It's the Spelling, Stupid

A report that a "French" woman was stopped from visiting the U.S. - allegedly because her name sounded (vaguely) like al-Qaeda - reminded me of the peculiar quandary of Balkans spelling (or lack thereof).

RT reported that Aida Alic, 33, residing in southern France, was turned back from a flight to New York with her husband and two children, and told she had been "blacklisted". No official explanation was given, so Alic speculated to the regional daily Le Dauphiné Libéré that it must have been her name. All passports list surnames first, so hers identified her as "Alic Aida," which she says, when pronounced, may have sounded like "Al-Qaeda" to the Americans.

Except her name is really Aida Alić. The ć is pronounced as "ch", and it is the most common ending to surnames in what used to be Yugoslavia. If the name was Aida's problem (which may or may not be the case; mysterious are the ways of Homeland Security), it could have been resolved simply by knowing how to spell.

One of the first articles I wrote for Antiwar.com, back in 2000, dealt with the problem of Balkans spelling. Because Serbian - and the languages derived from it - is a phonetic language, there is no such thing as "spelling" in it: every letter always sounds the same. While solving the spelling problem, this feature of the mid-19th century linguistic reform also played merry Hell with etymology, grammar, and dialects. But that's another subject for another time.

There are always variations when transliterating names from languages with non-Latin alphabets, such as Russian, Greek, Chinese, Arabic or Hebrew. But there is no transliteration standard for Serbian (or its derivations), which is properly written in Cyrillic. An additional wrinkle is that many modern Serbs (and almost all derivative languages) use the Modified Latin alphabet invented in the early 1800s to replicate the Cyrillic reform for the benefit of Slavs living in Austria-Hungary.

Allow me to illustrate. The last Serbian royal house was named Карађорђевић, after their progenitor, Карађорђе. In Modified Latin, these names would be Karađorđević and Karađorđe, respectively. Properly transliterated, they might look like Karageorgevich and Karageorge. But the lazy, illiterate butchery of language simply erases the modifier marks, turning it into Karadordevic! Even ""Karadjordjevic" would be better, since it at least offers a nod to proper pronunciation of the ђ/đ (like the j in jam). But it still leaves us with a "c" at the end that is pronounced wrong.

Even though modern technology absolutely allows for multiple input alphabets - as demonstrated above - we still get "Alic" and "Vucic" and "Milosevic" and so on. But the problem goes beyond casual usage of lazy illiterates: documents issued in Modified Latin (passports, etc) do not transcribe the names either - so they simply get entered without what the clerks (wrongly) assume are "accent marks." Because of this combination of ignorance and stupidity, most people from the former Yugoslavia emigrating to the West end up with misspelled and unpronounceable names.

Transliteration after the fact is a cumbersome process, and even then, most people don't know how to actually spell their names in English, French, German, Dutch, etc. Previous generations of immigrants have tried, with varying success: Kucinich from Kucinić was a relatively minor change, while Mihajlo Pejić (Михајло Пејић) got turned into Mitchell Paige. Though he was still a hero either way, so there is that.

The Kiev Gambit

In my newest column on Antiwar.com, I argue that "the Atlantic Empire establishment may be looking for a new Cold War as a way to give the Empire meaning." Having failed at imposing the "end of history", the Empire desires to revert to the comfortable state of perpetual war - "in their minds... the best kind of conflict, in which the national security apparatus expanded exponentially, the military-industrial complex grew fat on government contracts, and the eventual victory of the West was foreordained by the superiority of morals and values."

as seen on Facebook

That won't work, of course, but they are too far gone in the world of their own lies to realize this. Which is why the "government" in Kiev - encouraged by the Empire - has launched a crackdown on the east of the country and ratcheted up the propaganda war. Neither effort is really working; Army convoys are being stopped by civilians in a repeat of the Kosovo Serb tactic, while the propaganda gets debunked almost as soon as it appears. See, for example, the case of the "OSCE observers" that weren't, or the anti-Semitic flyer, or the "photo evidence" even the New York Times felt compelled to retract.

