Chief of Staff Andy Card (on right). (White House photo)

When the new scheme arrives, it’s as if the earlier disasters hadn’t happened. Across the ideological spectrum, the mainstream media’s star reporters act as if the only proper reaction toward the latest brilliant idea is to show undying credulity. The only questions that get asked of politicians are why they aren’t intervening faster and going bigger, whether the new plan is to blast the targeted country in a “shock and awe” display or ship weapons to some proxy force which may include jihadists and neo-Nazis or sabotage a country’s economy so the people will support a coup out of hunger and desperation.

Time and again, the unhappy country at the receiving end of America’s latest “regime change” project ends up wallowing in pools of blood as the international circle of chaos widens. But the U.S. public’s attention quickly goes elsewhere, like a child bored with a broken Christmas toy. The targeted country is mostly forgotten, except for the occasional op-ed or think-tank complaint that if only the politicians had started the wars earlier or had dispatched a bigger military force or had kept U.S. soldiers there indefinitely or had done more to undermine some demonized leader, then the neocon/liberal-hawks scheme would have worked out just perfectly. Which sets us up for the next grand idea.

Dropping the Big One

But the next grand idea arguably could be the last one. After several years of intensifying anti-Russian propaganda, the United States reportedly is ready to escalate the New Cold War with Russia by inflicting new punishments in retaliation for the still-unproven allegation that President Vladimir Putin authorized the hacking of Democratic emails and then released them to the American people via WikiLeaks.

Russian President Vladimir Putin answering questions from Russian citizens at his annual Q&A event on April 14, 2016. (Russian government photo)

Though the Obama administration has yet to provide any public evidence to support the charges, mainstream news outlets – particularly The Washington Post and The New York Times – have lapped up their own leaks from the Central Intelligence Agency, which appears to have been operating under instructions from President Obama to discredit President-elect Donald Trump’s victory.

The hope seemed to be that the CIA’s claims about Putin’s interference in the election could anger enough electors to the Electoral College to prevent Trump from getting the 270 required votes on Dec. 19 and thus toss the selection of a new president into the House of Representatives, which under the Twelfth Amendment would pick from the Electoral College’s top three vote-getters (who turned out to be Trump, Hillary Clinton and former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who received four votes from Clinton’s electors in Washington State).

Though this Electoral College coup failed – Trump got more than the 270 votes he needed – the CIA’s claims about Russian hacking lived on with neocon and liberal-hawk members of Congress (not to mention pretty much every important op-ed writer and editorialist in America) demanding that Russia be made to pay a heavy price.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, spoke for many of his colleagues when he tweeted, “My goal is to put on President Trumps desk crippling sanctions against Russia.”

In a new leak to The Washington Post on Wednesday, Obama administration officials vowed to do just that, readying “a series of measures to punish Russia for its interference in the 2016 presidential election, including economic sanctions and diplomatic censure [as well as] covert actions that will probably involve cyber-operations.”

A New Escalation

This latest U.S. escalation of tensions with nuclear-armed Russia actually culminates at least a half decade of probing by the United States for Moscow’s vulnerabilities to “regime change,” an operation that appears to have begun around Russia’s 2011 elections and continued with protests against Putin’s election in 2012, street demonstrations dubbed by the West’s media as the “snow revolution,” since all these strategies seem to require a “color” or a similar special identification marking.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at a press conference on Sept. 9, 2012. (State Department photo)

Former Secretary of State (and defeated Democratic presidential nominee) Hillary Clinton has cited Putin’s belief that she orchestrated this interference in Russian politics as his supposed motive for leaking emails that embarrassed her campaign. And, without doubt, the Russian election protests had the strong support of various U.S.-based “non-governmental organizations” that receive funding either from the U.S. government or from U.S. “pro-democracy” foundations.

There is also no doubt that the West’s neocons and liberal hawks want desperately to instigate a “regime change” in Moscow, in part, as punishment for Putin interfering in their “regime change” schemes for Syria and Iran.

In 2013, by getting Syria to surrender its chemical weapons, Putin helped thwart plans for a U.S. bombing campaign against the Syrian military in retaliation for a mysterious sarin gas attack outside Damascus that the Obama administration and Western media immediately blamed on President Assad though later evidence suggested that it was a provocation carried out by Islamic extremists connected to Al Qaeda.

Putin also assisted Obama in securing concessions from Iran regarding the agreement to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon, which disrupted Israeli and neocon hopes for a plan to “bomb-bomb-bomb” Iran, as Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, once described.

Putin’s Payback

The neocons and liberal hawks delivered Putin his first dose of payback when they helped orchestrate a putsch in neighboring Ukraine in 2014 that ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych. Neocon Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, a Hillary Clinton favorite, was caught on an unsecure phone line discussing with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt how they would “glue” or “midwife” a change in government that would put Nuland’s choice, Arseniy “Yats is the guy” Yatsenyuk in power. Meanwhile, the U.S.-government-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED) sponsored scores of projects inside Ukraine for training activists and funding journalists.

Ukraine’s now former Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk

Another key project seeking to undermine Yanukovych’s government was the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Open Society foundation of billionaire currency speculator George Soros.

Amid a massive propaganda barrage, street protests in Kiev and open encouragement from senior U.S. officials, a violent coup on Feb. 22, 2014 – spearheaded by neo-Nazi street fighters – forced Yanukovych to flee for his life and brought Yatsenyuk to power as Ukraine’s prime minister.

When ethnic Russians from Crimea and eastern Ukraine rejected this unconstitutional transfer of power – and Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to leave Ukraine and rejoin Russia – the State Department and the mainstream Western media reported this resistance as a “Russian invasion” or “Russian aggression” – prompting the first wave of U.S. economic sanctions to punish Russia.

The European Union was brought into the sanctions regime after Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, and the U.S. government immediately blamed Russia. The crash investigation – though technically “Dutch-led” – was effectively put under the control of Ukraine’s unsavory intelligence agency, the SBU, which has among its mandates the protection of Ukrainian government secrets and has been implicated in torturing captured ethnic Russians.

Though I was told that at least some CIA analysts saw the hand of Ukrainian extremists behind the MH-17 shoot-down – and Dutch intelligence reported that the only powerful anti-aircraft missiles in the area that day were under the control of the Ukrainian military – Obama refused to release the details of the U.S. intelligence assessment, allowing the SBU-dominated investigation to pin the blame on Russia. [See here and here.]

The U.S.-government-subsidized OCCRP also was involved in the analysis of the so-called “Panama Papers,” a law firm’s purloined financial records that led to front-page stories seeking to tie Putin to off-shored wealth even though Putin’s name was not found in the documents.

The West’s thorough demonization of Putin set the stage for Hillary Clinton’s attempts to delegitimize Donald Trump by portraying him as Putin’s “puppet” because the Republican nominee advocated seeking normalized relations with Russia and cooperating with Moscow on counter-terrorism operations against Islamic State.

The Clinton campaign theme, which I was personally briefed on, sought to convince journalists that Trump was a Russian agent completely under Putin’s control. That theme provided the backdrop for the CIA’s leaked allegations about Russian hacking of the emails of the Democratic National Committee, which revealed how the DNC improperly tilted the primary playing field in favor of Clinton over Sen. Bernie Sanders. A second batch of emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta disclosed the contents of Clinton’s paid speeches to Wall Street interests and pay-to-play aspects of the Clinton money machine.

Obama’s Hand

Given Obama’s refusal to let CIA analysts brief reporters about internal CIA dissent questioning the mainstream consensus blaming the sarin attack on Syria and the MH-17 shoot-down on Russia – because those briefings might undercut the prevailing propaganda narratives – it’s a fair assumption that Obama authorized the CIA leaks to The Washington Post and other major media outlets about the alleged Russian hacks.

President Barack Obama walks from Marine One on arrival on the White House’s South Lawn, July 5, 2016, a few days before leaving to attend the NATO Summit in Warsaw, Poland. Official White House photo by Lawrence Jackson

I’ve also been told that there is some internal CIA dissent against the publicly released claim of Russian responsibility for the Democratic leaks, an analytical dispute that appears to center less on whether Russian intelligence and other entities may have hacked the email accounts than whether Russia then released the material to WikiLeaks.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and former British Ambassador Craig Murray, an Assange associate who says he communicated with one of the sources (or a representative) in a meeting in Washington in September, say the emails did not come from the Russian government. Murray also has indicated that the two batches of emails had two different sources, both American, one a disgruntled Democrat and the other possibly from the U.S. intelligence community.

Despite these doubts, the CIA’s leaked claims about alleged Russian responsibility for the hacks have prompted congressional demands for a thorough investigation, possibly even a special committee like the ones that examined the Watergate and Iran-Contra scandals.

Telling the Full Story

If such an inquiry is undertaken – and assuming it’s not a pre-packaged deal that starts with the conclusion of Russian guilt and assembles whatever is necessary to “prove” the case – the investigation should also obtain testimony regarding Putin’s suspicion that Secretary of State Clinton, the National Endowment for Democracy and the Soros organization had a hand in the aborted “snow revolution” in Moscow from 2011 to 2013.

The investigation also should explore whether Obama assigned the CIA’s leadership to leak information to the mainstream media in a failed attempt to reverse the outcome of the U.S. election by trying to stampede the Electoral College into denying Trump the presidency. Under the CIA’s charter, it is forbidden to operate domestically or interfere in U.S. politics, a concern that worried President Harry Truman at the CIA’s founding.

One of the most serious abuses of the Reagan administration was its systematic politicizing of the CIA’s analytical division when it was under the control of CIA Director William Casey and his deputy, Robert Gates.

