On Hitler's Birthday, US to Begin Openly Training Neo-Nazi Integrated Forces in Ukraine - Washington's Blog

Posted on April 2, 2015 by Robert Barsocchini

The US has long be openly coordinating with, advocating for, and supporting neo-Nazi and neo-Nazi integrated forces in Ukraine.

Here is Victoria Nuland, a high-ranking and corrupt member of Obama’s executive, meeting with far-right figures Arseniy Yatsenyuk and Vitali Klitschko, and officially designated neo-Nazi Oleh Tyahnybok:



In 2012, the EU officially designated Svoboda, the militant group led and co-founded by Tyahnybok, as an anti-democratic, “racist”, “anti-Semitic” group, and the World Jewish Congress designated it a “neo-Nazi” group.

In a leaked phone call, Nuland was caught determining who should assume the post of prime minister after the Ukrainian coup d’etat was completed, or, in Nuland’s term “midwifed”. She picked Yatsenyuk, and, indeed, he took the position after the coup. Nuland suggested that he should meet with Tyahnybok “four times a week”.

For his part, also exhibiting a Nazi-influenced outlook, Yatsenyuk later wrote on a government website:

“They lost their lives because they defended men and women, children and the elderly who found themselves in a situation facing a threat to be killed by invaders and sponsored by them subhumans. First, we will commemorate the heroes by wiping out those who killed them and then by cleaning our land from the evil”

Complete story at - On Hitler's Birthday, US to Begin Openly Training Neo-Nazi Integrated Forces in Ukraine Washington's Blog

Secret History: The U.S. Supported and Inspired the Nazis - Washington's Blog

Unless We Learn Our History, We’re Doomed to Repeat It

Preface: I am a patriotic American who loves my country. I was born here, and lived here my entire life.

So why do I frequently point out America’s warts? Because – as the Founding Fathers and Supreme Court judges have explained – we can only make America better if we honestly examine her shortcomings. After all:

“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”

Only when Americans can honestly look at our weaknesses can we become stronger. If we fail to do so, history will repeat …

While Americans rightly condemn the Nazis as monstrous people, we don’t know that America played both sides … both fighting and supporting the Nazis.

Americans also aren’t aware that the Nazis were – in part – inspired by anti-Semites in America.

Backing Nazis

Large American banks – and George W. Bush’s grandfather – financed the Nazis.

American manufacturing companies were big supporters of the Nazis. here are 6 historical examples …

(1) IBM. CNET reports:

IBM has responded to questions about its relationship with the Nazis largely by characterizing the information as old news.

“The fact that Hollerith equipment manufactured by (IBM’s German unit) Dehomag was used by the Nazi administration has long been known and is not new information,” IBM representative Carol Makovich wrote in an e-mail interview. “This information was published in 1997 in the IEEE Annals of the History of Computing and in 1998 in Washington Jewish Week.”

***

IBM also defended Chairman Thomas Watson for his dealings with Hitler and his regime.

Complete story at - Secret History: The U.S. Supported and Inspired the Nazis Washington's Blog

The Greanville Post • Vol. IX | NATO’s Shadow of Nazi Operation Barbarossa

NATO’s Operation Atlantic Resolve paced ahead this week with the latest arrival of more US military forces in the Baltic region. Under the guise of defending eastern Europe from «Russian aggression», more than 100 Abrams tanks and Bradley armoured personnel carriers rolled into Latvia. Last month, a similar motorised display of military support was deployed in Estonia – in the town of Narva – with American flags flown by the US Army’s Second Calvary Regiment just 300 metres from the Russian border.

Narva protrudes sharply eastward – like a metaphorical blade – into Russian territory. It is only some 100 kilometres from St Petersburg – Russia’s second city after Moscow, and with a searing history of military assault by Nazi Germany during 1941-44. The siege of St Petersburg, formerly Leningrad, caused over one million Russians to perish, mainly from hunger, before the German Wehrmacht was eventually pushed back and defeated by the Soviet Red Army. More on that in a moment.

