Twenty years after the collapse of the Soviet Union–Political Rights Still Restrained

Twenty years after the collapse of the Soviet Union: Fundamental freedoms in Central Asia remain under serious threat


Coalition of Human Rights Organizations in Europe and Central Asia has published a new 41-page report in which there are serious problems with respect for fundamental freedoms in the former Soviet republics – Kazakhstan , Turkmenistanand Uzbekistan . Twenty years after the disappearance of the Soviet Union, these countries continue to be governed by authoritarian leaders who have monopolized power, isolated and silenced political opposition and limited the rights of citizens to express their views, ideas and beliefs.

“The recent wave of uprisings in the Arab world showed authoritarian rulers in Astana, Ashgabat, Tashkent, and that their position is vulnerable. At present it seems that they are more than ever before, ready to use repressive measures to stifle dissent, to retain power and avoid accountability for their actions “, – says Brigitte Dufour, director of” The International Partnership for Human Rights ” (IHRL).

In the report “sobering reality. Fundamental freedoms in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, two decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union “ shall be considered violations of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and association and freedom of religion in the three former Soviet republics. Trends that have long been observed in Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, are more and more visible in Kazakhstan. This use of public media to the official propaganda, persecution of independent media and journalists, restrictions on Internet usage and block Web sites containing information criticizing the government, attacks on civil society activists and political opposition movements, if there is movement in general, the suppression of peaceful protests; prosecution of the so-called non-traditional religious communities, including Muslim associations that operate outside the strict state control, and non-Muslim groups called “cults.”

“While Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have long been among the most repressive countries in the world, now there are serious concerns about the situation of human rights in Kazakhstan, which has recently deteriorated sharply,” – commented on the situation Garry Hummel, director of the Netherlands Helsinki Committee (NHS).

Because of the riots on 16-17 December 2011 in western Kazakhstan, which were suppressed with the use of excessive force, the authorities have begun a new campaign against the political opposition, the opposition media and trade union activists.Also, the Kazakh authorities have recently stepped up measures to control the use of the Internet and other electronic media.Also in 2011 enacted a new law on the repression of religion.

“Human rights in Kazakhstan and the international community prizyayut authorities to fulfill the commitments reaffirmed in the Astana Declaration, adopted at the OSCE summit in Astana in 2010,” – said Rosa Akylbekova, Acting Director of the Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law (KIBHR).

Modes of Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have also made statements in support of democracy and human rights, but in practice they continue to consolidate their power and to counter the opposition. In Turkmenistan, there have been new attempts to prevent the spread of information, questioning the official propaganda, and silence the critics of the regime during the campaign of presidential elections held in February 2012. Under the guise of expression of democracy, elections consolidated the power of the nominal current president, who took office after the death of Turkmenbashi in 2006, in connection with which the new leader of the anticipated policy changes.

“During the last election campaign, Berdymukhammedov instead of the program the candidate would publish a report on the fulfillment of previous promises – said Farid Tukhbatullin, head of the Turkmen Initiative for Human Rights (TIHR). “But of the promised five years ago is nothing democratic reforms were not carried out. Therefore, he published a new promise. And I think that they will not be fulfilled, “- he added.

The Uzbek government, in response to the growing number of Internet users among the people of Uzbekistan and speculation about possible revolutions in Central Asia, similar to what has happened recently in the Arab countries, have taken new measures to “rein in” the Internet. At the same time, the authorities continued their relentless campaign against the dissidents.

“Karimov’s regime says the reforms, but it is only a ploy to gain international approval” – said Surat Ikramov, chairman of the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders of Uzbekistan (IGNPU). – “In fact, the Uzbek authorities have not done anything concrete to change its repressive policy, but rather continue to harass independent journalists, human rights activists, religious believers and others who question the official policy”, – he added.

The report, published by five human rights groups, analyzes the general trends regarding the protection of fundamental rights in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, as well as describes the individual cases that illustrate these trends. The report is largely based on information obtained from monitoring conducted KIBHR, and TIHR IGNPU in 2011 and early 2012. At the end of the report offered recommendations to the authorities of the three former Soviet republics and international community.

The full report is available on the link (file format PDF, 1,5 Mb).

