OMNI
RUSSIA
NEWSLETTER #8, 11-10-21
Compiled by
Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace, Justice, and Ecology.
(#1 March 21,
2014; #2 April 10, 2014; #3 May 16, 2014; #4 July 22, 2014; #5 March 10, 2015;
#6 Sept. 1, 2016; #7, October 3, 2017)
CONTENTS: RUSSIA NEWSLETTER
#8
NEW
COLD WAR AND RUSSOPHOBIA
2021 Russiagate
Tomlinson and Paulson
2018 Transcend Media
Service
Muzzafar,
“The Geopolitics of Targeting Russia”
Petras,
“UK, the EU, and the US Gangs Up on Russia”
Klare,
“The New Cold War”
Marcetic,
US and Russia: Fake News
Kuzmarov
and Marciano (book), The Russians Are
Coming Again
2017
Kuzmarov
and Marciano (essay), “The Russians Are Coming, Again”
ADG Reports US Sends
Troops to Russian Border, google search
Oliver
Stone DVD, Ukraine on Fire
Cohen,
Democrats Repudiate FDR’s Detente
TEXTS
PERSPECTIVES
2021
New Cold
War, Russiagate lies & Rachel Maddow
11-9-21
|
||||||||||
|
10:21
AM (1 hour ago) |
|
||
|
||||
Hi
Abel, Dick and Art,
I
hope you are all well.
I’m
sorry I wasn’t in on the Russiagate conversation between Abel and Dick. I
actually read Aarron Mate’s article yesterday, so Abel and I are on the same
page, as it were!
My
thoughts: Abel is absolutely correct in his assessment. Besides
Aaron Mate, Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi and a handful of others have
written critically about Russiagate (not surprisingly, all have been
effectively “cancelled” 100% by all Blue State legacy media).
Russiagate,
at its core, was an attempt by the Democratic establishment to explain away
Hillary Clinton’s humiliating 2016 loss to an openly corrupt, vulgar,
buffoonish, politically inexperienced game show host, despite outspending him
two to one. 2016 should have been the mother of all come to Jesus moments for
Democrats, but, instead of coming to terms with the legacy of 30 years of
aggressively pushing neoliberalism, they came up with the laughably transparent
excuse that Trump essentially parachuted in to DC from a Russian plane piloted
by Putin. Russiagate, from the get go never passed the smell test, but
the entire Democrat establishment, the entire Democrat party leadership, the
entirety of Blue State legacy media such as CNN, MSNBC (the worst offender),
the New York Times, the Washington Post, and NPR all went all in on this
pathetic joke. Furthermore, the majority of Democrats bought this
pathetic joke. Probably close to 100% of the self-styled “Hashtag Resistance”—especially
well-off, upper middle class women who personally identified with Hillary’s
“journey”, were the worst, not simply drinking the Russiagate kool-aid, but
guzzling it. Time and time again, evidence free assertions based on
anonymous claims (usually from our intel services) about Trump and Russia were
put forward as fact.
As
conspiracy theories go, Russiagate is certainly stupid, but stupidity is hardly
the worst of it. Belief in it—approaching an almost religious level by
members of Hillary Clinton’s fan club—prevented the Democrats from coming to
terms with how Trump ended up in the Oval Office. No coming to terms with
NAFTA, with Wall Street-friendly policies such as deregulation that even Reagan
himself couldn’t have imagined, with massive outsourcing of manufacturing jobs,
with mass incarceration of mostly black and brown people, with unchecked
militarism, etc., No, rather than take a good look in the mirror,
Democrats preferred the comforting narrative that the Orange Monster was an
aberration, and reached the White House via a coup concocted in Moscow.
Think of what Russiagaters believed: that Trump conspired with the
Kremlin to win in 2016, that the Kremlin had blackmail on him (the pee tape),
that, essentially, he was a traitor, doing the bidding of a hostile foreign
power. Think of that. Forget that Trump is odious and that you hate him.
The president is a traitor. People like Rachel Maddow rooted for
this to be true. And she wasn’t alone. That’s how badly Trump’s election
broke the brains of most Democrats.
