« Civilisation » ? Vous avez dit « civilisation » ?

L'enfer selon l'OTAN

William Bowles

29 octobre 2006
Tlaxcala

Civilisé (adjectif) : cultivé, instruit, raffiné, éclairé, poli,
élégant, sophistiqué, courtois
Civiliser (verbe) : éclairer, instruire, cultiver, améliorer,
avancer, développer, raffiner

Pauvre vieux Dante Alighieri, s'il était des nôtres aujourd'hui, je
suis sûr qu'il trouverait difficile de dénicher les mots pour décrire
les maux répandus par les soi-disant nations civilisées aux sans-
défense de la planète, et en supposant qu'il serait entièrement au
courant de ce qui se passe.

Je sais que je ne devrais pas être étonné mais néanmoins je le suis.
Étonné premièrement de vivre dans une culture barbare qui a été
capable de se faire passer pour civilisée et deuxièmement, qu'elle
ait pu persuader le monde qu'elle possède des lettres de créances de
civilisation de premier choix. Et troisièmement, qu'elle ait été
capable d'entretenir cette illusion depuis au moins cinq cents ans.

La plupart d'entre nous associons l'idée de civilisation à la
connaissance et au respect pour la culture, cependant la racine du
mot est celle du citadin.

« Les missiles ont frappé des réservoirs de stockage du complexe
pétrochimique [à Panchevo, au nord-est de Belgrade], envoyant plus de
900 tonnes de monomère hautement cancérogène de chlorure de vinyle
(VCM) se répandre dans les airs. Au lever du soleil, les nuages de
VCM ruisselaient au-dessus de toute la ville, enregistrant pas moins
de 10.600 fois la limite permise pour la sécurité humaine, et les
nuages se levant de l'usine étaient si épais que les résidants ne
pouvaient voir le soleil. Le VCM est déjà dangereux en soi, mais
quand il brûle, il libère en sous-produit du gaz phosgène, une
substance si nocive qu'elle a servi comme gaz toxique pendant la
Première Guerre mondiale. Le feu faisant rage libère du chlore, une
autre substance qui a été utilisée comme gaz toxique pendant la
Première Guerre Mondiale, avec une foule d'autres produits chimiques
nocifs, tels que la naphte, le dichlorure d'éthylène et l'acide
chlorhydrique. Plus de 2.000 tonnes de PVC dichloroéthane fortement
toxique ont lavé la terre, nécessitant l'interdiction à long terme de
manger des racines alimentaires poussées dans la ville. Une pluie de
poison a éclaboussé la région, et des centaines de tonnes de pétrole
et de produits chimiques ont imbibé le sol et se sont déversés dans
le Danube. Après qu'un missile eut manqué de peu de frapper un
réservoir d'ammoniaque liquide, les ouvriers ont paniqué devant les
conséquences effrayantes qu'aurait une explosion sur le réservoir, et
du déversement de l'ammoniaque liquide dans le Danube. » 1

Comme si l'utilisation de puissants explosifs lors de bombardements «
ordinaires » d'hommes, de femmes et d'enfants, qui ne font que vous
mettre en pièces n'était pas assez mauvaise, ce que j'appelle une
guerre écocide n'est pas immédiatement évidente dans ses effets
dévastateurs non seulement sur les gens mais sur les générations, sur
des écologies entières, des effets à long terme dont nous avons
seulement une compréhension des plus vagues, excepté qu'ils ne
peuvent qu'être désastreux pour nos descendants.

La gamme d'armes écologiques employées par de soi-disant nations
civilisées est déjà dévastatrice en soi, mais comme en plus les
cibles elles-mêmes contiennent assez souvent des substances toxiques
et cancérigènes, les effets des armes écologiques sont multipliés par
les produits chimiques déversés dans l'environnement.

Il est inconcevable que les planificateurs de guerres ne se rendent
pas compte des conséquences qu'il y a à cibler des usines
industrielles modernes, dont le contenu une fois libéré rend en fait
l'environnement inhabitable, peut-être pour des générations. Quand
des accidents se produisent dans les usines équivalentes des pays
occidentaux, ça provoque un boucan d'enfer, des plans d'urgence sont
mis en action, des communautés entières sont évacuées ; des zones
d'exclusion sont établies, le nettoyage exige l'intervention
d'équipes utilisant les dernières techniques pour réduire au minimum
les dommages à l'environnement.

Il n'en va pas de même pour les malheureux habitants de Yougoslavie,
d'Iraq et du Liban, où le ciblage des industries électriques et
chimiques et des lieux de stockage fait partie intégrante d'une
politique délibérée de terreur, parce que non seulement elle affecte
les gens qui vivent et travaillent en ces lieux, mais elle met aussi
en danger la population entière par la destruction des systèmes de
traitement et de distribution d'eau, la perte du courant électrique
pour les hôpitaux. C'est en fait tout le tissu de la société moderne
qui est paralysé.

Tout aussi dévastateur est le silence presque total de tous les
médias occidentaux qui constamment et a dessein retiennent
l'information du public au sujet des effets horribles de ces armes de
cauchemar sur littéralement des millions de gens. « Mettre le feu et
oublier » prend une sens tout nouveau.

L'utilisation de ces armes sur des cibles industrielles constitue un
crime de guerre d'une telle dimensions absolument dévastatrices qu'il
est imaginable que nos populations nationales, si elles étaient
vraiment averties de l'échelle et de l'impact de ces armes de
destruction massive, réagiraient avec horreur et répugnance au fait
que de tels ravages soient commis non seulement en leur nom mais par
des sociétés qui prétendent être civilisées. Pas étonnant que les
principaux médias nous aient caché la réalité.

« La demi-vie de l'uranium appauvri (UA) est de 4,5 milliards
d'années, assurant essentiellement la contamination permanente des
zones affectées. Pour comprendre exactement ce que cela signifie en
termes de temps, considérez que l'âge du système solaire est
légèrement plus long. Les armes à l'UA ont le côté avantageux
supplémentaire d'être un moyen efficace de se débarrasser des déchets
nucléaires. Avant la guerre de l'OTAN [en Yougoslavie], les USA ont
stocké plus de 450 000 tonnes (un milliard de livres anglo-saxonnes)
de déchets de la production d'armes nucléaires, et le Pentagone a
fourni le matériau sans coût aux fabricants d'armes. Une seule
particule d'UA logée dans les poumons équivaut à une radiographie de
la poitrine à l'heure pendant toute une vie. » 2

Les médias occidentaux, utilisant les fausses déclarations de l'OTAN
selon lesquelles l'UA n'a pas eu comme conséquence l'accroissement
des radiations, des déclarations basées sur l'utilisation de
compteurs Geiger qui en fait ne mesurent pas les rayons alpha dégagés
par l'UA, ont permis de rejeter l'accusation de dangerosité à vie de
l'UA.

Il a été fait grand cas de l'utilisation des bombes à fragmentation
mais une variante bien plus mortelle est la bombe au graphite
utilisée contre les stations de transformateurs électriques, conçues
pour détruire l'approvisionnement électrique d'une nation.

« Ce sont de petits récipients remplis de petits rouleaux, enveloppés
avec des fils de silicium. Les fils de silicium sont recouverts
d'aluminium, pour être conducteurs électriquement. quand cette bombe
à fragmentation éclate au-dessus d'une usine de transformateurs, un
genre de toile d'araignée tombe sur l'usine. C'est une sorte d'eau
solide. L'effet est le même que si vous jetiez d'énormes quantités
d'eau sur ces usines de distribution. Cela causerait des courts-
circuits, etc., et toutes ces usines seraient mises hors service.
Mais une plus grande quantité de ces matériaux ont été répandus dans
un brouillard de minuscules particules de silicium. Comme vous le
savez, le verre est fait de silicium. La laine de verre est aussi
faite de silicium. On a interdit la laine de verre il y a vingt ans.
Elle est très cancérigène. Je parle des personnes vivant dans les
secteurs où ces bombes ont été lâchées. Un brouillard épais a plané
là-bas pendant des heures. Les gens ont inhalé ces particules de
silicium. » 3

Les humains ne sont-ils pas ingénieux quand il s'agit de concevoir
des méthodes pour nous exterminer ? Que des millions de gens
hautement habiles soient occupés à inventer ces moyens terrifiants de
meurtre devrait nous mettre en révolte ouverte contre nos
gouvernements commettant de tels actes de pure malfaisance contre nos
frères humains et tou cela dans la quête de profit privé.

