https://misteri1963.blogspot.com.esgoogle.com, pub-5827770858464401, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0https://misteri1963.blogspot.com.argoogle.com, pub-5827770858464401, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0https://misteri1963.blogspot.com.cogoogle.com, pub-5827770858464401, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0https://misteri1963.blogspot.com.brgoogle.com, pub-5827770858464401, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0 google.com, pub-5827770858464401, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0 Misteri1963

Translate

sábado, 18 de marzo de 2017

When America Interfered in a Russian Election


Region: 
Theme: 
In-depth Report: 

russia-us
“All of the news is fake when corporate media connive with the powerful to produce their desired ends.”
There is still no evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election. What substitutes for proof is nothing but an endless loop of corporate media repetition. The Democratic Party has plenty of reason to whip up hysteria in an effort to divert attention from its endless electoral debacles.
What no one mentions is that the United States government has a very long history of interfering in elections around the world. Since World War II American presidents have used electoral dirty tricks, fraud and violence to upend the will of people in Italy, Iran, Guatemala, Vietnam and Honduras to name but a few nations. If possible brute force and murder are used to depose elected leaders as in Haiti and Chile.
Amid all the hoopla about Russia’s supposed influence in the election or with Donald Trump directly, there is little mention of a successful American effort to intervene in that country. In 1996 American political consultants and the Bill Clinton administration made certain that Boris Yeltsin remained in the Russian presidency.
There is no need for conjecture in this case. The story was discussed quite openly at the time and included a Time magazine cover story with the guilty parties going on record about their role in subverting democracy.
“In 1996 American political consultants and the Bill Clinton administration made certain that Boris Yeltsin remained in the Russian presidency.”
Polls showed that Yeltsin was in danger of losing to the Communist Party candidate Gennadi Zhuganov. The collapse of the Soviet Union had created an economic and political catastrophe for the Russian people. Oligarchs openly stole public funds while government workers went without pay. Russians lost the safety net they had enjoyed and the disaster resulted in a precipitous decline in life expectancy and birth rates.
The United States didn’t care about the suffering of ordinary Russians. Its only concern was making sure that the once socialist country never turned in that direction again. When Yeltsin looked like a loser the Clinton administration pressed the International Monetary Fund to send quick cash and bolster Yeltsin’s government with a $10 billion loan.

Clinton had an even more direct involvement. Led by a team connected to his adviser Dick Morris, a group of political consultants went to work in Moscow, but kept their existence a secret. One of the conspirators put the case succinctly. ”Everyone realized that if the Communists knew about this before the election, they would attack Yeltsin as an American tool.” Of course Yeltsin was an American tool, and that was precisely the desired outcome.
The Time magazine article wasn’t the only corporate media expose of the American power grab. The story was also made into a film called “Spinning Boris.” One would think that this well known and documented account would be brought to attention now, but just the opposite has happened. The tale of Clinton administration conniving has instead been disappeared down the memory hole as if it never took place.
When Yeltsin looked like a loser the Clinton administration pressed the International Monetary Fund to send quick cash and bolster Yeltsin’s government with a $10 billion loan.”
The supposedly free media in this country march in lock step with presidents. After Obama and his secretary of state Hillary Clinton made Russia bashing a national pastime the media followed suit. The reason for the hostility is very simple. Russia is an enormous country spanning Europe and Asia and has huge amounts of energy resources which European countries depend on. Its gas and oil reserves make it a player and therefore a target for sanctions and war by other means.
The American impulse to control or crush the rest of the world is thwarted by an independent Russia. While Americans are fed an endless diet of xenophobia Russia and China continue their New Silk Road economic partnership. Of course this alliance is born of the necessity to protect against American threats but no one reading the New York Times or Washington Post knows anything about it. Nor do they know that Vladimir Putin’s mentor stayed in power because of Bill Clinton’s meddling.
All of the news is fake when corporate media connive with the powerful to produce their desired ends. If they want to make Yeltsin a hero, they make him a hero. If they want his successor to be cast as the villain then he becomes the villain. If the United States wants to play the victim it is turned into the hapless target of Russian espionage. If its history of thwarting the sovereignty of other countries becomes an inconvenient truth, then the truth is disappeared.
It is difficult to know what is true and what is not. But it usually a safe bet to assume that this government and its media hand maidens are covering up criminality of various kinds. The story of the 1996 manipulation of Russian voters is but one example.
Margaret Kimberley‘s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.
Author: Phil Butler


Brussels, NATO, and the Globalists: In Total Disarray


1487859209The EU, NATO, and the western alliance have utterly failed the people of eastern Europe. The unrequited love of former Soviet bloc nations is slowly turning to scorn. The Euromaidan and ensuing civil war have laid bare an ideological and cultural divide ages old. With Brussels and NATO reeling from recent events, the fear mongering used to leverage aligned nations is losing its effectiveness.

