During all this time what was called Tsarist---then USSR---then Russian satellite nations serving as a buffer from those pesky civilized Romans and Greek global 1%----have citizens with a thousand years of being targets of social and civil unrest. It is no fun being that buffer zone----ask those nations surrounding China. The battle of global 1% lies in controlling what is real estate filled with natural resources, fresh water, and lots of room. A Putin is simply the face of one group of global 1% vs a Trump representing another group of global 1%.
These USSR buffer-zone nations went capitalist during Russian PERESTROIKA with their 1% stealing those nations' national communal assets. After these few decades of being in the EURO----those buffer-zone 1% have watched as massive banking frauds by UK and US banks stole all that wealth and now THAT 1% IS REALLY ANGRY. Citizens' in buffer-zone Russia don't want MARXISM----they don't want NAKED CAPITALISM---they want to control their own local economies just as WE THE PEOPLE in the US.
The global 1% target Ukraine because it is the most powerful of these Russian satellites--controlling Ukraine makes controlling the rest of satellites more easy. Folks thinking any of these global 1% is better than another do not understand the goal of MOVING FORWARD US CITIES AS FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE colonization of America.
Ukraine Crisis in Maps
A visual guide to the continuing conflict.
Protests in Kiev Turn Deadly as Tensions Persist in Eastern Ukraine
Published September 1
At least three police officers have been killed and dozens of police officers and protesters wounded in clashes in Kiev after a vote to give greater powers to separatist regions in eastern Ukraine. Separatist control of these regions, including the border with Russia, has remained unchanged for months. Violence between the two sides has waned in recent weeks and the number of cease-fire violations has decreased, but the situation remains tense.
Cease-Fire Brings Lull, But Clashes Persist In Some Areas
Published March 10
The latest cease-fire in Ukraine, brokered by Germany and France and put into effect on Feb. 15, has been more effective than the previous two negotiated truces, which collapsed quickly. Both Ukraine and the Russia-supported separatists claim they removed all heavy weaponry from the buffer zone by the March 7 deadline. But fighting has continued in some areas, including Donetsk, Horlivka and Mariupol.
Ukrainian Forces Withdraw From Strategic Town
Published February 18
Ukrainian soldiers retreated from Debaltseve, a strategic railroad hub, where intense fighting raged in recent days despite the cease-fire agreement. As many as 8,000 Ukrainian soldiers were trapped, surrounded by Russian-backed militants who had taken control of the main road. It was unclear how many of the soldiers survived and avoided capture.
Rebels Advance on Last Major City in Eastern Ukraine
Published February 12
Pro-Russian rebels began capturing villages in eastern Ukraine last summer. As they gained momentum, they pushed the Ukrainian military out of the region’s largest cities, Luhansk and Donetsk. Now with most of eastern Ukraine’s population centers under their control, the rebels are pushing toward Mariupol.
Fighting Near Mariupol
Published February 10
The focus of the conflict in eastern Ukraine has shifted to the industrial port city of Mariupol. Ukrainian military officials reported that national guard units have begun an offensive against the pro-Russian rebels, who have been massing their forces near the city. If the rebels take control of Mariupol, they could open a land route between Russia and Crimea, which would ensure Russian control of the Sea of Azov.
Refugees in Ukraine
Published February 6
Nearly one million people have fled their homes and have registered as internally displaced, according to Ukraine’s Ministry of Social Policy. Fighting continues in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, where many civilians are still unable to leave because of travel restrictions and indiscriminate shelling. The majority of the internally displaced people are elderly.
Donetsk Airport in Shambles
Published January 23
After weeks of fierce fighting, the Donetsk airport is in ruins. In recent days, the site had been claimed by both sides. On Jan. 22, Ukrainian troops finally retreated, abandoning their last toehold in the city.
Ukrainian Troops Retreat from Donetsk
Published January 23
Fighting between government troops and pro-Russian rebels has continued despite a September cease-fire. Last week, an attack on a bus near Volnovakha, which the government attributed to rocket fire from separatists, fatally injured 13 people. Intense fighting for control of the Donetsk airport in recent weeks appeared to have ended Thursday with a Ukrainian retreat.
Cluster Bomb Attacks in Donetsk Region
Updated October 21, 2014
An October report revealed that cluster munitions, which blanket a target area with bomblets filled with deadly shrapnel, have been used by government troops and possibly pro-Russian rebels against civilian population centers during the fighting in eastern Ukraine. Evidence strongly indicates that Ukrainian troops stationed about 30 kilometers, or 19 miles, southwest of the city launched attacks on Donetsk earlier this month, including an attack that killed a Swiss employee of the International Red Cross.
Minsk Peace Talks Create Buffer Zone
Updated September 27, 2014
In an effort to strengthen the existing cease-fire, negotiators in peace talks on Saturday agreed to create a buffer zone separating Ukrainian forces from pro-Russian rebels and to withdraw heavy weapons. While the buffer zone has been in effect this week, fighting has continued throughout the region.
Cease-Fire Takes Effect
Updated September 5, 2014
The Donetsk and Luhansk regions are densely populated, heavily industrial areas in eastern Ukraine where a majority of people speak Russian and a sizable minority of the population is ethnically Russian. The regions share hundreds of miles of border with Russia, much of which is currently controlled by rebel forces. Some analysts have suggested that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia may want the area as a buffer between Russia and a hostile Ukraine, or as a gray zone where Russia can foment unrest to influence Ukrainian policy.
Ukrainian Military Loses Ground
Updated September 3, 2014
In recent days, the Ukrainian military has lost ground in eastern Ukraine. Last month the military had cut both Donetsk and Luhansk off from their supply chains, but now the cities are reconnected to the larger area of rebel-controlled territory. Ukrainian officials said that the lost ground and the opening of a third front at Novoazovsk are a result of direct intervention from Russia. Russia denies sending weapons and fighters across the border.
NATO Releases Images Showing Russian Forces in Ukraine
Updated August 29, 2014
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia hailed on Friday the success of a recent rebel offensive and asked that a humanitarian corridor be opened to allow encircled Ukrainian fighters to retreat. Ukrainian officials said Russian forces and separatists continued fighting near Novoazovsk, a town along the southern land route from Russia to Crimea, which emerged as a new front on Wednesday. On Thursday, NATO released satellite images it said showed Russian artillery units operating in eastern Ukraine.
Rocket Fire in Donetsk
Updated August 19, 2014
Intense violence continues in Donetsk, the largest city under the control of pro-Russian separatists. Ukranian forces have cut the city off from the rest of the rebel-held territory, and government officials said they had destroyed three rebel checkpoints near the city of one million people. The Donetsk city council released locations of more than 130 sites in the city that have been hit by rocket fire over the last month.
Military Base Buildup at the Russian Border
Published July 22, 2014
Two satellite images of the Russian military base near Rostov were released on Tuesday by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. American intelligence officials said that the image on the right, taken approximately a month after the image on the left, shows how much buildup there has been at the base. American officials said Tuesday that there has been a stream of military support to rebels in Ukraine.
Fierce Battles Continue in Region During Crash Recovery
Published July 21, 2014
As international experts began the investigation of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, heavy fighting between the Ukrainian military and pro-Russian separatists continued. After Ukrainian soldiers retook Slovyansk earlier in July, insurgents dug into the urban centers of Donetsk and Luhansk. Reports emerged that Russia was building up forces along border areas, and several Ukrainian military aircraft were shot down near the Russian border before Malaysia Flight 17.
Cease-Fire Collapses After Talks Fail
Published July 1, 2014
After a 10-day cease-fire, President Petro O. Poroshenko ordered government forces to resume fighting the pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine. Conference calls between leaders of Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany had failed to bring tangible results, like rebels' relinquishing border crossings at Izvarino, Dolzhansky and Chervonopartyzansk. There were fierce battles throughout the region on Tuesday, including in the cities of Donetsk, Slovyansk and Kramatorsk
After Relative Calm, Presidential Election Is Bookended by Violence
Published May 28, 2014
Violence escalated in the Donetsk region in the days before and after the May 25 presidential election. Pro-Russian rebels ambushed a military checkpoint in Blahodatne on May 22, killing as many as 15 Ukrainian soldiers. A firefight between a Ukrainian militia group and pro-Russian rebels in Karlovka the following day left at least seven people dead. And one day after Petro O. Poroshenko was elected president, dozens of pro-Russian separatists were killed in an offensive by the Ukrainian military to retake the airport.
Across Ukraine, Rebels and Loyalists Vie for Control
Published May 10, 2014
A close look at the day-to-day action in Ukraine from reports by international observers reveals a mixed picture of the rebellion. While increasing rebel activity by pro-Russian militants in Ukraine can leave the impression that Kiev has lost its hold on the east, support for a united Ukraine is strong in some key cities. Militants in parts of the east vowed on Thursday to press ahead with a referendum on Sunday seeking autonomy.