Listening to the speech John Kerry made Thursday evening didn't quite make me gag. It did, however, make me feel very happy he was defeated by George W. Bush in 2004 - that's how dire it was. Moon of Alabama does a thorough debunking of Kerry, which I commend to your attention, and The Saker believes it signals desperation:

His statement is a desperate attempt to do what the lawyers call the "last resort rule".  It goes like this: “If you have the law, hammer the law. If you have the facts, hammer the facts. If you have neither the law nor the facts, hammer the table”.  Kerry was hammering the table really very, very strongly... Had the facts or the law been on his side, there would have been no need for table hammering, of course.

As I mentioned before, it is really useful to keep in mind this rule of propaganda: "The propagandist will not accuse his opponent of just anything, but precisely of the deed that the propagandist himself aims to perpetrate." (Ellul)

The Russians do, apparently. They have stopped taking phone calls from Imperial officials. 

Forbidden History: Yugoslavia in WW2

I rarely do advertising here, but today I'll make an exception.

Over the past year, Kragujevac historian Miloslav Samardžić has worked to make a documentary about the untold history of WW2 in Yugoslavia. The first six episodes of the series, "Kingdom of Yugoslavia in WW2", are now available for purchase here.

Proceeds from the first six episodes will go towards the funding of the following six. You can also buy the book on which the series is based.

I had a small part in this endeavor as well, as a pro bono translator/consultant on the series' English subtitles. So while I have no financial stake in this documentary either way, I would like to see it continue out of both professional curiosity and a desire to dig up as many facts as possible about this crucial period in history.

Truly He is Risen

Resurrection of Christ

"Pascha is not some beautiful legend, not some theoretical theology and not a nod towards a popular custom established in the distant past. It is the essence and kernel of Christianity. It is the victory that God has granted to us.

From the time of the apostles and up to the present the Church has preached Christ’s resurrection as the greatest miracle in the history of humanity. She speaks of this miracle not only as a fact of the Gospels, but – and what is especially important – as a moment of destiny for all those who have received the Paschal good news. This feast bears the most direct relationship to us, for Christ’s resurrection, the Lord’s redemption of the fallen world, is the greatest joy which the human person can experience. No matter how difficult our life, no matter what everyday troubles besiege us, no matter what grief and imperfections we have to endure from the world around us – all of this is nothing in comparison to the spiritual joy, to the hope of eternal salvation that God gives us."

(from the Paschal Proclamation of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill, of Moscow and All Russia)

Christ is Risen!
Христос воскресе!
Χριστός ἀνέστη!

The Great Betrayer

Urged by their masters, the Maydan junta in Kiev has moved to suppress the pro-Russian regions in the east. According to reports coming in from the field, the "overwhelming military force" has fizzed and failed, due to the junta troops defecting or refusing orders to fire on civilians.

It is perhaps too late for the junta to think about this soberly; they are committed, 100% invested in doing the Empire's bidding, else they will be fed to their own "Right Sector" attack dogs. And even if that were not the case, they would still fear the retribution of ordinary Ukrainians whose livelihoods they have ruined with yet another "color revolution."

They are not the first people to think and act so. Many have served the Empire before, only to find themselves deposed and discarded; Wayne Madsen lists just some examples:

The CIA also virtually ran the intelligence services of Zairean dictator Mobutu Sese Seko, Dominican Republic caudillo Rafael Trujillo, Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, and Nicaraguan strongman Anastasio Somoza. However, in what may cause some apprehension among the interim leaders of Kiev, it should be noted that when the CIA grew tired of these dictators, it quickly helped eject them from power. Mobutu died in exile in Morocco after being overthrown by forces aided by the CIA. Trujillo was assassinated in his chauffeured Chevrolet Bel Air by plotters trained by the CIA. Noriega was arrested while seeking asylum in the Vatican embassy in Panama City after a U.S. military invasion; he served prison sentences in Florida and France and is now rotting away in a Panamanian jungle prison; and Somoza was forced to flee Nicaragua after a cut-off in U.S. support; his car was later hit by an anti-tank rocket while he lived in exile in Paraguay.