Tel est le degré d'aliénation provoqué non seulement parce que des
scientifiques et des ingénieurs dans des bureaux reculés sont
totalement déconnectés des effets de leur ingéniosité, mais parce que
nous tous habitons une culture qui est dans la désinformation depuis
des générations et qui accepte l'idée que nous occupons quelque niche
plus haute dans l'arbre de l'évolution, tant est pernicieuse notre
conception de la « civilisation ».

Pour combien de temps encore pourrons-nous continuer à nous
soustraire à notre complicité tacite dans le meurtre de masse en
vertu de l'idée que nous avons une sorte d'autorisation « d'en haut
», d'un Dieu qui peut parler pitié et compassion et, dans le même
souffle, trouver des excuses à l'usage de la terreur comme moyen de
propager la « civilisation », de style occidental ?

En dernière analyse, les vraies raisons, cachées aux yeux du public,
sont économiques. La Yougoslavie, le dernier bastion de la propriété
sociale en Europe de l'Est, devait voir son économie intérieure
réduite en ruines. Ainsi sous les dehors de cibles « militaires » à
détruire, chaque usine et entrepôt de quelque importance, toutes les
infrastructure, électriques, eau, traitement des eaux usées,
communications et transports, ont été bombardées, souvent à de
nombreuses reprises, sans se soucier des conséquences. Et ne vous y
trompez pas, les plans de l'OTAN mettent en évidence que l'économie
yougoslave devait être bradée au capital occidental.

« Le Pacte de Stabilité sponsorisé par l'Occident pour l'Europe du
sud-est a exigé des privatisations étendues et des investissements
occidentaux.. Le Nouveau Forum de la Serbie, financé par le Foreign
Office britannique. a amené les professionnels et les universitaires
serbes régulièrement en Hongrie pour des discussions avec les «
experts » britanniques et d'Europe Centrale. .. Le Forum a préconisé
une « réintégration de la Yougoslavie dans la famille européenne »,
un euphémisme pour désigner le démantèlement de l'économie
d'orientation socialiste et la mise en ouvre d'une campagne de
privatisation au profit des entreprises occidentales. » 4

En réalité, le mot « civilisation » est en fait un mot de code pour
capitalisme, de style occidental, qui justifie l'extermination de
masse et la terreur contre tout pays qui résiste à ses demandes.


Notes

1. George Monbiot, « Consigning Their Future to Death » (Confiant
leur futur à la mort), The Guardian (Londres), 22 avril 1999.
Tom Walker, « Poison Cloud Engulfs Belgrade » (Le nuage toxique
engloutit Belgrade), The Times (Londres), 19 avril 1999.
Mark Fineman, « Yugoslav City Battling Toxic Enemies » (La ville
yougoslave se bat contre des ennemis toxiques), Los Angeles Times, 6
juillet 1999.
2. Scott Peterson, « Depleted Uranium Bullets Leave Trail in Serbia
» (L'uranium appauvri laisse des traces en Serbie), Nando Medias, 5
octobre 1999.
« Use of Depleted Uranium (DU) Weapons by NATO Forces in Yugoslavia
» (Usage d'armes à l'uranium appauvri par les forces de l'OTAN en
Yougoslavie), Coghill Research Laboratories (UK), avril 1999.
3. Interview de Dushan Vasiljevich par délégation, Belgrade, 7 août
1999.
4. « Britain Trains New Elite for Post-Milosevic Era » (La Grande-
Bretagne forme la nouvelle élite pour l'ère post-Milosevic), The
Independent (Londres), 3 mai 2000.

Toutes les citations et références sont extraites de Stranges
Liberators -- Militarism, Mayhem and the Pursuit of Profit (Étranges
libérateurs -- Militarisme, pagaille et recherche du profit) par
Gregory Elich. Llumina Press, 2006.

Traduit par Pétrus Lombard, membre associé, et révisé par Fausto
Giudice, membre de Tlaxcala, le réseau de traducteurs pour la
diversité linguistique. Cette traduction est en Copyleft pour tout
usage non-commercial : elle est libre d'être reproduite, à condition
d'en respecter l'intégrité et d'en mentionner sources et auteurs.

URL de cet article : http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=1417&lg=fr

SOURCE : http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/group/alerte_otan/

German Supreme Court guarantees impunity to NATO butchers

(LA CORTE SUPREMA FEDERALE TEDESCA HA GARANTITO L'IMPUNITÀ AGLI
ASSASSINI DELLA NATO DENUNCIATI DAI PARENTI DEI CIVILI MASSACRATI SUL
PONTE DI VARVARIN)



1) 19.10.06: Serbs take Germany to court over NATO attack during
Kosovo war

2) 02.11.06: German Court Rejects Civilian War Damages Claim

3) TRAGIC BOMBING OF VARVARIN BRIDGE RECALLED IN "THE BOMBER'S DREAM"



=== 1 ===

http://rawstory.com/news/2006/
Serbs_take_Germany_to_court_over_NA_10192006.html

Deutsche Presse-Agentur
October 19, 2006

Serbs take Germany to court over NATO attack during
Kosovo war

Karlsruhe, Germany - The families of civilians killed
and wounded in a NATO airstrike on a Serbian village
17 years ago sought compensation from a German court
on Thursday.

Ten people died and 30 were injured in the May 1999
attack on a bridge in Varvarin at the height of the
Kosovo war.

Although no German planes took part in the raid, the
plaintiffs are seeking 3.5 million euros (4.1 million
dollars) in damages from the German government.

They claim German troops serving with NATO helped
select the target and Germany therefore shared
responsibility for the NATO action.

Three of the 35 plaintiffs appeared before the High
Court to present their case on Thursday.

Vavarian a town of 4,000, is located 200 kilometres
from the province of Kosovo where Slobodon Milosevic's
Serbian army was suppressing ethnic Albanians.

Lawyers for the German government called the attack a
"tragedy," but said they could not see why damages
should be paid because the bridge was a military
target.

NATO has defended the bombing and said the bridge was
a "legitimate" target that served as infrastructure
for the Serbian army fighting in Kosovo.

Varvarin Mayor Zoran Milenkovic, who lost his daughter
Sanja in the air strike, said before the hearing that
"the town was not defended and could not defend itself
against a NATO strike."

Two lower courts had previously rejected claims for
compensation.



=== 2 ===

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2223146,00.html

Deutsche Welle
November 2, 2006

German Court Rejects Civilian War Damages Claim

A German federal court decided Thursday that families
of civilians killed in a 1999 NATO air strike on a
Serbian town cannot seek compensation from Germany,
affirming that civilians may not sue countries for war
damages.

Thirty-five survivors and victims' family members from
the Serbian village of Varvarian had been seeking
about 500,000 euros ($638,200) from the German
government until the German Federal Supreme Court in
Karlsruhe, Germany's highest court of appeals, ruled
Thursday that civilian victims of war cannot claim
such damages.

The incident dates back to 1999 when a surprise NATO
air strike in the town of Varvarian at the height of
the Kosovo war killed 10 civilians and injured another
30.

Although no German planes took direct part in the
raid, the plaintiffs claimed that German troops
serving with NATO helped select the target and that
Germany therefore shared responsibility for the NATO
action.

Potentially wide ramifications

With its ruling against paying out war damages to
civilians, the court countered the advice of an
earlier hearing in Cologne. Though the regional court
there rejected the concrete claim of the Varvarian
survivors and relatives, it had ruled that in
principle civilian victims of war could claim damages.

