The Russia-did-it stories are being used to bury the DNC-rigged-its-primary stories.
“Russia Wants to Undermine Faith in the U.S. Election. Don’t Fall For It.” Thus reads the cover of Time magazine with a photo of Vladimir Putin on the cover staring at me from shelves as I sit in an airport. Genuinely curious, I check out Massimo Calabresi’s article online.
Of course, U.S. elections are almost completely unverifiable and do not even pretend to meet international standards. Jimmy Carter doesn’t even try to monitor them because there’s no way to do it. Much voting is done on machines that simply must be trusted on faith. Whether they accurately count the votes entered is simply unknowable, and reason to wonder is fueled by the machines’ frequently changing a vote visibly just as it’s cast, and by the ease with which people have been able to hack the machines. Never mind all the problems with registration, intimidation, inconvenience, discrimination, etc.
We should undermine our own faith in the U.S. election system. I’d include in that the financial corruption, gerrymandering, etc., but here I’m just referring to the counting of votes. Then we should repair it! Is Russia helpfully pointing out the problem to us? Not that I’ve seen. But the Russia-did-it stories that were used to bury the DNC-rigged-its-primary stories rather shockingly blurted out in major corporate U.S. media what I’ve just been saying. For a while it seemed acceptable to be aware that U.S. elections are faith-based as long as it helps build up hostility with Russia. Now, however, we’re being told of our duty to remain firm in our faith. Time says:
“The leaders of the U.S. government, including the President and his top national-security advisers, face an unprecedented dilemma. Since the spring, U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies have seen mounting evidence of an active Russian influence operation targeting the 2016 presidential election.”
Why the “top national-security advisers”? That’s a euphemism for war counselors. How do they come into this? And where is the evidence, mounting or otherwise?
“It is very unlikely the Russians could sway the actual vote count, because our election infrastructure is decentralized and voting machines are not accessible from the Internet.”
Of the 50 states into which the vote counting is “decentralized” there are only a handful the U.S. media will pay much attention to. Those “swing states” are the ones a hacker would hack. And here’s an interesting Washington Post article I recommend to the editors of Time: “More than 30 states offer online voting, but experts warn it isn’t secure.”
“But they can sow disruption and instability up to, and on, Election Day, more than a dozen senior U.S. officials tell TIME, undermining faith in the result and in democracy itself.”
Democracy itself? Egad! Those commies must be against democracy. Perhaps they even hate capitalism! How many of those senior officials have names? Is “senior” in this case a polite way of saying “extremely elderly”? Come on! Nobody has faith in U.S. democracy. That’s undermined every day by the U.S. government, as Time’s own pollsters are perfectly aware. Most U.S. residents believe their government is broken, and they’re perfectly right. Russia’s government could use a lot of improvements too. But only one of the two is building missile bases and engaging in military “exercises” on the other one’s border.
“The question, debated at multiple meetings at the White House, is how aggressively to respond to the Russian operation. Publicly naming and shaming the Russians and describing what the intelligence community knows about their activities would help Americans understand and respond prudently to any disruptions that might take place between now and the close of the polls.”
Gee, there’s an idea. If only there were a journalist in the building!
“Senior Justice Department officials have argued in favor of calling out the Russians, and that position has been echoed forcefully outside of government by lawmakers and former top national-security officials from both political parties.”
Wait, don’t tell me, are these the same guys who sincerely wanted to tell us where the Weapons of Mass Destruction were in Iraq?
“Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. The President and several of his closest national-security advisers are concerned about the danger of a confrontation in the new and ungoverned world of cyberspace, and they argue that while the U.S. has powerful offensive and defensive capabilities there, an escalating confrontation carries significant risks.”
That’s right! Hey, they know best. Accusing Russia without any evidence shouldn’t offend anybody. The Russian government should be grateful. But presenting evidence and seeking to uphold the law, truth, and perhaps even reconciliation? Only reckless subversives would suggest such lunacy!
“National Security Council officials warn that our critical infrastructure–including the electricity grid, transportation sector and energy networks–is vulnerable to first strikes; others say attacks on private companies, stock exchanges and the media could affect the economy.”
Is there some nation whose infrastructure is not vulnerable to first strikes? Is the blurring of computer hacking and bomb dropping even conscious anymore?
“Senior intelligence officials even worry about Russia exposing U.S. espionage operations in retaliation.”
Well, if Russia can expose them, exactly what purpose are they currently serving? And what of any of this has Russia actually threatened? If I “worry about” Henry Kissinger streaking Fifth Avenue will Time run that story?
