Interesting Teach-in, well, discussion, with the speakers below. You will hear Scott Ritter divert from some of these speakers saying that the actions by Russia in Ukraine are legal, ethical and necessary.
While one may be able to mount a legal challenge to Russia’s contention that its joint operation with Russia’s newly recognized independent nations of Lugansk and Donetsk constitutes a “regional security or self-defense organization” as regards “anticipatory collective self-defense actions” under Article 51, there can be no doubt as to the legitimacy of Russia’s contention that the Russian-speaking population of the Donbass had been subjected to a brutal eight-year-long bombardment that had killed thousands of people.
Moreover, Russia claims to have documentary proof that the Ukrainian Army was preparing for a massive military incursion into the Donbass which was pre-empted by the Russian-led “special military operation.” [OSCE figures show an increase of government shelling of the area in the days before Russia moved in.]
Finally, Russia has articulated claims about Ukraine’s intent regarding nuclear weapons, and in particular efforts to manufacture a so-called “dirty bomb”, which have yet to be proven or disproven. [Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made a reference to seeking a nuclear weapon in February at the Munich Security Conference.]
The bottom line is that Russia has set forth a cognizable claim under the doctrine of anticipatory collective self defense, devised originally by the U.S. and NATO, as it applies to Article 51 which is predicated on fact, not fiction. (Ritter, Russia, Ukraine & the Law of War: Crime of Aggression)
All the speakers, except maybe excluding John Kiriakou, have great points to make: Andrei Martyanov, expert on Russian military affairs, author The Real Revolution in Military Affairs; Chris Kaspar de Ploeg, author Ukraine in the Crossfire; James Carden, Adviser U.S.-Russia bilateral commission during the Obama administration & Ex. Editor of The American Committee for East-West accord; Scott Ritter, former U.S. Marine Intelligence officer, UN Arms Inspector, exposed WMD lie in U.S. push to invade Iraq; John Kiriakou, CIA whistleblower and Radio Sputnik host; Ron Ridenour, peace activist, author The Russian Peace Threat; Gerald Horne, historian, author, Chair of History and African American Studies at the University of Houston; Jeremy Kuzmarov, CAM Managing Editor and author of The Russians Are Coming, Again: The First Cold War as Tragedy, the Second as Farce.
Imagine, the provocations.
The US government invoked self-defense as a legal justification for its invasion of Panama. Several scholars and observers have opined that the invasion was illegal under international law.
Watch, Panama Deception here: C-Span!
Oh, those Freedom Fighters, the back-shooting, civilian killing, village burning Contras:
Appendix A: Background on United States Funding of the Contras
In examining the allegations in the Mercury News and elsewhere, it is important to understand the timing of funding of the Contras by the United States. The following dates explain the periods during which the United States government provided funding to the Contras or cut off such funding.
Anastasio Somoza Debayle was the leader of Nicaragua from 1967 until July 1979, when he was overthrown by the Sandinistas. When President Ronald Reagan took office in January 1981, he promptly canceled the final $15 million payment of a $75 million aid package to Nicaragua, reversing the Carter administration’s policy towards Nicaragua. On November 17, 1981, President Reagan signed National Security Directive 17, authorizing provision of covert support to anti-Sandinista forces. On December 1, 1981, Reagan signed a document intending to conceal the November 17 authorization of anti-Sandinista operations. The document characterized the United States’ goal in Nicaragua as that of interdicting the flow of arms from Nicaragua to El Salvador, where leftist guerrillas were receiving aid from Sandinista forces.
In late 1982, Edward P. Boland, Chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, introduced an amendment to the Fiscal Year 1983 Defense Appropriations bill that prohibited the CIA, the principal conduit of covert American support for the Contras, from spending funds “for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Nicaragua.” However, the CIA could continue to support the Contras if it claimed that the purpose was something other than to overthrow the government. In December 1983, a compromise was reached and Congress passed a funding cap for fiscal year 1984 of $24 million for aid to the Contras, an amount significantly lower than what the Reagan administration wanted, with the possibility that the Administration could seek supplemental funds later.
