RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Parry writes: "The neocon-flagship Washington Post fired a propaganda broadside at President Putin for shutting down the Russian activities of the National Endowment for Democracy, but left out key facts like NED's U.S. government funding, its quasi-CIA role, and its plans for regime change in Moscow."

Russian president Vladamir Putin. (photo: AP)
Russian president Vladamir Putin. (photo: AP)

Why Russia Shut Down NED Fronts

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

02 August 15


The neocon-flagship Washington Post fired a propaganda broadside at President Putin for shutting down the Russian activities of the National Endowment for Democracy, but left out key facts like NED’s U.S. government funding, its quasi-CIA role, and its plans for regime change in Moscow, writes Robert Parry.

he Washington Post’s descent into the depths of neoconservative propaganda – willfully misleading its readers on matters of grave importance – apparently knows no bounds as was demonstrated with two deceptive articles regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin and why his government is cracking down on “foreign agents.”

If you read the Post’s editorial on Wednesday and a companion op-ed by National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman, you would have been led to believe that Putin is delusional, paranoid and “power mad” in his concern that outside money funneled into non-governmental organizations represents a threat to Russian sovereignty.

The Post and Gershman were especially outraged that the Russians have enacted laws requiring NGOs financed from abroad and seeking to influence Russian policies to register as “foreign agents” – and that one of the first funding operations to fall prey to these tightened rules was Gershman’s NED.

The Post’s editors wrote that Putin’s “latest move, announced Tuesday, is to declare the NED an ‘undesirable’ organization under the terms of a law that Mr. Putin signed in May. The law bans groups from abroad who are deemed a ‘threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation, its defense capabilities and its national security.’

“The charge against the NED is patently ridiculous. The NED’s grantees in Russia last year ran the gamut of civil society. They advocated transparency in public affairs, fought corruption and promoted human rights, freedom of information and freedom of association, among other things. All these activities make for a healthy democracy but are seen as threatening from the Kremlin’s ramparts. …

“The new law on ‘undesirables’ comes in addition to one signed in 2012 that gave authorities the power to declare organizations ‘foreign agents’ if they engaged in any kind of politics and receive money from abroad. The designation, from the Stalin era, implies espionage.”

But there are several salient facts that the Post’s editors surely know but don’t want you to know. The first is that NED is a U.S. government-funded organization created in 1983 to do what the Central Intelligence Agency previously had done in financing organizations inside target countries to advance U.S. policy interests and, if needed, help in “regime change.”

The secret hand behind NED’s creation was CIA Director William J. Casey who worked with senior CIA covert operation specialist Walter Raymond Jr. to establish NED in 1983. Casey – from the CIA – and Raymond – from his assignment inside President Ronald Reagan’s National Security Council – focused on creating a funding mechanism to support groups inside foreign countries that would engage in propaganda and political action that the CIA had historically organized and paid for covertly. To partially replace that CIA role, the idea emerged for a congressionally funded entity that would serve as a conduit for this money.

But Casey recognized the need to hide the strings being pulled by the CIA. “Obviously we here [at CIA] should not get out front in the development of such an organization, nor should we appear to be a sponsor or advocate,” Casey said in one undated letter to then-White House counselor Edwin Meese III – as Casey urged creation of a “National Endowment.”

NED Is Born

The National Endowment for Democracy took shape in late 1983 as Congress decided to also set aside pots of money — within NED — for the Republican and Democratic parties and for organized labor, creating enough bipartisan largesse that passage was assured. But some in Congress thought it was important to wall the NED off from any association with the CIA, so a provision was included to bar the participation of any current or former CIA official, according to one congressional aide who helped write the legislation.

This aide told me that one night late in the 1983 session, as the bill was about to go to the House floor, the CIA’s congressional liaison came pounding at the door to the office of Rep. Dante Fascell, a senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and a chief sponsor of the bill. The frantic CIA official conveyed a single message from CIA Director Casey: the language barring the participation of CIA personnel must be struck from the bill, the aide recalled, noting that Fascell consented, not fully recognizing the significance of the demand.

The aide said Fascell also consented to the Reagan administration’s choice of Carl Gershman to head the National Endowment for Democracy, again not recognizing how this decision would affect the future of the new entity and American foreign policy. Gershman, who had followed the classic neoconservative path from youthful socialism to fierce anticommunism, became NED’s first (and, to this day, only) president.

Though NED is technically independent of U.S. foreign policy, Gershman in the early years coordinated decisions on grants with Raymond at the NSC. For instance, on Jan. 2, 1985, Raymond wrote to two NSC Asian experts that “Carl Gershman has called concerning a possible grant to the Chinese Alliance for Democracy (CAD). I am concerned about the political dimension to this request. We should not find ourselves in a position where we have to respond to pressure, but this request poses a real problem to Carl.”

