Putin: I Kept Trying to Tell You; You Wouldn’t Listen

Many took offense when President Putin on March 1 accused the West of refusing to listen and respect Russia’s strategic concerns — particularly on missile defense. Small wonder there was such widespread consternation.  Some folks still think that, if they read the NY Times, they know what’s going on.

The following link includes four distinct warnings from Putin; in the last one, he comes close to losing it, watching the nonchalant reaction of the journalists who were listening — sort of.

Putin’s March 1 speech reminded Ray of a 14-minute talk (the LINK is above) he gave a year ago on Russia’s concerns regarding U.S. missile defense installations on Russia’s periphery.  Planers of a Webinar on U.S. missile defense (THAAD) in the Far East asked Ray to set the stage, speaking from own experience with Russian concerns — not only “back in the day” but particularly after the scuttling of the ABM treaty by President Bush in 2002

Embedded in Ray’s presentation are four short slides/videos of particular interest, given Putin’s claims that no one has been listening:

1 — minute 3:50 to 5:20 (SLIDE)— Conversation overheard on ABC microphone on March 26, 2012 in Seoul:  then-President Medvedev, on behalf of Putin, asking Obama when he will deal with Russian concerns over missile defense systems being installed around European Russia; Obama says tell Vlad to wait till I get re-elected.  (Obama apparently forgot about it, once re-elected.)

2 — minute 5:20 to 6:47 (SLIDE)— on March 17, 2014, the day before Crimea is formally annexed, Putin tells a country-wide TV audience that the threat of missile defense was an “even more important” factor in keeping Crimea out of NATO hands than the general threat of NATO encroachment eastward.

3 — minute 7:00 to 9:15 (VIDEO)— At Valdai Discussion Club, October 22. 2015, Jack Matlock makes a giant faux pas on missile defense and Putin does not let him down easy.*  (The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action restraining Iranian nuclear weapons development had been signed three months earlier, on July 14, 2015.)

4 — minute 9:55 to 13:00 (VIDEO) — Putin, on June 17, 2016 tries to explain Russian concerns over missile defense to Western journalists who were in St. Petersburg for the International Economic Forum.  Putin comes close to losing his patience as he watches their nonchalant reaction.

* Below is the transcript of the relevant parts of the Valdai discussion, October 22, 2015:

Vladimir Putin:  Now, on the question of continuing strategic offensive arms limitation talks, you are right to say that we do need to continue this dialogue. But at the same time, I cannot say that Russia and the United States have done nothing here. We did conclude a new treaty on limiting strategic offensive arms and set goals for limiting this type of weapons. However, the USA’s unilateral withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, which was the cornerstone for preserving the balance of power and international security, has left this whole system in a serious and complicated state.
In this respect, since this is a discussion club, I would like to ask Mr Ambassador what he thinks of the USA’s unilateral withdrawal from the ABM Treaty.

Jack Matlock: I was personally opposed to that withdrawal and I take your point. I would say that I don’t think that any subsequent plans for the sort of deployments were or could be a threat to Russian systems. But in general, I am not a supporter of ABM systems. I would point out that I think the main source of that is not to threaten Russia but to secure employment in the United States. A lot comes from the military-industrial complex and the number of people it employs.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Ambassador, I find your arguments unconvincing. I have the greatest respect for your experience and diplomatic skills, of which you have given us a flawless demonstration, avoiding a direct answer. Well, you did answer my question, but not without some embellishments.

One should not create jobs when the result of this activity threatens all of humanity. And if developing new missile defence systems is about creating jobs, why create them in this particular area? Why not create jobs in biology, pharmaceuticals, or in high-tech sectors not related to arms production?

On the question of whether this poses a threat to Russia or not, I can assure you that US security and strategic arms specialists are fully aware that this does threaten Russia’s nuclear capability, and that the whole purpose of this system is to reduce the nuclear capabilities of all countries but the USA itself to zero. We’ve been hearing arguments this whole time about the Iranian nuclear threat, but as I said in my remarks before, our position was always that there was no such threat, and now not only we but the entire international community share this view.

The United States initiated the signing of an agreement with Iran on settling the Iranian nuclear issue. We actively followed and supported our US and Iranian partners on the road to a common decision and this agreement has now come into force and Iran has agreed to send its enriched uranium out of the country. So if there is no Iranian nuclear problem, why develop a missile defense system? You could stop the project, but not only has the project not stopped, on the contrary, new tests and exercises are taking place. These systems will be in place in Romania by the end of the year and in Poland by 2018 or 2020.

The antidote to surprise?  Read Consortiumnews.com, raymcgovern.com; we listen.

Bill Binney Lets It All Hang Out Re Mind-Blowing Corruption at DOJ & FBI, on The Jimmy Dore Show

February 20, 2018  (35 minutes)

Binney, former Technical Director at NSA, is at his relaxed best providing hard-to-believe-but-all-too-real facts about our lawless Deep State, including drawing from his own personal experience.

At minute 12:00 Bill explains that a single warrant — on Carter Page, for example — enables intrusive surveillance of everyone Carter Page in in touch with, and everyone they, in turn, are in touch with.

