Translation by Tatzhit Mihailovich
Original publication:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=987_1454218437
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=12d_1454240379
Source for pics:
http://molonlabe.livejournal.com/164695.html
http://molonlabe.livejournal.com/28144.html
INTRO
The blogger molonlabe is some sort of a counter-terrorist operator in Russian Caucasus (Ingushetia region, most likely). Below, he talks about what life as an insurgent is like.
I thought this may be interesting to translate – not just to share his stories, but mostly to show the hell that insurgent’s/partisans life is in general. I would assume it stayed pretty similar in every place and age – from King Alfred of Wessex hiding from Saxons in a swamp, to American colonists and Viet Cong; details may change, but it’s always highly unappealing.
BACKGROUND
One thing you need to understand about the war in Caucasus is that:
1. On one hand, the Chechens and other islamists have been largely defeated, and the locals already got to see what their Caliphate looks like – they want none of it (Chechnya under Islamist rule was ISIS-lite, slave markets and all, but with even more lawlessness).
2. On the other hand, there are always a few idiots that are slow on the uptake, or have freshly arrived from a Hajj to Mecca, where they were “re-educated” by Saudis.
So there are no longer large, well-organized gangs, but low-intensity anti-terrorist campaign is endemic to the region. Maybe it can be compared to the IRA in some ways.
=======
PART 1: “STRAGGLERS”
Molonlabe (source):
Being an insurgent has its negative sides. One of them is that you can not count on your buddies not abandoning you in battle. This is not because the bandits are all vile and immoral (although that, too). It’s simply because the firefights are usually sudden, and trying to save a buddy in trouble is usually impossible. The choice is simple – to run, or die along with him. We have no such choice – the option to leave our own in battle is not considered even in theory. But the bandits have a different mentality and different priorities. Their talk about “dreaming of martyrdom” is mostly propaganda. The bandits will never stand and fight, if they have the option of running away. But oftentimes this salvation is actually a protracted death. Say, the whole gang destroyed, and one escaped. Or he went to get food, came back and the base was already destroyed by evil infidels. Or you were abandoned in battle, but managed to get away. The gang immediately faded into the woods, and you are left alone. So, what is next?
Bandits are put in conditions where they have to withhold vital information even from each other: who is the accomplice providing the gang with food, where are the caches, spare shelters, how to communicate with other gangs and so on. And the survivors, stuck by themselves, are left with nothing. If one is very lucky and knows where is a cache with food – he survives for some time. But it still is constant living on the brink. Sprained your foot? You will die. Caught a bad cold? You will die. Come out of the the woods? You will be shot. In a firefight, such stragglers put up little resistance. Trying to run away also ends in failure – they are too weakened. They are often found with body sores and boils. In practice, they resemble armed hobos.
Here are the contents of a backpack of one such straggler. Toothpaste is there, but the lid is stuck – has not been opened in a while. Just two pills of Nurofen…
The machinegun has not been cleaned in God knows how long …
His kitchen. He would stir a spoonful of flour with a little water, and bake it over a small fire into a tiny piece of bread, which he would eat with ketchup:
Empty mags, and one full one…
Some loose ammo in the backpack…
The battery in the phone was dead. Very little food. The bandit was haggard and emaciated. He just tried to hide in the bushes, hoping we won’t find him. No such luck.
Scouts sometimes find those who died by themselves. Just sat down, leaned against a tree and died. Obviously, that’s an unpleasant sight, because the remains are usually found some time later, and in summer the bodies decompose rapidly.
One straggler was found by the locals in their basement – he had a fever and began to rave, and this gave himself out. He did not make it.
What’s the point of running from a fight and condemning yourself to a lonely and hungry wandering through the woods? Well, everyone is the maker of their own little hell.
Story 2: A TERRORIST’S LIFE
Molonlabe: As promised, I’ll tell you about how terrorists live in the wild.