Currently, Gershman’s NED dispenses more than $100 million a year in U.S. government funds to various NGOs, media outlets and activists around the world. The NED also has found itself in the middle of political destabilization campaigns against governments that have gotten on the wrong side of U.S. foreign policy. For instance, prior to the February 2014 coup in Ukraine, overthrowing elected President Viktor Yanukovych and installing an anti-Russian regime in Kiev, NED was funding scores of projects.

A second point left out of the Post’s editorial was the fact that Gershman took a personal hand in the Ukraine crisis and recognized it as an interim step toward regime change in Moscow. On Sept. 26, 2013, Gershman published an op-ed in the Washington Post that called Ukraine “the biggest prize” and explained how pulling it into the Western camp could contribute to the ultimate defeat of Russian President Putin.

“Ukraine’s choice to join Europe will accelerate the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin represents,” Gershman wrote. “Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.” In other words, NED is a U.S. government-financed entity that has set its sights on ousting Russia’s current government.

A third point that the Post ignored is that the Russian law requiring outside-funded political organizations to register as “foreign agents” was modeled on a U.S. law, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. In other words, the U.S. government also requires individuals and entities working for foreign interests and seeking to influence U.S. policies to disclose those relationships with the U.S. Justice Department or face prison.

If the Post’s editors had included any or all of these three relevant factors, you would have come away with a more balanced understanding of why Russia is acting as it is. You might still object but at least you would be aware of the full story. By concealing all three points, the Post’s editors were tricking you and other readers into accepting a propagandistic viewpoint – that the Russian actions were crazy and that Putin was, according to the Post’s headline, “power mad.”

Gershman’s Op-Ed

But you might think that Gershman would at least acknowledge some of these points in his Post op-ed, surely admitting that NED is financed by the U.S. government. But Gershman didn’t. He simply portrayed Russia’s actions as despicable and desperate.

“Russia’s newest anti-NGO law, under which the National Endowment for Democracy on Tuesday was declared an “undesirable organization” prohibited from operating in Russia, is the latest evidence that the regime of President Vladimir Putin faces a worsening crisis of political legitimacy,” Gershman wrote, adding:

“This is the context in which Russia has passed the law prohibiting Russian democrats from getting any international assistance to promote freedom of expression, the rule of law and a democratic political system. Significantly, democrats have not backed down. They have not been deterred by the criminal penalties contained in the ‘foreign agents’ law and other repressive laws. They know that these laws contradict international law, which allows for such aid, and that the laws are meant to block a better future for Russia.”

The reference to how a “foreign agents” registration law conflicts with international law might have been a good place for Gershman to explain why what is good for the goose in the United States isn’t good for the gander in Russia. But hypocrisy is a hard thing to rationalize and would have undermined the propagandistic impact of the op-ed.

So would an acknowledgement of where NED’s money comes from. How many governments would allow a hostile foreign power to sponsor politicians and civic organizations whose mission is to undermine and overthrow the existing government and put in someone who would be compliant to that foreign power?

Not surprisingly, Gershman couldn’t find the space to include any balance in his op-ed – and the Post’s editors didn’t insist on any.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+41 # ronnewmexico 2015-08-02 08:41
SAme old same old….."The reference to how a “foreign agents” registration law conflicts with international law might have been a good place for Gershman to explain why what is good for the goose in the United States isn’t good for the gander in Russia. "

And for every reader of this article there will be a thousand who reads some propagandistic crap about Putin inciting us to hate the man and all Russians in kind….to what aim?
What is their aim…that is never clearly exposed.

And what happened in the Ukraine with the manufactured coup, was not exactly what happened in Iran so many years ago. As with Iran we will have to wait a good thirty years or so, till the freedom of information act proves is so.
To me their aim is clear, to extend corporate control globally…that is their aim and the US government and in kind the CIA their agent. No real nationists are these who conspire so…their aims are not ours.

Those in control now of this place this government, and those their minons the CIA NSA media mouthpieces and others, are as the carpetbaggers of the deep south in reconstruction days. Opportunists who are only interested in one thing…..their own interest.

It is not for my interests or the greater interest of a nation, that they would have me hate Russians and Putin. I hate none but if I were to…them I would hate not him or his kind. It is clear where the more clear and present danger to me and my kind lies….and it is not in Russia.
+36 # Texas Aggie 2015-08-02 09:18
One time in the airport I was talking with a woman who had been working in La Paz, Bolivia, with NED. Their mission was to dethrone Evo Morales, but she was disillusioned because all the other employees of the group did was sit around in the office reading women's magazines. This woman from Wyoming was the only one who tried to do anything and her Spanish and cultural skills were almost nonexistent, so nothing happened. I secretly smiled.

