Posted on September 7, 2014
by Jerry Alatalo
United States Professor Emeritus of Russian Studies Stephen Cohen appeared recently on “Democracy Now” and spoke about the situation in Ukraine. Among some of his statements in this very informative interview, he said:
“In my own judgment, we (United States) have contributed mightily to this tragedy. I would say that historians one day will look back and say that America has blood on its hands. Three thousand people have died, most of them civilians who couldn’t move quickly – that’s women with small children, older women. A million refugees. Nobody else should die for absolutely no reason”.
U.S. President Barack Obama spoke in Britain during the recent NATO meeting and said:
“It was not the government of Kiev that destabilized the Eastern Ukraine. It’s been the pro-Russian separatists who are encouraged by Russia, financed by Russia, trained by Russia, supplied by Russia, and armed by Russia. And the Russian forces that have now moved into Ukraine are not on a humanitarian mission or peacekeeping mission. They are Russian combat forces, with Russian weapons, in Russian tanks. (emphasis added)”
Professor Cohen said America has blood on its hands; Barack Obama hasn’t admitted that. So, what is the real deal; what is the truth? After Democracy Now ran the clip of President Obama and his speech, Stephen Cohen responded:
“What Obama just said implies, if not asserts, is that if it wasn’t for Russia, Ukraine would be stable. That Russia’s destabilized Ukraine. No serious person would believe that to be the case. Ukraine is in the throes of a civil war which was precipitated by the political crisis which occurred last November and this February, when the elected President of Ukraine was overthrown by a street mob, and that set off a civil war – primarily between the West (including Kiev) and the East”.
Professor Cohen goes on to explain that the civil war became a proxy war between the United States and Russia, and that if both left the scene, the civil war would still remain. Both the United States and Russia have contributed to Ukraine’s destabilization, and, according to Cohen, “when Obama says Russia has destabilized Ukraine, it’s a half-truth”.
Democracy Now co-host Amy Goodman asks Cohen about the criticism he’s faced for speaking out in contradiction to Obama administration narratives on Ukraine, and he replied that he’d probably been slandered and libeled in published articles and on radio and television, but that nobody has corrected any of his facts. He went on: “These assertions by the United States that we’re a “democracy builder”, we’re virtuous, and it’s all Putin’s fault – this is worse than a half-truth, it’s actually a falsehood”.
Ms. Goodman started asking him about Ukraine possibly joining NATO, and, before she finished her question, Cohen said, “It’s war”.
Moving on to the NATO proposal for a rapid response force – a “spearhead” – Cohen stated:
“Fifteen thousand or less rebels in Ukraine are crushing a 50,000-member Ukrainian army. Four thousand against a million-man Russian army is nonsense. The real reason for creating this so-called rapid deployment force is they save the infrastructure, and the infrastructure – that is, in plain language, military bases – need to be on Russia’s borders, and they’ve said where they’re going to put them. The Baltic Republics, Poland, and Romania. The last Cold War the military confrontation was in Berlin – far from Russia. Now it will be – if they go ahead with this NATO decision – right plunk on Russia’s borders”.
If this occurs, according to Professor Cohen, Russia will leave the first agreement ever abolishing a category of nuclear missiles – short-range nuclear missiles – after a historic agreement signed by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987. At this point in the interview, Mr. Cohen asks where the anti-nuclear groups of the world are, and why they aren’t becoming very outspoken and extremely active now.
The interview then focuses on the unthinkable scenario of a nuclear exchange, the possible events which could start one, and MH17… “about which everyone has forgotten. Still, nobody knows who did it. There seems to have been an agreement among the major powers not to tell us who did it, which suggests it wasn’t the rebels – it wasn’t Russia after all. But it would take something like that (shoot-down of MH17), which can happen in these circumstances, to launch something”.
Amy Goodman asks about the nations conducting the investigation into MH17:
“The major countries that are doing it are Britain that has the black boxes and others. There was a report the other day that those parties, those states, agreed that they would not divulge individually what they have discovered. Now, they’ve had plenty of time to interpret the black boxes. There are reports from Germany that the White House version of what happened is not true, therefore you have to look elsewhere for the culprit who did the shooting down. They’re sitting on satellite intercepts. They have the images. They won’t release the air controllers conversations in Kiev with the doomed aircraft. Why not? Did the pilot say, let me speculate, “Oh, my God! We’re being fired on by a jet fighter next to us! What’s going on?” Because we know there were two Ukrainian jet fighters. We don’t know. But somebody knows”.
“That’s a digression. I apologize”. End of interview.
If one looks up “digress” in their dictionary, it says “v. wander from main purpose, theme, etc”. It may have been the case that Ms. Goodman and Professor Cohen had agreed before the interview on the topics of discussion, and that MH17 was not one of them. Given the profound world-changing nature of discovering that Ukraine was behind the shooting down of MH17 and the deaths of 298 passengers and crew – and not the rebels or Russia – Professor Cohen’s talking about MH17 is about a major issue of the Ukraine civil war.
In other words, he had no reason for making an apology whatsoever.
Take some moments and ponder on exactly how stupendous an announcement to the world would be disclosure that Ukraine shot down MH17, after the virtual non-stop government and media accusations that Eastern Ukraine rebels and/or Russia were responsible. The August 2013 chemical attacks which the United States falsely blamed on Syria were since revealed carried out by mercenaries as a pretext for a bombing campaign by the US/UK and others. That bombing campaign became prevented in part because a lot of men and women around the Earth learned of that “false flag” event. Russia’s Vladimir Putin played a part in preventing escalation of war on Syria when helping to negotiate for eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons stocks. Another important event was the British Parliament’s “no” vote on war against Syria; an unprecedented action for that nation.
The “false flag” aspect of the Syria chemical attacks, because the world breathed a lot easier when war became averted, became largely forgotten and never reported in the western press/media.
There would be a colossal difference between the affect on international public opinion after the Syria “false flag” chemical attacks of August 2013 and – if it turns out to indeed have been the case – a “false flag” carried out by the Ukrainian government in the shooting down of Malaysian airliner MH17 in July 2014. The percentage of human beings in the world who today are aware that the August 2013 Syria chemical attacks were a “false flag” operation could be in the range of 10-20%.
So, Professor Cohen, you had no reason to apologize. You were absolutely justified to ask “why not?” after pointing out the silence and stonewalling surrounding the investigation into MH17, and saying that “somebody knows”.
If the Ukrainian government attempted a “false flag” operation in shooting down MH17 – and if the evidence proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt – then 100% of the human race will know.
(Thank you to democracynow at YouTube)