Under President Obama, the richest 10 percent were the only income group of Americans to see their median incomes rise, according to a survey released this week by the Federal Reserve.

The Fed data covered the years 2010-2013, during which period Mr. Obama constantly campaigned against income inequality and won re-election by painting his Republican rival as a tool of Wall Street plutocrats.

"Data from the 2013 Survey of Consumer Finances confirm that the shares of income and wealth held by affluent families are at modern historically high levels," the report said in noting that the median income fell for every 10-percent grouping except the most affluent 10 percent.

"The 2013 SCF reveals substantial disparities in the evolution of income and net worth since the previous time the survey was conducted, in 2010," the report stated. The SCF is conducted by the Federal reserve triennially and compiles information about family incomes, credit use, net worth and finances.

Russian consumer watchdog Rospotrebnadzor has suspended all confectionery imports from Ukraine after discovering two Ukrainian companies broke consumer protection laws.

"In order to ensure the rights of consumers, starting September 5 Rospotrebnadzor is suspending the import of confectionary goods produced in Ukraine to the Russian Federation," the watchdog said in a statement on Friday.

The restriction came after two Ukrainian confectionary companies AVK and Konti failed to comply with labeling standards.

AVK and Konti form the bulk of confectionary imported by Russia from Ukraine.

At the end on July 2013 Russia halted imports from another Ukrainian confectionary company, Roshen, citing food safety concerns. The Roshen Confectionery Corporation is owned by Petro Poroshenko, who was elected president in May this year.

As the Ukraine crisis enters an even more intense phase, it has been conventional wisdom for some time among Western strategists that China is actually the biggest winner of the new and grave tensions in Eastern Europe. Not only has it benefited from a landmark gas agreement with Russia, but, so the logic goes, the new tension in U.S.-Russian relations may sap dynamism from the erstwhile Asia-Pacific rebalance, while encouraging Moscow to increase its cooperation in all respects with Beijing. China has generally adopted a low key approach to the crisis itself, calling simply for restraint and a negotiated solution.

A key question that arises, however, is whether or not Chinese leaders are recalibrating their strategy to mirror Russian President Vladimir Putin's aggressive approach. Put simply, does Beijing see the Ukraine Crisis as demonstrating the West's weakness when confronted by a determined and capable challenger? Eminent Chinese specialist on international affairs Prof. Wang Jisi of Peking University said in a June 2014 interview with 财经 [Finance and Economics] magazine that Putin was the foreign leader that Chinese admired most. While calling for a more cautious and restrained approach himself, Wang also offers that Putin's popularity in China reflects a general desire for "strong man politics" and adopting an "iron wrist [sic] diplomacy."

Control over the Russian Military Industrial Commission will shortly be transferred from the government to the president, with Vladimir Putin assuming the chairman's post, according to a press report.

The popular business daily Kommersant has quoted an unnamed source in the presidential administration as saying that the Military Industrial Commission will be taken to a "principally new level." Putin's personal leadership will allow for fast and clear solutions of all potential conflicts between industrialists and the military.

According to the source, representation from weapons-making corporations and top military command in the new body will be balanced. The current head of the commission, Deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin, will become first deputy chairman and he will also chair the commission's main ruling body - the collegium. Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov is set to become executive secretary of the commission, with powers to form the daily agenda of its sessions. All current permanent members of the Military Industrial Commission will retain their posts, the newspaper reported.

The source also said that the reform's plan had been developed by the government and had already received approval from the presidential administration. The official announcement of the changes is expected to take place next week during a working conference between Vladimir Putin and government officials.

At first, I thought this had to be a joke in the style of "The Onion". Sadly, no. I have video of this dolt saying this on C-Span. I don't know who's more dangerous to humanity, Kerry or ISIS.
The video:

United States President Barack Obama said Friday that the US and European Union are still prepared to impose sanctions against Russia if the crisis in Ukraine continues to escalate following the signing of a ceasefire agreement.


Speaking in Newport, Wales at the close of a major NATO alliance summit, Pres. Obama expressed skepticism over a pact signed only hours earlier in Minsk during a meeting of representatives from Kiev, Lugansk and Donetsk, and said the US intends to go ahead with new sanctions revealed by the White House on Thursday this week.

"Obviously we are hopeful," Obama said of the ceasefire, "but based on past experience, also skeptical that, in fact, the separatists will follow through and the Russians will stop violating Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity."


"Pro-Russian separatists must keep their commitments," Obama told the crowd.

The following report is a slap in the face to president Obama and his NATO partners meeting today in Newport Wales. Obama confirmed on September 3 that "Russian combat forces with Russian weapons in Russian tanks" had been deployed in Eastern Ukraine.

That's not only a Lie, it is Lie which could potentially precipitate humanity into a Third World War.

Observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) "have registered no troops, ammunition or weapons crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border over the past two weeks" (Itar-Tass)

"Throughout the week, the Observer Teams noticed a net increase of young people (both men and women) wearing military-style dress crossing the border in both directions but did not observe any weapons among these groups," the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission's report covering a period from August 20 to September 3 said.

The observers said they had regular interactions with supporters of the self-proclaimed republics. "Some discussed openly with the OSCE while others expressed their total mistrust toward the OSCE. At both Border Crossing Points, some supporters of the self-proclaimed republics explained that they are not allowed to cross the border with weapons," the report said.

