Thursday
28Aug2008
The Truth About Russia In Georgia?
Thursday, August 28, 2008 at 06:00PM SO, was it the Russians or the Georgians who kicked off first recently? I read as many articles and saw as many news bulletins as I needed, and I was none the wiser. Georgian President Saakashvili seemed to have acted with some haste, although even if true, why he would have done so remained remained a mystery. Well, it may be that it woz the Russians wot started it all along.
“Okay,” I said. He had given this explanation to reporters before, and he knew exactly what I was thinking.
“Saakashvili is accused of starting this war on the 7th,” he said.
“Right,” I said. “But that sounds like complete bs to me if what you say is true.”
Thomas Goltz nodded.
Make a yourself a cuppa for what seems to be the most accurate timeline yet of events. Michael Totten has popped up in Georgia and he's pointing the finger at the Russians.
h/t samizdata
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (63)
Well, when
"Virtually everyone believes Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili foolishly provoked a Russian invasion on August 7, 2008,"
is his very first sentence, it isn't hard to guess his bias and how accurate his reading of politics is.
Noel Cunningham -
Yours neither, since you couldn't have read that article in the time between me posting the link and your response.
I'd suggest that Totten's first sentence is accurate, by the way, and I read that he's something of a liberal. At the very least, he's a disinterested outsider.
That account appears credible. The other version relies on the Georgians being utterly stupid. Not impossible but unlikely.
Great article Pete, I read it the other day. Michael Totten's reporting on the wars in the Middle East has been unbiased and very accurate in the past, I expect this is an equally fair assessment of the happenings in Georgia.
He is slightly liberal, not anywhere close to a rightwinger.
>>I expect this is an equally fair assessment of the happenings in Georgia.<<
Oh, come off it! Just look at the "Are you on the American side?" article in his link, from the equally unbiased Wall St Journal:
Nothing but long accounts and quotes from refugees apparently driven out by the Russians, oh and one by the US ambassador just to balance things a bit.
Accounts of marauding and looting Russians, and sure aren't the Georgians just like the Americans?
Not one mention that: 1) Before the Russians moved, Georgia had subjected many towns and cities - residential areas - to constant artillery bombardment. The Georgians were also foolhardy enough to kill many Russian soldiers in these attacks.
2) The fresh Russian troops were welcome in the two enclaves, not least because of this onslaught.
3) The enclaves in question were once autonomous and want to leave Georgia.
Noel Cunningham -
Oh, come off it! Just look at the "Are you on the American side?" article in his link ...
Ehem. That reads, "Are You Going to the American Side?", it's the headline and it's what a Georgian claims Russian troops asked him.
You're still only an inch down the page.
I have read some reports which opine that it was Russia that "engineered" the Georgian military action for the very purpose of legitimising their "counter-attack". Of course I cannot possibly know if this is true, all I can say is that it "rings true". The Russians are renowned masters of strategy, second to none, so if anyone could engineer events in such a way, Russia could. And it wouldn't be the first time that they deliberately timed their incursion in order to maximise its burial beneath other, internationally important news stories, that's for sure.
Other than that, I plead total ignorance as to the whole Georgian issue and which side is in the right. I just don't know enough about it. All I know is, only a fool underestimates the intricate, detailed planning behind Russian military strategy. No-one can touch them on that.
"it wouldn't be the first time that they deliberately timed their incursion in order to maximise its burial beneath other, internationally important news stories, that's for sure."
That's probably the reason why Russia always launches its invasions in Olympic & US Election years; Georgia 2008, Afghanistan 1980, Czechoslovakia 1968 and Hungary 1956.
Those examples hadn't occurred to me, actually (I was thinking more specifically of the attempt to crush Lithuania's uprising, 13 Jan 1991. Coming almost on the eve of the first Gulf War, it passed almost unnoticed, as the media was far more concerned with events in Kuwait).
Interesting stuff, but why would you say it 'seems to be the most accurate'?
After a lot of padding, the actual timeline comes from this guy:
Patrick Worms was recently hired by the Georgian government as a media advisor
...and one thing I do know, some of the stuff that the Georgians were feeding to the media turned out to be pure BS (claims from the president contradicted by independent eyewitnesses shortly afterwards).