According to the CIA’s then-chief Russia expert Melvin Goodman and other former CIA analysts, the Casey-Gates team broke down the agency’s historic tradition of objective analysis and bullied CIA analysts into producing phony intelligence that served President Reagan’s ideological agenda.

That corruption continued through both Republican and Democratic presidents, including George W. Bush’s “slam-dunk” National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s non-existent WMD and now including Obama’s selective release of data on Syria, Ukraine and Russia.

Going to Extremes

As destructive as the past distortion of intelligence has been, the Obama CIA’s apparent interference in an attempt to reverse the outcome of a U.S. presidential election arguably ranks with the worst intelligence scandals in U.S. history.

Donald Trump speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at the Prescott Valley Event Center in Prescott Valley, Arizona. October 4, 2016. (Flickr Gage Skidmore)

And, compounding the CIA’s political intervention is the fact that this controversy has taken on a life of its own as the Obama administration prepares to hit nuclear-armed Russia with a combination of new economic sanctions and covert cyber-attacks, apparently with the goal of heading off any rapprochement between Putin and Trump.

The neocons and their liberal-hawk allies clearly have in mind plans for making the Russian economy scream and somehow engineering a “regime change” in Moscow despite Putin’s current 80 percent approval ratings. But this latest scheme – like the earlier ones – is almost surely not going to end as its architects have drawn it up.

While the neocons and liberal hawks may dream about some Western-beloved “liberal” being carried into the Kremlin while Putin is dragged away, the likelihood that the Russian people would put up with another round of American-prescribed “shock therapy” – in which Russia’s resources were plundered, Russian life expectancy plunged, and various U.S. “advisers” and hedge funds made out like bandits – is remote.

The far more likely result of Sen. Graham’s “crippling sanctions” would be that a hardline Russian nationalist would rise, lacking Putin’s calculating temperament. Instead of Putin and his famous sang froid, the world would likely be facing some hot-blooded extremist determined to defend the honor of Mother Russia even to the point of pulling out the nuclear codes and pushing the button.

The neocons and liberal hawks may believe they’ve got this New Cold War all figured out, but if their record holds, they could easily be driving the world toward a hot war that would indeed be the war to end all wars – and to end humanity as well.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and

82 comments for “Escalating the Risky Fight with Russia

  1. LJ
    December 31, 2016 at 17:57

    The New York Times and Washington Post act as disinformation posts for the US Government. So do the Neocons at Fox News and elsewhere. Ultimately our policy of the Dissemination of Chaos towards are enemies in the hope of rebuilding the ruins of their societies to our wishes is fanciful and doomed to fail. It is anti intellectual and based on wishes rather than models constructed by analysts.Who has ever had their cake and ate it too and still stayed skinny? Besides Oil Companies and Defense Contractors that is ? BUT the War Business is good . Obama/Hillary increased Defense exports and the Europeans have stated their intent to buy more weapons and to rebuild their armies in Europe . Along with fracking and lower oil costs and inflating the Dollar, Euro and Yen at the allied Central Banks well it basically worked for the US economy and Pax Americana but how to keep all the losers in line? . So we have to take the baby with the bathwater, this is why Obama just signed on for more and deeper funding for Counter Intelligence in the latest NDAA and even our schools now will have to accept “fact based” stories from our government through it’s minions in the Press and Television. .

  2. Abe
    December 31, 2016 at 14:44

    “On more than one occasion, U.S. President Barack Obama overrode agreements that his Secretary of State John Kerry had reached with Russia. Unlike Obama’s consistent support of his prior Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s, initiatives (such as her backing of the coup that on 28 June 2009 had overthrown the progressive democratically elected President of Honduras and replaced him with a fascist regime), Secretary of State Kerry has repeatedly suffered humiliations from his boss’s (Obama’s) reversals of agreements that Kerry had reached with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov […]

    ” Obama never condemned nor fired any general, nor anyone else, for having perpetrated the U.S. bombing of Syrian government forces at Deir Zor, on 17 September 2016 — the sabotaging-event, which naturally caused Putin to instruct Lavrov to terminate all discussions with Kerry, because it displayed Obama’s unwavering determination to defeat Russia. (That sabotaging-event then motivated the meeting, on December 20th, when Russia, Turkey, and Iran, met together and agreed in their joint «Moscow Declaration», to complete, on their own, their war against the West’s jihadists who were trying to overthrow Assad; and so, the jihadists in Aleppo simply surrendered to Assad’s government — and the U.S. government and its propaganda ‘press’ howled that this was a victory for the ‘brutal’ Assad against ‘the civilians’, and against ‘the rebels’ — the latter being actually the U.S.-Saudi-Qatari-backed jihadists.)

    “Kerry had failed because Obama wanted a military settlement of the U.S.-backed jihadist invasion of Syria; he didn’t want a diplomatic end to it — at least not a diplomatic end that wasn’t a surrender by the Syrian government forces: the replacement of Assad by the jihadists (who were backed not only by Obama, but by King Saud who owns Saudi Arabia, and by Emir Thani who owns Qatar).

    “And this sabotage, by Obama, actually repeated Obama’s earlier refusal to accept the deal that Kerry had negotiated with Lavrov to settle the conflict in Ukraine.”

    How Obama Overrode Kerry’s Agreements with Russia
    By Eric Zuesse

    • Abe
      December 31, 2016 at 15:10

      The 17 September 2016 direct air attacks by U.S. Coalition and Israel on Syrian Arab Army (SAA) troops in Deir ez Zor and the Golan may be viewed as coordinated responses to SAA advances in liberating Syria from occupation by terrorist forces.

      The U.S. Coalition ‘Operation Inherent Resolve’ air attack on Syrian troops in Deir ez Zor province was coordinated in support of an Islamic State (also known as Daesh) ground attack. Surrounded by ISIS forces, the Syrian troops were holding firecontrol positions on Jabal Tharda, a mountain overlooking Deir ez Zor’s airport.

      The deliberate targeting of Syrian troops by the U.S. Coalition enabled ISIS forces to seize control of a key strategic position.

      On the same day as the U.S. Coalition air attack, the Israeli Air Force carried out a drone strike over the Golan Heights, targeting the Syrian Arab Army’s Fouj Al-Joulan’s (Golan Regiment) defenses near the border-town of Hader, killing one soldier and wounding 5 others. Israel alleged that the airstrike was done in retaliation for a mortar shell allegedly fired into the occupied Golan Heights by an unknown party.

      Israeli direct aid to terrorist forces in Syria was publicly acknowledged by Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon in June 2015.

      The redacted November 2016 summary report on the U.S. Coalition air attack featured an anonymous co-author, whose identity was redacted as ‘foreign government information.’” Both the unusually large amount of unredacted information revealed in the summary report and the concealment of the report co-author may be an indication that the U.S. Coalition was not the exclusive author of the 17 September attack on Syrian troops.

      Note that the 2016 U.S. and Israeli air attacks occurred near the anniversary of the 6 September 2007 Israeli airstrike on a suspected nuclear reactor in Deir ez Zor province.

  3. Ol' Hippy
    December 30, 2016 at 15:37

    If there’s one thing to be learned about the whole Ukrainian affair is all the misinformation(aka fake news), used to further the US agenda in the propaganda dis-information coming out of the ministry of ‘truth’ to further their agenda, whatever that is. To believe much of anything the government says is just a blight on real truth and requires much skepticism on our behalf. I believe very little of the ‘official’ line and I feel most folks ought to do the same. Putin is no dummy and will only be pushed so far and reprisals could be quite severe so we should tread lightly lest we unleash the bear and a war we can’t win. Putin needs respect and understanding instead of poking with sticks to unleash a monster we can’t tame.

  4. December 30, 2016 at 15:13

    Thanks for your excellent article Robert. I am hoping you can take a couple of minutes to read the following article. This article examines the DHS FBI report on Russian Hacking and concludes that it is the perfect example of fake news. They failed to provide any evidence that the Russians were in any way involved in hacking the DNC. Please share this study with anyone you know who is actually interested in learning the truth about this important matter.

  5. posa
    December 30, 2016 at 13:55

    Let’s all take a deep breath… Putin showed himself to be the class act today by declining retaliation against Obama and scheduling a party at the Kremlin for the US Embassy staff… Once Drump is in office, he and Putin can negotiate a Pl,an of Action to move forward… sanctions will be lifted or left unenforced… crisis averted.

  6. tony
    December 30, 2016 at 10:55

    And you know what? You would not hear a damn thing from the MSM about “Putin’s interference in the election” if HRC had won. Period.

  7. bozhidar balkas
    December 30, 2016 at 09:39

    Donald saw it right and said it right: US has been governed by inept, arrogant, ignorant, corrupt people. But God, me, and Donald have no cure for these illnesses yet.
    With no medicine in sight to take for the disease and with anger, hatred, demonization probably on the increase, expect worsenings for most Americans.
    But, then, i have been saying to expect ONLY worsening after each change of horses in US for at least two decades.
    I recall saying in’ 7 that we’d be nostalgic for good-ole days of Bush after Obama takes over the reins.

    How about after Obama? Expect worsenings for many Ameriicans!! 100% sure!!!

  8. Sharon Abreu
    December 29, 2016 at 16:30

    One small correction – Colin Powell got three electoral votes, not four. Accuracy in reporting is important, though this is undoubtedly by far the most minute point in the whole piece. Thank you for continuing to speak truth to power, Robert Parry.

  9. Pablo Diablo
    December 29, 2016 at 16:01

    The Neocons and their corporate sponsors make money (lots of money) off of war whether they win or lose.

  10. Mark Thomason
    December 29, 2016 at 15:56

    “The neocon/liberal-hawk elitists never seem to get anything right but they are so well-connected that they never are held accountable.”