Back to the present: US General John O’Conner said of the latest deployment in Latvia that American troops would «deter Russian aggression», adding with Orwellian prose: «Freedom must be fought for, freedom must be defended».

The US-led Operation Atlantic Resolve has seen a surge in American military presence in the Baltic countries and other eastern European members of the NATO alliance over the past year. Technically, it is claimed that the US forces are «on tour duty» and therefore not transgressing past agreements with Russia to limit NATO permanent forces on Russia’s borders. But semantics aside, it is hard not to see that Washington has, in effect, significantly stepped up its military footprint in a geo-strategically sensitive region, in brazen contravention of erstwhile commitments made to Moscow. NATO warplane sorties have increased four-fold in the Baltic region over the past year, as have NATO warships in the Black Sea.

Complete story at - The Greanville Post • Vol. IX | NATO’s Shadow of Nazi Operation Barbarossa

This Crisis Was Foreseeable … Thousands of Years Ago Washington's Blog

We’ve known for 5,000 years that mass spying on one’s own people is always aimed at grabbing power and crushing dissent, not protecting us from bad guys.

We’ve known for 4,000 years that debts need to be periodically written down, or the entire economy will collapse.

We’ve known for 2,500 years that prolonged war bankrupts an economy.

We’ve known for 2,000 years that wars are based on lies.

We’ve known for 1,900 years that runaway inequality destroys societies.

We’ve known for thousands of years that debasing currencies leads to economic collapse.

We’ve known for millennia that torture is a form of terrorism.

We’ve known for thousands of years that – when criminals are not punished – crime spreads.

We’ve known for hundreds of years that the failure to punish financial fraud destroys economies, as it destroys all trust in the financial system.

Complete story at - This Crisis Was Foreseeable … Thousands of Years Ago Washington's Blog

Russian news: Timothy Snyder’s Historical Malpractice - Russia Insider

If we are to believe Timothy Snyder, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin should be placed in the same company with some twentieth century dictators, particularly Josef Stalin.

By profession Snyder is an historian, but what he writes in the New York Review of Books under the title “Putin’s New Nostalgia” is not the mind of scholar at work. Rather, Snyder again demonstrates that he is actually worse than most western journalists writing about Russia and its role the world stage.

Snyder should know better.

Putin said something to a group of historians that rattled Snyder’s cage: “The Soviet Union signed a non-aggression agreement with Germany. They say, ‘Oh, how bad.’ But what is so bad about it, if the Soviet Union did not want to fight? What is so bad?”

Indeed, Europe’s two great totalitarian regimes joined in a temporary alliance and divided Eastern Europe among themselves.

It is common to come across the description of the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop pact as “immoral,” but realistically it should have been expected. This is how realpolitik works. States are not moral institutions, but they do have geopolitical interests. After all, Washington and its allies secretly plot and fund the overthrow of governments,some democratically elected like in Ukraine, as a matter of course – very much like the Secret Protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact!

Complete story at - Russian news: Timothy Snyder’s Historical Malpractice - Russia Insider

Documentary | Dark Myths about Russia (Part 2) | English Subtitles

Documentary | Dark Myths about Russia (Part 1) | English Subtitles

The War for Ukraine’s History | New Eastern Outlook

Walter Duranty, the Pulitzer-winning New York Times correspondent, is long dead. However, Duranty has not been forgotten, because there is an ongoing battle over his 20th century work — in a 21st century ideological war.

Duranty was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 1932 for his reporting in the Soviet Union, and the Ukrainian ultra-nationalist right wing has not forgotten this. They continue to make efforts to have his prize posthumously revoked.

The John Birch Society, white supremacist David Duke, and prominent figures in the Republican Party have all rallied around the call for Duranty’s prize to be revoked. They call Duranty a “communist propagandist” and “Stalin apologist.”

