Neocons are attack dogs of neoliberalism and lobbyists for MIC: "national security parasites".
"Being a neoconservative should receive at least as much vitriolic societal rejection as being a Ku Klux Klan member or a
child molester"
Caitlin
Johnstone
"There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare." ~Sun Tzu
Years ago, whilst this reactionary putsch was still in it's infancy,
my mom would
listen to the "news" on the local CBS affiliate,
and many times I heard her gasp and say,
referring to the "reporters"
jabbering, "My God, they're a bunch of dopes!"
The dopes areascendant; stupid, scared, violent-minded, and very well-paid.
Neoconservatives, which like Bolsheviks in the past are mostly Jewish intellectuals, are frequently described as ideologues with
pro-Israel and anti-Russian bent, but the truth is that they are far more interested in gaining access to money and power. Most of them
are useless smacks with degree in journalism or history and they would starve if not fed by military industrial complex. Being a lobbyist
of military industrial complex is the only job they can get. Add to that that most of them are personal cowards and chicken hawks and
you get the picture: they are just bottom-feeders. "National security parasites" is a very apt definition for this category of people.
The ideology of Neoconservatism was explicitly formulated in Wolfowitz Doctrine
which contains the key postulates of Neoconservatism in foreign policy. They can be summarized as "America has, and intends to keep,
military strengths beyond challenge". That partially explains unprecedented level of military expenses of the USA since 1991 (after
the dissolution of the USSR) when, effectively, the USA has not external enemies and those money can be used to improve well being
of common people in the USA. But neoliberal elite engage in building global neoliberal empire rules from Washington and that empire
needed the dominant military force to protect and expand it . From other point of view that was an attempt of the
US MIC to preserve its position acquired during the Cold War, if necessary by inventing or creating a new threats. Neocons
just happen perfectly suit the role of lobbyists of MIC interest in Washington and thus were financially and politically
supported by MIC.
Large part of neocons consist of so-called "elite-wannabes," often well-educated and highly capable, who has been denied access
to elite positions and who decided to use warmongering backdoor to get there.
Proselytizing their own brand of global regime change is just a mean to sustain the access to funds and political power. They
know perfectly well which side of the bread is buttered and by whom. We can suspect that for many of them (Max Boot is a
good example here) access to money from MIC and Israel lobby is the primary driving force. Often they are viewed as Likud lobby in the
USA: "The definition of a neocon is somebody who has great difficulty distinguishing between the strategic interests of Israel,
on the one hand, and the strategic interests of the United States on the other. Israel wants bedlam in Syria, and they’ve got it." (Israel lobby in the United States - Wikipedia
):
The formal component of the Israel lobby consists of organized lobby
groups, political action committees (PACs),
think tanks and
media watchdog groups. The
Center for Responsive Politics, which
tracks all lobbies and PACs, describes the ‘background’ of those ‘Pro-Israel’ as, “A nationwide network of local political action
committees, generally named after the region their donors come from, supplies much of the pro-Israel money in
US politics. Additional funds also come from individuals
who bundle contributions to candidates favored by the PACs.
The donors' unified goal is to build stronger US-Israel
relations and to support Israel in its negotiations and armed conflicts with its
Arab neighbors.”[24]
According to Mitchell Bard, there are, three key formal lobbying groups:
A summary of pro-Israel campaign donations for the period of 1990–2008 collected by
Center for Responsive Politics indicates
current totals and a general increase in proportional donations to the
US Republican party since 1996.[46]
The Center for Responsive Politics' 1990–2006 data shows that "pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual,
group and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990."[47]
In contrast, Arab-Americans and
Muslim PACs contributed slightly less than $800,000 during the
same (1990–2006) period.[48]
In 2006, 60% of the Democratic Party’s
fundraising and 25% of that for the Republican Party's fundraising came from Jewish-funded PACs. According to a Washington Post estimate,
Democratic presidential candidates depend on Jewish sources for as much as 60% of money raised from private sources.[49]
... ... ...
AIPAC does not give donations directly to candidates, but those who donate to AIPAC are often important political contributors
in their own right. In addition, AIPAC helps connect donors with candidates, especially to the network of pro-Israel political action
committees. AIPAC president Howard Friedman says “AIPAC meets with every candidate running for Congress. These candidates receive
in-depth briefings to help them completely understand the complexities of Israel’s predicament and that of the Middle East as a whole.
We even ask each candidate to author a ‘position paper’ on their views of the US-Israel relationship – so it’s clear where they stand
on the subject.”[43]
.... ... ...
Mearsheimer and Walt state that “pro-Israel figures have established a commanding presence at the American Enterprise Institute,
the Center for Security Policy, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Institute
for Foreign Policy Analysis, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). These think tanks are all decidedly
pro-Israel and include few, if any, critics of US support for the Jewish state.”[50]
When strategic interests of Israeli (for example remaking of the Middle East so that Israel can exercise dominant power in this region;
which includes fragmentation of several existing states) deviate from the strategic interests of the USA (which mostly are interested
in uninterruptable supply of cheap oil) neocons do betray the USA national interests with ease. The US-Israel relationship significantly
damages the relationship between the United States and the Arab world. They also were serving as propagandists and influencers for all
recent Middle East military adventures and regime change efforts. Recently that was the case in Syria: in no way Assad government
represented a threat to the USA interests. Still the pressure of "likudniks" was such that the USA engaged in the "regime change" efforts.
But in reality they should be viewed more like lobbing group of MIC then lobbing group of Israel. As well as transnational corporations
interested in opening new markets. But recently facts that Israel spend large sums on money on trying to influence the USA politicians
came to light and to this extent one gets impression that the tail is wagging the dog.
They should probably be viewed as the lobbying and propaganda arm of military industrial complex. Is both Republican and
Democratic Party position themselves as a "War Party" they represent an important political force on the USA political landscape.
The fact that some of staunch neocons such as Max Boot recently defected to Democratic Party just confirm the fact that
in forign policy there is only one party in the usa -- the neocon party.
And there is not much conservative in neocon ideology -- it is basically a revamped Trotskyism, if not neo-fascism. Just look at
Nuland's fraternization with Ukrainian far right nationalists despite
her Jewish roots (and despite the fact that this movement was hell-bent on killing Jewish people during WWII and served as capos in
concentration camps). This was not accidental; this was a conscious political choice -- they are birds of the feather.
Ideologically they are a more militant flavor of neoliberals ("neoliberals with the gun", so to speak). They also are
more openly statist, then a typical neoliberal. But their neo-Trotskyites
roots are mostly demonstrated in foreign policy (they do not have a coherent domestic policy; but generally their views in this area are more aligned
with the Democratic Party than Republican Party views).
All-in-all, we will essentially view them as lobbyists of MIC, "neoliberals with a gun".
PHOTO: DENIS CHARLET/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES Listen to this article 6 minutes 00:00 / 06:00 1x This is the year of the woke corporation, the year the chieftains of the most powerful companies got bored with making money and decided to remake America, principally by telling Americans how bigoted and backward they are. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. This is the year of the woke corporation, the year the chieftains of the most powerful companies got bored with making money and decided to remake America, principally by telling Americans how bigoted and backward they are. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP ( Apr 30, 2021 , www.wsj.com )
Henry Kissinger has said, not unreasonably, that we are in "the foothills" of a cold war
with China. And Vladimir Putin, who nurses an unassuageable grudge about the way the Cold
War ended, seems uninterested in Russia reconciling itself to a role as a normal nation
without gratuitous resorts to mendacity. It is, therefore, well to notice how, day by day,
in all of the globe's time zones, civilized nations are, in word and deed, taking small but
cumulatively consequential measures that serve deterrence.
If arrogance were a deadly disease, George Will would be dead.
George Will has been an
ass clown since I first had the displeasure of watching him in the 1970s. Age has not brought
an ounce of wisdom. Nevertheless, this total lack of self reflection and ability to project
American sins on others is unfortunately not unique to our man George. It seems a habit
throughout the entire US political spectrum. The ability to view, for example, the invasion
of Iraq as perfectly normal behavior, while viewing any resistance to US/Israeli dominance as
beyond the pale is the character of the decaying American superpower. George Will is but one
manifestation of it. It was once infuriating. But now it's simply like listening to the
ravings of a schizophrenic. More pathetic than anything else.
What do you expect from George Swill? He is a pathetic, disoriented refugee from his home in
Victorian England, when barbarism never set for a single instant on the British Empire.
There's a way to get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth from the
mainstream news media. Just look at their propaganda and ask yourself, "Why do they want me
to believe this particular lie?" If you can figure that you, you will have the truth.
Well, you know, the white man's burden...
The funny thing is that they seriously consider themselves a "superior race", while behaving
like wild barbarians.
Such opinions/articles of "Western civilized people" cause only a condescending smile,
nothing more. So let's let George Will entertain us.
I find it pretty bizzarre how western media obsessively try to portray the Defender
incident as a some sort of "victory" for "civilized nations".
What exactly is the victory here? The fact that Russia only resorted to warning fire and
didn't blow up the ship?
Decades of propaganda masquerading as news has led most "educated" Americans into a Matrix
of false narratives. Should you dare mention election fraud or question the safety of COVID
vaccines in the presences of anyone who considers the NY Times and Wash Post as the "papers
of record", they will be happy to inform you that you are "captured" by false news. Dialogue
with these true believers has become almost impossible. We are the indispensable, civilized
nation, don't you understand basic facts?
My sister, who is truly a good-hearted person, unfortunately keeps CNN and MSNBC on most
of the day in her small apartment, and lives for The NY Times, which she pours over,
especially the weekend edition. She knows that Putin is evil and Russia is a bad place to
live, etc etc. I got rid of my TV ten years ago and started looking elsewhere for my
information. I live in a rural area of a Red state, she lives in Manhattan. We have to stick
to topics that revolve around museums, gardening, and food.
This is precisely the type of arrogance that has led to US leaving Afghanistan with their
pants down - having spent untold Trillions of dollars and having nothing to show for it. And
soon, leaving Iraq and Syria too. It reminds me of how the US left Vietnam and Cambodia.
The 'White' establishment in Washington and across the US military industrial complex, has
an air of superiority and always seem to feel that they can subjugate via throwing money at
people! This in effect turns everyone they deal with into Whores (yes, prostitutes). Its
fundamentally humiliating, and sews the seeds of corruption - both economic and moral. Then,
they are shocked that there's a back clash!
The Taliban succeeded not with arms - but by projecting a completely different narrative
of "Morality (i.e. non-corruption), honor, and even intermingled nationalism with their
narrative". They projected a story that suggested that new Afghan daughters would not turn
into Britney Spears or porn stars.
And, believe it or not, the Chinese see themselves as having been fundamentally humiliated
by the West and couch their efforts as a struggle for their civilization (its not ideological
or even economic) - they are fighting for honor and respect.
Western Civilization (and western elite) on the left and right are fundamentally
materialistic. They worship money, and simply don't understand it when others don't. When
they talk about superiority, they are basically saying the worship of money rules supreme.
You sort of become dignified in the west if you have a lot of wealth. They want to turn the
whole world into prostitutes. Policy and laws are driven by material considerations.
Now, I am not saying that spirituality or religion is good; and in fact, the Chinese are
not driven by religious zeal (they are, on the whole, non-religious). What I am saying is
that - no matter how its expressed - be it through religion, through culture, through
rhetoric, etc. - all this back clash is really a struggle for respect, 'honor' and thus a
push back to Western Arrogance, and the humiliation it has caused. The West simply doesn't
understand that there are societies - especially in the east, that value honor over other
things.
When Trump calls other people losers, he is basically saying he is richer, they are
poorer. In his mind, winning, is all about money. When people write articles about the
superiority of a civilization - they are implicitly putting other people down. That's not
just arrogant, its rude and disrespectful. Its basically like a teenager judging their
parents. How dare a newly formed nation (the US), judge or differentiate or even pretend to
be superior to the Chinese, Persians etc.?
Our foreign policy (and rhetoric) in the West has to completely change. We have to be
really careful, because, (honestly), it won't be very long before these other (inferior)
civilizations actually take over global leadership. Then how will we want to be treated?
Don't for a second think these folks can't build great gadgets that go to Mars! Oh, did China
just do that? Does Iran have a space program? Did they just make their own vaccines? Once
they start trading among themselves without using the USD greenback, we are finished.
Some notable recent achievements of 'civilised' nations include:
-Illegal invasion and bombing of multiple non-aggressor nations
-Overthrowing of democratically elected Governments
-Support of extremist and oppressive regimes
-Sponsoring of terrorism, including weapon sales to ISIS
-Corruption of once trusted institutions like the UN and OPCW
...when all she did was offer slight resistance to Western aggression? The key event was
the August 2013 false-flag
gas attack and massacre of hostages in Ghouta in Damascus.
What really angered the West was the Russian
fleet in the Mediterranean that prevented the NATO attack on Syria. (You will not find a
single word of this in Western media.) This is why Crimea needed to be captured by the West.
As revenge and deterrence against the Russian agression.
The standoff was first described by Israel Shamir in
October 2013:
"The most dramatic event of September 2013 was the high-noon stand-off near the Levantine
shore, with five US destroyers pointing their Tomahawks towards Damascus and facing them -
the Russian flotilla of eleven ships led by the carrier-killer Missile Cruiser Moskva and
supported by Chinese warships.
Apparently, two missiles were launched towards the Syrian coast, and both failed to
reach their destination."
A longer description was published by Australianvoice in
2015:
"So why didn't the US and France attack Syria? It seems obvious that the Russians and
Chinese simply explained that an attack on Syria by US and French forces would be met by a
Russian/Chinese attack on US and French warships. Obama wisely decided not to start WW III
in September 2013." Can Russia Block Regime Change In Syria Again?
In my own comments from 2013 I tried to understand the mission of the Russian fleet. This
is what I believed Putin's orders to the fleet were:
To sink any NATO ship involved in illegal aggression against Syria.
You have the authority to use tactical nuclear weapons in self-defense.
I am sure NATO admirals understood the situation the same way. I am not sure of the
American leadership in Washington.
Insulting language aside, the narrative they are trying to create is that there is an
anti-Russia, anti-China trend developing and that those sitting on the fence would be wise to
join the bandwagon.
This will be particularly effective on the majority of folks who barely scan headlines and
skim articles. Falun Gong/CIA mouthpiece Epoch Times is on board with this, based on recent
headlines.
Wikipedia has a list of reliable
and unreliable sources . "Reliable" are those sources that are under the direct control
of the US regime. Any degree of independence from the regime makes the source "unreliable."
WaPo and NYT are at the top of the list of reliable sources.
This is the diametric opposite of how Wikispooks defines reliability.
Reliability of sources is directly proportional to their distance *from* power.
At A Closer Look on Syria (ACLOS) we only trust primary sources.
Makes me remember the cornerstone work from former Argentine president DF Sarmiento, who
dealt with "Civilization or Barbarism" in his book "Facundo". Of course, his position was the
"civilized" one.
Those "civilized" succeeded in creating a country submitted to the British rule, selling
cheap crops and getting expensive manufactures, with a privileged minority living lavishly
and a great majority, in misery.
Also, their "civilized" methods to impose their project was the bloody "Police War"
This article is fundamentally about propaganda and "soft power".
Soft power in foreign policy is usually defined when other countries defer to your
judgement without threat of punishment or promise of gain.
In other words, if other countries support your country without a "carrot or stick"
approach, you have soft power.
For years, the US simply assumed other "civilized" of the western world would dutifully
follow along in US footsteps due to unshakeable trust in America's moral authority. The
western media played a crucial role by suppressing news regarding any atrocities the western
powers committed and amplifying any perceived threats or aggressions from "enemies".
Now, with the age of the internet, western audiences can read news from all over the world
and that has been a catastrophe for western powers. We can now see real-time debunking of
propaganda.
In the past, the British would have easily passed off the recent destroyer provocation as
pure Russian aggression and could expect outrage from all western aligned countries. The EU
and US populations could have easily been whipped into a frenzy and DEMANDED reprisals
against Russia if not outright war. Something similar to a "Gulf of Tonkin" moment.
But, that did not happen. People all over the world now know NOTHING from the US or
British press is to be trusted. People also now know NATO routinely try to stir up trouble
and provoke Russia.
So, Americans and even British citizens displayed no widespread outrage because they
simply did not believe their own government's and compliant media's side of the story.
US and British "soft power" are long gone. No one trusts them. No one wants to follow them
into anymore disastrous wars of aggression.
Western media still do not understand this and cannot figure out why so many refuse
western vaccines or support the newest color revolutions.
They cast Germany as a victim or potential victim of foreign aggressors, as a peace-loving
nation forced to take up arms to protect its populace or defend European civilization
against Communism.
I remember a tv history program that had interviews with German soldiers.
I recall one who had seen/participated in going from village to village in the USSR
hanging local communist leaders. He said they had been taught that by doing this
they were "protecting civilization".
Arrogance is not a deadly disease or even a hindrance for mainstream presstitutes; it is a
job qualification, making them all the more manipulable and manipulative. And so, as with
Michael Gordon, Judith Miller, Brett Stephens and David Sanger (essentially all of them
pulling double duty for the apartheid state), people will die from their propaganda, but they
will advance.
Name a leader with moral courage and integrity among suzerainties (private plantations).
Nations without integrity and filled with Orcs (individuals without conscience), can't be
civilized. They're EVIL vassals of Saruman & Sauron, manipulated by Wormtongue.
"The true equation is 'democracy' = government by world financiers."
– J.R.R. Tolkien
Henry Kissinger, in his interview with Chatham House stated, "the United States is in a
CRISIS of confidence... America has committed great moral wrongs." What are U$A's core
values?
According to a CFR member :
"How lucky I am that my mother studied with JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis and WH Auden and that
she passed on to me a command of language that permits me to "tell the story" of the world
economy in plain English. She would have been delighted that I managed to show that the evil
Gollum from Tolkien's tales lives above the doorway in the Oval Office, which he
certainly does. I saw him there myself. He may have found a new perch over at The Federal
Reserve Bank as well."
– Excerpt From, Signals: The Breakdown of the Social Contract and the Rise of
Geopolitics by Dr Philippa Malmgren
The Financial Empire has ran out of LUCK. "In God We Trust"
I thought moral superiority was the official position of NATO. The explicit intent is to
weaponize human rights and democracy . So it is not merely the mundane 'our group is better'
or the somewhat nostalgic western form of moral superiority, it's weaponized moral
superiority.
George Will looking good I tellya. Anybody know who does his embalming?
Doesn't Will's article reek of Nazi propaganda against the Russians as a mongrel Asiatic
uncivilized people? Of course to attack the Chinese as uncivilized? China uncivilized? 5,000
years of continuous culture? The Russians and Chinese must join up with civilization.
Unfortunately at least in the West race is only about skin color. It certainly wasn't the
case with the original Nazis. Will's piece is blatantly racist out of the tradition of
Nazism.
Oxford and the Ivy League. The training grounds for the Anglo American deep state and the
cheerleaders of the empire. Expect nothing more of these deeply under educated sudo
intellectuals.
Plenty of people who work for the MIC and in various policy circles/think tanks have
plenty "to show for it" where all these wars are concerned. Many billions of dollars were
siphoned upwards and outwards into the bank accounts and expensive homes of the managerial
and executive classes (even the hazard pay folks who actually went to the places "we" were
bombing) not just at Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Booz Allen, etc. but plenty of lesser known
"socioeconomically disadvantaged" Small Businesses (proper noun in this context) companies
who utilized the services of an army of consultants to glom onto the war machine. In most
cases of the larger firms, Wall Street handled the IPOs long ago, and these companies have
entire (much less profitable) divisions dedicated to state and local governments to
"diversify" their business portfolios in case the people finally get sick of war. But that
rarely happens in any real sense because the corporate establishment "legacy media" makes
sure that there's always an uncivilized country to bomb or threaten....and that means the
"defense" department needs loads of services, weapons, and process improvement consultants
all the time. War is a racket; always has been, always will be.
Unfortunately, it seems that truly large segments of the population in the developed
western countries and especially in the Anglo-sphere believe the propaganda emanating from
the imperial mouthpieces. The US citizenry is a case study in manipulating the public.
Indeed, the DNC liberals are effectively the vanguard of the pro-war movement, espouse
racist Rusophobia and conitnue Trump's hostility to China. The so-cslled conservatives follow
their own tradition of imperial mobilization behind the Washington regime: Chin,Latin
America, the very people who berated the 'Deep State' now paise its subversive activities
against the targeted left-wing governments.
As for the moribund left - it would be better described as leftovers - it is often taken
for a ride as long as the imperial messaging is promoted by the liberal media. The excuses
for imperialism are a constant for many of them (even as they call themselves
anti-imperialists) and the beleaguered voicesfor the truth are far and few. The latter often
face silencing campaigns not just from the establishment hacks, but from their own supposed
ideological comrades, who are, of course, in truth nothing of the sort.
All in all, despite the consistent record of manipulative propaganda and utter criminality
the imperial regime never loses the support of the critical masss of the citizenry.
All in all, despite the consistent record of manipulative propaganda and utter criminality
the imperial regime never loses the support of the critical masss of the citizenry.
Maybe 50% of the people here bother to vote, in IMPORTANT elections. Can be a lot less if
the election is not important. The only people still engaged politically here at all are the
people with good jobs. The American people have given up. And there are a lot of angry people
running around, with guns. Claiming the citizenry here support the government is imperial
propaganda. Why do you think they like mercenaries and proxies so much? And this is all in
great contrast to when I was young 50 years ago.
"... Two world wars were fought to keep Germany down. The stated purpose of NATO is to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down. ..."
"... IMO US didn't cause NS2 friction because it thinks it benefits Russia, but exactly because it benefits Germany too much. ..."
"... You know, NATO, "Keep the Germans down..." and all that. US must not permit it's vassals to become too economically stronger than their master. They want to drag everyone they can down with them (and in shitter US goes) so they can still be king of the hill (or ad least shitter bottom). ..."
"... The most important point to know is that US hegemony in Europe is predicated on fear and hostility between Germany and Russia. ..."
"... There are many limitations to European strategic autonomy -- and the EU embodies those limits in many ways -- but the case of NS2 demonstrates an independent streak in German strategy. It amounts to a zero sum loss for Washington. ..."
"... Lebanon does illustrate the incredible reach of the Empire. A leverage so long that every door leads to self immolation. Your mention of the current spyware scandal is right on point. These are instruments of absolute power. ..."
"... While Trump is certainly no representative of humanity, it just as certainly doesn't look like his rise was in the playbook of the dominant faction of the oligarchy. Trump really seems to fit the mould of a Bonapartist, though recast in the context of contemporary America. This would indicate that the imperial oligarchy is in crisis, which itself could lead to fractures in the empire, and among the empire's vassals in particular. ..."
The sanctions war the U.S. waged against Germany and Russia over the Nord Stream 2 pipeline
has ended with a total U.S. defeat.
The U.S. attempts to block the pipeline were part of the massive anti-Russia campaign waged
over the last five years. But it was always based on a misunderstanding. The pipeline is not to
Russia's advantage but important for Germany. As I described Nord Stream 2 in a
previous piece :
It is not Russia which needs the pipeline. It can
sell its gas to China for just as much as it makes by selling gas to Europe.
...
It is Germany, the EU's economic powerhouse, that needs the pipeline and the gas flowing
through it. Thanks to Chancellor Merkel's misguided energy policy - she put an end to nuclear
power in German after a tsunami in Japan destroyed three badly placed reactors - Germany
urgently needs the gas to keep its already high electricity prices from rising further.
That the new pipeline will bypass old ones which run through the Ukraine is likewise to
the benefit of Germany, not Russia. The pipeline infrastructure in the Ukraine is old and
near to disrepair. The Ukraine has no money to renew it. Politically it is under U.S.
influence. It could use its control over the energy flow to the EU for blackmail. (It already
tried
once.) The new pipeline, laid at the bottom of the Baltic sea, requires no payment for
crossing Ukrainian land and is safe from potential malign influence.
Maybe Chancellor Merkel on her recent visit to Washington DC finally managed to explain that
to the Biden administration. More likely though she simply told the U.S. to f*** off. Whatever
- the result is in. As the Wall Street Journal
reports today:
The U.S. and Germany have reached an agreement allowing completion of the Nord Stream 2
natural gas pipeline, officials from both countries say.
Under the four-point agreement, Germany and the U.S. would invest $50 million in Ukrainian
green-tech infrastructure, encompassing renewable energy and related industries. Germany also
would support energy talks in the Three Seas Initiative, a Central European diplomatic
forum.
Berlin and Washington as well would try to ensure that Ukraine continues to receive
roughly $3 billion in annual transit fees that Russia pays under its current agreement with
Kyiv, which runs through 2024. Officials didn't explain how to ensure that Russia continues
to make the payments.
The U.S. also would retain the prerogative of levying future pipeline sanctions in the
case of actions deemed to represent Russian energy coercion, officials in Washington
said.
So Germany will spend some chump change to buy up, together with the U.S, a few Ukrainian
companies that are involved in solar or wind mill stuff. It will 'support' some irrelevant
talks by maybe paying for the coffee. It also promises to try something that it has no way to
succeed in.
That's all just a fig leave. The U.S. really gave up without receiving anything for itself
or for its client regime in the Ukraine.
The Ukraine lobby in Congress will be very unhappy with that deal. The Biden administration
hopes to avoid an uproar over it. Yesterday Politico reported that the Biden
administration preemptively had told the Ukraine
to stop talking about the issue :
In the midst of tense negotiations with Berlin over a controversial Russia-to-Germany
pipeline, the Biden administration is asking a friendly country to stay quiet about its
vociferous opposition. And Ukraine is not happy.
U.S. officials have signaled that they've given up on stopping the project, known as the
Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and are now scrambling to contain the damage by striking a grand
bargain with Germany.
At the same time, administration officials have quietly urged their Ukrainian counterparts
to withhold criticism of a forthcoming agreement with Germany involving the pipeline,
according to four people with knowledge of the conversations.
The U.S. officials have indicated that going public with opposition to the forthcoming
agreement could damage the Washington-Kyiv bilateral relationship , those sources said. The
officials have also urged the Ukrainians not to discuss the U.S. and Germany's potential
plans with Congress.
If Trump had done the above Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi would have called for another
impeachment.
The Ukrainian President Zelensky is furious over the deal and about being told to shut up.
But there is little he can do but to accept the booby price the Biden administration offered
him:
U.S. officials' pressure on Ukrainian officials to withhold criticism of whatever final deal
the Americans and the Germans reach will face significant resistance.
A source close to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Kyiv's position is that
U.S. sanctions could still stop completion of the project, if only the Biden administration
had the will to use them at the construction and certification stages. That person said Kyiv
remains staunchly opposed to the project.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration gave Zelensky a date for a meeting at the White House
with the president later this summer , according to a senior administration official.
Nord Stream 2 is to 96% ready. Its testing will start in August or September and by the
years end it will hopefully deliver gas to western Europe.
Talks about building Nord Stream 3 are likely to start soon.
Posted by b on July 21, 2021 at 17:13 UTC | Permalink
Did Merkel also get Biden to promise that neither he nor any of his clients (AQ, ISIS, etc.
etc. etc.) would perpetrate any "unfortunate incidents" or "disruptions" on NS 2?
And would any such promises be worth the breath that uttered them?
But it was always based on a misunderstanding. The pipeline is not to Russia's advantage
but important for Germany
I'm afraid it is you who doesn't understand. Two world wars were fought to keep Germany down. The stated purpose of NATO is to keep the
Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down.
They weren't trying to block NS2 to keep Russia out but to keep Germany down,
I beg to differ. IMO US didn't cause NS2 friction because it thinks it benefits Russia, but
exactly because it benefits Germany too much.
You know, NATO, "Keep the Germans down..." and all that. US must not permit it's vassals
to become too economically stronger than their master. They want to drag everyone they can
down with them (and in shitter US goes) so they can still be king of the hill (or ad least
shitter bottom).
That is why there is also pressure for all western countries to adopt insane immigration,
LGBT, austerity policies and what not. What a better way to destroy all these countries, both
economically and culturally, or adleast make them far more worse than US, it is only way US
can again become "powerhouse", like after WW2.
Does this represent a fracturing of the EU? or maybe a change in direction?
What b is pointing out about how if it were Trump....only means that the bullying approach
by empire didn't work and now we are seeing face saving bullying and backpedaling like crazy
in some areas.
I roll my eyes at this ongoing belief that Trump represented humanity instead of all or
some faction of the elite....as a demigod it seems.
the "facts" as you state them are not quite right.
1. China is ruthless. They waited until the last possible second to sign a deal with Iran,
thus ensuring they are getting the best possible price for Iran's oil, basically robbing Iran
blind. The poor Iran didn't have a choice but to agree. Even today, Putin will NOT say how
much China is paying for gas on Siberia pipeline and a lot of people think China is robbing
Russia blind on the deal. A second Siberia line without a NS2 will put Russia is very bad
negotiation position and China in very good one, giving them the advantage to ask for any
price of Russia and get it.
2. Merkel is leaving anyway in September and thw Green party that will be taking over HATES
RUssia with passion. The NS2 is far from done deal, it needs to be insured. Plus it will fall
under the EU 3rd energy package making sure Germany doesn't use it 100% . The NS2 will never
be 100 usable, the Green party will see to that. AT best it will be only 50% usage.
And so on and so on.
Funny how in today's world, we all have different facts. My facts are different than YOUR
facts. My facts are just as relevant as your facts.
What is more, the most dangerous potential alliance, from the perspective of the United
States, was considered to be an alliance between Russia and Germany. This would be an
alliance of German technology and capital with Russian natural and human resources.
The article explains a lot, more than just Germany or Russia.
They weren't trying to block NS2 to keep Russia out but to keep Germany down...
Germany would be 'down' no matter how much financial power it accumulates - i.e regardless
of NS2. The imperial garrison at Rammstein AFB will make sure of that. What the Americans fear is the symbolic meaning of NS2 in terms of geopolitical influence
for Russia. The loss of maneuverability against Russia that results from a key vassal not
being able to move in complete obedience to Uncle Sam's wishes.
The pipeline construction battle has been won, not the energy flow war.
The Financial Empire is most likely resorting to some CHARADE to find an excuse to later
stop the gas flow through Nord Stream 2. Empire's bullying was clearly exposed through
sanctions and it LOST the battle of stopping the pipeline construction. So it moves to the
next battle to find an excuse to stop the gas flow. Empire's evil intent is visible in these
words, "the U.S. also would retain the prerogative of levying future pipeline sanctions in
the case of actions deemed to represent Russian energy coercion, officials in Washington
said."
The Financial Empire has worked hard over the last century to prevent Germany from allying
herself with Russia. It wants to control energy flowing in Eurasia and its pricing. The war
will be only won when the Financial Empire is defeated and its global pillars of power
DISMANTLED.
"The 'heartland' was an area centered in Eurasia, which would be so situated and catered
to by resources and manpower as to render it an unconquerable fortress and a fearsome power;
and the 'crescent' was a virtual semi-arc encompassing an array of islands – America,
Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Japan – which, as 'Sea Powers,' watched over the
Eurasian landmass to detect and eventually thwart any tendency towards a consolidation of
power on the heartland."
Has the Financial Empire stopped interfering in other regions?
"US, Germany Threaten Retaliatory Action Against Russia in Draft Nord Stream 2 Accord -
Report...."
"As the US and Germany have reportedly reached a deal on the Nord Stream 2 project,
Bloomberg reported on Tuesday, citing the obtained draft text of the agreement, that it
would threaten sanctions and other measures if Russia tried to use energy as a 'weapon'
against Ukraine , though it did not specify what actions could provoke the
countermeasures.
"According to the report, in such a case, Germany will take unspecified national
action , a decision that may represent a concession from Chancellor Angela Merkel, who
had previously refused to take independent action against Moscow over the gas pipeline that
will run from Russia to Germany." [My Emphasis]
The article continues:
"On Tuesday, Ned Price, a spokesman for the US State Department, told reporters that he
did not have final details of an agreement to announce, but that 'the Germans have put
forward useful proposals, and we have been able to make progress on steps to achieve that
shared goal, that shared goal being to ensure that Russia cannot weaponize energy
."
" The US was hoping for explicit language that would commit Germany to shut down gas
delivery through Nord Stream 2 if Russia attempted to exert undue influence on Ukraine .
Germany, on the other hand, has long rejected such a move, stating that such a threat would
only serve to politicize a project that Merkel stresses is solely commercial in nature." [My
Emphasis]
The overall motive appears to be this:
"The accord would also commit Germany to use its influence to prolong Ukraine's gas
transit arrangement with Russia beyond 2024, possibly for up to ten years . Those talks
would begin no later than September 1, according to the news outlet." [My Emphasis]
So, here we have the Outlaw US Empire meddling in the internal affairs of three
nations--Germany, Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine cannot afford Russian gas as it has no rubles
to pay for it. Thus if Ukraine has no money to buy, then why should Gazprom be obliged to
give it away freely? What about other European customers who rely on gas piped through
Ukraine; are they going to see what they pay for get stolen by Ukraine? And what happens when
the pipelines breakdown from lack of maintenance since Ukraine's broke thanks to the Outlaw
Us Empire's coup that razed its economy? Shouldn't the Empire and its NATO vassals who
invaded Ukraine via their coup be forced to pay for such maintenance? And just who
"weaponized" this entire situation in the first place?
From my understanding, NS 2 was mutually beneficial for Germany and Russia.
As noted, Germany desperately needs energy and relying on the outrageously priced and
unreliable US LNG was not a viable option.
Russia benefits also.
1.No more high transit fees Russia pays Ukraine. I imagine some of that was finding its way
into US pockets after 2014.
2.Ukraine supposedly helped itself to plenty of stolen gas from the pipeline. That will
stop.
3.Ukraine was occasionally shutting down the pipeline for political reasons until Russia paid
the ransom. Not anymore.
So, Russia and Germany were both highly motivated to finish the pipeline ASAP.
Germany would be 'down' no matter how much financial power it accumulates - i.e regardless
of NS2.
The imperial garrison at Rammstein AFB will make sure of that.
Putin not too long ago (can't find the article now) said he was prepared to help Europe
gain its independence should they wish to do so, Rammstein or no Rammstein.
What the Americans fear is the symbolic meaning of NS2 in terms of geopolitical influence
for Russia. The loss of maneuverability against Russia that results from a key vassal not
being able to move in complete obedience to Uncle Sam's wishes.
What they fear should this deal go ahead is a Germany/Russia/China Axis that would control
the world island and thus the world.
I was convinced that the US of Assholery had lost its infantile anti-NS2 'battle' in
September 2020, after watching an episode of DW Conflict Zone in which Sarah Kelly
interviewed Niels Annen, Germany's Deputy FM. Annen came to the interview armed to the teeth
with embarrassing facts about US hypocrisy including, but not limited to, the fact that USA,
itself, buys vast quantities of petroleum products from Russia each year.
The interview is Google-able and, apart from pure entertainment value, Sarah is much
easier on the eye than Tim Sebastian...
1. China is ruthless. They waited until the last possible second to sign a deal with Iran, thus ensuring they are
getting the best possible price for Iran's oil, basically robbing Iran blind.
Hmmm... I seem to remember Iran shafting China on the south Pars gas field when it looked like the JCPOA was looking
likely...
If this memory of mine was correct (it may not be) then you really can't blame China for a little commercial payback.
In any case it was shown as soon as JCPOA Mk.1 was passed Iran RAN, not walked, to smooch up to the west for business, not
China, not Russia. So if its just business for Iran then its just business for China.
In our eagerness to expose the empire's shortcomings in a quick 'gotcha!' moment we
shouldn't rush head first into false premises. To suggest Dear Uncle Sam is concerned with
anything other than his own navel is naive. He's the man with the plan. He knows that down
the road, Oceania's eastern border won't run along the Dnieper but right off the shore of
Airstrip One.
As has been mentioned before, the NN2 pipeline gives Germany leverage over Russia ,
not the other way around.
US => Germany => Russia.
Which is now plan b for the US. If then they can use their leverage over Germany to
steer it in any direction it wants to vs. Russia.
This will probably be followed by "targeted" sanctions on specific Politicians, Bankers
and Heads of industry. They only need to propose such sanctions individually for them
to have an effect. Using Pegasus for inside information to Blackmail those it wants to.
*****
Example of a sanctions racket :
Similar to the potential sanctions on any Lebanese Politian or Group Leaders if they get Oil
from Iran, Russia or China. The Lebanese population be damned.
"Apparently US Treasury has informed the government of Lebanon, that if any Oil
products from Iran make it into Lebanon, in any way; the government of Lebanon and all its
members will be sanctioned. This includes the Central Bankers"
Just in case you didn't understand how the crisis in the country is manufactured.
Pegasus again:
"leaks on the targets of Israeli spy program Pegasus, show hundreds in
Lebanon including the elected leadership of every party, every media outlet, & every
security agency, have been targeted by clients in 10 countries; all belonging to the
Imperialist camp.
But it is very easy to guess by looking at who are the external imperialist forces
active in Lebanon. USA/UK/France/Turkey/Germany/Canada/Israel/Qatar; that's eight. Plus Saudi
Arabia." *******
PS. Lebanon; This comes as a response to Sayyed Nasrallah stating in his last speech
that if the State in Lebanon is not able to provide fuel, he will bring it at the expense of
Hizbullah from Iran, dock it in the port of Beirut, and dared anyone to stop it from reaching
the people.
*****
Germany will only be the latest victim as the Mafia-US "protection" racket is ramped
up.
Both b and the many commenters raise excellent points. Yes, the US wants to hurt both Russia
and Germany. And yes the US *definitely* fears close cooperation between Moscow and Berlin.
But the main take home lesson is that the US failed despite enormous efforts to block NS2.
Russo-German cooperation is inevitable and the world will be better for it.
>>a lot of people think China is robbing Russia blind on the deal
Why would be Russia building Power of Siberia 2 and 3 to China then? Or selling LNG too?
You don't have much knowledge on the topic, the way it looks. A giant gas plant was built
near the border with China, the second biggest gas plant in the world, because the gas for
China is rich in rare elements, thus turning Russia in of the the biggest producers of
strategic helium, not to mention extracting many other rare elements. China gets gas that has
been cleaned of anything valuable from it, with the exception of the gas itself.
>>merkel is leaving anyway in September and thw Green party that will be taking
over
The latest polls show clear lead for CDU/CSU. And it looks like its too late.
>>the NS2 will never be 100 usable, tthe Green party will see to that. AT best it
will be only 50% usage.
Do you even follow what has been going on? Germany is free not to buy russian gas, that
is, to be left without gas if this is what it wants.
Do you see how nat gas prices exploded in Europe recently? Do you know why is that?
Because Russia refuses to sell additional volumes via Ukraine's network. It is a message to
finish the issues with NS 2 pipeline faster and then everything will be fine, there will be
plenty of space for new gas volumes, and the gas price will drop.
It is the UNSC resolutions of 2006, 2007 and 2010 which have laid the backbone for the
incremental diplomatic, economic and material warfare against Iran. Without them, there would
be no narrative framing Iran as an outlaw nor justification for crippling sanctions. That
Iran should even be subjected to the JCPOA is in itself an objective injustice.
Each of these resolutions could easily have been blocked by the two permanent members of
the UNSC we go to much lengths on this forum to depict as selfless adversaries of the Empire.
All they had to do was raise a finger and say niet. In other words, by their actions, these
two members placed Iran in a very disadvantageous trading position.
So, did they profit from this position of strength?
"According to the draft deal, obtained by Bloomberg, Washington and Berlin would
threaten sanctions and other retaliation if Russia 'tries to use energy as a weapon against
Ukraine', with Germany being obligated to take unspecified actions in the event of Russian
'misbehaviour' . [My Emphasis]
The article then turns to the interview:
"Professor Glenn Diesen of the University of South-Eastern Norway has explained what is
behind the US-Germany row is." [That last "is" appears to be a typo]
I suggest barflies pay close attention to Dr. Diesen who's the author of an outstanding
book on the geoeconomics of Russia and China, Russia's Geoeconomic Strategy for a Greater
Eurasia . I judge the following Q&A to be most relevant:
"Sputnik: The Biden administration waived sanctions on the firm behind the gas project,
Nord Stream 2 AG, and its chief executive, Matthias Warnig. At the same time, Secretary of
State Antony Blinken stated in June that the pipeline project was a Russian tool for the
coercion of Europe and signaled that the US has leverage against it. What's behind
Washington's mixed signals with regard to the project? How could they throw sand in Nord
Stream 2's gears, in your opinion - or are Blinken's threats empty?
"Glenn Diesen: The mixed signals demonstrate that the completion of Nord Stream 2 was a
defeat for the US. Biden confirmed that he waived sanctions because the project was near
complete. Sanctions could not stop the project [link at original], rather they would merely
continue to worsen relations with Berlin and Moscow. The best approach for Washington at this
point is to recognise that Nord Stream 2 is a done deal, and instead Washington will direct
its focus towards limiting the geo-economics consequences of the pipeline by obtaining
commitments from Berlin such as preserving Ukraine's role as a transit state [Link at
original].
"The US therefore waives sanctions against Nord Stream 2, yet threatens new sanctions if
Berlin fails to accept US conditions and limitations on Nord Stream 2. Blinken's threats
are loaded with 'strategic ambiguity', which could be aimed to conceal that they are merely
empty threats . However, strategic ambiguity is also conducive to prevent Berlin from
calculating the "costs" and possible remedies to US threats. Furthermore, ambiguity can be
ideal in terms of how to respond as it is not a good look to continuously threaten allies."
[Emphasis original]
The professor's closing remarks are also very important regarding Merkel's successor.
Where I disagree is with the notion that the Outlaw US Empire has geoeconomic leverage over
the EU--military yes, but the Empire is just as uncompetitive versus the EU as it is versus
China.
So, did they profit from this position of strength?
Of course they did, let's be real. China and Russia are not going to be the all benevolent saviors of the world, they never
were, never will.
They will always serve their interests first and foremost. Sometimes, they do get suckered
into UNSC resolutions like those you spoke of. Sometimes, there're backroom horse trading
that we're not privy to and little countries are just chips on the table...
The best we can hope for is that they can behave with more integrity than currently shown
by the incumbent anglospheric bloc in their re-ascendancy.
Either we ditch the UNSC system or everybody get nukes, because i can't see the current
UNSC members willing ditch their own, ever.
Lysander is correct.
The most important point to know is that US hegemony in Europe is predicated on fear and
hostility between Germany and Russia.
Types of interdependence between Germany and Russia, eg. NRG security, are a direct threat
to US dominance over Europe as a whole.
There are many limitations to European strategic autonomy -- and the EU embodies those
limits in many ways -- but the case of NS2 demonstrates an independent streak in German
strategy. It amounts to a zero sum loss for Washington.
Way too much confusion over what Nord Stream 2 really means.
1) Russian gas transiting Ukraine had already fallen from 150 bcm to the high 90s/low 100s
before Nord Stream 2 goes online.
Even after NS2 goes online, a significant amount of Russian gas will still transit via
Ukraine.
2) Energy demand generally increases over time, not decreases. Russian gas exports aren't
increasing in a straight line, but keep in mind that there are significant new competitors
now and in the process coming online. These include Azerbaijan as well as the ongoing
pipeline struggle through the Black Sea/Turkey/Eastern Med.
I never believed there was any chance of NS2 not completing; the only question was
when.
Lebanon does illustrate the incredible reach of the Empire. A leverage so long that every
door leads to self immolation. Your mention of the current spyware scandal is right on point.
These are instruments of absolute power.
What we need now is a worldwide Me Too movement to denounce this leverage. Taking that
first step would require a lot of courage for any blackmailed individual, but the one little
breach could lead to a flood of world citizens just about fed up with the Empire's shit.
It pains me that I do not remember exactly who it was, but one of the more erudite posters
here mentioned some time ago that Trump seemed more like a Bonapartist figure than a fascist
or a typical and simple representative of a faction in the oligarchy. While Trump is
certainly no representative of humanity, it just as certainly doesn't look like his rise was
in the playbook of the dominant faction of the oligarchy. Trump really seems to fit the mould
of a Bonapartist, though recast in the context of contemporary America. This would indicate
that the imperial oligarchy is in crisis, which itself could lead to fractures in the empire,
and among the empire's vassals in particular.
It is unwise to downplay the significance of Trump coming to power in 2016, regardless of
what feelings one may have about the individual himself. The conditions that led to the rise
of Trump not only persist, but have intensified. Those conditions cannot be resolved by mass
media gaslighting and social media censorship, which actually seems to be having an effect
more like holding the emergency relief valve on a boiler closed; it quiets an annoying sound,
but causes the underlying issue to grow more severe.
Basically, further splits in the EU are inevitable. It is the timing of those splits that
is difficult to predict, but the accuracy of that prediction hinges upon the accuracy of our
assessment of events occurring now. Interestingly, Trump is still part of these unfolding
events.
Fracturing NATO and the West hmmm ... If Germany gains any independence from U.S.
coercion they are 'fracturing Europe'. Bad Germany.
Germany must forever remain a vassal state of the U.S. by allowing the U.S. to use another
vassal state to control their energy supply. And who says we don't believe in freedom. Neocons are such vile creatures. Always twisting words but remember, whenever they say
something, the exact opposite is true.
One issue underlying this fiasco is I believe that the neocons / Atlantic Council were 100%
certain that Russia did not have the expertise to lay pipelines at the required depths, and
once Allseas was facing sanctions, the project would never be completed.
I believe that the exact pricing formula for Power of Siberia is confidential, but this
much is known:
"The price of Russian gas supplies to China increased in the second quarter of 2021 for
the first time since deliveries started via the Power of Siberia pipeline in 2019, but daily
delivery volumes fell in April, Interfax reported on Sunday.
Russian gas giant Gazprom GAZP.MM has said it supplied China with 3.84 billion cubic
metres of gas via the Power of Siberia pipeline in its first year of operation.
Citing Chinese customs data, Interfax said the price of gas increased to $148 per thousand
cubic metres, rising from $121 in the first quarter, and reversing a downward trend."
Also, Victoria Nuland informed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today about Biden's
cave to Russia. That must have been brutal for her. Regardless, nice to see a rare display of
sanity from s US administration.
The primary and only objective of the US Foreign policy vis-a-vis Europe since WW2 has
been to prevent Russia and Germany (now read the German run EU project) coupling up, that's
it, nothing else matters on Europe.
The completion of N-2 presents a serious blow tho this aim, the new pipeline is a must for
Germany, it must get finished, without it Germany's supply of energy would have been almost
fully controlled by the Americans who have either direct or indirect authority over every
major source of hydrocarbons except for Venezuela and Russia, the latter only partly, the
Ukrainian pipeline is fully in their sphere of influence.
Energy fuels everything from private dwellings to major corporations, it's together with
labour and technology the most important ingredient in every economy. To lose control of it
would have been a catastrophe for Germany, in particular if one takes into account the secret
treaty between Germany and the Allies (read the US) from 1949.
"On 23 May 1949, the Western Allies ratified a new German constitution, known as the
"Basic Law" or Grundgesetz.
However, two days prior, a secret state treaty - Geheimer Staatsvertrag - was also signed to
grant complete Allied
control over education and all licensed media, press, radio, television and publishing houses
until the year 2099.
This was confirmed by Major-General Gerd-Helmut Komossa, former head of German Military
Intelligence in his
book, "Die Deutsche Karte" or The German Card".
What's interesting about Power of Siberia-1 is that the gas is being stripped -- refined at
the newly completed Amur Gas Plant -- of its components prior to being piped into China. I
don't know if Germany's petrochemical industry will be deprived in similar manner with
NS2.
CD Waller @36--
Nothing in the energy production realm is carbon neutral. ROSATOM has mastered the fuel
cycle which means most if not all toxic waste will now be burned for energy. New reactors do
NOT use water as coolant. Clearly you need to update what you know about nuclear power.
The Russian 'victory' is very narrow and mostly consists of the patience and determination to
follow-thru while consistently being derided/attacked by Western media, pundits, and
politicians:
Since Russia/Gasprom owns NS2 100% (paying for half the construction cost outright and
financing the rest), there was never much need to stop construction, only to stop/limit
consumption. The 'trick' was to find a way to accomplish US/NATO goals that would not make
German leaders look like puppets.
Biden's approach looks good compared to Trump's heavy-handed approach. As they are BOTH
spokesman of the Empire's Deep State, we can surmise that this is merely good cop / bad cop
theatrics.
This USA-GERMAN agreement makes Germany appear to voluntarily support EU/NATO -
a good thing(tm) that most Germans will accept without question. But behind the scenes,
it's unlikely that there was ever any real choice, just a mutual desire to fashion a
'smart' policy that didn't undermine German political leaders.
Germany can now be pressured to support USA-Ukraine belligerence - if they don't they
will be portrayed as not living up to their obligations to US/NATO/EU/Ukraine as enshrined
in this agreement.
If Russia retaliates against German purchase reductions in any way they will be labeled
as a politically-driven, unreliable supplier. That will 'invite' sanctions and spark
efforts to force EU/Germany to eliminate all Russia goods from their markets.
Russia and China are likely to be increasingly linked in Western media/propaganda.
Deficiencies of one or the other will apply to BOTH.
The next few winters in EU will be very interesting.
Jackrabbit @41 incorrectly says Russia owns NS2 100% It's owned by Nord Stream 2 AG, and
here's its
website listing its financial investors, while its shareholders/owners are global. The
company is located in Zug, Switzerland. Here we are told who the financial companies
are :
"In April 2017, Nord Stream 2 AG signed the financing agreements for the Nord Stream 2 gas
pipeline project with ENGIE, OMV, Royal Dutch Shell, Uniper, and Wintershall. These five
European energy companies will provide long-term financing for 50 per cent of the total cost
of the project."
As with the first string, Russia doesn't own it 100% nor did it finance it completely;
rather, its stake was @50% It appears both Nord Streams will be managed from the same
location in Zug. I hope the company produces a similar sort of book to record its
accomplishment as it did for the first string pair, which can be found and downloaded here
.
Who is paying for it: Russia's energy giant Gazprom is the sole shareholder of the
Nord Stream 2 AG , the company in charge of implementing the €9.5 billion ($11.1
billion) project. Gazprom is also covering half of the cost. The rest, however, is being
financed by five western companies: ENGIE, OMV, Royal Dutch Shell, Uniper and
Wintershall.
Emphasis is mine.
<> <> <> <> <>
Nord Stream 2 AG is a German company that is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Russia's
Gazprom. The German subsidiary has borrowed half of the construction cost but is 100% owner
of the NS2 project.
From karlof1's link to Nord Stream 2 AG's Shareholder and Financial Investors page makes it
clear that NordStream 2 AG is a subsidiary of Gazprom international projects LLC, which is,
in turn, a subsidiary of Gazprom. Under "Shareholder" there is only one company listed:
Gasprom.
PS I was mistaken: Nord Stream 2 AG is a Swiss company, not a German one.
"4. Germany can now be pressured to support USA-Ukraine belligerence - if they don't they
will be portrayed as not living up to their obligations to US/NATO/EU/Ukraine as enshrined in
this agreement.
If Russia retaliates against German purchase reductions in any way they will be labeled as
a politically-driven, unreliable supplier. That will 'invite' sanctions and spark efforts to
force EU/Germany to eliminate all Russia goods from their markets."
Germany has been portrayed as not living up to its NATO obligations one way or another
since about 1985, and with respect to NS 2, since 2018. They do not seem fazed - maybe a
Green win would change that. If the USA-Ukraine get (more) belligerent, Germany might be less
likely to insist on Ukraine gas transit after 2024.
The Russian government owns a majority of Gazprom. As majority owner they can be said to
control the company and with that control comes an inescapable political dimension.
For the purposes of this discussion: the Russian government has biggest stake in the
financial success of Nord Stream 2. That "success" depends on gas sold, not simply the
completion of NS2 construction.
Update (2130ET): Tucker Carlson responded to today's 'unmasking' - namely an Axios report
which accuses him of trying to set up an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"I'm an American citizen, I can interview whoever I want - and plan to," said the Fox News
host.
Presented without further comment, along with Carlson's sit-down with journalist Glenn
Greenwald, who broke the Edward Snowden revelations about domestic spying and other illicit
activities conducted by the US government.
Last week, Fox News host Tucker Carlson said in a bombshell broadcast that an NSA
whistleblower had approached him with evidence that the National Security Agency
has been spying on his communications , with the intent to leak his emails to the press and
'take this show off the air.'
Today, Carlson told Fox Business' Maria Bartiromo that the emails have in fact been leaked
to journalists - at least one of whom has contacted him for what we presume is an upcoming
article on their contents.
"I was in Washington for a funeral last week and ran into someone I know well, who said '
I have a message for you ,' and then proceeded to repeat back to me details from emails and
texts that I sent, and had told no one else about. So it was verified. And the person said
'the NSA has this,' and that was proven by the person reading back the contents of the email,
'and they're going to use it against you.'
To be blunt with you, it was something I would have never said in public if it was wrong,
or illegal, or immoral. They don't actually have anything on me, but they do have my emails.
So I knew they were spying on me, and again, to be totally blunt with you - as a defensive
move, I thought 'I better say this out loud.'"
"Then, yesterday, I learned that - and this is going to come out soon - that the NSA
leaked the contents of my email to journalists in an effort to discredit me. I know, because
I got a call from one of them who said 'this is what your email was about.'
So, it is not in any way a figment of my imagination. It's confirmed. It's true. They
aren't allowed to spy on American citizens - they are. I think more ominously, they're using
the information they gather to put leverage and to threaten opposition journalists, people
who criticize the Biden administration. It's happening to me right now..."
" This is the stuff of banana republics and third-world countries ," replied Bartiromo.
Why there is so much social pressure if the idea of "herd immunity" became a fiasco after
emergence of Delta variant, which like South African variant can infect vaccinated people and
thus can spread in vaccinated population (although not as quickly as in unvaccinated population).
What government medical bureaucrats like Fauci are hiding ?
I am retired in the US so I only see some of the working world through others eyes. What I
am seeing more of is pressure to take the vaccine in US even though the infection numbers are
going down in most states.
I have shared before that I have a cousin, my age, that got one of the mRNA vaccines and
now has some sort of blood cancer. I believe this is related to the mRNA vaccines and that
more cases like my cousin will occur and eventually it will effect an "important" someone who
the MSM can't suppress the connection to the vaccines and the flood gates of related cases
like my cousin will open....can you imagine what the blowback will be??.....the jaded in me
says they are planning on that blowback to keep the chaos/fear/manipulation level
high.....its all China's fault/snark
What is the final straw that will bring the barbarian shit show to a halt? Inquiring minds
want to know. What will finally break through the brainwashing?
There is also technological imperialism. As long as key technologies (for example CPU
production) are controlled by the USA the project of power via sanctions is possible and viable.
But the USA demined this regime due to the greed of neoliberal elite which offshored a lot of
production to China and Taiwan.
Is your nation sovereign (independent) or a suzerainty (controlled)? Who wants to make us
all, whether we be nations or individuals, ENSLAVED? Name a democracy that isn't a
suzerainty.
Today slavery is less about people owning other people, instead, it is about exploiting
and controlling them. The Financial Empire wants to build a global empire by capturing
various regions, privatizing their assets and controlling them using financial mechanisms.
Its CONTROL elements are:
-- MEDIA -> Mind. Control individual's & society's information and RICHNESS of
thinking. The media enables matrix & servitude.
-- MARKETS -> Money. Control individual's REACH of influence & impact by
controlling their money supply and its value. Majority (90+%) of money is created by private
banks controlled by the Global Financial Syndicate. This enables it to consolidate assets
with its kleptocrats and power with its elites (financial, political, bureaucrats,
business,...).
-- MIS (Military Intelligence Service) -> Might. If the individual/society/elites wants
to be independent and have marshaled enough resources to build a good RESISTANCE then they're
constrained or eliminated by intelligence agencies, coup masters or use of force.
However, the foundation of this Financial Empire is based on lies, myths, deceits, frauds,
... What is its Achilles' Heel?
"It is not possible to found a lasting power upon injustice, perjury, and treachery. These
may, perhaps, succeed at first, and limp along on hope for awhile with a flourishing
appearance. But time betrays their weakness, and they eventually fall into ruin of their own
designs."
– Demosthenes
But it shows the fundamental contradictions of global capitalism: on the one hand, the
internationalization of division of labor as an aspect of technological advancement; on the
other hand, divisions and rivalries between states and the monopolistic ambitions of
technological leaders, which act against cooperation, mutual gain and ultimately human and
social development for all.
This is why capitalism has to be overthrown and eradicated. It is anti-development for the
poor. And its fundamental dynamics of geopolitical division pave the way for world war.
Piotr Berman@54 advocates compromising with imperialism. Sadly, imperialism doesn't return
the favor. The operation of the imperialist world system inevitably leads to economic crises,
which cannot be resolved by a good policy, because it's the system that is crazy. The system
makes the people running it go nuts, not the overlords being crazy that cause things to go
nuts. World economic crises, including the inability to cope with world systemic threats like
climate change, inevitably afflict the poor worse. Reforms will not take away this disparity
in effect. Most of all, of course, war, threats of war, fears of war, arms races,
interventions, economic sieges are indispensable to the normal function of the imperialist
world system.
You can't win a rigged game. Telling people they should play anyhow because it's the only
game in town, makes no sense.
When the end of the road comes into view, it's too late. Insisting on mile markers till
the catastrophe is not wisdom.
I admit to some amusement over the suspension of the female American sprinter Sha'Carri
Richardson by WADA. Imagine if she were Russian. WADA has waged a political war against
Russian Olympians ruling against the entire national team most of whom never used performance
enhancing drugs according to independent testing. And now the expected cries of racism
against a blood test for a banned drug. Sort of ironic I suppose, but watched a clips of
several African American sports pundits and they all agreed that rules are rules and must be
followed. It has been mostly white pundits who have virtue signaled that her suspension must
be lifted due to racism.
As of July 2, 2021 out of 4456 total deaths attributed to vaccination (of them 1890 after
vaccination with Pfizer), it looks like there were at least 36 death of people aged less then 30
years after vaccination with Pfizer vaccine (out of 61 total). Around 136 millions were fully
vaccinated,.
Other sources list higher figure (6113)
CDC- 6,113 DEAD Following COVID-19 Injections ("Besides the 6,113 deaths reported, there are
5,172 permanent disabilities, 6,435 life threatening events, and 51,558 emergency room visits."
)so my method of extracting those data from VAERS database might be wrong or not all death are
reported to VAERS.
Another 5 young people were crippled but survived (67 total).
Each year, more than 165 million Americans get the flu shot. There were 85 reported
deaths following influenza vaccination in 2017; 119 deaths in 2018; and 203 deaths in
2019
Between mid-December 2020 and April 23, 2021, at which point between 95 million and 100
million Americans had received their COVID-19 shots, there were 3,544 reported deaths
following COVID vaccination, or about 30 per day
In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available
vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 -- a period of 15.5 years
As of April 23, 2021, VAERS had also received 12,618 reports of serious adverse events.
In total, 118,902 adverse event reports had been filed
In the European Union, the EudraVigilance system had as of April 17, 2021, received
330,218 injury reports after vaccination with one of the four available COVID vaccines,
including 7,766 deaths
In a May 5, 2021, Fox News report, Tucker Carlson asked the question no one is really
allowed to ask: "How many Americans have died after taking the COVID vaccine?"
1
Then there's not selling Syria the latest S#00 system to help keep Israel out of Syrian
skies. That tells me he's using Syria for personal / State gain and that is where he's wrong.
That's what makes him just another politician.
I totally get it, there are things that are puzzling to those of us in the audience,
watching the moves from afar.
An advanced S-300 or S-400 system could paint every F-16 as it took off from Israel. This
would be a red line for Israel and would bring in Uncle Shmuel.
Syria (and by extension Russia) has been allowing Israel to overfly her territory and bomb
Hezbollah installations.
It's puzzling – why would you allow a foreign power to bomb your territory, especially
if you have S-300's. The answer must be that Syria and Russia are holding back on purpose for
reasons only known to them. I can speculate, in that they don't want to give away military
capability unless the war goes hot.
Think about the situation now, as opposed to the 90's. Russia's military has been
modernized; Military physical fitness is up by 30% (better nutrition?); Foreign exchange is in
good shape; the economy is modernizing; food production is up – so Russia is no longer
food insecure; oil can be extracted at prices that Saudi cannot compete with; the Artic route
is opening up; national economy is more diversified thanks to the western sanctions; Yamal LNG
will be fueling Asia; Nordstream will be fueling Europe.
"In effect, those that have joined the Liberal US Empire, have forfeited their sovereign
rights on foreign and domestic policies to those of the United State. You can see it all over
Europe but also among Muslim countries as well as in East Asia."
In fact, there is NOTHING "liberal" about the U$ empire, and it's conduct with the rest of
the world.
"... De Garay explained that after receiving the second coronavirus vaccine dose, her daughter started developing severe abdominal and chest pains. Maddie described the severity of the pain to her mother as "it feels like my heart is being ripped out through my neck." ..."
"... The Ohio mother added her daughter experienced additional symptoms that included gastroparesis, nausea, vomiting, erratic blood pressure, heart rate, and memory loss. "She still cannot digest food. She has a tube to get her nutrition," De Garay said to Carlson. "She also couldn't walk at one point, then she could I don't understand why and [physicians] are not looking into why...now she's back in a wheelchair and she can't hold her neck up. Her neck pulls back." ..."
"... De Garay said she had joined a Facebook support group to help people cope with the unexpected events happening from the coronavirus vaccine trial, and she said it was shut down. "It's just not right," she said. ..."
"... Sen. Ron Johnson , R-Wis., has sent letters to the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna seeking answers about adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine following a June 28 press conference with affected individuals. The conference in Milwaukee included stories from five people, including De Garay ..."
"... The Wisconsin senator noted that some adverse reactions were detailed in Pfizer's and Moderna's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) memorandums following early clinical trials ..."
"... Those reactions included nervous system disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders for the Pfizer EUA memo. The Moderna EUA memo included reactions such as nervous system disorders, vascular disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, according to Johnson's letter. ..."
"... You missed the whole point! The issue is that the government is not acknowledging and and not reporting these side effects of the vaccine. Instead they are lying about the safety. If you are young, you are much more likely to get sick and injured by the vaccine than COVID. ..."
"... anyone under 25 should not get the vaccine because the percentages are about the same or worse having a negative impact from the vaccine versus the actual virus. ..."
"... With the Covid19 mortality rate among the children why even vaccinate? As a Chemist / Biochemist I learned that there is always unintended consequences. ..."
"... Vaccines may have long term effects that are not known today. ..."
"... The CDC's generic guidelines for getting a vaccine for any reason are very restrictive, first being, the disease you're getting vaccinated against has to pose a real, immediate danger. CV-19 poses virtually no danger whatsoever to kids under 14. Of all the deaths of children 14 and under in the last 18 months only .8% of them had a case of CV-19. That's 367 deaths out of over 46,000. (Data from CDC website) Forcing them to take an experimental vaccine that they absolutely don't need is criminal. As a parent, allowing your child to take the vaccine without spending a few hours doing some research is criminally negligent. This is like some terribly warped Kafka novel but it's real. ..."
Mother Stephanie De Garay joins 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' to discuss how her 12-year-old
daughter volunteered for the Pfizer vaccine trial and is now in a wheelchair.
An Ohio mother is speaking out
about her 12-year-old daughter suffering extreme reactions and nearly dying after volunteering
for the Pfizer coronavirus
vaccine trial.
Stephanie De Garay told "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Thursday
that after reaching out to multiple physicians they claimed her daughter, Maddie De Garay,
couldn't have become gravely ill from the vaccine.
"The only diagnosis we've gotten for her is that it's conversion disorder or functional
neurologic symptom disorder, and they are blaming it on anxiety," De Garay told Tucker Carlson.
"Ironically, she did not have anxiety before the vaccine."
De Garay explained that after receiving the second coronavirus vaccine dose, her daughter
started developing severe abdominal and chest pains. Maddie described the severity of the pain
to her mother as "it feels like my heart is being ripped out through my neck."
The Ohio mother added her daughter experienced additional symptoms that included
gastroparesis, nausea, vomiting, erratic blood pressure, heart rate, and memory loss. "She still cannot digest food. She has a tube to get her nutrition," De Garay said to
Carlson. "She also couldn't walk at one point, then she could I don't understand why and
[physicians] are not looking into why...now she's back in a wheelchair and she can't hold her
neck up. Her neck pulls back."
Carlson asked whether any officials from the Biden administration or representatives from
Pfizer company have reached out to the family. "No, they have not," she answered.
"The response with the person that's leading the vaccine trial has been atrocious," she
said. "We wanted to know what symptoms were reported and we couldn't even get an answer on
that. It was just that 'we report to Pfizer and they report to the FDA.' That's all we
got."
After her heartbreaking experience, the Ohio mother said she's still "pro-vaccine, but also
pro-informed consent." De Garay mentioned she's speaking out because she feels like everyone
should be fully aware of this tragic incident and added the situation is being "pushed down and
hidden."
De Garay said she had joined a Facebook support group to help people cope with the
unexpected events happening from the coronavirus vaccine trial, and she said it was shut
down. "It's just not right," she said.
"They need to do research and figure out why this happened, especially to people in the
trial. I thought that was the point of it," De Garay concluded. "They need to come up with
something that's going to treat these people early because all they're going to do is keep
getting worse."
Sen. Ron
Johnson , R-Wis., has sent letters to the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna seeking answers
about adverse reactions to the COVID-19vaccine
following a June 28 press conference with affected individuals. The conference in Milwaukee
included stories from five people, including De Garay.
The Wisconsin senator noted that some adverse reactions were detailed in Pfizer's and
Moderna's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA) memorandums
following early clinical trials.
Those reactions included nervous system disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue
disorders for the Pfizer EUA memo. The Moderna EUA memo included reactions such as nervous
system disorders, vascular disorders and musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders,
according to Johnson's letter.
Pfizer and Moderna did not immediately respond to inquiries from Fox News about Johnson's
letters.
J jeff5150357 6 hours ago
My daughter had the same thing happen to
her after getting a flu vaccine 9 years ago. Within days of getting it, she went from being as
healthy as an ox to years of awful, unexplained illness. The short version is they concluded
that she had a severe adverse reaction to the vaccine, but from the delivery chemicals, not the
flu content itself. Formaldehyde was the likely major cause. Now she is getting ready to begin
college and is being required to get the Covid vaccine by her university and the NCAA for
athletics. It is causing her, my wife and I horrible anxiety and we feel like we are being
railroaded into something that could be very dangerous for her. Any discussion or concern
expressed on social media is immediately blocked. I know from years of working in the research
grants office at Yale University that the big pharma industry is powerful and will go to great
lengths to control the narrative. What I don't understand is why mainstream media and social
media are so willing to help them these days!
jeff5150357 4 hours ago
While the college experience is great for a young adult. I would look at getting a degree
online. Her future earnings will be based on her merit, not where she went to school. If
someone was telling me what to do with my personal health, and I was uncomfortable with their
prescription, I would follow my instincts.
LoraJane92649 jeff5150357 5
hours ago
If her flu vax is well documented she should be able to get a waiver. Hopefully you
have an able bodied family physician or medical team to advocate on your behalf.
G gunvald 7 hours ago
You know when you take it that there can be adverse
reactions. So, in that sense, you are informed. Any one of us could be the odd person. That
said, I have a problem with any child getting these vaccines, especially when most people
recover from the disease. It's one thing for me as an elderly person to make the decision to
take it as covid affects the elderly person more and I wanted to avoid that ventilator. Most of
my life has been lived and that's how I evaluated it. This will always come down to putting it
in God's hands.
TheTruthAsItIs gunvald 6 hours ago
You missed the whole point! The
issue is that the government is not acknowledging and and not reporting these side effects of the
vaccine. Instead they are lying about the safety. If you are young, you are much more likely to
get sick and injured by the vaccine than COVID.
D DontDestoryUSA
gunvald 4 hours ago
It's not being informed when you are forced to take a vaccination that they
clearly had trouble with past vaccination sounds like a lawsuit for the university is on the
horizon. With a big pay day
Tony5SFG 7 hours ago
"Ohio
mother said she's still "pro-vaccine, but also pro-informed consent." " And as a pediatrician
for over 40 yrs (retired now) and a 10 year member of my medical school's Institutional Review
Board (which had to approve all human research), THAT is a problem I have been bringing up As
far as requiring all young people, such as entering or in college, to get the vaccine Children
are a protected class and the informed consent for research on them is much more strenuous than
for adults And, requiring young people to take these new vaccines is the equivalent of doing
research on them. The issue of myocarditis is quite troubling. And while it has been seen in
natural infections, I have not yet seen an adequate risk - benefit evaluation regarding risking
natural infection versus vaccination And people say that the myocarditis is not severe, no one
can be sure of the long term effects of a young person getting it. The vaccines that we give
children have been used for decades and the risks/benefits have been well established
D DallasAmEmail Tony5SFG 6 hours ago
A friends daughter who just went through internship as
Physicians assistant based on the percentages in age groups believes anyone under 25 should not
get the vaccine because the percentages are about the same or worse having a negative impact
from the vaccine versus the actual virus. Yes, older age groups the percent having negative
impact from the virus is much greater than the vaccine, so yes older age groups should get the
vaccine. What really is bothersome is when Youtube removes Dr. Robert Malone video who helped
create the mrna vaccine express concern that normal testing has not happened and be cautious
about taking it, especially for the young.
marinesfather601 Tony5SFG 5
hours ago
With the Covid19 mortality rate among the children why even vaccinate? As a Chemist /
Biochemist I learned that there is always unintended consequences.
Hilltopper9 7 hours ago
Vaccines may have long term effects that are not known
today. The same could be said of all the chemicals we apply to our body daily through shampoos,
hair dyes, body lotions, and suntan lotions. Life's a gamble. It's up to each individual to
make the best decisions possible given the facts available.
A akbushrat
Hilltopper9 6 hours ago
The CDC's generic guidelines for getting a vaccine for any reason are
very restrictive, first being, the disease you're getting vaccinated against has to pose a
real, immediate danger. CV-19 poses virtually no danger whatsoever to kids under 14. Of all the
deaths of children 14 and under in the last 18 months only .8% of them had a case of CV-19.
That's 367 deaths out of over 46,000. (Data from CDC website) Forcing them to take an
experimental vaccine that they absolutely don't need is criminal. As a parent, allowing your
child to take the vaccine without spending a few hours doing some research is criminally
negligent. This is like some terribly warped Kafka novel but it's real.
F
Fauxguy930 Hilltopper9 5 hours ago
☢️ N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl)nitrosamine is a
nitrosamine that has butyl and 4-hydroxybutyl substituents. In mice, it causes high-grade,
invasive cancers in the urinary bladder, but not in any other tissues. It has a role as a
carcinogenic agent. Ingredient in all shots. How did a carcinogen get FDA approved, oh it was
an emergency.
R RussellRika 6 hours ago
I have a
twelve year old, and not a chance I'd allow her to volunteer for any vaccine trial, and
especially not this one. She very much wanted to get a vaccine, until she started reading about
some of the adverse reactions. Sorry, but I'm a child, the benefit does not outweigh the risk.
MrEd50 6 hours ago
I took the vaccine because I'm 60 years old and work with special ed kids. My 18 year old child
refuses to take it and I support him on this. COVID shouldn't be an issue for most of us.
Putin
Signs Law Forcing Foreign Social Media Giants To Open Russian Offices (reuters.com) 47
Posted by msmash on Thursday July 01, 2021 @12:45PM from the how-about-that dept. President
Vladimir Putin has signed a law that
obliges foreign social media giants to open offices in Russia , a document published by the
government on Thursday showed, the latest move by Moscow to exert greater control over Big
Tech. From a report: The Russian authorities are keen to strengthen their control of the
internet and to reduce their dependence on foreign companies and countries. In particular, they
have objected in the past to political opponents of the Kremlin using foreign social media
platforms to organise what they say are illegal protests and to publicise politically-tinged
investigations into alleged corruption. Moscow has fined firms for failing to delete content it
says is illegal, slowing down the speed of Twitter as punishment, and on Wednesday opened a new
case against Alphabet subsidiary Google for breaching personal data legislation. by
Vlijmen Fileer ( 120268 ) on
Thursday July 01, 2021 @12:47PM ( #61540686 )
Other countries do the same. But somehow get less media attention for it
"Objective judgement is our jugement about the people we do not like ;-)"
In view of the fact that Delta (Indian) variant can infect vaccinated with the first
generation of vaccines people Fauci statement "when you get vaccinated, you not only protect your
own health, that of the family, but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the
spread of the virus throughout the community." i obviously wrong.
Delta Covid-19 Variant Can Infect Vaccinated People
Those who don't get their news from mainstream media have been aware of Anthony Fauci's
connection to "gain of function" research for months. Now, mainstream media is picking it up so
the White House is scrambling.
For months, there wasn't a day that went by when Dr. Anthony Fauci wasn't doing multiple
interviews spreading fear of Covid-19, demanding people take the various "vaccines," and
changing his talking points from moment to moment on a slew of healthcare-related issues. We
saw a clear change last week when the White House's chief doc seemed to fly under the radar for
the first time since Joe Biden took office.
It all comes down to "gain of function" research that is almost certainly the cause of the
Wuhan Flu. Developed in the Wuhan Virology Lab, Covid-19 either escaped or was intentionally
released. While many in academia still hold onto the notion that the pandemic was started by
bats, they do so simply because it hasn't -- and likely cannot -- be completely ruled out as
long as the Chinese Communist Party has a say in the matter. But many are now accepting the
likelihood that it came from the Wuhan Virology Lab as a result of "gain of function"
research.
We also now know that Fauci has been a
huge proponent of this research and he participated
in funding it at the Wuhan Virology Lab.
More evidence is emerging every day despite the bad doctor's protestations. And when I say
"we also now know," that's to say more mainstream media watchers know. Those who turn to
alternative media have known about Fauci's involvement with the Wuhan Virology Lab for a
while.
They've been trying to cover their tracks. A bombshell revelation from The
National Pulse yesterday showed they realized this was going to be a problem long before
Rand Paul
or Tucker Carlson started
calling Fauci out.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology scrubbed the U.S. National Institutes of Health as one
of its research partners from its website in early 2021. The revelation comes despite Dr.
Anthony Fauci insisting no relationship existed between the institutions.
Archived versions of the Wuhan lab's site also reveal a research update – "
Will SARS Come Back? " – appearing to describe gain-of-function research being
conducted at the institute by entities funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institute of
Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).
On March 21st, 2021, the lab's website listed six U.S.-based research partners:
University of Alabama, University of North Texas, EcoHealth Alliance, Harvard University, The
National Institutes of Health (NIH), the United States, and the National Wildlife
Federation.
One day later, the page was revised to contain just two research
partners – EcoHealth Alliance and the University of Alabama. By March 23rd,
EcoHealth Alliance was the sole partner
remaining .
The Wuhan Institute of Virology's decision to wipe the NIH from its website came amidst
heightened
scrutiny that the lab was the source of COVID-19 – and that U.S. taxpayer dollars
from the NIH may have funded the research. The unearthing of the lab's attempted coverup also
follows a heated
exchange between Senator Rand Paul and Fauci, who attempted to distance his organization
from the Wuhan lab.
Beyond establishing a working relationship between the NIH and the Wuhan Institue of
Virology, now-deleted posts
from the site also detail studies bearing the hallmarks of gain-of-function research
conducted with the Wuhan-based lab. Fauci, however, asserted to Senator Paul that "the NIH
has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of
Virology."
There is still a tremendous gap between those who know the truth about Fauci and those who
still think he's just a smart little guy who tells Joe Biden what to do when it comes to Covid.
As we've documented multiple times in the past, there seems to be a cult of personality
surrounding Fauci, or as many have called it, Faucism. He is practically worshipped as a savior
by millions who believe everything he says even if he contradicts something he had said in the
past.
Today, he was interviewed on CBS News during "Face the Nation." It was a softball interview,
as always, and at no point was "gain of function" research discussed. Instead, John Dickerson
tried to sound smart and Fauci gave him kudos in an odd back-and-forth promoting vaccines.
JOHN DICKERSON : So, if- if a person is deciding whether or not to get vaccinated, they
have to keep in mind whether it's going to keep them healthy. But based on these new
findings, it would suggest they also have an opportunity, if vaccinated, to knock off or
block their ability to transmit it to other people. So, does it increase the public health
good of getting the vaccination or make that clearer based on these new findings?
DR. FAUCI : And you know, JOHN, you said it very well. I could have said it better.
It's absolutely the case. And that's the reason why we say when you get vaccinated, you not
only protect your own health, that of the family, but also you contribute to the community
health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community. And in other words,
you become a dead end to the virus. And when there are a lot of dead ends around, the virus
is not going to go anywhere. And that's when you get a point that you have a markedly
diminished rate of infection in the community. And that's exactly the reason, and you said it
very well, of why we encourage people and want people to get vaccinated. The more people you
get vaccinated, the safer the entire community is.
JOHN DICKERSON : And do you think now that this guidance has come out on relaxing the
mass mandates if you've been vaccinated, that people who might have been hesitant before will
start to get vaccinated in greater numbers?
DR. FAUCI : You know, I hope so, JOHN. The underlying reason for the CDC doing this was
just based on the evolution of the science that I mentioned a moment ago. But if, in fact,
this serves as an incentive for people to get vaccinated, all the better. I hope it does,
actually.
Don't let the presence of this interview fool you. It was almost certainly scheduled before
the "gain of function" research discussion hit the mainstream. But as Revolver News reported
today, we should start seeing less and less of Fauci going forward.
What happened to the almighty Dr. Fauci? Last week he was on TV telling all of us that life
wouldn't get back to normal for at least another year or so, and this week he's pretty much
gone. So what happened?
Well, a lot, actually. The biggest turn for Fauci involves 3 little words: Gain of Function.
It was this past week when the "gain of function" dots were publicly connected to the good
doctor. This is nothing new for those of us on the right. Here on Revolver, we've covered
Fauci's gain of function research extensively and the evidence against him is very damning.
A couple of months ago Fox News Host Steve Hilton blew the lid off of Fauci's macabre
obsession (and funding) of research involving the manipulation of highly contagious viruses.
Hilton laid the groundwork, but it was Senator Rand Paul who called out Fauci and his ghoulish
research face to face during a Senate hearing.
But even more notable, is that the CDC just updated their guidelines on mask-wearing and
essentially ended the pandemic -- a pandemic that Fauci has been the proud face of for over a
year now -- and when that announcement hit, he was nowhere to be found. And his absence didn't
go unnoticed.
Yes indeed, you'd think that Fauci would have been front and center to discuss the CDC's new
guidelines the moment the news hit. The "Golden Boy" taking yet another victory lap. After all,
Fauci never misses a moment in the spotlight. But he was not hitting the airwaves with the
typical fanfare.
It is still very possible that Fauci can make a resurgence. His fan-base is up there with
Meghan Markle and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, though even more devoted than the divas'. Unlike
other useful idiots, the White House will not be able to detach easily from Fauci, nor do they
want to. At this point, they're telling him to lay low and avoid any interviews in which they
do not have complete control over the "journalist" involved. John Dickerson has been a Democrat
Party pawn for decades.
Behind the scenes, they're already planning on ditching him. It will be done with all the
pomp one would expect for one of their heroes and will be used to mark the end of the
"emergency" in the United States. He'll still be promoting vaccines and will try to stay in his
precious limelight, but Democrats are ready to move on and open up the country. It has just
been too politically suicidal to persist with their lockdown mentality.
The key to seeing Fauci's narcissistic reign end is for patriots to continue to hammer him
on his involvement with developing Covid-19. His beloved "gain of function research" needs to
be explained to any who will listen. Then, maybe, Fauci will go away.
Sounds like a great book for Tucker to recommend to that Army Chief of Staff!
Notable quotes:
"... I call it ROLE -- The Racism Of Low Expectations. This phenomenon has done ten times more to damage Black lives than can be attributed to CRT or institutionalized racism. ..."
"... A subset of ROLE is MVT. This is Manufactured Victimhood Theory. This comes about from influential Black "leaders" who, instead of teaching Blacks the truth about how to live good lives (work hard, develop skills, etc.), they told them to apply as their life strategy "say you are a victim." ..."
Recently the Joint Chiefs of Staff remarked that the US military should teach CTR to our
military essentially because they shoild teach all theories.
That doesn't make sense to me but I would like to put another theory into the public
sphere. I call it ROLE -- The Racism Of Low Expectations. This phenomenon has done ten times
more to damage Black lives than can be attributed to CRT or institutionalized racism.
A subset of ROLE is MVT. This is Manufactured Victimhood Theory. This comes about from
influential Black "leaders" who, instead of teaching Blacks the truth about how to live good
lives (work hard, develop skills, etc.), they told them to apply as their life strategy "say
you are a victim."
I am hoping that ROLE and MVT will become part of all aspects of American life -- all
levels of education, the military, businesses, the media, etc.
If the goal really is to improve Black lives, ROLE and MVT should be the rage over the
next few years.
Tom F
John Callahan 4 hours ago
Corporate America 'makes money critiquing itself.' The rest of us pay the price in
diminished freedom.
Wokeism is fascism dressed up in new clothes- the censorship, demonization of
groups and individuals and the physical violence against people and property remain the same.
Corporate America has one overriding interest- making money. Paying the left (and yes,
fascism is of the left) through critiquing itself and token monetary donations is a get out
of jail free card for Corporate America.
"Capitalism knows only one color: that color is green; all else is necessarily
subservient to it, hence, race, gender and ethnicity cannot be considered within it."
- Thomas Sowell
Dom Fried 4 hours ago
It will end the same. Almost, because there will be nobody to stop it.
Ed Baron 3 hours ago
Very well said, John. Fascism is a fundamental element or subset of Leftist or Marxist
thought. It demands conformity of the individual to the new "woke" state and it punishes any
who dissent. It's not incidental that American Leftists, including FDR, loved Mussolini prior
to WWII. That bromance has been washed clean, and attributed instead to the Right. Such a
typical transference technique used by Marxist.
Alex Guiness
I interpret your supposition 'White male global warming', as meaning White Males are
particularly flatulent hence are producing Green House Gases with their diets of greasy meats
(some on sticks), carnival funnel cakes, corn dogs, Philly cheese-steaks, Popeyes fried
chicken, all washed down with Bud Light. Would it kill them to have a salad now and then? How
can their spouses stand to be around them unless they are also consuming the same foods.
Imagine what it must be like at a sermon in a Lutheran Church, the whitest church of all.
They leave the doors open else a spark could set the whole place ablaze.
carol Perry
Thanks for today's chuckle Alex.
Alex Guiness
read my smurfs comment. i just posted it
Lynn Silton
Mr. Ramaswamy is right in every way! I don't belong to the Woke Church. I'll never join.
America is an inspirational country as is all it's written declarations. We, the people rule.
No religion can overrule it. We will not allow religious 'honor killings.' They are murder
here. We will not allow Wokism here it is the murder of our hopes and dreams which belong to
everybody regardless of appearance. I don't even know how appearance (of all things) became a
religion. The whole thing is so sick, people of all shades are speaking out and we will put
this crazy idea down. Here, we marry across all appearances. New people are often different
in appearance than parents. Woke will die of that alone. That's why we have an immigration
'problem' . People love our constitution and Declaration of Independence. People love that
they rule here, not the government. That's our creed and promise. Help protect it!!
VAERS data: "5,888 deaths", "19,597 hospitalizations", "43,891 urgent care", "58,800
office visits", "1,459 anaphylaxis", "1,737 Bell's palsy", "2,190 heart attacks" and "652
miscarriages". CDC says data is "unreliable". You choose who to believe.
WarrenLiz 16 hours ago
Over 15,472 dead from Jab in 27 EU countries, about half of Europe's 50 countries.
The EudraVigilance database reports that through June 19, 2021 there are 15,472 deaths
and 1,509,266 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19
shots:
The answer to Carlson's question is because.. it's a money grabbing death cult!.
Natural immun system is destroyed... just wait till next flu season or the next virus
they relase and see what death numbers we see!
racing_flowers 17 hours ago
Isn't it curious that the 3 big pharma Corps (think Vacc pushers) and the big 2 MSM
Corps are BOTH controlled by Blackrock Partners Hedge Fund...
Nona Yobiznes 18 hours ago remove link
Them going after the children makes me deeply suspicious. Nobody under 50, unless
they're made of blubber, dies from this. In 2020, there was practically zero excess death
for people younger than 70 years old in Sweden. These are their official statistics. For
the vast majority of people it's basically a flu you get for a couple days and you're over
it. What the **** is all this about? If the vaccine is only really good for preventing
hospitalizations, and doesn't stop you from spreading or from catching variants, what in
the hell are we giving kids vaccines when they are more likely to die from the regular flu?
It's freaky, and it stinks.
In the later years of an abusive relationship I was in, my abuser had become so confident in
how mentally caged he had me that he'd start overtly telling me what he is and what he was
doing. He flat-out told me he was a sociopath and a manipulator, trusting that I was so
submitted to his will by that point that I'd gaslight myself into reframing those statements in
a sympathetic light. Toward the end one time he told me "I am going to rape you," and then he
did, and then he talked about it to some friends trusting that I'd run perception management on
it for him.
The better he got at psychologically twisting me up in knots and the more submitted I
became, the more open he'd be about it. He seemed to enjoy doing this, taking a kind of
exhibitionistic delight in showing off his accomplishments at crushing me as a person, both to
others and to me. Like it was his art, and he wanted it to have an audience to appreciate
it.
I was reminded of this while watching a recent Fox News appearance by Glenn Greenwald where he
made an observation we've discussed here
previously about the way the CIA used to have to infiltrate the media, but now just openly
has US intelligence veterans in mainstream media punditry positions managing public
perception.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/jU58mrEpPvU
"If you go and Google, and I hope your viewers do, Operation Mockingbird, what you will
find is that during the Cold War these agencies used to plot how to clandestinely manipulate
the news media to disseminate propaganda to the American population," Greenwald
said .
"They used to try to do it secretly. They don't even do it secretly anymore. They don't
need Operation Mockingbird. They literally put John Brennan who works for NBC and James
Clapper who works for CNN and tons of FBI agents right on the payroll of these news
organizations. They now shape the news openly to manipulate and to deceive the American
population."
In 1977 Carl Bernstein published an article titled " The CIA and the Media " reporting
that the CIA had
covertly infiltrated America's most influential news outlets and had over 400 reporters who
it considered assets in a program known as
Operation Mockingbird . It was a major scandal, and rightly so. The news media are meant to
report truthfully about what happens in the world, not manipulate public perception to suit the
agendas of spooks and warmongers.
Nowadays the CIA collaboration happens right out in the open, and the public is too
brainwashed and gaslit to even recognize this as scandalous. Immensely influential outlets like
The New York Times uncritically pass on CIA disinfo which is then spun as fact by cable news
pundits . The sole owner of The Washington Post is a CIA contractor ,
and WaPo has never once disclosed this conflict of interest when reporting on US intelligence
agencies per standard journalistic protocol. Mass media outlets
now openly employ intelligence agency veterans like John Brennan, James Clapper,
Chuck Rosenberg, Michael Hayden, Frank Figliuzzi, Fran Townsend, Stephen Hall, Samantha
Vinograd, Andrew McCabe, Josh Campbell, Asha Rangappa, Phil Mudd, James Gagliano, Jeremy Bash,
Susan Hennessey, Ned Price and Rick Francona, as are known
CIA assets like NBC's Ken Dilanian, as are
CIA interns like Anderson Cooper and CIA applicants like
Tucker Carlson.
They're just rubbing it in our faces now. Like they're showing off.
And that's just the media. We also see this flaunting behavior exhibited in the US
government-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a propaganda operation geared at
sabotaging foreign governments not aligned with the US which according to its own founding
officials was set up to do overtly what the CIA used to do covertly. The late author and
commentator William Blum
makes this clear :
[I]n 1983, the National Endowment for Democracy was set up to "support democratic
institutions throughout the world through private, nongovernmental efforts". Notice the
"nongovernmental"" part of the image, part of the myth. In actuality, virtually every penny
of its funding comes from the federal government, as is clearly indicated in the financial
statement in each issue of its annual report. NED likes to refer to itself as an NGO
(Non-governmental organization) because this helps to maintain a certain credibility abroad
that an official US government agency might not have. But NGO is the wrong category. NED is a
GO.
"We should not have to do this kind of work covertly," said Carl Gershman in 1986, while
he was president of the Endowment. "It would be terrible for democratic groups around the
world to be seen as subsidized by the C.I.A. We saw that in the 60's, and that's why it has
been discontinued. We have not had the capability of doing this, and that's why the endowment
was created."
And Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, declared in 1991:
"A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA."
In effect, the CIA has been laundering money through NED.
We see NED's fingerprints all over pretty much any situation where the western power
alliance needs to manage public perception about a CIA-targeted government, from Russia to
Hong
Kong to Xinjiang to the
imperial propaganda operation known as Bellingcat.
Hell, intelligence insiders are just openly running for office now. In an article titled "
The CIA
Democrats in the 2020 elections ", World Socialist Website documented the many veterans of
the US intelligence cartel who ran in elections across America in 2018 and 2020:
"In the course of the 2018 elections, a large group of former military-intelligence
operatives entered capitalist politics as candidates seeking the Democratic Party nomination
in 50 congressional seats" nearly half the seats where the Democrats were targeting
Republican incumbents or open seats created by Republican retirements. Some 30 of these
candidates won primary contests and became the Democratic candidates in the November 2018
election, and 11 of them won the general election, more than one quarter of the 40 previously
Republican-held seats captured by the Democrats as they took control of the House of
Representatives. In 2020, the intervention of the CIA Democrats continues on what is arguably
an equally significant scale."
So they're just getting more and more brazen the more confident they feel about how
propaganda-addled and submissive the population has become. They're laying more and more of
their cards on the table. Soon the CIA will just be openly selling narcotics door to door like
Girl Scout cookies.
Or maybe not. I said my ex got more and more overt about his abuses in the later years of
our relationship because those were the later years. I did eventually expand my own
consciousness of my own inner workings enough to clear the fears and unexamined beliefs I had
that he was using as hooks to manipulate me. Maybe, as humanity's consciousness continues to
expand , the same will happen for the people and their abusive relationship with the
CIA.
* * *
The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is
to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack , which will get you an email
notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely
reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around,
following me on Facebook , Twitter , Soundcloud or YouTube , or throwing some money into
my tip jar on Ko-fi ,
Patreon or Paypal . If you want to read more you
can buy my books .
Everyone, racist platforms excluded,
has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else
I've written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand,
and what I'm trying to do with this platform,
click here .
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of
time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that
glorifies it."
- Frédéric Bastiat, French economist
If there is an absolute maxim by which the American government seems to operate, it is that
the taxpayer always gets ripped off.
With every new tax, fine, fee and law adopted by our so-called representatives, the yoke
around the neck of the average American seems to tighten just a little bit more.
Everywhere you go, everything you do, and every which way you look, we're getting swindled,
cheated, conned, robbed, raided, pickpocketed, mugged, deceived, defrauded, double-crossed and
fleeced by governmental and corporate shareholders of the American police state out to make a
profit at taxpayer expense.
The overt and costly signs of the despotism exercised by the increasingly authoritarian
regime that passes itself off as the United States government are all around us: warrantless
surveillance of Americans' private phone and email conversations by the FBI, NSA, etc.; SWAT
team raids of Americans' homes; shootings of unarmed citizens by police; harsh punishments
meted out to schoolchildren in the name of zero tolerance; drones taking to the skies
domestically; endless wars; out-of-control spending; militarized police; roadside strip
searches; privatized prisons with a profit incentive for jailing Americans; fusion centers that
collect and disseminate data on Americans' private transactions; and militarized agencies with
stockpiles of ammunition, to name some of the most appalling.
Meanwhile, the three branches of government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) and the
agencies under their command -- Defense, Commerce, Education, Homeland Security, Justice,
Treasury, etc. -- have switched their allegiance to the Corporate State with its unassailable
pursuit of profit at all costs and by any means possible.
By the time you factor in the financial blowback from the COVID-19 pandemic with its
politicized mandates, lockdowns, and payouts, it becomes quickly apparent that we are now ruled
by a government consumed with squeezing every last penny out of the population and seemingly
unconcerned if essential freedoms are trampled in the process.
As with most things, if you want to know the real motives behind any government program,
follow the money trail.
When you dig down far enough, you quickly find that those who profit from Americans being
surveilled, fined, scanned, searched, probed, tasered, arrested and imprisoned are none other
than the police who arrest them, the courts which try them, the prisons which incarcerate them,
and the corporations, which manufacture the weapons, equipment and prisons used by the American
police state.
Examples of this legalized, profits-over-people, government-sanctioned extortion abound.
On the roads : Not satisfied with merely padding their budgets by
issuing speeding tickets, police departments have turned to asset forfeiture and
red light camera schemes as a means of growing their profits. Despite revelations of
corruption,
collusion and fraud, these money-making scams have been being inflicted on unsuspecting
drivers by revenue-hungry municipalities. Now legislators are hoping to get in on the profit
sharing by imposing a vehicle
miles-traveled tax , which would charge drivers for each mile behind the wheel.
In the schools: The security industrial complex with its tracking, spying, and
identification
devices has set its sights on the schools as " a vast, rich market " -- a $20 billion market, no
less -- just waiting to be conquered. In fact, the public schools have become a microcosm of
the total surveillance state which currently dominates America, adopting a host of
surveillance technologies, including video cameras, finger and palm scanners, iris scanners,
as well as RFID and GPS tracking devices, to keep constant watch over their student bodies.
Likewise, the military industrial complex with its military weapons, metal detectors, and
weapons of compliance such as tasers has succeeded in transforming the schools -- at great
taxpayer expense and personal profit -- into quasi-prisons. Rounding things out are
school truancy
laws , which come disguised as well-meaning attempts to resolve attendance issues in the
schools but in truth are nothing less than stealth maneuvers aimed at enriching school
districts and court systems alike through excessive fines and jail sentences for
"unauthorized" absences. Curiously, none of these efforts seem to have succeeded in making
the schools any safer.
In the endless wars abroad : Fueled by the profit-driven military industrial complex, the
government's endless wars are wreaking havoc on our communities, our budget and our police
forces. Having been co-opted by greedy defense contractors, corrupt politicians and
incompetent government officials, America's expanding military empire is bleeding the country
dry at a rate of more than $32 million per hour . Future wars and
military exercises waged around the globe are expected to
push the total bill upwards of $12 trillion by 2053 . Talk about fiscally irresponsible:
the U.S. government is spending money it doesn't have on a military empire it can't afford.
War spending is bankrupting America.
In the form of militarized police : The Department of Homeland Security routinely hands
out six-figure
grants to enable local municipalities to purchase military-style vehicles, as well as a
veritable war chest of weaponry, ranging from tactical vests, bomb-disarming robots, assault
weapons and combat uniforms. This rise in military equipment purchases funded by the DHS has,
according to analysts Andrew Becker and G.W. Schulz, "
paralleled an apparent increase in local SWAT teams ." The end result? An explosive
growth in the use of SWAT teams for otherwise routine police matters, an increased tendency
on the part of police to shoot first and ask questions later, and an overall mindset within
police forces that they are at war -- and the citizenry are the enemy combatants. Over 80,000
SWAT team raids are conducted on American homes and businesses each year. Moreover,
government-funded
military-style training drills continue to take place in cities across the country.
In profit-driven schemes such as asset forfeiture : Under the guise of fighting the war on
drugs, government agents (usually the police) have been given broad leeway to seize billions
of dollars' worth of private property (money, cars, TVs, etc.) they "suspect" may be
connected to criminal activity. Then -- and here's the kicker -- whether or not any crime is
actually proven to have taken place, the government keeps the citizen's property, often
divvying it up with the local police who did the initial seizure. The police are actually
being
trained in seminars on how to seize the "goodies" that are on police departments' wish
lists. According to the New York Times, seized monies have been used by police to "pay for
sports tickets, office parties, a home security system and a $90,000 sports car."
By the security industrial complex : We're being spied on by a domestic army of government
snitches, spies and techno-warriors. In the so-called name of "precrime," this government of
Peeping Toms is watching everything we do, reading
everything we write, listening to everything we say, and monitoring everything we spend.
Beware of what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, and with whom you
communicate, because it is all being recorded, stored, and catalogued, and will be used
against you eventually, at a time and place of the government's choosing. This far-reaching
surveillance, carried out with the complicity of the Corporate State, has paved the way for
an
omnipresent, militarized fourth branch of government -- the Surveillance State -- that
came into being without any electoral mandate or constitutional referendum. That doesn't even
touch on the government's bold forays into biometric surveillance as a means of identifying
and tracking the American people from birth to death.
By a government addicted to power: It's a given that you can always count on the
government to take advantage of a crisis, legitimate or manufactured. Emboldened by the
citizenry's inattention and willingness to tolerate its abuses, the government has weaponized
one national crisis after another in order to expand its powers. The war on terror, the war
on drugs, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes,
school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate
responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the
police state's hands. Now that the government has gotten a taste for flexing its police state
powers by way of a bevy of COVID-19 lockdowns, mandates, restrictions, contact tracing
programs, heightened surveillance, censorship, overcriminalization, etc., "we the people" may
well find ourselves burdened with a Nanny State inclined to use its draconian pandemic powers
to protect us from ourselves.
These injustices, petty tyrannies and overt acts of hostility are being carried out in the
name of the national good -- against the interests of individuals, society and ultimately our
freedoms -- by an elite class of government officials working in partnership with
megacorporations that are largely insulated from the ill effects of their actions.
This perverse mixture of government authoritarianism and corporate profits has increased the
reach of the state into our private lives while also adding a profit motive into the mix. And,
as always, it's we the people, we the taxpayers, we the gullible voters who keep getting taken
for a ride by politicians eager to promise us the world on a plate.
This is a far cry from how a representative government is supposed to operate.
Indeed, it has been a long time since we could claim to be the masters of our own lives.
Rather, we are now the subjects of a militarized, corporate empire in which the vast majority
of the citizenry work their hands to the bone for the benefit of a privileged few
Adding injury to the ongoing insult of having our tax dollars misused and our so-called
representatives bought and paid for by the moneyed elite, the government then turns around and
uses the money we earn with our blood, sweat and tears to target, imprison and entrap us, in
the form of militarized police, surveillance cameras, private prisons, license plate readers,
drones, and cell phone tracking technology.
All of those nefarious deeds by government officials that you hear about every day: those
are your tax dollars at work.
It's your money that allows for government agents to spy on your emails, your phone calls,
your text messages, and your movements. It's your money that allows out-of-control police
officers to burst into innocent people's homes, or probe and strip search motorists on the side
of the road. And it's your money that leads to Americans across the country being prosecuted
for innocuous activities such as growing vegetable gardens in their front yards or daring to
speak their truth to their elected officials.
Just remember the next time you see a news story that makes your blood boil, whether it's a
police officer arresting someone for filming them in public, or a child being kicked out of
school for attending a virtual class while playing with a toy gun, remember that it is your tax
dollars that are paying for these injustices.
There was a time in our history when our forebears said "enough is enough" and stopped
paying their taxes to what they considered an illegitimate government. They stood their ground
and refused to support a system that was slowly choking out any attempts at self-governance,
and which refused to be held accountable for its crimes against the people.
Their resistance sowed the seeds for the revolution that would follow.
Unfortunately, in the 200-plus years since we established our own government, we've let
bankers, turncoats and number-crunching bureaucrats muddy the waters and pilfer the accounts to
such an extent that we're back where we started.
Once again, we've got a despotic regime with an imperial ruler doing as they please.
Once again, we've got a judicial system insisting we have no rights under a government which
demands that the people march in lockstep with its dictates.
And once again, we've got to decide whether we'll keep marching or break stride and make a
turn toward freedom.
But what if we didn't just pull out our pocketbooks and pony up to the federal government's
outrageous demands for more money?
What if we didn't just dutifully line up to drop our hard-earned dollars into the collection
bucket, no questions asked about how it will be spent?
What if, instead of quietly sending in our checks, hoping vainly for some meager return, we
did a little calculating of our own and started deducting from our taxes those programs that we
refuse to support?
As I make clear in my book Battlefield
America: The War on the American People , if the government and its emissaries can just
take from you what they want, when they want, and then use it however they want, you can't
claim to be anything more than a serf in a land they think of as theirs.
Weaver "China seems to have defined "communism" as a rejection of democracy."
What is democracy? In the west, it has become apparent that whoever controls the media
controls democracy. We elect rulers. We do not get any say in formulating many laws as in
each new law being put to a referendum. China voted with its feet during the revolution. Many
culture elect or otherwise have local leaders who everyone in the community knows and the
community leaders decide on or elect who has positions at the next level of governance and so
forth. In that way, China is very democratic beginning at the grass roots level.
The Chinese government have done a huge amount in bringing millions of people out of poverty,
creating better living conditions for its people. When there is constantly and increase in
prosperity at all levels, even if some prosper more than others, the people have an
optimistic outlook.
Democracy at a national level where voters do not personal know the candidate requires
accurate information to enable an informed vote. In that way, democracy in the west is non
existent - it is an illusion but the sheeple cling to it.
Compared to the so called west, China government is very much of the people for the
people.
@ Peter AU1 (# 23), name a democracy that isn't a suzerainty. We don't elect rulers. We
elect puppets that have been selected by the rulers. Who owns the media? Who creates majority
of money in your nation?
"The true equation is 'democracy' = government by world financiers."
– J.R.R. Tolkien
"Democracy" is a temporary phase of history which allows the Global Financial Syndicate to
take control from the earlier generation of dominant power players: the monarchies.
Long ago and far away, a group of very clever paleo-banksters figured out a way to stop
those annoying periodic slave revolts... eventually it came to be known as "the two party
system" (democracy/Republic) and it's working like a charm...Rulers make the slaves fight
each other.
World Financiers & Banksters ENSLAVEMENT plan using democracy:
– Create a REVOLUTION & steal a region
– Create a Private CENTRAL BANK (First Bank of the USA, BoE-1694)
– Fund & control new rich individuals (Kleptocrats)
– Fund & control political PARTIES & MEDIA
– Nationalize the central bank (the Fed, BoE-1946)
Enslave & control people by DOMINANCE over economic & political powers & call
it a DEMOCRACY. An interesting FRACTAL emerges when one analysis the formation of
democracies.
What we have is "representative" democracies designed by the economically powerful solely
for their interests and in this sense would always be functioning anti-democratically. In a
money democracy (where the fundamental element of influence is the unit of money), the
political and legal system is influenced and shaped by systems of power to protect and
enhance those systems of power.
"There are none so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The
truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They
feed them on falsehoods till wrong looks like right in their eyes."
– Goethe
Your understanding of democracy and the prevalent Chinese understanding of democracy are
divergent.
It is true that all of the political decisions in China are made by the communists; the
CPC. But do note that the CPC has almost 100 million members . These are not simply
voters like political parties have in the US, who just align themselves with a party
and vote for it every couple years. These 100 million members of the CPC are actual
decision-makers.
Of course, that is a lot of work and responsibility and not everyone in China wants to
commit that much of their life to politics. With that said, how much of your life do
you commit to politics? Does your biennial vote actually carry any weight, and do you take
full responsibility for the consequences of it? Of course not on both points.
Those Chinese people who choose to do so live democracy. You, on the other hand,
just play a shallow democracy game that is little more than a reality TV show like
Survivor . Does Trump get voted off the island? Clinton? Sanders? That is your choice.
Does America slaughter some more dark skinned people in the Global South? Do the banks get
bailed out with your wealth? These things you get no say in.
Communists don't oppose democracy. They oppose the crappy reality TV "The Democracy
Show!™" sham that westerners love to hate.
I look on it as somewhat of a mixed group. Fellow travelers do the same thing but for
different reasons. Finance, anglo supremacy ect. Amongst the vassal states in same cases
straight out corruption as in selling their service es to the highest bidder, amongst the
five-eyes, the elite in particular, in the current events of trying to bring down Russia and
China, continued anglo dominance of the world is a very big driver. The anglosphere has been
a dominant force in the world for close to 500 years and many are truly afraid of this
ending. The cant envisage a world that is dominated by cultures other than anglo or
anglo/europe.
Robin, "the Imperial Pottery Barn rule" is an extremely good analogy. I'm going to have a
hard time citing you if I ever use that. I've also seen US foreign policy described as
"rubblization," with regard to Syria especially.
What is the fastest way to create lots of DEBT (money)? Wars, civil war, technological
waves, credit bubbles (speculative, housing,...), infrastructures...
What is the real purpose of war? To capture & control more areas for EXPLOITATION? War
is the fastest way to create lots of debt for all parties.
"the real value of a conflict, the true value, is in the debt it creates. You control the
debt, you control everything."
Money Power = Land x Lives x Loans
Putting Afghanistan in further debt, enables it to be exploited... What are its revenue
sources? Who pays for its security and infrastructure? Will NATO leave by September?
Who wants to make us all, whether we be nations or individuals, slaves to debt?
Those Uyghur jihadists stuck in Idlib province in Syria and in refugee camps in Turkey are
bound to get a warm welcome from the Taliban when Ankara finally ships them off to Kabul as
part of this proposed "security force" to protect the airport so the CIA can continue to ship
out its heroin.
The US MSM is ablaze with "Taliban against Afghan forces" headlines, conveniently forgetting
that the Taliban are Afghan forces too, in fact they preceded the current "Afghan forces" in
government until the US intervention.
So why do their guys always beat our guys? Because their guys fight for their country and our
guys fight for us.
@ ToivoS, why did the U$A withdraw from Vietnam? There was conscription in the U$A, thereby
the rich were at risk. Also, the U$A was being constrained by money creation due to the gold
standard. Both of these issues have been addressed.
Name a nation that the U$A has WITHDRAWN its military after occupying it, other than
Vietnam. Aren't we still in Germany, Japan, South Korea, ...?
It ain't over 'til it's over.
How much DEBT has the Afghanistan conflict created so far? In trillions? Who got that
money?
@ CJC #10
re: . . . Turkey to retain control of airport after NATO withdraws
It's more than NATO.
The US-Taliban agreement:
The United States is committed to withdraw from Afghanistan all military forces of the United
States, its allies, and Coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel,
private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel within
fourteen (14) months following announcement of this agreement. . .
here
@ Max
re: . . . why did the U$A withdraw from Vietnam?
The US had no choice because the conscription-based US Army was broken, with troops refusing
to obey orders and fragging their superiors etc. . .So Washington pulled out the troops and
ended the draft.
The US "experts" who are crying about a possible, or inevitable, return to Talban
government haven't read the agreement.
The US-Taliban Agreement of Feb 29, 2020 called for all foreign forces to leave Afghanistan
by May 2021, and recognized that the outcome would be a return to a Taliban government. For
example one agreement condition, II-5:: "The Taliban will not provide visas, passports,
travel permits, or other legal documents to those who pose a threat to the security of the
United States and its allies to enter Afghanistan." . .
here
re: Why is the US in Afghanistan?
Decades ago Washington had its own "Silk Road" strategy, to move into the -Stans in Central
Asia after the uSSR breakup. There was a large interest in Kazakhstan up north, as well as
the other -Stands including Afghanistan. It was of course a road to nowhere but as we know
the creeps in Washington ain't too bright. There were no seaports to accommodate this road,
for one thing. There were some other considerations, like an energy pipeline, but it was all
just going nowhere until 9-11 came along, giving the US to do what it does worst, employ its
military.
@ Abe 32
re: This simplistic "views" are as inaccurate as insulting.
You need to get out more.
. . .from Fragging: Why U.S. Soldiers Assaulted Their Officers in Vietnam
During its long withdrawal from South Vietnam, the U.S. military experienced a serious
crisis in morale. Chronic indiscipline, illegal drug use, and racial militancy all
contributed to trouble within the ranks. But most chilling of all was the advent of a new
phenomenon: large numbers of young enlisted men turning their weapons on their superiors.
The practice was known as "fragging," a reference to the fragmentation hand grenades often
used in these assaults. . . here
Glad to hear that Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan is not letting the US use Pakistan
as a base for its continued machinations, in spite of heavy US pressure, and that Pakistan as
a whole was saying #AbsolutelyNot. Kudos Pakistan.
According to M. K. Bhadrakumar:
"Washington is now considering the hiring of Pentagon contractors (mercenaries) to secure
Kabul airport. But that will be a hugely controversial step with grave consequences, as
apparent from Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan's brusque rejection of the very idea of
American military presence on Pakistani soil in relation to the Afghan situation."
MKB also places all this into the context of "the US' grand project to create rings of
instability in [Russia and China's] adjacent regions -- Ukraine, Belarus, Moldavia, Hong
Kong, Myanmar, Afghanistan."
You forget the ISIS group that magically appeared in Afghanistan a few years ago. The same
group that immediately attacked the Taliban, forcing the Taliban to dedicate its best forces
to countering the threat instead of fighting the puppet child sex slaver Quisling warlord
regime. What's more likely than continuing the occupation in the name of "fighting ISIS"?
Just like Iraq was reinvaded and reoccupied in the name of "fighting ISIS" and continues to
be occupied to this day?
This "fairly good" relationship is mainly done in spite to China and to gain another pawn
on the SCS theatre.
It's being wined and dined by the school jock after China gave him the finger like a
back-up shag. But Vietnam knows the score, it works for them for now and it would be stupid
not to play along as long as it is aligned to its interests.
A large number of its businesses exporting to the west are, you guessed it, are founded
and operated by the Chinese for the lower wages and to skirt quotas, tariffs etc.
Vietnam is still a communist state, how is this fact not lost in the face of full spectrum
demonisation of China for being communists in the minds of the 5 eyes populace is a most
interesting question indeed.
It's as moronic as "China is authoritarian!" but Saudi Arabia is A-OK!
Today democracy and human rights are just fig leaves of the hegemony, war cry for the
[colonization of] expendables.
Of course you've heard the name " George Soros ," often invoked as a sort of folk demon on the
American and international right, it's likely that you have some vague notion of why you think
he's a bad guy, or maybe you think the whole thing is a bunch of hype.
However, if you're a freedom lover, there's nothing "hype" about the influence that George
Soros has around the world attacking your freedom. Indeed, you probably vastly underestimate
the influence that he has on politics.
From the perspective of someone who values life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,
there is no more dangerous man today than George Soros. This is not hyperbole, it is the simple
truth. While we don't plan to paint a picture of a man standing behind the scenes, rubbing his
hands together and cackling as he plays puppet master over each and every attack on freedom
around the world, Soros acts as a strawman and a caricature of what is actually going on in the
world.
George Soros, his
money , and his NGOs
are bankrolling and influencing public policy and opinion from the local level all the way up
to the national level. Entire nations have been made to bow to the Soros agenda, but perhaps
more importantly for our purposes, key local officials in government are increasingly wholly
owned subsidiaries of the Soros machine.
American political culture focuses almost entirely on Presidential elections, with
Congressional and gubernatorial races getting much less attention from the general public. When
it comes to local politics, unless you live in a large city, chances are good that you don't
know much about city politics. For example: Who is your local district attorney or county
prosecutor?
Most people have no idea. It's a low-key office, generally staffed by someone looking to do
public service, not advance their career. There is little glamor, low pay, and lots of
thankless work to be done at this level, which means that for the most part, this is not where
social climbers begin their careers.
That being said, these elected officials have enormous amounts of power because they decide
who gets prosecuted, who doesn't, and what charges are levied against them. If your DA decides
that the local band of looters are actually peaceful protesters, they won't ever see the inside
of a courtroom. Similarly, if the local DA isn't a fan of the right to self-defense, one must
consider this when choosing whether or not to pull your firearm if a mob of them shows up on
your lawn.
Part of this is just the very nature of bureaucracy, the plainer term for what people mean
when they talk about "the deep state." The government rests on men doing things, chief among
these are what Vladimir Lenin called "special bodies of armed men"
: cops, courts, and jails. According to Lenin, this is the very essence of the state.
Libertarians will sympathize with this definition of the state. At its core, the state is a man
with a gun who will throw you in a cage or kill you if you fail to comply. Everything else is
just window dressing.
The local prosecutor is a chokepoint in the special bodies of armed men. The attorney
general isn't euphemistically called "top cop" for no reason and in his own way, the local
prosecutor is also a "top cop," albeit with a much smaller jurisdiction. This also means that
he has more direct control over the individuals in his district, as the attorney general deals
more in broad brushstrokes.
Who is your local DA? George Soros knows. He might very well be his paymaster.The campaigns
for local DAs and the like aren't shy about stoking racial resentment and animosity. The
Democratic Party's playbook hasn't changed much since the days of Jim Crow, it's just that it
has found new ways to make political hay out of sowing racial divisions among Americans. One
Soros-produced ad for Noah Phillips campaign for District Attorney of Sacramento County,
focuses almost exclusively on a black
boy in a hoodie .
It is of course unrealistic to expect that even highly bureaucratic roles are entirely
apolitical, however, the Soros DAs have ratcheted up the partisanship, not just in the race,
but in the actual execution of the office. As of September 2020, there were
31 Soros-backed DAs in the United States . That might not sound like a lot, but it includes
the DAs of Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Portland, San Francisco, and St.
Louis. All told, tens of millions of Americans are now victims of the Soros racket in the form
of their local top prosecutor.
Some examples of the Soros machine at work in America's DA offices include:
After the last round of rioting, looting, and arson in St. Louis, Circuit Attorney Kim
Gardner dismissed charges against all 36 people arrested. She's on the take from Soros for
$307,000 . This is also the prosecutor who filed charges against the McCloskeys.
Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon got over $2 million
from the Soros operation , he ended cash bail and is no longer prosecuting the crimes
of trespassing, disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, prostitution, or driving without a
license.
Kim Foxx is the Illinois State's Attorney and has received
$807,000 from Soros. She also declined to prosecute rioters, saying "The question it
comes down to is, is it a good use of our time and resources? No, it's not." Foxx likewise
declined to prosecute hate crime hoaxer, Jussie Smollett.
Philly District Attorney Larry Krasner has received
$1.7 million from Soros. He won't be prosecuting rioters, looters, and arsonists.
Krasner was very open about the ideology driving his permitting chaos in the city:
"Prosecution alone will achieve nothing close to justice -- not when power imbalances and
lack of accountability make it possible for government actors including police or
prosecutors to regularly take life or liberty unjustly and face no criminal or career
penalty."
Krasner is worth calling out for special attention because he filed 75 cases against the
police and has represented both Occupy Philadelphia and Black Lives Matter. At his victory
party, supporters chanted, "F*** the police! F*** the police!" He generally declines to
call himself a "prosecutor," instead labelling himself a "public defender with power."
The results in Philadelphia are stunning as charges are dropped in 60 percent of all
shooting cases – though we suspect your odds of being a conservative self-defense
case and having your charges waived are rather slim. Shootings in Philadelphia were up 57
percent year over year from 2019 to 2020.
San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who's working off
$620,000 in Soros money, proclaims that "[t]he criminal justice system isn't just
massive and brutal, it's also racist." He doesn't prosecute crimes such as solicitation,
public camping, or public urination, which has certainly
transformed San Francisco into a paradise on earth . Homicide rates have increased,
burglary cases have increased by 42 percent, motor vehicle theft increased by 31 percent,
and arson rates increased by 45 percent. He was formerly an advisor to Hugo Chavez and his
parents were members of the Weather
Underground , a far-left terrorist organization who directly participated in the
robbery of an armored car. His victory party included obscene anti-police chants.
DA Mike Schmidt of Portland, who's received
$230,000 in Soros money, also declined to prosecute rioters who burned the city for
months while besieging a federal building. He openly sympathized with the rioters saying
that they "represent the instinctive reactions of people who have been gassed repeatedly,
who have been struck with kinetic projectile weapons."
If the Soros machine can capture a District Attorney's office in San Francisco, which is
extremely expensive, there is little preventing them from capturing prosecutorial powers in
Omaha, Annapolis, or Colorado Springs – or indeed your hamlet.
The Soros Machine
and Racial Unrest
Much like the Democrat Party he supports, George Soros is not the slightest bit afraid to go
into the mud of the politics of racial resentment. The Open Society Foundations are the primary
mechanism for Soros delivering money to political activists in the United States and around the
world. In 2020, The Open Society Foundations unveiled plans to spend
$220 million on "efforts to achieve racial equality in America."
To show you the relative priority that the Soros machine places on "racial equality" as
opposed to electoral politics, the Soros machine only spent
$28 million on the Democrat Party in 2020 .
When Soros says "racial equality," he means something very different from what you or the
average American means when they say it. What Soros deems "racial equality" might more
accurately be called "racial revenge," though the left prefers to use the term "racial equity."
We will dive more into the ideology motivating Soros later, but our article on
the Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism is also an excellent resource on the deep
philosophy of the Soros machine.
What Are the Open Society Foundations?
It's important to know how the Soros machine operates so that you can learn to look for it.
The Open Society Foundations is the main umbrella under which Soros distributes money. It
includes a number of organizations, most of which you've probably never heard of and most of
which feature very innocuous, even bland-sounding, names. The think tank used to generate the
ideology is New America, formerly known as the New America Foundation, the name of which is
much more direct about what it intends to create.
So what is an "Open Society?" Well it's based on a phrase used by Karl Popper , a
somewhat obscure 20th Century thinker known best for his " paradox of tolerance ," which
essentially says that liberals should stop tolerating diversity of opinion when it begins to
threaten liberalism.
Where does the Soros operation put its money in America in order to transform the country
into an "open society?" It aims to abolishing
the police and invest $1.5 million into the Community Resource Hub for Safety &
Responsibility, another one of these blandly named organizations working to undo the American
way of life. Additionally, his money has been
linked to the urban unrest in Ferguson in 2014 . In total he spent
$33 million fomenting chaos in the formerly safe suburb of St. Louis.
Of course, no rogue's gallery of the radical left would be complete without mentioning Black
Lives Matter (BLM), another one of these vaguely innocuous-sounding organizations that Soros
spends his money on. And boy howdy, did he spend money on BLM - George Soros spent
$33 million on BLM alone .
What Is the Philosophy of the Open Society
Foundations?
We've seen the modus operandi of the Soros machine, but what is the ideology that motivates
it?
Soros' umbrella organization is The Open Society Foundations. The phrase "open society" is
one of those things that sounds so unassailable that no one could be against it. After all, are
you for a closed society?
This is the framing trick used by the left since time immemorial. Something vague and
innocuous sounding is picked as a name which means something very, very different to those in
the know. So what is an "open society" to Soros and his retinue?
It is a concept developed by Karl Popper, Soros' intellectual hero. Popper was not a
Cultural Marxist, in fact he was highly critical of Marxism. However, there is so much overlap
in terms of end results that it becomes a distinction without a difference.
Karl Popper didn't invent the concept of the open society, despite his association with the
term and his development of the idea – that dubious honor falls to a Frenchman by the
name of Henri Bergson. However, we can credit most of what the open society is understood as
today as springing from the mind of Karl Popper.
There are some key takeaways about what an open society actually is. First, the open society
is an atomized society. People are to be seen not as part of any kind of social organism, but
rather as radically separate individuals. The individual is not an essential building block of
society, it is the end to itself. Social norms and traditions are seen as necessarily
oppressive.
The open society is hostile to the notion of natural law and instead puts man-made laws,
properly called "legislation," over and above a more natural law flowing from a set of first
principles, most notably God. Again, like Cultural Marxism, it seeks to "dethrone God" from
society, replacing it with a cult of human judgment.
Popper also believed in a culture of constant critique, this is a point of overlap with
Cultural Marxism; and humanitarianism, which is a loaded word designed to sound innocuous, but
which actually means something far more specific than "being nice to people."
Perhaps most frighteningly, the "open society" is just that – open. That is, entirely
without any sort of privacy. While the notion of a "right to privacy" as interpreted by United
States courts as a justification is troubling in practice, far more troubling is Popper's
conception of a society where every facet of a person's life is in the public sphere,
irregardless of their consent.
Free speech and free elections were seen as a necessity for such a society, however, Popper
and the Open Society Foundations had different interpretations for this. Free speech does not
apply to opponents of the open society unless they are critiquing society from the left –
the only way to complain about Comrade Stalin is to say how much better we would all be if
there were but two of him. Similarly, free elections means that of the kind we had in 2020
– one with absolutely no safeguards against abuse and taking place behind closed doors
under the supervision of ideologically motivated "monitors" with rampant fraud.
It's not just in America, it's a worldwide phenomenon.
George Soros: King of the Color
Revolution
George Soros' primary weapon for changing countries to be more pliable to his desires is the
"color revolution." You've probably heard of revolutions occurring, generally in post-Soviet
states, but also elsewhere. They have names like the Yellow Revolution (the Philippines), the
Rose Revolution (Republic of Georgia), the Orange Revolution (Ukraine), and the Saffron
Revolution (Myanmar).
There are some common themes to a color revolution which are worth noting for those wishing
to prevent such a thing from happening in their own country. A disputed election where there is
widespread cheating on the part of the "opposition" candidate generally kicks things off. The
"opposition" is controlled by the Soros machine and friendly to NATO or other Atlantacist
political organizations. There are then street rallies where violent operatives hide in crowds
of otherwise peaceful protesters.
The government then responds and there is outcry from "humanitarian" organizations that the
government has dealt sternly with what are effectively terrorists using human shields. There
are generally operatives within the command structure who are sympathetic to Soros and his
allies in Western governments.
There have been mixed success with color revolutions. They fail more often than they
succeed. But they do succeed, especially where one defines success not so much as overthrowing
the existing government, but forcing it to accept radical concessions that dramatically remake
the political culture in the country. Color revolutions have resulted in what was effectively
regime change in the Republic of Georgia ( twice ), Ukraine , the Arab World , and Belarus .
George Soros is deeply embedded in color revolutions around the world through the auspices
of his Open Society Foundations NGO. The playbook should look somewhat familiar to most
Americans after the summer riots of 2019 and 2020, as well as the aftermath of the
2020 elections .
It's important to remember that George Soros is not a god. He is simply a man with a lot of
money. Thus, we should be cautious in attempting to attribute each and every action on the far
left to him, particularly in the view that he is some kind of micromanaging puppet master who
is involved in the trenches of making policy or street activism. He is not.
He is a real-world supervillain and he is able to direct the law, constitutional, and
political culture of entire nations using his money and his vision for what society ought to
look like. He is able to get away with it thanks to general ignorance of just how effective he
is and a coordinated effort by the media to smear anyone who calls him out as a dangerous
fanatic.
It is George Soros, however, who is the dangerous fanatic. He is gunning for you, your
property, your children, and ultimately your way of life.
play_arrow
7thGenMO 4 hours ago
It is a bit of a red herring to focus only on Soros when he is part of a network - our
friends of intelligence that:
- Gun down American sailors in lifeboats after firebombing their ship.
- Infiltrate the financial and, accordingly, the political systems.
- Steal military technology.
- Sell poor American kids as sex slaves.
- Etc., etc., etc.
gregga777 5 hours ago
George Soros, aka Gyorge Schwartz, was a Nazi collaborator and assisted the SS in
confiscating wealth from Hungarian ****. The Holtzman Amendment prohibits anyone who
participated in Nazi persecution from living in the United States. Why is George Soros even
allowed in the US not to mention being allowed to live here? Does that Law only apply to
Gentiles and not to ****?
Lordflin 5 hours ago
When later asked how he felt about that part of his life... he said that aiding his Nazi
stepfather to plunder his own people... made him feel powerful...
RedCharles 17 minutes ago
Compare Soro's moral position with Einstein's take on Gandhi's moral position.
Operation Paperclip brought the best of Nazi middle management and scientists to the US
and Canada. Wernher Braun for example.
Canada's Deputy PM is the descendant of a Ukrainian Nazi propagandist.
gregga777 5 hours ago (Edited)
NASA hero SS-Sturmbannführer Werner von Braun was an unindicted Nazi war criminal.
He was responsible for deaths amongst slave laborers, probably numbering in the thousands,
at the Mittelwert Dora V-2 assembly plant. But, 95-year old retired factory worker
Friedrich Karl Burger was recently deported back to Germany because in 1945 he had served a
few weeks as an 18-year old concentration camp guard. The 2010 Holtzman Amendment prohibits
anyone who participated in Nazi persecution from living in the United States.
Fluff The Cat 5 hours ago
Millions of illegals get away with violating our sovereignty, yet the state will throw
the book at the average Joe citizen for a misdemeanor. People like Soros and Gates are
untouchable for a reason. It's not just because they have so much money but rather because
they fill roles which help facilitate radical transformations to our detriment.
Gold Bug XXX 5 hours ago remove link
Thankfully, the 60 Minutes interview with Steve Kroft that exposes Soros' Sabbatean
Frankist origins is still online. Anyone who wants to know the real story about Soros and
the wealthy patron family behind him needs to read Rabbi Marvin Antelman's 2 book series:
Eliminate The Opiate available on Amazon. Antelman was the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Rabbinic Court of America from 1974 to 2004 and he exposes both who and what is behind
Soros and his agenda. Literally, this is THE book every American needs to read now.
This is the group behind Fabian Socialism, the group exposed by George Orwell (Eric
Blair) in his book 1984, as well as in Animal Farm. This is the philosophy of of modern
progressive Democrats in the USA and the liberal Labour party in Britain. This is the group
behind the Rhodes Trust, that created the Rhodes Scholarships, the London School of
Economics (Soros is a grad) and the Royal Institute of International Affairs who created
the CFR branch in the USA. Why do you think we have so many Rhodes Scholars and graduates
of the London School of Economics in the Obama and Biden administrations and leading the
far left?
Soros has sponsored everything evil from NAMBLA to BLM. He (and Bloomberg) funded the
anarchy and nationwide explosion in violent crime that we are seeing in every Blue City
where they installed their radical, Marxist prosecutors and DAs like Gascon in LA, Larry
Krasner in Philly, Kim Gardner in St. Louis, and Kim Foxx in Chicago - all cities where
prosecutors are emptying the jails, not prosecuting crime, and letting chaos reign supreme
so they can Federalize the Police (Soros' primary agenda) giving the federal government
more political power. This will extend the corruption we already see in our Intel Agencies,
the DOJ, all the Courts, and especially in the rogue FBI which is now a purely NKVD,
Brownshirt SA, STASI political police force focused inward on political dissidents and no
longer a legitimate law enforcement agency.
America had better wake up and wake up now, because with the purge of conservatives,
Christians and patriots from the military led by MIC Ratheon board member, the bitter
affirmative action general known as Lloyd Austin and the bat ****e crazy radical Marxist
Bishop Garrison, if we lose the police and the military - we will relive the Bolshevik
Revolution... the round ups, the torture the gulags and the death.
And then just like Solzhenitsyn warned, we'll burn in the camps wondering what would
have been if only we had resisted...
C urious it was to
read that the Russian judiciary ruled last Wednesday that Alexei Navalny's political
network is an extremist movement. Its members should be grateful that the courts recognized it
as a movement, given Navalny's nationwide support has never exceeded 3 percent or so, but on
paper they are now liable to arrest and prosecution and, if convicted of one or another charge,
could be fined or imprisoned.
There have been no arrests, so far as has been reported. But think of all those chances
Western intel agencies and their clerks in the press may now have to lionize a new cohort of
oppositionists as Navalny's heroic followers. Let us not forget, a kooky poseur journalist
named Oleg Kashin had the nerve to call Navalny "Russia's true leader" in a recent
New York Timesopinion piece.
There is no limit to the silliness in all matters Russian, it seems. At least not at the
Times .
I say "curious" because, in the ordinary conduct of statecraft as we have had it for the
past seven decades, the Moscow's court's ruling, exactly a week prior to President Joe Biden's
first summit with President Vladimir Putin, would have to be counted obtuse. Wouldn't minding
one's manners -- especially given that the Navalny network's significance resides solely in the
minds and news pages of Western propagandists -- be the wise course?
I don't think so. I have no clue as to the independence or otherwise of the Russian
judiciary, but it is unthinkable the Russian leader did not know in advance of what the courts
were about to determine. I think Russia was indeed minding its manners -- a different and
altogether more honorable set of manners than American pols and diplomats have exhibited lo
these many decades.
In a sensible read, the court ruling was a calculated gesture in response to Biden's
commitment,
announced during a Memorial Day speech, to confront Putin in Geneva on June 16 with the
question of human rights in the Russian Federation. "We will not stand by and let him abuse
those rights," saith the man from Scranton.
We will not stand by, Moscow replied in so many words, as you grandstand at Russia's
expense. Recall in this connection, Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, has lately made
it a habit to note
that Moscow is monitoring human rights in the U.S. since the Jan. 6 protests at the Capitol.
"We have no taboo topics," Lavrov said in evident response to Biden's speech. "We will discuss
whatever we think is necessary."
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, left, and President Vladimir Putin meeting with
China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, 2017. (President of Russia)
It would be very wrong to take this matter as a passing spat as the Russian and American
presidents find their feet with one another. In my view, the court judgment last week and
Lavrov's remarks on human rights as a two-way street make the Geneva encounter far more
important than it may have otherwise turned out to be.
Five Principles
To understand this, we must go back and back and back some more until we reach the early
1950s, when newly independent India and newly socialist China were working out how two very
large neighbors ought best to conduct their relations. It was while negotiating a bilateral
agreement on this question in 1953 that Zhou Enlai, Mao's cultured, subtle, farsighted premier,
first articulated his Five Principles, the ethical code by which the People's Republic would
conduct its relations with all nations.
These were incorporated into the Sino–Indian Agreement of 1954 and have been
justifiably well-known since. Note that four of the five have to do with respectful conduct and
parity:
– Mutual respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty;
– Mutual nonaggression;
– Noninterference in the internal affairs of other nations;
– Equality and mutual benefit among nations;
– Peaceful coexistence.
A year after New Delhi and Beijing signed their accord, Zhou's principles were reiterated at
the historically monumental conference of nonaligned nations Sukarno hosted at an Indonesian
hill station called Bandung. When the Non–Aligned Movement was formally constituted six
years after that, the Five Principles effectively became the non–West's statement -- of
aspiration, of intent -- to the West: This is what we have to offer the postcolonial world, the
NAM said in so many words. This is our contribution to a new and peaceable world order. This is
how we will manage our relations with others.
The Grand Mosque of Bandung, Indonesia, with its twin minarets, adjacent to the city square
in Asia-Afrika Street, 2008. (Prayudi Setiadharma, Wikimedia Commons)
The United States never had any time for the NAM. As readers of a certain age will recall,
it dismissed the movement, with-us-or-against-us style, as a badly dressed bunch of
crypto–Communists or Soviet dupes. The decades since are an easy lesson in why Washington
took this utterly awful position: It has not once, not in any given year, observed even one of
Zhou's principles. It has always, in any given year, abused all five.
Vladimir Putin
One may admire or detest Vladimir Putin, but he is undeniably possessed of an excellent
grasp of history, as many of his speeches attest. I doubt he thinks very specifically about the
NAM or Zhou's principles, but, without naming them, these are what he will have on the table
when he meets Joe Biden.
This is the meaning of the oddly timed court judgment against Navalny's apparatus and the
message Lavrov conveyed in response to Biden's Memorial Day speech: Internal affairs are to be
resolved internally.
Geneva will mark the start of a long and welcome process. Its importance will lie in its
formalization of a stance Russia -- and China, too -- have adopted since those two
catastrophically stupid mistakes Biden and Secretary of State Blinken made last March, when
Biden called Putin a murderer and tin-eared Blinken hollowly lectured the Chinese about human
rights and democracy.
President Joe Biden in Oval Office, April 27. (White House, Adam Schultz)
Beijing and Moscow have ever since stiffened their backs toward the U.S., giving as good as
they get on all the questions with which Washington customarily browbeats others.
If we have begun a process, where will it lead? In my read to an excellent place, where
nations mind the better set of manners noted above -- Zhou Enlai's manners, let us say.
Before this century is out, and very possibly before the midway mark, Zhou's Five Principles
stand to become the norm in international relations. Zhou's true topic was parity between West
and non–West. This will be achieved, and strange it is that the opening months of the
Biden administration have opened us to this salutary prospect. The U.S. will otherwise lead us
all into an egregiously messy period of history, and I do not think rising powers -- Russia,
China, India, others -- will find this acceptable.
One other matter must be clarified as Geneva approaches.
I do not know the merits of the case against Navalny or, since last week, the ruling against
his followers. But I have always found it curious that The New York Times and the other
major dailies recite as rote that Navalny and his people consider the two charges of
embezzlement (and the two convictions) that put him in jail in the first place to be "trumped
up" or "politically motivated." Why doesn't the Times ' Moscow bureau do the gumshoe
work and inform readers whether or not this is so?
True, Times ' Moscow correspondents are among the worst in my lifetime, but this kind
of kabuki requires one to consider carefully whether the charges are indeed legitimate.
My read: The legal case against Navalny probably holds water, and the American press uses the
power of omission to avoid acknowledging this.
Pitiful, if this is the case.
The larger point here: We must learn to put all such questions aside in contexts such as we
have now in U.S.–Russia relations. Anyone who has ever been in a Marxist reading group
knows the importance of distinguishing between primary and secondary contradictions. Let us not
forget the essential lesson, no matter anyone's political stripe.
What is the primary contradiction here? It is Washington's refusal to observe the principles
of noninterference and sovereignty, and it is vital far, far beyond bilateral relations that
Russia defends these. The Navalny case and the associated matter of human rights are, plainly
and simply, a secondary contradiction -- and one it is imperative to leave to Russians to
resolve.
Geneva in June, a rather nice place to be. Let us see if Biden and Putin mind their manners
-- and whose manners these turn out to be.
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International
Herald Tribune , is a columnist, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is
Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century . Follow him on Twitter @thefloutist . His web site is Patrick Lawrence . Support his work via
his Patreon site .
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those
of Consortium News .
Comments for this article are pretty instructive about the particular strata of US population
mindset right now. Reminds the mood of dissidents in the USSR.
Tucker Carlson dropped several bombshells on his show Tuesday night, chief among them was
from a Revolver News report that the FBI was likely involved in organizing the Jan. 6 Capitol
'insurrection,' and were similarly involved in the kidnapping plot against Michigan Governor
Gretchin Whitmer .
" Why are there so many factual matters that we don't understand about that day? " asked
Carlson.
" Why is the Biden administration preventing us from knowing? Why is the administration
still hiding more than 10,000 hours of surveillance tape from the US capitol on January 6th?
What could possibly be the reason for that - even as they call for more openness... they could
release those tapes today, but they're not. Why?"
Carlson notes that
Revolver News has dissected court filings surrounding the Capitol riot, suggests that
unindicted co-conspirators in the case are likely to have been federal operatives.
We at Revolver News have noticed a pattern from our now months-long investigation into 1/6
-- and in particular from our meticulous study of the charging documents related to those
indicted. In many cases the unindicted co-conspirators appear to be much more aggressive and
egregious participants in the very so-called "conspiracy" serving as the basis for charging
those indicted.
The question immediately arises as to why this is the case, and forces us to consider
whether certain individuals are being protected from indictment because they were involved in
1/6 as undercover operatives or confidential informants for a federal agency.
Key segment from Tucker:
"We know that the government is hiding the identity of many law enforcement officers that
were present at the Capitol on January 6th, not just the one that killed Ashli Babbitt.
According to the government's own court filing, those law enforcement officers participated
in the riot - sometimes in violent ways . We know that because without fail, the government
has thrown the book at most people who were present at the Capitol on Jan. 6. There was a
nationwide dragnet to find them - and many are still in solitary confinement tonight. But s
trangely, some of the key people who participated on Jan. 6 have not been charged ."
Look at the documents , the government calls those people 'unindicted co-conspirators.'
What does that mean? Well it means that in potentially every case they were FBI operatives
... in the Capitol, on January 6th."
"For example, one of those unindicted co-conspirators is someone government documents
identify only as "person two." According to those documents, person two stayed in the same
hotel room as a man called Thomas Caldwell - an 'insurrectionist.' A man alleged to be a
member of the group "The Oathkeepers." Person two also "stormed the barricades" at the
Capitol on January 6th alongside Thomas Caldwell. The government's indictments further
indicate that Caldwell - who by the way is a 65-year-old man... was led to believe there
would be a "quick reaction force" also participating on January 6th. That quick reaction
force Caldwell was told, would be led by someone called "Person 3," who had a hotel room and
an accomplice with them . But wait. Here's the interesting thing. Person 2 and person 3 were
organizers of the riot . The government knows who they are, but the government has not
charged them. Why is that? You know why. They were almost certainly working for the FBI. So
FBI operatives were organizing the attack on the Capitol on January 6th according to
government documents. And those two are not alone. In all, Revolver news reported there are
"upwards of 20 unindicted co-conspirators in the Oath Keeper indictments, all playing various
roles in the conspiracy, who have not been charged for virtually the exact same activities
and in some cases much, much more severe activities - as those named alongside them in the
indictments."
Revolver , meanwhile, has important questions about January 6th
In the year leading up to 1/6 and during 1/6 itself, to what extent were the three primary militia groups (the Oath Keepers,
the Proud Boys, and the Three Percenters) that the FBI , DOJ , Pentagon and
network news have labeled most
responsible for planning and executing a Capitol attack on 1/6 infiltrated by agencies of the
federal government, or informants of said agencies?
Exactly how many federal undercover agents or confidential informants were present at the
Capitol or in the Capitol during the infamous "siege" and what roles did they play (merely
passive informants or active instigators)?
Finally, of all of the unindicted co-conspirators referenced in the charging documents of
those indicted for crimes on 1/6, how many worked as a confidential informant or as an
undercover operative for the federal government (FBI, Army Counterintelligence, etc.)?
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) has demanded an explanation from FBI Director Christopher Wray:
We recommend you read the entire
Revolver piece, which includes the fact that at least five individuals involved int he
"Whitmer Kidnapping Plot" were undercover agents and federal informants .
_Rorschach 7 hours ago
Just remember folks
a Klan meeting is always 33 FBI agents
and 2 ACTUAL white supremacists
Dragonlord 7 hours ago
No CIA? I am disappointed.
_Rorschach 7 hours ago (Edited)
Glowies are never at the meetings
theyre busy planting bombs for the false flag afterwards
Misesmissesme 6 hours ago
90% of "terrorists" would never commit acts of terror if the US Guv wasn't coercing them
to commit said acts. The wrong people are in jail.
Wonder who in government started the ball rolling on 9/11 before it got away from
them?
Sedaeng PREMIUM 6 hours ago
it never got away from them! They directed through and afterwards... Patriot act just
'happened' to be on standby just in case? ha!
Not Your Father's ZH 6 hours ago (Edited)
Amid this chronic Machiavellian conniving, here are creatures who know how to act
right:
"Civilization is a stream with banks. The stream is sometimes filled with blood from
people killing, stealing, shouting and doing things historians usually record; while on the
banks, unnoticed, people build homes, make love, raise children, sing songs, write poetry
and even whittle statues. The story of civilization is the story of what happened on the
banks. Historians are pessimists because they ignore the banks of the river." ~ Will
Durant, "The Story of Civilization"
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a
monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss , the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich
Nietzsche
"Everything human is pathetic. The secret source of humor itself is not joy, but sorrow.
There is no humor in Heaven." ― Mark Twain
thomas sewell 6 hours ago
everything in the USA is bull sheet. its all polluted with mind fook.
the last 1+ year has gone beyond any psycho drama i could ever imagine.
krda 5 hours ago
Didn't Brennan issue the 9/11 hijackers' visas?
zedwork 1 hour ago
Yes, but no planes. That would have been way too risky when you can just add them into
the live feed later using CGI.
Bob Lidd 1 hour ago
You mean like what happen in the 1993 WTC bombing.....??
How there hasn't been a day of reckoning yet is beyond me.
SexyJulian 6 hours ago
And stacks of bricks.
E5 5 hours ago
The FBI does not have the right to commit a crime. They chose to run an operation they
should disavow all agents involved and they know it. Arrest them.
With Wray out there spreading fear about the Great White Supremacy Threat, you can bet
the FBI is working overtime to make something newsworthy happen. Remember folks: 3
"militia" = 2 FBI informants + 1 patsy
Until the JFK murder/coup is brought to light, you can bet it's all hoax, including
Trump being an 'outsider'. He's not. He did everything Israel told him to do.
GhostOLaz 3 hours ago
America's perception of the FBI comes from TV "programs", not history or reality.
Joiningupthedots 1 hour ago
"Why is the administration still hiding more than 10,000 hours of surveillance tape from
the US capitol on January 6th?"
For the same reason the UK government wont release the Skripal Tapes from Salisbury,
UK.......LMAO.
Its an inside job........OBVIOUSLY!
Faeriedust 2 hours ago
So. Incidents are being staged and then used as excuses for more draconian State
security powers. How is this different from the behavior of known historical groups such as
the SS and the KGB? How can this be interpreted except as the actions of a totalitarian
State?
Sizzurp PREMIUM 6 hours ago
Scary stuff. They manufacture their own crimes to suit their political narrative and
agenda. This is straight out of the Nazi playbook.
Garciathinksso 6 hours ago
this is SOP for FBI, long rich history of manufacturing crimes and low, mid and high
level corruption . Prior to that the BOI was even worse.
JaxPavan 7 hours ago remove link
The chickens coming home to roost.
This was a "color revolution" by us, against us. And, it was designed to fail. Like a
freakish side show.
Why? Let off political steam. Keep all the people in their respective aisle of the
democan and republicrat uniparty bus. Distract political attention away from the full
****** plandemic lockdowns. Keep the rest of the world agape for a few more years thinking
things will fall apart on their own, while their resources are extracted. . .
Jam 47 minutes ago
This scam getting some press now is better late than never, but not by much. Some of
these media types being all surprised by this must have lived pretty sheltered lives and
are lacking any street smarts. This set up was obvious since day one, this is the same
bunch that won't call out these crooks for rigged elections.
Oxygen Likes Carbon 48 minutes ago
It should be painfully clear that with the level of surveillance in 2021, nobody can
walk into high security governmental building, without being arrested. Let alone organize a
mass demonstration then go into Capitol Building during the day, while the politicians
being there, to take ... selfies.
... without some help, or coordination from some governmental services.
anti-bolshevik 7 hours ago (Edited)
Replace 'unindicted co-conspirators.' with Agent Provocateurs.
The entire chain-of-command that authorized / planned / executed / gave material support
to this Operation should be indicted and prosecuted.
In this course of its investigation, researchers at Fordham discovered that EVERY
SINGLE ONE of the 138 terrorist incidents recorded in the USA between 2001-2012 involved
FBI informants who played leading roles in planning out, supplying weapons, instructions
and even recruiting Islamic terrorists to carry out terrorist acts on U.S. soil.
Enraged 56 minutes ago
With FBI Director Comey, Assistant Director McCabe, and FBI agent/covert CIA agent
Strzok acting against President Trump, this should be considered treasonous, and hopefully
they will be prosecuted.
The question is who authorized the latest actions on January 6 since Comey, McCabe, and
Strzok were fired.
Conductor "Corn Pop" Angelo 38 minutes ago
I can think of two to start with. Mitch McConnell and Nancy Pelosi. Both refused
additional security even after being told that the latest intel suggested there was going
to be a protest at the capital building on Jan 6th. The two were offered National Guard
troops, in addition to Capital Police, to help out, but refused. IIRC, both the Senate and
House Sgt at Arms lost their jobs over this, too
Make it three, Mayor Bowser had the same intel and did nothing
Andro1345 7 hours ago
These are old tricks by the FBI. They have been just as bad as the CIA for years.
So many instances going back so far. They plan things, set it up, help to encourage and
supply sheep to do these things. If I had someone trying to encourage me to get on board
something similar my first guess would be a government operative, seriously.
WeNamedTheDogIndiana 1 hour ago
I attended protests after the election, and it was obvious to be that the rallies at our
state capitol were infiltrated by FBI/deep state stooges. A number of them were talking
civil war, and said it too boldly in my opinion, and then many of them were carrying AKs,
when that was not necessary.
The only rally that I attended that seemed uncorrupted was the first protest in DC a few
weeks after the election.
taketheredpill 7 hours ago
Don't be shocked if the FBI funded some of the trips, hotels etc.
And for sure the FBI operatives "wound up" the participants...
But you won't find out for 10 years.
Alfred 7 hours ago
Not just infiltrated.
The FBI actually creates the organizations they then infiltrate.
Someone goes on a good rant here or there, can expect to be befriended by someone of
like mind. Thereafter that someone undergoes radicalization and then organization via FBI
sting ops. They get funding, they get resources, they get ready, they get busted.
Ha! It's all shake-n-bake, baby!
ProudZion 6 hours ago
...The proud boys was led by a FBI agent....
Mad Muppet PREMIUM 1 hour ago
They're called Agents Provacateurs and it's nothing new. The Government always initiates
the violence they say they want to prevent.
Ms No PREMIUM 1 hour ago remove link
"Informants" is a very misleading title. They aren't out there ferretting info of people
up to no good. It's more an infiltration and steering game and always has been.
They are basically agents without the boundaries of law. Good front guys too. They will
keep them out of trouble and protect them if they can but if it gets too hot they are
expendable and even easily patsied. It's all actually actually technically illegal because
even when they do real informant work it's actually entrapment.
We used to be protected from these things and now you see the reason behind that.
Nothing is new it just has different names and since it's always avoided by media, some of
it doesn't even have proper names, at least for the public.
It's basically false flag color revolution operations.
QuiteShocking 6 hours ago (Edited) remove link
The USA's standing in the world is vastly diminished by the continue lies and
mischaracterizations of what happened on Jan 6th by the democrats. The police officer died
from a stroke and not from the rioters. The unarmed white woman was executed by capital
police and no one was held responsible. The democrats have continued to blatantly lie and
mislead on what really happened on Jan 6th for political gain...
Max21c 7 hours ago
We recommend you read the entire
Revolver piece, which includes the fact that at least five individuals involved int
he "Whitmer Kidnapping Plot" were undercover agents and federal informants .
People were already aware that the FBI kidnapping plot against Michigan Governor
Gretchen Whitmer was an FBI thing from the start and all throughout. Just as many if not
most of these things are as they involve the secret police creating the plots and then
unraveling the plots they've created and managed and orchestrated all along the way.
Angular Momentum 7 hours ago
The states need to outlaw entrapment in cases like that. The FBI moles need to be
punished as severely as the dupes.
junction 7 hours ago
The FBI and the CIA apparently fund the so-call White Supremacist organizations. Your
tax dollars at work. Meanwhile, total silence for a decade from the FBI as Jeffrey Epstein
ran a transnational white slavery operation out of his Manhattan mansion, aided by the
Israeli Mossad.
Max21c 7 hours ago
The intelligence community and secret police community were well aware of what was going
on with the Epstein operation. It's not just the US side either as the UK and Israelis were
aware of it also.
Uncle Sugar PREMIUM 7 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Trump is better than Xiden, but
He left Chris Wray running the FIB
He didn't prosecute Comey, Brennan, anyone
He pushed the "Vax"
He spent worse than a drunken sailor
Conclusion - He's not the answer
OldNewB 6 hours ago
He should have pardoned Snowden.
otschelnik 7 hours ago
Well looks like the DOJ is bringing back the Obummer spygate team. John P. Carlin who
was head of DOJ/National Security Division is now deputy AG. He let the FBI give 4 civilian
contractors access to the NSA database for 702 inquiries, which Admiral Rogers stopped.
Also back is Lisa Monoco who oversaw the FISA warrants for Carter Page, and now she's going
to be heading up Garland's domestic terror task force.
That's all very ominous.
Farmer Tink 4 hours ago
I didn't realize that Carlin was back. He tried to defend his actions in the annual
report to the FISA court but Adm. Mike Rogers, on whose watch the NSA found out what the
DOJ was doing, carried the day. I also didn't realize that Lisa Monaco was the one in
charge of those illegal Page warrants. It's just sickening that they are being rewarded.
Thanks for the info.
glenlloyd 2 hours ago (Edited)
With such a high percentage of those 'involved' in the "insurrection" (said loosely
here) and the so called Whitmer kidnapping being from FBI / CIA / other intelligence
agencies AND those same people end up apparently being in leadership roles in these groups
that are supposedly going to be doing the kidnapping and insurrecting, then it's really
hard not to come to the conclusion that the fault was with the FBI et al.
It just seems like the FBI et al were way more involved in this than they should have
been, if you're going to suggest that it was the others that are to blame. The tough pill
to swallow is the claim that it was the people the FBI et al infiltrated and coerced into
do these things, that are to blame.
Things really do stink with this.
newworldorder 5 hours ago
How are these actions are not "entrapment."
InfiniteIntellRules 5 hours ago
I will stop, just too many tales of FBI corruption. Last 1
Under COINTELPRO, FBI agents infiltrated political groups and spread rumors that loyal
members were the real infiltrators. They tried to get targets fired from their jobs, and
they tried to break up the targets' marriages. They published deliberately inflammatory
literature in the names of the organizations they wanted to discredit, and they drove
wedges between groups that might otherwise be allied. In Baltimore, the FBI's operatives in
the Black Panther Party were instructed to denounce Students for a Democratic Society as "a
cowardly, honky group" who wanted to exploit the Panthers by giving them all the violent,
dangerous "dirty work." The operation was apparently successful: In August 1969, just five
months after the initial instructions went out, the Baltimore FBI reported that the local
Panther branch had ordered its members not to associate with SDS members or attend any SDS
events.
EVERY MAJOR EVENT. EVERY SINGLE TIME.
heehaw2 6 hours ago
All happened under Trumps watch. He said he was going to lead the March to Capital
building, then totally disappeared.
MrNoItAll 7 hours ago
Got to hand it to them. Those Fed guys sure know how to stage a riot to get media
attention and shape public opinion. How else could they explain why all the guard troops
were needed in D C. When getting them there could have been the primary goal of this staged
event.
lightwork 7 hours ago
In the early 70's it seemed that a government informant/ mole was instrumental in the
activities of virtually every left wing group in the country. It became common knowledge
that whomever was most vocal and advocated the most activist positions was usually "that
guy". It was effective since paranoia caused most groups to disintegrate.
otschelnik 8 hours ago remove link
Probably more snitches than that.
Oath Keeper Thomas Caldwell who is one of the lucky few released but still charged is a
former FBI contractor who had top secret security clearance according to his lawyer.
Proud Boy Enrique Tarrio who was arrested 2 days before the riot for vandalism (burning
a BLM banner), had been an informer to the FBI and law inforcement in Florida, according to
his lawyer.
They forgot Antifa and BLM in their list of groups.
State sponsored terrorist groups favored by Liberal Elites and their secret police are
generally omitted and immune.
heehaw2 6 hours ago
George Bush Senior, then head of CIA was in Dallas when JFK was assinated. Ol George
announced as President the New World order
QE49er 6 hours ago
Reichstag Fire style false flag.
Ruff_Roll 6 hours ago
It makes perfect sense that FBI or government supported operatives were acting as agents
provocateurs on 1/6, organizing and instigating the riot, and subsequently let off as
"unindicted co-conspirators." Pelosi was probably in on it, too.
TheySayIAmOkay 7 hours ago
This is the biggest "duh" ever. Of course the government is involved. Just like they
were in 9/11. Just like they were stealing the election. Just like they are in at least
some of these mass shootings (the FBI was warned about the Parkland shooter multiple
times). Just like they will be in the next big incident that massively strips rights from
the people.
The Deep State is real. And it is the upper echelons of the FBI, DHS, CIA, ATF, etc.
They are the shadow government that wags the tail. They can do whatever they want and
nobody can do anything about it. Do you think if Ted Cruz or Nancy Pelosi killed someone
they'd get away with it? No. They are figures. The limits of their power can be stripped
with a single, stupid, scandal. How about John Brennan? I have absolutely no doubt in my
mind he could. Because who will hold him accountable? Nobody in the CIA or FBI went down
for not listening to the FBI agent about the 20th hijacker. Mueller got PROMOTED! He's deep
state. Brennan was regional chief of the CIA in Riyadh leading up to 9/11. He got...
PROMOTED! Deep state.
3-fingered_chemist 7 hours ago
The fact the Capitol had essentially zero security the day all members were present to
tally the EC votes and people still think this wasn't faked?
Jim in MN 7 hours ago
Speaking as someone who actually attended the earlier 'Stop the Steal' rally in DC, I
said at the time that the Jan. 6th event didn't smell right and felt like a setup.
Recommended that folks stay away, expect trouble and stay frosty at that time.
Note that the FBI was/is also deeply involved in the BLM riots. AKA a criminal
conspiracy to destabilize US civil order. Of course a lot of mayors and police chiefs are
also involved in that criminal conspiracy.
The more you know.....
jammyjo 7 hours ago
FBI is making contact with unstable people, and do nothing but keep them on a list of
"assets" to be activated when needed.
Patmos 7 hours ago
Gives new meaning to false narrative. More than just spin, they actually create the
events themselves. Not quite a false flag, because nothing really happened.
Is anyone involved going to stand up and say no? Or have they all just decided to
reserve themselves to being corrupt little b!tches?
Feck Weed 7 hours ago
FBI is the US domestic secret police force for the Globalist Empire. Nationalism is the
enemy of the globalists...
NBC pushed regular neocon garbage, so it is not very interesting interview. We saw better
executed similar attempts to attack Putin in the past. The guy is really second rate: too pushy,
too opinioned to be a good interviewer. He really is not interested in Putin opinions, he need to
push the agenda of his handlers. He demonstrated zero respect as if Russia is a US vassal (it was
in 1990 under alcoholic Yeltsin) . In other words he is a regular Pressitute. This neocon pushed
the label killer on Putin, while this label is appropritate to any recent US presendent to much
greater measure. Just look at how many people were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan in attempt to
achive "full spectrum Dominance" and enhance andcement global neoliberal empire. But some moments
when Putin destroyed neocon agenda are pretty educational.
Russian President Vladimir Putin this week sat down for an interview with a US media outlet
for the first time in nearly three years . NBC's Keir Simmons talked to Putin for about 90
minutes, and released a teaser segment Friday night.
Perhaps the most interesting part of the conversation centered on the Russian leader's
perspective on American politics and his personal thoughts and comparison of Donald Trump and
Joe Biden. Putin called the former president "extraordinary" and "talented" while noting that
Biden is "radically different" and is a quintessential "career man" in politics .
https://www.youtube.com/embed/oh_obIUJ7HA
"Well even now, I believe that former U.S. president Mr. Trump is an extraordinary
individual, talented individual, otherwise he would not have become U.S. President," Putin told
Simmons.
" He is a colorful individual. You may like him or not. And, but he didn't come from the
US establishment, he had not been part of big time politics before , and some like it some
don't like it but that is a fact."
"...President Biden is a career man. He has spent virtually his entire adulthood in
politics," Putin said in part.
"That's a different kind of person, and it is my great hope that yes, there are some
advantages, some disadvantages, but there will not be any impulse-based movements, on behalf
of the sitting U.S. president."
Also interesting is Putin's response to the March George Stephanopoulos interview with Biden
wherein the US President dubbed Putin a "killer" with "no soul". Putin responded in this new
NBC clip:
"Over my tenure, I've gotten used to attacks from all kinds of angles and from all kinds
of areas under all kinds of pretext, and reasons and of different caliber and fierceness and
none of it surprises me."
Putin called the "killer" label "Hollywood macho."
Putin also took aim at a recent
Washington Post report over Russia-Iranian military relations and the transfer of advanced
satellite systems. "It's just fake news," Putin dismissed. "At the very least, I don't know
anything about this kind of thing. Those who are speaking about it probably will maybe know
more about it. It's just nonsense, garbage."
activisor 2 hours ago
Funny how Putin has become leader of the free world! He and Lavrov are streets ahead
of the rest, and have massive support outside Russia based on their common sense approach
to world events. He will be hard to replace.
yerfej 2 hours ago
EVERYONE with common sense realize Putin is the ONLY current leader who gives a ****
about his country and people and is willing to cooperate with any country that isn't
wandering around the globe looking to tell everyone else what they can say or do or
think.
No_Pretzel_Logic 2 hours ago
How fascinating that you speak for "everyone" with common sense. That's quite a
skill.
Do tell us about the responses from people you've polled in the Scandinavian
countries, Poland, UK, France, etc.?
George Bush League 2 hours ago
You can start by not being such an pathetic condescending azzhole.
smellmyfingers 54 minutes ago
Putin, articulate, intelligent, answers without a teleprompter and without babbling or
stumbling.
Is he perfect? Obviously not nor is he a messiah. But I'd bet people have more
confidence in him out in front than the corruption and lies the USA and many other
western nations have that are completely compromised.
chunga 2 hours ago remove link
Dmitry Orlov has got some interesting translations from Putin at the thing in St.
Petersburg.
Early in the pandemic, I had been furiously writing articles about lockdowns. My phone rang
with a call from a man named Dr. Rajeev Venkayya. He is the head of a vaccine company but
introduced himself as former head of pandemic policy for the Gates Foundation.
Replay Unmute Duration 0:22 / Current Time 0:22
Loaded : 100.00% Fullscreen Up Next Replay the list
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.464.0_en.html#goog_652049397 The World Now
Officially Has Five Oceans UP NEXT Kevin Connolly and girlfriend welcome daughter Edge Of The
World: Going Up River Political leaders arrive in Cornwall for G7 summit French president
Emmanuel Macron slapped in face during visit to town The G7 summit: What you need to know
Awake: Gina Rodriguez On What Drew Her To The Film Awake: Lucius Hoya On How He Prepared For
His Role NOW PLAYING
I did not know it then, but I've since learned from Michael Lewis's (mostly terrible) book
The Premonition that Venkayya was, in fact, the founding father of lockdowns. While working for
George W. Bush's White House in 2005, he headed a bioterrorism study group. From his perch of
influence "" serving an apocalyptic president" he was the driving force for a dramatic change
in U.S. policy during pandemics.
He literally unleashed hell.
That was 15 years ago. At the time, I wrote about the changes I was witnessing, worrying
that new White House guidelines (never voted on by Congress) allowed the government to put
Americans in quarantine while closing their schools, businesses, and churches shuttered, all in
the name of disease containment.
I never believed it would happen in real life; surely there would be public revolt. Little
did I know, we were in for a wild ride"¦
The Man Who Lit the Match
Last year, Venkayya and I had a 30-minute conversation; actually, it was mostly an argument.
He was convinced that lockdown was the only way to deal with a virus. I countered that it was
wrecking rights, destroying businesses, and disturbing public health. He said it was our only
choice because we had to wait for a vaccine. I spoke about natural immunity, which he called
brutal. So on it went.
The more interesting question I had at the time was why this certified Big Shot was wasting
his time trying to convince a poor scribbler like me. What possible reason could there be?
The answer, I now realized, is that from February to April 2020, I was one of the few people
(along with a team of researchers) who openly and aggressively opposed what was happening.
There was a hint of insecurity and even fear in Venkayya's voice. He saw the awesome thing
he had unleashed all over the world and was anxious to tamp down any hint of opposition. He was
trying to silence me. He and others were determined to crush all dissent.
This is how it has been for the better part of the last 15 months, with social media and
YouTube deleting videos that dissent from lockdowns. It's been censorship from the
beginning.
For all the problems with Lewis's book, and there are plenty, he gets this whole backstory
right. Bush came to his bioterrorism people and demanded some huge plan to deal with some
imagined calamity. When Bush saw the conventional plan" make a threat assessment, distribute
therapeutics, work toward a vaccine" he was furious.
"This is bulls**t," the president yelled.
"We need a whole-of-society plan. What are you going to do about foreign borders? And
travel? And commerce?"
Hey, if the president wants a plan, he'll get a plan.
"We want to use all instruments of national power to confront this threat," Venkayya
reports having told colleagues.
"We were going to invent pandemic planning."
This was October 2005, the birth of the lockdown idea.
Dr. Venkayya began to fish around for people who could come up with the domestic equivalent
of Operation Desert Storm to deal with a new virus. He found no serious epidemiologists to
help. They were too smart to buy into it. He eventually bumped into the real lockdown innovator
working at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico.
Cranks, Computers, and Cooties
His name was Robert Glass, a computer scientist with no medical training, much less
knowledge, about viruses. Glass, in turn, was inspired by a science fair project that his
14-year-old daughter was working on.
She theorized (like the cooties game from grade school) that if school kids could space
themselves out more or even not be at school at all, they would stop making each other sick.
Glass ran with the idea and banged out a model of disease control based on stay-at-home orders,
travel restrictions, business closures, and forced human separation.
Crazy right? No one in public health agreed with him but like any classic crank, this
convinced Glass even more. I asked myself, "Why didn't these epidemiologists figure it out?"
They didn't figure it out because they didn't have tools that were focused on the problem. They
had tools to understand the movement of infectious diseases without the purpose of trying to
stop them.
Genius, right? Glass imagined himself to be smarter than 100 years of experience in public
health. One guy with a fancy computer would solve everything! Well, he managed to convince some
people, including another person hanging around the White House named Carter Mecher, who became
Glass's apostle.
Please consider the following quotation from Dr. Mecher in Lewis's book: "If you got
everyone and locked each of them in their own room and didn't let them talk to anyone, you
would not have any disease."
At last, an intellectual has a plan to abolish disease" and human life as we know it too! As
preposterous and terrifying as this is "" a whole society not only in jail but solitary
confinement" it sums up the whole of Mecher's view of disease. It's also completely wrong.
Pathogens are part of our world; they are generated by human contact. We pass them onto each
other as the price for civilization, but we also evolved immune systems to deal with them.
That's 9th-grade biology, but Mecher didn't have a clue.
Fanatics Win the Day
Jump forward to March 12, 2020. Who exercised the major influence over the decision to close
schools, even though it was known at that time that SARS-CoV-2 posed almost risk to people
under the age of 20? There was even evidence that they did not spread COVID-19 to adults in any
serious way.
Didn't matter. Mecher's models" developed with Glass and others" kept spitting out a
conclusion that shutting down schools would drop virus transmission by 80%. I've read his memos
from this period" some of them still not public" and what you observe is not science but
ideological fanaticism in play.
Based on the timestamp and length of the emails, he was clearly not sleeping much.
Essentially he was Lenin on the eve of the Bolshevik Revolution. How did he get his way?
There were three key elements: public fear, media and expert acquiescence, and the baked-in
reality that school closures had been part of "pandemic planning" for the better part of 15
years. Essentially, the lockdowners, over the course of 15 years, had worn out the opposition.
Lavish funding, attrition of wisdom within public health, and ideological fanaticism
prevailed.
Figuring out how our expectations for normal life were so violently foiled, how our happy
lives were brutally crushed, will consume serious intellectuals for many years. But at least we
now have a first draft of history.
As with almost every revolution in history, a small minority of crazy people with a cause
prevailed over the humane rationality of multitudes. When people catch on, the fires of
vengeance will burn very hot.
The task now is to rebuild a civilized life that is no longer so fragile as to allow insane
people to lay waste to all that humanity has worked so hard to build.
China's Foreign Ministry blasted the resurgent interest in the Covid-19 lab-origin theory,
noting that the journalist behind a report about Wuhan scientists falling ill is the same one
who peddled lies that led to the Iraq War.
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin took aim at Michael R. Gordon, a national
security correspondent for the Wall Street Journal and one of the authors of the report that
added fuel to speculation about Covid-19's lab origin.
"Not long ago, Michael R. Gordon, an American journalist, by quoting a so-called
"˜previously undisclosed US intelligence report,' hinted [at] a far-fetched connection
between the "˜three sick staff' at the Wuhan lab and the Covid-19 outbreak," Wang said
at a briefing on Friday.
"Nineteen years ago, it was this very reporter who concocted false information by citing
unsubstantiated sources about Iraq's "˜attempt to acquire nuclear weapons,' which
directly led to the Iraq War," he charged, referring to the 2003 US invasion.
The WSJ
piece , published on May 23, cites "a previously undisclosed US intelligence report" as
saying that three researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell seriously ill in
November 2019 with symptoms "consistent" with Covid-19 as well as a seasonal flu.
The report got picked up by other mainstream media, which recently began shifting their
coverage on Covid-19's origins from outright dismissing theories that the virus was man-made
to admitting that a lab leak remains a possibility.
Furthermore, I wouldn't personally point to Gordon as the source for the "Wuhan Lab Leak
Hypothesis" "" I would point to the Jewish neocon Josh Rogin.
Rogin, like Gordon, spent years promoting various atrocity hoaxes in the Middle East and
pushing wars for Israel, and is the original source for the version of the "Wuhan Lab theory,"
that is currently circulating, writing a
Washington Post column promoting the hoax on April 14, 2020.
The point of course is that everywhere you look, there are neocons "" most of them Jewish ""
promoting this Wuhan Lab stuff. They are the absolute source of the claim "" they and a Falun
Gong Hong Kong CIA feminist woman, Li-Meng Yan.
She is claiming to be a "whistleblower," despite the fact that she in no way meets the
definition of that term. The term necessarily implies insider knowledge "" usually, a
whistleblower is an employee or former employee of the organization they are blowing the
whistle on.
Though none of the media promoting her says it outright, there is an implication that she
worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. She did not. She worked at a university in Hong Kong
when she was funded by Steve Bannon to write a paper making the claim that the supposed
coronavirus is a Chinese bioweapon.
Bannon has recently been associated with Guo Wengui, a billionaire who was exiled from China
for fraud and various crimes. In June of last year, Bannon declared that Guo is now the real
ruler of China in a bizarre video on a boat.
While they were on the boat in front of the Statue of Liberty saying they were going to
"overthrow the government of China," they flew planes around with signs announcing their new
government.
No one understood what was going on, and even Fox News
reported on "confusion" regarding the banners and the livestream on the boat. The
livestream has since been deleted, and there is no news from the Federal State of New China.
But there is a Wikipedia page documenting this
incredibly strange event.
Guo also runs a fake news website (I use that term in the most literal sense) where he
published the Hunter Biden footjob videos.
The point is: this is a very weird operation, and it is absurd to take a person funded by
these people seriously, as Tucker Carlson shamefully has.
(I'm not attacking Tucker over this, he's overall great and is sometimes just really slow on
the uptake, unfortunately "" but it is shameful to get involved with a Hong Kong woman who was
literally given money by Steve Bannon and his "Federation of New China" group to write a fake
science paper.)
To pretend that she is a whistleblower, to pretend that political organizations funding
papers with a predetermined outcome is serious science, is non-serious behavior.
The first time I heard the Wuhan lab leak theory it was being promoted by neocon extremist
Tom Cotton. It was then promoted by neocon extremist Mike Pompeo, who was then in the process
of trying to start a war with China. Now, it is being promoted by the Jews of CNN.
There is no one involved in claiming that the supposed coronavirus came from a Chinese lab
who doesn't have vested interests in starting a war with the Chinese. This goes for all of
these Jews, as well as Steve Bannon, who has actually declared "overthrowing the government of
China" (his words) to be his goal.
It's very obvious to see how people who want a war with China would use this hoax, and it is
great that China is making the link to the Iraqi WMD hoax. It truly is the same thing.
The United States is a country with a lot of problems. None of those problems are the fault
of China. China is not promoting gay sex to children, they are not flooding us with millions of
brown people, they did not steal our election, they did not take all of our freedoms and
collapse the economy.
Our enemies are domestic and they are Jewish. Any attempt to fear-monger and attack China is
intended as a distraction from what is going on in this country, and intended to stoke a
war.
Furthermore, this "lab leak" nonsense is designed to get people to continue to believe in
this coronavirus hoax.
Though none of the media promoting her says it outright, there is an implication that
she worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. She did not. She worked at a university in
Hong Kong when she was funded by Steve Bannon to write a paper making the claim that the
supposed coronavirus is a Chinese bioweapon.
Bannon has recently been associated with Guo Wengui, a billionaire who was exiled from
China for fraud and various crimes. In June of last year, Bannon declared that Guo is now
the real ruler of China in a bizarre video on a boat.
This style of presentation is updated "internet culture" gonzo that stands on the
shoulders of Hunter Thompson, Tom Wolfe, and in a sense Mark Twain.
That fact that today's Anglospheric system no longer has a place within itself for this
type of "dominant narrative-jamming" creativity, and to write like this means one has chosen
to become a hunted outcast, means this culture is in a death spiral. It's no longer a
self-renewing organism, but simply a collection of isolated biomass units used and thrown
away by the masters.
"Nineteen years ago, it was this very reporter who concocted false information by citing
unsubstantiated sources about Iraq's "˜attempt to acquire nuclear weapons,' which
directly led to the Iraq War," he charged, referring to the 2003 US invasion.
Either the neo-cons thought no one would notice or the noe-cons didn't notice
themselves.
I'm leaning towards the latter, especially with sloppy drunk Steve Bannon and a "Falun
Gong Hong Kong CIA feminist woman" in the mix. Is this really the best they can do?
These times we're living in are absolutely surreal. Not surprised though, we've been doing
this for a long time now. Alas, a great many of my fellow White Americans will fall for it
completely & be all in for a war with China. None of them ever even contemplating what
that would mean for us & the world. But, these are the same people who boast "we're
number one" when we rank at or near the bottom in positive stats for all developed nations,
beset with crippling societal ills. The same people who think we can vote ourselves out of
this mess & Trump will win in "˜24 & somehow save the day. The same people who
think our best days are ahead when our productivity base has been utterly gutted, our
infrastructure is collapsing & our ability to maintain it & the skill set needed to
sustain that productivity/infrastructure is slipping away. The same people who boast of "muh
freedoms" when their freedoms & their children's future is being pulled from right under
their feet. The same people who think we'll always be on top even when every example of
history shows that every empire in history has collapsed. We're racing toward a cliff but
they still think "god" is on their side & won't let it happen or we'll stay on top
because, well, "we're America"..
Utter denial & abject delusion seem to be a central aspect of our people..
" There is no one involved in claiming that the supposed coronavirus came from a Chinese
lab who doesn't have vested interests in starting a war with the Chinese. This goes for all
of these Jews, as well as Steve Bannon, who has actually declared "overthrowing the
government of China" (his words) to be his goal."
" History often repeats itself, first as a tragedy and second as a farce"
Karl Marx.
The tragedy of the WMD of Iraq follows many other tragedies that got young Americans to
spill their blood for the sake of special interests making a killing as war profiteers. The
farce of " China spread the Corona virus will the biggest tragedy to hit America if the
waning bald eagle tries to poke the rising dragon.
Andrew Anglin, is one of the few American journalists who stand boldly for the truth. Not
bad for someone labelled a Neo Nazi by Wikipedia.
"The problem of empires is that they think they are so powerful that they can afford
small inaccuracies and mistakes. "But problems keep piling up. And, at some point, they are
no longer able to cope with them. And the United States is now walking the Soviet Union's
path, and its gait is confident and steady."
The current consensus that Covid was likely a Wuhan lab leak was triggered by an article
by Nicholas Wade, a former science writer for the NY Times and an impeccably
establishmentarian journalist. Previous attempts by right wingers or maverick scientists to
advance this hypothesis were ignored or scorned by the establishment press. Wade could not be
so easily dismissed. His article, plus the release of emails by Fauci acknowledging the
possibility of a lab-created virus (which he publicly ridiculed) and the revelation that
Fauci had funded bat research at Wuhan, have changed the game entirely. My own suspicion is
that the Biden administration is preparing to throw Fauci under the bus and has signaled the
press that he is now fair game. He has served his purpose and can now be used as a scapegoat.
It is unlikely that the Wuhan release will ever be definitively proven. It is more important
to realize that this research is not restricted to Wuhan or China and that steps should be
taken to shut down all such research world-wide, including the USA, lest we have a succession
of these disasters.
The USA has been using bio-warfare for 200 years plus and can NEVER be trusted not to
carry on such research. It controls c.200 labs, worldwide, where research into pathogens and
vectors, particularly arthropods, and the collection of pathogens, is carried out. It used
biological agents in Korea in the early 50s, and against Cuba (African Swine Fever and
dengue) in the 70s, and God knows where else, and against its own people, most infamously the
Tuskegee syphilis abomination. And it is responsible for SARS CoV2, you can be sure.
The West has been trying to bring down China since they tried to turn them all into opium
addicts. Americans were complicit with the British in this and many of the so-called deep
state players made their money from the opium trade. Apparently the same families control the
present day drugs trade and the laundering of the profits from it; the so-called drug cartels
are mostly minor actors well below those who run the operation at the top. Members of the
cartels are often sacrificed but those at the top remain the same.
@Ber t we have is the Josh Hawley demand to declassify everything related to Covid from
day-1, and since he made that proposal, it has been crickets from everyone else, which is
again indicative that no one in the power elite has any incentive or goal to do more than
batter their usual targets.
All that said "" the best practices at this stage of overwhelming deception is to start
with what we can in fact establish and prove as actual plain fact, and proceed from there. If
you start from what you suspect or theorize, you will soon be enmeshed in fevered
propositions ("missiles hit the pentagon on 9/11") that crap all over the genuine facts and
do nothing but hand-craft a made-to-order, wild goose chase. This is very welcome by those
who want to control the entire denouement, to serve their own agenda.
"¦ many other tragedies that got young Americans to spill their blood for the
sake of special interests making a killing as war profiteers.
Agree the main thrust of your post, Joe.
It is also worth remembering that very many innocent souls in countries across the world
have been going about their daily lives when they were attacked, maimed and killed, their
houses destroyed, infrastructure wrecked etc by those same young Americans. Some countries at
this very hour are occupied and are being looted by the same.
Perhaps not a comfortable thought for Americans to add in as they see their country now
descending into certifiable lunacy.
But what goes around does have a habit of coming around, sooner or later.
@Anon t Ron Unz has been saying from the beginning. If you look at it geostrategically,
this is most plausible conclusion. They released the virus in China but those who created it
suffered a massive blowback and even worse China came out of it even stronger than ever
before. They were hoping China would crumble but instead got stronger while they weakened.
That's why they are fanning out a major Anti-China propaganda campaign to contain her now
openly with an overwhelming support of western citizens. This frenziness displayed by western
politicians is the reflection that China is on the verge an unstoppable economic powerhouse
within a few years and they need to put the brakes right now. It is an implicit admission of
desperation. The tussle between China and the US is going to dramatically intensify.
A country can't bring another country down by giving it "Most Favored Nation Trading
Status".
Then sending all it's major corporations there to make big deals.
And how has it served the United States where practically every item, pill in the US is
"Made in China"?
The American people were sold out decades ago in order for the 1% and their Congressional
lackeys to make major bucks. We were even working with them to create a deadly virus!
President Vladimir Putin said Russia doesn't want to stop using the dollar as he accused the
U.S. of exploiting the currency's dominance for sanctions and warned the policy may rebound on
Washington.
Russia has to adopt other payment methods because the U.S. "uses its national currency for
various kinds of sanctions," Putin said late Friday in St. Petersburg at a videoconference with
representatives of international media organizations. "We don't do this deliberately, we are
forced to do it."
Settlements in national currencies with other countries in areas such as defense sales and
reductions in foreign-exchange reserves held in dollars eventually will damage the U.S. as the
greenback's dominance declines, Putin said. "Why do U.S. political authorities do this? They're
sawing the branch on which they sit," he said.
Putin spoke a day after Russia announced it will eliminate the dollar from its oil fund to
reduce vulnerability to sanctions, a largely symbolic move as the switch in holdings will take
place within the central bank's reserves. Russia has tried with limited success to shift away
from the dollar for years amid international sanctions over Putin's 2014 annexation of Crimea
and support for separatists in eastern Ukraine, as well as for alleged cyber attacks, election
meddling and espionage operations.
The Russian leader's comments came ahead of his first summit meeting with U.S. President Joe
Biden in Geneva on June 16. While he praised Biden as one of the world's most experienced
leaders, Putin said he expects no breakthrough in relations with the U.S. at the talks.
And he offered a warning at Friday's meeting for the U.S., based on what he said was his own
experiences "as a former citizen of the former Soviet Union."
"The problem with empires is that they think they can afford small errors and mistakes,"
which gradually accumulate, Putin said. "There comes a time when they can no longer be dealt
with. And the U.S., with a confident step, a confident gait, a firm step, is walking straight
along the path of the Soviet Union."
Sanctions are the "gentlemanly" neo-imperial language of gunboat diplomacy, never better
expressed than the attempts of the British government in the early 1950s to discipline a newly
democratic Iran. First the British Labour Government, then a Conservative government under a
splenetic Churchill, tried to put a halt to the runaway popularity of Mohammed Mossadegh, prime
minister of Iran, and his policy to shut down the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and nationalize
Iran's own oil. The British sabotaged their own company, refused to distribute the oil, and did
everything else they could to impoverish Iran. This was only after the AIOC had refused to
budge from its insistence on taking practically all of the profits and to refrain from treating
Iranian oil workers as subhuman. Ironically, the British needed AIOC money to finance their own
program of industrial nationalization and the welfare state. As is so often the case, the
"sanctions" merely hardened anti-imperial sentiment, and were succeeded by a joint US-UK
directed regime-change coup d'etat
None of this need suggest a diminution in the importance of national sovereignty. Sovereign
nations should be free to trade with whomsoever they choose, to protect which domestic
industries they consider worthy of protection. That is their right. They also have the right to
enter into trade agreements with others for the purpose of regulating the conditions of trade
between them, provided that they enter into such agreements without duress, bribery or
punishment.
Questions of Definition
The Council for Foreign Relations (CFR) explains that sanctions have become one of the most
favored tools for governments to respond to foreign policy challenges. The term sanctions
can refer to travel bans, asset freezes, arms embargoes, capital restraints, foreign aid
reductions, and trade restrictions, and represent efforts to coerce, deter, punish, or shame
entities that are considered by those who wield them to endanger their interests. They are
generally viewed as a lower-cost, lower-risk course of action in calculations that balance
diplomacy against war. Yet sanctions can be just as devasting in terms of loss of human life.
They may be particularly attractive in the case of policy responses to foreign crises in which
national interest is considered less than vital, or where military action is not feasible.
Sanctions that blanket entire populations generally do most damage to poorer and more
vulnerable social strata, who lack the means to avoid or compensate for their consequences. The
USA has more than two dozen sanctions regimes. Some target specific countries such as Cuba and
Iran, others target specific categories of person or institution or even specific named
individuals. Sanctions have been used in efforts of counterterrorism, counter-narcotics,
nonproliferation, democracy and human rights promotion, conflict resolution, and cybersecurity.
They are frequently applied as a form of punishment or reprisal for behavior in which it is
alleged that the target has engaged and of which the applying entity disapproves.
In the case of the UN Security Council sanctions resolutions must pass the fifteen-member
council by a majority vote and without a veto from any of the five permanent members: the
United States, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom. The most common types of UN
sanctions, binding for all member states, are asset freezes, travel bans, and arms embargoes.
The UN relies on member states for enforcement, with all the idiosyncrasies and abuses that
this entails. The council-imposed sanctions against Southern Rhodesia in 1966 were intended to
undermine Ian Smith's white supremacist regime and were followed in 1977 by another set of
comprehensive UN sanctions against apartheid South Africa. They have been applied more than
twenty times since 1990 against targeting parties to an intrastate conflict, as in Somalia,
Liberia, and Yugoslavia in the 1990s.
The European Union imposes sanctions as part of its Common Foreign and Security Policy. They
must receive unanimous consent from member states in the Council of the European Union, the
body that represents EU leaders. The EU has levied its sanctions more than thirty times.
Individual EU states may also impose harsher sanctions independently within their national
jurisdiction.
The USA resorts to economic and financial sanctions more than any other country. Presidents
may issue an executive order that declares a national emergency and invokes special powers to
regulate commerce for a period of one year, unless extended by the president or terminated by a
joint resolution of Congress. Most of the more than fifty states of emergency declared by
Congress remain in effect today. Congress may pass legislation imposing new sanctions or
modifying existing ones.
In 2019, the United States had comprehensive sanctions regimes on Cuba, North Korea, Iran,
Sudan, and Syria, as well as more than a dozen other programs targeting individuals and
entities (currently some 6,000). Existing U.S. sanctions programs are administered by the
Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), while other departments,
including State, Commerce, Homeland Security, and Justice, may also play an integral role. The
secretary of state can designate a group a foreign terrorist organization or label a country a
state sponsor of terrorism, both of which have sanctions implications. State and local
authorities may also contribute to enforcement efforts.
The practice of sanctions received a significant boost with the formation of the World Trade
Organization, which recognizes the legitimacy of sanctions as a response to the failure of
parties in a trade dispute to reach agreement on satisfactory compensation. A complainant may
ask the Dispute
Settlement Body for permission to impose trade sanctions against the respondent that has
failed to implement. The complainant's retaliatory response may not go beyond the level of the
harm caused by the respondent. The complainant should first seek to suspend obligations in the
same sector as that in which the violation or other nullification or impairment was found,
unless the complainant considers it impracticable or ineffective to remain within the same
sector The complainant is allowed countermeasures that are in effect and would in other
circumstances be inconsistent with the WTO Agreement. In other words, the result is that a
complainant responds to one trade barrier with another trade barrier, contrary to the
liberalization philosophy underlying the WTO. Such measures are nearly always harmful for both
the complainant and the target. Although such retaliation requires prior approval by the DSB 1,
the countermeasures are applied selectively by one Member against another. The suspension of
obligations is temporary and the DSB is obligated to maintain a review of the situation for as
long as there is no implementation. The suspension must be revoked once the Member concerned
has fully complied with the DSB's recommendations and rulings.
In a 2019 decision
the WTO allowed China to impose trade sanctions on $3.6 billion of American goods on the
grounds that the USA had not followed WTO rules in the way it imposed duties on what it
regarded as unfairly cheap Chinese goods. The ruling concluded a case that China brought
against the USA in 2013 that stemmed from levies placed on more than 40 Chinese goods. At issue
were subsidies that the USA accused China of providing to its companies so that they can sell
goods more cheaply overseas.
The case touched on some of the deep politics of neoliberalism for which the WTO is supreme
icon, and which make the very notion of sanctions problematic as evidenced in frequent
criticisms of the WTO . These are that free trade benefits developed countries more than
developing countries; that countries should trade without discrimination means a local firm is
not allowed to favor local contractors, giving an unfair advantage to multinational companies
and imposing costs for local firms; ; it is important that nations be allowed to assist in the
diversification of their economies and not be penalized for favoring emerging industries; free
trade is not equally sought across different industries "" notably, both the US and EU retain
high tariffs on agriculture, which hurts farmers in developing economies; principles of free
trade often ignore environmental considerations, considerations of labor equity and cultural
diversity.
After 9/11 "" still one of the least understood events in modern history "" and amidst the
subsequent US invasions of the sovereign countries of Afghanistan and Iraq, and
de-stabilization of many others (including Libya, Syria, Ukraine), the USA set about disrupting
what it deemed the financial infrastructure supporting terrorists and international criminals,
(but not including the USA itself). The Patriot Act awarded Treasury Department officials
far-reaching authority to freeze the assets and financial transactions of individuals and other
entities suspected of supporting terrorism, and broad powers to designate foreign jurisdictions
and financial institutions as "primary money laundering concerns." Treasury needs only a
reasonable suspicion""not necessarily any evidence""to target entities under these laws. The
centrality of New York and the dollar to the global financial system means these U.S. policies
are felt globally. Penalties for sanctions violations can be huge in terms of fines, loss of
business, and reputational damage. Sanctions regimes today increasingly impact not merely the
primary targeted countries or entities but also those who would do business with such countries
or entities.
Questions of Effectiveness
Sanctions have a poor track record, registering a modest 20-30 percent success rate at best,
according to one source, Emily Cashen, writing for World Finance in 2017. According to leading
empirical analyses, between 1915 and 2006, comprehensive sanctions were successful, at best,
just 30 percent of the time. The longer sanctions are in place, the less likely they are to be
effective, as the targeted state tends to adapt to its new economic circumstances instead of
changing its behavior.
Examples of "successful" applications of sanctions (always judged from the very partial
viewpoint of those who impose them) are said to include their role in persuading the Iranian
leadership to comply with limits to its uranium enrichment program. But if this was "success,"
why then did the USA break its agreement with Iran in 2018? And why was there an agreement in
the first place if Iran had never had nuclear weapons nor was likely to produce them on its own
account without serious provocation. Sanctions are also said to have pressured Gadaffi in
handing over the Lockerbie suspects for trial, renouncing the nation's weapons of mass
destruction and ending its support for terrorist activities. But then, if that was "success,"
why did NATO bomb Libya back to the stone age in 2011?
Sanctions that are effective in one setting may fail in another . Context is everything.
Sanctions programs with relatively limited objectives are generally more likely to succeed than
those with major political ambitions. Furthermore, sanctions may achieve their desired economic
effect but fail to change behavior. Only correlations, not causal relationships, can be
determined. The central question is one of comparative utility: Is the imposition of sanctions
better or worse than not imposing sanctions, from whose viewpoint, and why? Best practices are
said to combine punitive measures with positive inducements; set attainable goals; build
multilateral support; be credible and flexible: and give the target reason to believe that
sanctions will be increased or reduced based on its behavior.
In cases where the targeted country has other trading options unilateral measures have no
real impact or may be counterproductive. Sanctions against Russia over Ukraine may have simply
helped to push Russia closer to its eastern neighbors, notably China.
To bypass sanctions Russia has shifted its trade focus towards Asia. Asian non-cooperation with
the sanctions helps explain why Russia was expecting to grow its trade with China to $200bn by
2020. For several countries in western Europe, the sanctions had a double-edged sword.
Russia is the European Union's third largest commercial partner, and the EU, reciprocally, is
Russia's chief trade partner, accounting for almost 41 percent of the nation's trade prior to
the sanctions. In 2012, before the Ukrainian crisis began, the EU exported a record
€267.5bn ($285bn) of goods to Russia. Further, US sanctions against Russia
increasingly and patently had nothing to do with Ukraine and everything to do with US interest
in exploiting its imperial relationship with West European vassal states to grow its LNG
(liquefied natural gas) market in competition with Russia, and by doing everything possible to
obstruct "" and to coerce European nations into helping it obstruct "" Russia's Nord Stream 2
oil and gas pipeline that will bring cheap Russian oil to Europe without passing through
Ukraine. The very opposite of principles of globalization and free trade.
The USA can afford to be aggressive in sanctions policies largely because (for the time
being, and that time is getting shorter by the day) there is no alternative to the dollar and
because there is no single country export market quite as attractive (for now and even then,
one must wonder about China) as the USA. Sanctions that are effective in one setting may fail
in another. Context is everything. Sanctions programs with relatively limited objectives are
generally more likely to succeed than those with major political ambitions. Furthermore,
sanctions may achieve their desired economic effect but fail to change behavior. Only
correlations, not causal relationships, can be determined. The central question is one of
comparative utility: Is the imposition of sanctions better or worse than not imposing
sanctions, from whose viewpoint, and why? Best practices are said to combine punitive measures
with positive inducements; set attainable goals; build multilateral support; be credible and
flexible: and give the target reason to believe that sanctions will be increased or reduced
based on its behavior.
Sanctions and Human Misery
Since the early 1990s, the US, Europe and other developed economies have employed sanctions on
other nations more than 500 times , seeking to assert their influence on the global stage
without resorting to military interventions. Yet military interventions tend to happen in any
case suggesting that in some cases the sanctions are intended to "soften up" the target prior
to armed conflict).
The economic stranglehold of stringent sanctions on Iraq after the successful allied
invasion of 1991 caused widescale malnutrition and prolonged suffering, and a lack of medical
supplies and a shortage of clean water led to one of the worst humanitarian crises in modern
history. Sanctions all but completely cut off the oil trade. Iraq lost up to $130 billion in
oil revenues during the 1990s, causing intense poverty to many Iraqi civilians. Prior to the
embargo, Iraq had relied on imports for two thirds of its food supply. With this source
suddenly cut off, the price of basic commodities rose 1,000 percent between 1990 and 1995.
Infant mortality increased 150 percent, according to a report by Save the
Children, with researchers estimating that between 670,000 and 880,000 children under five
died because of the impoverished conditions caused by the sanctions. Then US Secretary
of State Madeleine Albright notoriously excused this horrendous slaughter as "worth the
price ." During the Gulf War, almost all of Iraq's essential infrastructure was bombed by a
US-led coalition, leaving the country without water treatment plants or sewage treatment
facilities, prompting extended outbreaks of cholera and typhoid.
Targeted sanctions can be equally devastating. The de facto
boycott on Congolese minerals, for example, has led to the loss of more than 750,000 jobs in
the nation's mining sector. The loss of income resulting from this mass redundancy has had
a severe impact on child health in the nation, with conservative estimates recording a 143
percent increase in infant mortality. Despite an international shift away from comprehensive
sanctions, this Congolese suffering indicates targeted measures are still not free from ethical
quandaries.
Application of sanctions became more popular at the end of the first cold war because
previously targeted nations could negotiate for relief with the oppositional superpower. In the
succeeding era of greater enthusiasm for sanctions it became clear that they could have dire
consequences for civilian populations, and this helps account for increased popularity of
targeted sanctions.
Sanctions of Spite: Syria and the Caesar Act
There are many current examples of the murderous horror of the impact of sanctions by
"civilized," usually western powers, especially when their targets are poorer countries such as
Venezuela and Syria. Not untypically, some of the behaviors that the imperialists seek to
change are themselves the consequence of past imperial aggression.
The secular regime of Bashar Assad in Syria has faced a ten-year existential threat from the
Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda affiliates, ISIS and other jihadist entities supported by an array
of global and regional actors including the USA, UK, and other NATO members, Israel, Jordan,
Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the UAE. Whatever the regime's defects they are at the very
least comparable and in some cases dwarfed by those of many of Syria's opponents in the Arab
world.
The significance of genuine popular support for Assad , demonstrated in numerous polls, has
been marginalized by western mainstream media. The regime's survival, with air support from
Russia and ground support from Hezbollah and Iran, is extraordinary by any measure. Yet the USA
has continued to interfere in the affairs of Syria with a view to its continuing impoverishment
and destabilization by allowing Turkey to occupy large areas of the north west and populate
these with jihadist emigrees; funding Kurdish forces to secure Syria's oil resources on behalf
of the USA, and for maintaining prisons and camps for ISIS supporters, by maintaining its own
military bases; and permitting a constant succession of Israeli bombing attacks on what Israel
claims are Iranian-backed militia or Syrian Arab Army militia working in collaboration with
Iran; and approving further Israeli incursions into the Golan Heights.
Defeat of ISIS and recovery of non-Kurdish areas outside of Idlib by the Syrian Arab Army
(SAA) took place in conditions of considerable economic challenge, exacerbated by US-imposed
sanctions against both Syria and its neighbor Lebanon. This had a corrosive impact on relations
among top regime figures. Bashar al-Assad's billionaire first cousin and richest man in Syria,
Rami Makhlouf, complained in early 2020 of regime harassment and arrests of employees. Until
then, the Makhlouf family enjoyed exclusive access to business opportunities and monopolies on
hotels, tobacco, and communications, partly
camouflaged by a philanthropic empire that assisted many Syrians through the conflict .
Some $30 billion of the country's wealth, representing 20% of all deposits in Lebanese banks,
was trapped by Beirut's financial implosion, exacerbated by the unprecedented explosion ""
possibly accidental, possibly sabotage "" in the city's harbor area on August 4. Syrian
businessmen needed Beirut's banks to conduct business abroad, and to evade sanctions. A regime
crackdown on money transfer companies made matters worse by creating
a dollar shortage , depriving thousands of families who were dependent on foreign
remittances. Before the explosion, purchasing power of the Syrian pound was already worth 27
times less than before the start of the conflict.
Deteriorating economic conditions ravaged Syria's surviving pretensions to socialist
principle. In the first decade of Bashar's rule, there had been big gains in healthcare in
terms of available beds, hospitals, and nursing staff. But by now there were 50% fewer doctors,
30% fewer hospitals. Before the conflict, 90% of pharmaceutical needs were filled by Syrian
factories. By 2018 those factories which remained had trouble getting raw materials and
replacement parts for equipment because of sanctions. Before the conflict there was improved
land irrigation and food security. In 2011, abject poverty stood at less than one percent,
rising to 35 percent by 2015. The percentage of those facing food insecurity had fallen from
2.2% in 1999 to 1.1% in 2010. Now, 33% lacked food security. One third of homes were
damaged or destroyed, 380,000 killed and 11 million displaced since 2011.
Economic conditions were worsened by ever tightening economic sanctions and US enforcement
of the so-called Caesar Act from June 2020 (named after a faked human rights scandal in 2015).
The Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act sanctioned the Syrian government, including President
Bashar al-Assad, for alleged war crimes. The purposes were to cripple Syria for the purposes of
regime change, while luring Russia further into the Syrian quagmire. The Act targeted 39
individuals and entities, including the president's wife, Asma. Anyone doing business with the
regime, no matter where, was potentially vulnerable to travel restrictions and financial
sanctions. The Caesar Act smeared the Syria Central Bank as a "˜money laundering'
institution and sought to render it impossible for Syrian companies to export and import from
Lebanon. It made it difficult or impossible for Syrians abroad to transfer money to family
members. The Act contributed to devaluation of the Syrian pound which tumbled from 650 Syrian
pounds to one US dollar in October 2019 to 2600 to the US dollar in summer 2020.
The Caesar Act (alongside legal initiatives in Europe designed to charge senior
administration officials with war crimes) were designed to stymie reconstruction, hit the
construction, electricity, and oil sectors, and cripple the Lebanese private companies that
would otherwise lead reconstruction efforts. Sanctions prevented non-U.S. aid organizations
from assisting reconstruction. An opposition leader predicted it would result in "
even greater levels of destitution, famine, and worsening criminality and predatory
behavior " and would precipitate regime change, migratory flight, excess deaths, and youth
deprivation. In a climate of regulatory confusion, sanctions often encourage over-compliance.
Prospects of reconstruction investment funds from Russian companies were
negatively impacted . Blumenthal ascribed responsibility for the Caesar sanctions
initiative to a "years-long lobbying campaign carried out by a network of regime-change
operatives working under cover of shadowy international NGOs and Syrian-American diaspora
groups." The country had already suffered severe US and EU economic sanctions. A 2016 UNESCO
report found that sanctions had brought an end to humanitarian aid because sanctions
regulations, licenses, and penalties made it so difficult and risky (Sterling 2020). In 2018,
United Nations Special Rapporteur, Idriss Jazairy, observed that sanctions impacted negatively
on
After 500,000 civilians returned to Aleppo following its liberation in 2016, US sanctions
and UN rules prohibited reconstruction. Returnees were allowed "shelter kits" with plastic but
rebuilding with glass and cement walls was not allowed because "˜reconstruction' was
prohibited.
In brazen acknowledgment of US support for the HTS terrorists of Idlib, the Caesar Act
exempted Idlib province, as well as the northeast areas controlled by US troops and the SDF. It
designated $50 million for "˜humanitarian aid' to these areas. Other US allies pumped in
hundreds of millions of dollars more in aid, further exacerbating pressure on the Syrian pound
and substantially increasing prices for all commodities in regime-controlled areas.
"best-designed sanctions can be self-defeating, strengthening the regimes they were designed
to hurt and punishing the societies they were supposed to protect."
They recalled the destruction of Iraq's middle class in the 1990s, when US sanctions killed
hundreds of thousands of Iraqis:
"Their effect was gendered, disproportionately punishing women and children. The notion that
sanctions work is a pitiless illusion." .
Several European nations (Italy, Poland, Austria, Greece, Hungary) indicating unease with
the continuing stagnation of US and EU sanctions policy, restored tacit contacts with Damascus.
While the EU was an important source of humanitarian aid for internally displaced people in
Syria and for displaced Syrians abroad, it continued to refrain from dealing directly with
Damascus
or from support for reconstruction efforts, on the grounds of continuing instability.
Conclusion
Under indubitably wise international leadership, acting within a framework of equitable
political power among nation states whose sovereignty is sacrosanct, then perhaps sanctions
policies might sometimes be strategically appropriate. These conditions clearly do not apply.
The increasing weaponization of sanctions is a powerful contribution to a crumbling world
order, one that invokes the grave danger of over-reaction by an aggrieved victim, in a context
of intense economic and military competition between rival nuclear powers.
Oliver Boyd-Barrett is Professor Emeritus at Bowling Green State University, Ohio, and at
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. He is an expert on international media, news,
and propaganda. His writings can be accessed by subscription at Substack at https://oliverboydbarrett.substack.com.
A comprehensive roundup of the sanctions-based aggression being imposed on the world by
the bankster dominated west. I really don't think the majority of citizens have a clue what
is being done by their rulers, nor any idea of the sheer hatred being fostered by those
actions. The time for waking up is well overdue, the west has been sucked dry by those same
policies (especially the US) and the fall is imminent.
"The increasing weaponization of sanctions is a powerful contribution to a crumbling world
order, one that invokes the grave danger of over-reaction by an aggrieved victim, in a
context of intense economic and military competition between rival nuclear powers."
Fact: "War is the health of the state" [Randolph Bourne]- meaning, the "business" of
governments is always war- war on its citizens, war on other nations, it never ends.
Invade the world, invite the world. Economic cold war vs. 1/3 of the world's landmass and
population. Seemingly purposeful hollowing out of it's middle class, the abolition of
educational/societal standards to placate the demands of wokeness and the replacement of it's
historical population with an eclectic mix of third world strivers, corrupt east asians and
south american day laborers. Oh, and an increasingly debt centric economy.
The USA is obviously a very prudent country which focuses on it's own long term survival
first and foremost. I expect it to do quite well in the coming years.
My good friend in Canada says that it seems to be a "BioSecurity Fascist State" forming
also. And it's not against Cuba , it's against the populace of Canada. Worse than anything in
the US.
Sanctions strike hard at the very essence of positive international relationship ""
trade.
U.S. economic sanctions are insulting, provocative, corrosive and largely ineffective.
However, trade is hardly the essence of positive international relationship.
Britain traded massively with Germany right up until Britain attacked Germany in 1914.
Germany traded even more massively with the Soviet Union right up until Germany attacked the
Soviet Union in 1941. Were it not for Japanese trade with China, the Mukden Incident that, in
1931, opened the conflict that developed into World War II in Asia""well, it probably would
not have occurred. In short, the trade premise that underlies your article needs to be
revisited.
Sanctions is war. US wars are always cloaked behind our alleged love for democracy and
freedom, but alleged friends beginning with Saudi Arabia and impacting every country South of
our border, prove we are liars, interested only in preserving the best interests of our
wealthiest citizens.
The purpose of US foreign policy is to enhance the profits of global US Corporations
regardless what the consequences are to local targeted populations. The US has extraordinary
power over the EU, but the Russian pipeline is evidence that EU support is cracking.
Shame on the USA for failing to respect the national sovereignty of other nations big and
small. Our constitutional form of government is not a model example of the fruits of
democracy and freedom, as both are crippled by original design, for profit prisons and
schools, toll roads, and the moral hazards imposed by misguided religious fanatics who impose
their will on a disinterested public.
Winston Churchill was a great one for blockades. Churchill, the MoFker is responsible for
5 million deaths. During the 2nd World War he shipped grain from India to Britain and left
the Indians to starve. Five million Bengalis and east Indians died of starvation. Let's hope
when the tide turns all this is forgotten and forgiven.
The war against Japan was instigated by blocades.
The war against Iran is the next.
Syria policy has nothing to do with oil or Assad being a dictator. It is a continuation of
Israel's policies. The whole purpose of these wars is to establish an independent Kurdish
state so that the pressure on Israel could be reduced and states in the region could be
destabilized. While the US was busy trying to fight Israel's wars in ME, China has become a
strategic threat with no signs of slowing down the process of overtaking the US as the
dominant superpower of the world. Despite all the damage these policies have caused, even the
so-called conservatives in the US keep repeating nonsensical ideas like "Kurds deserve a
state." Not realizing that there is no such thing as "deserving a state" or that this just a
zionist project that offers nothing to the US.
Regarding China, sanctions should be used more not less, unless the US wants to be the
secondary power. However, they are not needed with other countries. In ME, the US should wash
its hands off Israel and let the most moral army of the world protect their own country. That
country is a huge liability and problem for the US, it offered the US nothing other than
selling American military secrets and earning 1.5 billion Muslims' disdain. To counter Russia
and Iran, the US should double down on cooperating with Turkey, increase investments and
military support so that Turks can be more active in Central Asia and Afghanistan as well.
This is the smartest and the most efficient way for the US to achieve its goals in Asia and
ME. Which would be slowing China's growth, Russia's creeping in the South, and Iranian
activity in Arab ME.
However, the US basically does the opposite of everything it should. Turning
neutral/unfriendly with Turkey is one of the dumbest things the US foreign service could do,
considering the fact that Turks are the historical enemies of all three of China, Russia, and
Iran, and they did exactly that? Why? For Israel whose feelings were hurt by Erdogan of
course. Currently, the US government is a hostage to vocal minorities and interest groups.
Therefore, its relative decline will not stop unless actual Americans with no double
allegiances step up and take back their government.
Canada is a pathetic American colony, selling their resources cheap in return for being
allowed to have a few crappy hockey teams and access to degenerate American entertainment.
The Brits tell them to murder white Germans, they do it. The Americans tell them to murder
Afghans, they do it...
The US government is a menace to all, including the US population. All US presidents are
war criminals, and sanctions are only one aspect of their endless criminality.
Sanctions are the modern day adaptation of siege warfare. It's essentially a
"˜starve them out' approach to foreign policy. Theoretically, one presumes, the goal is
to cause enough instability to harm the targeted regime. But I can't think of a single time
they have succeeded at anything but causing mass suffering to those at the bottom of the
power pyramid.
In the case of sanctions on Iraq and the subsequent corrupt Oil-For-Food Program, the
sanctions became a vehicle to transfer billions of dollars to oligarchs and their pet
politicians" as usual.
They had alleged that on May 23 a Ryanair plane had been forced by the Belorussian
government to land in Minsk after which one activist on board, Roman Protasevich, had been
arrested. But in reality a real bomb threat, delivered by email, had been received at Minsk
airport as well as by Lithuanian air authorities. The plane was made aware of the threat by
the Belorussian air traffic control and the pilot, after communicating with Ryanair
management, had decided to land in Minsk.
Belarus handled the case by the book and the plane was released after it had been
unsuccessfully searched for the alleged bomb. There were outstanding arrest warrants against
two passengers on board, Roman Protasevich and his Russian girl friend Sofia Sapega. Both
were detained after passing through the custom and passport controls.
Roman Protasevich had been betrayed. Other regime change activists, with whom he had
disagreed, had sent the bomb threat email to get him trapped.
This is evident from his testimony in the later part of the TV documentary linked above,
where he appears as a lively and engaged chain smoker.
Former editor-in-chief of NEXTA Roman Protasevich interviewed the Belarusian state
channel ONT. In it, he pleaded guilty in a criminal case to organizing and preparing
actions that violate public order, and also criticized the Belarusian opposition and said
he respected Alexander Lukashenko.
In the interview Protasevich is spilling the beans about the whole foreign financed
opposition organization which was behind the 2020 color revolution attempt in Belarus.
During the Korea war U.S. pilots, captured by China, admitted to dropping biological
weapons on China. The U.S.
long denied the use of biological weapons and claimed that the pilots had been tortured
and made false confessions. Decades later secret files were released
which proved that
the claims the pilots had made
had been correct .
At the beginning of the interview with Marat Markov, the head of the Belorussian state TV
channel ONT, Protasevich is still somewhat tense. But after 3 or 4 minutes the talk develops
into a lively exchange during which Protasevich at times interrupts and corrects the
journalist. Protasevich's voice sounds rough and at times pressed. He is a chain smoker and
claims to have a cold. Towards the end, when they talk about the personal damage the color
revolution attempt has caused to many, both get somewhat emotional but in no way hostile to
each other.
Protasevich's demeanor, engagement, body language and general attitude throughout
the interview has
me convinced that he doing it voluntarily and that he is telling the truth. He is not reading
off a script someone else has written. He is doing a tell all about the foreign financed
regime change effort he had been part of. And why not? He has been betrayed by his former
comrades. He is now expecting up to fifteen years of jail. Telling it all might well help him
to lessen the sentence for his crimes.
There are yet no English subtitles on the interview and there is no English language
transcript of the interview. The following are excerpts from an eight part
summary published in Russian language on Office Life. The text is machine
translated:
Yes, I see a lot of "he's being tortured" now, accompanied by pictures of him crying.
Luka is a more interesting guy than I had thought. He was, prior to all this, trying to do
a balancing act between East and West, not unlike Ukraine pre-Maidan. This is pretty normal.
He may have been a bit naive, but so have many others been. As Roman says, Luka is not just a
suit droid. He has "eggs of steel". I think the final word on him will depend on how well he
preserves the Soviet-style economy he has kept running there, while finally joining the
"union state".
Incidentally, I am curious why no-one has commented on western hypocrisy when complaining
about passengers being endangered (which they definitely were not), in light of the following
(from wikipedia):
...he boarded an S7 Airlines commercial flight to Chișinău, where he would meet
Moldovan President Igor Dodon, but the Romanian government again denied permission for the
plane to enter its airspace, citing the "presence of a sanctioned person on
board".[citation needed] The Boeing 737-800 went on a holding pattern in Hungarian airspace
for a while,[17] but after Hungary denied permission for landing and ordered the plane to
leave, it was decided to divert to Minsk, Belarus, outside of the EU, reportedly with
barely enough fuel to reach there.[18] The plane later flew to Chișinău with the
remaining passengers, but without Rogozin.[19] The Deputy Prime-Minister later tweeted:
"The Romanian authorities endangered the lives of passengers on an S7 flight, women and
children. Fuel was [just] enough to [get to] Minsk. ...
where western behavior definitely contravened the Chicago convention and actually endangered
passengers...
Protasevich also said that it was allegedly planned to transfer one of the Nekhta channels
to Russian hands.
This is either an incorrect translation or an incorrect summary. Protasevich said there
were plans to switch the main Nekhta (NEXTA) channel to "Russian agenda", i.e. to start
posting anti-Russian/anti-Putin stuff, as the channel had lots of subscribers from Russia. He
was strongly against the plan, as Nekhta was one of the main media assets of the Belarusian
regime changers. Later discussion was about making a separate Nekhta-branded channel for
Russia.
This episode must have been important in making Protasevich realize he's not really
"fighting for democracy" in Belarus, but is a mere cog in Washington's Drang nach Osten
2.0 machine.
Tortured confession or singing after being snitched on? Nobody here knows for sure.
What we do know is; this story makes sense.
Ratting Roman Protasevich out is consistent with SOP of the Langley/Langley-acolyte crowd;
back in the day OSS field agents complained of being burned by the agency's well placed cadre
of Nazi infiltrators. It's hard to imagine that the practice of compromising assets/floaters
has gone away.
You do not seem to be a regular MoA reader. You otherwise would have read the six previous
posts on the issue which discussed the evidence in detail and concluded that the narrative -
that Lukashenko did something to the Ryanair flight - is false.
There was a real bomb threat and Belarus reacted to that by the book. The Ryanair pilot
and his company decided to go to Minsk. Belarus did not know that Protasevich was on board.
He was only arrested after passing through passport control.
Boris Rozhin's summary of Protasevich's ONT
interview (my translation):
1. There are plans to switch Nekhta [NEXTA] to the Russian agenda.
2. Tikhanovskaya is financed from various sources, including the Lithuanian budget,
diaspora money, etc.
3. The opposition of Belarus is controlled by Poland and Lithuania (which I wrote about
back in August, calling it the "Polish-Lithuanian opposition"). In Poland, it is controlled
by the Prime Minister of Poland.
4. Putilo is an ungrateful pig. He received the Sakharov Prize for the work done by
Protasevich.
5. One advertising post on Nekhta in August 2020 cost $20,000.
6. The main specialists in the Belarusian opposition are money laundering
specialists.
7. Nekhta did not come up with an information agenda - it was communicated to it from
the top. In the building where Nekhta was located there were secret rooms where Nekhta's
employees were not allowed.
8. The real ceiling of the Belarusian Telegram is about 1,000,000 people. The real
audience of the opposition Telegram channels is 500,000 people.
9. A Russian oligarch competing with Gutseriev and connected with Ural was involved in
financing Nekhta.
10. Protasevich believes that the opposition has lost and there will be no new serious
protests at this stage.
11. Protasevich is afraid that he may be extradited to the LPR and very much hopes that
Lukashenko will not allow that.
12. He now considers his trip to Donbass to "Azov" to be the biggest mistake of his
life. He denies being a member of Azov.
13. Protasevich is grateful that he ended up in his native Belarus, and even alive.
14. The conspirators planning the assassination of Lukashenko were connected with
Tikhanovskaya's HQ. Protasevich acted as one of the mediators. He participated in
conspirators' zoom calls.
15. There are still sleeping combat groups and caches of weapons in Belarus, which have
not yet been discovered by the KGB.
16. Protasevich fully cooperates with the investigation and is ready to continue
providing valuable information in order to correct his mistakes.
17. He no longer wants to engage in politics, asks everyone for forgiveness and hopes
that things will not turn out as badly for him as they could.
I agree with the blogger's assessment over the veracity of the interview.
Protasevich is clearly revising the story to make himself appear to be small fish in the
whole scheme (to get a lighter sentence and also to open the remote possibility to get
redeployed as a Belarusian asset), but his description of the whole scheme itself and the
people involved is probably true in the general.
Those mercenaries - specially those liberal (fascist) ideologues - have, by nature, very
low morale. They want a lot of money and comfort for their services, and have a very low
tolerance for hardship. They also lack long-term vision, so they tend to be very greedy.
Betrayal and surrender are very common among them, if you manage to hit back a little bit
and/or capture them: one night at a prison cell without any luxuries already is enough.
Tortured people usually don't have the physical and mental capacity to tell such a
detailed, colored and nonchalant confessions. Even if the confessor is a trained actor, it's
impossible, as torture is designed to destroy the spirit/personality of the tortured. That's
why confessions under torture are all in written form, just with the signature of the
"confessor". The few confessions under torture are very short ones, recorded in a simple,
front camera angle, with the tortured clearly physically and mentally spent, in a depressive
mood/tone.
I find this intreview on public television of a person who has been arrested deeply
disturbing.
Anyone under arrest can be considered to be in circumstances of coercion, pressure, not
free.
It is highly unethical to broadcast a confession of a person under arrest.
Regardless of whether Protashevich was telling the truth, and what his motives may have
been,
this interview should not have been broadcast.Chilling!
B says this is a tough guy. Looks soft to me. Looks pampered and privileged. I do not have
a word of Slavic, still see Protasevich busy manipulating and negotiating from beginning to
end. Guy can't stop scheming. He has not been tortured. He has not been broken. He is not
fearful.
Cuffs were tight against wristbone. Briefly. The more usual way to stop someone from
slipping the cuffs is to tape back the thumbs. Some officers do not believe that sufficient.
They want a pain signal to interfere with fine coordination. Maybe they had cuffs, were low
on supplies, did not have good enough duct tape handy. In totally normal custody wrists can
look far worse than that. Slipping cuffs is a manipulation that any con can teach to a
willing student quite quickly. The way prisoners are seen cuffed on the TV is what gets used
on zero risk prisoners. Or prisoners who are broken, who have learned to cooperate with the
routine.
I have spent a lifetime observing Slavic immigrants to Chicago. This is destination #1.
Most come to work. They still have three buckets of attitude, and then they work. Then there
is a big cadre of those who have heard that Americans are gullible and easy to con. This guy
looks exactly like one of them. Most of those come from privileged backgrounds. I do not
understand how privilege survived the Comintern years. But it did. A former Polish landlady
of mine grew up in 60s and 70s in the family manor. Sure the roof was falling in. They still
had the manor hall, the outbuildings, the tenants who no longer had any legal obligation
still gave deference, did service, brought offerings. When the Wall came down she promptly
went to court and reclaimed title to the 1939 estate. Then started proceedings to get back
the 1914 estate. Class never dies. I see a child of privilege.
You should watch the Russian film "The Brother II", not as good as the first one by far,
but since the first was a no budget project filmed with outdated stock and at friends houses,
- up to this day is a very influential film that best describes Russia's meltdown of the
90's-, for the second version they had money, so they went to Chicago to film the second
iteration, by my favorite director the late Balabanov. Easy to find with subtitles. The
slavic -mainly Ukrainian- Chicago community has a big role to play in it.
Years back I knew one counter insurgency specials with whom I had always interesting
conversations.
One of funny things he told me - best way to make someone spill beans is to raid their
house, then let them know their neighbor ratted them out for some thing. More often than not,
suspect would start to sing "Me has/did xxx? That bastard, he did even worse yyyy!"
So, theory that Belorussian (or Russian or anyone there) calling in that bomb threat, then
convincing the guy that it was his people that sold him out - that theory hold water a lot
more than other one.
As expected, the EU has it's own plan, which does not take into account the truth. Carry
on regardless, as the real objective is the Belarusian "regime change".
At some point, according to Protasevich, there was Russian funding: 3-5 thousand euros per
week. The money came from a certain company from Russia, which, judging by the name, is
associated with the Urals and mining.
Its owner is a well-known Russian oligarch, and he is a direct competitor of Mikhail
Gutseriev. Protasevich did not give his last name, but perhaps he means a native of Minsk,
Dmitry Mazepin, who actually now controls Uralkali.
Dmitry Mazepin also owns the US American Formula one team Uralkali Haas F1 Team ,
where his son Nikita is one of the drivers https://www.formula1.com/en/drivers/nikita-mazepin.html
(the son of Michael Schumacher, Mick Schumacher is the other).
I recall reading online that when Putin first became President in 2000, he more or less
struck an understanding or a "deal" with the "oligarchs" at the time, that they could keep
their billions and do what they wanted as long as they stayed out of politics and paid their
taxes. During the Yeltsin era, "oligarchs" were buying politicians and, in the case of
Mikhail Khodorkovsky, even buying political parties.
After Putin made an example of Khodorkovsky by having him jailed for 10 years, and had
Roman Abramovich made governor of Chukotka (near Bering Sea) in the Russian Far East, the
others either fell into line or fled to Britain.
The current situation seems about the same: Moscow allows Russian business magnates to
carry on wheeling and dealing as long as they operate within Russian law. Putin does not run
the country as his personal fiefdom. It is true very large investment projects costing
billions will come to Putin's attention and he will want to meet the people directing these
projects to see what their objectives are but that would be no more and no less of what we'd
expect of our own politicians if they are capable people interested and curious about what is
going on in the countries they govern.
It would seem also that China allows its business magnates to operate more or less
independently except where they threaten to overstep Chinese laws concerning state control,
as in the case of Jack Ma's arrest concerning issues of intellectual ownership (I'm vague on
the details of Ma's arrest so barflies can correct if I am wrong), and Russia may be
observing what the Chinese are doing in creating a mixed economy.
No, most of these "threats" aren't taken seriously. Only if there is some indication they
might be real (intelligence/police) are they acted upon immediately.
This blog or any other site still haven't presented any evidence showing that the first
email claimed by Minsk was real, or that the opposition knew beforehand what was going to
happen.
The email was a hoax, but it contained a real bomb threat that needed to be
taken seriously. It was thus one step above a prank .
What made the threat real was the information about the passengers. It is prima
face evidence that the threat came from an intelligence service, a terrorist group or
from an insider. All of these would be capable of carrying out the threat.
Accessing information on the passenger list is costly. For a hostile agency or terrorist
group it would mean exposing human agents to exposure or capture. For example, if Belarus had
been behind the email, they could have sent an agent to Athens to make sure Protasevich had
boarded the flight.
Greek police would have video footage of him from tens of surveillance cameras.
Why the elaborate scheme to get rid of Nazi-boy when the Seth Rich solution is more
efficient? The CIA and their attack dogs have always preferred drama when disposing of one of
their own. Think of Boris Nemtsov, for instance. When a regime change "asset" starts
to become a liability then there is always one final act in the play for them, which is to
appear to die in the most memorable way at the hands of the empire's enemies. With Nemtsov:
murdered in the perfect spot with Saint Basil's Cathedral as the backdrop - one of the few
iconic visuals in Russia that any American could identify as Russian.
But what about Nazi-boy? How to kill him in a way to get the TV audience's attention and
get them to automatically associate it with Belarus? Americans know absolutely nothing about
Belarus. There is no pre-existing imagery in their empty little heads to connect with
Belarus. They could not even use novichok because even the well-conditions American mass
media consumers would get suspicious, or at least confused, because they expect that to be
something to do with Russia.
No, the sky piracy nonsense was the best the western narrative spinners could cook up to
get the media consumers' attention directed to Belarus.
Americans have become too jaded these days. They need drama in their brainwashing or it
just won't take.
"can you tell me how russia under putin works with these types of oligarchs - mikhail
gutserijev and dmitry mazepin? it seems to me russia is run by oligarchs and putin has very
little control over them.."
James @32
Under Yeltsin, the oligarchs owned the Russian state, and they shamelessly stripped assets
out of enterprises yeltsin gave them, dodged taxes, and offshored the proceeds.
Russia was helpless, bankrupt, & dying off by 1m/yr.
Now, the State owns the oligarchs. Branko Milanovic below compares and contrasts:
Money quote:
"The Putin oligarchs are billionaires which "serve" at the discretion of the state. As a
Russian commentator once said, they should all consider themselves to be temporary custodians
of their wealth. If they fall from grace with the regime they could be stripped of their
assets either through dubious legal proceedings, or if needed, more forcefully by being
imprisoned.
The original kind of Yeltsin-type oligarchs, which "popularized" the term, were different.
These oligarchs owned the state -- so the state existed only at their discretion. At the peak
of their power, after Yeltsin's reelection in 1996 which they helped him win (in the deal
that led to the infamous "loans for shares" trade) oligarchs, separately, controlled Yeltsin
and practically most of the levers of state power. Since they also jockeyed for power amongst
themselves with some being allied with the military, others controlling natural monopolies,
and the third group having their own media, Russia at the end of the 1990s was a country on
the verge of a civil war. It stood not so far from where Libya stands today. Under that
"regime", life expectancy fell from 69 to 64.5 years, the largest decline in life expectancy
ever recorded in peacetime. It was today's US opiate crisis multiplied by ten or more.
Russia was a county ruled, to borrow Mancur Olson's terminology, by roving bandits. What
Putin accomplished through reining in of the roving bandit oligarchs was to create a system
of stationary bandits whose wealth depends on proximity to the state and who, like every
stationary bandit, have more of an interest in the strength of the state and the welfare of
its population -- simply because such welfare is more closely intertwined with theirs.
It is in that sense that Putin's oligarchs represent an improvement. Since foreign
commentators do not have to live in countries on whose democratic records they expatiate,
they are often wont to confound the two types of oligarchs. But for people who have to live
under the two alternative regimes (roving or stationary bandits) the choice is rather
simple.
It is a choice of living in a state of incipient civil war where you do not know what
might happen to your children in school, where you could be randomly beaten up in the street,
abducted by different private militias, or evicted from your home by one mafia today and
another tomorrow. Indeed, the same things can happen under the centralized kleptocratic
regime (such as Putin's), but there these things happen with certain "logic" and "order".
Differently put, punishment is exacted for political disobedience and the rules of conduct
are well known. In the system of disorderly roving bandits, punishment can be meted out
randomly, or can be done for entirely different actions or reasons -- some of which may
displease one baron/bandit but not another. Under that chaotic system, violence can come from
any direction, for any reason, and at any time.
To the outside observers, the system of random violence -- because foreign observers are
exempt from it, as indeed foreigners were exempt during Russia's "decade of humiliation" --
might seem more democratic. There are indeed alternative centers of power in competition with
each other, there is freedom of speech, each media empire owned by one baron attacks the
media empire owned by another baron, and there thus appears to be a political life despite
absence of a rule of law, rampant corruption, and physical insecurity. The system of
stationary bandits is monochromatic by comparison but for people who live under it more
predictable and much safer.
The truth is that large part of the world's population has only a choice between these two
systems: between multi-original kleptocracy and anarchy, and more centrally controlled
enrichment. There is no surprise that most ordinary people will select stability over chaos,
predictable violence over random violence, and some administration of justice over none.
"
Infighting, intrigue, and corruption have been a feature of emigre reactionary
opposition groups since ... forever. See the royalists during the french revolution, the
Russian whites, the Miami Cubans, Guaido crew and so on. The emigres themselves are
economically unstable being removed from their previous 'holdings' but then also showered
with money by supporters (ie Lith and Pole govt) on an ad hoc basis... leads naturally to
corruption. They often end up fighting with each other over the money and love of their
backers more than opposing their own country's govt.
That faced with a long prison term, Roman would make the calculation that the Belo-emigre
community was sunk already and try to rescue the best outcome for himself. not
surprising.
Also historically these emigre groups have always had people who got fed up with the
emigre opposition life, and if they could, negotiate a safe return to their country.
Of course, now you know why so many Russian business magnates buy foreign football clubs
and put so much of their money promoting elite sports and cultural and arts organisations
overseas.😀
It's really neither here nor there that such individuals might be interested in music.
Gutseriev is probably of a generation of Soviet children who were exposed to classical music
education and music education generally to a much greater extent than Western children were
over 30 years ago. Being of Jewish background in Soviet times would make this exposure even
more likely.
You would be well aware of how the CIA promoted particular art and cultural movements like
abstract art in the past, and how US and other Western govts, especially the British, still
use artists, musicians and film-makers as their foot soldiers.
It is likely that Protasevich would not know with certainty who trapped him.
So I think it unlikely that he would burn his bridges so willingly.
He would have to appear to be willingly divulging everything he knows, but even if he does
it is likely it will be suspected that he is fabricating parts or witholding
information.
A difficult situation.
The analysis includes assumptions which lead to a goal-seeked conclusion.
A common tendency.
It is OK for Protasevich to rat out his opposition colleagues, but he would be much more
careful about exposing the CIA handlers, who are the real brain of the operation.
The full story may not be know yet. This is the way the narrative changes.
MiG-29s intercepted the flight and Belarus thugs dragged the screaming Protasevich from
the plane.
Lukashenko and his KGB sent the hoax email to themselves, causing everything to
happen.
Belarus acted by the book. It must have been evil Putin who sent the hoax email.
The whole thing was just a blunder caused by opposition infighting and incompetence.
<- We are now here.
The operation was a false-flag provocation planned and executed by Western intelligence
services. The opposition figures are just puppets used and abused to give the operation a
human face.
I have transcribed the first 18 minutes of Protasevich's ONT interview and translated it
to English.
Marat Markov: Hello, Roman!
Roman Protasevich: Good afternoon!
M: As a person from the execution lists, it is quite difficult for me to abstract
from your direct participation in the processes that we will talk about today. But I'll
try. And, to be honest, this is not for my own sake, but rather, probably, for the sake of
people learning to talk to each other -- since you and I could.
My journalist colleagues, I am sure, they would hardly refuse such an opportunity. But
today I am the one who has this right. That's why I'm going split this conversation. I will
ask the questions that the media dependent on the opposition and state media would probably
like to ask, that is, in some cases I will differentiate between these questions. I hope at
least you understand that there are no independent media?
P: Of course.
M: It is good that you understand, because then many things will not need to be
explained. Then let's start with the basics. Opposition media would ask: "Did you agree to
this interview voluntarily?"
P: Absolutely.
M: And how do you feel?
P: I feel great, the only thing is, well, I've got a slight cold, but that,
again, is not a reason to, you know, postpone the conversation and so on.
M: And what do you think, how will your associates react to our conversation with
you?
P: To be honest, it's hard for me to predict the reaction on their part. I'm just
sure that a lot of people will start publicly condemning me. I'm just sure that any support
actions that they were planning earlier will naturally come to naught. I would not be
surprised if, well, many would call me an alleged "traitor" and so on. But I can honestly
say that I absolutely don't care what they say. I am here and now, and I really I want to
do everything in order to correct my mistakes, in order to
M: So you don't care about their reaction?
P:(over) try to do something
No. I followed a certain idea of mine and my convictions, and the more I tried not to
pry my nose into others' business, the more I tried not to think about where money was
coming from and what kind of money, which, you know, I don't know, which intelligence
services were influencing what was going on, the less I just tried to think about it, the
worse it all got.
M: And are they afraid of your appearance, what do you think?
P: I think so. I think that this will cause quite a stir.
M: Well, look, a media like Nasha Niva, it would have echoed, right, the previous
question. Was makeup applied to you before this interview?
P: I wasn't touched at all.
M: Well, I mean, you know
P: All they did was put on a microphone -- that's all.
M: They like to say that bruises, beatings are being covered by makeup. But you
have answered, okay.
I will not further develop the airplane issue today. I think that, in principle,
everything is obvious to both you and me. But a question remains, as I would call it, "from
the yellow media". Who knew that you were flying on this plane?
P: I'll probably say the preamble first. In principle, the only time I told
anything to anyone during this unfortunate vacation, let's call it that way, was the moment
before the plane took off. And I wrote
M: Before departure from where?
P: Already from Athens to Vilnius.
M: From Athens.
P: And this is the only time at all during my entire vacation when I wrote about
my movements, and the thing is, I wrote it exclusively in the working chat. That is, there
were, well, several journalists who are working on the project, plus, well, there were a
few people from Svetlana Tikhanovskaya's HQ -- these are Franak Vechorko [Vyachorka in
Belarusian spelling] and Daniil Bogdanovich.
M: You smiled somewhat while naming the last surname. Will you give a specific
surname? Whom you are suspecting from this chat, who could keep such a serious grudge
against you?
P: Well, as you understand, I smiled for a reason, because, again, I also had a
personal conflict with the same Daniil Bogdanovich, that is, he held the position of
director of the Infopoint network, my relationships weren't working lately [unclear whether
he refers to relationship with Bogdanovich or with other members of the team], and I was
both emotionally tired and did not want to do any political work, and in general, in
principle, I just wanted to do photography, and plus, in parallel, even, you know, two days
before my departure from Athens to Vilnius, that is, they were talking about dismissing me
altogether, and even Franak Vechorko wrote a phrase that "upon arrival we will discuss the
prospects of our further cooperation".
M: Whom were they discussing your dismissal with?
P: There was a call, which I did not get on, and I did not get on it for an
absolutely stupid reason, the Wi-Fi worked very badly at the hotel, and I simply could not
join the call, and there they essentially said, behind my back, that they were going to
dismiss me, you know, for the fact that I missed an absolutely petty deadline.
M: Who specifically warned you that this discussion will take place, and it will
be about your dismissal?
P: The journalist guys told me about this, and
M: So you think it was Bogdanovich, after all?
P: I am inclined to assume that yes. Well, I more than that, I'm just sure of
it.
M: You made quite a, well, populist mockery of the appeal of the Belarusian
authorities to Poland to extradite you and Putilo. Why did you have such confidence that
you won't be handed over?
P: I never had such confidence. The way I can confirm this is by the fact that,
be that as it may, I never engaged in direct insults of the authorities, you know, I did
not try, you know, like some people, you know, to almost send dick pics to the prosecutor's
office, and so on That is, I always understood that sooner or later I could still be held
responsible for my activities.
M: Well, you did quite a lot through The Black Book of Belarus at the very least,
and through Belarus Golovnogo Mozga [the name of this Telegram channel is a play on
"Belarus" and "encephalitis", so it could be translated as "Belcephalitis"].
P: Well, these are still somewhat different projects, I had zero direct relation
to the activities of The Black Book of Belarus project. Nekhta's Belarus Golovnogo Mozga -
yes, but not The Black Book of Belarus. That is, my only contact with The Black Book of
Belarus project was that once I just held a journalist workshop for them, where I simply
explained why headings are important, what the structure of the text should be, and so on.
Well, to also accuse me of involvement with The Black Book of Belarus is probably well, in
this case, that is, this was, in fact, my only somewhat direct working contact with
them.
M: Your companion Sofiya, right? She was an editor of the extremist Telegram
channel The Black Book of Belarus.
P:(nods in agreement)
M: They were publishing personal information of well, even though she indicated
that it was only about siloviki [law enforcement, military, intelligence] -- no, of
course, it wasn't just about siloviki , and you know that.
P:(nods in agreement)
M: There was personal information of journalists, my employees, you know,
teachers well, in general, everyone who is connected in one way or another with the state.
We found about 80 posts prepared for publication on her phone, right? They have not been
published yet. How did the information get to The Black Book? Was it paid for, or were
there enough people who happily gave away their colleagues and neighbors?
P: Again, I can only say the part of the things that I know for sure, I had no
direct relation to this project.
M: I am not suggesting that you fantasize
P: Based on what I know, well, a lot of information, it really was passed on,
among others, you know, by ex- siloviki , or, you know, that is, in fact, in some
workplaces there were some that they fittingly call "rats", which just easily betrayed
their colleagues, former colleagues, and so on.
M: Among those who passed through you, there were our colleagues, state
journalists, former ones, those who turned their coats. Did they dabble in this, did they
leak information -- about us?
P: As far as I remember, there was -- and then, only on, it seems, on Motolko's
Telegram channel -- information about STV employees, you know, there were some duty
schedules, something like that.
M: Well, yes, this information was there.
P: So yeah, but otherwise, well, again
M: So you haven't come across something like that?
P:(over) that is, I, I had nothing to do with the activity concerning the
publication of personal information.
M: Roman, and your personal attitude, well, towards those alleged "celebrities"
who turned their coats -- well, you must have somehow characterized them among yourselves
-- that fact that they started talking about the same thing en masse, posting the same
posts, you know, did that cheer you up, made you laugh? What was the reaction?
P: Personally, it amused me, because, first of all, again, that is, if people
have just decided, you know, to show some of their opposition views, then why only now?
And, again, that is, if they had such views before, then how did this then, in general,
actually intersect with their worldview?
M: As we called it, "changed shoes in the air".
P: Yes, yes.
M:(over) In the middle of a jump.
P: This is, it seems to me, the most accurate characterization.
I have exactly the same question. How? That is, even if you allegedly, you know, all
your life had some, well, opposition views, you know, you did not support the government,
how could you calmly walk around and, you know, for example, work at Belteleradiocompany or
somewhere else.
M: Well, it's called
P:(over) That is, one receives, receives money from the state, but then,
at the first opportunity, decides to give up everything.
M: We have this joke when a person then simply writes in his memoirs: "I worked
in the system in order to destroy it from within". Right?
P: Well, that's funny.
M: Yes, I agree.
P: It's funny.
M: Roman, a question from the likes of Onliner or Dev.by. Why did you, well, a
really progressive person, not stupid at all, a former recipient of a fellowship - you
understood perfectly well what could happen, the phone has a lot of interesting things on
it - why didn't you kill your phone while in the air, well, haven't erased the information?
Or why didn't Sofiya erase it?
P: Actually, the reason there are two reasons, in principle. One of them is very
banal -- and that is that at that moment we were both, in principle, in such a state of
stress that our brains practically did not work. I mean, that is, we weren't in a state to
think about such things. And the primary task was just to calm down.
M: Was there a panic?
P: Of course.
M:(over) Did you panic?
P: Of course. Later, I just thought about it, and, probably, it is comparable to
the feeling when you ascend the scaffold -- only, in my case, I was landing on it. Well,
because I understood that as soon as the plane landed, I would be held accountable for
everything I did and for all the damage that I caused to the country.
M: And why did you say that a death penalty awaits you here?
P: It's simpler. Because the State Security Committee [KGB] at one time included
me in the list of persons involved in terrorism, and terrorism may well be punished with a
death penalty.
M: Well, you yourself indicate that you understood that you would be held
accountable. And for what exactly do you think you should be held accountable? I am not a
judge, and, well, really, you are not under interrogation, and I
P: Yes, I understand, of course.
M:(over) should not be emphasizing this, but it's very important for me
to know how well do you understand where you were crossing this line of what was permitted
or provided for by the law.
P: Again, well, first of all, it's important to understand, and, again, I openly
admit that I was one of those people who posted calls to go out on the 9th. As soon as they
presented me, you know, provided me with documents, presented charges against me, that is,
all these things, I immediately admitted my guilt under Part 342 of the Criminal Code, it's
organizing massive unauthorized actions -- well, I don't remember, you know, the details,
but something like that. I really immediately and in full admitted my guilt under this
part, and after that I just knew that the appeals that were published by me, among others,
they were the result of, in fact, uncontrollable riots starting in the streets [he means to
say the reverse, that the riots were the result of appeals]. And, in fact, Minsk lived in
chaos for three days.
M: Well, the fact is that even in the very memorable interview with Dud' you
clearly indicated that not only you were called for, you, in fact, were coordinating and
controlling these processes. Well, that is, at least here, here, those who were in Belarus
had an absolutely clear feeling that this extremist Telegram channel, in which you were
directly involved, was acting as a protest coordinator. I'm a military person, I understand
perfectly well that protests are not organized by appeals alone, and that they need At
least, even by the amount of auxiliary literature, instructions, right, plans, schemes,
schemes [explaining] how to organize terrorism on the railway, right, how to make, you
know, a device to pierce tires -- well, that is, things that an ordinary person, he,
without encountering this in life, he will never know this, that is, you need to instruct
him -- in fact, there was a perfectly clear coordination.
I've heard the term Love Hata. What was that, an instrument of creating this protest
picture? That is, to create events, on the basis of which the messages were then
posted?
P: Let's just say that, in principle, it was the main chat of the administrators
of the largest Telegram channels. It was there that the discussions of the upcoming actions
really took place, there was, that is, planning, work on the agenda that should be in
place, you know, for this or that week of protests. That is, one can say that this chat,
Hata -- well, it, you know, was called by different names, that is, it was re-created
several times, it had, you know, different names, well, it's not important, that is, the
main thing was that keyword, "hata" -- that is, there were, well, administrators of the
largest channels, bloggers, and so on, and what was really happening was, well it was this
main coordination chat of street protests and information agenda.
M: Well, who was there, in this secret chat?
P: Hmmm
M: Well, apart from you?
P: Stepan Putilo, Jan Rudik, well, another representative of the Nekhta Telegram
channels also joined, that is Tadeusz Gichan, Franak Vechorko also was there, who often
could just come to this well, for example, come and write in the chat specific talking
points on which we had to work, Anton Motolko, Daniil Bogdanovich, whom I already
mentioned, earlier there were also such characters as [Artyom] Shraybman, [Eduard] Palchis
...
M: Quite well-known people.
P: Yes, Shraybman, Palchis, [Evgeniy] Yushkevich As far as I remember, there was
also Anastasiya Rogatko, who is also related to the activities of Svetlana Tikhanovskaya's
HQ, then Victoriya Palchis, the wife of
M: Yes, Palchis's wife.
P:(over) Eduard Palchis, that is. Well, these are, right away, the people
whom I can Oh, Dmitriy Navosha also was there. In principle, quite well-known media
person.
M:(over) Well-known.
P: Yes, Evgeniy Malahovskiy, who worked mainly with courtyard chats and courtyard
initiatives. There, basically, we made all the main decisions about where the next action
would take place, what kind of information agenda we should push, you know, in the near
future, all current events were discussed there, all incidents, everything, so, in fact,
one chat, it played the role, you know, of the main coordination chat, in fact, of the
entire information war and street protests.
M: So you're saying that a quite talented journalist, Shraybman, a cunning
journalist, I won't hide it, he was also managing what was, in fact, the riots?
P: I can't say that he was managing directly, but quite often he would express,
you know, his opinion, or was telling us that no, guys, this way it won't work, change at
least, you know, for example, you know, such and such theme, or right here, perhaps draw
more attention to this.
M: Well, they were as far as I understand, a secret chat, it's usually some kind
of nicknames.
P: Well, again, many
M:(over) How did you know who is who?
P: many were present under their own names.
M: That is, in any case, you were sure that these people were present in this
chat.
P:(over) Yes, yes, yes, yes. That is, some tried to hide, you know, under
other nicknames. For example, Bogdanovich, he was always, you know, "John", or "Kastus", or
"Curator", or someone else, that is. There was another person there, Miroslav, who had a
surname Chigir, if my memory serves me, who worked, you know, in Belarus Golovnogo Mozga,
and, well, later he you know, lately he was doing some kind of investigations, as I
understand it, together with The Black Book of Belarus, well, he too, you know, was
constantly changing nicknames. To be honest, I, well, can't even remember which ones now,
because he, you know, was changing them literally, you know, every week. [Unclear] was also
in Hata, that is, a well-known, in principle, Belarusian freelance journalist.
M: But, despite the fact that you are here, in fact, this chat still exists, as I
understand it
P:(over) Yes, yes.
M: it's just named differently now.
P: Well, for sure now it's just it was re-created. Almost certainly there is
still the word "hata" in it.
M: Well, I heard it is Safe Hata.
P: Well, that was the last name.
M: The last name.
P: It turned out to be not very safe.
M: Yes, they say, but there is nothing safe, unfortunately, in this age of
technology.
"Protasevich admitted that he is afraid of some kind of extradition (to which country, it
is not clear) "
It is clear. It is Donbass resp. Lugansk, the separatists in Ukrainia.
- BTW: the complete interview is translated in 3 german translated parts, which maybe is
better to translate: https://www.anti-spiegel.ru/
(I recommend https://www.deepl.com/translator which is better than
Google.)
I find this intreview on public television of a person who has been arrested deeply
disturbing. Anyone under arrest can be considered to be in circumstances of coercion,
pressure, not free. It is highly unethical to broadcast a confession of a person under
arrest.
Regardless of whether Protashevich was telling the truth, and what his motives may have
been,
this interview should not have been broadcast.Chilling!
Would it be ethical for BBC to broadcast a 1.5 hour interview with Julian Assange?
Would Julian Assange be willing to give an interview to BBC?
My personal experience with bomb threats and airplanes FWIW:
In 2005 I was booked on a flight from JFK (NYC) to Europe. After typical hanging out at
the gate I boarded the jet normally along with the other passengers and had stowed my hand
luggage and taken my seat when an announcement was made for all passengers to exit the
aircraft and return to the gate area. No explanation was offered. Upon returning to the gate
area I found that all the passengers for that flight were sequestered in the gate area and
could not leave. No explanation was offered. The jet was backed away from the terminal and
taken to some other area away from the gates. I think we waited between 1.5 and 2hrs before a
rumor spread that there had been a bomb threat to the aircraft. We waited longer, with people
getting restive. Eventually we were told we were going to re-board the aircraft - we were to
proceed down the jetway after a document check and take a bus out to the aircraft. In the
jetway were armed security personnel with dogs. We had to pass single file past the dogs who
smelled us for explosives and then board the bus. We unloaded near the jet where all the
luggage had been arranged in a long line. Each passenger identified their bags and they were
reloaded onto the jet. Only those which passengers had identified were loaded. Then we
boarded again via a stair and eventually took off. I recall the delay being 7hrs total. We
were told that a book had been found at a payphone booth in the gate area and amongst the
pages had been a note making threats against the aircraft. Had we been airborne when the note
had been found I have no doubt that we would have been asked to return, perhaps to a military
airport.
Those are Russian headlines from today, and not all of them.
The authorities in Lugansk want him extridited to stand trial,
Not only for participating in hostilities against the people of Lugansk, but also for
organising for others to participate in the firing of numerous weapons against the population
on the front lines (as something like a 'hunting trip' to customers who would pay).
Posted by: Petri Krohn | Jun 4 2021 21:44 utc | 75
The full story may not be know yet. This is the way the narrative changes.
Your suggestion that "we are now here" at point number 4 may reflect the level of
awareness of this blog and its readership, but it certainly doesn't describe the main
narrative as presented - and accepted, by the general Western audience.
The media treatment of the May 31 Dublin - Krakow Ryanair flight and the June 3 Ndjamena -
Paris Air France flight is a good indication of where the narrative presently stands. Despite
the glaring similarity of the incidents, such as the diversion of the Ryanair flight to a
third country and the military jet escort for the Air France flight, I haven't come across
any commentary referring to the Minsk incident. For a story which was only a few days old and
which centred around the notion of the illegitimacy of the bomb threat excuse, this really
shows the bad faith of the media and the wilful passivity of its audience.
This point alone suggests that this particular narrative battle was fought and won by the
West.
Counter battery fire isn't effective when it comes a week late. People have already moved
on and the damage is done. The specifics of the incident don't matter anyway, as most folks
have little awareness and zero curiosity of these matters. What counts is the lasting
sentiment imprinted in their mind, keywords to be added to a subfile of 'Russia and
stuff'.
How strange: a bunch of posters who have never posted here before, all with names in a
specific format (U2, I2, etc.) suddenly appear to spew MSM talking points...
À 14 h 48, Svetlana Tikhanovskaïa publie un post sur sa chaîne
Telegram sur l'arrestation de Protassevitch. Or à cet instant précis,
Protassevitch est encore dans la file d'attente et personne dans l'aéroport de Minsk
ne sait qu'il est là !
À 14 h 53 , Roman Protassevitch passe calmement ses bagages aux rayons X.
Mais en 18 minutes, les employés de la direction biélorusse de la lutte contre
le crime organisé ont eu le temps de lire les messages des chaînes Telegram de
l'opposition annonçant que Protassevitch a été arrêté
à l'aéroport de Minsk, et décident de vérifier
l'information.
I hadn't realised that Svetlana was part of the group that wanted Protasevitch used as
"bait". Suggests that in Roman's version that accuses Bogdanovich of being the originator, he
is NOT the culprit, but it is much more a higher level or external operation. If there is one
channel that the Belarusian Anti-crime employees would be looking at full-time it is that of
Svetlena. Deliberate publicity to use her!!
She was posting before he was apprehended., Which seems to show that the order for the
deliberate publication came from Poland, not from someone who Ramon had left behind in
Athens.
Big props to S@81 for translating the first 18 minutes of the interview. I tried my hand
at continuing where you left off, but it goes so deep into Belarussian opp-dynamics that it
becomes meaningless without context, and not much better with context. So, here's 4 more
minutes, stopping at 22.
Roman Protasevich:Ян
Авсеюшкин was also in Hata, that
is, a well-known, in principle, Belarusian freelance journalist.
Marat Markov: But, despite the fact that you are here, in fact, this chat still
exists, as I understand it
P: (over) Yes, yes.
M: it's just named differently now.
P: Well, for sure now it's just it was re-created. Almost certainly there is
still the word "hata" in it.
M: Well, I heard it is Safe Hata.
P: Well, that was the last name.
M: The last name.
P: It turned out to be not very safe.
M: Yes, they say, but there is nothing safe, unfortunately, in this age of
technology.
Alright, so. While you're here, in this sort of informational vacuum, there's talk that the
staffs of the "incredibles" (Ed: presumably, regime-change groups) have united, joined
forces. Do you, personally, believe that Putila won't betray Vechorko, at some point? That
Latushka and Tikhanovskaya can get along? Or that Strizhak wouldn't sell them all out, if
he thought he could profit from it? Are you confident in this sort of alliance?
P:(over) Let me just step in here and take the question one step further.
In reality, and I expect everyone understands this already – there were always major
friction between different working groups and projects. One simple example would be
Latushka, and his NAU
initiative.
This might surprise you, but NAU was meant to be Tikhanovskaya's project, and it was
supposed to be, fundamentally, her cabinet of ministers. But days before the project
dropped as intended, Latushka somehow got access to the site and all the information, and
he announced NAU as his own personal initiative. Despite the fact that, earlier to this, he
was bartering for the position of Prime Minister from Tikhanovskaya, and so on. He
essentially just stole the project for himself days before launch.
This is the clearest example I can think of, to demonstrate how much internal friction
there is within the organization. (Ed: to put it mildly. "Gnawing" like a rabid animal was
the literal expression used.)
M:(over) That's unthinkable/scandalous.
P: Vechorko almost beat up Erohovets (Ed:
Алексей
Ероховец), and he's supposed to be a
representative of Страна Для
Жизни. (Ed: Translation along the lines of 'Country you can
live in' – I'm too far removed to explain what it is. Looks like a cross-platform
movement that, perhaps, grew out of Sergei Tikhanovskiy's Youtube channel?) And so on.
There are constant internal conflicts, and that's what the staff fear the most – that
these internal conflicts, of which there are enormous amounts, become known to the
public.
And from all this, it becomes very clear, that everyone is in it for their own personal
interests.
M: Which are? What are they fighting for?
P: Let me give another simple example, concerning the highly public Olga Karach . In every public
appearance, she tries very hard to out-shout the rest of the opposition, building herself
up as a central figure. Every week there's a new attempt to pull the mantle off of
Tikhanovskaya, for head of the opposition – that's all her work amounts to. To get
financial access to the Belarusian diaspora, primarily, since she isn't really interested
in wielding executive power. She's only interested in money.
Having lived in Lithuania for 10 years, she lives in a house that's 600 square meters, in
an elite quarter of Vilnius.
M:(over) Wonderful woman.
P: You tell me, where that money comes from. In the same way, everyone else is
competing to get a piece of that pie. For that same reason, you get tons of internal
strife. There are even frictions with BYSOL , even though I'm personally well acquainted/on good
terms with Andrej
Strizhak I perfectly understand that there's something amiss: one moment there's money,
and then suddenly they run out. We've obviously had this discussion, internally of course,
away from the public.
M: Did you voice these concerns to him directly?
P: This was only discussed internally. One of the key things, well... Like in the
example with Latushka – he never openly went against Tikhanovskaya, but he did steal
her project from right under her nose, to accomplish his own goals.
M: She just accepted this?
P: The key take-away is this: that the organizations keep all internal conflicts
under wraps, and try to the very end – even at times when I considered silence on the
issue harmful – they try their hardest to keep things quiet and 'keep it in-house'
(Ed: Russian proverb) so as not to disillusion their supporters among the public. In terms
of finances, in terms of political ambitions, in terms of zones of influence – there
are tons of examples. Everything is fought over.
My key take-away is that this interview is full of redundancies and needs creative editing
for those outside of the Belarus-regime-change-keyboard-warrior demographic.
The impression I get of Roman in the select clips I've seen of the interview (I haven't
seen it in its entirety) isn't one of remorse or fear, but relief. With security guarantees
for cooperation, he's more than happy to throw everyone he was in contact with under the bus,
and the picture is pretty much of a criminal organization with tons of money on the line,
which should be a terrifying prospect for any front-line peon involved. Jail-time with a
commuted sentence may not be a bad way to get yourself out, considering the alternatives.
On the other hand, his mannerisms remind me a bit of Lukashenko. Can we be sure this isn't
the dictator himself with advanced Belorussian deep-fake technology, coached on hip internet
lingo by the KGB, giving the interview? ;)
WaPo "journalism" -- State Dept provided -- nails it..../s Detained Belarus dissident breaks down in state TV interview, renewing fears of coercion
and torture
Belarusian journalist Roman Protasevich, detained last month after his flight was forced to
land in Minsk, Belarus, sobs during an interview with Belarusian state television. Footage
of detained journalist Roman Protasevich that aired on Belarusian state television Thursday
has raised renewed concerns that he is being coerced to take part in political propaganda
under duress.
...Protasevich's father, Dzmitry, told the AFP that the interview was painful to watch
because his son was clearly repeating statements that he does not believe. "They broke him
and forced him to say what was needed," Dzmitry Protasevich said. [with all those
details??]
Exiled opposition leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya told reporters Friday that such videos are
routinely filmed after torture and should not be believed. "The task of political prisoners
is to survive," she said, according to the AFP.
Human Rights Watch Executive Director Kenneth Roth tweeted that the video "should be
Exhibit A in a prosecution for torture and ill treatment under President Lukashenko." .
.Jun 4, 2021 here
Roman says he was about to be ousted from the anti-Belarus organization that he was
associated with over some "petty deadline".
Is this believable? Can this be verified? If they were going to oust him, it seems it
would have been over something more serious than a "petty deadline".
If truthful, we could ask if Roman was identified as a suspiciously unenthusiastic
participant by the Belarus opposition (a double-agent?). If not truthful, then it may be
part of a cover story for Minsk's diversion of the Ryanair flight.
Roman says that he himself was the source of info about his travel to Vilinus.
This hints at how Minsk knew of his presence on the Ryanair flight (i.e. not via
Protonmail email).
The 'blackbook' that identifies State security personnel seems to be a real source of
irritation to Lukashenko/Belarus. Is such identification a standard aspect of 'color
revolution'? Was there a similar effort to identify Ukrainian security personnel in the
lead-up to Ukraine's Maidan?
The loyalty of security services is requisite for a 'strongman' like Lukashenko.
<> <> <> <> <>
Roman says that he didn't really help with the 'black book' and wasn't really part of
'Asov' in Ukraine. His quick conversion indicates that this may be true. This 'leader of
the rebellion' doesn't appear to have a strong pro-Western affiliation (compare to
Assange! who risked and lost everything for his principles).
Others at moa have noted Roman's weak allegiance.
AFAICT Sofia is not ratting out her colleagues like Roman. She and her family are
saying it was all a set-up.
Was Roman a double-agent? Was Sofia (leader of the 'blackbook' project) and
discrediting the opposition (as petty and mercenary) the real target?
@ 119 jackrabbit... just for fun here... how do you think the usa gov't would react to a
list given out of the police personal info who oversaw occupy wall st protests?? do you think
the people who gave out the list would be charged with terrorism or some such law in the
usa??
regarding your comment about romans story being a little too convenient.. lets look at the
facts as they stand on the ground.. has belarus benefited from this, or has the west?? some
would argue belarus-russia has benefited because a hole was been blown in the regime change
operation... others would say the west has won because the narrative to isolate belarus and
russia has been successful... so, i am not so sure about his story being too convenient... in
fact, i can see it as a possibility a plan was in place to do exactly this with the bomb
threat being phoned in from the west.. however, my gut tells me it is russia that instigated
the e mail, not the west .. hard to know either way, but using protonmail it suggests the
west is behind it... i think protonmail would be a lot more forthright if russia was behind
it... so my gut is wrong or not very accurate!
Western press continues to describe the incident as a "hijacking". Ukraine releases
statement by Rada:
"By committing this compulsory act of landing a passenger plane, the Belarusian
authorities endangered the safety of passengers and crew. These actions are a violation of
international civil aviation rules and pose a threat to international security, including the
safety of air transport" https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/748084.html
NATO CEO predictably refers to a "state hijacking" which must produce "consequences" for
Belarus and also Russia.
"Russia has not condemned it," Stoltenberg said during a Brookings Institution event.
"Russia has actually tried to do the opposite to excuse and explain that outrageous
action."
There is so much material that there is no way the western MSM is going to get away with
the typical excuses, no lawyer, torture, etc. To start with there is the Dud interview in which a
couple of young fellows with huge egos, especially the front man Putilo, reveal in retrospect
much more than what they would like to, then there is the first news investigation item by
ONT.by , with airport cameras, pilot and control tower communications, in that first program
about the incident quite a few fakes are discredited, like Roman being detained right by the
airplane when the cameras show that he takes a long walk from the airplane to the bus by
himself, then we have the interview with Markov and then not to be forgotten, the interview
is one hour an a half but four and a half hours were taped, so probably somebody is waiting
for more denials and fakes to be published and then confront them with recorded facts.
It is so obvious that the MSM and whoever is behind are masters of denial and manipulation
but this saga is far from over. After watching all the material available if someone insists
that Roman was tortured then the Belarusian KGB operatives are truly masters of their trade
and should be hired by the CIA to show them that water boarding, sleep deprivation,
electroshock and all the tricks employed so far by the agency are primitive and
ineffective.
@ 98 robin... so what do you think is more important? narrative control, or facts on the
ground?? one is playing with people's minds, and the other is what is.. one could say the
propaganda war is being won by those who want to control the narrative, but if we step
outside the world of propaganda for a moment, who is actually winning?
Are you asking what is my personal stand on the matter or what I believe is more important to
the belligerents? I'll assume it's the latter and answer that, to the main aggressor,
controlling the narrative for its domestic audience is absolutely crucial.
As the perpetrator of wars of choice, the empire cannot afford to have its citizenry see
its foreign policy for what it is. It cannot come out and say : "So, look, we're going to
squeeze these different places until there's nothing left. You see, our models tell us that
down the road, that Eastern block is going to significantly cut into our bottom line. That's
why we need to crush them all while we're still ahead."
As I said earlier, most folks are not very curious about geopolitics. However, they would
certainly resent being told they are on Team Asshole. They would seek to distance themselves
from those politics and this would ultimately impede the Empire in its adventurism.
This is where the narrative management comes in. Thanks to the incessant artillery
barrage, unsolicited membership to Team Asshole is duly hidden from sight. Better yet, we get
to be partners in making this world a better, freedomer place for all and make a stand
against tyranny and terror.
It is perfectly believable that Protasevich was sold out by someone on Tikhanovskaya's
team, likely with her knowledge; she would need to act quickly to capitalize on it with calls
for European sanctions against Belarus. Her opposition movement is floundering and moribund,
and she desperately needs relevance and attention.
US Troops Die for World Domination, Not Freedom May 31, 2021 Save
On Memorial Day, Caitlin Johnstone says it's important to block the propaganda that helps
feed a steady supply of teenagers into the imperial war machine.
Airman placing U.S. flags at military graves, May 27. (Arlington National Cemetery,
Flickr)
V ice President Kamala Harris spent
the weekend under fire from Republicans, which of course means that Kamala Harris spent the
weekend being criticized for the most silly, vapid reason you could possibly criticize Kamala
Harris for.
Apparently the likely future president tweeted "Enjoy the long weekend,"
a reference to the Memorial Day holiday on Monday, instead of gushing about fallen troops and
sacrifice.
That's it, that's the whole entire story. That silly, irrelevant offense by one of the
sleaziest
people in the single most corrupt and murderous government on earth is the whole entire
basis for histrionic headlines from conservative media outlets like this :
Harris, the born politician, was quick to course correct.
"Throughout our history our service men and women have risked everything to defend our
freedoms and our country," the veep tweeted . "As we prepare to honor
them on Memorial Day, we remember their service and their sacrifice."
Which is of course complete bullshit. It has been generations since any member of the U.S.
military could be said to have served or sacrificed defending America or its freedoms, and that
has been the case throughout almost the entirety of its history. If you are reading this it is
statistically unlikely that you are of an age where any U.S. military personnel died for any
other reason than corporate profit and global domination, and if you are it's almost certain
you weren't old enough to have had mature thoughts about it at the time.
Whenever you criticize the U.S. war machine online within earshot of anyone who's
sufficiently propagandized, you will invariably be lectured about the second World War and how
we'd all be speaking German or Japanese without the brave men who died for our freedom. This
makes my point for me: the fact that apologists for U.S. imperialism always need to reach all
the way back through history to the cusp of living memory to find even one single example of
the American military being used for purposes that weren't evil proves that it most certainly
is evil.
But this is one of the main reasons there are so very many movies and history documentaries
made about World War II: it's an opportunity to portray U.S. servicemen bravely fighting and
dying for a noble cause without having to bend the truth beyond recognition. The other major
reason is that focusing on the second World War allows members of the U.S. empire to escape
into a time when the Big Bad Guy on the world stage was someone else.
From the end of World War II to the fall of the U.S.S.R., the U.S. military was used to
smash the spread of communism and secure geostrategic interests toward the ultimate end of
engineering the collapse of the Soviet Union. After this was accomplished in 1991, U.S. foreign
policy officially shifted to preserving a unipolar world order by preventing the rise of any
other superpower which could rival its might.
"In a broad new policy statement that is in its final drafting stage, the Defense
Department asserts that America's political and military mission in the post-cold-war era
will be to insure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or
the territory of the former Soviet Union.
A 46-page document that has been circulating at the highest levels of the Pentagon for
weeks, and which Defense Secretary Dick Cheney expects to release later this month, states
that part of the American mission will be 'convincing potential competitors that they need
not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate
interests.'
The classified document makes the case for a world dominated by one superpower whose
position can be perpetuated by constructive behavior and sufficient military might to deter
any nation or group of nations from challenging American primacy."
This is all U.S. troops have been fighting and dying for since the Berlin Wall came down.
Not "freedom", not "democracy" and certainly not the American people. Just continual
uncontested domination of this planet at all cost: domination of its resources, its trade
routes, its seas, its air, and its humans, no matter how many lives need to risked and snuffed
out in order to achieve it. The U.S. has
killed millions and
displaced tens of millions just since the turn of this century in the reckless pursuit of
that goal.
And, as Smedley Butler spelled out 86 years ago in his still-relevant book War is a Racket , U.S.
military personnel have been dying for profit.
Nothing gets the gears of industry turning like war, and nothing better creates chaotic Wild
West environments of shock and confusion during which more wealth
and power can be grabbed. War profiteers pour immense resources into lobbying ,
think tanks and campaign donations to manipulate and bribe policy makers into making decisions
which promote war and military expansionism,
with astounding success . This is all entirely legal.
It's important to spread awareness that this is all U.S. troops have been dying for, because
the fairy tale that they fight for freedom and for their countrymen is a major propaganda
narrative used in military recruitment. While poverty plays a
significant role in driving up enlistments as predatory recruiters target poor and middle
class youth promising them a future in the nation with the worst income
inequality in the industrialized world, the fact that the aggressively propagandized
glorification of military "service" makes it a more esteemed career path than working at a
restaurant or a grocery store means people are more likely to enlist.
Without all that propaganda deceiving people into believing that military work is something
virtuous, military service would be the most shameful job anyone could possibly have; other
stigmatized jobs like sex work would be regarded as far more noble. You'd be less reluctant to
tell your extended family over Christmas that you're a janitor at a seedy massage parlor than
that you've enlisted in the U.S. military, because instead of congratulating and praising you,
your Uncle Murray would look at you and say, "So you're gonna be killing kids for crude
oil?"
And that's exactly how it should be. Continuing to uphold the lie that U.S. troops fight and
die for a good cause is helping to ensure a steady supply of teenagers to feed into the gears
of the imperial war machine. Stop feeding into the lie that the war machine is worth killing
and being killed for. Not out of disrespect for the dead, but out of reverence for the
living.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those
of Consortium News .
Em , June 1, 2021 at 09:52
Instead of annually memorializing those dead youth, who were, in one way or the other,
coerced to go off to foreign lands to kill or be killed, by other youth, in the name of a
piece of dead symbolic cloth, wouldn't it be a better idea to honor them, while alive in the
prime of living (the world over) by affording them the means to learn, leading by example, to
discover for themselves – how to think critically as to what the real options are,
collectively as well as individually, for survival and thriving.
CNfan , June 1, 2021 at 04:06
"Global domination" for the benefit of a predatory financial oligarchy.
Peter Loeb , June 1, 2021 at 09:11
Read William Hartung's "Prophets of War " to understand the dynamics.
Thank you all for speaking your truth in this dystopian human universe so apparently
lacking human reason and understanding. As is so wisely introduced and recognized herein, the
murderous depravity of the "Wolfwitz Doctrine" being and remaining the public policy
formulation of our national governance, both foreign and domestic, is a fact that every U.S.
citizen should consider and understand on this Memorial Day.
As Usual,
EA
Realist , May 31, 2021 at 17:27
Well stated, perfectly logical again on this subject as always, Caitlin. You out the
warmongers for their game to fleece the public and rape the world all so a handful of already
fat, lazyass but enormously wealthy and influential people can acquire, without the slightest
bit of shame, yet more, more and more of everything there is to be had. You and General
Butler.
Will this message get through, this time? Maybe the billionth time is the charm, eh? Can
the scales suddenly fall from the eyes of the 330 million Americans who will then demand an
immediate end to the madness? On the merits, it's the only conclusion that might realise any
actual justice for our country and the rest of the world upon whose throat it keeps a knee
firmly planted.
Sorry, nothing of the sort shall ever happen, not as long as the entire mercenary mass
media obeys its corporate ownership and speaks nothing but false narratives every minute of
every day. Not as long as the educational system is really nothing more than a propaganda
indoctrination experience for every child born in the glorious USA! Not as long as every
politician occupying any given office is just a bought and paid for tool of the Matrix with
great talents for convincing the masses that 2 + 2 = 3, or 5, or whatever is convenient at
the time to benefit the ledgers of their plutocrat masters.
What better illustrates the reality of my last assertion than the occupancy of the White
House by Sleepy/Creepy Joe Biden who, through age alone, has been reduced to nothing more
than a sack of unresponsive meat firmly trussed up with ropes and pulleys that his handlers
pull this way or that to create an animatronic effect apparently perfectly convincing to the
majority of the American public? Or so they say, based upon some putative election
results.
Truly, thanks for the effort, Caitlin. I do appreciate that some have a grasp on the
truth. I look forward to its recapitulation by yourself and many others to no effect on every
Memorial Day in the USA. It would be unrealistic of me to say otherwise.
Rael Nidess, M.D. , May 31, 2021 at 12:54
Kudos for being one of a very few to mention the central driving ethic behind U.S. foreign
policy since the demise of the USSR: The Wolfowitz Doctrine. As central today as it was when
first published.
"... After Epstein's 2019 arrest, it emerged that Epstein had "directed" Bill Gates to donate $2 million to the MIT lab in 2014. Epstein also allegedly secured a $5 million donation from Leon Black for the lab. Ito was forced to resign his post as the lab's director shortly after Epstein's 2019 arrest. ..."
"... Epstein appears to have become involved with Brockman as early as 1995, when he helped to finance and rescue a struggling book project that was managed by Brockman. ..."
"... According to former Israeli intelligence operative Ari Ben-Menashe, Bill Clinton had been the main focus of Epstein's sexual blackmail operation in the 1990s, a claim supported by Epstein victim testimony and Epstein's intimate involvement with individuals who were close to the former president at the time. ..."
"... Despite tensions arising from the Clinton administration's pursuit of Microsoft's monopoly in the late 1990s, the Gates and Clinton relationship had thawed by April 2000, when Gates attended the White House " Conference on the New Economy ." Attendees besides Gates included close Epstein associate Lynn Forester (now Lady de Rothschild) and then secretary of the treasury Larry Summers, who has also come under fire for his Epstein ties. ..."
"... Huffington Post ..."
"... Huffington Post ..."
"... Black was deeply tied to Epstein, even having Epstein manage his personal "philanthropic" foundation for several years, even after Epstein's first arrest. ..."
"... Indeed, 2013 was also the year that the Gates mansion systems engineer, Rick Allen Jones, began to be investigated by Seattle police for his child porn and child rape collection, which contained over six thousand images and videos. Despite the gravity of his crime, when Jones was arrested at the Gates mansion a year later, he was not jailed after his arrest but was merely ordered "to stay away from children," according to local media reports. From Melinda's perspective, this scandal, combined with Bill Gates's growing association with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein may have posed a threat to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's reputation, well before Epstein's 2019 arrest. ..."
"... Evening Standard ..."
"... The likely reason for the continued cover-up of the true extent of Epstein's ties to Gates has much more to do with Gates's company Microsoft than with Bill Gates himself. While it is now permissible to report on ties that discredit Gates's personal reputation, the information that could tie his relationship with Epstein and the Maxwells to Microsoft has been omitted. ..."
"... If, as the Evening Standard ..."
"... This is hardly an isolated incident, as similar efforts have been made to cover up (or memory hole) the ties of Epstein and the Maxwells to other prominent Silicon Valley empires, such as those led by Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk . One key reason for this is that the Epstein network's blackmail operation involved not only sexual blackmail but electronic forms of blackmail ..."
"... That Isabel and Christine Maxwell were able to forge close business ties with Microsoft after having been part of the front company that played a central role in PROMIS-related espionage and after explicitly managing their subsequent companies with the admitted intention to "rebuild" their spy father's work and legacy, strongly points to the probability of at least some Microsoft products having been compromised in some fashion, likely through alliances with Maxwell-run tech companies. The lack of mainstream media concern over the documented ties of the Epstein network to other top Microsoft executives of the past, such as Nathan Myhrvold, Linda Stone, and Steven Sinofsky, makes it clear that, while it may be open season on the relationship between Bill Gates and Epstein, such is not the case for Microsoft and Epstein. ..."
"... The ties of Epstein and the Maxwells to Silicon Valley, not just to Microsoft, are part of a broader attempt to cover up the strong intelligence component in the origin of Silicon Valley's most powerful companies. Much effort has been invested in creating a public perception that these companies are strictly private entities despite their deep, long-standing ties to the intelligence agencies and militaries of the United States and Israel . The true breadth of the Epstein scandal will never be covered by mainstream media because so many news outlets are owned by these same Silicon Valley oligarchs or depend on Silicon Valley for online reader engagement. ..."
"... Perhaps the biggest reason why the military/intelligence origins and links to the current Silicon Valley oligarchy will never be honestly examined, however, is that those very entities are now working with breakneck speed to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which would make artificial intelligence, automation, mass electronic surveillance, and transhumanism central to human society. One of the architects of this "revolution," Klaus Schwab, said earlier this year that rebuilding and maintaining trust with the public was critical to that project. However, were the true nature of Silicon Valley, including its significant ties to serial child rapist and sex trafficker Jeffery Epstein and his network, to emerge, the public's trust would be significantly eroded, thus threatening what the global oligarchy views as a project critical to its survival ..."
"... What a menace these philanthropic organizations are to the ordinary and lowly. These billionaire creeps never stop plotting and figuring out even more ways to stomp on people and push their creepy agendas, which remain forever hidden. ..."
It further appears that Bill Gates, then head of Microsoft, made a personal investment in
CommTouch at the behest of Isabel Maxwell. In an October 2000
article published in the Guardian , Isabel "jokes about persuading Bill Gates to
make a personal investment" in CommTouch sometime during this period.
The Guardian article then oddly notes, regarding Isabel Maxwell and Bill Gates:
"In a faux southern belle accent, [Isabel] purrs: 'He's got to spend $375m a year to keep
his tax-free status, why not allow me to help him.' She explodes with laughter."
Given that individuals as wealthy as Gates cannot have "tax-free status" and that this
article was published soon after the creation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,
Isabel's statements suggest that it was the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, which
manages the foundation's endowment assets, that made this sizable investment in CommTouch.
Furthermore, it is worth highlighting the odd way in which Isabel describes her dealings
with Gates ("purring," speaking in a fake Southern accent), describing her interactions with
him in a way not found in any of her numerous other interviews on a wide variety of topics.
This odd behavior may be related to Isabel's previous interactions with Gates and/or the
mysterious relationship between Gates and Epstein during this time.
Isabel Maxwell as
CommTouch President
After 2000, CommTouch's business and clout expanded rapidly, with Isabel Maxwell
subsequently crediting investments from Microsoft, led by Gates, and Paul Allen for the
company's good fortune and the success of its effort to enter the US market. Maxwell, as quoted
in the 2002 book Fastalliances , states that Microsoft viewed CommTouch as a key "distribution
network," adding that "Microsoft's investment in us put us on the map. It gave us instant
credibility, validated our technology and service in the marketplace." By this time,
Microsoft's ties to CommTouch had deepened with new partnerships, including
CommTouch's hosting of Microsoft Exchange .
Though Isabel Maxwell was able to secure lucrative investments and alliances for CommTouch
and saw its products integrated into key software and hardware components produced and sold by
Microsoft and other tech giants, she was unable to improve the company's dire financial
situation, with CommTouch netting a loss of
$4.4 million in 1998 and similar losses well into the 2000s, with net losses totalling $24 million in 2000 (just one
year after the sizable investments from Microsoft, Paul Allen and Gates). The losses continued
even after Isabel formally left the company and became president emeritus in 2001. By 2006, the
company was over $170 million in debt. Isabel Maxwell left her position at CommTouch in 2001
but for years retained a sizable amount of CommTouch stock valued at the time at around $9.5
million . Today, Isabel Maxwell is, among other things, a " technology pioneer " of the World
Economic Forum.
Another indication of a relationship between Epstein and Gates prior to 2001 is Epstein's
cozy ties with Nathan Myhrvold, who joined Microsoft in the 1980s and became the company's
first chief technology officer in 1996. At the time, Myhrvold was one of Gates's closest
advisers, if not the closest, and cowrote Gates's 1996 book, The Road Ahead , which
sought to explain how emerging technologies would impact life in the years and decades to
come.
In December of the same year that he became Microsoft's CTO, Myhrvold traveled on Epstein's
plane from Kentucky to New Jersey, and then again in January 1997 from New Jersey to Florida.
Other passengers accompanying Myhrvold on these flights included Alan Dershowitz and "GM,"
presumably Ghislaine Maxwell. It is worth keeping in mind that this is the same period when
Gates had a documented relationship with Ghislaine's sister Isabel.
In addition, in the 1990s, Myhrvold traveled with Epstein in Russia alongside Esther Dyson , a digital
technology consultant who has been called "the most influential woman
in all the computer world." She currently has close ties to Google as well as the DNA testing
company 23andme and is a member of and
agenda contributor to the World Economic Forum. Dyson later stated that the meeting with
Epstein had been planned by Myhrvold. The meeting appears to have taken place in 1998, based on
information posted on Dyson's social media accounts.
One photo features Dyson and Epstein, with a time stamp indicating April 28, 1998, posing
with Pavel Oleynikov, who appears to have been
an employee of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center. In that photo, they are standing in front of
the house of the late Andrei Sakharov, the Soviet nuclear scientist and dissident, who is
alleged to have had ties to US intelligence.
Sakharov and his wife, Yelena Bonner, were supporters of Zionist causes
.
The photos were taken in Sarov, where the Russian Federal Nuclear Center is based. That same
day, another photo was taken that
shows Epstein inside a classroom full of teens, apparently also in Sarov, given the time
stamp.
Another Dyson
image , one without a visible time stamp but with a caption stating the photo was taken "at
Microsoft Russia in Moscow" in April 1998, shows Nathan Myhrvold. Dyson's caption further
states, "This was the beginning of a three-week trip during which Nathan and a variety of
hangers-on (including a bodyguard) explored the state of post-Soviet science." Epstein appears
to be one of the "hangers-on," given the photographs, dates, and the described purpose of the
trip.
Myhrvold and Epstein apparently had more in common than an interest in Russian scientific
advances. When Myhrvold left Microsoft to cofound Intellectual Ventures,
Vanity Fair reported that he had received Epstein at the firm's office with "young
girls" in tow who appeared to be "Russian models." A source close to Myhrvold and cited by
Vanity Fair claimed that Myhrvold spoke openly about borrowing Epstein's jet and
staying at his homes in Florida and New York. Vanity Fair also noted that Myhrvold has
been accused of having sex with minors provided by Epstein by none other than Harvard law
professor Alan Dershowitz, who stands accused of the same crime and who had previously flown
with Myhrvold on Epstein's private plane.
In addition, a former colleague of Myhrvold's at Microsoft later developed her own ties to
Epstein. Linda Stone , who joined
Microsoft in 1993 and worked directly under Myhrvold, eventually became a Microsoft vice
president. She introduced Epstein to Joi Ito of the MIT Media Lab after Epstein's first arrest.
"He has a tainted past, but Linda assures me that he's awesome," Ito later said in an email to
three MIT staffers. In Epstein's famous little black book, there are several phone numbers for
Stone, and her emergency contact is listed as Kelly Bovino, a former model and alleged Epstein
coconspirator. After Epstein's 2019 arrest, it emerged that Epstein
had "directed" Bill Gates to donate $2 million to the MIT lab in 2014. Epstein also
allegedly secured a $5 million donation from Leon Black for the lab. Ito was forced to resign
his post as the lab's director shortly after Epstein's 2019 arrest.
Nathan Myhrvold , Linda Stone , Joi Ito, Esther Dyson , and Bill Gates were all members of the Edge
Foundation community (edge.org website), alongside several other Silicon Valley icons. Edge,
which is described as an exclusive organization of intellectuals " redefining who and what we are ," was created by John
Brockman, a self-described "cultural impresario" and noted literary agent. Brockman is best
known for his deep ties to the art world in the late 1960s, though lesser
known are his various "management consulting" gigs for the Pentagon and White House during
that same period. Edge, which
the Guardian once called "the world's smartest website," is an exclusive online
symposium affiliated with what Brockman calls "the Third Culture." Epstein appears to have
become involved with Brockman as early as 1995, when he helped to finance and rescue a
struggling book project that was managed by Brockman.
Edge, however, is more than just a website. For decades, it was also instrumental in
bringing together tech executives, scientists who were often Brockman's clients, and Wall
Street financiers through its Millionaires' Dinner, first held in 1985. In 1999, this event
rebranded as the Billionaires' Dinner, and Epstein became intimately involved in these affairs
and the Edge Foundation itself. Epstein was photographed attending several of the dinners as
was Sarah Kellen, Ghislaine Maxwell's chief "assistant" and coconspirator in the
Epstein/Maxwell-run sex trafficking and blackmail scheme.
Nathan Myhrvold, Microsoft and
Jeffrey Epstein at the 2000 Edge Billionaires' Dinner Source: https://www.edge.org/igd/1200
From 2001 to 2017, Epstein
funded $638,000 out of a total of $857,000 raised by Edge. During this period, there were
several years when Epstein was Edge's only donor. Epstein stopped giving in 2015, which was
incidentally the same year that Edge decided to discontinue its annual Billionaires' Dinner
tradition. In addition, the only award Edge has ever given out, the $100,000 Edge of
Computation prize, was awarded in 2005 to Quantum computing pioneer David Deutsch -- it was
funded entirely by Epstein. A year before he began donating heavily to Edge, Epstein had
created the Jeffrey Epstein VI Foundation to "fund and support cutting edge science around the
world."
Since the Epstein scandal, regular attendees of the Billionaires' Dinner, sometimes called
the Edge annual dinner, have referred to the event as an "influence operation." If one follows
the money, it appears it was an influence operation largely benefitting one man, Jeffrey
Epstein, and his network. The evidence points toward Myhrvold and Gates as being very much a
part of that network, even before Epstein's involvement in Edge increased
significantly.
It is worth exploring the ties between the "philanthropic" endeavors of Bill Gates and Bill
Clinton in the early 2000s, particularly given Epstein's and Ghislaine Maxwell's ties to the
Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative during that period. According to
former Israeli intelligence operative Ari Ben-Menashe, Bill Clinton
had been the main focus of Epstein's sexual blackmail operation in the 1990s,
a claim supported by Epstein victim testimony and Epstein's intimate involvement with
individuals who were close to the former president at the time.
Bill Gates at the White
House Conference on the New Economy in 2000, Source: LA Times
Despite tensions arising from the Clinton administration's pursuit of Microsoft's
monopoly in the late 1990s, the Gates and Clinton relationship had thawed by April 2000, when
Gates attended the White House " Conference on
the New Economy ." Attendees besides
Gates included close Epstein associate Lynn Forester (now Lady de Rothschild) and then
secretary of the treasury Larry Summers, who has also come under fire for his Epstein
ties. Another attendee was White House chief of staff Thomas "Mack" McLarty, whose special
assistant Mark Middleton met with Epstein
at least three times at the Clinton White House. Middleton was fired after press reports
surfaced detailing his ties to illegal donations linked to foreign governments that had been
made to Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign. Another participant in the conference was Janet
Yellen, Biden's current Secretary of the Treasury.
Gates spoke at a conference panel entitled "Closing the Global Divide: Health, Education and
Technology." He discussed how the mapping of the human genome would result in a new era of
technological breakthroughs and discussed the need to offer internet access to everyone to
close the digital divide and allow the "new" internet-based economy to take shape. At the time,
Gates was backing a
company , along with American Telecom billionaire Craig McCaw, that hoped to establish a
global internet service provider monopoly through a network of low-orbit satellites. That
company, Teledesic, shut down between 2002 and 2003 and is credited as being the
inspiration for Elon Musk's Starlink.
Bill Clinton and Bill Gates entered the world of philanthropy around the same time, with the
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation launching in 2000 and the Clinton Foundation, in 2001. Not
only that but Wired described the
two foundations as being "at the forefront of a new era in philanthropy, in which decisions --
often referred to as investments -- are made with the strategic precision demanded of business
and government, then painstakingly tracked to gauge their success."
Other media outlets, however, such as the Huffington
Post , challenged that these foundations engaged in "philanthropy" and asserted that
calling them such was causing "the rapid deconstruction of the accepted term." The
Huffington Post further noted that the Clinton Global Initiative (part of the Clinton
Foundation), the Gates Foundation, and a few similar organizations "all point in the direction
of blurring the boundaries between philanthropy, business and non-profits." It noted that this
model for "philanthropy" has been promoted by the World Economic Forum and the Milken
Institute. It is also worth noting that several of Epstein's own "philanthropic" vehicles were
also created just as this new era in philanthropy was beginning.
The Milken Institute was founded by
Michael Milken , the notorious Wall Street "junk bond king," who was indicted on 98 counts
of racketeering and securities fraud in 1989. He served little prison time and was ultimately
pardoned by Donald Trump. Milken committed his crimes while working alongside Leon Black
and Ron Perelman at Drexel
Burnham Lambert before its scandalous collapse. Black was deeply tied to Epstein, even
having Epstein manage his personal
"philanthropic" foundation for several years, even after Epstein's first arrest.
Perelman was a major Clinton donor whose 1995 fundraiser for the then president was attended by
Epstein and whose companies offered jobs to Webster Hubbell and Monica Lewinsky after their
respective scandals in the Clinton administration. Like Gates, Milken has transformed his
reputation for ruthlessness in the corporate world into one of a "prominent philanthropist."
Much of his "philanthropy" benefits the Israeli military and illegal Israeli settlements in
occupied Palestine.
Years after creating their foundations, Gates and Clinton discussed how they have "long
bonded over their shared mission" of normalizing this new model of philanthropy. Gates
spoke to
Wired in 2013 about "their forays into developing regions" and "cites the close
partnerships between their organizations." In that interview, Gates revealed that he had met
Clinton before he had become president, stating, "I knew him before he was president, I knew
him when he was president, and I know him now that he's not president."
Also in that interview, Clinton stated that after he left the White House he sought to focus
on two specific things. The first is the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), which he
stated exists "thanks largely to funding from the Gates Foundation," and the second is the
Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), "where I try to build a global network of people to do their
own thing."
The Clinton Health Access Initiative first received an $11
million donation from the Gates Foundation in 2009. Over the last twelve years, the Gates
Foundation has donated more than $497 million to CHAI. CHAI was initially founded in 2002 with
the mission of tackling HIV/AIDS globally through "strong government
relationships" and addressing "market inefficiencies." The Gates Foundation's significant
donations, however, began not long after CHAI's expansion
into malaria diagnostics and treatments. Notably, in 2011, Tachi Yamada, the former president
of the Gates Foundation's Global Health program, joined CHAI's board alongside Chelsea
Clinton.
Bill Gates and Bill Clinton at the annual Clinton Global Initiative in 2010
Regarding the CGI, Epstein's defense lawyers argued in
court in 2007 that Epstein had been "part of the original group that conceived of the
Clinton Global Initiative," which was first launched in 2005. Epstein's lawyers described the
CGI as a project "bringing together a community of global leaders to devise and implement
innovative solutions to some of the world's most pressing challenges." The Gates Foundation
gave the CGI a total of $2.5 million between 2012 and 2013 in addition to its massive donations
to the CHAI and an additional $35 million to the Clinton Foundation itself. In addition to the
Gates Foundation donations, Gates's Microsoft has been intimately involved in other
"philanthropic" projects backed by Clinton.
In addition to these ties,
Hillary Clinton established a partnership between the Clinton Foundation and the Gates
Foundation in 2014 as part of the Clintons' No Ceilings initiative. That partnership sought to
"gather and analyze data about the status of women and girls' participation around the world"
and involved the two foundations working "with leading technology partners to collect these
data and compile them." Months before the partnership was announced, Gates and Epstein met for
dinner and discussed the Gates Foundation and philanthropy, according to the
New York Times . During Hillary Clinton's unsuccessful run for president in 2016,
both Bill and Melinda Gates were on her
short list as potential options for vice president.
In addition, Epstein attempted to become involved in the Gates Foundation directly, as seen
by his efforts to convince the Gates Foundation to partner with JP Morgan on
a multibillion-dollar "global health charitable fund" that would have resulted in hefty
fees paid out to Epstein, who was very involved with JP Morgan at the time. Though that fund
never materialized, Epstein and Gates did discuss Epstein becoming involved in Gates's
philanthropic efforts. Some of these contacts were not reported by the mainstream press until
after the Bill and Melinda Gates divorce announcement. Yet, as mentioned, it was known that
Epstein had "directed" Gates to donate to at least one organization -- $2 million in 2014 to
the MIT Media Lab.
Recent revelations about Gates and Epstein meetings that took place between 2013 and 2014
have further underscored the importance Epstein apparently held in the world of billionaire
"philanthropy," with Gates reportedly claiming that Epstein was
his "ticket" to winning a Nobel Prize.
Norwegian media, however, reported in October 2020 that Gates and Epstein had met the Nobel
Committee chair, which failed to make a splash in international media at the time. It is worth
asking if Epstein managed to arrange such meetings with other individuals who also coveted
Nobel Prizes and if any such individuals later received those prizes. If Epstein had such
connections, it is unlikely that he would use them only once in the case of Bill Gates, given
the vastness of his network, particularly in the tech and science worlds.
The year 2013 is also when Bill
and Melinda Gates together met with Epstein at his New York residence, after which Melinda
allegedly began asking her soon-to-be ex-husband to distance himself from Epstein. While the
stated reason for this, in the wake of the Gateses' divorce announcement, was that Melinda was
put off by Epstein's past and his persona, it could potentially be related to other concerns
about Melinda's reputation and that of the foundation that shares her name.
Indeed, 2013 was also the year that the Gates mansion systems engineer, Rick Allen
Jones, began to be investigated by Seattle police for his child porn and child rape collection,
which contained over six thousand images and videos. Despite the gravity of his crime, when
Jones was
arrested at the Gates mansion a year later, he was not jailed after his arrest but was
merely ordered "to stay away from children," according to local media reports. From Melinda's
perspective, this scandal, combined with Bill Gates's growing association with convicted
pedophile Jeffrey Epstein may have posed a threat to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's
reputation, well before Epstein's 2019 arrest.
2013 was also the year that the Maxwells become involved in the Clinton Foundation. That
year, Ghislaine Maxwell's TerraMar Project, which officially supported UN Sustainable
Development Goals as they relate the world's oceans,
made a $1.25 million commitment to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of an effort to
form a Sustainable Oceans Alliance. TerraMar shut down shortly after Epstein's 2019
arrest.
Isabel Maxwell and Al Seckel at the World Economic Forum's 2011 Annual Meeting
Notably, Ghislaine's TerraMar Project was in many ways the successor to Isabel Maxwell's
failed Blue World Alliance, which was also ostensibly focused on the world's oceans. Blue World
Alliance was set up by Isabel and her now deceased husband Al Seckel, who had hosted a
"scientific conference" on Epstein's island. The Blue World Alliance also went under the name
Globalsolver Foundation, and Xavier Malina, Christine Maxwell's son, was listed as
Globalsolver's liaison to the Clinton Foundation. He was previously an intern at the Clinton
Global Initiative.
Malina
later work ed in the Obama administration at the Office of White House Personnel. He now
works for Google. It is also worth noting that during this same period, Isabel Maxwell's son,
Alexander Djerassi ,
was chief of staff at the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs in the Hillary Clinton–run State
Department.
While the Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation intermingled, and the latter had ties
to Epstein and Maxwell, it also appears that Epstein had significant influence over two of the
most prominent science advisers to Bill Gates over the last fifteen years -- Melanie Walker and
Boris Nikolic.
A screenshot from a 2019 presentation Melanie Walker gave for Rockefeller
Foundation, where she is a fellow. Source: YouTube
Melanie Walker , now a celebrated neurosurgeon, met Jeffrey Epstein in 1992 soon after she
graduated from college, when he offered her a Victoria's Secret modelling job. Such offers were
often made by Epstein and his accomplices when recruiting women into his operation and it is
unclear if Walker ever actually worked as a model for the Leslie Wexner-owned company. She then
stayed at a New York apartment building associated with Epstein's trafficking operations during
visits to New York, but it is unclear how long she stayed there or at other Epstein-owned
properties. After she graduated from medical school in 1998, she became Epstein's science
adviser for at least a year. By 1999, she had grown so close to Prince Andrew that she
attended
a Windsor Castle birthday celebration hosted by the Queen along with Epstein and Ghislaine
Maxwell. During this period, Melanie appears on Epstein's flight logs under her birth name , Melanie
Starnes , though it looks like "Starves" on the flight logs.
The close relationship between Prince Andrew and Melanie Walker came under scrutiny after
Epstein's former housekeeper at the Zorro Ranch property, Deidre Stratton,
stated in an interview that Prince Andrew had been "given" a "beautiful young neurosurgeon"
while he stayed at Epstein's New Mexico property. Given that only one neurosurgeon was both
close to Prince Andrew and a part of Epstein's entourage at the time, it seems highly likely
that this woman "gifted" to Andrew was Melanie Walker. According to Stratton, Andrew "kept
company" with this woman for three days. The arrangement was set up by Epstein, who was not at
the property at the time. The exact timing of the stay is uncertain, but it likely took place
between 1999 and 2001.
"At the time, Jeffrey had this, she supposedly was a neurosurgeon, quite young, beautiful,
young and brilliant, and she stayed in the home with him At one point we had all these
different teas and you could pick the teas that you wanted and she asked me to find one that
would make Andrew more horny.
I'm guessing she understood her job was to entertain him because I guess, the fear, I
don't know; the fear would be that Andrew would say, "No I didn't really find her that
attractive." . . . He would tell Jeffrey that and then she would be on the ropes.
I'm guessing that, another theory is, that Jeffrey probably had her on retainer and she
knew what her job would be, should be, to make these people happy. . . . Sex was all they
thought about. I mean, I know for sure that Jeffrey would ideally like three massages a
day."
Sometime later, Walker moved to Seattle and began living with then Microsoft executive
Steven Sinofsky, who now serves as a
board partner at the venture capital firm Andreesen Horowitz. Andreesen Horowitz notably
backs Carbyne911, the Israel intelligence-linked precrime start-up funded by Epstein and his
close associate, former prime minister of Israel Ehud Barak, as well as another Israeli
intelligence-linked tech company led by Barak,
called Toka . Toka recently won contracts with the governments of Moldova, Nigeria, and
Ghana through the World Bank, where Melanie Walker is currently a director and a former special
adviser to its president. It is unclear when, how and under what circumstances Walker met
Sinofsky.
After moving to Seattle to be with Sinofsky and after a brief stint as a "practitioner in
the developing world" in China with the World Health Organization, Walker was hired as a senior
program officer by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in 2006. Given that the main feature
of Walker's resume at the time was having been a science adviser to another wealthy
"philanthropist," Jeffrey Epstein, her hire by the Gates Foundation for this critical role
further underscores how Bill Gates, at the very least, not only knew who Epstein was but knew
enough about his scientific interests and investments to want to hire Walker. Walker went on to
become deputy director for Global Development as well as a deputy director of Special
Initiatives at the foundation. According to
the Rockefeller Foundation , where she is a fellow, Walker later advised Gates on issues
pertaining to neurotechnology and brain science for Gates's
secretive company bgC3 , which Gates
originally registered as a think tank under the name Carillon Holdings. According to
federal filings,
bgC3's focus areas were "scientific and technological services," "industrial analysis and
research," and "design and development of computer hardware and software."
During her time at the Gates Foundation, Walker introduced Boris Nikolic, Gates's science
adviser, to Epstein. Today, Melanie Walker is the cochair of the World Economic Forum's Global
Future Council on Neurotechnology and Brain Science, having previously been named a WEF Young
Global Leader. She also advises the World Health Organization, which is closely linked to Bill
Gates's "philanthropy."
At the WEF, Walker wrote an article in 2016 entitled "
Healthcare in 2030: Goodbye Hospital, Hello Home-spital ," in which she discusses how
wearable devices, brain-machine interfaces, and injectable/swallowable robotic "medicines" will
be the norm by 2030. Years before COVID-19 and the Great Reset–inspired efforts to change
health care in just this way, Walker wrote that while the dystopian scenario she was painting
"sounds crazy . . . most of these technologies are either almost ready for prime time, or in
development." Of course, a lot of those technologies took shape thanks to the patronage of her
former bosses, Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Gates.
In the case of Boris Nikolic, after being introduced to Epstein through Walker, he
attended
a 2011 meeting with Gates and Epstein where he was photographed alongside James Staley,
then a senior JP Morgan executive, and Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and a
close Epstein associate. Nikolic was chief adviser for science and technology to Bill Gates at
the time, advising both the
Gates Foundation and bgC3. According to the mainstream narrative, this is supposed to be the
first time that Gates and Epstein had ever met. In addition, this may have been when Epstein
pitched the joint Gates Foundation–JP Morgan "global health charitable fund."
The 2011
meeting at Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan mansion attended by James E. Staley, Larry Summers,
Jeffery Epstein, Bill Gates and Boris Nikolic
In 2014, Nikolic " waxed
enthusiastic " about Epstein's supposed penchant for financial advice ahead of a public
offering for a gene-editing company that Nikolic had
a $42 million stake in . Notably, both Nikolic and Epstein were clients of the same group
of bankers at JP Morgan, with Bloomberg later reporting that Epstein regularly helped those
bankers attract wealthy new clients.
In 2016, Nikolic cofounded Biomatics capital, which invests in health-related
companies at "the convergence of genomics and digital data" that are "enabling the development
of superior therapeutics, diagnostics and delivery models." Nikolic founded Biomatics with
Julie Sunderland, formerly the director of the Gates Foundation's Strategic Investment
Fund.
At least three of the companies backed by Biomatics -- Qihan Biotech , eGenesis , and
Editas -- were cofounded by George Church, a Harvard geneticist with deep ties to Epstein
and also closely associated with the Edge Foundation. Biomatics investment in Qihan Biotech is
no longer listed on the
Biomatics website. Church's Qihan Biotech seeks to produce human tissues and organs inside pigs
for transplantation into humans, while eGenesis seeks to genetically modify pig organs for use
in humans. Editas produces CRISPR gene-editing "medicines" and is also backed by the Gates
Foundation as well as Google Ventures.
After Epstein's death in 2019, it was revealed that Nikolic had been named the "successor
executor" of Epstein's estate, further suggesting close ties to Epstein despite Nikolic's
claims to the contrary. After details of Epstein's will were made public, Nikolic did not sign
a form indicating his willingness to be executor and
did not ultimately serve in that role.
Despite the relatively abrupt shift in the mainstream media regarding what is acceptable to
discuss regarding the Jeffrey Epstein–Bill Gates relationship, many of these same media
outlets refuse to acknowledge much of the information contained in this investigative report.
This is particularly true in the case of the Evening Standard article and Bill Gates's
odd relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell's sister Isabel and CommTouch, the company Isabel
previously led.
The likely reason for the continued cover-up of the true extent of Epstein's ties to
Gates has much more to do with Gates's company Microsoft than with Bill Gates himself. While it
is now permissible to report on ties that discredit Gates's personal reputation, the
information that could tie his relationship with Epstein and the Maxwells to Microsoft has been
omitted.
If, as the Evening Standard reported, Epstein did make millions out of his
business ties with Gates prior to 2001 and if Gates's ties to Isabel Maxwell and the Israeli
espionage–linked company CommTouch were to become public knowledge, the result could
easily be a scandal on a par with the PROMIS software affair. Such a disclosure could be very
damaging for Microsoft and its partner the World
Economic Forum , as Microsoft has become a key player in the WEF's Fourth Industrial
Revolution initiatives that range from digital identity and vaccine passports to efforts to
replace human workers with artificial intelligence.
There are clearly powerful actors with a vested interest in keeping the Epstein-Gates
narrative squarely focused on 2011 and later -- not necessarily to protect Gates but more
likely to protect the company itself and other top Microsoft executives who appear to have been
compromised by Epstein and others in the same intelligence-linked network.
This is hardly an isolated incident, as similar efforts have been made to cover up (or
memory hole) the ties of Epstein and the Maxwells to other prominent Silicon Valley empires,
such as those led by
Jeff Bezos and
Elon Musk . One key reason for this is that the Epstein network's blackmail operation
involved not only sexual blackmail but electronic forms of blackmail , something used to
great effect by Robert Maxwell on behalf of Israeli intelligence as part of the PROMIS
operation. Given its nature, electronic forms of blackmail through illegal surveillance or
backdoored software can be used to compromise those in power with something to hide, but who
were uninclined to engage in the exploitation of minors, such as those abused by Epstein.
That Isabel and Christine Maxwell were able to forge close business ties with Microsoft
after having been part of the front company that played a central role in PROMIS-related
espionage and after explicitly managing their subsequent companies with the admitted intention
to "rebuild" their spy father's work and legacy, strongly points to the probability of at least
some Microsoft products having been compromised in some fashion, likely through alliances with
Maxwell-run tech companies. The lack of mainstream media concern over the documented ties of
the Epstein network to other top Microsoft executives of the past, such as Nathan Myhrvold,
Linda Stone, and Steven Sinofsky, makes it clear that, while it may be open season on the
relationship between Bill Gates and Epstein, such is not the case for Microsoft and
Epstein.
The ties of Epstein and the Maxwells to Silicon Valley, not just to Microsoft, are part
of a broader attempt to cover up the strong intelligence component in the origin of Silicon
Valley's most powerful companies. Much effort has been invested in creating a public perception
that these companies are strictly private entities despite their deep, long-standing ties to
the intelligence agencies and militaries of the United
States and
Israel . The true breadth of the Epstein scandal will never be covered by mainstream media
because so many news outlets are owned by these same Silicon Valley oligarchs or depend on
Silicon Valley for online reader engagement.
Perhaps the biggest reason why the military/intelligence origins and links to the
current Silicon Valley oligarchy will never be honestly examined, however, is that those very
entities are now working with breakneck speed to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution,
which would make artificial intelligence, automation, mass electronic surveillance, and
transhumanism central to human society. One of the architects of this "revolution," Klaus
Schwab, said earlier this year that rebuilding and maintaining trust with the public was
critical to that project. However, were the true nature of Silicon Valley, including its
significant ties to serial child rapist and sex trafficker Jeffery Epstein and his network, to
emerge, the public's trust would be significantly eroded, thus threatening what the global
oligarchy views as a project critical to its survival .
I'm always impressed with the vigorous detail and documentation in your articles. What
a menace these philanthropic organizations are to the ordinary and lowly. These billionaire
creeps never stop plotting and figuring out even more ways to stomp on people and push their
creepy agendas, which remain forever hidden.
If we take ZH commentariat opinions as a representative sample of the US conservatives
opinion, Fauci days are now numbered. And not only because he over 80.
Speaking to Laura Ingraham, Paul asserted that "The emails paint a disturbing picture, a
disturbing picture of Dr. Fauci, from the very beginning, worrying that he had been funding
gain-of-function research. He knows it to this day, but hasn't admitted it."
The Senator also urged that Fauci's involvement has not been adequately investigated because
in the eyes of Democrats "he could do no wrong".
Paul pointed out that Fauci was denying that there was even any funding for gain of function
research at the Wuhan lab just a few weeks back, a claim which is totally contradicted by his
own emails in which he discusses it.
"In his e-mail, within the topic line, he says "˜acquire of perform research.' He was
admitting it to his non-public underlings seven to eight months in the past," Paul
emphasised.
The Senator also pointed to
the email from Dr. Peter Daszak , President of the EcoHealth Alliance, a group that
directly funded the Wuhan lab gain of function research, thanking Fauci for not giving credence
to the lab leak theory.
Ingraham asked Paul if Fauci could face felony culpability, to which the Senator replied "At
the very least, there is ethical culpability," and Fauci should be fired from his government
roles.
Earlier Paul had reacted to Amazon pulling Fauci's upcoming book from pre-sale:
In softball interviews with MSNBC and CNN Thursday, Fauci dismissed the notion that his
emails show any conflicts of interest, and claimed that it is in China's "best interest" to be
honest about the pandemic origins, adding that the US should not act "accusatory" toward the
communist state.
Roger Stone was given 9 years for lying to Congress. Fauci should be on the same
hook.
truth or go home 2 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Looks like Fauci is going the way of Gates, but he won't be arrested, because he is
doing the bidding of the overlords.
What could he be arrested for? Let's see: Misappropriation of government funds, lying to
a senator under oath, covering up a criminal operation, operating a conspiracy to deceive
the people of the United States.
Seems like Rand is willing to nail Fauci to the wall, but he is not willing to go after
the big kahuna - the entire hoax - the fake vaxxes, the fake lockdowns, the fake "cases",
the fake death count, the elimination of flu...
Lucky Guesst 10 hours ago
Fauci is owned by big pharma. All the major news channels have at least one big pharma
rat on the board. MSM continues to push the vaccines. They are all in bed together and need
busted up if not taken out.
SummerSausage PREMIUM 15 hours ago
2012- Fauci says weaponized virus research may produce a pandemic but it would be worth
it.
Jan 9, 2017 NIAD memo recommends lifting ban on funding weaponized virus research. Fauci
controls the funds.
Jan 4, 2017 - CIA/FBI/DNC - under Obama's direction are told, essentially, to get
Trump.
Obama is behind release of this virus, creating pandemic panic and lockdown to
facilitate stealing the 2020 election.
OBAMA must be investigated.
play_arrow
CheapBastard 10 hours ago
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak
it."
~ Anonymous
serotonindumptruck 17 hours ago remove link
Call me a pessimist, but I predict no accountability, no malfeasance, no criminal
charges will be filed against Fauci.
We've all witnessed similar criminal behavior being perpetrated by the wealthy elite
which result in no consequences.
Why should this be any different?
(((They))) now know that (((they))) can lie to us with impunity, and get away with
it.
alexcojones 16 hours ago
New Nuremberg Needed Now.
Fauci in the witness chair.
"So, Dr. Fauci, your decisions, your outright lies, led to thousands, perhaps millions
of unnecessary deaths."
Baric & Batwoman published their chimeric coronavirus with ACE2 receptor access in
2015. Funded by Fauci, of course.
Kevin 3 hours ago (Edited)
That document only shows that Gain Of Function research exists - not that the deaths,
falsely attributed to covid are due to the product of that research.
What self-respecting, lab-created, killer virus, supposedly so deadly that it warrants
the shutting down of the entire planet, is incapable of doing any more damage than the flu
does every year?
In the case of the UK, and according to its own official figures, it hasn't even been
able to do that compared to its history of seasonal flu.
So, 2020 was just a blip compared to the past and most of that blip in increased deaths
was due to the insane policies imposed rather than any lab-created Fluzilla. If you
subtract the deaths that occurred due to:
1. Kicking seniors out of hospital and dumping them into nursing homes where they died
because they no longer got the treatment they needed but where they could infect the other,
previously healthy residents.
2. The many tens of thousands of people who had life-saving surgeries and procedures
cancelled.
3. The huge increase in suicides.
..... I doubt there would even be that blip.
If those historically, insignificant 2020 death figures are due to a lab-created,
chimeric coronavirus then that's an epic fail of the scientists and an enormous waste of
money for their education and the G.o.F. research.
However, it has conned enough idiots into believing that there was a Fluzilla in 2020
and got them to beg for jabs that might be how a lab created, chimeric coronavirus with
ACE2 receptor access gets into their bodies and kills them.
The new con that it was a leaked GoF bio-weapon that caused the 2020 'pandemic' is just
a lie upon a lie.
But it will persuade many of the gullible and fence-sitters to get jabbed because they
will have accepted (subconsciously), that the Fluzilla must have existed last year and that
the only way to combat such a bio-weapon is to jab themselves with poison. Ironically, that
will create in their bodies what they fear most.
Befits 9 hours ago remove link
No, you are not thinking clearly. The Covid death numbers were clearly and horrifically
inflated
1) The CDC changed how death certificates were recorded. Co-morbidities ( cancer,
congestive heart failure, COPD for example) that co- morbidity was listed as cause of death
in part one of the death certificate for 2 decades until the CDC changed death
certificates. If that person had for example a flu At that time ( cough, stuffy nose etc)
it might be listed as a contributing factor ( part 2 of death certificate) person died of
co- morbidity but flu was a contributing factor. The CDC reversed these to make sure Covid
was the cause of death- but truth was people died with Covid not from Covid.
2) 95% of Covid listed deaths actually died of co- morbidities- with Covid not from
Covid. The CDC published that only 5% of " Covid " deaths had only Covid- the other 95% had
on average 4 co- morbidities. In other words their cause of death was co- morbidity not
Covid.
3) personal experience. I was a nurse. A close friend's brother had cancer for 7 years-
in and out of remission. He was " diagnosed with Covid via PCR, almost no symptoms but for
a slight cough and runny nose in March 2020. In April his cancer came back his liver shut
down and he was dead by May 2020. He died from liver cancer but his death was recorded as
Covid 19 simply because he had tested positive 60 days before on a Covid PCR test. This is
the fraud the CDC perpetrated.
4) Hospitals received greatly enhanced financial renumeration if a patient was "
diagnosed" with Covid. Compare hospital reimbursement ( Medicare) for a hospitalized Covid
patient v influenza patient - similar symptoms- on or off respirator. Bottom line the
medical system was financially rewarded for diagnosing " Covid" v influenza. Indeed the
hospital did not even have to confirm a " Covid diagnosis with the fraudulent PCR test to
diagnose Covid- just " symptom" based.
5) The PCR test can not diagnose any viral illness- simply by amplification cycles (30
plus) you can " find" Covid from a dead, partial RNA fragment. As Kary Mullis, Nobel prize
inventor of PCR testing said PCR testing is NOT a diagnostic tool. Hospitals and docs,
universities and public health departments, corporations, the CDC, FDA, used false PCR
testing to financially enrich themselves while destroying the lives and livelihoods of
millions inc careers of medical truth- tellers.
Fauci, the CDC, and the FDA knows all of this. Crimes v humanity trials must be
undertaken v every medical person- from Big Pharma, CDC, FDA, Doctor, nurse, hospital
administrator, public health official, corporate leader etc who used this Covid plandemic
for personal benefit or whom through their actions harmed another.
SoDamnMad 17 hours ago
Watch Tucker Carlson's expose on "Why they lied for so long" At 3:29 he goes into Peter
Danzak getting 27 "scientists" to write in the Lancet that the Covid virus didn't come from
the Wuhan Lab but rather from nature (with the HIV spliced into the genome). But he also
tells individuals at UNC NOT to sign the letter so that their gain-of-function research
isn't tied into this. His e-mail goes to Ralph Baric, Antoinette Baric, as well as Andre
Alison and Alexsei Chmura at EcoHealthAlliance who Fauci got the money to for funding GOF
Chinese research.
Fauci is 80. Why was he allowed to stay on so long?
He controls $32 billion in annual grants that all US scientists and researchers depend
on.
There's a whole lot more corruption to explore.
CatInTheHat 8 hours ago remove link
This whole thing feels CONTRIVED
Why does this even matter anymore?
China is NOT the problem here and focusing on CHINA DISTRACTS from a few things
here.
1 FORT DETRIK. A nefarious US BIOWEAPONS lab that Fraudci worked at for 20 years. FD
also works in conjunction with DARPA
2. Whenever it's WAPO or Buzzfeed (FFS!) who breaks a story related to the Rona, I am
convinced that the elite have called them up to DISTRACT the public from something more
important. Maybe that Fort Detrik was the source of the virus transferred to China via the
US MIC/CIA and the Wuhan military games in China in Nov of 2019. 2 weeks later the first
cases showed up at Wuhan.
3. This VACCINE has now killed over 5000 people and since the rollout for children
between 12-16, several hundred have now been hospitalized with MYOCARDITIS OR
PERICARDITIS.. In Israel a study conducted as the vax rolled out in YOUNG MEN, it was
revealed that one in 3,000 was suffering from MYOCARDITIS within 4 days of the jab.
MSM is now reporting on adolescents in several states hospitalized with INFLAMMATION.
... Which they blame on RONA. FUNNY how every one of those states have rolled out the jab
for CHILDREN
WE are being massively LIED too.
Also, Biden's press secretary PSAKI LIED when she said, today, that 63% of the
population has had the jab.
Wrong. Only 41% of the US population has had BOTH jabs. Anti gun Biden is now offering
guns in exchange for a vax in Virginia. And anti marijuana Biden offering MJ in AZ for
those who take the jab. Why the desperation?
For more perspective on the massive deaths piling up due to this jab, in 1976, when 50
people were killed after the Swine flu jab IT WAS PULLED FROM THE MARKET.
Many thousands who have not had the jab are reporting illness after being in close
contact with those who are vaxxed.
Lots and lots to DISTRACT from
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!
ableman28 10 hours ago
True story....one of my VC firms investments was approached by the defense department to
create a wearable lapel style detector for chemical and biological weapons that would work
in very low concentrations giving people time to put on their CBW gear. Our investee said
sure, we'll take a crack at it, but where are we going to get all the biological and
chemical agents to test it with. The DOD response was don't worry, we have everything
you'll need. And they did.
The US bio weapons program was supposedly terminated by Nixon in 1969. And our official
policy is that we don't research or stockpile such things. ********.
Armed Resistance 15 hours ago (Edited) remove link
This virus was engineered at Ft. Detrick. It's the same place that made the
military-grade Anthrax the deep state sent to Tom Daschle and others in government post
9/11 to gin up more fear.
This was a Fauci-coordinated deep state bio weapon they released in Wuhan to kick off
the scamdemic and the "great reset". Releasing it China gave some cover to the deep state
and the people there are under total control of the state. The rest is just filler. Always
about more control.....
BeePee 15 hours ago
The virus was not engineered at Ft. Detrick.
You are a CCP troll.
Sorry you have such a low pay grade job.
Armed Resistance 15 hours ago (Edited)
Anybody who Questions the deep state is a CCP troll? Look in the mirror. You're the one
running cover for these satanists! You rack up downvotes like Jordan did points! ZH'ers can
spot a troll a mile away son.
louie1 PREMIUM 14 hours ago (Edited)
The US way is to put the perpetrators in charge of the inuiry to control the outcome.
Dulles, Zellick, Fauci
Mighty Turban of Gooch 11 hours ago
Our government is corrupt. As long as the Democrats and the MSM have Fauci's back, he
has nothing to worry about no matter what he's done.
He's just a typical lying bureaucrat and lying to the public thru the media outlets, as
we have seen countless times now by countless government 'officials', is not a crime. Lying
under oath however is. But now days we see these guys get away with that too without
consequence.
So don't hold your breath. There is absolutely nothing that can take these guys out.
Even if they throw one of their own under the bus, the best you can ever hope for is a
resignation as criminal charges would never happen.
dustinthewind 16 hours ago (Edited)
"The CDC Foundation operates independently from CDC as a private , nonprofit 501(c)(3)
organization incorporated in the State of Georgia."
"Because CDC is a federal agency , all scientific findings resulting from CDC research
are available to the public and open to the broader scientific community for review."
"The Board of Directors of the CDC Foundation today named Judith A. Monroe, MD, FAAFP,
as the new president and CEO of the CDC Foundation . Monroe joins the CDC Foundation from
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ), where she leads the agency's Office
for State, Tribal, Local and Territorial Support."
Gates is the largest private donor of the CDC and WHO. Gates is part of the World
Economic Forum who controls Fauci which using US taxpayers funds did gain of function
studies first in the US and caught moved to China where it was intentionally leaked to
blame the Chinese. John Kerry is also part of the WEF and is their man in Washington
calling the war mongering narrative against both China and Russia. Gates funded Imperial
College and Ferguson to write the code that was fake and used by many countries to justify
lockdowns. Gates is the largest ag landowner and wants to ban meat. Who just got hacked and
now it is blamed on Russia? Boris is destroying the UK and after a call from Gates gave 500
million pounds to vaccinate third world countries and lockdowns. Both fathers were tied to
Rockefeller Institute. Rand, connect the dots!
Fauci is under attack globally and has shown himself to be unreliable and should be
fired "" PERIOD! All the emails that have come out from an
FOIA request are interesting, and it shows he has information that was credible
concerning a leak from the lab in Wuhan. Let me make this PERFECTLY clear! This was NOT a
DELIBERATE leak by the Chinese government. If China wanted to really hurt the West, the
technology is there where a virus can be used as a delivery system, and as such, it can be
designed to attack specific genetic sequences meaning that it could target just Italian,
Greeks, English, Germans, or whoever.
COVID-19, based upon everything I see from our model and reliable sources, was created
in a lab and was DELIBERATELY unleashed to further this Great Reset. I BELIEVE someone from
this agenda bribed a lab technician to release it in the local community. China did NOT
benefit from this pandemic. The only ones who benefitted were the World Economic Forum
(WEF) consortium, which I know sold stocks and bonds ahead of the crash. They are also in
league with the World Health Organization (WHO), and the head of the WHO is a politician
and not even a doctor. That is like putting me in charge of surgery at a hospital. How can
Tedros Adhanom be in such a position with no background in the subject matter? Tedros appears at the World
Economic Forum and has participated in its agenda. The WHO should be compelled to turn over
ALL emails and communication ASAP. My bet is they pull a Hillary"¦Oh sorry. They
were hacked by Russians who destroyed everything.
The World Economic Forum is at the center of everything. When will someone investigate all
of these connections right down to creating the slogan, Build Back Better? Of course, they
will call this a conspiracy theory so they can avoid having to actually investigate
anything. My point is simple: produce the evidence and prove this is just a conspiracy
theory.
'John Kerry's Think Tank Calls for War With Russia Over Climate Change'
" America will soon have a government that treats the climate crisis as the urgent
national security threat it is."" John Kerry
Recently-appointed Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry has announced his
intention of dealing with the pressing issue of global warming as a national security
concern. "America will soon have a government that treats the climate crisis as the urgent
national security threat it is," the 76-year-old former Secretary of State wrote. "I am
proud to partner with the President-elect, our allies, and the young leaders of the climate
movement to take on this crisis." Kerry is a founding member of the Washington think tank,
the American Security Project (ASP) , whose board is a who's who of retired generals,
admirals and senators.
For the ASP, the primary objectives were:
A huge rebuilding of the United States' military bases,
Countering China in the Pacific,
Preparing for a war with Russia in the newly-melted Arctic.
The ASP recommends "prioritizing the measures that can protect readiness" of the
military to strike at any time, also warning that rising sea levels will hurt the combat
readiness of the Marine Expeditionary Force. Thus, a rebuilding of the U.S.' worldwide
network of military bases is in order.
Fort Detrik a US BIOWEAPONS lab working in tandem with the Wuhan lab. The US is the
leader in BIOWEAPONS research and has 100's of labs across the US and in other
countries.
FRAUDCI having worked at FD for 20 years.
MommickedDingbatter 12 hours ago
Without Nuremberg trials 2.0, this is all meaningless.
Nycmia37 16 hours ago remove link
Follow the science, lol. Just ask yourself who controls the science?? Big drug pharmas,
people is so stupid they believe in everything doctors tell them. The vast majority are on
the field to get rich and enjoy from the big bonuses and trips they get paid in order to
promote a drug. If they speak out they get called a conspiracy person. Nobody cant go
against this mafia because they have the total control, media, politicians, government. We
the people have to self educate about health and finance otherwise we will become zombies
like the majority of people.
SoDamnMad 7 hours ago remove link
Here are the 27 starting with Peter Daszak who signed THE LANCET letter saying ," We
stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not
have a natural origin. "
Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance, New York
Charles Calisher, Colorado State University
Dennis Carroll, Scowcroft Institute of International Affairs, Texas
Fauci is protected at the very highest levels of the oligarchy. So regardless of these
revelations nothing serious will ever happen to him. At worst, he will step down and retire
to his villa in the south of France. Then the controlled MSM will refuse to mention him
again.
Clearing 17 hours ago
Gee, while you're at it, sue Fauci in his individual capacity. He doesn't get immunity
for lying. See below:
In the United States, qualified immunity is a legal principle that grants government
officials performing discretionary (optional) functions immunity from civil suits unless
the plaintiff shows that the official violated "clearly established statutory or
constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known". It is a form of
sovereign immunity less strict than absolute immunity that is intended to protect officials
who "make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions" extending to "all
[officials] but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law " Qualified
immunity applies only to government officials in civil litigation, and does not protect the
government itself from suits arising from officials' actions.
DemandSider 3 hours ago (Edited)
"PCR is separate from that, it's just a process that's used to make a whole lot of
something out of something. That's what it is. It doesn't tell you that you're sick and it
doesn't tell you that the thing you ended up with really was going to hurt you or anything
like that," Mullis said.
-Nobel Prize winning inventor of PCR being used as a "test" to perpetuate the scamdemic.
Mr. "small government" Rand Paul is only making it worse.
Almachius 2 hours ago
Never mind Fauci. White Supremacists are the greatest threat to America.
Obiden said so.
And Obiden is an honourable man.
Fiscal Reality 14 hours ago
Fauci doesn't give a crap what happens. He got his book deal payoff. He's praying to get
fired so he can cash in on his taxpayer funded pension and get a $10 million contract with
CNN.
2types PREMIUM 13 hours ago
Amazon pulled his book from presale so says the article. Probably in his best interest
to keep his mouth shut right now. Anything he says can and will be used against him. On
second thought.... maybe that's why water carrier Bezos suspended sales?
The murder of MilcÃades Contento marked the beginning of a nearly two-decade
extermination campaign
. From 1984-2002, at least 4,153 UP members - including
two presidential candidates, 14 parliamentarians, 15 mayors, nine mayoral candidates, three
members of the House of Representatives and three senators - were
murdered or disappeared , in what a Colombian court deemed was a "political genocide."
According to data presented to the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the purge claimed more than 6,000 victims through
murders, disappearances, torture, forced displacement and other human rights violations. From
May 1984 to December 2002, not a month passed without a murder or disappearance of a UP member.
In the 2002 elections that brought Ãlvaro Uribe to power, the Patriotic Union had been
so thoroughly wiped out that it failed to meet the electoral threshold and the government
removed the party's legal status.
According to a recent investigation by renowned Colombian journalist Alberto Donadio, the
extermination of the Patriotic Union was devised by Betancourt's successor, President Virgilio
Barco Vargas, implementing a plan concocted by of one of the most decorated spies in Israeli
history, Rafael 'Rafi' Eitan.
The revelations underscore the pivotal relationship that has developed between Israel and
Colombia - the United States' respective top allies in the Middle East and Latin America. Both
countries are testing grounds for military weapons and strategies that have long been exported
around the world. Following the success of the U.S. government's Plan Colombia in debilitating
the FARC guerrilla movement, it has been hailed as an exportable counterinsurgency model to be
applied from
Mexico to Afghanistan .
Israel, for its part, maintains the world's largest repression- and weapons-testing
laboratories in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, where it has a captive population of
several millions Palestinians.
Through the presence of Rafi Eitan in Colombia, the burgeoning alliance of junior
partners of the U.S. empire deepened. Despite a series of scandals, the Israel-Colombia
relationship has only grown stronger over the years. Under President Iván Duque,
the two countries have renewed ties and Israeli military personnel have trained their Colombian
counterparts in "counter-terrorism."
Yet the systematic murder of the UP remains one of the most extreme cases of political
violence in Latin America. The scale of killing is especially striking because, unlike many of
the bloodiest U.S.-backed regimes of the 1980s, Colombia never became a dictatorship. The
killing of the UP - known among its perpetrators as El Baile Rojo (The Red Dance) - took place in an ostensible
"democracy."
'All intelligence work is a partnership with crime'
Involved in Israeli espionage since the establishment of the state, Eitan is primarily
remembered for capturing the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Argentina. However, he also
played a central role in several of the Mossad's most unsavory operations. "All intelligence
work is a partnership with crime. Morals are put aside," Eitan once remarked .