    True, but only part of the truth. Their gambits DID “work” for their domestic power base. The money flowed. The wars served domestic interests, enriched some, gave some political points.

  11. Jamie
    December 29, 2016 at 14:26

    “According to the CIA’s then-chief Russia expert Melvin Goodman and other former CIA analysts, the Casey-Gates team broke down the agency’s historic tradition of objective analysis and bullied CIA analysts into producing phony intelligence that served President Reagan’s ideological agenda..”

    This claim is disputed by Paul Craig Roberts, who worked in the Reagan Administration:

    “Star wars was mainly hype. Whether or nor the Soviets believed the arms race threat, the American left-wing clearly did and has never got over it.”

    “The US military/security complex did not want Reagan to end the Cold War, as the Cold War was the foundation of profit and power for the complex.”

    “Reagan did not believe the CIA’s claim that the Soviet Union could prevail in an arms race. He formed a secret committee and gave the committee the power to investigate the CIA’s claim that the US would lose an arms race with the Soviet Union. The committee concluded that the CIA was protecting its prerogatives. I know this because I was a member of the committee..”

    “The military/security complex wants a major threat, not an actual arms race .. the trouble with an actual arms race as opposed to a threat is that the US armaments corporations would have to produce weapons that work instead of cost overruns that boost profits.”

    “American capitalism and the social safety net would function much better without the drain on the budget of the military/security complex.”

    • Bill Bodden
      December 29, 2016 at 15:57

      “According to the CIA’s then-chief Russia expert Melvin Goodman’s and other former CIA analysts, the Casey-Gates team broke down the agency’s historic tradition of objective analysis and bullied CIA analysts into producing phony intelligence that served President Reagan’s ideological agenda..”

      Ray McGovern on this website made a claim similar to Melvin Goodman – “No tears for the real Robert Gates: Exclusive: In Official Washington, the gap be-tween image and reality can be wide, but there is a virtual canyon separating the mainstream’s awestruck regard for Robert Gates as a “wise man” and his record as a deceitful opportunist known to his former colleagues”, like ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern. –

  12. Brian
    December 29, 2016 at 13:47

    DECEMBER 29, 2016 Trump wants hacking claims laid to rest

    US President-elect Donald Trump says the United States and Russia should lay to rest the controversy over Moscow’s computer hacking of Democratic Party computers, saying “we ought to get on with our lives.”

  13. December 29, 2016 at 12:41

    I am starting to wonder if Obama is stupid enough to start a war with Russia with 22 days left in Office. He may just be.

  14. Drew Hunkins
    December 29, 2016 at 11:55

    Over at CommonDreams some Killary supporters mocked and ridiculed me and deemed me hysterical and delusional and a fear monger when I pointed out how dangerous it is for Washington and the mass media to be constantly saber rattling toward Moscow. They said it was a cheap ploy on my behalf for me to bring up the potential for nuclear war, it was a “naked attempt to sway people to [my] side of the argument using scare tactics.:”

    • December 29, 2016 at 12:15

      Kudos to you. The brainwashed benefit from and enjoy their brainwashing. Thinking independently and having some sense of the truth is its own reward–the majority will never (barring major consciousness raising) be interested in truth or morality for that matter–however paradigms do shift and we are entering just such a shift over the next few years.

      • Drew Hunkins
        December 29, 2016 at 12:54

        Thanks for the kind words. You make some great points.

  15. December 29, 2016 at 11:43

    In the meantime, the Russians continue to reach out to us. Here is the Teardrop Memorial in New Jersey to the victims of 9-11.

    And then the tenth anniversary concert in Canada. Scroll down to hear “God Bless America” sung at the tenth anniversary of 9-11, now being acknowledged by members of the NYPD after the same choir was killed in this week’s Christmas Day plane wreck. I apologize that I don’t have a copy in English, but God Bless America is clear enough.

    • backwardsevolution
      December 30, 2016 at 02:21

      Aurora – thanks for posting the Russian choir singing “God Bless America”. It brought tears to my eyes. What a terrible shame they were all lost in the plane crash. I hope this plane was not brought down on purpose, just to get back at Russia.

  16. Herman
    December 29, 2016 at 10:56

    Mr. Parry’s article is a great summation. As interesting are the comments defending the Ukrainian coup. I think the term was a “democratic coup”.

    To suggest that Putin meddles in the affairs of neighboring countries sounds like something new in the world of international politics. Think only of our reaction over fifty years ago when the USSR put missiles in Cuba. I think we engaged in a little meddling when that was discovered, in fact our meddling began before.

    So we can expect that Russia will continue to meddle when confronting with what they perceive as threats. Putting missiles at your borders creates a response to meddle.

    Mr. Parry is right to raise an alarm. As bizarre as it may seem, the tactics used by the Clintonistas after the election are similar to those to get rid of the Ukrainian president. There was an attempt, we don’t know how serious or who was involved, to removed a democratically elected president elect.

    Tragic, but funny is the hoopla regarding Trump’s planned registry. Also mentioned in passing is that Obama is getting rid of the Muslim registry which he maintained for eight years!

    Finally, the picture of Hillary in the article. It was labeled as a State Department photo. Was it taken from her college yearbook!?
    Then there is the picture of Trump, the usual frumpy, bejowled guy we see all the time. He needs to find that State Department photographer.

    Yes the discourse in this country is worrisome, from the adolescent remarks by our leaders about our foreign leaders, to our domestic political discourse to our angry discourse among ourselves to the point where ordinary people cannot rationally discuss who they voted for with risking shunning.

  17. T. Gundvale
    December 29, 2016 at 09:12

    TRUE: There are none so blind as those who will not see. Not only is the proof of Russian interference in the election tangible and followed to its source, but even after the fact, Putin has shown his hand again, in an effort to help his boisterous friend, Donald Trump, who is being hurt by the perception of being a Russian lackey or at minimum a Putin “boyfriend.” What better tactic can Putin employ but to arbitrarily and without other justification, suddenly declare that the Russian nation must expand its nuclear capability. Almost on cue, Trump comes out next morning making declarations about the need for the U.S. to increase its nuclear capability. The American press takes the bait and immediately shifts its focus from “Manchurian candidate” Trump and his cozy relationship with Russia to the threat of nuclear arms race. We are beyond gullible in having elected this man. We are a downright ignorant electorate that has surrendered all critical thinking for the pleasures of easy answers and fake news.

    • Gregory Herr
      December 29, 2016 at 13:23

      Well if the tangible proof right to the source of Russian “interference” exists, I give, whodunnit?

      And some context…Putin was addressing a Russian Defense Ministry board meeting in which a review of many matters, not just nuclear defense modernization, were discussed. I don’t know where you get your “arbitrarily and without justification” idea, but you may have missed recent aggressive posturing by NATO, actual destabilization efforts by the U.S., and oh, by the way, a 30-year expenditure of a cool trillion that the U.S. has already authorized itself for nuclear weapons “modernization”.

      So you think the press is “taking the bait” and suddenly forgetting that Trump is a Putin stooge because Trump and Putin have outsmarted them to obscure their “cozy relationship”. That’s funny.

      I don’t know what “easy answers” you might be referring to, but they aren’t found on this website which doesn’t skirt complexity, analysis, and factual evidence.

    • Bill Bodden
      December 29, 2016 at 13:38

      Not only is the proof of Russian interference in the election tangible…

      What proof? Accusations, especially from the CIA, innuendos, hearsay, and conventional wisdom are not proof. Nor do repeated lies from losers qualify. The president said so. President Obama also has said on several occasions that no one is above the law. Hands up anyone so out of touch with reality as to believe that.

      To the contrary “US Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims” –

      We may have dodged the Clinton bullet, but Donald Trump as president will be the price we will have to pay. We can, to a great extent, thank the American people for getting the nation to this dystopian prospect for continually accepting their perceived lesser evil would be good enough for president. After many quadrennial charades we finally reached the point in 2016 where many people recognized there was no lesser evil.

      • Realist
        December 29, 2016 at 20:59

        A couple of hours ago James Woolsey, in an MSNBC panel discussion, said in answer to a question on whether Obama was justified in applying the latest array of wide-ranging sanctions against Russia for “hacking the election,” was that he would have preferred that Obama had brought charges against Russia in an American court of law. Moreover, he made the appropriate point that such charges would require concrete evidence to back them up, which he wanted to see made public. I think he was tacitly saying that the evidence just isn’t there, else we’d be doing exactly that. Obama is substituting bullshit for hard facts, but his political flunkies and the media won’t explicitly say that.

    • Sam F
      December 29, 2016 at 14:56

      I demand your “proof.” There is nothing at all and you know it, and the fact that the CIA offered none is sufficient. If they produced some faked-up internet traces long after the fact it would prove nothing. The CIA staff who made extreme accusations during an election and produced no evidence need to be prosecuted for acting as foreign agents for Hillary’s sponsors, Israel and Saudi Arabia, for that is exactly what they are. Admit right now that you have no evidence whatsoever.

  18. December 29, 2016 at 09:00

    Mr. Parry

    “………The neocons and liberal hawks delivered Putin his first dose of payback when they helped orchestrate a putsch in neighboring Ukraine in 2014 that ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych. Neocon Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, a Hillary Clinton favorite, was caught on an unsecure phone line discussing with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt how they would “glue” or “midwife” a change in government that would put Nuland’s choice, Arsenio “Yats is the guy” Yatsenyuk in power…….”

