BFP Roundtable Video- Who is Putin & Why has he let his nation become encircled by NATO

Sibel Edmonds, Pearse Redmond & Tom Secker on the recent “revelation” from Putin regarding Operation Gladio B

In this second episode of the new BFP Roundtable series Pearse Redmond, Sibel Edmonds and Tom Secker discuss the recent “revelation” from Putin regarding Gladio B operations in Chechnya. They start with the basic facts that Putin has laid out: intercepts obtained by the FSB show that US officials in Azerbaijan were supporting and backing Chechen rebels during the early 2000’s. The panel each breaks down the interesting timing of these revelations, which come as a series of shake-ups in and around Russia have threatened Putin’s grasp on power. Is this a threat from Putin to the West or a bone to throw to the hardcore nationalists within the Russian Federation? Later they move on to the question of who Putin is as a leader and how he has managed to let his nation become completely encircled by NATO. The group then moves on to how the geopolitical chessboard has been reoriented away from ideological battles into one based on identity and media control. They finish off by looking at how Russia Today fits into this new geopolitical landscape.

Watch Preview Here:

Watch Full Video (Members Only) Here:

Listen to the full Audio (Members Only) Here:


FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. Wally Sarkeesian says:

    Tom nice to see you what happen to the beard? on Russia I agree with Sibel but Russia lost before Putin when the Gorbachev and Yeltsin let US free to invade Iraq first golf war that Brock the camel back from there US was free to do whatever they liked. also do not forgot the Turkish game here, Turkey want to extend to central Asia the Turks mother land, because for hundreds of years Turks had two enemy the Russian and Persians, as you can see all the Gladio operation are in Ankara and Turkey have successfully turn US and Russia against each other starting with so called Cuban missile crises which should have been called Turkish missile crises.
    Thank you

    • Wally,

      Good to see you back. You are making very good and highly important points. I do agree: it started before Putin. And yes, I also agree with the Greater Turkish Republic objectives being a factor (Thus, the active participation in Gladio B Ops).

  2. Sibel, Tom, Pearse:
    Hmmmmm…you got me brooding here a bit. Obviously I have to brush up more on Chechnya. Chechnya had Caucasian people there 6000 years ago(which means Islam spread throughout that area after thousands of years of tribal living). Were they part of the Byzantine empire?. It is about 7500 sq. miles (Oregon is about 97,000 sq. miles) with a little over 1 million people–mostly Sunni Muslims. They fiercely wanted their independence when the Soviet Union broke up. Hence endless rebellion and Gladio B help, right?
    Flash forward to today: This is my approach whenever I think of Russia/Putin:
    I’m just riffing here–it is a gigantic topic. What would I be thinking if I were Putin? Place importance on Russian infrastructure and agriculture, manufacturing, etc. Crush the PETRO-DOLLAR–begin to accept Chinese currency and Gold. And keep buying Gold as is China at a fierce pace! Deal with Iran via trading commodities, etc. Ignore Europe with a huge pipeline through Turkey(by- pass any Eastern European country like sad Bulgaria)and have it stop in Greece. I think he has made that offer to Greece. Begin a serious very close connection with China which includes massive military drills and state of the art missiles. Reach out to the BRICS countries. Join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank(AIIB).
    Sibel, Russia is the largest land mass country on earth and a link with the most populated country, China, will make The US non-exceptional.
    Some things are clear to me regarding the big players in the world: The US is BANKRUPT and keeps the big banks afloat–socialism for banks by fiat currency– and crumbs for the 99.9%. Russia and China absolutely know this! And that big Russo-China ship has left port! Many financial wizards claim WW3 has begun! Cyberspace 24/7 hacking. Money wars and continual shift from the dollar. Sanctions imposed by a US dominated NATO(sanctions can be called a state of war, cf., Israel/Gaza)
    NATO would dissolve in a few weeks if the US pulled out. The EU, NATO, the “TROIKA”–all non-elected and connected to deep state dynamics will collapse. Greece must be mentioned, because as Greece goes, so goes Italy, Spain and Portugal. There are just too many things going on. This financial thing will go global–not “if”, but when?
    Regarding Putin, I don’t think he cares too much about Europe. The US/NATO forces are playing dirty small-time games “threating” Russia. A joke to me. Putin IMO does not want a hot war with the USA. It would destroy human civilization forever. Those neo-cons are sick and as true psychopaths do not care about the results of their actions. WW3 is certainly possible. Almost any damn thing–a Black Swan–could kick it off.

    You guys got a little gossipy at the end re; RT. And Sibel, why do you think Putin is the way you describe him? I kept waiting for you to offer a reason. Thanks for letting us comment.

    • Phillip Kokesh says:

      Bingo, on all points!
      (anybody besides me start to smell sheep-dip?)
      Sibel appeared practically slathering at the mouth in her blood-lust against ‘weak and sell-out’ sissy ‘checker’-level mentally-slow and thick Putin and in support of the progressive ‘hardliners’ (whom I thought she said she had actually met on some occasion???) like she was trying to PROVOKE the Hardliners into a putsch and mabe even get the US Bankster Bail-out War started! Gee, whose goals does THAT line up with? Putin doesn’t bluff, he negotiates. Nothing could be more in Russia’s and China’s and their rapidly growing list of partners in new economic interests.

      Au contraire re RT: I think they do an excellent job in some areas. Its the only way to find out what’s really going on in our own country and very streets! There news is more current and topical re current world events, no commercials for drugs and memorial day sales, some excellent presenters that can obviously think on their feet and are adroit at focussing discussions- I think of Annisa and Oskana especially, and their crosstalk program is more cogent than equivalents in the US or Germany or England or France, etc. Also, they are not afraid to poke fun of the obvious.

      and no, I am not a shill for RT or Russia. I’ve done enough investigation of the truth in my 72 years while all the while watching the evolution of our own system of ‘news’ reportage to be able to spot the crap and the propaganda from both sides. Example, I subscribe to Boiling Frog…

      For the presenters, these days and times, credibility is everything… jus’ sayin’

      • Sibel appeared practically slathering at the mouth in her blood-lust against ‘weak and sell-out’ sissy ‘checker’-level mentally-slow and thick Putin and in support of the progressive ‘hardliners’ (whom I thought she said she had actually met on some occasion???) like she was trying to PROVOKE the Hardliners into a putsch and mabe even get the US Bankster Bail-out War started! Gee, whose goals does THAT line up with?>>

        Phillip–I asked myself exactly the same question when I read about those “real nationalists” from GRU who killed right and left the enemies of Mother Russia in Turkey and left betrayed by Putin (Who else?) and about that secret conference “somewhere in Northern Europe” at which Sibel was told that there were “several underground movements-some include members of military (including military intel)” in Russia. I mean I was trying to imagine, in good faith, GRU officers taking care to inform the alternative pundits in the West that they were running a conspiracy against that Western stooge Putin. I tried hard… And I came to the same conclusion: these days and times, credibility is everything…

  3. chuck70 says:

    Dear BFP,
    I wanted to download and watch this roundtable discussion, but the file was too big (over 700 mbs).
    My maximum daily allowance is 500 mbs, after which, my computer downloads at stone-age speed.
    Is it possible to offer low resolution video files or just the audio file for people with slow or limited internet connections? James Corbett does this and it’s a big help.
    Thanks always for your informative shows.

    • Chuck,

      I’ll ask our admin and see what we can do about that. Meanwhile: would it help if we make the audio only version available for download?

      • Corylus says:

        Yes, that would help greatly. I have a very slow and ropey connection here, I’ve now tried several times to listen to the conversation but only get so far and then it all grinds to a halt.
        All the best

        • Sibel,
          If you could make an audio only version of videos available for download that would be fantastic. I like to go out walking and listen to your latest. With the podcasts, I can just quick download and listen and not need constant internet access.

          • Hi Lizzie,

            I checked with our part-time web admin/expert, and it is doable. It will be done.

          • Okay. We have the audio file up and running (check the post above for the link). Yay! I like it when we can find easy fixes (considering how technologically challenged I am;-), plug them in, and make you happy.

  4. Yes..Tom.
    Putin will have to sell oil in europe.
    like this..
    That pipeline goes right by my little island Bornholm…
    In Denmark.
    What I think…Money and geopolitic goes hand in hand.
    Kind regards

  5. Andrei Tudor says:

    I can see a couple of reasons for Russia not asserting itself:

    1. Self doubt. Russia was the defeated nation at the end of the Cold War. Communism was the defeated ideology. It seems natural to me that they would want to “get with the program” so to speak, to adopt the winning system themselves. Think Japan and Germany at the end of WWII. They accepted their defeats, and they basically accepted American superiority. I haven’t traveled to Russia, but judging by the state of Romania when Ceausescu fell, they must have been economically in ruins, while, at the time, the US and the West looked all conquering. It’s hard not to doubt yourself under such conditions.

    2. Perceptions of their actions in neighboring countries. There is widespread, well founded and deep fear of Russia in Eastern Europe. Any assertive action on their part triggers disproportionate reactions, as witnessed with the recent events in Ukraine. Some of it is driven by propaganda, but the propaganda is successful mainly because these countries have been under de facto Russian occupation for half a century, an occupation which has proved to be disastrous for them.

    3. Domestic opposition. It’s easy to forget now, but when Putin came to power, the moral and economic bankruptcy of the West was not as apparent as it is now. It really looked at the time that capitalism was the way forward. I imagine actions that looked to be antagonistic towards the West would not have been well received domestically. That’s obviously not the case any longer.

    4. Belief that keeping a low profile might be the right strategy. After all China has employed that strategy successfully, or so it seems.

    • Russia was the defeated nation at the end of the Cold War. Communism was the defeated ideology. >>

      1. Russia (USSR) was never defeated militarily and this is the only kind of defeat that matters. Russia remains the only power in the world who preserves the ability to obliterate the so-called “West,” or the ultra-imperialist alliance presided over by the US. Never in their history, starting with first crusades, European colonizer and settlers nations faced an outside power capable of this. This most fundamental of all facts–who can kill who– is what determines the ‘bottom line’ thinking of Western top powers.

      2. Communism is not a ideology but an actual movement, generated by capitalism who socializes production on a global scale. Capitalism cannot stop producing communism just as plants cannot stop producing oxygen as a necessary byproduct of their very existence. What is correct though is that the word ‘communism’ has become discredited in the minds of most working class people around the world and especially in the so-called West partly because of the real history of early socialist societies and above all because this experience has been misrepresented and demonized by the entire apparatus of the mind control in the hands of capitalists. One way or another, we all, without exceptions, are victims of this conditioning.

      >>Think Japan and Germany at the end of WWII. They accepted their defeats, and they basically accepted American superiority. I haven’t traveled to Russia, but judging by the state of Romania when Ceausescu fell, they must have been economically in ruins.

      The USSR was not in ruins economically by the time it was destroyed. Even in 1941-45, when the country was incomparably less developed, the Soviet economy proved its superiority over the entire economy of Continental Europe which was in the hands of the Third Reich plus the economic assistance of American capitalists who continued to supply the Nazis with strategic commodities. The entire land-lease program counted only for 4 percent of Soviet war-time production. In comparison, by the end of its existence the SU was economic and military-political colossus with nuclear arms and ICBMs and space program. The correct way of describing its state of the verge of its demise is: the SU was made to look “economically in ruins” by the calculated policies of its ruling cliques in the highest echelons of the party and state power who were preparing a restoration of capitalism. The destruction of Soviet economy and its working class came only in the 1990s, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

      >>2. Perceptions of their actions in neighboring countries. There is widespread, well founded and deep fear of Russia in Eastern Europe. >>

      Fear by who? The working classes and peasants in Bulgaria and Romania who stood to lose everything from the coming destruction of their factories and collective farms? By Polish shipbuilders who will be kicked out to the streets and leave the country to clean German lavatories when their great Gdansk Shipyards get shut down? Or the ruling strata of these countries and their middle-class shills who wished to join the club of their Western counterparts and were only too willing to sacrifice their people for this?