Yet, when one looks over Duranty’s writings, they just don’t sound like communist propaganda. Duranty calls Stalin an “imperial dictator” and a “czar,” comparing him to Ivan the Terrible. He describes Soviet society as “supreme autocracy of the imperial idea.”

Duranty’s writings reek of anti-communism and contempt for Marxism-Leninism. One of Duranty’s articles for which he won a Pulitzer proclaims: “Russia has transformed Marxism—which was only a theory anyway—to suit its racial needs and characteristics, which are strange and peculiar, and fundamentally more Asiatic than European.”

The Pulitzer Committee has refused to revoke Duranty’s 1932 award, because no evidence has yet been provided that Duranty lied about anything. In his reporting, amid his racist and anti-Soviet editorializing, he accurately described what he observed in Moscow and other parts of the Soviet Union.

Complete story at - The War for Ukraine’s History | New Eastern Outlook

What was Ukraine made of and why is it falling apart

Published on Sep 14, 2014

Ukraine is actually where Russia started about 1100 years ago, and Kiev was Russia’s first capital (hence the name, Kievan Rus).

However, about 300 years after that, the Mongol invasion, and later pressure from the south and east, shifted the center of the Russian culture north, to Novgorod and later Moscow.

Thereafter, and for most of the middle ages, Ukraine became a mess of small towns and lawless steppes being raided and fought over by Muslims to the South, Catholic Europeans (mostly Lithuanians, Poles, and Austrians) in the West, and Orthodox Christian Russians in the North. Russians won Ukraine back roughly 350 years ago, but the struggle never really stopped.

Here is a brief and incomplete list of foreign powers that have fought Russia for the lands of modern Ukraine:

Lithuania (5 wars 1492-1537)
Turkey (7 wars 1568-1792)
Poland (9 wars 1605-1939)
Sweden (1 war 1700-1721)
Austria (3 wars 1733-1918)
France (3 wars 1812-1918)
Britain (2 wars 1853 -1918)
Germany (3 wars 1914-1945)
Romania (2 wars 1918-1945)

In these wars the locals, few in number, tended to take the Russian side because they were culturally and, more importantly, religiously affiliated with Russia.

However, Poles, Austrians, Germans (and now US and EU) have all worked to change that by supporting cultural/religious conversion, or at least independent Ukrainian identity (preferably anti-Russian). These efforts finally bore fruit when Central Ukraine briefly sided with Austrians during the 1918 civil war (although the southern and eastern Ukraine formed Soviet Republics).

When Bolsheviks reunited the area, they have attached a lot of formerly Russian lands to the newly formed Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, to counterbalance rural West Ukraine with some industry and Eastern proletariat.

As a result of WWII, West Ukraine was attached to Ukrainian SSR as well. These lands have not been part of Russia since the Mongol invasion in the 13th century, and due to their Polish/Austrian/German masters spending the past 700 years nurturing Russophobia, were very anti-Russian.

Finally, in 1954, Crimea was handed to Ukraine for no actual reason - it was never even part of the Kievan Rus, much less Ukraine, and settled by ethnic Russians.

So, in the end, we have one side of the country extremely Russophobic (most recent Western funding for nationalism came in the form of approximately $15 bn from US State Dept and Soros), and the other side essentially settled by ethnic Russians who were arbitrarily thrown in there by USSR.

What followed was a tug-of-war between two halves of the country, ending in Westerners deposing a democratically elected Eastern president in an armed coup, and ensuing civil war.

... As we can see, the history is a little more complex than "eebil Putin" narrative you would see on CNN ;).

PS. Oh, and before the Holodomor trolls run all over this history video - saying Russia oppressed Ukraine because of 1932 famine is like saying USA oppressed Texas because of the Dust Bowl.

Incidentally, Dust Bowl and the Great Depression (as well as famines in the Volga region, Central Asia, and India) were largely caused by the same factors as the Ukrainian famine, although US had more resources and competence to handle the Dust Bowl than the newly formed Soviet state did.

