Russian interference

Emma Robertson

Active Member
More on Russian cyber interference in US and allies. See my other posts spread on various other threads. https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?search/6465/

Russians behind Texas furor over Jade Helm exercise

AUSTIN — Russians were behind the Texas furor over the Jade Helm 15 federal military exercise, which drew so much concern that Gov. Greg Abbott directed the State Guard to monitor the operation, former CIA director Michael Hayden said on MSNBC.
Hayden, a retired Air Force general who also headed the National Security Agency in 1999-2005, was on Wednesday’s podcast by “Morning Joe.” He has a new book, “The Assault on Intelligence: American National Security in an Age of Lies,” and discussed Russia’s focus on information warfare.

Russians “took their game to North America in 2015,” said Hayden.

“There was an exercise in Texas called Jade Helm 15,” he said. “Russian bots and the American alt-right media convinced most — many — Texans … that Obama planned to round up political dissidents.

“It got so much traction the governor of Texas had to call out the National Guard to observe the federal exercise to keep the population calm,” Hayden said. “At that point, I’m figuring the Russians are saying, ‘We can go big time.’ At that point, I think they made the decision, we’re going to play in the electoral process.”

The San Antonio Express-News, which obtained correspondence to and from Abbott’s office regarding the exercise, found that many people wrote or called with concerns about the possibility of martial law and closed Walmarts being prepared as detention camps.

The Texas Democratic Party drew attention to Hayden’s comments and jabbed at Abbott, calling him “a Russian pawn and a useful idiot for Russian efforts to instill fear and distrust in our American institutions.” “Governor Greg Abbott was duped by Russian bots. He indulged in awful conspiracy theories against our own men and women in uniform. He was a puppet in a Russian infowar that sowed distrust amongst Americans and paved the way for foreign intervention in our elections,” former Dallas County sheriff Lupe Valdez said in a statement.

Houston businessman Andrew White said on Twitter that Abbott “thought the movie ‘Red Dawn’ was really happening ... except with USA forces invading the USA... Truth: Russia fooled Greg into calling out the State Guard.”

https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/politics/article/Former-CIA-chief-Russians-behind-Texas-furor-12885303.php

You can start to think where your fears of martial law enforcement and dictatorship in US come from, who is instilling them...

I used to believe the voice that FEMA is preparing detention camps for dissidents, until I digged better and found people working at FEMA doing their best to shed light on the groundlessness of that conspiracy. This voice was from almost 20 years ago. And it will go on and on and nothing will continue to happen, no deportations.
The same freak who instilled that idea in me was also worried by seeing fields rounded by barbed wire turned inside at the top, which he assumed was to prevent people inside from running outside, in preparation for detention camps. He reasoned that if the barbed wire was to prevent people from getting inside, it should be turned outside. Until I found out, in the quiet country where I live now, golf courses rounded by barbed wire turned inside. And I got a laughter. Preventing golfers from escaping without paying their tee times?
 

Emma Robertson

Active Member
Aleksandr Dugin

The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia is a geopolitical book by Aleksandr Dugin. The book has had a large influence within the Russian military, police, and foreign policy elites[1] and it has been used as a textbook in the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian military.[1][2] Its publication in 1997 was well-received in Russia and powerful Russian political figures subsequently took an interest in Dugin,[3] a Russian eurasianist, fascist[4] and nationalist[5] who has developed a close relationship with Russia's Academy of the General Staff.[6]

Klokotov stated that in the future the book would "serve as a mighty ideological foundation for preparing a new military command".[9] Dugin has asserted that the book has been adopted as a textbook in many Russian educational institutions.[1] Former speaker of the Russian State Duma, Gennadiy Seleznyov, for whom Dugin was adviser on geopolitics,[10] has "urged that Dugin's geopolitical doctrine be made a compulsory part of the school curriculum".[9]

In Foundations of Geopolitics, Dugin calls for the United States and Atlanticism to lose their influence in Eurasia and for Russia to rebuild its influence through annexations and alliances.[2]

The book declares that "the battle for the world rule of Russians" has not ended and Russia remains "the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution". The Eurasian Empire will be constructed "on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us."[9]

Military operations play relatively little role. The textbook advocates a sophisticated program of subversion, destabilization, and disinformation spearheaded by the Russian special services. The operations should be assisted by a tough, hard-headed utilization of Russia's gas, oil, and natural resources to bully and pressure other countries.[9]

The book states that "the maximum task [of the future] is the 'Finlandization' of all of Europe".[9]

In Europe:

  • Germany should be offered the de facto political dominance over most Protestant and Catholic states located within Central and Eastern Europe. Kaliningrad oblast could be given back to Germany. The book uses the term "Moscow–Berlin axis".[9]
  • France should be encouraged to form a "Franco-German bloc" with Germany. Both countries have a "firm anti-Atlanticist tradition".[9]
  • The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.[9]
  • Finland should be absorbed into Russia. Southern Finland will be combined with the Republic of Karelia and northern Finland will be "donated to Murmansk Oblast".[9]
  • Estonia should be given to Germany's sphere of influence.[9]
  • Latvia and Lithuania should be given a "special status" in the Eurasian–Russian sphere.[9]
  • Poland should be granted a "special status" in the Eurasian sphere.[9]
  • Romania, Macedonia, "Serbian Bosnia" and Greece – "Orthodox collectivist East" – will unite with "Moscow the Third Rome" and reject the "rational-individualistic West".[9]
  • Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[9]
In the Middle East and Central Asia:
  • The book stresses the "continental Russian–Islamic alliance" which lies "at the foundation of anti-Atlanticist strategy". The alliance is based on the "traditional character of Russian and Islamic civilization".
In East and Southeast Asia:


The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: "the main 'scapegoat' will be precisely the U.S."

In the United States:

  • Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics".[9]
The Eurasian Project could be expanded to South and Central America.[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics
 
Last edited:

Emma Robertson

Active Member
1990s Manifesto outlining Russia’s plans is starting to come true

IN the 1990s, an inner-circle of Generals and political scientists wrote a manifesto outlining Russia’s goals over the coming decades. They’re falling into place.

EVER wondered what Vladimir Putin is up to infiltrating the US elections? Surprisingly, there is an answer to that.

In 1997, a Russian political scientist named Aleksandr Dugin and a serving Russian General named Nikolai Klokotov sat down and wrote a text that would become the foundation of Russian geopolitical strategy over the next 20 years. It was called “Foundations of Geopolitics” and it was all about how Russia could reassert itself in the world.
Chillingly, the book now reads like a to-do list for Putin’s behaviour on the world stage.

Perhaps surprisingly, the document is not a secret. It has long been known to observers of Russian foreign policy, and has served as a text book among a generation of military strategists. But with the scandal over Russian influence in the US elections, growing by the day, it’s surprising how little coverage this important text has been given.

The book starts out by saying that the shrewd thing for Russia to do is to steer clear of direct military confrontation. Instead, the book counsels Russian leaders to favour political stealth. It emphasises the need for the infiltration of Western institutions, and the use of soft power to shape the world in Russia’s favour. Sound familiar yet? We haven’t even got to the good stuff.

The text then goes into a very specific list of to-dos, about Russia’s posture towards almost every nation on earth.

Let’s start close to Russia. The book argues that Ukraine should - surprise, surprise - be annexed by Russia

Next, it turns to Britain. The book’s authors say Russia should encourage Britain to leave the European Union, and thus weaken it. That’s right. Russian strategists were openly arguing in favour of Brexit in 1997, when it was still just a glimmer in Nigel Farage’s eyes.

Score so far, Putin: 2, Rest of World: 0.

How about the rest of the world? It identifies Iran as a key ally for Russia, and recommends that Turkey should receive a series of “geopolitics shocks” using Kurds and Armenians to keep it off-balance. I’d give that Putin: 4, Rest of World: 0.

