by Scott Creighton
Pussy Riot™ mission statement: When the world is being neoliberalized as fast as possible and the masters of the universe demand tribute from those seeking a place at the table, no effort to assist in that endeavor , no matter how sophomoric or insipid, no matter how ridiculous, no matter how contrived, shall go unrewarded. And Pussy Riot™ will be there to cash in
Not that long ago President Obama said that Russia and President Putin had tried to influence the outcome of our election process and that it was “unacceptable” behavior for a nation to attempt to influence the democratic process of other nations. Forget for a second that his evidence was so laughable that the Department of Homeland Security, the agency that cobbled it together, posted a disclaimer on the first page of the report that said it didn’t stand by a single shred of “proof” in it’s own report:
“this report is provided “as is” for informational purposes only. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within.”
Russia did not attempt to influence our election. They did not “hack” the DNC, Hillary Clinton’s illegal private email server nor the email account of the perpetually corrupt John Podesta. Even if they did, which they didn’t, all they did was expose the truth about these three deeply tainted entities. No one has disputed the authenticity of the leaks. They stand as an accurate representation of the level of corruption that exists in the fake left that is the unDemocratic Party of America these days. This is a footnote that gets lost in the discussion far too often these days.
Which leads me to ask one simple question: since when is it considered “unacceptable” behavior to expose the truth about corruption at the highest ranks in the American political system?
For all the McCarthyite efforts being put forward by the breathless ladder-climbers of the corporate propaganda mills which pass for “news organizations” these days I am often awestruck by those who seem to wish to demand their guests present a kind of American exceptionalism when it comes to comparisons between this fake news story about Russia “hacking” our democracy and the altogether too real history of our State Department and the CIA doing the exact same thing to other countries across the globe. The hypocrisy is simply stunning. And that is when a guest has the audacity to bring up said history, which doesn’t happen very often.
No one can deny our long history of meddling in the political affairs of other countries on behalf of our “national interests” and you even find a few MSM outlets having to address this seemingly sticky bit of trivia every now and again:
“The U.S. has a long history of attempting to influence presidential elections in other countries – it’s done so as many as 81 times between 1946 and 2000, according to a database amassed by political scientist Dov Levin of Carnegie Mellon University.
That number doesn’t include military coups and regime change efforts following the election of candidates the U.S. didn’t like, notably those in Iran, Guatemala and Chile. Nor does it include general assistance with the electoral process, such as election monitoring.” L.A. Times, Dec. 2016
From the State Department to the CIA to NGOs like the National Endowment for Democracy or USAID, I think you would have an easier time listing all the elections in the world since WWII that the U.S. didn’t try to subvert or influence to suit their needs than then ones they did. It doesn’t matter the size of the country or their ranking on the global index of natural resource ownership. Take Haiti for instance. Or Palestine for that matter. They are hardly world leaders in anything, yet both little nations felt the brunt of our “democratization” efforts in ways that are both proven and disastrous to the citizens of those nations. Of that there is no doubt.
But what about Russia?
Now we can go back to the heyday of the neoliberalization of Russia if we want to and some suggest the Russian hacking might just be payback for the good-old Clinton days of spreading “democracy” by infecting various nations with the cancer of Milton Friedman’s “free market” ideology.
“Early 1996 Boris Yeltsin’s approval rate was in the single digits. He had carried out a presidential putsch, started a shambolic war in Chechnya and had helped oligarchs pillage the nation and brought the economy to its knees. July 1996 he was elected president for the second time. How did this happen?
Oh well, it just took one of the most unfair, costliest and most fraudulent election battles in the history of democracy. — All with the complicity of the United States which backed the Russian alcoholic in chief every step of the way (as it had during the ’93 coup) Russian Insider
It is no secret that the U.S.’s man in Moscow was the drunken puppet Boris Yeltsin. We installed him and we instructed him on how to neoliberalize the country, a process that was so entirely detrimental to the Soviet people they wanted to go back to communism before his first term in office was complete. The billionaires and the global bankers liked him though, so we sent some of Milton Friedman’s Chicago Boys and PR spin doctors to the country to help keep him in office. And if you think that quote from Russian Insider is biased and a conspiracy theory, just look up TIME magazine’s July 15th, 1996 cover page for a little more insight. It isn’t a conspiracy theory folks.
You can go back that far if you want, but I figure all we have to do is go back to their last election and see how we tried to influence it on behalf of the same “national interests” our political hacks have served since the beginning of time.
I would like to remind you of Hillary Clinton’s destabilization campaign in Russia circa Nov. 2011 through March 2012 and a little thing called “Pussy Riot”
Now I have written a great deal about these efforts of Hillary’s and I am not going to rehash all of it today. Here are a few choice articles you might want to review in order to get up to date on the REAL history of U.S./Russia democracy interference.
Back in those days Hillary Clinton was doing everything she could to influence the Russian democratic process and that is because Vladamir Putin was extremely popular among Russian citizens at the time. He was the symbol of the new anti-neoliberal revolution that took place once they finally got rid of our puppet Boris Yeltsin and the standard of living for many Russians improved greatly under his leadership. He arrested corrupt oligarchs who, along with their global partners in crime, attempted to fleece the entire country for every penny they could suck out of it while Yeltsin and the Chicago Boys ran the government.