      >>Some of it is driven by propaganda, but the propaganda is successful mainly because these countries have been under de facto Russian occupation for half a century, an occupation which has proved to be disastrous for them.>>

      Really? Disastrous? Ask any working class Bulgarian, Romanian, Pole, Lithuanian, you name them which disaster would they prefer today, the one they had in the 1970s “under de facto Russian occupation” or presently under de facto US-NATO occupation? And it’s only the beginning. When the coming new recession hits again and turn into the Greater Depression, then you will learn what “disaster” is and recall “Russian occupation” as the Golden Age too good to believe in.

      • Netter”
        “Communism is not an ideology but an actual movement” sounds too pedantic, too declarative for my analysis.
        The very word “Communism”, has never been clear since Marx(and Engels) wrote about it. It appears to be more of a theory than ideology, since Mark took Hegel’s “triadic dialectic”-thesis-antithesis struggle leading to synthesis which became thesis in time, etc. As you know he coined the term “dialectical materialism”. Within this theory there is an ideological base which assumes that via dialectical materialism members of such a society will begin to arrive at a semi-utopian state of Communism. In that sense there, of course is a “movement” to it. Some 50 or 60 years after Marx’s ideas, Lenin read them and used them as a basis for a Communist/Bolsheivik “revolution”. It was Lenin and the Bolsheviks who brutally crushed/stopped an ideal! Soon Russia/Soviet Union became a totalitarian state. Forget ideal communism!
        From my point of view, I have yet to see the dialectical movement anywhere move to a level whereby “Workers Unite!” Sooner or later, social systems seem to become top to down hierarchical systems. A very important dynamic in this entropic movement has to do with the brutal fact that about 4% of all humans are psychopaths–and psychopaths love power.

      • Andrei Tudor says:


        Just one question – have you actually lived in a Eastern European country under a communist regime?

        • Andrei,

          We love getting your take/analysis/perspective on this as someone who has lived there.

          From where I see, the point made here was: Was this the ‘real’ (aka pure) communism as envisioned by Marx? Or was it the warped/twisted version of it planned and implemented by the totalitarian/authoritarian regime rulers?

          This is similar to the analysis/literature out there on: Capitalism in the US. Is it the ‘real’ capitalism/free market? Or is it a warped and corrupted version by the rulers/deep state?

          Then of course there was the point on ‘Ideology’ vs. ‘movement’ characterization when it comes the ‘original’ communism…

          • Andrei Tudor says:


            I have not studied Marx, in fact, for a long time, I have had a deep revulsion to anything associated with him, a view which was very common in Romania, and pretty easy to understand for someone who has experienced the “benefits” of the society he has imagined. I am not saying I was right in this. I believe I am detached enough now from that anger that I am starting to become curious as to what he has actually written, and I may try to read some of his stuff.

            So I will not comment on the differences between what Marx has envisioned and what has actually transpired. But whether he wanted a totalitarian society or not, I cannot see how it could have turned out any differently. What I mean is that I believe that when levers of power over people are built into the societal framework, they will eventually fall into the wrong hands, and will be used nefariously. In the communist society that I know, the levers of power were many, and close to absolute. There was no room for divergence from the party line, either in action or in thought. Orwell’s 1984 comes fairly close in some respects to describing what was going on in communist Romania. We lived under a constant threat of being watched and ratted out, we could not trust anyone beyond close family. The forced labor camps in the 50’s and 60’s were real, and many people have been sent there on political grounds, never to come back. The experiments in re-education through brutal torture, such as the Pitesti prison was real. Many tried to swim across the Danube into Yugoslavia and risked drowning or being shot at in doing so, and many were. I could go on and on, but I don’t believe I can come close painting the right picture – I don’t have the talent for it, so I’ll stop here.

            That’s why, when I hear others describing this period of time as some kind of golden era, it feels to me like they come from another planet. I admit that my direct experience is limited to Romania, and, to my knowledge, Romania was one of the countries worst hit by communism. Yugoslavia was at the other end of the spectrum, but then Yugoslavia did not do full-on, hard core communism. Some level of private enterprise was still allowed, the borders were not sealed, etc – this, according to people I know who come from there.

            I think I understand though how some, who have never had any factual experience of communism, can come to view it in such a positive light. The propaganda in the US against “the evil ones”, whatever “evil” is defined to be at that particular moment, is so thick that, absent direct knowledge, one may come to believe that the opposite of what is being said must always be true. But that is a logical fallacy. Just because someone is a liar, it does not follow that the opposite of everything that person says is truth. In the case of communism, the propaganda machine did not really have to work very hard to make it look bad. Presenting the facts would have been enough.

          • Andrei:
            All of which you stated sounds totally right to me. There is a an incredibly huge/impossible gap between an idea or a written Constitution and what really transpires in real life. Class structure breaks out, nepotism, the oligarchs emerge from the shadows, pathological police take over the streets, the rich rise to the top of a now totalitarian system, psychopaths find their power, etc., etc.
            I lived for two years in an developing country in SE Asia which had a great written constitution which meant absolutely zero. REALPOLITIK ruled the day.

  6. A crazy World it is..
    (Internal EU energy security documents seen by Reuters also describe plans to tap new non-European gas import sources in central Asia, including Iran.

    Iran, exploiting the reversal of old enmities caused by the upheaval of the Islamic State militants in the Middle East, is also keen to sell its gas.

    “Iran can be a secure energy centre for Europe,” its President Hassan Rouhani was quoted on Wednesday telling Austrian President Heinz Fischer in New York.

    Tehran’s assertions over reliable supply are likely to ring alarm bells at Russia’s giant Gazprom, after interruptions to its exports via Ukraine in previous disputes scared Europe.

    “Iran is trying to position itself in Europe as an alternative to Russian gas. It’s playing a very sophisticated game, talking with Russia on the one hand about cooperation on easing sanctions and also talking to Europe about substituting Russian gas with its own,” said Amir Handjani, an independent oil and gas specialist working in Dubai.

    “Given Russia’s current strategy politically, which is one of confrontation with Europe, I see the EU having little choice but to find alternative gas supplies,” he added.),,,!
    (Independent feasibility studies show that if sanctions were to be eased and investments started soon, Iran could supply 10-20 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas a year to Turkey and Europe by the early 2020s.)..
    Kind regards

  7. kariflack says:

    interesting conversation, thanks for that. i’ve long been frustrated with Putin’s addresses now in how he does everything but spell out “NATO is a monstrous bloodsucking force that doesn’t recognize sovereignty and is pillaging what’s left of the planet.” pragmatic indeed — he understands his audience, and alt/left anti-imperialist anti-war people are clamoring for anything. i agree largely with the idea of how this is theatre that Tom alluded to; US empire has resources the common person cannot imagine. why aren’t they taking out Assad or moving harder on Ukraine? this is not to mitigate the very real suffering of the people trapped in these regions. it just seems like 20th century, 1970s thinking when the massive military buildup is not understood, when the proxy wars and those unseen aren’t understood.

    P.S. RT en Español is a bit of a varied creature from its American/Anglo counterpart. they have quite a few stories that give readers a better impression of post-WW11 history, i find.

  8. chuck70 says:

    Yes, Sibel audio only is better than nothing.

  9. Norman Schernau says:

    I would prefer audio too, or audio only, cause of the size and bad internet connection.

  10. wallace gromit says:

    Great stuff, as was the first episode. I thought Tom had a lot of really quality insights especially. On the topic of RT’s changes and Putin’s overall tactics, I think that most of the action is going on via covert ops, on RF’s side with HUMINT in particular, with NATO leaning on high level money and finance plays along with their SIGINT systems. RF doesn’t have much to contest NATO’s moves with except for their HUMINT assets and capabilities, especially being that they’ve drawn NATO into their back yard. To me, it looks like Putin is and has been playing moneyball, trying to rope-a-dope NATO, and US deep state actors in particular, into a scenario where they have a small chance of escaping and continuing to be in power over most of the world. The constant mention of a bipolar world by RF makes sense in a simple economic and security sense for them, and all they need for that is for the CIA to not have such a dominant position for a little bit. I wouldn’t expect a lot of stuff happening and influencing big events to ever come out either, because CIA and FSB are probably blackmailing relevant persons at an enormous scale, and the other main influence of events is likely popular political will (or what various parties’ impression of it) especially in countries between Five Eyes countries and RF partners, which is obviously influenced by a huge number of factors and manifests ways that are hard to analyse and predict these days. So, that said, much of these matters will probably be as fun to discuss for another 10-20 years… which isn’t all bad!

  11. Please make it to where the drop down menus only drop down after clicking on them. Its VERY difficult to get to this video on a touch screen as I have no hover option.

  12. Is there any way to download this video? The player is extremely hardware intensive and causes my browser to crash. This is a phone version of Firefox. Putin is someone I’ve really been wondering about.

    Also, the right 5% doesn’t show in wide screen mode and half the vid is missing from view in vertical mode.

  13. And now I see the audio only because I’m a weird kinda blind where I only see that AFTER reading about it in comments. Facepalm.

  14. Is there anything that explicitly tells any of you that Putin is not an NWO USA plant?

    Also, does he work with the same banking elite as all other countries? Are russion medicine and US medicine basically the same? I figure those would be two big indicators. PCR wrote about how his economic advisors were too western IIRC so that disconcerts me.

  15. “Who is Putin & Why has he let his nation become encircled by NATO?”

    The first question–unless it’s meant in some vaguely ominous, conspiratorial sense implying that ‘Putin is a CIA agent’ or ‘the mother of all traitors’–reminds me those inserted links for the sheeple, the kind of ‘How much you really know about Ukraine? Take a quiz!’ or ‘What Are 7 New Weapons in Vladimir Putin’s Arsenal?’ Well, it’s an easy one for this reader: Putin is the President of the Russian Federation serving his third term in this capacity and enjoying the approval of about 85 % of Russian citizens.

    But my real problem is with the second question. It employs the most hackneyed device of the corporate-cum-government disinformation sometimes called ‘begging the question.’ To ask ‘Why has Putin let his nation become encircled by NATO?’ is as misleading as the question ‘Why did the North Vietnamese attack US Navy in the Gulf of Tonkin?’ These questions assume as proven what yet needs to be proved. Is it true that Russia has become completely encircled. And if ‘yes’, was it Putin’s fault, that is realistically he could have prevented the ‘encirclement’ but he did not.