That was my first introduction to NED.
-8 # tgemberl 2015-08-02 13:24
So doesn't that make you wonder if their mission to "dethrone Evo Morales" was really all that strong? You seem to think they were sinister but incompetent. Maybe in truth they just weren't that sinister. Her attitudes may not have been that typical of the organization.
+9 # Anonymot 2015-08-02 09:58
I'd like to take issue with your lead that NED is a "quasi-CIA" organism. You should strike the quasi-.NED would seem to be a branch organization that planted the fuse in the Arab Spring bomb.
+15 # lorenbliss 2015-08-02 16:43

NED is what used to be called a CIA "front organization," sort of like how the German Nazi Party (NSDAP) was a front for the U.S. One Percent from the late 1920s through 1945; how Pinochet's torture regime in Chile was a CIA front, exactly as the Ukraine Nazis are today.

That said, President Putin's response to NED merely proves his understanding that the "democracy" so endowed is a classic example of the perversion of language against which George Orwell so presciently warned us.

This "democracy" is in reality the Ayn Rand tyranny of capitalism -- its freedom to subjugate, enslave, savage and eventually exterminate an entire people -- to which the Russians are saying an emphatic "no," and in revenge for which the USian Empire is trying to provoke World War III.
+21 # tedrey 2015-08-02 10:08
The alternate press, many small papers, foreign media have reprinted this article in the last couple of days. Which media have not? As far as I see, The New York Times, the major broadcasters, the LA Times, the WSJ, and certainly the Washington Post have completely ignored it.
Try to tell them "If you continue to ignore the real news we should know, we will completely ignore your advertisements. "
+12 # Salus Populi 2015-08-02 10:32
What would they care? The advertisers aren't going to abandon the mainscream tedia on whose boards of directors they claim seats, from whose stock they prosper, and with whom they share the fascist political view that is now universal across the board in U.S. politics. Even if it costs them money on the bottom line, most members of the corpoReich elite know that it's more important to keep the 99 per cent deluded and ignorant, thus preserving the system that enriches and empowers those in their circle, than to maximize profits at the expense of the stability of that system.
+9 # ronnewmexico 2015-08-02 11:31
Exactly as Salus states. The commonality of board structures enables a cohesion of view intent and purpose which exemplifies as action.
Shortly speaking, board members are common in corporations of this size and scope. A member of the board of Kraft will sit on the board of Phiilip Morris which has a board member who sits on the board of Pratt and Whitney(just as a hypothetical example). So the message or cohesion by common board membership enables communication and furthurance of agenda. Krafts agenda becomes communicated to Pratt and Whitney and a commoness of greatest good for the entire corporate membership entails. So what is good for one in a seemingly unrelated industry, becomes good for all and another.

So they act as a group for intentions that are not our nor to our benefit and may be in specific counter to theirs in a smaller manner of less duration.
Sounds like socialsim doesn't it. Well it is. Like the NFL adopting revenue sharing... the corporate world is not averse to such things, it is only when commoners employ them..
+23 # Archie1954 2015-08-02 11:08
When I state, as I often do, that Americans are an ignorant people, I'm not saying their stupid, just bereft of the facts. This ignorance is totally the consequence of the co-opting of the US MSM. The Fourth Estate used to be an independent powerhouse in American life and national governance, keeping all politicos on the straight and narrow. Now it is just another US government propaganda wing and it is betraying the trust of the American people!
+1 # A_Har 2015-08-03 12:31
Quoting Archie1954:
When I state, as I often do, that Americans are an ignorant people, I'm not saying their stupid, just bereft of the facts. This ignorance is totally the consequence of the co-opting of the US MSM. The Fourth Estate used to be an independent powerhouse in American life and national governance, keeping all politicos on the straight and narrow. Now it is just another US government propaganda wing and it is betraying the trust of the American people!

The "news" is dubbed as "entertainment" and there actually was a US court case that said the media could LIE. From Project Censored:

The Media Can Legally Lie
+9 # Activista 2015-08-02 11:43
The censorship/prop aganda (Pravda) killed the Soviet Union Empire - we, USA, are on the critical path to the same destiny.
Thank you Robert Parry for the factual analysis.
+19 # Radscal 2015-08-02 14:00
Back in the USSR days, I read about a USian who was visiting Russia, and got to talking with a local about propaganda.

The Russian said the Russians know their media is propaganda, so they don't believe it, but Americans believe their media is free, and so do believe their propaganda.

Seems to remain true today.
+8 # Activista 2015-08-02 23:03
I am from Eastern Europe and Radscal observation is true ...
Think that there is always an element (mass mentality -communism, fascism ) of true believers. This is relatively new to America (thinking of relatively free expression in 60ties).
Now it looks like the oligarchs (money rules). Read President Carter:
Jimmy Carter: US Is an 'Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery'‎ - 2 days ago
Former president Jimmy Carter said the "Citizens United" ruling "violates the essence of ...
0 # A_Har 2015-08-03 12:36
There used to be a law against using government sponsored propaganda here in the USA, but it was overturned.