And just the other day, Justin Raimondo wrote about the Empire's propensity for betrayal, using the example of the failed, false twitter in Cuba (all emphasis mine):

This episode shows that the US government, far from being the champion of liberty in a decidedly un-free world, is actually the main danger to liberty on earth. It systematically betrays those it seeks to "liberate," ruthlessly and cruelly manipulating those who dream of freedom from tyrannical regimes – and then abandoning them at the critical moment, just as they left thousands of ZunZuneo subscribers hanging after luring them in with promises of "free" text messaging.

From Cuba to Crimea, Washington is engaged in a global shell game, luring sincere freedom-loving people into its various front organizations, and using them as pawns in order to pursue its own agenda – one that has little if anything to do with the natural aspirations of oppressed peoples. And they won’t even do it under their own banner – as bloodstained and ragged with abuse as it is. So distrusted and hated are they that they have to sneak around setting up "false flag" operations: they don’t dare do it in their own name.

And that should tell you something.

Pushkov: "PACE betrayed its own principles"

Last Thursday, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) - voted to suspend Russia's voting rights in that body, explaining that:

...the military occupation of Ukrainian territory, threat of military force, recognition of the illegal so-called referendum and annexation of Crimea "constitute, beyond any doubt, a grave violation of international law".

The decision was based on a report by Austrian delegate Stefan Schennach.

Following the vote, Alexei Pushkov, head of the foreign affairs committee of Russia's Duma (lower house of parliament), gave a statement to the press. The video below, as well as the full English transcript of the remarks (delivered in Russian), are provided by fellow blogger The Saker, an outstanding source of information and analysis on the Ukraine situation.

Empire: It's Not Repression When We Do It

When the "Maidan" crowd was besieging and occupying government offices in Kiev, Brussels and Washington were cheering them on, and sending stern words of warning to President Yanukovich not to dare use force to re-establish order. Now that Kiev is controlled by their pet regime, however, they are demanding the use of force to suppress dissent. As Moon of Alabama points out:

[EU foreign policy chief] Ashton then:

"I call upon president Yanukovych, the government together with the leaders of the opposition to find an immediate way out of this deepening crisis, and to continue the work to find a way to solve the political crisis through dialogue."

Ashton now:

"The EU commends the Ukrainian authorities for pursuing their law and order operations in a measured way, in order to establish the authority of the state."

As for Washington, it sent CIA director Brennan to Kiev this past weekend. It must be a remarkable coincidence that Ukrainian "president" Turchinov then announced an "anti-terrorist" operation against demonstrators in the East.

Meanwhile, former head of Ukraine's security service (SBU), Alexander Yakimenko, claimed that his successor is a CIA stooge:

"Nalivaychenko was recruited by the US when he was Ukraine's Consul General in Washington [2001-2003]," said Yakimenko [to Russia's Channel One], for whom an arrest warrant has been issued in Kiev since he left the country last month... "The US is currently creating a sort of controlled chaos that is helping to blow up the bridges between Russia and Ukraine." (RT)

So while Moscow denies it wants Ukraine dismembered or destabilized - if it did, it could have done so at any point by now - Washington is feeding the flames. Samantha Power talks about "Russian propaganda" and accuses Moscow of organizing protests in the East. If this were actually the case, surely the all-listening NSA would have produced the Russian equivalent of the Nuland-Pyatt Call by now. But it hasn't. Which suggests such conversations do not actually exist - ergo, neither does the alleged Russian interference.

