When will the immeasurably important, near universally censored, unprecedented-in-magnitude Bill Browder-Magnitsky Act scandal finally – and rightly – crash, burn and become tossed away to where it belongs – on the ash heap of history?
Today I break my rule to only post on my own articles at this blog. The following article by a person who preferred to remain anonymous struck me as such a disturbingly powerful punch in the gut, I decided to post it here amongst my scribblings. A different style, different imagination… stuff that makes the writer in me slightly jelaous… It is a first-person account written fom the viewpoint of Bill Browder, the protagonist of my book “Grand Deception” (which was twice stricken from Amazon by Bill Browder’s lawyers). Here goes:
“What kind of truth is this which is true on one side of a mountain and false on the other?”
– MICHEL EYQUEM DE MONTAIGNE (1533-1592) French philosopher
merican Sharon Tennison has been a regular traveler to Russia for 35 years as a citizen diplomat trying to build peace, understanding and goodwill between the people of the United States and Russia – and she is very concerned.
She is concerned that news organizations and politicians in America and the West over recent years have misrepresented events and conditions in Russia, or, in other words, not been conveying the truth. For that and other reasons, particularly the increased threat of war over unopposed rumors, Ms. Tennison felt compelled to create the following video where she addresses what she calls “Ten Myths About Russia”.
Ms. Tennison states: “It’s kind of dangerous for us (Americans) to be getting wrong information on this country”.
Myth #1: Russia is a failing state. Sharon Tennison says this is “completely wrong”. She does believe it true that Russia was indeed a failed state in the 1990’s, but that since then, marked by the rise to leadership of Vladimir Putin in and around the year 2000, Russia has turned around and gotten back on its economic feet again.
Myth #2: Russia is a gas pump state. The phrase was popularized by the late Arizona Senator John McCain, and Ms. Tennison does admit that Russia, “blessed with a lot of gas and oil”, was almost fully dependent on energy resources revenues in the 1990’s-early 2000’s. In time with Putin’s rise to leadership, the nation has undergone extensive economic diversification, including greater (organic) food production, notably becoming the world’s largest producers of wheat. She notes that – ironically and amazingly – it was U.S.-Western sanctions which led to Russians becoming more self-sufficient and industrious.
Myth #3: Russia is seeking territorial expansion. Looking at the map showing Russia and its huge landmass covering 11 time zones, and this myth becomes easily debunked. With a low population relative to its nation’s colossal size, the Russian people have no need for stealing former republics, more land and/or resources – the country provides everything necessary to meet the basic needs of its citizens.
Myth #4: Moscow and Saint Petersburg are showcase cities, while the rest of Russia is impoverished. Ms. Tennison points out that rural areas in both America and Russia have shared fundamental experiences relative to evolutionary economic developments. This implies that persons perpetuating myth #4, either intentionally or through unconscious projection, miss the commonalities of the two nations.
Myth #5: Russian men are dying prematurely in their 50’s. Again, Sharon Tennison admits the truth of this assertion, but that the phenomena occurred most intensely in the terrible 1990’s Russia, and that health conditions/life expectancy measures for both Russian men and women have steadily improved over the last two decades.
Myth #6: Russia is a dangerous country for American travelers. After receiving a recent warning from the U.S. State Department advising Americans against travel to Russia, Ms. Tennison realized that:
“There was nothing dangerous about the society … I live in Russia part of the year, and I can tell you that looking out my windows I see young women and men walking the streets 12 o’clock at night, never afraid of anything. Generally, Russians consider themselves living in an extremely safe society. There are no guns among the citizenry, and the police themselves don’t carry guns – they carry billy sticks”.
Myth #7: Russia intends to be the #1 world power.
“This is completely fallacious”.