The United States Can Now Use Its Own Propaganda on US Citizens

Published 4:14 pm EDT, July 15, 2013

"The United States can now pivot its huge international propaganda operations toward the home front, according to RT. In 1948, the Smith-Mundt Act, also known as the US Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 was one of the first and most serious pieces of Cold War legislation. The act was simple, it would create a number of broadcasting and media agencies outside of the US and use them to disseminate information about the virtues of capitalism and the superior nature of democracy and the American way of life. This, the “Cold Warriors” thought, would convince the people of war-torn Europe to choose American democracy to better themselves rather than Soviet communism. The only stipulation was that this peacetime propaganda machine could only be used overseas, until now.

As of July 2, Section 501 added to the the controversial National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) abolishes the stipulation that the United States must leave its propaganda over seas."

It looks like the NY Times and WA Post have become agents of the "mighty wurlizer."
+2 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-02 18:18
I've lived with & around Russian-Canadia ns over decades from 1970 - today. They've much greater access to more diverse sources, international & national news reports than we do. Pravda (truth) didn't kill Soviet Union but economic disorganization in co-ops did as a dominanting model, violently imposed through Trotsky & a group of New Yorkers's western moneyed & armed influence. SS Kristianiafjord ship's voyage & how westerners such as Trotsky, started the mayhem of the Russian Revolution. What a sad story of murder, death & outside interference which so typifies US, Canadian, NATO & Israeli foreign interference. So much money controlled by so few, doing so much damage to humanity & planet. That those with money feel they can self-righteousl y command death-doers to fulfill their mission, is the story of humanity's recent colonial times. Article has many details & references.
Chapter II TROTSKY LEAVES NEW YORK TO COMPLETE THE REVOLUTION on the Kristianfjord, "You'll have a revolution, a terrible revolution. What course it takes will depend much on what Mr. Rockefeller tells Mr. Hague to do. Mr. Rockefeller is a symbol of the American ruling class & Mr. Hague* is a symbol of its political tools." Leon Trotsky, in New York Times, December 13, 1938. (*New Jersey politician)

Petr Kropotkin offered Mutual-Aid as organization option.
0 # Activista 2015-08-02 23:12
Soviet Union was corrupt totalitarian one party (communist) system - Pravda was the voice of the Party. They seem to be recovering as Russia is becoming more democratic.
People were sentenced to prison for reading forbidden books, especially by an authority.
+1 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-03 04:46
Activista, Thanks for your perspective. Problem arises from one-member/one- vote typically single stakeholder co-ops. I worked initiating, helping develop & operating co-op networks across British Columbia BC & Quebec over decades. In the 1970s I lived among Russian Dukobour, German Mennonite & English Quaker pacifist communities which although having built economic infrastructure worth billions of dollars, had difficulty making decisions together & eventually abandoned well built industries. Elders described to me their dilemma. Dukobour & Mennonite pacifist groups had huge roles in early visioning for what became Russia's 'Communist' revolution perverted by Trotsky & New York Jew SS Kristianiafjord violence.

Co-ops develop relatively huge & unproductive bureaucracies as no one can invest or make changes until the next Annual General Meeting or Special GM. Without recognition & differentiation Founders, Workers, Suppliers & Consumers stop investments of resources, time, expertise, labour, invention, goods, services & patronage. Friends from Russia & the Soviet bloc describe this exact devolution, disincentive.

As our province wide Natural-Food co-ops were failing in BC, some of us organized an 'indigenous' (Latin 'self-generatin g') economy study groups to research & share about 1st Nation business Wampum, Quipu Production-Soci ety/Guild progressive ownership models before colonial invasion & destruction.
+1 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-03 05:16
Activista, When Soviet co-ops (non-profits, NGOs, institutions etc) failed, then their networks reach for economies of scale trying to overcome what they believe are unavoidable weaknesses. In the Soviet Union whole networks were failing, hence government bureaucratic direction, command & control. When command & control fails, then bureaucracies try to limit or control information which does not jive with institutional thought.