A meeting in between Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and Moldova’s former PM and current head of the Socialist party, Zinaida Greceanîi in Moscow reveals the general eastern shift to Russia. While the world watches and waits on the next fantastical Donald Trump moment, the Russian administration continues to mend fences and to create new bonds of friendship. To the south and west of Moldova a score of EU member states discuss a “Brexit-like” abandonment of a globalist system many see as doomed to failure. And Moldova’s plight since the fall of the Soviet Union is a picture window into the biggest international experiment in history. To quote Ms. Greceanîi on Moldova’s recent elections and the lean toward Russia:
“We won because the majority of Moldovans are for strategic partnership with Russia. In 2014, our current pro-European coalition in the parliament signed an agreement on association with the European Union, and, frankly, we got almost nothing in return from the European Union, while sustaining a major economic setback by losing the Russian market and our strategic partner. This is what happens when politicians who try to destroy age-old ties and traditions between our peoples come to power.”
The Moldovan politician expressed what is a growing sentiment toward the European Union. The poorest country of the former Soviet republics, Moldova is perhaps the most neglected country in Europe. And recent calls from the south for Moldova and Romania to reunite foretell of the wider neglect of nations in the region. Hungary to the west has begun a Russia lean as well, and Bulgaria to the south of Romania was never fully a western satrap. Upheaval in Bucharest over real or perceived corruption by leadership, Greece’s ongoing plight, the old sounds of Serbia and even countries like Slovenia – send a clear signal. We’ve seen the evidence of a collapse of confidence in the western alliance for some time. Tomáš Kostelecký, Director of the Institute of Sociology at the Czech Academy of Sciences in Prague had this to say about a series, “25 Years after the fall of the Berlin Wall”:
“Overall I think the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland are examples of countries that came out well, whereas for others it was not so successful.”
A poll conducted in Czech Republic in 2014 showed that more than half the people there considered life before and after Soviet rule the same. In other words, most people in even the richest former Soviet bloc countries see no difference in the two systems. Many people see the spread of so-called democracy as a total lie. While free movement allowing Romanians (for instance) to travel to Germany for better paying jobs is a plus, Romanians choosing to stay home have been devastated by corruption, austerity, and the loss of potential to globalization.

In Romania a poll conducted back in 2014 showed half of Romanians held a positive view of their condemned leader Nicolae Ceausescu and believe that life was better under him. The same poll showed that of the 1,460 respondents, 54 percent claimed that they had better living standards during communism, while 16 percent said that they were worse. I make this point because of the strategic and ideological importance of Romania. Of all the countries in the EU, Romania was by far the most pro-democracy – the people there betting all their futures on the American promise. I know this because my wife is from Romania and her father was one of the unsung heroes of the revolution there in 1989. Romania has a history of picking the wrong side, and EU membership did about as much for Romanians as their brothers and sisters in separated Moldova.

In Hungary the recent visit by Russian President Vladimir Putin sent western mainstream media on a rant. But the fact the Hungarian economy has been hammered by the food embargo introduced by the Kremlin in response to US and EU sanctions against Moscow is but one sour note on EU policies in the region. The Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade for Hungary, Peter Szijjarto told Kommersant the other day:
“According to our estimates, the loss of profit for Hungary amounts to $6.5 billion over the last three years. We are speaking about exports. Given that the annual volume of Hungarian exports is about $90 billion, the losses are biting,”
Hungary’s recent overtures toward Russia are freaking the parliamentarians in Brussels out at the same time leaders like Germany’s Angela Merkel try and come to grips with thawing of relations between Moscow and Washington under U.S. President Donald Trump. A new wave of populism sweeping all Europe is seen by the left wing as some Russian conspiracy, when in reality the movement is a change of errant course. These former Soviet bloc countries are a kind of litmus tests that shows the EU was never a fair game in the first place. Germany and the central Europeans thrived for a time, while other nations were left to stagnate. In a recent poll conducted in Hungary, 75% of those asked favored pragmatic relations with Russia as opposed to only 5% saying that “Hungary should not even talk to Russian President Vladimir Putin at all”.

The Turkish reset with Russia, especially the renewal of the so-called “south stream pipeline” project mirrors the Russia tilt in Greece, Macedonia, Slovenia, Italy, and other formerly devout NATO-EU devotees. President Putin just recently praised Slovenia for an invite for a Trump-Putin summit in the country’s capital of Ljubljana. Slovenia, the native country of First Lady Melania Trump, is a literal stepping stone in what some will remember from Putin’s Vladivostok to Lisbon initiative. No matter how one classifies all these geo-political moves, the clear trend in favor or Russia ties is crystal clear. The globalist Washington Post called the trend “Europeans bowing to the power of Putin”, when in reality the motives are pragmatism and logic. Moving away from big promises and failure toward a change is only a natural thing.

