Revealed By WikiLeaks: Obama Team Stole Election, Bribed Jesse Jackson And Took Russian Money In 2008

October 31, 2012

obama medvedev SC Revealed By WikiLeaks: Obama Team Stole Election, Bribed Jesse Jackson And Took Russian Money In 2008According to internal Emails circulated among the staff at Stratfor, an Austin Texas based private intelligence gathering firm, John McCain was presented with proof that Democrats in Pennsylvania and Ohio used voter fraud to win those states and committed other disturbing crimes. The communiqués were stolen and made public by WikiLeaks. An Email dated November 7, 2008 under the subject line “ Insight – The Dems & Dirty Tricks ** Internal Use Only – Pls Do Not Forward **,” was sent by Fred Burton, Stratfor’s V.P. of Intelligence. It said in part, The black Dems were caught stuffing the ballot boxes in Philly and Ohio as reported the night of the election and Sen. McCain chose not to fight. The matter is not dead inside the party. It now becomes a matter of sequence now as to how and when to “out”. 
Burton also mentioned a “six-figure” Democrat donation/bribe to Jesse Jackson to buy his silence about Israel. On October 14, 2008 Jackson told fellow attendees in at the World Policy Forum in Evian France a ‘President Obama’ would “remove the clout of Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades.”
Burton continued with an explosive charge he apparently considered quite believable, The hunt is on for the sleezy Russian money into O-mans coffers. A smoking gun has already been found. Will get more on this when the time is right. My source was too giddy to continue. Can you say Clinton and ChiCom funny money? This also becomes a matter of how and when to out.
This allegation makes some sense of Obama’s reassurances to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev caught by an open mic. Obama said “….but it’s important for him [Putin] to give me space.”
Medvedev responded: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you …”

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”
Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir [Putin]…”
Fred Burton is a known quantity in the highest Intelligence circles. He has been Deputy Chief of the Department of State’s counterterrorism division for the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS).
Stratfor has acknowledged that last December its internal communications system was hacked and the group “Anonymous” has taken credit for the sabotage .  WikiLeaks started to publish Stratfor’s stolen Emails last month. Startfor will neither confirm nor deny whether the communiqués attributed to its staff are real or fabrications.


Obama’s Hopes For Nuke Treaty Go Down In Flames

November 16, 2010

WASHINGTON (AP) – In a blow to President Barack Obama, chances faded Tuesday for Senate approval of a major nuclear arms treaty with Russia this year, tripping up one of the administration’s top foreign policy goals.

the irony here is I would be for this treaty if Obama’s foreign policy were working. Russia should of been made an ally back in the 80’s instead of supporting Islam against the Soviets. Another mistake would of been to support Islam against the Serbs who are Russian allies and coreligionists. I have no doubt in the future both our countries will move forward with friendships because we are fighting the same war now, but right now the US state department has no direction besides Saudi cooperation. This is not really about Russia at all and has more to do with America catching up with Russia in some ways…. and sometimes Russia catching up with America. Both our countries need to figure out our objectives before we commit to anything. This is not a slap in the face to Russia. This is a prudent decision to reject this treaty for both Russia and the United State’s interests.

Russia Disappointed With Israel for building homes and schools. Not disappointed about enabling Iranian and Chavistan Nukes

October 16, 2010
Russia has urged Israel to reconsider its plans to build about 240 new housing units in the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Pisgat Z’ev and Ramot, the Russian foreign minister said in a statement on his website.
According to the Russian news agency, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov wrote, “We consider it important that the sides avoid unilateral actions which may affect the fate of settlements.” France, Jordan and the United States have also expressed their disappointment with the Israeli move.

they are disappointed…. really? about building and construction? they weren’t disappointed about building nuclear nuclear facility in Iran. the Russians weren’t disappointed about this either:

Russia's President Dmitry Medvedev (L) greets his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez during their meeting in Moscow, October 15, 2010. REUTERS/Natalia Kolesnikova/Pool

funny the way Russia is disappointed by construction for people who need homes and schools, but not disappointed about giving nuclear bomb capabilities to powers loyal to Iran or Iran itself

Russian Weapons Deal with Iran not Cancelled. Merely postponed.

