Voices from Russia

Saturday, 21 January 2017

Michael Moore’s Morning After To-Do List

00 electoral fraud, 27.10.14

THIS is why so many didn’t want to vote. The major parties gave us two substandard candidates… I can’t blame those who refused to vote for such…



This bears a repeat…



  1. Take over the Democratic Party and return it to the people. They’ve failed us miserably.
  2. Fire all pundits, predictors, pollsters, and anyone else in the media who had a narrative they wouldn’t let go of and who refused to listen to or acknowledge what was really going on. Those same bloviators will now tell us we must “heal the divide” and “come together”. They’ll pull more hooey like that out of their ass in the days to come. Turn them off.
  3. Any Democratic member of Congress who didn’t wake up this morning ready to fight, resist, and obstruct in the way Republicans did against President Obama every day for eight full years must step out-of-the-way and let those of us who know the score lead the way in stopping the meanness and the madness that’s about to begin.
  4. Everyone must stop saying they are “stunned” and “shocked”. What you mean to say is that you were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans and their despair. YEARS of being neglected by both parties, the anger and the need for revenge against the system only grew. Along came a TV star they liked whose plan was to destroy both parties and tell them all “You’re fired!” Trump’s victory is no surprise. He was never a joke. Treating him as one only strengthened him. He is both a creature and a creation of the media and the media will never own that.
  5. You must say this sentence to everyone you meet today: “HILLARY CLINTON WON THE POPULAR VOTE!” The MAJORITY of our fellow Americans preferred Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. Period. Fact. If you woke up this morning thinking you live in an effed-up country, you don’t. The majority of your fellow Americans wanted Hillary, not Trump. The only reason he’s president is an arcane insane 18th-century idea called the Electoral College. Until we change that, we’ll continue to have presidents we didn’t elect and didn’t want. You live in a country where a majority of its citizens have said they believe there’s climate change, they believe women should receive the same pay as men, they want a debt-free college education, they don’t want us invading countries, they want a raise in the minimum wage, and they want a single-payer true universal health care system. None of that has changed. We live in a country where the majority agree with the “liberal” position. We just lack the liberal leadership to make that happen (see: #1 above).

Let’s try to get this all done by noon today.

9 November 2016

Michael Moore



At the Battle of Jutland, Admiral Beatty turned to his aide and said:

There’s something wrong with our bloody ships today… (pause for reflection)… and something wrong with our system!

There IS something wrong with our system, but I fear that “liberals” don’t want to hear that. Chilly Hilly was MORE status quo than Trump was and people knew it. To have nominated her was a death-wish. Can we salvage the Democratic Party? Perhaps, if the “liberals” get out-of-the-way. The Clintons were nothing but Reagan Lite… they were of a continuum with Reagan and Bush II… they were pro-Wall Street neoliberals. Obama fooled us all… he talked of change, but was more neoliberal than either the Bushes or the Clintons. Indeed, he was the most bellicose of them all, tossing armed drones left n’ right, with Madame Chillary acting as his faithful Sancho Panza (but without Sancho’s good sense and intelligence).

Shall we have the courage to take on the oligarchs and their liberal defenders? That’s our choice… to do so or not… choose wisely…



Trump’s Speech: What Does the Future Have in Store for America?


This is why Trump won. The Dems nominated the most brutal, unfeeling, corrupt, and self-centred candidate that they could find. It’s no wonder that Trump looked good in comparison to her. The liberals did it to themselves… but they’re blaming the rest of us. Don’t get wrapped up in their pathetic blame game. “It ain’t over ’til it’s over”… and it ain’t over yet… 


Donald Trump’s rise to power has ushered in a new era of US national politics, experts said. Trump’s speech became a shining example of US presidential rhetoric. However, it appears that US élites will see a painful redistribution of spheres of influence within the government under Trump. Valery Garbuzov, Director of the Institute for US and Canadian Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences, told RIA Novosti:

In general, [this speech] is indeed a model of presidential rhetoric, well thought-out and well calibrated, which most US presidents are famous for. It appears that Trump put his heart and soul into it.