"Traditionally military operations are not subject to
scrutiny in a court of law," Frankfurt civil advocate
Michael Bothe told Der Spiegel magazine before the
ruling was issued. A ruling in favor of the victims
would have been a "landmark on the way to the
civilization of war," he added.

NATO attack on party went unpunished

Whether a pay-out from NATO would have been described
as civilized by the survivors of the attack is another
question, especially considering the horror of the
event over seven years ago.

In May 1999 two NATO warplanes swooped from a
cloudless sky to bomb a celebration of the Festival of
the Holy Trinity in the Serbian village of
Vavarian....

For the people of Varvarin, NATO's war against the
former Yugoslavia was something that had been
happening far away. The provincial Serbian town had
been spared the bombs of the Kosovo campaign until
that day.

While children rushed across a bridge to join the
festivities in the town, the alliance jets launched
their attacks. One missile obliterated the bridge and
as the townsfolk were rushing to the aid of the
wounded, a second missile struck, claiming additional
lives.

Why the bridge and the people of Varvarin were
targeted remains a mystery, as does whether the pilots
knowingly attacked the party. NATO has not revealed
the nationality of the planes, though many believe
they were F-16 fighters from the United States Air
Force.

The alliance spoke only of "collateral damage" at the
time and stated that the target had been a major
motorway bridge though the town was only made up of
small roads and side streets.

Demanding accountability

The survivors question why those who commit crimes or
fatal mistakes in war should not be made to face up to
the consequences.

"One cannot kill somebody and then say that no-one is
responsible," said Vesna Milenkovic, the mother of a
15-year-old victim of the attack.

Some countries have taken responsibility for similar
attacks in the past, mainly due to potential political
pressures. When the United States admitted to the
bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade during the
war, the furor was enough to prompt a payout of $28
million to the People's Republic of China and $4.5
million to the survivors and relatives of the dead.

Those countries who have been accused of fatal
mistakes by civilian victims have usually escaped
paying compensation by maintaining that individuals
cannot sue a state.

In 2002, when the Canadian Court of Appeal threw out a
case against Canada for what Yugoslavian victims of
the war called its "political decision to take part in
the bombardment by NATO," the Canadian government was
accused of enjoying a self-imposed immunity.

Germany has also rejected similar claims in the past.
The Federal Supreme Court recently rejected a claim
for damages from the inhabitants of the Greek village
of Distomo, which was the scene of a Nazi SS massacre
in 1944.

Call for civil cases gathering strength

Since the end of World War II, however, calls for
individual claims against nations have gotten
stronger. In May 2005 the UN human rights commission
asked states to pave the way for individual damage
claims in cases where international law had been
breached.

Germany, however, has not ratified that resolution.
The Varvarin case landed in German courts because the
Serb claimants were only able find financial support
for their case in Germany.



=== 3 ===


From: petar
Subject: "THE BOMBER'S DREAM" - Documentary on HISTORY TV, Canada
Monday August 7, 8pm ET/5 pm PT with a repeat at 12am ET/9 pm PT
Date: August 4, 2006 1:58:37 AM GMT+02:00


TRAGIC BOMBING OF VARVARIN BRIDGE RECALLED IN
"THE BOMBER'S DREAM"

MONDAY, AUGUST 7 ON HISTORY TELEVISION - Canada
Monday, August 7, 8pm ET/5 pm PT with a repeat at 12am ET/9 pm PT

[ALSO: An interview with filmmaker Barry Stevens -- on "Monday's
Encounter" on CKCU 93.1 FM in Ottawa on the same day, Monday, August
7, at 6 P.M. --To hear the show after the airing, click to:
http://f2.pg.briefcase.yahoo.com/pertep (go to CKCU and pick the show)]

The 1999 NATO air strike on a bridge in the small Serbian town of
Varvarin is an important topic covered in THE BOMBER'S DREAM.

The documentary is a landmark, feature-length film that takes a hard
look at the hidden history of the most significant military
innovation of the past century. It airs the day after Hiroshima
Day, on Monday, August 7, 8pm ET/5 pm PT (repeat at 12 midnight ET/9
pm PT).

Directed by award-winning Canadian filmmaker Barry Stevens, the film
addresses the heated moral controversy of aerial bombing and looks at
a recent high-tech air strike that went tragically wrong, resulting
in the first-ever lawsuit by the victims against those who bombed
them. It tells the story of Vesna Milenkovich, who lost her
daughter Sanya when the bridge in Varvarin was bombed in a NATO air
strike. Milenkovich joins other injured townspeople to seek justice
in a foreign court.

CAUGHT IN THE CROSSHAIRS: HISTORY TELEVISION'S THE BOMBER'S DREAM
TARGETS THE ISSUES AND ETHICS OF BOMBING CIVILIANS

Nothing epitomizes the brutality of modern warfare like aerial
bombing. By the end of World War II, bombing had erased the old
distinction between soldiers and civilians. Air power has given the
USA and the West their unprecedented dominance. Yet rarely has
television told this story.

Award-winning Canadian filmmaker Barry Stevens weaves history and a
present-day detective story into a visually arresting and personal
journey into the heart of desire for ultimate military power.

A writer, director, and producer of many documentaries, Barry Stevens
is perhaps best known for " Offspring " (2001). It was sold to about
40 countries and nominated for an International Emmy, and received
the Donald Brittain Gemini for best social documentary, and other
honors. His writing awards include Geminis for Gerrie & Louise,
(1997 International Emmy for Best Documentary) and The Diary of
Evelyn Lau (featuring the screen debut of Sandra Oh).

- 30 -

Contact: Linda Litwack at (416) 782-7837/ lalitwack@....
History Television is an Alliance Atlantis Network. For more
information on
History Television programming, please visit
www.aacmedia.allianceatlantis.com

(english / italiano)

In vista un rapido deterioramento dei rapporti tra Russia e Stati Uniti

1) A proposito dell’assassinio di Politkovskaja (Movisol.org)
2) Who killed Anna Politkovskaya? (John Laughland)
3) In vista un rapido deterioramento dei rapporti tra Russia e Stati
Uniti (Mauro Gemma)
4) Putin al Consiglio europero di Lahti: "Pensate a quello che avete
combinato in Jugoslavia!"
5) Russia, Israel and Media Omissions (ALISON WEIR)
6) FLASHBACK 2004: Russia, sprofonda il colosso Yukos


<< Anna Politkovskaja, pur esaltata come martire della verità a
destra e sinistra, non era che una spia al servizio
dell'imperialismo. Intima di Eltsin e della sua banda di criminali
mafiosi, non ha mai denunciato il minimo malaffare di quei
distruttori dell'URSS e della Russia, nè dell'ubriacone venduto a
Washington, nè dei suoi oligarchi che si sono mangiati i russi vivi e
si sono venduti perfino i cimiteri. Regolare collaboratrice del
circuito radio "Liberty" (ricordate Radio B-92 e Otpor???) gestito
dalla Cia fin dal 1948 per destabilizzare i paesi socialisti, è stata
il megafono dei terroristi ceceni finanziati e armati dalla Cia e dal
Mossad per sottrarre il petrolio caucasico alle rotte e al controllo
dei russi. Pessima scrittrice, non è accettabile che una sinistra non
corrotta come quella di Bertinotti o di parte del manifesto si
allinei passiva e acritica agli sterotipi falsi della propaganda
imperialista gestita dai gangster di Washington, Tel Aviv e UE. La
Politkovskaja era la Fallaci o il Magdi Allam russo. Niente di più.
Una vera schifezza. >>
Fulvio Grimaldi

See also:

The Oligarchs
By Uri Avnery, 2 August, 2004, Gush-Shalom
http://www.countercurrents.org/avnery020804.htm