“And while U.S. officials have ‘high confidence’ that Russia is behind what they describe as a major influence operation, senior U.S. officials tell TIME, their evidence would not yet stand up in court.”
Mid-article, you’ll notice, we’ve dropped from the statement of fact on the cover of a magazine displayed everywhere in a nation of people who hardly read, to a statement of possibility.
“And so with five weeks to go, the White House is, for now, letting events unfold. On one side, U.S. law-enforcement agencies are scrambling to uncover the extent of the Russian operation, counter it and harden the country’s election infrastructure. On the other, a murky network of Russian hackers and their associates is stepping up the pace of leaks of stolen documents designed to affect public opinion and give the impression that the election is vulnerable, including emails from the computers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).”
Not those emails that added so authoritatively to our knowledge that the DNC had rigged its own primary? Not those emails? Surely if it were those emails you’d mention their contents, not just an evidence-free claim as to who leaked them?
“Meanwhile, the FBI alerted all 50 states to the danger in mid-August, and the states have delivered evidence of a ‘significant’ number of new intrusions into their election systems that the bureau and their colleagues at the Department of Homeland Security ‘are still trying to understand,’ a department official tells TIME.”
Wait, I thought it was all offline and decentralized? Are all these intrusions harmless because they might be by non-Russians? Or is it only in the scenario in which they are acts of the Russian government that we should pay no attention to the uselessness of the lousy vote-counting machines? Or should we just not worry in either case, even while really really—you know—worrying?
“All of which makes Donald Trump’s repeated insertion of himself into the U.S.-Russia story all the more startling. Trump has praised Putin during the campaign, and at the first presidential debate, on Sept. 26, he said it wasn’t clear the Russians were behind the DNC hack.”
Time said the same thing three paragraphs back. Perhaps the real sin here is praising Putin, eh? But Trump is praising Putin for violating people’s rights, not for being a designated enemy of Time magazine and the government for which it serves as a stenographer.
“But the U.S. intelligence community has ‘high confidence’ that Russian intelligence services were in fact responsible, multiple intelligence and national security officials tell TIME.”
That’s impressive. How many of them have names?
“Trump was informed of that assessment during a recent classified intelligence briefing, a U.S. official familiar with the matter tells TIME. ‘I do not comment on information I receive in intelligence briefings, however, nobody knows with definitive certainty that this was in fact Russia,’ Trump told TIME in a statement. ‘It may be, but it may also be China, another country or individual.'”
Is that not indisputably accurate?
“Russia’s interference in the U.S. election is an extraordinary escalation of an already worrying trend.”
Whether or not it exists?
“Over the past 2½ years, Russia has executed a westward march of election meddling through cyberspace, starting in the states of the former Soviet Union and moving toward the North Atlantic.”
Freud. Sigmund. Paging a Doctor Freud, Sigmund. NATO has in fact literally marched in the path of Nazis right to the border of Russia with new members, new troops, new weapons, new nukes, new missile bases, new threats, and new lies—plus a violent coup in Ukraine. But it’s a march of alleged election meddling that should scare us, despite the United States government’s blatant election meddling (and support for coups) in nations all over the world, including Ukraine, Brazil, Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela, etc.
“‘On a regular basis they try to influence elections in Europe,’ President Obama told NBC News on July 26. With Russia establishing beachheads in the U.S. at least since April, officials worry that in the final weeks of the campaign the Russian cybercapability could be used to fiddle with voter rolls, election-reporting systems and the media, resulting in confusion that could cast a shadow over both the next President and the democratic process.”
Despite the offline decentralized security?
And the media too? How would Russia hack the media exactly?
“Obama’s decision not to call out the Russian espionage operation has so far left the effort to educate Americans about it to lawmakers and national-security experts. On Sept. 22, the ranking Democrats on the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, California’s Senator Dianne Feinstein and Representative Adam Schiff, released an unusually blunt statement. ‘Based on briefings we have received, we have concluded that the Russian intelligence agencies are making a serious and concerted effort to influence the U.S. election,’ they said. ‘At the least, this effort is intended to sow doubt about the security of our election.’
That’s like saying “We’ve been briefed on the WMDs in Iraq and at the very least there is an effort to scare the heck out of you. Of course we and Time magazine are central to this effort, but try to focus on the alleged role of Iraq.”
