Eric Zuesse<\/p>\n
U.S. President Barack Obama has stated many times his case against Russia\u00a0\u2013\u00a0the reason for the economic sanctions. In his\u00a0National Security Strategy 2015<\/i><\/span><\/a>, he uses the term \u201caggression\u201d 18 times, and 17 of them are referring specifically to only one country as \u201caggressive\u201d: Russia. However, not once does he say there what the \u201caggression\u201d consisted of: what its target was, or what it itself was.\u00a0He\u2019s vague there on everything except his own target: Russia.<\/span><\/p>\n For those things (what Russia\u2019s \u201caggression\u201d consists of), Obama\u2019s only statement that has been even as lengthy as moderately brief \u2013 since he has never presented it at any more length \u2013 was\u00a0his interview with Fareed Zacaria of CNN<\/span><\/a>\u00a0on 1 February 2015, which happened to be a statement given only three days short of the first anniversary of\u00a0his agent\u2019s, Victoria Nuland\u2019s, having selected, on 4 February 2014, whom the next leader of Ukraine would be, Arseniy Yatsenyuk (she called him \u201cYats\u201d)<\/span><\/a>\u00a0after the democratically elected and sitting Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, would become\u00a0overthrown<\/span><\/a>, which happened 18 days later, on 22 February 2014. (It was\u00a0nothing like Czechoslovakia\u2019s \u201cVelvet Revolution\u201d<\/span><\/a>. This wasn\u2019t democratic; it was a coup<\/span><\/a>.)<\/span><\/p>\n Obama said there, in this CNN interview, that the reason for the sanctions against Russia was that,\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n “since Mr. Putin made this decision around\u00a0Crimea and Ukraine\u00a0<\/i>\u2013 not because of some grand strategy,\u00a0but essentially because\u00a0he was caught off-balance by the\u00a0protests in the Maidan and\u00a0Yanukovych then fleeing after\u00a0we had brokered a deal to\u00a0transition power in Ukraine\u00a0<\/i>\u2013\u00a0since that time, this improvisation\u00a0that he’s been doing has\u00a0getting\u00a0<\/i>\u2013\u00a0has gotten him deeper and\u00a0deeper into a situation\u00a0that is a violation of international law,\u00a0that violates the\u00a0integrity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of\u00a0Ukraine, has\u00a0isolated Russia diplomatically, has made Europe\u00a0wary of\u00a0doing business with Russia, has allowed the imposition\u00a0of\u00a0sanctions that are crippling Russia’s economy at a time\u00a0when their oil revenues are dropping.\u00a0There’s no formula in which this ends up being good for\u00a0Russia.\u00a0The annexation of Crimea is a cost, not a benefit, to\u00a0Russia.\u00a0The days in which conquest of land somehow was\u00a0a formula\u00a0for great nation status is over.”<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n That\u2019s all; he didn\u2019t mention the subsequent shooting-down of the Malaysian airliner over the conflict-zone in Ukraine on 17 July 2014, which was the incident that he used, after the first set of sanctions, in order to get the European Union to increase the sanctions against Russia (and that incident will be discussed at the end of this article because he simply didn\u2019t mention it in this, his lengthiest statement on the cause of the sanctions). His entire reason there \u2013 and no reason at all was given in his National Security Strategy 2015<\/i> for calling Russia \u201caggressive\u201d\u00a0\u2013\u00a0was \u201cthe annexation of Crimea.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n What, then, are the facts on that matter, of Crimea?<\/span><\/p>\n First, we must make note of the fact that this annexation occurred on 16 March 2014, when Crimeans went to the polls and voted in a referendum on whether to remain ruled by the Ukrainian national Government in Kiev, as they had been ruled only since 1954, or instead by the Russian national Government in Moscow, as they had been ruled from 1783 to 1954; and we must also keep in mind that this referendum had occurred as a direct result of Obama\u2019s coup against the man, Viktor Yanukovych, for\u00a0whom Crimeans had voted at around 75% throughout Crimea<\/span><\/a>. In the United States, that type of election, one in which the leading candidate had received 75% of the vote, would be called a \u201clandslide.