    Unless you believe that NATO countries and ‘the world community’ are the same, the answer is negative. NATO cannot encircle Russia even if it pukes trying. True, the State Department and the psyop teams in the CIA, Pentagon, and Brussels want the rabble to believe they have, but we, relatively sophisticated people, know better, don’t we? On May 9, Putin was reviewing the military parade on the Red Square with Comrade Xi Jinping standing next to him. China–a workshop of the world–is a home to 1,200,000,000 people. China has a 5 million-strong army and its Naval force, armed with some of the most advanced Russian anti-ship weaponry, already today presents real danger to US battle groups in the Pacific, and is rapidly improving. This week Russia and China began joint naval exercises in the Mediterranean. Judging by all the whining in the Western press, this put the Pentagon and Brussels in a state of quiet panic. The battalion of India’s Grenadiers marched in the Red Square right after the Chinese paratroopers. India is another sovereign country neighboring Russia. It’s a home to 1,300,000,000 people, a rising economic colossus, and one of the largest buyers of Russian arms. Iran is another of Russia’s neighbors who is NOT in the business of encircling her. Instead, this year Iran is receiving 5 divisions of Russian S-300PMU anti-aircraft and anti-missile system. Putin has recently signed the sell order against the ferocious US-Israeli pressure. No wonder. In comparison to the US Patriot system, S-300 is like the Kremlin to a mouse. Iran has a population of 77 million. Just as Russia, China, and India, Iran is a sovereign country and a strategic player in the Middle East. Is Turkey encircling Russia? There are serious reasons to doubt this. Turkey’s relations with Russia are much more complex historically and presently. Turkey is not a sovereign country but trying hard to become one and Putin deserves all credit for exploiting the contradictions between Erdogan’s Turkey and Washington to improve Russia’s geopolitical situation. Russian-Turkish Western gas pipeline and distribution network deal was one of those Putin’s masterly strokes US-NATO are still reeling from. It makes Ukraine largely irrelevant as a transit country and takes away its blackmail power from Ukrainian Fascists and their Washington masters. No less importantly, the deal with Turkey is another time bomb in the foundation of the NATO alliance and “European unity.” So who’s left to encircle Russia in Asia and Europe? Baku? Bulgarians? Romanians? Czechs, for chrissake? Poles? Are you serious? What about the ‘old Europe’? Are Germans, French, Italians, Spaniards really encircle Russia? Or its Russia who’s encircling them? Who will blink first if worst comes to worst and Russia will have no choice but to occupy all of the Ukraine, clean the Fascist scum off it, and make Ukraine a federated and friendly state? What option will the French choose, to sit tight or risk having Paris turned into a radioactive pond for the next 5 thousand years? Are you kidding me? Russians will be fighting for their very existence and what the Italians or Spaniards will be fighting for? So much for Putin who let Russia become encircled by NATO. How about Putin encircling the United States instead? Nonsense? Why would then Obama suddenly become so accommodating towards “communist” Cuba, another sovereign state whose leader Raul Castro was in the Red Square on May 9. Putin has a lot of options just 90 miles from the Florida Peninsula while the Crimean is now out of reach for NATO. Consider this. The last agreements between Russia and Argentina include refueling and other infrastructure facilities for Russian Navy and AF. In exchange, Russia may lease Argentina its effective SU-24 fighter planes making the British defense of the Maldives problematic. Russia’s relations with Venezuela are superb and include intensive military cooperation like regular air drills and help in organizeng Venezuela’s air defenses. Brazil is a rising giant and important BRICS member in good standing. Finally, Russia is said to provide military protection for the construction of the Nicaraguan Canal and Development Project financed by the Chinese. Russians and Chinese in the Gringos near backyard? Now we’re talking encirclement!

    • Ronald Orovitz says:

      Well said Netter… In short, Russia/China/India together comprise the World Island. They are solidifying that island with expanding rail, road, and pipeline between them, and indeed are extending it into our own sphere, but they are decidedly NOT solidifying their cooperation with military treaties. I recall some time ago Putin giving a statement as to why Russia will not be part of a military alliance like NATO. As you say, it is because Russia is a sovereign nation, and sovereign nations do not let themselves become subject to other countries conflicts unless if the threat directly effects their own interests (to paraphrase -I’m going off of memory). All of the NATO countries however are subject to this idiotic alliance that says that if one country is attacked, then all countries will respond, collectively declaring war in conflicts that have no bearing on most of them. Such an alliance is really just stupid, from a strategic standpoint, when you consider how easy it becomes for third party nations, or non-state actors such as multi-national MIC corporations, intelligence networks, what-not, to trip-wire that entire alliance into a global conflict such as the Global War On Terrorism (GWOT) with a false-flag such as 9/11. Was Afghanistan really a threat to anyone? And yet we all piled on only to confirm once again the old adage about the graveyard of empires.

      • In short, Russia/China/India together comprise the World Island. >>
        Yes, but it’s incomplete without Germany and the rest of mainland Europe. This is why sooner or later Germany will join, if only because it makes economic sense. Besides, it’s the question of sovereignty and security. Ukraine has shown how vulnerable Europe is to US manipulations, both as EU and NATO members and individually. It’s obvious that the national interests of European peoples are not the same than the interests of those circles who control the North America. They have nothing to gain by returning to a Cold War type of politics. The kind of global confrontation US neocons have been calling for–like Robert Kagan’s dream of going back to the19th century imperialism of “civilized nations” vs. “barbarians”–is but a desperate attempt to reverse the decline of American hegemony. But what will Europeans gain from this? In the past, they could justify living in fear of a war with the Soviet Union by economic gains from their access to US markets, back then the world’s largest. Now the US has become a breeder of “greater recessions” rather than a motor of economic growth. Its middle class has been rapidly dwindling and so does their ability to buy European goods. In contrast, Eurasian markets are on the rise and have tremendous potentials for growth, especially given international peace and European intellectual and technological resources.

        Just look how stagnated Europe has become. Young people cannot afford to have families because of chronic unemployment, in some parts up to 25% among the young! Europe has great educational system but much of this talent and energy gets wasted because there is no economic development. Naturally, this situation decade after decade breeds pessimism, right-wing radicalism, cultural decadence and so on. Yet Europeans have the immense Eurasian expanses right next to them to apply their talents. I believe Russia should open up for Europeans the way the imperial Russia did from Peter I to Cathrine II when the European surplus of energetic and talented people, from farmers and craftsmen to administrators and scientists, were invited to settle in Russia, given land, government protection and subsidies.

        There are also some deep cultural forces working in favor of a Eurasian unity. The World Island is the cradle of ancient cultures and old cultural traditions. What it means is that Europeans, the peoples of the Middle East and Central Asia, Chinese, Indians, Russians and, without exception, all the rest inhabiting Eurasia, have national cultures which are not entirely conditioned by the 500 years of capitalism and bourgeois culture as it is the case in Northern America. It’s not the case even in Western Europe, the cradle of the world bourgeoisie, because it’s absolutely critical to differentiate between the progressive–revolutionary and liberal–stages of modern (bourgeois) development and its regressive imperialist stage we’re living in. Why is this so important? Because no money can buy a cultural tradition which is a repository of values, cultural dreams, human models, inspiring stories, existential horizons and everything else necessary for social imagination, for posting goals beyond what has been announced as “the end of history” arrived at in 1989.

        It is not an accident that the discourse of the end of history was born in the United States at the moment of its perceived triumph over the Soviet Union and “communism.” The American society is unique in that it’s rooted exclusively in a bourgeois culture and lacks any other cultural resources Eurasian societies have. Besides the predominant Imperialist variety of bourgeois culture this country has only the vestiges of its Liberal stage, politically (Libertarianism) and culturally (folk art) marginal. The cultural awareness of an average American is essentially devoid of historical dimension. It’s more like a everlasting present filled with commodities, commodified relations, and ideas. In such a society it is relatively easy to internalize a prohibition on social imagination beyond the status quo. But already in Western Europe, with its history of intellectual and social revolutions and cultural riches from the pre-bourgeois past, this closure of imagination is tenuous, even after almost a century of anti-communist propaganda. The material and spiritual rebirth of Europe depends on its turning eastward. This time not in Operation Barbarossa, but in friendship and cooperation with all other peoples of the World Island.

        • Ronald Orovitz says:

          Netter: “Yes, but it’s incomplete without Germany and the rest of mainland Europe. This is why sooner or later Germany will join, if only because it makes economic sense……”

          Indeed, just look at a map -is Europe really a separate continent? Why don’t we call it West Asia?… Well, because of the cultural traditions. But in terms of the potential for infrastructural connectivity, it’s a giant lump of land, and there’s really no reason why they can’t all get it together. -If not for fear of “the Hun”… Get over it Europe, Ghangis Khan was millennia ago.

    • Netter;
      I agree totally with most of your points. IMO, you are going in the direction of reality.. There really is no pure politics of compromise. The West has been doing REALPOLITIK—Dic. def. ” policy based on POWER rather than ideals(my caps).” Realpolitik was pushed by Kissinger, in particular; now the f’ing neocons. Russia and China are sick of it.
      This is a word that Tom seemed to be searching for and IMHO we should use it replace the word “politics.”(I’m not holding my breath). Hell, the Romans did it!
      Now the tables are beginning to turn and my hunch is that US-backed NATO countries are blinking like mad behind closed doors.
      This is a massive multilayered topic. One cannot go on for 10thousand words here. Check out my comments above–or maybe you already have. Anyway, good work.

      • Ronald Orovitz says:

        Yes, I liked your comments above as well… The Rons agree.

        There is a sense that the elites of the West, having thrown in their lot with this stupid military alliance, and doubling down on fiat finance, and blathering on with their morally bankrupt “international community” rhetoric, are on the brink of collapse. They are getting desperate… so the worry is, and this is everyone’s worry, are these psychopathic Strangeloves going to ruin it for everyone, ignite WWIII and plunge us into a nuclear winter? Or will the collapse be purely economic, as it was for the former Soviets in the 90s. Or will there be that and civil war in the U.S.? In any case, the prospects are not good for us, particularly in the context of all the Jade Helm paranoia that is running amok -we’ve been through these martial law fears before from the wing-nut right, but I don’t think it’s ever reached such a fever pitch… not even for Y2K. It’s as if the militias are being goaded into shooting first… It’s going to be a long hot summer.

    • Ronald Orovitz says:

      A caveat to this however: “Is Turkey encircling Russia? There are serious reasons to doubt this. Turkey’s relations with Russia are much more complex historically and presently. Turkey is not a sovereign country but trying hard to become one and Putin deserves all credit for exploiting the contradictions between Erdogan’s Turkey and Washington to improve Russia’s geopolitical situation…”

      What to make of this? -it would seem to indicate that Erdogan’s imperial dreams of capturing the Turkic regions to the East are alive and well, and he believes NATO is the vehicle for doing so, the sovereignty of the Republic of Turkey be damned.

      • Wally Sarkeesian says:

        Yes Turkey is not only encircling Russia, but also Middle east and beyond to central Asia, you need to read Davutoglu book to understand Turkey’s long plan expansion, after USSR claps first they through Azerbaijan against Armenian then Georgia against Russia now Georgia and Azerbaijan become depending on Turkey, then they build pipeline with 7 Billion $$ from Azerbaijan via Georgia to Turkey thanks to US Tax payer dollars with BP lobbing, then they through NATO on Turkey’s arch enemy Serbia destroying Serbia By created two Turkish republic Kosovo, and Bosnia, ( off course Kosovo now is the central distribution center for drag and terrorist) as you can see now they pulled every terrorist in the world to Syria and Iraq via Turkey destroying both Iraq and Syria. both countries easy target for the Turkey to takeover with help of NATO, Again another two pipeline from Iraq via Turkey. They successfully turn Ukraine on Russian that is another pipeline from Russia via Turkey next is the pipeline from Iran and Turkey will be in full control of all oil and gas to Europe.
        if you look at Turkish GDP 2001 before September 11, 170$ Billion today is 900$ Billion thanks to Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan war plus Iran embargo, Turkey is the only country benefitting from blood of the people of these countries that’s why Turkey dose not want the war to stop. While USA and Europe blindfolded Turkey is re-engineering neo-ottoman empire via Islamic State. do not kid yourself with all these convoluted naming convention (ISIS, ISIL, Islamic state) one name Turkish Jihadist. remember all these countries were under control of ottoman empire and Turkey want them back so it is going through slow process of achieving it one by one.
        if you read Turkish history how they end-up in the Islamic empire and how they highjack islam and used as tools went on concur three continent then you will understand how they are using NATO to do the same. that is exactly what Turkey is doing now

        FYI: I come from technology side of the world I become interested when I first read Sibel classified woman book it was very scary how the Turkish Government and there agents have infiltrated deep inside into all USA Government institution and private corporation that’s where I started research and investigating about the Turks who they are were they come from.

        neo-ottoman, Davutoğlu’ thesis ruffling feathers in Turkey

        Watch how the Turks infiltrated Islamic empire and hijack the Islam

        • Ronald Orovitz says:

          Thanks for that, Wally. Wayne Madsen’s been covering Erdogan’s pan-Turanian ambitions. One article in particular sheds much light onto what we’re discussing here, so I’m just going to copy/paste the whole thing…

          June 23-24, 2014 — White House Cold War panel pushed for a Turkish Empire

          Although the Justice and Development Party (AKP) of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the so-called “Gulenist” Islamist movement of Turkish Muslim spiritual leader and billionaire Fethullah Gulen have had a falling out, last year’s WMR report that pointed to Turkey’s resurrection of a planned pan-Turanian Empire of Turkic-speaking peoples from Asia to Europe has as its basis a formerly U.S. SECRET SECURITY INFORMATION Memorandum discovered by WMR in the Harry S Truman Library in Independence, Missouri.

