How the US Betrayed Russia

by

       George Sontag


      At the end of the Soviet Union, Soviet leaders preferred that U.S. forces remain in Europe and NATO stay intact, an arrangement they thought would keep a reunified Germany pacified. They and their Russian successors did not want NATO to grow any larger and assumed that Western diplomats understood their concerns. The United States gave assurances to Russia, who with good reason has a long history of invasion paranoia, that they would not march their NATO alliance towards their borders.  They lied! It was not a" little white lie." It was an understanding that the US had no intentions of honoring. They could not lose their "best" enemy just because they gave up Communism. There is no profit in that. So, against all the promises that were given during the time the Clinton administration began pushing for NATO to expand. The plan was to deny that there was a plan and continue the expansion of NATO towards the east so that Russia slowly would become encircled. 

      Beginning in 1999 missiles were stationed in Poland and Czech Republic...the Russians complained that it reduced its county's security, but the Western side was not interested in hearing that. They lied, saying that "those missiles are not targeting Russia." That brought a response from the Russian foreign minister, 'If we install rockets in Mexico, would you trust us if we say it's against Colombia or Cuba, and has nothing to do with the USA?'

     In  2004 NATO expanded further into Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Moscow complained bitterly from the start that when NATO comes right up to the Russian Federation’s borders. ... "The flame of war could burst out across the whole of Europe.” The US replied that they were there to help "defend" Russia against the Iranian threat. Moscow knew this was another lie but since none of the new members shared a border with Russia, save for the tiny Baltic countries, it did not look so threatening.

      Then NATO began looking further east. In a April 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, the alliance considered admitting Georgia and Ukraine. France and Germany opposed the move for fear that it would unduly antagonize Russia. In the end, NATO’s members reached a compromise: the alliance did not begin the formal process leading to membership, but it issued a statement endorsing the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine and boldly declaring, “These countries will become members of NATO.” Moscow was not amused.  Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said, “Georgia’s and Ukraine’s membership in the alliance is a huge strategic mistake which would have most serious consequences for pan-European security.” Putin maintained that admitting those two countries to NATO would represent a “direct threat” to Russia. Ignoring the obvious march towards  another world war NATO expansion continued marching forward, with Albania and Croatia becoming members in 2009.

     Under the guise of the EU,  the western alliance continued to undermine Russia in it's own backyard. In May 2008, it unveiled its Eastern Partnership initiative, a program to foster prosperity in such countries as Ukraine and integrate them into the EU economy. Not surprisingly, Russian leaders view the plan as hostile to their country’s interests. The West’s policies of NATO enlargement, EU expansion, and democracy promotion has added fuel to a fire waiting to ignite.

      All of this provacation, led by the US, has forced Moscow to review its military doctrine, a move that is caused by expansion of NATO in Eastern Europe, problems of missile defense and the crisis situation in neighboring Ukraine.“I have no doubts that the issue of drawing of military infrastructure of NATO member-countries to the borders of our country, including via enlargement, will remain one of the external military threats for the Russian Federation. The USA wants to strengthen its troops in Baltic States. [They] have already decided to transfer its heavy weapons and military equipment, including tanks and armored infantry vehicles, to Estonia. And all this next to Russia’s border.” Mikhail Popov, deputy secretary of the Security Council.

      On September 4th  more than 20,000 activists from around the world descended on Wales to protest against September’s NATO Summit. Police say they have drafted in 9,000 officers to face the protesters in one of the UK’s biggest ever police operations. Protestors rightfully were inscensed at the fact that the United States has stopped being a guarantor of international security and is only forcefully imposing its own interests and values upon other nations, seemingly for profit. Points made were:

• “Many of us are increasingly worried by the threat that NATO poses to world stability and peaceful relations,” said the organizers.

• “Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has reinvented itself supposedly as a tool of the ‘international community’ to safeguard ‘freedom and security’.

• “In reality it is a vehicle for US-led use of force in the interests of the rich and powerful, accelerating militarization, bypassing the United Nations and the system of international law, and escalating spending on arms,” they added.

      Is it any wonder that Russian fighters and bombers are at the edge of our airspace this very day?  The answer is no considering that the West had been moving steadily into Russia’s backyard and threatening its core strategic interests, a point Putin made emphatically and repeatedly. With the end of the Cuban Missle Crisis, President Kennedy made a deal with Moscow, "You stay out of our backyard and we'll stay out of yours." The US has betrayed that deal.

The Left-Wing-Funded "Main Street" Republicans

by

     M. Richard Maxson

      As is evident to those who are aware of their country's shift to the Left, the ruling party is now almost completely in the hands of the Democratic Socialists.. To call them Socialists is a simplification of the term. In reality they express more a Fascist ideology. We will save that for another column but we must also be aware that the Republican party is also infected. These Leftists operating under an umbrella of  D.C. groups masquerading as "Main Street" Republicans.

       They're also united against Tea Party conservatives. Along with their satellite groups "The Main Street Advocacy Fund" and "The Defending Main Street SuperPAC  planning to amass $8 million to bolster Republican liberals and moderates facing Tea Party challengers in 2014.  The Tea Party is not an ideological movement. It is a movement of decent, hard-working Americans from quiet communities who are no longer willing to accept freedom and opportunity disappearing as result of the massive growth of government and a power-satiated political class in Washington. The Tea Party is, along with Libertarians, the only true backers of the Constitution the way our founders meant it to be.