So because Worms isn't actually all that credible, then there is this guy:
Goltz has been writing about the Caucasus region for almost 20 years, and he isn't on Georgian government payroll.
...who is there to play the role of 'doubting Thomas', but who has no additional information to offer, no way to confirm or deny Worms timeline, and if you read the article you will see that he doesn't actually do either.
So it (the timeline) is just (yet another) account from a source that can't really be trusted much.
Frank O'Dwyer -
Not really. By the way, greetings Comrade.
It seems that Golts would have corrected Worms if needed, and did on one occasion. According to Totten, Goltz, ... earns his living from the University of Montana and from the sales of his books Azerbaijan Diary, Georgia Diary and Chechnya Diary. Goltz experienced these three Caucasus republics at their absolute worst, and he knows the players and the events better than just about anyone. Every journalist in Tbilisi seeks him out as the old hand who knows more than the rest of us put together, and he wanted to hear Patrick Worms' spiel to reporters in part to ensure its accuracy.
Sounds about as kosher as anyone else reporting from Georgia, and someone keen to know what lies behind, unlike the MSM, which seems strangely keen to say much and report little.
This account is the first I've read which addresses a fundamental question, one which seems to have eluded the entire MSM. Namely, just what were three Russian mechanised divisions doing there, rolling through the Roti Tunnel within hours of the artillery kicking off?
Of course the Russians knew what was up, of course they knew there would be something to quell in South Ossetia. It takes weeks to mobilise such a force, but the Russians had it all there, in line, ready to go.
There is an alternative possibility.
http://www.henrymakow.com/im_not_praying_at_putin_altar.html
GA -
To equate the New World Order with Zionism is incorrect. Zionism is just one pincer in the NWO. The other is Opposition-to-Zionism, represented by Russia's Putin and Iran's Ahmadinejad. The Rothschilds control them both through MI-6.
It's certainly alternative.
"greetings Comrade."
Zzzz.
"It seems that Golts would have corrected Worms if needed"
Because Goltz knows everything? Is he omnipresent?
Why not just ask Goltz what happened then? What is this Worms character needed for?
Here's why:
Goltz experienced these three Caucasus republics at their absolute worst, and he knows the players and the events better than just about anyone.
...but unless he was flying cameras around the region he still doesn't know what happened on the days in August any more than you or I.
1) Before the Russians moved, Georgia had subjected many towns and cities - residential areas - to constant artillery bombardment. The Georgians were also foolhardy enough to kill many Russian soldiers in these attacks.
Constant being in this case barely even 48 hours. And as usual, because the Ossetians who had been launching artillery and rocket attacks under the noses of Russia's 'peacekeepers' for months don't wear uniforms, they don't count do they?
2) The fresh Russian troops were welcome in the two enclaves, not least because of this onslaught.
And now we get down to the most poisonous part of the Left's desperate scramble to support their newly revived poster child. Yes folks, ethnic nationalism is just *dandy* all of a sudden. All those years of condemning the 'Occupations' of 'Palestine' and Northern Ireland, all that endless wittering about the benefits of mass immigration, the rhetoric about the horror and evil of the BNP wanting their own ethnicity to be on top of the pile and yet, who knew? Inside every leftie it seems there is a raging nationalist waiting to get out and mix it with those who'd deny people their chance to have their own cosy, ethnically homogenous homelands.
3) The enclaves in question were once autonomous and want to leave Georgia.
Ah yes, this is another favourite, the famous 'autonomous Soviet enclaves'. That load of bullshit is up there with Iran and Zimbabwe's 'free and fair elections'.
Unreconstructed Cold-War era pro-Russian propaganda, alive and well.
GA,
Pardon me for asking, but do you really read that stuff - in all seriousness, or just for amusement?
I cannot believe that anyone could view that stuff as anything other than fiction.
I mean no disrespect to you, but you cannot surely be serious in presenting that as any sort of alternative scenario.
Methinks you give our 'Leaders and diplomats', of either side, too much credit for having the brains to even think along those lines, let alone to put such plans into action.