October 1, 2010
Last week, the Kremlin announced that Russian president Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree banning delivery of its advanced S-300 air defense system to Iran. For years, Iran watchers have followed Russia’s 2007 contract to deliver the system to Iran closely, given the S-300’s potential to upend the regional status quo. The highly capable system can defend sites against attack by a range of platforms, including aircraft and ballistic missiles. Iran’s possession of such a system would represent a significant upgrade of its current air defenses, which currently includes some antiquated Shah-era U.S. systems. Experts have been concerned that a Russian fulfillment of the contract might cause Israel to strike preemptively, given that nuclear facilities protected by the S-300 system would be much more difficult to attack. In addition, S-300 batteries at some sites – Iran’s nuclear reactor at Bushehr basically sits on the shoreline of the Persian Gulf – could be used to threaten U.S. aircrafts operating outside of Iranian airspace. Obama administration officials were quick to crow about the supposed Russian change of heart as a success of its “reset” with Russia. In a breathless post at his blog The Cable, Josh Rogin quotes a senior administration official saying that “The decision was a bold one that acknowledges how important it is to us and how important Medvedev takes this reset with President Obama.”

The problem is, this “bold” decision is not a final decision. Nothing in Medvedev’s announcement cancels the 2007 contract and, as Rogin notes, the ban could be lifted at any time. Days later, Russian deputy foreign minister Ryabkov made clear that Russia’s military cooperation with Iran would continue, saying, “We will not able to develop military-technical cooperation with Iran in these categories [of weapons], but there are other directions.” As Max Boot wrote at Contentions, “In other words, the Russians are up to their old tricks — paying lip service to stopping the Iranian nuclear program while sabotaging efforts to really get tough with Tehran.”
The Bush administration and the Israelis have pressured Moscow for years not to fulfill the S-300 contract, so this is not the first time Russia has pocketed concessions only to come back begging for more. We should be pleased that S-300s will not be on their way to Iran any time soon, but should be wary of the price an administration desperate to claim results from a “reset” in relations with the Kremlin might be willing to pay.


conflict between Iran and Russia

May 27, 2010

The international headlines this morning are on the drama of an apparent public row between the Iranian and Russian leaders. 

The fuse was lit in a speech by President Ahmadinejad in Kerman. As usual, he focused on the international rather than the domestic front, but this time he had a surprise:

Today it has become very difficult to explain [Russian President Dmitry] Medvedev’s behaviour to our people. Iranians do not understand whether they (the Russians) are our neighbour and friend standing by our side or are after other things.

But non-Western media really noticed the bangs when Moscow, through Presidential advisors, fought back. Foreign Policy specialist Sergei Prikhodko stated:

Any unpredictability, any political extremism, lack of transparency or inconsistency in taking decisions that affect and concern the entire world community is unacceptable for us. It would be good if those who are now speaking in the name of the wise people of Iran … would remember this.

Russia has been playing a balancing game between Tehran and “Western” powers for months. Medvedev was one of the rare leaders who dared to appear in public with Ahmadinejad last summer, and the Russians maintained that projects such as the Bushehr nuclear power plant would be completed.

On the other hand, Medvedev — in contrast to his Foreign Ministry — has publicly signalled since last autumn that further sanctions can be considered if Iran did not shift its position over uranium enrichment. The Russians have delayed shipments and confirmation of contracts over missiles, and Bushehr’s opening date repeatedly slips.
Even last week, the Janus-faced policy of Russia continued. The sharp US response, with the introduction of a sanctions resolution to the UN Security Council, to the Iran-Brazil-Turkey declaration on uranium enrichment came after discussions with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Yet Moscow restated that Bushehr would come on-line in August, and the US press reported that Russian suppliers would continue to send missile components to Tehran.
So what happened for Ahmadinejad to disrupt the balance with his public statement? The obvious speculation is that Russia has refused to peel away from the sanctions move in the UN, but the truth is we don’t know. It’s unlikely that the warning from the Iran President is going to worry Moscow — what cards of pain can Tehran play against the Russians? — so Ahmadinejad’s statement appears as pique, anger, or even miscalculation.
For its part, the US has kept quiet, which seems the wise move. And China, the other “balancing” power in the UN Security Council, has also said nothing.

no doubt there is a quarrel, but is it good friends having a difference or is the Russian Bear ready to backstab their friend? Let’s analyze what Russia loses by losing Iran. a friendly neighbor… obviously, but more so they would lose the energy reserves in the Black Sea that Tehran has in the past been aggressive about. Certainly Russia has it’s own energy reserves. Perhaps Russia is feeling the pressure to betray and is weighing it’s options. Foreign Minister of Israel felt that Israel’s best bet during the Obama era was to cozy up to Moscow. My guess is Iran is having a tantrum.


or perhaps this is what the big feud was about:

Most of the projectiles in the Syrian, Hizballah and Hamas arsenals are propelled by liquid fuel and therefore take 50 minutes to 1 hour to load and loose at assigned targets. During this time gap, they are vulnerable to air attack. As a bridging device, western intelligence sources believe the joint command in Damascus plans to attack Israel with synchronized missile fire from Iran and Syria during the time Israeli warplanes are hammering, say, Hizballah batteries in Lebanon.