In 1965, Eitan
advised Moroccan King Hassan II on how to abduct and murder the leftist politician Mehdi
Ben Barka.
During a 1983 Mossad mission in the United
States, he disguised himself as an assistant prosecutor in the Israeli Ministry of Justice and
met with the inventor of the PROMIS surveillance software. After a visit to the Department of
Justice, Eitan obtained
the software and had an Israeli working in Silicon Valley install a backdoor in the program.
Fellow Mossad agent Robert Maxwell, (father of Ghislaine Maxwell, the notorious child sex
trafficker and partner-in-crime of Jeffrey Epstein), sold the PROMIS technology to dozens of
countries around the world, including Colombia.
According to a declassified CIA damage
assessment , Eitan urged Pollard to obtain material on
"signals intelligence and dirt on Israeli political figures, any information that would
identify Israeli officials who were providing information to the United States, and any
information on U.S. intelligence operations targeted against Israel."
According to a court document
, Pollard refused some of Eitan's requests "because he suspected that Eitan would use such
studies for improper political blackmail."
The discovery of the spying operation landed Pollard in prison. U.S. federal prosecutors
named Eitan as one of four co-conspirators but declined to file charges. With Eitan at the
center of a national embarrassment, he returned to Israel, never to set foot again in the
U.S.
Nevertheless, Eitan's elite status ensured he landed in a comfortable position. In the
1970s, he had served as deputy to Ariel Sharon, then national security advisor to Prime
Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Sharon, then a general in the army, arranged for Eitan to be appointed
as president of Israel Chemicals, the largest state-owned company in the country. This new
position left Eitan with ample free time to leverage his experience in black ops into a
position as a clandestine national security adviser to Colombia's president, Virgilio Barco
Vargas. With the Patriotic Union beginning to coalesce into a formidable political party, Barco
looked for any way to stop them. And Eitan's lifetime of experience waging war against the
Palestinian peasant population made him the perfect man for the job.
Eitan goes to Colombia
In 1985, Colombian President Belisario Betancourt and the FARC rebels negotiated a peace
accord to end nearly three decades of armed conflict. The agreement formalized the creation of
the Patriotic Union and saw ex-guerrillas join with communists, trade unionists, communal
action boards and leftwing intellectuals to form a party that would integrate the FARC into the
electoral political system . As negotiations were underway, Patriotic Union members were being
killed. In May 1986, Liberal Party leader Virgilio Barco won the presidency. Shortly after he
took office, the pace of assassinations of UP members skyrocketed. A whopping 400 members were
assassinated in the first 14 months of his term.
According to an investigation
by Donadio, Barco secretly brought the veteran Mossad agent Rafi Eitan to Colombia on August 7,
1986, seeking advice on how to defeat the FARC. After an initial clandestine meeting in
Colombia's presidential palace, Eitan spent months touring the country with Colombian advisors,
secretly funded by the Colombian energy giant Ecopetrol.
During the second meeting, President Barco explained Eitan's recommendation to Secretary
General Germán Montoya and a figure from the high military command present. Eitan
even offered to preside over the killings himself in exchange for another honorarium, but the
military commander rejected his offer, insisting that an all-Colombian force carry it out.
When Donadio
contacted Villamizar and asked him about the contract with KPI, though not mentioning the
Mossad spy's name, Villamizar answered him with a question. "Rafi Eitan?"
While Eitan sought to keep his activities in Colombia discreet, a profile in the Israeli magazine Makor
Rishon revealed that he played a central role in the March 1989 purchase of 20 Israeli Kfir
fighter jets. Eitan
"organized a visit by top army brass from Colombia - a visit which was followed by the
Colombians ordering many things from the [Israeli] air force, and it brought Israel much
benefit - but he himself was not permitted to participate in the meeting."
Following the purchase, Colombia sent several pilots to Israel for
training. The jets were
flown in numerous operations against the FARC over three subsequent decades.
A retired military officer, Klein started a mercenary firm called Hod Hahanit (Spearhead) in
1984, drawing from the pools of former Israeli police and special operations units.
According to the bookAll Is Clouded by Desire: Global Banking, Money Laundering, and International Organized
Crime , the mercenary outfit struck its first deal amid the civil war in Lebanon, supplying
the notoriously brutal Christian Phalangist militias - the same force that massacred between
800 and 3,500 Palestinian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila camps under direct Israeli military
supervision in September 1982.
In 1987, Klein landed in Colombia to meet with Israeli Lieutenant Colonel Yithzakh Shoshani
and Arik Afek, both of whom had established themselves years before with lucrative deals
selling military equipment in Colombia. Shoshani subsequently
became the main conduit between Klein and his Colombian customers.
In 1990, Afek's decomposing body was
found with multiple gunshot wounds in the trunk of a car at Miami International Airport
after a pedestrian noticed the odor. He was reportedly being investigated by the CIA and was
wanted by Colombian authorities.
Klein told me in a telephone interview that he was working through the Israeli Ministry of
Defense and the state-owned weapons manufacturer, Israel Military Industries (IMI), which
had a contract with a Colombian data surveillance company obtained through Colombia's
Ministry of Defense. He said he was originally hired to provide security for the banana-growing
operations in the region of Uraba, where the American fruit company Chiquita had paid
millions of dollars to Colombian death squads.
Shoshani, he explained, worked for a company called AMKAN, which is a subsidiary of IMI. The
Colombian Federation of Cattlemen, long known for its ties to
paramilitaires, contacted Shoshani to have Eitan train a force to fight guerrillas.
With Shoshani guiding him, Klein returned to Israel in 1988 and met with top paramilitary
and military figures as well as wealthy businessmen. All of this, Klein assured me, was done
with the full knowledge of the Israeli government. "You can't do anything without permission
from the Ministry of Defense," he said.
Klein's statement upends the claim of then-Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who
told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that the Israeli Defense Ministry had denied Klein's
company a license and warned him to leave the country.
Death squad leader: 'I learned an infinity of themes in Israel'
Klein held three training sessions, each for around 30 people. Assisting him were three
trainers, all of whom were colonels in the Israeli army: Tzadaka Abraham, Teddy Melnik and
Amatzia Shuali.
Klein trained brothers Carlos and Fidel Castaño, the squad leaders who would
go on to form the notoriously violent United Self-Defense Forces, known in Spanish by its
acronym, AUC. Under the patronage of wealthy landowners, drug lords, ranchers, politicians and
the Colombian military, the AUC committed bloodcurdling massacres all over the country, even
using
chainsaws to murder and dismember peasants, all aimed at terrorizing communities into
fleeing from their land. The United Nations estimated in 2016 that the
AUC was responsible for 80% of the deaths in the conflict.
"I received instruction in urban strategies, how to protect oneself, how to kill someone or
what to do when someone is trying to kill you. ...We learned how to stop an armored car and
use fragmentation grenades to enter a target. We practiced with multiple grenade launchers,
and learned how to make accurate shots with RPG-7s, or shoot a cannon shell through a
window."
Castaño also "received lectures on how the world arms business operates,
and how to buy arms."
In addition to the military training he received, Castaño credits
his time in Israel with revolutionizing his entire worldview. During that period, the
soon-to-be mass-murderer became an ardent admirer of Zionism and became convinced it was
possible to stamp out the insurgency at home in Colombia:
"I admire the Jews for their bravery in confronting anti-Semitism, their strategy for
survival in the diaspora, the surety of their Zionism, their mysticism, their religion, and
above all for their nationalism... I learned an infinity of themes in Israel and [to] that
country I owe a part of my culture, my achievements both human and military, and while I
repeat myself, I did not learn only about military training in Israel.
"It was there that I became convinced that it was possible to defeat the guerrillas in
Colombia. I began to see how a people could defend itself from the whole world. I understood
how to get someone involved who had something to lose in a war, by making such a person the
enemy of my enemies. In fact, the idea of "autodefensa" [self-defense] weapons I copied from
the Israelis; every citizen of that country is a potential soldier."
Klein also trained
Jaime Eduardo Rueda Rocha, who in 1989 assassinated Liberal Party presidential candidate Luis
Carlos Galán, the overwhelming favorite to win the upcoming election. Not only
had Klein trained the killer, but the weapon Rueda used was part of a shipment Klein
orchestrated of 500 Israeli-manufactured machine guns from Miami to the Medellin drug cartel,
according to a 1989 Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
report . (In 2016, Miguel Alfredo Maza Márquez, head of Colombia's then
Administrative Department of Security (DAS), was convicted of participation in the plot to
murder Galán and sentenced to 30 years in prison. He has since testified
that top-ranking members of the military plotted Galan's assassiation.)
As the revelations that a military reserve officer had been training death squads created
an international scandal, the Israeli government filed charges, convicting Klein of
illegally exporting weapons and military expertise.
In 2001, the Colombian government tried Klein in absentia, sentencing him to eleven years in
prison. In 2007, Klein was arrested in Moscow on a warrant issued by Interpol, and spent three
years in prison. Colombia sought his extradition, but in November 2010 the European Court of
Human Rights ruled that Colombia could not guarantee his physical safety. The Russian
government complied with the ECHR's ruling and released Klein, allowing him to return to
Israel. Colombia has since requested his extradition, but the Israeli government has
refused.
Klein's company, Hod Hahanit, remains active to this day.
A joint effort?
While Donadio's groundbreaking investigation has created a controversy in Colombia, it does
not answer whether Rafi Eitan and Yair Klein's simultaneous and respective operations advising
the government and death squads were a joint effort or merely coincidental. For his part, the
lawyer Ernesto Villamizar
told Donadio that Eitan and Klein had nothing to do with each other. Klein corroborated his
claim, saying that he was unaware of any of Eitan's activities in Colombia.
However, an AP article references an Israeli media report that Rafi Eitan (spelled Eytan in
the article) was in Colombia at the same time as Klein and left days before the gunman armed
and trained by Klein murdered presidential candidate Luis Carlos Galán:
It [the media report] said Rafael Eytan, an Israeli counterterrorism expert, denied
suggestions that he was a consultant to Israeli companies operating in Colombia and said he
had cut all business ties to that country.
According to the report, Eytan confirmed he flew to Colombia a week ago for private
reasons.
Beyond the vague suggestion of that article, there is no evidence of a connection
between Eitan and Klein. In some ways, it is even more remarkable that two Israelis advising
Colombian government in mass-murder of its political opponents were operating independent from
and unbeknownst to each other.
Israel-Colombia relations cool
After the fallout of Israelis training Colombian paramilitaries, the relationship between
the two top U.S. allies cooled, according to U.S. diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks. But
as Plan Colombia was implemented, Israel and Colombia once again ramped up collaboration.
In December 2006, Colombia's Ministry of Defense hired another private Israeli security
company known as Global CST to "help the GOC [Government of Colombia] conduct a strategic
assessment of the internal conflict." Global CST is headed by Israel
Ziv , a career officer who, like Yair Klein, leveraged his military experience into a
profitable career advising and training despots around the world.
"General Ziv was a personal acquaintance of then-Minister of Defense Juan Manuel Santos,"
the cable notes. William Brownfield, then U.S. ambassador to Colombia commented that
"Ziv worked his way into the confidence of former Defense Minister Santos by promising a
cheaper version of USG [United States government] assistance without our strings attached."
Under Santos, Colombia sought to purchase Israel's Hermes-450, a drone under
development in the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and in wars against neighboring
Lebanon.
However, according to the diplomatic cable, Tel Aviv-Bogota relations again soured after it
emerged that Global CST interpreter and Argentine-born Israeli national Shai Killman "had made
copies of classified Colombian Defense Ministry documents in an unsuccessful attempt to sell
them to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia." These documents contained "high value
target (HVT) database information" - a reference to the FARC leadership the CIA assisted
the Colombian government in assassinating. The resulting fallout, combined with pressure from the U.S., compelled
Colombia to cancel the contract to buy Israeli drones.
Despite the strains in the decades-old relationship, the two countries have maintained
strong ties. In 2016, then-Israeli Ambassador to Colombia Marco Sermoneta boasted
that Colombia is the top recipient of Israeli aid.
The following year, as the extermination of social leaders and ex-combatants began, Israeli
military advisors visited Colombian military bases to give training courses in
"security."
President Ivan Duque, the handpicked successor of far-right former President Ãlvaro
Uribe, has worked assiduously to shore up Colombia's ties with Israel. In March 2020, he
appeared at the
American Israel Political Action Conference, boasting about his ties with Israel. Months later,
Duque and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the launch of the
Israel-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.
Meanwhile, Duque has undermined and attacked the landmark 2016 peace accord at every turn,
while turning a blind eye to the mass-murder of demobilized FARC guerrillas, trade unionists,
human rights defenders, environmental activists and social leaders - a scenario eerily
reminiscent of the political genocide of the Patriotic Union. Rather than a veteran spy
advising the Colombian government, Israel now has an official presence. In January 2020,
Israeli military Brigadier General Dan Glodfus visited
a Colombian military base to reinforce ties between the two countries. Amid a spate of
massacres in September 2020, Israel
dispatched 10 instructors to train Colombian Special Forces in "counter-terrorism."
https://www.sott.net/embed/kUw7_O_qZzIdzTrYkN_8d5AFCeF
With the recent
assassination of Francisco Giacometto Gómez, an elder activist and founding
member of the Patriotic Union, it seems that the campaign against the UP and the current
slaughter are indistinguishable.
About the Author: Dan Cohen is the Washington DC correspondent for Behind The Headlines. He has produced
widely distributed video reports and print dispatches from across Israel-Palestine. He tweets
at @ DanCohen3000 .
"HUNTSVILLE: The Army's experimental Multi-Domain Task Force is a "game changer" that's
turned the tide in "at least 10 wargames," the commander of US Army Pacific says. "Plans are
already changing at the combatant command level because of this." The key: the unit cracked the
Anti-Access, Area Denial (A2/AD) conundrum, Russia and China's dense layered defenses of
long-range missiles, sensors, and networks to coordinate them. "Before, we couldn't penetrate
A2/AD. With it, we could," Gen. Robert Brown said of the task force's performance in "at least
10 exercises and wargames. With the Multi-Domain Task Force," he told me after his remarks to
the AUSA Global conference here, "we could impact their long-range systems and have a much
greater success against an adversary. If I go into any more, it'd be classified."
"In the future, Brown said here last week, "all formations will have to become multi-domain
or they'll be irrelevant, [but] it's going to be years before it can happen." The Army's goal
is modernize enough forces to wage multi-domain warfare against either China or Russia -- but
not both at once -- by 2028." (Breaking Defense)
Comment: I was intrigued when, in April, SecDef Austin announced he was sending two units
with about 500 personnel to Germany. The units are a multi-domain task force and a theater
fires command. Sounded like a mere symbolic move. But there's nothing symbolic about these
particular units. They are an early implementation of the Pentagon's new multi-domain
operations doctrine which focuses on theater level operations. That doesn't mean mass divisions
and corps. It means theater level employment of global assets across the entire spectrum of
conflict. It's still billed as a concept rather than a full blown doctrine, but it's getting
there and is already being implemented in the Pacific theater.
In an Army Chief of Staff paper, "Army Multi-Domain Transformation Ready to Win in
Competition and Conflict" dated 16 March 2021, the multi-domain task force (MDTF) is described
as "theater-level maneuver elements designed to synchronize precision effects and precision
fires in all domains against adversary anti-access/ area denial (A2/AD) networks in all
domains, enabling joint forces to execute their operational plan (OPLAN) directed roles." The
MDTF's purpose is during competition, to "gain and maintain contact with our adversaries to
support the rapid transition to crisis or conflict"; during a crisis, to "deter adversaries and
shape the environment by providing flexible response options to the combatant commander"; and
if conflict arises, to "neutralize adversary A2/AD networks to enable joint freedom of
action."
Russia has been modernizing their doctrine, force structure and equipment in earnest for at
least the last decade. Surely China has been moving in the same direction. It's about time we
do the same. It will be several years, at least, before this doctrine can be fully implemented
with the necessary force structure and equipment. In many ways, our military has atrophied
terribly due to two decades of brigade level, at best, counterinsurgency operations. However,
we should, and apparently are, implementing this new doctrine now with the minimal force
structure changes of the MDTF and the inclusion of EW within cyber. Our current equipment can
be employed more effectively especially if land, sea, air and space systems are better
integrated. It's an evolution, not a revolution.
A2/AD is just modern defense IMO – is it really necessary to have a doctrine that
demands superiority over Russia or China at – lets say – 200 km from their border?
And at which point do we just call this outright agressive posturing ? DougDiggler
says: June
3, 2021 at 1:42 pm
Is this more Pentagon wishful thinking, like their exercise that involved firing a still
nonexistent hypersonic from a B-52? I get the feeling that NATO's ID Pol army would not fare
well in attacking the military professionals of Russia, not even in these proposed multi-front
"crumbling" attacks. However, it is nice that they're finally getting around to studying
Operation Bagration. However I think the operational heirs to that offensive have probably
improved on it and have also spent much time considering being on the receiving end of such a
nightmare. They play chess while we play Nintendo. Christian J. Chuba says:
June
1, 2021 at 5:32 pm
Wow. We've been pushing our navy up Russia and China's nose today and doing the same with
NATO war games on land and air patrols. I hope this doesn't give us a false sense of confidence
to be outright reckless.
For some reason we have become obsessed with depriving the Russians control of their arctic
coastline. I'm not saying we are control freaks (actually we are control freaks) but I can
easily see a situation developing up their if we think we have some technology edge. That is
one place Russia wants to be secure and for some reason, if there is water, we must have our
navy just outside that 12 nautical mile limit.
What kills me is that we do this in the name of 'freedom of navigation' but that route is
going to be mostly transporting Chinese stuff to Europe and only because the Russians are
paying for the necessary ice breakers and rescue stations. In other words, we are waving our
wand over waters that are only navigable because of Russian investment.
Can the MIC make anything other than cost over-runs these days? d74 says:
June
1, 2021 at 11:38 pm
The answer is too easy: no.
Not only are the costs insane, but the functionality is insufficient. Simply put, it doesn't
work or seem unfit for fighting. Stacking technologies is a dream that does not stand up to
warfare realities. 'Keep it simple' seems out of reach.
I followed the adoption of the 120mm mortar by USMC. They started with a good weapon, with
confirmed potential. The end point was tactical paralysis.
This is (was) a very small issue, and an old one. It is significant. blue peacock
says: June
2, 2021 at 9:42 am
Washington would be easy to spot in a game of chess. It's the player with no plan beyond
an aggressive opening. That is no strategy at all. The failure to think several moves ahead
matters.
While I don't agree with everything many pundits including Chas Freeman say about our
behavior with respect to China, I do see the point that Chas makes in the quote above. Iraq and
Afghanistan are great examples. Our political and governmental leadership have no sense of
"smarts", all they've known for decades is bully behavior under both Democrats and Republicans,
especially towards those they perceive as weak, like our "invasion" of Grenada. How would we
actually perform against a serious military rival like China or Russia? What would be the
reporting at hysterical CNN, MSNBC and Fox when a few carrier strike elements are sunk? Would
they be shrieking to unleash nuclear-tipped ICBMs? How would a "mission accomplished" George
Bush/Dick Cheney type with all their hubristic swagger react? The continental US has not been
attacked like ever. What happens when Seattle, Los Angeles and even DC are under actual missile
fire? How would contemporary woke Americans who have no tolerance for "sacrifice" react?
Do we have the force that reflects good value for money considering that we spend more than
Russia & China combined on the military? What type of military do we actually have relative
to the tens of trillions of dollars spent over the last decade on the credit card? What are the
metrics to evaluate actual effectiveness of a military beyond graphics and tables on Powerpoint
slides?
What would an actual strategic plan to crush the CCP look like? IMO, it begins with insuring
no dependence on a Chinese supply chain. Would the Party of Davos even allow that?
"HUNTSVILLE: The Army's experimental Multi-Domain Task Force is a "game changer" that's
turned the tide in "at least 10 wargames," the commander of US Army Pacific says. "Plans are
already changing at the combatant command level because of this." The key: the unit cracked the
Anti-Access, Area Denial (A2/AD) conundrum, Russia and China's dense layered defenses of
long-range missiles, sensors, and networks to coordinate them. "Before, we couldn't penetrate
A2/AD. With it, we could," Gen. Robert Brown said of the task force's performance in "at least
10 exercises and wargames. With the Multi-Domain Task Force," he told me after his remarks to
the AUSA Global conference here, "we could impact their long-range systems and have a much
greater success against an adversary. If I go into any more, it'd be classified."
"In the future, Brown said here last week, "all formations will have to become multi-domain
or they'll be irrelevant, [but] it's going to be years before it can happen." The Army's goal
is modernize enough forces to wage multi-domain warfare against either China or Russia -- but
not both at once -- by 2028." (Breaking Defense)
Comment: I was intrigued when, in April, SecDef Austin announced he was sending two units
with about 500 personnel to Germany. The units are a multi-domain task force and a theater
fires command. Sounded like a mere symbolic move. But there's nothing symbolic about these
particular units. They are an early implementation of the Pentagon's new multi-domain
operations doctrine which focuses on theater level operations. That doesn't mean mass divisions
and corps. It means theater level employment of global assets across the entire spectrum of
conflict. It's still billed as a concept rather than a full blown doctrine, but it's getting
there and is already being implemented in the Pacific theater.
In an Army Chief of Staff paper, "Army Multi-Domain Transformation Ready to Win in
Competition and Conflict" dated 16 March 2021, the multi-domain task force (MDTF) is described
as "theater-level maneuver elements designed to synchronize precision effects and precision
fires in all domains against adversary anti-access/ area denial (A2/AD) networks in all
domains, enabling joint forces to execute their operational plan (OPLAN) directed roles." The
MDTF's purpose is during competition, to "gain and maintain contact with our adversaries to
support the rapid transition to crisis or conflict"; during a crisis, to "deter adversaries and
shape the environment by providing flexible response options to the combatant commander"; and
if conflict arises, to "neutralize adversary A2/AD networks to enable joint freedom of
action."
Russia has been modernizing their doctrine, force structure and equipment in earnest for at
least the last decade. Surely China has been moving in the same direction. It's about time we
do the same. It will be several years, at least, before this doctrine can be fully implemented
with the necessary force structure and equipment. In many ways, our military has atrophied
terribly due to two decades of brigade level, at best, counterinsurgency operations. However,
we should, and apparently are, implementing this new doctrine now with the minimal force
structure changes of the MDTF and the inclusion of EW within cyber. Our current equipment can
be employed more effectively especially if land, sea, air and space systems are better
integrated. It's an evolution, not a revolution.
A2/AD is just modern defense IMO – is it really necessary to have a doctrine that
demands superiority over Russia or China at – lets say – 200 km from their border?
And at which point do we just call this outright agressive posturing ? DougDiggler
says: June
3, 2021 at 1:42 pm
Is this more Pentagon wishful thinking, like their exercise that involved firing a still
nonexistent hypersonic from a B-52? I get the feeling that NATO's ID Pol army would not fare
well in attacking the military professionals of Russia, not even in these proposed multi-front
"crumbling" attacks. However, it is nice that they're finally getting around to studying
Operation Bagration. However I think the operational heirs to that offensive have probably
improved on it and have also spent much time considering being on the receiving end of such a
nightmare. They play chess while we play Nintendo. Christian J. Chuba says:
June
1, 2021 at 5:32 pm
Wow. We've been pushing our navy up Russia and China's nose today and doing the same with
NATO war games on land and air patrols. I hope this doesn't give us a false sense of confidence
to be outright reckless.
For some reason we have become obsessed with depriving the Russians control of their arctic
coastline. I'm not saying we are control freaks (actually we are control freaks) but I can
easily see a situation developing up their if we think we have some technology edge. That is
one place Russia wants to be secure and for some reason, if there is water, we must have our
navy just outside that 12 nautical mile limit.
What kills me is that we do this in the name of 'freedom of navigation' but that route is
going to be mostly transporting Chinese stuff to Europe and only because the Russians are
paying for the necessary ice breakers and rescue stations. In other words, we are waving our
wand over waters that are only navigable because of Russian investment.
Anyway, so they were able to develop a simulation? That's impressive.
Abridged version. See the original for full version.
Notable quotes:
"... In October 2014, the Obama administration imposed a moratorium on new funding for gain-of-function research projects that could make influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses more virulent or transmissible. But a footnote to the statement announcing the moratorium carved out an exception for cases deemed "urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security." ..."
"... the review process shrouded in secrecy. "The names of reviewers are not released, and the details of the experiments to be considered are largely secret," said the Harvard epidemiologist Dr. Marc Lipsitch, whose advocacy against gain-of-function research helped prompt the moratorium. ..."
"... In May 2014, five months before the moratorium on gain-of-function research was announced, EcoHealth secured a NIAID grant of roughly $3.7 million, which it allocated in part to various entities engaged in collecting bat samples, building models, and performing gain-of-function experiments to see which animal viruses were able to jump to humans. The grant was not halted under the moratorium or the P3CO framework. ..."
"... Shi Zhengli herself listed U.S. government grant support of more than $1.2 million on her curriculum vitae: $665,000 from the NIH between 2014 and 2019; and $559,500 over the same period from USAID. At least some of those funds were routed through EcoHealth Alliance. ..."
"... EcoHealth Alliance's practice of divvying up large government grants into smaller sub-grants for individual labs and institutions gave it enormous sway within the field of virology. The sums at stake allow it to "purchase a lot of omertà" from the labs it supports, said Richard Ebright of Rutgers. ..."
"... now the spin doctors come around pointing the finger at china. Sure, china may have done the experimentation and research, but where did the funding, research resources, training, and direction come from? ..."
"... The US banned bioweapon development (in the US) and moved it to China with Fraudci in charge so that they could do human experiments and make lots of money on GMO "vaccines" And now the US is trying to spin the story and put the blame on China ..."
As the NSC tracked these disparate clues, U.S. government virologists advising them flagged
one study first submitted in April 2020. Eleven of its 23 coauthors worked for the Academy of
Military Medical Sciences, the Chinese army's medical research institute. Using the
gene-editing technology known as CRISPR, the researchers had engineered mice with humanized
lungs, then studied their susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2. As the NSC officials worked backward
from the date of publication to establish a timeline for the study, it became clear that the
mice had been engineered sometime in the summer of 2019, before the pandemic even started. The
NSC officials were left wondering: Had the Chinese military been running viruses through
humanized mouse models, to see which might be infectious to humans?
In October 2014, the Obama administration imposed a moratorium on new funding for
gain-of-function research projects that could make influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses more
virulent or transmissible. But a footnote to the statement announcing the moratorium carved out
an exception for cases deemed "urgently necessary to protect the public health or national
security."
In the first year of the Trump administration, the moratorium was lifted and replaced with a
review system called the HHS P3CO Framework (for Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and
Oversight). It put the onus for ensuring the safety of any such research on the federal
department or agency funding it. This left the review process shrouded in secrecy. "The names
of reviewers are not released, and the details of the experiments to be considered are largely
secret," said the Harvard epidemiologist Dr. Marc Lipsitch, whose advocacy against
gain-of-function research helped prompt the moratorium. (An NIH spokesperson told Vanity
Fair that "information about individual unfunded applications is not public to preserve
confidentiality and protect sensitive information, preliminary data, and intellectual
property.")
Inside the NIH, which funded such research, the P3CO framework was largely met with shrugs
and eye rolls, said a longtime agency official: "If you ban gain-of-function research, you ban
all of virology." He added, "Ever since the moratorium, everyone's gone wink-wink and just done
gain-of-function research anyway."
British-born Peter Daszak, 55, is the president of EcoHealth Alliance, a New York
City–based nonprofit with the laudable goal of preventing the outbreak of emerging
diseases by safeguarding ecosystems. In May 2014, five months before the moratorium on
gain-of-function research was announced, EcoHealth secured a NIAID grant of roughly $3.7
million, which it allocated in part to various entities engaged in collecting bat samples,
building models, and performing gain-of-function experiments to see which animal viruses were
able to jump to humans. The grant was not halted under the moratorium or the P3CO
framework.
By 2018, EcoHealth Alliance was pulling in up to $15 million a year in grant money from an
array of federal agencies, including the Defense Department, the Department of Homeland
Security, and the U.S. Agency for International Development, according to 990 tax exemption
forms it filed with the New York State Attorney General's Charities Bureau. Shi Zhengli herself
listed U.S. government grant support of more than $1.2 million on her curriculum vitae:
$665,000 from the NIH between 2014 and 2019; and $559,500 over the same period from USAID. At
least some of those funds were routed through EcoHealth Alliance.
EcoHealth Alliance's practice of divvying up large government grants into smaller sub-grants
for individual labs and institutions gave it enormous sway within the field of virology. The
sums at stake allow it to "purchase a lot of omertà" from the labs it supports, said
Richard Ebright of Rutgers. (In response to detailed questions, an EcoHealth Alliance
spokesperson said on behalf of the organization and Daszak, "We have no comment.")
In July, the NIH attempted to backtrack. It reinstated the grant but suspended its research
activities until EcoHealth Alliance fulfilled seven conditions, some of which went beyond the
nonprofit's purview and seemed to stray into tinfoil-hat territory. They included: providing
information on the "apparent disappearance" of a Wuhan Institute of Virology researcher, who
was rumored on social media to be patient zero, and explaining diminished cell phone traffic
and roadblocks around the WIV in October 2019.
Ebright likened Daszak's model of research -- bringing samples from a remote area to an
urban one, then sequencing and growing viruses and attempting to genetically modify them to
make them more virulent -- to "looking for a gas leak with a lighted match." Moreover, Ebright
believed that Daszak's research had failed in its stated purpose of predicting and preventing
pandemics through its global collaborations.
It soon emerged, based on emails obtained by a Freedom of Information group called U.S.
Right to Know, that Daszak had not only signed but organized the influential Lancet
statement, with the intention of concealing his role and creating the impression of scientific
unanimity.
Under the subject line, "No need for you to sign the "Statement" Ralph!!," he wrote to two
scientists, including UNC's Dr. Ralph Baric, who had collaborated with Shi Zhengli on the
gain-of-function study that created a coronavirus capable of infecting human cells: "you, me
and him should not sign this statement, so it has some distance from us and therefore doesn't
work in a counterproductive way." Daszak added, "We'll then put it out in a way that doesn't
link it back to our collaboration so we maximize an independent voice."
Baric agreed, writing back, "Otherwise it looks self-serving and we lose impact."
Baric did not sign the statement. In the end, Daszak did. At least six other signers had
either worked at, or had been funded by, EcoHealth Alliance. The statement ended with a
declaration of objectivity: "We declare no competing interests."
Daszak mobilized so quickly for a reason, said Jamie Metzl: "If zoonosis was the origin,
it was a validation of his life work . But if the pandemic started as part of a lab leak, it
had the potential to do to virology what Three Mile Island and Chernobyl did to nuclear
science." It could mire the field indefinitely in moratoriums and funding restrictions.
In a CNN interview on March 26, Dr. Redfield, the former CDC director under Trump, made a
candid admission: "I am of the point of view that I still think the most likely etiology of
this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory, you know, escaped." Redfield added that he
believed the release was an accident, not an intentional act. In his view, nothing that
happened since his first calls with Dr. Gao changed a simple fact: The WIV needed to be ruled
out as a source, and it hadn't been.
After the interview aired, death threats flooded his inbox. The vitriol came not just from
strangers who thought he was being racially insensitive but also from prominent scientists,
some of whom used to be his friends. One said he should just "wither and die."
Peter Daszak was getting death threats too, some from QAnon conspirators.
Inside the U.S. government, meanwhile, the lab-leak hypothesis had survived the transition
from Trump to Biden. On April 15, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines told the House
Intelligence Committee that two "plausible theories" were being weighed: a lab accident or
natural emergence.
Even so, lab-leak talk was mostly confined to right-wing news outlets through April,
gleefully flogged by Tucker Carlson and studiously avoided by most of the mainstream media. In
Congress, the Energy and Commerce Committee's Republican minority had launched its own inquiry,
but there was little buy-in from Democrats and the NIH didn't provide responses to its lengthy
list of demands for information.
The ground began to shift on May 2, when Nicholas Wade, a former New York Times
science writer known in part for writing a controversial book about how genes shape the social
behavior of different races, published a lengthy
essay on Medium. In it, he analyzed the scientific clues both for and against a lab leak,
and excoriated the media for its failure to report on the dueling hypotheses. Wade devoted a
full section to the "furin cleavage site," a distinctive segment of SARS-CoV-2's genetic code
that makes the virus more infectious by allowing it to efficiently enter human cells.
Within the scientific community, one thing leapt off the page. Wade quoted one of the
world's most famous microbiologists, Dr. David Baltimore, saying that he believed the furin
cleavage site "was the smoking gun for the origin of the virus." Baltimore, a Nobel Laureate
and pioneer in molecular biology, was about as far from Steve Bannon and the conspiracy
theorists as it was possible to get. His judgment, that the furin cleavage site raised the
prospect of gene manipulation, had to be taken seriously.
Weedlord Bonerhitler, 1 hour ago
Gain of function research is weaponization. We are under attack by a biological weapon
designed in a laboratory to kill people. We are, in effect, at war.
KickIce, 1 hour ago, (Edited)
With who, Washington DC? FWIW, that would be my pick.
ted41776, 1 hour ago
Yes, except "we" moved this "research" to china many years ago to speed up the weaponization
of bioweapons. the original researchers came to the us from nazi Germany after WW2 (Project
Paperclip). it wasn't moving fast enough here because of that whole experimenting on humans
thing was looked down upon here in the US (at least in the past). so "we" hired china what "we"
couldn't do domestically on "our" own.
And now the spin doctors come around pointing the finger
at china. Sure, china may have done the experimentation and research, but where did the
funding, research resources, training, and direction come from?
gregga777, 1 hour ago
Gain of function research is weaponization
It's also insane. Hey, look at what we did! We made smallpox* in our gene sequencing
laboratory. Oops! It's release into the 'wild' was an unfortunate accident.
Anyone engaged in the research & development of making viruses or bacteria more lethal
or the resurrection of presumably extinct pathogens (e.g., smallpox*) are International War
Criminals. They should be arrested and placed on trial in a suitable jurisdiction. At the very
least they should be barred forever from working in any kind of even remotely related
laboratory research.
*The complete gene sequence of smallpox is apparently freely available over the
Internet.
is an example of GOF engineering that bat lady Shi Zhengli participated in, engineering
chimeras of SARS and SARS like coronaviruses and splicing with HIV to make it more
transmissible to humans.
Pax Romana, 1 hour ago
10 page article could have been condensed into one sentence: Fort Detrick -> Canadian Lab
-> Wuhan -> Spooks -> Election Fraud -> Vax -> State Control
ted41776, 1 hour ago
The US banned bioweapon development (in the US) and moved it to China with Fraudci in charge
so that they could do human experiments and make lots of money on GMO "vaccines" And now the US is trying to spin the story and put the blame on China
no, this covaids was MADE IN THE USA even if it was produced and manufactured in China under
US funding, direction, and supervision
brian91145, 1 hour ago
100% right that is the truth that everyone will know very soon
ted41776, 1 hour ago, (Edited)
not sure if it will make any difference
911: US training and funding bin laden for over a decade? WMDs, they got WMDs! pools of
molten metal caused by... kerosene (jet fuel)? building 7...
we gotta get that f||cker bin laden though
bammy arming cartels (fast and furious) and guns they got from him used to kill americans
(including cops and border patrol)? crickets
there is no election fraud, after seeing them spend 4 years trying to overthrow a president
who allegedly used fraud and russian collusion to get elected?
and on and on and on, the neverending 24/7 stream of lies and distortion
unfortunately, truth has become pretty worthless in this sick reality most people live
in
konputa, 1 hour ago
Designed in the US, manufactured in China. We've known this since early 2020.
CheapBastard, 1 hour ago
(((Vanity Fair))) has the same editorial weight that Teen Vogue has.
The article is meant to obfuscate the truth, not clarify it.
CheapBastard, 51 minutes ago, (Edited)
The author carefully avoids inconvenient but important truths including::
Fauci funded the Wuhan bioweapons lab thru NIH (proven by emails) Fauci lied repeatedly from
day#1 about the characteristics and origin of the deadly virus (also proven by emails) the
WHO lied repeatedly about the origin the involvement of Gates in this entire fiasco
S.Parker, · 1 hour ago
Fort Detrick, USA
Handful of Dust, · 4 minutes ago
· Bumbler-in-Chief Biden in the White House Backs 'Incredible' Dr. Anthony Fauci;
Refuses Comment on Explosive Emails Exposing the Lies & Deceit
Its a book! Damn Tylers it will take me days to read. · The Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 states:
"Whoever knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires,
retains, or possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, or
knowingly assists a foreign state or any organization to do so, shall be fined under this title
or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both."
Weedlord Bonerhitler, 1 hour ago
Don't need a next leak. Just need time for the leaky vaccines to do their work. A
vaccine that doesn't stop transmission and merely reduces symptoms, is not a vaccine, but an
evolutionary pressure upon the virus.
This is Marek's disease, found in chickens. A few decades ago, it was fairly
benign, but then it was treated with a vaccine that merely reduced symptoms to a minimum
without stopping the virus. Now, after evolving over a few decades while butting heads with
that leaky vaccine, it's so deadly to chickens that any unvaccinated flocks tend to be wiped
out by it, making vaccinating every chicken on Earth a necessity.
This is our future. They want people completely dependent on their vaccines to
survive.
"... Through a collaboration with Danish intelligence, the United States has conducted targeted espionage against senior politicians and officials in Norway, Sweden, Germany and France. That was one of the conclusions in an explosive report made by four employees of the Danish intelligence service (FE), according to Danmarks Radio (DR). ..."
"... Last year, NRK reported that the Danish-American spy cooperation was aimed at targets in Norway, but it was then unknown who the surveillance was aimed at. The new information indicates that the extent of espionage against Norway was far greater than previously known. ..."
Through a collaboration with Danish intelligence, the United States has conducted targeted espionage against senior politicians
and officials in Norway, Sweden, Germany and France. That was one of the conclusions in an explosive report made by four employees
of the Danish intelligence service (FE), according to Danmarks Radio (DR).
NRK mentions the Danish public broadcaster's findings as part of an international collaboration with Danmarks Radio, SVT, NDR,
WDR, Süddeutsche Zeitung and Le Monde.
Over several months, DR has met nine people with access to classified information from the intelligence service. All information
in the case has been confirmed to DR by at least two, often several, independent sources.
Last year, NRK reported that the Danish-American spy cooperation was aimed at targets in Norway, but it was then unknown
who the surveillance was aimed at. The new information indicates that the extent of espionage against Norway was far greater than
previously known.
NRK and DR do not know which Norwegian politicians and officials have been subjected to targeted espionage, but as one of DR's
sources says:
- It would not have been interesting for an intelligence service to spy on municipal politicians.
Tesla completely transformed the automotive landscape when it introduced the Roadster, pioneering the mass-market electric car and
reinventing
the car as we know
. It sold the first widely-available EV, and it did it with a product that you could easily live with every
day. The company has done more to further the electric game than anyone else and deserves total credit for making EVs a part of the
discussion when it comes to the future of the automobile.
Tesla
has
changed the world. It's also doomed.
The last mainstream automaker to be launched from scratch in the United States was Saturn, a heavily subsidized child of the GM
family. Even with those deep pockets, it failed. History is littered with dead automotive brands. The list of deceased automakers is
also replete with visionary leaders who pioneered new tech and aimed to dominate the luxury market.
The automobile game is tough. The dirty secret is
that the big brands only make around 6% margin on every car they sell
This is all to say: we've been here before. Hudson, Tucker, DeLorean (
twice!
),
Packard, and more. The stories here are all different in their specifics, with some succumbing to shady government dealing, others
losing to price wars. While the immediate causes of their failures might be unique, the fact that they failed certainly is not.
The consumer automobile game is devilishly tough. The dirty secret of the car making world is that the big brands only make around
6% margin on every car they sell. That's a pathetic amount of profit when compared to other well-known brands like Nike, Apple, or
Disney. Shoes, upscale electronics, and entertainment (as well as scores of other industries) all offer double the profit margins,
faster production times, less regulation, and fewer unionized workforces. Building cars is dumb. Car companies make billions of
dollars in profits because they sell so many cars, not because each car is so profitable. And therein lies the rub for Tesla.
Why Tesla is doomed
The only way to be successful at car manufacturing is to do it at a very large scale. You have to sell hundreds of thousands, if not
millions of cars per year to be stable. In 2018,
Tesla
shifted a total of 245,240 cars
. The
Tesla
Model 3
also became the best-selling luxury automobile in United States; last year was fantastic for Tesla. It also took the
company to the very brink of imploding.
Scaling up production lines and capacity is the activity that is killing Tesla, but scaling up further is the only thing that can
save it. The company is at the low point of a "production valley" where becoming capable of building 300,000 cars has made them
wildly unprofitable, but the only way to get to profit is to build even more capacity to enable it to make 700,000 – 1,000,000 cars.
Tesla could potentially have, or raise, the billions needed to do this. It could, that is, if the company could concentrate on doing
one thing at a time.
Tesla's worst enemy is Elon Musk. The serial entrepreneur has an affliction that many serial entrepreneurs have: Shiny Thing
Syndrome. Mr. Musk loves to chase after new challenges and novel projects. Tesla is currently producing 3 different cars, wall
chargers, charging stations, electric semi-trucks, photovoltaic roofs, and spearheading autonomous technology. Throw in the odd
flamethrower
,
underground
tunnels
, and a new
insurance
product
(not to mention
Space
X
), and you see a leader not focused on doing the hard work of pushing his company through a crisis of scale, but a man obsessed
with moon-shots and new projects.
Scaling up production is the activity that is
killing Tesla, but scaling up further is the only thing that can save it
It should be noted that Musk has never operated any business at this scale before. Running a nimble online service such as Paypal is
a very different thing than running a multinational car manufacturer -- especially one that is exclusively pursuing new technologies.
Quite frankly, Musk is not qualified to be CEO of Tesla any longer, and the mismatch of his skills to the company's needs could not
be worse timed for Tesla.
In the next 12 months, practically all other major global auto manufacturers have plans to release their own electric cars. Tesla
ate their lunch last year when it became the best-selling luxury car, but at that time, it was the only EV game in town. More
worryingly, the most common Tesla owner complaints happen to be the areas that traditional car companies excel at:
Fit
and finish
,
service
infrastructure
, and execution on timelines. When Porsche announced its
Taycan
electric sedan
, its #1 source of reservations was from current Tesla owners. This is a surefire sign that the Tesla customer
base is eager to upgrade to something better.
China, the world's largest car market, and the savior of many global brands, cannot save Tesla. Indeed, the current trade war
between the U.S. and China is
hurting
Tesla more
than any other car company. The current price for a Tesla Model 3 in China is approximately $73,000, with roughly
$30,000 of that price being the result of China's import tariffs. In January, Elon Musk broke ground on a Gigafactory in China, and
the total investment in the project is expected to exceed $4 billion,
according
to Goldman Sachs
. That is an amount of money Tesla, quite frankly, doesn't have to spend. After a disastrous first quarter 2019,
the company quickly raised $2.35 billion in stock and debt. Even with this recent cash infusion, Musk told employees the company
would be
out
of cash in 10 months
if spending continued at current levels.
The end of Tesla
Tesla will not go bankrupt. It cannot go bankrupt. At the moment, the company is still well-placed to raise another funding round
and could likely even do as many as three more funding events before investors stop lining up. Failure for Tesla won't happen
tomorrow, but it is coming. More and more evangelists are changing their tunes as competition in EVs gets fiercer. Wall street is
losing patience with broken promises and erratic CEO behavior. And the everyday consumer is finding more electric car options that
tempt their dollar now that Tesla is not the only game in town. No, Tesla's end will not happen tomorrow, nor will it be a dramatic
collapse.
Telsa is too valuable a brand to disappear in a cloud of Chapter 11 smoke. Again, history bears this out. The vast majority of
automotive brands from years past were acquired or absorbed into larger brands, where some succeeded brilliantly (Dodge) and others
slowly morphed into something unrecognizable (Hudson). Arguably, the Tesla brand is the most valuable piece of Tesla's balance sheet
as other manufacturers have caught up with their hard technology (batteries, chargers), and are rapidly chasing down their soft
technology (
Autopilot
).
The Tesla brand is global in reach, and still viewed favorably overall by the public.
The endgame for Tesla is an acquisition. It is the way of the automotive jungle -- the circle of corporate life, as it were. The
unknowable part at the moment is exactly who will acquire Tesla, as the list is quite long. Another car company is the reflexive
bet, but Silicon Valley and Chinese auto manufacturers are all likely bidders as well. Apple
already
offered to buy Tesla
back in 2013 for more than the company is worth at the time of this story. The field of suitors is wide
open, and the eventual winner could well come as a surprise to the everyday public.
Regardless of who steps up to the plate, it will be very surprising if the transaction is labelled as an acquisition. No -- this will
be a "merger" or "partnership" to protect egos and that all-important Tesla brand (again, the most valuable asset on their books).
Any upcoming news of a partnership with a Toyota or a Mercedes should not be seen as a life preserver thrown out in good faith, but
a wholesale pirate sacking of the company. Musk will quietly slip away to chase his shiny things, popping in for product launches
and tweetstorms, but the adults will be put in charge and set a profitable course. What happens after that, no one can know.
Before the pitchforks come out, make no mistake: The world is a better place for Tesla having existed. Electric cars are no longer
made out of old Porsche 914s by a guy in a shed. We are moving toward an electric future, all thanks to underdog Tesla. The world,
and Americans especially, are enamored with an underdog story. But more often than not, the underdog loses. That's why they are
underdogs. In the best of worlds, Tesla can influence Mercedes or a Chinese company from the inside to really nail electric cars and
make them the most affordable option for consumers. I hope that comes to pass for all our sakes.
The author is a very fuzzy way comes to the idea that neoliberalism is in essence a Trotskyism for the rich and that
neoliberals want to use strong state to enforce the type of markets they want from above. That included free movement of
capital goods and people across national borders. All this talk about "small government" is just a smoke screen for naive fools.
"... The second explanation was that neoliberal globalization made a small number of people very rich, and it was in the interest of those people to promote a self-serving ideology using their substantial means by funding think tanks and academic departments, lobbying congress, fighting what the Heritage Foundation calls "the war of ideas." Neoliberalism, then, was a restoration of class power after the odd, anomalous interval of the mid-century welfare state. ..."
"... Here one is free to choose but only within a limited range of options left after responding to the global forces of the market. ..."
"... Neoliberal globalism can be thought of in its own terms as a negative theology, contending that the world economy is sublime and ineffable with a small number of people having special insight and ability to craft institutions that will, as I put it, encase the sublime world economy. ..."
"... One of the big goals of my book is to show neoliberalism is one form of regulation among many rather than the big Other of regulation as such. ..."
"... I build here on the work of other historians and show how the demands in the United Nations by African, Asian, and Latin American nations for things like the Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources, i.e. the right to nationalize foreign-owned companies, often dismissed as merely rhetorical, were actually existentially frightening to global businesspeople. ..."
"... They drafted neoliberal intellectuals to do things like craft agreements that gave foreign corporations more rights than domestic actors and tried to figure out how to lock in what I call the "human right of capital flight" into binding international codes. I show how we can see the development of the WTO as largely a response to the fear of a planned -- and equal -- planet that many saw in the aspirations of the decolonizing world. ..."
"... The neoliberal insight of the 1930s was that the market would not take care of itself: what Wilhelm Röpke called a market police was an ongoing need in a world where people, whether out of atavistic drives or admirable humanitarian motives, kept trying to make the earth a more equal and just place. ..."
"... The culmination of these processes by the 1990s is a world economy that is less like a laissez-faire marketplace and more like a fortress, as ever more of the world's resources and ideas are regulated through transnational legal instruments. ..."
Hardcover: 400 pages
Publisher: Harvard University Press (March 16, 2018)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0674979524
ISBN-13: 978-0674979529
From introduction
...The second explanation was that neoliberal globalization made a small number of people very rich, and it was in the interest of
those people to promote a self-serving ideology using their substantial means by funding think tanks and academic departments, lobbying
congress, fighting what the Heritage Foundation calls "the war of ideas." Neoliberalism, then, was a restoration of class power after
the odd, anomalous interval of the mid-century welfare state.
There is truth to both of these explanations. Both presuppose a kind of materialist explanation of history with which I have no
problem. In my book, though, I take another approach. What I found is that we could not understand the inner logic of something like
the WTO without considering the whole history of the twentieth century. What I also discovered is that some of the members of the
neoliberal movement from the 1930s onward, including Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, did not use either of the explanations
I just mentioned. They actually didn't say that economic growth excuses everything. One of the peculiar things about Hayek, in particular,
is that he didn't believe in using aggregates like GDP -- the very measurements that we need to even say what growth is.
What I found is that neoliberalism as a philosophy is less a doctrine of economics than a doctrine of ordering -- of creating
the institutions that provide for the reproduction of the totality [of financial elite control of the state]. At the core of the strain I describe is not the idea that we
can quantify, count, price, buy and sell every last aspect of human existence. Actually, here it gets quite mystical. The Austrian
and German School of neoliberals in particular believe in a kind of invisible world economy that cannot be captured in numbers
and figures but always escapes human comprehension.
After all, if you can see something, you can plan it. Because of the very limits to our knowledge, we have to default to ironclad
rules and not try to pursue something as radical as social justice, redistribution, or collective transformation. In a globalized
world, we must give ourselves over to the forces of the market, or the whole thing will stop working.
So this is quite a different version of neoliberal thought than the one we usually have, premised on the abstract of individual
liberty or the freedom to choose. Here one is free to choose but only within a limited range of options left after responding to
the global forces of the market.
One of the core arguments of my book is that we can only understand the internal coherence of neoliberalism if we see it as a
doctrine as concerned with the whole as the individual. Neoliberal globalism can be thought of in its own terms as a negative theology,
contending that the world economy is sublime and ineffable with a small number of people having special insight and ability to craft
institutions that will, as I put it, encase the sublime world economy.
To me, the metaphor of encasement makes much more sense than the usual idea of markets set free, liberated or unfettered. How
can it be that in an era of proliferating third party arbitration courts, international investment law, trade treaties and regulation
that we talk about "unfettered markets"? One of the big goals of my book is to show neoliberalism is one form of regulation among
many rather than the big Other of regulation as such.
What I explore in Globalists is how we can think of the WTO as the latest in a long series of institutional fixes proposed
for the problem of emergent nationalism and what neoliberals see as the confusion between sovereignty -- ruling a country -- and
ownership -- owning the property within it.
I build here on the work of other historians and show how the demands in the United Nations
by African, Asian, and Latin American nations for things like the Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources, i.e. the right to
nationalize foreign-owned companies, often dismissed as merely rhetorical, were actually existentially frightening to global businesspeople.
They drafted neoliberal intellectuals to do things like craft agreements that gave foreign corporations more rights than domestic
actors and tried to figure out how to lock in what I call the "human right of capital flight" into binding international codes. I
show how we can see the development of the WTO as largely a response to the fear of a planned -- and equal -- planet that many saw
in the aspirations of the decolonizing world.
Perhaps the lasting image of globalization that the book leaves is that world capitalism has produced a doubled world -- a world
of imperium (the world of states) and a world of dominium (the world of property). The best way to understand neoliberal globalism
as a project is that it sees its task as the never-ending maintenance of this division. The neoliberal insight of the 1930s was that
the market would not take care of itself: what Wilhelm Röpke called a market police was an ongoing need in a world where people,
whether out of atavistic drives or admirable humanitarian motives, kept trying to make the earth a more equal and just place.
The culmination of these processes by the 1990s is a world economy that is less like a laissez-faire marketplace and more like
a fortress, as ever more of the world's resources and ideas are regulated through transnational legal instruments. The book acts
as a kind of field guide to these institutions and, in the process, hopefully recasts the 20th century that produced them.
This is a rather
interesting look at the political and economic ideas of a circle of important economists, including Hayek and von Mises, over
the course of the last century. He shows rather convincingly that conventional narratives concerning their idea are wrong. That
they didn't believe in a weak state, didn't believe in the laissez-faire capitalism or believe in the power of the market. That
they saw mass democracy as a threat to vested economic interests.
The core beliefs of these people was in a world where money, labor and products could flow across borders without any limit.
Their vision was to remove these subjects (tariffs, immigration and controls on the movement of money) from the control of the
democracy-based nation-state and instead vesting them in international organizations. International organizations which were by
their nature undemocratic and beyond the influence of democracy. That rather than rejecting government power, what they rejected
was national government power. They wanted weak national governments but at the same time strong undemocratic international organizations
which would gain the powers taken from the state.
The other thing that characterized many of these people was a rather general rejection of economics. While some of them are
(at least in theory) economists, they rejected the basic ideas of economic analysis and economic policy. The economy, to them,
was a mystical thing beyond any human understanding or ability to influence in a positive way. Their only real belief was in "bigness".
The larger the market for labor and goods, the more economically prosperous everyone would become. A unregulated "global" market
with specialization across borders and free migration of labor being the ultimate system.
The author shows how, over a period extending from the 1920s to the 1990s, these ideas evolved from marginal academic ideas
to being dominant ideas internationally. Ideas that are reflected today in the structure of the European Union, the WTO (World
Trade Organization) and the policies of most national governments. These ideas, which the author calls "neoliberalism", have today
become almost assumptions beyond challenge. And even more strangely, the dominating ideas of the political left in most of the
west.
The author makes the point, though in a weak way, that the "fathers" of neoliberalism saw themselves as "restoring" a lost
golden age. That golden age being (roughly) the age of the original industrial revolution (the second half of the 1800s). And
to the extent that they have been successful they have done that. But at the same time, they have brought back all the political
and economic questions of that era as well.
In reading it, I started to wonder about the differences between modern neoliberalism and the liberal political movement during
the industrial revolution. I really began to wonder about the actual motives of "reform" liberals in that era. Were they genuinely
interested in reforms during that era or were all the reforms just cynical politics designed to enhance business power at the
expense of other vested interests. Was, in particular, the liberal interest in political reform and franchise expansion a genuine
move toward political democracy or simply a temporary ploy to increase their political power. If one assumes that the true principles
of classic liberalism were always free trade, free migration of labor and removing the power to governments to impact business,
perhaps its collapse around the time of the first world war is easier to understand.
He also makes a good point about the EEC and the organizations that came before the EU. Those organizations were as much about
protecting trade between Europe and former European colonial possessions as they were anything to do with trade within Europe.
To me at least, the analysis of the author was rather original. In particular, he did an excellent job of showing how the ideas
of Hayek and von Mises have been distorted and misunderstood in the mainstream. He was able to show what their ideas were and
how they relate to contemporary problems of government and democracy.
But there are some strong negatives in the book. The author offers up a complete virtue signaling chapter to prove how the
neoliberals are racists. He brings up things, like the John Birch Society, that have nothing to do with the book. He unleashes
a whole lot of venom directed at American conservatives and republicans mostly set against a 1960s backdrop. He does all this
in a bad purpose: to claim that the Kennedy Administration was somehow a continuation of the new deal rather than a step toward
neoliberalism. His blindness and modern political partisanship extended backward into history does substantial damage to his argument
in the book. He also spends an inordinate amount of time on the political issues of South Africa which also adds nothing to the
argument of the book. His whole chapter on racism is an elaborate strawman all held together by Ropke. He also spends a large
amount of time grinding some sort of Ax with regard to the National Review and William F. Buckley.
He keeps resorting to the simple formula of finding something racist said or written by Ropke....and then inferring that anyone
who quoted or had anything to do with Ropke shared his ideas and was also a racist. The whole point of the exercise seems to be
to avoid any analysis of how the democratic party (and the political left) drifted over the decades from the politics of the New
Deal to neoliberal Clintonism.
Then after that, he diverts further off the path by spending many pages on the greatness of the "global south", the G77 and
the New International Economic Order (NIEO) promoted by the UN in the 1970s. And whatever many faults of neoliberalism, Quinn
Slobodian ends up standing for a worse set of ideas: International Price controls, economic "reparations", nationalization, international
trade subsidies and a five-year plan for the world (socialist style economic planning at a global level). In attaching himself
to these particular ideas, he kills his own book. The premise of the book and his argument was very strong at first. But by around
p. 220, its become a throwback political tract in favor of the garbage economic and political ideas of the so-called third world
circa 1974 complete with 70's style extensive quotations from "Senegalese jurists"
Once the political agenda comes out, he just can't help himself. He opens the conclusion to the book taking another cheap shot
for no clear reason at William F. Buckley. He spends alot of time on the Seattle anti-WTO protests from the 1990s. But he has
NOTHING to say about BIll Clinton or Tony Blair or EU expansion or Obama or even the 2008 economic crisis for that matter. Inexplicably
for a book written in 2018, the content of the book seems to end in the year 2000.
I'm giving it three stars for the first 150 pages which was decent work. The second half rates zero stars. Though it could
have been far better if he had written his history of neoliberalism in the context of the counter-narrative of Keynesian economics
and its decline. It would have been better yet if the author had the courage to talk about the transformation of the parties of
the left and their complicity in the rise of neoliberalism. The author also tends to waste lots of pages repeating himself or
worse telling you what he is going to say next. One would have expected a better standard of editing by the Harvard Press.
Read less 69 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment
Report abuse
Anybody interested in global trade, business, human rights or democracy today
should read this book.
The book follow the Austrians from the beginning in the Habsburgischer empire to the beginning rebellion against the WTO. However,
most importantly it follows the thinking and the thoughts behind the building of a global empire of capitalism with free trade,
capital and rights. All the way to the new "human right" to trade. It narrows down what neoliberal thought really consist of and
indirectly make a differentiation to the neoclassical economic tradition.
What I found most interesting is the turn from economics to law - and the conceptual distinctions between the genes, tradition,
reason, which are translated into a quest for a rational and reason based protection of dominium (the rule of property) against
the overreach of imperium (the rule of states/people). This distinction speaks directly to the issues that EU is currently facing.
"... No other book out there has the level of breadth on the history of US imperialism that this work provides. Even though it packs 400 pages of text (which might seem like a turnoff for non-academic readers), "How to Hide an Empire" is highly readable given Immerwhar's skills as a writer. Also, its length is part of what makes it awesome because it gives it the right amount of detail and scope. ..."
"... Alleging that US imperialism in its long evolution (which this book deciphers with poignancy) has had no bearing on the destinies of its once conquered populations is as fallacious as saying that the US is to blame for every single thing that happens in Native American communities, or in the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, etc. Not everything that happens in these locations and among these populations is directly connected to US expansionism, but a great deal is. ..."
"... This is exactly the kind of book that drives the "My country, right or wrong" crowd crazy. Yes, slavery and genocide and ghastly scientific experiments existed before Europeans colonized the Americas, but it's also fair and accurate to say that Europeans made those forms of destruction into a bloody artform. Nobody did mass slaughter better. ..."
I'm a professor at the University of California San Diego and I'm assigning
this for a graduate class.
No other book out there has the level of breadth on the history of US imperialism that this work provides.
Even though it packs 400 pages of text (which might seem like a turnoff for non-academic readers), "How to Hide an Empire" is
highly readable given Immerwhar's skills as a writer. Also, its length is part of what makes it awesome because it gives it the
right amount of detail and scope.
I could not disagree more with the person who gave this book one star. Take it from me: I've taught hundreds of college students
who graduate among the best in their high school classes and they know close to nothing about the history of US settler colonialism,
overseas imperialism, or US interventionism around the world. If you give University of California college students a quiz on
where the US' overseas territories are, most who take it will fail (trust me, I've done it). And this is not their fault. Instead,
it's a product of the US education system that fails to give students a nuanced and geographically comprehensive understanding
of the oversized effect that their country has around our planet.
Alleging that US imperialism in its long evolution (which this book deciphers with poignancy) has had no bearing on the destinies
of its once conquered populations is as fallacious as saying that the US is to blame for every single thing that happens in Native
American communities, or in the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, etc. Not everything that happens in these locations
and among these populations is directly connected to US expansionism, but a great deal is.
A case in point is Puerto Rico's current fiscal and economic crisis. The island's political class share part of the blame for
Puerto Rico's present rut. A lot of it is also due to unnatural (i.e. "natural" but human-exacerbated) disasters such as Hurricane
María. However, there is no denying that the evolution of Puerto Rico's territorial status has generated a host of adverse economic
conditions that US states (including an island state such as Hawaii) do not have to contend with. An association with the US has
undoubtedly raised the floor of material conditions in these places, but it has also imposed an unjust glass ceiling that most
people around the US either do not know about or continue to ignore.
To add to those unfair economic limitations, there are political injustices regarding the lack of representation in Congress,
and in the case of Am. Samoa, their lack of US citizenship. The fact that the populations in the overseas territories can't make
up their mind about what status they prefer is: a) understandable given the way they have been mistreated by the US government,
and b) irrelevant because what really matters is what Congress decides to do with the US' far-flung colonies, and there is no
indication that Congress wants to either fully annex them or let them go because neither would be convenient to the 50 states
and the political parties that run them. Instead, the status quo of modern colonial indeterminacy is what works best for the most
potent political and economic groups in the US mainland. Would
This book is about much more than that though. It's also a history of how and why the United States got to control so much
of what happens around the world without creating additional formal colonies like the "territories" that exist in this legal limbo.
Part of its goal is to show how precisely how US imperialism has been made to be more cost-effective and also more invisible.
Read Immerwhar's book, and don't listen to the apologists of US imperialism which is still an active force that contradicts
the US' professed values and that needs to be actively dismantled. Their attempts at discrediting this important reflect a denialism
of the US' imperial realities that has endured throughout the history that this book summarizes.
"How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States" is a great starting point for making the US public aware of
the US' contradictions as an "empire of liberty" (a phrase once used by Thomas Jefferson to describe the US as it expanded westward
beyond the original 13 colonies). It is also a necessary update to other books on this topic that are already out there, and it
is likely to hold the reader's attention more given its crafty narrative prose and structure
Read less 194 people found this helpful
Helpful
Comment
Report abuse
This is exactly the
kind of book that drives the "My country, right or wrong" crowd crazy. Yes, slavery and genocide and ghastly scientific experiments
existed before Europeans colonized the Americas, but it's also fair and accurate to say that Europeans made those forms of destruction
into a bloody artform. Nobody did mass slaughter better.
The author of this compelling book reveals a history unknown to many
readers, and does so with first-hand accounts and deep historical analyses. You might ask why we can't put such things behind
us. The simple answer: we've never fully grappled with these events before in an honest and open way. This book does the nation
a service by peering behind the curtain and facing the sobering truth of how we came to be what we are.
This is a stunning book, not to be missed. If you finished Sapiens with the feeling your world view had
greatly enlarged, you're likely to have the same experience of your view of the US from reading this engaging work. And like Sapiens,
it's an entirely enjoyable read, full of delightful surprises, future dinner party gems.
The further you get into the book the more interesting and unexpected it becomes. You'll look at the US in ways you likely
never considered before. This is not a 'political' book with an ax to grind or a single-party agenda. It's refreshingly insightful,
beautifully written, fun to read.
This is a gift I'll give to many a good friend, I've just started with my wife. I rarely write
reviews and have never met the author (now my only regret). 3 people found this helpful
This book is an absolutely powerhouse, a must-read, and should be a part of every student's curriculum in
this God forsaken country.
Strictly speaking, this brilliant read is focused on America's relationship with Empire. But like with nearly everything America,
one cannot discuss it without discussing race and injustice.
If you read this book, you will learn a lot of new things about subjects that you thought you knew everything about. You will
have your eyes opened. You will be exposed to the dark underbelly of racism, corruption, greed and exploitation that undergird
American ambition.
I don't know exactly what else to say other than to say you MUST READ THIS BOOK. This isn't a partisan statement -- it's not
like Democrats are any better than Republicans in this book.
This is one of the best books I've ever read, and I am a voracious reader. The content is A+. It never gets boring. It never
gets tedious. It never lingers on narratives. It's extremely well written. It is, in short, perfect. And as such, 10/10.
I heard an interview of Daniel Immerwahr on NPR news / WDET radio regarding this book.
I'm am quite conservative
and only listen to NPR news when it doesn't lean too far to the left.
However, the interview piqued my interest. I am so glad I
purchased this ebook. What a phenomenal and informative read!!! WOW!! It's a "I never knew that" kind of read. Certainly not anything
I was taught in school. This is thoughtful, well written and an easy read. Highly recommend!!
Battle of narratives. "Despite their potentially grave impact on public health, official
and state-backed sources from various governments, including Russia and – to a lesser
extent – China, have continued to widely target conspiracy narratives and disinformation
both at public audiences in the EU and the wider neighbourhood."
On Pratasevich – " The second claim – on dissident Raman Pratasevich being an
"Extremist" – is both unfounded and irrelevant to the case. It does not justify
Lukashenka's decision to use military threat against a civilian aircraft."
Having been a citizen of the European Union for so long I suppose I should know about the
EEAS. I didn't so I looked it up. It's the embryonic equivalent, according to Wiki, of the US
State Department. The old stamping ground of Lady Catherine Ashton of Ukrainian coup fame. Not
much of a budget to do a lot of things, so I imagine the articles above are cut and paste from
Bellingcat or some such source.
All very down market and a little depressing, Mr Armstrong. I had thought the EU and
particularly the French would provide a counterweight to our own mini-neocons of Westminster,
at least as far as the Russophobic stuff went. Not so it seems.
Reply
I seem to remember that one of the selling points of the EU years ago was that it would
become an independent foreign policy actor -- a sort of fourth world to use the expressions
of the time. Didn't happen, did it?
The story
gets fishier by the minute . First the simulated and hypocritical outrage when Minsk is
accused of following the example of the keeper
and guardian of the Rules-Based International Order (suspiciously rapid and uniform).
Calling this coup
specialist a "journalist" is pretty creative: yes he did fight with the
nazis ; more on Protasevich
and
more still . There has been a sustained – and unsuccessful – anti-Lukashenka
operation for some time, is this the next try? The real key to the story is the fake bomb
threat: who did it and when? If it did come, as Lukashenka says, from some source in
Switzerland (don't be fooled by the time stamp – they are in different time zones), then
everything took place as it should have and the
rules required the pilot to land in Minsk ; and the threat did say the bomb would be set
off in Vilnius. Incidentally, this is the third time (!) a Ryanair plane has been forced to
land by armed fighters after a bomb hoax:
2017 and
2020 . Fighter interception is normal behaviour. The people who stayed in Minsk were
not sinister operatives
but people headed there anyway . Did the Belarusan authorities only know he was on board
because of this tweet as Petri Krohn
wonders (see
comment 6 )? Maybe we'll read about it years later in the WaPo – remember
Ukraine's Joan of Arc ? So, the question that they should be asking is: who originated the
bomb threat? Answer that and you'll know whether it was another anti-Lukashenka provocation
(vide Vovan and Lexus ) or
something Lukashenka did to get Protasevich. But, anyway, it's time for Lukashenka to get
closer to Moscow; maybe he
will.
The narrative of the
incident (scroll down for the English version) by the Belorussian authorities starts with
this:
On May 23, 2021, a written message with the following content in English was sent to the
e-mail of the National Airport Minsk from the e-mail address protonmail.com:
A translation of the Russian language version of that paragraph is a bit more
specific:
On May 23, 2021, a written message with the following content was sent to the e-mail of the
National Airport Minsk [email protected] from the e-mail address protonmail.com in English:
The radio talk between ATC and the pilot of flight RYR 1TZ has additional information
about the email:
ATC: RYR 1TZ
Pilot: The bomb....direct message, where did it come from? Where did you have information
about it from?
ATC: RYR 1TZ standby please.
ATC: 09:33:42: RYR 1TZ
Pilot: Go ahead.
ATC: RYR 1TZ airport security stuff informed they received e-mail.
Pilot: Roger, Vilnius airport security stuff or from Greece?
ATC: RYR 1TZ this e-mail was shared to several airports .
At 9:33 utc the Belorussian ATC knew that the email had been received by several airports
in the region. This must have been the first email in question and the recipient field must
have show several airport related email addresses.
We know that one of the other recipients of the email received by Minsk airport was an
airport organization in Vilnius, Lithuania.
Swiss Hamas - Inconsistencies in the "terrorist" version of the Belarusian authorities
On May 26, during a speech in parliament, Alexander Lukashenko commented on the
emergency landing in Minsk of a Ryanair airline, on board which was the former
editor-in-chief of the Nexta Telegram channel Roman Protasevich. Lukashenka said that the
message about the mining of the side was received by "Athens, Minsk and Vilnius at the same
time". After the Belarusian air traffic controllers passed the information about the bomb
allegedly received from the special services to the Ryanair pilots, it was decided to land
the plane in Minsk. To escort the board, a MiG-29 fighter of the Belarusian Air Force was
raised.
The Dossier Center, together with The Daily Beast and Der Spiegel, managed to obtain and
analyze a copy of an email sent by a "Hamas representative" to the Minsk airport. It
follows from it that the Belarusian air traffic controllers informed the Ryanair pilots
about the mining of the plane 27 minutes earlier than they themselves received the message
about the bomb.
On May 23, at 12:25 pm Belarusian time, the administration of "Lithuanian Airports"
received a letter with a threat of a bomb explosion on board the flight FR4978, sent from
the address [email protected] .
The highlighted sentence says that a threat email arrived in Lithuania at 12:25 pm (9:25
utc). This must have been the same email which the Belorussian ATC mentioned at 9:33 utc:
ATC: RYR 1TZ this e-mail was shared to several airports.
Then however the Dossier Center claim in the second paragraph above, that "the Belarusian
air traffic controllers informed the Ryanair pilots about the mining of the plane 27 minutes
earlier than they themselves received the message about the bomb", makes no sense.
But the Dossier Center does show an email with a bomb threat that was received at 12:56
(9:56 utc) after the pilot had already made the decision to land in Minsk.
The explanation that resolves the seemingly contradicting evidence is simple. There were
two emails sent to the airports.
In fact on May 28 the Investigative Committee of Belarus, the country's prosecution
service,
published a note about the case (machine translation, emph. added):
It has already been established, to which we draw special attention, that there were
several messages about the "mining" of the aircraft received through the Swiss anonymous
mail service ProtonMail - at 12:25 and at 12:56 . At the moment, the records of
conversations with the pilots of the aircraft are being studied and analyzed in detail, and
numerous other investigative actions are being carried out.
The Dossier Center however claims, without providing any evidence, that Minsk did not receive the first email
(machine translation, emph. added):
At 12:30 the plane entered the airspace of Belarus. As follows from the transcript of the
dispatchers' negotiations with the Ryanair pilots, at the same moment the Belarusian side
informed the crew about the alleged explosion threat. At 12:33 pm, the controller informed
the pilot that a letter with a message about the bomb had been sent to several airports at
once. However, as the Dossier Center found out, at that time only Lithuanian Airports
received a letter from the "terrorists" . The Greek Civil Aviation Authority said it had
not received a bomb threat letter at the Athens airport.
At 12:47 the plane changed course and flew towards Minsk. The official statement of the
Aviation Directorate of the Ministry of Transport of Belarus did not disclose details about
the time of receipt of the email, but Dossier found out that a copy of the letter from user
Ahmed Yurlanov came to the email of the National Airport of Minsk ([email protected]) at
12:57 pm Belarusian time - that is, almost half an hour after the transmission of the
message about the possible mining of the side.
How the anti-Russian Dossier Center in London would even know when and what emails arrived
or didn't arrive at Minsk airport is inexplicable.
The Daily Beast has cooperated with the Dossier Center in reporting the issue. Its
piece, authored by Michael Weiss, a former research director of the neo-conservative Henry
Jackson Society in London, does
not resolve the issue:
The email was sent to Minsk's National Airport's general information account at 12:57 p.m.
on May 23, 27 minutes after the plane first entered Belarusian airspace and 24 minutes
after air traffic control in Minsk first informed the Ryanair pilot that an emailed bomb
threat was "shared with several airports."
But the Greek Civil Aviation Authority, which is responsible for the plane that took off
from Athens, has publicly stated that it received no such warning at any point during
FR4978's journey. Lithuania did receive the email, but not Vilnius Airport, the intended
destination; rather, the recipient was State Enterprise Lithuanian Airports, the state-run
company that handles three different Lithuanian airports (Vilnius, Kaunas, and
Palanga).
That someone in Greece did not receive the bomb threat email and who in Lithuania received
the email or not does not tell us anything about the reception of the first email in Minsk.
The whole writeup is a diversion from that critical point.
Here is where ProtonMail comes in.
ProtonMail was asked about the second email published by the Daily Beast and the
Dossier Center. It responded with a statement to Reuters which then misleading
headlined:
A bomb threat cited by Belarusian authorities as the reason for forcing a Ryanair jetliner
carrying a dissident journalist to land in Minsk was sent after the plane was diverted,
privacy-focused email provider Proton Technologies AG said on Thursday.
...
Proton declined to comment on specifics of the message but confirmed it was sent after the
plane was diverted.
"We haven't seen credible evidence that the Belarusian claims are true," the Swiss
company said in a statement. "We will support European authorities in their investigations
upon receiving a legal request."
ProtonMail seems to have confirmed to Reuters that the second email, received in
Minsk at 12:56 (9:56 utc), had been sent through its service.
ProtonMail however seems to not have been asked about the first email received in Minsk
and Lithuania on May 23 at 12:25 (9:25 utc). Still Reuters attributes the false claim, that
the bomb threat cited by Belarus was sent after the plane was diverted, directly to
ProtonMail. Belarus cited the first email sent. ProtonMail only confirmed that the second
email was sent. It should be in the interest of ProtonMail to clear up that issue.
Yesterday evening I asked ProtonMail to explicitly confirm that the first email was also
sent to and received in Minsk. As it confirmed that the second email was sent it should have
no problem with confirming the first one too. This unless it has left its claimed neutrality
and is an active participant in the information war against Belarus.
The email leaked to the press was not obtained from us. Due to our encryption, we can't
access/verify the message contents. However, we can see the sent time and can confirm it
was after the plane was redirected.
The Belarus prosecutor states that it received two ProtonMails - at 12:25 and at 12:56
(UTC+3).
sk.gov.by/ru/news-usk-gm...
Dossier Center claims that Lithuanian airports received threat email at 12:25.
Can you please confirm that the first email at 12:25 was also sent to Minsk.
Unfortunately we can't comment on this as the first email is not public information yet.
Only the Swiss authorities can make additional disclosures at this time.
I contacted you because I learned of the first email from:
a. Dossier Center
b. General Prosecutor of Belarus
Their claims of reception of the 9:25 utc email in Vilnius and Minsk are already public
information.
You are only asked to confirm that both were sent at that time.
There was no further response from ProtonMail.
While ProtonMail seems to confirm the existence of the first email it is not willing to
confirm that the first email was also received in Minsk.
This is not helpful. ProtonMail's confirmation to Reuters that the second email was
received in Minsk has led to widely misleading headlines and numerous reports which,
attributed to ProtonMail, falsely claim that Belarus recommended the plane to land in Minsk
without having received a bomb threat to that plane.
ProtonMail could easily clean up the false reports by confirming in a public statement
that there were two emails and that the first email at at 12:25 (9:25 utc) was also sent to
and received in Minsk.
That ProtonMail rejects to do so demonstrates that it is a party in the information war
against Belarus. Swiss Neutrality this is not.
But ProtonMail claims neutrality. It also claims that its encrypted email service is
secure.
In light of the above ProtonMail's neutrality seems to be quite questionable. That lets me
doubt that its service and products are as secure as it claims.
There have been other Swiss providers of encryption technology and services who had made
false claims about their neutrality. Their claims about the security of the encryption
services they provided turned out to be false.
It is easy for ProtonMail to reclaim Neutrality by publicly providing information that an
email from the account shown in the above screenshot or any other ProtonMail account was sent
to the [email protected] address in Minsk on May 23 at 9:25 utc. As ProtonMail confirmed that
the second email was sent and received it must have the metadata that allows it to issue a
similar confirmation about the first mail.
An additional public explanation of the fact that there were two emails in question and
that its previous statement to Reuters was only with regard to the second email would
be very helpful.
We should also keep in mind that this is not a question of good versus bad but true or
false. One may dislike the leadership of Belarus. But one also has to acknowledge, as even
The Atlantic does, that the government of Belarus acted in full
accordance with the relevant laws :
Ryanair's CEO called the incident "state-sponsored hijacking." It was not. Technically, you
have to be on a plane to hijack it. But the Ryanair incident was nevertheless diabolical --
and what makes it particularly diabolical is that Belarus may have managed to pull it off
without violating its agreements under international law.
I love your attack of this geo-political propaganda pig and can only suggest that when one
thinks of network security they should think of Swiss cheese.
"a threat email arrived in Lithuania at 12:25 pm (9:25 utc)."
Since ProtoMail refuses to verify that Belarus received this email. Have any of the other
recipients, such as Lithuania, showed the first email to anyone? This would at least confirm
that Belarus was included on the recipient list. I am taking it as a given that no one will
believe Belarus.
"Have any of the other recipients, such as Lithuania, showed the first email to anyone? This
would at least confirm that Belarus was included on the recipient list. I am taking it as a
given that no one will believe Belarus."
Lithuania is hostile to Belarus. It would not reveal such information.
When you have an alliance of countries committed to lying about Russia, China, Iran (and
friends), and get their own citizens to hate, and I mean really hate, their victims, I don't
see how this ends well.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On CNN I saw yet another story on the Wuhan Lab leak and their latest take on it was
to apologize for dismissing the lab leak theory last year. So their one regret was doubting
our CIA because Trump and Pompeo overplayed their hand. They regret shunning their friends in
the CIA because it would have helped Trump and now they have learned their lesson to forever
be loyal to their government caretakers.
If ProtonMail's position is "Unfortunately we can't comment on this as the first email is
not public information yet." , perhaps Belarus should release a screenshot - showing
showing time, sender, recipient, message - equivalent to the screenshost of the second email.
The first email would then be just as public as the second one. ProtonMail, having lost its
excuse, could then either deny or confirm the first email.
b - i agree with your conclusions here... as you note, if they change, you can change your
conclusion, but at present, it is the only conclusion to make as i see it... did Mikhail
Khodorkovsky pay protonmail to keep silent? is protonmail run by an intel agency? etc. etc..
they may not want to say, but in this example not saying anything about the first e mail
seals their duplicitous role here.. they agree to the one but when asked are silent on the
other... until they change this stance, it is clear they are an asset in the western system
of regime change in belarus..
@ 8 ms. cat... someone ought to send a note to Ben Wolford, the guy who wrote that article
asking him a question on the 2nd e mail that he can take to his superiors... otherwise he is
working propaganda for a company that looks bad on him..
Yeah, it's a myth Switzerland is a neutral country. Not only it isn't, but, since the
creation of the Euro Zone, it's de facto a EU member state (its monetary policy is directly
tied to the Euro, it adheres and adjust to most European law and regulations etc. etc.).
"... Everything in the Western media is a hoax by default. ..."
"... Moon of Alabama picked up my comment into a post, but left out the part where I cast doubt on the sources and later questioned the whole narrative. It later turned out the story was a RFE/RL fabrication. No Belarusian MiG fighter ever forced the Ryanair plane to do anything. ..."
"... I only read filtered news. Social media is usually quite good in filtering out BS. Another good news stream is the comment section on Moon of Alabama. If something important happens, you will find a critical comment on it within a few hours. ..."
"... It turns out that, far from being an innocent young democracy activist and precocious lyceum student who could not stomach the restrictions imposed by President Lukashenko's government, as misrepresented by the Western media, Protasevich is in fact an experienced agitator with long-standing ties to the neo-Nazi fringe in the neighboring Ukraine." ..."
"... IMO, there're many parallels between Fascism, Feudalism and Neoliberalism in that ownership is completely held by the small elite circle while the masses essentially have nothing of importance. The use of Terror by all three also binds them together. ..."
As part of that post I discussed the possible manipulation of a screenshot of the bomb threat email by the editor of the western
financed opposition media Nexta:
Protonmail, from where the email was received, is a encrypted web-email service hosted in Switzerland which allows more
or less anonymous traffic.
An alleged screenshot of the email currently gets peddled around by the Editor-in-Chief of NEXTA:
Not that anyone had any doubts but "˜Hamas email' was sent to Minsk airport 24 minutes after Belarusian air controllers
warned Ryanair pilots there's a bomb onboard.
Giczan is right in that the time shown in the screenshot is inconsistent with the timing of the Ryanair flight in the Belorussian
airspace.
That however proves nothing. Time stamps in emails are notoriously unreliable as they depend on various computer timezone
settings and several other variables.
Clocks, computers and phones in Switzerland are currently set to UTC(GMT)+2 hours. Clocks, computers and phones in Belarus
to UTC+3. A email sent at 10:57 Geneva time would likely show up as sent at 11:57 in Minsk time. However, if the timezone of
the computer/phone that is used to look at the email is set to UTC+4 the email time would be shown as 12:57.
Nice trick Mr. Nexta but that screenshot is unconvincing.
It turns out that my timezone manipulation speculation, while technically correct, might not have been an issue.
Today the Investigative Committee of Belarus, the country's proscecution service,
published a note about the case (machine translation, emph. added):
Investigation of a criminal case on a deliberately false report about the "mining" of the Athens-Vilnius flight continues
At the moment, the criminal case initiated on the fact of the "mining" of the plane, which carried out the flight "Athens-Vilnius",
is being processed by the USC in the city of Minsk.
These days, through destructive and extremist channels, as well as various Internet resources and Western media, incomplete
and unverified information is being disseminated aimed at manipulating public opinion in their own interests. For our part,
we urge the public not to popularize innuendo and cynical speculation. We consider it unacceptable to assume that someone has
a monopoly on the truth until the preliminary investigation is completed.
...
It has already been established, to which we draw special attention, that there were several messages about the "mining" of
the aircraft received through the Swiss anonymous mail service ProtonMail - at 12:25 and at 12:56. At the moment, the records
of conversations with the pilots of the aircraft are being studied and analyzed in detail, and numerous other investigative
actions are being carried out. ...
So there have been, if the officials are to be believed, two bomb threat emails. The first one at 12:25 local time (9:25 UTC)
arrived five minutes before the Ryanair flight at 12:30 (9:30 UTC) entered Belorussian airspace. That would have left enough time
to contact the air traffic controller who then warned the plane. The email in the screenshot received at would have been the second
one.
The Ryanair pilot was warned of the bomb threat at 9:30 utc but declared Mayday only at 9:47 utc. It took him several more
minutes to change the course. The sender of the emails might have watched the plane's course on
Flight Aware and prepared and sent the second email when the plane
seemed not to react to the first one.
Posted by b at
18:20 UTC |
Comments (28) I believe that Dossier Center actually confirms the timing of the first email with "at 12:25 pm Belarusian time,
the administration of "Lithuanian Airports" received a letter with the threat of a bomb explosion on board the flight FR4978 by
e-mail". This is by Google translation from the site https://dossier.center/bel-hamas/
It means that Vilnius received the email at the same time is Minsk says they received. It is unthinkable that Vilnius would
have done nothing after receiving the bomb threat. It must have contacted Minsk about the email unless Vilnius new that Minsk
got the same threat as well.
According to the time line, that Minsk has published, Minsk air traffic control contacted the pilot after about 3 minutes from
receiving the email threat.
It it very likely that Minsk airport received the email at the same time as Vilnius airport. The Belorussian prosecutor statement
is then correct. There were two emails.
Dossier Center misleads by saying that the threat email arrived in Belarus only at 12:26 local time. But that was the second
email. The alarm was triggered by the first one.
According to the Convention of International Civil Aviation Belarus has done nothing illegal.
Article 9
b) Each contracting State reserves also the right, in exceptional circumstances or during a period of emergency, or in the
interest of public safety, and with immediate effect, temporarily to restrict or prohibit flying over the whole or any part
of its territory, on condition that such restriction or prohib- ition shall be applicable without distinction of nationality
to aircraft of all other States.
C ) Each contracting State, under such regulations as it may prescribe, may require any aircraft entering the areas contem-
plated in subparagraphs a ) or b) above to effect a landing as soon as practicable thereafter at some designated airport within
its territory.
I commented about the earlier email
in the last thread:
When was the email sent?
Mikhail Khodorkovsky is the source of this fake story. Read carefully and you will see that Lithuanian ATC received a copy
of the email 6 minutes before Ryanair entered Belorussian airspace. Today's fake news is about a screenshot of another copy
of the email sent half an hour later (assuming it is real).
I also included this translation from the Dossier Center:
On May 23, at 12:25 pm Belarusian time , the administration of "Lithuanian Airports" received a letter with the threat
of a bomb explosion on board the flight FR4978 by e-mail, sent from the address [email protected] . It reported
the following: "We, the Hamas soldiers, demand that Israel cease fire in the Gaza Strip. We demand that the EU renounce its
support for Israel in this war. It is known that the participants of the Delphic Economic Forum are returning home on May 23
on flight FR4978. This plane has a bomb. If you do not fulfill our demands, the bomb will explode on May 23 over Vilnius. Allahu
Akbar ".
Dossier Center offers no reason to believe the 12:25 pm email was not sent to Minsk too. The Reuters hoax, repeated in every
Western media, adds two and two together (12:25 and 12:57 emails) and concludes that Minsk received no email at 12:57.
At 12:30 Ryanair was still in Ukrainian airspace and only approaching the SOMAT waypoint at the border. We do not know when
exactly the flight crossed the border.
***
The legal difference between a hoax and a fabrication is that leaders and politicians are free to endorse and
promote fabrications but promoting hoaxes makes them criminally liable under international criminal law. Capital crimes like this
one "" I believe "" deserve the capital punishment.
My instincts tell me that some clever people have successfully led some idiots a long way up a garden path and that they will
now be made fools of. The icing on the cake is the capture of the smug little terrorist....a face that invites a punch.
In April 2015 Mikhail Khodorkovsky visited Finland to meet Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb. I saw this as a very worrisome
development and wrote about it on my Facebook page. Sometime in the last two years Facebook censored and removed the post (possibly
on Khodorkovsky's orders). Luckily I had posted a copy on The Duran as part of my article:
Is There a Plot to Expel Russia from
UN Security Council?
KHODORKOVSKY MEETS FINNISH PM TO DISCUSS GOVERNMENT-IN-EXILE
NATO has chosen Mikhail Khodorkovsky to set up government-in-exile, take over Russia's UN seat and foreign assets.
The NATO plan is now obvious: Mikhail Khodorkovsky will set up puppet government-in-exile and claim to be the legitimate
president of Russia. He will then ask Western governments for diplomatic recognition.
The first step of the UN Security Council in its new configuration will be to ask NATO for military assistance in removing
the "pretender Putin" from the Kremlin and "liberating the Russian people from his tyranny." The US and its captive nations
have a qualified majority in the Security Council so the vote will pass. (The Chinese ambassador will be prevented from casting
a veto.)
A crucial part of the plan is the continuing information war against Russia. The demonization of President Putin. The Western
public has already been taught the inevitability of the war against Russia.
Khodorkovsky's usurpation of power will not happen today, not yet. The NATO plan will only be put to motion once the first
Russian troops overtly enter Ukrainian territory.
IN THE NEWS: Mikhail Khodorkovsky met Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb at the official summer residence Kultaranta
yesterday. The meeting was held on Khodorkovsky's request.
Looks like Belarus is now going through this treatment.
The pieces of the puzzle start to fit together, or the dominoes start to fall, depending on how you look at it.
But unfortunately, this is no longer important to the masses fed with false narratives.
Everything will now be ridiculed as necessarily clumsy attempts by Putin and Luka to clear their names...and therefore "clues"
to a "highly likely" responsibility.
Even an ICAO investigation will be reconstructed and oriented (those who do not remember the investigation on Sullenberger's January
2009 emergency landing of US Airways Flight 1549 on the Hudson River, in which all 155 passengers and crew survived must watch
the movie). This investigation will involve Lithuania, Poland, USA (passengers and Boeing...), Greece, France, Ireland and so
on (and perhaps one seat for Belarus and Russia if not denied... for security reasons)
I posted
on other thread
"the captain of the aircraft who "made the decision [to change course to Minsk] after consulting Ryanair's management", according
to Kiskis."
When an emergency is declared, air traffic control (ATC) gives the flight "priority." Saying the magic words "declare an emergency"
(or "Mayday") makes an aircraft the most important thing in the sky. If need be, ATC will move other traffic out of the way
so the emergency aircraft can get to the runway as quickly as possible. ATC provides the crew with current weather, vectors
(guidance) to the runway, navigation frequencies, they will contact emergency services (an ambulance if it's a medical emergency),
they can even notify airline management personnel to alert them of the problem if the crew doesn't have time. For pilots, air
traffic control is our "one-stop-shopping" link to services on the ground. They are awesome.
One nice perk of declaring an emergency is that the pilot-in-command of the aircraft can do whatever he/she deems necessary
to keep the aircraft safe. That includes breaking Federal Aviation Regulations. Speed limits and airspace rules all go out
the window once you declare an emergency. This rule encourages crews to declare an emergency even if the issue seems minor.
It's a good way for the crew to cover themselves in case they accidentally break a rule while trying to deal with a problem.
I'm just not agree with maintain Flight level for "Bomb Scare". Normally is flight to minimal flight level
https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Bomb_Warning:_Guidance_for_Controllers
Now, the question remains Why the pilot don't divert immediately (20 mn is too much).
And if you read the link from Petri Krohn (thanks Petri, excellent job for those 3 days!), it's not credible that the pilot can't
contact Ryanair and Vilnius (he is asking Minsk ATC for frequencies???
The pilot can't be a rookie. Here are the minimal requisite to become Captain at Ryannair.
https://careers.ryanair.com/pilots-requirements/
Who did he talk to ?
and how the decision to maintain the flight level and wait (in my opinion to make things worse and make air traffic control say
certain things) was made.
Normally, the base of any investigation. If we don't know any more about, it's an answer.
"There had been speculation that the other three persons were KGB agents. However the people were found and interviewed. All
three, one Greek and two Belorussian citizen, say that they had originally planned to fly from Greece via Vilnius to Minsk. They
thus had no reason to reenter the plane."
Interesting. Back when I lived in the USSA, the wife and I were on a plane that was made to divert and land at an airport that
would have been our ultimate destination on the trip, but which we were only going to get to after making a stop at a further
location. We were not allowed to deboard the plane and were threatened with arrest if we tried. This was about 10 years post-9/11.
Mind you both destinations were within the continental United States. We were forced to land in Denver and then wait for our connecting
flight to Albuquerque despite the unplanned landing was in ABQ. The same thing has happened to a couple different former co-workers.
I hope the other 3 people got some of their money back and I'm glad that European airlines and airport security is different than
in the USSA.
Given Protasevich's earlier travels without incidents, as speculated earlier, he may have been targeted specifically because he
was returning from the Delphi Conference. The rapidly authorized and blanket application of restrictions on the Belarus state
airline without any evidence of wrongdoing as decried by Lukashenko seem to indicate an attempt to further attack Belarus. Belarus
clearly adhered to the legal protocols for this event, and thus all the attacks on its airline have zero basis.
Recall what happening in Ukraine after the failed first coup attempt in 2004--it was further destabilized to make the next
attempt succeed. The same modus is now being applied to Belarus.
The Kremlin has posted a partial transcript
of the meeting between Putin and Lukashenko, where IMO it's made clear that Russia is doing quite a lot to stabilize Belarus's
economy with Putin remarking "in the first quarter of this year, our trade grew by a considerable 18.4 percent;" but, their discussion
about the "outburst of emotions" has yet to be made public.
The fools are on overdrive with the MSM as their megaphone. They still call Protasevich and his doxxer lady "journalists" in spite
of the toxic trail of pictures, sites and videos showing who these characters really are, but to no avail.
As a side scandal and desperation symptom some hockey tournament that at first was supposed to take place in Minsk moved to
Riga, and after the plane affair the official flag of Belarus was replaced in the central city square with the "bacon" flag, the
white red and white used during occupation and for a brief period after the fall of the USSR. Well, now it is known that some
US Embassy official hoisted it personally, what a lack of taste to say the least.
MSM is a HOAX wrapped in a FABRICATION "‹inside a FALSE narrative
A friend on Facebook read my post about this Ryanair hoax and posted this.
Everything in the Western media is a hoax by default.
Change my mind.
I commented:
First you take it at face value.
After 1 day you notice a gigantic narrative management operation.
On day 2 you discover it was all a fabrication.
Only on day 3 do you realize that it was a hoax: anyone with access to the raw data would immediately see through the fabrication.
I made a grave mistake on Sunday. Something happened and I went to Google to look for "reliable" sources. I ended out with
the Sidney Morning Herald. I then went on to congratulate Lukashenko on his well-executed revenge. But I did notice the narrative
management operation and the fact that everything in the media originated from RFE/RL fraudsters.
Moon of Alabama picked up
my comment into a post, but left out the part where I cast doubt on the sources and later questioned the whole narrative.
It later turned out the story was a RFE/RL fabrication. No Belarusian MiG fighter ever forced the Ryanair plane to do anything.
The correct thing to do is to unsubscribe from all MSM. I found this out 10 years ago, when researching Libya. MSM propaganda
invades your brain in so many levels from the factual to the emotional. Even if you filter out most levels something will still
seep through.
I only read filtered news. Social media is usually quite good in filtering out BS. Another good news stream is the comment
section on Moon of Alabama. If something important happens, you will find a critical comment on it within a few hours.
A MiG fighter from Belarus intercepted a civilian Ryanair flight from Athens to Vilnius and threatened to shoot it down
unless it diverted to Minsk airport. The MiG pilot informed the Ryanair pilot that he had been given permission to open fire,
i.e. this was not a rogue act but one sanctioned by the Belarus President, Alexander Lukashenko. After the plane landed in
Minsk, Belarus thugs boarded it and dragged off the young journalist Roman Protasevich, who apparently informed a fellow passenger
that he expected to receive the death penalty.
None of this ever happened. Except for the part where Protasevich believes that he would receive the death penalty if
convicted in a court of law. I do not know how severe his political crimes are, but even there I would not take his word as a
fact.
On the same site I find this piece of hate speech:
Belarus forcing down a civilian airliner flying between two EU, and Nato, capitals is a grave threat to the international
order. If any flight crossing the airspace of an autocratic regime is vulnerable to such an attack, the world begins to look
a very different Â"" and more dangerous "" place. The challenge to the free world now is to hit Minsk with such a set of punishments
that it doesn't dare repeat its action and that no other autocratic country tries to pull the same trick.
All this reminds me of a quote by George Orwell:
Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw
newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie.
I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed.
I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as
heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional
superstructures over events that never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of
what ought to have happened according to various "party lines."
Frankly who cares? The West has frequently downed airplanes in this fashion, starting with the Israeli downing of a Syrian DC3.
There's nothing to say; everyone does it. If the west wants to make an issue out of it, no-one can stop them.
"These facts are featured in an extensive expose posted on the German analytical website 'Moon of Alabama.' The hagiographical
account in the 'all the news that's fit to print' 'New York Times', the German analyst says, is noteworthy primarily for the key
facts that it omits. It turns out that, far from being an innocent young democracy activist and precocious lyceum student who
could not stomach the restrictions imposed by President Lukashenko's government, as misrepresented by the Western media, Protasevich
is in fact an experienced agitator with long-standing ties to the neo-Nazi fringe in the neighboring Ukraine."
Karganovic sees this event as an op by Belarus forces but provides no evidence for that assertion. He's pleased at its success
but also knows there're many more where Protasevich came from.
Along with the Chinese government and its mouthpiece Global Times , IMO we should look more closely at the very many
links the Outlaw US Empire has had since WW2 with Nazi and NeoNazi organizations and personages, while also examining the changing
nature of its political economy to that of Parasitical Neoliberalism. There's also the Neoliberal Davos Reset to be included.
IMO, there're many parallels between Fascism, Feudalism and Neoliberalism in that ownership is completely held by the small elite
circle while the masses essentially have nothing of importance. The use of Terror by all three also binds them together.
In case you missed it, here's the Global
Times discussing the Outlaw US Empire's use of Nazi methods and great willingness to do so as often as needed:
"No matter what Biden has in mind, the US government is generally up to something big against China. US executive bodies, Congress,
intelligence departments, and public opinion are forming a crazy spiral. Their ultimate goal is to create and hold China accountable
for the pandemic outbreak, making a new tool to severely thwart China's national interests.
"This is a big lie. German Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels once said: 'Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the
truth.' The US' radical political elites are engaged in a fever of intense competition with China. In a bid to achieve the goal,
they are increasingly Nazi-like in their belief and can do whatever it takes."
Here at MoA, we've used that adage numerous times, but this is the first time I've seen it employed by a major news publication--and
this publication reflects the views of China's government. IMO, the editor's use of it was okayed. The Forces of Reaction are
always Dark, and this time is no different. Protasevich worked for the Dark Forces, knew it and enjoyed serving. A pawn certainly,
but clearly a dangerous one.
Something most people have missed:
Today, Lukashenko personally delivered a briefcase directly to Putin containing documents related to the arrest of Roman Protasevich. What could possibly be so sensitive that any type of electronic communication would be too risky and required hard copies to
be delivered personally?
Why would the documents be so important to Russia? Very interesting if Protasevich's laptop or phone had some extremely incriminating evidence of a plot against Belarus and Russia.
Ryanair-gate would not be important if governments were denied the privilege of conducting its affairs in secret from those it
governs and if governments were denied the privilege of sovereign immunity, which keeps the rest of the world in the dark. The
private oligarch uses state secrecy and sovereign immunity to command its economic aggressions and conduct for private profit
is foreign wars.
So few changes in barricade type privileges associated to nation state power would make such a big difference to global humanity.
Protasevich could be a double agent who was found out and risked getting killed or imprisoned at the end of his trip. In that
case, hastily inventing a bomb threat from "Hamas agent" and exfiltrating him by downing the plane would make sense.
The key characteristics of the SOCIOECONOMIC system of a suzerainty are hierarchy, polarization and exploitation. This enables
the Global Financial Syndicate to drive PRIVATE CONTROL by privatization, extracting profits and increasing its power. Without
this system it can't survive, capture new entities and increase its power.
In analyzing any situation one need to understand the POWER DYNAMICS. This enables one to understand the hierarchy of religions,
nations, corporations, elites,...There seems to be a well defined playbook that is being followed to expand the global power.
However, now it seems to be failing?
Is this a good chart of the
POWER PLAYERS
driving U$A's and international developments?
(Solid lines refer to funding and dashed lines refer to mostly ideological connections)
Are there better charts and overview of the power players?
If one were to view Israel from an imperialist lens then it is a beachhead in the Middle East of the Financial Empire like
the Colony of Virginia (1606). The IMPERIALIST goal is to create a Middle East Union (MEU), similar to the United States and the
EU. Israel will be the financial, technological, military and trading hub of the ME? It will drive decimation of states to steal
the region's land, oil gas and natural resources, so they can be priced in the Empire's currency.
What were the strategies and tactics used by the Imperialist settlers to steal land from the Native Americans? Wasn't (freedom
of) religion one of the dimensions? How was the LAND stolen from natives of America? Weren't treaties made in bad faith? "In 1830,
US Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, forcing many indigenous peoples east of the Mississippi from their lands."
Ayn Rand framed
it as ... to the graduating Class Of U$A's military academy at West Point
Which of the past patterns of stealing land and getting rid of the natives are being repeated by Israel? We're watching a tragedy
and living through an epoch in the history of humanity.
One more thing... MECHANISM of power & control expansions to capture resources and control points...
Is this a good overview of what happened in
Ukraine? It discusses various power players,
plans and ploys.
"Anyone who does not understand contemporary history as a chain of decisions and events and instead always takes only the end
link of a long chain into account – will not understand anything at all."
"We must cultivate among the Ukrainians a people whose consciousness is altered to such an extent, that they begin to hate
everything Russian". -- Who said this & why?
The Dollar Empire is working towards neutralizing Russia through short term concessions. Russia has defined redlines and demanded
no interferences with Nord Stream 2, Belarus, Syria & Ukraine (implementation of the Minsk agreement). Also, no NATO membership
for Ukraine and Georgia. Russia wants to develop Iran and Turkey as regional powers, and be the third power to that of the U$A
and China. It will be interesting to see what happens next.
"She's done as a member of leadership. I don't understand what she's doing," one former
House GOP lawmaker told The Hill of Cheney's ongoing attacks on former President Trump. " It's
like political self-immolation. You can't cancel Trump from the Republican Party; all she's
done is cancel herself. "
Cheney has repeatedly attacked Trump for 'inciting' the Jan. 6 'insurrection' despite
telling supporters to protest peacefully and then go home following the breach of the
Capitol.
GOP leaders hope that purging Cheney from the leadership ranks will move Republicans
beyond their civil war over Trump" one that's raged publicly since the Jan. 6 attack on the
Capitol" and allow the party to unite behind a midterm campaign message that President Biden
and the Democrats are too liberal for the country. - The
Hill
"There are still a few members that are talking about things that happened in the past, not
really focused on what we need to do to move forward and win the majority back next year,"
according to Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), the minority whip. "We're going to have to be unified
if we defeat the socialist agenda you're seeing in Washington."
A victory by Stefanik would mark a symbolic shift back towards Trump by leading Republicans
- as the former president remains highly engaged this election cycle and has threatened to
politically obliterate any remaining GOP opposition.
"By ousting her, what we're saying is: We are repudiating your repudiation of the Trump
policies and the Trump agenda and her attacks on the president," according to Rep. Andy Biggs
(R-AZ), adding " President Trump is the leader of the Republican Party. And when she's out
there attacking him, she's attacking the leader of the Republican Party ."
Cheney has already survived one challenge to her leadership post, in February, after she
infuriated conservatives by voting to impeach Trump for inciting the Capitol rampage on Jan.
6. With the backing of Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), she easily kept
her seat as conference chair, 145 to 61 by secret ballot.
With McCarthy and Scalise fed up with Cheney and now backing Stefanik, the 36-year-old New
Yorker is expected to prevail in Wednesday's contest" a would-be victory for leaders who have
failed to unite the conference behind a post-Trump strategy in the early months of the Biden
administration. - The
Hill
... ... ...
Cheney isn't the only House Republican facing backlash for taking on Trump. Earlier in the
week, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), one of seven Republican senators who voted this year to
convict Trump, was booed and called a traitor at the Utah GOP state convention, where he
narrowly beat back an effort to censure him.
On Friday, the Ohio Republican Party Central Committee voted to censure Rep. Anthony
Gonzalez (R-Ohio), Cheney and the eight other House Republicans who backed Trump's
impeachment in January. The Ohio GOP also formally called for Gonzalez's resignation.
... ... ...
Catullus 51 minutes ago
I don't care if Trump runs again just as long as these gross establishment Republicans
are thrown out on their asses
JoeyChernenko PREMIUM 39 minutes ago (Edited)
Romney is a real traitorous worm. Did you hear him say Biden is a good man with good
intentions when the Utah crowd was booing his worthless hide? And we need to make sure the
Bush dynasty remains out of power.
Anath 51 minutes ago remove link
the cheney family is pure evil. that is all.
chinese.sniffles 52 minutes ago
Why Would Wyoming choose Chenney, after all that evil that **** brought upon America. If
there was no ****, Obama would never get elected.
chunga 47 minutes ago remove link
Cynics suspect primaries are also rigged.
Basecamp3 PREMIUM 50 minutes ago
Comstock is a traitor that never read the Navarro Report which goes into detail of
how the election was stolen. Also, ousting Cheney has zero risk. She is stupid, weak, and
her own constituents hate her.
overbet 50 minutes ago
which has caused some GOP leaders to fear alienating female Republican voters,
particularly educated suburbanites who will be key votes in the 2022 elections.
The female republicans I know are smarter than that. All of them
Grave Dancer 22 38 minutes ago remove link
Liz's sociopath dad **** got hundreds of thousands killed based on a total fraud lie of
a war. And Liz has a problem with Trump because he tweets some unfiltered stuff once in a
while? Freaking kidding me? ay_arrow
GhostOLaz 37 minutes ago
Don't blame Liz, she has a legacy of treason to protect, Daddy removed the only secular
anti Communist govt in the middle East which protected Christains and religious
minorities...
gaaasp 20 minutes ago (Edited)
Women could wear pants and not be burkahed up in Syria and Libya and Iraq before
Bush/Clinton/Obama/Trump sent troops.
chunga 49 minutes ago
I don't want to give up on the process but the GOP has a lot of work to do.
nmewn 39 minutes ago
The thing about "us" is, when we find them we jettison them. Cantor was another one. She
voted to impeach an outgoing President who's trial she knew would be held AFTER he was out
of office and again just an average American citizen holding no federal office at all.
She is either incompetent, stupid (or both) or a cancer the GOP can live with excised
from the body.
Make_Mine_A_Double 40 minutes ago
Peggy Noonan really came out the closet in this weekend's WSJ with editorial of Liz
Chaney against the House of Cowards.
They are 2 of the same. We've had these demsheviks in the ranks for decades. Noonan
takes it in the anoose at dem cocktail parties and is Team Mascot for the RINOs.
Tucker finally exposed that filth Luntz. McCathry is actually living with him in one of
his apartments - I assume it's not platonic in nature.
This is why Trump could never even the bottom of the swamp....g.d. RINOs need to purged
with the extreme prejudice.
the Mysterians 40 minutes ago
War pig.
in deditionem acceptos 48 minutes ago
Liz will survive the vote. Too much graff from the MIC to get her out. McCarthey could
of got her out in Feb if he wanted. Wonder what honey pot he's dipping into?
A Girl In Flyover Country 43 minutes ago
She won't survive the Wyoming voters, though.
Cogito_ergosum 52 minutes ago (Edited)
She is protecting her dad who was part of the inside gang that carried out the...
demolition of the twin towers on 911...
Flying Monkees 37 minutes ago (Edited)
BS. The tribe's fingerprints were all over 9/11 as documented in extensive detail by
Christopher Bollyn.
JoeyChernenko PREMIUM 53 minutes ago
Don't any of these evil families ever just fade into oblivion? Bush, Cheney, Clinton,
Obama, etc.
beavertails 50 minutes ago
Extending and pretending there are choices when there aren't any. The MIC got this. The
"Prez" is just show to sell ads and steal, I mean raise fiat from the gullible.
Money quite from comments: " more importantly it is devastating information about the dishonesty of our government. What have we
come to? What recourse is available?"
The man cast as a linchpin of debunked Trump-Russia collusion theories is breaking his silence to vigorously dispute the U.S.
government's effort to brand him a Russian spy and put him behind bars.
In an exclusive interview with RealClearInvestigations, Konstantin Kilimnik stated, "I have no relationship whatsoever to any
intelligence services, be they Russian or Ukrainian or American, or anyone else."
Konstantin Kilimnik: Decries the U.S. government's "senseless and false accusations." AP Photo
Kilimnik, a longtime employee of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, spoke out in response to an explosive
Treasury Department statement declaring that he
had "provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and campaign strategy" during the 2016 election.
That press release, which announced an array of sanctions on Russian nationals last month, also alleged that Kilimnik is a "known
Russian Intelligence Services agent implementing influence operations on their behalf."
Treasury 's
claim came shortly after two other accusatory U.S. government statements about the dual Ukrainian-Russian national. In March,
a U.S. Intelligence Community
Assessment accused Kilimnik of being a "Russian influence agent" who meddled in the 2020 campaign to assist Trump's reelection.
A month earlier, an FBI
alert offered $250,000 for information leading to his arrest over a 2018 witness tampering charge in Manafort's shuttered Ukraine
lobbying case, which was unrelated to Russia, collusion, or any elections.
Treasury provided no evidence for its claims, which go beyond the findings of the two most extensive Russiagate investigations:
the 448-page report issued in 2019 by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the 966-page report issued in August 2020 by the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence.
Treasury has declined all media requests for elaboration on how it reached conclusions that those probes did not. Two unidentified
officials
told NBC News that U.S. intelligence "has developed new information" about Kilimnik "that leads them to believe " (emphasis
added) that he passed on the polling data to Russia. But these sources "did not identify the source or type of intelligence that
had been developed," nor "when or how" it was received.
"Nobody has seen any evidence to support these claims about Kilimnik," a congressional source familiar with the House and Senate's
multiple Russia-related investigations told RCI.
Adam Schiff: Treated the Treasury claim about Kilimnik as the Trump-Russia smoking gun. "That's what most people would call collusion,"
he said. (Al Drago/Pool via AP)
Despite the absence of evidence, the Treasury press release's one-sentence claim about Kilimnik has been widely greeted as the
Trump-Russia smoking gun. Rep. Adam Schiff, the California Democrat who heads the House Intelligence Committee, told MSNBC that Treasury's
assertion about Kilimnik proved that Russian intelligence was "involved in trying to help Trump win in that [2016] election. That's
what most people would call collusion."
Speaking to RCI in fluent English from his home in Moscow, Kilimnik, 51, described these U.S. government assertions as "senseless
and false accusations."
His comments are backed up by documents, some previously unreported, as well as by Rick Gates, a longtime Manafort associate and
key Mueller probe cooperating witness. (Gates pleaded guilty to making a false statement and to failing to register as a foreign
agent in connection to his lobbying work in Ukraine.) The evidence raises doubts about new efforts to revive the Trump-Kremlin collusion
narrative by casting Kilimnik as a central Russian figure.
"They needed a Russian to investigate 'Russia collusion,' and I happened to be that Russian," Kilimnik said.
Highlights from the interview and RCI's related reporting:
Kilimnik denies passing 2016 polling data to Russian intelligence, or any Russian for that matter. Instead, Kilimnik says
he shared publicly available, general information about the 2016 American presidential race to Ukrainian clients of Manafort's
in a bid to recover old debts and drum up new business. Gates told RCI that the Mueller team "cherry-picked" his testimony about
Kilimnik to spread a misleading, collusion-favorable narrative. The U.S. government has never publicly produced the polling data
at issue, nor any evidence that it was shared with Russia.
Despite his centrality to the Trump-Russia saga, Kilimnik says no U.S. government official has ever tried get in touch with
him. "I never had a single contact with [the] FBI or any government official," Kilimnik says.
Kilimnik shared documents that contradict the Special Counsel's effort to prove that he has Russian intelligence "ties." Photos
and video of his Russian passport and a U.S. visa in his name, shared with RCI , undermine the Mueller report's claim that Kilimnik
visited the United States on a Russian "diplomatic passport" in 1997. To judge from the images, he travelled on a civilian
passport and obtained a regular U.S. visa. The Mueller team has never produced the "diplomatic passport."
Kilimnik denies traveling to Spain to meet Manafort in 2017. If true, this would undercut the Mueller team's claim that Manafort
lied in denying such a meeting. That denial was used to help secure a 2019 court ruling that Manafort breached a cooperation agreement.
The Special Counsel never furnished evidence for the alleged Madrid encounter.
While the Treasury Department and Senate Intelligence Committee claim that Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer, no
U.S. security or intelligence agency has adopted this characterization.
Kilimnik has never been charged with anything related to espionage, Russia, collusion, or the 2016 election. Instead, the
Mueller team indicted Kilimnik on witness-tampering charges in a case pertaining to Manafort's lobbying work in Ukraine.
Meanwhile, t he FBI's $250,000 bounty for Kilimnik is larger than most rewards it offers for the capture of violent fugitives,
including those accused of child murder .
Reviving the Polling Data Conspiracy Theory
Kilminik has provided an inviting target for proponents of Trump-Russia conspiracy theories. He was born in 1970 in Ukraine when
it was part of the Soviet Union, and later worked for Paul Manafort as a translator and aide there. This background makes him one
of the few people in the broad Trump 2016 campaign orbit to possess a Russian passport.
To this Mueller and others have added a series of ambiguous and disputed allegations to say that the FBI "assesses" him to "have
ties to Russian intelligence." This characterization, first made in a 2017 court filing, quickly transmogrified into a presumed fact
of the collusion narrative.
Rather than prosecute Manafort for any crime related to Russian interference in the 2016 campaign, the Mueller team instead pursued
him on financial and lobbying charges involving his pre-Trump stint as a political consultant in Ukraine. In 2018, it accused Kilimnik
of seeking to pressure two "potential witnesses" by sending them text messages about Manafort's Ukraine lobbying work.
As the Russia probe came to a close without a single indictment related to a Trump-Kremlin conspiracy, the Mueller team used Kilimnik
to suggest collusion without formally alleging it.
In January 2019, the Mueller team accused Manafort of breaching their cooperation agreement by lying about his interactions with
his Russian employee. Topping the list were alleged false statements about
sharing election
polling data with Kilimnik in 2016.
Andrew Weissmann: Despite this lead Mueller prosecutor's suggestion otherwise, the Mueller report "did not identify evidence of a
connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election," as the report itself stated. NYU Law
"This goes to the larger view of what we think is going on, and what we think is the motive here," lead prosecutor Andrew Weissmann
told Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC. "This goes, I think, very much to the heart of what the
special counsel's office is investigating."
Weissmann's musings became collusion fodder. Media pundits and influential Democrats, namely Congressional intelligence leaders
Schiff and Mark Warner, speculated that Kilimnik shared Trump campaign polling data with Russian intelligence officers as they allegedly
worked to turn the election in Trump's favor. "This appears as the closest we've seen yet to real, live, actual collusion," Warner
told CNN . "Clearly, Manafort was trying to collude
with Russian agents."
But soon after, the Mueller team quietly undercut Weissmann's "larger view" and the conspiratorial innuendo that it had fueled.
One month after igniting the frenzy about the polling data, Weissmann submitted a
heavily
redacted court filing that
walked back some of his
claims. The following month, the Special Counsel's final report acknowledged that its musings and speculations about Kilimnik could
not be corroborated. The Mueller team not only "did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data
and Russia's interference in the election," as the report stated, but also "could not assess what Kilimnik (or others he may have
given it to) did with it."
Rick Gates: Ex-Manafort aide says the Mueller team "cherry-picked" his testimony about Kilimnik to spread a misleading, collusion-favorable
narrative. AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana
"I have no idea who made up the lies about 'detailed' or 'sensitive' polling data, or why they did it," Kilimnik says. "They were
mostly quotes of the polls from the media, such as LA Times and others. They would be 'Clinton "" 43, Trump "" 42.' Never anything
more detailed. I never got even a page printed out with either polling data or any other info."
This public data was shared, Kilimnik says, with Ukrainian clients of Manafort's as part of both regular political chatter and
an effort to encourage future business. "I shared this info with a lot of our clients in Ukraine, who were closely following the
race and who were excited about Paul working for [Trump]," Kilimnik says.
If any government official did receive his polling data, Kilimnik adds, they were not Russian but rather from Ukraine or even
the United States. "I would share it with our political contacts in Ukraine, basically to keep their interest to Paul and our Ukrainian
business alive. Also I shared it with the U.S. and other embassies, basically offering the opinion that the election is not over."
Kilimnik's account is corroborated by Gates, the ex-Manafort associate and Trump campaign official whose testimony was used by
the Mueller team "" deceptively, he says "" to suggest a connection between the polling data and possible Trump-Russia collusion.
The Special Counsel's office "relied heavily on Mr. Gates for evidence" about the polling data, the
New York Times noted in
February 2019.
According to Gates, that reliance entailed significant creative license by Mueller's prosecutors, particularly Weissmann. Gates
says he told the Special Counsel's Office that the polling data was not sensitive information, but rather publicly available figures
taken from media outlets.
"I explained to them, over the course of many interviews, what the polling data was about, and why it was being shared," Gates
told RCI. "All that was exchanged was old, topline data from public polls and from some internal polls, but all dated, nothing in
real time. So for example, Trump 48, Clinton 46. It was not massive binders full of demographics or deep research. No documents were
ever shared or disclosed. And this is part of what Mueller left out of the report. They cherry-picked and built a narrative that
really was not true, because they had pre-determined the conclusion."
Happier times: Manafort and colleagues, with Kilimnik far left and the boss seated in white shirt, red tie. AP Photo
Asked why Manafort shared any polling data with clients in Ukraine, Kilimnik and Gates stressed the same reason: money. "The were
some outstanding debts, which we were working to get repaid, which never happened," Kilimnik says. "And there was also Paul's reputation.
He was very well known to a lot of people in Kiev, and he hoped [he] could generate some new business" by showcasing his work for
Trump's campaign.
"This was a way that Paul was using to let people in Ukraine know that he was doing very well in the United States running the
election of Donald Trump, and that he was trying to collect the remaining fees that he was owed," for prior work in Ukraine, Gates
says. "He was trying to position himself. This is not unlike any other political operative, Republican or Democrat, in politics.
They all do it."
The Mueller report itself quietly bolsters Gates' and Kilimnik's converging recollections. "Gates' account about polling data
is consistent [redacted]," it states, ""¦ with multiple emails that Kilimnik sent to U.S. associates and press contacts" in the summer
of 2016. "Those emails referenced 'internal polling,' described the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's role in it, and assessed
Trump' s prospects for victory." The corresponding footnote cites eight emails from Kilimnik to these "U.S. associates and press
contacts." This indicates that the Mueller team obtained direct evidence of the polling data that was shared; how it was discussed;
and with whom it was shared.
Rather than highlight the Kilimnik emails that it obtained, and Gates' account that the polling data was shared for financial
reasons, the Mueller report mentioned this information only in passing and ultimately concluded that it "could not reliably determine
Manafort's purpose in sharing" the information.
Weissmann did not respond to a request for comment.
The Kilimnik Passport Kilimnik's passport from the time in question "" to judge from photos and a video he shared with RCI
"" was issued in the standard red ... Konstantin Kilimnik via RealClearInvestigations ... not in the green of the diplomatic corps.
Mueller cited a Kilimnik "diplomatic passport" as evidence of "ties to Russian intelligence." Government of Russia/Wikimedia
Although the Mueller report walked back Weissman's innuendo regarding polling data, its assertion that Kilimnik has "ties to Russian
intelligence" remains a foundation of the Russia collusion narrative.
Putting aside the fact that the government has never produced any evidence that Kilimnik communicated with Russian intelligence
or the Kremlin, RCI has obtained documents that undercut the government's basis for assuming those unspecified "ties."
In Mueller's own telling, Kilimnik's only direct link to the Russian government was his enrollment in a Soviet military academy
from 1987 to 1992, where he trained as a linguist. "It's a language school, similar to what you guys have in Fort Monterey," Kilimnik
said, referring to the Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center, in Monterey, California. "It's a university that trains
military translators, mostly for the army, not for the intelligence services. Basically it was a military training, for five years,
focusing on English and Swedish. In normal circumstances, I would actually go and serve in the army, but because Soviet Union was
falling apart, I was able to get a job as the instructor of Swedish at the university. I never served in the real army. If teaching
Swedish counts as spying "" that will be very surprising."
To substantiate Kilimnik's alleged Russian intelligence "ties," the Mueller team wrote that Kilimnik "obtained a visa to travel
to the United States with a Russian diplomatic passport in 1997." (Intelligence operatives often travel to foreign countries under
diplomatic cover.)
Kilimnik's U.S. visa shows an "R" for "regular." (The typo in his last name was corrected on a later visa.) Konstantin Kilimnik via
RealClearInvestigations
But Kilimnik's passport from that period "" to judge from the images he shared with RCI via a messaging app "" was issued in the
standard red color, not in the green color of the diplomatic corps. The document also contains a regular U.S. visa issued on October
28, 1997 "" the same date the Mueller report claims he traveled to the U.S. "with a Russian diplomatic passport." The U.S. visa to
Kilimnik is issued under the category of "R" "" which stands for Regular "" and "B1/B2," the designation for a temporary visa for
business and tourism.
The Mueller team's claim that he possessed and travelled on a diplomatic passport is "a blatant lie," Kilimnik told RCI. "I never
had a diplomatic passport in my life. It's one of many very sloppy things in the Muller report, which don't make sense."
The Mueller report cites Kilimnik's "travel to the United States with a Russian diplomatic passport."
Mueller report, Page 133
Told of the Mueller report's apparent error concerning Kilimnik's passport, a Justice Department spokesperson declined comment.
Former Special Counsel Mueller and former lead prosecutor Weissmann did not respond to emailed queries.
Ironically, at the time when Mueller team claims that he visited the U.S. on behalf of the Russian government, Kilimnik was in
fact working for the U.S. government at the U.S. Congress-funded International Republican Institute (IRI) in Moscow. As RealClearInvestigations
has
previously reported , Kilimnik's 10-year IRI tenure is among several substantial Western government connections that have
been ignored in amid efforts to accuse him of ties to the Russian government. "I gave IRI my CV which clearly said which school I
graduated from, and gave my detailed background," Kilimnik recalls. "I never concealed anything."
Kilimnik: No Madrid Meeting With Manafort
When it comes to his travel history, Kilimnik says that the Special Counsel's Office made another significant error: falsely claiming
that he and Manafort held a meeting in Spain .
"I have never been to Madrid in my life," Kilimnik says. Wikimedia
When Manafort denied that he and Kilimnik met in Madrid in 2017, the Mueller team accused him of lying and cited this as one of
several alleged breaches of their cooperation agreement. The Mueller report claims that the two met in the Spanish capital on Feb.
26, 2017, "where Kilimnik had flown from Moscow."
It also states that Manafort initially denied the Madrid meeting in his first two interviews with the Special Counsel's office,
but then relented "after being confronted with documentary evidence that Kilimnik was in Madrid at the same time as him."
But Kilimnik tells RCI that no such meeting occurred, and that he believes that Manafort was coerced into changing his story.
"I have never been to Madrid in my life," Kilimnik says. The "documentary evidence" referenced in the Mueller report was, he speculates,
a flight booking that was ultimately cancelled. "I was thinking about going to Madrid, and I discussed it with Paul," he says. "But
it made no sense. And ultimately, it was too expensive. So I didn't go."
Had he actually visited Madrid, Kilimnik says, the Mueller team would have "easily found proof "" tickets, boarding passes, border
crossings "" all that stuff. It's not rocket science to get it. The European Union is a pretty disciplined place. There would be
at least be a record of me crossing the border somewhere in the EU."
Kilimnik told RCI that the last time he saw Manafort was one month before the alleged Madrid trip, around the time of Trump's
inauguration in Janaury 2017. "I did not attend any of the inauguration events myself," he recalls. "But I spent some time to meet
with Paul, and to catch up. That was our last meeting in-person, in Alexandria [Virginia]."
Asked why Manafort would have admitted to a Madrid meeting that did not in fact take place, Kilimnik said that his former boss
faced heavy pressure while locked up by the Mueller team, which included a long stint in solitary confinement. "I don't know why
he said that. I have difficulties to imagine Paul's psychological state when he was jailed. A guy who [had] a very high-level life.
Jail is a tough place. I still get the shudders to think what he had to go through."
The allegation that Manafort lied to the Mueller team proved consequential. In February 2019, U.S. District Judge Jackson
sided
with the Special Counsel and voided
Manafort's plea deal. No longer bound to give him a reduced sentence for cooperating, Jackson
nearly doubled Manafort's
prison term on top of his earlier conviction and excoriated him for telling "lies." President Trump pardoned in Manafort in December
2020.
Told that Kilimnik denies ever visiting Madrid, and asked whether the Special Counsel's office collected concrete evidence to
the contrary, both former Special Counsel Mueller and lead prosecutor Weissmann did not respond. A Justice Department spokesperson
declined comment.
FBI Alert Contradicts Senate-Treasury Spy Claim
Over one year after Mueller closed up shop, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) unilaterally upgraded Kilimnik's
alleged Russian intelligence status. The panel's
August 2020 report
declared that Kilimnik, far from merely having "ties" to the GRU as Mueller had claimed, is in fact a full-fledged "Russian intelligence
officer."
The Senate made the leap despite offering no new public evidence to support its explosive "assessment", and even acknowledging
that its "power to investigate" "" as well as "its staffing, resources, and technical capabilities" -- ultimately "falls short of
the FBI's."
Richard Burr and Mark Warner, Republican chair and Democratic co-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The FBI and Justice
Department do not endorse their panel's judgment that Kilimnik is a "Russian intelligence officer." AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
The Senate also labelled Kilimnik a Russian spy despite simultaneously presenting new evidence that he was, in the Committee's
own words, a "valuable resource" for officials at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, with whom he was "in regular contact."
In September 2020,
RCI asked the FBI and Justice Department whether it shares the SSCI's judgment that Kilimnik is a "Russian intelligence officer."
A DOJ spokesperson replied that "the Mueller report speaks for itself," and advised that the public "defer" to how Kilimnik was characterized
in the Mueller report and the Special Counsel Office's indictments. This strongly suggested, RCI reported, that the FBI has not adopted
the SSCI's view that Kilimnik is a Russian spy.
The FBI's February "alert"
offering $250,000 for information leading to Kilimnik's arrest bolsters this reporting. It once again states that Kilimnik is "assessed
by the FBI to have ties to Russian intelligence" "" shunning the SSCI's spy language and reverting to Mueller's original, ambiguous
characterization.
The wording of the FBI alert underscores that while the Senate Intelligence Committee and Treasury Department have declared that
Kilimnik is a Russian spy, the nation's top law enforcement agency has never adopted that assessment. When Manafort's legal team
asked the Special Counsel's Office for any communication between Manafort and "Russian intelligence officials,"
they
were told that "there are no materials responsive to [those] requests." In unsealed notes from early 2017, Peter Strzok "" the
top FBI counterintelligence agent who opened the Trump-Russia investigation ""
wrote :
"We are unaware of ANY Trump advisers engaging in conversations with Russian intelligence officials."
Asked whether the FBI has altered its characterization of Kilimnik in light of Treasury's claim that he is a "known Russian Intelligence
Services agent", an FBI spokesperson declined comment.
The FBI's alert was also remarkable for the size of the Kilimnik bounty, which is more than double the amount of most members
of the FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives List. While the bureau is offering $100,000 each for information regarding six alleged murderers,
and $200,000 for another, the FBI is offering $250,000 for help nabbing Kilimnik on a lone witness tampering charge in Manafort's
Ukraine lobbying case.
The Mueller team
accused Kilimnik of sending text messages to two individuals with whom Manafort had worked during his Ukraine lobbying days.
Kilimnik's aim, the Special Counsel's Office alleged, was to pressure the pair to attest that their prior work was focused on lobbying
officials in Europe, not in the United States. These individuals "" identified in court documents as "Person D1" and "Person D2"
"" were not active witnesses for the Mueller probe, but instead, according to the Special Counsel's Office, "potential witnesses."
The 13 Kilimnik messages to these "potential witnesses"
cited by Mueller include the following:
[Person D2], hi! How are you? Hope you are doing fine. ;))
My friend P [Manafort] is trying to reach [Person D1] to brief him on what's going on.
If you have a chance to mention this to [Person D1] - would be great.
Basically P wants to give him a quick summary that he says to everybody (which is true) that our friends never lobbied in the
U.S., and the purpose of the program was EU.
Hi. This is [Kilimnik]. My friend P is looking for ways to connect to you to pass you several messages. Can we arrange that.
Kilimnik says that he was not trying to tamper with anyone. "I do not understand how two messages to our old partners who helped
us get out the message about Ukraine's integration aspirations in EU, and asking them to get in touch with Paul, can be interpreted
as 'intimidation' or 'obstruction of justice,'" he says.
Whether or not Kilimnik sought to tamper with "potential witnesses" in Manafort's Ukraine lobbying case, the alleged 2018 infraction
has nothing to do with 2016 Trump-Russia collusion.
The FBI alert from February raises questions about the bombshell Treasury Department claims released two months later. If the
U.S. government stands by Treasury's claims about Kilimnik, why is he wanted only on a minor, non-Russia related witness-tampering
charge, and not for taking part in alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election? If Kilimnik indeed passed on "sensitive information
on polling and campaign strategy" to Russian intelligence while working as a spy, why has he not been indicted alongside the Russian
social media company charged by Mueller in February 2018, or the Russian intelligence officers charged by Mueller in July 2018?
To Kilimnik, the answer is found on that same Russian passport that Mueller mischaracterized. "It is clear to me that the indictment
of 2018 was pulled out of the thin air, simply to have a Russian face in the mix," he says. "I understand that they needed a Russian
to investigate 'Russia collusion,' and I happened to be that Russian," he says.
"The funny thing is that I'm not hiding. And I would have explained the same thing to the FBI or anyone who never reached out
to me. They don't because they don't want the truth."
From Russian Spy to "Influence Agent"
In Kilimnik's eyes, his utility as a Russian national for the Trump-Russia collusion narrative also explains his prominent inclusion
in the recent U.S. Intelligence
Community Assessment , released in March one month after the FBI alert for his arrest.
In yet another new iteration of how Kilimnik is described by the U.S. government, the ICA does not call him a Russian intelligence
officer, but instead a "Russian influence agent."
The ICA does not define the term "Russian influence agent," or explain how it reached that new assessment about Kilimnik. Nor
does it put forth any evidence for the alleged Russian influence activities ascribed to him .
The report alleges that Kilimnik was part of a "network of Ukraine-linked individuals "¦ connected to the Russian Federal Security
Service (FSB)" who "took steps throughout the [2020] election cycle to damage U.S. ties to Ukraine, denigrate President Biden and
his candidacy, and benefit former President Trump's prospects for reelection."
Andriy Derkach: "I have never met him in my life," Kilimnik says of this Ukrainian lawmaker with reputed Kremlin ties. Petro Zhuravel/Wikimedia
As part of this alleged meddling network, the ICA asserts that Kilimnik tried to influence U.S. officials; helped produce a documentary
that aired on U.S. television in January 2020; and worked with Andriy Derkach, a Ukrainian lawmaker alleged to have Kremlin ties.
"Derkach, Kilimnik, and their associates sought to use prominent U.S. persons and media conduits to launder their narratives to U.S.
officials and audiences," the ICA states.
Kilimnik says the U.S. intelligence officials who wrote those words are using their anonymity and power to launder their false
narratives about him.
"I have no idea what they're talking about," he says. "I would really love to see at least one confirmation of the things they
allege. Pulling me into this report with zero evidence really shows that [U.S. intelligence] people high up do not give a damn about
the truth, facts, or anything."
As for Derkach, "I have never met him in my life," Kilimnik says. "I don't know why, or on what basis, they're making claims that
he has any relationship to me."
"I had zero meetings with anybody related to the Trump campaign. In fact, I have tried to do my best "" understanding how I've
gotten into this mess "" to stay as far as possible from any U.S. politics." If he had held such meetings, Kilimnik adds, "this should
be easy to prove."
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not respond to requests for comment.
No Effort to Contact Russiagate's Top Russian
Even though Kilimnik's name fills dozens of pages of the Mueller and Senate Intelligence reports after years of federal scrutiny
and he is the target of a $250,000 FBI reward, this seemingly critical Russiagate figure has never been contacted by a single U.S.
government official, to judge from the public record as well as Kilimnik's account.
The lack of contact is similar to the way FBI, Mueller, and Senate investigators treated other supposedly central Russiagate figures.
When Joseph Mifsud, whose conversations with George Papadopoulos triggered the FBI's Trump-Russia probe, visited the U.S. in early
2017, the FBI subjected him to
a light round of questioning and then let him leave the country. The Mueller team later claimed in its final report that Mifsud
had lied to FBI agents, yet inexplicably did not indict him. Despite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's central role in publishing
the stolen Democratic Party emails supposedly hacked and supplied by Russia, the
Mueller team never contacted him and the Senate Intelligence Committee
shunned an offer to interview him .
Kilimnik believes that this avoidance is deliberate. "The FBI and others could have had the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv or Moscow, or
have any of my numerous contacts in the U.S., reach out and start a conversation, if they wanted info," he says. "But they do not
really need it. All they is need is a scarecrow. And as one of the few people within reach of the Trump campaign who has a Russian
passport, they picked me."
"They never reached out to me," he adds. "I never had a single contact with FBI or any government official, basically since charges
were brought [on] Paul. Nobody ever tried to talk to me because they know the truth. They understood damn well that I will tell them
what I'm telling you."
Kilimnik says that he has had only minimal contact with Manafort since the former Trump campaign chairman was released to home
confinement in March 2020 and subsequently pardoned by Trump in late December. "We had one short contact after he got out of jail,
basically catching up about family and kids and everything," Kilimnik recalls. "I want to give him time to just basically get his
life back to normal. We have not spoken on the telephone."
After years in Ukraine working with Manafort, Kilimnik now lives full-time in Moscow with his wife and two children. "I have been
pretty open all my life, and have not been hiding from anyone," Kilimnik says. "I would have been happy to answer any questions from
the FBI, or whoever. But I refuse to be a toy in bizarre political games and have my life ruined more than it has been because of
the senseless and false accusations."
Despite being labeled a Russian spy who meddled in the 2016 election, Kilimnik has no plans to return to the U.S. and try to clear
his name. "I am not going to the U.S. on my own dime, with no visa in COVID times only to be crucified by the media, having zero
chance of justice," he says. "This is a sad continuation of a deeply wrong story. I thought it would be over with Trump gone and
the need to create lies about his 'ties to Russia.' But obviously, I was wrong."
This and all other original articles created by RealClearInvestigations may be republished for free with attribution. (These terms
do not apply to outside articles linked on the site.)
We provide our stories for free but they are expensive to produce. Help us continue to publish distinctive journalism by making
a contribution today to RealClearInvestigations.
roc993 19 May, 2021 Did the Democrats and the media ever apologize for spending 2 years claiming the election was stolen by
Trump? The drumbeat was continuous - ratcheting up day by day - "Walls closing in" - right up to the point Mueller threw cold
water on the entire thing. Then they slinked away without another word. And no censorship of those entities and individuals by
FaceBook and Twitter? Fascinating. Reply 40 11 2 reply
N notenough 19 May, 2021 What are the odds that the FBI/Treasury Dept, CIA, etc are lying to the public about this whole mess
THEY created....100%. These are all political organizations, tasked with protecting the status quo, the status quo being the protection
of Empire. Reply 30 7 1 reply
A AJMG 19 May, 2021 "In his speech before a joint session of Congress last week, President Biden complained about "Russia's
interference in our elections," even though his intelligence czar had released a report the previous month formally dismissing
the idea Moscow had interfered in the 2020 election or the 2016 election." Reply 23 7 1 reply
D daniel155 19 May, 2021 No one, even those on the other side, believes there was Russian collusion though they will never
admit it. Hillary still says the Russia stole the election from her. I guess she uses that to cope with the fact that she blew
a very winnable election. Reply 28 7
A AJMG 19 May, 2021 Trump opposed Russia's Nord Stream 2 pipeline, & today we learn that Biden has accepted it. If Putin favored
Trump, it was a bad miscalculation since Trump was way more tough on Russia than any Democrat. Reply 36 6 1 reply
DH Derrick Hand 19 May, 2021 Hate to tell you guys but the Russia collusion discussion is over, no matter who is right. The
Media has succeeded in mudding the water and destroying any trust in finding the truth with respect to anything political, including
any election and that includes the coming one in 2022. This is like an argument at a table for four in a raucous high school cafeteria.
You should be more concerned where this total loss of trust is going to lead us and that is not a good place. Reply 16 6 3 reply
W Wisewerds 19 May, 2021 A wholly partisan, politically biased prosecutor lied and cherry-picked information to support a
pre-determined conclusion in an effort to savage an opponent and jail his supporters? I would put on my shocked face, but its
currently at the cleaners. Instead, I will just suggest that this is now standard operating procedure for our left-fascist oppressors.
Reply 21 4 1 reply
C Crutch 19 May, 2021 I can't wait for 2022 House win by Republicans. The first thing they should do is haul Adam Schiff in
under oath to discuss his every utterance, then expel him from the House. Reply 40 9 5 reply
A archon27 19 May, 2021 It not sedition if the democrats try to oust a legally elected president on a falsified premise...
because THEIR "evidence" was believable... This is literally the mantra of the left. Reply 27 6 3 reply
Mark H 19 May, 2021 If the wider media do not pick this up then the matter of Trump campaign's collusion with Russia can never
be cleared up, and will continue to serve the intention of the establishment. VAPOR 19 May, 2021 The media portrayed both Obama
and Biden as uninvolved. But now we know they both actively followed the investigation. According to former acting attorney general
Sally Yates, she was surprised that Obama knew about the investigation and knew more than she did at the time. Obama called upon
former FBI director James Comey to stay after a meeting to discuss the investigation. Comey had mentioned using the Logan Act
to charge Flynn, even though the unconstitutional law has never been used successfully in a prosecution since the country was
founded. Biden has repeatedly denied knowledge of the investigation. Just a day before the latest disclosure, George Stephanopoulos
asked Biden in an interview what he knew of the Flynn investigation. Biden was adamant that he knew nothing about "those moves"
and he called it a diversion. But that is not true if he took the relatively uncommon action for a vice president of demanding
the unmasking of Flynn information.
Justis 20 May, 2021 Thank you for your continued work. This is all hidden from Americans in this age of media coverage. But more
importantly it is devastating information about the dishonesty of our government. What have we come to? What recourse is available?
VAPOR 19 May, 2021 Carter Page Sues FBI, Comey, McCabe for Millions Nov 28, 2020" Former Trump campaign aide Carter Page filed
a $75 million lawsuit against the FBI and several former high-ranking bureau officials ... Reply 6 1 1 reply
V VAPOR 19 May, 2021 Just a reminder that Obama and his minions committed the greatest political crime in US history when
they weaponized government agencies to influence and discredit a presidential election and frame Trump. Reply 7 3 1 reply
V VAPOR 19 May, 2021 Obama needs to answer questions about his involvement with the Fake Russian Dossier and the weaponization
of government agencies to get Trump. He basically planted evidence and then said prosecute Trump by the book.
futbolfan 19 May, 2021 I respect all the dogged investigators who root out the truth of the crimes and corruption of our "justice
department", and FBI. I hope they keep up the good work. Personally I have no more faith in anything which was soaked in the hate
and insanity of the Obama thug regime...
Jerubbesheth xx 19 May, 2021 Give it up already. The Russia Trump Collusion was already disapproved by Mueller. Americans
are tired of the disinformation and propaganda. Bolshevik Schiff is a pathological liar. If anyone colluded with Russia it was
certainly Liberal Commie Democrat Clinton. The reason Bolshevik Schiff doesn't investigate Clinton? Schiff and Clinton are part
of the swamp. Clinton bought and paid for colluded with an ex-British Spy on a false dossier on Trump. Clinton was already in
Putin's pocket. Clinton approved the sale of Uranium one to the Russians, and then Clinton receives $145 Million from Russian
Oligarchs for her Corrupt Clinton Foundation. Mueller was FBI director at the time. So now who is colluding with the Russians.
I guess Clinton's colluding with the Russians is the good kind for the liberal commie Democrats, while the Liberal commie Democrats
deflect the bad colluding onto to Trump. Colluding is colluding anyway you cut it. Hillary's colluding wasn't disapproved. Reply
10 3 3 reply
C chuckstephens06 19 May, 2021 While the Special prosecutor office was capable of any transgression or corruption, one needs
to realize that it wouldn't have been possible without the assistance of corrupt lefty operative Judge, Amy Berman Jackson...
Jackson's non legal, political approach to decision making, has been the example that all corrupt lefty judges follow... Plus
her questionable relationship with Weissman outside of the Courtroom... Reply 6 2
K kochcomics 20 May, 2021 Lets see what we have here: 1)Kilimnik says he has no ties to the Russian government. OK. Do you
really believe that no one in the Putin's government has directly or indirectly debriefed him. Really? Do you think he would have
a choice in the matter? Do you know anything about Putin at all? Does he believe in democracy,. You clearly know little about
Trump. We've had Trump here for 40 years - from the NY Post page six to Howard Stern. Its a joke. Hey, he was proposing running
with Oprah as his VP in 2002. Then he tricked into the birther stuff. Lets check out the apologies from the Donald and the push
back from Republicans (apart from McCain) 2) There were enough sympathetic Russians around (Putin included) to raise concerns.
As the Donald himself made clear, he would have no problem with outside foreign help. The investigation took place. It was damning,
but not pretty clear that no . The collusion was possible but speculative, but as Jared himself said, the campaign was too chaotic
for any collusion to really get off the ground (though you are still stuck with Manafort as a conflicted party). But in Donald
world, everything is a bout big pronouncements... See more Reply 2 2
F futbolfan 19 May, 2021 For years, we on the right knew who had done what, and who should be arrested, Comey, Rosenstein,
Strzok, Mueller, etc. But I am not a lawyer, and I am not sure what crimes, exactly, these evil and sick creeps would be charged
with, if they ever were arrested. For me, the key question now is, if they WERE charged with whatever the appropriate offence
would be, what is the statute of limitations on those types of crimes? There is NO statue on treason, as far as I know. But what
about conspiracy? Obstruction of justice? Betrayal of oath of office? Sedition? The reason these questions are still alive is,
obviously there are people still patiently digging into the twisting trails of the conspirators, and eventually they may reel
in some live prospects for prosecution. Maybe even including "the big guy with black skin" Obama himself. Nothing would make me
happier than to see that African nightmare in handcuffs. Reply 4 4 2 reply
DC dana crow 20 May, 2021 Can't blame them for running with lies, innuendo and conspiracy theories when all Trump and Republicans
could ever muster in response was nuh-uh or let-mueller-finish-his-work. "Ties to [insert boogeyman]" is always a tell. It literally
means NOT the boogeyman. And since the "ties" are conveniently redacted, he probably ordered borscht from someone whose second
cousin gave a talk at a charity event hosted by a retired russian intel gofer. The election interference/russia collusion business
was always a cynical ploy to isolate Trump from his friends and bog down his administration. And it was wildly successful.
will.ganness 20 May, 2021 Who is calling the January 6th Protests the biggest threat the the country since the Civil war? The Democratic
Party, the MSM, The FBI.... Who produced and directed Russiagate? The same three!! If progressives think they should get on board
with Insurrectiongate, they should have more sense! VAPOR 19 May, 2021 The Fake Russian Dossier do it by the book Crossfire Hurricane
insurance policy to overturn a presidential election and frame Trump. Where is Professor Misfud and why won't Steele talk to Durham?
Call in Mary Jacoby and ask her what she discussed with Obama at the white house.
spinbag48 1 day ago Adam Schiff is a fool who told us he had the goods on Trump, but it turns out he is a liar. I do have
a question... The FBI spent 2 years and $35 million dollars investigating Trump only to find out they didn't have a case. But
when the pipeline got hacked Biden said the FBI told him that the Kremlin wasn't involved within a day of two. How is it they
got that good so quick? Same with the election within a couple of days they knew that the election was fair and square. Even though
I saw many people of TV say they saw corruption right in front of them. But the shooting of Andrew Brown took a month when they
had numerous videos that they couldn't release until the investigation was complete. I have lost all faith in the FBI, and the
press. They don't even pretend they are fair or truthful. Reply 1 1
CA Clear 4 All 19 May, 2021 The USIC and media has destroyed their own name. Nothing that the Russia collusion purveyors say
now has value on any topic. Russia didn't do that.
Justis 20 May, 2021 Why did Horowitz not discover this in his investigation? Was that investigation another coverup, finding just
enough to look authentic? Is he too, untrustworthy?
What wokeness does mandate for my son (who is studying biology) to be told in his class
that he is the carrier of "white guilt" even though his ancestors never interacted with
blacks, let alone blacks in the USA.
Obama's follow-up to "Dreams from My Father" will be "Sins of My Mother"
" [C]orporate "America" which is now flooding all its advertisements with the "correct"
races in total disregard to that race's real percentage of the population "
Yes, for corporate America, the U.S. demographic is composed mainly of young, beautiful,
smart looking "black folks" with a few flabby, pasty white dullards to heighten the
contrast.
"Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from
the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are
beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our
destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader
with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." -- Menachem
Begin (Israeli Prime Minister, 1977-1983)
More Hacks, More Baseless Accusations Against Russia
In January police in various countries took down the Emotet bot-network that was at that
time the basic platform for some 25% of all cybercrimes.
Based on hearsay Wikipedia and other had falsely attributed Emotet to Russian actors.
The real people behind it were actually
Ukrainians :
The operating center of Emotet was found in the Ukraine. Today the Ukrainian national police
took control of it during a raid (video). The police found dozens of
computers, some hundred hard drives, about 50 kilogram of gold bars (current price
~$60,000/kg) and large amounts of money in multiple currencies.
Now the U.S. is accusing Russia of somehow having part in another cybercrime :
President Joe Biden said Monday that a Russia-based group was behind the ransomware attack
that forced the shutdown of the largest oil pipeline in the eastern United States.
The FBI identified the group behind the hack of Colonial Pipeline as DarkSide, a shadowy
operation that surfaced last year and attempts to lock up corporate computer systems and
force companies to pay to unfreeze them.
"So far there is no evidence ... from our intelligence people that Russia is involved,
although there is evidence that actors, ransomware is in Russia," Biden told reporters.
"They have some responsibility to deal with this," he said.
Three days after being forced to halt operations, Colonial said Monday it was moving
toward a partial reopening of its 5,500 miles (8,850 kilometers) of pipeline" the largest
fuel network between Texas and New York.
Biden however is badly informed. There is no evidence that DarkSide has anything to do with
Russia. It is, like Emotet, a commercial
'ransomware-as-a-service' criminal entity that wants to make money and does not care about
geopolitics.
Yes, a version of the DarkNet software does exclude itself from running on system with
specific
language settings :
The DarkSide malware is even built to conduct language checks on targets and to shut down if
it detects Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Armenian, Georgian, Kazakh, Turkmen, Romanian, and
other languages ...
That is a quite long list of east European languages and Russian is only one of it. Why the
authors of DarkNet do not want their software to run on machines with those language settings
is unknown. But why would a Russian actor protect machines with Ukrainian or Romanian language
settings? Both countries are hostile towards Russia. To claim that this somehow points to
Russian actors is therefore baseless.
The Kremlin has once again pointed out the importance of cooperation between Moscow and
Washington in tackling cyberthreats amid a cyber-attack on Colonial Pipeline, a US company.
"Russia has nothing to do with these hacker attacks, nor with the previous hacker attacks,"
Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Preskov assured reporters on Tuesday.
"We categorically reject any accusation against us, and we can only regret that the US is
refusing to cooperate with us in any way to counter cyber-threats. We believe that such
cooperation - both international and bilateral - could indeed contribute to the common
struggle against this scourge [known as] cyber-crime," Peskov said.
The U.S. seems notoriously bad at attributing computer hacks. It claims that the recent
SolarWinds attack which intruded several government branches was also done by Russia. But that
attack
required deep insider knowledge and access to SolarWinds' computers
and processes :
The recently discovered deep intrusion into U.S. companies and government networks used a
manipulated version of the SolarWinds Orion network management software. The Washington borg
immediately attributed the hack to Russia. Then President Trump attributed it to China. But
none of those claims were backed up by facts or known evidence.
The hack was extremely complex, well managed and resourced, and likely required insider
knowledge. To this IT professional it 'felt' neither Russian nor Chinese. It is far more
likely, as Whitney Webb finds, that
Israel was behind it .
Indeed - the programmers of an Israeli company, recently bought up by SolarWinds, had all
the necessary access for such a hack. However the U.S. sanctioned Russia over the SolarWinds
hack without providing any evidence of its involvement.
If the U.S. continues to blame Russia without any evidence for each and every hack there may
come a time when Russia stops caring and really starts to hack into or destroy important U.S.
systems. The U.S. should fear that day.
Posted by b on May 11, 2021 at 17:31 UTC |
Permalink
Thanks b. I don't think Russia is going to escalate destructive attacks any time soon.
There's no upside.
They might even be reluctant to reveal their capabilities in the Ukraine.
For the moment, mockery is the best remedy while they up their game.
@ b who ended with
"
If the U.S. continues to blame Russia without any evidence for each and every hack there may
come a time when Russia stops caring and really starts to hack into or destroy important U.S.
systems.
"
How can you write such assertions that vary from the approach that both Russia and China
are taking?....strong defense but no offense.
Now if empire tried to hack into a Russian or Chinese system/network then appropriate
takedowns of malicious systems/networks would seem logical....and I expect they know
how...but will not do it on the basis of another avenue of empire lies and deceit.
You should have titled the post "Killing Two Birds With One Stone".
This pipeline is huge, running from Texas through the Southeast and all the way up to New
England. It's condition is beyond awful with multiple leaks along the route some of which
lose more than a million gallons per month and much more than can be determined since some of
the gasoline / jet fuel went into the aquifers. These faults have been well known for decades
and although some of the areas are heavily populated no remediation was done. The local
outcry recently caught the attention of the press when kids reported a gasoline smell along
the pipeline route to the police. The locals demanded the pipeline be closed for repairs and
sought answers from state officials and Federal authorities as to why this situation was
allowed. To blame the Russians for the closure of the pipeline which results in a surge in
prices and limited availability of gas for the summer is an absolute stroke of genius.
https://www.wcnc.com/article/news/local/ncdeq-colonial-pipeline-spill-huntersville/275-70e16fb6-c945-4634-b933-3975d0573f2e
It is odd that certain elements of the us intelligence community, along with negative
factions within the us political establishment, continue to absolutely refuse to enter into
verifiable and mutually binding international agreements on cyber security with exactly the
nation states that they accuse (without evidence) of malicious activity in the same sphere,
while at the same time operating in this field in an openly declared hostile manner under the
secrecy deemed necessary for 'national security'.
How can one ignore all the noise in the media to focus on the crux of the situation,
implications, and the future outcomes?
One can only understand the impact of events better and envision the future by exploring
plausible scenarios and identifying signals which over time will enable one to size up the
probabilities of outcomes.
INTERNATIONAL -- MONETARY IMPERIALISM
Geopolitical relationships are frosty & flammable. All the narratives can be summed up
into a few SCENARIOS:
DECOUPLING. Two spheres of influence & supply chains. China & Russia led and
the Five Eyes led. Germany/EU?
WAR. The dollar empire launching a war against China &/or Russia. Iran?
The probabilities of these scenarios will be defined by the following SIGNALS:
NS2. Is Nord Stream 2 completed by September? If yes, a major geopolitical
victory for Russia. If the U$A can thwart this project then it still has the power and will
to shape Europe. If, on the other hand, Germany & Russia resists U$A's pressure and
complete the pipeline to operate, that would be an act of defiance unprecedented in postwar
history. This is the biggest clash between Russia and the United States since the end of
World War II. Let's see if European countries are less subservient to Washington.
De-DOLLARIZATION. China, Russia and other nations moving away from the US$ and trading
in their respective national currencies.
SANCTIONS. More sanctions from the dollar empire against China, Russia, Iran,
Germany... Counter sanctions, retaliations... impact on the global economy...
Any new scenarios & signals? What probabilities would one assign to various scenarios?
What will be the construct of scenarios and signals at the national level?
The Dollar Empire likes to initiate a conflict during Olympics when they are held in its
adversaries:
. . . which has caused some GOP leaders to fear alienating female Republican voters, particularly educated suburbanites
who will be key votes in the 2022 elections.
When I first met my wife, she told me women shouldn't have the right to vote. It was instant love.
A Girl In Flyover Country 59 minutes ago
[in case of Cheney] The war monger doesn't fall far from the tree.
Rise21 42 minutes ago remove link
Amazing how the liberal news outlets are now supporting a Cheney. But they know more war equals more rating
yochananmichael 51 seconds ago
its time for the republicans to rid itself of chicken hawk warmongers like Cheney.
He father disbanded there Iraqi Army which was supposed to provide security, causing an insurgency and 5000 dead American boys
and countless maimed.
vic and blood PREMIUM 4 minutes ago
Cheney's benefactors have erected massive billboards all over the state, 'thanking her for defending the Constitution.'
She has an incredible war chest, and sadly, money and advertising decides a lot of elections.
After Russiagate the credibility of CIA is below zero. So this looks like a part of
propaganda compaign against China.
"Yet somehow Tony Fauci didn't know this Can we really believe that? No, of course, we
can't," Carlson continued, adding "right around the time those Chinese researchers became the
world's first COVID patients, the government of Thailand contacted the CDC and Tony Fauci's
office to say its intelligence service had picked up 'biological anomalies' around the lab in
Wuhan. In other words, there had been a leak."
ay_arrow
AUS-AUD 8 hours ago (Edited)
If fauci funded the wuhan lab then the US funded the wuhan lab.
popeye 6 hours ago
There has been no new credible information released in the past two months pertaining to
the origin of SARS-Cov-2. US Intelligence is not a credible source (lying & deception
are the tradecraft of espionage). All I see is media narrative spin based on conjecture
that you can guarantee has political origins.
Yet Americans, who complain incessantly about the dishonesty of their media, credulously
swallow the narrative fed to them without analysis or critique. Stupid. You think you are
independent rebels, when you are in reality manipulated sheep, and oh so easily
manipulated.
Lets be clear - ZH is now a part of the narrative machine.
SurfingUSA 4 hours ago (Edited)
Can't make inferences????
The Wuhan lab is just the fall guy here.
The virus,
the lab (or Army games) release,
the election impact ...
ALL either Made in the (((USA))) or close to it.
Justin Timberbieber 8 hours ago
Yep, just the CCP. No western involvement whatsoever.
E5 8 hours ago
Until you trace the scientists back to UNC. Then you see that the actual virus they
accelerated came from the US.
Heimdall - Torwart von Assguard 6 hours ago
AND Canada
Ted K. 6 hours ago
The Winnipeg lab of the fully infiltrated Canada is indeed a piece of the puzzle.
Herdee 5 hours ago
And Ft. Detrick
RedNemesis 6 hours ago (Edited)
Okay. They accelerated and released a virus obtained from the US. So is the US
responsible for a country turning yellow cake uranium mined in Nevada into a nuclear
weapon?
truth or go home 5 hours ago
Yes, if the US gives them the recipe and then pays them to develop it.
And if the US did that to get around a law that makes it illegal to do makes it even
worse - which is exactly what happened.
SteveNYC 7 hours ago
I'm going with the "populism" route. Stopping populist governments in their tracks has
always proven reason enough for panic and overkill from TPTB:
- USA
- Brazil
- India
<< Primary targets.
Heimdall - Torwart von Assguard 6 hours ago
Poland
Hungary
Venezuela
Brazil
popeye 6 hours ago
Most Americans have never left their country, many have never left their state, and few
seem to have an education. You can't expect them to know much about anything outside the
US. Basically a flat earth mentality - "the world consists only of what I can see".
junction 8 hours ago
The only certainty is that all the major facts are lies.
Jolt 5 hours ago
You're on the right track, "junction", but be aware that the virus is just an ordinary
flu/corona virus that isn't deadly for the vast majority of humans. The real culprit, the
biggest tool for creating the worldwide "emergency" is the PCR test, which is 100%
fraudulent. This is by design, thanks to the pharmaceuticals.
williambanzai7 PREMIUM 8 hours ago remove link
No Tucker, if you just want to blame the whole thing on China you are missing the
punchline: Fauci
tion PREMIUM 8 hours ago (Edited) remove link
It's all an assortment of narratives and partial truths. Tucker points the finger at
China without mentioning how Fauci was funding Gain of Function work at the Wuhan lab. Here
is just one example of people from that lab using an HIV splice to increase
transmissibility of a pathogen to humans.
In this study, we investigated the receptor usage of the SL-CoV S by combining a human
immunodeficiency virus-based pseudovirus system with cell lines expressing the ACE2
molecules of human, civet, or horseshoe bat. In addition to full-length S of SL-CoV and
SARS-CoV, a series of S chimeras was constructed by inserting different sequences of the
SARS-CoV S into the SL-CoV S backbone. Several important observations were made from this
study. First, the SL-CoV S was unable to use any of the three ACE2 molecules as its
receptor. Second, the SARS-CoV S failed to enter cells expressing the bat ACE2. Third,
the chimeric S covering the previously defined receptor-binding domain gained its ability
to enter cells via human ACE2, albeit with different efficiencies for different
constructs. Fourth, a minimal insert region (amino acids 310 to 518) was found to be
sufficient to convert the SL-CoV S from non-ACE2 binding to human ACE2 binding ,
indicating that the SL-CoV S is largely compatible with SARS-CoV S protein both in
structure and in function.
Journal of Virology, February 2008
And by the way let's not pretend that dear Donald aka President Kushner's FIL didn't
also know about Fauci's questionable involvement with unethical gain of function research
at this lab before appointing him and the PEPFAR mafia to head the Covid taskforce, putting
the foxes in charge of guarding the hen house so to speak.
TheAlmightyCorndawg 8 hours ago
Which is precisely why Tucker is Operation Mockingbird.
Billy the Poet 7 hours ago (Edited)
Then show me solid evidence that what you say is true. You do have film of Tucker
working with the CIA, right?
2+2 ≠ 5 8 hours ago remove link
Huh?
Tucker has NEVER "supported the election hoax".
In fact, Tucker is one of the very few on MSM to continually call for proper voting
audits of the 2020 election, and he repeatedly highlights the obvious fraud that took
place.
ay_arrow
GoodyGumdrops 8 hours ago
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Election fraud has been happening in the US
for decades.
The only thing new this time around is they decided to mock the American people openly,
so that they can never claim ignorance again about the corruption.
The plandemic is the real worldwide atrocity being played out right now before our
eyes.
asteroids 8 hours ago
The heads of the NIH and the CDC have been caught lying. Therefore both agencies have NO
credibility and have lost the trust of the people. ...
Flying Monkees 8 hours ago
Imagine being a total POS like Fauci who would destroy the freedom and liberties of his
fellow Americans just so he can line his own pockets...
Strange news of the fatherland... knowing what is going on in Germany right now is helpful
to understanding the strange goings on in the USAi and its dreams of eternal empire. It ain't
clear sailing yet for NS2!
If your country is part of an international empire, the domestic politics of the country
that rules yours are your domestic politics too. Whoever speaks of the Europe of the EU
must therefore also speak of Germany. Currently it is widely believed that after the German
federal elections of 24 September this year, Europe will enter a post-Merkel era. The truth
is not so simple.
In October 2018, following two devastating defeats in state elections in Hesse and
Bavaria, Angela Merkel resigned as president of her party, the CDU, and announced that she
would not seek re-election as Chancellor in 2021. She would, however, serve out her fourth
term, to which she had been officially appointed only seven months earlier.
Putting together a coalition government had taken no less than six months following the
September 2017 federal election, in which the CDU and its Bavarian sidekick, the CSU, had
scored the worst result in their history, at 32.9 percent (2013: 41.5 percent). (Merkel's
record as party leader is nothing short of dismal, having lost votes each time she ran. How
she could nevertheless remain Chancellor for 16 years will have to be explained elsewhere.)
In the subsequent contest for the CDU presidency, the party's general secretary, Annegret
Kramp-Karrenbauer, appointed by Merkel only in February 2018, narrowly prevailed over two
competitors.
After little more than a year, however, when Merkel publicly dressed her down for a lack
of leadership, Kramp-Karrenbauer resigned and declared that she would not run for
Chancellor in 2021 either. A few months later, when von der Leyen went to Brussels,
Kramp-Karrenbauer got Merkel to appoint her minister of defense. The next contest for the
party presidency, the second in Merkel's fourth term, had to take place under Corona
restrictions; it took a long time and was won in January 2021 by Armin Laschet, Prime
Minister of the largest federal state, North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW). To prevent the
comeback of an old foe of hers, Friedrich Merz, Merkel allegedly supported Laschet behind
the scenes.
While Laschet – a less-than-charismatic Christian-Democratic middle-of-the-roader
and lifelong Merkel loyalist – considered the party presidency to be a ticket to the
CDU/CSU candidacy for Chancellor, it took three months for this to be settled. As CDU/CSU
politics go, the joint candidate is picked by the two party presidents when they feel the
time has come, under four eyes; no formal procedure provided.
Thus Laschet needed the agreement of Markus Söder, Prime Minister of Bavaria, who
didn't keep it a secret that he believed himself the far better choice. In the background,
again, there was Merkel, in the unprecedented position of a sitting Chancellor watching the
presidents of her two parties pick her would-be successor in something like a semi-public
cock-fight. After some dramatic toing-and-froing, Laschet prevailed, once more supported by
Merkel, apparently in exchange for his state's backing for the federal government imposing
a 'hard' Covid-19 lockdown on the entire country...
...There will also be differences on the Eastern flank of the EU, where Baerbock,
following the United States, will support Ukrainian accession to NATO and the EU, and
finance EU extension in the West Balkans. That she will also cancel North Stream 2 will
be a point of contention in a Baerbock/Scholz government.
Laschet will be more inclined towards France and seek some accommodation with Russia, on
trade as well as security; he will also hesitate to be too strongly identified with the US
on Eastern Europe and Ukraine. But then, he will be reminded by his Foreign Minister,
Baerbock, as well as his own party that Germany's national security depends on the American
nuclear umbrella, which the French cannot and in any case will not replace. (my
emphasis)
France is was denying any discomfort with Zionism for 52 years. but since yesterday
effect of
Plate tectonics are perceptible.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian warned on Sunday of the risk of
"long-lasting apartheid" in Israel. The veteran politician [and high rank French official
for 40 years with solid connection to French weapons trade] made the remarks in an interview
with LCI TV NewsChannel, RTL radio and Le Figaro newspaper [ three major MSM]
French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian warned on Sunday of the risk of "long-lasting
apartheid" in Israel in the event the Palestinians fail to obtain their own state. Le Drian is one of the first senior French officials to use the term "apartheid" in
reference to Israel , which has angrily denied any policy of racial discrimination.
The veteran politician made the remarks in an interview with RTL radio and Le Figaro
newspaper in reference to the clashes between Jews and Arabs that erupted in several
Israeli cities during the latest conflict.
The violence, which revealed simmering anger among Israeli Arabs over the crackdown on
Palestinians in Jerusalem, shattered years of peaceful coexistence within Israel. "It's the first time and it clearly shows that if in the future we had a solution other
than the two-state solution, we would have the ingredients of long-lasting apartheid,"
Le Drian said, using the word for the white supremacist oppression of blacks in South
Africa from 1948 to 1991.
Le Drian said the "risk of apartheid is high" if Israel continued to act "according to a
single-state logic" but also if it maintained the status quo.
"Even the status quo produces that," he said.
He added that the 11-day conflict between Hamas and Israel had shown the need to revive the
moribund Middle East peace process. https://guardian.ng/news/france-sees-risk-of-apartheid-in-israel-paris-france/
"We have take one step at a time," he said, expressing satisfaction that US President Joe
Biden had reiterated support for creating a Palestinian state alongside Israel.
Israel's latest offensive against Hamas killed 248 people in the Gaza Strip, including 66
children, and wounded over 1,900, the Hamas-run health ministry said.
Meanwhile, rockets fired by Palestinian armed groups into Israel killed 12 and wounded
around 357 others, Israeli police said.
@120 m - "Iron Dome system according to Israeli sources..."
The point is not the numbers taken from the sales brochure of the system. The point is,
what does the penetration of the fantasy shield do to the Israeli psyche?
Israel initiated the ceasefire, without conditions. After 11 days, it could take no
more.
Israel has failed to protect itself from the indigenous population that it was oppressing.
Palestine has won a victory that changes the game and changes the world.
The entire regional Resistance now knows that Palestine alone can hold the enemy in check.
And all the Palestinians everywhere are completely united with only the Resistance as their
leader.
Over at the Saker just now, a speech from Hezbollah acknowledges proudly that Palestine
itself is now the leading edge of the struggle to remove Israel from the Middle East, and
that Hezbollah yearns for the day when it joins side by side with the Palestinians to drive
the oppressor from the land.
Palestine as it says could keep up this barrage against Israel for six months - just
Palestine alone. And the damage from such a thing would not be measured in how few or how
many individual persons were killed by those rockets. The damage would be measured by the
scream of madness and defeat from the Zionist oppressor, thrown down by the indigenous
populace and cast out of the land in abject fear.
As barflies can see, There may be an undefined 'ceasefire' but the 100 year old ethnic
cleansing project in the rest of Palestine continues:
Israel's Daily Toll on Palestinian Life, Limb, Liberty and Land
(Compiled by Leslie Bravery, Palestine Human Rights Campaign, Auckland, New Zealand)
18 May 2021 {Main source of statistics: Palestinian Monitoring Group (PMG): http://www.nad.ps/ NB:The period covered by this
newsletter is taken from the PMG's 24-hour sitrep ending 8am the day after the above
date.}
We shall always do our best to verify the accuracy of all items in these IOP
newsletters/reports wherever possible [e.g. we often suspect that names of people and places
that we see in the PMG sitreps could be typos; also frequently the translation into English
seems rather odd ~ but as we do not speak Arabic, we have no alternative but to copy and
paste these names from the PMG sitreps!] – please forgive us for any errors or
omissions – Leslie and Marian.
206 projectiles
launched from Gaza
82 air strikes (157)
Very many
Israeli attacks
158 Israeli
ceasefire violations
21 raids including
home invasions
11 killed – 261 injured
Economic sabotage
43 taken prisoner
Night peace disruption
and/or home invasions
in 6 towns and villages
Home invasions: 09:20, Nazlet al-Sheikh Zaid - 09:20, al-Arqa - 04:00, Anabta - 03:30, Madama
- 03:30, Tel.
Peace disruption raids: 14:40, Beitunya - 16:05, Um Safa village - 03:20, Bir Zeit - dawn,
Bil'in - 17:40, Tura village - 18:55, Ya'bad - 19:45, Zububa - 06:30, Tubas - 18:05, Quffin -
04:00, Tulkarem - 20:00, Aqraba - 13:45, al-Azza UN refugee camp - 13:45, Aida UN refugee
camp - 18:10, al-Khadr - 18:10, Janata - 20:15, Tuqu - 03:00, al-Ubeidiya - dawn, Husan -
dawn, al-Ubeidiya.
Ceasefire violations – Palestinian missile attacks: Gaza enclave: From 07:00 until
07:00 the following day 206 projectiles were launched towards the Green Line from Northern
Gaza, Gaza City, Central Gaza and Khan Yunis.
Ceasefire violations – Palestinian missile attacks: Gaza enclave: From 07:00 until
07:00 the following day, 206 projectiles were launched towards the Green Line from Northern
Gaza, Gaza City, Central Gaza and Khan Yunis.
Ceasefire violations – Palestinian missile attacks: Northern Gaza – 53
projectiles launched towards the Green Line.
Ceasefire violations – Palestinian missile attacks: Gaza – 81 projectiles
launched towards the Green Line.
Ceasefire violations – Palestinian missile attacks: Central Gaza – 17 projectiles
launched towards the Green Line.
Ceasefire violations – Palestinian missile attacks: Khan Yunis – 38 projectiles
launched towards the Green Line.
Ceasefire violations – Palestinian missile attacks: Khan Yunis – 17 projectiles
launched towards the Green Line.
Ceasefire violations – air strikes: Gaza enclave – from 07:00 until 07:00 the
following day, Israeli warplanes carried out 82 air strikes, launching 157 missiles onto
Gaza. There were 7 killed, 50 injured, 35 homes destroyed and much damage caused.
Ceasefire violations – air strikes: Northern Gaza – Israeli warplanes launched 21
air strikes – 35 missiles: 16 injured and 10 homes destroyed.
Ceasefire violations – air strikes: Gaza – Israeli warplanes launched 17 air
strikes – 27 missiles: 6 killed (including a child), 15 injured (including women and
children) and 7 homes destroyed.
Ceasefire violations – air strikes: Central Gaza – Israeli warplanes launched 14
air strikes – 20 missiles: 11injured and 6 homes destroyed.
Ceasefire violations – air strikes: Khan Yunis – Israeli warplanes launched 13
air strikes – 46 missiles: 1 killed, 14 injured and 10 homes destroyed.
Ceasefire violations – air strikes: Rafah – Israeli warplanes launched 17 air
strikes – 29 missiles. 3 injured and 2 homes destroyed.
Ceasefire violations – Israeli attacks: Gaza enclave: From 07:00 until 07:00 the
following day, the Israeli Army and Navy pounded Central Gaza, Khan Yunis and Rafah.
Israeli Army attacks – 18 wounded: Jerusalem – Israeli Occupation forces opened
fire, with live ammunition, rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters on
protesters in Shuafat, al-Zaim, al-Jib, Beit Ijza, Qalandiya, near the villages of Qatanna
and al-Issawiya, as well as in Abu Dis, al-Eizariya and at the entrances to Hizma,
al-Sawahrah al-Sharqiya, Anata, the al-Ram road junction, Bab al-Amoud area and al-Wad Street
in Jerusalem Old City. 18 protesters were wounded.
Israeli Army attack: Jerusalem – 18:00, Israeli Occupation forces opened fire on
Palestinian motor vehicles in the Sheikh Radwan neighbourhood.
Israeli Army attacks – 3 killed – 72 wounded: Ramallah – Israeli forces in
or near al-Bireh, Sinjil, Aboud, Ni'lin, al-Mughayer, Deir Jarir, Kafr Malik, Nabi Salih, Ein
Qiniya, Ras Karkar, Kharbatha Bani Harith, Beit Sira, al-Jalazoun refugee camp, fired live
ammunition, rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards protesters,
killing 3 people, Muhammad Mahmoud Hamid (24), Adham Fayez Al-Kashef (20) and Islam Wael
Fahmy Barnat, and wounding 72. There were many tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army attacks – 4 wounded: Jenin – Israeli troops, manning the Jalamah and
Dotan checkpoints and at the southern entrance to Silat al-Dahr, fired live ammunition,
rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards protesters, wounding 4
people and causing several tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army attacks – 7 wounded: Tulkarem – Israeli forces, manning the Einav
checkpoint and troops in Tulkarem, Quffin, Zit and at the entrance to Beit Lid, fired live
ammunition, rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards protesters,
wounding 7 and causing several tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army attacks – 8 wounded: Qalqiliya – Israeli Occupation forces, at the
entrances to Azun, Hajjah, and Kafr Qaddum as well as near Jayus, Hablat and at the Eyal
crossing, fired live ammunition, rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters
towards protesters, wounding 8 people and causing several tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army attacks – 33 wounded: Nablus – Israeli Army positions, near the
Huwara checkpoint, the intersection of Osirin and Sarra villages and near the entrances to
Qusra, Beta, Jama'in, Naqoura, Deir Sharaf, Burin, Madama, Asirah al-Qibliya, Yutma,
al-Labban al-Sharqiya, Odla, al-Sawiyah and the village of Tal, fired live ammunition,
rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards protesters, wounding 33
people and causing several tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army attacks: Salfit – Israeli troops, near the entrances to Deir Istiya,
Qarawat Bani Hassan, al-Zawiya and the northern entrance to Salfit, fired live ammunition,
rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards protesters. There were
several tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army attacks – 18 wounded: Bethlehem – Israeli forces, present at Bilal
Bin Rabah Mosque, the Aida refugee camp, northern entrance to Tuqu', western entrance to Beit
Fajar, Um Rakba area of al-Khadr and entrance to Husan, fired live ammunition, rubber-coated
bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards protesters, wounding 18 people and
causing several tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army attacks – 1 killed: Hebron – morning, Israeli Occupation forces,
positioned in the Old City, opened fire on and killed a resident: Islam Fayyad Zahida
(32).
Israeli Army attacks – 30 wounded: Hebron – the Israeli Army, positioned in the
Bab al-Zawiya area of Hebron and in the Old City, as well as near the entrances to Beit
Ummar, Bani Naim, Tarqumiya, Khurasa village, the al-Aroub refugee camp and on Halhul Bridge,
fired live ammunition, rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards
protesters, wounding 30 people and causing several tear gas casualties.
Economic sabotage: Gaza -- the Israeli Navy continues to enforce an arbitrary fishing
limit.
Home invasion: Jenin – 09:20, Israeli Occupation forces raided the villages of Nazlet
al-Sheikh Zaid and al-Arqa, and invaded a house.
Home invasion – boy (aged 15) abducted : Tulkarem – 04:00, Israeli troops raided
Anabta and abducted 15-year-old Muhammad Salam Wajih Rasheed.
Home invasions: Nablus – 03:30, Israeli forces raided Madama and Tel villages and
invaded a number of homes.
Israeli police and settlers' mosque violation: 23:00, Israeli Occupation police invaded the
courtyards of Al-Aqsa Mosque, filming the Mosque and its facilities.
Israeli Army – 7 wounded – rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas
canisters: Tubas – Israeli Occupation forces, manning the Tayasir checkpoint and in the
village of Atouf, fired rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters towards
protesters, wounding 7 people and causing several tear gas casualties.
Israeli Army – 5 wounded – rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades and tear gas
canisters: Jericho – Israeli forces, at the northern and southern entrances to Jericho,
as well as outside the Aqbat Jaber refugee camp, fired rubber-coated bullets, stun grenades
and tear gas canisters towards protesters, wounding 5 people and causing several tear gas
casualties.
Occupation settler violence: Jerusalem – 18:00, Israeli settlers stoned a family home,
on the outskirts of the village of Beit Ijza.
Occupation road casualties: Bethlehem – 16:40, an Israeli settler drove his motor
vehicle over and hospitalised a 19-year-old Abdullah Saqr Saad, near Khalet Iskarya.
Raid: Ramallah – 14:40, Israeli Occupation forces raided and patrolled Beitunya.
Raid: Ramallah – 16:05, Israeli forces raided and patrolled Um Safa village.
Raid – 1 taken prisoner: Ramallah – 03:20, Israeli troops raided Bir Zeit, taking
prisoner one person.
Raid – 1 taken prisoner: Ramallah – dawn, the Israeli Army raided Bil'in village,
taking prisoner one person.
Raid: Jenin – 17:40, Israeli troops raided and patrolled Tura village.
Raid: Jenin – 18:55, Israeli soldiers raided and patrolled Ya'bad.
Raid: Jenin – 19:45, Israeli Occupation forces raided and patrolled Zububa village.
Raid: Tubas – 06:30, Israeli forces raided and patrolled Tubas.
Raid: Tulkarem – 18:05, the Israeli Army raided and patrolled Quffin.
Raid: Tulkarem – 04:0 Israeli troops raided Tulkarem.
Raid: Nablus – 20:00, Israeli soldiers raided and patrolled Aqraba.
Raid – UN refugee camps: Bethlehem – 13:45, Israeli Occupation forces raided and
patrolled the al-Azza and Aida UN refugee camps in Bethlehem.
Raid: Bethlehem – 18:10, Israeli forces raided and patrolled al-Khadr and Janata.
Raid – 2 abductions: Bethlehem – 20:15, Israeli troops raided Tuqu and abducted
two 16-year-old youths: Muhammad Khaled Nasrallah and Sind Talal Al-Amor.
Raid: Bethlehem – 03:00, Israeli soldiers raided and patrolled al-Ubeidiya.
Raid – 2 taken prisoner: Bethlehem – dawn, the Israeli Army raided Husan village,
taking prisoner two people.
Raid – 2 taken prisoner: Bethlehem – dawn, Israeli Occupation forces raided
al-Ubeidiya, taking prisoner twopeople.
Restrictions of movement (14): 11:30, entrance to Turmusaya- 11:20, tightened procedures at
Huwara - 12:00, tightened procedures at Kifl Haris - 12:50, entrance to al-Zawiya -
11:25-12:30, al-Nashash road junction - 14:10, entrance to al-Walaja village - midnight,
entrance to Marah Mualla - 09:15, entrance to the Fahs area, south of Hebron - 18:45,
entrance to Sa'ir - Beit Hanoun (Erez) crossing closed - al-Mantar-Karni crossing closed -
al-Shujaiyeh crossing (Nahal Oz) closed - Sufa crossing closed - al-Awda Port closed.
[NB: Times indicated in Bold Type contribute to the sleep deprivation suffered by Palestinian
children]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If any of our subscribers should like to reproduce complete, in full and unedited, these In
Occupied Palestine daily newsletters that would be very welcome!
If you no longer wish to receive these emails, please let us know and if you have friends or
family who would like to receive them ask them to contact us at [email protected]
...
@ Paul, "100 year old ethnic cleansing project in the rest of Palestine continues",
but Tectonic plates still moving, collapse of an edifice of complacency
David Horovitz is the founding editor of The Times of Israel. He previously edited The
Jerusalem Post (2004-2011) and The Jerusalem Report (1998-2004).
"It doesn't matter that Hamas is a repressive, misogynistic, homophobic, Islamist terrorist
organization that fires thousands of rockets indiscriminately at innocent civilians all
over the State of Israel...
[...]
It doesn't matter...
[...]
Again, it doesn't matter, because we are no longer avowedly seeking, even in principle, a
two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- the currently and foreseeably
insoluble Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And since we no longer avowedly aspire to be part
of the solution, we are increasingly perceived as part of the problem, as
rejectionists.
[...]
Israel still has plenty of friends, and plenty of support, including crucially in the US.
Three EU foreign ministers chose to make a solidarity visit to bombed Israeli homes at the
height of the conflict. But the ground is shifting dangerously.
Many of us, this writer emphatically included, regard a two-state solution as essential
if we are not to lose either our Jewish majority, or our democracy, or both, forever
entangled among millions of hostile Palestinians. Many of us, this writer emphatically
included, cannot currently see a safe route to such an accommodation.
For the last time, it doesn't matter. So long as Israel does not place itself firmly and
distinctly on the side of those seeking a viable framework for long-term peace and security
for ourselves and for the Palestinians, we will be regarded as blocking that framework. And
even when facing an enemy so patently cynical, amoral and intransigent as Hamas, militarily
strong Israel will be held responsible for the loss of life on both sides of the
conflict. We may keep on winning the battles, though they will get harder if fighting spreads to
and deepens on other fronts. But we will be gradually losing the war.
If you lie down with dogs, you'll get up with fleas does not apply in this case
since I'm talking about very young guys whose apparent success goes up high, very high into
their psyche, just to find out that the higher you fly the harder you fall. A 22 year old
kid, comfortably living in Warsaw and traveling all around following the ersatz president
Juanita Guaidikha Tikhanovskaya, all expenses paid, trained in Kiev during the Maidan, and in
Donbass during the civil war consequence of the Maidan, and now we have all of the virtue
signaling bureaucrats in Europe and the US, lead by the incombustible VonDerLeyen, excuse me
while I wipe my mouth, shamelessly exposing their amnesia and solid faith in their right to
do as they please while the rest of the world has to do as they demand. Talk decadence, not a
better face for it than that poor lady that nobody voted for.
All these guys are amateurs.
Or just plain old copycats.
We, the French, have invented the whole concept, with legal justification . Another
great success of the National School of Administration
October 22, 1956, during which the French army captured a plane of the company Air
Atlas-Air Maroc in which five leaders of the National Liberation Front (FLN) were. The
five leaders of the Algerian National Liberation Front were supposed to travel from Morocco
to Tunisia on the personal plane of the Sultan of Morocco. "unfortunately", at the last moment, they had to change planes" . "Coincidentally",
this plane of the Moroccan company was registered in France and therefore "legally" the
French authorities forced it to land in Algeria (a French department at the time). On the
ground, as "wanted terrorist", they were arrested.
more in https://www.calameo.com/read/0007815969f106c3072eb
Chance or/and necessity? Ten years after, Mehdi Ben Barka, disappear in Paris (a joint
operation of Moroccan and French secret service). Was tortured to death and corpse supposed
dissolved with acid (a Jamal Khashoggi's precurssor)
Are Belarus the organizers or the victims?
if report correct: the bomb threat was given at the right time. And the pilot took the
decision to land in Minsk. The accompaniment by the Belarusian fighter is purely technical,
it is not the hijacking itself.
One must not forget the case of Itavia Flight 870 , that was shot down
in 1980 because of a suspicion that Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi was traveling in the
same airspace at the time.
A 22 year old kid, comfortably living in Warsaw and traveling all around following the
ersatz president Juanita Guaidikha Tikhanovskaya, all expenses paid, trained in Kiev during
the Maidan, and in Donbass during the civil war consequence of the Maidan, and now we have
all of the virtue signaling bureaucrats in Europe and the US, lead by the incombustible
VonDerLeyen, excuse me while I wipe my mouth, shamelessly exposing their amnesia and solid
faith in their right to do as they please while the rest of the world has to do as they
demand.
Posted by: Paco | May 24 2021 8:20 utc | 128
Yes, nothing is more dangerous than great un-earned success. People lose their minds.
The habit of trifling with people to get your way will get you in the end too. The habit
of lying will take over your life. Just look at the US government. Just look at Trump. This
is one of Putin's great strengths, he is not bullshitting anybody. Most of all, he is not
bullshitting himself.
I too have sympathy for young people who get involved with politics and have no idea what
is really going on. The young are at the mercy of the old, and the old are often hard
masters.
"... What is clear is that the FBI is taking a thumb-screws page from the playbook of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who deployed the little-used Foreign Agents Registration Act to pursue the white whale of collusion. As Lee Smith reported for RealClearInvestigations , just three people had pleaded guilty to FARA violations in the half-century before Mueller deployed it to pressure and punish Trump allies. ..."
"... And note, the FBI's zeal to crack down on unregistered foreign agents does not extend to the president's son Hunter Biden, who, Paul Sperry reported for RCI, "failed to register as a foreign agent while promoting the interests of foreign business partners in Washington, including brokering meetings with his father and other government officials." It appears that we have two tiers of justice: one for Biden administration enemies, another for its family and friends. ..."
The Biden administration is vigorously pursuing key figures from the phony Trump/Russia collusion scandal that roiled the nation
for four years. But instead of trying to punish the liars who perpetrated that fraud, it is targeting the truth-tellers who challenged
and exposed the conspiracy to negate the 2016 election.
Working from the same playbook used to smear dozens of Trump associates, the administration and its allies are planting stories
based on blind quotes in friendly media outlets to seek revenge.
On April 16,
Washington
Post columnist David Ignatius reported that the Justice Department is investigating Kash Patel – who had worked with Rep. Devin
Nunes and later the Trump administration to reveal the Russiagate hoax – for the "possible improper disclosure of classified information."
Ignatius said he received the tip from "two knowledgeable sources" who "wouldn't provide additional details."
Violating the bedrock principles of American justice and journalism, this article is an exercise in thuggery as the government
uses a powerful media outlet to intimidate and besmirch a citizen without evidence. With nothing to respond to, how can Patel defend
himself? If Patel is lucky, the federal government has only placed a sharp sword over his head that may not fall. If not, he might
be dragged into a lengthy court battle that could drain his finances and also cost him his freedom.
We don't know if Patel broke the law, but note that the administration has shown no interest in pursuing former FBI leaders such
as
James Comey and
Andrew McCabe , who improperly disclosed information regarding Russiagate.
Trump's former lawyer Rudolph Giuliani is also in the "cross hairs of a federal criminal investigation," according to
an April 29
article in New York Times that relied on "people with knowledge of the matter."
At issue, those anonymous sources say, is whether Giuliani was serving two masters when he counseled Trump to remove Marie L.
Yovanovitch as the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine in 2019. "Did Mr. Giuliani go after Ms. Yovanovitch solely on behalf of Mr. Trump,
who was his client at the time?" the Times reports. "Or was he also doing so on behalf of the Ukrainian officials, who wanted her
removed for their own reasons?"
I'll leave it to the lawyers to determine the wisdom of bringing a case based on the parsing of tangled motives. What is clear
is that the FBI is taking a thumb-screws page from the playbook of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who deployed the little-used Foreign
Agents Registration Act to pursue the white whale of collusion.
As Lee Smith reported for RealClearInvestigations , just three people had pleaded guilty to FARA violations in the half-century
before Mueller deployed it to pressure and punish Trump allies.
And note, the FBI's zeal to crack down on unregistered foreign agents does not extend to the president's son Hunter Biden, who,
Paul Sperry reported for RCI, "failed to register as a foreign agent while promoting the interests of foreign business partners in
Washington, including brokering meetings with his father and other government officials." It appears that we have two tiers of justice:
one for Biden administration enemies, another for its family and friends.
The targeting of Giuliani looks especially suspect and politically motivated after three main news outlets that have driven much
of the false Russiagate coverage – the New York Times, Washington Post and NBC News –
were forced to correct a recent story , once again based on anonymous sources, claiming the FBI had warned Giuliani in 2019 "that
he was a target of a Russian disinformation campaign during his efforts to dig up unflattering information about then-candidate Joe
Biden in 2019." Giuliani was never given such a briefing.
Considering the numerous instances in which the press published bogus information from "informed sources" during Russiagate, one
has to ask why they continue to serve as vehicles for falsehoods. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me
a dozen times and you're not fooling me – we're acting in concert. As RCI editor
Tom Kuntz has argued, journalistic integrity demands, at the very least, that these organizations tell their audience who exactly
had misled them. Confidentiality agreements should not protect liars.
A third example of the Biden administration's effort to punish Russiagate figures is its renewed effort to put former Manafort
associate Konstantin V. Kilimnik behind bars. In an extensive new article for RCI,
Aaron Maté reports that the Treasury Department provided no evidence to support its recent claim that Kilimnik is a "known Russian
Intelligence Services agent implementing influence operations on their behalf." It also refuses to explain how it was able to discover
the truth of Kilimnik's identity, which the two most extensive Russiagate investigations – the 448-page Muller report and the 966-page
Senate Intelligence report – failed to uncover.
This absence of evidence has not stopped the peddlers of the Trump/Russia conspiracy theory from claiming vindication. Democrat
Rep. Adam Schiff casts Treasury's unsubstantiated claim as smoking-gun evidence of collusion. The New York Times reports that the
claim demonstrates that "there had been numerous interactions between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence during the year
before the [2016] election."
Who needs proof when the government says it's so?
The FBI is also putting the screws to Kilimnik, offering $250,000 for information leading to his arrest on witness-tampering charges
involving text messages he sent in 2018 to two people who have only been identified as "potential witnesses" involving Manafort's
lobbying work for Ukraine, not Russiagate.
In an exclusive interview, Kilimnik told Maté, "I don't understand how two messages to our old partners who helped us get out
the message about Ukraine's integration aspirations in [the] EU, and asking them to get in touch with Paul, can be interpreted as
'intimidation' or 'obstruction of justice.'"
Maté also reports that the $250,000 bounty on Kilimnik is more than double the amount the FBI is offering for information leading
to the arrest of murder suspects.
The Biden administration's campaigns against Patel, Giuliani and Kilimnik suggest how the winners of the 2020 election are attempting
to rewrite the history of Russiagate. Having been debunked and rebuked by their own investigators, the conspiracists are taking a
second bite at the poisoned apple. Using anonymous sources to make unsubstantiated charges in the nation's most influential news
outlets, they are seeking to punish people for the crime of exposing their malfeasance.
Vk @30
..why the necessity of populist POTUSes arose in the USA in the first place?
Perhaps it might be useful to examine the case of the first Western populist of the modern
era: Louis Napoleon. It's been a while since I read Marx's 'The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis
Napoleon' but the short (hopefully not too vulgar) version is that the French ruling class
was too divided (between different flavours of Royalist and Republicans, finance capitalists
and industrialists etc) for any faction to provide a coherent class project to move France
forward and either co-opt or repress the working people of France.
The workers were also divided and not yet ready to articulate a revolutionary project of
their own. With France caught between its imperialist rival Great Britain and an awakening
Germany, and the threat of revolution working to focus their minds, the French Ruling class
came up with a way out of the impass: a populist leader who could stand above the social
divisions and 'Make France Great Again'.
Bonaparte's nephew Louis Napoleon was by most accounts a mere grifter and stuffed-shirt,
but he had name recognition and the ambition to play the part. The gambit was wildly
successful in rolling back the gains the workers had made in 1848 and resulted in the 'second
empire' that reinvigorated French imperialism. Well, wildly successful until Louis went up
against against a rising power (Prussia/Germany) and the second empire folded like a house of
cards.
When Trump was first elected it seemed probable that we were dealing with another
'Bonapartist'. With the ruling class floundering after the 'GFC' of 2008-11 and the crisis of
US imperialism after the rise of China and defeat in Ukraine and Syria, some faction of the
ruling class was seeking to put the pieces back together under a new strongman. But in this
case the attempt was a resounding failure in unifing the ruling class.
The weakness of the US working class may be the key to understanding the failure of
Trumpism. While French workers of 1850 may have struggled to create a unified revolutionary
project of their own, they were organised and poliicised enough to provide the muscle in
removing the Monarchy in 1848 and were a constant threat to French ruling class power. The US
working class of 2016 was none of these things. Without the threat of revolution there was no
incentive for the dominant ruling class factions to devolve some of their power to a
strongman.
The ruling class attack on Trumpism seems to have consolidated the power of the dominant
factions of the ruling class under the Democratic party, while hopelessly dividing the
working class between those who support the strongman and those that tail after the ruling
class attacks on him. So while Trumpism has failed to create a reborn and unified US empire,
it has accomplished the next best thing: disorienting and demoralising the greatest threat to
that empire. Perhaps it will take a diastrous collision with a rising power to change that.
For France's second empire it was Germany and resulted in the Paris Commune. For the US,
China and ?
@ S.P. Korolev | May 18 2021 5:26 utc | 69 with the nice description of Trump's Populist
failing
Thanks for that...nicely done and, yes, the China/Russia axis is the challenge to the US
faced axis....I keep calling it a civilization war because that it the only result I see
meaning we have evolved from barbarism and haven't gone extinct trying...
Commenter vk is the MoA ideologue troll that should go create her own web site and stop
polluting this one, IMO, and that of others on an ongoing basis....see the latest Week in
Review Open Thread about Ivermectin for example.
vk is the main reason I scroll to the bottom of each comment to find the author before
reading
I think Trump is a man for the moment. He is not particularly intelligent. He is not
particulary honest. He is not a natural leader. He loves to play to the gallery.He can be
dominated.He is weak. He is disingenuous.He is rich. I don't think he can ever be called a
self made man. He was chosen to do the job by those more connected and powerful than him.
Remember you always get the leader that you deserve.
She would need to rewire her brain to have a thought that was not programmed into her... After her Russiagate adventures there are
some doubts that this is possible. But money do not smell.
Perhaps Maddow is just sad that there's no longer official justification to intimidate and harass those who choose not to wear
masks, something that leftists have enjoyed doing for the best part of a year.
The notion that people who don't wear masks are a "threat" is of course completely ludicrous since the COVID-19 virus particle
is 1,000 times smaller than the holes in the mask anyway.
After Texas ended its mask mandate, COVID cases dropped to a
record low and a similar pattern was observed in Florida and South Dakota.
Lordflin 46 minutes ago (Edited)
She would need to rewire her brain to have a thought that was not programmed into her...
What a mindless shill... first that singer... what's her name... and now this creature...
What is the effect ZH is going for here exactly...?
takeaction 36 minutes ago (Edited)
Rachel...Pelosi...Schumer...Swalwell.....Cuomo (Both of them) Lemon, Anderson, Fauci, AOC, Maxine, etc.
With or without a mask...
takeaction 18 minutes ago (Edited) remove link
All calm....Gorgeous weather.....78 today.
Hamilcar 28 minutes ago remove link
Branch Covidians like Madcow "Love F$#%ing Science".
And by "science" they mean believing whatever braindead politicians or left-wing corporate media make up as they go along without
any critical analysis and hysterically denouncing any evidence that contradicts the narrative as heresy.
It's going to be fun when all these people become the object of universal mockery they deserve. In a JUST world they would
be severely punished though.
Lordflin 24 minutes ago
I have always been impressed by the willingness of those who know virtually nothing of the sciences to believe almost anything
if it is told to them in the name of science...
signer1 9 minutes ago
To quote Mark Twain, "It's easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled".
Citxmech 18 seconds ago
Apparently, it's also easier to get people to believe illogical arguments by telling them it's "science" than it is to get
them to actually think critically about the stupid shlt they're being asked to believe.
toiler4fiat 26 minutes ago
Madcow, like [neo]liberalism, is a disease. You can't repair a damaged brain like you can't turn a pickle into a cucumber.
I thought the "crumbling infrastructure" was just an internet joke or a lobby thing
(American Society of Civil Engineers sounds like a the name of a DC lobby firm). Never
thought it was de facto happening in USA.
No doubt the US/UK deep state, now more than ever, are busy trying to sow conflict and
division in Eurasia, to divide-and-rule Mackinder's "World Island" and hence the world.
I'm not sure that it is global private finance that is the key. Although I used to.
Either we consider the Oligarchs (Bezos Zuckerberg) as the newest form of low life, or the
Banking cartels and billionares are even lower.
BUT - There is a third class of Global financiers. That is "Corporations" (as a class).
Corporations are immortal, and like a hydra, with many heads, have more arms than an "image
of a covid-virus" ( Octopussii are simply too limited, although they are a good example of
multi-brained resourceful animals ). They are also "persons" in front of the law, with
all the protections and privilges that offers. On other occasions they are simply above the
law (Twit-Facebook and free speech). The people running them are only occasionally
reprimanded, but the "corporation" itself is never touched. *1*
They pay, sometimes, a bit of taxes, have different laws and have lobbies working in their
favour. Can corrupt Politicians with the offer of directorships or whatever. They can even be
"foundations" and pay no tax at all. They deal across many different National laws, obey what
they will, and are extra terrritorial in scope. They can have a nominal "center", while
decisions are made elsewhere. They are in fact a new type of alien supra-being .
Of course, the "leaders" of Corporations are rich, but they can be replaced by others at the
wishes of "shareholders". Untouchable and unknown.
Very useful for storing wealth and speculating at the same time.
In spite of Musk and others taking all the limelight, it is the corporations that work in
the background that seem to be the real seat of power.
--- *1* One of the last real actions taken against Corporate power was the breaking up of
Rockefellers Standard Oil .
*****
*2* In the case of the "breakup" of either the US or the EU - would the corporations be
touched (eliminated), or hailed as saving civilisation?
Paul alleged that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had used a middle-man to funnel
money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology via EcoHealth Alliance - which worked with the lab on
bat coronavirus projects.
Paul specifically referenced so-called "gain-of-function" research which in this case has
been focused on how to make animal viruses more transmissible to humans - specifically bat
coronaviruses .
"Government scientists like yourself who favor gain of function research," Paul
began...
...only to have Fauci interject "I don't favor gain of function research in China," adding
"You are saying things that are not correct."
Paul pushed back - continuing:
"[Those who favor gain of function] say that COVID-19 mutations were random and not
designed by man."
"I do not have any accounting of what the Chinese may have done," Fauci shot back, adding
that he's in favor of further investigation, but that the NIH had nothing to do with the
origins of COVID-19.
"We have not funded gain of function research on this virus in the Wuhan Institute of
Virology," he added.
"No matter how many times you say it, it didn't happen."
More from Sen. Paul via Twitter:
Senator Rand Paul @RandPaul ·
May 11, 2021 Dr Fauci dissembled or tried to hide his long time support for
'gain-of-function' research which creates super-viruses that jump from animals to humans.
ohm 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
You can't sit on your thumbs and run year long investigations and background checks
while thousands are dying .
But that's just the point, thousands were not dying . Instead of seeking out opposing
viewpoints, he relied on the bogus Ferguson model that predicted 2 million deaths presented
by Fauci and Birx. Plenty of qualified opposing voices were out there - John Ionnides of
Stanford for instance. Trump needs to own up to his mistakes and vow not to repeat them.
nodhannum 3 hours ago
How many renminbi do they pay you comrade...as in be "han" or be gone. I've been to a
number of seminars given by Fauci back in his HIV days but he is a lying sob now. It's
getting hard for the fellow to cover hisw *** now even with the Maserati marxists in power
here.
"We are not prepared for a pandemic," Biden tweeted on Oct. 25, 2019, saying the country
needs leadership that "mobilizes the world to stop outbreaks before they reach our
shores."
this_circus_is_no_fun 4 hours ago
At first Fauxi denied the allegation. Then, after Paul cornered him with facts, Fauxi said
something like "this is why we did that". So, he admitted that he did what he was denying
just a few seconds before . He is literally incapable of telling the truth. I guess he's not
called Fauxi for nothing.
adonisdemilo 5 hours ago
Fauci has known from day one what's going on and going wrong. He's up to his neck in it
and taking a good look at his body language under questions from Rand Paul, HE'S CONTINUING
TO LIE.
chinese.sniffles 5 hours ago
Dr. Fauci:
Have you or your team send or granted permission for work projects to Wuhan or China?
What were those projects?
Why did you send them?
Why did you not do these projects in the USA?
Were any of these projects illegal in the USA?
etc. simple line of questioning, let him perjure himself.
thezone 5 hours ago
Fauci (the politician) knew to not write a check out to the lab directly. It was great to
hear Dr Paul bring up EcoHealth. A shell company to facilitate.
surfer4444 5 hours ago
Exactly, blame it on the sub contractor....an old game and the elite are using it well
radical-extremist 5 hours ago remove link
Fauci knows full well the story in the Democrat State News media will be about how he was
ATTACKED by Rand Paul, and not about him lying under oath about funding the Wuhan Lab.
chiquita 5 hours ago
This information has been out for a while if you follow War Room, Steve Hilton, and some
other sources. Peter Navarro has been hammering at Fauci relentlessly for the last few months
and now the MSM is going after Navarro, trying to discredit him. Gee, I wonder why when it
looks like the truth about Fauci is falling apart.
What a mess_man 4 hours ago (Edited)
Tucker blew this wide open last night. Of course lots of us here knew all this many months
ago. Fauci is lying through his teeth here, and both he and Daszak are deep in the Chicom's
pockets. As Tucker said, in a functioning world there would be a criminal investigation.
Instead Biden and Co. kiss his *ss and make him our foremost authority on Covid and vaccines.
Clown world for sure.
Meatballs 3 hours ago (Edited)
Actually, Saagar beat Tucker to the punch. Either way, the unraveling has begun.
Don't let the bioweapon profiteer, Daszak, off the hook.
Both greedy psychopaths should hang for their crimes against humanity.
Furthermore, we have no business sharing infectious disease technology with China, even if
they could run a lab properly.
Itinerant 4 hours ago
This story is about 14 months old, though not for the MSM.
Actual documentation of the grants from the NIH via the Eco Alliance have been circulating
in the public domain for all that time. In it they exactly describe the gain-of-function
research that is being outsourced to China, the viruses involved, the methods, the type of
experiments, and the aims of the research ... exactly and technically.
There is no room for caveats, or 'allege' or interpretation or anything like that.
The evidence is rock hard and crystal clear.
toady 4 hours ago
Yet there are no prosecutions.
dogbert8 5 hours ago remove link
Finally, the unmasking (pun intended) of Fauci has started.
bsdetector 5 hours ago
Just listened to the questions and answers. Fauci qualifies his answers with information
that was not sought in the questions. His answers change the character of his denials... "we
did not fund GOF research on this virus in the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
OK Dr. Fauci, please identify the viruses that you did fund for GOF research at the
Institute.
Jack Mayorhaufer 5 hours ago
master gaslighters once they reach certain status and paygrade on the Hill
novictim 2 hours ago remove link
"I don't know how many times I can say it? We did not fund gain of function research to be
done in the Wuhan Institute of Virology ...(under his breath) because we funded Eco Health
Alliance/Peter Daszak which granted the research funding to do gain of function research in
the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
CleeTorres 2 hours ago
A simple internet search shows Fauci is lying about funding for this research. But he
knows the media won't do their jobs.
Onthebeach6 2 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Let me assist Dr Fauci with the truth.
Why US outsourced bat virus research to Wuhan
Dr Christina Lin
April 2020
"A U.S. NIH-funded $3.7 million project was approved by Trump's Covid-19 advisor Dr.
Anthony Fauci in 2015, after the Obama White House imposed a ban on 'monster-germ' research.
In October 2014, the federal government declared a moratorium on gain-of-function research to
weaponize viruses related to influenza, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and severe
acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). As a result, the research was outsourced to China's Wuhan
Institute of Virology, which is currently at the center of scrutiny for the Covid-19
pandemic."
Fauci looks very nervous . Perhaps why he has been so adamant about constantly moving the
goalposts? If you were guilty of something wouldn't you keep changing the focus and appear to
be very helpful and concerned?
Max21c 3 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Which people in & around the National Security Council, CIA, and Pentagon are involved
in this attempt to gain access, penetrate and spy on the PLA Biological Weapons/Warfare
programs via funding mechanisms route? Which people had contact with this institute and
programs and what if anything did the spy games produce?
When are they in Washington going to establish civilian rule over the US military and CIA
and National Security Council?
When are they going to knock off these silly spy games and spy world operations off and
stop this nonsense which produces zero positive results?
What did the gangsters on the Intelligence/Spy Committees in Congress know? What did the
gangsters atop the Pentagon, CIA, National Security Council know?
Which Washingtonian assholes are going to go to prison for this boomerang disaster?
How many other groups similar to "EcoHealth Alliance" operate as part of the US/UK
intelligence "community" and what other stupid stuff are the idiots mixed up in?
TheRapture 3 hours ago remove link
There is a great deal of evidence (NIH, State Dept grants to offshore USA bioweapons
research, Bat Lady was the protege of Dr. Ralph Baric at UNC who has been doing coronavirus
bioweapon research for more then twenty years, initial and simultaneous infections in Wuhan
at different locations suggesting an intentional release, etc., etc., etc.) And of course,
Trump had motive, opportunity and means to stage a false flag to destroy China's economy and
damage China's political relations with other countries.
It is likely the USA, no doubt using a CIA proxy, released SARS-CoV-2 in simultaneously in
multiple locations in Wuhan. The evidence is substantial. But most Americans can't bring
themselves to stare down that particular rabbit hole.
WorkingClassMan 3 hours ago
I'd rather an honest CCP commie ruling the roost than those traitors anyway.
"If I had but one bullet and were faced by both an enemy and a traitor, I would let the
traitor have it."
― Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, For My Legionaries
sarret PREMIUM 3 hours ago
Fauci is such a liar, pulling school kid mentality out of a hat to answer serious
questions. Likely in his mind he knows it all to be true but since the correct name is
中国科学院武汉病毒研究所
then unless you say that name, or the exact name of the exact subsidiary that was funding or
was being funded, then it is not correct and therefore he can answer the question incorrectly
without calling himself a liar internally and without saying what the error was in the
question that led him to be able to this.
In all respects he just disregards the spirit of the question when he knows full well that
he is in the wrong, but denies it every single time based on some concocted fabrication in
his mind that the question is not precise enough to nail him to the cross.
Completely disingenuous, can't trust a word he says.
Fish Gone Bad 4 hours ago
Lawyer speak:
We have not funded gain of function research on this virus
They funded all kinds of gain of function on all kinds of permutations of the virus, just
not THIS virus.
radical-extremist 5 hours ago remove link
Fauci is also responsible for the deaths of hundreds of men in San Francisco by covering
up Bath Houses as the origin of the spread of AIDS...for Mayor Diane Feinstein's political
career. No one dares talk about this today.
the Mysterians 5 hours ago
"I did not have sex with that woman!"
Flying Monkees 5 hours ago (Edited)
What could possibly be the reason for gain-of-function research if not bio-warfare?
These evil, irresponsible, arrogant a-holes need to pay.
Posa 5 hours ago
The Eco-Alliance grant from Fauci's NIAID states
We will use S [ie the Spike Protein that makes the SC-2 virus highly infectious] protein
sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and
analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S
protein sequences predict spillover potential.
That has been interpreted as a commitment to Gain of Function research on the Spike
Protein which is the key to turning SARS into a virulently transmissible pathogen.
surfer4444 5 hours ago remove link
Exactly...im just baffled how this PoS can blatantly lie to a Senate committee and get
away with it...there is zero accountability in our government...end times
Posa 5 hours ago
Fauci can lie because his audience is a convention of lazy, cowardly , illiterate dunces.
If Rand Paul were serious he would have had the damn grant in front of him and read the same
quotes as I provided in this post. PAul would have held these hearings last year when his
Party controlled the Senate.
Posa 4 hours ago
NOTE: This post was censored by The Hill. Typical free speech in America.
George Bayou 5 hours ago
"11 labs in the US create these super-viruses in the US and one of them collaborated with
Wuhan Virology Inst -- Fauci has supported NIH funds for all these labs!"
Why is this a-hole still working?
notfeelinthebern 4 hours ago (Edited)
Yap, yap,. yap. Another dog and pony show and the show is painfully old. They parade
personage after personage before congress and ask lots of questions. The swamp rats in the
hot seat lie by omission and with sleight of hand answers and when done with the act walk
away with smug faces....The show must go on.
George Bayou 5 hours ago
Here's an interesting article on Dr. Baric and what he was doing, mutating virus using
serial passaging so that the virus are able to infect a completely different species:
Take, for instance, this paper from 1995:
"High Recombination and Mutation Rates in Mouse Hepatitis Viruses Suggest That
Coronaviruses May Be Potentially Important Emerging Viruses." It was written by Dr. Ralph
Baric and his bench scientist, Boyd Yount, at the University of North Carolina. Baric, a
gravelly voiced former swim champion, described in this early paper how his lab was able to
train a coronavirus, MHV, which causes hepatitis in mice, to jump species, so that it could
reliably infect BHK (baby-hamster kidney) cell cultures. They did it using serial
passaging: repeatedly dosing a mixed solution of mouse cells and hamster cells with
mouse-hepatitis virus, while each time decreasing the number of mouse cells and upping the
concentration of hamster cells. At first, predictably, the mouse-hepatitis virus couldn't
do much with the hamster cells, which were left almost free of infection, floating in their
world of fetal-calf serum. But by the end of the experiment, after dozens of passages
through cell cultures, the virus had mutated: It had mastered the trick of parasitizing an
unfamiliar rodent. A scourge of mice was transformed into a scourge of hamsters. And there
was more: "It is clear that MHV can rapidly alter its species specificity and infect rats
and primates," Baric said. "The resulting virus variants are associated with demyelinating
diseases in these alternative species." (A demyelinating disease is a disease that damages
nerve sheaths.) With steady prodding from laboratory science, along with some rhetorical
exaggeration, a lowly mouse ailment was morphed into an emergent threat that might
potentially cause nerve damage in primates.
GeneKelly 5 hours ago remove link
"We have not funded gain of function research on this virus in the Wuhan Institute of
Virology,"
Sociopaths can lie without registering on a detector by simply defining terms differently
in their cerebral cortex and then answering -- from their perspective truthfully -- "no"
because the question doesn't match their internal definition.
So Fauci wasn't funding "gain of function". He was actually funding "increasing the
virulence of pathogens" or "enhancing the pathogens' ability to infect different
species".
Rand and others will have to ask the question a hundred ways to force Fauci to spill the
beans.
DeeDeeTwo 1 hour ago remove link
Tucker finally called Fauci a "criminal" at least twice and said, "In any functioning
society Fauci would be investigated."
Txjac 5 hours ago
Fauci also owns the patents on the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines
Everybody All American 5 hours ago remove link
How is it that only one Congressman dare questions Dr. Fauci? One tough questioner. These
cowards all need to hang for the crimes they are allowing. If they think we are just going to
sit back and watch this man for much longer lead us they are sadly mistaken.
Downhill from here 5 hours ago
Being an MD, Paul has some credibility on the topic. At least educationally and by
training, Fauci and Paul are peers.. More than likely other R's are letting him take
point.
replaceme 5 hours ago (Edited)
I forgot, that's the same dr daszak that sent the letter to the lancet saying that covid
didn't come from Wuhan, and that he had no reason to falsely say this. THAT Dr daszak. Got
it.
"We [NIH/Fauci] did not fund gain of function research to be done in Wuhan." What the
weasel didn't say is that the NIH did in deed fund Dr Baric who was working in collaboration
with Wuhan with gain of function experiments on the SARS virus. Baric worked with Ft Dettrick
and Univ NC researchers who in turn were collaborating with Canada and Wuhan.
Fauci can parse words but he's a traitor and ought to be held responsible along with all
others involved with this.
scraping_by 5 hours ago (Edited) remove link
One amendment to the story --
Carlson was quoting a story by Nicholas Wade, former science editor to the NYT. Published
in Medium. So it's not just a talking head repeating newsroom copy, as in CNN.
zorrosgato 14 minutes ago remove link
Fauci is part of a flawed system and don't be fooled in believing he is part of any
solution. His endorsing of impractical mask mandates along with mandatory vaccinations of the
population, using unproven genetically engineered drugs is proof enough.
“A Top Biden Cybersecurity Aide Donated Over $500,000 to AIPAC as an NSA
Official†[David Corn,
Mother Jones (via the War Nerd )].
“Several other national security expertsâ€"who asked not to be
namedâ€"say that the foundation’s donations to AIPAC create, at
the least, an appearance problem for Anne Neuberger.†•
Apparently Neuberger
was too much not only for Corn, but for his handlers in the intelligence community, to stomach.
The whole piece is well worth a read. It’s all horrible.
"... They have looted businesses, burned churches, assaulted police officers, attacked and harassed ordinary citizens eating in restaurants or going about their normal lives "and all with impunity." No FBI raids, no systematic arrests, no dissemination of "Wanted" images on social media. ..."
"... Now I turn to my second contrast: the recent FBI raid on Rudy Giuliani's home and office, while there has been no raid on the home or office of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo . Start with Giuliani: The ostensible justification for the raid was to look for evidence Giuliani violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act. ..."
"... Moreover, Giuliani had for several months been offering the FBI clear evidence, corroborated by texts and emails, that Hunter Biden not only allegedly failed to register as a foreign agent, but also that he was allegedly involved in child pornography, money laundering, and an elaborate Biden family scheme to sell their political access in exchange for millions of dollars in personal gain. ..."
"... Giuliani seems warranted in concluding that the agency's conduct is a "clear example of a corrupt double standard": "One for high-level Democrats whose blatant crimes are ignored, such as Hillary Clinton, Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden" and quite another for "Republicans who are prominent supporters and defender of President Trump." ..."
For a long time, the FBI
has stood as the admirable symbol of a police agency of government, implacably going after the bad guys and neutrally enforcing
the laws. This is the FBI of the movie "The Untouchables," in which special agent Eliot Ness leads his devoted crew of armed
agents in a heroic battle against the forces of organized crime.
Well, forget about the Untouchables. Today's FBI has quite obviously been
corrupted from the top. This is a process that seems to have begun under President Barack
Obama, endured during the Donald Trump years, and has now reached its unfortunate nadir under
President Joe Biden. It's time for conservatives and Republicans to start
thinking about getting rid of the FBI.
I want to highlight two sets of contrasting episodes that give us a window into how biased
and partisan this once-respected agency has now become.
Contrast the treatment the FBI has given to Jan. 6 activists with that it has afforded to
Antifa and Black Lives Matter protesters.
The FBI has unrelentingly hunted down Jan. 6 protesters, in many cases confronting Trump
supporters who were merely in Washington at the time, or at the mall rally but not involved in
entering the Capitol. Those who have been arrested have been treated like domestic terrorists,
captured in raids involving drawn weapons, even though the charges against most of them amount
to little more than trespassing or entering a government facility without proper permission.
Nonviolent offenders have been given the same brutal treatment as violent ones. And to this day
the FBI promulgates images "a grandma here, a teenager there" asking
the public to help them track down still-at-large individuals who had something, anything, to
do with the events of Jan. 6.
Contrast this concentrated effort with the lackadaisical, even disinterested, approach of
the FBI to the Antifa and Black Lives Matter activists. Over a period of many months, those
activists have proven far more violent. They have killed a number of people, in contrast to the
Trump activists who killed nobody. (The only person killed on Jan. 6 was Ashli Babbitt, a Trump
supporter shot in the neck by a Capitol police officer.) They have looted businesses, burned
churches, assaulted police officers, attacked and harassed ordinary citizens eating in
restaurants or going about their normal lives "and all with impunity." No FBI raids, no systematic arrests, no dissemination of
"Wanted" images on
social media.
Now I turn to my second contrast: the recent FBI raid on Rudy Giuliani's
home and office, while there has been no raid on the home or office of New York Gov. Andrew
Cuomo . Start with Giuliani: The ostensible justification for the raid was to look for evidence
Giuliani violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
Giuliani pointed out in a statement
released by his lawyer, however, that he offered to sit down with the FBI and the Biden
Department of Justice (DOJ) and show them to their satisfaction that there had been no
violation of law. Moreover, Giuliani had for several months been offering the FBI clear
evidence, corroborated by texts and emails, that Hunter Biden not only allegedly failed to
register as a foreign agent, but also that he was allegedly involved in child pornography,
money laundering, and an elaborate Biden family scheme to sell their political access in
exchange for millions of dollars in personal gain.
Both the FBI and the DOJ showed no interest in any of that. Consequently, Giuliani seems
warranted in concluding that the agency's conduct is a "clear example of a corrupt double standard": "One for high-level Democrats whose blatant crimes are ignored, such as
Hillary Clinton, Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden" and quite another for "Republicans who are prominent supporters and defender of President
Trump."
Giuliani
further revealed that the FBI and DOJ had in late 2019 obtained access to his email
database without notifying him. This means that while Giuliani was advising his client Donald
Trump during the impeachment process""a relationship fully protected by attorney""client privilege""the FBI violated the law while supposedly
investigating Giuliani and Trump's possible violations of law.
Here, again, the FBI's extreme diligence in going after Giuliani can be
contrasted with the FBI's failure to act in the case of Gov. Cuomo. Cuomo is
currently involved in two separate scandals, one involving multiple women who have accused him
of sexual harassment, and another involving his direct involvement in a cover-up scheme to hide
the magnitude of nursing home deaths caused by his own policies.
According to the New York
Times , the Cuomo administration was far more culpable than previously known in
deliberately undercounting nursing home deaths over a period of five months.
Let's recall that these deaths need not have occurred. At the direction of
the Trump administration, the U.S. Navy dispatched a hospital ship Comfort to New York to
accept non-coronavirus patients and thus lessen the burden on New York hospitals.
Gov. Cuomo, however, turned the ship away to spite the Trump administration and instead
ordered New York nursing homes to accept the overflow of COVID-19 patients, helping the virus
to spread among vulnerable nursing home populations and thus causing thousands of unnecessary
deaths.
Then, when the Trump administration inquired about the nursing home data in New York, Cuomo
instructed his state health officials, including the health commissioner Howard Zucker, not to
release the true death toll to the federal government, state officials, or the general public.
Cuomo also suppressed a research paper that revealed the data and blocked two letters by
Zucker's department from being sent to state legislators.
While Giuliani's offense remains unclear, Cuomo is guilty of obvious
abuses of power ""actions that have not only put people in their graves but also
amounted, in a statistical sense, to "hiding the bodies." Again,
the FBI is nowhere to be found, and the reason for its absence appears to be that Cuomo is a
Democratic governor who seemingly enjoys immunity as far as today's FBI and
Biden's DOJ are concerned.
Enough is enough! When justice no longer involves the neutral or equal application of the
laws, it ceases to be justice. I realize, of course, that there will be no FBI reform under
Biden. Therefore, I strongly urge the Republican Party to make abolition of the
FBI""shutting down the agency and then reconstructing it from the ground
up""key provisions of its campaigns both in 2022 and 2024.
* * *
Dinesh D'Souza is an author, filmmaker, and daily host of the Dinesh
D'Souza podcast.
"... "If the day should ever come when we must go, if some day we are compelled to leave the scene of history, we will slam the door so hard that the universe will shake and mankind will stand back in stupefaction.." ― Joseph Goebbels ..."
"... 'We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under' ― General Moshe Dayan ..."
I went lateral in researching today's b-post and in so doing came across a Goebbels quote:
"If the day should ever come when we must go, if some day we are compelled to leave the scene of history, we will slam
the door so hard that the universe will shake and mankind will stand back in stupefaction.."
― Joseph Goebbels
And I was sure that I had read something like that before:
'We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under'
― General Moshe Dayan
"... you make the best point: you have to have something seriously "wrong" with your mind to want a job with these spooks in the first place. you can't spell "sociopath" without "c-i-a". ..."
I asked Google (and thus Wikipedia) what cisgender means?
cisgender /sɪsˈdʒɛndə/ adjective
Denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender
corresponds with their birth sex. "this new-found attention to the plight of black trans folks by primarily cisgender allies
is timely and necessary"
On the same page as the search result is a teaser headline:
"How An (the) Ad About Cisgender Backfired Spectacularly"
I've formed the opinion that the BIC (the Billionaires In Charge) want societies atomised
to reduce the likelihood of a revolution involving rope, and nooses. So guess how surprised
I'm not that the BIC's loyal servants/savants, the CIA, are attempting to popularise such
vacuous tosh as yet another addition to the LBGTQUERTY "landscape?"
you make the best point: you have to have something seriously "wrong" with your mind to
want a job with these spooks in the first place. you can't spell "sociopath" without
"c-i-a".
both the bold - and to a lesser extent the italics - are terms people use to sound
interesting when they're not. especially the tendency toward self-diagnosis that westerners
have; "i'm not dumb with no attention span ...i have " ADHD " or "i don't have
low self esteem or work-related anxiety based on the inner knowldge of how inept i am...i
have " imposter syndrome ".
the woke types tend to be this kind of malleable and empty vessel...which is what the
"company" wants.
Thanks for bringing this issue to the main page in a brief article, b. I linked to
this
article, "CIA & The Woke Totalitarian Generation" , on the Week in Review thread, but
it generated no additional comment despite its being one of several recent essays on the
issue of the contrived Wokeism "culture" that Alastair Crooke's written about on several
occasions over the past months and Pepe Escobar made the focus of his most recent essay.
Crooke argues that Wokeism is the peculiar and singular outcome of the American Malaise
prominently exposed by Christopher Lasch in his 1994 Revolt of the Elites , which
we've seen in the trenches as the war being waged against the State and citizenry by the
Neoliberal Rentier Class that was explained well in this Renegade Inc
interview from last year .
The Outlaw US Empire is clearly trying hard to get its
Neoliberal vassals to adopt the Woke insanity, which proves beyond doubt Putin's assertion
that the Liberalism of the West has died or worse evolved into something profane and
loathsome.
Several previous studies have examined the risks across generations of radiation exposure
from events such as this, but have yielded inconclusive results. In this study, the
investigators analyzed the genomes
of 130 children and parents from families where one or both parents were exposed to
radiation due to the Chernobyl accident, and where children were conceived afterward and born
between 1987 and 2002.
There was no increase in gene changes in reproductive cells of study participants, and
rates of new germline mutations were similar to those in the general population, according to a
team led by Meredith Yeager of the U.S. National Cancer Institute, in Rockville,
Md.
Lavrov "stating facts" at the virtual UNSC meeting is also a blistering critique of the
Outlaw US Empire and its EU vassals. Here is the beginning of the meat portion of his speech
that continues for another ten paragraphs:
"The core tenets of international law enshrined in the UN Charter have withstood the test
of time. Russia calls on all states to unconditionally follow the purposes and principles of
the Charter as they chart their foreign policies, respecting the sovereign equality of
states, not interfering in their internal affairs, settling disputes by political and
diplomatic means, and renouncing the threat or use of force. This is especially important at
the current stage in the difficult process of forming an international multipolar system. At
a time when new centres of economic growth, financial and political influence are gaining
strength, it is necessary to preserve the internationally recognised legal basis for building
a stable balance of interests that meets the new realities.
"Unfortunately, not all of our partners are driven by the imperative to work in good faith
to promote comprehensive multilateral cooperation. Realising that it is impossible to impose
their unilateral or bloc priorities on other states within the framework of the UN, the
leading Western countries have tried to reverse the process of forming a polycentric world
and slow down the course of history.
"Toward this end, the concept of the rules-based order is advanced as a substitute for
international law. It should be noted that international law already is a body of rules, but
rules agreed at universal platforms and reflecting consensus or broad agreement. The West's
goal is to oppose the collective efforts of all members of the world community with other
rules developed in closed, non-inclusive formats, and then imposed on everyone else. We only
see harm in such actions that bypass the UN and seek to usurp the only decision-making
process that can claim global relevance."
I thought this one of his best arrows, although others were equally sharp and on
target:
"By the way, as soon as we suggest discussing the current state of democracy not just
within states but on the international stage with our Western colleagues, they lose interest
in the conversation."
And Lavrov's facts are not out of line with global opinion as revealed by the info
supplied @26 above.
In the recent plot against Belarus President Lukashenko, there is a curious detail totally
missing in press reports. The trump evidence of the plot is a tape purporting to be a recording
of a conversation between a Belarusian general and the chief plotter, lawyer Yuri Zenkovich,
who has Belarusian and American citizenships. In Belarus, Zenkovich was an opposition activist,
a well-known member of the Belarusian Popular Front. He left for the US in the mid-2000's,
where he began to build his career as a lawyer, said the US
Embassy. The general apparently was used to trap the lawyer, who actively looked for potential
accomplices in the Belarus Army. In the tape (5:05), the lawyer tries to
convince the general to join the plotters by saying: "I am supported by US Jewish capital. I
have excellent relations with the American Jewish Committee. This is an NGO headed by three
hundred of the wealthiest Jewish families of America. It is the Jewish Lobby of America".
This is starting to look really like staging of "Brave new world..." Today's society is
closer to Huxley's "Brave New World" than to Orwell's "1984". But there are clear elements of
both. If you will, the worst of both worlds has come true today.
In 1949, sometime after the publication of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four , Aldous
Huxley, the author of Brave New World (1931), who was then living in California, wrote to
Orwell. Huxley had briefly taught French to Orwell as a student in high school at Eton.
Huxley generally praises Orwell's novel, which to many seemed very similar to Brave New
World in its dystopian view of a possible future. Huxley politely voices his opinion that his
own version of what might come to pass would be truer than Orwell's. Huxley observed that the
philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is sadism, whereas his own version is
more likely, that controlling an ignorant and unsuspecting public would be less arduous, less
wasteful by other means. Huxley's masses are seduced by a mind-numbing drug, Orwell's with
sadism and fear.
The most powerful quote In Huxley's letter to Orwell is this:
Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant
conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs
and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting
people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
Aldous Huxley.
Could Huxley have more prescient? What do we see around us?
Masses of people dependent upon drugs, legal and illegal. The majority of advertisements
that air on television seem to be for prescription drugs, some of them miraculous but most of
them unnecessary. Then comes COVID, a quite possibly weaponized virus from the
Fauci-funded-with-taxpayer-dollars lab in Wuhan, China. The powers that be tragically deferred
to the malevolent Fauci who had long been hoping for just such an opportunity. Suddenly, there
was an opportunity to test the mRNA vaccines that had been in the works for nearly twenty
years. They could be authorized as an emergency measure but were still highly experimental.
These jabs are not really vaccines at all, but a form of gene therapy . There
are potential
disastrous consequences down the road. Government experiments on the public are
nothing new .
Since there have been no actual, long-term trials, no one who contributed to this massive
drug experiment knows what the long-term consequences might be. There have been countless
adverse injuries and deaths already for which the government-funded vaccine producers will
suffer no liability. With each passing day, new side-effects have begun to appear: blood clots,
seizures, heart failure.
As new adverse reactions become known despite the censorship employed by most media outlets,
the more the Biden administration is pushing the vaccine, urging private corporations to make
it mandatory for all employees. Colleges are making them mandatory for all students returning
to campus.
The leftmedia are advocating the "shunning" of the unvaccinated. The self-appointed
virtue-signaling Democrats are furious at anyone and everyone who declines the jab. Why? If
they are protected, why do they care? That is the question. Same goes for the ridiculous mask
requirements . They protect no one but for those in operating rooms with their insides
exposed, yet even the vaccinated are supposed to wear them!
Months ago, herd immunity was near. Now Fauci and the CDC say it will never be achieved? Now
the Pfizer shot will necessitate yearly booster shots. Pfizer
expects to make $21B this year from its COVID vaccine! Anyone who thinks this isn't about
money is a fool. It is all about money, which is why Fauci, Gates, et al. were so determined to
convince the public that HCQ and ivermectin, both of which are effective, prophylactically and
as treatment, were not only useless, but dangerous. Both of those drugs are tried, true, and
inexpensive. Many of those thousands of N.Y. nursing home fatalities might have been prevented
with the use of one or both of those drugs. Those deaths are on the hands of Cuomo and his
like-minded tyrants drunk on power.
Months ago, Fauci, et al. agreed that children were at little or no risk of getting COVID,
of transmitting it, least of all dying from it. Now Fauci is demanding that all teens be
vaccinated by the end of the year! Why? They are no more in danger of contracting it now than
they were a year ago. Why are parents around this country not standing up to prevent their kids
from being guinea pigs in this monstrous medical experiment? And now they are " experimenting
" on infants. Needless to say, some have died. There is no reason on Earth for teens, children,
and infants to be vaccinated. Not one.
Huxley also wrote this:
"The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people they
will have a chance of maltreating someone. To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be
able to behave badly and call your bad behavior 'righteous indignation' -- this is the height
of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats ."
Perhaps this explains the left's hysterical impulse to force these untested shots on those
of us who have made the decision to go without it. If they've decided that it is the thing to
do, then all of us must submit to their whims. If we decide otherwise, it gives them the
righteous right to smear all of us whom they already deplore.
As C.J. Hopkins has
written , the left means to criminalize dissent. Those of us who are vaccine-resistant are
soon to be outcasts, deprived of jobs and entry into everyday businesses. This kind of
discrimination should remind everyone of ...oh, Germany three quarters of a century ago. Huxley
also wrote, "The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other
sets of people are human." That is precisely what the left is up to, what BLM is planning, what
Critical Race Theory is all about.
Tal Zaks, Moderna's chief medical officer, said these new vaccines are "hacking the
software of life." Vaccine-promoters claim he never said this, but he did. Bill Gates called
the vaccines " an operating
system " to the horror of those promoting it, a Kinsley gaffe. Whether it is or isn't
hardly matters at this point, but these statements by those behind the vaccines are a clue to
what they have in mind.
There will be in the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love
their servitude and producing dictatorship without tears , so to speak, producing a kind of
painless concentration camp for entire societies so that people will in fact have their
liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it.
This is exactly what the left is working so hard to effect: a pharmacologically compromised
population happy to be taken care of by a massive state machine. And while millions of people
around the world have surrendered to the vaccine and mask hysteria, millions more, about 1.3
billion, want no part of this government vaccine mania.
In his letter to Orwell, Huxley ended with the quote cited above and again here because it
is so profound:
Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant
conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs
and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting
people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
Huxley nailed the left more than seventy years ago, perhaps because leftists have never
changed throughout the ages. 61,497 173
Fat Beaver 14 hours ago (Edited)
If i am to be treated as an outcast or an undesirable because i refuse the vax, i will
immediately become someone that has zero reverence for the law, and i can only imagine 10's
of millions will be right there with me.
strych10 14 hours ago
Welcome to the club.
We have coffee in the corner and occasional meetings at various bars.
Dr. Chihuahua-González 13 hours ago
I'm a doctor, you could contact me anytime and receive your injection.
Fat Beaver 13 hours ago (Edited)
I've gotta feeling the normie world you think you live in is about to change drastically
for the worse...
sparky139 PREMIUM 10 hours ago
You mean you'll sign papers that you injected us *wink *wink? And toss it away?
bothneither 2 hours ago
Oh geez how uncommon, another useless doctor with no Scruples who sold out to big Pharma.
Please have my Gates sponsored secret sauce.
Unknown 6 hours ago (Edited)
Both Huxley and Orwell are wrong. Neoliberalism (the use of once office for personal
gains) is by far the most powerful force that subjugates the inept population. Neoliberalism
demolished the mighty USSR, now destroying the USA, and will do the same to China. And this
poison dribbles from the top to bottom creating self-centered population that is unable to
unite, much less resist.
Deathrips 15 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Tylers.
You gonna cover Tucker Carlsons show earlier today on FOX news about vaxxx deaths? almost 4k
reported so far this year.
Is the population of india up in arms or is the MSM?
Nelbev 10 hours ago
Facebook just flagged/censored it, must sign into see vid, Tuck also failed to mention
mRNA and adenovirus vaxes were experimental and not FDA approved nor gone through stage III
trials. Beside deaths, have blood clot issues. Good he mentioned how naturally immune if get
covid and recovered, better than vaccine, but not covered for bogus passports. Me personally,
I would rather catch covid and get natural immunity than be vaccinated with an untested
experimental vaccine.
Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya; Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche; Dr. Ron Brown; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr.
Richard Fleming; Dr. Simone Gold; Dr. Sunetra Gupta; Dr. Carl Heneghan; Dr. Martin Kulldorff;
Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Peter McCullough; Dr. Joseph Mercola; Dr. Lee Merritt; Dr. Judy Mikovits;
Dr. Dennis Modry; Dr. Hooman Noorchashm; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sherri Tenpenny; Dr. Richard
Urso; Dr. Michael Yeadon;
Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya; Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche; Dr. Ron Brown; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr.
Richard Fleming; Dr. Simone Gold; Dr. Sunetra Gupta; Dr. Carl Heneghan; Dr. Martin Kulldorff;
Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Peter McCullough; Dr. Joseph Mercola; Dr. Lee Merritt; Dr. Judy Mikovits;
Dr. Dennis Modry; Dr. Hooman Noorchashm; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sherri Tenpenny; Dr. Richard
Urso; Dr. Michael Yeadon;
His making of the gamma and delta workforce was quite prescient. We are seeing it play out
now, we all know gammas and delta. There was a really good ABC tv movie made in 1980 Brave
New World. Excellent show, it shows the Alphas and names them Rothchild and so on. Shows what
these people specifically want to do to the world. I wonder if the ruling psychopaths
actually wait for science fiction authors to plan the future and then follow their
script.
Mineshaft Gap 10 hours ago
If Huxley were starting out today no major publisher would touch him.
They'd tell him Brave New World doesn't have a diverse enough of cast. Even the mostly
likable totalitarian guy named Mustapha turns out to be white! A white Mustapha. It's soooo
triggering. Also, what's wrong with a little electronic fun and drug taking, anyway? Lighten
up , Aldous.
Meanwhile his portrait of shrieking medieval Catholic nuns who think they're possessed in
The Devils of Loudun might remind the leftist editors too uncomfortably of their own recent
bleating performances at "White Fragility" struggle sessions.
"... All an FBI supervisor has to do to get a FISA warrant on you is have one agent get a crooked snitch in a foreign country to send you a weird text message, and then have another bright eyed and bushy tailed agent who doesn't know the crook is a snitch write up a search warrant application affidavit and submit it to the FISA court. ..."
"... Nothing says "Unconstitutional (illegal) Deep State" like FISA. Hitler's Gestapo would be proud! ..."
"... Lisa and Peter removed any credibility the FBI had with the public. If they solved real crime they would go after the massive fraud and stolen ID criminals. Of course that takes real work and someone wanting get off their lazy rear end ..."
The FBI continues to lawlessly use counterintelligence powers against American citizens...
The Deep State Referee just admitted that the FBI continues to commit uncounted violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act of 1978 (FISA).
If you
sought to report a crime to the FBI, an FBI agent may have illegally surveilled your email. Even if you merely volunteered
for the FBI "Citizens Academy" program, the FBI may have illegally tracked all your online activity.
But the latest FBI offenses, like almost all prior FBI violations, are not a real problem, according to James Boasberg, presiding
judge of the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. That court, among other purposes, is supposed to safeguard Americans'
constitutional right to privacy under FISA. FISA was originally enacted to create a narrow niche for foreign intelligence investigations
that could be conducted without a warrant from a regular federal court. But as time passed, FISA morphed into an uncontrolled yet
officially sanctioned privacy-trampling monster. FISA judges unleash the nuclear bomb of searches,
authorizing the FBI "to conduct, simultaneous telephone, microphone, cell phone, e-mail and computer surveillance of the U.S.
person target's home, workplace and vehicles," as well as "physical searches of the target's residence, office, vehicles,
computer, safe deposit box and U.S. mails."
In 2008, after the George W. Bush administration's pervasive illegal warrantless wiretaps were exposed, Congress responded by
enacting FISA amendments that formally entitled the National Security Agency to vacuum up mass amounts of emails and other communication,
a swath of which is provided to the FBI. In 2018, the FISA court
slammed the FBI for abusing that
database with warrantless searches that violated Americans' rights. In lieu of obeying FISA, the FBI created a new Office of Internal
Audit. Deja vu! Back in 2007, FBI agents were caught massively violating the Patriot Act by using National Security Letters to conduct
thousands of illegal searches on Americans' personal data. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.)
declared that
an Inspector General report on the abusive searches "confirms the American people's worst fears about the Patriot Act." FBI
chief Robert Mueller responded by creating a new
Office of Integrity and Compliance
as "another important step toward ensuring we fulfill our mission with an unswerving commitment to the rule of law."
Be still my beating heart!
The FBI's promise to repent after the 2018 report sufficed for the FISA court to permit the FBI to continue plowing through
the personal data it received from NSA. Monday's disclosure "a delayed release of a report by the court last November "revealed
that the FBI has conducted
warrantless searches of the data trove for "domestic terrorism," "public corruption and bribery," "health care fraud,"
and other targets "including people who notified the FBI of crimes and even repairmen entering FBI offices. As Spencer Ackerman
wrote
in the Daily Beast , "The FBI continues to perform warrantless searches through the NSA's most sensitive databases for routine
criminal investigations." That type of search "potentially jeopardizes an accused person's ability to have a fair trial since warrantlessly acquired information is supposed to be inadmissible. The FBI claimed to the court that none of the warrantlessly queried
material "˜was used in a criminal or civil proceeding,' but such usage at trial has happened before," Ackerman noted. Some illicit
FBI searches involve vast dragnets. As the
New York Times reported ,
an FBI agent in 2019 conducted a database search "using the identifiers of about 16,000 people, even though only seven of them
had connections to an investigation."
In the report released Monday, Judge Boasberg lamented "apparent widespread violations" of the legal restrictions for FBI searches.
Regardless,
Boasberg kept the illicit search party going: "The Court is willing to again conclude that the . . . [FBI's] procedures meet
statutory and Fourth Amendment requirements." "Willing to again conclude" sounds better than "close enough for constitutional."
At this point, Americans know only the abuses that the FBI chose to disclose to FISA judges. We have no idea how many other perhaps
worse abuses may have occurred. For a hundred years, the FBI has buttressed its power by keeping a lid on its crimes. Unfortunately,
the FISA Court has become nothing but Deep State window dressing "a facade giving the illusion that government is under the law.
Consider Boasberg's recent ruling in the most brazen FISA abuse yet exposed. In December 2019, the Justice Department Inspector
General reported that the FBI made "fundamental
errors " and persistently deceived the FISA court to authorize surveilling a 2016 Trump presidential campaign official. The
I.G. report said the FBI "drew almost entirely" from the Steele dossier to prove a "well-developed conspiracy" between Russians
and the Trump campaign even though it was "unable to corroborate any of the specific substantive allegations against Carter Page"
in that dossier, which was later debunked.
A former FBI assistant general counsel, Kevin Clinesmith, admitted to falsifying key evidence to secure the FISA warrant to spy
on the Trump campaign. As a Wall Street Journal
editorial noted , Clinesmith "changed an
email confirming Mr. Page had been a CIA source to one that said the exact opposite, explicitly adding the words "˜not a source'
before he forwarded it." A federal prosecutor declared that the "resulting harm is immeasurable" from Clinesmith's action.
But at the sentencing hearing, Boasberg gushed with sympathy,
noting that Clinesmith
"went from being an obscure government lawyer to standing in the eye of a media hurricane"¦ Mr. Clinesmith has lost his job in
government service"what has given his life much of its meaning." Scorning the federal prosecutor's recommendation for jail time, Boasberg gave Clinesmith a wrist
slap"400 hours of community service and 12 months of probation.
The FBI FISA frauds profoundly disrupted American politics for years and the din of belatedly debunked accusations of Trump colluding
with Russia swayed plenty of votes in the 2018 midterms and the 2020 presidential election. But for the chief FISA judge, nothing
matters except the plight of an FBI employee who lost his job after gross misconduct. This is the stark baseline Americans should
remember when politicians, political appointees, and judges promise to protect them from future FBI abuses. The FISA court has been
craven, almost beyond ridicule, perennially. Perhaps Boasberg was simply codifying a prerogative the FISA court previously awarded
upon FBI officials. In 2005, after a deluge of false FBI claims in FISA warrants, FISA Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly proposed
requiring FBI agents to swear to the accuracy of the information they presented. That never happened because it could have "slowed
such investigations drastically," the
Washington Post reported
. So, FBI agents continue to lie with impunity to the judges.
The FISA court has gone from pretending that FBI violations don't occur to pretending that violations don't matter. Practically
the only remaining task is for the FISA court to cease pretending Americans have any constitutional right to privacy . But if a sweeping
new domestic terrorism law is passed, perhaps even that formal acknowledgement will be unnecessary. Beginning in 2006, the court
rubber-stamped FBI requests that bizarrely claimed that the telephone records of all Americans
were "relevant" to a terrorism
investigation under the Patriot Act, thereby enabling NSA data seizures later
denounced by a federal judge as "almost Orwellian." FISA could become a peril to far more Americans if Congress formally creates
a new domestic terrorism offense and a new category for expanding FISA searches.
The backlash from Democrats after the January 6 clash at the Capitol showcased the demand for federal crackdowns on extremists
who doubted Biden's election, disparaged federal prerogatives, or otherwise earned congressional ire. If a domestic terrorism law
is passed, the FBI will feel as little constrained by the details of the statute as it does about FISA's technicalities. Will FBI
agents conducting warrantless searches rely on
the same
harebrained standard the NSA used to target Americans: "someone searching the web for suspicious stuff"? Unfortunately, unless
an FBI whistleblower with the same courage as former NSA analyst Edward Snowden steps forward, we may never know the extent of FBI
abuses
ebworthen 39 minutes ago
"You want to harass a political opponent? Sure, we can do that...
JaxPavan 42 minutes ago
All an FBI supervisor has to do to get a FISA warrant on you is have one agent get a crooked snitch in a foreign country to
send you a weird text message, and then have another bright eyed and bushy tailed agent who doesn't know the crook is a snitch
write up a search warrant application affidavit and submit it to the FISA court.
Joe Bribem 32 minutes ago
It's almost like we did this to Trump. But it'll never come to light. Oops it did. Not that anything will happen to us because
we own the corrupt DOJ and FBI.
Obama's own personal private army.
You_Cant_Quit_Me 7 minutes ago
A lot of tips come in from overseas. For example, the US spies on citizens of another country and then sends that country tips,
in exchange that country does the same by spying on US citizens and sending the FBI tips. Then it starts, "we are just
following up on a tip"
wee-weed up 36 minutes ago (Edited)
Nothing says "Unconstitutional (illegal) Deep State" like FISA. Hitler's Gestapo would be proud!
You_Cant_Quit_Me 37 minutes ago
Lisa and Peter removed any credibility the FBI had with the public. If they solved real crime they would go after the massive fraud and stolen ID criminals. Of course that takes real work and
someone wanting get off their lazy rear end
takeaction 58 minutes ago (Edited)
If you own a smart phone...everything you do is recorded...and logged.
"They" have been listening
to you for a long time if they want to.
If you own any smart device...they can listen and watch. They are monitoring what I am typing and this site. There really is no way to hide.
Leftists reacted with fury after Fox News host Tucker Carlson said people who wear masks
outside should be mocked and that parents who made their kids wear them were engaging in "child
abuse."
Carlson noted that masks were "purely a sign of political obedience like Kim Il-Sung pins in
Pyongyang" and that the only people who voluntarily wear masks outside are "zealots and
neurotics."
He then asserted that the tables should be turned on Biden voters who have been harassing
conservatives for almost a year for not wearing a mask in public.
"The rest of us should be snorting at them first, they're the aggressors – it's our
job to brush them back and restore the society we were born in," said Carlson.
"So the next time you see someone in a mask on the sidewalk or on the bike path, do not
hesitate. Ask politely but firmly, ' Would you please take off your mask? Science shows there
is no reason for you to be wearing it. Your mask is making me uncomfortable, " he added.
"We should do that and we should keep doing it until wearing a mask outside is roughly as
socially accepted as lighting a Marlboro on an elevator."
The Fox News host went on to call mask wearing "repulsive" while asserting that forcing
children to wear masks outside should be illegal.
"Your response when you see children wearing masks as they play should be no different from
your response to seeing someone beat a kid in Walmart. Call the police immediately. Contact
Child Protective Services. Keep calling until someone arrives," Carlson said.
"What you're looking at is abuse, it's child abuse, and you are morally obligated to attempt
to prevent it," he added.
As expected, Carlson immediately began trending on Twitter, with hysterical leftists
hyperventilating over Tucker once again challenging their cult. Many called for the Fox News
host to be fired while others ludicrously described him as a "national security threat."
As we
highlighted yesterday , even Dr. Fauci now admits that the risk of vaccinated people
spreading COVID outside is "minuscule," and yet some health professionals are pushing for the
mask mandates to be made permanent.
The transmission of COVID-19 outdoors is almost non-existent, making mask mandates merely a
political tool of population control.
In a recent open letter to the German government and state premiers, five leading members of
the Association for Aerosol Research (GAeF) wrote, "The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 viruses
takes place indoors almost without exception. Transmission outdoors is extremely rare and never
leads to cluster infections as can be observed indoors."
Why the us government did not fund this type of mask for all is telling what the overall
strategy is.
Controlling you, your neighbor, and others that think for themselves.
Its not about the virus
Robert Neville 7 hours ago
Actually, M95 masks filter out 95% of particles over 4 microns in diameter in perfect
conditions. In the real world it is much less effective than that. Viruses are generally less
than one micron in size so they are ineffective for most viruses. Also, the masks are so hard
to breath through that some version have an exhale valve so they do nothing to protect others
if you are infected. Most masks don't protect your eyes. The only thing that works is a space
suit that is decontaminated before you remove it. The rest is virtue siganling.
Properly fitted n95's do protect against virus and the science proves it.
Dickweed Wang 10 hours ago (Edited)
This is an excerpt from the "Stanford Study" from November 2020 (that's been making the
rounds in the alternative media and conservative media space recently) about the uselessness
of masks in preventing "the virus":
A meta -analysis among health care workers found that compared to no masks, surgical
mask and N95 respirators were not effective against transmission of viral infections or
influenza-like illness based on six RCTs [28] . Using
separate analysis of 23 observational studies, this meta -analysis found no protective
effect of medical mask or N95 respirators against SARS virus [28] . A recent
systematic review of 39 studies including 33,867 participants in community settings
(self-report illness), found no difference between N95 respirators versus surgical masks
and surgical mask versus no masks in the risk for developing influenza or influenza-like
illness, suggesting their ineffectiveness of blocking viral transmissions in community
settings [29] .
It's predictable that the usual suspects have come out of the woodwork to "fact check" and
disparage the entire paper (do an internet search for 'Stanford Mask Paper' and you'll see
what I'm talking about). Their main criticism is 'that wasn't published by Stanford', while
they totally ignore the claims made in the paper. When you look at the people and
organizations doing the fact checking it really shows that the entire mask issue is a
political/control ploy. Here's the link to the entire paper if anyone is interested:
Unsurprisingly, the rich have gotten richer, and their preferred asset classes are the most
protected by the tax code.
Just one of many first-order economic problems in the US. Wealth, once entrenched –
most particularly when it is unearned and inherited – will never be voluntarily
disgorged. The beneficiaries would rather give up democracy, give up the Rule of Law, rather
than see their privileged status compromised.
From comments: " Tucker is right on this one. If you wear a mask outside you truly are a
moron. You may as well add goggles and a butt plug." ... "Don't forget about those solo drivers
with masks on!", "Maskers are stupid scared virtue signalers"
As an anti-mask militant for quite a while now I've been going out of my way to ask people
with masks on outdoors why they're wearing one (I've really tried to be polite but it's
getting increasingly hard to do that). In literally hundreds of instances I haven't gotten a
straight answer yet. It's stunning that people are so gullible but it shows what the power of
propaganda really is. 99% of that is coming from teevee, which truly rots your brain.
Capt Tripps 10 hours ago remove link
They are signaling the submission to a tyrannical state. That submission makes us all less
free.
safelyG 10 hours ago
mister tucker is wrongeddy wrong wrong.
we must all wear multiple masks. indoors. outdoors. at work. at play. while we sleep.
while we bathe. while we eat. while we sing praises unto the most high.
and we must remain 8 feet apart, one from the other. at all times.
and report our whereabouts and our contacts and our body temperature. to the
authorities.
get your vacines!
lovingly,
bill n melinda
radical-extremist 10 hours ago
When Tucker Carlson says to tell people to take off their masks and call CPS on parents
who mask their children he's trolling the Left. And because the Left has no sense of humor or
irony or hypocrisy...they're of course OUTRAGED, which was his point.
Realism 10 hours ago remove link
I like it best when hiking outside, in 75 degree weather with a nice breeze, you see
people put up their mask as they walk by
Pure comedy, it's hard to understand the stupidity if you think you'll get any disease
much less Covid walking by someone
And importantly, would you really be hiking if you had Covid LOL
aztrader 10 hours ago
Mask wears see it as a badge of honor because they "care" about other people. In reality,
it's a badge of Stupidity and ignorance.
Prince Velveeta 10 hours ago (Edited) remove link
California is an open-air mental ward. I was just out there and the collective idiocy is
astounding. People jogging with masks on , exaggerating their breathing as they pass you in
some competitive virtue signaling event. I witnessed some idiot jogging up the hill past my
family member's house, with a bandana on his face, being sucked into his mouth as he's
gasping for air.....
Looks like an attempt to redirect anger against neolibel elite into racial antimosity does nto work well. A least for this UNZ commentariant.
They are not folled by woke nonsense.
In any case it looks like the USA is a divided country.
Never underestimate the insanity of Zionists, be they full Jews, half-Jews, or soulless Jew-wannabes like Joe "I am a Zionist"
Biden. We're in unprecedented territory -- an empire run by Zoglodytes. They'll run it into the ground sooner or later, but just
how quickly and at what cost to the humanity is anyone's guess.
Of course, none of it would be possible but for the Anglo-elites doing deals with ((bankers)) in search of post-Imperial easy-living.
In fact, that's probably what caused WW2.
Today, gangsters from every creed, race and religion want in on the Zionist action, and happily signal to their criminal lodestar
that they're "all in" with virtually unlimited aid, wars and diplomatic support in Congress for the Jewish state.
The New World Order. How do you like it, whitey? You just had to listen to the gold-plated promises of the Jew confidence man.
The streets will be paved with gold, right?
If you're white and in the armed forces/police, you're a moron.
The fact is Americans are nothing but the Jew's bitch, killing for them. There isn't one American, who's defended their country,
well, you'll have to go back to the war of independence for that. Every, serving member of the armed forces is a mercenary, paid
by the US taxpayer, to kill fire Israel as they establish greater Israel.
So STOP looking at your armed forces as heroes. They aren't, not one, single one! See them for what they are, braindead, brainwashed,
fighting machines, WHO DON'T FIGHT FOR YOU! And that's what's worrying. Throughout history every armed force has been turned against
its own nation and its just a matter of time with the US. THEY WILL use them against you, to push nationwide vaccination.
The armed forces, like the police, are your enemy and I strongly suggest that if you know anyone in them, or a friend whose
family members are in them, tell them to leave ASAP before they institute martial law. Remember, the armed forces don't serve
you, so leaving them is doing the people good while staying within is causing them harm.
I'm suspicious of Biden's planned withdrawal from Afghanistan. The troops will probably get reassigned to the Middle East or
the Polish Border. Trump's "withdrawal" from Syria just amounted to shipping those troops to Iraq.
The Biden administration is a revolutionary one. It is not American and doesn't pretend to be. Like Lenin's early revolutionary
Bolshevik government it is comprised of mostly Jews and racial/ethnic minorities who are antagonistic towards the majority population
and its history and traditions.
I believe that the Jews, radical blacks and others who are really in charge of the Biden administration have no plans to relinquish
power in 2024 even if they lose the election. Since the courts refused to provide a legal remedy for battleground states breaking
their own elections laws to massively increase Democrat mail-in ballots then they will just do it again unless Republicans can
win the gubernatorial elections in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. But that might not be possible with mail-in ballot schemes
that were illegally put in place.
Will whites support a globalist regime that picks fights abroad and wars against them at home? The mood of the country is
comparable to East German during the 1980's. Resignation and apathy. The last election was a fraud, the media are liars, the courts
are political, privacy and free speech aren't being protected, and half the country declares it hates the other half.
Go ahead, try to conjure a false flag to rally Team America
There are no signs whites are about to repudiate the Evil Empire. Trace Adkins, Gerald McRaney are on tv advertisements imploring
whites to provide financial support to the fools who came back crippled from fighting in Israel's wars.
"Will Whites Support A Globalist American Empire That Picks Fights Abroad and Wars Against Them At Home?"
The answer is YES, they will.
Why?
Because they've been zombified by 150 years of corporate media whose only purpose is to use subliminal messages 24/7 to control
them. Worse of all, they pay monthly fees in order to be zombified!
Wait for the next false flag attack against the US "Interests" at home or abroad and you'll see how the zombies behave.
Elites, oligarchs, plutocrats, super-rich, whatever, but don't slime the Yankees.
And while I agree with much of this, don't forget that in the late 1960's the elites imported Mexicans to specifically replace
blacks. And then cried a river of tears at how blacks were mysteriously losing ground!!!!
Oh and also: nobody NEEDS cheap labor to run factories. History has shown that without cheap labor factories run perfectly
well. It's just that the elites need cheap labor to stay elite
The real enemy of the American working class and middle class all of them is neoliberalism ! Coupled with a two party plutocracy
that disenfranchises the same Americans who desperately need a more equitable society! Nothing to do with Russia or China we caused
it all by ourselves!
This is why there needs to be White Liberation from Jewish Supremacism. But Jewish Power tries to preempt this by making a
big stink about 'white supremacism'.
No more white support for Jewish supremacist tyranny over Palestinians and mass murder of Arabs/Muslims. If, after 2020, any
white person still harbors sentimentality about Jewish Power, he or she is cuck-roach. Useless and worthless.
Currently, an indebted, belligerent, imperialist U.S. is being propped up by naïve, well-meaning whites.
These "well-meaning whites" are the enemy. "Well-meaning whites" have always been the greatest enemy of Whites. A lot of people
here consider Jews to be our greatest enemies. But why are they here in such huge numbers and why are they in control? It started
with the Powdered-Wig Gang (a.k.a. the Founding Fathers) giving them citizenship on the basis of their shit "Enlightenment" ideology,
which held that religion was merely a private matter and of no importance. No country at the time gave Jews citizenship save Poland,
which had fallen under their sway and paid an exceedingly high price for it. Then France followed the American example when they
had their own powdered-wig revolution.
The tragedy of the US is that nearly every fair-skinned, non-Jewish individual who has any influence here is a "well-meaning
White". Generations of brainwashing have done that. Their latest bit of tomfoolery is the belief "Uncle Tim" Scott, a dim, charmless,
venal, ugly black mediocrity, will be their savior. By the way, the first time I laid eyes on Uncle Tim, I said myself, "They're
going to want to make that fellow president." That's no reason to brag, however, because "well-meaning whites" are nothing if
not predictable.
"Well-meaning whites" have no common sense and can't learn from experience. They could not conceive the idea "diversity" is
the problem. "Diversity" elected Joe Biden, through bloc-voting by non-Whites and by she-boons in black-dominated counties bringing
in suitcases of fake ballots, but guess what: as far as "well-meaning Whites" are concerned, "diversity" in the form of "Uncle
Tim" Scott is the solution.
What it comes down to is that if Whites want the White race to survive, then "well-meaning whites", who can accurately be called
"liberals", have to go. Whites cannot afford to be sentimental about "well-meaning whites".
@xyzxy the Zio-western imperialists decided ( ie "backed down") not to risk crossing them.
Incidentally JK I don't disagree with this position --
"Rather than feeling anger or shame at this national humiliation, instead I feel something like schadenfreude against them --
along with righteous indignation on behalf of the countless patriots used up and spat out by a System unworthy of their sacrifice."
But perhaps you could spare a few words & emotions for the poor bloody average Afghans who have died in their 100's of 1000's
in this vicious, stupid war.
A lack of sympathy for & indeed basic knowledge of, other peoples is part of the reason the US constantly gets stuck in these
ridiculous wars. (Had they the "leaders" we have now , the Vietnam War would probably have limped to a halt sometime in
the late 80's).
Hmm. Kirkpatrick doesn't seem to realize that 911 was sort of an official beginning to the elites domestic threat problem?
There was never a reason to enter Afghanistan because Afghanistan never attacked us and nor did Osama Bin Laden.
As long as ppl believe the official story there will always be a reason the American citizen can support for invading middle east
countries
Like the holocaust, it is a lynch pin lie that is the pre-requisite for all sorts claims and behaviors that without them would
otherwise not give validation
I doubt Russia has any regard for Turkey – it has a very long history of wars against them and knows just how treacherous they
are.
Russia alone is powerful enough to end life in USA
USA has lost Europe already- Merkel is aligning with China
Americans think Russian gas binds Germany rather than export markets like China and the fact EU needs semiconductors and Asia
is where they are produced
No one takes USA seriously any more it is peripheral as in 19th century. You forget Europeans cannot travel to US and frankly
fear to do so anyway
This cannot be said nearly enough. WASP culture is WASP elites hating all 'other' whites and pretending not to hate
a few non-WASP white groups when they (the WASPs) can use them against the whites they most hate or fear at the moment. WASPs
discard all groups they use as soon as they no longer need them to wage some type war against still other whites.
The Scotch-Irish are probably the best example of what WASPs think of even those who serve them most ruthlessly.
The mood of the country is comparable to East German during the 1980's. Resignation and apathy.
The last election was a fraud, the media are liars, the courts are political, privacy and free speech aren't being protected,
and half the country declares it hates the other half.
Go ahead, try to conjure a false flag to rally Team America.
It does look like resignation and apathy – which is sort of logical – given that all centers of power are in the hands of the
totalitarians (same as in the old East Germany).
The totalitarian Communist East German regime actually collapsed when it became caught up in the mass demonstrations of neighbouring
countries (Poland Feb. 1989 and Hungary the following month). The Communists didn't have the political will/ability to suppress
demonstrations on this scale and ceded power. Two points here are 1) that the public in each country overwhelmingly opposed the
government 2) each country was ethnically united (Poles in Poland, Hungarians in Hungary and Germans in East Germany) and viewed
their oppression as sourced externally (the Soviet Union).
The US looks different, since the population is split both politically and ethnically. So if anything is going to happen (unlikely)
then it's either a civil war, a military coup or a world war (nuclear) removing most major American cities + Israel.
@anonymouseperson c accountants uncovering the depths of Israel and its fifth column's theft of many tens of billions of our
war matériel and of our most guarded military secrets, which were then sold to China in concert with the Greenspan/Goldman Sachs
plan to transfer of our industrial intellectual assets and over 50,000 factories to China in preparation for a new order based
on joint Israeli-Chinese technocratic hegemony.
My point is that the uninterrupted, elaborate efforts at 9/11 concealment legally constitute, by themselves, sufficient proof
of the Pentagon's complicity and guilt in 9/11 and, therefore, make it an alien occupation force that serves Israel, its fifth
column, and no other. A war completing the "Bolsheviks" effective extermination of white Christian Russia at the same time as
exterminating white Christian America appears to be the objective of International Jewry, whom alone Joe Biden and his Pentagon
answer to.
When I was in the US Army, I never met anyone who signed up to 'fight for the Anglo-Zionist empire'. We were there for a variety
of reasons, no job, to get training, money for college, adventure or maybe running away from a crazy girlfriend. As the grandson
of immigrants, I was probably the most patriotic, the rest of the guys, not so much. Young men will always join the military,
whether the military oppresses its people or not. How many Irishmen served in the British military when they had few civil rights
back home? In the military, a young White man can learn a trade, learn military tactics, earn money for college and become a real
asset to his community. You can also get killed or maimed, but at 18 or 19, we didn't think about that.
Will Whites Support A Globalist American Empire That Picks Fights Abroad and Wars Against Them At Home?
If they are members of Congress, the military leadership, the police, the FBI, the NSA, the CIA, the MSM, or the leadership
of either political party the answer is clearly a resounding YES!!
I believe a large percentage of whites in America have a Stockholm syndrome of some kind going on. The title of the article
has rolled two very separate issues into one. As far as continuing to support wars abroad that aren't benefiting the average person
of whatever color is not an issue that can be specifically directed at Marxist oriented regimes such as that of Obama/Hillary
and now Sleepy Joe & Camel Toe. One can never forget the years of the faux conservative Bushlet regime. Whites as a group more
overtly support the military than do other racial groups (even though blacks and Hispanics make up a large percentage of our military).
They are very reluctant to criticize American foreign policy as unpatriotic and somehow react to military interventions as if
they were a sporting event.
Their concept of patriotism is very puerile. Many never ask the question of who benefits? (bankers, weapons manufacturers
and Zionists). As far as the war on whites is concerned, here is where the Stockholm syndrome comes more into play. Our people
have been psychologically beaten into submission by accepting whatever the Marxist intelligentsia throws at them.But there is
also a cultural flaw primarily among Northern European Protestant whites which consists of being perceived as NICE. Stop being
NICE, especially to people who wish you dead. Is this some sort of perversion of Christianity? Maybe. Rather than throwing the
whole Gospel message out the window, a recalibration of one's Christianity needs to happen as well. The churches have not been
our friend either.
Back in the good old days, when things were more innocent and simple, the psychopathic
Central Intelligence Agency had to covertly infiltrate the news media to manipulate the
information Americans were consuming about their nation and the world. Nowadays, there is no
meaningful separation between the news media and the CIA at all.
Analysis: US
blinks first on Russia-Ukraine tensions
Journalist Glenn Greenwald just highlighted an interesting point about the reporting by The
New York Times on the so-called
“Bountygate†story the outlet broke in June of last year
about the Russian government trying to pay Taliban-linked fighters to attack US soldiers in
Afghanistan.
“One of the NYT reporters who originally broke the Russia bounty story
(originally attributed to unnamed ‘intelligence
officials’) say today that it was a CIA claim,†Greenwald
tweeted .
“So media outlets - again - repeated CIA stories with no questioning:
congrats to all.â€
Indeed, NYT’s original
story made no mention of CIA involvement in the narrative, citing only
“officials,†yet this latest article speaks as though it had
been informing its readers of the story’s roots in the
lying, torturing , drug-running , warmongering Central
Intelligence Agency from the very beginning. The author even writes “The New
York Times
first reported last summer the existence of the C.I.A.’s
assessment,†with the hyperlink leading to the initial article which made no
mention of the CIA. It wasn’t until later that The New York Times began reporting that the CIA
was looking into the Russian bounties allegations at all.
The Daily Beast , which has itself uncritically published many articles
promoting the CIA “Bountygate†narrative, reports the
following:
It was a blockbuster
story about Russia’s return to the imperial “Great
Game†in Afghanistan. The Kremlin had spread money around the longtime central
Asian battlefield for militants to kill remaining U.S. forces. It sparked a massive outcry
from Democrats and their #resistance amplifiers about the treasonous Russian puppet in the
White House whose admiration for Vladimir Putin had endangered American troops.
But on Thursday, the Biden administration announced that U.S. intelligence only had
“low to moderate†confidence in the story after all.
Translated from the jargon of spyworld, that means the intelligence agencies have found the
story is, at best, unproven â€" and possibly untrue.
So the mass media aggressively promoted a CIA narrative that none of them ever saw proof of,
because there was no proof, because it was an entirely unfounded claim from the very beginning.
They quite literally ran a CIA press release and disguised it as a news story.
In totalitarian dictatorships, the government spy agency tells the news media what stories
to run, and the news media unquestioningly publish it. In free democracies, the government spy
agency says “Hoo buddy, have I got a scoop for you!†and the
news media unquestioningly publish it.
In 1977 Carl Bernstein published an article titled “ The CIA and the Media
†reporting that the CIA had
covertly infiltrated America’s most influential news outlets and had
over 400 reporters who it considered assets in a program known as
Operation Mockingbird . It was a major scandal, and rightly so. The news media is meant to
report truthfully about what happens in the world, not manipulate public perception to suit the
agendas of spooks and warmongers.
Nowadays the CIA collaboration happens right out in the open, and people are too
propagandized to even recognize this as scandalous. Immensely influential outlets like The New
York Times uncritically pass on CIA disinfo which is then spun as fact by cable news
pundits . The sole owner of The Washington Post is a CIA contractor ,
and WaPo has never once disclosed this conflict of interest when reporting on US intelligence
agencies per standard journalistic protocol. Mass media outlets
now openly employ intelligence agency veterans like John Brennan, James Clapper,
Chuck Rosenberg, Michael Hayden, Frank Figliuzzi, Fran Townsend, Stephen Hall, Samantha
Vinograd, Andrew McCabe, Josh Campbell, Asha Rangappa, Phil Mudd, James Gagliano, Jeremy Bash,
Susan Hennessey, Ned Price and Rick Francona, as are known
CIA assets like NBC’s Ken Dilanian, as are
CIA interns like Anderson Cooper and CIA applicants like
Tucker Carlson.
This isn’t Operation Mockingbird. It’s so much worse.
Operation Mockingbird was the CIA doing something to the media. What we are seeing now is the
CIA openly acting as the media. Any separation between the CIA and the news media, indeed even
any pretence of separation, has been dropped.
This is bad. This is very, very bad. Democracy has no meaningful existence if
people’s votes aren’t being cast with a clear
understanding of what’s happening in their nation and their world, and if
their understanding is being shaped to suit the agendas of the very government
they’re meant to be influencing with their votes, what you have is the most
powerful military and economic force in the history of civilization with no accountability to
the electorate whatsoever. It’s just an immense globe-spanning power
structure, doing whatever it wants to whoever it wants. A totalitarian dictatorship in
disguise.
And the CIA is the very worst institution that could possibly be spearheading the movements
of that dictatorship. A little research into the many, many horrific
things the CIA has done over the years will quickly show you that this is true; hell, just
a glance at what the CIA was up to with the
Phoenix Program in Vietnam will.
There’s a common delusion in our society that depraved government
agencies who are known to have done evil things in the past have simply stopped doing evil
things for some reason. This belief is backed by zero evidence, and is contradicted by
mountains of evidence to the contrary. It’s believed because it is
comfortable, and for literally no other reason.
The CIA should not exist at all, let alone control the news media, much less the movements
of the US empire. May we one day know a humanity that is entirely free from the rule of
psychopaths, from our total planetary behavior as a collective, all the way down to the
thoughts we think in our own heads.
May we extract their horrible fingers from every aspect of our being.
The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is
to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack , which will get you an email
notification for everything I publish. My work is
entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around,
liking me on Facebook
, following my antics on Twitter , or
throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi , Patreon or Paypal . If you want to read more you can buy
my books . For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying
to do with this platform,
click here . Everyone, racist platforms excluded,
has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else
I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.
"... Don't deny W his agency. As I followed the horrors, from Vietnam to Iraq to Syria to Central America and elsewhere, the full list that was visible anyway, of the W regime, it sure seemed clear to me that W played the bumbling yuk very well. ..."
"... the dumb cluck thing was mostly an act. he was deliberately talking that way not only to paint himself as stupid, but also because those in power assume we must be spoken to as children (they've studied president speeches since JFK have decreased from high school level to 6th grade in complexity, word usage etc). ..."
"... In our kayfabe duoparty system, it also gave the "opposing" side the "W is a Chimp" talking point to harp on (dress rehearsal for the same stuff against tRUMP). ..."
"... Abu Ghraib was not an anomaly, Con Son Island served the same purpose during the Vietnam War. When I was young I was proud to be an American Citizen, we had the Bill of Rights, the Military was controlled by Civilians and their oath was to defend the Constitution from "All Enemies Foreign and Domestic.". I have been horrified, ashamed and deeply saddened by what has happened in the US over the last half Century or so. ..."
"... I view the 2008 election as the major failing-to-turn-back-when-we-had-the-chance point. Obama could have undone Bush's worst policies, but instead he cemented them into place forever. ..."
"... Our elites are both stupid and evil, but Bush is more stupid and Obama is more evil ..."
"... you are 40 years off the mark-It was Reagan who's brand of avuncular fascism, celebrating stupidity as a virtue who paved the way. ..."
"... albrt: I agree with your take. Obama campaigned as an anti-war candidate (at least wrt Iraq). He then proceeded to "˜surge' into Afghanistan and added Libya, Syria, and Yemen, to the regime change mix. Never a thought given to prosecuting the war criminals: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Tenet, Feith, Wolfowitz, Powell, et al; much less even consider a truth and reconciliation commission. ..."
"... Obama was equally complicit in this never ending horror show and, I am hopeful, history will hold him equally accountable. ..."
"... Is it not written that Margaret Thatcher's true legacy was Tony Blair? If that is true, then the true legacy of Dubya is Obama. ..."
"... As far as harm that George W. Bush did and launched (illegal/immoral wars, domestic surveillance, tax cuts for the wealthy"¦.) Bush should take the award. ..."
"... When Obama deliberately and with malice aforethought turned all the admitted (and in fact proudly self-avowed) war-criminals and criminals-against humanity loose, free and clear under "look forward not back", he routinised and permanentized the up-to-that-very-minute irregular and extra-constitutional novel methods of governance and practice which the Cheney-Bush Administration had pioneered. Obama deliberately made torture, aggressive war, etc. "legal" when America does it and "permanent" as long as America is strong enough to keep doing it. ..."
"... The Greatest Disappointment in History. No-one else comes close, in terms of the sheer numbers of people globally who he let down. The Bait and Switch King, The Great Betrayer. After the nightmare of Bush we got him and his "˜eloquence', pulling the wool over the dazzled sheeple's eyes while he entrenched the 1% and the neocon MI complex, his paymasters, and sponsors for his entry into the overclass. ..."
"... Lambert, you forgot this one" Biden presents Liberty Medal to George and Laura Bush Instead of a war crimes trial at the Hague, Biden gave him a (family bloging) medal! ..."
"... A Clean Break: A New Strategy For Securing the Realm ..."
"... It's really sickening to see George W being "rehabilitated" and made to look like some kind of a senior statesman, when he should be hauled off to the Hague to spend the rest of his life in prison for war crimes. For me, his election in 2000 was mostly the beginning of the end of the rule of law in this country. As a result, the U.S. has Guantanamo, the Patriot Act, in addition to all the other events mentioned, and don't forget he tried to privatize Social Security. ..."
"... and welfare "reform", the crime bill. Talk of privatizing SSI made commonplace acceptable. Repeal of Glass Steagall. They were going to do to healthcare what oBLAM succeeded at, 20 years before him but got sidelined by Lewinsky's blue dress stains. Clintoon is a criminal and so is his spouse, and he did his share of damage everywhere. people who think otherwise might be looking back with nostalgia on a simpler (pre 9.11) time. ..."
"... Jeff Wells wrote some interesting essays in the Bush years, though many of his connections were a bit too far out, even for me. He had some striking collateral evidence for his concept of High Weirdness in high places "" sex abuse, torture and magick figuring prominently, juxtaposed with political skulduggery, and financial crimes and misdemeanours. The Gannon/Guckert affair, the Franklin ring and Gary Caradori were the sort of thing that laced his quite penetrating analyses of events. Facts were jumping off points for speculations, but given our lack of facts his imaginings were a nourishment of sorts, though often very troubling indeed. ..."
"... People have been brain washed by the glossed over history of the US they are taught. It gives people a false belief of our past. The phrase American Exceptionalism comes to mind. It is a myth. The real history is out there but you have to search it out. From it's beginning continuing to today our government is responsible for bad behavior. ..."
"... We Americans have this thing called exceptionalism which among other things creates the idea that our government is more virtuous than others. ..."
"... We are not at Hitler/Stalin/Mao standards ""yet"" but who's to say that could never happen here? One of the bafflements of the 20th century was how a civilized people descended into the dark barbarism of Nazi Germany. ..."
"... Noam Chomsky observed some thirty years ago that if the Nuremberg standards were applied to all the post-war American Presidents, then all of them would hang. ..."
"... We have such a dismal record. Little George was the most audacious of all our criminal presidents, but he has plenty of company. My question is now, looking back, why was the USA incapable of organizing a peaceful world after WW2? I start there. 1945. ..."
Bush became President in the year 2000. That was "" let me break out my calculator "" 2021 "" 2000 = 21 years ago. It occurs to
me that our younger readers, born in 2000, or even 1990, may not know how genuinely horrid Bush was, as President.
I was blogging even back then, and I remember how horrid Bush was; certainly worse than Trump, at least for Trump's first three
years in office, until the Covid pandemic. To convey the full horror of the Bush years would not a series of posts, but a book. The
entire experience was wretched and shameful.
Of the many horrors of the Bush years, I will pick three. (I am omitting many, many others, including
Hurricane Katrina , the
Plame Affair
, Medicare Part D, the Cheney Energy Task Force
, that time
Dick Cheney shot an old man in the face ,
Bush's missing
Texas Air National Guard records , Bush gaslighting the 2004 Republican National Convention with terror alerts, and on and on
and on. And I didn't even get to 9/11, "
You've covered your ass ," WMDs, and
the AUMF. Sorry. It's exhausting.) I'm afraid my recounting of these incidents will be sketchy: I lived and blogged in them, and
the memories of the horror well up in such volume and detail that I lose control of the material. Not only that, there was an actual,
functioning blogosphere at that time, which did great work, but unfortunately most of that work has succumbed to link rot. And my
memory of events two decades ago is not as strong as it could be.
The White House Iraq Group
Here I will rely on excerpts from Colonel Sam Gardiner's (PDF) "Truth from These Podia: Summary of a Study of Strategic Influence,
Perception Management, Strategic Information Warfare and Strategic Psychological Operations in Gulf II" (2003), whose introduction
has been saved from link rot by the
National Security Archive and
a full version
by the University of Leeds . I would bet, long forgotten even by many of those who blogged through those times. ("Gulf II" is
what we refer to as the "War in Iraq.") Quoting from the full version:
You will see in my analysis and comments that I do not accept the notion that the first casualty of war is truth. I think we
have to have a higher standard. In the most basic sense, Washington and London did not trust the peoples of their democracies
to come to right decisions. Truth became a casualty. When truth is a casualty, democracy receives collateral damage.
Seems familiar. (Gardiner's report can be read as a brilliant media critique; it's really worth sitting down with a cup of coffee
and reading it all.)[2] More:
My research suggests there were over 50 stories manufactured or at least engineered that distorted the picture of Gulf
II for the American and British people . I'll cover most in this report. At the end, I will also describe some stories that
seem as if they were part of the strategic influence campaign although the evidence is only circumstantial.
What becomes important is not each story taken individually. If that were the case, it would probably seem only more of the
same. If you were to look at them one at a time, you could conclude, "Okay we sort of knew that was happening." It is the pattern
that becomes important. It's the summary of everything. To use a phrase often heard during the war, it's the mosaic. Recognizing
I said I wouldn't exaggerate, it would not be an exaggeration to say the people of the United States and UK can find out more
about the contents of a can of soup they buy than the contents of the can of worms they bought with the 2003 war in the Gulf.
The White House was, naturally, at the center of the operation:
One way to view how the US Government was organized to do the strategic communications effort before, during and after the
war is to use the chart that was used by the Assistant Deputy Director for Information Operations. The center is the White House
Office of Global Communications, the organization originally created by Karen Hughes as the Coalition Information Office. The
White House is at the center of the strategic communications process"¦.
Handy chart:
And:
Inside the White House there was an Iraq Group that did policy direction and then the Office of Global Communications itself.
Membership of the White House Iraq Group:
So, in 2020 Bush's write-in vote for President was Condi Rice, the [x] Black [x] woman who helped run a domestic disinformation
campaign for him in 2003, to sell the Iraq War to the American people. Isn't that"¦. sweet?
Of course, I was very naive at that point. I had come up as a Democrat, and my first real political engagement was the Clinton
impeachment. Back in 2003, I was amazed to discover that there was a White House operation that was planting fake stories in the
press "" and that I had been playing whackamole on them. At a higher level, I was disturbed that "Washington and London did not trust
the peoples of their democracies to come to right decisions." Now it all seems perfectly normal, which is sad.
Torture at Abu Ghraib
There are a lot of images of our torture prison in Iraq, Abu Ghraib. This one (
via ) is not the
most famous , but to me it is the most shocking:
What kind of country sets dogs on a naked prisoner? Well, my kind of country, apparently. (Later, I remember discussing
politics with somebody who came from a country that might be considered less governed by the rule of law than my own, and they said:
"Abu Ghraib. You have nothing to say." And they were right.)
For those who came in late, here's a snapshot (the detail of the story is in fact overwhelming, and I also have pity for the poor
shlubs the brass tossed into that hellhole[3].) From the Los Angeles Times, "
Few have faced consequences
for abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq " (2015):
[A] 44-year-old Al Jazeera reporter named Salah Ejaili, said in a phone interview from Qatar that he was arrested in 2003 while
covering an explosion in the Iraqi province of Diyala. He was held at Abu Ghraib for 48 days after six days in another facility,
he said.
"Most of the pictures that came out in 2004, I saw that firsthand "" the human pyramid where men were stacked up naked on top
of each other, people pulled around on leashes," he said in the interview, with one of his attorneys translating. "I used to hear
loud screams during the torture sessions."
Ejaili says he was beaten, left naked and exposed to the elements for long periods, and left in solitary confinement, among
other acts.
"When people look at others who are naked, they feel like they're animals in a zoo, in addition to being termed as criminals
and as terrorists," he said. "That had a very strong psychological impact."
The plaintiffs also say they suffered electric shocks; deprivation of food, water and oxygen; sexual abuse; threats from dogs;
beatings; and sensory deprivation.
Taha Yaseen Arraq Rashid, a laborer, says he was sexually abused by a woman while he was cuffed and shackled, and also that
he was forced to watch a female prisoner's rape.
Ejaili said that his face was often covered during interrogations, making it difficult for him to identify those involved,
but that he was able to notice that many of the interrogators who entered the facility wore civilian clothing.
His attorneys, citing military investigations into abuses at Abu Ghraib and other evidence, say the contractors took control
of the prison and issued orders to uniformed military.
"Abu Ghraib was pretty chaotic," said Baher Azmy, legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights, which brought suits
against CACI and L-3 Services. "They were involved in a conspiracy with the military police to abuse our clients.""¦. Eleven U.S.
soldiers were convicted in military trials of crimes related to the humiliation and abuse of the prisoners.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers , and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
If our legal system had the slightest shred of integrity, it would be obvious to the Courts, as it is to a six-old-child, that
what we laughingly call our "personal" computers and cellphones contain "paper," not in the tediously literal sense of a physical
material made from wood fibre, but in the sense of content . Bits and bytes are 20th Century paper, stored on silicon and
hard disk platters. Of course a warrant should be needed to read what's on my phone, ffs.
That Fourth Amendment common sense did not prevail is IMNSHO due in large part to Bush's program of warrantless surveillance,
put in place as part of the Global War on Terror. Here again, the complexity is overwhelming and took several years to unravel. I'm
afraid I have to quote Wikipedia on
this one :
A week after the 9/11 attacks, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), which
inaugurated the "War on Terror". It later featured heavily in arguments over the NSA program.
Soon after the 9/11 attacks President Bush established the President's Surveillance Program. As part of the program, the Terrorist
Surveillance Program was established pursuant to an executive order that authorized the NSA to surveil certain telephone calls
without obtaining a warrant (see 50 U.S.C. § 1802 50 U.S.C. § 1809). The complete details of the executive order are not public,
but according to administration statements, the authorization covers communication originating overseas from or to a person suspected
of having links to terrorist organizations or their affiliates even when the other party to the call is within the US.
In October 2001, Congress passed the Patriot Act, which granted the administration broad powers to fight terrorism. The Bush
administration used these powers to bypass the FISC and directed the NSA to spy directly on al-Qaeda via a new NSA electronic
surveillance program. Reports at the time indicate that an "apparently accidental" "glitch" resulted in the interception of communications
that were between two U.S. parties. This act was challenged by multiple groups, including Congress, as unconstitutional.
The precise scope of the program remains secret, but the NSA was provided total, unsupervised access to all fiber-optic
communications between the nation's largest telecommunication companies' major interconnected locations, encompassing phone conversations,
email, Internet activity, text messages and corporate private network traffic .
Of course, all this is perfectly normal today. So much for the Fourth Amendment, good job. (You will note that the telcos had
to be in on it; amusingly, the CEO of Qwest, the only telco that refused to participate, was charged and convicted of insider trading,
good job again.) The legal aspects of all this are insanely complex, but as you see from my introduction, they should be simple.
Conclusion
Here's a video of the Iraqi (now in Parliament) who threw shoes at Bush (who got off lightly, all things considered):
We should all be throwing shoes at Bush, seriously if not literally. We should not be accepting candy from him. We should not
be treating him as an elder statesman. Or a "partner in crime." We should not be admiring his paintings. Bush ran a bad, bad, bad
administration and we are living with the consequences of his badness today. Bush is a bad man. We are ruled by bad people. Tomorrow,
Obama!
NOTES
[1] Indeed.
[2] For example, I vividly remember playing whack-a-mole as a blogger with the following WMD stories: Drones, weapons labs, WMD
cluster bombs, Scuds, nuclear materials from Niger, aluminum tubes, and dirty bombs. They one and all fell apart on close inspection.
And they were only a small part of the operation, as Gardiner shows in detail.
[3] My personal speculation is that Dick Cheney had a direct feed from the Abu Ghraib torture chambers to the White House, and
watched the proceedings live. Some of the soldiers burned images of torture onto CDs as trophies, and the prison also had a server,
whose connectivity was very conveniently not revealed by the judge in a lawsuit I dimly remember being brought in Germany. So it
goes.
Does anyone believe that W, son of H. W. Bush, H. W. son of Senator Prescott Bush, would have been been pres without that familial
lineage and its important govt connections? The pity is W wasn't smart enough to grasp world politics and the US's importance
as an accepted fulcrum in same beyond his momentary wants. imo. Brent Scowcroft and others warned him off his vain pursuits. The
word "squander" come to mind, though I wish it did not.
See for example Kevin Phillips' book American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush
. ( Kevin Phillips is a great
modernist American historian, imo, who saw the rise of Nixon before anyone else.)
Don't deny W his agency. As I followed the horrors, from Vietnam to Iraq to Syria to Central America and elsewhere, the
full list that was visible anyway, of the W regime, it sure seemed clear to me that W played the bumbling yuk very well.
He did what he set out to do, no doubt with careful guidance from that sh!t of a father (magically turned into a laid-in-state
"statesman") and mother-of-string-of-pearls, and of course Cheney and the rest of the corpo-gov policy gang.
The Consent Manufacturers are whitewashing an evil man and his slicker but equally evil successor and his glamorous spouse.
Helluva job, Georgie! Full marks for kicking the world a long way down a dark road.
the dumb cluck thing was mostly an act. he was deliberately talking that way not only to paint himself as stupid, but also
because those in power assume we must be spoken to as children (they've studied president speeches since JFK have decreased from
high school level to 6th grade in complexity, word usage etc).
see Pelosi's daughter's film of his campaign trail. He's no Angel Merkel, but sly enough for politics in this country
and most third world corruptocracies.
In our kayfabe duoparty system, it also gave the "opposing" side the "W is a Chimp" talking point to harp on (dress rehearsal
for the same stuff against tRUMP).
Abu Ghraib was not an anomaly, Con Son Island served the same purpose during the Vietnam War. When I was young I was proud
to be an American Citizen, we had the Bill of Rights, the Military was controlled by Civilians and their oath was to defend the
Constitution from "All Enemies Foreign and Domestic.". I have been horrified, ashamed and deeply saddened by what has happened
in the US over the last half Century or so.
And it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
You actually "˜blogged' back when we had to use punch cards to program our PCs? How oh how did you clamber on up out of "the
Well" so many times a week? I am somewhat convinced that the Hollerith Cards Protocol was the origin of the Twitter 140 character
limit.
I also "lived through" the "˜Reign of "W""˜ and see it as a Time of Prophecy. Most of the things we are now staring down the
barrel of were effectuated then.
I may be foilly, (may be? who am I kidding,) but I view the 2000 election as a major turning point of American history.
I view the 2008 election as the major failing-to-turn-back-when-we-had-the-chance point. Obama could have undone Bush's worst
policies, but instead he cemented them into place forever.
Our elites are both stupid and evil, but Bush is more stupid and Obama is more evil.
All the pomp and circumstance surrounding the personage of the President serves to conceal the people behind the scenes who
vetted and groomed said president, and actively advise him while in office. It's in this way that a Jimmy Carter may be viewed
as a gentle soul so far as presidents go, but he was actually vetted by Brzezinski on behalf of the CFR goons. Once in office
he was then advised by Brzezinski and Volcker, among other assorted lunatics. And he gladly took their advice the entire time.
That's how he came to be president in the first place. And so it goes.
albrt: I agree with your take. Obama campaigned as an anti-war candidate (at least wrt Iraq). He then proceeded to "˜surge'
into Afghanistan and added Libya, Syria, and Yemen, to the regime change mix. Never a thought given to prosecuting the war criminals:
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Tenet, Feith, Wolfowitz, Powell, et al; much less even consider a truth and reconciliation commission.
Obama was equally complicit in this never ending horror show and, I am hopeful, history will hold him equally accountable.
Could you explain your view that Obama and Trump are "worse than that" (Bush-Cheney).?
As far as harm that George W. Bush did and launched (illegal/immoral wars, domestic surveillance, tax cuts for the wealthy"¦.)
Bush should take the award.
Obama did push for military action in Libya, but at least held back from Syria.
The administrations after Bush "kicked the can down the road" but he initiated the events they simply continued. And Trump
did attempt to pull troops back from Bush initiated wars. How is Trump worse than Bush? What are your metrics?
I am just a commenter here, but I would say that . . .
When Obama deliberately and with malice aforethought turned all the admitted (and in fact proudly self-avowed) war-criminals
and criminals-against humanity loose, free and clear under "look forward not back", he routinised and permanentized the up-to-that-very-minute
irregular and extra-constitutional novel methods of governance and practice which the Cheney-Bush Administration had pioneered.
Obama deliberately made torture, aggressive war, etc. "legal" when America does it and "permanent" as long as America is strong
enough to keep doing it.
He did some other things like that which I don't have time to mention right now. Maybe others will beat me to it.
Most of all, by slickly conning or permitting to self-con numbers of people about "hope and change" to come from an Obama Administration,
he destroyed all hope of hope. He destroyed hope itself. Hope is not a "thing" any more in this country, thanks to Obama.
He may also have destroyed black politicians' dreams of becoming America's " Second Black President" for several decades to
come. Been there, done that. Never Again. But since I am not Black, that is not my problem. That is something Black America can
thank Obama for, if they decide to wake up to the fact of that reality.
Of course , if the Evil Countess Draculamala becomes President after Biden, then I guess I will be proven wrong about that
particular observation.
The Greatest Disappointment in History. No-one else comes close, in terms of the sheer numbers of people globally who he let
down. The Bait and Switch King, The Great Betrayer. After the nightmare of Bush we got him and his "˜eloquence', pulling the wool over the dazzled sheeple's eyes while he entrenched
the 1% and the neocon MI complex, his paymasters, and sponsors for his entry into the overclass.
Last, does any single person with the possible exception of Hillary Clinton, bear so much responsibility for the election of
Trump?
Remember that Obama voted in favor of FISAA, the bill that immunized Bush and his flunkies from prosecution for their felony
FISA violations, as a senator, not long before the presidential election. It was impossible to make myself vote for him after
that.
Thanks Lambert. I'd add that the intelligence being sent to the "White House Iraq Group" was being manufactured by the Office
of Special Plans (OSP) which was set up and run by Douglas Feith and Paul Wolfowitz. Following Feith's history and connections
alone is a fruitful endeavor for those so inclined.
Among other things, Feith co-authored, along with Richard Perle and David Wurmser, the A Clean Break: A New Strategy For
Securing the Realm paper prepared for the prime minister of a certain foreign country. This is back in 1996. Around the same
time the PNAC boys were formed by Kagan and Kristol and started selling the same policy prescriptions vis a vis Iraq to the pols
and public here.
Feith was also fired from the NSC back in the early 80's for passing classified information to some little country. Fast forward
to his OSP days and, lo and behold, his employee Larry Franklin is convicted of the same thing, along with Steve Rosen and Keith
Weissman of AIPAC.
This stuff has gone on forever. What amount of ventilation is needed to blow this kind of dung out of the Augean stables of
geopolitics? Not much chance of that anyway, given all the incentives and and interests"
Is it luck that Putin and Xi might be a little less monstrous?
It's really sickening to see George W being "rehabilitated" and made to look like some kind of a senior statesman, when he
should be hauled off to the Hague to spend the rest of his life in prison for war crimes. For me, his election in 2000 was mostly
the beginning of the end of the rule of law in this country. As a result, the U.S. has Guantanamo, the Patriot Act, in addition
to all the other events mentioned, and don't forget he tried to privatize Social Security.
His eight years as president, for me, was a horror show. What really bothers me is that he got away with all of it "" and now
he's hailed as an eminence gris. I can't help but think that his rehabilitation is to remind us all of how bad Orange Man was
"" Obama was just as bad because he cemented everything W did "" and more.
That is an assignment, which is a violation of our written site Policies. This applies to reader comments when you could easily
find the answer in less than 30 seconds on Google rather than being a jerk and challenging a reader (or even worse, me derivatively)
on bogus grounds.
> For me, [W's] election in 2000 was mostly the beginning of the end of the rule of law in this country.
At this moment I'm writing it is still early days for this thread: there are only 24 comments. In these comments are named
many bad people. However, one name that does not (yet) appear is "˜Clinton'. W was a monster as president (and likely remains
a monster as a human being) but surely Billy Jeff needn't yield to him in his contempt for the rule of law.
Quite right, of course. My comment was specifically in regard to his disdain for and abuse of the rule, and rôle, of law in
the American polity, e.g., his perjury > disbarment. Sort of like the famous photograph of Nelson Rockefeller who, while serving
as VP, was captured giving the finger to a group of protestors; Clinton also oozed that kind of hubristic impunity.
Regarding Clinton, the damage he caused to his own country and the world was substantial. The destruction of Yugoslavia caused
considerable mayhem "" in addition to bombing and breaking apart a sovereign nation, it enabled "liberals" to feel good about
war again, and paved the way for the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.
And the damage done by NAFTA was enormous "" in terms of leading to deaths of despair in both the US and Mexico I suspect NAFTA
has a higher domestic "body count" than any of the subsequent forever wars.
and welfare "reform", the crime bill. Talk of privatizing SSI made commonplace acceptable. Repeal of Glass Steagall.
They were going to do to healthcare what oBLAM succeeded at, 20 years before him but got sidelined by Lewinsky's blue dress
stains. Clintoon is a criminal and so is his spouse, and he did his share of damage everywhere. people who think otherwise might be
looking back with nostalgia on a simpler (pre 9.11) time.
little known covered up crime from his ARK days is the selling of HIV tainted blood (taken from prisoners) to Canada, among
other things.
yet another who had credible rape allegations. which damages our image at home and abroad.
I read that for the very briefest time, somebody or other was selling Total Information Awareness memorabilia with the Total
Information Awareness symbol on it. I wish I had thought to buy a Total Information Awareness mug.
I imagine knockoffs and parodies exist, but I am not sure the real thing is findable any more.
After Dennis Rader, the Wichita serial killer, murdered someone, the cops always found his semen on the floor next to the mutilated
victim. He got sexual pleasure out of gruesome murder. This is how I always pictured Cheney's attitude toward torture. Well. I
tried not to actually picture it.
Talk about your target rich environment. Where do you even start? Where do you begin? A serial business failure, draft dodger,
military deserter, drunk driver "" and all that was before he became President. A man so incurious about the world "" just like
Trump "" that he never even owned a passport until he actually became President and who never knew that Islam (prior to the Iraq
invasion) , for example, was just not one religion but was divided into Sunni and Shia in the same way Christianity is divided
into "" mostly "" Protestant and Catholics. But to me he was always the "Frat Boy President". His family always protected him
from his many flaws and he never had to grow up like his father had to in WW2. Even as President he never grew into the job, again,
just like Trump.
Lambert gives a few good reminders but there were many others and these are just the top of my head. He cared little for the
US Constitution and called it nothing more than a goddamn scrap of paper. He officially made the US a torture nation, not only
by pretending that US laws did not apply in Guantanamo bay but also aboard US Navy ships for which laws definitely did apply.
As part of a movement to make America an oil-fueled hegemony for the 21st century, he invaded Iraq with the firm intention on
invading Iran next so that Washington would have a firm grip on the fuel pump of the world. As he said "" "America is addicted
to oil." He dropped the ball on 9/11 through over-obsessing on Iraq and in the immediate aftermath sent jets around the country
"" when all jets were grounded "" to fly Saudi royalty back to Saudi Arabia before the FBI could interrogate them about all their
knowledge of the attack. All this to hide his very deep connections with the Saudis.
I could go on for several more paragraphs but what would be the point? For the neocons he was a great fronts-man to be followed
by a even greater one. I sometimes think that if Biden was a "˜real' Republican, then he would have been a great vice-president
for Bush. And now the establishment and their trained seals in the media are trying to make him out as "America's Favourite Uncle"
or something so that when he dies, he will have the same sort of funeral as John McCain did. And I predict that tens of thousands
of veterans around the country will then raise their glasses to him "" and then pour the contents on the ground.
W's rehab continues in the UK MSM, not just the Independent. The worst offenders are probably the Grauniad and Channel 4, both
Blairite.
The rehab mirrored the rise of Trump. His lack of interest in war upset these preachy imperialists.
Using Michelle Obama to facilitate the rehab brought id pol into the equation and made it easier. It was remarkable how often
the above photo is used in the neo liberal and neo con media.
Thank you, Colonel. That foto is remarkable and I suspect that the origins for the idea for it may lay on the other side of
the pond as it seemed so familiar-
There is a blog called Rigorous Intuition 2.0. Many of its blogposts are about the Bush period and Bush related subjects and
events. ( Many others are not). The sections on 9/11, Iraq, and Katrina probably have the highest percent of Bush-related blogposts,
in case one is interested.
Jeff Wells wrote some interesting essays in the Bush years, though many of his connections were a bit too far out, even for
me. He had some striking collateral evidence for his concept of High Weirdness in high places "" sex abuse, torture and magick
figuring prominently, juxtaposed with political skulduggery, and financial crimes and misdemeanours. The Gannon/Guckert affair,
the Franklin ring and Gary Caradori were the sort of thing that laced his quite penetrating analyses of events. Facts were jumping
off points for speculations, but given our lack of facts his imaginings were a nourishment of sorts, though often very troubling
indeed.
Who needs to make shit up during those years?
The facts"¦the shit he actually did, was glossed over or simply forgotten.
If shit was made up about his sorry ass i didn't bother checking, Sir.
I just assumed it was true.
Bushies destroyed the country. If there's a country in 100 years they'll be paying for those years.
And then came obama and big Mike
People have been brain washed by the glossed over history of the US they are taught. It gives people a false belief of our
past. The phrase American Exceptionalism comes to mind. It is a myth. The real history is out there but you have to search it out. From
it's beginning continuing to today our government is responsible for bad behavior.
Some scholars like Noam Chomsky write about
our real history. Unfortunately most people don't read this material. They are content with our glossed over shining star version
of US history that unfortunately continues to be taught in our educational system , starting in elementary school continuing through
a 4 year college education. Our system of government is so corrupted , I don't believe it can be fixed.
Nixon was rehabbed so he could open China, Kissinger got to keep his mantle. W portrayed by Josh Brolin pretty good take. Nice
to see dunking on GW, but the cycle of rehabilitation is due. The question is can he do some good or is there too much mud on
his boots. Can't see W as a new Jimmy Carter. Glossing over history begins the moment it's made. Makes me miss LBJ
Between 1998 and 2000, under the rule of Saddam Hussein, about 1000 prisoners from Abu Ghraib prison were executed and buried
in mass graves.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prison
How many Abu Ghraib prisoners did the US army execute?
Tell me again how many Iraqis were killed by the US Army because they were doing their own version of "Red Dawn"? And that
tens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would still be alive if Saddam was simply left in place. Here is a video to watch
while you have a little think about it-
We Americans have this thing called exceptionalism which among other things creates the idea that our government is more virtuous
than others. It's a useful idea in that it calls us to be different and better than the average nation, and certainly different
and better than a cruel dictatorship. But it's also a dangerous idea because too many of us actually believe it to be true. Our
atrocities are different in kind, but the scale is the same.
We are not at Hitler/Stalin/Mao standards ""yet"" but who's to say
that could never happen here? One of the bafflements of the 20th century was how a civilized people descended into the dark barbarism
of Nazi Germany.
"(I am omitting many, many others, including Hurricane Katrina, the Plame Affair, Medicare Part D, the Cheney Energy Task Force,
that time Dick Cheney shot an old man in the face, Bush's missing Texas Air National Guard records, Bush gaslighting the 2004
Republican National Convention with terror alerts, and on and on and on. An I didn't even get to 9/11, "You've covered your ass,"
WMDs, and the AUMF. Sorry. It's exhausting.)"
Agree with all the criticism of Bush, Cheney, Obama. On a lighter note, my father-in-law is a high tech oil prospector in W
Texas, much of it in Midland, overlapping in time with W. Both members of the Petroleum Club (been there once, very stuffy) and
worked out at the same gym. Naturally, my wife asked if he had ever seen W naked. Her dad wouldn't answer, but did turn beet red.
We take this as confirmation.
Noam Chomsky observed some thirty years ago that if the Nuremberg standards were applied to all the post-war American Presidents,
then all of them would hang. Chomsky could not have imagined the future sequence of presidents from that point forward, but certainly
they did not break the chain of criminality. My point is that Bush is not unique in the type of crimes, just the enormity of them.
But I also believe he set new standards (lower) for shamelessness. Remember his smirk?
But also remember Obama joking about killing people.
Remember the comedy skit in which GWB "looked" for Iraq WMD's in the Oval office as part of the White House Correspondent's
dinner?
Anyone with any sense of decency would have refused to do this skit, but Bush apparently followed his handlers' advice to get
some laughs. That the USA was led by someone of such limited talent for 8 years speaks volumes. Years ago, a New York Times reader wrote that Hillary Clinton is a "well-connected mediocrity".
That comment may be true for ALL of the recent political candidates, from both parties, for a great many years.
LBJ was definitely not mediocre (civil rights/war on poverty), and would be viewed far more favorably, maybe as great, if he
had pulled out of Vietnam rather than escalating. Carter in his post presidency has much to recommend. Post presidency Bush is painting his portraits rather than having any retrospective regrets for the harm he did.
We have such a dismal record. Little George was the most audacious of all our criminal presidents, but he has plenty of company.
My question is now, looking back, why was the USA incapable of organizing a peaceful world after WW2? I start there. 1945. How
did our ideology become so inept? And everything I have read about our failures over the years is contrasted with what might have
been. We have operated under a system that could not function without extraction. There was always a sell-by date on the cover;
one that we tried to ignore. There's no doubt in my mind that it has finally failed completely. Ignominiously. But we have also
learned and come to admit certain realities. The most important one is that there can be no more war; civilization cannot survive
a modern war. So, ironically, our advanced warfare might well bring a peaceful world without world war. And our advances in science
(mostly militarily inspired) will help us now survive.
Lambert, thank you for this piece. I won't repeat what others have opined. I've had a real problem with Michelle Obama being
the rehabilitation cheerleader leader for Dubya. Imho, we lost all of our rights under the odious Patriot Act, which was pre-written.
Russ Feingold was the lone Senate holdout. And I recall Byrd's ire and rant at the tome they had no time to read, but he caved.
It went downhill from there. The links below, (apologies, I don't know how to fashion a hot link..) are about Bush's crimes and
Amnesty International's exhaustive investigation of them.
I don't have the citation anymore, and I've knocked myself out trying to find it. But there exists a UN human rights commission
memo suggesting (?) Obama to do a number of things: hold Bushco accountable for war crimes etc, as well as address what is termed
as "systematic racism" in incarceration (and more). I had printed it out a number of years ago and can't find it.)
I'm not buying that Bush fils is any elder statesman. He and his cronies used torture, extreme rendition, hired mercenaries and
completely destabilized the Middle East. We still don't have our rights back, and I'm betting the Patriot Act will never go away.
(Nor will data mining under the guise of "targeted advertising" and sold to..the military.) The NYT's link is how Obama elected
to rug sweep and just move ahead! I look forward to Lambert's take on the Obama administration..
Finally, someone has the courage to point out the obvious. An excellent article, well researched and nicely nuanced.
I'm disappointed with the remedy proposed, however. Throwing shoes is not enough; it's merely symbolic. The potential crimes
committed here, including lying us into war, the extent of torture committed, and practices that violate international military
norms and intelligence require a transparent and impartial investigation. One possible venue is the International Criminal Courts
in the Hague.
I've been told many times that sunlight can be an effective deterrent against disease.
"... I am omitting not prosecuting bankers for accounting control fraud, the HAMP debacle, the mortgage settlement debacle, destroying a generation of black wealth with his housing policies ..."
"... it was VP at BOH ..."
"... I could go on, like many of us, but what’s the point. ..."
"... ‘fresno dan April 27, 2021 at 6:46 am’ ..."
Even today you cannot get a single elected left-wing politician to say that Obama was a
bad president. Think about that. We cannot have an honest discussion of what it meant to use
power when Democrats were in charge, so the language of dissension is polluted with
incoherent nonsense. All the grand philosophical musing and Democratic Socialists of America
study groups do not matter when not a single elected official outside the Republican Party
can make the simple, obvious point that Obama’s policies straight up made
things worse.
This was not some capitalist plot. There was a lot of dissent within the Democratic Party
about whether it was a good idea to do what Obama did. I was part of a network of people who
tried to fight against the foreclosure nonsense and opposed Obama’s
handing Puerto Rico over to hedge funds [ here ]. We
lost. And the people who made public explanations about these fights lied to cover up for
Obama’s bad choices. They lied because some of them are frauds, but also
because it was painful not to; Democratic voters and many left-wing voters were and still are
deeply hostile to any criticism of Obama. He is beloved; according to Gallup polling, 95
percent of Democrats have a favorable view of him. To the extent there is skepticism, it is
framed in ways that avoid admitting that his actions systemically ruined millions of
lives.
You will remember
Bush’s program of warrantless surveillance from the post on Bush. The
battle against it was conducted under the confusing banner of “FISA
Reform†(that is, the battle framed not that Bush’s actions
destroyed the Fourth Amendment, but that the process of FISA authorization was not properly
followed). Nonetheless, the blogosphere of that time played a big role in that battle (I was
there, albeit peripherally) which Eric Boehlert describes well in his book Bloggers on the
Bus . Here is a long excerpt (the legislation in the first sentence is FISA Reform).
I’ve added the highlighting:
So, where was Obama on “FISA Reform� That depends. From
Politifact
:
In October 2007, Obama spokesman Bill Burton issued this unequivocal statement to the
liberal blog TPM Election Central: “To be clear: Barack will support
a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications
companies .â€
Key segments of the Democratic base â€" enjoying substantial influence in the
run-up to the Democratic presidential primaries â€" were pleased.
“This is the kind of leadership we need to see from the Democratic
candidates,†MoveOn spokesman Adam Green said at the time.
Obama clinched the Democrat
nomination on June 4, 2008. Nomination safely in hand, he changed his mind on
“FISA Reformâ€[1] in July:
In October, Obama had vowed to help filibuster an update of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA) that gave telecommunication companies that had cooperated with
President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program immunity from
lawsuits.
The Senate voted Wednesday on the bill updating FISA â€" which had a
provision to shield telecommunications companies that had cooperated in the surveillance.
Obama joined the 68 other senators who voted to send the bill to the
president’s desk.
No filibuster! Putting Fourth Amendment issues aside, if you think that granting
corporations retroactive immunity for multiple felonies is a really bad idea from the
standpoint of the [genuflects] rule of law, then Obama’s flip-flop
â€" let’s just go ahead and call it a betrayal â€" is
a bad act by a bad President. (On the bright side, Obama’s pivot looks like
an inflection point: Where Democrats won the loyalty or at least the alliance of the
intelligence community, which worked so for them in 2016-2020.)
STEPHANOPOULOS: The most popular question on your own website is related to this. On
change.gov it comes from Bob Fertik of New York City and he asks, “Will
you appoint a special prosecutor ideally Patrick Fitzgerald to independently investigate the
greatest crimes of the Bush administration, including torture and warrantless
wiretapping.â€
OBAMA: We’re still evaluating how we’re going to
approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth. And obviously
we’re going to be looking at past practices and I don’t
believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand I also have a belief that we
need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards . And part of my job is to make
sure that for example at the CIA, you’ve got extraordinarily talented
people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them
to suddenly feel like they’ve got to spend all their time looking over
their shoulders and lawyering (ph).
STEPHANOPOULOS: So, no 9/11 commission with Independence subpoena power?
OBAMA: We have not made final decisions, but my instinct is for us to focus on how do
we make sure that moving forward we are doing the right thing . That
doesn’t mean that if somebody has blatantly [nice qualifier] broken the
law, that they are above the law. But my orientation’s going to be to
move forward .
STEPHANOPOULOS: So, let me just press that one more time. You’re not
ruling out prosecution, but will you tell your Justice Department to investigate these cases
and follow the evidence wherever it leads?
OBAMA: What I â€" I think my general view when it comes to my attorney general
is he is the people’s lawyer. Eric Holder’s been
nominated. His job is to uphold the Constitution and look after the interests of the American
people, not to be swayed by my day-to-day politics. So, ultimately, he’s
going to be making some calls, but my general belief is that when it comes to national
security, what we have to focus on is getting things right in the future, as opposed
looking at what we got wrong in the past .
Stephanopolous really should have said “I’ll take that
as a ‘no.'†And how is there an “other
hand†to “I don’t believe that anybody is
above the law� Fast forward to the administration Obama created the conditions
for, and we see the results. From the Atlantic, “
Obama’s Legacy of Impunity for Torture “, on the
nomination of “ Bloody Gina
“:
The 44th president, Barack Obama, bears a measure of responsibility for the recklessness
of his successor, in particular Trump’s decision to appoint Gina Haspel,
the Central Intelligence Agency’s deputy director, to run the agency
itself. Haspel
oversaw a black site during the Bush era where at least one detainee, Abd al-Rahim
al-Nashiri, was tortured*.
Haspel also then played a role in a decision to destroy recordings of CIA detainees being
tortured.
The Obama administration’s actions helped entrench a standard of
accountability that stretches from beat cops to CIA officials, one in which breaking the law
in the line of duty is unpunishable, but those suspected of a crimeâ€"particularly
if black, Muslim, or undocumentedâ€"can be subjected to unspeakable cruelty
whether or not they are ultimately guilty.
In a country where a CIA official like Haspel can destroy evidence in order to obstruct a
federal investigation, and not only escape prosecution but rise to become the head of the
agency, it is no wonder that the president and his allies behave as though the possibility of
the law catching up to them is not merely remote, but a kind of absurdity.
So, thanks to Obama, we’ve legitimized torture, and a torturer became the
head of the CIA. That was a bad act by a bad President.
So we have Cheney and Obama working together to create fracking. Obama is, in fact, proud of
this:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/YDfHH8zAIUU
“That was me, people.†Setting the Earth on fire for money.
Come to think of it, signing the Paris Accords while on the other hand making the US
the world’s number one oil producer is a lot like supporting the rule of law
while on the other hand “looking forward and not backâ€
when laws are broken, and a lot like promising to filibuster a bill granting retroactive
immunity to lawbreaking corporations while on the other hand not doing so.
Conclusion
We are ruled by bad people and have been for years. Madison, of course, expected this, but
his system seems to have broken down Federalist 51 :
But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same
department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary
constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The
provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger
of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be
connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human
nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what
is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were
angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor
internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be
administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the
government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.
No longer is ‘the interest of the man … connected
with the constitutional rights of the place†(that is, of the office). If that were
true, Bloody Gina would not have headed the CIA. It’s not even clear that
the government can “control itself,†or
“control the governed,†except by propaganda and violence, as
our continuing public health debacle shows. I don’t know what the answer to
this is, but I do think it begins with the recognition that we are ruled by bad people. Simply
replacing “bad people†with “good
people†does not have a record of success, since the
“good†quickly become “bad.â€[3]
How to rebuild our political economy so that we seem to be governed by angels even though we
are not is a question that I cannot answer. But it is a question increasingly before us.
The OP serves as a fantastic example of the Obomba apologists. The old
‘yeah but imagine if the other guy got elected’ BS. As
if that ‘worse’ potential outcome absolves all the
wrong doing committed by the actual president.
“No longer is ‘the interest of the man
… connected with the constitutional rights of the placeâ€
(that is, of the office). â€
It’s not about perfection. It’s about the complete
co-option of power granted by election to liars who basically say,
“Whaddya gonna do aboudit?â€
Might be so â€" so many of My Fellow ‘Muricans are all happy
that it seems to appear that possibly it might be the case that due consideration may be
given to exploring what should or could be done to put a frame around some conceptual
elements of what could eventually gel into the skeleton of an approach to making some
well-considered and gradual changes to the way bidness is conducted in the Empire.
If only we had: universal health care like every single other developed country; if only
we had a $15 or higher, living wage; if only we had a massive infrastructure project; if only
college grads weren’t drowning in student debt; if only we were ending all
of our Mideast wars; if only we had paid family and medical leave; if only we had tried to
stop climate change; if only we had strong unions and excellent labor policy, etc.
IF ONLY OBAMA had even tried to implement some of these policies! I agree with this author
and others of similar views. Obama had more charm than any president, probably ever, but he
was a bad president!
He might still have a second career (after knee-knocking with filthy-rich people) as a
televangelist. Some of them are equally slick, using the same rhetorical trickery and symbol
manipulation, and they sure drag in the (is it tax-free?) megabucks!
Obama was the first Democratic President with commanding majorities in the House and
Senate. He could have been great. He had a unique opportunity to take meaningful action on
Global Warming, something he was elected to do. Instead he increased production of fossil
fuels. History will NOT be kind to Obama.
Honestly, I’m not seeing much of a difference between GWBush and Obama,
in Lambert’s post. War, extra legal killings and black sites,
surveillance, bailing out finance, etc.
The loss of life (assuming there is some USA citizenry moral concern about the
deaths/injuries of non-US citizens from the USA initiated wars) and the large expenditure in
resources (by some estimates 6 trillion dollars in Afghanistan/Iraq) make the damage Bush did
far worse.
The 6 trillion dollars represents a lot of hydrocarbons dug/pumped up and converted into
CO2 and could have been diverted into USA infrastructure or world betterment..
“Population-based studies produce estimates of the number of Iraq War
casualties ranging from 151,000 violent deaths as of June 2006 (per the Iraq Family Health
Survey) to 1,033,000 excess deaths (per the 2007 Opinion Research Business (ORB)
survey).â€
A million Iraqi deaths is about 3% of their population corresponding to about 10 million
deaths in the USA’s larger population if a foreign power invaded the USA
and behaved similarly.
And the Iraq war was promoted by Bush and cohorts.
I continue to see a LOT of difference between Bush’s actively pursued
cumulative damage and Obama’s “kick the can down the
road†damage.
There is a LOT of difference in the “cumulative damage balance
sheets†of Bush vs Obama.
Neither is admirable, but the prime mover/instigator Bush was far worse.
Since you are comparing Obama to the Christian Messiah, could you offer evidence of his
near perfection or is this a you have to take it on faith kind of thing?
OK liberal. More perfect would be one who wasn’t so servile to
organized money. Also, Lambert left out Obama’s
“pivot†to the deficit while unemployment raged. I wanted to
tear my hair out. Obama’s biggest crime was his embrace of austerity in
the midst of a depression. That’s why Trump was elected.
One reason Obama has to be defended with such ludicrous arguments is the couple of times
he wasn’t praised but was actually criticized he did the less wrong thing.
Look at our current President, his supporters never bring up the one good thing he did which
was force Obama to take a still cowardly stand on gay marriage. They won’t
credit Biden with it because shows how accountability works. Biden put Obama on the spot, and
Obama was forced to react. Biden didnt offer excuses about secret negotiations.
Obama’s desire for celebrity could have been used to make him a reasonable
President, but his followers wanted to go to brunch.
It was David Geffen and other wealthy gay Democratic donors who forced
Obama’s hand on gay marriage. Not to discount what Biden did
â€" one of the few honorable things in a very long career â€" but it
was the money that spoke loudest.
Obama was not perfect but he sang ‘Amazing Grace’ at
a black church so I guess that makes everything OK but he was a convincing fraud and maybe a
better salesman than Trump.
No longer is ‘the interest of the man … connected
with the constitutional rights of the place†(that is, of the office). If that
were true, Bloody Gina would not have headed the CIA.
If the US govt were to conform to this Madisonian vision, would the CIA even exist?
SOMEbody has to be the “rough men who keep us safe in our ignorant beds
at night,†am I right? But there’s
“always†been “state securityâ€
people who are programmed, apparently in the womb, to come out wanting to emulate Beria and
Wild Bill Donovan and the Dulles brothers and Prescott Bush (who
“allegedly†orchestrated attempt to remove FDR by a military
coup, hoping a really respected Marine General, twice Medal of Honor recipient, would lead
the coup and the new “government.†https://allthatsinteresting.com/the-business-plot
I haven’t looked, but I wonder if the CIA archives have anything on the
subject…
And that General, Smedley Butler, turns out to be a Class Traitor and whistleblower, who
published and lectured on the subject of “War Is A
Racket:â€
War Is A Racket
WAR is a racket. It always has been.
It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is
the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in
dollars and the losses in lives.
A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the
majority of the people. Only a small “inside†group knows what
it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very
many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least
21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War.
That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war
millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.
How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench?
How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them
spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How
many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in
battle?
Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take
it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few â€" the
selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the
bill.
And what is this bill?
This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies.
Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its
attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.
For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not
until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war
clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.
Again they are choosing sides. France and Russia met and agreed to stand side by side.
Italy and Austria hurried to make a similar agreement. Poland and Germany cast
sheep’s eyes at each other, forgetting for the nonce [one unique
occasion], their dispute over the Polish Corridor…. https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
The whole screed is worth reading and studying, including the prescription for how to
rein in the looters.
Keep in mind that after the War of 1812, the United States was never invaded, even though
for much of its history, it had almost no standing army to speak of and a weak navy.
Yet somehow, the United States survived the Age of Imperialism unscathed, and the fact
that we lacked a CIA, an NSA or a Pentagon to tell us that Freedom is Slavery and War is
Peace or that we have always been at war with Eastasia didn’t seem to
bother us much.
Not entirely accurate. Don’t forget that in March, 1916, General Pancho
Villa ran a quick incursion into Columbus, New Mexico, killing 18, including 8 US soldiers.
The Villa forces actually suffered worse casualties under submachine gun fire, but looted a
bit, including weapons.
The ultra-imperialst faux “progressive†Woodrow Wilson was
encouraged to retaliate and, of course, did so, sending a large force under Pershing into
Mexico. Obviously USA empire really expanded beyond “Manifest
Destiny†indigenous killing and displacement earlier, under McKinley, and
obviously the theft of half of Mexico leading to “New Mexicoâ€
did lead to blowback of this kind even a century ago.
The Wikipedia page is pretty solid on the events. In fact, I was previously unaware of a
later Mexican troop incursion into Texas in May of ’16. Sometimes the
aggrieved bite back. Wiki link at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancho_Villa_Expedition
Don’t forget that Obama tried to cut Social Security with the
appointment of Erskin Bowles and Alan Cranston to the †cat food
commission,†two politicians who were opposed to social security. Then he bailed
out the banks with trillions and no conditions while not helping people stay in their homes
led to 9 million losing their homes and this hit blacks the hardest. Meanwhile his justice
department didn’t investigate let alone indict any banker for fraud so
Obama established the principle that the perpetrators of loan fraud leading to the mortgage
crisis are too big to jail. Yes, that’s right, he gave perpetrators of
felonies which led to the near collapse of the whole economic system legal immunity! Many of
the foreclosed homes were acquired by asset managers who now rent them out.
Yes, and his ACA did not include a public option in spite of campaign promises. The irony
here is while he refused to provide a public option to private insurance, there is now a
private option to public health insurance, Medicare. Under his watch, private insurance (
Medicare Advantage) has now attracted 40% of the 60 million who qualify for Medicare. So
while a majority of Americans want some kind of government health insurance or Medicare for
all, we’ll probably end up with the private scam, Medicare Advantage for
all. That’s real progress for for profit health insurers. At the same time
he promised the pharmaceutical companies that the government would not use its purchasing
power to negotiate the price of medicines.
And he promised to let workers gain union representation via a card check but
didn’t do it in 8 years.
The hope and change rhetoric amounted to nothing but another betrayal.
Like Barack and Michelle’s wonderful friend Li’l
Bushy the 2nd, who they tried (half successfully) to politically rehabilitate.
Some of TPTB will assure you that despite his clownish show as Prezinet, George the Lesser
is truly kind and even, despite all appearances,
“intelligentâ€. Evidently the Obamas feel the same way.
Lambert, thank you for this. I shall not argue with you! At all! Criticism of Obama is not
acceptable, I have found. My description of him has always been “Bush
Lite.†Does anyone recall those little whispers between W and Obama during the
transition? I’ve always been skeptical about just
“going forward.†Bygone crimes will be bygone crimes. Big
crimes. Crimes against humanity. As for the banks, I believe that had a couple of bankers
gone to jail for fraud, we may not have ended up with a Trump, because he may not have felt
as untouchable.
Finally, as Telee notes, I’m sure what we’ll get as
Medicare For All will indeed be the odious Medicare Advantage. No one else has mentioned that
or cares to discuss it. I’ve raised the issue on Tarbell. (Crickets.) I
doubt we’ll ever rid ourselves of the blood sucking, fraudulent corporate
medical complex.
agree with you i became disabled again 2002 , medicare advantage was and is a fraud .never
signed up FOR IT. last week or 2 weeks ago . people leaving the ( advantage plan ) going back
to the real MEDICARE .
Dropping mine next go around. You basically gain nothing as hospital administrators have
gone during Covid-19 to where the money is, killer intubated mechanical ventilators and
ditched the highly effective Hyperbaric oxygen therapy. If this were China they would have
been shot already and their organs harvested.
And to think that I was once taken to task for describing our “Saintly
Diverse Chief Executive†of years gone bye as a glorified Lawn Ornament of
disreputable Antebellum Southern extraction.
I bring this up as a reminder of how the “times†can
change.
It is also a reminder of just how much “soft power†Obama had
available to him in the beginning of his term. That he threw that all away is the real
crime.
To cut the man some slack, averse as I am to do so, I will observe that he was enmeshed from
the beginning in the Clinton Triangulated Democrat Party.
Lambert S: I am omitting not prosecuting bankers for accounting control fraud, the
HAMP debacle, the mortgage settlement debacle, destroying a generation of black wealth with
his housing policies
You’re wrong to omit those things and you’re too
kind to Obama. What happened in 2008 was nothing less than a coup by Wall Street and the
financial predator class.
If one goes into the archives as far back as 2005-6, one can find the smarter minds on
Wall Street figuring out how they weren’t going to have a replay of FDR
and the New Deal when the financial collapse came this time around.
That’s why Bernanke was installed at the Fed in February 2006, and
that’s why Obama got more money for his presidential campaign from Wall
Street than any previous presidential candidate in history. Wall Street knew what was coming
and wanted a front man.