This funding was insufficient to support the Administration’s “Contra program” and the decision was made to approach other countries for monetary support. In April 1984, Robert McFarlane convinced Saudi Arabia to contribute $1 million per month to the Contras through a secret bank account set up by Lt. Col. Oliver North.
In October 1984, the second Boland amendment took effect. It prohibited any military or paramilitary support for the Contras from October 3, 1984, through December 19, 1985. As a result, the CIA and Department of Defense (DOD) began withdrawing personnel from Central America. During this time, however, the National Security Council continued to provide support to the Contras.
In August 1985, Congress approved $25 million in humanitarian aid to the Contras, with the proviso that the State Department, and not the CIA or the DOD, administer the aid. President Reagan created the Nicaraguan Humanitarian Assistance Office (NHAO) to supply the humanitarian aid. In September 1985, Oliver North began using the Salvadoran air base at Ilopango for Contra resupply efforts.
On October 5, 1986, a plane loaded with supplies for the Contras, financed by private benefactors, was shot down by Nicaraguan soldiers. On board were weapons and other lethal supplies and three Americans. One American, Eugene Hasenfus, claimed while in custody that he worked for the CIA. The Reagan Administration denied any knowledge of the private resupply efforts.
On October 17, 1986, Congress approved $100 million in funds for the Contras. In 1987, after the discovery of private resupply efforts orchestrated by the National Security Council and Oliver North, Congress ceased all but “non-lethal” aid in 1987. The war between the Sandinistas and the Contras ended with a cease-fire in 1990.
Although the Contras were often referred to as one group, several distinct factions made up the Contras.
In August 1980, Colonel Enrique Bermudez, a former Colonel in Somoza’s National Guard, united other former National Guard officers and anti-Sandinista civilians to form the Fuerza Democratica Nicaraguense (FDN). This group was known as the Northern Front because it was based in Honduras. In February 1983, Adolfo Calero became the head of the FDN.
In April 1982, Eden Pastora split from the Sandinista regime and organized the Democratic Revolutionary Alliance (ARDE) and the Sandinista Revolutionary Front (FRS), which declared war on the Sandinista regime. Pastora’s group was based in Costa Rica and along the southern border of Nicaragua, and therefore became known as the Southern Front. Pastora refused to work with Bermudez, claiming that Bermudez, as a member of the former Somoza regime, was politically tainted. The CIA decided to support the FDN and generally declined to support the ARDE.
Again, let’s think about what is actually happening in Ukraine, and where the country is, and what the Russians in that country are facing, and, gulp, where is Ukraine? Thousands of miles away, like Panama and Nicaragua are from USA?
Here, a Dutch journalist:
Read her work:
As the war in Ukraine rages on, I visited the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk as an embedded reporter with the Russian army.
Both of the republics are the trigger of the current conflict.
Russian President Vladimir Putin declared their independence on February 24, 2022, something a lot of people were waiting for since the CIA backed coup in Ukraine of February 2014. That coup had resulted in the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and new laws forcing the Ukrainian language on Russian-speaking residents. Luhansk and Donetsk consequently voted on their independence and Ukraine attacked them, precipitating the war.
European support for the so-called Maidan coup was considerable: the Dutch MP Hans van Baalen from the ruling Dutch VVD party (Mark Rutte), for example, was at the protests that helped trigger the coup, as was the former Prime Minister of Belgium Guy Verhofstadt. Both were seen cheering on the crowds, surrounded by right-extremists on the stage, shouting “democracy.”
So what is preemptive defense? Right to Protect? What is big ugly history of Nazi’s in Poland and Ukraine? What is that all about, uh, Americanum?
At least 32 countries have sent direct military aid to Ukraine this year! US and NATO Allies Arm Neo-Nazi Units in Ukraine as Foreign Policy Elites Yearn for Afghan-style Insurgency
So, plans by ZioLensky for Dirty Bombs from the wasteland of Chernobyl, not a provocation?
How many were immolated in Waco? Why? Mount Carmel Center became engulfed in flames. The fire resulted in the deaths of 76 Branch Davidians, including 25 children, two pregnant women, and David Koresh himself.