One can see this same failure in 'Capitalism' (Latin 'cap' = 'head' = 'wisdom of experience') on a massive scale such as the failure of design & economy in the US Car industry. Single owner monetary-capita l businesses fail because they don't understand, value, account-for or enable the collective intelligence of their stakeholders. As small businesses continually fail, larger monetary-capita l 'pools' buy-up small businesses or monopolize euthanize these small businesses, replaced by top-down franchises, machines & the like serving junk-food & "unsafe at any speed" vehicles. Bureaucracies control capital corporations in the same vein as co-ops, limiting what they see as contradictory information to their message & hence massive censorship. Because Soviet system disbanded, they never achieved the level of censorship as we take for granted in western capitalist centralized ownership. In these monetary-capita l pools, war becomes their main industry / public-service.
-1 # bmiluski 2015-08-02 11:44
Why did Putin block a tribunal into the crash of mh17?
+21 # indian weaver 2015-08-02 12:01
That did seem strange, on the surface. But, politically speaking, such a NATO task force would be controlled by Amerika, and contrived by Amerika's allies to blame / convict Russia of the plane's demise. Under the aegis of NATO, that finding would be just one more lie, given cover by NATO, even when disputed by Moscow. Putin doesn't need this b.s. He knows how it works. Putin is better off not having this discussion for that reason only. Amerikan Nazi allies in the Ukraine apparently accidently / purposely shot down the wrong plane, or something like that. That is why the plane's black box has been sequestered (stashed / hidden) by NATO in the UK, and contents have not been / will never be revealed - it's the smoking gun that would indict the Kiev and Amerika.
+11 # ronnewmexico 2015-08-02 12:02
If we had a similiar crash which we were thought to be implicated… ry close to our border….would we allow a international tribunal to determine outcome? Or would we block it? Would we instead allow our own investigators to determine outcome if we were in any manner connected?

Keep in mind we still will not allow our membership to even the international court of justice. As we will not let others determine our potential fates in any regard.

Considering the manipulation of the politic in the Ukraine who would suppose such a body would not also be manipulated for political purpose? No reasonable person. And Putin he is well reasoned.
+4 # Radscal 2015-08-02 14:05
Why does the putsch regime in Ukraine (one of the suspects) have the authority to block any finding from the official investigation?
+2 # geraldom 2015-08-02 21:49
Radscal, did you ever get a chance to watch RT Headline news this weekend to see what I was talking about as far as the two investigating teams investigating the MH17 shoot down?
+1 # Radscal 2015-08-03 11:50
No, I didn't see that. I'll check out their website.
+1 # geraldom 2015-08-03 08:49
Hi, Radscal. I have another interesting question to ask you, to get your opinion. Yesterday, the following article came out:

It's entitled "Obama Authorizes Airstrikes to Defend Syrian Rebels If Attacked."

This was confirmed on Democracy Now this morning so I know it's real. What it seems to come down to is that Obama is telling the Syrian government that those Syrian rebels that have been trained by U.S. forces have now become U.S. territory on sovereign Syrian territory.

In other words, if these Syrian rebels start killing sovereign Syrian troops, Syria is no longer allowed to defend itself. Is that what Obama just said? Am I no longer in "Kansas" anymore? What chutzpah!!

Then, this morning, I read the following article that came out:

It's entitled "Turkey’s Erdogan Says Putin May 'Give Up' On Assad."

Is Putin about to throw Assad underneath the bus as he seems to have done to the pro-Russian rebels? Is he about to concede control of a sovereign nation, Syria, over to the United States?

Russia is not going to have too many allies left in the middle east at this rate, and that includes Iran, if they keep this up, and it already has very little if any allies left at all in eastern Europe.

+1 # geraldom 2015-08-03 08:51

Iran is still under constant threat from the U.S. and its puppet ally in the middle east, Israel

If the shoe were on the other foot, and it were a U.S. ally under threat from Russia and one of its very short list of allies that it has left, most especially against a nation like Iran that has a large reserve of natural energy resources, the U.S. wouldn’t hesitate to (harshly) threaten Russia and its ally to keep their hands off or else.

So, why has Putin become such a wuss lately? He doesn’t seem to care very much about strongly protecting what little that’s left of the Russian Federation’s international interests. Has he all of a sudden completely lost his huevos?
0 # Radscal 2015-08-03 11:56
I hope Putin doesn't stop supporting Assad. Mind you, I don't think Assad is a nice man. He was operating a CIA "black site" to torture "terrorists" the US captured. But he had been a mostly moderate leader and Syria was one of the better places for their own people in the ME.

The US/Israeli goals are clear. They want to "regime change" Assad and Balkanize Syria. Israel already claims to have annexed Syria's Golan Heights, and they want more of Syria (and Lebanon).

But doesn't Russia want to build a pipeline through Syria? I wonder what threats the US are holding over Putin's head?
-1 # geraldom 2015-08-03 14:28
Radscal, if you read this today, I would suggest that you watch RT’s Cross Talk with Peter Lavelle. One of his guests today is Chris Hedges and it makes for interesting listening.

I've gotten to the point where Peter Lavelle annoys me to no end. His constant attitude in support of Putin for a long time for not getting more deeply involved in eastern Ukraine, that Putin is doing the right thing just gets me damn angry. I get to yell at him constantly when watching his program on television. I have called him an idiot so many times that I’ve lost count.

Many times he acts as if he really doesn't know what's going on and why the United States is doing what its doing. I wish that he would invite me on his program. I'd straighten him very quickly.