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n How would Americans feel if they had voted 75% for a President in 2010, for a six-year term, only to find him overthrown in an extremely violent coup four years later by\u00a0a foreign power that they despised and feared as an aggressor, as Crimeans overwhelmingly, and by far more than 75%, felt about the United States<\/span><\/a>? Specifically, if you\u2019ll look there (at that link) at those polls by Gallup (and you can get to each one of them there by just two clicks, so it\u2019s quick), what you\u2019ll find is that even before\u00a0Obama\u2019s February 2014 coup which overthrew the\u00a0Ukrainian President\u00a0whom nearly\u00a080% of Crimeans had voted for,\u00a0the\u00a0Crimean people overwhelmingly wanted to secede from\u00a0Ukraine \u2013 and,\u00a0especially now they did, right after the\u00a0President for whom they had\u00a0overwhelmingly voted, Viktor\u00a0Yanukovych, had been overthrown in this\u00a0extremely bloody\u00a0coup<\/span><\/a>. Furthermore,\u00a0in April 2014, Gallup again polled Crimea,\u00a0and they found that 71.3% of Crimeans viewed as \u201cMostly\u00a0positive\u201d the\u00a0role of Russia there, and 4.0% viewed it as\u00a0\u201cMostly negative\u201d; by\u00a0contrast, only 2.8% of Crimeans viewed the role of the\u00a0United States there as\u00a0\u201cMostly positive,\u201d and a whopping\u00a076.2% viewed it as \u201cMostly negative.\u201d\u00a0During the intervening\u00a0year (i.e., both before and after Obama\u2019s coup and the resulting secession-referendum), Crimeans\u2019 favorability toward America had\u00a0plunged down\u00a0to 2.8%, from its year-earlier 6%. Clearly, what Obama had\u00a0done in Ukraine (his violent coup in Kiev<\/span><\/a>) had antagonized the\u00a0Crimeans.\u00a0And, as if that weren\u2019t enough, the 2014 poll\u00a0provided yet more\u00a0evidence: \u201cThe 500 people that were\u00a0sampled in Crimea were asked [and\u00a0this is crucial] \u2018Please tell\u00a0me if you agree or disagree: The results\u00a0of the referendum on\u00a0Crimea\u2019s status [whether to rejoin Russia] reflect\u00a0the views of\u00a0most people here.\u2019 82.8% said \u2018Agree.\u2019 6.7% said \u2018Disagree.\u2019\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n But there turned out to be even more evidence that the referendum-results in Crimea had been accurate: Even after just one click (not even two) from\u00a0there<\/span><\/a>, you\u2019ll see the following information, also with a link to its source: <\/span><\/p>\n Because both of those two Gallup polls had been paid-for by the U.S. Government, Canada\u2019s Government wanted its own read on the Crimean situation; and, so, they hired a different polling organization to do their own poll. However, the Canadian Government got no better news\u00a0than\u00a0the U.S. Government had gotten: 82% of Crimeans \u201cFully\u00a0endorse\u201d\u00a0Crimea\u2019s having become part of Russia;\u00a011% \u201cMostly endorse\u201d it; 2%\u00a0\u201cMostly disapprove\u201d; 3% \u201cDon\u2019t know\u201d; and\u00a0only 2% \u201cFully\u00a0disapprove.\u201d Or, to put it simply: 93% approve; 3% don\u2019t\u00a0know,\u00a0and 4% disapprove. The results of the referendum had been 96% to rejoin Russia. 4% voted against. That\u2019s like the 4% who disapproved of the return to Russia, in the Canadian-sponsored poll.<\/span><\/p>\n In a situation like that, what can one say of President Obama\u2019s statement against Russia: “The days in which conquest of land somehow was a formula\u00a0for great nation status is over.”<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n Which country had engaged in conquest here? Did Russia conquer Crimea, as Obama constantly alleges? Or did the United States conquer Ukraine? Is Putin the aggressor<\/span><\/a>? Or is Obama?<\/span><\/p>\n Obama knows the answer to that question. He isn\u2019t an ignorant man. He had hired Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to head the State Department, and they had hired Dick Cheney\u2019s chief foreign-policy advisor Victoria Nuland to run\u00a0the operation to take over Ukraine<\/span><\/a>. (And they kicked off the coup\u00a0a day earlier than the Maidan demonstrations even started<\/span><\/a>, but the operation had been long planned<\/span><\/a> regardless.) Obama knew that both Clinton and Kerry had voted for the invasion of Iraq and that both have also been lifelong supporters of\u00a0the CIA\u2019s Gladio operation that hired Hitler\u2019s and Mussolini\u2019s intelligence operatives in order to exploit not only anti-communist sentiment but anti-Russian sentiment in Eastern Europe<\/span><\/a> (and here\u2019s the much lengthier BBC documentary on that<\/span><\/a>), so as for the U.S. to take control of Eastern European countries and strip Russia of its western allies and take Russia over, as well, for an unchallenged American Empire, which Obama constantly refers to as\u00a0\u201cthe one indispensable nation,\u201d<\/span><\/a>\u00a0meaning that all other nations are \u201cdispensable.