Oh, the impatience of the USA, FBI, ATF.
Or, dropping bombs on Philly, to kill, well, black people:
How many died, and what happened to the city block? Bombs dropped on our own people, again! Police dropped a bomb on a West Philly house in 1985. The fire caused by the explosion killed 11 people, an atrocity that Philadelphia still grapples with today.
Oh, the irony. Black Lives Do Not Matter, here, or in Ukraine.
Oh, being black in Ukraine:
Yes, the first casualty of war is truth, and with the USA as the Empire of Lies and Hate, the casualty is now a larger framework of a Zombie Nation of virtue signalers and those who want the fake news to be real, please!\
So far as I know, this is the first war in modern history with no objective, principled coverage in mainstream media of day-to-day events and their context. None. It is morn-to-night propaganda, disinformation and lies of omission — most of it fashioned by the Nazi-infested Zelensky regime in Kiev and repeated uncritically as fact.
There is one thing worse than this degenerate state of affairs. It is the extent to which the media’s malpractice is perfectly fine to most Americans. Tell us what to think and believe no matter if it is true, they say, and we will think and believe it. Show us some pictures, for images are all.
There are larger implications to consider here. Critical as it is that we understand this conflict, Ukraine is a mirror in which we see ourselves as we have become. For more Americans than I wish were so, reality forms only in images. These Americans are no longer occupants of their own lives. Risking a paradox, what they take to be reality is detached from reality.
This majority — and it is almost certainly a majority — has no thoughts or views except those first verified through the machinery of manufactured images and “facts.” Television screens, the pages of purportedly authoritative newspapers, the air waves of government-funded radio stations — NPR, the BBC — serve to certify realities that do not have to be real, truths that do not have to be true.
Before proceeding to Bucha, the outrage of the moment, I must reproduce a quotation from that propaganda-is-O.K. piece The Times published in its March 3 editions. It is from a Twitter user who was distressed that it became public that the Ghost of Kiev turned out to be a ghost and the Snake Island heroes didn’t do much by way of holding the fort.
“Why can’t we just let people believe some things?” this thoughtful man or woman wanted to know. What is wrong, in other words, if thinking and believing nice things that aren’t true makes people feel better? (Patrick Lawrence, Special to Consortium News)
Daniel Boorstin’s The Image: Or, What happened to the American Dream, has been cited by yours truly several times. It is a completely work.
“I describe the world of our making, how we have used our wealth, our literacy, our technology, and our progress to create the thicket of unreality which stands between us and the facts of life. …. The reporter’s task,” he wrote memorably, “is to find a way to weave these threads of unreality into a fabric the reader will not recognize as entirely unreal.”
6 thoughts on “Deconstructing Preemption, Nazification, Right to Protect . . . in the Eyes of Empire of Lies (and Hate)”
Good piece, Paul. I was familiar with most of the contents, but I like the way you presented the topic. Clear language, easy to understand (I would think), appropriate for people who will not read very long arguments (no time and/or interest). Necessary to think of both. M.
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 3:24 PM Paul Haeder, Author wrote:
> haederpaul posted: ” Interesting Teach-in, well, discussion, with the > speakers below. You will hear Scott Ritter divert from some of these > speakers saying that the actions by Russia in Ukraine are legal, ethical > and necessary. While one may be able to moun” >
Thanks, Maria. I know you are quite informed about these issues, big time. Here, Max Blumenthal, with a good interviewer, On today’s Bad Faith podcast, Briahna Joy Gray.
Yet, it does take a lot of time to get into the history of Russia, WWI, WWII, Nato, USSR, the hateful UK-USA, Israel’s role, and, of course, France, Italy, Germany, Greece, more. Poland. Amazing, the death of critical thinking, slow in many camps, and quickly when it comes to the masses in the Empire of Lies and Hate.
Here, 2 hours, plus:
The first casualty of War is Truth (Live w/Scott Ritter)
More, Moon of Alabama:
Note that there are no Russian or Russia-aligned forces west-southwest of Kramatorsk within the 120 km maximum range of a Tochka missile. The missile must have been fired by Ukrainian forces.