Moreover, John McCain (who the Hell put that lunatic in charge of foreign policy?) is doing the media circuit clamoring for U.S. weapon deliveries to the coup regime. So, Washington (and the EU), who justified their invasions of places like Serbia and Libya by claiming it was a crime for governments to oppress their own people, are telling (and helping) their puppet regime in Kiev to do just that.

UPDATE April 15, 2014): MoA offers this quote as further proof of Who/Whom in action:

Obama says the U.S. urges Ukraine's military not to get involved in a conflict that must be resolved politically. He's expressing outrage about images of Ukrainian security forces firing automatic guns on Ukrainian people.
Obama says in a statement that Ukraine should respect the right of protest and that protesters must be peaceful. He's calling for dialogue to reduce tensions and address the people's grievances.

Confused? Don't be - this was a statement made on February 20, calling on the Yanukovich government to appease the (pro-Empire) protesters. Now that it's his stooges have taken over in Kiev, the Emperor is all about crushing the (pro-Russia) protesters with overwhelming force.

Ukraine Update

To someone who has only watched the Western media - with its calculated nurturing of the rabid squirrel attention spans - the situation in Ukraine may make no sense beyond the simplistic narrative of "good Ukrainians" facing off the "invading Evilrussians."

One could just look at all the posts here tagged "Ukraine," but alas, my coverage of the crisis has been rather spotty, since I've had to spare some attention to Serbian issues as well.

To remedy this, I've been meaning to put together a brief summary of events in the past four months, but that turned out to be unnecessary: Russian vlog "Goblin News" has already done so. Watch their video here, with English, German or even Ukrainian subtitles (select from the CC menu). Hat tip to The Saker for finding the video.

The Saker has also posted Vladimir Putin's letter to Russia's gas buyers in Europe, and his analysis thereof. Both are worth reading, as is the Saker's coverage of recent unrest in Donetsk, Lugansk, Kharkov, and other regions in the East.

As for the big picture, I have a new piece up on Antiwar.com today, comparing the present situation with the plot of an undeservedly forgotten 1991 sci-fi novel. For all the differences, there are some eerie similarities - the transformation of the USA into a militarized, paranoid police state, and the use of Ukraine to strike at Russia, to name just two. And the author, Norman Spinrad, has a keen eye for understanding and describing what makes people tick.

About the only advice I can give, based on 15 years or so of observing the media, is this. When you read, watch or listen to the coverage of Russia in the West, keep in mind the following observation by Jacques Ellul, in his 1962 book "Propaganda":

"The propagandist will not accuse his opponent of just anything, but precisely of the deed that the propagandist himself aims to perpetrate."

In other words, an extreme form of psychological projection. Observe many examples of it in Frank Furedi's account of Western activists, published in Spiked. So, the next time you hear about Russia "violating international law," or "invading" someone, or being "imperialist", keep in mind that those accusations speak far more about the person or organization making them, than about their target.

If the Shoe Fits

A few days ago, a reader sent in a comment demanding I "stop using sexist remarks against women." (Being sexist against men is OK, then?)

Apparently, my recent use of "harridan" annoyed her, because it's a derogatory term that only applies to women, so my anonymous correspondent demanded I "cut it out."

Not a chance.

As a very American saying goes, "if the shoe fits, wear it." And does "harridan" ever fit the two women I mentioned in the article! Like a bespoke article of clothing. They are, in fact, belligerent, "bossy" women, carrying on in ways that are entirely inappropriate to anyone in their profession, male or female.

There is this thing I endeavor to adhere to here, called precision of language. So long as people like Ambassador Power and "journalist" Amanpour behave like harridans, I will call them that. I may also use shrew, termagant, harpy, gorgon, battle-ax - or any number of other appropriate expressions available in the English language.

And the Thought Police, both official and self-appointed, can go hump a burrow. 

"Kosovian" Suicide Bomber Behind Baghdad Attack

Serbian national television RTS reported earlier today that the March 25 suicide bombing in Baghdad was the work of Blerim Heta, a "Kosovian" Albanian. This, they say, is the first confirmed instance of any Balkans jihadist taking part in a suicide attack; there have been reports of Bosnian Muslims doing so in Iraq, but none could be corroborated.