    The US has been meddling in foreign affairs since WWII – so “meddling” in the affairs of Ukraine by the Obama Administration does not necessarily mean this was a neoconservative-inspired political crisis. It seems to reflect more of a cold war mentality. Regardless, it’s just as clear that Russia was “meddling” in the Ukrainian attempts to build closer economic ties to the EU. Yanukovych was set to sign a long-negotiated deal with the EU, but reneged at the last moment under pressure by Russia. The origin of the protests can be traced to this decision by the Russian puppet, Yanukovych, to please Putin. Putin was actively seeking to dominate the political and economic environment in Ukraine and to keep Ukraine under the thumb of Russia. Certainly, Putin and Yanukovych were aware that this decision was inflammatory to the Ukrainian population.

    Ukraine has been dominated by Russia since the Bolshevik Revolution which took place 100 years ago. At the time Ukraine sought independence from Russia. There were no democratic votes or actions allowed to alleviate Russian dominance of Ukraine under communist rule. Ukrainians freely chose independence by a large margin after the USSR collapsed and have been struggling economically and politically ever since. Ukrainian protests are derived directly from Soviet and Russian control over Ukrainian affairs. Ukrainians should be allowed to freely sign a deal with the EU. That’s what freedom entails – choice. There is nothing in international law which recognizes a “sphere of influence” around any country (let alone Russia), or the annexation of part of a sovereign nation. There is nothing in international law which recognizes the support of an insurgency to re-establish dominance over any country. To blame the US (or the EU), Mr. Parry, is to effectively recognize a sphere of influence around Russia – a fear-based capitulation to authoritarianism.

    This was a democratic “coup”. The military-style crack down on Ukrainian protesters led to the quick exit of Yanukovych to Russia today where he resides. The Rada voted 328-0 to rightly remove Yanukovych from power. Additionally, this is solely a Russian-initiated war in Ukraine. Thousands of people have died because of the Russian decision to support military action in Ukraine including the use of Russian military personnel and equipment in Ukraine – a fact which was denied by Putin for a couple of years. Sanctions leveled by the US and the EU are meant to punish Russia for their illegal and immoral actions.

    • Adrian Engler
      December 29, 2016 at 11:48

      “Yanukovych was set to sign a long-negotiated deal with the EU, but reneged at the last moment under pressure by Russia. The origin of the protests can be traced to this decision by the Russian puppet, Yanukovych, to please Putin. Putin was actively seeking to dominate the political and economic environment in Ukraine and to keep Ukraine under the thumb of Russia. Certainly, Putin and Yanukovych were aware that this decision was inflammatory to the Ukrainian population.”

      Yanukovich and the Party of Regions were certainly more pro-Russian than other political forces, but he can hardly be called a “Russian puppet”. After all, it was him who negotiated the association treaty with the EU.

      Many people have recognized that there were good reasons for delaying the signature of the association treaty with the EU. The economic part of the treaty opens Ukraine for goods from the EU. It is certainly understandable that Russia could not simply accept Ukraine as a backdoor through which EU goods could be imported to Russia via Ukraine. It is clear that the reaction of the Russia would have been restricting trade with Ukraine. Of course, other countries, mainly the Baltic states, went through such a reorientation of markets – they used to produce goods for Russia and thoroughly changed their economy towards the EU market. But Ukraine is much poorer, and there was much less political readiness in Ukraine for the negative effects of restricting economic relationships with Russia. The most affected areas are the ones in the East – the ones where many are in favor of a closer relationship with Russia -, and there is hardly such a readiness for paying the price for markets in the East as there was in the Baltic states, and Ukraine is in a much more difficult economic situation.

      It would be important for Ukraine to have good economic relationships both with the EU and with Russia. Of course, that makes agreements more complicated, but there is nothing in principle that prevents trade agreements to be negotiated in a way that this is possible – with trilateral talks between Ukraine, the EU and Russia. This seems to be what Yanukovich wanted.

      “There is nothing in international law which recognizes a “sphere of influence” around any country (let alone Russia)”

      There may be some people who are in favor of such spheres of influence – for example people who suggest that Poland and the Baltic states should not have been allowed to join NATO although large majorities in these countries are in favor of NATO membership. But what people who argue in favor of pulling away Ukraine from Russia on the basis of rejection of spheres of influence ignore is that the case of Ukraine is completely different from Poland or the Baltic states. When you look at election results in Ukraine, you see that results in the East and in the West of the country are very lopsised. In the East of Ukraine, the parties who are in favor of good relationships with Russia and a balanced position of Ukraine between Russia and the EU have very large majorities, while in the West, parties with an anti-Russian orientation have very large majorities. What clinches elections is the “swing region” in the center of the country. There are very different views on Ukrainian identity and history in different parts of Ukraine. It is simply not true that all Ukrainians want to distance themselves from Russia and only some evil Russian puppets prevent this.

      When we take all of Ukraine into consideration, it is in the interest of the country to be able to have good and close relations both with Russia and with the EU, and it is bad if Ukraine is forced to go to one side and restrict its relations with the other.

      There is also the question what the EU really offers Ukraine. On Euromaidan, many Ukrainians associated the EU with prosperity. But the EU neither offers a grand Marshall plan for Ukraine nor EU membership. EU countries have financial problems of their own, and there is little readiness to spend large sums for such a large, poor country as Ukraine. This inevitably leads to the disappointment of many people, as it did in Moldova. A much more sensible approach than pulling on Ukraine from both sides would be if the EU and Russia collaborated to offer Ukraine good economic (and other) relations with both sides.

      Few people in Eastern Ukraine want to join Russia (this is very different from Crimea), but many people in that part of the country want to have good cultural and economic relations with neighboring Russia and do not support one-sided policies that pull Ukraine completely away from Russia.

      In Ukraine, power changed several times between the two camps. When people were dissatisfied with the “pro-Western” camp that came to power after the Orange Revolution, Yanukovich was democratically elected in an election no one disputes. It is true that in 2013, there was again widespread dissatisfaction with the government. But the situation was not principally different from other situations in the recent past when many people were dissatisfied with the government. What is the justification that this time, the government should be overthrown violently (with members of the government fleeing because there were credible death threats) and not with elections? At the time when the armed coup took place, Prime minister Mykola Azarov had already resigned to make power sharing with the opposition possible, and Yanukovich had talks with EU representatives about early elections.

      “The military-style crack down on Ukrainian protesters led to the quick exit of Yanukovych to Russia today where he resides.”
      Which crack down? On the contrary, the police was rather restrained and tolerated not only demonstrations, but the occupation of significant parts of the city center in Kyiv. Do you mean the mass killings for which the culprits have not been found? It seems that both policemen and demonstrators were shot with the same guns. So far, there is no conclusive evidence about who is responsible for this. The reason why Yanukovich, other members of the government and former Prime Minister Azarov fled were death threats from armed paramilitary groups.

      “Additionally, this is solely a Russian-initiated war in Ukraine.”
      I think your position is rather contradictory here. According to you, we should accept it as a people’s uprising when armed paramilitary groups occupied public buildings in Kyiv at gunpoint. But when people in Eastern Ukraine who did not agree to this change of power did the same and occupied buildings of the administration there, we should not also see it as a popular uprising?

      What came first, were demonstrations and the occupation of public buildings in Eastern Ukraine – something similar to what had happened in Kyiv before from the other side. The reaction of the central government was to attempt to crush these protests with military force instead of looking for a political solution (and after that, Russia supported the insurgents who were attacked by the Ukrainian army and radical right-wing militias).

      “The Rada voted 328-0 to rightly remove Yanukovych from power.”
      328 of 450 members is a simple majority, but, according to the constitution, this is not enough for ousting a president. There would have to be an impeachment procedure, not a simple vote, and thre quarters of the members of the Rada (338) would be needed after the end of the impeachment procedure.
      Some people argued that by fleeing, Yanukovych implicitly resigned. But he explicitly said that he did not resign. Furthermore, people who think it is a normal way of changing governments when members of the current government receive death threats from paramilitary groups and therefore flee, which is then interpreted as an implicit resignment, can hardly call themselves democrats, in my view.

      • Randal Marlin
        December 29, 2016 at 19:34

        Adrian Engler: Your account tallies with all that I’ve read. Thanks for taking the trouble to spell things out in detail. Craig Summers’ account is in line with MSM groupthink, complete with significant omissions, and reinforces that oversimplified account. People need time and effort to grasp what you are saying. Hopefully they will pursue the matter.

        • Realist
          December 29, 2016 at 21:11

          Yes, many thanks to Adrian. It takes time to counter the lengthy load of rubbish that Mr. Summers routinely spews against just about all of Robert Parry’s articles. I guess he thinks that no one will notice how he twists the facts and omits critical details to reflect the fanciful narrative of the Obama administration and its MSM propagandists.

      • December 29, 2016 at 22:50


        “…….What came first, were demonstrations and the occupation of public buildings in Eastern Ukraine – something similar to what had happened in Kyiv before from the other side. The reaction of the central government was to attempt to crush these protests with military force instead of looking for a political solution (and after that, Russia supported the insurgents who were attacked by the Ukrainian army and radical right-wing militias)……”

        Thanks for your reply. I appreciate your attention to an eventual Russian and EU solution to the current crisis. That makes sense, but it was Yanukovych who turned down the EU offer in favor of Russia. That was Russia pressuring Yanukovych – an ethnic Russian by the way. That’s what started the protests. And the reality is that Ukrainians have been under Russian influence for a long time. They just felt like closer relations with the EU would benefit their economically troubled and corrupt government while freeing them of Russian control.

        In the order of events: first, Crimea was annexed by Russia. That emboldened separatists to act on their interests which was to secede from Ukraine – with help from the Russian military. Pro-Russian separatists enabled by Russian intelligence and manpower occupied the buildings in Eastern Ukraine – and set the tone for the violence that followed. According to Wikipedia:

        “……..Former adviser to the President of Russia Vladimir Putin and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington, DC, Andrey Illarionov estimates that at least 2,000 Russian intelligence officials are operating in eastern Ukraine.[421]………..”