We remind the American people that the ROARING 20s and economic collapse giving the Great Depression early last century was the same ROBBER BARON frauds occurring these few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA----the US and UK global 1% used our newly installed US FED to corrupt banking globally. Americans always think only of how this effects Americans but the same conditions here in US occurred in nations around the world and especially in Eastern Europe and Near-Far East. WW1 and WW2 was sparked largely by a Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini because of the anger at global banking frauds stealing the 99% of citizens' wealth. The 1% in those Eastern European and Near/Middle Eastern nations were mad as well. Fast forward to CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA---US and UK banking did the same thing on larger scale because US and Europe over last century gained much wealth. So, again all global 99% of people were fleeced by banking frauds but those 1% in Eastern Europe and Near/Far Middle Eastern nations are really mad at losing their wealth.
The leaders of Russian satellite nations are as brutal and corrupt as our CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA---so too those leaders of NEAR-FAR-EAST nations. They are that global 1% and their 2% SOCIOPATHS after all.
The 2008 saw global Wall Street frauds---from subprime mortgage frauds sold globally----to sovereign debt frauds sold globally---to this LIBOR fraud----tens of trillions of dollars were moved from American government coffers and citizens' pockets alone. Trillions more of course were looted from our Eastern Europe/Near-Far Eastern nations as well.
SO, AS WITH WW1 AND WW2 ----LOT'S OF GLOBAL CITIZENS ARE ANGRY AT LOOTING BY GLOBAL BANKING WORKING FOR GLOBAL 1%.
Because our government was stacked with global Wall Street players none of these global Wall Street frauds were recovered. The American people know how it effects their lives---they often don't think the same conditions are happening to global citizens--as in Russian satellite nations like Ukraine.
LIBOR Fraud May Be the Mother of All Bank Scandals
An estimated $1.5 trillion was stolen from customers in the LIBOR scandal.
By James Rickards, Contributor | July 23, 2012, at 4:30 p.m.
LIBOR Fraud May Be the Mother of All Bank Scandal
A view of Barclay's headquarter at London's Canary Wharf financial district, Thursday, June 28, 2012. Barclays PLC and its subsidiaries will pay about 453 million US dollars to settle charges that they tried to manipulate interest rates that can affect how much people pay for loans to attend college or buy a house. Britain's Barclays is one of several major banks reportedly under investigation for such violations. Lefteris Pitarakis/AP Photo
James Rickards is a hedge fund manager in New York City and the author of “Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis” from Portfolio/Penguin. Follow him on Twitter at @JamesGRickards.
Investors have by now heard of the LIBOR scandal engulfing the banking industry. LIBOR stands for the London Interbank Offered Rate. To some it may be just the latest entry on a list of bank frauds and blunders in recent years, from mortgage scams to MF Global and the London Whale.
In fact, this may be the mother of all scandals—the one that finally leads to criminal charges and the insolvency of major banks. The fraud is breathtakingly easy to understand once past a small amount of jargon. Indeed, the simplicity of the fraud is the greatest threat to the perpetrators because here at last is a fraud that is easy for juries to understand and for prosecutors to prove.
LIBOR is the interest rate at which top-tier banks in London offer to lend to each other on an unsecured basis. The loans are usually short term, typically a day, a week, or several months. Historically the banks in the LIBOR market were among the strongest credits in the world and this type of lending was considered extremely low risk. As a result, LIBOR was among the lowest interest rates available in the market. Other interest rates including corporate loans were benchmarked to LIBOR and expressed as a spread, such as LIBOR plus 1 percent. LIBOR became the base rate used in calculating a vast number of other products and transactions.
LIBOR is set by a committee of banks sending their estimates of the rate at which they could borrow to a trade association. The banks on the committee are among the largest in the world including J.P. Morgan, Citibank, and Bank of America. The trade association would discard the highest and lowest rates and average the rest to arrive at the official LIBOR. This would then be published on financial news services. Payments due under LIBOR transactions would be calculated using that published rate.
We now know that some of the banks on the committee lied about the rates for a period of six years from 2005 to 2010, perhaps longer. The lies had two purposes. The first was to make money for the bank by lowering what it had to pay on LIBOR-based contracts. This is a kind of direct theft from customers. The second reason involved hiding the fact that some banks were being asked to pay high rates during the Panic of 2008. This is considered a sign of distress. By lowering the reported rate, the banks were made to appear healthier than they were and committed a fraud on the market as a whole.
We also know that regulators acted as aiders and abettors of the fraud by ignoring clear signs, including admissions by the banks themselves, that the rates were rigged. Regulators passed vague proposals back and forth about the need to improve practices instead of calling law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute the crimes.
One might expect that the scandal will follow the familiar pattern of bogus bank contrition, slaps on the wrist, large but not life-threatening fines, and pious promises not to do it again soon to be ignored. In short, it's just another scandal.
But this time it's different and here's why: The sheer volume of contracts based on LIBOR defies the imagination. Estimates vary, but $500 trillion seems reasonable. Even if the banks lied by as little as one-tenth of 1 percent, that percentage applied to $500 trillion multiplied by the six years of the fraud comes to $3 trillion stolen from customers. Cutting that amount in half to allow for the fact that some customers benefited from the fraud while others lost still gives implied damages of $1.5 trillion, greater than the combined capital of all of the too-big-too-fail banks in the United States. Taken to the full extent of the law, these damages are enough to render a large segment of the global banking system insolvent. These damages will be pursued not by regulators, but in private lawsuits by class action lawyers.
Bank defendants in cases like this typically ask a judge to dismiss the case because the claims are too vague. However, the facts in this case have already been made plain by Barclays, which is the one large bank to settle its case with the regulators. Once the plaintiffs get past the motion to dismiss, they begin discovery, which gives the class action lawyers access to internal E-mails, tape recordings, depositions, and other books and records of the perpetrator banks. Based on small glimpses of the doings at Barclays, the communications of the other major bank LIBOR trading desks could be shocking.
This kind of private legal process takes years to play out. In the meantime, some arrests and criminal charges by the government seem likely. In the end, legislatures may have to intervene to limit total damages to avoid the destruction of the too-big-too-fail banks. In this sense, the LIBOR litigation may come to resemble the tobacco litigation where the big tobacco companies embraced a government-backed deal with damages of over $200 billion to avoid eventual bankruptcy in the face of state and private lawsuits.
Of course, the insolvency of a major bank in the face of LIBOR rate rigging charges cannot be ruled out. In that case, good riddance. The big banks have perpetrated a crime wave longer than that of Bonnie and Clyde. If it has taken the law this long to catch up with them, it's better late than never.
'Protests that involve “ordinary” citizens are rare and confusing events, in particular if they last for a long time like the Ukrainian protests that began in November'.
Here we have GLOBAL AMAZON.COM OWNER BEZOS telling us as always these mass protests are about citizens wanting to be joined to the EURO---or American capitalism. If one reads local media with REAL citizen content---as with the Egyptian protests---you will hear the 99% saying they want no part of NAKED, CRONY, CORRUPT EURO/UK/US capitalism---they want to build local capitalist economies the people control.
Articles like this pit Ukraine leaders as either being RUSSIAN PUPPETS----or EURO PUPPETS---which they have been since USSR broke apart. None of these leaders have been POPULIST LEADERS. This is for what all these Ukraine citizens are out en masse for weeks and months protesting---as in Egypt.
Our national media always makes the PUPPET LEADERS tied to EURO a populist leader when they are not wanted by their own people----as today in the US.
You can bet these Ukraine citizens do not want WW 3 any more than WE THE PEOPLE in US.
What does Ukraine’s #Euromaidan teach us about protest?
By Olga Onuch and Gwendolyn Sasse February 27, 2014
Ukrainians attended a mass meeting on Independence Square in Kiev on Wednesday.
(EPA/Maxim Shipenkov)Joshua Tucker: The following is a guest post by Oxford University political scientists Olga Onuch and Gwendolyn Sasse. They provide a very thorough overview of of the evolution of the #Euromaidan protests in Ukraine, as well as what these events can teach us about political protest more generally. A full list of guest posts from The Monkey Cage’s coverage of ongoing events in Ukraine can be found at the end of this post.
Last week the Ukrainian protest movement known as EuroMaidan spiraled out of control and descended into violence. On Feb. 18, Berkut (riot police) used severe tactics to repress protesters. The violent storming of the Maidan protest camp in Kiev, left about 90 dead (many under the age of 25) and over 600 injured (from both sides of the barricades, but mostly protesters). Analysts and journalists have struggled to understand the protest cycle as it turned to violence and the rapid succession of events since.