So was Trump himself “wiretapped,” as he claimed?  No. Technology has rendered that term “quaint” or “obsolete,” to use adjectives favored by Bush Jr.’s lawyer Alberto Gonzales (to characterize those annoying Geneva protections for POWs).

Was Trump surveilled?  What do you think?

NachDenkSeiten translates some of Ray’s articles

For those who wish to brush up on their German, the popular progressive website in Germany, NachDenkSeiten, has been translating and publishing some of Ray’s articles and those that Bill Binney and he have written together.  Here are two recent examples:

1 —

27. Februar 2018

Russland erschrocken über US-Strategie der nuklearen Vergeltung von Cyberangriffen

Die neue US-Strategie der nuklearen Vergeltungsschläge gegen Cyberangriffe gibt Anlass zur Besorgnis, da Russland behauptet, dass es bereits für eine False-Flag-Cyberattacke verantwortlich gemacht wurde, nämlich für die angeblichen Hackerangriffe während der Wahl 2016, erklären Ray McGovern und William Binney. Von Ray McGovern und William Binney, aus dem Englischen von Josefa Zimmermann.
Dieser Beitrag ist auch als Audio-Podcast verfügbar.

Translation of “Russians Spooked by Nukes-Against-Cyber-Attack Policy,” February 16, 2918

2 —

10. Februar 2018

Wird der Kongress dem „Tiefen Staat“ entgegentreten?

Durch die Entscheidung des Geheimdienstausschusses des Repräsentantenhauses vom Montag, ein Memorandum zu veröffentlichen, in dem mutmaßliche Amtsvergehen im Justizministerium und im FBI beschrieben werden, könnten Verfassungsgrundsätze auf die Probe gestellt werden, schreibt Ray McGovern[*]. Aus dem Englischen für die NachDenkSeiten von Josefa Zimmermann.

Dieser Beitrag ist auch als Audio-Podcast verfügbar.

Translation of  “Will Congress Face Down the Deep State?” January 30, 2018

(Man tut, was man kann.)

Growing Risk of U.S.-Iran Hostilities Based on False Pretexts, Intel Vets Warn


By Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), February 26, 2018

Copied in below is the Introduction to VIPS’ latest Memorandum (link above).  The 21 VIPS signers are second to none in relevant, agenda-free expertise.

February 26, 2018

MEMORANDUM FOR:  The President

FROM:  Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT:  War With Iran


In our December 21st Memorandum to you,
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/21/intel-vets-tell-trump-iran-is-not-top-terror-sponsor/  we cautioned that the claim that Iran is currently the world’s top sponsor of terrorism is unsupported by hard evidence. Meanwhile, other false accusations against Iran have intensified. Thus, we feel obliged to alert you to the virtually inevitable consequences of war with Iran, just as we warned President George W. Bush six weeks before the U.S. attack on Iraq 15 years ago.

In our first Memorandum in this genre,
we told then-President Bush that we saw “no compelling reason” to attack Iraq, and warned “the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic.” The consequences will be far worse, should the U.S. become drawn into war with Iran. We fear that you are not getting the straight story on this from your intelligence and national security officials.

After choosing “War With Iran” for the subject-line of this Memo, we were reminded that we had used it before, namely, for a Memorandum to President Obama on August 3, 2010
in similar circumstances. You may wish to ask your staff to give you that one to read and ponder. It included a startling quote from then-Chairman of President Bush Jr.’s Intelligence Advisory Board (and former national security adviser to Bush Sr.) Gen. Brent Scowcroft, who told the Financial Times on October 14, 2004 that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had George W. Bush “mesmerized;” that “Sharon just has him wrapped around his little finger.”  We wanted to remind you of that history, as you prepare to host Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu next week.

Some comic relief …

Millions of Americans Demand $130,000 for Not Having Sex With Trump
By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker
18 February 18

Millions of Americans on Wednesday demanded that Donald J. Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, issue them checks in the amount of $130,000 for not having sex with Trump.

After Cohen revealed that he had issued such a check to Stormy Daniels, a porn star who he claims never had intimate relations with his client, there was widespread outrage among other Americans who had also not had sex with Trump but had not been paid for not doing so.

“Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy for Stormy Daniels,” Tracy Klugian, a florist in Santa Rosa, California, said. “I just want my check, too.”

Harland Dorrinson, a bank teller in Akron, Ohio, said that he had already e-mailed Cohen to demand payment. “I have never come close to having sex with Trump, and that should be worth something,” he said. “Specifically, $130,000.”

But, even as millions of Americans clamored to be compensated for abstaining from sex with Cohen’s client, others, like Carol Foyler, of Tallahassee, Florida, took a different view. “Never having sex with Donald Trump should be a reward in itself,” she said.

This is from Reader Supported News, which, since it stopped re-posting articles by the late Robert Parry a year or two ago, has been serving thin gruel from writers drinking Kool Aid at the DNC/DOJ/FBI/CIA trough.  But, this time satirist Borowitz, we think, hits the mark.  Enjoy.