Oleksii Arestovich prominent former advisor to Ukrainian’s Zelensky now in self-exile within the Outlaw US Empire authored the following message on his X account which has 146,000 views.
I have bones to pick with all of them (our 'alt-media') I think. None of them do the job I think they should do. I've learned to settle for what I get from each - you know?
Oleksii Arestovich is right.. ukraine picked the wrong side... they were too stupid to see this either... playing russia off usa is one thing... betting on the usa to be your savior is another and a very bad choice to have made... arestovich gets this very clearly..
"Their task is to increase the value of shares, not to make new equipment."
So he is no fool after all, he does finally see the reality charging towards him. Of course if he can figure it out is there any doubt the Russians didn't long ago?
One of his claims was that Ukrainians (and political audiences in general - it's a human-nature thing), will know a story is completely false, devastatingly expensive in being false, but go along with it anyway. He seems to revel in creating this situation. Or pointing it out to looks smart?
Re Congress, I guess should wait for the actual recess, and then new year. The whole "boo hoo Ukraine out of people and out of money" synchronized media campaign was made for the US congressional audience. They would normally be straightforward to sway, it's just a matter of price. Only now outbid by Israel.
When the dust settles, the every building in Gaza flattened, every child murdered, Tel Aviv will want "to make sure it doesn't happen again" - meaning US handing over half a dozen aircraft carriers, a couple years worth of munitions production, and apologizing for not having prevented the unfortunate incident.
But the down-the-road goal for US hawks is to rearm for the purpose of Taiwan. Best time for the Lockheed Boeing Raytheon to negotiate the cost of that particular sale? During the heat of the election of course, next year. So for now, they're letting the buyer sweat a little. Congress will be going to bat for the vendors.
The collective west is in paralysis dealing with the poisonous neoliberalism that sponsored shock therapy at home and abroad. My guess is that golden parachutes will be deployed and migrations to NZ and Latin America, anywhere far south.
Slightly off topic. Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein explains a lot. Then there was her book "This Changes Everything: Capitalism and The Climate."
So far so good in my eyes. Liberal positions. (Liberal vs conservative are meaningless terms)
Then there is the covid "pandemic" with an bioweapons weapon leashed on the world. The other Naomi, Naomi Wolf. Naomi Klein has followed the other Naomi as their paths merged and diverged
Naomi wolf went off the reservation of liberalism. Here is the New Republic magazine in June 2021
"The Madness of Naomi Wolf: The “Beauty Myth” author has gone from being a feminist icon to an anti-vaxxer banned by Twitter. But she’s always struggled with the truth."
While it has been out there for months, and I don't follow liberal media, on a local in Columbus OH low power socialist FM station I heard an interview of Klein in which she railed against conspiracy theorists and focused on the turncoat Naomi Wolf. Klein's new word for turncoats is the old term which is the title of her latest book "Doppelganger". This gives the "left" the right to slander the unvaccinated, those who believe in the lab origin of Sars covid2, and that the mRNA vaccines have caused and continue to cause widespread sickness and death.
This is the gap I have had to span both for covid and Ukraine.
We can thank the NYT for keeping the "liberal" frame justified! Title of NY Times Magazine article
"When Your ‘Doppelganger’ Becomes a Conspiracy Theorist
If you’re Naomi Klein, you write a book about it.
New York Times August 30, 2023"
So the book event was last summer and I had not noticed chatter about Doppelganger thus in my limited experience, it looks like Naomi Klein didn't birth a meme like she did with Shock Doctrine.
Even the use of a mythological character to hang on me has not worked.
Yep. I took a lot of trouble to get myself an English transcript of this today.
Haven't gone over it again and again yet. I admit. Confess. But my overall first impression is he's simply a whinger and a whiner.
I'm interested in the closing bit he said about the catastrophe of the last 32 years. Which means since the fall of the USSR of course.
I'd like some elucidation of that.
He's mooted as possible Ukraine President. I don't think he's fit for that job. Yankee puppet maybe - whiners generally just want attention and give it to them and they happily wag their tails and do as you wish.
But he seems to sincerely think the whole western world - no.. the whole world - should be running to help 'Ukraine' (by which he means the regime only, certainly not the mass of Ukrainian people prior 2014 which is what 'Ukraine' SHOULD mean - excuse my shouting please, I'm exasperated...).
"Helping Ukraine' when you consider that word to mean a collection of People means helping all of those people regardless of where they are.
Today 'Ukraine' is tacitly simply the Kiev regime. It has no connection with people at all. But this should not be so.
Return to where I left off:
The whole world help a nation with a civil war predicated on ethnic lines?
Don't give me any fancy talk.
Down lower than the stratosphere the whole thing is predicated on ethnicity and that's a simple fact.
