L’opposition russe chez elle à l’ambassade US

Partager/Marquer

Voici quelques documents intéressants montrant l’opposition russe défilant à l’ambassade US, où vient de s’installer, depuis la fin de l’automne dernier, l’ambassadeur McFaul, spécialiste de l’agitation. Ces films datent de janvier 2012.

C’est Tony Cartalucci, sur son site nommé LandDestroyer.blogspot, qui publie, ce 6 mai 2012, une série de documents vidéo montrant diverses personnalités de l’opposition se rendant à l’ambassade US, ou en sortant, aux alentours de la mi-janvier 2012.

C’est à cette époque qu’une réunion de coordination rassembla McFaul et les principaux dirigeants de l’opposition (les sujets des diverses vidéos), pour préparer des actions anti-Poutine dans l’esprit des actions de type –“révolution de couleur”, que nous avons designées également par l’expression “agression douce”.

Les USA sont activement impliqués dans ce processus, qu’ils financent d’ailleurs d’une façon très officielle.

Un texte de Cartalucci, accompagnant les vidéos, est largement référencé pour donner le plus possible d’informations sur les circonstances et les personnalités présentes. En plus de McFaul et des opposants russes, on trouvait les habituels agents d’influence, relais, membres des ONG qui vont bien, qui pullulent dans cette sorte de circonstance. (L’article est également repris sur Infowars.com le 7 mai 2012.)

• «In mid-January 2012, just days after Michael McFaul arrived in Moscow to begin his stint as US Ambassador to Russia, Russian opposition leaders lined up outside the US Embassy (Russian) to meet him in a bizarre confab that reeked of both treason and duplicity. Approached by journalists inquiring as to why they had all come to greet the US Ambassador, their responses ranged from silence to dismissive gibes. Later, the group of opposition leaders emerged responding only with “you’re Surkov’s propaganda,” meaning the journalists represented government efforts to undermine their work and legitimacy. It is a common response given by Russia’s opposition members when media attempts to question them about their increasingly overt ties to Wall Street and London.

• »Present at the US Embassy confab were regular mainstays of the Western media’s coverage of anti-Vladimir Putin protests, including Boris Nemtsov, Yevgeniya Chirikova of the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funded “Strategy 31,” Lev Ponomarev of the NED, Ford Foundation, Open Society, and USAID-funded Moscow Helsinki Group, and Liliya Shibanova of NED-funded GOLOS, an allegedly “independent” election monitoring group that served as the primary source of accusations of voting fraud against Putin’s United Russia party. Clearly, this wasn’t the first time both words and cash had been exchanged between the Russian opposition and the US State Department, but is perhaps the most overt example of such flagrant conspiring yet.

• »US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul himself, is a card carrying member of both Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), two organizations notorious for extraterritorial meddling in the foreign affairs of sovereign nations and demonstratively funding, supporting, and directing Russia’s so-called opposition. It was accurately predicted in October 2011′s “Agitator Nominated for Next US “Ambassador” to Russia,” that McFaul’s primary goal would be to continue with America’s “disingenuous front of “resetting” with Russia, while simultaneously subverting the Russian government with US-funded political unrest.” It appears that McFaul has begun his work in earnest.»

Nous avons parlé à diverses reprises de cette forme d’activisme alimenté par le tissu d’organisations para-gouvernementales, non-gouvernementales, etc., par des services et des bureaucraties gouvernementales de l’administration américaniste (essentiellement au département d’État).

Cet activisme est fondée sur une sorte d’idéologie que nous nommerions l’“idéologie de l’extension forcée de la démocratie” (s’entendant, une démocratie de type américaniste, signifiant une ouverture complète aux intérêts américanistes). Comme nous l’avons rappelé plus haut, nous nommons cela “agression douce” (voir notamment nos textes du 14 mars 2012 et du 9 avril 2012).

Cet interventionnisme d’influence et de subversion des USA, qui reprend la formule du stalinisme et des “idiots utiles” (selon Staline) pour désigner les intellectuels occidentaux qui se firent les relais de l’influence soviétiques dans leurs pays, se déploie sans aucun souci de l’interférence qu’il opère dans les relations officielles entre les USA et la Russie.

(Les Russes ont déjà observé ce phénomène en découvrant l’autonomie d’intervention de ces bureaucraties à l’intérieur de l’appareil gouvernemental US. Nous citions cette remarque, dans notre texte du 9 avril 2012 :

• «Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said in an interview with Russian news agency Interfax that [ …] the Russian side had repeatedly voiced this concern to the American partners on different levels. Ryabkov acknowledged that his side had met some understanding on the State Department’s side and even received some particular data on which groups were funded and in what amount, but he said that the concerns remained.») Ce mécanisme a encore fonctionné lors des manifestations de l’opposition autour de la prise de ses fonctions de nouveau président russe.

Les dirigeants russes considèrent cet activisme comme extrêmement dommageable et, dans ses ramifications avec les USA, comme une ingérences dans les affaires intérieures russes et une interférence dans la souveraineté russe.