Unsurprisingly the Russian military has come to the same conclusion:
An analysis of the engagement radius of the warhead, as well as the characteristic position of Tochka-U missile’s tail section, clearly confirm that it was launched from a south-western direction away from Kramatorsk.
According to intelligence reports, one of the divisions of the 19th Missile Brigade armed with Tochka-U missile systems at the time of the strike on Kramatorsk was located near Dobropol’e in Donetsk Region, 45 km south-west of Kramatorsk.
This area is still under the full control of the Ukrainian military grouping troops in Donbass.
The publicly available evidence shows that the Ukrainian military must have fired the missile that killed some 50 Ukrainian civilians in Kramatorsk.
The only purpose of the attack I can think of was to create propaganda that, when distributed as ‘Russian attack’ through ‘western’ media, will create more military support for Ukraine.
Everyone who urges to give more arms to the Ukraine or who eggs it on to continue this war is guilty of creating impetus for more incidents like the one seen in Kramatorsk.
“Everyone who urges to give more arms to the Ukraine or who eggs it on to continue this war is guilty of creating impetus for more incidents like the one seen in Kramatorsk.”
As I mentioned in the last thread, Alexander Mercouris has come to the conclusion that this is precisely what the neocons in the West want, both in the US, the UK and in Brussels. The US and the UK have both expended efforts to convince the Ukrainians to downgrade any diplomatic efforts and to continue the war. That makes the goal of the West fairly obvious.
As Mercouris states, “The neocons have no reverse gear”, and they will only double down and triple down continuously as long as their operation is not going to plan, i.e., Russia continues to win in Ukraine, and the Russia economy and currency do not collapse and the Russian population support for Putin continues to remain high. So the longer this conflict continues, the higher the probability that the neocons – using media pressure on the the US, UK and EU governments – will convince those governments to commit to ever higher levels of intervention, up to and including no fly zones and eventually a hot war with Russia against NATO directly.
As I’ve suggested before, it is even possible that the neocons intend a direct war between NATO and Russia, regardless of its potential to escalate out of control to WWIII. As Mercouris says, these people don’t live in reality and can not accept that their plans are failing. And since they have the bulk of the western electorates behind them due to the MSM brainwashing, it’s quite possible that they will get what they want.
Just the other day, Biden again made a gaffe, in talking to some construction people, to the effect that “if I have to go to war, I want to go with you guys”. He said, “I really mean it”, while the headline said he was “joking”. Maybe he’s joking now, but will he be joking in a month or three when another 20 or 30 false flag massacres have occurred in Ukraine and the ignorant electorates are baying for Russian blood?
Some people say that the Russians need to speed this up even if it means taking heavier Ukrainian civilian casualties. Reducing the Donbass Ukrainian army could take days, weeks or even a couple months at the present pace. And after that, how long to do “phase 3”, whatever that might turn out to be?
Me, I have nothing to say. It is what it is. It’s up to Putin and his team to make the decisions. But I agree with Mercouris that the next 5-6 months, and possibly as little as the next 2 or 3, are going to decide the outcome of this affair. Either the Russians wrap this up before the neocons can expand the war or they won’t.
As I mentioned before, if this turns into a shooting war between Russia and the West, you need a one-way ticket to South America or maybe New Zealand. At worst, the only relatively safe space in the US is northeastern Utah.
[****Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Apr 9 2022 11:30 utc | 7***]
Apart from not having the means to carry out that attack, Russia didn’t even have a motive to do so, unless we believe that Putin is just evil and likes to kill woman and children.
If the Russians did it, they would have been attacking mostly their own people, since Kramatorsk is in the middle of east Ukraine. Not a very good way of creating good will amongst a population that you want to be governed by your allies.
Also you would expect that Russia would want to encourage civilians to leave an area that it is encircling and intending to conquer – that would leave fewer people that it would have to distinguish from enemy soldiers.