“Orders for Russian intelligence agencies to conduct electoral-influence operations, they added, could come only from very senior levels of government. ‘We call on [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin to immediately order a halt to this activity.’ The statement, though not endorsed publicly by the Administration, was cleared with the CIA. To understand why Putin would want to undercut the legitimacy of the U.S. election, it helps to step back from the long and ugly presidential campaign and remember why we’re voting in the first place. Elections are the ultimate source of authority in our democracy. Because Republicans and Democrats have agreed for decades that spreading democracy is good for everyone, America has pushed for free and fair elections around the world.”
Really? Are we all agreed on “pushing” for the “spread of democracy”? Who has more of it, do you think, Russia, the United States, or any of the seven nations the United States has bombed and “liberated” in recent years?
“And many nations have embraced them: peasants in the Balkans put on their Sunday best to go to the polls, and burqa-clad women in Afghanistan brave terrorist attacks to stand in line for hours to cast their ballots.”
Well that proves it. Better bomb some more places!
“Not surprisingly, quasi-authoritarian rulers in the former Soviet Union, latter-day communists in China and medieval theocrats in the Middle East, among many others, see America’s sometimes aggressive evangelism about the benefits of liberal democracy as a direct threat to their own claims to authority.”
The UN Charter also has that odd view, choosing to see aggressive wars as criminal.
“Putin has taken particular umbrage, accusing the U.S.–and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in particular–of meddling in Russia’s presidential election in 2012. He has publicly questioned the validity of past U.S. presidential elections, saying, on June 17, of the Electoral College, ‘You call that democracy?'”
Do you?
“Now, experts say, Putin is expanding his anti-American campaign into cyberspace. ‘More than any attempt to get one candidate or another elected, this [Russian influence operation] is about discrediting the entire idea of a free and fair election,’ says Dmitri Alperovitch, co-founder and chief technology officer of CrowdStrike, the cybersecurity company that did the analysis of the DNC hack.”
Wow, congratulations on naming names. Dmitri must be a special person to get his name into Time magazine.
“No one knows that better than Arizona secretary of state Michele Reagan. One day in June she was in her backyard in Phoenix when she got a call from her chief of staff. ‘Are you sitting down?’ he asked. The FBI had been monitoring a corner of the so-called dark web, the network of hidden sites used by criminals to buy and sell drugs, pedophilic pornography and stolen identities. A group of hackers known collectively as Fancy Bear, which the U.S. government believes is controlled by Russian military intelligence, was trying to sell a user name and password that belonged to someone in an Arizona county election official’s office, which holds the personal data of almost 4 million people. ‘My first reaction was, Well, this is like the worst thing that you want to hear,’ Reagan recalls.”
All I can say is it’s a darn good thing everything is offline and decentralized.
“Reagan and the FBI scrambled to figure out how the Russians had gotten into Arizona’s system and what needed to be done to secure it. It turned out that an election official in rural Gila County, pop. 54,000, had opened a Word document on her desktop computer that contained malicious software. Fortunately, while Fancy Bear had penetrated a local computer system, it hadn’t accessed the statewide registration database. Others weren’t so lucky. Fancy Bear’s electronic fingerprints were found on the hack into the DNC computers. In Illinois, the feds found that Fancy Bear had stolen 85,000 voter records from that state’s registration systems in mid-July. Later that month, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) revealed that it, too, had been hacked by Fancy Bear.”
Well he or she or they are called “Bear.” I can’t see why that wouldn’t be enough to convict Russia in a court of law.
“With other states now reporting intrusions of unknown origin, the government wants to reassure the public that the vote count itself is safe. ‘We have confidence in the overall integrity of our electoral systems,’ Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson said on Sept. 16. ‘It is diverse, subject to local control, and has many checks and balances built in.’ Each of the U.S.’s more than 9,000 polling places uses machines not connected to the Internet, precincts count and report their results independently, and most have paper or electronic backups in case a recount is needed.”
Oh OK, then I’ll stop worrying. Never mind, after all, Vladimir.
“The Administration has a message for Russia too.”
Oh no. Wait. What?
“The U.S. has privately warned that any effort to sway the election would be unacceptable, intelligence and other Administration officials tell TIME. Secretary of State John Kerry delivered the message to his counterpart, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in Laos on July 27. During a 90-minute meeting with Putin on the sidelines of the G-20 meeting on Sept. 6, Obama pulled Putin aside and discussed the cyberconcerns one-on-one, with no aides present, a White House official tells TIME. In a press conference later, the President called for restraint on all sides in the use of cyberweapons and issued a veiled threat about America’s cyberpowers. ‘Frankly, we’ve got more capacity than anybody both offensively and defensively,’ Obama said.”
Because offensive attacks by the United States are good things, you see. (Some people might get confused without that explanation.)