Screenshot of the RTS report

Heta is a native of Uroševac (called Ferizaj by Albanians), and his family believed he was fighting in Syria. They confirmed his death, with Blerim's father Remzi denouncing religion and claiming his family followed "European values", while his son was "seduced".

RTS further cites a report on the website of the jihadist outfit ISIL, confirming Heta's death and referring to him as "Abu Habbab al-Kosowi".

Yet the most interesting detail of Heta's biography - that he worked for the U.S. military at Camp Bondsteel, the major military base right outside of Uroševac - is mentioned only in passing. When did he work there? What was he doing? Was he fired and then turned to jihad, or the other way around? Or was he recruited there to go to Syria? Questions about, yet RTS offers no answers. Maybe someone else will.

Residual Lies

One of the more ghastly features of Empire's war on reality is to what extent even those that have come to challenge its more recent lies still accept older ones as fact.

A perfect example is the otherwise enjoyable takedown of Mr. Obama's Brussels speech by Gayane Chichakyan on RT the other day. Responding to the Emperor's assertion that "NATO only intervened after the people of Kosovo were systematically brutalized and killed for years," Chichakyan simply said "Good point" and segued into talking about the civilian victims of NATO's 1999 aggression.

Here's the problem: it's not a "good point." It is just another lie.

NATO soldiers inspect a destroyed Serbian church in Prizren, following the March 2004 pogrom;
the graffiti (in gutter Albanian) reads "Death to Serbs" (photo: SrbijaDanas) 

Empire's War on Reality

I sure am glad I wasn't the only one telling the Emperor he had no clothes. The boy in Hans Christian Andersen's tale was lucky; in this day and age, he might have been hauled away for "diversity training".

Perhaps that is why the mainstream media are still silent on the (to put it mildly) Brussels gaffe. The Washington Post even quoted it without comment (!) while spinning Mr. Obama's speech as being a "generous spin" on the Iraq War. Fox News settled for reprinting the article written by two journalists at Breitbart London.

Just in case someone missed it, here is Mr. Obama's behind-the-looking-glass claim, made in the March 26 speech in Brussels:

"Kosovo only left Serbia after a referendum was organized – not outside the boundaries of international law but in careful cooperation with the United Nations, and with Kosovo’s neighbors."

And just to be clear, none of this ever happened. There was no UN-supervised referendum, no "careful cooperation" with anyone (least of all "Kosovo's neighbors", whoever that might be referring to), and no staying within international law. Why else would it have been necessary to bend it?

One possible explanation, as I noted yesterday, was that the Emperor's speechwriter mixed up the (nonexistent) referendum in Kosovo with the 2006 vote in Montenegro - a dirty affair in which the separatists barely scraped up the 55% majority arbitrarily decided upon by the EU. Bad enough when retired diplomats can't tell Kosovo and Bosnia apart, but the Emperor's own speechwriters mixing up his Balkans clients?

Daniel McAdams of the Ron Paul Institute may sound harsh when he calls this a "war on history," but he might actually be too lenient. This isn't just a war on history, but a war on reality. Remember Karl Rove's tirade to Ron Suskind, about the Empire shaping reality? Apparently this kind of delusional thinking is not just the province of Republicans and neocons. The party currently in power in Washington very much believes in the power of conjuring "reality" with words and images: Hope and change. Keep your doctor. Russia is an aggressor. There was a referendum in Kosovo. And so on.

The two experts interviewed by Breitbart reporters expressed expectations that the White House would issue a retraction, or at least an apology. That has not happened. Nor is it likely to happen, as that would undermine Washington's projected aura of infallibility - the only thing still hiding the fact that the Empire has no clothes.

Do Try This at Home

To Doris Pack, MEP:

It has come to my attention that you have praised the so-called "citizen plenums" in Bosnia, calling them a "good idea" and urging people to "take to the streets and take control of their own destiny."

Noble words. But this is what that looks like in practice:

(AP, via Daily Telegraph)

How about this, Doris: you do that, in your native Schiffweiler, first.

Don't bother letting me know how it turns out. I honestly don't give a damn.

WHY? - a RT Documentary

To mark the 15th anniversary of the NATO attack on Yugoslavia, RT has produced a documentary, asking the question in its title: Why?

NATO and its media apologist will give you a long list of excuses and justifications. But that won't be the actual answer. They did it for power, for kicks, because they could. And they will keep doing it, until they can't.

From the film's description:

Fifteen years after NATO’s 78-day bombardment of Yugoslavia, memories of the bombing still haunt present-day Serbia. NATO killed over 2,000 people, hundreds were civilians, 88 were children. Serbs ask ‘why?’ above all. Why did NATO smash their cities, kill their children, bomb hospitals and schools?
When the NATO bomb campaign began (on March 24th 1999) Jelena Milincic was a student at the University of Belgrade, and just 18 years old.
Jelena takes Anissa Naouai on a road trip, to remember the victims, and hear the survivors of NATO’s strike terror.

Watch "WHY?" on RT.

Directed by Pavel Baydikov
Written by Jelena Milincic, Anissa Naouai & Victoria Vorontsova
See RT for broadcast rights.

From Belgrade to Baghdad

Amidst all the activity concerning the Ukraine, I barely managed to set aside some time to commemorate the anniversaries of NATO's 1999 war of aggression and the 2004 pogrom it produced. And somehow I missed March 19, the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq - one of those invasions "on completely trumped up pretext" that, according to John Kerry, no one does anymore.

Except, you know, the Empire.

Just before the invasion began, I wrote about the complete moral bankruptcy of invoking the Balkans precedent, and all the ghastly, appalling "arguments" proffered by both advocates and "critics" of the invasion.

Here was Richard Holbrooke, for example: "one should never underestimate the persuasive power of power itself." And here was Veton Surroi, a "moderate" ethnic Albanian demanding that Iraqis die to justify the American murder of Serbs four years prior: "Change will only come when the bombs begin to fall."

All the "debate" in the West, then as now, has focused on appearances of Imperial interventions. With a handful of notable exceptions such as Ron Paul, few have ever questioned their validity. Until it is recognized that the Empire had no right to initiate the use of force, whether in Serbia in 1999, or in Iraq 2003, comparisons between the different acts of aggression will be mere exercises in justification.

Considering the number of falsehoods per sentence in yesterday's statement by Mr. Obama, however, I wouldn't wager on that recognition coming any time soon.

A Telling Slip

Here is a still from the minute-long propaganda video by "Fatherland" party of Ukrainian "Prime Minister" Yahtzee, following his trip to Brussels:

Notice anything? Right between Italy and Romania? Instead of the shards of Yugoslavia, there is now just one country: Croatia.

Is this ignorance of geography, as some have suggested, or perhaps outdated maps? I doubt it. Unlike Americans, the rest of the world actually bothers studying geography, and while I can imagine getting some frontiers wrong, erasing half a dozen countries is still a bit much.

Nor is this a pre-1991 map, as Germany is united, while Czechs and Slovaks are separated. Also note that Cyprus (a tiny speck of blue disappearing off the southeastern edge of the picture) is correctly noted as an EU member.

Far be it from me to suggest that this map betrays a delusion of the Empire that some day all of what was once Yugoslavia would be "Croatia" - though I am kind of curious what Slovenians, "Bosnians," "Montenegrians", Macedonians and "Kosovians" think of that. And I can't shake off the feeling the Serbs are being systematically bullied and brainwashed to that very end.

Drawing Them a Picture

Yesterday, "Kosovian" politician Vlora Citaku tweeted an image celebrating the NATO aggression 15 years ago. It was quickly re-tweeted by the proud NATO press office:

screen capture from Twitter

I'm curious to see if Nike will react to this infringement of their trademark by mobsters, drug-runners, butchers, slavers and aggressors. Not betting on it.