If you have been on a serious hike, you know that staying clean the whole time is a problem. Sooner or later, habits recede, and you are eating food with unwashed hands, tolerate grimy dishes, and in general, are not a picture of cleanliness. For those that have to permanently live in the forest, far from civilization, especially since they need to constantly hide and sneak, hygiene inevitably takes third place to the needs of constant struggle against hunger and cold. There are limits, of course. Those who go too far in their disgusting habits, are forcibly brought back up to minimum standards by other bandits. Because, although it is possible to tolerate the stench – lice, bedbugs and decaying body parts can be a hazard to others, physically and morally. There were even cases of executions of far-gone militants. Because they can’t let those go in peace, and can not bring them back to human form. Nothing else to do.
Living autonomously is hard. Bandits try to create some kind of minimum living conditions, but those hiding like rats will inevitably have a rat’s life. Well, no one said being a terrorist would be easy – from the very beginning, newcomers are warned about the hardships and privations of “jihad”. However, in practice it turns out to be much worse than described. Sooner or later, “warriors of God” cease to view life as something valuable – because the value of living such a lifestyle is, objectively, near zero. Yes, no one wants to die, and survival instinct still works. I personally haven’t seen cases where a “Mujahid rushed a crowd of enemies, sowing panic among them his courage”, as their propagandists like to say. As a rule, the main goal of the bandits in a firefight is to run away from it as quickly as possible. And, unlike [us], abandoning their own in battle is not considered reprehensible among them.
Insurgents only live in dugouts and bunkers during the winter. Other seasons, it is impossible to stay in them, because you need to burn a fire the whole time, to ward off dampness. If this isn’t done, a wet dugout will drive them to the grave faster than the “evil infidels.” Very rarely do they manage to build a comfortable dugout. I only saw a couple of holes where you could walk straight, and which have been more or less insulated for staying warm in winter. Here is one, for example:
Usually, dugout is only big enough to move on all fours. Nothing fancy – staying alive is already great. The stench in these holes is unbearable, and soaks into everything. Nothing to be done – nowhere to shower in winter…
In the summer, bandits live in tents or just sleep under the open sky. This is due to the fact that the bases have to be saved for the winter. Loss of a base, which was built at such an expense, is a real tragedy for them. Especially in winter, when building even a temporary hut is very difficult. Cry, terrorists – “evil infidels and apostates” found and burned your “home sweet home”:
How do you live now? Where to go? What to do? All the food and loot is gone!
In short, losing a base is a real reason to be sad…
Therefore, the bases are necessarily left empty in the spring, summer and autumn, and insurgents wander through the mountains, stopping at random places for the night. Sometimes it looks relatively civilized – camped similar to tourists:
But mostly – like dogs. Falling on rugs and sleeping:
Here, a question of building campfires comes up. Yes, they need to hide and so on. But how much food can one make on a burner, for example? And how long can you exist on dry bread and cookies? So they to take risks and start campfires.
Sometimes they even make an improvised oven. Bake bread (no shops in the forest). Pants are dried above it, so that the heat is not wasted.
A fire is needed not only to dry off and get warm, but also to prepare any kind of hot soup:
But sometimes there is nothing cook, at all. Say, the accomplice who brought them food gets arrested – that’s it, facing starvation. They have to go back to hunter-gatherer mode – berries, mushrooms, fishing and hunting. This guy caught fish for soup:
And if they managed to shoot a deer, or steal a lamb – then it is a holiday. The remaining meat needs to be cured, or it’ll rot.
One time, they got hit by an attack helo when drying meat. We did not know, and when we arrived, found on the branches plastered with pieces of raw meat. At first we thought those were the bandits after direct hit. Barf …
By the way, about hygiene again – that’s how they cook their meals:
The bottle isn’t that big a deal – look at the sides of a cooking pot:
And see the “clean” hands of the cooks?
But at least those guys will have hot soup. Most will have to eat their food on the run, whatever they got:
Actually, this lifestyle is what prevents many potential militants from going into the forest. Those that leave are usually already involved, and flee to the country when they realize they’re about to get nabbed. At this point, their choices are limited – prison, or a dugout.
