dodaj komentar 4 komentara

1. citat08.02.2012. 03:09#1
   http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/print/Putin%20Finito.pdf
   
   Why Washington Wants ‘Finito’ with Putin
   
   "Washington clearly wants ‘finito’ with Russia’s Putin as in basta! or as they said in Egypt lastspring, Kefaya--enough!. Hillary Clinton and friends have apparently decided Russia’s prospectivenext president, Vladimir Putin, is a major obstacle to their plans. Few however understand why.
   
   Russia today, in tandem with China and to a significant degree Iran, form the spine, however shaky, of the only effective global axis of resistance to a world dominated by one sole superpower.
   
   On December 8 several days after election results for Russia’s parliamentary elections were announced, showing a sharp drop in popularity for Prime Minister Putin’s United Russia party, Putin accused the United States and specifically Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of fuelling the Russian opposition protesters and their election protests. Putin stated, “The (US) Secretary of State was
   quick to evaluate the elections, saying that they are unfair and unjust even before she received materials from the Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (the OSCE international election monitors-w.e.) observers.”1
   P
   utin went on to claim that Clinton’s premature comments were the necessary signal to the waiting opposition groups that the US Government would back their protests. Clinton’s comments, the seasoned Russian intelligence pro stated, became a “signal for our activists who began active work
   with the US Department of State.” 2
   
   Major western media chose either to downplay the Putin statement or to focus almost entirely on the claims of an emerging Russian opposition movement. A little research shows that, if anything, Putin was downplaying the degree of brazen US Government interference into the political processes of his country. In this case the country is not Tunisia or Yemen or even Egypt. It is the world’s second nuclear superpower, even if it might still be an economic lesser power. Hillary is
   playing with thermonuclear fire."
2. citat08.02.2012. 03:28#2
   http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/print/Putin%20Finito.pdf
   Demokracija ili nesto drugo?
   "Let’s examine closely Putin’s charge of US interference in the election process. If we look, we find openly stated in their August 2011 Annual Report that a Washington-based NGO with the innocuous name, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), is all over the place inside Russia.
   
   The NED is financing an International Press Center in Moscow where some 80 international NGOs can hold press briefings on whatever they choose. They fund numerous “youth advocacy” and leadership workshops to “help youth engage in political activism.” In fact, officially they spent more than $2,783,000 in 2010 on dozens of such programs across Russia. Spending for 2011 won’t be published until later in 2012. 4
   
   The NED is also financing key parts of the Russian “independent” polling and election monitoring, a crucial part of being able to claim election fraud. They finance in part the Regional Civic Organization in Defense of Democratic Rights and Liberties “GOLOS.” According to the NED Annual Report the funds went “to carry out a detailed analysis of the autumn 2010 and spring 2011 election cycles in Russia, which will include press monitoring, monitoring of political agitation,
   activity of electoral commissions, and other aspects of the application of electoral legislation in the long-term run-up to the elections.”5
   
   In September, 2011, a few weeks before the December elections the NED financed a Washington invitation-only conference featuring the Russian “independent” polling organization, the Levada Center. According to NED’s own website Levada, another recipient of NED money, 6 had done a
   series of opinion polls, a standard method used in the West to analyze the feelings of citizens. The polls profiled “the mood of the electorate in the run up to the Duma and presidential elections, perceptions of candidates and parties, and voter confidence in the system of ‘managed democracy’ that has been established over the last decade.”
   
   Zasto bas Putin?
   "The salient question is why Putin at this point? We need not look far for the answer. Washington and especially Barack Obama’s Administration don’t give a hoot about whether Russia is democratic or not. Their concern is the obstacle to Washington’s plans for Full Spectrum Dominance of the planet that a Putin Presidency will represent. According to the Russian Constitution, the President of the Russian Federation head of state, supreme commander-in-chief and holder of the highest office in the Russian Federation. He will take direct control of defense and foreign policy.
   