=== 1 ===

http://www.lernesto.it/index.aspx?m=77&f=2&IDArticolo=12160

http://www.movisol.org/znews195.htm

A proposito dell’assassinio di Politkovskaja

di Movisol.org

su stessa fonte del 17/10/2006

L’assassinio della giornalista russa dissidente Anna Politkobvskaya
va inquadrato nel contesto della serie di assassinii avvenuti nelle
ultime settimane, evidentemente miranti a ledere la stabilità
politica del presidente Vladimir Putin. Tutti gli assassini in
questione sono stati condotti da “professionisti”. E’ noto che il
crimine organizzato russo è collegato con i vari oligarchi latitanti
dalla giustizia russa. Il più famoso degli oligarchi è Boris
Berezovsky che ha ottenuto “asilo politico” in Inghilterra.
* Il 14 settembre è stato assassinato Andrei Kozlov, vice presidente
della banca centrale russa. Deciso sostenitore della politica del
governo, Kozlov era impegnato contro il riciclaggio del denaro ed
aveva ordinato il ritiro di alcune licenze bancarie.
* Il 30 settembre è stato assassinato Enver Zighashin, ingegnere capo
della TKN BP, la sussidiaria russa della British Petroleum. Si tratta
di un assassinio che certamente non ha risolto gli attriti tra Russia
e imprese petrolifere occidentali ma li ha piuttosto aggravati.
* Il 7 ottobre è stata assassinata Anna Politkovskaya.
* Il 10 ottobre è stato assassinato Alexander Plokhin, direttore
della branca moscovita della Vneshtorgbank, banca di stato che
riveste un ruolo importante nei rapporti economici che la Russia
intrattiene con Africa, Asia, America Latina ed Europa, in
particolare quelli promossi dallo stesso Putin. La Vneshtorgbank ha
recentemente acquistato il 5% del gigante aerospaziale europeo EADS,
proprietario di Airbus. L’acquisto ha suscitato una notevole
controversia, sia a motivo delle implicazioni economiche che quelle
di sicurezza.
* Il 16 ottobre è stato assassinato Anatoly Voronin, esperto
immobiliare della Itar-Tass.

Alexander Lebedev che è comproprietario, con Michail Gorbaciov di
Novaya Gazeta, il giornale su cui scriveva la Politkovskaya, ha
pubblicato un commento intitolato: “Chiunque abbia sparato alla
Politkovskaya mirava ai suoi avversari” — in altre parole mirava al
regime di Putin. La Politkovskaya era così nota come oppositrice del
regime, scrive Lebedev che è fin troppo facile sospettare coloro che
lei criticava. “Ma non dobbiamo considerare attentamente la
possibilità che chi ha ordinato l’assassinio voleva che noi facessimo
proprio questo? Forse un’ondata di rabbia contro coloro che la
giornalista criticava è proprio l’effetto su cui contavano i killer?
Così sparando alla giornalista miravano ai suoi avversari”.
Nel corso della sua visita in Germania, tra il 10 e l’11 ottobre, il
presidente Putin ha fatto due volte riferimento al grave episodio. A
Dresda il presidente ha detto, secondo quanto riferito dalla Pravda:
“Non molto tempo fa fu ucciso un altro giornalista, Paul Khlebnikov.
Dopo la pubblicazione del libro intitolato «Conversazioni con un
barbaro», in cui i personaggi principali sono posti in cattiva luce,
lui è stato ucciso. Non so chi l’abbia uccisa [Anna Politkovskaya],
ma è chiaro che chi si sta sottraendo alla giustizia ha valutato
l’opportunità di sacrificare qualcuno per incoraggiare i sentimenti
anti russi nel mondo”.
Nell’intervista concessa l’11 ottobre al Sueddeutsche Zeitung,
pubblicata integralmente solo sul sito Kremlin.ru, Putin ha detto:
“Saprete che diversi anni fa un giornalista americano di origini
russe, Paul Khlebnikov è stato ucciso in Russia. Si era occupato dei
problemi della Repubblica di Cecenia ed aveva scritto un libro
intitolato «Conversazioni con un barbaro». Stando alle indagini, i
protagonisti del libro non erano contenti di come Khlebnikov li ha
presentati e lo hanno distrutto”.
Il “barbaro” in questione è Khodj-Akhmed Nukhayev, il finanziatore
del separatismo del Caucaso Settentrionale: Oggi Nukhayev vive in
Israele, fa affari con il lord inglese McAlpine ed è sospettato di
collegamenti con Boris Berezovsky. Khlebnikov era il genero di John
Train, personaggio di Wall Street impegnato nelle operazioni contro
Lyndon LaRouche. Nel 2005 Anna Politkovskaya ha ricevuto il “Premio
per il coraggio civile” del Northcote Parkinson Fund di John Train.


=== 2 ===

http://cirqueminime.blogcollective.com/blog/_archives/
2006/10/21/2433746.html

http://www.sandersresearch.com/

Who killed Anna Politkovskaya?

By John Laughland

Oct/11/2006

In C. S. Lewis' science fiction dystopia, That Hideous Strength,
the secretive organization which controls the state has its agents
writing in newspapers on all sides of the political spectrum, in
order to disguise its power with the appearance of plurality. In
today's West, by contrast, even the appearance of plurality seems to
have been discarded.

The murder on 7th October of the Russian journalist, Anna
Politkovskaya, was greeted with the monolithic unanimity which has
now become the hallmark of the so-called free press in the West. The
right-wing Daily Telegraph devoted a leader to her murder on 9th
October, the first sentence of which was:

'People sometimes pay with their lives for saying out loud what
they think,' Anna Politkovskaya said last year of Vladimir Putin's
Russia.

The same day, the left-wing Guardian also published a leader about
her murder. Its first sentence read:

'People sometimes pay with their lives for saying out loud what
they think,' Anna Politkovskaya told a conference on press freedom
last December.

The whole of the British, American and West European press extolled
Politkovskaya as 'one of Russia's bravest and most brilliant
journalists' (The Guardian), 'one of the few voices that dared
contradict the party line' (The Daily Telegraph), 'a firebrand for
freedom' (The Independent), 'the most famous investigative journalist
in Russia' (The Times), 'one of the bravest journalists in
Russia' (The New York Times); 'a victim of rare courage' (The
Washington Post). All these quotes are from the leader articles which
each paper thought worth devoting to her death. In reality,
Politkovskaya was virtually unknown in Russia. The reaction of a
wealthy Russian businessman dining in Brussels on the night of her
murder was typical:

'Politkovskaya? Never heard of her.'

Politkovskaya in this respect resembles another murdered Russian-
speaking journalist with connections in the Caucasus, Georgiy
Gongadze, the Ukrainian citizen with a Georgian surname whose murder
in 2000 was instrumentalized by the United States in an attempt to
implicate the then Ukrainian president, Leonid Kuchma. Politkvskaya
was not quite as obscure as Gongadze: he ran a mere web site
(although this meant that when he traveled to Washington DC he was
received by the Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright) while the
newspaper where she worked, Novaya Gazeta, had a circulation of
250,000. Still, that is not much in a country of nearly 150 million
inhabitants and certainly not enough to merit the exaggerated praise
heaped posthumously upon her.

The media in Britain and America also competed with one another to
lay the blame for the murder squarely at President Putin's door. The
Financial Times announced that,

'In a broad sense, Mr. Putin bears responsibility for creating,
through the Kremlin's long-standing assault on the independent media,
an atmosphere in which such killings can happen.'

The Washington Post asserted pompously that,

'It is quite possible, without performing any detective work, to
say what is ultimately responsible for these deaths: It is the
climate of brutality that has flourished under Mr. Putin.'

All papers implied that Mrs. Politkovskaya had been killed by
allies of the Russian President for reporting the truth about the war
in Chechnya. According to them, Russia is a quasi-dictatorship in
which the government brooks no dissent, and they illustrated this by
referring back - albeit in strangely vague terms - to the number of
other journalists who have been victims of similar contract killings.

