Debt Rattle Jul 25 2014: The Big Energy = Power Battle Is Coming
- This topic has 11 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
DPC The Flatiron Building, NY 1903 I don’t really want to keep talk about Ukraine, but it’s too hard to avoid. Besides, it’s not the same story anymor
[See the full post at: Debt Rattle Jul 25 2014: The Big Energy = Power Battle Is Coming]The acerbic Pepe Escobar’s take on matters.
https://atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/CEN-01-230714.html
The “policy” of the Empire of Chaos is clear, and multi-pronged; diversify the “pivot to Asia” by establishing a beachhead in Ukraine to sabotage trade between Europe and Russia; expand the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to Ukraine; break the Russia-China strategic partnership; prevent by all means the trade/economic integration of Eurasia, from the Russia-Germany partnership to the New Silk Roads converging from China to the Ruhr; keep Europe under US hegemony.
and
” in his latest book, Strategic Vision (2012), Dr Zbig ( Zbigniew Brzezinski) was in favor of an enlarged “West” annexing Turkey and Russia, with the Empire of Chaos posing as “promoter” and “guarantor” of broader unity in the West, and a “balancer” and “conciliator” between the major powers in the East. A quick look at the record since 2012 – Libya, Syria, Ukraine, encirclement of China – reveals the Empire of Chaos only as fomenter of, what else, chaos.
Now compare a fearful Dr Zbig with Immanuel Wallerstein – who was a huge influence in my 2007 warped geopolitical travel book Globalistan. In this piece (in Spanish) Wallerstein argues that the Empire of Chaos simply can’t accept its geopolitical decadence – and that’s why it has become so dangerous. Restoring its hegemony in the world-system has become the supreme obsession; and that’s where the whole “policy” that is an essential background to the MH17 tragedy reveals Ukraine as the definitive do or die battleground. ”I’m not necessarily buying it all but it seems pretty clear some grand strategy is being introduced. The thing is I can’t figure out who would be in charge of it. Obama? The neo cons salted all through the intelligence and military bureaucracy and somehow the financial giants of the West?
The most vital premise for understanding the causes and development of the ukrainian situation is that the ukrainian government did fall victim to a violent antidemocratic coup in february 2014. Evidence thereto is provided by exhibits A and B:
Exhibit A:
One of the thousands of available online press releases which announces that the ukrainian parliament did unanimously impeach president Yanukovych on feb 22.https://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/22/us-ukraine-idUSBREA1G0OU20140222
Exhibit B:
The ukrainian constitution itself, being the only legal document to delineate the parliament’s authority and duty in the matter of presidential impeachment:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Ukraine,_2010Article 85
The authority of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine comprises:
-10. removing the President of Ukraine from office in accordance with the special procedure (impeachment) established by Article 111 of this Constitution;Article 111
-The President of Ukraine may be removed from office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime.
-The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is initiated by the majority of the constitutional composition of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
-To conduct the investigation, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine establishes a special temporary investigatory commission whose composition includes a special procurator and special investigators.
-The conclusions and proposals of the temporary investigatory commission are considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
For cause, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, by no less than two-thirds of its constitutional composition, adopts a decision on the accusation of the President of Ukraine.
-The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime.The impeachment prodedure must always be followed so as to establish the charge of a particular impeachable offense accruing to the office of the president, and must involve a ‘special temporary investigatory commission’ (to establish evidence) and the ukrainian supreme court (to judge legitimacy of the procedure (and the evidence thereto)). These devices were never applied.
As none of the necessary procedures required to establish an actual impeachable offense were followed by the Rada, and as the Rada apparently did not attempt or intend to follow any of the necessary procedures, despite having opportunity to do so, the entire body of said Rada, having voted unanimously to impeach the president in direct contravention to their constricted constitutional authority, therefore did commit to an act of state treason against the office of the president and the ukrainian state on february 22 2014, as did all civilian and military officials who aided the Rada in this matter, whether by dereliction of duty, conscious inaction, violent coercion or active collaboration.