\u201d\u00a0Obama has a consistent record as being supportive of the Gladio operation, and of the CIA\u2019s other specifically anti-Russian operations<\/span><\/a>, though his statement to Fareed Zakaria on CNN pretended that Obama had been friendly toward Russia when Dmitry Medvedev was Russia\u2019s President, throughout Obama\u2019s first term.\u00a0(He can pretend that, because it helps deceive people to think that Putin must be overthrown<\/span><\/a>, that Putin is \u2018the problem.\u2019)<\/span><\/p>\n All during Obama\u2019s first term, he was continuing the preparations at the CIA, State Department, etc., to conquer Russia by surrounding it with\u00a0recently recruited hostile NATO member states<\/span><\/a>, thus far: Croatia<\/b> and Albania<\/b> in 2009 under Obama; Bulgaria<\/b>, Estonia<\/b>, Latvia<\/b>, Lithuania<\/b>, Romania<\/b>, Slovakia<\/b>, and Slovenia<\/b> in 2004 under Bush; Czech Republic<\/b>, Hungary<\/b>, and Poland<\/b> in 1999 under Clinton \u2013 that\u2019s a total of 12 formerly Russia-friendly nations which have switched to become members of the anti-<\/b>Russia military club: NATO<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n Obama is having trouble bringing Ukraine into that club, because Putin has set a red line at Ukraine, both because of its size and because of its having, ever since 1783, Russia\u2019s key naval base, in Crimea. President Obama knew that he would be crossing this red line by seizing Ukraine as he did in February 2014, but he did it anyway; and Putin responded by using Russia\u2019s existing military in Crimea to protect Crimeans so that they could have a peaceful and honest referendum, which Putin knew, just as well as Obama did, would overwhelmingly favor rejoining Russia.<\/span><\/p>\n Yet now, Obama has the nerve to say that it\u2019s Putin instead of Obama who has been the aggressor here and who should be subject to \u201cregime change.\u201d (Of course, if Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush becomes the U.S. President, then there will be continuity of the existing U.S. imperial regime, which actually started in earnest in 1980, long before Putin came to power.)<\/span><\/p>\n Regarding the shoot-down of the MH17 Malaysian airliner (the pretext for Obama\u2019s getting the EU to support increased anti-Russian sanctions): the U.S.-Ukrainian account of the downing is that pro-Russian rebels shot it down by mistake, with a missile. For this, Obama blamed Russia, and his agents who run European governments and the EU went along with that and hiked their economic sanctions against Russia; but, nobody in power believed it,\u00a0because the postulated scenario is absurd to anyone who knows anything<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0However, even if that scenario had been true, yet still,\u00a0Obama definitely caused the Malaysian airliner to be downed<\/span><\/a>. Furthermore, the reason why the official \u2018investigation\u2019 into the downing is not being made public is that\u00a0Obama\u2019s own Ukrainian Government was given veto-power over everything that will be in it<\/span><\/a>, and they won\u2019t allow the additional evidence, above and beyond the already dispositive evidence that has been revealed but not publicized, to be included in it; so, the report is not issued. The Ukrainian Government weren\u2019t able to prevent the decisive proof that their own Air Force plane had intentionally shot it down from leaking out; but the Western press have cooperated with Obama to suppress that information.\u00a0More information keeps leaking out supporting that earlier proof<\/span><\/a>;\u00a0but, actually, additional proof isn\u2019t even needed. Publication of\u00a0the existing damning evidence<\/span><\/a>\u00a0is. However, no one will be able to suppress the \u2018findings\u2019 by the official \u2018investigation.\u2019 So: it doesn\u2019t yet exist, and maybe it never will.<\/span><\/p>\n In other words: President Obama planned and executed an operation to take over Ukraine for the United States; and for then using that country as a springboard to \u2018justify\u2019 sanctions against Russia, including sanctions that have been added, on the basis of Obama\u2019s operation shooting down the Malaysian airliner in order to be able to stir up yet more hatred against Russia. And here<\/span><\/a> is how the\u00a0<\/span>\u2018news\u2019<\/span>\u00a0media in the West have reported on all that.