It is here that we can put our fingers firmly on the page and
shout, 'Liars!' Some of these articles contained glancing references
to the last journalist to have been killed in Moscow, the American
editor of Forbes magazine, Paul Klebnikov, but none of them bothered
to add the key rider that no one has ever suggested that the Russian
government had Klebnikov murdered. On the contrary:

whereas Politkovskaya was an anti-Putin militant, Klebnikov was an
anti-oligarch militant. He wrote a brilliant book about Boris
Berezovsky - one of the most informative books about Russia's
'transition' in the 1990s, in which he accused Berezovsky of murder
and of being hand in glove with Chechen drug lords and gangsters -
and he published a series of interviews with one of the Chechen
separatist leaders, which he undiplomatically entitled 'Conversations
with a barbarian'. He was rewarded for his efforts with a bullet in
the head. When he died, there were no paeans of praise for his
bravery or courage in the Western press, even though he was an
American, for Klebnikov had devoted his life to arguing that the
West's policy in Russia is based on an alliance with very serious
criminals, and that the 'businessmen' whom the West champions as
freedom fighters - Berezovsky has political asylum in Britain - are
in fact a bunch of ruthless murderers.

In contrast to both Klebnikov and Politkovskaya, the one murdered
Russian journalist whom all Russians had heard of when he died - and
whose name is virtually unknown in the West - was Vlad Listyev.

When he fell under the assassin's bullets on the night of 1st March
1995, Listyev was Russia's most popular talk show host and one of the
most trusted people in the country - a genuine TV superstar. He had
just become director of Russia's main TV channel, ORT (now First
Channel). In spite of Listyev's immense fame, the Western media never
cited his murder as an example of the lawlessness or intolerance of
the then president, Boris Yeltsin, in the way that they now attack
Putin.
This is doubtless because - to use the charming euphemisms of
Wikipedia - 'When Listyev put the middlemen advertising agencies out
of business, he deprived many corrupt businessmen of a source for
enormous profits.' In plain English, this means that most Russians
believe that Listyev was murdered either by Boris Berezovsky - who
took control of ORT immediately after Listyev's murder, and in large
measure because of it - or by Vladimir Guzinski, a rival TV magnate
who, like Berezovsky, is a Yeltsin-era oligarch now in exile. The
only journalist from the West who did discuss openly whether the
contract to kill Listyev had come from Berezovsky, Guzinsky or
Berezovsky's ally, the advertising mogul, Sergei Lisovsky, was, oddly
enough, Paul Klebnikov.

Politkovskaya's colleagues on Novaya Gazeta include notorious pro-
American commentators like the 'independent Moscow-based defense
analyst,' Pavel Felgenhauer, whose also works as a columnist for the
Jamestown Foundation: the Director of that body, Glen Howard, is
Executive Director of the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, a
neo-con outfit which campaigns for a 'political settlement' with the
terrorists in that North Caucasus province of the Russian federation.
This may explain why you can find only one opinion about
Politkovskaya in the Western media. At the same time, by contrast,
there is a huge variety of opinions about her murder in supposedly
dictatorial Russia itself. The theories now circulating in Moscow
about Politkovskaya's murder include (apart from the claim that the
Russian government or the Chechen authorities were responsible):

revenge by corrupt police who found themselves wanted or in prison
as a result of her sensationalist journalism;

a conspiracy by opponents of the Russian president and the Chechen
Prime Minister, Ramzan Kadyrov, to discredit them;

revenge by former Chechen militants;

a murder carried out by Russian nationalist opponents of Putin (her
name was on the death-lists of various neo-Nazi groups);

a political provocation designed to discredit the Chechen
authorities or trigger some movement in that troublesome province;

or a conspiracy by opponents of Russia from the former Soviet
Republic of Georgia with which Moscow is currently engaged in a
fierce diplomatic row.

Take your pick - but the sheer variety of points of view gives the
lie to the claim that Politkovskaya was fighting a monolithic media
machine controlled by the government.

Among the many points of view expressed, few were pithier than this
one from a commentator for Lentacom.ru,

Politkovskaya's murder spells unambiguous benefits for the West.
The past month saw massive unofficial clampdown on Russia. Take the
attempts to pull Ukraine into NATO. Take the alliance's "intensive
dialogue" with Georgia. Take Saakashvili's behavior the President of
Georgia, very humiliating for Russia, which has been certainly agreed
with the West. Theoretically, Politkovskaya's murder diverts
attention from Georgia and builds up western pressures on Russia,
something today's Georgia can only benefit from. Yet, I believe that
those who had ordered the crime are more global. There is no
immediate evidence somebody in the West issued direct instructions.
It is beyond doubt, though, that the West is a direct beneficiary.

One does not have to believe this conspiracy theory, or any of the
others. But at least if one is Russian, the consumer of news has a
large number of different points of view to consider, all of which
are easily accessible to the ordinary Russian by buying the newspaper
or looking at the Internet. In the West, by contrast, even the most
assiduous conspiracy theorist will have great difficulty finding
anything other than the party line that Mr. Putin did it. Now, what
does that tell you about the state of political and media pluralism
in the West?


=== 3 ===

www.resistenze.org - popoli resistenti - russia - 27-10-06

In vista un rapido deterioramento dei rapporti tra Russia e Stati Uniti

Secondo un rapporto presentato al parlamento russo

Nota di Mauro Gemma*

Nei giorni scorsi è stato reso pubblico a Mosca un importante lavoro,
commissionato dalla Duma di Stato (la camera bassa della Federazione
Russa) e curato da due autorevoli esperti di politica internazionale
e di questioni della difesa e della sicurezza nazionale, Valentin
Falin, ex segretario del Comitato Centrale del Partito Comunista
dell’Unione Sovietica, e Ghennadij Jevstafiev, già tenente generale
dei servizi segreti.

Il documento, dal titolo “Probabile guida delle azioni degli Stati
Uniti nei confronti della Russia nel periodo 2006-2008”, verrà ora
sottoposto all’attenzione delle commissioni competenti del Parlamento
russo e, molto probabilmente, verrà discusso anche in sessione plenaria.
I due prestigiosi esperti fanno il punto sullo stato delle relazioni
tra le due grandi potenze e analizzano nei dettagli la politica USA
nei confronti della Russia, delineando, già per l’immediato futuro,
scenari a dir poco inquietanti.

I rapporti russo-americani, secondo il rapporto, dovrebbero subire un
brusco e accelerato deterioramento, a prescindere dal tipo di
amministrazione che, in futuro, fosse chiamata a gestire la Casa Bianca.

Il documento che, a parere della stampa russa (ne ha parlato in
particolare l’autorevole “Nezavisimaja Gazeta”), sembra essere una
risposta a un testo, pubblicato nel marzo scorso dal “Consiglio di
New York per le relazioni internazionali”, dal significativo titolo
“La strada sbagliata della Russia”, e mette in guardia il Cremlino e
le autorità russe rispetto alla pericolosità dei progetti messi in
campo da Washington per fronteggiare il crescente protagonismo di un
paese che ormai è considerato un pericoloso concorrente da
neutralizzare e ridimensionare.

Da un lato, Washington sembra intenzionata a produrre ogni sforzo per
intaccare la “sovranità energetica” della Russia, mediante la
sollecitazione di processi separatisti all’interno della stessa
Federazione Russa e gravi forme di ingerenza negli affari interni del
paese; dall’altro, l’amministrazione USA (con una sostanziale
comunanza di intenti di repubblicani e democratici) sicuramente darà
ulteriore impulso a tutte le iniziative tese a promuovere
l’allargamento della NATO ad est e la rapida integrazione
nell’alleanza nord-atlantica di alcune repubbliche dell’ex Unione
Sovietica, in particolare della Georgia e dell’Ucraina.