        Regardless of whether the actual number is accurate or not, the FSB has been present all the way through the 2013-2014 revolution – just like the CIA. The referendum in Eastern Ukraine was illegal and conducted without oversight because of the dangerous war conditions. Obviously, Russia’s military conquest of Chechnya indicates that Putin opposes secession when it affects Russian territory, but in Eastern Ukraine separatists are supported (like Abkhazia and South Ossetia). Of course, it had nothing to do with protecting ethnic Russians. That was the excuse to undercut the new Ukraine government. Putin’s shameful actions have resulted in the deaths of several thousand people.

        Crimea was effectively invaded and annexed by Russia. The Russian Naval complex was under no threat. Ukraine is obviously no match for the powerful Russian military (which could easily conquer Ukraine). The military facility on Crimea was leased until 2042 (option for 2047). Putin authorized the Russian annexation as payback for the ousting of Yanukovych. Additionally, Crimea was turned over to Ukraine by Khrushchev (I believe) so Russia considered the peninsula to be Russian. The referendum and annexation of Crimea was illegal – and violated the Budapest Memorandum. None the less, Russian actions in Crimea set the tone for the protests by Secessionist in Eastern Ukraine.

        “……..328 of 450 members is a simple majority, but, according to the constitution, this is not enough for ousting a president. There would have to be an impeachment procedure, not a simple vote, and three quarters of the members of the Rada (338) would be needed after the end of the impeachment procedure……”

        While it is true that 328 votes does not meet the requirement of the constitution, it does indicate the level of support commanded by Yanukovych after the murder of demonstrators (and police). That level of discontent certainly warrants a change in leadership – constitution or not. The vote of 328-0 simply meant that Yanukovych was retiring in Russia.


        • AndJusticeForAll
          December 30, 2016 at 07:23

          craigsummers I would speculate that the annexation was not a response for ousting Yanukovich, but the escape of Yanukovich was a part of a plan to occupy Ukraine. Partially in favor of this points coincidence that Russian military exercises in 2013 together with Belarus armed forces have had almost the same units and positions used later by Russians along Ukrainian border in 2014.
          As to economic reasoning for ties with Russia. Its a sunk cost from old times and an illusion that Ukraine would be greatly hurt from departure. Now Russian export is only 8% and no gas import from Russia for 2 years and economy is slowly recovering.

        • Abe
          December 31, 2016 at 16:12

          Get a room you two, “craigsummers” and “AndJusticeForAll”

          Must get pretty erotic checking each others’ “sources” and “related projects”.

          Who knew reading all those Atlantic Council and Bellingcat “reports” could stimulate such delicious pillow talk.

          Guess it’s getting super crowded in the First Draft troll factory with all those Google bucks rolling around.

          Sure we’ll hear lots more entertaining stuff from you and your PropOrNot info-warrior coalition “partners” in 2017.

          Fare thee well

    • F. G. Sanford
      December 29, 2016 at 11:56

      So…now that Ukraine has cast off the yoke of Russian domination, how do you explain the total corruption, dysfunction, incompetence and criminality now afoot? Seems to me, when (if?) the Russians ever controlled Ukrainian affairs, they were much better off. There was no military crackdown on protestors. Yanukovych ordered his police forces to stand down, so as not to draw the ire of Western disapproval. Had Yanukovych listened to Putin, he would have conducted a real military crackdown leading to the elimination of the most vile elements of neo-Nazi thugs, criminals and hooligans. Ukraine, as the Saker put it, “Is like a man who has jumped off a forty story building. As he reaches the twentieth floor, he is still OK, but his fate is nevertheless inevitable.” Your interpretations of current events – which amount to the complete reversal of the truth – are almost hilarious…except that they indicate what the average American dupe probably believes is flat fact. Which hasbara agency pays you? And, by the way, your statistics on the Rada vote are a complete misrepresentation. Sufficient members were not present to make the vote valid under the terms of Ukraine’s constitution.

    • December 29, 2016 at 12:12

      You have not said anything about the long-term attempt by NDE (CIA in another form) to undermine and stage “color revolutions” in Ukraine (and everywhere it could) and the huge expenditure (in billions) to do just that. Putin did not have Ukraine “under its thumb” any more than the U.S. has Canada or Mexico/Central America under its thumb. Russian policy has been, for a long time, to maintain some kind of buffer between European invaders and its own borders–that’s it really. The U.S. however, in its long standing policy of anti-Russian actions going back to 1917 wanted to seize the Crimea to cripple Russian power. Why? Because the U.S. goal is “full spectrum dominance” of ALL regions of the Earth. Russia is in the way and makes an easy enemy after generations of film villains having Russian accents so Russia makes an easy Orwellian enemy.

      The Russian regime deals with the real world–a world where the most powerful country in the world wants to take over the direction of the country (as it did in the Yeltsin days) for its own purposes. Russian does not have any such ambition to do the same against any part of the world. What it wants is a chance to assert its own security and economic interests. Russia came to the defense of the Dombass region and displayed enormous restraint, in my view, in countering Ukrainian (largely made up of neo-Nazis and CIA operatives) moves to destroy and loot eastern Ukraine. Of course, if you accept the mainstream narrative about that war not only did you get utterly false reports from the front that were later clearly debunked by events but you have no clue as to the importance of the struggle there. Fortunately Obama exhibited restraint in the Ukrainian area clearly dragging his feet in taking more aggressive action that Clinton was clearly about to undertake.

      The main dynamic in global politics is Washington-based Imperialism which is a curious and multi-headed monster often working at cross-purposes with itself–which makes it so dangerous and thus should be resisted or sidestepped by sane people.

      • December 29, 2016 at 23:47


        “………Russian policy has been, for a long time, to maintain some kind of buffer between European invaders and its own borders–that’s it really…….”

        The reason that NATO advanced to Russia’s doorstep was because these countries chose to join NATO as a protection (or buffer) against Russia. No one forced anyone to join the EU and NATO. Fifteen countries were freed when the USSR collapsed. Under the Soviet system, there were no elections or democracy. You can imagine the same kind of fear of the US in South America because of the destructive US policies during the cold war. The problem with a buffer as you define it is that Russia must have a sphere of influence where the surrounding countries have few choices – like Ukraine’s attempt to develop closer economic ties with Europe.

        While I agree that some Neo-Nazis make up the Ukrainian army, the same can be said for the separatists from Eastern Ukraine (and for that matter, Russians, Americans, Europeans etc.). Regardless, it’s mostly Russian propaganda. At any rate, when Yanukovych was in control, the Nazis didn’t seem to bother Putin as much. In fact, Russia hosted a far right conference in 2015. While condemning Ukraine’s Nazis, Putin encourages far right nationalism (Buzzfeed; “Racists, Neo-Nazis, Far Right Flock to Russia for Joint Conference”, via @maxseddon):

        “……..Russia’s appeal to Europe’s fringe was on full show Sunday at the International Russian Conservative Forum, a conference organized by a pro-Kremlin ultranationalist ……..United by their hatred of Washington, the European Union, and LGBT people, about 200 far-right politicians and activists from across Europe gathered in St. Petersburg’s Holiday Inn to rail against liberal tolerance and implore Russia to lead the fight for Christian morality…….. Rhetoric at the conference, however, outstripped — and sometimes contradicted — Russia’s official line. Of the three members of the European Parliament there, one, Germany’s Udo Voigt, has described Adolf Hitler as a “great German statesman.” The other two hail from Greece’s Golden Dawn, whose logo is a barely disguised swastika. “It’s a bizarre lineup,” Jared Taylor, an American “racial realist,” told BuzzFeed News. “It’s the fringe of the fringe.” Speakers railed, variously, against Freemasons; the corrupting influence of Hollywood; “Nazi fascists in the EU”; a “global cabal” of “bloodsucking oligarchs”; non-white immigrants practicing “alien traditions”; “fags and dykes”; and “Zionist puppet filth.”…..”

      • AndJusticeForAll
        December 31, 2016 at 10:09

        @ Chris The only imperialistic moves to destroy and loot are from Russians. Do you know what is RNE and Barkashov? Are you aware who are Girikin, Arsen Pavlov ala Motorola, Borodai, Dugin, Kozicyn, Zhuchkovskii? Are you aware how Dugin was instigating killing Ukrainians? Do you like a host on Russian TV Kisilev saying that US will be turned into a radioactive dust?

      • Abe
        December 31, 2016 at 16:50

        Escalating the fight, First Draft troll army twins “craigsummers” and “AndJusticeForAll” are gettin’ busy earnin’ Google bucks.

        Whether it’s Bellingcat or the Atlantic Council, or the latest screed from First Draft propaganda coalition “partner” Buzzfeed’s “reporter” Max Seddon, the West’s new Web Brigade info-warriors are ready to make money writing exactly what they’re told.

        But they’re “not evil”.

    • Abe
      December 29, 2016 at 22:29

      Trolling the comments sections of investigative reports by Robert Parry over the past two weeks, “craigsummers” uses a strategy of fake news and information perfected by mainstream media and pro-Israel Hasbara propagandists.

      This “firehose of falsehood” method of propaganda also is employed by fake “citizen investigative journalists” like Eliot Higgins and his gang at Bellingcat, and fake “human rights organizations” like Open Russia financed by oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

      The litany of “craigsummers” Hasbara and MSM propaganda talking points – and their ease of refutation – appears in the comments here


      Western war propaganda aims to dismiss, distract, divert, deny, deceive and distort the facts as a prelude to military engagement.

      Fake “citizen investigators” like Bellingcat are employed as deception conduits by aggressive factions in Western governments, which strive to demonize Russia and China, and seek to sabotage current peace efforts in Ukraine and Syria.