Brilliant tacticians the Russians may be - when playing chess, but their military successes(?) have usually been by 'weight of numbers' rather than due to any superior strategy.
Good plot for James Bond film tho'....
Bring back the Soviet Union , things were so much simpler then - If only because I can't get my head around all these endless breakaway republics and 'stans'. Talk about those Russian dolls, where everytime you think you've found the smallest one, you find an even tinier one popping out.
Colm -
Hope you had a good one in Rome. If your taste is anything like mine, your eyes will still be on stalks.
The 'Stans' reminds me of when The RoI was drawn in the same World Cup qualifying group as Moldova in the early Nineties. Jack Charlton was asked by a journalist what he knew about them.
"What do I know about them?" he replied, "I've never even heard of'em."
Pete
Rome was great, everything I expected it to be and more. Alas there were very few locals - all gone away for August , so there were few stylish signoritas to oggle along with the old ruins . Only other gormless looking tourists like me wandering the streets . But I loved Rome, a better city than Paris in my opinion.
Yes it is Pete, I agree. It would be impossible to explain all the connections here but having reviewed some of the theories surrounding the idea of an agenda for a New World Order I'm more than a little intrigued. There's an awful lot of smoke and some fire can be seen but it's very difficult to see the source with any degree of accuracy.
Here are a few random clues or puzzles.
Albert Pike, head of the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, became the Grand Commander of North American Freemasonry from 1859-1891. Pike also worked closely with Giusseppe Mazzini of Italy (1805-1872) who was a 33rd degree Mason, who became head of the Illuminati in 1834, and who founded the Mafia in 1860. [Pike} described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871... plans for three world wars that were seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order. "The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other".
One more piece of the puzzle is that Israel appears to be more of a Masonic state than a Jewish state. The six pointed Star of David was never a Jewish symbol but it is used by the House of Rothschild.
http://www.samliquidation.com/section_2.htm
The Israeli Supreme Court is replete with Masonic imagery.
http://gnosticliberationfront.com/rothschild__the_israeli_supreme.htm
Here's some more information that leads towards, at the very least, a strong Masonic influence in Israel.
http://www.cephas-library.com/israel/israel_the_rebuilding_of_solomons_temple.html
With regards to MI6, why does their logo include the all seeing eye of Horus at the top of a symbolic pyramid?
http://www.bilderberg.org/sis.htm
The claim is that what we are witnessing is the first early skirmishes of World War 3 that will involve Russia, Iran and possibly China (they came out in support of Russia the other day) on one side and Israel, America and Britain on the other. Various other countries will be drawn in and the end result will be far from pretty. What's absolutely certain is that if it does happen what follows will be more centralisation of power 'to prevent it happening again'.
Welcome to the New World Order
Welcome to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
Who anyone thinks started it will depend where their sympathies lie. As regards who started it any chance any one could point a finger at NATO and its encirclement of Russia?
Ernest, it's quite simple really. Our 'leaders and diplomats' are merely front men. Try looking at the Royal Institute for International Affairs; the Council on Foreign Relations; the Trilateral Commission; the Club of Rome and the Bilderbergers for our real Government.
How much of this 'stuff' have you reviewed?
I used to think exactly like you until I started looking into this stuff more seriously. Reactions such as yours is exactly what the elites rely on. Ask yourself this; how does the banking system work and who owns and controls it?
Believe me, seeing events through the lens of an agenda of a move towards a One World Government makes more sense than the charade we are being told is being played out in Georgia.
Mahons, I'll ask you the same question. How much of the evidence that abounds that we are being governed by an elite dedicated to bringing about a New World Order (Novus Ordo Seclorum; they're not even hiding it from you, it's on your dollar bill) have you reviewed?
I have read some reports which opine that it was Russia that "engineered" the Georgian military action for the very purpose of legitimising their "counter-attack". Of course I cannot possibly know if this is true, all I can say is that it "rings true".
You mean false flag? I thought that was the stuff of conspiracy theorists, like me? Personally, I keep an open mind for thr possibility, but Id also keep an open mind for the possibility of a "wag the dog" event, that got a little out of hand. Id also wouldnt rule out WW3 either. With NATO running the gauntlet in the Black Sea it could all kick off very quickly.