The thinking in Tehran and Damascus is that the Israeli Air Force will find it hard to tackle three or four fronts simultaneously.

Tehran and Damascus are therefore building air shields around their missile bases and launching sites, for which purpose Assad asked Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to speed up the delivery of the advanced Russian Pantsir anti-aircraft missiles when the latter visited Damascus on May.

Medvedev promised to accede to this request.

debkafile’s military sources recall that the same Russian Pantsir missiles were ineffective in preventing the September 2007 air strike, by which Israel destroyed the North Korean plutonium reactor financed by Tehran at Al-Azur in northern Syria.

The Russian Game

May 20, 2010

Former world chess champion turned opposition  politician Garry Kasparov in RFE/RL's Moscow studios during a previous  interview.The 47-year-old Kasparov, born Garry Weinstein to an Armenian mother and a Jewish father and widely considered the greatest chess player of all time, urged the West to tackle Putin via a list of oligarchs who he said acted as his “wallet” and against whom, he said, there was no shortage of evidence of financial wrongdoing.  via Kasparov made a short-lived bid to challenge for the Russian presidency and was arrested and briefly jailed in recent years after anti-Putin protests.

It’s incredible how much influence a Russian chessmaster has in politics.  I would have to agree that all leaders should be masters of the great strategic language of sixty four squares, but sadly it is never enough if one can not see beyond the cold blooded code of game theory.  Bobby Fisher certainly is no example of balance and reason, but Kasparov the grandmaster who broke with the Socialists feels that Russia is being hurt by it’s own actions and feels that it’s totalitarian but very profitable tendencies will in the end drive it’s Asian connections away because the Asians will begin to see Russia as an aggressive bear.

Kasparov: It is simply not correct to link the level of democracy to prosperity. It is absolutely clear that the economic wealth of Saudi Arabia exceeds the performance of the Czech Republic. But apparently democracy is quite stable in the Czech Republic, which cannot be said about Saudi Arabia. As we delve into the past, we must not forget about the existing model of society. If we look at statistical data, we see that Protestant countries in terms of economic development are more successful than those observing Catholicism. There is coherence, after all, among different societal factors. Most likely, the system of mutual relations that has evolved in Eastern Europe and Asia corresponds to another level of governance. via

Essentially Kasparov clarifies that freedom and profit do not go hand in hand and that Americans must realize that cost benefit analysis will lead to more of the same.

When Kasparov compares Catholicism and Protestant systems he is alluding to free capital.  The Catholic church has been traditionally hostile to interest and banking.  (hence the Catholic’s world dependence on Jews to fill the need to make their society sustainable and at the same time burden Jews with the role.  Same thing as Islamic society and Orthodox Christians such as Russian Orthodoxy.  Religious hostility to profit from banks is what leads to a condemned class of wealthy mercantilism.  It is the root of a black market and it is not exclusive to  Religion.  The same black market exists in other ideologies like socialism.  Hostility to banking causes a despised mercantile class that is rich, because Capitalism is natural and denying nature merely creates a fetish.

Sticking to the current form of governance, which is to say guaranteeing the survival of Putin’s regime, will necessarily lead to the demise of Russia within its present borders.  The Far East and Eastern Siberia are already developing according to a Chinese scenario, the full scope of which will be revealed in the near future. In the next 10 to 15 years, a lot of Russian territories will become at least de facto Chinese. This will change the situation in Russia fundamentally.

Furthermore, the situation in the North Caucasus is rather unstable. Mutual relations and the cooperation between Putin and [Ramzan] Kadyrov, the high price that has been paid to buy the loyalty of the local elite through an enormous tribute of multibillion[-ruble] investments, all this cannot be an arrangement for good. The situation in the region can easily get out of control if the capital inflow is interrupted. It is apparent, even when leaving democratic institutions and values aside for a moment, that Putin’s regime has led the country down a blind alley. Our task is to usher in a shift of paradigms, a new foundation. via

That is a threat that will make the Kremlin take notice, but it contradicts what he says above.  Certainly propping up totalitarianism has worked for Russia as it hide behind a facade of Democracy.  What ever mean spirited chess game Russia has done in the last 20 years has worked for them, but Kasparov obviously sees resource rich Asian states turning on “colonial” Russia out of greed as well. 