While we're on the subject, it's also worth noting that Texas has only been a part of the US about half as long as Ukraine was part of Russia, and that Texas secession from Mexico is quite similar to Novorossiya's secession, although less justified.

Text from... - What was Ukraine made of and why is it falling apart [read description]

Battle for the State. Russians Awaken. | Center For Syncretic Studies

By: Alexander Dugin

Translated by Nina Kouprianova

Originally published at Nina Kouprianova

In the political sense, the situation in Russia is becoming quite critical. These are fundamental shifts rather that fluctuations at the surface. Let us attempt to create a conceptual schema of current events.

There is a People (Narod in Russian, akin to the German Volk: henceforth the term “Narod” will be used—editors), and there are people (population). These are different things (different concepts). And all of them are collectively known as “Russia.” This homonymy generates layers of meaning, and everything gets tangled. Let us orthogonalize the full picture by placing everything onto its own level.

Narod is a historical-cultural community. This is a subject of destiny and creator of history. However, not all philosophies and ideologies recognize its existence in this sense. Narod does not exist for the Liberals—there is only an aggregate of individuals. Nor does it exist for the Communists—only classes do; for the Nazis—only race exists; and for the fascists—only the state does. And, even though it sounds paradoxical, Naroddoes not exist for the nationalists either—for them, there is a political nation based on individual membership (the classic bourgeois nation is a product of Europe during the period of Modernity). Narod does not exist for all these ideologies—this is the complete ideological nomenclature of Modernity. But it does exist—it is the only thing that truly exists. Heidegger used to say, “Dasein exists through a People” (Das Dasein existiert völkisch). That is to say, man’s presence in the world is given to us through Narod. It provides us with language, appearance, psychological attributes, a place in time (history) and space (geopolitics).

Today, Russia’s Narod awakens breaking through the depths of its dreams—difficult and simple, impoverished and enriched—but dreams nonetheless. It views Crimea and Novorossia as territories of its awakening. Thus, Narod heads to a place where the Russian Light pulls it in like a magnet, shining through the heroes of Novorossia. These are not emotions, chauvinism, or ultra-patriotism. This is not a “hurray” or a surface, but, rather, it is the voice of our ultimate Russian depths. We exist authentically only when faced with death. Only when faced with death does it become clear what it means to be Russian. People go to Novorossia, to Donetsk and Lugansk, obeying the Will of Russian History, drawn in by the Russian Death. It is this Red Death that makes Russians what they are. Death in the world. In the name of Narod. Death for Narod is life. Thus, people go to Novorossia to live in the Russian way.

Igor Strelkov is the symbol of the Russian Narod. Strelkov is the embodiment of our spirit, our will, our resistance. And even if we are not there with him, he makes us ashamed of ourselves and proud of him, but most important, he inspires Faith in ourNarod. Strelkov exists authentically. In him, our Narod finds its image. And all those who are with him—Gubarev, Motorola, Mozgovoi, Babai, Purgin, and all the heroes of the Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples’ Republics, living or dead—they are all our Narod, its faces. As it is. As it exists. One cannot rip it out, pollute it, or relativize it.

Complete story at - Battle for the State. Russians Awaken. | Center For Syncretic Studies

Year Zero: The Silent Death Of Cambodia

NoBC4U Note: This will be my only post for the day. But I think it's an important one. It's been said many a time, many a place, that "those who cannot learn from the past are condemned to repeat it."

I must admit that on a few occasions, I wondered if Svoboda and Right sector might be the new Khmer Rouge. Extreme? No doubt. But when you viewed the atrocities that occurred in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, you might wonder if this was an anomaly. Or you might wonder, not if something like this is going on today, but where is it happening right now? And if it's not happening right now, one certainly must wonder where and how soon such atrocities will reappear. And when and how long will it be before the world responds? Or will the world fail to respond in any meaningful way?