          The SECRET memorandum of conversation is dated December 3, 1952, just a month after Dwight Eisenhower was elected president. A meeting was held between two U.S. ambassadors, George McGhee, Washington’s envoy to Turkey, and Loy Henderson, the ambassador to Iran, and unspecified “others” believed to be CIA officials. The conversation on Turkey and Iran dealt with a secret plan by the United States to build up a strong Turkey in NATO that would eventually rule over vast stretches of a conquered Soviet Union. The memorandum was written by George A. Morgan, the deputy director of President Truman’s Psychological Strategy Board and not declassified until June 10, 2013.

          The memo states: “Ambassador McGhee spoke with great confidence in the solidity and future development of Turkey as a main anchor of NATO in that part of the world. He said he thought that Pakistan might develop into a similar strong point for its region. He said that the Turks are definitely interested in psychological operations across the Iron Curtain, notably in using Pan Turanianism as a basis for appeal to the Turkish minorities in the Soviet Union. Their eventual wish would be to organize a Turkish Federation with such peoples after liberation

          On June 3, 2013, WMR reported: “Erdogan and his enigmatic ally, Turkish charismatic Muslim lay leader and billionaire industrialist and media mogul Fethullah Gulen, have been accused by their opponents of pushing the concept of ‘Turanism,’ which is a desire to resurrect the ancient Turanian Empire that once stretched from the Balkans to western China and included all the Turkic-speaking peoples of Asia.”

          On November 26, 2013, we reported: “Held for decades deep within the Central Intelligence Agency’s Top Secret Archives and Records Center was a plan, co-opted from an unnamed German Turkish expert, known as a ‘Turcologist,’ that would have seen a victorious Nazi Germany carve the Soviet Union into a group of puppet states based on Turanian nationalism. This ‘Pan Turania Idea’ report, not declassified by the CIA until Christmas Eve of 2005, was, in fact, adopted by the CIA during the early days of the Cold War as a means to dissolve much of the USSR and replace it with a Pan-Turanian federation.
          ‘Pan-Turanianism’ was a concept originally developed by the British Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister Lord Palmerston as a way to destroy the Russian empire and replace it with Turkic and Mongol vassal states that would answer to the Ottoman sultan and ultimately, to the British crown. Pan-Turanianism influenced the ‘Young Turks’ movement of Kemal Ataturk and was conceived, along with ‘pan-Arabism.'”

          The two nationalist ideologies would eventually destroy the Ottoman Empire.

          The December 3, 1952 memo also discusses the problem the United States faced with the government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq. The memo states that Ambassador Henderson felt that the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was “based to much on logic and common sense, whereas the Iranians are highly emotional and often irrational in their actions.” Henderson said he did not favor a program that would see the United States virtually taking over the whole government” of Iran, which he stated, was “obviously out of the question.” Henderson believed the Iranians would agree to the U.S. “having the necessary control [of Iran] for limited purposes.” In August 1953, under the Eisenhower administration, the CIA decided to overthrow the democratically-elected Mossadeq in a coup d’etat and place the reigning Shah of Iran in firm control of the country.

          In the December 3 memo, Henderson is quoted as stating that “the emergence of a good leader might do wonders” in Iran. The U.S., rather than exercising limited control of Iran, opted to back the Shah’s dictatorial government. That decision continues to plague U.S. relations with Iran to this very day.

          The early support for pan-Turanianism by the United States explains why the CIA has heretofore, supported Gulen during his self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania. The recent raid by the FBI, Department of Education, and Federal Communications Commission on 19 Gulenist charter schools in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, suggests that, once again, a turf battle has broken out between the FBI on one hand and the CIA on the other. The breakdown of formerly close relations between Israel and Turkey has been mirrored by turf battles in the United States between agencies like the FBI, Education Department, and FCC that are strongly influenced by the Zionist Israel lobby and the Turkish lobby centered around the CIA and Pentagon various politically-connected Turkish-American groups.

          • Wally Sarkeesian says:

            Thanks Ron, Well said great information unfortunately I am not able to get to Wayne Madsen’s article must be very interesting it is for the subscriber only. possibly you can help getting it. US pretending fighting Islamic state (Turkish Jihad) while Turkish Imam Gulen taking over US public charter schools teaching American children English and Science that tells you how Turkish rolling elites have infiltrated and corrupted Washington even though Turkey rank the second in the bottom of OECD education ranking.

            I have always wondered when it come to chicken and egg which come first who is really running CIA the Turks, Saudi’s, Brits or American”s? just few days ago the Turkish government hired yet another high ranking US Government official; EX. CIA Director Goss for lobbing. Is there anyone left in Washington that the Turks have not hired from Congress man/woman to Government officials?
            Do any American really know or even care what is going on in Washington?

            I realize and understand why Sibel keeping this forum just for subscribers however, we need to get at least some of these information out there in public,

          • Ronald Orovitz says:

            Wally, that is the article -everything that follows the link – the only thing you’re missing are the pdfs of the Truman Library docs. Usually WMR stories are mirrored on other sites (after 48 hr hold), but I couldn’t find this one elsewhere in a search, hence copying it here.

      • it would seem to indicate that Erdogan’s imperial dreams of capturing the Turkic regions to the East are alive and well, and he believes NATO is the vehicle for doing so, the sovereignty of the Republic of Turkey be damned. >>
        I wouldn’t read that much into this NATO thing. Erdogan may be just feeling out what Brussels is up to. Or he may want to show finger to Putin for his use of ‘genocide’ word in Armenia. Who knows. Turks must jockey all the time, it’s a hard life.
        Panturkism is a secular ideology and used to be for Turkish military like marxism-leninism was for Soviet officialdom. I don’t know how well it mixes with a moderate Islamism of Erdogan and his party. Ideologies don’t like swift changes. As a geopolitical project, PT is as utopian as pan-Slavism, pan-Germanism, or the dreams of Polish elites and Ukrainian Banderovites about the Greater Matka Polska “from sea to sea” and Greater Ukraine in place of Russia. However, applied PT, so to speak, must remain a part of Turkey’s and NATO’s games against Russia, Iran (the second Azerbajan), and China. Incidentally, I read that PT as ideology was born in the Crimea well before the revolution. As pan-Islamism (another British invention), it was used against the Russian Empire. The Nazis also saw PT as allies and enjoyed serious support among the Crimean Tatars but not all. Tatar police battalions were used against Soviet partisans in Crimea, half of which were also Tatars, and wiped out almost all of them. I suppose Turks have a PT network in Crimea and this can be of interest to NATO.

  16. Unless NWO is using ww 3 or threat of ww 3 as theater for their objectives and this thing with Putin is just part of the show.

    Another thing I would like to know. The NSA such have a global network of data collection centers. In what countries do these exist? Just the Ines the appear to be friendly with the US? Or do they also exist in countries who aren’t overtly friendly with the US, and if so which ones?

    Tracking key infrastructure nodes like banking, intel, medicine, economic behavior, is where the truth would seem most likely to be from my perspective.

  17. “Ines” should be ones

  18. And “the” should be that

  19. SimonFiliatrault says:

    Thanks for the audio, for walking the dog in the forest… perfect!
    This episode was good, but I was wondering… how much of it is pure speculation and how much is based on facts or intelligence. Or maybe is experience based educated guesses?

    I feel the same way as many about RT… was good a while back but so so now.

    BTW, I loved your latest book…
    Keep up the good work!


    • I can only speak for myself, but most of what I’m saying is educated guesswork. I don’t have any great knowledge or extra inside sources or anything, but on the other hand I have spent a fair bit of time reading Russian history and trying to understand the place. I am certainly not claiming that I know exactly what’s going on.

    • Simon,

      Welcome to BFP community, and thank you for your kind words on the book.

      When we sit and look at the map (the region) what do we see? When we look at NATO’s expansion beginning in 90s with Eastern Europe and moving forward from there? When we look at US-NATO-Georgia status in the last decade? Azerbaijan? Ukraine? Granted US bases in Kyrgyzstan & Uzbekistan were closed. But what other installations took place during their operations? CIA-Gladio backed Gulen’s expansion in the region? These are facts out in the open. If we were to reverse this (hypothetically) and apply it the other way: Russia installing and operating bases in … Mexico, Panama, Venezuela? That’s the debate: it’s been a one-way expansion with no or very little resistance/defense from the other side.

  20. From PCR’s new article. Might be a good point when one of you said it didn’t matter if Washington has them surrounded. “Is Washington Coming To Its Senses?” is the title.
    Read the whole article as it is relevant. Here’s a snippet.

    “So, while the increasingly irrelevant West, absorbed in its own self-importance, snubbed the celebration of the victory that the Red Army gave them over Hitler, the three largest countries in the world were present united. Russia has the largest land mass, and China and India, also large land masses, have the world’s largest populations.

    The celebration in Moscow made it clear that Washington has failed miserably to isolate Russia. What Washington has done is to make the BRICS more unified.”

    And what do bases matter if no one is really behind the war? Without strong belief in what they’re fighting for they will likely be slaughtered unless a robot war can be waged.

  21. I should point out the cost of these bases and also the purpose. Does one really need so many bases world wide if one is not seeking to be hegemon? Perhaps the tactics of power projection are different for those seeking defense rather than hegemony. Also, on that note Russia and China could crash the US economy at any time sending us into an abyss of starvation and internal conflicts.

    Another question to ask is what do our “leaders” get out of their control over the US? Please remember that they likely care nothing about the US but see it as a tool for their objectives much as a CEO cares about his golden parachute and not the company. If we know what these objectives are then perhaps we can tell better by Russia China and India reaction where they, and Putin really stand.

    Another thing, why do these three countries bother with the US at all? They have no need for it whatsoever.

    Either they are working against it to drop it like a bad habit, or they will be working together to form a greater global network/NWO. Which is actually happening though? Someone with the knowhow needs to look at their social infrastructure mechanisms, like banking, data collection and intel services, medicine, manufacturing etc… I don’t know of anywhere else to look and find the truth. What do the future plans of these countries for the US look like?

  22. And how close are they with the western power brokers?

  23. And.. what do we see?
    Something like this…!
    US imports from where…!
    It is A big World.
    It is.
    Little People get Hurt…
    All over …again and again,,
    I see All of Us in this forum..
    Like A voice, coming from all around the World.
    Kind regards

  24. I think Putin is buying time and choosing Russia’s battle carefully. Why would they need to start fights with all these countries over the US/NATO?It would give them exactly what they want. So they can run around and say ” we told you so! Russia is trying to reunite the Soviet Union! Look how aggressive they are! NATO will save you! etc. etc. Pretty much what they say already but with no evidence to back it up; instead the every corner of the world is being ravaged by the US/NATO/western intelligence/MIC/finance. All Russia has to do on the world stage is be calm and diplomatic while the US and the west act like thugs and buffoons. They can’t force anyone to be friendly towards them or to be their ally, especially in the former Soviet states. But they can build a reputation while the US/NATO go completely insane.
    The main problem Russia has is internal. They are not monetarily sovereign ( they are a financial vassal/colony of the western central banking/BIS) and they have a 5th column of traitors. I think the west has been trying to pull off their invasion covertly. Use the 5th column to whip up a revolution. The problem for the US is that with each stunt they pull, they expose themselves and more importantly, who is working for them. As this process takes place, other plans and arrangements are being lined up. Military alliances, economic changes, etc. that will need to be ready to go. They will at some point have to nationalize their central bank. I suspect that card will not be played until the Russian people are the ones demanding it then Putin can oblige.
    I think MH-17 shoot down and Nemsov’s murder were attempts to get the people out in the streets and to turn on Putin. There have been plenty of other attempts to stir up s*** being obviously directed by the US embassy. Nemsov’s murder, though, was pretty blatant in the location. It was too perfect; get a giant crowd at the Kremlin and get your 5th column to get the Maidan going. I mean, all the t-shirts and banners they had made in what 36 hours? It was very staged and showed as such, especially to who it matters most, the Russian people.
    I forget where I saw this opinion but it’s stuck with me- That the US has miscalculated with Russia. They thought they were up against 140 million cabbages. The more they push, the more people wake up and realize exactly what is at stake. And at the same time, I think the US and the dollar are in a corner. Do or death of the dollar. They will have to take control of Russia’s resources.
    So after all that rambling, I hope I wasn’t too all over the place. But most important, is that they need time and I think Putin is doing just that.