…meanwhile Putin sees the chessworld as his key to power.

Former world chess champion Anatoly Karpov has never been much of a rabble-rouser. During the Cold War he was a loyal Soviet subject whose chess anthologies featured pictures of him harvesting wheat with a scythe — for fun. He flirted with elected office in the 1990s, but has confined his public activism in the Vladimir Putin era largely to ecological and children’s causes. He speaks in a gentle, nasal voice. He collects stamps. 

But Karpov, whose battles with Garry Kasparov in the 1980s defined the
game of kings for an era, is now at the epicenter of an escalating political
spreading through the already fractious world of international

With the backing of his former nemesis Kasparov and national federations from the United States and Western Europe, Karpov is bidding to unseat Kirsan Ilyumzhinov as the president of the International Chess Federation, known by its French acronym, FIDE. Ilyumzhinov is also the mercurial president of the southern Russian republic of Kalmykia, which he runs as his own fiefdom. His tumultuous 15-year reign over world chess has seen a precipitous decline in the prestige of the title of World Chess Champion.  More than chess is at stake. Winning re-election could be crucial for Ilyumzhinov, whose fate as the president of Kalmykia is up in the air. Ilyumzhinov has run his quasi-autonomous, mostly Buddhist republic since shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union, but is facing increasing criticism from the local opposition over persistent poverty in the region. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will have to decide whether to nominate him for another term this fall.
“Even if he’s not nominated for a new term, [the FIDE presidency] would allow him to remain a flashy, notable person of status,” says Nikolai Petrov, an expert on regional Russian politics at the Carnegie Moscow Center.  Karpov, meanwhile, is promising to restore some of the international attention chess enjoyed for most of the last century. “The value of the title of world champion has been degraded, and the popularity isn’t there,” Karpov said in an interview last week. “No one knows who the world champion is
anymore.” (That would be Indian grandmaster Viswanathan Anand, for those keeping score at home.) But a funny thing happened on Karpov’s road to the FIDE presidential
election: The Kremlin’s point man for chess snubbed him, declaring instead that
Ilyumzhinov will be Russia’s candidate for the post. The decision puts the
government in the peculiar position of supporting a deeply eccentric, autocratic regional leader — Ilyumzhinov claims to have once been briefly abducted by aliens and counts Muammar al-Qaddafi and Chuck Norris among his friends — over one of Russia’s greatest, and most politically loyal, sporting icons.   Why, exactly, is unclear, but the decision has prompted a revolt in the Russian Chess Federation. When the federation’s supervisory council convened Friday in the ornate main playing hall of Moscow’s Central Chess Club, a majority voted to nominate Karpov. But the meeting was subsequently declared “illegitimate” by Arkady Dvorkovich, the senior Kremlin aide who oversees the federation. Should Dvorkovich’s decision stand, Karpov might end up running as a nominee from a European or North American federation. The geopolitical overtones of all this are a throwback, however faint, to chess’s Cold War glory days, when the game was as inextricable from matters of national pride and identity as the Olympics. In the West, Bobby Fischer’s victory over Boris Spassky in the 1972 World Chess Championship was portrayed as a triumph of American individualism and self-discipline over the collectivism and powerful state sponsorship of the Soviet chess machine. Millions of Americans
followed televised analysis of the intricate on-board maneuvering between the
two grandmasters, inspiring a brief national infatuation with chess. The 1984-1985
Kasparov-Karpov duels were eerily symbolic of the perestroika era, with the young, rebellious Kasparov surviving a grueling series of games to eventually trump Karpov and the fading Soviet hierarchy that supported him.


Evidence that Medvedev isn’t being straight about Nuclear War and Refugees. he’s bringing up Jewish homes

April 13, 2010

Asked if he thinks Israel will refrain from striking Iran, the Russian leader said: “I do have a good relationship with the President and Prime Minister of Israel. But those are independent people. And I would say that on many questions they are defending stubborn positions. Very tough. And the US has seen the proof of that lately… In many instances the Israeli position, including settlements, remained the same even after open and honest talk with America and we have spoken to them also. Why am I bringing it up? Because you can’t imagine any scenario, with the Middle east it would be a gigantic human disaster, and not only for the Middle East. If something would happen in Iran, the people from that region would try to escape. Where would those people go? They would head toward our borders. They would go to Azerbaijan. Iran has many with roots from Azerbaijan.”


So the reason Iran has reason to bomb Israel according to Medvedev is because they don’t like Jewish homes? Did the Medvedev family have a lot of fun during the pogroms?