Protests that involve “ordinary” citizens are rare and confusing events, in particular if they last for a long time like the Ukrainian protests that began in November. Protests evolve all the time, and one stage in the process critically shapes the next stage. The issues and events that trigger a protest may not be the same as the ones that sustain a protest movement or make it tip into violence. The Ukrainian protest cycle since November provides us with important insights into the often misunderstood dynamics of popular mobilization. It follows a number of patterns known from other cases of mobilization, but it also highlights some underexplored aspects and provides important correctives, not least to accounts of protests given by journalists and analysts “in the heat of the moment.” It also breaks with the model of “electoral revolutions” centered on rigged elections in “competitive authoritarian” regimes. Triggered by now-ousted Ukraine leader Viktor Yanukovych’s decision not to sign an Association Agreement with the European Union, the current protests started with a more intangible conglomerate of popular aspirations rather than a concrete event like an election that can be re-run. As a result, the nature of the demands stayed in flux and coalesced around the dismissal of the president without, however, fusing into a clear political alternative with majority support among the protesters and the political opposition.
Four aspects in particular make the Ukrainian protests interesting for the wider study of protest:
1) The profile of the protesters at different stages of the protest cycle (different types of protesters drifting in and out of the protests and the formation of a hard core sustaining the protest but remaining divided in itself with right-wing extremists involved in the violent incidents but not controlling the protests)
2) The prolonged disconnect between the protesters and the regime on the one hand and between the protesters and the political opposition in parliament on the other hand
3) The occurrence of (small-scale) protests in favor of the EuroMaidan in the most unlikely places for opposition mobilization in eastern cities of Ukraine
4) The important but ultimately subsidiary role of external actors in framing and catalyzing events
Political scientist Sidney Tarrow’s work on protest cycles (also known as cycles of contention or waves of collective action) provides a useful framework for understanding the political dynamics surrounding the EuroMaidan. According to Tarrow, the cycle begins with a rapid diffusion of mobilization as existing social movement organizations (SMOs) create political opportunities for “ordinary citizens to join in. This is followed by innovation and expansion in the forms of contention, as well as shifts in the collective action frames and the protest discourse. A further phase sees a coexistence of organized and unorganized civic engagement leading up to a period of heightened interaction between the party in power and the party in opposition. At each stage, the use of violent repertoires by activists or the party in power shifts the rules of the game.
Breaking down the EuroMaidan protest cycle into phases of mobilization and referencing who participated when and how (based on on-site surveys and rapid interviews collected as part of the Ukrainian Protest Project at the University of Oxford and NaUkMa, which was described in this Monkey Cage post in January) allows us to better contextualize the turn to violence.
The EuroMaidan Protest Cycle
Nov. 21-30: creating political opportunities for “ordinary” citizens to join in: Mobilization started on Nov. 21, after Yanukovych announced that he would not sign the Association Agreement with the EU. Between Nov. 21-23 local journalists, activists and students coordinated small protest events in Kiev’s Independence Square (Maidan Nezalezhnosty). Journalists and activists used online social media to inform and motivate citizens, and the #EuroMaidan was created. Yet it was not until political opposition leaders Vitali Klitchko, Arseniy Yatseniuk and Oleh Tiahnybok jointly coordinated a pro-EU march on Nov. 24 in Kiev (on the anniversary of the Great Famine and the Orange Revolution) that “ordinary” citizens joined the protests, which quickly grew to 100,000 to 250,000 people. By now the central demands were “a better way of life” associated with “a European future for Ukraine.” “Ukraine is Europe” became the main slogan. The protesters split into two groups, one led by nonpartisan SMOs convening in the Maidan and the other led by political opposition groups in Evropeiska Ploshcha (European Square). Smaller but substantial protests took place in regional city centers across central and western Ukraine. The following week the protests shrank in size (2,000 to 35,000 in Kiev). As we see from our survey of protest participants, they were maintained by activists (with experience and networks from 2001 and 2004) and students, with some participation by other groups, such as middle-aged young professionals. The protests remained peaceful, included live concerts, and activists continued to reject partisan attempts at “co-optation.”
Nov. 30 – Jan. 16: shift in collective action frames and protest language:
On Nov. 30, a small group of protesters (mostly students and journalists) were brutally beaten in a first raid by Berkut. This assault on unarmed peaceful protesters (including foreign journalists and women), went viral on social media outlets and galvanized the protesters. In rapid interviews protesters said that the protests were “not about Europe anymore,” but about “saving Ukrainian democracy” (Data: Ukrainian Protest Project). On Dec. 1, after a coordinated effort by opposition parties and the Civic Sector SMO, 500,000 to 800,000 people joined the protests in Kiev. Our surveys show that protesters were now made up of a cross-cleavage coalition of citizens. They represented three age groups (under 30, 30 to 55, and 55-plus), at least two religious cleavages (Catholic and Orthodox), and they included large numbers of Russophones (30 percent) and participants who had previously voted for Yanukovych (19 percent) and the Party of Regions (15 to 19 percent) (Data: Ukrainian Protest Project). Large protests were held in all western and central regional city centers, and hundreds of protesters (up to 2,000) gathered in Crimea, Odessa, Kharkiv, Kirovohrad, Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhya and Poltava. Regime repression had provided activists with new frames and mobilization tools that facilitated mass mobilization.
From Nov. 30 onwards, activists explained in interviews that they were struggling to control (young male) protesters escalating violent and nationalist rhetoric. Several key leaders of the Civic Sector expressed their concerns about having to collaborate with the extremist Pravyi Sektor (Right Sector) and the right-wing party Svoboda (authors’ interviews with Civic Sector members). These groups began coordinating teams of 100 to 200 armed individuals who walked around the city center wearing hard hats, holding bats and chanting nationalist slogans. Protests continued throughout the next month, with nightly gatherings in city centers. As our survey shows, each violent encounter between protesters and militia made the protests shrink in size, with women dropping out at a faster rate than men (data: Ukrainian Protest Project). In rapid interviews conducted at the end of December, protesters complained that the opposition was unable to achieve anything, and described a sense of growing desperation.
Jan. 16-27: innovation and expansion in the forms of contention:
On Jan. 16, the regime and its Party of Regions parliamentarians voted in anti-protest laws that made all protest illegal. Protesters reacted by building barricades in the Maidan. On Jan. 19, the Berkut attacked the protesters at night. Between Jan. 19 and Jan. 24, at least three people died as a direct result of police action, and many were injured. This second wave of repression changed the composition of protest participants: They now included a strong majority of young males, and right-wing groups gained a foothold (authors’ interview with unnamed activist). The expansion to extreme violent repertoires, such as Molotov cocktails and the increasing use of nationalist symbols, marked a sharp break in Ukraine’s protest history from the Soviet dissidents through the transition period. The new forms of contention polarized Ukrainian citizens and encouraged the regime to employ so-called anti-terrorist measures. Radicalized protesters occupied government buildings in Kiev and other cities, including in some eastern regions. Facing increasing internal pressures from Party of Regions financiers, Prime Minister Mykola Azarov stepped down and offered the post to opposition leader Yatseniuk. The opposition declined the offer and demanded that Yanukovych resign. In an attempt to quell the diffusion of protests, the wave of repression subsided. The protests, continued; by this time Pravyi Sektor, the Svoboda Samo Oborona (Self-Defense) and retired Afghanistan veterans controlled most of the front lines, leading to a further radicalization in the protest repertoires.
Jan. 27 -Feb. 20: coexistence of organized and unorganized civic engagement:
Unhappy with what protesters described as the “opposition leaders’ inability and ineffectiveness to achieve the EuroMaidan’s aims,” the official opposition protest events were combined with autonomous citizen initiatives (see below for a list of Kiev-based Self-Defense Patrol Groups). Throughout the country (mostly in the center-west), citizens coordinated their own peaceful and direct-action protest events (such as defending medical clinics and donating items). Activists complained in interviews that they or the opposition could not control the protest movement. Hard-core protesters explained that they had “nothing left to lose,” and members of the Pravyi Sektor stated that they were “prepared to die as heroes for their country.” The baseline claim uniting all protesters was the removal of Yanukovych from power. When on Feb. 18 Berkut and special operations Alpha militia started another raid on protesters, this time using live ammunition, grenades and snipers, the worst-case scenario of a large-scale “civil war” (pitting the regime against the protesters) seemed inevitable to the activists and protest participants interviewed. The protesters felt that now they were “fighting for the fate [dolya] of their country.”
Every time we read about this banking raid by hackers or that banking raid by hackers---whether Russian---Chinese---North Korean----Turkish----the amounts stolen are pennies compared to the amounts stolen by global banking. These are almost always tied to government leaders trying to get back money looted by Western banking.
THE SOLUTION IS OF COURSE DISMANTLE GLOBAL INTERNET BANKING CONNECTIONS---OF COURSE ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE ONE CENTRAL BANK WON'T HEAR OF THAT.
American citizens don't hear about justice for WE THE PEOPLE from our global Wall Street--but we hear about all those pesky BAD GUYS IN UKRAINE AND RUSSIA.
During this 2016 Presidential election the starting of WW3 was a big issue on both right and left wing and this is why. The coming economic crash from what will be the largest global banking fraud in WORLD HISTORY-----the sovereign debt frauds of US Treasury and state municipal bonds with Europe banking doing the same to their nations and citizens---will bring that same GREAT DEPRESSION to US, Europe,and yes to Russian satellite nations like UKRAINE---and the same tensions that existed in early 20th century exist today in early 21st century for the same reasons.
