Monday, June 17, 2019

US Intel Russiagate report exposes that US elites are spoiled brats, complain Russia won’t accept that US leads an alleged global order. US elites believe world belongs to them, are shocked that with Putin they can’t plunder Russia as they did with Yeltsin in 1990s-Intel Assessment, 1/6/2017

US elites are spoiled brats whose obsession with Russia is simply that Russia doesn’t accept subservience to an alleged US-led “liberal democratic” global order. In any case, US elites believe Russia is their personal property: “In the years following the end of the Soviet Union, the idea that Russia was “ours to lose” gained wide currency in American foreign policy circles.” Elites cashed in during 1990s when Russian President Yeltsin was US lap dog, allowed US to commit economic genocide of newly independent Russia:

Above, 1993, Beaming American currency speculator George Soros with Russian President Yeltsin at the Kremlin, Reuters

Above, 7/15/1996, Boris Yeltsin, Time cover, “Yanks to the Rescue.”…Article, Rescuing Boris,” Time, Michael Kramer, Moscow, 6/24/2001, originally published 7/15/1996. US ran Yeltsin’s 1996 re-election campaign.

Above, 9/21/1993, Yeltsin reached for a cup of tea to show Russians he was not drunk, says English speaking announcer. Yeltsin announced he was dissolving parliament.

Added: As described in US Intel Russiagate report, 1/6/2017, US elites have dreamed up a global “liberal democratic order,” have appointed themselves to “lead” it, and are enraged that Russia won’t admit its subservience: “The fundamental issue for Washington is that Russia is not a vassal for American imperialism. That’s why there will be no reset. There will only be reset when American imperialism is replaced by a law-abiding, genuinely democratic US government.” Following is US Intel opening statement about Russiagate, 1/6/2017:

Jan. 6, 2017, “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US elections,” ICA, Intelligence Community Assessment 

page ii, “Key Judgments”

Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order.” Image, Logo of US Office of Director of National Intelligence from ICA report, 1/6/2017


Added: “The Western agenda for Russia, a superpower-turned economic and military weakling, a subservient client state and a source of cheap energy and minerals…In sticking labels on Russian leaders, the West outrageously ignores the opinion of the Russian people. 

March 20, 2008, Why the West loved Yeltsin and hates Putin,", Vladimir Radyuhin, updated 10/9/2016  

“One reason why Yeltsin was the West’s darling — while Mr. Putin is the target of virulent attacks — was that his policies perfectly suited the Western agenda for Russia, a superpower-turned economic and military weakling, a subservient client state and a source of cheap energy and minerals. By contrast, Russia’s resurgence under Mr. Putin is seen as upsetting the global balance of power and threatening the U.S. unipolar model. 

But there is a deeper reason….Mr. Putin steered Russia along its own path of democracy building. Mr. Putin’s “controlled democracy” involves centralisation of power, government control over most electronic and some printed media, and Kremlin-supervised grooming of political parties. This policy helped to curb the chaos of the 1990s and bring about political stability that has underpinned economic growth. 

The West has denied Mr. Putin’s Russia any democratic credential because it “challenges the prerogative of the dominant democratic powers, in practice the U.S., to judge what is and what is not democratic, says Russia expert Vlad Sobell of the Daiwa Institute of Research…. 

The rise of new Russia has undermined America’s self-arrogated right to decide what is good and what is evil, to award marks for good or bad behaviour, and to impose “democratic transformation” on other nations, either by war as in Iraq, or through “colour revolutions” as in Georgia and Ukraine.  

If Mr. Putin’s Russia is accepted as an emerging democracy, rather than as a successor to the “evil empire, it will be difficult to justify the new containment policy the U.S. has set in train, surrounding Russia with a ring of military bases and missile interceptors. Nor would one be able to easily dismiss Moscow’s [accurate] criticism of the aggressive and arrogant U.S. behaviour across the world. 

As Mr. Putin asked in his famous Munich speech, if Russia could carry out a peaceful transition from the Soviet regime to democracy, why should other countries be bombed [by the US] at every opportunity for want of democracy? Hence the Herculean effort of Western opinion-makers to paint everything Mr. Putin does in evil colours.  

The U.S. State Department’s annual report on human rights in 2007 mounted the harshest attack yet on the state of freedom in Russia, while the U.S. Freedom House [a vicious US neocon group that tag-teams with NED] listed it as one of the several “energy-rich dictatorships.” [Warmonger 2008] Republican presidential candidate John McCain has accused Mr. Putin of “trying to restore the old Russian empire,” and “perpetuating himself in power” by installing his “puppet” Dmitry Medvedev in the Kremlin. 

In sticking labels on Russian leaders, the West outrageously ignores the opinion of the Russian people. Russians showed what they thought of Yeltsin’s legacy when they voted out of Parliament twice in recent years the liberal parties that had supported his policies in the 1990s. They demonstrated their support for Mr. Putin’s policies when they triumphantly re-elected him for a second term in 2004 and when they overwhelmingly voted for Mr. Medvedev in March 2008.  

Mr. Putin bluntly told the West that its criticism of his policies would not induce his successor to strike a softer posture in foreign policy. “I am long accustomed to the label by which it is difficult to work with a former KGB agent, Mr. Putin said at a recent press conference. Dmitry Medvedev will be free from having to prove his liberal views. But he is no less a Russian nationalist than me, in the good sense of the word, and I do not think our partners will find it easier to deal with him.” 

For his part, Mr. Medvedev, while pledging that “freedom in all its manifestations — personal freedom, economic freedom and, finally, freedom of expression” — would be “at the core of our politics,” said democratic values would be adopted in line with Russia’s “national tradition.”” 




No comments: