http://www.counterpunch.com/watson02082008.html

I am half Serb and half Croat. I used to live in that country. We Serbs have committed many war crimes, that is true. All of the different international media reporting the same thing, how likely is that? How do I know this? Because I traveled over there, I talked to people. I talked to my Serbian relatives in Croatia, who were bombed by the Serbs, just like their Croat neighbors, by cannon fire, for several long years. They showed me where little kids were playing when a shell landed on them. These shells came with no warning, and you either lived or died, depending on your luck. Bombing of Sarajevo by heavy artilery for several long years. I have talked to people from Bosnia and Croatia who have lost every thing. Including those nearest and dearest to them. The wounds are unspeakable. I talked to Serbian people who talked with gusto and pleasure about killing the others — including the whole families. One story is in my mind, about some Montenegrin, who wanted independence from Serbia. They came, and slit the throats of his family, in front of him. First his son — then dumped the body in the river. Then his wife, then dumped the body in the river. Then himself, and dumped the body in the river. And I know the Serbian refugees from Croatia, who had to endure unspeakable things because of what has been unleashed by your Milosevic and others like him. And yes, such unspeakable things did happen to Serbian people also, but mostly in WW2. In this war, they had the majority of firepower and majority of opportunities to comit murder, they were acting just like the other in war.

Please do not talk about things you know absolutely nothing about. Unspeakable horrors occurred there. Unspeakable open wounds there. We do not need your armchair liberal apologists to make unspekable shit look and smell like roses. Yes, black is white, white is black, all I see is LIES, lies, lies. Just score some points, just get some MONEY for your causes (no, not your causes, YOURSELF), that’s what it’s all about, right?

If all this happened when Estonia, outnumbered by 100 to 1 by Russia, is a NATO member, what do you think would have happened had Estonia been faced with a situation like in 1940, when it was occupied by the Red Army and absorbed against its will into the USSR?

Oh, as to the illegal bombing and invasion of Afghanistan. Did anything precede that event? Was that legal under international law?

Fact check: Finland can’t be considered for membership in NATO before its people and government decide whether or not they want to apply to join NATO. There is a debate going on as to whether changing the country’s traditional neutrality policy would be a net gain or loss for its security. The Russians have not helped matters by putting on big tariffs on Finnish wood products or provocative flights near the Finnish border.

One article for the “comrades” to consider:

//After all, Russia’s windfall profits from the sale of oil and gas abroad have already resulted in significant changes in Russian policies at home and abroad. The government’s clamp down on the once free Russian media, its intolerance of any political opposition and its un-neighborly behavior towards neighboring Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia all point in a direction that seems to validate the worst fears of a resurgent and aggressive Russia on the part of the smaller neighbors.

But times have changed since 1991 when the Soviet hardliners sent their OMON thugs in to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to terrorize the Baltic peoples into submission. These three small countries did become independent again after the Soviet breakup and all three, after all, became not only independent states but also EU and NATO members.

Meanwhile, NATO membership for either the Finns and/or the Swedes is no foregone conclusion – but Russian threats and bullying – will more likely hasten – rather than halt – such a decision sometime in the future and invoke yet again that law of unintended and unwanted consequences.//

Why didn’t you mention that Russia is also a signatory of Partnership for Peace? Or that Russia in 2005 signed a cooperation agreement with NATO? Afraid it would spoil your argument?

As previous writers have mentioned, it would be nice if you corrected your own information gaps before you start correcting those of others.

Take the Ukraine, or any other “Soviet country”. They were Soviet, but not by their own choice. There is a lot of resentment in the Ukraine that, over the centuries, they were never in charge of their own destiny, the big Russian bear always managed to muscle in and run the country as part of their empire. And the fact is, even though they think that, and even though now the Ukrainian is the official language, ordinary people in the street largely still speak Russian in their conversations, that’s how insidious the occupation has been. I lived in a non-aligned country in Europe during the cold war, and our everyday fear was that the Russians would invade, not that the Americans would invade.