Garbuzov pointed up that although Trump didn’t say anything that differed sharply from his election statements, there are several points that deserve special attention. Firstly, Trump primarily addressed his speech to the ordinary, “forgotten” people of America. Trump pitted the people against the US Establishment:

They flourished while ordinary Americans didn’t share in its wealth. The Establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories weren’t your victories; their triumphs weren’t your triumphs; and while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land. That all changes… starting right here, and now, because this moment is your moment… it belongs to you.

Regarding foreign policy, Trump highlighted the necessity to shift America’s focus to its own domestic problems and needs; to protect its borders and not spread itself thin by fighting on distant shores. Garbuzov noted:

What’s more important is that Trump drew attention to the right of all nations to put their own interests first.

Trump stated:

We’ll seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world… but we do so with the understanding that it’s the right of all nations to put their own interests first. We don’t seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to follow.

At the same time, Garbuzov believed:

There are a number of contradictions hidden in Trump’s “plan” voiced at his inauguration. For instance, it’s strange that Trump decided to rip up the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) project, given his tough stance toward Beijing. The Obama administration long regarded the TPP as powerful leverage against China.

For his part, Igor Kryuchkov of Gazeta.ru suggested that Trump’s speech was a sign of an upcoming realignment of spheres of influence within the US government:

The bottom line is that Trump’s rise ushered in a new era for the USA. From now on in, Washington won’t rule the country, since the country will rule Washington. Judging by the reaction of Congress and the public, the American Establishment will face a painful redistribution of spheres of influence [within the government].

David Azerrad of the Heritage Foundation suggested in an interview with Gazeta.ru :

I believe that Trump is determined to challenge the US Establishment. Therefore, the US President is seeking to win the American people’s support.

A close advisor to President Putin on business affairs, Boris Titov, didn’t quite agree with such a stance:

Contrary to popular belief, Trump maintains close ties with the US financial establishment. Most of the financial élite support Trump. Those who pose a challenge to [Trump] are from the political élite.

Sputnik contributor Martin Sieff called attention to the fact:

Trump vowed to “restore unity” in the USA. Given the post-presidential campaign tensions that continue to simmer in American society, the vow takes on a new significance.

In his speech, Trump said:

When you open your heart to patriotism, there’s no room for prejudice. The Bible tells us, “How good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity”.

According to A K Pushkov, a leading member of the Federation Council, the upper house of RF Federal Assembly, a new era definitely began for the USA with Trump taking office. Pushkov wrote on Twitter:

Brilliant politician… a powerful speech. A new type of politician… a speech for a new time. He has a great responsibility. Some will try to interfere. Good luck, Mr Trump.

21 January 2017

Sputnik International


Here’s How the Trump Presidency Will Play Out



The Trump era starts now… with geopolitics and geoeconomics set for a series of imminent unpredictable cliffhangers. I argued that the strategy of Trump’s foreign policy guru Henry Kissinger to deal with the formidable Eurasia integration trio… Russia, China, and Iran… is remixed Divide and Rule; seduce Russia away from its strategic partnership with China, while harassing the weakest link, Iran. In fact, that’s how it’s already playing out… as in the outbursts of selected members of Trump’s cabinet during their US Senate hearings. Factions of US Think Tankland, referring to Nixon’s China policy, designed by Kissinger, are also excited about the possibilities of containment regarding at least one of those powers “potentially arrayed against America”. Kissinger and Dr Zbig “Grand Chessboard” Brzeziński are the two foremost self-described Western puppet masters in the geopolitical arena. In opposition to Kissinger, Obama’s foreign policy mentor Brzezinski, true to his Russophobia, proposed a Divide and Rule centred on seducing China. Yet, an influential New York business source, very close to the real discreet Masters of the Universe, who correctly predicted Trump’s victory weeks before the fact, after examining my argument offered not only a scathing appraisal of those cherished “puppeteers”; he volunteered to tell me how the Masters laid out the new normal directly to Trump. Let’s call him “X”.