However, it wasn't long before someone created a response graphic:

via Facebook (by M.V.)

And then someone else created another:

(via Facebook)

For those who don't remember, the top right panel is a photo of what remained of the F-117 stealth bomber, shot down over Serbia on March 27, 1999.

UPDATE (3/27/2014) And here is another design, also referring to the shoot-down:

(via Facebook(

Yet this one, posted by Young Americans for Liberty, is my personal favorite:

(via Facebook, Young Americans for Liberty)

Something to remember, every time you hear the phrase "the entire world" or "international community" coming from the mouths of State Department deputy assistant undersecretaries, or EU commissars.

The Real Day Everything Changed

The phrase "the day everything changed" is used in America to describe that Tuesday, the eleventh day of September, 2001, when hijacked airplanes destroyed the twin towers of the World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon.

Belgrade, March 1999

Yet a sober look back at the past dozen years reveals a continuity, not change - at least in the government's behavior. Meanwhile, a certain spirit has gone out of Americans, and they now tolerate the omnipotent surveillance state and accept the regular trampling of what remains of their liberty in exchange for empty promises of temporary safety.

The government of George W. Bush was quick to launch a punishment expedition against Afghanistan, which morphed into "nation-building" and eventually failed. NATO forces have now been in Afghanistan longer than the Soviets, and with much the same result. In 2003, Bush invaded Iraq - a country entirely unrelated to the events of 9/11, but of personal interest to him and his advisors - on a manufactured pretext. Though U.S. troops have officially withdrawn by December 2011, some 25,000 "embassy staff" and "military contractors" have remained.

Osama Bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of the attacks, was supposedly tracked down to Pakistan and killed in 2011 - though there have been claims he died way back in 2001 of kidney failure, and everything since had been chasing a phantom menace.

But there was definitely no War on Terror when it came to Islamic militants in the Balkans, for example - quite to the contrary, US lawmakers called out to "jihadists of all color and hue" to take note of Washington promoting jihadism in Europe. And in the very year Bin Laden was supposedly killed, Washington backed jihadists in Libya - and later in Syria.

That is not to say there hasn't been an actual turning point in modern history, however. You just have to go back a bit more to find it. I would argue it is 3/24/1999, when the Atlantic Empire - believing itself at the pinnacle of power, exceptional, and exempt from the rules it sought to impose on others by force - launched an evil little war against a country called Yugoslavia.

Those who waged that war openly described it in terms that perfectly fit the definition of terrorism. Look at the photos from Yugoslavia 1999 and New York 2001 side by side, and contemplate the eerie similarities.

The war was a clear-cut act of aggression, violating both NATO's charter and the U.S. Constitution and lacking any UN authorization. It was illegal, illegitimate, and unjust. Ostensibly fought for "humanitarian" reasons, in practice it backed a terrorist Albanian insurgency aimed at carving out a province from Serbia (one of the two states federated within then-Yugoslavia).

Empire's "diplomats" and perfumed generals believed the Serbs would surrender within a week. It took a Trojan truce, eleven weeks later, for NATO to actually occupy the province of Kosovo (and not all of Serbia, as initially demanded). Undeterred by reality, NATO leaders believed their own lies, ensuring they would make the same - and worse - mistakes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya...

Most importantly, perhaps, the bombing of Yugoslavia had one effect no one in the West had anticipated. Up to that point, Russians were still enraptured with the West, despite nearly a decade of financial and political rape. But the first bomb that hit Belgrade was a wake-up call.

Fifteen years later, the leadership in Moscow has demonstrated they had neither forgotten, nor forgiven. And something tells me that the West hasn't yet begun to pay the real price for that golden idol in Pristina, or the train of abuses and atrocities inflicted upon Serbia since. 