Understanding that the parliamentary elections and the presidential elections were right around the corner, our NGOs started funding color revolution type destabilization campaigns (like Pussy Riot for starters) and Hillary installed a color revolution specialist as our ambassador to Russia (Michael Anthony McFaul)
“Want to know why so many Russians hated Boris Nemtsov? Here’s a video of him paying a visit on U.S. Ambassador to Russia, Michael Anthony McFaul, just after McFaul took office back in 2012. It’s well understood here and in Russia, that McFaul’s task was to attempt to instigate a color revolution in Russia from day one.
“Most Russia-watchers are diplomats, or specialists on security and arms control. Or Russian culture. I am neither. I can’t recite Pushkin by heart. I am a specialist in democracy, anti-dictatorial movements, and revolutions” (emphasis added). Michael Anthony McFaul
“(Hillary) Clinton noted that McFaul, who is a specialist in democratic transition – a Kommersant headline from January 11 touted him as a “color revolution specialist” – is uniquely suited for his new post, given Russia’s current climate.” Russia Profile
So in comes the color revolution specialist and one of the first to meet and greet the neoliberal scum, is Boris Nemtsov. Go figure.” Scott Creighton, March 1, 2015
Sending regime change specialists into targeted nations as our ambassadors was standard operating procedure for Hillary Clinton. She did it with Russia. She did it with Robert Ford in Syria in Dec. of 2010 just before the color revolution started over there. And she had a hand in selection Geoffrey R. Pyatt to take office in 2013 after she left the State Department. Soon after he took over, he started meeting with opposition leaders and the Ukraine color revolution was underway in Jan. of 2014.
This is what Clinton called “smart power”: going into various nations who don’t bow down to our “national interests” and getting some of the most deplorable, degenerate, out-of-power opposition leaders you can find to sign onto your regime change plan in exchange for a promise of future control. Future control under your thumb of course. Kinda like Boris Yeltsin.
In April of 2015 a Russian Federation council member explained it this way:
“Extremism is used as a geopolitical instrument, for reshaping the spheres of influence, overthrowing regimes undesirable for some countries by the means of organizing ‘color revolutions’,” Matviyenko said. “The West makes attempts to organize them [‘color revolutions’] in Russia as well,” she added. These efforts are directed at “discrediting the authorities and destabilizing the situation in Russia, and using both extremist elements and opposition for that,” the speaker noted.” TASS News
Smart power. Hiring terrorists and extremists to do the dirty work, the wet work, of overthrowing your enemies. Libya, Egypt, Syria, Thailand, Yugoslavia, Ukraine… all examples of “smart power” I suppose.
In the end, Hillary failed in Russia just like Obama has finally failed in Syria. She didn’t bring in the jackals though, like she did in Libya and Obama did in Syria. Russia is a nuclear state after all. More care must be taken in such circumstances. That’s one of the reasons they hired the Pussy Riot destabilization roadshow, called Proxy Poseurs by another writer a couple years ago.
Pussy Riot was perhaps the dumbest, most sophomoric bullshit destabilization psyop to ever get hatched by the neoliberal think-tanks that think they run the world. It was absolutely infantile in it’s conception and beyond pedestrian in it’s performance.
I wrote about their staged “beatings” scenes repeatedly in the run-up to the Russian elections. The fingerprints of George Soros and his ilk were all over it like those of a drunken uncle on his nieces underwear.
On February 20th, not even a month ago, I wrote about a poorly scripted and badly staged street-theater performance in Sochi performed by the Western backed agitation operation known as “Pussy Riot™ ”
Their hasty little performance was designed to demonize Russia under Putin since we all know, Russia under the neoliberal drunkard puppet Yeltsin was such a better place for the oligarchs and the international bankers.
It involved members of the “band” (if you wish to call them that) setting up under a Sochi Olympics sign in a parking lot and immediately being attacked by actors wearing what is supposed to look like Russian military or police uniforms.
The video was such a joke, it reminded me of that “news story” CNN did during the Gulf War where two reporters in a studio pretended to be reporting live from a hotel as scud missiles rained down on their heads. The first Pussy Riot™ video is almost as bad.
The latest Pussy Riot™ beating video is actually worse.” Scott Creighton, March 2014
For a broader understanding of the nature of our efforts to undermine democracy in Russia during those months, read the following:
With a recorded and unquestionable history like this, one could hardly blame Russia for trying to influence a U.S. election in which Hillary Clinton seemed to be the shoe-in candidate chosen by our own oligarchs. Turn about is fair play after all.
But they didn’t. Or at least, no one has presented a single shred of credible evidence to suggest they did at this point.
And after all, when you think about it, all someone really did was expose just how unqualified Hillary Clinton was for office. I mean it wasn’t like they hired a band of untalented misfit hookers to show their private parts in a church or something and then promote a global campaign against the outrage of them being arrested for doing so.
Whoever did it (my guess is a leaker from within and perhaps a branch of the CIA or even the NSA who were pissed off about the “Snowden” psyop?) simply told the truth, which I guess is a revolutionary idea these days and a treasonous one.
American exceptionalism aside, it is never acceptable when nations attempt to influence the democratic process of other countries though that has been the staple of our State Department’s diet since day one. And I know that it is all the rage these days to hate on Russia in both venues of the One Party System we laughingly call a democracy these days but I still cannot seem to get on board with that kind of bandwagon thinking.
No. Russia did not hack our democracy or attempt to thwart it like Hillary Clinton did back in 2012 to them. They didn’t have to. Hillary sucked so bad on her own, all they had to do was sit back and laugh and that probably pissed them off more than anything else.