For
Progressives, Russiagate was a disaster, and not simply because it prevented
the party from coming to terms with the legacy of its terrible economic
policies, but because, predictably, the Democratic establishment began smearing
Bernie Sanders with the Russia brush when it looked like he had a real shot at
the nomination in 2020. I believe it was the Washington Post that on the
eve of Super Tuesday claimed that Bernie was the Kremlin’s preferred candidate.
And Bernie wasn’t alone. Anyone on the left risked being smeared in this
way. Wow. Think about that. I’d like to think that most Democrats
resorted to this truly disgusting Neo-McCarthyism because Trump so broke their
brains, and not because they are so utterly ignorant of the history and legacy
of Joe McCarthy.
Finally,
for those of us who care about issues of war and peace, including nuclear war,
Russiagate—and the very worst offender promoting it was Rachel
Maddow—Russiagate was probably the most reckless, irresponsible thing I have
ever seen in American politics. Following the collapse of the USSR, the
US expanded NATO right up to Russia’s borders, borders which invading armies
from the West have crossed numerous times (the Russians are aware of their
history, unlike the vast majority of Americans (who seem to think that Tom
Hanks won WWII after he saved Private Ryan). Unlike the US Empire, which
has 800 plus bases spread around the planet, the Russian military is almost
entirely concentrated within Russia itself. Any future war with the
American Empire and its NATO vassals will probably be fought on its borders,
and they have been planning accordingly. Think about it. A modern
well-equipped military. Short supply lines. Defending their
country again for the umpteenth time against invaders from the West. It
is not impossible to imagine an accident, an incident along Russia’s border
with NATO escalating into shooting. In a conventional war, Russia might
very well prevail, and quickly. And the US would take real military casualties
for the first time since WWII. For the first time since WWII, the US
would be facing a modern, well-equipped military, not third world insurgents.
Can you imagine the reaction back home if we stumbled into a shooting war
on Russia’s border and lost? Can you imagine if that had happened under
Trump? Trump, an insecure ego maniac? After years of Russiagting
him, saying that he was Putin’s puppet, that he was controlled by the Kremlin?
The pressure to resort to “tactical”nuclear weapons would probably be
irresistible. Need I say more?
Final
thoughts on Russiagate. It’s not going away, although the damage it has
done, including a loss of even more trust in the media, is irreparable.
Special prosecutor John Durham is slowly investigating it, and, I
predict, the results will not be pretty for Democrats or their courtiers in the
media, like Rachel Maddow.
And
my favorite Russiagate nonsense? That would have to be an article
published in the Washington Post, mere days after the 2016 election, which
listed a large number of alternative media organizations—most of them on the
left, predictably—that supposedly were doing the bidding of the Kremlin.
Included among them was our very favorite vegan website, Nutritioinfacts.org! Yes, that’s’
correct, the paper whose motto is “Democracy Dies in Darkness” suggested in an
article that a vegan website was spreading Russian propaganda! The
founder of the site attributed it to his promotion of Russian Kale. And
there you have it.
Peace
(and Good help us, and I’m not religious),
George
2018
The Anti-Empire Report #157
By
William Blum – Published April 18th, 2018
https://williamblum.org/aer/read/157
Unpersons
One reason
it’s so easy to get an American administration, the mainstream media, and the
American people to jump on an anti-Russian bandwagon is of course the legacy of
the Soviet Union. To all the real crimes and shortcomings of that period the US
regularly added many fictitious claims to agitate the American public against
Moscow. That has not come to a halt. During a debate in the 2016 Republican
presidential primary, candidate Ben Carson (now the head of the US Housing and
Urban Development agency) allowed the following to pass his lips: “Joseph
Stalin said if you want to bring America down, you have to undermine three
things: Our spiritual life, our patriotism, and our morality.” This is a
variation on many Stalinist “quotes” over the years designed to deprecate both
the Soviet leader and any American who can be made to sound like him. The quote
was quite false, but the debate moderators and the other candidates didn’t
raise any question about its accuracy. Of course not.
Another
feature of Stalinism that was routinely hammered into our heads was that of the
“non-person” or “unperson” – the former well-known official or writer, for
example, who fell out of favor with the Stalinist regime for something he said
or did, and was thereafter doomed to a life of obscurity, if not worse. In his
classic 1984 George Orwell speaks of a character who “was
already an unperson. He did not exist: he had never existed.” I was reminded of
this by the recent sudden firing of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State.