      • AndJusticeForAll
        December 30, 2016 at 06:53

        @ Abe you said Bellincat is fake. Ok. Do not use them as a source. But if other sources point to similar conclusions, you dismiss the information and facts, because it does not fit your point of view. Also, you mentioned propaganda methods used by Western media and are ok when the same is used by Perry or RT, Lifenews. So, the value of your posts diminishes as a result.

      • Abe
        December 31, 2016 at 08:23

        Bellingcat fanboy “AndJusticeForAll” returns:


        Babbling in Google-approved Newspeak, the re-booted Western troll army has increased attacks on reputable independent investigative journalism websites like Consortium News.

        The Washington Post / PropOrNot imbroglio included an effort to position Higgins’ Bellingcat gang of amateurs as some kind of “professional” journalistic “source”.

        PropOrNot-listed “Related Projects” Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab continue to masquerade as “independent researchers”.

        Google, an enthusiastic supporter of Higgins despite his massive track record of debunked claims about Syria and Russia, helped form the First Draft Coalition in June 2015 with Bellingcat as a founding member.

        In addition to the fake “independent investigators” at Bellingcat and the Atlantic Council, the First Draft “partner network” includes the New York Times and Washington Post, the two principal Western “regime change” propaganda media organs.

        Note that it was the Washington Post that catapulted PropOrNot to prominence.

        In a triumph of Orwellian Newspeak, this Propaganda 3.0 coalition has already demonstrated its ability to “work together to tackle common issues, including ways to streamline the verification process” of Western propaganda narratives.

    • Rob Roy
      December 30, 2016 at 00:48

      John N.S., I agree. Craigsummers’s comments were so ill-informed, off-base and full of false ‘facts,’ I didn’t even spell out his errors to him. Not worth the effort. But moving back to Mr. Parry’s article, as always his reporting is factual and clear. His analysis of any topic he writes about is superb. There are just a handful of top journalists in today’s America and Robert Parry is one of them.

  19. Alfred Kath
    December 29, 2016 at 07:42

    While I am very pleased with your reporting and thank you for it, Mr. Perry, I do have one little “but”. You argue, that all actions of the CIA – at least all concerning regime change – resulted in shambles. But, – at least THEY (the neocons and the CIA’s) could argue, that the infiltration of the “muslim desperados” – brought about regime change – or even the breakdown of the Sowiet regime.
    Whether that is so and whether it is a feat to be proud of, – I do’nt know

    • Sam F
      December 29, 2016 at 08:38

      Well, I’ll argue that the collapse of the USSR was not a triumph, nor was it due primarily to US subversion.
      1. The USSR included central Asia, some of the most intractably undeveloped areas of the world, virtually impossible to integrate into a modern society. Looney Christian fundamentalism is the worst we face here, but is relatively small and less extreme.
      2. If the mad US warmongers like Reagan/Brzinski had left the USSR alone in Afghanistan, instead of creating Al Qaeda to attack them, very likely the USSR would have lost there anyway. But if they had succeeded eventually, it would have been a victory for the world. A secular ideology of economic development was needed there to counter the warlords and religious extremists. In a later stage of development they would have moderated their economic views. The US actions were stupid, completely unplanned and unsupportable, based as always on the right wing ideological rants of imbecile bullies in CEO offices, secret because Reagan & co knew that they were wrong, and disastrous as always. Leaving the USSR alone there would have hurt no one.
      3. The USSR was self-destructing anyway in slow motion, like the US. The US now has even worse problems of corruption of mass media, public debate, and political office. It has not had more than a glimmer and a pretense of benevolence since the 19th century: it is a school that teaches nothing but selfishness, ignorance, hypocrisy, and malice.

      The warmongers have no excuse in the nature of their enemy du jour. They are the enemy of the people.

  20. December 29, 2016 at 07:31

    Let’s cut right to the chase right now:

    In a February 1991 Cabinet meeting in the Roosevelt room at the White House, CIA Director Bill Casey made the following statement: “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American people believe is false.”

    This statement was confirmed by Barbara Honegger, who was at the meeting. ( )

    Operation Mockingbird is still alive and well . . . .

  21. elmerfudzie
    December 29, 2016 at 03:21

    Let’s take a moment to zoom out a bit, from the substance of this article and reflect on American history, over the last fifty years. LBJ, jokingly referred to as the senator from the Pentagon, was raised by rifle fire into the Oval Office. The civilian Neocon element or seed began to germinate during LBJ’s administration, the origins of which were at the high end of polite society and JCS staffers who’s philosophy was not unlike General Lyman Lemnitzer. Predictably, following the assassination, JFK’s decision to withdraw from Viet Nam was immediately reversed and thus, to-this-very-day, has embroiled the entire nation into a succession of financial and military fiascos. Little has changed, the projection of force instead of applying diplomacy (disguised under the cloak of “globalism”), the rise of Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) together with corporate defense lobbyists and lest we forget, the Bilderberg group, all began to gradually emerge, in unison, during the Gerald Ford Presidency, to form the Neocon cliques of today. It seems obvious to me that Nixon became the Neocon’s first presidential, marionette. He took over the war mantra, where LBJ left off. and at that moment in time, I believe, Nixon became utterly disillusioned by such formidable outside power(s) manipulating and directing the executive powers of his office. For example; Henry Kissinger grasping fresh B-52 bombing run footage during that horrible plan to disrupt the PAVN in Cambodia. Nixon got so sick of the representatives from the CFR that he fired his Cabinet Officers en mass and slowly, psychologically, went to pieces. Be it the CIA or Military Intel agencies like the DIA, the Neocon’s maintain a power within all of them. Don’t forget the likes of E. Howard Hunt, a CIA man who ended up at the WH. He was, very likely, one the trigger men who killed JFK. The same sort of man can be found across all of our Intel agencies today (sixteen in all I believe) Obama has some sway but is not in full command or control of the “rogue elements” within our “second government”. This is indeed a very dangerous transition time as we go forward with the inauguration of our new POTUS, Trump.

  22. Realist
    December 29, 2016 at 03:14

    Obama is a sick hate-filled man. When frustrated, he clings to his sanctions and his weapons. This spiteful, small-minded man is bound and determined to poison the waters for his successor. I have never seen such a determined effort to conspicuously sabotage the incoming administration in all my 70 years. Just who is telling this damned fool to do this? To muck up as much foreign policy as he possibly can in his last 3 or 4 weeks in office? And why must he persist? Everything else he has pushed over the course of eight years has been unmitigated disaster, why the rush to add to the pain and suffering? I see only revenge for losing the election and being made the fool constantly over his two terms as a plausible motive. Sad, pathetic man, and a danger to all.

    • Wm. Boyce
      December 29, 2016 at 16:40

      You won’t have much longer to fume over our president. If you’re referring to the U.N. resolution on Israel’s illegal settlements, I thought it was too little, too late that the U.S. abstained on the vote, allowing it to pass and remind everyone on the reality on the ground in the Occupied Territories. However, it at least focused the world’s attention on this open sore of a situation. And that Secretary of State Kerry used the Arabic word “nakba” in his speech garnered a wow from me. Never thought I’d hear it acknowledged – ever.

      • Realist
        December 29, 2016 at 20:36

        I’ve been more concerned with the Islamic nations he has utterly destroyed with his warmongering foreign policies, the innocents he has murdered with his drone program, and his poisoning the waters with Russia by fomenting a coup in Ukraine, then a civil war, and then blaming the entire mess on some fallacious “invasion” of Ukraine and “annexation” of Crimea by Russia to rekindle the Cold War. The man has been a hateful, spiteful, American-supremacist (which is a lot like a racist) from day one, doing a damned good job of hiding his biases until the last three years or so. With regard to Israel v. Palestine, yes, he has basically applied his same high-handed aggressive tactics used in the aforementioned world theatres to help keep the Israeli boot on the neck of the Palestinian people. Really, I don’t think he even cared about the consequences of his (too little, too late) abstention in the U.N., it was rather just his way of personally sticking it to Netanyahu as he has been sticking it to Putin in his waning days in office (a seriously juvenile approach to governing, and they say Trump should grow up!). I fume so voluminously against Mr. Obama because he was such a chamaeleon that he was able to fool both the American people and me personally twice in national elections. The default position the voters generally take is to assume that the candidates are being truthful about what they believe and what they will do in office. Usually we are somewhat disappointed at the lack of honesty, but Obama wins the prize for dispensing lies. If they gave an Academy Award for Propagandistic Deceits, Obama could put that statue on his shelf alongside his Nobel “Peace” Prize.

        • Taras77
          December 29, 2016 at 23:14

          Realist, good comment!

          I would note, to state the obvious, that you certainly are not alone on feeling totally conned by this fraud, obama.

          Starting with his initial staffing and cabinet picks, they were all hand s elected by the Rubin clique: summers, geithner, holder and his law firm associate, the sec picks, on to the present day with mary joe white. The list is extensive and reflects the guiding hand of wall street and the neo cons. If ash carter (remember this is the guy who wanted to nuc N. Korea under a previous administration) had more time, I think it would be a good bet that more wars would be on the agenda. And of course, we have nuland at state, a prominent member of the war mongering kagan family with her ukraine masterpiece.

          In total, everything obama promised and advocated was a total fraud-and the press was ever present to aid in the con-jeez, this guy allegedly still has a 50% approval rating. If that does not prompt a feeling a revulsion, I do not know what would.

  23. Kenneth Jackson CPO USN Ret.
    December 29, 2016 at 03:09

    At present, I am ashamed to call myself an American, I immigrated to Tahiti in the late 70’s and became a French Citizen when I completed all my obligations to the United States and the US Navy. I am not ashamed of my Naval Service nor am I ashamed of the US Navy. It is only the Knuckle Heads we seem to elect these days, they are only out for themselves and and care nothing for those of us who voted them in office.