<\/p>\n If it seems like George Orwell\u2019s 1984<\/i>, that\u2019s because it is.<\/span><\/p>\n However, it\u2019s heading toward a far worse ending<\/span><\/a>. And this isn\u2019t fiction<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n \u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013<\/span><\/p>\n Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/i><\/span><\/a>,<\/i> and of \u00a0<\/i>CHRIST\u2019S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity<\/i><\/span><\/a>.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Eric Zuesse U.S. President Barack Obama has stated many times his case against Russia\u00a0\u2013\u00a0the reason for the economic sanctions. In his\u00a0National Security Strategy 2015, he uses the term \u201caggression\u201d 18 times, and 17 of them are referring specifically to only one country as \u201caggressive\u201d: Russia. However, not once does he say there what the \u201caggression\u201d […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1254,"featured_media":143859,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[461,1622],"tags":[115,30,32,96,535,59,524,92,523,49,76,40],"class_list":{"0":"post-143956","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-editorials","8":"category-featured","9":"tag-barack-obama","10":"tag-big-brother","11":"tag-cia","12":"tag-cover-up","13":"tag-global-news","14":"tag-military","15":"tag-russia","16":"tag-terrorism","17":"tag-ukraine","18":"tag-usa-news","19":"tag-warfare","20":"tag-white-house"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143956","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1254"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=143956"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143956\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/143859"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143956"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143956"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143956"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![whom Crimeans had voted at around 75% throughout Crimea<\/span><\/a>. In the United States, that type of election, one in which the leading candidate had received 75% of the vote, would be called a \u201clandslide.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nHow would Americans feel if they had voted 75% for a President in 2010, for a six-year term, only to find him overthrown in an extremely violent coup four years later by\u00a0a foreign power that they despised and feared as an aggressor, as Crimeans overwhelmingly, and by far more than 75%, felt about the United States<\/span><\/a>? Specifically, if you\u2019ll look there (at that link) at those polls by Gallup (and you can get to each one of them there by just two clicks, so it\u2019s quick), what you\u2019ll find is that even before\u00a0Obama\u2019s February 2014 coup which overthrew the\u00a0Ukrainian President\u00a0whom nearly\u00a080% of Crimeans had voted for,\u00a0the\u00a0Crimean people overwhelmingly wanted to secede from\u00a0Ukraine \u2013 and,\u00a0especially now they did, right after the\u00a0President for whom they had\u00a0overwhelmingly voted, Viktor\u00a0Yanukovych, had been overthrown in this\u00a0extremely bloody\u00a0coup<\/span><\/a>. Furthermore,\u00a0in April 2014, Gallup again polled Crimea,\u00a0and they found that 71.3% of Crimeans viewed as \u201cMostly\u00a0positive\u201d the\u00a0role of Russia there, and 4.0% viewed it as\u00a0\u201cMostly negative\u201d; by\u00a0contrast, only 2.8% of Crimeans viewed the role of the\u00a0United States there as\u00a0\u201cMostly positive,\u201d and a whopping\u00a076.2% viewed it as \u201cMostly negative.\u201d\u00a0During the intervening\u00a0year (i.e., both before and after Obama\u2019s coup and the resulting secession-referendum), Crimeans\u2019 favorability toward America had\u00a0plunged down\u00a0to 2.8%, from its year-earlier 6%. Clearly, what Obama had\u00a0done in Ukraine (his violent coup in Kiev<\/span><\/a>) had antagonized the\u00a0Crimeans.\u00a0And, as if that weren\u2019t enough, the 2014 poll\u00a0provided yet more\u00a0evidence: \u201cThe 500 people that were\u00a0sampled in Crimea were asked [and\u00a0this is crucial] \u2018Please tell\u00a0me if you agree or disagree: The results\u00a0of the referendum on\u00a0Crimea\u2019s status [whether to rejoin Russia] reflect\u00a0the views of\u00a0most people here.\u2019 82.8% said \u2018Agree.\u2019 6.7% said \u2018Disagree.