The fact that Obama simultaneously came from their own class â€" his
grandmother, who essentially raised him, was president of the Bank of Hawaii â€"
and was half-black, so that the masses of American mopes could buy into that and any critics
of the coup that he fronted for could be deflected and vilified with cries of
“racist, racist,†made Obama ideal.
It was a coup by the financial criminal class, in which they not only evaded punishment
but also continued their pillaging and immiseration of the vast mass of Americans. Obama
fronted for it.
I agree this was one of the greatest failures of any president ever.
He “unwittingly†destroyed rising black wealth by failing to
act. More black misleadership.
By turning a blind eye, he ushered in the institutionalization, from top to bottom, of
residential real estate fraud as a legitimate business. The magnitude of
today’s unpaid rents fall directly on the man’s
shoulders.
I could go on, like many of us, but what’s the point.
Obama was the consummate courtier. He’s hard-wired to court the favor
of the king. Part of his problem as president was the role reversal. He
didn’t know what to do with the idea that now people
we’re supposed to kiss his butt, not the other way around. He sure did try
though with people like Jamie Dimon and Mitch McConnell.
Obama did a great job in exacerbating inequality in the US. The rich have more than
recovered from the 2008 debacle while the bulk of the people have still not caught up to pre
2008 levels of income.
Lambert, for all the reasons mentioned in your post, and more too numerous to be mentioned
here as a terrible president, his “Terror Tuesdays†was what
shook me. His meeting with John Brennan on each Tuesday to decide which
“terror†suspect to have droned next was something
I’m not likely to ever forget. This went beyond how any civilized, decent
human being would act. His statement that, “I’m really
good at killing people†was probably the only truth he told.
I never voted for Obama because I thought he was a fraud from the beginning. This country
has had horrible presidents since Clinton,(I’m sure there were some before
him) but I think Bush/Obama were two of the worst this country has had and have done
everlasting damage to â€" in my lifetime. Another thing that struck me about Obama
from the beginning was that he had “dead eyes†â€"
flat, emotionless eyes..
I also felt he was a fraud from day one. The signs were there, and the alternative media
did report on the boatload of donor money he received from Wall St, the health insurance
lobby, et al. (I guess we could think of it as a down payment on the
Martha’s Vineyard estate), but good liberals voted for him anyway.
Regarding “Terror Tuesdaysâ€, I wonder how many drone
strikes Obama approved by phone from the ninth hole of the golf course.
Acacia, thanks for pointing to the alternative media’s reporting on
Obama’s taking a boatload of donor money from Wall Street. It was in
CounterPunch â€" which, if I remember correctly, was another one of those media
entities disparaged by the spooks at “ProporNotâ€
â€" where I read an illuminating article by Ms. Pam Martens. I read this in hard
copy, and I believe the edition I read was from February 2008. [And I hope you, Ms. Smith,
don’t mind that I plugged a like-minded writer, but I think she should be
recognized.] Ms. Martens noted how Obama took advantage of coding of industries (back then,
it was the “SIC†code) to dupe the public into thinking that
he was not taking Wall Street money. Worked like a charm, as Ms. Martens more-or-less
predicted.
I should also say that, as a Veteran, I was quite dismayed by many in the anti-war
movement (in which I was active back then, in the Imperial Capital) who fell for Obama,
instead of backing Cynthia McKinney. When Obama said he was only against
“dumb warsâ€, I instantly interpreted that as a loophole
through which a blind person could drive a Mack truck, and yet so many in the movement fell
for it. It was a lonely time, to be sure.
I also sensed that Obama was a fraud from the beginning, or if not a fraud, that he would
prove to be weak and easily manipulated. I never voted for him, not in 2008 or in 2012.
But people wanted to believe in the man, and for eight years, too many people made excuse
after pathetic excuse for the man. Even today, the excuses continue, because people want to
badly to believe.
Another gift to Obama was that he was able to claim he was opposed to the Iraq War.
He wasn’t a US Senator at the time, so he did not have to vote
yay/nay.
His opposition was limited to a critical speech, which was used as evidence of his
opposition of the war.
Obama was an orders of magnitude better conman than Trump. Many in America believed that
Trump was a conman, but Obama largely avoided this description.
I know people who still believe Obama wanted and tried to do the right things but was
prevented by the “evil†Republicans.
Adolph Reed described Obama’s future behavior very early.
“Adolph Reed was the first writer to see who Obama was. In 1996, Reed
wrote about him in The Village Voice:â€
“In Chicago, for instance, we’ve gotten a foretaste
of the new breed of foundation-hatched black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth
Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good credentials and vacuous-to-repressive neoliberal
politics, has won a state senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundation and
development worlds. His fundamentally bootstrap line was softened by a patina of the rhetoric
of authentic community, talk about meeting in kitchens, small-scale solutions to social
problems, and the predictable elevation of process over program â€" the point
where identity politics converges with old-fashioned middle-class reform in favoring form
over substance. I suspect that his ilk is the wave of the future in U.S. black politics, as
in Haiti and wherever else the International Monetary Fund has sway. So far the black
activist response hasn’t been up to the challenge. We have to do
better.â€
If the title said “Barack Obama was a Horrible President†I
would agree and the text would support the headline.
But this post and yesterday’s post purported to tell us why we have
horrible presidents. So why do we?
Personally, I think it is because the United States is in the process of collapsing. The
horribleness of our presidents both confirms that the collapse is happening and ensures that
the collapse will continue until the United States no longer exists, probably less than a
decade from now.
But I would be very interested in other views on why our presidents are so horrible.
Our vaunted republic has been taken over by a duopoly of corporatists. They carefully vet
and choose Presidents from their network of cronies, while pretending it’s
the choice of the people. E.g., what else are the superdelegates for? Result: a series of
horrible leaders. Trump was an exception in that he slipped around the usual process of
vetting and show democracy, like a rat that entered a fancy restaurant via the service
entrance, and for that he had to be annihilated.
The exception that recently said his greatest accomplishment in office was the corporate
tax cuts. Trump merely used their fraudulent ways in his own interest. He out-frauded the
frauders by recognizing their game and one-upping them. Yay. As for the rest of us?
Trump was surrounded by and gladly operated in the same morass of financial and corporate
shysters and Israel-firsters that the previous administrations were inundated with.
Adding, I’d like to preempt right now any thought that this is in any
way a defense of Obama, who I despise. It’s simply a reminder that Trump
is an absolute con too (obviously).
Let’s not forget Mr. TPP here, who put more energy into trying to sell
the democracy destroying TPP and ISDS than he did trying to get the public option into the
ACA. Not that they had any intention of doing so. Standing just a stones throw from the
outsourced grave of my wife’s career and lecturing us on how wonderful it
was going to be, and how we should stop complaining and take our medicine. But what do I
know, I’m just an F’n retard. The
administration’s term, not mine.
And then there was austerity, the cat food commission, and no doubt his
administration’s failures economically helped set the stage for Trump.
Personally, I think the worst thing Obama did was to rob those who suffered from his
dreadful economic policies from the dignity of being able to understand why they had failed,
why they suddenly had a lot less, or nothing. All his charm and eloquence was marshaled to
make sure that people would never identify the true villains of their collapsing personal
narratives. And the media was only too happy to comply, as Obama fluently escorted millions
into self-loathing and despair, with nary a shred of hope. Of course, the absence of a single
banker conviction was all part of that narrativeâ€"they didn’t
do anything wrong, it’s just more complicated than you think, because,
well, because you don’t have the sophistication of an investment banker to
really understand, and maybe if you went to a better college, or a college at
all…… It all created the carcass of civil society
that Trump so effectively weaponized with resentment and anger.
And then of course we were all forced to listen to the endless excuses of our friends and
colleagues, often good people who had worked hard to elect him, and knew exactly what he had
promisedâ€"after all, he’s an effective speaker,
no?â€"and now were forced into wild and tortured tales of why he
couldn’t, or wouldn’t, or shouldn’t,
do all those great things he had said he believed in.
I thought I hated Bush, but I didn’t vote for him, and knew he was a bad
guy. But the Obama betrayal? That hit deep, deeper than Bush. He twisted so many of my
friends and relatives into raving fools. He normalized nearly every Bush atrocity, and still
walks the earth like a great man.
I remember when Bernie first hit the campaign trail in 2015 and began to point very directly
to the 1%. You could feel the electricity surge through the population like a lightning bolt,
hitting places that had lain dormant for decades. The power of narrative is everything. Obama
was the worst, an absolutely abominable President.
Also Obama opened up the Arctic to oil exploration, full assault on the press by
threatening to use the Espionage Act, campaigning to end wars but created around 3-4 new
conflicts (bombing of Libya, Syria, and Yemen), and used more armed drones than George W.
Bush did.
“Obama fluently escorted millions into self-loathing and
despairâ€.
This is beautifully said.
I am very late to this discussion, but would like to add that I think of Obama as an
example of the Dunning-Krueger effect. That is, he was/is an intellectual flyweight
â€" and not so much “educated†as
“groomed†â€" and this ENABLED him to be so
satisfied with himself.
The article and comments provide sufficient evidence that Obama was well beyond your
(Rose) garden-variety fraud. The clarifying moment for me was his speech in Hiroshima,
delivered with heart-rending sincerity and conviction (I was getting choked up even though I
could never stand the sound of his voice), all while putting the finishing touches on his $1
trillion nuclear weapons modernization plan. An article in The Diplomat called it irony,
“a missed opportunity.†I call it the epitome of cold,
calculating evil. https://thediplomat.com/2016/05/obamas-hiroshima-speech-a-missed-opportunity/
P.S. “President†shouldn’t be
capitalized (especially not this one), unless it’s used as a title
directly before the executive person’s name.
No sitting US President or ex President deserves the Nobel peace price. That says a
lot..having said that, Obama’s book also shows the inner workings of his
world view…he was conflicted too many a times.
He paid lip service to his conscience.
He resolved all of his conflicts in the same way, in the service of money.
No violence to the social order allowed.
Violence to all the people being screwed by the social order?
…well that’s ok, they need to learn to get in
line…
Back in 2008 I thought that America had finally caught a break in having Obama come into
office as by that stage, George Bush was getting to be downright clownish with his
Presidency. The first warning though was just after he had been elected when it came out that
his campaign had gotten two advertising awards. It was at that point I remembered the
articles trying to warn people that Obama was not who people though he was which I had just
assumed at the time were Republican screeds. It did not take long after that for him to show
his true colours. The number of crimes that he did, the looting that he allowed are mentioned
here in some detail but I thought to take a 10,000 foot view of his Presidency.
When Bill Clinton was President, he really allowed neoliberalism to take over America by
having the media and defence corporations to consolidate, removing laws that had been in
place since the days of FDR, etc. and it took Wall Street less than a decade to steer America
into a ditch because of all this. But during the time following you had George Bush as
President who let loose the dogs of the neocons in an attempt to secure American hegemony for
the rest of the 21st century but which actually revealed America’s
limitations of power and which taught other nations how to fight back against America.
Between the destruction of the middle class, the disruption in the world as America caused
chaos in one country after another, the militarization of the police, etc. all set rifts into
motion at home. So in 2008 the stage was set.
What was critically needed was a reformist President who would bring back law and order to
America and the rest of the world. Who would reverse course on the destruction of the world
through climate change. Who could develop mature relations with such countries like Russia,
China, Cuba, Iran, etc and come to some sort of diplomatic accommodation. One who could take
advantage of public feeling and tame Wall Street and put the bankers back in their box.
America desperately needed a change of direction before it steered right into the coming
iceberg fields. Instead you got Obama who doubled down on the worse of America and put his
foot down on the pedal with every fiber of his exceptional soul. The rifts in American now
became chasms which resulted in Trump being elected followed by Biden who is now doubling
down on everything in an attempt to make America great again.
The one best chance for America to get back on course and reform itself and you had Obama
come in and help betray Americans instead to the worse of their own kind â€" and
all for his own personal wealth and aggrandizement. History will judge him harshly.
The Rev Kev
April 27, 2021 at 5:39 am
https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/under-obama-democrats-suffer-largest-loss-in-power-since-eisenhower/
President Obama entered the White House with his party touting a 60 seat majority in the
Senate and 257 seat majority in the House. Democrats now hold a 48* seat minority in the
Senate and 194 seat minority in the House â€" a net loss of 12 and 64 seats
respectively.
In 2009, President Obama’s party controlled both chambers of 27 state
legislatures. Eight years later, Democrats control both chambers in only 13 states.
=====================================
Inadvertent…or intended? At best, startling incompetency.
Actually it was worse than that, dan. Under Obama, the Democrats lost nearly 1,000 State
legislator seats as well. Democrat party finances had collapsed too which was why Hillary was
able to go in and buy it up before the 2016 elections-
And now we hear so many complaints about the electoral college, but nothing about how much
further Obama put us from the 2/3 of state legislatures necessary to change it. Assuming we
even want or need to to do that â€" I think Democrats need to make their case in
every state, and Obama purposefully undermined that by rejecting the 50-state strategy.
Adolph Reed saw Obama for what he was early in Obama’s career. In 1996
Reed wrote in the Village Voice: †In Chicago, for
instance,we’ve gotten a foretaste of the new breed of foundation-hatched
black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good
credentials and vacuous â€" to repressive neoliberal policies, has won a state
senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundations and development
worlds.â€
“… you had Obama come in and help betray
Americans…â€
Because that’s what he was hired to do.
A quick glimpse at his political career in Chicago, to say nothing of Adolph
Reed’s prescient assessment in 1996 (!), should have revealed his
duplicity and narcissism. Then, taking Lieberman as his mentor upon entering the Senate
should have also told us everything we needed to know.
On a personal level, I can’t bear the sound of his voice, or the
banality of his “soaring†rhetoric.
Presidents are elected on their message to voters. For Obama it was hope and change. Trump
won on make America great again. These are great slogans because they say nothing. It is left
up to the voter to interpret what it means. I’m a life long registered
Democrat.I didn’t vote for Obama either time. This was because I observed
Obama during his time in the senate. Obama wasn’t my idea of a real
democrat. He was a Wall Street democrat. They are really what used to be called moderate
Republicans. As long as monkey trumps everything, we won’t have a
government that represents the people.
Obama in Flint epitomizes the man. Flint needed Federal aid to help clean their drinking
water. Giving these deplorables money they don’t deserve is against elite
priorities and would set a bad precedent. Cue Obama, who gladly goes and puts on not one
â€" but two â€" separate performances where he delights in faking
taking a sip of water. He has the audacity to say “This is not a
stunt†as he’s in the middle of performing his show for the
people of Flint. He then repeated his performance backstage for a smaller media audience. All
of this was done eagerly, without a hint of remorse or conscience.
I’ve actually gotten a few Obamaphiles to at least stop and think for a
moment upon viewing his disgusting display in Flint.
I made a similar list to this one, but mine was much longer, when Mr. Obama left office.
One disaster you left off, understandable because of your economic and political focus, was,
well, Arne Duncan. After writing my first draft, I found I had added the former Secretary of
Education’s name to the list three times. The failure of the Obama
administration to defend and support public education is a lasting smear on our society.
And his lack of effort to directly help Black people, for fear of seeming to have a bias
was also unsupportable. What President doesn’t have a bias or two or
twenty?
I love Welsh’s site, and yes, Hugh is very big on US
“humanitarian†interventions. Those swarthy complexioned
people living abroad don’t know what’s good for them,
but Hugh is very confident that the empire does, despite the historical record.
Well, I always refer to the Obama Depression, from 2008 onward, and we are still in it.
There was no recovery. All the GDP growth since 2008 has accrued to only 5% of the
population. (Pavlina Tscherneva’s charts)
But we need to go beyond Obama. The problem is the Democratic Party itself. THEY produced
him, and Joe Lieberman tutored him on just whom to serve. And he locked in the
DNC’s right-wing control (while dismantling local Democratic politics in
red states).
In that sense he really was a Republican. But it’s necessary to trace how
he wrecked the Democrats.
Obama was embarrassed by economic stimulus. His was supposed to be the presidency that
established centrist neoliberal austerity and show everyone how great it is. Everyone who
mattered, that is. It wasn’t supposed to be cleaning up after a
depression. So he had to be dragged into action and almost immediately
“pivoted†to the deficit. That eventually gave us Trump.
Obama was an inspiring 1 percenter. If I recall, the Kennedys were early promoters as
well.
Republican / Democrat? Seriously why do we care these days? If Lambert wrote this article
from the perspective of the top 5% of the global elite looking at the executive, legislature,
and judiciary successes and failings at the federal / state / international levels, how
dramatically different would this article be? What would the score cards for Democrat v.
Republican look like? How would they overlap and compliment one another?
I suspect Clinton, Bush and Obama would be considered highly excellent executives /
politicians if one’s grading standards use the top 5%’s
objectives and goals as the guidelines.
We like to say special interests and bribes are the
“reason.†If only there were
“good†politicians… There are extremely
good politicians. Look at all the changes that have happened to our society in the last few
decades and how they are accelerating with only minor bumps in the road to said changes.
Until we accept that the political class is part and parcel of the top 5% and treat them
as true adversaries, societal changes at a global level will continue on its death cult
course.
Just think… if we were to lose half of the global population how that
would rise the standard of living. It would certainly solve a lot of global problems even if
it created others. Yeah, I really do believe that there are people in positions of power
thinking that way.
Good morning,
I remember before his 100 days were up, he dismantled the grassroots coalition that gave him
the Presidency. He is alive, his family are alive. I do not know what i would do. America is
a scary place. Sun’s nice in Miami.
Pusillanimously,
John
His personal ambition was to become America’s first billionaire
ex-president.
His ambition for his daughters is to elevate them up into the Bush Class. . . . . the High
High High global gentry. Martin Luther King’s dream, no doubt.
And Black America , in its millions, is beside itself with worshipful humble servile pride
in their Obama.
Add Yemen to the list. There was zero excuse for this. Yes, they wanted to reassure the
Saudi “ regime†( we never call our scumbag allied governments
“ regimesâ€) after the Iranian agreement ( which was one good
thing Obama did). But obviously the war would be be long massive crime and that was true from
the start. I once saw a YouTube link where John Kirby, a State Department spokesman, was
explaining to a Russian reporter that Saudi bombing of civilians was due to an imprecision in
the targeting process, while Russian bombing in Syria was a crime. I never get over how
amazingly hypocritical people are on this. Of course, our own bombing of Fallujah, Mosul, and
Raqqa was every bit as destructive as anything the Russians did in Aleppo.
I found that most liberals I spoke to online and in real life in 2016
didn’t know about Yemen and when I told them, with one or two exceptions
they brushed it off or assumed there was some good reasons for it or even used the
“ placate the Saudis†justification. Everything has to be run
through a partisan filter before judging it as right or wrong. And if Obama was responsible,
it couldn’t be that bad.
Let us not forget foreign policy: Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Honduras. Even though his Cuba
and Iran policy were hits in between the second base and center field, he still only batted
below 150 and continually left runners on base.
It seems like an eternity since Obama took office. Hope and change. I’m
forever amazed at how much we learn and change as a community in such short periods of time.
We should have a tab, like the Top Ten ideas of the year. Since Obama’s
pathetic debacle the country has changed so much it’s hard to even make a
list. We are no longer naive politically, we are no longer naive economically, we are
watching the military like doves; we are not in denial about our unexceptionalism, we are
serious about our overconsumption and the environment, and we don’t seem
to even care about political promises; we are now demanding the things we need â€"
we know everything went to hell. So maybe it’s hopelessness and change.
Because if you have hope you just keep hanging on to the same old crap. When Obama proved to
be ineffective, when he wept during his SOTU and asked the electorate to
“demonstrate†more for social equality, when he caved to the
banks and ruined every spark of hope in America, America did indeed change. Powerful voices
came through the fog (think NC here) and there’s no going back.
He lost me when he appointed Geitner for Treasury. I shouldn’t say
“lost me†so much as “showed me his true
character.â€
He was so arrogant that he thought his charm and brilliance would win over rank and file
Republicans in the House and Senate. Failed.
He did that one big thingâ€"the ACAâ€"but let Congress mangle and
distort the thing so badly. He could have lowered the age of eligibility for Medicare to 55
but for Joe Lieberman, who decided against it.
In retrospect, a Romney win would have been a better outcome in 2012. As we know, Romney
is not the “strict conservative†he presented to the Tea Party
in order to gain their favor. He would have governed as a New England liberal Republican, ala
Rockefeller, perhaps. Instead, we got four more years of neo-liberal mush.
But most damning: “No one is above the law, but on the other hand . .
.â€
I used to live on the surface.
I didn’t really have time to analyse anything in detail, and I got my
information from the mainstream media.
Bill Clinton was a good President, and the Republicans were behaving terribly trying to
remove him from office.
New Labour were really going to change things in the UK, I thought this was just what the UK
needed.
The Iraq war seemed sensible enough; Saddam Hussein was a terrible leader and needed to be
removed.
Then I had more time to look at things in more detail.
The more you scratch away at the surface and look underneath, the worse it gets.
The image of Bill Clinton that I had received from the mainstream media gave no indication of
some of the awful legislation he passed.
I was firmly behind New Labour when they were in office, but I am now pretty sure they were
not who I thought they were.
I was still pretty near the surface when Barack Obama came into office and things did look
very hopeful.
I won’t be surprised by any revelations now.
During Obama’s Presidency, I used to argue that
Obama’s terrible policies were not the result of his being malicious or
evil, but because he was thoroughly trained and indoctrinated in neo-liberalism. This
explains Obama’s awful economic policies, but it does not explain, to my
satisfaction, the first two examples Lambert uses â€" surveillance, and
torture.
As I have sought for a solution to the problems USA and the world faces, I have since come
to also realize that elites are trained â€" not just in USA but all over the world
â€" to be ruthless and vindictive. That is how they rise to the top of any
organization they are in. I think part of this is captured by Ian Welsh’s
argument that managers are taught to make all decisions using cost-benefit analysis to some
degree. I think a very large part of it is captured by Thorstein Veblen’s
analysis of the ruling Leisure Class. Marxist analysis, I have concluded does not offer much
in the way of understanding the psychology of sociopathy that characterizes elites. Veblen
offers many insights on this, Marx does not. This is why Marxists cannot explain why actual
socialism or communism failed to change human nature, but Veblen can. All other analysts of
elites psychopathology since Veblen, including Wolin and Hedges, basically restate what
Veblen already wrote a century and a quarter ago.
Another conclusion I have reached from all this searching, inquiring, and pondering, is
that the principles of civic republicanism offer workable solutions out of this accelerating
vortex of catastrophe. First, civic republicanism demands that the rights and needs of
community be given equal, and sometimes greater, weight, than individual liberty, while at
the same time demanding the creation and maintenance of institutions devoted to preserving
individual liberty. In essence, civil republicanism recognizes and accepts that there are
some really bad parts of human nature, and that governments must be instituted to guard
against the effects of these. Socialists and communists are just plain wrong in their belief
that changing or eliminating property relations and who owns the means of production will
result in a better human nature.
Second, civic republicanism demands an active promotion of “the
good.†Now, of course, you can debate what “the good
is†at any given moment, or for any given society, but this is exactly why public
education grounded in classics such as Plato, Euripides, Plutarch, Milton, Shakespeare, is
indispensable to self-government and the maintenance of liberty. But to see what I mean about
an active promotion of “the good†just look at the life and
achievements of Benjamin Franklin, especially the various voluntary, charitable, and
political institutions he helped establish and create.
Looking at Obama, I think that is the key element that was missing: the personal
determination, which was never inculcated in him through his thorough education in
neoliberalism, to do good. Cost benefit analysis was drilled into him, but not a wide-ranging
examination and understanding of doing good.
In the end, how a society behaves will be determined by what the members of that society
believe. In USA, we have discarded civic republicanism â€" aided and abetted by a
wrong-headed leftist insistence that racism and empire were baked into the USA from the
beginning â€" and replaced it with the neoliberal insistence that only markets are
the true and just arbiter of human affairs, not humans themselves.
The reason you dare not condemn Obama in public is because his worshipful millions of
black worshippers will call you racist and will Wokemail and Wokestort you to â€
take your racist racism against Obama back, you racist.â€
Don’t believe it? Try it and see.
I remember reading about how the black racist comedian Trevor Noah played the racist card
against people noting Obama’s corruption. I can’t find
the referrence now on my search prevention engines.
So I will just send along this other link about the racist comedian Trevor
Noah’s documented racism in another context. https://thebrag.com/trevor-noah-controversial-remarks-indigenous-women/
Ditto. I am sure the CIA will be grinding the generals as we speak. Even the letter in
Politico could well be one of their strategies. I posted a piece in the open thread yesterday
from The HILL that was
pure propaganda.
USA is not alone in losing guerrilla warfare.
Watch for Biden announcing a 'shake up' of the military command in the next few
weeks/months.
The US military 2021 retreat from Kabul will result in a slaughter in the USA.
I see the Pentagon pulling the plug on the opium income for the CIA. Now THAT is the real
war. So the CIA now has to pay its mercenary army to defend the harvest and extraction. That
added cost to the CIA will not be taken lightly.
"... By Tom Engelhardt. Originally published at TomDispatch ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... I supported the rule of law and human rights, not to mention the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. ..."
"... In these years, one key to so much of this is the fact that, as the Vietnam War began winding down in 1973, the draft was ended and war itself became a “voluntary†activity for Americans. In other words, it became ever easier not only to not protest American war-making, but to pay no attention to it or to the changing military that went with it. And that military was indeed altering and growing in remarkable ways. ..."
"... “The dislike of government spending, whether on public investment or consumption, is overcome by concentrating government expenditure on armaments†..."
"... “The dislike of government spending, whether on public investment or consumption, is overcome by concentrating government expenditure on armaments†..."
"... “Large-scale armaments are inseparable from the expansion of the armed forces and the preparation of plans for a war of conquest. They also induce competitive rearmament of other countries.†..."
Yves here. Englehardt describes how US war-making has been a continuing exercise starting
with World War II. It’s important to recognize that before that, US military
budgets were modest both in national and global terms. But with manufacturing less specialized,
the US was able to turn a considerable amount of its productive capacity to armaments in fairly
short order.
A second point is as someone who was in Manhattan on 9/11, I did not experience the attacks
as war. I saw them as very impressive terrorism. However, I was appalled at how quickly
individuals in positions of authority pushed sentiment in that direction. The attack was on a
Tuesday (I had a blood draw and voted before I even realized Something Bad had happened). I was
appalled to see the saber-rattling in Bush’s speech at the National
Cathedral on Friday. On Sunday, I decided to go to the Unitarian Church around the corner. I
was shocked to hear more martial-speak. And because the church was packed, I had to sit in the
front on the floor, which meant I couldn’t duck out.
Here’s the strange thing in an ever-stranger world: I was born in July
1944 in the midst of a devastating world war. That war ended in August 1945 with the atomic
obliteration of two Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, by the most devastating bombs in
history up to that moment, given the sweet code names
“Little Boy†and “Fat Man.â€
I was the littlest of boys at the time. More than three-quarters of a century has passed
since, on September 2, 1945, Japanese Foreign Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu and General Yoshijiro
Umezu
signed the Instrument of Surrender on the battleship U.S.S. Missouri in Tokyo Bay,
officially ending World War II. That was V-J (for Victory over Japan) Day, but in a sense for
me, my whole generation, and this country, war never really ended.
The United States has been at war, or at least in armed conflicts of various sorts, often in
distant lands, for more or less my entire life. Yes, for some of those years, that war was
“cold†(which often meant that such carnage, regularly sponsored
by the CIA, happened largely off-screen and out of sight), but war as a way of life never
really ended, not to this very moment.
In fact, as the decades went by, it would become the
“infrastructure†in which Americans increasingly invested their
tax dollars via aircraft
carriers , trillion-dollar jet fighters, drones armed
with Hellfire missiles, and the creation and maintenance of hundreds of military garrisons
around the globe, rather than roads, bridges, or
rail lines (no less the high-speed
version of the same) here at home. During those same years, the Pentagon budget would grab
an ever-larger percentage of
federal discretionary spending and the full-scale annual investment in what has come to be
known as the national security state would rise to a staggering $1.2
trillion or more.
In a sense, future V-J Days became inconceivable. There were no longer moments, even as wars
ended, when some version of peace might descend and America’s vast military
contingents could, as at the end of World War II, be significantly demobilized. The closest
equivalent was undoubtedly the moment when the Soviet Union imploded in 1991, the Cold War
officially ended, and the Washington establishment declared itself globally triumphant. But of
course, the promised “peace dividend†would never be paid out as
the first Gulf War with Iraq occurred that very year and the serious downsizing of the U.S.
military (and the CIA) never happened.
Never-Ending War
Consider it typical that, when President Biden recently
announced the official ending of the nearly 20-year-old American conflict in Afghanistan
with the withdrawal of the last U.S. troops from that country by 9/11/21, it would functionally
be paired with the news that the
Pentagon budget was about to rise yet again from its record heights in the Trump years.
“Only in America,†as retired Air Force lieutenant colonel and
historian William Astore wrote recently,
“do wars end and war budgets go up.â€
Of course, even the ending of that never-ending Afghan War may prove exaggerated. In fact,
let’s consider Afghanistan apart from the rest of this
country’s war-making history for a moment. After all, if I had told you in
1978 that, of the 42 years to follow, the U.S. would be involved in war in a single country for
30 of them and asked you to identify it, I can guarantee that Afghanistan
wouldn’t have been your pick. And yet so it’s been. From
1979 to 1989, there was the
CIA-backed Islamist extremist war against the Soviet army there (to the tune of billions
and billions of dollars). And yet the obvious lesson the Russians learned from that adventure,
as their military limped home in defeat and the Soviet Union imploded not long after
â€" that Afghanistan is indeed the “graveyard of
empires†â€" clearly had no impact in Washington.
Or how do you explain the 19-plus years of warfare there that followed the 9/11 attacks,
themselves committed by a small Islamist outfit, al-Qaeda, born as an American ally in that
first Afghan War? Only recently, the invaluable Costs of War Project
estimated that America’s second Afghan War has cost this country almost
$2.3 trillion (not including the price of lifetime care for its vets) and has left at least
241,000 people dead, including 2,442 American service members. In 1978, after the disaster of
the Vietnam War, had I assured you that such a never-ending failure of a conflict was in our
future, you would undoubtedly have laughed in my face.
And yet, three decades later, the U.S. military high command still seems not faintly to have
grasped the lesson that we “taught†the Russians and then
experienced ourselves. As a result, according to recent reports, they have uniformly
opposed President Biden’s decision to withdraw all American troops from
that country by the 20th anniversary of 9/11. In fact, it’s not even clear
that, by September 11, 2021, if the president’s proposal goes according to
plan, that war will have truly ended. After all, the same military commanders and intelligence
chiefs seem intent on organizing long-distance versions of that conflict or, as the New
York Timesput
it , are determined to “fight from afar†there. They are
evidently even considering
establishing new bases in neighboring lands to do so.
America’s
“forever wars†â€" once known as the Global War on
Terror and, when the administration of George W. Bush launched it, proudly aimed at 60 countries â€"
do seem to be slowly winding down. Unfortunately, other kinds of potential wars, especially new
cold wars with China and Russia (involving new kinds of
high-tech weaponry) only seem to be gearing up.
War in Our Time
In these years, one key to so much of this is the fact that, as the Vietnam War began
winding down in 1973, the draft was
ended and war itself became a “voluntary†activity for
Americans. In other words, it became ever easier not only to not protest American war-making,
but to pay no attention to it or to the changing military that went with it. And that military
was indeed altering and growing in remarkable ways.
In the years that followed, for instance, the elite Green Berets of the Vietnam era would be
incorporated into an ever more expansive set of Special Operations forces, up to 70,000 of
them (larger, that is, than the armed forces of many countries). Those special operators would
functionally become a second, more secretive American military embedded inside the larger force
and largely freed from citizen oversight of any sort. In 2020, as Nick Turse reported, they
would be stationed in a staggering 154 countries
around the planet, often involved in semi-secret conflicts “in the
shadows†that Americans would pay remarkably little attention to.
Since the Vietnam War, which roiled the politics of this nation and was protested in the
streets of this country by an antiwar movement that came to include significant numbers of
active-duty soldiers and veterans, war has played a remarkably recessive role in American life.
Yes, there have been the endless thank-yous
offered by citizens and corporations to “the troops.†But
that’s where the attentiveness stops, while both political parties, year
after endless year, remain remarkably
supportive of a growing Pentagon budget and the industrial (that is, weapons-making) part
of the military-industrial complex. War, American-style, may be forever, but â€"
despite, for instance, the militarization
of this country’s police and the way in which those wars came home
to the Capitol last January 6th â€" it remains a remarkably distant reality for most
Americans.
One explanation: though the U.S. has, as I’ve said, been functionally at
war since 1941, there were just two times when this country felt war directly â€" on
December 7, 1941, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, and on September 11, 2001, when 19
mostly Saudi hijackers in commercial jets struck New York’s World Trade
Center and the Pentagon.
And yet, in another sense, war has been and remains us. Let’s just
consider some of that war-making for a moment. If you’re of a certain age,
you can certainly call to mind the big wars: Korea (1950-1953), Vietnam (1954-1975)
â€" and don’t forget the brutal bloodlettings in neighboring Laos
and Cambodia as well â€" that first Gulf War of 1991, and the disastrous second one,
the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Then, of course, there was that Global War on Terror that began
soon after September 11, 2001, with the invasion of Afghanistan, only to spread to much of the
rest of the Greater Middle East, and to significant parts of Africa. In March, for instance,
the
first 12 American special-ops trainers
arrived in embattled Mozambique, just one more small extension of an already widespread
American anti-Islamist terror role (
now failing ) across much of that continent.
And then, of course, there were the smaller conflicts (though not necessarily so to the
people in the countries involved) that we’ve now generally forgotten about,
the ones that I had to search my fading brain to recall. I mean, who today thinks much about
President John F. Kennedy’s April 1961 CIA disaster at the Bay of Pigs in
Cuba; or President Lyndon Johnson’s sending of 22,000 U.S. troops to the
Dominican Republic in 1965 to “restore orderâ€; or President
Ronald Reagan’s version of “aggressive
self-defense†by U.S. Marines sent to Lebanon who, in October 1983, were attacked
in their barracks by a suicide bomber, killing 241 of them;
or the anti-Cuban invasion of the tiny Caribbean island of Grenada that
same month in which 19 Americans were killed and 116 wounded?
And then, define and categorize them as you will, there were the CIA’s
endless militarized attempts (sometimes with the help of the U.S. military) to intervene in the
affairs of other countries, ranging from taking the nationalist side against Mao
Zedong’s communist forces in China from 1945 to 1949 to stoking a small ongoing
conflict in Tibet in the 1950s and early 1960s, and overthrowing the governments of Guatemala
and Iran, among other places. There were an
estimated 72 such interventions from 1947 to 1989, many warlike in nature. There were, for
instance, the proxy conflicts in Central America, first in Nicaragua against the Sandinistas
and then in El Salvador, bloody events even if few U.S. soldiers or CIA agents died in them.
No, these were hardly “wars,†as traditionally defined, not all
of them, though they did sometimes involve military coups and the like, but they were generally
carnage-producing in the countries they were in. And that only begins to suggest the range of
this country’s militarized interventions in the post-1945 era, as journalist
William Blum’s “
A Brief History of Interventions †makes all too clear.
Whenever you look for the equivalent of a warless American moment, some reality trips you
up. For instance, perhaps you had in mind the brief period between when the Red Army limped
home in defeat from Afghanistan in 1989 and the implosion of the Soviet Union in 1991, that
moment when Washington politicians, initially shocked that the Cold War had ended so
unexpectedly, declared themselves triumphant on Planet Earth. That brief period might almost
have passed for “peace,†American-style, if the U.S. military
under President George H. W. Bush hadn’t, in fact, invaded Panama
(“Operation Just Causeâ€) as 1989 ended to get rid of its
autocratic leader Manuel Noriega (a former CIA asset, by the way). Up to 3,000 Panamanians
(including many civilians) died along with 23 American troops in that episode.
And then, of course, in January 1991 the First Gulf War began . It
would result in perhaps 8,000 to 10,000 Iraqi deaths and “onlyâ€
a few hundred deaths among the U.S.-led coalition of forces. Air strikes against Iraq would
follow in the years to come. And let’s not forget that even Europe
wasn’t exempt since, in 1999, during the presidency of Bill Clinton, the
U.S. Air Force launched a destructive 10-week bombing
campaign against the Serbs in the former Yugoslavia.
And all of this remains a distinctly incomplete list, especially in this century when
something like 2
00,000 U.S. troops have regularly been stationed abroad and U.S. Special Operations forces
have deployed to staggering numbers of countries, while American drones regularly attacked
“terrorists†in nation after nation and American presidents
quite literally became assassins-in-chief . To this day,
what scholar and former CIA consultant Chalmers Johnson called
an American “empire of bases†â€" a historically
unprecedented 800 or more of them â€"
across much of the planet remains untouched and, at any moment, there could be more to come
from the country whose military budget
at least equals those of the next 10 (yes, that’s 10!) countries
combined, including China and Russia.
A Timeline of Carnage
The last three-quarters of this somewhat truncated post-World War II American Century have,
in effect, been a timeline of carnage, though few in this country would notice or acknowledge
that. After all, since 1945, Americans have only once been “at
war†at home, when almost 3,000 civilians died in an attack meant to provoke
â€" well, something like the war on terror that also become a war of terror and a
spreader of terror movements in our world.
As journalist William Arkin recently argued , the U.S. has created a
permanent war state meant to facilitate “endless war.†As he
writes, at this very moment, our nation “is killing or bombing in perhaps 10
different countries,†possibly more, and there’s nothing
remarkably out of the ordinary about that in our recent past.
The question that Americans seldom even think to ask is this: What if the U.S. were to begin
to dismantle its empire of bases,
repurpose so many of those militarized taxpayer dollars to our domestic needs, abandon this
country’s focus on permanent war, and forsake the Pentagon as our holy
church? What if, even briefly, the wars, conflicts, plots, killings, drone assassinations, all
of it stopped?
What would our world actually be like if you simply declared peace and came home?
Here in Asia, many people think the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan was an act of
flaying the dying horse, since Japan was staring at defeat even without the bombs. It was a
totally callous act of the USA to drop the bombs just to “test their
efficacyâ€.
Why then the bombs could not have dropped on Germany that was still waging war at that
time? Asians smirk and say one) the “collateral†damage of
radiation etc., to neighbours like France who were Allies and two) they were (and are)
‘whites’; unlike Japan and its neighbours.
I think that you have the dates mixed up. The war against Germany in Europe ended on May
7th and the testing of the first atom bomb was not until 16th July when the first bomb went
off at Alamogordo in New Mexico. The following month the two remaining atom bombs that the US
had were dropped on Japan. In short, the bombs arrived too late to use in Europe.
The bomb was built with Berlin being the first target, but because the war ended a year
sooner than what everyone thought it would and making the very first bombs took longer than
planned, it was used on Japan. It was probably used as a demonstration for the Soviets, but
considering that sixty-six other large Japanese cities had already been completely destroyed
by “conventional†firebombing, and in
Tokyo’s case, with greater casualties than either nuclear bombing, the
Bomb wasn’t really needed. The descriptions and the personal accounts of
the destruction of Tokyo (or Dresden and Hamburg) are (if that is even possible) worse than
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Honestly, just what new and excitingly horrific ways of killing people the atom bomb used
was not clearly understood. They generally thought of it as a bigger kaboom in a smaller
package. And honestly, being pre-cremated during an entire night with your family and
neighbors in the local bomb-shelter or dying after a few days, weeks, or even a month from
radiation poisoning, is not really a difference is it?
“FOR 20 years after Harry Truman ordered the atomic bomb dropped on
Japan in August 1945, most American scholars and citizens subscribed to the original,
official version of the story: the President had acted to avert a horrendous invasion of
Japan that could have cost 200,000 to 500,000 American lives. Then a young political
economist named Gar Alperovitz published a book of ferocious revisionism,
“Atomic Diplomacy: Hiroshima and Potsdam†(1965). While
acknowledging the paucity of evidence available at the time, he argued that dropping the
atomic bomb “was not needed to end the war or to save livesâ€
but was Truman’s means of sending a chastening message to the Soviet
Union.â€
If we accept that at face value, then certainly the second bombing was unecessary. The
threat would have been enough. But the US had a second bomb design to
test…
Few things working here. The US needed Japan to surrender quickly before Stalin invaded
(which they asked him to do) so he couldn’t get his forces onto the island
where the Allies couldn’t stop him. Most Japanese feared Stalin and
preferred surrendering to the US but the Japanese government was trying to use talks with the
USSR to get better terms than unconditional surrender (little did they know Stalin was
licking his chops for more territory under his iron curtain).
The first bomb design (little man) was significantly less ambitious, it was so certain to
function they never tested it because a study had proven there was almost no chance it would
fail.
Fat boy was the scientific leap in technology needing to be demonstrated. Building little
man was mostly a matter of enriching Uranium vs Fat boy Plutonium enrichment harder and
detonation mechanism more complicated. However the end result was a bomb that could produce
significantly higher yields with smaller amounts of fissionable material where both the size
of the bomb could be significantly reduced and the yield of the device could be significantly
scaled up at the same time.
Fat boy demonstrated the USA could someday be putting nukes on V2 rockets recently
smuggled out of Germany. Even more important Fat boy is a precursor to the mechanism that
initiates the H bomb fusion devices that Edward Teller would soon be Dr Strangloving.
Even after Trinity Fat boy still had very high odds of failure. They feared looking like
fools if it failed and the USSR ended up with the Plutoniumt. As a result the US Air Force
dropped little man first because it was certain to work. After the 1st bomb dropped, the
Soviets declared war and began their invasion of Japan which forced
Truman’s hand to drop Fat boy too. Even after Fat Boy, war mongers in
Japan still refused to surrender where Emperor Hirohito finally overruled them and although
there was a military coupe attempted, it failed.
Thus ended the most bloody conflict in the history of human kind.
I’m not saying it isn’t true, but is there any
actual evidence that the bombs were dropped as “a message to the Soviet
Union†and not to speed the end of the war?
Also, who exactly wanted to send this “message� The US
generals were against it, I understand.
“What would our world actually be like if you simply declared peace and
came home?â€
a. All those families whose livelihood is based on waging war would have to find a new
job. These people will fight tooth and nail to avoid change
b. The resource grabs by the rich people behind the Oz-like curtain would fail. Their fate
would be that of the English aristocrats who have to rent out their castles in order to
maintain a roof over their head. These people will fight tooth and nail to avoid change
c. The general public would have a fire-hose of newly-available resources to direct toward
activities which benefit all the rest of the families outside A and B above
d. Fear-based leverage by the few over the many would be diminished. Attention would be
re-directed toward valid problems we all face
=====
There’s an interesting question which I see posed from time to time,
and often ask myself. It runs thus:
“Who decides who our “enemies†are, and
why they are “enemies�
This is a fundamental question which I believe very few of us can currently answer
accurately. Yet this question carries a $1.2T per year consequence. That’s
a lot of money to allocate toward something we know nothing about.
One time I asked an acquaintance â€" who spent a career at CIA â€"
that question. His reply was “Why, Congress decides who our enemies are,
and why. Congress then tells the CIA what to doâ€.
I wasn’t sure if he truly believed that. It’s quite
possible he did, of course, and I’m sure many of the people in group A
above surely do think they’re doing honorable and patriotic work.
Group B above â€" the people who are actually moving the chess pieces of
“the Great Game†â€" they are pretty clear on who
defines our “enemies†and why they are
“enemiesâ€. And they wisely don’t stand in
front of podiums and explain their actions. These people aren’t visible,
or explained, or known because it’s better for them not to be.
The way to combat manipulation by these predators is to:
a. Know them by their actions. Predators predate.
b. Don’t participate. In order for them to predate, they need minions.
Don’t be a minion. Instead…
c. Be the giver, the creator and the constructor of things that are of no use to
predators
It’s not the soldiers but the contractors who live in dumpy overpriced
holes like Northern Virginia.
As to your acquaintance, my godfather was in the CIA in the 60’s and a
bit into the 70’s, and he might not say Congress as much as the
President’s Chief of Staff as threat they choose what the President sees.
You have to remember it’s primarily an organization of boring paper
pushers looking to get promoted which requires political patronage. Imagine getting the
Canada desk. You’ll be at a dead end unless you paint it as a grave
threat. Then there is information overload and just the sheer size of the US. They would file
reports, he mentioned an incident in Africa in the wake of decolonization when y godfather
was stationed there that maybe warranted the President’s attention, but to
get information to the President’s CoS took so long, it was in the
President’s daily newspaper before the report could be handled. By then,
why care, given the size of the US? Who can get to the Chief of Staff? Congress, so everyone
else lobbies them. The CIA director is an appendage of the CoS.
When the President wants something, everyone jumps, but when the President
doesn’t care, everyone is jockeying get for patronage.
The war machine is sustained by plutocrats and their sociopathic flunkies in the national
security state. How this works is clearly depicted in “The
Devil’s Chessboard,†by David Talbot, a deeply depressing
chronicle of how Allen Dulles and his brother John Foster Dulles did the dirty work of US
corporations worldwide. The arrogance, impunity, and irresponsibility of these men
established the framework of our secret government, which remains intact to this day.
It would be pleasant to believe that this evil persists because of public ignorance, but
like the good Germans of the Nazi era, Americans accept that deception, torture, and murder
are routinely practiced on our behalf to maintain our high standard of living and to keep us
“safe.†The reverence for the operatives of the US national
security state is evident throughout our popular culture, and that is a damning judgment on
the American people.
Of course the core problems are stationed at the place hardest to get to: right between
our ears. This complicity disease runs deep and wide.
While I often succumb to that same despondency you mentioned, occasionally I interrupt the
doom tape to notice that there’s a lot of people who are paddling hard
toward a new ethos…like the posters here @ NC, for ex.
So today I’m going to indulge in a little happiness. Plant a tree. Do
something good, something durable, something hopeful.
Something that offers no real hope of rent extraction potential.
It was nice being accused of supporting the terrorists because I supported the rule of
law and human rights, not to mention the United States Constitution and the Bill of
Rights.
WTF do some people think that the Founders wanted an extremely small army, a large
organized militia, and passed the Bill of Rights? It was a reaction to what the British Army
did to them (using much of the same tactics as the current
“justice†system does today.) The ignorance and lack of
thinking is really annoying.
Much of what the British military did was not good. Even now some of it would not be
allowed in a court of law, but I do not recall them being nearly as violent, brutal, or
deadly in their tactics while enforcing the King’s Law as the current
regime or the local police are. That the milder British tactics caused a civil war with in a
decade, and that the people then had less to fear from an occupying army as we do from
“our†police is disturbing to think on.
But wars always come home, don’t they? Faux toughness on the supposed
baddies here with claims of treason and insurrections on protests and riots now that often
would hardly be in the news fifty years ago, so great was the protests and riots happening
then. The cry to use the same tactics that did not work overseas to be used here at home.
“To keep us safe.â€
There’s truth to this, but once the war was really on, British and
Tory/Loyalist brutality had decisive effects on public opinion, putting lots of people into
the Whig/Patriot camp. Tom Paine makes great efforts to publicize British sexual assaults,
looting, and general thugishness as they chase the Continental Army across New Jersey in
1776; the cruelty of backcountry British cavalry officers and Tory rangers in the Carolinas
was legendary as the war reaches its latter phases.
And there was brutality on the other side, too, especially for Loyalist elites who faced a
kind of “social death.†It was a war, after all, as well as a
social revolution. It wasn’t France in 1789 or Russia in 1917, but it was
rough, especially given the small population size.
Except as Engelhardt just pointed out, the national security state does not
“maintain our high standard of livingâ€.
It’s an immense net drain on our standard of living. The only Americans
made well-to-do or wealthy by it are those who are directly involved in supplying contract
goods and services to the system.
I don’t know if Americans “accept†it as
opposed to taking a dim view of being able to affect change.
The levers the average person has to change the behavior of the state is infinitesimal.
Add to that the scope of action and Overton window mediated by the hypernormalized press
ecosystem just means those in power get to act without restraint.
Hell, Obama literally said “We tortured some
folks†and the media and government barely shrugged. To my knowledge, no one went
to jail, no one was brought up in the Hague, and some of the same ghouls that perpetrated
such crimes got cushy commenter jobs in the media.
Right now, localities can’t even keep their police from regularly
killing citizens.
What does the average person do in the face of such things?
Hell, Obama literally said “We tortured some folks†and
the media and government barely shrugged. To my knowledge, no one went to jail, no one was
brought up in the Hague, and some of the same ghouls that perpetrated such crimes got cushy
commenter jobs in the media.
No one went to jail. Certainly no one went before the Hague. No bankers went to jail
either. Even during the nutty Reagan administration, people went to jail for financial
shenanigans. Some got long sentences. Hell, the Iran-Contra stuff was at least covered and
people were indicted, even if they all got pardoned. Not anymore. These shenanigans are the
norm and happen right out in the open. I’d imagine some of
it’s been given legal cover. It seems like it’s become
the expected behavior within these circles. To act otherwise â€" to attempt to be
honest, in other words â€" is seen as weak and is mocked as fiercely as a weaker
child on the playground might be.
It’s just a continuing regression. And as you note,
it’s an excellent career builder:
“Looking for a job in mainstream media? Research has shown that
reducing your sense of ethics and morality actually helps you get ahead.â€
Doubtless, Ms. Smith and Ms. Engelhardt have provided a key public service here. And I
speak as a veteran, decorated for service in the War Over Oil (a.k.a. the
“Persian Gulf Warâ€).
Between the vast economic inequality currently raging in our country, the social
stratification enabled by access to colleges and universities accepted as
“eliteâ€, the trashing of Constitutional protections (e.g. the
4th Amendment, now thoroughly eviscerated owing to the “PATRIOT
ACTâ€), and the rampaging rule by “intelligence
agencies†over foreign policy, I see no reason why any father should tell his
children that this is a country worth fighting and dying for. [Think: China] Of course, the
Empire â€" just as Rome did in its dying days â€" will be able to find
enough desperately poor who will take the king’s shilling and don the
uniform.
If anyone wishes to prove me wrong, let them work for a substantive
“peace dividend†for a 2-3 years. Then we can sit down and
talk; I’ll buy the ale.
In these years, one key to so much of this is the fact that, as the Vietnam War began
winding down in 1973, the draft was ended and war itself became a
“voluntary†activity for Americans. In other words, it became
ever easier not only to not protest American war-making, but to pay no attention to it or to
the changing military that went with it. And that military was indeed altering and growing in
remarkable ways.
Because, imo,
Since the Vietnam War, which roiled the politics of this nation and was protested in the
streets of this country by an antiwar movement that came to include significant numbers of
active-duty soldiers and veterans, war has played a remarkably recessive role in American
life.
Despite having already ‘pledged’ at my Uncles
Invitation, with the Draft’s End, I had great hope my future would see the
great Peace Dividand rather than 9 more Opportunity Conflicts.
Little did that then 21 year old see the brilliance in that Pentagon Strategy.
I Now firmly support a No Exemption Draft for all post HS.
Military Service being only one, and a restricted one, of many counter-balancing options
available for Public Service for that cohort.
This article reminded me of one of the best Congressional Research Service reports that
I’ve read: Instances of Use of United States
Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2020 . Despite being just a list of dates and locations with a
brief description, it comes in at around 50 pages, which I think is a testament to how
important foreign military engagement has been to the growth of the US even before 1945.
Between these foreign wars and the genocidal war against the indigenous people of the
continent I think it’s fair to say this country has been at war since its
founding.
Correct. Even the so called Louisiana Purchase was not really a purchase of land, but a
faux “option†to engage in land treaties with the native
Americans;.the US chose Indian Wars and relocation treaties that have been violated
repeatedly. (This territory is now known as the Red States.)
The rest of the land extending to the west coast was acquired through conquest with the
new nation of Mexico. I guess the only real honest acquisition would be
Seward’s Icebox.
>>I guess the only real honest acquisition would be Seward’s
Icebox.
Alaska has only been inhabited for a few tens of thousands of years. I would think that
the natives should have some say about who “owns†the land
even though the Russian Empire did say that they did. The reasons sometimes included the use
of guns. As for stealing Mexico’s territory, again that was, and in some
areas still is, inhabited by natives who somehow became under the
“governance†of New Spain or the country of Mexico despite not
being asked about it and often still a majority part of the population in many areas when
Mexico lost control.
Often, Europeans or Americans would show up somewhere, plant a flag, and say that they
claimed or owned the very inhabited land, sometimes with farms and even entire cities. Rather
arrogant, I would say.
I agree. Seward’s Icebox was not empty at time of sale. My
understanding is that Seward thought it was. So faraway, so cold; no one would be living
there, right?
As I’ve commented here many times, it was small pox not small bullets
that allowed the Old World to take the New. There were estimates of 20 million native
Americans living on the land now known as Mexico and the US. 90% were felled by Old World
disease before Custer lost his scalp to the northern Plains Indians. In a fair fight the
Indians would be enforcing the treaties.
It is amazing how the US continues to engage in war and still lose: Korea, Vietnam,
Afghanistan, Iraq. . .Ukraine?
For nearly a decade now every time I’ve read about the war in
Afghanistan I’ve thought about Tim Kreider’s mordant
2011 cartoon We
Could’ve Had The Moon, Instead We Get Afghanistan . Ten years later,
that $432 billion has ballooned to $2.3 trillion (and more) and every word he wrote still
stands. :-(
The author has retired from cartooning and now focuses on essay writing.
We are going to have to halt the production lines.
The warehouses are full of bombs already, there is no more room.
Biden to the rescue; he’s started dropping bombs already.
When you have a large defence industry, you need war.
The only purpose is to use up the output from the defence industry.
“The dislike of government spending, whether on public investment
or consumption, is overcome by concentrating government expenditure on
armamentsâ€
“Large-scale armaments are inseparable from the expansion of the
armed forces and the preparation of plans for a war of conquest. They also induce competitive
rearmament of other countries.â€
These were the lessons they learnt from the 1930s.
So now, here we are. And how do we create a peaceful world? Refit the US military for a
sustainable world. It will prove to be very useful. We and other advanced nations still have
the advantage for prosperity but we should not abuse it. The whole idea back in 1945 was for
the world to prosper. So I’ll just suggest my usual hack: Get rid of the
profit motive. It’s pure mercantilism. And totally self defeating in a
world seeking sustainability for everyone.
The Manhattan Project was an enormously expensive enterprise with two components
â€" the development of a uranium bomb (Oak Ridge) and a plutonium bomb (Hanford,
WA).
If no bomb had been used, the project would have been considered a waste of time, and
there would have been a congressional investigation. If only one bomb had been used, half the
cost would have been considered a waste.
I’m not saying these were the only reasons for dropping the bombs. The
event was, as they say, “overdetermined.â€
Few people, apart from specialists, may have heard of the JCPOA Joint Commission.
That’s the group in charge of a Sisyphean task: the attempt to revive the
2015 Iran nuclear deal through a series of negotiations in Vienna.
The Iranian negotiating team was back in Vienna yesterday, led by Deputy Foreign Minister
Seyed Abbas Araghchi. Shadowplay starts with the fact the Iranians negotiate with the other
members of the P+1 â€" Russia, China, France, UK and Germany â€" but not
directly with the US.
That’s quite something: after all, it was the Trump administration that
blew up the JCPOA. There is an American delegation in Vienna, but they only talk with the
Europeans.
Shadowplay goes turbo when every Viennese coffee table knows about
Tehran’s red lines: either it’s back to the original
JCPOA as it was agreed in Vienna in 2015 and then ratified by the UN Security Council, or
nothing.
Araghchi, mild-mannered and polite, has had to go on the record once again to stress that
Tehran will leave if the talks veer towards “bullyingâ€, time
wasting or even a
step-by-step ballroom dance, which is time wasting under different terminology.
Neither flat out optimistic nor pessimistic, he remains, let’s say,
cautiously upbeat, at least in public: “We are not disappointed and we will
do our job. Our positions are very clear and firm. The sanctions must be lifted, verified and
then Iran must return to its commitments.â€
So, at least in the thesis, the debate is still on. Araghchi: “There are
two types of U.S. sanctions against Iran. First, categorized or so-called divisional sanctions,
such as oil, banking and insurance, shipping, petrochemical, building and automobile sanctions,
and second, sanctions against real and legal individuals.â€
“Second†is the key issue. There’s
absolutely no guarantee the US Congress will lift most or at least a significant part of these
sanctions.
Everyone in Washington knows it â€" and the American delegation knows it.
When the Foreign Ministry in Tehran, for instance, says that 60% or 70% has been agreed
upon, that’s code for lifting of divisional sanctions. When it comes to
“secondâ€, Araghchi has to be evasive: “There
are complex issues in this area that we are examiningâ€.
Now compare it with the assessment of informed Iranian insiders in Washington such as
nuclear policy expert
Seyed Hossein Mousavian : they’re more like pessimistic realists.
That takes into consideration the non-negotiable red lines established by Supreme Leader
Ayatollah Khamenei himself. Plus non-stop pressure by Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, who are
all JCPOA-adverse.
But then there’s extra shadowplay. Israeli intel has already notified the
security cabinet that a deal most certainly will be reached in Vienna. After all, the narrative
of a successful deal is already being constructed as a foreign policy victory by the
Biden-Harris administration â€" or, as cynics prefer, Obama-Biden 3.0.
Meanwhile, Iranian diplomacy remains on overdrive. Foreign Minister Javad Zarif is visiting
Qatar and Iraq, and has
already met with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim al Thani.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, virtually at the end of his term before the June
presidential elections, always goes back to the same point: no more US sanctions;
Iran’s verification; then Iran will return to its
“nuclear obligationsâ€.
The Foreign Ministry has even released a quite detailed fact sheet once again
stressing the need to remove “all sanctions imposed, re-imposed and
re-labeled since January 20, 2017â€.
The window of opportunity for a deal won’t last long. Hardliners in
Tehran couldn’t care less. At least 80% of Tehran members of Parliament are
now hardliners. The next President most certainly will be a hardliner. Team
Rouhani’s efforts have been branded a failure since the onset of
Trump’s “maximum pressure†campaign.
Hardliners are already in post-JCPOA mode.
That fateful Fateh
What none of the actors in the shadowplay can admit is that the revival of the JCPOA pales
compared to the real issue: the power of Iranian missiles.
In the original 2015 negotiations in Vienna â€" follow them in my Persian
Miniatures e-book â€" Obama-Biden 2.0 did everything in their power to include
missiles in the deal.
Every grain of sand in the Negev desert knows that Israel will go no holds barred to retain
its nuclear weapon primacy in the Middle East. Via a spectacular kabuki, the fact that Israel
is a nuclear power happens to remain “invisible†to most of
world public opinion.
While Khamenei has issued a fatwa clearly stating that producing, stockpiling and using
weapons of mass destruction â€" nuclear included â€" is haram (banned by
Islam), Israel’s leadership feels free to order stunts such as the sabotage
via Mossad of the (civilian) Iranian nuclear complex at Natanz.
The head of Iran’s Parliament Energy Committee, Fereydoun Abbasi Davani,
even accused Washington and London of being accomplices to the sabotage of Natanz, as they
arguably supplied intel to Tel Aviv.
Yet now a lone missile is literally exploding a great deal of the shadowplay.
On April 22, in the dead of night before dawn, a Syrian missile exploded only 30 km away
from the ultra-sensitive Israeli nuclear reactor of Dimona. The official â€" and
insistent â€" Israeli spin: this was an “errantâ€.
Well, not really.
Here â€" third video from the top
â€" is footage of the quite significant explosion. Also significantly, Tel Aviv
remained absolutely mum when it comes to offering a missile proof of ID. Was it an old Soviet
1967 SA-5? Or, rather more likely, a 2012 Iranian Fateh-110 short range surface-to-surface,
manufactured in Syria as the M-600 , and also possessed by Hezbollah?
A Fateh family tree can be seen in the attached chart. The inestimable Elijah Magnier has
posed some very
good questions about the Dimona near-hit. I complemented it with a quite enlightening
discussion with physicists, with input by a military intel expert.
The Fateh-110 operates as a classic ballistic missile, until the moment the warhead starts
maneuvering to evade ABM defenses. Precision is up to 10 meters, nominally 6 meters. So it hit
exactly where it was supposed to hit. Israel officially confirmed that the missile was not
intercepted â€" after a trajectory of roughly 266 km.
This opens a brand new can of worms. It implies that the performance of the much hyped and
recently
upgraded Iron Dome is far from stellar â€" and talk about an euphemism. The
Fateh flew so low that Iron Dome could not identify it.
The inevitable conclusion is this was a message/warning combo. From Damascus. With a
personal stamp from Bashar al-Assad, who had to clear such a sensitive missile launch. A
message/warning delivered via Iranian missile technology fully available to the Axis of
Resistance â€" proving that regional actors have serious stealth capability.
It’s crucial to remember that when Tehran dispatched a volley of
deliberately older Fateh-313 versions at the US base Ayn al-Assad in Iraq, as a response to the
assassination of Gen Soleimani in January 2020, the American radars went blank.
Iranian missile technology as top strategic deterrence. Now that’s the
shadowplay that turns Vienna into a sideshow.
Biden is privatising the war in Afghanistan. 18,000 private contractors will stay behind
to maintain a landing area for U.S. aircraft should the need arise. According to war monger
Lynn Cheney the "troops will never leave". The U.S. National Guard has been fighting
undeclared wars all over the ME for twenty years and legislation is being proposed at the
state level to end the abuse. I personally know one man who has done three tours in Iraq as a
National Guardsman.
I totally agree with your comments concerning the U.S. government here at home. It is
Bolshevism 2.0.
"... All an FBI supervisor has to do to get a FISA warrant on you is have one agent get a crooked snitch in a foreign country to send you a weird text message, and then have another bright eyed and bushy tailed agent who doesn't know the crook is a snitch write up a search warrant application affidavit and submit it to the FISA court. ..."
"... Nothing says "Unconstitutional (illegal) Deep State" like FISA. Hitler's Gestapo would be proud! ..."
"... Lisa and Peter removed any credibility the FBI had with the public. If they solved real crime they would go after the massive fraud and stolen ID criminals. Of course that takes real work and someone wanting get off their lazy rear end ..."
The FBI continues to lawlessly use counterintelligence powers against American citizens...
The Deep State Referee just admitted that the FBI continues to commit uncounted violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act of 1978 (FISA).
If you
sought to report a crime to the FBI, an FBI agent may have illegally surveilled your email. Even if you merely volunteered
for the FBI "Citizens Academy" program, the FBI may have illegally tracked all your online activity.
But the latest FBI offenses, like almost all prior FBI violations, are not a real problem, according to James Boasberg, presiding
judge of the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. That court, among other purposes, is supposed to safeguard Americans'
constitutional right to privacy under FISA. FISA was originally enacted to create a narrow niche for foreign intelligence investigations
that could be conducted without a warrant from a regular federal court. But as time passed, FISA morphed into an uncontrolled yet
officially sanctioned privacy-trampling monster. FISA judges unleash the nuclear bomb of searches,
authorizing the FBI "to conduct, simultaneous telephone, microphone, cell phone, e-mail and computer surveillance of the U.S.
person target's home, workplace and vehicles," as well as "physical searches of the target's residence, office, vehicles,
computer, safe deposit box and U.S. mails."
In 2008, after the George W. Bush administration's pervasive illegal warrantless wiretaps were exposed, Congress responded by
enacting FISA amendments that formally entitled the National Security Agency to vacuum up mass amounts of emails and other communication,
a swath of which is provided to the FBI. In 2018, the FISA court
slammed the FBI for abusing that
database with warrantless searches that violated Americans' rights. In lieu of obeying FISA, the FBI created a new Office of Internal
Audit. Deja vu! Back in 2007, FBI agents were caught massively violating the Patriot Act by using National Security Letters to conduct
thousands of illegal searches on Americans' personal data. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.)
declared that
an Inspector General report on the abusive searches "confirms the American people's worst fears about the Patriot Act." FBI
chief Robert Mueller responded by creating a new
Office of Integrity and Compliance
as "another important step toward ensuring we fulfill our mission with an unswerving commitment to the rule of law."
Be still my beating heart!
The FBI's promise to repent after the 2018 report sufficed for the FISA court to permit the FBI to continue plowing through
the personal data it received from NSA. Monday's disclosure "a delayed release of a report by the court last November "revealed
that the FBI has conducted
warrantless searches of the data trove for "domestic terrorism," "public corruption and bribery," "health care fraud,"
and other targets "including people who notified the FBI of crimes and even repairmen entering FBI offices. As Spencer Ackerman
wrote
in the Daily Beast , "The FBI continues to perform warrantless searches through the NSA's most sensitive databases for routine
criminal investigations." That type of search "potentially jeopardizes an accused person's ability to have a fair trial since warrantlessly acquired information is supposed to be inadmissible. The FBI claimed to the court that none of the warrantlessly queried
material "˜was used in a criminal or civil proceeding,' but such usage at trial has happened before," Ackerman noted. Some illicit
FBI searches involve vast dragnets. As the
New York Times reported ,
an FBI agent in 2019 conducted a database search "using the identifiers of about 16,000 people, even though only seven of them
had connections to an investigation."
In the report released Monday, Judge Boasberg lamented "apparent widespread violations" of the legal restrictions for FBI searches.
Regardless,
Boasberg kept the illicit search party going: "The Court is willing to again conclude that the . . . [FBI's] procedures meet
statutory and Fourth Amendment requirements." "Willing to again conclude" sounds better than "close enough for constitutional."
At this point, Americans know only the abuses that the FBI chose to disclose to FISA judges. We have no idea how many other perhaps
worse abuses may have occurred. For a hundred years, the FBI has buttressed its power by keeping a lid on its crimes. Unfortunately,
the FISA Court has become nothing but Deep State window dressing "a facade giving the illusion that government is under the law.
Consider Boasberg's recent ruling in the most brazen FISA abuse yet exposed. In December 2019, the Justice Department Inspector
General reported that the FBI made "fundamental
errors " and persistently deceived the FISA court to authorize surveilling a 2016 Trump presidential campaign official. The
I.G. report said the FBI "drew almost entirely" from the Steele dossier to prove a "well-developed conspiracy" between Russians
and the Trump campaign even though it was "unable to corroborate any of the specific substantive allegations against Carter Page"
in that dossier, which was later debunked.
A former FBI assistant general counsel, Kevin Clinesmith, admitted to falsifying key evidence to secure the FISA warrant to spy
on the Trump campaign. As a Wall Street Journal
editorial noted , Clinesmith "changed an
email confirming Mr. Page had been a CIA source to one that said the exact opposite, explicitly adding the words "˜not a source'
before he forwarded it." A federal prosecutor declared that the "resulting harm is immeasurable" from Clinesmith's action.
But at the sentencing hearing, Boasberg gushed with sympathy,
noting that Clinesmith
"went from being an obscure government lawyer to standing in the eye of a media hurricane"¦ Mr. Clinesmith has lost his job in
government service"what has given his life much of its meaning." Scorning the federal prosecutor's recommendation for jail time, Boasberg gave Clinesmith a wrist
slap"400 hours of community service and 12 months of probation.
The FBI FISA frauds profoundly disrupted American politics for years and the din of belatedly debunked accusations of Trump colluding
with Russia swayed plenty of votes in the 2018 midterms and the 2020 presidential election. But for the chief FISA judge, nothing
matters except the plight of an FBI employee who lost his job after gross misconduct. This is the stark baseline Americans should
remember when politicians, political appointees, and judges promise to protect them from future FBI abuses. The FISA court has been
craven, almost beyond ridicule, perennially. Perhaps Boasberg was simply codifying a prerogative the FISA court previously awarded
upon FBI officials. In 2005, after a deluge of false FBI claims in FISA warrants, FISA Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly proposed
requiring FBI agents to swear to the accuracy of the information they presented. That never happened because it could have "slowed
such investigations drastically," the
Washington Post reported
. So, FBI agents continue to lie with impunity to the judges.
The FISA court has gone from pretending that FBI violations don't occur to pretending that violations don't matter. Practically
the only remaining task is for the FISA court to cease pretending Americans have any constitutional right to privacy . But if a sweeping
new domestic terrorism law is passed, perhaps even that formal acknowledgement will be unnecessary. Beginning in 2006, the court
rubber-stamped FBI requests that bizarrely claimed that the telephone records of all Americans
were "relevant" to a terrorism
investigation under the Patriot Act, thereby enabling NSA data seizures later
denounced by a federal judge as "almost Orwellian." FISA could become a peril to far more Americans if Congress formally creates
a new domestic terrorism offense and a new category for expanding FISA searches.
The backlash from Democrats after the January 6 clash at the Capitol showcased the demand for federal crackdowns on extremists
who doubted Biden's election, disparaged federal prerogatives, or otherwise earned congressional ire. If a domestic terrorism law
is passed, the FBI will feel as little constrained by the details of the statute as it does about FISA's technicalities. Will FBI
agents conducting warrantless searches rely on
the same
harebrained standard the NSA used to target Americans: "someone searching the web for suspicious stuff"? Unfortunately, unless
an FBI whistleblower with the same courage as former NSA analyst Edward Snowden steps forward, we may never know the extent of FBI
abuses
ebworthen 39 minutes ago
"You want to harass a political opponent? Sure, we can do that...
JaxPavan 42 minutes ago
All an FBI supervisor has to do to get a FISA warrant on you is have one agent get a crooked snitch in a foreign country to
send you a weird text message, and then have another bright eyed and bushy tailed agent who doesn't know the crook is a snitch
write up a search warrant application affidavit and submit it to the FISA court.
Joe Bribem 32 minutes ago
It's almost like we did this to Trump. But it'll never come to light. Oops it did. Not that anything will happen to us because
we own the corrupt DOJ and FBI.
Obama's own personal private army.
You_Cant_Quit_Me 7 minutes ago
A lot of tips come in from overseas. For example, the US spies on citizens of another country and then sends that country tips,
in exchange that country does the same by spying on US citizens and sending the FBI tips. Then it starts, "we are just
following up on a tip"
wee-weed up 36 minutes ago (Edited)
Nothing says "Unconstitutional (illegal) Deep State" like FISA. Hitler's Gestapo would be proud!
You_Cant_Quit_Me 37 minutes ago
Lisa and Peter removed any credibility the FBI had with the public. If they solved real crime they would go after the massive fraud and stolen ID criminals. Of course that takes real work and
someone wanting get off their lazy rear end
takeaction 58 minutes ago (Edited)
If you own a smart phone...everything you do is recorded...and logged.
"They" have been listening
to you for a long time if they want to.
If you own any smart device...they can listen and watch. They are monitoring what I am typing and this site. There really is no way to hide.
PHOTO: DENIS CHARLET/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES Listen to this article 6 minutes 00:00 / 06:00 1x This is the year of the woke corporation, the year the chieftains of the most powerful companies got bored with making money and decided to remake America, principally by telling Americans how bigoted and backward they are. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. This is the year of the woke corporation, the year the chieftains of the most powerful companies got bored with making money and decided to remake America, principally by telling Americans how bigoted and backward they are. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. Major League Baseball shipped the All-Star Game out of Georgia when that state's elected representatives dared enact modest election-integrity measures. Big Tech silenced a sitting president, banned books it didn't like, and threatened to install itself as censor of the nation's speech. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. America's founders had a word for this state of affairs: aristocracy. We might call it oligarchy, rule of the wealthy and the few. The founders understood that concentrations of power in either government or the economy are dangerous, threatening the rule of the people. That's why they curbed monopolies and strictly limited the corporate form, largely confining its use to educational institutions and churches and sometimes public-works projects. They wanted the people to govern the nation, not an elite, whether that elite resided in government or business. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. It's time America recovered the founders' political economy. We need a new era of trustbusting, an agenda to break up Big Tech and the other concentrations of woke capital that threaten to turn the U.S. into a corporate oligarchy. The aim should be simple: Give working Americans control again over their government and their society. In short, protect our democracy. NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
All the day's Opinion headlines.
PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBE
We are living in an age of monopoly power. Since the 1990s, two-thirds of American industry has become more
concentrated. In 1995 the nation boasted 60 major pharmaceutical companies. By 2015 they had merged to form just
10. Big banks grow bigger while top airlines control ever larger shares of revenue. The credit-card market is now
effectively a duopoly, and online it's no better. Google and
Facebook
control
more than 60% of digital advertising.
Big-business consolidation strips Americans of economic opportunity. In today's corporate economy, small and new
businesses struggle. New-business formation is barely half what it was in the 1970s, and the pandemic has further
privileged the largest players at the expense of local and family enterprises. Concentrations of
market
power
also mean a smaller share of gross domestic product for labor, which leads to flat wages for workers. As
the market power of big U.S. corporations has increased, business investment has declined, meaning less spending
on innovation and less productivity growth.
Not surprisingly, corporate monopoly leads to political power. It has always been thus. The giant railroads of the
19th century tried to bully and buy entire legislatures, including the U.S. Congress. Today, Major League
Baseball -- exempt from antitrust laws -- and a cohort of megacorporations such as Delta and
Coca-Cola
are
trying to order about states on election integrity, while Google, Facebook and
Twitter
decide
which citizens may say what in the public square.
Nike
lectures
the nation on social justice while it is suspected of profiting from forced labor overseas, as the
Congressional-Executive Commission on China noted in its March 2020
report
.
Welcome to the woke economy, led by concentrated woke capital. Do as these companies say or face cancellation.
Americans weren't content to let monopolists run the country a century ago, and we shouldn't be today.
I propose three measures. First, break up Big Tech. The tech companies are the most powerful corporations in the
country and likely in American history. They control what Americans read and what they say, what Americans share
and what they buy. The Big Tech companies are the railroad monopolies, Standard Oil and the newspaper trust rolled
into one, and tech CEOs are our robber barons. Congress should enact new bars on industry consolidation that will
prevent the dominant tech platforms from simultaneously controlling separate industries and services. Google, for
example, shouldn't be able to own the world's dominant web-search platform and run the cloud. That's too much
power and it's bad for competition.
Second, cut the other megacorporations down to size. We can start by banning mergers and acquisitions for
corporations larger than $100 billion. No exceptions. There is no good reason for a corporation to buy its way to
the size of a small country. Vertical integration, in which one company buys up an entire supply chain -- think
Amazon
marrying
Whole Foods with its Prime shipping network -- should also receive antitrust scrutiny.
Third, give courts a new standard to evaluate anticompetitive conduct. For years, courts have asked whether an
alleged monopolist harms consumer welfare. In other words, does the business behavior in question drive up
consumer costs? That's a fine question, but trustbusting isn't about consumer prices alone. The tech companies
insist that most of their services are free, even as they extract monopoly rents in other ways, like taking
private consumer data without consent.
Trustbusting is about promoting robust competition. It's competition that helps workers, spurs innovation and
ultimately preserves the power of the ordinary citizen. Our founders understood that competition, not monopoly, is
a friend to liberty.
Republicans were once the party of trustbusters. They should be again. The left is increasingly willing to cheer
on the new monopolists -- so long as they push the left's agenda on cultural and other issues. In the face of this
new alliance between big government and big business, conservatives must recover the wisdom of the founders'
vision: liberty, not monopoly.
Mr. Hawley, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Missouri. He is
author
of
"The Tyranny of Big Tech," forthcoming May 4.
The social engineers at the World Economic Forum -- seizing on the opportunities presented
by mass fear over COVID-19 and the choking lockdowns on economies and societies worldwide --
have an authoritarian vision for the future of humanity, carefully choreographed from on high
at the top levels of the global power structure.
Unaccountable, unelected entities are hard at work constructing this brave new world through
a shadowy process they have ominously dubbed the " Great Reset ":
"The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and
reset our world."
A sea change, just now coming into clear focus, is afoot. Without grassroots pushback from a
united populist front, as the
former CDC director recently forecasted , "nothing is ever going back to normal" –
ever.
Addressing the globalist Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
group advocating "free trade" – a misleadingly labeled concept which means nothing more
than corporate profiteering across borders to capitalize on cheap labor and instantiating
dystopian
corporate sovereignty into law while bleeding the working classes in rich nations dry
– Canadian Prime Minister expounded on the ethos of the "Great Reset":
"This pandemic is truly a global challenge. And not just because every country in every
corner of the world has been affected: because there is no part of society, no industry, no
aspect of daily life that has not changed . This is our chance to build back societies that are
fairer and economics that are more resilient ."
All of which begs the questions:
Who decided on these changes?
What populations in the Western "democracies" were permitted to exercise popular will in
a vote on these changes?
For whose benefit are these "Great Reset" policies enacted?
"The most promising [Global Reset] ideas will be taken up within existing IMF and World Bank
processes as well as at the G7 and G20 Leader Summit This pandemic has provided an opportunity
for a reset . This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to re-imagine economic
systems ."
The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the G7 and G20 are unelected,
non-representative international bodies run by and for the interests of the global elite at the
expense of the working classes in every country on Earth.
Debt slavery, slave wages, hollowed-out middle
classes in the US Rust Belt , corporate tyranny, environmental catastrophe, and destruction
of human rights are the rotten fruits of globalism.
Normal people have no seat at the table nor any voice in the decisions by these global
behemoths. At its core, the international regime is fundamentally anti-democratic and,
increasingly, anti-human.
-- -- -- -- -- -- –
The real agenda of the ruling class -- as it has been for decades since globalized trade and
politicization began in earnest -- is to further remove power from everyday people and place it
into the hands of distant corporations and internationalized bureaucracies:
"We have to do more. We have to diversify our supply chains. We need to deepen our
cooperation with different parts of the world we look for new iterations of multilateral
structures as people are looking at a transforming world."
At the current crossroads in American -- and indeed, global -- history, reform is no longer
a viable solution; on the contrary, reform is a fool's errand. World trade, and even more so
world government, is a death machine :
"Globalization now connotes economic dislocation, increasing inequality, unwanted
immigration, and a vehicle for the transmission of disease. The pandemic has emphasized the
dangers rather than the benefits of efficient linkages between markets, laying bare the dangers
of complex global supply chains where any node can become a 'choke point', and the risks of
overspecialization or the concentration of technological knowledge and/or production capacity
in a single country or region."
"Choke point" indeed. The task before us -- the only possible solution to the corporate,
technocratic, medicalized, authoritarian nightmare we are hurdling toward at breakneck speed --
is our own populist, ultra-localized rendition of the "Great Reset" or the "Great UpSet." Some
suggest that we are not uprising but rather "upwising" – arming ourselves with knowledge
to carry out a peaceful reinstatement of public power.
The DC Swamp – not to mention the lurking global behemoths like the United Nations
– is beyond reform. There is no salvation to be found in these institutions. Congress
members don't represent average people – how could they ? Average people don't make small
talk with them at Georgetown cocktail parties. Average people don't finance their campaigns.
Average people don't give them lucrative positions in the never-ending revolving lobbying door
after they conclude their terms.
We must insist, by our own means, on restoring control over our own communities. We must
work to rebuild intimate human bonds at levels below abstraction – ones in which we are
invested spiritually and financially:
"While local government is closest to voters, turnout in local elections is low; it is
highest in national elections . Despite the pivotal importance of local politics getting out
the vote is the toughest problem that party and labor leaders face."
The only way to reverse course is to decentralize. Decouple from the toxic corporate-state
ties that bind and enslave your local community. Reconnect with your neighbors. Shop locally
and, whenever possible, sell locally.
Flout immoral laws imposed by far-off authorities. Target and eliminate national and
international influence from bloated government and transnational corporations with no
allegiance to you, your family, or community. Their claims to authority are illegitimate,
non-representative, malevolent, and, increasingly, even genocidal.
Destroy what destroys; nourish what nourishes.
The time has come to #UNRIG not just our elections, but our entire economy and society to
restore control to the local level, with the people, the only place it has ever rightfully
belonged.
Robert David Steele, alt-right white male and former US spy as well as founder of the Open
Source Everything movement, has joined with Kevin Jenkins and others to launch ARISE USA! The
Resurrection Tour , that will visit all 50 US states from 15 May to 6 September and could
transform into a global movement, Arise.World.
In partnership with Sheriff Richard Mack, founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs movement
that challenges federal and state abuse of power, as well as other icons of freedom, they are
building the definitive organic pro-human movement from the ground up – the only way to
build anything of value.
Join the tour as a Founding Citizen at BigBatUSA.org ; learn about election fraud and reform options at
UNRIG.net .
Ben Bartee is a Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Contact him via
Armageddon Prose .
"... While the released documents portray the U.S. as having knowledge of the coup as opposed to intervening overtly or covertly, the aftermath shows U.S. involvement was considerable. ..."
While the released documents portray the U.S. as having knowledge of the coup as opposed
to intervening overtly or covertly, the aftermath shows U.S. involvement was
considerable.
Last March, on the 45 th anniversary of Argentina’s descent
into dictatorship, the National Security Archive posted a selection of
declassified documents revealing the U.S. knowledge of the military coup in the country in
1976. A month before the government of Isabel Peron was toppled by the military, the U.S. had
already informed the coup plotters that it would recognise the new government. Indications of a
possible coup in Argentina had reached the U.S. as early as 1975.
A declassified CIA document from February 1976 describes the imminence of the coup, to
the extent of mentioning military officers which would later become synonymous with torture,
killings and disappearances of coup opponents. Notably, the coup plotters, among them General
Jorge Rafael Videla, were already drawing up a list of individuals who would be subject to
arrest in the immediate aftermath of the coup.
One concern for the U.S. was its standing in international diplomacy with regard to the
Argentinian military dictatorship’s violence, which it pre-empted as a U.S.
State Department briefing to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger shows. “An
Argentine military government would be almost certain to engage in human rights violations such
as to engender international criticism.â€
After the experience of Chile and U.S. involvement in the coup which heralded dictator
Augusto Pinochet’s rise to power, human rights violations became a key
factor. Kissinger had brushed off the U.S. Congress’s concerns, declaring a
policy that would turn a blind eye to the dictatorship’s atrocities.
“I think we should understand our policy-that however unpleasant they act,
this government is better for us than Allende was,†Kissinger had declared .
Months after expressing concern regarding the forthcoming human rights abuses as a result of
the dictatorship in Argentina, the U.S.
warned Pinochet about its dilemma in terms of justifying aid to a leadership which was
becoming notorious for its violence and disappearances of opponents. “We
have a practical problem to take into account, without bringing about pressures incompatible
with your dignity, and at the same time which does not lead to U.S. laws which will undermine
our relationship.â€
In the same declassified document from the Chile archives of 1976, Pinochet expresses his
concern over Orlando Letelier, a diplomat and ambassador to the U.S. during the era of Salvador
Allende and an influential figure among members of the U.S. Congress, stating that Letelier is
disseminating false information about Chile. Letelier was murdered by car bomb in Washington
that same year, by a CIA and National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) agent Michael
Townley.
However, the Argentinian coup plotters deepened their dialogue with the U.S. over how human
rights violations would be committed. Aware of perceptions regarding
Pinochet’s record, military officials approached the U.S. seeking ways to
minimise the attention which Pinochet was garnering in Chile, while at the same time making it
clear to U.S. officials to “some executions would probably be
necessary.â€
Assuming a non-involvement position was also deemed crucial by the U.S. To mellow any
possible fallout, the coup plotters were especially keen to point out that the military coup
would not follow in the steps of Pinochet. One declassified cable document detailing U.S.
concern over involvement spells out how the U.S. Ambassador to Argentina Robert Hill planned to depart the
country prior to the coup, rather than cancel plans to see how the events pan out.
“The fact that I would be out of the country when the blow actually falls
would be, I believe, a fact in our favor indicating non- involvement of Embassy and
USG.†The main aim was to conceal evidence that the U.S. had prior knowledge of the
forthcoming coup in Argentina.
While the released documents portray the U.S. as having knowledge of the coup as opposed to
intervening overtly or covertly, the aftermath shows U.S. involvement was considerable. The
Chile experience, including the murder of a diplomat on U.S. soil, were clearly not deterrents
for U.S. policy in Latin America, as it extended further support for
Videla’s rule. The Videla dictatorship would eventually kill and disappear
over 30,000 Argentinians in seven years, aided by the U.S. which provided the aircraft
necessary for the death flights in the extermination operation known as Plan Condor.
“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these
people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in
the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between
them.†â€" Thomas Jefferson
The trial was pointless .
We knew the outcome . We knew
the threat. Convict Derek Chauvin of murder, or cities will burn . Jurors
surely knew they would be doxxed if they didn’t vote to convict; one
potential juror was
dismissed after he dared mention this fear.
There is a debate to be had about police conduct. I’m not going to back
the blue unconditionally after Charlottesville
, Ashli Babbit , and
the ruthless
manhunt for January 6 rioters. Derek Chauvin would have carried out the same orders against
us. However, what Derek Chauvin did to George Floyd isn’t even close to
what happened to white
man Daniel Shaver , gunned down in a hotel hallway by a police officer who was later
acquitted and was paid for his mental suffering . This is about race, not police. I expect police will crack
down further on law-abiding
whites while ignoring black crime .
The howls for Derek Chauvin’s head were primal. I
haven’t heard such cries of triumph since O.J. Simpson was
acquitted .
Of course, Derek Chauvin was hardly a champion of white identity . In 2018, the
Twin Cities Pioneer Press gave a fawning profile to his then-wife, Hmong
refugee Kellie Chauvin. She called her husband a “gentlemanâ€
and “just a softie.†Less than two years later, just three days
after George
Floyd’s death , she divorced him. Her lawyer
told journalists about her “utmost sympathy†for
Floyd’s family.
What’s so striking about the Derek Chauvin case is that it could have
happened anywhere. Every police officer (or white person who lives in a black neighborhood)
knows about the sob stories, the wailing, the lying, and the sudden switch from threats to
begging and back again when blacks face cops. Floyd himself had
tried this soft-shoe routine when he was arrested in 2019. Derek Chauvin and his three
colleagues had probably seen far worse.
Whether a routine arrest like this becomes a cause depends on countless factors. If
the teenager Darnella Frazier had not
taken a video , nothing would have happened. Even with body cam footage, I suspect there
would have been no case. Without a simple image to rouse the simple masses, no one would have
cared.
The sanctification of George Floyd makes this even more surreal. The #MeToo movement took
down powerful men who had made inappropriate jokes or crude gestures decades ago, but a
criminal who spent his last moments on earth trying to rip-off shopkeepers and lying to police
has become a holy
figure , complete with literal claims of miracles. George Floyd’s life
and death were practically a caricature of what the crudest
“racist†would conjure out of a hateful imagination. A white man
with his record would have been treated exactly the
same , but because Floyd was black, journalists made him a saint. Most people let
others
build their reality . Post-white America has a new faith .
Fox News host Greg Gutfeld, author of The Bible of Unspeakable Truths and The Joy
of Hate , said that even if Derek Chauvin wasn’t guilty of all charges,
he
thought the verdict was a good thing. “I want a verdict that keeps this
country from going up in flames,†he explained. That’s the
bravery of American conservatives for you. While the country didn’t
“go up in flames,†there were some troubling signs last night
that worse is to come.
The guilty verdict didn’t calm the streets. It didn’t
even calm the politicians. The President of the United States
said that “this can be a moment of significant change.â€
Kamala Harris , whose
parents are immigrants,
intones that this won’t “heal the pain that existed
for generations.†Barack and Michelle Obama
want “true justice,†which requires “that
we come to terms with the fact that Black Americans are treated differently, every
day.†(I don’t think they mean affirmative action.) Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez said the verdict
wasn’t justice and doesn’t want people to think the
system works. Empty-headed celebrities
demand that more be done.
Rep. Tlaib represents Detroit ,
where the already-ruined city saw a huge
increase in homicides and shootings in 2020, just another part of what was undoubtedly the
largest
single-year increase in the murder rate in American history. Almost all the added victims
were black. “The community†doesn’t seem to
care, so there’s no reason politicians should.
Let’s hear no wailing about “black lives.â€
The main victims of the crime wave are black, with victims including
children , partygoers , and funeral guests
. Voters who elect
progressive prosecutors don’t seem to care any more than the
“community†does. Do they prefer bloodshed to good police
work?
Vox
tells us BLM has led to a reduction in “police homicides†in
areas where there were protests. Of course, at least some of these homicides would have
been justified use of force. Yet the very same research Vox cites says that between 2014 and
2019, there were “somewhere between 1,000 and 6,000 more homicides than
would have been expected [absent protests]†in those places. Even if we accept the
unhinged premise that police suddenly stopped gunning down blacks for no reasons, the result of
BLM was thousands of dead blacks â€" and nice houses for the
movement’s co-founder .
Still, it’s not about blacks. It’s about us. Rudyard
Kipling, a poet who wouldn’t get far in our affirmative
action world , wrote :
It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say: â€"
“Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet
you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away.â€
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we’ve proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
We paid the Dane-geld. We’ve shamefully paid it to people with far less
nobility and courage than the Vikings. The Minnesota protester screaming that riots worked is
right. They worked because they had media backing. If others ran the press, the Cannon
Hinnant case alone could have changed everything. Instead, most whites
haven’t heard of it, nor about the others of
our race butchered every
year .
Our loss of identity leaves us vulnerable to moral blackmail. Whites seem to be in a
permanent state of shellshock. White conservatives want to be left alone, with Tucker Carlson
saying
that what the nation needs “more than anything†is
“a moment to catch our national breath.†Really? Conservatives
know something is wrong, but don’t dare recognize the real problem.
Republicans who collaborate with this rotten system have
shut down even halting steps towards white
identity .
Meanwhile, over the last decade, white liberals have radically changed their views on race
and actively discriminate against
whites . It’s more correct to say that new views were
inserted into their brains through hysterical media coverage of police shootings. Those who
call themselves “very liberal†are hopelessly deluded. A
majority think that
police gun down over 1,000 unarmed black men a year â€" almost 100 times the actual
number.
https://www.bitchute.com/embed/5Bf07CnmFidD/
Statistics can’t compete with sob-stories, and stories give people
meaning. I believe many Americans get their moral purpose for life from them.
There are also specific benefits in keeping the system going. Activists and politicians
build careers. Blacks get a chance of hitting the “
ghetto lottery †(assumed they aren’t killed) and becoming
heroes. It’s a strong incentive to turn a petty scam into an epic showdown.
Journalists who want to lead a social revolution or just get clicks (or both) fall right in
line.
Even as this is written, there is a case in Columbus, Ohio that could be our next George
Floyd-style passion play. Officers arrived at a chaotic brawl and shot a black girl. Body cam
footage shows the girl trying to stab someone before she was shot. Nonetheless, the image the
Associated Press
uses for the story is a Black Lives Matter protest. It looks like yet another case of a
degenerate “community†causing chaos, attracting the police, and
causing a racial confrontation.
The police are going to lie. I’m so thankful that someone from the
family was actually on the scene,†[Aunt] Bryant said . . . .
“The police are going to lie. The police are going to cover up for
themselves. They don’t care. At this point, I feel like
they’re just out to kill Black people. They’re not here
to protect and serve. That isn’t happening. That’s been
over a long time ago. They’re not here to protect and serve.
They’re here to kill Black folks.
Like many other whites, I’m exhausted. Unlike Tucker Carlson , I don’t
think we need a chance to catch our breath or pursue change more slowly. We need radical
change.
Every confrontation between a white officer and a non-white criminal is a potential
riot . The process is corrupt
because judges, jurors, and politicians know that the mob has a veto over the verdict. The rule
of law is dead.
The answer is separation . Without it, this will never
stop.
https://www.bitchute.com/embed/2vb9uMyWhLuW/
The strange reality is that there is almost no difference now between being a notorious
white advocate or any white guy. Derek Chauvin went, in just one day, from a heartwarming
“softie†who married a Hmong refugee to the embodiment of white
supremacy. A few days ago, it was a
soldier who stopped a black guy from accosting women. He had to be chased from his home.
Tomorrow it could be you.
You could try to stop a crime. You could fight back against an assault. Maybe you just look
at someone the wrong way. Maybe you do nothing at all. But if you
donated $10 to a cause the media don’t like â€" or even if
you didn’t â€" you could be the mark for the next great hate
hoax.
I write this reluctantly. Many of us become white advocates kicking and screaming, afraid to
see the truth. We all get here through experience
, usually painful.
However, no matter how far you run, how earnestly you plead, what you say, or even whom you
marry, you will always be white to those with power. That means many despise you. At some
point, you must decide to stand or kneel, and a society that kneels before the memory of a
George Floyd is not one worth serving or saving.
Whites created this country. They sustain it. Without whites, there is no America. America
is an extension of Western Civilization, white civilization, on this continent. Whites
pay to support
people who hate, curse, and sometimes kill us. We gain nothing. They owe everything. What they
have, we gave them, through weakness, folly, and good
intensions .
We deserve reparations for trillions wasted in a 60-year effort to babysit a population that
pays us back with violence and hatred. Most importantly, we deserve liberation from this
albatross that prevents any kind of real national life. Almost any price would be worth paying
if we could be sovereign and free, something our ancestors took for granted.
All the quasi-theological abstractions about “privilege†and
“critical theory†melt away before one immutable truth: They
need us; we don’t need them. Until we have the will to say so, all of us
â€" including you â€" are just one “viralâ€
incident away from ruin.
Don’t know who Gregory Hood is but I do know after reading all of his
essays, that he is the most erudite writer on race issues. I find him fair and balanced
basically sticking to the relevant issue of what ever he is writing about.
“Almost any price would be worth paying if we could be sovereign and
free…â€
This essay is superb…but worryingly, only as far as it goes. What,
very specifically, is the separation plan, and what is the price that might have to be paid
and IS worth paying, and what is the price that is NOT worth paying? The action-plan cannot
be safely specified, because we have already come too far for one to safely specify it.
Already. And worse is to come.
Besides individual ramifications, there is this. In Trump vs. Hawaii, Justice Roberts
declined to overrule Korematsu (the Japanese-internment case). He wrote that Korematsu had
been “overruled by history.†Group internment remains the law
of the land.
And yes, I am too cowardly to speak-out. Again. I was an undergraduate at an elite
University exactly when (late 60s) and where this all started. I (and my friends, and
like-minded faculty members and administrators) were all too cowardly to speak out, and take
action, then. Too much to lose. I apologize to the younger generations.
American Renaissance is a joke. No mention of the (((real problem))) at all. Until we can
discuss and point to the (((instigators))) of our present day horror, we will achieve
nothing. The funny and ironic thing about all of this is, (((they))) will suffer as much as
any White at the hands of the Frankenstein’s monster they created. I guess
Whites can take some small comfort in those just desserts.
The U.S. had a good run while it lasted. My plan is to move on. Whites really should
consider leaving. Problem is when we establish a new area they will just come to move in on
us all over again.
Fox News host Greg Gutfeld, author of The Bible of Unspeakable Truths and The Joy of
Hate, said that even if Derek Chauvin wasn’t guilty of all charges, he
thought the verdict was a good thing. “I want a verdict that keeps this
country from going up in flames,†he explained. That’s the
bravery of American conservatives for you.
This is how greed-driven “Jews†(Gutfeld is a partially
Hebrew, greed-driven Globalist and stooge for Conservatism Inc) have destroyed the neoconned
American right, and ultimately the nation. Having no soul or backbone, brushing it all under
the carpet in deference to the Golden Calf markets, Satanic Hebrews like Gutfeld will appease
the irrational mob all day long, and then just prior to collapse, invoke their
“Jewish†heritage and flee to Israel.
This us why they are known as Judenrats , and have always been.
And “liberal†Judenrats are even worse, but had
trouble penetrating the GOP until the ((neocons)) came along and sold it on easy-money
wars.
Anything for a buck, no matter how Satanic. Morality never enters into the equation.
They’re only destroying animal goyim nations, after all.
Whites don’t need blacks, browns or Jewish parasites.
The day we refuse to be intimidated and believe the lies is the day we get our countries
back.
Demand that Congress exercise their constitutional power over money creation.
National strike.
Something.
We need to turn this cancer around rather than waiting for the ship to hit the iceberg. That
will be the financial collapse lurking. It is the perfect opportunity for radical reform
including constitutional admendments. It will be a blessing in disguise: angry masses looking
for soneone to blame. Tptb will try to throw US to the angry masses but we throw them.
@steinbergfeldwitzcohen
y intractable endemic racial frictions in the USA are being systematically nurtured and
nourished by malign agents embedded in the American governmental and media frameworks.
The behaviour and loyalties of your Senator Maxine Waters makes this abundantly clear,
beyond any ambiguity or doubt.
So there is a cancer, for sure, eating away at the American Republic.
To extend the analogy, the danger with any cancer is permitting it to get past the point
of no return, after which the host cannot possibly recover and is inevitably consumed.
So you better find a cure soon, preferably something holistic which feeds the healthy
constituents and promotes healing at the same time as extinguishing the poisonous
infections.
Otherwise Team America may suffer a tragic and permanent demise.
Don’t forget that Jews own the media and the politicians. The culture
of vicitmhood, cancel culture, “wokeness,†race-baiting and
multi-racialism all either originate in the Jewish community or are strongly supported by
Jews. Jews brought down white, Christian Russia in 1917 and they are in the process of doing
that here. Jews hate us Christian whites and that fact is reflected in their media.
“All the quasi-theological abstractions about
“privilege†and “critical
theory†melt away before one immutable truth: They need us; we
don’t need them. Until we have the will to say so, all of
us…â€
Us who? White liberals don’t want you & don’t
need you & never will accept you, let alone agree any hare-brained scheme to
‘separate’ or have a racial homeland. And
they’re using Blacks to tell you that.
And until we have the will to say so, nothing will result from DOA dreams about a separate
state for “usâ€. A separate quasi-theological state abstraction
based on race will melt away in immutable reality as quickly as the communist belief in a
dictatorship of the proletariat abstraction. You have to make it here; there is no
“us†anymore. Get ready for 2022 or civil war as you will, but
there’s no escape to la-la land.
In the 1960 census, Minnesota was 98.8% white. In 1973, Time magazine ran an article on
the “Good Life in Minnesota.†It really was. We led the nation
in education. In 1960, there were 1,400 violent crimes in the State. Now, it is 13,000 to
14,000. What happened? We had mass migration from Chicago. Our Minnesota socialists offered
generous welfare benefits that attracted Chicago’s blacks and resettled
many refugees from failed countries, like Somalia, to the State. The State went from low
crime, highly educated, to much crime, much disorder, and a feeling we now live in a 3rd
world country. Today, we have armed soldiers with machine guns on the corners of the streets
in Minneapolis. You’d think the woke monsters that censure our news and
who form the Chauvin jury would awake from their idiocy, but instead, they censure the facts,
portray cops as the bad guys, portray drug abusing criminal degenerates like George Floyd as
saints.
It looks like blacks are now untouchable. This can only cause them to increase their
savage ways.
Realistically, wouldn’t it be better if every white person that wanted
to be armed could do so, and do so without a gov’t permission slip? The
reason we can’t pack a piece is because the gov’t says
the police will protect us. I know that’s a lie, do you?
Get rid of street cops like Chauvin because they are the ones that
aren’t there to protect us and end up in Floyd type situations. We should
be demanding our Constitutional rights to carry a weapon if we want to AND have the laws
changed so if we take out some POS there’s nothing to worry about.
Just think if a shop keepers in Portland put a shotgun round through their window through
the same hole made by the brick some antifa or blm POS threw. All the rioting and destruction
would have been cut off in seconds as these miscreants scatter. That’s the
only way to handle the low life trash that currently has immunity via a justice system that
is broken.
Eliminate street cops. Demand our Constitutional rights. Tell the gov’t
to change the laws that allow for deadly force when attacked by some miscreant.
No, Whites cannot police them, just like we cannot educate them. That’s
why the only acceptable solution is to expel them from White countries. Any other course of
action will mean the end of civilization because their presence is incompatible with
civilized life. Fuck them all and their cuckservative fans.
Putin promises 'asymmetrical' response to any threats made against Russia, promises those
provoking Moscow will come to regret it
Russian President Vladimir Putin has given a stern warning to anyone threatening the
national security of Russia, telling officials that those responsible will "regret their
actions like they have never regretted anything before."
IMHO NATO and D.C. need to pull their heads out of their arses, for mankind's sake.
Recent events in the world have given me great hope that we might finally emerge from the
century of permanent war. The Great Reset agenda seems to be losing steam and those in charge
of implementing it are losing conviction (with the exception, perhaps, of the very top echelon
in power). At the same time, the ranks of people who are opposed to it and are willing to take
a stand, appear to be swelling.
Since the very start of the great pandemic of 2020, something about the public health
response didn't feel right. It was clear from the measures that were enacted and from measures
that were not enacted that their purpose had little to do with public health. Instead, they
seemed to further a different agenda. Soon we learned that this was all connected to World
Economic Forum's hugely ambitious "Fourth Industrial Revolution" or the Great Reset. But the
agenda and the steps taken seemed rushed, panicked and frankly, hopeless.
Many of the solutions and technologies that would have to be rolled out and ready to use
turned out to be non-existent or only in conceptual stages of development. As months went on,
the events proved this impression correct as we saw the authorities muddle through, destroying
their own credibility in the process. In a very
recent interview, Dr. Rainer Fullmich sated as follows: "We have a whistleblower and she
told us that the original plan was to roll this out in 2050. But then those who are involved
with this got greedy and pulled things forward to 2030 and then to 2020 and that's why so many
mistakes are happening."
I do not believe that the people involved with this got greedy – I believe they
understand the fragility and imminent demise of the financial system which is their key
mechanism of control over all the levers of influence in society. The implosion of that system
would also jeopardize their position of power. So they rushed the Great Reset right off the
back of the 2020 pandemic to try to front-run the collapse and take an iron-fisted control of
things ahead of the unfolding crisis. From their various documents and white papers, it is also
evident that they had anticipated the public pushback.
Conjuring a big new war
As I wrote
last August , they have "surely planned diversions to misdirect our grievances One of the
greatest means of diversion are wars. We must therefore guard against believing that our
enemies are the Russians, the Chinese or whomever the logic of divide-and-rule would pit us
against." Over the last few weeks we've seen a sharp escalation of hostilities in Ukraine
between the Kiev government and the Donbas region. The situation became so tense that many
learned observers saw a military conflagration as inevitable. On 6th April, SouthFront.org
published an article, titled, " War Between
Russia and Ukraine is Inevitable. " Over the weekend I had the pleasure of listening to
Tom
Luongo's podcast with Alexander Mercouris – two among the most learned geopolitical
analysts. While Mercouris was more optimistic about the situation, Tom Luongo expected that the
war would break out.
If we judged by historical precedents, I would entirely agree with Luongo. However, I think
we are living in a different era today. In the run-up to the previous two world wars, leaders
of the key powers (Russia, France, Germany, etc.) were quite naive about the scheming of the
British diplomacy and intelligence services which led the way to both those wars. Wittingly and
unwittingly, they played along and sleepwalked into those conflicts (OK, Hitler didn't quite
'sleepwalk' into war but he had clearly badly misunderstood the British game and thought he
could sue for peace after only limited military engagements).
Today, it is clear that the leaders in Russia, China and certain other nations are
remarkably sophisticated, that their understanding of the great geopolitical chessboard is
crystal clear, and that they know exactly who their true enemies are. They have also understood
that giving their adversaries a war would mean giving them a lifeline. It seems to me that they
have made it an imperative priority not to give them that war.
Russia's build-up of an overwhelming military force on its border with Ukraine was therefore
not a preparation for war. To the contrary, it was a move to prevent one from erupting. As
Victor
David Hanson recently wrote , " Wars often arise from uncertainty. When strong countries
appear weak, truly weaker ones take risks they otherwise would not ." Thus for now, the Ukraine
tensions have abated - but had they faced a weak and indecisive Russia, the leadership in Kiev
and their Western backers might have made a very different gamble and today the war might
already have started. The cabal that's been dominating the western world for the past two
centuries is rapidly running out of time and out of options.
Their plans for the one world government are now in tatters and without a new world war, the
best they can hope to achieve is to carve out a geopolitical block and erect a new iron curtain
around it. The most likely candidate for that block is Western Europe consisting of the old
colonial powers and their satellites. However, even this consolation prize will not be viable.
As the Soviet experience has taught us, even with an iron fist and heavy-handed repression, the
edifice can sustain itself at best for a few decades. But as populations awaken, and awakening
they are, the sun will finally set on their system, probably for good.
The new world
dawning
What's left for the awakened masses to do is to build a better world on the ruins of the old
system. Here is what I wrote last March in an earlier blog post :
"We are witnessing the manifestations of old systems collapsing. And while some of those
manifestations appear fearsome, keep in mind Confucius ' counsel:
A seed grows with no sound. But a tree falls with huge noise. Destruction has noise but
creation is quiet. This is the power of silence grow silently .
Destruction is all around us creating great noise, but you carry a seed that grows silently
within you. Things that emerge from seeds are worthy of our reverence. If we cultivate them
with attention and love, they can grow beautiful and majestic. Dostoevsky said that beauty
would save the world. That beauty is us – you and I – our children, our parents,
our friends, all of us. We can't see what all these seeds will become, but it should be easy to
believe – nature's creations are always so beautiful."
Just the other day while on a hike, I came across a scene that captured this idea
metaphorically:
As we know, the better the seeds are nourished, the more beautiful, more robust and more
fruitful they become. The most important nutrient we need to build a better tomorrow is
knowledge and today we have that nutrient in greater abundance than we have ever had before. It
is incumbent upon us to use it, digest it, learn and apply ourselves to create the best version
of the future that we can muster.
It may just be that this crisis we are living through is a precious gift and that we who are
privileged to witness humanity at this juncture are fortunate in ways we can't yet fully grasp.
We must embrace this and do our very best with it and pass it on to our children and their
children.
...The view from Moscow is very different, fueled by a sense of grievance that the West is
determined to weaken Russia and stoke a pro-democracy "color" revolution to topple Putin. By
this reading, the U.S. and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies have repeatedly
betrayed Russia, abandoning missile treaties and expanding ever closer to its borders, since
Putin became the first foreign leader to offer help to Washington after the Sept. 11, 2001
terrorist attacks in the U.S.
"The Kremlin feels in a fortress, under sustained pressure from the U.S. and the West in
general. With its aggressive actions, Russia is trying to deter the U.S., but Washington is
just responding with stronger measures," said Oksana Antonenko, a director at Control Risks in
London. "We are certainly at the most dangerous point since the Soviet Union collapsed."
... ... ...
On Wednesday, the day before Russia announced its troop withdrawal, Putin warned rival
nations not to cross Russia's "red line" in his annual state-of-the-nation speech, saying
pressure on his country had become "a new form of sport." But he also held out an olive branch
of talks on strategic security.
... ... ...
Prosecutors this month asked a Moscow court to declare Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation
and his campaign offices to be extremist organizations, which could subject staff and
volunteers to criminal prosecution and imprisonment. They accused them of plotting to stage a
"color" revolution in Russia on the instructions of unnamed foreign states.
A top Putin ally, Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of Russia's lower house of parliament,
described Navalny as a "tool of American policy" that allowed himself to be used for
interfering in Russia's domestic affairs.
... ... ...
In his call with Biden, Putin raised an alleged plot to stage a coup against Belarusian
President Alexander Lukashenko hatched in consultation with the U.S., according to the Kremlin.
Lukashenko, who's ruled Russia's neighbor and closest ally since 1994, has faced months of
pro-democracy opposition protests since disputed elections last August.
"The practice of organizing coups and planning political assassinations, including of top
officials, that's going too far," Putin said in his annual address. "They've overstepped all
boundaries."
In talks with Lukashenko in Moscow next day, Putin said Russia is tightening military and
security cooperation with Belarus.
... ... ...
Putin insisted in Wednesday's address that "we really don't want to burn bridges" with the
West, before adding that anyone who mistakes Russian intentions for weakness "must know that
Russia's response will be asymmetrical, swift and tough."
The enrollment of corporations in the scheme to vaccinate the population and to require such
vaccinations for social participation should not be considered in terms of the prerogatives of
private organizations but as part of the incursions of the state into private industry. What we
are witnessing, and should be resisting, is a merger into a corporate-government complex,
wherein government can bypass the legislative branch and enforce unpopular mandates by
colluding with corporations and other organizations to make "policy."
Perhaps the most egregious element of this corporate-state stranglehold on the population is
the participation of Big Digital and the mainstream media. Big Digital conglomerates eliminate
media outlets and voices that challenge the official covid narrative, including information
about lockdowns, masking, and vaccinations, although the official narrative has not only
changed willy-nilly but also has been proven factually wrong, as well as socially devastating.
Big Digital and the media serve both the state and Big Pharma by eliminating oppositional views
regarding the lockdowns, masks, and vaccines, and by pushing fear-inducing propaganda about the
virus and its ever-proliferating variants.
As I have written in Google
Archipelago , Big Digital must be considered an agent of a leftist authoritarian state --
as a " governmentality " or state
apparatus functioning on behalf and as part of the state itself. "Governmentality" is a term
that should become well known in the coming days and weeks. I adopted the term from Michel
Foucault and have emended it to refer to corporations and other nonstate actors who actively
undertake state functions. These actors will be doing this in droves with vaccine passports,
which will vastly augment state power under a state-corporate alliance.
Similarly, other major corporations perform state-sanctioned roles by echoing and enforcing
state-approved ideologies, policies, and politics: indoctrinating employees, issuing woke
advertisements, policing the opinions of workers, firing dissidents, and soon demanding vaccine
passports from employees and customers.
The overall tendency, then, is toward corporate-state monopolization over all aspects of
life, with increasing control by approved principals over information and opinion, economic
production, and the political sphere. As the consolidation accelerates, the broad global state
will require the elimination of noncompliant, disaffected, and "untrustworthy" economic and
political actors. In the United States, with the elimination of political opposition, the
tendency is toward uniparty rule, and with it, the merging of the party and state into a
singular organ.
play_arrow
PGR88 2 hours ago (Edited)
The only way the fascist deep state ends is with a currency collapse. That could be
effected immediately - arrest the members of the Federal Reserve. Without a printed, fiat
dollar, and the illusion that $30 Trillion in debt will repaid - the leftist, DC deep state
collapses immediately.
BDB 13 hours ago remove link
The US govt is a corporation.
We as a central banking nation have an economic and political monopoly that is trying
really hard to maintain fascist control.All the big multinationals are owned by the banksters
too.
Psyop covID19 and man's co2 emissions causes climate change are both lies pushing a
political agenda
" Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state
and corporate power." Benito Mussolini
HonorSeeker 11 hours ago (Edited)
Under Fascism, the government wrote the rules. Under our corporatist system, it's the
corporations. At least that's what I would say the difference is.
DesertEagle 9 hours ago
We're under the boot heel of billionaire oligarchs and big corporations that are their
handmaidens. They are toxic and will never take their boot off of our neck unless they are
forced to.
Don't make simple things complicated the irony of starting this way for this post lol :D
(of course everything is complicated as well as simple, language betrays us all).
· The people of the Warsaw pact and then the Russians did what they did for
themselves and not for others, and they did it by themselves. It went well as long as the
people were in charge (ie. the initial actions) but the politicians then soon messed it up as
politicians anywhere are bound to do.
Gorbachev and Yeltsin didn't want or wish for disasters due to the results they got (and
maybe their tasks were impossible in their context). Clear mistakes were made and crimes
"allowed", far too much was rushed and ill thought out. The politicians had no way of being
prepared any more than they would be in the US right now.
· The US is out-competed, dysfunctional, and trapped in a cycle of excuses
in order to shoehorn their labyrinth of lies into their current reality. All people lie
despite this clear lesson as to why no one should, it is the lies one tells without realizing
they are lies that are the worst. This is much like the USSR was but easily even worse.
Will people in Europe and the US manage to duplicate the fall of the Warsaw pact and the
USSR? Right now it looks unlikely but remember or be aware that no one predicted the fall of
the Iron Curtain or the Politburo and most if not all outsiders in "the west" had trouble
believing it and understanding it when it happened or even now (and especially people
on both/all sides that are running on ideological biases as fuel).
(Our systems and models do not capture reality and can not, not even theoretically, a
different bigger discussion which boils down to the Shannon limit in the end (but I notice
thermodynamics is contentious among some so why would I invite that much work?)).
A repeat of history is not necessary nor automatic; the US isn't doing anything to stop
its own ongoing fall, at least not anything that I have noticed.
Because b is right.
(I really hope the CPC has a better grasp on this than that article vk posted hints at
because I want a stable prosperous China and that includes/demands the continuation of the
CPC and the way they have shaped and structured the Chinese system which is noticeable for
not taking the USSR approach that worked itself into a blind alley despite decades of
repeated attempts at reform (hell even Stalin tried)).
Unfortunately the constant demonization of Russia's president by the 'Putin-whisperers' has
already led to some tragic consequences
In one of the recent MoA topics about the murder of a group of Asian citizens in the
United States, I already commented on this, saying that we will see more of such tragic cases
when certain inadequate individuals will do terrible things as a result of the total
brainwashing by Western anti-Russian propaganda (as well as anti-Chinese, anti-Iranian,
etc.).
What happened (like the murder of the Russian ambassador to Turkey, as well as the murder
of Asians in the United States, etc.) is the direct fault of Western MSM, who deliberately
spread propaganda of lies and slander, denigrating and demonizing both individuals and entire
countries. People are pumped up with hatred, and one day someone's brain explodes. The result
is murder, assault, sabotage, etc.
The blood of the victims is on the hands of all these "journalists" and "experts" from
CNN, BBC, Guardian, NYT and other propaganda machines.
Russia exposed a plot to assassinate the President of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko
The incident clearly indicates that the United States is in a critical situation. The
transition to open terrorist methods is caused by the inability of the United States to
continue to use traditional, standard, civilized methods of competition and political
struggle. The United States is no longer able to compete with Russia and China in the legal,
civilized field. Falsifications, slander, choreographed staging of incidents, false flag
operations are used. An attempt to eliminate the head(!) of a foreign state is already the
next, even more radical stage of terror.
On the one hand, this is unprecedented, on the other hand, it is not new at all. One has
only to recall dozens of attempts by the American leadership to kill Fidel Castro, a
successful attempt to assassinate Gaddafi, an assassination attempt on Maduro, an attempt to
liquidate Yanukovych in 2014, an intention to overthrow Assad (the prospect of his physical
elimination is beyond doubt). Lukashenko is just another on the list.
The United States (and a number of its allies in Europe) act by the methods of a terrorist
state, in fact it is. The situation is aggravated by the complete inadequacy of the US
leadership, their presence in a distant alternative reality, which has little in common with
the existing reality.
I am not sure that an ordinary western inhabitant understands the seriousness of what is
happening. The attempt to liquidate Lukashenko is essentially another casus belli, which the
United States and its allies have already accumulated so much that it is time to talk about
an overdose.
Residents of American and European cities wake up, go to work, or to the store, or take
their children to kindergarten, do not even suspect that at any second a real war can start,
and missiles will fall on them from above. For a number of reasons, Russia considered that
the Nazi coup d'etat in Ukraine in 2014 was not worth the start of the world war, although
what happened was a casus belli. In 2018, Russia considered that the unprecedented expulsion
of Russian diplomats from the United States and Europe due to the "Skripal poisoning" was not
worth the start of the war, although it was a casus belli. Not so long ago, Putin chose not
to start a war and portrayed Biden as a crazy idiot, wishing him good health when he called
the Russian president a "killer", which was a casus belli. An attempt to assassinate the
President of Belarus has now been prevented, in which the United States (and a number of its
European allies) are undoubtedly involved. Belarus is part of a union state with the Russian
Federation, and the liquidation of Lukashenko is without a doubt a casus belli. Russia's
patience and understanding of responsibility is great, but not unlimited.
As a cornered beast, the United States (and its closest allies) pose a particular danger,
being ready to use any (I emphasize, any) means to alleviate its situation. These people can
commit a series of terrorist attacks in the heart of Europe, they can kill one (or several)
high-ranking European politicians, they can carry out a large-scale cyberattack against
European nuclear power plants, they can commit sabotage and poison drinking water in one of
the cities of Europe, then blaming Russia for everything. By the way, recently China made an
unexpected statement regarding the danger of American biological laboratories in Ukraine.
Russia has been talking about this for a long time. The use of biological weapons by the US
authorities is very likely. Using deep fake technology, they can stage a terrible crime
committed by "Russian special services." They can falsify the Russian Sputnik-V vaccine by
placing poison in ampoules, causing hundreds, possibly thousands of people to die. They can
arrange a terrorist attack and blow up a gas pipeline - in Europe, or in Ukraine, or on some
section of the Nord Stream-2 - recently we have already seen an attempt by the Poles to carry
out a trial sabotage. Next time it may not be "accidentally lost fishermen", but a boat with
explosives.
I have listed just a few options, and do not let them seem ridiculous fantasy to you. The
events of a number of recent years show that Russia's "Western partners" are capable of
anything . Anything, i mean it. Remember the downed Boeing MH-17, or the wiretapping
of European leaders, or the attempt to poison the Skripals (theatrical show, but who said
that it cannot be turned into a real chemical attack?).
I repeat, it is unlikely that an ordinary Western citizen understands the seriousness of
what is going on. Power in the United States has been seized and held by an insane
totalitarian sect that lives and thinks purely in its distant alternative reality. Rest
assured that these fanatics will be ready to start a war to satisfy their obsessive hatred of
Russia, as well as try to fix their ever-worsening situation in the world.
The first priority of civil society in American and European cities is to force their own
governments to be prudent. At least out of a sense of self-preservation.
America just tried to assassinate Lukashenko. America has assassinated a number of national
leaders, and attempted to assassinate many others. Anyone who interjects "But America would
never stoop to trying to kill Putin!" is not using reason or working from America's
established history.
It is a safe bet that the CIA is maintaining multiple active plots to assassinate Putin.
Fortunately the CIA is incompetent.
They obviously assassinated Prime Minister Olof Palme in Sweden in 1986.
The assassination plot is so incredibly important here. Think about the implications. Not
only did the FSB and the Belarus KGB sniff out the entire thing, but they publicly released
the video evidence. They all but confirmed US involvement. Lukashenka, in his typical verbal
grandiosity, claims that Putin had confronted Biden about the plot during their phone call
and Biden's response, allegedly, was "Gurgling - and not a single answer." And, the Kremlin
confirmed it:
The presidents of Russia and the United States, Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden, discussed the
attempted coup d'état in Belarus by phone, said Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for the
Russian leader.
Russia is not playing around. The US just tried to assassinate the president of an ally on
the eve of possible unification. And when it gets exposed, this nonsense from Czechia was
released almost immediately, clearly as a response. And it's a total joke of a response. This
is what maximum pressure looks like in 2021. The US is lashing out and have few other avenues
to engage. The Kremlin is winning, and if the Biden admin doesn't accept that...then we're
all doomed because it means the US will do more crazy things like these.
The politician most responsible for pitting ordinary men and women
against each other, ruining marriage among ordinary people, then
accusing someone else of "having no soul" is ironic.
It's the Orwellian narrative: "We have enemies overseas." Enemies
that aren't real enemies because we really don't actually want to
start a war with them but we need to put on a show to keep the
people distracted from looking at who are the real enemies inside
their own country.
...The current political class running the US loathes the average American, and it matters
not what side of the isle you sit on. They hate us. They also have their assets squirreled
away offshore. One question to ask is our demise something the international financial class
wants for their reset or one world?
One question to ask is our demise something the international financial class wants for
their reset or one world?
Posted by: Old and Grumpy | Apr 17 2021 22:25 utc | 44
I guess we should just see when there's large movement of patents and technologies
transfers to the next capital finance powerhouse. As it is right now i can see US financial
elite are doing everything it can to keep their monopolies and current order as is trying to
sabotage emerging China+Russia led new economic initiatives.
The US moneyed elites would like it very much at home where they don't have to fear forceful
government crackdown on themselves and having their wealth seized.
Just remind you that Venezuelan gold are swiped by it's local British government as soon as
they have the pretext. It can happen to them too in China and Russia where local prominent
houses already emplaced in position of power.
My guess is they got too used to game the Democratic process in the US that they do not
want it to come back functional anytime soon without minding too much of the long term
effects of dumbed down populaces.
The U.S. has leveled sanctions on Russia over election interference and cyberattacks,
including barring U.S. financial institutions from buying new domestically issued Russian
government debt.
The Biden Administration went where Presidents Obama and Trump had not, barring U.S.
financial institutions from buying new domestically issued Russian sovereign bonds. The move
excluded the secondary market, though. Anyone can still trade the so-called OFZs already in
circulation. And it was matched by a substantial carrot: a dovish speech on Russia by Biden,
floating a potential summit with Putin this summer.
The market had feared worse, says Vladimir Tikhomirov, chief economist at BCS Global Markets
in Moscow. The ruble is still down 4%, and stocks 3%, since Russia stoked tensions a month ago
by massing troops on Ukraine's border. That is despite buoyant oil prices that should benefit
Russia. "Everyone was discussing direct punishment of Russian companies or a cutoff from
SWIFT," he says, referring to the backbone for global financial transactions. "The actual
sanctions turned out to be relatively mild."
Global investors have been fleeing the OFZ market without any push from the White House.
Foreigners' share of outstanding bond holdings have fallen to 20% from about a third last
summer, notes Aaron Hurd, senior currency portfolio manager at State Street Global
Advisors.
Political risk still depresses the value of Russian assets by 15%, Tikhomirov
estimates. That is reasonable considering Biden's options for escalating sanctions, says
Daniel Fried, an Atlantic Council fellow who was the State Department's sanctions coordinator
under Obama. "He could move into the secondary debt market, restrict state-owned energy
companies' ability to raise capital, or go after the money hidden by Putin and his cronies," he
says. "It could get to be a pretty tight squeeze."
To close the political risk gap, Putin needs to at least restore calm with Ukraine, risking
domestic political face after a month of hyping the alleged threat from Russia's southern
neighbor. The coming week offers two opportunities for Putin to move toward Biden's proffered
stable relationship, Tikhomirov says. He could sound friendly in an annual state of the nation
address scheduled for April 21, and he could turn up (virtually) for the global climate summit
Biden has called on April 23-24.
These may be far overshadowed by Alexei Navalny, the
Russian opposition leader who is on hunger strike in a maximum-security prison outside
Moscow. Navalny-allied doctors said April 17 he could "die within days" without outside medical
intervention. Backing off from its merciless treatment of Navalny would also look like an
embarrassing climb-down from the Kremlin's point of view.
Hurd expects a stalemate where Russian assets could nudge higher as oil prices remain firm
and the Central Bank of Russia raises interest rates. Putin will make few concessions with his
party facing parliamentary elections in September, he predicts. Washington will be constrained
by the European Union's reluctance to stiffen anti-Russian measures. "The ruble could still go
higher from here, but we remain tentative over the next six months," he says.
Putin has essentially accomplished the goal he set after his 2014 invasions of Ukraine, a
self-sufficient Russia that can pursue its perceived security interests without worrying what
the rest of the world thinks, says Yong Zhu, portfolio manager for emerging markets debt at
DuPont Capital Management.
Government debt amounts to a mere 18% of gross domestic product, and in a pinch can be
serviced domestically. That keeps yields too low to pay for the country's geopolitical
turbulence, he concludes: 10-year Russian domestic bonds pay about 7% annually, compared with
9% for Brazil or South Africa. "Russia doesn't really need anything beside the iPhone," Zhu
quips.
Self-reliance has also spelled isolation from the capital and talent that could lift Russia
to its proper place in global innovation and growth. But Putin and his regime seem to like it
that way.
Lukashenko says Putin-Biden
talked about alleged US-led assassination plot
MINSK, April 17. /TASS/. Russian President Vladimir Putin focused on the issue of an
assassination attempt on Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko prepared by US
intelligence agencies in a call with US President Joe Biden, Lukashenko said aired by the ONT
television channel on Saturday.
"Another thing that surprises me is why Americans behave like this. Remember that no one
except the top political leadership can set the task of getting rid of a president. Only
them, not the special services," Lukashenko said.
"I'll tell you more. I am grateful to Putin. When he was talking with Biden, he asked him
this question. Gurgling and no answer. Vladimir Vladimirovich [Putin] called me and told me
about this when I arrived from Azerbaijan," he added.
(Entire article.)
It's interesting what's happening right now (in the past hour or so).
First: Russian and Belorussian news about the arrest of leaders (or key participants) of
an attempted military coup in Belarus, planned by the US security services.
Then, 30 minutes later: the Czechs expel 18 Russian diplomats, accusing them of spying and
of connection to some explosion back in 2014.
I could've been skeptical about the details of the first story, but the second one seems
to confirm it. The second story appears to be an obvious attempt to squeeze the first one out
of the news. And who else could order the Czech government to do this with a 30 minute
notice?
"The Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation, together with the State Security
Committee of the Republic of Belarus (RB), as a result of a special operation, suppressed the
illegal activities of Yuri Leonidovich Zyankovich, who has dual citizenship of the United
States and the Republic of Belarus, and Alexander Iosifovich Feduta, a citizen of the
Republic of Belarus, who planned to carry out a military coup in Belarus according to the
worked-out scenario of "color revolutions" with the involvement of local and Ukrainian
nationalists, as well as the physical elimination of President Alexander Lukashenko.
Zyankovich arrived in Moscow after consultations in the United States and Poland. In the
Russian capital, he planned a meeting with representatives of the Belarusian Armed Forces to
convince them to participate in a coup involving local and Ukrainian nationalists. The coup
was planned in Minsk on May 9 during the Victory Day parade.Currently, the detainees have
been transferred to Belarus. (C) FSB DSP
@ Mao Cheng Ji | Apr 17 2021 19:17 utc | 15.. thanks agreed! and as funny as funny would
have it, the 2 guys accused are the same 2 the uk accused of in regards the skripal
poisoning... apparently there are only so many fsb agents to go around and these guys are
always especially busy.... it is a 7 hour drive from Vrbetice to Lviv, or about 700
kilometers...
"Also on Saturday, the Czech police placed two Russian citizens, who had allegedly visited
Vrbetice at the time of the explosions, on the wanted list over "serious crime." They were
identified as Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov – the same persons that Britain
accused of being the Russian spies in the UK responsible for using the infamous 'Novichok'
chemical agent on double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury in March
2018."
MOSCOW, April 17. /TASS/. Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) has detained two
individuals who plotted a military coup in Belarus and an assassination attack on President
Alexander Lukashenko, the FSB Public Relations Center said on Saturday. READ ALSO
MOSCOW, April 17. /TASS/. Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) has detained two
individuals who plotted a military coup in Belarus and an assassination attack on
President Alexander Lukashenko, the FSB Public Relations Center said on Saturday. READ
ALSO
"In a special operation conducted by the Federal Security Service of the Russian
Federation alongside the State Security Committee of the Republic of Belarus (KGB), the
illegal activities of Yuri Leonidovich Zyankovich, a dual citizen of the United States
and the Republic of Belarus, and Belarusian citizen Alexander Feduta were prevented, as
those had been scheming to stage a military coup in Belarus in accordance with the tried
and tested 'color revolution' scenario with the involvement of local and Ukrainian
nationalists, as well as the physical removal of President Alexander Lukashenko," the FSB
said.
The FSB said, "according to proactive information received from the Belarusian
partners, in private chats of an internet messenger the ideologists of radical opposition
Zyankovich and Feduta organized discussion of a plan of armed uprising in Belarus and
decided to hold an in-person meeting in Moscow, using available measures of secrecy, with
the opposition-minded generals of the republic's Armed Forces."
The FSB Public Relations Center continued that upon Zyankovich's arrival in Moscow
after his consultations in the US and Poland, such a meeting took place in a private room
of a restaurant in Moscow.
10 САМЫХ
НЕОБЫЧНЫХ
ДОМОВ В МИРЕ 00:00
Previous Pause Next
00:22 / 09:40 Unmute Fullscreen Copy video
url Play / Pause Mute / Unmute Report a problem Language Mox Player
"At the meeting, the conspirators told the 'Belarusian generals' that to succeed in
implementing their plan, it was necessary to physically remove nearly all the top figures
of the republic. They described in detail the plan of a military coup, including the
seizure of radio and television centers to broadcast their address to the nation and the
blocking of internal troops and OMON (riot police) loyal to the authorities in the
capital," it noted.
"They were preparing a blackout of the Belarusian power grid to hamper the actions
of the army and law enforcement agencies. Some armed groups (guerillas) located at hidden
bases were supposed to launch an active phase," the FSB reported adding that the ultimate
goal was the upheaval of Belarus' constitutional system, to eliminate the position of
presidency and to vest political power in the National Reconciliation Committee.
The coup was scheduled for May 9 during the Victory Day Parade in Minsk, the FSB
said.
"After the above mentioned meeting had been recorded, the conspirators were
apprehended by the Russian security services and handed over to the Belarusian
counterparts," the FSB said. /div
While I agree with 99% of your post, there is one point that I think needs to be keeping
in mind. While the populace of this particular manure-hole certainly has its equal share of
dumb creatures, the people running things cannot be so easily dismissed. The problem as I see
it is they have a great deal of a certain kind of intelligence, as someone said "smart, but
not wise". They are educated, but insane. The cream of the crop that has gone sour. In my
travels I would often ask people what they actually thought of "Americans". An Indonesian man
responded " soft, but cunning. You have to be careful around them."
If these cunning, insane, power hungry creatures were simply dumb and not truly evil, we
might be in less of a shit show (nod to psychohistorian) than we are.
After 20 years of regular interaction with Amerikastanis online and in real life, I have
realised that they live in a parallel universe in which Hollywood is the arbiter of truth.
They genuinely believe that anything they choose to imagine is the truth just because they
imagine it.
A couple of days ago when the Imperialist States admitted its "Russia Bounty" story was
concocted, the people who had shrieked to the skies about it last year had a chance to
apologise. Did they? They ignored it. It did not happen because they chose to believe it
didn't.
Well yeah, "demos" are running all this having robbed any meaning from that traditional
labor/common man viewpoint (think FDR) thus in full cahoots with the global cabal which is
gates and all the other devils, which must be stopped. Too long to list, here is astonishing
summary big food/pharma/chemical/oil/$
Interesting interview. Apparently, Yuri Andropov had a contingency plan on the event of
the disintegration of the USSR - and yes, it included the partition of the Ukraine into two
("east bank Ukraine" and "west bank Ukraine" - probably West of the Dnieper, East of the
Dnieper). It's in Russian, so maybe inconsistencies with automatic translation may exist:
The interview is with Russian neoliberal banker (of the circle of Yeltsin and Gaidar, St.
Petersburg intelligentsia) Viktor Loshak, from "Alfa-Bank group" (machine translation). He
was a working under Shatalin in the 1980s, so he's allegedly an eye witness (primary source)
of the alleged plans.
He also claims that the St. Petersburg neoliberals never intended to end the Union, and
that what really happened in the 1990s wasn't intended. Smells like revisionism to me, but
ok, the St. Petersburg circle was never known for their intellectual prowess, so it's
possible.
--//--
@ Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | Apr 10 2021 21:07 utc | 51
It has in the sense that the Ukraine wants to restore its entire territory, not just some
part of it. There is no scenario where, it being able to reconquer LPR-DPR, it would leave
Crimea with Russia.
The Jewish Anti-defamation league is after Tucker Carlson. That's as bad as it gets. They
have more money than God.
Anti-Defamation League chief Jonathan Greenblatt "Tucker must go"...."white supremacist
tenet that the white race is in danger by a rising tide of non-whites" that is "anti-Semitic,
racist and toxic."
I don't know what weed you're smoking but it has really scrambled your brains. The ability
to show up on the parade grounds and go around the world showing fancy overpriced toys does
not equate to fighting ability. The US hasn't faced a real army in a conventional war since
Vietnam. The US is great at fighting banana republics, but if facing a real military like
Russia (who believe me have all the drones that the US has and the ability to neutralize
those of the enemy) would run for their safe spaces and hide.
This guy is nothing but a f * c king crook and a gangster. They just paid a fine of a
BILLION dollars for manipulating the Gold Market. And they even give time for this shyster to
even speak?
jamesblazen62 10 hours ago remove link
Dimon is in greed's grasp and he can't escape. He's had 2 brushes with death (cancer and
emergency heart surgery). You'd think a billionaire with more money than he can ever need or
want has something better to do in his life than conniving for more money and playing big
corporate games of manipulation and deceit.
Evil-Edward-Hyde 50 minutes ago
J P Morgan is a crime Syndicate.
They constantly Break the Laws.
No Problem for Them,
They Just Pay The Fines.
Their secret is they make much much more money on the scam did they have to pay in
fines.
FiscalBatman 1 hour ago remove link
It's amazing how out of touch these guys are. They just don't get it. Dimon will be
swaying back and forth with the rest of them at this rate
The Competent Man 8 hours ago remove link
This is NOT a boom.
When was the last time houses went for above asking price, ever, with 20 million out of
work?
All of this 'boom' is nothing but asset inflation.
And also by the level of degeneration of the US neoliberal elite. Healthy elite would never
resort to "Wokism" in the attempt to crush populism and deflect anger directed on banksters, tech
moguls and politicians
Political populism, a common lament for Dimon, was also criticized.
" Americans know that something has gone terribly wrong, and they blame this country's
leadership: the elite, the powerful, the decision makers - in government, in business and in
civic society," he wrote.
"This is completely appropriate, for who else should take the blame?"
That fuels populism on the right and left, he said.
"But populism is not policy, and we cannot let it drive another round of poor planning and
bad leadership that will simply make our country's situation worse."
The lengthy letter touched on many perennial policy bugbears like the need for "proper
immigration policies" - ie making it easier for tech companies and others to hire skilled labor
from abroad - while the CEO also wrote that " affordable housing remains out of reach for too
many Americans."
At one point, Dimon offered a defense of the dollar's status as the world's reserve
currency, arguing that the Chinese yuan isn't "fully convertible" like its American
counterpart, and warned of the possibility of capital controls and prohibitions against assets
like gold and cyptocurrency.
But the CEO was very candid about China...
"China's leaders believe America is in decline... The Chinese see an America that is
losing ground in technology, infrastructure and education – a nation torn and crippled
. . . and a country unable to coordinate government policies (fiscal, monetary, industrial,
regulatory) in any coherent way to accomplish national goals."
"Unfortunately," Dimon writes, "there is a lot of truth to this."
Warning of the real risks of stagflation, the banker warned
"...the United States could be perceived as a place that is inhospitable to capitalism and
capitalists," and he advised readers to think about "currency diversification, country
diversification, and asset class diversification."
And
as SovereignMan's Simon Black notes , Dimon then lists goes on to provide a wide-ranging
laundry list of problems that have been building for years in the United States– "I'll
give some examples, but if I tried to address them all this letter would become a book."
Dimon cites "a litigation and regulatory system that is costly, crippling small
businesses with red tape and bureaucracy ".
" terrible infrastructure planning and investment"
"huge waste and inefficiency at both the federal and state levels"
a lack of "effective immigration policies"
"we fail to properly fund pension obligations "
" income equality has gotten worse"
"social safety nets [are] poorly designed"
" 30% of Americans don't have enough savings to deal with unexpected expenses that total
as little as $400"
"Veterans [hospitals] . . . are broken"
"Almost all institutions – governments, schools, media and businesses – have
lost credibility in the eyes of the public. And perhaps for good reason: Many of our
problems have been around for a long time and are not aging well."
"Politics is increasingly divisive, and government is increasingly dysfunctional "
He also rails against the education and healthcare systems, saying:
"Our education and health issues come together in this alarming statistic: Seventy percent
of today's youth (ages 17-24) are not eligible for military service , essentially due to a
lack of proper education (basic reading and writing skills) or health issues (commonly
obesity or diabetes)."
Dimon goes on to explain that all of these problems "may explain why, over the last 10
years, the U.S. economy has grown cumulatively only about 18%. "
"Some think that this sounds satisfactory, but it must be put into context: In prior sharp
downturns (1974, 1982 and 1990), economic growth was 40% over the ensuing 10 years."
The country ultimately needs to "move beyond our differences and self-interest and act for
the greater good," Dimon said. "The good news is that this is fixable."
Of course, a strong economic rebound is good for JP Morgan, and waxing about the threat
posed by Big Tech could help the CEO push for less regulation even under a Democratic
Administration. Is Dimon once again just talking his book?
"... The adjectives used in the FAZ to describe Putin had overwhelmingly negative connotations, including: threatening, rough, aggressive, confrontational, anti-westem, power-political, untruthful, cool, calculated, cynical, harsh, abrasive, non-substantive (arguments) and implausible (arguments). ..."
"... The words used to describe Obama had a completely different tone: committed, fanatically welcomed, enthusiastic, conciliatory, praised, hopeful and resolute ..."
"... The former FAZ Washington correspondent Matthias Rub wrote the adulation to US President Bush cited above shortly before the Iraq War began in 2003, in violation of international law. One year later he received the Arthur F. Bums Award for a different article. The Arthur F. Bums Award is presented by Germany's Foreign Minister. So, who selects the winners today? ..."
An interesting undergraduate thesis from Munich put together a list of the adjectives and
adverbs used in select articles about Obama (USA) and Putin (Russia) in the Frankfurter Allgemeine
Zeitung between 2000 and 2012.
The words selected were ones that implied a value judgement in their description of Obama or
Putin. The adjectives used in the FAZ to describe Putin had overwhelmingly negative
connotations, including: threatening, rough, aggressive, confrontational, anti-westem,
power-political, untruthful, cool, calculated, cynical, harsh, abrasive, non-substantive
(arguments) and implausible (arguments).
The words used to describe Obama had a completely different tone: committed, fanatically
welcomed, enthusiastic, conciliatory, praised, hopeful and resolute :' In plain language:
The reporting in the once renowned FAZ newspaper is definitely not neutral, independent,
unbiased nor objective these days. So where is this bias coming from? Does this style of
reporting possibly have anything to do with the closeness that the FAZ's writers have to
certain elites and powerful circles? In the following chapters, we won't only be considering
the FAZ when it comes to this question. We will also look into why the mainstream media doesn't
even want you to imply that they're close to the elite.
Chapter one, scene two: A few years ago, the reporter Thomas Leif painted a rather
conspiratorial picture in the ARD television documentary Strippenzieher und Hinterzimmer
(Puppet Masters and Back Rooms). In it, journalists, ministers and party officials appeared to
all be sitting in the same boat, isolated from the common folk and getting along like
gangbustcrs. Viewers got to see how politics is made in secret meetings behind the scenes. The
film was about a corrupt world of cozy connections.4 What was being shown, however, wasn't a
conspiracy theory.
The film was controversial, because die people being shown in it were the perpetrators. They
thought that this form of corruption was completely normal. The journalists portrayed in the
documentary took it as an affront when they were simply asked about these secret networks
operating in the background.
... ... ...
The manipulation of the readers has been noticeable at the FAZ for many years. Dr. Heinz
Loquai gave a famous speech in 2003 where he said the following about the FAZ:
We learn from the FAZ's Washington correspondents that, among other things, Bush
studies the bible every day, prays regularly and bases his actions on the question, "What
would Jesus do?" The president is a "paragon of modesty and close to his people." There may
be "an arrogant bone or two in Bush's body," but he is "a man of love." His "portion of
missionary fervor" is "softened by statesmanlike prudence," through "patient waiting," the
"natural political talent's decision" has been "expressed." Although Bush may know that he is
not an intellectual, he can rely on "his political instinct, his wisdom and his natural
wit."
So (...) lectured, we can continue to count on the judgement and objectivity of leading
German daily and weekly newspapers' America correspondents! Embedded with the allied troops,
embedded in the political-media network in Washington - what's the difference? 16
The former FAZ Washington correspondent Matthias Rub wrote the adulation to US President
Bush cited above shortly before the Iraq War began in 2003, in violation of international law.
One year later he received the Arthur F. Bums Award for a different article. The Arthur F. Bums
Award is presented by Germany's Foreign Minister. So, who selects the winners today? The
jury includes, for example, the journalists Sabine Christiansen and Stefan Kornclius
(Sflddeutsche Zeitung).17 Keep these names in the mind. We will come across them and their
interesting connections quite often.
In truth, the West has a very long list of reasons for which to hate Putin and everything
Russian, but I believe that there is one reason which trumps them all: the western leaders
sincerely believed that they had defeated the USSR in the Cold War (even medals were
made to commemorate this event) and following the collapse of the former superpower and the
coming to power of a clueless, alcoholic puppet, the triumph of the West was total. At least in
appearance. The reality, as always, was much more complicated.
The causes and mechanisms of the collapse of the Soviet Union are not our topic today, so I
will just indicate that I believe that the USSR never "collapsed" but that it was deliberately
destroyed by the CPSU apparatus which decided to break up the country in order for the Party
and Nomenklatura to remain in power, not at the helm of the USSR, but at the helm of the
various ex-Soviet republics. Weak leaders and ideologies which nobody really believes in do not
inspire people to fight for their rulers. This is why the Russian monarchy collapsed, this is
why the masonic democracy of Kerenskii collapsed and this is why the Soviet Union collapsed
(this is also one of the most likely reasons for the final collapse of the US as a state).
Putin, who was not very well known in the West or, for that matter, in Russia, came to power
and immediately reversed Russia's course towards the abyss. First, he dealt with the two most
urgent threats, the oligarchs and the Wahabi insurrection in the Caucasus. Many Russians,
including myself, were absolutely amazed at the speed and determination of his actions. As a
result, Putin suddenly found himself one of the most popular leaders in Russian history.
Initially, the West went into a kind of shock, then through a process reminiscent of the
so-called " Kübler-Ross model " and,
finally, the West settled into a russophobic frenzy not seen since the Nazi regime in Germany
during WWII.
In this sequence, Russia committed two very different types of "crimes" (from the
AngloZionist point of view, of course):
The minor crime of doing what Russia actually did
and The much bigger crime of never asking the Empire for the permission to do so
The West likes to treat the rest of the planet like some kind of junior partner, with very
limited autonomy and almost no real agency (the best example is what the USA did to countries
like Poland or Bulgaria). If and when any such "junior" country wants to do something in its
foreign policy, it absolutely has to ask for permission from its AngloZionist Big Brother. Not
doing so is something akin to sedition and revolt. In the past, many countries were "punished"
for daring to have an opinion or, even more so, for daring to act on it.
It would not be inaccurate to summarize it all by saying that Putin flipped his finger to
the Empire and its leaders. That "crime of crimes" was what really triggered the current
anti-Russian hysteria. Soon, however, the (mostly clueless) leaders of the Empire ran into an
extremely frustrating problem: while the russophobic hysteria did get a lot of traction in the
West, in Russia it created a very powerful blowback because of a typical Putin "judo" move: far
from trying to suppress the anti-Russian propaganda of the West, the Kremlin used its power to
make it widely available (in Russian!) through the Russian media (I wrote about this in some
detail here and here ).
The direct result of this was two fold: first, the CIA/MI6 run "opposition" began to be
strongly associated with the russophobic enemies of Russia and, second, the Russian general
public further rallied around Putin and his unyielding stance. In other words, calling Putin a
dictator and, of course, a "new Hitler", the western PSYOPs gained some limited advantage in
the western public opinion, but totally shot itself in the leg with the Russian public.
I refer to this stage as the " phase one anti-Putin strategic PSYOP ". As for the
outcome of this PSYOP, I would not only say that it almost completely failed, but I think that
it had the exact opposite intended effect inside Russia.
A change of course was urgently needed.
The redirection of US PSYOPs against Putin and Russia
I have to admit that I have a very low opinion of the US intelligence community, including
its analysts. But even the rather dull US "Russia area specialist" eventually figured out that
telling the Russian public opinion that Putin was a "dictator" or a "killer of dissidents" or a
"chemical poisoner of exiles" resulted in a typically Russian mix of laughter and support for
the Kremlin. Something had to be done.
So some smart ass somewhere in some basement came up with the following idea: it makes no
sense to accuse Putin of things which make him popular at home, so let's come up with a new
list of accusations carefully tailored to the Russian public.
Let's call this a " phase two anti-Putin PSYOP operation ".
And this is how the "Putin is in cahoots with" thing began. Specifically, these accusations
were deployed by the US PSYOPs and those in its pay:
Putin is disarming Syria Putin will
sell out the Donbass Putin is a puppet of Israel and, specifically, Netanyahu Putin is a
corrupt traitor to the Russian national interests Putin is allowing Israel to bomb Syria (see
here )
Putin is selling the Siberian riches to China and/or Putin is subjugating Russia to China Putin
is corrupt, weak and even cowardly Putin was defeated by Erdogan in the Nagorno-Karabakh war
The above are the main talking points immediately endorsed and executed by the US strategic
PSYOPs against Russia.
Was it effective?
Yes, to some degree. For one thing, these "anti-Russian PSYOPS reloaded" were immediately
picked up by at least part of what one could call the "internal patriotic opposition" (much of
it very sincerely and without any awareness of being skillfully manipulated). Even more toxic
was the emergence of a rather loud neo-Communist (or, as Ruslan Ostashko often calls them
"emo-Marxist") movement (I personally refer to as a sixth
column ) which began an internal anti-Kremlin propaganda campaign centered on the
following themes:
"All is lost" (
всепропальщики
): that is thesis which says that nothing in Russia is right, everything is either wrong or
evil, the country is collapsing, so is its economy, its science, its military, etc. etc. etc.
This is just a garden variety of defeatism, nothing more. "Nothing was achieved since Putin
came to power": this is a weird one, since it takes an absolutely spectacular amount of mental
gymnastics to not see that Putin literally saved Russia from total destruction. This stance
also completely fails to explain why Putin is so hated by the Empire (if Putin did everything
wrong, like, say Eltsin did, he would be adored in the West, not hated!). All the elections in
Russia were stolen. Here the 5th (CIA/MI6 run) column and 6th column have to agree: according
to both of them, there is absolutely no way most Russians supported Putin for so many years and
there is no way they support him now. And nevermind the fact that the vast majority of polls
show that Putin was, and still is, the most popular political figure in Russia.
Finally, the big SNAFU with the pension reform definitely did not help Putin's ratings, so
he had to take action: he "softened" some of the worst provisions of this reform and,
eventually, he successfully sidelined some of the worst Atlantic Integrationists, including
Medvedev himself.
Sadly, some putatively pro-Russian websites, blogs and individuals showed their true face
when they jumped on the bandwagon of this 2nd strategic PSYOP campaign, probably with the hope
to either become more noticed, or get some funding, or both. Hence, all the nonsense about
Russia and Israel working together or Putin "selling out" we have seen so many times recently.
The worst thing here is that these websites, blogs and individuals have seriously misled and
distressed some of the best real friends of Russia in the West.
None of these guys ever address a very simple question: if Putin is such a sellout, and if
all is lost, why does the AngloZionist Empire hate Putin so much? In almost 1000 years of
warfare (spiritual, cultural, political, economic and military) against Russia, the leaders of
the West have always hated real Russian patriots and they have always loved the (alas, many)
traitors to Russia. And now, they hate Putin because he is such a terrible leader?
This makes absolutely no sense.
Conclusion: is a war inevitable now?
The US/NATO don't engage in strategic PYSOPs just because they like or dislike somebody. The
main purpose of such PSYOPs is to break the other side's will to resist . This was also
the main objective of both (phase one and phase two) anti-Putin PSYOPs. I am happy to report
that both phases of these PYSOPs failed. The danger here is that these failures have failed to
convince the leaders of the Empire of the need to urgently change course and accept the
"Russian reality", even if they don't like it.
Ever since "Biden" (the "collective Biden", of course, not the potted plant) Administration
(illegally) seized power, what we saw was a sharp escalation of anti-Russian statements. Hence,
the latest " uhu, he is a killer " -- this was no mistake by a senile mind, this was a
carefully prepared
declaration. Even worse, the Empire has not limited itself to just words, it also did some
important "body moves" to signal its determination to seek even further confrontation with
Russia:
There has been a lot of sabre-rattling coming from the West, mostly some rather
ill-advsied (or even outright stupid) military maneuvers near/along the Russian border. As I
have explained it a billion times, these maneuvers are self-defeating from a military point of
view (the closer to the Russian border, the more dangerous for the western military
force). Politically, however, they are extremely provocative and, therefore, dangerous. The
vast majority of Russian analysts do not believe that the US/NATO will openly attack Russia, if
only because that would be suicidal (the current military balance in Europe is strongly in
Russia's favor, even without using hypersonic weapons). What many of them now fear is that
"Biden" will unleash the Ukronazi forces against the Donbass, thereby "punishing" both the
Ukraine and Russia (the former for its role in the US presidential campaign). I tend to agree
with both of these statements.
At the end of the day, the AngloZionist Empire was always racist at its core, and that
empire is still racist : for its leaders, the Ukrainian people are just cannon fodder, an
irrelevant third rate nation with no agency which has outlived its utility (US analysts do
understand that the US plan for the Ukraine has ended in yet another spectacular faceplant such
delusional plans always end up with, even if they don't say so publicly). So why not launch
these people into a suicidal war against not only the LDNR but also Russia herself? Sure,
Russia will quickly and decisively win the military war, but politically it will be a PR
disaster for Russia as the "democratic West" will always blame Russia, even when she clearly
did not attack first (as was the case in 08.08.08, most recently).
I have already written about
the absolutely disastrous situation of the Ukraine three weeks ago so I won't repeat it
all here, I will just say that since that day things have gotten even much worse: suffice to
say that the Ukraine has moved a lot of heavy armor to the line of contact while the regime in
Kiev has now banned the import of Russian toilet paper (which tells you what the ruling gang
thinks of as important and much needed measures). While it is true that the Ukraine has become
a totally failed state since the Neo-Nazi coup, there is now a clear acceleration of the
collapse of not only the regime or state, but of the country as a whole. Ukraine is falling
apart so fast that one could start an entire website tracking only all this developing horror,
not day by day, but, hour by hour. Suffice to say that "Ze" has turned out to be even worse
than Poroshenko. The only thing Poroshenko did which "Ze" has not (yet!) is to start a war.
Other than that, the rest of what he did (by action or inaction) can only be qualified as "more
of the same, only worse".
Can a war be prevented?
I don't know. Putin gave the Ukronazis a very stern warning (" grave consequences for Ukraine's statehood as such ").
I don't believe for one second that anybody in power in Kiev gives a damn about the Ukraine or
the Ukrainian statehood, but they are smart enough to realize that a Russian counter-attack in
defense of the LDNR and, even more so, Crimea, might include precision "counter-leadership"
strikes with advanced missiles. The Ukronazi leaders would be well-advised to realize that they
all have a crosshair painted on their heads. They might also think about this: what happened to
every single Wahabi gang leader in Chechnya since the end of the 2nd Chechen war? (hint: they
were all found and executed). Will that be enough to stop them?
Maybe. Let's hope so.
But we must now keep in mind that for the foreseeable future there are only two options left
for the Ukraine: " a horrible ending or a horror without end " (Russian
expression).
The best scenario for the people of the Ukraine would be a (hopefully
relatively peaceful) breakup of the country
into manageable parts . The worst option would definitely be a full-scale war against
Russia.
Judging by the rhetoric coming out of Kiev these days, most Ukrainian politicians are firmly
behind option #2, especially since that is also the only option acceptable to their overseas
masters. The Ukrainians have also adopted a new military doctrine (they call it a "military
security strategy of Ukraine") which declares Russia the aggressor state and military adversary
of the Ukraine (see here for a machine translation of the official text).
This might be the reason why Merkel and Macron recently had a videoconference with Putin
("Ze" was not invited): Putin might be trying to convince Merkel and Macron that such a war
would be a disaster for Europe. In the meantime, Russia is rapidly reinforcing her forces along
the Ukrainian border, including in Crimea.
But all these measures can only deter a regime which has no agency. The outcome shall be
decided in Washington DC, not Kiev. I am afraid that the traditional sense of total impunity of
US political leaders will, once again, give them a sense of very little risk (for them
personally or for the USA) in triggering a war in the Ukraine. The latest news on the
US-Ukrainian front is the delivery by the USN of 350 tonnes of military equipment in Odessa.
Not enough to be militarily significant, but more than enough to further egg on the regime in
Kiev to an attack on the Donbass and/or Crimea.
In fact, I would not even put it past "Biden" to launch an attack on Iran while the world
watches the Ukraine and Russia go to war. After all, the other country whose geostrategic
position has been severely degraded since Russia moved her forces to Syria is Israel, the one
country which all US politicians will serve faithfully and irrespective of any costs (including
human costs for the USA). The Israelis have been demanding a war on Iran since at least 2007,
and it would be very naive to hope that they won't eventually get their way. Last, but not
least, there is the crisis which Blinken's condescending chutzpah triggered with China which,
so far, has resulted in an economic war only, but which might also escalate at any moment,
especially considering all the many recent anti-Chinese provocations by the US Navy.
Right now the weather in the eastern Ukraine is not conducive to offensive military
operations. The snow is still melting, creating very difficult and muddy road conditions
(called " rasputitsa " in Russian) which greatly inhibit the movement of forces and
troops. These conditions will, however, change with the warmer season coming, at which point
the Ukronazi forces will be ideally poised for an attack.
In other words, barring some major development, we might be only weeks away from a major
war.
We must not forget President Putin's outrageous opinion piece in the New York Times of
September 11th 2013: delivered at the same time as he had the impertinence to propose
the voluntary relinquishment of all chemical weapons by Syria -- thwarting the traditional
wholesale bombing campaign that the "Allies" were working up to. This was an unforgivable
affront to the USA -- and to Obama in particular; who had only just invoked his "red line".
It made him look ridiculous -- and a man in his position can't afford to look ridiculous.
This behaviour by Mr. Putin has never been forgotten or forgiven and it will be quite a
while before the New York Times prints another oped by him.
Russia was "back": in 2013 Russia stopped the planned US/NATO attack on Syria (the
pretext here was Syrian chemical weapons). In 2014 Russia gave her support to the
Novorussian uprising against the Ukronazi regime in Kiev and, in the same year, Russia also
used her military to make it possible for the local population to vote on a referendum to
join Russia. Finally, in 2015, Russia stunned the West with an extremely effective military
intervention in Syria.
Don't forget what Russia did the Georgia's American trained and supplied military in
2009.
This was an unforgivable affront to the USA -- and to Obama in particular; who had only
just invoked his "red line". It made him look ridiculous -- and a man in his position can't
afford to look ridiculous.
Excellent observation.
To deal with contemporary western elites is, to a great extent, to deal with Satan
himself. The devil- and presumably, his minions- does not mind confrontation or opposition
anywhere as much as he hates being the object of derision.
"The devil the prowde spirite cannot endure to be mocked." -- St. Thomas More
"why does the AngloZionist Empire hate Putin so much?"
I have an explanation, but that would tend to get me labelled a "sixth columnist".
It is obvious to anyone who does not believe that Putin is the Saviour Of Russia, but just
a neoliberal politician who is moderately better than Yeltsin, and whose real alternatives,
not Quislings like Navalny but real alternatives, are all far more nationalist and not
beholden to international capital than he is. Since the 90s are now over, and the attempt to
destroy Russia has failed, how does one ensure that the country does not become even stronger
and, crucially, more assertive?
One possible answer is interesting: keep demonising the man in power, *even though you
know that demonising him hardens support behind him*. Especially since it hardens support
behind him. As long as you keep attacking him, the Russian people support him more, making it
less likely for someone who would be more nationalist and less neoliberal to take charge.
I've come to think that the whole "Putin the Devil" thing is pushed so hard by the
corporate-communist-left (aside: I do struggle these days with what to call them) mostly as a
distraction. "Hey! Look over there! A BAD MAN!" (and pay no mind to what I'm doing over here,
flooding the country with replacements, thrashing the constitution, coming up with vaccine
passports and enabling a totalitarian technocracy).
In fact, it's a necessary hallmark of ALL totalitarian leftist regimes to have a huge
"outside enemy" who threatens the very existence of the state and is used to distract from
domestic troubles. Try to find a single totalitarian state without one.
So the U.S. has everything to gain and little to lose (Biden gov thinks anyways) by
goading Ukraine into "taking back Crimea." The U.S. is committed to fight that war down the
very last Ukrainian.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba announced this week that the country's National
Security and Defense Council had approved a strategy that is aimed at retaking Crimea and
reintegrating the strategically important peninsula.
Christopher Caldwell delivered what I thought was a good assessment of Putin in 2017, and
this excellent piece by The Saker complements and updates it for me. I think Putin is even
more reviled than ever by the U.S. Dems, because Putin = a national-sovereignty proponent =
Trump.
I play online chess -- speedy games, and so I have a lot of experience with players from
Russia and Ukraine. They tend to favor what chess players call "quiet moves." Is this a
manner of thought, a philosophy, that can be extrapolated to government? (U.S. players, by
contrast, tend to be more impetuous and impulsive in their chess style.)
To be fair, the neocon's feel that way about everyone - they embrace the role of paranoid
imperialist because that's a relatively accessible way to get funded in the DC policy world.
The striking thing is the hubris - they're just going to fight everyone all at the same time
and it will somehow be okay in the end, no cost to them.
"To be fair, the neocon's feel that way about everyone"
Did you consider the article linked to @59?
Michael Hudson quote from the article, for your consideration.
(take it or leave it)
The Americans want war. The people that Biden has appointed have an emotional hatred of
Russia. I've spoken to government people who are close to the Democratic Party, and they've
told me that there's a pathological emotional desire for war with Russia, largely stemming
from the fact that the Tzars were anti-Semitic and there's still the hatred about their
ancestors: "Look what they did to my great-grandfather." And so they're willing to back the
Nazis, back the anti-Semites in Ukraine. They're willing to back today's anti-Semites all
over the world as long as they're getting back at this emotional focus on a kind of post
19th-century economy.
"...And this is because Zbig [Brezinski] is a Polish aristocrat with lost family estate on
outskirts of Lvov. Any fool knows emigre info is useless and emigre aristocrat most useless
of all."
Brezinski's keyboard was hacked before age 3; its output foreordained by unknown sources
he mis-owned as "self". A well-oiled robot producing brilliant compositions of high-quality,
effective communication promoting madness and contagious ruin of non-aristos.
Ghost Ship: That same Nazi scum that the OSS/CIA brought into the US after WW2 was also
involved in the assassinations of JFK, MLK, RFK, and probably Malcolm X.
In the last several years the CIA and other intel agencies have cemented their control of
the US that is now a fascist rogue state that is marching the American people into a war with
peer powers. As usual the American people will believe US elites telling them the war is
started by a foreign power. Americans around me are blind as bats. And they think I'm dumb
for not taking experimental mRNA vaccines.
@ptb (63) "...they're just going to fight everyone all at the same time and it will
somehow be okay in the end, no cost to them."
Correct, there will be no personal physical cost to them, as in getting maimed or killed
in a war. But on the other side of the ledger, the profits that flow to the MIC are massive,
and many, if not most of the neocons are in some way connected to it, either by consultancy,
think-tank positions, corporate board positions, TV sinecures, etc. In other words, they are
cashing in big-time on their political views and policy recommendations.
@ptb (63) "...they're just going to fight everyone all at the same time and it will
somehow be okay in the end, no cost to them."
Correct, there will be no personal physical cost to them, as in getting maimed or killed
in a war. But on the other side of the ledger, the profits that flow to the MIC are massive,
and many, if not most of the neocons are in some way connected to it, either by consultancy,
think-tank positions, corporate board positions, TV sinecures, etc. In other words, they are
cashing in big-time on their political views and policy recommendations.
For decades, America styled itself the 'indispensable
nation' that led the world & it's now seeking to sustain that role by emphasizing a new Cold War-style battle against
'authoritarianism'. But it's a dangerous fantasy.
It seems a week cannot go by without US
Secretary of State Antony Blinken
bringing
up the specter of the 'rules-based international order' as an excuse for meddling in the affairs of another state or region.
The most recent crisis revolves around allegations that
China
has
dispatched a fleet of more than 200 ships, part of a so-called 'maritime militia', into waters of the South China Sea claimed by
the Philippines. China says that these vessels are simply fishing boats seeking shelter from a storm. The Philippines has
responded by dispatching military ships and aircraft to investigate. Enter Antony Blinken, stage right:
"The United States stands with our ally, the Philippines, in the face of the PRC's maritime
militia amassing at Whitsun Reef,"
Blinken
tweeted
.
"We
will always stand by our allies and stand up for the rules-based international order."
Blinken's message came a mere 18 hours after he tweeted about his meeting in Brussels with NATO.
"Our alliances were created to defend shared values,"
he
wrote
.
"Renewing
our commitment requires reaffirming those values and the foundation of international relations we vow to protect: a free and
open rules-based order."
Our rules, our order
What this actually means, of course, is that the order is rules-based so long as it is the nation called America that sets these
rules and is accepted as the world's undisputed leader.
Blinken's fervent embrace of the 'rules-based international order' puts action behind the words set forth in the recently
published 'Interim National Security Strategy Guidance', a White House
document
which
outlines
President Joe Biden'
s vision
"for how
America will engage with the world."
While the specific term 'rules-based international order' does not appear in the body of the document, the precepts it represents
are spelled out in considerable detail, and conform with the five pillars of the
"liberal
international order"
as set forth by the noted international relations scholars,
Daniel
Duedney
and
G.
John Ikenberry
, in their ground-breaking
essay
,
'The nature and sources of liberal international order', published by the Review of International Studies in 1999.
The origins of this
"liberal international order"
can be traced back to the end of the
Second World War and the onset of a Cold War between Western liberal democracies, helmed by the United States, and the communist
bloc nations, led by the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. The purpose of this order was simple – to maintain a
balance of power between the US-led liberal democracies and their communist adversaries, and to maintain and sustain US hegemony
over its liberal democratic allies.
This was accomplished through five basic policy
'pillars': Security co-binding; the embrace of US hegemony; self-limitation on the part of US allies; the politicization of
global economic institutions for the gain of liberal democracies; and Western
"civil
identity."
All five are emphasized in Biden's interim guidance, in which the president openly advocates for
"a
stable and open international system."
It notes that
"the alliances, institutions,
agreements, and norms underwriting the international order the United States helped to establish are being tested."
The faltering empire's flaws and inequities
Biden also observed that the restoration of this international order
"rests on a core
strategic proposition: The United States must renew its enduring advantages so that we can meet today's challenges from a
position of strength. We will build back better our economic foundations; reclaim our place in international institutions; lift
up our values at home and speak out to defend them around the world; modernize our military capabilities, while leading first
with diplomacy; and revitalize America's unmatched network of alliances and partnerships."
All five of Duedney's and Ikenberry's policy 'pillars' can be found embedded in these – and other – statements contained in the
guidance.
There is a defensive tone to Biden's guidance, which notes that
"rapid
change and mounting crisis"
have exposed
"flaws and inequities"
in the US-dominated
international system which
"have caused many around the world – including many Americans – to
question its continued relevance."
Here Biden runs into the fundamental problem of trying to justify and sustain a model of economic-based global hegemony which was
founded at a time when the existence of a Western liberal democratic
"order"
could be
justified as a counter to the Soviet-led communist bloc. The Cold War ended in 1990. The 'international rules-based order' that
was created at the behest of the US to prevail in this conflict continued, however. It seems that the US wasn't simply satisfied
with preventing the spread of communism; its raison d'être instead transitioned from being the leader of an alliance of liberal
democracies, to being the global hegemon, using the very system devised to confront communism to instead install and sustain the
US as the undisputed dominant power in the world.
This trend began in the immediate aftermath of the end of the Cold War, where the US had the opportunity to pass the baton of
global leadership to the United Nations, an act that would have given legitimacy to the notion of an 'international order'.
This, however, proved a bridge too far for the neo-liberal tendencies of the administration of President Bill Clinton, who
continued the Cold War-era practice of using the UN as a vehicle to promote US policy prerogatives at the expense of the
international 'order'. Clinton's Secretary of State Madeleine Albright helped coin the term
"indispensable
nation"
when defining America's post-Cold War role in the world (it is notable that Blinken recently praised Albright in a
tweet
,
noting that
"her tenacity & effectiveness left the US stronger & more respected globally,"
and
adding
"she's a role model for me & so many of our diplomats."
)
The arrogance and hubris contained in any notion of a single nation being
"indispensable"
to
the global order is mind-boggling and is reflective of a disconnect with both reality and history on the part of those embracing
it.
The myth of indispensability
The unsustainability of the premise of American 'indispensability' was demonstrated by both the events of September 11, 2001, and
the inability of the US to deal with its aftermath. Had the US embraced and acted on President George H. W. Bush's notion of a
"new
world order"
in the aftermath of the Cold War, it would have found itself as a vital world leader working in concert with a
global community of nations to confront the scourge of Islamic fundamentalist-based terrorism. But this was not to be.
Instead, the 'indispensable nation' was exposed as a fraud, with many in the world recognizing the US not as a power worthy of
emulation, but rather as the source of global angst. This
rejection
of
America's self-anointed role as global savior extended to many Americans too, who were tired of the costs associated with serving
as the world's police force.
Indeed, this exhaustion with global intervention, and the costs accrued, helped create the foundation of electoral support for
Donald Trump's rejection of the
"rules-based international order"
in favor of a more
distinct
"America first"
approach to global governance. What gave Trump's policy so much
"punch"
was
the fact that not only did many American citizens reject the
"rules-based international
order,"
but so did much of the rest of the world.
Repairing the damage done by four years of Trump has become the number one priority of the Biden administration. To do this, both
Biden and Blinken recognize that they simply cannot return to the policy formulations that existed before Trump took office; that
ship has sailed, and trying to sell the American people and the rest of the world on what many viewed as a failed policy
construct (i.e., unilateral, uncontested American hegemony) was seen as an impossible task.
Instead, the Biden administration is seeking to reinvent the original premise of the
'rules-based international order' by substituting Russian and Chinese 'authoritarianism' in place of Soviet-led communism as a
threat which liberal democracies around the world willingly and enthusiastically rally around the US to confront.
"Authoritarianism is on the global march,"
Biden's guidance observed,
"and
we must join with like minded allies and partners to revitalize democracy the world over. We will work alongside fellow
democracies across the globe to deter and defend against aggression from hostile adversaries. We will stand with our allies
and partners to combat new threats aimed at our democracies"
and which
"undermine the
rules and values at the heart of an open and stable international system."
Biden concluded his essay in dramatic fashion.
"This moment is an inflection point,"
he
noted.
"We are in the midst of a fundamental debate about the future direction of our
world. No nation is better positioned to navigate this future than America. Doing so requires us to embrace and reclaim our
enduring advantages, and to approach the world from a position of confidence and strength. If we do this, working with our
democratic partners, we will meet every challenge and outpace every challenger. Together, we can and will build back better."
No longer the world's undisputed No.1
While postulated as a statement of American strength, Biden's concluding remarks actually project not only the inherent
insecurity of the US today, but also its root causes. The fact that the US needs to
"reclaim
our enduring advantages"
implies that we lost them, and illustrates that these so-called advantages are not nearly as
enduring as Biden would like to think.
"Building back better"
is an admission of
weakness, a recognition that the notion of an 'indispensable nation' is an artificial construct; most nations no longer accept
America as the world leader.
The reality is that the US is one of the most powerful nations in the world. That
position, however, is no longer uncontested; China has emerged as the equal of the US in many metrics used to measure global
power and influence, and superior in some.
Moreover, China operates effectively in a multi-polar global reality,
recognizing that the era of the American singularity is over. Russia, India, Brazil, and the European collective all represent
polar realities whose existence and influence exists independent of the US.
The US, however, cannot function in such a world.
While there is a growing
recognition among American politicians that the post-Cold War notion of the US being the sole-remaining superpower has run its
course, the only alternative these politicians can offer is the attempt to return to a bi-polar world which has the US at the
head of its liberal democratic 'partners', facing off against the forces of 'authoritarianism'. This vision, however, is
unrealistic, if for no other reason that the world no longer views Western liberal democracy as 'good', and authoritarianism as
'evil'.
This reality is evident to much of the rest of the world. Why, then, would US policy makers embrace a formulation doomed to fail?
The answer is simple – the US, as it exists today, needs the 'rules-based international order' to remain relevant. Relevant, as
used here, means globally dominant.
US politicians who operate on the national level cannot get elected on platforms that reject the 'indispensable' role of the
country, even if many Americans and most of the world have. US economic dominance is in large part sustained by the very systems
that underpin the 'rules-based international order' – the World Trade Organization and the World Bank. US geopolitical relevance
is sustained by Cold War-era military alliances.
An unviable, unsustainable future
An American retreat from being the 'indispensable' power, and a corresponding embrace of a leadership role based upon a more
collegial notion of shared authorities, would not mean the physical demise of the US – the nation would continue to exist as a
sovereign entity. But it would mean an end to the psychological reality of America as we know it today – a quasi-imperial power
whose relevance is founded on compelled global hegemony. This model is no longer viable. The fact that the Biden administration
has chosen to define its administration through an ardent embrace of this failed system is proof positive that the survival of
post-Cold War American is existentially connected to its ability to function as the world's 'indispensable nation'.
American exceptionalism is a narcotic that fuels the country's domestic politics more than global geo-political reality. The
'rules-based international order' that underpins this fantasy is unsustainable in the modern era and makes the collapse of the
"exceptional"
United
States inevitable.
Watching the Biden administration throw its weight behind a US-dominated 'rules-based
international order' is like watching the Titanic set sail; it is big, bold, and beautiful, and its fate pre-ordained.
lay_arrow
2banana
37 minutes ago
remove
link
We
are just about to see how that is going to work out in the Ukraine.
It seems a week cannot go by without US
Secretary
of State Antony Blinken
bringing up the specter of the 'rules-based international order' as an
excuse for meddling in the affairs of another state or region.
TimeHasCome
29 minutes ago
I
live near a huge military base and every night since the inauguration of Dementia Joe there has been
cannon fire and mortar fire every night . This nut is going to get us in a war.
TimeHasCome
29 minutes ago
I
live near a huge military base and every night since the inauguration of Dementia Joe there has been
cannon fire and mortar fire every night . This nut is going to get us in a war.
kanoli
31 minutes ago
The
rules-based international order requires US approval or national approval to put troops on the ground in
another country. The US troops in Syria are there illegally, Mr. Blinken. Is the rules-based
international order only for the other countries?
TBT or not TBT
14 minutes ago
"Syria" is a place on a map, but demonstrably is no longer a sovereign country able to manage its own
territory. Dozens of factions and foreign powers operate in its former territory.
Apollo Capricornus Maximus
10 minutes ago
rules based international order = laser guided joint direct attack munitions
End Times Prophecy
25 minutes ago
The
international criminals against humanity, WMD using, international mass murderer, repeated international
declarations of war , international terrorists, permanently Oath of Office breaching and violating
subversive, seditious, traitors and more are blathering about being a part of a rules-based international
order?
Clearly these maniacs are an exceptionally extreme danger to themselves and the entire World and more.
Chain Man
3 minutes ago
(Edited)
The
US should have a law (lol) that no politicians can make any money other than his regular pay when coming
into office plus his pay from their elected position (on going tabs on income while in Office.). Don't
like it don't run !
The
problem with being a leader is you have to get involved in the Nations problem most of the time, then the
USA gets charged with being the problem. Leave um the hell alone if they screw with us blow um away. End
the Foreign Aid and we will end their smart *** crap.
Just work with the foreign Nations we can screw these drawn out treaties
Mearsheimer is an interesting cat. His whole conception of international relations seems
to be that it is necessarily zero-sum, and that the general model is that of US regional
hegemony, as in the Monroe Doctrine in the 19th century and the frankly neocolonial
relationship that exists today. (and he makes no attempt to dress it up as anything other
than the brute power relations). His thesis is that there must be a conflict, and that the US
will successfully get all of China's neighbors to join the US in opposing the rise of China.
Importantly, if you go back to look at talks he gave and how they've evolved in the last 15
years, Mearsheimer included Russia in his "anti-China balancing coalition" list, up until
2013-2014. More recent talks have him leaning essentially on Japan, Australia, and India,
with South Korea and ASEAN determined to avoid picking sides as Mearsheimer would have it,
and most of central Asia, plus Iran and Pakistan, already on the Chinese side.
I also take issue with Mearsheimer's singular focus on the regional-hegemony model,
although I think it does provide good insights into the thinking behind US policy. But in
reality, there have been long stretches of history, European history in particular, where
there was in fact a balance of power on the regional level, not to mention on the global
level.
Besides that, with significant numbers of nuclear weapons, the historical analogies of the
first half of the 20th century pretty much go out the window. No decisive war between
superpowers is possible, except by accident, and in that case it will not be decisive in the
way he means. It's all proxy conflict from the 1950s on. And when it comes to proxy conflict,
the clear imperative for third parties, from the history of the last 70 years, is to avoid
becoming a proxy battleground.
Even before the targets in Yemen had been "legally" designated as
a Foreign Terrorist Organization Obama used cluster bombs to shred
dozens of women and children in a failed attempt to hit members of
"al Qaida in Yemen (AQY)".
.
The war crime immediately became a dirty Obama secret, covered up
with the help of the MSM, in particular ABC.
.
An enthusiastic White House had leaked to their contacts at ABC that
Obama had escalated the War on Terror, taking it to another country,
Yemen. This was December 17, 2009 only days after Obama had returned
from his ceremony in Oslo where he proudly accepted the Nobel Peace
Prize.
.
ABC was thrilled with their scoop and in manly voices announced
the escalation in the War on Terror.
.
The very next day ABC went silent forever about it, joining the cover up
of a war crime.
.
Hillary Clinton, by the way, committed her own act of cover up.
Covering her butt by backdating a memo.
.
The designation of a organization as a FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization)
is not official nor legal until it is published in the Federal Register.
An oversight? Obama attacked Yemen before Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
had done the paperwork to make the killing legal?
.
The designation was not published until a month later, January 19, 2010.
Hillary Clinton back dated the memo she published in the Register with the date of
December 14, 2009, to somewhat cover her butt.
.
Obama's acceptance speech in Oslo for the Nobel Peace Prize was December 10th.
.
Yemen leaders agreed to participate in Obama's coverup saying it was their
own Yemen forces that had accidentally shredded dozens of women and children.
.
Obama was grateful to the Yemen leaders. The Yemen leaders were not
honored in Oslo. But, ironically, Obama ended his speech honoring women
and children, days before he ordered their slaughter.
.
Obama in Oslo, December 10, 2009:
.
"Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty
still takes the time to teach her child, scrapes together what
few coins she has to send that child to school -- because she
believes that a cruel world still has a place for that child's
dreams.
.
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will
always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the
intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity. Clear-eyed,
we can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace.
We can do that -- for that is the story of human progress; that's the
.
hope
.
of all the world; and at this moment of challenge,
that must be our work here on Earth.
.
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
.
One week later Obama shredded dozens of women and children in Yemen
and covered it up.
.
Here is ABC's Brian Ross using his most masculine voice to boast about Obama's attack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHcg3TNSRPs
.
Wikileaks cable corroborates evidence of US airstrikes in Yemen (Amnesty Intl)
https://www.amnesty.org/en/press-releases/2010/12/wikileaks-cable-corroborates-evidence-us-airstrikes-yemen/
.
Actual cable at Wikileaks: https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/10SANAA4_a.html
.
More at ABC [12/18/2009]: https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236 https://web.archive.org/web/20190624203826/https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236
">https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236">https://web.archive.org/web/20190624203826/https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236 https://web.archive.org/web/20190725171012/https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cr
">https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cr">https://web.archive.org/web/20190725171012/https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cr
Stefani
Reynolds/Bloomberg via Getty Images
This story is part of a group of stories called
Finding the best ways to do good.
One of the greatest challenges facing democratic societies in the 21st century is the loss of faith in public
institutions.
The internet has been a marvelous invention in lots of ways, but it has also unleashed a tsunami of misinformation and
destabilized political systems across the globe. Martin Gurri, a former media analyst at the CIA and the author of the
2014 book
The
Revolt of the Public
, was way ahead of the curve on this problem.
Gurri spent years surveying the global information landscape. Around the turn of the century, he noticed a trend: As the
internet gave rise to an explosion of information, there was a concurrent spike in political instability. The reason, he
surmised, was that governments lost their monopoly on information and with it their ability to control the public
conversation.
One of the many consequences of this is what Gurri calls a "crisis of authority." As people were exposed to more
information, their trust in major institutions -- like the government or newspapers -- began to collapse.
Gurri's book became something of a cult favorite among Silicon Valley types when it was released and its insights have
only become more salient since. Indeed,
I've
been thinking more and more about his thesis in the aftermath of the 2020 election and the
assault
on the US Capitol
on January 6. There are lots of reasons why the insurrection happened, but one of them is the
reality that millions of Americans believed -- really believed -- that the presidential election was stolen, despite a
complete lack of evidence. A Politico poll conducted shortly after the election found that
70
percent
of Republicans thought the election was fraudulent.
That's what a "crisis of authority" looks like in the real world.
And it's crucial to distinguish this crisis from what's often called the "epistemic crisis" or the "post-truth" problem.
If Gurri's right, the issue isn't just
that
truth suddenly became less important; it's that people stopped believing in the institutions charged with communicating
the truth. To put it a little differently, the gatekeeping institutions lost their power to decide what passes as truth
in the mind of the public.
I reached out to Gurri to explore the implications of his thesis. We talk about what it means for our society if
millions of people reject every claim that comes from a mainstream institution, why a
phenomenon
like QAnon
is fundamentally a "pose of rejection," and why he thinks we'll have to "reconfigure" our democratic
institutions for the digital world we now inhabit.
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.
Sean Illing
Have elites -- politicians, corporate actors, media and cultural elites --
lost
control of the world?
Martin Gurri
Yes and no. It's a wishy-washy answer, but it's a reality.
They would have completely lost control of the world if the public in revolt had a clear program or an organization or
leadership. If they were more like the Bolsheviks and less like QAnon, they'd take over the Capitol building. They'd
start passing laws. They would topple the regime.
But what we have is this collision between a public that is in repudiation mode and these elites who have lost control
to the degree that they can't hoist these utopian promises upon us anymore because no one believes it, but they're still
acting like zombie elites in zombie institutions. They still have power. They can still take us to war. They can still
throw the police out there, and the police could shoot us, but they have no authority or legitimacy. They're stumbling
around like zombies.
Sean Illing
You like to say that governments have lost the ability to dictate the stories a society tells about itself, mostly
because the media environment is too fragmented. Why is that so significant?
Martin Gurri
When you analyze the institutions that we have inherited from the 20th century, you find that they are very top-down,
like pyramids. And the legitimacy of that model absolutely depends on having a semi-monopoly over information in every
domain, which they had in the 20th century. There was no internet and there was a fairly limited number of information
sources for the public. So our ruling institutions had authority because they had a very valuable commodity:
information.
So I was an analyst at the CIA looking around the world at open information, at the global media. And I can tell you, it
was like a trickle compared to today. If a president, here or somewhere else, was giving a speech, the coverage of it
was confined to major outlets or television stations. But when the tsunami of information hit around the turn of the
century, the legitimacy of that model instantly went into crisis because you now had the opposite effect. You had an
overabundance of information, and that created a lot of confusion and anarchy.
Sean Illing
I'm curious how you weigh the significance of material factors in this story. It's not just that there's more
information, we've also seen a litany of failures in the 21st century -- from Hurricane Katrina to the forever wars to
the financial crisis and on and on. Basically, a decade of institutions failing and misleading citizens, in addition to
the deepening inequality, the deaths of despair, the fact that this generation of Americans is doing materially worse
than previous ones.
How big a role has this backdrop of failures played in the collapse of trust?
Martin Gurri
I would say that what matters is less the material factors you mention than the public's perception of these factors.
Empirically, under nearly every measure, we are better off today than in the 20th century, yet the public is much
angrier and more distrustful of government institutions and the elites who manage them. That difference in perception
arises directly from the radical changes in the information landscape between the last century and our own.
With few exceptions, most market democracies have recovered from the 2008 financial crisis. But the public has not
recovered from the shock of watching supposed experts and politicians, the people who posed as the wise pilots of our
prosperity, sound and act totally clueless while the economy burned. In the past, when the elites controlled the flow of
information, the financial collapse might have been portrayed as a sort of natural disaster, a tragedy we should unify
around our leadership to overcome. By 2008, that was already impossible. The networked public perceived the crisis
(rightly, I think) as a failure of government and of the expert elites.
It should be a truism that material conditions matter much less than expectations. That was true during the Great
Depression and it's true today. The rhetoric of the rant on the web feeds off extreme expectations -- any imperfection in
the economy will be treated as a crisis and a true crisis will be seen as the Apocalypse.
Take the example of Chile. For 40 years, it had high economic growth, rising into the ranks of the wealthiest nations.
During this time, Chile enjoyed a healthy democracy, in which political parties of left and right alternated in office.
Everyone benefited. Yet in 2019, with many deaths and much material destruction, the Chilean public took to the streets
in revolt against the established order. Its material expectations had been deeply frustrated, despite the country's
economic and political successes.
Sean Illing
Just to be clear, when you talk about this "tsunami" of information in the digital age, you're not talking about more
truth, right?
Martin Gurri
As
Nassim
Taleb
pointed out, when you have a gigantic explosion of information, what's exploding is noise, not signal, so
there's that.
As for truth, that's a tricky subject, because a lot of elites believe, and a lot of people believe, that truth is some
kind of Platonic form. We can't see it, but we know it's there. And often we know it because the science says so.
But that's not really how truth works. Truth is essentially an act of trust, an act of faith in some authority that is
telling you something that you could not possibly come to realize yourself. What's a
quark
?
You believe that there are quarks in the universe, probably because you've been told by people who probably know what
they're talking about that there are quarks. You believe the physicists. But you've never seen a quark. I've never seen
a quark. We accept this as truth because we've accepted the authority of the people who told us it's true.
Sean Illing
I'm starting to hate the phrase
"post-truth"
because
it implies there was some period in which we lived in truth or in which truth was predominant. But that's misleading.
The difference is that elite gatekeeping institutions can't place borders on the public conversation and that means
they've lost the ability to determine what passes as truth, so now we're in the Wild West.
Martin Gurri
That's a very good way to put it. I would say, though, that there was a shining moment when we all had truth. They are
correct about that. If truth is really a function of authority, and if in the 20th century these institutions really had
authority, then we did have something like truth. But if we had the information back then that we have today, if we had
all the noise that we have today, nothing would've seemed quite as true because we would've lacked faith in the
institutions that tried to tell us.
Sean Illing
What does it mean for our society if an "official narrative" isn't possible? Because that's where we're at, right?
Millions of people will never believe any story or account that comes from the government or a mainstream institution.
Martin Gurri
As long as our institutions remain as they are, nothing much will change. What that means is more of the same -- more
instability, more turbulence, more conspiracy theories, more distrust of authorities. But there's no iron law of history
that says we have to keep these institutions the way they are. Many of our institutions were built around the turn of
the 20th century. They weren't that egalitarian or democratic. They were like great, big pyramids.
But we can take our constitutional framework and reconfigure it. We've done it once already, and we could do it again
with the digital realm in mind, understanding the distance we once had between those in power and ordinary citizens is
gone forever. It's just gone. So we need people in power who are comfortable in proximity to the public, which many of
our elites are not.
Sean Illing
I do want to at least point to an apparent paradox here. As you've said, because of the internet, there are now more
voices and more perspectives than ever before, and yet at the same time there's a massive "herding effect," as a result
of which we have more people talking about fewer subjects. And that partly explains how you get millions of people
converging on something like QAnon.
Martin Gurri
Yeah, and that's very mysterious to me. I would not have expected that outcome. I thought we were headed to ever more
dispersed information islands and that that would create a fragmentation in individual beliefs. But instead, I've
noticed a trend toward conformism and a crystallizing of very few topics. Some of this is just an unwillingness to say
certain things because you know if you said them, the internet was going to come after you.
But I think Trump had a lot to do with it. The amount of attention he got was absolutely unprecedented. Everything was
about him. People were either against him or for him, but he was always the subject. Then came the pandemic and he
simply lost the capacity to absorb and manipulate attention. The pandemic just moved him completely off-kilter. He never
recovered.
Sean Illing
But we're in a situation in which ideas, whether it's QAnon stuff or anything else, are getting more hollow and more
viral at the same time -- and that seems really bad moving forward.
Martin Gurri
I'm not quite that pessimistic. You can find all kinds of wonderful stuff being written about practically every aspect
of society today by people who are seeing things clearly and sanely. But yeah, they're surrounded by a mountain of viral
crap. And yet we're in the early days of this transformation. We have no idea how this is going to play out.
There has always been a lot of viral crap going around, and there have always been people who believe crazy stuff,
particularly crazy stuff that doesn't impact their immediate lives. Flat earthers still get on airplanes, right? If
you're a flat earther, you're not a flat earther enough to not get in an airplane and disrupt your personal life. It's
not really a belief, it's basically giving the finger to the establishment.
Sean Illing
It's a pose.
Martin Gurri
Yeah, it's a pose of rejection. QAnon is a pose of rejection. There are very many flavors of it, but what they have in
common is they're saying all these ideas you have and all the facts you're cramming in my face -- it's all a prop for the
powerful and I'm rejecting it.
Sean Illing
It's an important point because a lot of us treat QAnon like it's some kind of epistemological problem, but it's not
really that at all. It's actually much more difficult than that. And even if we set aside QAnon, the fact that the vast
majority of Republicans still believe the 2020 election was fraudulent speaks to the breadth of the problem.
Martin Gurri
Right, it's a problem of authority. When people don't trust those charged with conveying the truth, they won't accept
it. And at some point, like I said, we'll have to reconfigure our democracy. Our politicians and institutions are going
to have to adjust to the new world in which the public can't be walled off or controlled. Leaders can't stand at the top
of pyramids anymore and talk down to people. The digital revolution flattened everything. We've got to accept that.
I really do have hope that this will happen. The boomers who grew up in the old world and can't move beyond it are going
to die out, and younger people are going to take their place. That will raise other questions and challenges, of course,
but there will be a changing of the guard and we should welcome it.
Millions of people rely on Future Perfect to understand the most effective ways to create a better world. We focus on
what's important but not necessarily new -- things like the future of meat, artificial intelligence, morality, and
threats to society, including pandemics. Financial contributions from our readers help support our journalism and
enable our staff to continue to offer our articles, podcasts, and newsletters for free.
Please
consider making a contribution to Vox today from as little as $3
.
The West is declining because the elite production system has failed. The worst type of
mediocre grinders are pulling the levers of power. The plebes are revolting because
immigration, taxes, inflation and the tenuous over-complication of society (fragility) has
positioned a great deal of people in precarious positions. Might as well loot Target.
I don't agree with it. Violence is the inverse of the type of impulse control necessary
for a functioning society.
But impulse control is gone from our overlords as well. So long noblesse oblige. The
plebes loot Target while the gentry loots the treasury. Race blindness is a courtesy for
civilized people. Ignore the social implications because the enemy has no race. They are
global elites with no homes and no loyalty. They may not be sending their best but our worst
are sending out the invitations.
We can't go on ignoring the class violence hollowing out the West. The elites today are
actively trying to make everyone poorer. Not themselves, obviously. How is that going to
induce cops out of the donut shops? The culture wars are making me a retarded Marxist.
Marxist in the class conflict sense. Retarded in the spergy libertarian view that economics
and politics are intertwined to create the type of society that, as Menken says, we deserve
good and hard.
It was the preamble to Putin's most important message in years to what he called the
American "establishment, the ruling class". He said the US leadership is determined to have
relations with Russia, but only "on its own terms".
Although they think that we are the same as they are, we are different people. We have a
different genetic, cultural and moral code. But we know how to defend our own interests.
And we will work with them, but in those areas in which we ourselves are interested, and
on those conditions that we consider beneficial for ourselves. And they will have to reckon
with it. They will have to reckon with this, despite all attempts to stop our development.
Despite the sanctions, insults, they will have to reckon with this.
This is new for Putin. He has for years made the point, always politely, that Western powers
need to deal with Russia on a basis of correct diplomatic protocols and mutual respect for
national sovereignty, if they want to ease tensions.
But never before has he been as blunt as this, saying in effect: do not dare try to judge us
or punish us for not meeting what you say are universal standards, because we are different
from you. Those days are now over.
One domino falls on another which falls on another, etc. But one has to push the first
domino over.
I hope the Germans build Nordstream II and then III and IV and as many as they like. It
will prevent the US gas industry from selling any LNG to Europe. That will keep the price of
NatGas in America nice and low. That will keep luring electro-grid power-makers away from
coal. Hopefully it would finalistically and irreversibly exterminate the power-grid
thermal-coal industry in America.
The meme is that "Biden called Putin a killer." Looking at the video, Biden just answered
"yes" to that snake Stephanopolous's opening, "So you know Vladimir Putin, do you think he's
a killer?" Same thing with "Will you make Putin pay a price?"
Maybe I've just missed it, but I haven't seen any place where the Gerontocrat in Chief has
emitted those gaffes heard 'round the world from his own volition, rather than in the kind of
setup that ABC News put up there to spin the pedals of the Narrative Bicycle that Putin
authorized meddling in the US electoral games
Apparently Biden was either too senile or too inherently stupid to realize what gangrenous
filth the subhuman Clintonite scum Stephanopoulis is, was and always will be. And put his
stupid senile foot into Stephanopoulis's clever little bear trap.
Europe and Germany appear to be disappointingly wishy washy over Russia, they seemed happy
to play poodle and follow the lead of the UK in expelling Russian diplomats after Theresa May
falsely claimed that the presence of Novichok indicated a "state actor", a standard the US
with its various drone assassinations (such as of Qasem Soleimani) is never held to. I
suspect German attitudes to US foreign policy are driven mostly by concerns over exports,
knowing full well the US propensity to link trade with supporting their foreign policy, the
US remains the sole biggest destination for German exports (from what I can tell via google
at a little over 8% total exports, in and around $110 billion per annum) and in the absence
of the Euro being the global reserve currency I would imagine for the time being they (and by
extension Europe as a whole) will remain somewhat reluctant foreign policy poodles to the US,
so long at least as the new cold war remains cold.
It's a bit difficult for Germany to 'Step up' when the majority of their clout is derived
from their close association with the US. While they have strong backing from some of Europe,
they do not have the strong backing of a number of key members since the introduction of
uneven austerity measures in 2009 which means without the US, they would not be able to
portray themselves as leaders
Alex Cockburn (RIP) once commented that he didn't think GWB was as bad as some people
thought -- because through his (admittedly awful) recklessness in Iraq and elsewhere he was
inexorably driving the American Empire into failure and eventual dissolution. (My paraphrase,
mind you.)
Dog, I detested GWB and remember the huge anti-war march in London that day. And had tears
in my eyes at 2AM in a Tokyo hotel watching Obama being inaugurated. But St Barack if
anything extended W's wars -- along with fellow warmongers Hillary and Biden, of course.
Trump conversely tried to remove troops from Afghanistan only to have the Permanent War Party
(Dems & Repubs) deny him the chance.
Well, as the post points out, Biden's foreign policy advisors are definitely the B Team
but seem to have the hubris of the A Team. A bad combination.
As for the new Russia-China axis, I recommend Pepe Escobar's writings; he has been
following this for some time.
Anyway, please excuse the rambling -- I meant to praise LowellHighlander for his final
sentence. (^_^)
The United States government is able to impose its will on all the world's countries. The rest
of the world, even some of the strongest imperialist countries of the Global North, lie prostrate at the feet of the U.S. What
is the source of this seemingly impregnable power? Which of course leads to the next question: How long can it last?
The U.S. moves against any country that dares to act on a belief that its resources should be
for its own people's benefits rather than maximizing profits of multinational corporations or prioritizes the welfare of its
citizens over corporate profit or simply refuses to accept dictation in how it should organize its economy. The military is
frequently put to use, as are manipulation of the United Nations and the strong arms of the World Bank and International
Monetary Fund (IMF). But sanctions are a frequently used tool, enforced on countries, banks and corporations that have no
presence in the U.S. and conduct business entirely outside the United States. The U.S. can impose its will on national
governments around the world, using multilateral institutions to force governments to act in the interest of multinational
capital, even when that is opposite the interests of the country itself or that country's peoples. And when a country persists
in refusing to bend to U.S. demands, sanctions imposing misery on the general population are unilaterally imposed and the rest
of the world is forced to observe them.
In short, the U.S. government possesses a power that no country has ever held, not even Britain
at the height of its empire. And that government, regardless of which party or what personality is in the White House or in
control of Congress, is ruthless in using this power to impose its will.
This power is most often wielded within an enveloping shell of propaganda that claims the U.S.
is acting in the interest of "democracy" and maintaining the "rule of law" so that business can be conducted in the interest
of a common good. So successful has this propaganda been that this domination is called the "Washington Consensus." Just who
agreed to this "consensus" other than Washington political elites and the corporate executives and financial speculators those
elites represent has never been clear. "Washington diktat" would be a more accurate name.
Much speculation among Left circles exists as to when this domination will be brought to an end, with many commentators
believing that the fall of the U.S. dollar is not far off and perhaps China will become the new center of a system less
imperialistic. On the Right, particularly in the financial industry, such speculation is far from unknown, although there of
course the downfall of the dollar is feared. In financial circles, however, there is no illusion that the end of dollar
supremacy in world economics is imminent.
There are only two possible challengers to U.S. dollar hegemony: The European Union's euro and
China's renminbi. But the EU and China are very much subordinated to the dollar, and thus not in a position to counter U.S.
dictates. Let's start here, and then we'll move on to the mechanics of U.S. economic hegemony over the world, which rests on
the dollar being the global reserve currency and the leveraging of that status to control the world's multilateral
institutions and forcing global compliance with its sanctions.
Europe "helpless" in the face of U.S. sanctions
A February 2019 paper published by the German Institute for International and Security Affairs,
discussing the inability of EU countries to counteract the Trump administration's pullout from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of
Action, the multilateral nuclear deal with Iran, flatly
declared
the EU "helpless"
: "In trying to shield EU-based individuals and entities with commercial interests from its adverse
impact, European policy-makers have recently been exposed as more or less helpless."
The legislative arm of the EU, the European Parliament, was no more bullish. In a paper
published in November 2020, the Parliament wrote this about
U.S.
extraterritorial sanctions
: "[T]his bold attempt to prescribe the conduct of EU companies and nationals without even
asking for consent challenges the EU and its Member States as well as the functioning and development of transatlantic
relations. The extraterritorial reach of sanctions does not only affect EU businesses but also puts into question the
political independence and ultimately the sovereignty of the EU and its Member States."
No such open worries are going to be said in public by the Chinese government. But is China
better prepared than the EU? Mary Hui, a Hong Kong-based business journalist,
wrote
in
Quartz
, "China is actually far more vulnerable to US sanctions than it will let on, even if the sanctions are
aimed at individuals and not banks. That's because the primary system powering the world's cross-border financial transactions
between banks, Swift, is dominated by the US dollar." We'll delve into this shortly. As a result of that domination, Ms. Hui
wrote, "the US has outsize control over the machinery of international transactions -- or, as the Economist put it, 'America is
uniquely well positioned to use financial warfare in the service of foreign policy.' "
Grand
Place, Brussels (photo by Wouter Hagens)
In 2017, then U.S. Treasury
Secretary Steven Mnuchin
threatened
China with sanctions
that would cut it off from the U.S. financial system if it didn't comply with fresh United Nations
Security Council sanctions imposed on North Korea in 2007; he had already threatened unilateral sanctions on any country that
trades with North Korea if the
United
Nations didn't apply sanctions
on Pyongyang.
So neither Brussels or Beijing are in a position, at this time, to meaningfully challenge U.S.
hegemony. That hegemony rests on multiple legs.
The world financial platform that the U.S. ultimately controls
The use (or, actually, abuse) of the two biggest multilateral financial institutions, the World
Bank and the IMF, are well known. The U.S., as the biggest vote holder and through the rules set up for decision-making,
carries a veto and thus imposes its will on any country that falls into debt and must turn to the World Bank or IMF for a
loan. There also are the U.S.-controlled regional banks, such as the Asian Development Bank and Inter-American Development
Bank, that impose U.S. dictates through the terms of their loans.
Also important as an institution, however, is a multilateral financial institution most haven't
heard of: The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, known as SWIFT. Based in Brussels, SWIFT is the
primary platform used by the world's financial institutions "to securely exchange information about financial transactions,
including payment instructions, among themselves." SWIFT says it is officially a member-owned cooperative with more than
11,000 member financial institutions in more than 200 countries and territories.
That sounds like it is a truly global entity. Despite that description, the U.S. holds ultimate
authority over it and what it does. U.S. government agencies, including the CIA, National Security Agency and Treasury
Department, have access to the SWIFT transaction database. Payments in U.S. dollars can be seized by the U.S. government even
when the transaction is between two entities outside the U.S. And here we have a key to understanding.
Beyond the ability of U.S. intelligence agencies to acquire information is the status of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve
currency, the foundation of the world capitalist system of which SWIFT is very much a component and thus subject to dictates the
same as any other financial institution. What is a reserve currency? This
succinct
definition
offered by the Council on Foreign Relations provides the picture:
"A reserve currency is a foreign currency that a central bank or treasury holds as part of its country's formal foreign
exchange reserves. Countries hold reserves for a number of reasons, including to weather economic shocks, pay for imports,
service debts, and moderate the value of its own currency. Many countries cannot borrow money or pay for foreign goods in
their own currencies -- since much of international trade is done in dollars -- and therefore need to hold reserves to ensure a
steady supply of imports during a crisis and assure creditors that debt payments denominated in foreign currency can be made."
The currency mostly used is the U.S. dollar, the Council explains:
"Most countries want to hold their reserves in a currency with large and open financial markets, since they want to be sure
that they can access their reserves in a moment of need. Central banks often hold currency in the form of government bonds,
such as U.S. Treasuries. The U.S. Treasury market remains by far the world's largest and most liquid -- the easiest to buy into
and sell out of bond market[s]."
If you use dollars, the U.S. can go after you
Everybody uses the dollar because everybody else uses it. Almost two-thirds of foreign exchange reserves are held in U.S.
dollars. Here's the breakdown of the four most commonly held currencies, as of the first quarter of 2020:
U.S. dollar 62%
EU euro 20%
Japanese yen 4%
Chinese renminbi 2%
That 62 percent gives the U.S. government its power to not only impose sanctions unilaterally, but to force the rest of the world
to observe them, in conjunction with the use of the dollar as the primary currency in international transactions. In some
industries, it is almost the only currency used. To again turn to the Council on Foreign Relations explainer:
"In addition to accounting for the bulk of global reserves, the dollar is the currency of choice for international trade.
Major commodities such as oil are primarily bought and sold using U.S. dollars. Some countries, including Saudi Arabia, still
peg their currencies to the dollar. Factors that contribute to the dollar's dominance include its stable value, the size of
the U.S. economy, and the United States' geopolitical heft. In addition, no other country has a market for its debt akin to
the United States', which totals roughly $18 trillion.
The dollar's centrality to the system of global payments also increases the power of U.S. financial sanctions. Almost all
trade done in U.S. dollars, even trade among other countries, can be subject to U.S. sanctions, because they are handled by
so-called correspondent banks with accounts at the Federal Reserve. By cutting off the ability to transact in dollars, the
United States can make it difficult for those it blacklists to do business."
Sanctions imposed by the U.S. government are effectively extra-territorial because a non-U.S. bank that seeks to handle a
transaction in U.S. dollars has to do so by clearing the transaction through a U.S. bank; a U.S. bank that cleared such a
transaction would be in
violation
of the sanctions
. The agency that monitors sanctions compliance, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), insists that
any transaction using the dollar comes under U.S. law and thus blocking funds "is a
territorial
exercise of jurisdiction
" wherever it occurs, even if no U.S. entities are involved. Even
offering
software as a service
(or for download) from United States servers is under OFAC jurisdiction.
Two further measures of dollar dominance are that about half of all cross-border bank loans and international debt securities
are
denominated in U.S.
currency
and that 88 percent of all foreign-exchange transactions in 2019
involved
the dollar
on one side. That forex domination has remained largely unchanged; the figure was 87 percent in April 2003.
Dollar dominance cemented at end of World War II
The roots of the dollar as the global reserve currency go back to the creation of the Bretton Woods system in 1944 (named for the
New Hampshire town where representatives of Allied and other governments met to discuss the post-war monetary system as victory
in World War II drew closer). The World Bank and IMF were created here. To stabilize currencies and make it more difficult for
countries to reduce the value of their currencies for competitive reasons (to boost exports), all currencies were pegged to the
dollar, and the dollar in turn was convertible into gold at $35 an ounce. Thus the dollar became the center of the world
financial system, which cemented U.S. dominance.
By the early 1970s, the Nixon administration believed that the Bretton Woods monetary system no longer sufficiently advantaged
the United States despite its currency's centrality within the system cementing U.S. economic suzerainty. Because of the system
of fixing the value of a U.S. dollar to the price of gold, any government could exchange the dollars it held in reserve for U.S.
Treasury Department gold on demand.
Rising world supplies of dollars and domestic inflation depressed the value of the dollar, causing the Treasury price of gold to
be artificially low and thereby making the exchange of dollars for gold at the fixed price
an
excellent deal
for other governments. The Nixon administration refused to adjust the
value
of the dollar
, instead in 1971 pulling the dollar from the gold standard by refusing to continue to exchange foreign-held
dollars for gold on demand. Currencies would now float on markets against each other, their values set by speculators rather than
by governments, making all but the strongest countries highly vulnerable to financial pressure.
The world's oil-producing states dramatically raised oil prices in 1973. The Nixon administration eliminated U.S. capital
controls a year later, encouraged oil producers to park their new glut of dollars in U.S. banks and adopted policies to encourage
the banks to lend those
deposited
dollars to the South
. But perhaps "encourage" is too mild a word. The economist and strong critic of imperialism
Michael
Hudson once wrote
, "I was informed at a White House meeting that U.S. diplomats had let Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries
know that they could charge as much as they wanted for their oil, but that the United States would treat it as an act of war not
to keep their oil proceeds in U.S. dollar assets."
Restrictions limiting cross-border movements of capital were opposed by multi-national corporations that had moved production
overseas, by speculators in the new currency-exchange markets that blossomed with the breakdown of Bretton Woods and by neoliberal
ideologues, creating decisive momentum within the U.S. for the
elimination
of capital controls
. The ultimate result of these developments was to make the dollar even more central to world trade and thus
further enhance U.S. control. Needless to say, bipartisan U.S. policy ever since has been to maintain this control.
U.S. sanctions in action: The cases of Cuba and Iran
Two examples of U.S. sanctions being applied extraterritorially are those imposed on Cuba and Iran. (There are many other examples,
including that of Venezuela.) In the case of Cuba, any entity that conducts business with Cuba is barred from doing business in the
U.S. or with any U.S. entity; foreign businesses that are owned by U.S. companies are strictly prohibited from doing any business
with Cuba. Any company that had done business in Cuba must cease all activities there if acquired by a U.S. corporation. Several
companies selling life-saving medical equipment and medicines to Cuba
had
to cease doing so
when acquired by a U.S. corporation.
Meanwhile, U.S. embassy personnel have reportedly threatened firms in countries such as Switzerland, France, Mexico and the
Dominican Republic with commercial reprisals unless they canceled sales of goods to Cuba such as soap and milk. Amazingly, an
American
Journal of Public Health
report quoted a July 1995 written communication by the U.S. Department of Commerce in which the
department said those types of sales
contribute
to "medical terrorism"
on the part of Cubans! Well, many of us when we were, say, 5 years old might have regarded soap with
terror, but presumably have long gotten over that. Perhaps Commerce employees haven't.
The sanctions on Cuba have been repeatedly tightened over the years. Joy Gordon, writing in the
Harvard International Law
Journal
in January 2016,
provides
a vivid picture
of the difficulties thereby caused:
"The Torricelli Act [of 1992] provided that no ship could dock in the United States within 180 days of entering a Cuban port.
This restriction made deliveries to Cuba commercially unfeasible for many European and Asian companies, as their vessels would
normally deliver or take on shipments from the United States while they were in the Caribbean. The Torricelli Act also prohibited
foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies from trading with Cuba. The Helms-Burton Act, enacted in 1996, permitted U.S. nationals
to bring suit against foreign companies that were doing business in Cuba and that owned properties that had been abandoned or
confiscated after the revolution. Additionally, the Helms-Burton Act prohibited third-party countries from selling goods in the
United States that contained any components originating in Cuba. This significantly impacted Cuba's major exports, particularly
sugar and nickel.
[T]he shipping restrictions in the Torricelli Act have increased costs in several ways, such as Cuba sometimes having to pay
for ships carrying imports from Europe or elsewhere to return empty because they cannot stop at U.S. ports to pick up goods.
Shipping companies have partially responded by dedicating particular ships for Cuba deliveries; but in most cases, they tend to
designate old ships in poor condition, which then leads to higher maritime insurance costs."
However distasteful we find the religious fundamentalist government of Iran, U.S. sanctions, which are blunt weapons, have caused
much hardship on Iranians. The same restrictions on Cuba apply to Iran. The Iranian government said in September 2020 that it
has
lost $150 billion
since the Trump administration withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal and that it is hampered from importing food
and medicines.
The Trump administration's renewed sanctions were imposed unilaterally and against the expressed policies of all other signatories
-- Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia. With those governments unable to restrain Washington, businesses from around the world
pulled out to avoid getting sanctioned. EU countermeasures were ineffective -- small fines didn't outweigh far larger U.S. fines,
European companies are subject to U.S. sanctions and favorable judgments in European courts are unenforceable in U.S. courts.
Sascha Lohmann, author of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs paper,
wrote
:
"Well ahead of the deadlines set by the Trump administration and absent any enforcement action, major European and Asian
companies withdrew from the otherwise lucrative Iranian market. Most notably, this included [SWIFT,] which cut off most of the
more than 50 Iranian banks in early November 2018, including the Central Bank of Iran, after they again became subject to U.S.
financial sanctions. [T]he exodus of EU-based companies has revealed an inconvenient truth to European policy-makers, namely
that those companies are effectively regulated in Washington, D.C. [T]he secretary of the Treasury can order U.S. banks to
close or impose strict conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent or payable-through accounts on behalf of a
foreign bank, thereby closing down access to dollarized transactions -- the 'Wall Street equivalent of the death penalty.' "
The long arm of U.S. sanctions stretches around the world
The idea that sanctions can be the "Wall Street equivalent of the death penalty" is not a figment of the imagination. Two examples
of sanctions against European multinational enterprises demonstrate this.
In 2015, the French bank BNP Paribas was given a penalty of almost $9 billion for violating U.S. sanctions by processing dollar
payments from Cuba, Iran and Sudan. The bank also pleaded guilty to two criminal charges. These penalties were handed down in U.S.
courts and prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice. The chief executive officer of the bank
told
the court
"we deeply regret the past misconduct." The judge overseeing the case declared the bank "not only flouted U.S. foreign
policy but also provided support to governments that threaten both our regional and national security," a passage highlighted in
the
Department's
press release
announcing the settlement.
Why would a French bank agree to these penalties and do so in such apologetic terms? And why would it accept the preposterous idea
that Cuba represents any security threat to the U.S. or that a French bank is required to enforce U.S. foreign policy? As part of
the settlement,
Reuters
reported
, "regulators banned BNP for a year from conducting certain U.S. dollar transactions, a critical part of the bank's
global business." And that gives us the clue. Had the bank not settled its case, it risked a permanent ban on access to the U.S.
financial system, meaning it could not handle any deals denominated in dollars. Even the one-year ban
could
have triggered an exodus
of clients in several major industries, including oil and gas.
Viñales
Valley, Pinar del Rio province, Cuba (photo by Adam Jones adamjones.freeservers.com)
This was completely an extraterritorial application of U.S. law. An International Bar Association
summary
of the case
noted, "the transactions in question were not illegal under French or EU law. Nor did they fall foul of France's
obligations under the World Trade Organization or the United Nations; no agreements between France and the US were violated. But as
they were denominated in dollars, the deals ultimately had to pass through New York and thus came under its regulatory authority."
It does not take direct involvement in financial transactions to run afoul of the long arm of U.S. sanctions. A Swiss company,
Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiques (SITA), was forced to agree to pay
$8
million to settle allegations
that it provided blacklisted airlines with "software and/or services that were provided from,
transited through, or originated in the United States." Among the actions punished were that SITA used software originating in the
U.S. to track lost baggage and used a global lost-baggage tracing system hosted on servers in the United States. Retrieving baggage
is a service most people would not consider a high crime.
Can the EU or China create an alternative?
Dropping the widespread use of the dollar and substituting one or more other currencies, and setting up alternative financial
systems, would be the logical short-term path toward ending U.S. financial hegemony. The German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle,
in
a 2018 report
, quoted the German foreign minister, Heiko Maas, "We must increase Europe's autonomy and sovereignty in trade,
economic and financial policies. It will not be easy, but we have already begun to do it." DW reported that the European Commission
was developing a system parallel to SWIFT that would allow Iran to interface with European clearing systems with transactions based
on the euro, but such a system never was put in place. In January 2021, as the new Biden administration took office,
Iran
dismissed it entirely
, Bloomberg reported: "European governments have 'no idea' how to finance the conduit set up two years ago,
known as Instex, and 'have not had enough courage to maintain their economic sovereignty,' the Central Bank of Iran said in comments
on Twitter."
It would seem that Teheran's dismissal is warranted. The European Parliament, in its paper on U.S.
sanctions
being imposed extraterritorially
, could only offer liberal weak-tea ideas, such as "Encourage and assist EU businesses in
bringing claims in international investor-state arbitration and in US courts; Complaints against extraterritorial measures in the
[World Trade Organization]." Such prescriptions are unlikely to have anyone in Washington losing sleep.
What about China? Beijing has actually created a functioning alternative to the World Bank and IMF, the
Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank
. Just on the basis of the new bank representing a bad example (from Washington's perspective),
the U.S. government leaned heavily on Australia and other countries sufficiently firmly that Canberra initially declined to join the
bank despite its initial interest, nor did Indonesia and South Korea, although all three did later join. There is a possibility of
one-sidedness here, however, as China has by far the
biggest
share of the vote
, 27 percent, dwarfing No. 2 India's 7 percent, giving Beijing potential veto power. And with US$74 billion in
capitalization (less than the goal of $100 billion set in 2014), it can't realistically be a substitute for existing multilateral
financial institutes.
China has also set up an alternative to SWIFT, the
Cross-border
Interbank Payment System
(CIPS), a renminbi-denominated clearing and settlement system. CIPS says it has participants from 50
countries and regions, and processes US$19.4 billion per day. But that's well less than one percent of the $6 trillion SWIFT handles
daily. The Bank of China, the country's central bank, is on the record of seeking an alternative to the dollar system so that it can
evade any U.S. sanctions. "A good punch to the enemy will save yourself from hundreds of punches from your enemies," a 2020 Bank of
China report said. "We need to get prepared in advance, mentally and practically."
The report said if Chinese banks are deprived of access to dollar settlements, China should consider
ceasing
the use of the U.S. dollar
as the anchor currency for its foreign exchange controls.
That is easier said than done -- China holds $1.1 trillion in U.S. government debt issued by the U.S. Treasury Department. That total
is second only to Japan, and Beijing's holdings comprise 15 percent of all U.S. debt held by foreign governments. The
South
China Morning Post
admits that China
holds
such large reserve assets
of U.S. debt "largely due to its status as a 'safe haven' for investment during turbulent market
conditions." Although Beijing seeks an erosion of dollar dominance and fears that U.S. economic instability could result in another
world economic downturn, its use of the safe haven is nowhere near at an end. "While it is clear that China is keen to lessen its
dependence on US government debt, experts believe that Beijing is likely to continue buying US Treasuries, as there are few
risk-free low cost substitutes," the
Morning Post
wrote.
Coupled with the restrictions on renminbi conversion, Chinese institutions are today far from a position of challenging current
global financial relations. The U.S. investment bank Morgan Stanley
recently
predicted
that the renminbi could represent five to 10 percent of foreign-exchange reserves by 2030, up from the current two
percent. Although that would mean central banks around the world would increase their holdings of the Chinese currency, it would not
amount to any real threat to dollar dominance.
No empire, or system, lasts forever
The bottom line question from all of the above is this: Will this U.S. dominance come to an end? Stepping back and looking at this
question in a historical way tells us that the answer can only be yes, given that there has been a sequence of cities that have been
the financial center. Centuries ago, the seat of a small republic such as Venice could be the leading financial center on the
strength of its trading networks. Once capitalism took hold, however, the financial center was successively located within a larger
federation that possessed both a strong navy and a significant fleet of merchant ships (Amsterdam); then within a sizeable and
unified country with a large enough population to maintain a powerful navy and a physical presence throughout an empire (London);
and finally within a continent-spanning country that can project its economic and multi-dimensional military power around the world
(New York).
No empire, whatever its form, lasts forever. But knowledge of the sequence of capitalist centers tells us nothing of timing. Each
successive new financial locus was embedded in successively larger powers able to operate militarily over larger areas and with more
force. What then could replace the U.S.? The European Union has its effectiveness diluted by the many nationalisms within its sphere
(and thus nationalism acts as a weakening agent for the EU whereas it is a strengthening agent for the U.S. and China). China's
economy is yet too small and retains capital controls, and its currency, the renminbi, isn't fully convertible. U.S. Treasury bills
remain the ultimate safe haven, as shown when investors poured into U.S. debt during crises such as the 2008 collapse, even when
events in the U.S. are the trigger.
There are no other possible other contenders, and both the EU and China, as already discussed, are in no position to seriously
challenge U.S. hegemony.
Here we have a collision of possibilities: The transcending of capitalism and transition to a new economic system or the decreasing
functionality of the world capitalist system should it persist for several more decades. Given the resiliency of capitalism, and the
many tools available to it (not least military power), the latter scenario can't be ruled out although it might be unlikely. Making
any prediction on the lifespan of capitalism is fraught with difficulty, not least because of the many predictions of its collapse
for well over a century. But capitalism as a
system
requires infinite growth
, quite impossible on a finite planet and all the more dire given there is almost no place on Earth
remaining
into
which it can expand
.
Although we can't know what the expiration date of capitalism will be, it will almost certainly be sometime in the current century.
But it won't be followed by something better without a global movement of movements working across borders with a conscious aim of
bringing a better world into being. In the absence of such movements, capitalism is likely to hang on for decades to come. In that
scenario, what country or bloc could replace the U.S. as the center? And would we want a new center to dictate to the rest of the
world? In a world of economic democracy (what we can call socialism) where all nations and societies can develop in their own way,
in harmony with the environment and without the need to expand, and with production done for human need rather than corporate
profit, there would no global center or hegemon and no need for one. Capitalism, however, can't function without a center that uses
financial, military and all other means to keep itself in the saddle and the rest of the world in line.
Yes, the day of U.S. dethronement will come, as will
the
end of capitalism
. But the former is not going to happen any time soon, however much millions around the world wish that to be
so, and the latter is what we should be working toward. A better world is possible; a gentler and kinder capitalism with a different
center is not.
History doesn't repeat, but it sure as hell rhymes.
The Revolutionary and Civil war was fought against finance capital; where said capital
emanated mostly from London. By 1912 the U.S. was no longer Industrial Capitalist, but had
been usurped by Finance Capitalism, and of course the (((usual suspects))) were pulling
strings in the background.
WW2 was the now finance capitalist allies against the industrial capitalist axis
powers.
The run up to WW2 had the axis "industrial capitalist" powers exit the London based
finance capitalist "sterling" system. Churchill even admitted to the reason why the allies
attacked.
Germany's most unforgivable crime before the Second World War was her attempt to
extricate her economic power from the world's trading system and to create her own exchange
mechanism which would deny (((world finance))) its opportunity to profit.
Finance capital exported jobs from the U.S. and the West toward China; this in order to
take wage arbitrage. China then rope-a-dopes the dummies from the west, and uses its state
credit and industrial capitalist system to acquire intellectual know-how, and climb the
industrial curve.
Finance capitalist are slowly being cut-out of taking wage arbitrage from China and
realize that their "assets" over there, can be taken by the Chinese state at any time. Now
they want war to secure their asset position, and to buy more of China at a war time fire
sale price.
Finance capital runs the same playbook over and over. The bad guys won in WW1 and 2. The
(((international))) finance class works behind the scenes to take sordid gain on humanity,
including mass death.
If your government is festooned with ne0-con Jews, then that should be strong signal that
your country is not sovereign, but instead is operated by stealth with finance capital and
its oligarchs.
This time around is different, China and Russia will exit the dollar system, and the
western finance capitalist class can do nothing but make idle threats. Some will argue that
the West will resort to nukes.
Maybe? I'm assuming that our (((friends))) are not completely insane, as they would lose
their capital and asset position. Their greed will stop them from destroying themselves, and
us.
"If your government is festooned with ne0-con Jews, then that should be strong signal
that your country is not sovereign, but instead is operated by stealth with finance capital
and its oligarchs. "
You are a wise man Mefobills
If your government is festooned with ne0-con Jews, then that should be strong signal
that your country is not sovereign, but instead is operated by stealth with finance capital
and its oligarchs.
"When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt, but protects the corrupt from you
– you know your nation is doomed."
Actually, it is the ***American people*** who are fucked. The little people that is.
Fucked on behalf of Israel/Neocons, the MIC, the Neolibs, and the other "owners" of the
country.
The good news is that when the above have thoroughly looted the country, and the rest of
the world sheds the by then worthless US dollar, and the City on the Hill becomes the
Toothless Slum on the Hill,
@Anonymous that a strong American military and national security posture is the best
guarantor of peace and the survival of our values and civilization.
Stavridis has been at the forefront of the mass slaughter known as the implementation of the
Oded Yinon Plan for Eretz Israel:
From 2002 to 2004, Stavridis commanded Enterprise Carrier Strike Group, conducting combat
operations in the Persian Gulf in support of both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation
Enduring Freedom.
Stavridis "oversaw operations in Afghanistan, Libya, Syria." In short, this prominent
racketeer is dripping with the blood of hundreds of thousands of the victims.
Edited for clarity; racial slurs are removed... Paradoxically recently due to summer riots
the attitude toward Zionism among the US public slightly improved, as least as far as domestic
policies are concerted...
American Renaissance has done important work, but it is ultimately useless because it
pulls its punches or willfully misses what should be the main target: Zionist Supremacist
Power. Take Jared Taylor's commentary of the US military in the video below. It's pure
Pat-Condell. He blames everything but will not name the power behind the mess. Shhhh about
the Zionists.
https://www.bitchute.com/embed/03vYmvgpmBQi/
At this point, why should Taylor lament that Mexican-American soldiers proudly display the
Mexican flag? Why not, when the US flag represents nothing abroad but 'twerking', Zionist
supremacism, Wars for Israel, mindless animus toward Russia, ridiculous paranoia about China,
nonstop hatred toward Iran, complete nonsense about Venezuela, BLM stupidity, and global
dissemination of globo-homo ludicrousness? Americanism meant something when
Anglo-Americans(and those properly Anglo-Americanized) ruled the nation with pride and
confidence. Then, Americanism was based on the Great Compromise: A move toward a more
merit-and-rule-based on the part of Anglo-Americans who took the land from the Indians,
brought blacks in chains, and encouraged mass-immigration to develop the land. In return,
non-Anglos would acknowledge the Anglo-foundation of America and try to be Good Americans.
That compromise is no longer relevant because the US is now totally Zionist-supremacist,
meaning the New Americanism is predicated on just about everyone and everything revolving
around the question of "Is it great for Zionists?" If Zionists want it, they get it
eventually. No wonder the First and Second Amendments are now hanging by a thread. Zionists
don't like the Constitution now that they got total power.
Other than Zionists, Jared Taylor should be blaming his own Wasp kind. Why did they hand
over power to the Zionists almost completely? That was the beginning of much of the rot
since. Taylor bitches about blacks, Mexicans, and etc. not being properly patriotic in the
new order, but who created the new order? Zionists spearheaded the making of New America, but
Wasps just played along. If Wasps are such worthless cucks to Zionists, why should it be
surprising that nonwhites would no longer respect whites? Of course, given that most
nonwhites would find it odd if Zionists told them, "Americanism = Zionist Greatness",
Zionists encourage the next-best-thing, which is anti-whiteness or 'scapewhiting'(scapegoat
whitey for everything), as it unites all nonwhites with Zionists in the War on Whiteness. War
on Whiteness or WOW is great for Zionists as it morally shames and paralyzes whites into
having no pride and prestige, which translates into having no will and agency. Filled with
shame and 'white guilt', whites become mired in mode of redemption, the terms of which are
decided by Zionists who advise Total Support for Zion, More Wars for Israel, More Diversity,
and More Globo-Homo(proxy of Zionist Power).
The source of the problem is the Zionist-White relations. When whites handed over power to
Zionists, Zionists made the key decisions, and those have been premised on
whatever-necessary-to-secure-Zionist-power. #1 priority for Zionists is then White
Submissivism to Zionist Supremacism. If Taylor will not discuss Zionist Power, it's like
complaining about the smoke without mentioning the fire. Also, does it make sense for whites
to bleat about blacks, browns, yellows, and etc. when whites themselves cravenly collaborate
with Zionist Power? Whites, especially the elites, don't stand for what is good for America
as a whole. They suck up to Zionists and support Zionist identity & Zionism. When whites
act like that, why should nonwhites be good American patriots? Whites have led the way in
betraying the original Americanism. In some ways, nonwhites, such as blacks into black power
and Mexican-Americans into Mexican pride, are more admirable because, at the very least, they
are tribal-patriotic about their own kind. In contrast, whites have betrayed both White Power
and Traditional Americanism. They are now allergic to anything white-and-positive but also
utterly lack a general sense of Americanism. White 'liberals' love to virtue-signal by
supporting blacks, diversity, & globo-homo, AND white 'conservatives' love to cuck-signal
by waving the Israeli Flag & yapping about how Israel is "America's best, greatest,
closest, and dearest ally." Both groups fail at simple generic patriotism based on rules and
principles. For white 'liberals', blacks are higher than other groups, and for white
'conservatives' it's Zionists-uber-alles.
In the current order, Zionists encourage nonwhites to wave their own identitarian flag
AGAINST whiteness while encouraging whites to wave the Zionist flag. In a way, one might say
this Zionist strategy is foolish. After all, if nonwhites are made to be anti-white and if
whiteness is made to be synonymous with support-for-Israel and praise-of-Zionists, might it
not lead to nonwhites being anti-Israel and anti-Zionist as well? After all, if whiteness =
love-for-Zionists whereas non-whiteness = anti-whiteness, wouldn't it lead to non-whiteness =
anti-Zionistness since whiteness is so closely associated with cucking to Zionists?
Zionists bank on two factors in this strategy. They figure (1) nonwhites are too dumb to
connect the dots or (2) even if nonwhites connected the dots and became more critical of
Israel & Zionist Power on account of whiteness = support-for-Zion, it will draw whites
even closer to Zion as white-knight-defenders of Israel against the rising tide of darkies.
We see scenario 2 play out with both Mitt Romney and Jared Taylor. They hope that powerful
Zionists will like them more if they stand with Zionists against the 'antisemitic'
darkies.
It's like Zionists encourage Ilhan Omar to be anti-white while white conzos beat their
chests as noble defenders of Zionists from 'Anti-Semites'.
"The strategic stealth bomber will be able to deliver conventional and thermonuclear
weapons to enemy targets anywhere and anytime in the world. It will be able to destroy any
target, anywhere".
Once it gets there, anyway – which at presumably subsonic speed may take a long,
long time.
So basically this will cost a huge amount of money to do what ICBMs have been able to do
for 60 years, and what Burevestnik can do with a lot more flexibility and stealth.
"Afghanistan is a great base from which to invade Central Asia and threaten Russia from
the south. The country has been occupied by the US for 20 years "
If Russia, China, Pakistan, Kazakhstan and Iran got together and supported the Taliban,
they could get the Americans out of Afghanistan double quick.
I am slightly puzzled that they haven't done so long ago.
Unless they prefer to keep the Americans tied up and bleeding in Central Asia. Keep your
enemies closer, etc.
This uncomfortable thought came to me while listening to Joe Biden talking about "soulless
killer" Vladimir Putin. Smaller insults have sparked off wars. The "Footless, yellow
earth-worm" slur moved Kaa the Rock Python to devour Bandar Log. Luckily, easy-going Putin
replied with a smile. He said that in his
childhood, kids responded with "I am rubber, you are glue; bounces off me and sticks to you";
he only wished good health for the American president and proposed to debate him online, so
that Americans and Russians, as well as the whole world, could form their own opinion. Biden
evaded the challenge. It's not clear he remembered who Putin is. An empty suit with a
teleprompter, called him Donald Trump Jr . Biden
said Putin meddled in the US elections and he will pay a price for it. Alas, Putin couldn't
influence the US dead, and they swung the elections as they voted for Biden by whole
cemeteries. Yes, Biden is a senile dummy that couldn't even board Air Force One without
stumbling thrice
the next day, but there is somebody who operates the teleprompter, and that is the problem.
The Russians were visibly furious. When US leaders drop such invective, it's like pirates
passing a 'black spot' in Treasure Island .
It's a signal that the foreign leader has to be deposed or killed outright. That's how they
spoke of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gadhafi; both were killed and their 'rogue states'
devastated. It was clearly a show of hostile intentions, not just from Biden but also from the
US establishment speaking like ventriloquist through the current White House tenant.
Afghanistan is a great base from which to invade Central Asia and threaten Russia from the
south. The country has been occupied by the US for 20 years, and Trump was determined to pull
out the troops. Biden has already hinted that the US will renege on its agreement with the
Taliban to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan. The withdrawal was supposed to be completed by
May 2021; it will be "tough" for the United States to withdraw forces from Afghanistan in six
weeks, he said. Biden has also scrapped Trump's plan to withdraw forces from Germany, and with
good reason. His administration wants Germans to drop the Nord Stream II project, and it is
easier to convince a country if you have forty military bases there.
Fighting against Iran never stopped. When the US isn't doing it her best friend Israel is
acting. It has emerged that during the last two years, Israeli frogmen sabotaged 12 Iranian
tankers, reported the Wall
Street Journal . But it all backfired. On February 16, the entire Mediterranean coast of
Israel was covered with sticky black mess.
... ... ...
The blow to Israel was terrible – animals, plants and fish died; for a long time it
will be impossible to swim and sunbathe on the oily shores. Only now the sad truth has begun to
leak out: 'the worst pollution of the century' had been done by Israelis. The first to speak
about the source of the pollution was Israeli Minister of the Environment Gila Gamliel. She
said the oil was released by the Iranian tanker Emerald carrying a cargo of
US-sanctioned oil products to Syria. This is Iranian eco-terrorism, she said. But Gila was
quickly gagged – the Israeli military censorship forbade discussion of this topic, except
in the most general terms. It appears Gila Gamliel was right – up to a point. The Israeli
dissident
Richard Silverstein wrote about it:
It was a deliberate attack by Israel on the Iranian vessel. Israel's naval commando unit,
Flotilla 13 covertly attached a mine to the Emerald . The intent was to cause minor
damage that would send a message to Iran that its own attacks on Gulf shipping would bring a
cost. This Times of London
report written by Haaretz columnist Anshel Pfeiffer confirms my source. However, the
commandos didn't realize that the Emerald was a rusty old hulk in desperately
ill-repair. The Israeli mine, which was supposed to cause minor damage, actually ripped a
hole so big that much of the contents of the ship's hold leaked into the Mediterranean. This
is what caused the Israeli environmental disaster: Israel itself.
Biden voted for Gulf War Two. Why? Because as he admits, he is a Zionist. Zionists are
traitors, terrorists and murderers. Yet Biden the terrorist accuses Putin of being a
killer?
The illusion of a US president having any actual authority is pretty much being dispelled by
this ventriloquist's dummy Biden signing whatever is placed in front of him and parroting
whatever is on the teleprompter. A stupid egotist his entire life, his mental decline isn't as
apparent as it might be quite yet because he's been carefully stage managed so far. They're
being extremely careful not to let the cat out of the bag in letting people get a glimpse of
what he's really like. And it's downhill from here.
The virus hysteria has been a test case lab in assessing what works, what doesn't, how to
improve on herding and suppressing the population, etc. Insofar as dead foreign leaders goes,
who really knows?
When tens of millions of dollars are available lots of people in some leader's circle might
be tempted to expose the target to some form of poisoning or lethal radiation. Hugo Chavez
expressed suspicion at how he and other leaders opposed to US diktat seemed to come down with
cancer.
The US itself has claimed some of it's diplomats were possibly targeted by mystery rays in
Cuba so the idea of something like this is not far-fetched; it's just a case of projection,
accusing others of what one is guilty of.
LOL, you don't know how many times, since his campaign and now as (fake) POTUS that Biden
has reminded me of Chauncey Gardiner. It's the perfect comparison.
(But, Jobotomy Xiden will be gone soon and then the bi-racial, sociopathic Hillary 2.0 will
be inaugurated. Excuse me while I go hurl.)
Think of the hysteria and histrionic nation wide wailing and teeth gnashing over Trump
calling it "the China virus" and the dead silence when Biden calls Putin:
A soulless killer. .
I wish Putin would take revenge and pull a Soleimani on Biden & Co. but perhaps he
laughs & chalks it up to the senile, demented ramblings of a clown.
Is this more theater?
To add to the insanity, the embrace and total absolution of the pathological liar, war
criminal and mass torturer and murderer, George W. Bush leaves me .stunned:
Bush on Putin, 2001:
"I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We
had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul ; a man deeply
committed to his country and the best interests of his country."
Biden is a sociopath, one of limited intelligence. But a sociopath nevertheless.
If he is instructed by his controllers to initiate a nuclear war, he will do so
unhesitatingly.
I would not be surprised if both Joe and Hunter were somehow benefiting from drug traffic
across the border. Actually, I expect that is largely what is behind Biden's open border
policy.
It's impossible for normal people to understand sociopathic behavior. The American political
class has been selected for sociopathy now for generations.
"Americans should write a letter of apology to Putin, apologizing for our rude and senile
leader (and the degenerate lunatics that surround him) and ask for President Putin's
understanding and patience. "
Not a bad idea at all. I would formulate some things differently though, the idea is that
the letter should also circulate, so mind the crude tone, show that even Americans can be
tactful gentle-man. Even that would impress the whole world.
Thanatopia's attacks on Putin differ vastly from its deranged Sinophobia. Thanatopians want
Putin gone, replaced by a New Yeltsin, and Russia vivisected for further pillage. But they
don't want Russians dead, because this 'Free Russia' will be needed for the Great Purpose-the
destruction of China.
The truly Evil campaign to entirely falsely accuse China of genocide in Xinjiang, is a call
not just to war, but to genocide. A China devastated would still rise again, even if the USA
and its villainous stooges succeed in breaking it up, again, as was nearly achieved in the 19th
and 20th centuries.
The USA and the Western vassals promote, train and finance separatists in Xinjiang, Tibet,
'South' Mongolia, Taiwan, Hong Kong, even 'Manchuria'. Such civil discord would cause millions
of deaths, but it gets worse.
The Imperial hatemongers never cease to vilify the CCP. The 'New Nazis', 'It is 1939 again,
and 'appeasement' is treason', human organ harvesters etc. All lies, all the crudest
projection. But the CCP is 100 million strong, and the Chinese CCP Government enjoys 95%
satisfied or highly satisfied rating from the populace, according to the latest Harvard poll.
So the entire population is complicit, 'Xi's willing executioners' etc, and must be punished.
SARS CoV2 was obviously meant to kill millions of Chinese and devastate the economy, but the
'blowback' has been cosmic retribution, and that has only made the Western genocidists even
more enraged.
The Western oligarchy does not do mass high kultur. Kultur is a commodity and a venue for
narcissistic display and mass kultur is base, exploitative and mind-destroying, keeping the
plebs permanently obtunded, morally, intellectually and spiritually. 'Feed 'em muck' as Nellie
Melba recommended.
Worldometer/coronavirus today: Tanzania population >60 million; CV19 cases <600. Dear
Scott, that cannot be correct! (If all the brainwashing serves me right.)
RIP President Magufuli, the man who busted WHO with their fraud -- or scientific
incompetence. Ha. This story could have been the lead paragraph, and no stone should be left
unturned to find out if Magufuli was murdered. This especially includes death by a deadly viral
infection, ala Operation Zyphr ?
Minor correction: Biden does not represent the American people. Those who think they support
him are unaware of their Stockholm syndrome.
Now, let's arrest our schadenfreude about Israel's acts of sabotage spoiling their own
coastline. Our fragile seas are too precious for that sort of vindictive spirit. Nevertheless,
it is okay be encouraged about this colossal blunder, because it proves the controllers are
really not in control at all. And they damn well know it.
Finally, forget not Shere Khan totally trumps Kaa. But as fate would have it even he loses
in the end.
Unless neocons are insane, I don't think that they want to start a war with Russia and much
less China. The U.S. can't even win a war against goat herders with homemade explosives. The
U.S. military is more concerned about having black transgender soldiers than about being
efficient.
Also, China practically owns the U.S. and Canada at this point.
This is probably just another distraction to keep people from noticing that they are
(again!) being fleeced and raped.
It now appears the Russians and Chinese are using our woke BS against us like a deflector
shield.
Putin's speech of the US projecting its own psychology on others, mentioning BLM and racism
plus the Chinese mentioning the US "persecution of blacks".
They inflict this woke shit on us but didn't realize it could also be used by their
enemies.
Ultimate blow back for the dumb fuckers in Washington. Totally hilarious.
Old neocon still is dreaming about imperial greatness and full spectrum Dominance, when the
country is significantly and irreversibly crippled by neoliberalism and its accumulation by
dispossession which eliminated a large swats of well paid workers and professionals. It is now
the country where the Congress is now hiding from people behind barbed wall.
It is difficult to teach old dog new tricks. Intimidation of the opponent replaced diplomacy.
Semi-Dementia mixed with arrogance in action. "White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden
would continue to look to cooperate on efforts to stem Iran's nuclear program and, more broadly,
nuclear nonproliferation. But she said Biden did not regret referring to Putin as a killer and
pushed back against suggestions that the rhetoric was unhelpful."
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Director of National Intelligence came out with a report today saying
that Vladimir Putin authorized operations during the election to under -- denigrate you,
support President Trump, undermine our elections, divide our society. What price must he
pay?
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: He will pay a price. I, we had a long talk, he and I, when we -- I know
him relatively well. And I-- the conversation started off, I said, "I know you and you know me.
If I establish this occurred, then be prepared."
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: You said you know he doesn't have a soul.
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: I did say that to him, yes. And -- and his response was, "We understand
one another." It was-- I wasn't being a wise guy. I was alone with him in his office. And that
-- that's how it came about. It was when President Bush had said, "I looked in his eyes and saw
his soul."
I said, "Looked in your eyes and I don't think you have a soul." And looked back and he
said, "We understand each other." Look, most important thing dealing with foreign leaders in my
experience, and I've dealt with an awful lot of 'em over my career, is just know the other guy.
Don't expect somethin' that you're-- that -- don't expect him to-- or her to-- voluntarily
appear in the second editions of Profiles in Courage.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: So you know Vladimir Putin. You think he's a killer?
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: Uh-huh. I do.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: So what price must he pay?
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: The price he's gonna pay we'll-- you'll see shortly. I'm not gonna--
there's-- by the way, we oughta be able that ol' -- that trite expression "walk and chew gum at
the same time," there're places where it's in our mutual interest to work together.
That's why I renewed the start agreement with him. That occurred while he's doin' this. But
that's overwhelmingly in the interest of humanity, that we diminish the prospect of a nuclear
exchange. But that and SolarWinds as well. He's been -- they've done some mischievous things,
to say the least. And so we're gonna have -- I'm not gonna announce what I'm doing, but he's
gonna understand that --
Vladimir Putin issues new 'kill list' - and six of the targets live in Britain
EXCLUSIVE: The warning of a deadly post-pandemic campaign comes from same spy who alerted
that Salisbury novichok victim Sergei Skripal was earmarked for assassination
I'm in the middle of Armstrong's
essay and am at the first reference to Kagan's vision:
"What should that role be? Benevolent global hegemony. Having defeated the 'evil empire,'
the United States enjoys strategic and ideological predominance. The first objective of
U.S. foreign policy should be to preserve and enhance that predominance by strengthening
America's security, supporting its friends, advancing its interests, and standing up for its
principles around the world .'
It's absolutely clear that Kagan has no clue as to the reality of what is actually the
objective of the Neoliberal Parasites running the Outlaw US Empire; for aside from "advancing
its interests," the Parasites have zero motivation to do any of that as their sole
ambition/goal is to vacuum up all the wealth they can and leave a shell just as they planned
and failed with Russia, but have succeeded elsewhere. And as for principles, the reality is
it has none, nor does it have any friends, just vassals and victims. This analogy by
Armstrong's excellent:
"The U.S. is sitting on a dragon and it daren't get off or the dragon will kill it. But
because it can't kill the dragon, it must sit on it forever: no escape. And dragon's eggs are
hatching out all around: think how much bigger the Russian, Chinese and Iranian dragons are
today than they were a quarter-century ago when Kagan & Co so confidently started PNAC;
think how bigger they'll be in another....
"But the more sanctions, the stronger Russia gets: as an analogy, think of sanctions on
Russia as similar to the over-use of antibiotics – Russia is becoming immune."
And tying it all up is this excellent summation:
"Has there ever been a subject on which people have been so wrong for so long as Russia?
How many times have they said Putin's finished? Remember when cheese was going to bring him
down? Always a terminal economic crisis. A year ago they were sure COVID would do it. A U.S.
general is in Ukraine and Kiev's heavy weapons are moving east but, no, it's Putin who, for
ego reasons – and his "failing" economy – wants the war. Why do they keep doing
it? Well, it's easy money – Putin (did we tell you he was in the KGB?) wants to expand
Russia and rule forever; therefore, he's about to invade somebody. He doesn't, no problem,
our timely warning scared him off; we'll change the date and regurgitate it next year. In the
meantime his despotic rule trembles because of some-triviality-of-the-moment. These pieces
write themselves: the anti-Russia business is the easiest scam ever. And there's the
difficulty of admitting you're wrong: how can somebody like Kagan, such a triumphantasiser
back then, admit that it's all turned to dust and worse, turned to dust because they took his
advice? Much better to press on – it's not as if anybody in the lügenpresse will
call him out or deny him space. Finally, these people are locked in psychological projection:
because they can only envisage military expansion, they assume the other guy is equally
obsessed and so they must expand to counter his expansion. They suspect everybody of
suspecting them. Their hostility sees hostility everywhere. Their belligerence finds
belligerence. The hyperpower is forever compelled to respond to lesser powers. They look
outside, see themselves and fear; in their mental universe the USA is arrogantly strong and
fearfully weak at the same time."
The Walking Dead is finally becoming a metaphor for the Outlaw US Empire, its
policies, and what it terms values--which aren't values but vices. But TWD was fiction and
was thus capable of reforming itself. The Empire's goals and polices are essentially the same
as in 1940 and even further back to 1913, and haven't changed very much, being just as
illegal and immoral then as now. What's different are the "Dragons" which didn't exist in
1918 or 1944, and the Parasites have almost total control that's finally seeing domestic
pushback.
It's absolutely clear that Kagan has no clue as to the reality of what is actually the
objective of the Neoliberal Parasites running the Outlaw US Empire.
Why do you give him the benefit of the doubt?
Are we really to believe that Kagan, and others like him, talk of these things for DECADES
and yet aren't aware of the ramifications?
IMO it is absolutely clear that he knows the neoliberal reality as well as the neocon and
neocolonial realities.
But we are supposed to avoid cynicism and be polite so as to not be thought a
malcontent?
=
@karlof1 The need for more cynicism is a theme of mine (which I've written about at moa
many times) so please don't respond in a knee-jerk way.
@ michaelj72 | Mar 21 2021 2:46 utc | 173 who provided the Yang quote
"
"The United States uses its military force and financial hegemony to carry out long arm
jurisdiction and suppress other countries,"
"
I continue to not understand why China is coy about connecting PRIVATE financial hegemony
to the US when they assuredly know it is the global private finance folk that are the enemy.
I don't know why they play into the meme that if the US were brought to heel then the
financial hegemony would magically stop.
All Yang had to do was put the word private before financial hegemony and the message
would have been much clearer and stronger message to the world struggling under the private
finance jackboot, IMO
To me
rules based order = dog whistle for global private finance, property and unfettered
inheritance
Blinken and Bush are as boorish and rude, perhaps even more condescending than pompeo and
Trump - But it is hard to choose between the lesser of two american evils. So in just a matter of
weeks, the US just antagonized both Russia and China. The US is getting very bold,
"The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and winner
takes all and that would be a far more violent and unstable world," Blinken said.
The 'rules based order' means 'do what we say' and is of course unacceptable.
Here is how the Chinese replied:
What China and the international community follow or uphold is the United Nations-centered
international system and the international order underpinned by international law, not what
is advocated by a small number of countries of the so-called "rules-based" international
order.
and
I don't think the overwhelming majority of countries in the world would recognize that the
universal values advocated by the United States or that the opinion of the United States
could represent international public opinion, and those countries would not recognize that
the rules made by a small number of people would serve as the basis for the international
order.
When Yang was chided by Blinken for making a too long opening statement in response to
Blinken's accusations Yang replied:
The Chinese side felt compelled to make this speech because of the tone of the U.S. side.
Well, isn't this the intention of United States, judging from what – or the way
that you have made your opening remarks, that it wants to speak to China in a condescending
way from a position of strength?
So was this carefully all planned and was it carefully orchestrated with all the
preparations in place? Is that the way that you had hoped to conduct this dialogue?
Well, I think we thought too well of the United States. We thought that the U.S. side
will follow the necessary diplomatic protocols. So for China it was necessary that we made
our position clear.
So let me say here that, in front of the Chinese side, the United States does not have
the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength . The
U.S. side was not even qualified to say such things even 20 years or 30 years back, because
this is not the way to deal with the Chinese people. If the United States wants to deal
properly with the Chinese side, then let's follow the necessary protocols and do things the
right way.
Many netizens on China's social media said Chinese officials were doing a good job in
Alaska, and that the U.S. side lacked sincerity.
Some even characterized the talks as a "Hongmen Banquet", referring to an event that
took place 2,000 years ago where a rebel leader invited another to a feast with the
intention of murdering him.
Posted by b on March 19, 2021 at 18:53 UTC | Permalink
The Chinese emphasis on most of the world rejecting a US-directed 'rules-based order'
instead of honouring the UN Charter and settled international law is of supreme importance
aand must be re-emphasized ad nauseum.
What a bunch of amateurish megalomaniac idiots. It was an exhibition of a total lack of
tact, self-perception, decency or any equilibrium. The Chinese's confident offensive resulted
in a rapid emotional dive from a state of megalomaniac bravado to shaky self-confidence. In
comparison they made even Trump look like a cultivated gentleman.
To translate from Orwellian Western Newspeak to english:
'Rules-based order' means 'Our rules for you that we don't have to follow and can change
anytime we like.'
'International order' means 'Western-ruled-world order.'
'International community' means the US-led Western community and vassal states. Western
media spouts this all the time.
'Rules-based' is the modern day incarnation of Americans/British throwing around the
phrase 'treaty', 'treaty-based' in colonial days. Different words, same con.
USA provided a transcript of both US Govt & China Govt speakers.
I thought this a little unusual, as foreign miminstries like to publish their own
transcripts so that they control the authentic translation of their words, free from the
opposing parties editing or mis-translation.
"cutthroat competition" may be an arguably alternative translation of "strangle" in the
China readout "those who seek to strangle China will suffer in the end."
I was waiting for the China verbatim translation to check the fidelity of the USA
translation.
But there is only an unquoted report, which is the meeting, but without quotation marks to
distinguish between the authors voice and the Officials voice.
Verbatim would be better.
Maybe the USA had reciprocal concerns about the verbatim accuracy of the China
transcript.
My translation of "The Brothers Karamazov" has one of Dostoevski's brothers saying, "Each
man creates Satan in his own image."
Blinken is Secretary of State for USA, head of the US State Department.
He mentioned in his nomination hearing, & makes allusion in this meeting with China, to a
genocide in Xinjiang.
Foreign Affairs magazine article reports US State Department legal office saying they have no
evidence for a genocide in Xinjiang.
Is Blinken in touch with his department?
"The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and winner
takes all and that would be a far more violent and unstable world," Blinken said.
The 'rules based order' means 'do what we say' and is of course unacceptable. Here is how
the Chinese replied:
What China and the international community follow or uphold is the United Nations-centered
international system and the international order underpinned by international law, not what
is advocated by a small number of countries of the so-called "rules-based" international
order.
Say it to uncle sam. Say it every time they meet. The bankruptcy of the "rules based
order" gang of five or six is a failure.
For all its apalling faults the UN and established international courts are the place to
go. Suck it up uncle sam.
"The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and
winner takes all and that would be a far more violent and unstable world," Blinken
said.
LOL.
You really have to wonder if the Americans believe their own bullshit about their hollowed
"Rules Based International Order"?
The violent and unstable world is ALREADY here thanks to ... this very same American
"Rules" Based Order.
Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Serbia, Somalia--these are just a few of the countries
America has either invaded, bombed, or supported moderate jihadi Head-Choppers against to
destabilize in the past generation.
Re Sadde @3 " What a bunch of amateurish megalomaniac idiots. It was an exhibition of a
total lack of tact, self-perception, decency or any equilibrium. "
Seems like just the other day I was reading the same description about Pompeo lol. And yet
somehow this is much worse, as we have a clearly demented, recently installed "president" who
can't make it up a flight of stairs or give a press conference, who has the nuclear football
following him around 24/.7.
"Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who accompanied Yang to the talks,
told CGTN that their side had made clear to the Americans that China takes its sovereignty
very seriously and warned them not to 'underestimate China's determination to defend its
territory, to defend its people, and maintain its righteous interests.'
"Washington has criticized China's security policies in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, where
Western-backed separatist forces have created chronic unrest, as well as its longstanding
claim to rule Taiwan, an autonomous island ruled by the Republic of China that lost the civil
war in mainland China in 1949, when the socialist People's Republic of China was formed. The
US technically recognizes Beijing's claim to be the sole legitimate representative of China,
but in reality is the primary backer of the Taiwanese government. Beijing says all of these
are internal matters and not of Washington's concern."
Very little's reported of the Outlaw US Empire's response. This little bit doesn't bode
well:
"US State Department officials noted they did not see the Alaska summit as the beginning
of a new mechanism or dialogue."
I see that as a confession that they aren't agreement capable since they can't even
continue a dialogue.
contrived moulded whatever the case I leave this excerpt. I feel it hits the head.
Here's what journalist Joe Bageant wrote in 2007:
Much of the ongoing battle for America's soul is about healing the souls of these
Americans and rousing them from the stupefying glut of commodity and spectacle. It is about
making sure that they -- and we -- refuse to accept torture as the act of "heroes" and babies
deformed by depleted uranium as the "price of freedom." Caught up in the great
self-referential hologram of imperial America, force-fed goods and hubris like fattened
steers, working people like World Championship Wrestling and Confederate flags and
flat-screen televisions and the idea of an American empire. ("American Empire! I like the
sound of that!" they think to themselves, without even the slightest idea what it means
historically.) "The people" doing our hardest work and fighting our wars are not altruistic
and probably never were. They don't give a rat's bunghole about the world's poor or the
planet or animals or anything else. Not really. "The people" like cheap gas. They like
chasing post-Thanksgiving Day Christmas sales. And if fascism comes, they will like that too
if the cost of gas isn't too high and Comcast comes through with a twenty-four-hour NFL
channel.
That is the American hologram. That is the peculiar illusion we live within, the illusion
that holds us together, makes us alike, yet tells each of us we are unique. And it will
remain in force until the whole shiteree comes down around our heads. Working people do not
deny reality. They create it from the depths of their perverse ignorance, even as the
so-called left speaks in non sequiturs and wonders why it cannot gain any political traction.
Meanwhile, for the people, it is football and NASCAR and a republic free from married queers
and trigger locks on guns. That's what they voted for -- an armed and moral republic. And
that's what we get when we stand by and watch the humanity get hammered out of our fellow
citizens, letting them be worked cheap and farmed like a human crop for profit.
Genuine moral values have jack to do with politics. But in an obsessively religious
nation, values remain the most effective smoke screen for larceny by the rich and hatred and
fear by the rest. What Christians and so many quiet, ordinary Americans were voting for in
the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004 was fear of human beings culturally unlike
themselves, particularly gays and lesbians and Muslims and other non-Christians. That's why
in eleven states Republicans got constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage on the
ballot. In nine of them the bill passed easily. It was always about fearing and, in the worst
cases, hating "the other."
Being a southerner, I have hated in my lifetime. I can remember schoolyard discussions of
supposed "nigger knifing" of white boys at night and such. And like most people over fifty,
it shows in my face, because by that age we have the faces we deserve. Likewise I have seen
hate in others and know it when I see it. And I am seeing more of it now than ever before in
my lifetime, which is saying something considering that I grew up down here during the Jim
Crow era. Fanned and nurtured by neoconservative elements, the hate is every bit equal to the
kind I saw in my people during those violent years. Irrational. Deeply rooted. Based on
inchoate fears.
The fear is particularly prevalent in the middle and upper-middle classes here, the very
ones most openly vehement about being against using the words nigger and fuck. They are what
passes for educated people in a place like Winchester. You can smell their fear. Fear of
losing their advantages and money. Fear there won't be enough time to grab and stash enough
geet to keep themselves and their offspring in Chardonnay and farting through silk for the
next fifty years.
So they keep the lie machinery and the smoke generators cranking full blast as long as
possible, hoping to elect another one of their own kind to the White House -- Democratic or
Republican, it doesn't matter so long as they keep the scam going. The Laurita Barrs speak in
knowing, authoritative tones, and the inwardly fearful house painter and single-mom forklift
driver listen and nod. Why take a chance on voting for a party that would let homos be scout
masters?
(Dear Hunting with Jesus: Dispatches from America's Class War, chapter 2)
That's a lovely little compilation about Putin and his family, thanks.
The narrative says that Putin's mother survived the siege of Leningrad, but it doesn't go
into the details. You can get the story from one of the several Russian documentaries about
Putin - I forget which one but I could dig for it if pressed.
Putin's father came back from the front, wounded and on crutches. He showed up just as
medics were taking his wife out to whatever transport they were using to clean up the dead
bodies - she was practically dead, and the witness to this says she was "washed up". Putin's
father fought the medics away with his crutches and took his wife back into their home, and
nursed her back to life.
Thus runs the story, and this is the woman who later gave birth to Putin, already with two
brothers dead that he never knew. It sounds exaggerated when I write out the story like that,
but I never disbelieved it when I heard it, and I still don't.
So this is the depth of the man who heads the Russian Federation. Personally touched by
war, personally grieving for the losses of Russia, personally committed to the safety of
civilians and to minimal death in general.
~~
While I'm on the subject, two other stories occur to me. One was when he first took
command of Russia and addressed the war in the Caucasus - his famous episode with his
military commanders in the tent, when he said they would not drink to success until they had
achieved it (I paraphrase), and put his glass down untouched. To drink prematurely, he said,
would be to dishonor all those who had already died in this war. First, to stop the
dying.
But the story I wanted to say about that was that he also forcefully told his generals to
be very careful how they conducted operations: they were entering places where civilians
lived - old people, those who had fought in the Great Patriotic War, those to whom everyone
present owed their lives. He was very serious about taking great care not to harm those most
honorable people.
The second story is when the Berlin Wall went down, and crowds surged to invade the Stasi
building, ripping its secrets into the open. They also came to the KGB building. The chief of
that bureau fled, leaving by the back way. That left Putin as next in command. He went down
to address the crowd. He stood in front of them and they asked who he was and he lied and
said that he was "the interpreter". He said that this building was the property of the USSR.
In his gun he had twelve bullets, he said, eleven for those whom he faced and the last for
himself. The crowd understood that this building was not East Germany but the Soviet Union,
and that this officer would defend it with his life. Whatever they thought, they turned away
and left the building unmolested.
~~
I'm impressed with the character and caliber of this human being called Putin, for good
reasons, I find. There's a heroic scale to him that comes from Russia itself and the
experiences that Putin was born into and from. And yet he personally is a naturally modest
man. He bears that heroic dimension of scale with the grace that comes from ordinariness. He
loves ordinary people. He renews his own mental health from being in their company. The
security state of Russia chose the best person it could find, in a last-ditch attempt to save
their country. It worked.
[D]ifficult, dramatic, and bloody events abound in the history of every nation and every
state. But when we evaluate other people, or even other states and nations, we are always
facing a mirror, we always see ourselves in the reflection, because we project our inner
selves onto the other person.
You know, I remember when we were children and played in the yard, we had arguments
occasionally and we used to say: whatever you call me is what you are called yourself.
This is no coincidence or just a kids' saying or joke. It has a very deep psychological
undercurrent. We always see ourselves in another person and think that he or she is just
like us, and evaluate the other person's actions based on our own outlook on life.
There is an additional passage of interest which sets out rules for future talks that I
have not seen reported in 'western' media:
I know that the United States and its leaders are determined to maintain certain
relations with us, but on matters that are of interest to the United States and on its
terms. Even though they believe we are just like them, we are different. We have a
different genetic, cultural and moral code. But we know how to uphold our interests. We
will work with the United States, but in the areas that we are interested in and on terms
that we believe are beneficial to us. They will have to reckon with it despite their
attempts to stop our development, despite the sanctions and insults. They will have to
reckon with this.
We, with our national interests in mind, will promote our relations with all
countries, including the United States.
The 'takes one to know one' quote is not a direct quote from Putin, it is a claim by
Biden.
Here is the Daily Beast's take on it. (Yeah, I know it's a ridiculous source, but it
was the first source I found that correctly attributed that quote to Biden.)
Biden recalled: "We had a long talk, he and I, when we... I know him relatively well. And
the conversation started off, I said, 'I know you and you know me. If I establish this
occurred, then be prepared.'"
The president also confirmed that, some years ago, he was alone with Putin in his
office and he brought up the topic of Putin's lack of a human soul. "I said, 'I looked in
your eyes and I don't think you have a soul,' and he looked back and said, 'We understand
each other.' The most important thing of dealing with foreign leaders... is just know the
other guy."
The Guardian's translation of "it takes one to know one," which has been amplified by
western media and social media, is absolutely incorrect. It implies that Putin is
admitting that he is a 'killer,' which he absolutely does not do. Anybody that has a
working knowledge of Russian will be able to translate the saying that Putin uses to mean
that he is suggesting that Biden is projecting. In fact, Putin provides context for this
statement by referring to US History.
I say bullshit. "It takes one to know one" - suggests some equivalence for the two
people. That meaning is not in Kremlin transcript of Putin's words. Putin is saying "you
are projecting (your own problem)".
I understand that this is just semantics, but something as widespread as this has become
in western media can have a big impact on perception of lazy westerners if the
interpretation is incorrect. This should be obvious, regardless of the supposed "elegance"
of the phrase.
"Takes one to know one" does not imply projection, it rather implies hypocrisy. Putin is
not accusing Biden of hypocrisy, he is accusing Biden of projection. "Takes one to know
one" gives a western audience the suggestion that Putin qualifies an admission of being a
killer with an accusation that Biden is also a killer. Putin, in fact, does not do
this. He only suggests that Biden is projecting and only projecting.
Minister Lavrov today confirmed Putin's words,
saying " [We] will be ready to cooperate only in those areas that are of interest to
us, and only on terms that are beneficial to us ".
In my opinion, the Chinese representatives gave a good answer to the American side,
although this answer will obviously not be heard.
The Americans have completely lost the culture of negotiation. If there are no elementary
human manners, then what kind of agreements can we talk about?
A sad picture. And dangerous. A madman with nuclear weapons (and chemical weapons, by the
way) is not the best option for a reliable negotiating partner.
"In a desperate bid to thwart the strategic partnership between Russia and Europe,
Washington is resorting to ever-more frantic threats of sanctions and other disruptive
measures. Biden is playing the personal insult card in a gambit for blowing up bilateral
relations with Russia as a way to sabotage Nord Stream 2.
"It's a pathetic move, one that actually speaks more of America's historic enfeeblement
rather than pretensions of power. Russia would do well to stay calm and let the Americans
make fools of themselves."
It seems Russia's doing just that--attending to the vital business of developing its
nation and peoples. Russia's geared for numerous patriotic celebrations throughout the
year, and Biden's comments were made on the eve of Crimean reunification with Russia, which
only served to cement Russians closer and hold Putin in even greater esteem. Talk about an
Own Goal!
Outlaw US Empire Nord Stream policy is close to being the same as literally torpedoing
it, making it an act of war against the EU and Russia. Somehow, I don't think Blinken
understands that fundamental fact.
"I know that the United States and its leaders are determined to maintain certain
relations with us, but on matters that are of interest to the United States and on its
terms. Even though they believe we are just like them, we are different. We have a
different genetic, cultural and moral code. But we know how to uphold our interests. We
will work with the United States, but in the areas that we are interested in and on terms
that we believe are beneficial to us. They will have to reckon with it despite their
attempts to stop our development, despite the sanctions and insults. They will have to
reckon with this."
This statement is a positive, that is the mark of a government that adheres to real
values, beneficial to the growth of humanity, and not just for the enrichment of a greedy
minority of it's citizens.
The most peculiar aspect of Biden's outburst is its timing.
If there was one moment in time when it would be ill advised for even the most brass
necked, cynical American exceptionalist not to restrain himself from accusing anyone of
murder, it would have to be that moment in which the bulkiest object in the "Out" tray on
the Presidential desk happened to be a crude coffin like box containing the butchered
remains of the Washington Post journalist and long established CIA asset Adnan
Khashoggi.
Now there was the victim of a killer, the Crown Prince, acting with the permission of
the US government and in the spirit of the Deep State which put Joe Biden in office.
Joe was perhaps thinking of Khashoggi-a beltway denizen he must have run into in one of
the cocktail parties or brothels on the circuit- when he murmured admiringly, to himself,
blissfully unaware of the presence of George Stephanopolous- one of the grande horizontales
of American culture- and the TV camera, "That guy, whatsisname, the one from whatsitcalled,
Russia, is a killer."
Putin fell into a trap. He should have not said a damn thing after Biden spouted off
about him being a killer. The western MSM on both sides of the Pond are now running with
the incorrect translation and narrative that Putin admitted to being a killer. The western
MSM is now also claiming that Putin's wishing Biden good health means he's threatening to
poison him.
Putin should have heeded Mark Twain's wise words:
"Don't wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it."
The western media was captured many years ago and serves only its propaganda business
model.
America is number one instigator and developer of conflict across the entire planet and is
increasingly unworthy of anyones trust or respect.
The US media has degenerated into a slave to the propaganda business model that it has
chosen to adopt.
The US is the Number One instigator and manipulator of conflict across the planet and is
unworthy of anyones trust or respect. The American way defines all that is devious and
corrupt.
None of this is new. There was some disruption for a few years recently, but now that all
obstacles are permanently neutered the destruction of the future for personal gain can get
back into top gear once again.
@Boogity | Mar 20 2021 19:42 utc | 141, and others Barflies...
Putin don't wrestle with the pig.
1) as b., and thanks for his Job, all of us must go to the original and extensive
version. MSM and chats are narrative tools reducing and calibrating our souls.
2) with regards to China and Russia stay tune about context
3) be careful about "translation".
To Biden as an old man, Putin just wish him Good health.
"I would say "stay healthy." [... ] I am saying this without irony or tongue in
cheek."
But "secondly, taking a broader approach to this matter" "to the US establishment, the ruling class – not the American people who are
mostly honest, decent and sincere people who want to live in peace and friendship with
us", he said something like [you are not qualified to speak to Russia from a position
of strength]
their mindset [of US ruling class] was formed in rather challenging circumstances which
we are all aware of. After all, the colonisation of the American continent by the
Europeans went hand-in-hand with the extermination of the local people, the genocide, as
they say today, outright genocide of the Indian tribes followed by a very tough, long
and difficult period of slavery , a very cruel period. All of that has been part of
life in America throughout the history of the United States to this day. Otherwise,
where would the Black Lives Matter movement come from? To this day, African Americans
face injustice and even extermination.
The ruling class of the United States tends to address domestic and foreign policy
issues based on these assumptions. After all, the United States is the only country to
have used nuclear weapons , mind you, against a non-nuclear state – Japan, in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of WW II. There was absolutely no military need for the
bombing. It was nothing but the extermination of civilians.
I am bringing this up, because I know that the United States and its leaders are
determined to maintain certain relations with us, but on matters that are of interest to
the United States and on its terms. Even though they believe we are just like them, we
are different. We have a different genetic, cultural and moral code. But we know how to
uphold our interets .
[...]
despite their attempts to stop our development, despite the sanctions and insults. They
will have to reckon with this.
We, with our national interests in mind, will promote our relations with all
countries"
And he said that on March 18th, 7th anniversary of Crimea reuniting to Russia.
Yang Jiechi stated China's position at his opening remarks, saying China hopes this
dialogue is sincere and honest.
Opening remarks were for 8mn (4x2mn),
But after Yang Jiechi spoke Blinken broke protocole agrement, recall journalists in order
to show is strength. They came to 90mn press conference.
Strength was on chinese side:
"we thought the US would follow the necessary diplomatic protocol In front of the Chinese
side, the US side is not qualified to speak to China from a position of
strength"
"the US must focus on its own human rights issues -- like the Black Lives Matter
movement -- and not meddle in the country's internal affairs "
Putin's elaboration of the history and founding culture of the USA was brilliantly well
done, I thought. As an academic lesson it could hardly be more concise, nor more
penetrating and accurate.
He was speaking to his home constituency of Russia, but he was well aware that the whole
world would listen. The so-called Global South listens to these words for the same reason
we do, to know what has now been said out loud and thus can now be referenced in future
discussions and in future geopolitical positions and stances.
In this sense, all of these words, and words like them, are strength to the backbone of
the world. It clarifies what Russia is now prepared to say out loud, and it suggests very
clearly where a lesser nation might stand, perhaps, and even solicit the support of Russia
- at the UN or in diplomacy at least, if not with S-400s.
And so as these words are sent out into the real world as things that can now be
"noticed", to use the judicial sense of the word, the growing world alliance coheres around
these words, and the world changes in its global attitude.
Those who believe that none of this matters - and this would obviously include the
ruling class of the US, described so perfectly by Putin - are in for a shock.
I can't easily demonstrate how greatly these words matter, other than to remind us how
things used to look half a dozen years ago, when the US was such an ogre, and how things
look now, when the US is more literally a dotard than ever before, and when the fear of
challenging the US is beginning to disappear from the world, overcome by disgust.
These are dangerous times - for the US. Being described accurately is a small step from
being in someone's cross-hairs.
Many great observations tonight, but all, beg the question; How do we change a nation
state that has so thoroughly morphed into an advertising and marketing phony, aided and
abetted by so many deluded morons?
This is interesting. Apparently both the Russians and the Chinese have concluded that
Biden intends to use "CornPop" faux-macho posturing as his foreign policy, and they have both
decided that "f**k that, let's nip this in the bud".
Because it looks like they have decided they have had a gut-full of US "exceptionalism"
and are quite determined to say so. To anyone, but especially to the Americans.
Going to be a lot of very confused people at Foggy Bottom. They may never have experienced
this degree of contempt before.
I about fell on the floor when I read Blinken's words, my first thought being "this klutz
has zero knowledge of history since 1588 and just admitted as much. In China, Blinken would
never achieve any position of power.
The decadence of the Outlaw US Empire's government is like so many prions turning brain
tissue into a swiss-cheese-like mass and then boasting about how finely tuned are its
cognitive abilities. And when Harris is installed, we'll have a genuine novice in charge--The
Blind leading the Blind.
It's no wonder the Chinese sought an audience with Lavrov ASAP.
The Americans have completely lost the culture of negotiation. If there are no elementary
human manners, then what kind of agreements can we talk about? A sad picture. And
dangerous. A madman with nuclear weapons (and chemical weapons, by the way) is not the best
option for a reliable negotiating partner.
17 March Russia withdraws it's US Ambassador for consultations:
"Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov has been summoned to Moscow
for consultations in order to analyse what needs to be done in the context of relations
with the United States.
The new US administration took office about two months ago and the symbolic 100-day
mark is not too far away, which is a good occasion for trying to appraise what Joe
Biden's team has managed to do and where it was not very successful.
The most important thing for us is to identify ways of rectifying Russia-US
relations, which have been going through hard times as Washington has, as a matter of
fact, brought them to a blind alley.
We are interested in preventing an irreversible deterioration in relations, if the
Americans become aware of the risks associated with this."
Pres. Putin invite Pres. Biden for a live on-line public discussion of issues:
"I want to invite President Biden to continue our discussion, but on the condition that
we do this actually live, as they say, online. Without any delay, but directly in an
open, direct discussion. It seems to me that it would be interesting for the people of
Russia, for the people of the United States, and for many other countries", Putin said
on air on the Rossiya 24 broadcaster.
The talk to be tomorrow (Friday). If not, then Monday, as he is spending free time in
the Taiga (oblique reference to North Korea going up the sacred mountain to re-majorly
rethink policy). This also places a live face to face in Prime media time, avoiding the
dead news weekend.
Biden is an intelligent man, but can't appear on an unedited live TV show with Putin -
not because of his age-related related memory recall difficulty - this is normal - but
because it risks exposing the cartoon-like tropes, lies, racism, & duplicity of the US
Govt. approach.
Especially when compared and contrasted with the serious and adult approach of the
Russian President. Nearly 100 days in, USA Govt. has been given the chance, and it is
clear USA Govt aggression and attempts to interfere in Russian domestic policy will
continue. Should Russia abandon soft diplomacy and strategic patience with USA?
Perhaps it is all theatre, coordinated by the Presidential envoys.
Perhaps a 'crisis' is created, Ukraine creates a threat to Europe, climate must be
cooperatively addressed, the Middle East could explode at any moment, a new peace treaty
in the Gulf required, blah blah, blah.
A live face to face airs the issues from both sides publicly, done respectfully,
sensibly, no political point scoring or spittle-mouthed fabrications from the US Govt
side.
The Press filter is sidestepped - a Trump tactic. It would be intended as a circuit
breaker, and the start of a new course for USA Govt. Russia is ready, has been for years,
and repeated it over and over.
If the USA Govt fails to step up it will hardly be the end of the world. But it will
show what a lot of short-sighted, self-interested, careerist, and functionally useless
time-servers most of the US political class are.
They will identify themselves as impediments to the health and welfare of the American
people.
The president named the fight against the pandemic, regional conflict resolution, and
strategic stability issues as possible topics, noting that he would be ready to talk to
Biden on Friday or Monday in an "open" chat.
"I would like to suggest to President Biden that we continue our discussion, but on the
condition that we actually do it live, without any delays, directly in an open, live
discussion," Putin told the Russia 24 TV channel on Thursday. "I think it would be
interesting for the people of Russia and the people of the United States and many other
countries," he added.
It would be so delicious to actually witness such a debate. By asking for it to be
streamed live, Putin is subtly calling out Biden's lie that he "told Putin he had no soul"
(whereas it's unlikely that Biden actually had a 1:1 meeting with Putin during the Obama
administration) as well as making Biden look weaker when Crash Test Dummy doesn't respond to
the invite.
Biden"s time is limited. Cannot be trusted near a microphone, no matter how well prepared
or how thoroughly edted. Has trouble walking, begins to have trouble standing up.
Kamala is still very much a problem. First, no one likes her. Not the public, not her
peers. The public is not prepared for her accession. Her competence is possibly even lower
than Biden's. She may be better able to read a TelePrompter, she still annoys everyone when
she speaks. May turn out to have some aptitude for riding herd on the advisors, we shall see.
She may be able to function as some sort of ringmaster but will contribute nothing, she knows
nothing.
It shall be government by advisors and functionaries and hidden hands. The advisors and
functionaries are all steeped in hegemony and exceptionalism. They have no idea of anything
else. Anyone who ever had a thought in their head was weeded out of academia and out of
public life a long time ago. That leaves the hidden hands. We will never know much about
that. It does appear they are perhaps ready to close down the American project and move
on.
If those within the US government were so stupid as to swallow Russiagate's bullshit thus
resulting in a "deep hatred of Russia," why would Russia want to deal with such obtuse idiots
incapable of logic or critical thinking?
IMO, the current goal of Russia/China/Iran is to completely ice-out the Outlaw US Empire
from having any practical impact on global affairs. The new initiative to Re-ratify the UN
Charter is a case in point for such a policy. The not agreement capable nation now has a
figure head that can't be allowed to talk without minders, a fact Putin would like the entire
world to observe. The world has no way to deny that it sees a nation talking like a Gangster
and acting like a Gangster as its recent behavior's been very explicit and public. IMO, such
behavior hasn't been observed since 1938, but there'll be no appeasement or betrayal of
another nation this time. China's already invited Lavrov to Beijing once its diplomats return
from Alaska. Yet the Empire lies to itself when it says it has more tools to deal with
Russia. The reality is it has no more cards to play--not even its nukes.
Absolutely no difference in foreign policy?
B, I think you're pandering to your audience.
I wonder what President Putin would think- or perhaps "feel" about teamBiden versus
Trump?.
How would you like to be called a "killer, without a soul"? Not withstanding all the
theatrical bellicosity of Pompeo, Putin at least understood that Trump admired him as a
person. I contend this is a big difference.
Do you think the Dems want any comparison with the Trump administration? They are after
contradistinction.
The Dems, the internationalists and the Blairites imagine themselves to be on a roll. Putin
is in their crosshairs.
This time the belligerence is the real thing.
International Music Festival volunteer coordinator and representative of Crimea Federal
University Polina Bolbochan: Mr President, I have a somewhat personal question for you.
Yesterday, President Biden got quite tough in his interview, including with regard to you.
What would you say to him?
Vladimir Putin: With regard to my US colleague's remark, we have, indeed, as he said,
met in person. What would I tell him? I would say "stay healthy." I wish him good health. I
am saying this without irony or tongue in cheek. This is my first point.
Secondly, taking a broader approach to this matter, I would like to say that difficult,
dramatic, and bloody events abound in the history of every nation and every state.
But when we evaluate other people, or even other states and nations, we are always
facing a mirror, we always see ourselves in the reflection, because we project our inner
selves onto the other person.
You know, I remember when we were children and played in the yard, we had arguments
occasionally and we used to say: whatever you call me is what you are called yourself. This
is no coincidence or just a kids' saying or joke. It has a very deep psychological
undercurrent.
We always see ourselves in another person and think that he or she is just like us, and
evaluate the other person's actions based on our own outlook on life.
With regard to the US establishment, the ruling class – not the American people
who are mostly honest, decent and sincere people who want to live in peace and friendship
with us, something we are aware of and appreciate, and we will rely on them in the
future – their mindset was formed in rather challenging circumstances which we are
all aware of.
After all, the colonisation of the American continent by the Europeans went hand-in-hand
with the extermination of the local people, the genocide, as they say today, outright
genocide of the Indian tribes followed by a very tough, long and difficult period of
slavery, a very cruel period.
All of that has been part of life in America throughout the history of the United States
to this day. Otherwise, where would the Black Lives Matter movement come from? To this day,
African Americans face injustice and even extermination.
The ruling class of the United States tends to address domestic and foreign policy
issues based on these assumptions. After all, the United States is the only country to
have used nuclear weapons, mind you, against a non-nuclear state – Japan, in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of WW II. There was absolutely no military need for the
bombing. It was nothing but the extermination of civilians.
I am bringing this up, because I know that the United States and its leaders are
determined to maintain certain relations with us, but on matters that are of interest to
the United States and on its terms.
Even though they believe we are just like them, we are different. We have a different
genetic, cultural and moral code .
But we know how to uphold our interests. We will work with the United States, but in
the areas that we are interested in and on terms that we believe are beneficial to
us.
They will have to reckon with it despite their attempts to stop our development,
despite the sanctions and insults.
They will have to reckon with this.
My bolds, to bring out the essence.
Essentially, he is saying 'We reject your posturing and rudeness, do what you want. We are
ready, and will go our own way. You are not worthy of our cooperation. It' over'.
So, the ball, once again, is in the USA Govt court.
Vladimir Putin, you may have noticed, is everywhere. He has soldiers in Ukraine and Syria,
troublemakers in the Baltics and Finland, and a hand in elections from the Czech Republic to
France to the United States. And he is in the media. Not a day goes by without a big new
article on "
Putin's Revenge ", " The Secret Source of
Putin's Evil ", or "10 Reasons Why Vladimir Putin Is a Terrible Human Being".
Putin's recent ubiquity has brought great prominence to the practice of Putinology. This
enterprise – the production of commentary and analysis about Putin and his motivations,
based on necessarily partial, incomplete and sometimes entirely false information – has
existed as a distinct intellectual industry for over a decade.
...At no time in history have more people with less knowledge, and greater outrage, opined
on the subject of Russia's president. You might say that the reports of Trump's golden showers
in a Moscow hotel room have consecrated a golden age – for Putinology.
...
Compared to the 40-year cycle of US deindustrialisation, during which only the rich gained
in wealth; the 25-year rightwing war on the Clintons; the eight-year-old Tea Party assault on
facts, immigration and taxes; a tepid, centrist campaign; and a supposed late-breaking
revelation from the director of the FBI about the dubious investigation of Clinton's use of a
private email server – well, compared to all those factors, the leaked DNC emails must
rank low on the list of reasons for Trump's victory. And yet, according to a recent report,
Hillary Clinton and her campaign still blame the Russians – and, by extension, Barack
Obama, who did not make a big issue of the hacks before November – for her electoral
debacle. In this instance, thinking about Putin helps not to think about everything else that
went wrong, and what needs to be done to fix it.
This evasion is the essence of Putinology, which seeks solace in the undeniable but faraway
badness of Putin at the expense of confronting the far more uncomfortable badness in front of
one's face. Putinology predates the 2016 election by a decade, and yet what we have seen in
connection to Trump these past few months has been its Platonic ideal.
Hope that more people start cancelling cable TV and boycotting companies like Twitter,
Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Google and Amazon and others to counter the censorship, bias and
corruption.
I don't think the corrupt politicians of either party will pay attention until We The
People unite behind basic principles and become an economic force. Money talks and it can be
used to make positive change in contrast to all the bad things it is also used for.
ACTION PLAN FOR IMMEDIATE CHANGE to counter the corruption , censorship and surveillance
by media/tech/finance giants and politicians:
1)Cancel Cable TV (All channels should be made available individually so consumers don't
have to give money to channels they don't want to)
2)Do Not donate money to politicians & consider boycotting companies that give them
money or pay them for speeches.
Some might decide to boycott Facebook,Twitter,Apple,Amazon,Microsoft, Google and Netflix for
censorship or corruption issues alone.
3)Bank with small local banks & invest with small brokerages & insist your
employer/pension fund do the same.
Buy from small local merchant stores and use cash when possible.
4)Demand a pardon for Julian Assange & Edward Snowden and other
whistleblowers/truthtellers
5)Join Pro freedom social networks like MINDS and Gab ,where freedom of speech and truth
are respected.
Follow Zero Hedge and Project Veritas for pro truth/freedom news.
6)Use web browsers like Dissenter,Tor or Brave rather than Chrome or Safari when you surf
the web.
Use search engines like Quant or DuckDuckGo rather than Google or Bing for web searches.
Use an email service like ProtonMail rather than Gmail.
Save important online videos/articles/posts to your PC hard drive or phone.
Post videos to Bitchute and LBRY rather than youtube
Shop online at Overstock and smaller independent retailers rather than Amazon/Wayfair
7)Use Linux operating systems like Linux Mint,Debian or others on your computer rather
than Windows, Mac or Chrome OS (Almost any PC can be switched to Linux).
Use a Linux based smartphone like PINEPHONE or a "dumbphone" rather than Google Android or
Apple iPhone.
Avoid buying a "smart" TV as it is smarter to buy a "dumb" TV with no operating system
pre-installed.
Use a Linux mini PC with wireless keyboard on your TV for web browsing/computing/gaming/video
streaming rather than amazon fire tv/roku/google chromecast/apple tv/microsoft xbox/nvidia
shield.
8) Do NOT support the phony "War on Drugs" which causes more crime,death,murder,gang
violence,incarcerations,enriching criminals while millions of people still use illegal drugs
anyway.
9) Support a new foreign policy where We The People worldwide unite behind and promote the
principles of truth/freedom/goodwill/integrity/humility/Non-Aggression Principle/Golden Rule
and focus on winning hearts and minds.
10) Support a worldwide effort to voluntarily help others in the hope that it will win
over more people to these principles.
If you buy anything from that TREASONOUS Amazon you should be run out of your neighborhood
when the truck shows up.
andrew h nelson 2 hours ago
Institutional corruption. And that's why they are sitting behind a barb wire fence around
Washington D.C. OBTW, walls seem to work when these idiots want one.
newworldorder 5 hours ago
And there we people of the USA have it all. Brazen in our face political and
institutionalized corruption with no consequences for the Senior US Bureaucracy. If that does
not say it all, - nothing else will.
Hope and Change? For the "connected elite," - it's a done deal. You are either in the club
or you are not.
The key is the collapse of neoliberalism and this topic Tabbi tries to avoid. Which makes this article junk with a couple of
interesting, thought provoking quotes.
The "
collapses of faith in traditional hierarchies of power
" should peropery called the "deletimization of the elite."
and the situation the result due to it "the revolutionary situation" when the elite can't rule "as usual" and "Deplorables" does not
want to live "line usual" anymore. Actually Marxists wtore quite a bit about revolutionary situation, although the fact
tht they assign mystique stiat of "future hegemon class" to proletariat undermines much of their writings.
I entered Martin Gurri's world on August 1, 2015. Though I hadn't read
The
Revolt of the Public
, at the time a little-known book by the former CIA analyst of open news sources, I hit a
disorienting moment of a type he'd described in his opening chapter. There are times, he wrote, "when tomorrow no longer
resembles yesterday the compass cracks, by which we navigate existence. We are lost at sea."
Gurri's book is about how popular uprisings are triggered by collapses of faith in traditional hierarchies of power
.
I felt such a collapse that day in Waterloo, Iowa, covering the Republican presidential primary
.
The
first debate was five days away and the man expected to occupy center stage, Donald Trump, held a seemingly
inexplicable
six-point lead
.
Two weeks before, on July 18th, Trump lashed out against former Republican nominee John McCain. Even McCain's critics
considered his physical and mental scars from years as a Vietnam war prisoner to be unassailable proofs of his patriotic
gravitas, but the service-evading Trump was having none of it. "I don't like losers," he said, adding, "He's only a war hero
because he was captured." It was the universal belief among colleagues in campaign journalism that this was an unsurvivable
gaffe, a "Dean scream" moment. We expected him to apologize and wash out. Instead, he called McCain a "dummy" and kept a
firm
grasp
on
the lead.
... ... ...
Elections in the pre-Trump era had been stale rituals. As recently as 2013, Chris Cillizza of the
Washington
Post
called them "
remarkably
scripted and controlled
." Donors, party chiefs, and pundits could concoct contenders through sheer alchemy, mesmerizing
the public with incantations like "electability." But in Iowa that summer, one "electable" Republican candidate after another
-- from Jeb Bush to Scott Walker to Marco Rubio -- flopped in public appearances, savaged as phonies on social media. Walker,
the betting favorite among reporters, saw his campaign deflated when his online strategist, Liz Muir, started
tweeting
her real feelings
about Iowa (including the classic, "#agsubsidies #ethanol #brainless").
I'd spent weeks crisscrossing the state in search of even one piece of evidence that conventional wisdom still had predictive
power in Republican politics, finding none. Now, here was Christie, reduced from being lionized in a
Time
cover
story as a favorite and a "
guy
who loves his mother and gets it done
," to being nobody at all, a clown standing alone in a park. The realization that no
one was in control of the campaign show anymore was jarring even to me, a critic of the old gatekeeping ritual.
In the introduction to
The Revolt of the Public
, Arnold Kling speaks of a different
"Gurri moment": when Dan Rather's 2004 expose about George W. Bush's military service was blown up by an amateur blogging
under
the name "Bucklehead
." In the past, a media titan like CBS could only be second-guessed by another major institutional
power. In "Rathergate," both the network and one of its most iconic celebrities were humiliated by a single individual, a
preview of the coming disorientation.
The thesis of
The Revolt of the Public
is that traditional centralized powers are
losing -- have lost -- authority, in large part because of the demystifying effect of the Internet.
The information
explosion undermined the elite monopoly on truth, exposing long-concealed flaws. Many analysts had noted the disruptive power
of the Internet, but what made Gurri unique is that he also predicted with depressingly humorous accuracy how traditional
hierarchies would respond to this challenge: in a delusional, ham-fisted, authoritarian manner that would only confirm the
worst suspicions of the public, accelerating the inevitable throw-the-bums-out campaigns.
This assessment of the motive
for rising public intransigence was not exactly welcomed, but either way, as Kling wrote, "Martin Gurri saw it coming."
Gurri also noted that public revolts would likely arrive unattached to coherent plans, pushing society into interminable
cycles of zero-sum clashes between myopic authorities and their increasingly furious subjects. He called this
a
"paralysis of distrust," where outsiders can "neutralize but not replace the center" and "networks can protest and overthrow,
but never govern." With a nod to Yeats, Gurri summed up: "The center cannot hold, and the border has no clue what to do about
it."
Why
would he want to be Arkansancided (or what ever Barry's team calls it)?
Oldwood
29 minutes ago
Obamanated.
YuriTheClown
17 minutes ago
Taibbi is a camp follower. He always seems to be on the spot a year or two late.
But at least he gets there unlike so many others.
Estimated_Fractal
PREMIUM
1 hour ago
I
read the book last week. At times you'll feel like he's pro liberal and times when he sounds pro
conservative. It's not a political book. It's about the deluge of information, in the age of being
online, and how the public have just as much information, if not more than the elites. This creates a
crisis of authority. I'm trying to sum it up. You should just go read it.
how the public have just as much information, if not more than the elites.
Except the information online is filtered by the elites. So theres that.
Patmos
36 minutes ago
MSM outlets no longer have the scoop, because the internet beats them to it. MSM outlets no longer
are the gatekeepers, because the internet exposes their lies. Their authority is neutered. It's why
people who still follow the MSM parade around like little nutless b!tches.
Isn't Life Gland
30 minutes ago
Yet they slap each other on the back with Pulitzer and Nobel Prizes which nowadays is the
equivalent of showing what sellout snakes and intelligence bitches they really are.
fightapathy
23 minutes ago
remove
link
Happy memories of Trump stomping on Mad Dog McCain's face.
Thank you, Matt!
I Write Code
1 minute ago
Exactly, whatever myths the MSM told themselves about "Maverick", if half the stories about McCain
were ever true, he should never have been elected to anything, unfit. Before his brain exploded he
was a sweet guy, but never stable, and maybe not even before the POW bit. Taibbi is really shocked
when Trump only barks out what everyone already knows, namely the TRUTH?
Isn't Life Gland
45 minutes ago
(Edited)
I
tried to read the "rest of the report"...subscription required.
Oh,
and F*CK John McCain..good riddance
Slaytheist
57 minutes ago
Taibbi is the left's Ben Shapiro. He will use logical arguments to concede certain facts, but never
those that threaten the establishment he critiques so tirelessly.
I Write Code
7 minutes ago
remove
link
The thesis of
The Revolt of the Public
is
that traditional centralized powers are losing -- have lost -- authority, in large part because of the
demystifying effect of the Internet.
Gurri might be right or wrong, I dunno, about how it stood in 2015 - but Taibbi here only shows how
utterly clueless he and the entire MSM have been since 2015. They had maybe half a clue from 2008-2015.
Maybe two-thirds of a clue from 1992 through 2007. But since 2015 they have not even wanted a clue,
they've decided to do without.
HOW
ABOUT THIS, THE PUBLIC HAD EVERY RATIONAL RIGHT TO BE REVOLTED BY THE ACTIONS OF THE ELITE AND THE
CLUELESSNESS OF THE PRESS after 2015. I don't know how or why the MSM had their heads cut off at that
point, but Taibbi shows this to be the case - BRAGS about it being the case.
LouTurks
PREMIUM
32 minutes ago
This is nothing new. What has happened is there is a new medium the computer so info can now be shared
without the ruling consent. Last time it was the printing press. Ideas could be shared acrossed distences.
Thomas Locke and his likes could print ideas and sent them far and wide.
But
sadly US is going towards a French style revolt instead of the splendid experiment we now have and have
destroyed by our own ignorance.
More Americans, and in particular the "deplorable" ones, need to read that article.
One can safely bet that they will not take away from it what the Grauniad intended. I cannot
believe the authors of that article think they can win sympathy from the scores of millions
of Americans opposed to the establishment crackdown, "cancelling" , and labeling of
them as "domestic terrorists" .
The phones rang on Friday.... More than 50 [agents of American imperialism] across Hong
Kong received a call from the authorities: they were to report to police on Sunday.
What? Masked stormtroopers didn't kick in their doors at 3:00AM and drag them naked out of
bed as happens in America to "insurrectionists" "? They just got a call to show up in
court the next week? Let me play a sad song for them on the world's smallest violin!
One of the favourite tropes of the transparent cabal who have seized power in the US and
other captive nations is that the solution to the Palestine/Israel problem is "the path to
peace is through direct negotiations.'
This proposition requires the occupied bartering away their land and amending their
borders, always for the benefit of the illegal occupier. These 'negotiations' are expressly
forbidden by the Geneva Conventions. Every functioning government in the world knows
this.
The alien invaders are under an obligation to simply get out. Every 'agreement' is null
and void.
The New Zealand government and the NZ superannuation fund has recently decided to divest
their investments in Israeli banks citing international law, the Geneva Conventions and
reputation damage as key factors.
It is sheer hypocrisy for the usual suspects to talk about human rights, rules based
international law, democracy and our values, while advocating the opposite policies in the
middle east.
Is it possible they actually believe their own propaganda and their own lies through
Bernays like repartition?
@4 dsfco
If Russia and China really ever formed a bloc Europe and several countries in the Middle East
and Asia would immediately switch firmly into the American camp and form a bloc, too. That`s
precisely what Washington wants!
Bejing does the opposite, making deals with key allies of the USA, like recently the EU,
Japan, Australia, New Zealand (RCEP) etc. - thus stalling the US efforts. The "Eurasian Bloc"
is a Russian wet dream but it`s not in the interest of China.
@42 Passer by
You are reading this wrong. It says in sweet EU diplomacy talk: "Accept a partnership on
equal level if you want our continued support."
[The US could also suffer damage.But then the US has also never been shy about losing
lives in the US to maintain its hegemony.
Interesting times ahead. The US goal of full spectrum dominance is on schedule and
raring to go.
Posted by: jiri | Mar 5 2021 3:57 utc | 73]
The US do not have a functional Nuclear Shelters for their citizens. That's a first.
It's also do not have nuclear proofed infrastructure such as power infrastructure, farms,
water system, etc.
It doesn't have citizens cohesion necessary to survive shattered government authorities
(easy to riot, looting, and murdering happen. Too divided)
Nor it trained or can be controlled in any nuclear warfare scenario protocols to reorganize
and rebuild (recent covid measures reveals their Karen mentality).
It never have or achieve food securities and independence.
It never have energy independence.
It's industrial sector hollowed up with middle managerial class the one that have the
knowledge to ensure their crews and workers can remain in production rapidly aging and or
moving aboard with no replacement due to corporate 'restructuring' culture (no regular s
became senior enough to have their level of experience).
I can go on and on of how delusional your statement is but I'll just stop for now because
it's dumb when you have to specifically point this out.
The only one that can take nuclear war and win their race for rebuilding perhaps just
Russia.
Soviet leaders were of the people as you say, yes, but when you drill into the details of
their careers before they became General Secretaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet
Union, you find they had careers as political administrators and propagandists. Only Leonid
Brezhnev had a technical background. They were the early equivalents of people like former UK
Prime Minister David
Cameron who went straight into the British Conservative Party after leaving Oxford
University with typical graduate qualifications for a career party hack and who for a time
worked for a media communications company; or like current Australian Prime Minister
Scott Morrison
who worked in marketing executive roles in which his most outstanding qualities were his
sheer ineptitude and flouting procurement guidelines.
From Nikita Khrushchev onwards, all General Secretaries with the exceptions of Yuri
Andropov and Konstantin Chernenko (neither of whom lasted long as leaders) had some personal
or family connection with the Ukrainian SSR. This may not have been coincidence: it may
suggest that there was a network of individuals selecting future leaders for promotion based
on close personal career connections.
Until recently most people in the most senior
levels of the Communist Party of China , from whom China's leaders are drawn, had
technical, engineering or scientific backgrounds. Current members are now drawn from most
walks of life though several of them have worked in factories or done manual labour at some
point in their working lives.
As a south east asian myself, I do think the east asians really aren't the way forward,
not until Korea is united, Vietnam and China rid themselves of "to be rich is to be glorious"
Dengists, Japan free of LDP and American sock puppetry. I'm also VERY wary of chinese
reactionaries who speak of Confucianism.
Maybe the grass is always greener on the other side, but I look favorably to the slavs and
their culture, and of course the shining beacon that was the USSR and the 2nd world until
1991 fucks everything up.
Taoism nowadays is basically superstitions. The historical taoist practiced by the ancient
and medieval chinese political class is basically free market libertarianism "just let the
market regulates itself bruh".
There's a reason that most of the greatest chinese emperors practice legalism (Qin Shi
Huang, Liu Bang, Han Wudi), which is direct government intervention in all matters,
especially in market and infrastructure, while the Taoist-leaned dynasty (i.e. the Song)
resulted in mysticism and the take-over of China by the khitdan and then mongols.
In the West, "Taoism" and "Buddhism" are rebranded as some kind of new age exotic
philosophies, but in Asia proper, Taoism is kookery and Buddhism is militarist/nationalist
state religion, see Myanmar and Thailand.
I see you qualify your comment by specifying Hong Kong Chinese. They most certainly are
not Mainlanders and have a culture polluted by British Imperialism that's closer to the
Gangsterism of Chiang Kai-shek than Mao's Collectivism.
You may recall the book and video Affluenza that does a good job of explaining how
traditional conservative mores are assaulted and trampled by affluent modernity. Such
outcomes aren't restricted to North America but are global thanks to human similarity.
If one were to develop a moral equivalency chart evaluating all global cultures and major
sub-cultures, you'd see a majestic hodge-podge with very little uniformity, which also
relates to the very uneven state of human development in all its facets. The great task of
humanity over the next several centuries is to peacefully level out those disparities. But as
I wrote on the Shia thread, the remaining Imperialist nations are a very large impediment in
attaining that goal and need to be removed so humanity can evolve.
There is no reason to speculate. Chinese culture, history, stories, have the answers.
The Romance of the Three Kingdoms, for example, has:
3 brothers who are put forwards as "godly". There is a celebrated image of the three of
them making the vow of brotherhood in an orchard. The leader, Liu Bei, is a prince of the
declining dynasty. He basically constantly virtue signals, but basically mostly does as the
rest, which is fight, kill, and grab other people's territories. His two other brothers
include a psycho drunk and a supremely self satisfied other. They look good next to a
character like Cao Cao;
the intelligentsia are basically bunch of self satisfied gurus of varying degrees of
competence that compete with devising deception schemes against other kingdoms.
the military is hardcore, brutal. also stuck on formations, aesthetics, which can be a
weakness.
the general population are docile cattle.
What the world hasn't seen for 2 centuries is the famous Chinese arrogance that was their
reputation until they truly pooped the pooch of their country with the arrival of Jews and
Europeans.
A certain fragrance of superstition and sentimentality also is always present, at various
degrees.
Obsequious to superiors, inhuman to inferiors. This is what you can expect from a world
order with Chinese characteristics.
Lurking Dragon 66
Obsequious to superiors, inhuman to inferiors. This is what you can expect from a world order
with Chinese characteristics.
Well, this is what we are seeing from our western "partners" as was bestowed upon the
globe by so many self righteous defenders of human rights, democracy and the "white man's
burden"
See for an example Halliburton's mercenaries, ISIS and other creepy creatures invented and
bestowed upon civilisation by people that believe that if you are not jewish, you are not
human and, therefore, can be dispensed at will if of no use to the chosen ones.
Yes, the western hippie generation is very fueled by drugs and new age philosophies. But
note that these rebranded exotic religions do not resemble the native ones.
For example in Asia proper, you have actual deities to worship in Taoism, and it's not
just a philosophy waxing about the Dao like in the west. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daode_Tianzun
And Taoist priests are still an actual thing, and you can hire them to check Feng Shui and
even exorcism.
Still, it's superstitions and money making schemes, and I wouldn't put much trust in
them.
Obsequious to superiors, inhuman to inferiors. This is what you can expect from a world
order with Chinese characteristics.
Posted by: LurkingDragon | Mar 6 2021 1:17 utc | 66
That sounds pretty much like every job I have had here in the USA all of my life. (Except
the union jobs.) There is a reason they hate unions, especially ones that have not been
domesticated yet.)
Hong Kong culture is very different from the culture of Mainland China, thanks in no small
part to HK having once been a link between China and the rest of the world for a long time
and becoming very wealthy as a manufacturing and financial services centre as a result. HK
people are very materialistic and status-conscious, and look down on other Chinese (to say
nothing of what they think of other Asians and other non-white people) who do not speak HK
Cantonese. The only people HK people respect are English-speaking white British and
Americans.
My parents visited HK back in the 1990s and my mother tried speaking Taishanese (our
native language: it is related to Cantonese and is spoken just west of the Pearl River delta
not far from Macau, in Guangdong province) to shop assistants. They ignored her and it was
only when she switched to English that their attitude changed dramatically and fell over one
another to help.
Before the 1980s, huge numbers of Cantonese people living in English-speaking countries
were actually Taishanese speakers. My parents visited San Francisco's Chinatown in 1988 and
nearly everyone they came across spoke Taishanese. It was the dominant language there.
My dad's second (and current) wife is Chinese. He met her online in the late 90's, and she
moved with her young son to Wisconsin and married him around 2000.
I think my dad was looking for a docile women after his previous marriage and girlfriends,
and on the surface, Xue Lin seemed docile...in reality she is not docile, but subtle, a
characteristic I found true of her, her son and the Chinese people I have met thru them.
Nobody ever got my dad to work as hard or be as frugal as she!
They came over with money and bailed my dad out of a tax mess. She still owns apartment
buildings in China. Both are very hard working, smart and frugal, but not materialistic.
Jake (her son) and I ended up being pretty close. He received an MBA from the University
of Wisconsin and worked in the natural gas business in Texas before moving back to China
where I've had the pleasure of visiting him.
My impression of China and the Chinese is largely positive, the extreme work ethic can be
a bother given I am a pothead hippy slacker. There is a lot of optimism and energy there, it
makes the USA feel like a barbaric backwater country whose best days are past.
@66
Sounds like projection. You have nicely described my experience in the USA! Aside from my
union jobs, it has been kiss up and kick down...even self-employed.
"A certain fragrance of superstition and sentimentality also is always present, at various
degrees." Growing up in a small, conservative religious town, this is a great description of
my experience.
I will say, the general American population isn't docile, but are herded about like cattle
none the less. I'd also say the Chinese aren't so much docile as they are subtle, which I
believe is far more effective than rowdy but dumb.
The stereotype of the Chinese as the greedy merchant in SE Asia comes from the colonial
era. Western colonization of China created a Chinese comprador elite who was allowed many
commercial privileges within the Mainland (as middlemen) but also in the SE Asian region. As
every Latin American well know, comprador elites are the worst of the worst. No wonder the
peoples of Indonesia, Philippines etc. etc. see the Chinese as a negative force in their
countries.
The same is true for the stereotype of the Chinese as a mafioso in Latin America: the
Chinese who emigrated to Latin America are mainly triad and hyper-capitalists from Taiwan or
pre-communist China (who may or may not have indirectly come from Taiwan in later
decades).
The same is true for the stereotype of the Chinese as the arrogant, pro-laissez faire
upper middle class individualist in Canada, USA, Australia and Western Europe in the modern
times. They are most tourists and/or a selected bunch of upper middle class Chinese who are
lured into real estate schemes in those countries (Australia, Vancouver etc.).
As we can see, peoples make up stereotypes of other peoples based on small and heavily
skewed samples. That's why we have statistics, and they tell us the Chinese are one of the
most if not the most down-to-Earth, non-religious, socialist and tolerant peoples of the
world today.
This does not comport with Article II(Section 2) of the USA constitution.. which says
"The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the usa, and of the
Militia of the serveral states, when into the actual service of the USA,
but no where do I find a private corporation may exercise the power of the Office of the
President ...? What did I mis?
Are you gonna believe what I tell you or are you gonna believe what you see, comes to mind.
I believe what I see and I don't see the USA doing any bridge building, even in its own
country where bridge infrastructure is in serious decay.
I repeat: These are not normal people in charge. They have lost their minds.
Maybe once a long time ago the USA diplomatic corp was supported by elected officials that
set out to make allies based on mutual respect. But those days are long gone. The only
bridges the USA builds is munition supply channels, be it by air or by sea. They destroy
physical and metaphorical bridges in every nation they occupy.
The USA builds walls and barriers and obstruction: at home at the Mexican border, in the
capital state, by economic sanctions illegally applied throughout the world, by destroying
its home regulatory system to keep poisoned citizens from seeking judicial or regulatory
redress for pollution and human suffering.
I see a mendacious, failed state surrounding its elected officials and financial
institutions and even suburbs with walls and barriers. Then they attack people who criticise
them in moderately peaceful ways. That is who they are, that is what I see.
US politicians usually justify their bloodlust wars with Thucydides Trap style rhetoric. "
Let's fight "X" there so that we don't have to fight them here ." Most of us are old
enough to remember Rice's ominous warning about the " smoking gun becoming a mushroom
cloud ". Granted, it's part of the consent manufacturing process but it's the public
perception of an imminent danger that matters.
At the end of January, Putin was given the opportunity to address the World Economic Forum
(WEF) in Davos, Switzerland (online). The WEF is a prestigious assembly of political leaders,
corporatists and billionaire elites many of who are directly involved in the massive global
restructuring project that is currently underway behind the smokescreen of the Covid-19
pandemic. Powerful members of the WEF decided that the Coronavirus presented the perfect
opportunity to implement their dystopian strategy which includes a hasty transition to green
energy, A.I., robotics, transhumanism, universal vaccination and a comprehensive surveillance
matrix that detects the location and activities of every human being on the planet. The
proponents of this universal police state breezily refer to it as "The Great Reset" which is
the latest make-over of the more familiar, "New World Order". There's not a hairsbreadth
difference between the Reset and one-world government which has preoccupied billionaire
activists for more than a century. This is the group to which Putin made the following
remarks:
"I would like to speak in more detail about the main challenges ..the international
community is facing . The first one is socioeconomic .. Starting from 1980, global per capita
GDP has doubled in terms of real purchasing power parity. This is definitely a positive
indicator. Globalisation and domestic growth have led to strong growth in developing
countries and lifted over a billion people out of poverty .Still, the main question is
what was the nature of this global growth and who benefitted from it most ..
developing countries benefitted a lot from the growing demand for their traditional and
even new products. However, this integration into the global economy has resulted in more
than just new jobs or greater export earnings. It also had its social costs, including a
significant gap in individual incomes . According to the World Bank, 3.6 million people
subsisted on incomes of under $5.50 per day in the United States in 2000, but in 2016 this
number grew to 5.6 million people.. ..
Meanwhile, globalisation led to a significant increase in the revenue of large
multinational, primarily US and European, companies In terms of corporate profits, who got
hold of the revenue? The answer is clear: one percent of the population .
And what has happened in the lives of other people? In the past 30 years, in a number
of developed countries, the real incomes of over half of the citizens have been stagnating,
not growing . Meanwhile, the cost of education and healthcare services has gone up. Do
you know by how much? Three times
In other words, millions of people even in wealthy countries have stopped hoping for an
increase of their incomes. In the meantime, they are faced with the problem of how to keep
themselves and their parents healthy and how to provide their children with a decent
education .
These imbalances in global socioeconomic development are a direct result of the policy
pursued in the 1980s , which was often vulgar or dogmatic. This policy rested on the
so-called Washington Consensus with its unwritten rules, when the priority was given
to the economic growth based on a private debt in conditions of deregulation and low taxes on
the wealthy and the corporations .
As I have already mentioned, the coronavirus pandemic has only exacerbated these problems.
In the last year, the global economy sustained its biggest decline since WWII. By July, the
labour market had lost almost 500 million jobs . In the first nine months of the past year
alone, the losses of earnings amounted to $3.5 trillion. This figure is going up and,
hence, social tension is on the rise." (" Session of Davos Agenda 2021Online Forum,
Putin Addresses World Economic Forum, Jan 27, 2021)
Why is Putin telling his elitist audience these things? Does he think these fatcats don't
know how the system works or how it was originally set up? Does he think they are unaware of
the glaring flaws in a system that shifts all of the profits to obscenely wealthy corporations
and scheming elites while working people slip further into debt and desperation?
Putin knows how globalisation works, just as he knows who it was designed to benefit. It's
no secret. Check out this quote from the Russian president in a speech nearly 5 years ago:
"Back in the late 1980s-early 1990s, there was a chance not just to accelerate the
globalization process but also to give it a different quality and make it more harmonious and
sustainable in nature. But some countries that saw themselves as victors in the Cold War,
not just saw themselves this way but said it openly, took the course of simply reshaping the
global political and economic order to fit their own interests.
In their euphoria, they essentially abandoned substantive and equal dialogue with other
actors in international life, chose not to improve or create universal institutions, and
attempted instead to bring the entire world under the spread of their own organizations,
norms and rules. They chose the road of globalization and security for their own beloved
selves, for the select few, but not for everyone." (President Vladimir Putin, Meeting of the
Valdai International Discussion Club)
"To the victor belongs the spoils"? Isn't that what Putin is saying, that Washington figured
its Cold War triumph entitled them to create a system whereby they could pillage and loot the
rest of the world with impunity?
Indeed, that is precisely what he's saying. And he knows what he's talking about, too.
Putin has followed developments in global trade for over 20 years. He knows the system is
rigged and he knows who rigged it. And now he's telling them in no uncertain terms that they
are responsible for the mess the world is in today. "The world is in crisis, because you
fu**ed up." That's what he's saying. It's not a subtle message, he's simply laying it on the
line. Check out this blurb from an earlier speech by Putin where he shows that he's not just a
capable leader but also an astute critic of social trends linked to globalization:
"It seems like elites don't see the deepening stratification in society and the erosion
of the middle class (but the situation) creates a climate of uncertainty that has a
direct impact on the public mood. Sociological studies conducted around the world show that
people in different countries and on different continents tend to see the future as murky
and bleak . This is sad. The future does not entice them, but frightens them. At the same
time, people see no real opportunities or means for changing anything, influencing events
and shaping policy. As for the claim that the fringe and populists have defeated the
sensible, sober and responsible minority – we are not talking about populists or
anything like that but about ordinary people, ordinary citizens who are losing trust in
the ruling class. That is the problem . " (President Vladimir Putin, Meeting of the
Valdai International Discussion Club)
In this one brief comment, Putin shows that he has a better grasp of 'what is going on' in
the west than any of the numbskulls in congress today. And notice how he ignores the hype about
"racial justice", BLM, "white supremacy" and the other "racialized" bunkum that's
propagated in the media today. He's not hoodwinked by that nonsense. He knows it's just
another diversion promoted by the cadres of dirtbags who use race and identity politics to
conceal their role in the ongoing class war. That's what's really going on. The men that
Putin is addressing in his speech are the very same men who are doing everything in their power
to eviscerate democracy, skewer the middle class and grind America's working population into
dust. It's plain old class war dolled-up to look like racial unrest. Here's more from
Putin:
" During the past 20 years we have created a foundation for the so-called Fourth
Industrial Revolution (AKA–"The Great Reset")based on the wide use of AI and
automation and robotics. The coronavirus pandemic has greatly accelerated such projects and
their implementation . However, this process is leading to new structural changes, I am
thinking in particular of the labor market. This means that very many people could lose
their jobs unless the state takes effective measures to prevent this . Most of these
people are from the so-called middle class, which is the basis of any modern society.
. The rise of economic problems and inequality is splitting society, triggering social,
racial and ethnic intolerance . Indicatively, these tensions are bursting out even in the
countries with seemingly civil and democratic institutions that are designed to alleviate and
stop such phenomena and excesses.
The systemic socioeconomic problems are evoking such social discontent that they
require special attention and real solutions. The dangerous illusion that they may be
ignored or pushed into the corner is fraught with serious consequences." ( Putin, WEF)
Putin understands that the Covid-related lockdowns and closing of "non-essential" businesses
is merely prelude for the massive societal restructuring project elites have in store for us.
They've already put millions of people out of work and expanded their surveillance capabilities
in anticipation of the social unrest they are deliberately inciting. Putin thinks this
futuristic strategy is unnecessarily reckless, disruptive and fails to account for intensifying
social animosities and widening political divisions that are bound to have a catastrophic
impact on democratic institutions. But Putin also knows that his appeal for a more cautious
approach will be brushed aside by the billionaire powerbrokers who set the policy and call the
shots. Here's more:
" Society will still be divided politically and socially. This is bound to happen
because people are dissatisfied not by some abstract issues but by real problems that concern
everyone regardless of the political views that people have or think they have. Meanwhile,
real problems evoke discontent. "
This is a recurrent theme with Putin and one that shows that he has a deeper understanding
of what is really happening in both the United States and Europe than any of his peers.
Populist candidates, like Trump, have not gained momentum due to thier abilities and charisma,
but because the financial situation of millions of Americans continues to deteriorate forcing
them to seek remedies outside the establishment candidates. The economic distress is real and
widespread and, as Putin notes, it is expressing itself in outbursts of discontent, frustration
and rage. Here's more:
"So, the key question today is how to build a programme of actions in order to not only
quickly restore the global and national economies affected by the pandemic, but to ensure
that this recovery is sustainable in the long run, relies on a high-quality structure and
helps overcome the burden of social imbalances. Clearly economic growth will largely rely on
fiscal incentives with state budgets and central banks playing the key role.
Actually, we can see these kinds of trends in the developed countries and also in some
developing economies as well. An increasing role of the state in the socioeconomic
sphere at the national level obviously implies greater responsibility and close
interstate interaction when it comes to issues on the global agenda.
Calls for inclusive growth and for creating decent standards of living for everyone
are regularly made at various international forums. This is how it should be, and this is an
absolutely correct view of our joint efforts.
It is clear that the world cannot continue creating an economy that will only benefit a
million people , or even the golden billion. This is a destructive precept. This model is
unbalanced by default. The recent developments, including migration crises, have reaffirmed
this once again." ( Putin, WEF )
Putin's recommendations, of course, are going to be dismissed with a wave of the hand by the
men in power. The last thing these sociopaths want is "inclusive growth.. and decent standards
of living for everyone." That's not even on their list, and why would it be. After all, they
know what they want. "They want more for themselves and less for everyone else." (George
Carlin) Which is why the system works the way it does, because it was constructed with that one
solitary goal in mind.
Putin also acknowledges the need for greater state intervention in the economy to
counterbalance the more destructive effects of "smash and grab" capitalism. And, while he
rejects the swift and far-reaching structural changes (The Great Reset) that would precipitate
massive social upheaval, he does support a larger role for the state in providing essential
fiscal stimulus, employment and a more equitable distribution of the wealth. This does not
imply that Putin supports state socialism. He does not. He merely supports a more regulated and
benign form of Capitalism that veers from the "scorched earth" model backed by powerful members
of the WEF and other elitist organizations.
With that in mind, Putin makes these specific recommendations:
"We must now proceed from stating facts to action, investing our efforts and resources
into reducing social inequalit y in individual countries and into gradually balancing the
economic development standards of different countries and regions in the world. This would
put an end to migration crises."
The focus of this policy aimed at ensuring sustainable and harmonious development
are clear. They imply the creation of new opportunities for everyone, conditions under which
everyone will be able to develop and realize their potential regardless of where they were
born and are living
I would like to point out four key priorities , as I see them.
First, everyone must have comfortable living conditions, including housing and
affordable transport, energy and public utility infrastructure. Plus, environmental
welfare, something that must not be overlooked.
Second, everyone must be sure that they will have a job that can ensure sustainable
growth of income and, hence, decent standards of living. Everyone must have access to an
effective system of lifelong education, which is absolutely indispensable now and which will
allow people to develop, make a career and receive a decent pension and social benefits upon
retirement.
Third, people must be confident that they will receive high-quality and effective
medical care whenever necessary, and that the national healthcare system will guarantee
access to modern medical services.
Fourth, regardless of the family income, children must be able to receive a decent
education and realize their potential. Every child has potential." (Putin, Davos )
What does it mean that the current president of Russia is now throwing his weight behind
a program that is nearly identical to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's economic Bill of
Rights? Doesn't that seem a bit odd? After all, Putin is a devout Orthodox Christian, a
strong proponent of the traditional family, a self-avowed social conservative, and a
hardscrabble survivor of the failed Soviet state. Who would have thought that such a man
would support a program that provides a decent standard living to every member of society
regardless of their circumstances?
But it makes sense, doesn't it? Putin is pushing for a return to the heavily-regulated
"Heyday" of 20th Century capitalism, when workers' wages were still on the rise, when college
tuition and health care were still affordable, and when the American Dream was still within
reach of the average guy. People were happier then, because they felt that if they applied
themselves, worked like hell, and stashed their savings in the bank; they'd eventually reach
their goal. But that's not true anymore. People are much more pessimistic now and no longer
believe that America is the land of opportunity.
Putin wants to rekindle that optimism. He wants to avoid social unrest by implementing
programs that provide a more equitable distribution of the wealth. This isn't a return to
Communism. It's sensible way to soften the harsher effects of unrestrained capitalism ,
which is presently ravaging the West. Here's Putin again:
"This is the only way to guarantee the cost-effective development of the modern economy,
in which people are perceived as the end, rather than the means . A strategy, also being
implemented by my country, hinges on precisely these approaches. Our priorities revolve
around people, their families, and they aim to ensure demographic development, to protect the
people, to improve their well-being and to protect their health. We are now working to
create favourable conditions for worthy and cost-effective work and successful
entrepreneurship and to ensure digital transformation as the foundation of a high-tech future
for the entire country, rather than that of a narrow group of companies.
We intend to focus the efforts of the state, the business community and civil society on
these tasks and to implement a budgetary policy with the relevant incentives in the years
ahead ." ( Putin,
Davos )
Imagine a political leader who actually put the needs and well-being of his people before
the special interests of his deep-pocket donors and shady corporate buddies. Imagine a leader
who stood eye-to-eye with the big money guys and told them that their system "sucked" and that
they were taking too much for themselves leaving nothing for anyone else. Imagine a leader who
invited more criticism, hectoring, demonizing and punitive sanctions for "speaking truth to
power" in order to stand on the side of ordinary working people, pensioners, cast-offs and the
other victims of this globalist rip-off system.
The reason Putin spoke out at the WEF confab and put himself at risk, was because Putin is
one of the "good guys" who actually believes that everyone deserves a shot at a decent life.
And that's what sets Putin apart from the other leaders in the world today. He doesn't just
"talk the talk", he also "walks the walk."
IF the above comment by BHObama is really him he is arguing that we should hold the course
of American exceptionalism and dominance. I personally, after 70 years of hearing how "we
should tell the world that only we matter" and expect them to ignore their own needs and
aspirations is why China (in particular) is on the rise and the 'myth of America' is
crashing. The recent rebellion among people sick of the way things are heading (typified by
the so-called tRUMP diversion) should serve as a wake up call that something is horribly
wrong.
It wasn't tRUMP that was the problem nor was his idiocy a solution. It is the results of
years of flagrant propaganda that created a nation that considers itself exceptional. We are
exceptionally selfish and war like.
Had the US corporate/banking/Wall Street NOT MADE the egregious mistake with millions of
jobs "offshored"
It was not a mistake. It was done consciously by design by the NWO ELITE CABAL, knowing
the Consequences is going to bring to the 99.9%. The Transnational Globalist Elites do not
have allegiance to a country any more. All they care about is more profit and power.
After reading Putin's statements and Whitney's commentaries, I am further convinced that
whenever some individual or organization constantly and consistently badmouths Putin and
Russia ; these messages come from the enemies of humanity.
It depends on what is meant by globalisation. Globalisation of trade is not necessarily a
bad thing. The problem is that "trade" is not the operative word of the elites, "loot"
is.
That thing doesn't exist. Every complex society in history has eventually collapsed and had
to be regrown from a new basis. Trying to "design a system" is self-defeating. I guess one
could rig governmental buildings with self destruct charges and sarin gas containers controlled
by random nuclear decay to keep the monster in check and to shed useless load from time to
time. "Schrödinger's Office Warmers". I'm going to patent that.
There is too much of a focus on "isms". Right policy is right policy no matter the system.
But the ghosts of Cecil Rhodes still exist. There is a certain group that believes it is their
divine right to rule over all others. There are some who dont belong to their group but will
agree with them as long as they can reap crumbs. Hence the struggles in the world. God alone
will eventually "fix" the problems of man. Until then it is a constant squabble.
The premise that Putin is not the dangerous evil that the US Military Industrial Complex
makes him out to be, is certainly valid. He is trying to carve out a profitable role for Russia
in the future, that depends on participation in Western economies. Germany is on board with
that, but not the USA.
But, like claiming Trump is a populist, there is a certain naivety in suggesting Putin is an
advocate for the common man. I agree with all his words, which fall on deaf ears in the West,
but like Trump, Putin takes care of himself first. Trump sought to destroy universal health
care and was able to pass another tax cut for the rich, designed by the Aynn Rand nutcase Paul
Ryan.
Still it should be recognized that when Clinton and Larry Summers bamboozled Russia into
reorganizing their society into a dozen Oligarchs, the average Russian suffered greatly, which
ultimately led to Yeltsin resigning in tears and handing the reins of Government over to Putin.
Under Putin the average Russian income doubled.
Meanwhile, the USA is doing its best to reignite the cold war. Given our engineered reliance
on Chinese goods today, this doesn't make a lot of sense. These Putin speeches make a lot of
sense yet contradict the current economic structure of Russia and China today, not just the
West.
For those of us in the West taxing the rich is a partial solution to designing a sustainable
economy, which promotes the general welfare, as declared in our constitution. This is an issue
which only Sanders, Warren and a fresh delegation of progressive representatives support today.
They are still a minority.
""To the victor belongs the spoils"? Isn't that what Putin is saying, that Washington
figured its Cold War triumph entitled them to create a system whereby they could pillage and
loot the rest of the world with impunity?"
Putin is an Orthodox Christian and I greatly admire that.
He is also pro family, pro traditional values and a social conservative.
But some people might think that his conservative leanings make him more "free market" than
he really is.
Putin does not worship the market or the people who are able to exploit the system to
their own advantage. Remember, in order to put Russia back on the right track, Putin had to
reign in the oligarchs who had split up the country's wealth under Yeltsin leaving the economy
in dire straits.
This is the lesson that Putin has for us all: If you can't reign in the Bill Gates,
George Soros and other cutthroat oligarchs who want to own and control everything, than you are
not going to have a free and prosperous society .
I was hoping that Trump would meet Putin so Putin could give him so pointers on this issue.