The document even mentions Australia, if only in its relation to China.
It also talks about making Germany and France the predominant powers in the European Union, in order to unbalance that alliance, and encourage an anti-Atlantic sentiment on the continent. Score so far is Putin: 6, Rest of World: 0.

But perhaps most amazing part of the book is when it calls for Russia to “introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilising internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics.” If that reads like an accurate description of Trump’s inner-circle, again remember that this text was written twenty years ago.(*)


(*) I read elsewhere that Russia has been preparing Trump to become president long ago. Because of his activities in Russia, and getting into a debt with oligarchs, this could be used as a leverage to make him a pawn of them (reason why he would be doing all possible dishonest things to avoid his tax returns being checked, which would reveal such link). They have studied his psychological profile and know how to turn him in their favour. That's why they have offered him to build a Trump tower in Russia, which for a naive narcissist like him is such a reason of pride that it can bend him to do anything for them.

Like Putin, Dugin and Klokotov saw the collapse of the Soviet state as humiliating. They believed that the West had hacked infiltrated their institutions in the late-1980s, and weakened the Soviet state from within. They therefore sought revenge in kind - influencing the institutions of other countries, to return Russia to what they considered its rightful place as a superpower.

It’s now clear to everyone but Sean Spicer that Trump’s campaign was in communication with the Kremlin for a year leading up to his election victory. The revelation on Thursday about Jeff Sessions means that this is the story that will dominate Trump’s first term. Putin: 7, Rest of World: 0.

Of course, every nation has influential strategic thinkers who help leaders shape their thinking, but the Foundations of Geopolitics has had an outsized influence since it’s publication 20 years ago. There are many factors that go into geopolitics — and it can be easy to overstate Putin’s influence in what are tendencies that may have arisen anyway. But reading through the document, it is hard to escape the conclusion that much of Russia’s foreign policy has been shaped by Dugin and Klokotov’s thinking - and that that is in turn, shaping the way the world is heading.

And that should be a concern to us all. Their thinking breaks with many of the central tenets that underpin our politics. It rejects democracy, and places nationalism at the heart of how geopolitics should operate.
https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/1990s-manifesto-outlining-russias-plans-is-starting-to-come-true/news-story/343a27c71077b87668f1aa783d03032c
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
The book argues that Ukraine should - surprise, surprise - be annexed by Russia

Next, it turns to Britain. The book’s authors say Russia should encourage Britain to leave the European Union, and thus weaken it. That’s right. Russian strategists were openly arguing in favour of Brexit in 1997, when it was still just a glimmer in Nigel Farage’s eyes.

Score so far, Putin: 2, Rest of World: 0.
Notice the assumption here, that the "Rest of World" loses if Russia wins.

But, Ukraine has been intimately linked to Russia since the days of Kievan Rus. Ukrainian is a Slavic language written with Cyrillic characters, very closely related to Russian. Ukraine and Russia share the legacy of the Russian Orthodox church. A very significant minority of Ukrainians consider themselves Russian. So how does it hurt the rest of the world, if Ukraine is annexed by Russia?

And furthermore, is it true that Russia scored a win here? Since when was Ukraine annexed by Russia? Ukraine has been an independent country since 1990. Maybe the author was thinking of the annexation of Crimea, a very different thing.

The voters of Britain agreed with Nigel Farage as well as Aleksandr Dugin, when they opted for Brexit. But if they were wrong about that, how is the "Rest of the World" harmed? Is it possible that democracy actually worked here to the benefit of the British voters, who no longer have to worry about power-hungry bureaucrats in Brussels? And to the extent that Europe loses trade with Britain, other nations will pick up the slack?

It identifies Iran as a key ally for Russia
If Iran allies with Russia, does that make the "Rest of the World" the loser? Or, just the Zionist alliance of the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia?