Matthew Lee, the courageous Associated Press reporter who has
been challenging State Department propaganda for years, had this to say in an
April 1 article:
Rex
Tillerson has all but vanished from the State Department’s website as his
unceremonious firing by tweet took effect over the weekend.
The
“Secretary of State Tillerson” link at the top of the department’s homepage
disappeared overnight Saturday and was replaced with a generic “Secretary of
State” tab. When clicked, it leads to a page that informs visitors in a brief
statement that Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan “became acting Secretary
of State on April 1, 2018.” It shows a photo of Sullivan signing his
appointment papers as deputy in June 2017 but offers no explanation for the
change in leadership.
In addition to that
change, links that had connected to Tillerson’s speeches, travels and other
events now display those of Sullivan. The link to Tillerson’s biography as the
69th secretary of state briefly returned a “We’re sorry, that page can’t be
found” message. After being notified of the message, the State Department
restored the link and an archive page for Tillerson’s tenure was enabled.
The most
repeated Cold War anti-Communist myth was of course Nikita Khrushchev’s much
quoted – No, eternally quoted! – line: “We will bury you.” On November 20 1956
the New York Times had reported: “In commenting on coexistence
last night Mr. Khrushchev said communism did not have to resort to war to
defeat capitalism. “Whether you like it or not, history is on our side,” he
said. “We will bury you.”
Obviously, it was not a
military threat of any kind. But tell that to the countless individuals who
have cited it as such forever. So, as matters turned out, did
communism, or call it socialism, bury capitalism? No. But not for the reason
the capitalists would like to think – their superior socio-economic system.
Capitalism remains the world’s pre-eminent system primarily because of military
power combined with CIA covert actions. It’s that combination that irredeemably
crippled socialist forces in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines, Guatemala,
Haiti, Ecuador, the Congo, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Chile, Angola, Grenada,
Nicaragua, Bulgaria, Albania, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, El Salvador, etc., etc.,
etc.
We’ll
never know what kind of societies would have resulted if these movements had
been allowed to develop without US interference; which of course was the idea
behind the interference. MORE https://williamblum.org/aer/read/157
TRANSCEND MEDIA SERVICE: Solutions-Oriented Peace Journalism
Week 13 // 26 Mar - 01 Apr 2018
The Geopolitics of Targeting Russia
Chandra Muzaffar
The
aim is clear. It is to compel Moscow to submit to the hegemonic power of the
Washington elite. Anyone who has a rudimentary understanding of Russian history
knows that this will not happen. Russia will continue to resist. And Russian
resistance may well hold the key to a different future for humankind.
Why the UK, the EU and the US Gang-Up on Russia
Prof.
James Petras – TRANSCEND Media Service
20
Mar 2018 - For the greater part of a decade the US, the UK and the EU have been
carrying out a campaign to undermine and overthrow the Russia government and in
particular to oust President Putin. Fundamental issues are at stake including
the real possibility of a nuclear war.
Michael
Klare. “The New Cold War.” The Nation
(April 2, 2018).
Feb. 2018
signalled the NCW by 3 events: 1) US Nuclear Posture Review, 2) Chinese
elimination of term limits for President, 3) Pres. Putin’s State of the Nation
Address. Klare urges readers to support
the No Unconstitutional Strike Against North Korea Act.
When It Comes to the Fake News
Scourge, Russia Doesn’t Hold a Candle to U.S. Conservative Media
The
panic over Russian interference obscures the fact that fake news has always
been with us—it’s just been pushed by the American Right.
BY BRANKO MARCETIC
The Russians Are Coming, Again: The First Cold War as
Tragedy, the Second as Farce by Jeremy Kuzmarov and John Marciano. Monthly Review P, May
2018.
https://monthlyreview.org/product/the-russians-are-coming-again-the-first-cold-war-as-tragedy-the-second-as-farce/
Karl Marx famously wrote
in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon that
history repeats itself, “first as tragedy, then as farce.” The Cold War, waged
between the United States and Soviet Union from 1945 until the latter’s dissolution
in 1991, was a great tragedy, resulting in millions of civilian deaths in proxy
wars, and a destructive arms race that diverted money from social spending and
nearly led to nuclear annihilation. The New Cold War between the United States
and Russia is playing out as farce—a dangerous one at that. The Russians Are Coming, Again is a red flag to
restore our historical consciousness about U.S.-Russian relations, and how
denying this consciousness is leading to a repetition of past follies.