“Putin’s history of using influence operations against opponents begins, appropriately enough, with himself. As he was rising quickly through the Kremlin ranks in 1999, one of his main opponents, Prosecutor General Yuri Skuratov, was caught on tape having sex with two women in a hotel room in what Skuratov later claimed was a Putin-run espionage operation traditionally known as a ‘honey trap.’ Putin, who had risen from a Soviet-era KGB operative to head the country’s intelligence services, denied he was behind it but said on TV that his agents had confirmed that the man in the grainy video was Skuratov. Putin went on to win the presidency the next year. Skuratov, who ran against him, got less than 1% of the popular vote.”
That seems like good grounds to me for risking nuclear apocalypse. Please proceed.
“With the expansion of the Internet in the decade that followed, the Russians adopted cyberweapons as a standard tool of political meddling. Nowhere has their tactic of spreading chaos around a vote been clearer than in Ukraine, where three days before the presidential election on May 25, 2014, the computer systems of the Central Electoral Commission went dark. ‘The servers wouldn’t turn on. The links to the local election authorities were cut off,’ says Victor Zhora, director of the cybersecurity firm Infosafe, which had been hired to defend the system. ‘Literally, nothing worked.'”
Only the Russians could have done something so devious to put in place a new anti-Russian government that immediately began efforts to restrict the use of the Russian language, and which put into power actual Nazis.
Read the rest at Time magazine if you can stand it.
This article was originally published at DavidSwanson.org.
As a Brit, on visits to the USA, I`m always bemused at US printed media, that`s not a criticism it`s just my reaction!
I understand the New York “Time” magazine, voted Adolf Hitler as their “Man of The Year” in 1938, that, despite Hitlers occupation of The Rhineland in 1936 and his obvious intentions by 1938 to embark on military expansion.
If Time magazine got it so wrong with Hitler, why should we assume they have it right with Putin?
As I say, I`m always bemused at US printed media, but thank the Lord (Whatever that is!) for The Foreign Policy Journal, an oasis of sanity in a bemusing desert
” obvious intentions by 1938 to embark on military expansion”????
You would not go far wrong by reading some history that is not spewed by jewish media.
Hitler pleaded with Chamberlain to make the Poles stop murdering Germans in the parts of Germany given to Poland as a result of the Versailles Treaty. Germany did not start WW1.
Hitler promised to invade Poland and stop the mass murders if Chamberlain didn’t stop it
Hitler never lied or broke any deals. Chamberlain did.
The NYT magazine never got it wrong.
In 1938, they had not yet decided to demonize Hitler.
Putin, (the head of the Russian mafia) is the only world leader who can actually be trusted to tell the truth or do the right thing.
It is obvious the jewish media will lie to try and destroy him, just like they do to Jeremy Corbyn.
That`s telling ME, Jerry!
My comments were more to illustrate the Time magazines “Less than perfect” opinions, Hitler was an obvious case and I think demonising Putin is another.
Putin, in Europe is/was well respected, The Russian Federation was forging strong and friendly links with the EC, with some suggesting that sooner or later Russia should join the EC. The Crimean people voted overwhelmingly to become part of Russia, as it always was up to 1958 (I think) when the USSR granted independence to Ukraine.
It was the USA reaction to that (democratic) event that has caused all the problems (What`s it got to do with the USA anyway?). USA inspired sanctions on Russia, resulted in retaliatory sanctions against Europe.
European milk products were banned by Russia, the effect in Europe has been tens of thousands of Dairy Farmers going out of business, Thanks USA!
Hitler did embark on a military expansion pretty early on, he promised the German people as early as 1936, that he would replace the Charlemagne Reich, which in the 9th century covered most of Western Europe, so there is little doubt he was aggressive.
But I take your point regarding Zionist propaganda, it`s one of the 20th and 21st centuries phenomenons that Zionist myths have taken such a hold.
I do like my history, I have a sly trick when someone claims to know more about history, I ask then “What was the name of Charlemagne`s Father”, that sorts the wheat from the chaff!
“Pippin” is the answer of course.
I certainly do not make claims to being even an amateur historian.
My uptake in history came about only after the Israeli theft and atrocities in Palestine. Something America encourages.
That made me look into some zionist history, which led to the lies behind the wars.
Can you give me any links to Hitler wanting to replace the Charlemagne Reich in a manner that indicated military expansion?
It is something I know nothing about. It does sound out of character.
Don’t forget, Hitler never wanted war and persistently requested peace.
Churchill it seems, wanted nothing but war with Germany.
Is there anything you can tell me about the “Focus Group” that funded Churchill between the wars?