The international news agency “Fergana”


Why Putin is driving Washington nuts

Why Putin is driving Washington nuts

By Pepe Escobar


Forget the past (Saddam, Osama, Gaddafi) and the present (Assad, Ahmadinejad). A bet can be made over a bottle of Petrus 1989 (the problem is waiting the next six years to collect); for the foreseeable future, Washington’s top bogeyman – and also for its rogue North Atlantic Treaty Organization partners and assorted media shills – will be none other than back-to-the-future Russian President Vladimir Putin.

And make no mistake; Vlad the Putinator will relish it. He’s back exactly where he wants to be; as Russia’s commander-in-chief, in charge of the military, foreign policy and all national security matters.

Anglo-American elites still squirm at the mention of his now legendary Munich 2007 speech, when he blasted the then George W Bush administration for its obsessively unipolar imperial agenda “through a system which has nothing to do with democracy” and non-stop overstepping of its “national borders in almost all spheres”.”

So Washington and its minions have been warned. Before last Sunday’s election, Putin even advertised his road map The essentials; no war on Syria; no war on Iran; no “humanitarian bombing” or fomenting “color revolutions” – all bundled into a new concept, “illegal instruments of soft power”. For Putin, a Washington-engineered New World Order is a no-go. What rules is “the time-honored principle of state sovereignty”.

No wonder. When Putin looks at Libya, he sees the graphic, regressive consequences of NATO’s “liberation” through “humanitarian bombing”; a fragmented country controlled by al-Qaeda-linked militias; backward Cyrenaica splitting from more developed Tripolitania; and a relative of the last king brought in to rule the new “emirate” – to the delight of those model democrats of the House of Saud.

More key essentials; no US bases encircling Russia; no US missile defense without strict admission, in writing, that the system will never target Russia; and increasingly close cooperation among the BRICS group of emerging powers.

Most of this was already implied in Putin’s previous road map – his paper A new integration project for Eurasia: The future in the making. That was Putin’s ippon – he loves judo – against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the International Monetary Fund and hardcore neo-liberalism. He sees a Eurasian Union as a “modern economic and currency union” stretching all across Central Asia.

For Putin, Syria is an important detail (not least because of Russia’s naval base in the Mediterranean port of Tartus, which NATO would love to abolish). But the meat of the matter is Eurasia integration. Atlanticists will freak out en masse as he puts all his efforts into coordinating “a powerful supranational union that can become one of the poles of today’s world while being an efficient connecting link between Europe and the dynamic Asia-Pacific Region”.

The opposite roadmap will be Obama and Hillary’s Pacificdoctrine. Now how exciting is that?

Putin plays Pipelineistan
It was Putin who almost single-handedly spearheaded the resurgence of Russia as a mega energy superpower (oil and gas accounts for two-thirds of Russia’s exports, half of the federal budget and 20% of gross domestic product). So expect Pipelineistan to remain key.

And it will be mostly centered on gas; although Russia holds no less than 30% of global gas supplies, its liquid natural gas (LNG) production is less than 5% of the global market share. It’s not even among the top ten producers.

Putin knows that Russia will need buckets of foreign investment in the Arctic – from the West and especially Asia – to keep its oil production above 10 million barrels a day. And it needs to strike a complex, comprehensive, trillion-dollar deal with China centered on Eastern Siberia gas fields; the oil angle has been already taken care of via the East Siberian Pacific Ocean (ESPO) pipeline. Putin knows that for China – in terms of securing energy – this deal is a vital counterpunch against Washington’s shady “pivoting” towards Asia.

Putin will also do everything to consolidate the South Stream pipeline – which may end up costing a staggering $22 billion (the shareholder agreement is already signed between Russia, Germany, France and Italy. South Stream is Russian gas delivered under the Black Sea to the southern part of the EU, through Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary and Slovakia). If South Stream is a go, rival pipeline Nabucco is checkmated; a major Russian victory against Washington pressure and Brussels bureaucrats.

Everything is still up for grabs at the crucial intersection of hardcore geopolitics and Pipelineistan. Once again Putin will be facing yet another Washington road map – the not exactly successful New Silk Road (See US’s post-2014 Afghan agenda falters, Asia Times Online, Nov 4, 2011.)