The dudes understand all these problems. Once, they even decided to shoot a “commercial” of how they feast. Like, “we want for nothing, and live like kings”. Alas, the idea has ended in failure.After a few days, both the camera operators and the actors saw the end of their worthless existence. Oh well, at least they didn’t die starving.
A rather interesting article from Pravda :
CIA’s cultural wars topple unwanted regimes worldwide
The CIA uses writers, filmmakers, publicists and other cultural activists for staging coups and conducting subversive activities in other countries. This was told by Cuban double agent, writer Raul Capote. Most likely, the CIA has been using the technology for quite a while in Russia as well. “The CIA has real control over mass media and cultural industries in the US and around the world. Actually, there is no conspiracy theory here, ” Raul Capote said in an interview with Brazilian portal Sul21.Capote, a Cuban writer, had worked for the Cuban intelligence from 2004 to 2011 as a double agent at the CIA. The Americans wanted him to create “a new type of opposition” that could start a “soft revolution” in the country after Fidel Castro’s departure to topple the communist regime. Even though the revolution is considered “soft”, but, according to “198 Methods of Nonviolent Action” by Gene Sharp, it stipulates for illegal actions, such as a “rebellion” against government structures. “Ideas of non-violent war undermine foundations of the country’s government until the government of this country loses control of the situation,” said Capote. The idea is to blow up a government from the inside to generate chaos. As soon as a country plunges into chaos, one can proceed to more extreme measures, the Cuban writer believes. According to Raul Capote, the CIA used this technology in Venezuela, Iran and Libya “and still uses it in various parts of the world.”The CIA started looking closely at Capote in 1986, when he was a 20-year-old man, a member of the youth organization of poets, artists and writers in the city of Cienfuegos.”The first person who came to us, was a freelance journalist from Paris – Match magazine Denis Reichler. He was an idol of sports journalism to us,” explains Capote. –
This man “brought us together with non-governmental organizations, which, presumably, were interested in creating a fund of artistic projects in Cuba.”The CIA failed to distinguish between his critical attitude to the government and hatred of Castro. When Cuban security services offered Raul Capote to become an informant, he agreed. In 1994, he chaired the trade union of cultural workers with more than 40,000 people in it. “It made me even more interesting for the CIA, as I was the leader of the union that collected almost all cultural activists – artists, musicians and writers. It was a very strong union.”Capote was informing the CIA on the lifestyle and activities of young people in Cuba. “I was advised what information I should promote,” he said. This process lasted for many years before 2004 when Capote was enlisted. “In 2004, they recruited me with a very specific task. My job was to promote a culture war, a war in the world of ideas. We usually use complex expressions to define this kind of war, for example, political and ideological subversion, but they call it simply – a “cultural war.””The CIA has control over mass media and cultural industries in the US and around the world. I discovered that it actually exists, it’s not a conspiracy theory, as some believe.”Their idea is to create a “new type of opposition” that they begin growing at universities and institutes. They do it through a system of grants, sending students to study under the programs that carry absolutely innocent names. For example, they can send a writer to Jerusalem for a course on the history of Israel, but a person will be lectured on how to topple unwanted regimes in a non-violent way. “The number of today’s world leaders, who have taken part in those programs is impressive,” said Capote.