Though I am currently on Valium for my back.
PS GA, you should read up on the Italian P2 masonic of Italy. I also heard on the world service about a new book called SuperClass, which has researched the likes of the Bilderbergs. Its on my list.
GA, no disrespect intended, but those points don't hold water. I've spent a considerable amount of time looking at the Bilderburg/Masonic connection to the 'world order' theories and they just keep sliding away. Occams Razor applies here. There is no conspiracy.
Daphne: He'll just presume you are part of the conspiracy.
Anyone whose got a couple of hours spare might want to watch this (formerly banned) british film. It made a profound impression on me as a kid, when our english teacher showed it to us, when it was still banned.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2023790698427111488&hl=en
If it was your teacher that told you 'Threads' was banned then he was spinning you a line DT. It aired here on release, was on PBS in the US shortly afterwards, went to video two years later etc etc. Its never been banned except in the minds of pro-CND fantasists.
GA,
Zionists in 1871? Really? You crack me up. Long live the Vast Right-Wing Jewish NWO ZOG Zionist Masonic Conspiracy baby!
I've read a lot of Michael Totten's work. He has a way of getting into places a lot of reporters won't go. He did some really interesting reporting from Lebanon.
Let's face it; there were no independent reports from the area at the time of the invasion, because no one was paying any attention. But the version Totten tells fits the available facts.
If Georgia was seeking a conflict, they'd have to be pretty stupid to have their best troops in Iraq, and to fail to have their armor ready to block the tunnels through the mountains. The Georgians couldn't hope to prevail long term against the Russians.
And in the time since, we've seen the Russians claim to be observing ceasefires, and claim to be withdrawing, when in fact their forces were moving deeper into Georgia.
The story Totten relates makes sense of the facts we know.
Daphne, don't worry, it's impossible to embrace what are referred to as 'conspiracy theories' and not expect some flak. I'd be extremely interested as to what areas you researched. By their very nature these things are difficult to see clearly but the more I look into it the more that it's glaringly obvious that *something* is going on. Exactly what is harder to pin down but a general picture becomes fairly clear.
One thing's for absolute certain which is that '9/11' was an inside job. If you don't believe that then you're what can only be described as a coincidence theorist. It was just a coincidence that Norad failed to intercept any of the four planes on that day, despite a 100% record in every other incident that year; it was just a coincidence that none of the 'black boxes' that hit the two towers were ever found; it was just a coincidence that none of the considerable number of security cameras around the Pentagon were working when the plane crashed into it. Of course you can believe that jet fuel melted steel girders; or that both towers fell in a 'pancake effect' without any resistance so that it happened at more or less free fall speed. I could go on, the anomalies and inconsistencies are numerous. Once you realise that at the top of the American government are people capable of involvement, to whatever degree, with 9/11, it becomes clear they are capable of anything.
DSD, believe me it soon becomes quite obvious that these people plan many years in advance. Scoff all you like, I really don't care. Forget all this left wing, right wing stuff. Both sides of the 'debate' are controlled and manipulated. Facism and Communism are both totalitarian in nature. Theirs no real difference. Similarly internationalist Marxism and global capitalism pretend to be in opposition when both will lead to the same thing; a world dominated by large corporations with a fascist elite governing the rest of us. If you want to see our future then take a look at China. That's the model they're working towards.
Mahons, I see you didn't answer my question. I'm still waiting.
Ernest, I ask again. How does the banking system work and who owns and controls it? Work that out and you'll see the 'credit crunch' is yet more manipulation.
I can see that convincing any or all of you here on ATW is going to be something of a challenge. I've no idea what made me look closely at this stuff, but I'm glad I did.
Guardian Apostate: If the phone ain't ringing, its me.
If it was your teacher that told you 'Threads' was banned then he was spinning you a line DT. It aired here on release, was on PBS in the US shortly afterwards, went to video two years later etc etc. Its never been banned except in the minds of pro-CND fantasists.