In the last 24 hours I’ve seen no attempt to give a rational explanation for why the Russians attacked the railway station. And as far as I know, neither has anyone provided any evidence that Russia did so, for example about where the Russians launched the missile from.
Posted by: Brendan | Apr 9 2022 11:35 utc | 8
The truth must be established. Thank you for this fact based report.
[****Posted by: Norwegian | Apr 9 2022 11:43 utc | 9 ****]
“”Everyone who urges to give more arms to the Ukraine or who eggs it on to continue this war is guilty of creating impetus for more incidents like the one seen in Kramatorsk.”
As I mentioned in the last thread, Alexander Mercouris has come to the conclusion that this is precisely what the neocons in the West want, both in the US, the UK and in Brussels. The US and the UK have both expended efforts to convince the Ukrainians to downgrade any diplomatic efforts and to continue the war. That makes the goal of the West fairly obvious.”
The same conclusion comes from Jacques Baud. As a NATO Intelligence officer he has a very clear view of why this war is occurring and who is responsible. I’d encourage anyone who hasn’t read it to take a look.
[****Posted by: KP | Apr 9 2022 11:48 utc | 10****]
Thank you b for that analysis.
The Ukraine army is a foul brew and I trust the patriots will destroy them all soon.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Apr 9 2022 11:50 utc | 11
Former senior advisor the Secretary of Defense Col. Doug Macgregor joins Max Blumenthal and Aaron Mate for a candid, live discussion of the Russia-Ukraine war and his time in the Trump administration when an Afghan withdrawal was sabotaged and conflict with Iran and Syria continued.
Amazing guy, Parenti —
How the organized Left got Covid wrong, learned to love lockdowns and lost its mind: an autopsy
CHRISTIAN PARENTI·MARCH 31, 2022
In Jacobin, a magazine claiming to support the working class in all its struggles, Branko Marcetic demanded the unvaccinated be barred from public transportation: “one obvious course of action is for Biden to make vaccines a requirement for mass transport.”  Journalist Doug Henwood has scolded the unvaccinated with: “Get over your own bloated sense of self-importance.”  But Henwood has championed shutting down all of society in the name of safety, while refusing to engage counter-arguments – a combination that suggests a bloated sense of self-importance of his own.
Other left intellectuals, like Benjamin Bratton, author of a Verso book on the pandemic called Return of the Real, are notable for hiding amidst academic blather: “the book’s argument is on behalf [of] a ‘positive biopolitics’ that may form the basis of viable social self-organization, but this is less a statement on behalf of ‘the political’ in some metaphysical sense than on behalf of a governmentality through which an inevitably planetary society can deliberately compose itself.”  This is, as the late Alex Cockburn once said, “what dumb people think smart people sound like.”
Even the American Civil Liberties Union – long a bastion of objective thinking and civil liberties absolutism – has supported the mandates, lockdowns, and censorship. David Cole, the group’s legal director, debased himself in the New York Times with a tortured op-ed explaining how everything the ACLU stood for over the last 100 years suddenly did not apply during the season of freakout and overreach. 
When activist left influencers did stray from the official line, it was to occasionally harumph about how school closure would be ok if we just had “free childcare for all.” That argument is so flimsy one wants to respond with: “Yes, and let’s call these new socialist childcare centers: public schools!”
All of this unmasks the Lockdown Left’s blue-city provincialism. Its adherents drink high-quality coffee and enjoy bike lanes, but have revealed themselves to be as narrow-minded, clannish, mean-spirited and faith-based as any group of small-town “deplorables” might be. If you don’t agree with the consensus in Cambridge, Brooklyn, Bethesda, or Berkeley, then you are very obviously insane. End of story. For this set, Covid vaccines have become a fetish, a talisman to wave against the specter of “contagion”; while lockdowns and censorship are treated as purely technical, apolitical interventions. Prominent left intellectuals have embraced the weaponization of solidarity and made it into a lifestyle via their obsessive masking, scolding, and hiding. They pretend to care for society while actually applauding deeply anti-social and scientifically ungrounded policies like the indefinite shuttering of schools.