I would highly recommend “Western Imperialism in the Middle East 1914 – 1958” by D.K. Fieldhouse, a British Historian (Over 90 years old!) who specialises in British Colonial history.
It`s a book written for University students studying Modern M.E. history, quite expensive and hard work but fairly essential reading for anyone wishing to gain a balanced understanding on why the M.E. is as it now is.
In that book, Fieldhouse regards British conduct in Palestine as “The most shameful episode in the entire history of British Colonisation”
The Zionist Israeli Hasbara propaganda organisation provides a perversion of history, but is accepted by the ignorant and the unconcerned, USA unconditional Financial, Military and diplomatic support is highly reliant on sustaining those Zionist myths.
Churchill once said ” A lie can run half way around the world before the truth can get it`s pant`s on”, he hit the nail right on it`s head when saying that. The truth with regard to Zionist Israel is steadily catching up with Zionist propaganda.
In the 8th century Europe was occupied by pagan tribes, large and small but none dominant, The Visigoths were quite expansive, in Spain and North Africa and the Lombards occupied parts of north Italy.
In North Europe, near to to-days Aachen there were “The Franks” a loose collection of tribes that intermarried creating dynastic alliances that to-day is called “The Merovingian`s”, Pippin was a senior administrator who quite literally imposed himself (With no trouble) as the accepted leader.
On Pippins death Charlemagne assumed leadership, and with the support of the Church of Rome (Who awarded Charlemagne the title Emperor) , went on a campaign to unite the Pagan tribes and impose Christianity, with Latin as the language of communication. Charlemagne`s Empire is now known as the Carolingian Empire, and is responsible for shaping the Europe we nor recognise.
Germans have long regarded Merovingian and Carolingian as the first and second Reich`s, Adolf Hitler promised the German people “A third Reich that would last 1,000 years”, with respect, Jerry that could only have been achieved by military conquest.
As a point of interest (To me anyway) one of Charlemagne`s sons ruled half of his Empire, which became known as France. Napoleon Bonaparte also used Charlemagne`s Empire as an excuse to go on his military expansions, also with the enthusiastic of the French population,
Adolf Hitler went to great lengths to avoid war with Britain, I would agree with that.
Churchill was born into the British Establishment, no establishment member is ignored, as soon as an opportunity occurs the establishment manipulates “their boy” into positions of influence,
Ex Prime Minister Cameron is a member, he has never worked in his life, his future Mother in Law did`nt appreciate her daughter marrying a jobless person, so she (Lady Astor) arranged for Rothschilds to pay him £80,000 p.a. (£200,000 in todays value) for doing nothing!
The Establishment certainly have a problem with Jeremy Corbin, but the ordinary members of the Labour Party love him.
Sorry to be so boring.
Boring… Fascinating.
I think I agree with “The most shameful episode in the entire history of British Colonisation”.
Does it actually beat Churchill’s sacking of India?
My long gone father in law served in Palestine.
He told us if an Arab was injured in some way by the British army, it was common practice to kill them rather than tend to them.
It apparently “Tied up lose ends.”
He laughed at my dismay saying it was expected.
Your recommended reading is not quite as elusive as you may have thought. I have just downloaded it along with two other of his books from here….
http://libgen.io/search.php?req=D.K.+Fieldhouse&open=0&res=25&view=simple&phrase=1&column=author
The site often throws a temporary glitch but has been reasonably reliable for much of my reading material.
My other source of material is here….
https://archive.org/search.php?query=Behind%20the%20Balfour%20Declaration%20-%20Britain%27s%20Great%20War%20Pledge%20to%20Rothschild%20Bankers
Well Jerry, Winston Churchill had eloquence, no doubt about that, but nonetheless he was a racist thug, as were most Brits in those days. Hated in India at the time and despised in India today, that says it all really!
I can`t shake the feeling that he and Donald Trump would have got along like a house on fire, if Trump had been born 100 years earlier. I`m nonplussed at Trumps current popularity in the US today.
There is a book written by Robert Fisk, a British Journalist for the London Times then The Independent, who lived in Beirut for some 30 years. It`s called “The Great War For Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East. It has no historical authority, it`s simply Fisk`s experiences from a journalists perspective.
Robert Fisk offers a summary that asks serious questions regarding the double standards of Western actions in the M.E. and he provides many “starting points” for more detailed research, it`s 1,300 pages long! and there are very cheap copies on Amazon.
On page 745, he gives a sobering example of Western double standards with this example;
“In June and August 1980, the UN Security Council declared Israel`s annexation of Jerusalem was “Null and Void” under international law.