Il y a eu une rencontre discrète et impromptue, le 4 mai, en marge de la conférence de Moscou sur les antimissiles, entre Poutine et le directeur du National Security Council et conseiller d’Obama pour les affaires de sécurité national, Thomas Donilon.

Poutine a clairement fait savoir à Donilon qu’il tenait effectivement cette question pour un contentieux important des relations USA-Russie, du point de vue russe. Il est assuré que cette question constituera désormais un dossier important pour la diplomatie russe, qui sera constamment mis en avant lors des contacts avec les USA.

Sunday, May 6, 2012

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.fr/2012/05/unbelievable-russian-oppositions-confab.html

Unbelievable: Russian Opposition’s Confab At US Embassy

Russian Opposition Caught Filing into US Embassy in Moscow.
by Tony CartalucciMay 7, 2012 – In mid-January 2012, just days after Michael McFaul arrived in Moscow to begin his stint as US Ambassador to Russia, Russian opposition leaders lined up outside the US Embassy (Russian)to meet him in a bizarre confab that reeked of both treason and duplicity.

 

Images: Caught red-handed – Russia’s opposition, long accused by the Kremlin of being foreign-funded, and who have well documented ties to the US State Department, are caught filing into the US Embassy in Moscow in January of 2012, just days after agitator Michael McFaul began his stint as US Ambassador to Russia. (click on image to enlarge)

….

Approached by journalists inquiring as to why they had all come to greet the US Ambassador, their responses ranged from silence to dismissive gibes. Later, the group of opposition leaders emerged responding only with « Вы сурковская пропаганда, » or « you’re Surkov’s propaganda, » meaning the journalists represented government efforts to undermine their work and legitimacy. It is a common response given by Russia’s opposition members when media attempts to question them about their increasingly overt ties to Wall Street and London.

Video: This video captured outside the US Embassy in Moscow, Russia, shows prominent leaders of Russia’s US-funded, backed, and directed opposition attending a confab with newly appointed US Ambassador Michael McFaul. Both the opposition leaders and McFaul himself are directly connected to the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

….

Present at the US Embassy confab were regular mainstays of the Western media’s coverage of anti-Vladimir Putin protests, including Boris Nemtsov, Yevgeniya Chirikova of the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funded « Strategy 31, » Lev Ponomarev of the NED, Ford Foundation, Open Society, and USAID-funded Moscow Helsinki Group, and  Liliya Shibanova of NED-funded GOLOS, an allegedly « independent » election monitoring group that served as the primary source of accusations of voting fraud against Putin’s United Russia party. Clearly, this wasn’t the first time both words and cash had been exchanged between the Russian opposition and the US State Department, but is perhaps the most overt example of such flagrant conspiring yet.

Image: A screenshot from NED’s official website, listing GOLOS as a recipient of NED funding, which in turn is provided by the US State Department.  (click image to enlarge)

….

Image: A screen shot from the « Moscow Helsink Group » clearly subsidized from abroad. The significance of this group & its affiliates leading protests, indicates nothing less than foreign-funded sedition unfolding in the streets of Russia. (click image to enlarge)

….

US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul himself, is a card carrying member of both Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), two organizations notorious for extraterritorial meddling in the foreign affairs of sovereign nations and demonstratively funding, supporting, and directing Russia’s so-called opposition. It was accurately predicted in October 2011′s, « Agitator Nominated for Next US “Ambassador” to Russia, » that McFaul’s primary goal would be to continue with America’s « disingenuous front of “resetting” with Russia, while simultaneously subverting the Russian government with US-funded political unrest. » It appears that McFaul has begun his work in earnest.

Despite damning exposure of the Russian opposition’s ties to Wall Street and London, the Western media, even as recently as this weekend during protests against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inauguration, insists that such connections are the creation of Kremlin-controlled propaganda. The Associated Press in their article titled, « Putin Returns to Presidency in a Changed Russia, » accuses Putin of portraying the protesters as « in the pay of the Americans and intent on bringing about a revolution that would take Russia back to the instability and humiliations of the 1990s. » AP adds, « with Kremlin-controlled television still the main source of information for most Russians, many believed him. »

In reality, Putin’s assessment of the opposition is verified by the National Endowment for Democracy’s own website, the « About Us » pages of the opposition’s various websites, and confirmed by confabs conducted by the opposition themselves with foreign interests in foreign embassies on Russian soil. And indeed, many of those leading Russia’s opposition are members and representatives of the corrupt oligarchies that plundered Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990′s. The treason is so overt, it begs the question as to whether the United States has indeed become this recklessly brazen, this desperate, or playing at a broader geopolitical gambit yet revealed.

With Russian opposition leaders on video climbing over themselves to get into the US Embassy to confer with regime-change specialist (Russian), US Ambassador Michael McFaul, and as their funding and affiliations become more widely known to the public, their work and legitimacy will be undermined by public awareness of the facts, not « Surkov’s propaganda. »

Partager/Marquer