Leave the arguing about that to one side:
The point is the "whole world" is not by any imaginative leap supposed to concern itself with that issue. FAR LESS (excuse me again.. but there's no italics, not bold, you know..) far less 'choose a side' !!
Isn't that a fact?
That might not be a primary school fact. Might not be. I rather think it is though. Something we try to teach babies.
But he claims some reason for this doesn't he? He claims all of western democracy (or something - where he might see western democracy I'm not sure at all) is at risk. As though we ( let's assume we really are democracies) cannot look after ourselves. !!
I don't know what he his. Pleasant to listen to even if you don't understand his language. Pleasant enough appearance. You know? Modern western standard? Physical beauty? His face is without character but has symmetric unblemished features. That equals 'beauty' in the west which is so, so, so tremendously lacking in any perception whatever.
He has that.
And reading his transcripts his sentences flow well enough and he quotes interesting facts.
Yep.
All true.
But what I said earlier true, too. And written on his face. He's a sulky whiner with a grudge.
And when analysed it turns out his logicality, perceptions and intellectual directions are flawed at least.
So leave him out as president. But keep him on as what he is right now. Whatever that is. Just don't promote him. Mark him 'not to be promoted'. I've heard that's a thing. They do that in some places? I can see the reason why they might.
Yes, he's certainly a conflicted person who grew up in a conflicted nation at a very difficult time. To provide a full answer would require a short book. When one looks at the amount of wealth Ukraine produced for the USSR, it's easy to see how corruption was possible to grow and consume the government of the SSR prior to 1989. And of course, he was only one of millions affected by those times where manipulation of minds is made much easier. Do recall the extent of CIA/MI6 penetration into Ukraine to understand how and by whom those minds were altered.
Thanks for that. I can't 'recall' because I've never known. I came to take an interest in international politics and Ukraine/Russia in particular only recently and only because of this war. I'm slowly learning more and more of the background. :)
Although somewhat uneven as an historian, Cynthia Chung did a good job writing about the CIA-OUN connection in a three part series of which the second part is linked. Do take note of her sources and spend some time exploring them if you are interested. A few other writers also wrote articles based on the basic info provided, but none "stuck" anywhere important, https://strategic-culture.su/news/2022/04/04/how-ukrainian-nationalist-movement-post-wwii-was-bought-and-paid-for-by-cia/
You're welcome. As I said, Chung's somewhat uneven meaning she's not always 100% objective, so she must be read carefully. FYI, she's married to Matthew Ehret.
thanks again. I didn't know of Matthew Ehret so I chased him up and found 'the cradle' - i hadn't known about that, either... I'm profiting all the way here.... :)
What I am curious about - if he sees the larger context now ( as he says), why he did not see it before. Nothing really changed RE neoliberalism for quite some time. I suppose, this is an unanswerable question.
Sometimes it takes time to remove the blinders from eyes and to finally see and more important admit the truth. That's what I mean when I describe him as "going off" and "confessing"--he's expressing what many of us in the opposition know but our views are suppressed or rather limited, which is why his statement has importance.
He saw it before, predicted accurately Ukraine's being used and abused as a disposable tool with which US would attempt to beat Russia, in a likely long repetitive process (ie he had no expectation that any of the gambits would actually work as US proposed). When offered an upgrade from comedian to politico, he dutifully played along with each twist and turn of the series of frauds that made the TV production team figureheads for the fascist puppet regime.
To this day Arestovich is exempt from much of the BS imposed on other Kiev luminaries - gets to travel abroad, nobody cares if he speaks Ukrainian (his endless interviews are all in Russian), gets to criticize anybody, gets to contradict sacred talking points that would have ordinary Ukies stripped naked and tied to a telephone post...
Arestovich is clearly an oddball when compared to the others around Zelensky even though he's a member of one of the Extremist Parties. As his confession shows, he's clearly conflicted in his beliefs and has experienced a sort of epiphany. He seems to be reformable, but first we'll see if he gets to live long enough.
I just bust my finger writing a long, long post which I suppose most people will have sense enough not to read.
But then I went and read a post by Korybko, you know? His 'newsletter' ? To which you cannot comment unless you pay him.
And I read an interesting phrase which we've all seen again and again:
".... if Ukraine cedes territory to it...."
Talking about 'Russia'.
Listen: that's the hub of the whole thing right there.
I go barmy trying to spell it out.
How the narrative is all wrong.
The POV is all wrong.
The lexicon is all wrong.
Look: the question is about Kiev (which is what they mean when they way 'Ukraine') ceding territory TO UKRAINIANS.
Ceding territory to THE OWNERS OF THAT TERRITORY.
OK?
That's what it is about.
Pick the bones out of that.
I've had bones to pick with Korybko on several occasions and rarely use any of his material as he's untrustworthy, IMO.