Myth #8: Putin is a thug and an assassin. After hearing news that Vladimir Putin was receiving strong consideration as Russian leader after Boris Yeltsin’s departure, Sharon Tennison describes her thoughts at the time:
“I said to my friends: He will never make a decent President of Russia. But, of course, knowing him (Putin) and having had this very intense experience with him earlier, I watched him like a hawk from the beginning. And I began to see what this man was made of. I was not watching the rumors; I was listening and watching what his foreign policy was, and what his internal policy was. So, from my perspective, Putin is a very logical, a very astute, a very quiet, a very honest man … The two (different) pictures of who this man is just don’t match”.
Myth #9: Putin is the richest man in the world. After Putin assumed the presidency of Russia, one of his major actions was to greatly diminish the levels of financial/economic corruption, and especially tax evasion, predominant in the horrible Russian version of the “robber baron” years which cruelly darkened ordinary Russians’ lives in the 1990’s. The highly increased levels of tax receipts/revenues as a result of the corruption crackdown were redirected to rebuilding and renovating cities and regions all across Russia’s 11 time zones, leading to an appreciation of Putin by Russians described by Ms. Tennison:
“Anyone looking at this country today, compared to where it was 18 years ago, understands that a miracle has been created here … He’s considered the greatest leader ever of Russia after Peter the Great”.
Myth #10: Russia is our enemy.
“We have just come from 10 regions and 15 cities across Russia, and we haven’t had one single manifestation, of any kind, of enemy-ship from the Russian people. They all say, ‘We want to be friends with the United States. We admire Americans. We look up to you as leaders and number one in the world. We want to be like you’ … They have to have defensive weapons when we are on their borders with our offensive weapons. Russia really, still, wants to be our friend, and still the friendship is offered. So, we need to take advantage of that”.
“In closing friends, please consider the role of rumors in international relations today. What do they do? They influence people who don’t follow the issues closely. They influence Congress members who have reasons of their own for wanting to go along with whatever the rumor is. They create the opportunity for wars to take place, and invasions to take place that Congress has never authorized. This is the role of rumors”.
“They’re not harmless. It behooves all of us to listen carefully to what’s being said, and to ask questions about it. And to talk with our Congress members about it, and to be on the alert of what’s going on in our names … As these rumors fly around, one after another that are unsubstantiated, that have no relation to the truth and yet they’re creating havoc internationally. One that we could have a nuclear war over”.
“Assassination is the extreme form of censorship.”
– GEORGE BERNARD SHAW (1856-1950) Irish dramatist
hristine Assange, WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange’s mother, has issued a challenge to peace activists, politicians and journalists around the Earth to act in defense of her son, who she considers has now entered a life-threatening situation.
Anyone who has looked into the situation concerning Julian Assange understands that the man’s unjust, irrational legal persecution of 8-years duration is based on his efforts as publisher of WikiLeaks to end criminal wars of aggression on Earth forever.
For that series of high morality, journalistic actions on his part, Julian Assange has consciously moved forward with full cognizance that severe retribution was always forthcoming and possible, even to the extent which potentially could place him in the same extremely precarious, life-and-death position that men and women of moral conscience through history willingly accepted.
Because Assange willingly accepted the severe consequences of his actions, and because he now faces manifestation of those truly profound personal risks, it becomes necessary for people around the world of varying, similar feelings about improving conditions for humanity vis-à-vis the greatest human issue of war and peace to come to his defense.
Persons aware of Assange’s deteriorating situation might consider life on Earth without people like Julian Assange, – if treated rightly, freed and willing to act for the improving of humanity now and for future generations – when deciding what to do now. Some would describe Assange as a rare genuine hero who has neither committed nor been convicted of any crimes whatsoever, and whose continued imprisonment serves as a historical case study of injustice against an individual which turns the legal foundation of 2018 civilization upside down and totally incoherent.
In other words, what is happening to truth-revealing publisher Julian Assange is simply and obviously wrong from each and every conceivable legal level. For that astonishingly distressing reason, persons in possession of good conscience aware how utterly irrational is his situation have no alternative but to rise up and act powerfully in his defense.