The Nonstop China Watch

“X” starts by doing something US deep state-connected regulars, who revere their idols, never dare to, at least in public:

It’s important not to attribute too much importance to either Kissinger or Brzeziński as they’re merely fronts for those who make the decisions and it’s their job to cloak the decisions with a patina of intellectuality. Their input means relatively nothing. I use their names on occasion as I can’t use the names of those who actually make the decisions.

That’s the cue for “X” to detail the new normal:

Trump won the election with the support of the Masters to tilt towards Russia. The Masters have their tools in the media and Congress maintaining a vilification campaign against Russia, and have their puppet Brzeziński also come out against Russia, stating, “America’s global influence depends on coöperation with China”. The purpose is to threaten Russia to coöperate and place these chips on the negotiating table for Trump. In a traditional good cop-bad cop approach, they portray Donald as the good cop wanting good relations with Russia, and Congress, media, and Brzeziński are the bad cops. This is to aid Trump in the negotiations with Russia as Putin sees the “precarious” position of his friend and should be willing to make major concessions as the line goes.

That brings us to how Taiwan… and Japan… got into the mix:

Donald shows the Russian tilt by talking to the Taiwanese, demonstrating that the shift is serious. However, they decided to throw Japan into the mix as a predator against US industry, with an attack on Toyota, thoroughly deserved. That moderated the position as the Masters became afraid that the perception of our building up Japan against China would be too much of a provocation.

So expect China… as “not too much importance” Kissinger prescribed… to be under nonstop scrutiny:

The Masters decided to reindustrialise the USA and want to take jobs back from China. This is advisable from the Chinese viewpoint; for why should they sell their work to the USA for a dollar that lacks intrinsic value and get really nothing back for the work? China should have a car in every Chinese worker’s garage; they’d become a larger producer of cars than the EU, USA, and Japan combined, and their own nation will keep their wealth in their own country.

Why China over Russia? “X” noted:

In this sense, Russia, being a natural resource country with a gigantic military industrial complex (the latter being the only reason she’s secretly respected) is exempt from any tough trade talk as they hardly export anything but natural resources and military equipment. The Masters want jobs back from Mexico and Asia, including Japan, Taiwan, etc., and you see this in Trump’s attack on Japan. The main underlying reason is that the USA has lost control of the seas and can’t secure its military components during a major war. This is all that matters now and this is the giant story behind the scenes.

In only a few words, “X” details the reversal of an economic cycle:

The Masters made money out of transfer of industry to Asia (Bain Capital specialised in this), and Wall Street made money from the lower interest rates on the recycled dollars from the trade deficits. However, now, the issue is strategic; and they’ll make money on the return of industries scaling down their investments in Asia and returning them to the USA as we rebuild production here.

“X” remains quite fond of Henry Ford’s business strategy; and that’s the cue for him to address the crucial theme… national defence. According to “X”:

Ford doubled the wages he paid and made more money than any other manufacturer. The reason was that a living wage where the mother can have many children on her husband’s wage was psychologically good for productivity in his car plants and that his workers could then afford his cars. Thus, he recognised we had to have a just distribution of wealth… his admirer Steve Jobs couldn’t. Henry’s mass productivity was the wonder of the world and that won World War II for the USA. Amazon doesn’t contribute anything to national defence, being merely an internet marketing service based on computer programs, nor does Google, which merely organises data better. None of this builds a better missile or submarine except in a marginal way.

It’s the Pentagon, Stupid

So yes… this all has to do with reorganising the US military. “X” made a point to refer to a CNAS report I quoted in my initial column:

It’s very important for what is visible between the lines. That is, we’re in deep trouble being technologically behind Russia by generations in weapons, which is a follow-up on the Brzeziński quote that we’re no longer a global power.

