Originally appeared at DiePress.com. Translated by Xenia Zinoviev, Julia Rakhmetova and Rhod Mackenzie
The following are extracts from an interview given to the Austrian newspaper DiePress.com by the former US Secretary of State. We have included a withering response by famous Russian writer and left wing activist Eduard Limonov to one of Albright’s responses that seeks to belittle Russia
Even Russia felt betrayed by what happened in Libya.
I’ve had quite enough of people coming up with excuses for Russia. Russia is always provoking and feeling offended afterwards. The country has gone through a crisis of identity. I will never forget how back in the 90s I encountered a man near Moscow who said to me: “I am so very ashamed. We’ve been a superpower but now we’re like Bangladesh with missiles”. Putin has made good use of the situation, claiming he’d “build Russia up once again to bring it back to further glory”.
In its endorsement of Hillary, the New York Times editorial board did such a sloppy job I can’t help but think it may have done permanent damage to its brand. Upon reading it, my initial conclusion was that the editorial board was either suffering from Stockholm syndrome or merely concerned about losing advertising revenues should they endorse Sanders. Then I thought some more and I realized my initial conclusions were wrong. Something else is going on here, something far more subtle, subconscious and illuminating. The New York Times is defending the establishment candidate simply because the New York Times is the establishment.
– General Petraeus and “the spy who loved him” (Jon Rappoport’s Blog, Nov 12, 2012):
by Jon Rappoport
It’s absurd to think the FBI just found out about CIA Director Petraeus’ affair with Paula Broadwell, his biographer. The timing is too convenient.The FBI knew about the affair some time ago and, under strict orders, kept their mouths shut until just after Election Day. If they hadn’t, the scandal would have blown up during Obama’s campaign run.
During the period the FBI knew about Petraeus’ affair, they also knew he was completely vulnerable to blackmail. In FBI and CIA circles, to have done nothing about it is considered treasonous. Putting a gag on these FBI people had to been done by the White House.
And such an attack can be much more easily staged than a real terrorist attack.
Listen also to the buzzwords.
NATO is considering the use of military force against enemies who launch cyber attacks on its member states.
The move follows a series of Russian-linked hacking against NATO members and warnings from intelligence services of the growing threat from China.
A team of NATO experts led by Madeleine Albright, the former US secretary of state, has warned that the next attack on a NATO country “may well come down a fibre-optic cable”.
A report by Albright’s group said that a cyber attack on the critical infrastructure of a NATO country could equate to an armed attack, justifying retaliation.
“A large-scale attack on NATO’s command and control systems or energy grids could possibly lead to collective defence measures under article 5,” the experts said.
Article 5 is the cornerstone of the 1949 NATO charter, laying down that “an armed attack” against one or more NATO countries “shall be considered an attack against them all”.
It was the clause in the charter that was invoked following the September 11 attacks to justify the removal of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
NATO is now considering how severe the attack would have to be to justify retaliation, what military force could be used and what targets would be attacked.