Kuzmarov
and Marciano’s book is timely and trenchant. The authors argue that the
Democrats’ strategy, backed by the corporate media, of demonizing Russia and
Putin in order to challenge Trump is not only dangerous, but also unjustified,
misguided, and a major distraction. Grounding their argument in
all-but-forgotten U.S.-Russian history, such as the 1918-20 Allied invasion of
Soviet Russia, the book delivers a panoramic narrative of the First Cold War,
showing it as an all-too-avoidable catastrophe run by the imperatives of class
rule and political witch-hunts. The distortion of public memory surrounding the
First Cold War has set the groundwork for the New Cold War, which the book
explains is a key feature, skewing the nation’s politics yet again. This is an
important, necessary book, one that, by including accounts of the wisdom and
courage of the First Cold War’s victims and dissidents, will inspire a fresh
generation of radicals in today’s new, dangerously farcical times.
In The Russians are Coming, Again,
Jeremy Kuzmarov and John Marciano present an excellent and well researched
effort to remind liberal America of how awful the Cold War was and how it was
based on a cynical exaggeration of a largely fictional ‘Russian threat.’ Their
warning against creating a new Cold War with post-communist Russia is well
worth considering. —David N. Gibbs,
University of Arizona; author, First Do No Harm: Humanitarian
Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia
Jeremy Kuzmarov is
Jay P. Walker Assistant Professor of American History, University of Tulsa. He
is the author of Modernizing Repression: Police Training and
Nation-Building in the American Century and The Myth of the Addicted Army: Vietnam and the Modern War on Drugs,
as well as numerous articles and reviews in professional journals, popular
magazines, and newspapers.
John Marciano,
Professor Emeritus at SUNY Cortland, is an antiwar and social justice activist,
scholar, and trade unionist. He is author of The American War in Vietnam:
Crime or Commemoration? and Civic Illiteracy and Education:
The Battle for the Hearts and Minds of American Youth, as well as,
with William L. Griffen, Teaching the Vietnam War.
2017
“The Russians Are Coming, Again” (article)
by Jeremy Kuzmarov and John Marciano
Monthly
Review (Sep 01, 2017)
Alan Arkin in the Norman Jewison film, "The Russians are
Coming, The Russians are Coming"
Jeremy Kuzmarov is an assistant professor
of history at the University of Tulsa and the author, most recently, of Modernizing Repression (University of
Massachusetts, 2012).
John Marciano is professor emeritus of education at
the State University of New York, Cortland, and the author of The American War in Vietnam (Monthly Review
Press, 2016).
The 1966 Academy Award-winning film The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming,
directed by Norman Jewison, parodies the Cold War paranoia then pervading the
United States, depicting the chaos that seizes a small coastal New England town
after a Soviet submarine runs aground. Half a century later, Americans are
again being warned daily of the Russian menace, with persistent accusations of
Russian aggression, lies, violations of international law, and cyberattacks on
U.S. elections, as reported in leading liberal outlets like the New York Times and the Washington Post.
The
charges are many and relentless: the Russians invaded Georgia; the Russians
tried to subvert and overthrow the Ukrainian government; the Russians shot down
Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 in July 2014 over eastern Ukraine, or supported
rebels that did so; the Russians annexed Crimea in 2014 in an aggressive move
reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s postwar actions in Eastern Europe; the
Russians have threatened smaller NATO nations in the region; and most recently,
the Russians engaged in cyberwarfare by blatantly interfering in the 2016 U.S.
presidential election, and then tried to manipulate the president through
connections to key figures in his inner circle.