Well at the time thats what i was told. And as it was not the most important thing in my life i didnt feel the need to dispute it. Although she may have got Threads mixed up with The War Game that was banned a few decades earlier. Its even more grim than Threads.
Hilarious Mahons. I see you still didn't answer the question.
I can see that convincing any or all of you here on ATW is going to be something of a challenge. I've no idea what made me look closely at this stuff, but I'm glad I did.
Fair play to you. You will have hard time convincing any one here that the West would use false flags to get what they want (Even when its been a proven tactic during the cold war). Even the ones who posit theories that Russia would false flag the Georgia incident.
GA: Isn't my answer obvious? - I don't frequent fringe group conspiracy theory literature or websites, except for entertainment purposes. I leave that to those poor souls unable and unwilling to see the difference bewtween fact and fiction...such as yourself.
They're all on the same side Daytripper. The strange thing is it's so obvious once you get an idea of how it works. The 'credit crunch', food shortages, global warming, 'turmoil' in the Labour party (it's an old trick and it works every time), mass immigration followed by multiculturism and diversity (divide and rule yet again), the list of manipulations is endless. One of the best researchers I've come across is someone called Alan Watt. He's an ex-pat' Scot living in Canada. You can find him at:-
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/
No Mahons, your answer isn't obvious. I'd like to know more about what actual research you've done that makes you so smugly certain that you're able to refer to me as a poor soul. It seems from your answer you'd already decided before you visited any of these 'fringe group conspiracy..websites' that they were fiction. Which ones have you visited and can you point out just a few of the 'fictions' I'm 'unable or unwilling to see'?
Distinguishing between fact or fiction isn't always as easy as it seems and I've looked into this for long enough to know that keeping an open mind is essential. Where do you get your 'facts' from? Which particular newspaper or TV station do you believe?
Humour me for a while. One of the cornerstones of this whole thing is the banking system. Here's a brief overview I'd like your thoughts on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnCjYagqtMo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZiosMwLzSU&feature=related
Guardian Apostle: I draw my conclusion from reading your comments over the course of time. Would you care for my thoughts on the Protocolss of The Elders of Zion as well?
Not particularly Mahons, but I see where you're going with this. The Protocols of the elders of Zion is (almost certainly) a forgery therefore all conspiracy theories are 'fiction'. Brilliant. It's also a skillful attempt to avoiding answering my questions. In particular, which ['conspiracy websites'] have you visited and can you point out just a few of the 'fictions' I'm 'unable or unwilling to see'?
An open question to all. How does the banking system work, who owns it and who controls it?
GA: No it was me telling you to enjoy your hobbies.
Ok, I can see you are avoiding actually backing up any of your claims. It's no real surprise. I'll continue with my hobbies while you 'grown up's' deal with the 'real' world. It would be funny if it wasn't so serious.
Any chance you could tell me how the banking system works, who owns it and who controls it?
Scrooge McDuck of course.
In other words you don't know and can't answer the question.
In other words I see no benefit in debating a lunatic.
Mahons, I'v yet to see any debate only base insults. It's quite simple really; prove I'm a 'lunatic' by answering the question.
GA: you prove it by asking it.
Mahons, why does asking YOU if you know how the banking system works mean I'm a lunatic? I'm not particularly impressed by your 'debating' skills.
From 1837 – 1863 was a period of free banking in America during which only state-chartered banks existed and the values of silver and gold were very stable. In 1863 the Rothschild interests had succeeded in forcing a bill through Congress via their insider Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase. He passed the National Banking Act, once again creating a federally chartered central bank, one with the power to print and issue paper money. At the time President Abraham Lincoln fought against the central bankers and said: “The money power preys upon the nation in time of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me, and causes me to tremble for the safety of our country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the republic is destroyed.” He was shot and killed shortly after on May 22nd, 1864.
Guardian Apostate: I've always been impressed with Abraham Lincoln as a towering figure, and never more so than learning from you that he was shot and killed on May 22, 1864, since he was still able for almost a year thereafter to serve as President and direct Union forces as Commander and Chief (although dead you claim) up until April 14, 1865 when he died a second time after being shot by John Wilkes Booth.