    • Lizzie:
      …”the US has miscalculated with Russia”, indeed! It’s even worse than that! Neocons are essentially psychopathic and according to Paul Craig Roberts they want to test Russia via slaughtering people in the Ukraine by using Ukrainian Nazis. This is beyond “miscalculation”–it is madness with no concern for the consequences–that is how psychopaths operate. They appear like strange beings in a blood lust trance. All the while being physical cowards themselves. They seem to be clueless what awaits them and the rest of us.
      WW3 with Russia/China could end civilization in 24 hrs. No soldiers and armor fighting for territory–that was WW2. The fission bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima is now a mere trigger device for a fusion -thermonuclear (H bomb) strike. The Russians posses thousands! Done! Finished! It’s a wrap!

      • ”the US has miscalculated with Russia”>>
        Yes, but not with Yeltsin’s or Medvedev’s Russia (It was Medvedev, of course, who sold Libya to NATO and almost gave them South Ossetia in 2008).

        The West miscalculates with Russia every time when Russia is led by a man of the people rather than an elitist, that is someone who’s Westernized spiritually not in external culture. This was the case with Napoleon and Hitler and it’s all over again with the Big Punks in Washington. As I already said here, the West can make deals with anyone, from Trotskyists to the Black Hundreds, but never ever with a son of the people.

      • Nuclear war may not look like what you think it will. Rail guns alone would vastly change the name of the game. Getting a war head through is probably a lot harder than you think. That is if the defending country actually cares about its citizens anyway.

  25. I didn’t know who Sophie was on RT so when Pearse mentioned that interview with Sibel I had to go find it. Oh. My. God. Well let’s just say I understand perfectly why Sibel wouldn’t want to go through anything like that again. Time and again this empty-headed RT spokesmodel asked the utterly wrong question following on from official propaganda, and time and again Sibel laughed out loud and answered what would have been the right question. And this Sophie caricature just could not get it, could not get up to speed, could not ask a follow-up question, could not reflect the least understanding of what she had just been told. I mean not even the least bit of skepticism. Agree with it, attack it, question it, whatever, but for the love of journalism try to *understand* the words coming out of your guest’s mouth!

    Well done, Sibel. Very impressive. I was surprised you lasted 23 minutes, I kept expecting you to just excuse yourself and cut it off. I guess you entertained yourself by just openly messing with her. So well done.

    Anyway. Just had to mention it. Good episode too, thanks Tom, Pearse, and as always Sibel. I liked Tom’s notion of the uninvented word for a new mediated geopolitics, and I think it’s a useful analytical concept. It works rather well as an explanation for Putin’s behavior, that somehow all the key players are not entirely competing, not entirely cooperating, but wheeling and dealing, playing cards, jostling, hustling, but somehow more than ever before essentially sitting around the same table. The objective being not to win the game, but to keep it going.

  26. CuChulainn says:

    reading comments above and listening to Sibel’s interlocutors, one understands her frustration a little better–despite valiant efforts to inform the public, even here, where she finds presumably her most sympathetic audience, we are mostly “pundits,” which is to say mouthpieces of the conventional wisdom in its alternative format, e.g. Vineyard of the Saker. Sibel and niqnaq are about the only westerners i have heard talk realistically about Putin, although many in Russia understand.

    those Russians who want to believe in Putin will blame e.g. Surkov for his Ukraine policies. a true nationalist coup would, as Sibel says, be most unwelcome in the West, but there is also the prospect N. Starikov warns about, that a pseudo-coup could be used as a kind of right-wing Maidan to further destabilize Russia.
    while Putin continues Yeltsin’s work of destruction, the long-term travail de sape of the society of the spectacle on Russia’s population continues. it took 20 years to prepare Ukraine’s population for the witches’ brew of Maidan, it will take longer before the older generation of Russians is gone.

    as for RT, the destruction of the Voice of Russia–always a more authentic voice–is instructive:

    • CuChu,

      Thank you- makes me feel less alone.

      “Sibel and niqnaq are about the only westerners i have heard talk realistically about Putin, although many in Russia understand.”- You are on this list as well- make the three of us:-) Many in Russia do understand. There are several underground movements-some include members of military (including military intel). Last summer I was invited to a conference (not public) somewhere in Northern Europe …
      ” … a pseudo-coup could be used as a kind of right-wing Maidan to further destabilize Russia”- So glad you brought it up. This is within their ‘Plan B’- to be implemented if (and when) they see a ‘weakened’ Putin (and increased chance of takeover by true nationalist). Right now it is not anywhere near that point.

      “while Putin continues Yeltsin’s work of destruction…” another important point. The fact that ‘the destruction’ did not start with Putin, but immediately after the collapse with Yeltsin.

      “it took 20 years to prepare Ukraine’s population for the witches’ brew of Maidan, it will take longer before the older generation of Russians is gone.” Yet another factual well-made point.

      You know the refusal to see the obvious is very similar to what we saw (have been seeing) with Snowden. It is that wishful thinking. Wishfully believing in and considering Putin as the world’s only chance to go back to the bipolar world system in order to balance the insane solo imperialist’s aggressions. Knowing first-hand what ‘we’ did between 1996-2002, and what/how much Russia knew (with all evidence), and how much it did ‘not’ do, not because of some ‘genius chess-game strategy’, makes me certain of my position and belief. I was also trying to emphasize this by reading the list of GRU assassinations in Turkey: It was not FSB. Those were not sanctioned by Putin (just the opposite). It was the attempt by the nationalist faction within Russia military. Guess what happened to majority of the planners/operatives? Some are no longer alive. Another one abandoned by Putin- in jail in Turkey …

      PS- The underground movement also includes large number of journalists/writers.

      • Ronald Orovitz says:

        Well, perhaps a true nationalist coup would be unwelcome for good reason. Would you prefer Zhirinovsky? I like him, but he is where he needs to be – in the Duma.

        And, how is it that Putin is continuing the destruction of Russia? This needs to be explained. It isn’t obvious at all, particularly with the many infrastructure projects Russia is undergoing with its neighbors, especially China, and with the gradual moves towards financial independence (BRICS bank, AIIB, the replacement of SWIFT) from the Western institutions that it had been so dependent on, even in the Soviet period (with the likes of Averell Harriman and Armand Hammer as interlocutors).

        As far as I can tell, the “World Island” is getting it together with economic infrastructure, as opposed to the purely military infrastructure which our “fearless leaders” have regrettably thrown their lot in with. Looking at history, it would seem that the policies of the West have been all about preventing development of the World Island, outside of resource extraction for their own benefit. With their “Great Game,” this was the policy of the British Empire, and then of the Nazis, who were likely only intended to be proxies of the imperialists, until they got a little uppity.

        Where I’m getting this “World Island” talk – in part two of Frank Capra’s “Why We Fight” series – “The Nazi Strike – there is a nice summary of the geopolitical theories of Karl Haushofer… -This came at an all too brief period of U.S. policy where we didn’t regard Russian autonomy and cooperation with its neighbors as something to be prevented at all costs. Now we seem to be back to risking nuclear war in order to prevent it. Now, I don’t think we are on the brink of it, though it is moving in that direction, which is alarming enough. But, if the more hardcore Russian nationalists should come to power, then the brinkmanship becomes palpable.

        • But, if the more hardcore Russian nationalists should come to power, then the brinkmanship becomes palpable.>>

          For certain sections of US-NATO this will be the wildest dreams come true. The only practical difference that matters in their thinking is not “Russian nationalists” or “pro-Western liberals,” “oligarchs” or “communists,” left, right, green, brown, pink or whatever. What really matters is Putin or no Putin. These people think in very simple, down-to-earth terms. This is why they have power and we don’t. Every thing that safeguards or better increases their power is good, every thing that doesn’t is bad and must go. And it’s also personal. Politics of power must be one or it becomes too abstract and wobbly. I mean it’s a gut feeling. “I’ll get you, Russian SOB!” This is how Obama or Biden must feel to be an Obama or a Biden. Who the hell cares about political labels? The punks who call themselves ‘communists” are no different from the goons who announce that they are “Russian nationalists” or, God forbid, the “pro-Western” liberal leeches, most despicable of all. All these are nothing but public roles and all of these actors are more or less acceptable and infinitely better than Putin. Better for who and why ? for the sake of brevity, let’s say for the collective Biden of ours and because they are open for backroom deals. The least acceptable are the leeches. They have no or little support in Russian society. It means that any deal with them won’t last. “Communists” are somewhat more acceptable, they have more support in the country, but they are too divisive internally because they will have to implement some ‘populist’ reforms and will be resisted by Russian capitalists and a part of the middle class. This is no good for backroom dealings. Who else then? “Hard core Russian nationalists,” of course. This is what I call a fabulous choice for our collective Biden. The space for great backroom deals with these guys is fricking infinite! Internally, they enjoy a solid popular base, because they are leaning to the left and babble about ‘social justice’ and similar crap. They are the majority in the army, internal affairs, and secret services. They are 100 % the military-industrial complex. They are great sports! Just like us, the collective Biden. Externally, our Russian friends will play the Russian boogie man for European leeches as no one else can! Thanks for them we’ll keep these puppies on a short leash for another thousand years. As to the East and all that gibberish about the ‘Eurasian unity’ and the ‘World Island’, we cannot think of better allies. They are white, Christians and hate the Chinks no less than we do. With hard-core Russian nationalists as our bed mates we’ll live long and happily, with an occasional small proxy war here and there between us to keep the show going.

          This is how I understand the reasoning of our collective Biden. All that talk how Russian oligarchs or some one in the Kremlin may remove Putin because of ‘sanctions’ is just smoke and mirrors. When and if a putsch in Moscow takes place it will be carried out under the banner with inscription: “We are certified hard-core Russian nationalists” and not before the first deals are made between the collective Biden and these people in the backroom of the backroom of another backroom.

      • Sibel!
        You are not alone here!! Please! We are having a discussion, I hope. This feels so familiar to me–Intense discussions/arguments in 60s with students/academics in a real live group–but most of us still cared about one another, because our goal was the same.
        After a while I came to know about group psychology, etc. This particular format of texting on a thread talking about massive topics leads straightaway to a barrage of semantic confusion and a virtual rampage of over-generalizations! This format alone is difficult for me and I’m surprised that more threads haven’t gone this way. I think I said something like this way back when “probable cause” started. To wait 24 hours to relate to a complex subject is still foreign to me. But I persist because of your Intent–I respect you.
        In this very moment , when feelings are hurt; my only recourse is to completely leave this particular discussion because I sense almost anything I say will hurt somebody. I am 74 and I don’t won’t to “pull rank”. My SUGGESTION is that we look at this or any other topic shoulder to shoulder. If we are unable to pull it off, we are no better than “Conspiracy Theorists” arguing defensively over what? Their egos.
        Let me state, for the record, I feel very protective of you and what you wish for. All I see here is INTENSITY and PASSION–not a bad thing, really. I don’t see anybody attacking a person-just the words of the topic. But I do see people starting to defend, etc….that’s when it starts to fall apart and commenters may blaze away without first reading All comments.

        • Ron,

          I think you took that comment out of context. It was meant for the macro geostrategic analyses in general- not my view or this particular topic. You’d hear similar comments from people with expertise in particular topics- For example: William Engdahl.

          One characteristically American trend is: for many (majority) the perception and opinions are obtained through ‘popular’ literature and media. It is very rare (at least for me) to come across those who have traveled and lived around the world (and I don’t mean only as a tourist;-). Without those direct experiences (cultural, geographic, political …)it is very hard (if not impossible) to form multi-dimensional and deep analyses.