In December 1981, the UN Security Council declared Israel`s annexation of Syrian Golan Heights as “Null and Void” under international law.
In August 1990, the UN Security Council declared Iraq`s annexation of Kuwait as “Null and Void” under international law.
For the third declaration – but not the first two – the West would insist on the strict application of “International Law”. Arabs (and Iranians) already knew, of course, that there was one rule of law for Zionist Israel, a quite different one for Non-Zionist Israelis”.
There are today several excellent Web sites with objective attitudes to Zionist Israel, this site is one, and there is “If Americans Knew” it leaves no stone unturned, then you could try “B`Tselem”, The Israeli Human Rights organisation, or “Breaking the Silence” a group of IDF soldiers who object to being ordered to commit Human rights breaches, or “The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network”, and finally “Apartheid Israel” consisting of 100 Universities throughout the world, who around March each year organise a couple of weeks of Films, Lectures, and debates exposing the Zionist Israeli myths for what they are.
Not quite finally, there is a phone app. called “Buycott” which scans bar-codes and identifies Zionist Israeli products, it also provides a good justification for informing retailers that you are boycotting the products of Apartheid Israel.
There is a rapidly growing number who object to the Genocidal actions of Zionist Israel!
I am afraid I can find no excuse for Churchill.
He brought the world to war for his jewish backers.
He has the blood of millions on his hands.
WW2 did not need to happen.
I have to admit to great distaste putting his picture in my pocket.
I too find it difficult to believe that Trump is taken seriously as a politician but his rhetoric occasionally has an element of truth.
Something his rival would have no understanding of.
That has hit some Americans like a bulldozer.
Clinton is destined to be POTUS, the American circus is set to remain in the world of the bizarre, be it with a more militant and dangerous leader.
I honestly have no idea how much weight the American presidency has. I suspect Rothschild has more.
Both Clinton’s will always follow the money.
Never before have I seen someone with so much reason to be in jail, be in such an elevated position.
Does America not know her husband was impeached for selling secrets to the Chinese?
I did have a friend living in America who claimed that America are the worlds police force.
I tried to correct him informing him America are the worlds terrorists.
The abrupt end to the friendship came as no surprise.
To the most part, they are Republican and Democrat.
To each, the opposition is the Devil with horns who’s lies and deception know no bounds.
I am well aware of “If Americans Knew” and “Breaking the Silence”.
I fully support BDS, something that people I mention it to have never heard of.
What a wonderful job the BBC et al. do.
An institution where we pay them so much money a year, to lie to us.
Thank you for your insights. The book recommendation, it is now in my collection.
I have no problem at all with Judaism, Jerry, Judaism is a fine old religion and the foundation for the two later Semite religions of Christianity and Islam, all three religions venerate the God of Abraham.
Zionism however is a completely different kettle of fish! Zionism is a European Nationalistic Racist Political Movement, no different to that of Nazi Germany, particularly in Zionisms emulation of the Nazi racial supremacy ideals. Zionism hides behind the skirts of Judaism.
Of the worlds 15 million or so Jews, Zionist Israelis are some 40% of the worlds Jews, 60% have neither the need nor the desire to live on stolen Palestinian land.Many of this 60% of course have an understandable sympathy for the Zionist State of Israel, but there is a growing number of Jews who are questioning the actions and policies of Zionist Israel, some are increasingly critical and some who are strongly opposed to a State of Israel, Zionist or not.
During WW1, Britain was effectively, bankrupt, Rothschild`s arranged the finance and asked for a favour in return, The Balfour Declaration was the result, but that is the way of the world and quite normal (China is doing pretty much the same today, an obvious example is the way China has influenced Britain`s attitude to Iran).
In Palestine, Zionists used their leverage when attempting to remove intrinsic Palestinians from positions of authority during the British Mandate, what in 1918 had been a Palestinian Civil Service staffed 100% by Palestinians, had by 1947 only a 6% Palestinian work force, none in senior positions.
In the 1930`s Britain was seriously concerned at Zionist intransigence, particularly at the number of illegal European Zionist immigrants (a maximum of 7,500 p.a. had been agreed with all parties. then ignored by Zionists).
By 1944, Britain had officially recognised Hagana as the Zionist Army, and Lord Moyne (himself a Zionist) was discussing with David ben Gurion, during a series of meetings in Cairo, a “Partition Line” defining the borders of a future State. It was clear at that time that Britain had provided all that Britain was prepared to provide.