The observers registered a decrease in helicopter sightings compared to last week but they were still observed at border crossing points flying at low altitude along the border.

"In either case, in as far as could be seen, the aircraft did not violate the Ukrainian airspace," the report said. (Ibid)

The OSCE Observer Mission is deployed at the Russian Checkpoints of Gukovo and Donetsk at the request of Russia's government. The decision was taken in a consensus agreement by all 57 OSCE participating States, many of which are represented at the NATO Summit in Wales.

The OSCE report contradicts the statements made by the Kiev regime and its US-NATO sponsors. It confirms that NATO accusations pertaining to the influx of Russian tanks are an outright fabrication.

Kiev officials and representatives of the two self-proclaimed republics in southeastern Ukraine have agreed to a ceasefire, as the contact group met behind closed doors in Belarus.

The two sides accompanied by representatives of Russia and the OSCE were meeting in the Belorussian capital, Minsk, in an attempt to end the bloodshed in eastern Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, who is now in Wales for the NATO summit, has confirmed the ceasefire agreement on his Twitter account.

He has ordered the pro-government forces to stop military actions starting 6 pm local time (15:00 GMT), as stated in the protocol.

"I give the order to the chief of the General staff of the Ukrainian Armed Forces to cease fire, starting from 18.00 [local time] on September 5," Poroshenko's statement says.

He has called on both the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and the OSCE to provide international monitoring of compliance with the bilateral ceasefire.

"We must do everything possible and impossible to stop bloodshed and put an end to people's suffering," the president said in a statement posted on his official website.


He also expressed hope that both sides would follow the protocol.

Barack Obama has opened himself to widespread ridicule in Russia after making a history gaffe in a keynote speech in Estonia. Accusing Moscow of imperial ambitions, the US President suggested Russia is trying to reclaim some lands it "lost" 150 years ago.

"Reaching back to the days of the tzars, trying to reclaim lands lost in the 19th century is surely not the way to secure Russia's greatness in the 21st century," Obama said to the rapturous applause of his Estonian audience in Tallinn hall, where he was promising to defend the Baltic States from the Kremlin.

It was a neat and dramatic soundbite - contrasting the ages of monocles and crowns with that of drones and iPhones - and a callback to US Secretary of State John Kerry, who accused Russia of acting in a "19th century fashion" in Crimea back in spring.

There was one problem, though: the quote made little sense.

Russia's Foreign Ministry was quick to gleefully point out Obama's gaffe.

• Will we repeat the idealistic follies which led to disaster in Iraq, Syria and Libya?
• How can it be a 'defeat' to have conquered millions of square miles of central and eastern Europe, and destroyed Communism? Why do we need yet more territory?
• What is the moral imperative that says the 'West' must possess Ukraine?

A reply to Ben Judah's call to 'Arm Ukraine or Surrender' in the New York Times.

I have been much struck by an article in the New York Times by Ben Judah, published beneath the headline: 'Arm Ukraine or Surrender'. It really ought to have an exclamation mark on it, so frantic is its tone. Given its prominent publication in that important forum of opinion, it may be influential. It ought not to be. I explain why below. You can read it here.

It seems to me to have been written in the hope that its readers, especially its readers in Washington DC, will heed the call to arms (or rather to arms shipments), rather than the call to 'surrender' (or, as some might say, make a sensible compromise with Russia).

The same people who have turned much of Syria into a smoking, gore-encrusted rubble-heap, and Libya into a cauldron of blood and fire, are hard at work here, making a very similar mistake to the ones they made in Damascus and Tripoli. First, they think that because the Russian government is bad (beyond dispute), whatever replaces it will be better (very questionable).

The author presents the dilemma thus: 'Either we arm Ukraine, or we force Kiev to surrender and let Mr. Putin carve whatever territories he wants into a Russian-occupied zone of "frozen conflict."'

Let's go through the article. Mr Judah says :

'Russia and Ukraine are now at war.'

No they are not. No state of war yet exists, despite the best efforts of a legion of pot-stirrers who openly wish for a war with Russia. The two neighbours still have diplomatic relations and their governments are in communication with each other, probably rather more than either is letting on. Ukraine's leaders are much given to exaggerated public claims against Russia, which a generally gullible and unquestioning Western media reproduce as proven fact. Ukrainian forces have allegedly destroyed a Russian armoured column, an event for which no evidence has ever been produced. More recently Russian forces were said to have annihilated an entire Ukrainian village. I have yet to see evidence of this. There are plenty more such claims. I have seen them reproduced as fact, without qualification in headlines, in respectable western newspapers which ought to know better.

Russia meanwhile tells its own lies, not of exaggeration but of what might politely be called understatement. Russia maintains, quite incredibly, that none of its soldiers are in Ukraine and that it is not arming the rebels. Of course Russian soldiers are in Ukraine, and of course Russia is helping with supplies and training. To the extent that all its operations are technically deniable, this may well be true. But it is obvious that the GRU is giving powerful aid to the rebels. Quite rightly, the western media recover their proper scepticism when confronted by these claims, and sneer at them.

What they do not do is ask how it was that the pathetic Ukrainian armed forces suddenly, a couple of months ago, began to fight effectively. Could it be that they, too, have been receiving help from elsewhere? Anybody remotely interested in the serious truth about this crisis would surely at least wonder about this. But nobody does.