Remember, the RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS live in NYC and London so none of this has to do with the Russian 1%----they were enriched from global Wall Street/UK frauds. All this is simply destabilization of regions to create civil unrest and war.
Hackers steal £650 million in world's biggest bank raid
Investigators uncover what is thought to be the biggest ever cybercrime with more than £650 million going missing from banks around the world
By Martin Evans, Crime Correspondent
4:09PM GMT 15 Feb 2015
British banks are thought to have lost tens of millions of pounds after a gang of Russian based hackers spent the last two years orchestrating the largest cybercrime ever uncovered.
As much as £650 million is thought to have gone missing after the gang used computer viruses to infect networks in more than 100 financial institutions worldwide.
The hackers managed to infiltrate the bank’s internal computer systems using malware, which lurked in the networks for months, gathering information and feeding it back to the gang.
The illegal software was so sophisticated that it allowed the criminals to view video feeds from within supposedly secure offices as they gathered the data they needed to steal.
Once they were ready to strike, they were able to impersonate bank staff online in order to transfer millions of pounds into dummy accounts.
They were even able to instruct cash machines to dispense money at random times of the day even without a bank card.
While the criminals behind the audacious electronic raid are thought to be based in Russia, the scale of their crime was truly global with banks in Japan, China, the United States and throughout Europe having been hit.
The scale of the losses by UK based financial institutions has not yet been disclosed, but is thought to run into tens of millions of pounds.
The scam was uncovered by the Russian cybersecurity firm, Kaspersky Lab, which was called in to investigate after a cash machine in Ukraine was found to have been spitting out money at random times.
As investigators began to look into the problem they were staggered by the scale of the crime they uncovered.
A spokesman for Kaspersky Lab said: “The plot marks the beginning of a new stage in the evolution of cybercriminal activity, where malicious users steal money directly from banks, and avoid targeting end users.”
Despite the fact the plot has been uncovered, it is feared that banks may still find themselves falling victim as once installed the malware can operate almost independently and is extremely difficult to identify.
The cybercriminals would gain entry to an employee’s system through a process called spear phishing, where they would send an email which appeared to come from a trusted source.
Once the email was opened, the malware would infect their system allowing the hacker to jump into the bank’s network.
They would then gain access to an administrator’s computer providing video surveillance of everything on in the office.
They were able to monitor the screens of staff that serviced the cash transfer systems and after watching how they operated were able to mimic the process needed to move money around.
It is thought the largest sums stolen were taken in bold electronic raids, where hackers would break into computer system and transfer tens of millions of pounds in one go.
On average, each bank robbery took between two and four months, from infecting the first computer at the bank’s corporate network to making off with the stolen money.
Another method used was where the criminals would gain access to someone’s account and inflate the balance many times over.
They would then withdraw the amount they had increased it by and the person would never suspect because their original balance remained the same.
Sergey Golovanov of Kaspersky Lab said: “These bank heists were surprising because it made no difference to the criminals what software the banks were using.
“So even if its software is unique, a bank cannot get complacent. The attackers didn’t even need to hack into the banks’ services. Once they got into the network, they learned how to hide their malicious plot behind legitimate actions. It was a very slick and professional cyber-robbery.”
We spoke about this North/South Korean vs Trump policy---our US 2016 election was filled with shouts against starting WW 3----all of the candidates promoted by national media from Hillary----to Obama ----to Trump are global Wall Street far-right, militaristic HAWKS ----CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA MOVING FORWARD towards just that----WW3.
This is the mechanism for realigning for ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE---as WW 2 was used to do the same.
Fears of ‘World War 3’ as U.S. Takes on North Korea
By Nate | Foreign Policy, Politics | April 12, 2017
We’ve entered a strange portion of President Trump’s first 100 days. The U.S. missile strike in Syria and the current posturing toward North Korea’s threats of nuclear war are a departure from how the Obama administration handled these issues for the past eight years. As a result, many Americans are scared as to how this entire ordeal with North Korea will end as China and Russia continue to be key players.
Report from the Washington Post:
The United States and North Korea are engaging in high-tension brinkmanship, with North Korea warning Tuesday that it will “hit the U.S. first” with nuclear weapons, but the prospects that this could escalate into an actual clash of arms are slim.
The stakes remain too high for both countries, analysts say, today as they were yesterday, as they were last year. But the temperature in the region has become decidedly hotter in recent days. And there’s always the chance that one side or the other could miscalculate.
Expectations are mounting that North Korea will unleash some kind of provocation this week, and the U.S. Navy rerouted an aircraft carrier strike group, capable of both firing missiles and shooting missiles down, to the Korean Peninsula over the weekend.
On Tuesday President Trump issued his latest tweet taking aim at Pyongyang. “North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A.” he tweeted.
North Korea has posed a threat for years to surrounding nations, including U.S. allies such as Japan, and of course South Korea. President Obama, just like his predecessor President Bush, have dealt with the threat of a nuclear-armed North Korea during his presidency and it seems that President Trump wants to be the one to end the talk, and get on with the action.
According to Google Search Trends, the keyword of “World War 3” has recently seen the highest level of use since the trend has been recorded starting in 2004:
Clearly the prospects of involvement with Syria, which hinges on Russia, and North Korea, which is coupled with China, is sparking fears of global discord, perhaps to levels that we haven’t seen in recent times.
According to the UK Guardian, Japan is also getting involved and joining as a partner of the United States:
Japan is preparing to send several warships to join a US aircraft carrier strike group heading for the Korean peninsula, in a show of force designed to deter North Korea from conducting further missile and nuclear tests.
Citing two well-placed sources who spoke on condition of anonymity, Reuters and the Kyodo news agency said several destroyers from Japan’s maritime self-defence forces would join the USS Carl Vinson and its battle group as it enters the East China Sea.
China is calling for calm and has reiterated a stated goal for denuclearizing North Korea:
The move comes as the Chinese president called for calm in the region in a phone conversation with Donald Trump.
China “is committed to the goal of denuclearisation on the Korean peninsula, safeguarding peace and stability on the peninsula, and advocates resolving problems through peaceful means,” Xi Jinping said, according to CCTV, the state broadcaster.
China is the North’s only key diplomatic ally and its largest trading partner, providing a lifeline to the reclusive state.
There are signs China is taking steps to squeeze North Korea and its erratic leader, Kim Jong-un. Chinese authorities have ordered trading companies to return North Korean coal shipments and banned all imports in late February. [Emphasis added]
As most analysts have said for years, North Korea is basically under China’s control economically. Therefore, it’s incumbent upon China to exert that influence if it truly desires to avoid military conflict in the region. We may be seeing signs of that starting to play out.
Either way, Americans are weary of war, though this projection of strength is something that Donald Trump campaigned on. However, it can also be argued he campaigned on avoiding international conflicts as well. As in most cases, Trump can be on both sides of an issue and probably have past conflicting statements that support either policy position.
So our US 2016 Presidential election was filled with the voices of pols tied to MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE and without coincidence----WW 3.
This coming economic crash will be so deep and long that all global citizens will be angry---especially WE THE PEOPLE. Global 1% always meet domestic anger with civil unrest and war----it keeps the 99% busy while the global 1% are remodeling each nations' societal structures.
Don't worry-----the START TREATY between Obama and Putin was not about nuclear disarmament as national media sold----it was always about retooling nuclear arsenals to the NEW NEUTRON NUCLEAR WARHEADS. Whereas these warheads if big enough will bring down buildings and destroy infrastructure----our global military is of course designing weapons to kill the most people while leaving infrastructure with minimum damage----those global Wall Street 5% to the 1% always wanting to take care of their human capital.
Neutron bombs are far more damaging to human tissue and pass right through buildings---if used in local bombings in small packages they will be deadly to WE THE PEOPLE around the world.
Make no mistake the global 1% are sociopaths no matter where in the world they locate----just get rid of global Wall Street pols and players!
Fact Check: Trump Is Right that Clinton Might Cause WW3
by George Washington
Oct 26, 2016 4:23 PM
Trump claims that Clinton’s policy on Syria would lead to World War 3.
Let’s fact check …
The Washington Post points out that a vote for Clinton is a vote for escalating military confrontation in Syria and elsewhere:
In the rarefied world of the Washington foreign policy establishment, President Obama’s departure from the White House — and the possible return of a more conventional and hawkish Hillary Clinton — is being met with quiet relief.
The Republicans and Democrats who make up the foreign policy elite are laying the groundwork for a more assertive American foreign policy, via a flurry of reports shaped by officials who are likely to play senior roles in a potential Clinton White House.
The studies, which reflect Clinton’s stated views, break most forcefully with Obama on Syria .... call[ing] for stepped-up military action to deter President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and Russian forces in Syria.
Most of the studies propose limited American airstrikes with cruise missiles to punish Assad ....