View this film. You will no doubt notice some similarities between the events of that time and events of today. And you will certainly notice that when it comes to the role of nation-states, some of the players never change.


Year Zero: The Silent Death Of Cambodia from John Pilger on Vimeo.

Ukraine: A Grand 1000 Year History, or a 100 Year-Old Manufactured Fantasy?

NoBC4U Note:  This is the original title: Metaphysical Doubts Concerning the Existence of Modern Ukraine, a 1918 Creation of the German General Staff « TARPLEY.net

News reports on the reaction in Kiev to the reunification of the Crimean peninsula with Russia have included the idea that some Ukrainians resent the failure of the United States or the western European powers to intervene militarily against Russia in favor of the new Kiev fascist government. At the same time, it appears that Ukrainian military units have uniformly refused to fight for their borders, their bases, their headquarters, or other strategic assets under their control. Much of the Ukrainian army and navy located in the Crimea has chosen rather to become part of the Russian forces. Repeated attempts by the Yatsenyuk government in Kiev to call up reservists or otherwise to mobilize manpower for military purposes have met with a very meager response.

What can we make of a country which refuses to fight for itself, and at the same time, expects foreign countries to pull its chestnuts out of the fire? The reasons may lie in the historical genesis of modern Ukraine, which is a nation called into being during World War I, not by a popular movement of its own people, but rather by the German military leadership, and then propped up in recent years by the United States and the European Union.

International attention has lately been much focused on Ukraine, but world publics know very little of the history involved. The country located on the Pontic step (the flatlands north of the Black Sea) currently calling itself Ukraine has only existed for 23 years, since the failure of the August 1991 KGB-inspired coup in Moscow. Before that, to find something that corresponds to modern Ukraine, we must go back to the Kievan Rus late in the first millennium of the Common Era. This was a state set up by Vikings (called Varangians) along the Dnieper River, which was the main inland waterway between Scandinavia in the north and the Byzantine Empire in the South. It was here that grand Duke Vladimir converted to Orthodox Christianity in the year 988, thus establishing a religious tradition which continues to be decisive in Russian history down to the present day. But Vladimir’s state did not call itself Ukraine, considering itself rather the leading state of Russia, which the Latin West sometimes called Ruthenia.

No Ukraine on Map Until 1918

The Kiev Rus was conquered around the middle of the 1200s by the Mongols, and was thereafter ruled by a series of Mongol Khans. After the Mongol power north of the Black Sea had been shaken by the victory of the grand Duke of Moscow Dmitry Donskoi in the battle of Kulikovo on the Don in 1380, the Mongol yoke over the Kiev region began to fall away. By 1526, much of today’s Ukraine, including Kiev, was part of the very large Polish Republic, which stretched from the Baltic to near the Black Sea. Other parts of today’s Ukraine were under Moscow, while some — including the Crimea — had been incorporated into khanates of the Ottoman Empire, and a small corner had been taken by the emerging Austrian Habsburgs. Little of this had changed by the time of the peace of Westphalia in 1648. Emmanuel Bowen’s 1747 English map of Eastern Europe calls today’s Ukraine “Little Russia” (south of “White Russia,” today’s Byelorus) with “Red Russia” (south of the city of Lvov (Lwow in Polish, Lviv in Ukrainian, Lemberg in German, and Leopoli in Italian); only a very small area astride the Dnieper is labeled “Ukrain,” meaning something like “at the border.”

In the Russo-Turkish War of 1768-1774, Russian troops conquered the north coast of the Black Sea and much of modern Romania from the Ottoman Empire. By the 1774 Treaty of Kuchuk Kainarji, the Turkish Sultan lost his status as overlord of the Black Sea Tartars, and had to allow Russian ships to transit the Straits at Constantinople in and out of the Black Sea. Soon Russia permanently acquired the Black Sea coast, and Moscow’s ability to project power into the Mediterranean, upon which the survival of civilization in Syria has largely depended, dates from this important historical turning point.