In other words, it’s not that NATO elbowed its way into those countries, it’s that these countries wanted to be in NATO. The people there never again wanted to spend their lives waiting in bread lines all day, every day (and don’t judge them until you’ve tried this yourself). And NATO was an insurance policy that this wouldn’t happen again. Of course, Russians have their own security interests, no-one disputes that. And yes, it’s true that, here, the industrial-military complex has taken over — maybe exactly because of denial of reality in all its facets. My point is, how can you fix a problem if you don’t know the whole reality of it, rather than the surface black and white portrayal given here and elsewhere? It’s like saying, we’ve built this wonderful aircraft, all new engines, super-duper wheels, etc., you’ll see how it will take off. The only problem is, we neglected to put the wings on it (and we neglected to tell you that), so it will crash and burn before it’s airborne.

So, for those in the choir, be suspicious of any black and white arguments. The reality is more complex than that. And question the motives of those proffering such. Actually both the ones on the left and the right have the exact same motives – money and power, though the former pretend it’s something else. All you have to do is open your eyes and you’ll see this. You can see this when Mr. Blum bemoans the fact that he’s not getting as many speaking invitations, that he had to reduce his fees, or when some others on the left try to sabotage meaningful discussion about 9-11 or global warming, because then the center of gravity (i.e., power, i.e., money) would move away from them.

Just like when you said (in another article) that Marshall plan was used to help the capitalist countries, when I saw Marshall plan packaging in Yugoslavia, (again, NOT a capitalist country).

Playing loose with the facts, just like the other side.

The coherent theme here, almost understated, is the nature of democracy in our modern world.

As our corporate media focus the attention of our forgetful masses on one inane show after another–the “Superbowl,” “Super Tuesday,” “Law & Order,” Britney, etc.–real democracy–the ability of the people to have a say in their domestic and international affairs–is lost in the bargain. We know all we need to know about Hillary’s weepiness and McCain’s “straight-talking express,” but almost nothing about the machinations of the NATO superstate that rides roughshod over our own national policies and those of other nations. To overcome the constant sloganeering of our mass media–0ur “noble” democracy-building projects in Iraq and Afghanistan–Blum suggests “preaching to the choir”; i.e., repeating our own message to those who have heard it before, even to those mostly convinced. Why not? We, too, who have seen a glimmer of the light, read a bit of history, and managed to read between the lines, must cut through the bric-a-brac of confusing messages, irrelevant information, and plain old lies.

Who will counter NATO? Blum asks at one point. Well, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization of seven powers (anchored by China and Russia) is one possible counter. How well a state of interlocking countervailing alliances bodes for a resources-challenged world we may learn from Europe circa 1914. Knowledge is always the best counter to ignorance, but ignorance more frequently counterbalances itself and we messy mortals get caught in the interstices.

Still, there’s the moral injunction to keep truth-searching and truth-telling because it’s, well, the right thing to do. That Blum challenges us to think for ourselves, as well as behave morally, are the best reasons to inform ourselves, ponder his work, and act on our conclusions.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_timothy__080204_mike_gravel_3a_his_tim.htm

“The Politics of Change”… sure, change… from one war-mongering regime to another, that’s the change we will get. The handwriting is on the wall. If you desire real change, and a return of the principles of a modern, civilized United States of America, you will cast off the politics of fear and partisanship, and vote for Mike Gravel when he announces his independent run for the White House! This is not wishful thinking; he told me that he will run as an Independent! It will take hard work and hard campaigning. It will take people that give a damn about what kind of country we will live in, where we raise our children, what kind of a country we will fight for. Progressives and thinking Democrats and Republicans can get together when it is absolutely essential. It is essential now! The time has come today! Don’t let this chance pass us by; it may be the only chance we as a nation, have left. We should do this not only for America, but for the entire world. Isn’t it about time we cut through the self-interests of politicians and listened to our conscience for once? I believe it is time, it must be time. Our time has come today!

Otherwise the piece is excellent. Thank you.

peace,
tlm