Russia Pulls UN Cover Off MH17 Propaganda

August 4, 2015 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) - Russia's veto of the recent United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution regarding the Malaysia Airlines MH17 disaster over Ukraine a year ago has garnered immediate condemnation across the West. Predictably, Russia has been decried as obstructing justice with language intentionally used to further heap guilt upon Moscow... which might perhaps be why Moscow itself had no faith in a UNSC resolution regarding MH17 to begin with.



In the wake of the veto, the BBC would report condemnation from the US to Europe to Australia, a familiar trifecta of allied special interests overtly arrayed against Moscow and predictably using the MH17 disaster now for over a year to advance their agenda against Russia. Australia's Foreign Minister Julia Bishop vowed to pursue "an alternative prosecution mechanism" with Malaysia, the Netherlands, Ukraine and Belgium, but stopped short of elaborating. It should be noted that Ukraine still stands as a possible suspect in the disaster, while Malaysia was originally excluded from initial investigations until after much protest, despite the doomed aircraft being registered in and operating from Malaysia.

The United States and Europe had from the beginning used the disaster politically, openly accusing Russia and anti-regime rebels in eastern Ukraine before any evidence surfaced and before any investigation was underway. With such an immediate, reckless abandonment of objectivity, how could any investigative body including such politically-motivated actors proceed with any credibility?

These are answers the Western media refuses to answer. Russia, with its veto, answers clearly. Such objective investigations are not possible. And while Russia disclosed the summation of its data regarding the MH17 disaster in the immediate aftermath, to this day information allegedly possessed by NATO members remains undisclosed.

The Fake War on ISIS: US and Turkey Escalate in Syria

August 3, 2015 (Eric Draitser - NEO) - It is late July 2015, and the media is abuzz with the news that Turkey will allow US jets to use its bases to bomb Islamic State (ISIS) targets in Syria. There is much talk about how this development is a “game-changer,” and how this is a clear escalation of the much ballyhooed, but more fictional than real, US war on ISIS: the terror organization that US intelligence welcomed as a positive development in 2012 in their continued attempts to instigate regime change against the Syrian government led by Bashar al-Assad.


The western public is told that “This is a significant shift…It’s a big deal,” as a US military official told the Wall Street Journal. What the corporate media fail to mention, however, is the fact that Turkey has been, and continues to be, a central actor in the war in Syria and, consequently, in the development and maintenance of ISIS. So, while Washington waxes poetic about stepping up the fight against the terror group, and lauds the participation of its allies in Ankara, the barely concealed fact is that Turkey is merely further entrenching itself in a war that it has fomented.

Of equal importance is the simple fact that a “war on ISIS” is merely a pretext for Turkey’s military engagement in Syria and throughout the region. Not only does Turkey’s neo-Ottoman revanchist President Erdogan want to flex his military muscles in order to further the regime change agenda in Syria, he also is using recent tragic events as political and diplomatic cover for waging a new aggressive war against the region’s Kurds, especially Turkey’s longtime foe the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK).

In this way, Turkey’s recent moves should be seen as merely a new phase of its engagement in the regional war that it has helped foment. Contrary to western corporate media talking points, Turkey has not just recently become actively engaged in the conflict; Ankara has merely shifted its strategy and its tactics, moving from covert engagement to overt participation.

Same War, New Phase

The immediate justification for the launching of renewed airstrikes by Turkey and the US is the expansion of the war against ISIS. In the wake of the bombing in Turkey’s majority Kurdish town of Suruç, which killed 32 youth activists, the Turkish government has allegedly struck hard against both ISIS and PKK targets. It is against this backdrop that any analysis of the new phase of this war must be presented.

First and foremost is the fact that even if one were to accept the Turkish government’s official story – the suicide bomber was linked to the Islamic State (ISIS) – not at all a certainty, the question of ultimate responsibility becomes central. While Ankara would have the world believe that its hands are clean, and that it is the innocent victim of international terrorism, the reality is that Turkey has done everything to foster and promote the growth of ISIS from the very beginning. As such, it is the Turkish government who must shoulder much of the blame for the Suruç bombing.


Russia Shoots Down US Stealth Coup

July 31, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Times are tough for America's "color revolution" industry. Perfected in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union, and honed during the so-called "Arab Spring," the process of backing subversion in a targeted country and overthrowing a sitting government under the cover of staged mass protests appears to be finally at the end of running its course.