But now the oligarchs have their puppet in the White House so we're screwed.
I've been admiring Putin for several years now. However I can't get one particular thought
out of my head. And it goes to Trump too. Why did he give his credence to Covid19? Why hasn't
he, or any major leader, stood up to the 'science' and rebuked the world wide reaction to this
obvious psy-op? I'm not saying there isn't a set of symptoms (and that's the CDC definition)
that define Covid19. What I'm saying is what any one with a thinking brain is pondering: Why is
everyone wearing a useless mask, closing their pub, standing on a specific X when in line,
bumping elbows, and acting like a certain type of cattle? Why is MSM dedicating 50 minutes of
every hour to a set of symptoms we have all lived with our entire life? I'll answer my own
question. Remember 911 and the news coverage then? If you don't let me remind you. It was 24/7
Osama Bin Laden, Iraq Iraq Iraq, Muslim bad, weapons of mass destruction. Over and over again.
And today we are living with the consequences of our silent acquiescence. And if you don't know
what the consequences were you haven't been on an airplane. There's a reason the media reports
the way they do. It's not really reporting, it's a particular method, a method of
indoctrination, previously known as brainwashing. Ala Edward Bernays.
We have been criminally assaulted by Big Tech, the MMSM, and corrupt politicians, and there
should be consequences.
It was NOT a mistake. Just ask Romney or Paul Ryan or any "American" CEO. The people behind
the offshoring knew exactly what would happen. How could they not? They didn't care as long as
they made personal fortunes out of it.
Go back to the London Conference 1953 and see how The West rigged export surpluses in West
Germany's favour together with 66.2% Debt Reduction and limits on repayments to permit export
surpluses.
This deal alone guaranteed Trade Deficits in UK and USA and a violation of IMF and GATT
rules on persistent trade surpluses. Look how Germany had an undervalued D-mark made
convertible in 1957 and not until 1972 did USA try to reverse it with a Forced Revaluation of
D-Mark. That is when the Werner Plan put the EEC on course for a Single Currency. – which
1991 Germany locked in at an undervalued rate against D-Mark thus gaining persistent surpluses
when Unification should have meant trade deficits.
Distortions of World Trade to serve Western geopolitical interests led directly to higher
inflation in USA and UK which required OPEC to recycle surpluses through Western Banks into
Second World economies. The distortions are what skewed global trade and currency crises for 50
years.
Globalisation was simply a means of exploiting cheap labour and welfare standards to
FINANCIALISE the economic system and facilitate Unbalanced Budgets in The West consistently and
on an upward trend.
China has simply exploited The West and accessed technology and manufacturing capacity to
render The West a non-industrial society of paper-shufflers and transaction-traders wholly
dependent on China for physical goods
@the
grand wazoo more of the same? Bomb Syria. Check. More troops to Syrian and Afghanistan.
Check. More sanctions on Russia. Check.
In Syria, they are stealing 140,000 barrels-day. That is a Trump legacy. But Bidet is
doubling down. They now have 11 bases in Iraqi Kurdistan-North Syria province. They seem to
want to create a de facto country in North Syria.
They are also focusing on Thailand and Myanmar. This is fundamentally 'If we can't have it,
we destroy it.' And a f#ck you to China.
I expect that under Bidet we are going to see Israel dictate American Foreign policy to the
point where the U.S. is no more than a Thug. BiBi the Clown faces another election. I wonder
how that will play out?
@GMC
is why they stepped in to help Syria. Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa
– the real reason it was invaded is because Gaddafi had been influencing African leaders
to switch Africa to a gold standard and to price all African commodities in a new African
currency. That would have pushed out France and the US economic influence over Africa. So for
that he had to die – and now Libya is among the worst places in Africa. But France reaped
what it sowed. Refugees on top of refugees using Libya as their spring board.
Europeans should thank Putin because the refugee problem could be even worse from Syria
right now. But they have themselves to blame anyway.
Christianity is actually more humane than leftist secular humanism or any of its
ideological offsprings.
Did anyone compare number of victims during Christian forced conversions, inquisition and
compare it to victims of other ideologically inspired terror and atrocities?
Orthodox dogma is VERY VERY different from Vatican or Protestants that is much closer to
Plato's time when God and Mother Nature were synonymous.
@Franz
investment in clandestine media control in Russia (Max Blumenthal article), sanctions, Syria,
the neocons are circling Russia and getting ready to strike and Putin is going to this Davos
dufus derby talking about stagnant US wages. There's a deafening lack of focus here.
The whole point with Russia, in case some might have missed it, is that the Empire sees the
need to control Russia as an existential priority. Not just to eliminate it as a threat but
because they know that if China has free access to Russia's natural resources, the Empire is
finished.
It's for this reason that I think that if Putin doesn't see this, he's ceded the field
already.
@Anonymous
derstands this now, but Russia is still stuck at the reaction part of the
problem-reaction-solution cycle. They are being bombarded with problems and can't catch a
break. I see some attempts by the Russian government to form some sort of a political line and
seek real political allies but it looks like they are being blocked by Germany and the
Russian oligarchs. We shall see.
Mike Whitney is reading way too much into Putin's Davos speech, it's simple politics –
praise globalization some to make Xi happy, poo-poo it some to appeal to the average Westerner,
add happy talk about fairness, stir, not shake and serve cold – there's nothing more to
it.
For all these many years now Putin has been relentlessly demonized as a thug, dictator,
threat, you name it. Many Americans have bought into these images under the influence of the
American propaganda machine. One can see the reason for this campaign when one looks at what he
actually says. Americans might get some idea that a president should be looking out for their
interests and that would be bad. Putin can give speeches, field questions, give his personal
analysis on different subjects whilst standing on his feet. Compare him to the current addled
mental midget we have and note the vast difference.
@chris
oy the USA. In an ideal world, the US Deep State would like the USA Empire to have an exclusive
monopoly on nuclear weapons while preventing other geopolitical rivals from acquiring nuclear
weapons. That is exactly what happened at the end of WWII when Truman decided to drop two
atomic bombs on Japan to intimidate Stalin who frantically embarked on a nuclear weapons
program.
What the Yanks wants to do is to 'defang' the Russian bear so they no longer have to fear
Russian nukes, without which Russia would no longer pose an 'existential threat' to the USA.
The Yanks could then do anything, such as bomb any country they want and pretty much rule the
world, FOREVER.
{" What shocked me then about Trump, and now about Putin is that they don't seem to get
it, this isn't some kind of friendly game of Cricket or something, their opponents don't just
want to beat them they want to destroy them "}
Don't be fooled by Putin & Co speeches to the West.
Don't be fooled either by them using terms like "our partners" and such.
Russian leadership got a rude awaking after Yeltsin: Putin is quite aware of what
GloboSorosaNATO is trying to do. He is a former KGB officer posted to East Germany and knows
quite a lot about West/NATO mindset.
@Flying
Dutchman han to its own? And particularly a people that suffers from the mania of
objectivity as much as the Germans. For, after all this, everyone will take the greatest pains
to avoid doing the enemy any injustice, even at the peril of seriously besmirching and even
destroying his own people and country.
Now it is entirely unlikely that a KGB agent cum President of Russia is ignorant of matters
relating to propaganda.
Isn't it perfectly understandable that the whole country ends up by lending more credence to
enemy propaganda, which is more unified and coherent, than to its own?
...I concede that here's plenty of US racism expressed by wars of aggression against
countries outside the USA but that's supported by all races within the USA and both main
parties. In foreign policy, there's only one War Party, dedicated to ruling the world, in the
most aggressive country on earth. That's nothing like the reality within the USA. Yanks don't
want to treat other Yanks like they treat disobedient foreigners and they certainly don't want
to copy Israeli Jews. [email protected]
Absolutely agree.
Russia lacks solid, political structures-from a written constitution and time honored customs
and conventions-and Putin knows this. I thought his reforms were meant to address this
area?
Russia needs some more time, some more babies and good men at the helm. We can hope.
@antibeast
ct and practical causes than the more theoretical nuclear threats it poses.
Owning the significant Russian natural resources would make the US bullying of China,
Europe, the Middle Eastern vassals all the more effective. Yeah, the official story might be
nukes but the vastly more significant pay-off is the control of all the other actors. The proof
is the fact that the neocons are absolutely in a frenzy about destroying Russia, and yet
nuclear stuff never even comes up.
And if you wanted to neutralize a threat, you don't make a frontal attack on it, you would
be better served to befriend the country and create better ties than to try to overtly destroy
them.
A classic villain of 1970s and 80s was the evil tycoon. James Bond took on some of them.
Meet Hugo Drax of the Moonraker , or Karl Stromberg of The Spy Who Loved Me ;
these guys were willing to destroy mankind to replace it with a better version. Stromberg
planned to trigger a global nuclear war and survive it underwater. Drax intended to poison
mankind with his deadly gas and repopulate the world with his new chosen ones. Another one was
de Wynter, the super-villain of The Avengers, played by Sean Connery. He controlled the world
weather, and could kill us all off by hurricanes and tsunamis.
Before the tycoons, when the Cold war raged, a villain was a KGB agent or a Chinese
operative. As détente calmed relations between the blocks, the agents went out of
fashion; later, the fantastic villains of Marvel came into a vogue. The evil tycoons were
uncomfortably close to the real thing; and they moved from the cinematic world into our
reality.
The world we live in is the world formed by evil tycoons. They are the modern Demiurges, the
evil creators of the Gnostics, an early sect that confronted the Church. Like the Demiurges,
they are practically omnipotent; stronger than the State. The government needs lot of
permissions and authorisations to spend a penny. If a penny had been misspent, the dark word
'corruption' will sound. 'Corruption' is a silly concept; by applying it, the oligarchs
eliminated state competition, for they can pay whatever they want to whomever they wish. The
State must observe intricate arcane rules, while the tycoons have no such limits. As a result,
they shape our minds and lives, making the State a poor legitimate king among powerful and
wealthy barons.
The Corona crisis is a result of their activity. Now, a group of WHO scientists completed
its four weeks inspection tour of Wuhan trying to find out how the virus found its way to
humans; some of them think (as President Trump did) the virus escaped the Wuhan Lab. Matt
Ridley of The Daily Telegraph concluded
his piece analysing their findings: "A growing number of top experts [he provides the list] say
that a lab leak remains a plausible scientific hypothesis to be investigated". It is rather
unlikely, said the WHO , but other
explanations (pangolins etc) also
border on the improbable . The Chinese are understandably upset. Hua Chunying, the
spokeswoman for the Foreign Affairs ministry (the Chinese counterpart for the State
Department's Ned Price)
rejected the idea saying, "The United States should open the biological lab at Fort
Detrick, and invite WHO experts to conduct origin-tracing in the United States". The Guardian
report said she promoted "a conspiracy theory that it came from a US army lab"; while Ms Hua
accused the US of spreading "conspiracy theories and lies" tracing the source to Wuhan.
Whatever we say is a fact-based result of diligent research; whatever you say is a conspiracy
theory – both the US and China representatives subscribe to this mantra.
Our own Ron Unz made an excellent analysis of these accusations and counter-accusations in
his April 2020 piece
. He noted that the virus attack in Wuhan took place at the worst possible time and place for
the Chinese; therefore, an incidental release (or intentional release by the Chinese) is
extremely unlikely. Ron Unz suggested that it was an American biowarfare attack upon China.
Didn't American people suffer from the disease? Yes, the US government is "grotesquely and
manifestly incompetent " and they were likely to expect "a massive coronavirus outbreak
in China would never spread back to America".
Perhaps, but a better explanation is that some evil tycoon(s) played the part of Karl
Stromberg who intended to nuke both Moscow and New York causing war and world-wide devastation,
as in the James Bond movie. It could be somebody like Bill Gates, who is a major investor in
Wuhan Lab. A fact-checking site with its
weasel language admitted that the Lab "has received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, but Bill Gates can hardly be called a "partner" in the laboratory." Sure, not a
partner. Just an investor, and that is more important than a partner. And he is not the only
one; other multi-billionaires also are involved in bioresearch, in vaccine manufacturing, in
Big Pharma. "Glaxo, BlackRock, and Bill Gates are all partners, but not owners of Pfizer", says
another
fact-checker . "In 2015, Anthony Fauci did issue a USD 3.7 million grant to the Wuhan
Institute of Virology, but not to "create the coronavirus" – the
fact-checking site adds. Well, you could not possibly expect Fauci to word the grant in
such a straightforward way, could you?
Perhaps it is too formidable a job even for an evil tycoon like Gates. A plot of several
evil tycoons is more likely. Together, they could try to change the world and mankind to suit
them.
The evil tycoons could poison China on their New Year holiday and take this uppity state
down a ring or two. They could import the virus into the US to undermine and remove Trump whom
they hated. (He was certain to win the elections but for Corona.) They could poison Europe to
weaken it and make it more docile and obedient to their demands – and to buy their assets
on the cheap. Corona and lockdown did not harm them for they are normally withdrawn from the
bustle of the common man's life.
The billionaires control the media; that much we know, and the part media has played in the
Corona crisis was enormous. The media coverage of the crisis has a huge hidden cost. Try to
publish information you consider important on the front page of a newspaper. It will cost you a
lot. Still, all newspapers belonging to the Billionaires' Media block beginning with the New
York Times and ending with Haaretz gave at least a third of its front page to Corona news each
day. The sheer cost of this advertising runs into billions. Will we ever know who paid for
it?
Steven Soderbergh's (2011) film Contagion predicted many features of the Covid-19, notably
the origin of the virus. In the film, the disease originates from bats in China and is spread
through markets where contaminated pork meat is sold. How could Soderbergh (or his script
writer Scott Z. Burns) possibly know eight years before the event that the contagion should
originate in the Chinese bats? Who told him? Wouldn't you expect he knew something? Burns was
instructed by WHO experts, the CNN
site explains. Isn't it interesting that the same Bill Gates is a major donor of WHO? Is it
entirely impossible that already in 2011 Gates' people began to leak some details of the future
virus through their own WHO to Hollywood?
The tycoons could force a weak state to follow their instructions. Scientists do obey
orders: otherwise, no grants, no positions. In April 2020, the German
scientists were ordered , "to instill the fear of Corona". And they did it, as we learned
this week, producing numbers of dead on demand.
It seems that tycoons gained most from the Corona Crisis. Their assets grew by trillions,
while the assets of the middle classes decreased by the same amount. More importantly, all
states suffered from the crisis; they took loans and credit, they were responsible for their
citizens' health, while billionaires just had fun and enjoyed it. For this reason, I tend to
dismiss the case against states, be it the US or China, while (some) billionaires appear the
only possible villains.
These billionaires are able to influence people much better that the state. Consider Pierre
Omidyar. Besides being the owner of eBay, he is the force behind hundreds of NGOs. His
organisations form the 'progressive' agenda and train the foot soldiers of the Green Deal.
Roslyn
Fuller of Spiked-online checked the plethora of NGOs he employs.
She says his NGOs and charities are "engaged in 'social engineering' – that is, using
their resources to artificially change the structure of society to how they think it should be.
If successful this would amount to an extreme circumvention of democracy, utilising money not
just to win elections, but to substitute paid or subsidised content for actual support, and
thereby flip an entire political culture on to a different track by amplifying some voices and
drowning out others."
He is just one of the Masters of Discourse, next to the infamous George Soros. Facebook,
Google, Twitter and Amazon are even more powerful. The billionaires have immense clout and they
decide what we can and can't say and write. Just last week Amazon banned my Cabbala of
Power , a book that was sold by them for some ten years. The estimable The Unz
Review is banned on Facebook and shadow-banned on Google. Twitter switched-off President
Trump, showing who is the real boss of the United States. Probably almost all movements
described as 'leftists' nowadays are engineered by the tycoons like Omidyar or Soros. True left
had been left for dead on the battlefield of ideas.
The tycoons are directly involved in the Corona Crisis, because its results are good for
them. And it means they have us where they want to have us, and they won't let us out. We are
cancelled until we regain the government and cancel them.
SAGE, as British Corona management team rather presumptuously named itself (it included the
ridiculous figure of Neil Ferguson, he of the millions of predicted deaths), already declared that
lockdowns will be a part of British life for years to come, vaccine or no vaccine. The
Guardian , the Voice of the Oligarchs, gently pooh-poohed them, for it is not good to
declare what must happen right away. Let people have some hope, so they run to vaccinate
themselves, and then only afterwards can we reveal that, sorry, it does not help, you still
have to don a mask and observe social distance and, yes, suffer lockdowns. "It's much easier to
follow the rules if we think of them as temporary."
The plotters' plans aren't secret; they were described by Klaus Schwab in his book
The Great Reset .
Schwab is not a great thinker, being merely a weak scientist with just a few publications, and
not a good or even decent writer. He had to collaborate with a journalist Thierry Malleret to
produce the book. He is just a voice for the tycoons. But the question is, will he/they get
what they want?
The Afghans (including the Taliban) do not want the US to leave their country. The flow of
US$ into the country (including the flow of heroin$) is what the Afghans have lived on for
many decades. Its not like the Afghans don't have control of their own country. They have
complete control of all the parts of the country that they want to control. They are
perfectly happy to allow Americans to control small parts of the country as long as the $$$
keep flowing into the whole country.
The US power elite may have figured out that just like every other power that has ever
tried to occupy Afghanistan that it is a black hole that sucks the life out of the power
trying to conq
@76 Tom
Interesting! Been too busy for reviewing the new military appointees until I read your post.
It looks like this is a last ditch attempt by Trump to get troops out of Afghanistan and
Syria...
"withdrawing troops from Afghanistan may well be exactly what TPTB want."
Posted by: jinn | Nov 12 2020 23:34 utc | 81
Well, they have had, what 19 years years to do that and now that President Trump makes
another push for it, all hell breaks loose from the forever war team, you know that team of
Democrats and RINO's who are now vying for a spot on Biden's team of psychopaths for war. The
we came, we saw and aren't leaving team.
"withdrawing troops from Afghanistan may well be exactly what TPTB want."
Anything is possible, but given the pushback that is taking place (quietly of course, lest
the masses get awoken) that is seriously doubtful.
Afghanistan can be likened to one of the central squares on a chessboard...control of
central squares is vital as it reduces the mobility of your opponent and lays ground for
offensive action.
China has a border with Afghanistan, as does Iran...were Afghanistan to free itself from
USA occupation, it would make a great conduit for the BRI.
That is without getting into Afghanistan's role in opium trade and the related black
budget, nor its wealth in rare minerals. One might say for the Hegemon to remain the Hegemon
it needs to control Afghanistan.
The problem for the hegemon is Afghanistan is expensive to hold on to...and this is
without Russia, Iran or China putting any effort in to chase US troops out via arming and
training proxies...that could be done quickly, and I am guessing the groundwork is already in
place.
Well, they have had, what 19 years years to do that
_________________________________________
Well sure but you need to remember the story of why we were there in the first place.
They can't just dump all the BS that they have been feeding us for nineteen years and say
"never mind" like Roseanne Roseannadanna.
As for the warmongers who support attacking Libya, Iraq, Syria, etc that was done to send
a message to any country that does not want to knuckle under to the $$$ hegemony and thinks
about trying to escape it.
That messaging does not apply to the Afghan war. That war sends the exact opposite
message.
Putin is considered the richest man in the world for the amount of wealth he
controls , not the amount he owns. Alexei Navalny is considered the bravest man in the
world for returning to Russia after recovering from Novichok poisoning in Germany. Putin had
Navalny's returning flight diverted to avoid mobs of protestors, then arrested Navalny at the
airport.
Never lacking a certain Russian sense of humor, Putin charged Navalny, whom he calls "the
blogger," with violating parole
... ... ...
Putin called the EU's bluff, expelling three E.U.
diplomats from Russia during a visit by the EU's foreign minister, Josep Borrell, on
February 5. Putin's pugnacious foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, spoke disapprovingly of the
E.U. in a press conference standing right next to the humiliated minister. This is the same
Lavrov seen laughing in a famous White House
photo with U.S. President Donald J. Trump on the day after Trump fired FBI Director,
James Comey.
With the E.U. suddenly voting 28-0 against Russia, with Joe Biden proclaiming "America is
back," and with Tony Blinken promising Russia must pay for the recent SolarWinds cyber attack
against the U.S., Vlad the Underpants Poisoner must be feeling his briefs getting
uncomfortably snug.
As Putin desperately tries to wriggle out of the sanctions surrounding him and his
oligarch buddies, he faces the ultimate decline in his fortune: the green new deal.
The
majority of Putin's wealth is still in the ground , and it's worthless if the world turns
away from fossil fuels as quickly as it appears to be. Without the NORD-2 pipeline shipping
gas from Russia to Germany, without the corrupt contracts to supply satellite nations with
fuel, Russia has nothing to sell except tourism and nesting dolls.
Putin will encounter the same problem the nations of the Arab Spring encountered:
domestic youth realizing their futures look nothing like the lives they see on their phones.
The Russian people are not stupid. They know they're not enjoying the same quality of life as
their European neighbors. Even though Western Democracies fail to provide for basic living
needs, they are at least exciting and hold the possibility of getting unbelievably
rich.
... ... ...
STEVE O'KEEFE is the author of several books, most recently Set the Page on Fire:
Secrets of Successful Writers , from New World Library, based on over 250 interviews. He
is the former editorial director for Loompanics Unlimited.
I've been saying this same thing for months. Trump's policies were widely popular. It was
Trump's personality that did him in along with a lot of help from a pandemic, the FBI and the
media.
The democrats are going to push way too far left for the country to stomach. You do not
have to be a hard core conservative to think that it is unfair for girls to compete against
trans girls or some guy that claims to identify as a girl and nor is any liberal father going
to be thrilled with his 13 yr old daughter sharing a locker room with one.
Pretty sure that if we took a vote more than 90% of adults in this country would agree
that the government should not be able to step in and override a parents decision not to
provide puberty blockers to their child or that children should even be given puberty
blockers. BUT that is what is being nominated by the Biden team.
Trump tried to get us out of Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq but the dems fought him tooth and
nail right along with the hawks in the republican party. WHO KNEW the dems would become the
war hawks? Biden sent more troops into Syria on his first day. Now he is trying to figure out
how to get out of the withdrawl in Afghanistan and Germany.
All these "green" energy policies are going to lead to higher costs for electricity, gas,
home heating oil, natural gas and they are gonna do it while unemployment is high.
Going to push for $15 minimum wage that they KNOW is going to kill a lot of jobs while
unemployment is already obscenely high.
BTW Trump voters were overall higher earning than Biden voters. That they had fewer
college degrees tells me two things. First, that the average Trump voter is not a toothless
redneck but a professional tradesman or small business owner. It also tells me that a college
degree aint worth the paper its printed on if your looking just at earning potential.
Point is .the democrats are going to tick off a lot of people. Pass the minimum wage and
those that get the increase will love you but those that lose their jobs will hate you and
small business owners across the country will detest you. Do not pass it and the left will
never forgive you.
Yep, I think the democrats are going to have a very very hard time and they are going to
end up turning on each other. I also think that Trumpism without Trump has a very good
future.
Dont get me wrong, Trump will be around. He will attend rallies, raise money, drive the
media nuts and the democrats insane but he will not run again. He is going to just create
headaches for the media, the democrats, the never Trump republicans and enjoy the heck out of
it. But he will not be a candidate.
The 'New Democrats' have stolen the nouveau riche from the Republicans, and the nouveau
riche are fantastically richer than the old money. The NewDems have also abandoned poor
people. The only way forward for the Repubs is to corral the poors.
The way to do it? Retarget the Christian Right from abortion to usury. 1 out of 7
Americans has a debt collector after them. Everybody, even this atheist, knows the story
about Jesus throwing moneylenders out of the temple.
If Trump wants to get any traction in 2024, he's got to weld the Repubs back together.
Usury is a great strategy.
Trapped in the empty luxury and petty court intrigues of Versailles, the French ruling
class could only see their own imagined beauty and illusions of power reflected in mirrors.
They were ignorant and blind to the despair and rage building up against them among the
ordinary people of France.
Today, old Reagan Free Market, minimum government Republicans and tree-hugging, coal,
oil and natural gas-hating and abortion-loving romantic Green Democrats who hold the
politics of Washington and its media in an iron (and rusting) grip are the true heirs of
those decadent French aristocrats. Their Mainstream Media has become a 21st century
Cybernetic Hall of Mirrors 2.0. Across the Atlantic the dark and doomed Spirit of
Versailles has migrated from the outskirts of Paris to Brussels where it now resides in the
European Commission.
History has repeated itself on a colossally larger scale.
Populism is a term used in neoliberal Newspeak instead of the term "mass social protest" and
it is used by neoliberal propagandists and neoliberal MSM in order to smear the rejection of
neoliberalism by the vast swats of the US population. Generally this social movement (and it is
a social movement) is about the resistance to neoliberalism and globalization.
When the term "populism" moves on front pages of neoliberal MSM and into papers like this
one that, first of all, means the process of de-legitimization of the ruling (in our case
neoliberal) elite reached at a moderately dangerous for the elite stage which requires some
"active countermeasure" not just passive suppression in MSM and ostracism.
The typical charges of corruption, the control of government by financial oligarchy,
outsourcing and offshoring of manufacturing jobs as well and suppression of wages and
redistribution of wealth up are just icing on the cake. The core is the rejection of
neoliberalism, the rejection of accumulation by dispossession – gangster capitalism in
other words. Which is politely called "redistribution of wealth up" in the neoliberal MSM.
Trump during his 2016 election campaign (and only during it; he governed like Bush III )
voiced some concern that are typically associated with this mass rejection of neoliberalism and
instantly became kind of de-facto leader of the movement. But, in reality, he was yet another
"full-blown BS artist" as Tucker called him.
So Trumpism or "national neoliberalism" is not exactly populism – it is more of the
attempt to hijack and channel the protest in a way beneficial for the "nationalist" part of
national oligarchy and military-industrial complex like happened in Germany in late 20th
– early 30th. Only this time "national neoliberalism" card is played instead of "national
socialism". And what is interesting is that intelligence agencies, which typically are viewed
as a part of the military-industrial complex, fought Trump and this movement tool and nail. The
Russiagate gang of Brennan-Comey-McCabe was not an accident.
Please note that the social base of Trump movement are not so much blue collar unionized
workers but owners of small business and contractors. They stick to Trump as their leader
despite blatant betrayal of their interests on his part. that does not exclude part of blue
collar workers but if you look at the social composition of the Jan 6 meeting participant I do
not see many blue color workers in it. But is did included some former police officers, which
is pretty telling and makes it superficially looks like Germany 2.0.
And rapid construction of barbed fence and National Guard sleeping on Capitol floors is
another testament that neoliberal elite took this threat seriously.
Durham was investigating the Mueller Russia-Collusion coup against President Trump and his
administration.
He was appointed as Special Counsel in October.
He resigned as US Attorney in Connecticut.
There will likely be no indictments after the Deep State spied on Trump and attempted to
throw him from office.
[...]
Update 3:59 pm EST via Twitter/Chad Pergram:
"John Durham steps down as US Atty in CT. But stays on board as special counsel probing
origins of Trump/Russia investigation. Biden Admin asked US attys to resign by end of
February"
Probably means whatever Durham was investigating will receive a quiet burial.
Most Americans consider Kissinger a war criminal too, and informed Americans know that
Zbignue Brzenski has lost all credibility. He was a cold war era Anti-Russian. He has said
little if anything relevant since the collapse of the USSR.
Informed Americans would prefer a doplomatic relationship with their neighbors south of
the border. It would be much more economically and environmentally sustainable to have a
cooperative agreement with Venezuela, rather than the KXL advocates north of the border, that
Biden thankfully banned. It may be the only thing tbat he ends up doing correctly. I hope
not. I did not vote for him, Trump, or anyone else. Biden, Blinken, and Austin speak about
wanting to go back to the JCPOA and START, but whether they are willing to give up their
policy errors of force through sanctions, and falsely blaming Iran for the attack on the
Irbil Iraq airport will probably determine whether they can do this successfully or not.
Everyone is sick of the bullshit from the American government, including American citizens!
The government does what they Globzi investors demand from them. They really do not give a
damn about anyone else. Everyone is just a means to an end to them, and unkess someone is
exceptionally wealthy, they are an irrelevant pain in the ass to the government, unless they
are willing to sell out their own interest in order to elevate the corrupt government.
That's true. As a barometer of establishment thinking, Foreign Affairs is indeed
useful. I would just make a distinction of using it to understand establishment thinking
versus using it as a source for good policy, which is evidently questionable if its editors
still think Robert Kagan has anything useful to propose.
@Sirius e Council on Foreign Relations quest for a New World Order through global
cooperation, ending borders of trade and immigration, and continuing America's military role:
ready to intervene anywhere in the world if necessary.
Escobar: The Art Of Being A Spectacularly Misguided Oracle
Peace is Forever War
Now let's move to another oracle, a self-described expert of what in the Beltway is
known as the "Greater Middle East": Robert Kagan, co-founder of PNAC, certified
warmongering neo-con, and one-half of the famous Kaganate of Nulands – as the joke
went across Eurasia – side by side with his wife, notorious Maidan cookie distributor
Victoria "F**k the EU" Nuland, who's about to re-enter government as part of the
Biden-Harris administration.
Kagan is back pontificating in – where else – Foreign Affairs, which
published his latest superpower manifesto. That's where we find this absolute
pearl:
That Americans refer to the relatively low-cost military involvements in Afghanistan and
Iraq as "forever wars" is just the latest example of their intolerance for the messy and
unending business of preserving a general peace and acting to forestall threats. In both
cases, Americans had one foot out the door the moment they entered, which hampered their
ability to gain control of difficult situations.
So let's get this straight. The multi-trillion dollar Forever Wars are "relatively
low-cost"; tell that to the multitudes suffering the Via Crucis of US crumbling
infrastructure and appalling standards in health and education. If you don't support the
Forever Wars – absolutely necessary to preserve the "liberal world order" – you
are "intolerant".
"Preserving a general peace" does not even qualify as a joke, coming from someone
absolutely clueless about realities on the ground. As for what the Beltway defines as
"vibrant civil society" in Afghanistan, that in reality revolves around millennia-old
tribal custom codes: it has nothing to do with some neocon/woke crossover. Moreover,
Afghanistan's GDP – after so much American "help" – remains even lower than
Saudi-bombed Yemen's.
Some context to the 2016 to 2020 Trump interruption to Business as Usual:
The United States in 2016 was long lost as republic. Politically it had been transmuted
into something for which there is no simple traditional title. Oligarchy and plutocracy and
tyranny and corporatocracy and insane asylum and stupidocracy, with disproportionate Jewish
presence at levers of influence and power, still fails to capture the whole adequately.
This – whatever descriptive we give it – political conglomeration aka the
'United States' had residual elements of Empire – 1000 ish military bases and uncounted
numbers of biological warfare related facilities outside its borders. It still militarily
occupied Japan and Germany and Italy and South Korea and many other countries.
Doctrine promoting 'full spectrum domination' – that is, the intention of achieving
global totalitarian control – was still hanging in the air and influencing behaviour.
The Federal Reserve dollar was still the dominant international currency. The United States
was still a heavyweight in the IMF and UN Security Council. Many countries remained de facto
vassal to it (Canada, Australia, Norway )
At home a police state had been in place for generations, but the mass media and
educational system steadfastly refused to call a spade a spade. The mass media had
comprehensively for generations been a mind warping propaganda system. Publicly execute JFK
and RFK. In response the political and judicial system and the media have been comatose or
lying to the people for half a century.
The treasonous false flag 9/11 2001 is carried out, and again, the mass media tell lies
and censors and the political system is silent or complicit in buttressing the official lies.
More police state measures are implemented, and mass murdering wars of aggression abroad are
initiated. The more general 'war on terror' war of terror is launched, which is actually
merely the old policy of subversion, robbery, murder etc abroad given a new title and a
refurbished rationale (from fighting communists to fighting terrorists).
Meanwhile at home the middle class and the blue collar workers and the infrastructure are
in steady decline. 40 % of Americans are living hand to mouth while billionaires proliferate.
Tens of millions are on anti depressants, while tens of millions more are morbidly obese or
beset with chronic serious health problems. Etc. Growing basket case.
Meanwhile David Rockefeller famously confesses that he and his family (and fellow
'intellectual elite' and banking exemplars) have been working against the best interests of
America and towards the goal of world government. Sort of a Rockefeller Pinky and the Brain
syndrome, but not a cartoon, a real intention, steadily worked towards. He writes that all we
need is the "right big crisis" and voila, we will have it!!: World Government. The New World
Order.
Then something happened. Whatever folly and genius and everything in between Donald J.
Trump possesses, whatever his intentions conscious or unconscious might have been, he in 2o16
won election over the selection of the Powers that BE. They tried to steal the election, but
the tide for Trump was too strong.
In the wake of this political rookie's election, while he may have been naive, and
foolish, and made any number of questionable moves, he was also facing the entire phalanx of
the global establishment.
One of his first acts was to announce that he was going to drain the swamp, and all the
many powerful swamp creatures took this as an unforgivable and deeply threatening public
challenge. So a four year unending attack on Trump by FBI, DOJ, mass media, former CIA,
European politicians, tech giants, and the American political establishment ensued.
Equally guaranteed to create a massive effort by the PTB was his rhetoric on behalf of
national sovereignty and against globalism – The Rockefeller-esque extended pipedream.
One of his first acts was to cancel the TPP, which had threatened a further erosion of
national sovereignty on behalf of the power of transnational corporate and financial
power.
Another fundamental really priceless contribution that Trump made was to continually and
pointedly jeer at and identify the "fake news": The NYT and CNN were subjected to the public
humiliation of a sitting President continually accurately describing them.
Trump's willingness to call out the mass media propaganda and brainwashing system that the
CIA under largely Jewish auspices (or vise versa?) had intensely inflicted on the American
people for decades was an indispensable act of rebellion. American politics and media is
dependent upon the pretense that it is legit. Trump's message was: there's something deeply
wrong here: Fake news and the Swamp.
Trump also at least gave frequent voice to the desirability of reducing American military
activity and presence abroad, and stands in contrast to his Nobel Peace Prize winning
predecessor Barry ( aka B.O.) Soetoro (Libya destroyed) and George Bush the Latter (Iraq and
Afghanistan attacked) and Clinton (Serbia attacked). Trump as comparatively a deplorable
peacenik.
So then we have the COVID- psyop, creating de facto world medical martial law, which is a
kind of sick facsimile to Rockefeller's pipe dream. And also, dislocating, disorienting,
social and economic turmoil and pain. Trump was placed at the center of that storm,
surrounded by ghoulish Fauci and the CDC and the Bill Gates contaminated WHO.
Then the looters and burners and rioters were let loose. And the underlying goal was to
have Americans so sick of it all and Trump could be blamed and surely he would be thrown out
of office.
But even so, no. He wins in a huge landslide. And the Swamp goes all out and installs a
pathetic creature in Trump's place. This story is not over .
"The world has moved on." – the character 'Roland' in Stephen King's The Dark Tower.
(an excellent series, btw)
Change is constant. It is inevitable. It is an ever-flowing river. America however, does
not ascribe to this truism. America has *not* moved on. It does not change or adapt. It
simply continues to fervently believe it is it's right to rule the world. Simply put, the
days and decades where a single country 'rules the world' – like the Mongol, Byzantine,
Romans, French, and British empires before, are gone. The Americans are nonetheless very
slowly coming to realize this historical point, and they are desperately trying to reverse
the trend. To absolutely no avail. They cannot escape history. The American empire will die
the same death as all empires did before it. Maintaining empire, and peace 'at home' becomes
unsustainable. The costs are simply too great.
It is ludicrous that a country founded on genocide and slavery, at war during 90% of it's
existence demands the rest of the world look to it's 'beacon on the hill' as a viable option
for humanity. It is laughable.
I read the hope inherent in the comments section to this piece. It is unfounded. Why do I
say this? I will direct you to the latest spew from the Atlantic Council entitled "The Longer
Telegram: Toward A New American China Strategy". It makes for farcical reading, and an
interesting thought game it to substitute the US in any instance China is mentioned, and vice
versa. Nonetheless, it is a plan by the movers and shakers to re-establish American global
dominance. It is a disgusting piece of work. Much like America itself.
Putin surprised me. He flatly refused the offer of Schwab and his ilk. He condemned the
manner of recent pre-Covid growth, for all the growth went into a few deep pockets. Moreover,
he noted that digital tycoons are dangerous for the world. In his own words , "Modern
technological giants, especially digital companies, are de facto competing with states. In the
opinion of these companies, their monopoly is optimal. Maybe so but society is wondering
whether such monopolism meets public interests".
The tycoons were probably amazed. In 2007 in Munich, they laughed at him. Max Boot, a
Russian Jewish émigré, called Putin,
"The louse that roared" and added, "in Putin's sinister and absurd rhetoric, you can hear an
empire dying". Mad Max didn't know yet which empire is dying.
Putin was supposed to be softened up by pro-Navalny demos on January 23 (The Davos talk was
on January 27), but he was not. Quite the reverse. The Russian President does not like to be
pushed. The demo on January 31 was met with force; those detained were sentenced to heavy (by
Russian standards) fines. Three European diplomats were expelled from Russia for joining the
demonstration. Josep Borrell, a Spanish diplomat and a representative of the EU, went to Moscow
and was harshly treated. In the concluding press-conference, the Russian minister for foreign
affairs Sergey Lavrov told the press that Russia does not (repeat, not) consider the EU to be a
"reliable partner". The expulsions were carried out at the same time. In addition, Putin warned
the West that 'sanctions' (acts of economic warfare) could cause Russia to use direct military
force. It was probably the first such warning since 1968.
At the same time, Russia practically ended corona restrictions. Bars and restaurants have
been opened for night revellers; sport events have returned; schools are open; in some parts of
Russia, the masks became "recommended" instead of "compulsory". Russians are now allowed to
travel and return freely from many countries. The Russians have easy access for their vaccine
Sputnik-V that was deemed by The Lancet the best of all existing Corona vaccines. It is a coup
comparable to the first Sputnik launched in 1957, the Western experts said. Thus Russia has
derailed the Grand Reset.
This development had caused a huge shift in consciousness in Russia. If until now (since
1970, at least) the Russian educated classes tended to feel inferior to the West, the
prosperous lands of the free, then this has now changed. One of the leading Russian theatre
directors, Constantine Bogomolov declared that
the West is undone. The West's compulsory political correctness, its culture-cancelling, its
kneeling and boot-licking of BLM, its cult of transgenders, its fear of 'harassment' and sex,
its obligatory smile, its wokeness, its fear of death (and of life!), are comparable to the
behaviour of Alex, the victim of Clockwork Orange therapy, said Bogomolov.
The young man [Alex] does not just get rid of aggression – he is sick of music, he
cannot see a naked woman, sex disgusts him. And in response to the blow, he licks the boot of
the striker. The modern West is such a criminal who has undergone chemical castration and
lobotomy. Hence this false smile of goodwill and all-acceptance, frozen on the face of a
Western person. This is not the smile of Culture. It is a smile of degeneration.
He concludes:
The West tells us: Russia is at the tail of progress.
Wrong.
Just by chance, we have found ourselves at the tail of a runaway train, rushing headlong
into [Hieronymus] Bosch's hell, where we will be greeted by smiling multicultural,
gender-neutral devils.
We should uncouple our carriage off the train, make a sign of cross and start rebuilding
our good old Europe, the Europe we dreamed of. The Europe they have lost.
Take notice of his call to 'make the sign of the cross'. In the West, the churches are
barred, service had been discontinued. The Anglican Church is on the verge of dying ,
with its Archbishop of Canterbury celebrating BLM, removing statues from the churches,
accepting every SAGE edict locking the churches up. Meanwhile Russian churches are all open and
worshippers are pouring into their cathedrals every feast and Sunday.
Russian boys and girls are flirting with each other, fearless of MeToo and harassment
charges. Russian cafes are open. Whoever wants, can get a jab against Covid, or ignore it.
For the first time in many years, Russia shows the way for the West. This is good. Perhaps,
the West, after a long-needed correction, will be able to overtake Russia again. Though Russia
showed the way of socialism to Europe, the best results of socialism were achieved elsewhere,
in the North of Europe. Good old Europe (and the US, its overseas offshoot) are still able to
repeat this feat and get rid of the plotting tycoons and their preaching of compulsory love. At
this occasion, perhaps banning all tycoons is a good idea. In the better world before their
rise, there were no multi-billionaires. History is not over; we are entering the most
interesting part of it. Be of good cheer!
Bravo! Israel Shamir. I enjoyed every syllable of that essay. It frames the shocking
reality that is nowhere treated so forcefully in print in the decadent West. These tycoons
not only purchasse their corrupted governments but are positioned to trade them in concert
like Monopoly board properties, all in plain sight of our blind mass media.
Putin courageously stepped up a notch when he said as much to the Davos crowd and then
demonstratively restored to his own countrymen many of the basic freedoms that have just been
erased in the locked-down EU.
How long will it take for Europe's venal career politicians to realize they are in danger
of becoming just expendable hirelings in the new world order they have so gleefully promoted?
Probably nothing short of a revolution could now save the United States from the new
feudalism.
But Putin's warning must have resonated among the European politicians, whose status and
relevance still derives from a long tradition of statism with a strong social components.
Will the national governments finally grasp that the gravest threat is not the hated populism
but relegation to irrelevance by corporations and plutocrats. The stakes are clear; either
governments will reassert their prerogatives or plutocrats will govern.
For the first time in many years, Russia shows the way for the West. This is good
. Perhaps, the West, after a long-needed correction, will be able to overtake Russia
again.
This is good and timely and needs to be repeated often.
Actually, near where I'm at, "Russia" has been showing the way since Putin got rolling,
even before they tried pulling the Obama rug over our eyes when our hollowed-out economy
became obvious in the days after Bush W. ("War President") made large segments of the old
working class ashamed to be American again.
By all means, let Putin pull out a dusty copy of Ron Reagan quotes and start punting them
back to the United States of Blah.
How did Ron put it in 1982? Oh Yeah: "A nation that cannot honor its own people's rights
cannot be trusted anywhere else."
Putin can simply quote the Dead Cowboy. The current Plutocracy won't get it, the
economically wrecked in the USA already knows it, and everyone else can enjoy the Old Truth
that always gives a wicked return: What goes around comes around.
thank you mr. shamir for the uplifting analysis of this brave new world order being
foisted upon us.
I don't think we will be able to throw off our billionaire overlords unfortunately, as the
average citizen is too compliant and indoctrinated to understand what is happening to
them.
We have no vladimir putin to slay the dragon here. i'm just glad that russia is here as a
counterweight to the kleptocratic cthulhu wrapping its tentacles around the world.
Max 'Jack' Boot's comment reminds one of Croesus. Contemplating whether to attack Persia
or not, he consulted the Pythia at Delphi and the oracle declared that, if he attacked, a
great kingdom would fall. He attacked, but the Empire that fell was his, not Persia. And
brilliant example of Zionazi hubris.
The State must observe intricate arcane rules, while the tycoons have no such limits. As
a result, they shape our minds and lives, making the State a poor legitimate king among
powerful and wealthy barons.
Just by chance, we have found ourselves at the tail of a runaway train, rushing headlong
into [Hieronymus] Bosch's hell, where we will be greeted by smiling multicultural,
gender-neutral devils.
We should uncouple our carriage off the train, make a sign of cross and start rebuilding
our good old Europe, the Europe we dreamed of. The Europe they have lost.
There are some fine sentiments – and many in the West would like to joint the
project.
Biden began his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination in June 2019 at a
Manhattan hotel,
telling wealthy donors that "nothing would fundamentally change" under his presidency.
After one month in office, it appears as if that is one campaign promise he is likely to
keep.
The U.S. will also continue its wars on Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.
We are left to guess where, not if, Biden will start another one.
Posted by b on February 19, 2021 at 18:46 UTC | Permalink
I always thought that Biden's campaign slogan should have been a modification of Obama's
"Hope and Change" slogan.
Biden's campaign slogan should have been: "No Hope and No Change."
And, contrary to the 1960s-1970s, it will now have to start to win those wars, otherwise
the wealth will stop flowing.
I believe the objective now is to prevent wealth from flowing East. This means
that the definition of 'winning' the war may not be the one we intuitively may think of.
An obvious example which illustrates the strategy is the one of a functioning, promising
nation with the highest standard of living on the African continent turned into a devastated
stretch of rubble.
Another example is the success the empire is having in Syria. With large chunks of
confiscated land and a state of durable smoulder everywhere else, we shouldn't expect the
Eastern bloc to extend westward to the Mediterranean anytime soon. Nor should the empire fear
the regional actors gaining sufficient economic and political mass to ever make an impression
on the world podium and demand the return of occupied territories and repatriation of all
refugees as required by law.
"We are left to guess where, not if, Biden will start another one."
Given the context of the past 20 years including the Bush, Obama and Trump presidencies
and current geopolitical realities, I doubt Biden starts a war on par with Libya, Syria,
Afghanistan and most certainly not on the level of Iraq. They will have to try hard to grow
and harvest so-called low hanging fruit if they intend to engage in any real, direct,
shooting military engagements much less invasions/occupations. I'm not saying that can't or
won't happen - and I predicted a much wider scale military confrontation with Iran if Trump
was re-elected. Maybe not an all out invasion which would never sell back home and would be a
military and societal folly of epic proportions. But Trump did try with Soleimani, tanker
seizures, and standard militaristic posturing and prodding, not to mention brutal
sanctions.
Biden isn't as beholden to Israel (which isn't saying much since the rest of the gov't is)
or Saudi Arabia (there is a "damning" report coming soon on the Kashogghi murder which
allegedly ties it directly to MBS...duh) and most countries which are even possible military
targets that represent a "threat" to US or Israeli interests have been thrown into chaos and
instability (which was the real goal). China, Russia, North Korea, and even Iran are off the
table in my opinion.
Guess we'll have to wait and see. While the US corporate media were the main cheerleaders
for the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions, they sold Obama's wars much more subtly, often
intentionally ignoring or burying stories that were contrary to that administration's image.
That is the kind of treatment I expect from them for Biden if and when he starts a new
war.
The Harris/Biden presidency will not start any more wars just like the Trump presidency
because we are in the throes of a civilization war already and it escalated to MAD phase in
late Obama days.
Yes, there can be border skirmishes but no more invasions like Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
Russia has said that Iran is a strategic partner of Russia and I believe both China and
Russia are protecting Venezuela to some degree.
The process of taking sides in this civilization war continues and as the membership of
those sides firms up, the firming events at some point will precipitate the final
act......extinction or capitulation.......I hope I get to see the final act and maybe
experience a bit of the denoueument period.
It sure looks to me like empire is in crash and burn mode but we haven't reached the final
act of this shit show yet.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 19 2021 21:02 utc | 26
Of course. That goes without saying at MoA. Those who frequent this site understand the
brutality of sanctions and embargoes. We also know they are acts of war. But I don't think
that's what b meant when he said: "We are left to guess where, not if, Biden will start
another one." If so, what other countries are left to sanction? Keep in mind that "another
one" means one that isn't currently sanctioned/sabotaged - which Biden will of course
continue doing. So what countries do you think might be on their radar for new brutal
sanctions?
Closest thing I can think of when it comes to war under Biden would be Reagan/Bush/Clinton
(incl. Hillary)style coups and "behind the scenes" support for right wing death squads in
Central and South America. Otherwise, I think the Biden administration sits back and supports
Israel's invasion or destruction of Lebanon.
Come on, you can do better:
"its wars"?
How about "Its unlawful, war crime, extra-constitutional wars of aggression".
The US military: most expensive, losingest military in human history. Hasn't won a war since
1945 unless you count Panama and Grenada.
So Biden is saying he Made America Great Again ? Just by successfully scamming the
election? Even if he never delivered at least Trump's MAGA referenced jobs and industry and
economic growth. Biden's MAGA is just about tone and empty posturing. Which one attempted to
deal with reality and which one is just delusion? I'll leave that as an exercise for the
reader!
Really, why would anyone be surprised that a candidate who did nothing to win the
Presidency should similarly do nothing once elected?
Posted by: c1ue | Feb 19 2021 21:15 utc | 30
Ouch!!
Many a true word is spoken in jest...
...
It'll be easy for the Biden Admin to start a new war with Jewed-up John (Assad Must Go) Kerry
as USA's Climate Czar. The Climate Czar has a big say in Energy Policy which Trump
interpreted as Stealing Oil. Kerry's appointment is unlikely to have been an accident.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 19 2021 21:47 utc | 35
"...which Trump interpreted as Stealing Oil."
LOL
So are you saying that Trump didn't "steal oil" in and around Syria or are you simply
commenting on his campaign messaging and not his proven history of stealing (no quotes needed
and anyone can find the information) oil?
"Biden's Post-Trump NATO Reset Points to Failing U.S. Global Power in Multipolar
World."
Key snippet:
"American hegemonic ambitions required to satisfy its corporate capitalism are dependent
on a zero-sum geopolitics. The globe must divided into spheres of influence as in the earlier
Cold War decades. There must be antagonism to thwart genuine cooperation which is anathema to
American capitalism. Indeed, it can be said that the Cold War never actually ended when the
Soviet Union dissolved more three decades ago. America's imperialist ideology continued under
new guises of 'fighting terrorism', 'democracy promotion and nation building', or more
recently 'great power competition' with Russia and China.
"The bottom line is that NATO is more important than ever for enabling Washington's global
power ambitions given the demise of American capitalism and the rise of China and Eurasia.
NATO provides a crucial political cover for what would otherwise be seen as naked American
imperialism ." [My Emphasis]
IMO, the socio-political-economic set of crises within the Outlaw US Empire will deter
BidenCo from going to war elsewhere, especially if Dollar Hegemony's to be salvaged or at
least delayed from ending soon. The one big change that Hudson will raise in his rewritten,
third edition of Super Imperialism will be the Outlaw US Empire's loss of ability to
have the world finance its Imperialism as was the case until 2008. That's why Stoltenberg's
cost-sharing proposition is being warmly received in DC.
The Texas has been returning for 7 days the stone age . IF Germany wants destroy the
Nordstream II project for American gas.. I wish they see what is happening in TEXAS.
We are left to guess where, not if, Biden will start another one.
He actually started one already. It's called a war against his own people (~ half of the
population, to be precise).
There is no need for a democratically elected president, for whom the majority of voters
honestly voted, to sit behind several rows of high barbed wire fences guarded by thousands of
soldiers. And if this happens, then not everything is okay. Not okay at all.
I think there's a hyrid war on all countries that have:
a large Shia or Palestinian population;
a socialist/anti-oligarch orientation;
are simply not willing to be assimilated into the Empire;
allied with country(s) that fall into the above categories.
I count at least a dozen countries (along with the stateless Palestinians) that qualify.
And lets not forget the war on whistle-blowers, "populist movements", "conspiracy
theorists" and other domestic dissidents. Example: white nationalists are fine when
they support Trump's expanded military budget and denunciation of socialism but become an
evil threat when they rail against his total support for Israel or demand answers as to why
they are being de-platformed/canceled.
Those who claim (directly or indirectly) that Trump didn't start any new wars are
(knowingly or unknowingly) minimizing the outrage of the Empire's many, and ongoing, hybrid
wars for total global domination.
Tannenhouser (#3) said 'Actually lends credence to the theory that there aren't 2 parties
anymore ... Soon to b 3 parties just like Canada. Then u will have 3 parties doing
squat....except for donors.'
Might be true for the US one day, but here in Canada our third party is a centre-left
alternative to the two centre-right parties...
Why would anyone be surprised that a candidate who did nothing to win the Presidency should
similarly do nothing once elected? by: c1ue @ 30 <= based on the laws, decisions and lies
in years since 1788 it seems obvious to me the less the USA does, the greater will be
America.
I get what you're saying but I don't think the war is against one half versus another
half. In my view the real war is from the top against all below.
~~
On the US domestic scene, I happened to notice today that the Administration signed off on
extending foreclosure forbearance until midsummer, but didn't extend the eviction moratorium
past March.
I'm on the side of mortgage holders (i.e. small landlords), and forbearance is useful, but
no extension for tenants? They are determined to clean the weak off the rolls, aren't
they?
That's a 3-month margin for landlords to evict tenants, rehab the property and get it
rented again at a a higher rent. Tight, but doable for small landlords (whom I regard as
little different from the rest of the poor, by the way - rentier philosophies
notwithstanding).
~~
What the US always does supremely well is knock the weakest portion of society into the
gutter through financial manipulations (recessions) and then sweep them all into a memory
hole so they don't exist anymore. Those who survive don't notice the carnage and it is never
mentioned, so life goes on as if there's a working economy.
There's a subliminal tacit agreement in US society, I think, not to mention the ones who
fell by the wayside, in case this should plunge the economy into another fall. No one dares
to talk about the weak who are lost. Some of the survivors glory in their survivorship, while
others I suspect are simply afraid to call the airstrike down on themselves. No negative
thinking, lest the magic runs out.
But it keeps the economy running, for a bit longer.
In light of the Romanoff recent articles, I think this dynamic fits the national psyche
somewhere.
@jim46. The orange house in Canada is in cahoots w whatever party happens to be in power at
any given moment. It spouts
virtuous rhetoric at every opportunity, and then does what ever blue or red house tells it
to. ALL three parties in Canada serve the same interests, and it isn't yours or mine. Ever.
Look no further than each parties stance on Palestine. All three are beholden to Non
sovereign interests. The Red house handed 2 elections to the Blue house under Harper by
fielding unelectable candidates. Dion 1st and then Ignatieff. The blue house has done the
same, second unelectable candidate being O'tool. The NDP is left in rhetoric only. Under its
previous leader it may have had a chance at leading federally. Jagmeet hasnt a hope here, and
he knows it, which why he pretends to be relevant with virtue signaling. Its all Kayfabe just
like the states.
Im not sure if the NCP counts as center left in any meaningful way compared to the
Liberals or Progressive Conservatives. Nowadays, the NDP are mostly "Liberals" who weren't
cut-throat enough to cut it in the Liberal Party. The Greens are at least slightly different
from the Liberals & Conservatives in that they are fanatical in their devotion to "Green"
policies. However, I would hesitate to call the Greens "leftist", as they every bit as
Neo-liberal in their economic policies as the Liberals & Conservatives (just with a green
veneer slapped on top) and pro-war as well, i remember during the last election I was
considering voting green and saw their foreign policy boiled down to keep trying to overthrow
of Assad and the mass settlement of Syrian refugees into Canada. Call me old fashioned, but
I've always felt that sinking ships so you can praise yourself for rescuing the lifeboats is
a repugnant morality. Perhaps one day Canada will have a political party worth voting for,
but until that day I will keep casting my vote for Putin
I agree with Kadath that the Greens, under Annamie Paul, are neoliberal and not at all
antiwar. Ms Paul seems to unquestioningly accept all the Sinophobic and Russophobic
propaganda peddled in our Canuckistan media. I was really hoping that Dimitri Lascaris would
win the leadership but "Democratic" (DNC) style rigging, including by the outgoing leader,
ensured that Dimitri would not succeed Elizabeth May.
Thanks for your posts, that's what I see too. They found another slice of the salami. I've
seen a few other rhetorical touches that suggest they are heading towards less "kinetic"
options, and Iran is aware of the situation. They took the bait. Psaki has said that is all
we are going to do before talking. Zarif says "we agree", but all the stuff Trump did must be
undone. Which would seem like a congenial choice for Biden to consider. But I don't suppose
everybody is going to take this lying down. But this all does suggest a dose of reality is at
work, which would be nice. I notice the Bidenites want China and Russia in the talks
too.
Munich Security Conference 2021(video conference): SleepyJoe, no comment, he can't remember
his speech anyway.
Obvious stoned Stoltenberg reports about NATO's low-carbon warfare! LOL!
U.v.d.Lying, no comment! Sic!
Looks like dancing vampires: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n5s6he1feg
Lisa Fritz Kabarett, sorry German only.
This so-called rare earth (RE) element shortage is a false narrative pumped out by the
fake media, controlled by the US -asset-liquidating vulture GloboCapitalists.
There are lots of mothballed US/North American RE mines/deposits that were shut
down/abandoned/undeveloped, for cheaper Chinese sourced (cheaper labor/dirty coal
energy-powered/pollution friendly) RE mined resources.
The Vulture GloboCaps just don't want to pay the extra out-of-pocket to mine RE
domestically.
That would cut into their profit margins...[just like in Texas...]
Well, NATO is sending 3,500 new troops to... Iraq.
increasing its invasion force from 500 troops to 4,000. So maybe that's an indicator where
the next 'war zones' are going to be: Iraq and Syria... Again
Gotta keep a hold on that Syrian oil and the better part of the Syrian northeast as well,
which can easily be used as a springboard (along with the al-Tanf area) to mount/support
either frequent ISIS and/or al Qaeda, etc attacks on the Syrian government and people.
And after endless debate, the simple question is; How much improvement in the lives of
workers across America, will Biden's owners let him tinker with? After all is said and done,
that's the key to any president's term.
We'll see. Take a deep breath and pay attention to what's done, not what's said,
especially in the empire's MSM.
So true. Radoslav Dimitrov captured the reality so well in his concept of "Empty
Institutions" designed not to make any real policy progress, but rather to provide
performative political art on a regular basis to distract from the actual lack of real
progress. I have linked to his paper below:
Below is a quote from Biden's speech to the Munich conference....at least he agrees with my
civilization war context....
"
"We are in the midst of a fundamental debate about the future direction of our world. Between
those who argue that -- given all of the challenges we face, from the fourth industrial
revolution to a global pandemic -- autocracy is the best way forward and those who understand
that democracy is essential to meeting those challenges."
"Historians will examine and write about this moment. It's an inflection point. And I
believe with every ounce of my being that democracy must prevail."
"
When is the world going to call BS on the democracy term applied to a society that has its
money system controlled by a cult of private individuals? The longer humanity continues to
live the myth/lie of democracy in the West, the more likely our species will go extinct
because we are unable to evolve beyond barbarism as our form of social organization.
No offense to anyone (or their imaginary friends),
But,
What are these silly bitches going to do when the music stops?
Seriously? https://youtu.be/AULRSOK1KPQ
...
Just sayin'...
div> The world is like an onion, it has layers. Where Trump attacked
everything Obama, Biden is attacking everything Trump plus his supporters and, while the MSM is
mostly silent on this, about half the USA is gearing up for a civil war. Meanwhile the
international wars have been increasing, just not so visibly. Don't forget the digital wars,
the apparent biological wars, the propaganda wars, the food wars, and etc. And while most
people just recognize the shooting wars the oligarchs, through the
military-industrial-congressional complex and other world governments, are playing a global
game of Monopoly against each other where even superpowers are but pawns. WWIII started years
ago, it's just that most people don't recognize it as such because it's not state actors
calling the shots, it's oligarchs who are, in essence, ghosts because we can't see them.
Posted by: Glenn S Olson , Feb 20 2021 4:17 utc |
71
The world is like an onion, it has layers. Where Trump attacked everything Obama, Biden is
attacking everything Trump plus his supporters and, while the MSM is mostly silent on this,
about half the USA is gearing up for a civil war. Meanwhile the international wars have been
increasing, just not so visibly. Don't forget the digital wars, the apparent biological wars,
the propaganda wars, the food wars, and etc. And while most people just recognize the
shooting wars the oligarchs, through the military-industrial-congressional complex and other
world governments, are playing a global game of Monopoly against each other where even
superpowers are but pawns. WWIII started years ago, it's just that most people don't
recognize it as such because it's not state actors calling the shots, it's oligarchs who are,
in essence, ghosts because we can't see them.
Posted by: Glenn S Olson | Feb 20 2021 4:17 utc |
71
"And while most people just recognize the shooting wars the oligarchs, through the
military-industrial-congressional complex and other world governments, are playing a global
game of Monopoly against each other where even superpowers are but pawns. WWIII started years
ago, it's just that most people don't recognize it as such because it's not state actors
calling the shots, it's oligarchs who are, in essence, ghosts because we can't see them."
This is obvious to anyone paying attention, so, you'd think more folks would get it.
Putin's response to the Duma Speaker is worth citing fully. Too bad so few will read his
words:
"What you have said regarding the so-called platforms, the IT companies, presents a major
challenge, and not only to us alone. You can see what happened in the United States. This is
a watershed running across the world as a whole, an ideological watershed, which is
absolutely obvious . I have said this before, but I can repeat it now: if they behave
like this in their own country, how will they treat others if they think themselves
exceptional? This is a serious matter, and we certainly need to think about it in
advance, this is the obvious thing.
"As for freedom of speech, the situation is perfectly clear to us as well. The so-called
double standards have manifested themselves so vividly recently that we have no doubt about
how our so-called opponents will behave towards us, no doubt at all.
"Just take a look at Ukraine, where three leading channels have been shut down at the
stroke of a pen. And everyone keeps silent, while some have even given them an approving pat
on the back.
"How can we comment on that? The only thing we can say is that they are using these
instruments to attain their own geopolitical goals. This is also true for Ukraine. Why are
the developments pivoted on Nord Stream 2? They want Russia to pay for their Ukraine
geopolitical project, that is it. In fact, this is a rather primitive and simple thing. We
have become aware of this long ago, but this is the world we are living in.
"Or take a look at what has happened in Latvia. They have clamped down on 16 of our media
outlets, but the only reaction to this is silence. Why have the Western truth seekers not
provided any assessments of what is happening to freedom of expression there, in Europe? No,
there are no evaluations, as if this is how it should be, because they are allegedly fighting
propaganda. As if what they are doing is not propaganda. What is it then? This is an
instrument of attaining their geopolitical goals, in this particular instance, with regard to
our country.
"We must take this into account. I would like to say once again that this is nothing out
of the ordinary. I believe we have been observing this, seeing this happen for a long time,
but the recent events have especially vividly confirmed the correctness of our views and
assessments." [My Emphasis]
Myself and many others would certainly like to know what Putin sees as "their geopolitical
goals" as well as those "with regard to our country." I know Putin's said he sees the Outlaw
US Empire is trying to deter Russia's development, but that seems too simplistic to me
knowing that the #1 policy goal is Full Spectrum Dominance.
Thanks for the FYI. That's not at all an unexpected assault on a method for the people to
redress grievances, not that it was actually acted upon since the Executive has a very nasty
habit of not obeying the law.
I'm curious as to how Russia will regulate Western Big Tech platforms licensed to operate
within Russia if they violate the terms of the agreement outside its borders, as Twitter did
recently to a Russian group outside of Russia. Perhaps Russia will make an extraterritorial
law such that if Twitter, for example, unjustifiably freezes an account as it does daily it
will lose its rights to operate within Russia. As for the individual user, IMO its dumb to
sign onto a service that you know practices censorship and shares private data with
governments and other entities--either you value your own privacy or it will be stolen from
you. With luck, quantum computing and its encryption algorithms will destroy all efforts at
data collection; but those days are a ways off and will likely first become available on
Chinese devices which the West will ban.
I wonder what our Aussie barflies have to say about this :
"Facebook to ban Australian users from reading and sharing news in response to
government's Big Tech bill."
That's right! FB Australia is going to ban its users from discussing a legislative
proposal by the Australian government that would regulate Aussie FB.
If that's how they choose to operate, more nations will ban them. And again I ask why have
anything to do with an organization that censors basic content.
Google promised the same about two weeks ago as the Murdoch controlled Oz legislature is
pushing to ensure that if big tech carries links to articles in news sites such as Murdoch's
Daily Telegraph or Fairfax's Sydney Morning Herald they, big tech, will have to kick back a
proportion of the advertising revenue they make.
Despite it being murdochian the claim has some merit, but no monopoly is going to acquiesce
to such a small population as Australia's so Google, FB, Twitter etc, will just ban all news
links to Oz sources.
The Oz conservatives are likely to do their usual "damn the voters, full speed ahead" as
long as nothing else crops up to make this too on the nose.
This if it happens will be a win win for the Oz population as they will revert back to
sourcing their own news and sharing it with others free of big tech's control &
censorship. It will be an interesting time, although the monopolies will be pushing shock
horror tales about it outside Oz. There is no chance of it happening in amerika as BidenCorp
is a big tech puppet, but it could happen eventually as the fishwraps still retain
considerable power over the amerikan political structure.
Thanks for your reply! I recall one of the Cold War talking points was that the Free Flow
of Information was Vital to democratic governance and was a major reason why the USSR and
Warsaw Pact was so backwards as they stifled all information flows through censorship and
other means. VoA Trumpeted that constantly. Such hubris is going to encourage the world's
nations to come together to control what are clearly becoming outlaw organizations.
The last outstanding nugget from Putin's conference is an admission by Putin of his
political-economic philosophy made during his reply to the Communist Party's Gennady
Zyuganov:
"The growth of unemployment during the pandemic – it is not big but it is still here
and we are seeing and recording it. I speak about this all the time and encourage the
Government to do what is necessary to reach pre-crisis levels. In general, the situation is
improving and has proven to be better than preliminary forecasts. But you are right. It is
clearly necessary to focus on this all the time .
"Of course, I know that the Communist Party is always concerned over issues of
privatisation. I have also spoken about this. Probably, our approaches to this matter do not
always coincide, but at any rate I believe we share the common view that privatisation for
the sake of privatisation is unacceptable for us, especially the way it was carried out in
the 1990s in some areas. It must be beneficial for the economy; it must improve the economic
structure. We must proceed from the premise that any step in this context must create a
better, more efficient owner de facto, in practice rather than formally . But obviously,
this must be done in a certain environment so as not to give away what costs millions and
maybe billions for next to nothing. This is the bottom line for us." [My Emphasis]
Lots of trolls accuse Putin of promoting Neoliberalism. The above proves them liars.
Putin's foremost concern has always been for the welfare of his fellow Russians. If I
haven't made that clear over the years of my reporting on his speeches and pressers, then the
failure must be on those feigning blindness when they can see perfectly well.
IMO, the four main political parties are all fundamentally nationalist, even the
Communists. I don't think anyone/party anti-Russian/pro-Neoliberalism has any chance
politically, and won't for many years. However, it's what I'll term progressive nationalism
that seeks to promote the same in its partners--even in those nations that don't deserve such
treatment. Russia takes the high road and doesn't deviate, which I find commendable. It's my
hope that the Eurasian Bloc will follow the examples of Russia and China, but selfishness and
greed are formidable obstacles, not to mention exceptionalism.
Last week. during a visit by the EU's foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, Russia's Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov
slapped down the EU's sanctimonious interference in Russia's internal policies.
Back in Brussels, Borrell, who was criticized by some EU hardliners for not directly rebuffing Lavrov's
talk, set down to write
a blog post in which again attacked Russia over the latest Navalny stunt:
I have just returned from a very complicated visit to Moscow, on which I had embarked to
discuss the fraught state of EU-Russia relations. They have been low for a number of years,
and deteriorated even further after recent developments linked to the poisoning, arrest,
and sentencing of Alexei Navalny as well as the related mass arrests of thousands of
demonstrators. The purpose of this mission was to express directly the EU's strong
condemnation of these events and to address, through principled diplomacy, the process of a
rapid worsening of our relationship with Russia, and to help prepare the forthcoming
European Council discussions on EU-Russia relations.
Borrell is delusional. Hardly anyone in Russia believes the nonsensical poisoning story
for which the 'west' could provide exactly zero evidence:
Only 15% in Russia believe the Navalny poisoning was the Govt trying to eliminate an
opponent, and the 15% based this opinion from Telegram and the Internet and were mostly
18-24. The rest think it was staged, a Western false flag, personal or opposition:
https://levada.ru/2020/12/24/...
The whole Navalny poisoning was obviously some secret service operation to bash Russia.
His lavish living in in a 5 bed
room luxurious apartment in Germany after he was released from hospital was paid
by the libertarian oligarch Evgeny Chichvarkin . Chichvarkin, who
lives in London, is probably an MI6 cutout. It is still not known who paid the multimillion
production costs for the
fake 'Putin palace' video. The studio renting for the video was requested by a company in
Los Angeles. Some U.S. involvement is thereby assured.
Poland and other NATO countries are now openly pressing Navalny and other traitors like
him to continue their regime change attempts:
This confrontation was predictable. There is a limit to what Russia can accept. Even after
the russophobic UK departure from the EU, the mood is the same.
Therefore a frank confrontation may either be a wake-up call for Europe that they may lose
totally Russia as a partner or in the contrary bring them more apart.
What the EU fails to realize is that without Russia , it may end up become the puppet of the
USA and the UK
Time will tell
thanks b.... you're correct borrell is delusional and a perfect representative for a
delusional europe.... i am glad lavrov said what he did.. i just wish russia would throw the
shit back at them by making a parallel with the wests treatment of assange... it really
highlights the outrageous-ness of the west at this point...
and someone on the open thread posted about mh17 and trying to access more info contained
in boxes on the rear part of the plain that might lead to a different conclusion... as i see
it mh17, skripal, navalny and etc. etc - are all frame ups to take down russia... it has
reached a level of insanity and borrell is the perfect delusional character to represent it
all here..
throw the shit back at them russia... call the west out on their endless bullshit... the
time for diplomacy is long gone and this appears to be the conclusion that russia is indeed
coming to, however slowly....
Borrell - "The strategic choices we make now will determine international power dynamics in
the 21st century, and notably whether we will advance towards more cooperative or more
polarised models, based on closed or on freer societies."
He answers his own question - the EU (and "partners") will advance towards a more
polarized international model, based on their own self-serving definitions of "closed" or
"freer" societies. This self-generated dichotomy will be used to mask the true nature of this
perceived crossroad: "they" can live with us, but "we" can't live with them.
In a video posted earlier today, 12/02/2021 Alexander Mercuoris of The Duran analysed the
reaction of Germany's politicians to Lavrov's comments.
Basically even Heiko Maas the anti-Russian foreign minister shit his pants at the though of
Russia abandoning Europe and therefore jeapordizing Germany a significant percentage of it's
energy supply.
When all is said and done, the E.U. will suffer far worse than Russia if Moscow abandons
Europe.
The technocrats know this. However the level of maturity required to overcome their hubris is
patently lacking and to re-orientate themselves idealogically will be viery difficult as can
be seen by the reaction of 70 mental retards who pose as M.E.P.s in a letter they signed
calling for Borrell's resignation and a tougher stance on Russia.
Until a few years ago, Russia did not have an alternative for purchases of many items
other than from the West. It now has China to supply most needs. When China finally solves
the problems caused by the US sanctions to semiconductor factories (it will take roughly a
decade to develop its own photolithography and design, the most critical tools of advanced
semiconductor processing), China will be able to provide everything that Russia needs except
for warm climate fruits and vegetables (maybe Turkey?). This new paradigm seems to be behind
Russia's new assertiveness. Europe should make peace with Russia before it fully tilts
towards the East.
In 1990 at the what I then thought end of Cold War there seemed an opening to the
coalescing of a northern hemisphere zone of peace - but that vision has come to nothing. What
an idiot I was! How could I ever have thought that the best of the inheritance of Western
civilization would lead in the West. The plowing, plundering, grasping, murdering and
scheming for profit psychos in the West stabbed that vision in the heart. I am sure now
another opening will not come in my lifetime - the West will make sure of that.
If I was younger I would leave the US but now can only hunker down and stay out of the way
of the juggernaut of rampaging psychos lurching from one failure to another. The only relief
from the deepest moments of despair is looking to the East and others that are building and
working together to build a new world. Obviously Russia and China, along with Iran, Cuba,
Venezuela, Syria and others. It is a strange world for me turned upside down when I even
include North Korean resistance to the US Empire of Mendacity as contributing to the building
of that new world.
the Reality is NOT quite right the way b has present it. EU together with US, Canada CAN
and WILL hurt Russia deeply if they slap severe economic sanctions on Russia's energy sector.
And Russia knows that and EU knows that Russia knows it.
The West's game is very simple: cut Russia from the Western world, by denying it access to
any type of new tech, economic loans and any type of ties with the West. (this worked quite
well with the Soviet Union, so it WILL work again) And this WILL hurt Russia deeply
economically, no question about it. And before you tell me about China and the supposed
Russia-China's ties, let me inform you that the ties are merely economic and both still don't
trust each other. The Russians are well aware of CHina's claims over Siberia. They don't
really work together, most of those ties are imaginary and dont really exist.
Putin has made several mistakes, and he is too dependent on the Rich Russian millionaires.
The threat of sanctions made him freeze when the West went after Ukraine and Putin didn't act
to save it. Russia will cry bloody tears over this in the very near future. This is only the
overture of things to come. There will be another fake false flag even in the Azov sea after
which USA will demand Russia be boycotted. Ys that will hurt EU also, but the Eu are
masochists who love getting their asses fucked by US.
Russia better get prepared and get their supply ass grease ready, they will be getting
serious ass fucking very very soon. And they wont be able to do anything about it. Good
going, Putin!
I commiserate as we're in the same boat. I watch like a hawk because forewarned is
forearmed!
/////
Published at the right moment given events is this
Strategic-Culture Editorial : "NATO's Road To Perdition With Ukraine." It omits
the Borrell incident to focus on the recent meeting between NATO secretary general Jens
Stoltenberg hosted Ukrainian prime minister Denys Shymhal at the organization's headquarters
in Brussels:
"At a joint press conference, both men were upbeat about Ukraine joining NATO. Stoltenberg
admitted that the former Soviet Republic has been eyed for membership of the alliance since
2008, a timescale which puts more recent conflict over the past nearly seven years in
perspective. He also confirmed that NATO forces have been building up their presence in the
Black Sea in coordination with Ukrainian counterparts. In recent weeks, three US warships
have been training with Ukrainian naval vessels in order to counter what Stoltenberg says is
'Russian aggression'."
So, there's much more in the stew than it appears:
"It is interesting to speculate why Stoltenberg – a former Norwegian premier and
nominal civilian head of NATO – this week appeared to give new impetus to Ukraine's
ambitions. Could it be related to the change of administration in the United States? Senior
members of the Biden administration have publicly stated during Senate hearings a willingness
to increase military support for the Kiev government in its conflict with pro-Russian
separatists in Eastern Ukraine. American and European envoys at the UN Security Council
this week reiterated strident accusations against Russia claiming that Moscow was responsible
for prolonging the conflict in Ukraine . Russia's envoy Vassily Nebenzia countered that
it was the Kiev regime and its Western allies who have not implemented the previously agreed
Minsk peace accord signed in 2015." [My Emphasis]
Bald-faced lies in public forums that began with Clinton/Gore have steadily escalated and
clearly aren't a product of any one administration but a continuity of the War Party's
attempt at Full Spectrum Domination that keeps slipping further away from any possibility of
occurring, thus its desperation. Yesterday, I provided this link to The Saker's latest
analysis and called it a Must Read. Within he links to several reports from Russian media
and military sources that those watching closely need to read. Yesterday, Putin met with his Security
Council ostensibly about arms control but I think the conversation went well beyond that,
although I have no confirmation.
The Solovyov-Lavrov transcript isn't complete yet, but what's there is incredible! As
Lavrov said, "Well, this is some kind of a kingdom of crooked mirrors." If what Lavrov said
of Borrell's position, we should have some pity for him being put into such an impossible
position--but then, he's well paid to do his duty.
Patrick Armstrong wrote yesterday about the consequences of the Navalny brothers' scam in
2012 against Yves Rocher:
NAVALNIY. The story continues. The theory that he's being fitted up for a treason charge
was given a boost when Zakharova said he should be called an "agent of influence" rather than
a politician. His suspended sentence for fraud was lifted and he's off to prison. Read Yves
Rocher's statement; sounds to me as if the company believes he did swindle them. The fact
that there's now a campaign against the company suggests my deduction is correct. https://patrickarmstrong.ca/2021/02/11/russian-federation-sitrep-11-february-2021/
That contains a couple of links giving more details of the case.
Armstrong also links to this tweet by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs of a video
showing many examples of police brutality in the West and also violence by protesters against
police in Russian (the opposite of what is shown in Western media). https://twitter.com/mfa_russia/status/1356674233464729609
Several days ago on the 10th, I posted
this link and commented about what I deemed the notable words spoken by Lavrov on
Diplomats' Day. IMO, it's a martial pep-talk given his peroration followed by this
paragraph:
"Russia's attempts to become an independent state, to uphold its right to an independent
foreign policy and to protect international law are coming against increasingly harsh
resistance of our Western colleagues, who would like to teach 'obedience' to us. They would
like us to accept the highly questionable interpretation of common human values, an
interpretation that contradicts Russia's cultural and civilisational traditions. They would
like Russia to become a 'convenient' territory for promoting their own security, economic,
social and political interests. We can see that these are becoming ever more aggressive with
every passing day. We must actively apply our efforts, knowledge and experience, based on the
wisdom of our predecessors, to consistently promote the foreign policy course formulated by
President Vladimir Putin."
How else do you prepare your diplomatic corp for war?
If you've followed Lavrov closely for many months as I have, the change in his demeanor is
quite marked; yet as Paco notes, he still maintains his professionalism. Lavrov's perplexity
about how consensus is supposed to function was well put--we know several nations disagree
with the policy yet go along with it--WHY?--the united front undercuts your own interests. In
Putin's latest conversation with his Energy Minister, there was no mention of Nord Stream 2's
situation. Given all the sanctions and lack of pushback by the EU nations most dependent on
it, IMO Russia is willing to sacrifice it as it didn't bear all the costs and has plenty of
potential customers for its hydrocarbons. So, I wouldn't at all be surprised if Russia
stopped short of finishing, said it would fulfill its existing contracts, but no more would
be negotiated until conditions drastically change. Hardball is just that--Hardball.
Levada is
considered a [pro-]Western sociological service (there are links with Soros) in Russia
and the results of its polls, let's say, cause a certain skepticism. 15% of those who believe
in "poisoning"... I would say figures of 5-8 (maximum 10) percent look much more realistic.
It is still not known who paid the multimillion production costs for the fake 'Putin
palace' video.
Well, I would look for sources in names like
Khodorkovsky or/and Browder .
Both scammers are longtime haters of Russia.
The Kremlin later said that some media misrepresented Lavrov's remarks but essentially
confirmed his stand
According to Russian legislation, the country's foreign policy is determined directly by the
president. The Foreign Ministry is essentially just a repeater, although of course it
introduces its own peculiarities. Therefore, there is no doubt that Lavrov's words were
coordinated with (and approved by) Putin. Peskov, as usual, in his own manner, tried to
somewhat "smooth out"/"embellish" Lavrov's directness and rigidity, which, however, does not
negate the essence of the statements themselves.
Today Navalny was back in court for publicly insulting a World War II veteran. The EU will
certainly make remarks about that. But only a few days ago police in Scotland arrested
someone because he typed a mean tweet about a British veteran of that war.
Here I can only support the British, who massively stood up for the offended veteran Sir
Thomas Moore.
Citizens wrote mass appeals, statements to the police demanding to bring to justice the
degenerate who insulted the memory of the war hero.
Unfortunately, Russian society often lacks such civic initiative. Yes, the authorities
will do their job, and a piece of shit named Navalny, who slandered the war veteran, will be
punished. But besides the actions of the authorities, it would be nice to see also the
"demand of the people", you know.
And I have been following you, following Lavrov.....
The Nordstream II is a question mark. It is being finished by the Russians, with their own
ships. The Germans have also realised that their own interests are tied up there. The
"Threatening situation" (from the west) does not come from either one.
My conclusion is that EU policy is being dictated from outside , the secondary
question is "by whom". Unfortunately I suspect that the main driving force is the same one
that "enabled" Biden, Enabled the ousting of socialist candidates in many countries. (Corbyn,
and in S. America generally), and generally assume they are the top of the top.
Is this force based on "nationality" or on "interests", call them Religious nuts, Extreme
militarists OR Financial Fascists? Alternatively are they a mixture of all three***.
One explanation for Lavrov's coldness is that IF the EU was an independent representative
body (which it isn't) then certain actions to improve the lot of the populace would have been
taken. That they are not means that they lack the ability to deviate from what they have been
ordered. By way of an explanation, the Media will lie, because they cannot do otherwise
having been "bought" in some way. Lavrov has certainly changed. Because he probably knows
what is "supposed" to happen, and the EU miasma do not understand that they too will be in
the forefront of any battleground. (Since that includes me, I am not too happy about the
situation either).
Aside; *** They could be mixture of all three tendencies. ie. 9/11 had operatives from the
Saudis, Israel, and the Pentagon, with three different motivations. Religious (Saudis),
Suprematist (Israel) and monetary (Pentagon and it's "lost" trillions, and profitability by
insiders).
As the head of the Soviet intelligence service, Leonid Shebarshin, an extremely
well-informed man, once said: "The west wants only one thing from Russia -- that it does
not exist".
"One explanation for Lavrov's coldness is that IF the EU was an independent representative
body (which it isn't) then certain actions to improve the lot of the populace would have
been taken ." [My Emphasis]
Now what current ideology supports such a policy--that the lot of the masses
isn't supposed to be improved; rather, they are to have their wealth wrung out,
then be tossed aside and used as manure. Hint: It was famously announced as Trickle-down
Economics, which was lambasted as Voodoo Economics.
If you read Hudson, then you know where the power center lies within the Outlaw US Empire
and its network of vassals--The privately held Central Banks and those that control them and
many other key corporations thanks to interlocking boards of directors--the same basic cabal
that failed to assassinate FDR and oust him via a coup but succeeded with JFK, RFK, MLK, and
so many others: millions when adding in their terrorists and their Death Squads.
To rid Europe of its Central Bank, the EU would need to be disbanded. But to gain complete
sovereignty, NATO would need to die also. Currently, Europe is essentially occupied by a
force every bit as immoral as the Nazis. It's not by accident that Lavrov, Putin and others
invoke the Great Patriotic War and the events that led to it as recurring.
I would not be surprised to see Russia actually perform the deeds it's accused of, like
actually invade and subdue Ukraine. It it did so, realistically what would change? Nuland
famously gave the answer Russia would now echo--Fuck the EU. As with the Republic's Trade
Federation secretly aligning with the Sith, the EU will come to regret playing dummy to the
Outlaw US Empire as it gets barred from gaining any benefits from being in the Eurasian Bloc
and China's BRI Combo.
I don't really follow the Navalny situation anymore because as soon as I see Russia
mentioned in any Western media I assume it's an "intelligence community" psyop or just plain
old propaganda. But something piqued my curiosity regarding this alleged mansion of
Putin's.
Strategic culture provided two links to YouTube videos in their articles, one of which to
my knowledge isn't subtitled so I don't know what was being said in Russian. In this video a
group of guys made the trip to the site of this mansion compound and showed the place in
disrepair, looking like exterior had aged quite a bit.
The other is to Navalny's own video which alleges to explain that the reason for the
current state of the project is that the original design/construction were faulty and that a
serious mold problem, as well as leaking roofs, had caused them to strip out the entire
interior ostensibly to rebuild from scratch (and allegedly tossing "billions" of rubles worth
of marble and other fancy construction materials). He also says that the original photos and
video which show the place in pristine condition, were from 6 years ago before the
teardown.
Leaving aside the obvious fake photos (like the one in Moscow times which was a
photoshopped Putin swimming in his new mansion, lol) and the situation in general (i.e.,
whether Putin has anything to do with this structure at all), can anyone square this circle
for me? Is it disproven that the place was indeed built a while back and later stripped down
due to the leaking roofs and mold? If so is there a source in the English language that
explains the situation?
There is a strong whiff of desperation of the EuroCrapsters and their US masters to grab
what Russia has (resources) and thus delay own economic collapse. All these crapsters are
freezing their asses off right now whilst dreaming of profits from pillaged Russian energy.
The most precarious is the Western pension system, which with ZIRP and NIRP interest rates
has stopped existing. There is no source of funding in this World that could feed that hungry
monster with ageing population. The Western printing presses are overheating and this is only
a delaying solution for the deeply debalanced system. Absolutely the only way out for the
West is to bring down Russian government and pillage. If Russia did not have nuclear weapons
this would have happened a while ago. The Russians understand this perfectly.
Will the sick West run into a desperate confrontation against a bee with a big sting? It
must be unusually frustrating for the AngloAmerican crapsters not to be able to just take
what they want and need from the World as they have been doing over the past couple if
centuries. They have the big sting but their mark has an even bigger (hypersonic) sting. What
a profound change in world affairs - pillaging from now on to come at the huge cost. And
Putin appears prepared to prevent pillaging of not only Russia.
The calculation is fairly clear - either they will feed, cloth and keep warm the Western
elderly and others using Russian resources or there will be no pensioners after a nuclear
Holocaust. Either way problem solved.
would like to know, in concrete terms, what is the benefit from constant denigration and
provocation of Russia, and who benefits, in precisely what ways. I do know, however, who does
not benefit. The vast majority of Europeans, the Russians and generally the majority of
humanity.
-Pushing Russia around and away is counter productive for the EU and Europe as whole. It is a
big, peaceful, neighbouring country willing to cooperate on the basis of mutual respect and
interest. Russia has put foreward many constructive proposals, all of which have been
rejected
- There is no rational basis for the long-lasting and escalating pressure on Russia. If that
is correct, the goals and actions of the West, and the the EU in particular, are irrational
from the perspective of the real life interests of the majority of European citizens and
welfare and wellbeing of the majority of people in the world.
- I hope that Russia does not abandon its orientation towards Europe, because it is a
European state. It should be part of European integration projects, albeit not on the present
model of the EU. That does not clash, but accords, with its Asian relations and projects.
- The EU should radically change its policies towards Russia, and welcome it as an important
partner in all fields.
- The qeustion is - who is going to stop the race into the abys that the European leaders are
accelarating? I don't see anyone or anything on the European scene considering, capable of
and willing to put an end to this utter madness. I do see who is paying the price and who
will pay even more dearly in the future. The majority of European citizens.Deeply depressing
and very scary.
The Bulletin article doesn't really delve into the issues around the US' new low-yield
'tactical' nukes, it concentrates on a new big 'strategic' ICBM system, the Ground Based
Strategic Deterrent (GBSD). It seems to be basically an attempt to resurrect the capabilities
of the Reagan era MX 'Peacekeeper' that was scrapped under the START treaties as it was
optimised to carry a large number of warheads and the US preferred to keep a larger number of
Minuteman III missiles with single warheads.
Although it probably won't be quite as large as the MX, it will be better suited than the
Minuteman for carrying multiple hypersonic glide vehicles like the Russian 'Avangard' system.
The Russians have an initial operating capability on their SS-19/UR-100N ICBM (similar in
payload to the Minuteman) but will soon deploy their much larger RS-28 Sarmat which will
allow multiple hypersonic gliders to be carried.
The article describes a typically corrupt US procurement process, with the big three arms
companies (Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman) fighting it out for the mountain of
$. Northrop Grumman managed to win out by buying up the only manufacturer of the large solid
rocket motors that the contract required the contractors to use. Solid rocket motors were one
of the only aspects of space technologies where the US was unequivocally in the lead, with 4
or 5 companies producing them. By the time of the GBSD contract only one company remained
after the orgy of mergers and buyouts, Orbital ATK. ATK was the successor to Thiokol Corp,
whose product doomed the crew of the Space Shuttle Challenger (being basically a big 'light
it and stand the f*** back' firework solid motors are not a great option for crewed
spaceflight, but well suited to ICBMs).
By buying up ATK, Northrop Grumman threatened to massively cut into the profits of any
other company bidding, ensuring a clear run to the contract for itself. Many analysts had
suspected that Boeing would be given the GBSD contract to compensate for their losses on the
737Max, but Northrop's maneuvers and Boeing's terrible recent track record in space made that
impossible. Boeings SLS moon rocket failed its crucial static-fire test in Jan 2021 and is 5
years behind schedule despite it being basically a Space Shuttle tank with Shuttle engines
bolted to the bottom (early 70s tech). Its Starliner Space Station ferry also failed its
uncrewed flight test last year due to a plethora of software errors, one of which was
discovered with minutes to spare and would have killed a crew by crashing the service module
into the crew module moments after the modules seperated for reentry into the atmosphere.
With all that in mind I don't think the Russians are too troubled by the US's prowess in
space or financial technology. Whatever Frankenstein's Rocket emerges from the GBSD program
will be most unlikely to rival the RS-28 (known to NATO as 'Son of Satan'), and by that time
the 'Grandson of Satan' will probably be flying.
The problem with armchair strategists is of course they don't know all the facts, those at
hand to the actual players. Some leaks into the real world but far too much is hidden.
All we know is that Russia appears to have stopped its subservient position and have
started with the EU, not the US. Is that because they believe they are now finally powerful
enough for a military conflict? Or perhaps as they believe one is coming anyway? Or are there
other hidden factors in play?
One thing of interest is that it hasn't taken long for the NATO/Russian situation to
escalate quickly since Trumps removal, anyone still doubt he was removed? Also of note the US
general now stating nuclear war is possible, more fear to add or just introducing the idea to
us as something that may "have" to be done to save the world for democracy?
How much does one believe in coincidence? Karmically there is no such thing. Many big
issues going on in the world now from covid with its fascist responses to Big Resets, massive
world debt, and now increasing military tension with Russia and perhaps China as well soon.
All interlinked?
Putin created a document about lessons from WW2. Even if you disagree with him or just
hate him, ask yourself if Trump, Biden, Pelosi or any other elderly US leaders could reason
at this level or offer this depth of thought. That's my take away...
The problem with Navalny is not that he is a 'traitor' to Russia but that he is an agent
of the Empire, on the payrolls of the Five Eyes security complex. Which makes him a traitor
to humanity.
"The wave of enthusiasm regarding the Biden administration has not washed over me," he says.
"I'm glad Trump is out, but at the very same time I'm very worried that Trumpism is going to
get stronger. I'm very worried that the Democratic Party is in the process of turning in on
itself, of divisions between the establishment figures, those who were effectively supported by
Wall Street to become senators or congressmen or presidents for that matter and the
socialists.
"The clash is already there, the blame game has begun. While the Trumpists are more united
than ever, they're going to be aided and abetted by two things. First, the [financial] slump
which is unavoidable given the pandemic, they will be blaming it on the system and the swamp
that has taken over again and a false but real sense that they have, false in the sense that
it's untrue but real in the sense they do feel it, that they were robbed of the election.
"So this combination, solidity on the Trumpist side, political economy which is
strengthening their feeling and their unity and the fragmentation of the Democratic side which
is only going to get worse as we're moving towards the congressional elections two years from
now. That for me is the great danger."
Varoufakis doesn't believe that the Biden-Harris ticket will improve outcomes for the poor
or radically redistribute wealth. Nearly eight million Americans, many of them children and
minorities, have fallen into poverty since May last year as the pandemic took its toll,
according to Columbia University research .
Opinion -- there are Trumpers who like Trump. There are also Trumper who are broadly
against the level of corruption today and "1984" materializing before them. They believe that
the deep state exists and that the two primary political parties are one and the same; their
differences being cosmetic only
Didn't vote for Trump, but in a blue state it wouldn't matter with vote bundling (sans
Nebraska & Maine), but this post resonates. Basically we're in political exile, both
Party's are corrupt and most spend their time calling donors and/or taking lobby monies for
their Party dues in exchange for their vote. The only politician I can stand is Massie, who's
not even allowed in the RNC building, and actually walks-the-walk on issues, and me as a Vet,
Massie doesn't vote for unending war (NDAA).
I would imagine that to be Thomas Massie. You may not know the name but he was one of the
few who stood against that CARES Act last March. He copped lot of flak from Trump and John
Kerry at the time which means that he must have been right-
This was interesting. I wish YV had defined the term "Trumpism". I haven't seen it defined
anywhere; it's used to smear voters, but I haven't seen it defined.
Imo, it's the rising populism (in the good sense) in the US trying to stop financial
predations by the banks and Wall St. speculators, stop trade deals that undercut US wages and
off shore jobs, again regulate and breakup the new monopolies – especially the tech
monopolies whose rents attach to nearly everything now. That's my definition. I wonder what
YV's definition is. It's happening in the US, in the UK (Brexit), in France (jillet jaunes),
and in other Western countries where the bottom70-80% of the populations – the once
large and financially stable middle class – has been economically undermined for the
past 30 years by govt policy and deregulation. Its a reasonable, sane response to seeing your
childrens' and grandchildrens' life chances and life expectancies fall at the same time
billionaires are getting richer and richer.
But calling the idea that this economic destruction needs to be addressed, calling it
"Trumpism" smears the entire idea there's something badly out of balance that needs to be
addressed. Calling it "Trumpism" dismisses these ideas as unimportant and maybe even slightly
unhinged.
So, again, I wish YV had defined "Trumpism" as he understands it. Otherwise, the argument
sounds a bit like "these crackpots are a worry, how can we keep the crackpots under control"?
Shorter: over half the country has real, long term, ongoing financial grievances against the
current system, but I'll use this dimissive name for them and still expect everyone to take
half the country's financial and health care grievances seriously. It doesn't work that way,
imo.
trump will be a weapon against any populism, at all.
think the next election had problems? the primary? you must be a moron and a trumper.
think the economy is rigged for the powerful, and ruinous for everyone else? damned trumpy
racist moron.
on and on on just about every real problem we face, there is a rebuttal there in trump that
will dismiss it out of hand no matter the glaring evidence that the problem is real.
just as the Left appeared to be getting it's shit together, the Powers have their out.
see Haydar Khan's part 2: https://thescrum.substack.com/p/the-great-reset-part-2
of course, dismissing the myriad problems or doing them in such a way that they are
ineffective, if very profitable will only make them worse, and that will eventually have
consequences.
From the great reset – an attempted corporate coup: "The recent social media
cancellation of former president Donald Trump is certainly a demonstration of private
corporations serving as private trustees of society."
Agreed that Newsweek should have pressed Mr Varoufakis to define his key term. 'Trumpism'
seems to defy succinct definition, however. Possibly its vagueness counts as an advantage in
ideological discourse? Still I think the Wikipedia article on 'Trumpism' is a pretty good
place to get a start on understanding it. I noticed that it actually suggests the existence
of more than one 'Trumpism' in the US, and as covers it/them as an international phenomenon.
It also makes clear what a wide variety of assessments of it have already emerged. It
provides a rather vast bibliography. More provocative, in the good sense of
thought-provoking, are the several definitions offered up by contributors to Urban
Dictionary. They emphasize its reliance on deception to market itself. Personally I think it
may make more sense to understand 'Trumpism' as a mode of political discourse – a means
of advancing a certain political agenda, apparently a means especially amenable to social
media though I very much doubt one engendered by its parameters – than as any
particular agenda as such.
that wiki page is a pretty good read in itself, and provides a launch pad for further
digging.
and, i hadn't realised that Bob Altemeyer was still around and on the case.
his main book was one of the most important in trying to understand the people i've been
embedded in for all my life. https://theauthoritarians.org/options-for-getting-the-book/
re: the wiki, the sections on "Methods of Persuasion" and "Social Psychology" are
particularly good, and link to a lot of names familiar to me from my own research
project/field study into the american right, circa 2002-2014~.
by comparison, just about the entire canon of interpretation of the trump phenomenon by
NYT, WaPo, etc etc is useless unless you are after a mirror image emotional
response/catharsis, rather that actually trying to understand what why and how.
we'll be dealing with this mess for a long time to come.
Thank you Amfortas! I too hadn't realized Bob Altermeyer was still writing – he
hadn't added anything new in quite a while so I figured he had retired and I hadn't been
checking.
1. America first
2. white supremacy
3. pandering to religious fundamentalists
4. pandering to gun enthusiasts and right wing militias
5. marking people and groups as enemies of the people
6. decrying so called hostile elites
7. creating alternative 'facts' and imaginary realities
8. xenophobia
9. misogyny
10. politics of force, inside and outside
a. Campaigning against more trade deals like TPP and TPIP (NAFTA on steroids)
b. Campaigning on ending the endless wars and bringing troops home
c. Campaigning on bringing back on shore manufacturing and good jobs.
d. Campaigning on closing the US/Mexico border and stopping the inflow of the cheapest
labor possible undercutting wages of already very low paid workers here.
e. Campaigning on lowering military tensions with Russia
(not that he did these things, but he campaigned heavily on economic issues and reducing
military adventurism, both important to the middle class/working class in 2016. Not sure what
the 2020 message was.)
1. America first. True. Is this so bad?
2. White supremacy. False. Very few of these characters exist, although they're much in
demand from the left.
3. Pandering to religious fundamentalists. False, although substitute "appealing" for
"pandering" and it's true.
4. Pandering to gun enthusiasts and right-wing militias. Sigh, true, although there's nothing
wrong with gun enthusiasts, broadly speaking.
5. Marking people and groups as enemies of the people. False, I think. Needs to be more
specific, though.
6. Decrying so-called hostile elites. True if you omit the "so-called."
7. Creating alternative "facts" and imaginary realities. Sigh, True.
8. Xenophobia. Mostly false. It's not fear of others, it's mostly a plea to at long last shut
off the firehose of wage-crushing immigration.
9. Misognyny. Mostly false. Trump has certainly had his moments, but many women were happy to
serve in the Trump administration, and I'm not seeing evidence of misogyny among his
backers.
10. Politics of force, inside and outside. True to a small degree but not nearly as
characteristic of Trumpists as of leftists, who destroyed thousands of buildings and
businesses last summer, and the media, which have cheerfully allied themselves with our
internationally murderous intelligence community.
flora, I'm thinking your "populism in the good sense" aligns with the political science
textbook definition of a populist, at least the economic component of that definition: a
populist is an economic liberal (one who generally believes that government should play a
role in the economy to protect the 99% by regulating and otherwise reining in large and
powerful private sector interests, especially big business).
The textbook definition says that a populist is also a cultural conservative (one who
believes that government should play a role in our private/social/cultural lives by promoting
traditional values). (I am not sure you are meaning to discuss this cultural aspect of a
populist; I'm just providing the textbook definition.)
I am thinking that arkansasangie (above) is also describing populism in the same way
("Trumper(s) who are broadly against the level of corruption today and "1984" materializing
before them. They believe that the deep state exists and that the two primary political
parties are one and the same; their differences being cosmetic only" (if by the "deep state"
she might mean a government that has been captured by and serves the interest of corporate
elites, eg, globalization, market monopoly, empire, etc.).
And I am thinking Amfortas the hippie's "feedstore people" are, likewise, (economic
liberal) "populists" (who could have "been won by a new New Deal"). (Having enjoyed many of
Ath's posts, I'm guessing they are also cultural conservatives.)
I do think that some if not most "Trumpists" are populists. But what I think is
interesting is how they are being managed (as in how the Koch brothers (created and) managed
Tea Party "populists").
Conservatives are reactionary – they react to change. It seems to me that one of the
ways they react is by co-opting the changes taking place, dressing them up and claiming at
least some aspect of those changes as their own. I find myself thinking about the Social
Gospel of Christ. Or Adam Smith's "free markets". Martin Luther King Jr.'s struggle for
freedom (transformed into idpol?). I think all of us understand that this is largely what is
happening today with the term "populism".
Thomas Frank would agree ("The People, No") https://tcfrank.com/product/the-people-no/
And he would speak to the manipulation – he would as "What's the Matter with
Kansas?"
While Janet Yellen advocates pouring money into the covid/economic crisis now because it
will be cheaper in the long run (and we know from various indications that the term could be
a decade) and post-Trump the trade deficit is no longer talked about since nobody's counting
– nobody's buying as much – except RVs and groceries and the stats show a
vertical drop down in commercial activity and a vertical shot up in bankruptcies and closings
and while Klaus Schwab talks about the great capitalist reset from shares to stakes but not
to sovereign states, China is busy establishing the new silk road and consolidating its
neighbors into cooperative economic behavior. I don't even want to know what that combined
CO2 footprint is. Cooperative economics has really already been precluded here in the West
– we can't turn back that clock. So, Biden is looking for an excuse to go to war. He is
wasting no time letting Russia and China know. It's possible that when Yellen says spend
whatever is necessary now she is being encouraged by Biden and the militarists who will
receive much of that financial aid whether we actually go to war or not. It would be so
idiotic and wasteful it is hard to imagine that even that dope Biden would march us off to
war. So when YV talks about "financial engineering for a better world" it sounds too Klaus
Schwab to embrace at face value. I don't see how a switch from shareholders to stakeholders
is going to change western capitalism significantly unless there is a financial separation
between old capitalism and new capitalism. That being the West and China. And the big problem
there is that capital seeks its best return. Otherwise it's not capital for long. So either
direction we are looking, (neoliberalism or socialism) financial engineering will have to
restrain capital, hence "capitalism" will be a euphemism. Which it has been for a long time,
but who's even noticing? It's possible that "war" as we knew it is also a thing of the past
and when Biden salivates for war he'll have to be content to just do "war engineering" to
achieve the necessary separation from China. It's all so meta. The irony is that the thing
called "sovereignty" is the only tool we have to organize all this neoliberal and/or social
protection. And the big one – the environment? Still no details.
Why isn't capitalism working as it should?
You need to identify where real wealth creation occurs in the economy to get it working
well.
Houston, we have a problem.
Mankind first started to produce a surplus with early agriculture.
It wasn't long before the elites learnt how to read the skies, the sun and the stars, to
predict the coming seasons to the amazed masses and collect tribute.
They soon made the most of the opportunity and removed themselves from any hard work to
concentrate on "spiritual matters", i.e. any hocus-pocus they could come up with to elevate
them from the masses, e.g. rituals, fertility rights, offering to the gods . etc and to turn
the initially small tributes, into extracting all the surplus created by the hard work of the
rest.
The elites became the representatives of the gods and they were responsible for the bounty of
the earth and the harvests.
As long as all the surplus was handed over, all would be well.
The class structure emerges.
Upper class – Do as little as they can get away with and get most of the rewards
Middle class – Administrative/managerial class who have enough to live a comfortable
life
Working class – Do the work, and live a basic subsistence existence where they get
enough to stay alive and breed
Their techniques have got more sophisticated over time, but this is the underlying
idea.
They have achieved a total inversion, and got most of the rewards going to those that don't
do anything.
The last thing they needed was "The Enlightenment" as people would work out what was really
going on.
They did work out what was going on and this had to be hidden again.
The Classical Economists had a quick look around and noticed the aristocracy were
maintained in luxury and leisure by the hard work of everyone else.
They haven't done anything economically productive for centuries, they couldn't miss it.
The Classical economist, Adam Smith: "The labour and time of the poor is in civilised countries sacrificed to the maintaining
of the rich in ease and luxury. The Landlord is maintained in idleness and luxury by the
labour of his tenants. The moneyed man is supported by his extractions from the industrious
merchant and the needy who are obliged to support him in ease by a return for the use of his
money. But every savage has the full fruits of his own labours; there are no landlords, no
usurers and no tax gatherers."
There was no benefits system in those days, and if those at the bottom didn't work they
died.
They had to earn money to live.
The classical economists could never imagine those at the bottom rising out of a bare
subsistence existence as that was the way it had always been.
Economics was always far too dangerous to be allowed to reveal the truth about the
economy.
How can we protect those powerful vested interests at the top of society?
The early neoclassical economists hid the problems of rentier activity in the economy by
removing the difference between "earned" and "unearned" income and they conflated "land" with
"capital".
They took the focus off the cost of living that had been so important to the Classical
Economists as this is where rentier activity in the economy shows up.
The landowners, landlords and usurers were now just productive members of society again.
Economists do identify where real wealth creation in the economy occurs, but this is a
most inconvenient truth as it reveals many at the top don't actually create any wealth.
Confuse making money and creating wealth and this problem goes away and we can get back to
the traditional order.
Upper class – Do as little as they can get away with and get most of the rewards
Middle class – Administrative/managerial class who have enough to live a comfortable
life
Working class – Do the work, and live a basic subsistence existence where they get
enough to stay alive and breed
What happens when you confuse making money and creating wealth?
We are forty years in, just look around.
When you equate making money with creating wealth, people try and make money in the
easiest way possible, which doesn't actually create any wealth.
In 1984, for the first time in American history, "unearned" income exceeded "earned"
income.
The American have lost sight of what real wealth creation is, and are just focussed on making
money.
You might as well do that in the easiest way possible.
It looks like a parasitic rentier capitalism because that is what it is.
You've just got to sniff out the easy money.
All that hard work involved in setting up a company yourself, and building it up.
Why bother?
Asset strip firms other people have built up, that's easy money.
The private equity firms have found an easy way to make money that doesn't actually create
any wealth.
Letting private equity firms ransack your economy is not really a good idea, even though they
do make lots of money.
Bankers make the most money when they are driving your economy into a financial
crisis.
They will load your economy up with their debt products until you get a financial crisis.
On a BBC documentary, comparing 1929 to 2008, it said the last time US bankers made as much
money as they did before 2008 was in the 1920s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAStZJCKmbU&list=PLmtuEaMvhDZZQLxg24CAiFgZYldtoCR-R&index=6
At 18 mins.
The bankers loaded the US economy up with their debt products until they got financial crises
in 1929 and 2008.
As you head towards the financial crisis, the economy booms due to the money creation of bank
loans.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf
The financial crisis appears to come out of a clear blue sky when you use an economics that
doesn't consider debt, like neoclassical economics.
UK bankers started to make a lot of money after 1980.
Oh no.
What happened in 1979?
The UK eliminated corset controls on banking in 1979, the banks invaded the mortgage market
and this is where the problem starts.
The transfer of existing assets, like real estate, doesn't add to GDP, so debt rises faster
than GDP until you get a financial crisis.
Before 1980 – banks lending into the right places that result in GDP growth
(business and industry, creating new products and services in the economy)
Debt grows with GDP
Bankers don't make much money
After 1980 – banks lending into the wrong places that don't result in GDP growth
(real estate and financial speculation)
Debt rises faster than GDP
Bankers make lots of money
2008 – The financial crisis
Banks – What is the idea?
The idea is that banks lend into business and industry to increase the productive capacity of
the economy.
Business and industry don't have to wait until they have the money to expand. They can borrow
the money and use it to expand today, and then pay that money back in the future.
The economy can then grow more rapidly than it would without banks.
Debt grows with GDP and there are no problems.
The banks create money and use it to create real wealth.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf
They took the focus off the cost of living that had been so important to the Classical
Economists as this is where rentier activity in the economy shows up.
What will happen?
Now everyone trips up over the cost of living, even the Chinese.
It is well hidden.
Someone from the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) has just seen the equation.
Disposable income = wages – (taxes + the cost of living)
Two seconds later ..
They realise the UK's high housing costs push up wages, and are actually paid by the UK's
employers reducing profit.
UK's high housing costs make UK labour very expensive compared to elsewhere in the world, and
it makes it very expensive to do anything in the UK.
Employees get their money from wages.
Employers pay the UK's high housing costs in wages reducing profit.
You can pay wages elsewhere that people couldn't live on in the West.
To maximise profit you will need to off-shore.
Why was China always going to be the winner in an open, globalised world?
Maximising profit is all about reducing costs.
Western companies couldn't wait to off-shore to low cost China, where they could make higher
profits.
China had coal fired power stations to provide cheap energy.
China had lax regulations reducing environmental and health and safety costs.
China had a low cost of living so employers could pay low wages.
China had low taxes and a minimal welfare state.
China had all the advantages in an open globalised world.
It did have, but now China has become more expensive and developed Eastern economies are
off-shoring to places like Vietnam, Bangladesh and the Philippines.
China trips up over the cost of living.
Davos 2019 – The Chinese have now realised high housing costs eat into consumer
spending and they wanted to increase internal consumption. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNBcIFu-_V0
They let real estate rip and have now realised why that wasn't a good idea.
The equation makes it so easy.
Disposable income = wages – (taxes + the cost of living)
The cost of living term goes up with increased housing costs.
The disposable income term goes down.
They didn't have the equation, they used neoclassical economics.
The Chinese had to learn the hard way and it took years.
They have let the cost of living rise and they want to increase internal consumption.
Disposable income = wages – (taxes + the cost of living)
It's a double whammy on wages.
China isn't as competitive as it used to be.
China has become more expensive and developed Eastern economies are off-shoring to places
like Vietnam, Bangladesh and the Philippines.
I worked the other way.
I looked at the world around me and worked back to find the cause.
We got some stuff from Ricardo, like the law of comparative advantage.
What's gone missing?
Ricardo was part of the new capitalist class, and the old landowning class were a huge
problem with their rents that had to be paid both directly and through wages. "The interest of the landlords is always opposed to the interest of every other class in
the community" Ricardo 1815 / Classical Economist
What does our man on free trade, Ricardo, mean?
Disposable income = wages – (taxes + the cost of living)
Employees get their money from wages and the employers pay the cost of living through wages,
reducing profit.
Employees get less disposable income after the landlords rent has gone.
Employers have to cover the landlord's rents in wages reducing profit.
Ricardo is just talking about housing costs, employees all rented in those days.
Low housing costs work best for employers and employees.
In Ricardo's world there were three classes.
He was in the capitalist class.
The more he paid in labour costs (wages) the lower his profits would be.
He was paying the cost of living for his workers through wages, and the higher that was, the
higher labour costs would be.
There was no benefits system in those days and those at the bottom needed to earn money to
cover the cost of living otherwise they would die. They had to earn their money through
wages.
The more he paid in rents to the old landowning class, the less there would be for him to
keep for himself.
From Ricardo:
The labourers had before 25
The landlords 25
And the capitalists 50
.. 100
He looked at how the pie got divided between the three groups.
The capitalist system actually contains a welfare state to maintain an old money, idle
rich in luxury and leisure. In the UK we still have an aristocracy, so it is hard to
forget.
The Classical economist, Adam Smith: "The labour and time of the poor is in civilised countries sacrificed to the maintaining
of the rich in ease and luxury. The Landlord is maintained in idleness and luxury by the
labour of his tenants. The moneyed man is supported by his extractions from the industrious
merchant and the needy who are obliged to support him in ease by a return for the use of his
money."
There were three groups in the capitalist system in Ricardo's world (and there still
are).
Workers / Employees
Capitalists / Employers
Rentiers / Landowners / Landlords / other skimmers, who are just skimming out of the system,
not contributing to its success
The unproductive group exists at the top of society, not the bottom.
Later on we did bolt on a benefit system to help others that were struggling lower down the
scale.
Fox News ' Tucker Carlson said on the
Thursday night episode of his program that his show has been targeted for cancellation.
Carlson said
that "in the last several weeks, and particularly in the last 24 hours, the call to take
this show off the air by groups funded -- for real -- by the Ford Foundation, or by George
Soros, by Michael Bloomberg, by Jeff Bezos, has become deafening, going after our advertisers,
going after the companies that carry our signal into your home."
What's more, he added, there has been a "cowardice and complicity" on behalf of the "entire
media class in all of this," suggesting that eventually, reporters at legacy news outlets will
be targeted as well.
Writing for Fox News' website, Carlson added that it may be part of a larger campaign to
silence Fox News and other media, noting that some legacy news outlets have dedicated resources
calling for the channel to be taken down. One columnist for The New York Times, he added, "has
written three separate columns demanding that someone yank this news channel off the air
immediately" and on Wednesday, "suggested that 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' was somehow guilty of
terrorism and violence, something that we've opposed consistently for four years."
"Fox is the last big organization in the American news media that differs in even the
smallest ways from the other big news organizations. At this point, everyone else in the media
is standing in crisp formation, in their starched matching uniforms and their little caps,
patiently awaiting orders from the billionaire class. And then there's Fox News off by itself,
occasionally saying things that are slightly different from everyone else," Carlson wrote
.
He added: "These are craven servants of the Democratic Party. They are feline, not canine.
All of their aggression is passive aggression."
@Gina Schrank
because he liked paying huge premiums to insurers.
Here, again, is what The Corbett Report wrote on that:
"Although the Port Authority carried only $1.5 billion of insurance coverage on the WTC
complex, which earlier that year had been valued at $1.2 billion, Silverstein had insisted on
doubling that amount, insuring the buildings for $3.55 billion."
@Mustapha Mond e
was in the habit of spending his mornings in the Windows on the World Restaurant at
the top of the North Tower. He even forgot he had a doctor's appointment that morning. But
for his wife's gentle reminder, Windows on the World might as well have been his
Windows at the End of the Universe.
More seriously, I was about to commend Mr. Giraldi for his mastery of the art of subtle
irony. Then I thought perhaps he could give lessons to you and that Just-another-Serf guy (as
well as our dear departed Trickster), who have been getting all too obvious at times.
However, I see you at least are back in form.
If one follows the time-honored formula for crime detection -- means, motive, opportunity --
it easy to see that such a spectacular crime could not happen without the involvement of a
sophisticated (shadow) government.
...Certainly three employees of Urban Moving Systems were spotted on 9/11 on the roof of a
van in the parking lot of the Doric Apartments in Union City, NJ taking pictures and
exchanging high fives with the WTC burning in the background. Subsequently, the van was
pulled over and five Israelis in it were arrested, detained for two months, and then released
to Israel. Reportedly, all the pictures they took on 9/11 have been destroyed. Witnesses saw
the van in the parking lot the morning of 9/11 before the attacks on the WTC, so there
is at least circumstantial evidence these guys had foreknowledge of "the event," and later
claimed on Israeli TV they had been there to record it.
For some reason, the five documenting photo-shlomos have come to be known as "The Dancing
Israelis" despite the fact there were never any reports of them dancing, so typically, when
it comes to Israel, the players are out of focus and mislabeled
There were indeed numerous reports from workers in both Twin Towers of frequent and
ongoing elevator work extending back several months before 9/11, giving the plotters ample
opportunity to plant explosives or do other prep-work for a (barely) controlled, or at least
planned demolition.
But to get to the bottom of 9/11, you really do have to follow the gold.
The vast majority of the military never actually fight. When was the last serving member
of the US Navy killed while on active service aboard ship? The army is useless against any
but third world opposition.
The Marines and Special forces such as the SEALs and Rangers do the actual fighting and I
suspect that the junior officer and NCO positions there will be relatively free of diversity
in order to keep them at least semi-useful.
Meanwhile, at officer level in the Navy, regular army and Air Force it will be an orgy of
rent seeking from the pet minorities
The U.S. is inept, disorganized, and dishonest. The possibility of a nuclear detonation,
or nuclear war, occurring through incompetence, miscalculation, or systems error, is now
significant. Probably the Russian and Chinese policymakers give the U.S. a lot of latitude
for that very reason, the way a parent might placate a two-year-old to prevent a tantrum.
Putin was saying there's no single democratic model. That was eventually conceptualized
as "sovereign democracy". Democracy cannot exist without sovereignty
This is one of the key concepts here and to me the most interesting one. "Sovereign
democracy". There are actually now very few countries in the world with true sovereignty,
never mind democracy.
The ones that try to exercise sovereignty, or even that don't show sufficient servility,
are severely punished. If they aren't large or strong enough, like Syria and Lebanon, they
suffer tremendously under "sanctions", which in reality is economic warfare. If they are,
like Russia and Iran, they still suffer sanctions, but will probably ride them out.
I remember a speech by King Hussein of Jordan in 1990, in a moment of rare candor,
remarking something like, and I paraphrase: "We live in a world dictatorship". The context
was the run up to the US/Saudi/Zionist-led attack on Iraq the first time around, when George
Bush I, urged by Margaret Thatcher, assembled a huge coalition against that country. I've
never been able to locate that speech since (I would be grateful to anyone who can).
For a background on that conflict, which set up the post-Cold War order:
The United States is muscle-bound. Despite its huge military budget it can't field an army.
It has a foreign legion. ISIS, for instance, is part of its foreign legion. The European NATO
is part of its foreign legion. But there's no way American can ever have a land war again, so
you can never invade and conquer a country with a military army. All America has is the Atom
bomb, and that's muscle bound. It cannot go to wage any kind of war except atomic war. There's
nothing in between.
I think Russia and China know that, and Russia at least has taken steps to protect itself
and said, "If the United States wants atomic war, we'll be wiped out but it'll be wiped out
too, and Europe will be wiped out." I think probably the first exchange would be to wipe out
England and Europe, to say "We don't want to go to war with you and really blow up the world,
America. Let's just show you what we can do. Let's blow up England and Europe so at least you
won't have your colonies there." If America persisted, it would be the end of the world. Will
America really do that?
There was worry that Donald Trump would do that so he could go down in history as the man
who destroyed civilization, but I don't think other people are going to do that.
This is a great piece, but I'm not sure its nuclear war-fighting take is accurate. If the
US and Russia engage in nuclear war, there is no way it can be limited to Europe and the UK.
France and England have hundreds of nukes of their own. The atomic destruction of Europe
would result in a nuclear winter of indeterminate length and disastrous consequences.
Orange Man Bad actually asked an interesting question re. US nuclear policy: does the US
really want to start an atomic war in order to 'defend' Lithuania or Japan? Would it not make
more sense for them to acquire their own nukes, or [fill in saner alternative]?
I think that what Prof Hudson points out is true: The US has not won any land war since
(at the least) 1948, they have not the smarts to win an economic war (as have the Chinese),
and the only arrow in their quiver is E=mc2. Talk about bringing a nuke to a knife fight!
Pax Americana:
US clandestine agencies, and the State Department and Pentagon to varying degrees, have been
involved in non-stop regime change efforts towards the global integration of populations and
resources in this system of private, capitalist control. Mostly successful since WWII, these
efforts began with Greece in 1948, followed by Syria in 49, Albania from 49-53, Iran in 53,
54 Guatemala, Syria again in 56, Haiti in 57, Indonesia 57, Laos 58-60, Cuba 59-present, 59
Cambodia, 60 Ecuador, 60 Congo, 61 Dominican Republic, 62-64 Brazil, 63 Iraq, 63 South
Vietnam, 64 Bolivia and Brazil, 65 France, 65 Indonesia again, 66 Ghana, 67 Greece again, 70
Costa Rica, 71 Bolivia again, 73-75 Australia, 73 Chile, 74 Portugal, 75 Angola, 75 Zaire, 76
Argentina, 76 Jamaica, 79-89 Afghanistan, 79 Seychelles, 80-92 Angola again, 80-89 Libya,
81-87 Nicaragua, 82 Chad, 83 Grenada, 82-84 South Yemen, 82-84 Suriname, 87 Fiji, 89 Panama,
91 Albania again, 91 Iraq, 93 Somalia, 99-2000 Yugoslavia, 2000 Ecuador again, 01 Afghanistan
again, 02 Venezuela, 03 Iraq again, 04 Haiti again, 07 to present Somalia again, 11 Libya
again, 12 to present Syria for a third time, 14 Ukraine, Brazil again in 16 and Bolivia and
Ecuador in 2018. Ongoing destabilization efforts are underway in Venezuela, Iran, Russia and
China.
I thought Christine Lagarde had her nerve saying the US had an exorbitant privilege by
owning the reserve currency. After WW2, according to a better view of our goals, the United
States wanted a Pax Americana.
We wanted to actually police the world and bring all boats up with a rising tide of
prosperity via free trade. We had been too frustrated by tariffs imposed on our goods by the
old empires, specifically the British Empire for too long. It makes some sense that we
willing bought everyones manufactured goods and went into a big deficit to do so because
holding the reserve currency we made money on loans and financial services to make up for it.
All the while controlling foreign military dust ups.
And for a while, through the 50s, we manufactured all sorts of things. Interesting to
learn that the funding from having the reserve currency paid for the military. (and for the
FIRE industry too)
It makes sense knowing this because the military and finance can get anything they ask for
from the budget. Nothing is too much. Because the money coming in, as protection money for
our military, more than covers it. But when it comes to sufficient social spending, there has
never been enough.
The Empire always neglected its home base. Other countries do not operate that way.
So Ms. Lagarde, I'd hardly call that exorbitant. It was simply two separate economies.
Well, Great Britain's performance in the first half of the 20th century has hardly
inspired America to treat it with much respect:
1. Excepting their heroic 1940 defense of Britain, and beating an overextended (and mainly
Italian) army at Third Alamein, they were either thrashed or bled white in every major battle
of both world wars, relying on US armies/navies and materiel to prop them up. For all the
eloquent theorizing, Britain's strategies were visibly self-serving, beyond its power, or
outright quixotic, not to mention criminally incompetent (Somme, Bengal, soft underbelly,
etc.)
2. Their vast colonial empire was becoming a crazy quilt of gigantic monocropped
plantations and mines, increasingly nonviable as functional societies, and the locals knew
it.
3. The US, Germany and Russia had all eclipsed Britain as industrial powers and had
overtaken it as an innovator as well, although it remained strong in this sphere with an
influx of Eastern Europeans.
.So to the emerging American technocratic elites, by 1945 the Mother Country must have
seemed a mere shell: still supercilious, but myopic, exhausted and consistently unable to
walk its talk.
(apologies to my British friends)
Prof. Hudson, many thanks for another good read, although I do continue to feel you view
China through very rose colored glasses. Harmony and fairness are rather different concepts,
but I'm eager to hear more from you on this topic in the future.
As always Professor Hudson is great, thank you for sharing this. I would note that it goes
very well with the subsequent post on the site, dealing with negative rates.
I'd quibble ever so slightly with two things, the first the historical vacuum with regards
to the Soviet Union and communism as a historical force which shaped the contours of this
American system. The submission of the British Imperial system to the American one was driven
by the fear of communism, not necessarily Soviet Communism but even the domestic sort. The
American distaste for the overt imperial structure of the UK wasn't driven solely by economic
sadism or democratic character, but the fear of communism as the vanguard of
anti-imperialism: America and the UK as best of allies, but leave the Suez alone or Nasser
will go commie.
The 2nd quibble is that the American collapse in this regard is already well underway.
While I love professor Hudson's historical analysis I disagree with his economic determinism.
The notion that the system whose creation he described was guided by actions bounded by the
rules of economics. And that the next stage of historical development will follow those rules
just in different contexts. As opposed to understanding that those rules are largely
artifice.
Beneath the economic collapse, the conundrum the US finds itself in is that of its ruling
class. As opposed to the British ruling class which understood that submission to the
American system would protect their ancient privileges. The American ruling class can't find
the same concordat with China. The Chinese are communist, and as Jack Ma's case demonstrated
to the world recently. They aren't intimidated by the myths around wealth that sheepishly
guide Americans.
So those same rules that governed balance of payments and modified American behavior
throughout the Cold War don't apply today. They only applied then because they reinforced the
interests of the American ruling class. As a matter of fact they subverted those very rules
quite easily, note the talk of negative interest rates on the site today.
The Chinese BRI initiative seems less about generating profit for China and more about
exposing the inadequacy of the current dollar system.
Professor Hudson correctly notes that the US is powerless against this. It can only act
via proxy and those have been neutralized, see Syria. And that both Russia and China now are
just trying to manage American decline and avoid the only American option left, nuclear
war.
I often wonder if the "threat of communism" was genuine, as if there could not be
cooperation among states with different systems of government. This is seen in the continued
hatred of Russia in the last thirty years when it is no longer communist-in fact I think that
Pres. Putin seems to be a far more Christian leader than any in the USA or other Western
powers!!!
The arrogant attitude to Russia in the recent development of vaccines, when derision and
skepticism a few months ago are replaced by amazement and acceptance now that the "West" has
realized that the sputnik V seems to be among the best vaccines available. The USA does not
yet seem to realize that the Russian defense (yes it IS for defense) is actually effective,
unlike the US aggressive actions.
I think it was genuine if you were "Lord something or other" or a Dulles brother. That's
not to say the world would've suffered from it. Simply those predecessors of our current
tormentors may have suffered from it.
I think the interesting thing is that, for the US, that ship has sailed. There is
submission to it, but no cooperation with it; and I doubt there ever will be again.
This is seen in the continued hatred of Russia in the last thirty years when it is no
longer communist
I often get the impression that Western, US in particular, politicians and political
analysts have failed to grasp that the USSR has collapsed and that one part of it, the
Russian Federation is now a capitalist country.
We also have to remember that the USA elite always needs an external enemy to blame. The
loss of the USSR must have been traumatic and they have substituted the Russian Federation in
its place.
As always Professor Hudson is great, thank you for sharing this. I would note that it goes
very well with the subsequent post on the site, dealing with negative rates.
I'd quibble ever so slightly with two things, the first the historical vacuum with regards
to the Soviet Union and communism as a historical force which shaped the contours of this
American system. The submission of the British Imperial system to the American one was driven
by the fear of communism, not necessarily Soviet Communism but even the domestic sort. The
American distaste for the overt imperial structure of the UK wasn't driven solely by economic
sadism or democratic character, but the fear of communism as the vanguard of
anti-imperialism: America and the UK as best of allies, but leave the Suez alone or Nasser
will go commie.
The latter is that the American collapse in this regard is already well underway. While I
love profesor Hudson's historical analysis I disagree with his economic determinism. The
notion that the system whose creation he described was guided by actions bounded by the rules
of economics. And that the next stage of historical development will follow those rules just
in different contexts. For instance does China
I am curious to know Professor Hudson's thoughts on the role U.S. banks (i.e. J.P, Morgan)
played in the US entry into WW1 and the creation of the Creel Committee propaganda
campaign.
With Russian withdrawal from the eastern front giving Germany the ability to transfer
resources to the western front, it became highly probable that Germany would win the war and
US banks would suffer considerable losses.
In other words was US entry into WW1 a bailout of Wall Street.
World War I and the end of the Gold Standard due to the inability to ship gold greatly
diminished the power of the House of Morgan. JP Morgan had been the conduit for foreign
capital into the US. He was trusted as a vetter of promising investments. That role became
less important and less profitable after the US became a creditor nation. World War I
accelerated that process.
If you enjoyed the Global War on Terror, you're going to love the new War on Domestic
Terror! It's just like the original Global War on Terror, except that this time the
"Terrorists" are all "Domestic Violent Extremists" ("DVEs"), "Homegrown Violent Extremists"
("HVEs"), "Violent Conspiracy-Theorist Extremists" ("VCTEs"), "Violent Reality Denialist
Extremists" (VRDEs"), "Insurrectionary Micro-Aggressionist Extremists" ("IMAEs"), "People Who
Make Liberals Feel Uncomfortable" ("PWMLFUs"), and anyone else the Department of Homeland
Security wants to label an "extremist" and slap a ridiculous acronym on.
According to a "
National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin " issued by the DHS on January 27, these DCEs,
HVEs, VCTEs, VRDEs, IMAEs, and PWMLFUs are "ideologically-motivated violent extremists with
objections to the exercise of governmental authority" and other "perceived grievances fueled by
false narratives." They are believed to be "motivated by a range of issues, including anger
over Covid-19 restrictions, the 2020 election results, police use of force," and other
dangerous "false narratives" (e.g., the existence of the "deep state," "herd immunity,"
"biological sex," "God," and so on).
"Inspired by foreign terrorist groups" and "emboldened by the breach of the US Capitol
Building," this diabolical network of "domestic terrorists" is "plotting attacks against
government facilities," "threatening violence against critical infrastructure" and actively
"citing misinformation and conspiracy theories about Covid-19." For all we know, they might be
huddled in the "Wolf's Lair" at Mar-a-Lago right now, plotting a devastating terrorist attack
with those WMDs we never found in Iraq, or generating population-adjusted death-rate
charts going back 20 years , or posting pictures of " extremist frogs " on
the Internet.
The Department of Homeland Security is "concerned," as are its counterparts throughout the
global capitalist empire. The (New Normal) War on Domestic Terror isn't just a war on American
"domestic terror." The "domestic terror" threat is international. France has just passed a "
Global Security Law " banning citizens from filming the police beating the living snot out
of people (among other "anti-terrorist" provisions). In Germany, the government is preparing to
install an
anti-terror moat around the Reichstag . In the Netherlands, the police are cracking down on
the VCTEs, VRDEs, and other "
angry citizens who hate the system ," who have been protesting over nightly curfews.
Suddenly, everywhere you look (or at least if you are looking in the corporate media), "
global extremism networks are growing ." It's time for Globocap to take the gloves off
again, root the "terrorists" out of their hidey holes, and roll out a new official
narrative.
Actually, there's not much new about it. When you strip away all the silly new acronyms, the
(New Normal) War on Domestic Terror is basically just a combination of the "War on Terror"
narrative and the "New Normal" narrative, i.e., a militarization of the so-called "New Normal"
and a pathologization of the "War on Terror." Why would GloboCap want to do that, you ask?
I think you know, but I'll go ahead and tell you.
See, the problem with the original "Global War on Terror" was that it wasn't actually all
that global. It was basically just a war on Islamic "terrorism" (i.e., resistance to global
capitalism and its post-ideological ideology), which was fine as long as GloboCap was just
destabilizing and restructuring the Greater Middle East. It was put on hold in 2016 , so that
GloboCap could focus on defeating "populism" (i.e., resistance to global capitalism and its
post-ideological ideology), make an example of Donald Trump, and demonize everyone who voted
for him (or just refused to take part in their free and fair elections ), which
they have just finished doing, in spectacular fashion. So, now it's back to "War on Terror"
business, except with a whole new cast of "terrorists," or, technically, an expanded cast of
"terrorists." (I rattled off a list in my previous column .)
In short, GloboCap has simply expanded, recontextualized, and pathologized the "War on
Terror" (i.e., the war on resistance to global capitalism and its post-ideological ideology).
This was always inevitable, of course. A globally-hegemonic system (e.g., global capitalism)
has no external enemies, as there is no territory "outside" the system. Its only enemies are
within the system, and thus, by definition, are insurgents, also known as "terrorists" and
"extremists." These terms are utterly meaningless, obviously. They are purely strategic,
deployed against anyone who deviates from GloboCap's official ideology which, in case you were
wondering, is called "normality" (or, in our case, currently, "New Normality").
In earlier times, these "terrorists" and "extremists" were known as "heretics," "apostates,"
and "blasphemers." Today, they are also known as "deniers," e.g., "science deniers," "Covid
deniers," and recently, more disturbingly, "reality deniers." This is an essential part of the
pathologization of the "War on Terror" narrative. The new breed of "terrorists" do not just
hate us for our freedom they hate us because they hate "reality." They are no longer our
political or ideological opponents they are suffering from a psychiatric disorder. They no
longer need to be argued with or listened to they need to be "treated," "reeducated," and
"deprogrammed," until they accept "Reality." If you think I'm exaggerating the totalitarian
nature of the "New Normal/War on Terror" narrative, read this op-ed in The New York
Timesexploring
the concept of a "Reality Czar" to deal with our "Reality Crisis."
And this is just the beginning, of course. The consensus (at least in GloboCap circles) is,
the (New Normal) War on Domestic Terror will probably continue for the next 10 to 20 years
, which should provide the global capitalist ruling classes with more than enough time to carry
out the "
Great Reset ," destroy what's left of human society, and condition the public to get used
to living like cringing, neo-feudal peasants who have to ask permission to leave their houses.
We're still in the initial " shock and awe
" phase (which they will have to scale back a bit eventually), but just look at how much
they've already accomplished.
The economic damage is literally incalculable millions have been plunged into desperate
poverty, countless independent businesses crushed, whole industries crippled, developing
countries rendered economically dependent (i.e., compliant) for the foreseeable future, as
billionaires amassed over $1 trillion in wealth and supranational corporate behemoths
consolidated their dominance across the planet.
And that's just the economic damage. The attack on society has been even more dramatic.
GloboCap, in the space of a year, has transformed the majority of the global masses into an
enormous,
paranoid totalitarian cult that is no longer capable of even rudimentary reasoning. (I'm
not going to go on about it here at this point, you either recognize it or you're in it.)
They're actually lining up in parking lots, the double-masked members of this Covidian cult, to
be injected with an experimental "vaccine" that they believe will save the human species from
a virus that causes mild to moderate
symptoms in roughly 95% of those "infected," and that over 99% of the "infected" survive
.
So, it is no big surprise that these same mindless cultists are gung-ho for the (New Normal)
War on Domestic Terror, and the upcoming globally-televised show trial of Donald Trump for
"inciting insurrection," and the ongoing corporate censorship of the Internet, and can't wait
to be issued their " Freedom
Passports ," which will allow them to take part in "New Normal" life -- double-masked and
socially-distanced, naturally -- while having their every movement and transaction, and every
word they write on Facebook, or in an email, or say to someone on their smartphones, or in the
vicinity of their 5G toasters, recorded by GloboCap's Intelligence Services and their corporate
partners, subsidiaries, and assigns. These people have nothing at all to worry about, as they
would never dream of disobeying orders, and could not produce an original thought, much less
one displeasing to GloboCap, if you held a fake apocalyptic plague to their heads.
As for the rest of us "extremists," "domestic terrorists," "heretics," and "reality
deniers," (i.e., anyone criticizing global capitalism, or challenging its official narratives,
and its increasingly totalitarian ideology, regardless of our specific DHS acronyms), I wish I
had something hopeful to tell you, but, the truth is, things aren't looking so good. I guess
I'll see you in a quarantine camp , or in
the psych ward, or an offshore detention facility or, I don't know, maybe I'll see you in the
streets.
C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist
based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing,
Inc. His dystopian novel, Zone 23 , is
published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. Volumes I and II of his Consent
Factory Essays are published by Consent Factory Publishing, a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Amalgamated Content, Inc. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .
Reading Blacks biography of Roosevelt, Hudson's work, Talbot's "The Devil's Chessboard"
and Douglas's "JFK and the Unspeakable" one discerns a clear line between the UK interwar
Foreign Office, military intelligence and rentier class and the Dulles brother's post war
ascent to the pinnacles of back room power.
Before the war the brothers arranged IP shares between the soon to be contending German
and Anglo-sphere industries, during the war they tried to arrange a separate peace with post
Hitler Germany, after Roosevelt's death and particularly in their con job on Truman, they
made the CIA the collective tool of the transatlantic financial elite, David Rockefeller
explicitly included.
These books all rely extensively on previously lightly touched primary sources.
If you go back under Eisenhower, the wealthiest segment of the population, the wealthiest
corporations paid 91% income tax. What you saw, and I learned much of this from Ralph Nader who
was turned into a pariah consciously, is that they pushed out the real liberal wing of the
Democratic party. Ralph himself wrote I think 24 pieces of legislation, consumer protection,
the mine and safety act, the clean water act. This was all Nader. But it was pushed through by
liberal senators, Proxmire, Fulbright and others, Wellstone, maybe being one of the last. All
of these people were pushed out of the Democratic party and replaced with these full liberal, I
would call them full liberals figures like Obama, figures like Clinton, who spoke in that
traditional feel, you're paying language of the Democratic party but serve the interest of Wall
Street. Cornel West called Barack Obama black mascot for Wall Street which was correct.
The former head of the CIA Counterterrorism Center has suggested that counterinsurgency
tactics used by the military in Iraq and Afghanistan should be applied to 'domestic extremists'
inside the US.
NPR reports that Robert Grenier, who directed the CIA's Counterterrorism program from 2004
to 2006, declared "We may be witnessing the dawn of a sustained wave of violent insurgency
within our own country, perpetrated by our own countrymen."
In an op-ed for
The New York Times last week, Grenier suggested that "extremists who seek a social
apocalypse are capable of producing endemic political violence of a sort not seen in this
country since Reconstruction."
Grenier, also a former CIA station chief in Pakistan and Afghanistan, grouped together "the
Proud Boys, the Three Percenters, the Oath Keepers, 'Christian' national chauvinists, white
supremacists and QAnon fantasists" and claimed they are all "committed to violent
extremism."
Grenier labeled dissenters an "insurgency" and called for them to be "defeated" like an
enemy army.
In further comments to NPR, Grenier stated that "as in any insurgency situation, you have
committed insurgents who are typically a relatively small proportion of the affected
population. But what enables them to carry forward their program is a large number of people
from whom they can draw tacit support."
Grenier also stated that insurgents may emerge from groups who "believe that the election
was stolen," or those "who don't trust NPR or The New York Times ."
"The most violent elements that we are concerned about right now see former President Trump
as a broadly popular and charismatic symbol," the CIA spook added, before comparing Trump to
Saddam Hussein.
"You know, just as I saw in the Middle East that the air went out of violent demonstrations
when [Iraqi leader] Saddam Hussein was defeated and seen to be defeated, I think the same
situation applies here," he proclaimed.
Grenier suggested that Trump should be convicted at the upcoming impeachment trial as a
'national security imperative' because "So long as he is there and leading the resistance, if
you will, which he shows every sign of intending to do, he is going to be an inspiration to
very violent people."
Grenier then compared Americans to Al Qaeda and the Taliban, noting that in Afghanistan "the
thrust of our campaign there was, yes, to hunt down al-Qaida, but primarily to remove the
supportive environment in which they were able to live and to flourish. And that meant fighting
the Taliban."
"I think that is the heart of what we need to deal with here," he added.
The call to treat Americans as terrorist insurgents comes on the heels of a
Department of Homeland Security warning that those dissatisfied with the election result
may rise up and commit acts of terrorism in the coming weeks.
"Information suggests that some ideologically-motivated violent extremists with objections
to the exercise of governmental authority and the presidential transition, as well as other
perceived grievances fueled by false narratives, could continue to mobilize to incite or commit
violence," stated the bulletin issued last week through the DHS National Terrorist Advisory
System -- or NTAS.
The bulletin added that 'extremists' may be "motivated by a range of issues, including anger
over COVID-19 restrictions, the 2020 election results, and police use of force."
House Democrats on Thursday voted to strip Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) of her
committee assignments after arguing that her past support of QAnon disqualified her from
holding them.
Lawmakers voted 230-199 to remove Greene from the House education and budget committees,
with 11 Republicans joining the Democrats, after the GOP declined to take action themselves,
according to
The Hill .
The vote came after members of both parties gave impassioned speeches for or against
removing Greene - with much of the GOP stepping up to her defense, while at the same time
condemning her past comments.
Some Republicans warned Democrats that they were setting a dangerous precedent .
"I think you are, frankly, overlooking the unprecedented nature of the acts that you've
decided upon, and where that may lead us when the majority changes," said Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK),
the senior Republican member of the Rules Committee.
On Wednesday night, Greene received a standing ovation during a closed-door GOP conference
meeting, where she apologized for embracing QAnon. Then on Thursday, Greene said in a House
floor speech that she had recently 'realized the dangers' of such narratives .
Greene described how she'd "stumbled across" QAnon in late 2017 and began posting about it
on Facebook while she was "upset about things and didn't trust the government."
Later in 2018, Greene said, "when I started finding misinformation, lies, things that were
not true in these QAnon posts, I stopped believing it."
Greene also disavowed her previous support for several conspiracy theories, declaring a
belief that school shootings are "absolutely real" and that 9/11 "absolutely happened."
But as Greene concluded her speech, she adopted a more defiant tone, blasting unnamed
Democrats for what she suggested was their encouragement of the violence that, at times,
accompanied last year's national protests against police brutality. -
The Hill
" If this Congress is to tolerate members that condone riots that have hurt American people,
attack police officers, occupy federal property, burn businesses and cities, but yet wants to
condemn me and crucify me in the public square for words that I said, and I regret, a few years
ago, then I think we're in a real big problem ," she said, before criticizing the MSM.
"Will we allow the media, that is just as guilty as QAnon of presenting truth and lies, to
divide us?" Greene asked, drawing sharp rebuke from House Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern
(D-MA) who called the comparison "beyond the pale."
https://www.youtube.com/embed/F5bItzYCqNE
Yet, at the end of the day, Greene's defense wasn't enough to overcome the Democrats and 11
Republicans who decided to punched right over a colleague's past.
The Trump experiment is over, and the strange journey that the last five years have been is
now at an end. There are already lots of assessments being made about the meaning of Trump's
presidency, but most of them are from either liberal or conservative viewpoints. It also needs
to be evaluated from the viewpoint of the Dissident Right -- those of us such as myself who
fall outside what is usually called "Right-wing" in today's mainstream. And no group had more
dramatic ups and downs with Trump than the Dissident Right did.
I imagine my experience with Trump was the same as that of many other people reading this.
When he first announced his candidacy in 2015, I was initially dismissive and didn't even think
he'd make it to the primaries. It was when I saw him in the Republican debates that I decided
that, first, he was preferable to the other candidates in both parties; and second, that he
actually had some good positions, such as on immigration and non-interventionism. I never
really put my faith in the guy -- I always thought people who hailed him as the "God Emperor"
were being naïve -- but I could see that he was the least bad option among his many
competitors (and "least bad" is all I ever look for when contemplating the American political
scene). As his campaign developed, the signs were more and more encouraging -- mainly because
Trump was free to just talk without having to deliver on anything he was saying.
No one was more flabbergasted than me when Trump actually managed to win, and like many
people I allowed myself to become giddily optimistic for a few months after the election. I was
proud of the fact that Michigan, where I vote, was one of the states that had dramatically
swung over into Trump's column after having been solidly Democrat for decades, but it confirmed
for me that the white working class, which remains Michigan's backbone despite the weakening of
the American auto industry, had finally come to see more or less eye-to-eye with the Dissident
Right on many issues. I had suspected this even before the election, but it was nice to see it
confirmed in reality.
Perhaps, I thought, as an outsider and maverick, Trump could actually bring about some real
change in Washington, especially with the help of genuine populists like Steve Bannon. But
those hopes were soon dashed by the bombing of Syria only two and
a half months after he took office, which seemed to herald the gradual rolling back of the
entire agenda he had campaigned on. By 2018, with Bannon out, Bush leftover John Bolton as
Secretary of State, the President himself embroiled in the seemingly endless Russia
investigation, and the promised Wall nowhere to be found, it looked like the Swamp had subdued
Trump after all.
Still, I never for a moment felt that the support the Dissident Right gave to Trump in 2016
had been a mistake. There was no question that Trump, as poor as his performance was from our
perspective, was nevertheless preferable to what we know Hillary would have enacted. (In the
run-up to the 2016 election, when people would ask me why I was voting for Trump, I would say,
"I know exactly what Hillary will do; I can't say with any certainty what Trump will do, but
he's at least saying some of the right things.") And whenever Trump spoke his own mind -- which
he made sure to do often -- he usually stayed on message, even though we always knew that the
reality would end up being different from his words. (Remember when he promised to abolish
birthright citizenship in the run-up to the 2018 midterm elections?) For us, I think the
epitaph we can write on the tombstone of his presidency is "It could have been worse."
I don't know what Trump really believed while President, and quite honestly I don't care; it
was his words and his actions that mattered, and even if it was all a cynical ploy, his impact
on American politics and culture is undeniable. It became a tired cliché, but it was
nevertheless true that Trump moved the Overton window further to the right in a way that isn't
likely to be undone anytime soon. Many issues that were virtually nonexistent except at the
margins of American political discourse before 2015 are now front and center. Some dislike
Trump for his personality and failings, feeling that these contributed to his lack of
achievement as President. While this is justified, it's indisputable that only someone like
Trump, who was independently wealthy and already held celebrity status among the white working
class, could have made the breakthrough as an outsider that he did. And even if he didn't
succeed in remaking Washington, he nevertheless weakened the Washington Establishment during
his tenure. Most importantly, it's always best when the Washington elite remains so divided and
gripped by internal conflicts that it can't pursue its evil designs on the rest of us, and
Trump turned the heat up in Washington beyond where it had been at any time since the Civil
War.
We also shouldn't overlook the fact that Trump was continually embattled with the Washington
Establishment, the opposition, the mainstream media, and on many occasions even his own party
from the day he took office. It also shouldn't be forgotten that when Trump took office, his
party controlled the executive branch and Congress, and yet the President still had to fight
every step of the way to pursue his agenda -- often unsuccessfully. James O'Meara once
commented that Trump was in fact a third-party candidate who managed to hijack one of the two
major parties. This was true, and many Republicans in the House never lost sight of that,
showing that their true loyalties lay with maintaining the Establishment rather than with
supporting their erstwhile leader's agenda.
We can't ignore the short, spectacular life of the Alt-Right, either. Those of us who had
been on the Dissident Right for many years prior, and who understood that the only way to bring
America into line with genuinely Rightist principles would be to transform the country from its
very foundations on issues such as citizenship, immigration, and capitalism, always saw Trump
as merely a stepping stone to something grander and better. And indeed, although this fact has
vanished into the mists of prehistory, before the 2016 election "Alt-Right" merely referred to
anyone on the Right whose views fell outside those of the Republican Party; even Steve Bannon
infamously told Mother Jones in 2016 that Breitbart was "the platform of the
Alt-Right," a statement I imagine he came to regret later. I myself was happy to accept the
label at first. And like many, I was naïve enough to think that the Alt-Right could make
use of the mainstream media rather than the other way around.
Once they realized that a Trump presidency was a reality, the mainstream media quickly
understood that the "Alt-Right," which was a nebulous phenomenon with no clear leadership or
goals, could be used to discredit Trump and populism more generally. Its decentralized nature
and lack of an organizational structure were in one sense a strength in that it was more
difficult to pin down and target it; but at the same time, anyone ranging from libertarians to
outright neo-Nazis could claim the mantle or be designated "Alt-Right" by clever journalists.
As such, it was perfect from their perspective as a means of attacking the populist Right as a
whole, since they spun the ridiculous narrative that the Alt-Right was somehow vaguely
responsible for getting Trump elected. The fact is, of course, that there was never any
relationship between what was called the Alt-Right and the Trump administration, but the Alt
Right's media-appointed leaders were hungry for attention that the media was more than happy to
provide -- and the rest is, regrettably, history.
It might have been possible to develop an alternative movement in late 2016 and 2017 that
could have piggybacked on Trump's success while laying the groundwork for a genuinely
innovative form of the American Right more in keeping with genuine Right-wing principles, and
yet that could still have appealed to ordinary Americans. It quickly became apparent, however,
that those individuals who found themselves thrust into the Alt-Right spotlight lacked the
character, maturity, and judgment to make it happen. Being wizards at winning followers for
websites, podcasts, and social media was no proper education to prepare them for entering the
arena of actual politics. Granted, they were confronting forces far beyond what any marginal
group could be expected to compete with; but by adopting tactics that had failed for George
Lincoln Rockwell half a century earlier and standing shoulder-to-shoulder with actual Nazis and
Klansmen, they played the role of cartoon Nazis that the media had cast them in to a tee. After
being led into the trap that was Charlottesville, the Alt-Right's tombstone was written and
Trump was never again able to plausibly deny that he was a white supremacist. We must persist
in our efforts, but the fact remains that the Alt-Right's spectacular and tragically
unnecessary failure will continue to hamper us for many years to come.
Despite our disappointment, we must still acknowledge that President Trump accomplished some
goals that deserve our thanks. It must be granted that throughout his tenure, despite the
constant accusations of warmongering by his opponents, he didn't start any new wars.
There were a few close calls, of course, particularly with Syria and Iran, but none of
America's enemies called his bluffs despite provocation and things remained at the level of
low-intensity conflict. It is certainly true that when it comes to foreign policy, Trump did
much more for Israel than he did for America, but he nevertheless made strides toward ending
the conflicts he had inherited and never bowed to the pressure to start new ones. As a
corollary to this, no Islamist terror attacks occurred within the United States during Trump's
tenure apart from the shooting at the Naval Air Station in Pensacola, which puts him above both
Bush and Obama in that category. (It struck me as odd that Trump didn't play this up more in
his second campaign.)The most glorious moment of Trump's presidency for me, however, remains
his refusal to denounce the Alt-Right in the notorious press conference that he held three days
after Charlottesville. While it certainly wasn't the unequivocal defense of White Nationalism
that the media has made it out to have been ever since, the fact that he refused to issue the
standard denunciations of the Alt-Right that he had doubtless been asked to deliver stands for
me as a rare moment of principle for President Trump. In the end, it meant nothing in practical
terms, but it's one of the few clear examples we have that there was something deeper to his
presidency than mere egotism. It's also a sign of how much worse things were to get over the
subsequent years that he failed to show the same spirit when dealing with those of his
supporters who stormed the Capitol, opting for submissiveness rather than the spirit of
defiance that had characterized his campaign and the early days of his term.
Additionally, Trump's strident Euroskepticism forced Europe for the first time since the
Second World War to consider pursuing greater independence from NATO and the US and to perhaps
even solely pursue its own interests in foreign policy yet again, rather than serving as
America's lapdog on many issues and continuing to rely on the US for defense. It remains to be
seen if this trend will persist or reverse now that Trump is gone, but we can hope that more
forward-looking European politicians will continue thinking in terms of preparing for a
post-American global order.
We should also bear in mind that the Trump administration established good relations with
Right-wing populist parties in Europe in a way that would have been unimaginable under any
other presidency. The present governments of Hungary and Poland, in particular, enjoyed
friendly relations with Washington for the first time and will sorely miss Trump now that
Biden has made it clear that he intends to return to a confrontational policy with them.
(At the same time, it's worth noting that some European politicians on the Right I have spoken
with said that they preferred a Trump defeat, since they feel that Trump and American politics
more generally have become an obsessive distraction for the European Right and that his removal
would allow Europeans to focus on their own problems again.)
Domestically, Trump could hardly be considered a success on his signature issue,
immigration, although he wasn't entirely a failure, either. We certainly didn't get anything
like the sort of sweeping and radical changes on immigration that many of us had hoped for in
the beginning. Indeed, the Trump administration did not pass a single new piece of
immigration-related legislation. By some metrics , in
fact, certain types of immigration remained the same or increased during Trump's tenure. In
those currents where it decreased, some of it appears to have occurred as a result of the
pandemic rather than due to any political action. And of course, the Wall remains mostly
unbuilt and now surely faces cancellation.
At the same time, Trump did fortunately withdraw the US from the United Nations'
ethnomasochistic Global Compact on Migration. He did make limited
progress in a few other areas as well , particularly making it more difficult for
"refugees" to come to the US and for illegal immigrants to remain there. And he did put a stop
to some of the more troubling immigration policies that have emanated from both parties in the
past, such as the push for amnesties for illegals, and called a temporary moratorium on visas
for "guest workers" in response to the pandemic.
The issue that could be regarded as his second-biggest signature issue was opposing
globalization and helping ordinary working Americans; bringing industry back home was a
constant theme of his first campaign. In the end, however, Trump remained largely ineffectual
in this area. We should thank him for ending the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP). But the treaty he signed to replace the
former, the
United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement , is only slightly better than its precursor. The
other nations which were part of the TPP ended up signing the virtually identical Comprehensive
and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which the US has not signed
but which it remains eligible to join at any time. In other words, the Trump administration
didn't do much to halt the drumbeat of globalization.
When it comes to the Dissident Right, Trump offered little but empty rhetoric. Despite
occasionally talking about establishing controls over Big Tech to prevent their blatant
censorship of non-conformist views that challenge the neoliberal narrative, no action was ever
taken in this direction. Apart from his Charlottesville press conference, neither did Trump
ever take a stand in defense of white advocates, and he often went in the other direction,
such as in September , when he promised to declare the "Ku Klux Klan" a terrorist
organization (thus opening the door for any Dissident Right groups to be targeted given the
lack of an easily identifiable unified KKK organization), calling for Juneteenth to be declared
a federal holiday, and promising $500 billion in aid to black communities.
Thus, President Trump achieved modest successes at best, and even those issues on which he
won victories can be easily reversed by the Biden administration -- and in some cases they are
already doing so. But such is the ephemeral nature of politics in a liberal democracy.
On the plus side, the Republican Party now finds itself in its direst predicament since the
1940s, if not before, as a result of Trumpism taking root within it. The conflict between
populists and neoliberals within its ranks, which now threatens to come to a head as a result
of Trump's second impeachment, may very well end the party for good, or at least result in a
split -- either outcome of which might perhaps open the door for a more genuinely Right-wing
party to fill the void it will leave behind. Only time will tell, but if it happens, it will be
a parting gift from Trump to have achieved what once seemed impossible, back when the
Republican Party was nothing more than the party of multiculturalism and globalism plus Jesus
and low taxes.
President Trump's most important contribution is that he lit the flame that genuinely
started the fire of Right-wing populism in America after previous attempts such as Pat
Buchanan's campaigns and the Tea Party ( yech ) had guttered out without raising the
temperature in Washington by even a degree. Whether that flame can continue burning now that
he's gone remains to be seen, but we can still hope that it was the start of a trend rather
than a temporary deviation. If American populism is to survive, it will clearly stand on the
Right; the Left has already amply demonstrated in its underhanded suppression of more populist
Democratic candidates such as Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard that they will not tolerate the
rise of any form of Leftism that doesn't conform to the Washington Elite's expectations.
Now, Unpresident Biden and the entire Democratic Party apparatus, emboldened by their
largely successful efforts to discredit the Right as a whole by blaming it in its entirety for
the Capitol occupation, believe themselves to be in a place where they can reshape American
politics according to their own agenda without any regard for the other side whatsoever. As
they've done continuously since the 2016 election, the Democrats always choose to double down
on their extremist rhetoric rather than doing any soul-searching about how they might have
contributed to bringing the situation about, nor about how they might be able to seek some sort
of compromise with the other side. They are too self-righteous to be capable of critical
reflection.
The Capitol "coup," harebrained as it was, certainly does not even begin to compare to the
Democrats' -- and some Republicans' -- efforts to undermine the Trump administration and the
will of the American electorate at every turn over the past four years, which to my mind much
more accurately fits the definition of a coup. It will be the task of the Dissident Right --
and hopefully the Right more generally, if they have the stones -- to do to the Left exactly
what they have been doing to us by throwing endless obstacles in their path, denying their
legitimacy, and constantly calling them to account for their injustices and excesses at every
possible opportunity.
The Democrats are not as strong as they believe. Even most liberals only supported Biden
grudgingly and purely out of expediency. Unpresident Biden is America's Brezhnev -- his health
and stamina failing, he is merely an old Establishment tool who has been resurrected in an
attempt to prop up an order that everyone knows is on its last legs. A telling video from the
inauguration shows Biden passing a contingent of Marines on guard duty, who any sitting
president is supposed to salute, being the Commander-in-Chief. Biden just shambles past them
without a gesture, oddly mumbling "salute the Marines" under his facemask. The quite plausible
theory that has been making the rounds is that Biden was being instructed on what to say and do
through an earpiece, and that he mistakenly repeated an instruction to salute the Marines
rather than actually doing it. This seems a good metaphor for his entire administration. (If
you're wondering who is on the other end of Biden's earpiece, it might perhaps be one of the
many Jews with whom he has packed his cabinet -- such a number that makes Trump's pandering
to the Jewish lobby seem tame in comparison. What happened to diversity? Does the White House
need affirmative action for whites nowadays?)
Like the late Soviet Union, however, Washington Inc. will project images of power in order
to conceal the reality of their order's decrepitude. That is surely the motive behind the
deployment of 26,000 soldiers to Washington, DC -- more than the number currently stationed in
Iraq and Afghanistan combined -- in response to the supposed Right-wing "threat." It isn't
about security, it is a show of force to prove to America that they are back and that they
intend to keep Washington and propagate their policies by any means necessary. Further, I
predict that the US will engage in some significant military action within the next year to
make a similar show of force on the world stage, flexing its muscles to prove that America
intends to resume its role as the world's policeman.
Starting from before the inauguration, the Left has been making their intention to declare
war on anything authentically white or Rightist clear. But while it was very easy for the
Establishment to muzzle the few thousand adherents of the Alt-Right, it will be much more
difficult for them to silence the 75 million Americans who voted for Trump -- in many cases not
because they loved Trump but simply because they wanted to prevent the return of the ruling
clique that had been governing our country entirely unopposed for decades before Trump's
rise.
In the final analysis, the most important lesson to be taken away from the Trump
administration is that the last five years were never about Trump himself. American populism
didn't start with him and it won't end with him. Samuel Francis was already predicting the rise
of a populist figure like Trump in the 1990s, even heralding a " revolution from the Right
" in a way that seems extremely prescient today. What the Capitol occupation
showed is that the populist current has grown beyond Trump's ability to channel and contain
it. As a result -- maybe -- we have an opportunity to transcend him and construct something
real out of the movement he energized, and do it better.
The real news of the last few months was the fact that 11 million more Americans voted for
Trump in 2020 over 2016, despite the ongoing demographic changes and despite all of his flaws
and failures. There is nothing that more aptly proves that it wasn't all merely about him than
this. American populism isn't dead. White America isn't dead. That's why I didn't use a photo
of Trump himself to illustrate this post, but rather one of his supporters -- ordinary
Americans, who were the real motor behind these changes in the political landscape.
I can't say at present what will come next for the Dissident Right. I'm not sure who will,
or even could, emerge to form the leadership of a post-Trump populist movement. Perhaps those
who follow the American political scene more closely than I do might have an inkling of who is
waiting in the wings that might be qualified to take charge. One thing that is certain is that
these new leaders must be completely disconnected in every public way from the fiasco that was
the Alt-Right. That brand is dead. But hopefully what is best in the Dissident Rightist milieu
can still inform whatever follows in our, and Trump's, footsteps.
With Trump's wings clipped, ordinary white Americans are looking for a leader. Here's hoping
they can finally get the one they deserve.
Well Lets see interesting year Biden wins ,Pennsyllvanis by 25,000 more votes than
Registered voters. He wins Wisconsin by 17,000 more votes than voters, their were two states
with over 300,000 combinred votes that were from people who did not exist, But according to
the courts all the way up to the supreme court who said it was legal, needless to say i no
longer, trust the supreme court
Trump succeeded in two things, both for the Jewish cause: advanced the Zionist interest in
Israel, and put back the opposition to the liberal-neocon Jewish establishment in America.
How is that in any way a "win" for authentic America Firsters?
I was proud of the fact that Michigan, where I vote
No real dissident votes. When one votes, he is buying into the scam that continually
produces the next savior and continually produces nothing but more repression.
A real dissident understands he is getting reamed and won't cooperate in his own demise. A
dissident has a brain that actually thinks. A voter is a mindless spectator in the endless
game of politics purposely designed to provide a false sense of control for people too stupid
to understand the system offers them no control.
Trump was a little bit better choice than the other candidates. And they were really,
really, really bad. I was not disappointed in Trump because I never expected much out of him.
RIP Donny!
It's always amazing to see how many right-wingers have invented a country for themselves
called "this country", which is everywhere, has no population, but lives in their minds
anyway. All for the sake of a chimera called "the white working class".
How is it an imaginary class which is actually a minority, and that has no history
anywhere is also going to rule over a continent of 50 States with 300+ million people?
I called it the day he rode down the escalator. I was happy he won, but not happy with his
performance. Even so, I voted for him again, because the alternative was much worse.
Trump ran on a Democrat 1980 platform: manufacturing jobs, family values, everything the
Democrats were before homosexuals, Scientism, and "people of color" changed the party. Hardly
"right wing," but given today's politics, who knows what the labels mean anymore. Contrary to
the New York Times, he was not a racist or a fascist. He pandered more to blacks and
Hispanics than he did to Whites. His pardon of two negro rappers just before he left office
was disgusting. Allowing that Kardashian whore into the Oval Office was likewise disgusting.
And his Jewish in-laws were nauseating.
He was not my ideal candidate, but, as I said, the alternative was far worse. As for the
future, I will not vote again. We are unlikely to ever see a promising leader that Whites can
follow.
While it is true that Trump didn't start the war with Syria, that honor belongs to
our 44th White President, make no mistake: we are at war with Syria and should not
be.
Can everybody please stop calling it "immigration"? And start calling it "illegal alien
invasion"? Immigration is not the problem although the H1B visa program is a disaster for
American workers, just a way to import cheap mostly Indian labor and it needs a
moratorium.
I think the author is far too generous in his assesssment of Trump. The only positive
thing I can see was that he didn't start any new wars, only maintained the ones that was
although the blatant zionist provocation of Iran was unforgivable.
It all started the first day after the election when Trump et al decided that they would
not be going in opposition to their own party. That was his first mistake. His econd mistake
mistake was not hiring people loyal to him and Bannon's vision and third mistake was being a
dumbfuck who let himself be led into the most stupid things by the corrupt -- - Kushner who
had way too much influence over everything, yes everything, in the administration.
Ultimately Trump was a bloviating buffoon (Although that was known to anybody reasonable
before the election) with a degree of narcissism never seen in a white goy in politics before
that was only thinking about himself the whole time, without any convictions at all.
He squandered the first two years on going along with the GOPe agenda and ultimately the only
people who got anything out of his presidency was blacks/criminals, the left (Because he
riled them up and poked them while never using the force of the state to shut them down, even
dropping his own voter fraud investigation halfways and crying on twitter that somebody
should do something about so many different things when he was the President – an
absurd thing to do), the rich 1 % elite and Jews (But i repeat myself).
If Russia anneses Crimea, which was a part of the country until the 1950s or 60s, it's a
crime against humanity. If Israel annexes the West bank it's only good and right.
Why? Because Jews run the USA and Trump did nothing at all to stand up to them in any real
way that gave any results (And I mean implicitly, not explcitly of course).
As mr Morgan said, its not about Trump, it is American Populism rising, and betrayed once
again. I
Israel got the most!
Four years wasted, and no organizing but ludicruos fringe alt-right queers, and nazi-fan
boys!
This should be about the ordinary people, 75 million, long since betrayed by the democrats
calling them "deplorables" and "fly-over-people".
Organize now!
Pick up Tulsi Gabbard and forget about Bernie Sanders!
Create a movement and form resistance, before they jab you out in space!
Sir John Glubb's essay on the rise and fall of empires is a must read. As this quote from
his work shows, empires throughout history have had an extraordinary pattern of lasting an
average of 250 years from rise to fall.
Assyria: 859 B.C. – 612 B.C. 247 years
Persia: 538 B.C. – 330 B.C. 208 years
Greece: 331 B.C. – 100 B.C. 231 years
Roman Republic: 260 B.C. – 27 B.C. 233 years
Roman Empire: 27 B.C. – A.D. 180 207 years
Arab Empire: A.D. 634 – A.D. 880 246 years
Mameluke Empire: A.D. 1250 – A.D. 1517 267 years
Ottoman Empire: A.D. 1320 – A.D. 1570 250 years
Spain: A.D. 1500 – A.D. 1750 250 years
Romanov Russia: A.D. 1682 – A.D. 1916 234 years
British Empire: A.D. 1700 – A.D. 1950 250 years
United States: A.D. 1776 – A.D. ???? ??? years
Some more quotes from this essay:
Feminism isn't working out too well today. It didn't work out for 10th century Arabs
either:
In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab Empire, the women
demanding admission to the professions hitherto monopolised by men. 'What,' wrote the
contemporary historian, Ibn Bessam, 'have the professions of clerk, tax-collector or
preacher to do with women? These occupations have always been limited to men alone.' Many
women practised law, while others obtained posts as university professors. There was an
agitation for the appointment of female judges, which, however, does not appear to have
succeeded. Soon after this period, government and public order collapsed, and foreign
invaders overran the country. The resulting increase in confusion and violence made it
unsafe for women to move unescorted in the streets, with the result that this feminist
movement collapsed.
One half of America's population at the other half's throat? Yeah, the Byzantines have
been there and done it already:
In the fourteenth century, the weakening empire of Byzantium was threatened, and indeed
dominated, by the Ottoman Turks. The situation was so serious that one would have expected
every subject of Byzantium to abandon his personal interests and to stand with his
compatriots in a last desperate attempt to save the country. The reverse occurred. The
Byzantines spent the last fifty years of their history in fighting one another in repeated
civil wars, until the Ottomans moved in and administered the coup de grâce.
What do the new overlords do when they take control of a ravaged empire? Civilised Persian
officials found out when the barbaric Mongols took the empire they had let fall by the
wayside:
When the Mongols conquered Persia in the thirteenth century, they were themselves
entirely uneducated and were obliged to depend wholly on native Persian officials to
administer the country and to collect the revenue. They retained as wazeer, or Prime
Minister, one Rashid al Din, a historian of international repute. Yet the Prime Minister,
when speaking to the Mongol II Khan, was obliged to remain throughout the interview on his
knees. At state banquets, the Prime Minister stood behind the Khan's seat to wait upon him.
If the Khan were in a good mood, he occasionally passed his wazeer a piece of food over his
shoulder.
I'm not American, but I feel like crying as I put this together. Anyway, America will do
its best to buck the 250 year trend.
@Anonymous
antines spent the last fifty years of their history in fighting one another in repeated civil
wars, until the Ottomans moved in and administered the coup de grâce.
Can't forget the American Indians, the South American Indians etc never stopped fighting
each other once Europeans showed up .
Many Tribes did little more than welcome better weapons (firearms) to continue their genocide
against neighboring Tribes .
No matter how much the Left talks about the plight of the First Peoples, they paid attention to
the outcome and are pushing much the same internal conflicts
We have a problem. The U.S. government is supposed to be of, by, and for the people. But it
has held itself unaccountable for decades while systematically stupefying, demoralizing, and
impoverishing the public through popular culture. Does a republic always turn to an empire, a
democracy to a tyrant, and a tyrant into pieces? The world needs globalism, but it does not
need monoculture. When the U.S. regime collapses it may be different this time. This time we
have the internet. The whole world watches everything.
I also predict the 1917 outcome. Worst outcome the Trump presidency was knowledge that Red
America is incapable to organize on the grassroot level, unite and fight back . So the Blue can
do whatever they want .
There are 2 issues remain. Elite infighting may make Government dysfunctional. New democrats
like the Squad want to push old Swamp Things out and fill Government positions with their
supporters.
Financial system blows off and massive economic disaster with chaos makes country
ungovernable.
"... By 2013, the CIA's chief technology officer outlined the agency's mission "to collect everything and hang on to it forever," acknowledging the internet companies, including Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Fitbit and telecom companies, for making it possible. ..."
"... The revolutionary roots of surveillance capitalism are planted in this unwritten political doctrine of surveillance exceptionalism, bypassing democratic oversight, and essentially granting the new internet companies a license to steal human experience and render it as proprietary data. ..."
"... What's been reinvented is no less than the idea of people as property. ..."
"... As an internet executive who has been in the game from the very beginning (1995 and onward), I am still dumbfounded that the overwhelming majority of Google search users have no idea that when they search for a product or a store, for example, the results are not democratically revealed. Using fashion as an example, Google's business model has stores and brands bid on keyword search terms, like "fine lingerie," or "red pumps," or "blue silk robe," to name a few of the billions of search terms. ..."
"... surveillance economies of scale and AI insights of prediction that allow a herd animal, us, to be more profitably managed and the profit more efficiently extracted. ..."
"... Alexa, dim the lights! ... like the hundreds of millions of other herd animals living the same delusion. if we were paid for our data use, we would just become aware of its use. this is a defect in a system designed to make you feel unique and special. that's the kink: at bottom, you like being surveilled and controlled. ..."
We can have democracy, or we can have a surveillance society, but we cannot have both.
By Shoshana Zuboff
Dr. Zuboff, a professor emeritus at Harvard Business School, is the author of "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism."
Two decades ago, the American government left democracy's front door open to California's fledgling internet companies, a cozy
fire lit in welcome. In the years that followed, a surveillance society flourished in those rooms, a social vision born in the distinct
but reciprocal needs of public intelligence agencies and private internet companies, both spellbound by a dream of total information
awareness. Twenty years later, the fire has jumped the screen, and on Jan. 6, it threatened to burn down democracy's house.
I have spent exactly 42 years studying the rise of the digital as an economic force driving our transformation into an information
civilization. Over the last two decades, I've observed the consequences of this surprising political-economic fraternity as those
young companies morphed into surveillance empires powered by global architectures of behavioral monitoring, analysis, targeting and
prediction that I have called surveillance capitalism. On the strength of their surveillance capabilities and for the sake of their
surveillance profits, the new empires engineered a fundamentally anti-democratic epistemic coup marked by unprecedented concentrations
of knowledge about us and the unaccountable power that accrues to such knowledge.
In an information civilization, societies are defined by questions of knowledge -- how it is distributed, the authority that governs
its distribution and the power that protects that authority. Who knows? Who decides who knows? Who decides who decides who knows?
Surveillance capitalists now hold the answers to each question, though we never elected them to govern. This is the essence of the
epistemic coup. They claim the authority to decide who knows by asserting ownership rights over our personal information and defend
that authority with
the power to control critical information systems and infrastructures.
... ... ...
The second stage is marked by a sharp rise in
epistemic inequality
, defined as the difference between what I can know and what can be known about me...
The Surveillance Exception
The public tragedy of Sept. 11 dramatically shifted the focus in Washington from debates over federal privacy legislation to a
mania for total information awareness, turning Silicon Valley's innovative surveillance practices into objects of intense interest.
As Jack Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School, observed
, the intelligence community would have to "rely on private enterprise to collect and generate information for it," in order
to reach beyond constitutional, legal, or regulatory constraints, controversies that are central today.
By 2013, the
CIA's chief technology officer outlined the agency's mission
"to collect everything and hang on to it forever," acknowledging the internet companies, including Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter,
and Fitbit and telecom companies, for making it possible.
The revolutionary roots of surveillance capitalism are planted in this
unwritten political doctrine of surveillance exceptionalism, bypassing democratic oversight, and essentially granting the new internet
companies a license to steal human experience and render it as proprietary data.
Young entrepreneurs without any democratic mandate landed a windfall of infinite information and unaccountable power. Google's
founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, exercised absolute control over the production, organization and presentation of the world's
information. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg has had absolute control over what would become a primary means of global communication and
news consumption, along with all the information concealed in its networks. The group's membership grew, and a swelling population
of global users proceeded unaware of what just happened.
The license to steal came with a price, binding the executives to the continued patronage of elected officials and regulators
as well as the sustained ignorance, or at least learned resignation, of users. The doctrine was, after all, a political doctrine,
and its defense would require a future of political maneuvering, appeasement, engagement and investment.
Google led the way with what would become one of the world's richest lobbying machines. In 2018 nearly half the Senate received
contributions from Facebook, Google and Amazon, and the companies
continue to set spending records .
Most significant, surveillance exceptionalism has meant that the United States and many other liberal democracies chose surveillance
over democracy as the guiding principle of social order. With this forfeit, democratic governments crippled their ability to sustain
the trust of their people, intensifying the rationale for surveillance.
The Economics and Politics of Epistemic Chaos
To understand the economics of epistemic chaos, it's important to know that surveillance capitalism's operations have no formal
interest in facts. All data is welcomed as equivalent, though not all of it is equal. Extraction operations proceed with the discipline
of the Cyclops, voraciously consuming everything it can see and radically indifferent to meaning, facts and truth.
In a
leaked memo , a Facebook executive, Andrew Bosworth, describes this willful disregard for truth and meaning:
"We connect people.
That can be good if they make it positive. Maybe someone finds love. That can be bad if they make it negative. Maybe someone dies
in a terrorist attack. The ugly truth is anything that allows us to connect more people more often is *de facto* good."
In other words, asking a surveillance extractor to reject content is like asking a coal-mining operation to discard containers
of coal because it's too dirty. This is why content moderation is a last resort, a public-relations operation in the spirit of ExxonMobil's
social responsibility messaging. In Facebook's case, data triage is undertaken either to minimize the risk of user withdrawal or
to avoid political sanctions. Both aim to increase rather than diminish data flows. The extraction imperative combined with radical
indifference to produce systems that ceaselessly escalate the scale of engagement but don't care what engages you.
I'm homing in now on Facebook not because it's the only perpetrator of epistemic chaos but because it's the largest social media
company and its consequences reach farthest.
The economics of surveillance capitalism begot the extractive Cyclops, turning Facebook into an advertising juggernaut and a killing
field for truth. Then an amoral Mr. Trump became president, demanding the right to lie at scale. Destructive economics merged with
political appeasement, and everything became infinitely worse.
Key to this story is that the politics of appeasement required little more than a refusal to mitigate, modify or eliminate the
ugly truth of surveillance economics. Surveillance capitalism's economic imperatives turned Facebook into a societal tinderbox. Mr.
Zuckerberg merely had to stand down and commit himself to the bystander role.
Internal research presented in 2016 and 2017 demonstrated causal links between Facebook's algorithmic targeting mechanisms and
epistemic chaos. One researcher concluded that the algorithms were responsible for the viral spread of divisive content that helped
fuel the growth of German extremist groups. Recommendation tools accounted for 64 percent of "extremist group joins," she found --
dynamics not unique to Germany .
The Cambridge Analytica scandal
in March 2018
riveted the world's attention on Facebook in a new way, offering a window for bold change. The public began to grasp that Facebook's
political advertising business is a way to rent the company's suite of capabilities to microtarget users, manipulate them and sow
epistemic chaos, pivoting the whole machine just a few degrees from commercial to political objectives.
Image
Credit... Pool photo by Graeme Jennings/EPA, via Shutterstock
The company launched some modest initiatives, promising more transparency, a more robust system of third-party fact checkers and
a policy to limit "coordinated inauthentic behavior," but through it all, Mr. Zuckerberg conceded the field to Mr. Trump's demands
for unfettered access to the global information bloodstream.
Mr. Zuckerberg
rejected internal proposals for operational changes that would reduce epistemic chaos. A
political whitelist identified over 100,000 officials and candidates whose accounts were exempted from fact-checking, despite
internal research showing that users tend to believe false information shared by politicians. In September 2019 the company
said that political advertising would
not be subject to fact-checking.
To placate his critics in 2018, Mr. Zuckerberg commissioned a civil rights audit led by Laura Murphy, a former director of the
ACLU's Washington legislative office. The
report published
in 2020 is a cri de coeur expressed in a river of words that bear witness to dashed hopes -- "disheartened," "frustrated," "angry,"
"dismayed," "fearful," "heartbreaking."
The report is consistent with a nearly complete rupture of the
American public's faith in Big Tech. When asked how Facebook would adjust to a political shift toward a possible Biden administration,
a company spokesman, Nick Clegg,
responded, "We'll adapt to the environment in which we're operating." And so it did. On Jan. 7, the day after it became clear
that Democrats would control the Senate,
Facebook announced that it would
indefinitely block Mr. Trump's account.
We are meant to believe that the destructive effects of epistemic chaos are the inevitable cost of cherished rights to freedom
of speech. No. Just as catastrophic levels of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere are the consequence of burning fossil fuels,
epistemic chaos is a consequence of surveillance capitalism's bedrock commercial operations, aggravated by political obligations
and set into motion by a 20-year-old dream of total information that slid into nightmare. Then a plague came to America, turning
the antisocial media conflagration into a wildfire.
... ... ...
The Washington Post reported in late March that with
nearly 50 percent
of the content on Facebook's news feed related to Covid-19, a very small number of "influential users" were driving the reading
habits and feeds of a vast number of users. A study released in April by the
Reuters Institute
confirmed that high-level politicians, celebrities and other prominent public figures produced 20 percent of the misinformation
in their sample, but attracted 69 percent of social media engagements in their sample.
... ... ...
In 1966, Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann wrote a short book of seminal importance, "The Social Construction of Reality." Its
central observation is that the "everyday life" we experience as "reality" is actively and perpetually constructed by us. This ongoing
miracle of social order rests on "common sense knowledge," which is "the knowledge we share with others in the normal self-evident
routines of everyday life."
Think about traffic: There are not enough police officers in the world to ensure that every car stops at every red light, yet
not every intersection triggers a negotiation or a fight. That's because in orderly societies we all know that red lights have the
authority to make us stop and green lights are authorized to let us go. This common sense means that we each act on what we all know,
while trusting that others will too. We're not just obeying laws; we are creating order together. Our reward is to live in a world
where we mostly get where we are going and home again safely because we can trust one another's common sense. No society is viable
without it.
"All societies are constructions in the face of chaos," write Berger and Luckmann. Because norms are summaries of our
common sense, norm violation is the essence of terrorism -- terrifying because it repudiates the most taken-for-granted social certainties.
"Norm violation creates an attentive audience beyond the target of terror,"
write Alex P. Schmid and Albert J. Jongman in "Political Terrorism," a widely cited text on the subject. Everyone experiences
the shock, disorientation, and fear. The legitimacy and continuity of our institutions are essential because they buffer us from
chaos by formalizing our common sense.
... ... ...
For many who hold freedom of speech as a sacred right, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes's 1919 dissenting opinion in
Abrams v. United States is
a touchstone. "The ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas," he wrote. "The best test of truth is the power
of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market." The corrupt information that dominates the private square
does not rise to the top of a free and fair competition of ideas. It wins in a rigged game. No democracy can survive this game.
Our susceptibility to the destruction of common sense reflects a young information civilization that has not yet found its footing
in democracy. Unless we interrupt surveillance economics and revoke the license to steal that legitimates its antisocial operations,
the other coup will continue to strengthen and produce fresh crises. What must be done now?
... ... ...
Shoshana Zuboff is a professor emeritus at Harvard Business School and the author of "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism."
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity
of letters to the editor. We'd like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips
. And here's our email: [email protected].
Jaron Lanier has made the same arguments in a more accessible style. "You Are Not A Gadget" and "Ten Arguments For Deleting Your
Social Media Accounts" are highly recommended!
Professor Zuboff is being polite and cautious. What's been reinvented is no less than the idea of people as property. Your data
is owned. Behavior is traded like a commodity. There is limited personal protection. Imagine you live completely off the grid.
One day you come into town to get coffee with an old friend. You don't bring any electronic device because you don't own any.
You pay in cash. You are 'not' surveilled. Your friend is surveilled. She has a phone and lives typically. The bill has two coffees.
A data point is created about you. Scale up to trillions data points and this reflective data gathering spreads like COVID. This
isn't benign information either such as your preferred coffee order. The difference between data 'person favours this political
party' and metadata 'person looked at a website for this many seconds, liked these posts, walks at this pace or was at such and
such location' is merely a mathematical function of utility. With enough data one can be translated to the other and monetized.
When placed into a market outcomes like 'engagement' are really euphemisms for inputs that you may consider private like your
sexual and reproductive history, your love and spiritual beliefs or who you voted for. Like Climate Change there's no individual
'opt out'. Unlike Climate Change, there are relatively near term solutions.
Had a nice dinner with my daughter and nephew. We used Siri to get to the restaurant. My iphone was on the table while we talked.
What came up in conversation was carpet cleaning; something I don't recall e-mailing or texting about. (My place then had hardwood
floors) Next day; boom, e-mails and ads from carpet cleaning places all over my e-mail, phone, texts. So does the internet just
snag the info you voluntarily give to them? Or connect to companies when you mention something in an a-mail or text? It's worse.
Siri actually listens to you while you're chatting over dinner. Try what I've described. Pick a topic you haven't communicated
about recently.
I've got to confess that I gave up on this about page three. It strikes me as paranoid; 2+2=6, maybe seven. These titians of the
internet need to get way better before they are as dangerous as portrayed. It causes me to think of 'how close we are to driverless
cars' - no we aren't.
If you don't care about privacy (which many don't) then the digital world is an Eden. People voluntarily post intimate details
of their lives willingly. You have to really work at it to have any privacy today. It can be done though. The US needs to take
a harder stance towards internet privacy like the EU. Any service that operates in the US needs an opt out clause in their user
agreements towards sharing any of their personal information. Most people would just click on the "I Agree to Share" but the people
who care about their privacy will opt out.
As an internet executive who has been in the game from the very beginning (1995 and onward), I am still dumbfounded that the overwhelming
majority of Google search users have no idea that when they search for a product or a store, for example, the results are not
democratically revealed. Using fashion as an example, Google's business model has stores and brands bid on keyword search terms,
like "fine lingerie," or "red pumps," or "blue silk robe," to name a few of the billions of search terms.
The stores or brands
that bid highest most often appear at the top of the list. As well, above those results sit paid ads, though again, most users
do not know those ads are actually ads, as they consider them to be legitimate results.
Over the years, I've read many a user
survey on Google search, and still--as savvy as we believe we have become in the online space--most users believe the results
at the top of the list must be the best results out there. Talk about a rigged system. Sadly and frighteningly, most of us do
not know, or probably even care, that it is.
i've been an admirer of dr. zuboff's take on technology for many years. but it's useful to reverse this analysis and consider
it from the corporate side: surveillance economies of scale and AI insights of prediction that allow a herd animal, us, to be
more profitably managed and the profit more efficiently extracted.
it's important to see that surveillance fundamentally benefits
command and control capabilities: china uses it to command obedience; corporations use it to control profit extraction, and to
guide your car GPS. we do not mind that we are being commanded and controlled because this brings us home delivery, voice control
systems, GPS navigation, targeted ads, on demand media, vast connectivity and personal media bubbles. these make us feel unique
and almost godlike ... Alexa, dim the lights! ... like the hundreds of millions of other herd animals living the same delusion.
if we were paid for our data use, we would just become aware of its use. this is a defect in a system designed to make you feel
unique and special. that's the kink: at bottom, you like being surveilled and controlled.
you like the commercial and recreational
benefits this brings. you don't care who uses what, provided you get all the consumer satisfaction and none of the dark web blowback. i'm not optimistic about "unprecedented solutions." there is no imminent stampede of the herd to get out of the corral. we like
it in here.
My life has gotten better since I deleted Facebook a few years ago. I get fewer updates from high school acquaintances, but my
real friendships have continued just the same, and my professional life has improved (since I have one fewer distraction). My
anxiety level is also lower. Of course the news over the past year has been a major source of anxiety, but it would have been
worse if I'd spent 2020 doom-scrolling on Facebook. I think a lot of people's lives would be better if a lot of people got off
social media...for these reasons as well as the important issues this essay addresses.
I'm 100% behind the "surveillance society" as long as corporations and lawmakers are surveilled. But when an Assange or a Snowden
proves that the NSA and CIA are criminal enterprises...the dishonest politicians hide behind the Espionage Act to quash the facts.
Right from the beginning I knew this Internet and social media revolution was dubious Right from the start, I tried never to use
my real name on SM or in email addresses...But they figured it out...It's been creepy from day one... Let's regain our old-fashioned
anonymity!
"... "It's so dangerous as you guys have been talking about, this is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially because we don't have to guess about where this goes or how this ends," Gabbard said. ..."
"... She continued: "When you have people like former CIA Director John Brennan openly talking about how he's spoken with or heard from appointees and nominees in the Biden administration who are already starting to look across our country for these types of movements similar to the insurgencies they've seen overseas, that in his words, he says make up this unholy alliance of religious extremists, racists, bigots, he lists a few others and at the end, even libertarians." ..."
"... "What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life? Where do you take this" ..."
"... "You start looking at obviously, have to be a white person, obviously likely male, libertarians, anyone who loves freedom, liberty, maybe has an American flag outside their house, or people who, you know, attended a Trump rally, " Gabbard said. ..."
After 9/11, the entire country collectively lost its mind in the throes of fear. During that time, all civil and Constitutional
rights were shredded and replaced with the pages of The
USA PATRIOT Act .
Almost 20 years later, the U.S. has again lost its collective mind, this time in fear of a "virus" and it's
"super mutations" and a
"riot" at the capitol. A lot of people called this and
to the surprise of very few, much like after 9/11, Americans are watching what remains of their civil liberties be replaced with
a new bill.
The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021
The DTPA is essentially the criminalization of speech, expression, and thought . It takes cancel culture a step further and
all but outlaws unpopular opinions . This
act will empower intelligence, law enforcement, and even military wings of the American ruling class to crack down on individuals
adhering to certain belief systems and ideologies.
"The attack on the U.S. Capitol earlier this month was the latest example of domestic terrorism, but the threat of domestic
terrorism remains very real. We cannot turn a blind eye to it," Upton said. "The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act will equip
our law enforcement leaders with the tools needed to help keep our homes, families, and communities across the country safe.
Congressman Upton's
website gives the following information on DTPA:
The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021 would strengthen the federal government's efforts to prevent, report on, respond
to, and investigate acts of domestic terrorism by authorizing offices dedicated to combating this threat; requiring these offices
to regularly assess this threat; and providing training and resources to assist state, local, and tribal law enforcement in addressing
it.
DTPA would authorize three offices, one each within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ),
and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), to monitor, investigate, and prosecute cases of domestic terrorism. The bill also
requires these offices to provide Congress with joint, biannual reports assessing the state of domestic terrorism threats, with
a specific focus on white supremacists. Based on the data collected, DTPA requires these offices to focus their resources on the
most significant threats.
DTPA also codifies the Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee, which would coordinate with United States Attorneys and other
public safety officials to promote information sharing and ensure an effective, responsive, and organized joint effort to combat
domestic terrorism. The legislation requires DOJ, FBI, and DHS to provide training and resources to assist state, local, and tribal
law enforcement agencies in understanding, detecting, deterring, and investigating acts of domestic terrorism and white supremacy.
Finally, DTPA directs DHS, DOJ, FBI, and the Department of Defense to establish an interagency task force to combat white supremacist
infiltration of the uniformed services and federal law enforcement.
Those who read the bill aren't so gung ho to shred the Constitution
Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard
has some serious reservations.
In a recent interview
on Fox News Primetime, Gabbard stated that the bill effectively criminalizes half of the country. (Emphasis ours)
"It's so dangerous as you guys have been talking about, this is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, independents,
Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially because we don't have to guess about where this goes or how this
ends," Gabbard said.
She continued: "When you have people like former CIA Director John Brennan openly talking about how he's spoken with or
heard from appointees and nominees in the Biden administration who are already starting to look across our country for these types
of movements similar to the insurgencies they've seen overseas, that in his words, he says make up this unholy alliance of religious
extremists, racists, bigots, he lists a few others and at the end, even libertarians."
Gabbard, stating her concern about how the government will define what qualities they are searching for in potential threats to
the country, went on to ask:
"What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking
about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody
who is pro-life? Where do you take this"
Tulsi said the bill would create a dangerous undermining of our civil liberties and freedoms in our Constitution. She also stated
the DPTA essentially targets nearly half of the United States.
"You start looking at obviously, have to be a white person, obviously likely male, libertarians, anyone who loves freedom,
liberty, maybe has an American flag outside their house, or people who, you know, attended a Trump rally, " Gabbard said.
Tulsi Gabbard is not the only one to criticize the legislation
Even the ACLU , one of the weakest organizations on civil liberties in the United States, has spoken out. While the ACLU was
only concerned with how the bill would affect minorities or "brown people," the organization stated that the legislation, while set
forth under the guise of countering white supremacy, would eventually be used against non-white people.
The ACLU's statement is true.
As with similar bills submitted under the guise of "protecting" Americans against outside threats, this bill will inevitably expand
further. The stated goals of the DPTA are far-reaching and frightening enough. It would amount to an official declaration of the
end to Free Speech.
Soon there will be no rights left for Americans
In the last twenty years, Americans have lost their 4th Amendment rights, and now they are losing their 1st. All that remains
is the 2nd Amendment , and
both the ruling class and increasing numbers of the American people know it.
The acronym ought to be ISUS or USIS. Of course, al-Tanf is a terrorist base, the
terrorists primarily being forces of the Outlaw US Empire and its main accomplice.
Accepting that as fact, we must then determine WHY? What is the overall aim?
If Hudson's correct about the overall geopolitical aims of the Parasitical Neoliberal
Fascists running the Outlaw US Empire and its NATO vassals, then we've known the answer for
quite awhile. The following is what Hudson has distilled it to:
"All economic systems seek to internationalize themselves and extend their rule
throughout the world. Today's revived Cold War should be understood as a fight between
what kind of economic system the world will have . Finance capitalism is fighting
against nations that restrict its intrusive dynamics and sponsorship of privatization and
dismantling of public regulatory power . Unlike industrial capitalism, the rentier aim
is not to become a more productive economy by producing goods and selling them at a lower
cost than competitors. Finance capitalism's dynamics are globalist, seeking to use
international organizations (the IMF, NATO, the World Bank and U.S.-designed trade and
investment sanctions) to overrule national governments that are not controlled by the
rentier classes . The aim is to make all economies into finance-capitalist layers of
hereditary privilege, imposing anti-labor austerity policies to squeeze a dollarized
surplus .
" Industrial capitalism's resistance to this international pressure is necessarily
nationalist , because it needs state subsidy and laws to tax and regulate the FIRE
sector . But it is losing the fight to finance capitalism, which is turning to be its
nemesis just as industrial capitalism was the nemesis of post-feudal landlordship and
predatory banking. Industrial capitalism requires state subsidy and infrastructure
investment, along with regulatory and taxing power to check the incursion of finance
capital . The resulting global conflict is between socialism (the natural evolution
of industrial capitalism) and a pro-rentier fascism, a state-finance-capitalist reaction
against socialism's mobilization of state power to roll back the post-feudal rentier
interests ." [My Emphasis]
The situation in Syria and Iraq represent the kinetic edge of what's mostly a Cold War
globally. It's noted that some of the Parasitical organizations have powers equal to some
nation-states and that the main underlying aim is the weakening of governments's abilities
to regulate them. The pandemic has weakened a great many nations while the Parasites have
grown stronger as they get massive transfusions from the Fed. Thus it seems very plausible
that given their motive, the Parasites spawned the pandemic, not this or that government.
We watched as those forces operated independently of Trump by disobeying his orders, and
now we have further understanding of why the so-called Forever Wars. We can also understand
the real motive for 911 was the destruction of evidence at Building 7 and the Pentagon that
would've gravely injured the Parasites while also providing a covering reason for launching
the Forever Wars. IMO, the only way the Outlaw US Empire will leave the areas it occupies
is if its physically ousted--Korea, Japan, Europe, Afghanistan, Southwest Asia. It ought to
be possible to now see how Full Spectrum Domination can be obtained without a military
conflict, as well as the real reasons behind the demonization of China and Russia.
Both Putin and Xi told Davos and the Parasites that they're committed to their
development path which is completely at odds with what the Parasites desire. IMO, the
global masses would agree with both and join them if they knew what they said. We can also
see why the attack on the Ummah, which is the Islamic global collective that adheres to the
values that promote the collective, not the Parasites that would feed on it. And we just
witnessed how the Parasites are able to quickly counter any concerted effort to disciple
them, which also served the purpose of outing Big Tech as an enemy of the collective. Cold
War or Class War? The difference between them is close to indistinguishable.
How can a U.S. citizen even respond? U.S. Intel agency secrets. CENTCOM's treason, the
nation's complicity in another eternal war for Israel. It's just too sad to comment about.
Maybe voting and the law will fix this mess.
Posted by: PavewayIV | Jan 29 2021 11:31 utc | 2
I think maybe its time to rethink is it actually the nation state of Israel, OR is it
that the Nation State of Israel is the same as the Nation State of the USA, a warrior, pawn
and get it done group that both holds captive its citizens by rule of law and that serves
the will and wishes of the Oligarch..
Oligarchary has gone global. They are in control of the top of nearly all governments
and they privately own (92% owned by just 6 entities) the media (the ninth tier in the 9
tier model) At the top and at the bottom they have what it takes to keep divided the
populations so the deplorable cannot effectively organize. Until someone comes up with a
way to overcome the divided nation,nothing effective is likely to surface. Nation states
are the pawns, the war machine (leg breakers) that keep the Oligarch familes wealthy..
forget the nation state as the center of power, the nation state is not, the center of
power is invisible, the nation state is just the war machine, and law making machine and
the wealth extraction machine the oligarch depend on to keep their wealth and to deny the
deplorable their chance at the good life.
One of the biggest challenges to democracy lay in the copyright and patent monopolies.
these monopolies are creatures of the rule of law, without law there can be no privately
owned monopolies. as of Oct 1, it is reported that 90% of the balance sheets of the traded
companies is either patents or copyrights. that only leaves 10% for physical assets. Rule
of law, without effective input from those who are the governed, is the enemy of the
deplorable and the supression of Democracy, Independence of mind, thought and deed.
If you removed the laws that enable copyright and patents, overnight some mighty big
corporate enterprises would be broke.
Speaking about rich families who own the world. There is one unique feature of german
oligarchy, they don't change. More than half of the hundred richest families now have already
been rich before ww1. They made the crazy history of last century possible. Please just go
for a second in the perspective they have.
Clinesmith worked at the FBI General Counsel's Office (GCO) and was assigned to Crossfire
Hurricane, the probe of Trump's alleged ties with Russia during the 2016 election. In that
capacity, he altered an email from the CIA that described Page as a source for the spy agency,
to say he was "not" a source – enabling the FBI to request a Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant against Page as a "Russian agent" – and, through
him, spy on the Trump campaign, transition and presidency.
On Friday, federal judge James Boasberg – who also sits on the FISA court –
sentenced Clinesmith to 12 months' probation, 400 hours of community service, and a $100
fine.
Boasberg was reportedly swayed by Clinesmith's insistence that he'd acted in good faith and
that his wife has a baby on the way, while shrugging-off Page's testimony that his life had
been ruined as the result of false claims he was a "Russian agent."
The Republicans sitting on the House Judiciary Committee called the sentence
"insanity" and "outrageous."
Led by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-California), the Judiciary GOP first exposed the FISA abuse and
published a
memo about it in February 2018, revealing that the FBI had relied on the "Steele
Dossier" – a collection of spurious claims compiled by a British spy and paid-for by
Hillary Clinton's campaign – in the initial spying request.
Others pointed out that Clinesmith's transgression was far greater than almost anyone who
ended up going to jail as a result of special counsel Robert Mueller's 'Russiagate' probe.
Campaign aide George Papadopoulos spent two weeks in jail for allegedly lying to the FBI
– the same process crime Clinesmith pled guilty to last
August – and General Michael Flynn spent four years trying to beat the same
charge.
Clinesmith is also the only FBI official to face any scrutiny over the bureau's handling of
Crossfire Hurricane. Former director James Comey, his deputy Andy McCabe, lead agent Peter
Strzok and attorney Lisa Page – all of whom were involved in the probe – have
landed lucrative book contracts or cable news jobs, or become heroes of the Democrat
"resistance" instead.
The lenient sentence for a FBI lawyer altering evidence was seen as especially egregious,
as, earlier this week, a Trump supporter going by the handle 'Ricky Vaughn' on Twitter was
arrested and
charged by the Biden administration for "conspiracy to deprive people of their voting
rights" by posting memes that allegedly misled Clinton voters in 2016.
"The entire game is rigged," said Federalist editor Sean Davis. "The rule of law
is dead."
"As outrageous as this is, it's also useful. It's in our faces now," wrote lawyer and
filmmaker Mike Cernovich. "When they come for more Trump supporters Remember today."
Democrats, who spent the past four years insisting that "no one is above the law" and
that Trump must be investigated for an array of suspected crimes, did not
comment.
Due to the immense power of propaganda, normal people who should identify politically as the
"left" are actually supporting these dangerous policies and the erosions of liberty are
accelerating in direct proportion to the level of resistance, such as r/Wallstreetbets and the
immediate crackdown across several platforms to stop them.
I've seen an extraordinary erosion of rights and liberties over the past few years. It
really started with the cover up after the Trump election, which sought to steer the
narrative of public opinion away from the failure of the Clintons and the Democratic machine
with obvious fantastic lies about Russia.
For a myriad of reasons probably understood best by likes of Freud, Jüng, and others,
everyone on the left (who are supposed to be the smart and rational ones in society) bought
these lies and repeated them.
Once this was allowed to happen, once Maddow was allowed to lead the vanguard of libel
with no recourse, the snowball began to roll and now we are seeing the enforcement of that
thought-policing, which is as unconstitutional as the libel itself, especially considering it
is being perpetrated ubiquitously among media owners.
The phenomenon of Donald Trump the villain President has been used as an excuse to destroy
free speech and shoe horn in authoritarian policies. Due to the immense power of propaganda,
normal people who should identify politically as the "left" are actually supporting these
dangerous policies and the erosions of liberty are accelerating in direct proportion to the
level of resistance, such as r/Wallstreetbets and the immediate crackdown across several
platforms to stop them.
This Wall St. favoritism is obvious, but will likely end without bankers taking much
damage besides some short term outrage. They still control all the levers of currency and
trade no matter the President.
The real dangers of the day are the clamping down on speech. Starting with imprisoning
Julian Assange and then migrating to various corners of the Internet. I'll be very interested
to see how things shake out with the stock market, but I imagine it will go back to the firm
grip of those who control the money supply, which it was for a very long time.
In the meantime, shutting down the Reddit forums and Discord servers is a very serious
danger and I hope we can shine a light on it.
"Where is the line between a successful global business, in-demand services and
consolidation of big data – and attempts to harshly and unilaterally govern society,
replace legitimate democratic institutions, restrict one's natural right to decide for
themselves how to live, what to choose, what stance to express freely?" Putin wondered.
"We've all seen this just now in the US. And everybody understands what I'm talking
about," he added.
The Russian leader was apparently referring to the crackdown by Big Tech corporations like
Twitter, Facebook, Google, Apple and Amazon, mostly on Donald Trump and his supporters, during
the recent presidential election in the US. The companies, which, according to some critics,
sided with Democratic candidate Joe Biden, blocked President Trump's social media accounts over
accusations of inciting violence, with the same being done to many pages of groups and
individuals who'd backed him.
However, one-sided bias claim voiced by some might be an overestimation – the accounts
of Democrats supporters were also subject to restrictions, but on a much smaller scale.
Conservative Twitter-like platform Parler was also forced offline, and now there are calls
to block the Telegram app as well.
These events have shown that Big Tech companies "in some areas have de facto become
rivals to the government," Putin said.
Billions of users spend large parts of their lives on the platforms and, from the point of
view of those companies, their monopolistic position is favorable for organizing economic and
technological processes, the Russian president explained. "But there's a question of how
such monopolism fits the interest of society," he stressed.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
shadow1369 8 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 07:51 AM
This is a great opportunity for Russia to create some Big Tech operators which actually allow
free speech. Russia certainly has the expertise and the means, and cannot be bullied by
western regimes.
Proton1963 shadow1369 1 hour ago 27 Jan, 2021 02:54 PM
Sure.. But only after the Russians can build a drivable car or a decent smart phone or a
laptop.
The West is surely giving Russia a lot of opportunities, through its own arrogance and
stupidity, does not it ? It keeps going backwards in its effort to diminish Russia. And the
same goes for China too.
JOHNCHUCKMAN 7 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 08:45 AM
Putin is a remarkable statesman, and he sets a very high standard for political discourse. I
can't think of any of our Western leaders who speak in these truthful and philosophic terms.
What we hear in the West are slogans or whining or complaining.
Tenakakhan JOHNCHUCKMAN 3 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 01:03 PM
The patriarch of the west has become extremely weak. It seems like our leaders lack any moral
authority to speak truth and common sense for fear of being cancelled. What we see now is the
virtue signaling dregs sponsored by extreme groups leading our nations down the toilet. If a
real war was to break out now we would be cannon fodder.
Hilarous 7 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 09:04 AM
I think there's a simple explanation. Big tech is afraid to lose section 230 of the
communications act, which stipulates that online platforms are not legally responsible for
user content. Trump and some Republicans have accused social media sites of muzzling
conservative voices. They said undoing Section 230 would let people who claim they have been
slighted sue the companies. So Big Tech has a strong interest to remove Trump and run down a
few bad examples to convince people and politics that Section 230 must remain.
Count_Cash 8 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 07:40 AM
In many cases they aren't rivals, but owners of government. Money controls everything in the
west and big tech have it. They have taken control of, or are blackmailing governments. The
Western Liberal Regime straddles both Big Tech and government!
RTaccount Count_Cash 7 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 08:57 AM
Correct. Let us never forget that in America we are ruled by oligarchs just like the rest of
the world, and that our oligarchs are largely hidden. They are our true government, and so it
is meaningless to make this type of distinction.
It's part & parcel here especially from DUP types who sometimes appear to be living in
a fantasy world – Shinners not so much but I imagine that SF dissidents have similar
extreme positions & all of this comes from some intelligent & professional people not
just the malleable mobs. Meanwhile there is a turf war for the gangster versions of both UVF
& UDA hitting the streets in Belfast.
I recall a few years back reading an account from a British Army general who was familiar
with both Northern Ireland & the former Yugoslavia before they blew up, who in both
instances was shocked by how people who had for the most part lived happily side by side
within a relatively short space of time became sworn enemies. All of that had a religious
background with the latter including ethnicity, but to him both sides in both cases spiraled
down through negative reactions into extremes, becoming in the end each others sworn
enemies.
Politics & Class have I believe caused the same fractures & after all the
successful & presumably intelligent PMC also have their deplorable others that are
largely a construction based on generalisations & stereotypes, while sadly peace &
reconciliation efforts as far as I can tell always appear to arrive as an epilogue to a very
bad book.
Yugoslavia definitely didn't live happily side by side. Its tensions were hidden under
Tito, but existed before (cf WW2 Croats vs Serbs, as most visible example), and blew up
after, to a great extent because they were so supressed before w/o any reasonable outlet. It
might have given a semblance of "happines", but it wasn't really there.
I was only in Yugoslavia once for about a week in 1982, and you could see what a mess it
was in the making. I'm used to Europeans drinking, but Belgrade made em' look like
teetotalers. Add in age old tensions and kaboom!
One of the biggest hyperinflationary episodes came out of their civil war, only to be
eclipsed in the numbers game by Zimbabwe after the turn of the century.
I was going through Yugoslavia by train in 1981 and the one thing that struck me looking
out the windows was flags. You had Yugoslavian flags everywhere you looked to the point that
it was almost a fetish. It was only years later that I wondered if the point of those flags
was to encourage the different groups to think of themselves as Yugoslavians first and
foremost.
> to a great extent because they were so supressed before w/o any reasonable
outlet.
But this seems to excuse the fighting? If everybody was "suppressed" then why did they
kick sideways, rather than up? As I think I said once before, my friend from Serbia would say
"I'd be on "my" side of the street and "they" would be shooting at me, and then I'd cross the
street and "my" people would be shooting at me".
He, like so many nowadays, came to the US not because this was some beacon of hope but
because where he lived, a place he loved for many reasons, was that messed up.
Reading Wikipedia I come across this tiresome sentence: "The Croat quest for independence
led to large Serb communities within Croatia rebelling and trying to secede from the Croat
republic. Serbs in Croatia would not accept a status of a national minority in a sovereign
Croatia, since they would be demoted from the status of a constituent nation of the entirety
of Yugoslavia."
Croats? Serbs? Like they are fundamentally different species? It's as bad as the
Reconstruction South, but per my example above people didn't even have different colored
skin, heck they were physically indistinguishable. They just wanted something they themselves
couldn't even describe without foaming at the mouth.
To be considered above somebody else by birth was what it really was.
Oh, and another head-banging quote: "the "Croatian Spring" protest in the 1970s was backed
by large numbers of Croats who claimed that Yugoslavia remained a Serb hegemony and demanded
that Serbia's powers be reduced .Tito, whose home republic was Croatia,"
An iron-fisted dictator runs the country, he is from Croatia, yet the country is
considered by Croatians to be "Serb hegemony". Ok whatever, hey it does make more sense than
following a normal-height dark-haired dark-eyed man because he says that tall blond-haired
blue eyed people are superior. And that was a short-by-American-standards drive away
We can give the globe a spin and find the same idiocy in Asia, where "they all look alike"
to western eyes but oh boy they slaughter each other just as regularly as we do.
Ok I'm done ranting. What a plague on the planet this species is.
Kicking sideways (or downwards) is always easier than kicking upwards, especially if
people were doing it for years.
Otherwise, you're just accentuating my point – and I agree with you. It was
incredible watching people in pub who were getting on very well until one of them asked where
the other was from, and that has changed the whole atmosphere.
My cousin from Prague came to America in the late 90's to live on a genuine ranch for a
spell and go on a long roadtrip in search of
So he gets pulled over for speeding in a red state and gives the officer his Czech drivers
license, and he told me the officer went into a harangue over all the ethnic cleansing that
was going on in his country, and how sorry he was about it, and let him off.
Cousin was torn between telling the copper, nah that's a few countries over, but went for
the victim card instead.
Hah, do you know the Western press brain-melt induced by having Slovakia and Slovenia
(which, moreover have very similar flags..) in the same World Cup (soccer) 2022 qualification
group?
Croats? Serbs? Like they are fundamentally different species?
Not different species, but different religions; Roman and Orthodox Catholicism,
respectively. Think German-speaking Europe during the Thirty Years War.
The irony of course is that, in 1992, Croats for the most part didn't go to mass, Serbs
did go to Liturgy, and Bosniak Muslims thought beer went well with their pork chops.
Think of it not as a religious war, but a re-hash of WWII.
Diana Johnstones "Fools Crusade" goes into the destabilization efforts made by various EU
and Nato entities to precipitate the break up. It's where the Clintons beta tested the nation
breaking tools Bush/Cheney began deploying around the world.
Karl Von Hapsburg and the Pope were both involved in prying the Catholic portions loose
from the Yugoslav federation and bringing them back into the Mont Pelerin orbit of the former
Habsburg empire.
The Orthodox regions have been left to the Russians with black markets to everyone's
benefit and the Bosnians given the standard settler/colonial treatment of designated
"races."
Vlade – perhaps I should not have used the word happily but basically neighbours
were not killing each other as was also mainly the case in NI, although there were tensions
gradually building up in tandem with the Civil Rights movement based on the MLK. model.
I don't know what the tipping point was in the Balkans, but in NI it was the treatment
received by the marchers & the likes of the Bogside at the hands of the B specials &
RUC in Derry which gradually spread elsewhere in mass battles between mobs from both sides
& the above armed cops. All of this capped off in 72 by the Provos most successful
recruiting campaign courtesy of the Parachute regiment on Bloody Sunday, while about that
time around 10,000 Catholic refugees crossed into the Republic.
If the General thought that people in NI lived happily side by side before the Troubles,
then he was sorely misinformed. Tensions were always very strong, although not just religious
ones. In Dublin growing up I had neighbours who were Belfast protestants but had been driving
out of Belfast because their grandfather was involved in a shipyard trade union and that was
sufficient for him to have been labeled as a communist and Taig lover.
Yes happily was the wrong word but in the North outside of the cities there was mixing
& occasionally mixed marriages.
You are very correct in relation to the troubles in the shipyards, which I read a few
books about in prep for a statue. Funny thing is that during my 2 stints at the Titanic
studios for GoT I was informed by the top man that many of the tradesmen were ex
paramilitaries from both sides who managed to work well together for a decade, but in
separate teams. That was also tjhe case during the yearly Wraps where they all took full
advantage of the free bars but besides a few scuffles, there was never any real trouble.
A lot of the work would have been carried out in the original paint hall.
You have lost me there Vlade ( If you were indeed commenting on my post ) as I don't know
the book, but you have reminded me of one very violent incident on location in Spain between
2 Catholics in a bar. It was due to one of them being a member of another group of savages
that plagued Belfast as the other 2 wound down.
They were called the Hoodies who were part of the huge crime wave that hit Belfast as a
consequence of the Troubles. It was cleaned up in Catholic areas over about 7 years under the
command of Bobby Storey.
"Blinken has said that America's foreign policy must be conducted with 'humility and
confidence', which may sound refreshingly modest. But it's not. Underlying this 'quiet
American' is the same old arrogance about U.S. imperial might-is-right and Washington's
presumed privilege of appointing itself as the 'world's policeman'.
"If Blinken's record is anything to go on, his future role as America's top diplomat is
foreboding.
"Previously, he was a senior member in the Obama administrations serving as national
security advisor to both the president and Joe Biden who was then vice-president. Blinken
rose to become deputy Secretary of State in the final years of the second Obama
administration. In those roles he was a key player in a series of foreign interventions which
turned out to be utterly disastrous."
The once upon a time manufactured aura of Virtue projected by the Outlaw US Empire that
was swallowed by so many naïve nations has vanished with nothing other than its stark
ugliness as a replacement. Refusal to see that reality is what Xi just referred to again as
"arrogance" which puts Blinken into the same ideological camp as Pompeo. As Global Times notes
, if the Outlaw US Empire's attitude's not going to change, than why should China's as
Pompeo's constant lying is replaced by Psaki's:
"When White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki responded to a question Monday about US-China
relations, she said that 'China is growing more authoritarian at home and more assertive
abroad,' adding that China 'is engaged in conduct that hurts American workers, blunts [US]
technological edge, and threatens [US] alliances and [US] influence in international
organizations.' She also noted that Washington is 'starting from an approach of patience as
it relates to [its] relationship with China.'"
The editor's response to such inanity:
"Psaki's statement shows that the Biden administration's view and characterization of
China is virtually identical to those of the Trump administration. Psaki stressed that 'We're
in a serious competition with China. Strategic competition with China is a defining feature
of the 21st century,' reflecting that the Biden administration only cares about a "new
approach" to holding China accountable."
And Psaki's words are the same as Blinken's, which were the same as Pompeo's and Trump's.
In other words, the hole digging by the Outlaw US Empire in its relations with the rest of
the world will continue, which will cause further deterioration of its domestic Great
Depression 2.0. Yesterday I posted a comment that highlighted Putin's expounding on the
further enhancement of the educational component of Russia's Social Contract that is
impossible for Navalny's backers to match. On the previous thread, a good comparison was made
between the Yeltsin years and the ongoing drowning of the Outlaw US Empire. The Reset that's
in the works isn't the one envisioned by Global Neoliberals like Klaus Schwab of the
WEF/Davos crew. It's what Xi spoke of yesterday that I commented upon and Escobar reported on
today. The Winds of Change are blowing again, but there's a gaping hole in the USA's wind
sock so it can't see in which direction it's blowing.
blinken is bad news.. i think that is very obvious from a superficial read on him.. the usa
can't get out of the ditch it has made for itself.. nothing is gonna change...
'liberal interventionism' has always been the hallmark of the US Liberal Class and its
foreign policy Establishment, especially since at least Wilson's jumping into WWI.
Has the US ever not intervened in Latin America whenever it felt like it or thought its
"interests" were at stake?
I think Caitlan J. has a good grasp on what to expect from the Biden war mongering crowd
that has recently moved into DC once again:
"....Trump's base has been forcefully pushing the narrative that the previous president
didn't start any new wars, which while technically true ignores his murderous actions like
vetoing the bill to save Yemen from U.S.-backed genocide and actively blocking aid to its
people, murdering untold tens of thousands of Venezuelans with starvation sanctions, rolling
out many world-threatening Cold War escalations against Russia, engaging in insane
brinkmanship with Iran, greatly increasing the number of bombs dropped per day from the
previous administration, killing record numbers of civilians, and reducing military
accountability for those airstrikes....
....Rather than a throwback to "new wars" and the old-school ground invasions of the Bush
era, the warmongering we'll be seeing from the Biden administration is more likely to look
like this. More starvation sanctions. More proxy conflicts. More cold war. More coups. More
special ops. More drone strikes. More slow motion strangulation, less ham-fisted overt
warfare...."
---
Simply put, more small scale wars/ops mostly by proxy, more support for local wankers
(like Guaido in Venezuela, who has incredibly little popular support), and more of these
killing sanctions, which are especially pernicious to the civilian populations in vulnerable
countries like Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Nicaragua and Venezuela, etc.
"... Blatantly frauding the election against Trump wasn't enough and they have to hold show trials and even label the "Deplorables" as terrorists to get back to where they expected to be after the election in 2016. This is why the establishment feels they have to go forward with the second impeachment, and it is why the public is being treated to the spectacle of hysterical, over-the-top hyperbole from the establishment mass media about the threat of imaginary white supremacists and Capitol building insurrectionists. ..."
"... If Trump WAS a "champion" of the right he would've mauled the establishment via prosecutions (that never came) and true 'America First' actions. Instead, we see Biden just picking up where Trump left off. ..."
Part of the reason the establishment ushered Trump into the race in 2016, apart from
thinking that would guarantee Clinton a win, was the intention to socially/culturally
marginalize the "Deplorables" and crush their morale when their "champion" was
brutally humiliated by losing the election bigly. Though Trump winning against all
expectations set back the establishment's plans for rolling out its more "inclusive"
formulation of capitalist exploitation, they are now fully committed to picking up the pieces
of their plans and trying to run with them as if the previous four years never happened.
The
only difference in their plans is that Trump actually was president, so the establishment has
to work much harder at shaming and humiliating the "Deplorables" into subjugation.
Blatantly frauding the election against Trump wasn't enough and they have to hold show trials
and even label the "Deplorables" as terrorists to get back to where they expected to
be after the election in 2016. This is why the establishment feels they have to go forward
with the second impeachment, and it is why the public is being treated to the spectacle of
hysterical, over-the-top hyperbole from the establishment mass media about the threat of
imaginary white supremacists and Capitol building insurrectionists.
Of course the establishment's plans will not work any better now than they did in 2016,
but it should be fun to watch them continue to cluelessly flounder about.
Part of the reason the establishment ushered Trump into the race in 2016, apart from
thinking that would guarantee Clinton a win ...
Firstly, "the establishment" is very broad. I think those who "select" the President is a
much narrower group of power people and the interests they represent. If there's one thing
that they have in common, it is this: their outlook is EMPIRE-FIRST, and the interests they
represent benefit from the Empire.
The Presidency is the lynchpin of the Empire.
There's evidence that Hillary was meant to lose to Trump:
as sheepdog, Bernie all but guaranteed that Hillary would win the Democratic
nomination;
Hillary, a seasoned campaigner made egregious "mistakes" that angered key voter groups
- mistakes that no seasoned campaigner in a 'must win' campaign would do: she snubbed
blacks (she was very cold to BLM); alienated progressives (bringing Debra Wasserman-Schultz
into her campaign); and declared that non-progressive whites were "deplorables."
In the closing weeks of the campaign, she also refused to campaign in the THREE STATES
that SHE KNEW would decide the election.
After Russia stood up to USA in Syria and Ukraine, Kissinger wrote a WSJ Op-Ed (August
2014) that all but called for MAGA! He argued for a return to America's global
leadership/dominance. 10 months later Trump entered the race as the ONLY MAGA!
candidate.
= ... was the intention to socially/culturally marginalize the "Deplorables" and crush
their morale when their "champion" was brutally humiliated ...
But Trump was hardly a "champion" of the Tea Party Republicans in 2015-16. He was just a
billionaire poser that was paying lip service to them. Many weren't sure they could trust him
but he was sure as hell better than Hillary. The popular right's embrace of Trump mostly came
after the election as propaganda from Qanon and others spun every action of Trump's as
heroically fighting the good fight.
= The only difference in their plans is that Trump actually was president ...
And therein lies the rub! If Trump WAS a "champion" of the right he would've mauled the
establishment via prosecutions (that never came) and true 'America First' actions. Instead,
we see Biden just picking up where Trump left off.
There is no singular "opposition" for Washington to support -- no unified alternative
ideology, least of all one palatable to the West, to replace the current Russian state and
institutions.
Jailed Kremlin foe Navalny being used by West to destabilise Russia: Putin ally
By
Reuters
Staff
3 MIN READ
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny is being used by the West to try to destabilise Russia, a
prominent hardliner and ally of President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday, saying he must be held to account for
repeatedly breaking the law.
Slideshow
(
2 images )
Navalny was remanded in custody for 30 days last week after returning from Germany where he had been recovering from a
nerve agent poisoning. He could face years in jail for parole violations and other legal cases he calls trumped up.
Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of the Security Council, called for Navalny to face the full force of the law in comments
that offered a glimpse into the mood inside Russia's security establishment after tens of thousands of Navalny's
supporters protested against his jailing on Saturday.
"He (Navalny), this figure, has repeatedly (and) grossly broken Russian legislation, engaging in fraud concerning large
amounts (of money). And as a citizen of Russia he must bear responsibility for his illegal activity in line with the
law," Patrushev told the Argumenty i Fakty media outlet.
"The West needs this figure to destabilise the situation in Russia, for social upheaval, strikes and new Maidans,"
Patrushev said, in a reference to the 2014 revolution in Ukraine that ousted a Moscow-backed president.
When asked about Patrushev's comments, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it was up to a court to make further
decisions in the opposition politician's case and that it was not a matter for the Kremlin.
Police detained more than 3,700 people on Saturday as protesters called on the Kremlin to release Navalny. The Kremlin
said the protests were illegal.
Peskov on Tuesday said there could be no dialogue with illegal protesters, accusing them of behaving aggressively and of
using what he called unprecedented violence against the police.
He said incidences of police violence against protesters, some of which were captured on video, were far fewer and being
investigated.
In a sign that Russian authorities may crack down hard after the protests, the Kommersant newspaper on Tuesday cited
unnamed security sources as saying they may open a criminal investigation that would treat the demonstrations as "mass
unrest".
The West has called for Navalny's release, but the European Union has said it will refrain from fresh sanctions on
Russian individuals if Moscow releases Navalny after 30 days.
News outlets and campaign groups that get cash from overseas could be prevented from
spending money in Russia under proposals put forward by an influential Moscow think tank.
RT obtained a copy of the proposal, addressed to Interior Minister Vladimir Kolokoltsev on
Wednesday. Developed by Anton Orlov, director of the Institute for the Study of Contemporary
Politics, the draft regulations would effectively ban groups that are registered as "foreign
agents" from making financial payments to individuals.
Orlov claims in his statement that one such organization has been demonstrated to have
"organized unauthorized street political actions in Russian cities." He added: "At
the same time, representatives of the organization disseminated information on social networks
and in the media that they were ready to pay the fines of citizens received as a result of
committing offenses at these events."
It is unclear how this would affect the ability of these groups to pay their staff in
Russia.
A number of organizations have been labeled as foreign agents under government rules,
because they receive significant proportions of their funding from abroad, predominately from
Western governments. Among them are US state-run media outlets Voice of America and RFE/RL, as
well as the opposition-leaning Moscow-based Levada Center.
In March last year, President Vladimir Putin defended the law, comparing it to equivalent
measures in the US and arguing that it "exists simply to protect Russia from external
meddling in its politics."
"Nobody's rights are being infringed on here whatsoever. There is nothing that runs
counter to international practice," he added.
One of the country's most senior parliamentarians, Senator Andrey Klimov, told Rossiya-1
news channel on Sunday that the street protests organized in support of jailed opposition
figure Alexey Navalny last weekend had been orchestrated from outside the country. "The
Senatorial Commission has reason to believe that all these activities are clearly traced to the
actions of foreign states, and it is all happening with the assistance of foreign
specialists," he told the broadcaster.
A number of organizations have been labeled as foreign agents under government rules,
because they receive significant proportions of their funding from abroad, predominately from
Western governments. Among them are US state-run media outlets Voice of America and RFE/RL, as
well as the opposition-leaning Moscow-based Levada Center.
In March last year, President Vladimir Putin defended the law, comparing it to equivalent
measures in the US and arguing that it "exists simply to protect Russia from external
meddling in its politics."
"Nobody's rights are being infringed on here whatsoever. There is nothing that runs
counter to international practice," he added.
One of the country's most senior parliamentarians, Senator Andrey Klimov, told Rossiya-1
news channel on Sunday that the street protests organized in support of jailed opposition
figure Alexey Navalny last weekend had been orchestrated from outside the country. "The
Senatorial Commission has reason to believe that all these activities are clearly traced to the
actions of foreign states, and it is all happening with the assistance of foreign
specialists," he told the broadcaster.
Dachaguy 3 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 09:57 AM
America used their weaponized dollar to fund mercenaries in Syria and we all saw the result
of that. Russia has a duty to prevent that type of attack against Russia. America's Achilles'
Heel is the US dollar, so cutting off its use by foreign agents to fund nefarious activities
is a good place to start.
Count_Cash 3 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 10:44 AM
Not enough - its time to send the diplomatic note to western countries that Russia considers
itself under attack by Western powers through an info war. Then it should close all foreign
media and campaign groups over night. It cannot be the case that enemy spying posts and
combatants are allowed on Russian soil during conflict!
And for example until recently The Air Force member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was David
Lee Goldfein who flew with his Israeli equivalent over Israel during Israeli military
exercises.
He who lives by the drone dies by the drone? Also there is supposed involvement by certain
Air Force resources in all the Chemtrail, High Altitude Aerial Spraying operations?
The entire command structure of the US Military has been subverted?
@ImaBotKnot an
intelligence/stress test 1. How stupid are the American People 2. How totally controlled is
US Media 3. If the people of the US fall for this how many other lies can we get away with 4.
If they accept the Patriot Act what other restrictions will they embrace 5. How corrupted is
the US Military
The capital thing was our Ukrainian Maidan along with the Biden election steal by the same
evil caste of characters. Ukraine, Lybia, Syria and such being under the Obama/Biden
administrations. Afghanistan, Iraq being Cheney administration.
Research Merrick Garland's role in the Oklahoma city Federal Building Bombing false
flag.
oe Biden enters the White House with an entourage of faces very familiar to OffGuardian, and
many of those readers who have been with us since the beginning.
Glassy-eyed Jen Psaki is once again taking the White House press briefings. Victoria
"Fuck the EU" Nuland
is going to be secretary of state, and Samantha Power is hoisted back onto a platform from
which she can berate the rest of the world for not following America's "moral example" by
bombing Syria back to the stone age.
It was the machinations of these people – along with Biden as VP, John Kerry as
Secretary of State and of course Barack Obama leading the charge – that lead to the coup
in Ukraine, the war in Donbass and – indirectly – the creation of this website. For
it was our comments on the Guardian telling this truth that got everyone here banned, multiple
times.
So, for us, pointing out cold-war style propaganda is like slipping back into a comfy pair
of shoes.
A good thing too, because with this coterie of neocon-style warmongers comes another
familiar friend: the propaganda war on Putin's Russia. Throughout the media and on every front,
all within hours of Biden's inauguration.
Now, anti-Russia nonsense didn't go away while Trump was President – if anything it
became deranged to the point of literal insanity in many quarters – but it definitely
quietened down in the last 12 months, with the outbreak of the "pandemic".
Of course underneath the standard pot-stirring propaganda to keep the "new cold war" on the
boil, there is the Navalny narrative. An incredibly contrived piece of political theatre that
may even evolve into a full-on attempt at regime change in Moscow.
He knew he would be arrested if he returned to Russia, so his doing so was pure theatre.
That fact is only underlined by the media's reaction to his 30 day jail sentence.
Yes, that's thirty DAYS, not years. He'll be out before spring. Even if he's convicted of
the numerous charges of embezzlement and fraud, he faces only 3 years in prison.
On the same day as Biden's inauguration, the European Parliament announced that Russia
should be punished for arresting Navalny, by having the Nordstream 2 pipeline project
closed down . (Closing this pipeline down would open up the European market to buy US gas,
instead of Russia. This is a complete coincidence).
And then, the day after Biden's inauguration, the European Court of Human Rights announced
they had found Russia guilty of war crimes during the
5-day war in South Ossetia in 2008. The report was subject to a gleeful (and terrible)
write-up by (who else?) Luke Harding. (Why they waited 13 years to make this announcement
remains a mystery)
It doesn't stop there, already Western pundits and
Russian "celebrities" are trying to encourage street protests in support of Alexei Navalny.
An anonymous Guardian editorial states Navalny's
"bravery needs backing" , whatever that means.
But are there bigger aims behind this as well? Do they hope they can create another Maidan
but this time in Moscow? That would be insane, but you can't rule it out.
One thing is for sure, though; they work fast. Less than two days in office, and we've
already got a new colour revolution kicking off. Speedy work.
Reply
captain spam , Jan 25, 2021 7:33 PM
As McFaul said recently, we must combat Putin! His support for traditional Christian
family values is an absolutely intolerable threat to the liberal international order!! What
we desperately need is non stop gay anal sex for everybody, especially children, non stop
free abortions for sluts, and as many child trannies as possible!!! We must force through
this progressive enlightened agenda everywhere!!!!
Bob , Jan 25, 2021 4:15 PM
The overthrow crew is back in business. They will continue chipping away at the old USSR.
Belarus seems pretty ripe, though under Trump CIA failed at the overthrow earlier this year.
But with Victoria Nuland and gang in there we will see a real push to dismantle Russia and
China. Also watch for Islamic terror in Xinjiang in Western China with CIA sponsored Uygher
militants. Jan 24, 2021 6:18 AM
For people who prefer information to propaganda, a little ethnographic insight into the
reality of life in Russia, courtesy of Dr Jeremy Morris:
If it's a CIA only operation, Russians are obviously incredibly gullible and
impressionable, and in surprisingly huge numbers (and this is only one brief snapshot of what
apparently is happening across 11 time zones):
Yup, I'd say there's at least a couple of dozens of people who came together in that show
of discontent toward a government that, if not exactly among the ranks of this particular
riff-raff, is hugely popular.
And then there are these CIA trained Russian provocateurs caught on video:
Navalny has heroically returned to Russia after the dastardly Putins hapless goons
Novichoked his tea/ water bottle/ underpants* delete as appropriate. But at least we are now
seeing the truth emerge from completely impartial and wholly credible CIA funded sources like
the Victims Of Communism Foundation. Now we know the horrific facts about 300 million Weegers
and 500 million Georgians being turned into soap and lamp shades. We must nuke Putins dacha
immediately. Show him we mean business. Its a typical underhand trick of the evil Vlad,
genociding millions of people without leaving any evidence. Further proof of his guilt, if
any were needed.
Charlie , Jan 23, 2021 8:08 PM
Just running a theory by you all, was the Ukraine colour revolution a response to Russian
push-back on the WMD narrative in Syria and Obama's red line that failed the sniff test
(that's bleach, not chloride gas)? Mess in our back yard and we'll mess in yours. If so Putin
handled it very well, all things considered, ended up more secure than before, in spite of
everything.
America,s aim after the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1990 was to split Russia apart gut
it and subdue it! Playing silly buggers on Russia's border would have happened no matter
what! The globalists want complete control! Georgia Chechnya are other examples of globalist
interference. China is getting the same treatment.
niko , Jan 23, 2021 8:01 PM
Duck and cover the Russians are coming! Prelude to false flag cyberterrorism and the dark
winter? Whatever comes next, we need to start fighting the real enemy.
"Whether the mask is labeled fascism, democracy, or dictatorship of the proletariat, our
great adversary remains the apparatus -- the bureaucracy, the police, the military. Not the
one facing us across the frontier of the battle lines, which is not so much our enemy as our
brothers' enemy, but the one that calls itself our protector and makes us its slaves. No
matter what the circumstances, the worst betrayal will always be to subordinate ourselves to
this apparatus and to trample underfoot, in its service, all human values in ourselves and in
others." -Simone Weil
Charlie , Jan 23, 2021 7:51 PM
Did anyone catch that interview Aaron Mate did with Luke Harding? Think it was while Aaron
was still with the real news. Poor old Luke thought he was talking to a confirmed Democrat
and Aaron took his piece of shit book on Russia 2016 to pieces, well worth a look if it's
still up.
Guy , Jan 23, 2021 7:44 PM
"But are there bigger aims behind this as well? Do they hope they can create another
Maidan but this time in Moscow? That would be insane, but you can't rule it out."
The Western media propaganda machine IS insane . Jealousy in big bold letters because
Russia , Russia seems to be doing quite well economically ,regardless of Western media
machinations.
Mercuns would love to rerun Maidan. I don't think they have the numbers in Rooskia though.
Division, internal conflict, confusion that will have to do for the short term.
dr death , Jan 24, 2021 3:42 PM Reply to
Victor G.
indeed but burger-on-a- bagel land has got plenty of its own now
the thrashing bankrupt golem is about to have its own yeltsin 'moment'..
just lining up the ducks
now where did I put that novichok, I mean icing sugar, I mean mrs mays concealer.
I suspect that GloboCap will eventually – and in a very controlled fashion –
allow some normalcy to resume, once they're finished with the lesson of Covid lockdowns and
once they're convinced that the "domestic terrorist" propaganda is sufficiently internalized
by enough people to sustain a subtle but pervasive level of distrust, paranoia, and
suppression of dissent.
Thus, the illusion of democracy will return and the booboise will once again be permitted
their panem et circenses – sportsball matches, concerts, pubs, in-person
schooling, and art fairs – as long as GloboCap feels convinced that those things will
no longer be fertile ground for spreading populism.
The carrot will return, but the stick will now always be hanging like the sword of
Damocles.
I see occasional mentions of Goebbels, and his words about propaganda, like this from you,
Hoppy.
But Goebbels was just a baby in his mother's arms relative to our voter "democracy" for
which, unlike the original Athenian democracy, which beyond general assembly had
representatives elected by lot, has representatives elected by voters who are already victims
of propaganda.
The word "democracy" as used today it itself pure propaganda. Again and again America
commits naked aggression against distant countries while shouting "Democracy!" Totally fake,
pure propaganda, making Goebbels look like a child.
Sometimes it seems a struggle within to assess who I detest more – Karlin or
Navalny. Both are dishonest parasites living off Western sources of funds.
I think I will call it a draw and be done with it.
Correct. I am enough familiar with the Russian language and culture to agree with you, JL.
Not that I know what is true about Mr Putin, but I find it ugly, calling him Vlad, as
ignorant people associate it with an evil creature in Romania.
There are some similarities between Navalny and Boris Yeltsin. Yeltsin became known for
attacking the privileges of the nomenclature (as the Communist Party boss of Moscow, no less)
like their access to special shops, luxury cars (by Soviet standards), special healthcare
facilities, nice apartments etc. He was for a time a "star" in Soviet media with this, but
finally Gorbachev got him fired for attacking him and his cronies too.
Mais c'est excellent! Il vient tout d'un coup de monter d'un cran sur mon échelle
de gens potentiellement respectables. Et il a tout à fait raison : un peuple
armé est un peuple libre. Imaginez les Gilets jaunes armés d'AK-47, ça
aurait été une toute autre histoire, n'est-ce pas ?
"But on the off chance I am wrong, Russians will only prove themselves morons."
You would be absolutely right if it turned out that way and there would be no help for the
Russians, just as the American simpletons who balk at the notion of compensating the three
branches of the United States government adequately leading to the pernicious influence from
the likes of the late Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban among others.
We should pay our representatives one million dollars a piece and two million for senators
but the chief executive must be paid at least fifteen million dollars per anum if not more to
keep out interlopers and the whole shebang would amount to little more than one billion
dollars which would be a drop in the bucket to save the nation from the predators.
Erdogan trying to, quote, ' ..preserve human nature, ' ?
As far as I know neither Orban nor Hungary have been involved in mass murder and invasions of
sovereign countries lately.
Sutan Erdogan is an IslamoFascist dictator, who was instrumental ( .together with US, KSA,
Israel, UK, France, ..) in training, arming, and sending cannibalistic head-chopper
terrorists into Syria, resulting in the deaths of several hundred thousand innocent
Syrians.
Orban is a Hungarian Christian nationalist, trying to defend Hungary from
GloboSorosization.
Sultan Erdogan is an IslamoFascist head of a genocidal, criminal state.
The presentation of Navalni's "investigation" on YouTube has collected millions of
comments in no time. A native speaker has noticed that there were the same identical comments
that appeared thousands of times under different names. Looks like a computer-generated wave
of responses.
I'm sure many others have realized what I have; although it is rarely put into words. It
seems like the columnists here who write about Russia are falling into the idiot binary view
that can be expressed as follows: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". Sometimes this is
true. Often times, the enemy of my enemy is an even worse enemy. Just because Russia is
clearly not under the thumb of the creeps in Washington dos NOT mean that Russia is the
beacon of justice, truth, and freedom. Do not lose sight of the fact that the current
(((elites))) are GLOBAL and their original source of influence and power is international
finance (greatly expanded by fiat systems). The covid response and vaccine push as carried
out by Russia should be an eye opener to anyone who doubts the fact that they are heavily
compromised. Remember, Abortion (murdering a baby) has been legal in Russia for most of a
century and they had/have some of the highest rates of abortion in the world. It is estimated
that well over 100 million babies have been murdered, LEGALLY. The utter evil of this cannot
be put into words. I detest the post-christian, perverted west. IS Russia any better? in some
ways, perhaps. But at the end of the day, we must not allow ourselves to fall into the idiot
binary view that because one group is bad, its (alleged) adversaries are good.
@Ray
Caruso d that the US Embassy ought to explain why they had posted a series of 'protest
routes' marking the locations where demonstrators planned to mee t. "One can only imagine
what would have happened if the Russian Embassy in Washington published a map of protest
routes indicating the end point, for example, in the Capitol," Maria Zakharova said. "Giving
directions to those on the ground would have led to global hysteria among American
politicians, Russophobic slogans, threats of sanctions and the expulsion of Russian
diplomats."
It is time to remind the US Embassy staff about what was done to Maria Butina for nothing by
the lawless US. The Russian Federation should boot out the American subversives.
He must know this. He must also know that his electoral prospects are nil – even if he
was allowed to compete and given access. Short of a revolution he is done, and
revolution is not coming, too soon. That is not a good place to be. He is in theory protected
by his sponsors, but that may not amount to much if things get hot. At best he would get
exchanged. Or he can quietly slip away after a few years if he is lucky.
Mulatto did his job, now mulatto can go. A single-use politician who is endlessly promoted,
celebrated, and then discarded and forgotten, only to be listed on a sad list of names to
demonise the enemy. That enemy is his own country, is that really heroism?
McFaul cautions against what he refers to as "Putin's ideological project" as a
threat to the neoliberal international order. Yet he is reluctant to recognize that the
neoliberal international order is an American ideological project for the post-Cold War
era.
After the Cold War, neoliberal ideologues advanced what was seemingly a benign proposition
– suggesting that neoliberal democracy should be at the center of security strategies.
However, by linking neoliberal norms to US leadership, neoliberalism became both a
constitutional principle and an international hegemonic norm.
NATO is presented as a community of neoliberal values – without mentioning that its
second largest member, Turkey, is more conservative and authoritarian than Russia – and
Moscow does not, therefore, have any legitimate reasons to oppose expansionism unless it fears
democracy. If Russia reacts negatively to military encirclement, it is condemned as an enemy of
democracy, and NATO has a moral responsibility to revert to its original mission as a military
bloc containing Russia.
Case in point: there was nobody in Moscow advocating for the reunification with Crimea until
the West supported the coup in Ukraine. Yet, as Western "fact checkers" and McFaul
inform us, there was a "democratic revolution" and not a coup. Committed to his
ideological prism, McFaul suggests that Russia acted out of a fear of having a democracy on its
borders, as it would give hope to Russians and thus threaten the Kremlin. McFaul's ideological
lens masks conflicting national security interests, and it fails to explain why Russia does not
mind democratic neighbors in the east, such as South Korea and Japan, with whom it enjoys good
relations.
Defending the peoples
States aspiring for global hegemony have systemic incentives to embrace ideologies that
endow them with the right to defend other peoples. The French National Convention declared in
1792 that France would "come to the aid of all peoples who are seeking to recover their
liberty," and the Bolsheviks proclaimed in 1917 "the duty to render assistance, armed,
if necessary, to the fighting proletariat of the other countries."
The American neoliberal international order similarly aims to liberate the people of the
world with "democracy promotion" and "humanitarian interventionism" when it
conveniently advances US primacy. The American ideological project infers that democracy is
advanced by US interference in the domestic affairs of Russia, while democracy is under attack
if Russia interferes in the domestic affairs of US. The neoliberal international system is one
of sovereign inequality to advance global primacy.
McFaul does not consider himself a Russophobe, as believes his attacks against Russia are
merely motivated by the objective of liberating Russians from their government, which is why he
advocates that Biden "distinguish between Russia and Russians – between Putin and the
Russian people." This has been the modus operandi for regime change since the end of the
Cold War – the US supposedly does not attack countries to advance its interests, it only
altruistically assists foreign peoples in rival states against their leaders such as Slobodan
Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin etc.
McFaul and other neoliberal ideologues still refer to NATO as a "defensive alliance,"
which does not make much sense after the attacks on Yugoslavia in 1999 or Libya in 2011.
However, under the auspices of neoliberal internationalism, NATO is defensive, as it defends
the people of the world. Russia, therefore, doesn't have rational reasons for opposing the
neoliberal international order.
McFaul condemns alleged efforts by Russia to interfere in the domestic affairs of the US,
before outlining his strategies for interfering in the domestic affairs of Russia. McFaul
blames Russian paranoia for shutting down American "non-governmental organizations" that
are funded by the US government and staffed by people linked to the US security apparatus. He
goes on to explain that the US government must counter this by establishing new
"non-government organizations" to educate the Russian public about the evils of their
government.
The dangerous appeal of ideologues
Ideologues have always been dangerous to international security. Ideologies of human freedom
tend to promise perpetual peace. Yet, instead of transcending power politics, the ideals of
human freedom are linked directly to hegemonic power by the self-proclaimed defender of the
ideology. When ideologues firmly believe that the difference between the current volatile world
and utopia can be bridged by defeating its opponents, it legitimizes radical power
politics.
Consequently, there is no sense of irony among the McFauls of the world as US security
strategy is committed to global dominance, while berating Russia for "revisionism."
Raymond Aaron once wrote: "Idealistic diplomacy slips too often into fanaticism; it divides
states into good and evil, into peace-loving and bellicose. It envisions a permanent peace by
the punishment of the latter and the triumph of the former. The idealist, believing he has
broken with power politics, exaggerates its crimes."
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Ghanima223 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:36 AM
In short, the tables have turned since the end of the Cold War. It is no longer communist
ideologues that try to export revolution and chaos while the western world would promote
stability and free markets. Now it's western ideologues that are trying to export revolutions
and chaos while clamping down on free markets with Russia, as ironically as it sounds, being
a force for stability and a strong proponent for the free exchange of goods and services
around the world. The west will lose just as the USSR has lost.
US_did_911 Ghanima223 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 01:01 AM
The Dollar is the only fake reason that still keeps US afloat. The moment that goes, it loss
will be a lot worse then of USSR.
US_did_911 Ghanima223 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 12:58 AM
That happened not exactly after the end of the cold war. It was about even for a decade after
that. The real u-turn happened after the 9/11 false flag disaster.
Amvet 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 10:00 AM
Foreign dangers are necessary to keep the attention of the American people away from the 20
ton elephant in the room--the fact that 9/11 was not a foreign attack. Should any of the main
stream media suddenly turn honest and report this in detail, things will get interesting.
King_Penda 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:11 AM
I wouldn't worry too much. At the same time Biden will be purging the US military of any men
of capability and replacing them trans and political appointments. The traditional areas
where the military recruited it's grunts are falling as they are waking up to the hostility
of the state to their culture and way of life. The US military will end up a rump of queerss,
off work due to stress or perceived persecution and fat doughballs sat in warehouses
performing drone strikes on goats.
Fjack1415 King_Penda 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 01:20 PM
Yes, you point to a paradox. While the globalists are using the US as their military arm for
global domination, they are at the same time destroying the country that supports that
military. Perhaps the US military will be maintained by dint of its being the only employer
for millions of unemployed young men in the American heartland, doughballs or not.
Ghanima223 King_Penda 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:39 AM
Ideologues will always be more concerned with having political reliable military leadership
as opposed to actually qualified leaders. It took the Russians 2 decades to purge their own
military of this filth of incompetent 'yes' men within their military.
UKCitizen 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:09 AM
'The Liberal International Order' - yes, that seems a fair description. Led by what might be
termed 'liberal fundamentalists'.
far_cough 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 07:01 AM
the military industrial complex and the various deep state agencies along with the major
corporations need russia as an adversary so that they can milk the american people and the
people of the western world of their money, rights, freedoms, etc etc...
roby007 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:54 AM
I'm sure Biden will pursue "peaceful, productive coexistence" just as his friend Obama did,
with drones and bombs.
Paul Citro 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:16 AM
I hope that Russian leaders fully realize that they are dealing with a country that is the
equivalent of psychotic.
Fjack1415 Paul Citro 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 01:26 PM
True, the ruling party and MSM mouthpieces and their readers and followers are now truly
INSANE. Beyond redemption. Staggering in the depth and power of the subversion of so many
people, including many with high IQs (like my ex girlfriend and housemate in the US).
Anastasia Deko 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 10:57 AM
US security strategy is committed to global dominance
Absolutely. Biden has filled up his admin with "progressive realists," which
when it comes to foreign policy, is just a euphuism for neocons and their lust for world
empire. So expect an unleashing of forces in the coming two years that will finally humble
America's war machine.
tyke2939 Anastasia Deko 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 01:07 PM
They are desperate for a war with someone but it must be someone they can beat convincingly.
It certainly will not be Russia or China and I suspect Iran will be a huge battle even with
Israel s backing. More than likely they will invade some country like Venezuela as Syria has
Russia covering its back. What a dilemma who to fight.
9/11 Truther Anastasia Deko 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 11:24 AM
The "American war machine" has been humbled from Saigon, Vietnam 1975 to Kabul, Afghanistan.
Salmigoni 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:25 AM
They are not really liberals. They are blood thirsty parasitic neoconservative fascist war
mongers working for the Pentagon contractors. General Eisenhower warned us about these evil
people. A lot of Americans still do not get it.
@annamaria
or wish it well – and everyone knows that.
He must know this. He must also know that his electoral prospects are nil – even if
he was allowed to compete and given access. Short of a revolution he is done, and
revolution is not coming, too soon. That is not a good place to be. He is in theory protected
by his sponsors, but that may not amount to much if things get hot. At best he would get
exchanged. Or he can quietly slip away after a few years if he is lucky.
Mulatto did his job, now mulatto can go. A single-use politician who is endlessly
promoted, celebrated, and then discarded and forgotten, only to be listed on a sad list of
names to demonise the enemy. That enemy is his own country, is that really heroism?
He is a nationalist like the Maiden. Maiden in power promoted with violence anti-Russian
hysteria. This action created a civil war since a large part of Ukraine are Russian
speakers.
Navalny, if in power, would do something similar as in Ukraine. Act as a Nationalist of
only the Russians in the Russian Federation. Get all the other peoples of the Russian
Federation to break away or stir up a civil war.
Within a few years, put in place Zion/USA puppets like Poroshenko and Zelensky. Look at
the recent Ukrainegate Impeachment trial, almost everyone supporting Ukrainegate trial was
Jewish, even the Ukrainians in this sham trial. .
This is not about bringing down Putin but about dismembering Russia and ending its
sovereignty
The easiest proxy here is the 1990s campaign against Milosevic (the campaign) as a tool to
dismember Yugoslavia
Russia is too rich, too week and is refusing to surrender, hence it will be divided
between and
Absorbed on one side by China and on the other side/s by USA and EUSA
The initial planning for disintegration of Russia was drafted in the NSC directive in
1948
West of Russia to Urals will be absorbed by EU/(Germany)
East of Russia to Yenisei will be controlled by US/(Japan)
China will take over hte greatest price – everything between Urals and Yenisei
Putin with his United Russia/One Russia Party is a major obstacle to the master plan
and
will therefore
be eliminated
whether one likes it or not
@annamaria
from his sponsors are of little use in his current situation.
I find the Western coverage of this affair absurdly propagandistic. A few things are never
mentioned:
– what was Navalny convicted off – fraud
– that he is not by any stretch of imagination the "opposition" leader – his
party has not reached even 5% required to be represented in the parliament
There is also an omission of why Russia claims "interference" – because US Embassy
published the routes for the demos. And many of the demonstrators are paid one way on
another by the West – if the situation was reversed, liberals would call for a war
(as they basically did with Trump's allegations).
"... "Q Anon" originally called himself "Q clearance patriot". Former CIA counterintelligence operative Kevin M. Shipp explained that an actual "Q clearance leaker" – i.e. someone possessing the highest security clearance at the US Department of Energy, required to access top secret nuclear weapons information – would have been identified and removed within days. ..."
"... But given the recent revelations by British investigator David J. Blake – who for the first time was able to conclusively show, at the technical level, that the "Russian hacking" operation was a cyber psyop run by the FBI and FBI cyber security contractor CrowdStrike – the Reuters report may in fact indicate that "Q Anon" was neither a hoax nor "Russian", but another FBI psychological cyber operation. ..."
"... If the "Q Anon" persona – similar to the Guccifer2.0 "Russian hacker" persona played by an FBI cyber security contractor – was indeed an FBI psychological operation, its goal may have been to take control of, discredit and ultimately derail the supporter base of US President Trump. In this case, the "Q Anon" movement may have been a modern version of the original FBI COINTELPRO program. ..."
A recent Reuters investigation may indicate that "Q Anon" was in fact an FBI cyber psyop.
The "Q Anon" phenomenon has generally been regarded as a
hoax or prank , originated by online message
board users in late October 2017, that got out of control. The "Q Anon" persona was preceded by
similar
personae , including "FBI anon", "CIA anon" and "White House insider anon".
"Q Anon" originally called himself "Q clearance patriot". Former CIA counterintelligence operative Kevin M. Shipp
explained that an actual "Q clearance leaker" – i.e. someone
possessing the highest security clearance at the US Department
of Energy, required to access top secret nuclear weapons information – would have been identified and removed within days.
However, in November 2020 Reuters
reported that the very first
social media accounts to promote the "Q Anon" persona were seemingly "linked to Russia" and even "backed by the Russian government".
For instance, the very first Twitter account to ever use the term "Q Anon" on social media had previously "retweeted obscure Russian
officials", according to Reuters
.
These alleged "Russian social media accounts", posing as accounts of American patriots, were in contact with politically conservative
US YouTubers and drew their attention to the "Q Anon" persona. This is how, in early November 2017, the "Q Anon" movement took off.
But given the recent revelations by British
investigator David J. Blake – who for the first time was able to conclusively show, at the technical level, that the "Russian hacking"
operation was a cyber psyop run by the FBI and
FBI cyber security contractor CrowdStrike – the Reuters report may in fact indicate that "Q Anon" was neither a hoax nor "Russian",
but another FBI psychological cyber operation.
Of note, US cyber intelligence firm New Knowledge, founded by former NSA and DARPA employees and tasked by the US Senate Intelligence
Committee, in 2018, with investigating alleged "Russian social media operations" relating to the 2016 US presidential election, was
itself caught
faking a "Russian social media botnet" in order to influence the 2017 Alabama senate race.
If the "Q Anon" persona – similar to the Guccifer2.0 "Russian hacker" persona
played by an FBI cyber security contractor –
was indeed an FBI psychological operation, its goal may have been to take control of, discredit and ultimately derail the supporter
base of US President Trump. In this case, the "Q Anon" movement may have been a modern version of the original
FBI COINTELPRO program.
Postscript
Contrary to some
media
claims , the person or people behind the "Q Anon" persona have never been identified. Some media speculated that
James Watkins , the owner of the 8chan/8kun
message board, on which "Q" was posting his messages, might be "Q" or might be linked to "Q", but Watkins denied this. In September
2020, the owner of QMap, a website aggregating "Q" messages, was identified as a
Citigroup employee , but again
no actual link to "Q" could be established.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog
site, internet forums. etc.
The option of stopping the rise of Trumpism by changing the system has been taken off the
table. Instead, people are being asked to debate the pros and cons of giving more powers to
that same corrupt system which created Trump.
The US political/media class have been pushing hard for more authoritarian policies
to stave off the threat of "domestic terrorism" in the wake of the Capitol riot.
President Biden, who was already
working on rolling out new domestic terrorism policies well before January 6, confirmed after the riot
that he is making these new measures a priority. Political internet censorship is becoming
increasingly normalized , anti-protest
bills are being passed , and now we're
seeing liberals encouraged to form "digital
armies" to spy on Trump supporters to report them to the authorities.
And an amazingly large percentage of the US population seems to have no problem with any of
this, even in sectors of the political spectrum that should really know better by now.
"What else can we do?" they reason. "What other solution could there possibly be
to the threat of dangerous fascists and conspiracy theorists continuing to gain power and
influence?"
Well there's a whole lot that can be done, and none of it includes consenting to sweeping
new Patriot Act-like authoritarian measures or encouraging monopolistic Silicon Valley
plutocrats to censor worldwide political speech. There's just a whole lot of mass-scale
narrative manipulation going on to keep it from being obvious to everyone.
The way to stem the tide of Trumpism (or fascism, or white supremacism, or Trump cultism, or
whatever term you use for what you're worried about here) is to eliminate the conditions which
created it.
Trump was only able to launch his successful faux-populist campaign in the first place by
exploiting the widespread pre-existing opinion that there was a swamp that needed draining, a
corrupt political system whose leadership does not promote the interests of the people.
Conspiracy theories only exist because the government often does evil things and lies about
them with the help of the
mass media, forcing people to just guess what's happening behind the opaque wall of government
secrecy.
People only get it in their heads that they need a trustworthy strongman to overhaul the
system if the system has failed them.
People who are actually interested in ending Trumpism would be promoting an end to the
corruption in the political system, an end to the opacity of their government, an end to their
uniquely awful electoral
system , and an end to the neoliberal policies
which have been making Americans poorer and poorer with less and less support from the
government which purports to protect them.
But these changes are not being promoted by the US political/media class, because the US
political/media class speaks for an empire that depends on these things.
Without corruption, the plutocratic class couldn't use campaign donations and corporate
lobbying to install
and maintain politicians who will advance their interests.
Without government secrecy, the oligarchic empire could not conspire in secret to advance
the military and economic agendas which form the glue that holds the empire together.
Without a lying mass media, people's consent could not be manufactured for wars and a system which does not serve
their interests.
Without widespread poverty and domestic austerity, people could not be kept too busy and
politically impotent to challenge the massive political influence of the plutocrats.
So the option of stopping the rise of Trumpism by changing the system is taken off the
table, which is why you never hear it discussed as a possibility in mainstream circles. The
only option people are being offered to debate the pros and cons of is giving more powers to
that same corrupt system which created Trump, powers which will be under the control of the
next Trumpian figure who is elevated by that very system.
You're not going to prevent fascism by creating a big authoritarian monster to stomp it into
silence, and even if you could you would only be stopping the fascism by becoming the fascism.
To stop the rise of fascism you need to actually change. Drastically. Believing you can just
make it go away without changing your situation is like believing you can avert an oncoming
train by putting your hands over your eyes.
There is no valid argument against what I am saying here. Saying the powerful won't allow
any positive change is just confirming everything I'm saying and confirming the need to remove
the powerful from power. Saying that ending corruption, government secrecy and injustice would
just be giving the terrorists what they want would be turning yourself into a bootlicker of
such cartoonish obsequiousness there aren't words in the English language adequate to mock
you.
Yes, change is desperately needed. Yes, the powerful will resist that change with everything
they have. But the alternative is letting them plunge the world into darkness and destruction.
We're going to have to find a way to win this thing .
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
By Caitlin Johnstone, an independent journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. Her
website is here and you can follow
her on Twitter @caitoz
Paul Ericson 1 day ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:59 PM
Trumpism doesn't really exist, because Trump doesn't really subscribe to all the mythical
traits his enemies claim for him. He did however expose the ground-level Americans' resentment
of corporate USA and radical liberal USA working them over and wanting to make patsies of them.
I'm quite happy to support a real Trumpism if it ever comes along, just as I support Putin.
Neither are ideal but are at least appreciative of the instincts of the worker and the patriot.
jayjm1138 Paul Ericson 13 hours ago 23 Jan, 2021 03:33 PM
Very well stated. The so-called "Trumpism" was just people rallying around one figure who was
outside of the establishment dictatorship. Trump was far from perfect, but he proved that the
establishment will not tolerate anyone who goes even slightly against them. Those who did not
support Trump have no right to complain about authoritarianism now. Trump warned them what was
coming and they did not care.
Jewel Gyn 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 12:44 AM
Politics is about saying what voters want to hear but do otherwise after you won. This is
bipartisan and folks must realise the policies are often not for people but to perpetrate the
narratives disguised as pro US.
An academic study carried out by researchers in the US and Germany has concluded that
big-tech elites are completely different to all other people on the planet, and can be placed
in their own class.
"Our research contributes to closing a research gap in societies with rising inequalities,"
note the authors of the study from two German universities and the Ralph Bunche Institute
for International Studies in New York.
The research
centres around analysing language used in close to 50,000 tweets and other online statements by
100 of the richest tech-elites as listed by Forbes.
The researchers conclude that big-tech elites such as Mark
Zuckerberg and
Bill Gates display a 'meritocratic' worldview, meaning they do not see wealth as a source
of their influence or success, but rather believe their innate abilities and more altruistic
beliefs have enabled them to achieve power.
"We find that the 100 richest members of the tech world reveal distinctive attitudes that
set them apart both from the general population and from other wealthy elites," the study
states.
The findings reveal that big-tech elites consistently talk about believing in democracy,
being philanthropic, and helping make the world a better place for other people.
"Yet their position in a democratic system is contradictory – as a result of their
enormous wealth, they have disproportionate influence over how discretionary income is
spent," the researchers note.
The researchers found that language used by the tech-elites regularly includes words such as
'merit', 'distinct', 'excellent', 'value', 'virtue', 'advantage', 'superiority', 'worth',
'perfect', 'important' and 'significant'.
"The tech elite may be thought of as a 'class for itself' in Marx's sense – a social
group that shares particular views of the world, which in this case means meritocratic,
missionary, and inconsistent democratic ideology."
The researchers noted that the study had limitations, ironically owing to the fact that they
were not able to access language used by all the top 100 tech-elites because Twitter is banned
in China.
The Twitter accounts they were able to access could also be managed by PR professionals and
are obviously public projections of how the tech elites want to be thought of by the public at
large, therefore the language used may be 'strategic'.
Nevertheless, the findings go some way to explaining why big-tech elites are so inclined to
censor and
de-platform those who hold world views at odds with their own.
ay_arrow
josie0802 12 hours ago remove link
Big Tech feeds on narcissist tendencies in people. As long as you engage you are part of
the problem. Once you leave you might be part of the solution.
LetThemEatRand 18 hours ago remove link
Ironically, most of history's psychopaths were nerds before they gained power. If you want
a basic psychology lesson, they have an axe to grind.
BluCapitalist PREMIUM 18 hours ago remove link
Also grandiosity. Their wealth is self fulfilling. Hitler thought the same of himself
in4mayshun 17 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Agreed. Deep down they know how pathetic they are. Even more sad is that they aren't even
smart enough to make their own billions; These technologies were entrusted to them in
exchange for selling out humanity.
"... Consequently, there is no sense of irony among the McFauls of the world as US security strategy is committed to global dominance, while berating Russia for "revisionism." ..."
ByGlenn Diesen, Professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway, and an editor at the Russia in Global
Affairs journal. Follow him on Twitter @glenndiesen
Donald Trump's efforts to reduce the ideologically driven base of US foreign policy fuelled great resentment among those who believed
it betrayed Washington's leadership position in the so-called "liberal international order."
Now that power has changed, will the pendulum swing in the opposite direction, with Joe Biden's administration applying a radical
ideological foreign policy?
A recent article by Michael McFaul, once Barack Obama's ambassador to Russia and a noted 'Russiagate' conspiracy theorist, indicates
what such an ideological foreign policy would look like. McFaul's article, 'How to Contain Putin's Russia', makes a case for a containment
policy.
Containment: learning from the past or living in the past?
To advance his argument, McFaul quotes George Kennan, the author of the Long Telegram and architect of erstwhile US containment
policy against the Soviet Union. McFaul suggests that Kennan's advocacy for a "patient but firm and vigilant containment"
against the revolutionary Bolshevik regime 75 years ago remains as valid as ever.
It would have made more sense to
quote Kennan when
he condemned NATO expansionism and predicted it would trigger another Cold War. As Kennan noted: "there was no reason for this
whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their
graves."
Kennan continued to express disbelief over the rhetoric by the misinformed US leadership, presenting "Russia as a country dying
to attack Western Europe. Don't people understand? Our differences in the Cold War were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now
we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime."
Kennan then went on to correctly predict that, when Russia would eventually react to US provocations, the NATO expanders would wrongfully
blame Russia.
Ideologues often have nostalgia for the Cold War, when the bipolar power distribution was supported by a clear and comfortable
ideological divide. The Western bloc represented capitalism, Christianity, and democracy, while the Eastern bloc represented communism,
atheism, and authoritarianism. This ideological divide supported internal cohesion within the Western bloc and drew clear borders
with the adversary.
The liberal international order has attempted to recast the former capitalist-communist divide with a liberal-authoritarian divide.
However, the ideological incompatibility between American liberalism and Russian conservatism is less convincing. For example, McFaul
cautions against Putin's nefarious conservative ideology committed to "Christian, traditional family values" that threatens
the liberal international order.
The new ideological divide nonetheless advances neo-McCarthyism in the West. McFaul presents a list of European conservatives
and populists that should be treated as American conservatives, purged from political life as enemies of the liberal international
order and thus possible agents of Russia. Hillary Clinton even suggested that the Capitol Hill riots were possibly coordinated by
Trump and Putin – yes, Russiagate is here to stay. The solution, for McFaul, is for American tech oligarchs to manipulate algorithms
to protect populations from Russian-friendly media.
An American ideological project
McFaul cautions against what he refers to as "Putin's ideological project" as a threat to the liberal international order.
Yet he is reluctant to recognize that the liberal international order is an American ideological project for the post-Cold War era.
After the Cold War, liberal ideologues advanced what was seemingly a benign proposition – suggesting that liberal democracy should
be at the center of security strategies. However, by linking liberal norms to US leadership, liberalism became both a constitutional
principle and an international hegemonic norm.
NATO is presented as a community of liberal values – without mentioning that its second largest member, Turkey, is more conservative
and authoritarian than Russia – and Moscow does not, therefore, have any legitimate reasons to oppose expansionism unless it fears
democracy. If Russia reacts negatively to military encirclement, it is condemned as an enemy of democracy, and NATO has a moral responsibility
to revert to its original mission as a military bloc containing Russia.
Case in point: there was nobody in Moscow advocating for the reunification with Crimea until the West supported the coup in Ukraine.
Yet, as Western "fact checkers" and McFaul inform us, there was a "democratic revolution" and not a coup. Committed
to his ideological prism, McFaul suggests that Russia acted out of a fear of having a democracy on its borders, as it would give
hope to Russians and thus threaten the Kremlin. McFaul's ideological lens masks conflicting national security interests, and it fails
to explain why Russia does not mind democratic neighbors in the east, such as South Korea and Japan, with whom it enjoys good relations.
Defending the peoples
States aspiring for global hegemony have systemic incentives to embrace ideologies that endow them with the right to defend other
peoples. The French National Convention declared in 1792 that France would "come to the aid of all peoples who are seeking to
recover their liberty," and the Bolsheviks proclaimed in 1917 "the duty to render assistance, armed, if necessary, to the
fighting proletariat of the other countries."
The American liberal international order similarly aims to liberate the people of the world with "democracy promotion"
and "humanitarian interventionism" when it conveniently advances US primacy. The American ideological project infers that
democracy is advanced by US interference in the domestic affairs of Russia, while democracy is under attack if Russia interferes
in the domestic affairs of US. The liberal international system is one of sovereign inequality to advance global primacy.
McFaul does not consider himself a Russophobe, as believes his attacks against Russia are merely motivated by the objective of
liberating Russians from their government, which is why he advocates that Biden "distinguish between Russia and Russians – between
Putin and the Russian people." This has been the modus operandi for regime change since the end of the Cold War – the US supposedly
does not attack countries to advance its interests, it only altruistically assists foreign peoples in rival states against their
leaders such as Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin etc.
McFaul and other liberal ideologues still refer to NATO as a "defensive alliance," which does not make much sense after
the attacks on Yugoslavia in 1999 or Libya in 2011. However, under the auspices of liberal internationalism, NATO is defensive, as
it defends the people of the world. Russia, therefore, doesn't have rational reasons for opposing the liberal international order.
McFaul condemns alleged efforts by Russia to interfere in the domestic affairs of the US, before outlining his strategies for
interfering in the domestic affairs of Russia. McFaul blames Russian paranoia for shutting down American "non-governmental organizations"
that are funded by the US government and staffed by people linked to the US security apparatus. He goes on to explain that the US
government must counter this by establishing new "non-government organizations" to educate the Russian public about the evils
of their government.
The dangerous appeal of ideologues
Ideologues have always been dangerous to international security. Ideologies of human freedom tend to promise perpetual peace.
Yet, instead of transcending power politics, the ideals of human freedom are linked directly to hegemonic power by the self-proclaimed
defender of the ideology. When ideologues firmly believe that the difference between the current volatile world and utopia can be
bridged by defeating its opponents, it legitimizes radical power politics.
Consequently, there is no sense of irony among the McFauls of the world as US security strategy is committed to global dominance,
while berating Russia for "revisionism."
Raymond Aaron once wrote: "Idealistic diplomacy slips too often into fanaticism; it divides states into good and evil, into
peace-loving and bellicose. It envisions a permanent peace by the punishment of the latter and the triumph of the former. The idealist,
believing he has broken with power politics, exaggerates its crimes."
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent
those of RT.
By 8 January 2021, Mitch McConnell had determined he would not permit the Senate to try
Trump until 19 January 2021 or later. He ruled that the Senate could not convene for special
session unless all 100 Senators formally agreed; he maintained that ruling consistently,
through 19 January 2021. By 10 January 2021, House majority Whip James Clyburn suggested the
House may not deliver articles of impeachment to the Senate until after Biden has been in
Office 100 days.
Not until today, 20 January 2021, did Pelosi deliver articles of impeachment to the Senate.
The same day, McConnell said: (a) the Senate will receive the House managers at noon ET
Thursday, 21 January, when the managers will present and exhibit the articles; (b) at 2:00 PM
21 January, Chief Justice John Roberts will be escorted into the Senate chamber and swear in
all senators; (c) the impeachment articles' trial will begin Tuesday, 26 January.
Until 20 or 21 January, the Senate majority would remain Republican; and a GOP-majority
Senate would not only acquit Trump but also impeach, strongly, the articles of impeachment. So,
why did Mitch McConnell block early Senate trial? Two possible intersecting reasons:
has
said Trump fed the "mob" lies to provoke the mob to use violence to prevent Congress's
certification of Biden's election.] (b) If trial occurs (as it will) when the Democrats
control the Senate, a conviction might seem a Democrat-framed lynching -- not the GOP's
traitorous assassination of Trump's "populism" and his political career.
I do not suggest such reasons are wise, logical, or even rational, but possibly real.
McConnell is a crafty, dissembling, unscrupulous pseudo-aristocrat, but no Socrates or
Aristotle.
"Liberal" and "moderate" Democrats, never-Trump Republicans,"The Squad, " the "Deep State"
-- the nation's whole jumble of psychopathic and otherwise-psychically-ill "Elite," "woke,"
anti-"White"/anti-male/anti-meritocracy/sexually-deviant members -- all share one mantra :
Trump and populism are evil, inimical to "Democracy" and the "culture," "morality," and "public
interests" of the U.S. Populism must be extinguished. Never again may Trump "hold and enjoy any
Office or honor, Trust or Profit under the United States" [U.S. Constitution Article I § 3
clause 7].
Why ought anyone care?
I voted twice for Trump, the second time (2020) merely because he was the lesser evil. In
2016, Trump promised more than a few moves that would have bettered the nation, e.g.
,
Trump meant and honored some promises -- at least partly. But others -- (a), (b), (f), (h),
(i), and (k) -- were bad jokes. His Israel policy was evil. He railed against growing
impairment of free speech. But his concern was mostly his own freedom of expression; and he
failed to do anything substantial toward restoring the general public's freedom of speech. He
continued, and worsened, Obama's persecution of Julian Assange and Bradley ["Chelsea"] Manning.
Edward Snowden remains exiled. Trump has pardoned or commuted sentence of tens of nefarious
criminals, but not Assange, Manning, or Snowden.
Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, George W Bush, and Obama supported the
illegal "state" called Israel. But Trump lifted Israel-support, and, concomitantly, anti-Iran
policy to insane levels. Trump's Israel-related domestic policy included design of blocking or
impeding first-amendment-protected speech and assembly that opposes Israel's genocidal
persecution of Palestinians. Trump rendered formal equation of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism
and sought to outlaw the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction movement.
So, why ought we care whether, after Trump is not President, the Senate tries the articles
of impeachment of Trump and rules that Trump shall not "hold and enjoy any Office or honor,
Trust or Profit under the United States"? Why ought we care even whether simply the Senate
tries the articles of impeachment but acquits Trump?
Trump's 2016 election suggested a true populist might become President -- not a closet
"Elite," but one who would resist the Elites and the Deep State, not surround himself with
snakes of the swamp. If the Senate tries Trump and rules that Trump shall not "hold and enjoy
any Office or honor, Trust or Profit under the United States" because Trump and his supporters
exercised their First Amendment freedom of speaking and assembling to support populism and
protest a corrupt election, speech and assembly freedoms will cease and near-certainly no
capable, electable populist will run for the Presidency.
But that consideration is subsumed in another, greater, more vital, fundamental
concern. We have a federal Constitution. Every federal legislator and judge promises, by oath,
not to act contrary to that Constitution. Every federal judge must promise this: "I solemnly
swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right
to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform
all the duties incumbent upon me under the Constitution and laws of the United States."
...You live in a totalitarian state with arbitrary power.
Your government has three branches: CIA, CIA, and CIA. They infest every other corner of
your government with spies. Until you can accept this you will be an irrelevant muppet
writing bullshit.
... ... ...
4. Every jew ever involved in health care fraud over the past 100 years
If you might be a Trump supporter, just stop. Trump was an incompetent fraud. And Biden
(well his handlers really), will be very competent and will soon make you feel the sting of
systemic punishment.
Everyone can claim some African ancestry. Suggest you get familiar with the process real
quick
Back in 1987, as a young political science major, my constitutional law professor made us
attend a lecture by a visiting scholar on the 200th anniversary of the Constitutional
Convention. I cannot remember who the lecturer was, but I do recall one phrase he used that
has stuck in my mind ever since: the Constitution only works if we have a "constitutional
frame of mind." In other words, the Constitution reflected the culture and the attitudes of
its authors. Today, elites in both parties could give a damn about the Constitution. They
simply ignore the Constitution when it suits them -- or, conversely, use it as a club to
bludgeon their enemies when it suits them.
Today we are reduced to parsing the language of the Constitution because nobody is really
committed to the upholding the culture and the attitudes that informed it when it was
written. Therefore it has become meaningless.
The president must dance to the tune of the bankers and assorted oligarchs who actually
control the US. They enjoy confusing the common people with changing rhetoric and theater,
but at the end of the day, the president is little more than a figurehead, and the policies
remain largely the same. Many do not realize that the Obama administration deported some
2,750,000 illegals.. Under Trump it was only 935,000. Foreign wars? Police brutality? the
rich getting richer? Prison industrial complex? decimation of the middle class? endless
currency debasement? these things are consistent regardless, because they represent the
interests of the actual rulers. The red candidate throws a bone to the "conservatives", the
blue candidate throws a bone to the socialists, but the policy makers continue from one
administration to the next. The last president who tried to stand up to the powers that be
was JFK . and look what they did to him.
Tucker Carlson said Monday or Tuesday night on his show that McConnell warned Trump not to
pardon Assange, and he held the impeachment over Trump's head.
Swampington has gone rogue. I have a feeling that during much of Trump's presidency the
threat of impeachment loomed large, and maybe worse.
Look at Sessions, recusing himself and cowering in the corner. Barr comes in and does
diddly squat. The Durham investigation was a very long joke.
Two years of the Mueller Commission (when everybody in the know knew it was a pack of
lies), spying, leaking, abuse of the FISA Court, Kavanaugh, impeachment over Ukraine, Covid,
Antifa, BLM, stolen election ..never-ending chaos.
These corrupt clowns will do whatever the hell they please. They are the law now. If they
do end up following the law, it will only be because the destruction they've caused already
will be deemed to be enough.
With the federal judiciary's corrupt or cowardly treatment of legitimate
election-result challenges, the federal judiciary has shown it has abnegated its
constitutional duty and will incline to commit impeachable offenses to avoid resisting the
Elites' and the Deep State's subjugation of the People. The Supreme Court has shown that
five or more pseudo-aristocrat judges (two Democrats, three or more Republicans) align with
the Elites and the Deep State. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is correct. The People are
suffering a revolution wrought by the "Establishment" (of the Elites and the Deep
State).
I would say that they are more cowardly than corrupt.
They know that if they supported Trump's legitimate (good evidence) questioning of the
election result, they would personally be in big trouble, so the Supreme Court is really not
a Supreme Court at all – it's a piece of establishment window dressing – same as
the rest of the hollowed out US Democratic institutions.
Real power in the US lies with the ZioGlob deep state and their MSM, the military
(whichever way they turn), and the 72 million US gun owners (whatever they decide to do).
There's also the aspect of real military power outside the US (Russia and China) that could
be brought to bear, and would be potentially decisive. Accepted that some of these are
TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It) scenarios but that seems to be how it is.
Genuine Democracy isn't coming back to the US any time soon.
@Beavertales at, do you really think Trump will discuss anything that went on in private?
He is not the type to write a memoir.
And some of the most bizarre decisions he made while POTUS were as a result of "advice"
from his favourite daughter Ivanka and her repellant husband. Ann Coulter has an article
where she lists the boneheaded decisions Trump made on "advice" from the two incompetent
rich-kids..
This short video is very indicative of the stupidity of Ivanka: she is so stupid, that she
can't even see the contempt these politicians have for her, and sticks around like a bad
smell:
[French Government Posts Video Of Ivanka Trump At G-20 Summit | NBC News]
McConnell must, not maybe, must be the first person to go if the Republican Senate has any
chance of surviving in a way that serves conservative interests. He has been positively of
Zero support to president Trumps four years in office, only giving lip service to the
interests of the issues the presidents supporters wanted addressed.. For four long years,
McConnell was an expert at bringing every advance, or potential advance in conservative
interests to naught. He however, had no problemo at all in taking advantage of President
Trumps popularity with conservative voters, when his re-election was in doubt. Maybe his
middle name should be Mitt.
@anonymous ChiComs -- from whence In Laws $ all arises . McConnell shows the country is
totally sold out to the ChiComs and in fact "governed" by them -- the rest of Congrassholes
are about the same with various "spies" working them, having sex with them, and screwing us
-- the USA is an occupied country via IsraHell and the Chinese Communists -- very, very bad
days are ahead and most in the USA are moron mask wearers who actually believe the filthy
pieces of cloth do something for their "health" contrary to all actual 41 Medical Studies to
date which state the opposite -- truly Maskholing was an IQ test and the country failed to
reach even the level of "Moron". Easy to steal an election when dealing with Maskhole Morons.
Sad all are being pulled down by them .
@Aardvark you are charged by the Feds you will be railroaded, innocence means zero once
you are charged and all the "Judge" cares about is getting you to plead guilty and move the
case, you will be grossly overcharged to force this to happen and the Judge will glare at you
and let you know he hates you if you go forward -- unless you are a Leftist Political hack or
"activist" then you will be cut loose and probably never even charged ."justice" Roberts is
the "model" -- his rulings in Obamacare etc. show he has no care for the actual "law" at all
-- all the other Federal "judges" follow his example .The best thing that could happen to the
USA is for the end of the Federal Courts, DOJ, and FBI -- all are Enemies Of The People --
get involved with them and find out.
@FoSquare The works of Plato and Aristotle have had much influence on the modern view of
the "sophist" as a greedy instructor who uses rhetorical sleight-of-hand and ambiguities of
language in order to deceive, or to support fallacious reasoning. In this view, the sophist
is not concerned with truth and justice, but instead seeks power.
Societies that value truth but recognize the difficulties involved in discovering it also
put value on freedom of expression. Those interested in power for its own sake, not so much.
Unfortunately the power mongers always have the advantage of moral certainty. For them Alinsky
and the Protocols are the only bibles.
@Anon olling 90% of the mass media of mindfuckery, mesmerization and mass megalomania and
finally, the CIA financed and directed "Social Media", the greatest enemy of our First
Amendment rights;;; those nefarious forces nearing absolute control over the federal regime in
the Di$trict of Corruption have now fully succeeded in driving the last nail into the coffin of
the Constitution AND the Bill of Rights, the enabling precondition for establishment of the
federal system.
Behind the scenes, roaring and howling with fits of schadenfreude laughter; the ultimate
shotcallers, those OWNER$ of the Federal Reserve and most other major international banking
institutions, are rubbing their greasy palm$ with total glee by having pulled off the greatest
heist in world history.
Former President Trump is playing his final scene today, making ready to hand over the
lead part of a government like reality show to the mentally infirm Joe Biden. Biden, with
history of pathological lying and a trail of crimes and associations with other crimes had no
actual chance of winning a real election, but real elections are now only part of America's
history. Trumped & Dumped: The Psychological Operation Scrambles to Survive | Jack Mullen
https://blog.thegovernmentrag.com/2021/01/21/trumped-dumped-psychological-operation-enters-phase-two/
@Old and Grumpy wn individual of blackmail able importance -- was discovered in one of
Ep$tein's logs).
Anyone notice how the Joint Chiefs of $taff for the U$ armed forces put out a notice to all
military personnel that they must not participate in acts of sedition prior to the coronation
of the Kamal's Foote/Biding administration.? Since the days of their attempted Operation
Northwoods false flag scheme to attack Cuba, which was vetoed by JFK (among his other sins
against the Deepe$t $tate); the proof was already in the pudding that the JC$ is dirty and our
military is compromised by their chains of command from the top-down -- which is the way the
enemies of We The People choose to employ their nefarious control system over one and all --
excepting, of course, the Elite$ themselves.
@Mefobills of savvy self-promoter and foil for Hillary. That would explain a lot,
especially Hillary's (and the Democrats) absolute hatred of Trump and his supporters. That his
shtick worked is testament to both his talent for self-promotion and our dislike of Hillary.
Guess she miscalculated
In any case, it became obvious that either the fix was in, when he refused to back Flynn and
appointed swamp creatures to fill his administrations' posts, or Trump was a fool. But that's
not to say he wasn't useful in exposing the media and deep state's contempt, hatred and fear of
us -- deplorables all -- by personifying it in their attacks on him.
The question that matters now, for populists, is how do we avoid the leadership trap?
For the most part, our entire legal profession has been taken over by an overeducated,
inexperienced crowd of people who are not able to deal in "Letter" and "Spirit" of law. They're
prisoners of the letter of the law because their only background is of the spoken and written
word.
When I see President Trump, I feel pity, sadness, and grief. I pity him because he has
no future and will be go down in history as America's most hated man.
And in exactly which historical document will he go down as this?
A half a century ago, the media tried to tell us that Richard Nixon was the most warped
and corrupt political leader of the late twentieth century without using those exact words,
of course, because those exact words were a lie, but that was the distinct message it tried
to convey. It sort of worked for a couple of decades, but only with a definable segment of
the population. That's because political pathos can only stay alive for so long. And
historical figures can only be defined solely by their failings and political enemies for so
long.
Despite gaffs and missteps that likely cost him his reelection, Trump wasn't "the guy who
let us down" but instead, the William Jennings Bryan of the 21st century right leaning
populist movement. Like Bryan, he changed the nature of his political party forever. Unlike
Bryan, he at least got to be president once, but -again- like the Democrat game changer out
of Nebraska 100 years ago, he never was the right person to lead the movement to it's
promised land. Instead, he was the tip of a spear that the opposition said it could never be
gored by but was.
Trump's loss has a very bright silver lining in the admittedly dark cloud of looming far
left authoritarianism. Ultimately, the self-aggrandizing Trump could really do little more
than make his opponents really angry, but he also made his supporters aware of just how
numerous and (more importantly) potent they are. The movement now needs leadership that's
more cognizant of the political world they live in and capable of more coherent strategies
that will move it forward hopefully strategies that can offer more than tweets.
But what did President Trump actually do as President? Not much. In 2016, after the most
remarkable, unlikely, and miraculous campaign in American history, President Trump governed
like a normal Republican. He did not deport illegals, make English the official language,
or tax remittances to Mexico. He did not abolish birth-right citizenship. He was not a
"white nationalist." He did not even eliminate race-based discrimination against whites and
Asians.
The establishment's hate for what Trump legitimised saying – that media news is
often fake, it's ok to fight globalism, it's ok to defend your own culture, we should
disentangle from wars – is Trump's enduring badge of honour, despite Trump's flaws
and how he disappointed
There was another aspect to Trump that provides possible inspiration for emerging
political aspirants: he could at any time go 'alarmingly' and sometimes effectively 'off
script', and furthermore, sometimes wield his 'outrageous remarks' repeatedly.
Going 'rogue' is the great heresy within the context of a western (at least) political
establishment that considers remaining 'on message', – sticking to the script, no
matter how dishonest or absurd the message – to be the basic principle of successful
party power politics.
And there was the moon's problem in sunlight: The political establishment near and far,
used to being celebrated in noxious ceremony, trained actors just about all, but trained to
avoid spontaneity like the plague, were suddenly cast into the dismal light of seeming boring
and predictable by comparison.
Trump's forays into rogue utterance sometimes included unmentionable truths that become
memes. Trump's swamp is now far more identifiable, and sometimes more accurately now referred
to as a cesspool. The fake news universe has been hauled out of their previously
self-satisfied abode in the mass media heavens and had their addiction to dishonesty more
fully exposed. In desperation the fallen angels have cobbled together an army of fake fact
checkers, to identify truth tellers as the real fake news, but their audience nevertheless
yawns and dwindles.
From J1234 at comment 129:
[Trump has] also made his supporters aware of just how numerous and (more importantly)
potent they are. The movement now needs leadership that's more cognizant of the political
world they live in and capable of more coherent strategies that will move it forward
hopefully strategies that can offer more than tweets.
The COVID monstrosity has also given countless millions of people opportunity to
re-evaluate a lot in their lives and learn a lot, and so a politically more cognizant
deplorable/independent political confluence may result.
For many years, a handful of people have postulated that those who control industry, finance
and governments are essentially the same people – a cabal of sorts that have, over
generations, solidified their relationships in order to gain greater wealth and power, whilst
systematically making things ever more difficult for the free market to exist.
But why should this be? Surely, corporate leaders are more ardently capitalist than anyone
else?
Well, on the surface, that might appear to make sense, but once a significant position of
power has been achieved, those who have achieved it recognize that, since they've already
reached the top, the primary concern changes. From then on, the primary concern becomes the
assurance that no others are able to climb so high as they have.
At that point, they realise that their foremost effort needs to be a push toward corporatism
– the merger of power between government and business. This is a natural marriage. The
political world is a parasitic one. It relies on a continual flow of funding. The world of big
business is a study in exclusivity – the ability to make it impossible for pretenders to
the throne to arise. So, big business provides the cash; government provides protective
legislation that ensures preference for those at the top.
In most cases, this second half of the equation does not mean a monopoly for just one
corporation, but a monopoly for a cabal – an elite group of corporations.
This corporatist relationship has deep roots in the US, going back over one hundred years.
To this day, those elite families who took control of oil, steel, banking, motor vehicles and
other industries a century ago, soon created a takeover of higher learning (universities),
health (Big Pharma) and "Defense" (the military-industrial complex).
Through legislation, the US was then transformed to ensure that all these interests would be
catered to, creating generations of both control and profit.
Of course, "profit" should not be an evil word, but under crony capitalism, it becomes an
abomination – a distortion of the free market and the death of laissez faire
economics.
Certainly, this sort of collectivism is not what Karl Marx had in mind when he daydreamed
about a workers' paradise in which business leaders retained all the risk and responsibility of
creating and building businesses, whilst the workers had the final word as to how the revenue
would be distributed to the workers themselves.
Mister Marx failed in being objective enough to understand that if the business creator took
all the risk and responsibility but gave up the ability to decide what happened to the revenue,
he'd never bother to open a business. Even a shoeshine boy would reject such a notion and elect
to go on the dole, rather than work.
Mister Marx sought more to bring down those who were successful than to raise up those who
were not, yet he unwittingly created a new idea – corporate collectivism – in which
the very people he sought to debase used the appeal of collectivist rhetoric to diminish both
the freedoms and wealth of the average worker.
On the surface, this might appear to be a hard sell – to get the hoi polloi into the
net – but in fact, it's quite easy and has perennially been effective.
Hitler's New Order was such a construct – the promise to return Germany to greatness
and the German people to prosperity through increasingly draconian laws, warfare and an
economic revolving door between government and industry.
Of course, a major influx of capital was required – billions of dollars – and
this was eagerly provided by US industry and banks. Heads of New York banks not only funded
Nazi industry; families such as the Fords, Rockefellers, Morgans, etc., sat on the boards of
German corporations.
The Nazi effort failed, as they underestimated the Russian will to fight to the death.
(Eighty percent of all German Army deaths were due to the Russian campaign.)
But those in New York were able to regroup and be first in the queue for the restructuring
of German industry after the war and, ultimately, profited handsomely.
But most significantly, the idea of corporatist collectivism did not die. Even before the
war, the same group of families and corporations had drawn up the plan for Franklin Roosevelt's
New Deal.
Mister Roosevelt was a dyed-in-the-wool Wall Street man and a director of New York banks. In
the 1930s and early 1940s, he created, as president, a revolving door that favoured large
corporations, whilst the average American was consciously kept at the subsistence level through
government entitlements.
The scam worked. Shortsighted Americans not only were grateful; they deified him for it.
Likewise, John Kennedy's New Frontier sought to revitalize the concept, as did Lyndon
Johnson's Great Society: Give the little people entitlements that keep them little. Tax smaller
businesses and create a flow of tax dollars to the elite industries, who, in turn, provide
monetary favours to the political class.
The Green New Deal is merely the latest corporate collectivist scheme on the list.
Corporate collectivism can be defined as a system in which the few who hold the legal
monopolies of finance and industry gain an overriding control over all others, and in so doing,
systematically extract wealth from them.
Today, this system has become so refined that, although the average American has a flat
screen TV and an expensive smartphone, he cannot raise $400 to cover an emergency that occurs
in his life. He is, for all practical purposes, continually bankrupt, but still functioning in
a zombie-like existence of continual dependency.
This, on the surface, may not seem all that dangerous, but those who cannot buy their way
out of a small emergency are easily controlled. Just create an emergency such as an uber-virus
and that fact will be illuminated quickly.
In order to maximise compliance in a population, maximise their dependence.
As stated above, this effort has been in play for generations. But it is now reaching a
crescendo. It's now up to speed in most of the former Free World and those who hold the strings
are ready for a major step forward in corporate collectivism.
In the coming year, we shall see dramatic changes appearing at a dizzying rate. Capital
controls , migration controls, internal movement controls, tax increases, confiscation of
assets and the removal of "inalienable" rights will all be coming into effect – so
quickly that before the populace can even grasp the latest restrictions, new ones will be
heaped on.
As this unfolds, we shall witness the erosion of the nation-state. Controls will come from
global authorities, such as the UN, the IMF and the WEF. Organisations that have no formal
authority over nations will increasingly be calling the shots and people will wonder how this
is possible. Elected officials will increasingly become mere bagmen, doing the bidding of an
unelected ruling class.
The changes that take place will be not unlike a blanket that is thrown over humanity.
The question then will be whether to, a) give in to this force, b) to fight it and most
likely fall victim to it, or c) seek a means to fall outside the perimeter of the blanket.
* * *
Unfortunately most people have no idea what really happens when a government goes out of
control, let alone how to prepare The coming economic and political crisis is going to be much
worse, much longer, and very different than what we've seen in the past. That's exactly why New
York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent video.
Click
here to watch it now .
"... "We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved", ..."
"... "We will never give up. We will never concede, it just doesn't happen." ..."
"... " Biden's America Would Be A Dystopian Hellhole ", ..."
"... Trump has not signed the Insurrection Act. ..."
"... 'trust the plan' is a never ending story psyop ..."
"... 'best is yet to come' .. ..."
"... to beam back to the mothership. ..."
"... the humans are out to get them ..."
"... it happening you watch just donate ..."
"... without symptoms. ..."
"... Amnesty run by US State Department representatives, funded by convicted financial criminals, and threatens real human rights advocacy worldwide. ..."
"... Yes yes yes – as if we didn't fucking know! ..."
"... YOU MEAN TO DESTROY THE NHS AND YOU WILL REPEAT THIS OVER AND OVER AND OVER UNTIL IT IS DONE! ..."
The Trump Era is over after the incumbent announced in the day after
Wednesday's storming of the US Capitol that "My focus now turns to ensuring a smooth, orderly
and seamless transition of power", which was widely interpreted by friends and foes alike as
the tacit concession that he previously promised never to provide a little more than 24 hours
prior during his speech at the
Save America Rally .
At that event, he literally said that "We will never give up. We will never concede, it
doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved", yet completely changed his
tune following the day's tumultuous events and after mysteriously "going dark" for over 24
hours, during which time some speculate that he was forced by his enemies in the permanent
military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (" deep state ") to give
up the fight.
BETRAYING HIS BASE
This totally devastated his supporters who elected him primarily
for the purpose of executing his chief promise to "drain the swamp" that all of them so
deeply despise. They truly believed that he could irreversibly effect significant long-term
change to the way that America is run, something which Trump himself also sincerely thought he
could do as well, but he ultimately lacked the strength time and again to take the decisive
steps that were necessary in order to do so.
Thus, he ended up getting swallowed by the same "swamp" that he attempted to drain, which is
licking its lips after feasting on the political carcass that he's since become as a result of
his capitulation. For as much hope as he inspired in his supporters and the respect that many
of them still have for him, most of them are profoundly disappointed that he gave up and didn't
go down fighting.
That's not to say that the vast majority of them expected him to forcefully resist Biden's
impending inauguration, but just that they never thought they'd see the day where he publicly
capitulated after carefully cultivating such a convincing reputation among them as a fighter
who literally said a little more than 24 hours prior that "We will never give up. We will
never concede, it just doesn't happen."
This prompted an ongoing soul-searching process among the most sober-minded of them who
aren't indoctrinated with the cultish Q-Anon claims that Trump still has a so-called "master
plan" that he's preparing to implement after this latest "5D chess" move. It's over, the Trump
Era has ended, and the "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) movement that he inspired is now at
risk of being declared a "
domestic terrorist " organization in the coming future.
TRUMP'S MOST FATAL POLITICAL
MISCALCULATION
" Biden's America Would Be A
Dystopian Hellhole ", like the author predicted a few months ago, and all of Trump's
supporters know that. Some had already resigned themselves to its seeming inevitability after
his efforts to legally reverse the contested results of the latest elections failed for a
variety of reasons that most of them attribute to the "swamp's" corruption, but they
nevertheless remained as positive as possible after having believed that their hero would go
down with them to the end.
None ever thought twice about his promise to "never give up, never concede", and they even
expected him to have to be escorted from the White House on 20 January, yet his tacit
concession is forcing many of them to re-evaluate their views about him in hindsight. Not only
is he going out with a whimper on the "deep state's" terms, but he never fully "drained the
swamp".
Trump's most fatal political miscalculation is that he thought that he could change the
system from the "inside-out" after symbolically -- yet importantly, not substantively -- taking
control of it as America's first modern-day "outsider" President. He immediately switched from
an "outsider" to an "insider" shortly after his inauguration by capitulating to the "deep
state's" demands that he fire former National Security Advisor Flynn, which was his "original
sin" that paved the way for all that would later follow.
Trump the self-professed "deal-maker" thought that he could strike a "compromise" with his
enemies through these means, but all that he did was embolden them to intensify their fake
news-driven efforts to oust him and continue sabotaging him from within through many of the
same "swamp" creatures that he naively continued to surround himself with.
RINOS + MSM =
TRUMP'S DEFEAT
The most reviled among them in the eyes of his base is "Javanka", the popular portmanteau of
Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner and his daughter Ivanka. He continued listening to these
"Republicans In Name Only", or RINOs as many MAGA members describe them, as well as many others
such as those who still sit in Congress but pretended to be his friend just to win
re-election.
Furthermore, the influence that his former reality TV career had on him resulted in Trump
remaining obsessed with how his enemies might malign him in the Mainstream Media (MSM) for any
decisive moves that he took to smash the "deep state". This weakness of character proved to be
his greatest personal flaw since he should have followed his instincts instead of submitting to
the egoistic desire to be "liked" by his foes.
So influenced was he by the MSM that his enemies were able to employ the most basic
"reverse-psychology" tricks to manipulate him into "playing it safe" in his struggle against
the "deep state". They fearmongered since even before he entered office that he'd turn into a
so-called "dictator", yet he never seriously contemplated any such authoritarian moves in that
direction despite always having the possibility of utilizing the immense powers vested in him
by the Constitution to do so if he sincerely wanted.
His MAGA supporters passionately pleaded that he should have turned into his enemies' worst
nightmare by declaring at least limited martial law in response to the decades-long Hybrid War
of Terror on America finally going kinetic last summer after Antifa and "Black Lives
Matter" (BLM) orchestrated nationwide riots to oust him.
TRUMP'S THREE GREATEST
FAILURES
Bewildering his base, Trump also failed to revoke Article 230 despite now-proven fears that
it would empower Big Tech to censor him and
his supporters , nor did he thwart the Democrats' mail-in ballot and Dominion voting system
schemes which they argue ultimately led to them stealing the election.
Just as concerning was his decision to not stop the Democrat Governors from locking down
their populations for political reasons under the convenient pretext of COVID-19. The author
addressed all of these issues in his analysis published shortly after the election about why "
The Anti-Trump Regime
Change Sequence Is Worthwhile Studying ". Trump could have legally exercised
near-"dictatorial" powers to avert all of this and thus save America as his supporters see it,
yet time and again he failed to gather the strength needed to do so due to his deep personal
flaws.
THE HYBRID WAR ON AMERICA IS OVER
While Trump was unquestionably victimized by the "deep state" during his entire time in
office, he's no longer as much of a martyr as he used to be after suddenly giving up the fight
following Wednesday's storming of the US Capitol. He surrendered to the shock of his base, was
subsequently swallowed by the "swamp", and is now being mercilessly destroyed in an ominous
sign of what awaits the rest of the MAGA movement in the Biden-Kamala era.
Had he gone down fighting to the end and "never gave up" like he promised, then it would be
an altogether different story, but instead his over-hyped "deal-making" instincts got the best
of him at the very last minute and he foolishly thought that he could save himself by
capitulating to their demands. The "deep state" is now showing their "thanks" by censoring him
from social media and pushing for his impeachment.
The MAGA movement always believed that the country has already been at "war" for years even
though most couldn't articulate the hybrid nature of it like the author did in his piece last
summer about how " The Hybrid War Of Terror
On America Was Decades In The Making ".
They truly felt that Trump shared their threat assessment after he was viciously attacked by
the "deep state" from the second that he stepped onto the campaign trail, but it turned out
that he underestimated the threat even though his enemies never did. To the "deep state" and
their public Democrat proxies, this was always a "war" in its own way, which they never shied
away from expressing.
The supreme irony is that while Trump lambasted the "weak Republicans" in his Save America
Rally speech, he himself ultimately epitomized that very same weakness by later
surrendering.
THE "DEEP STATE" WON
His opponents know no limits and believe in classic Machiavellian fashion that "the ends
justify the means", whereas he thought that he could play by the rules -- and not even all of
them as was early explained by pointing out his refusal to employ the near-"dictatorial" powers
vested in him by the Constitution -- and still come out on top.
His naïveté will go down in history since it's what's most directly responsible
for him failing to fully recognize the seriousness of the "deep state's" no-holds-barred war on
him and the rest of America.
As a born-and-raised New Yorker, Trump perfected the art of slick talking, so much so that
he even managed to dupe his base into believing that he shared their threat assessment about
the decades-long Hybrid War of Terror on America. They fell for this charade since they
desperately wanted to believe that there was still some hope left.
There isn't, though, since the war is over and the "deep state" won once and for all. The "
Great Reset "/"
Fourth Industrial Revolution " brought about by
World War C is
barreling forward at full speed ahead, and practically every domestic accomplishment that Trump
has to his name will likely be reversed by Biden-Kamala during their first year in office,
especially since the "deep state's" Democrat proxies control all branches of government now
(remembering that the Supreme Court's supposed "conservative supermajority" really just
consists of RINOs as was proven by their refusal to hear his team's convincing election fraud
cases).
In fact, the only real "master plan" was that of the "deep state", which effectively
thwarted every one of Trump's moves and ultimately turned his supporters' "last hurrah" of a
mostly peaceful rally into the nail that'll now be hammered into the MAGA movement's
coffin.
It's extremely suspicious that the US Capitol was so poorly defended despite there being an
ongoing session of Congress on such an historic day and after weeks of preparation to ensure
the site's safety ahead of Trump's long-planned Save America March.
It's even more baffling that some of the police officers removed
the barricades and even
opened the doors to some of the protesters, which in hindsight suggests that the "deep
state" wanted to tempt the most "overly passionate" among them (to say nothing of suspected
provocateurs) into storming the site as the pretext for what followed.
The whole point in passively facilitating this scenario through the masterful exploitation
of crowd psychology was to lay the basis for a comprehensive nationwide crackdown against the
MAGA movement on the grounds that it's now "proven" to be a "domestic terrorist" group.
That explains the push behind impeaching Trump less than two weeks before he himself
acknowledged just the other day that he'll be leaving office after ensuring the "transition of
power".
Had he not surrendered, then he probably would still be a martyr to most of the MAGA
movement, but now he's just a palace hostage awaiting his highly publicized political execution
as the opening salvo of the "deep state's" Democrat-driven reprisals against his supporters in
the name of "defending against domestic terrorism". That, not whatever Q-Anon imagines, is the
real "master plan", and it succeeded.
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Trump was swallowed by the "swamp" because he lacked the strength to drain it. Every MAGA
member needs to accept this harsh truth no matter how painful it might be. Time and again, he
failed to muster up the strength needed to meaningfully fulfill what many sincerely believed to
be his destiny.
This was due to his fatal political miscalculation of transforming from an "outsider" into
an "insider" in a doomed-to-fail attempt to change the system from within. He continued relying
on RINOs despite their proven unreliability. Trump's obsession with how his foes portrayed him
in the MSM also led to him never seriously countenancing the use of the near-"dictatorial"
powers vested in him by the Constitution to save America.
He pathetically surrendered after the "deep state's" "master plan" succeeded, and now he
can't even go down in history as a martyr.
Originally published on One World Press Jan
20, 2021 2:08 PM
Trump was part of the show nothing more nothing less. They had the goods on him for decades.
He made Izzrail grate again. That was about it. Notice Jizzlaid Maxwell, the Mossad kiddy
victim procurer watching her mark in the background of the video below from 92 as the king of
bankruptcy eyes the broads and "struts" his stuff.
Meanwhile Kill Bill Gates gets to poison Planet Sheeple and nobody ever questions his
association with Mossad kiddy porn snuff director, Epstein or Kill Bill's sojourns on Pedovore
Island. Anyone remember the CIA Operation Brownstone"? It's global and it's Satanic.
How could Trum 'drain the swamp' when he lives in the swamp. contributes to the swamp and
essentially is part of the swamp.
This story is sh!te. Trump is a swamp dweller.
Trump is just the same as all the other oligarchs and would be oligarchs. He is a rich,
privileged, white entrepreneur. His propaganda campaign in which he claimed to be on the side
of the poor and unemployed whites is just about the biggest lie which has been swallowed
wholesale since Goebbles was whitewashing the Nazi regime.
How you fools here can fall for this tripe has me absolutely beat.
Aethelred , Jan 13, 2021 10:17 AM
Trump in his political ineptitude resembles Jimmy Carter, an idealist incapable of
wielding power. Neither man had the gumption, nor the charisma (much the same thing) to win
over the apparatchiki. Both vain and selfish men (like all politicians), neither inspired
sufficient love nor fear to gather support, unlike Reagan or Clinton, both of whom exuded
calm confidence. Trump differs from Carter in that Trump's social incapacity manifests in
bombast, and Carter's in staged humility. Neither could convince the ruling classes, and so
were ushered away.
The elevation of Biden, an aged hack, is a signal the republic is finally overturned. The
feds not only can convict but now can elect and govern through a ham sandwich.
Blather , Jan 13, 2021 8:21 AM
Does the author know how to read Trump's speech or is he so BIAS as not to see?
Trump DID NOT capitulate. Read careFOOLY. It can go both waze.
ZenPriest , Jan 12, 2021 8:50 PM
Trump was never going to drain the swamp. He was a clown put in place by America's
masters, to keep an endless supply of material for their media and to stir up hatred among
citizens.
It's funny because citizens should be uniting against the puppeteers. Or they would be if
they knew they even existed, or knew they were being played.
S Cooper , Jan 13, 2021 2:47 AM Reply to
ZenPriest
"Quite a number already know this. That number keeps growing with each passing day. Got
Debs?"
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and
I'm here to help." Remember that line? That was Ronnie Raygun back in 1986, with one of his
(or his ghost writers') versions for 'draining the swamp' then, getting government off our
backs, and blah, blah, blah. Agitprop thrown the masses so the corporate state could get down
to bizzness as usual in dispossessing 'we the people' by rolling back government programs for
social welfare and building up wealth and power for elites via the MIC and Wall Street
(complementary to Iron Bitch Thatcher's neoliberal programs for a greater fascism in
Britain).
Hardly anything original, such marketing ads. Politricking fronts of the ruling class have
been campaigning before and after getting into office with noble lies of populism covering
for their brands of treachery as long as the fraudulence of capitalist democracy and
representative government have been around. In the post-WWII era of Pox Americana, the U$
CEOs for the Fortune 500 routinely have disguised their institutional role in managing the
empire under cover of brands of reform that keep promising power to the people with one hand
while taking it away with the other.
But when it comes to the greatest show on earth, it's the words attributed to P.T. Barnum
that there's a sucker born every minute (or at least every election season) which ring
truest. So now we've got the ringmasters retiring the Donald and installing good ole Creepy
Joe to 'build back better' on behalf of the Great Reset. That's after Swamp Thang has played
his part as dictator of distraction overseeing such achievements as the greatest robbery of
the commons in human history and launch of technofascism under Operation Warp(ed) Speed, all
thanks to a global coup with which he's been entirely complicit. And his manufactured base of
true believers still carry on with the covidiocy as much as the controlled opposition of the
faux left.
The more things change, the more they stay the same (only worse!).
Chris , Jan 12, 2021 5:14 PM
The Q group are patriots with access to a quantum computer able to untangle timelines from
a possibility/probability vortex.
Their movement was designed to awaken many individuals with key roles to play in the real
Operation Warpspeed.
The majority of these folks had some connection to the military or other branches of
government including the police.
In 2012 nearly all technology, ancient or more modern, was suddenly rendered non
functional.
The Mayans were obviously dead right with their calender.
The race was on to gain absolute supremacy in the prediction game.
All major stakeholders have access to quantum computing, but the US has the upper hand.
The true value of quantum computers lies not in the task of pure number crunching, but in its
ability to predict probabilities of complex situations.
The quantum computer exposes the most probable timelines and delivers the results in
numerical form that correspond to actual events and dates/times .
Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:43 PM
"The only kinds of fights worth fighting are those you're going to lose, because somebody
has to fight them and lose and lose and lose until someday, somebody who believes as you do
wins."
― I.F. Stone
Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 12:42 PM
President Trump has declared a State of Emergency in the District of Columbia.
White House
OW look the fruitcakes and cult follower spent another new moon being juiced , Trump
has not signed the Insurrection Act. BUT BUT BUT
Cult of BIG disclosure keep watching.donate huge Arrests and stay tuned keep watching
it happening – keep watching- it happening soon, BIG disclosure huge Arrests . it
Happening soon psyop AND distraction
Simple simon and Q nonsense told another lie to the sheep
Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 12:16 PM
President Trump has signed the Insurrection Act.
YouDontCareAboutGrandma , Jan 12, 2021 12:47 PM Reply to
Laurence Howell
Proof? And don't link to Simon Parkes' YouTube channel. He's provided no evidence
whatsoever for his claims. He says he talks to aliens and "Q" on the telephone.
Gosh, evrn more baffling and scarey and reminescent of 1963, never seen footage of the
murder of Ms. BABBIT showing collusion between police and antifa agitators, taken by an
independent Japanese reporter!
Great article but consider how many thousands of people the Islamist extremist, Erdogan of
Turkey, had to fire and imprison, to dismantle the positive Deep State structure Attaturk put
in place to keep that country secular? Functioned admirably for many years.
DimlyGlimpsed , Jan 12, 2021 1:06 AM
Dems enthusiatically voted from Bill Clinton, Obama, Hillary and Biden. All corrupt and
compromised. Repubs voted for Bush Jr., Romney, and Trump. All corrupt and compromised. Both
accuse the other of corruption, dishonesty and hypocrisy. Both are right, of course.
Reality, though, is not possible to perceive when limited to a diet of mainstream news.
Neither is it a trivial task to navigate the rough seas online disinformation.'
Unless one is privy to big-picture high-level (and secret) information, one is left to
attempt to identify and assemble a complex jigsaw puzzle using one's own sleuthing and
intuition skills.
Common people without inside knowledge can still interpret the world, however. War is evil,
and those who advocate war have been seduced by evil. Kindness and generosity are among the
highest values. On the other hand, those who are selish and cruel pollute our world. Etc,,
etc.
Let us keep in mind that the most evil cloak themselves in the garb of peace, kindness and
generosity, in order to dine on sheep who wishfully and willfully refused to judge behavior
rather than be seduced with addictive slogans. Let us also keep in mind that no leaders can
remain in power without the compliance of the rest of us.
Any of should be able to recognize Joe Biden as evil. His "track record" is one of
corruption, budget cutting, war and authoritarian legislation. And Trump? One of the great
mysteries of human civilization is that Trump, the ultimate swap creature, was elected by
promising to "clean the swamp".
That is fairly accurate but Trump did push back against America's China Class and the CCP
-- more than you can say for commies like the Bidens, Obamas, Clintons, Bushes, etc.
Trump's America First Hoax: Trump is an Israeli agent. He put #Mossad asset #JaredKushner
in charge of infiltration of US Intelligence and Defense. Bidens are Chinese agents? Charles
Kushner (Jared's father), is an agent of #AnbangInsurance, a Chinese Communist front
group.
Jams O'Donnell , Jan 13, 2021 6:54 PM Reply to
REvail
All US presidents, vice-presidents, chiefs of staff, etc are Israeli agents, or more
accurately, are in effect the same thing.
Jams O'Donnell , Jan 13, 2021 6:53 PM Reply to
Sgt_doom
"commies like the Bidens, Obamas, Clintons, Bushes, etc."
If you think that the above mentioned capitalist clowns are "commies", then you really,
REALLY, need to get an education, because clearly you don't know your arse from your
elbow.
Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:46 PM Reply to
DimlyGlimpsed
"Trump, the ultimate swap creature " I do not think you have any idea what the 'swamp' is
to make such a claim.
Otherwise, a great post.
Lost in a dark wood , Jan 12, 2021 12:40 AM
Note: I drafted this as a response, but the person is not worthy of a reply, so I'll post
it here instead.
--
I've always said that Q is a deep-state operation. It's the NSA, military intelligence,
etc. It's just a different deep state to the CIA/MI6 deep state. And I've always said that
people should at least know what "the plan" is. They should know what it is because it's by
far the most coherent explanation for what is happening now, and for what has happened over
the last four years.
A couple of years ago I thought a deal had been struck between the opposing factions, and
it was all going to be wound down. But I changed that view after the Covid911, attempted
colour revolution. The overwhelming view on this site, from contributors and posters, was
that Trump would fall in June 2020. I was one of only a handful of people saying Trump would
survive.
I can't predict the details of what's happening now, but I think Trump will survive this
because:
a) he has the ammunition
b) it would make no sense to go this far and not see it through
c) even though it seems to be going to the precipice, it still fits a coherent plan
I've only recently started following Simon Parkes, but in his latest update he claims to
have spoken to the real Q. Of course, as anybody who's been following Q posts would know,
this would breach the "no outside comms" principle.
I'm not at all impressed. Appeared on the scene coincidental with Gen McInerney and all
the misinformation about "hammer and scorecard" which was a blatant distraction from clear
and convincing evidence of election fraud.
Parkes does far too much, "I could have told you beforehand but then I'd have had to kill
you."
Your on the ball wow from 1 psyop to another Now your following simon charlatan
parkes.
HE gets excepted into the Q nonsense and trump Savior psyop and becames one of there star
leaders over night.
Do you not do basic checks on who you start to worship?? or do they have to say code words
like Q and trump maga and its like there chosen to lead you.
Negative, far too silly and cartoonish and tracks back to a Filipino Maoist group directed
by the CCP!
Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 7:34 PM
We've been manipulated into fighting against each other over trivial differences to divert
us from the fact that we're all in the same boat.
Lost in a dark wood , Jan 11, 2021 6:33 PM
Andrew Korybko: "That, not whatever Q-Anon imagines, is the real "master plan", and it
succeeded."
Okay, I'm trying to figure this out. With regard specifically to this thread, are we
allowed to post direct links to Q posts? For instance, Q has stated explicitly that there is
no "Qanon" (#4881). Instead, there is Q and there are anons. I personally think this is
debatable, and that Qanon is a collective name for a highly amorphous movement and method of
enquiry. Furthermore, that movement and method predates Q and was to some extent co-opted by
Q. The movement will also outlive Q, though it may retain the name. As a movement, Qanon
stands in opposition to the hierarchical, hive-mind vacuity of the Rationalists and
Neo-Platonists. In short, Qanon is Blakean. Welcome to Jerusalem!
We do not want either Greek or Roman models if we are but just & true to our own
imaginations, those Worlds of Eternity in which we shall live forever; in Jesus our Lord.
– William Blake https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Milton_(excerpts)/Preface
Q Alerts is back up so I'll try again. The following is a critical part of "the plan".
--
Q (Oct 17, 2020):
I'm going to bring the whole diseased, corrupt temple down on your head. It's gonna be
Biblical.
Enjoy the show! https://qalerts.app/?n=4884
Please – can we have more of Andrew Karybko. I've seen him on Peter Lavelle. For
such an acutely well informed young chap about international politics, he demonstrates an
equally rigorous understanding about Trumps psyche.
Andrew Korybko is probably one of the best geo-political analysts I've come across and his
depth of knowledge across all continents shines through. A very warm and engaging person.
He runs a site called OneWorld Press. Recently accused by mainstream media and The Daily
Beast of being GRU agents. Well if it is, they are most measured and balanced in the history
of intelligence services.
Your be saying that on the way to the concentration camps!!! 'trust the plan' is a never ending story psyop
Similar to the 'best is yet to come' ..
you trumpsters have your own Down Syndrome language.
WWG1WGA, another bunch of devotees similar to a cult who will not except there guru is a
oppressor
mikael , Jan 11, 2021 1:09 PM
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the
things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."Reinhold Niebuhr
Pardon moi for the lenght.
I dont know whats with people this days, the shere avalange of bollocks is baffling, the
inability to conect the dots to what was, the past, to the present is making me think there
must be something, hehe, with the narrative, or should we say in this uh . conpiracy tinfoil
hat wearing days, in the tap water, and the rethotic, about Trump, I have my issues, and I
have never been quiet about them, but then to whine about things when most of it have been
inplace before Trump came into the WH, incl children in gages to wars, Obamalama started more
wars than any other American president ever, with Hitlary the Beast from Little Rock beside,
after Her husband stole Social sec and now, witch could be massive, is completely eradicated
out of existence, and the sactions, etc, most of them are just continuations of existing
systems, we can always blame Trump for something, but please, do know the difference and dont
just throw bollocks because of the people whom wanted change, when Obamalama said it, you
belived, and what happened, again, he pissed upon you all, and have since laughed all the way
to the bank, the economic crashes, the insane austeritys, the bailins and outs, you name it
to color revolutions.
This isnt to defend Trump, for me, He was more an castrat, singing but otherwise balless, but
also tied, unable to move, and been relentlessly attacked by those that defenses the past
witch in no way was better.
Then we have the eh .. storming?, and if you look at videos, what sticks out is, what
storming, some gass clouds, yea, means what, an Cop throving an gass can, but take an look
for your self, it was never in any way what the MSM wants you to belive, and the army of
people crawling all over the sites wants you to persive, along with profanitys about people
whom did suported Trump, because they hoped for change, you cant attack them, maybe for been
a bit naive, but one thing shal be the thing Trump did, exposed them all, in an way witch is
unpresedented despite His flaws, nobody have done that in this level, He exposed them all,
and if you havent gotten it yet, you have an problem, nobody else, incl the people whom did
their duty as free citizens of the USA, did the protesting.
Rioting, again, what riot, the worst thing I can come up with, after watching some videos, is
minore, a window, probably by the AntiFags/BLMs/eh leftards?, and one man whom ran off with
an piece of the furiture, nothing else, and if I drag that further, maybe the stormers should
have wiped their shoos off before entering the Hill, stepping on the fine carpets on the
floor in the hallway, what an horrible crime, right.
What storming, do you see anything, do enlighten us.
So, I know I am pushing the attention span to the limit.
BUT, I have thru the years found out that Americans, not that I want to call em stupid, but
regarding world poltics, more infantile, naive, brainwashed to such an extent thru the
decades/centurys of propaganda, where the various Gov always have had an enemy, it have
variated, from muslims etc to what it have become to day, domestic terrorism aka
conservatives whatever that means, and not only in the MSM but also thru an army of so called
Alternative MSM, witch have feed upon this narratives and played upon this, but overall, gone
the same erant as the Gov wanted them to go, and witch have resulted in wars upon wars, and
stil some want more wars, like the broad attack line on Iran, just to give you one ex to the
strangling of others, like western sahara to the Palestinians.
Then we have the new enemy, in mainly the so called alternative ugh .. rightwinged? whatever
whom sommehow manages to blame everything on socialism, yea, apart from the weather because
thats Putins fault, despite that, I found Putin to be an scoundrel, the Russian Gov rotten to
its core, that dont mean I hate Russians but there will always be those that cant
differentiate at all.
Whom is the "enemy" Americans, socialism, China, Russia, Iran, huh.
I have saxed this from P. L. Gonzalez.
Social media networks, payment processors, airlines, hotels, streaming services, and online
vendors are strangling people based on ideology but TPUSA is still complaining about
"socialism." Burn your money or donate it to TPUSA, it's the same thing.
Yup, briliantly summarised everything in some few lines, and why, do you refuse to see
them when they are right infront of your very own eyes, and yet, you blame some imaginary
enemy witch have nothing to do with this coup, its an class war, its the oligarcs, the robber
barons, witch have an army of buttspreaders in the capitol Hill to their abuse, and this
bitches do whatever they are told, do notice how the RepubliCONs threw you under the buss, is
that to the Chines fault.
So, I hope the Americans whom stil have some parts of their bran fuctional, can notice the
difference, in Norway we have the same problem, but we are an so called socialistic nation,
but we are held hostages by the same pack of scums that is plundering your nation and
resources, and have nothing but contempt for everyone of us, and an Gov that do whatever they
want and whom are we then to blame, the Hottentots, Maoris, communism is an tool for social
unrest, and when they have done their job, thrown under the buss, because the PTB wants us to
fight each others, as long we do, they will win.
Unite and you have an chanse, if not, well, I am old, and my life span expectanse isnt that
long anymore and I will not have to live in the totalistaian regime that comes, but the sole
reason for me to even bother, is for our children, and their children.
And to all of you whom went to the protest, you have my deepest respect.
It truly is an war, against the dark forces.
You all need to take an stand.
Be the light.
peace
Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:53 PM Reply to
mikael
We have the same problem worldwide. Singling out and scorning the Americans is simply
divisive. It has always been the People against the Oppressors. The Americans are people and
have Oppressors bearing down on them like the rest of us. There is a cancer that needs to be
removed lest it devour us all.
Chris , Jan 11, 2021 10:57 AM
The overtone of Korybko's writing is excessively defeatist. When the "Deep State" applies
such overt tools to steal the U.S. election, imposes censorship, labels millions of American
citizens as potential "domestic terrorists", silences the still incumbent U.S. President,
resorts to provocation, deprives Americans of essential liberties through Covid, curfews or
other bogus emergencies, then it means that the establishment behind the "Deep State" is
scared. Scared not as much of Donald Trump as scared of You – the People. I know it
since I live in a central European country with a very bitter experiences with dicatorship.
When the power starts to resort to an open forgery and uses coercion or force it reveals its
weakness, not strength. Its power derives only from the passive attitude of majority of
population, nothing more. What this so called 'liberal elite' in America hopes for is to
return to the good old days, when the whole Middle America remained voiceless, silent,
isolated, without any leadership or political representation. Now it is their objective to
'legally' separate the 'progressive America' from the 'populist' one and they might even
inspire separation, violence or secessionist moves to achieve it. But MAGA movement must not
play this delusional vision of retreat to entrench in false sense of local security. That's
what the 'Deep State' wants to achieve – to herd the popular opposition into their home
arrests and their privacy soon to be possibly separated by walls, sanitary wards, wired
fences or a new Indian reservation. Americans would never win their Independence by acting in
defense only, by retreating to 'wait and see' tactics as Korybko suggests. What must be done
is to recapture Your state institutions that have been stolen and turned into a travesty of
American political tradition. Before that happens a common awareness is needed that those who
appear to rule as a new 'government' are just a tiny bunch of criminals who try to impress
the whole world that their power has no limits, that they monopolised the mass media and
economy, that they are invincible. Do not let this delusion of 'Deep State' victory to
dominate Your outlook. Yes, I agree that Trump failed as a leader in a time of crisis but
MAGA (or however we call it) but all the people who really care for America need to maintain
representation, authority and leadership. They shouldn't accept a comfortable fantasy that
sooner or later the 'Deep State' would crumble under its own weight and then by some miracle
a new movement would be born. If Trump indicates that 'its only the beginning' then his
supporters should join him in any action he offers. All Republican politicians, conservative
or libertarian societies, local communities, state legislatures or any other active group
must be engaged in this action. Struggle for political freedom always involves risk and
mistakes. Trump certainly made a lot of them. But it is the People who are sovereign, not any
office, institution or technological dicatorship. When the Constitution, the congressional
debate and civil liberties are ruined by 'elite' it is the responsibility of the People to
act in emergency to restore law, order and liberty. The 'Deep State' perfectly understands
that after the four years of Trump and the emergence of trumpism as a social-political fact
there can not be any turning back to the business as usual. Not under normal and peaceful
circumstances. That's why they are so frightened and act in panic. That's why they impose
health and security 'emergencies' to incapacitate the population, to make it superfluous and
useless. We saw it in totalitarian regimes.
The world needs the U.S. not as an imperial power but as an example of well established
social contract, human liberty and hope for a better future. The European 'elites' are in
revolt against their people too but here we won't have a chance for any anti-establishment
president to support us. That's why in Europe we still believe that not all has been lost in
America.
Laurence Howell , Jan 11, 2021 12:17 PM Reply to
Chris
Lt. General Thomas Mcinerney,
"special forces imbedded in Antifa rioters have Nancy Pelosi's laptop"
laptop always the laptop it on the laptop he/she left the laptop at
it etc etc et was found there# etc etc etc bullshit
laptop psyop used as much as the immaculate passport psyop found at the scene of crime in a
burning inferno it aimed at idiots
Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 10:37 AM Reply to
Asylum
Are you saying that Hunter Biden's laptop and the released information that it contains is
of no value?
Conflating 911 with the current conspiracies is not helpful. This would need an article of
longer length and written by an unbiased observer which you are not.
Instead of saying etc. etc. bullshit, why not explain why this is your position?
Or does this not fit in with your soundbite posting?
Jacques , Jan 11, 2021 9:41 AM
Historically speaking, the problem with the "deep state" is essentially that the current
system has corrupted itself to a point where it is so far from what is claimed, or perhaps
appears to be, that there is no way to fix it from within by rebuilding it, by "draining the
swamp".
Klaus "Cockroach" Schwab et al understand this, hence the Great Reset, a new vision for
the future. Of course, they want a future for themselves, but that's another story.
Even if Trump were entirely sincere in his effort to "drain the swamp", he had nothing to
offer apart from some vague anachronistic concept of Making America Great Again. What the
fuck is that supposed to mean anyway, eh? The only thing he had behind him was populism which
in itself is an empty concept.
Like it or not, a change will only come if people formulate a new philosophy, ideology,
and if the new ideology is proposed and embraced on a broad scale. Ideally in a non-violent
fashion.
Right now, there is fuck all, people are still stuck on all sorts of left-right bullshit
dichotomies, (fake) democracy, the games that have been played for decades if not hundreds of
years.
If you ask me, it would be nice if the ideology of the future was loosely based on Hayek's
spontaneous order.