The Zionist leadership realised that the future world power would be the USA, from that time all Zionist propaganda was aimed at the USA, with Britain sidelined as irrelevant and not to be tolerated.
In November 1944, Lord Moyne was assassinated by Irgun, on the orders of Yitzhak Shamir, who later justified this murder by stating “He did not want a limit placed of the borders of a future Zionist State”.
In the House of Commons, Winston Churchill, in response to the murder of Lord Moyne stated “If our dreams for Zionism are to end in the smoke of an assassins pistol and our labours for it`s future to produce only a new set of gangsters worthy of Nazi Germany, many like myself will have to reconsider the position we have maintained so consistently in the past”.
At that time Churchill was unaware that the USA had usurped Britains influence in Palestine, and while British administrators and soldiers then became a target for Zionist terror organisations, the USA insisted on unrestricted European Zionist immigration to Palestine. While Britain was well aware of the consequences USA policies would have, Britain was never again in a position to have any effective influence.
Today we have the situation where Zionist Israel occupies all of Palestine, part of Syria and the Lebanon, there are 5 million UN registered Palestinian refugees, all denied the right of return to their homeland.
Were Zionist Israelis Druids, their actions would not be tolerated, instead Zionist Israel accuses critics of Zionist Israeli actions as motivated only by anti-Jewish sentiment, when anti-Zionism is a far more accurate and relevant description as many Jews are coming to realise.
Zionist Israel brings shame upon Jews.
.
I totally agree with your take on jews and zionists.
Those poor jewish puppets.
Possibly I spend too much time on youtube forums.
While they are like chalk and cheese, on the forums, jews will always always support zionists.
It makes it a little difficult sometimes to differentiate.
Most are very committed to judism. Possibly those that aren’t don’t frequent youtube.
There is much proof of lies from the mouths of Auschwitz inmates.
Particularly their famed inmate “Ellie Wiesel”.
Their famed Spielberg has not yet produced anything that has not been unequivocally debunked.
The holocaust is something I am prepared to believe when I have seen the evidence.
I have questions like why is “IG Farben” never mentioned?
I mean… IG Farben was the star of the show.
It is what the whole German war effort was based on.
German women did not work in munitions like they did in Britain and America.
Concentration camp inmates did.
They were imperative to Germany’s survival.
It is very unlikely that Germany would have mistreated the workers that were keeping them alive.
Infact their Auschwitz commander, Rudolf Hoess, admitted to murdering millions more jews than the Auschwitz museum now claims. (London Cage)
I am not doing a soap box here, just bringing to light facts that you will already be aware of.
So. Armed with what research I have done, I have many many unanswered questions.
Possibly you have some answers.
The Irgun of the 40’s was not much different to the 60’s actions on the USS Liberty.
Even today with the jewish / Israili lobby, not much has changed.
ipinions are formed, Jerry, on the available information and more often than not, that information is very superficial, that said very strong opinions can be formed and maintained on myths and misconceptions.
It`s called “Conditional bias” and every citizen of every country is subject to it`s effect, Governments refer to this effect in countries that are perceived as a threat, as brainwashing! All Governments present only their perspectives to their populations (Spin doctors have been around for thousands of years!), most everyday people have no reason to doubt what they are told, and most people are not the slightest bit concerned.
If I were in charge of the world, I would demand that every politician display a knowledge of history, with the leaders of countries requiring at least a degree level of historical knowledge, the crooks and manipulators would still get elected of course, but at least the chances of history repeating itself would be lessened.
I have to admit my knowledge of events in Germany prior to and during WW2 are very superficial, that said, I have often wondered about the outcome if Hitler had not aligned Germany with Japan, or declared war on the USA and Russia. But for those decisions, in Europe, we may indeed be living in the Third Reich, with a completely different opinion prevailing!
You tube, I only use for music, so I have no idea of the validity of any “Facts” available there. However the Internet is outstanding for delving behind the headlines, for example I have spent hours in “trumanlibrary.com” reading the correspondence between Harry Truman before and during his US Presidency, sort of “Seek and Ye shall find!”, and what is found can be printed off (Loads of material in English relating to the Nuremberg War trials). The fact it is all in English is convenient, not sure how useful documents in German would be though.
Best of luck with your researches.
The internet is powerful and it can`t be stopped either, though Governments try, and Governments try to maintain control. I`m still a bit miffed that “the Government” asked for suggestions for the name of the new research vessel, then rejected the overwhelmingly popular name choosing instead an establishment name.
Boaty McBoatface would have become a legend.
.
“trumanlibrary.com” seems to be taking a break for the time being.