E’ così prevedibile che non cessino i tentativi di promuovere
rivolgimenti nelle strutture di potere dei paesi che fanno parte
della Confederazione degli Stati Indipendenti (CSI), e che venga
rafforzato il sostegno materiale e propagandistico (attraverso la
mobilitazione di tutti gli strumenti di comunicazione di massa a
disposizione) alle forze filo-occidentali fautrici di nuove
“rivoluzioni colorate”, puntando, in tal modo, direttamente alla
destabilizzazione della stessa Federazione Russa, mediante
l’isolamento dei suoi dirigenti e l’azione delle forze di opposizione
della destra neoliberista presenti nel paese.

Per quanto riguarda il programmato attacco alla cosiddetta “sovranità
energetica”, secondo gli estensori del documento, si dovrebbe
assistere ad un’intensificazione delle pressioni dell’amministrazione
USA allo scopo di ottenere la privatizzazione del settore
dell’energia, oggi in larga parte tornato sotto controllo statale,
pretendendo la partecipazione obbligatoria delle compagnie
multinazionali occidentali ai pacchetti azionari. Allo stesso tempo,
sempre in merito al settore strategico dell’energia, il lavoro
redatto da Falin e Jestafiev accenna a iniziative tendenti a favorire
l’interruzione dei piani di cooperazione tra Russia e Cina e
all’intensificazione delle pressioni su Azerbaigian, Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan e Turkmenistan per coinvolgerli attivamente nei progetti
dell’amministrazione di Washington.

Non è privo di interesse il fatto che il documento presentato
all’attenzione del parlamento russo venga reso pubblico in
coincidenza con l’elaborazione da parte del Ministero della Difesa
russo di una nuova dottrina militare, in cui, nell’ordine, Stati
Uniti, NATO e “terrorismo internazionale” vengono indicati quali
“nemici potenziali della Russia” e che spiega che la maggior minaccia
alla sicurezza nazionale continua ad essere costituita dall’ingerenza
straniera negli affari interni del paese, attuata attraverso
l’appoggio a “strutture interne” (un riferimento esplicito a ONG e
“gruppi informali”, ispirati da istituzioni occidentali) animate da
intenti eversivi.

Di più. Il documento viene significativamente diffuso mentre in
Russia e in altri paesi della CSI si sta assistendo ad una fase di
particolare vivacità del vasto movimento di opinione (testimoniato da
tutti i sondaggi) che intende opporsi alle ingerenze e alle pressioni
degli USA e della Nato negli affari interni dell’ex URSS, pretendendo
dalle autorità locali una più energica politica di contrapposizione
ai piani delle potenze imperialiste.

Un seppur limitato risalto hanno ricevuto in Occidente le
manifestazioni di massa in Crimea e nel resto dell’Ucraina contro la
presenza delle truppe USA sul territorio nazionale, che hanno
certamente avuto un ruolo non secondario nella sconfitta della
“rivoluzione arancione”, nel mutamento degli assetti di governo a
Kiev (con l’ingresso di due ministri proposti dai comunisti
nell’esecutivo) e nel conseguente “congelamento” di una quasi
scontata (fino a pochi mesi fa) adesione alla NATO, annunciato dal
primo ministro Janukovic a Bruxelles.

Non ha avuto praticamente eco, invece, il rilevante movimento che si
è manifestato nelle scorse settimane in Russia contro l’effettuazione
di manovre militari congiunte russo-statunitensi nella regione di
Nizhegorod nel quadro degli accordi di partnership militare
realizzati nell’ultimo decennio, culminato in incisive manifestazioni
su tutto il territorio nazionale, con la partecipazione complessiva
di decine di migliaia di persone. Quasi a coincidere con gli umori
oggi prevalenti negli ambienti militari della Federazione, il
movimento (in cui ha giocato un ruolo rilevante il Partito Comunista
della Federazione Russa) sembra aver offerto ai vertici della difesa
l’opportunità per rinviare “sine die” lo svolgimento delle operazioni
previste, lanciando in tal modo un secco segnale al partner
statunitense.

*La nota sarà pubblicata nel prossimo numero della rivista comunista
“L’Ernesto”


=== 4 ===

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/10/sezioni/esteri/putin-italia-mafia/
putin-italia-mafia/putin-italia-mafia.html


Scatto d'ira del presidente russo al Consiglio europeo in Finlandia
di fronte alle critiche sulle violazioni dei diritti umani nel suo Paese

Putin: "Italia, culla della mafia" e i funzionari spagnoli "corrotti"


ROMA - L'Italia, "culla della mafia", non ha nulla da insegnare alla
Russia. Irritato dalle critiche dei leader europei sulle violazioni
dei diritti umani nel suo Paese, il presidente russo Vladimir Putin
ha reagito sparando a zero anche sulla Spagna, "i cui enti locali
sono pieni di funzionari corrotti". Lo scrive il quotidiano spagnolo
El Pais, al quale fonti diplomatiche hanno riferito dello scatto
d'ira del leader del Cremlino durante il Consiglio europeo di Lahti,
in Finlandia. Nell'auditorium Sibelius, sulle sponde del lago
Vesijarvi, dove venerdì scorso i leader europei e Putin hanno
partecipato a una cena per discutere delle forniture di gas russo
all'Unione, la serata non era cominciata sotto i migliori auspici.

Putin era reduce dalla clamorosa gaffe sul presidente israeliano, per
le cui prestazioni aveva espresso ammirazione e invidia. Il
presidente del Parlamento europeo, Josep Borrell, non lo aveva
accolto nel più caloroso dei modi, ricordandogli la preoccupazione
dell'Unione per il deterioramento dei dritti umani in Russia, poi il
minuto di silenzio osservato dai deputati per l'assassinio della
giornalista Anna Politkovskaya, e il cenno alle difficoltà sofferte
dalle Ong russe. "Facciamo affari con Paesi peggiori del suo - gli
aveva poi detto - ma con voi vogliamo unirci e per questo è
necessario che condividiate certi valori".

Putin, palesemente irritato, si è difeso con l'attacco. Il Cremlino,
ha detto - secondo quanto riferito dalle fonti citate da El Pais -
non può accettare lezioni di democrazia da Paesi come la Spagna, in
cui molti sindaci sono sotto inchiesta per corruzione, o dall'Italia,
"dove è nata una parola come 'mafia'". Il premier spagnolo Jose Luis
Zapatero, e quello italiano Romano Prodi, secondo le fonti, sono
rimasti senza parole, mentre Putin rispondeva anche alle
preoccupazioni europee per la situazione in Georgia e Cecenia:
pensate a quello che avete combinato in Jugoslavia, ha detto.

Ad allentare la tensione, ci ha pensato il premier finlandese e
padrone di casa Matti Vanhanen. In chiusura di cena, Putin ha ammesso
che anche in Russia c'è diffusa preoccupazione per l'aumento della
violenza, negando però ogni responsabilità nella morte della
Politkovskaya.

(22 ottobre 2006)


=== 5 ===

http://www.counterpunch.org/weir02172005.html

February 17, 2005

Do Americans Even Care?

Russia, Israel and Media Omissions

By ALISON WEIR

As is often the case with AP's coverage of news having to do with
Israel, there's a serious omission in its reporting on the Russia-
Israel connection even when it involves oil and the United States.

The day after the State of the Union Address, two Interpol fugitives
attended the "National Prayer Breakfast" held in Washington DC. The
day before that, these fugitives from the law were the guests of
honor at an hour-long meeting of the International Relations
Committee on Capitol Hill, invited by ranking Democrat Tom Lantos
(Calif.)

You would think it would be hot news when wanted men being hunted by
European police suddenly pop up in the US particularly on Capitol
Hill and at events attended by the US president.

Yet, there was not a single AP story in the US on any of this. [1]
Not a single national network television or radio news program even
mentioned these facts. In fact, Google and LexisNexis searches four
days after these events took place turned up only three newspaper
articles on them anywhere in the entire country. [2]

Who are these fugitives from the law, wanted by Interpol, who are
meeting at the highest levels of the US government? And why didn't we
learn of them?

Therein lies the story. These two men, it turns out, are just the
tips of a colossal iceberg. And this iceberg doesn't just have 90
percent of its mass hidden under water; this iceberg is almost
entirely submerged.