I have bones to pick with all of them (our 'alt-media') I think. None of them do the job I think they should do. I've learned to settle for what I get from each - you know?
Oleksii Arestovich is right.. ukraine picked the wrong side... they were too stupid to see this either... playing russia off usa is one thing... betting on the usa to be your savior is another and a very bad choice to have made... arestovich gets this very clearly..
The political class in Ukraine got their skim. That Ukraine is wrecked and Ukrainians are killed in droves does not affect them in the least.
true... people can be easily bought off - all over the world... we all have to do better collectively...
Power is to sociopaths what catnip is to cats.
Except that, unlike power, catnip is basically harmless.
"Their task is to increase the value of shares, not to make new equipment."
So he is no fool after all, he does finally see the reality charging towards him. Of course if he can figure it out is there any doubt the Russians didn't long ago?
Well good for him to announce it.
One of his claims was that Ukrainians (and political audiences in general - it's a human-nature thing), will know a story is completely false, devastatingly expensive in being false, but go along with it anyway. He seems to revel in creating this situation. Or pointing it out to looks smart?
Re Congress, I guess should wait for the actual recess, and then new year. The whole "boo hoo Ukraine out of people and out of money" synchronized media campaign was made for the US congressional audience. They would normally be straightforward to sway, it's just a matter of price. Only now outbid by Israel.
When the dust settles, the every building in Gaza flattened, every child murdered, Tel Aviv will want "to make sure it doesn't happen again" - meaning US handing over half a dozen aircraft carriers, a couple years worth of munitions production, and apologizing for not having prevented the unfortunate incident.
But the down-the-road goal for US hawks is to rearm for the purpose of Taiwan. Best time for the Lockheed Boeing Raytheon to negotiate the cost of that particular sale? During the heat of the election of course, next year. So for now, they're letting the buyer sweat a little. Congress will be going to bat for the vendors.
IMO, the Congressional chemistry a year from now will be rather different, and quite possibly the Executive too. A lot can happen in 11 months.
No truer statement "The fundamental motivation of the market is financial speculation." The whole thing is one big money laundering sham.
The collective west is in paralysis dealing with the poisonous neoliberalism that sponsored shock therapy at home and abroad. My guess is that golden parachutes will be deployed and migrations to NZ and Latin America, anywhere far south.
Slightly off topic. Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein explains a lot. Then there was her book "This Changes Everything: Capitalism and The Climate."
So far so good in my eyes. Liberal positions. (Liberal vs conservative are meaningless terms)
Then there is the covid "pandemic" with an bioweapons weapon leashed on the world. The other Naomi, Naomi Wolf. Naomi Klein has followed the other Naomi as their paths merged and diverged
Naomi wolf went off the reservation of liberalism. Here is the New Republic magazine in June 2021
"The Madness of Naomi Wolf: The “Beauty Myth” author has gone from being a feminist icon to an anti-vaxxer banned by Twitter. But she’s always struggled with the truth."
While it has been out there for months, and I don't follow liberal media, on a local in Columbus OH low power socialist FM station I heard an interview of Klein in which she railed against conspiracy theorists and focused on the turncoat Naomi Wolf. Klein's new word for turncoats is the old term which is the title of her latest book "Doppelganger". This gives the "left" the right to slander the unvaccinated, those who believe in the lab origin of Sars covid2, and that the mRNA vaccines have caused and continue to cause widespread sickness and death.
This is the gap I have had to span both for covid and Ukraine.
We can thank the NYT for keeping the "liberal" frame justified! Title of NY Times Magazine article
"When Your ‘Doppelganger’ Becomes a Conspiracy Theorist
If you’re Naomi Klein, you write a book about it.
New York Times August 30, 2023"
So the book event was last summer and I had not noticed chatter about Doppelganger thus in my limited experience, it looks like Naomi Klein didn't birth a meme like she did with Shock Doctrine.
Even the use of a mythological character to hang on me has not worked.
Stuff happens when a person becomes a celebrity of sorts too young in life before enough wisdom has been acquired.
Yep. I took a lot of trouble to get myself an English transcript of this today.
Haven't gone over it again and again yet. I admit. Confess. But my overall first impression is he's simply a whinger and a whiner.
I'm interested in the closing bit he said about the catastrophe of the last 32 years. Which means since the fall of the USSR of course.
I'd like some elucidation of that.
He's mooted as possible Ukraine President. I don't think he's fit for that job. Yankee puppet maybe - whiners generally just want attention and give it to them and they happily wag their tails and do as you wish.
But he seems to sincerely think the whole western world - no.. the whole world - should be running to help 'Ukraine' (by which he means the regime only, certainly not the mass of Ukrainian people prior 2014 which is what 'Ukraine' SHOULD mean - excuse my shouting please, I'm exasperated...).