          Let’s say you have a Turkish person who has never been in US, has not obtained any in-depth expertise ‘n US politics, posting comments and offering views on why …. let’s say Republican Party is better and more ethical than Democratic Party. And offer this view based on a couple of literature pieces and a certain TV/radio channel.

          The reverse is true.To read or listen to people who don’t know a thing about a certain country(s), have never been there, doesn’t speak the language, doesn’t have any particular academic background on that country … is amusing. Impossible to take seriously. I encounter them regularly. Everywhere. A few weeks ago a guy we met somewhere said: ‘I read a few articles in Erdogan in NYT and the other day I listened to this NPR talk about him … he is …. and is trying to do … and this is his intention … because …’ I usually (almost always) smile, and don’t even respond. Where would I begin?! You’d never hear me offer any views on Western African countries. Or South America. It would be ludicrous. Clownish. My maternal grandfather used to say: ‘Don’t open your mouth on things you know nothing about … it would make you a fool.’ I’ve been practicing that. Whether it is ‘Federal Reserve’ topic or ‘Housing Bubble’ or ‘Brazil’ or … The internet, the virtual forums/discussion sites are filled with people throwing opinions/answers backed by not much (or nothing). Is it good? Yes. Sure. It provides a decent understanding of what people do and or why … And it can be amusing.

          • CuChulainn says:

            the spectator lives and learns nothing directly, so he doesn’t distinguish between hearsay and experience, he talks about everything without distinction, in fact what distinguishes the spectator is precisely indistinction.
            thus his intrinsic and perverse relationship with the psychopath–as Debord says, “Specialists in the power of the spectacle, an absolute power within its system of language without response, are absolutely corrupted by their experience of contempt and of the success of contempt; and they find their contempt confirmed by their knowledge of the contemptible man, who the spectator really is.”
            more psychopaths–

          • Ronald Orovitz says:

            Well, I’ve been to some places, but not to Turkey or Russia. So yes I’m relying on journalists to give me a cue in as to what’s going on (not NPR or NYT though). I do get your point on this Sibel -after looking at what Wally linked above and the pan-Turanian stuff from WMR, I see better what you’re getting at. The list didn’t make much sense on the first listen of the podcast, but I was having download problems as well.

            Still, are these ambitious infrastructure projects between Russia, China, etc. not happening? Given that reality, I don’t see how you can say Putin is continuing the destruction of Russia – it is a distinct turnabout from the neo-lib policies of the Yeltsin era.

          • Sibel:
            OK. I can relax now. Why? You understand the over-arching view, as it were. I raised a daughter who is about 8 tears older than you– my only child. And being very physical and protective is simply part of my makeup. Hell, genetic, I think…stuck with it…part of my “way”.
            And there is something we have in common: We have seen life in developing countries for long periods of time(for me 2 years), and unfortunately for you and me and many others; one cannot possibly put in words something that is intertwined in a type of visceral memory. Even the term “reverse culture shock” doesn’t do it. Actually I seldom bring it up-instead I just plow away at research.
            All right then!

          • CuChulainn says:

            as to where all this leads, don’t miss Doug Valentine’s latest

    • while Putin continues Yeltsin’s work of destruction, the long-term travail de sape of the society of the spectacle on Russia’s population continues. it took 20 years to prepare Ukraine’s population for the witches’ brew of Maidan, it will take longer before the older generation of Russians is gone.>>

      eh, the waiting time before these unreasonable Russians agree to exit is likely to be much-much longer if we are to believe the recent observations by Sarah Mendelson–not exactly the best friend of the Russian people–in her book review “Generation Putin” (Foreign Affairs). My personal observations agree with hers.

  27. I guess it’s probably just me being pretty thick but I don’t suppose Sibel or CuChulainn would care to spell out the idiot’s guide to what the implied realistic theory is here about Putin?

    • CuChulainn says:
      • Well, thanks for responding and for the link. I’ve read through it. It is more of a dense mass of (presumably informed) speculation and innuendo — an advanced course, if you will — than an idiot’s guide to the informed speculation and innuendo right here. But it does give me some dots to connect. It looks like Hodos’s theory could be titled: Putin, Secret Tool of Amazingly Powerful Chabad. Implicitly the title of the theory seemingly suggested here would be: Putin, Secret Tool of the Western Deep State. From these we could suggest a Grand Unified Theory of Putin and call it, with elegant simplicity: Putin, Secret Tool.

        For me, due entirely to my own limitations, I have to file this under Inconclusive But Interesting. It certainly offers a helpful explanation of cards demurely not played.

  28. tonywicher says:

    I completely and totally disagree with Sibel’s analysis of Putin. What she says was true of Yeltsin and Medvedev, who sold out to the West, but Putin has restored Russian power and stood up to the West and is known as having done so by his people. He is a skilled diplomat who knows he is dealing with a mad adversary with a huge nuclear arsenal. Putin is winning this battle. The BRICS nations and their allies are forming an economic union with financial institutions like the AIIB that are independent of Western banks. The economy of the West is dying.

  29. I guess the question should not be so much who is Putin but who is behind Putin? Not only in Russia but abroad. When did they begin this planning? Who was it originally and who has come one board since then or who has left? What/when was their starting point? The Shanghai 5 started in ’96 and SCO in ’01. So China is not really a new found ally. I know he is the front for something beyond anything I could ever ponder. I don’t view him as some savior of the world. That’s pretty simplistic. I do get a sense that the Western elites are split when it comes to the future-preserve the US dollar at all costs or move on to greener pastures. For all the puppet bastards and their minions, there is a lot of incentive to attempt to cling to the dollar; if it loses its power and standing, that’s a lot of disposable puppet bastards(btw Sibel-I love that name for them). Who knows-this could be the ultimate Rockefeller vs. Rothschild battle or a complete snowjob by every hand in the cookie jar.
    I just see the encirclement as a way to loot those countries and pay tribute to their masters. Extract as much as you can. Suffocate them in loans, bankrupt them paying for the US MIC’s toys, use the cheap labor, lower the standard of living, get a steady stream of subservient people who will do anything for some money.
    When I said I think their was a miscalculation, I meant on the people not the politicians. As you had mentioned, in order for them to fully take control and achieve their objectives they are left with the options of getting a far-right/fake nationalist group to pull a coup or military invasion. Using the Islamic fundies and pro-west liberals has caused problems but nothing has materialized to effect a regime change. So they are left with those options. If they don’t need to fully take over, then they can just do their Empire of Chaos routine and use Ukraine as the anti-Russia and make a mess-if we can’t have it no one can.
    Another question is exactly what does the US/West need from Russia? What are their objectives? How dependent is the dollar system on achieving those objectives?
    Also, one of you mentioned Putin as being all things to all people. I see that also. Obama is very much in that category, too. To me, Obama has nothing to back it up once you scratch the surface. With Putin, no matter what ends up being his purpose, you couldn’t have picked a better person to fit either roll. He is very distinct from the usual puppet bastards that have been used in the last 2 decades.
    As far as where this is going, I can’t help but keep in mind the patterns of history for the US and Russia. One has always been the invader and one has always been the invade. we in the US are very used to this idea of all this military conquest going on outside our borders. The Russians are very familiar with the idea of a defensive posture.

    • Lizzie:
      “What does the US/WEST need from Russia?” Actually I could never ask a question like that. It is a huge generalization. So huge, in fact, I would not try to answer it.
      If you were to ask, for example, “What does the neocon faction now entrenched in the US Executive Department want from Russia?” ; I would say it depends on the factions. The neocons, in particular, seem to want Everything! Endless power driven by endless wars! And, as I said earlier to you, the seemingly dominant psychopathic part cares NOT about the consequences! WW3? OK. Fine! They do not care if they are psychopaths.
      Other factions want Endless wars for $$$–but they stop short of Nuclear annihilation. And so it goes. Each wants something. “The West”? I know what it sort of means when I hear it in casual newspeak. But when it comes to actually wanting to know in an intense deeper manner, the word “West” dissolves into a cloudy mist of disconnected parts in conflict with their own interests. Spain, Italy, German Corp. oligarchs do not want sanctions against Russia!! Not good for business. But feckless politicians vote for sanctions. Very complex now on planet earth–facile answers are fading into the sunset.
      BTW, I like the way you express yourself.

  30. You are bang on the money about Putin, Sibel.

    The Mexico analogy sealed it for me.

    I’ve had an inkling of suspicion for some time he’s the US man in Russia and it makes nothing but sense as all he’s achieved is loss of Russian allies and turned RT into CNN.

    A lot of these KGB and CIA ops in the 80s and prior were globalist (non-nationalist) playing both sides and believed they were above any government. Putin is a globalist for sure whose job is to pacify the Russian nationalists as without him in power NATO could not have made the gains it has.

    He’s probably just happy to live with the trappings and run Gazprom whilst handing Russia and its former allies over to the NWO. Its all theatre and both sides are playing their part in the charade.

    I’ll re-iterate, when Nuland said “F*ck the EU” she meant it. NATO wants the eastern european states for itself to exploit, not for the EU.

    Excellent analysis. I could see Secker’s head spinning 🙂

    • mike33,

      Here us another question I pose to people who view Putin as the great savior of Russia and counter-balance force against the US-NATO: Why is it that Putin’s $150+ million wealth (stolen wealth) is stashed in Cyprus, Malta & England banks? In 2001-2002, while I was working @ FBI that amount was $80+ million. We (the United States-NATO) knew exactly where they were held (During that period: Cyprus & Malta) and kept track of it. That’s a 100% factual information obtained directly. Since that time it is claimed that the amount now exceeds $150 million- kept in bank accounts in Cyprus, UK and Malta. The West, NATO countries, is where Putin feels safe to stash and be protected. Why?

      • On May 19 , 2015 Sibel wrote:
        Why is it that Putin’s $150+ million wealth (stolen wealth) is stashed in Cyprus, Malta & England banks? In 2001-2002, while I was working @ FBI that amount was $80+ million. >>

        On April 22, 2014 Sibel wrote:

        Of course my information was limited to what I had gathered in early 2002, when Putin’s wealth stashed in Cypriot Banks was estimated at around $300-$500 million. Nonetheless, I knew that they had the card, and I was wondering when they were going to play it. >>

        Unlike all other banks in the world, Putin’s has the uncanny ability to earn interest backwards, eh?

        • I’m out of my depth to comment with any authority, but the 2013 EU rort of Cypriot bank deposits must be somehow related to all of this.

        • I thought this dude was worth tens of billions. Wouldn’t that amount be basically pocket change to him? IIRC it was something like 40 billion. Maybe he had a small stash in those banks for some sort of convenience reason?

  31. Sorry to be late in contributing to this discussion, and by another Ron.

    The main question is: “Who is Putin & Why has he let his nation become encircled by NATO?” I think the most likely explanation is that Putin was like originally rather apolitical and came up in the ranks of the former KGB in which he performed his duties very well. Then after the Yeltsin putsch and the new oligarchs took over in the ’90s and plundered the Russian economy while cozing up to the US, he simply transformed his loyalties to his new bosses. He came out of the rule of these people who appointed him in top leadership positions of Prime Minister, President, and Prime Minister again. During his reign he has seen the aggressive moves against Russia by the US and he finally wisend up, jailed some oligarchs, took back some of their lootings, and has finally realized that getting along with the Empire on any kind of mutually respectful basis is impossible.

    • This is a very good, common sense take on Putin. He was an ordinary Soviet Russian intelligence officer of humble social origin, more interested in Judo than in any political ideology. Great Russian patriot he naturally was, communist — only on paper. He was no doubt, ambitious and career oriented. His rise began after his retirement from the KGB when he landed a job in St. Petersburg city administration under the prominent “reformer” Sobchak. He proved to be a good worker, intelligent, well-organized, and above all, loyal. People like Asad have had the opportunity to appreciate this quality of his character. As virtually all upwardly-mobile people of his generation, Putin admired the West, especially the United States, and they wanted to make Russia a part of the West, let it be a junior partner, but partner, not a vassal. This is what distinguishes Putin and his group from the 1990s regime of Jewish oligarchs and Yeltsyn’s liberal associates. Great Russian nationalism (GRN) was the umbilical cord tying them to the Russian people. This is how simple it is. All really important things are always the most simple.