A prime example of the new
Russia hysteria comes from a 2016 report in the New York
Times by national security correspondents David Sanger, Eric
Schmitt, and Michael R. Gordon:
For his part, Mr. Putin is counting the days until Mr. Trump is
in the Oval Office. Despite a failing economy, the Russian president has been
pursuing for the past four years what most Western analysts see as a plan to
reassert Russian power throughout the region. First came the annexation of
Crimea and the shadow war in eastern Ukraine. Then came the deployment of
nuclear-capable forces to the border of NATO countries, as Moscow, working to
fracture the power structures in Germany and France and promote right-wing
parties, sent a reinvigorated military force on patrol off the coasts of the
Baltics and Western European nations.1
Based on unproven
assertions masquerading as fact (such as that Putin was working to fracture
power structures and promote right-wing parties in France and Germany), the
article fails to acknowledge that a verbal agreement was made in late 1990
between Mikhail Gorbachev and U.S. Secretary of State James Baker. According to
the Russians—whose version is corroborated by hundreds of memos and transcripts
at the George H. W. Bush presidential library—Baker pledged to Gorbachev that
NATO would not expand east toward their border, in return for Russian support
for German reunification.2 Since then, of course, the United States has armed and
funded NATO’s eastward advance to include states that share borders with
Russia. The United States also provocatively increased its naval presence in
the Black Sea, and in 2014, the State Department fanned protests that led to
the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s autocratic but elected pro-Russian
government, prompting the Russian annexation of Crimea, and then supplied more
than a billion dollars in security assistance to a new, Western-friendly
right-wing regime.3
In summer 2016, the Obama
administration announced the construction of a future U.S. missile defense site
in Poland and the activation of a missile defense system in Romania.4 This came on top of a previously announced trillion-dollar
nuclear modernization program, prompted in part by the lobbying efforts of the
defense contractor Bechtel, that includes the development of new nuclear-tipped
weapons, whose size and “smart” technology, according to a leading general,
ensure that the use of nuclear arms is “no longer unthinkable.”5
Russia, not surprisingly,
has watched these policies with alarm, itself putting five new strategic
nuclear missile regiments into service in 2016, and backing the Assad
government in the Syrian civil war. Former Secretary of Defense William J.
Perry is among those who believe that the danger of nuclear catastrophe arising
from the renewed arms race is “greater today than during the Cold War.”6
As in the original Cold
War, U.S. arms manufacturers have fueled the escalation by lobbying Washington
and NATO to maintain high levels of military spending, aided by hired-gun think
tanks and professional “experts.” As retired Army General Richard Cody, a vice
president at L-3 Communications, the seventh-largest U.S. defense
contractor, explained to shareholders in December 2015, the
industry faces a historic opportunity: following the end of the Cold War, peace
had “pretty much broken out all over the world,” with Russia in decline and
NATO nations celebrating. “The Wall came down,” he said, and “all defense
budgets went south.”7 Reversing this slide toward peace required the creation of
new foreign enemies, including the perception of a revived Russian
imperialism—even though the U.S. military budget, totaling $609 billion in
2016, dwarfs that of Russia, which spent $65 billion.
To
understand the New Cold War emerging today, it is necessary to reexamine the
original conflict between the United States and the USSR. The present Russia
panic follows an entire century of fearmongering and “threat inflation,” dating
to the Russian Revolution, that has long served the interests of the U.S.
military-industrial complex and security state. It has had little to do with
either Russian or American realities, which have been consistently distorted. MORE
This essay is well-worth reading, if at the moment you lack the time to
read the book. https://monthlyreview.org/2017/09/01/the-russians-are-coming-again/
U.S. Military Sends Troops to
Russian Border Search Results, Google Search, 10-13-17
How do Western media report Russian domestic troop
movements? US promise not to expand NATO
eastward following the end of the Cold War resulted in Russia’s border from
Finland to Kazakstan ringed almost entirely by NATO countries and Russian
internal troop movements in response being labeled aggression.
U.S. Military
Sends Troops to Russian Border, Officials Say They Want 'Peace, Not War' With
Russia Newsweek · 1
day ago
Russia's
Military Drills Near NATO Border Raise Fears of Aggression ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/world/.../russia-military-exercise-zapad-west.html
Jul 31, 2017 - American military officials are
concerned that Russia will use the ... is preparing to sendas many as 100,000 troops to the eastern edge
of ...
Russia Sending
Up to 100,000 Troops to Border of NATO Territory as ...
https://www.usnews.com/.../russia-sending-up-to-100-000-troops-to-border-of-nato-te...
ALERT - Obama
Sends US MILITARY to Russian Border, Russia ...
www.angrypatriotmovement.com/russia-response-to-obama-military/
Obama has deployed United States special forces troops along
Lithuania's border to protect its citizens from an “aggressive” Russia. Vladimir Putin is
deploying ...