Ant then there’s the joker in the pack – the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Putin will want Pakistan to become a full member as much as China is interested in incorporating Iran. The repercussions would be ground-breaking – as in Russia, China, Pakistan and Iran coordinating not only their economic integration but their mutual security inside a strengthened SCO, whose motto is “non-alignment, non-confrontation and non-interference in the affairs of other countries”.

Putin sees that with Russia, Central Asia and Iran controlling no less than 50% of world’s gas reserves, and with Iran and Pakistan as virtual SCO members, the name of the game becomes Asia integration – if not Eurasia’s. The SCO develops as an economic/security powerhouse, while, in parallel, Pipelineistan accelerates the full integration of the SCO as a counterpunch to NATO. The regional players themselves will decide what makes more sense – this or a New Silk Road invented in Washington.

Make no mistake. Behind the relentless demonization of Putin and the myriad attempts to delegitimize Russia’s presidential elections, lie some very angry and powerful sections of Washington and Anglo-American elites.

They know Putin will be an ultra tough negotiator on all fronts. They know Moscow will apply increasingly closer coordination with China; on thwarting permanent NATO bases in Afghanistan; on facilitating Pakistan’s strategic autonomy; on opposing missile defense; on ensuring Iran is not attacked.

He will be the devil of choice because there could not be a more formidable opponent in the world stage to Washington’s plans – be they coded as Greater Middle East, New Silk Road, Full Spectrum Dominance or America’s Pacific Century. Ladies and gentlemen, let’s get ready to rumble.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His most recent book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at

Did Israel Extort Tankers and Bunker-Busters for Promise To Wait Until After Obama’s Reelection Bid?


(Reuters) – Israel has asked the United States for advanced “bunker-buster” bombs and refueling planes that could improve its ability to attack Iran’s underground nuclear sites, an Israeli official said on Thursday.

“Such a request was made” around the time of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington this week, the official said, confirming media reports.

But the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the issue, played down as “unrealistic” reports that the United States would condition supplying the hardware on Israel promising not to attackIran this year.

Netanyahu told Obama at a White House meeting on Monday that Israel had not yet decided on military action against Iran, sources close to the talks said.

Netanyahu has hinted that Israel could resort to force should Tehran – which denies suspicions that it is covertly trying to develop atomic bombs – continue to defy big powers’ diplomatic pressure to curb its nuclear program.

The risk of an Israeli-Iranian war troubles President Barack Obama, who is up for re-election in November and has cautioned against kindling more Middle East upheaval. A Gulf conflict could send oil prices rocketing upwards.

A front-page article in the Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv on Thursday said Obama had told Netanyahu that Washington would supply Israel with upgraded military equipment in return for assurances that there would be no attack on Iran in 2012.

Israel is widely assumed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal but its conventional firepower may not be enough to deliver lasting damage to Iran’s distant, dispersed and well-fortified facilities, many experts say.

Israel has limited stocks of older, smaller bunker-busters and a small fleet of refueling planes, all supplied by Washington.

Western powers suspect Iran’s uranium enrichment program is aimed at stockpiling fissile material for nuclear weapons. Iran says it is strictly for civilian energy uses.

(Writing by Maayan Lubell; Editing by Mark Heinrich)

Russia Accuses Libya of Harboring and Training Syrian Rebels/Terrorists

Russia accuses Libya of harboring Syrian rebels, training them to attack Damascus

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Russia accuses Libya of harboring Syrian rebels…, posted with vodpod

Russian ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin, said that Libya’s assistance to fighters opposed to President Bashar al-Assad will exacerbate the security situation in Syria. (Reuters)


As Libya’s prime minister said the world should help the Syrian people to obtain their freedom, Russia on Wednesday accused Tripoli of helping to train Syrian rebels to carry out attacks on Damascus government targets.

Russia’s U.N. envoy on Wednesday accused Libya of helping to train Syrian rebels to carry out attacks on Damascus government targets.

Allegations by Russian ambassador Vitaly Churkin over the rebels and NATO’s attacks in Libya last year set off a diplomatic furor at the U.N. Security Council with Libya’s interim Prime Minister Abdel Rahim al-Kib.

“We have received information that there is in Libya, with the support of the authorities, a special training center for Syrian revolutionaries and these people are sent to Syria to attack the legal government,” Churkin said.

“This is completely unacceptable according to all legal standards. This activity is undermining stability in the Middle East,” he told a Security Council meeting on Libya.