Last year, Obama dismissed calls for a no-fly zone in northwestern Syria — a position advocated by Clinton — as “half-baked.”
Even pinprick cruise-missile strikes designed to hobble the Syrian air force or punish Assad would risk a direct confrontation with Russian forces, which are scattered throughout the key Syrian military bases that would be targeted.
“You can’t pretend you can go to war against Assad and not go to war against the Russians,” said a senior administration official who is involved in Middle East policy and was granted anonymity to discuss internal White House deliberations.
The most liberal presidential candidate still running – Green Party candidate Jill Stein – says:
"It should clear to everyone that a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for war."
"Under Hillary Clinton, we could very quickly slide into NUCLEAR WAR with her declared policy in Syria."
Hillary Clinton wants to start an air war with Russia. Let’s be clear: That’s what a no-fly zone means. It is tantamount to a declaration of war against Russia.
Clearly the Democrats are incredibly embarrassed about the nature of these [email] revelations, and they’ve created a smokescreen here to try and distract from that. But that smokescreen is pushing us to the brink of warfare with Russia now, where you have the U.S. head of defense, Ashton Carter, talking about nuclear war. We just did a dry run dropping fake nuclear bombs over Nevada. This is really dangerous stuff; this is not pretend. So we need to take a deep breath here, we need to step back and stop beating the war drums. In this context, Hillary Clinton is talking about starting an air war with Russia. Which could slide—you know, we’re on the verge of nuclear war right now.
The most likely nuclear threat right now is with Russia. There’s no doubt about that. When you have Mikhail Gorbachev, who was the prime minister of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, saying that the threat of nuclear war is hotter now than it has ever been in all of history, you’ve got to take that pretty seriously. And when you have Hillary Clinton then beating the war drums against Russia, and essentially saying that if she’s elected that we will declare war on Russia—because that’s what a no-fly zone over Syria amounts to. Shooting down Russian warplanes.
Hillary Clinton is a disastrous nuclear threat right now in a context where we’re already off-the-charts in the risk of nuclear war. She has stated in this context that she’s essentially opening up a battlefront with Russia. So to my mind, this emerges as the clearest and most present danger.
Prominent liberal economist Jeffrey Sachs writes in the Huffington Post, in an essay bannered “Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine“:
It is often believed that the Republicans are the neocons and the Democrats act as restraints on the warmongering. This is not correct. Both parties are divided between neocon hawks and cautious realists who don’t want the US in unending war. Hillary is a staunch neocon whose record of favoring American war adventures explains much of our current security danger.
Just as the last Clinton presidency set the stage for financial collapse, it also set the stage for unending war. On October 31, 1998 President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act that made it official US policy to support “regime change” in Iraq.
It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.
Thus were laid the foundations for the Iraq War in 2003.
Of course, by 2003, Hillary was a Senator and a staunch supporter of the Iraq War, which has cost the US trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and done more to create ISIS and Middle East instability than any other single decision of modern foreign policy. In defending her vote, Hillary parroted the phony propaganda of the CIA:
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members… “
After the Iraq Liberation Act came the 1999 Kosovo War, in which Bill Clinton called in NATO to bomb Belgrade, in the heart of Europe, and unleashing another decade of unrest in the Balkans. Hillary, traveling in Africa, called Bill: “I urged him to bomb,” she told reporter Lucinda Frank.
Hillary’s record as Secretary of State is among the most militaristic, and disastrous, of modern US history. Some experience. Hilary was a staunch defender of the military-industrial-intelligence complex at every turn, helping to spread the Iraq mayhem over a swath of violence that now stretches from Mali to Afghanistan. Two disasters loom largest: Libya and Syria.
Hillary has been much attacked for the deaths of US diplomats in Benghazi, but her tireless promotion of the overthrow Muammar Qaddafi by NATO bombing is the far graver disaster. Hillary strongly promoted NATO-led regime change in Libya, not only in violation of international law but counter to the most basic good judgment. After the NATO bombing, Libya descended into civil war while the paramilitaries and unsecured arms stashes in Libya quickly spread west across the African Sahel and east to Syria. The Libyan disaster has spawned war in Mali, fed weapons to Boko Haram in Nigeria, and fueled ISIS in Syria and Iraq. In the meantime, Hillary found it hilarious to declare of Qaddafi: “We came, we saw, he died.”
Perhaps the crowning disaster of this long list of disasters has been Hillary’s relentless promotion of CIA-led regime change in Syria. Once again Hillary bought into the CIA propaganda that regime change to remove Bashir al-Assad would be quick, costless, and surely successful. In August 2011, Hillary led the US into disaster with her declaration Assad must “get out of the way,” backed by secret CIA operations.
Five years later, no place on the planet is more ravaged by unending war, and no place poses a great threat to US security. More than 10 million Syrians are displaced, and the refugees are drowning in the Mediterranean or undermining the political stability of Greece, Turkey, and the European Union. Into the chaos created by the secret CIA-Saudi operations to overthrow Assad, ISIS has filled the vacuum, and has used Syria as the base for worldwide terrorist attacks.
The list of her incompetence and warmongering goes on. Hillary’s support at every turn for NATO expansion, including even into Ukraine and Georgia against all common sense, was a trip wire that violated the post-Cold War settlement in Europe in 1991 and that led to Russia’s violent counter-reactions in both Georgia and Ukraine. As Senator in 2008, Hilary co-sponsored 2008-SR439, to include Ukraine and Georgia in NATO. As Secretary of State, she then presided over the restart of the Cold War with Russia.
It is hard to know the roots of this record of disaster. Is it chronically bad judgment? Is it her preternatural faith in the lying machine of the CIA?
Is it a repeated attempt to show that as a Democrat she would be more hawkish than the Republicans? Is it to satisfy her hardline campaign financiers? Who knows? Maybe it’s all of the above. But whatever the reasons, hers is a record of disaster. Perhaps more than any other person, Hillary can lay claim to having stoked the violence that stretches from West Africa to Central Asia and that threatens US security.
Jakob Augstein notes in Der Spiegel:
Trump would probably be the better choice in the question of war and peace than Clinton.
Clinton has expressly expressed the wish to establish a flight ban on Syria, or parts of it. *** In truth, it would be an act of war. The risks are unpredictable. Above all, the risk of a military conflict with Russia.
The highest soldier of the United States of America, General Joseph Dunford, President of the United States General Staff of the United States Forces, is certain. To control the entire airspace over Syria would mean war with Syria and Russia. Dunford’s predecessor in office estimated a few years ago that an effective flight bomb over Syria would involve the use of 70,000 soldiers and a monthly cost of $ 1 billion.
But the bottom line is Clinton’s proven historical track record … she’s at least partly responsible for war after catastrophic war and coup after disastrous coup in Libya, Syria, Kosovo, Haiti, Honduras and other countries around the world.
And it's interesting, indeed, that the Neocons who got us into the Iraq war have endorsed Clinton instead of Trump.
Trump might speak in a crude, knee-jerk manner … but Clinton is probably more likely to actually get us into war.
As Americans protest their 2016 elections as rigged and filled with fraud giving us that far-right, authoritarian, militaristic, dictator-like TRUMP---Turkey is doing the same. Turkey was part of the OTTOMAN EMPIRE----divided after WW2 with a leader who for several decades was SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY LIBERAL. Now Turkey is moving back to that same far-right, authoritarian, militaristic, dictatorship. Turkey as the Russian satellite nations like Ukraine were victim to global Wall Street frauds and losses and they are angry-----
Turkey's citizens don't want to MOVE FORWARD back to the DARK AGES----but they don't want EURO/AMERICAN naked capitalism either---as in Egypt. All over the world global 99% citizens simply want
LOCAL ECONOMIES, STABLE AND FREE FROM FRAUD AND CORRUPTION, CONTROLLED BY COMMUNITIES AND CITIES/COUNTIES.
The global 1% have been fighting over these regions for thousands of years. ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE is a movement by SOME of these global 1% while other global 1% KNOW an alliance will have wars between that alliance........this is not a movement towards a peaceful ONE WORLD---for ANY global 99% especially WE THE PEOPLE in America...
Protests in Turkey turn violent - CNN.com
Cnn › 2016/11/05/europe/turkey-protests/index.html Nov 04, 2016 · Istanbul (CNN)Clashes erupted Saturday in Istanbul between police and protesters demonstrating against the arrests of opposition politicians and ...
Turkey Arrests Dozens Over Referendum Protests
By PATRICK KINGSLEYAPRIL 19, 2017
Protesters marched in Istanbul on Tuesday in support of a petition seeking annulment of a referendum that approved an expansion of powers for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Credit Bulent Kilic/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
ISTANBUL — Dozens of members of Turkey’s political opposition were arrested in dawn raids on Wednesday, as a crackdown began on those questioning the legitimacy of a referendum on Sunday to expand the powers of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Mr. Erdogan has claimed a narrow 51.4 percent to 48.6 percent victory in the vote, but protesters in pockets of the country have marched in the streets every night since then to demonstrate against what they assert was a rigged election.