      • Ronald Orovitz says:

        That and this “son of the people” talk – now, that’s some kool-aid drinking I’m not so eager to partake in… He’s a Machiavellian, don’t doubt it. But he is a more skillful Machiavellian.

        • Ronald Orovitz says:

          Clarifying that: he is a Machiavellian of The Discourses as opposed to a Machiavellian of The Prince. In the former, it is acknowledged that it is better to have the genuine blessing of the people. But such is rarely obtained, and more often it becomes necessary to obtain that blessing by deception. The nature of Putin’s blessing, so to speak, is what is at issue here. Time will tell.

          • It’s irrelevant what you, I or anyone here may think of Putin and his “nature.” Only what the Russian people think matters. And they have said their word time and again.

      • Netter:
        You have laid out some strong points of view on this thread and many of them seem closer to the reality of things we are “seeing through a glass darkly”(Ingmar Bergman).Although the “truth” of something still evades us. Your paragraph above seems to feel right except for your last sentence: ” All really important things are always the most simple.” I simply disagree. I take it then, that you haven’t studied the theories of quantum physics or the origin of this universe in which we are imbedded. and the latest theories regarding Complexity, Chaos, Uncertainty, Thresholds, Emergence, the particle/wave dualism of the most fundamental phenomena–the proton and the electron.
        Nothing seems simple to me once I begin to study it. The strange irony is that when I’m not pondering ; it all becomes more” simple”.
        For about the last couple of centuries, great thinkers have suggested that important things are not so difficult to understand. Try reading the works of these people and it quickly becomes one of the most complex syndromes for most readers before an insight dawns. That has been my experience.

        • Dude, why don’t you write an article or more and post them on the site? It’d be good to have at least some semblance of the perspective of a brainiac floating about in my mind. Perhaps others would appreciate it too.

          I never could do math and science well even though I once tried for a few years.

          It would be really nice to know about the formation of consciousness, the potential non locality of the mind and the various patterns of the physical, and so called non physical world. I’ve long though that the patterns of the social world probably mimic those of the physical/so called non physical world.

          • That second sentence to last should have ended “and how they relate to social world and the world we see.”

  32. CuChulainn says:

    NATO can behave as it does because they know putin is precisely the opposite of what they accuse him of being; VP, who grew up pretty much fatherless, is cut from the same cloth as our own politicians; like any puppet he pretends to fight back, but the record speaks for itself.
    if you go to niqnaq and search for Ilyukhin you will find a military tribunal indictment of Putin for treason in 2011, when things were not so obvious as now.
    why do people who presumably understand that the US 2-party system is a synthetic conflict imagine things are different between Russia & USA? a primary object of this spectacle is Franco-Germany, keeping Europeans frightened and submissive; another is the Pentagon budget.
    Rick Rozoff at least is clear-minded about Putin’s complicity in NATO aggression–

  33. Wally Sarkeesian says:

    All these talk about Putin, Russia, NATO all you need to know is watch Sibel Video on Gladio operation, Turkey is the epicenter of all the east/ west and Russia confrontation because Turkey throughout it history wanted to destroy Russia and Iran to open path and unite central Asia Turkic nation to Turkey. so now they have changed the Gladio operation to these new just Created (VJTF) “Turkey offers to take lead in NATO’s rapid reaction forces” Turkey has pledged to be a “framework nation” for NATO’s Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) by 2021. The force was originally designed to serve as a deterrent to Russian aggression after President Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea and supported separatists in eastern Ukraine. Report which is name change from Gladio to (VJTF). Turkey have all the way have been the God father of so called Islamic state ISIS. Just another tool in Turkey arsenal.

  34. The BFP investigation into the real nature of Mr. Putin has inspired me to take a deeper look at the international situation of this great country of ours. Using the methodology so effectively employed in the series of three round tables on Putin and Gladio, I did a study provisionally named “President Obama and the KGB.” I respectfully submit the conclusions of my study to BFP members for their expert consideration.

    Who is Obama & Why has he let his nation become encircled by Russia and China?

    Consider these facts.

    Obama has failed to establish a US naval base in the Black Sea and allowed Putin to take the strategic Crimean Peninsula without a single shot!

    Obama has let Putin to take Donbass, the industrial heartland of Eastern Europe from Ukraine!

    Under the cover of the so-called US-Russia ‘reset’, Obama’s allowed Putin to kick us from our strategic air base in Manas, Kyrgyzstan — a transit hub for our strategic Afghan dope running to Europe and a life line for our failing banking system!

    Obama has let Putin to prevent the victory of democracy over tyranny in Syria!

    Obama has let Putin to sell most advanced anti-missile defense systems to Iran to protect the medieval regime of reactionary mullahs from the forces of freedom!

    Obama has allowed Putin to manipulate our strategic NATO ally Turkey and use his buddy Erdogan to build an alternative pipeline to Europe! Turkey won’t link Air Defense System to NATO because Obama’s let the Chinese to sell their copy of S-300 to Erdogan!!! Who’s going to fight Russians? Finns and Georgians?

    Obama has let Putin’s diplomacy in LA to become such a threat to this country that we have to seek “normalization” with Cuban commies and lift the Blockade!

    By inaction, Obama has allowed Putin to penetrate our very backyard–Nicaragua, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia and threaten us from there! Our Air Force bases in Colombia are of no use now because Obama has let Putin to sell S-300s to Venezuelan commies and train them how to shoot down our planes! Obama didn’t move a finger to ban the flights of Russian nuclear bombers along our Western borders and their submarines patrolling our East Coast!!!

    Just look what’s happening in Macedonia right now! Obama had let Putin’s agents to defend the corrupted authoritarian regime of that country from a group of the freedom loving Macedonians of Albanian ethnicity whose only “crime” was that they wanted their country to join the European union of free nations and their transAltlantic shield.

    Yet a the same time, Obama’s allowed Putin to suppress the pro-American opposition in Moscow, pass the “foreign agents” law which undermines our ability to finance them, and even physically destroy some of our best friends in Russia!

    Obama has let Putin to project Russia’s military might even over the natural riches of the Arctic! Will Alaska come next?

    Obama’s allowed Russians and Chinese to build their own transoceanic canal in Nicaragua which will make our Panama Canal obsolete. Now they have squeezed us between the Arctic and Central America as well as between the Atlantic and the Pacific! The Russian Fleet operates from its bases in Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Argentina. The Chinese are building artificial islands, their new great chinese wall, in the Pacific fencing out our battle groups!

    I could have continued this list of Obama’s (mis)deeds demonstrating his strange meekness towards the aggressive expansion of Russia and China but it’s more than enough for BFP intelligent and savvy people who read this.

    So why did President Obama has let the enemies of freedom to completely encircle its last beacon in this dark world? I see only one plausible explanation. We all know how good the KGB has always been in collecting dirt on free world politicians. They use what they call ‘kompromat’ (compromising materials) to control and blackmail them into obeying Russian orders. Or else they will publicly reveal their dirty underwear just like that Gladio superman did in Mrs. Edmonds’ novel. But the KGB handlers of our politicians and presidents are much more skilful and cunning. They want their ‘assets’ to pretend being great American nationalists, talk all the time about American exceptionalism, sound like anti-Russian toughies, and all that. KGB even orders them to act like ones: impose sanctions on Russia, send Gladio people to make havoc in the Caucasus, encircle Russia by military bases, bomb Asad and Qaddafi, finance the fifth column inside Russia, and so on. This is what the KGB calls “active measures.” What is all this masquerade for? To keep the genuine hard American nationalists at bay, make them happy, bide time before they all die away of broken hearts at the sight of America’s changing color, one-sex marriages, bearded divas, multiculturalism, $15 minimum pay, and the financial atrocities of the Federal Reserve! That’s how simple it is whatever Einstein or Peter Pan may think of it. Back to Obama.

    I can only speculate what the KGB/FSB has gotten on our president since I never worked in that organization. But my guess is that Russian spooks have documents proving that Obama was born outside the United States. I think so because the KGB handlers like keeping their “assets” on their toes, so to speak, by reminding them from time to time who’s the boss. One way of doing this is by spreading as rumors and innuendos some of the ‘kompromat’ the KGB has. This is also the way to convince some of their stubborn assets who may steer away from ‘the party’s line’ to come back to their KGB daddies. This is what, imho, the KGB did in Obama’s case. They began raising questions about his citizenship through their proxies in the Republican party at the start of the election campaign. Obama got religion and now we are where we are: completely encircled! But who knows what else they’ve got on the President. It can be anything: sexual deviations graphically documented, marital infidelity, use of hard drugs, hundreds millions from kickbacks stacked in London and Malta…

    I have my doubts about Senator John McCain as well. He plays a hard-boiled Great American nationalist but if you look closer at his record you’ll see that he did absolutely nothing to prevent the complete Russian-Chinese encirclement of the United States. He only peacocked around the Capitol Hill with the stiff upper lip and talked gibberish that made the entire world ridicule true American conservatives. I am confident he’s under the KGB control as well. And I have some info confirming this. A nice elderly lady who lives in my apartment building has a friend who works for MacDonald and a couple of years ago went on a business trip to Moscow to make sure the locally produced beef fit the company’s requirements. In Moscow she met, for Romantic purposes, a nice elderly gentleman whose niece’s husband’s high-school friend used to work for the FSB as interpreter from Albanian. This man said that shortly after he retired he received first-second hand 100% true info that KGB had a thick file on Senator McCain collected during his captivity in North Vietnam…

    The End.

    Was I successful in demonstrating the worth of ‘critical thinking’ and ‘genuine alternative journalism’ in the story called “Who is Putin? & Why has he let his nation become encircled by NATO?”?

    • Netter:
      There just simply too many statements which “beg the question”(a logical fallacy, as you know). My question would therefore have to be: Why is it a struggle between and just Putin and Obama? They are extremely important, but there are many, many players on the stage of the Ukrainian disaster.
      Your statement: “Obama… allowed Putin to take the Crimean peninsula without firing a single shot”

      I see it in a completely different way. THE CONTEXT: A savage riot by Bandera Nazi-type thugs smashed through and took advantage of a moderate protest in Kiev against an elected President. He fled. People were beaten, shot, bludgeoned in the Maidan madness/massacre.
      The people of Crimea saw this! They felt fear. They held a referendum themselves and by over 90% wanted to become part of the Russian Federation. The Russian government considered this and accepted it. There were no shots fired by anyone. Instead there was celebration–Check out the videos for your self. Do not take my word for it. Crimea was NOT annexed by Russia–that is US MSM BS. Putin did NOT take Crimea because Obama let him! that’s absurd!
      Now the important point; You have a sharp brain and write with intensity. We are just “talking here”–we are rather harmless in the scheme of things–given what I’ve seen/done. Please do not make this “The End”. To quote a Black Panther of yesteryear when I was young, “Freedom is a struggle!”

  35. We need an intelligence arm. Just sayin’.

    The only thing I know now is that my forehead is thankful I don’t have a desk in front of me.

    • I know, right? Face palm!

      • Why don’t you ever have a discussion about how to get the info needed to make decisions?

        You can sit here all day and talk about history patterns and it will not mean anything if the current reality has deviated from that pattern. I can no linger remember the podcast, and much of it I could not follow anyway, but it ended up with speculation no matter what points were made from what I can tell.

        There needs to.either be a way to gather hard data or a way to create a movement that can’t be hijacked to force those in power positions to act properly regardless of their propencities.

        Although I fear that neither of those needs are fulfillable.

        • Actually, the second need is always present. But is there a need for that hard info? Can things be bent into shape without it? If not then how do we get it?

          That’s what I should.have asked.