\u2019\u201d<\/span><\/p>\nBut there turned out to be even more evidence that the referendum-results in Crimea had been accurate: Even after just one click (not even two) from\u00a0there<\/span><\/a>, you\u2019ll see the following information, also with a link to its source: <\/span><\/p>\nBecause both of those two Gallup polls had been paid-for by the U.S. Government, Canada\u2019s Government wanted its own read on the Crimean situation; and, so, they hired a different polling organization to do their own poll. However, the Canadian Government got no better news\u00a0than\u00a0the U.S. Government had gotten: 82% of Crimeans \u201cFully\u00a0endorse\u201d\u00a0Crimea\u2019s having become part of Russia;\u00a011% \u201cMostly endorse\u201d it; 2%\u00a0\u201cMostly disapprove\u201d; 3% \u201cDon\u2019t know\u201d; and\u00a0only 2% \u201cFully\u00a0disapprove.\u201d Or, to put it simply: 93% approve; 3% don\u2019t\u00a0know,\u00a0and 4% disapprove. The results of the referendum had been 96% to rejoin Russia. 4% voted against. That\u2019s like the 4% who disapproved of the return to Russia, in the Canadian-sponsored poll.<\/span><\/p>\nIn a situation like that, what can one say of President Obama\u2019s statement against Russia: “The days in which conquest of land somehow was a formula\u00a0for great nation status is over.”<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nWhich country had engaged in conquest here? Did Russia conquer Crimea, as Obama constantly alleges? Or did the United States conquer Ukraine? Is Putin the aggressor<\/span><\/a>? Or is Obama?<\/span><\/p>\nObama knows the answer to that question. He isn\u2019t an ignorant man. He had hired Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to head the State Department, and they had hired Dick Cheney\u2019s chief foreign-policy advisor Victoria Nuland to run\u00a0the operation to take over Ukraine<\/span><\/a>. (And they kicked off the coup\u00a0a day earlier than the Maidan demonstrations even started<\/span><\/a>, but the operation had been long planned<\/span><\/a> regardless.) Obama knew that both Clinton and Kerry had voted for the invasion of Iraq and that both have also been lifelong supporters of\u00a0the CIA\u2019s Gladio operation that hired Hitler\u2019s and Mussolini\u2019s intelligence operatives in order to exploit not only anti-communist sentiment but anti-Russian sentiment in Eastern Europe<\/span><\/a> (and here\u2019s the much lengthier BBC documentary on that<\/span><\/a>), so as for the U.S. to take control of Eastern European countries and strip Russia of its western allies and take Russia over, as well, for an unchallenged American Empire, which Obama constantly refers to as\u00a0\u201cthe one indispensable nation,\u201d<\/span><\/a>\u00a0meaning that all other nations are \u201cdispensable.\u201d\u00a0Obama has a consistent record as being supportive of the Gladio operation, and of the CIA\u2019s other specifically anti-Russian operations<\/span><\/a>, though his statement to Fareed Zakaria on CNN pretended that Obama had been friendly toward Russia when Dmitry Medvedev was Russia\u2019s President, throughout Obama\u2019s first term.\u00a0(He can pretend that, because it helps deceive people to think that Putin must be overthrown<\/span><\/a>, that Putin is \u2018the problem.\u2019)<\/span><\/p>\nAll during Obama\u2019s first term, he was continuing the preparations at the CIA, State Department, etc., to conquer Russia by surrounding it with\u00a0recently recruited hostile NATO member states<\/span><\/a>, thus far: Croatia<\/b> and Albania<\/b> in 2009 under Obama; Bulgaria<\/b>, Estonia<\/b>, Latvia<\/b>, Lithuania<\/b>, Romania<\/b>, Slovakia<\/b>, and Slovenia<\/b> in 2004 under Bush; Czech Republic<\/b>, Hungary<\/b>, and Poland<\/b> in 1999 under Clinton \u2013 that\u2019s a total of 12 formerly Russia-friendly nations which have switched to become members of the anti-<\/b>Russia military club: NATO<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\nObama is having trouble bringing Ukraine into that club, because Putin has set a red line at Ukraine, both because of its size and because of its having, ever since 1783, Russia\u2019s key naval base, in Crimea. President Obama knew that he would be crossing this red line by seizing Ukraine as he did in February 2014, but he did it anyway; and Putin responded by using Russia\u2019s existing military in Crimea to protect Crimeans so that they could have a peaceful and honest referendum, which Putin knew, just as well as Obama did, would overwhelmingly favor rejoining Russia.<\/span><\/p>\nYet now, Obama has the nerve to say that it\u2019s Putin instead of Obama who has been the aggressor here and who should be subject to \u201cregime change.