They are Mikhail Brudno and Vladimir Dubov, Israeli-Russian partners
in the giant Russian oil company Yukos. They, along with a number of
their cronies, are wanted by Interpol for allegedly bilking Russian
citizens out of billions of dollars. To elude Russian prosecution,
these men have taken up residence in Israel. [3]

As the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz explains: "In recent years Russian
authorities began investigating [Yukos], its managers and major
stockholders, many of whom are of Jewish origin. The probes caused
several of the managers to flee to Israel, and resulted in
Khodorkovski's [Yukos CEO] arrest and a Kremlin attack on Yukos."

The fact is that Israel is an important factor in the ongoing, nation-
shaking power struggle now going on in Russia. Yet AP virtually never
reports this connection. For example, a few months ago in a typical
AP story on this power struggle, "Report: Russia again charges
Berezovsky," [4] Moscow AP Bureau Chief Judith Ingram makes no
mention anywhere that Berezovsky is an Israeli citizen, or of his
many connections to Israel.

Such omissions by AP and large swaths of the American media leave
Americans seriously disadvantaged in deciphering what is going on in
Russia, and its profound significance for the world.

In order to make sense of this Russian power struggle, and to
understand its importance to the rest of us, it is necessary to
understand the usually omitted Israeli subtext. When this is
understood, the friendship of such pro-Israel Congressional leaders
as Rep. Lantos to fugitive Russian oil tycoons begins to make sense.

To explore this background it is often useful to turn to the Israeli
press. In July a major Israeli publication, the Jerusalem Post,
carried an article headlined: "Boris Berezovsky: Putin's Russia
dangerous for Israel." Before describing what this contained, let us
first go into a little of the background.


The Oligarchs

Boris Berezovsky is one of seven "oligarchs," as they are known both
inside and outside Russia: massively rich, powerful manipulators who
through violence, theft and corruption acquired a mammoth percentage
(reports range from 70 to 85 percent) of Russia's resources, from its
oil to the auto industry to mass media outlets.

At the same time, the group steadily gained control over much of the
country's political apparatus. Using extraordinary financial
resources and insider dealing, the oligarchs handpicked prime
ministers and governmental leaders and barely even bothered to do
this behind the scenes.

In 1997 Yukos founder Mikhail Khodorkovsky, one of the group and
Russia's sometimes richest man (several of the oligarchs trade the
top spot back and forth) told an interviewer before he was arrested
and imprisoned by Putin last year:

"If we rank all the fields of man's activity by profitability,
politics will be the most lucrative business. When we see a critical
situation in the government, we draw lots in order to pick out a
person from our milieu for work in power." [5]

Almost all of these oligarchs, it turns out, have significant ties to
Israel. In fact, Berezovsky himself has Israeli citizenship a fact
that caused a scandal of Watergate proportions in Russia in 1996 when
it was exposed by a Russian newspaper. [6]

Do Berezovsky's dual loyalties really matter? Yes. In the realm of
global dominance, Israel's interests and Russia's are considerably
divergent. It is in Israel's interests to bring to power a regime in
Russia friendly to Israel, rather than the current one under Putin,
which Israeli leaders feel is supportive of its enemies. Not long
ago, for example, Putin met with Syrian leaders an action highly
disturbing to Israel.

Having an Israeli citizen at the highest levels of the Russian
government is ideal, from Israel's point of view. In Berezovsky they
had such a man. The Jerusalem Post article mentioned above is
revealing. It describes Berezovsky as "the Godfather of the
Oligarchs' and Kingmaker of Russia's Politics'" and reports
Berezovsky's statement that "Putin's Russia is dangerous for Israel."
Berezovsky goes on to assert that Putin "supports terror" in the
Middle East through Russia's previous relations with Iraq and current
relations with Iran. [7]

While Israelis may have been delighted at Berezovsky's position in
Russia, It is not surprising that Russian citizens were somewhat less
so. Finding that a powerful leader and member of the Russian Security
Council was an Israeli citizen was disconcerting, at best.

As a result of the media uproar over Berezovsky's Israeli citizenship
and other events, the Oligarchs' connections to Israel are widely
known in Russia and elsewhere. In Israel they are covered frequently,
often with adulation, including a recent hit Israeli TV series called
"The Oligarchs."

"Some of its episodes," according to Israeli writer Uri Avnery, "are
simply unbelievable or would have been, if they had not come straight
from the horses' mouths: the heroes of the story, who gleefully boast
about their despicable exploits. The series was produced by Israeli
immigrants from Russia."

Avnery writes that the oligarchs used "cheating, bribery and murder,"
as they "exploited the disintegration of the Soviet system to loot
the treasures of the state and to amass plunder amounting to hundreds
of billions of dollars. In order to safeguard the perpetuation of
their business, they took control of the state. Six out of the seven
are Jews." [8]

According to a Washington Post story by David Hoffman, the group
bought and controlled Russian governmental officials at the highest
levels. After financing Yeltsin's election in 1996, Hoffman writes:
"The tycoons met and decided to insert one of their own into
government. They debated who and chose [Vladimir] Potanin, who became
deputy prime minister. One reason they chose Potanin was that he is
not Jewish, and most of the rest of them are, and feared a backlash
against the Jewish bankers." [9]

In Russia, the oligarchs are deeply loathed, considered villains who
worked to bleed the country dry; during their reign many Russian
citizens saw their life savings disappear overnight. A new term was
coined for their dominance, "semibankirshchina" (the rule of the
seven bankers), and they were widely known to have wielded small,
murderous armies. There are rumors that Berezovsky, subject of the
respectful AP article, was even responsible for the gunning down of
an American journalist, Forbes Moscow editor Paul Klebnikov.

While no one has been charged with the murder of Klebnikov, who had
written a book on Berezovsky, many suspect a Berezovsky connection.
As a friend of Klebnikov wrote: "Experienced expatriates in Russia
shared an essential rule: Don't cross these brutal billionaires,
ever, or you're likely to go home in a box." [10]


The Chechnya Connection

There is evidence that Berezovsky's responsibility for death and
tragedy may be vastly greater.

"Berezovsky boasts that he caused the war in Chechnya," Avnery
reports, "in which tens of thousands have been killed and a whole
country devastated. He was interested in the mineral resources and a
prospective pipeline there. In order to achieve this he put an end to
the peace agreement that gave the country some kind of independence.
The oligarchs dismissed and destroyed Alexander Lebed, the popular
general who engineered the agreement, and the war has been going on
since then.

"In the end," Avnery writes, "there was a reaction: Vladimir Putin,
the taciturn and tough ex-KGB operative, assumed power, took control
of the media, put one of the oligarchs (Mikhail Khodorkovsky) in
prison, caused the others to flee (Berezovsky is in England, Vladimir
Gusinsky is in Israel, another, Mikhail Chernoy, is assumed to be
hiding here.)"

Yet, apart from the Washington Post, American media report on almost
none of this. Instead, US coverage largely portrays Berezovsky and
his crowd as American-style entrepreneurs who are being hounded by a
Russian government whose actions are, to repeat the media's commonly
used phrase, "politically motivated."

US news stories, even when they occasionally do hint at questionable
practices, tend to use such phrases as "brash young capitalists" to
describe the oligarchs. [11] For example, a long series co-produced
by FRONTLINE and the New York Times referred to these men as "shrewd
businessmen," and asked "what it's like to be young, Russian and
newly affluent?" [12] Massive violence, dual loyalties, and control
of resources are rarely, if ever, part of the picture.

When AP Moscow bureau chief Ingram was asked for this article about
Berezovsky's Israeli citizenship, she claimed to know nothing about
it, a curious contention for someone who has been an AP news editor
in Moscow since 1999. When Ingram was queried further, she hung up
the phone.