He noted that such courses are practiced at the Albert Einstein Institution, the Serbian Centre for Applied Nonviolent Action and Strategies (CANVAS), and other institutions established by George Soros. According to CIA estimates, if one in ten of such students becomes a political opposition activist, the mission is considered successful. In 2006, the first attempt to “blow up the government” was made. “On August 13, 2006, on Fidel’s birthday, I was supposed to spark an uprising in Havana and call for protests against the transfer of power to Raul Castro,” says the writer. “I was supposed to say that the country was in chaos, that the US had to interfere to stop violations of human rights.” But the plan did not work, people did not come out to the streets, said Capote. He explained to the Americans that the Cubans were not ready, because there was no freedom of speech and the Internet in the country. “Afterwards, we were supplied with state-of-the-art gadgets and were taught to use latest technologies. In 2007, I received a communication device connected via satellite to the Department of Defense that could not be tapped. I used the device to contact my chief in Washington.” In fact, after the change of the government, everything will be privatized, including healthcare and social security, and austerity measures will be introduced. “They told me that the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Cuban community abroad will support the reconstruction of the Cuban society.”It was a very interesting game of chess. I had to make them believe that their tactics was working. That was a very difficult thing to do,” the Cuban writer said. “The project has many flaws. They thought that a revolution depended on one person. Believe me, it was not Fidel Castro alone who made the Cuban revolution happen. Their another mistake was to believe that the Cuban people were naive,” he added. Capote left the game in 2010, when a civil war broke out in Libya. “The Cuban government asked me to publicly denounce the CIA,” Capote said. Afterwards, there were the crises in Ukraine and Argentina. If there is someone among our readers, who believe that there is no cultural war in Russia, these people are mistaken. We can only hope that there are double agents in Russia too.
Lyuba Lulko
Pravda.ru
That is a great article. And it leads to a “huge” question. Since as we know from this article (and many other reports) those are the methods used by the empire to subvert other nations. What is to be done to prevent that. I believe that in a “perfect” World. Governments should not restrict the rights to information of their citizens. But in a World like we live in. A World where a hegemonic power uses those very “rights” to subvert nations. Where they use “freedoms” as a dagger to kill a nation. Then maybe we need to “rethink” those rights.If the enemies of “freedom” use “freedom” to destroy people’s freedoms. Then maybe in times like we have,there is such a thing as too much freedom. Like I said that is a huge question to answer. But there is no doubt that there is an assault on “freedom” itself. And that it must be fought against if nations are to survive. And with them the concept of “freedom” itself. As a small example,what would have been the results if Yanukovich had declared a state of emergency in Ukraine. Cut of the access to the internet and twitter to the maidan fascists. Intervened the Press and all other mass media.And expelled the Western NGO’s and US Embassy. Then used the military and police to crush and arrest the maidan leadership. Certainly the West would have howled to the moon over it. And attacked him for violations of “human rights” and “freedoms”. But thousands of people would be alive today,Donbass would not have been destroyed. And the country of Ukraine not be on the brink of extinction. So to me that would have been the correct move on his part. But instead he (and many other victims of color revolutions) was “willing” to “play the game” by the West’s rules. Rules that are “rigged” to serve them.
I tend to think that, to the contrary, the best solution is for the pseudo-freedom peddled by the empire to be combatted with a good deal more, and more genuine, freedom–specifically, freedom for actual people rather than for billionaires.
Take the media, which is the subject of so much of the manipulation. CIA et al. manipulation of the media works because that media is highly centralized, so you only have to get to a few top people, who are disposed to be on your side in the first place because they are working for the plutocrats who own the media, in order to make a huge impact on what is covered and how.
So how do you combat that? Government control? But if the government is democratic, an election can change that 180 degrees, and if the government is not democratic then it is, like the media, very centralized and so can readily be corrupted or an internal coup can likely be arranged. And in either case, a government-controlled media is very vulnerable to charges that it only spouts the party line, leading to public mistrust and disaffection, and also very vulnerable to the reality of only spouting the party line.
But what if you say OK, the big media in this country will be nationalized, split into much smaller units, be handed some personnel changes including a serious layoff of the top echelons, and then handed over to the people who work there. The new media will be a bunch of worker’s co-operatives and we will have laws making sure it stays that way. Then you have a broader, decentralized media, where the money goes to programming rather than internationalized profits, and where the owners are legion and have no class interest in pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes. OK, CIA, see how much of that you can co-opt!
(Cuba, incidentally, is an odd case in that while we don’t call it “democratic” it actually has broader participation in governance than the “west” as near as I can make out)
Now, that said, I’d tend to agree with you about what Yanukovich should have done. But that would hardly have been a case of failing to observe the freedoms observed by “the West”. Let us not forget that most of the things that the US routinely does in foreign countries with its “NGO”s (which are only in title “non-governmental”) would be totally illegal for some other country to do in the US, and would never be tolerated if any country other than Israel and maybe a bit Saudi Arabia tried them. And if someone tried a protest along the lines of the Maidan in Washington DC it would be crushed in no time flat, the leaders arrested as terrorists and probably put away for years before they ever got to trial.