(*) I read elsewhere that Russia has been preparing Trump to become president long ago. Because of his activities in Russia, and getting into a debt with oligarchs, this could be used as a leverage to make him a pawn of them (reason why he would be doing all possible dishonest things to avoid his tax returns being checked, which would reveal such link). They have studied his psychological profile and know how to turn him in their favour. That's why they have offered him to build a Trump tower in Russia, which for a naive narcissist like him is such a reason of pride that it can bend him to do anything for them.
Maybe you read about this here? We've written extensively about Trump's deep ties to Russian gangster oligarchs. I've also claimed that Putin's relationship with these Russian criminal elements is complex and nuanced, and that Putin is not necessarily their puppet, but it's impossible to deny that Putin is heavily under their influence.

In Trump's case, it's hard to say that the Russians have won any actual benefits from their relationship with Trump. US foreign policy has continued on its anti-Russian track, more or less regardless of Trump's efforts on the Kremlin's behalf, either real or imagined.

it can be easy to overstate Putin’s influence in what are tendencies that may have arisen anyway.
Bingo!! Does anybody think that problems of racism and oligarchy in America would disappear, if only the Russians would stop talking about them?

While Trump does indeed have deep connections to Russia, the recent attempts to put the same stigma on Bernie Sanders are completely shameless. As WSWS explains this morning, there is absolutely no factual basis for the claims.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/02/24/pers-f24.html

The victory of Bernie Sanders in the Nevada caucuses has escalated the anti-Sanders hysteria of the Democratic Party establishment and Democratic-aligned media outlets such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC. This has taken the form of fabricated allegations of Russian intervention into the 2020 elections to support Sanders’ candidacy.
This fable is elaborated on the front page of Sunday’s New York Times in a lengthy article by David Sanger...
In this latest thriller, Sanger does not produce a single fact in support of the contention that Russian President Vladimir Putin backs Sanders or has done anything to assist his campaign.
Besides numerous unnamed “outside experts” and “intelligence analysts,” Sanger quotes three current and former intelligence officials by name, including Angela Stent, national intelligence officer for Russia, now a professor at Georgetown University and author of Putin’s World: Russia Against the West and With the Rest, who actually says nothing about Sanders.
Victoria Nuland is also cited. Nuland is certainly an expert on foreign subversion of elections, having played, as she boasted, a central role in 2014 in the $5 billion US effort to destabilize and oust the democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine.
Nuland does not present any evidence to support Sanger’s storyline, beyond asserting, “Any figures that radicalize politics and do harm to center views and unity in the United States are good for Putin’s Russia.” In other words, Sanders is functioning as a Putin stooge because his policies are to the left of the Democratic Party candidates favored by the CIA.
Sanger finds the hand of Putin in Sanders’ support for “a drastic expansion of taxes and government programs like Medicare,” claiming that this divides American society in a way favorable to Moscow.
Also named by Sanger is Christopher Krebs, head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency in the Department of Homeland Security. Sanger cites his role in “documenting how Russian operatives are becoming stealthier, learning from the mistakes they made in 2016.” These Russki agents are so devilishly clever that they successfully conceal all traces of their insidious manipulation of American elections.
In Sanger’s make-believe world, the very absence of evidence of Russian interference is proof of their subversion. His story line is a modern-day version of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s anticommunist invocations of a “conspiracy so vast.”
No American is safe from Putin’s tentacles. Sanger claims that Russia is “feeding disinformation to unsuspecting Americans on Facebook and other social media." He continues: "By seeding conspiracy theories and baseless claims on the platforms, Russians hope everyday Americans will retransmit those falsehoods from their own accounts.”
He concludes, with apparent regret over the existence of freedom of speech, “It is much harder to ban the words of real Americans, who may be parroting a Russian story line, even unintentionally.”
The anti-Russia narrative has the most ominous implications for the democratic rights of the American people. The New York Times implies that any expression of social discontent in the United States, and, above all, the growing anger over mounting social inequality, can be delegitimized as “parroting a Russian story line” and outlawed.
 
Top