    For the Last 2 decades, I have had to hold my nose to vote to keep from vomiting on the ballots, our government stinks, our elected officials are in it for the money and tell us that the will help us get ahead, while under their breath, they tell us to take a flying F**k at a rolling donut. Oura education system is in the crapper, teachers to not teach critical thinking they only teach to pass some silly exam to finish their high school education. Even our kids here in Tahiti get a better education than those going to school in the USA.

    The USA has become the town bully, and if this doesn’t change soon, something bad is going to happen that might be disasterous for all of you. I no longer travel on my American passport, I only travel using my French One. Even through the 70’s and into the 80’s I was proud to be an american, Now I am proud to be French.

    Yes, I still have a lot of friends who are Americans, and of whom I am proud of, even today I am proud of the military for the most part. As far as I am concerned, almost all of the Polititians today need to be drug out of the House and Senate and many other public offices and horsewhipped all the way back to their particular craphole of a town/city they came from. Too many millionaires are in government today and they sure as Hell aren’t there to help the working man.

    I am not sure that there is anyway to correct this short of Revolution as our founder Thomas Jefferson said many many years ago “The Tree of Liberty requires the blood of patriots and tyrants to stay alive.” .

  24. December 29, 2016 at 03:02

    An interesting sideshow developing is the undermining of Benjamin Netanyahu’s position as prime minister of Israel. Not only has John Kerry declared Netanyahu’s government the most right-wing in Israeli history, but an Israel TV station, Channel 10, is reporting that Israel’s Attorney General has ordered a criminal investigation into Netanyahu’s activities.

    Following the recent abstention from the UN Security Council resolution on illegal setllements, we can speculate that the U.S. has begun the process of tearing itself apart before our very eyes. Whereas the abstention was way overdue, and doesn’t amount to so much in itself, Kerry’s words, coupled with the new investigation being instigated by Israel’s Attorney General, suggest the tentacles of U.S. power no longer act in the sort of co-ordination necessary to maintain peace at home, let alone abroad.

    It would be very interesting to hear Mr Parry’s views on these new developments and what they might mean.

  25. Tibor Varga
    December 29, 2016 at 02:46

    Trump has turned CIA, the trained killers, against him. He is doomed. If Graham does not get him impeached CIA will kill him. I hope I am all wrong!

  26. Wm. Boyce
    December 29, 2016 at 01:35

    Despite the good recounting and reporting on what has happened, soon it will be January 20. An unstable sociopath will be inaugurated as president. He loves Putin today, tomorrow, who knows? He loves Israel today, tomorrow, who knows? His whole life has been spent getting revenge on people who he thinks have crossed him. That’s nothing compared to what he will face as president. We’ll be lucky if we’re not all blown to smithereens this way, too.

    • Zachary Smith
      December 29, 2016 at 02:31

      We’ll be lucky if we’re not all blown to smithereens this way, too.

      It’s a risk for sure. But the alternative to President Trump was President Hillary, and there is a powerful argument she would have been worse.

      That’s what you get when the Top .01% made certain we had only those two candidates.

      • Brad Owen
        December 29, 2016 at 05:57

        They weren’t the ONLY TWO candidates on the ballot. I’ll not give a pass to that statement, whenever I see it. People have got to learn to see outside D and R. D and R deserve to wither up die and blow away.

    • T. Gundvale
      December 29, 2016 at 09:31

      Absolutely agree. But please note: There is no real fight with Putin. This arms race commentary is a “staged duet” that pushes Trumps romance with Putin and the Russian hacking to the backburner. Putin needed to do something quick to save Trump from continuing to look like a Russian lackey. The nuclear comment and Trump’s orchestrated response worked perfectly.

      • Gregory Herr
        December 29, 2016 at 12:35

        Leave aside the fact that Trump doesn’t look like a “Russian lackey” except in fevered imaginations. But you see right through it.

  27. Bill Bodden
    December 29, 2016 at 01:34

    Omitted from the miscreants listed above are the credulous people who through ignorance caused by disinformation or a lack of curiosity related to current and historical events fail in their duties as citizens. I’m reminded of two events that happened in the area where I live. Out of curiosity a local resident asked other locals who was their city’s mayor. Several didn’t have a clue who he was. On another occasion I was collecting signatures to get a measure on the ballot at the next election. Some people I solicited didn’t even know there was an election coming up. I engaged a few people with the explanation we were trying to get a measure on the ballot for campaign finance to cut out the corruption. They said they didn’t care.

    • Sam F
      December 29, 2016 at 08:07

      Yes, the lack of concern reflects despair and belief that corruption and lies are so entrenched that no thought or action makes a difference. Elections become close because the voting preferences are random: no candidate represents the people. When a candidate offers to drain the swamp he gets some extra votes.

      When the despair extends to not even signing a petition for an anti-corruption measure it is truly extreme, but not surprising, because people reach exhaustion with the corruption and lies, and collapse into a dim awareness of politics until something new emerges.

  28. CitizenOne
    December 29, 2016 at 00:29

    I can’t believe it. Oh, wait, yes I can. Unfortunately, this is the reaction of the neocons. Perhaps we should be more afraid of Obama having the Nuclear Codes than Trump! I am fairly sure there were no Russian secret agents pushing a gun in peoples back as they voted. Is there a single person interviewed who claims they were influenced by the Russians and now feels duped by the Kremlin?

    It is all boiled down by our national media as to whether or not somebody in Russia posted a fake news story on Facebook. We all know the reality of the internet. People publish all kinds of trash all the time. The internet is a Sargasso Sea filled with the flotsam and jetsam of a billion spammers and con artists from every corner of the Planet. Perhaps the greatest source of fake news of all is the official news. It was the NY Times which claimed Russia invaded Ukraine which was fake news. It was the NY Times that spewed the BS claims of Ahmad Chalabi as if they were real news about all of the WMD Iraq was hiding which was fake news.

    These “official” news sources which gobbled up dubious intelligence from dubious sources which created the pretext for a real war which killed real Americans: were never held accountable for all the fake news they published leading us into the Iraq war as some kind of revenge for 9/11 which Iraq had nothing to do with. Is anybody worried about that fake news that killed thousands of our own people?

    You might define American Media as “fake” news by example of all of the misinformation, disinformation and lies which make the American media akin to something far worse than Pravda.

    It is actually sad to see the once proud ship of American Journalism reduced to a big lie propaganda machine which lashes out at some foreign power, again, to place the blame where it does not lie on Russia for causing the result of the election.

    Obviously there is a great amount of apoplexy among the current establishment. There might have just as well been another 9/11 with Donald Trump’s win with a need to identify some foreign nation as the culprit when the culprit was here at home all along.

    What about gerrymandering?
    What about the Media’s role in providing Trump with billions of dollars in free advertising?
    What about why they did it? Just ask Les Moonvies of CBS. He’ll tell you straight up why. To get three billion actual real dollars out of the SuperPacs
    What about the DNC trotting out a lame horse that barked like an angry grandmother at half of Americans who were “deplorable” in her scolding eyes?
    What about Trumps message which many people found appealing?

    No no, none of this factored into anything. It was The Russians!!. Not the Chinese, Indonesians, Saudis, or anyone else in any one of the other 196 countries in the World. None of them had any ability at all to influence the elections. It was …… The Russians!!

    What a load of BS coming from officialdom and their handmaidens and town criers, our “news” agencies.

    How about this proposition? Donald Trump won the election. He won it by winning the Electoral College. The vote discrepancy which has been growing between the popular vote and the Electoral College is simply the result of good old fashioned gerrymandering right here at home. Like it or not, it is the system we have and we need to accept the results and not become hysterical and launch a new Cold War.

    Even if it is just an attempt to salt the earth and prevent any growth in cooperation between Russia and the USA under a Trump administration, this posturing by a militarized and eager government to willing to play the spoiler and alienate a potential ally simply is a reaction to their stunning defeat. Nothing more to see here folks, move along.

    • Daniel
      December 31, 2016 at 14:29

      Exactly. But try telling all of this to the ‘good liberals’ of this country, whose world views have been rocked the results of the election and who are in denial about their own role in this mess, played for their team from the opposite side of the same worthless coin. Heads explode.

      As for my head, I keep it informed but down, lest I be chastised by the ‘mean girl’ clique that the Democratic party has become. My hope (and work) is for the realization of the end of the rotten Rep/Dem duopoly that dominates our world and represses the critical thinking so desperately needed.

  29. Joe Tedesky
    December 28, 2016 at 23:55

    Paul Craig Roberts today wrote of how Henry Kissinger is now advising Donald Trump to team up with Russia and go after China. (My words not PCR’s – read it for yourself)

    What I’m curiously watching, is how will Trump be able to cozy up to Putin, after all has been said and done. The Russians have endured a lot of late, considering the assassination of their ambassador coupled with the loss of their TU154 plane which was filled with renown Russian performers, and while Russia deals with those losses then they are slapped in the face with sanctions upon sanctions to make life in Russia hard and scary for what all that’s worth. With all of this, then to be excused of meddling in an American presidential election, leaves me to wonder to how much more Russia can, or will take.

    So here we are, one side of the American hegemonic system wanting to partner up with Russia to make life miserable for China, while the otherside of this imperialistic order in America wants to go toe to toe with Putin himself, and arrange a coup d’eta right in the middle of Red Square Moscow itself.

    My fear for the U.S. is that all this geopolitical engineering will someday blow up in our face, and we will not be the better for it.