Image: "No to Plunder's" core leaders are US-trained lawyers and activists. Because they are not overtly members of any specific US-funded group, the US believes it can maintain sufficient plausible deniability during the initial phases of political destabilization. Unfortunately for the US, Armenians suspected the US' role from the beginning, and America's more overt assets never had time to move into place before the protests fizzled out.  

That is because the United States can no longer hide the fact that it is behind these protests and often, even hide their role in the armed elements that are brought in covertly to give targeted governments their final push out the door. Nations have learned to identify, expose, and resist this tactic, and like Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime's tactic of Blitzkrieg or "lighting war," once appropriate countermeasures are found, the effectiveness of lighting fast, overwhelming force be it military or political, is rendered impotent.

This was most recently observed in Armenia during the so-called "Electric Yerevan" protests - Yerevan being the capital of Armenia, and "electric" in reference to the alleged motivation of protesters - rising electric prices.

American-backed "color revolutions" always start out with a seemingly legitimate motivation, but soon quickly become political in nature, sidestepping many of the legitimate, practical demands first made, and focusing almost entirely on "regime change." For the Armenian agitators leading the "Electric Yerevan," they didn't even make it that far and spent most of their initial momentum attempting to convince the world they were not just another US-backed mob.

The Stealth Coup 

Nikol Pashinyan and his "Civic Contract" party are transparently US-backed. So many found it suspicious that he was the most prominent voice insisting that the "Electric Yerevan" was not political and by no means a US-backed movement.

Verelq, an Armenian-based news website which inexplicably links to the US State Department's Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Armenian site, would report in their article, "Nikol Pashinyan: Protest actions in Yerevan are of exclusively social nature," that: 
“Even if you look at the ongoing processes through the microscope, you cannot see any foreign political or domestic political components in the demonstrations. People do not want electricity to grow in price. That’s all,” said Pashinyan. He said electric power is first of all a product: the Electric Networks sells it and the citizens buy it. “The protest actions should be considered as protection of consumers’ rights. Politics is nowhere near,” he said.
But politics were very near, including politicians like Pashinyan himself, who made it a point to visit jailed protesters throughout the failed uprising and even at one point called for the construction of a "human wall" of prominent Armenian personalities between protesters and police. US State Department-funded Armenia Now (of the New Times Journalist Training Center) reported in their article, "Politics in the Middle: Lawmakers, public figures form “human wall” between police, protesters," that:
The appeal to create a human wall was made by opposition lawmaker Nikol Pashinyan late on Tuesday as he urged all former and current MPs, scholars, show-biz representatives, lawyers, reporters, religious representatives and other public figures to visit the standoff site in order to ensure no force is applied against the protesters.

Other obvious ties between the protests, Pashinyan, and US-backed NGOs have been laid out by geopolitical analyst Andrew Korybko in his article, "'Electric Yerevan' is Sliding Out of Control."

Despite these links, some have attempted to claim Pashinyan was merely an opportunist and that his US-backing, and attempts by US NGOs to manipulate the protests had little to do with the protests themselves. But nothing could be further from the truth.


China’s NGO Law: Countering Western Soft Power and Subversion

July 25, 2015 (Eric Draitser - NEO) - China has recently taken an important step in more tightly regulating foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) inside the country. Despite condemnation from so called human rights groups in the West, China’s move should be understood as a critical decision to assert sovereignty over its own political space. Naturally, the shrill cries of “repression” and “hostility toward civil society” from western NGOs have done little to shake the resolve of Beijing as the government has recognized the critical importance of cutting off all avenues for political and social destabilization.



The predictable argument, once again being made against China’sOverseas NGO Management Law, is that it is a restriction on freedom of association and expression, and a means of stifling the burgeoning civil society sector in China. The NGO advocates portray this proposed legislation as another example of the violation of human rights in China, and further evidence of Beijing’s lack of commitment to them. They posit that China is moving to further entrench an authoritarian government by closing off the democratic space which has emerged in recent years.