To prevent incidental treason upon the office of the president, article 111 delineates the only lawful impeachment procedures consequent upon the establishment of any particular impeachable offense, to be designated by devices separate to the parliament. Therefore, the act of unlawfully conducting any means of presidential impeachment other than specified in article 111, being without legitimate authority, is legally identical to state treason, insofar as the criminal offense of treason must necessarily be consequent upon a coup d’etat on the office of the president, such as the Rada did commit to.
The assertion that the ukrainian parliament is evidently commited to a coup d’etat by means of constitutional state treason cannot reasonably be rejected upon admission of evidence exhibitions A and B, being adequately incontrovertible.
Therefore, a constitutional crisis does exist in the Ukraine and shall persist until reconstitution is effected and a new constitution is ratified, including the national election of a new parliament, but naturally excluding eligibility for office of all those government officals provably committed to aforementioned treason.
Absent reconstitution, in regards to the evident coup d’etat in Kiev, if one were a natural-born separatist in the east, ethnically russian or not, one would remain morally and legally obligated to forcibly resist the insane and genocidal military assault by the regime in Kiev on the eastern regions, such (armed) separatist resistance now being the most appropriate function of legitimate self-defense or democratic self-determination.https://jurist.org/paperchase/2014/04/icc-opens-preliminary-investigation-into-alleged-ukraine-crimes.php
Additional evidence that no impeachable offense was ever established by proper parliamentary procedure is otherwise provided by the fact that the ukrainian coup regime has now publicly requested that the Hague’s International Criminal Court investigate the coup regime’s allegations that Yanukovych was personally responsible for the sniper killings during the maidan riots. But logically, Yanukovych could not have been legally impeached for such responsibility without the Rada having already proved such an allegation themselves beforehand, which they did not do.Does anyone disagree that exhibits A and B establish that an antidemocratic coup in Kiev did happen on feb 22 because unlawful impeachment of the president did cause the ukrainian parliament to commit to an act of treason under their own consititution?
https://www.rferl.org/content/was-yanukovychs-ouster-constitutional/25274346.html
This article mentions that the vote for impeachment was not actually unanimous, only 328 of 450 members grossly exeeded their authority according to this interpretation.
“A majority of 328 lawmakers of the 450-seat parliament voted on February 22 to remove Yanukovych from power, citing as grounds his abandoning office and the deaths of more than 80 protesters and police in the past chaotic week of violence.”
Abandonment of office may not be impeachable unless it is equivalent to a dereliction of presidential duties, and, together with other allegations, such facts must first be incontrovertibly established per article 111 to be actual impeachable offenses, upon review by the specified devices. Mere allegations of misconduct are insufficient grounds.
Vineyard of the Saker has a purported Ukrainian document or two regarding military losses from July 14 – July 19. These are fairly catastrophic desertion losses, and a lot of killed and wounded. If a true document, it implies a very good reason for Yatsenyuk and company to leave their offices. Likewise, their leaving must be quite a signal to the dispirited conscript army.
https://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/07/catastrophic-desertions-and-losses-in.htmlIlargi,
“The US can’t wage a physical war against Russia, it wouldn’t dare.”
Though I appreciate your faith in the US Government’s ability to exercise constraint in that category, I beg to differ.
“The move to isolate Russia and Putin which has evolved over the past week, evidence be damned, makes clear that those operating on “our side” may well have had a lot more motive to shoot down a passenger plane than the ‘rebels’ did. And that they have a political agenda: those sanction were not all drawn up on a rainy afternoon. .”
is
Exactly Right!i was pondering such possibility some days ago upon gaining information indicating “the west’s action”.
Russia’s side:
“I want to expose the airspace situation in the Donetsk area that day. In the picture you can see the information of the objective air traffic control between 17.10 to 17.30 Moscow time.