If Trump can pull something off this week or early next, the new plan is already waiting
in the wings. It's called Nesara/Gesara. It's a new economic system not based on a debt based
system.
rechenmacher , Jan 12, 2021 3:45 PM Reply to
Thom1111
Heard that one before. Fraud.
Thom1111 , Jan 12, 2021 7:09 PM Reply to
rechenmacher
It's a real framework plan, it's just whether it can be implemented is the question.
Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:57 PM Reply to
Jacques
"Like it or not, a change will only come if people formulate a new philosophy, ideology,
and if the new ideology is proposed and embraced on a broad scale. Ideally in a non-violent
fashion."
Sure. So we the people have had centuries or more to figure the answer out. Repeating the
dilemma is not enlightening. Idealism has no voice with tyrants.
ZenPriest , Jan 11, 2021 8:53 AM
All this talk of the 'deep state' yet no one can name them. Lol.
Thom1111 , Jan 11, 2021 3:04 PM Reply to
ZenPriest
you must have been born yesterday. In America it's the alphabet agencies but obviously all
runs back to Rothschild and the Vatican.
In Covid-19 Period, Honest online career from home, Now A Days Scam is every where but
don't worry , every one is not a cheater, very reliable and profitable site. Thousands
peoples are making good earning from it. For further detail visit the link no instant money
required free signup and information
𝚠𝚠𝚠.𝚓𝚘𝚋𝚜𝟷𝟼.𝚝𝚔
The 6 January protest march clearly shows that the majority of Trump voters had already
given up on Trump so did not join the protest. There was originally talk of a possible one
million people attending, it didn't get anywhere close. If half the nation was still behind
Trump, this was a very puzzling showing.
Trump just did not have what it takes, or was not really trying, to ruthlessly cut out the
cancer of corruption in government. History will show that he was a weak leader who allowed
the deep state to distract him to the extent that he never did anything of note other than to
reveal, through no action of his own, how extreme is the corruption that he had promised to
drain.
The Democrat distractions, paid for by their oligarch owners, showed the world that
extreme corruption is running the USA. Even the most loyal Democrats must be puzzled by the
current purges and threats of extreme centralised thought control, the arrogance of the swamp
now that it has gotten rid of the peoples' man.
To his credit, I am still willing to believe that Trump tried to do the right thing.
Although the author is trying to place Trump as a coward who resigned, going back on his
word, I think this is not how his original supporters see him. From what I can see, the
majority of his original supporters still support him and see him as a figurehead, but they
recognise that he doesn't have the skills to do the job. He is not a coward, he did not cave
in, he recognised, probably because of the low protest numbers, that he did not have what is
takes to continue the fight, he could see that his base had already given up on him. He is
still a figurehead in the patriot movement. He may have lost the far right, but he still has
a lot of centre-ground supporters.
I disagree with your claim that the majority of supporters had already given up on him. It
was the middle of the week. People have jobs. It was a significant turn out. People
understand what is at stake. I would not place the blame for failure on Trump. He is amazing
in so many ways.
I just don't understand here how anybody can believe Trump was sincere in wanting to
change anything: he's a narcissistic bully in it for his own benefit and that of his
offspring. Fighting corruption??? Come on!
Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 4:06 PM Reply to
Carmpat
The mere fact that hundreds and hundreds of treasonous actors throughout government and
business have been clearly and openly revealed through the process started by Trump is a damn
good start.
"What is going in DC right now is like what went on at Jonestown after Jim Jones went
crackers. Except instead of cyanide laced Kool-Aid they are going to use 'Doc' Billy Eugenics
EUTHANASIA DEATH SHOT to off the 'faithful'. If only Billy and they would just off themselves
and leave the rest of the World out of it."
" EUTHANIZE the World! Corporate Fascism and Eugenics forever."
"Time now for Na n zi Pelosi, Chuckie 'Upchuck' Schumer and all the rest of the war
criminal gang of CORPORATE FASCIST FABIAN EUGENICISTS to beam back to the
mothership. They see insurrections, rebellions and conspiracies everywhere. They believe
the humans are out to get them . They are going full Jim Jones. "
"Also Nasty Na n zi should lay off the hooch. It is beginning to have a deleterious and
harmful effect upon the sad thing's cognitive faculties and behavior."
Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:35 PM
I *Hope* they name the next Carrier after him – USS Donald J. Trump – CVN
83
😉
Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:38 PM Reply to
Sgt Oddball
- Nickname: – 'Big Don'
Voxi Pop , Jan 10, 2021 9:57 PM
https://worldchangebrief.webnode.com INSURRECTION
ACT "PROBABLY" SIGNED –
Military In Control of the US, Under Commander In Chief Trump/
Updates Will Follow Throughout The Day
Cal , Jan 10, 2021 9:56 PM
.
Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 9:26 PM
"Captain America's been torn apart,
Now he's a court jester with a broken heart,
He said, "Turn me around and take me back to the start",
"I must be losing my mind!" Are you blind?!
– I've seen it all a *Million Times* "
You are going to be very surprised. See what happens.
David Meredith , Jan 10, 2021 9:08 PM Reply to
Sukma Dyk
I was just about to post a comment saying: It's not over yet, but you beat me to it! Well
done.
John Smith , Jan 11, 2021 6:17 PM Reply to
Sukma Dyk
Why the secrecy? If you know summit then spill.
Jacques , Jan 10, 2021 8:49 PM
I don't know what Trump's intentions were, and I couldn't care less.
From where I'm standing, it appears that he was elected on a wave of populism, which
seemed to be an alternative to the "liberal democracy" fakery, the swamp. An interesting
presentation of that was here ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA50BE7d1X8
). IMHO, Bannon kicked Frum's butt in that debate.
It would appear that populism was a big enough threat for the "swamp" to unleash four
years of a hate campaign against Trump, possibly, probably culminating with COVID. Hard to
believe that it was a coincidence.
Be it as it may, and allowing for the possibility that this or that or the other thing has
been staged this way or that way, Trump's presidency has certainly set things in motion,
woken up people. Had somebody more slick been elected, the transition to the dystopia that
seems to be in the pipeline would probably have been less noticeable, perhaps not noticeable
at all. With the shitshow that has been going down since last February, all of a sudden there
is a public debate. Perhaps misinformed, perhaps mislead, but there is a debate nevertheless.
Will it result in something positive? Hard to say, hopefully.
Bottom line, Trump's presidency has been historically a good thing.
YouTube_censors_unfortuna , Jan 11, 2021 10:05 AM Reply to
Jacques
Covid 19 was DECIDED? But of course, yes, it's just a detail .. lol
Researcher , Jan 10, 2021 8:45 PM
Turns out the Viking Guy aka QAnon Shaman aka Jake Angeli aka Jacob Anthony Chansley aka
Actor and self proclaimed "Super Soldier" pals around with Bernard Kerik and Rudy Giuliani
when he takes time off from memorizing the latest NSA script:
Lost in a dark wood , Jan 10, 2021 9:42 PM Reply to
Researcher
Oh look, a photo at some sort of book-signing type event. I'll file it alongside the one
of Oswald and Mother Teresa.
Lost in a dark wood , Jan 11, 2021 4:37 PM Reply to
Researcher
BTW: if that's what Bernard Kerik looks like when he's "palling around", you definitely
wouldn't want to fall out with him!
James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:10 PM Reply to
Researcher
Haven't you figured out yet that QAnon is an intelligence agency psyop based in the type
of magical thinking that will get you killed and lose the nation? If not, you really aren't
qualified to participate in what is currently hitting us. The enemy has your number. This is
obviously a photo op staged by the security state to feed the false narrative created around
QAnon.
Researcher , Jan 10, 2021 11:23 PM Reply to
James Meeks
Can you read? Read what I wrote again. Read it enough times until you understand.
QAnon = Q Group NSA
Nothing is hitting you except the Democrats and Republicans together against the citizens.
That's not new.
"If there was a non WAR RACKETEER CORPORATE FASCIST in SHAM DEMOCRACY USA for whom to vote
and the REPUBLICRATS did not FAKE the counts and rig the SHAM elections WE THE PEOPLE might.
Where is a Eugene Victor Debs when the world needs one?"
"Soon that is not going to be an issue, however. There will be no need for SHAM ELECTIONS
after Billy EugenIcs and the CORPORATE FASCIST FABIAN EUGENICISTS cull all the untermenschen
and useless eaters with their EUTHANASIA DEATH SHOT."
"Just can not give up the opportunity for a good lead up (segue'). In good faith and in
all seriousness, thanks for providing it."
Cmiller , Jan 12, 2021 5:27 AM Reply to
Researcher
Masonic handshake
Dayne , Jan 10, 2021 8:40 PM
Peasants in 19th-century Russia clung to a notion of the Czar as a benevolent, fatherly
figure. Even when he rained misery and oppression down on them, it was only because he was
"misinformed", "surrounded by bad guys", etc.
It makes sense: Those were desperate, illiterate people living in misery. Hoping against
hope was all they had. But why would anyone in 2021 think of Trump in essentially the same
way is beyond me. An entrenched military-industrial-media-psychiatric-intelligence system,
hundreds of years in the making and with untold trillions in funding, just stood by as a
Robin-Hood-type hero and people's champion rose to take the Oval Office? Sorry. Trump might
as well sprout wings and fly.
Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:10 PM Reply to
Dayne
Thanx for your comment, Dayne – I've been trying to put this into words, and as I'm
autistic, I could frankly, literally *Sperg'-out* over this, right now
- TL:DR version is this, tho': – Ever wonder why 'Populism' is such a dirty word for
the establishment and their MSM bullhorn? – The argument I've heard thus far generally
goes like the South Park underpants gnome's plan for world domination: – Phase 1:
Popular Uprising (aka: 'Civil Unrest') Phase 2: ? . Phase 3: Fascist 'Strongman' Dictatorship
– Why is that?
- Also that we're *Too Stoopid*(/ie: Self-Absorbed) – Like the Mud-Pickin' peasants
in Monty Python' Holy Grail
- I would suggest 2 reasons for this:
- 1.) The Davostanis (Global Banksters/Oligarchs) never *merely* back the *winning horse*
in the race, – In fact they back *every* horse that they *allow* to run (ergo: Trump
was an Establishment-groomed *Stalking Horse* )
- 2.) The Davostanis (again), have *long since* seen to it that *most everyone*, from
birth onwards, is psychologically conditioned, first with childhood myths and fairy-tales
about Charming Princes and Fair Princesses, then with religio-spiritual 'adult' myths and
fairy-tales about (In Judeo-Christian terms) Messianic, White-Knight champion/rescuer types
who, if *we would only* put our lives and our *Utmost Faith* in their holy, heaven-sent
hands, would *Save Us All* from all the terrible, terrible *Mess We've All Made* for
ourselves down here on Earth, by collectively *Shitting The Bed*
*Obviously*, this is *All* just so much *Childish Nonsense*, and, more to the point, a
*Writ-Large Con-Job*
- Cutting to the chase: – The 'Great-Man' theory of history is *Bunk* – Always
*Has Been*, always *Will Be*
If you're still "Holding Out For A Hero", I invite you to stare *Long And Hard* into the
nearest available mirror, *Take A DEEP Breath*, and then go out and *Elect Yourself* to the
office – *Better Yet*, elect your family, elect your friends, elect your neighbors,
elect *Everyone*
- And then let's *Do This Shit* – *Together*!
James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:23 PM Reply to
Dayne
It could have something to do with the fact that Biden is backed by every billionaire
member of the Davos gang of criminals getting ready to use this event, coupled with medical
martial law, to stage the "great reset" scheme. A wet dream of Malthusian eugenecists like
Faucci & Gates, since it includes a drastic reduction in world population aka genocide of
the elderly, vulnerable, poor and non compliant. This Globalist Technocracy will be led by
un-elected bankers and corporate CEO's effectively ending any form of Democracy planet wide.
MSM mockingbirds are completing the programming of the public to make Casey's statement to
Reagan ring true" We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the
American public believes is wrong."
Ow look Simon one trick pony parkes been laughed at and ridiculed and busted for his many
many many many lies and it happening you watch just donate psyop
gets excepted into the Q nonsense and trump Savior psyop and became s one of there
leaders!!!
doesn't anyone go back 5 years and do basic check on thsoes they watch and then make idols
of them.
fools follow fools
Mike , Jan 10, 2021 8:15 PM
Trump was never going to be Ameica's hero. He was played to depict America as a fascist,
racist, neo-nazi country that needs to be saved by the Left aka Joe Biden/Kamala Harris. The
Left can now "save us all" from the "damage" caused by the MAGA movement and Trump. They can
do this through heavily increased mass surveillance and what is essentially imprisonment, to
make sure that we don't fall victim to the "domestic terrorism" that is represented by Trump
and his fan base.
David Meredith , Jan 10, 2021 9:10 PM Reply to
Mike
saved by the left? The left has been selling out the US to the globalist agenda for the
last 20 years (in power or out). Trump is not finished restoring America to a country that
doesn't sell out to China.
"Left-Center-Right" seems that paradigm is a tad askew. It is more like a top to bottom
pyramid [scheme/racket]. The CORPORATE FASCIST OLIGARCH MOBSTER PSYCHOPATH SLAVE MASTERS
sitting on their gold platinum thrones at the very top of the tower/pyramid and all their
prole slave victims, WE THE PEOPLE (HUMANITY) in the mud at the base. The PSYCHOS will say or
do anything to get the prole slaves at each others throats. IF WE ARE FIGHTING AMONG
OURSELVES WE ARE NOT FIGHTING THEM."
Well, being saved by the left was a sarcastic comment. And Trump is clearly done with
"restoring America" because it was never his to restore, let alone him conceding to the left
after the Capitol "riots".
falcemartello , Jan 11, 2021 3:53 AM Reply to
David Meredith
@ David
The left is as left as my right GONAD
Martin Usher , Jan 10, 2021 10:12 PM Reply to
Mike
Biden/Harris "the left"? Surely you're joking? These two are conservatives, in another
timeline they'd be Republicans. What they have going for them is they, like many Americans,
believe in the Constitution of the United States, about what the country is and what its
trying to acheve. It strives to build "a more perfect union".
This the fundamenal error many people made about the Deep State. I've no doubt that
there's a fom of Deep State out there, an ingrained conservative streak in the bureaucracy,
because there is in all bureaucracies. But the real Deep State is all of us, its every last
person who believes in the system, in the American form of democracy and the principles upon
which the nation was founded. There are innumerable personal interpretations of exactly what
this means but the sum total is the United States.
Trump, MAGA and the modern GoP represent 'capture', the idea that the capture of the state
can be turned to personal profit. In doing so Trump and his enablers degraded the notion of
what the US is and why it exists. This is what's caused the backlash, its not 'the left' or
'socialism'.
Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:54 PM Reply to
Martin Usher
"Biden/Harris "the left"? Surely you're joking?"
- The proverbial 'Overton Window' has, at this point, collapsed to a quantum singularity,
about a nothingth of a planck length wide
- Prepare for *Teh Great Suck*!
Peanut butter wolf , Jan 10, 2021 8:11 PM
You seriously think Trump was genuinly elected? All the points you make show obviously he
was a puppet and psy-op of the deepstate from the very beginning.
The deepstate won because they never had an enemy, they created him from the start, with or
without him knowing we dont know, but anyone on that level is on a need to know basis anyway.
It's clear that his every move is steered with the goal to bring down rogue antiestablishment
sentiments.
And it worked very well. Radical left antiestablishment is suddenly prodemocrats and
radical right antiestablishment is totally disillusioned and just became domestic
terrorists.
Trump wasn't supposed to win in 2016. The deep state probably wanted liberal Jeb Bush or
Rubio or Cruz in there. Trump destroyed all the competition in the GOP primaries. Remember,
Trump wasn't picked by the deep state to be their guy. He financed his own campaign. He was a
major burr in their saddle. The Trump phenomenon is real and he proved it with a landslide
victory that was stolen.
Martin Usher , Jan 12, 2021 6:16 PM Reply to
Thom1111
What 'landslide'? The numbers tell a very different story. Trump should have won a second
term but he didn't because of two things, one being the grass roots efforts of Democrats to
motivate voter groups despite systematic road blocks being placed in those groups' path and
the other -- a important one -- being that there's quite a lot of life long Republicans out
there that cannot stand Trump.
Trumpism is like a cult in many ways. One feature is that those who 'believe' find it
difficult to come to grips with the fact that they might hold a minority view. They're used
to being embattled, that's a signature feature of such groups (they're always fighting for
something against an implacable enemy, preferably an unseen one) but its just inconceivable
that they're really a fringe group. The events of last Wednesday have probably done more to
promote Democrat candidates than anything else this cycle; fortunately for the most part the
election was over so all they lost were the two Senate seats.
PS -- May I draw your attention to an old Beatles song -- "Revolution"? (I'd also suggest
an even old song "Trouble Coming" from the Mothers of Invention.)
Voz 0db , Jan 10, 2021 7:58 PM
Under the CURRENT MAIN SYSTEM – The Monetary System – there is no "drain the
swamp"!
James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:29 PM Reply to
Voz 0db
Then you're going to love the technocrats "social credits" scheme such as China currently
imposes on it's population.
Voz 0db , Jan 11, 2021 10:43 AM Reply to
James Meeks
China developed that system with the HELP of the Western Corporations, so that in a near
future the tech will be deployed in the western Plantations. OPERATION COVIDIUS is just the
1st of many operations that will create the FEAR & PANIC conditions among the herds of
modern western moron slaves, that will make it really easy for THEM to deploy that tech.
Why do you think China was the chosen one to practice a "city lockdown" during EVENT 201
planning?
Why do you think China was on the news of western countries while they were executing the
lockdown and then no more China news?
China is also under the Shadow of the SRF & Billionaires at least for now. The only
thing China is trying to achieve is to shift the POWER of the SRF into Chinese Families,
nothing more.
maxine , Jan 10, 2021 7:48 PM
What has Off-G come to? .One must be truly mad to imagine that D. tHRUMP
"SINCERELY" thought ANYTHING EVER, let alone "changing the way America is run" .He's
incapable of comprehending what the word "SINCERITY" means .Sorry the author has lost his
hero.
OffG publishes articles and anybody who wants to can comment on them.
It does not push, or imagine, any group philosophy other than to support us all in a deep
distrust of what the mainstream media ram down our throats every day, and to give us space to
express our personal disgust in our own way.
We are not going to imagine what you would like us to imagine merely on your say-so
either, although you are quite free to tell us what your personal recommendations are.
OffG has never been pro-Trump, and we are all aware that the alternative is far from being
any better.
Perhaps you would like to tell us what is really bugging you, given that you have
never been under any pressure even to show up here At the very least, you could stay on
topic:
So, what about the swamp, and who you think is most likely to succeed in draining it ?
Carol Jones , Jan 10, 2021 8:53 PM Reply to
wardropper
Hear Hear!
Gezzah Potts , Jan 10, 2021 10:26 PM Reply to
wardropper
Spot on W👍
YouTube_censors_unfortuna , Jan 10, 2021 7:40 PM
Trump's racist fan base supported America's bogus War of Terrorism against blameless
Muslim countries, did they not? What goes around, comes around.
I think you are getting fan bases mixed up. Trump inherited these conflicts from Bush,
Iraq 2002 invasion & Obama's 2015 invasion of Syria and it was Trump that threatened to
end the propping up of the endless war industry. In fact that played the major role in why
Trump had to be removed at all costs including selling treason and vote rigging as Democracy
to be defended against "domestic terrorists".
YouTube_censors_unfortuna , Jan 11, 2021 9:45 AM Reply to
James Meeks
Did America's white patriots oppose the demonisation of Muslims as being terrorists who
did 9/11 or did they participate in this US government fiction?
No, at least half of the patriots are and were aware that 9/11 was an inside job.
Geoffrey Skoll , Jan 10, 2021 7:25 PM
Right! The Donald was too weak and too stupid. A smarter president got shot for his
troubles, but the rulers knew they didn't have to resort to that against the Donald. He was
obsessed with his mirror. All those meeting between Ike and JFK, what do you think they were
talking about?
Sounds like you came to Off Guardian thinking it was the Guardian and expected to find a
group of like minded consumers of security state propaganda in a Trump bashing fest.
Do u relly guys think Trump was a hope for all pf us? I am still amazed that
people(including off-guard) still thinks in terms of left vs right, good vs bad, and all that
narrative. I am afraid that nnarrativ has never been true. It is part of the game of "the
matrix" to keep us entertained in shows programmed for tth masses, division, polarizaiomn,
saviours and "heros". In my opinion it is time for a deep shift. Continuing to hope that some
guy will save us all, it is just seeing a tree but not being able to see the woods. While
some keep waiting for somebody to save us, they are moving forward with their plans really
fast. But no problem guys. Sooner or later the rrality will knock on you door, and you will
have to decide if you are going to be a slave or a free human. And it will be all about what
you decide. No american hero or any messiah will do it for you.
Sophie - Admin1 , Jan 10, 2021 9:50 PM Reply to
MANUEL
We have warned against accepting the Left/Right paradigm many times. This is NOT an
editorial and therefore is not 'the voice of OffG'.
Some visitors here need to up their sophistication level to the point they understand we
publish a SPECTRUM of dissident opinion that we consider merits discussion or a wider
audience, without necessarily agreeing with all of it.
"Some visitors here need to up their sophistication level to the point they understand
we publish a SPECTRUM of dissident opinion "
- Yep, well that's as may be, but Andrew Korybko's position is *Lame As All Hell* –
Every establishment talking point *Covered* – just from the 'Contrarian' side
- Trump was an 'Outsider' who 'Became' an 'Insider'?! – Aww Puh-lease! – He
was a *Stalking Horse
- "He didn't have the *'Strength'* to 'Drain The Swamp'(tm)"??!?! – *No-One*
*Indivudal* in all Creation could've
- Do you think we're *Children*?!
Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 3:26 PM Reply to
Sgt Oddball
been on this site a whole while now not seen any articles discussing trump failures
James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 11:06 PM Reply to
MANUEL
We are all aware that we are the playthings of the rich and powerful but all you're doing
is stating what most of us already know. What is your solution? So tell us please what you
are doing to that makes you feel free and not a slave? Are you living off the grid? Not using
currency? What is it you're doing that makes you different from those of us you claim are not
facing reality? I think many people, myself included, who have no love for Trump see that he
is being denounced by every billionaire member of the Davos gang of criminals as a threat to
world order and the economy while they shut down the planet with medical martial law and
create an authoritarian Globalist Technocratic dictatorship ending Democracies worldwide and
targeting "domestic terrorists" who oppose them.
George Mc , Jan 10, 2021 6:35 PM
The steps on how to destroy all of the services, public and private though
focussing on the NHS:
Seize on a moderate flu variant. Build it up to be the blackest
death since the black death. Seize on all the old people who die anyway and claim their
numbers as an indication of the carnage. For anyone still hesitant, introduce hypocritical
emotional blackmail about "the most vulnerable" in our society to shame everyone into the
game On the basis of those appropriated death figures, endlessly circulate fear porn –
enhanced by the fact that the symptoms of this apocalyptic virus are indistinguishable from
the regular flu or even the common cold. Get everyone to steer clear of everyone else. Close
down all "inessential" work plus communal gathering places to ensure everyone is isolated
before the droning monolithic message you are pumping out. Introduce even more draconian
measures for anyone who "has" the bug – effectively barring them even (especially) from
care work. Prioritise the new bug cases so that they have access to hospital facilities
– while anyone with other (real) illnesses are barred to "protect" them! This fills up
the hospitals with hypochondriacs with the common cold. Introduce the notion that some may
carry the bug without symptoms. Introduce a new test which can determine who has the
symptomless bug. On the basis of those magical symptomless bug test kits, bar the
essential workers from supporting the vulnerable – in order to "protect the
vulnerable"! Constantly report on how the NHS is collapsing – which it is, being filled
up with folks with the cold and turning everyone else away, and also being deprived of
essential workers who tested positive for the symptomless bug. Just stand back and watch it
all collapse whilst continuing to report on it with increasing horror!
George Mc , Jan 10, 2021 6:41 PM Reply to
George Mc
PS the list is not exhaustive. I didn't even touch on the phony Left/Right divide.
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL , Jan 10, 2021 7:18 PM Reply to
George Mc
EXCERPTS FROM THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORTS INTO COVID-19 AND CARE HOMES.
A must read.
The Department of Health and Social Care . adopted a policy, that led to 25,000 patients,
including those (known to be) infected (with Covid-19, and also those who were) possibly
infected with Covid-19 (but) had not been tested, being discharged from hospital into care
homes between 17 March and 15 April -- exponentially increasing the risk of transmission to
the very population most at risk of severe illness and death from the disease. (This, while
being denied) access to testing, (being denied) personal protective equipment, (while having)
insufficient staff, and limited (and confusing) guidance.
"... The existential contradictions of a multi-polar world, climate change and internal unrest are unresolvable by neoliberals and neoconservatives (they are the cause). Both political parties in the USA have gone crazy because they can't deal with it. The chickens have come home to roost. ..."
The USA has been an Empire since the Mexican War when it annexed California, Texas,
Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Since WWII a World Empire and after the fall of the USSR, a
Hegemon. Basically since 1990 the top 10% of Americans became a global protection racket,
resource extractor and human exploiter.
The existential contradictions of a multi-polar world, climate change and internal
unrest are unresolvable by neoliberals and neoconservatives (they are the cause). Both
political parties in the USA have gone crazy because they can't deal with it. The chickens
have come home to roost.
The Biden/Harris Administration will fail. They cannot hold the North American USA Empire
together; let alone, subjugate Russia, China or Iran. The Pandemic is unlikely to be
controlled by vaccines by themselves, the virus is endemic in the Americas and is
mutating.
Joe Biden will not provide healthcare for all or a functional national public health
service needed to control coronavirus. The pandemic debacle, slow vaccine distribution, the
storming of the Capitol are not solely Donald Trump's fault, they are systemic and can only
be addressed by restoring government by and for the people.
To avoid this, the Elite will force Americans into lockdowns, get tens of trillions of
dollars direct deposited, and Russia will be blamed for everything.
The US postal service can't deliver the mail. The Google Map of DC is a sea of red
closures. The US government has fallen and all the king's men cannot put it back together
again.
"... Oh, yes, you really did it this time! You stormed the goddamned US Capitol. You and your racist, Russia-backed army of bison-hat wearing half-naked actors have meddled with the primal forces of GloboCap, and now, by God, you will atone! ..."
"... No, do not try to minimize your crimes. You entered a building without permission! The building where America simulates democracy! You walked around in there waving silly flags! You went into the Chamber, into people's offices! One of you actually put his filthy populist feet up on Pelosi's desk ON HER DESK! This aggression will not stand! ..."
So, welcome to 2021! If last week was any indication, it is going to be quite an exciting year. It is going to be the year in
which GloboCap reminds everyone who is actually in charge and restores "normality" throughout the world.
or at least attempts to restore "normality," or the "New Normality," or the "Great Normal Reset," or "The New Normal War on Domestic
Terror" or whatever they eventually decide to call it.
In any event, whatever they call it, GloboCap is done playing grab-ass. They have had it with all this "populism" malarkey that
has been going on for the last four years.
Yes, that's right, the party is over, you Russian-backed white supremacist terrorists! You Trump-loving, anti-mask grandmother
killers! You anti-vax, election-fraud-conspiracy theorists! You deviants who refuse to follow orders, wear your damn masks, vote
for who they tell you, and believe whatever completely nonsensical official propaganda they pour into your heads!
Oh, yes, you really did it this time! You stormed the goddamned US Capitol. You and your racist, Russia-backed army of
bison-hat wearing half-naked actors have meddled with the primal forces of GloboCap, and now, by God, you will atone!
No, do not try to minimize your crimes. You entered a building without permission! The building where America simulates democracy!
You walked around in there waving silly flags! You went into the Chamber, into people's offices! One of you actually
put his filthy populist feet up on Pelosi's desk ON HER DESK! This aggression will not stand!
OK, before I go any further with this essay, I need to explain to my regular readers (in case it wasn't already clear) that I've
decided to forswear every word I've ever written, and all my principles, and my common sense, and join the remainder of my old leftist
and liberal friends in the orgy of online hate and outrage they are currently mindlessly indulging in.
I'm already in enough trouble as it is for not playing ball with their "
apocalyptic plague ," and whatever else I
am, I am certainly no martyr, and I have a career in the arts to consider, so I have decided to listen to my inner coward and join
the goose-stepping global-capitalist mob, which is why this column sounds slightly out of character.
See, back in the old days, before my conversion, I would have made fun of my liberal friends for calling this "storming" of the
Capitol a "coup," or an "insurrection," and for demanding that the protesters be prosecuted as "domestic terrorists."
I probably would have scolded them a bit for taking to the Internet and spewing their hatred at
the unarmed woman
shot dead by the police like a pack of soulless, totalitarian jackals.
I might have even made a reference to that infamous scene in Schindler's List where the crowd of "normal" German citizens
all laugh and jeer as the Jews are marched away to the ghetto by the Nazi goons.
But, now that I have seen the light, I see how bad and wrong that would have been. Clearly, trespassing in the US Capitol is a
crime that should be punishable by death. And comparing contemporary American liberals to the "good Germans" during the Nazi era
is so outrageous that well, it should probably be censored.
In fact (and I hope my liberal friends are still reading this), the police should have shot the entire lot of them! All these
Russian-backed Nazi insurrectionists should have been gunned down right there on the spot, preferably by muscle-bound corporate mercenaries
and CIA snipers in Black Hawk helicopters with big Facebook and Twitter logos on them!
Actually, anyone who trespassed in the Capitol Building (which is like a cathedral), or just came to the protest wearing a MAGA
hat, should be hunted down by federal authorities, charged as a "domestic white-supremacist terrorist," frog-marched out onto Black
Lives Matter Plaza, and shot, in the face, live, on TV, so that everyone can watch and howl at their screens like the
Two Minutes
Hate in 1984 . That would teach these "insurrectionists" a lesson!
Or they could shoot them in one of those corporate-branded stadiums! We could make it a weekly televised event. It's not like
there is any shortage of Trump-supporting "domestic terrorists." They could use a different stadium every week, deck the place out
with big "New Normal" banners, play music, make speeches, the whole nine yards. Everyone would have to wear masks, of course, and
strictly adhere to social distancing. Folks could bring the kids, make a day of it.
How am I doing so far, leftist and liberal friends? No? Not fanatical and hateful enough?
OK, so what is it going to take to convince you that I have changed my tune, got my mind right, and am totally on board with the
New Normal totalitarianism? Trump? Sure, I can do Trump. I hate him! He's Hitler! He's Russian Hitler! He's Russian White Supremacist
Hitler!
Yes, I know I've spent the last four years pointing out that he isn't actually Hitler, or a Russian agent, and that he's really
just the same ridiculous, narcissistic ass clown that he has always been, but I was wrong. He's definitely Hitler, and a Russian
agent! He is certainly not just a pathetic old huckster without a single powerful ally in Washington who could not stage an actual
coup if Putin nuked every blue state on the map.
No, I soil myself in fear before his awesome power. Never mind that he's just been banned by
Facebook ,
Twitter , and
numerous other corporate platforms , and made a fool of by the corporate media, the international political establishment, the
Intelligence agencies, and the rest of GloboCap since the day he took the oath of office.
Forget the fact that, although he holds the nuclear launch codes in his tiny little hands and is Commander in Chief of the US
military, the most he could do to challenge his removal was file a buttload of hopeless lawsuits and sit around in the Oval Office
eating cheeseburgers and tweeting into the night.
No, none of that means a thing, not when he still has the power to "embolden" a few dozen pissed-off Americans to storm (
or calmly walk ) into the Capitol and
take selfies sitting in the Vice President's Chair!
Look, the point is, I hate him. And I hate his supporters. I hate everyone who doesn't hate him and his supporters. I hate everyone
who won't wear a mask. I hate the Republicans. I hate the Russians. I hate everyone who won't get the vaccine. My God do I hate them!
I am so full of hatred and mindless rage that it is making me crazy. I am so consumed with self-righteous hatred, propaganda, and
manufactured hysteria that, if Rachel Maddow, or Chris Hayes, or whoever, told me that it was time to round them all up, these "domestic
terrorists," these "insurrectionists," these "conspiracy theorists," these "anti-mask extremists" (and anyone else who won't obey
us), and put them on trains and send them to camps, I'd probably be OK with that.
How am I doing, liberals? Am I back in the club? Because, I get it. I swear! I'm cured! Praise God! I'm ready to pitch in and
do my part. I believe in GloboCap's final victory! I'm willing to work, if our leaders order me, ten, twelve, or fourteen hours a
day, and give all I have for GloboCap victory! I am ready for total ideological war an ideological war more total and radical than
anything I can even imagine!
Sure, our imaginary enemies are formidable (and this war will probably last forever or at least until the end of global capitalism),
but, in the words of one our greatest liberal heroes, George W. Bush, "bring it on!"
*
CJ Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published
by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing, Inc. His dystopian novel,
Zone 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy,
Swaine & Cormorant. Volume I of his
Consent Factory Essays
is published by Consent Factory Publishing, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amalgamated Content, Inc. He can be reached at
cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org
.
It's an Empire with a revolving-door Emperor called a President or Prime Minister. The
facts are fixed around the policy. We're obviously headed back toward a more 'can't we all
get along' empire, after four years of a guy who thought he was an actual emperor, instead of
a bobble-head. The differences between the two monopoly parties in the USA are entirely
domestic and are nothing but the size of the crumbs given to the people who think they are
free.
The USA is now the proverbial Whale in a Swimming Pool: it is big, powerful and impressive
- but can't hide its moves anymore and has little to none margin for any maneuver.
The American Center-wing is ossifying, or, in Cold Warrior terminology (Arthur
Schlesinger Jr.), is losing its "vitality". It is entering a stage where it must "burn the
village in order to save it".
... it seems the answer is that Germany plays the role in Europe that the US plays in the
world and both are satisfied with that role even though neo-liberalism, austerity and
war-mongering are leading us to inhumanity and disaster.
Like i said before elsewhere Biden would capitalize on what Trump has put forth and take
the infamy and blame for instead of moving in the opposite directions of whatever Trump
criticized for in foreign policy. That means be it trade war with China, renege on climate
deals, strong arming NATO and EU countries, or giving everything Israel wants nothing stop
Biden from maintaining what has been put in place.
At most they'll just make excuse on why they had to maintain the policies they themselves
criticized Trump for without changing direction.
He said Joe Biden's strong conviction was that the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is a "bad idea"
and that the administration would use "every persuasive tool" to convince partners,
including Germany, to discard the project.
That is pretty much a declaration of war against countries in Europe. Stay
away,
America's
disarray is its own woes, not other countries' opportunity The Financial Times lives in
a world where the USA doesn't have more than 2,000 operational nukes, doesn't control the
financial system (SWIFT), doesn't issue the universal fiat currency (Dollar Standard),
doesn't have a big fucking navy, doesn't enjoy absolute ideological hegemony etc. etc.
...Tronald's foreign policy has been a disaster, even if he has supposedly not sparked a
new war. Let's not talk about all the secret operations, multiplied drone attacks, state
terrorist assassinations, etc. And the new administration is now continuing this...
They've stopped thinking, become utterly predictable.
They just go through the motions. They know that they can't win-achieve their long held
objectives-but they can't stop repeating themselves, including their past errors. They are
not allowed to. The US ruling caste-servants of the ruling class- are only allowed to
operate within very narrow boundaries. They aren't allowed to take radical measures when
faced with new crises- they are confined within ever diminishing political circles. The
duopoly has become an obvious One Party system. And its politics are those of the Gilded
Age-150 years old and still going strong.
The only solution to America's problems is defeat so complete that it cannot be denied
even by the least perceptive. Anyone with money to spare should be buying popcorn
futures.
...Biden is an elderly figurehead. Trump's mistake was being openly bullying and vulgar
instead of underhanded. Already, the EU ( as cowardly vassals ) are falling into line on
Iran and Russia.
...Paul Craig Roberts is correct. There has not been a regime change, there has been a
revolution and treating policies of this "president" as if he is more than a figurehead
being run by oligarchs is foolish in the extreme.
They've stopped thinking, become utterly predictable.
One could say this about the American people who have been herded into two camps so that
the Center can rule. Here's an example: One of Biden's first executive actions is to
include undocumented residents in the Census. This will please the Left immensely and
outrage the Right. But the Census is conducted every 10 years and it was completed in 2020.
So Biden's action is actually meaningless. How many people will actual notice this? Very
few.
It is funny/sad to see the Post Trump Stress Disorder victims are already rationalizing
and making excuses for the war that the establishment drones they voted for will be
starting, and those drones are not even sworn in to office yet. They know that they voted
for war yet their plastic, Hollywood "identities" are so intertwined with their assumed
self-evident moral superiority that they are compelled to defend the evil they are
responsible for even before it is committed. For them, doing nothing crudely is far worse
than murdering millions accompanied by lofty and emotive platitudes.
Meet the Filthy Rich War Hawks That Make up Biden's New Foreign Policy Team
"I expect the prevailing direction of U.S. foreign policy over these last decades to
continue: more lawless bombing and killing multiple countries under the cover of "limited
engagement," – Biden Biographer Branko Marcetic
by Alan Macleod November 13th, 2020
https://www.mintpressnews.com/filthy-rich-war-hawks-make-joe-biden-foreign-policy-team/273039/
Neera Tanden – Reduce US Deficits by Raiding the Economies of Countries We Have
Destroyed:
Neera Tanden, Biden's Pick for Budget Office: Now Is Not the Time To 'Worry About Raising
Deficits and Debt'
by Robby Soave https://reason.com/2020/11/30/neera-tanden-biden-omb-debt-deficit/
She once suggested that if Americans care about the deficit so much, maybe we should make
Libya pay for it.
| 11/30/2020
( Ariana Ruiz/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom )
Trump ripped the mask off US foreign policy and exposed it for what it is - ugly Zionism
and outrageous Jewish supremacy. Trump did many foreign policy changes previous incumbents
and their handlers wanted to do but were constrained by the optics and international
opinion.
I agree the Biden administration will continue the same tired old foreign policy, only
with the mask back on. Of course the media won't notice the similarities, but the public
will. No matter how fervently the managers tinker with the edges it is events that drive
changes and change people.
I just listened to President Biden's speech. It was a good one, even a great one. Thinking
about what Plato means by the 'noble lie' it was a noble speech, and there wasn't much of a
lie about it.
b finished the posting with
"
While Trump had continued the wars the U.S. waged when he came into office he did not start
any new ones. Since Joe Biden first entered the Senate 47 years ago he has cheered on every
war the U.S. has since waged. It would be astonishing to find four years from now that he
did not start any new ones.
"
Prepare to be astonished. Biden isn't going to start any new wars for the same reason
that Trump didn't......MAD
Humanity has been in the MAD phase of the civilization war we are in since the Obama era
push back in Syria.
Biden's chest beating will not be as "impressive" as Trump's but the trajectory is the
same.
The new chief says to tighten the circle of wagons, but those accused of besieging the
Outlaw US Empire's wagon train stopped attacking and moved on long ago. Meanwhile,
supplying the wagon train continues to take resources away from dealing with very real
domestic problems. The upshot is China will continue to pull away and increase its lead
geoeconomically, and together with Russia will continue to solidify and strengthen the
Eurasian Bloc. Very soon, the EU is going to be faced with a very stark choice--to join the
Eurasian Bloc and thus stave-off economic atrophy or continue to allow its brand of
Neoliberal Parasites to eat and risk rupture, perhaps not in 2021 but before 2030.
The key is that the false narrative that was initiated in 1945 and bolstered in 1979
continues to be treated as gospel despite its path to certain ruin. I noted there were no
questions asked about the international call for a Bretton Woods 2.0 that would end dollar
hegemony and Petrodollar recycling, while removing the one source of coercion behind its
illegal sanctions.
The only possible target of opportunity I see is Venezuela as the frack-patch is about
to fold-up shop and fuel prices cause domestic inflation to soar -- Here in Oregon, gas
prices have gone up 50cents/gal since the first of the year--25%. The oil being the obvious
target now the the lower-48 has definitely peaked.
@ 32 juliania... you are the eternal optimist! there is something admirable about that!..
however you have to contend with a lot of cynical people who think like it's business as
well, as b's post notes..... you might not like to hear this, but nothing is going to
change under biden... big wheels set in motion and biden is not interested in the least in
changing any of it... neither was trump as some of his fanbots are coming to see too...
political speeches are just so much b.s... juliania - as the saying goes, talk is cheap, it
is actions that count.... watch peoples actions, not their talk... biden can talk a good
line, but that has nothing to do with his actions... top of the day to you!
@34 Invading Venezuela and 'taking the oil' won't be easy though there is a possibility
Colombia will help out. Which means the total disruption of South America. More economical
to just buy the stuff.
"It is funny/sad to see the Post Trump Stress Disorder victims are already rationalizing
and making excuses for the war that the establishment drones they voted for will be
starting, and those drones are not even sworn in to office yet. They know that they voted
for war yet their plastic, Hollywood "identities" are so intertwined with their assumed
self-evident moral superiority that they are compelled to defend the evil they are
responsible for even before it is committed. For them, doing nothing crudely is far worse
than murdering millions accompanied by lofty and emotive platitudes."
Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 20 2021 16:16 utc | 26
Tnx for expressing this in a much nicer and polite way then i would have written. And
yes, yes it is sad/amusing to watch NPC`s turn into pretzels to explain away their
cognitive dissonans ,utter foolishness and stupidity.
We begged Trump to get rid of him many months ago. Same with Wray. Without justice you
have no society and no Constitution. Halper came into the CIA by Brennan. Should have gotten
rid of her many months ago. These are Trumps biggest mistakes.
Sessions, Barr, Wray, Haspel, Coates, Krebs... Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Coney-Barrett... even
his SC Justice picks are suspect at this point. Honestly, it's pathetic!
Trump the Manchurian Populist
He made a joke of foreign policy restraint (his restraint is worse than Obama's 'war') and he
ruined the career of good people like McGregor. McGregor is now toxic because of Trump.
Trump's domestic policies failed. He gave us $8T of new debt.
Operation Warp speed had a warp core
breach . What happened to the 300M doses we were supposed to have in Jan, we only have
30M doses, where did the reserve go?
Yeah, this "America First" so-called "populist" also weaponized space, doubled-down on
Israel and ME idiocy, supported a coup in Venezuela (including seizing Venezuelan State
assets), cut taxes (yet again), and lied about the seriousness of the virus.
Oh, and no pardon for Assange or Snowden to support whistle-blowers and independent
journalism that keep the Deep State (that Trump supposedly fights) in check.
"... No examination of Neoliberalism's utter failure to deliver benefits to the masses while expropriating the wealth they produced for delivery to the class of Financial Parasites. At least the writers at Global Times get it right: ..."
Global
Times reports on an essay published by the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine
Zeitung (Check it out b or other German barflies) deeming " China's system, although
'authoritarian,' is 'very successful .'" [My Emphasis]
"It explained that as long as a society can reach the following goals - improving social
welfare, increasing consumption choices, safeguarding domestic security, promoting education,
and providing good healthcare - people will support and trust the system even if their
influence in the decision-making process is limited. Such can 'in part ensure the legitimacy'
of the social system....
"But the authors' introspection stopped from digging problems as they tried to shift blame
to the rise of populism in the US."
No examination of Neoliberalism's utter failure to deliver benefits to the masses
while expropriating the wealth they produced for delivery to the class of Financial
Parasites. At least the writers at Global Times get it right:
"Populism, which helped crown Donald Trump, is being blamed today. Yet it all started
from the widening gap between rich and poor. When German scholars use the US populist
government as a scapegoat, they overlooked the real question - without addressing the
growing inequality in a Western system, will there be a second Trump in the future?" [My
Emphasis]
The fatal thrust is delivered in the two closing paragraphs but still omit naming the
actual culprit, which is the ideology of Neoliberalism:
"The article raised the support and trust of people when it comes to judgment over the
legitimacy of a society. In this regard, data speak louder than words. According to a poll
conducted in 2020 by US-based global public relations and marketing consultancy firm Edelman,
95 percent of Chinese trust their government while the US government only saw an approval of
48 percent .
"What other excuses will the Western world have to question the legitimacy of the Chinese
system? If the West, especially the US, the beacon of democracy, actually senses the crisis
and does not wish to lose the competition, it should stop burying its head in the sand." [My
Emphasis]
The problem isn't heads being buried in sand; rather, it's the design of the ideology to
exploit and degrade a nation's masses so they're left with relatively nothing compared to the
nation's Financial Parasites, all so the latter will always have their Free Unearned
Lunch.
Thanks for the link to the Rostislav Ischenko article. Are you making the translations of
these Russian analyses? I'm grateful to whomever is doing them - the translators are the
heroes of the information war. By the way, I think plenty of people here would recognize
Ischenko's name and would be glad to know about his articles if you link another in future -
it could easily get missed the way you linked it.
~~
Ischenko has some interesting things to say about the US dystopia from a Russian
perspective. He speaks of the oligarchs no longer needing a home country - which we've
discussed here before - and that they may now feel powerful enough to take on any country in
the world.
All of this, Russia should watch with careful interest.
The American oligarchy no longer needs a strong state. They need power over its remnants.
... As I wrote above, the actions already taken and the future actions of the Democrats are
destroying American statehood. However, the American oligarchy felt itself global and
became so insolent that it is no longer afraid of being left without a state behind its
back, hoping that if they had enough of their own resources to seize America, then they
would have enough to defend their interests in a changing world.
Why is it important for us to thoroughly understand what is happening in the United
States? Because the left-liberal (including pseudo-communist) movements around the world
are guided by the financial oligarchy...They really work to destroy the state.
[...]
Whatever they think, de facto they are doing it in the interests of the trans-national
oligarchy, the global financial capital, which is ready to devour the corpses of the USA,
Russia, China, the EU and others, just as it is now devouring the corpse of Ukraine. Strong
bureaucratic republics hinder them in this regard. They don't need strong states. They
want tiny debris.
That is why the internal political struggle in the United States is not just an
interesting spectacle for us, but a scientific experimental base for the struggle for our
statehood against international financial capital (transnational globalist oligarchy) and
its left-liberal mercenaries.
I think this is the overarching view of what's happening in the US and the world today.
Oligarchic power and riches are now so great and so globally mobile that nation-states are
simply getting in the way of the plunder.
~~
In my opinion, the very rich of this world actually do have a solution to climate change
and resource depletion, and they didn't have to think very hard to see what to them is
obvious. As they break up societies to make the plunder easier, they also imperil millions
and ultimately billions of people, who will quickly die and relieve the burden on planetary
resources.
This is why chaos is success for them. There is no plan to save anything except their own
riches. Everything and everyone else can fade away. We spoke of steady-state economies the
other day, and the very rich are now prepared to live in one - their own. New world order is
a red herring anymore. They don't want to rule anything. They just want it all to go
away.
They, the rich, have come up with the obvious, brilliant solution to all recent problems
of this world. We the people are the largest ingredient of these planetary problems.
Obviously, we'll have to go. And as this happens, the rich will exuberantly - with great zest
- increase their own wealth from the very crumbling of former societies.
Hillary Clinton & Nancy Pelosi suggest Putin ORDERED Trump to launch Capitol siege in
unhinged interview
Sad news (for American society), but not surprising.
I can only repeat that democratic elites (although the Republicans are far from ideal either)
are mentally unstable, they have serious brain problems. In the direct/medical sense of the
word. There is no joke or metaphor here.
Their bizarre manic obsession with Putin/Russia is striking. These people have
invented/artificially created for themselves some kind of alternative reality, where Russia
"threatens them", where "Putin wants to undermine world democracy", where "Putin can order
Trump to storm the Capitol" and other such nonsense of a sick imagination. Frankly, I am
somewhat alarmed that the Americans are consistently choosing a leadership suffering from
such a serious mental disorder.
These people created a Big Lie about Russia, believed in it themselves, act (make
political decisions, official statements, etc.) on the basis of this Big Lie, and who can
give a guarantee that one day they will not press the nuclear button when the mass of their
inadequate action (based on a Big Lie) will exceed the critical threshold?
All this wild hysteria with inauguration - an unprecedented 26,000(!) thousand soldiers,
several lines of fences, barbed wire, absolutely insane statements by the Democrats, frenzied
censorship, repression against disloyal - only confirms the illegality of the seizure of
power by the Democrats. They know very well that in reality they would not have won the
elections without falsifications. They have essentially carried out a coup. After the seizure
of power, their regime is unstable and is in danger for several weeks/months. To
strengthen/stabilize their regime, they resort to all these insane actions and statements.
The disagreement of the disloyal must be suppressed in the bud, not to be allowed to grow
into stable resistance.
The very fact that Trump (and millions of his supporters) resisted until the end, refusing
to accept the election results, is, if you will, a moral delegitimization of the power of the
Democrats. Probably, this is one of the reasons for the brutal hatred of the Democrats
towards the outgoing president, expressed in the ridiculous decision on a second impeachment.
And this is the reason for the need for 26,000 soldiers to protect the "elected president"
from essentially his own people.
A good recent
article by a Russian political scientist examines opposition to Trump from the
perspective of the interests of the American oligarchy.
One area Biden's team will be challenged is in defending the use of Depleted Uranium
munitions as the Serbian legal
assault vs NATO begins and as Outlaw US Empire Stormtroopers try to get their own compensation
for exposure to various toxins. Both efforts will hopefully aid other nations in their quest
to hold the Outlaw US Empire accountable for the crimes it committed against many millions of
innocents. One outcome is already certain: Opposition to those millions seeking justice will
serve to further degrade the international standing of the Outlaw US Empire and make it
harder for vassals to justify their adherence to such a monster.
@42 I'm sure Maduro would take dollars.....or gold. Of course buying Venezuelan oil from an
evil brutal socialist dictator would be a major climb down.
The USA doesn't pay for oil or gas. It takes over the mining company, demands the project
be funded by local or national borrowing from USA banks with sovereign guarantees, sells the
product to a separate US company that pays peanuts to the miner and then onsells for a major
markup (transfer pricing). Its called modern day stealing of other countries resources.
Look at the report on keystone that you cited at #39 where
The Canadian province that invested $1.1 billion of taxpayers' money in the controversial
Keystone XL project is now considering the sale of pipe and materials to try to recoup some
funds.
"If the project ends, there would be assets that could be sold, such as enormous
quantities of pipe," Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said in a press conference Monday.
Meanwhile the directors and shareholders got their fat checks and dividends from the
municipal loan funds ;)
The USA will not pay in gold until it is on its knees - it simply will not pay. See how
the USA 'bought' Tik Tok: blatant extortion/theft. The same as was done to Japan's high tech
in the 60's 70's or whenever. Thieves.
In the end, it's all about money. And the US has an army that costs more than can be
plundered from the countries it occupies.
The US military costs about a trillion every year. There are no countries left to be
conquered by the US where that kind of treasure can be looted.
This is why Q Anon came on the scene, sponsored by some real government intel [agency] just enough to
prove it was inside information to mislead you into apathy while they cement power and bide
time to create contingency plans behind the scenes.
"... Q-Anon Bears Striking Resemblance to Bolshevik Psy-Op From 1920s Known As Operation Trust ..."
"... These agents confided in their contacts that the anti-Soviet monarchist movement that they represented was now well established in Soviet Russia, had penetrated into the higher levels of the army, the security service, and even the government, and would in time take power and restore the monarchy ..."
"... The European governments and the emigre leaders should put a stop to anti-Soviet terrorist activities and change their attitude from hostility toward the Soviet regime to one of passive acceptance. ..."
Q-Anon Bears Striking Resemblance to Bolshevik Psy-Op From 1920s Known As Operation Trust --
Information
Liberation
From Anatoliy Golitsyn's "New Lies for Old":
These agents confided in their contacts that the anti-Soviet monarchist movement that they
represented was now well established in Soviet Russia, had penetrated into the higher levels
of the army, the security service, and even the government, and would in time take power and
restore the monarchy
The European governments and the emigre leaders should put a stop to anti-Soviet terrorist
activities and change their attitude from hostility toward the Soviet regime to one of
passive acceptance.
From Wikipedia's article on Operation Trust:
The one Western historian who had limited access to the Trust files, John Costello,
reported that they comprised thirty-seven volumes and were such a bewildering welter of
double-agents, changed code names, and interlocking deception operations with "the complexity
of a symphonic score", that Russian historians from the Intelligence Service had difficulty
separating fact from fantasy.
The role of QAnon in the January 6 MAGAist insurrection is becoming clearer by the day. Most
readers are familiar by now with its unofficial mascot, be-horned "supersoldier" (and perhaps
future WWE Trump tag-team member) Q Shaman . In addition, at
least two of the five dead were QAnon adherents. Even the killed police officer followed QAnon
influencers on Parler.
Meantime, their enigmatic prophet/insider Q hasn't posted in over a month, and only the
fourth dropping since Election Day (compare that to the average of over 130 per month over the
three-year run). How do we reconcile this silence with its mob prominence? I would venture to
say that QAnon goes on because it has disappeared into and become the crowd. QAnon's mission is
over and it has been a successful one at that. But what comes in its wake could be much
worse.
To put it simply, QAnon provided Trump loyalists with a transcendent narrative, moral
certitude, hostile enemy, and unit cohesion. QAnon sought to mobilize a mass to "change the
narrative" in accordance with a
putative military operation . Its redpilling phase (The Great Awakening) is now over, as it
successfully won over a sufficient number of hearts and minds. The Storm is here now, and that
phase of the mission is different, as we'll see below.
The seeds were planted months ago. As a way of avoiding de-platforming and banning by Big
Tech (obviously it didn't work), QAnons camouflaged themselves through codes such as "17" (the
letter Q's place in the English alphabet), or referring to Q as "our favorite anon," "special
insider," and "military insider." More recently, one of their major agitator-influencers contended that there
is no QAnon, only Q and anons.
QAnon as a named community or specific entity might be dead. This doesn't mean the effects
of this three-year old militant Magaist spiritual movement are gone. The collection of
agitators and agitated has mutated, dispersed, and retrenched into something more dangerous: a
networked social body on a death march to civil war. Jan 6 was its opening salvo.
Here are its key accomplishments, coming into relief in the last six months:
*It has expertly constructed an enemy through seemingly grassroots means. QAnon recruited
and integrated its zealots through classic wartime propaganda techniques, stirring the passions
to invent an all-powerful yet ultimately vanquishable enemy. Hardcore adherents will never see
Biden as a legitimate president because he heads the party of bloodthirsty child predators.
Built on top of this frothing moralism, other familiar enemies merge together: Communists,
Satanists, and Foreign Influencers (Soros, Globalists, with special guests the Chinese
government).
*It has generated a network of authoritative interpreters and "decoders" who have
established their credibility among a large following and continue to develop a media ecosystem
despite ongoing efforts at deplatforming them. The restorationist rightwing mirrors the
Russiagate-era integration of intelligence and security officials into MSNBC and CNN. QAnon
adds reactionary insurrectionist layers to the existing " weaponized flak " (what Brian Goss,
extending Chomsky and Herman's propaganda analysis, calls the 21 st century advances
in antagonizing media outlets to shape political opinion). But instead of supplying
professional news outlets with pundits as force multipliers, the QAnon version uses ex-military
intelligence and others to build their own martial media. No longer a pressure operation on
mainstream media, flak severs ties with them, developing autonomous media networks and
agitator-influencers as part of a combat operation (see the peculiar sudden appearance of sites
like WorldView Weekend and
American Periscope
Media).
*More than anything, QAnon has been fomenting war in various spheres. From its inception,
QAnon has rested on the prophecy of an imminent military coup against the deep state. This
coalesced around the Presidential election. In July 2020 we saw QAnon circulate a Digital Soldiers oath in which members
swore fealty to Trump and the Constitution. This campaign converged with the Army for Trump , part of his presidential bid
that involved watching over (translation: meddling with) the voting process. These martial
simulations eventually converged with organized militias and boogaloo militants (whose Hawaiian
shirts also seem to have dissolved to black) to produce a civilian war machine that eagerly
awaits its orders from Trump (and factions of the standing army).
For the two-month period of Nov 3-Jan 6, the influencer-agitators were keeping up morale,
encouraging their followers to "hold the line" in the face of numerous defeats of the Trumpist
legal campaigns. Predictions of (translation: calls for) civil war by
Lin Wood, Michael Flynn, and former Generals led the
charge.
During its three-year run, QAnon helped accelerate this predicted civil war by proliferating
social severances . Fanatics turned against neighbors, lovers, and bio-family members as
they were suspected of being deep state agents, or child traffickers, or both.
But the biggest severance is from the empirical realm. Their feverish fantasies have
hostilely removed the faithful from a shared world, producing an augmented reality with
diminished capacities. QAnon is an exemplary case of propaganda's projections and reversals.
They project their actions (e.g. coup, treason, fascism) onto their enemies. Even their own
Capitol storming has now been officially deemed an Antifa operation.
In a remarkable 180 degree turn from the FEMA concentration camp panics of 1990s New World
Order conspiracy narratives, current "freedom" fighters salivate over the possibility of
martial law and putting citizens in Guantanamo. The liberty-lovers love imagining others
deprived of it -- imprisoned, tortured, and killed. The bottom-line value is the freedom to
exert despotic power, a sovereign delight afforded to their leader as well as to the millions
of mini-tyrants. If such microfascist cruelty can be directed against women and people of
color, all the better.
QAnon also prepared the way for a final troubling dimension to their messianically invoked
war: sacrifice of life. Kyle Rittenhouse defense lawyer, QAnon darling, and 1776 fetishist Lin
Wood regularly foresees death in his calls to action. In early December at a Georgia rally,
Wood shrieked "we will die before we let them steal our freedom!" from the stage. Around the
same time, Stop the Steal campaign organizer Ali Alexander tweeted, "I am willing to give my
life for this fight." Arizona's Republican Party retweeted Alexander's message with a
challenge: "He is. Are you?" At the Jan 6 Save America rally in DC, Rep. Mo Brooks invoked the
blood
sacrifice of American ancestors and then asked if the crowd was willing to do the same.
QAnon has stirred up the necrotic passions in such a way that a significant sector of the
population is ready for martyrdom. One can imagine the future instagram inspo posts now: "Dying
my best death!" They already have some martyrs as a result of Jan 6. How many more are to come?
More to the point, how will their slogan "where we go one we go all" include those taken
against their will?
QAnon, now publicly moribund because it resides secretly in the hearts and hashtag-engorged
profiles of its enthusiasts, has completed its mission's first phase. It has developed a
national social network gearing up for a holy war, ready to become fodder for its operators.
Someday historians will puzzle over this elusive alphabet letter much like we do over the Nike
shoes on Heaven's Gate corpses. But the stakes this time are much higher.
This comes at a time when Americans are now
reporting that they trust corporations more than they trust their own government or media,
when pundits are gleefully proclaiming in The New
York Times that "CEOs have become the fourth branch of government" as they pressure the
entire political system to smoothly install Biden, when the leading contender for the
Department of Justice's Antitrust Division is an Obama holdover who went from the
administration to working for both Amazon and Google, and when Americans are being
paced into accepting an increasing amount of authoritarian changes for their own good.
And this manic celebration and increasing brazenness of corporate power are of course
overlaid atop an unceasing river of human blood as the globe-spanning empire continues to smash
any nation which disobeys it into compliance so as to ensure lasting uncontested planetary
hegemony.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of
Consortium News.
DH Fabian , January 18, 2021 at 12:03
Yes, nervous middle classers pray Joe Biden will be their salvation. The rest of us know
why "business as usual" will continue. The only real difference between Biden and Trump is
that Biden is more likely to start a catastrophic war (as his record clearly indicates).
Jeff Harrison , January 17, 2021 at 23:17
Good points. Since Americans don't see any consequence to their government's outrageous
behavior, everything's outstanding (there are real benefits to those two oceans)! And it will
remain outstanding until someone shoves our bad behavior in our faces (which could really
happen. The Russians and Chinese are arming themselves to defend themselves from the US.
That's a lot cheaper than having to support a major offensive capability) or our brokeness
blows our economy to hell. You might want to read up on what happened to Sparta ..
Looks like Trump is elevated well beyond his standing and abilities. He proved to be mediocre politician who got into
the prepared trap and endangered and then betrayed his supporters.
Notable quotes:
"... Four years ago the Anglo-American deep state concluded that liberal democracy is no longer guaranteed to keep them in power. The new threat comes from populist like Trump. Instead of democracy they decided to turn to totalitarianism. The first step was a totalitarian media regime . ..."
"... LMFAO. Trump is no threat. Listen to his farewell speech . Summary: bend over and salute the flag. ..."
Four years ago the Anglo-American deep state concluded that liberal democracy is no longer
guaranteed to keep them in power. The new threat comes from populist like Trump. Instead of democracy they decided to turn to totalitarianism. The first step was a
totalitarian media regime .
"Unfortunately, not everywhere and not always has this quest for solidarity and joint work
manifested itself during the pandemic. Some of our Western colleagues, primarily the United
States and its closest allies, tried to take advantage of the situation and to ratchet up
pressure, blackmail, ultimatums and illegitimate actions while introducing unilateral
restrictions and other forms of interference in the internal affairs of many countries,
including our closest neighbour Belarus.
"The West unanimously ignored the calls by the UN Secretary General and the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights to suspend, at least for the duration of the pandemic,
unilateral and illegitimate sanctions regarding the supply of medications, food and equipment
needed to fight the virus while Russia was ready to back up this approach. President Putin
put forward a parallel initiative during the G20 summit to create green corridors in the
economy that are free from sanctions and other artificial barriers. Unfortunately, these
sensible appeals - both ours and those of the UN leaders - were left hanging in the air.
"Last year we observed the 75th anniversary of the end of WWII, the birth of the United
Nations and the entry into force of its Charter. Against the backdrop of these anniversaries,
we are very concerned about the continuous arrogant actions of the United States and most of
its Western allies, which are aimed at undermining international security, which is based on
the UN, its Charter and its agencies and replacing the traditional norms and standards of
international law with a "rules-based international order.'"
Lavrov then proceeds to indict the EU for promoting "multilateralism" outside the
framework of the UN in a manner meant to replace the UN with EU diktats: "The EU views the
establishment of specific rules as its exclusive right in the belief that all others must
follow these standards. Examples are many." Thus the EU follows the Outlaw US Empire's lead.
Lavrov then shares his own analysis:
"[T]hese are apprehensions of competition and the understanding that in today's world the
West can no longer dictate its own orders to others as it has over the last five centuries.
History is moving forward, it is developing. This has nothing to do with ideology. This is
just a statement of fact. It is necessary to consider the views of the countries that now
have a much greater weight in the world arena (completely incomparable with that of the
colonial era) and the countries that want to preserve their civilisational identity and that
do not see in the West the ideals for their societies. Tolerance of diversity is another
characteristic that the West is losing very quickly."
And all that is connected to other related developments:
"There are situations where half a dozen people that have created their own technological
empires do not even want to know what rights they have in their own states. They determine
their rights themselves proceeding from so-called corporate standards and completely ignore
the constitutions of their states. We have seen this clearly in the US and this is a source
of deep concern . Much has been said about this recently in television reports and
special analytical materials. We are not pleased by the attempts of the Western elites to
find external enemies to resolve their internal political problems. They find these enemies
in Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela. The list of these countries is well
known. [Yet, Lavrov insists there's no ideology involved, a point of contention I have with
him.]
"We all see the response to the news of Alexey Navalny's return to the Russian Federation.
Carbon-copy comments on this event are coming in one after another. They are full of joy
because they allow Western politicians to think that in this way they can divert public
attention away from the deepest crisis of the liberal development model.
"I am convinced that it is necessary not to seek outside excuses to justify one's own
actions or sidetrack attention from one's deepest problems and crises. On the contrary, it is
essential to play an honest game and look for opportunities to resolve domestic problems via
fair and equitable international cooperation. No one can expect to resolve its own problems
outside multilateral formats any longer."
Unfortunately, they do exhibit just that expectation. Yet, the most insidious, factual
accusation made against the West in Russia's defense is this:
" They just don't provide the facts, which is what decent people always do in order to
justify their discussions ." [My Emphasis]
Thus my very heavy critique of Cynthia Chung who invented facts to fit her ideological
hypothesis.
Lavrov closes his peroration by directly addressing those foreign reporters in the
audience:
"We are interested in addressing problems through a dialogue. However, 'forcing a
closed door' that the West keeps 'under lock and key' is beneath our dignity . Your
governments are well aware of our proposals that we have made repeatedly, starting with the
dialogue on strategic offensive arms, arms control and nonproliferation to interaction on
cybersecurity and non-deployment of weapons in space. There are many such areas. For each of
them, Russia has proposals for establishing honest cooperation on key threats that are common
to all countries around the world instead of using these threats to achieve unilateral
geopolitical advantages by means of unscrupulous competition. President Putin's initiative to
hold a summit of the five UN Security Council permanent members is a manifestation of such a
desire to start a dialogue. All other leaders of the Group of Five responded positively to
this proposal." [My Emphasis]
Lavrov closes by reminding his audience that Russia is hardly alone or isolated, that it's
in combination with over 1/3 of the planet's people; and that instead of an unhealthy
competition, Russia has openly asked all Eurasian nations to join together with its partners
who "share our common philosophy: to say no to confrontation and to address existing
problems on a balance of interests ." [My Emphasis]
In his presser, Lavrov referred to Russia's Main Foreign Policy Results in
2020 , the document available at the link. There's so much to read! Lavrov's response to
the question about Latvia's recent behavior IMO best encapsulates the depth of Western
immorality and blatant double-standards for its behavior. When it comes to the Outlaw U
Empire:
"The most important thing is that our proposals on cybersecurity and on investigations
into our alleged interference in US affairs, as well as on space projects and arms control,
are on the table. As recently as in September 2020, President Putin publicly invited the
United States – not President Trump or anyone else, but the United States as a power
which, we hope, has retained at least a degree of respect for continuity and compliance with
foreign policy agreements – to reboot our relations in the sphere of cybersecurity and
non-intervention into internal affairs of each other."
Russia simply would like to hear an answer, even no is better than being ignored. There's
so much more, particularly on the Freedom of Speech topic where Lavrov again remined people
of their nations's responsibilities under the treaties they've signed and ratified. Lavrov
made the effort to highlight this:
"I have already mentioned the topic of states' obligations and now want to remind you
about them. The US is a member of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Interestingly (however, this issue is often omitted) there have been two international
treaties, one for civil and political rights, and the other the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Having signed the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (it was in the 1960s), the US flatly refused to sign the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as the Convention on the Rights of
the Child [just as it refused to ratify the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which was
the product of Eleanor Roosevelt's doggedly determined efforts].
" This is a refusal to take any responsibilities related to providing adequate quality
of life to its population and solving social and economic problems ." [my Emphasis]
My point is the same as Lavrov's: The Outlaw US Empire has on several occasions not to
sign and ratify a treaty that it's Constitution says it ought to in order to form a more
perfect union and to advance the general Welfare, which is quite telling when we discuss the
reasons for the rise in Populism and the reasons someone like Trump is elevated well beyond
his standing and abilities.
And since no English language media source published anything about Lavrov's very
important presser, how should we rate its Information Hygiene while Pompeo's illegal antics
get reported no matter their outrageousness? Gross failure is my verdict.
As Paco said, reporting on Lavrov's presser would be rather long, and he was quite
correct! I left quite a lot on the cutting room floor.
By 2016 the concept of "liberal democracy," once bright with promise, had dulled into a
neoliberal politics that was neither liberal nor democratic. The Democratic Party's turn toward
market-driven policies, the bipartisan dismantling of the public sphere, the inflight marriage
of Wall Street and Silicon Valley in the cockpit of globalization -- these interventions
constituted the long con of neoliberal governance, which enriched a small minority of Americans
while ravaging most of the rest.
Jackson Lears is Board of Governors Distinguished Professor of History at Rutgers,
Editor in Chief of Raritan, and the author of Rebirth of a Nation: The Making of Modern
America, 1877–1920, among other books. (January 2021)
>>Today, the Trump administration filed an appeal against the UK decision not to
extradite Assange. I must imagine that means that Trump has no intention of pardoning
Assange.
Trump was a desperate "Murica must have the biggest dick" imperialist massively triggered
by the US decline and trying to save the US Empire. Like a rabid dog that is wounded, he
attacked anything that moves, including those who helped him get into power.
Anyone who thought that he will help the likes of Russia or Assange does not understand
the psychology of elite US WASPs.
These people thought that they and the US should rule the world and that they are the
cream of the cream. Anything denying them that would lead to crazed reactions, hysteria,
rabid animalistic behavior, and snarling and gnashing of teeth at anything that moves.
Simply put, their decline caused them to go rabid. A rabid dog attacks anything that
moves, whether friendly or not. Unfortunately for the likes of Russia and Assange.
The Pew surveys have found the same thing: In almost all countries surveyed, other than
Poland, public approval of America's leadership plunged when Trump replaced Obama, and that low
approval stayed down throughout Trump's Presidency.
Of course, Congress was also culpable in all of these Robin-Hood-in-reverse policies (
protecting Wall Street while
abandoning Main Street ), but the ultimate leadership was at the top, and it was a policy
of sheer hypocrisy. Trump has merely been hypocritical in a different way, and espousing a
different set of excuses for his failures.
The purpose of Title XIII ("Pay it Back Act") of the DoddFrank Act, according to Senator
Michael Bennett, was to "rebuild the credibility of our financial system, save taxpayers
billions of dollars, and finally move to end the TARP"12 by "prevent[ing] further government
spending, recaptur[ing] taxpayers' investment in financial institutions, and ensur[ing] that
repaid funds are used for deficit reduction."13 Under Title XIII, TARP funding authorized under
the EESA was reduced from $700 billion to $475 billion.14 Also, no additional TARP funds can be
spent on any program initiated after June 25, 2010; any money repaid to the TARP fund must be
used for deficit reduction only.15 Title XIII amends the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of
2008. The Treasury must allocate the sale of obligations and securities, as well as fees paid
by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Federal Home Loan Banks to the General Fund of the Treasury
("General Fund").16 The funds must be "dedicated for the sole purpose of deficit reduction" and
"prohibited from use as an offset for other spending increases or revenue reductions."17
Similarly, TARP funds provided to a state under ARRA and rejected by the Governor or by the
State legislature, or funds withdrawn or recaptured by the head of an executive agency not
obligated by a State or local government, will be rescinded and deposited in the General
Fund.18 Once in the General Fund, the money will be "dedicated for the sole purpose of deficit
reduction" and "prohibited from use as an offset for other spending increases or revenue
reductions."19 Section 1306 further provides that discretionary ARRA appropriations that have
not been obligated as of December 31, 2010 shall also be rescinded and deposited in the General
Fund for the sole purpose of deficit reduction.
Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the massive federal bank bailout
program, or TARP, is stepping down from his post in March. He says the Obama administration's
program to prevent foreclosures is broken, and that many of the people it's supposed to be
helping are now "in a far worse place than they would have been had this program not
existed."
The megabanks had gotten their federal help, but foreclosures and boarded-up windows and
storefronts were appearing everywhere and were lowering the surrounding property-values, so
that both lower and middle-class real estate were getting progressively worse and more
run-down. The TARP Bailout Program saved the
megabanks but not their victims; and here is why, as explained even by a conservative,
pro-corporate, source:
The Problem With the TARP Program for Homeowners
Why didn't more people take advantage of the HAMP and HARP programs? This would have
pumped billions into the economy and helped millions of homeowners avoid foreclosure.
The problem was the banks. They cherry-picked applicants and refused to consider those
with lower equity.Banks were too wary of riskto allow the programs to work.
These were the same banks, who just a few years before, were giving out loans to anyone
because they were making money on the investments that were created from the loans.
There was no risk to the banks, as all these loans were guaranteed byFannie Mae or
Freddie Mac. Banks didn't want to be bothered with the paperwork involved with
homeowners who hadmortgage insurance.
The admirers of President Trump are equally deceived -- no less deceived than the admirers
of Obama had been. Trump promised to "drain the swamp" and did none of that .
In foreign policies, Trump continued Obama's wars (including aggressive sanctions), such as
against Syria, and against Russia, and against Iraq, and intensified Obama's war against China
and against Iran and against Venezuela -- all of these being against countries that had never
threatened to invade the U.S., and so all of them were (and are ) actually wars of
aggression, not of defense.
Americans are profoundly deceived to accept such people as leaders, instead of to reject
them as liars and as traitors.
Most Americans -- and many people throughout the world -- prefer one or the other of those
two American Presidents on the basis only of political prejudices, but the actual differences
between Obama and Trump were more stylistic than substantive .
President Trump, at the end of his Presidency, is polling, among the American public,
both as one of the worst Presidents ever and as one of the best Presidents ever , and this
is a reflection of the astoundingly sharp partisan divide now between Democrats and
Republicans. Pathetically few Americans recognize that both of the two Parties represent only the billionaires -- not the
American people . This pervasive miscomprehension, by the public, results because the
billionaires control not only the Government, they also control the press -- they shape the
population's perceptions, so as to make this aristocracy (America's billionaires) acceptable to
the public, directing the public's rage to be against the opposite Party, instead of against
the billionaires themselves , who
actually control the country .
Consequently, Democratic Party voters think that that Party is their Party, and
Republican Party voters think that that Party is their Party. However, in reality, both
Parties are controlled by America's hundreds of billionaires -- not by the Party's
voters. Obama represented the Democratic Party's billionaires, and Trump represented the
Republican Party's billionaires (other than the ones who, in 2020, disliked Trump so much that
they donated instead to the Biden campaign or to one of its PACs). This is a Government of the
people, by the billionaires, and for the billionaires. It's no democracy , whatsoever, and the U.S.
Constitution has been covered-over, by the U.S. aristocracy's Supreme Court's rulings, to
become, by now, merely a parchment document, which 'means' whatever the (majority of) the U.S.
aristocracy's Supreme Court say that it means. Although those jurists are paid by the
public, they don't represent America's Founders, and they don't represent the American people.
They represent -- and protect the interests of -- America's billionaires. They were chosen
because that is what they had been doing before they had been chosen. If they hadn't been doing
this, they wouldn't have been chosen. That's today's American reality.
46 Follow RT on Outgoing US
President Donald Trump has delivered his "parting gift" to the Moscow-led Nord Stream 2 gas
pipeline, with newly announced sanctions targeting a pipe-laying vessel and companies involved
in the multinational project.
The specialist ship concerned, named, 'Fortuna,' and oil tanker 'Maksim Gorky', as well as
two Russian firms, KVT-Rus and Rustanker, were blacklisted on Tuesday under CAATSA (Countering
America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) as part of Washington's economic war on Moscow.
The same legislation had been previously used by the US to target numerous Russian officials
and enterprises.
Russian energy giant Gazprom warned its investors earlier on Tuesday that Nord Stream 2
could be suspended or even canceled if more US restrictions are introduced.
However, Moscow has assured its partners that it intends to complete the project despite
"harsh pressure on the part of Washington," according to Kremlin press secretary Dmitry
Peskov. Reacting to the new package of sanctions on Tuesday, Peskov called them
"unlawful."
Meanwhile, the EU said it is in no rush to join the Washington-led sanction war on Nord
Stream 2. EU foreign affairs chief, Josep Borrell, said that the bloc is not going to resist
the construction of the project.
"Because we're talking about a private project, we can't hamper the operations of those
companies if the German government agrees to it," Borrell said Tuesday.
Nord Stream 2 is an offshore gas pipeline, linking Russia and Germany with aim of providing
cheaper energy to Central European customers. Under the agreement between Moscow and Berlin, it
was to be launched in mid-2020, but the construction has been delayed due to strong opposition
from Washington.
The US, which is hoping to sell its Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) to Europe, has hit the
project with several rounds of sanctions over scarcely credible claims that it could undermine
European energy security. Critics say the real intent is to force EU members to buy from
American companies.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
46 Follow RT on
Trends:
Fatback33 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:20 AM
The group that owns Washington makes the foreign policy. That policy is not for the benefit
of the people.
DukeLeo Fatback33 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:06 PM
That is correct. The private banks and corporations in the US are very upset about Nord
Stream - 2, as they want Europe to buy US gas at double price. Washington thus introduces
additional political gangsterism in the shape of new unilateral sanctions which have no merit
in international law.
noremedy 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:22 AM
Is the U.S. so stupid that they do not realize that they are isolating themselves? Russia has
developed SPFS, China CIPS, together with Iran, China and Russia are further developing a
payment transfer system. Once in place and functioning this system will replace the western
SWIFT system for international payment transfers. It will be the death knell for the US
dollar. 327 million Americans are no match for the rest of the billions of the world's
population. The next decade will see the total debasement of the US monetary system and the
fall from power of the decaying and crumbling in every way U.S.A.
Hanonymouse noremedy 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:37 PM
They don't care. They have the most advanced military in the world. Might makes right, even
today.
Shelbouy 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:25 PM
Russia currently supplies over 50% of the natural gas consumed by The EU. Germany and Italy
are the largest importers of Russian natural gas. What is the issue of sanctions stemming
from and why are the Americans doing this? A no brainer question I suppose. It's to make more
money than the other supplier, and exert political pressure and demand obedience from its
lackey. Germany.
David R. Evans Shelbouy 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:58 PM
Russia and Iran challenge perpetual US wars for Israel's Oded Yinon Plan. Washington is
Israel-controlled territory.
Jewel Gyn 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:34 AM
Sanctions work both ways. With the outgoing Trump administration desperately laying mines for
Biden, we await how sleepy Joe is going to mend strayed ties with EU.
Count_Cash 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:20 AM
The US mafia state continues with the same practices. The dog is barking but the caravan is
going. The counter productiveness of sanctions always shows through in the end! I am sure
with active efforts of Germany and Russia against US mafia oppression that a blowback will be
felt by the US over time!
Dachaguy 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:24 AM
This is an act of war against Germany. NATO should respond and act against the aggressor,
America.
xyz47 Dachaguy 42 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:20 PM
NATO is run by the US...
lovethy Dachaguy 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:04 PM
NATO has no separate existence. It's the USA's arm of aggression, suppression and domination.
Germany after WWII is an occupied country of USA. Thousand of armed personnel stationed in
Germany enforcing that occupation.
Chaz Dadkhah 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:19 PM
Further proof that Trump is no friend of Russia and is in a rush to punish them while he
still has power. If it was the swamp telling him to do that, like his supporters suggest,
then they would have waited till their man Biden came in to power in less than 24 hours to do
it. Wake up!
Mac Kio 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:34 PM
USA hates fair competition. USA ignores all WTO rules.
Russkiy09 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:33 PM
By whining and not completing in the face of US, Russia is losing credibility. They should
not have delayed to mobilize the pipe laying vessel and other equipment for one whole year.
They should have mobilized in three months and finished by now. Same happens when Jewtin does
not shoot down Zio air force bombing Syria everyday. But best option should have been to tell
European vassals that "if you can, take our gas. But we will charge the highest amount and
sell as much as we want, exclude Russophobic Baltic countries and Poland and neo-vassal
Ukraine. Pay us not in your ponzi paper money but real goods and services or precious metals
or other commodities or our own currency Ruble." I so wish I could be the President of
Russia. Russians deserve to be as wealthy as the Swiss or SIngapore etc., not what they are
getting. Their leaders should stand up for their interest. And stop empowering the greedy
merchantalist Chinese and brotherhood Erdogan.
BlackIntel 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:27 PM
America i captured by private interest; this project threatens American private companies
hence the government is forced to protect capitalism. This is illegal
Ohhho 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:15 PM
That project was a mistake from the start: Russia should distance itself from the Evil
empire, EU included! Stop wasting time and resources on trying to please the haters and
keeping them more competitive with cheaper Russian natural gas: focus on real partners and
potential allies elsewhere!
butterfly123 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:58 PM
I have said it before that part of the problem is at the door of the policy-makers and
politicians in Russia. Pipeline project didn't spring up in the minds of politicians in
Russia one morning, presumably. There should have been foresight, detailed planning, and
opportunity creation for firms in Russia to acquire the skill-set and resources to advance
this project. Not doing so has come to bite Russia hard and painful. Lessons learnt I hope Mr
President!
jakro 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:37 AM
Good news. The swamp is getting deeper and bigger.
hermaflorissen 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:49 AM
Trump finally severed my expectations for the past 4 years. He should indeed perish.
ariadnatheo 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:06 PM
That is one Trump measure that will not be overturned by the Senile One. They will need to
amplify the RussiaRussiaRussia barking and scratching to divert attention from their dealings
with China
Neville52 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:01 PM
Its time the other nations of the world turned their backs on the US. Its too risky if you
are an international corporation to suddenly have large portions of your income cancelled due
to some crazy politician in the US
5th Eye 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:03 PM
From empire to the collapse of empire, US follows UK to the letters. Soon it will be
irrelevant. The only thing that remains for UK is the language. Probably hotdog for the US.
VonnDuff1 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:10 PM
The USA Congress and its corrupt foreign policy dictates work to the detriment of Europe and
Russia, while providing no tangible benefits to US states or citizens. So globalist demands
wrapped in the stars & stripes, should be laughed at, by all freedom loving nations.
Below is a list of which House Republicans voted to impeach Trump on Wednesday.
Rep. John Katko
(N.Y.) : "To allow the President of the United States to incite this attack without
consequence is a direct threat to the future of our democracy. For that reason, I cannot
sit by without taking action. I will vote to impeach this President."
Rep. Liz
Cheney (Wyo.) : " There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United
States of his office and his oath to the Constitution. I will vote to impeach the
President. "
Rep. Adam
Kinzinger (Ill.) : "There is no doubt in my mind that the President of the United
States broke his oath of office and incited this insurrection I will vote in favor of
impeachment."
Rep. Fred Upton
(Mich.) : "Enough is enough. The Congress must hold President Trump to account and send
a clear message that our country cannot and will not tolerate any effort by any President
to impede the peaceful transfer of power from one President to the next. Thus, I will vote
to impeach."
Rep. Dan Newhouse
(Wash.) : "A vote against this impeachment is a vote to validate the unacceptable
violence we witnessed in our nation's capital. ... I will vote yes on the articles of
impeachment."
Rep.
Peter Meijer (Mich.) : "With the facts at hand, I believe the article of impeachment to
be accurate. The President betrayed his oath of office by seeking to undermine our
constitutional process, and he bears responsibility for inciting the violent acts of
insurrection last week."
Rep. Anthony Gonzalez
(Ohio) : "When I consider the full scope of events leading up to January 6th including
the President's lack of response as the United States Capitol was under attack, I am
compelled to support impeachment."
Rep. Tom Rice (S.C.) : "I
have backed this President through thick and thin for four years. I campaigned for him and
voted for him twice. But, this utter failure is inexcusable."
Rep. David Valadao
(Calif.) : "Based on the facts before me, I have to go with my gut and vote my
conscience. I voted to impeach President Trump. His inciting rhetoric was un-American,
abhorrent, and absolutely an impeachable offense. It's time to put country over
politics."
@My SIMPLE Pseudonymic Handle ations are either dissolved or they merge with the
artificial ones, but always in subordinate roles.
Basically, instead of going out to find the radicals you attract them to you. Now you know
where they all are and what they are doing. Even better, you are now in command of those very
radicalized individuals who want to take you down. Sweet! If you need to thin their ranks you
just hatch a fake plot to do whatever and send the ones to die into a kill zone that your
military has set up somewhere. Not only do you get rid of some radicals but you build a
reputation of omniscience and invulnerability around your military. Alternatively you can
steer two or more of your controlled radical organizations into conflict with each other,
killing more radicals and building the reputation of your opponents as being a bunch of
idiots who kill their own.
@lloyd s been given "Get Out Of Jail Free Cards" for violence before and he is out of jail
now – – others (fools) who followed him into the Capitol (which he is on tape
inside urging them to "burn it down") have NO Bail and face decades in Prison (Buffalo Horn
head guy) -- the FBI is nothing but a NWO KGB -- they "infiltrate" or set up all the "violence"
we see to use it so our Rights can be stripped away as we are now seeing and have since the 911
False Flag which they also knew about, allowed, and covered up -- it is all theater to be used
to destroy us for the NWO Globalist Agenda:
https://national-justice.com/black-lives-matter-organizer-seen-entering-capitol-building-crowd-likely-fbi-agent-provocateur
So you may be on to something. He may be the key witness in the Ashli case. He was certainly
most seriously shocked by it.
This is Sullivan's documentary. The murder scene is real. It is extremely difficult to
watch, but occurs near the end, at about 1:11. The rest is incredibly good footage. Every
second person in the protest was taking pics. No one had weapons. The man who broke the window
for Ashli to climb through was probably the same one who snuck down the stairs to change his
clothes right after, so most probably Antifa.
"... Although there may not be tanks on the streets and a dictator inciting crowds from his bully pulpit, the end result has been pretty much the same. ..."
"... it is important to put aside the notion that fascism is a purely right-wing phenomenon, complete with a chauvinistic demagogue haranguing a frenzied crowd. The new dictator on the block is not some fanatical Fuhrer, but rather Silicon Valley, the fountainhead of technological advancement and the formidable fortress of liberal ideology. In other words, fascism is an ideology that moves fluidly along the political spectrum, although some say the ideology grew out of European progressivism. ..."
"... Liberal Fascism ..."
"... Many years earlier, the late political theorist Hannah Arendt described the Nazi Party (which stands for, lest we forget, the 'National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party') as nothing more than "the breakdown of all German and European traditions, the good as well as the bad basing itself on the intoxication of destruction as an actual experience." That sounds like a pretty accurate description of the cancel culture mentality that has now gripped the 'progressive' left with an almost demonic possession. ..."
"... We are living Orwell's 1984. Free-speech no longer exists in America. It died with big tech and what's left is only there for a chosen few. ..."
"... Big Tech began its slide towards marked fascist tendencies thanks to one of the greatest hoaxes ever foisted upon the American public, known as Russiagate. One after another, Silicon Valley overlords were called before Congressional committees to explain "how and why Russian operatives were given free rein to tamper with 2016 U.S. election," in favor of the populist Donald Trump, no less. ..."
"... Strangely, violence has never shocked the progressive left, so long as the violence supported its agenda. ..."
"... While all forms of 'cancel culture' (which seems to be part of a move to build American society along the lines of the Chinese 'social credit system,' which rewards those who toe the party line, and punishes those who fall out of favor) are egregious and counterintuitive to American values, perhaps the most astonishing was the cancellation of Republican Senator Josh Hawley's book deal with Simon and Shuster. ..."
"... In conclusion, it would be a huge mistake for the Democrats to believe that they are safe from the same sort of corporate and government behavior that has now dramatically silenced the conservative voice across the nation. The United States has entered dangerous unchartered waters, and by all indications it would appear that the American people have inherited a 'soft' form of fascism. ..."
Although there may not be tanks on the streets and a dictator inciting crowds from his
bully pulpit, the end result has been pretty much the same.
Most Americans can probably still remember a time when U.S. companies were in business with
one goal in mind – providing a product or service for profit. It was a noble idea, the
bedrock of capitalism, in which everyone stood to gain in the process.
Today, the monopolistic powers now enjoyed by a handful of mighty corporations, which are no
longer shy about declaring their political bent, have tempted them to wade into the deep end of
the political pool with deleterious effects on democracy. Indeed, corporate power wedded to
government is nothing less than fascism.
In presenting such a case, it is important to put aside the notion that fascism is a
purely right-wing phenomenon, complete with a chauvinistic demagogue haranguing a frenzied
crowd. The new dictator on the block is not some fanatical Fuhrer, but rather Silicon Valley,
the fountainhead of technological advancement and the formidable fortress of liberal ideology.
In other words, fascism is an ideology that moves fluidly along the political spectrum,
although some say the ideology grew out of European progressivism.
Jonah Goldberg argued in his 2008 book, Liberal Fascism , that even before World
War II "fascism was widely viewed as a progressive social movement with many liberal and
left-wing adherents in Europe and the United States." Many years earlier, the late
political theorist Hannah Arendt described the Nazi Party (which stands for, lest we forget,
the 'National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party') as nothing more than "the breakdown of all
German and European traditions, the good as well as the bad basing itself on the intoxication
of destruction as an actual experience." That sounds like a pretty accurate description of the
cancel culture mentality that has now gripped the 'progressive' left with an almost demonic
possession.
It should be shocking to Republicans and Democrats alike that the Commander-in-Chief of the
United States is banished from all of the main social media platforms – Twitter, Facebook
and YouTube – denying him the ability to communicate with his 75 million constituents, or
one half of the electorate. This is real and unprecedented violence being committed against the
body politic and far more worrisome than any breach of federal property, as loathsome as such
an act may be.
The Capitol building is, after all, ultimately a mere symbol of our freedoms and liberties,
whereas the rights laid down in the U.S. Constitution – the First Amendment not least of
all – are fragile and coming under sustained assault every single day. Why does the left
refuse to show the same concern for an aging piece of parchment, arguably the greatest
political document ever written, as it does for a piece of architecture? The answer to that
riddle is becoming increasingly obvious.
We are living Orwell's 1984. Free-speech no longer exists in America. It died with big
tech and what's left is only there for a chosen few.
Big Tech began its slide towards marked fascist tendencies thanks to one of the greatest
hoaxes ever foisted upon the American public, known as Russiagate. One after another, Silicon
Valley overlords were called before Congressional committees to
explain "how and why Russian operatives were given free rein to tamper with 2016 U.S.
election," in favor of the populist Donald Trump, no less.
After this made for television 'dressing down', the Big Tech executives at Google, Facebook,
Twitter and others got busy reconfiguring their software algorithms in such a way that
thousands of internet creators suddenly lost not only a lifetime of hard work and their
sustenance, but their voice as well. This is the moment that Big Tech and the Democrats began
to really march in lockstep. A new dark age of 'McCarthyism' had settled upon the nation, which
gave the left unlimited powers for blocking user accounts they deemed "suspicious," which meant
anyone on the right. Now, getting 'shadow banned,' demonetized and outright banned from these
platforms has become the new dystopian reality for those with a conservative message to convey.
And the fact that the story of 'Russian collusion' was finally exposed as a dirty little lie
did nothing to loosen the corporate screws.
Incidentally, as a very large footnote to this story, Big Tech and Big Business have not
dished out the same amount of medieval-style punishment to other violators of the public peace.
The most obvious example comes courtesy of Black Lives Matter, the Soros-funded social-justice
movement that has wreaked havoc across a broad swath of the heartland following the death of
George Floyd during an arrest by a white police officer.
Both BLM and Trump supporters believe they have a very large grudge to bear. The former
believes they are being unfairly targeted by police due to the color of their skin, while the
latter believes they are not getting fair treatment by the mainstream media due to 'Trump
Derangement Syndrome', and possibly also due in part to their skin color. But at this point the
similarities between BLM and Trump voters come to a screeching halt.
Taking it as gospel that America suffers from 'systemic racism' (it doesn't, although that
is not to say that pockets of racism against all colors and creeds doesn't exist), dozens of
corporations jumped on the woke bandwagon to express their support for Black Lives Matter at
the very same time the latter's members were looting and burning neighborhoods across the
nation. Strangely, violence has never shocked the progressive left, so long as the violence
supported its agenda.
Here are just some of the ways the corporate world responded to charges that America was a
racist cauldron ready to blow, as reported by The Washington Post: "Jamie Dimon, chief
executive of JPMorgan Chase, knelt
alongside employees during his visit to a Chase branch. Bank of America
pledged $1 billion to fight racial inequality in America. Tech companies have
invested big dollars in Black Lives Matter, the Center for Policing Equity, Colin
Kaepernick's Know Your Rights Camp and other entities engaged in racial justice efforts " And
the list goes on and on.
Of course, private corporations are free to express their solidarity with whatever group
they wish. The problem, however, is that these monopolistic monstrosities have an overwhelming
tendency to pledge allegiance to liberal, progressive values, as opposed to maybe steering
clear of politics altogether. Nowhere was Corporate America's political agenda more obvious
than in the aftermath of the siege of the Capitol building on January 6, which led to the death
of five people.
Corporate America missed a very good opportunity to keep quiet and remain neutral with
regards to an issue of incredible partisan significance. Instead, it unleashed a salvo of
attacks on Trump supporters, even denying them access to basic services.
Aside from the most obvious and alarming 'disappearing act,' that of POTUS being removed
from the major social media platforms, were countless lesser names caught up in the
'purge.'
One such person is conservative commentator and former baseball star Curt Schilling, who
says that AIG terminated his insurance policy over his "social media profile," which was
sympathetic to Donald Trump,
according to Summit News.
"We will be just fine, but wanted to let Americans know that @AIGinsurance canceled our
insurance due to my "Social Media profile," tweeted Schilling.
"The agent told us it was a decision made by and with their PR department in conjunction
with management," he added.
While all forms of 'cancel culture' (which seems to be part of a move to build American
society along the lines of the Chinese 'social credit system,' which rewards those who toe the
party line, and punishes those who fall out of favor) are egregious and counterintuitive to
American values, perhaps the most astonishing was the cancellation of Republican Senator Josh
Hawley's book deal with Simon and Shuster.
"We did not come to this decision lightly," Simon & Schuster said in a statement over
Twitter. "As a publisher it will always be our mission to amplify a variety of voices and
viewpoints: At the same time we take seriously our larger public responsibility as citizens,
and cannot support Senator Hawley after his role in what became a dangerous threat."
The so-called "threat" was a photograph of Hawley raising a fist to the crowd that had
assembled outside of the Capitol building before it had breached the security perimeter. It
seems that corporations may now serve as judge, jury and executioner when it comes to how
Americans behave in public. Is it a crime that Hawley acknowledged a crowd of supporters who
were at the time behind the gates of the Capitol building? Apparently it is.
By the way, the name of the Hawley's book? 'The Tyranny of Big Tech'. How's that for
irony?
In conclusion, it would be a huge mistake for the Democrats to believe that they are
safe from the same sort of corporate and government behavior that has now dramatically silenced
the conservative voice across the nation. The United States has entered dangerous unchartered
waters, and by all indications it would appear that the American people have inherited a 'soft'
form of fascism.
Although there may not be troops and tanks on the streets and a dictator inciting crowds
from his bully pulpit, the end result has been pretty much the same: the brutal elimination of
one half of the American population from all of the due protections provided by the U.S.
Constitution due to an unholy alliance between corporate and government power, which is the
very definition of fascism. Democrats, you may very well be next, so enjoy your victory while
you still can.
It seems political appointees have transformed Hoover's FBI into an operation engaged in
the manufacture of "boogeyman" groups to sustain budgets and political narritaves.
Meanwhile BLM and Antifa did hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage this
summer, COVID-19 gets released (by whom?), and presidential elections get millions of
fraudulent votes in plain sight. But dont worry, the fibs have two drunken, meth-addled
hillbillys at a trailer park under surveillance and might get a collar if they can get the
pair to illegally obtain a used swiss army knife or something similar.
Well, it's like they say, in the Internet, if you're sex chatting with a man, it's
probably a man. If if you're sex chatting with a woman, it's probably also a man. And if
you're sex chatting with a child or teen, it's probably the FBI.
Well, here it's the same thing. If you're chatting with a "Nazi" or a "terrorist", it's
probably the FBI.
Federal Bureau of Instigation. That's all it is. The modern KKK is their thing, and I
often thought the Nazis is as well.. Adding the Satanic to the recipe is probably an inside
joke since they think we are all stupid.
In my personal experience, the Federal Bureau of Investigation will protect an individual,
who livestreams child pornography from a Third World Country in order to protect Wall Street
millionaires.
Do you honestly believe that Jeffrey Epstein was not protected by the FBI?
In the reality the USA is not falling apart. It is neoliberalism that is falling apart and
this is just how common people feel during the collapse of neliberalism.
"79% of Americans think the US is falling apart" those not accounted for are possibly
homeless or illiterate and don't have the opportunity of putting their view forward.
RTaccount 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:22 PM
There will be no peace, no unity, and no prosperity. And there shouldn't be.
TheFishh RTaccount 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:38 PM
The US regimes past and present have worn out their bag of tricks. A magician is a con-man.
And the only way they can entertain and spellbind the crowd with their routines is if
everyone just ignores the sleight of hand. But people are starting to call the US out for the
tricks it is pulling, and that's where the magician's career ends.
SJMan333 23 hours ago 16 Jan, 2021 01:02 AM
America as a whole is now reaping the fruits of its decades of exceptionalism complex.
Through its propaganda machine, Americans as individuals and collectively as a society, have
been brainwashed into believing that laws, rules and basic human decency do not apply to
themselves. These are only sweetened poisons for them to shove down the throats of other
lesser countries, especially those in Africa, Latin America, Middle East and Asia ((bluntly
put, non-white countries)) when it suited America's global resource thievery and daylight
wealth grabbing. Habitualized into bullying every other countries with no resistance,
Americans are now showing their ugly faces on each other. The same exceptionalism delusion
"the laws apply to you, not me'' is driving every American (except the colored Americans
probably) to blame all the ills of the country on everyone else except himself. Nancy Pelosi
advocated total lock-down but treated herself to a total grooming in a hair saloon is just
one example. For the sins it has committed over the decades, I guess the time is right for
USA to have a dose of its own medicine. Except in this case, America never thought it
necessary to develop an antidote.
Artemesia, This seems far-fetched but perhaps these troop deployments are coming at President
Trump's direction but the opposition is "owning" them with the help of the MSM. We all know
good and damn well that Trump supporters aren't going to storm the capital nor the state
capitals but Antifa/BLM might.
Love him or hate him, Alex Jones has an intriguing article up today that compares the Q
movement to an operation the Bolsheviks ran (pretending to be dissident military that gave
hope to the regular folks that they were going to be able to eventually defeat the
Bolshies).
"... "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself." ..."
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason
from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner
openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling
through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself."
Marcus Tullius Cicero
The Transition Integrity Project (TIP) is a shadowy group of government, military and media
elites who have concocted a plan to spread mayhem and disinformation following the November 3
presidential elections. The strategy takes advantage of the presumed delay in determining the
winner of the upcoming election. (due to the deluge of mail-in votes.) The interim period is
expected to intensify partisan warfare creating the perfect environment for disseminating
propaganda and inciting street violence. The leaders of TIP believe that a mass mobilization
will help them to achieve what Russiagate could not, that is, the removal Donald Trump via an
illicit coup conjured up by behind-the-scenes powerbrokers and their Democrat allies. Here's a
little more background from an article by Chris Farrell at the Gatestone Institute:
"In one of the greatest public disinformation campaigns in American history -- the Left
and their NeverTrumper allies (under the nom de guerre: "Transition Integrity Project")
released a 22-page report in August 2020 "war gaming" four election crisis scenarios: .The
outcome of each TIP scenario results in street violence and political impasse.
Is it possible that the leadership of the American Left, along with their NeverTrumper
allies, are busy talking themselves into advocating and promoting street violence as a
response to a presidential election?
The answer is: Yes . expect violence in the aftermath of the election, because now
that is the new 'normal." (" How to Steal an
Election",Gatestone Institute )
Farrell is right. As we can see from the many articles that have recently popped up in the
media, the American people are being prepared for a contested election that will fuel public
anxiety and revolt. This all fits with the overall strategy of the TIP. Selected journalists
will be used to provide bits of information that serve the interests of the group while the
people will be told to expect a long and drawn-out constitutional crisis. Meanwhile, the media,
the Democrat leadership, trusted elites and elements in the Intelligence Community will put
pressure on Trump to step down while firing up their political base to take to the streets.
TIP's 22-page manifesto makes it clear that mass mobilization will be key to any electoral
victory. Here's an excerpt from the text:
"A show of numbers in the streets-and actions in the streets-may be decisive factors in
determining what the public perceives as a just and legitimate outcome." (
"Preventing a Disrupted Presidential Election and Transition"The Transition
Integrity Project )
In other words, the authors fully support demonstrations and political upheaval to achieve
their goal of removing Trump. Clearly, this scorched earth approach did not originate with Joe
Biden, but with the cynical and bloodthirsty puppetmasters who operate behind the curtain and
who will do anything to advance their agenda.
This is a full-blown color revolution authored and supported by the same oligarchs and
deep-state honchoes that have opposed Trump from the very beginning. They're not going to back
down or call off the dogs until the job is done and Trump is gone. And when the dust settles,
Trump will likely be charged, tried, sentenced and imprisoned. His fortune will be seized, his
family will be financially ruined, and his closest advisors and allies will be prosecuted on
fabricated charges. There's not going to be a "graceful transition" of power if Trump loses. He
will face the full wrath of the scheming mandarins he has frustrated for the last 4 years.
These are the men who applauded when Saddam and Ghaddafi were savagely butchered. Will Trump
face the same fate as them?
Trump has less than two months to rally his supporters, draw attention to the conspiracy
that has is presently underway, and figure out a way to defend himself against the coup
plotters. If he is unable to derail the impending junta, his goose is cooked.
It's worth noting, that the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) has no legal authority to
meddle in the upcoming election. They were not appointed by any congressional committee nor did
any government entity approve their intrusive activities. This is entirely a "lone wolf"
operation designed to exploit loopholes in campaign laws in order to undermine public
confidence in our elections and to express their unbridled hostility towards Donald Trump. That
said, there analysis will probably influence those who share their views. In the first page of
their "Executive Summary" they say:
"We assess with a high degree of likelihood that November's elections will be marked by a
chaotic legal and political landscape. We also assess that the President Trump is likely
to contest the result by both legal and extra-legal means, in an attempt to hold onto
power. "
(Ibid )
This short statement provides the basic justification for the group's existence. It presents
the participants as impartial observers performing their civic duty by objectively analyzing
exercises (war games?) that indicate that Trump will challenge the election results in a
desperate attempt to hold on to power. Not surprisingly, the group provides no evidence that
the president would react the way they think he would. In fact, their hypothesis seems
extremely far-fetched given the fact that Trump has no militia, no private army, and very few
allies among the political class, the Intelligence Community, the FBI, the military or the deep
state. Who exactly does the group think would help Trump hold on to power: Bill Barr, Larry
Kudlow, Melania??
There is nothing "impartial" about this analysis. It is partisan gibberish aimed at
discrediting Trump while creating a pretext for launching a coup against him. Here is another
sample of TIP's "objective analysis" from page 1 of the manuscript:
"The Transition Integrity Project (TIP) was launched in late 2019 out of concern that the
Trump Administration may seek to manipulate, ignore, undermine or disrupt the 2020
presidential election and transition process. TIP takes no position on how Americans
should cast their votes, or on the likely winner of the upcoming election; either major
party candidate could prevail at the polls in November without resorting to "dirty tricks."
However, the administration of President Donald Trump has steadily undermined core norms
of democracy and the rule of law and embraced numerous corrupt and authoritarian
practices. This presents a profound challenge for those –from either party
–who are committed to ensuring free and fair elections, peaceful transitions of power,
and stable administrative continuity in the United States."
(Ibid )
Got that? In other words (to paraphrase) "Trump is a corrupt dictator who hates democracy
and the rule of law, but that is just our unbiased opinion. Please, don't let that influence
your vote. We just want to make sure the election goes smoothly."
As we noted, the hatred for Trump permeates the entire 22-page document and that, in turn,
undermines the credibility of the author to portray his project as an impartial examination of
potential problems in the upcoming election. There is nothing evenhanded in the approach to
these issues or in the remedies that are recommended. This is a partisan project concocted by
malicious elites who despise Trump and who plan to remove him from office by hook or crook.
So, do we know who the leaders of this (TIP) group are?
Well, we know who their two main spokesmen are: Rosa Brooks– Georgetown law professor
and co-founder of the Transition Integrity Project, and Ret. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson,
Distinguished Adjunct Professor of Government and Public Policy at the College of William &
Mary, and chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to an article by
Whitney Webb:
" (Rosa) Brooks was an advisor to the Pentagon and the Hillary Clinton-led State
Department during the Obama administration. She was also previously the general counsel to
the President of the Open Society Institute, part of the Open Society Foundations (OSF), a
controversial organization funded by billionaire George Soros.Zoe Hudson, who is
TIP's director, is also a former top figure at OSF, serving as senior policy analyst and
liaison between the foundations and the U.S. government for 11 years .
OSF ties to the TIP are a red flag for a number of reasons, namely due to the fact that
OSF and other Soros-funded organizations played a critical role in fomenting so-called
"color revolutions" to overthrow non-aligned governments, particularly during the Obama
administration. Examples of OSF's ties to these manufactured "revolutions" include Ukraine in
2014 and the "Arab Spring" ..
In addition to her ties to the Obama administration and OSF, Brooks is currently a scholar
at West Point's Modern War Institute, where she focuses on "the relationship between the
military and domestic policing" and also Georgetown's Innovative Policing Program. She is
a currently a key player in the documented OSF-led push to "capitalize" off of legitimate
calls for police reform to justify the creation of a federalized police force under the guise
of defunding and/or eliminating local police departments. Brooks' interest in the
"blurring line" between military and police is notable given her past advocacy of a military
coup to remove Trump from office and the TIP's subsequent conclusion that the military "may"
have to step in if Trump manages to win the 2020 election, per the group's "war games"
described above.
Brooks is also a senior fellow at the think tank New America . New America's
mission statement notes that the organization is focused on "honestly confronting the
challenges caused by rapid technological and social change, and seizing the opportunities
those changes create." It is largely funded by Silicon Valley billionaires, including Bill
Gates (Microsoft), Eric Schmidt (Google), Reid Hoffman (LinkedIn), Jeffrey Skoll and Pierre
Omidyar (eBay) . In addition, it has received millions directly from the U.S. State
Department to research "ranking digital rights." Notably, of these funders, Reid Hoffman was
caught "meddling" in the most recent Democratic primary to undercut Bernie Sanders' candidacy
during the Iowa caucus and while others, such as Eric Schmidt and Pierre Omidyar, are known
for their cozy ties to the Clinton family and even ties to Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign."
("
"Bipartisan" Washington Insiders Reveal Their Plan for Chaos if Trump Wins the Election
", Unlimited Hangout )
Is it safe to say that Rosa Brooks is a Soros stooge overseeing a color revolution in the
United States aimed at toppling Trump and replacing him with a dementia-addled, meat-puppet
named Joe Biden?
Political analyst Paul Craig Roberts seems to think so. Here's what he said in a recent post
at his website:
"I have provided evidence that the military/security complex, using the media and the
Democrats, intends to turn the November election into a color revolution The evidence of
a color revolution in the works is abundantly supplied by CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, NPR,
Washington Post and numerous Internet sites funded by the CIA and the foundations and
corporations through which it operates.. All of these media organizations are establishing
the story in the mind of Americans that Trump will not leave office when he loses or steals
the election and must be driven out.
With Antifa and Black Lives Matter now experienced in violent protests, they will be
unleashed anew on American cities when there is news of a Trump election victory. The media
will explain the violence as necessary to free us from a tyrant and egg on the violence, as
will the Democrat Party. The CIA will be certain that the violence is well funded .
What is a reelected President Trump going to do when the Secret Service refuses to repel
Antifa and Black Lives Matter when they breach White House Security?
American Democracy is on the verge of being ended for all times, and the world media
will herald the event as the successful overthrowing of a tyrant." ( "America's
Color Revolution" , Paul Craig Roberts )
Another of the leading spokesmen for TIP is Retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson who
made this revealing statement in a recent interview:
"Let me just say some of the things that we're putting out there. Among those things, one
that is very important is the media, particularly the mainstream media. They cannot act as
they usually act with regard to elections. They have to play a coup on election night. They
can't be declaring some state like Pennsylvania for one candidate or the other. When
Pennsylvania probably has thousands upon thousands of votes yet to come in and count. So,
the media has to get its act in order and it has to act very differently than it normally
does."
(NOTE: In other words, Wilkerson does not want the media to follow the normal protocols for
covering an election, but to adjust their reporting to accommodate the aims of the
coup-plotters. Does that sound like someone who is committed to evenhanded coverage of events,
or someone who wants reporters to shape the news to meet the specifications of his own
particular agenda? Here's more from Wilkerson:)
"Second, .we also have learned that poll workers have to be younger. And we've started
a movement all across the country to train young people. And we've had really good luck with
the volunteers to do so , to be poll workers. Because we found out in Wisconsin, for
example, poll workers are mostly over 60. And many of them didn't show up because they were
afraid of COVID-19. And so Wisconsin went from about one 188 polling places, to about 15.
That's disastrous." (" This 'War Game'
Maps out what happens if the President contests the Election" , WBUR )
Why is Wilkerson so encouraged by the young people he's trained to act as poll workers?
Doesn't that sound a bit fishy, especially from a dyed-in-the-wool partisan who's mixed up with
a group whose sole aim is to beat Trump? And why are the authors of the TIP manifesto so eager
to reveal their true intentions. Take a look:
"There will likely not be an "election night" this year; unprecedented numbers of voters
are expected to use mail-in ballots, which will almost certainly delay the certified result
for days or weeks. A delay provides a window for campaigns, the media, and others to cast
doubt on the integrity of the process and for escalating tensions between competing camps. As
a legal matter, a candidate unwilling to concede can contest the election into January.
.."(
Ibid)
So, that's the GamePlan, eh? The coup plotters want a contested election that drags on for
weeks, deepens divisions among the population, undermines confidence in the electoral system,
instigates ferocious street fighting in cities across the country, and gives the Biden camp
time to mobilize its political resources in Congress to mount a Constitutional attack on
Trump.
Can we at least call this treachery by its proper name: Treason– "the crime of
betraying one's country by trying to overthrow the government?"
For anybody who listened to state hearings in one or more state if is clear that there was widespread fraud. And its importance
is much larger then the question who won the elections
Notable quotes:
"... Multiple methods of attack on the election outcome have been prepared, all methods well planned, tried and perfected in the string of color revolutions around the World. Because those attacking Trump are the same as those who have been doing the "regime changes" in the vulnerable countries over the past 30 years. ..."
"... The playbook/manual is fully symmetrical – it always addresses both possible outcomes – if their side does not manage to steal the election then they incite an insurrection and oust the winner (the Viktor Yanukovych outcome). ..."
"... It is funny how few people appear to understand that Hunter's laptop was not just a suppressed election decider then an important reason for Biden's suitability – the insurance of ensurance, the media ready Kompromat. ..."
"... Finally, it is very important to keep in mind that none of what transpired would have been possible in a healthy country ..."
"... Maybe it was hostility towards Trump's supporters rather than hostility towards Trump. Trump is a reliable pro-immigration ultra-Zionist rabidly pro-LGBT liberal. The views of a large proportion of Trump's supporters are diametrically opposed to Trump's own views, but his supporters aren't smart enough to figure that out. ..."
"... whatever else Trump may be, he's no white nationalist. But again his supporters can't figure stuff like that out. ..."
"... In extreme situations, it's more important to win than to play by the rules. – This is the moral reasoning **** of the fraudsters. The basic equation they applied is so simple that it hurts (and therefore: worked perfectly well – in all of the West) ..."
"... In the Art of Winning Elections it did not take a genius to develop this solution – the lowest number of night-suitcases (filled with ballots) for the highest number of elector votes . ..."
"... In my mind the election was already unfair when you have the entire MSM and the Internet social media companies rooting for one candidate while attacking the other and banning/censoring the voices of his supporters under various pretexts. Both candidates and their supporters, should have been given equal exposure but I don't know how that could be achieved in practice. ..."
"... At a minimum the circumstantial evidence of vote counts being stopped in swing states along with gerrymandered rules was highly suspicious. To claim a mandate on such a close election while losing house seats is absurd but the Republicans bungling the Georgia Senate run off over $2K checks and a sycophantic MSM ensures they will. ..."
"... We are to believe Biden won 507 counties, the least EVER, but won the most votes ever. Trump won 74 million votes, beating Obama's 69 million in 2008, the previous all-time high. Trump won over 2500 counties. ..."
"... Strange that all these presidential elections are always neck and neck. Just because there are two parties does not mean that election after election the vote will boil down to one or two "swing states" and a few thousand votes. Statistically, it just doesn't make sense. ..."
"... This is strong evidence, if not proof, that these elections are scripted from beginning to end ..."
"... The convenient thing about postal votes is that they make it possible to wait until the opponent's votes are all in and counted – then send in just enough postal votes to tip the balance. It's rather like an auction in which one bidder gets only the one bid, and then a rival can offer $1 more. ..."
"... Well said. I'm sure that it's no coincidence that DJT has been involved with televised wrestling over the years. Every great contest requires a memorable "heel" to engage the spectators. In televised snooker in the UK, final matches often are over best of 35 frames. It's unusual for them not to go to the last ball of the final frame. Got to have a little drama. ..."
"... The point is, it is the average intellect, moral and civic weight of the involved constituencies that allows or doesn't allow what shouldn't be allowed in a real democracy. You don't have actual democracy below a lower threshold of intellect and moral and civic worth of all the main involved parties. ..."
"... When you consider Donald Trump's grotesque antics, his entirely unpresidential behavior, evident falsehoods and blatantly corrupt actions – together with the systematic media blitz taking every opportunity to show him in the worst possible light; it is quite astounding that he received as many votes as he did. Far, far more than could be accounted for by simply ascribing them to his 'deplorables'. ..."
"... I think Trump's greatest legacy will be that he ripped away the curtain and the masks fell and we all got to see just how nefarious and rigged the system is, from federal judges to our intelligence community to the FBI/DOJ to Congress to the media ..."
"... Dominion machines can do anything! They can assign a weight of 1.5 per single vote to one candidate, and .75 per vote to the other, and can adjust as necessary. They can assign batches of "adjudicated" ballots to the candidate of your choice. They can just switch votes from one candidate to the other in increments of several thousand, let's subtract 29,000 votes from candidate a and add them to b's column. They can allow access by a third party to the administrator's identity and password so the third party can enter and participate directly in tabulation of the votes. ..."
"... They won the election the old way: they stole it fair and square. ..."
"... If you like your bourgeois job and want to keep it, you will support the narrative. ..."
"... All of the comments on here that analyze DJT's strengths and weaknesses miss the point. I personally think he made some very poor choices; but, to inappropriately paraphrase Carville, it's the fraud, stupid. ..."
"... Occam's Razor should be applied- instead of the nonsense of Chavez having an interest in voting software; voting machines being manipulated; truckloads of paper ballots being moved across state lines- my favorite; etc. ..."
"... t would be very easy to have individuals in a nursing home or even an adult day care center for mentally (dementia) incapacitated adults sign ballots. There are numerous day care centers in New York City, federally funded, where individuals could be coaxed to sign ballots. Just say Trump will close the day care center -- especially where interpreters must be provided because the individuals cannot understand English due to varying stages of mental incapacity. ..."
"... I wonder how many people have watched the twenty hours or so of state legislature hearings related to the election. Can people just not be bothered? These were historic hearings of huge importance, but I assume they didn't get much coverage in the MSM. I think most of them were livestreamed only by small right-wing networks. ..."
"... What were the results of the 2016 election? Billary received 65 million to Trumps 62 million. Gotcha. So we have roughly 127 million who showed up to vote that time. (Wonder how many of those were legit.) So ONLY 4 years later, Joe "I Look Like I'm Drugged" Biden ALLEGEDLY received 80 million and Trump received 74 million. Okay, that is a turnout of 154 million votes. So if I believe in this fairy tale, I was supposed to believe that in ONLY 4 years the vote count increased by an alleged 27 million. Hell, a lot of our most populous states do not even have that many people. ..."
"... Laws don't say a little bit of fraud is OK, because the fraud committed on or by a business didn't cause bankruptcy. Either there was fraud, or there wasn't. ..."
"... That several courts refused to hear cases for lack of standing, is patently ridiculous. If a candidate has no standing, who does? In an election, everybody has standing because they are affected by the result, and by virtue of Citizens United , corporations do as well. ..."
"... Watch this recent interview of Chris Hedges by Jimmy Dore about the root causes of our current woes. Hedges speaks off the cuff in words that sound as polished, powerful and precise as the language in tracts considered to be classics. His Pulitzer clearly was not found in a Cracker Jack box. ..."
Before the election I polled all my friends who would win. The majority of both left and right oriented said that it would
be Trump. I said, yes Trump would win a fair election, but he will lose on who is counting. Multiple methods of attack on
the election outcome have been prepared, all methods well planned, tried and perfected in the string of color revolutions around
the World. Because those attacking Trump are the same as those who have been doing the "regime changes" in the vulnerable countries
over the past 30 years. Trump never had a grain of chance against this mighty machinery. Corrupt local governors and blackmailed
and co-opted all levels of judiciary, targeted lawlessness, threats and examples of violence and future civil war if the other
side wins, censorship, eviction of election observers, night-time suitcases of ballots, one-sided main sewerage media.
All pure déjà vu – this is exactly how the color revolutions work – the art of winning elections. The US bombers arrive
only if the "peaceful transition of power" (aka the stealing of election and post-election) fails. In the color revolution manual,
there is also a chapter on prevention of resistance to the stolen election – thus the msm and congress screeching like castrated
pigs against Trump's imaginary incitement of insurrection (pure psychological projection). I was always sure that Trump is too
much of a cheap demagogue and hot air filled balloon to be able to initiate a real insurrection.
The playbook/manual is fully symmetrical – it always addresses both possible outcomes – if their side does not manage to steal
the election then they incite an insurrection and oust the winner (the Viktor Yanukovych outcome).
... ... ...
In political terms, in the 2016 election a quasi-populist candidate slipped through. This will never happen again because state
laws will be enacted with built-in mail voting and electronic voting machines. Competent or incompetent populists will never get
through again. This will ensure that the choice will always be only between the approved, controllable candidates with plenty
of skeletons in wardrobes and dirty laptops in their closets. It is funny how few people appear to understand that Hunter's laptop
was not just a suppressed election decider then an important reason for Biden's suitability – the insurance of ensurance, the
media ready Kompromat.
Finally, it is very important to keep in mind that none of what transpired would have been possible in a healthy country
: election of Trump without enough Kompromat to have to invent the dumbest Putin's puppet meme and the consequent exposure
of the manipulative Deep State, the sulfuric acid for the brain MSM and the high-techs fakers. These are all the Hegels' seeds
of destruction in action.
One thing to ask is why was this huge effort made to oust Trump?
Maybe it was hostility towards Trump's supporters rather than hostility towards Trump. Trump is a reliable pro-immigration
ultra-Zionist rabidly pro-LGBT liberal. The views of a large proportion of Trump's supporters are diametrically opposed to Trump's
own views, but his supporters aren't smart enough to figure that out.
In extreme situations, it's more important to win than to play by the rules. – This is the moral reasoning **** of the
fraudsters. The basic equation they applied is so simple that it hurts (and therefore: worked perfectly well – in all of the West):
Trump = Hitler.
**** If I might go with Sigmund Freud here, I'd say: – Their rationalizations instead of "their moral reasoning".
I prefer this model, and it's not being discussed: Someone was making BIG money off of those programs and policies leftover
from Obama. Trade with China? Care to mention one BIG company who peddles Chinese wares? Maybe two or three of them, perhaps?
"Follow the money", is what Deep Throat told Woodward. If we do that with our darling Deep State? Just ask yourself, who stood
to benefit from four years of Hillary, pray tell? There's your answer.
The Deep State regime stole this election in exactly the same states where Trump successfully campaigned in 2016 to win against
Clinton. In the Art of Winning Elections it did not take a genius to develop this solution – the lowest number of night-suitcases
(filled with ballots) for the highest number of elector votes .
Thanks for a balanced assessment. In my mind the election was already unfair when you have the entire MSM and the Internet
social media companies rooting for one candidate while attacking the other and banning/censoring the voices of his supporters
under various pretexts. Both candidates and their supporters, should have been given equal exposure but I don't know how that
could be achieved in practice.
Trump was severely hamstrung by the role played by the MSM and the social media. In a real democracy this state of affairs
should not be allowed: where the rich and powerful who control the media have an unequal say and overwhelming influence compared
to the ordinary voters.
Now we have Ruby Freeman, heretofore only on video rolling out suitcases in Fulton County, now on AUDIO discussing her $100
an hour election heist gig and the "Secretary of State" is mentioned at 2:02 by her boss Ralph Jones:
There is a small element of illogic in the numbers part of the argument, namely in using 2 different metrics to make that argument.
(I agree with the corruption part of the argument covered by Glenn Greenwald. It's censorship in action).
As I've done before, I'll reiterate, I'm no fan of Biden or Trump. In fact I'm worried about the war cabinet Biden already
seems to be assembling just as I still worry about the crazed maniac Pompeo for the next few days left in the current administration.
But here's the point and it is a very subtle one: to say it was a tight race and only 1 in 7,000 Americans had to change their
vote is a bit misleading. In the absurd Electoral College, winner take all the state system (which is far more scandalous in my
view), we take one state at a time. If we accept the vote count, Biden won over 7,000,000 more votes more than Trump, a margin
of victory of 4.4%. Not very close.
Therefore, if it were a one person one vote nationwide system, 2.2% would have to change their minds, meaning 1 out of every
45 Americans.
But it's a state by state margin that we're after. Thus more to the point would be to take each individual state and its margin.
So if we took Georgia as one example, the margin of Biden's lead was 11,779 votes out of 4,935,487 votes cast for Biden and Trump
(we disregard all the third party votes in this argument). 5,890 voters would have to "change their minds". Out of the Biden/Trump
overall vote, that's 1 out of 838 Georgian voters.
To apply a different system, overall US vote count, to one state, Georgia, is using which system you prefer to come up with
an illusionary 1 out of 7000 Americans, not applying the same metric down the line. It's a separate state by state system, not
a nationwide vote. You have to stay consistent to be accurate in this method of argumentation.
Very technical, yes. What about mail-in voting? What is the evidence that this is by definition rigged or manipulated? Mailed
ballots have a paper trail like in-person ballots. Presumably someone could steal your ballot from your home and vote on your
behalf, but this can be traced and found out. At least one state, Washington, doesn't even have in-person voting at all. Does
that mean all of their votes are fraudulent?
What about voter suppression? Shouldn't that be factored in? That seems to happen a lot more often in red states than blue
states. What about Trumps attempts to sabotage the US Postal System? Doesn't that bother anybody who supports him? What about
his refusal to commit to the results prior to Election Day? (He did the same in 2016 by the way). This only added to his
opponents concern about his dictatorial tendencies.
Finally, in all the arguments I've seen anywhere, I haven't seen anyone lay out which states use those ridiculous electronic
voting machines which leave no paper trail. That should be the other real scandal and those should be immediately banned in every
state. Get rid of those and the Electoral College and we might have a fair system.
Oh, and get rid of a system that is eternally dominated by 2 parties as well, whether through run off elections or even better,
proportional representation. The latter that would be truly more democratic.
why was this huge effort made to oust Trump? What did they want him to do that he wouldn't do? Was he an impediment to the
increase of control over the average person? Did not want to start up another action against Syria? Would not attack Iran without
having a coalition of NATO countries lined up? Was against total outsourcing to China? Not confrontational enough against Russia?
Perhaps he gave the deplorables dangerous ideas about them having some rights. If that question could be answered then we'd
know what is coming.
He humiliated the upper echelons of society so thoroughly via his 2016 campaign and victory.
@anon Because Trump
inflames white nationalism, which is anathema to the Jews.
There is evidence that Trump himself is a Jew, and a fanatic Zionist at that, so his self-serving incitement of white nationalism
(whose causes he did little to implement, unlike his steady support for every imaginable Israeli cause, tbe more outrageous the better,
short of war with the "usable" nukes he had had developed for the purpose, that Russia warned him away from) was especially galling
to the top Jews such as the Rothschilds for whom Israel is nothing sentimental, just one more piece in their chess game for world
power.
And thank you for this site which is a beacon of free speech and dissent against our vile, corrupt, incompetent ruling class.
In all the post election rancor little attention has been brought to how razor thin the margin actually was. And with you being
a vociferous critic of Trumps boorish antics and insane foreign policy the candor on this issue is appreciated.
At a minimum the circumstantial evidence of vote counts being stopped in swing states along with gerrymandered rules was highly
suspicious. To claim a mandate on such a close election while losing house seats is absurd but the Republicans bungling the Georgia
Senate run off over $2K checks and a sycophantic MSM ensures they will.
And after abetting barbaric violence and anarchy for months the Democrats will now use trespassing in their "Sacred Temple"
to unleash a crackdown by the national security state and unprecedented censorship and social-credit run by woke-corporate oligarchs.
Interestingly (And as many predicted) it appears they will reopen the economy and declare "victory" over Covid shortly after
Bidens inauguration. Clearly the bizarre excesses of the lockdowns and dynamiting of the economy were calculated to undermine
Trump and consolidate wealth and power from the start.
The question is what exactly this "new normal" will be and how far they're willing to go in order to purge the Trumpists and
populist right. It will be easy to garner support for the latter but if the daily disruptions and financial shocks continue the
system will collapse.
A new, large scale war would be a useful distraction but it's hard to imagine the U.S sustaining one in its current state much
less against capable adversaries like China and Russia.
Then again, arrogant, idiotic, catastrophic policy blunders are the defining feature of this ruling class for the last 30 years
so I wouldn't put it past them given the madness we've seen already.
In effect, America's media and tech giants formed a united front to steal the election and somehow drag the crippled Biden/Harris
ticket across the finish line.
adjustment
via a plastic bag put over their heads. If they were lucky.
There was no real contest. Because? A. Control of the mainstream media was so one sided. And that is where we are at now here
in USA. Imagine, a standing President of the USA has been banned and censored by all the "American" mainstream media giants. Actually,
you do not have to imagine. It just happened: Big Tech and MSM has openly torpedoed the First Amendment and US Constitution. So
we know where they are coming from. It's also kind of disappointing how most of our "representatives" are dealing with this.
The only cause other than himself on which Trump has been consistent is serving Israel. One of the only two major policies
of Obama's that he didn't reverse was support of Israel, though he took it to yet another level. The other one was
increasing military spendings. Obama never cut military spending. My money is on Biden never doing it either, and also
that he will take support of Israel to yet another level. I hope I'm wrong.
On the election night I was listening to two of our New Zealand reporters who were reporting the incoming results. I remember
quite clearly after results had been coming in for a while they remarked: "well that's it another four years of the same". That
were their exact words. That must have been before the postal votes came in, which suddenly changed the picture completely to
Biden's advantage. Postal votes I believe were introduced for the first time in 2020 because of the Corona pandemic. It's believed
that postal votes can be more easily tampered with. Postal votes are expected to remain during future elections I believe.
We are to believe Biden won 507 counties, the least EVER, but won the most votes ever. Trump won 74 million votes, beating Obama's 69 million in 2008, the previous all-time high. Trump won over 2500 counties.
Clarice Feldman at the Americanthinker.com noted that many residences
had multiple votes from the current occupants plus previous occupants (apartment complexes) in this election, because old voter
rolls aren't purged in a timely manner. The same addy might have 3 previous residents voting, plus the same individual voters
legitimately voting at their new addresses.
My advice for whites is this .we will probably be getting in new wars for neocons now, so you might wanna think twice before
signing up for the military. You may find your twenties being used up in multiple deployments in foreign miserable places.
Strange that all these presidential
elections are always neck and neck. Just because there are two parties does not mean that election after election the vote will
boil down to one or two "swing states" and a few thousand votes. Statistically, it just doesn't make sense.
Of course the media loves these nail-biter elections because it drives up their viewership. Every election we get the same
old farcical "debates", scandals and continual ridiculous sound bites. This is strong evidence, if not proof,
that these elections are scripted from beginning to end, even up to and including the "march to the Capitol" and the
ensuing "insurrection".
Exactly. "Spin". He also appears to be entirely ignorant of the fact that the constitution states that each states electors,
and the procedure for choosing them, must be accomplished via the state[s] legislatures, and that in all 6[?] swing states that
recorded early morning, miraculous turn-around votes from Trump to Biden, that that particular constitutional procedure had been
entirely , and very conveniently, ignored:
The Lobby wants Syria by any means, up to a direct confrontation with the Russian Federation. The Jewish hatred for Iran is boundless
(same for Russia – take note, Americans). Zionists care not about human lives.
"I don't know or care anything about Dominion voting machines, whether they are controlled by Venezuelan Marxists, Chinese
Communists, or Martians. But the most blatant election-theft was accomplished in absolutely plain sight".
Cui bono? Obviously the main group profiting from the fraudulent election was the Democratic Party and its supporters. So why drag in foreign governments? Most of them are all too well aware that it's very dangerous to attract the attention of
the USA for good or bad. Like trying to save a drowning whale.
So their sensible strategy is to stand back at a safe distance and watch the monster perish in its own poisons, hoping it doesn't
lash out and harm them in its dying struggles.
The convenient thing about postal votes is that they make it possible to wait until the opponent's votes are all in and counted
– then send in just enough postal votes to tip the balance. It's rather like an auction in which one bidder gets only the one
bid, and then a rival can offer $1 more.
Ridiculous if you want a fair election. But nobody who matters wants or expects anything of that kind. A proper political machine
gets everything cut and dried well in advance.
Trump was unpredictable and, to a degree, uncontrollable. He had to go.
Well said. I'm sure that it's no coincidence that DJT has been involved with televised wrestling over the years. Every great contest requires
a memorable "heel" to engage the spectators. In televised snooker in the UK, final matches often are over best of 35 frames. It's unusual for them not to go to the last
ball of the final frame. Got to have a little drama.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch the rancher counts the silver dollars.
...If ego or narcissism can explain it, so be it. I'll go with insane or suffering from dementia. Any 'drain the swamp' or 'fix
the system', MAGA or "build back better" argument would appeal only to retards. Re-visit Carroll Quigly's succinct description
of political parties in the USA in Tragedy and Hope, pages 1247-1248 (hardcover) or Google same.
I'm beginning to believe that a different species is holding sway and we are the proverbial Eloi.
The point is, it is the average intellect, moral and civic weight of the involved constituencies that allows or doesn't allow
what shouldn't be allowed in a real democracy.
You don't have actual democracy below a lower threshold of intellect and moral and civic worth of all the main involved
parties.
We could in other words say: there will be as much real democracy as is desired by the average citizen, where to desire it
is not to blandly say "I agree with democracy".
It is funny how few people appear to understand that Hunter's laptop was not just a suppressed election decider then an
important reason for Biden's suitability
Yes, few people understand that all regime-approved candidates are people able to be blackmailed for a precise reason, and
not at all by chance. What about Hegel though?
@obvious Globalist
NWO creeps stole the election, they spent 4 years trying to overthrow the 2016 election by coups aided and abetted by the Globalist
Mainslime Media, FBI etc. -- you missed all that of course? .
They also PUBlICLY previewed, as they did the COVID Agenda, stealing
the election a couple months before, gamed and planned it in various outcomes .Anyone who can't see what is up is either willfully
ignorant, lying, or "stupid" as you say.
No decent person is in favor of the Agenda of Harris/Biden serving the NWO "Great
Reset" to crush the Peons -- you must see yourself as above the coming carnage -- I have news for you -- your not.
We'll know we're in an actual civil war when different branches of the military, or units within a branch are fighting each
other or when the police are fighting the military. Don't hold your breath of course because every cop and soldier in America is a traitor and they're all on the same team.
What I still find unfathomable is the fact that the steal was so obvious: so in your face but yet the big media, big tech,
federal and state law enforcements, spooks, judges, big GOP politicians etc still behave like nothing ever happened. Trump and
his supporters are now labeled domestic terrorists and lawfare is about to be unleashed on them. It's surreal.
Had the Orange heeded his MAGA base rather than his (((rat-in-law))) he'd still be President. There was certainly
election fraud; enough of the betrayed base stayed home to make it effective. Trump was a p -- y all four years and got what
he deserved. He was always a stop-gap time-buying non-solution...
...issues can no longer be discussed openly, the reliability of elections in the USA is the most important issue that faces us. The
people will accept an honest winner in a serious election. Nothing is as cleansing to our natural divisions as the result of a
well-contested election, in the knowledge that, in a reasonable interval, the same offices will be up for new contests.
Nothing is as damaging to our peace of mind as knowing that one side won fairly, but was robbed of governing. I thank Ron Unz for writing and publishing such a reasonably argued essay on the matter. It is the gold standard for 2020 election
analyses.
This is sad people. Was talking to a friend and even his 80 something year old mother commented on how decrepit Sleazy Joe
looks and walks. I was watching him deliver "his speech" last night and the guy had a hard time reading a few sentences off the
teleprompter without stammering and stuttering.
After an embarrassing and truly cringe worthy "speech" Biden is seen walking off. The dude can barely walk...
For eighty million who cast their ballots for the old geezer, it's mostly out of economic necessity; however, for the seventy
plus million people who are Trump supporters, it's a fight for their country and more importantly, culture.
Brought to you by the same people who gave us the Weimar Republic, only twice as vicious and vindictive this time because they
know what they did wrong last time -- they weren't vicious and vindictive enough.
When you consider Donald Trump's grotesque antics, his entirely unpresidential behavior, evident falsehoods and blatantly corrupt
actions – together with the systematic media blitz taking every opportunity to show him in the worst possible light; it is quite
astounding that he received as many votes as he did. Far, far more than could be accounted for by simply ascribing them to his
'deplorables'.
And, even if Biden did, in fact, just manage to win – presenting himself as a force of reason, stability and sanity – a great
mass of voters sensed something in him that they distrusted even more than in Trump. That was a stunning rejection – of almost
the same magnitude as Hillary's in 2016!
You're right, and Ron Unz is right. Had Trump retained his white male voters of 2016, the Democrats likely couldn't have pulled
off the steal. But in the end Donald Trump was a mere salesmen selling a con.
...If you had told people in France in 1785 or Russia in 1913 that within a few short years about a quarter of their population
would be slaughtered in revolutionary turmoil and many more displaced, they would have dismissively laughed in your face believing
– as do we – that their civilizations were far too advanced for such nonsense.
Let us hope such a horrific fate is not in store for all of us as the Great Reset is imposed on us all given how western civilization
has clearly failed to the point where some sort of profound, substantive reform is inevitable.
Given that the foundation of this Reset comprises so much ill-will, deception, theft and coercion, it is unlikely that this
new paradigm will benefit the millions of people it will soon dominate.
Another
can of worms, there would be additional Congressional hearings over it, etc. At the time Trump was still in the middle of the
Muller investigation. That special prosecutor investigation tied up Trump until March 2019.
I firmly believe that no man in human history could have taken on and fought Deep State, the Swamp, the Establishment, media,
GOPe, et al., as valiantly as Trump. Even in his 70's the man has superhuman energy, fortitude, and strategizing. I think Trump's
greatest legacy will be that he ripped away the curtain and the masks fell and we all got to see just how nefarious and rigged
the system is, from federal judges to our intelligence community to the FBI/DOJ to Congress to the media
"I don't know or care anything about Dominion voting machines"
Why not? Take a look at Patrick Byrne's summary of evidence for massive election fraud involving the Dominion machines, on
his blog over at DeepCapture.
It will explain how a man who sheltered in his house, did not campaign, drew no more than six or seven or twenty-five people
to his events, got seven million more votes than a man who drew up to thirty thousand people at his rallies.
...An expert witness in Georgia was able to hack into Dominion in front of the legislative committee in less than a minute. "We're
in." In Dominion, and on the internet.
Dominion machines can do anything! They can assign a weight of 1.5 per single vote to one candidate, and .75 per vote to the
other, and can adjust as necessary. They can assign batches of "adjudicated" ballots to the candidate of your choice. They can
just switch votes from one candidate to the other in increments of several thousand, let's subtract 29,000 votes from candidate
a and add them to b's column. They can allow access by a third party to the administrator's identity and password so the third
party can enter and participate directly in tabulation of the votes.
And more. If your disfavored candidate is winning by a landslide and your 1.5/.75 ratio isn't working, you can put in a USB
card and adjust accordingly.
If you're desperate you can upload tens of thousands of votes in a single drop which all, every one, go to your preferred candidate.
And you can do it in one hour on a machine which can only handle a few thousand votes per hour, fed in manually.
If things get out of control you can call a halt to the vote count, send the observers home, and haul out the extra ballots
stashed under the table skirt. But it's best to be mindful of the video cameras. Which they were not.
Really, read about it: Patrick Byrne, DeepCapture, "Evidence That The 2020 Election Was Rigged." Lays out the various ways
by which it was done, then appends evidence using graphs, memos from election administrators, and statistical analysis.
He's no Trump supporter either, is a committed libertarian, and has never voted for either a Democrat or Republican presidential
candidate in his life. He thinks Barack Obama graced the presidency and that Michelle Obama was a class act as First Lady.
Also: The Chinese government acquired Dominion for $400 million in the fall of 2020.
Finally, does anyone think the Dominion case against Sydney Powell potentially offers an opportunity for the evidence of electoral
fraud to be aired in public?
While it's an effective rhetorical tactic by our fearless leader Unz, there's no reason to be agnostic about CIA ballot-stuffing.
That's as blindingly obvious as their censorship.
The ballot-stuffing shows only the most cursory measures to conceal it, consistent with a command structure that exercises
precision control over media attention. CIA can censor adverse information on their candidate's trading in influence and abuse
of function. So naturally CIA dumped votes in statistically absurd proportions, trusting to their Mockingbird media to short-circuit
public inquiry. When you have arbitrary Nazi-grade life-and-death power, as CIA does, it's hard not to get sloppy. They don't
give a fuck that you saw what they did there, cause shut up.
Spot on about postal votes; it's my only slight disagreement with Ron's take on the affair.
These votes were being received for days, if not weeks before the deadline and could have been (and probably were) counted as
they came in. The gross imbalance between Trump and Biden votes in these after-hours counts, along with the sudden spikes obvious
on many graphs, is proof, imo, of the cheat. In order to get ahead of the narrative, the 'rats said it would happen, and, lo,
it did.
If the regime can't provide for trustworthy elections, it can't expect to be regarded as legitimate. Probably by design; they
don't need us.
Navarro's three reports do a good job of summarizing most of the possible vote fraud. He's a Harvard PhD so more than qualified
to pull all the date together etc. They use many graphics and are easy and fast to read.
In this post-Republic new reality, no Court will take a case in which Discovery reveals any sort of election fraud. The election is over and it's now verboten to revisit it. Don't be surprised if
archive.org is forced to delete thousands of articles about it. Orwellian times
Incumbent Donald Trump lost Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin by such extremely narrow margins that a swing of less than 22,000
votes in those crucial states would have gotten him reelected. With a record 158 million votes cast, this amounted to a
victory margin of around 0.01% . So if just one American voter in 7,000 had changed his mind, Trump might have received
another four years in office. One American voter in 7,000
Margins of general vote do not matter. Biden won Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin by much higher margins than 0.01%. In Arizona
Biden won by 0.3% of all votes in Arizona and in Georgia by 0.2%. These are small margins but probably comparable to margins in
swing states in 2016 where Trump won.
@Garliv It's for
your own good, of course. I once read an article written by someone who had a chance to hang out with the rich, powerful, famous,
etc. and gain some perspective on their thinking. They really do believe that it's their role to shape the future for the
proles. I know someone who's just like that.
If you like your bourgeois job and want to keep it, you will support the narrative.
All of the comments on here that analyze DJT's strengths and weaknesses miss the point. I personally think he made some very
poor choices; but, to inappropriately paraphrase Carville, it's the fraud, stupid.
Occam's Razor should be applied- instead of the nonsense of Chavez having an interest in voting software; voting machines being
manipulated; truckloads of paper ballots being moved across state lines- my favorite; etc.
The mail in ballots could be sent to a nursing home or to individuals, who are very old, and these individuals could be instructed
by a relative to sign their name.
I frequently explain to individuals, whose first language is not English, the papers, which they are signing. I explain their
401K and retirement plan withdrawals.
It would be very easy to have individuals in a nursing home or even an adult day care center for mentally (dementia) incapacitated
adults sign ballots. There are numerous day care centers in New York City, federally funded, where individuals could be coaxed
to sign ballots. Just say Trump will close the day care center -- especially where interpreters must be provided because the individuals
cannot understand English due to varying stages of mental incapacity.
The day care center is a racket. I believe the reimbursement rate under Medicaid-Medicare is $120 per day. Plus, the transportation
fee - approximately $40 per person each way. These centers flourish in cities, such as New York City, Newark, Philadelphia, etc. I have yet to hear anyone mention that Nancy Pelosi's father was Mayor of Baltimore, Thomas D'Alesandro Jr. And Baltimore is
one city that it totally devastated by drugs, prostitution, crime, etc.
Now for the important question. Did Nancy Pelosi have $12 pints of ice cream in her office?
But I wonder how many people have watched the twenty hours or so of state legislature hearings related to the election. Can
people just not be bothered? These were historic hearings of huge importance, but I assume they didn't get much coverage in the
MSM. I think most of them were livestreamed only by small right-wing networks.
Servant of Gla'aki 39, Hapalong 101 anent Willke: Willke sold a million books in less than two months. He was more of a media
phenom than Trump, much hotter at the time of the election. They were going to make a movie of One World. And his message was
more populist, too – basically, fuck your US national interest, we want peace and freedom. He just came out and said what everybody
thought, Oh boy, now that we won the war, we'll get the peace and freedom that we fought for! So he didn't need a Sheldon or a
Gina to rig elections and install him.
Dulles was squirming around under rocks at that time (he cut his teeth at the League of Nations founding,) even before he and
his ultras got their Gestapo in Foggy Bottom, and they arranged Hillary-style party machinations to push Willke aside.
Now of course there's a second line of defense, the CIA proprietaries that steal the election directly:
Diebold and its brass-plate acquirers. CIA set them up to ratfuck Kerry and Maduro and sheep-dipped them to ratfuck Trump.
The whole world knows the USA is a ridiculous fake democracy, a totalitarian CIA pariah state voting alone against peace, development
and human rights. (Just look at the 2nd Committee vote on A/C.2/75/L.4/Rev.1) The USA is North Korea with an ugly leisure squad.
It's the beltway that deserves our fire and fury. Just wipe it out with WMD and start again.
What were the results of the 2016 election? Billary received 65 million to Trumps 62 million. Gotcha. So we have roughly 127
million who showed up to vote that time. (Wonder how many of those were legit.) So ONLY 4 years later, Joe "I Look Like I'm Drugged"
Biden ALLEGEDLY received 80 million and Trump received 74 million. Okay, that is a turnout of 154 million votes. So if I believe
in this fairy tale, I was supposed to believe that in ONLY 4 years the vote count increased by an alleged 27 million. Hell, a
lot of our most populous states do not even have that many people.
Like I say, I concede that Biden might have had about 60-65 million LEGIT votes to Trump's MINIMUM of 74 million. Hmm, so that
means that total vote count would be 134-139 million. Hmm, sounds more reasonable to me. Numbers are not adding up folks.
...Laws don't say a little bit of fraud is OK, because the fraud committed on or by a business
didn't cause bankruptcy. Either there was fraud, or there wasn't. If there was, then the results of the election in those areas
are null and void. The certification of those results expands the fraud to the state level.
That several courts refused to hear cases for lack of standing, is patently ridiculous. If a candidate has no standing, who does?
In an election, everybody has standing because they are affected by the result, and by virtue of Citizens United , corporations
do as well.
In an ideal world, we would be discussing how we can ensure the integrity of our elections, so that both substantively and
the appearance of integrity is upheld. Instead, we are trying to get citizens jailed (right & left) for protesting the sanctity
of a system in which both sides know is corrupt. There is no question in Dems mind that Bush stole the election in 2000, so why
is it any different now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Our oligarch rulers know very well that they rig elections, it has been documented under LBJ, not to mention the long list
of coups all over the world organized by the intelligence agencies over the past 50 years, these are historical facts. But rather
than citizens being able to focus on the real problem, we are beating the crap out of our fellow citizens for something we know
all know is real; and pointing to the other side as the source of the corruption. This is exactly why the rich stay rich and the
poor stay poor.
Mr. Unz, who is always well informed, highly organized and impeccably lucid, gives a credible and succinct analysis of the
dumpster fire that is American politics, indeed of this country's leadership across the board. It creates mostly chaos and suffering
every time it meddles in our affairs these days, certainly over the long run but especially in its current crash program to impose
tyranny over the many so the few can take whatever they want whether they require it or not.
Watch this recent interview of Chris Hedges by Jimmy Dore about the root causes of our current woes. Hedges speaks off the
cuff in words that sound as polished, powerful and precise as the language in tracts considered to be classics. His Pulitzer clearly
was not found in a Cracker Jack box.
He ain't buying that Trump alone was the fount of all our sorrows or that a deceiving sycophantic
grifter like Joe Biden is the fix for anything. There were many bad actors, both GOPers and Dems, both office holders and offstage
string-pullers, who have contributed to the coming collapse of this country, which decapitating Trump will not prevent. Joe just
happens to be the useful idiot who will be left holding the bag when the end comes, which won't be long now. Factoring in Kamala's
possible ascension to the throne will change nothing. Like Joe, she's just a cluck there to take the same orders.
@Carroll Price
...Trump also flew on the Lolita express. If after all the broken promises that Trump made
to his Maga followers anyone still thinks that he is an outsider is, frankly, an idiot.
Trump is a lifetime actor and the entire election was just one big show.
One way we will know if Trump really was a threat to the swamp and an outsider will be what happens after Jan 20. If Trump
ends up dead or impoverished and in prison then we will know that he was a real threat. If he flies off into the sunset, perhaps
even starting a media company, then we will know that it was all one big vaudeville act.
"... , and author of several books, including ..."
"... Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran ..."
"... . @medeabenjamin; Nicolas J. S. Davies, an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of ..."
"... Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq ..."
"... . @NicolasJSDavies; and Marcy Winograd of Progressive Democrats of America served as a 2020 Democratic delegate for Bernie Sanders,and is Coordinator of ..."
Yves here. Biden's nominees have skewed towards the awful, particularly on the foreign
policy front. But his plan to install Victoria "Fuck the EU" Nuland at State is a standout. For
those of you new to this site and not familiar with Nuland's sorry history, this post gives an
overview of her role in fomenting the coup in Ukraine and in putting relations with Russia on a
Cold War footing. The authors encourage readers to call their Senators and urge them to vote
against her nomination.
And before you get unduly excited by Biden nominating Gary Gensler to the SEC, I would much
rather have seem Gensler at Treasury. Gensler demonstrated at the CFTC that he's effective and
dedicated to combatting abuses by Big Finance. However, his best shot at making the SEC feared
and respected again is to appoint a tough head of enforcement, so keep an eye out for that
pick.
The problem that Gensler will have at the SEC is that it is the only Federal financial
services industry regulator that is subject to Congressional appropriations, rather that living
off its fees and fines (the SEC collects far more than Congress allows it). And Democrats, like
Joe Lieberman, then the Senator from Hedgistan, have been if anything more aggressive than
Republicans in threatening the SEC and in keeping it budget-starved.
I had said to Lambert that if Biden wanted to be Machiavellian, the way to pretend to reward
Elizabeth Warren while actually sandbagging her would be to make her SEC chair. Let's hope that
isn't his logic for appointing Gensler.
Photo Credit: thetruthseeker.co.uk Nuland and Pyatt planning regime change in Kiev
Who is Victoria Nuland? Most Americans have never heard of her because the U.S. corporate
media's foreign policy coverage is a wasteland. Most Americans have no idea that
President-elect Biden's pick for Deputy Secretary of State for Political Affairs is stuck in
the quicksand of 1950s U.S.-Russia Cold War politics and dreams of continued NATO expansion, an
arms race on steroids and further encirclement of Russia.
Nor do they know that from 2003-2005, during the hostile U.S. military occupation of Iraq,
Nuland was a foreign policy advisor to Dick Cheney, the Darth Vader of the Bush
administration.
You can bet, however, that the people of Ukraine have heard of neocon Nuland. Many have even
heard the leaked four-minute audio of her saying "Fuck the EU" during a 2014 phone call with
the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt.
During the infamous call on which Nuland and Pyatt plotted to replace the elected Ukrainian
President Victor Yanukovych, Nuland expressed her not-so-diplomatic disgust with the European
Union for grooming former heavyweight boxer and austerity champ Vitali Klitschko instead of
U.S. puppet and NATO booklicker Artseniy Yatseniuk to replace Russia-friendly Yanukovych.
The "Fuck the EU" call went viral, as an embarrassed State Department, never denying the
call's authenticity, blamed the Russians for tapping the phone, much as the NSA has tapped the
phones of European allies.
Despite outrage from German Chancellor Angela Markel, no one fired Nuland, but her potty
mouth upstaged the more serious story: the U.S. plot to overthrow Ukraine's elected government
and America's responsibility for a civil war that has killed at least 13,000 people and left
Ukraine the poorest
country in Europe.
In the process, Nuland, her husband Robert Kagan, the co-founder of The Project for a New
American Century , and their neocon cronies succeeded in sending U.S.-Russian relations
into a dangerous downward spiral from which they have yet to recover.
Nuland accomplished this from a relatively junior position as Assistant Secretary of State
for European and Eurasian Affairs. How much more trouble could she stir up as the #3 official
at Biden's State Department? We'll find out soon enough, if the Senate confirms her
nomination.
Joe Biden should have learned from Obama's mistakes that appointments like this matter.
In his first
term , Obama allowed his hawkish Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Republican Secretary
of Defense Robert Gates, and military and CIA leaders held over from the Bush administration to
ensure that endless war trumped his message of hope and change.
Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, ended up presiding over indefinite detentions without
charges or trials at Guantanamo Bay; an escalation of drone strikes that killed innocent
civilians; a deepening of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan; a self-reinforcing
cycle of terrorism and counterterrorism; and disastrous new wars in
Libya and Syria
.
With Clinton out and new personnel in top spots in his second term, Obama began
to take charge of his own foreign policy. He started working directly with Russia's President
Putin to resolve crises in Syria and other hotspots. Putin helped avert an escalation of the
war in Syria in September 2013 by negotiating the removal and destruction of Syria's chemical
weapons stockpiles, and helped Obama negotiate an interim agreement with Iran that led to the
JCPOA nuclear deal.
But the neocons were apoplectic that they failed to convince Obama to order a massive
bombing campaign and escalate his covert,
proxy war in Syria and at the receding prospect of a war with Iran. Fearing their control
of U.S. foreign policy was slipping, the neocons launched a
campaign to brand Obama as "weak" on foreign policy and remind him of their power.
With
editorial help from Nuland, her husband Robert Kagan penned a 2014 New Republic
article entitled "Superpowers Don't Get To Retire," proclaiming that "there is no democratic
superpower waiting in the wings to save the world if this democratic superpower falters." Kagan
called for an even more aggressive foreign policy to exorcise American fears of a multipolar
world it can no longer dominate.
Obama invited Kagan to a private lunch at the White House, and the neocons' muscle-flexing
pressured him to scale back his diplomacy with Russia, even as he quietly pushed ahead on
Iran.
The neocons' coup de grace against Obama's better angels was Nuland's 2014 coup
in debt-ridden Ukraine, a valuable imperial possession for its wealth of natural gas and a
strategic candidate for NATO membership right on Russia's border.
When Ukraine's Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych spurned a U.S.-backed trade agreement with
the European Union in favor of a $15 billion bailout from Russia, the State Department threw a
tantrum.
Hell hath no fury like a superpower scorned.
The EU trade
agreement was to open Ukraine's economy to imports from the EU, but without a reciprocal
opening of EU markets to Ukraine, it was a lopsided deal Yanukovich could not accept. The deal
was approved by the post-coup government, and has only added to Ukraine's economic woes.
The muscle for Nuland's $5 billion coup was Oleh
Tyahnybok's neo-Nazi Svoboda Party and the shadowy new Right Sector militia. During her leaked
phone call, Nuland referred to Tyahnybok as one of the "big three" opposition leaders on the
outside who could help the U.S.-backed Prime Minister Yatsenyuk on the inside. This is the same
Tyanhnybok who once
delivered a speec h applauding Ukrainians for fighting Jews and "other scum" during World
War II.
After protests in Kiev's Euromaidan square turned into battles with police in February 2014,
Yanukovych and the Western-backed opposition
signed an agreement brokered by France, Germany and Poland to form a national unity
government and hold new elections by the end of the year.
But that was not good enough for the neo-Nazis and extreme right-wing forces the U.S. had
helped to unleash. A violent mob led by the Right Sector militia marched on and invaded the
parliament building , a scene no longer difficult for Americans to imagine. Yanukovych and
his members of parliament fled for their lives.
Facing the loss of its most vital strategic naval base at Sevastopol in Crimea, Russia
accepted the overwhelming result (a 97% majority, with an 83% turnout) of a referendum in which
Crimea voted to leave Ukraine and rejoin Russia, which it had been a part of from 1783 to
1954.
The majority Russian-speaking provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk in Eastern Ukraine
unilaterally declared independence from Ukraine, triggering a bloody civil war between U.S.-
and Russian-backed forces that still rages in 2021.
U.S.-Russian relations have never recovered, even as U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals still
pose the greatest single
threat to our existence. Whatever Americans believe about the civil war in Ukraine and
allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, we must not allow the neocons
and the military-industrial complex they serve to deter Biden from conducting vital diplomacy
with Russia to steer us off our suicidal path toward nuclear war.
Nuland and the neocons, however, remain committed to an ever-more debilitating and dangerous
Cold War with Russia and China to justify a militarist foreign policy and record Pentagon
budgets. In a July 2020 Foreign Affairs article entitled "Pinning Down Putin," Nuland
absurdly
claimed that Russia presents a greater threat to "the liberal world" than the U.S.S.R.
posed during the old Cold War.
Nuland's
narrative rests on an utterly mythical, ahistorical narrative of Russian aggression and
U.S. good intentions. She pretends that Russia's military budget, which is one-tenth of
America's, is evidence of "Russian confrontation and militarization" and calls
on the U.S. and its allies to counter Russia by "maintaining robust defense budgets,
continuing to modernize U.S. and allied nuclear weapons systems, and deploying new conventional
missiles and missile defenses to protect against Russia's new weapons systems "
Nuland also wants to confront Russia with an aggressive NATO. Since her days as U.S.
Ambassador to NATO during President George W. Bush's second term, she has been a supporter of
NATO's expansion all the way up to Russia's border. She calls
for "permanent bases along NATO's eastern border." We have pored over a map of Europe, but
we can't find a country called NATO with any borders at all. Nuland sees Russia's commitment to
defending itself after successive 20th century Western invasions as an intolerable obstacle to
NATO's expansionist ambitions.
Nuland's militaristic worldview represents exactly the folly the U.S. has been pursuing
since the 1990s under the influence of the neocons and "liberal interventionists," which has
resulted in a systematic underinvestment in the American people while escalating tensions with
Russia, China, Iran and other countries.
As Obama learned too late, the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time can, with a
shove in the wrong direction, unleash years of intractable violence, chaos and international
discord. Victoria Nuland would be a ticking time-bomb in Biden's State Department, waiting to
sabotage his better angels much as she undermined Obama's second-term diplomacy.
So let's do Biden and the world a favor. Join World Beyond War , CODEPINK and dozens of other
organizations opposing neocon Nuland's confirmation as a threat to peace and diplomacy. Call
202-224-3121 and tell your Senator to oppose Nuland's installation at the State Department.
Nuland has also been declared persona non grata by Russia, so she would not be able to go
with Biden, were he to visit Moscow. Russian foreign minister Lavrov, actually refused to
shake her hand when she attended a US-Russia meeting with Kerry. She is poison to any attempt
to peaceful relationships.
Yes, I remember that meeting clearly. Can't cite the network, but it covered her closely
– body language only. I wonder where Biden stood on that act of diplomacy given his own
corruption, and also what John Kerry's thinking is about now. John Kerry's stepson was in
cahoots with Hunter Biden. It looked like Kerry brought her along for some rehabilitation and
Lavrov was having none of it. Instead he went directly to the delegation from Ukraine and
they stood in a circle all with their backs turned to Vicky who had no choice but to wander
over to the coffee table and pretend she wasn't totally uncomfortable. Totally excluded. How
can she recover from that?
If there is one thing that Russia hates it is fascists and that is because of the enormous
damage caused by them in WW2. We call those invaders Nazis but the Russians seem to call them
fascists. I sometimes wonder if it is part of their mother's milk this hatred. For people
like Nuland to help topple the government of a large, bordering country like the Ukraine and
install people that were literally fascists was too much for the Russians. These were fascist
of a very low order that had the old 1930s routines down pat, including the torchlight
parades. And there was Nuland, handing out cookies to the rioters, many of whom had been
trained in rioting tactics in Poland and were being paid about $100 a day by the US if I
recall correctly. Of course Nuland was not alone as there was also a Representative from the
EU also handing out cookies. The only equivalent that comes to mind is a violent revolution
in Canada using professional rioters and having diplomatic representatives from the Russian
Federation and China handing out donuts to the rioter. I wonder what Washington would say
about a stunt like that.
Nuland is a disgusting human being. Since she is a right winger, regardless of what party
may be listed on her voter ID, I don't think Bettridge's law applies here at all.
So glad all these 'woke' people put good old Uncle Joe back in office. Wonder how many
realized they were supporting people being burned alive by actual Nazis in doing so?
Thanks for this. Our "learned nothing/forgot nothing" Bourbon restoration will be led by
one of the dimmer Bourbons who couldn't even set up a good grift in Ukraine without boasting
about it and then angrily denying it. Should the press finally, improbably turn on him it
should make for some fun news conferences. But perhaps he'll merely be moving to the White
House basement from his Delaware basement.
CFTC's budgets are also set through congressional authorization and appropriations. Yes,
the CFPB is not subject to Congressional appropriations, but for good reasons. However, all
financial regulation can be overturned by the Congressional Review Act.
As for the article, citation needed. Sort of a laundry heap of questionable material. Make
no mistake, the Russo-Ukrainian War is a real war. Uniformed Russian armored infantry of
331st regiment of the 98th Svirsk airborne division dropped into Ukraine territory on 24
August 2014. From 25 to 27 August, Russian troops in civilian clothing, backed up by an
armored column [not in disguise] took Novoazovsk. This is about Russia not being able to
station 25,000 troops in Crimea as they had under Yanukovych. US troop levels in Europe have
been at their lowest for the last 20 years. The US would like to [nay, needs to] keep it that
way. However, the erosion of territorial integrity is a touchy subject in Europe given the
lasting peace of the post-war period in a place where the wars have a pre-fix like "Hundred
Years".
President Arseniy Yatsenyuk is of Jewish origin so the claims of coordination with Nazi
sympathizers is dubious. Not even going to get the boycotted unconstitutional Crimean
referendum.
As for WW III, Obama's defense department made it a priority to recover all the MANPADS,
such as the Chinese-made FN-6 [via Qatar], Russian-made Strela-2's and Igla-S's [via Libya]
from the FSA without so much as a thank you from the Russian Air Force. [Turkey, on the other
hand, armed the FSA with Stinger's.] It should be noted that the Syrian conflict's death
toll, in just four years, surpassed the 19-year death toll in all the Afghanistan, Pakistan,
and Iraq war theatres combined.
Think about this way: who needs NATO and the EU more to maintain his power structure, Joe
Biden or Vladimir Putin. Isn't it clear Americans don't care, and American business does not
look to compete in Russian anytime soon. The geography is wrong. But Putin must find a way to
engender ethnicities who do not like the Russian Empire, who had been cleansed by Stalin. One
way is to sell energy below cost to the republics and buy in back from political allies in
the form of electricity. Something upon which the EU frowns. [Personally, I did not care for
the way Putin early on systematically and indiscriminately starved Chechen civilians for
years. It was cruel on a level unseen outside of the Rwandan genocide. More importantly, it
was the Russian Federation abdicating its authority by not providing for its own citizens and
not letting NGO's fill the calorie gap. I'd like to think had Putin's admin not been so
wobbly the first few years, he might've let the Red Cross feed the children.]
Russia was never going to permit a US orchestrated coup in Ukraine without resistance. The
idea that Putin needs NATO more than Biden does seems unreasonable.
Talking about "citations", perhaps you could supply the readership of this site with some
credible citations and links for a few of the far fetched claims you're making here. Most of
this comment reads like pro-Ukrainian propaganda.
I heard about Gary Gensler, Samantha Power, and Victoria Nuland, and I immediately
thought, "The good, the bad, and the ugly."
Gensler surprised everyone when he was at the CFTC by doing his job, and doing it well,
and his running the SEC is a good thing.
Samantha Power is an aggressive war monger, and in her position at USAID, she will likely
have her fingers in regime change pie, since USAID is part of the deep state regime change
apparatus..
I've long suspected that NATO has existed since 1991 to allow the US/EU axis to control
Middle-Eastern and African resources. For example, the Rammstein military hospital is where
every Gulf War soldier was airlifted for major treatment and convalescence.
Also, there is a huge international trade in opium. It's grown in Afpak and shipped out in
every direction. I suspect that a fair amount of that flows through Ukraine and Crimea. If
you look at a topo map of Crimea, there's a lot of seashore that could be good "smuggler's
coves". Following this line of argument, Russia grabbing it from Ukraine was a gimme to
Russia's gangsters. This, as well as the "Pipeline Wars", gives Russia a strong reason to
encircle Ukraine.
A major scandal is unfolding in the US naval community. It turned out that a whole class
of ships, on which America had pinned great hopes a couple of decades ago, turned out to be
utterly incapable of combat. What exactly are the problems with these ships? Why did they
only show up now? What does the massive corruption in the United States have to do with what
is happening?
Political events in the United States have overshadowed everything that happens in this
country. Including one event related to the Navy, which would indeed have exploded.
We are talking about a whole type of warships, both already delivered to the US Navy, and
those still under construction – the so-called Littoral combat ship (LCS) of the
Freedom type. And it's not that they're useless. And not at the prohibitive cost. And not
even that the gearboxes of the ship's main power plant (GEM) do not withstand the maximum
stroke, and with the speed of 47 knots, which was the ridge of this project, he will never be
able to walk – they also resigned themselves to this.
But at the end of 2020, it turned out that they generally cannot move faster than a dry
cargo ship for more or less a long time. That is, it is not just scrapping metal; it is also
almost stationary scrap metal.
A central rule of a color revolution is to avoid an "orderly transition". The new regime
must have a revolutionary mandate instead of a democratic one. Only then can it operate
outside the constitution and outside the law.
The plan here is to declare not only Trump illegitimate but his whole administration
illegitimate. The new regime can then undo all of Trump's executive decisions. There is no
need to "stuff" the Supreme Court with extra judges. Simply declare Trump's appointments null
and void.
The Trump administration denounced or threatened trade agreements and "jaw-boned" particular
manufacturers without tangible or lasting results for young workers. It continued drone warfare
and bombing runs, exacerbating refugee problems. Its ham-handed actions relating to visa and
green card holders with vested rights partially wasted its "trump card" on immigration. Its
deregulatory and tax proposals had little appeal to its three new constituencies, and in its
kindness to fund managers, it forgot Bernard De Jouvenel's maxim that "the wealth of merchants
is resented more than the pomp of rulers."
There are still available, either to a Republican Party cleansed of Trump or to the Biden
administration, my 11 proposals of a populist nature, none very expensive. Since the Trump
administration was a milder version of what Hermann Rauschning in the 1930s called "A
Revolution of Nihilism," any effort to enlarge its constituency of malcontents was forsworn.
Accordingly, these ideas are re-tendered:
1. Completely relieving workers under the age of 25 of payroll taxation, as in Germany and
Holland. Over the long term, this would render them the most employed, rather than the most
unemployed, age cohort. Because they make up at most 10 percent of the labor force, and
typically enjoy barely half of average earnings, relieving them of 12.4 percent payroll taxes
would require an increase in general payroll tax rates of, at most, 5 to 10 percent of one
percent.
2. A revived Civilian Conservation Corps, a cause promoted only by Senator Bernie Sanders,
with its focus on low-tech infrastructure projects and services, including such neglected
fields of activity as soil conservation, reforestation, disaster relief, reclamation of
abandoned mine sites, creation of new national parks in Appalachia, hydrology, desert
agriculture, creation of footpaths and youth hostels, and training as practical nurses and
nursing assistants.
3. Making the services of the United States Employment Service, a largely moribund adjunct
of the unemployment system, available to all workers under the age of 25.
4. Tax credits, like those in Germany, Finland, and Japan, to encourage the installation of
second kitchens in owner-occupied housing, thereby fostering the creation of low-cost housing
in the form of accessory apartments, duplex houses, and mother-in-law flats. This is a far more
economical method of generating new low-cost small units than subsidized housing, and
restrictions to owner-occupied homes would eliminate the fears and controversies accompanying
public housing proposals.
5. Limited incentives, in the form of handbooks and nominal tax credits, to foster the
creation of cooperative old-age clubs on the Japanese pattern to assist the elderly in
remaining in their own homes, removing pressures on Medicaid.
6. Promotion of model state and local legislation and tax incentives for the creation of
land readjustment and land assembly districts on the postwar Japanese, Korean, and German
pattern, to foster private redevelopment of blighted urban and inner-suburban areas.
7. Support for a revived TEAM Act providing for the organization of single-plant works
councils, with the authority to negotiate local pay and productivity deals, work rules, and
employee grievances. Legislation to this effect sponsored by the Dunlap Commission appointed by
Labor Secretary Robert Reich and including several former Democratic secretaries of labor was
vetoed by President Clinton at the behest of the United Auto Workers. Since private-sector
union membership has declined by 60 percent since Clinton's veto, even Democratic congressmen
might now support it, to the great benefit of the low-income work force in non-union chain
establishments.
8. An orderly de-criminalization of marijuana on the Canadian pattern, accompanied by an
educational campaign stressing its de-motivating characteristics and enlisting schools and
colleges in its discouragement through selective drug testing, as in the military and adult
work force. This will eliminate nearly a million arrests a year and defund much of the
underworld that is the youth employer of first resort in depressed areas.
9. An effort to revive depressed downtown areas in small towns and cities with incentives
for the creation of Business Improvement Districts, together with enhanced enforcement of
antitrust, predatory pricing, and bribery laws against offending large retailers.
10. Relief for credit unions and community banks from the more oppressive Sarbanes-Oxley and
Dodd-Frank regulations without holding them hostage to secure unjustified deregulation for
larger banks.
11. Grant of work permits to undocumented workers without criminal records and with long
records of American employment upon payment by them, their families, employers, or
philanthropies of large ($5,000) application fees, the proceeds to be dedicated to a fund for
law enforcement, housing, and nurse practitioner programs addressing migration in its Central
American and other source countries. As with women's suffrage prior to 1920, the question of
enfranchisement should be left to the States, pursuant to Article I, Sections 2 and 4 of the
Constitution.
It may be objected that measures to relieve the young are of limited political appeal, since
they do not vote in large numbers. They do not, but their mothers do. And many of the other
measures will provide citizens with a greater sense of control over their own lives.
While much of this agenda may not appeal to gradgrind Republicans who appreciate the price
of everything and the value of nothing, nor to those whose idea of an infrastructure program is
aid to a contracting class and its representatives on K Street, some might be led to follow a
vagrant thought of former speaker Paul Ryan. It will be recalled that he uttered the only
memorable words of the 2012 Republican Convention when he declared that "college graduates
should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at faded Obama
posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life."
George W. Liebmann, a Baltimore lawyer, is the author of various books on public policy and
history, including Solving Problems Without Large Government: Devolution, Fairness, and
Equality (Praeger, 1999), reprinted as Neighborhood Futures (Transaction Books, 2003).
I would modify Item#1 and Item#3 to not just encourage employment for those under 25 but I
would:
1) exclude all (legal, illegal or visa workers from programs to encourage their
employment.
2) such programs should also include the difficult to employ like the disabled
3) such programs should also include the difficult to employ over 50 job seeker.
I especially support Item 4 (small studio apartments or granny flats)
I oppose Item#7 It is much to dangerous for such worker councils to be usurped by our
leftist Marxist woke culture, political activist, social justice, cancel culture, diversity,
inclusivity, cross sectional race theorists, etc. which will translate into a hostile
anti-white, anti-male, anti-Christian, anti-marriage, anti-family, anti-chrildren,
anti-American corporate enforced ideology. If you thought the left's false accusations of
rape on campus and the lefts false accusations of race hatred on campus, it you thought false
accusations of Jesse Smollett in Chicago were an example of ruining an individuals life on
hearsay then wake until these work councils get taken over by leftist activists and watch
what they do to innocent working class employees who just want to do their job but don't
follow the leftist narrative.
I oppose Item#11. We lost 250,000 jobs due to COVID (the chinese bat flu stew). Our
unemployment rate is 6.7%. At the same time we are losing jobs our legal immigration rate is
steady at 1 million per year. No, I do not support illegal immigration, legal immigration,
refugees, asylum seekers, economic migrants, temporary work or education visas. No western
nation can continue to relieve the problems of over population by mass immigration. It is not
fair to the citizens of the US or any other western/westernized country.
I don't disagree with very much here though as a practical matter I will point out a
mistaken assumption that seems to underlie #5:
Re: Limited incentives, in the form of handbooks and nominal tax credits, to foster the
creation of cooperative old-age clubs on the Japanese pattern to assist the elderly in
remaining in their own homes, removing pressures on Medicaid.
I assume that is about nursing homes, but those are almost always a last resort when the
patient is so seriously disabled that they cannot possibly live independently and their
medical needs surpass the abilities of family members to care for them.
Also, I don't think that youth unemployment is the big bugaboo with deindustrialization.
Young people are a good deal more flexible, and have fewer financial commitments, than older
people after all. Rather the disemployment of middle aged (and older) blue collar workers is
the larger problem. These people expected to be in the same job (or type of job) for life and
they had the rug pulled out from under them and found themselves with few prospects. Some of
them ended up in low paying service jobs, some lived off a still-employed spouse, some went
on SSDI, and some few even ended up homeless.
Most of these barely sound conservative. One-company workers' councils violate NLRB rules,
for reasons probably having to do with Clinton's veto; these days they would vastly increase
the number of workers in organized setting.
The marijuana suggestion contains bits of the old War on Drugs: forced drug testing of
workers, and propaganda that focuses on marijuana rather than the dangers of any kind of
excess substance use/addiction. *Free employers to pursue a drug-free work place
rather than a drug-free work force. *Any govt-sponsored statements on drugs should be
based on facts and even-handed research, not the whoring that scientists have done for the
last 50 years, and should include the tonic effects of both a mild buzz and deep psychedelic
experience.
As a moderate Democrat, most of these ideas appeal to me. As someone who has paid
attention for decades, I see no chance in hell of any of these things happening [during Biden
administration], especially if proposed by a Democrat. As an optimist, I wish moderate
Republicans could join moderate Democrats in making such things a possibility. As a realist,
I don't think America is capable of solving any problems right now, especially tough ones. As
an American, it saddens me.
Most of the ideas are excellent. I would add much greater funding for vocational education
at the secondary and post-secondary level. Our public schools are far too focused on
preparing students for college with insufficient training for those ill suited for or
uninterested in seeking a university education.
The lack of affordable housing is a major obstacle for twenty somethings to get out of
their childhood home and begin the process of family formation. We need tax incentives to
build limited equity cooperative apartment buildings, resident-owned mobile/modular home
parks and small bungalow-style houses.
I like the proposal for worker councils but employee ownership is an even better idea.
Workers owning a share in their business should be strongly encouraged by public policy at
all levels.
What deterrent has Mr. Bandow on his mind for Europeans? One that goes against the NPT?
The type that Iran has been pummeled economically for the past 20 years? And for which North
Korea has been practically cordoned and now lives in quasi-autarchy? I have read this type of
idiocy that encouraged S. Korea and Japan to acquire nuclear weapons. How is this supposed to
work and be explained to the world at large? Oh, we need to all acquire nuclear weapons now
because...? But we'll continue to sanction Iran and N Korea for the same things
because...?
I guess that is the corollary of 20 years of repeating the mantra "rules based
international order". Mr. Bandow, in terms of nuclear proliferation (which the US presently
breaches by bringing its nukes on the territory of other states, plus other shenanigans done
in conjunction with Japan concerning plutonium), it is the NPT that is the rule... Stick with
it, and don't pretend that it doesn't apply to you and your allies.
Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, etc. are enemies because they do not open their economies
to be under the control of the West or where the West can get a greater share of profits
(most for the elites and some for the battered pension plans that were for years betting on
7% return on investment). Therefore military is another instrument to open that oyster up.
All the rest is BS created to have people marshalling under the flag...
Interesting article. As Trump has once proposed. The US leave NATO and withdraw their
troops from Europe and take their nukes with them. That would lead to disbanding NATO . Many
Germans would be glad. The transatlanticists in the German government don't represent the
majority of the German people. Germany could have her own nukes. Trump was all for it. I have
never understood the agression against Russia. If a country doesn't intend to invade and
conquer another country a blown up military isn't necessary in my opinion. To deter other
countries from attacking a country needs a few nukes and it's safe. Isn't it? North Korea is
the best example. Libya, Syria and Iraq who gave up their nuclear weapons program were all
invaded and destroyed. But NATO being disbanded remains wishful thinking. The MIC needs the
proceeds.
The US presence in NATO and Europe has been detrimental to Europe for atleast 10 years
possibly 20 or longer. It has allowed European nations to indulge in follies that prudent,
self aware nations responsible for their own defense and their own future would take very
seriously and both national interests and security/defense interests. Lets take a few
examples of Europes follies:
1) France wants all EU nations to federal their militaries into a continental military.
Federalize means that individual EU nations would lose sovereignty over their militaries. It
also means that the most powerful nations in the EU (ie France and Germany) would have
overwhelming influence/control over Brussels decisions regarding its continental armies just
as France and Britain have overwhelming control over regulation, immigration, trade, finance,
etc.
2) European nations do not consider open borders and uncontrolled migration as continental -
domestic security issues. Brussels-Germany-France-Sweden overwhelmingly support open borders
and mass immigration plus they use Brussels to bully less powerful poorer nations to accept
immigrants without any compensation, as well as threatening to take EU voting rights from
countries like Hungary or Poland.
3) In another issue concerning open borders and mass immigration,
Brussels-Germany-France-Sweden completely ignore terrorist acts, car bombings, infiltration
of radical islam, infiltration of radical subversive anarchistic individuals and groups,
honor killings, human trafficking/child brides, knifings, grooming gangs, assaults, violent
crime, murder, etc.
4) Europe follows the US in still engaging Russia as a cold war enemy.
5) Europe has gone full fledged gender neutral / gender equal society. Everyone believes in
equality of opportunity but with Equality of Opportunity comes Equality of Responsibilities.
If men must serve in the military then so much women or there is no Gender Equality.
Furthermore, radical subversive leftist belief is that men must be made weaker and less
masculine to make women appear stronger. Sorry but you cannot defend a continent on
Feminist-Cultural Marxist Theory.
6) Europe has allowed its birthrate to fall drastically below replacement (2.1). In many
European countries their birth replacement rate is close to 1.0, 1.2, 1.5 etc. Europe cannot
defend itself if it has no people to staff a military. I will not judge Europe. Europe must plan for its own future but many EU nations and
NATO members think they can indulge in any utopian theory because the US will come to save
them from the responsibilities of their ill conceived societal experiments. The US should be
an invisible partner and force every nation to take responsibility for how much sovereignty
they are willing to relinquish to Brussels and take responsibility for their nations culture,
its progeny, its defense and its national interest.
In the end it all comes down to China. If the Europeans are not willing to move towards
cutting off China, and were I in Europe's position I'm not sure if I would be, NATO is
worthless to the US. You really would be better off thinking more about security integration
with Latin America or an alliance with a remilitarized Japan.
Europe's day as the prime concern for the US has passed and rather than dinking around in
some Latvian forest we need to be practicing naval exercises in the Western Pacific.
This criminal organization should be disbanded and it's leader, the U.S., should be
dragged into world courts and tried for continuing crimes against humanity.
Nothing good ever came from these creeps, the Europeans and the American ones across the
world, unless y'all think world 1 and the other fun one, 2 and...oh, Iraq, Afghanistan,
Syria, Libya and other places these mobsters caused so much misery and death are cool.
Meanwhile, Russia and China laugh.
I'm laughing with 'em.
celebrating the return of the consensus that Americans must forever pay for the continent's
defense.
Wrong, Americans must forever pay for occupying foreing lands. Go home, and take with you
those traitor burecrats that sigh with relief to the fact of being occupied, then you might
be able to take care of your people and spend your ridiculous "defense" budget to renew your
degraded infrastructure.
It wasn't a single speech by Trump just before events unfolded that led to the violence of
January 6 during which five people died. Many of the same people now pointing fingers at Trump
bear responsibility for the tragedy themselves. So, in the spirit of Zola
I accuse the Washington establishment of reducing the concept of democracy itself to little
more than a convenient pretext for foreign invasion of countries that don't align with
America's interests. You've perverted the concept for the average foreigner of target countries
that have seen little more than enduring chaos and destruction borne of ' democracy '.
So why should the average American trust in the notion when you cry about 'democracy' itself
being attacked by a mob?
I accuse the Democratic Party of spending the past four years since Trump was legitimately
elected trying to disenfranchise the near-63 million Americans who cast their ballot in his
favor by portraying them as useful idiots of a foreign power (namely Russia), rather than
people who simply wanted someone in charge who wasn't going to kowtow to the insidious
corruption in Washington.
I accuse the Republican Party of placing its own personal interests over those of the
citizens by enabling – or even cheerleading – Trump's behavior when it risked
becoming a liability for his presidency, for the party, and for the hopes of millions of
average Americans who voted for him.
I accuse Big Tech – specifically, social media giants – of rank hypocrisy. The
more extreme and buzzworthy the comments on your platforms by Trump and his most fervent
supporters, the more money it has made you. And now you have the gall to admonish and blacklist
Trump and his supporters while pretending that it's all such a shock. You played just as much a
role in all of this as they did. Own it. And to clarify, are you in favor of free speech, or
strictly speech that squares with the prevailing political winds and social pressures at any
given time?
I accuse right-leaning ideological talking heads of self-serving pandering to your audience
of consumers – by screaming about unproven 'election fraud', for example – rather
than providing rational analysis and credible information that might have helped to make your
case to a wider audience beyond the handful of radical extremists who didn't exactly need
convincing in the first place.
I accuse left-leaning pundits of hysteria rather than constructive opposition, and reducing
any pushback against your agenda or positions to some form of bigotry.
I accuse the mainstream media of obvious and inherent bias against President Trump from the
very outset of his presidency, which has ultimately served to radicalize his base and further
erode the average American's faith in the important work of the free press.
I accuse the sanitary fascists who emerged over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic and who
acted like anyone prioritizing their own solvency and ability to feed their families over
various, ever-changing restrictions of questionable effectiveness was some kind of terrorist.
Many members of the mob that showed up on Capitol Hill felt that they had little left to lose.
And it's in part because of you.
I accuse Wall Street, and the politicians whom it has purchased through lobbying efforts, of
failing to see how globalization would ultimately disenfranchise the average American worker by
exporting jobs and driving down wages. You, too, contributed to the frustration seen in that
mob that congregated in Washington from the four corners of America.
Finally, I accuse President Donald Trump of failing to grow into his presidency, of allowing
his own ego to get in the way of his promises, of seemingly prioritizing the interests of
friends and associates, and of failing to convert his considerable rhetorical power into
lasting achievements and a legacy in which his voters and supporters could take pride.
Every one of these people hold responsibility for catalyzing the events of January 6. Unless
those who remain standing when the dust settles on this fiasco change their ways, America is in
for a long, rough ride.
This is about the consolidation of power after questionable election; Capitol ransacking is
just a pretext for represssions. If it did not occur they would find another one.
Notable quotes:
"... (5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that -- (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended -- (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. ..."
"... Why all the talk about "domestic terrorism"? I suspect it's because people can't stand the idea that the Trump mob could be guilty of nothing more than trespassing. Time reports sadly that there are no laws against domestic terrorism, but lists the charges it wants brought: seditious conspiracy, which carries a 20-year maximum sentence, homicide, assault, interstate travel in aid of racketeering, restricted-area violations, vandalism, and trespassing. ..."
"... The authorities promise to hunt the rioters -- many of whom just walked through an open door -- to the ends of the earth as if they were Osama bin Laden. The contrast with the handling of BLM and antifa rioters is stark. ..."
Joe Biden has the people who took over the Capitol on Jan. 6 figured out. In just two days,
he had them pegged for "a bunch of thugs, insurrectionists, white supremacists, and
anti-Semites, and it's not enough." Not enough? He also said they were "domestic terrorists."
Curiously, there is a federal definition of domestic terrorism, but it isn't a crime. There
is now tremendous pressure to change that, and depending on what kind of law takes shape, there
could be huge implications for dissidents.
For now, this
definition from 18 U.S. Code § 2331 is worth studying:
(5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that -- (A) involve acts dangerous to
human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended -- (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to
influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the
conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur
primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
Does this apply to the Capitol takeover? Domestic terrorism must be an illegal act
"dangerous to human life" and meant to influence policy. The Trump supporters wanted to
influence policy alright, but what does "dangerous to human life" mean? The
Michigan Penal Code says it is "that which causes a substantial likelihood of death or
serious injury."
That wouldn't include trespassing, breaking and entering, or even scuffling with the police.
Anyone who may have
killed Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick would meet the definition of a "domestic
terrorist," but the circumstances of his death are still not clear. It may be there wasn't a
single "textbook" domestic terrorist at the Capitol that day. Lefties are gloating
over the death of Ashli Babbitt, but the only thing she did that was "dangerous to human life"
was stop a bullet.
Why all the talk about "domestic terrorism"? I suspect it's because people can't stand the
idea that the Trump mob could be guilty of nothing more than trespassing. Time reports
sadly that there are no laws against domestic terrorism, but lists the charges it wants brought:
seditious conspiracy, which carries a 20-year maximum sentence, homicide, assault, interstate
travel in aid of racketeering, restricted-area violations, vandalism, and trespassing.
Sure enough, the Justice Department has set up a task force
to file sedition and conspiracy charges . The investigation is said to be "one of the most
expansive criminal investigations in the history of the Justice Department." The authorities
promise to hunt the rioters -- many of whom just walked through an open door -- to the ends of
the earth as if they were Osama bin Laden. The contrast with the
handling of BLM and
antifa rioters is stark.
Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson, who chairs the House Committee on Homeland Security,
has another idea . "Given the heinous domestic terrorist attack on the U.S. Capitol," he
wants everyone involved put on the No-Fly List. Rep. Jason Crow, a member of the House Armed
Services Committee, wants the US Army Secretary to track down and
court martial every soldier who entered the Capitol. A court
martial requires a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, usually for a serious
felony. Police departments in
Virginia ,
Washington , and
Pennsylvania are
scouring their rosters , looking for officers who went to the rally, whether they entered
the Capitol or not. Will they be fired?
Wikipedia describes John McCain's daughter Meghan as a
"columnist, author, and television personality." She wants the rioters sent to Guantanamo :
"They should be treated the same way we treat Al-Qaeda" -- yet another American frustrated by
the lack of a law against domestic terrorism.
... ... ...
... [neoliberal] Lefties were of course
pleased that "white supremacists" can
now officially be "terrorists." This is very important for any potential new law because
the occupation of the Capitol has unleashed a wave of vitriol against "white supremacy," even
though there is no evidence the Trump supporters had the slightest racial motivation. NBC News
ran this
headline : "'Vintage white rage': Why the riots were about the perceived loss of white
power." Politico
tells us "there's a term for what happened at the Capitol this week: 'whitelash'." The
Atlantic
explained that "the Capitol riot was an attack on multiracial democracy." The
Guardian 's
headline was "Insurrection Day: When White Supremacist Terror Came to the US Capitol."
Black Congressman Hank Johnson
told Al Sharpton that the black Capitol policeman who killed Ashli Babbitt had
singlehandedly put down a lynch mob: If he hadn't shot her, "I have no doubt that some of us
who look like me would've been hanging from the railings of the 3rd floor, onto the House
floor, swinging like . . . strange fruit." Nancy Pelosi said that
the people who entered the Capitol "have chosen their whiteness over democracy," whatever that
means.
This perfectly matches the views of Richard Durbin, ranking member on the Senate
Subcommittees for Defense and for the Constitution. In 2019, he introduced the Domestic Terrorism
Prevention Act , which called white supremacy "the most significant domestic terrorism
threat facing the United States." The act was only about 3,000 words but used "white
supremacist" 12 times, "neo-Nazi" six times, "far-right" eight times, and "hate crime" 10
times. It was silent on any other kind of domestic terrorism. Sen. Durbin says he will
reintroduce the bill right away in light of the Capitol takeover.
There is no telling what laws could pass in this fevered environment, but it's important to
note what Mr. Durbin's 2019 bill did and did not do. It did not make domestic terrorism a crime
or authorize the designation of "domestic terrorism organizations," which would mean jailing
Americans as if they were Al-Qaeda members and seizing assets without notice. What it
did
do was set up special offices in the FBI, Justice Department, and Homeland Security "to
analyze and monitor domestic terrorist activity and . . . take steps to prevent domestic
terrorism." It's anyone's guess what those "steps" were supposed to be.
The bill also required the three agencies to "review each hate crime incident reported
during the preceding year to determine whether the incident also constitutes a domestic
terrorism-related incident," though it didn't say to what end.
Sen. Durbin loves to quote FBI Director Christopher A. Wray's testimony
before Congress in 2019: "A majority of the domestic terrorism cases that we've investigated
are motivated by some version of what you might call white supremacy . . . ."
However, the bill used the definition of "domestic terrorism" from 18 U.S. Code § 2331
cited above, which is ideologically neutral. That means Black Lives Matter and antifa commit
vastly more "domestic terrorism" than all the "white supremacists," "neo-Nazis," and "far-right
extremists" combined. Anyone who shouts "Defund the police," "Justice for Breonna Taylor,"
"Black lives matter," or even "I can't breathe" is trying to "influence the policy of a
government." If, in that context, someone commits an illegal act "dangerous to human life," he
is a domestic terrorist. Since the
death of George Floyd , there have been countless dangerous-to-human-life acts of arson and
aggravated assault; even attempts to
stop ambulances from bringing wounded officers to emergency rooms. If "white supremacists"
were organizing freeway shutdowns, they would surely count as "dangerous to human
life."
The levels of hypocritical hysteria dominating the corporate airwaves and most electronic
media, together with an even more amplified level among the pro$titicians in the Di$trict of
Corruption means they are scared.
They suddenly feel vulnerable. Are they as vulnerable as the people of Yemen who are being
bombed daily and starvation blockaded by the $audi crime clan with the full. assistance of
those D.C. Pro$titician$? Are they as vulnerable as those half million!!! deliberately
starved Iraqi children whom Madelein Albrietstein declared to be "worth it" in forwarding the
I$raeli agenda?
Could it just simply be that they are themselves guilty of crimes against humanity and in
violation of their oaths to protect the Constitution of the United States from all enemies
foreign and DOMESTIC? The little gal under the streetlight with high heels, short skirt and
low-hanging purse in the midnight hour at least provides a desired service. Can the same be
said for the Pro$titicians on the Hill overlooking Urination'$ Capitol?
As for the media whores and pre$$titute$, being myself a recovering journalist; there is
good reason to believe that I have correctly identified them.
I don't see how it can't be recognized that Trump set-up his own supporters by luring them
to DC.
Going to Wash DC to protest wasn't going to change the vote outcome in Congress and any
fool could anticipate Antifa types would show up (apparently Pelosi, Schumer, McConnell and
DC Mayor were advised they were planning to come and riot. So Trump had to have known
too.)
Now, neither POTUS or Congress members will publicly identify the organized Antifa thug
element. So, Trump supporters, and by extension Repubs, are being widely labeled as "domestic
terrorists'. While Trump releases another video today lecturing about violence which
implicates HIS supporters by no mention of the other elements there.
Congressman Hank Johnson told Al Sharpton that the black Capitol policeman who killed
Ashli Babbitt had singlehandedly put down a lynch mob: If he hadn't shot her, "I have no
doubt that some of us who look like me would've been hanging from the railings of the 3rd
floor, onto the House floor, swinging like . . . strange fruit.
This statement is quite stupid but Johnson has said worse in the past:
During a House Armed Services Committee hearing on March 25, 2010[40] concerning the
U.S. military installation on the island of Guam, Johnson said to Admiral Robert F.
Willard, Commander of U.S. Pacific Command, "My fear is that the whole island will become
so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize", to which Admiral Willard replied,
"We don't anticipate that."
The great thing about language in the 21st century is it means whatever you want it to
mean, sort of like Alice in wonderland. A terrorist is whatever they deem to be a terrorist;
anyone who does not go along with their agenda. "building back better" means repression and
censorship. "the new normal" means global corporate government and the great reset agenda.
"global pandemic" means a plandemic that kills one in a million healthy young people. etc.
Facts and information do not matter to these people; it is 1984. This struggle will be
decided by force, as logical arguments are useless to those who deny the basic axioms of
reality and existence (almost all libtards and most rinos). I think in a way it is a good
thing that things are getting worse for the average middle american. Things will need to get
much worse before they get better as more than half the people are still totally asleep. Of
the minority that are awake, most of us have too much to lose right now . But we need to
organize and prepare to take action soon or we will be bled to death by a thousand cuts as
they have been doing for a while now. What kind of a world will our children inherit if we
stay silent and apathetic?
O MY GOD!
All the discussions around Trump reminded me of Hitler after Stalingrad.
After the defeat at Stalingrad, the Germans waited 2 years for Hitler to use the secret
weapon and win the war. The German army suffered defeat after defeat, the Russian communists
were searching for Hitler's body through Bunkers and the Germans still waited for the
super-secret weapon to save them.
Two months after the election, Trump's team suffered defeat after defeat. Trump is waiting
for jail, but his supporters are convinced that Trump still has a secret weapon with which
will win the election.When you wake up to reality. Trump is a false Messiah and he he doesn't
have a super-secret-weapon.
You have to fight your self for justice and truth and not wait for someoneelse to fight for
you while you button porn, tiktok or chat smalltalk on Facebook.
I can't forget what Mother Teresa said 30 years ago: "Don't wait for a leader because he
won't come. Be your own leaders."
You all are for sure. I just changed my party registration and I'm now a proud Democrat. I
don't want to be denied jobs, loans, transportation, and possibly freedom and life itself for
the sake of a country that has collectively decided to destroy itself.
And that's what false flag with Capitol ransacking accomplished. It fives Clinton/Obama/Biden
clique card blank for suppressing the dissent
This false flag operation like shooting protesters by snipers during Ukrainian Maydan is a
logical end of American Maidan and pursued the same goals -- deposing the current president,
hijacking political power and consolidating it via repressions.
Notable quotes:
"... That is why we are witnessing the fussy, aggressive actions of the Democrats - a ridiculous re-impeachment of the president, who will leave the White House in a week, the most severe censorship and suppression of dissent. There is no need for the real winners of fair elections to behave like that, as they are aware of their legitimacy and are confident in themselves (relying on the real, not imaginary, support of the majority of the population). ..."
From the "Biden Exploits His Capitol Gains" article:
Joe Biden's own language certainly sounded less like a magnanimous winner uniting his
people than like that used by autocrats and dictators to hold onto power, argues Diana
Johnstone.
Diana Johnstone's opinion is quite reasonable. In fact, a "creeping"/"bureaucratic" coup
d'etat took place in the United States. And it wasn't Trump at all, but Biden & Co. The
fact that "Joe Biden's own language sounded like that used by autocrats and dictators to hold
onto power" is further confirmation of this.
If you are in the majority and you win the election honestly, then there is no need to act
the way the Democrats did. The current aggressive rhetoric of Biden (and other Democrats) is
evidence that the elections were stolen/falsified. Biden knows this very well, and therefore
his language is as cruel, irreconcilable and repressive as possible. After the illegitimate
elections, the task is to consolidate own's power and suppress all those who reject what
happened. In fact, this is what happened in Ukraine after the Maidan 2014.
That is why we are witnessing the fussy, aggressive actions of the Democrats - a
ridiculous re-impeachment of the president, who will leave the White House in a week, the
most severe censorship and suppression of dissent. There is no need for the real winners of
fair elections to behave like that, as they are aware of their legitimacy and are confident
in themselves (relying on the real, not imaginary, support of the majority of the
population).
Globalization has made the United States a hollow giant. It has produced an enormous
wealth gap, and this inequality is producing a breakdown in social cohesion. They have faced
crisis before in the form of political polarization, economic hardship and racial tensions,
but the situation now is a combination of every one of the mentioned before amplified by
orders of magnitude by the pandemic.
The power of the MIC, Wall Street and Big Tech along with their MSM minions acting in a
concerted way is the only thing preventing an implosion of the country. Either that or the
notion of "American Exceptionalism" is truly implanted in the hearts and minds of the people,
whether they realize it or not.
There will be a wipe out of Trumpists and one party Dem state ala California. The Rep
party will divide itself into Trumpists and establishment fighting each other.
The clear changes in the culture of the US population, which is found by numerous surveys,
back up this assessment of the situation.
Trump's biggest fault is that he managed to corrupt many naturally isolationist rank and
file republicans into "I have the biggest dick" imperialism and China/Iran hysteria. He tried
to save the US Empire, corrupted MAGA into Make America Rule the World Again, and for that he
paid the price.
He was triggered by the US decline in the world (Murica is no longer number 1, how can
this be!) and tried to prop up the Empire that will eat him later.
If he tried to run on anti-imperial isolationit platform he still had a chance. But that
required better relations with China, Russia, Iran and others, something impossible for a US
rightoid massively triggered about Murica not being "number 1".
Too many people believe what they choose to read. The constantly reinforced world view of
us vs them. I remember when Obama had a real mandate and both houses of Congress his first
two years. His big 'socialist' victory - a corporate run for-profit healthcare system which
is the laughing stock of the world and oh yeah he expanded the 911 Forever War.
What did Trump do in four years? Nothing. The government of the USA is failed. The
dissatisfaction with the Establishment goes way beyond the QAnon crowd.
The idea that there are actually two opposing political ideologies in the USA is Big Lie
101.
Is there anything more pathetic than competition between two political mafias hiding as some
sort of disagreement over principle?
Notable quotes:
"... Absolutely his instinct to rebalance the economic relationship with China was correct. But he's too stupid to do it in a way that actually benefits or improves the US long term. Every once in a while with him there was hint of a good instinct but he never followed through because his base instincts always win out. ..."
"... The cries of censorship are asinine. Real censorship of diverging opinions was accomplished decades ago. Banning Donald trump from twitter isn't censorship. They didn't ban the POTUS account (they did delete tweets when he tried to use it), they banned his personal account because he's an asshole who broke the rules. Republicans have been telling me about the sanctity of property my whole life. Now they change their minds? ..."
It's all just farts in a jar. The trajectory was set decades ago and the political
oligarchy and gerontocracy aren't going to let go of that trajectory. Trump was only a
"populist" insofar as it was a means for him to be popular. In reality, he's a dishonest,
craven asshole. If he was a populist he would have responded to Covid way differently. What
he is, however, is a nationalist. Those are dangerous because they don't think clearly.
Absolutely his instinct to rebalance the economic relationship with China was correct.
But he's too stupid to do it in a way that actually benefits or improves the US long term.
Every once in a while with him there was hint of a good instinct but he never followed
through because his base instincts always win out.
The cries of censorship are asinine. Real censorship of diverging opinions was
accomplished decades ago. Banning Donald trump from twitter isn't censorship. They didn't ban
the POTUS account (they did delete tweets when he tried to use it), they banned his personal
account because he's an asshole who broke the rules. Republicans have been telling me about
the sanctity of property my whole life. Now they change their minds?
The empire is in terminal decline. Trump doesn't change it. Biden doesn't change it. Who
controls Congress doesn't change it. Because all of them are beholden to the declining empire
and/or they believe in America's myths (they are nationalists). A failed color revolution run
by people who don't want to accept an election result just says real loud that the empire is
falling.
Mass protests generally have two distinct but intertwined goals: 1) to "make a statement,"
and 2) to inflict a cost. To state the obvious, mass protests occur because a group of people
are unhappy about something, and they want something to change. Change only occurs, in a large
bureaucratic nation like ours, if a loud "message" is conveyed, or if the price of non-change
becomes too high. If thousands of Trump voters are mad as hell because they believe the
election was stolen, and if they want to protest, they can either make their message heard and
then hope for the best (not much hope there), or they can attempt to punish the thieves
-- that is, make them incur some cost for their malfeasance.
What did the mob achieve on Wednesday? We already knew their message -- Trump won the
election, and it was stolen. We know they have support across the country; even our biased
media admit to some 74 million Trump voters, of whom 70% to 80% (depending on the poll) think
the election was stolen. But then what? "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it." And
then what? The message is impotent. It has no consequence.
If 'the message' was doomed to impotence, inflicting 'a cost' was much more tangible, and
much more achievable. By forcing their way into the Capitol building, a motivated and
reasonably prepared mob could have caused tremendous damage. If -- and I stress the conditional
here -- if they wanted to inflict damage, they had a golden opportunity. They had guns,
presumably hidden, and far outnumbered the handful of guards. Any firefight would have been
over quickly, with the mob victorious. Security guards, staffers, even congressmen would have
been easy prey, for kidnapping, injury, or worse. But this did not happen.
... ... ...
Notice how congressmen, left and right, responded to the event. All were indignant. All were
outraged. All condemned the "senseless violence" of the crazed mob and the "attempted
overthrow" of American democracy. All of them: left, right, and center; Democrat and
Republican; Trump supporter or not. All of them condemned it.
Again: Why? The answer here is clear: All congressmen, of all stripes, have a vested
interest in sustaining the system, more or less in its current form . This is obvious. They
are all 'winners' in the system. It has made them all rich, famous, and powerful. Yes, they
fight for relative power and relative influence, but this is largely a sham. The
Republican-Democrat battles are only there to give the impression of real competition. Instead,
in reality, we have a deep and radical monopoly -- a monopoly of pro-corporate, pro-capitalist,
pro-war, pro-Israel, and pro-Jewish individuals. On these things, they all agree. I've been
saying as much for many years: We should focus not on what divides the two parties, but on
what unites them . This is far more revealing.
... More than anything, Trump was a symbol: a symbol of resistance, of defiance, and of an
'in your face' attitude. But nothing more. The Trump presidency was all show, no substance. It
was, and is, hardly worth dying over.
And by 'media,' I mean all media. Consider what our beloved Tucker Carlson had
to say , speaking at the beginning of his show on the very first day after the protest:
Political violence begets political violence. That is an iron law that never changes. We
have to be against that, no matter who commits the violence or under what pretext, no matter
how many self-interested demagogues assure us the violence is justified or necessary. We have
a duty to oppose all of this, not simply because political violence kills other people's
children, but because in the end it doesn't work.
No good person will live a happier life because [Ashli Babbitt] was killed in a hallway of
the Capitol today. So our only option, as a practical matter, is to fix what is causing this
in the first place. You may have nothing in common with the people on the other side of the
country -- increasingly, you probably don't -- but you're stuck with them. The idea that
groups of Americans will somehow break off into separate peaceful nations of like-minded
citizens is a fantasy. That will not happen. There is no such thing as 'peaceful separation';
there never has been, and there won't be.
The two hemispheres of this country are inseparably intertwined, like conjoined twins.
Neither can leave without killing the other. As horrifying as this moment is, we have no
option but to make it better, to gut it out.
The entry of the Capitol building was spontaneous. Nobody saw it coming.
In the immediate aftermath, the media didn't know whether to promote it or bury it. It
took hours and days for the narrative to coalesce on orders from the top.
As it was happening, the media was gob-smacked. The 'insurrection' narrative didn't truly
get going until the protest was long over.
It's real tiresome to do this but people need to be reminded that Ziocorporate conman
fraud Trump and his MAGA brand are a product of the same lot that governs the Democrats, and
that he was never on his constituency's side:
And it's necessary because if there's a chance to unite even a small group of people after
realising how they're being had, then there's a chance for a small change to snowball into
something larger. And it should not stay on the white side of the divide, it's not like the
plandemic's been killing the economy for whites only. No "populist anti-Deep State patriot"
or national leader goes around endorsing other countries' politicians, much less Israel's,
the purest manifestation of corporate bankster power acting in unison with neocolonial
globalism, a trait shared by Biden and Trump.
Actions should be peaceful, because entities like the Pentagon and CIA have an absolute
monopoly on violent repression...
One Christian fellow I listened to said that Antifa were definitely there. He took video
of them walking down the street. That just proves to me that even Antifa knew they were no
threat, otherwise they wouldn't have been mingling among thousands and thousands of Trump
supporters.
The fellow said that from what he could see, the Trump protesters were unarmed, well
behaved, smiling, and content with waving their flags. He said they are proud patriots and
would never think of destroying art work or smashing up the Capitol Building.
He said on the 15 to 20 previous trips he's made to the Capitol Building, the pop-up metal
barriers have always been up, but no barriers were up on January 6th. He said on a previous
trip he had stepped onto the grass to take a picture and was quickly told by an officer to
"get off the grass". But on January 6th, the sidewalks were blocked off, forcing people onto
the grass.
We've seen the video of what looks to be an Antifa member breaking a window, only to be
stopped by a Trump supporter.
No, these were salt of the earth people who were no threat to Antifa OR the spineless
politicians. They knew this, but they've played it up for all it's worth.
Amazon includes a couple accurate blurbs on the product description page:
This short book is wicked, truthful, and entertaining. The author, after outlining a
step-by-step procedure for bringing about a coup, analyzes modern (post–Second World
War) coups, and points out why some succeeded and others failed. ( New Yorker )
An extraordinarily competent and well-written work, displaying very wide knowledge of
the ways in which coups, both successful and unsuccessful, have actually been organized. (
Times Literary Supplement )
You don't do a "coup" by invading the congressional discussion bunker in a nominal
democracy. You do a "coup" by ordering up CIA-organized troops to take over communication
centers as checkpoints secured by APCs go up everywhere as congresscritters are frogmarched
to a nearby stadium. The CEOs and salaried Wokers of the social meedja companies would swear
enthusiastic allegiance to the new powers. Antifa would be issued clean shirts, ties and
government-approved truncheons. Then a grand proclamation that there will be a convention to
work towards national unity. Ooops, that last part actually happened.
If there had been a coup, it would 100% evident.
If there had been fair elections, it would 100% evident.
The event was, variously, a "coup," an "insurrection," or at minimum, "a riot." Protesters
were "right-wing extremists" and even "domestic terrorists" who were attacking "the very
basis of American democracy."
A coup?
An insurrection?
Attacking the very basis of American democracy?
The only reason the crowd was there in the first place was to protest against the people
committing those crimes through election fraud. Hopefully at least the crowd has figured out
that the Republicans and Trump are not on their side...
Jazzhand McFeels of https://therightstuff.biz/ has written a very interesting
article on Dissident Mag about some sudden changes in the administration that could explain
this thing.
If the attack on the Capitol was already so clumsy and ineffective, how could those same
people succeed in the much more difficult task of seccession?
You're assuming that the phony attack was planned by the people who would be involved in a
secession movement. I haven't seen any evidence that it was.
Cui Bono? The Key to 6 January is what did NOT happen. The two houses of congress had gone
off to hear, separately, in public broadcast, evidence from objecting congressmen that there
was massive electoral fraud to criminally deliver the election to Biden. MSM transmitted the
opening statements to the debate by McConnell and Schumer. These two said that there was no
election fraud. MSM then pulled away when the other congressmen started presenting the view
that there WAS fraud. Although MSM was not going to carry what the people are not supposed to
know, and filled in instead with their own propagandists and the Party Line, the proceedings
examining election fraud would have been seen by some of the public through the internet
streams and C-Span. This was clear evidence which the courts should have heard, but refused to
hear. BUT, instead of Congress publicly hearing evidence, the hearings abruptly STOPPED. Why?
The Capitol police, following instructions, opened the barricades and waved the demonstrators
to come in. The demonstrators were guided to the spot where the Deep State assassin was
waiting. A person was shot. After that, there were NO MORE discussions of election fraud. Biden
was confirmed without the airing of evidence of fraud. 6 January was a simple, but elegant,
Deep State SETUP. A psyop. The American people have been, once again, deceived. Once everybody
submits to vaccination there will never again be disputed elections, just like in the third
world.
Correction: The media said that the policeman "collapsed when he got back to the Precinct.
.that he MAY have been hit with a fire extinguisher." It was not reported as fact. No other
subsequent report abouthow he died albeit it should have been established by now.
The second poilce officer who the media says was "killed" by the "riots" was a man who we
heard nothing about on the date of the event, but who, five days later, committed suicide. The
suicide story is not speculation. It was given as a fact. They call this suicide a "killing"
because of the riots. It is more likely a police officer shooting his mouth off about these
lies,who, five days later was suicided.
This summer and fall at least a dozen police officers were killed. Many more were injured.
One got his eye knocked out. Many were very gravely injured. The government officials applauded
their killers, posted bail for them, and every step of the way government officials "incited
the violence".
Trump made a speech in front of his supporters laying out the evidence of the election
fraud. He was complaining about the election fraud, a fraud that was never scutinized or
investigated by anyone except his own lawyers and a few other lawyers, like Sidney Powell. They
want to impeach him for publicly complaining about their stealing the election from him. It's
like someone getting their home stolen, and when the victim publicly complains, he is
threatened with arrest.
Again, they fundament their impeachment grounds on the "insurrection" of January 6, but
again, like the election fraud, no one has scrutinized or conducted the most cursory
investigation of it The fact that we still don't know how that policeman died is telling. The
speculations made about him getting hit by a fire extinguisher are still floating around when
at this point, it should be an established fact how he died. The dopiest doctor in this country
would be able to diagnose a trauma to the head or body, if there were any physical trauma of
that kind.
Two people died from natural causes. Yet, no details are given. One woman, age 34 and
overweight was said to have been "trampled by the mob." Minutes after her death her family and
closest friends were bad mouthing her, saying that she was mentally unstable, a conspiracy
theorist, and "had problems in the past." She just died shortly before, and that was their
public statements about their dearest friend and family member.
Ashli Babbits death was a provocative act that would have encouraged Trump supporters to
turn on the police. It is no coincidence that those around her breaking windows, and screaming
that she was dead when she was not, also provoked the crowds of Trump supporters. They are seen
clearly on the video near Ashli not only breaking windows but changing their clothes after they
had done so to hide their identification. This is clearly seen on the video. One guy provoking
the crowds, breaking windows and screaming that Ashli was dead when she was not, was clearly
Antifa, proven to be Antifa by video evidence. Yet, after January 6, he was interviewed by CNN.
Clearly, the Antifa provocateur was not arrested by the Washington police or the FBI, but at
least 6 Trump supporters were arrested for breaking curfew after 6 p.m. when all that happened
at the Capitol was over. Those six were the first arrested – for breaking curfew. I do
not find it a coincidence that both Ashli Babbitt and those breaking the windows around her,
and screaming that she was dead when she was not, all acted to provoke the crowds and were all
proven to be Antifa members. Was it coincidence that Ashli Babbitt's getting shot also acted as
an unwitting provocateur, along with the Antifa members around her in the Capitol that day? Or
was both Ashli and Antifa working for our security agencies that day, all playing their roles
as agents provocateurs.
Why wouldn't the DOJ and FBI investigate the election fraud? Was it because the government
did it? That would be a good reason not to investigate. Sidney Powell has produced an affidavit
from a Serb who said it was the CIA who oversaw the manipulation of the US voting machines from
Serbia, a country completely taken over by the CIA. He also writes about Hunter Biden's
clandestine trip there in August 2020 to meet with these people.
Whoever didn't develop a sense of humor with your Ziocorporate fraud reality TV show
president posing as patriot anti-deep maverick ain't gonna do it now.
Yes, the coup and insurrection had ALREADY happened.
The coup and insurrection happened when the Democrats AND Republicans rigged the election.
Democratic state courts and election officials changed voting laws, and Republican state
legislatures looked the other way.
You are wrong on so many counts. The event was not spontaneous, that is quite clear when the
guards let the protesters in and they mostly went inside peacefully while a handful of rioters
did minimal damage. Some Antifas, yeah, for sure. But someone stole Pelosi's computer or did
they? That smacks of a plan. It achieved the objectives of the groups on the inside. The
marchers that went inside had to have been, for the most part, surprised that they were
welcomed. Did you see how they walked in between the purple ropes? Took photographs and
selfies, some of these with the guards? Did you see the videos of some of the protesters
stopping the people trying to break the glass windows? ...
I see "anti-Semitism" has made it to the floor during these impeachment hearings. LMAO. I
would guess that 97% of Trump's base is the muh Israel crowd and Trump is as pro-Israel,
pro-Jewish as it gets.
Even more laughable is Maxine Waters standing up and decrying violence. I guess Maxine has a
very selective memory. All these demsheviks and the gay guys over at CNN who had no problem
with Antifa/BLM are now staunch advocates for the Constitution and have a problem with riots.
How in the hell do these cretins live with themselves? Have these hypocrites no shame? It can't
be said enuff that Antifa/BLM's and (((the leftoids))) fingerprints are all over these riots.
This is the new 9-11, folks, don't believe your lying eyes. Look at some of those scraggly
people busting windows and attacking cops? Do they look like the average Trump voter? Do these
young punks scaling the walls look like the average Trump voter?
The democratic party is now pretending to "call out" the "white supremacists" in Congress.
Even if there were "white supremacists" in Congress, they would be not one bit different from
"brown supremacists", "black supremacists","yellow supremaicsts", if by "supremacists" is meant
politicians that belong to the Hispanic caucus, Black caucus or Asian caucus , ALL of whom
claim to be looking out for the welfare of their respective group.
This is of course what is going on here. The democratic party politicians, Pelosi, Schumer,
Biden and the whole left has been race baiting against white people as a default manner of
doing politics for over sixty years now. It is the fault of the FAUX REPUBLICAN PARTY, that has
been posing as conservatives who many whites believe "have their backs", against the hate and
shenanigans the anti-white left perpetrates. THEY ARE WRONG. We see plainly now, that what the
U.S. has is a uni-party, that is left and far left and includes good old Republican RINO's, but
the left and far left is used by the elite to keep and gain control of the U.S. for their own
agenda. The idea now operating is to belittle, denigrate and cow white folks as never before,
because many of the protesters at the recent "event", scared the living bleep out of the
politicians who have simply not been representing them. The corporations and tech moguls,etc.
are not taking the side of the left because they are "better" citizens or politicians than
people on the right side of the political spectrum. They take the side of the left because that
is where these corporations know that the radical Americans are, the ones that burn, loot and
murder and therefore can be used to divide the nation for the big corporations and tech
moguls,etc. Any honest person that considers what happened at the so called violent
demonstration in D.C. knows that compared to the violence that ANTIFA, BLM and other groups
perpertrated on innocent Americans last summer, knows perfectly well that there is no
comparison. The anti-white left, enabled by the democratic party and the news media, IN SERVICE
OF THE U.S. ELITE. BURNED, LOOTED AND MURDERED THE CITIZENS OF AMERICA for months, WITHOUT A
SINGLE WORD FROM PELOSI, SCHUMER, BIDEN HARRIS, ETC.
The simple fact is that these D.C. politicians were scared shitless by some plain American
citizens, who finally felt they needed to meet these representatives that keep ignoring and
abusing them. The wrong people are being blamed here.
Before reading this article, the reader might consider the fact that there was NO COUP, by
the accepted meaning that the word "coup" denotes. Now, if the fake news media and the
democratic party want to explain the event by bending the facts and actual events to fit their
own interpretation of it, that's a problem due to their dishonesty.
FoxNews finally showed its true face during the election steal when it declared that
Trump had lost the election long before any evidence in support of this thesis
materialized.
For those that paid attention to Fox News, especially daytime and weekend Fox News its
true face has been obvious for some time.
It is now abundantly clear that with a few exceptions (notably Tucker Carlson), FoxNews
is very much on the same page as CNN and the rest of them.
While Carlson is not the worst on Fox News he is not a friend. His obsession with the
China bad narrative is over the top. He is playing the GOP Inc side of the Deep State
coin.
The A block last night was Carlson reiterating over and over, that he and Fox News were
against violence like that at the Capitol. He stated that violence from the left was also
wrong but that violence from the right was not the answer of course like most articles on
this blog, he didn't say what the answer was.
"... I have, for some time, been mis-naming the Nomenklatura as the Politburo, with the commune being the many tentacled international banking cartel. ..."
FoxNews finally showed its true face during the election steal when it declared that Trump
had lost the election long before any evidence in support of this thesis materialized. It is
now abundantly clear that with a few exceptions (notably Tucker Carlson), FoxNews is very much
on the same page as CNN and the rest of them. So what just happened and what is taking place
now?
Americans have been brainwashed into calling things they don't like, or don't understand, as
"Socialist" or even "Marxist". The sad reality is that most Americans sincerely believe that
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Bernie Sanders are "socialists", and when they see modern movies
ridiculously filled with "minorities" and gender fluid freaks – this is a case of
"cultural Marxism" (a totally meaningless term, by the way!). This is all utter nonsense,
neither Marxism nor Socialism have anything to do with BLM, Antifa, Nancy Pelosi or Chuck
Schumer (in fact, Marxism places a premium on real law and order!). I can't take the time and
space here to discuss Marxism, but I do believe that there is one analytical tool which we can
borrow from Marxist thought to try to make sense of what just happened in the USA. Let's begin
by asking a simple question:
If "the mob" did not win, who did?
Most certainly not the abstract concept of "law and order". For one thing, it is now
abundantly clear that some cops deliberately let a (rather small) subset of protestors not only
across police lines but even inside the Capitol Building itself. That is not exactly law and
order, now is it? Furthermore, it is now also clear that Ashli Babbitt was very deliberately
shot by an (apparently black) cop who was then quickly hidden away from sight by the
authorities. Not exactly law and order either.
Neither did the abstract concept of "democracy" win anything that day. Many protesters were
recorded saying that the Capitol building belonged to the people, not to the people working in
it on behalf of the people. They are right. But even if we accept the notion that those who
entered the building were trespassing, the massive crackdown on free speech which immediately
followed the events at the Capitol is a clear sign that "democracy" did not win that day. More
about that later.
So who won?
Well, look who is celebrating and who is now demanding that punitive and even repressive
measures be taken against Trump supporters:
here
and
here ) The Russia-hating Lobby Antifa/BLM/etc The many freaks of nature leading
various "minorities" Big Tech megacorporations a la Google and Amazon
The list is longer, of course, and it includes pretty much all the folks afflicted with the
now famous Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).
Our list looks like a cocktail of very different actors, but is that really the case?
I submit that if we look closely at this list of possible "winners" we can quickly see that
we are dealing with a single social category /group whose "diversity" is only apparent.
Here is what all these groups have in common:
They are numerically small, definitely a
minority They are very wealthy They are very close to the real centers of power They share the
same narcissistic (Neocon) ideology of self-worship They are driven by the same hate-based
ideology of revenge They don't care about the people of the USA They want to dismantle the US
Constitutional order
On the basis of these common characteristics, I believe that we can speak about a social
class united by a common ideology .
Now, of course, in the plutocratic oligarchy (which the United States in reality is), the
notion of "class" has been declared heretical and it has been replaced by identity politics
– the best way for a ruling class to (a) hide behind a fake illusion of pluralism and (b)
to divide the people and rule over them.
I have already written about what I consider to be a US version of the Soviet Nomenklatura , a
special ruling class which was official in the (comparatively much more honest) Soviet system
but which is always hidden from sight by the rulers of the United States.
The actual word we use are not that important: Nomenklatura , class, caste,
establishment, powers that be, deep state, etc. – they all approximate the reality of a
small gang of self-declared "elites" (as opposed to the "deplorables") ruling with total
impunity and no checks and balances mitigating their de facto dictatorship. Some
well-intentioned people began speaking about the "1%" – which is not bad, even if the
actual figure is even smaller than just one percent. Others used "Wall Street" (as in the
"occupy WS" movement), again – not a bad attempt to describe the problem. Whatever the
terms you chose, what is certain is that this entity has what Marx would call a " class
consciousness " which produces a single " class ideology " characterized by an
extremely strong sense of "us versus them" .
By the way, while I disagree with any notion that the US Nomenklatura is Marxist or
Socialist in any way, I very much agree that these "elites" are displaying an ideological
zeal very similar to what Trotskysts or Nazis typically exhibit, especially when confronted
with the "deplorables" or, like FoxNews says, the "mob" (the Polish word " bydło " – cattle
– very accurately renders this contempt for the masses).
In fact, they see us all as their "class enemy" . And they are quite correct, by the
way.
Their ideology is messianic, racist, violent and hate filled while the members of this US
Nomenklatura see themselves as the cream of the crop, the "chosen people", whose
"destiny" is to rule over the "dark and primitive" "mob".
This contempt for the "mob" is something which self-described "liberals" always try to
conceal, but which always comes out, be it in 1917 Russia or in 2021 USA. There is a weird
logic to this, by the way. It goes something like this: " we are clearly superior to the
plebes, yet these plebes seem to reject that notion, these plebes are therefore a "dark mob"
which absolutely needs to be strictly ruled by us ". The underlying assumption is that
plebes are dangerous, they can always riot and threaten "us". Hence the need for a police
state. QED.
We all remember how the Clinton gang was mega-super-sure that Hillary would easily defeat
Trump. And just to make darn sure that the US "plebes" don't do anything stupid, the US legacy
corporate ziomedia engaged in probably the most hysterical candidate bashing propaganda
operation in history only to find out that the "deplorables" did not vote as they were told to,
they voted for "Trump The New Hitler" instead.
What a truly unforgivable affront of these serfs against the masters which God, or Manifest
Destiny, placed above them!
And just as their pseudo-liberal colleagues from the past, the US liberals decided that this
vote was a slap in their face which, of course, is quite correct (I still believe that most
votes for Trump where not votes for Trump, but votes against Hillary); it was, so to speak, a
gigantic "f**k you!" from the revolting serfs against their masters. And class consciousness
told the US Nomenklatura that this was an anti-masters pogrom , a US "
Jacquerie "
if you wish. This "revolt of the serfs" had to be put down, immediately, and it was: Trump
caved to the Neocons in less than a month (when he betrayed General Flynn) and ever since the
US Nomenklatura has been using Trump as a disposable President who would do all
the crazy nonsense imaginable to please Israel, and who would then be disposed off. And yet it
is now quite clear that the US "deplorables" voted for the "wrong" candidate again! Hence the
need for a (very poorly concealed) "election steal" followed by a "test of loyalty" (you better
side with us, or else ) which eventually resulted in the situation we have today.
What is that situation exactly?
Simply put, this time the USNomenklaturahas truly achieved total
power. Not only do they control all three of the official branches of government, they now
also fully control the 4th one, the "media space", courtesy of the US tech giants which now are
openly silencing anybody who disagrees with the One And Only Official Truth As Represented By
The Propaganda Outlets. This is the very first time in recent US history that a small cabal of
"deep insiders" have achieved such total control of all the real instruments of power. The bad
news is that they know that they are a small minority and they realize that they need to act
fast to secure their hold on power. But for that they needed a pretext.
It is hardly surprising that after successfully pulling off the 9/11 false flag
operation, the USNomenklaturahad no problems whatsoever pulling off the
"Capitol" false flag.
Think about it: the legally organized and scheduled protest of Trump supporters was
announced at least a week before it had to take place. How hard was it for those in charge of
security to make sure that the protesters stay in one specific location? At the very least,
those in charge of security could have done what Lukashenko eventually did in Mink: place
military and police forces around all the important symbolic buildings and monuments and say
"you are welcome to protest, but don't even think of trying to take over any government
property" (that approach worked much better than beating up protesters, which Lukashenko
initially had tried). Yet what we saw was the exact opposite: in DC protesters were invited
across police lines by cops. Not only that, but even those protesters which did enter the
Capitol were, apparently, not violent enough, so it had to be one of the cops to shoot an
unarmed and clearly non-dangerous woman, thereby providing the "sacrificial victim" needed to
justify the hysterics about "violence" and "rule of law".
And the worst part is that it worked, even Trump ended up condemning the "violence" and
denouncing those who, according to Trump, did not represent the people.
The hard truth is much simpler: the "stop the steal" protestors did not commit any real
violence! Yes, they broke some furniture, had some fights with cops (who initially were
inviting people in, only to then violently turn against them with batons, pepper sprays and
flash-bang grenades). Some reports say that one cop was hit by a fire extinguisher. If true,
that would be a case of assault with a deadly weapon (under US law any object capable of being
used to kill can be considered a deadly weapon when used for that purpose). But considering the
nonstop hysteria about guns, the NRA and "armed militias", this was clearly not a planned
murder. Finally, a few people died, apparently from natural causes, possibly made worse by the
people trampling over each other. In other words, the Trump supporters did not kill anybody
deliberately, at most they can be accused of creating the circumstances which resulted in
manslaughter. That was not murder. Not even close. Want to see what a planned murder looks
like? Just look at the footage of the Ashli Babbitt murder by some kind of armed official. That
is real murder, and it was committed by a armed official. So which side is most guilty of
violating laws and regulations?
Furthermore, no moral value can be respected unless it is universally and equally applied.
Which, considering that the US deep state has engaged in a full year of wanton mass violence
against hundreds of innocent US citizens makes it unbelievably hypocritical for the US liberals
to denounce "the mob" now. Frankly, the way I see it, all the US liberals should now "take a
knee" before the pro-Trump protestors and declare that this was a "mostly peaceful" event
which, objectively speaking, it was .
Won't happen. I know.
What will happen next is going to be a vicious crackdown on free speech in all its
forms . In fact, and just to use a Marxist notion, what comes next is class warfare
.
We have all seen Pelosi and the rest of them demanding that Trump either be removed by Pence
and the Cabinet (25th A.), or they will unleash another impeachment. First, if impeached, Trump
won't be able to run in 2024 (which the liberals fully realize is a major risk for them). But
even more important, is to humiliate him, make him pay, show him once and for all "who is
boss"! These people thrive on revenge and victory is never enough to appease them, they simply
hate anybody who dares oppose them and they want to make an example of any and every serf who
dares to disobey them. That is why they always send "messages", no matter how inchoate: they
want to bully all the deplorables on the planet into total subservience.
But they won't stop with just Trump. Oh no! They will also go after all those serfs who
dared defy this Nomenklatura and who objected to the wholesale repudiation of the US
Constitution. For example, in a truly Orwellian move, the NY State Bar now wants to disbar
Giuliani for acting as Trump's lawyer (not a joke, check here ). Which,
considering that Trump already lost several lawyers to such tactics should not come as a
surprise to anybody: apparently, in the "new 2021 Woke-USA", some are more entitled to legal
representation than others.
Don't expect the ACLU to protest, by the way – equal protection under the law is not a
topic of interest to them. Here are a few screenshots take off their website , so see for yourself.
Clearly, the priority for the folks at the ACLU is to destroy Trump and anybody daring to
take up his defense.
One one hand, this is truly an absolute disaster, because when the US ruling
Nomenklatura agrees to drop any past pretenses of objectivity, or even decency, things
will definitely get ugly. On the other hand, however, this immense "coming out" of the US
Nomenklatura is, of course, unsustainable (just look at history, every time these folks
thought that they had crushed the "plebes", the latter ended up rising and showing their
supposed "masters" to the door; this will happen here too).
Last, but not least, let's keep another crucial thing in mind: even if you absolutely hate
Trump, you really should realize that it is not just "the vote" which was stolen, it was the
entire US Constitutional order . While we often focus on the SCOTUS, we should not remember
the many lower courts which showed a total absence of courage or dignity and which caved in to
the hysterical demands of the US Nomenklatura . It is impossible to have a country under
the rule of law when the courts shy away from their obligation to uphold the said rule of law
and, instead, place political expediency above the letter and spirit of the law.
Furthermore, when concepts such as "legal" and "illegal" lose any objective meaning, how can
any action be considered illegal or punishable?
Here is, just as an example, the Oath of Office taken by all Supreme Court Justices:
(emphasis added)
"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect
to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich , and that I will
faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE]
under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."
And this is what each member of the US Armed Forces swears: (emphasis added)
"I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend
the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic ; that
I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the
President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to
regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (So help me God)."
It does not take a genius to figure out that the SCOTUS is now in the hands of a small cabal
of people who clearly are "domestic enemies" of the US Constitution.
Finally, here is what the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence states: (emphasis
added)
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty
and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted
among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,–That
whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the
People to alter or to abolish it , and to institute new Government, laying its foundation
on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely
to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long
established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all
experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable,
than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a
long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to
reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such
Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
I don't think that there is any need to further beat this dead horse and I will simply
summarize it as so:
The regime which will soon replace the Trump Administration is an illegal occupation
government, with strong ties to foreign interests (and I don't mean China or Russia here!),
which all those who served in the US military have taken an oath to oppose; this is precisely
the kind of occupation regime which the Founding Fathers foresaw in their Declaration of
Independence . Furthermore, the rule of law has clearly collapsed, at least on the
federal level, this should give the states more freedom of movement to resist the decrees of
this new regime (at least those states still willing and able to resist, I think of TX and FL
here). The leaders of this US Nomenklatura understand this, at least on some level, and we
should expect no decency from them; neither should we expect any mercy. Revenge is what
fuels these ideology- and hate-filled people who loathe and fear all the rest of humanity
because nobody is willing to worship them as our "lords and masters ". But this is also
the beginning of their end.
Conclusion: now we are all Palestinians!
True, no "mob" won on the Capitol, unless we refer to the (disgraced, hated and useless)
Congress as "the mob". And, of course, neither did "the people" or the protesters. The only
real winner in this entire operation was the US deep state and the US Nomenklatura . But
they did not win any war, only the opening battle of a war which will be much longer than what
they imagine in their ignorance.
I have said it many times, Trump really destroyed the USA externally, in terms of world
politics. The Dems have done the same thing, only internally. For example, Trump is the one who
most arrogantly ignored the rule of law in international affairs, but it was the Dems who
destroyed the rule of law inside the USA. It was Trump who with his antics and narcissistic
threats urbi et orbi who destroyed any credibility left for the USA as a country (or
even of the the AngloZionist Empire as a whole), but it was the Dems who really decided to
sabotage the very political system which allowed them to seize power in the first place.
What comes next is the illegal rule of an illegitimate regime which came to power by
violence (BLM, Antifa, Capitol false flag). This will be a Soviet-style gerontocracy with
senile figureheads pretending to be in power (think Biden vs Chernenko here). Looking at the
old, Obama-era, names which are circulated now for future Cabinet positions, we can bet on two
things: the new rulers will be as evil as they will be grossly incompetent, mostly due to their
crass lack of education (even Nuland and Psaki are back, it appears!). The Biden admin will be
similar to the rule of Kerensky in "democratic" Russia: chaos, violence, lots and lots of
speeches and total social and economic chaos. The next crucial, and even frightening, question
now is: what will replace this US version of a Kerensky regime?
It is way too early to reply to this question, but we should at least begin to think about
it, lest we be completely caught off guard.
But until then, "domestic terrorism" will, once again, become the boogeyman we will be told
to fear. And, as all good boys and girls know, the best way to deal with such a horrible
"domestic terrorism" threat is to dismantle the First and Second Amendments of the
Constitution. Having corrupt kangaroo courts on all levels, from the small claims level to the
Supreme court, will greatly help in this endeavor. Of course, there will be resistance from the
deplorables who still love their country and their Constitution.
But no matter how long this takes (might be decades) and how violent this confrontation
becomes (and, it will, if only because the regime vitally needs more false flags to survive!),
what will happen with this occupation regime is what happened to all of them throughout history
(could that be the reason why history is not taught anymore?).
As the Russian poet and bard, Vladimir Vissotski, wrote " it is impossible to trample
upon souls with boots " (сапогами
не вытоптать
душу). Now we are all Palestinians. And we, like they, will win!
"Americans have been brainwashed into calling things they don't like, or don't understand,
as "Socialist" or even "Marxist". The sad reality is that most Americans sincerely believe
that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Bernie Sanders are "socialists", and when they see modern
movies ridiculously filled with "minorities" and gender fluid freaks – this is a case
of "cultural Marxism" (a totally meaningless term, by the way!). This is all utter nonsense,
neither Marxism nor Socialism have anything to do with BLM, Antifa, Nancy Pelosi or Chuck
Schumer (in fact, Marxism places a premium on real law and order!)."
"class" has been declared heretical and it has been replaced by identity politics
– the best way for a ruling class to (a) hide behind a fake illusion of pluralism and
(b) to divide the people and rule over them
It's a neat bait and switch scheme, identity being substituted for class. Billionaires can
now be hailed as people's champions by instituting 'gender-fluid' toilets and forcing their
peons to kneel. Who knows how much force they'll be willing to use against the deplorables
but probably it would know no limit. The shock and awe unleashed against foreign countries
could now be instituted domestically with things like the Phoenix Program being tried here,
among other things. Anything but relinquish power.
The old war-lovers are coming back in. Although he was considered belligerent the new
regime will be worse. War is probably part of the future agenda. Solidifying it's grip upon
the domestic population may be the precursor to embarking upon an unpopular and certain to be
costly war against Iran or perhaps even some clash with Russia.
From the I Ching: "Large ambitions coupled with meager talent will seldom escape
disaster."
The fervid machinations of the current crop of "self"-glorifying wannabes will not, as The
Saker reminds us here, be any exception to the rule, either. They're hardly the first bunch
of feckless opportunists to take a run at "full spectrum dominance" .aiming to trap Life
Herownself within the suffocating CONfines of their own little nut'shell.
The rampant insanity symptomatic of their virulent "self"-sickness, as it runs its
inevitable course, looks like being somewhat more than usually trying for the rest of us,
though .given all the electro-mechanical and institutional enhancement available to them, for
intensifying the degenerative effects of their folly. At the same time, our best response
will be just what we all know is always organically and in all Ways imperative for our Kind,
anyhow. All our precious attention is best devoted to taking care of the Earth and each
other. Our unconditional affection is best lavished on this Living Creation, all our
Relations, and The Great Spirit whose gift it is.
It is an Oligarchy of bond holders. I'm using the word bond as an stand-in for debt
instruments, or any sort of claim on productivity. Bond/Bondage/Debt are all closely related
concepts.
The entire Western World is inter-connected double-entry balance sheets.
One side of the balance sheet is "assets" and the other is "liabilities." One person's
liability is another persons asset.
It is best to view the western world as a balance sheet, especially as private bank credit
is the dominant money type of the west. Private banking and debt spreading has metastasized
like a cancer, and is now consuming the host. Debt instruments and finance paper are being
serviced in the finance sector with QE and 'CARES' act shenanigan's, which pays these finance
"assets."
If you want to call the bond holders in finance and elsewhere as a nomenklatura, go ahead
– but it obscures reality. These people are a class, a class of usurers, who are
"taking" wealth in sordid ways by gaming the system.
All through history, plutocracy has arisen out of the population because debts were not
annulled, or land was enclosed.
Oligarchs of various types are harvesting the world through various means, including the
growth of debt claims. These claims grow exponentially, and outside of nature's ability to
pay. The derivative bubble wants to be paid. What cannot go on, will not.
The balance sheet is not really balanced, one side (the debt instrument holder) is making
exponential claims on debtors.
Moritz Hinsch from Berlin collected what Socrates (470-399 BC) and other Athenians wrote
about debt, and the conference's organizer, Prof. John Weisweiler, presented the new view
of late imperial Rome as being still a long way from outright serfdom. The 99 Percent
were squeezed, but "the economy" grew – in a way that concentrated growth in the
hands of the One Percent . In due course this bred popular resentment that spread in
the form of debtor revolts, not only in the Roman Empire but that of Iran as well, leading
to religious reforms to limit the charging of interest and self-indulgent greed in
general.
By now Nazi references are getting thread-bare. We actually need to examine how the
national socialists operated because their situation is analogous to today.
I very much agree that these "elites" are displaying an ideological zeal very similar to
what Trotskysts or Nazis typically exhibit
National Socialism arose as a reaction to finance capitalism's excesses. The very things
we are seeing today, were present in Weimar Germany. The country was being bought up, and the
people were being denied their birthright. Self-indulgent greed of an arising Oligarchy was
smashed by the National Socialists to then re-balance German civilization.
Nazi zeal restoring civilizational balance is quite something different than leftist
bolshevism.
I have, for some time, been mis-naming the Nomenklatura as the Politburo, with the
commune being the many tentacled international banking cartel. It's the same crowd that
funded the original Bolsheviks.
IMO they are only "Neo" by virtue of the old ones having died, but I'm not going to split
hairs. We all know it is those whose loyalty is to a shitty little country on the
Mediterranean.
@Anonymous ties
extract, which makes politicians whores for their donor class. The donor class is the
"holders of debt instruments" as I explained earlier. Or, they can be part of the military
industrial complex, to then whore for more taxpayer dollars. In all cases it is for self
aggrandizement. By the same reasoning, press-titutes are whores for their paymasters.
The easy money is taken in by usury or other sordid schemes; then donated/recycled into
politicians, to then keep the game going. Average laboring people don't have this surplus
wealth to donate.
Hi Ah,
That the US deep state has been terrorising parts of the world for many years my reaction
before the election was to hope that Biden would win as I believed that would be the quickest
destruction of the terrorist deep state rather than with Trump where I believed it would
survive some time longer. It is inconceivable that any political party can survive in the US
without the backing of the 'deep state'.
Of course this makes the nuclear option more likely yet democrats are more attached to
their lives than many others since the profit motive looms larger.
Secondly the US owes the pension and social security systems so much money they do not
have unless they print, print and more print and hope someone will buy their bonds (over 100
trillion for the next 'x' years). That is not going to happen. That is why both political
parties will not endorse medicare for all or any further social security programmes. Those
with money insurance industries et al will run away to Australia that has more gold than it
knows what to do with the Chinese are now trying to buy Aussie gold mines. Wonder why?
To sum up the US population will experience some of the same terrorism tacticts the deep
state exported to the rest of the world while the same population will wonder why it is
happening to them just like some of the middle east countries wondered the same for the last
20 years. That the deep state and the army offer pensions and heathcare will not matter if
the funds are not there.
What are the options for the citizens that always believed in capitalism and Jesus and were
the single moral compass for the rest of humanity? After living in a Buddist country for many
years I am not so certain.
"... The military would support whomever pays their salary and their pensions, i.e. the Establishment. However, as Iraq and Afghanistan has shown, the U.S. military, while possessing remarkable firepower when taken on directly and openly, is quite vulnerable. The U.S. military is essentially mercenaries. Mercenaries work for pay. Mercenaries are not willing to die for a cause. You can't spend money if you're dead. ..."
As a person who grew up in the glorious aftermath of World War II, it never occurred to me
that in my later years I would be pondering whether the United States would end in civil war or
a police state. In the aftermath of the stolen presidential election, it seems a 50-50 toss
up.
There is abundant evidence of a police state. One feature of a police state is controlled
explanations and the suppression of dissent. We certainly have that in abundance.
Experts are not permitted forums in which to challenge the official position on Covid.
Teachers are suspended for giving offense by using gender pronouns.
Recording stars are dropped by their recording studios for attending the Trump rally.
Parents ratted on by their own children are fired from their jobs for attending the Trump
rally. https://www.rt.com/usa/512048-capitol-riot-employees-fired/
Antifa is free to riot, loot, intimidate and hassle, but Trump supporters are
insurrectionists.
White people are racists who use hateful words and concepts, but those who demonize whites
are righting wrongs.
Suppression of dissent and controlling behavior are police state characteristics. It might
be less clear to some why dictating permissible use of language is police state control. Think
about it this way. If your use of pronouns can be controlled, so can your use of all other
words. As concepts involve words, they also can be controlled. In this way inconvenient
thoughts and expressions along with accurate descriptions find their way into the Memory
Hole.
With the First Amendment gone, or restricted to the demonization of targeted persons, such
as "the Trump Deplorables," "white supremacists," "Southern racists," the Second Amendment
can't have much life left. As guns are associated with red states, that is, with Trump
supporters, outlawing guns is a way to criminalize the red half of the American population that
the Establishment considers "deplorable." Those who stand on their Constitutional right will be
imprisoned and become cheap prison labor for America's global corporations.
Could all this lead to a civil war or are Americans too beat down to effectively resist?
That we won't know until it is put to the test.
Are there clear frontlines? Identity Politics has divided the people across the entire
country. The red states are only majority red. It is tempting to see the frontiers as the red
center against the blue Northeast and West coasts, but that is misleading. Georgia is a red
state with a red governor and legislature, but there were enough Democrats in power locally to
steal the presidential and US senate elections.
Another problem for reds is that large cities -- the distribution centers -- such as
Atlanta, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los
Angeles -- are in blue hands as are ports and international airports. Effectively, this cuts
reds off from outside resources.
What would the US military do? Clearly, the Joint Chiefs and the military/security complex
are establishment and not anti-establishment Trumpers. With the soldiers themselves now a
racial and gender mix, the soldiers would be as divided as the country. Those not with the
Establishment would lack upper level support.
Where are the youth and younger adults? They are in both camps depending on their education.
Many of the whites who went to university have been brainwashed against themselves, and regard
white Americans as "systemic racists" or "white supremacists" and feel guilt. Those who did not
go to university for the most part have experienced to their disadvantage the favoritism given
to people of color and have resentment.
What about weapons? How can the reds lose when guns are a household item and blues would
never dirty themselves by owning one? The answer is that unlike the War of Northern Aggression
in the 1860s, today the weapons in the hands of the military are devastating compared to those
in the hands of the public. Unlike in the past, it is impossible for a citizens' militia to
stand against the weapons and body armor that the military has. So, unless the military splits,
the reds are outgunned. Never believe that the Establishment would not release chemical and
biological agents against red forces. Or for that matter nuclear weapons.
What about communications? We know for an absolute fact that the tech monopolies are aligned
with the Establishment against the people. So much so that President Trump, in the process of
being set-up for prosecution, has been cut off from communicating with his supporters both in
social media and email.
The American Establishment is doing to President Trump exactly what it did to Ukrainian
President Yanukovych in Washington's orchestrated "Maidan Revolution," called "the Revolution
of Dignity" by the liars at Wikipedia, and precisely what it did to Chavez, Maduro, and would
like to do to Putin.
Suppose an American civil war occurs. How is it likely to play out? Before investigating
this, first consider how the Establishment could prevent it by bringing the red states to its
defense. The Trump supporters are the only patriots in the American population. They tend to
wear the flag on their sleeve. In contrast, blue state denizens define patriotism as
acknowledging America's evils and taking retribution on those white racists/imperialists who
committed the evils. In blue states, riots against the "racist system" result in defunding the
police. If the Antifa and Black Lives Matter militias were sicced on the Biden regime, red
state patriots might see "their country" under attack. It is possible that the "Proud Boys"
would come to Biden's defense, not because they believe in Biden but because America is under
attack and he is "our president." Alternatively, an Antifa attack on the Biden regime could be
portrayed as an unpatriotic attack on America and be used to discourage red state opposition to
the police state, just as "Insurrection" has resulted in many Trump supporters declaring their
opposition to violence. In other words, it is entirely possible that the patriotism of the
"Trump Deplorables" would split the red state opposition and lead to defeat.
Assuming that the Establishment is too arrogant and sure of itself or too stupid to think of
this ploy, how would a civil war play out? The Establishment would do everything possible to
discredit the case of the "rebels." The true rebels, of course, would be the Establishment
which has overthrown the Constitutional order, but no media would make that point. Controlling
the media, the Establishment, knowing of the patriotism of its opponents, would portray the
"rebels" as foreign agents seeking to overthrow American Democracy.
The "foreign threat" always captures the patriot's attention. We see it right now with Trump
supporters falling for the disinformation that Switzerland and Italy are behind the stolen
election. Previously, it was Dominion servers in Germany and Serbia that did the deed.
On whose head will the Establishment place the blame for "the War Against America"? There
are three candidates: Iran, China, and Russia. Which will the Establishment choose?
To give Iran credit conveys too much power to a relatively small country over America. To
blame Iran for our civil war would be belittling.
To blame China won't work, because Trump blamed China for economically undermining America
and Trump supporters are generally anti-China. So accusing the red opposition with being China
agents would not work.
The blame will be placed on Russia.
This is the easy one. Russia has been the black hat ever since Churchill's Iron Curtain
speech in 1946. Americans are accustomed to this enemy. The Cold War reigned from the end of
World War II until the Soviet Collapse in 1991. Many, including retired American generals,
maintain that the Soviet collapse was faked to put us off guard for conquest.
When the Establishment decided to frame President Trump, the Establishment chose Russia as
Trump's co-conspirator against American Democracy. Russiagate, orchestrated by the CIA and FBI,
ensured for three years that Trump was accused in the Western media of being in cahoots with
Russia. Despite the lack of any evidence, a large percentage of the American and world
population was convinced that Trump was put into office by Putin somehow manipulating the
vote.
The brainwashing was so successful that three years of Trump sanctions against Russia could
not shake the Western peoples back into factual reality.
With Russia as the historic and orchestrated enemy, whatever happens in the United States
that can be blamed elsewhere will be blamed on Russia. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former US
Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, and former Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes
have already associated "Trump's insurrection" with Russia. https://www.rt.com/russia/512071-capitol-violence-consequences-fear/
Suppose that an American civil war becomes intense. Suppose that the Establishment's
propaganda against Russia becomes the reigning belief as propaganda almost always becomes, how
can the Establishment not finish the insurrection threat by attacking the country responsible?
The Establishment would be trapped in its own propaganda. Emotions would run away. Russia would
hear threats that would have to be taken seriously.
You can bet that Biden's neocon government will be egging this on. American exceptionalism.
American hegemony. Russia's fifth column, the Atlanticist Integrationists, who wish absorption
into the degenerate and failing Western World, will echo the charges against Russia. This would
make the situation a serious international incident with Russia as the threatened villain.
What would the Kremlin do? Would Russia's leaders accept yet another humiliation and false
accusation? Or will the anger of the Russian people forever accused and never stood up for by
their own government force the Kremlin into awareness that Russia could be attacked at any
moment.
Even if the Kremlin is reluctant to acknowledge the threat of war, what if another of the
numerous false warnings of incoming ICBMs is received. Unlike the past, is it believed this
time?
The stolen election in America, the emerging American Police State, more vicious and better
armed than any in the past, could result in American chaos that could be a dire threat to the
Russian Federation.
What Trump and his supporters, and perhaps the Kremlin, do not understand is that real
evidence no longer counts . The Establishment makes up the evidence that it needs for its
agendas. Consider how easy it was for the Capitol Police to remove barriers and allow some
Antifa mixed in with Trump supporters into the Capitol. This was all that was required to
create a "Trump led insurrection" that terminated the presentation of evidence of electoral
fraud and turned the massive rally of support for Trump into a liability. Trump now leaves the
presidency as an "insurrectionist" and is set up for continued harassment and prosecution.
As I previously wrote, the stolen election and its acceptance abroad signifies the failure
of Western democracy. The collapse of the Western world and its values will affect the entire
world.
No member of the State wants to be picked off one by one, be it military, cops, leadership
or functionaries.
What has been overlooked in the debate over the combat potential of violent extremists
is the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic
infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by
elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway, and it may
generate serious concerns for U.S. security policy in the future if ignored.
Imagine if fuel pipe lines to urban areas were hit, railroad tracks hit, water processing
facilities hit; the vision of an easy victory over Red America would quickly come home to the
city dwellers.
Elections in the US are not about picking winners. They are about making voters complicit
in governance by their having voted. The most recent election failed to make the Red voters
"complict" because there was no transparency and everyone believes there was fraud. No
election with mail in voting in the US will every work because everyone will assume
fraud.
In a nation as large as the US with as much concentrated city living, logistics are a
nightmare. The next time the lights go out, you may wonder. When your grocery chain runs out
of meat, you may wonder. When sewers in your city keep breaking, you may wonder. Thus truly
scares me.
today the weapons in the hands of the military are devastating compared to those in the
hands of the public
True enough. However, the weapons and the ammunition don't magically appear; they need to
be manufactured somewhere, and those places (and/or their suppliers) can be destroyed.
I must disagree. There will be no "civil war" in the United States. The establishment
controls the levers of power and all communications and all organized structures. There may
be a bunch of disaffected citizens, but they will remain a disorganized mob. Any apparent
emergent rival for power will be ruthlessly suppressed, deplatformed, villified, or co-opted.
The working class has been effectively divided and will waste its energy fighting itself over
crumbs ('diversity').
Disorganized mobs do not fight civil wars.
No, the fate of the United States will be the sort of chaotic autocracy we see in places
like Mexico and Brazil. Verging on being a failed state, the rich will nonetheless live lives
of great luxury secure in their walled estates. Meanwhile the average person will be crushed
into poverty, criminal gangs will flourish, and there will be a tension between the central
police and local gangs, but gangs are rarely organized enough to truly challenge centralized
states, and life will muddle on. There will be little social cohesion and no real trust of
central authorities, but that only matters if you want a strong and unified society. The rich
will do fine.
On the other hand, the overall national power will decline, and other powers like China
(which for all its flaws has not declared war on the working class, nor does it routinely
excuse or celebrate incompetence in leadership) will rise and take its place both on the
world stage and as the cutting edge of science and culture.
to me the biggest outcome of this faux coup/insurrection is the splintering of the
republican party. with this schism the trump "populists" have been cleanly pared off of the
party and thrown overboard and the remaining party will meekly do the bidding of the neocon
deep state that now totally controls both of these sock puppet parties. we will now see both
parties calling for a unification of our "indispensable nation". more than likely some false
flag will provide the necessary impetus to bury the hatchet and focus us all on our new/old
enemy. the only hope i see is an outside chance that so many republicans have been redpilled
that the party becomes the new whigs and fades into obscurity, leaving room for new parties
to rise from the ash. the dems are ripe for a schism themselves with aoc champing at the bit
to kick the boomers to the curb and the bernie bros finally realizing that three card monty
is a rigged game. i would love to see the destruction of both of these hopelessly corrupt
parties but the deep state cthulhu has its tentacles thoroughly wrapped around our poor
planet and anything emerging out of this toxic mess would most likely be even worse. the
situation reminds me of voltaire's candide and his sage advice to cultivate your garden.
I'd advise the young to develop a "plan B". Pick another country you find bearable amd
study it. Find out what jobs are in demand there. Develop those skills in your spare time
(computers, electricians, mechanics, etc.). Practice their language an hour or two per week
with online resources/dvd's/books. Research their immigration laws and perhaps contact their
embassy.
If it gets really awful for whites here, you may be able to take your family some place
more hospitable. Hopefully none of this will be neccessary and the rhetoric will tone down.
Trump personally really got under the left's skin. Don't umderestimate Hillary's supporters
influence here. They were ticked off. The Obama's too. Perhaps they will calm down a notch
now. Have a plan B though young whites.
Another insightful article by PCR. However, I must somewhat disagree on some points.
What would the US military do?
The military would support whomever pays their salary and their pensions, i.e. the
Establishment. However, as Iraq and Afghanistan has shown, the U.S. military, while
possessing remarkable firepower when taken on directly and openly, is quite vulnerable. The
U.S. military is essentially mercenaries. Mercenaries work for pay. Mercenaries are not
willing to die for a cause. You can't spend money if you're dead.
Think of the Troubles in Ireland.
The Establishment absolutely can deliver a punch to an identifiable opponent, but it can't
take a punch. Low level violence directed at officers and politicians would bring them to
their knees.
Controlling the media, the Establishment, knowing of the patriotism of its opponents,
would portray the "rebels" as foreign agents seeking to overthrow American Democracy.
I agree that they will try. However, I suspect that PCR is underestimating how little
faith many whites have in the media.
The Establishment will never be more powerful than it is today. They have inherited
institutions, the people to man those institutions and a generally functioning economy.
Basically, they stole the keys to car that they didn't create. But the Establishment run
those institutions and economy into ground. They will slowly start to show cracks.
Whites need to stay low, start forming small groups and begin preparing for the openings
that will come.
The racial right has been fantasizing about a civil war since forever, but I can't see it.
Too many people have too much to lose, there's no real desire for blood, and the people are
anyway too soft to initiate or withstand the violence real war would unleash upon them.
Further, and in stark contrast to the SJWs and antifa, the few racially conscious whites who
fantasize about this are mostly too old to make good soldiers. Also, just like the "God
emperor" himself, Trumpers are some of the stupidest people on the face of the earth, largely
down with their own enslavement, nauseatingly fond of "law and order", sporting "Blue Lives
Matter" badges, etc. Despite being preyed upon by blacks and browns for decades now, they
still refuse to become racist. Most of them are Bible thumpers who really believe that race
is just skin color, that all are equal before their imaginary friend called God, and that
Israel is America's greatest ally. Then too, vast numbers of whites work for the government
or its many offshoots such as education, law enforcement, the military, and the defense
industry. Civil war would mean they'd be revolting against themselves.
Will America become a police state? In case you haven't noticed, Americans already
live in a police state, and have for decades. PCR should know this as well as anyone, as he
was part of it during the Reagan years. America is an open-air prison Americans built
themselves, and they rat each other out and betray each other to keep themselves
ideologically in line. When someone white is doxxed and fired for having bad thoughts, who do
you think does the enforcing? For the most part, it's other white people. Fake president and
China asset Biden is just the new warden.
As a person who grew up in the glorious aftermath of World War II, it never occurred to
me that in my later years I would be pondering whether the United States would end in civil
war or a police state. In the aftermath of the stolen presidential election, it seems a
50-50 toss up.
In a very meaningful sense we already have a "police state." Why do we have a police
state? Because our masters realize that they can't run the whole world from anything
resembling a constitutional republic (as the Founders and Framers envisioned it). It's the
agenda for complete world domination and control that's driving the domestic oppression. As
they continue to squander everything of value on the agenda and take more risks, etc., while
the corruption and rot continue to take a toll and the country crumbles, the boot will need
to come down ever harder on the neck.
And please stop kidding yourself about Trump. It wasn't for the benefit of Joe and Jill
Sixpack that he seized Syrian oilfields, tried to start a war with Iran, tried to overthrow
the Maduro government in Venezuela, tried to stop Nord Stream 2, started a trade war with
China, pulled out of all the nuclear treaties, etc. Trump wasn't just fully onboard with the
agenda, he pursued it enthusiastically.
If Trump's nuclear brinkmanship and aggressive foreign policies aren't promptly reversed,
the U.S. may end as a pile of nuclear ash. Comments coming out of Moscow recently seem to
suggest that Russia is finally losing its patience with interminable U.S. hostility and may
soon start responding more forcefully to U.S./NATO provocations (and Biden's tough talk on
Russia isn't helping matters any).
Neither Russia, China nor Iran are going to surrender to the USraeli empire and start
taking orders, so either the U.S. "government" must back off and accept a multipolar world or
WW3 is still on the table, even by accident.
From Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War.
The Civil War in Corcyra
"So savage was the progress of this revolution, and it seemed all the more so because it
was one of the first which had broken out. Later, of course, practically the whole of the
Hellenic world was convulsed, with rival parties in every state – democratic leaders
trying to bring in the Athenians, and oligarchs trying to bring in the Spartans. In peacetime
there would have been no excuse and no desire for calling them in, but in time of war, when
each party could always count upon an alliance which would do harm to its opponents and at
the same time strengthen its own position, it became a natural thing for anyone who wanted a
change of government to call in help from outside.
So revolutions broke out in city after city, and in places where the revolutions occurred
late the knowledge of what had happened previously in other places caused still new
extravagances of revolutionary zeal, expressed by an elaboration in the methods of seizing
power and by unheard-of atrocities in revenge. To fit in with the change of events, words,
too, had to change their usual meanings . What used to be described as a thoughtless act
of aggression was now regarded as the courage one would expect to find in a party member; to
think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was a coward; any idea
of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one's unmanly character ; ability to
understand a question from all sides meant that one was totally unfitted for action.
Fanatical enthusiasm was the mark of a real man, and to plot against an enemy behind his back
was perfectly legitimate self-defence. Anyone who held violent opinions could always be
trusted, and anyone who objected to them became a suspect. To plot successfully was a sign of
intelligence, but it was still cleverer to see that a plot was hatching. If one attempted to
provide against having to do either, one was disrupting the unity of the party and acting out
of fear of the opposition. In short, it was equally praiseworthy to get one's blow in first
against someone who was going to do wrong, and to denounce someone who had no intention of
doing any wrong at all. Family relations were a weaker tie than party membership ,
since party members were more ready to go to any extreme for any reason whatever. These
parties were not formed to enjoy the benefits of the established laws, but to acquire power
by overthrowing the existing regime ; and the members of these parties felt confidence in
each other not because of any fellowship in a religious communion, but because they were
partners in crime. If an opponent made a reasonable speech, the party in power, so far from
giving it a generous reception, took every precaution to see that it had no practical
effect.
As the result of these revolutions, there was a general deterioration of character
throughout the Greek world . The simple way of looking at things, which is so much the
mark of a noble nature, was regarded as a ridiculous quality and soon ceased to exist.
Society had become divided into two ideologically hostile camps , and each side viewed
the other with suspicion. As for ending this state of affairs, no guarantee could be given
that would be trusted, no oath sworn that people would fear to break; everyone had come to
the conclusion that it was hopeless to expect a permanent settlement and so, instead
of being able to feel confident in others, they devoted their energies to providing against
being injured themselves."
Whether civil war as we may imagine it, or something equally unappealing to our every day
lives, something bad is about to happen.
I'm curious though, regarding what I do believe was unprecedented election fraud. How is
it possible, after watching the Georgia State Farm arena video, that the President of the
United States, with all the power that office should hold, could not force the woman
identified in that video, one Ruby Freeman, to answer questions about what we saw? Ruby
Freeman was never questioned as far as I can find. How is this possible? Nothing makes sense.
Before we begin killing one another, can we do two things; 1. Interrogate Ruby Freeman and 2.
Interrogate the killer of Ashli Babbit?
Little bit feverish article. And I do have to say no.
Civil war can happen only after hyperinflation accompanied with lawlessness.
And that will happen only if US looses its international position.
Everything depend now on Germany.
If Germany joins China Russia camp than US as a world leader will not mean anything
anymore.
China now is courting Europe intensively. Particularly is courting Germany.
Nothing is set yet.
So everybody can relax.
.
Biden is out of his mind. In his speech he said that he wants to increase minimum wage and
reestablish unions. That could be a little help also.
People living in the core areas of Ziocorporate globalism, like the US/EU, remain mostly
oblivious about the nature of their ruling regime than those living in the direct periphery
of globalist power. Take Colombia for an example, like Mexico's, all its presidents are
subservient to US Ziocorporate power. Last one, a Nobel peace prize winner under whose
pre-presidential stint as "Defense" minister oversaw the US-serving Colombian military's
systematic massacre of tens of thousands of lower class Colombian youths who were then
disguised as guerrillas to cash in rewards paid US Plan Colombia dollars, proceeded, now as
president, to negotiate the disarmament of the actual guerrillas under the Obama/Biden
regime's orders. Massmurder and massacres maintained an average level.
Then, in 2018, right after the Trumpet, a shamelessly pro-US regime, even for Colombian
standards, took over and massacres and massmurder picked right up again, to an average of 2
or 3 per week, with exploding cocaine production even for Colombia standards as well, and
extreme political polarisation, and all the while the Ziocorporate mother ship in Washington,
with its Qtard and MAGA bullshit, looked the other way except to accuse Venezuela of being
undemocratic and of human rights violations.
If Americans weren't so stupid and daydreaming like fucktards that they live in "muh
democracy/republic" instead of the Ziocorporate conglomerate regime that rules over them,
they could take a clue or two from their own regime's foreign policy, not only did Trumpet do
things like transferring $400 billion in weapons to ISIS/al-Qaeda royal Salafi patrons in
Ziodi Wahhabia, he doubled-down on the Obama/Biden policy of Venezuela "is a national
security threat to muh democracy and freedom"; to start pondering about the kind of
manipulation and radicalisation Ziocorporate agents Trump/Republicans and Biden/Democrats
have in store for them. Cointelpro certainly mutates far faster than Covid-1984.
What do Qtarts and the like need to realise this simple, evident facts? That the Trumpet
himself comes on national TV telling you all "I and the Democrats have been playing divide
and conquer with you dumbfucks for 4 years"?
The American Establishment is doing to President Trump exactly what it did to Ukrainian
President Yanukovych in Washington's orchestrated "Maidan Revolution," called "the
Revolution of Dignity" by the liars at Wikipedia, and precisely what it did to Chavez,
Maduro, and would like to do to Putin.
What Trump and his supporters, and perhaps the Kremlin, do not understand is that
real evidence no longer counts . The Establishment makes up the evidence that it
needs for its agendas.
Their playbook "Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals" by Saul D.
Alinsky, makes it clear that it's necessary to play dirty. This covers all aspects of their
Regime Change projects and the current US project surely isn't any different.
It's a cocktail of lies, fabrications, subversion, threats, blackmail, false friendships
– in fact any means to advance themselves.
For example: From Alinsky – "Means and Ends" His take on morality:
Rule 10) You do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.
Rule 11) Goals must be phrased in general terms like "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity", "Of
the Common Welfare, "Pursuit of Happiness" or "Bread and Peace".
So yes, this is why the most unpatriotic Patriot Act is called the Patriot Act and they
operate from patriotic sounding places like the American Enterprise Institute.
If traditional America is going to get anywhere in the upcoming conflict they have to get
used to playing by the same rules – difficult for them – but they have to do it.
It's inevitably going to be a dirty war.
Point of order- Russia is not the historic enemy, but the orchestrated one, rather it was
the Soviet Union which is the historic enemy, as the sponsors of the destruction of Russia
are behind the destruction of America.
We are already in a police state and you can kiss goodbye to the 1st and 2nd amendment
soon as free speech becomes hate speech just like they did in Europe.
So this site and many others in the alt news universe will soon be gone.
There's not going to be a civil war as the current generation of young people are too weak
and distracted and have been brainwashed into hating themselves.
There's a big elephant in the room and wild card that's been missed too and that's the new
covid vaccines who's long term effects on health are unknown.
Vaccines need to be studied for about 10 years before their safety can be guaranteed.
If tens / hundreds of millions are willing to be injected with a new untested genetic
engineered substance that could make them disabled or kill them in 5 years to save them
against something with a 99% survival rate what does that tell you about the mental state of
the Population?
The US as you once knew it is finished it's just that many are still in denial or haven't
realized it yet.
I see no civil war in the USA. I see no organisation amongst the people in order to carry
it out. They have no leader, they have no Hannibal, Boadicea or Adolf to rally them together
for a major insurrection against The Beast Empire. Unless of course something is brewing
secretly.
A French style form of resistance, as previously mentioned in these comments, also takes a
lot of planning and organisational skills, and I see no inkling of that taking place amongst
American patriots.
I also believe many do not realise how serious the matter is, they still, being bogged
down in irrelevant party politics.
If however a large swathe of the police and US Military including officers were to desert
their corrupt masters, things would look very different and a civil war could happen.
The civil was has been on since Crossfire Hurricane, the usurpers of the constitution
simply kept it cold because they thought they could enforce their tyranny silently.
And if Trump surrenders then they would have been proven right, at least for the
leadership fight.
Biden will likely launch a war because he already has his bay of pigs with his graft, and
will need a moonshot for the misdirection.
I don't think they can fight half the nation (and the military will split), and Russia at
the same time, so the only question is on whom the war will be launched. I still think the
odds are higher that it will be a civil war, but the Russia option looms strong for sure.
The US military is the most "woke" diverse incompetent organization in America.
Remember- contractors do all the heavy lifting "in theater"- from cooking to plumbing to
firefighting to IT to combat.
This knowledge is hidden from view- kept on the down low.I only know because my brother
has worked in Iraq and Afghanistan for KBR for the past 15 years. I have seen him accumulate
well over Half a million in cash. What does he do? He makes sure the troops have water and
food. He is in logistics. For the past decade I have heard hundreds if not thousands of
stories of the jaw dropping incompetence, insouciance and laziness of the American
military.
Rank-and-file Americans, indeed no one, talks about this very real infrastructure that
props up every dumb, overweight enlisted. About 4 contractors to every enlisted.
Most of the contractors in theater are from Eastern Europe and sub Sahara Africa. If they
were given orders to release biological or chemical weapons on the American populace, as long
as the huge checks were hitting their account they would do it in a heartbeat
More than the military- fear the shadow military that knows the systems, does the work ..
And will do whatever it is asked as long as they are paid.
Their mother doesn't live here.
Everywhere we turn, diversity and hiring people from the "other" never works out.
*** Side note: My brother revealed that when blacks came back from their R&R after the
George Floyd insanity, most of them became more aggressive and entitled. Unable to do their
work because they could not stop going to report others for incidence of racism.
This includes the American black contractors and enlisted.
These are dumb young black men and women who are making $92,000 a year to move pallets
around. If they were asked to stop calling in sick every day, they would run to report their
supervisor for-
Racism.
Many whites have lost their lucrative positions or been subject to discipline for having
the audacity to ask blacks to come to work.
We are about to participate in "The Great Experiment V. 2.0" in my opinion. This decides
which of the Georges, Washington and Orwell, is right. My money is on Orwell for a reason I
will tell you later.
...The checks and balances have been replaced with (Bank) checks and (Bank) balances. The
richest men in the world are overseeing this experiment which is going global quicker than you
can say"Google". They are enabled by the University academics who as Raymond Asquith once
observed are always prepared to provide an intellectual justification for vile acts if the
price is right and journalists will laud said acts to the heavens as decent, moral doings if
they want a paycheck next week from their masters.
The Legislature is bought. The Executive is bought. The Supreme Court are ninnies...
... And you enabled all this yourselves. When you applauded the Patriot Act. When you
cheered at the vilification of muslims, "sand niggers", "rag heads". When you justified the use
of torture. When you masturbated watching targeting videos of drone strikes on Afghans. When
you credulously watched fantasies on television about "Irans nuclear threat". When you listened
and watched uncritically (or perhaps with secret pleasure) as the media lied to you
breathlessly about the President disporting himself on a urine soaked bed with Russian hookers.
Where was your sense of outrage then? Every time you deny the humanity and human rights of
anyone, no matter how vile they be, you are destroying your own rights.
"... Clinton hollowed out his own country in order to completely remove all constraints (financial, mediatic, military). He doesn't get called out for it nearly enough in my opinion. ..."
"... Clinton was a particular type of low-class, sybaritic evil but he didn't have a strong USSR to contend with. Instead he had the drunken traitor Yeltsin dance for him like a bedraggled starving bear. ..."
"So when was this golden age? Under Reagan? Well, this is when the dismantling of the
inner core of the empire began."
Beg to differ. Reagan understood how to administer the US empire. He knew the risks of
overstretching it. He made the promise to the Soviets not to encroach on their sphere of
influence. He defended the high interest rates which strengthened the USD and which kept the
banking sector in check.
All of that went to hell with Bill Clinton:
He broke Reagan's promise and expanded NATO eastwards, he dismantled the Glass Steagall act
which led to a malignant hypergrowth of the banking sector, and he was the who introduced the
telecommunications act in 1996 which allowed for the concentration of corporate media in the
hands of the few.
Bill Clinton basically turned the empire into a rapacious and uncontrollable animal.
(Funny how noone here is talking about imprisoning him )
There is a silver lining to Bill C's blood-soaked administration. It was while he was in
power, that the Russians finally awoke from their 1990s stupor. They began to understand the
mortal danger they were facing, and they patriotically chose Putin to lead them in 1999.
– Reagan was a disgusting Russophobe and Serbophobe who proclaimed 10th April (the
founding of the Independent State of Croatia) a national holiday in California as governor.
Not surprising given that his was the most RC government ever – he also colluded with
the Polish anti-Christ to destroy the USSR. In the process he encouraged the German Nazis
(see visit to Bitburg) who then destroyed Yugoslavia.
– He brought the world to the brink of a nuclear holocaust that was prevented by a
vigilant Russian officer (in 1983?).
– He turbo-charged the power of corporations and decimated social structures and the
rights of the working class (the Americans are paying for this now).
This is not to say that the scumbag Clinton was good – after all he was trained at
Georgetown – that seminary for American murderers.
Thanks for this Ken. Good to know who Reagan really was!
To get back to your point about the "dismantling of the empire" Reagan, for all his
personal awfulness and recklessness (and subversiveness) was still more restrained than
Clinton. Clinton hollowed out his own country in order to completely remove all
constraints (financial, mediatic, military). He doesn't get called out for it nearly enough
in my opinion. I guess it's personal, after what he did to us.
Clinton was a particular type of low-class, sybaritic evil but he didn't have a strong
USSR to contend with. Instead he had the drunken traitor Yeltsin dance for him like a
bedraggled starving bear. Never again!
@84:
As sometimes said: don't sweat the small stuff.
This "We are all Taiwanese now" stunt is Pompeo's act of petty spite for getting outfoxed in
the Hong Kong colour revolution play.
Empire's useful idiots were let loose to trash the hapless city, fired up by the Western
propaganda machinery.
Now Beijing is putting the stock on those pompous minions with the National Security Law, and
their foreign masters can't do nuffin' except squeal human rights and apply some nuisance
sanctions.
The West fails because it looks at China through ideological lenses and sees Communists, who
can fall back on 5000 years of statecraft to push back at interlopers.
Beijing's moves can be likened to two classic strategies.
1. Zhuge Liang fools the enemy to fire all their arrows at straw men, which become ammunition
against them.
2. The Empty City strategy. Invaders take over an ostensibly abandoned city, only to be
trapped inside.
Global Times is cantankerous and sometimes risible, but even a broken clock is right, twice a
day.
So when it says that crossing Beijing's red line on the Taiwan issue is not in the island's
best interests, the incoming BiMala administration should take note.
"... What struck me was the behavior of most of the House's invaders: they for the most were pranksters. For them it was Halloween; not the storming of the Bastille! ..."
"... This is all pretty mild stuff. Useful to see that Washington is not so different to Kiev. With the Biden presidency you can certainly add the USA to the list of countries ruled by governments put in place by colour revolutions ..."
"... The images that arise from this event will remain iconic. It possibly was a shaperoned event, but the plan, that anger would be wide-spread and destruction abundant did not materialize. This is evident in the bizarre, concocted, pre-written M5M media reports. It was a trap, but it backfired. ..."
"... The French police official said they believed that an investigation would find that someone interfered with the deployment of additional federal law-enforcement officials on the perimeter of the Capitol complex; the official has direct knowledge of the proper procedures for security of the facility. ..."
"... someone interfered with the proper deployment of officers around Congress ..."
"... I was surprised but pleased to see Americans demonstrating their contempt for the hostile elite government we live under. Assault against Democracy? BS. ..."
"... But nobody should delude themselves into thinking that Donald Trump is a patriot who will die for the cause. Hell, he already threw the people risking their lives and liberty protesting the fraudulent election under the bus. It is long past time the whores in Washington become acutely aware of the contempt sane Americans have for them. I do not support violent protests, but I do support a mass demonstration of people expressing their total and absolute contempt for the traitorous whores who rule over us. ..."
But for me, I was no less happy to see the Republicans on the run. After all, it is they who
have been stoking the anger and resentment of populist Americans, secure in their belief that
they had conjured a monster they completely controlled and that they could endlessly exploit
for their own purposes no matter what they did. Well, that monster turned around and bit them
on their fleeing asses on Wednesday. The "people," whom they love to claim they represent, went
from being an ideological abstraction to an angry mob after they felt cheated and decided to
take matters into their own hands. It's important to remember that,
according to reports , what first inspired the protesters to descend on the Capitol was
when word reached them that Pence had refused to challenge the certification of the Electoral
College result. They weren't just angry at the Democrats; they were angry at the whole lot of
them.
... For me, the Capitol occupation was a spontaneous and dramatic expression of the white
working class' frustration with the Washington establishment and an indication that they won't
tolerate a return to business as usual. The Democrats -- and more than a few Republicans --
blocked and worked against Trump's agenda from the day he took office. Stealing the election
was merely the final prong in their assault on him and on the wishes of ordinary Americans. If
Washington doesn't begin to take populist demands seriously, violence is inevitable.
... This means they have to stop attributing the fact that working-class whites aren't on
board with their agenda to the influence of scapegoats like Trump or conspiracy theories and
instead finally recognize that our nation's yeomanry have legitimate grievances that won't go
away just because Trump does.
For its part, the American Left, which now has Biden as its figurehead, really has no moral
authority whatsoever to condemn the Capitol occupation given that they've been bending over
backward to excuse the violence of BLM and Antifa for years now. Remember "punch a Nazi"?
Not that these are in any way comparable to what happened in the Capitol; BLM and Antifa
violence has resulted in
dozens of deaths , rapes, other violence, and untold billions in property damage across the
United States. The Capitol protesters, by contrast, were mostly peaceful and caused very little
serious damage (if there had been extensive damage it seems unlikely the House would have been
able to reconvene so quickly). Most importantly, they were not attacking innocent bystanders'
private property. There also doesn't seem to have been much looting apart from a few items
taken as pranks; compare this to the scenes we witnessed from Minneapolis last
spring , when we saw black rioters stripping entire shopping centers down to their
frames.
The Left, of course, will never accept this logic; for them, the occupation was the next
Charlottesville, if not the next 9/11 -- but we have to never cease from reminding them of
their hypocrisy. In looking at the photos of politicians scurrying for cover as the protesters
began to break into the House chamber, I was reminded of the mockery that Trump took from
Democratic politicians back in May when word got out that he had been briefly sent to the
emergency
bunker beneath the White House after it had been besieged by BLM rioters . There's also a
delicious irony in the fact that some of the politicians who have been calling for police
departments to be defunded were hiding behind these very same police when their constituents
came calling.
On Wednesday, the world heard the voice of American populism. It wasn't Trump's voice; it
was that of the American people. And perhaps, just perhaps, the people are beginning to rule.
This isn't about Trump anymore -- it didn't start with Trump and it certainly won't end with
him. As for myself, all I can say is that, for the first time in a while, on that day I
actually felt proud to be an American.
Mostly some good and correct points in this article. Yes, Antifa was there, and Capital
police expected them. Yes, Washington's corrupt Capital police also did welcome surprised
Trump supporters into the building and even to the area where Ashli was assassinated. How do
you think there were no less than 5 videos of the murder from 4 angles? Trump supporters were
flabbergasted, nonviolent and wondering for the most part how they got so far.
But the END RESULT was a bizarre attempt to REMOVE TRUMP IMMEDIATELY – by any means
(25th or impeach – neither will succeed). Do you really think that end result is the
product of chance or circumstance? Do you really think Pelosi is foaming at the teeth because
she truly believes Trump is ready to enter the launch codes (give me a break)?
In point of fact, because the civilized legal process has been completely exhausted, we
now reach the military option, as in executive order on foreign interference in US elections.
This means, in the end, a military tribunal convened to prosecute treason. This is the reason
certain conspirators are soiling their Depends undergarments.
But how it will end when you have the global banking interests of "the Guardians" as a
foe, with their 10 trillion in play? This is a 5th generation world war unlike any before it.
Humanity is at stake.
Congress hasn't had any clothes for years. It was difficult to imagine anything that could
make Americans despise congress more. But look at this.
(You need Tor Browser Bundle to see it, and if you don't have it, Why the fuck not?)
Physically cowering in fear of the people they've fucked for all these years.
This is the single most compelling evidence for CIA LIHOP. This quirky peasant uprising
and its public happiness scared congress much more than CIA's anthrax attacks. Now congress
will do what they're told, take their AIPAC bribes and hide behind high walls.
It's the USA [neoliberlaism] that has no clothes...
Congress has no clothes because it's the best little whorehouse in America.
By the way, Twitter banning Trump is a great thing. Mass purge is actually better for
us.
The problem with limited purges was that most cons and patriots still stuck with Big Tech
because there was still enough freedom and conservative material available. But when Big Tech
goes whole hog and censors so many people, it will force a Techession(tech-secession or
techxodus) among millions and millions of people, and this will make Alt Tech far more
viable. Indeed, Alt Tech can turn into counter-tech and the Big Other Tech.
People who were too lazy to get off their butts and join Alt Tech will now have no
choice.
Big Tech could maintain monopoly as long as they just banned people like Alex Jones. But
when they ban the president and so many of his followers, they are forcing the creation of
the Big Other Tech, and that will end the monopoly.
The people's anger is real. Trump is a false prophet. He's nothing but a Jew loving
blowhard, a con man with a below average IQ. He campaigned on draining the swamp but staffed
his entire cabinet with nothing but swamp creatures, because he *is* the swamp. He's just
been cast aside because the puppet masters have found an even more corrupt puppet that they
can extort. The patriots who have been protesting the election deserve someone better, a real
deal like Kris Kobach.
This election exposes just how corrupt this country has become, from top to bottom, not
just the Executive branch and the legislative branch, but even the judiciary branch is now
completely corrupt from the very top, the Chief Justice of SCOTUS. Jews now have firm control
on every institution of import in this country, from Wall Street to Hollywood, DC to SV and
everywhere in between, media, academia, publishing industry, healthcare, everything. Patriots
now have our backs against the Wall. There's no place else to turn to. We either fight our
way out or die.
The Roman empire lasted 1,000 years, from 500BC to 500AD. In the first half, Rome was
ruled by elected emperors, and in the second half, by unelected emperors. Rome ruled for 500
years, peaked for 200, and fell for 300 years. It was a long, slow death. America was on the
ascendance for 300 years, peaked for 50 years (1945-1995), and has been on a decline the last
25 years. The next 75 will be a long, slow, increasingly painful death as we eventually get
swallowed whole by huns and visigoths.
"But the END RESULT was a bizarre attempt to REMOVE TRUMP IMMEDIATELY – by any
means (25th or impeach – neither will succeed). Do you really think that end result is
the product of chance or circumstance? Do you really think Pelosi is foaming at the teeth
because she truly believes Trump is ready to enter the launch codes (give me a
break)?"
Strange they are unable to wait for less than two weeks for inauguration. These people are
truly evil. It's like what did Trump ever do to them that is so personal?
What struck me was the behavior of most of the House's invaders: they for the most
were pranksters. For them it was Halloween; not the storming of the Bastille!
Were I an investor I'd be buying up stocks in private security firms. Just today I viewed
a video of that hideous old quean, Lindsay Graham plodding and plunging through an airport
passageway on the way (presumably) to his home in South Carolina. All the way he was being
harassed, shouted at and called a "traitor" for his RINO collusion in the takedown of the
Trumpster.
Then there is the case of Mike Pence. After his refusal to call the question on the
Constitutional approach to denying any confirmation of electors from either party, making way
for either a compromise (as was reached in a similar kerfuffle in the 1876 showdown between
Democrat Samuel Tilden and Republican Rutherfraud Hayes) or to call for new elections in the
challenged and conflicted swing states; Pence has been broadly excoriated as a traitor who
weaseled his way out of supporting the president's back-up plan.
Next, we fast-forward to those photos of Congressional prostiticians cowering behind their
seats as the "deplorables" streamed into the sacred chambers of the people's house. A lot of
guilty consciences in that zoo. They well know they either sold out for hefty campaign
contributions and money under the table or are being blackmailed through the workings of
Epstein, Maxwell and Wexner on behalf I$rael's Mo$$ad or maybe a dozen other intel agencies,
most specifically Britain's MI-6 and the shot-callers (think 11-22-63 in Dallas) who rule
through other deep state organs, the CIA.
Private security agencies will be getting a.lot of calls from terrified prostiticians and
many others who have been working for the enemies of WE THE PEOPLE. Consider those talking
heads on boobtoob noose who are paid handsomely for constant repetition of a false reality
paradigm which has entrapped all those suburban soccer moms who were mind-controlled into
voting for the Kamala's Foote/Biden ticket. Awakeners by the millions have been curing
themselves of the boobtoob noose habit. Do you think the teevee presenters are sleeping
peacefully these days and soon about to enjoy high times at fancy resorts and pricey
restaurants?
How about professors and other academics who get the call to appear as talking-heads on
PB$ and spread erudite sounding barf and garbage as fast as they spread their legs for all
those shekels and the public recognition?
Are gated communities with patrolling guards and cameras galore, places where powerful
movers and shakers tend to live will those havens (or those high-rise apartment suites
surrounding Central Park -- or placid neighborhoods in Georgetown or Bel-Air–) likely
to feel safe from now on?
Private Security services. That's where I'd invest. The "Deplorables" are pissed off at
the stolen election and even more so at the political duopoly constituting government of the
prostiticians, by the deep $tate bureaucratic Administrators and for the plutocratic
oligarchs.
As of January 6th, 2021 the status of our country devolved into a totally ruptured
republic. Democracy? Fuggidaboutit.
About 95% of the US media, and about 70% of US politicians are corrupt deep-state
globalists (which makes them implicitly treasonous). The source of their deep-state globalist
power is central banking, usury, and enslaving us goyim with debt and "the love of money".
The last president who was not a treasonous globalist was Reagan (although most of his
cabinet were globalists including VP Bush). President Trump has been constantly under attack
by this deep-state globalist cult because he is not an obedient member of their club and has
been irreverently exposing their hand.
Nothing will change: the US and the rest of the western civilization will eventually
succumb to this cancerous globalist corruption unless the cancer is removed. This is not
about politics: it's about removing the cancerous corruption before the cancer destroys its
host.
Thank God President Trump has exposed their hand and has got the ball rolling. Now it is
up to us: to step up and continue the populist movement that he started.
This truly is the end of the Banana Empire. I say "God bless Trump" only because he set
into motion the end of this tyranny; like Kerensky he was largely clueless as to the extent
of the rot.
This is the beginning of the end. Best case scenario the United States returns to
democracy.
No matter what the cause, there was evidence of agents provocateurs present who inflamed
the violence, and the reaction, calling those who opposed the regime candidate "terrorists"
is going to lead to more serious unrest, particularly if as appears likely, kangaroo courts
begin rounding up people for trial. The thing is, close to a majority already suspect that
the fix was in in November, and the fact the same methods of fraud were successfully employed
in Georgia's senate races inflamed the anger. Proof of agents provocateurs is abundant. Even
the guy dressed up in a viking suit whose photograph is run with the article apparently was
an antifa figure.
Since the regime's coordinated reaction is attempting to turn this into a sort of
Reichstag fire to eliminate opposition to a consolidated deep state fascist regime, we are in
for turbulent times. I suspect the tacticians, despite what the author says, actually are
hoping for a serious response before the opposition can effectively organize, and the regime
operatives are too arrogant to care about the economic consequences, and the likelihood that
the numerous vassal states may use the instability as a means of securing a greater degree of
independence from the yankee imperium.
This is all pretty mild stuff. Useful to see that Washington is not so different to
Kiev. With the Biden presidency you can certainly add the USA to the list of countries ruled
by governments put in place by colour revolutions
The best way for Trumps place in history to be magnified and consolidated would be for
them to imprison him and take away all of his assets (he'd become like a mini Jesus), though
I am guessing this is the only reason he has not been assassinated, yet.
The images that arise from this event will remain iconic. It possibly was a shaperoned
event, but the plan, that anger would be wide-spread and destruction abundant did not
materialize. This is evident in the bizarre, concocted, pre-written M5M media reports. It was
a trap, but it backfired. I for one likely would have ransacked the place. I must admit
I am impressed with their disinterest in marauding. It was an important event, cherish its
iconic imagery, for darkness, subversion and false flags will take our guns away and reduce
the flame of patriotism to pilot size soon.
I've seen at least two videos of the Capitol police opening steel fences at one point and
doors at another point only two stand aside and calmly allow protesters to pour in. Looked
more like an invitation than an invasion. Obviously they had orders to stand back at those
points.
What a wonderful moment to see all the Congressional rabble hitting the decks.
Next time the protesters should bring a guillotine!
Key word, there, "dramatic." And it apparently makes no difference how corny it is
(goofball with the horns and even Trump himself) or how idiotic, (the masked moron response
to COVID and installing senile Joe on the throne).
Drama is a force that gives empty heads meaning, or at least a bit of entertainment while
our owners mock and manipulate us at their adolescent pleasure.
I would have enjoyed it more – had 2 million armed Iraqis, Afghanis, Syrians,
Libyans, Yemenis, Ukrainians, and others , that have had their countries wasted by the USA ,
storm the Capital and get even with those that voted and supported those murderous
invasions.
If he's out in 11 days anyway, why the push to impeach? Pure spite?
It has been suggested that if the Dems could get DT impeached before his time is up then
they could attach legislation to his verdict stating that he could never run for any office
again.
Some on the Left are terrified that he will come back in 2024 and the same 75M Maga people
will be waiting to sweep him back in office.
IMO in 2024 KH as Prez is a sure thing -- -people will be shamed into voting for her to
avoid being called a racist AND a sexist.
Realizing that not only his political but also his personal future might be in jeopardy,
Trump was quick to concede the election and promise a peaceful transition of power --
showing that when things get tough, it's his own hide that he's thinking of.
"Trump was quick to concede the election" -- That's the part I somehow missed hearing over
here in central Europe, perhaps because not all the relevant news is reported here. Would the
author quote the words the president used to do that?
Conceding the election, as I understand it, is something he could have done any time since
Nov. 3, making our shadow government very happy. Since mainstream media spent the next two
months loudly demanding that he "concede the election", they must also have missed those
magic words.
Conceding the election not only acknowledges a valid election was held but also makes
monkeys out of the skeptical people who voted for Trump and answered his call to rally in
Washington Jan. 6. Are you saying that?
Or does conceding a U.S. election now equate to saying the election was rigged and it
looks like not a damned thing we can do about it?
A fitting end to the Trump movement, seeing as there was never anything in terms of a
structure to organise the political base except for a ludicrous conspiracy prank (i.e.
'Qanon'). The whole thing has been a diversionary venture to corral dissent and neutralise
it. It might 'feel good to see patriots in the Capitol Building' but -shorn of any genuine
movement, all that really amounts to is .well feelings .
Real populism looks quite different surely, and so do real insurrections. There was no
'invasion', the security was stepped down and they opened the doors for the crowd to walk in.
A spectacle to advance an agenda.
I must admit as an American abroad that I felt a little Schadenfreude -- having watched
the left burn America through the summer, it was about time the populists got a crack at it
-- but I had this nagging feeling this would end very unpleasantly for all; there's an old
adage that if you take a shot at the crown, you'd better not miss. That feeling was confirmed
as CNN started trumpeting this as being an insurrection, which was picked up by the politicos
in short order. It's hard to dismiss out of hand that this was a false flag because the
leftists almost immediately had the language and narrative and an action plan in hand to
finally put the populist genie back in the bottle. Then again, maybe they're just quick on
their feet.
If this was planned, as some above suggest, then I'm really disappointed at the lack of
thought given to this. Taking the Capitol was never going to seriously result in a change of
government in a country that has been practising Continuity of Government exercises for
three-quarters of a century, and at best would only be a symbolic protest. Having taken the
Capitol, this was never going to end well for those participating in the frolic, as we will
see in the coming weeks as more average Joes and Janes are dragged into court (do you think
Buffalo-boy will stand in the dock?). So why not make the best of what was going to be a shit
sandwich anyway?
Instead of walking through the halls of the Capitol, taking selfies, and then going home
when "asked" to leave, they should have taken a page out of Occupy Wall Street and settled in
for the long hall. The left would have shown up with pre-printed signs, some of which would
have looked amateurish enough to seem authentic. Where were these guys' signs?
They should have filled every seat in "the Peoples' House" with real people holding signs
saying "We are the People" with a few thousand more people sitting peacefully in all the
corridors and steps and waiting passively for the the police or military to carry them away.
That would have taken days, if not weeks, and would have put a serious damper on the
inevitable inauguration.
Politicians and their fellow bureaucrats have opened the door to the real barbarians;
corporate fascism, influence of special interest lobbies in Congress, foreign entanglements
(Israel) , endless war, unaccountable government within the ever expanding sixteen
Intelligence Agencies, secrecy in place of democracy, the authority to print currency handed
over to oligarchs at the Federal Reserve Board, who are, in reality a collection of banksters
and financiers- not an agency of the federal government as the organizations' name would have
all of us believe.
If there ever was a time for revolution and dissolution of a thoroughly corrupted
government (for every western Occident country) the time is now.
The corporate-fascist infection began under Ford the stumbler, he opened the door to The
NeoCons followed by Reagan the Union buster who did everything he could to dismantle FDR's
social democracy programs such as the CCC (infrastructure support), the social security
safety net. Reagan had a close association with the barbarism of Thatcher, she had a set of
horns much larger than that, so called "insurrectionist" buffoon who's face was plastered all
over newsprint today. Chavez was correct and I add, that a waft of sulfurous odor behind
Thatcher was shared by both Bushes. Strategies dedicated to endless war, endless predation(s)
for dwindling resources rather than embracing a philosophy that nourishes support for human
ingenuity and mutual trust between nations. Instead, adopting long range and global
domination plans outlined by Admiral Cebrowski and his assistant, Thomas P. M. Barnett, who
announced a new map of our world-according to the Pentagon that is. Visit Dr Henry Gaffney Jr
of the CNA Corporation.
ASIDE: This is what happens when an entire people allowed a post World War II dream to
die. The Kennedy Brothers dream of a new demilitarized era, and Western European style
Marshal Plan for third world countries who desired to attach themselves to the tail of our
kite (voluntarily) -Rest in peace John and Robert, I'll never let their guilt, control
freakishness or rapacity to go free !
Rusting bridges, potholed autobahns, with an emphasis on who owns them, not when
maintenance or repairs will be forthcoming-by extortion no doubt. Gaunt, vitamin deficient
citizenry, homelessness, epidemic drug addictions, who needs "society" haven't you heard?
Thatcher said there's no such thing as society!
Thus it seems improbable to me that the Deep State was willing to sacrifice the sense
of American invulnerability it projects across the globe simply in order to discredit the
populist movement when there are many other, less self-harming methods it could use
instead.
America's aura of invulnerability has been gone since September 11th 2001. Civil airliners
flown by a ragtag crew of "Islamists", if you believe the official story, smashed into the
WTC and the Pentagon. No fighter aircraft made any attempts to intercept them: they were
completely unhindered in their actions. The Deep State were willing to let thousands of
civilians die in order to achieve its own purposes.
Letting a couple of hundred people occupy the Capitol building for a short period of time
seems very minor in comparison.
Surely one of the first rules of the exercise of Power is to scrupulously avoid
demonstrating that you are a low grade coward. Now that the entire US Congress has been
videoed cowering in craven fear before an unarmed crowd, whose only "crime" is to seek
redress for a stolen election, there are going to be serious consequences.
How many foreign agents, and foreign powers, are now coming to the realization "hey, these
guys are bunch of pussies?" How many criminal organizations, in the USA or abroad, formerly
operating with some restraint, will now be freed from any restraint? And how many citizens of
the Republic, formerly circumspect to the Public Offices in our country, will now proceed to
operate with complete contempt of sniveling cowards in Public Office who seek to rule us?
The absolute lowest level of Degeneracy demonstrated by the Political Class is not in
their systematic sexual degeneracy, nor their relentless and despicable Negroaltry, nor their
thievery of anything they can steal, nor their relentless, pervasive, and relentless
dishonesty even when they would be much better served by the truth, but precisely in their
pervasive fear of everything Decent, including decent Americans.
So here we are, in the land of the Zoo Monkey Shit-eaters, faced with the only choice that
will ever have any real meaning for the rest of our lives:
What struck me was the behavior of most of the House's invaders: they for the most were
pranksters. For them it was Halloween; not the storming of the Bastille!
True.
Just another PR stunt that benefits nobody except the globalists.
The US have no clothes After decades and decades of warmongering & murdering innocent
people around the globe in the name of "democracy" (what a hypocritical sick joke!!!) to
steal and loot other nation's territories and resources now the true face of the USA is
visible to All: the face of a horrendous tyrannical evil monster serving not the american
people but the interests of a few billionnaires, master puppeteers in the dark. We knew it
all along: u are not a democracy and you are not an example to anyone.
All the contrary, you are an example of what not to be or what not to become.
You are and always have been a kleptocracy or something worse.
(wikypedia: Kleptocracy (from Greek κλέπτης
kléptēs, "thief", κλέπτω kléptō, "I
steal", and -κρατία -kratía from
κράτος krátos, "power, rule") is a government whose
corrupt leaders (kleptocrats) use political power to appropriate the wealth of their nation,
typically by embezzling or misappropriating government funds at the expense of the wider
population.)
One of the few among us who still is in possession of a functioning brain..
What should we expect in 2021?
So far, it looks like this year is going to be plagued by more of the same brand of
madness, mayhem, manipulation and tyranny that dominated 2020.
Frankly, I'm sick of it: the hypocrisy, the double standards, the delusional belief by
Americans at every point along the political spectrum that politics and politicians are the
answer to what ails the country, when for most of our nation's history, politics and
politicians have been the cause of our woes.
Consider: for years now, Americans, with sheeplike placidity, have tolerated all manner
of injustices and abuses meted out upon them by the government (police shootings of unarmed
individuals, brutality, corruption, graft, outright theft, occupations and invasions of
their homes by militarized police, roadside strip searches, profit-driven incarcerations,
profit-driven wars, egregious surveillance, taxation without any real representation, a
nanny state that dictates every aspect of their lives, lockdowns, overcriminalization,
etc.) without ever saying "enough is enough."
@Realist black
shirt thugs never went to prison. Antifa/blm are the shock troops for elitists like George
Soros, who are seeking to impose a new order, a global, neo-feudal system run solely by them
and solely for their benefit.
Antifa/blm are part of the machinery for achieving this neo-feudal vision, as are the
USA's Democrat-Republican establishment, DSMIC, and MSM. They will be dealt with when the new
order is achieved, just as Hitler dealt with the SA when they had served their purpose. All
populists, especially Trump supporters are an immediate threat to our would-be feudal
masters. Their eradication is a compelling necessity. There will be no mercy.
The French police official said they believed that an investigation would find that
someone interfered with the deployment of additional federal law-enforcement officials on the
perimeter of the Capitol complex; the official has direct knowledge of the proper procedures
for security of the facility.
someone interfered with the proper deployment of officers around Congress
It is routine for the Capitol Police to coordinate with the federal Secret Service and the
Park Police and local police in Washington, DC, before large demonstrations. The National
Guard, commanded by the Department of Defense, is often on standby too.
On Wednesday, however, that coordination was late or absent.
The National Guard, which was deployed heavily to quell the Black Lives Matter protests in
2020, did not show up to assist the police until two hours after the action started on
Wednesday, according to The Associated Press.
This is coordinated among different levels . ( think of 911 and lack of responses
preparedness and abuses of the drill )
Trump is a psycho who has convinced the low IQ white of him being a savior facing off deep
state which is against the poor white and which doesn't want Trump get elected . So the
election must be stolen .
And what's not good about fighting a thief or stealing ?
I was surprised but pleased to see Americans demonstrating their contempt for the
hostile elite government we live under. Assault against Democracy? BS. Perhaps there is
some fight left in the American people?
But nobody should delude themselves into thinking that Donald Trump is a patriot who
will die for the cause. Hell, he already threw the people risking their lives and liberty
protesting the fraudulent election under the bus. It is long past time the whores in
Washington become acutely aware of the contempt sane Americans have for them. I do not
support violent protests, but I do support a mass demonstration of people expressing their
total and absolute contempt for the traitorous whores who rule over us.
Pelosi, Schumer et al. want to pretend this was the burning of the Reichstag, so they can
take "appropriate" measures. They want to act with haste.
Pelosi and Schumer fear that people will realize, after looking at how for years Obama and
the left stoked racial hatred, which resulted in riots, murder and arson causing billions in
damage, this is, by comparison, a nothing-burger. Thus, haste is the order of the day.
Trump run his election complain of 2016 as champion of common Americans. After he won the
office the betrayed them all and governed like Bush III with his own cabal of neocons and
neoliberals. \
He betrayed his followed again on Dec 6, when he first incited them for the action but did not provide organization, security
and the plan needed to press Congress to appoint the commission for investigation of election "irregularities" for then days
before Biden inauguration. He is now completely spent politically and his enemies and first of all, Ms Pelosi, are after him.
Moreover he gave a shot in the arm for the gang of Russiagaters who were pursuing him
since his inauguration.
The fact that Trump leaves the political scene is good. While useful as a wrecking ball for
the neoliberal empire and neoliberal establishment he proved to be completely inept as
a politician and lack courage necessary for the national leader. Which he proved again on Dec 6. Famous quote from
Friedrich Schiller's play Fiesco "The Moor has done his duty. The Moor can go." is probably applicable. What is interesting
is that Zionists betrayed Trump.
But the fact hat he will be replaced by neocon warmonger and staunch neoliberal Biden means
that there is no light at the and of tunnel for the common people.
Like Trump, Biden was never Presidential material. He a a mediocre politician, by all
accounts. And extremely corrupt in addition to that.
Notable quotes:
"... Donald Trump denounced the people whom he personally called to protest. His close political allies withdrew their support. ..."
"... The deck was stacked against President Trump from Day One. His orders were ignored. The US courts, judges, police, the whole system of law enforcement was against him; his orders were blocked or overturned, while the media made fun of him and the opposition relentlessly delegitimised him. ..."
"... On January 6, a massive demonstration in his support gathered in Washington, DC. Hundreds of thousands Americans came to the capital to demand justice after the election fraud became obvious. They hoped that the Republican representatives would refuse to certify the fraud and appoint a commission to check and recount the votes. ..."
"... The horror and outrage of the Dem politicians and media were as faked as their news. During last year, many government buildings were taken over by Dem-sponsored BLM activists, and in not one case did the police use lethal weapons or even rush the protesters out of buildings. ..."
"... For them, it was an honest and funny way to express their indignation. But the real gambit plotters intended to frame them. They even murdered four protesters hoping they would respond with violence, but in vain. ..."
"... White American protesters are exceptionally non-violent lot; as with Occupy Wall Street a few years back the January 6 Capitol protesters were timid and obedient as lambs. For this reason, BLM was invented, for Blacks are able to riot violently, as opposed to well-trained whites. It is not a race thing: lily-white French Yellow Vests and Ukrainian nationalists have fought the police all right. But US whites are not prone to riot, not since the Civil War. ..."
"... Anyway, their non-violence didn't help them. The president-elect Biden begrudged them even the name of protesters: "Don't dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists." Indeed, the name should be preserved for Deep State-authorised looters and their brethren all over the world, whether in Hong Kong or Minsk, in Seattle or Portland. ..."
"... researchers will argue whether duplicitous Biden's minions organised it or just capitalised on the Trumpers' sincere protest. ..."
"... There is no doubt that to an objective observer the 2020 elections were profoundly unfair. I won't trouble you with too many published details about the statistically impossible results, but here is one example of fraud. The city of Detroit gave 95 per cent of its vote to Biden/Kamala, a number that Mr Kim Jong-un would view with slight envy, while Mr Lukashenko would murmur, "How can it be done?" It is highly likely this mind-boggling result was achieved in the following way. ..."
"... The problem is, Trump was a poor organiser. He could win elections, if he could prevent Cynthia Stephens's kind of legislation, outlaw postal ballots, enforce obligatory IDs for voting, mobilise his people for election control. A formidable task, but not impossible, while dealing with a prone-to-cheat adversary. He could even do a revolution on January 6, tasking the right people to act, forming a revolutionary HQ, planning a strategy of takeover, but he didn't do anything of the sort. He probably thought Congress would see the vast crowds and allow for the checking of election results. ..."
"... Alternatively, he was so naïve that he believed revolutions just happen by themselves, as in the movies. They do not. Behind every successful revolution, there is a lot of planning, armed force, weapons ready for use, supply lines, logistics, media support, and communications. Trump had none of that. It was enough to turn off Twitter to make him deaf and dumb. ..."
"... There was no coup attempt, as correctly stated by Tyler Durden : "Trump has never had the concentration, organizational acumen, or ideological coherence to mount a bona fide "coup," and a mob intrusion which was swiftly dispersed by armed agents of the state doesn't change that. ..."
"... Many Trumpists believed in the QAnon and Kayfabe conspiracies; they posted reports of bad guys being arrested, of servers snatched by the FBI, of Clinton and Biden waiting for rough justice behind bars. This belief disarmed people who would otherwise have fought to achieve this very result. That is the problem with conspiracies: imaginary conspiracies prevent real action. ..."
"... He succeeded against enormous odds in improving the lot of American workers: for the first time since the 1970s, their incomes rose in relation to the other classes. He stopped mass migration to the US: legal immigration went down to a trickle. He avoided new wars; he tried to make peace with Russia. He refused to bomb Iran even in the last days of his presidency, though some pro-Israel supporters promised him a second term if he would. ..."
"... His fight against the corona madness was his great achievement. He was against the lockdowns that are about to destroy our world so completely that few things will survive. The last great US ruler who didn't wear the cowardly mask will be remembered. He could not defeat the mighty medical complex, or FAGMA, or the Masters of Discourse, but he tried. ..."
President Trump was decisively beaten, if not fair and square. The hopes of millions of
American voters were squashed and extinguished. The saga of the Orange Man is over. The victors
used a gambit: they sacrificed the sanctity and security of the Capitol, allowed intruders in,
permitted them to take selfies in the Speaker's office, and then faked horror and outrage. The
attempted calls for electoral transparency were deflated in real time as huge crowds were
dispersed, electors were confirmed, and the ascendancy of Biden was assured, while Trump
followers were branded 'domestic terrorists'.
Donald Trump denounced the people whom he personally called to protest. His close political
allies withdrew their support. Within hours, or even minutes, this ruler of the world admired
by millions became a non-person. Like a boy who posted an obscenity, he was banned by Twitter
and Facebook. Time will tell whether he will go to prison, as so many Dems pray for, but his
political life seems to have ended, even if his cause may live.
The deck was stacked against President Trump from Day One. His orders were ignored. The US
courts, judges, police, the whole system of law enforcement was against him; his orders were
blocked or overturned, while the media made fun of him and the opposition relentlessly
delegitimised him. He was blocked even by Fox News. Dem-run states adjusted their laws to
assure the elections' result. Trump was a lame duck from the very beginning of his presidency
to its bitter end. He was kept on a short leash by the almighty Deep State, and when he tried
to free himself, they pulled the leash.
On January 6, a massive demonstration in his support gathered in Washington, DC. Hundreds of
thousands Americans came to the capital to demand justice after the election fraud became
obvious. They hoped that the Republican representatives would refuse to certify the fraud and
appoint a commission to check and recount the votes. Some of the protesters managed to break
into the Capitol, or were let in by the police. This peaceful Occupy Capitol action, the
exercise of a natural right to protest, was met with lethal fire, and a young female protester
from San Diego, Ashli Babbitt, was murdered by the plainclothes police. The Republican
representatives were cowed and surrendered; Biden was confirmed to take office.
The horror and outrage of the Dem politicians and media were as faked as their news. During
last year, many government buildings were taken over by Dem-sponsored BLM activists, and in not
one case did the police use lethal weapons or even rush the protesters out of buildings.
"Shortly after 8 p.m. Wednesday, hundreds of protesters gathered outside the locked King
Street entrance to the Capitol, chanting "Break down the door!" and "General strike!" Moments
later, police ceded control of the State Street doors and allowed the crowd to surge inside,
joining thousands who had already gathered in the Capitol to protest the votes. The area
outside the Assembly, which is scheduled to take the bill up at 11 a.m. today, was crowded
with protesters who chanted, "We're not leaving. Not this time."
Department of Administration spokesman Tim Donovan said although protesters were being
encouraged to leave, no one would be forcibly removed. Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said he had
instructed Police Chief Noble Wray not to allow his officers to participate in removing
demonstrators from the building."
This was what happened in Madison, Wisconsin in March 2011, as
Steve Sailer reminded us. Indeed, this is what the protesters expected; some were dressed
in flamboyant carnival attire; they behaved well and peacefully, within acceptable limits. It
was not an insurrection; they didn't try to take over the Congress in any meaningful sense.
For them, it was an honest and funny way to express their indignation. But the real gambit
plotters intended to frame them. They even murdered four protesters hoping they would respond
with violence, but in vain.
White American protesters are exceptionally non-violent lot; as with Occupy Wall Street
a few years back the January 6 Capitol protesters were timid and obedient as lambs. For this
reason, BLM was invented, for Blacks are able to riot violently, as opposed to well-trained
whites. It is not a race thing: lily-white French Yellow Vests and Ukrainian nationalists have
fought the police all right. But US whites are not prone to riot, not since the Civil War.
Being a foreigner, I do not understand why the Americans want to keep their guns if they never
use them, but that's the way they are.
Anyway, their non-violence didn't help them. The president-elect
Biden begrudged them even the name of protesters: "Don't dare call them protesters. They
were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists." Indeed, the name should be
preserved for Deep State-authorised looters and their brethren all over the world, whether in
Hong Kong or Minsk, in Seattle or Portland.
Russian social networks were comparing the Washington DC events with those nearer to home
and complained of 'double standards'. The US media expressed no indignation when their
appointee Boris Yeltsin shelled the Russian Parliament in 1993. The New York Times and
the State Department had encouraged the nationalist mob to storm Ukrainian government offices
in 2014. They cheered on the opposition in Minsk in taking over their parliament after failing
to win elections. The Belarus protesters claimed their country's election results were rigged,
just like Trump supporters did for the US elections, but Biden didn't call them "domestic
terrorists". (Actually, neither did President Lukashenko: he called them 'protesters', and
their violent demos were dispersed without a single shot fired.) In such cases, Jews respond
with "How can you compare?!"
The Russians compared the Capitol 'coup attempt' with their own semi-staged 'coup' of 1991,
a partly pre-planned provocation. In 1991, the feeble coup organisers could not detain Yeltsin
and surrendered as if on cue; the wave of indignation removed Gorbachev and the Communist party
from power. In the Capitol, too, police waved the 'invaders' in, as you can see on this video
forwarded by the BBC. More videos suggesting Capitol police involvement in the ostensible
provocation are presented
here . The orchestrated indignation allowed the victors to censor and purge the defeated
Trump and his followers. Just as the USSR went down in August 1991, Trump's America went down
in January 2021, and the liberal elites representing the big corporations came to power. It was
achieved by a provocation, but ordinary Trump followers were really angry with the Election
Steal. Likewise, 1991 was a provocation, but ordinary Russian citizens were angry at
Gorbachev's perestroika, while the liberal elites used it to dismantle the Soviet state and
transfer all assets to their oligarchs.
People with a good knowledge of history refer to the Reichstag Fire of February 1933, the
arson contrived by the newly formed Nazi government itself to turn public opinion against its
opponents and to assume emergency powers. Alternatively, other researchers have contended that
there was no proof of Nazi complicity in the crime, but that Hitler merely capitalised on the
Dutch Communist van der Lubbe's independent act. The fire is the subject of continued debate
and research, says
the Encycopaedia Britannica . Probably the same will be said about the Capitol "invasion",
and researchers will argue whether duplicitous Biden's minions organised it or just
capitalised on the Trumpers' sincere protest.
There is no doubt that to an objective observer the 2020 elections were profoundly
unfair. I won't trouble you with too many published details about the statistically impossible
results, but here is one example of fraud. The city of Detroit gave 95 per cent of its vote to
Biden/Kamala, a number that Mr Kim Jong-un would view with slight envy, while Mr Lukashenko
would murmur, "How can it be done?" It is highly likely this mind-boggling result was achieved
in the following way.
Detroit Dems outsourced ballot
harvesting to local drug lords, offering them as a prize – recreational marijuana
business licenses. These licences are the best thing sincea licence to print
money . Having such licenses is like having your own ATM. Here
you can read about their profitability and the lengths criminals will go to obtain them.
Detroit Dems had
changed local laws allowing the sale of marijuana in their fine city (it was forbidden
until November 2020). They changed local laws prescribing the
issuing of marijuana licences to drug dealers with previous convictions for drug dealing.
They let drug lords out of
jail . They changed local laws to allow ballot harvesting; that is, collecting postal votes
and assisting with the filling in of ballots. After that, the drug dealers went around
collecting postal ballots and filling them in immediately, if they were conscientious, or just
filling them in at their leisure, if feeling lazy. They had a judge at their disposal,
Cynthia Stephens , who
single-handedly
changed Michigan election laws, and then
rejected Trump's claims of fraud.
Yes, Virginia, there was election fraud in many American states. They are used to
gambling; they aren't surprised by a beautiful hand of four aces, as Mark Twain suggested.
Usually the two parties deal in turns, and cheat in turns. Only this time, Trump convinced many
people that it is different; that this is their last chance.
The problem is, Trump was a poor organiser. He could win elections, if he could prevent
Cynthia Stephens's kind of legislation, outlaw postal ballots, enforce obligatory IDs for
voting, mobilise his people for election control. A formidable task, but not impossible, while
dealing with a prone-to-cheat adversary. He could even do a revolution on January 6, tasking
the right people to act, forming a revolutionary HQ, planning a strategy of takeover, but he
didn't do anything of the sort. He probably thought Congress would see the vast crowds and
allow for the checking of election results.
Alternatively, he was so naïve that he believed revolutions just happen by
themselves, as in the movies. They do not. Behind every successful revolution, there is a lot
of planning, armed force, weapons ready for use, supply lines, logistics, media support, and
communications. Trump had none of that. It was enough to turn off Twitter to make him deaf and
dumb.
There was no coup attempt, as correctly stated by Tyler
Durden : "Trump has never had the concentration, organizational acumen, or ideological
coherence to mount a bona fide "coup," and a mob intrusion which was swiftly dispersed
by armed agents of the state doesn't change that. Shortly after the breach, he released a
video instructing his followers not to take Senators hostage or imprison Mike Pence, but to "go
home." No factions of the federal government joined the mob on Trump's orders, because he
didn't bother issuing any. The whole episode never stood the remotest chance of preventing the
certification of Joe Biden, much less overthrowing the government. It was just another goofball
charade, and in that sense, a fitting end to the Trump presidency."
Conspiracy theories played their disappointing part in the debacle. Many Trumpists
believed in the QAnon and Kayfabe conspiracies; they posted reports of bad guys being arrested,
of servers snatched by the FBI, of Clinton and Biden waiting for rough justice behind bars.
This belief disarmed people who would otherwise have fought to achieve this very result. That
is the problem with conspiracies: imaginary conspiracies prevent real action.
Still, I do not want to finish this piece on such a sad and disappointing note. President
Trump was a great leader. He succeeded against enormous odds in improving the lot of
American workers: for the first time since the 1970s, their incomes rose in relation to the
other classes. He stopped mass migration to the US: legal immigration went down to a trickle.
He avoided new wars; he tried to make peace with Russia. He refused to bomb Iran even in the
last days of his presidency, though some pro-Israel supporters promised
him a second term if he would.
His fight against the corona madness was his great achievement. He was against the
lockdowns that are about to destroy our world so completely that few things will survive. The
last great US ruler who didn't wear the cowardly mask will be remembered. He could not defeat
the mighty medical complex, or FAGMA, or the Masters of Discourse, but he tried.
The day of his defeat, January 6, was the Epiphany, or Adoration of the Magi, of the Three
Wise Men who came to worship Jesus in his cave. It was also Christmas Eve for the Eastern
Church. It is the darkest time of the year; from now on, the day will increase and so will our
hopes.
"It's the height of hypocrisy for people who claim to be the champions of rights for women
to deny the very biological existence of women," former Democratic presidential candidate
Tulsi Gabbard, who just might be the last Democrat in DC with a functioning brain, told
Tucker Carlson. "Instead of doing something that could actually help save people's lives,
they are choosing instead to say 'You can't say mother or father.'"
I would ask for an 'Amen!' at this point, but, thanks to the clown work of lawmaker
Emanuel Cleaver, who ended his congressional prayer opening of the very unsexy 117th
Congress with the words "amen and awoman," even that simple gender-free term (which simply
means 'so be it') is now tainted with foul political intrigue.
With these sort of unforgivable stunts under the belt, the Democrats should be very
grateful they have perfected the art of 'winning' elections, otherwise they would probably
vanish from the political landscape simply out of lack of doing anything positive for the
nation. Indeed, the term 'Democrat' may be on the way out faster than that of 'male' and
'female.'
Don't take my word for it, though. "If the post-American era has a start date, it is
almost certainly today," argued none other than the head of the Council on Foreign
Relations – the foremost think tank advocating for the Empire in Washington – after
Wednesday's storming of the Capitol by several hundred Trump supporters protesting the
certification of the election for Biden.
"No one in the world is likely to see, respect, fear, or depend on us in the same way
again," lamented CFR president Richard Haas.
Sure enough, as Haas was saying this the NATO secretary-general tweeted about the
"shocking scenes" in Washington and demanded that Joe Biden's election "must be
respected." British and French leaders followed suit , as did the
Organization of American States. Turkey "expressed concern." Canada and India chimed
in.
Even Venezuela got into the act, condemning "acts of violence" in Washington and
"political polarization" in the US, while expressing hope that Americans "can blaze a
new path toward stability and social justice."
Keep in mind that the US has refused to recognize Venezuela's elected president or
parliament, attempting for the past two years to install an unelected 'interim president'
instead and call it democracy. While the Trump administration has led this effort, the
Democrats – now poised to have absolute power in the US – have been fully on
board.
Likewise, the only time the Republican establishment and the Democrat 'Resistance' banded
together in near-unison was to override Trump's
veto of the NDAA military funding bill, which contained a provision that would block him or
any future president from withdrawing troops from overseas endless wars without prior
congressional approval. The commitment to the Empire runs deep in the Washington 'swamp', as
Trump used to call it.
"We are seeing images that I never imagined we would see in this country – in some
other capital yes, but not here," said Haas.
This unwitting admission of 'American exceptionalism' basically says it's fine for US-backed
activists to storm parliaments in "regimes" that Washington dislikes and wants to
change, but when Americans rebel against their own government they believe is acting
illegitimately, that's beyond the pale.
While what happened Wednesday was not actually a "color revolution," the visuals were
certainly similar enough for the world to take notice. It would be wrong, however, to blame the
Capitol "insurrection" for the demise of the American Empire, when it was merely the
last domino to fall.
Again, don't take my word for it – here's Ishan Tharoor, a columnist for the
notoriously pro-establishment Washington Post, declaring on Thursday that for "many
abroad," the vision of the US as a shining city on a hill with global moral influence and
authority "has already died a thousand deaths."
For some of these people, Tharoor argued, this narrative was "always an illusion to
obscure the Washington-engineered coups and client military regimes." Indeed.
Democrats and their neocon allies have spent the past four years blaming Trump's 'America
First' policy, lamenting that he was acting unilaterally, antagonizing "allies" and
creating a "leadership vacuum" in the world. Those are the talking points of the
incoming administration as well.
Except they've clearly forgotten the events of January 2020, when Trump ordered the drone
assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. There were no protests from US
"allies" – or should we say vassals? Instead, they fell in line with amazing
alacrity.
Trump actually embraced the American Empire, he simply dispensed with the polite fictions it
had used to dress up as something else over the years.
Ironically, it was the mobilization of the entire US political establishment to get rid
of Trump – starting with 'Russiagate' and the impeachment circus over the phone call
to Ukraine, with nationwide riots about "racial justice" and the politically weaponized
coronavirus lockdowns along the way – that did the lion's share of exploding the myths
that maintained US hegemony, both at home and abroad.
Remember the 'Deep State' that was supposedly a Trumpian conspiracy theory? Yet its
existence was confirmed in the
impeachment hearings, a former CIA director openly praised it, and the eventual
revelations of a FBI plot to frame General
Flynn removed any vestiges of doubt.
The mainstream media's war on Trump, later joined by social media platforms –
censorship of the legitimate and accurate Hunter Biden laptop story just before the election
being just the most egregious example – also played out for the world to see.
In the end, they banned Trump from every social
media platform while he was still in office, even as he said he would leave
peacefully.
Basically, the entire US establishment was so consumed by the desire to burn Trump at the
proverbial stake, they chopped up the scaffolding that held up the Empire to use as
firewood.
In a speech recently, Joe Biden vowed to "rebuild,
reclaim America's place in the world" as a country that will "champion liberty and
democracy once more." That's a daunting task, on par with putting the genie back into the
bottle, un-spilling milk, or putting Humpty Dumpty back together again.
Ironically, the only thing that could repair American prestige in the world might be to
patch up the American Republic, almost broken by the four years of 'Resistance' to Trump. But
as that would entail some self-awareness and soul-searching, it remains, shall we say, highly
unlikely.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The United States has by far the largest military in the world, but Vietnam proved that
sometimes that's not enough. An empire needs other nations submit or at least cooperate.
That becomes difficult when you're extremely
unpopular . That's where America is today.
In 20 of the 29 countries and areas that Gallup has results for so far in 2020, approval
ratings of U.S. leadership are at new lows or they tie the previous lows.
Median approval across the 29 countries and areas stood at 18% in 2020, down from 22% for
this same group in 2017. On its face, this decline is not good news for the next U.S.
administration, but even worse news is the number of allies on the list of countries where
approval dropped to historic lows: Ireland (20%), the United Kingdom (15%), Denmark (14%),
Switzerland (10%), Germany (6%) and Iceland (5%).
This doesn't necessarily mean anything to the American Empire if the leadership of those
nations are still in our pockets. However it does create a window of opportunity to get out
from under our thumb.
Judging by what happened this week, that appears to be exactly what's going on.
First there was the judge in the UK ruling against extraditing
Assange .
In Germany, the Climate and Environmental Protection Foundation approved by the parliament of
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern will take risks of the U.S. sanctions against contractors of Nord
Stream 2 as Deutsche Welle reported.
The foundation will deal with the purchase of equipment and construction materials to
carve out other contractors from the possible U.S. sanctions.
This is a big deal because it allows Russia access to hard currency, and ensures their
ability to withstand our sanctions. While at the same time it weakens the right-wing
governments in Poland and Ukraine. The American Empire loses its leverage in Eastern
Europe.
This isn't the first time Europe stood up to US sanctions. Europe created Instex a few
years ago to avoid sanctions on Iran. However they were never truly serious about using it.
This time it appears Europe is serious, it's not just a symbolic act.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/Hg-XE9wgXjc
But the big surprise was when the EU decided to part ways with our
Venezuela policy .
The European Union has dropped its recognition of Juan Guaidó as Venezuela's interim
president after he lost his position as head of its parliament.
Josep Borrell, the EU's foreign affairs chief, referred to him in his latest statement as
one of the "political and civil society actors striving to bring back democracy to
Venezuela", after controversial incumbent Nicolás Maduro took control of the
Venezuelan National Assembly at last December's disputed elections.
But the European Commission explained that it was a decision taken collectively by EU
governments.
This isn't exactly a bold brave stand. It's more like a reluctant admission of reality.
But what it does do is it opens the door to diplomacy with the actual government of
Venezuela.
The reality is that the members of the Coalition For A Coup have been quietly slipping out the backdoor for
months.
However, the press statement issued by the US State Department and GAC is notable because of
the dwindling number of ally countries that are now "committed to the restoration of
democracy in Venezuela." What used to be a long list of more than 50 nations is now down to
just 19
As for Guaido, it's just embarrassing that the governments of the world continue to
recognize him as anything but a grifter , fraud ,
and imperialist
puppet .
I'm starting to think the government of Venezuela might actually survive. It's hard to say
because the American media lies so much about the situation there. Remember about six years ago
the right-wing media said Venezuelans were eating rats and zoo animals? If that was true they'd
all be dead by now.
Going forward we could be looking at virtually the entire continent of South America (except
for Brazil) shifting to the left and outside the reach of the American Empire.
Next month the Ecuador
election in which the Socialist candidate is leading in the polls.