While I am writing this, I am now watching RT Headline News talking about Obama's threat to even attack the Syrian military if it were to attack the Syrian rebels trained by the United States, and I keep on yelling at my TV asking the question, "So what is Putin going to do about it?" as in is he going to push back on the U.S. to not only warn the U.S. to keep its dirty hands off of Syria, that Russia will protect Syria from any further illegal intrusion by the U.S. and its puppet ally, Israel, but also warn the U.S. that Russia will defend Iran against any attack by the U.S. or Israel. I know that they can't hear me, but it's the only way to help alleviate some of my anger at Putin.

-1 # geraldom 2015-08-03 14:28

Why hasn’t Putin shipped to both Syria and Iran Russia’s latest ground-to-air anti-aircraft missile system to protect against air attacks by the U.S. and Israel?
+7 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-02 14:48
bmiluski, Putin didn't block 'tribunal' but has done everything to convene a real inquiry. Remember that it was the Yanukovych democratic loyalists of eastern Ukraine who turned the MH17 flight recorder over to the Malaysians & other evidence over to the Dutch encouraged by Russians.
Loyalists didn't know that:
1) Ukrainian putsch regime would be given a veto on the inquiry & refuse to reveal flight records of their fighter jet in close proximity at the time of MH17 destruction.
2) USA would obstruct/hide key satellite recording of the destruction.
3) The inquiry being controlled by western controlled Dutch hasn't been transparent about all the evidence, except what American controlled media wants the world to believe.

Loyalists & Russia are only calling for transparency & a real inquiry.

Here's former USA assistant treasury secretary for Economic Policy Dr. Paul Craig Roberts on the US push towards war with Russia.
+3 # geraldom 2015-08-02 21:53
Nobody bothers to ask as to why the Ukraine Air Flight Controllers in Kiev instructed MH17 to fly over hostile airspace and why MH17 was instructed to drop down in altitude?

All that info and more would be part of what is on the black boxes which are now in complete control by the western powers.
-14 # tgemberl 2015-08-02 13:20
Parry makes a good point in telling us that the US government also requires foreign government agents to register. But does that justify shutting down the NED? Yes, make them register, but don't silence their voice.

Gershman made this statement in the article Parry links to:

"The United States needs to engage with the governments and with civil society in Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova to ensure that the reform process underway not only promotes greater trade and development but also produces governments that are less corrupt and more accountable to their societies. An association agreement with the European Union should be seen not as an end in itself but as a starting point that makes possible deeper reforms and more genuine democracy."

What's so bad about that?

He mentions that Gershman calls the Ukraine "the greatest prize." Yes, it's the most populous country from the former Soviet Union besides Russia. It will be a "prize" to whichever faction it settles into. There is nothing inherently undemocratic about calling it a "prize."
+2 # Salus Populi 2015-08-03 07:27
The meaning of "more genuine democracy" is not what you might think from the dictionary. To the United States government, its corpoReich masters and other capitalist elites, "democracy" means "you do what we tell you to do." Chomsky, as well as his colleague Edward Herman, has written at length on the meaning of terms used in propaganda.

Yanukovich, for example, was certainly corrupt -- as have been every government in Ukraine since the breakup of the USSR [and not to imply they were not corrupt when still a part of it] -- but he was elected by a majority of Ukraine voters.

When, in the wake of the U.S.-sponsored Right Sektor escalation of the Maidan protests, he offered to have early elections in just a couple of months, and in the meantime to make major reforms of the government, the response of the Gershman's "more genuine democracy" paladins was to violently overthrow the government the very next day, and after driving out the opposition to the coup in the parliament, to triumphantly hoist the banner of treason, slavery and terrorism -- the Confederate Battle Flag -- on the wall of the chamber.

It should also be remembered, wrt "the greatest prize," that historically Ukraine has been the territory through which Western military forces have invaded Russia on at least three occasions. "Greatest prize" need not refer to population nor resources: To those acolytes of the "Global Chess Game," both neo-libs and neo-cons, geostrategy is their guiding light.
-1 # tgemberl 2015-08-03 18:18
Be cautious about believing the Russian line too much. There's a lot of innuendo in what you are saying that is not really proven. You mentioned the "U.S.-sponsored Right Sektor." How do you know we sponsor it?

Yes, I agree it's questionable to overthrow a duly elected government. But isn't that the Ukrainians' call? It's not my country but theirs.

Even Stephen Cohen, as pro-Putin as he is, doesn't think Yanukovych was any good as a leader. I'm not saying that justifies overthrowing him, but when democracy is not well established (as it isn't in Russia, either), it is sometimes not very stable.

I keep going back to what someone was quoted as saying in another article Parry linked to: in 1991, Poland and the Ukraine, with about the same population, had about the same GNP. Now Poland's is twice as high. Why wouldn't the Ukrainians want to be part of the EU rather than the Russian sphere of influence?
0 # Salus Populi 2015-08-05 16:25
"You mentioned the "U.S.-sponsored Right Sektor." How do you know we sponsor it?"