During that period, there were 3 civilian aircraft:
Flight from Copenhagen to Singapore at 17.17;
Flight from Paris to Taipei at 17.24
Flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur… Beside it, the Russian system for air traffic control detected a Ukrainian Air Force aircraft, supposedly a Su-25, moving upwards towards the Malaysian Boeing-777. The distance between two aircraft was 3-5 kilometers.
The Su-25 can gain an altitude of 10,000 meters in a short time. It is armed with an air-to-air missile R-60, which is able to lock-on and destroy a target at a distance of 12 kilometers, and destroy it definitely at a distance of 5 kilometers. What was the mission of the combat aircraft, in the flight-path of civilian aircraft, almost at the same time and same altitude with the civilian craft? We want to have this question answered.”
“…MH17 deviated significantly from its usual flight path; routinely it was flying more to the south.”
“…the Ukraine Air Traffic Control ordered the plane’s crew to divert from the regular more southerly route to go north over the combat zone, a Ukraine jet fighter was recorded by Russian radar climbing rapidly towards it just before it went down…”
“According to our records from 17:06 till 17:21 Moscow time on the July 17 over the Southeastern territory of Ukraine, a US space satellite flew overhead.”
The airplane deviated from its course by 14 kilometers. Questions, questions.
Unfortunately, from here on, pretty much any scenario presented by outsiders will be dismissed as conjecture and/ or conspiracy theory. In other words, moot.
The establishment will have the last word.
“What difference does it make”. Hillary Clinton
On one of the above articles about Chinese debt, the Western bloggers were saying, “China is surviving because they’re bailing everybody out,” to which the Chinese bloggers said, “Yes, the same as America did with Wall Street, Fannie/Freddie, GM,” blah, blah, blah. Same in Europe, Japan…
Whose bailing arm is going to give out first? Because the debt is racking up fast and it’s all being bailed into the taxpayers’ boats, and their boats are starting to sink below the waterline. “It takes many sheep to satisfy one wolf.”
The central banks are either in collusion, one taking over from another in holding the world up by its neck, or they are each waiting for one to blink. Which is it? Whose ship will go down first?
I’ve noticed an abrupt change of tone in the dutch press concerning Ukraine. Suddenly the separatists are being called butchers and child-killers in newspapers. What little sympathy or political support the separatist cause had with the dutch population is mostly gone, whereas the coup regime in Kiev garners additional support for their assault on the east. The dutch were merely disinterested or mostly neutral on the ukrainian matter before.
The entire ukrainian civil war so far has been consistently misrepresented. The corporate media conveniently forgot to mention that an unlawful and antidemocratic coup actually did happen in Kiev. The whole Maidan movement was portrayed as a pro-EU, pro-western and therefore pro-democratic assault against corrupt pro-russian elites. Washington’s role in fomenting the regime change by bribery, aggression and subversion, or the criminally suspect nature of Kiev’s new political powers backed by Washington, is never mentioned by the MSM.
It remains unknown who was responsible for the sniper-killings in Kiev, these killing were still more likely perpetrated by Washington’s CIA or Blackwater than Yanukovych.Its really frightening to see emotional irrationality dominate people’s opinions now, fueled by a constant stream of ridiculous anti-russian propaganda.
I would openly support the separatist cause politically, favoring self-determination over Washinton’s military agenda and the asset stripping of Ukraine, but now my compatriots will resent me for such nuances.
Its just like 9/11, whether the event was synthetic terror or not, the situation is instantly being misused by the same powers who perpetrated the Kiev coup for despicable demagogy, to capitalise on people’s sense of vulnerability and helplessness.I mean, look at this:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2014/07/26/why-putin-shot-down-mh-17/
Biased nonsense. The only reason there are separatists at all is because of Washington’s coup in the Ukraine.I’ve also heard MH-17’s flightpath was changed by someone, perhaps by Kiev’s air traffic control itself, to fly directly over the warzone, which is suspicious insofar as it creates a unique opportunity which otherwise might not coincide with motives or means of any party to shoot MH-17 down. It is therefore important to also confirm whether the flight was placed under ukrainian fighter escort, and whether this escort coerced MH-17 into following the adjusted flightpath.