However, amid all the hand-wringing about human rights and democracy, what is conveniently left out of the narrative is the simple fact that foreign NGOs, and domestic ones funded by foreign money, are, to a large extent, agents of foreign interests, and are quite used as soft power weapons for destabilization. And this is no mere conspiracy theory as the documented record of the role of NGOs in recent political unrest in China is voluminous. It would not be a stretch to say that Beijing has finally recognized, just as Russia has before it, that in order to maintain political stability and true sovereignty, it must be able to control the civil society space otherwise manipulated by the US and its allies.

‘Soft Power’ and the Destabilization of China
Joseph Nye famously defined ‘soft power’ as the ability of a country to persuade others and/or manipulate events without force or coercion in order to achieve politically desirable outcomes. And one of the main tools of modern soft power is civil society and the NGOs that dominate it. With financial backing from some of the most powerful individuals and institutions in the world, these NGOs use the cover of “democracy promotion” and human rights to further the agenda of their patrons. And China has been particularly victimized by precisely this sort of strategy.

Human Rights Watch, and the NGO complex at large, has condemned China’s Overseas NGO Management Law because they quite rightly believe that it will severely hamper their efforts to act independently of Beijing. However, contrary to the irreproachable expression of innocence that such organizations masquerade behind, the reality is that they act as a de facto arm of western intelligence agencies and governments, and they have played a central role in the destabilization of China in recent years.

US-Backed Racist to Run in Myanmar's Elections

July 24, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Meet Ko Ko Gyi. He is a US-funded agitator working hard to reinstate Western hegemony in Myanmar (still referred to by its British imperial nomenclature "Burma" by the Western press) since at least the late 1980's. Now, he seeks to take the next step, running for office in upcoming elections, but in order to do so, the West will now have to cover up his dark past and his controversial present.

His "88 Generation Students" group is described by the BBC as:
The 88 Generation Students group is synonymous with the long struggle for democracy in military-ruled Burma. 

Its name comes from the 1988 uprising, when troops opened fire on mass student demonstrations in Rangoon, leading to the deaths of thousands of people.
Image: Myanmar's version of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) called "The Association for the Protection of Race and Religion," rallies in the streets. Organized by Aung San Suu Kyi's "saffron monks," this group and many others including Ko Ko Gyi's 88 Generation Students, find among themselves two common denominators: one of pro-genocidal racism aimed at Rohingya, many of whom have lived in Myanmar for generations, and two, they are all substantially funded and backed by the US State Department. 

In addition to the 1988 protests, he and his group would join others, including throngs of saffron-clad "monks" during the so-called "Saffron Revolution" in 2007. Together with Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) party, these three groups form a trifecta of foreign-funded sociopolitical destabilization, subversion, and serve together as a vector for Western special interests seeking to reenter and despoil the Southeast Asian state's economy, resources, and sovereignty.

There is, however, another factor, all three groups share - a passionate, racist hatred of the Rohingya people - many of whom have lived in Myanmar for generations. This racist hatred has manifested itself not only in words, but also in violence. Mobs led by Suu Kyi's "saffron monks" have raided Rohingya communities, hacking to death their inhabitants and burning to the ground their homes. Those who survive end up in refugee camps which are likewise raided by Suu Kyi's followers, or driven into the sea in such large numbers they are sometimes referred to as the "boat people."

Image: Thugs dressed as "Buddhist monks" take part in violent political rallies to support US-proxy Aung San Suu Kyi. When they aren't throwing bricks at local police, they are hacking to death Rohingya's and burning down their homes. 

Ko Ko Gyi has previously articulated his views on the Rohingya. In a report titled, "‘Trauma Will Last Long Time': Ko Ko Gyi," posted by the US State Department-funded propaganda clearinghouse "Irrawaddy" it states that:
In early June, Ko Ko Gyi accused “neighboring countries” of fueling the unrest in Arakan State, and stated categorically that the 88 Generation group will not recognize the Rohingyas as an ethnicity of Burma. He said that his organization and its followers are willing to take up arms alongside the military in order to fight back against “foreign invaders.” 

The Rohingya people have been living in Myanmar for centuries, with many being brought in generations ago by the British Empire as part of a wider strategy of divide and conquer across South and Southeast Asia. Ko Ko Gyi's comments would resonate well with his ideological counterparts in the Ku Klux Klan in the United States who are often fond of stating how African-Americans aren't truly Americans and should be "shipped back to Africa."