This includes persons of good moral conscience the world over, – because Assange’s worldview and consequent actions have consideration of bettering the health and well-being of all humanity in focus. There is nothing difficult in determining the way Julian Assange is being mistreated – and persecuted for his peace activism over the past 8-years – is simply and clearly wrong. In the same sense, men and women around the world sharing Assange’s morality-based worldview should have no difficulty determining what action(s) are now necessary … natural.
Good people will respond to Julian Assange’s life-threatening situation in a good way. Blessed are the peacemakers.
lthough the number of men and women determined to reach the truth about what happened to Bill Clinton White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster leading to Foster’s death in July 1993 is very small, they understand the enormous stakes involved in letting go for the future of the country, – so they are staying on in the legal, public awareness battle.
Vincent Foster’s death under suspicious circumstances in 1993 made his passing that of the highest positioned American government official or public figure since the equally controversial assassinations of United States President John F. Kennedy (JFK) in 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, and Robert F. Kennedy, brother of JFK, also in 1968 – while running for president.
What makes the deaths of the Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King Jr. and Vincent Foster stand out as a special category is the subsequent high level of national debate among citizens regarding the truthfulness of so-called “government narratives” claiming to have “solved” the cases. Many point to James Douglass and his book “JFK and the Unspeakable” as the go-to book for the truth, reinforcing the idea held by many that JFK’s murder was a coup d’etat, and that America has been a far lesser nation ever since.
William Pepper is held up by many as the man who was most responsible for bringing the shocking truth about Martin Luther King Jr., particularly after he led the extremely under-reported 1999 Memphis, Tennessee civil trial in which a jury, after hearing testimonies from 70 witnesses, absolved James Earl Ray posthumously of the murder.
Perhaps someday – hopefully soon – attorney Allan Favish will join James Douglass, William Pepper and others in the category of human force behind getting to the bottom of America’s most disturbing death-related debates and divisions-producing controversies. Many would add the esteemed academic David Ray Griffin to the select category as well, albeit the debate/controversy is somewhat different from one individual’s death: his work in leading the way for 9/11 truth involves state-sponsored covert mass-murder.
One need only to acknowledge the very high levels of partisan, divisive debates which occurred across America during the recent Senate hearings over the nomination by Donald Trump of Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court to realize the need for resolving controversial matters calmly, reasonably, and wisely.
Those men and women mentioned at the start refusing to let the Kavanaugh-Starr-Foster scandal go and forget about it are unanimous in their criticism of the Senate Supreme Court nomination process that just ended, for the obvious reason that neither republican or democrat senators so much as mentioned the alleged cover-up of critical facts surrounding Vincent Foster’s 1993 death.
For Americans unawares of the Kavanaugh controversy over Vincent Foster’s 1993 death, there has been an enormous amount of information compiled in the 25 years since the event. Three sources of relevant information providing perhaps the deepest legal insights – on the 2004 case and decision by the Supreme Court – into this matter are freely available at attorney Allan Favish’s website:
More information, including that compiled since that 2004 Supreme Court decision, is available at FBICover-up.com.
In the following interview of attorney Allan Favish with host Cliff Kincaid, Mr. Favish suggests that were straightforward, honest investigations done with respect to the 1993 death of Vincent Foster by Ken Starr, Brett Kavanaugh and others responsible from the start, that perhaps there would be no “Washington, D.C. swamp” today.
The term became popularized by – in supremely and cruelly ironic fashion – the same man whose nomination placed Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court of the United States … Donald Trump.
Ironic, also, is that while running for president in 2016 Donald Trump became sharply criticized for asserting there was “something fishy” about events surrounding the death of Vincent Foster.
Mr. Favish, then, wonders how long the “Washington, D.C. swamp” would survive if there were a new, 100% transparent investigation into Vincent Foster’s death today.
Most importantly, one wonders if Americans will ever even know.
(Thank you to USA Survival at YouTube | Posted: October 15, 2018)