The following month Peru gets their chance to elect someone good.
And later in the year it's Chile's turn , where a communist
mayor is leading in the polls.
Fyodor Lukyanov, the
editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on
Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion
Club How could something like this happen in Washington? It was assumed that, despite all
its social and political problems that have worsened in recent years, America was different and
far more robust than we are now seeing. A habit of being special
The rule of thumb was, 'there is America and there are others'. With the others,
shortcomings are natural and to be expected, even if many of them are well-established
democracies. But America is a different story, because by default, the US is a role model that
was supposed to remain the democratic icon forever.
Exceptionalism is foundational for America's political culture. This type of
self-identification was the cornerstone on which the nation and society were built a couple of
hundred years ago. That's how Americans are raised. And you will run into this phenomenon
everywhere.
When asking his supporters gathered by the Capitol building to go home, President Donald
Trump said, "You are special." People from the more liberal political camp have even
deeper convictions about the US being exceptional and therefore under an obligation to bring
light into the world, as they see it.
That's why everybody is shocked – how could this have happened? The reaction was
followed by a wave of explanations as to why the clashes near and inside the Capitol building
only looked like similar events in other countries, but in reality, they were something
entirely different. Here is a comment from the CNN website, "Sure there are superficial
similarities... but what's happening in America is uniquely American. It is that country's
monster."
Such restlessness is understandable. If we look at exceptionalism in the context of the
world order that we've had in recent decades, we see that after the end of the Cold War, the US
has held the unique position of the sole global hegemon. No other power in world history has
ever reached this level of dominance.
Besides massive military and economic resources, America's exceptionalism has also been
relying on the idea that this nation sets the tone for the global worldview. This authorized
America to certify systems of government in other countries and exert influence in situations
that it believed required certain adjustments. As we all know, this influence took different
forms, including direct military intervention.
We are not going to list the pros and cons of such a world order in this article. What's
important is that one of the key aspects of this order is the belief in the infallibility of
the global leader. That's why American commentators and experts are so worried about the
Capitol Building events and Trump's presidency in general hurting the international status of
the US.
Boomerang effect
Generally speaking, post-election turmoil is not a rare occurrence. After all, the US itself
has encouraged the new political tradition that has emerged in the 21st century. In recent
times, in certain places, election campaigns haven't ended after the votes were counted and the
winner is announced. Instead, Washington often encouraged the losing side to at least try to
challenge the results by taking to the streets. Indeed, resistance was part of the US
Declaration of Independence after all.
Western capitals consistently emphasized the legitimacy of such actions in situations when
people believed that their votes had been 'stolen'. Washington was usually the lead voice in
these declarations. Granted, this mostly applied to immature democracies with unstable
institutions, but where are all those unshakable, solid democratic countries today? The world
is experiencing so much instability that nobody is exempt from major shocks and
crises.
Information overload
There is another reason why traditional institutions are losing their footing. They were
effective in a solidified informational environment. The sources of information were either
controlled or perceived as trustworthy by the majority.
Today there are problems with both. Technological advances boost transparency, but they also
create multiple realities and countless opportunities for manipulation. Institutions must be
above reproach if they are to survive in the new conditions. It would be wrong to say that they
are all crumbling. They are, however, experiencing tremendous pressure, and we can't expect
them to be perfect.
Looking for a scapegoat
The US is not better or worse at facing the new challenges. Or, rather, it is better in some
areas and worse in others. This would all be very normal if America's exceptionalism didn't
always need affirmation.
Situations in which the US appears to be just like any other country, albeit with some
unique characteristics, are a shock to the system. In order to stay special, America looks
where to place the blame. Ideally, the guilty party should be someone acting in the interests
of an outside power, someone un-American.
This mechanism is not unknown to Russians from the experience in our country – for a
long time now, Russian elites have been keen to blame outsiders for their own failures. But
America's motivation today is even stronger; there is more passion, because simply covering up
the failures is no longer enough – America wants to prove that it is still perfect.
Russia says American system 'archaic' & not up to 'modern democratic standards' after
rioters raid Washington's Capitol building
Democrats are taking back the American political landscape. For the next two years (until
the 2022 mid-term elections), they will have all the power – in the White House and
Congress. Trump's supporters have seriously scared the ruling class, and the Capitol building
debacle during the last days of his presidency has created a perfect pretext for cleaning
house. Big Tech companies are at their disposal (so far).
Internal targets
Target number one is Trump himself. They want to make an example out of him, so that others
wouldn't dare challenge the sanctity of the political establishment. But Trump will not be
enough, something must be done about his numerous supporters. The awkward finale of his
presidency opens the door for labeling his fans as enemies of the republic and democracy.
The Democrats will do everything within their power to demoralize their earnest opponents.
This won't be hard, since the Republican Party itself is a hot mess right now. Trump has
alienated almost all his supporters from the party leadership, but he is still popular among
regular voters.
Demonstrative restoration of order and democratic fundamentals will also be used to reclaim
the role model status. The reasoning is clear – we successfully neutralized the terrible
external and internal threats to our democracy, so now we have regained the right to show the
world how one should deal with the enemies of said democracy. The 'summit of democracies' idea
proposed by Joseph Biden is starting to look like an emergency meeting for closing the ranks in
a fight against enemies of progress.
Foreign targets
And this brings us back to the foreign policy issue, because it's not difficult to predict
who will be enemy number one. Putin as an almighty puppeteer of all undemocratic forces in the
world (including Trump) has been part of the rhetoric for a few years now. Hillary Clinton said
it when giving a campaign speech in Nevada in August 2016, and Nancy Pelosi echoed the
sentiment after Trump supporters stormed the Capitol Building. Of course, China is a close
second on the enemy list created by the Democratic leadership, but there are some economic
restraints there.
America's inevitable strife to reclaim its exceptionalism will clash with the current
tendencies in global development. All aspects of international affairs, from economy to
security, to ideology and ethics, are diversifying. Attempts to divide the world along the old
democracy vs. autocracy lines, i.e. go back to the agenda prevalent at the end of the 20th to
the beginning of the 21st century, are doomed, because this is not the way the world is
structured now.
But attempts will be made nevertheless, and we can't rule out some aggressive 'democracy
promotion'. Even if it's just to prove that the embarrassing Trump episode was nothing more
than an unfortunate accident. This, by the way, could become a short-term unifying factor for
the diverse members of the Democratic Party, some of whom represent the old generation, while
others are energetic young proponents of left-wing politics.
We can conclude that the world will not really benefit from the new presidency, even if
respected foreign policy professionals return to the White House now that Trump is leaving. It
might stabilize America's frenzy in international affairs that we are all used to by now, but a
new wave of ideology will neutralize the potential advantage (if it even existed, which is
debatable).
America's resolve to prove to the world that it's not like others will encounter the
large-scale 'material resistance', which will make a dangerous situation even worse. At least
with Trump we knew that he didn't like wars, and he didn't start any new ones. Biden's credit
history is very different.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Actually Tucker Carlson is one of those people and props to the guy for telling us working
class Whites what "our elite white leader trash" have always thought about us. Of course
Tucker won't dare mention the Jew, but at least he clues us in on white traitor trash that
claim to be superior by avoid being seen near chain restaurants and hotels.
Of course we KNOW that the Jew and his elite shabbos goy only think of the common Black
and Brown foot soldiers as pets as well, these cats are the real Supremacists. These
(((elitists))) will dump the Black and Brown grunts for the Yellow ones, believe that as
well.
Can the hysterical little girls freaking out about tourists in the Capitol building do me
one little favor? I just want to see one video clip of rioting in DC back on the 6th.
All of these posts and we don't have a single link to evidence of rioting or mob-like
behavior. This is important because years from now people reading this thread may not clearly
remember what you imagined you saw and need some visual reminders of this imaginary rioting
that you are talking about. Please include some links or people of tomorrow will suspect that
what you little girls are wailing about didn't happen. In particular I want to see some
imagery of "baseball bats and metal pipes" on the scene in DC. Is this too much to ask
for?
Biden has previously said he plans to pass new legislation aimed at combating 'domestic
terrorism'
In the wake of pro-Trump demonstrators entering the US Capitol Building, Joe Biden made it
clear that he
views the incident as "terrorism" in comments on Thursday.
"Don't dare call them protesters," he said from Wilmington, Deleware. "They were a riotous
mob. Insurrectionists. Domestic terrorists. It's that basic. It's that simple."
As The Wall Street Journal reported in November , Biden has said he plans to
make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism. The Capitol incident will likely
speed up the process of crafting domestic terror-related legislation that could have grave
implications for the civil liberties of Americans.
Biden's transition team is also reportedly considering new "Red Flag" laws that would give
law enforcement more authority to confiscate firearms.
"I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing," he was quoted as saying by
the New Republic in 2001. "And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill," he said,
referring to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft.
In a
2002 Senate hearing on FBI counterterrorism efforts, Biden again took credit for creating
the Patriot Act. "Civil libertarians were opposed to it," he said. "Right after 1994, and you
can ask the attorney general this, because I got a call when he introduced the Patriot Act.
He said, 'Joe, I'm introducing the act basically as you wrote it in 1994.'"
Democrats in Congress are also calling to prioritize domestic terrorism. Rep. Elissa
Slotkin (D-MI), a former CIA analyst and Pentagon official, made her priorities clear
in
an interview with MSNBC .
"The post 9/11 era is over. We are in a new era. We had a generational event with the
infiltration of the Capitol," Slotkin said. "The single greatest national security threat
right now is our internal division. It's the threat of domestic terrorism."
The "patriotism" of the previous establishment was bound up with their economic interests.
Once the USA dropped protectionism, the allure of cheap foreign labor (via immigration or
outsourcing) became too much for them and they abandoned the interests of their fellow
Americans to follow the profits.
Thanks for the Tralfamidor perspective. Those of us here on earth know that the US was
never a democracy and always existed as a mechanism for exploitation of everyone else by an
oligarchy.
The USSR was collapsed by traitors as a function of the US imperial drive to destroy them
economically, not because the people were enraged at the "hostile elite". The US henchmen in
the Kingdom in Riyadh pitched in to break the Soviet economy by destroying the Soviet
capacity to obtain foreign exchange.
"... You do know a guy name Milton Friedman was the architect for Reagan economics? For the record we are currently living thru long term dystopia effects of Reagan economics. ..."
Biden and Kamala are mere figureheads put in office by a stolen election. Any agenda they
think that they have is irrelevant. Here is the Establishment's agenda:
First: Prevent any political organization of the "Trump Deplorables." Any who attempt to
form a real opposition party will be made an example of. In America it is child's play to frame
up anyone. We saw the show in Russiagate, and Trump will now be exhausted with endless frameups
as the Establishment pursues him into oblivion. If the President of the United States can be so
easily framed up, an unknown political organizer in the red states can be disposed of at
will.
... ... ...
Fourth: The Establishment will increase its fomenting of racial and gender conflict in order
to keep Americans too divided to resist its increasingly odious control measures, whether they
be the use of Covid to suppress freedom of movement and association, charges of being a foreign
agent in order to suppress free speech as in the Assange case, or round up and internment of
Trump Americans trying to organize a political party that represents the people instead of the
Establishment.
Modern weapons in the hands of the state are devastating. Mass spying and control techniques
that exist today go beyond those in dystopian novels such as Orwell's 1984 . Free speech
is a thing of the past. Free speech no longer even exists in universities. As I write Twitter,
Facebook and the presstitutes are suppressing the free speech of the President of the United
States, and the President of the United States is powerless to do anything about it.
https://thehill.com/policy/technology/533027-twitter-locks-trumps-account-for-at-least-12-hours?rnd=1609978506
The Establishment's control over the media means that no charge against President Trump is
too extreme to cause a protest. The enormous support shown for Trump in Washington on January 6
with estimates of participants ranging from 200,000 to 2,000,000 was easy for the Establishment
to turn into a liability by infiltrating the rally.
It was naive for President Trump and his supporters not to realize that infiltration was
guaranteed as it was necessary for the Establishment to turn massive support into a massive
liability. This would achieve two purposes. One purpose was to terminate the challenge to the
electors in the Senate, and it succeeded. Here, for example, is Republican Senator Mike Braun
from Indiana dropping his intent to object to the electors from the swing states where the
election was stolen: "I think that today change things drastically. Yeah, whatever point you
made before that should suffice. Get this ugly day behind us," he said. Even Rand Paul was
intimidated: "I just don't think there's going to be another objection. I think it's over at
that point."
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/533033-gop-senators-hopeful-theyve-quashed-additional-election-challenges?rnd=1609980353
Here is Republican Senator Kelly Loeffler whose reelection to the Senate was stolen from her
acquiescing in Trump's and her own stolen elections: "When I arrived in Washington this
morning, I fully intended to object to the certification of the electoral votes. However, the
events that have transpired today have forced me to reconsider and I cannot now, in good
conscience, object," Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.).
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/533052-congress-affirms-biden-win-after-rioters-terrorize-capitol
The other purpose served was to insure that Trump would not go out as a president whose
reelection was stolen but as an insurrectionist. And it has succeeded.
Internationally Trump was denounced by NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg for not
respecting democracy. "The outcome of this democratic election must be respected," declared
Stoltenberg. Stolen or not it is democracy to be rid of Trump. https://www.rt.com/usa/511743-uk-france-nato-condemn-capitol/
British prime minister Boris Johnson declared that the US is the world symbol of Democracy
and that it is vital there is a peaceful and ordered transfer of power, as if there was an
actual insurrection taking place and an election not stolen.
The French President Macron declared: "What happened today in Washington, DC today is not
American, definitely." In other words, it is unamerican to protest a stolen election that the
Establishment refuses to address. [I watched presentations by independent experts to the
Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan legislatures that proved beyond all doubt the presidential
election was stolen. Half of the professional presenters were people of color.]
Republican senators themselves, former members of Trump's cabinet, and a former chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff jumped on Trump with both feet. The no longer Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell said that Trump's "unhinged thugs" "tried to disrupt our democracy. They
failed. This failed insurrection underscores how crucial the task before us is" to restore
Establishment control.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/533039-mcconnell-after-rioters-storm-capitol-they-tried-to-disrupt-our-democracy
Republican Senator Richard Burr from North Carolina said: "The President bears
responsibility for today's events by promoting the unfounded conspiracy theories that have led
to this point."
Trump's Secretary of Defense James Mattis told the presstitutes that "Today's violent
assault on our Capitol, an effort to subjugate American democracy by mob rule, was fomented by
Mr. Trump. His use of the presidency to destroy trust in our election and to poison our respect
for fellow citizens has been enabled by pseudo political leaders whose names will live in
infamy as profiles in cowardice."
General Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Trump administration
said Republicans "who have continued to undermine a peaceful transition in accordance with our
Constitution have set the conditions for today's violence."
The presstitutes had a field day with misleading and lying headlines. One of the worst
offenders was The Hill , formerly a source of real news on what was going on in
Congress, but today a highly partisan Trump-hating source of Establishment propaganda.
With the American Establishment's foreign puppets, Republicans, Trump's own cabinet members,
military leaders, and the presstitutes speaking with one voice setting up President Trump as an
insurrectionist threat to democracy, the Democrats' wild charges seemed credible.
Democrat Senator Schumer from New York, the new Senate Majority Leader, Democrat House
Speaker Pelosi, and a large number of Democrat members of Congress, together with the New York
Times, have called for Trump's impeachment or his removal from office by invoking the 25th
Amendment. Here is the new Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) making the case:
"What happened at the U.S. Capitol yesterday was an insurrection against the United States,
incited by the president. This president should not hold office one day longer," Schumer said
in a statement.
Here is Adam Smith, Democrat from Washington state and chairman of the House Committee on
Armed Services, calling for Trump's removal from office: "President Trump incited &
encouraged this riot. He & his enablers are responsible for the despicable attack at the
Capitol. VP Pence and the Cabinet should invoke the 25th amendment to remove Trump, otherwise
Senate Republicans must work with the House to impeach & remove him.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/533136-house-armed-services-chair-calls-for-removing-trump-from-office
For the New York Times , it doesn't not suffice to remove Trump from office. He must
be prosecuted as well.
To understand the extraordinary hatred of President Trump by the Establishment, listen to
his inaugural address. He described the Establishment accurately as a force arraigned against
the American people, a force that he intended to dismantle and restore America to the American
people. This was a revolutionary challenge, a reckless one as Trump is a populist, not a
revolutionary leading a determined movement. Moreover, Trump was so uninformed about Washington
that he never succeeded in appointing anyone to his government, other than General Flynn (an
immediate casualty of the Establishment) who agreed with his agenda of normalizing relations
with Russia, bringing the troops home from the Middle East, ending NATO, and bringing the jobs
home that American corporations had exported to China. Here was Trump unarmed taking on the
American Establishment. This was an act of suicide as it has turned out to be.
People who think in terms of party politics have no likelihood of understanding the
situation. The struggle is not Democrats vs. Republicans. or red states vs. blue states. It is
the Establishment against the people. If you have any doubt about this, note that the US
National Association of Manufacturers, always a throughly Republican organization, agrees with
Schumer and Pelosi that Trump must be removed from office. Here is the organization's
statement: "Vice President Pence, who was evacuated from the Capitol, should seriously consider
working with the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment to preserve democracy."
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/532988-democratic-lawmakers-call-for-pence-to-invoke-25th-amendment-remove
The National Association of Manufacturers want Trump out because they are the ones responsible
for China's rise, the US trade deficit and the destruction of half of the US middle class. All
the goods and services imported from offshored production count as imports. It is the offshored
production that is responsible for America's trade deficit, not China.
The presstitutes throughout the Western world have intentionally misrepresented the January
6 rally in Washington in support of Trump. The rally had to be misrepresented, because no one
in politics today anywhere in the Western World can demonstrate such massive support other than
Donald Trump. No one turned out for Biden or Kamala during the presidential campaign. Their
events, soon cancelled, had no attendees. Yet, they won the election? What saps people are. Who
turns out for Merkel, Macron, Boris Johnson. No one even knows who the leaders are in the rest
of the Western World.
Trump could not be permitted to leave office with such a massive showing of support -- a
terrible embarrassment to the corrupt scum who "speak for the people." So the support had to be
discredited by turning it into an insurrection ordered by Trump against Democracy, a holy word
that is observed nowhere in the Western World.
Here is a description of agitators who suddenly appeared and provoked the entrance into the
Capitol by a few Trump supporters who, unlike the rioters in Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit,
Seattle, Portland, Atlanta and elsewhere, did not behave as rioters and did no damage. The
report is from a person present not as a Trump supporter but as a person to film the event. The
report was sent to NYU professor Mark Crispin Miller. I have left the person's name off so that
he doesn't get investigated by the FBI:
"I was in Washington, D.C. today filming the Trump rally and related events. I also ran
across your post concerning the Capitol demonstration tonight. Perhaps this short account
will help you assess what others are saying in a small way.
"I was also at the Capitol before the crowd appeared setting-up my camera on a stone wall
around the perimeter of the back of the capitol (the rear facing Constitution Avenue). Then I
waited for President Trump's speech to end and for supporters to walk-up Constitution Avenue
to the Capitol. I was located at the precise location where supporters first rushed up the
slope towards the back of the Capitol after casting aside a section of the first Capitol
perimeter barrier. Supporters gathered roughly at the center of the back of the capitol, but
a circle began to grow around the perimeter as the crowd grew larger. I had no sense that the
growing crowd intended to rush the Capitol.
"After a large crowd emerged at the perimeter a man in perhaps his late 30's or early 40's
showed-up, pacing quickly to his left then to his right before the crowd, and essentially
began hurling insults at the crowd challenging their political wisdom. He excoriated the
crowd for thinking that their attendance would be taken seriously by members of congress.
(Hard to say that he was wrong about that, whoever he was). I cannot recall his precise
words, but for a very short period he engaged in a shouting exchange with supporters, and
suddenly supporters pushed aside the first barrier and rushed towards the back of the
Capitol. Others on the northern edge of the perimeter followed suit. But the first rush was
right at the center of the back of the Capitol. I followed the rush to the bottom of the
Capitol back steps, and began filming again from atop an inner perimeter stone wall.
"The police, so it appeared, were a little surprised by the rush, and this gave supporters
an opportunity to race up the steps. One or two men even made it as far as the steps leading
up to the scaffolds on the south side of the Capitol before police arrested them. By this
time, five or ten men had climbed to the top of the tall steel tower structure facing the
Capitol. Then the police erected and lined-up behind a new barrier perimeter at the foot of
the Capitol steps. Police at the top of the Capitol steps aimed rifles down on the crowd
(perhaps rubber bullet rifles, I could not tell). The crowd began arguing with police and
pressing hard against the new barrier. The police sprayed men pressing directly against the
barrier with tear gas from time to time causing them to retreat. "Meanwhile, the men at the
top of the tower began rallying the crowd to challenge the new barrier (over bull horns) by
filling any gaps between the barrier and the stone wall that I was using as a filming vantage
point. Another man worked the crowd with a bull horn immediately in front of me and also
encouraged supporters to climb over the inner perimeter stone wall (my filming vantage point)
and create a wall of pressure on the new barrier at the bottom of the Capitol back steps.
"After about 30 minutes to an hour I dropped to the bottom of the stone wall to reload my
camera when suddenly the barrier gave way and police attempted to fortify it by blasting tear
gas into the area between the stone wall and the barrier. I was hit by the gas myself and
struggled back over the stone wall in order to breathe. The gas threw many crowd members into
a panic. And I was nearly trampled as I struggled to lift my camera and heavy gear bag over
the wall after two women began pulling desperately on the back of my coat to pull themselves
up and over the moderately high wall in retreat.
"After the second perimeter barrier gave way, the men with the bull horns began working
the crowd very hard to fill-up with Trump supporters the steps of the Capitol and the
scaffolding on both sides of it. At this point one of the calls, which the men with bull
horns repeated from time to time in order to encourage people to climb the Capitol steps was
"this is not a rally; it's the real thing." Another frequent call was "its now or never."
After about a two hour effort peppered with bull horn calls of this nature the entire back of
the Capitol was filled with Trump supporters and the entire face of the Capitol was covered
with brilliant small and very large Trump banners, American flags, and various other types of
flags and banners.
"Sometime after the rush on the back of the Capitol, people were apparently able to enter
the Capitol itself through the front. But I was not witness to anything at the front or
inside the Capitol.
"One clearly bona fide Trump supporter who had apparently entered the Capitol himself was
telling others emotionally and angrily (including press representatives of some sort, even a
foreign newsman) that he witnessed someone inside the Capitol encouraging violence whom he
strongly suspected was not a legitimate Trump supporter (apparently on the basis that the man
showed no signs at all of Trump support on his apparel). I did not pay that close attention
to his claims (for example the precise claim of the violence encouraged) because, naturally,
I had not yet read your post and it had not occurred to me that professional outsiders might
play a role in instigating particular violent acts in order to discredit the event.
"I overheard one Trump supporter (who followed the rush on the Capitol himself) say aloud,
"I brought many others to this rally, but we did not sign on for this" as he watched matters
escalate.
"Still, from my seat, I would say that large numbers of very legitimate Trump supporters
felt that it was their patriotic duty to occupy the Capitol in light of their unshakable
beliefs that (1) the 2020 election was a fraud, (2) that the vast majority of the members of
congress are corrupt and compromised, and (3) that the country is in the throes of what they
consider a "communist" takeover (although many use the expression "communism" as a synonym
for "totalitarianism"). They are also convinced that the virus narrative is a fraud and an
essential part of an effort to undermine the Constitution –in particular the Bill of
Rights. They have a very real fear that the country and the very conception of any culture of
liberty is on the verge of an irreparable collapse. For most (if not a very large majority)
rushing the Capitol was a desperate eleventh hour act of partiotism –even of the order
of the revolution that created our nation. Some Trump supporters sang the Star Spangled
Banner and other patriotic songs as others climbed the Capitol steps. They also demonstrated
a measure of respect for the Capitol itself. I saw no attempt by anyone to deface the Capitol
simply for the sake of defacing it.
"The incontrovertibly compromised press has called this event a riot. But from what I saw
and heard this would indeed be a gross and intentionally misleading oversimplification at
best. At least from the standpoint of supporters, if their Capitol event was a riot, then so
was the Boston Tea Party. It also seems to me that some professional help (very aware of deep
sentiments) might have come from somewhere to make sure that the party happened."
When I was on the Stanford University faculty, I remember rich and pampered Stanford
students occupying the university president's office in a protest either against the Vietnam
war or the name of the Stanford Football Team (Stanford Indians) and destroying the papers in
the president's files of his life's work. Despite the liberalism of the university president,
the presstitutes regarded the protest justified and well intentioned.
The rioters and looters who rampaged through many of America's major cities suffered no
media condemnation, only support and encouragement. This is because, unlike Trump, Antifa and
Black Lives Matter are financed by and controlled by the Establishment and thus represent no
threat.There is no FBI investigation or intended prosecution of any of the rioters who
destroyed billions of dollars of property in America's cities.
But the Trump supporters provoked into entering the Capitol are in for it says the
Establishment figure Trump, in yet another of his mistakes, put in charge of the FBI.
It is difficult to defend Trump when he consistently puts in charge of his security agencies
and Department of Justice members of the Establishment who hate his guts.
Here is Trump's appointee describing the people who elected the man who appointed him:
"The violence and destruction of property at the U.S. Capitol building yesterday showed a
blatant and appalling disregard for our institutions of government and the orderly
administration of the democratic process," Wray said in a statement.
"As we've said consistently, we do not tolerate violent agitators and extremists who use
the guise of First Amendment-protected activity to incite violence and wreak havoc," he
continued. "Such behavior betrays the values of our democracy. Make no mistake: With our
partners, we will hold accountable those who participated in yesterday's siege of the
Capitol."
Wray announced that the bureau "has deployed our full investigative resources" and is
working with law enforcement partners "to aggressively pursue those involved in criminal
activity" on Wednesday.
"Our agents and analysts have been hard at work through the night gathering evidence,
sharing intelligence, and working with federal prosecutors to bring charges," he said.
He requested the public send in any information about Wednesday's events to the FBI, noting
"We are determined to find those responsible and ensure justice is served."
Notice that Wray, the Establishment's servant, not the servant of the rule of law, aligns
the First Amendment with "violent agitators and extremists" and thus discredits the First
Amendment as a tool of insurrection.
Everyone who was not at the US Capitol building on January 6, which is the entire world
except the Trump supporters, has been brainwashed, by a corrupt, despicable collection of media
whores serving an Establishment of Oligarchs, that Donald Trump intended an insurrection, but
it was defeated. By Whom?
It was Trump who called out the National Guard and who told his supporters to leave the
Capitol and to go home.
What kind of people can present this as an insurrection that requires Trump's removal from
office and prosecution? The answer is totally evil people who have not only the United States
but the entire Western World in their clutches.
The Western World is dead. It is now Mordor.
Trump appointees realize that, unless they add to his orchestrated embarrassment and setup
by resigning, they are targeted for reprisals. Seeing permanent unemployment facing him, US
Deputy National Security Advisor Matthew Pottinger has resigned in response to Donald Trump's
handling of the crisis on Capitol Hill. "Other people named as likely to abandon the sinking
Trump ship are National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien and Deputy Chief of Staff Chris
Liddell." https://www.rt.com/usa/511769-white-house-officials-resign/
Everyone everywhere is participating in Trump's destruction. The English language Russian
press loves embarrassing America. The fun and games leaves the world in ignorance of the
extraordinary consequences of what the stolen election and demonization of Trump and his
supporters means. The end of the Western World is a big event, and it will affect everyone.
Addendum: Here is an example of the lies the presstitutes constantly deliver. Every
prestitute organization reports that Trump incited a mob of his supporters this week to storm
the U.S. Capitol: "House Democrats are racing toward impeaching President Trump for a second
time after he incited a mob of his supporters this week to storm the U.S. Capitol and halt
Congress's constitutional duty to certify President-elect Joe Biden's victory." https://thehill.com/homenews/house/533340-democrats-poised-to-impeach-trump-again
Clearly, the dumbshits at The Hill, Bloomberg, and everywhere else let their hatred of Trump
run away with them. What would be the point of halting the certification process? It could only
be a temporary halt. The National Guard ordered in by Trump would clear the Capitol and the
process would go forward, as it did. If Trump intended to halt the certification by having
supporters occupy the Capitol, why did he call in the National Guard and tell his supporters to
leave the Capitol? Clearly The Hill's presstitutes are devoid of reasoning ability. What Trump
wanted to happen was to have the electors from the stolen swing states rejected by Congress on
the basis of the evience. It was an unlikely thing to happen, but Trump had no choice but to
exhaust the legal means available.
Trump was too conflicted to lead a populist revolt. He was too mobbed up with wealthy
Zionists and right-leaning factions of the Jewish establishment. Now they'll quickly throw
him under the bus. He's finished, and politically homeless. Not even the Deplorables will
want anything to do with him, given the fact that he betrayed them time and again.
Trump might have been a populist leader had he immediately abandoned his Jewish handlers,
fully adopted the white right, the military and veterans, Christians, Constitutionalists,
small business, Main Street, America First industry and working class, etc. and oriented his
entire administration in their direction. But given that New York Jews were part of his
family, that wasn't going to happen.
A true populist will eventually emerge from the People, and do what Trump should have done
but lacked the guts and integrity to do. And the Deep State will do all it can to strangle
him in the cradle, but will fail, because like Golden Calf Hebrews from the Bible, or like
Cyclops if you prefer Greek fables, it and its sycophants are sick, blind and insane now
beyond any possibility for redemption, intoxicated by their own narcissism.
How long the white knight will take to emerge is hard to say, but he's eventually coming.
Count on it.
The US always had an establishment. So does every country. And in the past, there were
patriotic American establishments that cared about the people. What happened? Jews took over
as the new masters and severed the ties between white elites and white masses. White elites
now exist to serve Jews than to represent the American People.
Elites are formed by social selection. Fish rots from the head. As Jews at the top favor
the most craven and venal goy cucks for promotion, the result is that the elites get filled
up more and more with venal and craven people. And as people don't want to admit they're
craven and venal, they convince themselves that they're on the side of angels and 'liberal
democracy' even though all they do is serve Wall Street, spread worship of sodomy, and push
for Wars for Israel.
When social selection to the top is predicated on patriotism and national unity, a better
kind of people make it to the top. But when selection is based on obeisance to Jews and all
their agendas(anti-white politics, globo-homo degeneracy, magic negro worship, and etc), then
the result is the elites that the US has today.
There was a time when someone like Pat Buchanan and Paul Craig Roberts could serve in the
US government or work in elite industries. But today, even the most 'right-wing' Republican
would rather be dead than be seen anywhere near such individuals.
The Trumpet hasn't been a victim of any "color revolution", he's been the catalyst for the
US Ziocorporate regime's new phase of "democratic" government:
What's so populist about the Trumpet besides his speechwriters' style? He barely repealed
Bombamacare's forced payment of premiums to corporate health peddlers, but not before
doubling down on the Obama/Biden-backed war on Yemen and giving Ziodi Arabia's royal Salafi
headchoppers $400 billion more in weapons, among other pearls of "populist anti-swamp"
policies.
People had to occupy their local and state capitols, not the federal Ziocorporatists'
temple of corporate governance masquerading as public office. Why even leave your own
property unguarded to go fight for some billionaire with a tad too much fake tan, or for his
walking corpse president-elect "rival" for the other side of that same coin, though I doubt
anyone would fight for Kameltoe Biden without being paid in advance.
Great Reset was coming with Trump as it is with Biden either way, there wasn't any time to
be an ignorant partisan tool. Things won't be getting any easier now. Even Mexico with its
CIA/DEA-managed druglord wars is looking tame in comparison.
Trump is a moderate and inherently self-contradictory populist, not a phony populist, but
a flawed populist, and in terms of complete program a meager populist. But give him credit,
his tepid, flawed brand of populism has been spectacularly – popular – with tens
of millions of Americans, and countless others around the planet.
One of his advantages has been that the political leadership stage in not just the United
States but in the 'West' is occupied largely by corrupt pathetic figures who do political
theater, scripted, banal, dishonest political puppetry on behalf of transnational agendas and
powers that be, and their personal advantage. Trump populist program has included giving
priority voice to the 'outdated' concepts of national sovereignty and national interest. He
has been an implicit and explicit critic of the global 'full spectrum domination' American
establishment agenda.
In the land of political midgets a person of even modest stature seems a giant.
But more importantly, Trump is actually a great and singular revolutionary, not in normal
terms, of political ideology, or political program, but in terms of the ability to change and
animate public perceptions. His has been a needed revolution in terms of style and substance:
he has been by far the most effective critic on Earth of and enemy of the mass media mind
control system, a system indispensable to establishment power and agenda.
To the political class and the politically minded who demand and depend upon and find
their comfort in adherence to normal ritualistic banality and bromides, Trump's bombastic out
of bounds style is outrageous, he tossing shocking mental hand grenades like confetti on the
nation, his ejaculations sometimes truthful sometimes false, but often refreshing
entertainment for some and outrageous for others.
Recall for example when he merely stated the obvious about the annual joint military
exercises at the borders of North Korea: he described them as provocative. Howls of foreign
policy outrage over this lapse from scripted normality. How dare Trump utter a simple truth
contradicting our investment of decades of on message propaganda on the subject.
And truth – even little bites of truth – is the great nemesis – the
forbidden fruit that must not be allowed to be shown let alone bitten by the public –
of the corrupt system of public mind control and public exploitation and subjugation.
As response to his fundamental, effective if not outright deadly attack on the mind
control system, and for his espousal of national sovereignty over transnational hegemony, he
has been under continual establishment attack since – actually even before – his
2016 inauguration. Public belief in the veracity of mass media's reliability when it comes to
fairness and accuracy has never been as low.
And something else has happened during the last four years: the public perception of the
ethical rot, the stench, of the cesspool that the establishment occupies has grown greatly.
Beyond Pizza gate and Jeffrey Epstein, there is a greatly increased public opinion and
suspicion and perception that elite power is dependent upon and suffused with and tainted
with that which goes beyond mere typical variations of corruption: that there exists
widespread hitherto unthinkable unspeakable evil that preys on children and innocence.
But now, with the obvious massive coordinated election fraud that was engineered against
what was in fact one of the – if not the – greatest landslide presidential
victories in American history, another great service has been rendered by Trump. And this
service goes far beyond his particular case: The legitimacy of all US elections since the
advent of electronic voting machines is now cast into doubt. That is, the entire US political
class, state, local and federal, has had their legitimacy appropriately undermined. And the
call for election procedures which ensure reasonably fair elections will now be ongoing.
Funny how the MSM apparently missed Trump commuting Jonathan Pollard's sentence and
allowed him to fly back to Israel where he disembarked from his plane and kissed the
ground.
I think it might have been George W. Bush who was considering pardoning Pollard and the
various intelligence agencies told him there would be a mutiny if he did. And he didn't.
But now ..crickets?
Pollard should have been in federal prison for life with no parole or executed.
But Trump won't pardon Assange for being a journalist or Snowden for alerting the American
people we are all being surveilled 24/7?
"People who think in terms of party politics have no likelihood of understanding the
situation. The struggle is not Democrats vs. Republicans. or red states vs. blue states. It
is the Establishment against the people."
My dear Mr. Roberts, you hit the nail on the head.
Thanks PCR. My exact thoughts. Definitely DC rally was infiltrated with sole intention of
discrediting Trump and his supporters. And the chorus of "leaders" from US vassals like UK,
Germany, France and others is proof of well choreographed scheme. Where were they when
BLM/Antifa with clear support of Dem politicians rampaged through US cities including DC
itself?
I wonder whether people of the US would still consider voting as one of the most important
civic duties. This election steal has shown that even with a landslide win, the establishment
will get its way. Sad.
I watched presentations by independent experts to the Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan
legislatures that proved beyond all doubt the presidential election was stolen.
That the counting was manipulated electronically was proven for me by Shiva Ayyadurai
(MIT) in his interesting video showing the statistically impossible change in voting trend in
the early morning counting.
It is difficult to defend Trump when he consistently puts in charge of his security
agencies and Department of Justice members of the Establishment who hate his guts.
This is a real oddity. At the outset he had a good selection of very loyal people to
choose from – but he dumped them all in favour of Establishment people who have
predictably backstabbed him – even his own Vice President. The only explanation that I
can find is that he doesn't really sympathize with the Deplorables at all (certainly never
spends any time with them) and was just using them as an alternative route to a top
Establishment position. The surprise was that the Establishment then rejected him, despite
his best efforts to ingratiate himself.
What's undeniable, is that the ZioGlob US is starting to look, socially and economically,
like an international basket case. Much of the ROW (Rest Of the World) is moving to separate
from it as fast as possible – ref. trade agreements/international payments/currencies
etc.
The filthy old swindler could have easily won re-election if he had done even one tiny
thing for the vast demographic making under $34k per year (the median wage) i.e. the working
poor. He could have pushed for a federally mandated $15/ hour minimum wage. He could have
pushed for a universal basic subsidized medical plan instead of trying to take one away. How
about federal money for a new system of trade schools and vocational training institutes?
Instead, he signed off on massive tax cuts for himself and his wealthy jew sponsors. He
signed off on trillions of dollars for his wall street pals, goosing the stock market into
the stratosphere. The old coot played golf while half the nursing home population was wiped
out by the wu-wu. He started a pointless trade war with China after listening to three of the
dumbest jews on the planet: Munchkin, Krudlow, Koshner jews so stupid they couldn't figure
out how to cheat rubes at a corner furniture store. Endless demagoguery, fake religiosity,
phony nationalism, counterproductive race baiting, shameless nepotism, constant lying .but
then what else would you expect from a former WWE wrestling promoter?
This was a "False Flag" as evidenced by Speaker's Pelosi's 'Purple" dress as she elbow
bump's Pence after he did his dirty deed for the Coup.
Look the whole 'Kabuki' was a set up with Capitol Building guards opening the way for
crowds to mill forward after the professional black block antifa gang made the first assault
on police lines and subsequently forced entry
Trump had told people at the rally to be peaceful and we know that message has been
censored.
The Republican Party has been exposed, and all seems like all is lost as it appears, as is
the case that the whole fraud has been accomplished in the open, but I think the wrestling
match is not over, which is why impeachment and or 25th Amendment is what seals the coup, or
unseals sealed indictments, full disclosure and the Seals.
As a lawyer, I am convinced the election was stolen from Trump. I am absolutely stunned at
the total denial of this fact by all and sundry in the Establishment and by the citizenry in
both the USA as well as the West who believe the weaponized press and media. In addition the
Roman Catholic Church has now officially joined this political Establishment.
Post-modernism and multiculturalism have come home to roost.
Truth has been banished from the Western Establishment. What an achievement!
Whether they realize it fully or not, there is nowhere else but Hell that bids them on.
From the real God-fearing understandings of Reality, the anti-Christ/Dajjal now rule the
world.
MAGA couldn't be allowed to Continue.
MAGA had to be cut down.
MIGA couldn't Persist with MAGA. Unfortunately, Trump was a MIGA Player First before being a
MAGA Leader.
Catholics couldn't Persist with MAGA – they gained a POTUS and a SCOTUS Seat this Round
– with a mostly Catholic SCOTUS refusing to hear Electioneering Case Arguments.
OpenBorders wouldn't happen with MAGA.
DNC couldn't Persist with MAGA.
GOP_NeverTrumperz couldn't Persist with MAGA.
McConnell+Chao couldn't Persist with MAGA.
MSM couldn't Persist with MAGA
OffShoring couldn't Persist with MAGA.
FB/TWTR couldn't Persist with MAGA.
This article is above brilliant. Nobody can see the situation as clearly as PCR.
I am glad that Trump is gone. There will be no more somebody for MSM to serve as punching
bag.
It is unbelievable to me that Trump did withstand such a deluge of abuse from MSM and
Democrats and deep state. Trump did not have any real support from his coworkers. he was
standing alone.
I agree with Mr. Roberts; a bit of anger increased by the repeat of the "steal" in
Georgia, and a large dollop of agents provocateurs, including the famous viking with an
American flag, created an incident being blown up by the real fascisti, the establishment, as
a new Reichstag fire to set up a permanent dictatorial regime based in Washington. They are
in your face and probably hope for unrest because its suppression will consolidate this
odious regime. The only hope is that temporary instability will instigate a loss of control
over the vassal states and/or economic collapse caused by the authoritarian lockdown policies
will weaken the yankee state enough so that it loses influence. Otherwise, unfortunately, Dr.
Roberts' view of the future unfortunately looks accurate to me.
@Abdul
Alhazred the Capitol Police. She told him that a lot of people feel the police didn't do
enough the day before. He told her that at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday morning he was told to go
home, along with his fellow policemen. He thought this odd, considering there was going to be
a huge rally taking place that day, but off he went home. After hearing of the breach on the
news, he subsequently returned, but he did this on his own; he hadn't been asked to return.
Makes you wonder if they didn't intentionally short-staff the Capitol Police that day in
order to ensure the outcome they got. Made it much easier for the agent provocateurs to get
through.
The leftwing, or the fraud that passes for one, thinks it is now in the money. This is a
naive expectation. The Establishment is in charge, and there will be no leftist agendas
unless they serve the Establishment. If Antifa and BLM cut up, their funding will be cut
off, and the presstitutes will be sicced on them.
I don't believe this is quite true. The attempt by establishment in the US to use
non-Whites and radical leftists for their own ends brings to mind the attempt by the
establishment of the Weimar Republic to use the Nazis in the same way. When you put
power-hungry people in charge of the levers of power, you shouldn't expect them to pull those
levers according to your instructions.
Trump was so uninformed about Washington that he never succeeded in appointing anyone to
his government, other than General Flynn (an immediate casualty of the Establishment) who
agreed with his agenda of normalizing relations with Russia, bringing the troops home from
the Middle East
I was totally opposed to the railroading of Flynn, and while it is true that he
represented a breath of fresh air on Syrian and Russian issues, unfortunately, he–like
pretty much everyone else in Washington–is an Iran-hawk. Thus, I doubt he was actually
in favor of a total ME pull-out, though it is probably true that he would have pulled us out
from Syria if he could have.
Because of his brash, entertaining style of hitting back against the entire
MSM, it seems so much easier now to spot the stringpullers and start connecting the dots. Why
does the media speak with one voice always in support of the Establishment? Why is everything
portrayed by them so falsely and one-sidededly? Who is benefitting from the trajectory being
so relentlessly pushed by them? I see Trump's legacy as having awakened a sleeping giant,
despite the many ways he betrayed the ideals of his moving inauguration speech. How will the
Establishment's coming suppression of free speech for the purpose of attempting to put this
genie back in the bottle be resisted?
Schulosi know that the 25th Amendment move could easily be foiled by Trump long enough to
run out the clock. What they really want and it is being loudly telegraphed in the media is
for Congress to go the Impeachment/removal/bar from future Federal office route as a
dubiously legal Bill of Attainder to prevent Trump from ever again ascending to the pinnacle
of power. Mr. Biden's remarks yesterday seem to suggest Mr. Trump is not going to get the
same professional courtesy that Mr. Trump showed to the Obama regime saboteurs who worked
from well before the 2016 and well into the Trump administration to bring it down.
Trump has been entertaining, much like the old train wreck shows in days of old, but now
he has to accept that his brand has been thoroughly derailed...
The mainstream media and the Harris/Biden gang won't leave Donald Trump and his family
peace until he is destroyed. Craig Roberts described in his excellent article that the script
transforms the US into a "benign" dictatorship. There won't ever be fair and democratic
elections in the so-called beacon of democracy. The Democrats, their Billionaire instigators,
and their storm troopers such as BLM and ANTIFA will transform the US into a living hell for
whites. The brainwashing of the public and the President's framing has been started with
Trump's victory over a corrupt and criminal Hillary Clinton in 2016. In retrospect, it will
look like a child's play what's in the offing for the country in the future.
What happened on Capitol Hill was people power. The phony US political class supported
people power in Georgia, Serbia, Belarus, Ukraine, Venezuela, Moldova, Iran, Hong Kong, to
name a few, not to forget the so-called color revolutions and the Arab spring that were
instigated and organized by George Soros' "Open Society," the CIA and their Western
intelligence supporters.
On every American, Gender ideology will be forced on them. If it doesn't work, reeducation
camps such as in North Korea will be welcome them.
Don't be naïve. Israel's self-proclaimed 'guardian,' Chuck Shumer, is now Senate
Majority Leader. The zio-state will do just fine. Wish I could say the same about my own
country.
I am not surprised by this. In fact, nothing that happens surprises me anymore. I expect
bad things to happen in a world like this.
Perhaps I can understand the thinking of Trump supporters such as the ones in the above
image. They believe that the electoral process has been subverted and that an election that
should have been Trump's has gone to Biden instead. They are outraged. They are rioting and
revolting in response. Unfortunately, these people are misguided.
1, Trump is a Snake and has been a HORRIBLE President. Why fight to defend him? I could
see defending him if he actually did something for America but he did nothing but Tweet. He
does not deserve another four years of the same.
2. The entire American political process is owned by Jewish interests. It was this way
long ago and it is certainly this way now. Whoever wins serves Jewish interests and the Jews
make damn well sure of it. Nobody who is hostile towards Jews stands of chance of getting in
the White House. Only Jewish puppets become President. So stop crying Trump supporters and
wake the fuck up.
3. There are reasons to Revolt against the System but this is not one of them. If you are
going to revolt, revolt for the right reason, not in defense of a lying Jewish scumbag like
Trump.
4. Trump is directly to blame for this violence. He incited his followers to do this and
then he accepts no blame for it afterwards. Very typical behavior for a lying narcissist like
Trump who wraps himself in the American Flag when he is really just a selfish Bastard who
wants to remain in the White House for his own Egotistical reasons.
5. As a former Trump supporter, all I can tell current Trump supporters is that you have
to wise up and realize that the man you are supporting is not worthy of being supported. You
have to wake up to Trump as I had to wake up. He is not who he says he is. He is a liar and
deceiver who plays on your ignorance and uses your Patriotism to get you to support him
personally. See through his con game.
6. I suspect that this rioting in Washington D.C. is not spontaneous but has been
carefully planned in advance by the Jews who use Trump Supporters the same way as they use
Antifa. Its all controlled opposition being used to sway the opinion of the American public
in a direction that the Jews will use in their favor to further divide Americans from each
other. IMO the above image was Staged meaning that these riots were planned and executed in
the same way as the George Floyd riots were. Never trust a lying scheming Jew not to be
one.
I agree with the writer of this comment and his criticism of Coulter. US subservience to
Israel began under harry Truman, who recognized Israel in 1948 with this comment: "I have
600,000 Jews and no Arabs." We have seen academia, politics, and industry all become
pro-Zionist despite Washington's comment in his Farewell Address that the US should not
became attached to any foreign nation or permanently hate any foreign nation. The hated
nation has become Russia, and the Democrats have blamed Russia for Trump. But it was
Americans who voted for Trump, and fortunately the EC went in his favor. No wonder Hillary
wants to abolish it.
After all of Trump's promises to "drain the swamp" and "make America great again" he's
managed only to usher in a post-democratic America. In typical Trump style he incited his
supporters and after promising to lead them not only abandoned them but disavowed them and
sent in the troops to quell them.
On the 20th Joe Biden will be inaugurated as president of the corpse of America.
Considering the shameful circumstances of his "victory" it will be fitting that he wears a
mask for the occasion.
@SamwiseGamgee
roy (the ones that, until recently, were independent and therefore a threat).
So, obviously from my last point, I'm not denying their destructive power. Not at all.
It's only too easy to see. I'm denying their ability to manage themselves now that there is
absolutely no obstacle to that power. No obstacle in the West, that is.
They might be partners in crime with The CCP. But it's a dependent relationship and in no
way a friendly one. No one kisses the ass of a friend. Say what you want about The CCP, it
does not, unlike the now completely defeated host populations of the West, strike one as
being all that into power-sharing.
As a final going away present Agent Orange turns on his own supporters. This fraud has no
right to complain about stolen elections or how Pence let him down. None of our problems will
be solved by voting.
You do know a guy name Milton Friedman was the architect for Reagan economics? For the
record we are currently living thru long term dystopia effects of Reagan economics.
Well I'm now depressed, and I voted for the color flag revolution. I didn't predict this
milquetoast one. The storming of the capital was kinda lame, although it did make me laugh.
Guess when you control both sides you really don't need to go hot. The deep staters must be
thrilled they could protect their left wing assets with this one by using Qtards instead.
However there are a lot of things that make you "hmm?". My favorite being the black cop and a
Maga protester doing a slow walk up some stairs with a guy above them taping everything. Odd
but hilarious. Speaking of odd, where were all the Proud Boys? Seems they went poof to live
another day.
Sadly the peculiar and unnecessary murder of Ashli Babbit seems to give Qanon life after
Trump with a martyr. Give the deep state credit they do think ahead. Guess I have cheered
myself up, apparently they aren't done with us yet. My guess is they still need us to keep
the lights on and sewer systems running. Also burly white dudes seem to be the preferred
choice for private security.
So CIA wins again. They stole the election and stuck Biden's reanimated corpse in there.
And now they'll shake him around like a Barbie and make him talk while they blow shit up.
All Trump did was tease them about killing JFK and knocking down the WTC, which everybody
already knows. And Trump wouldn't sit still for their brainwashing briefings, at first. Trump
was no Nixon, turning CIA inside out with Schlesinger at DCI. Trump had no one in congress
like Pike or even Church.
Back then CIA purged Nixon. Don Gregg threatened congress with martial law. And that was
nothing. Look what the ratfuckers at Langley were willing to do to get Trump out. They framed
Flynn to cut him off from Turmp. They took SARS-COV-2 off the shelf and used it on us,
destroyed the economy and killed us, 300 thousand of us and counting. They infected the whole
world to cover their tracks, killed 1.7 million human beings so far. CIA did everything they
could to start a war with Russia and called Trump a Russian agent, making shit up to frame
him too.
Now we see how CIA controls us. We know now that there is nothing CIA won't do to stay in
power. It's like Zappa said: when they were ready, they took away the stage set and left us
looking at a blank brick wall. It's like Rockefeller said: They Control it. All of it.
At this point, anybody who won't face this totalitarian state is not worth listening to
for a second, they're not worth a pound of warm shit. Prouty told you fifty years ago, the
whole world knows who runs this country. CIA.
So just cut the shit. Face facts. They stormed the wrong capitol. We can't escape. We need
the outside world to free us.
...Trump is a populist, not a revolutionary. And when faced with a revolution moment he
had no clue what else to do. I believe Trump supporters, the Deplorables, are the real
substantive patriots. They are sensible and want a stable America. Unfortunately their
opponents the Dems/Leftists and all other assorted groupings just want to win even if they
burn the whole of US. These people worship god of mammon and nothing else...
It seems to me the intent of the Trump supporters was merely to occupy the Capitol and
according to those who were interviewed "make their voices heard". I think those were the
words of Ashli Babbitt about an hour before she was gunned down by a black cop as well as a
few other interviews I came across.
That's neither intent to commit treason nor sedition. At most they are guilty of
trespassing on federal grounds which apparently is now a grievous federal offense if you hold
right of center political opinions. The person who killed a Capitol police officer and those
who destroyed property have some additional legal problems but that's still a far cry from
sedition.
But let's reverse all this and say that Trump was accused of stealing the election from
Joe Biden because of the suspicious and massive ballot dumps 95-100% for Trump in all
battleground states between 1am and 6:34am after election day along with other
irregularities. Then when legal remedies were sought the corrupt state and federal courts
refused to hear or allow discovery in the vast majority of them using "laches", standing and
other pretexts.
Radical left mobs would have stormed the capitol building and it would be encouraged and
supported by the media and all Democrats. Chris Cuomo or some other leftist shitlord would be
telling us that "this is what happens when Republicans steal an election." Republicans would
be so intimidated that they would probably overturn the election in favor of Joe Biden.
If a female black Biden protester was shot by a white Capitol cop then it would be "say
her name" and the white cop would be immediately fired and probably in FBI custody for a hate
crime. Blacks would destroy D.C. again while authorities did little.
@Katrinka PCR
thinks Trump is the victim of a color revolution when in fact Trump is leading a color
revolution.
The basis of a color revolution is a claim of a fraudulent election, this was the case in
Ukraine, Venezuela, and Belarus. It is Trump who claimed the election was fraudulent, and if
you follow StormFront you'll know that the Trumpers are now claiming that the entire voting
process in the US is a fraud and worthless.
In the US it is Trump and Trumpers like PCR who are now ripping apart the fabric of US
society, on the basis of endless allegations of a fraudulent election that evaporate with a
moments scrutiny.
The owners of America have decided. You plebes will do as you are told and the owners will
do what they want.
Trump's owners, the military industrial complex and the zionist lobby, have thrown him
under the bus. Bummer dude but you don't get to be "the one". It is so easy to manipulate ego
maniacs.
What deal did they cut with Biden's owners (media (all 6), med-mafia (pharma on top), tech
and CIA+lawfare (DOJ, FBI, IRS))?
1) Biden will NOT end the sanctions against Iran. He may say "we'll negotiate" but it will
drag on forever.
2) The MIC gets to keep the "civilian special forces" and most importantly control of the
NSA.
So after doing all the dirty work Trump gets thrown under the bus. LMAO. Will he be a
broken man like LBJ or Nixon or will he drift off into irrelevance like most of the rest?
transformation of the United States from a democracy accountable to the people to an
oligarchy of entrenched vested interests.
That transformation happened decades ago. The only difference is, in 2020 (both before the
elections and in November massive fraud) the beast showed its ugly mug more clearly than
before.
By allowing the protesters into the Capital Building, the chance to challenge the certification of the various states' electors
was lost. This was Trump's and his supporters' last chance. They have been played like a piano. Quite brilliant, in its way. Game over.
There was a curious
lack of resistance from the relevant authority. While Trump proved to be an incompetent and a coward, this looks like another Pelosi
dirty trick similar to Ukrainegate ? Russiagate and Ukrainegate taught him nothing.
That the incoming president declares a number of activist from the opposing party to be 'terrorists' demonstrates how unqualified
he is for that job.
Is this a terrorist? These were not terrorists but tourists who came from all over the states to Washington for fun and to register
their disagreement with the 'elites'.
Those rabbles were in no way terrorists. They were not even a mob. Most of them were out-of-town rednecks who felt that they had
been wronged. They wanted to express that. They were surprised when they found how easy it was to enter the Capitol and they apparently
took more time to take pictures than to rearrange the furniture.
[L]et's be clear about what did not take place at the Capitol Building last night. This was not a fascist coup, as so many shrill,
supposedly liberal commentators are claiming. Their flagrant use of the word 'fascist' to describe every political movement they
disapprove of is an insult to reason and history. This wasn't a coup full stop. The National Guard suppressed the morons, the
barricades were put back up, and even their hero Donald Trump told them to go home. A coup is a conscious effort to illegally
seize power from the government. These people couldn't even believe they made it into the Capitol Building. They were like children
finding a candy store unguarded.
A children's game. Indeed.
Yet Biden and others are furious about the stunt because it lifted the veil off their vaunted U.S. 'democracy' and its empty rituals:
Nicholas J. Fuentes @NickJFuentes - 21:01
UTC · Jan 7, 2021
The US Capitol is hardly a "sacred temple of democracy," it's the sleaziest brothel in the world, totally bought and controlled
by powerful interest groups and foreign governments. Who are they kidding?
Congressional processes are dirty fights about the distribution of the loot. There is nothing sacred about it. Just consider the
massive
bribes that were taken during the Georgia Senate races. Those hundreds of millions of 'donations' will have to be paid back in
kind.
The threat inflation, the wild claims about a fascist coup, are transparent efforts by the cosseted political and cultural elites
to endow their project with moral importance; to give their restoration of managerial, technocratic power after the four-year
populist experiment – which is fundamentally the project that Biden and his influential supporters are currently engaged in –
the gloss of historical urgency. It is mission creation.
Worse, this narrative-building will allow the elites to circumscribe even more forms of political thought and speech than they
already desire to do , on the basis that the latent fascism among the American rabble is likely to be stirred up by inflammatory
ideas and commentary. Indeed, we've already been given a chilling glimpse of this post-incursion clampdown on 'violent' speech
in Twitter's extraordinary decision to ban, outright, three of Trump's tweets last night and to lock him out of his account for
12 hours.
It strikes me that this unilateral use of corporate power by Silicon Valley to prevent the democratically elected president
of the United States from engaging with millions of his voters and supporters, to physically forbid him from partaking in online
discussion, is a grave assault on democracy, too. More grave, I would say, than the immoral and anti-democratic incursion of the
Capitol Building. Already, right away, we are seeing that the threat-inflating response to last night's events will likely have
longer-lasting negative consequences for open debate and democratic norms than the thing itself.
Biden is famous for mixing his words up. He meant to say that the protesters were "domestic tourists" . I'm sure he meant
to thank them for doing their part to revitalize America's service economy.
High treason, where, what? Did I miss something then ? I think not. The Soviet Union was
doomed,
virtually bankrupt, its population queuing for almost everything, DDR likewise and Poland
too, I have seen it in all three places. Oh, you could get everything if you had dollars!
Poland 1975: 1 kg of Russian Caviar and 4 bottles of the best Crimean Champagne :$10 !
Russia: Brand new Makarow, 9 mm, and 100 shots $20 including nice shoulder holster too in
leather $30
But ordinary people did not have $, only the nomenclature had $. A totally corrupt and failed
system in all the Eastern block. I was there then, saw it, and I have not forgotten.
So it was high time for change, and yes it would be tough, but the eastern people are tough
people ( and hospitable, very indeed)so they stood it out.
Abe, take a trip to Russia and speak to some older people, so you may stop posting
nonsense!
Him and his underlings, along with its successor Yeltsin (died too soon, unfortunately)
are directly responsible for millions of dead and destroyed lives in Russia in the `90-ties.
But I sense you are from countries that now grow unhealthy and pathological hate towards
Russian people, so as far you are concerned, it was great period, right?
Blame the Soviets for the economy of places ravaged by war and sabotaged by the West?
Remember the Eastern Front suffered the majority of action. Russia itself suffered the worst
and had to rebuild more than anybody, whereas USA factories easily re-supplied Western
Europe.
Eastern Europeans better guard against being played by the West into fighting Russia
again. They allied with Western-financed Hitler the last time. So, I'm a little worried
they'll be conned again.
It is curious that in one of the articles MoA wrote that, in his opinion (which I share),
there are now two superpowers - the United States and Russia, while China is only on the way
to this.
But Chinese journalists think differently - for example, in this article (very controversial,
btw) the author asks the question "Russia has the potential to become a superpower,
what are the factors preventing it from doing this?" At the same time, apparently, the
journalist believes that the current superpowers are China and the United States, while
"something prevents" Russia from becoming such.
Funny.
Just one quote from the article:
The distance between Russia and the superpower is still very large, and not only because of
the country's "internal problems" - the United States is also constraining and restraining
Russia by all means. It is not easy to become a superpower.
"If you talk to older people in Russia they'll tell you how deeply they despise the
"marked one" as they call him."
I know there are multiple perspectives when assessing Gorbachev's legacy, but I also
encountered that reaction often during my time there by old and young alike. It was a
surprise to me as I had assumed he would be universally accepted in a positive light as he is
in the west.
Asking them why they felt that way, a common response was that he had been too trusting of
the US promises, which ushered in the looting and manipulation of the 90's. Many mentioned
Baker's promise to Gorbachev that if East Germany went to the west, NATO would not move "one
inch to the east", and Gorbachev's failure to get that in writing. (Not to say the US would
have honored it even then, of course, but at least some proof to show the west's
duplicity).
vk@8 "The USSR could've reformed and opened up like China did, and would be in a much better
situation than what really happened (Yeltsin's neoliberal genocide)."
This is nonsense. That's exactly what Gorbachev did. The relative stagnation of the USSR
turned into an economic catastrophe under Gorbachev who dismantled a still-functional
economy. Yeltsin's neoliberalism was a continuation of Gorbachev's economics. Yeltsin's
revolution was not to impose a new policy but to smash the opposition to the new policy, to
carry it out ruthlessly, to concentrate the theft of public property in Great Russian hands.
China's opening up was deliberately fostered by the western powers as a way of separating the
socialist powers. There was never going to be any such opening up with Europe, not for the
USSR. There wasn't in NEP in the Twenties. This absurd counterfactual misreads what happened
with the capitalist roaders in China.
There also seems to be some nonsense lurking about how the Cultural Revolution was a
gigantic catastrophe. Of course, though no one cares to notice, if this was true, then India
would have had all those years to race ahead of China, not being cursed with such a
nightmare. In truth, the Cultural Revolution brought many benefits to the countryside in
particular, and still progressed the economy as a whole. Then after the murderous Deng took
over, there wasn't any magical Great Leap Forward on IOUs to Imperialism as he promised. For
years and years, the wonders of reform and opening up delivered not much faster (at all?)
than the previous system. Not even the notorious Southern Tour was so miraculous. The failure
to deliver on his overblown promises is why the students at Tien An Men square were so
worried about getting good jobs commensurate with their higher elite status, reaffirmed by
Deng. Only after decades did the economic conjuncture finally lead to rapid growth...but at a
tremendous social cost still denied by too many. The iron rice bowl was broken long before
the privilege of working for a capitalist firm started to really pay.
From comments: "The lady martyr, a 14 year air force veteran will be a rallying cry to bring
down the corrupt swamp. As Pepe says, the deplorables will become the ungovernables. The real
red necks from the intermountain west were not represented. They will be there next time and
angry."
Notable quotes:
"... Since the global private finance elite can't start a global war they have to resort to manufactured civil warfare to keep the masses under control and brainwashed against the private finance TINA. ..."
"... The election was stolen. The fraud was blatant, in your face. The election process, the only peaceful means for a transfer of power according to the wishes of the electorate is seen as fatally undermined by a significant portion of the electorate. ..."
Here's what Steve Bannon's MAGA war-room had to say on today's events..."...What people need
to understand is that there's a growing sense among the Deplorables that they've been betrayed
not only by their political leaders, but the very institutions that were designed theoretically
to protect their liberties."
Who by the way knew that members of Congress have gas masks
under their seats ?
Tear gas was deployed in the Capitol rotunda, so the order came down for lawmakers to ready
gas masks that are stored under their seats. Allred helped some his colleagues take out
their masks as Arizona Rep. Ruben Gallego, a Marine Corps veteran, provided instruction.
"When you put your mask on, breathe slowly or you'll hyperventilate," Gallego said,
according to Allred.
There surely is a lot of hyperventilating right now. Trump is accused of inciting
violence.
It
doesn't read like that . In fact Trump spoke out against violence and called on the
people to leave peacefully only to get censored by the blue tick monopoly:
If this was the nakedcapitalism web site I would have no question about what the TINA
referenced (private finance) but in this posting I am not so sure that is so clear.
How can America have an epiphany moment about the mythological left/right when top/bottom
is the reality that TINA should be all about?
Since the global private finance elite can't start a global war they have to resort to
manufactured civil warfare to keep the masses under control and brainwashed against the
private finance TINA.
A shit show civil war to keep focus off the real TINA of global private finance......and b
wants to call that style.....
The election was stolen. The fraud was blatant, in your face. The election process, the only peaceful means for a
transfer of power according to the wishes of the electorate is seen as fatally undermined by
a significant portion of the electorate.
SCOTUS washed their hands of it.
So if their votes don't count and the highest court in the land won't remedy the situation
then the only alternative is either dissolve the union or a radical overhaul of the union.
Personally I don't think the latter will ever happen.
The only question is will the dissolution of the union be peaceful or violent!
Nuland will be nominated for the position of under secretary of state for political affairs,
the US media said on Tuesday with Politico being the first to
drop the scoop. It's the highest-ranking post in the department after the secretary and deputy
secretary. During the Obama administration, Nuland served as assistant secretary of state for
European and Eurasian Affairs, and was a key official in formulating and implementing his
Russia policies. She also served as US envoy to the UN under George W. Bush and advised Vice
President Dick Cheney on foreign policy.
The news that the vocal Russia hawk was returning to the White House was understandably met
with loud cheering by the fans of Pax American on both sides of the Atlantic. Critics were
dismayed and somewhat horrified, considering her record.
Arguably the most publicly known episode of Nuland's Obama tenure came in 2014, when a tape
of her conversation with then-ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt was leaked. It happened
shortly after Ukraine's democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovich was ousted in a wave
of street protests culminating in an armed coup, which happened with much encouragement from
Washington.
Nuland and Pyatt were discussing who among the coup leaders should be in the upcoming
Ukrainian government, which indicated that Washington played a much bigger role in the crisis
than it publicly admitted. The infamous " F**k the EU" remark came as Nuland expressed
frustration with European nations, who were reluctant to lend legitimacy to the benefactors of
the events, and said UN officials could be called in to help "glue this thing"
instead.
The EU's skepticism at the time could have been due to the fact that President Yanukovich
was expelled under a threat of violence just hours after Germany and Poland helped seal a power
sharing
agreement between him and the opposition leaders, serving as guarantors of the deal. Her
return as a senior diplomatic official is likely to get on a few people's nerves in Europe,
which is ironic considering how the Biden administration is supposed to rebuild alliances
damaged by the Trump presidency.
While flying private in the world of academia and think tanks during the Trump years, Nuland
maintained her confrontational attitude to anyone challenging US dominance. Her recipe for
dealing with Russia, as outlined
in Foreign Policy magazine last summer, is more sophisticated weapons, permanent NATO bases on
the Russian border (which will require abolishing a key Russia-NATO agreement) and deniable
cyber operations against Moscow.
Nuland also played a
peculiar part in US domestic affairs, possibly having a hand in the promotion of the
notorious Steele dossier. The collection of opposition research and rumors was used by the FBI
to justify surveillance of the Trump campaign and fueled the endless flood of claims that the
incumbent president was somehow a Russian stooge.
An FBI memo released last
year revealed that Fusion GPS head Glenn Simpson "and others were talking to Victoria Nuland
at the US State Department" about the file. The firm looked into Donald Trump for the
Hillary Clinton campaign and retained retired British intelligence agent Christopher Steele for
the job.
In multiple interviews, Nuland insisted that her role with the dossier was very limited
because it dealt with domestic politics. "[Steele] passed two to four pages of short points
of what he was finding, and our immediate reaction to that was, 'This is not in our
purview,'" she
told CBS News in 2018, adding that she advised him to go to the FBI. Some skeptics believe
her role in launching the Steele dossier may have been much more significant.
Nuland is one of many Obama-era officials tapped by Biden to serve again with him at the
helm. In addition to her, the latest reported batch includes Wendy Sherman, the former under
secretary of state for political affairs, Jon Finer, who had various roles under Obama, and
Amanda Sloat, ex-deputy assistant secretary for Southern Europe and Eastern Mediterranean
affairs.
Trump obviously wants better diplomatic relations with Russia. He is reluctant to
counter its military might. He is doing his best to make it richer. Just consider the
headlines below. With all those good things Trump did for Putin, intense suspicions of
Russian influence over him is surely justified.
There followed 34 headlines and links to stories about Trump actions, from closing Russian
consulates to U.S. attacks on Russian troops, that were hostile to Russia.
In fact no other U.S. administration since the cold war has been more aggressive towards
Russia than Trump's.
But some U.S. media continue to claim that Trump's behavior towards Russia has not been
hostile at all. Consider this line
in Politico about anti-Russian hawks in the incoming Biden administration:
Nuland and Sherman, who entered academia and the think tank world after leaving the Obama
administration, have been outspoken critics of President Donald Trump's foreign policy --
particularly his appeasement of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Where please has Trump 'appeased' Vladimir Putin?
Here are a number of headlines which appeared in U.S. media since we published our first
list two years ago. Which of the described actions were designed to 'appease' Putin or
Russia?
When one adds up all those actions one can only find that Trump cares more about Russia,
than about the U.S. and its NATO allies. Only with Trump being under Putin's influence,
knowingly or unwittingly, could he end up doing Russia so many favors.
Why, you certainly could view most (if not all) of those actions as favors.
People feel attacked, unite, rally around the flag. Internal problems are blamed on the
external enemy. The sanctions, the sort the West likes to impose, help develop domestic
industries. Etc. Yeah, favors.
Point on! Trump was never 'the Russians' bitch'. He was the whore of the Russian
émigré mafia that had relocated to the US in south Queens in New York City. A
major difference!
Well, the logic is to destroy or ad least severely weaken Russia. Yet damn Russia is
getting stronger and stronger, hence what ever happened under Trump's watch must have been a
favor to Russia.
Competent government would look itself in the mirror and admit it is their own fault and
stupidity, but that ship sailed long time ago for US.
Point on! Trump was never 'the Russians' bitch'. He was the whore of the Russian
émigrés mafia that had relocated to the US in south Queens in New York City. A
major difference!
Of course the whole point of US and Western MSM obsession with demonising Russia and
China, and castigating those like Trump (for not going far enough to oppose either one or the
other nation, or both), is to divert public attention away from govt failings at home and to
push the public into supporting regime change against both Russia and China.
B's post should be read as a companion piece to his previous post on China as an
existential threat to the US, as an example of a nation that achieved stability, peace and
enough prosperity for most of its people by pursuing an alternate political and economic
ideology in the space of 40 years. An ideology that moreover challenges the ideology that the
West has followed for the past 500 years, and the assumptions on which that ideology is
based. Despite Western attempts to destabilise, break up and impoverish Russia in the 1990s,
in order to steal its energy and mineral resources, that nation managed to bounce back to
some level of stability and economic security. In addition Russia and China signed a
friendship treaty in 2001 and are committing to a closer political ans economic
relationship.
All this serves to marginalise the Anglosphere nations and to deny the US, the UK and
their elites the opportunity to plunder these nations and their allies for their natural
resources.
Point on! Trump was never 'the Russians' bitch'. He was the whore of the russian
emigrée mafia that had relocatet to the US in south Quens in New York City. A maijor
difference!
Exactly that, thank you. The mafia that manages the D party are of Mediterranean roots and
are totally pi$$ed of with the Russians.
Enough of this polite avoidance of the reality of the USAi gangland - it is a mafia state.
The D 'reformist' squad just blew their best chance to start the reformation. They will be
neutered well before another chance arises.
AFAICT Russiagate's neo-McCarthyism and Trump's supposed friendliness toward Putin was a
set up prior to Trump negotiations with Putin at Helsinki.
"I'm your only friend ... and your last best hope ..." is a powerful pitch -
especially when it is accompanied by generous offers of aid and support. And perhaps it
would've worked if it had come years before.
So now we have a new Cold War - with both Russia and China.
Ever since November third the American political/media class have been keeping Democrats fixated on Trump's post-election shenanigans
with garment-rending urgency, now going so far as to
call for yet another oxygen-sucking impeachment
as he's on his way out the door while millions of Americans are struggling just to meet their basic needs.
You wouldn't know it from the dominant chatter, but Trump's impotent attempts to reverse the election results don't rank anywhere
remotely near the top ten worst things this president has done while in office,
which include vetoing attempts to end
the world's worst mass atrocity in Yemen, escalating world-threatening cold wars with both Russia and China, murdering untold tens
of thousands of Venezuelans with starvation sanctions, pushing Iran to the brink of war by assassinating its top military commander,
expanding the "war on terror" and rolling back airstrike regulations designed to protect civilians.
US political discourse hasn't reflected the fact that Trump's foreign policy has been far more atrocious than anything he's done
domestically–and certainly anything he's done since November–because news media coverage does not reflect this fact. News media coverage
does not reflect this fact because western news media regard imperialism and mass military slaughter as normal US presidential stuff,
and do not regard brown-skinned foreigners as human.
I point this out because it's good to note, as Trump leaves office, that he spent his entire administration
advancing murderous imperialist
agendas which spilled very real blood from very real human beings while mainstream America barely even noticed. Their attention
was drawn instead to endless narrative theater which had no impact whatsoever on the concrete actions taken by the US government's
executive branch. Their gaze was kept fixated on meaningless political drama while the war machine marched on unseen.
Americans are famously uninterested in the rest of the world, to such an extent that you can only get them to watch a British
sitcom if it's remade with American actors and they don't know that having your nation's flag flying all over your neighborhood isn't
normal. The story of Kanye and Kim's divorce is going to generate more news media views than the entirety of the Yemen war since
it began. This lack of interest in war and foreign policy is mighty peculiar, seeing how the people who run their country make it
their primary focus.
Americans only care about America while their rulers only care about the rest of the world. This is entirely by design.
Americans fixate on America while ignoring the rest of the world not because they are genetically prone to self-obsessed navel
gazing, but because their attention is being constantly and deliberately manipulated away from the stage upon which their government
is perpetrating monstrous acts.
The nationless alliance of plutocrats and government agencies who drive the US government's foreign policy cannot have the common
riff raff interfering in their affairs. Immense amounts of energy have gone into preventing the rise of an antiwar movement in the
hub of the empire like the one which began shaking the earth in the sixties and seventies, with propaganda playing a leading role
in this suppression. The US is far too important in the operation of the empire-like power alliance which sprawls across the earth
to permit its inhabitants to interfere in its operations by using the power of their numbers to force their nation's wealth and resources
to be used at home. So propaganda is used to hold their attention inside America's borders.
"The danger for American elites is not that the U.S.
may become less able to accomplish geopolitical objectives. Rather, it is that more Americans might begin to question
the logic of U.S. global hegemony," writes
@RichardHanania>
China's
Real Threat Is to America's Ruling Ideology", Richard Hanania argues that the example China sets as a nation rising to superpower
status by relatively peaceful and lawful means is deeply threatening to the orthodoxy promoted by western imperialists. If the world
in general and Americans in particular were to become more conscious of how a civilization can succeed and thrive without waging
endless wars in the name of "freedom" and "democracy", they might begin calling for such an order themselves.
"While most Americans will never experience a ride on a Chinese bullet train and remain oblivious in differences in areas like
infrastructure quality, major accomplishments in highly visible frontiers like space travel or cancer treatment could drive home
the extent to which the U.S. has fallen behind," Hanania concludes.
"Under such conditions, the best case scenario for most Americans
would be a nightmare for many national security and bureaucratic elites: for the U.S. to give up on policing the world and instead
turn inward and focus on finding out where exactly our institutions have gone wrong."
In other words, China's rise threatens to reverse the carefully-engineered dynamic which has Americans looking inward while their
government points its attention outward. If Americans begin turning their gaze internationally and use the power of their numbers
to force their government to heal and nurture their crumbling nation, it would spell the end for the imperialists. But it could also
be the beginning of a peaceful and harmonious world.
CAROLYN L ZAREMBA / JANUARY 6, 2021
It is an erroneous generalization to say "Americans only care about America". Which Americans? If you are talking about the
ruling class of the United States, even they don't care much about America, only their bank accounts and their stock portfolios.
Witness their indifference to the thousands of deaths from Covid-19 through a lack of lockdowns, testing and contact tracing.
Witness their demanding that schools and factories remain open, probably to kill as many of the working class as possible while
these wealthy goniffs drink champagne on their private islands.
I am born and reared in the United States, and I hate the government of my country of birth. I have hated them since the 1960s.
I am an internationalist. Nationalism is a 19th century idea that is past its prime. Ultra nationalism is fascism. All Americans
do not support fascism. Many of us are Marxists.
And when you use the term "American", you should be clear that you mean the United States, and not Canada, Mexico, Panama,
Brazil or Ecuador, among others.
STANLEY N LAHAM / JANUARY 6, 2021
When Vladimir Putin said that the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of post WWII was the dissolution of the USSR, he was right
on the button. What unraveled next was story of unparalleled greed and hubris in the United States in believing the world was
its spoils for winning the Cold War.
From Eastern Europe to Asia and South America it went on a rampage like an elephant in a tea house making and breaking governments,
bombing and dismembering viable states, creating chaos in order to come in and establishing its new Pax Americana. From Yugoslavia
to Libya to Syria, Sudan, Yemen, Honduras etc, it either promoted downright Coup d'États or mercilessly bombed destroying people
and infrastructure to achieve its agenda unopposed by a weak Russia and a Warsaw Pact that had gone to its grave. And in so doing
caused the greatest mass migration of refugees to Europe the likes of which the world had never seen since WWII.
Yet all this was conceived and effectuated not in secret rooms but openly declared as official policy. In the mid nineties
a new political doctrine that would guide policy was announced in the form of "Project for a New American Century" which is nothing
less than Manifest Destiny on steroids and on a global scale. This was soon followed by its military doctrine of "Full Spectrum
Dominance" over all countries of the earth. Well when the drunk Boris Yeltsin realized belatedly what was afoot, he literally
ceded control of the Russian Federation to Putin in 2000 who went about repairing the social, economic and military disaster his
country had become,
Starting in Syria in 2014, Vladimir Putin started challenging the American Empire that can no longer project the military supremacy
it enjoyed for nearly two decades and this has enraged its planners. The demonizing of Russia is for having stopped dead in its
tract the military supremacy of the US and the demonizing of China for having stopped its economic one and challenging the supremacy
of the dollar.
CAROLYN L ZAREMBA / JANUARY 6, 2021
Putin was quite right. The only brake on the brazen greed for power of the United States was the huge land mass of the Soviet
Union. That brake was removed when Gorbachev waved the white hankie and surrendered. The rest is nightmare.
ROUNDBALL SHAMAN / JANUARY 6, 2021
"Americans are famously uninterested in the rest of the world Americans only care about America while their rulers only care
about the rest of the world. This is entirely by design."
In a sense, you can't blame Americans for being so shallow-visioned. From birth, Americans are taught that they belong to "The
Exceptional Nation". Well, if you are Exceptional, that must mean everyone else ISN'T Exceptional. So why in the world would Americans
care about those unimportant outsiders?
Add to that the fact that most people are innately selfish anyway and just naturally don't care about anyone or anything much
but themselves. The World beyond USA borders is just some kind of unimportant black hole that doesn't count for anything. Or so
the belief goes. Generation to generation.
And add to that fact what does any of this have to do with big shiny pickup trucks, cold beer, and American football? Those are
the three dominant religions in America and have been for a long time. Why would Americans care about anything else? There's only
so many hours in the day, you know?
"The nationless alliance of plutocrats and government agencies who drive the US government's foreign policy cannot have the common
riff raff interfering in their affairs."
Where things seem to headed the nationless alliance of plutocrats and government agencies who drive the US government's foreign
policy cannot have the common riff raff AROUND AT ALL. Various scenarios in play for that outcome.
We need to live each day as if it is our last. Because one way or another, The Last One is getting closer. Do cattle at the stockyards
realize that they are in a stockyards and their brothers and sisters go into that big building and don't seem to come out? Will
we?
EDWARD HACKETT / JANUARY 6, 2021
You have completely summed up the central points of American thinking. Don't wear a mask or social distance because that interferes
with my right to be an idiot.
We get the best government money can buy. When will we stop electing celebrities and old white men? Someday there will be a
book called "The Decline and Fall of America". I hope someone is around to read it.
S.A. HOGAN / JANUARY 6, 2021
Dear Caitlin (with typos fixed),
I'm afraid I must take offense when you paint things with a broad brush–which is almost invariably a no-no, the stuff of which
prejudice is made–and say "Americans care only about America."
While our media may encourage an ethnocentric, myopic viewpoint
of the world, the cure is to A. explore the viewpoints of other countries, and B. get out there...
NEWTON FINN / JANUARY 6, 2021
"Americans fixate on America while ignoring the rest of the world not because they are genetically prone to self-obsessed navel
gazing, but because their attention is being constantly and deliberately manipulated away from the stage upon which their government
is perpetrating monstrous acts." Not entirely correct. Because of the basic decency of the American people, their imperial government
is compelled to use its MSM mouthpiece to sell wars to them in explicitly moral terms.
First, their attention is relentlessly
focused ON a specific foreign stage. Then, the leader of that foreign country is demonized as a new Hitler. Finally, the responsibility
of the exceptional nation is asserted to protect the citizens of that foreign country from their demonic leader. This longstanding
propaganda strategy of R2P (responsibility to protect), previously described by Caitlin and Diana (the other Johnstone), provides
strong evidence that the character of the American people, as Caitlin indicates, is no worse than that of other nations.
Indeed,
is it not precisely the morality and decency of American citizens which are manipulated by their government and MSM to provide
sanction and support for evil deeds?
America got shot with an animal tranquilizer dart in November 1963.
I'm praying for her to wake up and stand.
JWK / JANUARY 6, 2021
As is always the case, governments being the ideal environment for psychopaths, they eventually are saturated with them. The
longer they are around, and the more resources they have, the worse they get. America is peaking, I wonder what nation takes their
place?
FRED GROSSO / JANUARY 6, 2021
Good discussion Caitlin. I only add that America could never do the things you suggest it needs to do with Trump and his goons
in charge. With the Democrats we have a slim chance. I did not support Clinton in 2016 as I saw her a a hawk, and I found Biden
to be a weak choice, but at least one we could work with, just barely. We have a lot of work ahead of us.
KHATIKA / JANUARY 6, 2021
How could things be any worse than the US coming in and bomb you back to the stone age killing millions. Let people take care
of their own problems or at least have them solved regionally. The number one problem today is people determined on telling others
how to live their lives.
EDWARD HACKETT / JANUARY 6, 2021
Much of what you say about America's lack of involvement with foreign affairs is correct. If you asked the average American
citizen where is Yemen? You would get a blank stare...
SOLLY / JANUARY 6, 2021
No need for a long essay on the subject. Americans are violent, egotistic, egoistic, ignorant and greedy.
EDWARD HACKETT / JANUARY 6, 2021
In many cases you are correct, but I think that analysis applies more to our governing class than to the man in the street.
The average American is consumed with earning a living and watching TV. They have little knowledge of the world at large nor do
they have any interest in learning about the greater world.
Many of your criticisms could be directed to people around the world. We Americans don't have a corner on your listed qualities
but we are certainly in the top 10 of those that share our worst qualities.
MR OBVIOUS / JANUARY 6, 2021
We are a empire in decline riding on power and might derived from the WW2 victory and addicted to a system that is totally
inadequate for the present. Like any dying behemoth do not get close as the thrashing around is extremely dangerous. We will change
if modern civilization is so fortunate to survive.
ZARD / JANUARY 6, 2021
'A nation with a collective, room-temp IQ' :
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public" ~ H.L. Mencken
left（ZOG）right =Divide and Conquer
STEPHEN MORRELL / JANUARY 6, 2021
Here is one of the most insightful recent conversations on the rise of China and the decline of the US empire which will never
reach the mainstream, between Michael Hudson and Pepe Escobar:
I think Caitlin's post on the current state of American society was a Curate's egg : good in parts only. She is absolutely
correct to draw attention to US capitalism's desire to impose its dominion over the entire world by ANY means, including war,
if necessary.
Trump has confined himself to launching trade wars against US capitalism's rivals – Russia, China, and the EU trading bloc.
But the US military has kept up its murderous blood-letting in the Middle East and in Yemen, where the prize is control over the
region's oil and gas reserves.
Caitlin is, however, way off beam in her assessment of the "average" American, who, she believes, is only interested in American
affairs, flag-waving, and TV. This pessimism simply does not correspond with reality. American cities have been ablaze with revolt
for the last 2 years, in response to US police murders of innocent people, and especially black people. These mass demonstrations
reflect a revolutionary state of mind amongst wide layers of American working class people, especially the youth of America who
correctly see no future for themselves in capitalist America.
... ... ...
A Stalinist China is most definitely not to be admired, or emulated. I can assure Caitlin that she would not be allowed to
run her platform in Beijing. On the contrary, she would probably be put in jail for "deviationism," which is Stalinist doublespeak
for refusing to repeat, parrot fashion, every word that emanates from the mouths of the Chinese billionaire, fake "Communist"
leaders...
ROBERT L PHILLIPS / JANUARY 6, 2021
I very much agree with most of what the author states, but I agree that holding China and it's authoritarian regime up as anything
to emulate is wrong. But that nation is indeed racing past the United States in many technological areas.
I tend to agree with her assessment of 'most Americans,' however, as the vast majority could not pass a basic current events
quiz, don't know who Julian Assange is, and readily welcome ever stricter controls over the populace due to their fears of – anything
and everything, including CV19. Not all, but the majority.
Americans I am one but do you think I have a choice? Most of the people I know. Ok to be honest, all of them, consider themselves
well informed... Dissing people who live in a cultural wasteland is not a good use of time. As a great man once said: 'Forgive them father, they know not what they do.
I made it clear that Americans are the victims of imperialist propaganda brainwashing. My American husband who co-wrote this
article says stop being so precious about your nationality.
ANNA QUAY / JANUARY 6, 2021
As a Brit I hear you. This political ignorance is certainly not confined to America. I would go as far as to say it extends
to all of the English speaking countries of the world. Oh, I would also suggest that you can throw in most of Europe, then add
Asia into the mix. It is an affliction that affects humanity.
It is borne from years of being ruled by a hierarchy. We have a
slave mentality and it is only individuals who are awake. Collective groups of people usually belong to some organisation and
therefore by the nature of their organisation simply follow the doctrine/dogma or ideology of that organisation.
Once again Ms Johnstone hits it out of the park with an article that brings goosebumps to this old man. The United States government
is completely corrupt and its world-wide killing sprees are way worse than anything that Mr. Hitler ever did. No morals and no
ethics and no empathy are the hallmarks of its nature that need to be done away with ASAP. Thank You Ms Johnstone for you honest
assessment of the United States Monster.
The author says that China, even as it is growing and has passed the U.S. economically, is
not an enemy of the U.S. and no danger to U.S. or others' security:
While China is not blameless, one could reasonably make the argument that, from an
international perspective, it has had easily the most peaceful rise to great power status of
any nation of the last several hundred years.
...
Perhaps, as the McMasters of the world claim, this is all because Beijing is biding its time
in hopes of world domination. Alternatively, China may be an inwardly focused civilization
that, while it may have disputes with its neighbors, is not on a mission to fundamentally
remake the world. While it would naturally prefer rules that favor it and resists any
principles that would legitimize regime change supported from abroad, Beijing does not seek
to fundamentally replace the U.N. or rewrite international law. Its strategy has mostly
sought stability and growth within the rules of the system developed by Western democracies
in the aftermath of the Second World War. While its current position of strength is recent,
it has not yet broken from this precedent.
Nor does it, as far as is known, plan to do so.
Various U.S. influenced political scientists have claimed that democratization and
liberalization is a necessary precursor for peace and economic growth. That ideological
argument was used to seek and kill various 'dictator' dragons abroad. China has proved them to
be wrong. And therein lies the real danger to the U.S. establishment.
China's development over the last 40 years proves that it is not necessary to wage wars in
foreign countries to be secure and to prosper. For U.S. ideologues that is a bad example that
should not exist:
If universal democratization is not the ultimate endpoint of history -- or even an imperative
for development, peace, and prosperity -- how can the American role in the world be
justified? What will it say about the American system if the U.S. is no longer the wealthiest
and most powerful nation in the world, having been surpassed by a country that became the
dominant power in East Asia without even paying lip service to democratic ideals?
Ultimately, Americans themselves might begin asking themselves difficult questions about
how well they have been served by their own system, including the sacrifices in blood and
treasure they are regularly asked to make abroad.
That would be really bad as the monetary fodder in the trough the national security
establishment is feasting from would suddenly be seen as an unnecessary waste. That is the real
danger to the blob:
Ultimately, the danger for American elites is not that the U.S. may become less able to
accomplish geopolitical objectives. Rather, it is that more Americans might begin to question
the logic of U.S. global hegemony . Perhaps not every state is destined to become a liberal
democracy, and nations with very different political systems can coexist peacefully, as many
countries in East Asia do. Maybe the U.S. will not always be at the frontier of military and
economic power, and the country that overtakes it may have completely different attitudes
about the nature of the relationship between government and its citizens.
While most Americans will never experience a ride on a Chinese bullet train and remain
oblivious in differences in areas like infrastructure quality, major accomplishments in
highly visible frontiers like space travel or cancer treatment could drive home the extent to
which the U.S. has fallen behind. Under such conditions, the best case scenario for most
Americans would be a nightmare for many national security and bureaucratic elites: for the
U.S. to give up on policing the world and instead turn inward and focus on finding out where
exactly our institutions have gone wrong.
What then is the U.S. establishment going to do?
The U.S. rose to global supremacy on the back of two world wars which destroyed the
industrial capacities of its main competitors while the wars hardly touched its own country.
Could it arrange for a comparable event, by maybe instigating a conflict between Japan and
China, that would again lead to a major destruction of global production capabilities while the
U.S. stays on the sidelines?
Letting Japan, South Korea and Taiwan(!) have
their own nuclear weapons , as another writer proposes, may be a way to get there:
What to do [about China]? There is one way to square the circle. The Biden administration
should reconsider reflexive U.S. opposition to "friendly proliferation."
...
Taiwan is in greatest need of such a weapon, but developing one would be highly
destabilizing, since Beijing would be tempted to preempt the process. The alternative would
be for Washington to fill Taiwan's need, with a profound impact on Sino-American relations.
Proliferation would not be a good solution -- but it might be the least bad one.
No doubt, a nuclear-armed China would react badly to better-armed neighbors, but it is no
happier with a more involved United States.
...
It is easier to know what not to do with China than what to do. Don't go to war. Don't stage
a new cold war. Don't sacrifice core values and basic interests. Don't make the issue all
about Washington. Don't waste money and credibility on overambitious, unsustainable attempts
at containment. Don't attempt to dictate to the PRC.
But what to do? The United States should think creatively about new approaches to old
problems. One way to do so is to stop hectoring partners and preventing them from doing what
they want to do. Including, perhaps, developing nuclear weapons.
I expect that this and other such ideas will soon proliferate.
Posted by b on January 5, 2021 at 19:19 UTC |
Permalink
Fortunately the Taiwanese are smart enough not to use nuclear weapons.
Seems to me that China threatens mostly Big American companies - Google Facebook etc, and
therefore the US stock market valuations that depend on huge growth expectations remaining
credible.
thanks b... the idea to stop when digging a ditch for yourself is not something the usa has
ever demonstrated in my memory.. it would be nice if the usa could change its approach on the
world stage, but at this point i give it very low odds.. instead the usa will be forced to
adjust to a different reality, much like all the innocent people in the usa left behind by a
system that is broken.... the usa is becoming what it has failed to address and becoming a
failed state... it seems like it is now on one of those china bullet trains to reach this
failed state destination, as no other options are likely to be explored here forward...
i am presently reading a book by linda mcquaig given to me for christmas - the sport and
prey of capitalists - .... essentially the capitalist template used in the usa the past 40 or
more years is being pushed onto canada - privatization and allowing big finance firms like
blackrock into the halls of canuck political power to decide the direction that we have to
privatize our public institutions... again - we are back to the conversation that
@pshycohistorian likes to focus on - public, verses private finance... these financial
monoliths are dominating the landscape of the west... i don't know how we move forward and
put them to rest... i suspect a financial collapse is the only way, and i am not convinced
that the new system will be better then the last... the predators, although a small
percentage on the planet, are especially focused on there desire for financial power and
dominance.... is china headed in the same direction?? or russia?? i can't tell... as for
canada, the future looks grim if one was to just read this book i refer to...
Agree 100%. We can't expect the USA to suffer its own Shock Doctrine can we? The American
Fantasy of World Savior is too engrained in Establishment thought to give up its American
Exceptionalist, Unitary Super Power, Plunder for Profit, in the name of FREEDOM all while
doing Blankfein's God's Work without a fight.
Imagine the horror, the horror I tell you, of American Introspection at the nation's utter
failure at everything it pretended at.
As for China, I believe it's conclusively demonstrated the superiority of its
sociopolitical model. Growing economy, growing prosperity, growing influence in the world, no
wars.
Just ideas? Or maybe they have plans that they are already implementing?
Seems like the latter to me. But then I've been saying (repeatedly) that everything
changed in 2013-14 when USA realized that the Russia-China Alliance had teeth.
Some Chinese commenter here please help me, but, if I'm not mistaken, China has a doctrine
that in the US thinktankland they call "China's Peaceful Development Doctrine". In Chinese
the call it the "Celestial Ascension" [Doctrine] or something like that. And yes, it requires
socialism in order to make sense (the demonstration as to why the doctrine is socialist is
too long to put it here, but it is).
So, the author from the Paladium Magazine is reinventing the wheel here, as China makes no
secret of its global doctrine.
I maintain my opinion that nukes eliminate the prospect of another Kondratiev Cycle being
forced on a world war. Nukes not only destroy infrastructure - it also destroy land and air
themselves. It subtracts space from capitalism.
"If universal democratization is not the ultimate endpoint of history -- or even an
imperative for development, peace, and prosperity -- how can the American role in the world
be justified?"
Good question; but note that the question itself assumes that "universal democratization"
HAS in fact been the point of our imperial endeavors around the world. As can be seen from
our close and personal relationships with the Gulf monarchies, the Egyptian tyrant, the SE
Asia wars, and many many other examples to mention over the decades past, this is manifestly
not true.
The truth is that "universal democratization" and the so-called "rules-based order" post
ww2 have ever only been a narrative justifying (first) imperial anti-socialism and (now)
anti-localism. The truth is that what they are deathly afraid of is losing the all-important
NARRATIVE. Because, as the article points out, once the narrative of the savior nation is
lost, how can the expense in lives and treasure and thereby the feeding of the Mil-Sec-Think
Tan Complex) possibly be justified.
Given the gigantic problems facing the Outlaw US Empire that are detailed in the links I've
posted today on the week-in-review thread, I'll add
this interview that mostly covers its current domestic turmoil. Furthermore, given the
massive skewing of economic data over the past 30 years, those sitting in DC haven't a clue
as to the severity of the domestic crisis. From the interview:
"Colin Cavell: Failing to address the massive problems of unemployment and lack of jobs,
failing to address the massive wealth gap between rich and poor, failing to ensure adequate
healthcare to millions, failing to protect the American public during the course of the
current Covid-19 pandemic, failing to address the festering racial divisions, especially with
regards to the criminal justice system, and failing to instill a unified trust in the
governing apparatus and ruling economic class, then, yes, Biden will preside over a
collapsing economy, a divided country, and a distrustful citizenry, and thus open the door to
either another term for an older Trump or some other demagogue or outright fascist to
'restore order'."
And all that's primed to worsen more before it improves any. And the international
situation vastly differs from that of the Great Depression years with Fascism rising in
Europe and Asia. Hudson in his talk and the Keiser's guest both mention the chasm opening
economically between China and the Empire--they're heading in opposite directions as we've
been discussing here for months. If the mainland got any inkling that Taiwan was going to be
given nukes, it would be occupied the next day. Japan and RoK both want to be rid of their
occupier which is preventing them from gaining economically by further engaging with China.
And the same can be said for the EU. The bottom line is no nation shares the interests of the
Outlaw US Empire excepting perhaps Poland and Ukraine--not even Occupied Palestine.
The Parasite has almost devoured its Host, and in the process has disarmed it. Those
sitting in DC can't see that fact because the Parasite controls their collective brains, so
we get treated to idiotic essays like the one at Foreign Policy b linked above. Obama
chose to feed the Parasite in 2009 instead of having it executed. And that's why we are in
deep bantha pudu today.
I think the main problem are the two different approaches taken by the US or Chinese, which
are diametrically different. The Chinese seem to use a " Cumulative " approach, while
the US is based on what I call " Winnowing " as a state. Take their respective
attitudes towards the poor.
First the Chinese; Cumulative , we are all in this together . If everyone
has a "job" be it ever-so lowly, selling food on a street corner for example, then for the
Chinese this is a "plus". The person is more or less responsible for his own well being, is
not a burden on the State for handouts, and could be (potentially) taxable etc. The object
being that ALL Chinese then become positive factors in the society. They are also more
motivated because they have a "place" in society. The recent case of Jack Ma and an IPO is
not the opposite, but he was trying to get ahead by means that would have led to more
unemployment - on the back of the Chinese Government. He was not adding to the cumulative
good of the country. Only his own riches. (The Chinese do have billionaires and riches - but
are constrained by Corporate credit ratings as explained on a previous - very interesting -
thread. Thanks to: psychohistorian | Jan 5 2021 2:08 utc | 162. The MoA Week In Review - OT
2021-001)
The US. The attitude is to beat out the chaff leaving only the "kernel ". To "
Winnow " the population leaving only the top. ie the poor are sidelined, they become a
problem for the Government (needing support, food etc.). A net negative value to US society.
(The Rich also get handouts from the Fed. as free money has become an habitude, but that is
an another way of winnowing out the chaff - as others do NOT get the trillion dollar
handouts) The poor have no "place" in a society that has rejected them and so are less
motivated. They must fend for themselves and are expected to obey. If they do not there are
always the police to enforce obedience.
"Cumulative = win-win", and "Winnowing = Only the top win".
Your "Winnowing" differs little from Zero-sum. The big problem is the Outlaw US Empire's
initial storyline is greatly at odds with Zero-sum. As I've written many times at MoA, The
Constitution's Preamble that's taught to all citizens says the government's purpose is to
"form a more perfect Union...," and what's happening now--for several decades in reality--is
the exact opposite. US politicians and business magnates from the Guilded Age knew very well
that the way to keep the peace was for everyone to perceive they had a stake in the system.
Neoliberalism's Zero-sum throws that rationale under the bus, which in turn has generated the
current domestic turmoil. The one thing Trump failed to do was to promise to all Americans
they'd have a stake in the system, which is essentially what Hitler and Mussolini told their
masses. Trump intoned and shouted MAGA, but did nothing to show that he was serious about
doing so. That's why he failed. And that's why the D leg of the Duopoly will also break. It's
that break we must act upon when it occurs.
I think the oligarchic death cult that manages USAi affairs is not the slightest bit
interested in "universal democratization": just scan the homeland to see that. The death cult
is only interested in wealth accumulating their way. Every year they go into a demented
trance screaming about the evil of taxes. Whenever a crisis emerges or a bill goes to the
House they scramble to append as many 'tax relief measures' as they can.
The USAi oligarchy and their death cult regulate as many US political candidates as
possible to destroy any chance of a government introducing a universal education or universal
health system that will need taxes to supply it. Look at what just happened with the
#forcethevote attempt to get medicare for all to commence in the USAi. It was the best
opportunity in a century to implement it and the only possible advocates totally ignored the
initiative.
They became the FraudSquad instead: they used the M4All advocacy to get elected and then
ignored their electorate.
Something like %70+ of the people approve of this and the best advocates bowed to the
oligarchy death cult and have been since the day they were elected.
So what might the oligarchs think of Chinese people with their resounding support for the
Communist Party of China? They will hate them with every bone in their body, they will be
furious that this country resists and denies them a chance to plunder it - yet again. The
oligarchic death cult will be extremely angry that a single country presents an excellent and
achievable system of government and financial management and community betterment to all the
other nations on earth.
The oligarchy death cult will do anything to destroy them. And they have the perfect
compliant tool in the Biden Harris Presidency.
b - insightful perspectives.
But while I'd agree that China's threat to US ruling ideologies features foreign relations as
the leading edge of conflict, the danger of a good alternative may be even greater as it
concerns domestic policies.
If a reckoning comes for US ruling elites, the prosecution may begin with the offshoring
of US jobs, broad-based prosperity, manufacturing and strategic infrastructure development.
Indeed Trump's greatest threat might have been drawing a dotted line if not a solid one to
the culprits.
Exhibit B becomes the Chinese model's successes in poverty eradication, general rises in
broad-based prosperity, stunning growth in STEM capacities and jobs with futures and now,
obviously, competence in public-health crisis management.
The next phase may be litigating the hollowing out of the MIC itself through the
corruption of the national defense by a revolving door of staff officers, lobbyists, tankies,
bureaucrats and legislators for-profit, for-show, for-corruption.
An additional phase, should the human race survive it, may be tribunals -- such as those
of the Reign of Terror, in the event of revolution, or, in the event of war, along the lines
of war-crimes tribunals under Chinese / Russian direction, once a suitable city in the
smoldering ruins of the continental US equivalent to Nuremberg in German can be found.
It's not so much the American people but the people of the "blob" themselves who increasingly
question American exceptionalism. That's why they become ever more crazy and aggressive. They
compensate their (unconscious) self-doubts with fanatism.
The empire may be considering arming and provoking its vassals near China into nuclear war,
but America would never consider anything so terrible as trying to cripple China with
biological weapons! That would be just crazy!
There are several levels of analysis here that are being muddled by theoretical ignorance.
The liberal theory says that political democracy and free markets create economic growth,
responsible government, mutual gains from trade, economic interdependence, and a zone of
peace, reinforced and cemented by multilateral institutions. The liberal zone of peace is
threatened, though, by authoritarian regimes with state-run economies, and the former need to
contain and overthrow the latter.
Realist theory starts with the state and the state-system, which is anarchic and thus
produces conflicts over the balance of power. Defensive realists say that a prudent grand
strategy would focus solely on territorial integrity and sovereignty, because any aggressive
actions only produce balancing. Offensive realists say that hegemony is the only source of
security and that great powers should go to war and wage the arms race to achieve it.
Marxists say that none of these dynamics are distant from the class relationships and
competitive dynamics of capitalism and so both liberal and realist arguments turn out to be a
crude apologia for imperialism -- for the class-based strategies of dominant states.
With this in mind, we can turn the US' China problem. As the article says, China poses no
threat to the US state, nation and territory, so the defensive realist argument for
containing China is groundless. Likewise, China's economic growth and stability in the
absence of liberal democracy also undermines liberal arguments about the conditions of war
and peace in the world. Finally, the balancing of China and Russia against US primacy
strategies has undermined offensive realist fantasies of hegemony.
So, what is actually driving US aggression vis-a-vis China?
The only answer is that the long-term material interests of the American capitalist class
are threatened by the emergence of a superior competitor, namely, China.
This is true in several respects, most of which I can't cover here.
But, China is building dense global relationships, and positioning itself as a central
node of economic growth, technological prowess, social stability, manufacturing power,
consumer demand, green innovation, and multilateral reliability.
The US is in deep trouble as a result. As the world becomes more China-centric, the major
economic powers will stop funding US trade and government deficits. This will reduce the
value of the dollar and diminish the global roles of the Treasury Dept and Federal Reserve,
and of Wall Street. The US will fail to meet its debt obligations and the standard of living
will plummet as debt-financed consumption winds down. The USG will face fiscal dilemmas, all
of which pose serious problems: cut social programs and risk riots; cut the military and risk
the empire; raise taxes and risk capital flight and economic stagnation. Given the dynamics
of American domestic politics, these dilemmas will not be solved.
These are the underlying material fears of the US ruling class and they EXPLAIN the real
drive to containment and war with China.
In short, Marxism is a better science of world politics than are liberalism and
realism.
Nuclear Japan? Maybe. Nuclear South Korea? Maybe. It could be argued that both already are by
virtue of the U.S. occupation of both.
Nuclear Taiwan? I don't see that happening, and any attempt to do so would offer China the
perfect excuse to formally reabsorb that Chinese island.
American paranoia over China (and Russia) seeking to usurp the US and take over as world
hegemon is pure paranoia and projection. It's the western model of the world that considers
it normal and desirable to have one country or ideology ruling the entire globe.
China has no history of using its power to force the world to accept it as sole ruler. The
reason the US and the west are so paranoid about China et al is because they give
themselves the "divine" right to force their ideology onto others, first with Christianity, a
monotheistic religion that has converting the heathens, savages and infidels to its screed at
the center of its philosophy, and then with liberalism + capitalism (now neoliberal rentier
capitalism) and they, falsely, assume every country and ideology is like that.
American and western European foreign policy is a study in Psychological Projection 101.
When imperialists like Porcine Pompeo and Lurch Kerry accuse other states of aggressive
behavior, violating sovereignty and so forth, they are actually talking about their own
country's actions.
In the US, now that corporations are people, and since the corporations and tools of finance
are privately owned, the concept of democracy is a lie or myth if that offends you.
That is why I keep dragging the ideology discussion to the reality of public/private
finance.
It comes down to risk management decisions about the allocation of scarce resources. In
the West now those risk management decisions have a ROI skew which includes a profit
component that does not exist in China risk management decisions.
We are in a civilization war because the West will not show well in a social system merit
comparison...and the elite know this....hence the ongoing shit show to control the
narrative.
First off all....there is a difference between WAR and PIRACY
I did not see any bomb landing on US ground or soldier.
Second....free trade agreement is responsible for China economic succes.
Finally...bring back the production on US GROUND...that will kill China
Prof K@18 has a very optimistic scenario where China becomes the safe haven for capital and
then other countries stop using the dollar as the world currency and t-bills are passed over
in favor of the RMB and investors will prefer investing in Shanghai stock market because
their money will be more liquid thereand something something will happen so that they (whoc?)
won't finance US trade deficits. I don't understand this last, as it is entirely unclear in
what sense US trade deficits are being financed. In fact, actual trade deficits aren't being
financed. But then the balance of payments isn't just trade in goods, but financial services
and US stock markets and yes, government treasuries are also part of that.
It is entirely unclear to me how socialist China, where as of now the ren min bi is not
freely convertible, where the government has enormous influence on import and export of
capital and capitalists are not only not guaranteed bailing out by the Reserve Bank but
regulations are much more onerous than in the US especially with enforcement by prison
sentences even for the wealthy...it is unclear to me how this China can replace the US as
safe haven, at least while remaining some sort of socialist country at all, even in a
NEP-is-the-road-to-socialism kind of way. Further, the US role as the safe haven was not just
historically due to it's relative victory (as compared to its capitalist rivals,) in WWI and
WWII, but due to its military power. The US pursues a policy of rule or ruin, and ruins
selected easy targets on a regular basis (since Bush the senior at the latest,) just to keep
the point vivid in everyone's minds. The dollar is not founded on US economic
production/productivity but on blood. It is impossible to imagine today's China becoming a
capitalist policeman guarding the gates of the bazaar and collecting backsheesh, so to speak.
The Chinese capitalists would have to really take over and seriously re-organize Chinese
society to do this.
This all sounds pie-in-the-sky at best, I think. Except that's prettifying the ideal, I
think. I don't believe a reformed capitalist world system is even possible. Capitalists
ultimately depend on their states in their rivalries. There inevitably comes a point when the
states must resolve conflicts with wars. The pursuit of a multipolar world is a pursuit of a
world safe for war, not a pursuit of peace.
The link is to an article by Doug Bandow, titled "America's Asian Allies Need Their Own
Nukes". Bandow recommends "friendly nuclear proliferation".
This is how far the US has decayed: that a respected journal like Foreign Policy should
publish such insanity.
And yes, it's totally insane. The US is not the only country capable of proliferation. The
day after Taiwan gets nuclear weapons, so will Mexico and Hezbollah. The day after
that , so will many other countries. It's impossible to foresee all the consequences
of irresponsible proliferation, but one outcome is the most likely: doomsday for
humanity.
-// Another veteran diplomat, Victoria Nuland, will be nominated [by Biden] for the role of
under secretary of State for political affairs, one of the people said. //-
Lets look at what
China plans to do over the next 5 years . The article provides a very broad explanation
then links to some specifics at the bottom, the item about the Yangtze River Economic Belt
being most important. I found this bit of reporting highly important:
"More specifically, these days the government uses the five-year plans to reinforce and
complement the market dynamic by providing regulation and guidance. That includes providing
the legal and social framework, such as issuing monetary and fiscal policies, providing
public goods and services, such as building high-speed rails, and correcting for market
failures like pollution."
There's a vast difference in focus between China and the West--China's sharply focused on
its development in ways the West isn't whatsoever, and it makes certain its citizenry knows
that and everyone's working as a team--every job has its own value and is important. The best
explanation I have is that China is doing while the West is watching and not doing;
therefore, China continues to grow ahead of those standing watching with their jaws
agape.
China outnumbers the Outlaw US Empire by more than one billion people. That's a huge team
working together to advance their nation and themselves. Within the Empire, at least 30% of
the labor force is idle and not even counted for unemployment purposes since they aren't
actively looking for non-existent jobs while about 24% of the active labor force is
unemployed. That's 54% of your human capital that's not being used at all to better
themselves and their nation. Honestly, which one has the better outlook?
The enemies of the USA reside within it. Yeah, I've said that before and the evidence
continues to prove I'm correct.
All of this makes me think about the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century
according to Vladimir Putin: The fall of the Soviet Union. Not because of the shrink of the
Russian Empire, but for the loss of an equal to the USA in the international stage. That
would make the remaining superpower to have some sort of delusional sense of destiny, as seen
in Fukuyama's 'End of History'.
How the situation evolves in a timeframe of 5-10 years in the future is hard to evaluate
given the many factors that will influence the outcome but IMO, the only thing that can be
taken for granted is the further the USA gets weaker, the more dangerous it becomes for the
future of Humanity.
My first post at MoA, keep on with the good work :)
I would add that the threat China poses isn't just ideological - it is operational.
The US derives enormous benefit from the US dollar as reserve currency; from the USD as
alternative savings vehicle of choice by foreigners against their own currency; by all manner
of favorable international institutions like the World Bank and IMF.
Secondly, China isn't some bare assed Middle Eastern terrorists or Central Asian mountain
tribes. It has more people, it will or already has a larger economy and it is proceeding
apace with technology development.
This is very different than Russia or even the Soviet Union, for example.
The West was always far bigger, wealthier and productive than the Soviet Union - this enabled
all sorts of strategies like outspending on defense, buying job lots of puppet politicians in
vassal states, etc.
This won't work with a China that is a bigger supplier as well as all of the other
size-related advantages already noted.
Can the American oligarchs stand being 2nd fiddle in the medium term? Certainly in the long
term? Would their domestic and foreign empires hold up?
Sputnik publishes its own analysis , which relies rather heavily on Beijing-based
American commentator Thomas Pauken who has his own credibility issues as readers will
discover at the article's conclusion.
"democratization and liberalization is a necessary precursor for peace and economic
growth"
Well, anyone with any notion of history before 1800 knows this is absolute bullshit and those
aren't linked at all.
The affairs of humans are paltry compared to the vast changes that are taking place in
nature: the Sixth Mass Extinction resulting from our destruction of habitat and the stability
of the climate system. As methane has begun erupting from the enormous stores in the Arctic,
accelerating the forcing and ice melt, we continue on our merry way oblivious to the fate
that awaits us in the near future. Faster than expected, abrupt climate disruption is
nature's revolution to clear the earth of the invasive species -- humans.
The United States should think creatively about new approaches to old problems. One way to
do so is to stop hectoring partners and preventing them from doing what they want to do.
Unless, of course, they want to become friends with China -- this should be prevented at
all costs!
amerika's corrupt and undemocratic system of government will bring itself undone long before
it could succeed in any attempt to disrupt China's system.
The stupid two party both the same just tell different lies farce is tearing the population
apart, that's not going to get better it will get much much worse. In fact I suspect the
'prez-elect' is desperately hoping that the rethugs win both senate seats in Georgia as that
provides him with a way to avoid following up on his vague minutely left of center campaign
promises.
He may be outta luck cos at
this stage with about 25% counted the Dems have a lead in both races. Still that's mostly
urban electorates and as I understand 'urban' has become amerikan code for unwhite, so if the
dems are trying to fluff this contest it will be by Dems failing to turn out the rural
african american vote that saves creepy joe from embarrassment. We shall see cos the state
dems may not agree to that.
Anyway the lack of a shared dialog between amerikans is getting worse as we see even here
at moa where some of these fools come over all hysterical about quite minor issues. You get
that when it is barely possible to pull a cigarette paper between dem & rethug policies
on the big stuff, so all that is left are the same deliberately selected emotive issues such
as abortion & capital punishment that both parties have been encouraging the citizens to
obsess over for the last 60 years.
Those fools will go into a civil war over the emotive, totally irrelevant to living in a
functioning society, issues which have been beaten up & propagandised for so long, and
that will be the end of the threat to the rest of the world amerika poses.
I don't believe a reformed capitalist world system is even possible. Capitalists ultimately
depend on their states in their rivalries. There inevitably comes a point when the states
must resolve conflicts with wars. The pursuit of a multipolar world is a pursuit of a world
safe for war, not a pursuit of peace.
Ergo, we must pursue a socialist multipolar world.
An USA wich is not leader of the world is not possible. This is the central myth. Growing
toward that or beeing it. But without that there is no imaginable USA. I come for myself to
the conclusion, a multipolar world will cause breakup. As unit of one country it is just not
agreement capable.
In 1941, during WWII, Harry Truman wanted a brutal and prolonged conflict in order to inflict
as much death and destruction in Europe as possible, declaring:
"If we see Germany winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to
help Germany, and in that way let them kill as many as possible."
The US - or at least its ruling elite as expressed by one of its key leaders and
subsequent president - wanted the brutal war to continue for as long as possible, so that as
many Russians and Germans as possible would be killed, (with other Europeans, including Jews,
as inevitable collateral casualties in that process,) so that the US could then step in at
the very end to dominate war-destroyed Europe.
Following the same playbook, the US warmongering/plundering elite would love it if they
could pit Russia vs. China, Europe vs Russia, India vs. China, Japan vs. China, etc. So long
as Eurasia is divided instead of cooperating with itself, the US remains the hegemon. Even
better if a destructive war breaks out over there, that the US would sustain from over here,
and step in as the noble saviours at the last minute to plunder the spoils.
-
The threat of the example that China happens to provide is not just about preserving
America's ruling ideology ("universal democratization", "democracy", "freedom", etc.,) but
also about preserving US-led geopolitical hegemony and US-led plutocracy.
The US-spouted ideology is a tool for its hegemony that in turn is a tool for its
plutocracy to continue to enrich itself through plunder.
Any example of a country that serves its people, let alone one that does so without
foreign wars and regime change subversion, cannot be allowed by a plutocracy that sustains
itself through wars, subversion, parasitism, and plunder.
That means, unfortunately, we in the West will continue to be force-fed a barrage of
propaganda from our establishment media so that people can't perceive that example, (and are
even made to reject it as evil,) lest they start questioning the corrupt, plutocratic system
they live in.
Been thinking about what u said, rr 39..
Canada waits with baited breath... the burned out remains of empire's creche, negotiating for
commerlcial union with their long traditional north-south continental neighbors. Perhaps the
midwest could share in monopolizing grains ...
Or the sea coasts with the fisheries..... otherwise, i don't see it.
I think we are going to collapse to local economy, and maybe build bacl to anational economy,
after some time. I don't know when.
Your Brainwashing is complete, you have swallowed the green pill and happily pay your
carbon taxes and live in the fear artificially inserted into your sub/conscious having
trusted proven liars and and having failed to verify things for yourself or trust your own
senses. All thinking is filtered through your gree-coloured glasses.
You have swallowed wholly the manufactured-for-the-masses groupthink propaganda and
espouse it from the core of your very soul, shout it from the mountaintops. Be the
chickenlittle that you are and just come out and say, it will be cathartic and will feel good
- THE SKY IS FALLING!
You and your ilk are fools, and are dangerously fascistic, climate fatalist totalitarians
and you will not be satisfied until any and all opposing views/data/freedom of thought are
outlawed.
many comments mention "oligarchs" - and their power, nationally and internationally. I see a
serious danger of the "Oligarchic Internationale" (a wordplay on the marxist 19th. century
"Workers Internationale" with their slogan "Workers of the world, Unite! I say that for the
very few MoA readers who are too young or not educated in history or economy, apology to the
most MoA readers). The Oligarchs of the world (be it USA, China, Russia, Israel, and from
wherever they may creep) are de facto already in an "Internationale" type organization - they
say silently "Oligarchs of the World - Unite!" and they don't want a big war , which would
upset the status quo. They will try to keep it for themselves and their offspring with very
forceful means - Internationally enforced. Smaller proxi-wars may happen, but no WW 3, in my
laymen's opinion.
I've been pondering lately this one question: what is the point of even having a country
if the advantages to the ordinary citizen of having a country are no longer maintained?
In the US, if we can't get the federal government to act on behalf of the people, maybe
the only answer is to discard that government. In the USA, this can be done, lawfully and
peacefully (although with high drama, for sure) by the States acting in agreement to dissolve
the Union.
The United States acts under a certain hindrance by having two levels of government, but
this is also a great treasure as well. The top layer of government can go away, and the
people will still have a sovereignty-based government to live under, and to be represented
by, and to engage with.
So here's a proposal from each State to the Federal establishment: you discorporate, we
keep all our monies, and all federal properties within our borders convey to us. You fuck
off: we'll get by without you somehow; don't worry about us - and adios .
~~
And rico rose, your point about the multi polar world is very important I think. When you
say "a multipolar world will cause breakup" , I suggest that a multipolar world will
better allow breakup. It's kind of the same thing, the same result from two different
ends: from one end, the Demonstration Effect from the rest of the world including China
showing to the US populace that there is a much better way to live, and from the US end, the
general dissatisfaction growing among that populace as the federal government continues to be
useless.
It could take a short decade at most, I reckon, for the rest of the world to be so
impressive that US media can't hide it from the people any longer, and for US oligarchy to be
so lawless and ravaging that the people simply can't take it anymore.
In a softer world that follows the example of Asia, and especially given the natural
borders of North America anyway, there is no great threat from armed invasion to any of the
States, even if each one were to stand alone. Many states would form new unions, but even so,
the citizenry in place in each state possesses the firepower to resist any invasion, I
suggest.
So if there's no defense to be provided for, all that's left is the welfare of the
citizens to be provided for. And 2020 has shown dramatically that, while the federal
government has abandoned that sense of provisioning, the States and their people still care
passionately about this very thing.
~~
Apparently the calls for "secession" are arising again in the US, or so I've heard. It's a
crude concept at the moment, and there is no right of secession. But there is every right to
amend the Constitution, by a 3/4 majority of the States, and to dissolve the present Union,
in order to create a "more perfect" arrangement.
China has many billionaires, but I don't think they have the degree of power over the
Chinese government and society implied by the term "oligarch". Jack Ma may be the richest man
in China, but that hasn't stopped the Chinese government from quite effectively cutting him
down to size.
The pandemic is the final nail into the coffin of the Western Empire. Asia and South Pacific
nations functioned as they should and their public health systems are controlling the virus
but must enforce quarantines on the infected world to continue their ascension.
It is now a multi-polar world. The exploitative capitalism of the West intentionally
destroyed democracy and good governance to increase profits. Reality has bitten back. The
remains of the former public health system are corrupt and incompetent as exemplified by Dr.
Anthony Fauci. The virus basically spread unhindered in the USA and UK. The difficulty is
that in times of stress human being revert to tribal beliefs. The reality of the change in
power dynamics will be denied by Western decision makers. The truth is that if the West
cannot control a virus, it will never address the existential crises; climate change, rising
inequality and perpetual war.
Mankind will only survive if it learns how to live on a finite planet in peace.
No worry, Nature will take care of itself after we humans have disposed of ourselves. I
deplore our general destruction of the environment we live in and the misuse/abuse of
resources, but humans are not as strong as we think we are. We may cause considerable damage
to the mega fauna and flora, and severely damage ecosystems, but our current war against the
planet is one we cannot win and should not even be trying to (capitalism and its God Mammon,
again). Life will go on with or without us. Evolution is a fact of life, whether our
religions, corporate board rooms, genetics manipulation corps or biological weapons
departments understand that or not.
Faster than expected, abrupt climate disruption is nature's revolution to clear the earth
of the invasive species -- humans.
We're not an invasive species, but I broadly agree. The best thing to happen to the
beautiful planet in the last million years would be the extinction of the smart pest, Homo S.
Too bad I won't be around to enjoy a people free Earth.
I usually read MoA in the morning, yet today it late pm. Your article reminded me of an
earlier article read this morning re USA and China Wages comparison. Here is the article pay
particular attention to the graph. Pretty much sums it up in that China have an expansionist
economy while the USA has (with exception to the Financial rubbish posing as assets) a
contraction economy. Globalisation and Austerity from Reagan_nomics/Thatcher_nomics from the
"70's have lead the west into the debt ridden marsh we are in now. Yet the lesson of an
expansionist economy (which all western economies have done in the past) escapes the thinking
of those who supposedly matter. Personally I think the world needs a lot more "Musk's
(creating massive employment in making new tech cars and rockets plus solar) and a lot less
Bezios's and Jack Maa's (Alibaba china) (Using others products and screwing them on margins
to increase his wealth) https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2021/01/05/michael-pascoe-wages-graph-globalisation/
I agreee that the US is almost easier to define. Zero-sum or winnowing, both are reductive
traits. ie the population gets sidelined.
However, I also think that part of "our" problem is that the comments and viewpoint, are
generally all "western-centric" and not enough attention is paid to the fundamental
differences in attitudes. Chinese are being "gifted" with US preoccupations to show
that they are basically the same as those of the US itself. ie. The US is right-superior in
its attitudes and so others STILL try to copy-steal-follow it. Something that is becoming
visibly not true. Which is why my comment also mentioned the "cumulative" Chinese attitude.
It being probably more important to understand why China is on the ascendant.
Note that "Democracy", "communism" or whatever, all have the same stated object of
population input and therefore good for the masses. It is when their lofty ideals are no
longer seen to be true, (and are not true in practice?) that the edifice cracks. (Ie, part of
the USSR collapse corresponds with the rise of the Nomenklatura of only 750'000 people with
the right to vote etc. It worked as long as it worked, but fell through when the mass
realised they were NOT getting their part somewhere)
Sorry, Very short reply, as I have problems with internet to resolve, with a bit of luck
and perseverance I may be able to continue later today.
Exactly right. The second largest problem in the world just now is the Government of the
US. Breaking up the US would effectively get rid of the problem. Then we could deal with
climate change more effectively.
The current hatred and division between red and blue, the lack of effective health
services, the deterioration of infrastructure, the future demise of dollar power and thus
lack of funding for the military all give me cause to hope that break up will happen. Lets
all do our best to make it so.
@Canadian Cents #42
It shouldn't surprise you; Truman was closely associated with the Pendergast political
machine (Kansas City mob).
His Attorney General was closely involved in serious corruption in the IRS and DOJ-Tax
division.
He dropped the bomb and was a nasty person in general.
Meanwhile, Assange is denied bail. Something tells me that, even if not extradite,
they plan to hold him in prison indefinitely - if not American, British would do just as
well.
Wow! When did MoA give up all rationality? The US has long since dug its own grave and long
since guaranteed its unviability as a superpower. Everything from here is downward, as long
as it clings to the mad idea of supremacy. And the longer it continues to deny reality the
bigger and more brutal the bang when it finally collapses - or it disappears in its own
nuclear conflagration.
The US produces virtually nothing, except over-priced and disfunctional weapons.
Everything else that it has is stolen. It does not have the capability to reverse that trend
- that horse has long since bolted and disappeared over the horizon. Unlike the US, countries
like China and Russia create genuine wealth through their own productive efforts, and they
have the military and economic means to ensure that the US cannot strangle them. The economic
advantages of China and Russia will only increase compared to the US, and everything the US
is doing to sabotage their efforts only makes them stronger and the US weaker.
Nuclear weapons to Taiwan??? Only SuperMorons could entertain the notion for more than 2
seconds (and there are plenty such supermorons at the Foreign Policy Institute, that's part
of what got the US to this status in the first place). If the US gives nuclear weapons to
Taiwan they will be giving nuclear weapons directly to China. China would know about it
before it happens, and long before they could be operational Taiwan would cease to be Taiwan
and would be a province of Mainland China. Not to see that China has that capability - and
the resolution to carry it out - is sheer idiotic blindness.
Even if Taiwan could install such nuclear weapons before China takes over, where would
they hide them? The stupidity of thinking a tiny one-point nation on China's borders can
seriously threaten the entirety of nuclear-armed China - in alliance with Russia - defies
fantasy. Doing so requires not "superior weapons" (which the US does not have anyway, that
prize belongs to China's ally Russia) but superior idiocy and superior self-deception.
The US is on a bullet train to self-destruction. Stopping that train is impossible without
making changes in the past that were not made - unless it gives up 100% of its ambitions to
supremacy and becomes a minor self-sufficient village minding its own business. That is its
only chance.
Instead of waffling about and navel-gazing over such tiresome fantasies of the US
exceptionalists, MoA would do much better to concentrate on the serious issues that confront
the world today - like confronting the damage wreaked on society worldwide by the
hyper-unbalanced madness of covid policies; the direction of political changes in Europe; the
ever continuing instability in the Middle East; signs of latent possible resurgence of
society in Latin America (cf Bolivia etc); containment of the US madness; etc.
So here's a proposal from each State to the Federal establishment: you discorporate, we
keep all our monies, and all federal properties within our borders convey to us. You fuck
off: we'll get by without you somehow; don't worry about us - and adios.
Posted by: Grieved | Jan 6 2021 4:42 utc | 47
Sounds good to me! One specific form of the "village" alternative I mentioned above, in
another name.
I have wondered how we can go to war with actual bombing and stuff like that with China
because many many items that we use every day are purchased from factories in China, having
been manufactured there by, it seems to me, "American" (now, of course, multinational)
companies. Think apple. Or Ralph Loren. Or any item at the Dollar Store. Have you looked at
the labels on your purchases? In addition, we buy all kinds of medicinal products from China.
And socks. The US and China are intertwined in many ways.
I thought the MAGA theme of Pres. Trump was to lessen the immense difference in trade
amounts - we buy tons of stuff from China but they do not buy that much from us - by imposing
tariffs on good imported from China and demanding that "American" companies agree to
manufacture in the US again. I thought, well, fat chance.
It is a problem. I am not a "better red than dead or dead than red" or whatever it is, but
I cannot see the point of blowing up the world because we can't be the king of it.
Pres. Trump never struck me as a war monger although he has been surrounded by
them.
The big 'domino' has fallen: Red America; and Brexit is a second. Does anyone believe
that this American epiphany; this exploding of American delusions, will leave Europe
untouched? Or, that other states will not observe it too, and understand from it that the
past need to submit their own cultures to European moral scrutiny is over?
We claim our enemies fear us for the same reason that we actually fear China.
Experts say, Russia 'invaded' Ukraine because Putin was terrified about having an example of
a free and prosperous country on their border and Russians would ask themselves, why can't we
have that?'
Talk about projection.
Even so, why can't we coexist?
Most Americans don't travel, Neocons can do what they do best, just lie about other countries
and say that China is a starving mess and we are #1. Who in the U.S. would know, who in the
MSM would bother to find out otherwise. No set of facts would convince us otherwise.
China could voluntarily decide to go to their own graduate schools and stop going to the
U.S. because it's a waste of time and money.
Neocons: 'we banned Communist Chinese students protect our valuable IP'
China could surpass our economy to the point where hovercraft is commonplace.
Neocons: 'Communist China is destroying their environment, our kerosene scooters and trucks
are the best thing in the world'
The average fool in the U.S. would never know how backward we had become (or maybe are, I
don't travel either)
I guess that is too passive, Neocons have to justify their paycheck.
The Degradation of American Democracy -- And the Court
Foreword by Michael J. Klarman
[...] Freedom House, which researches and advocates for democracy around the world,
lowered the United States on the organization's scale of zero to 100 measuring political
rights and civil liberties from ninety-four in 2010 to eighty-six in 2017. The decline in the
United States' rating exceeded that of other Western democracies.
...
More than thirty years ago, political scientist Francis Fukuyama, reflecting on a wave of
democratization that had swept the world beginning in the 1970s, concluded that liberal
democracy had become inevitable -- the logical endpoint in the evolutionary trajectory of the
modern state. However, over roughly the last fifteen years, Freedom House has recorded
erosion in levels of freedom in once-strong democracies such as Hungary, India, the
Philippines, Poland, and Turkey. Governments in these countries have shut down independent
media, assailed and incarcerated independent journalists, packed courts and bureaucracies
with their supporters, dismantled independent institutions of civil society, and vilified
racial and religious minorities to distract attention from problems they cannot solve.
Many Americans cannot imagine the erosion of their own democracy. The United States has
the longest-standing constitution in the world, a strong middle class, high levels of wealth
and education, and deeply entrenched democratic institutions and mores. Yet the United States
is not immune from world trends of declining democratization. In addition to the developments
already noted, research shows that younger Americans are much less committed to democracy
than their elders are. Among Americans born in the 1980s, only twenty-nine percent believe
that living in a democracy is "essential," as compared with seventy-one percent of those born
in the 1930s.
This Foreword examines the recent degradation of American democracy, seeks explanations
for it, and canvasses the Supreme Court's contribution to it.
In Chinese the call it the "Celestial Ascension" [Doctrine] or something like that. And
yes, it requires socialism in order to make sense (the demonstration as to why the doctrine
is socialist is too long to put it here, but it is).
Having studied Chinese language and history in Europe and China for years since 1972 and
practiced as a teacher, interpreter and guide, I have never come accross any Mainland or
Táiwan Chinese text or person who have used the expression "Celestial Ascention" in
the Chinese language to describe what's been goin on the last fourty years. WHere have You
picked up this belief, Herr Jan?
@ Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 | Jan 6 2021 16:11 utc | 66
Heard it from a Brazilian scholar who once told me, a long time ago (don't even remember
the exact term). Never heard it ever since.
But my point is: China's geopolitical doctrine is not secret/cryptic. You only have to
know where to find it (and, preferably, know how to read Chinese). China never hid the fact
it is socialist (Market Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is the official name of the
system) and never hid the fact that it has a geopolitical doctrine that is in accordance with
its system (i.e. also a socialist geopolitical doctrine).
Dear Jan ;
As for the expression "Celestial ascention" (vk | Jan 5 2021 20:00 utc | 7), this mai be av
mistranslation of various chinese expressions for "natural rise" ('tiānrán
shēngqilai' or 'qiántiān-dìngde shēngzhǎng' both meaning
"coming naturally". Many other possibilities, byt the semi.religious or semi-imperial
associatons of "celestial" are definitely never heard in CHina nowadays. s
@Tolled As #68
You should be aware that black has many views which are literally unique.
It is also clear that few, if any, of them are based on first hand knowledge or
experience.
"Socialism with market characteristics" is something Deng brought in - it certainly was not
CCP ideology before that.
Having visited China many times as a fluent speaker starting in the early '80s, the
difference between the present day ideology and the past is stark.
But not to someone who has never been there and doesn't have good discernment in secondary
sources to boot.
@ Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 | Jan 6 2021 16:23 utc | 68
Maybe the Brazilian scholar was too creative.
Either way, the consecrated term in English is a surprisingly good translation ("China's
Peaceful Development/Rise/Development Doctrine"), which is also colloquially called
"win-win". But the doctrine is actually much more complex than that term suggests.
One should google the background of that Richard Hanania person.
Supposedly he is currently a postdoc fellow at Columbia University, and alredy serves as
President of some 4 letter institute/stink tank tere that was just set up in 2020[!!].
Before that he got a PhD (political sci) from UCLA (2017-2019?);
before that he got a JD from U. Chicago.
Quite the pedigree. Three top private or out-of-state high tuition schools in expensive
cost of living places. Likely his education was *state-sponsored*.
But which State? CIA? Mossad? Who's paying his bills?
@47 grieved yes, I like federalism as the basic concept because it works in booth directions
if needed. Towards unity but keeping the option of separation. Why not having California as
member of the Paris declaration alone. It opens the door for development for problems to
early to call. The negotiation process staying open for undecided parts. That is what
multipolar means in the core and I guess the only hope for the USA as a nation.
Germany is similar structured. The central government is only allowed to work from own power
in defence and foreign relations. For almost everything else it have to use the organs of 15
strong states. Also the source of statehood is coming from them. It is a bit covered right
now by EU and covid but there are deep contradiction inside of Germany. If EU, also because
of German influence a federation, fails maybe not the old country come up again. I see big
chance of totally different structures.
Global
Times article , "US politics in reality 'more interesting than House of Cards
,' entertains Chinese amid pandemic," is absolutely fascinating and revealing--essentially,
Chinese are roaring with laughter at the Emperor without clothing. This long excerpt helps
explain:
"'Nobody knows more about trending on Weibo better than me,' an internet user mocked Trump
via a Weibo comment, adding that 'Weibo would face huge losses after Trump steps down' since
the entertainment will largely subside .
"Chinese experts said Americans or other Westerners might not understand why Chinese
people are just curious about but don't admire US democracy, but instead treat it as a
variety show which is much more interesting than House of Cards . In fact, Chinese
people are pretty familiar with the US election and most of them can objectively observe and
compare it with the Chinese national conditions.
" House of Cards is the most famous US TV series viewed in China that has helped
many Chinese people learn about how US politicians struggle and vie for power. Now Chinese
people might learn that the scriptwriters of this TV series have actually underestimated how
much drama really occurs in US politics.
"Some experts of US studies said that in House of Cards , Chinese audiences have
learned that US politicians have a very vague bottom line. As long as they can make gains,
they will betray anyone. In reality, Trump has just proven that there is no bottom line at
all, as he empowers his family members in the White House as much as he wants, and uses
presidential authority to pardon many people with close connections to him.
" House of Cards tells the audience that mainstream media outlets are influential
and can impact politics, but in reality, Trump shows that he can use social media networks to
undermine the influence of mainstream media and the conservative new media can even
consolidate Trump's base by selling anti-intellectual information or conspiracy
theories."
"Some experts of US studies said that in House of Cards , Chinese audiences have
learned that US politicians have a very vague bottom line. As long as they can make gains,
they will betray anyone. In reality, Trump has just proven that there is no bottom line at
all, as he empowers his family members in the White House as much as he wants, and uses
presidential authority to pardon many people with close connections to him.
" House of Cards tells the audience that mainstream media outlets are influential
and can impact politics, but in reality, Trump shows that he can use social media networks to
undermine the influence of mainstream media and the conservative new media can even
consolidate Trump's base by selling anti-intellectual information or conspiracy theories."
[My Emphasis]
So the longstanding rule that Truth is Stranger than Fiction is again being proven true in
China. Most importantly, the chaos within the Outlaw US Empire is serving as education for
Chinese and other people globally showing quite graphically the absolute dysfunction of its
political system.
I haven't watched House of Cards or Game of Thrones , but I did just
recently watch a considerable portion of The Hunger Games . Combine reality with their
stories and we'll need to adjust our evaluation of Hollywood propaganda. Add the persecution
of Julian Assange for revealing capital crimes--something he'd be rewarded for doing in
China--into this mix and there's no way the Neoliberal West is ever going to win Chinese
hearts and minds; rather, the opposite's occurring at a rapid pace.
c1ue @56, thanks, knew that Truman unnecessarily dropped the atomic bomb on civilians twice,
but didn't know those other details about him. The point is, given the foreignpolicy.com
writer that suggests "creatively" encouraging seeding "friendly proliferation" of nuclear
arms to Taiwan, South Korea, Japan with the expecation that that would induce China to "react
badly to," it seems that the same sociopathic/psychopathic tendencies as Truman expressed are
still very much present in the US ruling foreign policy elite.
Along with the WWII example, the US induced and sustained a brutal war in Afghanistan in
1979 for its own hegemonic/plutocratic interests:
In 1979, the US began to covertly foster Wahhabi extremism in Afghanistan (another case of
"friendly proliferation") to, in the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski, "induce" a brutal war in
order to inflict on "the USSR its Vietnam war," at the casual expense of thoroughly
destroying the country and society of the people of Afghanistan for decades.
Robert Gates, the former Defense Secretary under George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and
former CIA director under George H. Bush and Ronald Reagan, stated in his 1996 memoirs "From
the Shadows" that American intelligence services began to aid the opposing factions in
Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet deployment in 1979.
That confirms what Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Adviser to Jimmy Carter
and also an adviser to Barack Obama, stated in a 1988 interview:
"According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during
1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979."
"But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July
3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of
the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I
explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military
intervention."
"That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians
into the Afghan trap [..] The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to
President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed,
for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war [..]"
- Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, foreign policy
advisor to Barack Obama, in Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998
There's a country run by sociopathic/psychopathic elements that has a pattern of inducing
conflicts and brutally destructive wars to disrupt constructive cooperation and
development.
The truth is out - Hollywood only makes "tele-reality shows" with a bit of extra gloss on
them for export. The Chinese have the right idea.
I should have realised that since we have been living the "Twitter era", that variety has
become our spice of life, and Shakespeare's "all the worlds a stage" was just a realistic
appraisal that we would become a comedy skit. I like the idea, I never did appreciate
melodramas or horror films either....
PS. Biden apparently doesn't "tweet", so will we regress to "silent movies"? He can at
least do some of the actions. Keystone cops anyone?
So it doesn't occur to this idiot that if the USA engages in "friendly proliferation" then
both Russia and China will do the same?
This is the central problem with American foreign policy "experts" - they are so shallow
that they never consider that every action they propose will lead to a reaction from those
that they target.
Here, consider this vapid statement: "No doubt, a nuclear-armed China would react badly to
better-armed neighbors, but it is no happier with a more involved United States."
F**k me.
Look, dude, this is very simple: if the USA gave nukes to (say) Taiwan then China would
consider that all niceties are out the window and will look to give nukes to some country on
the USA's doorstep.
You know: Cuba, or Venezuela. Or both.
How smart would that "least bad solution" look then?
@ v | Jan 6 2021 21:18 utc | 37 who wrote
"
Some MAGA nutter has just announced that the Kansas State Capitol has been taken over.
"
The interesting thing to me has always been that if you get the nutters on both sides of
the mythological left/right to say how they feel about the private bankers, you know, the
top/bottom reality we live in, they both agree that private banking is bad. But we can't have
that coming to the fore especially in the face of the China example of public banking.
So its MAGA, USA, MAGA, USA, MAGA, USA forever, or until another narrative gripping
opportunity comes along or is manufactured.
Ex-AG Barr Reportedly Met With Jeffrey Epstein's Last Cellmate Attorney General William Barr speaks at the
National Religious Broadcasters Convention Feb. 26, 2020, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/Mark
Humphrey)
By Charlie McCarthy | Tuesday, 05 January 2021 07:06 PM
Former Attorney General William Barr investigated the suicide of Jeffrey Epstein, reportedly
even meeting with the multimillionaire sex offender's last cellmate.
Epstein was found hanging in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in lower
Manhattan early on Aug. 10, 2019. Efrain "Stone" Reyes had shared the cell with Epstein until
being transferred a day before the suicide.
Epstein's death rattled the highest levels of the Justice Department, according
to the New York Daily News on Monday.
Following Epstein's death, Reyes was pulled from a privately run jail in Queens to meet
frequently with authorities, once with the attorney general himself.
"Barr wanted to know about what was going on in [the Metropolitan Correctional Center]," a
source told the Daily News. "Barr told him, 'I owe you a favor, thank you for telling us the
truth.'
"He said [Barr] was a good guy. Barr was nice about it. He just wanted to know if [inmates]
were being mistreated. What [Reyes] believed happened. Just basically that. He told them
everything. He cooperated with Barr."
The Daily News source said he befriended Reyes when both were being held at the Queens jail,
per the Daily Mail .
A Justice Department spokesman declined comment to the Daily News.
The New York Times reported previously that a "livid" Barr was personally overseeing four
inquiries into Epstein's suicide.
Reyes caught coronavirus at the Queens Detention Facility earlier this year, was released in
April and died last month. He was 51.
The source said he and Reyes watched a documentary about Epstein, who associated with some
of the world's most powerful men while allegedly running an international child sex trafficking
scheme.
"[Reyes] was like, 'I just didn't see that from him. I didn't see that side of him. I never
pictured him being with young girls. Some guys like that are creepy,'" the source recalled. "He
said he never really got that side of Epstein -- like he was someone who took advantage of
girls. But we all have our secrets, you know? You never know."
US Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) is calling out her party for pushing through a
new code of conduct that essentially denies women exist by requiring gender-neutral language in
Congressional rules.
"It's the height of hypocrisy for people who claim to be the champions of rights for
women to deny the very biological existence of women," Gabbard said on Monday night in an
interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
New guidelines introduced by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday and passed Monday by
Congress in a party-line vote endeavor to "honor all gender identities" by making all
pronouns and references to familial relationships gender-neutral. For instance, "seamen"
has been changed to "seafarers," and House rules have been scrubbed of such words as
"father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister.""Aunt" and "uncle" will be
replaced by "parent's sibling." Lawmakers also must inculcate such words as
"parent-in-law,""stepsibling" and "sibling's child" to replace
"mother-in-law,""stepsister" and "niece.""He" or "she" references to House
members are instead "such member,""delegate" or "resident commissioner."
"It's mind-blowing because it shows just how out of touch with reality and the struggles
of everyday Americans people in Congress are," Gabbard said. "Also, their first act as
this new Congress could have been to make sure that elderly Americans are able to get the COVID
vaccine now , but instead of doing something that could actually help save people's lives,
they're choosing instead to say, 'Well, you can't say mother of father in any of this
congressional language.' It's astounding."
Congress also has made permanent its Office of Diversity and now requires all committees to
discuss in their oversight plans how they will address "inequities on the basis of race,
color, ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, age or
national origin." Committees also must "survey the diversity of witness panels at
committee hearings to ensure we are hearing from diverse groups of experts as we craft
legislation."
Gabbard has run afoul of Democratic Party orthodoxy repeatedly in the past two years,
opposing the impeachment of President Donald Trump, speaking out against election fraud,
opposing regime-change wars and blasting the controversial Netflix movie 'Cuties' as "
child porn ." She
embarrassed party favorite Kamala Harris, now vice president-elect, in a Democrat presidential
debate in 2019, and the Iraq War veteran called former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the
" queen of warmongers
" after Clinton suggested that she's a Russian asset.
Gabbard, who didn't seek a new term in Congress, was attacked as a "transphobe" and
"bigot" after introducing a bill last month to limit participation in women's sports to
biological females. The movement to "deny the existence of biological women – it
defies common sense, it defies basic, established science, it just doesn't make any sense,"
she told Carlson on Monday.
"No wonder they called you a Russian spy," Carlson replied. "It's dangerous to
have you in the Democratic Party. I'm sorry you're leaving [Congress]."
Republicans praised Gabbard's latest contradiction of Democrat talking points. "Can we
please trade Mitt Romney for her?" one Twitter user asked. Brazilian entrepreneur Daniel
Gonzalez called her "the best Democrat since JFK."
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California) was among the many Republicans who
opposed Pelosi's rules changes. "This is stupid," he said. "Signed, a father, son and
brother."
Robert Farley
explains why the U.S. can't end endless wars if it pursues an aggressive China policy:
The problem is straightforward: Any effort to characterize China as an existential threat
to the United States necessarily implies a level of conflict that will (as it did during the
Cold War) provide justification for US intervention anywhere in the world. The solution for a
less interventionist foreign policy is not to play up the threat of Beijing in the hopes the US
will stop intervening elsewhere, but rather to carefully rethink what constitutes a threat to
US core values, and what the United States must sacrifice to meet that threat.
The open-ended wars that the US has been fighting for the last two decades were the result
of exaggerating a relatively small, manageable threat (i.e., terrorist attacks) into a major
global menace that required massive resources and frequent military interventions in many
different countries. One can only imagine how much worse things will be if the US replaces its
militarized overreaction to terrorism with a militarized overreaction to the Chinese
government. A hard-line China policy not only increases the likelihood of conflict between the
US and China in East Asia, but it is also likely to encourage more interference in the affairs
of other countries that have close relations with China.
If a U.S.-China rivalry follows the pattern of other great power rivalries, that would
involve trying to subvert client governments through proxy wars and coups and sometimes
intervening directly to overthrow those clients. Policymakers would predictably claim that
peripheral countries are actually vitally important and must be "defended" or pulled into our
orbit. Hawkish pundits would write articles about "who lost Malawi" and explain why it was
absolutely "crucial" to American security that we prop up a dictator in Uzbekistan. The US
would wage wars for "credibility" and refuse to end them for the same reason.
One could argue that rivalry with China need not be global and could be confined to East and
Southeast Asia, but the tendency with these sorts of policies is towards expansion. Kennan's
original idea of containment was never intended to justify waging wars of choice in Asia, but
it was almost immediately expanded to apply everywhere even when no real U.S. interests were at
stake. A China policy that sought to "contain" China would almost certainly expand in the same
way. If someone thinks there can be an intense rivalry with another major power but that it
won't become heavily militarized, I refer you to the record of U.S. foreign policy for the last
seventy years. All of this has happened before, but it doesn't have to keep happening.
Constant meddling and interventionism are driven by an overly expansive definition of U.S.
interests, threat inflation, and a strategy of pursuing global dominance. The meddling and
interventionism won't lessen if Washington identifies a different adversary to obsess over. The
only things that might change will be the names of the countries that the U.S. sanctions and
bombs.
If we want a more peaceful and less interventionist foreign policy, we have to challenge and
reject the assumptions that lead the U.S. to interfere in conflicts that have little or nothing
to do with us. The first steps in doing that involve rightly identifying what our vital
interests are and accurately assessing the threats to those interests. If we do that, we will
recognize that China poses much less of a threat to the U.S. than China hawks claim, and we
will see that increasing hostility towards China is not in the interests of our country or the
interests of our major allies.
Shocking how so few realize that the same people on the right and left think confronting
China via a zero-sum approach can be consistent with their support for reducing U.S. military
and foreign interventionism. These folks preaching withdrawal from Middle East, Pivot to Asia,
or "Rebalancing" crowds are active foreign interventionists by any other definition.
On that note I'm curious which sources of foreign policy information/podcast/writers out
their have a sensible approach to China. I do follow some leftist anti-imperialist voices for
perspective, but unfortunately they are far too forgiving of Beijing (think Grayzone or the
Qiao Collective), but everyone else to the right of these avowed Marxists are even worse,
parroting the same hawkish anti-China narrative as Washington's foreign policy blob.
From my reading of things, China is a nationalist country with a formal communist ideology
and the facto regular economy, with private and state ownership, but with a relatively muscular
regulatory state (not captured by the Ownership class) that ultimately has the decisive power
on things. Massive problems with corruption, which is a constant through Chinese history. The
corruption is so apparent because the state actually tries to do something about it, whereas in
the US the corruption is legalized and formalized.
As any country, China has its problems that should not be dismissed. Also not exaggerated
either. If one dreams of democracy in China, one needs to be very realistic about it. The
extremely long tradition (2000 years) of a bureaucratic/meritocratic state in China, from the
beginning can take the air from any democratic attempts, never mind half backed ones like the
US Polity). It is not the Communist Party Rule that is necessarily the biggest problem standing
in the path of a more democratic China.
Another great problem on a greater opening and relaxing of China is the US imperialist
attacks. China is under greater attacks and not because of Trump. That was coming. China is
developing more and more and is reaching escape velocity. Also, it has consistently refused to
relinquish a greater share of its economy profits to the US Oligarchy and US pension funds that
will be tanking in the foreseeable future given the gap between their outlays and their
returns... In the current climate, with the US the far greater evil, I am more than willing to
cheer for China and its president (2019 saw about 140,000 corruption cases in China acted upon,
from confiscations, firings, imprisonment, to the occasional death sentence... Go China! What
is the tally in the US? just check on the suffering of whistleblowers...)
"... It is difficult to know or to ensure that the ballots are actual ballots from registered voters. For example in the early hours of the morning of November 4 large ballot drops occurred in Michigan and Wisconsin that wiped out Trump's lead. State officials have reported that people not registered -- probably illegals -- were permitted to vote. Postal service workers have reported being ordered to backdate ballots that suddenly appeared in the middle of the night after the deadline. These techniques were used to erase Trump's substantial leads in the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia. ..."
"... Digital technology has also made it easy to alter vote counts. US Air Force General Thomas McInerney is familiar with this technology. He says it was developed by the National Security Agency in order to interfere in foreign elections, but now is in the hands of the CIA and was used to defeat Trump. Trump is considered to be an enemy of the military/security complex because of his wish to normalize relations with Russia, thus taking away the enemy that justifies the CIA's budget and power. ..."
"... The military/security complex favors the disunity that the Democrat Party and media have fostered with their ideology of Identity Politics. ..."
"... I would take it a little further and say that voting by mail is a method of vote fraud. The supposed safeguards are easily circumvented, as some whistleblowers have illustrated with ballots being brought forth in large numbers after election day without postmarks and postal workers being ordered to stamp them with acceptable postmarks. ..."
"... Eisenhower is always lauded for his MIC warning. Frankly he ticks me off. Thanks for the warning AFTER you were in some position to mitigate. ..."
"... the most likely source of fraud that is hard to detect, is ballot harvesting. This should be outlawed as it violates the idea of a secret ballot. Somebody comes to the home of a disinterested voter and makes sure he votes (of course they will never admit to hounding the person) and "helps" them with the ballot. If the voter cannot be cajoled into voting the correct way, you merely throw his ballot in the trash. ..."
"... Living in an urban setting I often had to visit apartment buildings. Without fail, there was always a pile of undeliverable mail in the lobby under the mailboxes. ..."
"... His farewell address was just flapdoodle; it wasn't really dredged up till the 70s. Eisenhower spent eight years spreading tripwires and mines and then said "Watch out." Thanks buddy. ..."
"... As the German newspaper editor Udo Ulfkotte revealed in his book, Bought Journalism, the European and US media speak with one voice -- the voice of the CIA. The very profitable and powerful US military/security complex needs foreign enemies. ..."
"... inventive creative new ways to deceive.. first it was election machines, then mail in votes. ..."
"... The phrase "there's no evidence" is just a public commitment to ignore any evidence, no matter how blatant or obvious. ..."
"... Paper ballots as ascribed by Tulsi Gabbard legislation is the only safe option for elections. Kudos to Tulsi! ..."
"... Everyone knew about the potential for voter fraud to occur, but the entire system is corrupt, including Trump who has allowed the massive corruption within the system that was present when he entered office to persist and grow because he is a wimpy, spineless, coward, that was too afraid to make any waves and take the heat that he promised his voters. ..."
"... Why anyone voted for Trump in 2020 confounds me. I voted for him in 2016 and he has turned out to be one of the worst presidents in history. ..."
"... Trump in his cowardess and dishonesty knew that the ailing economy would harm his chances of being re-elected, so he allowed the health scare scamdemic to occur and destroy the livelihoods, lives, and businesses of hundreds of millions of Americans because he is a psychopath. Trump did not do what he promised. Trump made America worse than it has ever been since the end of slavery. ..."
"... Trump has also demanded the extradition of Assange after telling his voters that he loved wikileaks. Trump is a two-faced, lying, fraud. It has been his pattern. He consistently supports various groups and people like Wikileaks, Proud Boys, and others and panders to them and voters and tells people that he loves them, and then every time without fail when the heat is on, Trump says," I really don't know anything about them." ..."
"... "I know nothing." Trump saying "I know nothing." defines his presidency and who he is as a person, a spineless, pandering, corrupt, two-faced, narcissist, loser, and wimp! ..."
A few months ago it looked like the re-election of Trump was almost certain, but now there was a close race between Trump
and Biden? What happen during the last months?
In the months before the election, the Democrats used the "Covid pandemic" to put in place voting by mail. The argument was used
that people who safely go to supermarkets and restaurants could catch Covid if they stood in voting lines. Never before used on a
large scale, voting by mail is subject to massive vote fraud.
There are many credible reports of organized vote fraud committed by Democrats. The only question is whether the Republican establishment
will support challenging the documented fraud or whether Trump will be pressured to concede in order to protect the reputation of
American Democracy.
It is difficult to know or to ensure that the ballots are actual ballots from registered voters. For example in the early
hours of the morning of November 4 large ballot drops occurred in Michigan and Wisconsin that wiped out Trump's lead. State officials
have reported that people not registered -- probably illegals -- were permitted to vote. Postal service workers have reported being
ordered to backdate ballots that suddenly appeared in the middle of the night after the deadline. These techniques were used to erase
Trump's substantial leads in the states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia.
Digital technology has also made it easy to alter vote counts. US Air Force General Thomas McInerney is familiar with this
technology. He says it was developed by the National Security Agency in order to interfere in foreign elections, but now is in the
hands of the CIA and was used to defeat Trump. Trump is considered to be an enemy of the military/security complex because of his
wish to normalize relations with Russia, thus taking away the enemy that justifies the CIA's budget and power.
People do not understand. They think an election has been held when in fact what has occurred is that massive vote fraud has been
used to effect a revolution against red state white America. Leaders of the revolution, such as Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
are demanding a list of Trump supporters who are "to be held accountable." Calls are being made for the arrest of Tucker Carlson,
the only mainstream journalist who supported President Trump.
In a recent column I wrote:
"Think what it means that the entirety of the US media, allegedly the 'watchdogs of democracy,' are openly involved in participating
in the theft of a presidential election.
"Think what it means that a large number of Democrat public and election officials are openly involved in the theft of a presidential
election.
"It means that the United States is split irredeemably. The hatred for white people that has been cultivated for many years,
portraying white Americans as "systemic racists," together with the Democrats' lust for power and money, has destroyed national
unity. The consequence will be the replacement of rules with force."
Mainstream media in Europe claim, that Trump had "divided" the United States. But isn`t it actually the other way around,
that his opponents have divided the country?
As the German newspaper editor Udo Ulfkotte revealed in his book, Bought Journalism , the European and US media speak with
one voice -- the voice of the CIA. The very profitable and powerful US military/security complex needs foreign enemies. Russiagate
was a CIA/FBI successful effort to block Trump from reducing tensions with Russia. In 1961 in his last address to the American people
President Dwight Eisenhower warned that the growing power of the military/industrial complex was a threat to American democracy.
We ignored his warning and now have security agencies more powerful than the President.
The military/security complex favors the disunity that the Democrat Party and media have fostered with their ideology of Identity
Politics. Identity politics replaced Marxist class war with race and gender war. White people, and especially white heterosexual
males, are the new oppressor class. This ideology causes race and gender disunity and prevents any unified opposition to the security
agencies ability to impose its agendas by controlling explanations. Opposition to Trump cemented the alliance between Democrats,
media, and the Deep State.
It is possible that the courts will decide who will be sworn into office at January 20, 2021. Do you except a phase of uncertainty
or even a constitutional crisis?
There is no doubt that numerous irregularities indicate that the election was stolen and that the ground was well laid in advance.
Trump intends to challenge the obvious theft. However, his challenges will be rejected in Democrat ruled states, as they were part
of the theft and will not indict themselves. This means Trump and his attorneys will have to have constitutional grounds for taking
their cases to the federal Supreme Court. The Republicans have a majority on the Court, but the Court is not always partisan.
Republicans tend to be more patriotic than Democrats, who denounce America as racist, fascist, sexist, imperialist. This patriotism
makes Republicans impotent when it comes to political warfare that could adversely affect America's reputation. The inclination of
Republicans is for Trump to protect America's reputation by conceding the election. Republicans fear the impact on America's reputation
of having it revealed that America's other major party plotted to steal a presidental election.
Red state Americans, on the other hand, have no such fear. They understand that they are the targets of the Democrats, having
been defined by Democrats as "racist white supremacist Trump deplorables."
The introduction of a report of the Heritage Foundation states that "the United States has a long and unfortunate history
of election fraud". Are the 2020 presidential elections another inglorious chapter in this long history?
This time the fraud is not local as in the past. It is the result of a well organized national effort to get rid of a president
that the Establishment does not accept.
Somehow you get the impression that in the USA – as in many European countries democracy is just a facade – or am I wrong?
You are correct. Trump is the first non-establishment president who became President without being vetted by the Establishment
since Ronald Reagan. Trump was able to be elected only because the Establishment thought he had no chance and took no measures to
prevent his election. A number of studies have concluded that in the US the people, despite democracy and voting, have zero input
into public policy.
Democracy cannot work in America because the money of the elite prevails. American democracy is organized in order to prevent
the people from having a voice. A political campaign is expensive. The money for candidates comes from interest groups, such as defense
contractors, Wall Street, the pharmaceutical industry, the Israel Lobby. Consequently, the winning candidate is indebted to his funders,
and these are the people whom he serves.
European mainstream media are portraying Biden as a luminous figure. Should Biden become president, what can be expected
in terms of foreign and security policy, especially in regard to China, Russia and the Middle East? I mean, the deep state and the
military-industrial complex remain surely nearly unchanged.
Biden will be a puppet, one unlikely to be long in office. His obvious mental confusion will be used either to rule through him
or to remove him on grounds of mental incompetence. No one wants the nuclear button in the hands of a president who doesn't know
which day of the week it is or where he is.
The military/security complex needs enemies for its power and profit and will be certain to retain the list of desirable foreign
enemies -- Russia, Iran, China, and any independent-inclined country in Latin America. Being at war is also a way of distracting
the people of the war against their liberties.
What the military/security complex might not appreciate is that among its Democrat allies there are some, such as Representative
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who are ideological revolutionaries. Having demonized red state America and got rid of Trump (assuming
the electoral fraud is not overturned by the courts), Ocasio-Cortez and her allies intend to revolutionize the Democrat Party and
make it a non-establishment force. In her mind white people are the Establishment, which we already see from her demands for a list
of Trump supporters to be punished.
I think I'm not wrong in assuming that a Biden-presidency would mean more identity politics, more political correctness
etc. for the USA. How do you see this?
Identity politics turns races and genders against one another. As white people -- "systemic racists" -- are defined as the oppressor
class, white people are not protected from hate speech and hate crimes. Anything can be said or done to a white American and it is
not considered politically incorrect.
With Trump and his supporters demonized, under Democrat rule the transition of white Americans into second or third class citizens
will be completed.
How do you access Trump's first term in office? Where was he successful and where he failed?
Trump spent his entire term in office fighting off fake accusations -- Russiagate, Impeachgate, failure to bomb Russia for paying
Taliban to kill American occupiers of Afghanistan, causing Covid by not wearing a mask, and so on and on.
That Trump survived all the false charges shows that he is a real person, a powerful character. Who else could have survived what
Trump has been subjected to by the Establishment and their media prostitutes. In the United States the media is known as "presstitutes"
-- press prostitutes. That is what Udo Ulfkotte says they are in Europe. As a former Wall Street Journal editor, I say with complete
confidence that there is no one in the American media today I would have hired. The total absence of integrity in the Western media
is sufficient indication that the West is doomed.
Never before used on a large scale, voting by mail is subject to massive vote fraud.
I would take it a little further and say that voting by mail is a method of vote fraud. The supposed safeguards are easily
circumvented, as some whistleblowers have illustrated with ballots being brought forth in large numbers after election day without
postmarks and postal workers being ordered to stamp them with acceptable postmarks.
It really seems to me that there would be no democrat majorities in Congress or in so many state legislatures without vote
fraud.
Worse than the fraud available with vote by mail is the voting of people normally who don't bother to vote. Think of how stupid
and uninformed that average American voter is. Now realize how much more stupid and uninformed the non-voter is, only now he votes.
However, the most likely source of fraud that is hard to detect, is ballot harvesting. This should be outlawed as it violates
the idea of a secret ballot. Somebody comes to the home of a disinterested voter and makes sure he votes (of course they will
never admit to hounding the person) and "helps" them with the ballot. If the voter cannot be cajoled into voting the correct way,
you merely throw his ballot in the trash.
I have little doubt that there have been massive "irregularities", particularly in the so-called battleground states, that
are at play in "stealing" the election.
...The favourite phrase these days is "no evidence of wide spread voter fraud". Let's break that down. Only 6 states have been
challenged for vote fraud. In the big scheme of things, 6 states is not wide spread, even if there is massive vote fraud within
those 6 states. That the vote fraud is not widespread, implies that some vote fraud is acceptable, and that the listener should
ignore it. Last and most importantly, in the narrowest of legalistic terms, testimony or affidavits are not evidence. Testimony
and affidavits become evidence when supported by physical evidence. An affidavit with a photograph demonstrating the statement
would be evidence.
Another phrase is something like "election officials say they have seen no evidence of voter fraud". I have yet to hear a reporter
challenge the "seen no evidence of " part of the statement, regardless of the subject, by asking if the speaker had looked for
any evidence. They won't, because they know damn well no one has.
That is how the liars operate. Not so different from Rumsfeld's "plausible deniability".
Living in an urban setting I often had to visit apartment buildings. Without fail, there was always a pile of undeliverable
mail in the lobby under the mailboxes.
The envelopes were mostly addressed to people who had moved out or died. If ballots were sent to these people based on incorrect
voter rolls, then these too would likely have been left sitting on the floor or on a ledge for anyone to take.
It doesn't take a leap of faith to know what a Trump-hating leftist would do when no one is looking. This moral hazard was
intentionally created by Dems, who know that urban dwellers are transient and lean left politically.
Eisenhower is always lauded for his MIC warning. Frankly he ticks me off. Thanks for the warning AFTER you were in some
position to mitigate.
Ike's a mystery. Why did he NOT question Harry Truman's commitments to NATO, the UN, and all that rubbish? Ike was a WWII guy.
He knew Americans hated the UN in 1953 as much as they hated the League of Nations after WWI. But he let it all slide and get
bigger.
His farewell address was just flapdoodle; it wasn't really dredged up till the 70s. Eisenhower spent eight years spreading
tripwires and mines and then said "Watch out." Thanks buddy.
Well, agree on your points however, on the other side of the ledger, he never understood the stupidity of the Korean war (that
he could have ended) and majorly up-ramped CIA activities in all manner of regime change (bay of pigs anyone?). Almost a direct
path to our foreign policy now (and now domestic policy)
He did deploy the military assistance advisory group to Vietnam in 1955. This is considered the beginning of U.S. involvement
in the war. This allowed the French to moonwalk out the back door leaving us holding the bag. In fairness this was Johnson's war
however. Eisenhower did cut the military budget as a peace dividend to fund interstate system and other domestic projects. In
today political spectrum he would be considered a flaming liberal.
As the German newspaper editor Udo Ulfkotte revealed in his book, Bought Journalism, the European and US media speak
with one voice -- the voice of the CIA. The very profitable and powerful US military/security complex needs foreign enemies.
What intrigues me is the ultimate political goal of the UN and the WEF when they anticipate a single global government centered
at the UN and the absence of nation-states.
So what is the MIC going to do when there are no existential threats of competing nation-states? Or will the MIC re-engineer
religious wars between the various religious groups, secular and theological? It seems the aspirations of the WEF and its fellow
travellers preclude the occurrence of future armed conflicts.
Of course one needs capitalistic economies to produce the ordnance and materiels for the engineered social factions to war
with each other. Yet if the Greens have their way, there will be no mining period.
More likely is the possibility that none of them actually understand what they are doing. As Nassim Taleb is alleged to have
remarked, 99% of humans are stupid.
The total absence of integrity in the Western media is sufficient indication that the West is doomed.
It's because Western media is completely under the control of Jews, the world's foremost End Justifies Means people. The Fourth
Estate has become the world's most powerful Bully Pulpit. There are still a few good ones though, brave souls they are: Kim Strassel
of WSJ, Daniel Larison of The American Conservative , Neil Munro of Breitbart.
The rest are more or less lying scums, including everyone on NYTimes, WSJ, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, MSNBC, Fox News (minus
Tucker Carlson and Maria Bartiromo), The Economist , and let's not forget the new media: Google, Facebook, Twitter. The
world would be a much better place without any of them.
@Beavertales
-- with either vote flipping on machines or having the totals that paper ballot scanners tabulate adjust via a pre-programmed
algorithm. Many elections have already been stolen this way.
Nancy Pelosi claims that Biden's victory gives the Democrats a "MANDATE" to alter the economy as they see fit with 50.5%.
This proves that Biden will NOT represent everyone – only the left! I have warned that this has been their agenda from day one.
Now, three whistleblowers from the Democratic software company Dominion Voting Systems, alleging that the company's software stole
38 million votes from Trump. There are people claiming that Dominion Voting Systems is linked to Soros, Dianae Finesteing, Clintons,
and Pelosi's husband. I cannot verify any of these allegations so far.
We are at the Rubicon. Civil War is on the other side. There should NEVER be this type of drastic change to the economy
from Capitalism to Marxism on 50.5% of the popular vote. NOBODY should be able to restructure the government and the economy on
less than 2/3rds of the majority. That would be a mandate. Trying to change everything with a claim of 50.5% of the vote will
only signal, like the Dread Scot decision, that there is no solution by rule of law. This is the end of civilization and it will
turn ugly from here because there is no middle ground anymore. As I have warned, historically the left will never tolerate opposition.
Yes, the theft is blatant. But what are you, us, going to do about it? We really can't do much as the Office of the President
Elect requires us to wear masks. For our safety.
"in the narrowest of legalistic terms, testimony or affidavits are not evidence. Testimony and affidavits become evidence when
supported by physical evidence. " Correct – but they also can become evidence by verbal testimony. ie "I saw the defendant hit
the victim with a rock"
Not only have they stolen the election but when Joe Biden and other democrats claim that President Trump caused the deaths
of hundreds of thousands of Americans because of his handling of Covid 19, they are in sane. No world leader could stop the spread
of this respiratory virus. However, Joe Biden and democrats have caused the deaths of hundreds of white people, while whipping
up weak minded people to kill many whites. Biden and the democrats are criminals. Any one who is white, man or woman, that supports
the democratic party is enabling a criminal organization to perpetrate violence on white people, including murder.
Since the article was from a German magazine it's understandable that there is no mention of "the one who shall not be named".
No mention of the people behind the Lawfare group, the same people behind the impeachment, the same people providing financial
and ideological support for the BLM/Antifa, the same people that own the media that spewed lies for 5 years and censored any mention
of the Biden family corruption, no mention of the people behind this Color Revolution, the same people who promoted the mail in
voting and those that managed the narrative for the media on election night to stop Trump's momentum.
For the public consumption the election will be described in vague terms, like this article, blaming special interests and
institutions like the FBI, CIA and MIC without naming names as if an institution, not the oligarchs and chosen pulling the strings,
are somehow Marxist, anti-white or anti-Christian.
The interviewer quotes the Heritage Foundation does anyone even care what they say? The English Tavistock Institute by way
of the CIA which the British molded from the OSS created programs for the Heritage Foundation as well as the Hoover Institute,
MIT, Stanford University, Wharton, Rand etc. These "rightwing think tanks" were created to counter the CIA's "leftwing think tanks"
at Columbia, Berkeley etc. Thank you British Intelligence.
Steve Bannon was just interviewing someone (can't remember his name). Apparently there are about 200 to 300 IT professionals/engineers
working on these so-called "glitches" (not glitches at all) which mysteriously "disappeared" thousands of Trump votes. Then they'd
dump phony Biden votes into the mix. These IT professionals are going to follow the trail.
I've also heard that Dominion Voting Systems played a big part in this scam by using algorithms. One Trump lawyer said that
big revelations are coming.
We're going to have to be patient and just wait.
"The inclination of Republicans is for Trump to protect America's reputation by conceding the election."
I honestly think it's more like the old established Republicans (corporate bought) want Trump to lose because that is what
their campaign donors want (Big Pharma, Wall Street, etc.) They are part of the elite, and the elite (both the Democrats AND Republicans)
want Trump gone so they can continue their crony capitalist looting. They've got to appear like they're behind Trump, but I don't
think they are. Of course, that's not all Republican representatives.
Sounds like they've been rigging elections for awhile now. I bet they just messed up with Hillary. I think that's why she was
so upset. She had it, but they screwed up and didn't supply enough ballots.
@KenHinventive creative new ways to deceive.. first it was election machines, then mail in votes. next it will be magic carpet
voting. But the votes don't count, cause it is the electoral college that elects the President.
Trump also lost a significant number who did not understand Trump was an Israeli at heart, they thought he was a uncoothed
NYC red blooded American.
As far as white, black or pokadot color or any of the religions ganging up against Trump I don't think that happened, the fall
out into statistically discoverable categories is just that, fall out, not those categories conspiring to vote or not vote one
way or the other.
PCR seems to have trouble seeing a difference between the counting of perfectly proper votes which Pres Trump's post office
delivered late which may or may not be allowed by law which can be determined in court, and fraud like the dead voting or votes
being forged.
The fraud is all so transparent but no one in the power elite seems to give a crap whether the public catches on or not these
days. They know that the entire media which creates the false matrix of contrived "truth" that we all live in will back them to
the hilt because they are actually just one more working part in the grand conspiracy. We all know that when "O'Brian" says 2
+ 2 equals 5 we must all believe it, or at least say we do. We interface with "O'Brian's" minions on a daily basis but we don't
know the ultimate identity of "O'Brian" (in the singular or multiple). Many guesses are made, but they hide that from us fairly
well with the aid of their militaries and "intelligence" agencies (aka secret police in other times and places).
For example in the early hours of the morning of November 4 large ballot drops occurred in Michigan and Wisconsin that wiped
out Trump's lead.
In a very similar vein, it is the same thing that happened to Bernie Sanders during the primary's. Joe was down and out, and
Bernie was enjoying the lead and then "Bam!" Overnight Joe is back on top.
Well, fool me once,,,,,, .,and blah, blah whatever Bush said .
Dr Roberts has referenced in the interview a UR article that goes into considerable detail about the massive electoral fraud
by the Democrats and their partners. You've obviously not bothered to read it.
You're like one of those MSM hacks who denies electoral fraud without making any attempt to look at the evidence.
@Begemot
And it's almost always a closer race than anyone would have guessed beforehand -- which I also find suspicious. How likely is
it that the majority of presidential elections over the last century were decided by more or less even numbers of voters from
each party, between more or less evenly matched candidates?
Really seems like they've perfected the art of putting on rigged political shows that you can't quite believe in, but don't
have anything really solid to back up your suspicions. It's like the "no evidence of fraud" canard -- anything solid enough to
show obvious manipulation is explained away as the exception, rather than the tip of a very deep iceberg
Like the false accusations about Russia, delegitimizing the presidential election as fraud is turning out to be much ado
about nothing.
Let's review. The Democrats perpetrated the phony 2016 Russian influence fraud, and now the Democrats are perpetrating the
phony 2020 election victory.
The common elements are Democrats perpetrate fraud.
IMO this is a simple remedy to settle the election fraud mess or we will be arguing about this 20 years from now .from the
American Thinker.
The candidates on the ballot must have an opportunity to have observers whom they choose to oversee the entire process so
the candidates are satisfied that they won or lost a free and fair election.
That is not what happened in the 2020 election. That is the single most important and simple fact that needs to be understood
and communicated. The 2020 election was not a free and fair election, because poll-watchers were not allowed to do their essential
job. The 2020 election can still be a free and fair election with a clear winner, whoever that may be, but time is running
out.
In every instance where poll-watchers were not allowed to observe the process, those votes must be recounted. They must
be recounted with poll-watchers from both sides present. If there are votes that cannot be recounted because the envelops were
discarded, those votes must be discarded. Put the blame for this on the officials who decided to count the votes in secret.
Consider it a way to discourage secret vote counts in the future.
The pandemic has not been fearful enough to close liquor stores, and it in should not be used as excuse to remove the poll-watchers
who are essential to a free and fair election. If we must have social distancing, then use cameras.
Certainly, there are other issues with the 2020 election. There may be problems with software, and there are issues like
signature verification and dead people voting. Everything should be considered and examined, but no other issue should distract
from the simple fact that both sides must be able to view the entire process. If one side is not allowed to view the vote-counting,
then that side should be calling it a fraud. We should all be calling it a fraud.
...Trump had control of the Senate, the House and of course the Executive between his inauguration in January of 2017 and the
Midterm Elections of 2018, a total time period of 1 year and 10 months. What did he do during this time? He deregulated financial
services and passed corporate tax cuts.
At the end of the day, being emotionally invested in US elections is no different to being emotionally invested in Keeping
up with the Kardashians , that is to say your life wouldn't be that different if your don't follow either.
The Democrats Have Stolen the Presidential Election
The Deep State Has Stolen the Presidential Election. FIFY. But they have been in control for decades they just don't care who
knows now. They are taking final steps to make their control impervious to attack.
This is the reason that the establishment latched on to the Eisenhowerian bon mot but entirely memory hole Trumman's
far more explicit warning a freaking month after a sitting president is shot like a turkey in Dallas: it white washes CIA and
NSC .
The place to begin, and it's mind-blowing when you think about it this way, is that nothing was resolved on election night.
Not who will take the oath on January 20th. Nor which party will control the Senate. Nor even who will be Speaker and which party
will control the House.
Suffice it to say, a still raging factional struggle has simply moved to a greater degree behind the curtain.
I noted this movie reference on another thread here:
If your father dies, you'll make the deal, Sonny.
-- "The Godfather"
My point being, you're foolish if you ascribe certainty as to outcome at this point.
Being rid of Trump has been as close to a dues ex machina for the establishment as imaginable since he took the oath. This
ineluctable observation elicits no end of foot-stomping by those who assume it necessarily says anything positive about the man.
With every persistent revision of the script they wrote for him, all ending with his political demise at least, Trump has not
just survived but grown stronger. While the Democrats turned our elections into something only seen in a third-world shit hole,
Trump legitimately drew 71M votes from Americans.
That's a lot of air in the balloon. Believe me, filth like Russian mole Brennan may think everything is finished once they
get rid of terrible, awful Trump, but those above his pay grade know better.
Like him or hate him, Trump is the only principal not wholly or largely discredited. He was saved from destruction during his
first term by the Republican base moving to protect him. That was the import of his 90-95% approval among them, destroy him and
you destroy the Republican Party.
Now, despite -- or perhaps, because of -- everything they've done, that base now includes a significant number of Democrats
and independents. Trump is merely a vessel for an American majority attached to this constitutional republic thingie we've got
going.
Don't get lost in the details. This isn't a puzzle you can solve by internet sleuthing. The plan they executed -- to steal
sufficiently to make the outcome inevitable by the morning after the election at the latest -- failed. This was evident early
on Election Day (e.g. fake water main breaks in Atlanta) and necessitated their playing their Fox/AZ card and shutting down the
count at least until they had removed Republican monitors.
"In 22 states, Republicans will hold unified control over the governor's office and both houses of the legislature, giving
the party wide political latitude -- including in states like Florida and Georgia."
"Eleven states will have divided governments in 2021, unchanged from this year: Democratic governors will need to work with
Republican legislators in eight states, and Republican governors will contend with Democratic lawmakers in three."
The Democrats have: Joe Biden, and a slim majority in the House of Representatives which they are almost certain to lose in
two years.
What the Republicans are going to do is everything we hate, but they will pretend they were "forced" to do it by the Democrats
– the Democrats being the minority party.
Who else could have survived what Trump has been subjected to by the Establishment and their media prostitutes. In the United
States the media is known as "presstitutes" -- press prostitutes. That is what Udo Ulfkotte says they are in Europe.
Left and right.
(What you small brains do not understand is this.)
Democrats enabling the elite to invest in far east (lower wage costs, higher profits) did abandon the working class in America.
Democrats by this act did throw away the working class as a dirty rug.
Democrats with their TPP exporting most of the production to far east would totally destroy working class in USA. Trump's first
act was to cancel this insanity. Democrats are insanely delusional.
Democrats were left. Left is a party that supports the working people.
So here switch occurred. Democratic party now represent the elite, and Republicans now represent the working people.
(The irony of the fate)
The headline for PCR's article is a prediction, not yet established, and incomplete.
There is an ongoing massive attempt to steal the Presidential election as well as to steal an unknown number of House and Senate
seats, and who knows what else.
The 'game' is still on. Many tens of millions of citizens – actual total unknown but possibly in numbers unprecedented in American
history – voted for Trump. Republican candidates for office generally had strong support, but again, the actual percentage of
support is unknown but presumably larger than now 'recorded'.
There are also the many millions who ardently supported Trump, know that Biden is illegitimate, deeply corrupt, and the precursor
to perils unknown. Their determination and backbone and intelligence will now be tested.
There is the electoral college process; there are the state legislators that have a say in the process; there is the Supreme
Court.
There is also the possibility of pertinent executive orders that mandate transparent processes in the face of, say, apprehended
insurrection via fraudulent voting processes.
There is also the matter of how millions of 'deplorables' with trucks and tractors and firearms and other means to make their
point will react to obvious massive election travesty.
The conjunction of the COVID global scamdemic/plandemic, with crazed Bill Gates and kin lurking in the background with needles,
'peaceful' protesters in many cities setting fires and looting with near impunity, and a mass media that is clearly comprehensively
committed to a demonic degree of dishonesty and manipulation, and lunatic levels of 'identity politics' ideology, are among the
elements setting the stage for what may be an historical watershed.
The American Revolution in the 18th century, against the British Crown's authority, came about after years of simmering anger
and sporadic resistance against British injustice. At some point there was a 'tipping point'. When Germany invaded and occupied
Norway early in the 2nd WW, an effective resistance quickly formed in reaction, where death and torture were the known willing
risk. Two years before, those forming the resistance would have been just going on with their lives.
Who's Afraid of an Open Debate? The Truth About the Commission on Presidential Debates. The CPD is a duopoly which allows the
major party candidates to draft secret agreements about debate arrangements including moderators, debate format and even participants.
Ben Swann explains how the new coalition of EndPartisanship org is working to break the 2 party hold on primary elections,
which currently lock around 50% of voters out of the process.
I am currently watching an interview with SD Governor Kristi Noem, who went on ABC to challenge George Stenopolosus' claim
that there is no fraud in this election. She pointed out that there has been many allegations, including dead people voting in
PA and GA, she says we don't know how widespread this is, but we owe it to the 70+ million people who voted for Trump to investigate
and ensure a clean and fair election. She said we gave Al Gore 37 days to investigate the result in 2000, why aren't we giving
the same to Trump?
She is extremely articulate and sounds intelligent and honest, and what's more courageous to come forward like this. I hope
she runs for president in 2024, I'd vote for her.
Am I the only one who sees something profoundly spiritual happening in front of our eyes?
Yes. In reality, 5% of White men sent Trump packing. That doesn't match the GOP negrophile narrative where "based" Hindustanis
join the emerging conservative coalition to make sure White people can't get affordable healthcare in their own countries, though.
So we'll have to watch you parasites spool up this pedantic "fraud" nonsense until the fat orange zioclown gracelessly gets dragged
out.
Good post. You will gain more insight from this background on the speech and drafting.
Jan 19, 2011 Eisenhower's "Military-Industrial Complex" Speech Origins and Significance US National Archives
President Dwight D. Eisenhower's farewell address, known for its warnings about the growing power of the "military-industrial
complex," was nearly two years in the making. This Inside the Vaults video short follows newly discovered papers revealing that
Eisenhower was deeply involved in crafting the speech.
Great article. Thanks. Agree with you about the big stealing being electronic. Trump tweeted out yesterday that over 2 million
votes were stolen this way. For him to say this, they must have evidence.
Dinesh D'Souza said he hopes that when this matter comes before the Supreme Court that they will tackle once and for all what
constitutes a legal vote.
Some pretty big names are involved with this Dominion Voting. It will be interesting to see what Trump's team of IT experts
discover re the use of algorithms to swing the vote.
Why (Oh, why) did Trump had to go? Because Trump is an enema to the Deep State. He was threatening to expose the biggest lie
of the last 100 years – the supposed "liberalism" of US...
The author refers to a body of overwhelmingly persuasive evidence of voter fraud that can be specified and quantified to provide
proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases, not to mention hands down proof in civil cases requiring only a preponderance
of the evidence to establish guilt. Furthermore, the Democrats' easily documented, elaborate efforts at concealing the vote counting
process by shutting down the counting prior to sneaking truckloads of ballots in the back door is by itself powerful circumstantial
evidence of their guilt. You have no idea what "evidence" means, either in general usage or in its strictly legal sense.
The election cannot be trusted at all, just based on the insane entitled emotional state of the Globalist establishment alone.
The system as-a-whole cannot be trusted, for the same reason. They are actively corrupting it in every way they can, and fully
believe (as a matter of religious conviction) that they are right to do so.
That's one of the Jew/Anglo Puritan Establishment's new catch-phrases. There's also "no evidence" that Joe Biden acted in a
corrupt manner in Ukraine, even though he admitted to it on tape. There's "no evidence" that Big Tech is biased against conservative
plebians, despite their removing conservative plebians' published content arbitrarily and with no State compulsion to do so.
The phrase "there's no evidence" is just a public commitment to ignore any evidence, no matter how blatant or obvious.
This newly discovered legal standard goes beyond "preponderance of the evidence" or even "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt"
to establish absolute certainty as the standard.
Just the obvious and necessary complement of the Bob Mueller standard for Russian collusion, don't you think -- "could not
(quite) exonerate"? /s
They went for a softer approach in KY in 2019. The first-term Repub Gov had a Yankee's forthrightness so they just latched
onto comments he made regarding the underfunded teachers pension program and amped-it to high heaven getting teachers all in a
frightful frenzy.
In that solidly Red state, with all other prominent offices on the ballot (AG, SoS, etc.) going overwhelmingly Repub
, somehow the Repub Gov loses to the Dem by around 5000 votes. The "teachers pension" narrative was rolled-out as the reason.
(Btw, it seems that Dominion, or another type, software was used to switch the votes in that race. I've seen video about it.)
@Orville
H. Larson out how the winds are blowing. There is nothing good about it.
Why not this:
-- ONLY in-person voting over a 2-day period, a Sat and Sun, with polls being open from 6AM to 9PM both days.
-- Exceptions are the traditional requested absentee ballot where the voter can be authenticated.
-- Paper ballots must be used at the polls and no single box of 'Straight Vote by Party' is offered.
-- Some kind of SIMPLE scanning tabulator could be used of the ballots and with it NOT being connected to the internet.
There is far too much cheating opportunity built into our current system. That's intended, of course. It needs to end!
Because you don't get it. You are missing the big picture. It was well known that these systems had the ability to be hacked
as soon as they were implemented. It is also a well known fact that massive mail in ballots increases the likelihood that corrupt
individuals are more likely to get away with election fraud.
Everyone knew about the potential for voter fraud to occur, but the entire system is corrupt, including Trump who has allowed
the massive corruption within the system that was present when he entered office to persist and grow because he is a wimpy, spineless,
coward, that was too afraid to make any waves and take the heat that he promised his voters.
Why anyone voted for Trump in 2020 confounds me. I voted for him in 2016 and he has turned out to be one of the worst presidents
in history.
Trump in his cowardess and dishonesty knew that the ailing economy would harm his chances of being re-elected, so he allowed
the health scare scamdemic to occur and destroy the livelihoods, lives, and businesses of hundreds of millions of Americans
because he is a psychopath. Trump did not do what he promised. Trump made America worse than it has ever been since the end of
slavery. Jeremy Powell said today that the economy is dead and will never recover.
The only injustices that Trump gave a damn about were the injustices against himself and his family, and has committed countless
injustices against the entire country and world during his term. Trump is a corrupt narcissist. The facts prove it. Trump is such
a corrupt narcissist that he was willing to destroy the entire economy based on scientific fraud, high crimes, and treason to
use as political cover for his own incompetency which is the most offensive and disgusting diabolical act ever perpetrated on
the entire country.
Trump has also demanded the extradition of Assange after telling his voters that he loved wikileaks. Trump is a two-faced,
lying, fraud. It has been his pattern. He consistently supports various groups and people like Wikileaks, Proud Boys, and others
and panders to them and voters and tells people that he loves them, and then every time without fail when the heat is on, Trump
says," I really don't know anything about them."
"I know nothing." Trump saying "I know nothing." defines his presidency and who he is as a person, a spineless, pandering,
corrupt, two-faced, narcissist, loser, and wimp!
Why would anyone vote for him the second time around after a record of pathological incompetency and pathological corruption?
What's to approve of about him? Go ahead, investigate voter fraud it if is permitted, and if it isn't then ask yourselves why
it is that a system that enables election fraud is in place, and ask yourselves who had the ability to change it and, who had
the ability to benefit from it!
My ancestors fought in both the Revolution and for the Union during the War of Southern
Secession. The Southerners were and are our brothers and the Southern peoples have existed as
distinct cultures longer than have the modern French. They are not just real Americans, but
founding Americans.
Screw the unassimilated Fake Americans, the overtly hostile foreigners with papers like
Schumer and Nadler raping our civilization to death for fun and profit. Screw the homegrown
globalists like Traitor Romney whose unquenchable love of money would turn our people into
neofeudal serfs ruled over by a de facto hereditary aristocracy using a totalitarian
corporate-police state that would have made Orwell blanch.
This is part of a larger war against the mere existence of European peoples. Johnnie Reb
is just the first and easiest target. Joining the attack on the Southerners in the hope that
the filthy people will spare you is the height of stupidity. They WILL feast upon you as
well. We are in an existential civilizational war: it is both a race war against European
people and a religious war against Christians. They are not going to stop until either we are
destroyed or they are destroyed.
Looks like Nancy is just a regular type of gal ;-). No security at all. No even 24x7 cameras.
Did they used Photoshop with masking to deface Piglosi's .jpg garage door ?
And amazingly enough the vandals remembered to bring masking tape or at least a peace of
cardboard to protect the bricks.
When you think of your average Antifa type (
these mug shots may be representative), does that Antifa guy or gal strike you as the kind
of person who would carefully avoid getting any paint on bricks so as to spare Pelosi the
inconvenience of getting the paint off the bricks?
It's entirely possible that this was an Antifa effort and the person spraying paint had some
residual compassion for Pelosi. But it's also possible that this is a false flag effort. I am
not offering any suggestions as to who might have raised this false flag. I note only what
others have pointed out before: Something's peculiar here.
ay_arrow
Soloamber 3 hours ago
No doubt this was a false flag . You don't think Pelosi has security covering her yard,
house, cars ?
Nobody gets that close to her house without a swat team there in a minute. So where is the
video showing who did it , when , and how . This will be used to justify some full time guard
house or something else .
lennysrv 2 hours ago
You are absolutely correct. Years ago, when John Kerry was a candidate in the Democrat
primaries, I was walking near his neighborhood in Boston. Near. As in about eight blocks
away. Not even close to his house. I didn't even know he was living there. I was challenged
by a Secret Service agent and his backup friend (in a vehicle behind him). SS guy asked who I
was, what I was doing, why I was there, etc. Spoke into a microphone beneath his overcoat.
Told me that my chosen route was no longer available and that if I would be well-advised to
head the other direction. The point being that nobody, not a single person, gets near
Pelosi's house without a bunch of security knowing about it and stopping it.
This entire "vandalism" thing is a complete tub of BS.
logically possible 4 hours ago
Instead of guessing who dun it' how about looking at the video footage from the camera on
the wall, left side of the garage, the neighbors video footage too.
They don't want to show you.
snblitz 6 hours ago
As a person who paints houses on occasion, the perp, or should we say Agent Provocateur,
used a piece of cardboard to protect the bricks.
You can even see the blow back from the paint bouncing off the cardboard.
You could even perform the test yourself and see the same results.
Maybe the whole thing is simply a photo-shop job?
Ms.Creant 5 hours ago
I was joking yesterday they masked it off to prevent overspray!!!
No joke.
gruden 5 hours ago
I saw those comments. Admittedly I was skeptical at first. Then I saw that it happened
right before a confirmation vote as House Speaker, then it all suddenly made sense. A false
flag to distance her from the demoturd whack-jobs and appear more moderate. A very simple
explanation. That old lady has a few tricks still to turn in her old age.
HungryPorkChop 6 hours ago
Propaganda for the masses. They probably needed some "event" so they could get extra
security detail as the Plan-Demic and lockdowns continue.
Handful of Dust 6 hours ago remove link
...If you think Pelosi's REAL home is not guarded 24/7 by armed security and camera
surviellance, you are nuts.
This is a poorly executed stunt paid for by Nervous Nancy herself.
DurdenRae 7 hours ago
From yesterday's comment: I know a scam when I see one. If you look carefully you will see
that nothing has been broken, only the garage door has been slightly defaced (and I'm sure
it's going to be easily fixed). Should this have really been antifa, then would have spray
painted the bricks and broken windows at the very least, not to mention thrown in a couple of
molotovs. Here we have nothing spontaneous. The whole thing has taken between 10 to 30
minutes to put in place, and we are supposed to believe that nobody from the security detail
saw anything on their monitoring cameras? Was epstein's phantom there to make security
cameras not working that day?
bshirley1968 6 hours ago remove link
Any thinking person knows that this was nothing but a psyop.
Nobody is going to get that close to Pelosi's real house to carry out that kind of
vandalism. What? You think there are no surveillance cameras that would have caught that
activity? No security?
If Pelosi's property is that wide open to attack, then she isn't who we think she is.
Nice catch on the paint lines......and excellent point that something is up.
Mad Muppet PREMIUM 7 hours ago
The Dems are getting ready to throw the rioters under the bus. Night of The Long Knives
style.
Zero-Hegemon 6 hours ago
Reichstag fire style, now that they think they're getting Kameltoe in office, Antifa, etc.
have become very dispensible.
Automatic Choke PREMIUM 6 hours ago remove link
if you or I showed up at Nancy's with a can of spray paint, we'd be surrounded by a swat
team before we finished shaking the can.
Kan 7 hours ago (Edited)
BLM and Antifa have been directed to reduce the Equity zones that Tech Stock owners have
bought into to dodge capital gains tax. These zones are now going for 1/100 their value to
the tech stock investors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=C1-0XKYAZII
minute 29 explains it very well. Its amazing all the riots have benefited value for Gate and
Bezos.
This pelosi and company riot is a ploy to change the spot light off the 90% pork in the
latest free Trillion dollar handout to my friends.
Brought to you by Dominion Software....
Imagine a world where Pelosi has only won re-election the last 5 times because of the
Software.
alexcojones 7 hours ago (Edited)
The pig's head was a nice touch, with that quart (gallon?) of blood, I mean water-based
paint.
False Flag to gain some sympathy for the old witch.
Surprised "They" didn't leave a pallet of bricks too.
alienateit 6 hours ago
Where is the plastic bag which contained the pigs head?
No vandal would put that back into their designer backpack.
mike6972 6 hours ago
We live in a world of synthetic reality. Staged (fake) events like this are treated as
real. Real events (Hunter Biden's laptop, rampant election fraud) are dismissed without
examination. I yearn for the days when you could watch or read the news and it mostly
corresponded with reality. Today's "news" would be just another form of entertainment if it
were not so painful to watch.
13 play_arrow
BoomChikaWowWow 6 hours ago
100% fake, and not just because of the lack of paint on the brick.
I guarantee you a pig's head would be off limits for SF anarchists. The vegans in their
ranks would literally be screaming bloody murder.
UselessEater 3 hours ago (Edited)
Its a false flag.
Everything is a lie.
Director of CIA William Casey, "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when
everything the American public believes is false."
MASTER OF UNIVERSE 6 hours ago remove link
I agree that this has all the hallmarks of a False Flag Op due to the fact that there are
no spelling mistakes on Pelosi's garage door, and the brick must have been shielded to avoid
overspray from the spray paint can. Assume that a professional tagger painted the display on
Pelosi's garage door and was instructed not to get paint on the brick beforehand.
In addition to this federal crime scene we have the evidence at Mitch McConnel's house
where the message was misspelled 'weres the money' when it should have been written by a
Democrat hooligan tagger that was educated enough to spell correctly as opposed to the
Republican tagger hooligan that painted McConnel's door and misspelled the message.
It's clear that Democrat tagging hooligans are educated enough not to misspell words
whereas it is also clear that Republican professional tagging hooligans cannot spell
correctly when professionally tagging a known Republican home.
Clearly there is indeed a conspiracy to engender sympathy for the Democrats and Nanci
Pelosi whereas no mention of Mitch McConnel's damage at his house.
In addition, the fact that no real pigs blood was evident suggests that the whole display
was crafted by professionals knowledgeable in terms of theatrics and theatrical displays as
well as propaganda.
Can you say G. Gordon Liddey, boys & girls?
Dadburnitpa 6 hours ago
Another case of GASLIGHTING. "Oh, look at what happened to poor nancy."
JZ123 6 hours ago
Pelosi pulled a Juicy smollet? Nah, I think the hatred is real for these people. The
volcano will erupt this year.
"... The Biden administration, staffed with Obama veterans , may be in effect a third Obama term. Biden may seek a détente with China on some issues. But Democratic foreign policy elites as well as Republicans view China more harshly than they did four years ago. The most likely scenario, then, is an attempt to restore Obama's trilateral strategy of building the biggest possible coalition of allies against China. ..."
"... Democratic foreign policy elites are much more Europhile and Russophobic than their Republican counterparts. ..."
Under Barack Obama, the containment of
China -- the "pivot to Asia" -- took the form of what might be called trilateralism, after
the old Trilateral Commission of the 1970s. According to this strategy, while balancing China
militarily, the United States would create trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic trade blocs with
rules favorable to the United States that China would be forced to beg to join in the future.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was intended as an anti-Chinese, American-dominated Pacific
trade bloc, while the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) sought to create a
NATO for trade from which China would be excluded.
Obama's grand strategy collapsed even before the election of 2016. TTIP died, chiefly
because of hostility from European economic interests. In the United States, the fact that the
TPP treaty was little more than a wish-list of giveaways to U.S. finance and pharma interests
and other special-interest lobbies made it so unpopular that both Hillary Clinton and
Trump
renounced it during the 2016 presidential election season.
Trump, like Obama,
sought to contain China , but by unilateral rather than trilateral measures. The Trump
administration emphasized reshoring strategic supply chains like that of steel in the United
States, unwilling to offshore critical supplies even to allies in Asia and Europe and North
America. This break with prior tradition would have been difficult to pull off even under a
popular president who was a good bureaucratic operator, unlike the
erratic and inconsistent Trump.
The Biden administration,
staffed with Obama veterans , may be in effect a third Obama term. Biden may seek a
détente with China on some issues. But Democratic foreign policy elites as well as
Republicans view China more harshly than they did four years ago. The most likely scenario,
then, is an attempt to restore Obama's trilateral strategy of building the biggest possible
coalition of allies against China.
An emphasis by the Biden administration on alliances may succeed in the case of the
U.S.-Japan-Australia-India "Quad" (Quadrilateral alliance). The UK may support America's East
Asian policy as well. But Germany and France, the dominant powers in Europe, view China as a
vast market, not a threat, so Biden will fail if he seeks to repeat Obama's grand strategy of
trilateral containment of China.
Democratic foreign policy elites are much more Europhile and Russophobic than their
Republican counterparts. In part this is a projection of domestic politics. In the
demonology of the Democratic Party, Putin stands for nationalism, social conservatism, and
everything that elite Democrats despise about the "deplorables" in the United States who live
outside of major metro areas and vote for Republicans. The irrational hostility of America's
Democratic establishment extends beyond Russia to socially-conservative democratic governments
in Poland and Hungary, two countries that Biden has denounced as "totalitarian."
In the Middle East, unlike Eastern Europe, a Biden administration is likely to sacrifice
left-liberal ideology to the project of
maximizing American power and consolidating the U.S. military presence, with the help of
autocracies like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Any hint of retrenchment will be denounced by the
bipartisan foreign policy establishment that lined up behind Biden, so do not expect an end to
any of the forever wars under Biden. Quite the contrary.
Michael Lind is Professor of Practice at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of the University of
Texas at Austin and the author of The American Way of Strategy. His most recent book is The New
Class War: Saving Democracy from the Managerial Elite.
After pushing phony stories of 'Russian interference' and working for an agency that
interferes in elections, ex-CIA agent now Congressman Will Hurd thinks the GOP should accept
Joe Biden's win, or risk helping the US' "enemies."
A dozen Republican Senators are getting set to object to the Electoral
College's certification of Joe Biden's win in November, unless an "emergency 10-day
audit" is held in a number of key swing states won by Biden. The move is also backed by a
number of Republican representatives in the House.
However, there's a rival faction of Republicans who want to put allegations of Democrat
fraud behind them and go back to business as usual under a Biden administration. Outgoing Texas
Rep. Will Hurd is one of them, and he made a novel argument against questioning the election on
Saturday.
"When I was undercover at the CIA, I saw firsthand how our enemies steal elections and
try to interfere in ours," he tweeted. "Elected officials continuing to sow doubt
amongst the public for petty political gain is playing into our enemies' hands."
As for who these "enemies" are, Hurd was presumably referring to the reliable old
specter of "the Russians." Throughout Trump's four years in office, Hurd has repeatedly
claimed that Moscow meddled in the 2016 election, despite there literally being zero proof for
these claims.
" This is honestly one of the most hilarious mega-viral tweets I've ever seen on
Twitter," journalist Glenn Greenwald tweeted. In a follow-up tweet, Greenwald joked that
Hurd "must have been in a different part of the CIA" than former Director James Woolsey, who
told Fox News' Laura Ingraham in 2018 that his agency had meddled in European elections during
the Cold War "in order to avoid the Communists taking over," and continues to dabble in
election meddling, but "only for a very good cause.
Hurd was mocked on all sides. First for condemning election interference from an agency
famed for
interfering in elections
... ... ...
And then for bragging about his undercover status...
On Sept. 15, Tucker Carlson brought onto his show Darren Beattie, a former Trump
speechwriter. Beattie explained to viewers that the same networks promoting color revolutions
overseas are now training their sights on President Donald Trump: "What's unfolding before our
eyes is a very specific type of coup called the 'color revolution.' "
Similarly,
Revolver website posted a multi-part series on the color revolution against Trump, with its
Sept. 9 installment taking up Norm Eisen, one of the participants in the Transition Integrity
Project's war gaming of the 2020 election. Eisen was Obama's White House ethics czar and was
hired by the Democratic leadership of the House Judiciary Committee in 2019, where he prepared
ten articles of impeachment against Trump a month before Pelosi announced an official
impeachment inquiry. He himself took part in the impeachment proceedings.
But his involvement in ousting Trump began even before the nomination. Eisen ran Citizens
for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), financed amongst others by George Soros's
Open Society, which partnered with David Brock to put forward a blueprint -- issued before the
inauguration -- for attacking Trump through such means as policing social media, getting tech
companies to censor content (media platforms ... will no longer uncritically and without
consequence host and enrich fake news), impeachment itself, fake news (a steady flow of
damaging information, new revelations), and other techniques.
Eisen co-authored "The Democracy Playbook: Preventing and Reversing Democratic
Backsliding," a Brookings guide to the perplexed seeking to institute policies through frankly
undemocratic means. Eisen named Gene Sharp's From Dictatorship to Democracy as an inspiration
for his document.
Consider another color revolutionary. Michael McFaul, former U.S. Ambassador to Russia
and a supporter of the Ukraine color revolution, realized that "color revolution" was taking on
a negative connotation. In August he tweeted a revised nomenclature: "Autocrats have demonized
the phrase, 'color revolutions.' (& revolution generally has a negative connotation for
many.) Instead, I use the term 'democratic breakthroughs.' "
What kind of democratic breakthrough? Consider McFaul's Sept. 4 tweet:
"Trump has lost the Intelligence Community. He has lost the State Department. He has lost
the military. How can he continue to serve as our Commander in Chief?"
Astute readers will note that neither the IC, State Department, or military appoint the
President, who takes that office by means that are actually democratic -- an election!
Eisen also heads the Transatlantic Democracy Working Group, whose website announces that
it is "a bipartisan and transatlantic platform for discourse and coordination to address
democratic backsliding in Europe." What is "democratic backsliding"? Naturally, it's when the
plebes get uppity and vote for their favored candidates, as in, you know, elections.
Russiagate has been an obvious coup attempt from the beginning
jinn @ May 10 15:20
That is not at all obvious... you have to be extremely gullible to believe any of it is
real.
IMO Russiagate was about initiating a new McCarthyism.
And Trump's Deep State selection was about re-igniting nationalism in response to
the Russia-China alliance which was recognized as a threat to the Empire in 2013-2014 with
Russia's blocking of US action in Syria and Ukraine.
There was nothing mysterious about "Russiagate." It was a transparently false narrative
designed, by the most incompetent election campaign team in history, to excuse their shocking
inability to defeat one of the weakest and most discredited Presidential candidates there has
ever been.
_________________________________________________
Yeah that is what we are asked to believe, but the problem is how did this incompetent
election campaign keep the ball in the air for more than 2 years?
They did not invent the Flynn lied to FBI story and they did not invent the Trump
obstructed justice stories. And they did not create any of the silly stories about contacts
with Russians. There is no doubt the Hillary supporters sat on the sidelines and cheered all
the nonsense that was unfolding in the Russiagate narrative but the storyline that they were
cheering for was all created by Trump and his lackeys.
rump the New Yorker was a stranger in a strange land, having nothing of the sensibility of
the insular, self-serving swamp-dwellers in Washington and no grasp whatsoever of the power of
the Deep State, whose ire he quickly aroused. Trump was a terrible statesman, too
seat-of-the-pants, but what was to him dealmaking was at bottom diplomacy, an activity
Washington has little time for.
Why did Trump surround himself with people who opposed him and not infrequently sabotaged
those few foreign policy ideas one can approve of -- constructive ties with Russia, an end to
wasteful wars, peace in Northeast Asia, sending "obsolete" NATO into the history books? What
were H.R. McMaster, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and numerous others like them but of lesser
visibility doing in his administration?
I am asked this not infrequently. My reply is simple: It is not at all clear Trump appointed
these people and at least as likely they were imposed upon him by the Deep State, the permanent
state, the administrative state -- whatever term makes one comfortable. Let us not forget,
Trump knew nobody in Washington and had a lot of swivel chairs to fill.
We must add to this Trump's personal shortcomings. He is by all appearances shallow of mind,
poorly read (to put it generously), of weak moral and ethical character, and overly concerned
with appearances.
Put these various factors together and you get none other than the Trump administration's
nearly illegible record on the foreign policy side.
Trump is to be credited with sticking to his guns on the big stuff: He held out for a
new-détente with Russia, getting the troops out of the Middle East and Afghanistan,
making a banner-headline deal with the North Koreans. He was scuttled in all cases.
Complicating the tableau, the prideful Trump time and again covered his impotence by
publicly approving of what those around him did to subvert his purposes. A year ago, the record
shows, Pompeo and Mark Esper (then the defense secretary) concocted plans to assassinate Qasem
Soleimani, the Iranian military leader, flew to Mar –a –Lago, and presented
Trump with a fait accompli -- whereupon Trump acquiesced as the administration and the
press pretended it was White House policy all along.
Now We Come to Iran
Hassan Rouhani, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, addresses the 74th session of the
United Nations General Assembly's General Debate, Sept. 25, 2019. (UN Photo/Cia Pak)
Pulling out of the Iran nuclear accord a year into his administration was among the most
destructive moves Trump made during his four years in office. It was afterward that the
shamefully inhumane "maximum pressure" campaign against Iranians was set in motion.
Trump's intention, however miscalculated, was the dealmaker's: He expected to force Tehran
back to the mahogany table to get a new nuclear deal. As secretary of state, Pompeo's was to
cultivate a coup or provoke a war. It was cross-purposes from then on, notably since Pompeo
sabotaged the proposed encounter between Trump and Rouhani on the sidelines of the UN GA.
Now we have some context for the recent spate of Iranophobic posturing and the new military
deployments in the Persian Gulf. We have just been treated to four years of a recklessly
chaotic foreign policy, outcome of a war the Deep State waged against a pitifully weak
president who threatened it: This is the truth of what we witness as Trump and his people fold
their tents.
Trump the dealmaker a year ago now contemplates an attack on Natanz on the pretext Iran is
not holding to the terms of an accord he abandoned two years ago? The only way to make sense of
this is to conclude that there is no sense to be made of it.
Who ordered the B–52 sorties and the Nimitz patrols? This question promises a
revealing answer. It is very highly doubtful Trump had anything to do with this, very highly
likely Pompeo and his allies in hawkery got it done and told the president about it
afterward.
Trump is out in a few weeks. The self-perpetuating bureaucracy that made a mess of his
administration -- or a bigger mess than it may have been anyway -- will remain. It will now
serve a president who is consonant with its purposes. And the eyes of most people who support
him will remain wide shut.
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International
Herald Tribune , is a columnist, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is
Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century . Follow him on Twitter
@thefloutist . His web site is
Patrick Lawrence . Support his
work via his Patreon site
.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of
Consortium News.
Ed Rickert , December 31, 2020 at 10:06
A first rate analysis of the inconsistent and inchoate policies of Trump as well as an
acute assessment of his psychology, notably his weakness when challenged. Equal cogent is
Lawrence's trepidation and concern over the policies and potential actions of the
administration that is to replacement Trump. Thank you for your thoughtful work.
Pierre Guerlain , December 31, 2020 at 06:51
I would just like to have a linkto the sources for Pompeo hoodwinking Trump for the
assassination of Soleimani.
Linda , December 30, 2020 at 18:42
Thank you, Patrick, for this very clear article summarizing Trump's clumsy attempts at
making peace with other countries (a campaign offering to voters) and the Deep State's
thwarting of those attempts. My friends and I intuitively knew the people taking roles around
the Trump presidency were put there by the "system". Trump had been made into a pariah by the
Press, his own Republican Party, and shrieks for 'Resistance' by Hillary Democrats in the
millions across the country even before he was inaugurated. There was no 'respectable' person
in Washington DC who would dare help Trump make his way in that new, strange land. Remember
one of the Resistanace calls to the front? . "Become ungovernable!!!!" Tantrums, not
negotiations, have become the norm
So long, any semblance of Washington DC respectability. It was nice to think you were
there at one time.
Dear readers and supporters of Consortium News around the Earth,
Please pass the following important message along to the genuine war criminals United
States President Donald Trump and United Kingdom Prime Minister Boris Johnson:
"Do the right & moral thing for once in your hideous, miserable & pathetic lives,
– and free genuine peacemaker Julian Assange."
***
Please consider making the (1st ever in history) establishment of genuine Peace on Earth
the absolute overwhelming #1 New Year's Resolution worldwide for 2021. The quality of life
for future generations depends on the good actions of this generation.. Thank you.
I thank these commentators, a couple of whom read these pieces regularly, and all others
who've taken the time this year gone by to put down their thoughts. I read them always and
almost always learn things from them. Blessings to all and wishes for a superb new year! --
Patrick.
Lee C Ng , December 30, 2020 at 14:02
I agree 100% with the writer. Example; if Bolton, probably pushed into the administration
by the Deep State, didn't sabotage Trump's talks with the N. Koreans in Vietnam, we might've
had a peaceful settlement on the Korean peninsular by now. And it's no surprise that Trump on
several occasions prevented the success of US-China trade talks – it was more than
likely he was forced to do so. Trump wasn't a politician, much less a statesman. But he
wasn't an orgre either, despite the hostility of the corporate press towards him (and I'm no
fan of Trump).
Biden will represent better the real forces behind all US administrations – the
forces responsible for the over 200 wars/military interventions in its 242 years of
Independence.
Jeff Harrison , December 30, 2020 at 00:19
Thank you, Patrick, you have made some sense out of a nonsensical situation. "We have just
been treated to four years of a recklessly chaotic foreign policy, outcome of a war the Deep
State waged against a pitifully weak president who threatened it: This is the truth of what
we witness as Trump and his people fold their tents." What is it that the Brits call their
Deep State? It's something like the civil service but it's actually called something
else.
You called Donnie Murdo a deal maker. Donnie Murdo is a New York hustler. His
"negotiation" style only works when his interlocutor must make a deal with him. If his
interlocutor can walk away, he will and Donnie Murdo will go bankrupt. The real problem is
that the US doesn't need a deal maker – we have people for that. The Prezzy & CEO
is frequently called that, the chief executive officer. But that's an administrative title.
He is also frequently called the commander in chief but that really only applies if we are at
war which we should be at as little as possible. What the prezzy really is supposed to be is
a leader. If Donnie Murdo were, in fact, a leader, John Bolton would have been taking a
commercial flight back to the US after his little stunt in Vietnam. But he didn't. So the
question isn't what could Donnie Murdo do in the next three weeks, it's what can Donnie
Murdo's henchmen do in the next three weeks?
Casper , December 29, 2020 at 18:19
One of the other personal things about Donald Trump, was that he had no skill nor
experience in leading and manipulating a bureaucracy. He had basically directed a family
business and his personal publicity machine. To the extent that Trump hotels had thousands of
employees, Trump hired managers to do that. It would appear that the Trump family business
largely concentrated on making of new deals for new hotels.
Thus, Donald Trump arrived in Washington completely unprepared to be the leader of a
bureaucracy and completely unskilled at being able to get it to do what he wanted it do
do.
I'm not a Joe Biden fan, but he's been in Washington since the 1970's. He's seen the
bureaucracy from the Senate point of view for 40 years, then got at least a view of what it
was like to try to direct it from watching as Veep. I still suspect the real power lies with
the military command, and has since the 1950's, but this administration is going to come in
with at least some skills in terms of trying to get a government to do what it wants.
PEG , December 29, 2020 at 17:46
Perfect article – and epitaph on Trump's foreign policy record.
Anne , December 29, 2020 at 14:00
Indeed, Patrick, they (the eyes of most of the electorate) will remain shut, eyelids
deftly closed Only other peoples commit barbaric, heinous war crimes, invade other cultures
completely without cause, bomb other peoples to death, devastation, loss of livelihood, home
water supply We, the perfecto (along with one other group now ensconced – illegally,
but apparently western acceptably – in the ME) people do what we do because, well, we
are perfecto and thus when we commit these barbarisms, they aren't such. And are, it would
seem, totally ignorable. Wake me in the morning style .
Truly, the vast majority of those – whatever their skin hue, ethnic background
– who voted for the B-H duo are comfortably off, consider themselves oh so bloody
"liberal" (do they really know what that means, in fact? Or don't they care?), so to the left
of Attila the Hun (which obviously doesn't mean much, Left wise) .and what the MICMATT does
to other people in other societies matters not flying F .After all, aren't they usually of
"swarthy" skin hue and likely not western and of that offshoot religion of the one gawd, the
third go around?
The west (US, UK, FR, GY etc ) really and truly need to develop a Conscience, a real
morality, humanity but I fear that that is all too late
By Jonny Tickle In recent years, the US has gone crazy with its idea of 'American
exceptionalism' and Washington has taught its people that the country does not need to follow
any rules and can disregard international agreements, Moscow claims.
Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, made the claim
on Thursday to YouTube channel 'Izolenta live.'
"It's a nuclear power that has gone wild with the idea of its own exceptionalism,
withdrawing from lots of documents, treaties, international organizations," she
said.
Zakharova also believes that Washington has "encouraged its population to think that they
don't owe anybody anything" and "they should not obey anyone," up to and including
international law.
However, she noted that the White House may one day decide to return to various deals
sidelined in recent years, presumably referring to the incoming president, Joe Biden.
Since the incumbent at the White House, Donald Trump, came to power in 2017, Washington has
reduced its participation in international organizations. In 2018, the US withdrew from UNESCO
and from the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). A year later, Trump pulled his country out of the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), and in 2020 the country left the Open Skies
Treaty. Furthermore, on February 5, a fortnight after Biden is due to take office, the US will
depart from the New START nuclear arms reduction treaty unless the Kremlin and the new
president's team quickly come to an understanding.
Last month, at his annual press conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin chided the US
for pulling out of treaties that Russia is fully supportive of, noting that there could be an
"arms race" if Biden doesn't agree to an extension of START.
"We heard the statement by the president-elect that it would be reasonable to extend the
New START. We will wait and see what that will amount to in practical terms. The New START
expires in February," Putin pointed out.
Veterans For Peace members in Asheville, North Carolina participated in a Reject Raytheon
Demonstration on Dec. 9th.
"Prior to the county vote on the incentives, a spokesperson for the company said it made $21
billion in sales last year. More than half came from the manufacturing of commercial engines
used for passengers and cargo. He said military engines made up about 20-30 percent of
sales.
"So much of our military hardware gets made here and is sent overseas and used in proxy wars
and in purposes that don't really serve the security of the United States itself," Veterans for
Peace's Gerry Werhan said."
"If we get caught they will just replace us with persons of the same cloth. So it does not
matter what you do, America is a golden calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it
off piece by piece until there is nothing left but the world's biggest welfare state that we
will create and control. Why? Because it is the will of God and America is big enough to take
the hit so we can do it again and again and again. This is what we do to countries that we
hate. We destroy them very slowly and make them suffer for refusing to be our slaves."
Herdee 9 minutes ago remove link
This is the philosophy that both the CIA and Pompeo used on Trump in order to help destroy
him. It actually sounds like something very similar or left over from the Nazi German era
from WW2:
In an interview published by Moscow news agency Interfax on Tuesday, Deputy Justice Minister
Mikhail Galperin said that litigation over the collapsed Yukos oil empire and fallout from
Russia's 2014 reabsorption of Crimea means that "a tough year" is on the cards.
The long-running dispute over Yukos, once among Russia's leading energy firms and one of the
most valuable companies in the world, has been raging for years. However, it now appears to be
coming to a head as the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, which claims it has jurisdiction in
the case, prepares to hear an appeal from Russia's lawyers. A legal settlement of more than $50
billion, thought to be the largest in history, hangs in the balance.
"Of course, we're not sitting idly, waiting for the Supreme Court's decision," said
Galperin. "Every day, we're defending our national interests in this case in different ways.
Legal battles related to the Yukos case are taking place not only in the Netherlands, but in
other jurisdictions as well."
Those who lost money in the collapse of the Yukos empire insist that the arrest of its CEO
on fraud charges and a colossal bill in back-taxes amounted to state appropriation.
Russian authorities argue that previous rulings in foreign courts on the side of the
claimants failed to take into account Russia's anti-corruption laws, and claim that the
investors weren't "bona fide." Moscow also insists that only Russia's courts have
jurisdiction, as the Energy Charter Treaty under which the case is being brought was signed but
never ratified.
Galperin added that the country's "main legal argument is that Russia never agreed for
the case to be heard by an international court of arbitration, which means that the judges had
no mandate to consider the lawsuit Yukos ex-shareholders filed against
Russia."
Last week, one of Russia's highest judicial authorities ruled that the country should
disregard any judgement coming from overseas tribunals. They state that, while the government
of the day took steps to join the Energy Charter Treaty in 1994, they did not have the
authority to make national laws subject to international agreements, or to "challenge the
competence" of Russian courts. Therefore, the jurists conclude, adhering to the Dutch
court's demands would be "unconstitutional."
However, if the verdict goes in favor of Yukos' former shareholders, refusing to pay the
bill could have substantial repercussions for Russia, with the claimants already calling for
the confiscation of the country's assets overseas as collateral.
Galperin, however, is confident that Russia could avoid cash and property falling into the
hands of the oligarchs who have brought the case. "Since 2014," he said, "they have
made multiple unscrupulous attempts to seize not only state property, but also assets that
belong to Russian companies in Western Europe. We have successfully repelled all these
assaults."
"While we can't rule out that in 2021 YUKOS ex-shareholders will continue their legal
battle in a number of countries, I can tell you without unnecessary bravado that we are fully
prepared to fight off any attempts to seize our property in any country of the world."
The Supreme Court of the Netherlands is expected to hear the case in February next year,
while simultaneous battles have also been fought in US and British courts. The row comes at a
time when tensions between Russia and the West are growing, with Moscow's diplomats arguing
that verdicts against the country have been "politically motivated." In December,
Justice Minister Konstantin Chuychenko told journalists that the case is part of a "legal
war that has been declared on Russia."
As well as the Yukos case potentially reaching a dramatic climax, Galperin expects that his
ministry will have their hands full next year with at least two other international disputes.
As early as January, the European Court of Human Rights is expected to announce a decision on a
legal fight between Moscow and Kiev over disputed Crimea. There is a further $8 billion claim
from a Ukrainian energy firm that insists it lost its assets when the peninsula was reabsorbed
into Russia. The same court will also rule on a case brought by Georgia over events in South
Ossetia and Abkhazia in 2008.
Senate Overrides Trump Veto Of Defense Bill BY TYLER DURDEN FRIDAY, JAN 01, 2021 -
15:15
Meeting for a rare New Year's Day session, the Senate voted 81-13 on Friday to override
President Trump's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which Trump said
"fails to include critical national security measures, includes provisions that fail to respect
our veterans and our military's history, and contradicts efforts by my Administration to put
America first in our national security and foreign policy actions."
A two-thirds majority was needed to override the veto - which would mark the first in
Trump's presidency. The NDAA authorizes over $740 billion in military programs and
construction, as well as 3% pay raises for US troops. It also contains a provision to rename
military bases named after Confederate generals .
Trump also wanted to force a repeal of Section 203 protections for social-media companies
enjoy due to their constant editorializing of user content, however lawmakers refused to
include the provision.
The rare January 1st session comes as the new Congress is set to be sworn in on Sunday.
On Wednesday, the Senate voted 80-12 to begin an official debate on overriding the veto,
proving that Congress can act with lightning speed when properly motivated.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said on Tuesday that the NDAA is crucial to
national defense, and to "deter great power rivals like China and Russia." The bill "will
cement our advantage on the seas, on land, in the air, in cyberspace and in space," he
added.
During Trump's time in office, he has vetoed eight other bills - several of them focused on
foreign policy and national security issues, according to the Wall
Street Journal .
The fight over the NDAA also underscored broader tensions over national-security issues
between congressional Republicans and Mr. Trump. On foreign policy and national-security
issues, many Republicans have readily bucked Mr. Trump during his presidency even as they
have stood by him on many other issues.
For instance, the Trump administration's recent effort
to cut troop levels in Afghanistan in half , to roughly 2,500, by Jan. 15, has alarmed
some Republicans. The NDAA requires the administration to submit to Congress a comprehensive
assessment of the withdrawal before it can use funds to pull out troops. -WSJ
In addition to creating a commission to assess changes to bases, displays, monuments,
symbols and other paraphernalia related to Confederate commanders, the bill limits the
president's ability to use emergency military construction funds for other purposes . It also
restricts employees or former employees from the military-industrial complex to work directly
for the Chinese government or government-controlled companies.
Banned Banana 56 minutes ago
Dwight Eisenhower warned us about this 60 years ago, and we have done exactly nothing.
RasinResin 50 minutes ago
When you comb through who is doing what, you realize it's just politicians supporting
monopolistic companies. Lawyers in essence, always have been, and always will be the problem.
Just ask Shakespere.
Orange Man Rad 53 minutes ago (Edited) remove link
McConnell is on a suicide mission for the GOP as a political party. I'm guessing he could
careless as he won't be running for reelection. I always knew he was a swamp creature that
hated Trump. He never once publicly defended Trump in 4 years. I will be changing my party
affiliation to Independent on January 7th. I'm waiting until then so it has maximum impact
after the scumbags throw Trump under the bus. Good riddance GOP.
It fully explains why China Mitch is fine being Minority Leader. Follow the money!!
Obake158 40 minutes ago
Don't change your party affiliation, do what I did and go to your town hall and unregister
to vote. There is absolutely no point in participating in this sham of a system. Voting for
muppet A or muppet B is silly when both sides are played by the same interests. All you do by
giving your consent to be ruled is create a mandate that the agent of corruption uses to lord
over you. I am 100% done playing with their system and by their rules. Politicians are a
verminous class of filth. They need to be purged, swapping a rat for a snake for a maggot is
what voting results in. Think of a single politician that represents you and your interests
and that you look up to. I haven't been able to say anything good about a politician since
Ron Paul was active, they are all treason scum.
techengineer 15 minutes ago
The Republican Establishment is disgusting.. A damn disgrace.. We can't get rid of the
rotten bastards without turning it over to even worse Democrats..
Bernout Sanders 43 minutes ago remove link
For those of you keep asking "but why doesn't Trump do more?" - this is your answer.
Could Trump have expanded the use of the Executive Order into clearly unconstitutional
territory and hope the Supreme Court would support this? Perhaps.
When it comes to legislation, though, sadly there are less than 10 (and perhaps less than
5) Republican Senators worth a hill of beans.
I mean, look at Utah. Solidly Republican, elect the sorriest GOP Senator and carpetbagger
Mittens, and even their decent Senator, Mike Lee, is militantly pro-immigration.
Until Republicans start primarying SOB RINO's like Democrats do in their caucus, there
will never be any change.
AboveAverageIdiot 27 minutes ago
Senators who voted to sustain Trump's veto of defense bill:
Booker (D)
Braun (R)
Cotton (R)
Cruz (R)
Hawley (R)
Kennedy (R)
Lee (R)
Markey (D)
Merkley (D)
Paul (R)
Sanders (I)
Warren (D)
Wyden (D)
yerfej 27 minutes ago
The endless wars continue. What the phyuyk is wrong with a country that can't stop
starting wars yet never has the balls to finish them? Oh its just a facade for ayssholes to
line their pockets.
dustnwind 43 minutes ago
"Amazing how fast Congress can act when properly motivated..."
Yes motivated by special interests, lobbyists and perks. Someday R voters might realize
that R politicians were just as involved in the voter scams to neuter(2018) and remove Trump
as the democrats. Any appearances to the contrary are simply theater to retain the voter base
Trump had.
vasilievich 21 minutes ago
The mood in this country seems to be poisonous. In this little county of ours, population
about 220,000, the food bank is moving into larger premises. Also there will be a residence
for those in need, available only to women and children.
I think it's doubtful that this sort of thing can go on without consequences, some of
which may be dramatic.
I had family in Europe which lived through something similar, the result of which was a
world war.
aliens is here 29 minutes ago
When comes to fudging over the people, congress wastes no time doing it.
GreatUncle 29 minutes ago
The politicians on all sides support the censorship and cancellation culture through big
tech editing.
Handful of Dust 28 minutes ago
The Republicans had complete control of both houses during Trump's first two years and did
ZERO for the working middle class American.
Jon_noDough 7 minutes ago
Can't give the citizens more than a pittance for Covid relief but no limits to military
industrial swamp complex...
Baronneke 8 minutes ago
"National Offense Authorization Act " is a more appropriate name as the US was never
attacked after ww2 so no need to Defend. The 5-6 last US presidents on the other hand are all
war criminals and have attacked (including sanctions) countless countries since the end of
ww2. Far over 700 Billion Dollars to the DOO. Just crazy !!
HoodRatKing 4 minutes ago (Edited)
The US is in BUSINESS, one of their top businesses is SELLING ARMS...
I can't of course discuss their other lucrative businesses in Asia &
Afghanistan...
JaWS 5 minutes ago (Edited)
I understand that Cocaine Mitch will be visiting the spa in the near future.
"... I'm still stunned that the paper did a study that confirmed what people have suspected, namely that a high cycle threshold used on PCR testing was creating the appearance of a pandemic that might have long receded. The testing mania was generating wild illusions of millions of "asymptomatic" carriers and spreaders. How severe was the problem? Read this and weep ..."
"... up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found. ..."
"... A major reason for the ongoing lockdowns are due to the pouring in of positive case numbers from massive testing. If 90% of these positive tests are false, we have a major problem. The whole basis of the panic disappears. All credit to the Times for running the article but why no follow up and why no change in its editorial stance? ..."
"... I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near total meltdown of normal life -- schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned -- will be long lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus itself. ..."
"... During the Covid-19 pandemic, the world is unwittingly conducting what amounts to the largest immunological experiment in history on our own children. We have been keeping children inside, relentlessly sanitizing their living spaces and their hands and largely isolating them ..."
"... in the course of social distancing to mitigate the spread, we may also be unintentionally inhibiting the proper development of children's immune systems. ..."
"... The psychological effects of loneliness are a health risk comparable with risk obesity or smoking. Anxiety and depression have spiked since lockdown orders went into effect. ..."
The paper of record in 2020 shifted dramatically to the most illiberal stance possible on
the virus, pushing for full lockdowns, and ignoring or burying any information that might
contradict the case for this unprecedented experiment in social and economic control. This
article highlights the exceptions.
...
Even within the blatant and aggressive pro-lockdown bias, and consistent with the way the
New York Times does its work, the paper has not been entirely barren of truth about Covid and
lockdowns. Below I list five times that the news section of the paper, however inadvertently
and however buried deep within the paper, actually told the truth.
I'm still stunned that the paper did a study that confirmed what people have suspected,
namely that a high cycle threshold used on PCR testing was creating the appearance of a
pandemic that might have long receded. The testing mania was generating wild illusions of
millions of "asymptomatic" carriers and spreaders. How severe was the problem? Read this and
weep:
In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in
Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried
barely any virus, a review by The Times found.
On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a
database maintained by The Times . If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New
York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to
isolate and submit to contact tracing.
The implications of this revelation are incredible. A major reason for the ongoing lockdowns
are due to the pouring in of positive case numbers from massive testing. If 90% of these
positive tests are false, we have a major problem. The whole basis of the panic disappears. All
credit to the Times for running the article but why no follow up and why no change in its
editorial stance?
Gone missing this year in public commentary has been much at all about naturally acquired
immunities from the virus, even though the immune system deserves credit for why human kind has
lasted this long even in the presence of pathogens. That the Times ran this piece was another
exception in otherwise exceptionally bad coverage. It said in part:
Scientists who have been monitoring immune responses to the virus are now starting to see
encouraging signs of strong, lasting immunity, even in people who developed only mild
symptoms of Covid-19, a flurry of new studies suggests. Disease-fighting antibodies, as well
as immune cells called B cells and T cells that are capable of recognizing the virus, appear
to persist months after infections have resolved -- an encouraging echo of the body's
enduring response to other viruses .
Researchers
have yet to
find unambiguous evidence that coronavirus reinfections are occurring, especially within
the few months that the virus has been rippling through the human population. The prospect of
immune memory "helps to explain that," Dr. Pepper said.
Data from monkeys suggests that even low levels of antibodies can prevent serious illness
from the virus, if not a re-infection. Even if circulating antibody levels are undetectable,
the body retains the memory of the pathogen. If it crosses paths with the virus again,
balloon-like cells that live in the bone marrow can mass-produce antibodies within hours.
It's still a shock that so many schools closed their doors this year, partly from disease
panic but also from compliance with orders from public health officials. Nothing like this has
happened, and the kids have been brutalized as a result, not to mention the families who found
themselves unable to cope at home. For millions of students, a whole year of schooling is gone.
And they have been taught to treat their fellow human beings as nothing more than disease
vectors. So it was amazing to read this story in the Times :
So far, schools do not seem to be stoking community transmission of the coronavirus,
according to data emerging from random testing in the United States and Britain. Elementary
schools especially seem to seed remarkably few infections.
Byline Karen Yourish, K.K. Rebecca Lai, Danielle Ivory and Mitch Smith
Another strangely missing part of mainstream coverage has been honesty about the risk
gradient in the population. It is admitted even by the World Health Organization that the case
fatality rate for Covid-19 from people under the age of 70 is 0.05%. The serious danger is for
people with low life expectancy and broken immune systems. Knowing that, as we have since
February, we should have expected the need for special protection for nursing homes. It was
incredibly obvious. Instead of doing that, some governors shoved Covid patients into nursing
homes. Astonishing. In any case, the above article (and
this one
too) was one of the few times this year that the Times actually spelled out the many thousands
times risk to the aged and sick as versus the young and healthy.
Notable Opinion
columns
The op-ed page of the paper mirrored the news coverage, with only a handful of exceptions.
Those are noted below.
I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this
near total meltdown of normal life -- schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned --
will be long lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus
itself. The stock market will bounce back in time, but many businesses never will. The
unemployment, impoverishment and despair likely to result will be public health scourges of
the first order.
Worse, I fear our efforts will do little to contain the virus, because we have a
resource-constrained, fragmented, perennially underfunded public health system. Distributing
such limited resources so widely, so shallowly and so haphazardly is a formula for failure.
How certain are you of the best ways to protect your most vulnerable loved ones? How readily
can you get tested?
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the world is unwittingly conducting what amounts to the
largest immunological experiment in history on our own children. We have been keeping
children inside, relentlessly sanitizing their living spaces and their hands and largely
isolating them. In doing so, we have prevented large numbers of them from becoming infected
or transmitting the virus. But in the course of social distancing to mitigate the spread, we
may also be unintentionally inhibiting the proper development of children's immune
systems.
Our mental health suffers, too. The psychological effects of loneliness are a health risk
comparable with risk obesity or smoking. Anxiety and depression have spiked since lockdown
orders went into effect. The weeks immediately following them saw nearly an 18 percent jump
in overdose deaths and, as of last month, more than 40 states had reported increases. One in
four young adults age 18 to 25 reported seriously considering suicide within the 30-day
window of a recent study. Experts fear that suicides may increase; for young Americans, these
concerns are even more acute. Calls to domestic violence hotlines have soared. America's
elderly are dying from the isolation that was meant to keep them safe.
Declining empires never decline gracefully. And neither will the US empire –
addicted as it is to a belief in its 'exceptionalism' and its grounding in aggression both at
home and abroad. Add to the mix that 70 million people voted for Donald Trump and 70% of
Republican supporters believe that the election was stolen by the Democrats. A sick country!
Joe Biden will smooth a few rough edges but won't do much more.
Yesterday I discussed US 'exceptionalism' and that the US is almost always at war. Today I
discuss the US domestic sickness- a failing democracy, inequality, racism and violence.
It is a myth that democracies like America will behave internationally at a higher level of
morality. Countries act in their own interests as they perceive them. We need to discount the
noble ideas espoused by Americans on how they run their own country on the domestic front and
look instead at how they consistently treat other countries. Consider how the Kurds are being
treated. They led the fight against ISIS but are now largely abandoned by the US and other
'allies'. The scrapping of the alliance with them is made the more dishonourable by the
US/Saudi alliance with the resulting tragedy in Yemen.
The US claims about how well they run their own country are challenged on so many fronts.
Alongside great wealth and privilege, 43 million US citizens live in poverty, they have a
massive prison population with its indelible racist connotations, guns are ubiquitous and they
refuse to address the issue. Violence is as American as cherry pie. It is embedded in US
behaviour both at home and abroad.
The founding documents of the US inspire Americans and many people throughout the world.
"The land of the free and the home of the brave" still has a clarion call. Unfortunately, those
core values have often been denied to others. For example, when the Philippines sought US
support it was invaded instead. Ho Chi Minh wanted US support for independence but Vietnam was
invaded.
Like many democracies, including our own, money and vested interests are corrupting public
life. As some have described it, 'Democracy' in the US has been replaced by 'Donocracy', with
practically no restrictions on funding of elections and political lobbying for decades. House
of Representatives electorates are gerrymandered and poor and minority group voters are often
excluded from the rolls. The powerful Jewish lobby, supported by fundamentalist Christians, has
run US policy off the rails on Israel and the Middle East. The powerful private health
insurance industry has mired the US in the most expensive and inefficient health services in
the world
The US has slipped to number 21 as a 'flawed democracy' in the Economist's Intelligence 2016
Democracy Index. (NZ was ranked 4 and Australia 10). It noted that 'public confidence in
government has slumped to historic lows in the US.' Trump is pushing the US into becoming a
failed state. His executive power is largely unchecked by a crippled Congress. The Supreme
Court is stacked
Many democracies are in trouble. US democracy is in more trouble than most. With over 40% of
Americans still prepared to vote for Donald Trump it tells us a great deal about the pervasive
sickness.
But our risky dependence on the US cannot be avoided or excused by laying problems at the
door of Donald Trump alone. Malcolm Fraser warned us about a dangerous ally long before Donald
Trump came on the scene. US obsession with war and with overthrowing or undermining foreign
governments goes back over a century. So does domestic gun violence,inequality and racism.
Donald Trump excesses are not likely to significantly move American policies from what has
become the norm over two centuries.
Hugh White has pointed out, the US has in effect now given up looking after anyone but
itself – "America first" – which makes it very dangerous for a country to be joined
at the hip with the US, with or without Donald Trump. It could, of course, be argued that Trump
is just being honest and saying what US presidents have always done, looking after their own
interests even if they refuse to admit it.
A major voice in articulating American extremism and the American Imperium is Fox News and
Rupert Murdoch who exert their influence not just in America but also in the UK and Australia.
Fox News supported the invasion of Iraq and is mindless of the terrible consequences. Rupert
Murdoch applauded the invasion of Iraq because it would reduce oil prices. Fox and News Corp
are leading sceptics on climate change which threatens our planet. News Corp underpins American
imperialist intentions. The New York Times tells us that outside the White House, Rupert
Murdoch is Trump's chief adviser. God help us!
In the past as in the Vietnam war, the good sense of the American people turned the tide. It
is now a moot point whether the US can turn the tide again. The sickness is now more entrenched
by Fox News and other moneyed extremists.
But it is not just the destructive role of News Corp in the US, UK and Australia. Our media,
including the ABC and even SBS, is so derivative. Our media seems to regard Australia as an
island parked off New York. We are saturated with news, views, entertainment and sit-coms from
the US. It is so pervasive and extensive, we don't recognize it for its very nature. The last
thing a fish recognizes is water. We really do have a 'white man' media'. We see it most
obviously today in its paranoia over China.
One outcome of the declining comparative US economic power is that the US will ask its
allies to do more. We saw the influence of US budgetary pressures in its launch of the pivot to
the Pacific. It was designed in part to help the US extricate itself from the Middle East, but
also to reduce defence expenses in the budget.
Despite continual wars, often unsuccessful, the overthrow or subversion of foreign
governments and declining US economic influence, US hegemony and domination of Australian
thinking continues. Despite all the evidence, why do we continue in denial?
One reason is that as a small, isolated and white community in Asia we have historically
sought an outside protector, first the UK and when that failed, the US.
We are often told that we have shared values and common institutions first with the UK and
now with the US. But counties will always act first in their own interests as Australian
farmers are finding as a result of Trump's dealing with China.
We continue to seek security from our region through a US protector rather than, as Paul
Keating put it, security within our own region. Our long-term future depends on relations in
our region and not reliance on a dangerous and distant ally.
Another reason why we are in denial about the American Imperium, is, as I have described,
the saturation of our media with US news, views and entertainment. We do not have an
independent media. Whatever the US media says about tax cuts for the wealthy, defence or
climate change it inevitably gets a good run in our derivative media.
A further reason for the continuing US hegemony in Australian attitudes is the seduction of
Australian opinion leaders over decades who have benefitted from American largesse and support
– in the media, politics, bureaucracy, business, trade unions, universities and
think-tanks. Thousands of influential Australians have been co-opted by US money and support in
travel, 'dialogues', study centres and think tanks. That is real 'foreign influence'.
China is a beginner in this soft power game.
How long will Australian denial of US policies continue? When will some of us stand up? Are
our political leaders right in their assessment that any questioning of the threats posed by
our interpretation of the benefits and obligations of the US alliance will lose them an
election?
In so far as China is any sort of distant threat it would be much less so if we were not so
subservient to the US. The great risk of war with China is if we continue to act as a proxy for
the US.
What will we do if the US decides to follow the advice of some of its senior generals and
use tactical nuclear weapons in North Korea? Their use would engage the US/Australian
facilities in Central Australia a fact that would not escape the notice of China
There is also a great risk that we could be drawn into a US-led attack on China without our
knowledge or agreement.
We are a nation in denial that we are 'joined at the hip' to a dangerous ,erratic and risky
ally. Apart from brief isolationist periods, the US has been almost perpetually at war. The
greatest military risk we run is being led by the nose into a US war with China.
Our record is clear. We have allowed ourselves to be drawn into the futile wars of the UK
and the US time and time again. We are used to acting at the direction of our imperial masters.
We have become culturally addicted to being told what to think and do. We have forfeited our
strategic autonomy while parroting on about our sovereignty
It sure looks like Biden will take over the White House one way or another, and while Trump
and his supporters might still try a few things, the political correlation of forces inside the
US ruling classes is clearly against Trump. As for the "deplorables" – they have been
neutralized by stealing the election. Which means that Russia will soon face the most rabidly
russophobic gang of messianic Neocons in history. So what can the world expect next?
The Dems are not meaningfully different from the Republicans. True, the Dems blame Russia
for everything, while the Republicans blame China. Not much of a difference here: it is all
about hate and scapegoating. And both of these factions of the oligarchic Uniparty like to
blame Iran for, well, being located in the "wrong" part of the world, the Middle-East, which
all US politicians (and not to mention their Israeli masters) want to control. As for the
Israel Lobby, it has been trying to trigger a US attack on Iran for many decades. Recent US
moves of key personnel and bombers might indicate that discussions of an attack on Iran are
still very much taking place.
I don't believe that these fundamental directions in US foreign policy will change much.
Why?
Primarily because the AngloZionist Empire and even the US as we knew them are basically
dead, which means that irrespective of who is in control of the US, the objective
means/capabilities of the Empire and the US will remain the same . In other words, when
Biden promises to show Russia how tough and mighty he will be, he will not have any more
capabilities to threaten Russia with than Trump had.
So the first thing we can expect is simply "more of the same".
Now, in the Empire of
Illusions which the United States has become, appearances matter much more than
facts . US politicians have two quasi-reflexive reactions to any problem: use violence or
throw money at it. Of course, using violence against Russia (or China and Iran) would be
extremely dangerous. So throwing money at a problem is the way chosen by the US political
elites (see here for the, rather
boring, details).
A lot of that money will also be spent on ideological nonsense like supporting trans-gender
rights in Africa, woke-awareness in the Baltic, "critical race theory" in Japan (good luck with
that!), "Holocaust studies" in Poland and the like.
What will happen next is that this money will be spread amongst a pretty large US and EU
bureaucracy (and its subcontractors) to all sorts of political PR actions aimed at presenting
modern Russia as "Putin's Mordor" whose "Nazguls" (scary GRU and/or SVR and/or FSB agents) run
around the planet looking for more targets to infect with the totally ineffective, but still
scary, "Novichok". In the past, much of that money was spent inside Russia by all sorts of
CIA-run NGOs and much of it was also spent on various propaganda efforts outside Russia. Again,
this will not change, if anything, expect even more money poured into what are in reality
strategic PSYOP operations.
The sad truth is that US politicians know very little about Russia, a country which they
hate and fear, but not a country they even begin to understand. In this case, what US
politicians will not realize is that Russia herself has changed a great deal in the past years:
many new laws and regulation (see machine translated example
here ) were adopted which, in essence, "plugged" many political "holes" in the Russian
legislation which allowed AngloZionist organizations to have a great deal of influence in
Russia. As a result of these reforms, it has become far more difficult for western run NGOs to
influence the Russian political scene.
As a direct result of these new rules, I expect that a higher ratio of money will stay
allocated to activities situated in the West and less for Russian-based activities. In plain
English, this means that more US printed money will be spent on completely useless activities.
The only people benefitting from this will be the entire class of pseudo "Russia experts" whose
only true expertise is on how to secure grant money. They will produce even more conferences
and papers which nobody will care about, but which will allow the US Neocons and their deep
state to show how "Biden is firm with Russia". The typical US cocktail of waste, mismanagement
and fraud (and let's not forget good old corruption!).
Russia's response to that will also be "more of the same": Russian politicians will continue
to express their disgust with their western "partners" (FYI – when Russians speak of
"partners" it is understood by all that they mean this only sarcastically). Foreign Minister Lavrov and one of his
deputies have recently made statements basically indicating that Russia will not seek any
(!) form of dialog with the West, because, frankly, it is pretty clear to them that this is a
total waste of time: Russia has nobody in the West to speak to: the only country with real
agency (albeit severely limited by its subordination to Israel) would be the US, all the other
countries of the West are really colonies and/or protectorates with no sovereignty at all.
What about all the many military provocations the Empire is organizing all around Russia? Do
they concern Russia leaders or not?
Well, no and yes.
In purely military terms, US/NATO military capabilities are no real threat to Russia whose
military is much smaller, but also much more capable than the western ones. Why? Simply because
building a truly powerful military has been a core strategic priority for the Kremlin who
needed a military actually capable of a) deterring the West from attacking Russia and b)
defeating the West should deterrence fail. In sharp contrast, western militaries have not been
training for real wars for decades already: most of what the US/NATO do is using western
militaries for all sorts of propaganda purposes (like "sending messages" or "showing
determination" etc.) and for counter-insurgency operations, not for fighting a real, major,
wars.
Right now the Russian military is much more modern (about 80% of new gear on average across
all military branches and services!) and much better trained for real combat operations. In
sharp contrast, the US MIC is heavy on hot air (Space Force! Hypersonic missiles! Artificial
Intelligence!) and short on any actually deployed and engageable weapon systems. Away from the
propaganda machine (aka "corporate legacy ziomedia"), the reality is that the West is about
1.5-2 decades behind Russia in most critical military technologies.
Last, but not least, wars are not won by machines, computers or fancy engineering: they are
won by soldiers, real men, who know what they are defending and why. The contrast between the
typical Russian soldier (in any service or branch of the military) and his western counterpart
could not be greater than it is today. Simply put: no western country can boast that it has
soldiers like Russia has and, again, I don't mean the "super dooper" elite Spetsnaz operators,
I am talking about your very average, garden variety, infantry soldier, like the ones who saved
Russia in the Chechen conflict in spite of operating in truly horrible and totally chaotic
circumstances. These guys might not look like much, but as soldiers they are the kind every
commander dreams about.
All this is to say that Russians have nothing to fear from all the western sabre-rattling,
except maybe one thing: the rogue officer, on either side, who would suddenly decide to open
fire (for whatever reason) thereby creating a situation which could escalate into a full-scale
war very rapidly.
The other thing which is objectively bad for Russia is the number of key treaties the US has
now withdrawn from: these treaties are most needed, especially as confidence building measures.
Right now there are very few treaties left and that means that the US is desperate to try to
suck Russia into an arms race.
This won't work.
Why?
Putin himself explained it very well when he recently said that while the West throws huge
sums of money at any problem, Russia allocates brains, not money. According to Putin, it is the
use of brains, rather than wasting money, which allowed Russia to develop all the weapon
systems mentioned by Putin for the first time in 2018. This made it possible for Russia to get
ahead by a decade or more, while using only a small fraction of the kind of money the US, and
other western countries, are allocating on "defense" (while not being threatened by anybody!).
In the competition between the US money printing press and the Russian brains, you can be sure
that the latter one will always prevail.
The bottom line is this: the US can spend many hundred billion dollars on " countering
Russian (or Chinese) influence ", but this will do absolutely nothing to help the objective
circumstances and capabilities of the Empire or the US.
So the real question is what will change on the level below direct military
confrontation.
In a recent press conference, Putin mentioned something very interesting about the outgoing
Trump administration. He said:
"The current administration introduced new sanctions against Russia 46 times –
against our legal entities and economic operators. Forty-six times – this has never
ever happened before. But at the same time, bilateral trade grew by 30 percent over the
previous year, oddly enough, even despite those restrictions."
So if the putatively pro-Russian Trump Administration sanctioned Russia 46 times, it is
normal for the Russians to look at Biden with equanimity or even a resigned fatalism: " the
West has always hated us, the West still hates us and the West will always hate us "
– this truism is all but unanimously accepted amongst Russian politicians.
Still, we can count on Biden and Harris to try to show how "tough" they are on Russia and
Putin: they will show their prowess mostly by demanding that their NATO/EU colonies and
protectorates continue "send
messages" to Russia and show their "unity" and "solidarity" with each other, mostly by
parroting self-evidently nonsensical Anglo and German propaganda. Will the bilateral trade
between Russia and the US continue to grow? Probably not as the list of corporations and
agencies the US declares to be under sanctions will only grow further. But never say never,
especially with the comprehensively hypocritical Dems
How about the kind of self-evidently ridiculous stories about Russians using (a clearly
ineffective) combat biological agent like the so-called "Novichok", trying to kill irrelevant
bloggers and failing to do so, or some variation on "animal Assad" "poisoning his own people"?
Will that nonsense also continue? Probably, mainly simply because this is something which the
Empire has demonstratively proved that it has the ability to do. So why not continue,
especially with a press corps willing to parrot even the most ridiculous nonsense.
The bottom line is this: to get a sense of what any actor could do next, one always has to
multiply intentions by capabilities. If there is one thing which the outgoing Maga
Administration has shown, is that its declared intentions and actual capabilities are not at
all commensurate: hence the long list of countries Trump threatened, but never meaningfully
attacked. "Biden" (and I use this term very loosely, meaning "Biden and his real handlers")
will inherit the very same geostrategic toolkit Trump had at his disposal for four years and
which did not make it possible for him to effectively flex muscles, not even against weak and
nearby Venezuela! We can be pretty sure that the rhetoric about Russia will get even more
hate-filled and paranoid. Petty harassment (such as arrest of nationals, closures of offices,
expulsion from various international events, etc.) will also continue, not so much because they
work, but because a lot of people depend on these for their salary.
How likely is a shooting war? In my personal opinion, not very likely at all. I think that
the folks at the Pentagon are mostly aware of the real world out there, and they probably
recognize that the US armed forces are in no condition to fight any halfway capable
opponent.
How likely is it that the US will use a protectorate like the Ukraine or Georgia to reignite
another local war? It is not impossible, especially since the US did support SBU infiltration
of terrorists into Russia. Keep in mind that the sole goal of such (a, frankly, suicidal)
attack would be to provoke Russia into a military response, not to actually achieve anything
else. The main problem here is that the regular armed forces of the Ukraine and Georgia are in
no condition to fight, and that the (US letter soup controlled) Ukrainian and Georgian special
services have already tried this many times, and so far without success, mainly because, unlike
all the western countries, Russia has the actual means to lock her borders when needed.
What about the reported plan to destabilize Russia by creating conflicts all along her
periphery?
It would take way too long for me here to describe what is taking place in each of these
countries right now, but I will offer just the following bullet points:
Southern Military District or
the 58th
Combined Arms Army in the region). Those who believe that Turkey strengthened its
position in the region simply do not understand the outcome of the recent war (especially the
very interesting drone war which showed that while Armenia could not deal with them, Russian
EW literally destroyed Turkish drones in mid-air (this also happened in Syria, by the way).
Central Asia is an inherently unstable region, mainly because these countries never succeeded
in effectively transitioning from the Soviet period to full independence. And yes, the US has
a great deal of influence in this region. But only Russia can provide effective security
guarantees to the leaders of Central Asia, they all know that. Finally, Kazakhstan plays an
important "buffer" role for Russia,
putting distance between her and her chronically unstable southern neighbors . In the Far
East, Russia and China are enjoying a long honeymoon in which their already very deep
relationship only gets deeper and their collaboration stronger (in spite of western PSYOPs
trying to scare Russians about how China wants to take Siberia, and other silly fairy tales).
Russia is now even supplying key strategic defense technologies to China. Last, but most
certainly not least, Russia has total superiority in the Arctic, where the West is many
decades behind Russia. In fact, Russia is massively expanding her capabilities (civilian and
military) in the Russian north, which will give her even more weight on our planet's very
rich north.
Now ask yourself: do you see any of that changing in the next 4 years, even assuming a
rabidly hostile Biden Administration? I sure don't.
Conclusion:
Yes, the political atmosphere between Russia and the Empire will get worse. Most of the
"action" will take place in the public media space. The quasi simultaneous collapse of the
Anglo-Zionist Empire and the United States (at least as we knew them before the election steal)
will not give much time or energy to western leaders to pursue policies which have already
failed in the past and for which they simply do not have the means.
Trump or Biden was never a meaningful choice for Russia (only the Russian court jester
Zhirinovskii thought otherwise). It's not much of a choice today either. The most likely
consequence of these collapses will be that the world will split in roughly two sections:
"Section A" which will include all the countries of the "collective West" and which will be
busy trying to survive a crisis which has only begun and "Section B": the rest of the world,
which will try hard to decouple itself from the sinking West and try to develop itself in this
rather unstable environment.
Also, many Russians remember the gerontocracy which ruled in the last years of the USSR and
they know how such gerontocracies act (make no difference if the country is ruled by a
Chernenko or a Biden – such rulers are always weak and clueless).
i remember the late 80's when ronald reagan was declared a genius for single handedly
spending the ussr into oblivion. when the reagan administration took over (with a little help
from daddy bush working a deal with the iranians to hold on to the hostages until after the
election) the national debt was $900,000,000,000. when he left office he had tripled that, a
small price to pay for taking down the evil empire, they told me. in the 90's clinton and his
best friend newt gingrich magically balanced the budget (by raiding the social security trust
fund and leaving a rubber iou behind). when the skull and bones division of the neocons
seized power the debt was $6,000,000,000,000. twenty years and several wars later we were at
$23,000,000,000,000. we are about to reach $30,000,000,000,000 after a bad flu season this
year. our military is exhausted, our equipment is so out dated and worn it isn't worth
bringing back, (if we ever leave the middle east), the russians and chinese are decades ahead
in technological terms. now tell me, who spent who into oblivion?
Russia remains vulnerable to Western efforts at political subversion. And Democrats excel
at this. Remember, it was during the presidency of Barack Obama when Putin faced toughest
challenge to his rule. I'm talking, of course, about Bolotnaya protests.
These days millions of Russian kids watch political videos, promoted by Youtube, where
they are being taught, that their country sucks and there is no hope for their lives
whatsoever unless they overthrow Putin. Russian politicians do not use the internet and
appear completely oblivious to this danger. They're a bit like Saker to be honest: obsessed
with their tank divisions and rockets, dinosaurs preparing for yesterday's war. They risk
finding themselves in Lukashenka's position.
Excellent article. Even the US Marine Corps is cutting infantry battalions to fund
"information groups". A new video addresses this anti-Russian propaganda:
Russia doesn't have the working bodies to be a world hegemon.
CCP China does.
The Russian workers (Moscow, Cyprus) I've seen were indolent compared to Chinese.
Infiltration? Even here, the CCP leaning faction is large.
China appears to be Biden's highest bidder, and largest "investor", so far
Either Trump drops the hammer before Jan 20, or we're fucked on China.
Probably so's Russia, on a longer schedule.
Warsaw Pact was canclled –but NATO grew and grew and grew after Bush stating " We
will never expand–honest" and then 911 arrived and Firechief exclaimng "We decided to
PULL IT !" but othing had struck it and of course WMD in Iraq -- –
It's improbable that there would be any direct military clash somewhere even though
there's always the possibility of a mistake leading to a crisis. The US uses color
revolutions, proxy wars, subversion, bribery, economic warfare, sanctions and varying forms
of sabotage. It's been pretty successful so far with this all over the world but Russia is
too big and self-sufficient to be forced to capitulate.
rhetoric about Russia will get even more hate-filled and paranoid
The US propaganda system always needs a boogeyman to scare the public with. Promotion of
fear is an inherent part of the American system of engineering consent.
far more difficult for western run NGOs to influence the Russian political scene.
Big tech collusion in enforcing censorship here in the US has become heavy-handed and
omnipresent. But one supposes there'll be complaints about lack of free speech in Russia.
Trump was verbally belligerent but stopped short of starting any new wars, placating the
establishment with imposing sanctions, assassinating Soleimani, etc. Biden is a stupid,
reckless incompetent who could easily stumble us into conflicts we can't handle. But then, it
would be his handlers who actually pull the strings and they seem to be as cretinous as
him.
As for the "deplorables" – they have been neutralized by stealing the
election.
Neutralized? No way José, the deplorables are mad as hornets about the stolen
election and are just getting started. And they have their Second Amendment assets, and it's
not even January 20th yet.
Do you see the 'YouTube' kids starting a revolution, storming the Kremlin, and the
'organs' watching them with arms crossed from the side? Wouldn't they rather send them to
develop the Arctic?
Unlike the 80s there is no official ideological differences except that Russia's ideology
of national sovereignty, family and strength is in assendence while the US Marxist one of
globo homo anti white hate thyself BLM is openly ridiculed by the quiet majority.
It is about the US that people openly talk about being on the verge of civil war not
Russia these days.
Most Russians know it's a fight against subjugation there is no other way, defend itself
or get eaten.
Besides under the Harris presidency in a year or two it will be white Americans who will
be told officially they suck.
These days millions of Russian kids watch political videos, promoted by Youtube, where
they are being taught, that their country sucks and there is no hope for their lives
whatsoever unless they overthrow Putin
The cleverest trick the Devil ever invented was to convince young (white) people that
Globohomo, Blacks Lives Matter and Immigration are somehow a benefit to them and that they
should fight for their own displacement
Biden has a lot of compromat and Harris is basically akin to a wigger in a black gang, who
will need to prove her devotion when she takes the reigns after Biden.
Both will be like putty in their handler's hands.
Politicians start wars to make the public look away from domestic or personal crises.
Biden already has his corruption probe, and whilst Trump made many errors, he did not fall
for the trap of starting a major foreign policy disaster for personal political gain.
Both Biden and Harris would do that in a heartbeat. So whether that would be Iran or
Ukraine, or pushing Taiwan too far, I'm pretty confident a war will start.
I always said with Trump the odd's are 80% civil war, 10% world war, 10% peace, whilst
Biden is around 50% civil war, 45% world war, 5% peace.
Nice display of your brainwashedness, from western propaganda.
You didn't follow Saker's link to the machine translated example , did you?
One would need a bit more than broad, completely unsubstantiated claims by you that
Russian kids in large numbers actually believe those YT lies and similar.
And Lukashenko isn't doing so bad, currently.
@Felix
Keverich ng "dusty, dirty" -- a term used in 2nd-millennium BCE texts throughout the
Fertile Crescent for people variously described as rebels, outlaws, raiders, mercenaries,
bowmen, servants, slaves, and laborers"(Wikipedia).
The 2001 paper "Who are the Hîabiru of the Amarna Letters?" by retired professor
(Andrews University) S. Douglas Waterhouse (2001) joined a lot of dots for me. A good stumble
on, thanks, Guyénot and others who posted relevant comments etc. (A copy can be found
here: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/jats/vol12/iss1/3/
)
@Carlos22
ashion. Yet that is what the US empire wants. It is hard to imagine the opportunity for
satire could be greater.
Here is some preliminary ideas
https://www.youtube.com/embed/noIWQFMskG0?feature=oembed
I also did a satire on Bellingcat called Bellingbat that examines some of the same issues. Of
course there is a fair amount of nudity involved as that is the US way when considering if
powerful females can be trusted. Unlike Lautrec I was never allowed into the ballerina's
dressing rooms even though I was a recognized well respected painter and would seek death
should I betray a slack breast or two.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/8Z9pggzVJ68?feature=oembed
Cheers all and have a happy new year.
"Last, but not least, wars are not won by machines, computers or fancy engineering: they
are won by soldiers, real men, who know what they are defending and why."
Azerbaijan just ate Putin's lunch by crushing Armenia's entire AA systems and their piece
by piece destruction of hundreds of T90's and all the Armenian artillery. Azerbaijan
accomplished this through Israeli military technology, likely including remote drone piloting
services.
Saker wants to pretend that it is the US that has Israel on a leash, but it is clearly the
other way around. Israel has already hoovered up all of the US electronics and military
patents and clearly any other patents that would be useful in a war, especially a war for
Eretz Israel.
Azerbaijan took out all the Armenian armor and air defenses with Israeli drones like the
Hovering Artillery Drones and Suicide drones. The amount of live film is staggering, and the
T90's were picked off like sparrows sitting on an electric wire. Some of the drones
Azerbaijan used were Turkish, but we can be certain that the technology is either licensed
from Israel or Israel's gollum the JEWSA.
Added to this complete mastery of the traditional battlespace is the complete Heeb control
over the bio-warfare space. Whether Putin allowed Russia to be circumcised while he played
along to the Rabbi's Covid rituals, or whether Putin is playing it safe and vaccinating and
closing its borders pre-emtively is irrellevant. Russia is being bullied like a lone teenage
Swedish boy at muslim majority high school in Malmo.
And of course, Russia still has a Rothschild controlled Central Bank too.
So Putin, just like Biden, is going to do exactly what his Chabad Lubbovitz Rabbi's tell
him he has to do. Both are Israel's Shabbez Bitches.
@Felix
Keverich everyone knows that the US and England hate Russia and Putin, thus whatever
these 2 countries claim about either is dismissed with a laugh. As for Skripal (where are
they now? dead?), Navalny, novichok, Assad gassing his own people ..a child can see through
this stuff. Sorry!
Young people in Russia watching US propaganda against their country you honestly think
they are going to agree with the country (USA) that has targeted them with missiles and
nuclear bombs for 70 years? Do you think we can't see the corruption and stupidity?
But I'm wasting my time here. Facts, logic, is lost on a person so naive and brainwashedas
yourself.
he's pretending to be Russian intelligent, which I doubt – not his name nor his
thoughts seem to be Russian.
He's right only in one thing – there's quite a big part of our society who think that
Putin (despite his obvious achievements) has to go. And those aren't liberasts, but patriots.
Putin is very deep in oligarchy swamp and he achieved max he could, i'm afraid.
Now he's just trying to keep the status quo.
I believe you have a serious problem. When the stork brought you, it must have dropped you
on your head. Your comment is sheer nonsense. Do you really believe the shit you have written
or do you have a vulgar desire for "replies".
You are either an idiot or an ass wash douche troll. Comment intelligently or not at all
and for heavens sake, seek medical attention for the lump on your head ( and the one inside
it as well)
"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own drama . And while you're
studying that drama -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other
new dramas , which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're
drama's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Dont be so hard on Felix the cat. He has been hiding under his mother;s bed surrounded by
rolls of toilet paper and wearing a mask since March 2020. Self imposed solitary confinement
does things to a person more so one who was retarded at birth.
Once he has his operation to remove his head from his ass his IQ should increase by 100%
.from 2 to 4 !
Patrick Armstrong spent 30 years as an analyst for the Canadian government, specializing
in first the USSR and then Russia. He was a Political Counselor in the Canadian Embassy in
Moscow from 1993 to 1996. Given the torrent of anti-Russian sentiment in the West, it's
unlikely Moscow would get a fair hearing in legal proceedings overseen by Western courts. And
recent hints suggest three decades of engagement may be coming to an end.
A Dutch court has just reversed another earlier Dutch court ruling that reversed an even
earlier Dutch court ruling. Russia had been sued by a company representing the shareholders of
erstwhile oil giant Yukos. The latest iteration, reversing the reversal and taking us back to
the original judgment, demands that Russia pay $50 billion to its shareholders. Yukos was
nationalized in the early 2000s, on the grounds of failure to pay tax arrears after the arrest
of its CEO for tax evasion.
So, what should Moscow do? It has appealed, but perhaps it should think about whether it
still wants to play the game.
Let's look at the behavior of other Dutch courts. In 2001, Slobodan Milošević
appeared at the Hague charged with crimes against humanity, genocide – the full package.
And, quite rightly, said most Westerners, because had not their media already named him the
"butcher of the Balkans" ?
In 2016, the International Court of Justice ruled that maybe he hadn't been as guilty as
first assumed. But it was too late: Milošević had died in his prison cell 10 years
before, with the trial still rolling on.
The Netherlands is also in charge of the investigation into the destruction of the MH-17
flight over Ukraine in 2014. Again, we had immediate Western news assertions that Putin and
Russia were responsible, and the personal assurance of former Secretary of State John Kerry
that US intelligence resources had watched the whole thing unfold. And it's been a fact-free
Gish gallop ever since.
After several investigations, suspiciously dependent on Ukrainian intelligence sources,
social media, and the US-government funded agency Bellingcat, with no one asking where the
"we saw it" was, the trial of four individuals began in March 2020 and has been
proceeding at the same comfortable pace as the Milošević trial.
In 2018, Ukraine, without the least suspicion of a chain of evidence, produced some parts it
claimed were from the surface-to-air missile said to have shot the plane down. The parts had
numbers, numbers can be traced, and the missile factory traced them. They were parts of a
missile shipped to an anti-aircraft unit in the west of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic
in December 1986.
The judges decided that the documents were irrelevant because they "may say something
about where the missile was between [19]86 and 91, but they say nothing about where the missile
was in July 2014." Presumably, a daring raid from Donetsk to an ammo dump in Western
Ukraine had happened, which nobody noticed. So, one might ask what Russia can expect from any
trial held in the Netherlands except an interminable process until the defendant dies.
Russians might then turn their attention to the practice of the rule of law in other Western
countries today. Huawei's chief financial officer, Meng Wanzhou, is approaching her third year
of house arrest in Canada. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been in a British prison with
one of the most severe regimes for the past 18 months and is approaching the second year of his
extradition hearing. Maria Butina, convicted in 2018 of acting as an unregistered foreign agent
of Russia, was in a US prison for five months, often in solitary confinement, on very
questionable charges. Senior French executive Frédéric Pierucci arrested in 2013
and later imprisoned in a US maximum-security facility for unwittingly breaching American
bribery laws. Or the US's open-ended Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act
– a federal law that, in 2017, imposed sanctions on Iran, North Korea, and Russia. Or the
huge fine imposed on Russia's Gazprom energy corporation in a Polish court just last month over
the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Or they might consider that Venezuela stored its national gold
reserves in London for safekeeping but can't have it back (although that judgment has recently
been reversed – for now). Or that the European Union extended its sanctions on Russia
because it couldn't prove its innocence of the latest accusation over Ukraine. Russian
observers might be forgiven if they regarded this as not rule of law but war of law –
lawfare.
Moscow has generally played the game and accepted Western court rulings and, sometimes,
they've gone its way: for example, the European Court of Human Rights' ruling of 2011 that the
case against Yukos founder Mikhail Khodorkovsky had not been politically motivated. But, given
the relentless cascade of accusations – redoubled in the past five years – perhaps
Moscow should reconsider, on the grounds that Western 'justice' will never give it a fair
shake.
Will it do so? Well, there have been some hints. At a conference of the Valdai Discussion
Club think tank last month, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russia no longer looked to
Western Europe as an example and was not going to be its vassal. The constitution was recently
amended to make Russian law primary. These would appear to be clues that Moscow is at least
pondering the conclusion that Western courts are not an arbiter, but a weapon.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Moscow is set for a showdown with Western judges and 1990s Russian oligarchs, over a new
ruling enabling the country to refuse to pay what is considered to be the biggest legal
settlement in history, over a collapsed oil empire.
The Constitutional Court, one of Russia's highest judicial authorities, ruled on Friday that
the decision of an international tribunal in the long-running dispute over the now-dissolved
energy giant Yukos is incompatible with Russian law. The case has been heard by a court in The
Hague, which claims jurisdiction under the terms of the Energy Charter Treaty, and awarded the
company's former shareholders a $50-billion payout from the Russian government earlier this
year. Moscow claimed a win in November on the other side of the Atlantic, when a US court,
which had been hearing the case simultaneously, decided to throw it out.
However, as Russia signed but never ratified the Treaty, which hands powers to international
tribunals, the Constitutional Court has now determined it is not bound by the terms of The
Hague judgement. The ruling states that, while the country's government of the day began the
process of signing up to the pact in 1994, they did not have the authority to make national
laws inferior to international agreements, or to "challenge the competence" of Russian
courts. Therefore, the jurists conclude, adhering to the Dutch court's demands would be
"unconstitutional."
The claimants in the case are oligarchs who lost cash when Yukos, once among Europe's
largest firms, collapsed. They say that a multi-billion dollar tax bill and the arrest of its
CEO and founder, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, on fraud charges amounted to state 'appropriation' of
its assets. However, Russian authorities insist that the shareholders cannot be considered
"legitimate," and that the Dutch judges had steamrolled over the country's laws against
corruption and fraud when ruling in their favour.
As far back as July 2014, The Hague ordered Moscow to cough up $50 billion to compensate the
plaintiffs. After exhausting the appeals process in February this year, Russia's lawyers asked
the Dutch Supreme Court to consider the case and overrule the decision. However, at the start
of December, it similarly backed the oligarchs.
Russia has insisted that the judgements are "politically motivated," and in December
the country's Justice Minister, Konstantin Chuychenko, told journalists that the case was part
of a "legal war that has been declared on Russia." He added that "Russia must
adequately defend itself and, sometimes, even attack back."
Now standing at around $50 billion, around the same ballpark as Russia's annual military
budget, the colossal settlement is thought to be the largest award in history. If the country
now rejects the bill, it would spark one of the most serious impasses in international legal
history, and leave Western states deciding whether to respect Russia's constitutional ruling,
or to enforce the demands by confiscating assets.
Yukos' former shareholders have already sought to have Western governments take control of
Russian property overseas as an insurance policy in case Moscow refuses to pay up. However, in
November, a judge in the simultaneous hearing in the US refused that request, saying that
"the Russian Federation is a sovereign country with economic tendrils that cross the globe,
not an insecure potential debtor that must be required to post security lest there be no assets
to seize at a later date."
Not all countries have taken the same approach, however, and in 2015 Russia's diplomats
slammed France and Belgium for confiscating state cash in overseas banks, and even buildings,
to be held as collateral in the case. Moscow again rejected the court's authority and said
their move was "an openly hostile act." Tim Osborne, a British lawyer representing the
former shareholders, said at the time that such seizures were necessary because Russia "has
no regard for international law or the rule of law."
At its height, Yukos produced 20 per cent of Russia's oil, placing it firmly among the ranks
of the world's most valuable enterprises. It had been formed by the privatization of former
state assets after the fall of the Soviet Union, with Khodorkovsky acquiring the assets for a
fraction of their worth at an auction that one economist, Andrey Illarionov, called "the
swindle of the century."
Khodorkovsky claims his arrest on fraud charges and the subsequent collapse of Yukos
was tied to his
political activism and his personal animosity towards Russian President Vladimir Putin. Putin,
however, claims that the oligarch, once said to be Russia's wealthiest man, had admitted his
guilt to him privately in exchange for a pardon in 2013.
Khodorkovsky insists that he has renounced any claims to his former empire and that, should
a settlement be reached in the Yukos case, he would not stand to benefit. However, Russian
authorities are said to suspect that a number of claimants have close financial ties to the
former oil magnate.
"... Then the exceptionalist-triumphalist power inevitably runs off-the-rails, and -- especially when it feels threatened or insecure -- lashes out in fits of aggressive military, economic, religious, or racial chauvinism. This cycle tends to replay again and again until the empire collapses, usually through some combination of external power displacement and internal exhaustion or collapse. ..."
Exceptionalism, triumphalism, chauvinism. These characteristics define most empires, including, like it or not, these
United
States . The sequence matters. A people and national government that fancies itself exceptional -- an example for the rest of
the world -- is apt to assert itself militarily, economically, and culturally around the globe. If that self-righteous state happens
to possess prodigious power, as the U.S. has since the Second World War, then any perceived success will lead to a sense of triumphalism,
and thus put into motion a feedback loop whereby national "achievement" justifies and validates that conception of exceptionalism.
Then the exceptionalist-triumphalist power inevitably runs off-the-rails, and -- especially when it feels threatened or insecure
-- lashes out in fits of aggressive military, economic, religious, or racial chauvinism. This cycle tends to replay again and again
until the empire collapses, usually through some combination of external power
displacement and internal exhaustion or collapse.
Such imperial hyper-powers, particularly in their late-stages, often employ foot soldiers across vast swathes of the planet, and
eventually either lose control of their actions or aren't concerned with their resultant atrocities in the first place. On that,
the jury is perhaps still out. Regardless, the discomfiting fact is that by nearly any measure, the United States today coheres,
to a remarkable degree, with each and every one of these tenets of empire evolution. This includes, despite the hysterical denials
of sitting political and Pentagon leaders, the troubling truth that American soldiers and intelligence agents have committed war
crimes across the Greater Middle East since 9/11 on a not so trivial number of occasions. These law of war violations also occurred
during the Cold War generation -- notably in Korea and Vietnam -- and the one consistent strain has been the almost complete inability
or unwillingness of the U.S. Government to hold perpetrators, and their enabling commanders, accountable.
Enter the International Criminal Court (ICC). First
proposed , conceptually, in 1919 (and again in 1937, 1948, and 1971), in response to massive war crimes and human rights violations
of the two world wars, the Hague-headquartered court finally opened for business in 2002. With more than 120 signatory member states
(though not, any longer, the U.S.) the ICC has the jurisdiction to prosecute international violations including "genocide, crimes
against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression." A compliment, rather than a replacement, to sovereign national justice
systems, the ICC is designed to be the "court of
last resort," obliged to exercise jurisdiction only when a nation's courts prove unwilling or unable to prosecute such crimes.
All of which sounds both admirable and unthreatening (at least to reasonably well-behaved states with accountable, responsive
justice systems), but to the contemporary American imperial hyper-power, the very existence of the ICC is viewed as a mortal threat.
Matters demonstrably came to a head this past week when an ICC appeals court
reversed a lower-level decision and allowed its special prosecutor -- whose visa Washington has already revoked -- to simply
open an official investigation into alleged war crimes committed in Afghanistan by all three major parties to the conflict:
the Taliban, U.S., and U.S.-backed Kabul-based Afghan government. This decidedly mild decision, which only allows a multi-directional
inquiry , unleashed an immediate firestorm in Washington.
The reflexive reactions and responses of current and former Trump officials was both instructive and totally in line with decades
worth of bipartisan U.S. disavowal of the very notion of international norms and standards. Trump's recent hawkish national security
adviser, John Bolton -- now an MSNBC-DNC
darling for his apparent critique
of the president in a new memoir -- has spearheaded opposition to the ICC since its inception, has
asserted that the ICC is "illegitimate," and that the U.S. Government "will not sit quietly," if "the court comes after us."
After the most recent ruling, Secretary of State (and former director of the very CIA that is likely to be implicated in said war
crimes investigation) Mike Pompeo
declared the ruling a "truly breathtaking action by an unaccountable, political institution masquerading as a legal body," adding,
threateningly, that "we will take all necessary measures to protect our citizens from this renegade, unlawful, so-called court."
On that latter point, Pompeo is neither wrong, nor espousing a policy -- no matter how aggressive or rejectionist -- unique to
Donald Trump's administration. Here, a brief bit of all but forgotten history is in order. In 1998, the UN General Assembly
voted 120-7 to establish the
ICC. The United States, in good company with a gaggle of criminally compromised states -- China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Yemen, and
Qatar -- voted against the measure. Two years later, however, President Bill Clinton unenthusiastically
signed onto this foundational
Rome
Statute , but with some dubiousness and the requisite American exceptionalist caveat that he "will not, and do not recommend
that my successor, submit the treaty to the Senate for advice and consent until our fundamental concerns are satisfied."
Then came the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This tragedy turned (for then ascendant neoconservatives)
opportunity for expanded U.S. military global
assertiveness, ensured that Clinton's successor -- one George W. Bush -- wouldn't even consider ICC treaty submission to the Senate.
Rather, in May 2002, Bush
sent a note to the UN Secretary General informing him that the most powerful and influential country in the world no longer intended
to ratify the Rome Statute or recognize any obligations to the ICC (which officially
opened for business only two months later
). Never simply a morality tale of Republican villainy, Bush's disavowal didn't explain the half of it.
Far more disturbingly, a stunningly euphemistic
American Service-members' Protection Act
of 2001 amendment, first introduced just 15 days after the
9/11 attacks, to the Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery From and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States,
was already under consideration in Congress. With broad bipartisan majorities, that legislation -- which authorized the U.S. president
to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned
by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court" -- passed in the
House a couple weeks after Bush sent his note
to the UN, and the Senate just two weeks later.
President Bush then signed this authorization for, up to and including military, force into law on August 2, 2002. Much of the world
was appalled and international human rights organizations took to – quite appropriately – calling it the "
Hague Invasion Act ." It remains
in force today.
The timeline is instructive and itself tells a vital part of the story. Democrats and Republicans alike had chosen to "preempt"
-- an internationally prohibited precedent that Bush would
later invoke to invade Iraq -- the not yet in force ICC with this bill. They did so, I'd assert, because they knew a salient dirty
secret: the U.S. was about to unleash martial fury across the Greater Middle East. In the process, inevitably, American troopers
and intelligence spooks would push the limits of acceptable wartime behavior, and thus be vulnerable to international prosecution
by the soon effective ICC.
This was unacceptable for an exceptionalist, triumphalist nation, about to undertake chauvinist actions the world over. That unilateral,
world-order-be-damned national position held, and still holds, sway in the intervening 18 years. So, for all the Trump administration's
coarse obtuseness in response to the opening of the latest ICC Afghan investigation, this is, at root, not (as the mainstream media
will inevitably now claim) a Donald phenomenon.Three administrations, and multiple guard-changing Congresses, chose to not to touch
the infamous Hague Invasion Act or realign the U.S. with the ICC or the spirit (or even the pretense) of international law.
The cast of elite characters, many still politically influential, who voted for the Hague Invasion Act is nothing short of astounding.
The bill passed the House by a margin of 280-138, and counted
such "yea" votes as House Intelligence Committee Chair -- top Trump opponent and Russiagate investigator -- Democrat Adam Schiff.
Notably, especially in this ongoing electoral cycle, then Vermont Representative Bernie Sanders opposed the measure.In the
Senate , an even larger portion of Democrats joined current Speaker Mitch McConnell (and most of his Republican caucus), to vote
for the Act. These included such past and present notables as former Secretaries of State John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, current
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and, then Foreign Relations Committee Chair, and now Democratic presidential frontrunner, Joe Biden.
His vote, naturally, should come as scant surprise since even in early Senate committee
hearings four years
earlier, ranking minority member Biden was at best tepid, and at worst quite skeptical of the ICC – even finding unlikely points
of agreement with the later Hague Invasion Bill's sponsor, and longtime unilateralist hawk, Republican Senator Jesse Helms.
Still, the swift, frenetic response of senior Trump officials to ICC decision is telling. I suspect that Pompeo and Bolton know
the inconvenient truth – that U.S. national security forces have committed crimes in Afghanistan (and elsewhere) and that
the U.S. Government hasn't ever truly held these select perpetrators sufficiently accountable. Contra Pompeo, Bolton, and other Trump
officials' ardent public assertions, the U.S. military and intelligence community are, in fact – due to being demonstrably "unwilling
or unable to prosecute such [war] crimes" – the perfect candidates for ICC investigation, and if evidentiary appropriate,
prosecution. The U.S. has a historically abysmal
record either of
restraining or punishing wartime violations.
The rarely recounted
record is an extensive as it is appalling:
After U.S. Air Force pilots and U.S. Army soldiers strafed and gunned down some 400 Korean refugees (most women, children,
and old men) hiding under a bridge at No
Gun Ri over the course of four days in 1950, there was no criminal investigation when the military determined the killings
represented naught but an "unfortunate tragedy inherent to war."
When, after a two-year coverup, the journalist Seymour Hersh brought to light the blatant execution of at least 504 civilians
in the hamlet of My Lai , South Vietnam, just six
soldiers were charged, and only one – Lieutenant William Calley – convicted. Though countless victims were beheaded, scalped,
or had their throats slit in an orgy of violence, even Calley's original life sentence was repeatedly reduced by senior generals
until he was ultimately granted clemency by President Richard Nixon. Convicted by jury of military officer peers of personally
killing at least 22 civilians, Calley served only five months in detention and some three years under house arrest.
Later in the Vietnam War, when Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Herbert
blew the whistle on
endemic torture among some U.S. troops, and a subsequent investigation uncovered 141 confirmed incidents of prisoner abuse, not
a single criminal charge was filed and only three soldiers were administratively fined or reduced in rank. The only significant
punishment meted out was leveled at Herbert -- recipient of four Silver Stars and three Bronze Stars, who was also shot 10 ten
times and bayonet thrice -- when his reputation and career were ruined in retaliation.
When allegations of systemic prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib Prison were reported by Major General Antonio Taguba, and
simultaneously uncovered by the very same Seymour Hersh, not a single soldier above the rank of staff sergeant faced charges.
Taguba, incidentally, did suffer
-- his career unceremoniously curtailed in the wake of threats, intimidation, and harassment by the senior army commander
in Iraq (General John Abizaid) and the then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
Finally, and perhaps most relevant to the current ICC investigatory backlash, after an American AC-130 gunship unloaded on
a civilian hospital (by definition, a war crime) repeatedly for 30-60 minutes and killed 42 doctors, patients, and staff members,
the top theater commander, General John Campbell, and then Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter
changed
their stories four times in four days without ever fully explicating what exactly caused the massacre. An official military
probe – instructively, the generals always investigate themselves in these matters – found no criminal culpability, and, while
Campbell's nominal boss, General Joseph Votel, claimed to have administratively disciplined sixteen soldiers and officers, the
names of those personnel – and he details of their punishment – were never released.
Add to that the disconcerting fact that the U.S. crossed a rather macabre
tipping
point in 2019, whereby, for the first time, the American military and its Afghan allies killed more civilians than the Taliban,
and this brings us full circle to an alarming present reality. The very figures who championed and supported the wildly chauvinistic
"Hague Invasion" Act seem set to hold sway over, and in Biden's case serve as candidate for, the Democratic Party.In November, that
faction will likely, then face off against a Trump team that vehemently opposes even a basic investigation into alleged American
criminal misbehavior in the Afghan theater of its ongoing forever wars.
All of which demonstrates, once and for all, that human rights, and international law or norms were never of genuine interest
to the United States. None of this will play well on the "Arab," or even broader global, "Street," and will – just like U.S. abuses
at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo – actually
increase worldwide "terrorism"
and anti-Americanism. None of which matters to, or greatly concerns, a Washington elite lacking even a modicum of self-awareness.
Because empires, like the United States, which peddle in exceptionalism, triumphalism, and chauvinism are, historically, the world's
true rogue states
.
Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer and a contributing editor at antiwar.com
. His work has appeared in the LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Truthdig, Tom Dispatch, among other publications.
He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point.
He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers,
Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War is
now available for
pre-order . Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet . Check out
his professional website for contact info, scheduling speeches, and/or access
to the full corpus of his writing and media appearances.
The plutocratic class are not good custodians of our world. They are not good people. They
are not wise. They are not even particularly intelligent. They're just a very profitable sort
of clever, and have a willingness to crush anyone who gets in their way.
The plutocratic class has been buying up control over our political systems to ensure maximum profit, buying up
news media
outlets to propagandize the masses into supporting the status quo they've built their
kingdoms on, and forming alliances with sociopathic government
agencies which murder people around the world to ensure continual US unipolar hegemony.
These are the people we've placed in charge of the innovation and distribution of emerging
technologies, and we're meant to believe that they will save the world?
They will not. They will keep chasing power and profit until we drive ourselves off the
cliff of extinction. It's all they know how to do.
C3
@C_3C_3
FBI knew the Dossier was FAKE
CIA knew the Dossier was FAKE
DOJ knew the Dossier was FAKE
ODNI knew the Dossier was FAKE
Media knew the Dossier was FAKE
Mueller knew the Dossier was FAKE
Congress knew the Dossier was FAKE
BO Admin knew the Dossier was FAKE
They were all in on it
The war in Afghanistan, now in its 19th year, is the longest and most intractable of America's forever wars. There are now
American
soldiers fighting in Afghanistan
who were born after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the ostensible
casus
belli
. The American public has long ago grown tired of the war. A
YouGov
poll
conducted in July of 2020 showed that 46 percent of Americans strongly supported withdrawing troops from Afghanistan,
with another 30 percent saying they "somewhat" approved of troop withdrawal.
But this 76 percent majority is deceptive. Given the fact that America has a volunteer army and American casualties in
Afghanistan remain sporadic, this is not an issue that the public is passionate about. An inchoate dissatisfaction is compatible
either with disengagement or just a lack of interest. Conversely, those in the national security establishment who do
passionately support the war are able to thwart political leaders who want a drawdown. Under both Barack Obama and Donald Trump,
presidential efforts to disengage from Afghanistan and the larger Middle East were met with resistance from a foreign policy
elite that sees any withdrawal as a humiliating defeat.
Trump tried to resolve the contradiction between his desire to remove troops and the foreign policy elite's commitment to the
Afghan war by
loosening
the rules of war
. The thinking of the Trump administration was that by unleashing the military and intelligence agencies, it
could subdue the Taliban -- thus preparing the way for a drawdown of troops. Special priority was given to CIA-run covert operations
using Afghan paramilitaries, with the belief that this would lead to a more sustainable war that didn't require American soldiers
to participate in fighting.
A report in
The Intercept
, written by reporter Andrew Quilty,
documents
the horrifying consequences
of this policy: Afghan paramilitary units, known as 01 and 02, have acted as death squads,
launching raids against civilians that have turned into massacres. Many of these raids have attacked religious schools, the
famous madrassas, leading to the death of children as young as 8 years old.
According to Quilty, "Residents from four districts in Wardak -- Nerkh, Chak, Sayedabad, and Daymirdad -- spoke of a string of
massacres, executions, mutilation, forced disappearances, attacks on medical facilities, and airstrikes targeting structures
known to house civilians. The victims, according to these residents, were rarely Taliban. Yet the Afghan unit and its American
masters have never been publicly held accountable by either the Afghan or U.S. governments."
These raids all involve Afghan paramilitaries who are outside the control of the Afghan government and working in conjunction
with American handlers who provide high-tech aid and direction, Quilty reports.
The units' American CIA advisers go by pseudonyms or call signs rather than
names.They not only train Afghan unit members, but also choose their targets, which the Americans call "jackpots"; issue
detailed pre-mission briefings; and accompany Afghan paramilitaries on the ground during raids. The Afghans and Americans are
ferried to remote villages at night by American helicopters, and American assault aircraft hover overhead while they conduct
their raids, providing lethal firepower that is sometimes directed at health clinics, madrassa dormitories, or civilian homes.
Despite providing detailed accounts of American-led war crimes,
The
Intercept
's report has been met with near-silence from the American media. Jake Tapper of CNN
retweeted
the article
, but otherwise there is little indication that the American media cares.
As
Intercept
reporter Ryan Grim
notes
,
"It's been two days since this story was published, and the mainstream media has been largely silent on it. Imagine if the media
treated the My Lai massacre this way." (In fact, the mainstream press sat on whistleblower Ron Ridenhour's warnings about My Lai
for a year before Seymour Hersh and the scruffy Dispatch News Service finally broke the silence.)
Grim also suggested that the Biden administration might want to bring justice to the perpetrators of these alleged war crimes.
"One of the most outspoken proponents of bringing a fine legal eye to war has been Avril Haines, who will be Joe Biden's Director
of National Intelligence," Grim observes. "She'll have the authority and the ability to discover who in the CIA was involved in
these operations, and bring them to justice."
This is a forlorn hope given the Obama administration's
failure
to go after war crimes
committed by the CIA under George W. Bush. Further, Biden himself is ambiguous on Afghanistan in a way
that calls to mind Trump himself.
As Quincy Institute president Andrew Bacevich
noted
in
The
Nation
earlier this month, Biden "wants to have it both ways" on the Afghan war. Biden will occasionally say, "These
'forever wars' have to end," but he will also say that America needs to keep a contingent of forces in Afghanistan. As Bacevich
observes, "Biden proposes to declare that the longest war in US history has ended, while simultaneously underwriting its
perpetuation." Biden's support for a light military footprint could very easily lead him to the same position as Trump: using
covert CIA operations to maintain American power in Afghanistan with minimal use of uniformed troops. This is a recipe for more
massacres.
Writing in
The Washington Post
last month, veteran Afghanistan
analyst Carter Malkasian
made
a compelling case
that the United States is facing a "stark choice" between "complete withdrawal by May or keeping 2,500
troops in place indefinitely to conduct counterterrorism operations and to try to prevent the collapse of the Afghan government.
There's no doubt that withdrawal will spell the end of the Afghan government that the United States has supported for 19 years."
Malkasian makes clear that the counterterrorism operations would merely be an exercise of staving off defeat, with no prospect of
an end to the war. Given the enormous moral costs of this counterterrorism, unflinchingly described by
The
Intercept
, the argument for complete withdrawal becomes stronger.
It's likely that Biden will continue the policy of previous presidents of kicking the can down the road by using covert CIA
operators to fend off defeat. But Americans should have no illusions: That means perpetuation of horrific war crimes in a
conflict that cannot be won.
"Human rights" agitprop has long been a staple of US imperialist propaganda. As the
Grayzone website pointed out earlier this year, "HRW was founded during the height of the
Cold War as Helsinki Watch, an anti-Soviet lobby group closely linked to the US government
and funded by the Ford Foundation, which served as a CIA passthrough."
The hysterical propaganda against communist nations and fighters goes hand in hand with
the bombs, torture and assassination that are US/British/French/NATO specialties. The modern
version of "human rights" campaigning was born out of the US defeat in Vietnam, and the spate
of revelations that came out of that period about US crimes (Pentagon Papers, Church Senate
investigations, Winter Soldier, etc.) in an attempt to rebrand the Vietnam war criminals as
some sort of humanitarians. The Helsinki Accords were a US propaganda program that the
misguided leaders of the USSR, along with Tito, etc. approved with the vain hope of detente
and peaceful cooperation between nations. In reality, the US never wanted such peaceful
coexistence.
Thanks, b, for bucking the anti-China propaganda campaign. The Pentagon and CIA still lick
their wounds from the last time they faced Chinese forces in battle. Their dream of
anti-Communist conquest of China and North Korea (assisted by their supposedly docile
Japanese assistants) is as dangerous as their dream of dismembering Russia and turning all of
the Eurasian landmass into a colony for US (and Japanese) exploitation. There lies the fuse
for WW3, and the end deaths of hundreds of millions.
Now is the time for every person of clear mind to oppose these mad dreams of conquest! The
lies that have and are being told about Russia and China (only occasionally rooted in some
actual injustice) are being churned out daily by the CIA and Pentagon propaganda machine.
Their purpose is to rally the population for war. Soon the hammer will drop harder on the US
and West Europe/Australian population, as the persecution of Julian Assange suggests, as the
ruling elite tighten up the repression needed to pull off their genocidal war.
Former senior CIA official John Stockwell discusses how the CIA would place false reports
in newspapers around the world, including in the Washington Post. Stories that were complete
fabrications, that were attacking their enemies, like Cuba. John Stockwell
interview
What a courageous man Stockwell is, to give up his career, his support network, and invite
attacks from one of the most dangerous organizations around.
Second the 15-minute clip that Antiwar7 @17 posted. Just saw that one about 3 weeks ago.
It's from 1983, an interview on the University of Southern California campus. Everyone should
watch it if they haven't already.
(There are also YouTube vids with German journalist Udo Ulfkotte who's been mentioned here
before that are related to this.)
Met John Stockwell a few times. He's a terrific guy.
Working for the NSC in the White House, he created the false stories about the Cuban soldiers
raping nuns in Angola. That was his job. He's been around in public since the '80s but never
got any Media attention.
He also was CIA officer in the Vietnam Highlands working with the Hmong against the
government. He married a Vietnamese.
When the US pullout was ordered he was also ordered to sacrifice 150 agents in the
Highlands who worked for him. The US wouldn't take them out.
His book "In Search of Enemies" is vital to read. He testified to Congress about the
machinations of Henry Kissinger that were illegal, antithetical to US best interests, but no
one gave a damn. Left him out on the limb.
John Stockwell is a great voice of the Truth. A good man.
From comment it is clear that Trump did a tremendous job undermining and discrediting classic
neoliberalism from the position of national neoliberalism. He was a huge wrecking ball...
In June, Attorney General Bill Barr sat for an
interview in CNN's Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer and predicted widespread fraud with
mail in voting.
He said: "People trying to change the rules to this, to this methodology – which, as a
matter of logic, is very open to fraud and coercion – is reckless and dangerous and
people are playing with fire."
At the time, Barr was the nation's top law enforcement officer with an obligation to prevent
election fraud under a bevy of federal statutes
.
What Barr Could've Done.
Maybe an investigation of Silicon Valley billionaires ballot harvesting
in black neighborhoods , for starters, and then a warrant for surveillance cameras at
counting facilities in Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Atlanta and Detroit, with federal agents on
hand to double check the chain of custody of boxes coming through the back door.
Instead, election integrity was preserved with federal investigations to
prevent nonexistent seditious activity emanating from dubious white militias. The "reckless and
dangerous" mail-in ballot operation the Attorney General warned about was ignored.
Trump's political rise is because our institutions no longer work for the common good and
instead serve the idiosyncratic preferences of the sclerotic establishment. Picking a bombastic
outsider is the only way that 75-million Americans know to tell them to cut it out.
Barr,
A Typical Washingtonian Creature.
In private practice, Barr was a highly compensated conduit to power, because being the
former Attorney General, or ex-FBI Director, or alum of any office that confers a vendable
credential pays big bucks in DC.
He is sufficiently deluded by beltway noise that he does not realize his pandering to
shallow political interests as George H.W. Bush's Attorney General – for instance by
authoring in 1992
The Case for More Incarceration – was simply grist for the outrage mill that
perpetuates the swindle.
Based on the musings of General Barr, Senator Joe Biden spearheaded a crime bill in 1993. He
sold the
bill as a way to take "predators" who were "beyond the pale" off the streets.
Because that's how Washington works.
Insiders on both sides help one another perform their Kabuki dance as public servants for
the next election even as they pocket a Delaware mansion's worth of foreign money.
H.L. Mencken observed that, "The whole
aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to
safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
The
Shill Continues.
Barr was appointed AG the second time because he
penned a 20-page memo proposing that when the president protests against a ridiculous
investigation into whether he colluded with Vladimir Putin to steal an election, he is not
obstructing justice.
You know, like how nobody is suggesting that Joe Biden's protests against election fraud
investigations means he should get indicted for obstruction under 18 U.S. Code CHAPTER 73.
Any first year law student could tell you that. If you were a warm body willing to help
Trump escape a frivolous criminal charge, though, you got a promotion from the practice squad
straight into the starting lineup.
As Trump's Attorney General, Barr served the same cadre of Washington insiders as he did the
first time, many of whom were still there because the game works so flawlessly.
The Hard
Drive From Hell.
Weeks before the 2020 election, a concerned citizen turned over to federal authorities a
laptop that had irrefutable evidence of a Biden family operation to sell influence in China,
with 10 percent of the take going to "the big guy" – who happened to be the democratic
candidate then running for president.
The nation's
intelligence agencies mobilized on behalf of the Biden family to call the concerned citizen
a Russian stooge, and the contents of the laptop Russian disinformation.
At the time – we didn't know it – the Justice Department had
been investigating the very activities confirmed in the laptop.
Barr knew, obviously, that the slander against the concerned citizen was just deep state
tripe to protect the Bidens.
Yet Barr sat on his hands, kept his mouth shut, and let the whistleblower suffer vicious public attack , because Washington
insiders put the establishment first even against the heroic decency of the little
guy.
The Russia Lie.
For two years Barr had investigated the greatest political scandal in American history.
The Washington establishment, along with the FBI, the CIA, and foreign intelligence
services, ran protection for the democratic candidate in 2016 by calling embarrassing
disclosures about her Russian disinformation – and, when that dirty trick somehow did not
get her elected, carrying the hoax into the Trump presidency to cause maximum political
damage.
For more on that, please do yourself a favor and read about the sordid scandal in my short
ebook, The Russia Lie
. I propose in the book that the scam was a political operation to vilify Donald Trump by
falsely claiming Russian election interference.
A week after publication, the DNI released notes John Brennan
took of a meeting with Barack Obama that confirmed my controversial take.
Brennan wrote that Hillary Clinton was planning to "vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a
scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service."
Yeah, but I said it better.
If someone like me sitting at a desk in Pittsburgh can figure this out, then the Attorney
General's head-in-the-sand failure to expose the lie amounts to an intentional cover-up sourced
in deliberate indifference.
As with the Biden laptop, Barr's first impulse investigating the investigators was to
protect his friends and neighbors in Washington, the Republic be damned. Some minor flunky at
the FBI
will go to jail , and everyone else is going to escape to their lucrative cable television
deals.
Because the fix, as always, was in.
Now What?
The 75-million who voted for Trump feel cheated but they're not going anywhere. Their ranks
will increase as Washington's Rube Goldberg-ian governance wreaks havoc and the dissatisfied
look for an alternative.
Our side should win the next few election cycles. That would be a "will definitely win"
except Republican officials in various key states passed permanent mail-in voting laws
ostensibly to address the short-term contingencies of a temporary pandemic.
Yes, the Republican Party is staffed with a bunch of "bilbars" (inventing a word here) at
the highest levels.
The "reckless and dangerous playing with fire" will continue, with Republican hopes pinned
on electing conscientious candidates even though state elections will be fixed by vote
harvesting and back door shenanigans into the foreseeable future.
It is dire but hopeful. Popular movements are best when they overcome even official
corruption.
When Trump wins in 2024, he must avoid hiring swamp dwellers to drain the swamp. Of all the
things I've written about Trumpism in the last four or so years, my favorite is this –
nailed the problem a few months into the presidency.
There's got to be a law professor in Ohio who actually voted for Trump who can be tapped for
the position of Attorney General next time.
No more bilbars, please. As Hannah
Arendt knew, beholden insiders who prefer prestige to principle is the banality of
evil.
Oh, and whoever came up with the idea of landing Air Force One and Marine One at small
airports to hold rallies, give that person whatever job he or she wants.
It contributed to one of the greatest landslides in American presidential history.
USAllDay 4 hours ago
Bill Barr is a fat CIA hack just like his (daddy) that hired Jeffery Epstein.
Tirion 3 hours ago
Barr was appointed as a result of a deal done with the Bush family when Poppy Bush
died.
Lorenz Feedback 3 hours ago
You mean the Grassy Knoll poppy Bush? ;)
HAL9000rev1 4 hours ago (Edited)
Not doing anything is doing something.
In that vein he did a lot.
I hope he has a short and unpleasant retirement
Murky Mook 4 hours ago
Barr did nothing.Nothing. He must have a big payday coming from the swamp.
Cardinal Fang 3 hours ago
Trump is not a very good manager.
His hires were a ******* disaster.
BoiledFrogs 4 hours ago
What an utterly naive author.
The Rulers don't give a damn about us, whether we live or die. Barr doing something noble,
because WHY? Not for us, not for America, not for Justice. He Rules according to the Rulers'
dictates. There is not a single person working inside the Beltway who cares whether we live
or die, have jobs or don't, can feed our families or not.
There is no and never has been BY THE PEOPLE.
ZenoOfCitium 3 hours ago
Barr is a dirty birdy. Barr has always been [DS]. His CIA codename was Robert Johnson.
Barr was involved in Operation Screw Worm (part of the Iran-Contra operation)
Bill Barr always was a swamp creature, as was Durham. I feel a bit sad for those American
patriots who thought Barr/Durham would finally, "hold [them] accountable." That was never
going to happen. Swamp creatures never rat on each other; it's an unstated pact. "It's a big
club, and [we] ain't in it."
BuckShotJones 2 hours ago (Edited)
Author is either naive or controlled opposition. The deep state has just stolen a land
slide election with an "In-Your-Face" attitude. No true reformer is going to win ever again.
As imperfect as Trump is, especially with whom he chose to pick to counsel him, he will be
the last reformer that will be permitted to run and win an election.
Drag and Drop a win. It is now that simple.
As for Barr, was he AG during the Ruby Ridge fiasco?
marysimmons 3 hours ago
Trump's nomination of Barr was probably the worst of a very long list of horrible
nominations/appointments. Probably cost him re-election
Robert De Zero 4 hours ago
Shill Barr was a slick operator. He uncloaked completely when he said "no fraud." He sat
on EVERYTHING. I never believed all the Q nonsense about "trusting the plan." I hope all the
Q-tards apologize for trying to mislead everyone with their obvious nonsense and naivety.
radical-extremist 3 hours ago
Democrats fight dirty and Republicans don't contest their skullduggery that much because
"it's for the good of the country" that these long drawn out battles end. Barr was brought in
to make sure the Republicans didn't fight too hard and upset everybody.
liberty2day 3 hours ago
Why argue this?
Trump was either coerced to drop in this skunk or he is one of them. Total fail, either
way
No Time for Fishing 3 hours ago
Mitch picked Barr. Mitch made it clear to President Trump that Barr will be AG as no other
nominee would make it through the Senate and any push back would be the end of anything else
making it through the Senate for Trump. Barr was given clear instructions that the Swamp and
most importantantly Mitch and his China In Laws were off limits and Barr was not to do
anything that could endanger any Democrat Crime Family or Republican Crime Family made
man.
TxRogers 14 minutes ago remove link
"A plutocracy is a system of government where the wealthiest people in a country rule or
possess the power, and thus govern directly or indirectly. Plutocracy is often linked to the
term "dynastic wealth."
A plutocracy may not be the result of a planned system of government. Instead,
plutocracies can gradually form by allowing sole access to essential political and
educational resources that only the rich can afford.
The democratic concern of a plutocracy is that the wealthy will wish to maintain their
power and, therefore, only represent the interests of the wealthy as opposed to people of all
levels of education and income."
Sound familiar boys and girls?
pedro-the-cat 3 hours ago
The same people who go through the ranks in DC as young people end up being appointed to
big positions as payback for "services rendered". Barr is but one example. If he is out for
justice, then I am the King of Siam.
This is the way it has always been. Trump upended their "thing" and now both parties are
pulling out all the stops to get him out.
If Trump does not serve a second term and this vote is given to Biden, a curtain will slam
down on the U.S.
The aftermath will make Soviet Russia look like a birthday party in comparison.
Beaker99 3 hours ago
Barr is one of my biggest disappointments. I really thought he was going to bring some
accountability to the other side. Shame on me for not realizing he was installed as AG to
make sure exactly that did not happen.
Normally Aspirated 54 minutes ago (Edited) remove link
As a non American with nothin invested in US politics, I am still amazed that the US
republicans still have faith in Trump. He has achieved nothing except for Israel and his
families cronies.
He may have said the things that require change but he achieved nothing.
He made mistake after mistake and, still fails to learn. He is either dumb OR he is not
who he claims to be. Indeed, he may be involved in the whole thing. I think he's simply
playing a part. A role, not dissimilar to some TV Host on a TV show.
Either way, he has proven that he's no leader, has no conviction, has no insight with
people and, fails to identify a HUGE opportunity afforded to him at those rallies for him to
lead the country and her people by providing leadership and direction. He lacks political
intelligence or any conviction for the saving of the Republic.
Trump is simply in it for Trump! He is wasting your hope.
How you can overheat economy that is in permanent stagnation mode (secular stagnation)? This
is nonsense. What Larry is actually afraid of but can't say is the staut of the dollar the world
reserve currency.
You can almost physically sense the level of hate toward "neoliberal scum" in comments
below
Lawrence Summers, the former Treasury Secretary under Bill Clinton, director of the National
Economic Council under Barack Obama, president of Harvard, and Chief Economist at the World
Bank, wrote a post-Christmas editorial for Bloomberg entitled, "
Trump's $2000 Stimulus Checks are a Big Mistake ." It's a classic:
Some argue that while $2,000 checks may not be optimal support for the post-Covid economy,
taking stimulus from $600 to $2,000 is better than nothing. They need to ask themselves
whether they would favor $5,000, or $10,000 -- or more. There must be a limiting
principle.
The genesis of this Summers article is a perfect tale in microcosm about how America's
intellectual elite manages to lose elections to people like Donald Trump. It's a two-step
error. First, they put people like Summers in charge of economic policies. Then, they let them
talk in public.
Summers the day before Christmas
appeared on Bloomberg to offer his initial thoughts on why $2000 checks must be bad: he
looked at which politicians were supporting the plan, and worked backward. "When I see a
coalition of Josh Hawley, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump getting behind an idea, I think
that's time to run for cover," he said, adding: "When you see the two extremes agreeing, you
can almost be certain that something crazy is in the air."
Seeing that his comments "lit up the Twittersphere," Summers then sat down to compose an
article doubling down on his reasoning. Essentially, he argued that from an econometric point
of view, we're already overdoing it on the help front. If you were under the impression that
huge numbers of people are living off meals from food banks and/or are at risk in an
eviction
crisis , you were wrong.
Noting that "total employee compensation" is "only running about $30 billion per month
behind the Covid baseline," he insisted that $200 billion more in tax rebates per month over
the next quarter would "equal an additional seven times the loss of household wage and salary
income over the next quarter."
He then showed a graph explaining that "because of the legislation passed in 2020, total
household income has exceeded normal levels relative to the economy's potential more or less
since the pandemic began." The good news, as a result, is that "the existing stimulus bill is
sufficient to elevate household income relative to the economy's potential to abnormally high
levels -- unheard of during an economic downturn."
The whole piece reads like an extended New Yorker cartoon, in which an evictee with empty
pockets is about to dive after a rotten apple core in a dumpster, only to be blocked by a
cauldron-bellied Harvard economist in a $3000 Zegna suit. Caption: " Actually, total household
income relative to the economy's potential sits at abnormally high levels ."
There are of course different positions one could take on the question of stimulus checks,
but the issue with people like Summers is the utter predictability of their stances. Summers
belongs to a club of neoliberal thinkers who've dominated American policy for decades. From Bob
Rubin to Tim Geithner to Jason Furman to Michael Froman and beyond, the people one friend
jokingly refers to as the "Rubino Crime Family" are all basically the same person, affectless
technocrats who play up reputations as giant-brained intellectuals -- I always imagine them
with bulbous Alien Nation heads -- while reveling in cold, hard truths about the limits of
government assistance.
And this by an inbred group of gluttons who couldn't survive without the life they drain
from others...
yerfej 3 hours ago remove link
That is the key "the life they drain from others". I have no issue with those who work
their aysses off keeping their just rewards, but this kind of insider filth needs a
lamppost.
two hoots 1 hour ago
Summers and those of his Jabba class know that uncontrolled Congressional giving could
cause collateral damage to their lifestyles. So does every comfortable class below them. It
all depends where you are positioned. Here on ZH i find people playing all sides of the class
game to whatever suits their current mood of us/them others. The more an event can affect us
directly determines where we direct our dislikes...up or down...inconsistently.
Doom Porn Star 1 hour ago
ALL politicians and 'public servants' who advocateor demand lockdowns and restrictions
should cede ALL pay, benefits and accrual of all retirement or other benefits for the
duration of ANY lockdown or restriction of ANY kind.
Those who advocate or demand sacrificed should make first, fullest largest sacrifices.
The whole lot of fascist 'some animals are better than others' lot should be thrown in
gitmo or equivalent.
The_Dude 3 hours ago (Edited)
Study what Summer's and his (((ilk))) did to pillage post - Soviet Russia and you will
understand who is untouchable in this society... And why in more sophisticated societies,
they were always kept at the periphery where they couldn't harm others.
Larry 'Dinner with Epstein' Summers has put more than his foot in his mouth.
BlueLightning 3 hours ago
O boy he's scared now
sgt_doom 2 hours ago (Edited)
Isn't Larry Summers the chief poster boy of the Global Banking Cartel ever since he
inserted the credit derivatives clause in the WTO's Financial Services Agreement*** making it
acceptable legal tender?
Believe that was during the Clinton Administration.
Is Larry still a lobbyist for the cental bankers? Oh yes, his photo is still there:
***[Credit to Greg Palast for uncovering this item.]
Arising 2.0 2 hours ago (Edited)
Larry is a cabal member who has always been out of touch with the 'silly goy'.
iambrambles 3 hours ago
The real question is why trillions to foreign govs and corporations.
$2000/American is chump change and isnt what anyone should be focusing on.
America never had the right fiscal priorities, people tend to forget the brilliance of the
US was with the constitution that enabled more freedoms than before.
But fiscally, America was always doomed after the absolution of the gold standard and the
creation of the federal reserve which allowed for endless government largesse.
ElTerco 2 hours ago (Edited) remove link
"negative consequences of aid to the less fortunate..."
Yet, no mention from Larry of negative consequences of aid to the more fortunate, which,
so far this year, has been around 40x as much money.
ElTerco 2 hours ago (Edited)
The $10+ trillion that has been pumped into the US economy so far has been a firehose to
top earners, while people who lost their jobs got a trickle of runoff as it worked its way
down the street through a very long, crap filled gutter.
Funny how Summers never mentioned *that*.
Max21c 2 hours ago (Edited) remove link
"When I see a coalition of Josh Hawley, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump getting behind
an idea, I think that's time to run for cover," he said, adding: "When you see the two
extremes agreeing, you can almost be certain that something crazy is in the air."
Thus is just more elitist nonsense from the silly conventional wisdom of Washingtonians,
elites, and the Democratic Party establishment. Bernie Sanders was a solid and strong and
energetic candidate and he could have had a chance of beating Trump in a free & fair
election had the Party nomination not been fixed and stolen from him by elites and their
puppet press smear campaigns.
Democrats made a mistake in attacking and undermining Bernie Sanders. Since much of what
has transpired this past year has been massive increases in domestic spending and some social
spending. Bernie Sanders could have beat Trump--fair and square--whereas the Crats had to
cheat with Biden and steal the election. Had the Democratic Party not stolen the election
from Sanders it likely Sanders would have had a significant opportunity to beat Trump. Since
Sanders was positioned right/correctly to be competitive in contrast and have some edge with
a significant part of the public on peace, foreign policy, domestic policy, and social
spending agendas. Would have been a tight race with Sanders versus Trump instead of the fraud
and fraudulent election of 2020. Definitely would have been a tossup on balance. Would have
been even harder if Sanders had teamed with Tulsi Gabbard as they would have had a serious
edge in foreign policy. But both Sanders and Gabbard are official pariahs and lepers in the
Democratic Party and its establishment as well as in the Washington establishment. Sanders
had the issues and would have had the momentum to give Trump a serious run for the money had
he not be forced aside in favor of the establishment candidate in a series of rigged
primaries and media smear campaigns and other subterfuge & Machavellian intrigues.
Max21c 1 hour ago (Edited)
I don't have issue with the size of company but do not like state sponsored industry
whereby the state security apparatus heavily favors state industries and state sponsored
industries--and--the secret police community and intelligence community and political class
ensure that the statals/SEO and state backed companies are protected by the state security
apparatus... The government doesn't have any business being used by Washingtonians, JudeoWASP
elites, Ivy Leaguers and their secret police to using military warmaking powers in the secret
police and intelligence community to rob one and redistribute back to state industries and
state sponsored industries and favor elites and their firms using secret police powers...
That's what both the Bolsheviks and Nazis did... It's the banana republoc and police state
and tyranny...
The socialism Bernie was talking about seemed more his advocating for increases in social
spending. The socialism Washington currently practices both openly and secretively &
covertly and illegally through abuses of secret police powers and state secrecy is much more
dangerous than what Bernie was advocating. The current socialist system as practiced by
Washingtonians and their secret police does much more damage to the country. The police state
socialism is much worse than the social spending games.
Bay Area Guy 2 hours ago remove link
LOL. How do you overheat a dead economy? No real growth (inflation adjusted) in at least
20 years; real unemployment at least 12.5% and probably north of 20%; this DESPITE interest
rates at all time lows and likely to go negative. And this fool is talking about overheating
the economy.
Max21c 2 hours ago remove link
If they can handout hundreds of billions to businesses under a questionable government to
business subsidy program that has been previously fraught with fraud, inefficiencies in
timeliness & appropriateness and geographical distribution. Also, such government to biz
programs which shall likely fail to serve both business and the economy effectively both by
practice and natural elements: such as some businesses being located in areas with a more
sophisticated biz culture; and set of skills; as well as access to better educated &
possibly more skillful entrepreneurs and cultures thereof; as well as some firms being simply
better positioned; as well as some firms being more program wise or welfare wise; and still
other firms being better tuned in or connected to the political system and or its
bureaucracy. Given the afore situation the money is better spent on a basis of widely
scattered and unpredictable et uncontrollable and thus not as apt to manipulation as well as
a direct to households holding the advantage of timeliness.
About 4k is about right for the floor/minimum on the basis of 2k in the form of a stimulus
and another matching 2k+ coming from forwarded tax rebates for future years which can be paid
back through payroll deductions or which can be paid back similar to installment loans
monthly or quarterly.
2k shall suffice in the near term as to stimulating consumer spending, consumer
confidence, business confidence, sales & revenues & profits or the improvement in the
outlook of a future return to profitability and the confidence & risks taking that comes
with firms seeking current and future profits and potentially making investments and pursuing
loans and the potential for an earlier uptick in the credit cycle as banks may change their
outlook on lending sooner than they might otherwise.
Before our national self-inquest on Donald Trump has run its course, we will be prompted
to remember again that the world exists. President-elect Joe Biden's appointments at the
departments of defense, state, and the national security council are likely to include some
combination of Michele Flournoy, Jake Sullivan, Anne-Marie Slaughter, and others of the
globalization group around Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. These people believe in
the rightness of a world with the United States at its center, deploying commercial strength,
trade agreements, diplomatic suasion, and military alliances in a judicious synthesis. Armed
intervention, preferably multilateral, is held in reserve. They take on trust the global
politics of neoliberalism. For them, the Trump presidency, though unanticipated, was merely a
disagreeable hiatus. They have never stopped planning for their return.
SPONSORED CONTENT
How To Entirely Empty Your Bowels Each Morning (1 Min Routine) Your Gut Reboot
[Photos] The Most Dangerous Place Where You Should Never Swim Is Actually In New Jersey
Tie Breaker
[Photos] Marisa Tomei Gave The Crew A Little Extra Graduatez
They did not study the catastrophe of Vietnam, and they have not learned from it. As
Gareth Porter showed in Perils of Dominance , that war, whose atrocities the world
remembers more vividly than Americans do, was protracted not from morbid credulity regarding
the domino theory but rather a primitive fear of losing face. It was carried forward through
presidencies in both parties with a maximum of deception. The War in Afghanistan has
similarly extended over three presidencies; and yet, to the neoliberal establishment,
Afghanistan in 2020 is a good deal like Vietnam in 1971. It must not be "abandoned." A recent
New York Times story praised some generals for "tempering" the rashness of Donald
Trump's attempt to withdraw once and for all.
For reasons of personality that hardly bear looking into, Trump in foreign policy
represented a break from the militarized globalism the United States had adopted with the
fall of the Soviet Union and the coming of a unipolar world. The laboratory for this approach
was the Yugoslavia intervention commandeered by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. The madness
under the idealism was revealed in the bombing, invasion, and occupation of Iraq in 2003.
That seems a long generation ago, to the short memory of Americans. Even more thoroughly
forgotten has been the Libya War -- President Obama's disastrous bid to show support for the
Arab Spring -- with all the destruction it wrought: the civil war that followed, the swollen
mass migrations from North Africa to South Europe, the opening of slave markets in Libya
itself. After Libya came Syria, in which the United States supported an Al Qaeda offshoot in
another humanitarian cause. After Syria came the Obama-Trump support for the Saudi
obliteration of Yemen.
The United States has long faced the peculiar choice -- messianic on both sides -- of
serving the world as an exemplary nation or as an evangelical one. The former image was best
drawn by Abraham Lincoln when he said that the proposition "all men are created equal" was
meant as "a standard maxim for free society," which would be "constantly approximated" in the
United States itself, "constantly spreading and deepening its influence, and augmenting the
happiness and value of life to all people of all colors everywhere." By contrast, the
evangelical image was epitomized by John Kennedy's eloquent and dangerous inaugural address:
"we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any
foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Lincoln's standard
maxim meant the force of our example. Kennedy's bear any burden meant the force
of our weapons.
A new Cold War with Russia was dragged onto center stage in 2013–2014. The process
began at the Sochi Olympics and was locked in by the American reaction to the Russian
reaction to the coup in Ukraine. The neoliberal elite is deciding, at this moment, whether to
prefer Russia or China as the number-one U.S. enemy on the horizon. But must we have one?
"Faith in a fact can help create the fact," said William James. A named expectation of
trouble creates the conditions for that trouble. And yet, informed citizens today in the
United States, in China, and in Russia all know that such a return to the inveterate habits
of the old Great Powers would be supremely irresponsible. Our most dire confrontation now is
with the natural world, which, in the form of climate change, is taking its revenge on
humanity for a century of abuse.
SPONSORED CONTENT
[Photos] At 56, Laura Ingraham Has Never Been Married And Now We Know Why Graduatez
[Photos] Behind Her Fame, Milana Vayntrub Has Some Secret Now Out In The Open Penguin M.D.
[Photos] 35 People That Forgot to Check The Background Before Taking Photo Penguin
M.D.
If the fires and floods of the last many years, in Australia and California, in Prague and
Houston, have nothing to say to you, it is not clear what planet you are fit to live on. The
best thing the policy elite could do, for the United States and the world, would be to put
themselves out of business. Begin a series of international agreements to cooperate in
slowing the progress of climate change, and in anticipating and defending against the worst
of its effects. Practically speaking, as a matter of course, this will require a new ethic of
international cooperation. Not war, not even an enhanced trade war, and not with China and
Russia most of all.
David Bromwich is Sterling Professor of English at Yale University. He is the author
of American Breakdown:
On December 17, 2020, a new US Maritime strategy was unveiled putting into practice the
regressive concepts first outlined in the early National Defense Strategy 2020 doctrine which
target China and Russia as the primary enemies of the USA and demanding that the USA be capable
to " defeat our adversaries while we accelerate development of a modernized integrated
all-domain naval force of the future".
The Pentagon's
Advantages at Sea: Prevailing with Integrated All-Domain Naval Power continued by saying
"China's and Russia's revisionist approaches in the maritime environment threaten US interests,
undermine alliances and partnerships and degrade the free and open international order
moreover, China's and Russia's aggressive naval growth and modernization are eroding US
institutional advantages."
The document continued to describe that "we must operate more assertively to prevail in
day-to-day competition as we uphold the rules-based order and deter our competitors from
pursuing armed aggression ready, forward-deployed naval forces will adopt a more assertive
posture in day to day operations"
For anyone who has been paying attention to the vast growth of the Pentagon's Full Spectrum
containment policy around China's perimeter begun with Obama's Asia Pivot, it may appear as
though these words are not new, but just a continuation of American unipolar agenda, Pacific
war games, and psychological projection onto perceived enemies, that have been underway for
years. While this is certainly true, it must be noted that they are occurring at a time that
NATO 2030 has
enshrined an anti-China military posture into the Trans Atlantic security doctrine which had
formerly channeled most of its hate purely onto Russia.
The fact is those unipolar zombies programmed to think in no other terms but global
post-nation state dominance are deathly afraid of the Russia-China bond of survival which has
created a uniquely viable foundation for an alternative economic/security architecture for the
world. This model is based on a system of finance that defines money not in speculative but
rather long-term development of the real economic foundations of life. It also features a
strong emphasis on win-win cooperation as opposed to Hobbesian zero-sum logic dominant among
western powers, and it also finds itself driven by OPEN system economic practices shaped by
unbounded scientific and technological progress that once upon a time guided America's better
traditions.
With the obvious threat of nuclear war breaking out between a collapsing unipolar order in
the west and an emergent Multipolar alliance, it is important to review what possible latent
policy traditions may yet be revived within America's history which certain forces have worked
very hard to scrub out of the historical record and memory. This study will take us to the
incredible fights that arose over America's identity at the turn of the 20th century during the
period of President William McKinley and the treasonous anglophile President of vice, Theodore
Roosevelt.
Munroe Doctrine or Empire?
As
Martin Sieff eloquently laid out in his recent article , President McKinley himself was an
peacemaker, anti-imperialist of a higher order than most people realize. McKinley was also a
strong supporter of two complementary policies: 1) Internally, he was a defender of Lincoln's
"American system" of protectionism, internal improvements and black suffrage and 2) Externally,
he was a defender of the Munroe Doctrine that defined America's
anti-imperial foreign policy since 1823.
"After fifty years the United States has, without a single exception, respected the
independence of other nations, while asserting and maintaining her own.
That the United States does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the
well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only
of her own.
That by involving itself in the internal affairs of other nations, the United States would
destroy its own reason of existence; the fundamental maxims of her policy would become, then,
no different than the empire America's revolution defeated. It would be, then, no longer the
ruler of itself, but the dictator of the world."
America's march is the march of mind, not of conquest.
Colonial establishments are engines of wrong, and that in the progress of social
improvement it will be the duty of the human family to abolish them".
It was an aging John Quincy Adams whom a young Abraham Lincoln collaborated with in ending
the imperial Mexican-American war under Wall Street stooge James Polk in 1846. When Adams died
in 1848, Lincoln picked up the torch he left behind as the London-directed "proto deep state"
of the 19th century worked to dissolve the republic from within. The foreign policy conception
laid out by Adams ensured that America's only concern was "staying out of foreign imperial
entanglements" as Washington
had earlier warned and keeping foreign imperial interests out of the Americas. The idea of
projecting power onto the weak or subduing other cultures was anathema to this genuinely
American principle.