Since I call the dog, Dogface and the goldfish, Fishface, Boatface sounds perfect.
History will always repeat itself under various guises.
When one finances both sides of a war, the profits are doubled.
Saying that, I don’t think Russia paid all of it’s WW2 debts.
Without American munitions, Germany would have wiped them out.
Hitler always thought Britain would join him to help defeat the Bolshevik threat to Europe.
Germans knew exactly why they were fighting.
We, were spoon fed lie upon lie.
It did not matter much what Germany did in WW2.
Early on, it had been decided that simple defeat was not a consideration.
Germany was to be annihilated beyond reason, both during and after the war finished.
Eisenhower’s Rhine Meadows was nothing less than mass murder of innocents.
Do you know anything on the demise of Rosevelt and General Patton?
Patton was in a crash with an army lorry days after he sent a letter to his wife, telling her we defeated the wrong enemy.
Roosevelt died one week after sending a letter to Saudi Arabia telling them he would not be supporting the jews in Palestine.
When you consider the pure evil required to do what Israel did to the USS Liberty, I put no evil deed beyond their level of comfort.
They take racist thuggery to a level Churchill never knew.
Regarding the Nuremberg trials. This may help to put it in perspective.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223831/How-Britain-tortured-Nazi-PoWs-The-horrifying-interrogation-methods-belie-proud-boast-fought-clean-war.html
If you ever find yourself wanting to know more about that period, Karl Haushofer and his son are very worth a google.
Hiya, I need some help and you immediately came to mind. Hope you don’t mind.
I am discussing the history of Germany and it’s relationship with Prussia.
Well I am trying to. My sister claims Germany evolved from Prussia.
My claim is that Prussia was a dominant state of Germany.
The more I read, the more confused I get.
Please put me out of my misery.
I have just Googled “Trueman Library”, Jerry and it`s still available,
I mentioned it simply because the USA was “in charge” of “Everything” after December 1941 and Truman Library does have documents that would give an insight into USA policy decisions (In my opinion, Americans don`t seem to take neutral positions, “The Good” (friends) are pure and rightness, “The Bad” (not friends) are pure evil).
Only the USA could come up with the phrases “Axis of Evil” and “Enhanced interrogation”!
As for WW2, I have as i said, a superficial interest, Europe from the 1920`s was a place of great change, that said it is now part of history, victors justice was implemented and victors propaganda prevails.
The situation in Zionist Israel is of great concern, in 1919, the USA appointed King-Crane Commission was sent to explore the possibility of a “Jewish homeland” in Palestine.
The findings were submitted very swiftly to Woodrow Wilson (who withheld publication until 1922), it`s findings were very blunt, Such a proposal was not feasible, for two main reasons;
1. It would require the removal of the intrinsic population.
2. It could only be sustained by force of arms.
Today there are 5 million UN registered Palestinian refuges, all denied the right of return to their homeland, and Zionist Israel is sustained by force of arms.
With the King-Crane report, a codicil letter was sent, that letter emphasised that were such a Zionist State to be created, it would require a permanent guarantee to provide unconditional Financial, Military and Diplomatic USA support.
Wikipedia is not a reliable source, but it can be a starting point for relevant research, and don`t ignore Jewish sites either, for example Google “U.S. Vetoes of UN Security Council Resolutions” and you will find Jewish Virtual Library publishes a list of 42 occasions since 1972 when the USA has threatened to veto UN resolutions critical of Israel, so preventing debate.
Zionist Israel is in violation of 77 UN resolutions, the USA has vetoed a further 31 and threatened to veto a further 42 (since 1972), all three examples are all time UN records.
If it were a comic book story, it would not be believed.
It`s been interesting, Jerry, the magic of the internet, eh!
I think zionists would destroy the internet if they could.
Not their type of magic.
http://balder.org/judea/Six-Million-140-Occurrences-Of-The-Word-Holocaust-And-The-Number-6,000,000-Before-The-Nuremberg-Trials-Began.php
My next reading session…
I bought three paper books because the author needs and deserves the money.
That is the Alan Hart trilogy.
With other things going on, it could still take a while.
I have really enjoyed our conversation and would be happy if our paths cross again.
Strange thing….
On forums where I mention IG Farben, I don’t usually get a reply.
I can’t help wondering sometimes if they know full well they are conning the world.
Some things, I think we will never know.
I am being malicious here.
You will be familiar with this photograph.
Going off the shadows…. Where do you think the sun is?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/24/24DC43DA00000578-2924582-image-a-48_1422116153647.jpg
I see what you mean, Jerry, It took me a while!