“We think that Al-Qaeda is in Syria. And now there is the question ̶ is the export of revolution being turned into export of terrorism?” Churkin added.

Russia is Syria’s closest ally and a fierce critic of Western action in support of the rebel fighters who brought down Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi. Russia and China have vetoed two council resolutions on Syria.

Meanwhile, Libya’s Prime Minister Abdurrahim el-Keib said the situation in Syria “is definitely analogous” to last year’s uprising in Libya, which received help from NATO to help protect civilians.

But he said Libya can’t tell the international community what to do to help Syria.

El-Keib said Libya was supporting and financially helping Syria’s opposition and he called on the international community to investigate what it can do to help.

Russia demands apology

The Russian envoy made a new demand that NATO apologize for the deaths of civilians in attacks in Libya last year and pay compensation. China backed calls for a further investigation into the deaths.

The comments, which overshadowed a debate on renewing the U.N. mission in Libya, brought a stern rebuke from U.S. ambassador Susan Rice and the Libyan prime minister.

“It is quite rich for the Russians, one of Syria’s top two arms suppliers, to be accusing Libya or any other country of wrongly supplying arms ̶ if in fact there is any truth in that ̶ to the opposition,” Rice told reporters after the meeting.

Russia needs to “start at home, examining their whole responsibility” in the international dispute over the Syria crisis, she added.

Kib said the Libyan government had investigated all civilian deaths with NATO’s cooperation.

“This matter which concerns the blood of Libyans should not be a matter of political propaganda for one country against any other country,” he told the council.

“I hope that the reason for raising this matter will not be to impede or prevent the international community from interfering in the situation of other states where their people are being massacred,” Kib said.

The Libyan prime minister did not discuss the allegations about the training camps.

Libya announced on February 29 that it would provide $100 million in humanitarian aid to support Syria’s battle for “freedom” against the “dictatorial regime” of President Bashar al-Assad.

Libya government spokesman Mohammed al-Harizi said the opposition Syrian National Council opened a bank account for the funds which will be used to “provide financial support for humanitarian purposes, equivalent to $100 million.”

He said Libya backs Syrians in their twin “goals of freedom and getting rid of the dictatorial regime.”


India home to 4 p.c. of world’s billionaires and 25 percent of the world’s hungry poor

“Despite significant economic progress in the past decade, India is home to about 25 percent of the world’s hungry poor.”

India home to 4 p.c. of world’s billionaires: Forbes


A file picture of Mukhesh Ambani of Reliance Industries who leads the Indian billionaires in the Forbes list released on March 8, 2012.
BLA file picture of Mukhesh Ambani of Reliance Industries who leads the Indian billionaires in the Forbes list released on March 8, 2012.

India is home to over four per cent of the world’s billionaires, including the likes of Ambani brothers, Azim Premji and N R Narayan Murthy alongside Warren Buffet and Bill Gates in Forbes magazine’s annual list of the world’s richest people.

Forbes’s list of 1,226 billionaires is topped by Mexico’s 72-year-old telecom czar Carlos Slim, boasting of a networth of $ 69 billion.

Mr. Slim retained his title as the world’s richest man for the third year in a row. In the second spot is Microsoft founder Gates with a $ 61 billion networth followed by American investment giant and philanthropist Buffet whose networth is $ 44 billion.

Forbes said this year’s 1,226 billionaires are a record high, up one per cent from last year’s total. The numbers are up significantly from the 140 billionaires who had made the cut when the list was first released 25 years ago.

Between them, this year’s billionaires are worth a record $ 4.6 trillion and have an average net worth of $ 3.7 billion.

The list has 48 billionaires from India as well as nine of Indian-origin living in countries like Indonesia, Ireland, Thailand, UK and the US, taking the total number of billionaires hailing from India to 57. India’s 48 billionaires have a total networth of $ 194.6 billion.

Among India’s billionaires, the richest is Reliance Industries Chairman Mukesh Ambani with a networth of $ 22.3 billion. The 54-year-old is ranked 19 in the global rich list.

“Mr. Mukesh Ambani is the world’s richest Indian, despite losing $ 4.7 billion in the past year,” Forbes said.

The publication added that a spat between Ambani’s oil and gas conglomerate Reliance and India’s Oil Ministry over declining output at KG-D6, India’s largest offshore gas field, has dragged down the market cap of the country’s most valuable company.