But even there–Yanukovich isn’t a Nazi, and he had some vague feeling that there were bridges he couldn’t cross when it came to stooging for NATO at the expense of his country. But he’s still, lest we forget, an oligarchic dick who went through the motions of democracy largely for the purpose of feathering his own nest, just like the rest of the Ukrainian politicians. If he was a really good man, who was trying for alternatives to empire, then the thing to do would have been to do good things for the public, give the people something to fight for and help them organize and build their power before the Maidan ever happened, so that when the Color Revolutionaries organized their schtick there would have been three times as many counter-demonstrators in the streets defending what was theirs. Yanukovich couldn’t do that because he was just another corrupt, oligarchic politician who only looks good in retrospect because the replacement is incompetent, reality-disconnected Nazis.
So there again, the best countermeasure to the Color Revolutionaries taking advantage of limited pseudo-freedom would be a bunch more real freedom.
That is interesting. Supports and expands on various other things I’ve seen. Given the power of US intelligence agencies, we’re just lucky that being on top seems to breed a certain out-of-touch hubris that in effect results in a good deal of incompetence. If they had all that power and also really knew what they were doing, the world would be even more hooped than it is.
Actually King Alfred was king of the West Saxons. He was hiding from the Danes.
Thanks :). One can’t be a specialist in everything, I only really know Ukraine in-depth. You’re right of course.
thanks for this very revealing essay…Tatzhit, you’re the best.
None of these terrorist movements would get anywhere without the support of the anglozionists. Ammo and food drops, cash drops, satellite telephones, heli-evacuation, drone strikes, and of course blanket media coverage. That’s what these guys are missing.
Interesting article. There’s a certain bias there that colours some of the attitude, but the basic information is useful, well worth translating.
(bias example–of course terrorists, insurgents etc. run away from firefights with the military. What are they supposed to do, stand their ground and slug it out? That would be moronic. Running away is their job. The piece treating this as something contemptible is sort of deliberately missing the point for the sake of a slur)
Well, the guy hunts down terrorists, viewing them with contempt is more or less in the job description ;)
plg 12:12
Your bias claim misrepresents what the author stated. The author was describing how these terrorists would abandon each other and run. Like bandits, or zionist neocons. That they had no sense of what supporting a comrad is when things get tough. Your comment on insurgent tactics has zero to do with what the author was describing.
These scum by no means represent free thinking men nor do they represent any kind of moderation. They are imperial tools and as such they have met their fate.
There is no room for terrorism in public discourse.
May they rot in hell.
Sputnik has aired an emotionally powerful documentary which details the firsthand experiences of its special photo correspondent Valery Melnikov; the film shares the name of the series of photos he took in Lugansk Region of Ukraine in the summer of 2014; when he arrived in Donbass, “the feeling of an impending disaster was already in the air.”
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/agency_news/20160203/1034138810/sputnik-melnikov-ukraine-documentary.html#ixzz3z64rKqy0
There’s some truth in the grim saying that you rot and then you die. But for these insurgents it is worse. They go to hell, and then they die and go to hell.
What immediately attracted my attention was the blogger’s name: molonlabe. I know it probably means nothing to all of you, but to me (I am a Greek) means a lot. I am sure it will also mean a lot to you also, because all of you know the story. Molonlabe is in fact two greek words: Molon labe.
You all know Leonidas, the King of Sparta, with his 300 Spartan warriors who stood at Thermopylae against the Persians (in ancient Greece 480 B.C.). The King of Persia sent envoys asking Leonidas to surrender his arms. Leonidas’ answer was two words: Molon labe – come (and) get them.
This defiance is what the blogger wants to show by choosing the name molonlabe. This also speaks volumes about his personality.
Be well…