This is a thorough wide-ranging analysis of how Russia managed to organise the best armed forces in the world. Moreover, that doesn’t even take into account the S-500 missile defence system, now entering service, which arguably seals the entirety of Russian airspace. The next generation ( S-600?) will be even more powerful. “X” does venture into Deep State taboo territory, as in how Russia, over the past decade, managed to leap far ahead of the USA, “eclipsing it as the strongest military power”. However, the game may be far from over… wishful thinking or otherwise:

We hope Secretary of Defence James Mattis will understand this, and that the Deputy Secretary of Defence has the advanced technological skills, organisational ability, and the foresight to understand that the weapons of World War III are offensive and defensive missiles, and submarines, and not air power, tanks, and aircraft carriers.

A realist, “X” admitted that the warmongering neocon/neoliberal status quo… represented by most American Deep State factions… will never abandon the default posture of unremitting hostility towards Russia, but he preferred to focus on change:

Let Tillerson reorganise the State Department along Exxon efficiencies. He may be worth something in that. He and Mattis may be gutless, but if you tell the truth to the Senate you may not be confirmed, so what they say means nothing. However, notice this about Libya. The CIA had a goal of driving China out of Africa and so does AFRICOM. That was one of the secrets to our Libyan intervention.

Not that it worked; NATO/AFRICOM turned Libya into a wasteland run by militias; they failed to drive China out of the rest of Africa. “X” also admitted:

Syria and Iran are red-lines for Russia. So is the eastern Ukraine from the Dnepr. Moscow won’t allow any régime change gambit on Tehran. China’s investments in Iranian oil and gas imply that China also won’t permit Washington’s overthrow of the Iranian government.

The going really gets tough when it comes to NATO; “X” is convinced:

Russia will invade Romania and Poland if the USA doesn’t remove those missiles from Romania and the missile commitment to Poland rescinded. The issue isn’t the worthless American defensive missiles, but the substitutability of offensive nuclear missiles in these silos. Russia won’t tolerate this risk. These aren’t subject to negotiation.

In contrast to the “perpetual threat” perpetual propaganda by the US War Party, Moscow focused on facts on the ground since the 1990s…

  • the breakup of its historic Slavic ally Serbia
  • Warsaw Pact nations and even former Soviet republics annexed by NATO, not to mention attempts to also include Georgia and the Ukraine
  • American deployment of colour revolutions
  • the “Assad must go” fiasco, as in régime change forced on Syria, with the arming of Salafi-jihadis
  • economic sanctions, an oil price war, and raids on the rouble
  • non-stop NATO harassment

“X”, fully aware of the facts, added:

Russia always wanted peace. However, they aren’t going to play a game with the Masters of the Universe that has Trump as the good guy and the Congress, CIA, etc. as the bad guy as a negotiating ploy. That’s how they see it. They don’t regard this circus as real.

The circus may be just an illusion. Or wayang… Balinese puppet theatre… as I suggested. “X” advanced a crisp interpretation of the shadow play ahead from Moscow’s point of view:

Let’s give Putin several months to see if he can work out a détente with Trump that essentially creates an autonomous eastern Ukraine, a peace treaty in Syria with Assad in place, and a withdrawal of NATO forces back to their line of defence under Ronald Reagan.

Who will prevail? The Masters or the Deep State? Brace for impact.

19 January 2017

Pepe Escobar

Sputnik International


As Seen by Vitaly Podvitsky… An Ideology of Treason



On Tuesday, former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell suggested that Vladimir Putin should make Edward Snowden an inauguration “gift” to Donald Trump. MID RF spokesman M V Zakharova wrote on her Facebook page bashing Morell:

It’s clear that, for the CIA-man’s firm, it is normal to present people as gifts and give up those who seek protection. [Morell’s] comments reveal an ideology of treason in the CIA.

18 January 2017

Sputnik International


Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.