\u201d (Of course, if Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush becomes the U.S. President, then there will be continuity of the existing U.S. imperial regime, which actually started in earnest in 1980, long before Putin came to power.)<\/span><\/p>\nRegarding the shoot-down of the MH17 Malaysian airliner (the pretext for Obama\u2019s getting the EU to support increased anti-Russian sanctions): the U.S.-Ukrainian account of the downing is that pro-Russian rebels shot it down by mistake, with a missile. For this, Obama blamed Russia, and his agents who run European governments and the EU went along with that and hiked their economic sanctions against Russia; but, nobody in power believed it,\u00a0because the postulated scenario is absurd to anyone who knows anything<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0However, even if that scenario had been true, yet still,\u00a0Obama definitely caused the Malaysian airliner to be downed<\/span><\/a>. Furthermore, the reason why the official \u2018investigation\u2019 into the downing is not being made public is that\u00a0Obama\u2019s own Ukrainian Government was given veto-power over everything that will be in it<\/span><\/a>, and they won\u2019t allow the additional evidence, above and beyond the already dispositive evidence that has been revealed but not publicized, to be included in it; so, the report is not issued. The Ukrainian Government weren\u2019t able to prevent the decisive proof that their own Air Force plane had intentionally shot it down from leaking out; but the Western press have cooperated with Obama to suppress that information.\u00a0More information keeps leaking out supporting that earlier proof<\/span><\/a>;\u00a0but, actually, additional proof isn\u2019t even needed. Publication of\u00a0the existing damning evidence<\/span><\/a>\u00a0is. However, no one will be able to suppress the \u2018findings\u2019 by the official \u2018investigation.\u2019 So: it doesn\u2019t yet exist, and maybe it never will.<\/span><\/p>\nIn other words: President Obama planned and executed an operation to take over Ukraine for the United States; and for then using that country as a springboard to \u2018justify\u2019 sanctions against Russia, including sanctions that have been added, on the basis of Obama\u2019s operation shooting down the Malaysian airliner in order to be able to stir up yet more hatred against Russia. And here<\/span><\/a> is how the\u00a0<\/span>\u2018news\u2019<\/span>\u00a0media in the West have reported on all that.<\/p>\nIf it seems like George Orwell\u2019s 1984<\/i>, that\u2019s because it is.<\/span><\/p>\nHowever, it\u2019s heading toward a far worse ending<\/span><\/a>. And this isn\u2019t fiction<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013\u2013<\/span><\/p>\nInvestigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/i><\/span><\/a>,<\/i> and of \u00a0<\/i>CHRIST\u2019S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity<\/i><\/span><\/a>.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Eric Zuesse U.S. President Barack Obama has stated many times his case against Russia\u00a0\u2013\u00a0the reason for the economic sanctions. In his\u00a0National Security Strategy 2015, he uses the term \u201caggression\u201d 18 times, and 17 of them are referring specifically to only one country as \u201caggressive\u201d: Russia. However, not once does he say there what the \u201caggression\u201d […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1254,"featured_media":143859,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[461,1622],"tags":[115,30,32,96,535,59,524,92,523,49,76,40],"class_list":{"0":"post-143956","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-editorials","8":"category-featured","9":"tag-barack-obama","10":"tag-big-brother","11":"tag-cia","12":"tag-cover-up","13":"tag-global-news","14":"tag-military","15":"tag-russia","16":"tag-terrorism","17":"tag-ukraine","18":"tag-usa-news","19":"tag-warfare","20":"tag-white-house"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143956","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1254"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=143956"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143956\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/143859"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143956"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143956"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143956"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}](\"http:\/\/observationalism.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/01\/Ukraine_historical_vs_electoral_2010.png\"){kind=link}