ArcelorMittal Chairman Lakshmi Mittal comes at the 21st position with a $ 20.7 billion networth. Forbes said Mr. Mittal lost $ 10.4 billion in the past year, more than anyone else in the world and dropped out of the top 10 rankings for the first time since 2004.

Mr. Mittal had ranked sixth in last year’s list when his networth was $ 31.1 billion. Shares of ArcelorMittal, the world’s largest steelmaker, tanked due to surging costs and tepid demand in Europe, Forbes said.

Wipro boss Azim Premji is the third richest Indian in the list. With a networth of $ 15.9 billion, 66-year-old Mr. Premji is ranked 41 on the Forbes list.

The list has only two women billionaires from India, both matriarchs of big corporate houses. Jindal group’s Savitri Jindal is ranked 80 in the rich list with a networth of $ 10.9 billion. Chair of the media group Bennett Coleman Indu Jain, 75, is ranked 578th in the Forbes list with a networth of $ 2.2 billion.

With an $ 8.1 billion networth, Bharti Entreprises chairman Sunil Mittal is ranked 113. Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group chairman Anil Ambani comes in at the 118th position in the list, his networth of $ 7.8 billion, only about a third of that of his wealthier elder brother.

“Despite patch up with brother Mukesh that included a much photographed reunion in their late father’s hometown, Mr. Anil Ambani continues on a losing streak, down one billion dollars in past year and down $ 34.2 billion from his 2008 peak,” Forbes said.

Other billionaires from India include real estate major DLF chief K P Singh ($ 6.4 billion), IT company HCL’s Shiv Nadar ($ five billion), healthcare tycoons Malvinder and Shivinder Singh ($ 3.5 billion), Godrej group chairman Adi Godrej ($ 2.4 billion), Chairman of the Bajaj group conglomerate Rahul Bajaj ($ 1.8 billion) and Infosys co-founder N R Narayan Murthy and his family ($ 1.7 billion).

With a networth of $ 1.4 billion, former Infosys chief executive Nandan Nilekani, pharma tycoons Ajay Piramal and K Anji Reddy and head of the Avantha group Gautum Thapar are tied for the 913rd rank. Investment bigwig Rakesh Jhunjhunwala occupies the 1,075th rank with $ 1.1 billion of networth. Tied for the 1,153th rank is liqour baron Vijay Mallya and Spice group chief Bhupinder Kumar Modi with networth of a billion dollars each.

Also in the list is construction tycoon Pallonji Mistry, an Irish citizen, who with a networth of $ 9.7 billion is ranked 96th. Mistry’s younger son Cyrus has been anointed successor to Tata group Chief Ratan Tata when he retires in December. Incidentally, like last year, Tata is not on the rich list this year.

Among the Indians, who are based outside their native country and have been named in the Forbes list, is venture capitalist Vinod Khosla, whom Forbes calls the “rare Silicon Valley venture capitalist able to generate profits from a clean tech portfolio.”

The IIT and Stanford University alumnus has a networth of $ 1.3 billion and is ranked 960. California-based Kavitark .

“Ram” Shriram, the founding board member of Google and one of the first investors in Google, comes in at rank 804. A trustee at Stanford University, Mr. Shriram’s networth is $ 1.6 billion.

India-born, Indonesian citizen Sri Prakash Lohia and his brother Thai resident Aloke Lohia are ranked 634 and 683 respectively in the list. They are two of three brothers whose fortune spans India, Thailand and Indonesia through the Indorama group of companies involved in textiles, polyester and plastics. Between them, the networth of the two brothers is $ four billion.

Software guru Romesh Wadhwani ranks 634 in the list with a networth of $ two billion. Based in California, the IIT Mumbai alumnus heads Symphony Technology Group which is focused on building software and services companies.

This year there were 128 new additions to the Forbes billionaire list, while 117 dropped off. The US retained its position as the global epicenter of wealth, boasting of being home to 425 billionaires, including Oracle’s Larry Elison who had a networth of $ 36 billion.

Among the American billionaires are New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg ($ 22 billion), Google’s founders Sergey Brin and Larry page ($ 18.7 billion), Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg ($ 17.5 billion), News Corp chief Rupert Murdoch ($ 8.3 billion) and fashion czar Ralph Lauren ($ 7.5 billion).