   We must ask what policy? Clearly strong countermeasures against the blatant NATO encirclement of Russia with Washington’s dangerous ballistic missile installations around Russia will be high on Putin’s agenda. Hillary Clinton’s “reset” will be in the dustbin if it is not already. We can also expect a more aggressive use of Russia’s energy card with pipeline diplomacy to deepen economic ties between European NATO members such as Germany, France and Italy, ultimately weakening the EU support for aggressive NATO measures against Russia. We can expect a deepening of Russia’s turn towards Eurasia, especially with China, Iran and perhaps India to firm up the shaky spine of resistance to Washington’s New World Order plans.
   
   It will take more than a few demonstrations in sub-freezing weather in Moscow and St. Petersburg by a gaggle of corrupt or shady opposition figures such as Nemtsov or Kasparov to derail Russia.
   
   What is clear is that Washington is pushing on all fronts—Iran and Syria, where Russia has a vital naval port, on China, now on Russia, and on the Eurozone countries led by Germany. It has the smell of an end-game attempt by a declining superpower."
3. Kurbla08.02.2012. 06:04#3
   Engdahl je lud ko zec. Bivši član LaRoucheove ultradesničarske bizarne fašističke organizacije. Oni su toliko bizarni da sam Engdahl u jednom trenu optužen da je "ubačen", uslijed čega je doživio nervni slom i pozivao na vlastitu "kancelaciju" (Nikita?!), dok je LaRouche zaključio da je Engdahlova destruktivna aktivnost rezultat 'programiranja' od strane - CIA. Ključni dokaz mu je bio da je Engdahl zatečen kako "sisa svinju". Da, dobro ste pročitali. A zašto je Engdahl "sisao svinju?" To mu je bila nagrada od CIA za dobro učinjen posao, a kako ga je CIA programirala na ruskom, a na tom jeziku navodno "pig" znači "penis", to se Engdahl - zabunio. Ne možete vjerovati što čitate? Da, ali to je zaista LaRouche rekao o Engdahlu. Čitajte LaRoucha:
   
   http://lyndonlarouchewatch.org/larouche-1974-assassins.htm
   
   Tako je Engdahlova čast oprana, i on je ostao uz LaRouchea do 2001. Onda se odvojio - zašto ne, svatko ima pravo na novu šansu, bez obzir na ... svinjarije iz prošlosti ... no, ono što danas piše je da su globalno zatopljenje i potrošenost nafte - neistine i urote. Ti ljudi su bizarniji nego što mi mislimo.
   
   ---
   
   Što se Putina tiče - on nije nikakav ljevičar. On je desničar, konzervativac i nacionalist. Ne samo po tome kako ga drugi opisuju, nego kako se i sam opisuje - u programu njegove stranke jasno piše "Идеология Партии – российский консерватизм" u ionako konzervativnoj i imperijalističkoj Rusiji. Populizam i navodna krađa na izborima ga dovode na sam rub fašistizma.
   
   Jesu li izbori zaista pokradeni? Prigovori su toliko brojni, uvjerljivi (99.5% glasalo za njega u Čečeniji?!), statistike pokazuju jaku korelaciju broja izašlih na izbore i broja glasova za "ujedinjenu Rusiju" da je gotovo sigurno došlo do masovne krađe. No, uskoro će novi izbori, pa ćemo vidjeti.
   
   http://gawker.com/5864945/putin-clings-to-victory-as-russias-voter-turnout-exceeds-146
   
   
4. citat08.02.2012. 19:51#4
   @Kurbla
   
   Tvoja Goebels-propagandna radionica je uvijek budna da svakog analiticara koji kritizira Ameriku i Zapad redovito proglasava fasistom! Ali nikad na temelju onoga sto je rekao, nego uvijek na temelju "on ti je ovo i ono i jos ono sa onima ... ma znas ... ON TI JE fasist"!
   
   Tko te placa ne znam, ali su tvoje fasistoidne namjere da kontroliras komentatorski prostor na ovom portalu time sto sve sto kritizira Zapad proglasavas fasistickim neosporne! Daj vec jednom odjebi!