There is an interesting article over at the Huffington Post and the implications between the lines are well worth considering in some depth. The article is here:
Now I want to draw your attention to a few paragraphs in this article that will concern us here:
"The Magnitsky Act is named after Sergei Magnitsky, a lawyer who died in a Moscow jail in 2009 while awaiting trial on tax evasion charges. Relatives and former colleagues say he was jailed by the same officials he had accused of stealing $230 million from the state through fraudulent tax rebates.
"His death underscored the dangers of challenging the Russian state and deepened Western concerns about human rights and the rule of law in Russia.
"Passage of the Magnitsky Act in December added to tension in ties already strained by disagreement over issues ranging from the conflict in Syria to Russia's treatment of Kremlin critics and Western-funded non-governmental organisations since Putin returned to the Kremlin for a six-year term last May.
"Moscow has warned it will respond to a U.S. list by naming Americans barred from Russia under retaliatory legislation signed by Putin, and the spat threatens to cast a shadow over a visit to Russia by Obama's national security adviser Tom Donilon, who is to hold high-level talks in Moscow on Monday."
The background to all of this goes back to the days of the post-Soviet era, when King George Herbert Walker von Bush I gave solemn assurances to Moscow that the U.S. and its NATO satraps in Europe would not seek to expand the alliance into Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Republics such as the Ukraine, Byelorussia, or the Baltic states, a promise that was, as we all know by know, was quickly broken. This all followed the infamous Leo Wanta affair, an affair whose byzantine twists and turns are too labyrinthine to survey here. But the bottom line was the same old geopolitical bottom line: the West wants to encircle, and eventually, roll Russia back to a small European state, and to strip away Siberia. Russia, of course, wants to prevent this. As an adjunct to all of this, we must consider an important facet of Western activity in the former Soviet republics:
This is the use of various covert operations fronts like the National Endowment for Democracy - incidentally, rumored to be heavily funded and backed, if not staffed, by George Soros - to stage the color revolutions that led to "pro-western" governments in Minsk, Kiev, and other former Soviet republic capitals. And in my opinion, I strongly suspect there are even deeper ties, and deeper players - Can you say Reinhard Gehlen, and Fremde Heere Ost?
Such activity was bound to provoke a response from within the Russian National Security Establishment, and that inevitable response came in the form of one Vladimir Putin, who in this author's opinion may represent that aspect of the KGB that was heavily infiltrating, or infiltrated by, the nationalist Russian Orthodox Church as a result of the 1936 "Sergian Compromise". Make no mistake: Putin is an authoritarian, but he's no Stalinist. His roots lie much deeper within Russian culture and internal politics.
And he's no stranger to covert operations. In my opinion, Putin's threat here is nothing less than to expose the covert operations network and agenda of NATO, all of it, and thus to deal the Western oligarchs - already reeling from blow after blow to their credibility and ethics in the wake of LIBOR, the housing bubble, the gold repatriation calls - a final blow. And Putin can do it, and can back up his "names" with evidence. And the western oligarchs know it.
But there is another implicit threat in Putin's remarks, for by indirectly fingering the covert operations network and its activities in peeling away former Soviet republics - the Ukraine comes foremost to mind, followed closely by Byelorussia - Putin is also indirectly signaling that two can play the covert operations game in "disaffected regions" of a country, which in the USA's case, includes pretty much everywhere, with the exception of New York, Boston, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Franciso, and Seattle, and one can find all sorts of other disaffected elements there as well. And he knows the game well enough to know that the people he's playing against aren't above staging false flag incidents, and blaming it on him...
... But those people are no longer dealing with Radio Moscow and the scratchy Satlinesque fanfares... They're dealing with RT, and a much more sophisticated player. The message of the article says it all: Russia "won't run ahead" of the USA, but it will match any move tit for tat. Putin has made it clear that he can and will give any Rottenchild flunkie polonium poisoning.
That's what has them more than a little worried.
See you on the flip side.