"Helping Ukraine' when you consider that word to mean a collection of People means helping all of those people regardless of where they are.
Today 'Ukraine' is tacitly simply the Kiev regime. It has no connection with people at all. But this should not be so.
Return to where I left off:
The whole world help a nation with a civil war predicated on ethnic lines?
Don't give me any fancy talk.
Down lower than the stratosphere the whole thing is predicated on ethnicity and that's a simple fact.
Leave the arguing about that to one side:
The point is the "whole world" is not by any imaginative leap supposed to concern itself with that issue. FAR LESS (excuse me again.. but there's no italics, not bold, you know..) far less 'choose a side' !!
Isn't that a fact?
That might not be a primary school fact. Might not be. I rather think it is though. Something we try to teach babies.
But he claims some reason for this doesn't he? He claims all of western democracy (or something - where he might see western democracy I'm not sure at all) is at risk. As though we ( let's assume we really are democracies) cannot look after ourselves. !!
I don't know what he his. Pleasant to listen to even if you don't understand his language. Pleasant enough appearance. You know? Modern western standard? Physical beauty? His face is without character but has symmetric unblemished features. That equals 'beauty' in the west which is so, so, so tremendously lacking in any perception whatever.
He has that.
And reading his transcripts his sentences flow well enough and he quotes interesting facts.
Yep.
All true.
But what I said earlier true, too. And written on his face. He's a sulky whiner with a grudge.
And when analysed it turns out his logicality, perceptions and intellectual directions are flawed at least.
So leave him out as president. But keep him on as what he is right now. Whatever that is. Just don't promote him. Mark him 'not to be promoted'. I've heard that's a thing. They do that in some places? I can see the reason why they might.
Yes, he's certainly a conflicted person who grew up in a conflicted nation at a very difficult time. To provide a full answer would require a short book. When one looks at the amount of wealth Ukraine produced for the USSR, it's easy to see how corruption was possible to grow and consume the government of the SSR prior to 1989. And of course, he was only one of millions affected by those times where manipulation of minds is made much easier. Do recall the extent of CIA/MI6 penetration into Ukraine to understand how and by whom those minds were altered.
Thanks for that. I can't 'recall' because I've never known. I came to take an interest in international politics and Ukraine/Russia in particular only recently and only because of this war. I'm slowly learning more and more of the background. :)
Although somewhat uneven as an historian, Cynthia Chung did a good job writing about the CIA-OUN connection in a three part series of which the second part is linked. Do take note of her sources and spend some time exploring them if you are interested. A few other writers also wrote articles based on the basic info provided, but none "stuck" anywhere important, https://strategic-culture.su/news/2022/04/04/how-ukrainian-nationalist-movement-post-wwii-was-bought-and-paid-for-by-cia/
Thank you for that. I just read through about 80% of that post. Got to where it starts getting very involved with all the machinations of the OUN.
Good links cited. A good resource. Thanks. :)
You're welcome. As I said, Chung's somewhat uneven meaning she's not always 100% objective, so she must be read carefully. FYI, she's married to Matthew Ehret.
thanks again. I didn't know of Matthew Ehret so I chased him up and found 'the cradle' - i hadn't known about that, either... I'm profiting all the way here.... :)
What I am curious about - if he sees the larger context now ( as he says), why he did not see it before. Nothing really changed RE neoliberalism for quite some time. I suppose, this is an unanswerable question.
Sometimes it takes time to remove the blinders from eyes and to finally see and more important admit the truth. That's what I mean when I describe him as "going off" and "confessing"--he's expressing what many of us in the opposition know but our views are suppressed or rather limited, which is why his statement has importance.
He saw it before, predicted accurately Ukraine's being used and abused as a disposable tool with which US would attempt to beat Russia, in a likely long repetitive process (ie he had no expectation that any of the gambits would actually work as US proposed). When offered an upgrade from comedian to politico, he dutifully played along with each twist and turn of the series of frauds that made the TV production team figureheads for the fascist puppet regime.
To this day Arestovich is exempt from much of the BS imposed on other Kiev luminaries - gets to travel abroad, nobody cares if he speaks Ukrainian (his endless interviews are all in Russian), gets to criticize anybody, gets to contradict sacred talking points that would have ordinary Ukies stripped naked and tied to a telephone post...
Arestovich is clearly an oddball when compared to the others around Zelensky even though he's a member of one of the Extremist Parties. As his confession shows, he's clearly conflicted in his beliefs and has experienced a sort of epiphany. He seems to be reformable, but first we'll see if he gets to live long enough.
Meow, meow, meow…yup, yup, yup. Old lady with a virtual kat, kat❤️🐈⬛