U.S. probes allegations Afghan Air Force involved in drug running

File:ANA C-27s at Kabul-cropped.jpg

U.S. probes allegations Afghan Air Force involved in drug running

By Michael Georgy


(Reuters) – U.S. authorities are looking into allegations that some Afghan Air Force (AAF) officials have been using aircraft to transport narcotics and illegal weapons across the country, a U.S. official said on Thursday.

“At this point allegations are being examined,” said Lt. Col. Tim Stauffer, spokesman for the NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan, which is setting up and financing Afghan security forces, including the Air Force.

“Authorities are trying to determine whether the allegations warrant a full investigation.”

The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the allegations, said the U.S. military is also looking into whether the alleged transporting of illegal drugs and weapons is connected to an April incident in which an AAF colonel killed eight U.S. Air Force officers at Kabul Airport.

Gul Ahmad
More than 5000 people attended Gul Ahmad’s funeral. (Photo: RAWA)

A U.S. Air Force report about the deaths quoted American officials as saying that the killer was likely involved in moving illegal cargo, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Most of the victims had been taking part in an inquiry into the misuse of AAF aircraft, the newspaper said.

The allegations of drug running come from “credible” Afghan officers inside and outside the AAF and coalition personnel working within the AAF, it added.

An Afghan defense ministry official would not comment on the issue. But he did say that Afghanistan had come under pressure from the West to remove a senior AAF official over corruption allegations.

“They could not provide credible evidence,” he told Reuters.

Major General Abdul Wahab Wardak, the AAF commander, told Reuters the drug-running allegations were “baseless and they must be proven”. “We never do such things,” he added.

The allegations are likely to raise further doubts over the ability of Afghan forces to secure the country before foreign combat troops withdraw at the end of 2014.

The AAF was set up mostly with U.S. funds.

The United States poured in a record amount, near $12 billion between October 2010 and September 2011, to train and equip Afghanistan’s security forces. Almost as much cash, some $11 billion, is planned for the year through September 2012.

Afghanistan produces 90 percent of the world’s opium and the drug trade is often blamed by Western officials for hindering economic development.

The poppy economy in Afghanistan, which provides an income for insurgents in the country blighted by decades of war, has grown significantly in 2011 with soaring prices and expanded cultivation, a U.N. report said late last year.

(Additional reporting by Hamid Shalizi and Mirwais Harooni; Editing by Sanjeev Miglani)

International Jewish bankers of London and New York verses Russia and Putin

US to Attempt Overthrow of Putin Government

Wall Street & London elite lay groundwork to justify large scale destabilization in Russia.

by Tony Cartalucci

As predicted – the Western media and US State Department-funded “opposition” inside Russia have called Vladimir Putin’s landslide victory a “fraud.” It was stated on Thursday March 1, that the Western media had “already determined how Russia’s elections will unfold, creating the pretext in the minds of impressionable viewers to justify the unrest the US is undoubtedly planning.”

Image: Despite every poll indicating well in advance an easy victory for Vladimir Putin, and his critics admitting mobs of anti-Putin protesters constitute but a minority, claims of “election fraud” are rife across Western media. Clearly a man sure to win is not going to taint his victory by needlessly cheating. (Unless you are a paranoid Richard Nixon, looking to over egg the pudding in the 1972 Presidential elections! )

Conversely, in Thailand, when convicted criminal Thaksin Shinawatra ran for office by proxy through his own sister, and squeaked by with a tenuous victory, the Western media hailed it as a triumph of democracy. The difference? Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand works for Wall Street, Vladimir Putin does not. (I thought he worked for London ….he brought Manchester United (6). Spent time in the UK, in exile, until the ex-Thai Policeman was pushed out by further corruption charges there, and then he lived in UAE, which is an ex-British naval base and colony——though I accept that Thailand since the 1950’s has been heavily dominated by the USA, reinforced during the Vietnam war, and its security apparatus looks to the USA for guidance and inspiration ….military, Dick Shit International, and the police…….and Thaksin was educated in the USA)

Thaksin Shinawatra making the Jewish International Banker Devil sign.

Didn’t Taksin seek closer relations with China {He has Chinese ancestry}, and thus by implication less closer relations with the USA, which would be the antithesis of what Wall Street would want from one of their puppets surely? And a more pseudo-nationalist strident platform? I thought Wall Street only wanted obedient local globalist servants?