      Another group the "Main Street Partnership," which claims to represent "thoughtful," "pragmatic," "common sense" and "centrist" Republican leadership. In fact: they are a pro-bailout, pro-debt, pro-amnesty, anti-drilling group founded by former liberal New York GOP Congressman Amory Houghton which includes three liberal Senate Republicans (John McCain, Mark Kirk and Susan Collins) and 52 left leaning House Republicans. These "Main Street" Republicans in days past, have gloated over their successful campaign to force GOP leaders in D.C. to cave in to the Left.

      The  Main Street Individual Fund is yet another spinoff group that received $50,000 from progressive billionaire George Soros in 2002 soon after it was created. Soros also tried to help sway the Republicans to the left by offering a seven-figure contribution, but it was turned down. As of this writing Mr. Soros is concentrating his efforts on manipulating our next election.

      Is there any hope for Constitutional Americans to take back their country? With every passing day we allow this Corporate Socialism infection to flourish, is one less day for true Patriots of the Republic to be able to act. The old US is slipping away as honor and truth continue to go down the path of obsolescence and bribery and greed surpass morality.

The Many Sides of Racism in America

by

       Zeno Potas

       A little bit of background for this article. I am not a racial supremest. I believe that all men are born equal and what happens to them from that point on shapes who they become. If I don't like you it is because of who you are, not what you were born as. I grew up in Detroit. I worked in the "inner city" as the ghetto is called. I've been discriminated because of the color of the skin that I was born into. I've been told right to my face, "You are not going anywhere in this company because the era of the "white man" is over." Yes, discrimination is everywhere but this is the type of discrimination that the media ignores because it doesn't fit the Liberal agenda of Progressivism.

      That agenda is a one-sided, color is the most important thing, agenda. In the 21st century if you are not dark skinned, you should be ashamed. You are a vanilla nothing. Suburban youth today embrace this vision of their future whole heartily. The music, the fashions, the language, is all from the ghetto. Poverty, ignorance, and violence of all kinds is glorified. Hard work, decency, and relying on our ancestors knowledge and wisdom is maligned. It doesn't matter who or what you are. These Socialist-leaning, guilt-ridden children of privilege in their desire for diversity dress the same, eat the same, and read the same and if the truisms of the world do not suit their demands, they conjure convenient new facts that may fly in the face of reality, but anyone who points that out is labeled a bigot or a racist. Let's look at some facts.

      On one side we have what has been called one of the most disgusting displays of recent liberal bigotry recently when U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., called Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas an “Uncle Tom” on a radio show. His liberal Democrat reasoning is that people are their skin color first, and that should dictate their thoughts and behavior. To stray from that is somehow a betrayal. It’s the basest form of racism, even if the victim and the perpetrator share the same color. The problem is that Clarence Thomas  isn’t a man, he’s a black man. He isn’t an American, he’s an African American. It’s the prefix, not the person, that matters. He takes his oath to the Constitution too seriously and should ignore it to “favor” people who share his skin color. That, at its core, is racism and anti-American.

      Is ignoring or deliberately not reporting all the facts to the citizenry, racism? News stories about white on black crime litter the airwaves with Hollywood sensationalism but to find reports about black on white crime are buried in the pile of daily events. The rule of the day is that white on black crime is always racism but black on white crime - well, they got what they deserved. It is payback for them and their ancestors for being born white. So, with the circus-like events in Missouri in mind, let's look at some more facts.

      In 2010, 62,593 blacks were the victims of white violence. During that same year, 320,082 whites were the victims of black violence. Since the black and white populations are not the same size what you discover is that black perpetrators violently assault white victims TWENTY-FIVE times more frequently. When it comes to a specific kind of violent crime -- aggravated assault -- the number of black on white crimes is TWO HUNDRED TIMES HIGHER than white on black crimes. 

      Again in 2010 -- the National Crime Victimization Survey reported approximately 13,000 black-on-white rapes and 39,000 black-on-white robberies – both violent crimes. The statistics show that the number of white on black rapes and violent robberies were so small that they had to be rounded to the nearest whole number, and that whole number was ZERO !

      More of what is buried in the pile are the facts that:

•   46.2 million people, or 15% of the population, living in poverty. 
•   19 million whites living in poverty, two times rate black Americans.
•  76% of whites have experienced some form of economic inequality (joblessness, welfare, poverty).
•  Number of white single mother households living in poverty with children surpassed blacks in past decade.

        It's not all just about the black population in this country. The notion that blacks are always the victims has been nurtured by the Democratic party for decades. They will continue to exude racism publicly, and proudly, in the hope that it scares the hell out of voters, particularly minority voters, and keeps them from realizing their lives depend more on who they are and what they do than on any politician or party. Democrats will continue to convince people that even though their lives haven’t improved after decades of loyally voting for Democrats and their ever-increasing government programs, the alternative is worse. This is  divisive, cynical, cruel, un-American and racist. It’s also the path to, the reason for, and the basis of, the Democrats’ power. As long as it works, that misrepresentation of victimization, this  half-truth, a half-lie, will continue in our press, and in our television shows, and our films, for the whole world to see - forever.