After warnings from Mr. Erdogan, at least 38 people accused of participating in the protests were rounded up Wednesday morning or issued arrest warrants, according to lawyers and relatives of the detained.
Despite the arrests hundreds of people gathered in several cities across Turkey on Wednesday evening in a show of defiance.
“For the past five years they have been trying to turn Turkey into an empire of fear,” said Serhat, a 27-year-old attending a protest in Istanbul, who asked that his surname not be published, for fear of being arrested.
“But there will always be people who won’t bow to them,” Serhat, a TV producer, added.
Though tens of thousands of people have been detained for political reasons in Turkey in recent months, these were the first political arrests reported since the referendum.
“These people are mainly those who attended the protests after the referendum and raised their voice against the referendum result on social media,” said Deniz Demirdogen, a lawyer for one of the detainees, Mesut Gecgel.
“The police told the detainees that they were accused of trying to agitate people against the ‘yes’ vote,” Mr. Demirdogen said by telephone from the police station in Istanbul where his client had been taken.
Abdurrahman Atalay, a prominent political activist who filed an appeal on Tuesday against the referendum result, was also detained. His nephew, Can Atalay, said by telephone that the police had told Mr. Atalay that he was being charged for “inciting hatred among people by claiming the referendum result is dubious.”
Several of the detainees are from the United June Movement, a group formed after the mass protests in June 2013 against Mr. Erdogan’s government.
The arrests will add to fears that Sunday’s referendum has accelerated Turkey’s descent toward authoritarianism. Mr. Erdogan and his allies say their victory will help bring stability and prosperity to the country, while their critics argue that it will give the president too much power, insulate the post from judicial scrutiny and, as a result, contribute to greater instability.
Two international observer missions said the referendum campaign had been conducted in an unfair environment in which opposition voices were suppressed.
Observers also criticized the government for holding the vote during a state of emergency that was imposed after the failed coup in July against Mr. Erdogan.
Since then, roughly 45,000 people suspected of being dissidents and of plotting the coup have been arrested, more than 150 media groups and 1,500 civil society organizations have been closed, and about 130,000 people have been purged from their jobs. Anti-Erdogan campaigners faced physical intimidation and restrictions on their ability to hold rallies and to appear in the news media.
An Interior Ministry official said that no one was available to comment by telephone on the arrests, and asked that requests for comment be submitted by email.
In a separate development on Wednesday, Turkey’s electoral commission rejected an appeal by the opposition to annul the entire referendum. The opposition had based the appeal on the commission’s controversial decision — made while voting was still in progress on Sunday — to raise the burden needed to prove allegations of ballot-box stuffing.
International observers and legal experts said that this decision, made at the request of a member of Mr. Erdogan’s party, broke electoral law and contradicted the commission’s previous decisions. But the commission rejected the argument early on Wednesday evening.
Thousands of individual appeals of individual ballot boxes nevertheless remain in play, keeping open the possibility that the final vote tallies might yet change.
Bulent Tezcan, the deputy head of the main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party, or C.H.P., criticized the appeal’s rejection. “We call it organized election fraud, organized stealing of votes,” Mr. Tezcan said.
The rejection of the appeal came as more allegations of electoral fraud emerged. The secretary of the C.H.P. in Istanbul, Dr. Hakki Saglam, suggested that as many as 200,000 ballot papers in Istanbul alone may have been added to ballot boxes illegally, since they had not been validated with an official stamp.
Trump is OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE ANCIENT SCOTTISH RITE TEMPLE----ergo he is NOT a Putin-lover. The national media has Trump ranting that he will ATTACK ANYONE AND EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT SUPPORT US INTERESTS. He is that same BUSH/CHENEY whose only talent is LYING, CHEATING, AND STEALING. These folks can only win with bullying----threatening. They are those childhood school ground bullies who kicked young boy's shins and pulled young girl's hair and stole their lunch money----only they grew up and were allowed to gain power.
This is why Trump was installed in 2016 Presidential election---the Clintons are global Wall Street and banking fraud and technology----the Bush neo-conservatives are military and energy----ergo TRUMP THUMPING HIS CHEST. MOVING FORWARD needs war-----that is what all this kabuki theater in media means.
WE THE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT WAR----WE MUST GET RID OF THESE GLOBAL WALL STREET POLS AND PLAYERS---ROLLING PEACEFUL PROTESTS IN US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES---LIKE BALTIMORE.
Donald Trump will 'attack everyone and anyone' but Vladimir Putin is 'immune'
Jim Himes made the claim while questioning FBI Director James Comey for the House Intelligence Committee
Donald Trump will “attack anyone and everyone” but Vladimir Putin is “immune” from criticism, a member of the House of Representatives has said.
Jim Himes made the claim while questioning FBI Director James Comey for the House Intelligence Committee.
The member from Connecticut’s fourth district noted that Mr Trump had defended Mr Putin but had focused a range of attacks on US allies.
“Our new president will attack everyone and anyone. He will attack the cast of Hamilton, he will attack Chuck Schumer, he will attack our allies, Mexico, Australia, Germany, he will attack the intelligence community,” Mr Himes said.
“…There is one person and one country which is immune. Which is inoculated from any form of presidential attack no matter what the behaviour.
“No matter if there is a violation of the INF nuclear treaty, no matter if Vladimir Putin kills political opponents. The new President defends, obfuscates and does not attack,” he added.
Mr Himes also said many of those who were close to Mr Trump had “lied” and “misled” about their relationship with Russia.
“The people around the president, Micahel Flynn, Jeff Sessions, Carter Paige and Paul Manaford, have an odd connection to Russia. A series of odd connections,” he said.
'The hope for a Prussian rebirth is strong among those Germans who remember the greatness of the country’s 19th-century history. The idea of a Prussian state is but further evidence of a resurrected Holy Roman Empire with Germany at its head (Rev. 13:3-4).
Whoever leads this resurrected Holy Roman Empire will need people to wholeheartedly exhibit one specific Prussian virtue, that of blind obedience'.
This comment is OVERLY SIMPLISTIC-----
The global banking frauds by UK and US in early 20th century hit European nations hard as they did these few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA----Germany's 1% had empire-building in mind in recapturing the OTTOMAN EMPIRE----along with the ideals of A ROMAN EMPIRE----ergo the taking of all of Europe and marching into Far - Near Middle-East. Meanwhile STALIN in Russia thinking empire-building used this provocation to expand its satellite nations. Each one used the global 99% anger at losses of personal wealth from global banking frauds by global 1% and their own leaders.
WHETHER STALIN, HITLER, MUSSOLINI-----OR PUTIN, ERDOGAN, TRUMP----all of these global 1% and going to war only think of the advantages of AFTER-WAR TREATIES. THE NEW WORLD ORDER. They love losing millions of citizens to death in war time.
Greater Russia meets Greater Roman Empire meets Greater Ottoman Empire. REALLY?????? 'Erdogan: Sultan of an Illusionary Ottoman Empire
Turkey has no chance to become as powerful and influential as the Ottoman Empire was during its heyday. And it’s all Erdogan’s fault'.
Remember, North and South America are still those AMERICAN COLONIES to these global 1%! They think WE THE PEOPLE are already captured and colonized.
Germany’s Prussian Ambition
What does Germany’s desire to bring back the state of Prussia say about its future?By William Ghannam
From the June 2002
Trumpet Print Edition
After World War II, Winston Churchill condemned the German state of Prussia as “the root of all evil.”
So why is there a heartfelt effort in Germany today to bring back Prussia? Prussia directly connects Germany with its imperial past of power and conquest!
The victorious Allies, by means of the “Potsdam Declaration,” agreed on the removal of the German population from a part of the area known as Prussia. Much of this land was to be given to Poland and the Soviet Union. Two years later, in 1947, the Allies passed a law that permanently banned Prussia from ever existing, branding it the warmongering heart of Germany.
Still, a dream of a resurgent Prussian state has captured the hearts and minds of some in Germany today. This dream found a voice in the words of Alwin Ziel, Brandenburg’s social affairs minister, when he suggested in February that the proposed merger of the city-state of Berlin and the state of Brandenburg be called Prussia.
Germans still proudly remember and admire their past. This includes a growing number of liberal intellectuals, aristocrats and royalty who have joined forces in support of Prussia’s rebirth (Guardian, Feb. 23).
But given the law passed in 1947, can Prussia legally be reestablished? “The fact that the Allies dissolved the state of Prussia does not mean that one of Germany’s present-day states cannot bear the same name,” said Detlef Merten, professor of public law at the German University of Administrative Sciences in Speyer (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Feb. 17; emphasis mine throughout). He added, “Germany is indeed sovereign in the matter since only those states that are part of the Federal Republic of Germany are being dealt with here” (ibid.).
“Prussia is a project, not a historical relic or even a joke,” said Tilman Mayer, a professor of political science at the University of Bonn, adding that “only fatalists will argue that Prussia is history” (ibid., Feb. 28).