The map that
shows how many Nato troops are deployed along ...
www.independent.co.uk
› News › World › Europe
US Military
Sends Troops to Russian Border - Rediff Realtime News
realtime.rediff.com/.../US-Military-Sends-Troops-to-Russian-Border/f47f88655a3066...
Russia has accused
the U.S. of violating a peace
treaty between Moscow and the Western military pact NATO after the Pentagon deployed a
new force in the ...
Ukraine On Fire by
Oliver Stone DVD
Editorial Reviews
Ukraine. Across its
eastern border is Russia and to its west Europe. For centuries, it has been at
the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its rich lands and
access to the Black Sea. 2014’ s Maidan Massacre triggered a bloody uprising
that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych and painted Russia as the perpetrator
by Western media. But was it? Ukraine on Fire by Igor Lopatonok provides a
historical perspective for the deep divisions in the region which lead to the
2004 Orange Revolution, 2014 uprisings, and the violent overthrow of
democratically elected Yanukovych. Covered by Western media as a people’ s revolution,
it was in fact a coup d état scripted and staged by nationalist groups and the
U.S. State Department. Investigative journalist Robert Parry reveals how
U.S.-funded political NGOs and media companies have emerged since the 80s
replacing the CIA in promoting America s geopolitical agenda abroad. Executive
producer Oliver Stone gains unprecedented access to the inside story through
his on-camera interviews with former President Viktor Yanukovych and Minister
of Internal Affairs, Vitaliy Zakharchenko, who explain how the U.S. Ambassador
and factions in Washington actively plotted for regime change. And, in his
first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Stone solicits Putin s
take on the significance of Crimea, NATO and the U. S s history of interference
in elections and regime change in the region.
|
Product
details · Actors: Oliver Stone, Vladimir Putin, Viktor Yanukovych, Viktor Yushchenko, Vitaliy Zakharchenko · Directors: Igor Lopatonok · Studio: Cinema
Libre Studio · DVD
Release Date: July 18, 2017 · Run
Time: 94 minutes |
The Putin Interviews (Showtime Documentary Films) by
Oliver Stone Paperback $14.24The Plot to Scapegoat Russia: How the CIA and the Deep
State Have Conspired to Vilify Putin by
Dan Kovalik Paperback $12.81
"Democrats Are Repudiating FDR's Policy of Detente with Russia"
By Stephen F.
Cohen, The Nation, posted January 17, 2017.
The author is a professor emeritus of Russian history and
politics at Princeton University and New York University.
Early, I depended upon
William Blum's history of US imperialism in his books and his
newsletters. For example, Killing Hope (1986) provides
a chronology of post-WWII US illegal, murderous interventions, invasions,
occupations, and related depredations. Many other books and articles have
reinforced this perspective. I recommend also
Kovalik's The Plot to Scapegoat Russia published last year,
and both well-referenced and easy to read. Our nation needs to be aware
of its political bigotry. This and other
OMNI newsletter discuss the Cold Wars, Sovietphobia, Russophobia,
Sinophobia, US militarism, and empire from an independent point of view..
Dick
CONTENTS: RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #7, October 3, 2017
http://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2017/10/omni-russia-newsletter-7.html
Graphic: Russia Wants War?
Dick, Who’s the
Aggressor?
Noam Chomsky,
US/NATO Provocations
Kathy Kelly,
NATO, Crimea
Protesting NATO
in Lapland
New Book by Dan
Kovalik, The Plot to Scapegoat Russia
Publisher’s
Description
Dick, Page 29 of The Plot on USSR
Cindy Sheehan’s Interview of Kovalik
Other Comment
on Russophobia
Kuzmarov and Marciano, The Russians Are
Coming, Again
Cindy, Anthony Freda, Morgan Freeman
Bruce Shapiro, Investigate Russian Hacking
Without Cold War Hysteria
Russia,
Afghanistan, and Diplomacy
US COLD WAR AGAINST CHINA NEWSLETTER #4, May 4,
2021
https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2021/05/us-cold-war-against-china-newsletter-4.html
COMPILED BY DICK BENNETT FOR A CULTURE OF
PEACE, JUSTICE, AND ECOLOGY
END RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #8
No comments:
Post a Comment