About That Gratitude, Again

I have written before on the downright idiotic belief of the Imperial establishment that their white-knighting around the world on behalf of jihadists would result in gratitude. Except, you know, not.

In fact, there is a lengthy list of jihadists attacks perpetrated by those very "secular, modern, democratic, etc." Muslims from the Balkans the Empire has waged several wars to "save" or "liberate" - and it keeps growing.

Two commenters just sent in links to a developing story from southern Turkey. It appears that a Turkish patrol was ambushed on a highway near the Syrian border, and two soldiers and a policeman were killed. The Turks have captured three suspects, described as "two Albanians and a Kosovan [sic]" who were likely fighting the anti-government jihad in Syria. Which, by the way, Turkey has supported.

Here is a Macedonian news agency quoting the AFP quoting Turkey's Interior Minister:

Two Albanians and a Kosovan have been arrested for a suspected 'terror' attack that claimed the lives of two soldiers and a policeman in southern Turkey, Interior Minister Efgan Ala said Friday, AFP reports.

And here is that AFP story, as posted by Lebanon's Daily Star:

Two Albanians and a man from Kosovo have been arrested for a suspected "terror" attack that claimed the lives of two soldiers and a policeman in southern Turkey, Interior Minister Efgan Ala said Friday.

The three men were arrested after Thursday's attack, in which assailants opened fire on security forces carrying out a highway patrol near the town of Ulukisla, close to the Syrian border.

"The suspects captured were two citizens of Albania and the third from Kosovo," the official Anatolia news agency quoted Ala as saying.

Albania's interior ministry, however, denied that any of those arrested were Albanian citizens.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had labelled the shooting a "vile act of terror" and said the three security officers killed were "martyrs".

Deputy Prime Minister Besir Atalay said the attackers had "a link with Syria", without giving further details.

Local media reported they were affiliated with militant Islamist organisations operating in Syria.

Recall that the Empire had arranged for the Syrian "rebels" to "train" with the KLA back in 2012. And there are obviously Albanian (and Bosnian) jihadists fighting for the "rebels", as reports keep coming in about many of them reaching their goal of martyrdom (i.e. getting killed). Meanwhile, Turkey has not only backed the jihad in Syria, but also the Muslims of Bosnia and the "Kosovian" Albanians in their claims on Serb territory.

Perhaps this instance of Albanian jihadists biting the hand that fed them might cause the Turks to reconsider their position, if not on the Syrian jihad then "Kosovistan." But I'm not holding my breath.

Four (Not So) Easy Pieces

Over on my Serbian-language blog, I have a weekly overview of interesting articles that runs every Sunday. I wish I had the time to do something like that here, but it's just not practical. So a quick round-up now and then will have to do.

Here is an interesting view of the Ukraine tug-of-war from China's People's Daily. My best guess is that this sums up Beijing's official position, and that interpreting China's abstention in the UNSC as weakness or disinterest would be a huge mistake.

And here is how an Indian commentator looks on Russia vs. the West. I don't know how mainstream this publication is, but the author is very pointedly dispensing advice to the likely incoming cabinet and arguing that the Atlantic Empire simply can't be trusted.

I first heard the name Anne Williamson via Steve Sailer's blog, three weeks ago, when he quoted at length her 1999 testimony describing the financial Rape of Russia after the Soviet Union'd demise. Imagine my interest, then, when an essay by Williamson appeared on LewRockwell.com this past week, talking about how the Empire has adopted Lenin's "logic." Especially since some of you may remember me making the same argument here, back in 2012.

And then there is the inimitable Fred Reed, whom I simply have to quote:

"I mean, by all the gods and little catfish, what does he think a tiny irrititing [sic] boat like that is going to do—torpedo the Crimea? It doesn’t float, Barack. It’s stuck to the bottom. You can’t sink it."

Meanwhile, the Western press is bleating how the "international community" (what's that, again?) or even "the whole world" is against Russia. Yeah, about that...