Revitalization of great Prussian cities, palaces and buildings continue to rekindle the dream of the rebirth of past Prussian glory in a modern Germany. Many Germans are looking to the greatness of their past to lead their future!
Virtues of the Imperial Past
Germans increasingly refuse to feel continuing shame over their history. This fact was brought to prominence last year, when the German government officially named it Prussian Year 2001.
German President Johannes Rau defended all that was good with Prussia during the celebrations: “We should use this opportunity and then we can recognize that there are traditions and attitudes that are worth highlighting and rediscovering: tolerance, reform, selflessness and modesty, the nation-state and law and order” (Independent, Jan. 14, 2001).
Prussian Year 2001 was formally celebrated throughout Germany with a series of exhibitions and events commemorating Prussia’s influence upon Germany and the world. Over 100 museums and cultural organizations throughout the former Prussian region took part.
These celebrations confirmed one truism: “[T]he Germans are at least no longer afraid of Prussia” (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Feb. 20).
Eberhard Diepgen, former mayor of Berlin, expressed amazement at how the Prussian state was ever permitted to descend into disregard. “I am happy that Prussian Year 2001 will remind us of these fruitful traditions in our history,” he said. He added that the knowledge of those traditions “can be taken as a basis for the future of Europe” (Telegraph, Dec. 31, 2000).
Mr. Mayer said, “We need Prussia to unite Germany. We need Prussia as a shining name to inspire great achievements in Germany. We need Prussia as a provocation to trigger action” (op. cit.). One might ask, what action will be triggered if Prussian idealism takes over?
Looking to Frederick
The city of Potsdam was known as the “pearl of Prussia.” Devastated by World War ii and left inert by the forced seclusion of the Cold War, it has recently undergone great change, swiftly acquiring a reputation as one of Germany’s most attractive cities. After German reunification in 1990, Potsdam became the capital of the state of Brandenburg. A stunning reminder of its great imperial past is reflected in two elegant palaces which reside there, both built in the late 1700s by Prussia’s most recognized king, Frederick the Great.
Frederick, who reigned from 1740 to 1786, is remembered in Germany to this day. Adolf Hitler paid his respects to Frederick at his grave in Potsdam in 1933, and there declared the beginning of the Third Reich. When the collapse of the Reich was hastened by the advancing Russian army, the Nazi government protected Frederick’s remains by exhuming his body and moving it to western Germany.
Nazis and other right-wing extremists hail Frederick “as a cult figure because of his martial accomplishments” (Martin A. Lee, The Beast Reawakens, pp. 282-283). This “fierce Prussian warrior” was known as a frequent invader of foreign lands.
In 1991, only one year after Germany reunited East and West, Frederick was honored by a reburial at his beloved Sans Souci Palace near Potsdam—with over 80,000 in attendance, including then Chancellor Helmut Kohl.
Several newspapers acknowledged the immediate reaction in Europe: fear. Troubled hearts saw this national reverence as an inner-stirring for Germany to return to its roots of military greatness.
Remember the Good
Most Germans only want to remember the good that the Prussians are responsible for: They emancipated the local Jewish population in 1812; serfdom was eliminated; immigration was encouraged; the arts and sciences and the introduction of compulsory education were sponsored and administered by the Prussian state.
Warmly evoked by countless Germans is the belief in Prussian virtues: modesty, discipline, self-control, punctuality, thriftiness, state service and a hard-working attitude. These virtues are seen as the catalyst of Prussia’s economic power.
However, to most Europeans, Prussia is generally remembered for its militarism, arrogance and, especially, its expansionism.
“The anti-Prussian sentiment that survives in western and southern Germany is of no consequence and is declining by the decade,” wrote Wolf Jobst Siedler, a distinguished German journalist (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Feb. 17). Siedler added, “European irritation can be ignored, too, just as European unease was ignored when the two German states—East and West Germany—were reunited” (ibid.).
Alexandra Richie, Oxford historian, points out in her book Faust’s Metropolis that European irritation should not be so easily ignored. “The fact that German unification was achieved without violence was a political miracle, but experience shows that disruption often emerges later and in unexpected ways.”
How Did Prussia Rule?
In 1862, Count Otto von Bismarck became both prime minister and foreign minister of Prussia. He realized that to lead the German unification effort and attain world leadership status for Germany, Prussia would need both a potent army and effective diplomatic skills. In this he had the willing support of King Wilhelm i.
In 1866, the Prussian army crushed Austria in only seven weeks, thus forming the North German Union. A few years later, Prussia swiftly defeated the incompetent emperor of France, Napoleon iii, setting the stage for the highly anticipated unification of Germany in 1871. The German Empire, or Second Reich, was formed.
The newly crowned kaiser (emperor of Germany)--Wilhelm i—made Otto von Bismarck, his longtime champion advocate, Germany’s first chancellor.
During a constitutional crisis over army reforms, Bismarck was resolute regarding Prussia’s authority: “The position of Prussia in Germany will be decided not by its liberalism but by its power. … [N]ot through speeches and majority decisions are the great questions of the day decided … but by iron and blood” (Otto Pflanze, Bismarck and the Development of Germany, vol. 1). Bismarck insisted that the German Empire have a dominant role in European affairs and unhindered ability to colonize throughout the world.
Wilhelm i’s grandson—known to be vociferous and uncaring—attempted to persuade his dying grandfather to abdicate and give him the throne instead of giving it to his son Friederich. Wilhelm i refused. But after Wilhelm i’s death in 1888, Friederich ruled only 99 days before dying of throat cancer.
Thus Wilhelm i’s grandson, Wilhelm ii, ascended to the throne that same year. By 1890 he had forced Bismarck out of office; the new kaiser wanted to establish his own ultimate authority.
Kaiser Wilhelm ii was also determined to extend the German Empire’s power and influence throughout the world. So strong was his motivation, he even considered attacking the United States in a daring naval assault on New York, Boston and other U.S. ports 20 years before World War i began, because he wanted the Pacific Ocean clear for German colonial conquest.
Most do not realize this fact concerning the German Empire: Several kings, princes and other possessors of royal seats ruled under the kaiser’s seat of Prussian rule in this German alliance.
In November 1918, after the Great War had ended, all ruling monarchies in Germany lost their thrones and were officially abolished.
Count Carl-Eduard von Bismarck, descendant of Prince Otto von Bismarck, is one reminder of Germany’s once-great past living in today’s Germany. A wealthy banker, Bismarck is currently seeking political office and views Prussia just as his ancestor: “Prussia is a name that is known internationally and stands for something special” (Sunday Times, London, March 24).
Bismarck went on to declare, “It is back to the roots of Germany.” Yet, when history is closely examined, these deep Prussian roots reveal the true character of Germany as a militaristic-minded nation.
Days of Prussian Glory Revisited
After the destruction of Nazi Germany, cities were left in ruin by Allied bombs, and many historical buildings were lost or damaged beyond repair; Hitler’s plans were burned to ashes.
“Yet it has remained mysteriously unknown to this day that immediately after conquering Poland, Hitler charged his architect [Albert] Speer in October 1939 with expanding a residence in the East—a palace built by Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm ii between 1905-1910—in what was then the Prussian province of Posen” (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Feb. 19).
Hitler looked to the past with pride. Even today, Germans continue to visit cities and territories of their once-extensive empire, such as the Russian city of Kaliningrad (formally Königsberg, Prussia). “For Germans, Kaliningrad is still important from an emotional standpoint. German cash has been raised to reconstruct the ruined Königsberg cathedral, and thousands of Germans make pilgrimages to the city each summer in an attempt to rediscover their lost roots” (Telegraph, Jan. 21, 2001).
Königsberg was the first capital of Prussia, where Frederick the Great’s grandfather proclaimed himself Prussia’s first king in 1701.
Do the Russians remember the history of the former Königsberg? Germany doesn’t seem to think so. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kaliningrad has become an island unto itself—trapped between Poland and Lithuania—essentially deserted by Russia.
The Germans remember why. As they look to rediscover their lost roots, Königsberg will continue to weigh heavy in the hearts of Germans who long for the imperial past and the old borders that made up Prussia. When both Poland and Lithuania become members of the European Union as slated in 2003, Kaliningrad will be surrounded by the EU, leaving Russia disconnected from Kaliningrad.
Vladimir Yegorov, governor of the Kaliningrad region, has expressed his fears of an uprising by the people. He made it clear to the Kremlin that if living conditions continue to worsen, it could lead to a separation from Russia. He said the people of Kaliningrad might take matters into their own hands if they no longer had anything to lose.
Dreams of Regaining Königsberg
Britain’s Telegraph reported early last year that Germany and Russia were in secret talks to return Königsberg to Germany. But can Germany really hope to have Königsberg back?
Berlin had given billions of dollars to Russia that they knew could not be paid back. This begs the question: Will Russia trade land to offset the money it owes to Germany? Will a deal be struck in secret—just as they agreed to partition Poland right before World War ii?