Complete story at - Metaphysical Doubts Concerning the Existence of Modern Ukraine, a 1918 Creation of the German General Staff « TARPLEY.net

Article: The Nazis Even Hitler Was Afraid of | OpEdNews

By George Eliason

March 16, 2014 at 11:26:27

EU politicians that supported the Maidan Revolution are voicing concerns bordering on fear about how much control Ultra Nationalists have over the government in Kiev. Chancellor Merkel's government is telling her she can no longer afford to ignore the Ultra Nationalists in Ukraine. They are scared Germany will be responsible for setting up a new Reich. It's time to strip away the rest of the veneer and take a look at what's really there.

Forget about the Nazi symbolism, and ultra-nationalist exuberance. I will even grant supporters of the current government that much.

Every important ministry, from education and social policy to policing, prosecution and national defense, is headed by Ultra Nationalists. In every aspect of national life, Ultra Nationalists now determine what it means to be Ukrainian and all the policies needed to enforce it.

Even Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk falls among this moderate majority. For generations his own family has had a proud tradition of service to the Ultra- Nationalist cause and has won awards for their service. Before Maidan it hurt his chances for election. After Maidan he didn't need to worry about election.

What is Scary

In an OpEd in the LA Times, entitled "Ukraine's Threat from Within," Director of the School of International Relations at USC Robert English very concisely warns that "the way Ukrainian Ultra Nationalists whitewash Bandera history, which is their past, makes the present and future all that much more scary."

The Banderas, or Banderites, are activists in the Ukrainian Ultra Nationalist movement that is now in control of the government in Ukraine. Under the militant leadership of Stepan Bandera in World War II, the ultra-nationalists organized the Ukrainian Waffen SS Galician, Nichtengall, and Roland Divisions that collaborated with the Nazis and were responsible for the genocide of over 500,000 people. Following the war, however, Ukrainian Nazis were the only group to escape trial at Nuremburg for crimes against humanity. Moreover, neither the Banderas, the Ukrainian Waffen SS, nor any other Ukrainian collaborators have ever apologized for their participation in genocide.

In the landmark work on the subject , Genocide Committed by Ukrainian Nationalists on the Polish Population During World War II, Ryszard Szawlowski characterizes it this way:

"...the Germans have long admitted to their crimes, and have apologized for them publicly .... [The] president of the Federal Republic of Germany, Roman Herzog, [said] in his speech in Warsaw on August 1, 1994 ... 'I bow before the fighters of the Warsaw Uprising, and before all the Polish war victims. I beg forgiveness for what the Germans did.' Russian president Boris Yeltsin, when he kissed monsignor Zdzislaw Peszkowski on the hand, whispered the words 'I apologize' ....

"Ukrainian genocide committed against the Poles during World War II surpassed German and Soviet genocide .... [It] was marked by the utmost ruthlessness and barbarity, and ... up until the present day, it has been denied or, at best, presented with reminders that all is "relative' or other such evasions."

Complete story at - Article: The Nazis Even Hitler Was Afraid of | OpEdNews

Nazism: History is Repeating itself in Ukraine (Video)

Understanding the Russian mindset

One of the very foundations of political science is the principle that geography determines destiny. In the same way that the British Isles determined the naval culture, and the frontier affected the American culture, Russia too, can be defined by its geographic characteristics. The most obvious element of Russia's geography is its enormous size. However, the truth is that Russia's size is both an advantage as well as a liability. The very core of the Russian Federation, the Moscow region, is simply indefensible. There are no mountainous ranges; no rivers or oceans, there are no swamps or deserts. Only the forests of Moscow and the inhospitable climate can be defined as geographic obstacles. The only thing the Russians can do in event of an invasion is to drag out the war and bleed the enemy out. It is for this reason that Russia's history is largely about surviving invasion after invasion. These centuries long experiences left a deep mark in the Russian culture and psychology, and due to these experiences the Russian leadership became obsessed with security and survival.

Complete story at - Understanding the Russian mindset