Here's a link from the Centre for Global Research's Michel Chossudovsky [see the pictures of Nuland and McCain schmoozing with the top leader of Svoboda, the "above ground" political party of which Praviy Sektor are the footsoldiers]: "".

And here is one from Max Blumenthal, "".

The U.S. has been in bed with fascists around the world for many years, going back to Operation Paperclip right after WWII, along with the decision not to prosecute the Japanese monsters who experimented on captives and prisoners of war around the same time.

My recommendation is to eschew the mass media and sanitized history, and research in the darker corners that the elite oligarchs who run the system would prefer you to remain ignorant of.
+7 # Mainiac 2015-08-02 15:56
To tgember1, The Charter of the United Nations forbids its members to “meddle” in the affairs of other countries. The NED has no business in Ukraine, Russia, or any place else to try to strengthen reforms or make the country more transparent.

Put the shoe on our foot. Would we allow Russia to have an agency here that was trying to restore voting rights to Americans?
-2 # tgemberl 2015-08-02 17:48
I hope we would. How do you define "meddling" in the affairs of another country? If I run a charity that criticizes the brutality of Myanmar Buddhists to Rohingya Muslims, is that meddling?
+2 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-02 20:29
tgemberl, Criticism is one thing but financing & arming NAZI Right-Sektor & Svoboda mercenaries to overthrow a democratic elected government with an election scheduled within months is wrong. Victoria Nuland in an ambassador role boasted about investing 5 billion dollars in the overthrow. This was matched with more EURO billions & billions from private sources such as Pierre Omidyar. The total approximate 15 billion is equal due to Ukraine's weak money to 60 billion $. This is the same dark money financing Republican & Clinton presidencies. Representative Press 5Apr’14, Victoria Nuland's 5 billion dollar destabilization of the democratically elected Yanukovych government & her "Fuck the E.U." statement

NED so-called 'National Endowment for Democracy' accomplished this atrocity through financing the forming of social-media web-sites & internet communications since the so-called Orange revolution. NED is involved in similar arming, financing mercenaries government destabilization in over 85 countries worldwide. Nothing to do with real democracy.

All war & violence is cowardice / fear of engaging our perceived opponents in Both-sided, Equal-time, Recorded & Published Dialogue. The court of public opinion is far more powerful than guns.
-1 # tgemberl 2015-08-03 12:51
Nuland said, if you listen to the recording, that the investment of 5 billion dollars was "since 1991." That is long before the fall of Yanukovych.

"All war & violence is cowardice / fear of engaging our perceived opponents in Both-sided, Equal-time, Recorded & Published Dialogue."--How do you engage in dialogue by shutting voices down?
0 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-04 12:53
tgemberl, RE: "long before the fall of Yanukovych."
Exchange difference / buying power of Ukrainian money which is times 4 so 15 billion dollars "invested" = 60 billion in equivalent buying-power or effective-polit ical-influence in Ukraine. Once US NED "invests" it takes years for this money to trickle down through business, institutions & organizations. Money also multiplies in being re-spent in whole bought communities.

RE: "How do you engage in dialogue by shutting voices down?" A key question is, what are the qualities which distinguish between voices & violence?
2) Weapons, mercenary hire & arms training given Svoboda & Pravy-Sector through NED, CIA etc. moneys is totally not in keeping with tgemberl's assertion of 'voices'. NED financed NAZI violence was playing-out in front of us during NAZI massacre at the Trade Union building as well as in the firing on police & protestors in Maidan. German TV. 10.4.14. Who were the Maidan snipers? Ukraine. 2legs2armsetc·2 videos

Is NED promoting anything else but violence? Wouldn't it be nice if the USA itself had verifiable computerized voting with a paper trail & oversight? Why are we so concerned with former Russian satellite states? How many foreign deaths is NED willing to tolerate for geopolitical & economic gain? Can we get whole populations /stakeholders investing?
-1 # tgemberl 2015-08-03 13:34
We haven't shut the RT network down in the US. If we shouldn't do that, why should Russia shut down the NED?
+12 # PABLO DIABLO 2015-08-02 16:00
The NED has gotten the United States into much deeper shit that we are even aware of. They have lead a string of costly disasters. Anyone wonder why voting in the United Nations is now down to USA and Israel against 180 other nations. THE AMERICAN CENTURY the neocons promised us is over. All we can do is increase funding for the military (a sure sign of a declining empire). Get the neocons out of our government. They and their corporate sponsors make money off of war, lots of money. WE PAY. THANK YOU Robert Parry for all you do.
+2 # pietheyn07 2015-08-02 22:50
We could begin by passing legislation that would bar anyone with dual citizenship from holding any Federal elective office, or an appointed position that requires
Congressional approval.
+6 # RMDC 2015-08-02 18:09
It is important for Russia to ban the NED and other US backed "civil society" organizations. Russia is the subject of massive attempts at a color revolution. These "civil society" organizations are the way color revolutions get going. There are very many fronts like the NED. Many are not even based in the US. The CIA has vast reach when it comes to organizing subversion of other nations. After all, that is what the CIA was created to do.
+6 # Dongi 2015-08-02 18:17
The Washington Post for some reason is demonizing Putin despite the fact that he makes more sense than the leaders of the west. Why don't the NED people realize what they are doing in the Ukraine and clear out of that province. Their track record is pretty bad. Putin knows it and he is taking steps against its expansion. Smart guy.
+4 # geraldom 2015-08-02 21:42
It is really very simple. The National Endowment for Democracy, the NED, is a front for the CIA, and that is all one needs to say.