A major battle which has been intentionally obscured from history books took place in the
wake of Lincoln's murder and the re-ascension of the City of London-backed slave power during
the decades after the Union victory of 1865. On the one hand America's role in the emerging
global family of nations was being shaped by followers of Lincoln who wished to usher in an age
of win-win cooperation. Such an anti-Darwinian system which Adams called "
a community of principle " asserted that each nation had the right to sovereign banking
controls over private finance, productive credit emissions tied to internal improvements with a
focus on continental (rail/road) development, industrial progress and full spectrum economies.
Adherents of this program included Russia's Sergei Witte and Alexander II, Germany's Otto von
Bismarck, France's Sadi Carnot, and leading figures within Japan's Meiji Restoration.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/gYeVDjFKpOU
On the other hand, "eastern establishment families" of the USA more loyal to the gods of
money, hereditary institutions and the vast international empire of Britain saw America's
destiny tied to an imperial global partnership with the Mother country. These two opposing
paradigms within America have defined two opposing views of "progress", "value",
"self-interest" and "law" which have continued to shape the world over 150 years
later.
William Gilpin vs Alfred Mahan: Two Paradigms Clash
A champion of the former traditionally American outlook who rose to the international scene
was William
Gilpin (1813-1894). Gilpin hailed from a patriotic family of nation builders whose
patriarch Thomas Gilpin was a close ally of Benjamin Franklin and leading member of Franklin's
Philosophical Society. William Gilpin was famous for his advocacy of America's trans
continental railway whose construction he proselytized as early as 1845 (it was finally begun
by Lincoln during the Civil War and completed in 1869 as I outlined in my previous paper
How to Save a Dying Republic ).
In his thousands of speeches and writings, Gilpin made it known that he understood America's
destiny to be inextricably tied to the ancient civilization of China- not to impose opium as
the British and their American lackies were want to do, but to learn from and even emulate!
In 1852, Gilpin stated:
"Salvation must come to America from China, and this consists in the introduction of the
"Chinese constitution" viz. the "patriarchal democracy of the Celestial Empire". The
political life of the United States is through European influences, in a state of complete
demoralization, and the Chinese Constitution alone contains elements of regeneration. For
this reason, a railroad to the Pacific is of such vast importance, since by its means the
Chinese trade will be conducted straight across the North American continent. This trade must
bring in its train Chinese civilization. All that is usually alleged against China is mere
calumny spread purposefully, just like those calumnies which are circulated in Europe about
the United States".
With Lincoln's 1861 presidential victory, Gilpin became Lincoln's bodyguard and ensured the
president survived
his first assassination attempt en route to Washington from Illinois. During the Civil War,
Gilpin was made Colorado's first Governor where he successfully stopped the southern power from
opening up a western front during the war of secession (applying Lincoln's greenback system to
finance his army on a state level) and winning the " Battle of Glorieta Pass ", thus
saving the union.
After the war Gilpin became a leading advocate of the internationalization of the "American
system of political economy" which Lincoln applied vigorously during his short-lived
presidency. Citing the success of Lincoln's system, Gilpin said:
"No amount of argument will make America adopt old world theories To rely upon herself, to
develop her own resources, to manufacture everything that can possibly be manufactured within
her territory- this is and has been the policy of the USA from the time of Alexander Hamilton
to that of Henry Clay and thence to our own days".
Throughout his speeches Gilpin emphasizes the role of a U.S.-Russia alliance:
"It is a simple and plain proposition that Russia and the United States, each having
broad, uninhabited areas and limitless undeveloped resources, would by the expenditure of 2
or 3 hundred millions apiece for a highway of the nations threw their now waste places, add a
hundredfold to their wealth and power and influence"
And seeing in China's potential the means to re-enliven the world- including the decadent
and corrupt culture of Europe:
"In Asia a civilization resting on a basis of remote antiquity has had, indeed, a long
pause, but a certain civilization- although hitherto hermetically sealed up has continued to
exist. The ancient Asiatic colossus, in a certain sense, needed only to be awakened to new
life and European culture finds a basis there on which it can build future reforms."
In opposition to the outdated British controls of "chock points" on the seas which kept the
world under the clutches of the might of London, Gilpin advocated loudly for a system of
internal improvements, rail development, and growth of the innate goodness of all cultures and
people through scientific and technological progress. Once a global system of mutual
development of rail were established, Gilpin stated "in the shipment of many kinds of raw and
manufactured goods, it will largely supersede the ocean traffic of Great Britain, in whose
hands is now carrying the trade of the world."
Gilpin's vision was most clearly laid out in his 1890 magnum opus "The Cosmopolitan Railway" which
featured designs for development corridors across all continents united by a "community of
principle".
Echoing the win-win philosophy of Xi Jinping's New Silk Road today, Gilpin stated:
"The cosmopolitan railway will make the whole world one community. It will reduce the
separate nations to families of our great nation From extended intercommunication will arise
a wider intercourse of human ideas and as the result, logical and philosophical
reciprocities, which will become the germs for innumerable new developments; for in the track
of intercommunication, enterprise and invention invariably follow and whatever facilitates
one stimulates every other agency of progress."
Mahan Derails America's Anti-Imperial Identity
Alfred Thayer Mahan (1840-1914) represented an opposing paradigm which true American
statesmen like Lincoln, Secretary of State James Blaine, William Seward, President Grant,
William Garfield, and McKinley detested. Sadly, with McKinley's murder (
run by an anarchist ring with ties to British Intelligence ) and the rise of Teddy
Roosevelt in 1901, it was not Gilpin's but rather Mahan's worldview which became the dominant
foreign policy doctrine for the next 120 years (despite a few brief respites under FDR and
JFK).
Mahan is commonly credited for being a co-founder of modern geopolitics and an inspiration
for Halford Mackinder. Having graduated from West Point's naval academy in 1859, Mahan soon
became renowned as a total failure in actual combat having crashed warships repeatedly into
moving and stationary objects during the Civil War. Since reality was not his forte, Mahan
focused his post-war career on Ivory tower theorizing gushing over maps of the world and
fawning over Britain's power as a force of world history.
His "Influence of Sea Power
Upon History 1660-1783 published in the same year that Gilpin published his Cosmopolitan
Railway (1890) was a total break from the spirit of win-win cooperation that defined America's
foreign policy. According to
the Diplomat , this book soon "became the bible for many navies around the world" with the
Kaiser of Germany (now released from the influence of the great rail-loving statesman Otto von
Bismarck whom he fired in 1890) demanding all of his offers read. Later Teddy Roosevelt ordered
copies for every member of Congress. In Mahan's book, the geopolitician continuously asserts
his belief that it is America's destiny to succeed the British Empire.
Taking the British imperial definition of "commerce" which uses free trade as a cover for
the military dominance of weak nations (open borders and turning off protectionism simply makes
a people easier to rob), Mahan attempts to argue that America need not continue to adhere to
"outdated" habits like the Munroe doctrine since the new order of world empires demands America
stay relevant in a world of sea power and empire. Mahan writes : "The advance of Russia in
Asia, in the division of Africa, in the colonial ambitions of France and in the British idea of
Imperial Federation, now fast assuming concrete shape in practical combined action in South
Africa" demands that the USA act accordingly.
Attempting to refute the "outdated habits" of rail development which consume so many foolish
statesmen around the globe, Mahan states: "a railway competes in vain with a river because more
facile and copious, water traffic is for equal distances much cheaper and because cheaper, more
useful". Like those attacking today's Belt and Road Initiative, the power of railways is that
their returns are not measurable by simple monetary terms, but are rather QUALITATIVE. The
long-term construction of rail systems not only unite divided people, increase manufacturing
and industrial corridors but also induce closer powers of association and interchange between
agriculture and urban producers. These processes uplift national productive powers building
full spectrum economies and also a culture's capacity for creative thought.
The attempt made to justify sea traffic merely because "larger amounts of goods can be
shipped" is purely quantitative and monetaristic sophistry devoid of any science of real
value.
While Gilpin celebrates the successful awakening of China and other great nations of the
world, in the
Problem of Asia (1901) Mahan says:
"It is scarcely desirable that so vast a proportion of mankind as the Chinese constitute
should be animated by but one spirit". Should China "burst her barriers eastward, it would be
impossible to exaggerate the momentous issues dependant upon a firm hold of the Hawaiian
islands by a great civilized maritime power."
Mahan's adherence to social Darwinism is present throughout his works as he defines the
political differences of the 3 primary branches of humanity (Teutonic, Slavic and Asiatic) as
purely rooted in the intrinsic inferiority or superiority of their race saying: "There are
well recognized racial divergencies which find concrete expression in differences equally
marked of political institution, of social progress and of individual development. These
differences are deep seated in the racial constitution and partly the result of the
environment". Mahan goes onto restate his belief that unlike the superior Teutonics "the
Oriental, whether national or individual does not change" and "the East does not
progress".
Calling China a carcass to be devoured by an American eagle, Mahan writes: "If life departs,
a carcass can be utilized only by dissection or for food; the gathering to it of the eagles is
a natural law, of which it is bootless to complain the onward movement of the world has to be
accepted as a fact."
Championing an Anglo American alliance needed to subdue and "civilize" China as part of the
post-Boxer Rebellion, Mahan says " of all the nations we shall meet in the East, Great Britain
is the one with which we have by far the most in common in the nature of our interests there
and in our standards of law and justice".
In case there was any doubt in the minds of Mahan's readers as to the MEANS which America
should assert its dominance onto China, Mahan makes clear his belief that progress is caused by
1) force and 2) war:
"That such a process should be underlain by force on the part of outside influences, force
of opposition among the latter themselves [speaking of the colonial European monarchies
racing to carve up China in 1901 -ed] may be regrettable, but it is only a repetition of all
history Every step forward in the march that has opened in China to trade has been gained by
pressure; the most important have been the result of actual war."
A Last Anti-Imperial Push
The chaos induced by the anti-foreigner Boxer Rebellion of 1899 which spread quickly across
China resulted a heated battle between imperial and anti-imperial forces in both Russia and the
USA. Where Transport Minister Sergei Witte who spearheaded the development of the Trans
Siberian rail line (1890-1905) tried to avoid military entanglement, McKinley was busy doing
the same.
The boxers soon attacked the Manchurian rail connecting Russia to China by land and Witte
succumbed to pressure to finally send in troops. The reformers of China who attempted to
modernize with American and Russian assistance under Emperor Kuang Hsu and Li Hung Chang fell
from power as total anarchy reigned. The outcome of the Boxer chaos involved the imperial
powers of France, Germany and England demanding immense financial reparations, ownership of
Chinese territory and mass executions of the Boxers.
While McKinley is often blamed for America's imperial turn, the reality is just the
opposite.
The Spanish-American war begun in 1898 was actually launched unilaterally by Anglophilic
racist Theodore Roosevelt who used the 4 hour window he had while Undersecretary of the Navy
(while the actual Secretary was out of Washington) to send orders to Captain Dewey of the
Pacific fleet to engage in a fight with the Spanish over their Philippine territories. McKinley
had resisted the war hawks until that point but found himself finally bending to the momentum.
In China, McKinley, like Witte worked desperately to reject taking territory resulting in great
fears from the British oligarchy that a U.S.-Russia alliance led by McKinley and Witte was
immanent.
The assassination of McKinley on September 18, 1901 catapulted Mahan-loving Vice President
Teddy Roosevelt into high office, who enmeshed America into a new epoch of Anglo-American
imperialism abroad, a growth of eugenics and segregation at home and the creation of an
independent police
state agency called the FBI .
"Roosevelt devoted his next eight years in the presidency and the rest of his life to
integrating the United States and the British Empire into a seamless web of racial
imperialist oppression that dominated Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa and Asia and that
destroyed the cultural history and heritage of the Native North American nations."
In Russia, the 1902 Anglo-Japan Treaty led to the disastrous Japan-Russo war of 1905 which
devastated the Russian navy, ended the political career of Sergei Witte and threw Russia into
chaos leading to the fall of the Romanovs (Czar Nicholas II was the last statesman occupying
high office that this author is aware of to have actively promoted the Bering Strait Tunnel
rail connection in 1906 . It wasn't
until FDR's Vice President Henry Wallace met with Foreign Minister Molotov in 1942 that the
idea resurfaced once more ).
In his Two Peoples One Friendship , Wallace described his discussions with Foreign Minister
Molotov in 1942 saying:
" Of all nations, Russia has the most powerful combination of a rapidly increasing
population, great natural resources and immediate expansion in technological skills. Siberia
and China will furnish the greatest frontier of tomorrow When Molotov [Russia's Foreign
Minister] was in Washington in the spring of 1942 I spoke to him about the combined highway
and airway which I hope someday will link Chicago and Moscow via Canada, Alaska and Siberia.
Molotov, after observing that no one nation could do this job by itself, said that he and I
would live to see the day of its accomplishment. It would mean much to the peace of the
future if there could be some tangible link of this sort between the pioneer spirit of our
own West and the frontier spirit of the Russian East."
While the "open door" rape of the China was attempted by the Anglo-Americans, a fortunate
rear guard maneuver orchestrated by another follower of Abraham Lincoln named Sun Yat-sen
resulted in a surprise overthrow of the Manchu dynasty in 1911 and the institution of the
Republic of China with Sun Yat-sen as the acting President. While Sun Yat-sen sided with Gilpin
and Lincoln in opposition to the Mahanists on the issue of rail and industrial development
(illustrated in his extraordinary 1920 International Development of China
program which called for 160 000 km of rail, water diversion projects, ports and 1.5
million km of paved roads- illustrated below), the intrigues that sank the world into World War
I made any hopes of this early development of China impossible in Sun Yat-sen's lifetime.
Expressing his own deep understanding of these top down tactics of world history (and the
recognition that the same British imperial forces that orchestrated the US Civil War were
planning to do the same to China), Sun Yat-sen wrote in 1912:
"We understand too well that there are certain men of power -- not to include for the
present, certain nations -- who would view with a greater or lesser satisfaction an internal
rupture in the new Republic [of China]. They would welcome, as a move toward the
accomplishment of their own ends and designs, a civil war between the provinces of the North
and the South; just as, 50 years ago, there was applause in secret (in certain quarters) over
the terrible civil strife in the United States.
Americans of today who were alive in those dark days of the great republic will remember
the feelings in the hearts of the people -- the bitter and painful thoughts that arose from
the knowledge that foreigners were hoping and praying for the destruction of the American
Union.
Had the war been successful from the South's standpoint, and had two separate republics
been established, is it not likely that perhaps half a dozen or more weak nations would have
eventually been established? I believe that such would have been the result; and I further
believe that with the one great nation divided politically and commercially, outsiders would
have stepped in sooner or later and made of America their own. I do not believe that I am
stating this too forcibly. If so, I have not read history nor studied men and nations
intelligently.
And I feel that we have such enemies abroad as the American republic had; and that at
certain capitals the most welcome announcement that would be made would be that of a
rebellion in China against the constituted authorities.
This is a hard statement to make; but I believe in speaking the truth so that all the
world may know and recognize it."
Today's Belt and Road Initiative , and strategic friendship established between Russia and
China has re-awoken the forgotten vision of William Gilpin for a world of cooperating sovereign
nation states. Does the USA have the moral ability to avoid disintegration by accepting a
Russia-U.S.-China alliance needed to revive McKinley's American System or will we slip into a
new Great Reset and World War?
2020 just keeps getting crappier. This is the year when I have had to bow down and accept
that there is some line in the sand which past means that it doesn't matter how spectacularly
wrong you have been you still get treated as some sort of expert. You would think the fact
that Kissinger and Albright not being pariahs would have made that clear long ago, but no I
still clung to the belief that actions have consequences.
This year found a spectacularly bad ex President put his thumb on a primary to give the
nomination to a racist misogynistic geezer with cognitive issues whose entire time as a
public official was as a bank bagman who fought to destroy the middle class, criminalize
being a poor minority, increase the police state, indemnify banks and major corporations from
criminal acts, and force bad neoliberal economic policies on other countries by force.
That is when he wasn't selling access for profit, lying whenever possible and plagiarising
others work. When this "paragon" won we got retreads from the spectacularly bad ex
president's administration along with suggestions for positions for CEOs known for destroying
well run and ethical corporations leaving shells in their place. But the best is the return
of Summers, whose history of hubris and failure should have made him hard pressed to get a
job as a night gas station attendant.
The only response anyone should see to this "advice" was: "If Summers is against this and
fears its effect on the economy that can only mean the economy must need that payment to not
only be that large but be two or three times larger. Forget how mean and cruel his attitude
is about Americans in need, except to say perhaps it is long past time to strip him of all
income and most of his savings in order to keep the economy from getting overheated so he can
learn what the economy actually looks like." But no he is still accorded some respect.
The Deep State is unwilling to let go of any vassal state, military base, or even
sovereign countries it does not "own" or have any reasonable interest in running from its
vast de facto empire, places where nobody even speaks English, practices "free market
capitalism," is not deep into narco terrorism or can refrain from decapitating every
Christian or non-Jihadi home-grown raghead they cross paths with. The Deep State would sooner
see such places leveled to the ground than remove them from their stamp album. So, no
freakin' way an outfit like that is gonna allow Oklahoma or Nebraska or even Guantanamo Bay,
Hong Kong or Taiwan to flit away free from the "union" as an act of love. Any such place
declares its "sovereignty" or part of someone else's sphere of influence immediately gets
Iraned or Venezuelaed with extreme prejudice until the survivors come crawling back to their
masters.
Jesus of Nazareth lived in a time of political turmoil. Between the lines of the Gospels,
which are our main source of information about him, this comes through loud and clear. But it
is never brought to the surface. The last thing that the writers of the Gospels wanted was to
drag in politics. They wanted to extract Jesus from his real historical situation and put
across a universal message, which could apply to anybody. Above all, they did not want to tie
Jesus in with the fate of the Jewish people who, at the time of writing, had just been crushed
by the Roman legions after a bitter resistance war.
However, the actual situation in which Jesus lived is plain enough. In 63 BC Palestine was
conquered by a Roman army, led by Pompey, and made part of the Roman province of Syria. Pompey,
accompanied by his military staff, strode into the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem Temple,
which had been defended by its priests after the reigning king had opened the gates of the city
to the invaders. From that moment on, until the final showdown 133 years later in 70 AD, the
history of Palestine is mainly a history of Jewish resistance to Roman rule. It was a hopeless
resistance which took place during a time which fundamentally was one of Roman expansion. Jesus
of Nazareth lived right in the middle of this period and, despite his well-known attachment to
the other-worldly, he could hardly have been blind to what was going on.
Palestine's strategic role
The situation was not an easy one for the Romans. Palestine – Judea, as the
Jewish part of it was called – was one of a chain of small states, stretching from
Armenia down to Egypt, which formed a buffer zone between Rome and the Parthian Empire to the
east, based in Persia. Palestine was a crucial link in the chain because it bordered Egypt,
granary of Rome. Parthia was the second major power of the region and it was never conquered by
Rome. Indeed, it several times inflicted defeats on the Roman legions, routed them and captured
the eagles which were their battle standards. So Palestine was a sensitive area. A Jewish
uprising could count on Parthian support. Indeed, in 40 BC, only about twenty years after
Pompey's invasion and not very long before the birth of Jesus, this was exactly what happened.
The Roman puppet regime was overthrown and a new king installed, with Parthian support. The
Parthians, moreover, unlike the Romans, took care not to desecrate the Temple. Their position
was more or less like that of the Indians in Bangladesh, a foreign power aiding a national
movement for its own purposes.
The Romans reacted quickly. They ditched the old lot of puppets and brought in a new
candidate, Herod, who was about 30 at the time. Herod's father had been the strong man, main
pro-Roman in the old regime. Herod himself had been military governor of Galilee, the northern
part of Palestine. When the Parthians came in he managed to escape to Egypt and eventually got
to Rome. There he was crowned king of Judea. With full Roman backing he returned, taking
Jerusalem with the help of the legions in 37 BC, and promptly executed the rebel leaders. The
anti-Roman king, Antigonus, was crucified, the first of tens of thousands who were to be
executed in this way by the Romans or their puppets. Once on the throne, Herod stuck to it
until his death in 4 BC.
It is not certain exactly when Jesus was born. All we can say is that it was during the
reign of the Emperor Augustus, who died in 14 AD, and that during Jesus' adult life Augustus'
successor Tiberius was on the throne. Jesus may have seen the end of Herod's reign, as an
infant. Certainly the events which followed Herod's death must have impressed him, either as
childhood memories or as stories which were told him as he grew up.
Herod's death
Herod's death produced a crisis. Herod had been servile to the Romans and cruel and
extortionate to his own people. He was loathed and hated. Naturally, when he died there was
general rejoicing and the national movement came to the surface again. There had already been
rumblings shortly before the end of his reign. A student demonstration, more or less led by two
Pharisees, Judas and Matthias, had culminated in the tearing down of the Roman eagle which
Herod had displayed in the Temple to please his masters. The ringleaders were burned alive.
When Herod finally died, there was an uprising in Jerusalem. The procurator, Sabinus, the top
Roman official in Palestine, immediately moved troops into the capital to maintain law and
order and also to seize Herod's treasury. During the festival of Pentecost, fighting broke out
between pilgrims to the Temple and these Roman troops. Sabinus was pinned down in the
garrison.
At the same time, there was another armed uprising in Galilee, led by a partisan leader
called Judas, known as the Galilean, whose father had been executed by Herod for insurgency.
This was a large-scale uprising in which the partisans took Herod's palace in Sepphoris and
seized the arms which were stored there. Sepphoris was only a few miles from Nazareth, where
Jesus spent his childhood. About an hour's walk away, in fact. The Romans had to send two
legions, that is, twelve thousand troops, down from Syria to suppress these revolts and rescue
Sabinus. During the fighting the Temple was badly damaged and Sepphoris was completely
destroyed. When the Romans had restored order they crucified 2,000 rebels.
Twice the size of Northern Ireland
Palestine is a comparatively small country. Herod's kingdom of Judea was not much bigger
than Wales, about twice the size of Northern Ireland. It did not extend so far south as Israel
does today but it covered a fringe of what is now Syria and Jordan. The population, about five
million probably, was not homogenously Jewish. The Jews were concentrated in the Jerusalem area
– Judea proper – and in Galilee, to the north, where they were fairly recent
settlers. In between was Samaria, where the Samaritans lived. The Samaritans had their own
religion which was a variant of Judaism. For example, they did not recognise the Temple, but
had their own holy place on a mountain in Samaria. In the towns there were a number of Greeks
and Hellenized Syrians or Phoenicians, who had first come in the wake of Alexander's armies and
now identified with the Romans. Herod had encouraged further immigration of Greeks and had
built a number of new towns for them, including a new port and capital, Caesarea, which
nationalistic and pious Jews would not live in because it was dominated by irreligious
monuments, such as a theatre and a racetrack.
The divided country, split by national and religious differences, had some of the features
of Northern Ireland or Cyprus. The Jewish national movement took a religious form; it was
religion which bound the nation together. The leader s of the Zealots, as the
guerrilla partisans were known, were often ultra-religious and religion was one of the two main
issues around which opposition to the Roman occupation crystallised. There were riots over the
pagan eagle desecrating the Temple, as described above: later, after the Romans had adopted
direct rule, there were more riots under Pontius Pilate over the same issue. There were
uprisings in the late thirties, only a few years after the crucifixion of Jesus, when Emperor
Caligula wanted to put up a statue of himself in the Temple. Ten years after that there was a
big riot when a Roman soldier on guard on a roof overlooking the Temple made an obscene gesture
to the pilgrims.
Imperialist taxes
The second issue was economic: the Roman tax appropriations. Rome did not tax its own
citizens but relied on wringing what it could out of subject peoples. The system was laid down
officially and then the actual tax-collection was left to private enterprise, on something like
a tender basis. Roman troops backed up the tax-collectors. Naturally tax-collectors were
regarded as collaborators with the Romans and there were frequent attempts to sabotage the
system and boycott it. Quirinius's census in 6 AD was designed by the Romans to help implement
tax-collection and it provoked widespread resistance and armed struggle, which was not subdued
for some time, right during the childhood of Jesus. Once again Galilee was a focus of the
revolt, but this time there was heavy fighting in the south as well, led by a shepherd called
Athronges. Thousands were killed by the Romans during this period.
Direct rule starts
The census was particularly resented because it marked the beginning of direct rule by Rome.
The puppet regime was abandoned by the Romans shortly after Herod's death. His son was exiled
after the Procurator was given full powers, in Judea at least. In Galilee and in South-East
Syria, the Golan Heights area, two other sons of Herod were allowed to stay on as autonomous
rulers. Generally speaking, the Romans changed Procurators quite rapidly. Pontius Pilate, who
lasted nine years, from 27 to 36 AD was an exception to the rule. Pilate was intensely hated
and this loathing shows through all the Jewish source documents which remain. He was both harsh
and corrupt. When he took money from the Temple treasury there were massive demonstrations
against him. He suppressed them by putting troops into the crowd in plain-clothes, and with
concealed weapons, who suddenly leapt into action at a given signal. In the Gospels, there are
references to the killing of Galileans, always troublemakers, and to riots in Jerusalem at the
time of Jesus's death, while the word used to describe the two 'thieves' crucified with Jesus
is the same generally used to describe guerrillas, rather like 'bandits'.
The Pharisees and armed struggle
However, the real struggle built up from the forties onwards, culminating in the full-scale
national uprising in the sixties. At the same time, the national struggle began to cross-cut
with an increasingly overt class struggle. The traditional ruling class in Judea consisted of
an interlocking bloc formed by large landowners and the hereditary high-priestly families who
controlled the Temple. The Sadducees were members of this bloc. They were challenged as
religious authorities by the Pharisees, who were rigourists, organised on a strict entry basis
into cells, led by scribes, graduates in theology, but also including elements from artisan and
even labouring backgrounds. It was the Pharisees who welded the Jewish nation together into a
religious-political force. Many of the Zealot leaders were Pharisees who had decided to move
into a phase of armed struggle.
The mass of Zealots however, came from the people, from small towns and villages. This
period was one of an overall movement in the countryside towards large estates, throwing small
peasants, many of them in debt, off the land. There were a large number of slaves in Judea at
the time and these made up part of the guerrilla armies. There was also an increasing number of
hired hands, who are often mentioned in parables in the Gospel. The surplus of labour meant
that they were usually employed on a casual basis. There was naturally a drift from the country
into the towns and an increasing amount of employment in small craft industries.
Jesus and the apostles came from artisan families; Jesus was a carpenter, working with
lumber imported from Lebanon and many of the apostles were fishermen, owning their own boats.
We know from other sources that the fishing industry was thriving in Galilee at the time and
there was investment in pickles for use in exporting fish. Jesus did not come from the masses,
who were either living off charity – there was an efficient dole system in operation
– or else were day labourers or slaves. Neither, of course, did he come from the priestly
caste or from a rich business or land-owning background. He was a petit-bourgeois.
Kidnapping and assassination
The ruling class throughout this period became increasingly compromised with the Romans. It
was the Roman Procurator who appointed the High Priest, usually a matter for bribery. In
return, the High Priest acted as a Quisling, maintaining law and order in Jerusalem, a
sensitive area for Romans, with his own Temple police and handing over troublemakers for trial.
Yet at the same time, the Temple and its High Priest were the main symbols of national
consciousness. In the end, class feelings came out into the open. Zealots kidnapped a Temple
official and, like Tupamaros, held him ransom for the release of political prisoners.
Assassination of collaborators was stepped up, until a High Priest was struck down too.
When, in the sixties, resistance gathered momentum, there were particularly troubled
economic circumstances. For years extensions to the Temple had provided employment in Jerusalem
and these suddenly halted. After riots, the programme was set in motion again in the form of
paving the city streets. At the same time, there were complaints that the high-priestly
families, who had equipped themselves with armed gangs, were marauding in the countryside
extorting 'tithes' on which they had no claim. Matters came to a head in 66 AD when, after a
huge tax boycott, the Roman Procurator looted the Temple treasury to make up the deficit. There
was an immediate Zealot uprising. The Roman's main force withdrew and the remnant left behind
were massacred. One of the first acts of the Zealot regime was to destroy the record of debts
– freeing the masses from the grip of moneylenders and landlords. A new High Priest was
elected by lot, which fell to a peasant, an impoverished member of the priestly caste, an act
regarded as outrageous by ruling class opinion.
The left is isolated
During the four years between 66 and 70 AD there was all-out war. A whole Roman
expeditionary force, comprising two legions and several thousand auxiliaries, was wiped out.
The Romans lost over 5,000 infantry and 480 calvary. This victory led to the setting up of a
national Government, representing all aspects of religious opinion, both Sadducees and
Pharisees, and even Essenes, the monastic group who produced the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Zealots
opposed this Government, which they regarded as class-based and potentially collaborationist.
They were quite right.
The Jewish commander in Galilee, Josephus, who was a Pharisee, spent more time harassing the
Zealots than preparing defences against Rome. When the Romans arrived, under Vespasian, he
capitulated on the spot and became an open collaborator. Later he wrote a history of the events
to justify his completely treacherous role. The backbone of resistance was led throughout by
the Zealots who fought to the last in Jerusalem and then in the mountain fortress at Masada.
When the Romans took Jerusalem in 70 AD, under Titus, hundreds of thousands were butchered and
the city levelled. Josephus recounts how at one point the Romans ran out of wood for crosses
and, when they had enough, had to search for empty spaces to put more crosses up in. It is in
this context, that the crucifixion of Jesus and the writing of the Gospels must be seen.
Where did Jesus stand?
It can hardly be believed that he was as oblivious to what was going on around him as the
Gospel writers make out. Roman reprisals must have struck the families of Jews known to him in
the area. One of Jesus's own disciples, one of the Twelve, was Simon the Zealot, who presumably
participated in one of the uprisings.
Reading the Gospels, the picture presented in the main is that of a passive collaborator.
Although Jesus was condemned and executed by Pontius Pilate, every effort is made to clear him
of any real responsibility. Crucifixion was not a Jewish method of execution. It was the Roman
punishment for political crimes. Spartacus was crucified, for instance. Whereas the Jews had
responsibility for ordinary crimes and for religious offences, the political crimes went to
Pilate. Yet the Gospels claim that Pilate washed his hands of the affair, protested Jesus's
innocence, could see no wrong in him and was only pressured into crucifying him by the High
Priest and his lobby.
Jesus himself is represented in a pro-Roman light. For example, he is described as friendly
with tax-collectors and collaborationists. He heals the child of a Roman centurion. He advises,
not simply going along with the authority of Rome under duress, but going twice as far as
required. And, of course, the most important incident recounted concerns the payment of tax.
'Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's'. In the Gospels,
this is presented as a particularly cunning reply which outwitted the Pharisees who asked it.
In fact, it is not at all equivocal. It plainly supports the payment of taxes to Rome. The
whole question of taxation was the burning issue of the day. On this issue, Jesus took a
pro-Roman stand and backed the claims of the Imperial power.
Keeping Jesus clear of Judaism
The counterpart of this pro-Roman attitude of the Gospels is the persistent denigration of
the Pharisees. The Zealots, as such, play no part in the Gospel story at all. They are simply
suppressed verbally, as the Romans suppressed them militarily. But the Pharisees are very much
in the forefront. They are used as straw-men who feed Jesus the straight lines which enable him
to score off them. The purpose of this, as far as the Gospels are concerned, is clearly to
distinguish Jesus and the Christian community from the Jews and the Jewish cause. In almost
every case, it is a disagreement with Judaism which is stressed, so that Jesus can be distanced
from his own people. Stories like that of the Good Samaritan are heavily promoted to the same
end.
A number of scholars have tried to rescue Jesus from this Pro-Roman presentation, especially
in recent years when, after Auschwitz and Belsen, commentators on the Gospel have at long last
become sensitive to its anti-Jewish bias. In particular, the episode of Jesus's trial has been
gone over in detail and it has been admitted that Rome and not the High Priest was responsible
for his execution – as a political offender.
Pilate was not a weak administrator who was likely to allow the High Priest's lobby to
pressure him against his better judgement.
Pacifist sentiment
This line of reasoning has led some writers to go as far as claiming that Jesus was actually
pro-Zealot and sympathetic to armed struggle. This interpretation means discounting the great
slabs of pacifist sentiment which fill the Gospels as nothing but post-Fall of Jerusalem PR,
put in by the fawning Evangelists, eager not to rub Rome the wrong way. In contrast, episodes
like driving the money-changers out of the Temple are stressed and the fact that Jesus was
arrested by an armed patrol and one of his disciples drew his sword and resisted arrest.
Indeed, Luke describes how Jesus apparently instructed his disciples to buy swords just before
the arrest, though he quickly adds that two would be enough.
It is certainly true that there are patches of anti-Roman material in the Gospels which may
get closer to the attitude of Jesus, or at least the early followers, than the Gospel writers
do. For example, the story of the Gadarene swine seems to have an anti-imperialist gibe hidden
away in it. Jesus exorcises an evil demon, who is called 'Legion', and the demon then enters a
herd of pigs who plunge over a cliff. The Roman occupation troops were known as 'pigs' by the
Jews, so the moral is pretty clear. But conversely, there is a definite strain of anti-Temple
feeling in a Jesus's preaching. He is critical of a number of Temple institutions, particularly
the financial institutions, and more than once criticises the various ways the Temple made
money: donations, taxes, commercial transactions and so forth.
Above all Jesus did not in any way advocate violent resistance to the Romans, but believed
that it was necessary to undergo a spiritual change in readiness for the coming of the Kingdom.
He conceived of this change in a way which brought him up against the Pharisees, because he was
an anti-traditionalist in his attitude to the Jewish religious Law. Ethically, he was a purist,
but not in a legalistic way. Judging from his numerous parables about vineyards, labourers and
husbandmen, he was fully satisfied with the existing relations of production, including
slavery, and the general economic set-up, though he was distrustful of the rich. He seems to
have felt that the Temple should not be in any way a secular institution, either commercially
or politically.
Jesus not subversive
In itself, there was little that was subversive in Jesus's preaching and, in this sense the
Gospel writers were right to portray him as a passive collaborator. But his fate was sealed
when he began to attract crowds, partly because of his feats of healing, partly because he was
a compelling orator. The Gospels several times tell how he tried to get away from the crowds
and give them the slip, anxious about the outcome, as well he might be.
Pontius Pilate's last official act for example, in 36 AD, only two or three years after
Jesus's execution, was to massacre a crowd of Samaritans who expected a revelation on their
Holy Mountain. Anybody who gathered large crowds was in danger of being halted in their tracks
for political reasons. In Rome the careers of sports and theatre stars were abruptly stopped
when they began to acquire supporters who were too vocal or demonstrative.
Religions of the oppressed
It is quite usual for messianic and prophetic religious movements to spring up in times of
political upheaval. Jesus can be compared with the new movements which sprang up as part of the
response to the advance of European imperialism: Peyotism and Ghost-dancing among the American
Indians, Ringatū among the Maoris, Hòa Hảo in Vietnam. These movements
attempt to break out of the confines of an apparently hopeless historical predicament, by
stressing a glorious other-worldly role for the followers of their prophet. In a time of
political turmoil, they appear dangerous to the authorities, anxious to suppress anything which
might develop into a threat, usually cynical and ignorant, and inclined to err on the side of
ruthlessness rather than mercy. They are put down and, if the circumstances are right, a new
cult based on the prestige of martyrdom springs up.
The man in the middle
The real strength of Jesus's preaching lay in his ability to respond to conflict without
being sucked into it. He was the man in the middle. Not only was he in the middle of a class
conflict but of a national liberation struggle. He was able to find something to say which made
sense to all kinds of people without ever coming down on one side or the other. This still is
his strength. The discontented, the disaffected, the wretched of the earth could respond to
him. So could tax-collectors and Roman soldiers. In part, this was because he chose out of
preference to speak in riddles and parables, to tell stories rather than make statements. But
partly too it was because he had a talent for the ring of truth, for words which sounded right,
which pushed everyone a little bit further together. He walked a verbal tightrope which he wove
as he went along. And he could back it up with a quotation every time. It is precisely because
he had this ability to reconcile conflicting aspirations, that he sometimes seemed subversive.
But in the long run anything that covers over contradictions by appealing to both sides always
favours those in power, and Christianity still does.
First published in the left weekly 7 Days , 22 December 1971. An offshoot of
Black Dwarf , the paper ran from October 1971 to March 1971; it is available at the Amiel
Melburn Trust internet archive under Creative Commons license .
Longtime Trump ally Roger Stone announced on Friday that he will be filing a $25 million
lawsuit against the department of Justice, along with former FBI Director James Comey, former
CIA Director John Brennan, Special Counsel Robert Mueller and several other individuals,
according to the Washington
Examiner .
Stone was arrested in a 2019 pre-dawn raid (which CNN was alerted
to in advance) and sentenced to 40 months in prison before President Trump commuted it
in July, leaving stone with a fine and supervised release. Trump granted Stone a full
presidential pardon on Wednesday.
" The terms of my pardon allow me to sue the Department of Justice, Robert Mueller, James
Comey, John Brennan, Rod Rosenstein, Josnathan [sic] Kravis, Aaron 'Fat Ass' Zelinsky Jeannie
Rhee and Michael Morando, " stone wrote
on Parler . "My lawyers will be filing formal complaints for prosecutorial misconduct's
with DOJ office of professional responsibility at the same time I file a 25 million dollar
lawsuit against the DOJ and each of these individuals personally ."
Stone was found guilty of five separate counts of lying to the House Intelligence
Committee during its own Russia investigation regarding his outreach to WikiLeaks during the
2016 campaign, one count that he "corruptly influenced, obstructed, and impeded" the
congressional investigation, and one count for attempting to "corruptly persuade" the
congressional testimony of radio show host Randy Credico.
"I have an enormous debt of gratitude to God almighty for giving the president the strength
and the courage to recognize that my prosecution was a completely, politically motivated witch
hunt and my trial was a Soviet-style show trial ," Stone said Wednesday evening, adding on
Parler that he will add former Attorney General Bill Barr to the lawsuit - and that he would
"handle his cross-examination personally."
_arrow 3
dging 1 hour ago
I'm not a lawyer, but does Stone any chance in the world of getting more than 10 minutes
before a judge, let a long discovery, let alone inside a court room?
Lansman 3 hours ago
Somehow the court will declare that he doesn't have standing.
known unknown 2 hours ago
That's right a accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt.
anduka 2 hours ago (Edited)
If the president pardons you because he thinks you are innocent, what guilt could
accepting that pardon possibly admit? Pardons have no formal, legal effect of declaring
guilt.
known unknown 2 hours ago
It's the law. If you think you're innocent you don't accept a pardon then what exactly are
you pardoning an innocent man.
anduka 2 hours ago (Edited)
You need to read up on Burdick v. United States 1915. If
you think you're innocent you're free to reject the pardon and have your day in court. But if
you're innocent you can also accept the pardon with no implication of guilt, to save yourself
legal time and expense.
known unknown 2 hours ago
In 1915, the Supreme Court indeed said, of pardons, that "acceptance" carries "a
confession of" guilt. Burdick v. United States
(1915) . Other courts have echoed that since.
anduka 2 hours ago
You're reading it wrong. Burdick was about a different issue: the ability to turn down a
pardon. But pardons have no formal, legal effect of declaring guilt.
LEEPERMAX 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
Wikileaks just dumped all of their files online . . . Everything from Hillary Clinton's
emails, McCain's being guilty, Vegas shooting done by an FBI sniper, Steve Jobs HIV letter,
PedoPodesta, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Bilderberg, CIA agents arrested for rape, WHO
pandemic. Happy Digging! Here you go, please read and pass it on .. file.wikileaks.org/file/
The WHOLE 4 yrs Trump was in office showed up the FBI, DOJ, THE SECRET FISA COURT - ALL OF
IT - A DISGRACE ON THIS NATION. The criminal activity occurring during the OBAMA smash and
grab. OMG
Unfortunately even if Stone won (which I don't believe he will) the damage to the
reputation and credibility of these institutions won't recover. The shame was visible on a
global scale. What was done to Flynn was a national tragedy.
At least he survived, unlike LaVoy Finicum.
Obama far exceeded any standard as the worst POTUS this country has ever seen. The damage
to our institutions was a tragedy on a Greek scale.
In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two seminal decisions ratifying social
engineering as the deep grammar of American life. Berman v. Parker established urban
renewal as a form of ethnic cleansing, and Brown v. School Board , turned public schools
into vehicles of social engineering based on race. Following Brown v. School Board ,
race, not religion, became the source of ethnic identity in America. The oligarchs chose race
because they believed in the Roman motto " divide et impera ."
Two years after the annus mirabilis of 1953, William F. Buckley launched National
Review , most probably with the same CIA backing that launched Encounter . As we all
probably know, William F. Buckley was a CIA agent. When I asked Joe Sobran if National
Review were a CIA front, he told me he didn't know. He had signed on as a young writer at
National Review to fight Communism and didn't care where the funds to do it came from.
Murray Rothbard, another member of the conservative pantheon of the 1950s and 1960s, wasn't so
hesitant. Rothbard was "convinced that the whole National Review is a CIA operation."[5]
That quote was taken from John Judis's article "William F. Buckley, Jr., The Consummate
Conservative," which appeared in the September 1981 issue of The Progressive . In that
article, Judis explains how "after WWII and the birth of the National Security State in 1947,
the Central Intelligence Agency created, fostered, and molded the synthetic ideological
movement known as 'Conservatism.'" According to Charles Burris:
It was "former" deep cover CIA agent Buckley and intelligence community veterans of the
OSS and CIA (James Burnham, Willmore Kendall, Priscilla Buckley, and William Casey) who
launched National Review , which became the premier publication of this phony
"conservative movement." Buckley called Burnham, who had been a leading Trostykist communist
WWII consultant for the Office of Strategic Services, and later head of the Political and
Psychological Warfare division of the Office of Policy Coordination of the Central
Intelligence Agency, "the number one intellectual influence on National Review since
the day of its founding." Buckley and NR shaped and set the stentorian dogmatic tone
for such "conservatives" for decades, purging and declaring any alternative voices on the
Right anathema. Author John T. McManus, in his critical biography of the Buckley described
him as the "Pied Piper for the Establishment."[6]
Burnham's concept of managerial elites usurping representative government made a big
impression on a Southern boy by the name of Sam Francis, who took the concept and explained how
the elites had created in reaction a group he called "Middle American Radicals," whom he
defined as "essentially middle-income, white, often ethnic voters who see themselves as an
exploited and dispossessed group: excluded from meaningful political participation: threatened
by the tax and trade policies of the government: victimized by the tolerance of crime,
immigration, and social deviance, and ignored, ridiculed, or demonized by the major cultural
institutions of the media and education."[7]
Both Pat Buchanan and Joe Sobran contributed to the book, Shots Fired , which was the
source of that quote. Aside from that fact, these three men had something else in common: they
were all betrayed by William F. Buckley as part of that man's campaign to purge anyone who
disagreed with the CIA's version of conservatism from the conservative movement. In a pie ce
which took up an entire issue of National Review, Buckley accused both Buchanan and Sobran
of anti-Semitism. Buckley also traveled in person to Washington to the offices of The
Washington Times and demanded that Sam Francis be fired. In spite of what Russell Kirk said
in 1953, conservatism was never about principle, and certainly not about maintaining moral
principle. It was always a CIA black op run by commissars like Buckley according to the whims
of the oligarchs, who turned out to be increasingly Jewish as time went on.
Expelled from the synagogue of conservatism, Sam Francis became a white guy because nature
abhors a vacuum and, having been raised in the South, that is how he saw his identity. A white
guy, in case you don't know, is a Protestant who no longer goes to church. Tom Fleming, editor
of Chronicles , tried to keep this fact from the public by censoring Sam Francis's
articles, but eventually the truth came out to the embarrassment of all concerned.
Shortly before he died, Sam sponsored a talk in Washington by John Tyndall, founder of the
British National Party. During his talk, Tyndall tried to explain how we should all be proud of
being white guys and gave Elizabethan England as an example of their achievement. My friend and
associate Gerry Bruen looked at me when Tyndall made this claim, because the same thought
occurred to both of us. Wasn't Elizabethan England the place where Catholic priests could be
and were hanged until not quite dead and then drawn and quartered for saying the Mass? Were
Catholics white? When Gerry asked Tyndall if the Irish were white, Tyndall replied with obvious
distaste that of course they were. "My mother is Irish," he said hoping to end this train of
thought. At that point Sam Francis turned to him and asked, "Are Jews white?" To which Mr.
Tyndall had no answer.
I mentioned that incident and tried to answer that question at the memorial which was held
in Sam's honor at the National Press Club. I was in the middle of writing the book The
Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and I thought the time was opportune to broach the question.
But I was wrong. It was as if I had just lobbed a hand grenade into the room. Taki said we were
all going to be arrested. Peter Brimelow rebuked me by saying that he liked Elizabethan
England, doubtless because he would have enjoyed seeing me being drawn and quartered. No one
was willing to admit that race had replaced conservatism because conservatism had already
collapsed. Nature abhors a vacuum. Sam Francis's intellectual odyssey was proof of that. Sam
would spawn intellectual offspring as well. Richard Spenser, by way of his mentor Paul
Gottfried, who was also at the Sam Francis memorial, floated the new idea of the white race as
the latest manifestation of Middle-American Radical spirit in Charlottesville in 2017, where he
handed out spears and told the white boys to charge the machine gun nest. The white boys then
got mowed down by a "chubby Lesbian kike" by the name of Roberta Kaplan, who is still pursing
lawsuits against them to this day.
Lindbergh's Speech
William F. Buckley didn't just purge individuals. He worked avidly to expel groups like the
John Burch Society from the synagogue of conservatism as well. The main group which got purged
from the Right and declared anathema was America First. On September 11, 1941, Charles
Lindbergh, the American aviator who flew the Spirit of St. Louis across the Atlantic Ocean,
gave a speech in Des Moines, Iowa in which he claimed that "the three most important groups
which have been pressing this country toward war are the British, the Jewish, and the Roosevelt
Administration."[8]
Phyllis Schlafly had just graduated from City House, the now defunct Catholic high school in
St. Louis, when Lindbergh gave his speech. It's hard to imagine that the brightest girl at City
House was unaware of America First, since Lindbergh had already given the same speech to 15,000
people attending an America First rally at the St. Louis arena.
Phyllis Schlafly was a tragic figure. She was the abused wife of the Republican Party, an
organization which treated her with contempt until it was time to get out the vote. Then like
the husband who had beaten her in a drunken rage the night before, the Republicans would
apologize and sweet talk her into supporting them once more. Schlafly was a tragic figure
because she was cut off from her natural constituency, which was Midwest, America First
Catholics, in Alton, Illinois and St. Louis, most of whom were blue collar union members.
Phyllis was the victim of identity theft, perpetrated on her by the conservative movement by
people like William F. Buckley, whose job was policing the conservative movement and expelling
anyone who showed genuine, i.e., America First, conservative inclinations.
Three months after Lindbergh gave his speech, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December
7, and America entered the war. One day later the FBI showed up at the door of Henry Regnery's
father, the man who was the treasurer of America First, and confiscated their mailing list,
thus putting an end to the only genuinely conservative movement in America during the 20th
century. Henry told me that story some 50 years after it happened, an indication that the event
had made a big impression on him at the time. I never asked him what conclusions he drew from
it, but with hindsight the answer to that question was obvious. Henry abandoned America First
and created conservatism in its stead. Whether he did it with the CIA in mind is something I
can't say, but I can say that conservatism never lost its ethnic flavor. Russel Kirk's book was
based on Whig history. Henry Regnery's family may have been Catholic when they arrived in this
country, but Henry became a Quaker, largely because of the Quakerspeise , their effort
to feed the Germans Winston Churchill was starving to death with his naval blockade. Henry
married a Quaker princess from Philadelphia, and he published books which supported the ethnic
cleansing of Catholics from their neighborhoods on the south side of Chicago because he was a
Quaker and because Quaker was his ethnic identity.
In 1955, four years after Henry published God and Man at Yale , in the same year WFB
launched National Review , Will Herberg, who would become religion editor at that
magazine, became famous as the author of Protestant, Catholic, Jew , a book which
resurrected the 1930s sociological theory known as the triple melting pot. According to that
theory, ethnicity did not cease to exist after migration to America. After three generations
language was replaced by religion as the source of ethnic identity. America was like
Yugoslavia; it was a country which had three ethnic groups based on three religions.
Missing from Herberg's account was the fact that these three religious-based ethnic groups
were, as in Yugoslavia, in a constant state of cultural conflict. In the 1920s and the 1930s,
the Protestants joined forces with the Catholics in opposing the Jews who ran Hollywood and
were using their monopoly on cinema production to corrupt the morals of the American people.
Beginning in the late 1940s, with the publication of Paul Blanshard's book American Freedom
and Catholic Power , the WASP ruling class switched sides in the culture wars and joined
forces with the Jews in opposing the Catholics.
The complicated interface between religion, morality, ideology, and ethnicity gave rise to
similar conflicts on the campus of Hillsdale College, where Catholic students started arriving
in significant numbers after the sellout of Catholic education which Rev. Theodore Hesburgh
inaugurated after issuing the Land O' Lakes statement in 1967. As one of his first acts, when
he became president of Hillsdale College in 1971, George Roche III invited Russell Kirk to join
the faculty. Kirk's appointment put the world on notice that Hillsdale was serious about being
conservative. If Roche had been as serious about thinking as he was about fund-raising and
public relations, he might have noticed that Kirk's book The Conservative Mind , had
some significant things to say about the need for religion to restrain appetite, lessons that
would have increasing relevance to Hillsdale College under George III's increasingly autocratic
leadership. "Men's appetites," Kirk wrote describing Burke's point of view, "are voracious and
sanguinary . . . reason alone can never chain them to duty."
Both Burke and Adams were referring to religion as the antidote to "reason alone," but it is
the recurring tragedy of the Anglo-American philosophy that its traditionalist thinkers could
all agree on the necessity of religion, but could never get down to specifying which religion
was necessary, so suffused were they with the baleful effects of the Reformation.
Burke, according to Kirk, was dedicated to private property and tradition, but both pillars
were to prove fragile mixtures of iron and clay. When Mary Wollstonecraft, the feminist
Jacobin, asked the tradition-loving Burke if he believed strongly enough in tradition to want
to go back to the days when Englishmen worshipped bread, there was no answer forthcoming. When
Burke said he followed tradition, he meant going back to the political arrangements of 1688 and
no further. When Burke defended private property, he did not enquire too closely into the
question of where the richest English families got their property, because if he had, he would
have had to admit that they got it by looting the Catholic monasteries of the Middle Ages. Once
again tradition and property had distinct if dishonest boundaries.
There is no statue of Edmund Burke on the Hillsdale College campus, but there is a statue of
Ronald Reagan and one of Margaret Thatcher as well, the two representatives of the triumph of
modern conservatism over Communism, the main 20th century representative of the Jewish
revolutionary spirit. On October 12, 1990, right around the time I gave my speech on the fall
of Communism at Hillsdale, Margaret Thatcher said:
The new world of freedom into which the dazzled socialists have stumbled is not new to us.
What to them is uncharted territory is to us familiar and well-loved ground. For Britain has
returned to those basic truths and principles which made her great -- personal liberty,
private property, and the rule of law on which democratic freedoms everywhere are based. Ours
is a creed which travels and endures. Its truths are written in the human heart.
Hillsdale advocated those "basic truths" for the following decade, and they did nothing to
impede the slide into sexual degradation on the Hillsdale College Campus. Both Roche and the
conservatism he rode to wealth and power shared this ambivalence about religion. Russell Kirk,
after spending most of his life as an Anglophile Bohemian, finally converted to Catholicism
when he married in his mid-50s. George Roche followed the exact opposite trajectory. Raised a
Catholic in Denver, Roche abandoned the Catholic faith and became an Episcopalian as an adult.
When Roche decided that even the decidedly Erastian brand of Christianity that the Episcopal
Church had always been was too rigid for his liking, he founded his own Episcopalian Church. It
was a move reminiscent of Henry VIII and completely consistent with someone who referred to
himself as George III. George Roche was, to use the phrase of St. Augustine, someone who loved
money and made use of God. He was not someone who loved God and made use of money.
The crisis came in 1978. Pressured by the growing Catholic presence on campus, Roche put
Harry Vereyser in charge of creating a Christian Studies program, and then did everything he
could to undermine Vereyser's efforts. In October of 1978, Rev. Eugene Sweeney, the Catholic
chaplain, resigned in protest against Roche's animus against any religion which held fast to
the moral law in its entirety. Shortly thereafter, Harry Vereyser resigned, and shortly after
that Russell Kirk handed in his resignation as well.
After he left Hillsdale, Kirk would eventually get expelled from the movement he founded.
When Kirk opined at a meeting of the Heritage Foundation, "Not seldom has it seemed as if some
eminent Neoconservatives mistook Tel Aviv for the capital of the United States,"[9] he was
excommunicated from the conservative movement he had founded, because that movement had been
taken over by a Jewish Trotskyite sect known as neoconservatism, led by Irving Kristol, Norman
Podhoretz, and Midge Dector, who called Kirk's remark "a bloody outrage, a piece of
anti-Semitism by Kirk that impugns the loyalty of neoconservatives."[10]
With all of their faults, both Russell Kirk and John Adams were onto something, but they
would remain for their respective generations, voices crying in the wilderness, as their
contemporaries plunged toward the gratification of passions which would ultimately destroy
them.
Purged of the moral restraint which Catholicism offered, the campus became a hotbed of
sexual degradation whose best expression was the Porky's movies which Hillsdale alumnus
Bob Clark directed in the 1980s. "The passions," John Adams warned, "are all unlimited." If the
citizens of this republic "surrender the guidance for any course or tie to any one passion,
they may depend upon finding it, in the end, a usurping, domineering cruel tyrant." Anyone who
indulges in and continually gratifies passion will be driven mad by it. Man has a congenital
weakness to confound liberty and license, which is why according to Kirk, "Adams preferred the
concept of virtue to the concept of freedom." Kirk shared the same preference, and seeing how
things were going, left Hillsdale to its own devices.
"Democracy in some form," Kirk concluded at the end of The Conservative Mind , "will
endure. Whether it is to be a democracy of degradation, or a democracy of elevation, lies with
the conservatives."[11] Hillsdale chose the former path in the year Russell Kirk resigned in
1978. It was in 1978 that George III began his affair with his daughter-in-law Lissa. That
affair reached its tragic conclusion when Lissa Jackson Roche committed suicide. Purged of
morality, conservatism became nothing more than rationalized appetite, and Lissa had to kill
herself to draw everyone's attention to that fact.
Then everything includes itself in power Power into will, will into appetite, And appetite, a universal wolf, So doubly seconded with will and power Must make perforce a universal prey, And last eat himself up.
We witnessed the fulfillment of that line from Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida
over the summer of 2020. Deprived of the morality based conservatism that Russell Kirk proposed
as the only way to unite the people of this country, the United States descended into moral
anarchy, identity politics and race war, as articulated by the Jewish revolutionary spirit, and
Michigan led the way. Governor Gretchen Whitmer turned the COVID pandemic into a lockdown which
was nothing less than an undeclared war on the lower end of the state's entrepreneurial class,
epitomized by Karl Manke, the barber from Owosso, who defied Whitmer's lockdown regulations and
was later vindicated by the Michigan Supreme Court.[12]
The plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer surfaced two weeks before the election. At a press
conference which she called on October 8, 2020, Michigan attorney general Dana Nessell said
that she could not have thwarted the plot to kidnap Governor Whitmer without the help of the
FBI.13 Five days later, the attorney representing the alleged kidnappers agreed,
contending:
that there was no probable cause to arrest and charge the suspect, arguing, among other
things, that the suspects had no operational plan to do anything, were engaged in all legal
activities – including talking in encrypted group chats and practicing military
exercises with lawfully owned guns – and that it was the informants and undercover
agents who "pushed" others to do illegal things. "One of the most active leaders was your
informant," the defendants' attorney Scott Graham said.[14]
Graham went on to claim that the FBI informant who infiltrated the militia group "was one of
the most active leaders of the group pushing the rest of them to follow through with their
criminal plans."
The plot to kidnap Gretchen wasn't the first time that the FBI tried to incite terrorism in
Michigan. In late March 2010, nine members of a group known as the Hutaree were charged with a
conspiracy to overthrow the government. As we have come to suspect, the "undercover FBI agent"
provocateur was the most active member of the group. Two years later, on March 27, 2012, a
federal judge acquitted seven of the nine defendants. Two of the alleged conspirators were
sentenced to "time served on weapons-related charges, to which they pleaded guilty, and placed
under supervision for two years."[15]
Unlike the alleged kidnappers, Nessell and Whitmer were actually involved in a plot to
prevent Donald Trump from winning Michigan's electoral votes in an election that was less than
two weeks away. Evidence of cheating started showing up within a week of the election. On
November 5, Kellye Sorelle, an attorney on the Trump legal team who was sent to Michigan to
watch the count amidst concern about voter fraud, tweeted a report that she was told to leave
for the night because Trump was winning. She got suspicious and hung back with her camera and
waited. Later the same night cars started pulling up with luggage and ice chests full of
illegal ballots. She is now a witness for the Michigan and U.S. Supreme Courts.
The FBI could not have played their part in this conspiracy without the collaboration of
Michigan attorney general Dana Nessel, a Jewish Lesbian who got elected with the help of George
Soros money.
When former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich tried to explain the bad effect that Soros
prosecutors were having in cities across America, he was told by the info babe at Fox News, the
conservative network, that he was not allowed to mention Soros's name. The look on Gingrich's
face spoke volumes. Apparently, Newt hadn't gotten the memo. Merely saying the name George
Soros constituted a prima facie case of anti-Semitism.
During the time leading up to the riots in Ferguson, Missouri, George Soros gave Black Lives
Matter $33 million dollars. During the summer of 2020, Jews like George Soros and Jewish groups
like the Anti-Defamation league tried to ignite a race war in the United States as part of
their campaign to deny Donald Trump re-election.
The ADL was not the only Jewish organization supporting Black Lives Matter. According to a
report in the Jewish Telegraph Agency , "More than 400 Jewish organizations and
synagogues in the United States have signed on to a letter that asserts 'unequivocally: Black
Lives Matter.'"[16] Those groups represented a broad spectrum "of religious, political, gender,
and racial identities. The list of signatories – from small congregations to major Jewish
organizations – represents millions of Jewish people in the United States . . . ."
What name do we give to this involvement? In America it was called the Black-Jewish
alliance. For the 70 years following the lynching of Leo Frank, Jewish organizations like the
Anti-Defamantion League or ADL and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People, or NAACP, tried to foment race war in the United States. The culmination of this
campaign came in the 1960s with the creation of the Civil Rights Movement.
Religious Riots in St. Louis
But the Jewish revolutionary spirit goes back farther than that. It goes back to the foot of
the Cross. By rejecting Christ as their Messiah, the Jews rejected the Logos incarnate, and
when they rejected the Logos they rejected the order God created for this universe, and when
they rejected that, they became revolutionaries, which is what they are today in places like
St. Louis, where Umar Lee demanded the removal of the statue of the eponymous King of
France.
As in Minneapolis where the race wars of 2020 began, appearances are deceptive. Lee claimed
to be a Muslim, but he also claimed to be a descendent of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. He
claimed to have the support of Black Lives Matter, but why should they hold a grudge against a
French king from the 13th century? Did Louis IX own black slaves? Did he have secret cotton
plantations in Paris? No, Louis IX's crime was that he burned the Talmud.
Do the Blacks care about the Talmud? Do they know what it is? Do they know about the
blasphemies it contains, which was the real reason it was burned? Probably not. As in
Minneapolis, the group behind the protest was invisible. The Jewish revolutionary spirit was
behind the protests in both cities. In spite of appearances to the contrary, the brouhaha over
the statue in St. Louis was a battle between Catholics and Jews. Umar Lee, as front man for the
Jews, had to disguise that fact, and turn the conflict into a battle between blacks and whites.
Catholics became victims of identity theft when Umar Lee turned a group of Catholics who had
assembled to pray the Rosary in defense of the statue into "white supremacists." After Lee did
this, Black Lives Matter showed up and beat up a 60-year-old Catholic who was trying to pray
the Rosary, because, as we learned from the failed attempt to preserve the statue of Robert E.
Lee in Charlottesville, white people have no rights.
In fact, they don't even exist, except in the minds of their enemies. In order to have
rights, you first have to have existence. Identity flows from existence because as an essential
aspect of being, existence presupposes essence. Essence is the basis of identity, and identity
is the basis of unity.
To have unity you have to assert your identity. And this is precisely where the Catholics of
St. Louis ran into problems. They were willing to come to the statue and pray the Rosary, but
they were unwilling to go any farther than that. Most importantly, they were unwilling to
identify their enemy. This was a crucial mistake because, as Sun Tzu once said, "If you know
the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know
yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know
neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."[17]
The crisis came on June 12, when Umar Lee announced that a group of "white supremacists"
were planning to go to the St. Louis statue and beat up a group of Muslim, Christian, and
Jewish women. This was a complete fabrication on Lee's part, and his supporters probably knew
he was lying because virtually none of the St. Louis iconoclasts showed up to support him. The
Catholics, however, showed up en masse led by a black nun ringing a bell, a gesture
which did severe damage to the race-based identity theft which Lee attempted to impose on the
Catholics. That gesture was an implicit rebuke to Lee's racial narrative, but it was not
explicit, nor did that gesture alone explain the identity of the Catholics' enemy.
At this point, I became part of the story by releasing my account of the battle of the
statue as a Catholic-Jewish conflict. I say that I became part of the story because within
hours after the Culture Wars article appeared on the Internet, Umar Lee challenged me to
a debate.
Up to this point, Umar Lee didn't know me from Adam. The fact that he challenged me meant
that my article did significant damage to his racial narrative because only people on the
losing side of the battle challenge their opponents to debate. Up to this point, Lee was riding
high and confident not only that the statue was coming down, but also that the city named after
the same saint was going to be renamed Confluence.
Catholic reaction to Umar Lee's challenge was instructive. Almost to a man, the Catholics
told me not to debate Lee because, they claimed, if I did they would be called anti-Semites.
That statue is still standing, not so much because I accepted Lee's challenge, but because I
identified the enemy. If you want to succeed in the culture wars, you must identify the enemy,
as Sun Tzu pointed out a long time ago. That means avoiding meaningless labels like "liberal"
and "conservative" or "black" and "white," and getting to the heart of the matter in America,
which is invariably ethnic, involving a conflict between Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. Any
other strategy is based on a naïve acceptance of the terms of identity politics, which
invariably involves, as it did in St. Louis, identity theft.
Hillsdale College is now witnessing what Sigmund Freud would have called "the return of the
repressed." Censored by the administration, which had banned America First clubs on campus,
Hillsdale's Catholic ethnics protested against the form of identity theft known as conservatism
by inviting me to the local version of the catacombs to speak.
The death of conservatism in 2016 meant the resurrection of America First in 2020. Just look
at the map of election results, and you will see the same configuration that Charles Lindbergh
addressed in 1941. Both then and now, the center of the country supported isolationism, high
wage manufacturing, and limited representative government, and the coasts supported
globalization, low wages, identity politics, gender ideology, and Jewish usury. The triple
melting pot of religious identity re-asserted itself over race-based identity politics.
Religious-based ethnicity trumped race, because in America religious-based ethnicity is a
category of reality, whereas race is a category of the mind which invariably gets deployed for
political purposes which have nothing to do with race.
The most striking sign of the return of the repressed at Hillsdale was architectural.
Brooding over the quadrangle which it created, Christ Chapel is large enough to become the foil
balancing Central Hall, the iconic American Gothic administration building which is one of
America's most prominent symbols of conservatism. Christ Chapel is an Italianate masterpiece in
beige brick and limestone, worthy of Alberti, at least on the outside. Entering the building
through the porch of Doric columns during the era of COVID lockdown in Gretchen Whitmer's
Michigan proved impossible until, that is, a young female student took pity on my wife and I
and buzzed us in through a side door. This young lady had clearly never darkened a church door
during her 20 years of existence, and was apologetic about the chapel's price tag. "This
money," she said, "should have been spent on the poor," apparently unaware that one of Jesus'
disciples had said the same thing, and that that disciple was Judas Iscariot. "Be sure to check
out the day chapel," she said leaving us to our own devices.
I would have preferred a tour with her as guide, but the building spoke for itself. The
massive Doric columns we had seen at the entrance porch now reappeared and marched in stately
file up to what should have been the church's sanctuary, but was in this instance an empty
space with a pathetic little altar added at its back almost as an afterthought. I have had
similar experiences of architectural disappointment before. Walking up to the Taj Mahal was one
of the greatest aesthetic experiences of my life, but when I walked inside the empty tomb which
is that building's raison d'etre , I experienced on of the greatest aesthetic
disappointments in my life as well. The mosque of the wife of the fourth Imam in Qom is
gorgeously adorned with cobalt blue tiles, mirrored ceilings, and a solid silver shrine which
inspire weeping and devotion on the part of the Muslims worshipping at its walls, but the
interior of the mosque was, in spite of the worshippers conversing with imams seated on
gorgeous Persian carpets, disorganized and strangely empty. I had a similar experience at the
historic Quaker meeting house at 2nd and Arch in Philadelphia, where one sits on horsehair
benches and contemplates others sitting on horsehair benches as well. The chapel at Hillsdale
was both magnificent and disappointing because what should be the culmination of the aesthetic
experience, which the building offers, is missing. Instead of the Real Presence, we have a
significant absence, a vacuum which is of necessity abhorrent.
But then we went to the Day Chapel, just to the right of the empty sanctuary, and there, to
our surprise, we found stained glass windows. It was as if we had been touring one of England's
stately country estates and had discovered a priest hole. Popery had shown the hidden feature
which became the symbolic explicator of the building. Later that day, I learned that the
architect who had designed Christ Chapel was the Notre Dame professor Duncan Stroik. As some
indication that Stroik knows how to create a full-blooded expression of the Real Presence which
balances off the most magnificent interior, one need only visit his masterpiece in the
California style at Thomas Aquinas College in Ojai, California. There leafy ethereal Corinthian
pillars proceed to a baldachino with swirling pillars that were copied from St. Peter's in
Rome. That symbolic canopy provides a worthy shrine for the Real Presence. After walking the
length of the nave, the pilgrim feels that he has arrived at his cosmic destination in the same
way you feel that you have arrived safely home after the last note of a magnificent symphony.
Did Duncan Stroik wreck his own building when he left the sanctuary of Christ Chapel bare? He
used Anglophilic models like Christ Church in Philadelphia as his model, but they don't seem
unbalanced in the way that the chapel at Hillsdale did, probably because those architects
didn't know any better. Christ Chapel has the feel of the great Italian architect of the Middle
Ages Leon Battisti Alberti on the outside and the American Revolution on its inside. Christ
Church in Philadelphia is where our founding fathers signed the Declaration of Independence. Is
this bifurcation of purpose going to work? Is it possible to worship God and Mammon? Larry
Arnn, who is George Roche's successor at Hillsdale, talked about always needing a place to pray
on campus. Lissa's demise at the trysting place known as the Gazebo made that point in a bloody
and dramatic way. Christ Chapel totally dominates the quad behind Central Hall. The verdict is
still out on how that chapel aligns with the statues of Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher,
Frederick Douglass, and Thomas Jefferson which surround it. Conservatism failed to make that
connection under George III. If anyone can make it now, it is the students who attended my
talk.
We seem a long way from Edmund Burke's hope that "Providence would not abandon mankind to
Jacobinism," and even farther from Russell Kirk's vision of America as "the Providential
instrument of this redemption."[18] The color revolution continues to unfold before our eyes,
but Logos is rising because the prism of conservatism is no longer distorting what we see.
Hegel called it "the cunning of reason," but we call it Divine Providence. We now have a chance
to win, but only if we can identify the enemy. If we don't know who we are and we can't
identify the enemy, we will lose every battle as Sun Tsu predicted many years ago.
Excellent unz article
titled "The Rise and Fall of Conservatism in Michigan."
The death of conservatism in 2016 meant the resurrection of America First in 2020. Just
look at the map of election results, and you will see the same configuration that Charles
Lindbergh addressed in 1941. Both then and now, the center of the country supported
isolationism, high wage manufacturing, and limited representative government, and the
coasts supported globalization, low wages, identity politics, gender ideology, and Jewish
usury. The triple melting pot of religious identity re-asserted itself over race-based
identity politics. Religious-based ethnicity trumped race, because in America
religious-based ethnicity is a category of reality, whereas race is a category of the
mind which invariably gets deployed for political purposes which have nothing to do with
race.
I am continually fascinated by Ron Unz's site where alternative views thrive and are
debated. I would say the above article's thesis, that, through it all, and despite any pet
project of those at the bar, the real conflicts at play in the U.S. continually involve the
three predominant religious identities of Protestantism, Catholicism, and Judaism.
This Scott Ritter
op/ed is a good read and puts much into perspective if you've been paying attention. For
example, think of the breakneck speed Putin's trying to get Russia's national projects
underway and completed. Think of the ongoing and quickening pace of Eurasian integration. The
McFaul citation, "Russia is way more powerful today than it was 20 years ago, and it's way
more powerful today than it was four years ago," is yet another consideration. Finally, Putin
and Lavrov have spoken of the ever increasing need to negotiate an International Cyber
Security Treaty for almost all of Trump's term. And I'll wager the USA's National Debt that
Russia is very busily finishing its "for internal use only" internet that firewalls the
energy, defense and communications portions of Russian infrastructure.
The hole Obama/Biden were busy digging from 2009-2017 is now much deeper and getting
deeper daily. We've now seen the bipartisan rejection of the saner, larger, stimulus Trump
and some Rs & Ds demanded for the commonfolk, which provides an excellent signal as to
what's going to follow--nothing, aside from the hole deepening yet further. IMO, the economic
draft will soon cease as who will want to defend something that's indefensible. IMO, a
majority if not now will soon conclude that they no longer have a stake in this society, that
they're being milked for all they're worth then discarded.
Looks like Sidney Powell overplayed her hand with her Hugo Chavez claims and might pay the
price... They also attack her penchant for self-promotion.
This is a solid legal document that attack exaggerations and false claims and as such it puts
Sydney Power on the defensive. But at the same time it opens the possibility to analyze Dominion
machines and see to what extent votes can be manipulated, for example by lowest sensitivity of
the scanner for mail-in ballots and then manually assigning votes to desirable candidate. This
avenue is not excluded.
It also does not address the claim of inherent vulnerabilities of any Windows based computer
used in election, irrespective whether they were produced by Dominion or any other company due to
the known vulnerability of windows OS especially to the intelligence agencies attacks. As
well as the most fundamental question: whether the use of computers in election represents step
forward or the step back in election security? Especially Internet connected voting machines and
centralized tabulation centers deployed in 2020 elections.
So the success here depends whether they can narrow the scope tot ht claims made and avid
discovery of the voting machines themselves.
The weak point is that the letter references the testimony of Chris Krebs, who is a former
Microsoft employee and as such has a conflict of interests in accessing the security of Windows
based election machines produced by Dominion and other companies. Moreover he is now a computer
science processional but a lawyer, who does not has any independent opinion on the subject matter
due to the absence of fundamental CS knowledge required.
Notable quotes:
"... For example, you falsely claimed that Dominion and its software were created in Venezuela for the purpose of rigging elections for the now-deceased Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, that Dominion paid kickbacks to Georgia officials in return for a "no-bid" contract to use Dominion systems in the 2020 election, and that Dominion rigged the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election by manipulating votes, shifting votes, installing and using an algorithm to modify or "weight" votes such that a vote for Biden counted more than a vote for Trump, trashing Trump votes, adding Biden votes, and training election workers to dispose of Trump votes and to add Biden votes. ..."
"... Fifth, you had a financial incentive in making the defamatory accusations. Your own conduct and statements at the press conference, media tour, and on your websites make it clear that you were publicizing your wild accusations as part of a fundraising scheme and in order to drum up additional business and notoriety for yourself. ..."
Sidney Powell Defending the Republic 10130 Northlake Blvd. #214342 West Palm Beach, Florida
34412
Re: Defamatory Falsehoods About Dominion
Dear Ms. Powell:
We represent US Dominion Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Dominion Voting Systems,
Inc. and Dominion Voting Systems Corporation (collectively, "Dominion"). We write regarding
your wild, knowingly baseless, and false accusations about Dominion, which you made on behalf
of the Trump Campaign as part of a coordinated media circus and fundraising scheme featuring
your November 19 press conference in Washington, D.C. and including your "Stop the Steal" rally
and numerous television and radio appearances on -- and statements to -- Fox News, Fox
Business, Newsmax, and the Rush Limbaugh Radio Show, among others.
... ... ...
I. Your reckless disinformation campaign is predicated on lies that have endangered
Dominion's business and the lives of its employees.
Given the sheer volume and ever-expanding set of lies that you have told and are continuing
to tell about Dominion as part of your multi-media disinformation "Kraken" fundraising
campaign, it would be impractical to address every one of your falsehoods in this letter.
Without conceding the truth of any of your claims about Dominion, we write to demand that you
retract your most serious false accusations, which have put Dominion's employees' lives at risk
and caused enormous harm to the company.
For example, you falsely claimed that Dominion and its software were created in
Venezuela for the purpose of rigging elections for the now-deceased Venezuelan dictator Hugo
Chavez, that Dominion paid kickbacks to Georgia officials in return for a "no-bid" contract to
use Dominion systems in the 2020 election, and that Dominion rigged the 2020 U.S. Presidential
Election by manipulating votes, shifting votes, installing and using an algorithm to modify or
"weight" votes such that a vote for Biden counted more than a vote for Trump, trashing Trump
votes, adding Biden votes, and training election workers to dispose of Trump votes and to add
Biden votes.
By way of example only, just last week, you made the following false assertions about
Dominion to Jan Jekielek at The Epoch Times:'
Effectively what they did with the machine fraud was to, they did everything from
injecting massive quantities of votes into the system that they just made up, to running
counterfeit ballots through multiple times in multiple batches to create the appearance of
votes that weren't really there. They trashed votes.
These statements are just the tip of the iceberg, which includes similar and other false
claims you made at your Washington, D.C. press conference and to other media outlets with
global internet audiences. Your outlandish accusations are demonstrably fake. While soliciting
people to send you "millions of dollars"2 and holding yourself out as a beacon of truth, you
have purposefully avoided naming Dominion as a defendant in your sham litigations-effectively
denying Dominion the opportunity to disprove your false accusations in court. Dominion values
freedom of speech and respects the right of all Americans-of all political persuasions -- to
exercise their First Amendment rights and to disagree with each other. But while you are
entitled to your own opinions, Ms. Powell, you are not entitled to your own facts. Defamatory
falsehoods are actionable in court and the U.S.
Supreme Court has made clear that "there is no constitutional value in false statements of
fact." Gertz v. Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 340 (1974). Dominion welcomes transparency and a
full investigation of the relevant facts in a court of law, where it is confident the truth
will prevail. Here are the facts:
1. Dominion's vote counts have been repeatedly verified by paper ballot recounts and
independent audits.
Dominion is a non-partisan company that has proudly partnered with public officials from
both parties in accurately tabulating the votes of the American people in both "red" and "blue"
states and counties. Far from being created to rig elections for a now-deceased Venezuelan
dictator, Dominion's voting systems are certified under standards promulgated by the U.S.
Election Assistance Commission ("EAC"), reviewed and tested by independent testing laboratories
accredited by the EAC, and were designed to be auditable and include a paper ballot backup to
verify results. Indeed, paper ballot recounts and independent audits have repeatedly and
conclusively debunked your election-rigging claims, and on November 12, 2020, the Elections
Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council and the Election Infrastructure Sector
Coordinating Executive Committees released a joint statement confirming that there is "no
evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way
compromised" and that the 2020 election was the most secure in American history.3 The Joint
Statement was signed and endorsed by, among others, the National Association of State Election
Directors, National Association of Secretaries of State, and the U.S. Cybersecurity &
Infrastructure Security Agency ("CISA") -- then led by a Trump appointee, Chris Krebs.
In addition, your false accusation that Dominion rigged the 2020 election is based on a
demonstrably false premise that wildly overstates Dominion's very limited role in elections.
Dominion provides tools such as voting machines that accurately tabulate votes for the
bipartisan poll workers, poll watchers, and local election officials who work tirelessly to run
elections and ensure accurate results. Dominion's machines count votes from county-verified
voters using a durable paper ballot. Those paper ballots are the hard evidence proving the
accuracy of the vote counts from Dominion's machines. If Dominion had manipulated the votes,
the paper ballots would not match the machine totals. In fact, they do match. Recounts and
audits have proven that Dominion did what it was designed and hired to do: accurately tabulate
votes.
2. Dominion has no connection to Hugo Chavez. Venezuela, or China.
As you are well aware from documents in the public domain and attached to your court
filings, Hugo Chavez's elections were not handled by Dominion, but by an entirely different
company -- Smartmatic. This is a critical fact because you have premised your defamatory
falsehoods on your intentionally false claim that Dominion and Smartmatic are the same company
even though you know that they are entirely separate companies who compete with each other.
Dominion was not created in or for Venezuela, has never been located there, and is not owned by
Smartmatic or Venezuelan or Chinese investors. Dominion has never provided machines or any of
its software or technology to Venezuela, nor has it ever participated in any elections in
Venezuela. It did not receive $400 million from the Chinese in the weeks before the 2020
election or otherwise. It has no ties to the Chinese government, the Venezuelan government,
Hugo Chavez, Malloch Brown, George Soros, Bigfoot, or the Loch Ness Monster. Dominion does not
use Smartmatic's software or machines, and there was no Smartmatic technology in any of
Dominion's voting machines in the 2020 election.
3. You falsely claimed that Dominion's founder admitted he "can change a million votes,
no problem at all" and that you would "tweet out the video later''-- but you never did so
because no such video exists.
During at least one of your many media appearances, you promised to "tweet out [a] video" of
Dominion's founder admitting that he "can change a million votes, no problem at all." Your
assertion -- to a global internet audience -- that you had such damning video evidence
bolstered your false accusations that Dominion had rigged the election. Yet you have never
produced that video because, as you know, it does not exist. Dominion's founder never made such
a claim because Dominion cannot change votes. Its machines simply tabulate the paper ballots
that remain the custody of the local election officials -- nothing more, nothing less. 4. You
falsely claimed that you have a Dominion employee "on tape" saving he "rigged the election for
Biden''-- but you know that no such tape exists. In peddling your defamatory accusations, you
also falsely told a national audience that you had a Dominion employee "on tape" saying that
"he rigged the election for Biden." Your own court filings prove that no such tape exists. In
them, you cited an interview of Joe Oltmann, a Twitter- banned "political activist" who -- far
from claiming he had that shocking alleged confession "on tape"-claimed he took "notes" during
a conference call he supposedly joined after "infiltrating Antifa." This is a facially
ludicrous claim for a number of reasons, including the fact that he lives in Colorado, where it
would have been perfectly legal to record such a call if it had actually happened. As a result
of your false accusations, that Dominion employee received death threats.
II. Because there is no reliable evidence supporting your defamatory falsehoods, you
actively manufactured and misrepresented evidence to support them.
Despite repeatedly touting the overwhelming "evidence" of your assertions during your media
campaign, every court to which you submitted that socalled "evidence" has dismissed each of
your sham litigations, and even Trump appointees and supporters have acknowledged -- including
after you filed your "evidence" in court, posted it on your fundraising website, and touted it
in the media -- that there is no evidence that actually supports your assertions about
Dominion. Indeed:
One federal judge observed that you submitted "nothing but speculation and conjecture
that votes for President Trump were destroyed, discarded or switched to votes for Vice
President Biden." Op. & Order Den. Pl.'s Emer. Motion, for Deck, Emer., and Inj. Relief
at 34, Whitmer v. City of Detroit, No. 20-cv-12134 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 7, 2020) [Dkt. 62].
Another federal judge commented that the attachments to your complaint were "only
impressive for their volume," are "largely based on anonymous witnesses, hearsay, and
irrelevant analysis of unrelated elections," and include "expert reports" that "reach
implausible conclusions, often because they are derived from wholly unreliable sources."
Order at 24-25, Bowyerv. Ducey, No. 2-20-cv-02321 (D. Ariz. Dec. 9, 2020) [Dkt. 84].
Despite your claim that you have so much "evidence" that it feels as if you are drinking
from a "fire hose," when asked by your interviewers and other media outlets to provide that
evidence, you have failed to do so each and every time. Conservative television host Tucker
Carlson even called you out for failing to provide any evidence to support your
assertions.4
After you put the purported "evidence" in your court filings, Trump loyalist and U.S.
Attorney General Bill Barr stated, "There's been one assertion that would be systemic fraud
and that would be the claim that machines were programmed essentially to skew the election
results. And the DHS and DOJ have looked into that, and so far, we haven't seen anything to
substantiate that."
... ... ...
Fifth, you had a financial incentive in making the defamatory accusations. Your own
conduct and statements at the press conference, media tour, and on your websites make it clear
that you were publicizing your wild accusations as part of a fundraising scheme and in order to
drum up additional business and notoriety for yourself. Your financial incentive and
motive to make the defamatory accusations is further evidence of actual malice. See Brown v.
Petrolite Corp., 965 F.2d 38, 47 (5th Cir. 1992); Enigma Software Grp. USA, LLC v. Bleeping
Computer LLC, 194 F. Supp. 3d 263, 288 (S.D.N.Y. 2016).
Sixth, you cannot simply claim ignorance of the facts. As a licensed attorney, you were
obligated to investigate the factual basis for your claims before making them in court.
31 There is no factual basis for your defamatory accusations against Dominion and
numerous reliable sources and documents in the public domain have repeatedly debunked your
accusations. As such, you either conducted the inquiry required of you as a licensed attorney
and violated your ethical obligations by knowingly making false assertions rebutted by the
information you found, or you violated your ethical obligations by purposefully avoiding
undertaking the reasonable inquiry required of you as a member of the bar. Either is additional
evidence of actual malice.
Taken together, your deliberate misrepresentation and manufacturing of evidence, the
inherent improbability of your accusations, your reliance on facially unreliable sources, your
intentional disregard of reliable sources, your preconceived storyline, your financial
incentive, and your ethical violations are clear and convincing evidence of actual malice. See
Eramo v. Rolling Stone, 209 F. Supp. 3d 862,872 (W.D. Va. 2016) (denying defendant's motion for
summary judgment and finding "[ajlthough failure to adequately investigate, a departure from
journalistic standards, or ill
is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for
Antiwar.com from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Twitter @NebojsaMalic 22 Dec, 2020 12:08 Joe
Biden, set to be the oldest-ever US president, is actually on the younger side of people
currently running the American political establishment, who show no sign of wanting to ever
step aside for another generation.
It is often overlooked that Donald Trump currently holds the distinction of being the
oldest-ever US president, being 70 at the time of his inauguration. Biden will take that trophy
as well if he's inaugurated in January 2021, having turned 78 last month. Even so, he is
actually younger than the current leaders of the House and the Senate!
Though all major power brokers in Washington are older than the "gerontocracy" that
ruled the Soviet Union in the 1970s and the 1980s, you won't hear the US mainstream media make
the comparison, as it wouldn't fit their Narrative.
Sure, there has been some carefully calibrated talk about the "cognitive decline" of
Senator Dianne Feinstein, who is 87. But Feinstein is from an overwhelmingly Democrat state and
she can be easily replaced at the same time as Kamala Harris, Biden's running mate who still
hasn't resigned her Senate seat.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) is 80, and has raised eyebrows herself with the
whole "Good Morning. Sunday Morning" glitch-in-the-Matrix behavior during a TV
appearance in September.
Way back in 2018 , Pelosi
insisted that any talk about wanting someone younger in the leadership position was
"sexist," and went on to ruthlessly crush any opposition to her getting the gavel
– and the power that went with it – inside the party. In the same interview, Pelosi
blanked out on the name of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), calling him
"whatshisname."
Born several months ahead of Biden in 1942, McConnell is 78 himself. He had a bout with
polio when very young, and though successfully treated, he's had difficulty climbing stairs all
his life. While he hasn't shown any signs of cognitive decline, his political choices as of
late have certainly caused some Republicans to wonder if he's truly the legislative genius his
supporters make him out to be.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) is "only" 70, but has actually been
in Congress longer than McConnell, if one counts his 18 years in the House before he got
elected to the Senate in 1998.
Only House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, 55, technically qualifies as a member of
'Generation X' rather than a Baby Boomer. Nor does he have any Cold War political baggage like
the rest, having been in the House since only 2006. If the Republicans somehow win the House
majority in 2022, he might gain more influence – but that's speculation at this point, on
both counts.
Meanwhile, the young activist House members who came in with 2018's "Blue Wave," such
as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York), are being kept in check by the old guard. Just last
week, AOC was denied a spot on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, thwarting her plans to
push for her "Green New Deal" proposal.
Compare this state of US politics with the notorious "gerontocracy" of the Soviet
Union. Three aging Soviet leaders died in quick succession between 1982 and 1985, prompting
then-US president Ronald Reagan to say "How am I supposed to get anyplace with the Russians
if they keep dying on me?" Yet Reagan was 74 at the time, older than all three.
Leonid Brezhnev was 54 when he took over the Communist Party in 1964. For the sake of
political stability, he remained a figurehead after his 1975 stroke and "ruled" the USSR
until his death in 1982, as no one in the party could agree on who ought to succeed him. His
18-year tenure was later dubbed the "Brezhnev stagnation."
Former KGB chief Yuri Andropov, part of a triumvirate running things for the better part of
Brezhnev's latter years, died himself at the age of 70 in 1984. He had led the Soviet Union for
less than 16 months. Konstantin Chernenko, 73, took over from Andropov – and died in
March 1985, after only 13 months in charge. His successor, Mikhail Gorbachev, was 54 at the
time, two years younger than Kamala Harris is now.
In one of those strange intricacies of the American political system, Harris went from
getting zero delegates in the Democrats' nomination process and dropping out before the first
primary to being widely expected to take over from Biden sooner rather than later. One might
say her relative youth and being a 'Woman Of Color' – an identity politics feature
increasingly important to the Democrats – might spell the end of the Boomer
dominance.
The thing to keep in mind, however, is that the "young reformer" Gorbachev managed to
run the Soviet Union into the ground within five short years. In 1991, the old guard tried a
military coup against him. Though Gorbachev survived the coup, the Soviet Union didn't. By the
end of that year, the USSR had "dissolved," breaking up along Communist-drawn boundaries
into independent and quasi-independent states.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
UKCitizen 1 day ago 22 Dec, 2020 08:34 AM
Not only American politics but much of USA public life too. I believe one facet of rule by a
gerontocracy is maintenance of the status quo; another is less control over younger and more
vigorous members of society. The two come together in the rise of Silicon Valley and
dominance of USA affairs by corporate interests. But nothing lasts forever and there are long
cycles too. Little will change in the short term but I predict at least four years of more
serious decline in America. The turning point will be final disillusionment with liberal-left
politics (see K/r theory) and the arrival of some younger leaders, not yet known.
Liberal-leftism will fail eventually for the simple reason it is founded in utopian like
fantasies, disconnection with the real life (however harsh,and probably because it is harsh)
but above all an attempt to spread finite resources veneer thin and remove any effort to get
them (free everything and equality for all). America will come round eventually but it will
be painful and will require it to revise much of its political structure to becoming a true
democracy, which even I have realised it isn't, and probably only has been fleetingly since
its founding. K/r theory is magnificently expounded in the 'The Evolutionary Psychology
Behind Politics' and long cycles in 'Biohistory'. The former rings true on just about every
page.
KarlthePoet UKCitizen 1 day ago 22 Dec, 2020 11:35 AM
America is collapsing because its foundation is solidly built on lies. The US government and
Wall Street are ultimately being controlled by the Jewish Banking Cartel. It cannot be
denied. Take the Federal Reserve away and America collapses overnight. Trillions upon
Trillions of dollars that are being printed out of thin air are keeping the failed system
afloat, for now. A massive global economic collapse is imminent. Just watch. Happy Holidays
Thomas74 17 hours ago 23 Dec, 2020 03:46 AM
There are clear parallels between the USSR and USA. The question is whether the leadership in
the USA's leader class has the same self-awareness that arose at the top of the USSR in its
last years. Also whether the American people will tolerate the economic hardship that the
former Soviet peoples endured in the transition. Is this what we're seeing now with the
coronavirus situation? A gradual taking down of expectations in the West behind the
smokescreen of a virus?
Anubis64 1 day ago 22 Dec, 2020 12:24 PM
Dear Nebojsa, So what? Andropov would have made a first-class statesman (give or take his
infatuation with technocracy). Brezhnev was not only a hero but a capable statesman whose era
is remembered with nostalgia. Let us focus on the fact that Russia's responses to the blows
coming hard and fast are rather passive and lacking any historical vision. It is not age but
will that matters.
Anubis64 Anubis64 1 day ago 22 Dec, 2020 12:53 PM
Then, a young scoundrel was brought in by the shady Yakovlev character and destroyed the
greatest country in the world in less than a decade. May the same happen to the insufferable
Americans.
Krieger 1 hour ago 23 Dec, 2020 08:34 PM
I think this is mostly apples and oranges. In the USSR, the "old guard" were patriots who
wanted to preserve their country. The "young reformers" were traitors who wanted to destroy
their own country to benefit their Western masters and personally enrich themselves. In the
USA, on the other hand, both the young and old politicians are totally corrupt and want to
maintain the status quo, which is slowly destroying the country from within.
Mira Golub 1 day ago 22 Dec, 2020 10:17 AM
America is ruled by mobster clans, the puppets are indeed resemble walking dead. Russian
imbecile liberal pro Western 2% 'opposition' though are getting their jollies by calling
Putin who is 68 'grandpa'. Bunch of degenerates.
Marek Weglinski 1 day ago 22 Dec, 2020 08:25 AM
Maybe it's a telltale that the Soviet-like demise for the US is near. Hopefully the American
empire will not come to a SUPERNOVA-like ending (inflicting great damage to the rest of the
world), before turning itself into a dwarf.
Ohhho Marek Weglinski 1 day ago 22 Dec, 2020 11:37 AM
The Evil empire will implode and take the rest of the world down with it, that's the problem!
USSR had it's own economic system pretty much isolated from the Western world, and when that
system collapsed the effect was felt all around the satellite countries for years!
Which is fine -- victori sunt spoila and all that -- but it's already safe to say the Trump
years will be remembered as a brutal black comedy that made winners and losers alike look very,
very bad. It was supposed to be a historic, norms-smashing catastrophe, but the reality is that
almost nothing actually happened during the Trump years, except for a very long, exhausting
story. The major in-between change was a total loss of our collective grip on reality,
beginning with the fact that most of the country thinks we just went to hell and back a
thousand times, instead of making just one noisy trip in a circle, arriving just where we might
have four years ago, if Joe Biden had run instead of Hillary Clinton. The tiniest conceivable
step, but oh so much grief and self-deception to get there!
y_arrow
highwaytoserfdom 1 hour ago
Matt Im sure you know the
"The press is a gang of cruel(censored) . Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is
a cheap catch-all for (censored)offs and misfits -- a false doorway to the backside of life,
a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough
for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage."
― Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
RexSeven 2 hours ago
He put on display for all to see exactly what our media, deep state, and democrat party
is. And you dud nothing Matt. Nothing. Go F yourself.
incharge1976 PREMIUM 1 hour ago (Edited)
Crap article and terrible picture.
The reason Trump's 4 years were crazy was because of the corrupt Democrats who lied the
entire time with bs investigations and hearings.
Richard Chesler 1 hour ago
A breath of fresh air after corrupt charlatan Homobama.
NotKennedy 1 hour ago
An American hero, Donald Trump prevented Hillary.
Itchy and Scratchy 1 hour ago
Trump garnered a historic 75-80mm legitimate votes and a massive landslide victory and
this irrelevant dope writes a banal hit piece on him? SERIOUSLY PATHETIC!
"... USAID led at that time by someone named Rajiv Khan, I think it was, and directed by Hill, comandeered the few landing spots at the airport for themselves preventing planes carrying Actual Aid -- you know, food, clothing, meds -- from landing and unloading. ..."
"... I have friends who lived in Haiti at the time and years after the disaster only 6 new residences had been built and the promised factories? As far as I know, never did get built. ..."
"... USAID seems to be about anything but AID. ..."
"... When pressed about the lack of progress made in the (housing) rebuilding efforts, including inabilities to provide shelter, Secretary of State Clinton said "Those who expect progress immediately are unrealistic and doing a disservice to the many people who are working so hard. ..."
USAID led at that time by someone named Rajiv Khan, I think it was, and directed by Hill,
comandeered the few landing spots at the airport for themselves preventing planes carrying
Actual Aid -- you know, food, clothing, meds -- from landing and unloading.
Then Bill was named "Ambassador to Haiti" and the situation Never improved.
I have friends who lived in Haiti at the time and years after the disaster only 6 new
residences had been built and the promised factories? As far as I know, never did get
built.
good example! I vote Power and Sunstein to head USAID! i was a bit more than surprised
that ann garrison never mentioned it's a CIA cut-out, to say the truth.
on edit: ach; you'd meant Bill Fuck over haiti Clinton!
' F*cking the Haitian 99%: Another Clinton Family Project ', October
27, 2015 by wendyedavis (longish, but this key excerpt)
"Sure, Bill and Hill love sweatshop industrial complexes (from nacla.org) more than houses
for Haiti, and love HELP™ (comically ironic acronym):
"On September 20, Haitian prime minister Jean-Marc Bellerive, U.S. Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, and the World Bank's International Finance Corporation announced their
partnership with the South Korean garment firm Sae-A Trading Company to establish an
industrial park that will create 10,000 garment assembly jobs in Haiti. Without a doubt,
earthquake-ravaged Haiti needs jobs, mainly to provide the country's 1.3 million homeless
with the means necessary to rebuild their destroyed homes.
While little progress has been made on Haiti's immense housing needs since the January 12
earthquake, Clinton assured the investing public that factory development was moving full
steam ahead. These 10,000 jobs, she assured critics "are not just any jobs. These are good
jobs with fair pay that adhere to international labor standards, . . . Haiti is open for
business again."
Well, sure; at a $3.09 daily minimum wage (upped later to $5, but almost no one actually
gets paid at that rate), what's not to love?
"When pressed about the lack of progress made in the (housing) rebuilding efforts,
including inabilities to provide shelter, Secretary of State Clinton said "Those who expect
progress immediately are unrealistic and doing a disservice to the many people who are
working so hard."
Bill Clinton, UN Special Envoy to Haiti, has been equally optimistic about Haiti's cheap
labor prospects, especially since the passing of the Haitian Economic Lift Program (HELP) in
May. The bill would increase the amount of Haitian assembled goods that could be imported
into the United States duty free. "This important step," Clinton said, "responds to the needs
of the Haitian people for more tools to lift themselves from poverty, while standing to
benefit U.S. consumers."
But my, oh, my; the Big Dog loves high-end resort tourism, too. The Marriott opening was
well-attended by toffs, including Senn Penn, as I remember it.
"... World War II remains the go-to conflict for commemoration almost 80 years after America entered the fray. It marks the last time the U.S. Congress did its constitutional duty and actually declared war before sending America's young men off to kill and die on foreign fields. ..."
"... All subsequent " wars , " from Korea and Vietnam, to the Iraqs (1991, 2003, 2014), Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and a host of military deployments on every continent around the world were waged at the pleasure of the sitting president, amply funded by the Congress, yet conveniently never rose to the level of a declared war. ..."
"... So-called overseas contingency operations, or little wars, have seen their funding go " off-book ," as the Pentagon budget now covers just its routine expenses -- wars are paid for on top of that budget, so long as the Congress can be convinced by their Pentagon liaisons. And they nearly always are. ..."
"... Veterans, Memorial, Independence, or even just Tues days -- replete with military flyovers at football games amidst an age of pandemic -- have become empty gestures. VA hospitals across the country had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21 st century, and it is there today that many of our Vietnam veterans -- of another little war mainly designed to entertain Pentagon fantasies at their expense -- rot, for lack of a better word. ..."
"... What purpose then, does obligatory national celebration -- in prose or pageantry -- of veterans actually serve in year 20 of intractable and hopeless wars? Clearly, veterans and their families are the only ones who truly sacrificed anything. Those negotiating massive defense contracts -- including built-in clauses covering delays, flaws, and implicit corruption -- won't even sacrifice surplus profits for the good of the country. ..."
"... Money isn't blood, and stock prices can't compensate limbs (to the tune of 1,645 single or multiple amputee veterans between 9/11 and 2015). ..."
"... The war machine is largely about money (for select elites) and creating new and expanding markets (benefitting the same) -- the modern veteran's primary function is simply that of "patriotic" bait for the public. In fact, trotting out idealized veterans rationalizes and justifies MIC -corruption -- trading on the good will that most American have for those who served (even if the government they s erv ed was lying about why) is increasingly unworkable . ..."
"... As for difficulties in military recruitment, I often think that the reason the minimum wage remains so low is to make the military more attractive than "parking cars and pumping gas" which now is defined as the gig economy. ..."
"... It is time that we return to using the more appropriate reference to the Department of War, rather than use euphenic, Dept of "Defense?" ..."
"... "God bless the troops"? How about America, especially now that the voting system has become so corrupted? Joe Biden doesn't give a rat's ass about the troops, especially if the troops are SUPPOSEDLY fighting to "spread freedom and democracy". ..."
"... Sadly there's no hope biden and his chicken hawks will do anything but continue business as usual for the merchants of death. We know congress won't say anything other than pass on more Amerikan tax payers cash to endless wars:-( ..."
Biden ends speeches now with "God Bless the Troops," writesKaren Kwiatkowski. He should respect their sacrifices
with a more honorable foreign policy.
On Memorial Day, Joe Biden, accompanied by his wife Jill Biden, at Veterans Memorial Park, Wilmington, Delaware, May 25, 2020.
(Adam Schultz, Biden for President, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
By Karen Kwiatkowski Special to Consortium News
O ne week after the most attention-demanding election of our lifetimes, another Veteran's Day came and went. For the occasion,
presumed President-elect Joe Biden
laid a wreath at the Korean War Memorial in Philadelphia; whilst yet-to-conceded incumbent President Donald Trump held a ceremony
at Arlington National Cemetery.
Both channeled and invoked the great reverence Americans still hold for veterans of the bygone Second World War and more complicated
Korean conflagration. Only
some 300,000 of the men, and women, who fought in the former are still living. No doubt we will continue to hear how many succumbed
to Covid-19 in the past year, and whose fault that is.
Yet, in his official
statement , Biden
added a personal touch -- his son Beau's service in Iraq -- and a "personal commitment:" "I will never treat you or your families
with anything less than the honor you deserve." If he really means it, rebalancing U.S. war-making authority and ditching the dated
Second World War analogies would be a good start.
World War II remains the go-to conflict for commemoration almost 80 years after America entered the fray. It marks the last time
the U.S. Congress did its constitutional duty and actually declared war before sending America's young men off to kill and die on
foreign fields.
A veteran greets Vice President Mike Pence in Bedford, Virginia, ahead of the D-Day 75th anniversary, June 6, 2019. (White House,
D. Myles Cullen)
All subsequent " wars , " from Korea and Vietnam, to the Iraqs (1991, 2003, 2014), Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria,
Yemen, and a host of military deployments on every continent around the world were waged at the pleasure of the sitting president,
amply funded by the Congress, yet conveniently never rose to the level of a declared war.
Little Wars & Presidencies
We should consider these wars linked to the presidents themselves, or -- perhaps more accurately -- to their executive staffs,
and the Department of Defense. War policy-making power has almost completely shifted from the people ' s representatives (House and
Senate) to unelected appointees often recruited from think tanks -- these
funded by an array of organizations interested not in peace, but in accessing tax dollars, and gaining revenues at home and abroad.
Biden's incoming national security team is chock-full of
them. War spending, even in the absence of any notable war, is so compelling that for years, a Congress often
unable to come up with a budget ensured the flow stayed strong to the Pentagon -- and its cousin, the CIA -- through continuing
resolutions.
Please
Contribute
to Consortium News
During its 2020 Winter Fund Drive
So-called overseas contingency operations, or little wars, have seen their funding go "
off-book ," as the Pentagon budget now
covers just its routine expenses -- wars are paid for on top of that budget, so long as the Congress can be convinced by their Pentagon
liaisons. And they nearly always are.
This obscene spending for military weapons, training, gifts to allies, technology enhancement -- for everything from cyberwar,
surveillance, data collection, AI, robotics -- as well as for standard "pocketbook" weapons systems like the F-35 fighter and aircraft
carriers, represent the Military Industrial Complex's (MIC) mainstay.
Consider a disturbingly accurate recent
diagnosis of the current situation:
" the U.S. Presidents and their aides are quite aware of the current state of the US military: it is a military which simply
cannot win even simple conflicts a military whose Air Force spent absolutely obscene amounts of money to create a
supposedly " 5th generation " fighter which in many ways is inferior to US 4th generation aircraft!"
It is against this larded and incompetent backdrop -- of economic dependencies for a war machine directed by men and women who've
never fought a declared war, and scant understanding of what defending the nation ought look like -- that Americans await an inbound
president who now feels obliged to add the patriotic tick "
May God protect our
troops " at the tail end of speeches.
Empty Gestures
Veterans, Memorial, Independence, or even just Tues days -- replete with military flyovers at football games amidst an
age of pandemic -- have become empty gestures. VA hospitals across the country had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21
st century, and it is there today that many of our Vietnam veterans -- of another little war mainly designed to entertain
Pentagon fantasies at their expense -- rot, for lack of a better word.
Ultimately, these sacrifices, all part of a larger Washingtonian game, hardy matter to anyone but Vietnam alumni's wives, kids
-- and this generation's numbers now also dwindle.
What purpose then, does obligatory national celebration -- in prose or pageantry -- of veterans actually serve in year 20 of intractable
and hopeless wars? Clearly, veterans and their families are the only ones who truly sacrificed anything. Those negotiating massive
defense contracts -- including built-in clauses covering delays, flaws, and implicit corruption -- won't even sacrifice surplus profits
for the good of the country.
Money isn't blood, and stock prices can't compensate limbs (to the
tune of 1,645 single or multiple amputee veterans between
9/11 and 2015).
The war machine is largely about money (for select elites) and creating new and expanding markets (benefitting the same) -- the
modern veteran's primary function is simply that of "patriotic" bait for the public. In fact, trotting out idealized veterans rationalizes
and justifies MIC -corruption -- trading on the good will that most American have for those who served (even if the government they
s erv ed was lying about why) is increasingly unworkable .
Military r ecruitment has long been a challenge, partly because Americans increasingly see through the systemic scam, and are
left wondering whether it's such a great deal after all. Despite the Pentagon's massive data collection efforts and widespread access
to high school and college students, recruitment is becoming more and more difficult.
The latest army and air force recruiting
approach involves convincing
economically-insecure parents to encourage their kids to get out of their basements, and pursue dreams of playing soldier in the
woods or flying video game-like drones. In an era where more young people live at home for longer, this approach may appeal to parents,
but it's also a tell.
Despite repeated and routine public deference to veterans, the truth is out. There are just too many truth bombs available from
potential recruits' family and friends; too much outrage at the increasingly exposed police militarization in America's streets --
many of their new hires practicing what they learned patrolling Baghdad or Kandahar, policing Baltimore and Kansas City.
There's scant solace in knowing top defense contractors rake in untold billions, whilst too many American families slip further
through the cracks, unsure of whence their next thousand will come. And here's a truth uncomfortable for far too many privileged
and polite liberals so ready for a quiet return to a Biden-induced normalcy: both Trumpism and left-leaning progressivism was partly
fueled by that shared realization.
Our veterans, too, have a solid sense of this truth -- a truth that's often painful, embarrassing and sometimes shameful. The
Pentagon has little intrinsic interest in helping veterans, except to the extent that veterans, individually or collectively, can
both execute and justify profitable business-as-usual foreign policies -- which are increasingly crass, contradictory, and unconstitutional
affairs.
To truly honor our troops and veterans, Biden's bunch should be brutally honest about what Washingtonian " war" is, and should
respect the very real sacrifices of the "other 1 percent" who actually serve -- by demanding a more honorable and restrained foreign
policy. That's going to require more action than obligatory utterance, and admission of a final hard truth:
The imperial scam we've kept calling a republic these past 70 years is collapsing, and it will take all of us -- veteran and civilian
alike -- to ensure a soft landing.
Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D, is a farmer, teacher, and retired USAF lieutenant colonel, who spent years working in the Pentagon. She
was a notable critic and whistleblower in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion . Karen was featured in the acclaimed documentary,
"Why We Fight" (2005), writes regularly for
Lewrockwell.com , and has had her work
published in Salon, The American Conservative, and the Huffington Post, among others. She is a senior fellow at the Eisenhower Media
Network (EMN), an organization of independent veteran military and national security experts.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Please
Contribute
to Consortium News During its 2020 Winter Fund Drive Donate securely with PayPal'
here .
US military spending will ultimately bankrupt the US when the US dollar loses its reserve currency status. in the 1990's over
90% of countries kept asset in the US dollar, now it is less than 60% and declining. Also, the amount of corruption and waste
in military spending is stratospheric. Russia produces military requirements within a government controlled manufacturing structure,
and produce better systems on a tenth of what the US spends. The US develops its military as an alternative to diplomacy and uses
it to enforce hegemonic aims upon allies and adversaries alike. Russia is preparing for war to hopefully prevent war.
The US should support the troops by bringing them home; not by empty platitudes on veterans day. Ask yourself what the dead
troops in Vietnam and the Mideast really die for?
Bart Hansen , December 17, 2020 at 18:06
As for difficulties in military recruitment, I often think that the reason the minimum wage remains so low is to make the military
more attractive than "parking cars and pumping gas" which now is defined as the gig economy.
robert e williamson jr , December 17, 2020 at 17:54
The media is the blame for many things not the least of which is over using titles and such in their endless drivel.
That I notice no one twists the arm of those who volunteers for military service and these days that is the only way one enlists
to serve in the military.
Same with cops, they volunteer for their jobs, then whine about every little criticism of the actions, and brother there are
tons to criticize. Shooting any;l unarmed individual in the back when there is no threat to the officer is a military "free fire"
tactic. Wiki it and you will see the American public never really understood it was used in Vietnam to send a message to civilians
who were suspected of aiding the enemy.
Chuck Yager has a comment there about his role in WWII.
Now suddenly after the end of the draft if you have served in any of the conflicts since Vietnam you are immediately a hero
in the eyes of Americas blind MSM and those who refuse to learn enough about what is really happening to know the difference between
shit and shine-olla.
I would remind everyone that it takes between 6 and 10 non-combatant military members to keep combat troops at the ready.
Firemen and EMTs are the closest thing we have to everyday heroes in my opinion.
The young hope to increase their career chances by serving and they are approached while still in high school to volunteer,
a practice that needs to stop.
Anyone who knows vets know damned well they get little from the VA, system that if combined with the ACA would both save money
and increase the quality of their care.
But here is some sage advice instead of taking issue with every statement folks make try and think about why we all are in
this mess.
It is the result of the government doing what it wants to do instead doing what Americans think need to be done. Remember our
government is supposed to be working for us and right now it is exactly the opposite of that.
This is our common problem. Our Common problem. FULL STOP!
Volunteers are enabling the idiots in D.C. by ensuring the military has the manpower it needs. We never needed to go to Iraq
but far too many exceptional Americans are willing to own the fact they they have been duped.
Maybe this will mean something to you, I was duped once when I got drafted, no more for this ole guy. Fool me once and that
is enough.
If we all are truly "in this together" then we have very important work to do to clarify foreign policy and correct all the
misconceptions about just exactly what is the proper course of action. The MICIMATT is not doing this. Never have and never will.
You want to be a real hero start working to end the mangling of young bodies and civilians the spending of trillions of dollars
in order to make the rich richer.
We all have big problems because of our government and our government needs to be brought to accountability.
I'm pretty tired of this "we" business. War has outlived and usefulness what so ever, we are on a dying planet, wise up, wake
up and put up.
Julie , December 17, 2020 at 13:10
An italian magistrate, Carlo Palermo, who escaped a bomb attack for investigating the connection between mafia, masonry, State,
and C.I.A., discovered that such a plot had started and was known since world war II, by U.S., and other countries, which nowadays
are ready to grab the global power.
http://antimafiaduemila.com/home/primo-piano/81355-mafie-eterodirette-carlo-palermo-spiega-il-doppio-livello.html
http://carlopalermo.net/ (to be transated from italian)
Tom Moore , December 17, 2020 at 13:05
It is time that we return to using the more appropriate reference to the
Department of War, rather than use euphenic, Dept of "Defense?"
Richard Coleman , December 17, 2020 at 12:26
"God Bless the Troops", huh? Well here's a little known fact for ya Joe: the VA medical program doesn't include DENTAL! Never
did as far as I know. Don't vets have teeth!? Isn't dental care about the single most expensive (and unaffordable) routine medical
expense most Americans as well as vets face? How about "blessing" them with that? Of course M4A would resolve this, but you're
not with that either, are you Joe?
You know where you can stuff your "blessing" don't you, Joe?
Biden's son took the service route for the wealthy and politically ambitious. Navy lawyers sit thru two easy weeks of OCS to
learn to salute and wear uniforms. Then he deployed to a very safe camp in Iraq for a few months, safer than working in Baltimore,
where he did legal stuff from nice office. Then comes home to tell war stories.
vinnieoh , December 17, 2020 at 11:46
During the first several years of Bush's illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq I wrote many letters to the local paper, and
a multitude of elected representatives. I was of course outraged over the whole affair, first and most importantly because we
were committing mass murder in pursuit of a collection of bald-faced lies. But I knew that all and assembled had drunk a full
draught of the Kool-Aid, and arguments I would make along those lines would fall on permanently deaf ears.
So, I composed a long and very detailed letter to my then US Congressional Representative Ted Strickland detailing the abuse
and disregard our soldiers were enduring to carry out this campaign: the "stop-loss" policies (remember?), the multiple rotations
and deployments, the lack of protective gear. I also threw in, because I could just not help myself, the remark that "It is not
possible to garner honor and glory in pursuit of a dishonorable policy."
I actually got a personal response from Mr. Strickland, a supposedly "progressive" or at least "liberal" (ca. 1990's) politician.
A one-liner that went something like this: "I can not, at this time, take any action that would endanger the safety of our troops."
That was the whole purpose of my plea to you, you fucking incompetent asshole.
The US mass-murdered millions of Third-World peoples in its foreign wars, since the end of WW II, incurring minimal losses.
Even an inflated figure of US losses would not be anywhere near 300,000!
John Moffett , December 17, 2020 at 08:26
Great article Karen. I am encouraged by the difficulty in recruiting people to go into the military. Keeping wages low and
college expenses high seems to me like a heartless attempt to force some young adults from poor families into considering military
service. I would love to see a national movement to educate kids about the horrors of war, and the unscrupulous MIC tactics (including
video games) to entice new recruits.
Hank , December 17, 2020 at 07:09
"God bless the troops"? How about America, especially now that the voting system has become so corrupted? Joe Biden doesn't
give a rat's ass about the troops, especially if the troops are SUPPOSEDLY fighting to "spread freedom and democracy".
If you
don't have REAL democracy at home then what you are "spreading" abroad CAN'T be democracy, but tyranny! Biden and others always
seem to invoke the "troops" because they know this resonates with many Americans who have a knee jerk reaction to "supporting"
the troops. What he realistically could have said was "God bless the troops in molesting yet another nation". He could care less
about the troops as they are deployed to serve the rich man's agenda. And after stealing an election(at least to THIS point in
time!) those dead soldiers must be turning in their graves after supposedly giving their lives to protect democracy!
SPQR70AD , December 18, 2020 at 09:24
but the US has spread "democracy" all over the world by fixing elections and putting in their guy now they did it in the US
"Democracy" either by fixing votes in client countries OR by installing puppet regimes through murderous bombings/invasions
like in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.
Sadly there's no hope biden and his chicken hawks will do anything but continue business as usual for the merchants of death.
We know congress won't say anything other than pass on more Amerikan tax payers cash to endless wars:-(
I love America and its non-stop CIA psyop cyclops social media television.
The New Year will bring renewed police crackdown on private assembly, people's homes, the
continued destruction of employment, $40 checks from Uncle Joe to "tide you over," hysterical
harpies physically assaulting anyone without a mask in blue states, and a full-out propaganda
assault to destroy the defenseless minds of your friends and family.
You're going to lose a lot in the New Year. 2020 was just the beginning. Wait until summer
2021 and BLM/Antifa chaos. Conservative politicians like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul will be crying
"insurrection act!" and Tucker Carlson will launch into Season Two of 30-minute cracking-voice
monologues "this is your America!" while nothing and no one does a goddamn thing to protect
you.
We are on our own. Doctors, schools, cops, families, people you work with -- all are slowly
being sucked into the vortex of this simulacrum of hell being broadcast on their "smart"
phones. Compared to what's being sold to them, your voice sounds positively insane...
it seems the purpose of the usa media is in large part to keep the masses riled up over
cheering or booing for team red or team blue... speaking of which, i haven't seen one of the
cheerleaders here lately...
Yes, this RussiaGate story will flame out, just like all the rest, but ultimately these
stories aren't about Trump, but about setting the stage for the Biden Administration to
attack Russia. It doesn't matter that they are all lies, what matters is that the big pile of
lies as a whole creates a false reality in which anti-Russian propaganda is so overwhelming
that nobody in the west can see outside of the delusion.
The neocon criminals have managed to take over foreign policy in the U.S., leveraging
money power from their bankster backers. The latter is a tiny group of oligarchs and
their network of highly-paid promoters that are motivated to force U.S. hegemony onto the
world. They now have control over the U.S. Congress, Intelligence Agencies, and the MSM, and
are increasingly exerting censorship over social media.
Their latest gambit is the Coronavirus putsch using bio-warfare agents to
undermine small-scale economies and autonomy, while imposing vast corporate ownership of
property.
Worldwide compliance is the goal using a wide range of military, financial, and media
control measures to crush dissent. The pharma-promoted vaccinations that are questionable at
best reinforce those controls and are part of the plot. We are witnessing a worldwide COUPS
ATTEMPT, UBER-Fascism that exceeds all historical examples. Will it succeed?
"Yes, he killed foreigners. But no U.S. president will ever be indicted for that. It is
seen as a part of the job."
Yes, committing war crimes and "crimes against peace"--the supreme international crime as
asserted by the Nuremberg Tribunal--is fundamental to the job description of being America's
War-Criminal-in-Chief.
The fact that Americans and citizens in other self-styled "democracies" deny this
uncomfortable reality, or support these war crimes, says a lot about their own
criminality.
""Lock him up!" It's amazing how often the two political camps in the USA are mirror
images of each other."
Sure the scumbag politicians shout "Lock 'em up" at their opponents but that is just the
usual divisive partisan nonsense, they spout knowing that they have no intention of locking
anyone up. Why? because they know better than anyone that they have pulled exactly the same
illegal immorality as the other 'side' and the last thing needed is any such precedent.
By spreading that unfulfilled tosh they hope to negate the popular movement which needs to
happen if amerikans are ever going to extricate themselves from the fate of all empires that
once were, a millenia of misery e.g watch what is currently happening in england.
If actual ordinary amerikans have a chance of saving what can be preserved it is on to them
as citizens to hold the entire ruling elite to account. this must be done regardless of any
claimed political affiliation or claimed 'neutrality'.
Anyone who spends more than about 30 minutes objectively assessing the stunts amerika has
been pulling since 1945 (much before really, but let's just use 1945 as a cutoff) sees that
it is amerika which has been the force for just about all the evil in our world. A handful of
sops to the faint-hearted bourgeoisie, eg. finally acknowledging the evil of apartheid South
Africa right as the racist's downfall becomes inevitable doesn't excuse a thing. All such
stunts demonstrate is the greed driven amorality of amerika's elite.
If they spouted in the 60's, 70's & 80's that allowing the apartheid government of
South Africa to continue was a pragmatic call to prevent a bloodbath, yet a much needed
change did occur in the early 90's with no bloodbath, blind Freddie can see they got it wrong
then just as they are getting it wrong now about apartheid Occupied Palestine.
Yet they still continue, Why? The only conclusion can be that both gangs the dims &
the rethugs are going where there is a dollar to be made, just as happened with South
Africa.
Insisting that all 3 arms of amerikan government be taken out of the picture regardless of
whatever gang the claim allegiance to is not 'more of the same'.
If it occurred it would be an indication that all non-elite amerikans have lost faith in the
farcical, allegedly loyal, but in fact only to themselves, congress people, senators, prezes
& vice prezes and judges that regularly behave towards 99% of amerikans so contemptuously
that the corporate owned media have to expend so much resources distracting Jo/Joe Citizen
from.
It won't make much difference to me in my lifetime but it will to my offspring. If
amerikans don't sort this out for themselves, my kids or more likely my grankids will have to
do the job.
History teaches us that no matter how bloody things can get when a population stands up to
its masters, just going with the flow until the boil comes to a head and is then 'lanced' by
outside forces, is much worse for everyone. The hardest hit being the citizens of the once
domineering nation.
Amerikans have the best knowledge of who the crooks are, if they won't sort the problem
because they have been distracted into more partisan tosh such as "they all cry lock 'em up"
; it is they ordinary amerikans, who will finish up paying the piper.
As Putin and others noted, this was a most difficult year. I hadn't read his concluding
remarks until just now. I'm going to copy/paste them along with the question that sparked
them. And it most unequivocally answers a longstanding question Billy Joel asked at a time
that seems like it was only yesterday:
"Viktor Sineok: Izvestia, Viktor Sineok.
"Mr President, we have heard many questions about many different problems but mine is a
little different. Over the past year we have understood, we really felt what it meant to have
a very hard time, including emotionally. You said at the press conference a few years ago
that you put your emotions into your work. Here is my question: what sort of emotions have
you felt in recent years, including this difficult year of 2020? And which emotions would you
like to wish us in the coming year? Maybe you already know how you will toast the New
Year?
"Vladimir Putin: Please, be seated.
"As to which prevailed – the good or the bad You know, each year brings issues we
have to overcome, and each year brings us great joy – both family, and state, national
achievements. Against all odds, we have great achievements that we can and should be proud
of, and we are.
"Yes, the year was complicated, but what would I like to draw your attention to? You know,
this is what I thought about when you were asking me this question. Haven't we faced
difficulties in our recent history? Just now, in this meeting I remembered how hard life was
in the 1990s and the early 2000s. It seemed at that time that there was no light at the end
of the tunnel, that there was nothing. No army, no economy, a ruined social sphere and
skyrocketing unemployment. One out of three lived below the poverty line, but look at what it
is like now.
"Yes, there are problems. Yes, people are still living a very hard life, and there are
very many such people. That said, the foundations of Russian statehood, the pillars of the
Russian economy, and the potential of the state are incomparable with what they were in the
1990s and the early 2000s. This gives us tools we have never had before. This gives us an
opportunity to focus on resolving the most important, most urgent problems without forgetting
about the strategic development goals of the Russian Federation .
"As for toasts, like every person, every citizen, I always have toasts for the New Year.
It is only important that the amount of champagne and other drinks you consume is limited. As
for toasts, the number does not matter.
"Of course, we will all raise toasts to the people in our lives, our family, friends and
colleagues. But I, my family and friends always have one main toast – 'To
Russia.'
"Not to finish my remarks on this pathetic note but on something heart-felt, I would like
to say the following: during this meeting, some of my colleagues asked me what we were
planning to do to support families with children and whether we have plans for this. This is
what I would like to say. Some volunteers told me recently that they have various ideas and
initiatives on supporting children before the New Year. Unfortunately, this year large events
like children's New Year parties have been cancelled due to the restrictions. Large events in
theatres, children's studios and so on have been cancelled as well.
"But still, this is an unusual holiday. It comes with expectations and hopes for the
future and, at the same time, with difficulties. Therefore, before coming here I consulted
the Government and the Presidential Executive Office. We agreed that our country, our state
will also give a gift to our children. It is a small, modest gift, but nevertheless, we will
pay 5,000 rubles to all families with children under 7 years old; 5,000 will be paid for
every child in this age group .
"I would like to thank all of you for our common work. I would also like to wish you all
the best. I hope we have not worn each other out. I would like to hope that the people who
listened to us for more than four hours, for four and a half hours, have found this useful
and interesting.
"For my part, I would like to say that the meeting was very useful for me. We will do all
we can to give the best possible response to all your questions, concerns and problems that
are faced by the country and each Russian family.
"All the best to you!
"Thank you very much." [My Emphasis]
We now most certainly know that the Russians Love Their Children Too. However given the
behavior of the Outlaw US Empire, I very much doubt the same can be said, which makes for a
very dangerous situation. Putin has a truthful sincerity to him that is utterly vacant from
every US President I've known in my life except for JFK--he made a very positive impression
on my very young mind, something that was clearly missing from LBJ and Nixon prior to my
rather abrupt awakening in 1970. Perhaps that's because none ever promised to do anything for
Commonfolk as anything aimed at promoting the people's wellbeing was always opposed. I don't
know how the average Russian feels about Putin's words, but I would be very proud to have
such a leader as focused on the wellbeing of what makes his Nation great--its people.
I wrote this for the next thread; but after reading your comment, it belongs here since
the Trump thread didn't want to have it. "Provincials" as you said who in reality are
gutter-scum.
This may appear to be about getting Trump, but it's more likely about keeping relations
with Russia in the tank. For example, I remarked this morning that the only media report
about Putin's annual, impressive presser was the highly convoluted answer Putin gave to some
recent fake news reports about his family and how they connect to the Navalny crap. It
appears the writing has similar qualities meaning it was produced by similar sources. There's
only one way to properly illustrate this and that's to provide what Putin related.
The Question:
"Alexander Yunashev: Good afternoon, Mr President.
I will take the advice from the young reporter [from the previous question which is also
of some importance]. A number of interesting investigative reports have been released lately,
for example, about your daughter, your former son-in-law Shamalov and other people who are
allegedly close to you. This week the Alexei Navalny investigation also came out. Could you
tell us why a criminal investigation into his poisoning and who did it has not been launched
until now?
Putin: "I see.
"It is no surprise that these fake news stories emerge. It has always been this way and
always will. There is a battle unfolding in the media space. Nothing new here. Do you
remember the terrible developments in the Caucasus and efforts to fight international
terrorism? How was yours truly portrayed by the international media and, unfortunately, in
Russia as well? Remember how they portrayed me with fangs? I remember all this very well.
Still, I have invariably proceeded from the premise that I need to be doing what I believe to
be right for our country. When I do something, I do it not for the sake of pleasing someone
abroad. This is the first part of my answer.
"The second part has to do with my close ones. This report is impossible to read. I
flipped through it, since it talks about me, it seems, but it is such a cut-and-paste job,
with so many things piling up, that I was unable to finish reading it. What did I want to
point out in this regard? The report keeps repeating 'the president's son-in-law' over and
over again. At the end, however, he is referred to as the former son-in-law. This is the
first thing I wanted to say. Still, in the text they keep driving home the message that he is
my son-in-law. So this goes for point one.
"The second point is about 'President Putin forbidding the elite to hold overseas assets.'
There is no ban preventing the elite from holding assets abroad. Public servants cannot have
financial assets abroad. This was the right thing to do. They cannot hold accounts or other
financial assets abroad. The company in question is 100-percent private. The state does not
own a single share in it.
"The next question: who received shares in this company and how? It turns out that the
company released a statement on this matter and what it thinks about these allegations. The
company had a compensation scheme for its senior executives, and Mr Shamalov received stock
just like all other senior executives. There are also other programmes for executives at a
different level, and they received stock following a different scheme. Nothing special
here.
"But ultimately, in my opinion, the most important thing is this: just now, aspiring
journalist Shnurov asked about our hackers. What is written in the beginning? Note that it
says that an unknown, anonymous person is pursuing goals we do not understand and then,
apparently, this anonymous person is tracked down. What do I mean? It is said that what
happened is similar to the events in 2016 when outlawed Russian hackers associated with
Russian military intelligence hacked US Democratic Party members' emails. Here is your
anonymous person. I think we know who that is. Who called these hackers outlaws associated
with Russian military intelligence? It was the US Department of State and US intelligence
agencies, which are in fact the authors. At any rate, it is completely obvious that it was
done upon their instructions . This is the first thing.
"The second is that the reference to the insinuation that our hackers, as they believe,
interfered with US domestic policy in 2016 means that the purpose of this is clear. The
purpose is to take revenge and try to influence public opinion in our country in order to
interfere, of course, with our domestic politics. This is absolutely obvious. It is
absolutely obvious to me and, I think, it will also become clear to the majority of readers
if they pay attention to the things I have just mentioned.
"But to this end, I would like to emphasise the following:
"One should be driven by now I want to address those who ordered these publications,
not those who actually wrote them. I know that if they get an assignment from intelligence
services they have to write it. But those who order these kinds of articles, should not be
driven by revenge or act on the assumption of alleged exceptionalism; instead, they should
develop relations with their international partners based on mutual respect and the
fundamental standards of international law. Then we will be able to achieve shared success in
the areas that are essential to all of us .
"Now, with regard to the patient of a Berlin clinic. I have already mentioned it many
times, and can repeat only certain things. Mr Peskov told me just yesterday about the latest
speculations in this regard concerning our special service officers' data and so on.
Listen, we are perfectly aware of what this is all about. It is about legalisation the
first time around and now. This is not about an investigation. This is about legalising the
materials from the US special services .
"Do you really think we are unaware of the fact that they are tracking locations? Our
special services understand this well and are aware of it. Officers of the FSB and other
special services are aware of it and use telephones whenever they believe they should not be
hiding their location, etc. But if this is so – and rest assured that this is so
– it means that this patient of a Berlin clinic has the support of the special
services, those of the United States in this particular case. And if this is the case, then
it gets interesting and the special services should, of course, be looking after him.
However, this does not mean at all that he must be poisoned. Who cares about him? If they
really wanted to, they would have, most likely, carried it through . His wife addressed
me, and I gave the green light to have him treated in Germany that very second.
"There is one important thing that the general public is not paying attention to. It is a
trick to attack the people at the top. Those who perform it thus propel themselves up to a
certain level where they can say: see who I am talking to? I am a person of the same calibre,
so treat me as a person of nationwide importance. It is a well-known trick that is used in
political dealings around the world.
"I think, though, that something else, not these tricks, should be used to gain people's
respect and recognition. You need to prove your worth either by doing something important
or by putting together a realistic programme with specific goals that can be implemented in a
particular country, Russia, in this particular case .
"I urge the opponents to the current government and all political forces in our country to
be led not by personal ambitions, but by the interests of the people of the Russian
Federation, and to come up with a positive agenda in order to overcome the challenges facing
the country. And we have many of them." [My Emphasis]
The rational flow is probably better in Russian with some key emphasis lost in
translation. But Putin delivered the main point on the ordering and authorship, and IMO it's
the same for much of the crap thrown our way since 1990. The only reason we aren't being
treated to similar material about Biden is he's not one of the current targets, while
legitimate anti-Biden stories are completely suppressed until they disappear under the rug.
IMO, BigLie Media has become close to what State Media was in the USSR.
IMO, BigLie Media has become close to what State Media was in the USSR.
With one big difference, the scope is global and the tools are well, like comparing a
pencil with the most sophisticated printing press. Overall the translation sounds like what I
heard, and the main point should be that Putin is able to talk at length and just about any
subject since it is very hard to think of a pre arranged setup à la 2016 debate when
the questions to be posed had been previously provided to the Clinton team.
For next year conference, if all the players and myself are still around I'll try to take
advantage of the open offer to pose a question on line, I found out too late but there was a
very accesible setup to do it.
One of the questions was chosen by VVP or his team, and it was from a northern village
resident, complaining about the local health services, claiming that there was a single 86
year old nurse in charge, and that she was unable to tell apart a tonsillitis from a
hemorrhoid. I guess this part could have been prepared, to relax a bit a tense atmosphere.
But it had consequences, the mentioned nurse has sued the daring patient, maybe he'll get his
suppository orally, so as to heal his throat.
The WADA allegations against the Russian Federation's sporting establishment ultimately
rely on the testimony of a single witness (who is also the chief culprit if the allegations
are correct), and a tampering process which the manufacturer of the tamper-proof containers
insists is impossible. The WADA investigation has been prosecuted by Canadian bureaucrats,
who have been publicly outspoken in their animus towards Russia. It appears as another
element in the informational war, moved into the sporting environment - one of the few
truly international cooperative ventures humankind currently sustains. The recommended
punishment, albeit, was halved. Most of the sporting doping these days involves "health"
supplements which enjoy official exemption.
As for the Venezuelan gold - Guaido will soon have no standing as any kind of elected
official. Will he be retained as some sort of "leader" anyway, or what is the future of the
regime-change gambit?
Russia will not be able to use its name, flag and anthem at the next two Olympics or at any
world championships for the next two years after a ruling Thursday by the Court of
Arbitration for Sport.
In other words: this doping scandal never existed; but it was never about sports: it is
all - and always was - about propaganda. Russian athletes will continue to compete normally -
only without the Russian symbols.
" Russia banned from using its name, flag at next two Olympics"
"Russia will not be able to use its name, flag and anthem at the next two Olympics or at
any world championships for the next two years after a ruling Thursday by the Court of
Arbitration for Sport."
It's all about NordStream 2. Same as Skripals, Navalny, Hacking U.S. Treasury and other
agencies, Interfering in U.S.elections. If NS2 comes on line Germany will have a source of
clean energy and will receive income as a hub for pipelines to other European countries.
Gazprom will be paid in Euros, not USD inviting others to follow suit. If that happens the
U.S. is in serious trouble that is why it must stop NS2 at all costs.
" Correspondence between Hunter
Biden and CEFC Chairman Ye Jianming from 2017 shows President-elect Joe Biden's son
extending "best wishes from the entire Biden family ," and urging the chairman to "quickly"
send a $10 million wire to "properly fund and operate" the Biden joint venture with the
now-bankrupt Chinese energy company.
The $10 million transfer to the joint venture was never completed.
Fox News obtained an email Hunter Biden sent on June 18, 2017, to Zhao Run Long at CEFC,
asking that they please "translate my letter to Chairman Ye, please extend my warmest best
wishes and that I hope to see the Chairman soon.""
Biden went on to note that Bobulinski had "sent a request to Dong Gongwen [Gongwen Dong] and
Director Zang for the funding of the $10 MM USD wire."
"I would appreciate if you will send that quickly so we can properly fund and operate
Sinohawk," Biden wrote.
"I am sure you have been well briefed by our dear friend Director Zan g on the political and
economic connections we have established in countries where you are interested in expanding
during the coming months and years, " he continued. "I look forward to our next meeting."
"Fox News also obtained the response from Ye as part of an email, dated Sept. 6, 2017, from
Biden business associate James Gilliar to Bobulinski. That email forwarded Ye's letter
responding to Biden. The letter is dated July 10, 2017.
Ye stated that he had arranged for Zang and Dong to "expedite the charter capital input to
SinoHawk."
"I am glad to hear from you! Time flies and it has been months since we met in the US. It
seems that we were always on a rush when we were together," Ye wrote to Biden, adding that "the
consensus we made last time has been materialized in a timely manner."
Ye also recommended Biden "arrange your people to coordinate with Director Zang and Gongwen
Dong for specific work."
"I will continue to pay attention and give my support," Ye stated. "I have arranged Director
Zang and Gongwen Dong to expedite the charter capital input to SinoHawk."
"I look forward to meeting you in the near future and discussing our joint undertaking. If
there is anything I could do please do not hesitate to write to me," Ye wrote. "Please accept
my best regards to you and your family."" foxnews
------------
Well, pilgrims, the Ron Johnson hearing today was fun. The best part for me was former
Director Krebs' (election security guy for DHS) repeated statements that the election was
secure, "the most secure in history." Pilgrims, the distinction betwixt "secure" and "honest"
seems to have escaped him as he ignored questions about actual evidence of fraud, a swampie to
the end.
And then, there is Chairman Joe. He knows that nothing will be easier than to kill off
prosecution of his creepy son, or to "suggest" to the Delaware federal prosecutor that a minor
indictment would be appropriate, something resulting in a suspended sentence.
I have watched Tucker debrief Bobulinski twice about that payment. The way Bobulinski tells
it (with documentation) the Bidens were loaned $5 million by MEFC to pay their side of the
capitalization and then actually pocketed the other $5 million as a direct payment to La
Familia from FEMC (Oh Danny Boy!) from - equal opportunity! That was too much for the Bobster
(former naval Lt., man of world finance, patriot, self-abnegator, etc.) Besides, where was his
share?
Pistols at dawn? Good! Tucker can act as his second. Where are my cased flintlock
smoothbores? They are somewhere around here, the English 18th Century ones in the fitted blue
velvet case. pl
Senator Rand Paul accused Georgia and other states of using the COVID-19 pandemic to steal
the election in a move he says could have came from the playbook of Obama Chief of Staff, Rahm
Emanuel, who famously said, "you never want a serious crisis to go to waste."
Appearing on Fox News prior to the Wednesday Senate hearing on election irregularities,
Senator Paul was asked how revelations, such as the one out of Georgia showing more than 1,700
voters illegally submitted two ballots during the Nov. 3 contest, would effect the upcoming
runoff elections in the Empire State of the South.
Paul would respond, saying: "You'd think that all of this would be investigated and tried to
be fixed before the election."
He also pointed to potential illegal voting activity in Nevada:
"We're going to hear testimony from Nevada where 15 hundred people were deceased and
should not have voted, four thousand people were illegal aliens, and 15 thousand people voted
from commercial address when you have to vote from a home address."
Echoing the case laid out by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in his recently dismissed
Supreme Court lawsuit, Paul accused states of using the COVID-19 crisis to dodge state and
federal election law, comparing the move to a play right out of the Obama, Rahm Emanuel
playbook:
"It's sort of Obama, Rahm Emanuel's playbook. They took the crisis of COVID and then they
changed election law not by changing law at the state legislature, they had secretaries of
state and or governors simply by fiat change the law to say 'oh you can keep counting votes'
when the law did say that. So, this election really was stolen in a way and it was stolen
because people changed the law "
Shortly after his appointment as Obama's Chief of Staff, former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel
famously uttered the words "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste" during a corporate
panel sponsored by the Wall Street Journal .
"What I mean by that is never allow a good crisis to go to waste when it's an opportunity to
do things that you had never considered, or that you didn't think were possible," Emanuel would
explain at the time.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/_mzcbXi1Tkk
Trump Campaign Attorney, Jesse Binnall, would laid out similar accusations of voter fraud to
those given by Senator Paul during the Wednesday Senate hearing.
See Binnall's opening statement below:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/RpLAW-7FBPs
But, Senator Paul was not done, as Douglas
Braff reports via SaraACarter.com , during today's Senate hearing examining irregularities
during 2020 presidential election the Kentucky Republican claimed:
"The fraud happened. The election in many ways was stolen...And the only way it'll be fixed
is by, in the future, reinforcing the laws."
"But I think [Kreb's] job was keeping the foreigners out of the election. It was the most
secure election based on the security of the internet and technology, but he has never voiced
an opinion [ ] on whether or not dead people voted -- I don't think he examined that," Paul
said toward the end of his speaking time, then questioning if Krebs examined non-citizens'
voting.
Many Republicans, in alleging that widespread election fraud occurred in the 2020 election,
have often cited claims that a lot of dead people and non-citizens voted. The over 50 lawsuits
challenging the results of the election in certain swing states alleging election fraud have
overwhelmingly failed in the courts.
"So to say it was the safest election -- sure, I agree with your statement if you're
referring to foreign intervention," Paul continued.
"But if you're saying it's the safest election based on no dead people voted, no
non-citizens voted, no people broke the absentee [ballot] rules, I think that's false and I
think that's what's upset a lot of people on our side is that they're taking your statement
to mean 'Oh, there were no problems in the elections.'"
"I don't think you examined any of the problems that we've heard here," he added, "so really
you're just referring to something differently, the way I look at it." ay_arrow 1
wee-weed up 6 hours ago (Edited)
Okay, Sen Rand Paul...
Now put your credibility where your mouth is...
And back up Mo Brooks on Jan 6th when he stands up to challenge the validity of the
election.
This will call for congresscritters with balls enough to say, "This illegal voting that
occurred threatens the Republic and will not stand!"
US Banana Republic 6 hours ago
Do you know why Biden is telling everyone to stay home from his inauguration (which will
never be anyway)?
Because NOBODY would have come. With or without COVID being a factor.
Fraudly Dementia Boy who is supposedly the most popular Democrat in history according to
the vote, never would have gotten more than 12 people to show up to see him sworn in,.
EightyEight Mike 6 hours ago remove link
"17 Intelligence Agencies confirmed that there was foreign interference in the
presidential election."
Remember hearing that every day?
sgt_doom 5 hours ago remove link
Even Matt Taibbi debunked that bullcrap --- a couple of guys at the CIA, friends of the
Clapper/Brannan bromance, who later transferred to the NSA, to prattle the same bullcrap!
[ China (the CCP) owns UBS Securities Co LTD >> which owns Staple Street Capital
>> which owns Dominion >> ergo, CCP owns Dominion --- this is the way it is
done in int'l finance]
Doom Porn Star 6 hours ago (Edited)
Laws were NOT changed. The legal procedures for changing the voting laws were NOT
followed.
The very laws about changing the election laws were not followed and thus laws were not
changed.
For instance: in Pennsylvania the Legislature is the only authority that can change the
state constitution and the laws governing elections within. The Legislature did NOT change
the constitution of Pennsylvania.
Saying that laws were changed is not the same as actually going through the legal
procedures required to change the laws and enacting new legally binding legislation.
Saying "We changed the laws."doesn't change anything no matter how many times you repeat
the phrase.
They did NOT change the laws -which is why SCOTUS freaked out and refused to hear the
case.
IF SCOTUS actually had been forced to admit that the laws were not actually changed ,
despite the repeated insistent rhetoric that they had been changed, Trump would easily have
won the Electoral College.
PGR88 6 hours ago
Let's look at California
This year, due to "COVID-19," California mailed out 25 million ballots to everyone on
voter rolls. Remember also, their DMV automatically registers everyone to vote - including
illegals, who are given drivers licenses. Mail-in-voting in CA has been a trend, but now
Newsom wants this to be permanent.
There are no checks on non-citizens voting.
Voter rolls have not been purged of people who left the State or who changed addresses
In November 2020, approx, 7 million ballots were returned. Normally, in some districts, up
to 10% of mail-in ballots may be rejected for problems. This year, due to the vast numbers,
less than 0.01% were rejected.
It is absolutely impossible for state election workers to check voter rolls, signatures,
addresses on 7 million ballots - so in effect, NO checks occur
California also allows "ballot harvesters." Any organized group my collect ballots from
Voters, and turn them in. Some activist groups are even funded by the state to "harvest"
ballots. That means political actors are collecting ballots, completely outside of any
verification or chain-of-possession steps.
I dare anyone to tell me such a system is not full of manipulation and fraud
NoBigDeal 6 hours ago remove link
The GOP have to fight this in the court of public opinion because no court judge is
prepared to listen to the case. They accuse them of telling lies without looking at the
evidence. A cynical Catch 22 position.
As the administrators of justice this is a frightening heads up for anyone who thought
there was any integrity and fairness in the legal system.
It's all bribes now..
Nature_Boy_Wooooo 5 hours ago (Edited)
Imagine sitting in court for tax fraud and the prosecutor saying........ "we gotta make
sure this doesn't happen in the future.".....but you get to walk and keep the money you
stole.
Onthebeach6 6 hours ago remove link
The Deep State actors are still trying to steal it by claiming no CCP interference in the
election.
The report on foreign interference in the US election is due for release on Friday (18
th ) afternoon. This will be 45 days after it was requested by the President. It
may be delayed.
The report is being prepared by the DNI (Department of National Intelligence) which is an
umbrella organization over 16 intelligence agencies.
There is currently a massive ongoing fight between agencies in respect of those who wish
to include the evidence of Chinese CCP involvement and those who wish to cover this up and
blame Russia.
Director Ratcliffe of the DNI wants the CCP involvement included in the report and has
stated that he will not sign the report unless this detailed CCP information is included.
It is important to understand that there is both evidence of CCP helping to fix the
election and ongoing CCP pressure to ensure that their asset Biden is sworn in as
President.
It is clear that CCP and deep state assets as well as the DNC and big tech worked together
to steal the election and remove Trump in support of a globalist agenda that would enrich a
small minority whilst impoverishing most Americans.
WatchOutForThatTree 2 hours ago
Whether the "election" turned out the way you wanted or not, it's pretty damned obvious
this bitch was rigged.
Can all the stupid trolls and mindless posters please go back into your caves? The
quality(or lack thereof) of discourse here sucks nowadays...
Linguo 1 hour ago
Rigged ? Corporate money by the billions, voter suppression, two parties whose sole
allegiance is to Wall Street deliberately excluding third and fourth parties and
gerrymandering to name a few, contributes to the democratic process ? What planet do you live
on ? This country has never been a democracy. If the election was rigged, why did the
republicans do well with the exception of the racist war criminal who is personally
responsible for hundreds of thousands of COVID-19 deaths, King BS the 1st ? Idiot.
wimvincken 3 hours ago remove link
It's unbelievable what happened in the US. Many countries have simple ID driven elections.
You show your ID and vote. Simple.
And in case the country has a computers, that computer can check if you're a citizen and
if you already have voted in almost real-time. Simple.
I didn't know that the US doesn't have computers. Who would have thought that? /sarc
Sorry, but the incompetence is there running amok. Strategy is not one of the strongest
thing there, because they could predict something like this to happen beforehand. The way how
the Americans vote is simply asking for trouble like this. Now I'm curious if they want to
fix it. I don't think so.
Soloamber 3 hours ago
The winner of the USA elections is now who cheats best .
The Democrats did nothing for four years except the fraud impeachment and the coordinated
effort to steal the election . It was their only chance with Dementia man .
Pdunne 2 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Elections are won or lost these days with influence and money.
It is time to go back to the days when only individuals can donate to a campaign, not more
corporate money or dark funds for PAC's.
Candidates will always pander to the money and if it was coming from the people maybe the
people would get a fairer government. play_arrow
ronin12 PREMIUM 4 hours ago remove link
It's super fantastic to hear Rand Paul speak the truth.
So wtf is he actually going to DO about it?
Soloamber 3 hours ago remove link
Three full years of MSM Russia , Russia started by the Clinton's , CIA , Obama and the
biggest dip **** to run the FBI .
Mass election fraud ....cheating Trump out of an obvious win . NOTHING .
Move on because the gang rapists say so .
Voters one access to democracy stolen by the corrupt Democrat Party , negated by an
algorithm, dead voters
, vote harvesting, billionaire globalist determined to destroy the USA and Chinese money
.
Then people like sleeve bag Schumer unilaterally trying to bribe students with their own
credit card .
Biden was right dark days .
Babadook 4 hours ago remove link
Gullible. That is the only word that describes the fantasy of faith in using electronic
voting machines. Pen, paper & observers work perfectly well in other developed
countries.
Don Storm 4 hours ago
Like someone posted earlier on ZH:
" In 2020 California mailed out 25 million ballots to everyone on voter rolls. Remember,
the DMV automatically registers everyone to vote including illegals, who are given drivers
licenses. Mail-in-voting in CA has been a trend, but now Newsom wants this to be
permanent.
There are no checks on non-citizens voting. Voter rolls have not been purged of people who
left the State or who changed addresses.
In 2020, approx. 7 million ballots were returned. Normally, up to 5% of mail-in ballots
may be rejected for problems. This year, due to the vast numbers less than 0.01% were
rejected.
It is absolutely impossible for state election workers to check voter rolls, signatures,
addresses on 7 million ballots. So, NO checks occured whatsoever.
California allows "ballot harvesters." Any organized group may collect ballots from voters
and turn them in. In fact, some activist groups are even funded by the state to "harvest"
ballots.
I DARE anyone to show that such a system is NOT subject to total abuse and fraud on a
massive scale. "
Here we have our answer, and California isn't the only state that allowed for such a weak
mail-in ballot system.
Perhaps even more disturbing, why were mail-in ballots allowed on such a massive scale to
begin with? And, we are not even talking about Dominion and other crap that took place.
Bjorn2bebad PREMIUM 4 hours ago
I live in Japan and they sent me a ballot - to Tokyo! I have not lived in CA for 8
years!!!
Nullifytodefy1835 6 hours ago remove link
Do you think that signature verification, the very thing that was touted, as being the
very thing, that makes voting by mail safe, secure and fraud free, was thrown out the window
for this election. Literally, the PA SOS told the election staff that ballots cannot be
excluded because of signature mismatch, along with a host of other "irregularities" that
would have the ballots, like the 26,000 that were tossed during the primary, excluded from
being legal ballots that count. It concerns me that, the talking heads parrot the signature
verification talking point everywhere you look, knowing that they had no plan on ever doing
such. It really smacks of impropriety and corruption, if you only look at that, and that
alone. When you then take account of the other issues, it looks like a stolen election. I am
certainly not a Trump supporter, did not vote for him, but I have had an issue with election
fraud for many years, as I have personally known of a migrant advocacy group that would bus
the non citizens to the polling places and they would vote. I reported this many times, still
it continued. Still it continues. When the only "proof" of citizenship you must provide, is a
check in a box that you, "attest under penalty of perjury" that you are a citizen, blah,
blah, blah, there is bound to be those that take advantage of the lack of oversight. Wherever
there is an opportunity, a criminal, fraudster or corrupt actor, will take advantage, to the
fullest extent possible. Human nature.
"... No doubt that is on its way, but I think it would have been too difficult to pull off without full control over the government's top figurehead. Once Harris is enthroned then they will move on that, I am sure of it. ..."
But somehow the Satan candidate won. "Impossible!! It must be the Russians!"
@Posted by: William Gruff | Dec 16 2020 17:51 utc | 136
There is one Russiagate shoe that I am still waiting to hear drop (maybe it already did
and I missed it).
In 2003 when the CIA succeeded in misleading this country into an invasion over
non-existent WMD
the finger pointing began, to explain away the lies as simply a pack of errors.
One excuse that gained some traction was that it was Saddam's own fault, he had pretended
to have WMD.
For Russiagate I have been waiting for the excuse makers to offer something like they did
with "Saddam's own fault".
That is, the Russians - Putin -, wanted the FBI, CIA, Hillary, MSM, etc to fall for
Russiagate.
Thus John Brennan did not attempt a coup (nor Comey, nor the FBI, CIA and the rest of the "17
intelligence agencies" the MSM
and the Democrats) by knowingly creating a false narrative about the Russians, it was the
dastardly Russians (Putin)
themselves that are to blame. No attempted coup, simply a pack of errors seeded by the
Russians themselves.
As the Durham investigation appears to be heading for the historical footnotes there will
be no need for the
traitors to create excuses. And I do not expect to ever hear that shoe drop.
librul @139: "I have been waiting for the excuse makers to offer something like they
did with "Saddam's own fault". That is, the Russians - Putin -, wanted the FBI, CIA,
Hillary, MSM, etc to fall for Russiagate."
No doubt that is on its way, but I think it would have been too difficult to pull off
without full control over the government's top figurehead. Once Harris is enthroned then they
will move on that, I am sure of it.
Populist progressives have no friends and, in fact, face layer upon layer of blockers some
obvious but many diabolically deceitful. Only physical overthrow of the system will
accomplish what they desire. Of course, there will be lip service and maybe even some action
like enough UBI to keep the debt ponzi going and to keep the bourgeois from having their
lives too impacted by the unwashed.
Populist conservatives don't generally want to take handouts and certainly don't want any
given. And while many jobs are gone the populist conservatives dominate the military, law
enforcement, fire, and many other public service jobs and also manage who gets those type of
jobs via an informal good ole boy network they seem to be okay with the arrangement.
Populist conservatives also love authority and chain of command so while they may not love
wall st\corporate\elite handouts, those handouts don't change hierarchy. What they will not
allow is for other common people to get anything that could be seen as cutting in line except
for maybe themselves and protectors of their "values", in which case, they prefer to be
discrete and exclusionary.
Since when has USA needed evidence? They blamed Saddam for years that he had "weapons of
mass distraction". And back in 1990, they created the famous "Iraq solders took babies out fo
incubators " lies. Some of us have lived longer than 30 years and we remember all the lies
USA has said.
All part of the plan to cut Russia from the SWIFT in 2021. Once Biden becomes a president,
he will call on all "democracies" to stand up to Russia. He and other "Western democracies"
will hold a joint meeting sometime in 2021 where they will "condemn Russia for all the malign
things Russia has done" and will press Belgium to cut Russia fro the SWIFT.
Whats wore, instead of doing anything, Russia is just sitting and watching them instead of
warming Europe that this will mean Europe will freeze their collective asses next winter when
they won't be able to get Russia gas. Even Iran is warning Russia that they will be cut off
from the SWIFT...
I have to agree with you, the deep state just cannot get over losing Russia to Putin and
nationalism after the thought that they had turned it into their playground in the 1990s.
They are hot to trot to take out Russia and make it bend the knee, whatever the risks are.
Would not put it past them to pull the SWIFT option, although that would have huge
implications for the Europeans who buy so much oil and gas from Russia.
It could end up as an own goal, as the Europeans join the Russian payments network and
start paying in Euros convertible directly into Rubles (especially with Nordstream 2 in
place). The Indians and Chinese are already setup for payments in local currencies. Right now
China needs Russia as an ally, so they would also probably re-source oil imports to take more
from Russia.
Russia has already made itself self sufficient in food etc., and has been working on
payments in local currencies. They are not stupid, and see such a move coming.
By Kit Klarenberg , an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence
services in shaping politics and perceptions. Follow Kit on Twitter @KitKlarenberg Western journalists, rights groups
and governments are concerned about the head of a foreign NGO being asked to leave Russia.
However, serious discussion of the organization's background, and funding sources, is
completely absent.
Last week, it was announced that Moscow had revoked the residency of Vanessa Kogan, a US
national who heads the NGO Stichting Justice Initiative (SJI) in Russia. If her appeal against
the decision isn't successful, she'll be forced to leave the country, where she has lived for
over a decade, and has two children who are Russian nationals.
Authorities had been mounting pressure on the organization for some time -- one of its
branches was deemed a foreign agent in 2019, and the group's offices in Dagestan, Moscow, and
Ingushetia have been raided by officials in recent months.
Condemnation from Western media and rights groups was immediate, with the issue framed as
just the latest example of an ongoing autocratic crackdown on rights activists in Russia. The
censures were intriguing for what they both did and didn't say.
Perhaps predictably, references to its almost entirely foreign-borne history, composition,
finances -- which includes support from George Soros' Open Society Foundation (OSF) -- and ties
to dubious Washington-based regime change entities were entirely absent.
Curiouser and
curiouser
Mainstream outlets such as the UK's Guardian newspaper universally referred to Kogan and SJI
as "prominent" and/or "well-known" , a somewhat peculiar characterizations given
neither she nor the organization received virtually any media attention whatsoever in its
nigh-on 20 years of operation, prior to her residency being revoked. Perhaps she and SJI are
only familiar to the small community of Western journalists and activists in the Russian
capital.
In any event, several genuinely high-profile organizations and figures, such as Peter Stano,
European Commission lead spokesperson for external affairs, slammed Kogan's expulsion on
Twitter - SJI's own account on the social network is largely dormant, having accrued just 231
followers in its four-and-half years on the platform.
Conversely, the numerous mainstream articles on the move made virtually no reference to the
organization's funding sources -- The Guardian perhaps went furthest, at least hinting SJI
receives financial support "from abroad" .
A joint statement signed by six NGOs was similarly opaque on the former question, merely
noting SJI was "one of the most active in Russia in bringing cases" to the European
Court of Human Rights (ECHR), and had secured over 250 judgements in favor of complainants.
Curiously, there was no mention of the intimate ties between SJI and two of the cosignatories,
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, an oversight one might think unethical.
The sextet moreover alleged SJI "has always been open and transparent about its work"
, a claim difficult to square with the paucity of information on its official website.
A section on the organization's finances sparingly notes it "raises funds from
institutional and government donors" . Financial statements are provided, but only from
2010 - 2017, and aren't at all informative, merely noting SJI's yearly income, and what it was
spent on. Still, they indicate the vast bulk of its budget is goes on salaries, and grants have
accounted for up to 99 percent of the organization's yearly funding.
The organization's annual reports are somewhat more illuminating, although they're only
available from 2006 - 2011, and the final instalment isn't even publicly listed. They reveal
SJI has at least previously been funded by a number of controversial Western 'philanthropic'
organizations, including Soros' aforementioned OSF.
This vehicle, which bankrolls civil society groups the world over to the tune of many
millions, has been embroiled in countless controversies since its establishment in 1993.
Mounting suspicion of OSF internationally may at least partially explain why SJI has become
ever-increasingly unwilling to divulge who and what is bankrolling it over time. Recent years
have seen numerous governments investigate and curtail the foundation's activities, if not
outright ban it from operating on their soil - among them Russia, after Moscow ruled the
organization represented a threat to national security in November 2015.
SJI's fiscal opacity is assisted by being based in the Netherlands - as its name implies,
it's a 'Stichting', or foundation. While not registered as a charity, it's characterised as
being "without commercial enterprise" , so isn't required to file accounts under Dutch
law.
'Stichtings' are openly advertised as ideal ways for wealthy individuals and corporations to
minimize tax liabilities and discretely distribute funds internationally.
Murky,
incestuous web
The organization's 2011 annual report reveals SJI was established in 2001 by a trio of
Dutchmen, Diederik Lohman, the director of Human Rights Watch's health division, Jan ter Laak,
a theologian, and Egbert Wesselink, a senior advisor at PAX, a Netherlands-based NGO.
Further underlining SJI's foreign nature, its governing board boasts only one Russian
member, Alexandra Koulaeva. Previously an activist with Moscow-based civil rights group
Memorial, she has since relocated to Paris to work for the International Federation for Human
Rights (FIDH).
FIDH likewise receives OSF funding, along with financial support from the European Union,
Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and a variety of Western governments. Wesselink
also sits on the board -- PAX has the same correspondence address as SJI, a post office box in
Utrecht, and also gets OSF funding.
The rest of the board is comprised of Ole Solvang, of the Norwegian Refugee Council, Tanya
Mazur, director of Amnesty International Ukraine, and Viviana Krstecevic, of the Center for
Justice and International Law (CEJIL).
The Council is bankrolled by numerous European states, while CEJIL has a variety of
international donors, among them OSF, and the US National Endowment for Democracy
(NED).
When covert becomes overt
The connection between NED and SJI is supremely striking for more reasons than one. Firstly,
NED was banned in Russia July 2015 on the same grounds as OSF -- the move was widely lambasted
at the time, but any consideration of the organization's shadowy history and activities, and
the role they played in motivating Moscow's decision, was conspicuously missing.
NED was founded in November 1983 - then-Central Intelligence Agency Director William Casey
and senior CIA covert operations specialist Walter Raymond Jr. were instrumental in its
creation.
They sought to construct a mechanism to support groups inside foreign countries that would
engage in propaganda and political action the CIA had historically organized and paid for in
secret. In 1991, senior NED official Allen Weinstein acknowledged "a lot of what we do today
was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA" .
The specifics of CEJIL's activities on behalf of NED, for which it has reaped hundreds of
thousands of dollars over decades, may be relevant to assessing SJI's own work.
In September 2003, the organization granted CEJIL US$83,000 to train citizens in launching
legal action against Caracas via the Inter-American Commission and Inter-American Court of
Human Rights, a little-known yet extremely powerful Washington and Costa Rica-based legal nexus
that claims jurisdiction over the entirety of the Americas, with the agreement of the
Organization of American States.
The grant led to a dramatic increase in frivolous claims brought against the Venezuelan
government by opposition activists, all of which circumvented the country's legal system and
undermined its sovereignty, granting power of judgment to a potentially sympathetic foreign
body.
SJI board member Viviana Krsticevic's official biography on CEJIL's website notes she has
litigated cases before both the Inter-American Commission and Inter-American Court of Human
Rights, strongly suggesting she was involved in these very NED-funded anti-Chavez efforts.
SJI says its purpose is to provide legal support to residents of the North Caucasus who seek
justice for alleged human rights abuses through international bodies such as the ECHR.
When Chechnya declared independence from Russia in 1991, the region became a haven for
criminals, kidnappers, and Islamist warlords, and over the course of two extremely brutal wars,
December 1994 – August 1996, August 1999 - May 2000), enforced disappearances,
extra-judicial killings, torture and unfair trial became routine.
Such crimes continue intermittently to this day, and few would surely argue with the moral
necessity of bringing those responsible to justice and securing redress for those affected.
Nonetheless, the risk of at least some cases being without foundation and/or politically
motivated is significant, a prospect demonstrably magnified when there is a financial incentive
for individuals to bring cases, and organizations specifically seek out individuals to
represent in such legal actions.
For example, in February 2017 award winning British lawyer Phil Shiner, who'd played a
leading role in bringing legal action against British troops for their maltreatment of Iraqis
following the 2003 invasion, was struck off the solicitors' register. It had been revealed he
paid middlemen to seek out claimants, and made "unsolicited direct approaches" to
potential clients.
Could SJI have helped facilitate potentially vexatious claims against Russia in the ECHR?
Krsticevic's position on the organization's board suggests this is a possibility, and the
organization's 2010 annual report makes clear the organization specifically sought out young
Russian lawyers and trained them to bring cases to the Court, and boasts of how financial
rewards paid to out its claimants had almost doubled over the past decade, to an average of
€60,000 - 70,000.
At the very least, the same document makes clear "forcing structural change in Russian
law and policy" was a key objective of its founders from the beginning.
As such, SJI is just one example of how Western powers quietly and surreptitiously influence
politics and policy in "enemy" states via NGOs, under the aegis of democracy and human
rights promotion. While the aims of the foreign funded organizations in question may be benign,
the goals of those bankrolling them are often far from benevolent, and all too frequently left
unexamined.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
francismd 1 day ago 12 Dec, 2020 09:11 AM
what surprises me is Russia allowing NGOs to operate in their country. NGO is a trojan horse.
do you actually believe that these NGOs have good intentions. There is no such thing as free.
DoubleKnot 1 day ago 12 Dec, 2020 09:02 AM
,...Her expulsion is just Russia's auto-immune system in function.
shadow1369 1 day ago 12 Dec, 2020 07:43 AM
If corporate media is rattled that is proof absolute that Kogan was doing their dirty work.
Maybe she should not be expelled, but rather prosecuted for sedition. NATO routinely uses
fake 'journalists' and NGOs to undermine any country which stands against US tyranny.
Ohhho 1 day ago 12 Dec, 2020 12:10 PM
A memo for the Russian government: if the Western MSM condemns your actions then you did
the right thing. If it prizes whatever you did: repent and reverse!
gswew 1 day ago 12 Dec, 2020 09:55 AM
huh? you evicted 1 person but the NGO is still open? why???? Close down all of them!!!!
Jeff_P 1 day ago 12 Dec, 2020 12:22 PM
I'm stunned that other countries allow foreign "NGO's" to operate in their countries. Many
are naught but moles operating to undermine the countries in which they operate. Especially
if that CIA front operation NED is in any way involved.
AnnaMR 1 day ago 12 Dec, 2020 11:36 AM
Oh, poor "prominent" Kogan. How about the sadistic imprisonment/torture of the political
prisoner and great journalist Julian Assange? As for Ms. Alexandra Koulaeva, a former
"activist with Moscow-based civil rights group," who relocated to Paris to "work for the
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)," does she have a shred of decency to tell a
word or two to her FIDH' bosses about the imprisonment of Julian Assange? No? Then Ms.
Alexandra Koulaeva is a presstitute, a regular opportunistic hypocrite with no brains and no
soul.
Srinivas Injeti 15 hours ago 13 Dec, 2020 05:12 AM
99% of these NGO do anti-national activities in the garb of social and welfare activities.
They are also used for spying and creating unrest and sponsoring terrorist and subversive
activities. They are used to create uprisings against the ruling parties which do not bow
down to the diktat of the US and its western stooges. It is better to ban all these NGOs and
their affiliations.
NonDucorDuco 15 hours ago 13 Dec, 2020 05:07 AM
What else could one expect from the Dutch, known for being huge hypocrites with double
standards. They have their mouth full of Human Rights, but are one of the EU countries known
for the highest rate of discrimination against immigrants and treating their own nationals in
the Caribbean part of their kingdom as 3rd class citizens. The Dutch politicians volunteered
to become a loyal sheepdog for the US regime, misusing their Caribbean territorial waters to
provide cover for the destabilizing covert US regime OPS against neighboring Venezuela ~
against the will of the Caribbean natives whom have strong family ties with Venezuela.
Another example is the biased report on the downing of the NH-17 flight, which was clearly a
False Flag OPS.
Jewel Gyn 16 hours ago 13 Dec, 2020 05:07 AM
US is so full of crap and double standards you can't take it seriously. Ditto all these
state-sponsored rights group. They acted immediately when their interests are threatened but
vanish and lay low when it don't suit their narratives.
Money quote: "First thing to do when 'unrest rears its ugly head' is shut down external
communications and kick out any of the Five Eyes operating an embassy in your country. It
happnens so often."
The most unfortunate aspect of these large scale disruption and regime change operations
exploit actual grievances and truly indigenous civil society reform movements, thereby
compromising even the most authentic efforts by the people. Not only that but this casts
serious doubt on both authenticity and goals of all kind of demonstrations and civil
unrest, even in more developed countries, including ostensibly First World.
Take the HK demonstrations for example - how much of it was real, genuine unrest caused
by this or that more heavy handed China policy? truth is we don't know because by
definition, the exploitation of such protest movements - almost always led by supposedly
disaffected youth - includes a very sophisticated propaganda handbook that seeks to
effectively "erase" the controlling hands behind the scenes.
Or, even the BLM movement - a lot that happened with these protests seem to jive with
the instruction manuals per the ARK. Notice how these could be turned on and off - in this
or that city, made to appear organic, when in fact those invisible hands from behind
directed much of the action.
Another aspect that is very noticeable for both the HK and BLM movements is the way they
were directed at some very specific issue that most people would have a hard time
disagreeing with - on its face. Be it political "freedom", new "rules", new "taxes" and/or
police brutality - there are numerous commonalities - too many to dismiss as mere
coincidences.
At the same time, much care seems to have been taken to not allow these protests to be
directed at the actual ruling class, the 1%, the elites, big finance and the
corporatocracy. I always thought it was kind of funny the way these BLM protesters somehow
were not there when Bernie sanders ran his campaign, even though Bernie had their
grievances near the top of his list on the official platform (police brutality, uneven
criminal justice system and prison reform were huge issues for him). Yes, there were plenty
of black youths who voted with the Sanders movement in the primary (the one that was
basically a fraudulent one, due to outright vote flipping, as was exposed by several
credible analysts). But the BLM protests only came into being following the one GF killing
and were directed mostly against police in large cities, and, of course against anything
the federal government could try and do.
Now that Biden is all but declared as 'elect", those protests have died down (except for
a few flare-up points like Portland, where they seem to have taken permanent residence).
Funny that....must be that the "defund the police" was successful and black people no
longer suffer from unequal law enforcement.....so all is well now.....
Sometimes I thought something like this happened in Libya. Libyan army cleared this
town, that city, next town, moving east to west, then just before Benghazi, we get our
consent manufacturing message that Gaddafi said there would be a slaughter in Benghazi. So
NATO just had to attack, to save Benghazi.
After Libya was smashed, turns out a whole gang of British "diplomats & SAS" were in
Benghazi.
thanks b! informative... this ARK is not noahs or boris's... who is behind this grand
scheme?? it seems the idea of keeping lebannon and syria in a state of tension is the
goal.. whose purpose does this serve? it seems like an agenda written in tel aviv, or is it
washington?? who is behind all this?? it seems clear enough that the goal is to coddle
israel... take this money and make sure israel continues to dominate in the middle east and
all other countries are destabilized basket cases... these are sick people behind all
this.. that much is very clear... who would spend money like this??
the really shocking thing is the UK gov't is in on it, but don't want it to appear this
way.. the people in the UK sure are a weird lot.. i think they are weirder then the people
in the USA!
ARK (Analysis Research Knowledge) has a website and its founder, former British diplomat
Alistair Harris has a LinkedIn account you can look up on Google or whatever search engine
you normally use. The company is based in Dubai.
Among ARK's various activities in Syria was managing the Facebook page and probably
other PR for the White Helmets. The propaganda surrounding Bana Alabed and other Syrian
children seems to be of a type similar to White Helmets propaganda - designed to appeal to
people's emotions, particularly women's emotions - so there is a possibility all this
rubbish was being generated by the same organisation.
In the end the target audience for all this propaganda is us, as our support is needed
to justify an eventual US or NATO invasion of Syria and Lebanon.
First thing to do when 'unrest rears its ugly head' is shut down external communications
and kick out any of the Five Eyes operating an emmbasy in your country. It happnens so
often. Kick Out the Five Eyes (I live in one of them). Media Communications (the industry I
work in) is the publicly acceptable term for Information Program, Propaganda, Information
Warfare. It's all the same thing, with Event Management being the sister of and information
program.
I've worked in both areas; external media communications programs and event
coordination and management , often dovetailing the two and switching between roles in
order to 'maximise stakeholder value' for the benefit of the client. Who is the
client..? If the client isn't obvious then Follow the money. It is always the person
paying the bill. Follow the money people... follow the money and you will understand the
objectives of even the most obtuse communications programs.
As an aside, with all the hundreds of billions of dollars of weapons being pumped into
the MENA, 'no one in Government' is able to 'shut down the wars. It's a joke, Government
can track your spending down to the last cent and hit you up with a fine for 'incorrect tax
return' but they 'can't follow the hundreds of billions of dollars' in weapons that gets
flown around the world. Follow the money people. Follow the money and you'll catch the
culprit.
Color revolution tactics that have been used against foreign leaders are now being used by
President Donald
Trump 's opponents to oust him, a former special forces officer has warned.
"A color revolution is a tactic to affect regime change," the officer, who asked to remain
anonymous, told The Epoch Times.
"What I see happening is a Marxist insurgency that's using a color revolution to affect
regime change."
The 2019 Transition
Integrity Project , according to the officer, is an indicator that the events of this
year's presidential election were "transparently orchestrated" by "Marxist elements within the
Democratic Party and their Marxist allies in foreign governments."
"It may not have fallen out just as they wanted, because anytime you carry out an
operation like this, the enemy will get a vote. But the plan was we will not concede the
election. The goal here was never the presidency, " the officer said.
"The goal of the opposition was to fundamentally change the country. They are attacking
the efficacy of the Constitution."
To achieve their goal, the anti-Trump opposition focused their main effort on affecting the
election, the officer said.
Some of the most notable color revolutions took place amid turmoil sparked by disputed
elections. In 2004, mass protests in Ukraine following allegations of a fraudulent presidential
election, which initially showed pro-Russia Viktor Yanukovych as the winner, led to a new vote
won by Viktor Yushchenko, the candidate backed by the European Union and the United States.
The officer said the tactics used by the anti-Trump opposition can be found in the Special
Forces' guide for overthrowing a government.
"What you're getting from me, this is supported in all older unconventional warfare
doctrines," the officer said.
"You could go to our manuals and pull from them the information I'm telling you. This
isn't from someone who's a rabid Trump supporter. This is what's happening ."
The officer then talked about how President Barack Obama used his eight years in office to
"seed his political allies all through the institutions," created an "underground" or "shadow
government" supported by legacy media and rioters.
"With the president being unable to get his own people into the administration, we
effectively had a third administration of Obama," the officer said.
"So we come to what we have today: The underground are the elements within the government.
We saw how they opposed the president, how they tried the impeachment ."
"The press is the auxiliary on the outside. The only thing we're missing is a real guerrilla
force, and we would be mistaken to think that's just Antifa or Black Lives Matter. There are
professional revolutionaries within those movements."
We often discuss media coverage and accuracy on developing legal and political
controversies. Much of this discussion recently has focused on the bias shown by the media in
the last four years. I have worked for the media as a legal analyst and columnist for years,
but I have never before seen this raw and open bias in major media. At the same time,
academics are rejecting the very concept of objectivity in journalism in favor of open
advocacy.
This morning, Fox News called out all of the networks for zero coverage of the bombshell
story from Axios that Rep. Eric Swalwell may have had a close relationship with a suspected
Chinese spy who fled to China a few years ago. Many of us were struck by the lack of coverage,
particularly given the position of Swalwell on the House Intelligence Committee and his former
bid for the presidency. It was particularly striking when the media is now reluctantly covering
the Hunter Biden story after a long blackout before the election. Yet, the most stark
comparison is with the exhaustive coverage given the highly analogous story involving an
alleged spy, Maria Butina, who had an affair with a high-ranking figure in the National Rifle
Association.
Swalwell is alleged to have had a close relationship with Chinese national, Fang Fang or
Christine Fang, who not only raised money for him but placed at least one intern in Swalwell's
congressional office, according to
Axios . Bizarrely, Swalwell has refused to confirm or deny that he had an intimate
relationship with his office claiming that such an answer could compromise classified
information. Even that ridiculous comment did not prompt ABC, NBC, or CBS to cover the story.
Obviously, Fang and the Chinese already know if she had a sexual relationship with Swalwell.
The only people in the dark are the voters.
Swalwell himself explained why this is news.
The congressman was one of the most vocal voices calling out a June 2016 meeting that
President Trump's son, Donald Trump Jr., with Natalia Veselnitskaya, who was accused of being
an asset for the Russian government.
" Stated plainly, the President's son met with a Russian spy. We now have the best
evidence of that in our minority report the Democrats put out that Ms. Veselnitskaya was
going all over the world and bumping into Dana Rohrabacher, which is a sign of a spy, someone
who tries to create a coincidence encounter, and now we know that she was working at the
behest of the Russian government. "
Not even the utter hypocrisy of Swalwell's position or the lunacy of his classification
claim was enough to generate minimal coverage. There is also no interest in Swalwell remaining
on the intelligence committee given his ill-considered relationship.
Swalwell says that he cooperated with the FBI and cut off ties with Fang, who fled to China
years ago. There is no indication that he compromised classified information, but such assets
are used to often influence powerful leaders or acquire useful background information on other
leaders.
MSNBC and other news outlets could not get enough of that story about Trump Jr. but has an
effective blackout on the same allegation of Swalwell not just "bumping" into a spy but
carrying on a long relationship and even allowing her to raise money for him and help put an
intern in his congressional office.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Yet, the greatest contrast is with the NRA story which was endlessly covered. Even when NRA
moved to address the relationship between Butina and 57-year-old Republican activist named Paul
Erickson. Hundreds of stories ran on every deal and media explored
whether a Russian activist influenced powerful figures or shared information .
The FBI Director just gave a public speech on the extensive and growing espionage efforts of
China. Yet, the success of planting an agent with Swalwell and a couple of other politicians
has been given virtual Hunter Biden treatment. Where a host of legal expert called for charges
for treason and other crimes against Trump Jr., there is nothing but crickets when a liberal
Democrats members is accused of far more extensive contacts with a Chinese spy. Why?
PrintCash 6 hours ago (Edited)
Does a bear poop in the woods?
Its the sole purpose and desire of the ultra partisan types in the media to control the
narrative, control the messaging, control your life. It's what they LIVE for.
Hikikomori 6 hours ago
Swalwell was accusing Trump of colluding with Putin while at the same time Swalwell was
screwing a ChiCom spy - you couldn'tmake this up.
Floki_Ragnarsson 6 hours ago
Right out of a Tom Clancy novel.
Lord Raglan 5 hours ago remove link
Swalwell was boinking the Chi-Com Honey Pot in 2015 and maybe earlier, before Trump even
announced his run and yet it is all Trump's fault.
There is no lie that is too malignantly preposterous for people on the Left.
Flankspeed60 4 hours ago
The Chinese are not actually our enemy here. When you go to Yellowstone, you're warned not
to feed the bears. Same for dragons. Hang raw meat on a clothesline, and expect all the
downwind carnivores and blowflies to show up. In our case, corrupt politicians made
themselves readily accessible to any and every gomer with large bundles of cash. Even
real-life whores are more discerning in their choice of johns than the low-life bacterium we
elected to congress-it is THEY AND THEY ALONE who are to blame for selling this country out.
The Chinese have nothing but contempt for these dregs, and no one should blame them for
paying relative pennies for solid gold bars in return. In fact, our government does exactly
the same to countless other countries, so the stampeding hypocrisy of our government in
crying 'foul' simply reeks. The Chicoms would most likely shoot, and have shot their own
corrupt sell-outs for far less than the crimes committed by our treasonous scumbags. And,
until we adopt similar measures against our worthless SOB's, our Swamp will simply continue
to get deeper and slimier............
precarryus 4 hours ago
Yet Swill-well says Adam Schiff and Pelosi were aware of his activities, implying ...
...(Surprised?
American2 5 hours ago remove link
Perhaps Peter Strozk can be the defense's rock-solid moral character witness at Eric
Swalwell's federal trial.
surf@jm 5 hours ago
The Chinese own Hollywood and the media.....
The Chinese were the main force for the Russia collusion horsehockey through their
political whores in congress....
Schroedingers Cat 5 hours ago
Hillary, Brennan, Obama, Chris Hayes, Maddow, Comey, Zucker and many other swamp state
freaks are responsible for Russiagate.
The CHinese CCP are definitely up to no good but let's not excuse traitors and chalk it up
to Chinese spies. Swalwell is 100% responsible for his own behavior. They ALL ARE. Chinese
spies can't corrupt real American Patriots.
Son of Captain Nemo 5 hours ago
Last I checked so was Joe and Hunter Biden along with China?...
And Hunter is doing great things with his money buying under age prostitutes in Ukraine
and China making vids of it while sucking on a crack pipe... While the young ladies "suck"
something else "off"!!!
Willie the Pimp 6 hours ago remove link
The media? No such thing. CIA propaganda.
John Couger 3 hours ago
This slimy piece of excrement attacked our president for 4 years over the Russia hoax all
while being compromised by the communist Chinese
BinAnunnaki 4 hours ago
The Presstitute media is an extension of the Democratic Party.
Cobra Commander 4 hours ago remove link
Precisely. Why pay money to be misinformed? Biden up by 17 in Wisconsin, Hunter laptop
media blackout, panning away from ANY mention of voter and election fraud.
OCnStiggs 6 hours ago
"Swallowell" is a lying, prevaricating, stupid POS.
The very first thing they do to you when you get a high security clearance is brief you on
people and techniques used to compromise you. Period. Dot. This ****** either skipped the
brief or ignored it. Simply associating with people who might be a compromise threat is
unlawful. Ignorance is no excuse.
Just sayin'.
Cobra Commander 4 hours ago
Penalties for Inaccurate or False Statements (security clearance)
United States Criminal Code (title 18, section 1001) provides that knowingly falsifying or
concealing a material fact is a felony which may result in fines of up to $10,000, and/or 5
years imprisonment, or both.
If you have a security clearance, you agree to report all foreign contacts and
relationships. When you submit your clearance request, you attest that all is true, correct,
and complete to the best of your knowledge.
Intentionally submitting false information on a clearance request or renewal is subject to
criminal prosecution.
ByFyodor Lukyanov, the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs,
chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director
of the Valdai International Discussion Club. This Monday marked 50 years since one of the
20th century's most iconic moments, when German Chancellor Willy Brandt fell to his knees in
Warsaw, emotionally apologizing for the horrors the Nazis had unleashed on Eastern Europe.
It was one of the milestones of the Neue Ostpolitik – Bonn's policy aimed at
normalizing relations with the USSR and its East European satellites. On the day of this
anniversary, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas wrote the following: "Unlike Brandt, we no
longer have to go via Moscow to talk to our eastern neighbors nowadays. Many partners in
Eastern and Central Europe now view Russia very critically – and German foreign policy
must take our neighbors' concerns seriously. In addition to offers of dialogue, clear German
positions vis-à-vis Moscow are therefore important for maintaining trust in Eastern
Europe."
A clear testimony to the fact that, compared to other Eastern European states, Russia is now
of secondary importance to Berlin. This is perhaps the first time it's been stated so
explicitly.
A day later, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made several important statements about
relations between Russia and the EU, including the EU's locomotive, Germany. At the annual
meeting of the Russian International Affairs Council, Lavrov pointed out that "apparently,
the European Union has given up any attempts to become one of the centers in the emerging
multipolar world order and is now simply taking its cues from the US. Germany's policy on a
number of issues tells us that this is the course Berlin has chosen, as it reaffirms its
intention to preserve Germany's undisputed leadership within the EU. France's position is
somewhat different. The prevailing notion is that the European Union is now giving up any
ambitions of becoming a center of power in a multipolar world. And if France itself decides to
compete for this role well, we'll see how it goes."
Lavrov also mentioned the concept of a "sham multiculturalism that the Germans and the
French concocted," which they "are promoting, presenting the EU's policies and
initiatives to the world as beyond reproach, a shining example for everyone to see."
Right after that, Russia's top diplomat headed to a meeting with members of the Alternative
for Germany parliamentary party. Lavrov sent a clear message, basically saying that this visit
was his response to the political steps taken by official Berlin. "As for us, we don't have
any objections when German politicians communicate with the Russian opposition, and we never
get in the way of such contacts. Interestingly, Berlin officials prefer meetings with
opposition activists who work outside the system and do not represent parliamentary parties
" Obviously, a nod to the red carpet welcome that Alexey Navalny, a comparatively marginal
opposition figure back home, received in Germany.
While the meeting with a right-wing German party was more of a symbolic gesture, the Foreign
Minister's statement about the EU giving up its independent voice and Germany being the main
driver in this process reflected Moscow's official stance. The Kremlin has decided that it no
longer has any special relations with Berlin.
There is little hope that this connection will be restored in the foreseeable future, since
Angela Merkel's potential successors are even less likely to promote these special ties. The
Navalny case was just the last straw, with the Kremlin astonished by the irrational nature of
Berlin's actions.
Viewed from Russia, it seemed absolutely unnecessary to go against the pragmatic interests
that both countries seemed to have shared in the past. However, the Moscow-Berlin axis, once
viewed as something special, began to deteriorate a long time ago. Now it's over, along with
Russia's dreams about continental Europe changing its allegiances in the new world order and
moving away from its Transatlantic identity towards a more independent role.
And Germany has become the main obstacle for this hypothetical emancipation. That's why
France was mentioned, although the remark was also somewhat sarcastic.
Two months ago, Sergey Lavrov said that Russia was prepared to suspend its dialogue with the
EU, because it wasn't yielding any results. But he was talking about European institutions, not
the continent itself. Now relations with separate European countries are being revised, based
on their stance towards Russia and their role within the European Union. This concludes a very
important phase in Russia's foreign policy that began after the collapse of the Soviet Union
(or, to some degree, even before that) and signifies a transition to a different, probably a
lot less Eurocentric, approach.
The dialogue between Russia and the West, with Germany being a major participant, has now
reached a dead end – there is nothing of substance left to discuss. All the talk about
common values, which has been a focal point ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union, has
accomplished nothing. Back then it was believed that the whole of Europe, including Russia, was
a space of shared values that rested on the foundation of Western liberalism.
Since the 1990s, Russia has been publicly accused of departing from these values, which was
interpreted as evidence that Russia is, overall, unprepared for meaningful cooperation with the
rest of Europe. There are various assessments of the changes Russian politics has undergone in
this period, but it is apparent that it has moved away from the ideological commitments of 30
years ago. And Russia will not go back to them: not just because its own evolution as a state
has made this impossible, but because the old value system is growing obsolete and is no longer
perceived as universal.
The world has entered a new era, where pluralism of morals and values is becoming the new
normal, no matter how the European Union feels about it. International relations can no longer
be based on countries demanding their partners to conform to a certain set of values.
In this respect, Russia would gladly return to the time when internal political mechanisms
of individual states were not brought up as talking points in negotiations with their foreign
partners. Ideally, Russia would want to go back to the start of the Ostpolitik era – the
first half of the 1970s, before the Helsinki Accords and its "third basket" provisions,
which made respecting human rights and freedoms an integral part of all international
discussions. Back then, it was unthinkable for an expensive and strategically important
project, such as the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, to be jeopardized because of the personal history
of a single political figure – no matter how well regarded he is by Western
leaders.
For 30 years after the end of the Cold War, relations between Russia and the West have been
determined (to a lesser and lesser extent with every passing year) by the principles
established during the confrontation period – principles that were to be transformed into
a new form of international cooperation. However, this project has been abandoned, as have been
all attempts to adapt international institutions created in the second half of the 20th century
to the realities of the 21st century.
Stability and cooperation in the late Cold War period were dictated primarily by the need to
strengthen global security and prevent open confrontation. This was perceived as an absolute
priority. Today, Russia and the West no longer attach such importance to their relations
(although the perception persisted for a time, on both sides, even after the Cold War).
The EU is now busy dealing with its own issues. The United States also has problems to tend
to at home, on top of its efforts to contain China. Thus, Russia needs to redefine its
priorities and work out a proper new model of international relations – one that would
have Asia at the center and China as Russia's new key partner.
Simplified, the model of Russian-German relations in 2020 looks like this: Germany, as the
de-facto leader of the EU, no longer views promoting the 'European model' eastward as a
priority. And Russia, which had long viewed its relationship with Western Europe as
intrinsically valuable, has ceased to do so and is seeking closer cooperation with the nations
of Asia.
So, the specific circumstances that brought about the current crisis are just the trigger,
not the underlying causes of the change. Russia and the West are growing increasingly apart in
terms of their priorities. This is happening for objective reasons, but is also compounded by
subjective perceptions.
All of this does not mean, however, that the trend cannot be reversed. Russia, as the
largest country in Eurasia and a bearer of European culture, and Germany, as the strongest
European economy and a country that will have to redefine its identity in the coming years,
will have need of each other again, some day. But this cannot happen until a new world order is
fully formed – one that has little in common with the ways of the last century. The
notion of Ostpolitik was an integral part of the old model, and as one faded away into the
past, the other followed.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Russian collusion disappeared quicker than BLM after the election.
ominous 1 hour ago
one is returning soon
High Vigilante 16 minutes ago
Demsheviks: "There was never Russia collusion, and we have always been in peace with
Eastasia"
LevelHeadedMan 26 minutes ago
Russia narrative was a scapegoat for the real cause. The Democrats lost the working class.
They became the party of the coastal suburbanite liberal middle class. And now they are the
party of fraud. lay_arrow
Francis Marximus 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
I guess all the countries that have a higher GDP then Russia the US has in their pockets.
Hence...Russia has to be the fall guy.
The media and Democrats need simple minded people, people who are easily fooled and people
with no conscience to exist
ominous 1 hour ago
why would Russia interfere?
we're doing a bang-up job ******* things up on our own.
divide_by_zero 1 hour ago
Putin should announce his candidate has won, just to **** either as Soros will run our gov
otherwise
NotGonnaTakeItAnymore 1 hour ago
Let's all recall that genius of the senate from CT, Chris Murphy, who took every
opportunity to stand before anyone who would listen and had a camera, as repeatedly stating
that Russia was involved with Trump and with Hunter's laptop.
And now he's remarkably quiet.
Hey Chris, can you show me the Russians now??? You are so going to lose you next election.
We are sick of your games.
Baba Yaga 1 34 minutes ago
The American election is a farce in itself. Puppeteers from the Deep State have pushed
Biden's candidacy by all means. The American people are just extras in these elections,
nothing depends on them. This is the American way of democracy.
with extra foam 32 minutes ago remove link
That moment of clarity when you realize that modern America is no different than Soviet
Russia.
Bobby Farrell Can Dance 23 minutes ago (Edited)
With much worse propaganda and a bigger budget. Meaning the fall will be harder.
monty42 14 minutes ago
Worse in some ways. The devil that poses as an angel of light is actually more
dangerous.
Ms No 1 hour ago (Edited)
I have to pat the CIA on the back. This has dual purpose.
Both China and Maduro are accused of meddling in this election. They got Russia last time.
Amidst it all, thinking people are demoralized by the assholes who actually believe any of
that absurdity. It's a hideous and cruel weapon.
Well played.
youshallnotkill 1 hour ago
According to Rudy is was Chavez, don't cha know. Guy apparently just faked his death ...
/s
ouluoulu 24 minutes ago remove link
I am watching the death throes of the news business, newspapers, television and magazines.
Blogs, newsletters and individuals releasing their own videos will finally kill it off.
Investigative reporting is nonexistent, replaced by fake news that answers to the "Big
Club" that George Carlin referred to when he said "It's a big club and you ain't in it, you
and I are not in it."
Bobby Farrell Can Dance 18 minutes ago
Western MSM is all paid shilling, fully compromised by 5 Eyes + Mossad intel agency
staffers. The last place I would want to learn about the way the world works, but the first
place I would look to see their projections.
The United States' election victory of Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden has yet to
be officially confirmed. That requires the 500-plus Electoral College comprising the 50 federal
states to cast the final vote when the constitutional body meets on December 14. Biden holds a
commanding lead of over 300 delegates in the Electoral College, more than 70 above Donald
Trump's quota and decisively more than the 270 threshold required for election to the White
House.
Nonetheless, already one thing is indisputably clear. Biden's nominal victory from the
popular vote tallies is glaring proof that Russia did not interfere in the American
presidential ballot. Not in 2020. And not, we may discern, in 2016, nor in any other election.
Yet the silence in US media over this obvious conclusion is deafening.
Four years of frenetic and unsubstantiated allegations of "Russian interference" have
disappeared overnight, it seems. Poof! Gone! As if by a magic conjuring trick. Now you see it,
now you don't, so to speak.
The New York Times has declared the recent
presidential contest a "great election.. a resounding success free of fraud" . The Department
of Homeland Security pronounced the election to be the "most secure in American history." Other
US media outlets have jettisoned supposed political neutrality and can barely contain their
elation at Biden's electoral victory.
But hold on a moment.
In the months and weeks leading up to the November election, there was a fever pitch in US
media among politicians, national security chiefs, pundits and anonymous intelligence sources
that Russia was allegedly stepping up "interference efforts" to get Trump re-elected.
Those evidence-free claims were predicated on the equally absurd assertion that Trump was a
Manchurian candidate for the Kremlin. That "Russiagate" fable was first spun in 2016 and for
the past four years elaborated into a tangled web to "explain" how a maverick former reality TV
star had been elected to the White House.
Suddenly, however, the Democrats and supportive US media are now asserting that the voting
process was impeccable and unblemished by any malfeasance. Of course they would say that in
order to bolster legitimacy of Biden's win against the Republican White House incumbent Donald
Trump. But the thundering takeaway which the US political class and media are bizarrely
ignoring is that Russia did not interfere not in the 2020 race nor in any other election.
Russia has always categorically said it is not meddling in US politics and its electoral
process. Turns out that Russia is de facto vindicated in its protestations against American
slander.
The "Russiagate" nonsense was hatched by Democrats, their supportive media and intelligence
agencies because they could not come to terms with the reality of why Trump beat the then
establishment-ordained candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016. Could it have been because Clinton
and the Democrat party was repudiated by popular sentiment due to perceived corruption and
overseas wars? No, another "explanation" had to be found. And the US political establishment
came up with the "Russian interference" narrative.
No matter that the Mueller investigation found after 22 months of probing and hundreds of
millions of taxpayer-dollars spent that there was no evidence of "Russia collusion" with the
Trump campaign. Nevertheless, Mueller and the Democrats, their media and intelligence backers,
persisted in the spurious notion that Russia meddled in the 2016 election and, allegedly, was
continuing to meddle, purportedly with even more sophisticated, nefarious techniques.
How can US politicians, intelligence officials and media credibly claim that Russia
interfered in 2016 and in mid-term congressional elections in 2018, but now in 2020 it
evidently did not? The most logical explanation is simply that Russia never did.
Four years of hysterical American accusations against Russia have transpired to just that:
bogus hysteria . US politicians, media and so-called intelligence gurus should be held to
account for fabricating what is perhaps the biggest hoax ever played on the American
public.
Though, one can be sure that they won't be held accountable in a formal way. Venal power
doesn't work like that. And the US political system has built-in layers of self-protection for
the political class never to be prosecuted. But in an informal no less real way, the system is
being held to account by the wider public who are increasingly holding it in contempt and
distrust. The political class and their plaything media are losing the moral authority to
govern. This goes beyond mere Trump Derangement Syndrome. The systematic lying and deception
over alleged Russian interference perpetrated on such a grand scale has fatally damaged the
credibility of American institutions. Not just in the US, but around the world too.
Equally lamentable is the corrosive, damaging effect that the bogus hysteria has had on
bilateral US-Russia relations and international tensions. Relations are at a dangerous all time
low comparable to the depth of the Cold War. This has in turn sabotaged diplomatic efforts to
strengthen arms controls and global security. The anti-Russia hysteria has led to the US
abandonment of key nuclear weapons treaties, the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty
and soon the New START.
The Russophobia that has been whipped up as a political weapon against Trump over the past
four years is not something that can be easily put aside. It has engendered deep-seated
hostility against Russia. During the presidential debates, Joe Biden vowed that the would take
a tough stand against Russia for "interfering" in US politics. The incoming administration is
being mentally held hostage by its own Russophobia which was cultivated on entirely false
grounds.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
It is disturbing how the US nation has been dragged into an obsession about alleged Russian
malign activities, an obsession which turns out to be a mirage. Not for the first time either.
Recall the Cold War Red Scares and McCarthyite witch-hunts which poisoned American society.
The implications are daunting. How can bilateral relations with Russia be restored? How can
an intelligent dialogue be conducted with a nation whose leaders are so self-deluded and
irrational?
Moreover, this is a nation whose leaders presume to have the prerogative to use overwhelming
military force whenever they deem so. It is not unlike the driver of a juggernaut vehicle on a
precipice who is hurtling along while out of his brain on misconceptions.
There is a future out there on the time beam ... I somewhat agree with Turley, that
Russiagate vs Swampgate, I seem to forget how I labeled the other side of the pole over the
years--Obama-Clinton-Gate???---should be investigated--:
Appointment Of Special Counsel Leaves Biden and Democrats In A Muddle
Zucker – who now presides over one of the most fervently anti-Trump media outlets in
the American corporate press – hatched the idea to give then-candidate Trump a weekly
slot on CNN during a March 2016 phone call with Micheal Cohen, a lawyer for Trump at the time,
according to audio obtained by Fox News' Tucker Carlson.
Speaking with Cohen hours before the final Republican primary debate in the 2016 race,
Zucker said that while the Trump campaign had shown "great instincts, great guts and great
understanding of everything," he insisted victory would be impossible without CNN's
backing.
"Here's the thing you cannot be elected president of the United States without CNN,"
Zucker boasted. "Fox and MSNBC are irrelevant – irrelevant – in electing a
general election candidate."
When Cohen suggested the CNN chief relay his thoughts to Trump himself, Zucker demurred,
saying he is "very conscious of not putting too much in email," as Trump – "the
boss" – might go blabbing about it on the campaign trail.
You know, as fond as I am of the boss, he also has a tendency if I call him or I email
him, he then is capable of going out at his next rally and saying that we just talked, and I
can't have that, if you know what I'm saying.
Zucker soon talked himself back into contacting Trump, however, committing to "give him a
call right now" to "wish him luck in the debate tonight" – hosted by none
other than CNN – adding "I have all these proposals for him, like I want to do a
weekly show with him and all this stuff."
He went on to lavish praise on Trump, saying he had "never lost a debate" and would
do "great" during the CNN event later that night, even offering detailed advice for how
the president-to-be could deflect allegations that he is a "con man" from other
candidates.
While the source of the recording is unclear, the leak has made waves online, given that
Zucker has since made himself into Trump's "
cable news nemesis ." The network itself, meanwhile, has fielded an endless stream of
negative coverage of the president, heavily pushing the discredited 'Russiagate' conspiracy
theory for years and throwing full weight behind the Democrats' failed impeachment effort.
Some netizens have already suggested the "damning" revelation could soon result in
Zucker's ouster from his high perch at CNN.
"You think Jeff Zucker will be fired? I actually think there's a decent chance he will
be. Trying to kiss up to Trump is on par with murder in CNN world,"wrote filmmaker and
conservative pundit Robby Starbuck.
Others were less taken aback by the audio, as many pointed to the fact that Zucker and Trump
have a lengthy history together, both working on 'The Apprentice,' the hit reality show that
helped to solidify Trump's status as a pop culture icon. In 2012, Trump even hailed Zucker's
takeover as CNN president, saying the network made a
"great move," and that Zucker "was responsible for me and The Apprentice on NBC
– became #1 show!"
"Everyone knows Zucker made Trump, it's 100% true," one user said . "Trump was down and out.
Zucker pitched him a reality TV show called the Apprentice. Why? Because he likes his New
Yorkers, he likes Trump."
Sir,
Pretty sure you're trolling us a little with this post. That said, it is 2020.
I am 100% convinced that covid is a political conspiracy based on personal knowledge and
other info. Tonight Tucker Carlson reports that blood samples taken in early Jan 2020 tested
positive for covid - all of the samples. In other countries there is evidence of covid in the
population going back to Fall 2019; yet no overwhelmed hospitals and spiking death counts
from those early months. The internet fact checkers are clearly arrayed against information
seekers and forcing conformity to the state's message.
Clearly there was malfeasance in the election as well as a general Charlie Foxtrot created
by implementing mail in voting without sufficient time and resources for infrastructure
development; a no brainer that everyone should have foreseen and avoided - except for the
covid hysteria.
We saw the the Russia collusion hoax, Steele Dossier nonsense, idiotic impeachment and
slandering filthy lie campaign against of Justice Kavanaugh.
The list goes on. However, it stretches my credulity that the US military (Army SOF unit?)
would be shooting it out with the CIA in Germany and that Haskel would be there to be wounded
in the action; or was arrested and whisked off to some secret detention facility.
Would you please consider sharing what you really think?
This is actually a great speech. the problem is that Trump never followed up on his
election promises and rhethorics Reply
Lost in a dark wood , Dec 4, 2020 5:21 PM
I wrote the following a few days after the 2020 election:
My prediction for the next four years is that many of the putative "experts" will finally,
but reluctantly, start to take note of what Trump has been saying over the preceding four
years. However, there will of course be a lot of wilful holdouts.
--
The place to start is the "Our Movement" speech of October 2016.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/10/25/the-speech-to-save-a-nation/
The Speech To Save A Nation
Posted on October 25, 2016 by Sundance
On October 13th 2016, presidential candidate Donald Trump delivered a speech that defines
this moment in our nation's history. Part of that speech has been put to a video. The entire
transcript of that speech is below.
The Russian government is set to expel a prominent human-rights activist, with former
president Dmitry Medvedev claiming there's a co-ordinated campaign by international
organizations to stoke unrest in the world's largest state.
Vanessa Kogan, the director of the Stichting Justice Initiative project, told Britain's
Guardian newspaper that Russian authorities had notified her of the revocation of her residency
permit. She will now have two weeks to leave the country, where she has lived for more than ten
years. She also has two children with a Russian national.
The Stichting Justice Initiative is an NGO which, it says, provides legal support to
Russians in cases of perceived human rights abuses. It has been less open about its funding in
recent years, but in 2010 and 2011, it was bankrolled by the Dutch government and the Hungarian
billionaire George Soros. via his 'Open Society' pressure group, which has been banned in
Russia and declared "undesirable."
Kogan's work has previously focused on the North Caucasus region, where her group has
represented people alleging victimization at the hands of authorities. Its activity in the
majority Muslim area has reportedly brought tensions with local leaders, such as Ramzan
Kadyrov, the head of the Republic of Chechnya.
Now the Deputy Chairman of Russia's Security Council, Medvedev, who has also served as
Russia's prime minister, told reporters on Thursday that well-funded foreign groups were using
networks in Russia to "exacerbate the internal political situation in certain regions,
including through Russian non-profit groups they associate with."
He went on to add that these NGOs "depend on internet media, and use various far-fetched
reasons for rewriting the events of our national history." He called this a "large-scale
information campaign, being conducted to discredit the leadership of some specific territories
and Federal Subjects."
In November, the country's State Duma debated new legislation that would expand the
definition of foreign agents, enabling the label to be applied not only to NGOs and media
organizations, but also to ordinary citizensIn 2018, the United States imprisoned a Russian
citizen, Maria Butina, claiming that she was a foreign agent operating on behalf of Moscow.
Authorities allege that she had infiltrated conservative-leaning organizations to promote
better ties between Washington and the Kremlin. She served five months in prison, some of it in
solitary confinement, before being deported back to Russia.
Zeta029 43 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:01 PM
This is a most dangerous situation. Being unable to openly defeat Russia on a battlefield
(not that they didnt try, most recently in Georgia, Ukraine and Syria), the Empire is
focusing on certain NGO and people like Navalny to weaken the leadership of Russian
Federation. This is the undisputed truth and so these measures should be swift and harsh, for
National Security sake.
cangoroo Zeta029 16 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:28 PM
And those NGOs are funded with "printed money" in the Empire. Now Australia has joined the
money-printing party of their big-brother US; at the rate of $5billion a week. Money-printing
means PIRATING money from the holders of their money, including foreign CentralBnks like
China's. It was SEA-PIRACY on which the Empire Britannia was built during the reign of QE1 in
the 16th century. Genes, I guess.
Count_Cash Zeta029 18 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:26 PM
It's a multifaceted interference in Russia. The biggest play is economic , the next play is
internal friction based on wealth disparity, the third is to create perception that
westerners have better rights. The medium is external media, internal media, external courts,
attacks on internal courts and political institutions - But there is one thing the western
strategists haven't figured - nuclear weapons and their deterrent is aimed at preventing not
only military attacks but also other attacks that attempt to politically and economically
dominate Russia. While the west think all this activity has no cost, as was shown in the
places you reference, there can be a military cost for the western games of interference and
pushed far enough it could be a nuclear one. Nuclear Weapons their not just for countering
military threats!
TheFishh 40 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:04 PM
Funded by Soros and Dutch government? There you have it. I wonder what Netherlands and the US
would do, if some organizations operating there were getting money from Moscow. They'd lock
up everyone involved in it. They wouldn't just be told to go back to Russia.
Nonenity TheFishh 16 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:28 PM
They ought to be in OP and making their reports on the war crimes and human rights abuses
there - ongoing since before 1948...
Madbovineuk 1 hour ago 3 Dec, 2020 12:58 PM
Expel all NGOs from Russia especially those with American ties
WhoWantsAIDS Madbovineuk 13 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:31 PM
As an American if Putin wants to send Soros workers or sympathizers home in a box he would be
doing the world a favor. 💯🔮
Count_Cash Madbovineuk 25 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:19 PM
Yes just boot her and the rest out. They are just trouble makers, if they were straight up
they would be running to Iraq or Afghanistan to help people abused by the US.
Timothy-Allen Albertson 1 hour ago 3 Dec, 2020 12:56 PM
Soros, the nazi, needs to be hanged for Crimes Against Humanity. Too bad the Russian
Federation did not imprison this Soros agitator for a long term at hard labor.
She should work all her life, and still I dont think she would repay the harm she did.
Badgecub 1 hour ago 3 Dec, 2020 01:25 PM
Kogan, if you are worried about human rights abuses go to the UK and help Julian Assage
Nonenity Badgecub 18 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:26 PM
And all of those many, many US folks in prison for long periods, mostly for minor offences,
because it was their third time stealing a slice of pizza. You don't hear/read/see it on the
MSM, but these prisoners are all but slave labor and usually for multinational companies like
S...bucks... Indeed in at least two states they are slave labor because they do not even get
the cents (well under a dollar) per hour that prisoners in most states do. And should the
prisoners refuse to do this labor, they often end up in solitary confinement - well known to
be psychological torture...And there are political prisoners as well (not called that, of
course, given who and where they are)...not to mention Guantanamo and the various Black Sites
around the world and controlled by the CIA.... Stephen Kinzer's book on The Poisoner in
Chief...a good read about the post war decades and the human rights abuses by the
exceptionalist nation...
TheFishh Badgecub 35 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:09 PM
Yes. And these sorts of contradictions is what gives away these so-called western human
rights organizations as a bunch of nefarious fakes.
DoubleKnot 1 hour ago 3 Dec, 2020 01:14 PM
NGO - Non-Gentile Organization
TheFishh DoubleKnot 37 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:07 PM
BING!
Marko Podganjek 15 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:29 PM
I thought that such organizations and people were expelled from Russia long ago. Because on
west they want to imprison people that were just on trip in Russia. Not to say if somebody
would get money from Russia. The relations and approaches here has to be comparable on both
sides.
Smanz 20 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:24 PM
Anything linked to Soros generally only exists to create chaos and ruin the country it is in.
dunkie56 8 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:36 PM
i will say it again...throw the West and it's agents provocateurs out of Russia...all Western
companies must leave forthwith and restrict who comes into Russia and tighten the borders!
Preferably raise up the iron curtain once again!
SrJustice 5 minutes ago 3 Dec, 2020 02:39 PM
Politicians in the US think that improving relations with other countries is a bad thing
because they need enemies, enemies are better than friends to have for Washington, very
twisted minds. They just want to scare their people so they can suck more tax money and spend
on the weapons manufacturers, where most of those politician invest their money.
"... I don't disagree with the idea that Trump should go (he is clearly incompetent for this position), but to think that Biden (personally also completely incompetent due to his health condition, and even before that; can you imagine this second rate politician summit with Macron, Merkel, or Putin even if we ignore his current health problems ), in some ways, will be an improvement is pretty optimistic. ..."
"... Biden administration will be especially dangerous in foreign policy where Russiagaters mafia clearly returned to power, (and chickenhawks like Nuland are in demand again; as well several other flavors of "national security parasites".) ..."
"... Both are puppets of approximately the same social force -- the union on neoliberal oligarchy and MIC (aka Uniparty.) Biden mafia simply will be slightly more polished, and less "in your face." But both are brutal gangsters, both domestically and on foreign arena. And that's pretty depressing. And one great service of Trump administration was that it exposed what is behind the fake facade. Biden will try to rebuild this fake facade, this Potemkin village again. that's all the difference. ..."
When left becomes right, progressive become regressive, and fascist becomes anti-fascist,
then we have to invent whole new vocabularies just to discuss the problems that humanity is
facing. What is worse though is that upending the language of political society in this
manner makes the amassed knowledge from the past less accessible to the present. I suppose
that is the point though.
This is pretty interesting thought, thank you very much. Kind of Orwellian ""War
is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength," on a new, more sinister level as in
"this manner makes the amassed knowledge from the past less accessible to the present."
But is reality Henry Ford quote "Any customer can have a car painted any color that he
wants so long as it is black." is perfectly applicable to any US elections and political life
in general.
Some commentators here for some reason think that Biden (yes, this semi-senile Biden, a
marionette from the very beginning; senator from credit card companies; the worst enemy of
working class in Congress ) is somehow preferable to Trump (yes, this Trump, a marionette of
Zionists, the President who completely betrayed his electorate, best friend of billionaires
and Pentagon; kind of Bush III replicating both intellectual level of Bush II and his
policies, including a tax cut for the rich).
I don't disagree with the idea that Trump should go (he is clearly incompetent for
this position), but to think that Biden (personally also completely incompetent due to his
health condition, and even before that; can you imagine this second rate politician summit
with Macron, Merkel, or Putin even if we ignore his current health problems ), in some ways,
will be an improvement is pretty optimistic.
Biden administration will be especially dangerous in foreign policy where Russiagaters
mafia clearly returned to power, (and chickenhawks like Nuland are in demand again; as well
several other flavors of "national security parasites".)
Both are puppets of approximately the same social force -- the union on neoliberal
oligarchy and MIC (aka Uniparty.) Biden mafia simply will be slightly more polished, and less
"in your face." But both are brutal gangsters, both domestically and on foreign arena. And
that's pretty depressing. And one great service of Trump administration was that it exposed
what is behind the fake facade. Biden will try to rebuild this fake facade, this Potemkin
village again. that's all the difference.
"When left becomes right, progressive become regressive, and fascist becomes
anti-fascist, then we have to invent whole new vocabularies just to discuss the problems that
humanity is facing. What is worse though is that upending the language of political society
in this manner makes the amassed knowledge from the past less accessible to the present. I
suppose that is the point though."
Yes, that's what the gaslighing is all about, but the problem - as our self-designated
betters are finding out now - is that you cannot run a sucessful competitive modern society
that way, banana republics do not get to rule the world.
Even ... Henry Ford understood he had to take good care of his employees.
Biden is going to have his hands full without looking for any more trouble.
considering cuomo was responsible for spreading the virus exponentially in the early days, he probably has had more
influence on all of our lives than the others
Story about Fauci, at least at the time was that it was so hospitals wouldn't be liable for deaths among medical
staff. But I think it was completely bad what both Cuomo and Fauci
Dr. Fauci was the trusted expert who intentionally lied to the American people and made things far worse. Cuomo is
directly responsible for why New York's response to the virus was so bad and cost many lives. Bullshit award.
P resident-elect Joe Biden's pick to run the Office of Management and Budget has a history
of defending British ex-spy Christopher Steele's
discredited anti-Trump dossier.
Years of controversial claims about the Trump-Russia controversy, particularly about the
dossier funded in part by Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, presents one of several obstacles
for Neera Tanden, a longtime Democratic operative, to achieve Senate confirmation next
year.
A significant question that remains is how the two Senate runoff races in Georgia shake out
in January, with control of the upper chamber hanging in the balance. Tanden is sure to meet
stiff opposition from Republicans, who will be led by Sen. Mitch McConnell, whom Tanden
derisively tweeted in August 2019,
"Stacey Abrams just called McConnell 'Moscow Mitch.' Love it."
In selecting Tanden on
Monday, Biden described the president
of the left-wing Center for American Progress as "a leading architect and advocate of policies
designed to support working families." Tanden worked on Bill Clinton's successful run in 1992
and Barack Obama's successful presidential run in 2008. She was also an adviser on Hillary
Clinton's successful Democratic primary effort in 2016 and the failed general election run that
November.
Not mentioned in her Biden transition team biography was the role Tanden played in promoting
unsubstantiated claims throughout the Trump-Russia controversy.
Tanden launched the
"Moscow Project" in 2017, and after Buzzfeed published Steele's dossier in January 2017,
Tanden's think tank released a
statement saying, "The intelligence dossier presents profoundly disturbing allegations;
ones that should shake every American to the core." Tanden went on to defend the Steele dossier
repeatedly on Twitter, attacking those who critiqued the FBI for relying on its claims to
obtain Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act authority against former Trump campaign associate
Carter Page and implying that critics of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation were doing
Russia's bidding.
"Make Chris Steele the next James Bond," Tanden tweeted in January
2017.
In a tweet about Rep. Devin Nunes's FISA memo in February 2018, which criticized the FBI's
surveillance of Page and its use of the dossier, the Washington Examiner's Byron York
noted that "no FISA warrant would have been sought from the FISA Court without the Steele
dossier information." Tanden responded by saying, "Even
if this is true, hasn't the dossier been mostly proven to be true? It's amazing how comfortable
the likes of Byron York are happy to run interference for Russians intervening in our
elections." Tanden followed up with another tweet claiming that the
"dossier has been mostly established as right."
Tanden's "Moscow Project" also
released a flawed critique of the Republican FISA memo, with Tanden defending the FBI's
surveillance. In addition, Tanden tweeted in April 2018 that
the dossier was "started with funding by a GOP megadonor."
Although the conservative Free Beacon had hired the
opposition research firm Fusion GPS, it said in October 2017 that it "had no knowledge of or
connection to the Steele dossier." It later emerged that Steele was not commissioned by Fusion
GPS (and did not begin compiling his dossier) until Clinton campaign lawyer
Marc Elias hired Fusion.
"What parts of the dossier have been disproven?" Tanden tweeted in January 2019.
"I will wait."
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's December 2019 report and subsequent
declassifications undermined Steele's claims in the dossier. Horowitz said the Trump-Russia
investigation concealed exculpatory information from the FISA court, and he
criticized the Justice Department and FBI for at least 17 "significant errors and
omissions"
related to the FISA warrants against Page and for the bureau's reliance on Steele.
Declassified footnotes show the FBI knew Steele's dossier may have been compromised by
Russian disinformation . Horowitz said FBI interviews with Steele's main source, U.S.-based
and Russian-trained lawyer Igor Danchenko, "raised significant questions about the reliability
of the Steele election reporting."
FBI Director Christopher Wray called the FISA findings "utterly unacceptable" this
year and concurred with the DOJ's conclusions that at least two of the four FISA warrants
against Page amounted to illegal surveillance.
Nearly all the FISA signatories -- Deputy Attorney General
Sally Yates , Deputy Attorney General
Rod Rosenstein , fired FBI Director
James Comey , and fired FBI Deputy Director
Andrew McCabe -- indicated under oath they wouldn't have signed off on the surveillance if
they knew then what they know now, and a declassified FBI spreadsheet showed the
lack of corroboration for Steele's claims.
Other Russia-related claims Tanden has made could present sticking points during her
confirmation process.
She tweeted on Oct. 31, 2016,
that President Trump was a Russian "puppet" in part because there was a "Trump server connected
to Russian bank" and tweeted again in December
2016 that Trump may have gotten "talking points from the server at Trump Tower connected to
Russia."
The
claim that a Russian Alfa Bank server was secretly communicating with a server at Trump
Tower, also pushed by Steele, emerged in 2016, but Horowitz noted the FBI "concluded by early
February 2017 that there were no such links," and the Senate Intelligence Committee's August
report
did not find "covert communications between Alfa Bank and Trump Organization personnel." Jake
Sullivan, Biden's pick for national security adviser, also pushed the refuted Alfa
Bank claim in 2016.
The week after Trump's victory, following reports that Russian cyberactors had targeted a
number of state election systems, Tanden mused, "Why would hackers hack in unless they could
change results?" The next day, she pushed back against
criticism she received, tweeting, "Funny, I don't remember saying Russian hackers stole
Hillary's victory." There is
no evidence that Russian hackers changed any votes in 2016.
"Mueller found Russian interference in the election. He also found Trump coordinated with
Russia. These are facts," Tanden tweeted in October.
Although Mueller's investigation concluded in 2019 that the Russian government
interfered in a "sweeping and systematic fashion," the report "did not establish that
members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its
election interference activities."
After the report's release, Tanden tweeted that
"Mueller has failed the country" and "Adam Schiff > Robert Mueller." Earlier this year,
Schiff released dozens of House Intelligence Committee witness interviews that showed Obama's
top national security officials
testified they hadn't seen direct evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
I will henceforth refer to the MSM as the regime media or RM.
We reluctantly turned off Tucker last week. I felt bad about it as after watching him for
a few years my wife slowly left behind her liberal north eastern views and came around to the
right side of things. I'll thank him for that.
Szilard Demeter, a ministerial commissioner and head of the Petofi Literary
Museum in Budapest, used highly provocative language to describe Hungarian-American financier
George Soros and his purported influence over EU policy.
"Europe is George Soros' gas chamber," the government-appointed cultural commissioner
wrote in an op-ed.
"Poison gas flows from the capsule of a multicultural open society, which is deadly to the
European way of life."
He went on to
characterize Soros as "the liberal Fuhrer," insisting that the businessman's
"liber-aryan army deifies him more than did Hitler's own."
bristolwind shadow1369 19 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 02:07 PM
Now look at the US of Zimbabwe, banana republic with Mugabe level stolen election, fascist
brown shirts (BLM, ANTIFA) beating people on the streets, burning places of worship and
private business, eliminating Trump black supporters execution style. Plutocrats,
authoritarian to the core, control Uniparty, MSM and social media forbidding any dissent.
And, as even not much trusted, Gingerich said : IT IS VERBOTEN to mention one person name
(Soros) even on treasonous fox news!! In the future USA will be longing to have fair and
transparent election as people of Belarus or Venezuela. At this point Russia and Hungary are
beacons of free world. Simple because they throw out former Nazi quislin
J_P_Franklin 23 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 10:36 AM
"Europe is George Soros' gas chamber," the government-appointed cultural commissioner wrote
in an op-ed. " Poison gas flows from the capsule of a multicultural open society , which is
deadly to the European way of life."
Cryptoid
Cyaxares_425bc 21 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 12:37 PM
What RT DID NOT mention, is that as a teenager during World War II, Soros aided the Gestapo in
Budapest, by pointing out the homes & apartments of wealthy jews. And then he helped
inventory the loot - as well as load the furniture, paintings, carpets, and heirlooms onto
trucks. On CBS's program "60 minutes" he states that these 'were the best years of his life'.
Ohhho 22 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 11:49 AM
George Soros (aka Georgy Schwartz) is just a tool: he keeps the funds that the British-American
elites channeled from he British budget into his "private" account in that famous "British
Pound speculation"! Now for years he is financing all kind of covert and not so covert
operations by MI6 and CIA without any control or supervision from the state: nice!
EnkisDaughter 22 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 11:32 AM
Gyorgy Schwartz (his real name) and his father (Theodore Schwartz ) made money by selling their
own people (Soros is Jewish by birth) to the Nazis; these people then went to the concentration
camps. The Hungarians were allies of the Nazis and the Schwartz family certainly made money
from them.
CA_Sue 16 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 04:57 PM
I think the Hungarian commissioner had every right to say what he did. Soros hides behind his
NGO's and other organizations and has funded mayhem and horrible violence in America. If Poland
and Hungary want to protect their culture, so be it, it's THEIRS to protect.
Bianca882008 21 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 11:57 AM
And how creepy is it that EU conditions its COVID aid! So if these two countries do not pass
legislation on transgender rights, and few other gender-choice related issues, they are
deprived if aid in the middle of pandemic! That is militant liberalism. This is not about
rights, it is about SUPREMACY. It is to prove that liberal agenda can shove anything down a
nation's throat -- when a country is weak and needs money. It is about bringing to power those
that will champion the new "values". And kick out of power the conservatives, the nationalist
old guard. There us a method to this militant Soros madness. Perfect name -- liber-aryans!
veneziano49454 20 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 01:23 PM
I think that Hungary People has many reasons. Mr Open Society has ruined the World and again he
is ruining the USA. He is behind the Dominion Voting through his UK friend CEO of Smartmatic
Software. He is continuing to ruine the Italy after the Italian currency speculation in the
1992. We Italians hate him. He is continuing to invade the Italy by immigrants. Through the ONG
paid from Open Society. And now warning american people. Because he is thinking to a Monetary
war against the USD. He want create a Global Currency. The Great Reset begin with fraud against
the USA President. This is an obstacle to eliminate.
HandyGlock17 20 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 12:52 PM
Bravo Hungary, you are putting principles OVER filthy profit. You love your nation, people, and
culture more than dirty money. You put all other countries who are ruled by traitors to shame.
rolvik 22 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 11:29 AM
"Poison gas flows from the capsule of a multicultural open society, which is deadly to the
European way of life." this is 100% correct. EU puppets should arrest that criminal terrorist
soros . only Hungary and Poland dare to speak. "Israeli Embassy in Budapest expressed similar
outrage." is soros citizen of Israel?? of not, what should Israel have to have with soros??
beside they are complete terrorist criminal country, adn they are last to give anybody morale
lessons . "There is no place for connecting the worst crime in human history, or its
perpetrators, to any contemporary debate, no matter how essential," the Israeli diplomatic
mission wrote in a tweet. that is biggest lie in history, and even if that lie is true it is
definitely not biggest crime. and soros crime is way bigger then Hitler's. terrorist soros
sponsor genocide of whole European continent, and criminals including Israel support that
mumbojumbo272 22 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 11:25 AM
Open society, two nice words hiding horrible goals . Just like dissecting humanbeings in the
whomb of women under terms like: pro-choice and other terms eluding the true facts .
Robin Olsen 21 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 12:36 PM
The Jewish response is indeed curious seeing as though Soros built his fortune by stealing the
'left behind' wealth of deported Jews during WW2 while hiding out posing as a Nazi. One could
almost define that as a act of genocidal treason right? But Hungry and Poland are funny...big
problem with E.U and Soros but no problems accepting thousands of Soros supporting American
troops to fight off 'the Russian bogey man' . Flip flopping around like a Tuna caught out of
the water.
Dirk45 18 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 03:58 PM
Mr Demeter is referring to the deliberate liberal policy of promoting mass immigration from the
Third World, and thereafter using incessant indoctrination and legal coercion to promote mass
integration. The aim of Mr Soros , the EU, and Western governments can only be to destroy the
racial and consequently cultural identity of the entire native population of Europe. Relating
this to the extermination of millions of Jews is therefore entirely appropriate, and should in
no way be considered as somehow devaluing or depreciating it. To contrast the two situations is
pointless. The fate suffered by millions of Jews in Nazi camps was immediate and brutal; the
fate suffered by hundreds of millions of Europeans spread across an entire continent from the
Urals to the Atlantic is less so, but the intention of the perpetrators in both cases is
identical.
SheepNotHuman 12 hours ago 30 Nov, 2020 01:06 AM
George Soros runs America through his many fake politicians, DA, Judges, NGO's funded by him.
Actually he represents the Rothchild house for the Royals Global Cartel. No surprise that
Israel cover for him being the Rothchild is father of Israel. They are the destroyers of
humanity who use the MSM that they own to manufacture consent in your mind. Lone wolf, hear
your calling and do your duty for humanity.
Morsi_X 1 day ago 29 Nov, 2020 12:10 PM
Poison gas flows from the capsule of a multicultural open society, which is deadly to the
European way of life." multiculturalism and over population is a hindering within the United
States and stopping these younger progressives from getting some of their socialist policies
through because they can't look around and grasp that socialism doesn't work with an eternal
population that is approaching (or maybe already there) 350 million then onto 400 million with
a bunch of multi cultural people, like Armenians which never seen an American flag in their
lives, along with a bunch of other non-indigenous and non-founding immigrants but they
constantly yelling in the street and can't even pass a civics class.
sukmiwangyak 23 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 01:44 PM
Soros is far more evil than Hiltler, it's not even close by a long shot. For Israel to defend
Soros is like Judas running a trust fund. I always wondered why didn't Israel take action
against Soros who confessed he helped to Nazi's to catch Jews, then he would steal their
wealth; he said " it was his best memory's" ! Hitler wasn't as bad as the Bushes, or the
Clintons, he knew the Jews was like wild animals that's the reason he tried to give them to the
USA or other states, but they choice to turn their backs on them. Even if we hung Soros today,
he still would've gotten away with so much. Just like Hillary he is both Mossad & CIA,
protected by the Jesuits. We need to first condemn the color revolutions which is paid for with
the " Open Society Foundation " Secondly we need to close all secrete foundations and make them
accountable to the Rule of Law. Thirdly lets exterminate people like Soros's, Rockefeller's,
Rothschild's, Clinton's, Biden's, Bush's from this world for mankind's sake. Lastly we need
more people like Szilard Demeter.
Lloyd Hart 16 hours ago 29 Nov, 2020 08:55 PM
Soros was a member of the SS during the war & still is. He only pretends to be liberal but
his immigrant policies have more to do with breaking unions with cheap migrant and insecure
labour. So he is still a nazi in my book. Crushing uncooperative poorer nation's currencies is
his institutional nazism.
Human Rights are not intrinsic. They are a post-war invention (1948) by the UN, something
created so everybody could sleep better at night (or be invaded, if you're a fan of post-Cold
War History).
Natural rights are just as much the figment of some people's imagination as human
rights.
None of these have any existence or any objective, scientific, physical basis, they are just
intellectual notions, like money, gods and other fancy ideas. The majority of people might
agree on them from time to time, but they surely aren't eternal, and any system based on
these has a limited lifespan.
@ CJ 70 Natural rights are just as much the figment of some people's imagination as human
rights.
No. We all have the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Those rights are codified by the UN in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights .
...included...
Article I - All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are
endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of
brotherhood.
Article 2 - Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language,
religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other
status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political,
jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person
belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation
of sovereignty.
Article 3 - Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person...
here
17/ (watching for the "ear-reddening move") Quote Tweet Techno Fog @Techno_Fog · Nov
25 Weissmann protests b/c the Flynn case implicates the corrupt Special Counsel. They didn't
prosecute Flynn b/c they thought he was guilty (FBI agents didn't think Flynn lied).
Team Mueller went after Flynn so they could build an obstruction case against Trump. Corrupt
motive. twitter.com/AWeissmann_/st
On the issue of voter fraud, the right has sullied real concerns with ballot legitimacy in
highly mismanaged black cities with Bircherist bufoonery. The last of the MAGA faithful -- Alex
Jones, Steve Bannon, Q-Anon, Mike Cernovich, Dinesh D'Souza, Nick Fuentes, Ali Alexander, One
America News, and the Zionist opportunists at Newsmax -- have been trying to cancel more
sensible right-wing populists like Tucker Carlson, Ryan Gidursky, Pedro Gonzalez and others for
expressing skepticism about some of the Trump campaign's narratives on the election.
Like him or not, Tucker is a serious political commentator that has tried and failed to
provide coherence and principles to Trumpism for the last four years. When Tucker asked Sidney
Powell for evidence regarding her claim that Castro, Hugo Chavez, Nicolas Maduro and the
Chinese Communist Party stole millions of votes from Trump in an international Marxist coup, he
was subjected to insults, boycotts and unhinged shrieking in response. "THANK YOU SEAN HANNITY
FOR HOLDING THE LINE. THANK YOU TUCKER FOR THROWING US UNDER THE BUS," wrote Nick Fuentes.
Tucker was
vindicated when Trump's team abruptly severed ties with Powell and shelved her circus act.
But that hasn't stopped online Trumpistanis from speculating that Tucker's red bracelet is a
sign that he is a secret kabbalah
practitioner or that he's been a double agent for the satanic pedophile cartel led by Tom
Hanks put in place just for this moment. For Jews concerned that Tucker has been promoting the
potent combination of nationalism and economic populism to deplorables since 2016, it is a
welcome
amusement to see him being sacrificed on the alter of Orange Man Good and traded in for a
harmless lapdog like Hannity.
30 of 31 voter fraud lawsuits filed by Team Trump have been tossed. The whole thing is
starting to look like a Birther-style publicity stunt to help Trump monetize his following
after January. The
most recent defeat , a lawsuit demanding 7,000,000 votes be invalidated in Pennsylvania,
did not provide any compelling evidence for fraud or malfeasance.
Four years ago, Bernie expressed skepticism about mass immigration while Trump's original
campaign hinted at a public health care option and a war against Wall Street. These real world
issues impact real world people, and it allowed for a cross-front alliance of ordinary citizens
against the elite. The two candidates traded disenfranchised and largely white working class
voters throughout the primary, then the general.
But now there are actors on both sides trying to drag things back to personalities,
political tribalism and inanity. The COVID issue has drawn out the petty tyrants on the left
but also the UN-world-government conspiracy theorists of the right, with actual state relief
for desperate working people suffering from the lockdown being drowned out.
For Jewish gatekeepers of the phony right like Ezra Levant , "The Great Reset"
is much more palatable and less dangerous than the real issue of the Great Replacement. Former
Never
Trumper Mark Levin has worked with Sean Hannity to scrub 2020 Trumpism of its
anti-establishment and anti-globalist soul to try and transform it into another
Tea Party style Reaganite collection point for false consciousness held together by fumes
of Trump's personality cult.
There is a silver lining. As niches suffering from the two types of TDS -- Trump Derangement
Syndrome and Trump Delusion Syndrome -- duke it out, the liberal kleptocracy is still having
trouble restoring "normalcy."
The Biden Democrats are eager to betray and start purging the Bernie wing of their party on
economic and foreign policy matters. The GOP, whose establishment has no organic support and
never will, has decided to fake it until they make it and pretend like Trump was never
born.
This forced reboot is bound to meet challenges in an era of high unemployment and social
chaos. People are sick of voting for a "lesser of two evils."
There is lots of talk on the left and right about starting new parties to challenge the Wall
Street uniparty. The Movement for
a People's Party , an endeavor that has recruited big names like Jimmy Dore and Cornell
West, is looking to establish itself and begin attacking the Democratic party from the
left.
Meanwhile, right-populists who aren't hung up on Trump are beginning to talk of an
"America First Party."
The National Justice Party, a political construct that isn't afraid to appeal to white workers
or transcend traditional ideas of left and right, is also starting to gain momentum.
In the battle of corn syrup vs soy, of stupid vs gay, we the people deserve better. The
populi in populist can be described as being part of the radical center: left on economics and
right on social issues. A white worker should not have to vote for the anti-white Democrats
just to have a shot at affordable health care, nor should a rural family have to vote for the
Paul Singer funded Zionist GOP in hopes of being treated with dignity. A grounded and united
movement that explicitly rejects both parties and can obtain what we want must arise from the
ashes of back-stabbed Trumpists and Bernie fans.
The populi in populist can be described as being part of the radical center: left on
economics and right on social issues. A white worker should not have to vote for the
anti-white Democrats just to have a shot at affordable health care, nor should a rural family
have to vote for the Paul Singer funded Zionist GOP in hopes of being treated with dignity. A
grounded and united movement that explicitly rejects both parties and can obtain what we want
must arise from the ashes of back-stabbed Trumpists and Bernie fans.
The median wage in the USA in 2019 was $34,000 / year. If Trumpstein had done even one
tiny little, teensy weensy, itsy bitsy thing for the under $34k working poor .he would have
easily retained enough votes to keep his job. Instead, his domestic policy goals centered
around taking basic health insurance away from the working poor (even during a pandemic),
while giving billions away to his wall street pals, his relatives, giant corporations, and of
course his yid sponsors. Example: Fed Ex paid zero income tax in 2017, 2018, 2019. Let's see
how long a modern society can function when the top 0.1% are worth more than the bottom
80%.
"The populi in populist can be described as being part of the radical center: left on
economics and right on social issues. "
Indeed -- it does sound good.
You seem quite convinced that it was Tucker Carlson's version of events that was true
concerning this phone call to Sidney Powell. You know she disputes this version. Also I read
that Carlson did not make the call himself, but rather had a staffer do it.
One might be a little suspicious that perhaps a staffer put a little too much effort into
getting Ms. Powell to appear on the show, and perhaps embellished or 'interpreted' the phone
call out of concern for their job.
One might also consider it a bit petty and unprofessional to immediately report a rude
phone call on the Carlson news program, and not once but twice.
Are we to believe that Sidney Powell is the only source who has ever been rude on a phone
call with a staffer from the news media? Is it good journalism to publicly attack potential
sources because they said no the first time you asked?
In my opinion it seems a bit hard to believe that Ms. Powell had a meltdown with either
Carlson or a staffer on a phone call. She seems much more the type to just politely say
goodbye and hang up.
But let's assume that she did have a meltdown. Given the circumstances and time crunch
she's under, wouldn't a reasonable person assume she was acting badly because of stress and
she probably didn't mean it?
Carlson couldn't wait longer than the next morning before he planned to publicly shame her
for it? And in the middle of what must be, for her, the biggest and most important thing
she's ever done?
What happened to Tucker Carlson's philosophy of kindness towards one another? And do you
put any stock in the fact that so many people who watch (or watched) Tucker Carlson on a
regular basis were genuinely shocked by what he did? I know I was.
Everything about this seems very strange. If a normally reasonable person like Powell made
crazy sounding claims, why respond with such hostility? Does anybody remember the guy who
built his own rocket so he could prove the Earth was flat? All we had to do was wait.
And as for these voting machine companies having ties to Venezuela in the past, well
that's true. None other than Lou Dobbs on CNN reported this and the whole thing ended up in
congressional hearings iirc.
I have no opinion about Sidney Powell's claims. She seems respectable enough to withhold
judgement until she shows us what she's got. And if even a part of what she claims is true, I
for one will be pretty concerned.
The United States' election victory of Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden has yet to
be officially confirmed. That requires the 500-plus Electoral College comprising the 50 federal
states to cast the final vote when the constitutional body meets on December 14. Biden holds a
commanding lead of over 300 delegates in the Electoral College, more than 70 above Donald
Trump's quota and decisively more than the 270 threshold required for election to the White
House.
Nonetheless, already one thing is indisputably clear. Biden's nominal victory from the
popular vote tallies is glaring proof that Russia did not interfere in the American
presidential ballot. Not in 2020. And not, we may discern, in 2016, nor in any other election.
Yet the silence in US media over this obvious conclusion is deafening.
Four years of frenetic and unsubstantiated allegations of "Russian interference" have
disappeared overnight, it seems. Poof! Gone! As if by a magic conjuring trick. Now you see it,
now you don't, so to speak.
The New York Times has declared the recent
presidential contest a "great election.. a resounding success free of fraud". The Department of
Homeland Security pronounced the election to be the "most secure in American history." Other US
media outlets have jettisoned supposed political neutrality and can barely contain their
elation at Biden's electoral victory.
But hold on a moment. In the months and weeks leading up to the November election, there was
a fever pitch in US media among politicians, national security chiefs, pundits and anonymous
intelligence sources that Russia was allegedly stepping up "interference efforts" to get Trump
re-elected. Those evidence-free claims were predicated on the equally absurd assertion that
Trump was a Manchurian candidate for the Kremlin. That "Russiagate" fable was first spun in
2016 and for the past four years elaborated into a tangled web to "explain" how a maverick
former reality TV star had been elected to the White House.
Suddenly, however, the Democrats and supportive US media are now asserting that the voting
process was impeccable and unblemished by any malfeasance. Of course they would say that in
order to bolster legitimacy of Biden's win against the Republican White House incumbent Donald
Trump. But the thundering takeaway which the US political class and media are bizarrely
ignoring is that Russia did not interfere not in the 2020 race nor in any other election.
Russia has always categorically said it is not meddling in US politics and its electoral
process. Turns out that Russia is de facto vindicated in its protestations against American
slander.
The "Russiagate" nonsense was hatched by Democrats, their supportive media and intelligence
agencies because they could not come to terms with the reality of why Trump beat the then
establishment-ordained candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016. Could it have been because Clinton
and the Democrat party was repudiated by popular sentiment due to perceived corruption and
overseas wars? No, another "explanation" had to be found. And the US political establishment
came up with the "Russian interference" narrative.
No matter that the Mueller investigation found after 22 months of probing and hundreds of
millions of taxpayer-dollars spent that there was no evidence of "Russia collusion" with the
Trump campaign. Nevertheless, Mueller and the Democrats, their media and intelligence backers,
persisted in the spurious notion that Russia meddled in the 2016 election and, allegedly, was
continuing to meddle, purportedly with even more sophisticated, nefarious techniques.
How can US politicians, intelligence officials and media credibly claim that Russia
interfered in 2016 and in mid-term congressional elections in 2018, but now in 2020 it
evidently did not? The most logical explanation is simply that Russia never did.
Four years of hysterical American accusations against Russia have transpired to just that:
bogus hysteria. US politicians, media and so-called intelligence gurus should be held to
account for fabricating what is perhaps the biggest hoax ever played on the American
public.
Though, one can be sure that they won't be held accountable in a formal way. Venal power
doesn't work like that. And the US political system has built-in layers of self-protection for
the political class never to be prosecuted. But in an informal no less real way, the system is
being held to account by the wider public who are increasingly holding it in contempt and
distrust. The political class and their plaything media are losing the moral authority to
govern. This goes beyond mere Trump Derangement Syndrome. The systematic lying and deception
over alleged Russian interference perpetrated on such a grand scale has fatally damaged the
credibility of American institutions. Not just in the US, but around the world too.
Equally lamentable is the corrosive, damaging effect that the bogus hysteria has had on
bilateral US-Russia relations and international tensions. Relations are at a dangerous all time
low comparable to the depth of the Cold War. This has in turn sabotaged diplomatic efforts to
strengthen arms controls and global security. The anti-Russia hysteria has led to the US
abandonment of key nuclear weapons treaties, the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty
and soon the New START.
The Russophobia that has been whipped up as a political weapon against Trump over the past
four years is not something that can be easily put aside. It has engendered deep-seated
hostility against Russia. During the presidential debates, Joe Biden vowed that the would take
a tough stand against Russia for "interfering" in US politics. The incoming administration is
being mentally held hostage by its own Russophobia which was cultivated on entirely false
grounds.
It is disturbing how the US nation has been dragged into an obsession about alleged Russian
malign activities, an obsession which turns out to be a mirage. Not for the first time either.
Recall the Cold War Red Scares and McCarthyite witch-hunts which poisoned American society.
The implications are daunting. How can bilateral relations with Russia be restored? How can
an intelligent dialogue be conducted with a nation whose leaders are so self-deluded and
irrational?
Moreover, this is a nation whose leaders presume to have the prerogative to use overwhelming
military force whenever they deem so. It is not unlike the driver of a juggernaut vehicle on a
precipice who is hurtling along while out of his brain on misconceptions.
Earlier this year, our friend and colleague
Stephen Cohen passed away. His contributions to the field of Russian, East European, and
Eurasian Studies will be felt for years to come. Professor Cohen was a historian, but his
legacy extends far beyond his scholarly work. Every year, the Stephen Cohen
Fellowship -- established on Professor Cohen's initiative and supported by Katrina vanden Heuvel
and the Kat Foundation -- funds the graduate education for master's students in the Department
of Russian & Slavic Studies at NYU. Professor Cohen has also helped enable doctoral
students to conduct dissertation research in Russia through the Cohen-Tucker Fellowship .
As we prepare to celebrate Thanksgiving in the United States, we give thanks to Stephen
Cohen for not only his work in the REEES field but for the generosity he, Katrina vanden
Heuvel, and the Kat Foundation have shown to budding Russia scholars. We honor him today by
publishing the testimonials of some of current and former students who have benefitted from
Cohen Fellowships.
Natasha Bluth (Cohen Fellowship)
The Stephen Cohen Fellowship enabled me to continue my studies of the former Soviet Union,
not only easing the financial burden of graduate school, but also providing the opportunity to
merge journalistic training with area studies, engage with a wide range of scholars and
regional specialists, and conduct field research in Ukraine. The support and encouragement
Stephen Cohen offered at our annual fellowship alumni dinners also inspired me to pursue a PhD
in sociology in order to explore post-Soviet civil society, nationalism, and gender from a
social-scientific perspective.
Michael Coates (Cohen-Tucker Fellowship)
During the 2018-19 academic year, I held a Cohen-Tucker Dissertation Fellowship, which I
used to fund over a year of archival research in Russia on the history of the Great Soviet
Encyclopedia. The fellowship allowed me to visit more than a dozen archives in Moscow and Saint
Petersburg, and to copy thousands of pages of original documents. Had I not been able to carry
out this archival work, I would not have been able to write my dissertation. The travel that
the Fellowship enabled was also personally significant to me, because I had never been to
Russia before I arrived in Moscow for my research year, even though I had already been studying
the country and its language for several years. It is one thing to read books about a
particular place, but actually experiencing life there first-hand is quite another, and has
been essential to the development of my understanding of the region. I am extremely grateful to
Prof. Cohen and Ms. vanden Heuvel for their generosity in funding the next generation of Russia
specialists.
Stephen F. Cohen performed a great service in the last four years as he relentlessly
refuted the great Russiagate hoax which not only distorted our political life but seriously
wounded US-Russia relations for years to come. That hoax is a threat to world peace and Prof.
Cohen from the very first saw through it. Both in his writings for The Nation and his near
weekly conversations with John Batchelor of ABC radio rebutted it clearly, eloquently and at
times with good humor. How very much he is missed.
Moneycircus , Nov 26, 2020 5:47 PM Reply to
Moneycircus
"During the Cold War, the vast majority of states overthrown were left-leaning or
socialist governments aligned with the Eastern Bloc."
I take issue with this. The great movement after the collapse of the British Empire was
autonomy and, in attempting to throw off the plantation class, that meant land distribution
as a response to popular pressure, regardless of political colour.
In short it was nationalism, which can be left or right.
As for the U.S. it was just business. Both Allen Dulles and his brother were shareholders
in the Boston/United Fruit Company – and one of their first "happenings" was to defeat
the threat of redistribution and secure land for their own private profit .
Even more important than land distribution was equal access to natural resources ,
beginning with water and firewood and extending to minerals. That is why Bolivia's Evo
Morales came to power and why he was ousted.
U.S. regime change was primarily the CIA acting as muscle for the people who had founded
it: the Wall Street bankers, lawyer and associated corporations.
"Left leaning" was the excuse. This is why the CIA and State Department armed Castro while
halting weapon sales to Fulgencio Batista, as documented by U.S. ambassador to Cuba at the
time, Earl T. Smith.
The only explanation for this is that the CIA expected Castro to become another Batista or
it wanted a boogeyman in the western hemisphere as a justification for actions it had in
mind.
There is even a convincing argument that the Bay of Pigs was a ruse in order to provide
leverage against JFK. Nov 26, 2020 6:38 PM Reply to
Moneycircus
Agreed. At the same time that Rockefeller and Kissinger were pushing for an opening with
communist China and forging business deals with Chinese officials, they were also working to
orchestrate a coup against socialist Salvador Allende in Chile. Allende wasn't aligned with
the Eastern Bloc. He was a threat because of his nationalization program and its impact on
corporate interests in Chile, banking and copper mining among others. The 'communist' thing
was a pretext, as it had been when they overthrew Arbenz in Guatemala.
For Rockefeller, Kissinger and associates it was simply about serving Wall Street
interests, and the CIA was their enforcement arm. They have been willing to work with
communists, fascists, and anyone else who help advance their economic and global objectives.
However, I don't doubt that many CIA covert operators doing the dirty work during the Cold
War were true believers in the anti-communist crusade.
Researcher , Nov 26, 2020 6:42 PM Reply to
Moneycircus
Most of it's a ruse. I expect Bay of Pigs was some kind of intentional ruse. Didn't JFK
reject Operation Northwoods in favor of keeping Cuba communist to fuel the Cold War?
I don't even think JFK was planning to disband the CIA. I just think LBJ was far more
powerful within the cryptocracy and wanted JFK and Bobby Kennedy out of the way because he
was an ambitious psychopath. The Killing of the King was a ritual to inflict psychological
trauma on the American public and to show those working within the system that nobody is
safe.
Moneycircus , Nov 26, 2020 6:53 PM Reply to
Researcher
For all the talk about the defining role of the American corporation, the country's wealth
was largely secured by supplanting European empires. That did not happen once the "west" had
been settled or the internal opportunities exhausted -- it anticipated the decline of
European empires, starting well before the Monroe Doctrine of 1823.
To put it another way, how many of America's ruling families were not imperialists?
Grafter , Nov 26, 2020 5:13 PM
After reading that it is clear we will be entering a dark and dangerous era where those
who own and control the media , corrupt the foundations and operations of their own
government and believe in their psychopathic doctrine of "exceptionalism" will ensure that we
will be taken to the edge of a precipice. Their greed for power and financial gain is
limitless and as evidenced by the Covid scam we appear to be helpless regards whatever malign
agenda they wish to implement.
ByTom Fowdy , a British writer and analyst of politics and international
relations with a primary focus on East Asia While Joe Biden is a more civil representation
of the US than Donald Trump, he won't significantly change the foreign policy of the outgoing
president. America will still be hyper-aggressive, but in a more courteous way. " America is
back! " said Joe
Biden this week, as he prepares to take over as president. It's a sentiment that has, of
course, been championed by liberals, but what exactly does it mean? And did America ever really
go away?
If you ask any critic of Donald Trump, the answer is quite obvious. They will point to his
erratic behaviour, his negation of alliances, his apparent abrogation of leadership and the
damage he has done to America's standing around the world. Biden, of course, has pledged to end
all of that, vowing to steer the US back to dignity and respect, to be a country admired rather
than loathed and to promote 'American values' abroad, which Trump downplayed with his '
America First ' doctrine.
For
liberals , Biden's victory has been packaged as a supposed ' catch all ' solution to
America's international problems, which apparently have been caused exclusively by Trump. The
current president isn't representative of a broader pathology within America's socio-economic
order, but simply a bad smell which will eventually pass on. Therefore, " America is
back ."
But this denies the bigger problem at hand, that America never really went away. Trump was
not a coincidence, an accident or a mere mistake, he was a physical manifestation of what
America truly is and a continuation of what it has always done, albeit in a blunt and
unpleasant package.
Biden is not such a contemptible individual, but he merely represents America with a 'mask
on,' a kinder and more humane version of the same thing, the same America which has waged war
and caused chaos around the world for centuries.
Trump is a living, breathing manifestation of the country's vices, who makes many Americans
feel uncomfortable. As a mega-rich, privileged and egotistical individual, he not only
highlighted the deep inequality of the US and its system, he treated all his opponents and
rivals with utter disrespect, cheated in his dealings with others and using a form of
gangster-like extortion as his primary mode of
diplomacy.
For example, he regularly tried to deliver one-sided, preferential terms for the US by
strangling other countries with one-sided tariffs, sanctions and
threats of annihilation, including nations that are supposed to be allies. Rivals were to
be crushed mercilessly. It was ' law of the jungle ' politics, tactics derived from his
real-estate days. It is no wonder America's image suffered.
On a personal level, Biden is not like Trump and, of course, he vows not to be. He is not
inherently dislikeable, yet that is precisely the point: the system he represents is very much
the same thing. It will be just as aggressive to the world, which is in America's DNA, but in a
less obvious, callous manner. And, so, it is hard to argue America is back, because it never
went away.
Let's pause and question why Trump was
despised , including by the so-called ' never Trumpers. ' It wasn't for malign
actions across the world, it was because of ' him ' as a person. The US establishment,
for one, only ever truly criticized Trump's foreign policy when it was not ' aggressive
' enough, such as his attempt to make peace with North
Korea . When he threatened to " totally destroy " the country, there was silence.
Similarly, his cold war approach to China received no criticism, only bipartisan support.
Thus the 'issue' with Trump was not so much what he did, but how he did it. Objections to
the president never represented complaints about the US system as a whole, but that he simply
did not ' live up ' to it. America First was disliked because it focused on naked
self-interest for the US and did not try to market its cause as something virtuous and heroic,
which the longstanding legacies of wars, bombings, meddling in other countries and other
interventions have all been marketed as.
In pre-Trump America, the Iraq war (which Biden supported) was not a brazen attempt to
control oil, but a ' fight for freedom ' against evil. And, yet, by normal US standards,
George
W. Bush is considered acceptable, while Trump is the problem.
Given this, Biden represents a ' reset ' to the apparent normal, where America
doesn't act so obviously like a charlatan but 'pretends' it is the good guy and is worthy of
respect. Trump's brazen America First doctrine, which was so blatant in its intentions, will be
replaced again with the righteous zeal of US exceptionalism that masks its interests behind
bleeding-heart altruism.
And this is what Biden means by " America is back ." He is kinder, but not softer, he
is more likeable, but not trustworthy, he is more respectable, yet no less treacherous and more
tolerable, yet just as ruthless, and this is how it has always been. Trump did not diminish
America, he showed us what it really is and ever more tactfully will it continue.
Trump the populist has been greatly disappointing. His accidental gift has been giving
reason for the swamp critters to out themselves. It has been hilarious to watch them and
their press pets talk about how things will go back to normal with Biden. Also how the good
and kind their war machine is. What I am stuck on is if the Ukraine's Maidan is any guide,
don't they need Trump to win the election thru the courts ? Or not?
"... If Trump's legal action against brazen election fraud to deny him a second term succeeds -- what's highly unlikely but possible -- will a phony DJT/Russia connection again make headline news? ..."
The scheme was cooked up by Obama/Biden regime Russophobes John Brennan, Hillary and the
DNC -- to smear Russia and discredit Trump at the same time.
It aimed to maintain and escalate US hostility toward the Russian Federation – for its
sovereign independence, advocacy for world peace, opposition to Washington's imperial agenda,
and having foiled its aim to transform Syria into another US vassal state.
It also relates to Sino/Russian unity – representing the only obstacle to Washington's
aim for unchallenged global dominance.
Probes by special counsel Robert Mueller, as well as House and Senate committees found no
evidence of Russian US meddling.
Nor did the US intelligence community. Claims otherwise without corroborating evidence were
and remain baseless.
In US criminal judicial proceedings, evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is required for
convictions.
Without it, fairly and impartially adjudicated cases would be dismissed.
Time and again, Russia was falsely accused of US election meddling, notably in the run-up to
Trump v. Hillary in 2016.
To this day, no credible evidence ever proved accusations because none exists.
The Russiagate hoax remains one of the most shameful political chapters in US history,
exceeding the worst of McCarthyism because despite its exposed Big Lies, it's still around.
Yet in 2018 testimony before House Intelligence Committee members, former Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper (2010 – 2017) said the following:
"I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was
plotting (or) conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election."
"I do not recall any instance when I had direct evidence of the content of" alleged Trump
team-Russia collusion.
Remarks like the above, along with failure of probes by Mueller, House and Senate members to
present evidence of Russian US election meddling should have ended the Russiagate witch-hunt
once and for all.
While largely dormant in the run-up to and aftermath of US Election 2020, it could resurface
any time in old or new form.
In following NYT reports on other issues, most recently with regard to Trump v.
Biden/Harris, I haven't seen a Russiagate report in its online editions for some time.
Belatedly I discovered an August 2020 mini-book-length article in the NYT Magazine
(online), a publication I don't follow.
It discusses a classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of various geopolitical
issues, this one prepared in July 2019.
The Times: "According to multiple officials who saw it, the document discussed Russia's
ongoing efforts to influence US elections: the 2020 presidential contest and 2024's as well
(sic)."
Its so-called "interest" is much the same as in other nations.
"Interest" has nothing to do with meddling. No credible evidence ever surfaced to show US
election interference by any nations.
It's in sharp contrast to credible evidence of US meddling in scores of elections abroad
throughout the post-WW II period and earlier.
According to "key judgments" of US intelligence officials, "Russia favored the current
president: Donald Trump," adding:
Ahead of the summer 2020 party national conventions, "Russia worked in support of the (Dem)
presidential candidate Bernie Sanders," said the Times, based on the NIE report.
It wasn't "genuine" support for Sanders, just an effort "to weaken that party and ultimately
help the current US president (sic)."
The Times: "Just as this article was going to press," the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence (ODNI) claimed the following:
Moscow "is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former (Joe) Biden and what it
sees as an anti-Russia 'establishment (sic).' "
The ODNI accused Moscow of "sophisticated election-disrupting capabilities (sic)."
An unnamed intelligence community source familiar with the NIE was quoted, saying it's "100
percent reliable (sic)."
Left unexplained by the Times was that from inception to the present day, Russiagate was and
remains a colossal hoax.
No evidence ever surfaced to suggest Kremlin US election meddling, nor by any other foreign
country.
What the NIE allegedly called "100 percent reliable" defied reality. It's part of
longstanding Russia bashing.
In January 2017, a US intelligence community report titled "Assessing Russian Activities and
Intentions in Recent US Elections: The Analytic Process and Cyber Incident Attribution" --
claiming Trump v. Hillary election meddling -- included no evidence proving it.
None existed then or now to present day.
When Vladimir Putin was asked if he wanted Trump to win in 2016 -- at a joint Helsinki,
Finland news conference with DJT in July 2018 -- he replied: "Yes, I did."
His preference for Trump over Hillary was unrelated to election meddling.
If other foreign leaders expressed a preference for one US presidential candidate over
another, the same logic holds.
One thing has nothing to do with the other. Implying otherwise is an act of deception, a
longstanding US intelligence community and Times specialty.
Trump was justifiably skeptical about accusations of Russian US election meddling that
favored him over Hillary in 2016 or over Biden/Harris this month.
According to the Times, Trump's objections to claims about alleged Russia US election
meddling "alarm(ed) the intelligence community."
Former acting CIA director/Hillary campaign advisor Michael Morell was quoted calling Trump
"an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation."
He's a political novice, geopolitical know-nothing, first ever US reality TV president.
He's no witting or unwitting Russian agent.
Separately, Morell defied reality, claiming:
Election 2016 was "the only time in American history when we've been attacked by a foreign
country and not come together as a nation," adding:
"In fact, it split us further apart."
"It was an inexpensive, relatively easy to carry out covert mission." It deepened our
divisions."
"I'm absolutely convinced that those Russian intelligence officers who put together and
managed the attack on our democracy (sic) in 2016 all received medals personally from
Vladimir Putin (sic)."
The above claims and others about a DJT/Russia connection et al are pure rubbish.
The lengthy Times magazine piece was all about smearing Russia, falsely claiming Kremlin US
election meddling, and demeaning Trump for defeating media darling Hillary.
No evidence was included to back any of the above claims. None exists.
In the run-up to and aftermath of US election 2020, Russiagate simmers largely below the
surface.
If Trump's legal action against brazen election fraud to deny him a second term succeeds --
what's highly unlikely but possible -- will a phony DJT/Russia connection again make headline
news?
Will there be claims of Kremlin involvement in backing litigation to discredit
Biden/Harris?
No matter how often the Russiagate Big Lie was debunked before, it may never die.
It may be around as long as the Russian Federation and China remain Washington's favorite
national security threats.
Real ones don't exist so they're invented as pretexts to advance US imperial interests.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email
lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] . He is a Research
Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)
His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for
Hegemony Risks WW III."
The historic Trump presidency emasculated globalism Pat Buchanan notes how the elite
Bush-type Republicans have been silenced Patrick J. Buchanan By Patrick J. Buchanan Published
November 26, 2020 at 6:39pm Share on Facebook Tweet P Share Email Print In the first two
decades of the century, President-elect Joe Biden's choice for secretary of state supported
U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen. He was an ever-reliable liberal
interventionist.
This same Antony Blinken could spend the first years of a Biden presidency helping extricate
our country from the misbegotten wars he championed. What establishment Democrats like Biden
and Blinken helped to do in previous administrations, they will likely now have to undo.
Who effected this sea change in national thinking?
Donald Trump. Much that was said and believed before he came down the escalator in 2015 is
no longer said or believed by the majority of Americans.
And no institution has been more altered than the Republican Party.
How I beat election fraud in America's most corrupt state TRENDING: Employees melt down
after learning company is publishing prominent conservative Jordan Peterson's book: Report
George H.W. Bush's vision of a "New World Order," launched at the after-party of his Gulf
War victory, died with his presidency.
George W. Bush's crusade for global democracy to "end tyranny in our world" has been
forgotten. Bush Republicans no longer speak for the party on foreign policy, trade or
immigration.
NATO will never be the same again after Trump rudely demanded that freeloading nations pay
their fair share of the collective defense or the Americans would pack up and come home from
Europe.
Former Defense Secretary Gen. James Mattis may call for the ash-canning of the phrase
"America First." He will fail. For, as both national motto and national policy, the slogan has
put down roots in American soil because it comports with the will of the silent majority.
Whatever the establishment believes, in the clash between nationalism and globalism,
globalism has lost America.
Moreover, the world is going this way.
Does not Xi Jinping put his own country first as he claims for China all the waters and
islands for hundreds of miles into the East and South China seas? Does not Vladimir Putin put
his own country first as he seeks to bring back under Moscow's wing the former republics of the
Russian federation?
Does not President Erdogan put Turkey first as he sends arms and troops to pursue his
country's interests in Libya, Syria, Cyprus, the South Caucasus and the Eastern Mediterranean
in clashes with Greece?
What does Bibi Netanyahu put first, if not his own country, Israel?
If country and nation are not first in the hearts and minds of Americans, what should
replace them? Some nonexistent New World Order? The U.N.? NATO? A multilateral caucus of global
institutions?
Under Trump, economic nationalism has displaced free trade globalism as the trade policy of
the party and government.
The GOP elite that backed Bill Clinton on NAFTA, supported a new transnational World Trade
Organization, invited China to join the club and accorded Beijing most-favored-nation trade
status is now silent.
Tariffs to force open foreign markets and punish predator-traders who take advantage of
American workers have replaced the free trade fundamentalism that had been dogma since Dwight
Eisenhower's days.
Nor is the Republican Party likely to return to free trade, as long as "China First" is the
undeclared policy pursued by the nation that has now displaced us as the world's leading
manufacturing power.
The George Bush-John McCain Republican Party was for amnesty for illegals and open borders
for new migrants. Today's GOP supports the deportation of illegals and the 30-foot Trump Wall
on the Mexican border.
"... Trump and Giuliani are vulgar and buffoonish, but they play the same slimy game as their Democratic opponents. The Republicans scapegoat the deep state, communists and now, bizarrely, Venezuela; the Democrats scapegoat Russia. The widening disconnect from reality by the ruling elite is intended to mask their complicity in the seizure of power by predatory global corporations and billionaires. ..."
"... Silicon Valley billionaires, including Facebook cofounder Dustin Moskovitz and ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt, donated more than $100 million to a Democratic super PAC that created a torrent of anti-Trump TV ads in the final weeks of the campaign to elect Biden. The heavy infusion of corporate money to support Biden wasn't done to protect democracy. It was done because these corporations and billionaires know a Biden administration will serve their interests. ..."
"... Democratic Senator Chris Murphy told CNN during this campaign that Russian disinformation efforts are "more problematic" than in 2016. He warned that "this time around, the Russians have decided to cultivate U.S. citizens as assets. They are attempting to try to spread their propaganda in the mainstream media." ..."
"... This will be the official mantra of the Democratic Party, a vicious redbaiting campaign without actual reds, especially as the country spirals out of control. The reason I have a show on Russia-funded RT America ..."
"... Voice of America ..."
"... World Socialist Web Site, ..."
"... We let these companies get this monopolistic share of the distribution system. Now they're exercising that power. ..."
"... In the Soviet Union the truth was passed, often hand to hand, in underground samizdat documents, clandestine copies of news and literature banned by the state. The truth will endure. It will be heard by those who seek it out. It will expose the mendacity of the powerful, however hard it will be to obtain. Despotisms fear the truth. They know it is a mortal threat. If we remain determined to live in truth, no matter the cost, we have a chance. ..."
40
Comments on Chris Hedges: The Ruling Elite's War on Truth American political leaders
display a widening disconnect from reality intended to mask their complicity in the seizure of
power by global corporations and billionaires. By Chris Hedges / Original to ScheerPost
Joe Biden's victory instantly obliterated the Democratic Party's longstanding charge that
Russia was hijacking and compromising US elections. The Biden victory, the Democratic Party
leaders and their courtiers in the media now insist, is evidence that the democratic process is
strong and untainted, that the system works. The elections ratified the will of the people.
But imagine if Donald Trump had been reelected. Would the Democrats and pundits at The New
York Time s , CNN and MSNBC pay homage to a fair electoral process? Or, having spent
four years trying to impugn the integrity of the 2016 presidential race, would they once again
haul out the blunt instrument of Russian interference to paint Trump as Vladimir Putin's
Manchurian candidate?
Trump and Giuliani are vulgar and buffoonish, but they play the same slimy game as their
Democratic opponents. The Republicans scapegoat the deep state, communists and now, bizarrely,
Venezuela; the Democrats scapegoat Russia. The widening disconnect from reality by the ruling
elite is intended to mask their complicity in the seizure of power by predatory global
corporations and billionaires.
... ... ...
The two warring factions within the ruling elite, which fight primarily over the spoils of
power while abjectly serving corporate interests, peddle alternative realities. If the deep
state and Venezuelan socialists or Russia intelligence operatives are pulling the strings no
one in power is accountable for the rage and alienation caused by the social inequality, the
unassailability of corporate power, the legalized bribery that defines our political process,
the endless wars, austerity and de-industrialization. The social breakdown is, instead, the
fault of shadowy phantom enemies manipulating groups such as Black Lives Matters or the Green
Party.
"The people who run this country have run out of workable myths with which to distract the
public, and in a moment of extreme crisis have chosen to stoke civil war and defame the rest of
us – black and white – rather than admit to a generation of corruption, betrayal,
and mismanagement," Matt Taibbi writes.
These fictional narratives are dangerous. They erode the credibility of democratic
institutions and electoral politics. They posit that news and facts are no longer true or
false. Information is accepted or discarded based on whether it hurts or promotes one faction
over another. While outlets such as Fox News have always existed as an arm of the Republican
Party, this partisanship has now infected nearly all news organizations, including publications
such as The New York Times and The Washington Post , along with the major tech
platforms that disseminate information and news. A fragmented public with no common narrative
believes whatever it wants to believe.
... ... ...
The flagrant partisanship and discrediting of truth across the political spectrum are
swiftly fueling the rise of an authoritarian state. The credibility of democratic institutions
and electoral politics, already deeply corrupted by PACs, the electoral college, lobbyists, the
disenfranchisement of third-party candidates, gerrymandering and voter suppression, is being
eviscerated.
Silicon Valley billionaires, including Facebook cofounder Dustin Moskovitz and ex-Google
CEO Eric Schmidt, donated more than $100 million to a Democratic super PAC that created a
torrent of anti-Trump TV ads in the final weeks of the campaign to elect Biden. The heavy
infusion of corporate money to support Biden wasn't done to protect democracy. It was done
because these corporations and billionaires know a Biden administration will serve their
interests.
The press, meanwhile, has largely given up on journalism. It has retreated into competing
echo chambers that only speak to true believers. This catering exclusively to one demographic,
which it sets against another demographic, is commercially profitable. But it also guarantees
the balkanization of the United States and edges us closer and closer to fratricide.
When Trump leaves the White House millions of his enraged supports, hermetically sealed
inside hyperventilating media platforms that feed back to them their rage and hate, will see
the vote as fraudulent, the political system as rigged, and the establishment press as
propaganda. They will target, I fear, through violence, the Democratic Party politicians,
mainstream media outlets and those they demonize as conspiratorial members of the deep state,
such as Dr. Anthony Fauci. The Democratic Party is as much to blame for this disintegration as
Trump and the Republican Party.
The election of Biden is also very bad news for journalists such as Matt Taibbi, Glen Ford,
Margaret Kimberley, Glenn Greenwald, Jeffrey St. Clair or Robert Scheer who refuse to be
courtiers to the ruling elites. Journalists that do not spew the approved narrative of the
right-wing, or, alternatively, the approved narrative of the Democratic Party, have a
credibility the ruling elite fears.
The worse things get – and they will get worse as the pandemic leaves hundreds of
thousands dead and thrusts millions of Americans into severe economic distress –the more
those who seek to hold the ruling elites, and in particular the Democratic Party, accountable
will be targeted and censored in ways familiar to WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, now in a London
prison and facing possible extradition to the United States and life imprisonment.
Barack Obama's assault on civil liberties, which included the repeated misuse of the
Espionage Act to prosecute whistleblowers, the passage of Section 1021 of the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) to permit the military to act as a domestic police force and the
ordering of the assassination of U.S. citizens deemed to be terrorists in Yemen, was far worse
than those of George W. Bush. Biden's assault on civil liberties, I suspect, will surpass those
of the Obama administration.
The censorship was heavy handed during the campaign. Digital media platforms, including
Google, Twitter, YouTube and Facebook, along with the establishment press worked shamelessly as
propaganda arms for the Biden campaign. They were determined not to make the "mistake" they
made in 2016 when they reported on the damaging emails, released by WikiLeaks, from Hillary
Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta. Although the emails were genuine, papers such as The
New York Times routinely refer to the Podesta emails as "disinformation." This, no doubt,
pleases its readership, 91 percent of whom identify as Democrats according to the Pew Research
Center. But it is another example of journalistic malfeasance.
Following the election of Trump, the media outlets that cater to a Democratic Party
readership made amends. The New York Times was one of the principal platforms that amplified
Russiagate conspiracies, most of which turned out to be false. At the same time, the paper
largely ignored the plight of the disposed working class that supported Trump. When the
Russiagate story collapsed, the paper pivoted to focus on race, embodied in the 1619 Project.
The root cause of social disintegration -- the neoliberal order, austerity and
deindustrialization -- was ignored since naming it would alienate the paper's corporate
advertisers and the elites on whom the paper depends for access.
Once the 2020 election started, The New York Times and other mainstream outlets censored and
discredited information that could hurt Biden, including a tape of Joe Biden speaking with
former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, which appears to be authentic. They gave
credibility to any rumor, however spurious, which was unfavorable to Trump. Twitter and
Facebook blocked access to a New York Post story about the emails allegedly found on Hunter
Biden's discarded laptop.
Twitter locked the New York Post out of its own account for over a week. Glenn Greenwald,
whose article on Hunter Biden was censored by his editors at The Intercept, which he helped
found, resigned. He released the email exchanges with his editors over his article. Ignoring
the textual evidence of censorship, editors and writers at The Intercept engaged in a public
campaign of character assassination against Greenwald. This sordid behavior by self-identified
progressive journalists is a page out of the Trump playbook and a sad commentary on the
collapse of journalistic integrity.
The censorship and manipulation of information was honed and perfected against WikiLeaks.
When WikiLeaks tries to release information, it is hit with botnets or distributed denial of
service attacks. Malware attacks WikiLeaks' domain and website. The WikiLeaks site is
routinely shut down or unable to serve its content to its readers. Attempts by WikiLeaks to
hold press conferences see the audio distorted and the visual images corrupted. Links to
WikiLeaks events are delayed or cut. Algorithms block the dissemination of WikiLeaks content.
Hosting services, including Amazon, removed WikiLeaks from its servers. Julian Assange, after
releasing the Iraqi war logs, saw his bank accounts and credit cards frozen. WikiLeaks' PayPal
accounts were disabled to cut off donations. The Freedom of the Press Foundation in December
2017 closed down the anonymous funding channel to WikiLeaks which was set up to protect the
anonymity of donors. A well-orchestrated smear campaign against Assange was amplified and given
credibility by the mass media and filmmakers such as Alex Gibney. Assange and WikiLeaks were
first. We are next.
Democratic Senator Chris Murphy told CNN during this campaign that Russian
disinformation efforts are "more problematic" than in 2016. He warned that "this time around,
the Russians have decided to cultivate U.S. citizens as assets. They are attempting to try to
spread their propaganda in the mainstream media."
This will be the official mantra of the Democratic Party, a vicious redbaiting campaign
without actual reds, especially as the country spirals out of control. The reason I have a show
on Russia-funded RT America is the same reason Vaclav Havel could only be heard on the
US-funded Voice of America during the communist control of Czechoslovakia. I did not
choose to leave the mainstream media. I was pushed out. And once anyone is pushed out, the
ruling elite is relentless about discrediting the few platforms left willing to give them, and
the issues they raise, a hearing.
"If the problem is 'American citizens' being cultivated as 'assets' trying to put
'interference' in the mainstream media, the logical next step is to start asking Internet
platforms to shut down accounts belonging to any American journalist with the temerity to
report material leaked by foreigners (the wrong foreigners, of course – it will continue
to be okay to report things like the 'black ledger')," writes Taibbi , who has done some of the best reporting on
the emerging censorship. "From Fox or the Daily Caller on the right
, to left-leaning outlets like Consortium or the World Socialist Web
Site, to writers like me even – we're all now clearly in range of new speech
restrictions, even if we stick to long-ago-established factual standards."
Taibbi argues that the precedent for overt censorship took place when the major digital
platforms – Facebook, Twitter, Google, Spotify, YouTube – in a coordinated move
blacklisted the right-wing talk show host Alex Jones.
"Liberal America cheered," Taibbi told me when I interviewed him for my show, " On Contact ":
They said 'Well this is a noxious figure. This is a great thing. Finally, someone's taking
action.' What they didn't realize is that we were trading an old system of speech regulation
for a new one without any public discussion. You and I were raised in a system where you got
punished for speech if you committed libel or slander or if there was imminent incitement to
lawless action, right? That was the standard that the Supreme Court set, but that was done
through litigation. There was an open process where you had a chance to rebut charges. That
is all gone now.
Now, basically there's a handful of these tech distribution platforms that control how
people get their media.
They've been pressured by the Senate, which has called all of their CEOs in, and basically
ordered them, 'We need you to come up with a plan to prevent the sowing of discord and
spreading of misinformation.' This has finally come into fruition. You see a major reputable
news organization like the New York Post -- with a 200-year history -- locked out of its own
Twitter account.
The story [Hunter Biden's emails] has not been disproven. It's not disinformation or
misinformation. It's been suppressed as it would be suppressed in a Third World country. It's
a remarkable historic moment. The danger is that we end up with a one-party informational
system. There's going to be approved dialogue and unapproved dialogue that you can only get
through certain fringe avenues. That's the problem. We let these companies get this
monopolistic share of the distribution system. Now they're exercising that power.
In the Soviet Union the truth was passed, often hand to hand, in underground samizdat
documents, clandestine copies of news and literature banned by the state. The truth will
endure. It will be heard by those who seek it out. It will expose the mendacity of the
powerful, however hard it will be to obtain. Despotisms fear the truth. They know it is a
mortal threat. If we remain determined to live in truth, no matter the cost, we have a
chance.
Chris Hedges Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who
was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years forThe New York Times,where he
served as the Middle East Bureau Chief and Balkan Bureau Chief for the paper. He previously
worked overseas forThe Dallas Morning News,The Christian Science
Monitor, and NPR. He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America showOn Contact.paul eastonNOVEMBER
23, 2020 AT 10:28 AM
It seems like the masters are just as deluded as the slaves. But the situation is
unsustainable. When many millions of slaves become homeless and hungry that reality will become
unavoidable. Who will they blame? Will they attack one another or will they revolt against the
system? Soon we will see. Carolyn L ZarembaNOVEMBER
24, 2020 AT 10:30 AM
I share only alternative media since I don't trust "mainstream" media one iota. I post
articles from the World Socialist Web Site, Consortium News, the Grayzone, Caitlin Johnstone
and others all the time. I am a socialist. I was only banned from posting on FB once, for
criticizing Israel. No surprise there. But I suspect FB of shadow banning, i.e., making it look
like you've posted an article but making it invisible to others in their news feeds. I first
learned of this practice from Craig Murray, another whose articles I post regularly. paul
eastonNOVEMBER
25, 2020 AT 1:35 AM
That is a chilling thought. I was shadow banned by medium.com a few years ago. It appeared
to me that my posts and comments went in, but no one else could see them. At least with them I
could tell something was wrong because I had regular conversations with some people. With FB I
don't know if you could ever be sure. R ZwarichNOVEMBER
25, 2020 AT 5:37 AM
Mr. Easton is indeed correct. It is VERY chilling, especially if people would imagine what
THEY would do, if they had our Enemy's morally depraved motivations, and if they had the
control our Enemy has over ALL our communications switches.
There are three basic types of mass communications. One to many. Many to one. And many to
many.
The Enemy has complete access to 'one to many' communications, and complete control over
anyone's else's access to same. Many to one communications are ineffective for intrinsic
reasons. Many to many communications offer myriad methods of cunningly creative control.
If we send out group emails, for example, in simple old-fashioned list-serves, they who
control the switches could easily 'filter', to determine who among addressees gets any message,
and who doesn't.
I used to write comments in the Boston Globe, the wholly owned plaything of a VERY weird old
Billionaire and his proud and beautiful young trophy wife. (Less than half his age, of course).
At first I thought the Globe NEVER censored. I could write anything, and it would post. Ahh but
then I learned that the Globe is a HEAVY handed censor, but was clever enough to put a 'cookie'
in your browser folder to tell their server to let you see your own comments, so you would not
even know that no one else could see them. It was 'stealth censorship'.
We should try to remember that these people are morally depraved, in their constant
paroxysms of raw Greed and raw Lust. No force exists any longer in our nation to restrain them.
Anything we can 'see' that they CAN do, we can pretty much figure they already DO do, or else
sooner or later will. Carol ShapiroNOVEMBER
23, 2020 AT 1:44 PM
While I don't agree with you, Chris Hedges, all the time, I believe you are our one. true.
journalist. Thankful for your honesty. Insight. Huge intellect. Global experience. I am an
"unenrolled" voter -- an extremely disillusioned former Bernie Sanders supporter. Truly, I feel
like he would have been our closest attempt to achieving a real "citizen government". What a
laughable term that is these days. Bernie never would have had a chance running as a Democrat
– absurd. He should have walked out of that convention four years ago and taken his
supporters with him. Oh wait- you said that. NeverNOVEMBER
23, 2020 AT 2:59 PM
Don't forget that the selective coverage by the NY Times in this campaign didn't start when
Biden became the nominee. Up to that time, the Times ran one or two articles on Sanders it
seems. Whatever the number, it was miniscule. They almost completely ignored one of the most
significant campaigns in modern history, thus helping to ensure it died on the vine. And when
they did cover it one or two times, it was always negative.
US liberals more fascist than conservatives–long observed by historians/social
philosophers
"amerikans do not converse as Tocqueville wrote, amerikans entertain each other. amerikans do
not exchange ideas, they exchange images. the problem w amerikans is not Orwellian–it is
huxleyan: amerikans love their oppression: Neil Postman Stephen MorrellNOVEMBER
24, 2020 AT 1:18 AM
Glenn Greenwald's points need stressing: (i) some of the most vociferous proponents of
online censorship are mainstream and 'alternative' 'journalists' who on repeated occasions have
egged on the carriers to shut sites, pages, accounts or postings; (ii) these 'journalists'
aren't just serving the narrowest band of oligarchic media empires in history, but also are
ivy-league bourgeois brats with no interest at all in exposing the injustices or malfeasance of
bourgeois society, unlike many journalists of the past; and (iii) that it's not in the
immediate material interests of the carriers to conduct the censorship, especially in the
longterm, since it consumes resources and lowers traffic and profits. They'd much rather the
government do it and for them to be compensated at taxpayer expense.
To avoid future potential government antitrust measures or nationalisation (heaven forbid!),
Zuckerberg and his ilk have been censoring in heavyhanded and hamfisted ways that aren't so
'autonomous' but for the moment at least can be traced along the usual Democrat-controlled
thinktank and CIA/FBI lines, which of course also are beyond public scrutiny. Despite the
prospects for freedom of reach (and reach is what it's really about) apparently growing dimmer
with each senate committee appearance by the carrier oligarchs, ways and means will be found to
circumvent their draconian measures. While alternative non-censoring platforms have yet to gain
significant traction, it likely won't take much for one to catch on, perhaps sparked by an
outrageous event of suppression, that turns Facebook, Twitter, etc, into museum pieces. One
might imagine, for instance, Wikileaks-style YouTube, Facebook, Twitter equivalents that act as
true carriers, purely machine-based and devoid of human interference, that precludes them
becoming the 'moral guardians' that Twitter, Facebook etc, are quickly metamorphising into.
As increasing swathes of the population appear not to be aligning within the bourgeoisie's
preset ideological 'tribal' boundaries, there's a certain schadenfreude in seeing the rulers in
dread of the truth getting out and spreading uncontrollably. Their tailored counter-narratives
simply are too enfeebled and slight to square with the hard reality that's hitting everyone,
from the most educated and brainwashed to the least. That ivy-league stenographers are being
pressed into the service of censorship gives some indication of the desperation of the rulers.
We all know, as do they but can never admit it publicly, that censorship and repression are
frank admissions that they've lost all 'arguments' for their very existence.
To an extent, Trump has been responsible for letting the genie out of the bottle, as the
first president probably since before Andrew Jackson to have failed, repeatedly, to put
lipstick on the racist, capitalist imperial pig. The efforts by the ruling class at censorship
and naked suppression of freedom of reach and of access to sources of truthful information will
only increase in desperation as their myth-making narratives become ever more unable to
rationalise a crisis that's they're beginning to see as intractable and endangering their
rule.
When every girl in my entourage was melting over Obama, the first thing I did after saying
"hey wait a minute" was to read a book about what he had been up to in Chicago (knew it) then
it has been "we'll bail them for 70 billion, then 700, then 1.4 tril," (always decreasing
speech volume) then "we are going to decrease troops in Afghanistan, then more troops, then
more troops (always decreasing in speech volume)
That Nobel "War" Prize created the perfect cocktail of Benadryl+Marezine that send the
herd of moron slaves, practically all over the world, into numbing mode!
He was, and still is, the perfect jester.
And is being very well compensated for it.
Ms. Powell did not have much of a reputation in conservative legal circles until last year
when she took on the case of Michael T. Flynn, Mr. Trump's first national security adviser,
who had pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. but later sought to withdraw his plea. The case
became something of a cause célèbre among many Trump loyalists, who have long
insisted that the president and his allies were the target of nefarious "deep state" law
enforcement and intelligence officials.
Ms. Powell, a native North Carolinian who began her legal career as an assistant federal
prosecutor in Texas, certainly believed that. And through her aggressive defense of Mr. Flynn
-- she often used incendiary rhetoric, accusing the F.B.I. of committing "atrocities" against
her client -- she became an admired figure on the right and a frequent guest on conservative
radio and television programs.
... ... ...
In a statement to The New York Times earlier this year, Ms. Powell said she had long
considered "prosecutorial misconduct and overreach" a problem. Conspiracies within the
American government have been a preoccupation of hers for some time: In 2014 she
self-published a book that purports to be a seminal work in "exposing 'the Deep State.'"
The book arose from her work in private practice, where she spent years representing
defendants in the Enron financial scandal, including the accounting firm Arthur Andersen and
James A. Brown, a former executive at Merrill Lynch. During that time she began to impugn the
motives of one of the federal prosecutors on the case, Andrew Weissmann, who went on to be a
member of the special counsel team under Robert S. Mueller III, who led the investigation
into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia.
... ... ...
In an interview last week on the top-rated "Rush Limbaugh Show" -- in which she spoke for
nearly 20 minutes and faced no skepticism from the guest host, Mark Steyn -- Ms. Powell
claimed that the voting machines in question had been designed to rig elections for the
former ruler of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, who died in 2013. They were "so hackable a
15-year-old could do it," she said. And she cited unnamed "math experts" she had supposedly
consulted who told her how an algorithm added votes for President Trump to Joseph R. Biden
Jr.'s totals.
In an interview the day before on Fox Business, Ms. Powell also said the conspiracy
involved "dead people" who voted "in massive numbers" -- again offering no proof -- and
described how fraudulent paper ballots were also part of the scheme.
Speaking early last week to the right-wing radio host Mark Levin, who has the
fourth-largest audience in talk radio, Ms. Powell said she had obtained an affidavit from
someone purportedly present when the scheme was hatched by pro-Chávez forces in
Venezuela to rig his elections.
Because of her involvement in the Flynn case, the pro-Trump media often presented her as
an expert with unimpeachable credentials.
"Sidney Powell is no joke," declared one Breitbart article published last week, which
mentioned her early career as a federal prosecutor and her work for Mr. Flynn. Mr. Limbaugh,
too, told his audience last week that he seriously doubts she would be putting her
credibility on the line if she hadn't uncovered serious wrongdoing.
Other Trump allies were less convinced that her claims should be taken seriously. Tucker
Carlson of Fox News said last week that when he pressed Ms. Powell, she failed to produce any
evidence to support the elaborate conspiracy she purported to have uncovered. His dissent was
not appreciated by the president's defenders, or by Ms. Powell, who said Mr. Carlson had been
"very insulting, demanding and rude" to her.
Despite initial praise from the president, who announced less than two weeks ago that she
had been added to his team of "wonderful lawyers," it was never clear during her brief time
with the campaign what her job was supposed to be. Her efforts on behalf of the Trump
campaign appeared to be largely limited to public relations She has defended the president
and attacked the integrity of the vote solely on Twitter, on television and at news
conferences, acting more as a publicity agent than a lawyer.
She has said she plans to file a suit in Georgia but hasn't yet. It is unclear whether
that work will continue now that the Trump campaign has cut her loose.
Jeremy W. Peters covers national politics. His other assignments in his decade at
The Times have included covering the financial markets, the media, New York politics and two
presidential campaigns. He is also an MSNBC contributor.
Caitlin, when it comes to the real enemy of the Neocons and Neoliberals, Russia is the
real enemy, not China. You have to understand GLOBALIZATION. China is Part of the
Globalization project that started over 30 years ago. It's a complex parasitic relationship.
The Globalist elites in the US are working towards the "Great Reset" using the Coronavirus
pseudemic that started in China and use it as an excuse to move towards a society that will
resemble the totalitarian, repressive communist one like in China. A lot of our big
corporations are still doing great business there. However they are not in Russia. Russia was
kicked out of the G8 years ago, because they were not going to go along with the
Globalization project and the New World Order enslavement project of the G7 (without Russia
now). Trump was bad enough as a president, but he was not really part of the "Globalist
Club". I assure you Mr BIDEN is totally compromised by the NWO evil Globalists comprised of
the MIS, Transnational corporations & International Finance, and will try to act "tough"
with China, but this will be just a distraction. The US Shadow Government elites control him
totally, something they could not always do with Idiot Trump. Here's an example how they
worked with our "enemy" Communist China:
Gates, Fauci, CCP, Big Pharma, international Bankers, they have all colluded with the WHO
to create the Coronavirus "pseudemic".
(the NIH, under the direction of Dr. Fauci, sent $3.7 million to the Wuhan lab in 2014, and
then showered the Chinese scientists at this lab with another $3.7 million in 2019 to keep
their work going, the work of developing a bat virus that could attack people. Two
back-to-back 5-year projects that took $7.4 million out of taxpayer pockets and out of the
United States).
WHO is a globalist institution and so are the actors that are colluding with it.
How Joe Biden was 'recruited' to become agent of Chinese Communist party
While Joe was cutting deals with China, the Chinese Communist party was putting its hooks
into him:
You are wrong. You are a victim of the echo chamber dynamic described in this article.
China was temporarily courted to pull it away from the USSR and a bunch of plutocrats rode a
lot of wealth on that move, but it insists on its own sovereignty and an agenda to halt its
rise and roll back its power has long been in the works. Obama got the ball rolling on this
years ago. Biden will continue ramping up the same anti-China agendas as his predecessors
Trump and Obama, and I will document those escalations in this space. When that happens, you
need to make sure you re-evaluate your incorrect position based on the new evidence
presented. You should already be beginning that re-evaluation based on the information I just
gave you about his cabinet picks.
REALIST / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
Right. That's what the "Pivot to Asia" foreign policy during the Obomber administration
was all about. The US thought it was going to pick off as new allies all the countries
surrounding China and make them antagonists rather than partners with the Chinese and their
grand plans like the BRI. This was pretty much the same strategy that had been employed
against Russia and its former satellites and Soviet republics in Eastern Europe. Vietnam and
the Philippines were supposed to be the new Georgia and Ukraine set in the Orient.
~
Washington's oft repeated big trick is to dangle beaucoup bucks before the leaders of third
rate powers to get them to change allegiances and to play on age old resentments that small
regional powers often have against the local monolith like Russia or China. Ego-driven
lightweights like Poroshenko and Duterte are often susceptible to Yankee flattery that they
can wield some real power under the American umbrella.
~
So, Washington promises Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei etc that it will bring
"justice" and support their claims for sundry rocks in the South China Sea, especially the
ones fortified by China to ensure shipping lanes stay upon under potential aggression from
the Americans (who else would be a threat?)
~
That Washington would preach the usual bullshit about peace and harmony while actually
pursuing treachery and bloodshed is no surprise, however, one must snap to attention over the
ballsy evolution of its attitude of unconcern about who knows and understands this
disconnect. I don't doubt that Russia and China have always known that Washington is totally
untrustworthy. The Russians even coined a new term to describe this state of complete and
absolute American unreliability, which I don't remember because I don't speak their language.
But today, most of the American people also must know, they must know that America drafts
very real plans to eradicate the entire Chinese fleet off their own coast within a 72-hour
time frame all for pursuing nothing more than their own national interests. They know unless
they have been living under a rock for the entirety of the 21st century or have thoroughly
perfected the art of Orwellian Double Think.
It's competition for tribute. China has a long history of receiving tribute from all of
the world which it knew. This is Chinese world history. It's how Chinese rulers naturally see
the world. Russia is historically Byzantine (Greek) in it's diplomacy and somewhat
isolationist militarily, defending in depth, then counter-attacking decisively.
Our owners cannot get their new demotion worked out amongst themselves and plan to squeeze us
for blood and dominate the rest of the world, which is bigger and more complex than China and
Russia, and more flexible to adapt against the empire.
How much more hubris shall the world receive?
ANARCISSIE / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
I think the provocations against China, like those against Russia, have been largely
theatrical. There _was_ a plan to push the Russians out of the Caucasus, Ukraine, and Syria
in order to dominate the Black Sea and the Middle East, but the US had no intention of
applying serious military muscle to it (which could have led to a major war). The US actually
has no problems with Russia, and they have a common interest in keeping Muslims tamped down
in the Middle East. Likewise, the US will play at constructing a ring of hostile states
around China, but this is unlikely to succeed, and when it fails, the US plan is to retreat
to Australia and India, or possibly Africa if things go very badly. Again, the US has no
actual conflicts with China; the pseudo-war with China is 90% prolefeed. This was all laid
out pretty well by George Orwell in _1984_: 'We have always been at war with Eastasia,'
etc.
JP JUDE / NOVEMBER 24, 2020
I sort of agree with you, Ms Johnstone, but have you considered you might be in an echo
chamber? I say this because I read your article the same day I read about the new Asian trade
deal. It's huge with everyone, China to Australia in it. And, after I read about Xi wanting
to end global poverty; China has officially ended national poverty, and wants to end global
poverty. It kind of puts the altercations with India in a new light; they've long had a caste
system which is like class–which they're supposed to end but haven't, and reminds me of
the States being classless but not really. I think if you follow the money sotta speak, the
Americans have a real problem and a lot of the war propaganda is them trying to be relevant
to a world that has moved on. I don't know if it's anti-globalization but the thing about the
Americans going to war is the reality they're doing it for a buck. Weapons sales and all
that, just real war is now fought via technology. The Chinese, Russians even the Indians, can
fight that kind of war; the Americans can't as evidence by the proliferation of weapons and
number of friendly fire accidents demonstrates. They're all brawn in a more cerebral world. I
think the argument has changed.
In Washington foreign conflicts are to policymakers what lights are to moths. The desire
to take the U.S. into every political dispute, social collapse, civil war, foreign conflict,
and full-scale war seems to only get stronger as America's failures accumulate.
There may be no better example than the battle between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the
latter's claim to the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, contained within Azerbaijan but largely
populated by ethnic Armenians. Distant from the US and Europe, the struggle matters most to
nearby Georgia, Turkey, Iran, and Russia.
The impact on Americans is minor and indirect at best. Yet there is wailing and gnashing
of teeth in Washington that the US is "absent" from this fight. Send in the bombers! Or at
least the diplomats! Candidate Joe Biden predictably insisted that America should be leading
a peace effort "together with our European partners," without indicating what that would mean
in practice.
The roots of the conflict, like so many others, go back centuries. Control of largely
Muslim Azerbaijan and Christian Armenia passed among Persia, the Ottoman Empire, and Russian
Empire. After the Russian Revolution the two were independent and fought over N-K's status,
before both were absorbed by the Soviet Union. Nagorno-Karabakh's ethnic Armenian population
began pressing for transfer to Armenia during the U.S.S.R.'s waning days. After the latter
collapsed in 1992 the two newly independent nations again fought, resulting in tens of
thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of refugees, and Armenia grabbed the disputed
land as well as even larger adjacent territory filled with ethnic Azerbaijanis.
A ceasefire froze the bitter conflict, leaving the conquered territory under Armenian
control. Although Yerevan's gain was tenuous, unrecognized by the rest of the world and
dependent upon a geographic corridor between Armenia and N-K, the government, largely in
response to internal political pressures, grew steadily more aggressive and unwilling to
honor previous commitments. Violent clashes mixed with ineffective talks between the two
states.
With no prospect of resolution, despite long-standing diplomatic efforts through the
so-called Minsk Process, involving America and France, among others, Azerbaijani forces,
relying on Turkey, employing Syrian mercenaries, and utilizing Israeli-made drones, launched
an offensive in September. With Yerevan losing troops and territory, Moscow brokered a new
ceasefire, which required Armenia's withdrawal from areas conquered a quarter century ago.
The transportation corridor is to be policed by Russian peacekeeping forces; Turkish
officials will help monitor the ceasefire.
The result was jubilation in Baku and riots in Yerevan. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol
Pashinyan, under political siege, declared: "This is not a victory, but there is no defeat
until you consider yourself defeated, we will never consider ourselves defeated and this
shall become a new start of an era of our national unity and rebirth." More accurate was
Azerbaijani President Ilham Alyev's assessment: "This [ceasefire] statement constitutes
Armenia's capitulation. This statement puts an end to the years-long occupation. This
statement is our Glorious Victory." With Pashinyan's authority in tatters and Alyev
triumphantly enjoying a surge in popular support, hostilities could easily explode again.
Why would any sane American want to get in the middle of this fight?
Demands that Washington "do something" ignore three important realities. The first is that
the conflict has nothing to do with the US and threatens no serious American interests. The
fighting is tragic, of course, as are similar battles around the world. However, this
volatile region is dominated by Iran, Russia, and Turkey. Iran previously supported Armenia,
Turkey strongly backed Azerbaijan, and Russia has good relations with both, including a
defense treaty with Yerevan which Moscow deemed not to cover contested territory, meaning
N-K.
Which of these powers, all essentially American adversaries – despite Ankara's
continued membership in the transatlantic alliance – dominates which neighbor is a
matter of indifference to Washington. It simply doesn't matter, and certainly isn't worth
fighting over. Once US officials would have preferred Turkey over Iran and Russia, but
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has taken his nation in an Islamist and authoritarian
direction, warmed relations with Russia, the only serious target of NATO, and begun
aggressively expanding Turkish influence and control in Syria, Libya, and the eastern
Mediterranean. Ankara encouraged the current military round by enhancing Azerbaijani
capabilities.
Georgia also shares a border with both combatants but is only a bit player in the ongoing
drama. However, it has lobbyists in Washington whose mission is to get Tbilisi into NATO and
thus turn Georgia into another US defense dependent. Doing so would create a direct border
conflict with Russia, made much more dangerous by the volatility of Georgian politics. The
irresponsible and reckless President Mikheil Saakashvili triggered the brief yet disastrous
2008 war with Russia and remains active politically. Tbilisi's dubious role is another reason
for the US to avoid deeper involvement in the region's disputatious politics.
The second point is that there is nothing sensible America for do, despite cacophonous
demands otherwise. In October Washington Post columnist David Ignatius complained:
"The global power vacuum invites mischief. The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan has
escalated over 10 days of fighting. Armenian leaders initially hoped that US diplomacy could
produce a ceasefire; now they look to Moscow."
Translated, Yerevan wanted Washington to save Armenia from both its original aggression
and later intransigence. Like many other governments have desired in other conflicts. But how
was the US to restrain Azerbaijan, which was able to recover long-lost territory only by
resorting to force? America's regional policy has been a disaster. Washington already
demonstrated its impotence in Ankara as Erdogan charted an independent course. The US turned
a difficult relationship with Moscow into a mini-Cold War. The Trump administration foolishly
declared economic war on Iran, creating regional instability and precluding negotiation.
As for Azerbaijan, military intervention would risk war for no good reason. Economic
sanctions would punish Baku, but to what end? So far, the president's constant resort to
"maximum pressure" has failed to induce political surrender in Havana, Caracas, Damascus,
Pyongyang, or Moscow. Whatever the economic price, Aliyeh could ill afford to retreat and
anger an entire population currently celebrating his triumph. Anyway, the issue is not worth
another failed American attempt at global social engineering. Which means Washington had
nothing to offer but words.
Certainly the US should encourage a peaceful settlement and negotiation, but this is a
conflict for which there is no obvious diplomatic answer. It is easy to insist that Baku
should not have restarted hostilities, but the Alyev government struck because diplomacy had
frozen along with the dispute. And Baku's success dramatically reshaped the balance of power,
leaving Armenia in a far worse position than before. Creative mediation might help, but
Azerbaijan, on offense, showed no interest in such an effort. Nor has Washington demonstrated
the ability to reign in Baku's main backer, Turkey, anywhere else. Washington is filled with
magical thinking, the belief that the president merely need whisper his command and the
entire world will snap to attention. Alas, America long ago lost that ability, if it ever had
it.
Moreover, US officials share some blame: On the presumption that Azerbaijan was committed
to a peaceful settlement, Washington provided it with arms and aid to combat terrorism.
Unfortunately, weaponry, like money, is fungible. And that mistake cannot be unmade.
An equally mistaken belief in the Trump administration's commitment also might have helped
lead Armenia astray. Since taking power in the Velvet Revolution two years ago, Pashinyan
sought to move westward. However, in the present crisis neither America nor Europe did
anything to assist Yerevan – whose occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh remains illegal under
international law. Some US interest groups attempted to turn Armenia into a cause celebre of
religious persecution, but the Muslim-Christian clash is incidental to broader geopolitics
which little concerned the West.
The horrid genocide committed by the Ottoman Empire against ethnic Armenians a century ago
is constantly cited but remains irrelevant to today's conflict. Around three decades ago
Armenia invaded Azerbaijan to seize incontestably Azerbaijani land. Baku struck back for
reasons of nationalism, not religion. The essential irrelevance of religion is reflected in
Christian Russia's good relations with Muslim Azerbaijan, Jewish Israel arming Muslim
Azerbaijan, and Muslim Iran's long backing for Christian Armenia, though these ties ebbed in
the last couple years. The US should no more be a crusading Christian republic than a
crusading republic.
Finally, Russia demonstrated that other powers have an interest in peace and stability and
are able to act. That is a tough lesson for the denizens of Washington to learn, given their
irrational hatred of Russia. Vladimir Putin is no cuddly liberal but most American
policymakers make hypocrisy and sanctimony the foundations of their approach to Moscow. After
all, Putin has killed fewer innocent people than Trump administration's favorite dictator,
Mohammed bin Salman, whose aggression against Yemen has resulted in more than five years of
murder and mayhem and created the worst humanitarian disaster on the planet. Yet Washington
continues to sell Saudi Arabia more weapons and munitions with which to kill more Yemeni
civilians.
Moreover, though Moscow has behaved badly, in Georgia and Ukraine in particular, so has
the US in Russia's eyes. Washington misled Moscow over NATO expansion, dismantled longtime
Russian friend Serbia, pushed NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia, embraced Tbilisi,
which fired on Russian troops guaranteeing security in neighboring secessionist territory,
encouraged a street putsch against an elected, Russophile government in Kiev, and sought to
push Moscow out of Syria, an ally of nearly 70 years. The expectation of American
policymakers that they can use military force to push the Monroe Doctrine up to Russia's
border without triggering a sharp response is unrealistic at best, deadly at worst.
Of course, the Russia-brokered accord was a clear diplomatic triumph and likely will
solidify Moscow's influence. However, with success has come responsibility, which could prove
costly to Moscow. The accord remains fragile and unstable, and might collapse.
By its nature the agreement is short-term and does not address the fundamental issue, the
status of N-K. Indeed, on its own terms either party, which would most likely be Azerbaijan
in this case, can order the withdrawal of Russian monitors in five years. However, the modus
vivendi might not last even that long. Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev posited: "I hope
that today's ceasefire and our further plans to normalize relations with Armenia, if
perceived positively by the Armenian side, can create a new situation in the region, a
situation of cooperation, a situation of strengthening stability and security." With Yerevan
aflame after angry mobs took over the National Assembly building, severely beat that body's
speaker, trashed the prime minister's home, and forced him into hiding, "positive" probably
is not the right word to describe Armenians' perception of the settlement. In fact, those who
abandoned their homes in territory turned over to Azerbaijan adopted a scorched earth policy,
destroying everything.
Both sides probably view the latest agreement a bit like French Gen. Ferdinand Foch
presciently saw the Versailles Treaty: "This is not peace. It is an armistice for 20 years."
Only the N-K time frame might be much shorter. Nevertheless, no one else has offered any
better alternative. Unfortunately, zero-sum disputes over territory are among the most
difficult disputes to resolve. Either Armenia or Azerbaijan will control N-K. Either ethnic
Armenians or Azerbaijanis will live in N-K. Yes, the ideal would be people from both lands to
live together in a democratic state, joining hands around a bonfire to sing Kumbaya every
night. However, no one believes that is even a remote possibility.
With nothing meaningful to offer to solve the current firefight, it was best for
Washington to stay out. In fact, Armenia's old guard, pushed out of power by Pashinyan two
years ago in the Velvet Revolution, blame their nation's defeat on his government's
subsequent turn West, from which it received little support. Brokering the current defeat
would merely have reinforced anger against America.
Russia acted because it has far more at stake. Let it undertake the burden of seeking a
settlement. Let it accept the cost of enforcing a settlement. Let it bear the blame if the
system again crashes.
US policymakers have trouble imagining a world in which a sparrow falls to earth, to
borrow Biblical imagery, without the US responding. If the bird falls in Nagorno-Karabakh, at
least, Americans should allow someone else to pick it up. It is not Washington's purpose to
make every conflict on earth America's own.
Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to
President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire
.
Predictions are tricky matters in world affairs – and as it turns out, prescience
produces little in the way of public or personal vindication. There's scant satisfaction when
one's subjects tend towards the tragic. Take the (for now) paused 44-day war in the South
Caucasus. Back in an October
interview , I offered this (then) seemingly provocative prognosis:
"If this thing gets solved, or put back in the freezer, which is about the best we can
hope for right now, it will be Putin playing King Solomon and cutting the Nagorno-Karabakh
baby in half."
Think Moscow will merit plaudits from mainstream media? After all, four weeks ago, a
U.S.-brokered truce held a whole
few hours !
Snark aside, intellectual merriment loses luster when it amounts to dancing on thousands
of fresh graves filled with family members of the tens of thousands more newly
displaced . Only the implications of the ceasefire's terms – under which Armenian
troops withdraw from Nagorno-Karabakh after a 26 years occupation and replaced by Russian
peacekeepers – are also disturbing. The outcome also set potentially long-lasting
precedents.
Make no mistake this was no small victory for the initiator – if not aggressor
– nation of Azerbaijan. That under the agreement , Azeri troops stay
in place within areas of Nagorno-Karabakh they seized in battle, has profound ramifications.
War worked. Furthermore, seven odd weeks of combat proved – once again – that it
often does, at least in certain contexts.
What are those (not-so) special situations, you ask? Easy: be in the esteemed and wealthy
Western camp. Kow-tow diplomatically and play ball economically – especially in energy
sales – with multinational corporations headquartered in North American and European
capitals. Thus, win powerful friends and influence prominent people and nearly anything is
permissible.
Anyway, both people and leaders in Baku – especially the mini-Stalinist Aliyev dynasty running the
family fiefdom – are thrilled with the outcome. Same goes for folks in Ankara, and
madcap Erdogan – the man who would be sultan – himself. Instructively, there's no
less enthusiasm in Tel Aviv – not just by Bibi Netanyahu's dominant rightist ethnocrats .
Because this much you can't make up: pro-Baku rallies and the
waving of Azeri flags in Israel!
Look, Ankara hates their Armenian late genocide victims for surviving to tell the
Turk-indicting tale. Besides, Erdogan is pursuing neo-Ottoman
adventurism region-wide, and more than happy to tap in into ethno-Turkic and co-religionist
solidarity to grease those grandiose wheels. Israel's self-styled Jewish and Democratic
hybrid state support for Shia Islamic majority Azerbaijan seems stranger – unless one's
in the know on the lengthy and sordid ties
between Bibi and Baku.
Not so among Armenians in Yerevan – where protesters stormed the parliament, physically
accosted the speaker and reportedly looted the prime minister's own office. Something tells
me we haven't heard the last of Armenia's army in Nagorno-Karabakh – given the soreness
and inherent instability of losing sides in long-standing and externally-escalated
ethno-religious conflicts.
And here's the troubling rub: if not quite smoking guns there's plenty of smoke
indicating that Turkey – and to a lesser but
significant extent, Israel – conspired with Azerbaijan's petty autocrats to conquer
(or reconquer) Nagorno-Karabakh. The preparatory collusion was years in the making, ramped up
mightily in the months before D-Day – yet unfolded largely under the U.S. and broader
international radar. Consider a cursory recitation of the salient sequence.
Ankara's support for its Azeri Turkic-brethren has grown gradually more overt for years.
So have its long-standing arms-sales to Baku. Then came a decisive pivot – according to
one report , a six-fold jump in weapon's transfers to Azerbaijan over the last year.
Then, this past summer, Turkish troops trained and did joint exercises with Azeri forces.
Consider it a pre-invasion capstone.
Finally – now here's a cute catalyst – Ankara
reportedly moved those implausibly-deniable Syrian mercenaries into Azerbaijan two weeks
before Baku's attack. Don't take my radical word for it, though. Consider the
conclusions of the decidedly establishment-friendly Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace's resident Caucasus expert. Fellow longtime NK-watcher Tom de Waal was as clear as he
was concise:
"It's pretty obvious that Azerbaijan has been preparing for this. Azerbaijan decided it
wanted to change the status quo and that the Armenian side had no interest in a war " and
"Clearly, the decisive factor in this conflict is Turkey's intervention on Azerbaijan's
side. They seem to be heavily coordinating the war effort."
All told, that indirect intervention, coordination, and the combat-
proven capabilities of allied arms sales bonanzas – especially Turkish Bayraktar
TB2 and Israeli kamikaze drones – were decisive. Thousands of Yerevan's troops were
killed, about a third of its tanks were destroyed, and at least 50,000 Armenians have fled in
the face of Azeri gains.
Then, in the eleventh hour breach – as if to force friendly peace terms from Russia
– Turkey
threatened to intervene outright. Just how did big, bad, unhinged and the 10-foot-tall
Putin of Democrat-delusions respond to Erdogan's provocation? Well, he essentially folded
– or settled – in the interest of temporary tranquility in Russia's restive
near-abroad. Recall that Moscow eschewed even much menacing – let alone actual
intervention – on behalf of its official Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)
Armenian ally.
That this was all so represents nothing less than a paradigm-shifting precedent-setter. Or
at least a reminder of force's forever utility for some. Boost your batch of backers, gather
the tech-savvy arsenal that's thus available, and ready your patron-trained troops for war.
Invade only once the green-light comes from on-external-high, and the "rules-based"
international order that isn't – but is dominated (for now) by Washington
– will avert eyes long enough to enable Nuremberg's "
supreme crime " of armed aggression to work its magic.
So force pays if your government has coveted energy resources, the cash they produce, the
weapons they buy – plus powerful patrons willing to sell you the cutting edge stuff.
Just ask sundry Gulf Arab autocrats! (Though it rarely turns out as well for internal –
especially Shia dissidents or, you know, Yemeni kids).
To take it a step further, maybe your benefactor even tosses in some third-party
mercenaries, trains and advises your army just before game-time, and threatens outright
intervention if your little-bro-government doesn't get it's way. It also helps if your
patron's patron is still a hyper-hegemon that bullies – I mean, "leads" by principled
example – much of the wealthy world into silence or complicity, and looks the other way
long enough for facts on the ground to turn your way. Now there's a formula for force as
solution to frozen conflicts!
No doubt other parties paid attention. Heck, they want in on the violent game-changing
game! Believe you me, there are plenty of neo-fascists, adventurist American "allies," and
frenemies – all in need of a little citizen-distraction from Covid, corruption, and
economic collapse – who are all in for applying the new NK-formula. Ukrainian fascists,
Georgian Euro-aspirants, frightened and ever-opportunist Baltic bros or Taiwanese troops,
Egypt's military coup-artists, Arabian princely theocrats, and no doubt Israel's Bibi bunch
– yea, they all took careful Caucasus-notes.
So where does America's president-elect, Joe Biden, stand on the Russian-brokered truce,
you ask? About as you'd suspect from a fella inside the beltway cult of "collusion." Biden
picked partisan point-scoring over principled consistency. He "
slammed " Trump's supposed slow response to the NK-fighting and accused him of
"delegating the diplomacy to Moscow." In fact, his campaign's initial
statement singled out Moscow's ostensibly "cynical" arms sales to both conflict parties
and failed to name even once the war's Beetlejuice of bellicosity – Turkey.
Never known for nuance, the gut-player-elect failed to couch his rather bold critique with
admissions of US security assistance to both sides, acknowledge the Tel Aviv and Ankara
accelerants, nor the circumscribed options for any administration in an unfrozen conflict in
which Washington has no real "
dog in the fight ." Well, that's strange – seeing as the Russian-led settlement
pushed past achieving one of Biden's publicly
stated goals: to "make clear to Armenia that regions surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh cannot
be occupied indefinitely."
Well, so it goes with Russia-obsessed Democratic administrations beset with the
clinical -narcissism of American exceptionalism. No matter how distant the conflict, no
matter how far off the citizenry's obscurity-radar: the maelstrom must be about us .
See everything, everywhere , is apparently about US interests, anxieties, and
obsessions. Today's obsessive flavor of the moment – and for most of the century since
Bolshevik Red October – is Moscow.
Therein lies the problem, and what I've been boy-who-cried-wolfing about regarding the
real
risk regarding the coming Democratic administration. That is, after making everything
about Trump and Russia for four years, they might begin believing their own exaggerated
alarmism and follow through with legit escalation and acceleration of theater numero uno of a
dual-front, Eurasia-spanning Cold War encore. If Moscow and Beijing are forever branded bad
boys – in motive and machinations – then on shall continually churn the war
state, with all the pecuniary and professional benefits to both the outgoing Trump team and
incoming
Biden bunch alike.
Few Americans will notice, or bother to bother themselves about it – pandemic
preoccupied and social media distracted as they be – until the fruits of folly flash in
front of their eyes (pun intended).
Forget Condi Rice's farcical foreboding of a mushroom cloud as smoking gun . Even the Bushies'
bald-faced lies rarely reached past Saddam's singular nuclear blasts – Washington and
Moscow might end the world in an afternoon.
So permit me one final prediction: if they do, some staunch US"ally" learned-of the latest
Caucasus-conclusions will be the one to drag us down to oblivion.
Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer, senior fellow at theCenter for
International Policy(CIP), contributing editor atAntiwar.com, and director of the new Eisenhower Media
Network (EMN). His work has appeared in the NY Times, LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post,
The Hill, Salon, The American Conservative, Mother Jones, Scheer Post and Tom Dispatch,
among other publications. He served combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught
history at West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq
War,Ghostriders of
Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the SurgeandPatriotic Dissent: America in
the Age of Endless War. Along with fellow vet Chris "Henri" Henriksen, he co-hosts
the podcast "Fortress on a
Hill." Follow him on Twitter@SkepticalVetand on hiswebsitefor media requests
and past publications.
Vicky left fake democracy promotion was always about expanding and sustaining controlled
from Washinton global neoliberal empire. It is a part and parcel of Full Spectrum Dominance
doctrine implementation. So it will lean to further drop of the standard of living on the
majority of US people.
Biden is a tent revival for the aptly named "cruise missile liberals" and some of the more
shadowy neo-conservative forces are in retreat and determined to bring democracy building
home after their colonial expeditions extinguished it
"... Hate is the only thing that holds the American Empire together. Without its Two Minutes of Hate, America will break up apart into a million pieces. ..."
America desperately needs its Two Minutes of Hate against other countries like a meth
addict needs his next hit.
For Democrats and their ilk, Hate Russia was their unifying and
mobilizing ideology. For Republicans and their ilk, Hate China is their unifying and
mobilizing ideology.
Hate is the only thing that holds the American Empire together. Without its Two
Minutes of Hate, America will break up apart into a million pieces.
You can't find better smarter neocons to pursue the Full Spectrum Dominance Doctrine to the
total decimation of the standard of living of ordinary Americans ;-)
Since the 1990s, Flournoy and Blinken have steadily risen through the ranks of the
military-industrial complex, shuffling back and forth between the Pentagon and hawkish
think-tanks funded by the U.S. government, weapons companies, and oil giants.
Under Bill Clinton, Flournoy was the principal author of the 1996 Quadrinellial Defense
Review, the document that outlined the U.S. military's doctrine of permanent war – what
it called "full spectrum dominance."
Flournoy called for "unilateral use of military power" to ensure "uninhibited access to key
markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources."
... During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Biden declared, "In my judgment, President
Bush is right to be concerned about Saddam Hussein's relentless pursuit of weapons of mass
destruction"
As Iraq was plunged into chaos and bloodshed, Flournoy was among the authors of a paper
titled "Progressive Internationalism" that called for a "smarter and better" style of permanent
war. The paper chastised the anti-war left and stated that "Democrats will maintain the world's
most capable and technologically advanced military, and we will not flinch from using it to
defend our interests anywhere in the world."
... In 2005, Flournoy signed onto a letter
from the neoconservative think tank Project for a New American Century, asking Congress to
"increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps (by) at least 25,000
troops each year over the next several years."
Joe Biden's national security adviser pick defended the anti-Trump dossier in 2018 as
"perfectly appropriate."
Many news outlets have declared Biden the president-elect. Newsmax has yet to project a
winner, citing legal challenges in several key battleground states.
Jake Sullivan, who worked for Biden when he served as vice president in the Obama
administration and as a senior foreign policy adviser to Hillary Clinton during her
presidential race in 2016,
made the comments on a podcast interview with David Axelrod, the chief strategist for
Obama's presidential campaigns.
"I mean, I believe that it is perfectly appropriate and responsible if we get wind, or if
people associated with the campaign get wind, that there may be real questions about the
connections between Donald Trump, his organization, his campaign and Russia that that be
explored fully," he said at the time, The Daily
Caller reported.
Sullivan worked for Clinton when a law firm representing her campaign hired an opposition
research firm to investigate Trump's possible ties to Russia. The firm hired Christopher
Steele, the author behind the dossier alleging a "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation
between the Trump campaign and Russian government."
Special counsel Robert Mueller later found those claims to be unfounded during his probe
into Russian interference in the election, writing in his
report "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or
coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
This is highly relevant critique of Trump legal team. But what the author misses is the
systematic campaign of promoting mail-in ballots and enabling ballot harvesting fraud, which is
quite provable and which violated constitutions os several states in which it was practiced. For
example in Georgia the agreement was reached between the Secretary of State and Tracy Abrams, but
the secretary of State has no legal authority to change the state election laws, COVID or no
COVID.
Is not interruption in vote counting qualify as brazen interference? It was never explained.
Just swiped under the carpet. Does neoliberal Dems manipulations with mail-in ballots quality as
"brazen interference" ? i would say yes, it does, This is replica of Pendergast Political Machine
methods. Please note that I am not a Trump supporter. I actually consider both Trump and Biden to
be very similar abominations.
There is a lot of bad reporting in the media, but a lot of the blame rests on Trump, his
legal team and the magnitude, complexity and implausibility of their claims
Trump's lawyers spent a lot of time at the podium lecturing the media on their "fake"
reporting on the fraud claims. No doubt, after four years of mainstream media malpractice, they
have reason for making this claim.
However, the moralistic lecturing was myopic and counterproductive, simply because even
honest journalists (if there are any left) have been left with their heads spinning by the
quantity and magnitude of the claims the Trump administration is putting out there right
now.
Any honest person approaching the fraud claims without a pre-determined position on their
validity (something that is, unfortunately, all too rare) has inevitably been left feeling
overwhelmed and confused. There's just too much information. There are too many conflicting
claims. There isn't enough time to adjudicate each one of them properly. Not only is some
degree of media skepticism to be expected, it's actually the only responsible thing to
do , given the complexity and magnitude of the fraud claims, and the stakes at play.
One of the central claims being made by Trump's legal team is that there exists a vast
national and global conspiracy involving a network of shadowy electronic voting companies,
communist regimes, foreign dictators, vote routing, switching and deleting involving complex
algorithms, and the complicity of numerous Democratic governors and election officials. The
evidence proffered so far to support this claim is a single affidavit by an unnamed Venezuelan
official, and a number of non-specific allegations of data anomalies on election night.
Should we -- should the media -- simply assent to these claims, based solely upon the
heat of Sidney Powell's rhetoric, and a single affidavit? How seriously should we even take
them, given that the clock is ticking, and it is hard to imagine the Trump team actually
proving these allegations by the safe harbor deadlines, whether they are true or not?
How much effort should they expend chasing every new bone Sidney Powell and MAGA surrogates
throw their way?
"Dianne Feinstein's husband! George Soros! Scytl! German servers! Raids by U.S. military!
Spain! Hugo Chavez! Nancy Pelosi's chief of staff! Bill Gates! Cuba!" And so on and so
forth.
It's exhausting just trying to keep up. However you look at it, much of it is
extraordinarily confusing and, frankly, prima facie unbelievable. Of course, truth is
sometimes stranger than fiction. Powell could be right. But how likely is it that all
her increasingly wild allegations should come together just as she has laid them out? And how
surprised should we be that people outside the MAGA camp are skeptical?
3) The whole thing feels like intellectual blackmail
Rudy Giuliani complained that his team is preparing and presenting cases that would normally
take months, if not years to prepare and argue in normal circumstances. The media should give
them time to make their case, and wait for the evidence, he said.
But who's fault is this? The Trump administration had four years to investigate Dominion,
Smartmatic, and the dangers of electronic voting in general. They could have convened
bipartisan committees to investigate voter fraud and the vulnerabilities of these voting
machines.
In 2016, even after he won, Trump claimed that there were millions of fraudulent
votes. If he really believed that, why didn't he do something meaningful about it while he was
in office? Posting about it on Twitter doesn't count.
Sidney Powell has raised some good questions about electronic voting, if only that people
will readily believe wild claims of fraud using it. These questions should be pursued, however,
a few days ago, most of us had never even heard of Dominion, Smartmatic and Scytl, etc.
Now we're being told that we must simply believe Powell's theory that these companies stole the
election. Countless MAGA followers are posting that they are absolutely sure , without
the slightest shadow of a doubt, that Dominion is behind the electoral theft. This feels
mad.
"She's a competent lawyer!" her supporters say. "She's brilliant, she's honest! She's a
patriot!" Maybe she is all of these things, but I'm not going to make a judgment about the
outcome of a presidential election, or assent to a vast, complex, and highly implausible
theory, based upon such thin gruel.
I need time. I need evidence. I need witnesses and counter-witnesses, examined and
cross-examined. And being told by the MAGA crowd that I must assent to the theory, and to
declare certainty that an election is invalid and that a coup has been perpetrated,
without any of these, feels like intellectual blackmail.
The simple fact is, this process should not be happening under the gun like this. And
that's on Trump, not the media.
4) Trump's legal team is making an amateur error in its approach to convincing the
public
A thousand doubts does not constitute proof. Amateur debaters often fall into the trap of
trying to win a debate by listing as many arguments as they can come up with. The mistake is in
thinking that people are convinced by sheer quantities of evidence.
In reality, this almost always backfires. When you pound people over the head with argument
after argument, they tend to become confused, bewildered, and, in the end, resentful. They
resent not having the chance to really think through any one claim or argument in detail.
Inevitably they begin to suspect that you're just trying to pull a fast one on them. Usually,
they're right.
Trump and his legal team have fallen into this trap. At the press conference, they made
repeated reference to the "hundreds" of sworn affidavits they have gathered, and the large
number of their lawsuits. However, while hundreds of affidavits may be "evidence," in the legal
sense of the term, they do not amount to proof.
A journalist for The Blaze reviewed the affidavits filed in Michigan and noted that many of
them do not actually contain allegations of fraud. Instead, they often have to do with
circumstantial things, such as how GOP challengers felt they were being "treated" by election
officials, or described "fraudulent" behavior that could plausibly be interpreted as election
officials following normal procedures that GOP challengers simply failed to understand.
Maybe some of the affidavits obtained by Trump's legal team contain slam-dunk proof of
widespread fraud, but if they do, they are being lost in the noise.
Expert debaters know that the best way to win an argument is to select only the very
best arguments, and to focus on those. If you go for quantity of evidence, inevitably you
will include low quality evidence in your arguments. Your audience, which is not so much
weighing each piece of evidence (an impossible task), as whether you are the sort of person who
should be trusted, will often only remember your bad or weak arguments. The result is
that they will write off everything else you say, as coming from a fundamentally unreliable
source.
Trump and his surrogates have raised important questions about election integrity.
Unfortunately, however, they have also repeated and promoted numerous false claims. Starting on
election night, Trump began retweeting every claim of fraud that came across his Twitter feed,
without any effort to fact check them. Many of them have subsequently been proven to be
baseless.
It should come as no surprise that those who are not already on board the Trump Train are
reacting to each new claim made by Trump with deep skepticism. The tragedy is that some
of these claims may be valid. However, Trump's carelessness with the truth has fatally undercut
his ability to lead a productive inquiry into voter fraud.
5) The fraud 'investigation' is being conducted ass-backwards
Trump, his legal team, and MAGA supporters all began with the conviction that the
election was stolen. Then, they went in search of the proof.
People are skeptical of the effort, because that's the worst possible way to go about an
investigation. The point of conducting an investigation is that you do not know the answer. You
have a hypothesis or a suspicion, but not proof.
The Trump admin has, from the very beginning, claimed absolute certitude. Unfortunately,
this isn't just bad epistemology, it's also insanely reckless, since, by definition, the very
claim calls into doubt the very existence of democracy in America.
The word " coup " is being tossed around by MAGA followers carelessly. To say that's
a loaded word is an understatement. But Trump and his team have left themselves no escape
route. Even if incontrovertible evidence shows up at some point that the election was not
stolen, a significant portion of the MAGA crowd will always believe that it was. At this point,
there is nothing that could convince them otherwise.
Clearly, having a large body of citizens who believe that their government is illegitimate
comes with potentially catastrophic unforeseen consequences. Nobody in the Trump administration
or MAGA crowd seems to be giving any thought to this. Damn the torpedoes.
Given that it's Trump, we can expect him to throw out outrageous claims without making any
real effort to determine if they're really true. However, it is our responsibility to
prioritize truth over political expediency. Whatever our political affiliations, our duty is to
investigate with indifference to the outcome, rather than seeking ways to substantiate
our personal preferences. When faced with a choice between truth and winning, choose truth,
every time.
6) The U.S. electoral system is a mess
Rudy Giuliani has at least this much right. The evidence Giuliani and his team have
collected of conflicting processes and procedures around the country, the reports of
irregularities, the evidence of actual fraud, and the ongoing efforts of Democrats to push less
secure voting methods, may not be sufficient to actually overturn the result. But it absolutely
is sufficient to suggest that the whole system is a mess, and vulnerable to
exploitation.
While I believe the odds of Trump's fraud claims leading to the election being overturned
are slim (although I am keeping an open mind on the question), we can at least hope that the
whole sordid episode leads to some serious and much-needed bipartisan electoral reform, so that
this does not happen again.
But in the end, that's only going to happen if cooler heads prevail, and reckless rhetoric
only leads the country down a dark road of further division and strife.
John Jalsevac is
currently working towards a PhD in philosophy. Prior to grad school, he worked for over a
decade as a journalist, editor, and pro-life activist. His previous journalism and creative
writing have appeared in The Public Discourse, Gilbert! Magazine, Dappled Thing, LifeSiteNews,
and others.
The "conspiracy" gets more interesting the more deeply you look into it. For
instance :
A government body exists that certifies voting machines and software as being 'okay to
use' by individual states. There's a voluntary aspect to this, I believe -- states can choose
to ignore the certification, yeah? But that doesn't matter, because the conspiracy is about
Dominion , and Dominion was certified safe.
And this means that potentially complicit in the communist/globalist/Soros conspiracy to
overthrow Trump are:
* Dominion, obvs.
* Those heads of state that okayed the use of Dominion machines (possibly)
* Those members of that government body most directly responsible for repeatedly certifying
Dominion products
* The laboratory (Wyle, almost always) which repeatedly tested and cleared Dominion
products
And if Wyle is itself on the take from communists/globalists/Soros, shouldn't we
reasonably assume that every other voting product they've tested and cleared is
therefore suspect?