Finally, in 2014 Germany’s former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder blamed European Union policy for the current situation in Ukraine, and he also urged the West to stop new sanctions on Russia. Now we are seeing that Schroeder was right. At the other end of the German political spectrum,  German Left Party (Die LInke), Dr. Sahra Wagenknecht has railed against Chancellor Angela Merkel, NATO, and the west in general for failed policies and the destruction of détente with Russia. At the center of her arguments lay a cerifiable truth of Eastern European affairs since the fall of the Berlin Wall. In an interview with German Radio, Dr. Wagenknecht spoke about America’s “substantial economic interests” (“handfeste wirtschaftliche Interessen”) in the Ukraine, as a big part of Europe’s problem:
“There are substantial economic interests: the Americans have been in the Ukraine since the beginning. They have even made agreements with Ukrainian companies, even investing in some of them. So there are substantial economic interests, and it is all the more critical that Europe not be dragged into this (by the Americans), but that we act in our own interests.  This means peace and cooperation of course with Russia, improving the relationship which has cooled off markedly in the past months.
The common thread running through the new west-east crisis is “financial interest”. This will be the focus of my next report. For now though, it is not the Trump White House that seems in disarray, but Brussels and the NATO alliance. Stay tuned.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

corrupción en las empresas de alimentación




EX DIRECTIVO DENUNCIA LOS GRAVES FRAUDES DE LA INDUSTRIA ALIMENTARIA



Un libro publicado por un exdirectivo de la industria alimentaria revela abusivos fraudes de este sector que ponen en peligro la salud de los consumidores.
El libro de Christophe Brusset,titulado “¡Como puedes comer eso!”, denuncia que en su intento constante por maximizar todo lo posible sus beneficios, la industria alimentaria comete fraudes que incluso pueden poner en peligro la salud de los consumidores.
Brusset, un ingeniero francés que ha trabajado durante más de 20 años en la industria agroalimentaria en diferentes puestos, como ingeniero, director de compras o bróker, tanto en pequeñas y medianas empresas como en compañías multinacionales, fue cómplice y testigo de todas estas prácticas.
Finalmente, decidió poner en conocimiento del público el fraude de la industria.
Entre los ejemplos de fraude que expone, el exdirectivo relata casos de especias turcas molidas con excrementos de pájaros o pimientas y guindillas indias con excrementos de ratón. 
Todo para obtener el máximo beneficio posible. 
Además, narra como el azafrán molido se puede adulterar con polvo de ladrillo sin que el consumidor se de cuenta.
Otro caso peculiar es el del azafrán. España compra el azafrán a Irán, primer productor mundial de esta especia. Después, EE.UU. le compra el azafrán a España y lo vende como español, evitando, así, el embargo impuesto por el país norteamericano a los iraníes.
El libro también desvela que todo alimento que tenga una mala presencia o color no es desechado por la industria alimentaria, sino que estos productos son rebozados y vendidos como congelados.
Brusset también confirma el escándalo de hace unos años con los productos supuestamente de vacuno que contenían carne de caballo.
Otros ejemplos que expone, son el de los yogures de frambuesa, elaborados con pasta de frambuesas y gusanos, uso de aditivos que no figuran entre los ingredientes, miel que solo es una mezcla de diferentes azúcares, productos elaborados con almendras que en realidad llevan albaricoques, fechas de caducidad completamente abusivas… y así hasta un sinfín de casos fraudulentos.


Ibuprofeno incrementa el riesgo de paro cardiaco en un 31%

Londres a espionné Trump pour le compte d’Obama

Le juge Andrew Napolitano a déclaré sur Fox News que ce ne sont ni la NSA, ni la CIA, ni le FBI états-unien, qui ont espionné le candidat, puis le président élu Donald Trump, mais le GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters) britannique.
Le GCHQ est membre de l’accord des « Cinq yeux » constitué le 5 mars 1946 dans le prolongement de la Charte de l’Atlantique et de la victoire alliée.
Les liens entre le Royaume-Uni et l’administration Obama sont d’autant plus forts que Londres a financé le début de la campagne électorale présidentielle de Barack Obama. De nombreux membres de la première administration Obama avaient été choisis au sein de la Pilgrim’s Society, une très discrète association présidée par la reine Elisabeth II.
Selon le juge Napolitano, le GCHQ transmettait au président Obama les transcriptions des écoutes téléphoniques de la Trump Tower.
En 1974, le président Richard Nixon avait été contraint de démissionner lors du scandale du Watergate car il avait fait placer sur écoutes le quartier général de son rival démocrate.

Entrada destacada

PROYECTO EVACUACIÓN MUNDIAL POR EL COMANDO ASHTAR

SOY IBA OLODUMARE, CONOCIDO POR VOSOTROS COMO VUESTRO DIOS  Os digo hijos míos que el final de estos tiempos se aproximan.  Ningú...