Any nation that foolishly allows the NED to reside and operate in their country has a malignant cancer growing, metastasizing.
+2 # Activista 2015-08-02 23:22
an article how The National Endowment for Democracy "works"
"The NED promotes top-down, elite, constrained (or “polyarchal”) democracy. This is the democracy where the elites get to decide the candidates or questions suitable to go before the people—and always limiting the choices to what the elites are comfortable with. Then, once the elites have made their decision, THEN the people are presented with the “choice” that the elites approve. And then NED prattles on with its nonsense about how it is “promoting democracy around the world.”
+1 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-03 09:34
Activista, RE: POLYARCHY, 'In Western European political science, the term polyarchy (Greek: poly "many", arkhe "rule") was used by Robert Dahl to describe a form of government in which power is invested in multiple people. It takes form of neither dictatorship nor democracy.'

Lets look behind this Puppet-Show's curtain. There are countless indications of Trillionaire, Billionaire, Millionaire hierarchy among the elites which bely even false polyarchy. There is not by any means, ground-up organization of anything by "multiple-peopl e". It is better understood as a Dictatorship command & control tree.

Indications: 1) American Congress' Representatives & Senate vote support of Israel regardless of massacre in Gaza is a good indication of complete control (couldn't they have 'arranged' even one dissenting vote?). 2) Cynthia McKinney's shunning & financial euthanization by the 'Oath to Israel' system (not even without an oath?). 3) Voluminous number of Trolls on key information control websites is indication of a system at war with people. (we're talking one of America's major employers) 4) 100s of False-Flags to create war (why are they always rushing to make scripting mistakes?). 5) # of perpetual Wars & Conflicts always burning (is no dissent from the plan tolerated?). 6) Obama's stellar election performances & then subservience to the Oligarch agenda (fooled us all).

Multifaceted response:
+1 # Douglas Jack 2015-08-03 09:38
President Carter: The US is an “oligarchy with unlimited political bribery” By Jon Schwarz 2Aug’15 "Information Clearing House" - "The Intercept" - Former president Jimmy Carter said Tuesday on the nationally syndicated radio show the Thom Hartmann Program that the United States is now an “oligarchy” in which “unlimited political bribery” has created “a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors.” Both Democrats and Republicans, Carter said, “look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves.”

Washington’s Fifth Columns Inside Russia and China by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts. former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate.
It took two decades for Russia and China to understand that “pro-democracy” and “human rights” organizations operating within their countries were subversive organizations funded by the US Department of State and a collection of private American foundations organized by Washington. The real purpose of these non-governmenta l organizations (NGOs) is to advance Washington’s hegemony by destabilizing the two countries capable of resisting US hegemony.
+1 # Dongi 2015-08-04 18:06
You know a person could get depressed reading all this crap ab out the NED and the various ramifications of its many tentacles of power and influence. Maybe, we should just let global warming take its course and finish off the dumb humans once and for all. You know methane over oxygen.
0 # mmcmanus 2015-08-06 12:07
Vladimir Putin may well be the most dangerous man on the planet--a psycopathic megalomaniac with nucleur weapons.
0 # Salus Populi 2015-08-07 21:54
Let's see.... There's a country armed with nuclear weapons that has attacked countries on or near its borders over half a dozen times.

That would be Israel, under both the parties that take turns running the place.

There's another country that has nuclear weapons and has used them twice to kill a quarter million civilians, when even its military's Supreme Commander stated that it was not necessary; that has used its nuclear weapons to threaten other countries, both those with and without nukes, on dozens of occasions in order to get them to follow the public prescription of one of its past leaders, referring to other supposedly sovereign countries and our relationship to them, "What we say goes"; that has overthrown elected governments on every continent, and attacked scores of other countries for not toeing the line that it illegitimately and unilaterally sets; that has vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution calling on countries to observe international law; that has used chemical and biological weapons on the populations of other countries; that maintains military presences in two-thirds of the world's nations; that proclaims its own right to attack any other country it chooses at any time and for any trumped-up reason; whose populace by and large considers other countries' people to be literally sub-human; and that spends more on an aggressive strike force than the next nine nations combined.

That would be the U.S.

You are delusional.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.