Asif Ali Zardari President of Pakistan, Mr. 10%, with his Swiss bank $4 billion loot stolen from the impoverished nation would be a better example of Washington’s brazen hypocrisy and love for “Freedom” and “democracy”, in power since 2008 with repeated USA backing, after the ISI murdered his wife for the USA, even though 90% of Pakistanis hate him)

……Or what about Charles Taylor……..or Mobutu Sese Seko in power in the Congo between 1965–97 with USA backing, destroying the second richest African country through three decades of misrule.

Have a guess which country this one works for.

This is similar to what took place during the 2009 Iranian elections where US State Department-funded opposition groups also claimed the elections were “illegitimate” and took to the streets in an attempt to reverse the democratic process through ochlocratic means. In Egypt, directly before the US-engineered Arab Spring, elections that predictably overlooked the suspicious Mohamed ElBaradei were likewise called “fraudulent” and used as the rhetorical justification to execute destabilization long-planned by the US State Department since 2008.

Proceeding Thailand’s July, 2011 elections, as explained in ““Stolen Elections” Battle Cry of the Color Revolution,” Wall Street and London’s operatives laid the groundwork to likewise call any result aside from their proxies’ full installation to power “fraud,” to then be used as impetus to justify street mobs, destabilization, and violence.

And already, before Sunday’s elections, US State Department-funded Freedom House, through an article written by its “president” David Kramer, stated in Foreign Policy magazine:

“Even if the system delivers the required results, clear evidence of rigging may lead voters to reject the election as unfair and illegitimate. Moreover, the authorities’ stifling of the Russian public’s voice runs the risk of creating an even more combustible environment in the period after March 4. The balloting, whatever its outcome, is therefore unlikely to extinguish the rising desire for real change. Unless and until that change is permitted, Putin’s continued pursuit of simulated democracy will fail to achieve even a simulation of stability.”

Kramer’s veiled threats of instability brought about by the opposition he, his Freedom House organization, and its parent organization, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) have long been cultivating would then be repeated almost verbatim throughout the Western press on Sunday – also predictably. It was stated on March 1 that, “It is important to keep in mind Freedom House president David Kramer’s words, knowing that both the National Endowment for Democracy and Freedom House are self-serving frauds, when listening to these very same talking points regurgitated by the Western media during the elections this coming Sunday.”

The LA Times would feature an editorial by the Wall Street-funded American Enterprise Institute (AEI) titled, “Putin’s Pyrrhic victory,” which stated, “Putin’s win “will be a Pyrrhic victory. Far from enhancing the Putin regime’s legitimacy, the election will diminish it further in the eyes of a significant part of the Russian population.”

The corporate-funded hit piece would go on to admit that the “revolution” clearly constituted a minority but maintained:

“…few, if any, regime changes, let alone revolutions, have been started by the majority. The majority has families to feed and a living to make. It is the younger, the urban, the better educated who have led successful modern revolutions. People who start them are getting uncensored news and opinions from the Internet and social media, not state-controlled television.And make no mistake about it: This is a young, middle-class revolt. “

This frightening stamp of approval for lawless ochlocratic “regime change” would then be followed by a comparison to the now admittedly fraudulent US-engineered “Arab Spring.”

Joining the LA Times was a myriad of headlines regurgitating Freedom House president David Kramer’s predetermined conclusions, with the Wall Street Journal reporting, “Putin Claims Election Win as Observers Claim Fraud,” Fox News reporting, “Putin claims victory in Russia’s presidential election amid allegations of violations in election,” Reuters reporting, “Vladimir Putin ‘elected Russian president‘, opponents allege fraud,” and the London Guardian reporting, “Vladimir Putin’s critics cry foul over alleged voter fraud in Russian election.”

Each report mentions either US-funded fraud Alexey Navalny or US-funded “independent election monitor” GOLOS, or both.