And if that election commission is on the take from communists/globalists/Soros, mustn't
we assume that they are only certifying voting products which serve their agenda?
And should we not question those most responsible for advancing the responsible parties in
that commission to their present exalted state?
And what of Wyle's owners? (National Technical Systems) Should we not be
particularly concerned by their voluntary acquisition of a laboratory group that
exists as a tool of communists/globalists/Soros and sways elections on their behalf?
We need a public hearing all right. Like Watergate. Reminds me of when Sam Ervin said the
telephone is the instrument of the devil. Wiser words I cannot think of.
Every precinct in the United States uses a paper trail to ensure results can be audited.
Every single vote cast involves a piece of paper with voter selections on it. In Georgia,
where Dominion systems were used, the hand audit produced virtually identical results. That
was a full hand recount. If the tally machines were switching votes, even a partial audit
would pick up on that immediately.
Very good article here, and does a good job explaining why so many of us have trouble
taking the claims of fraud seriously. Especially given Trump's long estrangement with truth
generally, and his tendency to promote conspiracy theories, especially those which stand to
benefit him if believed (see QAnon.)
The issues with electronic voting machines have been known for years, and I've seen the
case made convincingly by commentators left, right, and center. I'm certainly glad to have
cast a paper ballot in the last election, as everyone in my state does. Hopefully a silver
lining from this mess will be the adoption of more robust paper balloting systems
nationwide.
Everybody casts a paper ballot in one way or another. In the few places that have voting
machines (and I think it's very few honestly), a paper ballot is generated for auditing
purposes.
Per my understanding, electronic voting machines are fairly widespread and fall into
several categories. While some states do require a paper ballot to be generated for auditing
purposes, there are some states like Kentucky and Indiana that have direct electronic voting
without that capability. It is worth noting that none of those states are the swing states
now in contention though, and that they are invariably red states.
My jurisdiction briefly switched to all-electronic machines, then quickly returned to the
paper ballots read by optical scanning device . . . a much better system.
"The mistake is in thinking that people are convinced by sheer quantities of
evidence."
It works for the democrats, that all they ever do is 'level charges without evidence' in the
MSM, and where Tucker was attempting to take Ms. Powell and it seems your on board like all
the other conservatives tell us, we have to accept Biden, while we look into voting
irregularities and fraud, sometime in the future [post GA's Jan 5th 2nd electronic vote
steal].
I am going to eschew the question about Mr. Carlson and Ms Powell ----
But your observations about what works is accurate. It's a tactic that does work. It works
for prosecutors How do you get 50 million people to believe the Russians actually invaded
election boards and their processes across the country.
And yet, here we have vast irregularities in differing parts of the country. I think there
is a case for fraud, but whether or not that is demonstrated, there is clearly a case for an
audit on both machines and mail in ballots. and there absolutely needs to be an audit of
votes to registered voters and no one needs to a HS diploma to comprehend that it's near
impossible for all mail in ballots to be for x candidate and less than a 6th grade education
to know that if you have 2000 registered voters or even a population of 2000 that the total
number of votes is never going to exceed 100% -- if it does, there's serious problem.
What, no comment forthcoming from you about the terrible, awful, totally crooked election
that happened in 2016, with millions and millions of fraudulent votes--- that Trump never
looked into? In 4 years? At all?
Until he lost this election? He's been whining about how this election was going to be
rigged, couldn't he have skipped a few golf games to actually look into it before it reared
its ugly head and kicked him out of the White House? Sure, sure.
One thing that seems to have gotten lost in the fog--and that definitely got lost
by this author--is that Giuliani and Powell are working on effectively two separate cases.
Both are working for Trump, and both are working against Biden et al with regards to this
election, but there is a clear line of demarcation between the two. Powell's focus is
primarily, if not solely, on Dominion and the electronic case, while Giuliani's primary focus
is on alleged physical fraud.
It makes no sense to assume that Powell's investigation should have begun four years ago,
and then use that as a basis to sneer, as this author does, at Giuliani--whose investigation
could not possibly have begun before November 4--for complaining about having to compress a
type of investigation that typically takes years into less than a month.
I'm not sure what Powell has. Some of the anomalies she has obliquely referred to are
already out there, if you look for them, and they are indeed suspicious (e.g. successive
batches of votes, often 10 or more in a row, all with the exact same ratio of Biden-to-Trump
votes--a statistical, if not literal, impossibility). However, it doesn't look like those
would be enough to swing the election, because even in her telling, if the race had been
closer, the Dominion irregularities would not have been discovered at all. The electronic
interference was significant, but it wasn't what made the difference.
The meat of this case, with the potential to flip the results, lies with old fashioned
physical fraud--ballot-manufacturing and box-stuffing--and Giuliani's mad scramble to find
enough evidence in time.
My gut says he won't make it.
There are very strong indications that what Giuliani and the Trump team suspect did indeed
happen. Most notable is the Democrats' brazen interference with GOP poll-watchers in multiple
states; it is inexplicable if they did not have something to hide. But by the same token,
that very interference successfully hid whatever it was that they did, and because of that,
they have already gotten away with it--the evidence that Giuliani needs is gone forever.
The room is filled with smoke, but the fire has already been extinguished--and without the
fire, Trump can't win.
"The mistake is in thinking that people are convinced by sheer quantities of
evidence."
Evidence, philosophically, is something that is true. If I have an apple in my hand and I
reach out and drop it, I can truthfully tell you that it will fall towards the ground. It is
evidence of the existence of gravity. I can't see gravity. But I can see the apple fall (and
anything else I drop). So can everyone in the world.
An affidavit is not evidence. It is a statement that someone is claiming is true. The
statement may or may not be true. So a lot of affidavits is not a "sheer quantity of
evidence". It's not evidence at all. Trump supporters need to understand that. And this is
why Trump continues to have these court cases thrown out: he is not presenting any real
evidence of fraud. Why? Because there isn't any.
You've got this wrong because your definition of evidence is wrong. An affidavit IS
evidence.The truthfullness or importance of it is something decided in court. It is evidence
just much as a fingerprint at a crime scene is evidence. The relevance of the fingerprint
evidence still has to be determined in court.
What's most obvious to me is that the lawyers making these far-fetched claims didn't
themselves believe the claims. The effort was geared to flood the zone, so to speak, to
create confusion and doubt resulting in state legislatures stepping in to settle electoral
vote allocations.
Sowing doubt this way might be acceptable in criminal court, where defense lawyers are trying
to establish reasonable doubt, however, here the objective should be to determine what
happened, and not inventing things that might have happened.
Soros, Chavez, Spain and communists? I believe the term is "jumping the shark."
Mr. Jalsevac confuses two different facts under heading no. 6, "The U.S. electoral system
is a mess." (1) The US electoral system is not a genuine system at all but an aggregate of
electoral systems that vary by state and even by county. (2) Some of these systems are
untrustworthy. It is clear that the second fact is cause for concern and in need of remedy.
It is not so clear that the first one is. The diversity of electoral systems is a feature
that contributes to the difficulty of manipulating national electoral results. It is the
chief reason why the Trump team has had to resort to grotesque conspiracistic fantasies to
maintain its claim that Trump is the legitimate winner.
"Durable, hand marked paper ballots must be established as the national standard for
democratic elections in the United States. While using paper may sound antiquated, the
consensus among election security experts is that nothing else provides the needed
reliability,security, and transparency. Durable, voter marked paper ballots are appropriate
technology for public elections....Hand Counted Paper Ballots are considered the 'Gold
Standard' of democratic elections"~ National Election Defense Coalition
https://www.electiondefense...
Are there any electronic voting machines in Team D-controlled states? How did they get
there? Did they sneak in across the border? Which political party held the presidency from
2008-2016? Were they pushing relentlessly for paper ballots, hand counted in public? For that
matter, following the 2016 election, I heard lots of conspiracy theory talk from Team D, but
little in the way advocating for paper ballots, hand-counted in public.
The Senate report was long on words, light on specifics. Great, if continuing a new cold
war is your objective. Note that the House did not impeach on that basis, after two years and
change of promising russiagate bombshells that never came.
According to this article, there are 8 states still using voting machines that produce no
paper trail. It's not a long article, but I extracted this list:
"eight states that will use some form of paperless voting in 2020: Texas, Louisiana,
Tennessee, Mississippi, Kansas, Indiana, Kentucky and New Jersey. "
There have been Democrats complaining about electronic voting machines for at least the
last 20 years. You're a bit late to the party, but you're welcome to join. Our democracy
works best when citizens are willing to work together toward goals on which they agree,
regardless of whether or not they agree on all goals.
I would also be glad to see bipartisan electoral reform, but only if includes measures
taken to protect votes before the actual voting starts. Some of the voter suppression
measures we.ve
seen in the last few years are:
- Purging of voter rolls near an election to keep voters from having a chance to vote
- Implementing postal procedures to reduce the speed of mail delivery to make it more
difficult to vote by mail
- Removing mail sorting machines and post office drop boxes to make it more difficult to vote
by mail
- Reducing the number of polling sites in areas populated by the other political party to
complicate voting in person
- Rejecting mailed in ballots because trivial differences in the signature, such as a missing
middle initial.
All of the Republican handwringing about "voter fraud" in the election seems to boil down
to complaints that the judges stopped their efforts to steal the election. Some of that gets
dressed up with pontification about the importance of the credibility of the election. The
credibility of an election is supremely important, but voter suppression damages that
credibility as much as voter fraud.
I noticed you did not mention the Ramsland affidavit in your discussion of the competence
of Trump's legal team. The affidavit attempts to identify areas in Michigan in which more
votes were cast than the number of registered voters. Unfortunately, all the examples
provided were in Minnesota. That does not suggest thorough research. In addition, the areas
listed in the affidavit tend to be in very Republican areas of Minnesota, suggesting that any
voter fraud may be as likely to be Republican as it is to be Democratic.
"Keeping copies of the physical ballots does nothing to assuage these concerns"
I disagree. Here in Michigan we do regular hand checks of randomly chosen scanners, and of
all of them if any problem arises. It has been remarkably accurate in my town.
The opposite of such scanning is prolonged counting, by fallible humans some of them
partisan and fighting with other partisans. I don't see advantage there.
But yes, hacking of any electronic device is a monster problem, and must be addressed by
regular and randomized physical confirmation, just as is done with any quality control
issue.
To be effective against fraud the count needs to be compelled by law and done on a truly
random sampling of ballots until statistical near-certainty of the result through
hand-counting alone is achieved, falling back to a count of all ballots if the election is
close.
Optional procedures executed in creative ways by goofy partisans is what "regular hand
checks" sounds like to me, though I may be wrong.
I agree it's not worthless to save the ballots, and I'd even agree with you far enough to
disagree with the author and say it's possible to design a good manual-check procedure. But I
read what he said as a simplification of the truth: in 2016 there was so much sillyness in
the law and the implementation of recount procedures that it'd be better if the machines
weren't there at all, and I doubt that's changed.
When it is close, we by law have an automatic 100% recount of machine scanned ballots by
hand. That is what was done in 2016. That was discontinued by agreement of both political
parties after the initial round of those counts showed zero error. Zero. By agreement. Thus,
it can be done. But you are correct about the sampling idea, and the need for uniform
enforceable law on the matter.
Now we're being told that we must simply believe Powell's theory that these companies
stole the election.
No, you must either do your own investigating to try and ascertain the truth, (which NO
media outlet seems to be doing) or keep an open mind that Powell will be able to prove what
she says. Powell is not some two-bit lawyer. She's a seasoned federal prosecutor putting a
lot on the line in making these claims. Grant her a modicum of respect in entertaining the
possibility that she can back up what she says.
Also, the Trump campaign has filed exactly 3, and now 4 lawsuits - not 30-something as is
continually and falsely reported and regurgitated by the media. The other lawsuits are by
supporters and allies, but not Trump's lawyers. Yes, it's hard to keep up, but YOUR JOB is to
at least try. Thank you.
I suggest young Master Jalsevac spend a couple of years living in one of our fine major
cities to see how things really are run outside of political philosophy books.
One of the oddest things about this is that in the past, particularly in 2004, many
Democrats charged that the Republicans had stolen the election, particularly in Ohio. Google:
2004 election stolen. You will find a lot of hits. Does anyone remember Diebold voting
machines? Are they still in use? Were they manipulated on behalf of Republicans, then or
later? I have no idea. But I want to make a few points: 1. Liberals have at times complained
loudly about stolen elections and the ease of manipulating electronic results by various
Republican-connected people. 2. Whether these were true or not have they ever been
sufficiently investigated? 3. Why, now is it only a vast liberal conspiracy that is alleged
to exist, and not perhaps the still existing conservative conspiracy from 2004? In November
2005 Mother Jones reviewed a book, Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election &
Why They'll Steal the Next One Too
The voting machine division of Diebold was taken over by Dominion Voting Systems. That's
the easiest conspiracy theory in history. The real question, if you want to believe, is why
the Republicans sold their election-stealer to the Democrats.
"In other words, Plaintiffs ask this Court to disenfranchise almost seven million voters.
This Court has been unable to find any case in which a plaintiff has sought such a drastic
remedy in the contest of an election, in terms of the sheer volume of votes asked to be
invalidated. One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would
come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant
corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed
injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.
That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal
arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and
unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the
disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated
state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to
meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant
Defendants' motions and dismiss Plaintiffs' action with prejudice."
You know, this kind of reasonable and thoughtful writing is why, as a liberal, I like
coming over here to the dark side of town to see what's going on. Even while struggling to
present an open mind, he admits to being buried in the silliness of it all. A good read. Not
surprised to see all these calls for crucifixion in the comments.
You know, this kind of reasonable and thoughtful writing .......
It is neither reasonable or thoughtful. It pretends to be condemning the defense while
pretending that they would otherwise have a case. And he is refusing to acknowledge that the
why Trump has to turn to Rudy - his last resort - is because the reputable lawyers he had on
his team are refusing to make bogus claims in court; to be fair, so does Rudy, but he is
willing to make them to the press and they are not.
Even while struggling to present an open mind, he admits to being buried in the
silliness of it all.
You are doing what Liberals so often do. They are so hungry for a Republican who is not
calling them names and willing to admit that Trump is at fault, that they completely miss the
point that the "admission" is trying to make. When Comey admitted that Hillary Clinton
omitted no indictable offense, they praised him for his "fairness". But he was not being fair
at all. He would have to be an evil crook to indict the nominee of one of our major parties
when he knew she could not be convicted. But he broke every rule of propriety and launched
into a condemnation that handed Trump what he needed to win the election. So this writer
admitted that Trump is making no case . So what? You seem to have missed the
fact that he is falsely claiming that Trump does have case to make. And that
claim is utterly baseless!
I am not a partisan. I detest political parties. But I also detest seeing partisans
complimented for being non-partisan for simply not being on the raving extreme of their
party. It lowers the standard of what it beings to be non-partisan. Non-partisan means to
make judgements consistently on principle, applying the same standards to everyone. I expect
that many Republicans will read my post and conclude that I am being partisan - because that
is taken nowadays to mean "condemns my party". But I get accused just as often by Democrats
to being a Republican, so that is alright with me. But in so far as this particular quarrel
is concerned, President Trump has no case at all. The Pennsylvania elections were run be
declared Republicans. Prominent Republicans, and they gave both Republican Senators more
votes. They counted the legal votes as they were cast. They ran a fair, honest and honorable
election!
Thanks for the magnificent reply, 414 words, all thoughtful. You may have me there in your
sterner criticism of Rod's equivocation about Trump, but consider the audience, after all. As
for being a liberal hungry for a conservative who is not an asshole, guilty as charged. You
make a good point that Rod still seems still to yearn for Trump to have a case to make and
that is true, but I think Rod is fairly conflicted in this and other conundrums conservatives
must find themselves as the whole enterprise sinks into hopelessness and tawdry hopelessness
at that. It is a hard row to hoe, after all. I never said he was non-partisan, just a poor
conservative religious guy trying to make his way in the difficult world while continuing to
try to be a decent man. It is what is endearing about his writing to me sometimes. But I
thank you for this response, it shows both feeling and intelligence.
Unfortunately IMHO, the Kraken was either a careless misspeak or a bluff to shake the
trees to see if a whistleblower would fall out. If the later, it failed. If the former, I am
inclined to give Sidney a break. She has done yeoman's work for Flynn. And so the Kraken
seems destined to remain a creature of Scandinavian lore and Hollywood movies. I wish it were
not so. The Dominion software apparently is easily hacked and allows votes to be directly
manipulated without a trace. Hard to make a case without an audit trail. I wonder whether the
outcry from MAGA supporters will be sufficient to encourage states to choose a more secure
vendor or will Dominion still be in widespread use during the midterms? Kemp, Raffensberger
and company should be ridden out of GA on a rail after a good tar and feathering. Other
states have their own corrupt actors who should receive the same consideration. They all have
sold us out -- if the Dems take the Senate, even to slavery under socialism -- for 30 pieces
of silver. As for Kemp and Raffensberger, in a different age I might have suggested an
appointment with a high, sturdy branch in one of GA's many 100 plus years old live oaks.
As I listened to Lin's interview today I tho't that there must be something in the
Southern water. Both he and Sidney have that Southern drawl. Very genteel, polished and
extremely intelligent.
I am a very brave soul, but I don't think I would want to go up against either of them in
a court of law. 🙂
I forget who it was, either Lou or Tucker, that ended their interview telling Sidney half
jokingly to remember to lock her doors at night.
Please remember to PRAY God's protection for this wonderful woman!
When are they going to lay out the case? Lin Wood and Sidney have been making serious
statements. They have reputations beyond reproach. I believe them when they say they have the
goods. It's like they have to get the election called for Trump or they will surely be
political prisoners.
IF you watch the movie "Kill Chain: The Cyber War on America's Elections"* you will see
that a steal was supposed to happen in Florida that day and it got thwarted, before it got
started,
PLUS, they didn't have the mail in ballot scheme in place yet to back up their theft back
then. China Virus was their plandemic to make that happen, and to get the cash from the Care$
Act to get machines for everyone.
*"(2020)From voter registration to counting ballots, data security expert Harri Hursti
examines how hackers can influence and disrupt the U.S. election system."
Love Sidney Powell but that interview did not give me a lot of confidence. I sure hope she
has some solid evidence. Doesn't sound like she has much though. Don't have much time
left.
Biggest heist in the history of the US and nothing can be done about it is sickening. Barr
and Wray should be ashamed of themselves for letting something like this happen on their
watch. They did nothing. Thanks to them the constitution is now worth nothing. The rights are
gone. Law and order is gone. We are on our own.
How do Barr and Wray even look at themselves in the mirror?
Finally, I found out from this interview where I could send money to support this legal
effort. I'm tired of the RNC doing nothing. Sidney Powell will get my direct support now.
DefendingtheRepublic.org – is the right place.
So what Biden is trying to achieve is to stem the collapse of neoliberalism and with
it the global US-controlled neoliberal empire.
Notable quotes:
"... IMO, all three of the turn-of-the-century free-market-neolibral model, the hypothetical Trump(ish) nationalist model, and the revised technocratic-neoliberal schemes, are fatally flawed. Despite the political rhetoric of US Republicans, there's no real prospect of an even mildly leftist (i.e. inclusive, egalitarian, and internationalist) alternative anytime soon in the US. I suspect the same is true in most neoliberal countries. ..."
Blinken surprised some in the Situation Room by breaking with Biden to support military
action in Libya, administration officials said, and he advocated for American action in
Syria after Obama's reelection. These sources said that Blinken was less enthusiastic than
Biden about Obama's decision to seek congressional approval for a strike in Syria, but is
now -- perhaps out of necessity -- onboard and a backer of diplomatic negotiations with
Russia. While less of an ideologue than Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United
Nations (a job for which he was considered), he not surprisingly shares her belief that
global powers such as the United States have a "responsibility to protect" against
atrocities.
He has since shown
no remorse about those foreign policy failures:
Blinken maintains that the failure of U.S. policy in Syria was that our government did not
employ enough force. He stands by the false argument that Biden's vote to authorize the
invasion of Iraq was a "vote for tough diplomacy." He was reportedly in favor of the Libyan
intervention, which Biden opposed, and he was initially a defender and advocate for U.S.
support for the Saudi coalition war on Yemen. In short, Blinken has agreed with some of the
biggest foreign policy mistakes that Biden and Obama made, and he has tended to be more of
an interventionist than both of them.
If you can't quite place Jake Sullivan, he's was a long-serving aide to Hillary Clinton,
starting with her 2008 race against Barack Obama, then serving as her deputy chief of staff
and director of the State Department's Office of Policy Planning when Clinton was Obama's
secretary of state. (...) In 2016, during her failed presidential campaign, Sullivan once
again teamed up with Clinton, and he was widely expected to have been named to serve as her
national security adviser or even secretary of state had she won.
Since 2016, and since the creation of NSA, Sullivan has emerged as a kind of foreign
policy scold, gently -- and sometimes not so gently -- criticizing those who reflexively
oppose American intervention abroad and who disparage the idea of American
"exceptionalism." Indeed, in an article in the January-February issue of The Atlantic,
"What Donald Trump and Dick Cheney Got Wrong About America," Sullivan explicitly says that
he's intent on "rescuing the idea of American exceptionalism" and presents the "case for a
new American exceptionalism".
Sullivan
send classified documents to Hillary Clinton's private email server. He wrote to her that
Al Qaida is "on our side in Syria." He also hyped fake Trump-Russia collusion
allegations.
It is yet unknown who will become Secretary of Defense. Michèle Flournoy is the
most named option but there is
some opposition to her nomination :
[B]ackers of Michèle Flournoy, his likely pick for defense secretary, are trying to
head off a last-minute push by some left-leaning Democrats trying to derail her selection,
with many progressives seeing her nomination as a continuation of what critics refer to as
America's "forever wars."
I expect that the progressive will lose the fight and that either Flournoy or some other
hawkish figure will get that weapon lobbyist position.
Progressives also lost on the Treasury position. Biden's nomination for that is Janet
Yellen who is known to be an inflation hawk. She is unlikely to support large spending on
progressive priorities.
As usual with a Democratic election win the people who brought the decisive votes and
engagement, those who argue for more socialist and peaceful policies, will be cut off from
the levers of power.
In three years they will again be called upon to fall for another bait and switch.
As I said over at Ian Welsh's blog
"this is brought on by the "blue no matter who crowd" who can't understand that
guaranteeing their vote at the outset without extorting any firm quid pro quo a priori
guarantees that [working people] can be safely ignored. And yet, almost everybody here
[reminder, posted at Ian's] argued for just that and will the next time and the next.
Why will something like that happen
If the polls are to be believed, Biden is the most popular Democrat of all time and by a
large margin. If polls are to be believed, the DNC denying the Sanders wing was the smartest
thing the DNC has ever done. If polls are to be believed, Biden strode through battle
unscathed while lessor Democrats were squashed. The DNC was right, the Sanders people are
fools, if polls are to be believed. The immense Biden vote proves once and for all, that any
who diverge from DNC dictata should be ignored for all time.
That was the message sent in 2020"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Biden is to the extreme right of Trump on the issue of the US's endless neocolonial wars.
And Biden is already laying the groundwork for the deconstruction of Social Security, work he
began as VP to Obama. That makes Biden to the extreme right of Trump on foreign &
domestic issues...all thanks to the "blue no matter who" crowd. Meanwhile, the election "make
'em scream" ploy Pelosi employed will toss millions off federal extensions of unemployment
midnight 31 Dec 2020 until congress reconvenes.
And for all those who claimed Trump to be evil incarnate, worse than Hitler...in a few
weeks, facts will show those people to be clownish frauds.
yep. sad. Yellen for Treasury is interesting, and a crucial position to watch. Mnuchin
basically ran the Trump administration's economic policy, as far as there was one.
One of the watchwords of the coming era is the "Great Reset", i.e. a limited shift in the
direction of a technocratic planned economy. In a way, this began after 2008 when the FED
intervened in stock and bond markets to such a degree that its interventions became the
dominant driving force. With that, "market forces" couldn't plausibly remain a reflection of
free competition as the theory postulated. The fact that this measure had to be taken (i.e.
markets had to be overtly "fixed"), is an implicit admission that the thesis of the
free-market purists, the dream of the Reagan-Clinton era, has been falsified.
The proposed solution, at least the version coming from the high business class (and
exaggerated further still by right-wing critics of Great Reset) seems like a recipe to worsen
the problem of "regulatory capture" above all else. I.e. the agents and beneficiaries of the
neoliberal era making an effort to adapt, without giving up the benefits of the prior
economic regime. Likelyhood of fixing inequalities is nil. The emphasis is on reinforcing the
stability of the system, holding on to power, perhaps competing with threatening alternatives
from the "outside", although that would seem to be a second priority.
Trump did put up a facade of a nationalist alternative, which had the effect of
acknowledging the inequalities and failures of the neoliberal system, but offering an equally
harmful solution. Besides that, if you look at who was making economic policy in the past 4
years (Treasury Dept), the nationalist facade was false, as far as domestic economic matters
were concerned.
IMO, all three of the turn-of-the-century free-market-neolibral model, the
hypothetical Trump(ish) nationalist model, and the revised technocratic-neoliberal schemes,
are fatally flawed. Despite the political rhetoric of US Republicans, there's no real
prospect of an even mildly leftist (i.e. inclusive, egalitarian, and internationalist)
alternative anytime soon in the US. I suspect the same is true in most neoliberal
countries.
So Biden comes into this moment, with a clear mandate -- from the sponsors -- to reinforce
the status quo. He brings Yellen into this moment in a the crucial position.
Of course Biden's foreign policy team and the policy itself will be shit. As it was for
the trump admin, the Obama admin, the Bush II admin, the Clinton admin, the Bush I admin, the
fucking Reagan admin, then there's carter and Nixon. Look, I can take this back all the way
to Washington. Biden's not special. It's always been an empire; trump did nothing to
dismantle it; but now it's a failing empire.
And don't try the "Trump's instincts were dashed by the deep state". Dude constantly
bragged about how much he spent on the DoD. If he could find a way to personally profit from
the empire he would have.
Here's an interview given by acclaimed Canadian International Law lawyer Christopher
Black who is rather pessimistic given the team members and its chief. While I disagree on a
few minor points, I agree with his overall assessment:
"The Americans proclaim they are all for competition but we know that means only when it
puts them in the superior position; and to maintain their position they are willing to
threaten and attack the world if necessary; and there are a myriad of domestic problems in
the USA which they have no way out of, since the two ruling parties have no solutions to
offer, except war."
I would disagree with war being a solution; rather, it exacerbates many already existing
problems. However, war would make revolution more likely. Since it's highly unlikely the
Empire could make the "Moderate Rebel" ploy work again, to escalate in Syraq as Biden's
nominee wants would require a direct assault by Imperial Stormtroopers, and that would be a
huge domestic error during the continuing pandemic.
Your buddy was born in Havana and grew up in Miami's Cuban hole. And he's Jewish. I'll eat
my hat if the family was not personal friends/business partners with Meyer Lansky and Myer
Schine. Wonderful, Homeland Security has been given to the Mafia.
It reminds me very much Khrushchev's government. He went in guns blazing, accusing Stalin
as outdated and promising a whole new paradigm (economic and geopolitical). He failed
miserably in both. He was toppled in 1964 and substituted by a figure of the "establishment",
Leonid Brezhnev, who basically restored what existed during Stalin and effectively gave up
making the USSR better. The first proletarian State would disintegrate soon.
Not saying Yellen-Biden will be the American Brezhnev - they are much lesser historical
figures than he was - but pay attention to the pattern.
Should come as no surprise that where it matters, Biden is Trump wearing a smiley face,
just like Pelosi is Trump in a wig. Actually, considering actual body count and misery
inflicted on vast populations, Biden's record is WORSE than Trump.
And that coming from Trump who put APARTHEID Israel first
and did more for that racist country than he did for America.
whether underground , 5 hours ago
Exactly. And biden will for sure, 110% COMPLETELY END any idea of putting Americans first
in anything other than shackles. F all of them.
Mr Poopra , 5 hours ago
People still think Biden will actually assume office? If Trump won't win in the courts,
he's going to burn the entire thing down on his way out. Full Declass coming. Swamp creatures
tremble!
SurfingUSA , 4 hours ago
Problem is the agencies are openly defying him on declass (and have been). Would have to
send in U.S. marshals.
CJgipper , 4 hours ago
trump will do nothing. he should have already done the declassifications.
FingerInTheDarkness , 4 hours ago
Dropping the Biden laptop after most of the mail in ballots were already in the mail is
all you really need to know. Biden was installed. The only question is what to do next? He
will come for the guns and he will force the poison shots. Options are few.
cankles' server , 4 hours ago
He's already tried the declass route regarding Russia hoax and was thwarted by swamp
creatures.
"Means and methods" will be the mantra for obstructionists.
FingerInTheDarkness , 4 hours ago
Just like he declassified the JFK stuff, err wait a damn minute. We been had!!!
eatapeach , 3 hours ago
Even if it's released, you can bet Israel's complicity in the murder/coup will be omitted,
despite the fact that Jack Ruby (Rubinstein) was a Mossad asset and AIPAC got the massive
benefit of NOT having to register as a foreign agent.
Dragonlord , 5 hours ago
I am more amazed that the left love wars more than Trump and thats after the former
accused the latter of starting WWIII
Herodotus , 5 hours ago
They made sure that Goldwater was defeated so that they could build up the war there and
insure that 58,000 Americans would die in Vietnam.
Fizzy Head , 4 hours ago
...Once they had JFK out of their way.
BarnacleBill , 4 hours ago
For as long as Americans honour the 58,000 invaders more than the 2,000,000 victims of the
invaders' activities, there is no hope for the USA. And no respect, either. Sorry! I wrote
this post (link below, "The war against women") eight years ago, and it's still sadly
relevant.
You really have to wonder about an American generals loyalties when they do not like or
recommend an America first policy. Who exactly is the guy Gen. Mattis working for?
Rich Stoehner , 5 hours ago
Mattis is working for a globalized cartel of ho-mos.
"America First" was a con. What we got is a 'J3w5 First' foreign & domestic
policy.
Biden's isn't hiding his ''J3w5 First' foreign & domestic policy.
The only difference between the two are stylistic, the goal is the same.
Haboob , 3 hours ago
The difference is how they operate.
Trump wants peace through business and Mattis wants peace through war?
frontierland , 3 hours ago
Peace has nothing to do with it.
Trump conned White America with his pro-White dog-whistles, a tactic developed by his
mentor Arthur Finkelstein. The establishment doesn't like this approach as it woke the
sleeping giant, White America, while delivering no pro-White policies... Which made White
America self-aware, with expectations raised, awake and pissed off with Trumps failure to
deliver.
The "Left" arm of the neoLiberal establishment prefers an honest, open anti-White
approach... The long, slow-boil of White America.
Seal Team 6 , 4 hours ago
Mattis also threw in a dig at Trump's coronavirus response, noting "The pandemic should
serve as a reminder of what grief ensues when we wait for problems to come to us."
Really now? It seems to me that the US did exactly what Mattis says by the Obama
administration helping to fund the level 5 Wuhan lab, along with the French and the
neo-marxist government in Canada.
Does anyone in the MSM ever ask any of these turds questions that are actually relevant,
or do they give them an open mike to fabricate history however they like?
Max21c , 4 hours ago
Mattis is a product of the Deep State and an agent of the Deep State. He's been
brainwashed by the Deep State and his loyalties are to the Pentagon Gestapo and CIA and Deep
State. His loyalties are not to the American nation, American citizenry, Constitution and
Bill of Rights. He works for and sides with the secret police and state security
apparatus.
d_7878 , 4 hours ago
Ron Paul: "Trump Does The Bidding of the Deep State".
Count me among the 79%. I WILL NEVER BELIEVE that Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential
election without MASSIVE CHEATING from Democrats and the Washington Swap - to INCLUDE a
select number of RINOs, Never-Trumpers and Lincoln Project Scuumm, whose main mission,
admittedly, was just to "get rid of Trump and then worry about Biden later"
. That is more or less a quote from Turncoat, Michael Steele.
Trump has got it right. Allow GSI to fund Biden transition team without conceding.
Americans deserve to know the election results are counted properly. Dominion voting
machines need to be audited. No signature authorization means no vote. Votes showing up
after deadlines not acceptable. Ensuring a fair and free vote is essential in America.
Given the mass of mail in votes due to covid America needs to follow the authenticity
guidelines more than ever. Not less.
Washington Democrats don't care what America knows, what America thinks - they care
about power and if stealing it is their only path then they will steal it and leave it to
you and me to prove it.
"... Greenwald earlier this week said NBC "has always existed to disseminate US government, CIA and corporate propaganda." ..."
"... NBC also helped the CIA sell the Iraq War on its Meet the Press program, and sister network MSNBC was "ground zero for mindless CIA stenography of the most unhinged Russiagate conspiracy theories," he said. ..."
"... The C.I.A. owns anyone of any significance in the media. -William Colby. Former Director of the CIA. In 1974, the Rockefeller Commission was established to investigate shennanigans carried out by the Agency. President Ford fired William Colby and replaced him with George Herbert Walker Bush. Why? Because Gerald Ford thought that Colby was being too honest with the Commission about CIA wrong doings. ..."
"... Interestingly, Gerald Ford was often referred to as "The CIA's Best Friend in The Senate", which would explain his old appointment to the Warren Commission. It was Ford who ordered JFK's bullet wound in the back to be raised six inches up to his neck, thus allowing Arlen Specter to float his "Magic bullet Theory" ..."
"... As is not generally known, Bush I was lifetime CIA and became I believe the first CIA President. There is a little known picture of a young Bush standing outside the Texas Book Depository on the day of the assassination. ..."
"... The CIA controls the media in subtle ways. Blacklists for instance. I have experience after one of my buddies fell for the spiel of an agent provocateur. Never trust anyone, always assume they could be CIA and assess what damage they can do to you (and your associates) before you interact with them. Misleading them would be best. ..."
"... As shocking as it may sound, Glenn is stating the obvious. Even AFP and Reuters are CIA mouthpieces. Look up Operation Mockingbird. Look up "propaganda multiplier" by the Swiss policy research. ..."
"... Interesting that nobody even tried to deny it, they just come up with the same line they used to attack Wikileaks for telling the truth: exposing this might put out operatives at risk. ..."
"... Perilous Environments because the CIA is probably manipulating another of its regimes change, to very undemocratically put someone they control into office. Surely you remember Poroshenko? ..."
"... Operation Mockingbird was a secret CIA effort to influence and control the American media. The first report of the program came in 1979 in the biography of Katharine Graham, the owner of the Washington Post, written by Deborah Davis. Davis wrote that the program was established by Frank Wisner, the director of the Office of Policy Coordination, a covert operations unit created under the National Security Council. ..."
"... Reporters who work for the CIA are not spies, because the CIA is a lying agency, not a spying agency. If a terrorist accuses you of being a CIA agent, you can honestly reply that the CIA is the terrorist's friend. ..."
"... The CIA wants the world to believe that China, Russia and Iran are the leading state sponsors of terrorism, and that those seeking the overthrow of Syria's Bashar al-Assad are freedom fighters, not terrorists... ..."
Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald torched accusations that he endangered reporters by
saying NBC News spouts CIA propaganda, saying he only spoke of a well-known fact, and the
effort to shame him was "manipulative bulls**t."
"Profoundly sorry for endangering the lives of NBC executives and TV personalities by
spilling the extremely well-kept secret of their close working relationship with the CIA,"
Greenwald tweeted sarcastically on Saturday. His message showed a picture of a headline about
NBC's 2018 hiring of ex-CIA chief John Brennan as an NBC and MSNBC contributor.
Greenwald's retort came in reply to reporter Sulome Anderson, who accused him of endangering
journalists who work in places where any CIA affiliation is "life-threatening."Greenwald earlier this week said NBC "has always existed to disseminate US government, CIA
and corporate propaganda."
"This crosses a line," Anderson said. "Like some of his proteges, Glenn is
endangering journalists working in perilous environments by telling his massive following that
they are mouthpieces for US intelligence."
Greenwald said on Saturday that NBC has a "long-standing role" in spouting CIA
propaganda, as evidenced by its hiring of Ken Dilanian, who was accused of sharing stories with the CIA press
office prior to publication while working as a Los Angeles Times reporter. NBC also helped the
CIA sell the Iraq War on its Meet the Press program, and sister network MSNBC was "ground
zero for mindless CIA stenography of the most unhinged Russiagate conspiracy theories," he
said.
"If you don't want to be known as a CIA outpost, then don't be one," Greenwald
tweeted. He added that NBC hired "John Brennan, Ken Dilanian and every other operative puked
up by the security state. People already know."
Anderson has written at least
two opinion
pieces on Lebanon for NBC in recent months. She has been critical of Hezbollah, designated
a terrorist group by the US government, but also has interviewed some of its fighters.
Anderson, who said she is "morally opposed" to journalists working as intelligence
agents, may have good reason for her sensitivity about alleged CIA ties. Her parents were both
journalists who covered Lebanon's 15-year civil war, and she said her father was kidnapped by
terrorists.
"They tortured him again and again for years, calling him CIA," she said
Saturday on Twitter. "'I am not a spy,' he would scream. 'I am a reporter.' It never stopped
them."
Anderson acknowledged journalists being used as intelligence-agency assets, but said such
cases are rare. "Time and again, American hostages – journalists and otherwise –
have been falsely called spies, tortured and killed," she said. "I have been in many
situations where I've had to convince the very dangerous men I am with that I am not a spy. My
saving grace has always been that I am not."
Greenwald came to international fame by breaking the Edward Snowden NSA whistleblower story
in 2013. He later co-founded the Intercept but quit the outlet last month after saying editors
there suppressed his coverage of Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden.
fezzie035fezzm 19 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 11:52 PM
The C.I.A. owns anyone of any significance in the media. -William Colby. Former Director of
the CIA. In 1974, the Rockefeller Commission was established to investigate shennanigans
carried out by the Agency. President Ford fired William Colby and replaced him with George
Herbert Walker Bush. Why? Because Gerald Ford thought that Colby was being too honest with
the Commission about CIA wrong doings.
Bush, as the new Director, stonewalled the hearings
and put the lid on any information coming out, which would explain why CIA Headquarters in
Langley was named after Bush. Colby is no longer among the living. Let's just say that he
didn't die from "natural causes".
Interestingly, Gerald Ford was often referred to as "The
CIA's Best Friend in The Senate", which would explain his old appointment to the Warren
Commission. It was Ford who ordered JFK's bullet wound in the back to be raised six inches up
to his neck, thus allowing Arlen Specter to float his "Magic bullet Theory"
JOHNCHUCKMAN fezzie035fezzm 1 hour ago 22 Nov, 2020 05:48 PM
Yes, Colby was an unusually frank man at times. He also told us about the ghastly Operation
Phoenix in Vietnam, a CIA run assassination scheme of village leaders and prominent men. They
killed 30 or 40 thousand people by sending in belly-crawling special forces guys to enter
villages at night and cut throats.
As is not generally known, Bush I was lifetime CIA and
became I believe the first CIA President. There is a little known picture of a young Bush
standing outside the Texas Book Depository on the day of the assassination. You'll find it on
my site Chuckman's Words in Comments on Wordpress. Its title to search is: A REMARKABLE DULL
LITTLE PHOTOGRAPH OF GEORGE H W BUSH WITH EXPLOSIVE SUGGESTIONS. Sorry, but RT doesn't like
links.
Of course, Colby himself may have been assassinated. He had a very odd boating
accident.
Ally Hauptmann-Gurski 20 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 11:14 PM
The CIA controls the media in subtle ways. Blacklists for instance. I have experience after
one of my buddies fell for the spiel of an agent provocateur. Never trust anyone, always
assume they could be CIA and assess what damage they can do to you (and your associates)
before you interact with them. Misleading them would be best.
Enorm 22 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:01 PM
NBC operatives don't have an opinion. They follow da money,. I feel sorry for folks glued to
propaganda TV.
WikiLeaks and other investigative outfits have looked at the conglomerates over the years and
over half of them are CIA "assets"...
Chris Cottrell 22 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 08:25 PM
Are they spies? Probably not. Are they tools of the CIA even if unwittingly, yes.
Oregon Observer Chris Cottrell 21 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:43 PM
Most ARE spies in every sense of the term. They look for specific information that they
pass onto their handler(s). It bears noting that the FBI and the 10,000 or so outfits that
contract with them and NSA and DHS and the pentagon and the various state Fusion programs are
as bad or worse and every stinking one if those outfits recruits reporters.
fakiho2 21 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:28 PM
As shocking as it may sound, Glenn is stating the obvious. Even AFP and Reuters are CIA
mouthpieces. Look up Operation Mockingbird. Look up "propaganda multiplier" by the Swiss
policy research.
shadow1369 fakiho2 6 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 12:30 PM
Interesting that nobody even tried to deny it, they just come up with the same line they used
to attack Wikileaks for telling the truth: exposing this might put out operatives at risk. My
response to that is good, time to have these roaches taken out.
Edward698 18 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 01:43 AM
You can bet on Glenn to tell you the truth unlike the main stream media which fed us with
lots of non sense on Syria. Read his interview with "Democracy now": .... Glenn Greenwald on
"Submissive" Media's Drumbeat for War and "Despicable" Anti-Muslim Scapegoating By Democracy
Now! ....
GLENN GREENWALD: Well, first of all, that clip is unbelievable. It is literally one
of the three most important military officials of the entire war on terror, General Flynn,
who was the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. He's saying that the U.S. government
knew that by creating a vacuum in Syria and then flooding that region with arms and money,
that it was likely to result in the establishment of a caliphate by Islamic extremists in
eastern Syria -- which is, of course, exactly what happened.
They knew that that was going to
happen, and they proceeded to do it anyway. So when the U.S. government starts trying to
point the finger at other people for helping ISIS, they really need to have a mirror put in
front of them, because, by their own documents, as that extraordinary clip demonstrates, they
bear huge responsibility for that happening, to say nothing of the fact that, as I said,
their closest allies in the region actually fund it.
Debra Edward698 14 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 05:37 AM
The US was not only counting on their ISIS creation to destabilize Syria in the hope of an
Assad exit but also to decimate the Hezbollah. I credit the Hezbollah for saving Lebanon,
Syria, and Iraq, but they suffered heavy, heavy losses. "So when the U.S. government starts
trying to point the finger at other people for helping ISIS, they really need to have a
mirror put in front of them, because, by their own documents, as that extraordinary clip
demonstrates, they bear huge responsibility for that happening, to say nothing of the fact
that, as I said, their closest allies in the region actually fund it."
frankfalseflag 19 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 12:08 AM
** "Glenn is endangering journalists working in perilous environments by telling. . ." ** . .
Perilous Environments because the CIA is probably manipulating another of its regimes change,
to very undemocratically put someone they control into office. Surely you remember
Poroshenko? ...
pogohere 21 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 10:16 PM
Operation Mockingbird was a secret CIA effort to influence and control the American media.
The first report of the program came in 1979 in the biography of Katharine Graham, the owner
of the Washington Post, written by Deborah Davis. Davis wrote that the program was
established by Frank Wisner, the director of the Office of Policy Coordination, a covert
operations unit created under the National Security Council.
According to Davis, Wisner
recruited Philip Graham of the Washington Post to head the project within the media industry.
Davis wrote that, "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of The New York
Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles."
Davis also writes that Allen Dulles
convinced Cord Meyer, who later became Mockingbird's "principal operative," to join the CIA
in 1951.
The Taliban Won the War 7 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 12:28 PM
It is true and it is an undisputed fact that all Western governments use Journalists, aid
workers and so called human relief organisations as cover for espionage, undercover and dark
operations. Not just that, they also use exchange teachers and students, they use priests and
pastors. They use anything and anyone that can hid
Isiah Steele 8 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 11:45 AM
The Motion Picture Industry of Hollywood, too are CIA! Propagates: war and constant US
Military dominated narratives.
Sergio Weigel 16 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 03:31 AM
I'm pretty sure that most journalists don't know, or don't wanna know, the dirty open secret
that editorial lines of most outlets are indeed determined or influenced by the CIA. The
trouble is their working conditions. There are far more journalists than job openings, and
they already earn badly. In order to keep the job, they just play ball, and as humans are,
they make themselves believe that what they were doing was just right. Cognitive dissonance,
and the result is outrage and defensive anger when someone points out their hypocrisy. That
is also why they avoid to even read alternative media, they don't have their noses pointed to
it. In a way, we can pity them. Then again, why become a journalist these days?
I used to think maybe 'journalists' were simply misled, but the narrative on too many
stories, from 9/11 to Iraq, from Syria to the ukraine, from the Skripals to Navalny, was so
ludicrous that a five year old could see through the lies. Nope, they know full well that
they are lying, and do so regardless. A great example was when some bbc l!cksp!ttle was
interviewing a general about events in Syria. Somehow they got the wrong guy, or he had not
been properly briefed, because his responses were factual and balanced. After trying to
challenge him, the interviewer finally said 'Don't you realise this is an informatioon war'.
Debra 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 03:11 PM
This is another warning for people: Over the last two years Facebook has been advertising for
viewers to join Facebook groups. Many political groups on Facebook are set up by CIA and FBI
agents. Facebook is full of agents, and that is why the ones in Michigan were caught in their
attempted coup against the Michigan governor...
Quick Draw 22 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:46 PM
Just NBC?
imnotarobot22 16 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 03:05 AM
google 'Udo Ulfkotte' ex editor of the Frankfurter Allgemeine - he'll tell you about it.
Richard Burden 2 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 05:07 PM
Reporters who work for the CIA are not spies, because the CIA is a lying agency, not a spying
agency. If a terrorist accuses you of being a CIA agent, you can honestly reply that the CIA
is the terrorist's friend.
The CIA wants the world to believe that China, Russia and Iran are
the leading state sponsors of terrorism, and that those seeking the overthrow of Syria's Bashar al-Assad are freedom fighters, not terrorists...
"... granting the government the authority to issue whatever edicts it wants under the guise of protecting the public health ..."
"... formally granted the government the authority to issue whatever edicts it wanted under the guise of remedying the distress of the people ..."
"... It functions like a cult , totalitarianism. It creeps up on you, little by little, little lie by little lie, accommodation by accommodation, rationalization by rationalization until one day you find yourself taking orders from some twisted little narcissistic nihilist on a mission to remake the entire world. You don't surrender to it all at once. You do it over the course of weeks and months. Imperceptibly, it becomes your reality. You do not recognize that you are in it, because everything you see is part of it, and everyone you know is in it except for the others , who are not part of it. The "deniers." The "deviants." The "foreigners." The "strangers." The "Covidiots." The "virus spreaders." ..."
Break out the Wagner, folks the Germans are back! No, not the warm, fuzzy, pussified,
peace-loving, post-war Germans the Germans ! You know the ones I mean. The "I didn't
know where the trains were going" Germans. The "I was just following orders" Germans. The
other Germans.
Yeah those Germans.
In case you missed it, on November 18, the German parliament passed a law, the so-called
"Infection Protection Act" ("Das Infektionsschutzgesetz" in German) formallygranting the government the authority to issue whatever edicts it wants under the guise of
protecting the public health . The government has been doing this anyway -- ordering
lockdowns, curfews, travel bans, banning demonstrations, raiding homes and businesses, ordering
everyone to wear medical masks, harassing and arresting dissidents, etc. -- but now it has been
"legitimized" by the Bundestag, enshrined into law, and presumably stamped with one of those
intricate official stamps that German bureaucrats like to stamp things with.
Now, this "Infection Protection Act," which was rushed through the parliament, is not in any
way comparable to the " Enabling Act of 1933
," which formally granted the government the authority to issue whatever edicts it wanted
under the guise of remedying the distress of the people . Yes, I realize that sounds quite
similar, but, according to the government and the German media, there is no absolutely
equivalence whatsoever, and anyone who suggests there is is "a far-right AfD extremist," "a
neo-Nazi conspiracy theorist," or "an anti-vax esotericist," or whatever.
As the Protection Act was being legitimized (i.e., the current one, not the one in 1933),
tens of thousands of anti-totalitarian protesters gathered in the streets, many of them
carrying copies of the Grundgesetz (i.e., the constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany),
which the parliament had just abrogated. They were met by thousands of riot police, who
declared the demonstration "illegal" (because many of the protesters were not wearing masks),
beat
up and arrested hundreds of them , and then hosed down the rest with water
cannons .
The German media -- which are totally objective, and not at all like Goebbels' Ministry of
Propaganda in the Nazi era -- dutifully reminded the German public that these protesters were
all "Corona Deniers," "far-right extremists," "conspiracy theorists," "anti-vaxxers,"
"neo-Nazis," and so on, so they probably got what they deserved. Also, a spokesperson for the
Berlin police (who bear absolutely no resemblance to the Gestapo, or the Stasi, or any other
notorious official-ideology-enforcing goons) pointed out that their water cannons were only
being used to "irrigate" the protesters (i.e., not being aimed directly at them) because there
were so many "Corona Denier" children in their ranks.
According to the government, the German media, the intelligentsia, and, basically, anyone in
public life who wants to remain there, these "Corona Deniers" are becoming a problem. They are
spreading baseless "conspiracy theories" that are threatening the public health and causing
distress to the German people (e.g., that
the vast majority of those infected suffer only mild to moderate flu symptoms or, more
commonly, no symptoms at all, and that over 99.7% survive ). They are walking around
without medical-looking masks, which is making a mockery of the government and media's efforts
to convince the public that they are under attack by an apocalyptic plague. They are posting scientific facts on the Internet. They are
staging these protests and otherwise challenging the government's right to declare a "health
emergency," suspend the German constitution indefinitely, and rule society by decree and
force.
Despite the German government and media's efforts to demonize anyone not obediently
parroting the official "New Normal" narrative as a "dangerous neo-Nazi Corona Denier," the
"Corona Denialism" movement is growing, not just in Germany, but all throughout
Europe . Clearly, the time is coming for Germany to take stronger measures against this
threat. The health of the Vater uh, the nation, is at stake! Fortunately, this "Infection
Protection Act" will provide the government with the authority it needs to conceive and carry
out some kind of well, you know, solution. Allowing these degenerate anti-social deviants to
run around challenging the German government's absolute power is not an option, not in a time
of national health emergency! These "
Nazi-sympathizing Corona Deniers " must be rooted out and dealt with, mercilessly!
But seriously, I don't mean to pick on the Germans. I love the Germans. I live in Germany.
And they're hardly the only ones
implementing the new
pathologized totalitarianism . It's just that, given their not-too-distant history, it is
rather depressing, and more than a little frightening, to watch as Germany is once again
transformed into a totalitarian state, where the police are hunting down the mask-less on the
streets, raiding restaurants, bars, and people's homes, where goose-stepping little Good German
citizens are peering into the windows of Yoga studios to see if they are violating "social
distancing rules," where I can't take a walk or shop for groceries without being surrounded by
hostile, glaring, sometimes verbally-abusive Germans, who are infuriated that I'm not wearing a
mask, and otherwise mindlessly following orders, and who robotically remind me, "Es ist
Pflicht! Es ist Pflicht!"
Yes, I am fully aware that it is "Pflicht." If I had any doubt as to whether it was
"Pflicht," the Berlin Senat cleared that up when they commissioned and ran this charming advert
instructing me to fuck myself if I don't want to follow their "Corona orders" and profess my
belief in their new Big Lie.
And OK, before the Literalist Society starts flooding me with outraged emails, no, I'm not
calling these Germans "Nazis." I am calling them "totalitarians." Which, at this point, given
everything we know, if you're still pretending that this coronavirus in any way warrants the
increasingly ridiculous "emergency measures" we are being subjected to, I'm sorry, but that is
what you are.
You may not believe that is what you are totalitarians never do, not until it is far too
late.
It
functions like a cult , totalitarianism. It creeps up on you, little by little, little lie
by little lie, accommodation by accommodation, rationalization by rationalization until one day
you find yourself taking orders from some twisted little narcissistic nihilist on a mission to
remake the entire world. You don't surrender to it all at once. You do it over the course of
weeks and months. Imperceptibly, it becomes your reality. You do not recognize that you are in
it, because everything you see is part of it, and everyone you know is in it except for the
others , who are not part of it. The "deniers." The "deviants." The "foreigners." The
"strangers." The "Covidiots." The "virus spreaders."
See, although the narratives and symbols may change, totalitarianism is totalitarianism. It
doesn't really matter which uniform it wears, or which language it speaks it is the same
abomination. It is an idol, a simulacrum of the hubris of man, formed from the clay of the
minds of the masses by megalomaniacal spiritual cripples who want to exterminate what they
cannot control. And what they want to control is always everything. Everything that reminds
them of their weakness and their shame. You. Me. Society. The world. Laughter. Love. Honor.
Faith. The past. The future. Life. Death. Everything that will not obey them.
Unfortunately, once this kind of thing gets started, and reaches the stage we are currently
experiencing, more often than not, it does not stop, not until cities lie in ruins or fields
are littered with human skulls. It might us take ten or twelve years to get there, but, make no
mistake, that's where we're headed, where totalitarianism is always headed if you don't believe
me, just ask the Germans.
C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist
based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing,
Inc. His dystopian novel, Zone 23 , is
published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. Volumes I and II of his Consent
Factory Essays are published by Consent Factory Publishing, a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Amalgamated Content, Inc. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .
Full spectrum dominance theorists are dusted off and put in key positions in new
administration. Instead of punishment and jail terms Russiagaters got promotion.
Biden signals US return to full-on globalism and foreign meddling by picking interventionist
Anthony Blinken as secretary of state
Joe Biden has named Anthony Blinken – an
advocate for isolating Russia, cozying up to China and intervening in Syria – as
secretary of state, cementing a foreign policy built on military forays and multi-national
motivations.
Biden, the nominal president-elect, announced his selection of
Blinken along with other members of his foreign-policy and national-security team, which is
filled with such veteran Washington insiders as John Kerry, the new climate czar and formerly
secretary of state in the Obama-Biden administration.
Blinken, a long-time adviser to Biden and deputy secretary of state under President Barack
Obama, has been hailed by fellow Democrats and globalists, such as retired General Barry
McCaffrey, as an experienced bureaucrat with "global contacts and respect." Enrico
Letta, dean of the Paris School of International Affairs, called Biden's choice the "right
step to relaunch transatlantic ties."
He was even praised for a 2016 appearance on the Sesame Street children's television
program, where he explained to the show's 'Grover' character the benefits of accepting
refugees.
While some critics focused on how Blinken " got rich working for corporate
clients " during President Donald Trump's term in office, the new foreign-affairs chief's
neoconservative policy recommendations might be cause for greater concern. He advocated for the
Iraq War and the bombings of such countries as Libya and Yemen.
Blinken is still arguing for a resurgence in Washington's
military intervention in Syria. He lamented in a May interview that the Obama-Biden
administration hadn't done enough to prevent a "horrific situation" in Syria, and he faulted
Trump for squandering what remaining leverage the US had on the Bashar Assad regime by pulling
troops out of the country.
"Our leverage is vastly even less than it was, but I think we do have points of leverage to
try to effectuate some more positive developments," Blinken said. For instance, US special
forces in northeast Syria are located near Syrian oil fields. "The Syrian government would
love to have dominion over those resources. We should not give that up for free."
Blinken also sees Biden strengthening NATO, isolating Russia politically and " confronting
Mr. [President Vladimir] Putin for his aggressions."
As for China, Blinken has said Washington needs to look for ways to cooperate with Beijing.
Reinvesting in international alliances that were weakened by Trump will help the Biden
administration deal with China "from a position of strength" as it pushes back against
the Chinese Communist Party's human-rights abuses, he said.
Throughout his campaign, Joe Biden railed against Donald Trump's 'America First' foreign
policy, claiming it weakened the United States and left the world in disarray. "Donald Trump's
brand of America First has too often led to America alone," Biden proclaimed.
He pledged to reverse this decline and recover the damage Trump did to America's reputation.
While Donald Trump called for making America Great Again, Biden seeks to Make the American
Empire Great Again .
Joe Biden: "Tonight, the whole world is watching America. And I believe at our best, America
is a beacon for the globe. We will lead not only by the example of our power, but by the power
of our example."
Among the president-elect's pledges is to end the so-called forever wars – the
decades-long imperial projects in Afghanistan and Iraq that began under the Bush
administration.
"It's long past time we end the forever wars which have cost us untold blood and treasure,"
Biden has said.
Yet Biden – a fervent supporter of those wars – will delegate that duty to the
most neoconservative elements of the Democratic Party and ideologues of permanent war .
Michele Flournoy and Tony Blinken sit atop Biden's thousands-strong foreign policy brain
trust and have played central roles in every U.S. war dating back to the Bill Clinton
administration.
During the Trump era, they've cashed in through WestExec Advisors – a corporate
consulting firm that has become home for Obama administration officials awaiting a return to
government.
Flournoy is Biden's leading pick for Secretary of Defense and Blinken is expected to be the
president's National Security Advisor.
Biden's foxes guard the henhouse
Since the 1990s, Flournoy and Blinken have steadily risen through the ranks of the
military-industrial complex, shuffling back and forth between the Pentagon and hawkish
think-tanks funded by the U.S. government, weapons companies, and oil giants.
Under Bill Clinton, Flournoy was the principal author of the 1996 Quadrinellial Defense
Review, the document that outlined the U.S. military's doctrine of permanent war – what
it called "full spectrum dominance."
Flournoy called for "unilateral use of military power" to ensure "uninhibited access to key
markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources."
https://www.youtube.com/embed/ivFFZ95EQvY
This video report was originally published at Behind The Headlines .
Support the independent journalism initiative here .
As Bush administration officials lied to the world about Saddam Hussein's supposed WMD's,
Flournoy remarked that "In some cases, preemptive strikes against an adversary's [weapons of
mass destruction] capabilities may be the best or only option we have to avert a catastrophic
attack against the United States."
Tony Blinken was a top advisor to then-Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Joe Biden,
who played a key role in shoring up support among the Democrat-controlled Senate for Bush's
illegal invasion of Iraq.
During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Biden declared, "In my judgment, President Bush
is right to be concerned about Saddam Hussein's relentless pursuit of weapons of mass
destruction."
As Iraq was plunged into chaos and bloodshed, Flournoy was among the authors of a paper
titled "Progressive Internationalism" that called for a "smarter and better" style of permanent
war . The paper chastised the anti-war left and stated that "Democrats will maintain the
world's most capable and technologically advanced military, and we will not flinch from using
it to defend our interests anywhere in the world."
With Bush winning a second term, Flournoy advocated for more troop deployments from the
sidelines.
In 2005, Flournoy signed onto a letter
from the neoconservative think tank Project for a New American Century, asking Congress to
"increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps (by) at least 25,000
troops each year over the next several years."
In 2007, she leveraged her Pentagon experience and contacts to found what would become one
of the premier Washington think tanks advocating endless war across the globe: the Center for a
New American Security (CNAS). CNAS is funded by the U.S. government, arms
manufacturers, oil giants, Silicon Valley tech giants, billionaire-funded foundations, and big
banks.
Flournoy joined the Obama administration and was appointed as under secretary of defense for
policy, the position considered the "brains" of the Pentagon. She was keenly aware that the
public was wary of more quagmires. In the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, she crafted a new
concept of warfare that would expand the permanent war state while giving the appearance of a
drawdown.
Flournoy wrote that "unmanned systems hold great promise" – a reference to the CIA's
drone assassination program. This was the Obama-era military doctrine of hybrid war. It called
for the U.S. to be able to simultaneously wage war on numerous fronts through secret warfare,
clandestine weapons transfers to proxies, drone strikes, and cyber-attacks – all
buttressed with propaganda campaigns targeting the American public through the internet and
corporate news media.
Architects of America's Hybrid wars
Flournoy continued to champion the endless wars that began in the Bush-era and was a key
architect of Obama's disastrous troop surge in Afghanistan. As U.S. soldiers returned in body
bags and insurgent attacks and suicide bombings increased some 65% from 2009 and 2010, she
deceived the Senate Armed Services Committee, claiming that the U.S. was beginning to turn the
tide against the Taliban: "We are beginning to regain the initiative and the insurgency is
beginning to lose momentum."
Even with her lie that the U.S. and Afghan government were starting to beat the Taliban
back, Flournoy assured the senate that the U.S. would have to remain in Afghanistan long into
the future: "We are not leaving any time soon even though the nature and the complexion of the
commitment may change over time."
Ten years later – as the Afghan death toll passed 150,000 – Flournoy continued
to argue against a U.S. withdrawal: "I would certainly not advocate a US or NATO departure
short of a political settlement being in place."
That's the person Joe Biden has tasked with ending the forever war in Afghanistan. But in
Biden's own words, he'll "bring the vast majority of our troops home from Afghanistan" implying
some number of American troops will remain, and the forever war will be just that. Michele
Flournoy explained that even if a political settlement were reached, the U.S. would maintain a
presence.
Michele Flournoy: "If we are fortunate enough to see a political settlement reached, it
doesn't mean that the US role or the international community is over. Afghanistan without
outside investment is not a society that is going to survive and thrive. In no case are we
going to be able to wash our hands of Afghanistan and walk away nor should we want to. This is
something where we're going to have to continue to be engaged, just the form of engagement may
change."
In 2011, the Obama-era doctrine of smart and sophisticated warfare was unveiled in the NATO
regime-change war on Libya.
Moammar Gaddafi – the former adversary who sought warm relations with the U.S. and had
given up his nuclear weapons program – was deposed and sodomized with a bayonet.
Flournoy, Hillary Clinton's State Department, and corporate media were in lockstep as they
waged an elaborate propaganda campaign to deceive the U.S. public that Gadaffi's soldiers were
on a Viagra-fueled rape and murder spree that demanded a U.S. intervention.
Fox News: "Susan Rice reportedly told a security council meeting that Libyan troops are
being given viagra and are engaging in sexual violence."
MSNBC jumped on the propaganda bandwagon, claiming: "New reports emerge that the LIbyan
dictator gave soldiers viagra-type pills to rape women who are opposed to the government."
So did CNN.
As the Libyan ambassador to the US alleged "raping, killing, mass graves," ICC Chief
Prosecutor Manuel Ocampo claimed: "It's like a machete. Viagra is a tool of massive rapes."
All of this was based on a report
from Al Jazeera – the media outlet owned by the Qatari monarchy that was arming
extremist militias in Libya to overthrow the government.
Yet an investigation by the United Nations called the rape claims "hysteria." Amnesty
International and Human Rights Watch found no credible evidence of even a single rape.
Even after Libya was descended into strife and the deception of Gadaffi's forces committing
rape was debunked, Michele Flournoy stood by her support for the war: "I supported the
intervention in Libya on humanitarian grounds. I think we were right to do it."
Tony Blinken, then Obama's deputy national security advisor, also pushed for regime change
in Libya. He became Obama's point man on Syria, pushed to arm the so-called "moderate rebels"
that fought alongside al-Qaeda and ISIS, and designed the red line strategy to trigger a
full-on U.S. intervention. Syria, he told the public, wasn't anything like the other wars the
U.S. had waging for more than a decade.
Tony Blinken: "We are doing this in a very different way than in the past. We're not sending
in hundreds of thousands of American troops. We're not spending trillions of American dollars.
We're being smart about this. This is a sustainable way to get at the terrorists and it's also
a more effective way."
Blinken added: "This is not open-ended, this is not boots on the ground, this is not Iraq,
it's not Afghanistan, it's not even Libya. The more people understand that, the more they'll
understand the need for us to take this limited but effective action ."
Despite Blinken's promises that it would be a short affair, the war on Syria is now in its
ninth year. An estimated half a million people have been killed as a result and the country is
facing famine.
Largely thanks to the policy of using "wheat to apply pressure" – a recommendation of
Flournoy and Blinken's CNAS think tank.
When the Trump administration launched airstrikes on Syria based on mere accusations of a
chemical attack, Tony Blinken praised the bombing, claiming Assad had used the weapon of mass
destruction sarin. Yet there was no evidence for this claim, something even then-secretary of
Defense James Mattis admitted: "So I can not tell you that we had evidence even though we had a
lot of media and social media indicators that either chlorine or sarin were used ."
While jihadist mercenaries armed with U..S-supplied weapons took over large swaths of Syria,
Tony Blinken played a central role in a coup d'etat in Ukraine that saw a pro-Russia government
overthrown in a U.S.-orchestrated color revolution with neo-fascist elements agitating on the
ground.
At the time, he was ambivalent about sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, instead opting for
economic pressure.
Tony Blinken: "We're working, as I said, to make sure that there's a cost exacted of Russia
and indeed that it feels the pressure. That's what we're working on. And when it comes to
military assistance, we're looking at it. The facts are these: Even if assistance were to go to
Ukraine that would be very unlikely to change Russia's calculus or prevent an invasion."
Since then, fascist militias have been incorporated into Ukraine's armed forces. And Tony
Blinken urged Trump to send them deadly weapons – something Obama had declined to do.
But Trump obliged.
The Third Offset
While the U.S. fueled wars in Syria and Ukraine, the Pentagon announced a major shift called
the Third Offset strategy – a reference to the cold war era strategies the U.S. used to
maintain its military supremacy over the Soviet Union.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS
MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
The Third Offset strategy
shifted the focus from counterinsurgency and the war on terror to great power competition
against China and Russia. It called for a technological revolution in warfighting capabilities,
development of futuristic and autonomous weapons, swarms of undersea and airborne drones,
hypersonic weapons, cyber warfare, machine-enhanced soldiers, and artificial intelligence
making unimaginably complex battlefield decisions at speeds incomprehensible to the human mind.
All of this would be predicated on the Pentagon deepening its relationship with Silicon Valley
giants that it birthed decades before: Google and Facebook.
The author of the Third Offset, former undersecretary of defense Robert Work, is a partner
of Flournoy and Blinken's at WestExec Advisors. And Flournoy has been a leading proponent of
this dangerous new escalation .
She warned that the United States is losing its military technological advantage and
reversing that must be the Pentagon's priority. Without it, Flournoy warned that the U.S. might
not be able to defeat China in Asia: "That technological investment is still very important for
the United States to be able to offset what will be quantitative advantages and home theater
advantages for a country like China if we ever had to deal with a conflict in Asia, in their
backyard."
While Flournoy has called for ramping up U.S. military presence and exercises with allied
forces in the region, she went so far as to call for the U.S. to increase its destructive
capabilities so much that it could launch a blitzkrieg style-attack that would wipe out the
entire Chinese navy and all civilian merchant ships in the South China Sea . Not only a blatant
war crime but a direct attack on a nuclear power that would spell the third world war.
At the same time, Biden has announced he'll take an even more aggressive and confrontational
stance against Russia , a position Flournoy shares: "We need to invest to ensure that we
maintain the military edge that we will need in certain critical areas like cyber and
electronic warfare and precision strike, to again underwrite deterrence, to make sure Vladimir
Putin does not miscalculate and think that he can cross a border into Europe or cross a border
and threaten us militarily."
As for ending the forever wars, Tony Blinken says not so fast: "Large scale, open-ended
deployment of large standing US forces in conflict zones with no clear strategy should end and
will end under his watch . But we also need to distinguish between, for example, these endless
wars with the large scale open ended deployment of US forces with, for example, discreet,
small-scale sustainable operations, maybe led by special forces, to support local actors In
ending the endless wars I think we have to be careful to not paint with too broad a brush
stroke."
The end of forever wars?
So Biden will end the forever wars, but not really end them. Secret wars that the public
doesn't even know the U.S. is involved in – those are here to stay.
In fact, leaving teams of special forces in place throughout the Middle East is part and
parcel of the Pentagon's shift away from counterinsurgency and towards great power
competition.
The 2018 National Defense Strategy explains that, "Long-term strategic competitions with
China and Russia are the principal priorities" and the U.S. will "consolidate gains in Iraq and
Afghanistan while moving to a more resource-sustainable approach."
As for the catastrophic war on Yemen, Biden has said he'll end U.S. support; but in 2019,
Michele Flournoy argued against ending arms sales to Saudi Arabia .
Biden pledged he will rejoin the Iran deal as a starting point for new negotiations.
However, Trump's withdrawal from the deal discredited the Iranian reformists who seek
engagement with the west and empowered the principlists who see the JCPOA as a deal with the
devil.
In Latin America, Biden will revive the so-called anti-corruption campaigns that were used
as a cover to oust the popular social democrat Brazilian president Lula da Silva.
In Central America, Biden
has presided over a four billion dollar package to support corrupt right-wing governments
and neoliberal privatization projects, fueling destabilization and sending vulnerable masses
fleeing north to the United States.
Behind their rhetoric, Biden, Flournoy, and Blinken will seek nothing less than global
supremacy , escalating a new and even more dangerous arms race that risks the destruction of
humanity. That's what Joe Biden calls "decency" and "normalcy."
naughty.boy , 14 hours ago
deep state will bankrupt the USA with forever wars.
Distant_Star , 14 hours ago
Yes. As a bonus neither of these Deep State wretches has even seen a shot fired in anger.
They are too "important" to be at risk.
Here's an analogy : imagine the blues and reds both agree that I am a notorious thief,
even if it's only a false narrative. Then they hire me as a security guard. That would be
willfully, knowingly hiring a criminal, which would be criminal, not because of the facts,
but because of the logic.
A couple of thoughts about the Venzuela gambit. Evidently Tucker Carson wanted Sydney to
tell him all about the "Dominion" vote flipping in a public interview. Which would have been
tantamount to giving away all the potential Republican case, and given the Democrats prior
knowledge of what to expect. A no-go. Mentioning "Venezuela-Cuba" could have the effect of
heading off a direct civil war if the US Dems and Repubs have a" common enemy" to blame. (Too
late for Russia, China too touchy, not many other major targets). Note that Venezuela has a
paper trail created at the same time as the electronic vote...
"Sidney Powell is practicing law on her own," senior Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and
Jenna Ellis said on Sunday in a joint statement. "She is also not a lawyer for the president
in his personal capacity."
Giuliani and Ellis gave no explanation for the statement. Trump last week named Powell, a
former federal prosecutor, among five well-known lawyers who would lead his legal team in
challenging the results of this month's presidential election.
Powell was among three featured speakers when the Trump legal team held a press conference
on Thursday to give an overview of its election-fraud cases in key states that the president
apparently lost to Democrat rival Joe Biden.
Powell focused largely on accusations that Dominion voting machines and Smartmatic election
software were fraudulently manipulated to award thousands of fake votes to Biden. Her
allegations went deeper, involving allies of the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez owning
Dominion and having ties to Democrat billionaire donor George Soros.
But by Thursday night, Powell's story was being challenged by a conservative media
superstar, Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who said she had brushed off multiple requests to
provide evidence of the Dominion-Smartmatic scheme for his show. She also was invited to be
interviewed on his show, but "when we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop
contacting her," Carlson said.
Powell responded by saying
she told Carlson not to contact her again because he was "very insulting, demanding and
rude." She also provided him with an affidavit and referred him to a witness who could help
him understand her statistical evidence. Carlson followed up the next night, saying he had
heard from Trump sources, including other members of the president's legal team, who said that
they hadn't seen Powell's evidence firsthand.
If Powell's allegations in the press conference seemed a little wild, her interview on
Saturday night with conservative news outlet Newsmax took the case to another level. She
accused Georgia's Republican governor, Brian Kemp, and the state's secretary of state, Brad
Raffensperger, of receiving financial benefits to help Biden win the state's 16 electoral
votes.
"Georgia's probably going to be the first state I'm gonna blow up," Powell said of
her planned fraud cases. "And Mr. Kemp and the secretary of state need to go with it because
they're in on the Dominion scam." She added that her Georgia lawsuit, which she hopes to
file this week, "will be biblical."
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
15
pogohere 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 08:17 PM
Some teams are harder to play on than others. Look at the Flynn case. The US Dep. of Justice
surrendered to Powell et. al. and requested that its own case against Flynn be
dismissed following the disclosure by Powell's efforts that the DOJ was withholding
evidence-- a "Brady rule violation"-- of Flynn's innocence from the defense and the court.
Flynn's prestigious Wa DC law firm earlier had Flynn plead guilty. The judge is holding up
the dismissal of that case, against all precedent. Powell most likely isn't finished. Neither
is The Donald.
GoldMorgsCom 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 08:31 PM
Giuliani and Ellis intimidated and gearing down? Powell least nervous at the presentation.
Usually fraud by (voting)computers escapes the possibility of external proof. But a
peculiarity in the Michigan-elections enabled it. See on the site vashiva (Shiva) MIT PhD
Analysis of Michigan Votes Reveals Unfortunate Truth of U.S. Voting Systems. Its systematic
fraud, save screenshots. Steven J. Miller Ph.D. published his testimony, that about 50'000
mail-in ballots of republicans have disapeared in Pensylvenia and 50'000 absentee ballots
have been abused by others (in favor of Biden = +50000). It makes up about 150000 to the
disadvantage of Trump in PA. Bidens surplus was about 75000. About Michigan and Pensylvenia
it has been published that the number of fraud votes was sufficient for a fraud change of the
outcome in favor of "the democrats". The signals are that the same happened in the other
critical states . See also -- Trump lawyers allege 'MASSIVE' election fraud, point to sworn
statements & efforts to threaten and silence them (VIDEO)-- 19 Nov, 2020 20:30 (
rt-search, on top at the right ) In the first ten minutes it is explained how the "democrat"
bosses facilitated huge fraud with absentee ballots. In Pensylvenia 682'000 have been
accepted without proper checks and with destroying the evidence of fraud. It is a federal
offence not to store all election records (scans), even not collecting them, such as besiding
mail-in envelopes and not checking them before opening them.
JingsGeordie 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 08:18 PM
Disavows? That's twisting the information (edit - they've now changed it to 'distances') From
Gen. Flynn's twitter feed - ".@SidneyPowell1 has been suspended from Twitter for 12 hours.
She understands the WH press release & agrees with it. She is staying the course to prove
the massive deliberate election fraud that robbed #WeThePeople of our votes for President
Trump & other Republican candidates."
Thesheperd666 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 09:02 PM
Trump fired Sidney Powell ? That is a huge mistake and might coast him the presidency. Trumps
team looks weak now ! Sidney look more confident and much more calmer than Rudy Giuliani. I
really don't trust Rudy as much as Sidney, wondering if they are afraid of spoiling the
Republic party before the 12th amendment goes to the house for votes ? Either side your on
this makes Trumps team look bad, and are starting to make up stories. I think Trump did win
by a landslide and this years vote was stolen from the US citizens. Demarcates can breath a
little more easier now that Sidney is gone, she was the strongest one on the team. Trump
needs more Sidney Powell's not less, I don't trust Rudy nor do I think he has what it takes
to win. Trump needs better Lawyers, Rudy is just a celebrity lawyer that will keep his image
no matter what ! Trump needs tigers not mice !
anastasia265 3 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 09:27 PM
It's not true. She was never a part of that team and had her own funding site. Their strategy
was to keep the two matters separate
J_P_Franklin 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 08:49 PM
Majority of Republicans are and have conspired against Trump since 2016. America First
Trumpism is the opposite of Republican open borders/free trade treason.
GoldMorgsCom 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 09:03 PM
Peculiar is that the German chamber of commerce does not reveal any registration of the
Dominions, neither of Smartmatic neither of Scytl neither of Amazone. These have not
registrated or their registrations are being hidden on request. So who's prosecution by the
German state prosecutors is to be requested?
Gerald Newton 2 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 10:56 PM
Sidney Powell has not released her evidence yet but it is coming. She has an impressive
record and probably will crush much of the federal justice system. That is what she does.
Read her book, Licensed to Lie. It is about the way federal prosecutors lie to prosecute like
they did to Senator Stevens of Alaska.
Swanster6450 3 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 09:56 PM
I guess Sidney Powell is finding what happens to people from outside the political loop when
they seek to stick their nose in and point out a few inconsistencies. Chucked under a bus is
the usual outcome. Julian Assange is also finding out the same thing and, incidentally, so
too is Donald Trump. All shafted and all chucked under a bus for pointing out a few
inconsistencies.
RTreaderCaribb 3 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 09:56 PM
I have one question and one question only: why would Sydney Powell who seems to be very
bright and a good lawyer say something of which she would know will be exposed only in less
than 14 days to be totally untrue? This makes no sense at all. And so I think we all should
pray that this woman does not end up like Jeffrey Epstein. We should take our time. 14 days
are nothing in comparison to the endless work she has to put in . And if she cant show any
fact for her allegations then we can maybe say something went wrong with her. But right now
let this woman work. All this prejudgment in the public court is irritating to me. And if
Sidney Powell did the same then yes, she would be irritating to me too. And for Trump: If he
can prove voter fraud then he should go to the supreme court. If he cant then at some point
he must concede. I guess the latest is December 14th and until then he should just figure out
what it is. That is his legal right. And for the American people: if you were so stupid to
vote for Biden then please bear the consequences thereof because you will go down the tubes.
The man is not well in his head.
allan Kaplan 3 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 09:43 PM
Sidney Powell's stamina, her defiance and her antipathy is so real that those who have faced
injustice by the hands of the powerful know what it takes to get such bullies sweating. The
house of cards of the Democrat commies will come tumbling down once Powell gets to the podium
of naming names, dates, places, and their coconspirators et al. I love her tenacity,
determination, perseverance and her unflinching boldness that most of the dems are sweating
about! Thank you Ms. Powell for a great American tradition and go full speed... the
dissenting maverick you are!
GoldMorgsCom 3 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 09:27 PM
They are so scared that the president Trump will conduct the great cleansing, to start with
removing the authority on the dollar from the Federal Reserve to the usa federal state of the
people. They are already blocking the president Trump during four years to keep him from
that. They know they can now only keep the president Trump from the great cleansing by
removing him from office. They will do more than the high treason of the fraud against the
federal elections, to remove the president Trump from office. Eventually they will detonate a
smuggled-in nuclear bomb and allegate Russia or fire a missile with a nuclear bomb from an
unindentified submarine and allegate Russia. You believe the spread of Covid-19 this year was
a coincidense? If Russia is being attacked any more (with allegations) it is a good reason
for conducting the great cleansing in Russia. Those probably sly covered Khodorovski-types
who are pressing forward (exports of) GMM-injections "against Covid-19" are probably
backstabbing Russia; catastrophic future compensation claims on Russia and confiscation of
all export-incomes. This is a good reason for conducting the great cleansing out of Russia of
all Khodorovski-types. We hope that the reorganized government of Russia will cleanse out all
Khodorovski-types, no matter the president Trump will continue office and conduct the great
cleansing in the usa or not.
Marlin1091 12 minutes ago 23 Nov, 2020 01:06 AM
Google did and is helping biden. That is why I don't use google any more, I use Yandex and
for fackrok I use vk
Washington's
reputation for expertise has been one of the greatest sources of its power. The coronavirus
pandemic may end it for good.
... that's not the only damage the United States will suffer. Far from making "America great
again," this epic policy failure will further tarnish the United States' reputation as a
country that knows how to do things effectively.
For over a century, the United States' outsized influence around the world rested on three
pillars. The first was the its awesome combination of economic and military strength. The
United States had the world's largest and most sophisticated economy, the world's best
universities and research centers, and a territory blessed with bountiful natural resources.
These features eventually enabled the United States to create and maintain military forces that
none of its rivals could match. Taken together, these combined assets gave the United States
the loudest voice on the planet.
The second pillar was support from an array of allies. No country every agreed with
everything Washington wanted to do, and some states opposed almost everything the United States
sought or stood for, but many countries understood that they benefited from U.S. leadership and
were usually willing to go along with it. Although the United States was almost always acting
in its own self-interest, the fact that others had similar interests made it easier to persuade
them to go along.
A third pillar, however, is broad confidence in U.S. competence. When other countries
recognize the United States' strength, support its aims and believe U.S. officials know what
they are doing, they are more likely to follow the United States' lead. If they doubt its
power, its wisdom, or its ability to act effectively, U.S. global influence inevitably erodes.
This reaction is entirely understandable: If the United States' leaders reveal themselves to be
incompetent bunglers, why should foreign powers listen to their advice? Having a reputation for
competence, in short, can be a critical force multiplier.
BRT 207, agreed that the interview was less than cathartic, but Sidney has a tighrope to
walk. Her opponent is not the opposing campaign of Dem hacks. Her opponent is CIA. CIA
stuffed all those ballots. Unfortunately for Sidney, in US law and regulation, CIA crime is
secret. The perps are secret under the IIPA. The facts are secret under the operational files
exemption. The law is secret under COG procedures. Flynn explained the birds and bees to her.
Remember DIA is JFK's creation.
Now Sidney has to find a way to puke up evidence of CIA crime in court.
CIA ratfucked Chavez with their electoral malware, albeit ineffectually.
CIA put their Venezuelan proprietary through a couple of sheepdippings and turned it on
Trump. Just like they used it on Kerry. Just like they do whenever you vote for the wrong
guy. Honnête homme Hopsicker, offered a lifetime of hookers and blow to shut up, has
the most synoptic take:
This is transnational organized crime by CIA. Sidney has to call CIA agents under oath.
She has to protect them from DO's murderers. She has to explode everything you think about
your bullshit fake democracy. I don't know if she can do it but I hope she can.
@anastasia
ny investigation would occur only after a Trump victory, in which case the investigation
would not be bi-partisan.
In terms of your original quote concerning maintenance of legitimacy:
* The urban areas will never accept election of Trump, as Trump and his supporters have no
intention of trying to remedy urban fiscal shortfalls by Federal borrowings.
* It would appear that governmental legitimacy has already been lost on both the urban and
hinterland coalitions in the US.
* The urban coalition cannot support itself even in the absence of conflict with the
hinterland coalition, and is thus incapable of ruling the USA.
* Legitimacy of some sort of government might be restored if Trump's election concerns are
acted upon, and if the US urban areas declined into political irrelevance, but not otherwise.
According to Merriam-Webster
, a "secret police" is "a police organization that is run by a governm
e
nt
and that operates in a secret way to control the actions of people who oppose the government." Of course, in this day and age, it's
not easy to define "the government". We live in an oligarchical society. There are elected officials, including the President, who
stay in office for a fixed amount of time and have a certain amount of power to change the way that things are done. But on the
other hand, there are permanent institutions, both within the government itself and within society at large, that also wield
significant power and are responsible for safeguarding the interests of the oligarchy, should they be threatened by the policies of
the temporary, elected government.
There are various ways to describe this superstructure of oligarchic rule. One term which has become popular of late is "Deep
State." Because the term has been used by Donald Trump, it has been ridiculed in the press as a "conspiracy theory," an expression
which is often used to identify an "unauthorized narrative". A more technical term, favored by the British and the
neocons
,
is "Continuity of Government" (COG.) There has been plenty of
analysis
of
this concept, some well-founded, some highly speculative.
But a few things are self-evident here. One is that there is a huge number of career civil servants working in all branches of
government who don't leave their jobs at the end of a 4- or 8-year presidential term. They remain, offering their professional
experience, as well as their established political allegiances and ideological habits, to the incoming administration. Secondly,
these career professionals are connected in multiple ways to non-governmental institutions with which they have formed closed
working relationships, such as the media and the financial community, or the arms industry (the famed "
Military
Industrial Complex
.")
Agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) devote much of their efforts to
covert activity, and these agencies have at times clashed with elected officials. There have been allegations that these agencies
are more loyal to permanent oligarchic power centers than to any temporary occupant of the White House. There are even compelling
reasons to believe that these secretive agencies have been
deployed
against U.S. elected officials
and
even
presidents
.
Senator Frank Church
In the early 1970s there were troubling revelations about covert operations, including illegal spying on American citizens and
assassinations of dissident leaders such as
Fred
Hampton.
Growing public concern about these abuses led to the formation of the United States Senate Select Committee to Study
Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, better known as the Church Committee after its chairman, Democratic
Senator Frank Church of Idaho. Creation of the Committee was approved on January 27, 1975 by the U.S. Senate. It published an
extensive final report in April of 1976.
The Committee investigated the activities of the CIA and FBI, as well as the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS). It investigated assassinations of foreign leaders, unauthorized surveillance of U.S. citizens, and other covert
operations. Efforts were made by political leaders, including President Gerald Ford, to keep these findings secret. These efforts
were only partially successful.
Some of the projects which were exposed by the Church Committee included:
COINTELPRO, the FBI program to infiltrate and disrupt dissident organizations, including the movement of Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. as well as many other civil rights or anti-war organizations.
MK-ULTRA, the CIA program to develop mind control techniques including the use of psychedelic drugs such as LSD
Operation Mockingbird, the CIA program to manipulate the news media for propaganda purposes
Edward Snowden
Typically, the agencies under investigation would issue a
mea culpa
and
assure the public that these naughty activities had all been discontinued. However, new revelations over the past decades have
demonstrated that nothing could be further from the truth. Of particular interest is the case of
Edward
Snowden
, the NSA whistleblower who revealed the truly staggering extent of the unlawful surveillance being carried out on
American citizens.
Some things which were once done with utmost discretion, such as the infiltration of the news media by the CIA under Operation
Mockingbird, are now done completely out in the open without the public batting an eye. For example, former CIA Director
John
Brennan
and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who both lied under oath to the US Congress about illegal
activity by the CIA and NSA, now hold high-profile positions at MSNBC and CNN respectively.
It was
Russiagate
that
brought into sharp relief the depth and breadth of CIA/NSA/FBI involvement in the manipulation of domestic politics. It originated
in London, the great mecca of the neocons, with the preparation of the "Steele Dossier" by a "former" operative of MI6. For four
years in the U.S., Russiagate was propagated through regular leaks of anonymous "assessments" from members of the "intel community"
to their assets in the media, some of whom were themselves ostensibly retirees from the "intel community."
These leakers were dutifully characterized in the media as courageous, patriotic whistleblowers, unlike those individuals such as
Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning or Julian Assange who revealed material that was embarrassing to the neocons. The
condemnation
of those latter persons
by intel community appendage Congressman Adam Schiff, who had
his
own personal whistleblower
on tap for his impeachment effort, is also illuminating.
One organization which has earned the gratitude of the American public for shedding light on the malignant activities of the "intel
community" is group of genuine, high-profile whistleblowers that calls itself
Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).
They have played an important role in
debunking
the
story that Russia "hacked" the DNC servers and furnished information on DNC misconduct to Wikileaks. A particularly insightful voice
is that of
Ray
McGovern
, who was a CIA analyst from 1963 to 1990, and in the 1980s chaired National Intelligence Estimates and prepared the
President's Daily Brief.
But what has come out of the shadows and into full view during the past four years is a new sort of complex, where the covert
agencies, the media, and the corporations which now monopolize social media, join forces to create an unprecedented, "total
immersion" propaganda environment. Initially, the internet and social media appeared to be a "wild west" sort of venue where anyone
could say anything. Much of the population soon began to prefer this as a source for news over the corporate media, and the neocons
cried foul.
Facebook
hastened to accomodate them
, bringing in the vociferously neocon Atlantic Council and the mother of all Regime Change
organizations, the National Endowment for Democracy, as consultants in 2018 to help decide which voices should be silenced.
The FBI joined the fun,
seizing
over 100 internet domains
in late 2020 and claiming that they were operated by Iran. This included the site for the
American
Herald Tribune
, an alternative press organ with a substantial following. The FBI Special Agent in charge issued a statement,
saying that "Thanks to our ongoing collaboration with Google, Facebook, and Twitter, the FBI was able to disrupt this Iranian
propaganda campaign and we will continue to pursue any attempts by foreign actors to spread disinformation in our country."
However, it doesn't stop with propaganda and censorship. During the presidential election of 2020, there was an escalated
intervention by the secret police agencies into the electoral process. A few
courageous
individuals
spoke out against this.
When election day arrived, numerous vote-counting anomalies were reported
all
around the country
, partially obscured by deliberate disinformation, "fact-checking", and general hysteria. One particularly
noteworthy allegation was made by Sidney Powell, an attorney who has represented General Michael Flynn. She alleged that computer
programs called HAMMER and SCORECARD, which had been developed for the intelligence agencies for use in rigging elections in other
countries, had been used to benefit
Biden
in
the election. Former NSA senior analyst and member of VIPS, Kirk Wiebe, explained the use of these cyber-weapons, and reported that
the man who developed them, Dennis Montgomery, was prepared to testify to this effect:
Why would the covert agencies attack Trump, who supposedly is a hardline right-winger? Well, apparently he is not regarded as such
in establishment circles. One of the preeminent establishment megaphones,
The
Atlantic
, published
a
very revealing article
in which they compared Trump to Henry Wallace, who served as Vice President under FDR and went on to
found the Progressive Party. Wallace opposed the Cold War, and Trump's reluctance to embrace the Cold War 2.0 that began with the
neocon-sponsored 2014 coup in Ukraine appears to be what put him on the enemies list.
The many allegations of fraud in the 2020 election may be the subject of controversy, litigation, and even civil unrest for possibly
years to come. As Republicans so often do, Sidney Powell has damaged her credibility by
alleging
that the Venezuelan government and assorted communists
played a role in orchestrating vote fraud, a red herring on a par with
Democratic Party claims of Russian interference in the 2016 election. If the CIA and/or NSA did in fact use cyber-warfare techniques
to manipulate the outcome, they most certainly did not do so at the behest of Hugo Chavez. And if they did tamper with the vote
totals, they will have ample opportunity to wipe the evidence.
But at this point, can anyone argue that it is not urgent for the Congress to resume an investigation of misconduct by our secret
police agencies, and that this time they not be satisfied with polite assurances that the bad behavior will cease? Trump has many
warts, but there is a proper way to remove him from office, if that is what the electorate wants. A
color
revolution
, or any other form of coup run by secret police agencies, is odious.
Thanks for reading. If you find this material interesting, perhaps
you might contact Twitter and ask them why
my
account was suspended
on June 30 of this year. I would very
much like to find out the reason.
For those readers who may be unfamiliar with the term "Color Revolution", it refers to what has now become the standard technique
for promoting "regime change" in targeted nations.
The term may have its origins in the works of
Gene
Sharp
, who wrote some guidebooks on how to organize popular revolts using Madison Avenue-style marketing techniques. He
recommended to the sponsors that rather than confusing or boring the participants with too much political theory, they should
motivate their budding revolutionaries with pop culture, using catchy, content-free slogans, logos, and team colors.
Color R
e
volutions are expensive (
$5
billion in the case of Ukraine
) and are typically orchestrated by a public-private partnership comprised of government agencies
such as the State Department and MI6 and/or CIA, combined with private funding and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).
The most famous organization of this sort is the National Endowment For Democracy, a curious entity that is funded by the US
Government through USAID (as well as by donations from major
neocon
private
foundations), and has two sub-organizations that disseminate the funds to various Regime Change projects: the International
Republican Institute, affiliated with the Republican Party, and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs,
affiliated with the Democrats. Both organizations carry out the same activity, which underscores the fact that on matters of
subverting and bullying the rest of the world, there is a lot more bipartisanship in the US than people are inclined to think.
Another name associated with funding and orchestration is
George
Soros
, whose various tax-exempt organizations such as the Open Society Foundations invariably pump money into the latest Color
Revolutions, for reasons that are often more commercial than strictly political.
After the September 11 attacks in 2001, the
neocons
fanned
the flames of indignation and xenophobia, and were able to exploit them in order to assume a dominant role in most American
institutions, particularly the political parties and the media. Regime Change fever swept the foreign policy establishment, and
anyone who looked cross-eyed at a neocon became a target.
Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama embraced the neocon ethos and gave them virtual carte blanche to carry out Color
Revolutions around the world. The advent of social media, which fosters communication in the form of short, catchy slogans and
images that can be made to "go viral," was particularly conducive to Gene Sharp's formula of organizing the masses around
advertising copy and team colors. The Color Revolution techniques were used on a large scale in the former Soviet Union, such as in
the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia or the 2005 Orange Revolution in Ukraine.
If the targeted populations can't be organized effectively to overthrow their leaders, there is always the fall back option of
arming mercenary groups to seize power by violence, or if that fails, out and out military aggression by the US or NATO. The most
reliable method seems to be a combination of non-violent and violent action, such as in the case of Ukraine's second Color
Revolution in 2014 (a coup which was comically dubbed the "Revolution of Dignity" by its neocon sponsors, who know that a successful
marketing campaign must never be understated.) A similar case was the 2019 protests in Hong Kong, where gang violence was deployed
in hopes of provoking a crackdown by the state which could then be exploited for propaganda purposes.
But it was inevitable that these techniques would eventually be used on the US itself. Donald Trump campaigned on a platform of
reducing US reliance on Regime Change wars and NATO "out-of-area deployments" as a centerpiece of foreign policy. This was
anathema
to the neocons.
Once in office, Trump vacillated, bringing prominent neocons into his cabinet and allowing them to launch
multiple Regime Change operations. However, Trump was not a doctrinaire neocon, and he angered them by advocating better relations
with North Korea, Russia and China. And for the neocons, anything short of total allegiance to their ideology is tantamount to
betrayal.
The standard methodology was put into play the moment Trump was inaugurated. The team color was pink, in the form of the pink "pussy
hats" (these ostensibly called attention to Trump's sexual vulgarity and libertine lifestyle, which lacked the charm of Bill
Clinton's.) The buzzword was #Resistance, which was intended to conjure up images of the struggle by nations which had been
conquered by Nazi aggression during World War II. Oddly enough, however, the aggressive moves by Trump against other nations were
not #Resisted. In fact, those were the only instances where he received hearty praise from the corporate media.
But it's not possible to mobilize a population with hats and hashtags alone. There had to be some minimal political content, and
herein lay the dilemma for the organizers of America's Color Revolution. There was widespread popular discontent with what has
become known as the "forever war" policy, as well as the neoliberal economics which have produced an unprecedented income disparity
between the 1% and the 99%, and this popular discontent was key in electing Trump. The neocons wanted discontent, but
not
on those issues
, since they had no intention of changing those policies.
Instead, they opted for a revival of the Cold War. Americans seem to have a particular susceptibility to jingoism, and the
demonization of the former communist powers, which had already begun in 2014 with the neocon-sponsored coup in Ukraine, was cranked
up to full volume in the corporate media, using all the imagery and sloganeering that had proved so effective during the 1950s.
This involved some spectacular feats of cognitive dissonance. Despite
Trump's
outbursts of bellicosity toward Russia
and other neocon targets, Trump was portrayed as being "soft," an appeaser, or an
outright enemy agent. The Democratic Party, which is considered to be the more liberal of the two parties and had in decades past
expressed some nominal opposition to military adventures in Vietnam and elsewhere,
swung
way to the right of the Republicans
in the jingoism derby.
The
secret
police agencies
and their pet journalists concocted what will be admired by historians as one of the most preposterous
conspiracy theories in recorded history, the tale of Russia manipulating the 2016 election with a computer hack which somehow
cannot
be detected by the NSA
, and
puppy
pages on Facebook
.
There was also a big focus on Trump's personality, which is admittedly none too winsome. This is consistent with the neocon "Hitler
of the Month Club" formula, where each new nemesis, from Manuel Noriega to Saddam Hussein to Muammar Gaddafi to Vladimir Putin, is
depicted as the most brutish, authoritarian dictator ever to walk the face of the planet.
They succeeded in impeaching Trump in December 2019, almost three years into his first term in office. They did not actually charge
Trump with an impeachable crime, but rather offered the rationale that he had allegedly used the power of his office in ways that
could benefit his re-election campaign (something that no other American president would ever dream of doing.) This was a far cry
from the much sexier, hoped-for rationale of "collusion" with the Bolshevik Foe, which had been shot down by the Mueller Report.
However, impeachment maven
Adam
Schiff
managed to insinuate that this Collusion was the real basis for impeachment, every time he saw a TV camera. We faced the
surreal spectacle of liberals begging John Bolton to testify, as the role of the neocons in orchestrating the #Resistance became
ever more explicit.
The impeachment passed the House on purely partisan lines, and Senate voted not to convict on purely partisan lines as well. There
has been much speculation that popular pushback to the whole spectacle may actually benefit Trump in this year's election. We shall
see.
Meanwhile, with the massively FUBAR Iowa caucuses of February 2020, questions were once again raised once again about the Democratic
nominating process. Bernie Sanders was emerging as a new threat to neocon dominance, this time from within the Democratic Party.
During the days leading up to Super Tuesday, there was a remarkable development. Every prominent neocon, from Bill Kristol to Max
Boot to David Frum to Susan Rice, acted with synchronized, military precision to endorse Joe Biden. Several neocon-friendly
Democratic presidential candidates abruptly withdrew from the race to endorse him as well. There was an immediate Pavlovian response
from cable news pundits and other putative journalists. Russiagate was dusted off and started up again, this time for use against
Sanders. On April 8, Sanders capitulated and withdrew from the race.
No one in their right mind believed that the confused and incoherent Biden could defeat the also incoherent, but clever and
confident Trump. But at this point, it was more important to the neocons that they keep control over at least one of the two
parties, and a decision was made that it were better to throw the election to Trump rather than to allow Sanders' brand of
left-populism to become ascendant in the Democratic Party.
But then the neocons saw a fresh opportunity, following the May 25 murder of African-American George Floyd by police in Minneapolis.
Protest demonstrations by the Black community intersected the anxieties of a population frightened and frustrated by the one-two
punch of economic collapse combined with public health isolation to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Violent groups from the
Antifa
milieiu,
predominately
white
and
possibly assets of the FBI's
COINTELPRO
progam,
initiated vandalism and looting. Neocons were salivating at the prospect of Maidan-style chaos.
The beleaguered Trump had already been showing signs of psychological fatigue, and there had been significant lapses in his already
questionable judgement. In addition to mishandling the public health measures and the economic crisis, he had capitulated once more
to the neocons and went on an anti-China tirade. Then, when the social unrest began in the wake of the George Floyd killing, all of
Trump's political flaws came into play.
The neocons triumphantly hit the airwaves and the digital arena. Their great oracle,
The
Atlantic
, published
an
article
that serendipitously confirms the central theme of the article you are presently reading. Neocon high priestess Susan
Rice
suggested
that the Russians were to blame
for the rioting. Trump's every misstep was amplified by neocon pundits. Suddenly the idea of
electing Biden was no longer so implausible, as long as he could be
kept
away from live microphones.
It's important to
bear
in mind that the neocons are not
in the least concerned with Trump's mishandling of COVID-19 pandemic or civil unrest. They
were delighted when he ranted against China. But when he advocated reducing U.S. troop deployments in Germany and Afghanistan, they
were livid. On June 26, the
New York Times
published
yet
another story
based on anonymous leaks from the "intelligence community". This one claimed that the Taliban needed some
incentives after being occupied by a foreign power after 20 years and was now accepting "bounties" from Russia in exchange for
fighting the US military. In mid-September, General Frank McKenzie, Commander of the U.S. Central Command, told NBC News that no
evidence had been found to support this claim. Neocons continued to speak of it as established fact.
Although the corporate press continued to depict Trump as a fanatical right-winger in coverage intended for the rubes, within the
citadels of neoconservatism he was regarded as something entirely different. On September 30, 2020, the
Atlantic
published
another revelatory article entitled "
What
a Second Trump Term Would Mean for the World
." Author Thomas Wright drops a few bombshells like this one, likening Trump to the
great Progressive leader Henry Wallace (who is regarded by neocons as a close relative of Satan):
Looking back on U.S. diplomatic history, one of the great counterfactuals is what would have happened if Franklin D. Roosevelt
had not replaced his vice president Henry Wallace with Harry Truman in 1944. Wallace was sympathetic to the Soviet Union and
became an ardent opponent of the Cold War. If he had become president when FDR died, in April 1945, the next half century could
have gone very differently -- likely no NATO, no Marshall Plan, no alliance with Japan, no overseas troop presence, and no
European Union.
The U.S. is now teetering on another historically important moment. With Trump, we would not only be deprived of our Truman. We
would be saddled with our Wallace -- a leader whose instincts and actions are diametrically opposed to what the moment requires.
The good news is that the neocons are not omnipotent. They are adept at conning the public and they have the full cooperation of the
corporate media, but the public is volatile and increasingly skeptical of the official "narratives." This is why the neocons are
growing more and more hysterical in their public proclamations about "conspiracy theories" and "disinformation." They are in fact
strongly in favor of conspiracy theories and disinformation, provided that it is their own conspiracy theories and not someone
else's.
Neocons are demanding
censorship
of social media
, to drive everyone into the arms of CNN and
The
Atlantic.
As the election approaches, these demands have become increasingly more vociferous, leading to a major controversy
with the decision by both Facebook and Twitter to censor the
New
York Post
coverage
of leaked email correspondence between Joe Biden's son and executives of the Ukrainian energy firm
Burisma (which employed him at a rather remarkable salary). The rationale offered by the two social media giants, that the sourcing
of the emails was unclear, did not impress media critics, who
pointed
out
that if that policy were applied in an even-handed fashion, Russiagate could never have happened.
As long as the option is open, follow alternative news sources online. I recommend the
Grayzone
and
Consortium
News
, both of which I have found to be quiet reliable. The neocons are frightened; they worry about what John Durham's
investigation, or the declassification of documents ordered by Trump, may reveal about their methods of manipulation. Frightened
people make tactical errors. We must keep our wits about us and find ways to turn those errors to our advantage.
Nota Bene: the author of this article was subsequently
suspended
from Twitter
without explanation. Contact @TwitterSupport
and ask them why.
O'Connor pushed her about her claims that computer software used in the election,
particularly Dominion Voting Systems, has been tainted, and he wondered how she would prove it.
For starters, Powell said that her legal team has pictures of votes being manipulated in
real-time.
"It is terrifying, and it is a huge national security issue," Powell said. "Why the
Department of Justice and FBI have not done something, Dominion is closing its offices and
moving. No doubt they're shredding documents. God only knows what else. More than 100 Dominion
people have wiped any connection with Dominion off the internet."
She also claims that they have testimony from witnesses opening military ballots and
trashing them if they were for Trump, and substitute ballots were put in for Biden.
"I'm essentially staking my personal and professional reputation on these allegations, and I
have no hesitation from what I've seen in doing so," she noted. "In fact, I think it would be
irresponsible if not criminal of me not to come forward with it."
She also says she would LOVE for Dominion to sue her over her allegations so she can conduct
civil discovery. Powell also reacted to Fox News host Tucker Carlson's criticism of her on his
program on Thursday night.
How 'Western' Media Select Their Foreign Correspondentsgottlieb , Nov 20 2020
19:21 utc |
1
Did you ever wonder why 'western' mainstream media get stories about Russia and other
foreign countries so wrong?
It is simple. They hire the most brainwashed, biased and cynic writers they can get for
the job. Those who are corrupt enough to tell any lie required to support the world view of
their editors and media owners.
They are quite upfront about it.
Here is evidence in form of a New York Times
job description for a foreign correspondent position in Moscow:
Russia Correspondent
Job Description
Vladimir Putin's Russia remains one of the biggest stories in the world.
It sends out hit squads armed with nerve agents against its enemies, most recently the
opposition leader Aleksei Navalny. It has its cyber agents sow chaos and disharmony in the
West to tarnish its democratic systems, while promoting its faux version of democracy. It
has deployed private military contractors around the globe to secretly spread its
influence. At home, its hospitals are filling up fast with Covid patients as its president
hides out in his villa.
If that sounds like a place you want to cover, then we have good news: We will have an
opening for a new correspondent as Andy Higgins takes over as our next Eastern Europe
Bureau Chief early next year.
To be allowed to write for the Times one must see the Russian Federation as a
country that is ruled by just one man.
One must be a fervent believer in MI6 produced Novichok hogwash. One must also believe in
Russiagate and in the multiple idiocies it produced even after all of them have been
debunked.
One must know that vote counts in Russia are always wrong while U.S. vote counting is the
most reliable ever. Russian private military contractors (which one must know to be evil men)
are 'secretly deployed' to wherever the editors claim them to be. Russia's hospitals are of
cause always much worse than ours.
Even when it is easy to check that Vladimir Putin (the most evil man ever) is at work in the
Kremlin the job will require one to claim that he is hiding in a villa.
Most people writing for the Times will actually not believe the above nonsense.
But the description is not for a position that requires one to weight and report the facts.
It is for a job that requires one to lie. That the Times lists all the recent
nonsense about Russia right at the top of the job description makes it clear that only people
who support those past lies will be considered adequate to tell future lies about Russia.
No honest unbiased person will want such a job. But as it comes with social prestige, a
good paycheck and a probably nice flat in Moscow the New York Times will surely find
a number of people who are willing to sell their souls to take it.
Interestingly the job advertisement does not list Russian language capabilities as a
requirement. It only says that 'Fluency in Russian is preferred'.
'Western' mainstream media are filled with such biased, cynic and self-censoring
correspondents who have little if any knowledge of the country they are reporting from. It is
therefore not astonishing that 'western' populations as well as their politicians have often
no knowledge of what is really happening in the world.
Hilarious. Don't need no stinking
Operation Mockingbird anymore. Just put out a want-ad and plenty of brainwashed folks will
come flocking. Propaganda works.
This is such an odd job description with very few specific requirements and none detailing
how much experience or what level of knowledge or skill is required (in the form of X number
of years worked in some area requiring Russian language skills or university qualifications
obtained) that I almost wonder if this advertisement is for real.
One notices also that "Vladimir Putin's Russia" is presented as a story. Everything else
that follows in the second paragraph of the advertisement is also a story. Indeed everything
in the news media industry is a "story" as if instead of employing investigative reporters on
the beat grimly searching for hard facts like old pulp fiction detectives, the media now only
wants Hollywood script writers or graduates straight out of creative writing courses.
But then I suppose whoever gets the job at the NYT can hardly do worse than what the hack
Luke Harding did as The Fraudian's Moscow correspondent nearly 15 years ago, so much so that
the Russian govt must have suspected that he was more than just a bad paranoid plagiarist ...
he must have been a spy as well, that it would initially refuse to renew his visa. One would
like to see the job specifications for the position of The Fraudian's Moscow reporter that
Harding held for a number of years.
Incredible. What the acronym 'SMH' (shake my head) was invented for.
It's no wonder I switched off CBC radio, our national broadcaster here in Canada. Their
music programs were okay, but every hour they had a news update, and those were
stomach-turning. Superficial, biased, Empire-friendly nonsense...
Norman Solomon wrote about this problem fifteen years ago in his book "War Made Easy, How
Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us To Death"
. . .from Amazon: In War Made Easy, nationally syndicated columnist, media critic, and author
Norman Solomon cuts through the dense web of spin to probe and scrutinize the key "perception
management" techniques that have played huge rolls in the promotion of American wars in
recent decades.
p.116
. . .The attitudes of reporters covering U.S. foreign policy officials are generally
similar to the attitudes of those officials. "Most journalists who get plum foreign
assignments already accept the assumptions of empire," according to longtime foreign
correspondent Reese Erlick. He added, "I didn't meet a single foreign reporter in Iraq who
disagreed with the notion that the U.S. and Britain have the right to overthrow the Iraq
government by force. They disagreed only about timing, whether the action should be
unilateral, and whether a long-term occupation is practical." After decades of freelancing
for major U.S. news organizations, Erlich offered this blunt conclusion: "Money, prestige,
career options, ideological predilections--combined with the down sides of filing stories
unpopular with the government--all cast their influence on foreign correspondents. You
don't win a Pulitzer prize for challenging the basic assumptions of empire."
> social prestige, a good paycheck and a probably nice flat
The term that Paul Craig Roberts often uses, " presstitute ", comes to mind.
Echoing JimmyG. @4 and spudski @7, in Canada, our taxpayer-funded state news agency's
flagship program "The National" gives us regular Two Minutes Hate pieces currently
being churned out every two weeks or so by Moscow correspondent Chris Brown who fits this
article's description to a T.
I've lost count of how many times he and CBC The National's editors have singled out
Russia's handling of COVID-19 for criticism, when so many other countries have far worse per
capita fatality numbers than Russia.
While decrying Russia's COVID-19 deaths, they, of course, never mention the fact that
Canada has had more COVID-19 deaths per capita than Russia ...
It's absolutely pathetic.
5 years ago the truly great journalist Robert Fisk made the following observations during an
interview with the journal.ie amongst others.
Back's up everything you have pointed out about the sheer disappearance of any impartial
reportage from the NYT and printed media in general.
"Most newspapers that have lost circulation, particularly in the States, it's not because
of the internet, it's because those newspapers were simply no good. When I go to San
Francisco the coverage of the Middle East in its papers is frightened, cowardly, pathetic,
there's no serious foreign coverage at all."
"Newspapers themselves are to blame for the deterioration in their readership. I read the
New York Times when its free, period, it doesn't deserve to be paid for. It's not worth
it.
It doesn't matter whether it's online or not. If a paper's not worth buying you'll read for
free online regardless"
"Most people writing for the Times will actually not believe the above
nonsense."
Our host is much too charitable to the presstitutes. Those in the "Mockingbird"
mass media eat their own effluent like a sort of group ouroboric scatophagia. To maintain
their perverse form of "mental hygiene" they studiously avoid information sources
outside of their own circular reprocessing of yesterday's delusions into fresh steaming piles
for today's consumption. They have become so accustomed to feeding off their own delusions
that if a hint of reality were to intrude into their looped intellectual food chain their
minds would reject it like poison. They would likely exhibit physical symptoms, which
doubtless would be attributed to evil Soviet mind rays from Havana.
Stengel stated clearly that a "news cartel" of mainstream corporate media outlets had
long dominated US society, but he bemoaned that those "cartels don't have hegemony like they
used to."
Stengel made it clear that his mission is to counter the alternative perspectives given
a voice by foreign media platforms that challenge the US-dominated media landscape.
"The bad actors use journalistic objectivity against us."
Wow ...
I clicked on the New York Times job link, and journalistic objectivity and integrity are
nowhere to be found in the job descripton. But I did notice these lines that add to the ones
that b brought to our attention:
We are looking for someone who will embrace the prospect of traversing 11 time zones to
track a populace that is growing increasingly frustrated with an economy dragged down by
corruption, cronyism and excessive reliance on natural resources. This posting offers the
chance to chronicle the continuing reign of one of the world's most charismatic leaders,
President Vladimir V. Putin.
Not to mention, Putin ushered in changes to the constitution, so he will likely stay in
power for many years to come.
And, of course, we are on the cusp of a new, less Putin-friendly president in the US,
which should only raise the temperature between Washington and Moscow.
It's not Russia it's "Vladimir Putin's Russia," so that's one mandatory term checked off,
i.e. personalizing the appointed enemy. But then we read "It sends out hit squads. . ."
instead of the usual obligatory: 'The regime' . . . . .but the Times can't get everything
right.
The amount of hourly propaganda directed at and leveled at American people is
unprecedented, I had not seen it this intense in past years it reminds me of my High school
days in Shah's Iran. This kind and this intense of control on news can only be due to
instability of the regime. IMO in coming Biden Adminstration regime will impose new rules for
control of internet and access to foreign news. Currently using my Mobil cellular I can't
access any Iranian news site.
While probably "less aggressively nasty" than Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden is still a
"conventional politician," but it won't be easy for him to dismiss his party's progressive
wing, Larry Sanders told RT's Going Underground.
Brother to US Senator Bernie Sanders and the Green Party Spokesperson on Health and Social
Care (England & Wales), Larry Sanders told RT's Going Underground host Afshin Rattansi that
while Biden was not his "choice" for president, he prefers him over the current
incumbent, President Donald Trump.
... ... ...
As a fixture of the establishment, Biden will follow the interests of corporate money and
the military-industrial complex rather than anybody else's, Sanders noted.
"Biden is a conventional politician, he is beholden to big money, he is beholden to
defense industries,
joe_go 13 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 07:03 AM
If no one in America went to vote the country would still look the way it looks today. The
big money and military industry would run the country the way it runs it when people vote and
think it matters.
Spirgily_Klump 20 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 12:46 AM
Do you know after Biden was out of the VP office the Chinese communist party had donated $70
million to one of his foundations at the University of Pennsylvania from which Joe drew a
salary of over $900,000 per year? With his benefiting from the hundreds of millions his
family took in from foreign powers and persons how can he gain the security clearance
necessary for the presidency? The president needs the highest clearance. Even an applicant to
the CIA get polygraphed.
shadow1369 Spirgily_Klump 9 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 11:00 AM
Just one of many skeletons jangling in Bidet's closet, they will be used by his controllers
to keep him on track.
Iwanasay 19 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 01:22 AM
It doesn't matter who is in power, America's destiny has been chosen by other behind the
scene faces
RedDragon 15 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 05:27 AM
All USA presidents are beholden to big money entities, inclusive incoming Biden presidency.
Trump is beholden to the Jewish money powers etc..
Frank Figliuzzi, former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence, says a President Trump "can't happen again," so a "bipartisan
committee," rather than voters, should "vet" and approve future candidates. Figliuzzi, who worked under Robert Mueller at the FBI,
made it clear during a Thursday appearance on MSNBC he buys into conspiracy theories about Donald Trump being influenced by the Russian
government, calling him Figliuzzi, who worked under Robert Mueller at the FBI, made it clear during a Thursday appearance on MSNBC
he buys into conspiracy theories about Donald Trump being influenced by the Russian government, calling him "the most vulnerable
president in history."
Figliuzzi's suggestion of giving a vague "committee" more power over the selection of presidential candidates than actual
voters has earned criticism from both liberals and conservatives on social media, with many seeing the idea as "scary" and
a step in the direction of countries where people have little power in who is put in power.
"Reminds me of Iran's Guardian Council, which has 12 members. The Guardian Council approves candidates for president and majlis
(Congress)," Huffington Post journalist Yashar Ali tweeted, adding, "Great idea, let's become like Iran that's going to turn
out well, I'm sure."
Threat inflation is like Apple pie among Washington swamp national security parasites
Notable quotes:
"... The US security state, with its huge military forces and techno-industrial base, and no diplomatic need nor capability, REQUIRES (fake) "security threats" in order to exist. ..."
"... Those appointed "threats" are currently, probably not changing soon, in some order of "threat-size" . . . ..."
Applying any logic to the "threats" against the US "national security" AKA world hegemony
becomes much simpler with recognizing two simple facts:
1. The US security state, with its huge military forces and techno-industrial base, and no
diplomatic need nor capability, REQUIRES (fake) "security threats" in order to exist.
2. Those appointed "threats" are currently, probably not changing soon, in some order of
"threat-size" . . .
China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Venezuela, & African
"terrorists" -- did I miss anyone?
The mass mailing of unsolicited ballots is of course a recipe for fraud, even more so in a
state where the voter rolls contain tens of thousands of people who haven't voted or updated
their records in more than a decade. This is how you get dead people voting, as we
reported here at The Federalist and as Tucker Carlson
noted last week .
But there's another, less sensational but perhaps more consequential election scandal in
Nevada that hasn't yet made headlines, even though it's been hiding in plain sight for weeks
now. Under the guise of supposedly nonprofit, nonpartisan get-out-the-vote campaigns, Native
American voter advocacy groups in Nevada handed out gift cards, electronics, clothing, and
other items to voters in tribal areas, in many cases documenting the exchange of ballots for
"prizes" on their own Facebook pages, sometimes even while wearing official Joe Biden campaign
gear.
Simply put, this is illegal. Offering voters anything of value in exchange for their
vote is a violation of
federal election law , and in some cases punishable by up to two years in prison and as
much as $10,000
in fines . That includes raffles, free food, free T-shirts, and so on.
... ... ...
There are about 60,000 eligible Native American voters in Nevada who make up about 3 percent
of the state's total voting population. That's almost twice the current margin of Biden's
current lead over President Trump in Nevada. So the Native American vote really does matter, it
could even be decisive. It therefore matters how many Native American votes were influenced by
an illegal cash-for-votes scheme, especially if funding for it came from American taxpayers via
the NCAI.
It also matters because this didn't just happen in Nevada. Organizers there might have been
more obvious about what they were doing, but there's evidence that similar efforts, including
gift card and electronics giveaways, were undertaken in Native communities in
South Dakota ,
Arizona ,
Wisconsin ,
Washington ,
Michigan ,
Idaho , Minnesota , and Texas .
All of this coordinated illegal activity, clearly designed to churn out votes for Biden and
Democrats in tribal areas all across the country, is completely out in the open. You don't need
special access or some secret source to find out about it. You just have be curious, look
around, and report it.
Unfortunately, mainstream media outlets are not curious and refuse to report on any of this
stuff. What's described above is an egregious and totally transparent vote-buying scheme in
Nevada that was likely undertaken on a similar scale across nearly a dozen other states, but
you won't read about it in The New York Times, or hear about it on CNN.
That's not because the story is unimportant, but because, for the media establishment, it's
inconvenient. No wonder these groups didn't try to hide what they were doing.
The recommendations of the State Department paper
listed by Axios are not practical steps but pure ideology:
The blueprint: The paper lays out "ten tasks" for the U.S. to accomplish.
Promoting constitutional government and civil society at home.
Maintaining the world's strongest military.
Fortifying the rules-based international order.
Reevaluating its alliance system.
Strengthening its alliance system and creating new international organizations to
promote democracy and human rights.
Cooperating with China when possible and constraining Beijing when appropriate.
Educating Americans about the China challenge.
Train a new generation of public servants who understand great-power competition with
China.
Reforming the U.S. education system to help students understand the responsibility of
citizenship in a complex information age.
Championing the principles of freedom in word and in deed.
Note especially the points 7 to 10.
They have nothing to do with China. They call for domestic propaganda, more domestic
propaganda and even more domestic propaganda.
Compare with Kennan characterization of Soviets in 1946:
Kennan described dealing with Soviet
Communism as "undoubtedly greatest task our diplomacy has ever faced and probably
greatest it will ever have to face". In the first two sections, he posited concepts that
became the foundation of American Cold War policy:
The Soviets perceived themselves at perpetual war with capitalism;
The Soviets viewed left-wing, but non-communist, groups in other countries as an even
worse enemy of itself than the capitalist ones;
The Soviets would use controllable Marxists in the capitalist world as
allies;
Soviet aggression was fundamentally not aligned with the views of the Russian people or with
economic reality, but rooted in historic Russian nationalism and
neurosis ;
The Soviet government 's
structure inhibited objective or accurate pictures of internal and external reality.
b's 5 bullet points covering Keenan presumptions lends itself to substitution of Soviet /
communism w/ Global Corporatist Oligarchy ... not aligned with wishes of citizenry, not
democratic, not aligned with reality, etc.
I do agree that Kennan's "long telegram" was misconstrued by the NatSec loons of the time
to justify what they wanted to do. But that is no surprise, that is how US politics works.
It's has always been a racket.
I don't know. The language Kennan used is too vague to make any specific conclusions.
The center-left certainly hated the USSR more than they hated capitalism. Indeed, it was
the intellectuals from the center-left - not the right - who created the term
"totalitarianism" as we know today.
Here's China's unofficial response via this Global Times editorial . I
wish I could reproduce the art at the editorial's header as it's very spot-on:
"There is no new wording in the report, which can be seen as a collection of malicious
remarks from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other anti-China US politicians and senators.
Right now, only a little more than 60 days are left for the current US administration. An
official from the State Department explained that the report is not meant to constrain the
next US administration. But the fact is the Department of State fears that the Biden
administration will adjust US-China relations, and the release of the report is part of their
efforts to consolidate the current extreme anti-China path.
"But most Chinese scholars who have read the report believe it is an insult to Kennan by
labeling the report as Kennan-style. Kennan, then US charge d'affaires in Moscow, sent an
8,000-word telegram to the Department of State detailing his views on the Soviet Union. At
least, there was no special political motive in Kennan's report. But the latest report is
trying to leave a legacy for the extreme anti-China policy adopted by the Trump
administration and fawning on Pompeo, which is evil in essence .
"The impulsive and capricious governing style of Donald Trump leaves sufficient room for
politicians like Pompeo to give free play to their ambitions. The Department of State has
become the governmental organ that has the most serious clashes with China, outperforming the
CIA and the Department of Defense.
"Diplomats are supposed to be communicators, but Pompeo and his team have chilled the
communication atmosphere with China. In the China direction, today's US Department of State
can close its door.
"Surrounded by such deep hostility and prejudice toward China and the wild ambition of the
secretary of state, how could the Department of State's Office of Policy Planning make out
anything objective about China? Their observation ability, cautious attitude toward research,
and sense of responsibility for history have been severely squeezed. They are just currying
favor from their seniors and manipulating extreme paths, pretending to be
'thoughtful....'
"Chinese diplomatic and academic circles look down upon the Pompeo team, which lacks
professionalism, and acts like a group of gangsters suddenly taking official positions.
They not only have messed things up, but also hope to build their nonsense as legacy.
Pompeo's choice of opportunists like Miles Yu as advisor in particular has increased Chinese
people's doubts over the 'amateurism' and 'immorality' of the Pompeo team's China
policy....
"The US' China policy is very much like 'drunk driving' internally while on the
international stage it's like sailing against the current." [My Emphasis]
There's not much more to add aside for asking barflies to read the entire editorial.
"Although it is hardly atypical of the President Trump administration, the document is
significant because it represents yet another attempt by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to
immortalize his Cold War confrontation between the US and China, bind the succeeding
administration to it and most strikingly, institutionalize anti-Beijing ideas into American
bureaucracy.
"The push against China by the Trump White House is not designed to be a passing phase,
but a permanent and defining change of direction, for which this entire term in office has
sought to prepare. This document aims to be a blueprint for long-term ideological struggle
and a series of aspirations for maintaining hegemony, an affirmation of priority and a
statement that things cannot " go back to normal ". But it makes no guarantee that the
US can ever adequately understand China, or that it will succeed in its aims.
"The reference to George F. Kennan in pitching this document is appealing given the
historical parallels, but it is not an exact fit and this, in turn, helps shine a light on
Pompeo's own ignorance of China. It might be described in one simple sentence: China is not
the Soviet Union and the ideological stakes are not quite the same." [Emphasis Original]
While I'd agree that differences in ideology exist between China and the Outlaw US Empire,
it is the Empire that's constructed upon and is living the Big Lie inherent within
Neoliberalism, while China continues to perfect its already very efficient system of
Collective Libertarianism through its revamped Democratic Centralism. The really big
fundamental difference is that China has absolutely no need to lie to its people, whereas the
exact opposite's true within the Neoliberal West. After a lengthy period of public input, the
government meets and eventually publishes its 5-year plan of development, which is contained
within an even larger plan that's also been devised with public input and once put together
is also published for public consumption. And since 2010, all plans have existed within
China's UN 2030 Development plan, which is also available to the public. In a great many
respects. China is a more open society than the Outlaw US Empire. Why? Because it doesn't
need to lie to its citizens because it fights against the corruption that provides the reason
for such lies--China has no Financial Parasitism it must mask from its citizens whereas the
Outlaw US Empire is drowning in a massive sea of corruption that is killing it. Clearly,
Pompeo wants that to continue.
A slight majority of Republicans believe that President Trump "rightfully won" the
presidential election two weeks ago, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released Wednesday found.
The survey,
taken November 13-17 among 1,346 U.S. respondents, found 73 percent expressing the belief
that Joe Biden (D) won the election, compared to five percent who chose Trump. However, 53
percent of Republicans, specifically, believe Trump "rightfully won," while less than a third,
29 percent, said the same for the former vice president:
According to Reuters, an even greater majority of Republicans expressed concern that the
election was, in fact, "rigged":
Asked why, Republicans were much more concerned than others that state vote counters had
tipped the result toward Biden: 68% of Republicans said they were concerned that the election
was "rigged," while only 16% of Democrats and one-third of independents were similarly
worried.
Social media censorship of anything that questions party line.
Protests are met with police oppression.
We are told when & where we can go & how many we can see.
Plans to prove health & vaccine status.
A reset no one voted for.
Is this enough for everyone to say NO? #NoGreatReset
Olde, sadly it probably exceeds 52% bc we know some rightwing dishonesty to pollsters is
still a big prob that needs fixing!! For how to correct these 52+ %, my idea is online training
for a few things like mask use obs, and a sensitivity/civilty course, and also training could
cover how elections are secure and legit. It wouldn't be totally mandatory, but anyone passing
the quiz after it could receive rewards, maybe corporations would donate stuff?? And or maybe
anyone whose social media accounts were suspended could have them restored provisionally???!?
We need to unify the country somehow!!
While Trump's record is far from a non-interventionist's dream, Trump helped bring attention
to America's incoherent foreign policy, stating that
"great nations do not fight endless wars." Now that the election results point toward a
Biden presidency, the hawks were already gearing up to reassert themselves less than a day
after the media announced Joe Biden to be the projected winner of the 2020 presidential
race.
The Heritage Foundation, one of Washington's most well-known conservative and conventional
hawkish think tanks, called the phrase "endless wars" a tool of "political sloganeering" rather
than a "serious critique of continued U.S. involvement in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria,
and Somalia." It attached a piece by Dakota Wood at The National
Interest, defending the last 20 years of war abroad.
In his piece, "The Myth of Endless Wars," Wood, a researcher at Heritage, tells us that U.S.
involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Somalia is not really endless, but rather that the
government "has enduring interests that must always be addressed." Wood argues that the United
States must keep troops abroad indefinitely to wield influence and dominate with the use of
force to protect American security and economic interests:
Indeed, this is not some "endless war" as some claim, but a shift in U.S. military
posture that accounts for changes in the security and diplomatic environments, national policy
objectives, and the efforts of enemy elements and their sponsors as they pose threats to the
United States and its interests.
Wood's contention is that when the United States fails to complete a mission, moving the
goalposts is acceptable in order to justify continued foreign intervention and occupation. It's
hard to see how this non-falsifiable argument doesn't qualify as endless.
Wood's argument blatantly disregards blowback from failed American interventions.
Nation-building proponents regularly tout post-World War II Germany as an example of America's
ability to export democracy. In reality, democracy building and reconstruction in Germany would
have occurred with or without American occupation. In fact, the goal was never to install
democracy
in Germany , and many foreign aid efforts – such as the Marshall Plan –
was
not a significant factor in Western Europe's postwar recovery. Pointing to Germany as a
U.S. success ignores the larger context that democracy was a result of political evolution
rather than importation.
Furthermore while he acknowledges that the continued U.S. military presence in Germany
required by the postwar NATO mission to meet the threat of the Soviet Union -- which is now
gone -- he maintains "that things change, the force that is there continues to have value but
for a different purpose."
Many of the justifications for remaining in the Middle East today are centered around
cleaning up messes the U.S. government created. From arming and training the Mujahideen in
Afghanistan that eventually formed the Taliban, to supporting and aiding anti-Assad fighters in
Syria that eventually sided with ISIS, or creating the conditions in Somalia that led to the
rise of al-Sabaab, these actions led to escalated violence that justifies continued U.S.
intervention to this day. The longer Uncle Sam attempts to dictate outcomes anywhere outside
its own borders, the messier the situations will become, and the easier it will be for
interventionists to say troops must stay.
Wood's article accuses those who use the term "endless wars" of "intellectual laziness," yet
he fails to develop or extrapolate on many of his key points. For instance, Wood repeatedly
alludes to vague American security and economic interests when he stresses the importance of
troops abroad, without defining any of them. Maybe because some of these interests only apply
to the corporate or political elite rather than national security – like protecting
Syrian oil
fields as President Trump
claimed in 2019. It's much easier to defend American intervention by glossing over the
reality that vital national security interests are not at risk if U.S. troops acting as
security guards aren't protecting Syrian oil fields.
Interventionists accuse restrainers of simplistically arguing for withdrawal without
considering the repercussions. Those of us who want to end endless wars have indeed weighed the
costs and benefits of continued occupation. The bottom line: the American people have not
benefited from these wars of choice or American military hegemony.
The post-9/11 wars through fiscal year 2020 have cost the United States $6.4 trillion,
according to Brown University's Costs of War Project . The U.S. military has lost
over 7,000 servicemembers and an estimated 8,000 contractors, and has sustained tens of
thousands of injuries across Iraq and Afghanistan theaters. According to their
numbers, projected healthcare costs for American veterans over the next 40 years could reach $1
trillion.
Meanwhile, the project estimates that more than 801,000 people around the
world have died directly from war violence, including more than 335,000 civilians who lost
their lives as a result of the fighting. Additionally, the U.S.-led Global War on Terror has
created conditions for an estimated 37 million refugees.
The U.S. has not achieved anything in these endless wars that could possibly outweigh these
costs. The Taliban is stronger now than at any other point
since 2001. In the
Afghanistan Papers published by The Washington Post , military leaders and White
House officials confessed that they had no idea what they were trying to accomplish in
Afghanistan and that the mission was unsuccessful. The mission is now as murky as ever, after a
Post article reported that U.S. Special Operations forces are secretly aiding the
Taliban against ISIS. A member of the elite Joint Special Operations Command counterterrorism
task force told the Post , "What we're doing with the strikes against ISIS is helping
the Taliban move." So now the United States has come full circle by helping the enemy they have
been fighting for the last 19 years.
Other measures of success, such as political freedom, women's rights, and poverty rates have
not greatly improved either. The countries Wood specifically mentioned in his article --
Afghanistan , Iraq , Syria , and
Somalia -- continue to rank
as the least free countries on global freedom indices in terms of political rights and civil
liberties.
All this is to say that America's military hegemony has not brought peace, stability, or
freedom to the world, and in most cases has had the opposite effect. Restrainers want to
protect American national security and U.S. citizens, but acting as the world's police and
throwing money and lives at failing strategies must end. The burden of proof should fall on
those who want America's military dominance to persist. They must rationalize their reasons for
engagement and be transparent and forthright with their intentions.
The American people no longer believe the lies propagated by the Bush Administration and so
many others
after 9/11 . The United States does not face an existential threat from terrorists, and
they don't hate us because "we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the
world." The sooner people like Wood understand this reality, the sooner we can end the endless
wars. Written by Nickie DeahlShare
Copy
Print
Related Posts
UAE and Israeli settlers find common ground in Jerusalem by James M. Dorsey
Rivalry for religious control of Al Aqsa Mosque and the site of the First Jewish Temple
involves multiple risks for Mr.
"... His farewell address was just flapdoodle; it wasn't really dredged up till the 70s. Eisenhower spent eight years spreading tripwires and mines and then said "Watch out." Thanks buddy. ..."
Eisenhower is always lauded for his MIC warning. Frankly he ticks me off.
Thanks for the warning AFTER you were in some position to mitigate.
Ike's a mystery. Why did he NOT question Harry Truman's commitments to NATO, the UN,
and all that rubbish? Ike was a WWII guy. He knew Americans hated the UN in 1953 as much as
they hated the League of Nations after WWI. But he let it all slide and get
bigger.
His farewell address was just flapdoodle; it wasn't really dredged up till the
70s. Eisenhower spent eight years spreading tripwires and mines and then said "Watch out."
Thanks buddy.
Well, agree on your points however, on the other side of the ledger, he never understood
the stupidity of the Korean war (that he could have ended) and majorly up-ramped CIA
activities in all manner of regime change (bay of pigs anyone?). Almost a direct path to our
foreign policy now (and now domestic policy)
A GOP recount observer in Georgia claims that several ballots recorded as Biden were
actually votes for Trump , and workers conducting the recount became angry when he reported
what was happening to elections officials.
The insider told Project Veritas , "The second person was supposed to be checking it
right, three times in three minutes she called out Biden," adding "The second auditor caught it
and she said, " No, this is Trump .""
"Now, that's just while I'm standing there. So, does the second checker catch it every
time? But this lady in three times in three minutes from 2:09 to 2:12 she got three wrong."" he
continued, adding "They were calling their bosses. They were pointing at me..."
Earlier in the day, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger hit back against claims
that he facilitated an unfair, illegal ballot count . He's also been accused of trying to skip
the manual recount altogether, and initially "wanted to just rescan the bar codes & be done
with it."
, 3 hours ago
Welcome To America
Welcome To The Most Corrupt Nation On The Planet......Fact
Welcome To The Most Dumbest Naive Brainwashed Nation On The Planet....Fact
smellmyfingers , 3 hours ago
This is click bait for people who want Trump and and an honest election.
The evidence is overwhelming. They will do Nothing.
You reap what you sow, America better get ready for a totally lawless society because it's
coming.
The First Rule , 1 hour ago
Fulton and Dekalb Counties are cesspools of Democrat Cheating (as is apparently areas of
Cobb).
Brad Raffensperger knows this. He just doesn't care to make sure the votes are counted
accurately there.
If he did, Trump would win GA. And Perdue would NOT be in a Run-Off.
But Brad's boss, George Soros, would frown upon that.
Normalcy Bias , 3 hours ago
This is exactly why they've made Republican Poll Watchers stand back 50'-100.'
Having spent over half of my life in or in a county next to Fulton, I'd wager that half of
the Fulton County poll workers aren't even literate.
106 play_arrow 1
Didymus , 3 hours ago
and gop allows it. they never fight, they always give in.
LetThemEatRand , 3 hours ago
Uniparty.
Sven Novgorod , 2 hours ago
The Uniparty = Deepstate.
It's been like this for a long time and when you look back in time with that point of view
most of the unusual laws and decisions made by lawmakers over the years start to make sense,
at least from the point of view of the Uniparty and it's associates.
Gerrilea , 2 hours ago
Psychotic question, seriously. Blame the victim.
The American public has been trained & conditioned like Pavlov's dogs to believe our
government has our best interests at heart. Hell, I believed it for a very long time. Slowly
I woke up to the Uniparty after the 2004 election.
We can't have endless wars & war profiteering by multi-national conglomerates like
Halliburton without cannon fodder AND Pelosi giving her "men" in the White House, all the
money and resources the American people can offer for the next 10 generations.
We've been continually sold a bill of goods that most did not realize was a poison pill.
"The Crime Bill", "took a bite out of crime". When in reality it created the Prison
Industrial Complex that initiated the New American Plantation and how we got a CANDIDATE for
the VP position whom actually argued in court NOT to allow criminals out whom had done their
time BECAUSE it would hurt the business model of the prison.
I could go on and on AND all we are left with is armed restoration of Constitutional Law
and bringing the traitors before a military tribunal for execution.
Kan , 2 hours ago
98% of the counties are NOT corrupt, so you'd not see much just the software slowly
without your knowledge moving the numbers over to the BLUE candidates and RHINO's.
That is why most of the map of counties is RED and not BLUE. You only need some of the
most populous locations in the past because the news was setup to keep us around 50/50 all
the time... But in this case its 30% more trump votes they have to overcome with cheating in
the democrap cities.
slightlyskeptical , 32 minutes ago
The recount will give the answer on the machines. Thus far they haven't found any machine
tabulating errors in the recounts.
DebbieDowner , 2 hours ago
Spent my time trying NOT to get into politics, because it's a waste of my talents and
skills.
What a sham... there was never any way to WIN. The only option was/is all out war.
Peace_and_Love , 3 hours ago
So, they need to stop the whole effing process and start over, and have every damned vote
verified by both parties, with video recording the damned process.
LetThemEatRand , 3 hours ago
The interesting question is whether Trump (a highly flawed candidate who brought us a
bigger banker bailout than Bush/Obama by far) is going to finally wake up middle America to
the fact that elections don't matter. If he accomplishes that, he won. Bigly.
"... "They've got a set of Republican waiters on one side and a set of Democratic waiters on the other side, but no matter which set of waiters brings you the dish, the legislative grub is all prepared in the same Wall Street kitchen." ..."
"... we can see that 2016 candidate Trump was relatively Trumpist but President Trump was less so. Salaries for the bottom 25% of workers did have the highest rate in increase during his term (through 2019). But in 2020, candidate Trump almost completely rejected Trumpism and ran as an ruling class establishment stooge. ..."
"... Trumpism is not a revolutionary ideology in the correct sense of the term. It is an incrementalist approach that seeks to better the material conditions of the working class but within the current capitalist power structure. ..."
"... The ruling class strategy in the US is to decorate with masks of "diversity" the ugly visages of class dominance. Thus Obama's and soon Kamala's pro-ruling class policies cannot be criticized for fear of being abused as a "racist". ..."
"... Trumpism relies on labor markets to improve the material conditions of the working class. A tight labor market necessarily transfers wealth from the rich to the poor in the form of decreased profits for the rich through increased salaries for the poor. ..."
"... Trump the ruler was presented with the greatest gift a border-loving Trumpist politician could ever ask for: Covid-19. But instead of exploiting this crisis like Viktor Orbán did in Hungary, Trump stabbed Trumpism in the back by turning himself into a useless libertarian during the crisis by refusing for example to push a law that requires home manufacturing of all critical supplies and in never closing the borders properly. He acted like a narcissistic clown in the early days of the crisis and deserves to lose just for that reason. ..."
"... So US racism is fully owned and perpetuated by the ruling class: wealthy oligarchs (including Trump), the media, Wall Street, CIA, FBI, the military industrial complex, multi-national corporations, Silicone Valley Tech, Hollywood, etc. Where there is power there is racism, where there is powerlessness there may be bigotry but not racism. The above lineup of ruling class racists, except for Trump, is the Biden coalition. The ruling class goal is to place an "enlightened person" mask over naked and rapacious ruling class greed and oppression. ..."
"... Under Biden, globalization will once again increase the pace and amplitude of the immiseration of the working class, resistance to the dominant economic paradigm will only grow on both the progressive left and the popular right. ..."
"... In a sense the Biden presidency will be a reactionary movement in that they will be trying to restore the pre-Trumpism political order. This will only further cement the soundness of Trumpism as an ideology. ..."
"... The bottom has no political or economic leverage, and isn't navigating to a position of strength. For example, the "bottom" is currently accepting placebo identity-politics as pacifier. The "bottom" is still searching for an "easy button" solution rather than taking a deeper look at oneself and the layout of the chess board at the macro level. ..."
"... Within an environment of worker scarcity, automation is a positive trend and helps lessen inflationary pressures. The problem with the US is that there is not enough automation because of cheap and docile labor. Compare a meat packing plant in Denmark which is highly automated compared to a US plant, which is packed to the brim with cheap imported labor. Much of the Covid crisis in the US and UK is brought about by sweatshop-style working conditions. ..."
"... It's grotesque to learn that Kamila Harris's relatives are connected to Uber/Lyft. Prop. 22 getting approved in California is another sign of propaganda/big money effectiveness ..."
"... Trumpism stands in opposition to globalization; whose goal is worker abundance which necessarily drives wages down and increases oligarchic wealth. US led imperialism, especially in the Middle East is also a necessary feature of globalization. ..."
"... Here too I would make a modification. Neo-liberalism and globalization aren't about worker "abundance" but rather worker "disposability." Again, if the idea is to create an abundance of workers, driving down market share, then why make finding work so complicated? Why be against strong education systems which would create new workers. Why shut down factories here in the US only to open them in Korea? Why lock up so many Americans for petty offensive, removing them from the willing work force. ..."
"... I would argue that the heart of neo-liberalism is a class structure that places "the establishment" as not just important in the grand scheme of things, but completely indispensable to an individual. And part of that self-aggrandizement is the subjection of every one else. "I am worth more than a thousand of you." Thus, why I must get 2-million-dollar bonus (even after bankrupting the company) and a post on the new re-org chart while everyone else gets a pink slip and watch their hard-earned pensions disappear in chapter 11 proceedings. ..."
"... But it does speak to how disposable workers are to upper management. You are hired for X, and when X is done you are automatically laid off. Why would you waste time giving such an employee training of any sort? Let alone benefits or perks. ..."
"... What is inexplicable is when unions attack Trumpist attempts at macro-scarcity through the use of national borders. A united Union/Trumpist front is required against ruling class interests. Struggling for worker scarcity does not mean one "hates" the workers the ruling class is importing in order to create worker abundance. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is Capitalism's attempt to remove the fetters on profits that exist within the power of a nation-state. Worker abundance is just one of many Neoliberal goals. Borders are a huge fetter to capitalism's basic mission of maximizing profit by producing commodifies with the cheapest labor and selling them to the wealthiest consumers. ..."
"... This is a very important aspect of precarity. Reducing work competition for jobs to increase wages is only half the job, stopping financial predators is the other half, imo ..."
"... Without immigration or outsourcing or even automation, the predators will find still other ways to break labor. We are seeing it with identity politics. ..."
"... I would argue that Bernie and Tulsi are "Trumpism adjacent" in the larger sense of Trumpism. ..."
"... If Trumpism as an ideology is going to flourish, Tulsi in particular will play a critical role in this. The simplest way to see this is that when the ruling class smears someone as a "Russian asset" what they are really doing is recognizing them as a Trumpist threat. ..."
"... precarious (adj.) 1640s, a legal word, "held through the favor of another," from Latin precarius "depending on favor, pertaining to entreaty, obtained by asking or praying," from prex (genitive precis) "entreaty, prayer" (from PIE root *prek- "to ask, entreat"). ..."
"... The notion of "dependent on the will of another" led to the extended sense "risky, dangerous, hazardous, uncertain" (1680s), but this was objected to. "No word is more unskillfully used than this with its derivatives. It is used for uncertain in all its senses; but it only means uncertain, as dependent on others " [Johnson]. Related: Precariously; precariousness. ..."
"... Questiones Disputatae ..."
"... contra, sed contra, ..."
"... When investigating the nature of anything, one should make the same kind of analysis as he makes when he reduces a proposition to certain self-evident principles." ..."
"... Vista Hermosa residents like Luna are troubled by a 2019 environmental rollback by the state, AB1197, that exempts homeless housing developments in the City of Los Angeles from the mandates of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Arguably California's broadest environmental law, CEQA requires builders to assess the environmental impacts of new development and find ways to avoid or mitigate them. ..."
"... The political will to rollback CEQA has continued into 2020. In January, Assemblyman Miguel Santiago, who represents District 53 bordering Vista Hermosa, introduced a new piece of legislation, AB1907, to further expand CEQA exemptions to now include all affordable housing. ..."
"... "a giant suction pump had by 1929 to 1930 drawn into a few hands an increasing proportion of currently produced wealth. This served then as capital accumulations. But by taking purchasing power out of the hands of mass consumers, the savers denied themselves the kind of effective demand for their products which would justify reinvestment of the capital accumulation in new plants. In consequence as in a poker game where the chips were concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing. When the credit ran out, the game stopped" ..."
We have to carefully distinguish between two very different concepts, both based on the word
"Trump". First there is "Trumpism" which is an ideology. The overarching idea behind Trumpism
is to make the GOP a working-class oriented party. The key policy aims of Trumpism are worker
scarcity and anti-imperialism. Worker scarcity is achieved through immigration restriction and
protectionist trade policies. So together, we have the Trumpist Trinity, anti-immigration,
trade restriction, and anti-imperialism. This is the ideology that Trump ran on and rode to
victory in 2016. This is the idea. Unions exist to create micro-worker scarcity. Borders can be
used to create macro-worker scarcity which is far more powerful. And E-verify can be far more
effective than a bombastic wall.
Trumpism stands in opposition to globalization; whose goal is worker abundance which
necessarily drives wages down and increases oligarchic wealth. US led imperialism, especially
in the Middle East is also a necessary feature of globalization. Invade the World / Invite the
World.
The US has always featured two political parties that serve ruling class interests; Huey
Long described it thusly,
"They've got a set of Republican waiters on one side and a set of Democratic waiters
on the other side, but no matter which set of waiters brings you the dish, the legislative
grub is all prepared in the same Wall Street kitchen."
Trumpism attempts to force one group of waiters to get their grub from the working class'
kitchen. This is obviously an ambitious goal.
Now comes a crucial distinction. In addition to the ideology of "Trumpism" there is "Trump",
the man and his brand. At best there is an extremely tenuous relationship between Trumpism and
Trump. Now to some extent this is natural as ideas never remain pure for long when poured into
the cauldron of reality. With that in mind, we can see that 2016 candidate Trump was
relatively Trumpist but President Trump was less so. Salaries for the bottom 25% of workers did
have the highest rate in increase during his term (through 2019). But in 2020, candidate Trump
almost completely rejected Trumpism and ran as an ruling class establishment stooge.
Now of course Trump is an oligarch and so he is a member of the ruling class. But within
oligarchy, the only people who can challenge the existing order are oligarchs. He committed
massive class treason in 2016 in order to serve his narcissistic need for recognition and
power. In no way should Trump be idealized as altruistically caring about the working class.
Trumpism was nothing more than a means to an end. Trump's end is and always will be Trump, not
Trumpism per se. But none the less Trump exploited and brought to life Trumpism and his motives
for doing so are irrelevant.
Trumpism is not a revolutionary ideology in the correct sense of the term. It is an
incrementalist approach that seeks to better the material conditions of the working class but
within the current capitalist power structure. It posits a class struggle ideological
superstructure which is radical opposition to the globalist ruling classes insistence on an
identitarian (politics of race, sex, etc) perspective. The ruling class strategy in the US
is to decorate with masks of "diversity" the ugly visages of class dominance. Thus Obama's and
soon Kamala's pro-ruling class policies cannot be criticized for fear of being abused as a
"racist".
Trumpism's non-revolutionary aspect is similar to social democracy, as was championed by
Bernie Sanders in 2016 (in 2020 Bernie unfortunately fell to the dark side of identitarian
politics, which are necessarily the enemy of class politics and the most effective class
warfare tool in the ruling class' tool box). The key difference is that Trumpism relies on
labor markets to improve the material conditions of the working class. A tight labor market
necessarily transfers wealth from the rich to the poor in the form of decreased profits for the
rich through increased salaries for the poor.
In fact far from there being any contradiction between Trumpism and social democracy there
is a mutual dependence between them. The public education, health, and support institutions of
social democracy are can only be supported and revitalized by a prosperous working class. The
key idea of Trumpism is that the state asserts its borders to create labor scarcity. The great
problem of Trumpism is that the state is everywhere a tool of ruling class oppression. Borders
are the battle lines of the struggle.
Trump the ruler was presented with the greatest gift a border-loving Trumpist politician
could ever ask for: Covid-19. But instead of exploiting this crisis like Viktor Orbán
did in Hungary, Trump stabbed Trumpism in the back by turning himself into a useless
libertarian during the crisis by refusing for example to push a law that requires home
manufacturing of all critical supplies and in never closing the borders properly. He acted like
a narcissistic clown in the early days of the crisis and deserves to lose just for that
reason.
The ruling class response to Trumpism is identitarian politics: noble ruling class lords
screaming that the dirty peasants are racist. What the US ruling class must always do is
project their racism onto the peasants, who white or black, both suffer economically from
racial oppression. Mao Tse-Tung gave this astute analysis of US racism:
In the final analysis, national struggle is a matter of class struggle. Among the whites
in the United States, it is only the reactionary ruling circles who oppress the Negro people
. They can in no way represent the workers, farmers, revolutionary intellectuals and other
enlightened persons who comprise the overwhelming majority of the white people. At present,
it is the handful of imperialists headed by the United States, and their supporters, the
reactionaries in different countries, who are oppressing, committing aggression against and
menacing the overwhelming majority of the nations and peoples of the world. We are in the
majority and they are in the minority.
So US racism is fully owned and perpetuated by the ruling class: wealthy oligarchs
(including Trump), the media, Wall Street, CIA, FBI, the military industrial complex,
multi-national corporations, Silicone Valley Tech, Hollywood, etc. Where there is power there
is racism, where there is powerlessness there may be bigotry but not racism. The above lineup
of ruling class racists, except for Trump, is the Biden coalition. The ruling class goal is to
place an "enlightened person" mask over naked and rapacious ruling class greed and
oppression.
Under Biden, globalization will once again increase the pace and amplitude of the
immiseration of the working class, resistance to the dominant economic paradigm will only grow
on both the progressive left and the popular right. Previously elections in the US were
between center left and center right factions fighting for the right to serve the ruling class.
Looking at 2020 from a bird's eye perspective, roughly speaking the Biden coalition is most
progressives, the center left, and many elements of the center right (elements close to the
Bush family). The Trump coalition is portions of the center right and the popular right. The
ruling class was going to be fine whatever the result, but a Biden presidency constrained by a
GOP Senate is ideal in some ways to the ruling class.
A key strategic objective of the ruling class is to keep the left and right at each other's
throats. Trump helped them achieve this rigid politically binary goal despite occasionally
flirting with political fluidity during the 2016 campaign where his similarities to Bernie
Sanders were unmistakable. In contrast, anti-ruling class progressives and popularists have to
find a way to combine their forces and energy in opposition to the ruling class and not in a
pointless stalemate of playing "socialists" vs; "fascists", a battle whose only possible winner
is the ruling class.
One of the most interesting outcomes of the 2020 election is the specter of Latinos
embracing Trumpism. From an economic point of view this makes total sense. Immigration
restriction will benefit first and foremost the material conditions of the Latino working
class. Also Trump's macho populist persona works well within Latino culture. Not to mention
many Latinos despise blacks and so the whole BLM phenomenon helped push Latinos onto the Trump
train.
California is a now a de facto one-party state but that conditions are ripe for the rise of
a popularist yet macho, Latino based, Trumpist style political faction to oppose the
cosmopolitan urban Democratic hegemony. Back in the 60's, Cesar Chavez was endeavoring to
increase the QUALITY of Hispanic life in the US by increasing the salaries of farm workers
through a strategy of worker scarcity.
Ruling class institutions, threatened by the potential of having portions of their wealth
transferred to poor peasants, created an organization called "La Raza" as an alternative to
Chavez. La Raza wanted QUANTITY, they wanted more and more Latinos to build up their base of
political power.
And all the better if these Latinos stayed poor: not only do their ruling class paymasters
stay happy, this would also keep the Latino masses dependent on their identitarian political
leaders. So one of the key outcomes of the 2020 election is that in ever larger numbers,
Latinos are rejecting Quantity of Latinos and opting for Latino Quality of life.
And so in order to further Trumpism, Trump, who is acting as a fetter upon it, must go.
In a sense the Biden presidency will be a reactionary movement in that they will be trying
to restore the pre-Trumpism political order. This will only further cement the soundness of
Trumpism as an ideology.
But Trump as a leader is a much more mixed bag. New Trumpists will arise, for example Tucker
Carlson or podcaster Joe Rogan. 2024 will be a great year for Trumpism because this time Trump
will not be running it; and that may allow many progressives to join the train, especially in
light of how much hippy punching they are about to endure from the coming Biden synthesis of
Neolibs and Neocons.
Nice essay. I especially liked the differentiation between Trump and Trumpism.
I'd be interested to hear what your vision of the platform (main objectives) might be for
this new Trumpism party.
I still question whether top-down politics of any stripe is really going to address the
underlying economic and biosphere issues we're facing. Why? Because:
the top-down political economy is dedicated to maintaining status quo (with emphasis on
status & wealth), and
the bottom-up people who want things to change seem to want someone else to do all the
changing
most of our big problems arise from the disconnect between what we must do as a species
in order to survive and what we're currently, actually doing as individuals
When a Zen-like party emerges, which encourages its adherents to understand themselves,
seek "right" action (accurate situational analysis yielding a well-crafted strategy), and do
right action, I'll get interested in politics again. For now, we're just treading water in a
strong current that's headed to a bad place.
The Zen plan is no panacea, though. That path involves great risk (e.g. lots of failures)
and hard work. Pay's not that good, either.
Top-down vs. bottom-up are not necessarily contradictory and can in successive waves
contribute to social change in an increasingly self-reinforcing manner. Bottom-up change
influences top-down change (often through the opposition forces' malignant top-down
overreaction) which intensifies bottom-down change: so on and so on.
I would describe the main objectives for Trumpist party as the development of "Green
Trumpism". The moral imperatives associated with the climate crisis would be used as a
catalyst for Trumpist labor scarcity through the means of a Green Reindustrialization. The
process of globalization is one where production is severed from consumption. Production is
moved to cheap labor countries with terrible environmental standards. Capitalists produce
dirtier commodities while increasing their profits. This process must be reversed. If the
first world wants to consume then they must produce.
First world population growth is a critical factor in exasperating the climate crisis. All
of this growth can be linked to immigration, usually people from low consuming nations moving
to high consumption nations. These migration flows must be reversed.
Globalization requires imperialist power to enforce the safe transport of commodities
produced in far flung regions of the world. As globalization declines, so will necessarily US
imperialism.
yes, bottom-up and top-down would interact, if only the bottom-up was happening. It's
not.
The bottom has no political or economic leverage, and isn't navigating to a position of
strength. For example, the "bottom" is currently accepting placebo identity-politics as
pacifier. The "bottom" is still searching for an "easy button" solution rather than taking a
deeper look at oneself and the layout of the chess board at the macro level.
Using the climate crisis as driver for econ change is the Great Hope, and the top 1% is
hip to the game. They have and will continue to block meaningful change. Keep in mind that
just stopping the daily damage to the environment will render much (most) of our industrial
and household infrastructure obsolete. Nobody's ready to take that on, and that's the
implication of actually effective Green policy.
Right now, across the political spectrum, "green" consists of "what's convenient" instead
of "what's necessary". This is the individual-ethic bankruptcy I've alluded to elsewhere:
it's endemic from top 1% to bottom-est of the bottom.
You made a few statements I don't agree with:
"Capitalists have dirtier / more destructive production than (others)." 1st world production
is cleaner than in other places, and that 2nd and 3rd world production often happens in
non-capitalistic scenarios. Dirty production happens where dirty production is tolerated.
Another statement you made: "globalization has to stop / be reversed". Dunno about that
one. Globalization has resulted in production moving to cheapest-input locations. Like China.
Globalization will stop only when cost-of-inputs is leveled, and we're decades away from
that, and a whole lot more pain for the Developed world. Slow barge, that one.
Your essay doesn't address the effect of automation on household or societal economics.
Automation is not a reversible trend, and it's accelerating. The focus on the "where" of
production might not yield the HH economic benefits you're hoping for.
Some fairly different strategies need to be developed at the household level in order to
address the problems we face. Would you consider using the household as the pivot-point of
your new econ strategy rather than using industry and government?
Americans can exert more power with their consumption choices than their choices at the
ballot box. So certainly the household is a crucial pivot point.
Green tariffs can overnight level cost-of-inputs. Climate change provides a powerful moral
incentive to co-locate US consumption and production.
Within an environment of worker scarcity, automation is a positive trend and helps lessen
inflationary pressures. The problem with the US is that there is not enough automation
because of cheap and docile labor. Compare a meat packing plant in Denmark which is highly
automated compared to a US plant, which is packed to the brim with cheap imported labor. Much
of the Covid crisis in the US and UK is brought about by sweatshop-style working
conditions.
The question on automation is that somehow "the people" have to have a slice of the
profits and thus benefit from the process. A Yang-style UBI would need to go hand in hand
with increased automation.
I agree with the uselessness of the current Green movement. It is typically just used as a
tool to attack perceived opponents. But a Green Trumpism would no doubt both address the
climate crisis and help alleviate economic inequalities.
"The ruling class was going to be fine whatever the result, but a Biden presidency
constrained by a GOP Senate is ideal in some ways to the ruling class."
Yeah – there will be a lot of Biden disappointment amongst Us the majority –
this Precariat. A true Green New Deal would offer lots of employment opportunities here in
the USA – and would seem ideal for either party to embrace. Divided government won't
achieve it – the ruling class – and both parties – with short sighted heads
up their asses won't embrace it anyhow.
Regardless, Trumpism seems a fail except for a vast mob angry/scared/confused voters- and
some tax break aficionados. It's not just Biden/Harris won't deliver – but Tucker
Carlson, Joe Rogan, Ted Cruz, or whichever clever one runs in 2024 , won't deliver either,
and Trumps wall is a fiasco. If still effective propaganda..?
It's grotesque to learn that Kamila Harris's relatives are connected to Uber/Lyft. Prop.
22 getting approved in California is another sign of propaganda/big money effectiveness
– and We the People being tricked once again. I got lot's of mail showing
photos and quotes of regular working people embracing Prop 22 VOTE YES! save our jobs –
it passed easily.
Overall: Still glad to see Trump himself out of the White House – the clever
SOB.
This is a good essay. But I still have a few issues with it.
The key policy aims of Trumpism are worker scarcity and anti-imperialism. Worker scarcity
is achieved through immigration restriction and protectionist trade policies. So together, we
have the Trumpist Trinity, anti-immigration, trade restriction, and anti-imperialism. This is
the ideology that Trump ran on and rode to victory in 2016. This is the idea. Unions exist to
create micro-worker scarcity. Borders can be used to create macro-worker scarcity which is
far more powerful. And E-verify can be far more effective than a bombastic wall.
I would modify this to say "worker exclusivity", that only a narrow class of workers can
be tapped for specific terms of employment. When discussing the subject with those on the
rights, they are far more concerned about immigrants "taking their jobs" then they are of
building a scarcity of workers to gain a market share over employers. Let's not forget that
"Trumpian" is still fervently anti-union, even though this would be a good way of
generating "micro scarcity" as you put it. Being anti-union would be counterproductive to
worker scarcity.
Assuredly, "worker scarcity" makes a certain degree of sense. And I can easily see how
you came to that conclusion. But I fear you still give "trumpisim" too much credit in that
they have specific goals that they are attempting to achieve, and thus conceive of logical
steps to that goal.
I would argue that the right doesn't have goals in the same perspective as we on the
left may seem them. What we might think of as "goals" are better described as ideological
commandments that must be obeyed at all cost, and ignoring all consequence. As you noted
yourself. Trump's wall would do little to impede immigration. A better e-verify system
would be far more effective. So why ignore e-verify while being completely for the wall?
Because the wall is a visible simple of defiance against immigration that conservatives can
march back and forth in front of brandishing their 2nd amendment right. You can't do that
for a government policy.
Trumpism stands in opposition to globalization; whose goal is worker abundance which
necessarily drives wages down and increases oligarchic wealth. US led imperialism, especially
in the Middle East is also a necessary feature of globalization.
Here too I would make a modification. Neo-liberalism and globalization aren't about
worker "abundance" but rather worker "disposability." Again, if the idea is to create an
abundance of workers, driving down market share, then why make finding work so complicated?
Why be against strong education systems which would create new workers. Why shut down
factories here in the US only to open them in Korea? Why lock up so many Americans for
petty offensive, removing them from the willing work force.
I would argue that the heart of neo-liberalism is a class structure that places "the
establishment" as not just important in the grand scheme of things, but completely
indispensable to an individual. And part of that self-aggrandizement is the subjection of
every one else. "I am worth more than a thousand of you." Thus, why I must get
2-million-dollar bonus (even after bankrupting the company) and a post on the new re-org
chart while everyone else gets a pink slip and watch their hard-earned pensions disappear
in chapter 11 proceedings.
Of course, unlike much of the right, neo-liberalism does have a goal-oriented
methodology. So, creating "worker abundance" to force down individual worker market share
certainly makes sense. But is it true? It doesn't capture the full cynicism of typical
neo-liberal thinking. For creating so much worker abundance, plenty of neo-liberal aligned
employers still managed to complain about worker "allocations" (the idea that certain
employment sectors face chronic worker scarcity.) Indeed, current "plug-n-play" employment
patterns have made filling many positions nearly impossible because no one ever has the
right qualifications for a specific job without training. I have seen engineering jobs go
empty for years because they can't find "prior experience for proprietary development
project." (face palm.).
But it does speak to how disposable workers are to upper management. You are hired for
X, and when X is done you are automatically laid off. Why would you waste time giving such
an employee training of any sort? Let alone benefits or perks.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I will attempt to respond to your points.
Ruling class elements of the GOP attack unions in order to minimize worker micro-scarcity.
What is inexplicable is when unions attack Trumpist attempts at macro-scarcity through the
use of national borders. A united Union/Trumpist front is required against ruling class
interests. Struggling for worker scarcity does not mean one "hates" the workers the ruling
class is importing in order to create worker abundance.
This is to accept the ruling elite's identitarian frame, which boils down to: class struggle is racist. What this basically boils
down to is that the ruling class is benevolent and kind and loves purely altruistically to
import little brown workers while evil workers hate them because they are taking their jobs.
Oligarchs + cheap labor immigrants = good. Workers militating for their class interests =
bad. The key goal for Trumpism is to flip these equations.
Worker abundance necessarily means job scarcity from the worker's point of view. This
makes workers desperate and willing to accept lower wages. This has been happening for the
last 40 years at least since the end of the Cold War, if not a little sooner. Worker scarcity
means job abundance, from the worker's point of view. This means plenty of options because
management has to bid up salaries to attract workers.
Neoliberalism is Capitalism's attempt to remove the fetters on profits that exist within
the power of a nation-state. Worker abundance is just one of many Neoliberal goals. Borders
are a huge fetter to capitalism's basic mission of maximizing profit by producing commodifies
with the cheapest labor and selling them to the wealthiest consumers.
Nation-states can also
impose regulations (environmental, worker, etc) which also limit capitalist profit. Free
trade allows corporations to relocate factories to nations with the lowest salaries,
environmental and worker protections. For those jobs that cannot be transferred, Prop 22 is
the thin edge of the neoliberal wedge that is constraining the nation-state from protecting
workers.
I understand restricting immigration and anti-globalism as a means to increase US workers
leverage in raising wages in jobs and in better political representation. This addresses the
physical world of work.
Left unaddressed, and equally important imo, is the fact that US business and economy is now
largely financialized; much of the greatest wealth comes from unregrulated or restrained
predatory financial practices, from rentierism, from tolls and fines and fees.
This
financialization is every bit as important as the physical conditions you list in the rise in
precarity, maybe even more so at this time. How, for instance, would only physical
restrictions have changed the financial outcomes of the 2008 mortgage bank frauds and
financial crisis, the outcomes of ratings agencies giving bogus ratings to junk bonds,
changed the exorbitant rise in medicine prices, etc?
This is a very important aspect of
precarity. Reducing work competition for jobs to increase wages is only half the job,
stopping financial predators is the other half, imo
O could have stopped the bank predators in 2009-10, but chose not to. In his own
words:
+++ Without immigration or outsourcing or even automation, the predators will find still other
ways to break labor. We are seeing it with identity politics.
Beware of the UBI: it simply greases the wheels for more privatization instead of public
goods and infrastructure, similar to how vouchers and charters gut a public school
system.
Financialization is the necessary result of globalization's destruction of Fordism: which
is the interdependent role of worker and consumer. In order to increase profits, Ford doubled
his workers' salaries so that could serve him as consumers as well as workers.
Globalization
seeks to increase profits even further by disassociating the worker and the consumer. Work is
off-shored to low wage countries, whose leaders intentionally damp down local consumption.
This paradoxically means the soon to be immiserated western worker is still called upon to
play the role of global consumer of last resort.
At the same time, huge waves of profits are
washing over Wall Street. And so temporary speculative bubbles are created that serve two
purposes. First false wave of prosperity brought on for example by a real estate boom tamps
down any worker resistance towards the new economic order. Secondly the seemingly "free
money" created by speculation allow western consumption to continue.
So necessarily a Green Reindustrialization will force Wall Street to stop chasing
speculative squirrels and to instead concentrate on financing the new clean plant that will
help alleviate the climate crisis.
Rogan likes to do long form interviews across the political spectrum, but he has
consistently been a fan of Bernie and Tulsi. Author is Confusing the medium with the message.
Not the same.
I would argue that Bernie and Tulsi are "Trumpism adjacent" in the larger sense of
Trumpism.
If Trumpism as an ideology is going to flourish, Tulsi in particular will play a
critical role in this. The simplest way to see this is that when the ruling class smears
someone as a "Russian asset" what they are really doing is recognizing them as a Trumpist
threat.
Trumpism in its highest form will mean a reconciliation of the non-identitarian left
and right. For example, white identitarians like Richard Spencer have abandoned Trumpism.
I think that one of the most important considerations is that there needs to be a
coalition of sorts – between the working class Trumpian base and the Left (primarily
Generation Y and X). It shares one thing, they are both victims of the Establishment,
neoliberals, and urgently need change.
One image has always been very important to me. Note the distribution of socially
conservative, economically left wing voters.
The major challenge facing Democrats today is that race, gender, identity politics, and
religion appear to trump economics, at least as far as politically engaged primary voters
go. The old-line Democrats were an economic liberal party with socially conservative and
socially liberal wings (the social liberals, in fact, were in a minority). The new
Democrats are a socially liberal party with an economic conservative wing (neoliberals) and
a progressive economic wing. They all agree on social issues. They are loath to compromise
on open borders (which is what the existing immigration dysfunction de facto gives us),
transgender bathrooms, making room for pro-life members, or gay married couples' wedding
cakesbecause those are the only issues that hold their economic right and economic left
together.
I don't think that the Democratic Party in its current form is viable for the left.
So the price of a new New Deal majority would be to let Democrats welcome abortion
critics and opponents of mass immigration, so long as they favored a higher minimum wage,
less "synthetic immigration," and a pause on globalization (which facilitates international
labor arbitrage). In the words of John Judis:
I think that we would end up with the following compromise.
1. The economically left, culturally right agrees to accept global warming, end the wars,
and "socialism" like universal healthcare), and to offer legal immigrants along with
minorities a shot at the middle class
2. The economically left, culturally left agrees to compromise on immigration, globalization
(think put a strong emphasis on re-industrialization and de-financialization), and social
issues (think abortion, guns, defend the police, etc).
Interestingly, the American Conservative has an article lambasting Trump as well.
"The ruling class goal is to place an "enlightened person" mask over naked and rapacious
ruling class greed and oppression."
Maybe the same can be said of placing a "socially conservative" mask. We need to be
cautious in positing the possiblility of a multi-ethnic, multi-racial conservative movement
that somehow manages to be "nationalist, anti-cosmopolitan, anti-immigration" but still
serves the interests of the multi-racial, multi-ethnic, religiously diverse, working class
populace that's already here.
Implementing worker scarcity will necessarily further the economic interests of the
multi-racial, multi-ethnic, religiously diverse, working class populace that's already
here.
Just as implementing worker abundance necessarily furthers the economic interests of the
multi-racial, multi-ethnic, religiously diverse, RULING class populace that's already
here.
Great write up.
While I generally agree with your characterizations, I will also throw out there ..in no
particular order..
1) luckily , trump and his "legion of doom" aren't competent enough to draw on the "larger
picture" you've outlined here to maximize his effectiveness by using these natural
advantages, in their plot of self aggrandizement luckily for us americans/ the trump is his
own worst enemy.
2) ejecting trump from trumpism is a path to greater success for the right and
fascism/corporatism, which some "smart" people will surely weave into their future plans and
models. And the corporatists,be they from the republican side of the aisle, or the democratic
side will surely carry forward with this opening in american politics.
because trump does have to go the professionals of deception can mold that wisp of smoke into
any shape they want but it won't stay for long and doesn't hold up to any scrutiny . it isn't
real..It isn't even a chunk of clay
3] the problem of trumpism, or "conservative republican politics", or "democratic party
politics" is that they all necessarliy MUST be a lie in progress. NONE of the political
duopoly can go into "truthland" . it is their kryptonite. So all have agreed to never enter
and call it a no go zone
And the fact that everything about our political situation is "fact free",at least in the
sense that any facts used are only used out of context to keep a truer understanding from
happening; hasn't stopped anyone yet and isn't likely too any time soon so too bad for
everyone. .we'll call that a draw.
The 30,000 foot description of yours not withstanding, that type of over arching layers of
this onion, is something for planners to incorporate in "the con" as it needs to be.. but is
above the paygrade of most political actors , who work at rousing the rabble
4) I don't see actual agency of the people . what people want to do has nothing to do with
what is going to happen usually, if the elites want something to happen, they provide the
opinions and the votes.. "deserve" has nothing to do with it.. and "our reality" is just an
illusion.
So over layering a description of bigger forces, over the chaos that has been created to keep
this "hegelian dialect" in place , is again for those at a higher pay grade in the
process..
Too many chefs ruin the meal but hey ,it's our gruel and we have nothing else to eat , for
the moment and maybe less later, if they get their way.
"Post-truth" is dystopian. It's a luxury to live at a distance from unpleasant realities.
If a society can sustain a population/segment so far up their own **** then you've "arrived"
in a sense.
However, dystopia sounds better than the crises that lay ahead. It's the unavoidable hard
landing that worries me.
Maybe truth works like wealth: The first generation discovers the truth. The second
generation teaches the truth. And the third generation fakes news.
The Democratic Party doesn't want to come to terms with the fact that they deserve as much
blame as the GOP for the predicament the working class finds itself in.
They chose under Clinton to repeal Glass Steagall, sign free trade agreements, and bring
China into the WTO. Under Obama, those policies largely continued. Under Biden, all signs
indicate that this will still continue.
I think the brutal reality is that the upper middle class is willfully ignorant of what
the precariat faces. Public health authorities, while understandably trying to contain the
pandemic, are not the ones who are going to see their lives destroyed. The working class was
doomed either way, either by being disproportionately hurt by the coronavirus (they can't
work from home) or from long-term unemployment (they've suffered more as a percentage of
total jobs lost). In other words, they don't have a stake in keeping the lockdown and may see
opening up as a lesser evil.
Likewise, the Liberals who are in secure upper middle class white collar jobs tended to
act disdainfully when working class people protested the lockdowns. I'm not saying the
protestors were right, but many are people who put their lives into their work, such as small
business owners. Evidently, subsidies were needed at the very least.
In this regard, the GOP might have more hope than the Democrats, barring a Berniecrat
takeover of the Democrats, which is looking less likely. That said the GOP still has a huge
right wing apparatus that would have to be overcome for a "real populist" (ex: someone who
actually cared about the well being of the working class) to take over.
One advantage might be that younger people are overwhelmingly left wing economically, so
as Generation Y and Z become a bigger share of the electorate, things may change.
Likewise, the Liberals who are in secure upper middle class white collar jobs tended to
act disdainfully when working class people protested the lockdowns. I'm not saying the
protestors were right, but many are people who put their lives into their work, such as
small business owners. Evidently, subsidies were needed at the very least
To this day, they still get outraged for the same reasons. If you so much as point out
what you just wrote–not being anti-science but simply the hardship lockdowns cause and
how it needs to be properly addressed–at best you'll be called scientifically
illiterate. At worst you'll be accused of being an evil rich person who wants to kill grandma
to make the stock market go up.
While some of the protests may have been astroturf, not all of them were. If you're a
small-business owner facing the prospect of losing everything you've worked for and basically
being told "you're on own" of course you will be angry. Likewise, if you're an employee and
can't work from home, of course you will be stressed out about losing your job. This is the
real "economic anxiety" and it is no laughing matter.
for the real small business owners, and the individuals who can't work .
they ought to feel pissed
after all . a fraction of the trillions that are earmarked for wall street, could have "paid
their bills"..at least for a year . and then the "citizens" would be getting something
tangible for the debt being incurred in their name by the duopoly.
All the people realizing "someone" is getting bailed out and it isn't them
I was puzzled by the victory of Prop. 22 in California. This is a state which has huge
Democratic majorities, and normally rubber-stamps all union-sponsored legislation.
Uber and Lyft threatened that if Prop. 22 did not pass, they would either stop operations
or would lay off 75% of their temp workers.
(not unlike an employer threatening to move to China if their workers form a union.)
They also threatened that ride prices would at least double, and wait times would greatly
increase.
The average voter may have put their own self-interest ahead of any class loyalty.
Final note: the gig workers did get a few benefits out of AB 5, things granted by Uber and
Lyft to buy some goodwill.
Comments welcome! I do not live in CA so I am just guessing on this. It was an important
vote.
Prop 22 is going to be the most important result of the 2020 election, not Trump
v Biden or control of either legislature.
I've been very puzzled by the result too as it passed handily and wasn't really close. I
don't live near CA either, but I did read that among other misleading tactics, the Prop 22
proponents gave delivery bags to restaurants that use these gig delivery services so that the
delivery drivers would be dropping off meals to people in Yes on 22 bags, which made it seem
like prop 22 would be beneficial to gig workers if you didn't look into it much.
So on the one hand there was the intent to deceive. But then I think that if I heard about
these dirty tricks 3,000 miles away, surely CA voters must have known about them too.
The depressing thing is that maybe a lot of people did know exactly what Prop 22 was all
about and decided they liked the idea of a permanent underclass always only minutes
away at the touch of a button to do the things they can't be bothered with for a
pittance.
The fact that so many of the gig company execs worked first in the Obama administration
and are now heading back to the Biden administration with dreams of scaling up prop 22 is a
very ominous portent.
I voted NO on prop 22, but a mailer I received from the YES side may show why it
passed.
It has text with "by 4-to-1, app-based drivers overwhelmingly prefer to work as
independent contractors".
The pictures of smiling workers on the mailer are all minorities (Asian, Hispanic,
Black).
I'd suggest a small percentage of CA voters actually use Uber/Lyft, so am inclined to
believe voters did not vote to preserve their own self-interest.
The "YES" mailer lists 5 advantages for the drivers, "guaranteed hourly earnings for
app-based drivers", "per mile compensation toward vehicle expenses", "medical and disability
coverage for injuries and illnesses", "new health benefits for drivers who work 15+ hours a
week", and "additional safety protections for app-based drivers"
The mailer lists groups supporting it, NAACP, California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce,
Consumer Choice Center, The Latin Business Association, Black Women Organized for Political
Action, California Small Business Association, California Senior Advocates League.
I remember a prior YES on 22 mailer had support from Mothers Against Drunk Driving..
The "YES" group spent about 12x more than the No group (188 million vs 15million)
I saw a lot of pro Prop 22 advertising and nothing against it. The ads were all sleek,
full of cheerful drivers with big smiles, and easily the best made ads of 2020. I knew that
there was something bad about the proposition, but until just a few days before the election
I couldn't tell you why. All my mental bandwidth was on the national elections and not on
parsing the various state propositions like I normally would. This time it was all on
something else.
If a poli-sci/poli-econ geek like me was having some problems with truly understanding
this extremely effective, slickly made campaign of manufactured consent, what does that say
about the many, often financially and/or socially overwhelmed, California voters who would be
much like me? I think that the overlords had the perfect situation for getting the
proposition passed.
"but the (GOP) party needs to reverse its positions on taxing the wealthiest, punishing
and preventing the expansion of organized labor, reversing their position on outsourcing
manufacturing, and addressing economic precarity"
And I need to become 6'4″, handsome, young and athletic.
Indeed why would they reverse when the Dems agree with them on all of it. What the above
article doesn't get is that the true ruling class response to precarity is simply to make
sure voters have no options to address it. We are in a class war, not a battle between
political parties. Any promises Biden made to the poor will blow away like smoke once in
office. He is on the record saying that billionaires are swell folks.
Lambert linked an interesting article yesterday in Water Cooler that talked about cycles
in history and the ingredients of high social unrest. The subject is historian Peter
Turchin
He has been warning for a decade that a few key social and political trends portend an
"age of discord," civil unrest and carnage worse than most Americans have experienced. In
2010, he predicted that the unrest would get serious around 2020, and that it wouldn't let
up until those social and political trends reversed. Havoc at the level of the late 1960s
and early '70s is the best-case scenario; all-out civil war is the worst.
The fundamental problems, he says, are a dark triad of social maladies: a bloated elite
class, with too few elite jobs to go around; declining living standards among the general
population; and a government that can't cover its financial positions.
Turchin is saying that social instability is not just the result of high inequality but
also of a bloated ruling class that is itself insecure because there aren't enough PMC jobs
for all those college graduates and their credentials. Thus in our case the political parties
have come to be dominated by these middle class concerns with the poor almost entirely out of
the picture and dismissed as racist deplorables who probably deserve their fate. As the
article says this sociological theory of history is controversial but at least worth
considering.
A good, broad, liberal arts degree, or something like it, can be useful in many kinds of
jobs, if the jobs exist . Much of the high skilled, high paying jobs have all been shipped
overseas, and the remaining good paying jobs increasingly are office jobs requiring not only
a masters degree, but good social connections, and at least saying only goodthoughts to get
and keep.
It use to be that there was plenty of diverse work. If you failed at getting tenure or
that job at the bank, or the government position you wanted, there was plenty of good work
requiring only some education, intelligence, and drive. Having the kind of degree and
connections that someone in the modern PMC would merely be very useful, not a requirement for
a good life. Bur now we have too many people having the exact education needed to get the few
remaining good jobs in the few safe fields, and unlike fifty years, failure means
destitution, not disappointment.
And yet claiming that this class war exist, which is supposedly immiserating increasing
numbers of Americans ever higher up the class chain, is all deplorably racist, sexist,
homophobic, and transphobic I am reliable informed. /s
It is unsettling to see writers who I have been reading for years, even decades, start
saying that it is racism or bigotry, and only that, which explains the Bad Man. One doesn't
have to be a Marxist to make a connection with the increasing poverty and corruption under
both parties over the past forty or fifty years with President Trump. Yet, many refuse
to.
It does make me wonder what it is that I am blind to.
I agree,
the class war is a better way of seeing things.
all the symptoms and externalities the class war provides are the things the parties use as
fodder issues for their respective bases but all the duopoly can provide is more of the same
. "their way" their culture . their rules . their precedents their history..
this is how they seem to win they teach the children to think their" way".
Then what else will happen in the future
people continually adopting patterns that already exist.
They have created a culture . and we all know how people are treated by their neighbors who
are "counter-culture"
It becomes a self reinforcing narrative, where the hive keeps the status quo because they
want to .
We keep supporting systems that are there to control us rather than recreating systems that
help .. like we are "supposed" to or something.
James P. Yep. That paragraph has some giant "ifs" in it that caught my eye as I was
reading. The likelihood of Republicans sponsoring legislation to repeal "right to work" laws,
which tend to be in Republican-dominated states, is almost nil. Further, a party that is
opposed to any tax increases, no matter what need has to be addressed, isn't going to change
course. Another "if" is relying on someone like the egregious Tom Cotton, as mentioned, for
leadership about legislation.
I am sure, though, that you are already on your way to becoming a beefcake model and
internet influencer.
It's going to take some time for this article to sink in. Words like precariat and
precarity are fairly new concepts, at least for me and my automatic spell checker. What is
the etymology of this word and what are it's conceptual dimensions. I know what precarious
means and I can see how using it as an adjective works. But if it's going to be a key term I
want to know more about it. Accordiing to a quick search, the etymology is:
precarious (adj.)
1640s, a legal word, "held through the favor of another," from Latin precarius "depending on
favor, pertaining to entreaty, obtained by asking or praying," from prex (genitive precis)
"entreaty, prayer" (from PIE root *prek- "to ask, entreat").
The notion of "dependent on the will of another" led to the extended sense "risky,
dangerous, hazardous, uncertain" (1680s), but this was objected to. "No word is more
unskillfully used than this with its derivatives. It is used for uncertain in all its senses;
but it only means uncertain, as dependent on others " [Johnson]. Related: Precariously;
precariousness.
So what is striking in reading it's etymology is that it is defined as something
"dependent, uncertain, risky, dangerous, hazardous." This characterizes many areas of life.
With respect to contemporary life in the area of economics, I certainly see it all around me
and in the news headlines, in the instability of good long-term paying jobs with benefits. In
politics, I certainly see the risks, dangers, and hazards, especially in the highly
militarized nature of foreign relations. But looking at the term from the perspective of a
"social scientist" does it explain the antecedents that lead to this condition and is it
operational in the sense of breaking it down into more rudimentary terms and
relationships.
I am reading St. Thomas Aquinas' book "On Truth" and although the style of Questiones
Disputatae , with its contra, sed contra, and style is archaic and hard to
follow, it provides a good way of centering dialogue. In Question one of Article 1, the
formal reply to the stated Article of "What is Truth?" states:
When investigating the nature of anything, one should make the same kind of analysis
as he makes when he reduces a proposition to certain self-evident principles."
Since this term "precarity" is new to me, I don't think I have a good handle on how to use
it outside of a descriptor. Does it explain anything? And maybe I'm just asking too much of
the word. Maybe it's just meant as that, a simple characterization whose underlying causal
relationships are to yet be determined and examined.
I've seen precariate be described as a combination of precarious proletariat.
While one could argue the position of the proletariat is always precarious, I do think the
are times in history which are more precarious than others, and what we see now is certainly
one (climate change impacts, opioid/alcoholism, covid19 pandemic, ever increasing inequality,
globalization of manufacturing, health care for profit in the US, increasing cost of housing
and education, no doubt many more)
Nice piece generally and which kinda validates a feeling I've had generally that
"uncertainty is increasing" which is often bad for people in so many ways – uncertainty
among the "entitled" can be highly damaging to polling (in addition to all the points raised
in the article). The elephant in the room is of course interpreting polling results. For
example 70% Democrat at a precinct/state/national level is consistent with an infinite number
of explanations: at one end we have "strong means" (meaning these are "solid" votes) and at
the other we have "very weak means but big variances" (meaning these votes are subject to all
sorts of factors like news items, real or manufactured, etc). We can't "know" which universe
we're in .Unless we conduct a secondary survey to give a "second line in the x-y plane" to
see where it intersects the main one ..then we know whether the 70% is driven by means or
variances or some combination.
The likelihood function for all "limited dependent variable models" – discrete
choices like voting – has a term that is multiplicative in means and variances. Thus
"70%" could mean any of a HUGE number of things. Those of us experienced in interpreting
these data can rule out the "dumb" explanations .but we are still left with a number of
"possible explanations". If we don't actively talk to voters, do a lot of qualitative
research etc, then we can't begin to limit the number of "possible solutions" further. I have
had little experience in applying the methods to polling so I rely a lot on sites like NC to
give "insights from the ground". It is a pity polling institutions don't. YouGov were on the
right track in 2017 but bottled it due to collecting data for their "second line" in a poor
way. It's a pity – if they collected data in better way they'd be far and away the best
polling organisation. Though the downright lies told by Trumpites that Lambert has
highlighted remain a problem – I do have ideas how to address this but they go way
beyond the scope of the site and like I've said before, I think pushing MMT etc is a better
use of resources (even though it pains me personally not to have my own "hobby horse"
championed, hehe).
But I personally think increased variances are a fact of life and reflect the article's
point that uncertainty in life is hurting everyone.
Uncertainty and fear are increasing because the kick-the-can strategies are starting to
look really wobbly, and the fights for survival and hail-marys (like MMT) are being trotted
out.
The velocity of change has increased, and the rate of adaptation appears to have somehow
actually slowed down. Just exactly the wrong response at the wrong time.
One commenter above poked fun at the term "precarity" – said it was a $10 gimmick
for the word "poor".
A while back Mark Twain said a "cauliflower is a cabbage with a college education".
Precarity is a college-educated middle class "information worker" who is "feeling
poor".
The effects of automation and globalization are moving up the class ladder. The ship's
sinking and the water's already flooded 3rd class berths (rust belt and flyover), and is
about 1/3 of the way into the 2nd class cabins.
Agree or disagree with Andrew's Yang's proposal for a universal basic income, I think he
is definitely on to something when he talks about the ramifications of automation and machine
learning, though he isn't the first person to point it out.
Some people are simply not aware–it's not that they necessarily don't care, they
simply just don't know–while others are in denial or don't care.
Regardless of where a given person falls, I do agree that with Yang and others that say
dealing with this economic reshaping will be of the key challenges–if not the most
important challenge–of our time.
reshaping our monetary system is one of the biggest hurdles in reshaping our economic
present.
Monetary reform efforts like the modern day "chicago plan" as was described in the bill
proposed in congress in 2011/2012 112th congress HR 2990
open the door to creating money debt free, and permanently which could pay off the national
debt, and fund policies like single payer health care and even "citizen dividends", that are
really just ways to inject money into the economy, rather than starting the injection of
money into the economy on wall street , like now.. https://www.congress.gov/bill/112-thcongress/house-bill/2990/text
In sharp contrast, Trump may have appeared indifferent to the gravity of the coronavirus,
but his persistent calls to reopen the economy addressed the precarity issue, as they
appealed to many workers whose livelihoods were being destroyed by the pandemically induced
government restrictions placed on economic activity.
The average worker up through October does not have Covid and may not know anyone of
working age who does have Covid ..but they do have a job, and if the job must be done
in-person they know they were vulnerable.
"Keeping the economy open" is more urgent to them than defeating Covid through
lockdowns.
This is a big reason why Trump even kept this election close.
In America, the authorities who order lockdowns cannot simultaneously order financial
relief. This created a tragic class divide on fighting the pandemic.
These days the members of the media tend to be dominated by the upper middle class who
attended elite colleges and probably don't even understand the meaning of precarity.
Therefore to them it seems perverse to object to lockdowns and elaborate precautions that the
work from home set can more easily deal with. In the old days newspaper reporters rose
through the ranks and came from small town newspapers and were more in touch with the general
society rather than journalism schools.
I live in California and was surprised to learn here that Harris opposed prop 22. While
the Pro campaign carpet bombed the airwaves with ads, I never saw any CA leaders raise a
voice in opposition or attempt to explain why this would be bad for working people. Never saw
any mention, other than in the state election booklet, that the prop introduced a huge
supermajority needed to repeal it, making it effectively impossible to remove once passed.
Didn't see any out of state money funding ads despite it being obvious that success in
California would lead to adoption in other states.
Well Harris does all support and oppose M4A depending on who shes talking to and when
she's saying it, so there's that. I suspect any disagreements she may express over prop 22's
passage are crocodile tears at best.
Her and every other leader who takes positions on many issues but not on this one. Perhaps
they saw polling and thought it best instead to add to the strategic underground reserves of
dry powder.
Great piece. One effect of spreading precarity–and I will use the term more loosely
to encompass not only economic precarity, but also the increasing sense of pervasive dread
and fear experienced by so many across all walks of life–is that living in this state
increases one's susceptibility to both totalitarian ideologies and to drives for war against
some perceived enemy. To me this explains the shadow of "law and order" hard nationalism
coming from the far right, the more extreme variants of identity politics on the left, and
the terrified push for censorship and "full lockdown" coming from the neoliberal center.
Unfortunately the billionaire class and their pets in the media see all of this as a
potential cash cow rather than a serious danger. Given their stranglehold on the national
discourse and their control of the most effective means of mass organizing (social media),
I'm not sure it is possible to reverse the trend early enough to prevent some kind of major
conflict. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try!
P.S. To avoid any confusion, when I disparagingly refer to "full lockdown" I mean an
authoritarian lockdown without accompanying benefits for workers and with "papers please"
checkpoints and penalties. The worst kind of lockdown, where people are both unable to
support themselves and are actively prevented from doing so. In my opinion people who push
for a hard lockdown before benefits/compensation can be arranged are unintentionally
advocating for such a position; the compensation will never come.
Heck, I've seen comments (generally not on this site) admiring what China did and
lamenting the fact that it can't be done here in the United States.
I sure hope these are troll accounts and not real people in this country, especially not
real people on the left. If these are real people, we are in more trouble than I thought.
A government with the power to literally weld people's door shut, which is what China did,
can do a lot of other scary things.
Yes, like get on top of a virus (and achieve the highest level of economic growth in human
history, and produce incredible poetry, and so on). And as I'm not 'in this country,' I
believe I'm not 'real people.'
I have seen the same thing and have had the same concerns. I do think there is more
dishonest disruption/manipulation and trolling going on than we are aware of. It's at the
point where I automatically assume that most social media accounts are not taking an honest
position. I hope I'm right, because if I'm wrong then humanity is absolutely terrifying.
The corporate imperialism status quo isn't terrifying enough for you? Oil and gas seeping
out through the land under and around "affordable housing" because CEQA doesn't count on
those properties doesn't terrify you? Flint's water crisis doesn't terrify you?
The throngs of human beings thrown out onto the street by Upgrading slumlords and
developers doesn't terrify you? Overlords talking with straight faces about excess and
surplus humans and ramming Prop 22 through doesn't terrify you?
There's a big difference between "humanity is OK, but the small slice that rules us is
terrible" and "humanity is in deep shit because we're mostly terrible." The first implies a
solution, the second what? Hope for a benevolent AI overlord to emerge?
Read my post again. I said that I automatically assume that most accounts posting terrible
stuff are bots. There are accounts that say awful things about almost any and every topic
imaginable. The number of them is so huge that if these are real people and not
bots, then people may indeed be largely terrible. But I assume they are bots.
https://popularresistance.org/affordable-housing-developers-set-their-sights-on-former-toxic-oil-fields/
DeSmog blog Vista Hermosa residents like Luna are troubled by a 2019 environmental rollback by the
state, AB1197, that exempts homeless housing developments in the City of Los Angeles from the
mandates of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Arguably California's broadest
environmental law, CEQA requires builders to assess the environmental impacts of new
development and find ways to avoid or mitigate them.
The political will to rollback CEQA has continued into 2020. In January, Assemblyman
Miguel Santiago, who represents District 53 bordering Vista Hermosa, introduced a new piece
of legislation, AB1907, to further expand CEQA exemptions to now include all affordable
housing.
I'm reminded of the excellent post by Anne Amnesia in May 2016, (yes, when Obama and Biden
were still in office, and the White House was just a huge gleam in Kamala's way too sparkly
eyes, given the massive poverty, incarceration and inequality in California, as she
successfully ran for California Senator and will have not completed even one term)
Unnecessariathttps://morecrows.wordpress.com/2016/05/10/unnecessariat/
A very brief excerpt (it's long and meaty), emphasis mine:
In 2011, economist Guy Standing coined the term "precariat" to refer to workers
whose jobs were insecure, underpaid, and mobile, who had to engage in substantial "work for
labor" to remain employed, whose survival could, at any time, be compromised by employers
(who, for instance held their visas) and who therefore could do nothing to improve their
lot. The term found favor in the Occupy movement, and was colloquially expanded to include
not just farmworkers, contract workers, "gig" workers, but also unpaid interns, adjunct
faculty, etc. Looking back from 2016, one pertinent characteristic seems obvious: no matter
how tenuous, the precariat had jobs. The new dying Americans, the ones killing themselves
on purpose or with drugs, don't. Don't, won't, and know it.
Here's the thing: from where I live, the world has drifted away. We aren't
precarious, we're unnecessary. The money has gone to the top. The wages have gone to
the top. The recovery has gone to the top. And what's worst of all, everybody who matters
seems basically pretty okay with that. The new bright sparks, cheerfully referred to as
"Young Gods" believe themselves to be the honest winners in a new invent-or-die economy,
and are busily planning to escape into space or acquire superpowers, and instead of
worrying about this, the talking heads on TV tell you its all a good thing- don't worry,
the recession's over and everything's better now, and technology is TOTES AMAZEBALLS!
The Rent-Seeking Is Too Damn High
If there's no economic plan for the Unnecessariat, there's certainly an abundance for
plans to extract value from them. No-one has the option to just make their own way and be
left alone at it. It used to be that people were uninsured and if they got seriously sick
they'd declare bankruptcy and lose the farm, but now they have a (mandatory) $1k/month plan
with a $5k deductible: they'll still declare bankruptcy and lose the farm if they get sick,
but in the meantime they pay a shit-ton to the shareholders of United Healthcare, or Aetna,
or whoever. This, like shifting the chronically jobless from "unemployed" to "disabled" is
seen as a major improvement in status, at least on television.
I was surprised Prop 22 passed because it was not doing well in the polls for most of the
pre-election period. It seemed Californians were solidly against it. Then, perhaps 4-6 weeks
before the election, I noticed a dramatic change in messaging. Suddenly the ads were touting
that if Prop 22 passed, Uber and Lyft drivers would receive health care benefits. I assumed
that this was deceptive messaging designed to turn the vote around. Here is what Kaiser
Health News says about the benefits:
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20201029/App-based-companies-pushing-Prop-22-say-drivers-will-get-health-benefits-Will-they.aspx
Looks like it worked. I guess there's no penalty for this sort of deception, or at least, no
enforcement of a penalty.
So, I have CSPAN on at the moment. They're streaming the DC #MillionMAGAMarch
#StopTheSteal SuperSpreader rally.
The over-the-top vitriol is rather breathtaking. The angry ignorance is depressing.
They're "not gonna allow the Steal." They're gonna "be warriors." "Trump WON! Trump WON!
Trump WON! Trump WON! "
The Occam's Chainsaw "logic" is on full display.
Meanwhile, yesterday's new U.S. Covid19 case count was more than 184k, 1.6m for Nov
1-13.
No argument there. I started an Excel sheet, w/ transcribed JHU data commencing Oct 1st
(thru yesterday). The exponential upward trendline in the graph has an R-sq of 0.91. (an
iterative 7-day moving avg is also illuminating.)
Of course, it'll go up until it no longer does. And, "new cases" incidence rates comprise
but one facet of interest.
If you're struggling but aren't sick (yet), economic concerns win out. No big surprise
there. 70 million people are fighting a return to austerity and a technocratic "Great Reset"
that was devised without their input. They see it as literally fighting for their lives and
livelihoods. The new admin can ignore this at their own peril. (Too bad Trump didn't actually
solve any of their problems, but at least he gave them his attention, more than anyone else
has done in decades.)
Many people have to choose between the certainty of being unable to pay their bills, if
they stay home, versus the unknown risk of contracting COVID if they work.
Staying home is luxury a lot of people just don't have–even pre-COVID it was very
common for people in low-wage jobs that don't provide sick-leave to show up to work sick. It
wasn't because these people are evil or wanted to get anyone sick but rather because if you
don't work you don't get paid.
Precisely. The rent isn't going to pay itself, and people are scared about their future.
Covid isn't an obvious terror like Ebola, so people weigh the risks and decide in favor of
their economic security. If we were like some of the more advanced countries in the world,
they wouldn't have to make this choice, but here we are.
"at least he gave them his attention, more than anyone else has done in decades."
Hmmm last time I looked Bernie Sanders was paying attention and proposing solutions since
at least 2015. Nice how you just erased him and the millions who voted for him.
You're right. Trump is the only primary-winning candidate who paid attention to
the working class in recent memory. Bernie was obviously a million times better than Trump
because he was sincere, he had a plan, and he would have followed through. But he got
screwed.
I'm becoming a bit weary of reading that politicians like Trump are "exploiting anxieties"
about poverty and unemployment, as though such anxieties were unreasonable and the problems
didn't really exist. The trouble is that "responding to voters' concerns about their lives"
doesn't have quite the same dismissive overtones. The supercilious assumption that people who
are afraid of losing their jobs are being "exploited", whereas people being urged to vote on
gender lines aren't, seems very strange. Is anyone really surprised that people are more
worried about how much money they have than about which gender they are?
Understand people's problems, devise reasonable solutions, communicate your plan to the
voters, and follow through on your promises. It sounds so easy, doesn't it but good luck
trying it with the media and parties working together against you at every turn. Pull up
those bootstraps!
Thanks. We are going to find out how the velocity of the vote is slower than the velocity
of hunger.
"Civilization is about 3 meals thick." John Brockman, ex-con.
We are not together and the people in power don't want to give the people without, food
money. Two more and 3 more months of disease as hunger and death knock at more and more
doors. Evictions pick up apace.
Cormac McCarthy dystopia. No country for anybody.
The economic theory attributed to Warren Mosler and popularized by Stephanie Kelton is the
last idea. If it is a Hail Mary then so be it. If it doesn't work, isn't put to work, mankind
itself is doomed.
Public health care authorities understandably directed their policy responses toward
pandemic mitigation, and the Democrats largely embraced their recommendations. But they
remained insensitive to the anxieties of tens of millions of Americans, whose jobs were
being destroyed for good, whose household debts -- rent, mortgage, and utility arrears, as
well as interest on education and car loans -- were rising inexorably, even allowing for
the temporary expedient of stimulus checks from the government until this past August
I agree and worse this dynamic is playing itself out again–talk about whether
President-elect Biden should institute a lockdown is bringing out the "lockdown now, worry
about the consequences later" mentality again.
While I'm not sure Biden personally regards the millions of those who cannot work from
home, but aren't considered essential, collateral damage, there are clearly a segment of
Democrats who do–I've even seen it on Facebook among people I know. It provides further
proof that the Democrats, as Thomas Frank and others have astutely noted, have become
predominantly the party of the college-educated upper-middle class.
While I'm not denying the severity of the pandemic, the consequences of business shutdowns
and subsequent layoffs are very real and not something to be laughed at or minimized,
especially if Democrats want to have a future among those who are less affluent.
The globalists found just the economics they were looking for.
The USP of neoclassical economics – It concentrates wealth.
Let's use it for globalisation.
Mariner Eccles, FED chair 1934 – 48, observed what the capital accumulation of
neoclassical economics did to the US economy in the 1920s. "a giant suction pump had by 1929 to 1930 drawn into a few hands an increasing proportion
of currently produced wealth. This served then as capital accumulations. But by taking
purchasing power out of the hands of mass consumers, the savers denied themselves the kind of
effective demand for their products which would justify reinvestment of the capital
accumulation in new plants. In consequence as in a poker game where the chips were
concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other fellows could stay in the game only by
borrowing. When the credit ran out, the game stopped"
This is what it's supposed to be like.
A few people have all the money and everyone else gets by on debt.
Most of today's problems come from the 1920s.
Financial stability had been locked into the regulations of the Keynesian era.
The neoliberals removed them and the financial crises came back. https://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/banking-crises.png
"This Time is Different" by Reinhart and Rogoff has a graph showing the same thing (Figure
13.1 – The proportion of countries with banking crises, 1900-2008).
After the 1930s, they wanted to ensure those times would never return and put things in
place to ensure they didn't.
The neoliberals have been busy stripping them away.
What did the economists learn in the 1940s? http://delong.typepad.com/kalecki43.pdf
In the paper from 1943 you can see ..
They knew Government debt and deficits weren't a problem as they had seen the massive
Government debt and deficits of WW2.
They knew full employment was feasible as they had seen it in WW2.
After WW2 Governments aimed to create full employment as policymakers knew it could be done
and actually maximised wealth creation in the economy.
Balancing the budget was just something they used to do before WW2, but it wasn't actually
necessary.
Government debt and deficits weren't a problem.
They could now solve all those problems they had seen in the 1930s, which caused politics to
swing to the extremes and populist leaders to rise.
They could eliminate unemployment and create a full employment economy.
They could put welfare states in place to ensure the economic hardship of the 1930s would
never be seen again.
They didn't have to use austerity; they could fight recessions with fiscal stimulus.
The neoliberals started to remove the things that had created stable Western societies
after WW2.
"If I thought voters were racists who want basic economic security and the other party was
offering them racism but not economic security, I would simply try offering economic security
but not racism rather than offering them neither." -Ed Burmilla https://twitter.com/edburmila/status/1324420903409692673
We stepped onto an old path that still leads to the same place.
1920s/2000s – neoclassical economics, high inequality, high banker pay, low regulation,
low taxes for the wealthy, robber barons (CEOs), reckless bankers, globalisation phase
1929/2008 – Wall Street crash
1930s/2010s – Global recession, currency wars, trade wars, austerity, rising
nationalism and extremism
1940s – World war.
We forgot we had been down that path before.
Right wing populist leaders are only to be expected at this stage.
Why is Western liberalism always such a disaster?
They did try and learn from past mistakes to create a new liberalism (neoliberalism), but the
Mont Pelerin Society went round in a circle and got back to pretty much where they
started.
It equates making money with creating wealth and people try and make money in the easiest
way possible, which doesn't actually create any wealth.
In 1984, for the first time in American history, "unearned" income exceeded "earned"
income.
The American have lost sight of what real wealth creation is, and are just focussed on making
money.
You might as well do that in the easiest way possible.
It looks like a parasitic rentier capitalism because that is what it is.
Bankers make the most money when they are driving your economy into a financial
crisis.
What they are doing is really an illusion; they are just pulling future spending power into
today.
The 1920s roared at the expense of an impoverished 1930s.
Japan roared on the money creation of real estate lending in the 1980s, they spent the next
30 years repaying the debt they had built up in the 1980s and the economy flat-lined. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YTyJzmiHGk
Bankers use bank credit to pump up asset prices, which doesn't actually create any
wealth.
The money creation of bank credit flows into the economy making it boom, but you are heading
towards a financial crisis and claims on future prosperity are building up in the financial
system.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf
Early success comes at the expense of an impoverished future.
Let's get the basics sorted.
When no one knows what real wealth creation is, you are in trouble.
We want economic success
Step one – Identify where wealth creation occurs in the economy.
Houston, we have a problem.
Economists do identify where real wealth creation in the economy occurs, but this is a
most inconvenient truth as it reveals many at the top don't actually create any wealth.
This is the problem.
Much of their money comes from wealth extraction rather than wealth creation, and they need
to get everyone thoroughly confused so we don't realise what they are really up to.
The Classical Economists had a quick look around and noticed the aristocracy were
maintained in luxury and leisure by the hard work of everyone else.
They haven't done anything economically productive for centuries, they couldn't miss it.
The Classical economist, Adam Smith:
"The labour and time of the poor is in civilised countries sacrificed to the maintaining of
the rich in ease and luxury. The Landlord is maintained in idleness and luxury by the labour
of his tenants. The moneyed man is supported by his extractions from the industrious merchant
and the needy who are obliged to support him in ease by a return for the use of his
money."
There was no benefits system in those days, and if those at the bottom didn't work they
died.
They had to earn money to live.
Ricardo was an expert on the small state, unregulated capitalism he observed in the world
around him. He was part of the new capitalist class, and the old landowning class were a huge
problem with their rents that had to be paid both directly and through wages.
"The interest of the landlords is always opposed to the interest of every other class in the
community" Ricardo 1815 / Classical Economist.
They soon identified the constructive "earned" income and the parasitic "unearned"
income.
This disappeared in neoclassical economics.
GDP was invented after they used neoclassical economics last time.
In the 1920s, the economy roared, the stock market soared and nearly everyone had been making
lots of money.
In the 1930s, they were wondering what the hell had just happened as everything had appeared
to be going so well in the 1920s and then it all just fell apart.
They needed a better measure to see what was really going on in the economy and came up with
GDP.
In the 1930s, they pondered over where all that wealth had gone to in 1929 and realised
inflating asset prices doesn't create real wealth, they came up with the GDP measure to track
real wealth creation in the economy.
The transfer of existing assets, like stocks and real estate, doesn't create real wealth and
therefore does not add to GDP. The real wealth creation in the economy is measured by
GDP.
Real wealth creation involves real work producing new goods and services in the economy.
So all that transferring existing financial assets around doesn't create wealth?
No it doesn't, and now you are ready to start thinking about what is really going on
there.
Economists do identify where real wealth creation in the economy occurs, but this is a
most inconvenient truth as it reveals many at the top don't actually create any wealth.
Hide what real wealth creation is, and pretend it's making money, and this problem goes
away.
Exactly a week after Esper was unceremoniously dismissed, the Pentagon
issued a notice to commanders to prepare to reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan to
2,500, and to reduce the number of troops in Iraq to 2,500 by January 15.
Despite the dark rumors, Esper and his associates weren't fired because they failed to
assist Trump in a domestic military takeover, or because they were insufficiently loyal and
didn't grovel enough before the person of Donald Trump. The real reason for their dismissal is
simple: Esper didn't think U.S. troops should be removed from Afghanistan by Christmas. Trump
disagreed.
The commander in chief has "the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views" are
aligned with his own, as former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said. This hardly represents a
coup.
"The commander in chief has "the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views" are
aligned with his own, as former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said. This hardly represents a
coup."
It's a "coup", alright. A coup against the deep state. Long overdue, but better late than
never. President Trump giving The Swamp the middle finger one last time. And flushing out
warmonger Biden, daring him to show his true colors & re-escalate again. Checkmate.
It used to be that "it took a village to raise a child", and where I'm from at least this
was meant in a very literal sense: it took not only parents but other elders in the community
to impart the accumulated wisdom that instills pro-social, community-building values into
children, ensuring that it wasn't the sins, but rather the virtues of the elders that were
visited upon the children, even unto the seventh generation. The "village" has now largely
replaced parents and community elders with a dizzying, eclectic mix of social media
influencers, tv personalities, pseudo-thought leaders and an education system that's been
captured by our elites to instill their own preferred version of values into our
children.
The analogue with the "horizon of understanding" is that for most individuals, defining
what it represents has been outsourced to a dizzying mix of experts who are tasked with
creating and maintaining a national value system. In a world paralyzed by partisanship, each
side of the ideological divide has its own (bought and paid for) triangulated opinion of
experts to shape what people on each side come to believe is real. As the chances of creating
a harmonious, pro-social horizon of understanding are sacrificed at the altar of partisanship
and polarization, the disorientation and discomfort felt by most people as we navigate the
unfolding crises of our times is only going to increase.
It seems these days that we are simultaneously bombarded with information and opinions,
while also being herded into our ideological corners by unseen algorithms. I honestly don't
know what the long term consequences of this will be, but its hard to see good
outcomes.
Going forward, I suspect the unseen algorithms are going to be the most malign influence
in widening the divide, a sort of social herding at scale. On the subject of opinions, most
people, for better or worse, still defer to the opinions of experts on important matters, so
you can imagine what happens when expert opinion is drawn not from "mere" PMC hired guns but
from the upper, upper crust of the oligarchy, even the most independent thinkers are bound to
subject their deeply held perceptions/beliefs to a review, if for nothing else but to get in
early on a nascent bull market and profit from it.
To take an example, the early adopter set for bitcoin was for a long time made up of
hackers, criminals and other fringe players who dabbled out of curiosity. The professional
money management industry on the other hand took a dim view of the whole crypto thing,
disparaging it at every opportunity and making sure portfolio allocations to it were
extremely scarce at the best of times to non-existent every other time. Then came covid, and
along with that activist central banks printing unprecedented amounts of money to shore up
collapsing economies. With fiat currencies being devalued as a result, the previously
skeptical titans of fund management started talking up bitcoin as a store of value comparable
to gold, first Paul Tudor Jones, then Stan Druckenmiller, followed most recently by Bill
Miller. Granted there are still holdouts like Ray Dalio and Peter Schiff who haven't hopped
on to the bitcoin bandwagon but, along with the guys at Microstrategy also becoming fervent
evangelists, I suspect the pronouncements of these titans alone are enough to take bitcoin
mainstream as an asset class, volatility be damned. I'm not a crypto bull by any stretch but
the power of expert opinion raining down from the very top of the class hierarchy to move the
herd further down will remain undiminished for a while still, and if said opinion is
programmed into an algorithm, heaven help us all.
Reminds me of the old proverb " If it ain't broke don't fix it " while I believe that at
some point in time someone decided to come up with a money making child rearing manual which
started a flood of variations on that theme resulting in constant tinkering, which in my job
would be the equivalent of overworking clay.
Consider the structure of the term "common sense", which is just shared opinion. If there
is no common sense, there will be no common action.
The problem with coming together is that the ruling class divides and rules us as a normal
procedure of creating a class system. Nobody in the ruling class has a problem with this.
Their purpose in life is to reproduce the system of mass slavery and adapt it to present
conditions and they, being among the elect, are fine with this.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald 'This is endlessly amazing: Brazil, a huge country, has nationwide municipal elections
today. Voting is mandatory. *All* votes will be counted & released by tonight.'
Ah, I see the problem here. The difference is that Brazil is a Third World nation that is
kept that way by morons such as Bolsanaro. America, on the other hand, is being turned into a
Third World nation because the elite is seeing a profit in doing so.
Daniel Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School
of Law, and is author of the recently-released No More
War: How the West Violates International Law by Using "Humanitarian" Intervention to Advance
Economic and Strategic Interests. You might have noticed something curious following
Biden's apparent election win – liberal politicians and media are sounding the alarm that
Trump may use his remaining months in office to draw down our troops from Afghanistan.
For example, the New York Times ran a piece on
November 12 claiming that " both in Kabul and Washington, officials with knowledge of
security briefings said there was fear that President Trump might try to accelerate an all-out
troop withdrawal in his final days in office " before the more "responsible" Biden can take
over and try to stop or at least slow this. It is clear now that it is the liberal
establishment, and the Democratic Party, which is more wedded to war than their counterparts
across the aisle, and that should be disturbing to people hoping for progressive change with
the incoming Administration.
First of all, we must start with this discussion with the undisputed fact that our leaders
do not know, and have not known for some time, what the US' goals and strategy in Afghanistan
even are. One would be forgiven for not knowing, or for forgetting this fact because the
incontrovertible evidence of it – the so-called "
Afghanistan Papers " – received scant and only momentary attention when they were
exposed last year by the Washington Post.
As these documents, consisting of interviews with hundreds of insiders responsible for
prosecuting the war show, the American public was intentionally lied to about the alleged "
progress " of this war, even as our leaders were unsure what " progress "
meant.
As the Washington Post noted, the US government never even decided who it was really
fighting there: " Was al-Qaeda the enemy, or the Taliban? Was Pakistan a friend or an
adversary? What about Islamic State and the bewildering array of foreign jihadists, let alone
the warlords on the CIA's payroll? According to the documents, the US government never settled
on an answer ." Almost to a person, everyone involved in this morass agreed that the
billions of dollars spent, and thousands of lives lost, have been in vain. It has all been a
colossal waste.
Now, however, we are being told to panic that Trump may end this disastrous conflict. For
example, the quite liberal and almost blatantly pro-Biden news outlet, National Public Radio
(NPR) ran segments all last week about
female soccer teams in Afghanistan. The message of these segments was clear – these
soccer teams are (allegedly) proof of women's advances in Afghanistan as a result of the US'
intervention since 2001, and these advances are in jeopardy if Trump ends this
intervention.
Such manipulative stories of course obscure the real fact that the US has been undermining
women's rights in Afghanistan since it began intervening there in 1979, and Afghanistan
still
ranks at the very bottom of all countries for women's rights. But there is no doubt that
such stories will warm the hearts of many Biden supporters to continue war there.
Meanwhile, it is not only Afghanistan which is the focus of the liberal enthusiasm for war.
Thus, as the Grayzone
has reported , Dana Stroul, the Democratic co-chair of the Congressionally-appointed Syria
Study Group, recently outlined the plans for even deeper US intervention in Syria – an
intervention which Trump has at least paid lip service to ending.
Specifically, Stroul emphasized that " one-third of Syrian territory was owned via the US
military, with its local partner the Syrian Democratic Forces, " that this territory
happened to be the richest in Syria in terms of oil and agriculture, and that the US would
intensify its intervention in and against Syria to keep its control of this territory and its
resources. Of course, taking over other nations' resources is a violation of international law,
including the Geneva Conventions prohibition against "plunder," but that seems to be of no
concern.
The liberal media is also elated by the prospect of a Biden White House being more
aggressive in its foreign policy towards both Russia and China.
As CNBC explains
, " Now there is likely to be a change in the air when it comes to U.S.-Russia relations. At
the very least, analysts told CNBC before the result that they expected a Biden win to increase
tensions between Washington and Moscow, and to raise the probability of new sanctions on
Russia...Experts from risk consultancy Teneo Intelligence said they expected more cooperation
between Biden and Europe on global issues such as 'countering China, Russia' ."
While one might think that increased tensions with two major nuclear powers would not be a
welcome development, years of the false Russiagate narrative have groomed liberals for such
tensions.
Incredibly, Trump has been portrayed as being soft on Russia, even as he backed out of a
major
anti-proliferation treaty (The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) which had been
signed with the Kremlin back in 1987, and even as he
sent the largest contingent of US troops (20,000) in a quarter of a century to train with
European soldiers on the Russian border. I must note here that the converse – Russia's
sending tens of thousands of troops to the border with the US – is simply inconceivable
and would indeed be seen in Washington as an occasion for war. I, for one, am quite alarmed to
think of what a Biden policy of "getting tougher" with Russia would look like, and what kind of
catastrophe it could bring about.
Regretfully, I now live in a country in which liberals outflanking conservatives in terms of
their tolerance and even eagerness for aggression and war, especially when that aggression and
war is being led by officials who, as I'm sure we will see in the new Biden Administration,
happen to be women or people of color. For the first time recently, I have seen the concept of
"intersectional imperialism" being used to describe this situation, and I believe this to be a
very real phenomenon; to be but another means of making war that much easier to swallow for
broad swaths of the American public.
The irony, of course, is that the bombs dropped by the US in war, no matter who happens to
be in charge of the US government at the time, disproportionately fall upon women and children
of a darker skin hue, and they maim and kill just as much as those dropped by old white male
Republicans. Sadly, few seem to understand or care about this.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
benalls 31 minutes ago 16 Nov, 2020 10:27 AM
It's not the "left" or "right", republicans or democrats, but a new American movement,,,,
CBM,,, wich usually means 'silent but deadly' but in this case it stands for "CEO's Bonus
Matters" . The movement congressional members from Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing vowed to
support. Its time for us to grab our shields, helmets, and frozen water bottles and travel to
a new neighborhood to loot and burn. Israel has given Harris and JOJO their instructions.
razzims 49 minutes ago 16 Nov, 2020 10:10 AM
same ol empire of chaos and their eternal war. no matter which party wins election
HypoxiaMasks 1 hour ago 16 Nov, 2020 09:42 AM
Other than the Bush and lil Bush, every war from the beginning of the 20th century was
started with a Democrat president. Tell me again how the Republicans are the party of war
MarkG1964 5 minutes ago 16 Nov, 2020 10:54 AM
The democrats and republicans are two wings on the same bird.
"... If Biden steals this election, it will be Obama 2.0. If Biden's mental health declines, Vice-President-Elect Kamala Harris, one of the most unpopular democrats in modern history will be the President at least for the short term. The question is who will be her vice-president? ..."
"... "only votes for Biden and no down-ballot selections, which she regarded as suspicious" ..."
"... New York Post article ..."
"... "two pieces of software called Hammer and Scorecard were used to flip votes from Trump to Biden in some pre-election voting ballots." ..."
"... "declaring that trespassers will be removed from the White House." ..."
"... Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. ..."
If Biden steals this election, it will be Obama 2.0. If Biden's mental health declines,
Vice-President-Elect Kamala Harris, one of the most unpopular democrats in modern history will
be the President at least for the short term. The question is who will be her
vice-president?
Both of the US political parties, the Democrats and the Republicans are a one-party system
controlled by special interests no matter who is president .
It's fair to say that Trump's foreign policy was heading towards a dangerous path to a world
war as I have written about in the past.
Many of Trump's foreign policies are similar to past administrations whether they were
Democrats and Republican, the only difference that I can say is that he did not start any new
wars, he continued ongoing wars that was launched by his predecessors.
Trump's domestic policies are mixed at best with an economy built on debt through its
Federal Reserve's printing press that can never be repaid jeopardizing the US economy and it's
US dollar-based hegemony which are already in a steady decline. However, on a good note about
the Trump presidency is that he secured America's 2nd amendment rights (an important right to
have during uncertain times), expanded school choice for families and he cut taxes for
individuals' and small businesses. Despite a handful of successes on the domestic front, his
foreign policy is dangerous for world peace . However, it's fair to say Trump is a different
type of politician, one who openly expressed how he felt about certain people in politics or in
Hollywood and the mainstream-media (MSM) hated all of it, they despised Trump. The Democratic
party has been planning this scenario the day after Hillary Clinton lost the elections to
Donald Trump in 2016 with the Russia-Gate Hoax, allegations of sexual assaults, racism and
other anti-Trump shenanigans to remove the President. The Democrats were going to steal the
2020 elections no matter what with help from the MSM. If the Supreme court reverses Biden's
election win to a loss, giving Trump the victory by January 20th,violence will erupt on US
streets leading to a civil war among the American people, and that is certain.
Stolen Elections and Biden's Voter Fraud Organization
This election was rigged by the Democratic party, plain and simple. The so-called
"President-Elect" Joe Biden has admitted unconsciously that they put together an extensive
"voter fraud" organization in U.S. history:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/WGRnhBmHYN0
One of Trump's lawyers fighting the election fraud, Sidney Powell, said that 450,000 ballots
was found in several key states with "only votes for Biden and no down-ballot selections,
which she regarded as suspicious" according to a recent New York Post article who
also said that Powell claimed that "two pieces of software called Hammer and Scorecard were
used to flip votes from Trump to Biden in some pre-election voting ballots."
In Michigan, the vote had increased at one point to over 130,000 votes for Biden in the
middle of the night, without a single new vote for Trump while most people were asleep:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/wLRITa1jHHw
https://www.youtube.com/embed/3P36qnU-Ozc
In Pennsylvania, former New York City Mayor and Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani made a press
statement on the fact that dead people were voting in Philadelphia:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/__fR2H_Bsu4
There will be many more whistleblowers, pollsters that were denied the access to observe the
vote count and average voters who will be exposing Biden's election as a fraud in the coming
days, weeks and months. This is just the beginning.
Mainstream Media Censorship In Your Face
This is perhaps the most in your face evidence that media censorship has been legitimized
against President Trump. The MSM now is fact-checking Trump in real-time claiming that he is
stating false-facts:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/F74MfjZWjI4
A Coming American Coup D'état?
The Biden regime had issued a warning to President Donald Trump "declaring that
trespassers will be removed from the White House." Former sportscaster Keith Olbermann has
even called for a coup against President Trump:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/q_7f-DfmNNQ
The 2020 election was stolen from Trump, no doubt about that,
However, Trump and his administration knew that the Democrats were going to commit fraud
through mail-in ballots.
The US just became a banana republic, a dictatorship with Orwellian overtones that will
ensure a Democratic and the Neocon Republican establishment that will move forward with an
American-style scientific based-dictatorship.
Biden has prematurely announced a Covid-19 task force that will include planned lockdowns,
vaccine mandates and mandatory facemasks due to an increase in Covid-19 cases. The US is surely
heading towards what George Orwell has warned the world about. Make no mistake about it, there
will be a resistance, a human resistance that will ultimately prevail, and that I can say with
certainty.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your
email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally
published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Saturday during an appearance on FNC's "Justice," Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) questioned why
Democrats oppose any investigations into the integrity of the presidential election, despite
their past efforts on the 2016 presidential election.
The Ohio Republican congressman reminded Fox News viewers that Democrats dedicated for years
to the "Russia hoax" but do not want to allow four weeks for an investigation into this year's
presidential election.
"What Syria withdrawal? There was never a Syria withdrawal," Jeffrey said.
" ... even as he praises the president's support of what he describes as a successful
"realpolitik" approach to the region, he acknowledges that his team routinely misled senior
leaders about troop levels in Syria.
"We were always playing shell games to not make clear to our leadership how many troops we
had there," Jeffrey said in an interview. The actual number of troops in northeast Syria is "a
lot more than" the roughly two hundred troops Trump initially agreed to leave there in 2019.
Defense One
-------------
"We?" Who are "We?"
State Department people? Well, certainly some of those were involved.
But ... IMO it would not have been possible to deceive or mislead the WH and specifically
the Commander in Chief without the active cooperation of CENTCOM, the JCS and OSD.
If they had not been participating in the lying, it would have been obvious in any number of
interactions with President Trump that the president's understanding of troop numbers in Syria
was not correct and that he was being deceived by "we." (whoever that was). That revelation
evidently did not happen. The NSC staff should have detected the lack of truth in reported
numbers. That it did not tells me that at least some of the NSC staff were disloyal to Trump.
Obvious? Yes, but that is worth re-stating.
James Jeffrey is quite proud of his achievement in maintaining a "realpolik" stalemate in
Syria, one that stymies both Russia and the Syrian government.
IMO opinion he is revealed by his own words as a treacherous back stabber. "Un hombre
sin honor." pl
This is exactly the result of Trump's lack of interest in fulfilling his original promise
of ending the "forever wars" in the middle east. This is exactly the result of putting
opelny-Democrat Jared Kushner (a lifelong member of Chabad-Lubavich network) and his ilk in
charge of the middle east geopolitics.
It also clearly proves that the State Dep. is a monsterous autonomous entity with its own
permanent objectives and agendas, independent of the WH. No matter what Trump wanted to
achieve in the ME, the so-called Blob (or as Col. Lang here has coined as the "BORG") do what
they will. You have to also remember that back in '17, career diplomats and high-ranking
State Dep. officials sounded the alarm that Rex Tillerson was down-sizing the Department so
much and that it was contrary to American interests abroad etc...fast forward to today, it
would not have mattered how much down-sizing Tillerson actually managed to do, they (people
like Jeffries) were still able to pursue their own agenda and undermine Trump's original
promise of ending the forever wars in the middle east.
The liberal elites managed to 'allegedly' manipulate the election against a sitting
president in favor of an highly unappealing candidate in Joe Biden. In all honesty, does
anyone think the Blob/Borg would NOT undermine the president's agenda and follow their own
permanent objectives aboard?
Trump should be furious about this. He should be firing everyone involved in the
deception. Those involved don't belong in ANY administration. Was convincing Trump that he
was getting the Syrian oil part of this despicable con? As you mentioned last night, this
deception is probably also going on in Afghanistan. This is a clear sign of a totally
dysfunctional nation security apparatus... Trump's national security apparatus. Could Trump
find no one he could trust to carry out his orders? Or did he just not even care? He
certainly wasn't up to the task.
However, our troop level in Syria has been widely and openly reported to be above the 200
level since Trump's initial announcement of a total pull out in December 2018. I thought it
was odd when shortly after that it was announced that more troops were being sent in to
facilitate the withdrawal of the 2,000 plus troops already there. We did reduce the level
somewhat, but then we brought in mech infantry with their Bradleys to secure the oil fields
and later more to counter the Russian patrols in northeast Syria. And isn't counting whatever
we have in Tanf.
"He should be firing everyone involved in the deception"
He just fired Esper. "Trump's national security apparatus." You mean America's natonal
security apparatus, the one that gave us LTC Vindman and that crew of Ambassadors, and the
'whistlebolower' Chief Justice Robert's wouldn't let any senator name nor ask questions about
during the impeachment. You remember all that don't you? I'm sure the same cast of characters
Biden would bring back if he succeeds in the rigged election would never do that to him.
COL(R) Mark Mitchell stated the following recently, regarding the duties and
responsibilities of the SECDEF in response to POTUS directives. The comments were in regard
to Acting SECDEF Miller (a longtime friend and colleague of Mitchell), but apply to any
Cabinet or sub-Cabinet post:
"He [POTUS] may make decisions that other people disagree with. They have two options:
they can do what he directs them to do, or after they've offered their advice, if they find
it illegal, immoral, unethical, unadvisable, they can step down," retired Col. Mark Mitchell,
who most recently served in the Pentagon as the principal deputy assistant defense secretary
for special operations/low-intensity conflict.
Mitchell added that he resented the implication at the defense secretary should be
expected to stand up to the president, or in his way, as the duly elected commander in
chief.
"You either carry out your lawful orders or you resign," he said. "We don't get the option
to 'stand up to him.' "(End of quote)
Unfortunately, President Trump made many poor personnel decisions, and selected people who
believed they had the duty and right to work against the President from within the
Administration. This has driven me nuts for the last four years, as I have watched senior
civilian and uniformed leaders actively undermining the Commander-in-Chief. They weren't
subtle about it. For whatever reason, they mostly got away with it.
To be clear, I am not writing this as a Trump supporter. As a career military
professional, I have a duty to support the Commander-in-Chief, and obey lawful orders from
the Commander-in-Chief.
It is very easy to play shell games with the BOG caps in the war zones.
Looking forward to a reprise of Trump's former starring role in The Apprentice, and
finally uttering yet again his immortal words: You're Fired!
The final days of Trump's first term are going to be awesome. Banish the Borg. BAMN. Put
Biden's fingerprints on any re-hiring.
Typically a new CEO will ask for everyone's resignation, and select and cull according to
new needs and new directions. Something Trump should have done, but he too was the apprentice
in this office when his term began.
Nothing to stop Trump from doing this now in reverse, and finally cleaning out the dross
that was dedicated to his administration's destruction. Better late than never. Our country
deserves nothing less. These insider traitors deserve to have their termination for cause
permanently be part in their career resumes.
It appears that POTUS Trump once his re-election is affirmed, urgently needs to fire a
large percentage of top-level ranks at the Pentagon, fire the CENTCOM CC and his staff, fire
the JCS, close down the NSC until it's thoroughly bleached, and charge all of them under the
UCMJ. Bust them down to slick-sleeves and show them the door. How many back-stabbing Vindman
types remain within the NSC? They need to be fired and prosecuted under the UCMJ as well.
As a citizen I am having great difficulty not concluding that the US is showing all the
signs of decline like the late Roman Republic.
James Jeffrey along with the rest of the herd that have run one agitprop disinformation
scheme after another since the 2016 election are like the roman senators that had the intent
to save the Republic but fatally weakened it by killing Caesar at its very center, in the
Senate.
Biden's people are openly calling for even more internet censorship and continuing to rush
out inherently dangerous mRNA vaccines without proper testing - and may force us to take it.
Groups are starting to create a database of Trump supporters to enable censoring them where
they work and live - what is this other than terrorism against half the voting population? If
just five percent of the 70M that voted for Trump moves together in resistance then the new
regime herd will be holding a tiger by is tail and with the election showing the people are
split right down the middle I fail to see how we can avoid even much worse chaos the next
four years. The American Republic is disintegrating while the herd is having a romp and
thinks it is winning while they are its assassins.
I am sick at heart of this and fear for the future of my children whose standard of living
opportunities are in free-fall.
We are shocked, SHOCKED! that military bureaucrats are acting in the same ways that they
always have. Come on now. The job of president is to get all these people to work in concert
to an extent adequate for getting things to come out mostly in our favor. None of this is
unique to Trump. Nearly every president in my lifetime has had to learn to deal with these
aspects of the military. Jimmy Carter trusted them to plan a rescue mission. They used navy
pilots for a mission over the desert! With no extra to enable adaptation to events! Ronald
Reagan sent a battleship to Lebanon and then found out the brass wouldn't take the risk of
actually using it for anything. Not to mention the superbly uncoordinated near simultaneous
invasion of Grenada. John Kennedy accepted a duplicitous projection of events for the bay of
pigs. Bill Clinton got caught in Somalia. George W. got sucked into a strategically unplanned
invasion of Iraq. Obama was told that an 18-month escalation would resolve Afghanistan. He
believed it! Boy were they shocked when he actually enforced the deadline. This is not a
criticism of any of those presidents. It is normal, however bizarre that may sound. My point
is that they mostly get bit once and learn not to trust the military's own estimates of what
they can or should do. Then they begin to do the job more adequately. They learn to pay
attention to goals and to manage their resources. Trump does not seem capable of this kind of
learning. The last months of an administration are not the time to suddenly discover the
nature of the organizations you are leading. And in any case, there is no time left for
learning how to get actual results.
JFK never should have unionized the government workforce.
Pits existential self-interests against patriotic national interest, should these
interests become in conflict. FDR warned against doing this. More attention needs to be paid
to this fundamental national turning point.
What ills were cured by this act (EO) and has the cure become worse than the perceived
disease. Must like term limits in California - the cure was 100 times worse than the original
disease.
Entrenched political personalities come and go; entrenched and corrupted political systems
are forever, because in the process they learned to self-perpetuate.
Name your favorite EO to strike down with an counter-mand EO, before a sitting president
leaves office:
1. Anchor baby citizenship triggering chain migration
2. Unionized government workforce
1. Use Democrat's standard politics of personal destruction to attack and harass any Trump
appointments; make working for the Trump administration so undesirable none dare even ask for
consideration.
2. Tie up the President's time with endless personal attacks, lies and investigations, so
Trump has no time as elected Chief Executive to oversee and clean up valid government
operations;
3. Take advantage of Trump's exclusively private sector experience to lull Trump into
thinking entrenched government BORGs are loyal government employees, who serve only to help
Trump carry out his Executive Office duties;
4. Leak like crazy; make things up if necessary that ensure the Trump administration
narrative appears chaotic and dysfunctional. Claim anonymous sources that undermine positive
functioning within Trump administration. Make everyone suspicious of everyone else.
5. Obliterate any recognition for the remarkable Trump administration accomplishments that
occurred, regardless of all of the above.
6. Pout relentlessly because regardless of the above, the President and the GOP Senate
appointed over 200 new federal judge and 3 new SCOTUS members.
7. In full public view, tear up the SOTU address listing remarkable administration
accomplishments mouthing - these are all lies -- laying down the gauntlet for all out
war.
8. Gin up pandemic hysteria to fill in any and all loopholes not yet covered by all of the
above.
Democrat skullduggery may have effectively destroyed an temporal administration, but Trump
Judiciary appointments are the equivalent of a very welcomed forever.
President Trump, you are missed already. But I suspect in short order it is you, who will
not miss the office. You are enshrined forever - #45 as President of the United States of
America. History will treat you far kinder than your current fellow citizens.
You broke up the Democrat plantation. You exposed the dark underbelly of the body politic.
Mission accomplished. There is no going back.
this sounds like the definition of a traitor to me - jeffery.... on the other hand one
could say he is working for wall st and the mil complex and has done a good job... which is
it??
I don't understand this. Trump is the Commander in Chief, at any time he could have asked
a straight-up question: How. Many. Troops. Do. We. Still. Have. In. Syria?
I find it astonishing that the military leadership would tell a lie to their Commander in
Chief when the question itself leaves no wriggle-room.
Heck, Trump could has asked for a list of every single one of those brave 200 boys, and
even if it included Name, Rank, and Serial Number that would still fit on a single
letter-sized printout.
I can't understand how Jeffrey's and his band of "we's" could get away with this unless
Trump wasn't paying any attention at all.
For the past three or four days I have been wondering why the NY Post made this very sudden
turn to supporting Joe Biden. For months we have had brilliant articles by Miranda Devine ,
Michael Goodwin, and others all in support of Trump and the America we have known for many
years. Replies: @Realist
REPLY AGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD
For the past three or four days I have been wondering why the NY Post made this very
sudden turn to supporting Joe Biden. For years we have had brilliant articles by Miranda
Devine , Michael Goodwin, and others all in support of Trump and the America we have known
for many years, and all of a sudden the NY Post changed its views, but these columnists have
not changed. They are too knowledgable and are gifted with common sense. I look forward to
reading their columns or will the Post cancel culture them?
Any discussion of how to "work with" the Marxists is well, it just shouldn't be discussed.
You can't work with Marxists. Besides, Trump won the election. This will be proven over the
next few weeks.
"... It would not be overstating the case to suggest that the neoconservative movement has now been born again, though the enemy is now the unreliable Trumpean-dominated Republican Party rather than Saddam Hussein or Ayatollah Khomeini. ..."
"... The transition has also been aided by a more aggressive shift among the Democrats themselves, with Russiagate and other “foreign interference” being blamed for the party’s failure in 2016. ..."
"... The unifying principle that ties many of the mostly Jewish neocons together is, of course, unconditional defense of Israel and everything it does, which leads them to support a policy of American global military dominance which they presume will inter alia serve as a security umbrella for the Jewish state. ..."
"... That change has now occurred and the surge of neocons to take up senior positions in the defense, intelligence and foreign policy agencies will soon take place. In my notes on the neocon revival, I have dubbed the brave new world that the neocons hope to create in Washington as the “Kaganate of Nulandia” after two of the more prominent neocon aspirants, Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland. ..."
"... A Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton protégé, Nuland openly sought regime change for Ukraine by brazenly supporting government opponents in spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev had ostensibly friendly relations. Her efforts were backed by a $5 billion budget, but she is perhaps most famous for her foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest that she and the National Endowment for Democracy had helped create. The replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with Moscow over Russia’s attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea. ..."
"... A lot of the neocons are Russian Jews who grew up in households that were Bolshevik communists. They're idea of spreading democracy goes back to Trotsky who tried to spread communism through the Soviet Union. Their hatred toward Russia dates back to their ancestors feudal days under the Tsars and the pogroms they suffered and the ice pick Trotsky got to the head. ..."
"... Obama's deep state lied, people died: https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/11/outgoing-syria-envoy-admits-hiding-us-troop-numbers-praises-trumps-mideast-record/170012/ ..."
"... I've never quite figured out the "neocon" ideology, beyond the fact that neocons seem devoted to the sort of status quo present in Washington, D.C. during the three administrations prior to Trump. Military adventurism, nation-building, and interventionist foreign policy, all based on nebulous concepts which are applied unevenly around the world. ..."
"... The Neocon movement seems to have morphed into nothing more than a club for bullies trying to one up each other. ..."
"... "It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way." ..."
"... Neocons don't really prefer war, so much as they prefer overseas "engagements" that may look like war and smell like war. All that's missing in neocon military operations is a defined end state. ..."
Donald Trump was much troubled during his 2016 and 2020 campaigns by so-called conservatives who rallied behind the #NeverTrump
banner, presumably in opposition to his stated intention to end or at least diminish America’s role in wars in the Middle East and
Asia. Those individuals are generally described as neoconservatives but the label is itself somewhat misleading and they might more
properly be described as liberal warmongers as they are closer to the Democrats than the Republicans on most social issues and are
now warming up even more as the new Joe Biden Administration prepares to take office.
To be sure, some neocons stuck with the Republicans, to include the highly controversial Elliott Abrams, who initially opposed
Trump but is now the point man for dealing with both Venezuela and Iran. Abrams’ conversion reportedly took place when he realized
that the new president genuinely embraced unrelenting hostility towards Iran as exemplified by the ending of the Joint Comprehensive
Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad. John Bolton was also a neocon in the
White House fold, though he is now a frenemy having been fired by the president and written a book.
Even though the NeverTrumper neocons did not succeed in blocking Donald Trump in 2016, they have been maintaining relevancy by
slowly drifting back towards the Democratic Party, which is where they originated back in the 1970s in the office of the Senator
from Boeing Henry “Scoop” Jackson. A number of them started their political careers there, to include leading neocon Richard Perle.
It would not be overstating the case to suggest that the neoconservative movement has now been born again, though the enemy is
now the unreliable Trumpean-dominated Republican Party rather than Saddam Hussein or Ayatollah Khomeini.
The transition has also
been aided by a more aggressive shift among the Democrats themselves, with Russiagate and other “foreign interference” being blamed
for the party’s failure in 2016. Given that mutual intense hostility to Trump, the doors to previously shunned liberal media outlets
have now opened wide to the stream of foreign policy “experts” who want to “restore a sense of the heroic” to U.S. national security
policy. Eliot A. Cohen and David Frum are favored contributors to the Atlantic while Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss were together at
the New York Times prior to Weiss’s recent resignation.
Jennifer Rubin, who wrote in 2016 that “It is time for some moral straight
talk: Trump is evil incarnate,” is a frequent columnist for The Washington Post while both she and William Kristol appear regularly
on MSNBC.
The unifying principle that ties many of the mostly Jewish neocons together is, of course, unconditional defense of Israel and
everything it does, which leads them to support a policy of American global military dominance which they presume will inter alia
serve as a security umbrella for the Jewish state. In the post-9/11 world, the neocon media’s leading publication The Weekly Standard
virtually invented the concept of “Islamofascism” to justify endless war in the Middle East, a development that has killed millions
of Muslims, destroyed at least three nations, and cost the U.S. taxpayer more than $5 trillion. The Israel connection has also resulted
in neocon support for an aggressive policy against Russia due to its involvement in Syria and has led to repeated calls for the U.S.
to attack Iran and destroy Hezbollah in Lebanon. In Eastern Europe, neocon ideologues have aggressively sought “democracy promotion,”
which, not coincidentally, has also been a major Democratic Party foreign policy objective.
The neocons are involved in a number of foundations, the most prominent of which is the Foundation for Defense of Democracies
(FDD), that are funded by Jewish billionaires. FDD is headed by Canadian Mark Dubowitz and it is reported that the group takes direction
coming from officials in the Israeli Embassy in Washington. Other major neocon incubators are the American Enterprise Institute,
which currently is the home of Paul Wolfowitz, and the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at John Hopkins University.
The neocon opposition has been sniping against Trump over the past four years but has been biding its time and building new alliances,
waiting for what it has perceived to be an inevitable regime change in Washington.
That change has now occurred and the surge of neocons to take up senior positions in the defense, intelligence and foreign policy
agencies will soon take place. In my notes on the neocon revival, I have dubbed the brave new world that the neocons hope to create
in Washington as the “Kaganate of Nulandia” after two of the more prominent neocon aspirants, Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland.
Robert was one of the first neocons to get on the NeverTrump band wagon back in 2016 when he endorsed Hillary Clinton for president
and spoke at a Washington fundraiser for her, complaining about the “isolationist” tendency in the Republican Party exemplified by
Trump. His wife Victoria Nuland is perhaps better known. She was the driving force behind efforts to destabilize the Ukrainian government
of President Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych, an admittedly corrupt autocrat, nevertheless became Prime Minister after a free election.
Nuland, who was the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, provided open support
to the Maidan Square demonstrators opposed to Yanukovych’s government, to include media friendly appearances passing out cookies
on the square to encourage the protesters.
A Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton protégé, Nuland openly sought regime change for Ukraine by brazenly supporting government opponents
in spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev had ostensibly friendly relations. Her efforts were backed by a $5 billion budget,
but she is perhaps most famous for her foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest that she
and the National Endowment for Democracy had helped create. The replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp
break and escalating conflict with Moscow over Russia’s attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea.
And, to be sure, beyond regime change in places like Ukraine, President Barack Obama was no slouch when it came to starting actual
shooting wars in places like Libya and Syria while also killing people, including American citizens, using drones. Biden appears
poised to inherit many former Obama White House senior officials, who would consider the eager-to-please neoconservatives a comfortable
fit as fellow foot soldiers in the new administration. Foreign policy hawks expected to have senior positions in the Biden Administration
include Antony Blinken, Nicholas Burns, Susan Rice, Valerie Jarrett, Samantha Power and, most important of all the hawkish Michele
Flournoy, who has been cited as a possible secretary of defense. And don’t count Hillary Clinton out. Biden is reportedly getting
his briefings on the Middle East from Dan Shapiro, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel, who now lives in the Jewish state and is reportedly
working for an Israeli government supported think tank, the Institute for National Security Studies.
Nowhere in Biden’s possible foreign policy circle does one find anyone who is resistant to the idea of worldwide interventionism
in support of claimed humanitarian objectives, even if it would lead to a new cold war with major competitor powers like Russia and
China. In fact, Biden himself appears to embrace an extremely bellicose view on a proper relationship with both Moscow and Beijing
“claiming that he is defending democracy against its enemies.” His language is unrelenting, so much so that it is Donald Trump who
could plausibly be described as the peace candidate in the recently completed election, having said at the Republican National Convention
in August “Joe Biden spent his entire career outsourcing their dreams and the dreams of American workers, offshoring their jobs,
opening their borders and sending their sons and daughters to fight in endless foreign wars, wars that never ended.”
It should be noted that the return of "neocons" does not mean the return of people like Wolfowitz, Ladeen, Feith, Kristol who
are more "straussian" than "liberal/internationalist", but those like Nuland, Rice, Sam Powell, Petraeus, Flournoy, heck even
Hilary Clinton as UN Ambassador who are CFR-type liberal interventionist than pure military hawks such as Bolton or Mike Flynn.
These liberal internationalists, as opposed to straussian neocons, will intervene in collaboration with EU/NATO/QUAD (i.e. multilaterally)
in the name upholding human rights and toppling authoritarianism, rather than for oil, WMDs, or similar concrete objectives. In
very simple terms, the new Biden administration's foreign policy will be none other than the return to "endless wars" for nation-building
purposes first and last.
The name Kagan is the Russianized version of the name Cohen. He was going to be McCain's NSA had he been elected. They pulled
a stunt with the Bush admin to make Obama look weak by pushing Georgia into war with Russia in 2008. Sakaasvili, the president
of Georgia, was literally eating his own tie:
A lot of the neocons are Russian Jews who grew up in households that were Bolshevik communists. They're idea of spreading democracy
goes back to Trotsky who tried to spread communism through the Soviet Union. Their hatred toward Russia dates back to their ancestors
feudal days under the Tsars and the pogroms they suffered and the ice pick Trotsky got to the head.
I don't think they have that much influence. They pushed a lot of nonsense in the late 70/early 80s about how the Taliban were
George Washingtons and here we are today, they're worst than the Comanche. The last time I saw Richard Perle make a TV appearance,
he was crying like a baby. Robert Novak, the prince of darkness, was a Ron Paul supporter. The only ones really kicking around
are Bill Kristol and Jennifer Rubin, but Kristol was almost alone when he was talking about putting 50,000 boots on the ground
in Syria. Rubin is a harpie who only got crazier and crazier. Kagan had his foot in the door with Hillary only because of his
wife. Those two might get back in with Biden on Ukraine, but Biden would do well to keep them at a distance.
I've never quite figured out the "neocon" ideology, beyond the fact that neocons seem devoted to the sort of status quo present
in Washington, D.C. during the three administrations prior to Trump. Military adventurism, nation-building, and interventionist
foreign policy, all based on nebulous concepts which are applied unevenly around the world.
It seems now that there is a new breed of neocons, unified by opposition to Trump's messaging, but not much else. Odd to find
people like Samantha Power, John Bolton, Jim Mattis, and Paul Wolfowitz marching together in perfect step.
A good perspective by Philip Weiss on the same subject. Eliot A Cohen must be communicating a lot with the Kagan brothers ,
Dennis Ross and Perle to see who can be parachuted either to the WH or Foggy Bottom.
I've never quite figured out the "neocon" ideology
The revolutionary spirit (see E. Michael Jones' work). From communism to neoconservatism it's ultimately an attack on the Beatitudes
and Christ's Sermon on the Mount. "The works of mercy are the opposite of the works of war" -- Servant of God Dorothy Day
I hold the Cold Warriors like Scoop a species distinct from those of the post-USSR era. The current version started at the
end of the cold war. We felt like kings of the world after Gulf War 1 and the shoe seemed to fit.
The HW Bush administration pondered how best to use this power for good. I've read some things which report there was a debate
within the administration on whether to clean up Yugoslavia or Somalia first. They got Ron to "do the honors" for the invasion
of Somalia at Oxford: About 20 minutes in.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?35586-1/arising-ashes-world-order
That was played as part of the pep-talk on the Juneau off the coast of Somalia. Stirring stuff.
In some small way I never stopped sipping that Kool Aid. It's hard to stand by and watch unspeakable evil go down when you
have the power to stop it...or think you do. Time will tell if the Neocons are capable of perceiving the limits of force. Certainly
had some hard lessons in the last few decades.
Hogs lining up for a spot at the trough? The Neocon movement seems to have morphed into nothing more than a club for bullies trying to one up each other.
I think its generally shocking that Trump or the republicans didn't make a bigger issue of Biden's history of supporting disastrous
intervention, especially his Iraq War vote. Maybe they felt like its not a winning issue, that they would lose as many votes as
they gain by appearing more isolationist. But overall, Trump favoring diplomacy over cruise missiles should have been a bigger point in his favor in the election.
It is distressing to read that we will have people in the government who are looking for a fight. That is especially true in
view of China's aggression in recent years and the responses we will have to make to that. I think we will have more than enough
to do to handle China. What do the neocons want to do about China?
Here is an article about China that really startled me and made me realize how much of a threat is was becoming. The Air Force
chief of staff talks about the challenges of countries trying to compete militarily with us in ways that have not occurred for
awhile. Here are two quotes that really got me:
"Tomorrow's Airmen are more likely to fight in highly contested environments, and must be prepared to fight through combat
attrition rates and risks to the nation that are more akin to the World War II era than the uncontested environments to which
we have since become accustomed," Brown writes."
And
"Wargames and modeling have repeatedly shown that if the Air Force fails to adapt, there will be mission failure, Brown warns.
Rules-based international order may "disintegrate and our national interests will be significantly challenged," according to the
memo."
The article doesn't say we will have another arms race but that is an obvious response to China's competition with us. I thought
all that was done and gone. I do not want to resume it. I don't want another period of foreign entanglements, period. We still
haven't paid for the War Against Terrorism. I look into the future and all I see is us racking up bills that we have no ability
to pay. And then there is the human cost of all this, I don't want to even think about that.
Snouts in the trough accounts for a certain amount of neocons, I'm sure. There is, however, a unifying vision beyond that which
puzzles me, given the very different political orientations of various neocons. Neocons are found in academia and the media as
well. Those types are less dependent on taxpayer dollars in exchange for their views (they'll get whatever tax money gets pushed
their way in grants, etc regardless).
I find Polish Janitor's "straussian" and "liberal/internationalist" flavors of neocon intriguing, as I hadn't considered that
before.
COL Lang's quote from Plato reminds me of another (from Cormac McCarthy): "It makes no difference what men think of war, said
the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The
ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way."
Neocons don't really prefer war, so much as they prefer overseas "engagements" that may look like war and smell like war. All
that's missing in neocon military operations is a defined end state.
I concur with your thoughts about standing by as evil occurs. We just have a habit of jumping into complex situations we don't
understand, and making things worse. I suspect you feel the same way.
The military misadventures during my career (Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria) were marked by our own black and white
thinking. The more successful adventures (Colombia, Nepal) were marked by our appreciation (to a certain extent) of the complex
nature of the environments we were getting involved in...and the fact that we weren't involved in nation-building in the latter
two locales. There were viable governments in place, and we weren't trying to replace them.
Here is another Biden clip that should have been exploited too - way back when - when the media was a little more trusted,
but no less pompous. However, Biden The Plagerizer had it coming.
Though I am warming more and more to Trump Media becoming the real soul of America. Plus someone, in time. will need to pick
up Rush Limbaugh's empire. America needs a counter-weight to fake news more than it needs the keys to the White House, with all
its entangling webs, palace intrigues, chains and pitfalls.
Godspeed President Trump. If someone with as few talents s Biden can rise like Lazarus, just think what you can do with your
little finger. No wonder the Democrats want Trump destroyed; not just defeated in a re-election. We have your back, Mr President.
Are the people of America up for another arms race and a more or less cold war with China? I think the Chinese will give us
a lot more trouble than the Soviets ever did.
And yet we allow their students to come here and learn all we know and their elites to bring their dirty money here and we
give them green cards and citizenship and protect the money they took from the Chinese people. Not so smart on our part.
What is the next theater of war that Biden's new friends will involve us in? I noticed lots of Cold War era conflicts are heating
up lately, Ethiopia Morocco Armenia being recent examples. IS in Syria/Iraq is still castrated due to the continued mass internment
of their population base in the dozens of camps, but they have established thriving franchises in Africa and their other provinces
continue to smolder.
I will go back to an approach that served me well with regard to the Iraq WMD story. I have
no way of evaluating Yan's claims, but there are a fair number of people and organizations that
do have the resources to evaluate. I rejected WMD claims in 2003 simply because none of the
other players with relevant competence acted in ways that indicated serious concern. What is
Yan Li-meng's evidence that others do not have? This issue of origin has to have been pursued
by at least a couple dozen organizations with the necessary competence. None of those has made
any such claims. That doesn't mean that the claims are false. But if the claims are true, then
there must be very strong motives for keeping silent. So what would be the common interest
between, say, the intelligence agencies of Germany and those of India?
Without such evidence this turns into a she-said-he-said story. Now that does not mean that
it is wrong. Suppression and intimidation would not be out of character for the Chinese
government. But again the world is loaded with very paranoid people who are capable of
evaluating that. And who are pretty much immune to Chinese intimidation. They don't have to
face off against the Chinese state. There are plenty of more roundabout ways to get the word
out if you want to do so and have government-level resources to put into the effort.
The obvious alternative to publication of the logic for detecting human agency is to engage
in simple human retaliation. Are the Chinese the only ones capable of such producing such a
catastrophe? Pretty unlikely. Would such a counterstroke catch the Chinese by surprise? Again
unlikely if they are aware of having stepped over the line. The measures they are taking
against virus outbreaks are more extreme than what western countries have imposed, but not
(yet) indicating panic. If somebody let some 1918 swine flu loose in Shanghai, would their
measures be able to counter it? (Five times as contagious as what we seeing in covid-19.)
Red State raises additional skepticism about this "scientist's interview", as well as the
oddities of the very original days of reporting about the Chinese t "flu" coming out of
China. Remembering also one of the very first ways we even started hearing about this "new
Chinese virus" in the US were reports about the Great Toilet Paper panic, even though people
here did not know why they were supposed to be hoarding it. https://www.redstate.com/michael_thau/2020/09/17/920958/
Best I could trace was to an earlier Australian toilet paper panic they claimed was hawked
by Yahoo News in Australia, and then spread via social media to the US. And our Great Toilet
Paper Hoax began in earnest here too. China was allegedly the source for all Australian TP,
so it was claimed with so many people sick in China with this "flu" there would be no more
toilet paper Down Under for their down unders.
But the US did not rely on China for TP, so the TP panic was not warrented to be set in
motion here. But it did capture attention and did trigger panic before we even knew what to
be afraid of. Greasing the skids in some manipulative way could be one jaundiced
conclusion.
Hope someone with better skills can really trace the origins of the Great Toilet Paper
Hoax, because it did wipe us out in the US. No sheet. Was that the covid panic transmission
route; and not really on a flight from Wuhan to Seattle?
No - but she may be another in a long line of useful idiots.
"Independent fact checkers?" 25 year old Humanities and Social Sciences grads working
for Facebook? Independent of what? Independent of their mommies and daddies at long
last?
Countervailing research goes light-years beyond "Independent fact checkers?".
Italicized/bold text was excerpted from nature.com a report titled:
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2
SARS-CoV-2 is the seventh coronavirus known to infect humans; SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and
SARS-CoV-2 can cause severe disease, whereas HKU1, NL63, OC43 and 229E are associated with
mild symptoms6. Here we review what can be deduced about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 from
comparative analysis of genomic data. We offer a perspective on the notable features of the
SARS-CoV-2 genome and discuss scenarios by which they could have arisen. Our analyses clearly
show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated
virus.
The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and
transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not
a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other
theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2
features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses
in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is
plausible.
Italicized/bold text was excerpted from The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and
Hygiene a report titled:
The Origin of COVID-19 and Why It Matters
In 2007, scientists studying coronaviruses warned: "The presence of a large
reservoir of SARS-CoV–like viruses in horseshoe bats is a time bomb. The possibility of
the re-emergence of SARS and other novel viruses should not be ignored."1
Studying animal viruses that have previously spilled over into humans provides clues
about host-switching determinants. A well-understood example is influenza virus emergence
into humans and other mammals.2 Human pandemic and seasonal influenza viruses arise from
enzootic viruses of wild waterfowl and shore birds. From within this natural reservoir, the
1918 pandemic "founder" virus somehow host-switched into humans. We know this from genetic
studies comparing avian viruses, the 1918 virus, and its descendants, which have caused three
subsequent pandemics, as well as annual seasonal influenza in each of the 102 years since
1918. Similarly, other avian influenza viruses have host-switched into horses, dogs, pigs,
seals, and other vertebrates, with as yet unknown pandemic potential.2,10,11 Although some
molecular host-switching events remain unobserved, phylogenetic analyses of influenza viruses
allow us to readily characterize evolution and host-switching as it occurs in
nature.2
It should be clarified that theories about a hypothetical man-made origin of
SARS-CoV-2 have been thoroughly discredited by multiple coronavirus experts.21,28,29
SARS-CoV-2 contains neither the genetic fingerprints of any of the reverse genetics systems
that have been used to engineer coronaviruses nor does it contain genetic sequences that
would have been "forward engineered" from preexisting viruses, including the genetically
closest sarbecoviruses. That is, SARS-CoV-2 is unlike any previously identified coronavirus
from which it could have been engineered. Moreover, the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain,
which has affinity for cells of various mammals, binds to human ACE2 receptors via a novel
mechanism.
Engineering such a virus would have required 1) published or otherwise available
scientific knowledge that did not exist until after COVID-19 recognition; 2) a failure to
follow obvious engineering pathways, resulting in an imperfectly constructed virus; and 3) an
ability to genetically engineer a new virus without leaving fingerprints of the engineering.
Furthermore, the 12 amino acid furin-cleavage site insertion between the SARS-CoV-2 spike
protein's S1 and S2 domains, which some have alleged to be a sign of genetic engineering, is
found in other bat and human coronaviruses in nature, probably arising via naturally
occurring recombination.24
It is also highly unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 was released from a laboratory by
accident because no laboratory had the virus nor did its genetic sequence exist in any
sequence database before its initial GenBank deposition (early January 2020). China's
laboratory safety practices, policies, training, and engineering are equivalent to those of
the United States and other developed countries,32 making viral "escape" extremely unlikely,
and of course impossible without a viral isolate present. SARS-CoV-2 shares genetic
properties with many other sarbecoviruses, lies fully within their genetic cluster, and is
thus a virus that emerged naturally.
Italicized/bold text was excerpted from nature.com a report titled:
Evolutionary origins of the SARS-CoV-2 sarbecovirus lineage responsible for the
COVID-19 pandemic
There are outstanding evolutionary questions on the recent emergence of human
coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 including the role of reservoir species, the role of recombination and
its time of divergence from animal viruses. We find that the sarbecoviruses -- the viral
subgenus containing SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 -- undergo frequent recombination and exhibit
spatially structured genetic diversity on a regional scale in China. SARS-CoV-2 itself is not
a recombinant of any sarbecoviruses detected to date, and its receptor-binding motif,
important for specificity to human ACE2 receptors, appears to be an ancestral trait shared
with bat viruses and not one acquired recently via recombination. To employ phylogenetic
dating methods, recombinant regions of a 68-genome sarbecovirus alignment were removed with
three independent methods. Bayesian evolutionary rate and divergence date estimates were
shown to be consistent for these three approaches and for two different prior specifications
of evolutionary rates based on HCoV-OC43 and MERS-CoV. Divergence dates between SARS-CoV-2
and the bat sarbecovirus reservoir were estimated as 1948 (95% highest posterior density
(HPD): 1879–1999), 1969 (95% HPD: 1930–2000) and 1982 (95% HPD: 1948–2009),
indicating that the lineage giving rise to SARS-CoV-2 has been circulating unnoticed in bats
for decades.
With horseshoe bats currently the most plausible origin of SARS-CoV-2, it is
important to consider that sarbecoviruses circulate in a variety of horseshoe bat species
with widely overlapping species ranges57. Nevertheless, the viral population is largely
spatially structured according to provinces in the south and southeast on one lineage, and
provinces in the centre, east and northeast on another (Fig. 3). This boundary appears to be
rarely crossed. Two exceptions can be seen in the relatively close relationship of Hong Kong
viruses to those from Zhejiang Province (with two of the latter, CoVZC45 and CoVZXC21,
identified as recombinants) and a recombinant virus from Sichuan for which part of the genome
(region B of SC2018 in Fig. 3) clusters with viruses from provinces in the centre,
east and northeast of China. SARS-CoV-2 and RaTG13 are also exceptions because they were
sampled from Hubei and Yunnan, respectively.
It is clear from our analysis that viruses closely related to SARS-CoV-2 have been
circulating in horseshoe bats for many decades. The unsampled diversity descended from the
SARS-CoV-2/RaTG13 common ancestor forms a clade of bat sarbecoviruses with generalist
properties -- with respect to their ability to infect a range of mammalian cells -- that
facilitated its jump to humans and may do so again. Although the human ACE2-compatible RBD
was very likely to have been present in a bat sarbecovirus lineage that ultimately led to
SARS-CoV-2, this RBD sequence has hitherto been found in only a few pangolin viruses.
Furthermore, the other key feature thought to be instrumental in the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to
infect humans -- a polybasic cleavage site insertion in the S protein -- has not yet
been seen in another close bat relative of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
As if on cue Li-Meng Yan appears like manna from heaven aiding/abetting in foisting
forth the current dominant Western government/media narrative that China is bad.
One very plausible hypothesis is that coronavirus will probably "militarizes the United States even more than 9/11" So the escape
from a lab could be orgnized by the same forces which did 9/11 and anthrax attack.
Notable quotes:
"... Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus ..."
"... And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago. ..."
"... in my understanding of biological warfare, no country used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation level. ..."
"... As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony. And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like PNAC looking for a new American century. ..."
"... And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015. ..."
"... I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far. So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen. ..."
"... first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their basic philosophy of life. And then secondly -- ..."
"... No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone to war? ..."
"... Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted, warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US. ..."
Kevin Barrett:
Truth Jihad Radio
is often
the best place to go for the most important stories that the mainstream won't cover. Today I'm talking to
Meryl Nass
. She's an expert who has written a very important article
about how the propaganda push by very suspicious scientists to claim that Covid-19 couldn't possibly be bioweaponized is a red flag
that everybody should be paying attention to.
But you won't see anything about this in the corporate controlled mainstream Mockingbird media. So please help this kind of material
continue to come to light, by subscribing to
DrKevinBarrett at Patreon.com
.
Welcome to Truth Jihad Radio. I'm Kevin Barrett searching fearlessly for truth in all of the most forbidden places, bringing on people
who are also going to those kinds of places. And sometimes I find genuine experts on various subjects. And we have one of those with
us today, Meryl Nass. She is definitely one of the go-to experts on biological warfare related topics. Yet for some reason, the mainstream
media isn't going to her. I wonder why that would be. Maybe because the things she wrote about the anthrax attacks back in 2001 were
a little bit too truthful. Anyway, she's got some very interesting posts up now at
her anthrax vaccine blog
. But first, before we jump into that, let
me just say that when I say she's an expert: She has consulted for the World Bank. She's testified to Congress. She diagnosed Zimbabwe's
1978 anthrax epidemic as an episode of biological warfare. She's consulted for Cuba's Ministry of Health on its optic and peripheral
neuropathy epidemic, and on and on. So she has a pretty good, solid basis for her views.
And she recently posted what I thought was a critically important piece "
Why are some of the
US' top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2?
" pointing out, why is this that the top
U.S. scientists are being trumpeted all over the media, making a specious argument about the natural origin of Sars CoV-2. So why are
they, Meryl? Why is it that they're telling us this could not possibly be a bioweapon, and yet obviously it could?
Meryl Nass:
Well, that's the $64,000 question, isn't it? Maybe we should go back and explain what I'm aware of that happened.
Sometime in late February, a group of scientists, which included the former head of the National Science Foundation and a former top
person at CDC, as well as a bunch of other people, many of whom had worked in the biological defense / biological warfare area -- possibly
all of them had -- published
a very short statement
in
The Lancet
saying they wanted to stand with the Chinese public health officials and scientists and point out that rumors
about the unnatural origin of coronavirus were a conspiracy theory and should be dismissed.
They didn't provide evidence, but they made this very strong statement in the top medical journal in the world,
The Lancet
. And so, OK. I have to say that the first author -- and it was alphabetical, so this is the first author alphabetically who signed
that -- is someone that I was told about 27 years ago when I consulted in Cuba, when they had a very severe epidemic of blindness and
other neurologic symptoms. And it turned out it was due to cyanide.
There were two. They were the first in 100 years, I think, in the Western Hemisphere. And if I remember correctly, this was a long
time ago, about 150 or more Cubans died, mostly small children, as a result of the Dengue epidemics. So I thought, that's interesting
that this bio-warrior is signing a statement saying that the core idea that the coronavirus might be due to a biological warfare construct
should be dismissed outright as a conspiracy theory.
Kevin Barrett:
Wow. What a coincidence, that that would be the guy who would do that. You say he's the first author alphabetically?
Meryl Nass:
Yes.
Kevin Barrett:
Well, we can figure out who that is then.
Meryl Nass:
A group of five scientists, and I knew of several of them. I've been in contact with at least one of them in the
past, and they too were sort of biological defense, biological warfare people.
Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks
with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried
to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced
illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus
.
So that's an odd group of different things that you might be researching and writing about. But oddly enough, a couple of these scientists
have chosen that obscure group of things that are somewhat unrelated to each other to comment about. And so these five scientists wrote
a piece in Nature Medicine which claimed to have found the scientific linchpin to be able to make the argument that the new coronavirus
is a natural occurrence. And the argument they made was that had it been constructed in the lab, it would have used the particular backbone
that laboratorians know about. But because it didn't have that backbone, it couldn't possibly be a lab construct.
The problem with that argument is basically it was a straw man argument. They said, well, if I were going to make the novel coronavirus,
I would have made it this way. But because it isn't made that way, it's not a lab construct. Of course, you can make the novel coronavirus
a lot of different ways. And I pointed out three different ways one might have come up with a novel coronavirus that weren't using the
method they suggested.
And I've gotten confirmation. I'm a physician, I'm not a scientist, but I did work in a lab. I went to M.I.T.. So I do know biology,
although I am not well versed in modern genetic engineering. But I do know a lot about how biological weapons used to be made, how they
were made before and during World War 2 and afterwards.
And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period
around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the
last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago.
So I then looked at the connections between the first group of scientists who had published in
The Lancet
and the second group
that had published in
Nature Medicine
and found that well, for example, that the person I mentioned before who had been to Cuba
and looked at the Aedes mosquitoes, even though that person is now of the retirement age, is a member of the institute of one of the
second authors. And I saw other connections between these two groups.
Kevin Barrett:
Sounds like the usual suspects.
Meryl Nass:
Yes, exactly. It seemed that the second group, anyway, the guys who were trotted out to provide the last word
on all these other controversial medical subjects had been again trotted out to provide the last word. Then I thought, who else is talking
about this? And when I looked that up, I found the head of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, an MD-Ph.D, cited the work of these five scientists
to say basically now we've proven that this is a natural occurrence and everyone can forget about the conspiracy theory. And he further
said if you're if you're concerned about what you read about coronavirus, just go to the FEMA website where they are telling you what
is a rumor and what isn't. So I thought, well, that's interesting that the policy makers or the people who pull the strings are able
to pull Francis Collins' strings and get him to comment on this, again agreeing with an argument that he must have known to be specious.
Kevin Barrett:
You don't have to comment on this, but this sure reminds me of what's been going on post-9/11, with first the
ridiculous FEMA report on the so-called collapses of the Trade Center towers and then the NIST reports culminating in the most absurd
one of all, the NIST report on Building 7. Throughout that whole process, the usual suspect so-called scientists were putting out utter
baloney and rubber stamping it, and all the officials were rubber stamping it mindlessly, and any independent voices speaking common
sense and truth were marginalized.
Meryl Nass:
Yes. So that is of course what's happening here. And it's very helpful, it seems, to be able to identify them
as this same group, the same group who can be used over and over and over again over decades to whitewash what the system wants whitewashed.
And then you look at their grants. Ugh! Some of these people are making unbelievable grants.
Kevin Barrett:
They're probably flying on Epstein's Lolita Express and things like that, too.
Meryl Nass:
That I did not look up.
Kevin Barrett:
I wouldn't be surprised, anyway.
Meryl Nass:
There is a lot of money flowing through their laboratories. So anyway, the final point I made was that every scientist
who signed these two documents and then Francis Collins has had something to do with biological defense. If you're a top scientist in
the U.S. government, you are asked to look into pandemics and the risk that they could be due to a biological weapon. And so as far
as I could tell, virtually all these people have had some background in looking at these things. And they're all old. They all remember
the days before the last three decades of genetic engineering and they all must realize, if they have any competence as scientists,
that there are other ways to create biological agents, microorganisms. And so for them to all have signed this, knowing that, just makes
you wonder -- why did they do this?
They presumably did it because they had some sense that it was a lab organism. Perhaps it was a lab escape and perhaps they were
trying to protect the whole enterprise of biological defense, which is a multibillion dollar yearly industry that feeds many, many people,
including themselves.
Kevin Barrett:
I would argue that's a relatively innocent explanation. There are worse ones than that.
Meryl Nass:
The interesting thing is that all these countries do research together. So China, US, (former) Soviet Union, Ukraine
All different countries send people to labs in other countries to work on micro-organisms. So you can put your finger on people from
many different countries who were working on bat coronaviruses in labs around the world. And this could have been a lab escape from
many different places. I mean, it could have been a deliberate attack. But
in my understanding of biological warfare, no country
used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto
their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation
level.
Kevin Barrett:
Let me just give you a possible opposing argument. John Mearsheimer wrote in, I believe 2015, in
a very famous article about China's
unpeaceful rise
that said, in so many words, the US is stuck between a rock and a hard place in terms of trying to contain China's
rise, which is based on its double digit growth averaging out since 1980 or so. And that that growth inevitably is pushing China to
break out of U.S. containment in Asia and become a regional hegemon, which is unacceptable to U.S. decision makers. And more likely,
it will actually "pose global challenges" meaning displace the U.S. as global hegemon as well, simply based on its economic growth,
which now has supposedly slowed to maybe 8 percent. But still, the differential between that and the U.S. and its Western allies is
such that within a decade or two, at the very most, it's a done deal.
As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically
ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony.
And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like
PNAC looking for a new American century.
And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way
to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy
would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015.
I've argued with Ron Unz about this. He he thinks it would have been a U.S. attack designed not to escape China, like previous U.S.
(bio-)attacks on China. But
I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what
it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run
stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us
back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far.
So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is
precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen.
Meryl Nass:
That's a reasonable argument. But the economy is not being totally destroyed. It's just that factories are, closed,
people aren't going to work. Nothing's been destroyed. When we come out of this, China will still have all the factories and we will
have all the monetarists and all the play money. So it seems like China could get its engines going a lot quicker than we can when we
come out of it.
Kevin Barrett:
We won't come out of it.
Meryl Nass:
So if we don't come out of it, then it's not what the neocons chose.
Kevin Barrett:
They don't want to come out of it. They want to wreck global prosperity while the U.S. still has most of the
military hardware.
Meryl Nass:
I'm sorry. I guess I don't understand that.
Kevin Barrett
: Well, OK,
first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme
situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all
out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their
basic philosophy of life. And then secondly --
Meryl Nass:
No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone
to war?
Kevin Barrett
:
Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted,
warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other
guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting
off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current
globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon
agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US.
Meryl Nass:
And is there anything wrong with that? That seems to me a worthy goal.
Kevin Barrett:
Well, actually, yes, I would support bringing back manufacturing. I would support never having sent it to China
in the first place. However, it's in the context of their plan to stop China's rise. And China is just as committed to its rise as these
guys are to stopping it. Which means a lot of danger of war and unpleasantness. And I think this is just the first shot of what's going
to be a long round of war and unpleasantness through the next decade.
Meryl Nass:
Perhaps. Right. We don't know. Another thing I've written is that the whole reason this (pandemic) is (being)
stopped. My theory is that, I've tried to think like a politician -- and I did write this before the lockdown -- which is that what
would have happened once this coronavirus had spread widely in the US, is that had it not been halted, we would have gotten to a point
where the coronavirus had required way more medical facilities, personnel, equipment, etc. than we had, and there would be people dying
without access to any medical care. And I thought that given that in America, based on polls, the one thing Americans want from their
government is a health care system, and that the idea of people dying in the street without being able to get into a hospital was so
beyond the pale for politicians who saw that they would never be re-elected under those circumstances, that they then did everything
they could to stop that from happening. And by the point they decided to do something, the only thing that could be done was a lockdown.
And then finally attempting to get more equipment, supplies and personnel.
Kevin Barrett:
So, yeah, I agree, that's plausible.
Meryl Nass
: That's what happened. And I'm sure everybody is trying to now use this very extraordinary circumstance to their
own benefit in the near and far future.
Kevin Barrett:
Yeah, I agree. We'll see. The thing is, if if you were planning this thing, assuming that my scenario and your
scenario are both true, a very small group of people would have unleashed it, and then everybody else would be reacting according to
their own self-interest, including the politicians doing precisely what you described.
Meryl Nass:
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Kevin Barrett:
Yeah. And I'm using as my model for this 9/11, which is what I've studied quite a lot over the past nearly
two decades. And I see parallels here between the two events in that 9/11 was about going to war with Islamic civilization, just as
this seems to be a strike against Chinese civilization -- both occurring in the wake of the Samuel Huntington -- Bernard Lewis claim
that "the clash of civilizations will be the new paradigm for us." And if it hadn't been for 9/11, that probably wouldn't have happened.
There would've been no clash of civilizations per se.
Meryl Nass:
I think, yes, you're right. And yet it looks like China is going to get out of this way more unscathed than we
are.
Kevin Barrett:
That's possible. Of course, you know, "they plot and Allah plots and Allah is the best of plotters." Ron Unz
may be right that some of this may have been unforeseen. And it's also possible that I could be wrong. It could be a coincidence. Sometimes
the coincidence theorists, even the craziest coincidence theorists, can be right once in awhile.
Meryl Nass:
Well, yes, given the fact that there are documented many hundreds of lab escapes of different organisms, going
by what's most likely, that seems to be the most likely explanation.
Kevin Barrett:
Do you think that's what happened with Lyme disease? Willy Burgdorfer, whose name was applied to the spirochete
organism that causes Lyme, is on record, filmed and recorded by Timothy Grey, confessing that he, Burgdorfer not only provided a name
for the organism, but he unleashed it on the world as a U.S. biodefense guy. So a lot of people think Lyme was an external escape. Others
hypothesize there may have been some U.S. versus Soviet element there, because Burgdorfer had a lot of money he was getting from somebody,
and he was flying to places where he might have been meeting with Russians, et cetera. So have you looked into the Lyme issue?
"Barking up a tree is more superstition then evidence unless you are a hunting dog. What about names,
fingerprints, DNA evidence, contact with someone who was actually there and willing to talk? This is the
real world, not superstitious nonsense."
They're exploring hypotheses here, not going to trial. (BTW, the U.S. "government" would tell you you're
full of shit. Things like DNA evidence, fingerprints, etc. are for suckers).
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
This Thread
Hide Thread
Display All Comments
Harold Smith
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 4:53 am GMT
Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from the
Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.
Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from
the Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.
He's a lawyer, therefore he'll play the devil's advocate – an useful role to validate a legitimate
conclusion.
@ Kevin Barrett
Good on you, Ron Unz and all the cast to pursue the quest for the source of the Cv-19 pandemic and keep the
question of biowarfare alive. An event unequal in human history in its sudden appearance, global reach, social
and economic consequences, with attendant officially approved and orchestrated propaganda and a long chain of
tell-tale "coincidences", must necessarily arouse the suspicion in every thinking person that the Masters of
the Universe are up with their usual tricks of attempting to re-shape the world according to their designs and
goals.
All major historical events have arisen, apart from the rare natural cataclysms, from Man's actions, mostly
the result of a single conspiracy from which, in turn, originate predictable and unpredictable reactions and
other conspiracies. Any plan or scheme to alter the existing status quo starts as a conspiracy whether a band
of professional robbers or politicians; it is in the nature of things that any organizational project or task
involves the co-operation of individuals as a group to achieve a particular aim and, if in the prosecution of
that aim a certain amount of discretion is necessary to have an advantage over the potential opposing side, a
conspiracy takes place. Most of governments' actions are conspiracies and their legitimacy and propriety should
be probed and investigated. To counter that, most (perhaps all) governments erect "official secrets acts" walls
to hide their conspiracies and set up counter-information departments.
This pandemic has risen a conspirational stench because it stinks of malodorous human interference with the
natural order for a purpose unknown, the first characteristic of a conspiracy. The same could be said about the
World Trade Centre incident because the official explanation is at variance with the physics natural order,
hence its conspiracy credentials because the government is openly hiding the true facts, as a conspirator does.
As Barrett has noted (and so have other commenters here at UR) the US is at a cross-roads in its history
where it must set a course of its own making to counter the rise of China as an economic superpower. The US
official policy is to prevent the emergence of any rival power, even a regional one in places where the US has
no legitimate concerns, and China must be hindered, blocked and neutralized. So far, nothing has worked to stop
the Chinese economic juggernaut and the usual solution of going to war is fraught with danger. Yes, the US
could nuke China (as the only military advantage it may have over China) but at a huge cost to itself, both
militarily and reputationally. Besides, facing the opprobrium of the world and a resurgent Russia (which would
not let the opportunity to be wasted) the US would be doomed. Even the clowns and puppets that masquerade as
government in Washington know that the "military solution" is out. Meanwhile, every year China is getting
bigger and better and time is of the essence, as Barrett noted.
What can be done to stop China then? Hybrid warfare (sanctions, blockades, threats, propaganda) is not
working either, but China, for the time being, has an Achilles heel: international trade, in which it depends
for continuing its economic development. If sanctions and threats against China's trading partners don't work,
how about bringing the whole international trade edifice down a la World Trade Centre? If the world global
economy is seriously disrupted, countries won't be able to trade and there goes the Chinese trump card. Enter
Covid-19.
"Our observations suggest that by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, it was already
pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV. However, no precursors or
branches of evolution stemming from a less human-adapted SARS-CoV-2-like virus have been detected. "
" and examine the environmental samples from the Wuhan Huanan seafood market. Importantly, the market
samples are genetically identical to human SARS-CoV-2 isolates and were therefore most likely from human
sources."
Where did RaTG13 come from?
Was Shi Zhengli engaging in some cover up, alibi [for whom?] constructing when she published her January
23, 2020 paper:
" on January 23, Shi Zhengli released a paper indicating that CoV2 is 96% identical to RaTG13, a strain
which her laboratory had previously isolated from Yunnan bats in 2013. However, outside of her lab, no one
knew about that strain until January 2020." – Yuri Deigin,
medium.com
The fact she revealed RaTG13 as her deus ex machina is somewhat odd, that RaTG13 which was sequenced and
analyzed was not published and not cataloged soon after its discovery in 2013 is, I would think, strange.
And supposedly there is no samples of RaTG13 in the lab. All they have is its sequence in the computer,
though, this perhaps might be normal for lab procedures, which I know nothing about.
RaTG13 is not that close to SARS-CoV-2.
https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748
Reports show that pangolins are potentially the intermediate host, but pangolin viruses are 88–98% identical
to SARS-CoV-2. In comparison, civet and racoon dog strains of SARS coronaviruses were 99.8% identical to
SARS-CoV from 2003. In other words, we are talking about a handful of mutations between civet strains,
racoon dog strains and human strains in 2003. Pangolins [strains of CoV2] have over 3000 nucleotide changes,
no way they are the reservoir species.
Alfred
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 10:30 am GMT
• 200 Words
@Morton's toes
Before inventing a hypothesis about powers and forces and geopolitics forming current events, you really
need a historical analog. If it has never happened before, anywhere, any time, then you are making an argument
which has a form of this time it is different.
How about Lyme Disease? Just look at a map of how it is
spreading and where it started. Humans have lived in this area for many thousands of years – without any such
infection. Don't you think that it is a little suspicious that it should start in the USA and in the 1980's?
TPTB are trying to blame it on "Climate Change". Well, the climate has changed many times in the past.
Anyway, there are areas of the USA that are warmer than New England so why did it not start there?
It is pretty obvious to anyone with the ability to think critically that Lyme Disease was created in the USA
and in a laboratory in New England – a leading research area.
There are two ways viruses mutate, replication and recombination. It seems highly unlikely that Covid 19 was
a naturally occurring replication, hence the support for some kind of man-made virus.
However, it does seem quite possible, even highly probable that this was a mutation by recombination, the
most likely candidate being a mix of bat corona virus and pangolin corona virus.
Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science.
Corvinus
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT
• 700 Words
@SBaker
"Can we blame it on the virus, even if it was manufactured in the evil labs of the US or China, as has been
convincingly suggested by Ron Unz?"
Suggested, yes. Convincingly? No.
The Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel
#coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China.
January 14, 2020, World Health Organization
There is no evidence that the coronavirus was created in a laboratory.
April 20, 2020, The Conversation
The World Health Organization reiterated that the coronavirus which causes COVID-19 is "natural in
origin." Scientists who are examining the genetic sequences of the virus have assured "again and again that
this virus is natural in origin."
May 1, 2020
Dr. Anthony Fauci, a renowned U.S. infectious disease expert, has said that there is no scientific
evidence to back the theory that the coronavirus was made in a Chinese laboratory. "If you look at the
evolution of the virus in bats and what's out there now, the scientific evidence is very, very strongly
leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated," he said.
May 4, 2020, National Geographic
WHO says it has no evidence to support 'speculative' Covid-19 lab theory
May 5, 2020, The Guardian
The British government has not seen any evidence to suggest that the novel coronavirus that causes
COVID-19 was man-made.
May 9, 2020, UK Health Minister Matt Hancock
Scientists: 'Exactly zero' evidence COVID-19 came from a lab.
May 12, 2020, Center for Infections Disease Research and Policy
Evidence of COVID's natural origin mounts even as conspiracy theory about Chinese lab refuses to die
May 13, 2020, Cornell Alliance for Science
Mr. Unz can't have his cake and eat it, too. On one hand, he tacitly encourages readers to peddle this "Fake
News" mantra. On the other hand, he latches on to MSM stories that seemingly support his conclusions. He
inferred that we ought to trust ABC News, which cited four separate intelligence sources that a government
report
*existed*
that Covid-19 is a bioweapon. Of course that report "exists". Whether or not
that report constitutes a "smoking gun" in an entirely different matter. But I thought that ANYTHING that comes
from U.S. intelligence ought not to be trusted. Because Deep State. It would appear that those stories which
supports his predisposed narrative, he takes stock in, and for other stories that go against his truth grain,
he vigorously questions their veracity, at best, or totally discards.
Ultimately, a fine number of readers here believe the source he used is part of FAKE NEWS. I would like to
know how Mr. Unz would respond to their repeated accusation that ALL of the mainstream media reporting are
lies. Here is Anon 223 stating that we ought NOT to trust ABC News.
I wouldn't take the ABC news report at face value. Essentially, most of the Federal Government despises
Trump, and want an excuse to make him look bad. Stating that the coronavirus was known since November would
make Trump look bad since he didn't do anything(though he does look bad ). This the same organization that
states continuously that Trump had allied with Russia and that he had a hooker pee on him in a Russian
hotel.
Now, if we go by the assumption that Mr. Unz "carefully reads" several MSM publications, then would it not
be probable that other people also carry out this same course of action? Would not those people be properly
equipped to counter his line of thinking if they underwent a similar process? Or does Mr. Unz possess a unique
skillset they ultimately lack?
"The Global Lockdown is a massive worldwide reset mechanism, deliberately engineered, designed to knock over
the chessboard and scatter the pieces, forcing the players to either start over or to create new, invented
positions on the board"
This statement here personifies the descent into modern anti-intellectualism. This insistence that a
Globalist cabal will destroy the white race once and for all is predicated on the notion that the Deep State is
pulling the strings through a series of coordinated false flags, with high IQ whites being duped along the way
by a complicit media. Proof? Not required. But anyone dare to question this general Alt-Right, Q-driven
narrative, and (whallah) one is deemed a purveyor of Fake News. Hey, no need to critically think when under the
impression that ANY and ALL news from the MSM is doctored, altered, or outright lies.
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
This Thread
Hide Thread
Display All Comments
Desert Fox
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT
• 100 Words
The coronavirus scam was unleashed to provide trillions to bail out wall street and at the same time bring in
UN Agenda 2030 draconian, diabolical, demonic controls over humanity, using the fake coronavirus scare , which
it a total scam.
Gates and Fauci and all involved in this scam should be arrested for crimes against
humanity!
This virus is man-made, but it is not a bioweapon.
The real weapon was the fake media that is controlled by a handful of people. All the countries that went
into a national lockdown, including Russia, have a media controlled by Zionists.
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
Display All Comments
2020crazzetrain
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 2:38 pm GMT
• 100 Words
Great article, Mr. Unz. The US is the consummate propaganda machine!
Mr. Romanoff's
3 part series on Bio-Weapons
, among other things, such as
'The Untold History of the
United States'
on Netflix; opened my eyes to just how diabolical these global technocratic, psychos have
been for as long as I've been alive.
Fort Detrick was likely place of origin for
'the engineered virus'.
"Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science."
Well that makes sense, but you're preaching to the choir.
As we would expect, the problem is the corrupt U.S. "government," which is already publicly blaming the
enemy du jour, China, without any evidence to back up its claims. And the U.S. "government" is making threats
and already taking some action based on those unsupported claims.
It may be of benefit to humanity if some doubt can be immediately cast on the specious claims of the U.S.
"government."
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
This Thread
Hide Thread
Display All Comments
Robert White
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT
• 400 Words
Real Probability of SARS-2-nCoV-19 being a bioweaponized nCoronavirus imbued with Gain-ofFunction properties,
and Dual Use applications is in fact P=1 given pathogenicity, asymptomatic & undetectable spread, and aged
cohort fatalities in Long Term Care environments.
Epidemiologically, a Six Sigma collapse of the entirety of
all Long Term Care facilities in the world would devastate the infrastructure for Tertiary Care Hospitals
worldwide via spread & vectoring of this deadly man made Pandemic Pathogen.
To assert that SARS-2-nCoV-19 is merely yet another nCoronavirus that has manifested naturally whilst
asserting on the other hand that it could not possibly be a man made bioweaponized nCoronavirus is a lesson in
doublespeak when evidence is not forthcoming for the assertions.
Real scientists are evidenced based via Empiricism proper. Propagandists don't utilize evidenced based
argumentation as that would undermine their task to win hearts & minds one step at a time.
NIST manufactured so-called 'evidence' that was NOT peer-reviewed whatsoever. The bioweaponized SARS-2-nCoV-19
will undergo the same propagandization process utilized for the CIA Controlled Demolition of the Trade Centers
in NYC.
Most researchers continue to neglect mention of the 2014 Cambridge Working Group Call to Action on
Gain-of-Function Dual Use Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in USA Biosafety Level Four laboratories, but it is
key to the historical patterns & USA finance of the global industry of Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in
global BSL-4 laboratories that are primarily funded by USA taxpayers the world over.
Most researchers also fail to mention that the United States of America is a culture of death & extreme text
book Psychopathy via Central Intelligence Agency acts of genocide on a global basis.
The historiography is replete with evidence that the United States of America is funding the lion's share of
Pandemic Pathogen research in BSL-4 labs worldwide, and they are also the most likely & probable culprits for
any & all Pandemic Pathogen outbreaks whether accidental or otherwise intentional.
American is a continent of liars, thieves, and text book Psychopaths helming the political sphere and
obviously lost hegemonic status worldwide 2020. In 2016 we were led to believe that if the USA voted in a true
text book Psychopath like Trump and facilitated a bogus meme to run on like Make America Great Again-MAGA, we
would all live happily ever after until the next round of elections manifested that produced a Democrat
replacement.
Neocons & Republicans always utilize threats of war to finagle their way through terms of corruption whilst
pillaging the financial system globally. Today is no different politically from any other Republican term of
office whereby violence & threats of violence are their only tools of choice.
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
Display All Comments
Sean
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 4:05 pm GMT
• 400 Words
'American neoconservatives' can only mean the crypto Zionist Jews of the Israel Lobby, and as they are far more
worried about Israel than America, to credibly propose US neocons as the authors of a bioweapon attack on
China, it is necessary to explain how that would benefit Israel. Or, at least how it might have been calculated
by US neocons to be in the interests of Jewish American Zionist aspirations for Israel. A continuing close
relationship between Israel and America is the prerequisite for all Zionist hopes for the future. I think the
only scenario for neocons attacking China with a bioweapon is they thought it necessary to save Israel from its
own leadership. Last December Netanyahu's son said British diplomats should be "kicked out" of Israel because
of their reference to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Israel has clearly no fear of anything the
international community says about the West Bank Palestinians. American support is a given and while Trump is
in office Israel formally annexing the West Bank and penning its Palestinian population up in Bantustans is
something American neoconservatives can and will bring about. Unless there is something else Israel is doing
that makes sustaining the pro Israel stance geopolitically impossible.
There is such an obstacle to Trump acquicing in the annexation of the occupied territories: a burgeoning
collaboration between China and Israel. China running the Israeli port that US Navy warships dock at and China
building the world's biggest desalination plant in Israel (supposedly a key ME ally of the US) is not something
that any US president could or would accept. Trump is absolutely going to have to act to counter it, and
because the Netanyahu family will be handsomely paid off by the Chinese (valuing the Israel Lobby as a wedge
against Trump's China trade policy) there is a possibility that Israel annexing the West Bank will be the
begining of the end of the US-Israel, special relationship. It sort of makes sense for the US neoconservatives
worried about Israel to attack China in order to separate it from Israel. However from what I have read the
Israel Lobby is subservient to Israeli politicians.
One very plausible hypothesis is that coronavirus will probably "militarizes the United States even more than 9/11" So the escape
from a lab could be orgnized by the same forces which did 9/11 and anthrax attack.
Notable quotes:
"... Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus ..."
"... And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago. ..."
"... in my understanding of biological warfare, no country used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation level. ..."
"... As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony. And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like PNAC looking for a new American century. ..."
"... And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015. ..."
"... I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far. So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen. ..."
"... first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their basic philosophy of life. And then secondly -- ..."
"... No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone to war? ..."
"... Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted, warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US. ..."
Kevin Barrett:
Truth Jihad Radio
is often
the best place to go for the most important stories that the mainstream won't cover. Today I'm talking to
Meryl Nass
. She's an expert who has written a very important article
about how the propaganda push by very suspicious scientists to claim that Covid-19 couldn't possibly be bioweaponized is a red flag
that everybody should be paying attention to.
But you won't see anything about this in the corporate controlled mainstream Mockingbird media. So please help this kind of material
continue to come to light, by subscribing to
DrKevinBarrett at Patreon.com
.
Welcome to Truth Jihad Radio. I'm Kevin Barrett searching fearlessly for truth in all of the most forbidden places, bringing on people
who are also going to those kinds of places. And sometimes I find genuine experts on various subjects. And we have one of those with
us today, Meryl Nass. She is definitely one of the go-to experts on biological warfare related topics. Yet for some reason, the mainstream
media isn't going to her. I wonder why that would be. Maybe because the things she wrote about the anthrax attacks back in 2001 were
a little bit too truthful. Anyway, she's got some very interesting posts up now at
her anthrax vaccine blog
. But first, before we jump into that, let
me just say that when I say she's an expert: She has consulted for the World Bank. She's testified to Congress. She diagnosed Zimbabwe's
1978 anthrax epidemic as an episode of biological warfare. She's consulted for Cuba's Ministry of Health on its optic and peripheral
neuropathy epidemic, and on and on. So she has a pretty good, solid basis for her views.
And she recently posted what I thought was a critically important piece "
Why are some of the
US' top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2?
" pointing out, why is this that the top
U.S. scientists are being trumpeted all over the media, making a specious argument about the natural origin of Sars CoV-2. So why are
they, Meryl? Why is it that they're telling us this could not possibly be a bioweapon, and yet obviously it could?
Meryl Nass:
Well, that's the $64,000 question, isn't it? Maybe we should go back and explain what I'm aware of that happened.
Sometime in late February, a group of scientists, which included the former head of the National Science Foundation and a former top
person at CDC, as well as a bunch of other people, many of whom had worked in the biological defense / biological warfare area -- possibly
all of them had -- published
a very short statement
in
The Lancet
saying they wanted to stand with the Chinese public health officials and scientists and point out that rumors
about the unnatural origin of coronavirus were a conspiracy theory and should be dismissed.
They didn't provide evidence, but they made this very strong statement in the top medical journal in the world,
The Lancet
. And so, OK. I have to say that the first author -- and it was alphabetical, so this is the first author alphabetically who signed
that -- is someone that I was told about 27 years ago when I consulted in Cuba, when they had a very severe epidemic of blindness and
other neurologic symptoms. And it turned out it was due to cyanide.
There were two. They were the first in 100 years, I think, in the Western Hemisphere. And if I remember correctly, this was a long
time ago, about 150 or more Cubans died, mostly small children, as a result of the Dengue epidemics. So I thought, that's interesting
that this bio-warrior is signing a statement saying that the core idea that the coronavirus might be due to a biological warfare construct
should be dismissed outright as a conspiracy theory.
Kevin Barrett:
Wow. What a coincidence, that that would be the guy who would do that. You say he's the first author alphabetically?
Meryl Nass:
Yes.
Kevin Barrett:
Well, we can figure out who that is then.
Meryl Nass:
A group of five scientists, and I knew of several of them. I've been in contact with at least one of them in the
past, and they too were sort of biological defense, biological warfare people.
Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks
with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried
to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced
illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus
.
So that's an odd group of different things that you might be researching and writing about. But oddly enough, a couple of these scientists
have chosen that obscure group of things that are somewhat unrelated to each other to comment about. And so these five scientists wrote
a piece in Nature Medicine which claimed to have found the scientific linchpin to be able to make the argument that the new coronavirus
is a natural occurrence. And the argument they made was that had it been constructed in the lab, it would have used the particular backbone
that laboratorians know about. But because it didn't have that backbone, it couldn't possibly be a lab construct.
The problem with that argument is basically it was a straw man argument. They said, well, if I were going to make the novel coronavirus,
I would have made it this way. But because it isn't made that way, it's not a lab construct. Of course, you can make the novel coronavirus
a lot of different ways. And I pointed out three different ways one might have come up with a novel coronavirus that weren't using the
method they suggested.
And I've gotten confirmation. I'm a physician, I'm not a scientist, but I did work in a lab. I went to M.I.T.. So I do know biology,
although I am not well versed in modern genetic engineering. But I do know a lot about how biological weapons used to be made, how they
were made before and during World War 2 and afterwards.
And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period
around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the
last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago.
So I then looked at the connections between the first group of scientists who had published in
The Lancet
and the second group
that had published in
Nature Medicine
and found that well, for example, that the person I mentioned before who had been to Cuba
and looked at the Aedes mosquitoes, even though that person is now of the retirement age, is a member of the institute of one of the
second authors. And I saw other connections between these two groups.
Kevin Barrett:
Sounds like the usual suspects.
Meryl Nass:
Yes, exactly. It seemed that the second group, anyway, the guys who were trotted out to provide the last word
on all these other controversial medical subjects had been again trotted out to provide the last word. Then I thought, who else is talking
about this? And when I looked that up, I found the head of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, an MD-Ph.D, cited the work of these five scientists
to say basically now we've proven that this is a natural occurrence and everyone can forget about the conspiracy theory. And he further
said if you're if you're concerned about what you read about coronavirus, just go to the FEMA website where they are telling you what
is a rumor and what isn't. So I thought, well, that's interesting that the policy makers or the people who pull the strings are able
to pull Francis Collins' strings and get him to comment on this, again agreeing with an argument that he must have known to be specious.
Kevin Barrett:
You don't have to comment on this, but this sure reminds me of what's been going on post-9/11, with first the
ridiculous FEMA report on the so-called collapses of the Trade Center towers and then the NIST reports culminating in the most absurd
one of all, the NIST report on Building 7. Throughout that whole process, the usual suspect so-called scientists were putting out utter
baloney and rubber stamping it, and all the officials were rubber stamping it mindlessly, and any independent voices speaking common
sense and truth were marginalized.
Meryl Nass:
Yes. So that is of course what's happening here. And it's very helpful, it seems, to be able to identify them
as this same group, the same group who can be used over and over and over again over decades to whitewash what the system wants whitewashed.
And then you look at their grants. Ugh! Some of these people are making unbelievable grants.
Kevin Barrett:
They're probably flying on Epstein's Lolita Express and things like that, too.
Meryl Nass:
That I did not look up.
Kevin Barrett:
I wouldn't be surprised, anyway.
Meryl Nass:
There is a lot of money flowing through their laboratories. So anyway, the final point I made was that every scientist
who signed these two documents and then Francis Collins has had something to do with biological defense. If you're a top scientist in
the U.S. government, you are asked to look into pandemics and the risk that they could be due to a biological weapon. And so as far
as I could tell, virtually all these people have had some background in looking at these things. And they're all old. They all remember
the days before the last three decades of genetic engineering and they all must realize, if they have any competence as scientists,
that there are other ways to create biological agents, microorganisms. And so for them to all have signed this, knowing that, just makes
you wonder -- why did they do this?
They presumably did it because they had some sense that it was a lab organism. Perhaps it was a lab escape and perhaps they were
trying to protect the whole enterprise of biological defense, which is a multibillion dollar yearly industry that feeds many, many people,
including themselves.
Kevin Barrett:
I would argue that's a relatively innocent explanation. There are worse ones than that.
Meryl Nass:
The interesting thing is that all these countries do research together. So China, US, (former) Soviet Union, Ukraine
All different countries send people to labs in other countries to work on micro-organisms. So you can put your finger on people from
many different countries who were working on bat coronaviruses in labs around the world. And this could have been a lab escape from
many different places. I mean, it could have been a deliberate attack. But
in my understanding of biological warfare, no country
used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto
their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation
level.
Kevin Barrett:
Let me just give you a possible opposing argument. John Mearsheimer wrote in, I believe 2015, in
a very famous article about China's
unpeaceful rise
that said, in so many words, the US is stuck between a rock and a hard place in terms of trying to contain China's
rise, which is based on its double digit growth averaging out since 1980 or so. And that that growth inevitably is pushing China to
break out of U.S. containment in Asia and become a regional hegemon, which is unacceptable to U.S. decision makers. And more likely,
it will actually "pose global challenges" meaning displace the U.S. as global hegemon as well, simply based on its economic growth,
which now has supposedly slowed to maybe 8 percent. But still, the differential between that and the U.S. and its Western allies is
such that within a decade or two, at the very most, it's a done deal.
As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically
ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony.
And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like
PNAC looking for a new American century.
And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way
to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy
would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015.
I've argued with Ron Unz about this. He he thinks it would have been a U.S. attack designed not to escape China, like previous U.S.
(bio-)attacks on China. But
I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what
it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run
stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us
back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far.
So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is
precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen.
Meryl Nass:
That's a reasonable argument. But the economy is not being totally destroyed. It's just that factories are, closed,
people aren't going to work. Nothing's been destroyed. When we come out of this, China will still have all the factories and we will
have all the monetarists and all the play money. So it seems like China could get its engines going a lot quicker than we can when we
come out of it.
Kevin Barrett:
We won't come out of it.
Meryl Nass:
So if we don't come out of it, then it's not what the neocons chose.
Kevin Barrett:
They don't want to come out of it. They want to wreck global prosperity while the U.S. still has most of the
military hardware.
Meryl Nass:
I'm sorry. I guess I don't understand that.
Kevin Barrett
: Well, OK,
first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme
situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all
out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their
basic philosophy of life. And then secondly --
Meryl Nass:
No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone
to war?
Kevin Barrett
:
Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted,
warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other
guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting
off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current
globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon
agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US.
Meryl Nass:
And is there anything wrong with that? That seems to me a worthy goal.
Kevin Barrett:
Well, actually, yes, I would support bringing back manufacturing. I would support never having sent it to China
in the first place. However, it's in the context of their plan to stop China's rise. And China is just as committed to its rise as these
guys are to stopping it. Which means a lot of danger of war and unpleasantness. And I think this is just the first shot of what's going
to be a long round of war and unpleasantness through the next decade.
Meryl Nass:
Perhaps. Right. We don't know. Another thing I've written is that the whole reason this (pandemic) is (being)
stopped. My theory is that, I've tried to think like a politician -- and I did write this before the lockdown -- which is that what
would have happened once this coronavirus had spread widely in the US, is that had it not been halted, we would have gotten to a point
where the coronavirus had required way more medical facilities, personnel, equipment, etc. than we had, and there would be people dying
without access to any medical care. And I thought that given that in America, based on polls, the one thing Americans want from their
government is a health care system, and that the idea of people dying in the street without being able to get into a hospital was so
beyond the pale for politicians who saw that they would never be re-elected under those circumstances, that they then did everything
they could to stop that from happening. And by the point they decided to do something, the only thing that could be done was a lockdown.
And then finally attempting to get more equipment, supplies and personnel.
Kevin Barrett:
So, yeah, I agree, that's plausible.
Meryl Nass
: That's what happened. And I'm sure everybody is trying to now use this very extraordinary circumstance to their
own benefit in the near and far future.
Kevin Barrett:
Yeah, I agree. We'll see. The thing is, if if you were planning this thing, assuming that my scenario and your
scenario are both true, a very small group of people would have unleashed it, and then everybody else would be reacting according to
their own self-interest, including the politicians doing precisely what you described.
Meryl Nass:
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Kevin Barrett:
Yeah. And I'm using as my model for this 9/11, which is what I've studied quite a lot over the past nearly
two decades. And I see parallels here between the two events in that 9/11 was about going to war with Islamic civilization, just as
this seems to be a strike against Chinese civilization -- both occurring in the wake of the Samuel Huntington -- Bernard Lewis claim
that "the clash of civilizations will be the new paradigm for us." And if it hadn't been for 9/11, that probably wouldn't have happened.
There would've been no clash of civilizations per se.
Meryl Nass:
I think, yes, you're right. And yet it looks like China is going to get out of this way more unscathed than we
are.
Kevin Barrett:
That's possible. Of course, you know, "they plot and Allah plots and Allah is the best of plotters." Ron Unz
may be right that some of this may have been unforeseen. And it's also possible that I could be wrong. It could be a coincidence. Sometimes
the coincidence theorists, even the craziest coincidence theorists, can be right once in awhile.
Meryl Nass:
Well, yes, given the fact that there are documented many hundreds of lab escapes of different organisms, going
by what's most likely, that seems to be the most likely explanation.
Kevin Barrett:
Do you think that's what happened with Lyme disease? Willy Burgdorfer, whose name was applied to the spirochete
organism that causes Lyme, is on record, filmed and recorded by Timothy Grey, confessing that he, Burgdorfer not only provided a name
for the organism, but he unleashed it on the world as a U.S. biodefense guy. So a lot of people think Lyme was an external escape. Others
hypothesize there may have been some U.S. versus Soviet element there, because Burgdorfer had a lot of money he was getting from somebody,
and he was flying to places where he might have been meeting with Russians, et cetera. So have you looked into the Lyme issue?
"Barking up a tree is more superstition then evidence unless you are a hunting dog. What about names,
fingerprints, DNA evidence, contact with someone who was actually there and willing to talk? This is the
real world, not superstitious nonsense."
They're exploring hypotheses here, not going to trial. (BTW, the U.S. "government" would tell you you're
full of shit. Things like DNA evidence, fingerprints, etc. are for suckers).
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
This Thread
Hide Thread
Display All Comments
Harold Smith
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 4:53 am GMT
Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from the
Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.
Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from
the Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.
He's a lawyer, therefore he'll play the devil's advocate – an useful role to validate a legitimate
conclusion.
@ Kevin Barrett
Good on you, Ron Unz and all the cast to pursue the quest for the source of the Cv-19 pandemic and keep the
question of biowarfare alive. An event unequal in human history in its sudden appearance, global reach, social
and economic consequences, with attendant officially approved and orchestrated propaganda and a long chain of
tell-tale "coincidences", must necessarily arouse the suspicion in every thinking person that the Masters of
the Universe are up with their usual tricks of attempting to re-shape the world according to their designs and
goals.
All major historical events have arisen, apart from the rare natural cataclysms, from Man's actions, mostly
the result of a single conspiracy from which, in turn, originate predictable and unpredictable reactions and
other conspiracies. Any plan or scheme to alter the existing status quo starts as a conspiracy whether a band
of professional robbers or politicians; it is in the nature of things that any organizational project or task
involves the co-operation of individuals as a group to achieve a particular aim and, if in the prosecution of
that aim a certain amount of discretion is necessary to have an advantage over the potential opposing side, a
conspiracy takes place. Most of governments' actions are conspiracies and their legitimacy and propriety should
be probed and investigated. To counter that, most (perhaps all) governments erect "official secrets acts" walls
to hide their conspiracies and set up counter-information departments.
This pandemic has risen a conspirational stench because it stinks of malodorous human interference with the
natural order for a purpose unknown, the first characteristic of a conspiracy. The same could be said about the
World Trade Centre incident because the official explanation is at variance with the physics natural order,
hence its conspiracy credentials because the government is openly hiding the true facts, as a conspirator does.
As Barrett has noted (and so have other commenters here at UR) the US is at a cross-roads in its history
where it must set a course of its own making to counter the rise of China as an economic superpower. The US
official policy is to prevent the emergence of any rival power, even a regional one in places where the US has
no legitimate concerns, and China must be hindered, blocked and neutralized. So far, nothing has worked to stop
the Chinese economic juggernaut and the usual solution of going to war is fraught with danger. Yes, the US
could nuke China (as the only military advantage it may have over China) but at a huge cost to itself, both
militarily and reputationally. Besides, facing the opprobrium of the world and a resurgent Russia (which would
not let the opportunity to be wasted) the US would be doomed. Even the clowns and puppets that masquerade as
government in Washington know that the "military solution" is out. Meanwhile, every year China is getting
bigger and better and time is of the essence, as Barrett noted.
What can be done to stop China then? Hybrid warfare (sanctions, blockades, threats, propaganda) is not
working either, but China, for the time being, has an Achilles heel: international trade, in which it depends
for continuing its economic development. If sanctions and threats against China's trading partners don't work,
how about bringing the whole international trade edifice down a la World Trade Centre? If the world global
economy is seriously disrupted, countries won't be able to trade and there goes the Chinese trump card. Enter
Covid-19.
"Our observations suggest that by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, it was already
pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV. However, no precursors or
branches of evolution stemming from a less human-adapted SARS-CoV-2-like virus have been detected. "
" and examine the environmental samples from the Wuhan Huanan seafood market. Importantly, the market
samples are genetically identical to human SARS-CoV-2 isolates and were therefore most likely from human
sources."
Where did RaTG13 come from?
Was Shi Zhengli engaging in some cover up, alibi [for whom?] constructing when she published her January
23, 2020 paper:
" on January 23, Shi Zhengli released a paper indicating that CoV2 is 96% identical to RaTG13, a strain
which her laboratory had previously isolated from Yunnan bats in 2013. However, outside of her lab, no one
knew about that strain until January 2020." – Yuri Deigin,
medium.com
The fact she revealed RaTG13 as her deus ex machina is somewhat odd, that RaTG13 which was sequenced and
analyzed was not published and not cataloged soon after its discovery in 2013 is, I would think, strange.
And supposedly there is no samples of RaTG13 in the lab. All they have is its sequence in the computer,
though, this perhaps might be normal for lab procedures, which I know nothing about.
RaTG13 is not that close to SARS-CoV-2.
https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748
Reports show that pangolins are potentially the intermediate host, but pangolin viruses are 88–98% identical
to SARS-CoV-2. In comparison, civet and racoon dog strains of SARS coronaviruses were 99.8% identical to
SARS-CoV from 2003. In other words, we are talking about a handful of mutations between civet strains,
racoon dog strains and human strains in 2003. Pangolins [strains of CoV2] have over 3000 nucleotide changes,
no way they are the reservoir species.
Alfred
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 10:30 am GMT
• 200 Words
@Morton's toes
Before inventing a hypothesis about powers and forces and geopolitics forming current events, you really
need a historical analog. If it has never happened before, anywhere, any time, then you are making an argument
which has a form of this time it is different.
How about Lyme Disease? Just look at a map of how it is
spreading and where it started. Humans have lived in this area for many thousands of years – without any such
infection. Don't you think that it is a little suspicious that it should start in the USA and in the 1980's?
TPTB are trying to blame it on "Climate Change". Well, the climate has changed many times in the past.
Anyway, there are areas of the USA that are warmer than New England so why did it not start there?
It is pretty obvious to anyone with the ability to think critically that Lyme Disease was created in the USA
and in a laboratory in New England – a leading research area.
There are two ways viruses mutate, replication and recombination. It seems highly unlikely that Covid 19 was
a naturally occurring replication, hence the support for some kind of man-made virus.
However, it does seem quite possible, even highly probable that this was a mutation by recombination, the
most likely candidate being a mix of bat corona virus and pangolin corona virus.
Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science.
Corvinus
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT
• 700 Words
@SBaker
"Can we blame it on the virus, even if it was manufactured in the evil labs of the US or China, as has been
convincingly suggested by Ron Unz?"
Suggested, yes. Convincingly? No.
The Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel
#coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China.
January 14, 2020, World Health Organization
There is no evidence that the coronavirus was created in a laboratory.
April 20, 2020, The Conversation
The World Health Organization reiterated that the coronavirus which causes COVID-19 is "natural in
origin." Scientists who are examining the genetic sequences of the virus have assured "again and again that
this virus is natural in origin."
May 1, 2020
Dr. Anthony Fauci, a renowned U.S. infectious disease expert, has said that there is no scientific
evidence to back the theory that the coronavirus was made in a Chinese laboratory. "If you look at the
evolution of the virus in bats and what's out there now, the scientific evidence is very, very strongly
leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated," he said.
May 4, 2020, National Geographic
WHO says it has no evidence to support 'speculative' Covid-19 lab theory
May 5, 2020, The Guardian
The British government has not seen any evidence to suggest that the novel coronavirus that causes
COVID-19 was man-made.
May 9, 2020, UK Health Minister Matt Hancock
Scientists: 'Exactly zero' evidence COVID-19 came from a lab.
May 12, 2020, Center for Infections Disease Research and Policy
Evidence of COVID's natural origin mounts even as conspiracy theory about Chinese lab refuses to die
May 13, 2020, Cornell Alliance for Science
Mr. Unz can't have his cake and eat it, too. On one hand, he tacitly encourages readers to peddle this "Fake
News" mantra. On the other hand, he latches on to MSM stories that seemingly support his conclusions. He
inferred that we ought to trust ABC News, which cited four separate intelligence sources that a government
report
*existed*
that Covid-19 is a bioweapon. Of course that report "exists". Whether or not
that report constitutes a "smoking gun" in an entirely different matter. But I thought that ANYTHING that comes
from U.S. intelligence ought not to be trusted. Because Deep State. It would appear that those stories which
supports his predisposed narrative, he takes stock in, and for other stories that go against his truth grain,
he vigorously questions their veracity, at best, or totally discards.
Ultimately, a fine number of readers here believe the source he used is part of FAKE NEWS. I would like to
know how Mr. Unz would respond to their repeated accusation that ALL of the mainstream media reporting are
lies. Here is Anon 223 stating that we ought NOT to trust ABC News.
I wouldn't take the ABC news report at face value. Essentially, most of the Federal Government despises
Trump, and want an excuse to make him look bad. Stating that the coronavirus was known since November would
make Trump look bad since he didn't do anything(though he does look bad ). This the same organization that
states continuously that Trump had allied with Russia and that he had a hooker pee on him in a Russian
hotel.
Now, if we go by the assumption that Mr. Unz "carefully reads" several MSM publications, then would it not
be probable that other people also carry out this same course of action? Would not those people be properly
equipped to counter his line of thinking if they underwent a similar process? Or does Mr. Unz possess a unique
skillset they ultimately lack?
"The Global Lockdown is a massive worldwide reset mechanism, deliberately engineered, designed to knock over
the chessboard and scatter the pieces, forcing the players to either start over or to create new, invented
positions on the board"
This statement here personifies the descent into modern anti-intellectualism. This insistence that a
Globalist cabal will destroy the white race once and for all is predicated on the notion that the Deep State is
pulling the strings through a series of coordinated false flags, with high IQ whites being duped along the way
by a complicit media. Proof? Not required. But anyone dare to question this general Alt-Right, Q-driven
narrative, and (whallah) one is deemed a purveyor of Fake News. Hey, no need to critically think when under the
impression that ANY and ALL news from the MSM is doctored, altered, or outright lies.
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
This Thread
Hide Thread
Display All Comments
Desert Fox
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT
• 100 Words
The coronavirus scam was unleashed to provide trillions to bail out wall street and at the same time bring in
UN Agenda 2030 draconian, diabolical, demonic controls over humanity, using the fake coronavirus scare , which
it a total scam.
Gates and Fauci and all involved in this scam should be arrested for crimes against
humanity!
This virus is man-made, but it is not a bioweapon.
The real weapon was the fake media that is controlled by a handful of people. All the countries that went
into a national lockdown, including Russia, have a media controlled by Zionists.
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
Display All Comments
2020crazzetrain
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 2:38 pm GMT
• 100 Words
Great article, Mr. Unz. The US is the consummate propaganda machine!
Mr. Romanoff's
3 part series on Bio-Weapons
, among other things, such as
'The Untold History of the
United States'
on Netflix; opened my eyes to just how diabolical these global technocratic, psychos have
been for as long as I've been alive.
Fort Detrick was likely place of origin for
'the engineered virus'.
"Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science."
Well that makes sense, but you're preaching to the choir.
As we would expect, the problem is the corrupt U.S. "government," which is already publicly blaming the
enemy du jour, China, without any evidence to back up its claims. And the U.S. "government" is making threats
and already taking some action based on those unsupported claims.
It may be of benefit to humanity if some doubt can be immediately cast on the specious claims of the U.S.
"government."
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
This Thread
Hide Thread
Display All Comments
Robert White
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT
• 400 Words
Real Probability of SARS-2-nCoV-19 being a bioweaponized nCoronavirus imbued with Gain-ofFunction properties,
and Dual Use applications is in fact P=1 given pathogenicity, asymptomatic & undetectable spread, and aged
cohort fatalities in Long Term Care environments.
Epidemiologically, a Six Sigma collapse of the entirety of
all Long Term Care facilities in the world would devastate the infrastructure for Tertiary Care Hospitals
worldwide via spread & vectoring of this deadly man made Pandemic Pathogen.
To assert that SARS-2-nCoV-19 is merely yet another nCoronavirus that has manifested naturally whilst
asserting on the other hand that it could not possibly be a man made bioweaponized nCoronavirus is a lesson in
doublespeak when evidence is not forthcoming for the assertions.
Real scientists are evidenced based via Empiricism proper. Propagandists don't utilize evidenced based
argumentation as that would undermine their task to win hearts & minds one step at a time.
NIST manufactured so-called 'evidence' that was NOT peer-reviewed whatsoever. The bioweaponized SARS-2-nCoV-19
will undergo the same propagandization process utilized for the CIA Controlled Demolition of the Trade Centers
in NYC.
Most researchers continue to neglect mention of the 2014 Cambridge Working Group Call to Action on
Gain-of-Function Dual Use Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in USA Biosafety Level Four laboratories, but it is
key to the historical patterns & USA finance of the global industry of Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in
global BSL-4 laboratories that are primarily funded by USA taxpayers the world over.
Most researchers also fail to mention that the United States of America is a culture of death & extreme text
book Psychopathy via Central Intelligence Agency acts of genocide on a global basis.
The historiography is replete with evidence that the United States of America is funding the lion's share of
Pandemic Pathogen research in BSL-4 labs worldwide, and they are also the most likely & probable culprits for
any & all Pandemic Pathogen outbreaks whether accidental or otherwise intentional.
American is a continent of liars, thieves, and text book Psychopaths helming the political sphere and
obviously lost hegemonic status worldwide 2020. In 2016 we were led to believe that if the USA voted in a true
text book Psychopath like Trump and facilitated a bogus meme to run on like Make America Great Again-MAGA, we
would all live happily ever after until the next round of elections manifested that produced a Democrat
replacement.
Neocons & Republicans always utilize threats of war to finagle their way through terms of corruption whilst
pillaging the financial system globally. Today is no different politically from any other Republican term of
office whereby violence & threats of violence are their only tools of choice.
Read More
Reply
Agree/Disagree/Etc.
More...
This Commenter
Display All Comments
Sean
says:
Show
Comment
May 30, 2020 at 4:05 pm GMT
• 400 Words
'American neoconservatives' can only mean the crypto Zionist Jews of the Israel Lobby, and as they are far more
worried about Israel than America, to credibly propose US neocons as the authors of a bioweapon attack on
China, it is necessary to explain how that would benefit Israel. Or, at least how it might have been calculated
by US neocons to be in the interests of Jewish American Zionist aspirations for Israel. A continuing close
relationship between Israel and America is the prerequisite for all Zionist hopes for the future. I think the
only scenario for neocons attacking China with a bioweapon is they thought it necessary to save Israel from its
own leadership. Last December Netanyahu's son said British diplomats should be "kicked out" of Israel because
of their reference to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Israel has clearly no fear of anything the
international community says about the West Bank Palestinians. American support is a given and while Trump is
in office Israel formally annexing the West Bank and penning its Palestinian population up in Bantustans is
something American neoconservatives can and will bring about. Unless there is something else Israel is doing
that makes sustaining the pro Israel stance geopolitically impossible.
There is such an obstacle to Trump acquicing in the annexation of the occupied territories: a burgeoning
collaboration between China and Israel. China running the Israeli port that US Navy warships dock at and China
building the world's biggest desalination plant in Israel (supposedly a key ME ally of the US) is not something
that any US president could or would accept. Trump is absolutely going to have to act to counter it, and
because the Netanyahu family will be handsomely paid off by the Chinese (valuing the Israel Lobby as a wedge
against Trump's China trade policy) there is a possibility that Israel annexing the West Bank will be the
begining of the end of the US-Israel, special relationship. It sort of makes sense for the US neoconservatives
worried about Israel to attack China in order to separate it from Israel. However from what I have read the
Israel Lobby is subservient to Israeli politicians.
© Antonio Cabrera
© Sebastian Scheiner/AP
© Haaretz When Donadio began searching for documentation of Eitan's role, he found a memo and contract draft with an Israeli security firm called "Ktalav Promotion and Investment Ltd" in the files of Barco's legal secretary, Fernán Bejarano Arias, who is today the vice president of legal affairs at Ecopetrol. The document valued the deal at almost $1 million, including a fee of $535,714, which covered "up to 50 tickets for air transport purposes, round trip, on the Tel Aviv-Bogotá route," among other expenses. The memo indicates that portions of the contract were agreed upon with the lawyer Ernesto Villamizar Cajiao.
© Rachamim Shaul/The National Library of Israel
© Luis Benavides/AP
Patrick Armstrong says: May 28, 2021 at 8:43 am
J says: April 21, 2021 at 9:20 am
10 САМЫХ НЕОБЫЧНЫХ ДОМОВ В МИРЕ 00:00 Previous Pause Next 00:22 / 09:40 Unmute Fullscreen Copy video url Play / Pause Mute / Unmute Report a problem Language Mox Player
Ms No PREMIUM 2 hours ago
odb 2 hours ago
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/69029754/1230447910.0.jpg)
Stefani
Reynolds/Bloomberg via Getty Images
.jpg)
Kevin Clinesmith is the FBI lawyer who altered evidence to secure a FISA warrant for spying on
Carter Page (December 7, 2018 file photo). © REUTERS/Yuri Gripas 152 Follow RT on
© Pixabay / Gerd Altmann 354 18 Follow RT on 
Influential Russian senator Klimov accuses foreign spooks of helping to organize weekend
protests in support of Navalny
READ MORE: With no sign of US returning to fold, Russia is preparing to withdraw from
'Open Skies' treaty - Foreign Ministry
Putin says American presence in Afghanistan is beneficial to Moscow's interests, rubbishes
claims of 'Russian bounties to Taliban'
The sun sets on the US Capitol (FILE PHOTO) - and on the American Empire. © REUTERS/James
Lawler Duggan 359 Follow RT on 
FILE PHOTO. Victoria Nuland during her visit in Kiev, Ukraine. ©Serg Glovny / Global Look
Press 81 Follow RT on 
© Sputnik / Russian Foreign Ministry 22 Follow RT on 
When in Russia Get yourself a dose of Sputnik V, Foreign Ministry tells US envoy who asked
Santa for VACCINE
FILE PHOTO. © Getty Images / serggn 86 147 Follow RT on 
READ MORE: 'It will be a challenging year': Russia's minister of justice talks to RT
about legal battle with 'Yukos oligarchs' & 2021 outlook
READ MORE: Moscow claims win after US court rejects oligarchs' demand for seizure of
Russian assets in $50bn Yukos legal battle
FILE PHOTOS. © Getty Images / artisteer; © Wikipedia 38 1 Follow RT on 
Yukos case: Netherlands prepares for hearing in $50 billion plus legal battle over disgraced
ex-oligarch's former oil empire
San Francisco man arrested for vehicle theft for 14th time in 18 months as Soros-linked DA
claims too many people are in jail
FILE PHOTOS. © Reuters / Kevin Lamarque ; Reuters / Christian Hartmann 88 Follow RT on
FILE PHOTO © REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst 15 Follow RT on 
Olde_Brooklyn_Lantern
Share
Copy
Print
Related Posts 