Presumably MH-17 was accidentally misidentified as someone’s military flight and subsequently targeted by anti-air weaponry.
The separatists, being the only party who have previously been reported to shoot down Kiev’s military aircraft assaulting them, would make likely suspects to misidentify MH-17 as a warplane, but they had no confirmed means to target the flight at high altitude.The other main suspects with greater means to target MH-17 are Kiev and Russia, but there remains a logical problem with motive for both.
Kiev’s anti-air capability could not accidentally shoot down BH-17 unless it was misidentified as a warplane, yet the separatists have no airforce besides Russia.
Kiev must see Russia as a potential aerial opponent, otherwise they’d have no AA at all in the contested region.
Its been previously reported that russian airforces have invaded ukrainian airspace to aid the separatists, presumably to intimidate and scare off Kiev’s airforces and prevent them from bombing separatist positions, although actual aerial combat between ukrainian and russian warplanes may have happened in ukrainian airspace.
If Kiev does expect russian warplanes to invade ukraines airspace on behalf of the separatists, then Kiev’s AA may have misidentified MH-17 for a russian warplane and targeted it, although shooting down russian warplanes inside ukrainian airspace would quickly lead to open war.
There was also a joint Kiev-NATO airforce excercise being held at the time involving aerial warfare drills and simulations, which could have provided opportunity for accidental mistargeting of civilian flights passing over, though the use of live munition must have been an additional mistake then.The russians themselves could have shot MH-17 down if misidentified as a ukrainian warplane, but that would depend on whether russian airforces, aiding the separatists, are now in the business of targeting and shooting down ukrainian warplanes in ukrainian airspace, clearly being an open act of war.
Besides accidental targeting of MH-17, by misidentification as warplane, neither Russia nor the separatists have possible motive to target a civilian flight deliberately.
Neither party could afford to create an international atrocity on purpose over separatist controlled territory, they would be highly motivated to avoid such bad press.Otherwise there are conceivable false flag motives for Kiev or Washington’s other assets to shoot down MH-17 deliberately as a civilian flight, in order to blame the separatists and widen the front against them, since Kiev was losing ground in the east as well as popular support in the west. Only Washington’s allied parties had the means, motive and opportunity to perpetrate any such false flag, and then utilise the controlled media fallout to demonise both the separatists and Russia.
I still dont see how only the separatists should be blamed for MH-17 without evidence or the clear means to do so, they certainly didn’t shoot it down deliberately as some are intent on believing.
And it is important to maintain an open discourse on the matter, whether the establishment media says the case is closed or not. Strongly nonconforming public opinion which questions the dominant narrative may actually prevent Washington’s NATO from furthering its military agenda in Ukraine.Gravity is a recursive algorithm, look it up.
Gravity – there was a lot of non-conforming public opinion in the “Comment” section of a Guardian story I read a few days ago, and people were strongly questioning everything they were being told. It was refreshing. People who wrote “questioning” posts got most of the “like” votes, while the people who just simply said it was Russia (with no evidence to back them up) had very few “likes”. People were saying, “Where’s the evidence?”
A criminal police investigator said he was told early in his career, “When looking at evidence and trying to tie facts together, you’ll see that the clean just keep getting cleaner, while the dirty just keep getting dirtier.” I think that’s about right. The truth will come out, just like with Syria and Iraq. The separatists have treated the bodies with respect and they’ve handed over the black box. Russia is asking all of the good questions. The U.S. had their spy satellite going overhead at precisely the time the plane went down, coincidentally; they know exactly what happened.
The truth will surface.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.