An examination of Ingram's reporting on the Berezovsky story cited
above raises serious questions. Though she is located in Moscow,
Ingram interviewed only two people for her news story: Berezovsky,
who is in London, and Berezovsky associate Alex Goldfarb, in New
York. One wonders why she interviewed none of the Russians residing
around her.

Similarly, one wonders why not a single AP story has identified
Berezovsky's considerable connection to Israel.

Further, nowhere does Ingram's article convey the ruthlessness of the
oligarchs' actions, or the significance of their holdings, including
control of its media. Unnoted in Ingram's report is the fact that her
subject and fellow oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky have been two of
Russia's most powerful media tycoons.

Before Putin's crackdown, according to the Washington Post, oligarchs
had succeeded in seizing "the reins of Russia's print and broadcast
media, vital to the evolution of the country's fledgling democracy
and growth of its nascent civil society." Berezovsky crony Gusinsky,
who is close friends with Rupert Murdoch and was about the launch a
satellite network, fled to Israel when it appeared he would be
arrested." [13]

Somehow, AP's bureau chief seems to have missed all this.


Does this matter to Americans?

AP is the major news source for the thousands of news outlets around
the country who cannot afford to have their own foreign
correspondents. When AP chooses not to cover something, its omission
is felt throughout the nation. When national news networks and others
leave out the same facts, the cover-up is almost total.

Russia, despite its current turmoil, contains enormous power. Its
natural resources are gargantuan: it possesses the world's largest
natural gas reserves, the second largest coal reserves, and the
eighth largest oil reserves. It is the world's largest exporter of
natural gas, the second largest oil exporter, and the third largest
energy consumer.[14] Russia's significance on the world stage now, as
in the past, is immense.

Similarly, the United States is currently the most powerful nation on
earth. It is therefore essential that its citizens be accurately
informed on issues of significance. Israeli citizens, Russian
citizens, and citizens of nations throughout the world know the
information detailed above. It is critical that American citizens be
no less well informed.

For years, the neocons' push for war against Iraq was largely
uncovered by the US media. For even longer, the neocons' close
connections to Israel have gone largely unmentioned in mainstream
American news reports. As a result, very few Americans know to what
degree many of those responsible for the tragic US invasion and
occupation of Iraq have been motivated by Israeli concerns.

The omission in coverage of Iraq has been profoundly disastrous, both
for the Middle East and for Americans. In fact, it is quite likely
that only history will show the true extent of this disaster. It is
deeply troubling to see the same kind of omission occurring on Russia.

Alison Weir is Executive Director of If Americans Knew


[1] Interestingly, an AP report sent out only on its Worldstream wire
(i.e. to Europe; Britain; Scandinavia; Middle East; Africa; India;
Asia; England, but not to US papers) contained information on this at
the end of the report.

[2] Washington Post: "Prayer Breakfast Includes Russian
Fugitives" (overall, the Post has been an exception to the general
blackout on this subject); the Seattle Times, which ran the Post
story, and the New York Times, in a short story on page 12 on Sunday,
three days after the event. Interestingly, the NY Times story was
filed from Moscow (not Washington) and quotes a "spokesman" for the
two men, Charles Krause, who has worked as a correspondent in Israel
for the News Hour with Jim Lehrer. In the Times story Russian
attempts to prosecute these men are described as "politically
motivated."

[3] This is a wise move, since Israel is known for never extraditing
Jewish citizens, no matter what their crime. Even requests for such
cooperation by the US, which gives Israel over $10 million per day,
go unheeded by the Israeli government. Private citizens wanted for
committing murder in the US, for example, are not returned for trial.

[4] Associated Press, Sept. 22, 2004

[5] "Tycoons Take the Reins in Russia," By David Hoffman, Washington
Post Foreign Service, Friday, August 28, 1998; Page A01

[6] "Media and Politics in Transition: Three Models," Post-Soviet
Media Law & Policy Newsletter, Issue 35, Benjamin N. Cardozo School
of Law, Feb. 27, 1997

[7] "Boris Berezovsky: Putin's Russia dangerous for Israel.', Bret
Stephens, The Jerusalem Post, July 5, 2005

[8]" The Oligarchs", Uri Avnery, CounterPunch, Aug. 3, 2004

[9] "Tycoons Take the Reins in Russia," By David Hoffman, Washington
Post Foreign Service, Friday, August 28, 1998; Page A01,

[10] "Same Old Ruthless Russia," by Michael R. Caputo,
Washingtonpost.com

[11] Washington Post, Aug 28, 1998

[12] October 2003, Sabrina Tavernise,

[13] "Powerful Few Rule Russian Mass Media," David Hoffman,
Washington Post, March 31, 1997; Page A01

[14] http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/russia.html



=== 6 ===

Da Liberazione del 6 luglio 2004

Russia, sprofonda il colosso Yukos

Dopo il cappio della procura e del presidente, le banche reclamano1
miliardo di dollari. Rischio bancarotta, ma la vera sfida è politica


Dopo il cappio di Putin, l'of fensiva della procura di Mosca e
l'arresto del prin cipale azionista Mikhail Khodo rovsky, a stringere
il collo del co losso petrolifero russo Yukos sono anche le banche
creditrici. Con una notifica ratificata al primo mattino nella sede
svizzera dell'immensa società ex statale privatizzata nei primi '90
da Eltsin in cambio di poche centinaia di migliaia di dollari, un
consorzio di istituti bancari capeggiato da So cieté Generale ha
reclamato da Yukos un credito da un miliardo di dollari, somma che si
aggiunge ai 3,4 miliardi di esposizione della società nei confronti
del fisco. Una cifra enorme, che a Mosca ha dato il là a speculazioni
su una prossi ma bancarotta, preludio di una possibile ri-
nazionalizzazione della più grande firma degli idro carburi della
Federazione.

«Non abbiamo nessun piano di tagli all'export e siamo certi di po ter
onorare tutti gli impegni della stagione» ha precisato Alexander
Shadrin per smentire le voci se­condo cui Yukos si apprestava a ri
durre l'attività verso l'estero per ri durre i costi e accumulare
liquidi. L'indice è calato ieri dell'11 per cento, ma la vera
scadenza è mer­coledì pomeriggio, termine ulti mo secondo la procura
per il pa gamento della tasse del 2000, an che se un'altra corte ha
dichiarato sospeso il pagamento in attesa di procedere. Sarà più
probabilmen te politica l'eventuale soluzione, anche se tra il
Cremlino e i vertici del gruppo non si sono registrati avvicinamenti;
mentre Khodo­rovsky ha preferito la prigione pur di non piegarsi a
Putin.

Il presidente russo tuttavia non ha fretta. Il "caso-Yukos", nato dal
la contrapposizione tra la televi sione di Khodorovsky e lo stesso
Putin, è stato accolto in Occidente come un affare interno e l'Unione
europea si è guardata bene dall'af frontare la questione come un
problema di pluralismo o diritti democratici, preferendo al limite
mettere in guardia il governo rus so da un «clima che minaccia gli
investimenti internazionali»: Khodórovsky è il terzo oligarca che
cade, dopo che Putin si era già sba­razzato di Vladimir Guossinski e
Boris Berezovski - anche questi a capo (tra le tante cose) di potenti
mezzi di informazione critici se non ostili apertamente al presi
dente, fino a quando non hanno ceduto lasciando Mosca per un esilio a
Londra e in Israele. Ma non è solo grazie all'assenza di infor
mazione indipendente che Vladi mir Putin è riuscito in questi ulti mi
due anni ad assicurarsi una agi bilità quasi totalitaria nella gestio
ne dello Stato, anche perché al di là delle difficoltà di Yukos la
Russia ha ancora una crescita del 7 per cento annuo. E le
nazionalizzazio ni dei beni degli oligarchi sono sta te salutate dà
veri boati di appro vazione nell'opinione pubblica, che non aveva e
non ha dimenti cato che quei capitali sono in gran parte il frutto
della grande rapina alle casse dello Stato degli anni di Boris Eltsin.

IVAN BONFANTI