        • Although I fear that neither of those needs are fulfillable. >>
          Why not? It’s just very hard and cannot be accomplished all at once, by a fiat and good intentions of a few. Which means it takes a movement of very many people whose social-economic circumstances are roughly similar and will remain so for considerable future and who are so hard-pressed by these circumstances that they see no other way to meaningfully improve them but by their long-term collective struggle. So far I do not see any public manifestation that would indicate that such a social base already exists in North America.

          As to “hard information,” it depends on what is meant by “hard.” If it’s the information that state agencies conceal from their citizenry by the state sanctioned regime of secrecy, we cannot have access to it by definition. What we can do is destroy the system of power in need of secrecy from and against its citizenry. This can be done only by the state run by the people themselves. Such a state cannot exist without a regime of absolute transparency because otherwise the people wouldn’t be able run it. Fortunately, people don’t need this sort of hard information to take power in their hands. They need knowledge, not information. And much of what actually matters we already know from everyday existence. It’s just that most of us either don’t know that they do because they cannot generalize, or simply don’t want to know because they remain sufficiently satisfied with their lives as they are. Nothing but some long-time and large scale collective hardship can change the mind of this second group. As to the former, they need historical and theoretical knowledge to generalize their everyday experiences and develop a provisional set of collective goals to achieve, a first draft of road-map so to speak. This kind of knowledge is also generally lacking in this society, though with the disintegration of US middle class and the corresponding proletarization of young intellectuals we can expect a gradual improvement in historical and theoretical awareness. An average graduate from an English department–who cannot afford having a family and has to live with parents because he can find at best a temporary job as technical writer or the like–will have to either accept the life of vegetation in the decrepit empire or look for social change. This is how some of them will come to Marx and communism and find a growing numbers of people looking for political enlightenment. But this is a long and far from certain perspective. Much shorter distance separates the American society from a Fascist alternative which needs only raw affects and no enlightenment. Is there any “hard” knowledge (“information”) shared already now by the vast majority of Americans which could counter Fascist tendencies and serve as catalyst for a mass nation-wide action towards a progressive solution? I think there is, and no state agencies can hide from the plain view.

          • Please don’t try to steer this toward communism. Not being able to own property is the very problem many of us already have. And what if it is custom made for a specific person? No private property is a bad idea.

            And you make sense , until you get to the part where the intellectuals are killed or re-educated. Those mraps aren’t for nothing.

          • CuChulainn says:

            do you want capitalism without terrorism?
            that would be a truly utopian position
            to exclude a priori the only tools of analysis that can explain our situation–those developed by Hegel and Marx, and applied most pertinently in our time by Debord–can only lead to an impasse

          • Netter:
            “with the disintegration of US middle class and the corresponding proletarization(proletarianize) of young intellectuals we can expect a gradual improvement and historical and theoretical awareness.”
            Hmmmmm. That word derives from the word “proletariat” and its classical Dic. definition:1. the unpropertied class, the class that is dependent for support on daily or casual labor. 2. the working class 3.the class of manual workers who do not possess capital or property and must sell their labor to survive.
            Obviously, your must be referring to young intellectuals who can, in theory, come to understand that they, as members of the WORKING CLASS must struggle with the BOURGEOISIE(I., e., thesis vs. antithesis toward synthesis). I’m trying to unpack your convoluted sentence which seems to make no sense because it has inherent contradictions.
            Stay with me. Back in the day(60s) we understood CLASS STRUCTURE. The very word WORKING CLASS has virtually vanished. The Poor, the Working Class(my roots), the Middle Class, the Upper Class, and the Aristocracy—each class was often subdivided into 3 levels.
            The present-day phobia of the term, THE WORKING CLASS as a serious dimension of American labor was pulled into the term MIDDLE CLASS because of some BS regarding a fear of class struggle in America. That’s nuts and deceiving! Hence your words “disintegration of US middle class” is understandably OK, because very few seem to understand Class struggle NOW and that it has been a severe smash to the The WORKING CLASS!–steelworkers, firemen(my dad),plumbers, teamsters, truck-drivers, policemen, factory workers—blue collar workers, men and women–screwed! The Middle Class wore/wear white shirts and don’t get callouses on their hands! And they have declined as well, but IMO, the WORKING CLASS took the first hit. Enough. But, sorry to say, with or without your convoluted sentence, We cannot” expect a gradual improvement and historical and theoretical awareness.”
            Wait a minute; is this more satire on your part? lol

          • Rin: “Wait a minute; is this more satire on your part? lol >>

            No, I was all seriousness writing this. I am not sure what exactly you are critical about in my post. I learned my Marx from very different sources than Americans like you in the 60s. And anyway this is “just a chatter,” right? Anyway, I guess this is something about the impropriety of using the term ‘middle class’ next to the world ‘Marx’. Let me say this, but only for clarification because I feel it’s important topic, otherwise I never argue in places like this.

            ‘Middle class’ in the mainstream American usage is not a ‘scientific’ concept in any interpretation of classical Marxism I know of, because it includes not only waged manual labor but also some propertied sections of bourgeoisie (small and middling) and professions, salaried or not (dentists, artists, professors and the like). Then what is the epistemological status of ‘middle class’ concept in the Marxist paradigm? Well, if it’s not ‘scientific’ it must be ideological. Are ideological/unscientific concepts/ideas false in the the same sense as the statement that the sun orbits around the Earth is false? Of course, not! Marxism would then be no different from the most pedestrian forms of bourgeois rationalism. Ideologies are not false. They are both false, true, and neither. They reflect really existing social relations but only at their surface, as they appear to people involved in these relations now and here and to observers who lack a theoretical understanding of man’s history. Ideological representations not only have an element of truth in them but also a performative value (neither false or true, but effective or not). The ideological concept of ‘middle class’ is true in the sense that it reflects the existence in American society of a group of population who for a significant historical period identify themselves as different from ‘the poor,’ on the one hand, and ‘the rich’, on the other, while the internal composition of this group is but cohesive from the point of view of Marxist sociology. This truth element in the concept of middle class has been tested and confirmed in practice. Otherwise, the political machine in this country wouldn’t make it the centerpiece of its electoral strategizing, as well as its imperial politics. The fundamental wisdom of US style political science and government is: A strong and prosperous middle class is synonymous with political stability. This wisdom has been proven time and again both positively (in the last 70 years) and negatively (the Great Depression). This is what makes it ‘true’. Any radical attempt to change this society which does not recognize this truth will end up not with a bang but a whisper like the US radicals in the 60s did. This is why the ideological concept of the middle class must remain in the center of our analysis if one day we want to hear another middle-class poet’s hysterics: “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold.” Only then the true worth of ‘scientific’ concepts will become possible to test again.

  36. Wally Sarkeesian says:

    I totally Agree with Ron on Crimea, moreover Crimea was Russian in first place Nikita Khrushchev give it to Ukraine because he himself was Ukrainian. this was the practice of USSR carving land and giving it to some other group another example was Nagorno-Karabakh with 90% of Armenian they carved from Eastern Armenia and handed to Azerbaijan to keep Muslim Azerbaijan happy and many examples like these.

  37. Isaac Dolores says:

    Wow, excellent analysis! I especially enjoyed Sibel commenting on RT as I am no longer a viewer. I have also stopped listening to Alex Jones and am curious to Sibel’s opinion on him. Many things he has to say are valid but some other angles he takes are outright insane. He still plays to the fake left right paradigm by being a quasi conservative and supporting certain politicians like Rand Paul, but he also has an ego and a strong personality that is sometimes hard to take. Plus he doesn’t let his guest, like you Sibel, speak when he interviews them. I could go on with reservations I have about him and his operation, but overall I think he is a distraction regardless of his motives. What do you think Sibel, Tom, and Pearse?

    • Yeah I’m curious about that too. I mean what is it about Sophie Shevardnadze hosting a current affairs show on RT. She lives in the US and with Georgians hating Russians, doesnt seem the best choice. I know about her grandfather and all growing up in the 80’s but that was another era.

      I’d like to know more from Sibel about that recent interview; how much was edited out. I used to watch Sophie a bit but mainly because being a conventional man I found her somewhat intriguing (a weakness I know), then later realised she was a ditz who had a team of writers to produce all her questions. I annoyed her on twitter once when I questioned a report she did on Japan Fukushima meltdown that showed video of the oil refinery on fire. She got all defensive and ended up backing down when she realised the error. 🙂

      As for Alex Jones, dont bother, unless for the comedy.

      The only other alt media I’d recommend is ‘no agenda’. Those guys wised me up to a lot of things – however one must have the kind of mind to be open to their way of thinking in the first place.

  38. How do you tell the true nationalist Russians from the fakes and fronts?

  39. CuChulainn says:
    • Rest in Peace, Russian Comandante!

      • Netter:
        I was basically focusing on your one phrase as per above. And during my riff I was also emphasizing that there is no longer a complete usage in everyday language(or understanding) of CLASS ANALYSIS in MSM. IMO the very term, MIDDLE CLASS covers damn near everything. The general impression for most Americans??– – The Homeless, the “working Poor”, THE MIDDLE CLASS–now suffering, and ,obscurely, the !%/the very rich. This is an absurd view of reality and of course this is not what you are saying. I like to really stress the term, THE WORKING CLASS because it took the hit when the big corps. took everything offshore. For a factory union member(working class)–suddenly he/she is flipping burgers with no health ins.!!
        . Other than me having trouble understanding that one phrase you and I probably agree on many things. We come at it from different angles and our writing styles are different. On the world of threads/text talk, semantic confusion is a given, for me. No ad hominem intended. Peace

      • CuChulainn says:

        you take the side of the assassins, and you proclaim RIP like a good stalinist

  40. CuChulainn says:

    parallel to the Phoenix-style assassinations of intellectuals like Oles Buzina and others deemed unacceptable to the Kiev oligarchs, the Kremlin’s boys in Novorossiya have been eliminating anti-oligarchical leaders–they killed Bednov, sidelined Gubarev, this was the last attempt on Mozgovoi–

  41. CuChulainn says:

    true believers in Putin might wonder why he never delivers on the S-300s, and why his allies (Libya, Syria) end up in ruins

  42. CuChulainn says:

    the shared business interests between Moscow & Kiev gangsters (link below) are more inconvenient truths for those who imagine that Putin and Poroshenko are at odds; in reality, they are allied against the people of both countries, and especially of Novorossiya, championed by Mozgovoi

  43. CuChulainn says:
  44. CuChulainn says:

    this beautiful woman could be a soulmate for Sibel

  45. CuChulainn says:

    whoever accepts the mainstream media view of Putin as opposed to the West, whether for or against Putin, has to studiously avoid the realities of SE Ukraine, which even as avid a propagandist as the Saker can hardly conceal

  46. I have had some wonders rolling around in my head.

    I wonder….

    1) Why does Russian space shuttle look the same as US space shuttle?

    2) Why does Putin meet Rothschildes?

    3) Why does Russia have a central bank?

    4) APA I think it was, or some other big psychology association awarded the man who invented sluggish schizophrenia.

    … I think there were other things I found curious.

    But the question I came to ask myself was how close ha e the US and Russia been?

    Also, thinking on nazi’s, US eugenics…

    How tightly have the upper levels of the various power societies of the world socialized with each other?

    I am still confused as to your views on what Putin is exactly… a US or NWO puppet? Is he just another member of the dark society?

  47. Also, I keep forgetting to ask, but some people think that the people in power in the Soviet union never really lost power and that this whole capitalism thing they have been doing since the fall is just an act and that eventually Russia will return to being just what it was. They say that the whole overthrow thing was staged.

    Is this theory reasonable?

  48. They just nailed 8 chechen terrorists apparently.

  49. CuChulainn says:
  50. CuChulainn says:
    according to the Federal Law of the Russian Federation #99-FZ of Jun 7 2007, signed personally by VVP (Putin – RB), NATO troops have a right to reside on the territory of Russia, to support the Government of the Russian Federation, to suppress riots and to undertake other activities. By the way, the transit of arms and military equipment to and from Afghanistan through Russian territory, terminated by Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation #468 of May 15 2015. But discontinued only transit. The placement of NATO weapons and military equipment on the territory of the Russian Federation still remains legitimate.

Speak Your Mind