    • Joe Tedesky
      December 29, 2016 at 01:04

      Wayne Madsen writes about how NBC is reporting how Obama almost took us to war with Russia, over this hacking business. Read the link…

    • Realist
      December 29, 2016 at 03:56

      Good post, Joe. My response is to Mr. Kissinger: Russia and China are on the same continent. It makes only good sense for those two countries to team up and develop the infrastructure and economy of the entire region to Western standards, via the New Silk Road initiative, the BRICS free trade agreement and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Washington can be invited to participate, but it’s probably going to continue to obstruct the economic development of any country that it does not directly control as a vassal state. It’s hard to judge the present enthusiasm of the EU for this planned “Lisbon to Vladivostok” economic development zone, if America even allows them an independent choice in the matter in spite of Pepe Escobar’s endless praises, but it sure sounds like a natural to this scientist who understands thermodynamics, energy transfer and its efficiency which apply to economic institutions as surely as they do to simple mechanical devices. Both the supply (Russia’s vast natural resources) and Asia’s enormous demand (the huge populations of China and India, just for starters) are right there adjacent to one another and not going anywhere whether Washington likes it or not. Surely Kissinger and Trump can see that. What America’s elite cannot possess for itself it always tries to poison. Let us hope that evil design fails quickly and does not drag the world further into wider wars. After 70 years, I am getting exhausted by the endless iterations of that policy.

      • Brad Owen
        December 29, 2016 at 06:28

        Meanwhile, I read over at Executive Intelligence Review, that Russia will launch their first floating nuclear powerplant in 2017 in the Chukchutka (spelling?) region (imagine nuclear-powered desalination plants floating off the Pacific, Gulf, Atlantic coasts), while China has published its’ white paper on its’ space operations over the next five years, accenting their ongoing lunar operations, intending to make industrial use of the moon, including mining H3 isotope for use as fuel in a yet-to-be-invented nuclear fusion powerplant. This is what’s going on in the sane part of the World, unencumbered by a failing Bankers’ Empire. How refreshing to read about such things.

        • Gregory Herr
          December 29, 2016 at 10:59

          It is refreshing, particularly since old-fashioned American ingenuity & innovation are bygone.

        • December 29, 2016 at 11:44

          Right on. If anyone wants to take a look at how China, and that end of the world, is doing all they need to do is look at the two part series ” China From Above” on National Geographic. it is on Youtube. China is the most dynamic country on the planet and is unstoppable now and it is bringing Russia along with it. Just look at the mega projects, the innovation, and right next door to the world´s largest supply of natural resources. Russia and China is an alliance made in heaven. not only that ,many other countries are jumping aboard that unstoppable band wagon. Europe sees the writing on the wall and is joining in as well.

          The US is going to persuade Russia to cut it´s economic throat by joining in a scheme to sever China from Russia.? Kissinger is suffering from delusions. After the last 25 years if Russia were to believe a single thing the US says , or promises would be stupidity on such an extreme scale as to willingly commit national suicide. If Putin were to decide to help the Americans defeat China, he should be taken out and shot. No doubt there are at least 150 million Russians who would be willing to pull the trigger. It is not going to happen. And now that Trump is in the Oval Office, the Neo Cons will make sure there is no overtures made to Russia to take sides against anyone let alone China.

          One other point. The Russia China alliance is the one developement that will keep the US in check. It would be one thing to take on Russia alone, but to take on China and Russia would be a fool´s decision. After that war, even if the US won it ( thats a dubious assesment at best) it´s military could be beaten by Grenada , because it would be so degraded.

          US foreign policy looks like it is being run by the members of a college Frat House and their only speciality is college pranks, and initiation rites. I would personally like to inform them that neither Russia and or China are Freshmen that will accept harrassment.

          • Taras77
            December 29, 2016 at 22:54

            I would offer a more accurate analogy in that unfortunately the us foreign policy is being run by obama’s group of harpies, ie a sorority, with rice, nuland, jarrett, and the humanitarian bomber, samantha power.

            Headed by obama, who appears clueless, it has appeared to be immature, petty, vindictive, and ill-informed.

      • Joe Tedesky
        December 29, 2016 at 12:14

        Realist you are part of a profession, namely science, where all nations of the world could center it’s interest around creating a better livable environment, and do some good for our raped earth and mankind. The sad part, is our American tax dollars always seem to be enough to build more bullets and bombs, but never is there nearly enough of money to fund worthwhile projects, which could help humanity. With the ‘One Bridge One Road’ infrastructure policy, it would appear that China got the message, but not so much equally good is being offered up by the U.S.. Instead America invests it’s dieing empires dollars into funding proxy wars fought by paid mercenaries where everyone loses big time. To further our country’s ignorance we continue to slap away the out reached hand of Vladimir Putin, as we demonize him to no end. Our corrupted quest for world hegemony has left us blind to what, and should really matter. At the rate we are going it will take a huge catastrophe of some terrible kind to bring us about, and to finally do what’s right.

    • Adrian Engler
      December 29, 2016 at 12:28

      I think Paul Craig Roberts’ ideas about Kissinger steering Trump towards anti-China policies are highly speculative (and I would not necessarily trust Paul Craig Roberts in that respect). There is a lot of information about Kissinger being in favor of improving US-Russian relationships and a more measured approach to the conflict in Ukraine – he thinks that Ukraine is a divided country (which is correct, in my view) and should rather be a bridge between the EU and Russia with good relationships with both sides than a country both sides attempt to pull to one side. Since the EU will neither accept such a large, poor country as a member nor spend very large sums for economic assistance, finding a way for Ukraine to have good relations both with Russia and the EU makes sense, anyway, in my view. Apart from what Paul Craig Roberts writes, I have not found anything about anti-Chinese positions of Kissinger. Rather on the contrary, one of the first results in a news search about Trump, Kissinger and China was that Kissinger “called on President- Elect Donald Trump to soften the tone of his harsh rhetoric against China”. So, I think it is more plausible that Kissinger would be in favor of improving US relations both with Russia and China (or maybe rather improve relations with Russia and not worsen the ones with China in spite of some of Trump’s ideas).

      • Joe Tedesky
        December 29, 2016 at 15:15

        I like your prognosis more than I do Paul Craig Roberts. I might add, that Kissinger was the diplomat who paved the way for Richard Nixon’s trip to China and Russia. This was a time when the U.S. felt this trip was within our national interest, as to wedge ourselves in between these two other superpowers. If nothing else could be said, it was a peaceful move, and it may have been the start of the end of the original Cold War. Détente is the only way, because using our military will only lead to more death, and destruction, and then nobody wins. I wish the Neocon/R2p people would realize this, and change their warring ways.

  30. msavage
    December 28, 2016 at 23:35

    And here I’d hoped we’d dodged that bullet by defeating Hillary. But clearly they’re not giving it up. American “leadership” has gone insane.

  31. Nancy
    December 28, 2016 at 23:04

    Super reporting.

  32. Edward Canade
    December 28, 2016 at 22:48

    Mr. Parry, you state, …”Obama CIA’s apparent interference in an attempt to reverse the outcome of a U.S. presidential election arguably ranks with the worst intelligence scandals in U.S. history.”

    So.. what about the whole Kris Kobach, Crosscheck, black, native american asian minority voter suppression, Southern ID laws, 10 of thousands of uncounted provisional ballot, the Greg Palest thing? You mean you think the outcome as it stands with Trump winning is legitimate??? I thought the all along that Republicans can steal an election without the help of the Russians. You?

    • Charles Fasola
      December 28, 2016 at 23:30

      The fact that anyone with even a partially functioning brain engages in the futile act of voting makes one wonder? It’s time to put your efforts to better use. Like figuring out what you can do to make our present system of governance go away.

      • Tonno
        December 29, 2016 at 05:59

        Without the excessive use of “hunting gear”? Not happening, among others because there is no external sponsor. The whole thing must fall apart from within from its own craziness. We also can get a military coup, a “March on Washington” or states may decide to just ignore Washington and drift away. The next “financial” crisis may well put to the system to terminal strain. We shall see.

    • Tonno
      December 29, 2016 at 05:55

      > So.. what about the whole Kris Kobach, Crosscheck, black, native american asian minority voter suppression, Southern ID laws, 10 of thousands of uncounted provisional ballot, the Greg Palest thing?

      What about it? Weren’t shenanigans on both sides in any way worse than in other years (if anything, I remember hearing much more Democratic sharp practices than anything else)

      > I thought the all along that Republicans can steal an election without the help of the Russians.

      I have heard amazingly little about “stealing the election”. Also, I had the impression that Republicans were against Trump?

      • Tonno
        December 29, 2016 at 07:16

        A coup has been underway to prevent President-Elect Donald Trump from taking office and fulfilling his campaign promise to improve US-Russia relations. This ‘palace coup’ is not a secret conspiracy, but an open, loud attack on the election.

        The coup involves important US elites, who openly intervene on many levels from the street to the current President, from sectors of the intelligence community, billionaire financiers out to the more marginal ‘leftist’ shills of the Democratic Party.

        The build-up for the coup is gaining momentum, threatening to eliminate normal constitutional and democratic constraints. This essay describes the brazen, overt coup and the public operatives, mostly members of the outgoing Obama regime.

        The second section describes the Trump’s cabinet appointments and the political measures that the President-Elect has adopted to counter the coup. We conclude with an evaluation of the potential political consequences of the attempted coup and Trump’s moves to defend his electoral victory and legitimacy.

    • ??????? ?????
      December 29, 2016 at 16:57


    • John
      December 30, 2016 at 04:13

      Indeed Russian hacking of American elections is trivial compared to American (mostly Republican) hacking of American elections

    • Les Pauls
      December 30, 2016 at 22:11

      At least Mr. Parry has not sold out to the corporate American media controlled by the American military Industrial complex.

Comments are closed.