Russia’s economic partnership with Germany is beginning to resemble the one they had just before World Wars i and ii. Once again, Russia sees Germany as one of its most important and stable trade partners. The roots for this partnership run deep, as Prussia, the center of the German nation-state, traditionally looked to Russia as an ally.
Yet, as history proves, the roots of German-Russian loyalty are not deep enough to endure. The non-aggression pact formed between the two nations in 1939 was completely ignored when, two years later, Germany attacked Russia.
The Power of PrussiaEberhard Straub of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung recently said that if a new Prussia incorporated the areas of Berlin, Brandenburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Western Pomerania and Mecklenburg, the German mindset could be changed: “Such a northern German federation in the form of a rejuvenated Prussia might after all arouse the energies that the weak need to grow strong—when united” (Feb. 20).
Straub undoubtedly speaks for many Germans. He challenged the people of Brandenburg and Berlin to persuade their fellowcitizens throughout the nation to the sensible benefits of restoring Prussia, “and thereby the whole of Germany, thus shaking it out of its lethargy” (ibid.).
In 1993, many Germans viewed a temporary life-sized replica of the former Prussian palace—home for the Prussian monarchy until 1918—in Berlin, creating huge momentum for its reconstruction. Then Chancellor Gerhard Schröder agreed with the traditionalists who believe that only by rebuilding the once-magnificent palace can all that was good about Prussia be fully understood.
To further embrace Germany’s glorious past, Schröder set up a panel to debate how to revive Berlin’s historic center—including the former Prussian palace, despite critics who argued that the palace could create nostalgia for a militaristic state.
“The wound must be healed—and in the architectural form of what was destroyed,” said panel chairman Hannes Swoboda at a news conference concerning the Prussian palace’s future (Associated Press, Jan. 18).
The hope for a Prussian rebirth is strong among those Germans who remember the greatness of the country’s 19th-century history. The idea of a Prussian state is but further evidence of a resurrected Holy Roman Empire with Germany at its head (Rev. 13:3-4).
Whoever leads this resurrected Holy Roman Empire will need people to wholeheartedly exhibit one specific Prussian virtue, that of blind obedience.
Professor Mayer reflected on a German proverb that says Prussians are slow to draw, and warned that when some well-known Bavarians start claiming that they are the better Prussians, “Prussia should watch out [before the] Bavarians storm Berlin” (op. cit.).
Adolf Hitler was closely associated with Bavaria, having been born in the neighboring city of Braunau am Inn and served in the Bavarian army in World War i. He used the Prussian military machine for his evil purpose, and millions followed him with blind obedience to make his idealism come alive, catapulting humanity into the Second World War.
Prussian power ruled by a Bavarian leader can be a lethal combination. Hitler has proven that. And now that Germany is unified and leading the European Union—and with the Bavarian Edmund Stoiber running in the German elections this year—could such a lethal combination of political rule happen again?
We will end this week' discussion on geo-political public policy by looking to where China fits into all these NEW WORLD ORDER ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE mechanisms.
One thing is for sure----Chinese politburo are billionaires because they are BFF with global Wall Street. Global Wall Street is deliberately killing the US dollar to kill the American status as a sovereign nation with the likelihood of the Chinese YEN taking over. Whatever is planned as the new global currency---it does not look like China's 1% are enemies of Western 1%---they look more like partners.
This partnership is driven by the desire of the OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE----the old ASIAN SPICE TRADING ROUTES making those merchants the global 1%. So the Asian OLD WORLD 1% partnered in rebuilding that extreme wealth extreme poverty model in Western nations with the goal of only dealing with trade geared towards that global 1% and their 2% as consumers.
Asian nations like China will sit back and watch a WW 3 between Western nations-----they simply want to get back to OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE---the extremely rich trading with one another.
The economic alliance of BRIC NATIONS--- Brazil, Russia, India, China is not a NEW WORLD ORDER---it is simply a balance to the power of US, UK, Europe.
China's new world order: Xi, Putin and others meet for Belt and Road Forum
By James Griffiths, CNN
Updated 6:17 PM ET, Sun May 14, 2017
Belt and Road Forum, Beijing (CNN)China's leaders are ringing in what they hope is a new world order at a major international conference in Beijing Sunday.
The Belt and Road Forum is China's answer to Davos or the G20, centered around the colossal One Belt, One Road (OBOR) trade initiative, which takes its inspiration from the ancient Silk Road trading route.
Speaking at the opening ceremony, Chinese President Xi Jinping emphasized OBOR's international credentials in the face of criticism that the project will be dominated by Beijing.
"What we hope to create is a big family of harmonious co-existence," Xi said, adding that all countries were welcome to take part in the project.
Xi announced an additional $124 billion in funding for the OBOR initiative, including loans, grants and $8.7 billion in assistance to developing countries. According to Chinese state media, some $1 trillion has already been invested in OBOR, with another several trillion due to be invested over the next decade.
Addressing the forum after Xi, Russian President Vladimir Putin appeared to take aim at the US, which is not involved in the OBOR initiative.
"Protectionism is becoming the new normal," Putin warned, adding that the "ideas of openness and free trade are increasingly often being rejected (even) by those who until very recently expounded them."
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned against "protectionism" at the Belt and Road Forum.
OBOR, which has been in the works for four years, spans more than 68 countries and up to 40% of global GDP. It is China's push to put it in a position of world leadership as the US under President Donald Trump takes a more protectionist approach and gives up the mantle of globalization.
Sunday's forum is being held near Beijing's Olympic Park -- the site of the 2008 games -- as the city enjoys the type of splendid weather China's leaders have shown themselves adept at creating on demand when needed for political events. Roads around the venue have been closed down amid a heavy security operation.Political push
In attendance Sunday were Chinese President Xi Jinping -- whose personal project the OBOR initiative is -- Russian President Vladimir Putin, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte, alongside a host of other world leaders and top ranking officials.
Joining them was a small delegation from North Korea, despite recent strained ties between Beijing and Pyongyang over the latter's nuclear program.
Early Sunday, North Korea launched a ballistic missile, emphasizing how high tensions in the region are at the moment and stealing focus from the OBOR forum in what could be seen as a deliberate insult to Xi.
The leaders of the US and most European economies were notably absent Sunday. While the US sent Matt Pottinger, special assistant to the President, no cabinet or elected officials were in attendance.
Attendees at the Belt and Road Forum include representatives of dozens of countries around the world, but the US and most European countries have not sent senior officials.
In a communique announcing a new trade deal with China Thursday, the US said it "recognizes the importance of China's One Belt and One Road initiative," but Washington is largely uninvolved in OBOR or connected projects like the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).
Speaking to CNN Saturday, AIIB President Jin Liqun was positive that the US could still play a role in China's projects, saying that "regardless of the membership of the US ... we can work together."
"The door is open, any member is welcome to join," he added.
While OBOR has been hailed within China as something that can benefit the whole world and lift millions out of poverty, further afield its reception has been more mixed.
Jörg Wuttke, outgoing president of the EU Chamber of Commerce in China, warned last week that the initiative has increasingly "been hijacked by Chinese companies, which have used it as an excuse to evade capital controls, smuggling money out of the country by disguising it as international investments and partnerships."
He and other critics have pointed to restrictions on and obstacles to foreign firms doing business in China as evident of the hypocrisy behind Beijing's grand unifying vision.
Even neighboring India has been skeptical. The country's finance and defense minister Arun Jaitley told reporters this month Delhi has "serious reservations" about the project, particularly regarding China-funded development in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
While many countries may have gone into OBOR with a "more rosy tinted view of what China's intent was," the scales are increasingly falling from their eyes, said Christopher Balding, a professor of economics at Peking University.
Of particular concern for many is what happens if Chinese-funded projects fail. In the past, this has meant Chinese firms or banks "essentially taking over," Balding said, giving them complete control over very strategic projects in foreign countries. Some have also warned of projects becoming expensive white elephants with little payoff for backers or locals.
Jin said such warnings are "necessary," adding that in the past "there were white elephants, there were mistakes."
"It's very important that the resources put into (OBOR) projects must be producing tangible results for the people" of the countries they are in, he told CNN.
Max Baucus, a former US ambassador to China, said OBOR has "if not frightened, then at least concerned, a lot of countries along the way."
Prior to Donald Trump's election as US President, it could be expected that Washington's Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) -- a free-trade alliance of 12 Asian and Pacific economies -- would act as something of a counterbalance to rising Chinese power.
Trump however, pulled the US out of the deal a day after taking office. While it still includes Australia and Japan, both major economies, without Washington's backing the TPP will be far smaller if it manages to nevertheless go ahead.
The US has also reduced activity in the hotly contested South China Sea, in what has been seen as another concession to China by the new US president who hopes for a solution in North Korea.
Baucus said the country's withdrawal from the region risked creating "a vacuum."
"(TPP was) an economic complement to military planning in the South China Sea," he said, while OBOR puts China "in the driving seat."