Alexey Navalny is fully subsidized by the US State Department through the National Endowment of Democracy (NED). And while Alexey Navalny is renowned for “exposing corruption,” at least when profitable, those researching his background begin unraveling his own insidious, compromised agenda. Alexey Navalnywas a Yale World Fellow, and in his profile it states:

“Navalny spearheads legal challenges on behalf of minority shareholders in large Russian companies, including Gazprom, Bank VTB, Sberbank, Rosneft, Transneft, and Surgutneftegaz, through the Union of Minority Shareholders. He has successfully forced companies to disclose more information to their shareholders and has sued individual managers at several major corporations for allegedly corrupt practices. Navalny is also co-founder of the Democratic Alternative movement and was vice-chairman of the Moscow branch of the political party YABLOKO. In 2010, he launched RosPil, a public project funded by unprecedented fundraising in Russia. In 2011, Navalny started RosYama, which combats fraud in the road construction sector.”

The Democratic Alternative, also written DA!, is indeed a National Endowment for Democracy fund recipient, meaning that Alexey Navalny is an agent of US-funded sedition and willfully hiding it from his followers. TheUS State Department itself reveals this as they list “youth movements” operating in Russia:

“DA!: Mariya Gaydar, daughter of former Prime Minister Yegor Gaydar, leads DA! (Democratic Alternative). She is ardent in her promotion of democracy, but realistic about the obstacles she faces. Gaydar said that DA! is focused on non-partisan activities designed to raise political awareness. She has received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, a fact she does not publicize for fear of appearing compromised by an American connection.”

Alexey was involved directly in founding a movement funded by the US government and to this day has the very people who funded DA! defending him throughout Western media. The mention of co-founder Mariya Gaydar is also revealing, as she has long collaborated, and occasionally has been arrested with, Ilya Yashin, yet another leader of a NED-funded Russian “activist” opposition group.

Photo: Alexei Navalny, Yale World Fellow and co-founder of US National Endowment for Democracy Da! or “Democratic Alternative/Yes in Russian.” It is yet another Otpor-esqueorganization courtesy of the United States government and willful traitors to their motherland.

GOLOS, also mentioned endlessly by the Western media, is directly listed on the US State Department-runNational Endowment for Democracy (NED) website as a recipient of funding. A NED subsidiary, the International Republican Institute (IRI), chaired by Senator John McCain, openly desires the ousting of Russia’s president Vladimir Putin while the US State Department itself is publicly accused by Moscow of trying to incite unrest across Russia. It is then difficult to fathom how GOLOS can claim to be an “independent” poll monitor when they are funded by a foreign nation actively seeking to manipulate Russia’s political landscape. It is also difficult to then understand why any reputable journalist would cite GOLOS as a reliable source of information, when clearly they are compromised. Difficult to understand, that is, unless one accepts that the Western media is nothing more than paid-propagandist serving Wall Street and London interests.

Image: Screenshot taken from the National Endowment for Democracy website featuring US funding for the NGO “Golos.” Golos allegedly was searching for “election irregularities.” Golos and other US-backed NGOs and opposition parties are now attempting to trigger an “Arab Spring” in Russia. (click to enlarge.)

The next step will be to fill the streets of Russia’s cities with the NED-funded opposition’s mobs of “young, educated urban youths,” just as they did in Egypt. AEI’s op-ed in the LA Times clearly states an intent to leverage a minority magnified through “social media” to enact “regime change.” Whether Russia’s security apparatus is capable of quickly and decisively dealing with this foreign-funded sedition, and how far Wall Street and London are willing to go are the only remaining variables that will determine the outcome of what was from the beginning the Wall Street-London “Arab Spring’s” final destination.


By understanding this process by which the neo-imperialists of New York and London manipulate both domestic and international opinion through a clearly compromised media and network of disingenuous, insidious NGOs and “pro-democracy opposition” movements, this geopolitical gambit can be exposed and balked.

The intended purpose of the US State Department is to maintain communications and formal relations with foreign countries – not project American hegemony around the globe. Meddling and subverting a sovereign nation is an act of war, and the potential conflict America’s ruling elite threaten to trigger will be one paid for by the American people, not the corporate-fascists on Wall Street, or their proxies in Washington.

Study and understand how the US State Department has manipulated and destabilized nations from the Middle East, to Thailand, and now across Russia through foreign-funded NGOs like GOLOSand treasonous opposition movements like those led by Alexey Navalny, Vladimir Ryzhkov, and Boris Nemtsov. Then spread the word. A well-informed population is inoculated from crass, demagogic and ultimately self-destructive manipulation by a degenerate and dangerous ruling elite.